NYC Transit tests 11-car train as means of alleviating 'F' line overcrowding

[Art Vandelay]

A further note on this topic. Two further tests occurred this week. Both of them were on portions of the E and F lines.

[MTR Admiralty]

A further note on this topic. Two further tests occurred this week. Both of them were on portions of the E and F lines.

 

Think they will pass, this time?

 

By the way, the Westminster Station in London was rehabbed in 1999 with the Portcullis House, the Portcullis House is the new Parliamentary office in London. So, that station has parallels to our Chambers Street Station (well only, MUCH more cleaner)

[Art Vandelay]

I wouldnt quite say that any test being done is of a "pass/fail" sort. Theyre just trying it out and seeing what potential issues are out there. I suspect that because of the numerous issues involved, that they wont be considering 11 car trains anytime soon.

[MTR Admiralty]

I wouldnt quite say that any test being done is of a "pass/fail" sort. Theyre just trying it out and seeing what potential issues are out there. I suspect that because of the numerous issues involved, that they wont be considering 11 car trains anytime soon.

Well the thing is, can the 11th car open its doors without passengers facing a tunnel wall at all stations?

[Art Vandelay]

No. The bigger problem is probably that a 11 car train at WTC would foul the interlockings. Also the fact that I believe they would reduce throughput significantly.

 

5/53 certainly can't hold 11 cars anyway.

[MTR Admiralty]

No. The bigger problem is probably that a 11 car train at WTC would foul the interlockings. Also the fact that I believe they would reduce throughput significantly.

 

5/53 certainly can't hold 11 cars anyway.

 

Yeah because of the signal control lengths. Think of it, if you run trains of smaller lengths, the system would be more frequent. Now, if trains are longer, would the system be more frequent? That's the question.

[metsfan]

Yeah because of the signal control lengths. Think of it, if you run trains of smaller lengths, the system would be more frequent. Now, if trains are longer, would the system be more frequent? That's the question.

 

You'd have to change the way the signals controlled the movements. If you ever saw how they did things at newark, nyp and trenton, you'd realize that trains can move as fast as they want, as long as the train in front gets out of the way in time. Where there are express tracks you may want to put switches in to allow trains to go around delayed trains. Right now if a train is idle at a station all the trains behind it are backed up. I think these 2 things (new signaling methods, in-movement reroutes) would allow more trains and longer trains.

 

- A

[Art Vandelay]

While I can't say that I know all the math involved in designing such things, For a defined intended speed, using cars with defined braking rates and trains of defined lengths, there will be an optimal length of a signal block. This optimal length will change if you change any of those parameters, and lengthening the train is certainly a parameter which will change that.

[metsfan]

While I can't say that I know all the math involved in designing such things, For a defined intended speed, using cars with defined braking rates and trains of defined lengths, there will be an optimal length of a signal block. This optimal length will change if you change any of those parameters, and lengthening the train is certainly a parameter which will change that.

 

You could always change the trucks around to something beefier with both more traction power and more braking capability. The technologies incorporated into modern truck design are advancing every day, and the fleet as delivered usually reflects an older set of technologies. Sometimes an order will have the specs changed as the technology changes. In this case i can see both retrofit and mid-delivery changes being a non-issue.

 

- A

[Y2Julio]

changes being a non-issue huh? well what about the extra money that would be required to do such changes. Bad enough that the MTA's capital budget is already in the red and you want to further it deeper? You're nuts man.

[Joe]

Why would they upgrade the trucks on the existing fleet? New trucks would have to be planned, designed, installed, tested, then installed on all the cars. I'm no engineer, but i'm going to out on a limb and say that costs a LOT of money.

 

The LIRR runs with at least 10% of its cars OOS on any given day, just for required inspections. Does anyone have a similar figure for NYCT? Upgrading the trucks would require lots of cars to be taken out of service, than tested before they can be placed back in revenue service.

 

What if there is a problem with the trucks? Anyone remember the R46 truck fiasco that resulted in Rockwell exiting the railcar business altogether?

