Around the Horn Posted May 23, 2019 Author Share #351 Posted May 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, Union Tpke said: Allegedly, according to tunnelrat, there are provisions for an 11-track storage yard past the bumper blocks. That aligns with my memories as a kid of seeing NYCT manholes on 4th Avenue way past where the stops running... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted May 23, 2019 Share #352 Posted May 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: That aligns with my memories as a kid of seeing NYCT manholes on 4th Avenue way past where the stops running... Where would those be? Tunnelrat has had trouble providing evidence of this on subchat. "also the tunnels extend beyound the bumper blocks ay 95st to 101st.just an empty 2 track tunnel that was meant to cross under the narrows&link up with sirt on the other side. " Era publication[the bulletin]stated so many,many years ago published it.Also over 10 years ago I met a light maintainer who told me that when the platforms at 95st were extended the wall beyound the b/b`s were taken down.he&his helper walked to the end[101st]no manholes or emergency exits were installed.he told me the only known entrance was thru an unmarked manhole across the street from the station[facing towards coney island]I searched,couldn`t find it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted May 23, 2019 Author Share #353 Posted May 23, 2019 10 minutes ago, Union Tpke said: Where would those be? Tunnelrat has had trouble providing evidence of this on subchat. "also the tunnels extend beyound the bumper blocks ay 95st to 101st.just an empty 2 track tunnel that was meant to cross under the narrows&link up with sirt on the other side. " Era publication[the bulletin]stated so many,many years ago published it.Also over 10 years ago I met a light maintainer who told me that when the platforms at 95st were extended the wall beyound the b/b`s were taken down.he&his helper walked to the end[101st]no manholes or emergency exits were installed.he told me the only known entrance was thru an unmarked manhole across the street from the station[facing towards coney island]I searched,couldn`t find it. I vaguely remember seeing them somewhere south of Marine Avenue and north of 101st Street (after 4th and 5th Avenues merge and the street makes a slight turn) but I went back later and couldn't find them. So either I misremembered seeing them as a kid or the covers were swapped out at some point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted May 24, 2019 Share #354 Posted May 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Union Tpke said: When was that? Allegedly, according to tunnelrat, there are provisions for an 11-track storage yard past the bumper blocks. 1968. 15tph of RR, 5tph of bankers’ special. Dunno about 11 track yard, but wouldn’t be surprised if there were provisions... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted May 24, 2019 Share #355 Posted May 24, 2019 1 hour ago, RR503 said: 1968. 15tph of RR, 5tph of bankers’ special. Dunno about 11 track yard, but wouldn’t be surprised if there were provisions... Wow. Did service to Astoria ever drop below 15 TPH? There were the QB trips that became RR trips as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caelestor Posted May 24, 2019 Share #356 Posted May 24, 2019 There's a lot of ways to improve service not just for Bay Ridge but systemwide. One obvious issue that needs to be addressed is the dispatching, as trains can't run on time if they don't leave the first stop on time. For whatever reason, trains don't depart the terminal on time except on the single-service lines. Luckily operations issues are much easier to resolve compared to building new tunnels. Deinterlining can improve service too. Right now the has to deal with the twice (btwn 36 St and 59 St in Brooklyn due to construction, then btwn Times Sq and 59 St - Lex Ave), the in Manhattan, and then the in Queens. In any reasonable service plan, the should stay on the express tracks to 96 St and then the Bay Ridge trains have fewer merges that impede them. Also, headways should be standardized. Assuming the Astoria line is limited to one train every 4 minutes, the needs to have similar headways so that there won't be conflicts. In practice that means the has to run every 8 minutes, and it follows that the has to run every 8 minutes as well. Fortunately the QB local trains aren't crowded and the run on 4 minute headways so everything syncs up nicely. Since the will be the more frequent route, it should replace the in Brooklyn. In the end, the ideal plan is something in the lines of Sea Beach / Bway express / 2 Ave, shuttle between CI and Whitehall St at night Brighton / Bway express / 2 Ave, local at night Forest Hills - Whitehall St local, no service at night Astoria - Bay Ridge local, all times 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Ridge Express Posted May 24, 2019 Share #357 Posted May 24, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Around the Horn said: I vaguely remember seeing them somewhere south of Marine Avenue and north of 101st Street (after 4th and 5th Avenues merge and the street makes a slight turn) but I went back later and couldn't find them. So either I misremembered seeing them as a kid or the covers were swapped out at some point. I can check for this and take a picture if I see it over the weekend. Also, overall, I have generally noticed that a lot of these plans have to sacrifice something else in the B Division that may be valuable. I still think having a would just be the easy way out, although that proposal's issues aren't unheeded either. But I do still think it would be better than adding supplement routes that stem from what are already long routes that may be unreliable themselves and would create an even bigger ripple effect than what we have today in terms of delays on the . After all, the only reason these plans are being talked about is due to the 's unreliability. Edited May 24, 2019 by Bay Ridge Express 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted May 24, 2019 Share #358 Posted May 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Union Tpke said: Wow. Did service to Astoria ever drop below 15 TPH? There were the QB trips that became RR trips as well. Yeah, pretty sure that they ran only 10-12 in the 80s and 90s. I'll have to double check though... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted May 24, 2019 Share #359 Posted May 24, 2019 12 hours ago, Union Tpke said: When was that? Allegedly, according to tunnelrat, there are provisions for an 11-track storage yard past the bumper blocks. Did you make a typo or did you actually mean 11 tracks? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted May 24, 2019 Share #360 Posted May 24, 2019 49 minutes ago, Lawrence St said: Did you make a typo or did you actually mean 11 tracks? That was according to tunnelrat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted May 25, 2019 Share #361 Posted May 25, 2019 On 5/24/2019 at 12:05 AM, Bay Ridge Express said: I can check for this and take a picture if I see it over the weekend. Also, overall, I have generally noticed that a lot of these plans have to sacrifice something else in the B Division that may be valuable. I still think having a would just be the easy way out, although that proposal's issues aren't unheeded either. But I do still think it would be better than adding supplement routes that stem from what are already long routes that may be unreliable themselves and would create an even bigger ripple effect than what we have today in terms of delays on the . After all, the only reason these plans are being talked about is due to the 's unreliability. The is the easy way out (relatively), but you’d still have to have a Broadway service (either the or ) continuing into Brooklyn not just to help it out, but also because Whitehall would have a lot of trouble turning both the and . A downside to the replacing the as the primary 4th Ave local train would be de-interlining the at 34th. Because if the is rerouted to 2nd Ave, something will have to replace it in Astoria. That something could be additional service. But that would result in a much more frequent train. It would be troublesome to terminate the additional ’s at Whitehall (or even Canal) if the is already turning there. Like @Caelestor proposed upthread, we can make a more frequently-running the full time 4th Ave local service and turn the at Whitehall. But then the will better get moving on creating storage space for revenue trains at 36th Street Yard. Though it’s possible under that scenario, the would be the only 4th Ave local train, because if it runs 15-20 tph, there may be very little capacity left for a Nassau train. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Ridge Express Posted May 25, 2019 Share #362 Posted May 25, 2019 2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said: The is the easy way out (relatively), but you’d still have to have a Broadway service (either the or ) continuing into Brooklyn not just to help it out, but also because Whitehall would have a lot of trouble turning both the and . A downside to the replacing the as the primary 4th Ave local train would be de-interlining the at 34th. Because if the is rerouted to 2nd Ave, something will have to replace it in Astoria. That something could be additional service. But that would result in a much more frequent train. It would be troublesome to terminate the additional ’s at Whitehall (or even Canal) if the is already turning there. Like @Caelestor proposed upthread, we can make a more frequently-running the full time 4th Ave local service and turn the at Whitehall. But then the will better get moving on creating storage space for revenue trains at 36th Street Yard. Though it’s possible under that scenario, the would be the only 4th Ave local train, because if it runs 15-20 tph, there may be very little capacity left for a Nassau train. Let me clarify: Bay Ridge-Bowery (or any other place nearby that would be easy to terminate in) via 4 Av Local/Nassau St Local 5 tph Bay Ridge-Astoria via 4 Av Local/Broadway Local/Astoria Local 10 tph (using 36-38 St yard) Whitehall-Astoria via Broadway Local/Astoria Local 4.5 tph Coney Island-96 St/2 Av via Sea Beach Local/4 Av Exp/Broadway Exp/2 Av Local 6-10 tph Coney Island-96 St/2 Av via Brighton Local/Broadway Exp/2 Av Local 10-11 tph As for the Queens Blvd portion there are several ideas: making an 8 Av express and creating a new 8 Av Local service to serve Queens Blvd Lcl, reducing tph on the / to increase capacity on the , decreasing overall tph on Queens Blvd Lcl, bringing back to Queens Blvd Lcl if there is no more capacity for trains to Manhattan, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Ridge Express Posted May 25, 2019 Share #363 Posted May 25, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said: delete Edited May 25, 2019 by Bay Ridge Express 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted May 27, 2019 Share #364 Posted May 27, 2019 On 5/25/2019 at 5:45 PM, Bay Ridge Express said: <proposal> In regards to the amount of service proposed, I'm a little wary on those frequencies there. The frequency imbalance has the very real possibility to create more problems than it would solve. Taking a look at the K and R services on 4th Avenue, almost every K local that would run would follow directly behind a more frequent R train, thus leading to an imbalance on usage. If the plan is to supplement the R, the new route must pretty much run in tandem with the R. In my opinion, since both would be intended to be feeders to other lines, they should run at equal frequencies with other lines boosted as needed. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Ridge Express Posted May 27, 2019 Share #365 Posted May 27, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Lance said: In regards to the amount of service proposed, I'm a little wary on those frequencies there. The frequency imbalance has the very real possibility to create more problems than it would solve. Taking a look at the K and R services on 4th Avenue, almost every K local that would run would follow directly behind a more frequent R train, thus leading to an imbalance on usage. If the plan is to supplement the R, the new route must pretty much run in tandem with the R. In my opinion, since both would be intended to be feeders to other lines, they should run at equal frequencies with other lines boosted as needed. Good point. Whitehall limits the to 6 tph and overall Astoria runs 15tph so if the were to go to Astoria it should run 9 tph. Bay Ridge only runs 10 tph but historically has run up to 20 so with the and having the same tph of 6 service should be more even. So 9 tph, 6 tph, 6 tph would be better. Ideally, each service should run 7.5 tph, but Whitehall terminal is a big factor imo (unless you were to short turn some trains at City Hall/Canal or extend to Coney Island) and I'm also not really sure what the limit is for tph on the at either Chambers, Canal, or Bowery. Edited May 27, 2019 by Bay Ridge Express 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted May 27, 2019 Share #366 Posted May 27, 2019 3 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said: Good point. Whitehall limits the to 6 tph and overall Astoria runs 15tph so if the were to go to Astoria it should run 9 tph. Bay Ridge only runs 10 tph but historically has run up to 20 so with the and having the same tph of 6 service should be more even. So 9 tph, 6 tph, 6 tph would be better. Ideally, each service should run 7.5 tph, but Whitehall terminal is a big factor imo (unless you were to short turn some trains at City Hall/Canal or extend to Coney Island) and I'm also not really sure what the limit is for tph on the at either Chambers, Canal, or Bowery. You can do much more than 6 at Whitehall, you just have to be good about getting crews in the right place (ie ready to board at the outbound end) at the right time (as soon as an inbound arrived). The EE in its day ran 15tph; I'm sure some turned at Canal, but would not be at all surprised to know that Whitehall could turn 10-12tph. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted May 27, 2019 Share #367 Posted May 27, 2019 1 hour ago, RR503 said: You can do much more than 6 at Whitehall, you just have to be good about getting crews in the right place (ie ready to board at the outbound end) at the right time (as soon as an inbound arrived). The EE in its day ran 15tph; I'm sure some turned at Canal, but would not be at all surprised to know that Whitehall could turn 10-12tph. Some did turn at Canal http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=720820 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted May 28, 2019 Share #368 Posted May 28, 2019 4 hours ago, RR503 said: You can do much more than 6 at Whitehall, you just have to be good about getting crews in the right place (ie ready to board at the outbound end) at the right time (as soon as an inbound arrived). The EE in its day ran 15tph; I'm sure some turned at Canal, but would not be at all surprised to know that Whitehall could turn 10-12tph. Right. They should be able to run at least 8 tph apiece on both the and . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Ridge Express Posted May 29, 2019 Share #369 Posted May 29, 2019 On 5/23/2019 at 6:53 PM, Around the Horn said: I vaguely remember seeing them somewhere south of Marine Avenue and north of 101st Street (after 4th and 5th Avenues merge and the street makes a slight turn) but I went back later and couldn't find them. So either I misremembered seeing them as a kid or the covers were swapped out at some point. There are absolutely no manholes saying "NYCT" between 95 and 101. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jcb Posted June 9, 2019 Share #370 Posted June 9, 2019 A Bay Ridge-Nassau Street service that runs in tandem with the like the old <R> Banker's special, but with expanded hours is probably the best way to solve the problem without any construction IMO. 95th street should have enough capacity to turn those trains. Essex would probably be the cause of the upper limit on capacity, as if you look at the track map, the distance that would have to be covered on a single track is rather long. With a little construction, the old four-track Nassau config could probably be restored, and termination could be done in the middle of Canal street, thus allowing for more frequency. As a bonus, a couple trains each morning and evening (maybe 2-3) before morning rush and then 2-3 after evening rush, could run to Broadway Junction if they need ENY access. Apologies if this proposal already came up earlier in the thread. Also, and unrelated, why did they reconfigure Nassau? What possible benefit was gained by removing two tracks from service and adding a bunch of slow curves to Brooklyn-bound service? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted June 9, 2019 Share #371 Posted June 9, 2019 1 hour ago, Jcb said: Also, and unrelated, why did they reconfigure Nassau? What possible benefit was gained by removing two tracks from service and adding a bunch of slow curves to Brooklyn-bound service? Cost savings was the reason behind the switch. The old configuration required the two platforms at Bowery and Canal St to be maintained for normal service. Shifting everything to the former downtown local and downtown express tracks meant they could close off the now-unused Williamsburg-bound platforms at those stations. It also meant they only had to rehab the visible parts of those stations as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted June 10, 2019 Share #372 Posted June 10, 2019 7 hours ago, Jcb said: A Bay Ridge-Nassau Street service that runs in tandem with the like the old <R> Banker's special, but with expanded hours is probably the best way to solve the problem without any construction IMO. 95th street should have enough capacity to turn those trains. Essex would probably be the cause of the upper limit on capacity, as if you look at the track map, the distance that would have to be covered on a single track is rather long. With a little construction, the old four-track Nassau config could probably be restored, and termination could be done in the middle of Canal street, thus allowing for more frequency. As a bonus, a couple trains each morning and evening (maybe 2-3) before morning rush and then 2-3 after evening rush, could run to Broadway Junction if they need ENY access. Apologies if this proposal already came up earlier in the thread. Also, and unrelated, why did they reconfigure Nassau? What possible benefit was gained by removing two tracks from service and adding a bunch of slow curves to Brooklyn-bound service? As I would do it, trains would in fact be from Bay Ridge to Essex as a "Brown " OR as a line of its own, with scheduled in service yard runs from and to Broadway Junction that would be noted as such in the schedule.. As noted, the reason the configuration was changed was only having to have one platform at Canal and Bowery for the and . Before the change, what used to be the "express tracks" were in fact northbound terminal tracks and there used to be a walkway between the southbound and northbound platforms at Canal that was done away with when the "downtown express" track became the "uptown" track. The only way I can see this changing is if the SAS were eventually connected to the Nassau line and continued to Brooklyn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted June 10, 2019 Share #373 Posted June 10, 2019 (edited) 21 hours ago, Jcb said: A Bay Ridge-Nassau Street service that runs in tandem with the like the old <R> Banker's special, but with expanded hours is probably the best way to solve the problem without any construction IMO. 95th street should have enough capacity to turn those trains. Essex would probably be the cause of the upper limit on capacity, as if you look at the track map, the distance that would have to be covered on a single track is rather long. With a little construction, the old four-track Nassau config could probably be restored, and termination could be done in the middle of Canal street, thus allowing for more frequency. As a bonus, a couple trains each morning and evening (maybe 2-3) before morning rush and then 2-3 after evening rush, could run to Broadway Junction if they need ENY access. Apologies if this proposal already came up earlier in the thread. Also, and unrelated, why did they reconfigure Nassau? What possible benefit was gained by removing two tracks from service and adding a bunch of slow curves to Brooklyn-bound service? But when you run the and <R> in tandem, you’ll have a long gap between first two trains and the next two. Unless the headways between each and <R> train are more evenly spaced out, I can see riders continuing to gripe. Edited June 10, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jcb Posted June 10, 2019 Share #374 Posted June 10, 2019 4 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said: But when you run the and <R> in tandem, you’ll have a long gap between first two trains and the next two. Unless the headways between each and <R> train are more evenly spaced out, I can see riders continuing to gripe. I figured that more-or-less even frequencies were implied. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear. Services, as a rule, really shouldn't be scheduled to bunch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucey Posted June 10, 2019 Share #375 Posted June 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Jcb said: I figured that more-or-less even frequencies were implied. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear. Services, as a rule, really shouldn't be scheduled to bunch. It’s not the scheduling - it’s the relays in Queens and 49th St that’s causing the problem. In any change that doesn’t modify ’s route, the second service on 4th Av would have to become the Primary service - if only to make sure train station show up close to on-time and at the scheduled frequency. Just like it is overnight when and share Montague. It also means would have to be the primary local on QBL - which affects on 6th Av and on QBL, and and possibly on 8th Av, for starters. @RR503 wasn’t kidding about how every part of the B division would have some modification if 4th Av’s fix isn’t simple. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.