[metsfan]

changes being a non-issue huh? well what about the extra money that would be required to do such changes. Bad enough that the MTA's capital budget is already in the red and you want to further it deeper? You're nuts man.

 

Why would they upgrade the trucks on the existing fleet? New trucks would have to be planned, designed, installed, tested, then installed on all the cars. I'm no engineer, but i'm going to out on a limb and say that costs a LOT of money.

 

The LIRR runs with at least 10% of its cars OOS on any given day, just for required inspections. Does anyone have a similar figure for NYCT? Upgrading the trucks would require lots of cars to be taken out of service, than tested before they can be placed back in revenue service.

 

What if there is a problem with the trucks? Anyone remember the R46 truck fiasco that resulted in Rockwell exiting the railcar business altogether?

 

You both need to think more long term. The subway, by the time we are old and wrinkly will be in the middle of a complete reconstruction. Tunnels re-cast, viaducts replaced, totally new station entrances and platforms... You can't expect them not to do something that is possible and has been done, especially if it will give the renewed system a complete advantage over the current one.

 

Since the subway started running, how much has the world changed? By the time the subway's infrastructure is rebuilt, how much do you think NYC's population will be? All you have to do is look at anything to do with rail transportation since it was invented, and you can see that the only constant is change.

 

- A

[Joe]

A complete reconstruction? New lines will be in progress, new cars will replace old ones (as we can see with the R160s), and the signaling will eventually undergo a major upgrade. Otherwise, it'll be the same old subway.

[metsfan]

A complete reconstruction? New lines will be in progress, new cars will replace old ones (as we can see with the R160s), and the signaling will eventually undergo a major upgrade. Otherwise, it'll be the same old subway.

 

I disagree, because "the same old subway" isnt even the same as it was 10 years ago. The changes i'm talking about have nothing to do with & its current mismanagement of funding. The changes i'm talking about are a part of the natural evolution of things over time. Do you really think the IRT planners could imagine the system as it stands today? Part of it wasn't even possible till well after those folks had passed away. The very first IRT line opened less than a year after the first manned powered flight of a heavier than air craft. Do you think they could fathom a visit to newark international? No, i think not.

 

- A

[Maserati7200]

I disagree, because "the same old subway" isnt even the same as it was 10 years ago. The changes i'm talking about have nothing to do with & its current mismanagement of funding. The changes i'm talking about are a part of the natural evolution of things over time. Do you really think the IRT planners could imagine the system as it stands today? Part of it wasn't even possible till well after those folks had passed away. The very first IRT line opened less than a year after the first manned powered flight of a heavier than air craft. Do you think they could fathom a visit to newark international? No, i think not.

 

- A

 

Well these changes you speak of cannot happen overnight or even in 50 years. The changes you speak of would take over the course of 200 years and at least 125 years away. They will need to be done eventually, but long after you and I are dead.

[UlmerPark B6]

Well these changes you speak of cannot happen overnight or even in 50 years. The changes you speak of would take over the course of 200 years and at least 125 years away. They will need to be done eventually, but long after you and I are dead.

 

Are you sure, by then most structures that is so reluctant to fix right now, might collapses just like the CN Tower might one day.

[Maserati7200]

Are you sure, by then most structures that is so reluctant to fix right now, might collapses just like the CN Tower might one day.

 

well, I'm assuming the actually cares about the infrastructure :cool:

 

But seriously, keep in mind, the the subway is currently in the best shape since 1960's. After the 60's things started to go downhill and got really bad in the 70's an 80's. Things are getting better now.

[metsfan]

Are you sure, by then most structures that is so reluctant to fix right now, might collapses just like the CN Tower might one day.

 

Correct. Also, tunnels with curves requiring serious speed reductions are a big "need to fix" item. The opening of new south ferry is an important step in this process. I know some curves can't be eased as much as others, but if rail engineers can build a tunnel, they can change it.

 

A good example outside of the subway is the S curve near elizabeth, nj. There are several ideas on how to eliminate the second bend and have it be one solid curve, and they all ready did re-align the tracks on part of it to make the radius bigger. One day, they will remove this S curve completely and totally re-align the track & ROW, but for now it remains.

 

- A