Around the Horn Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22676 Posted December 3, 2019 I had 1916-1920 in my train this morning and I can confirm that all five cars have the new single line rollsigns. The entire set except 1918 also has the LED circle/diamonds @MHV9218 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22677 Posted December 3, 2019 52 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: I had 1916-1920 in my train this morning and I can confirm that all five cars have the new single line rollsigns. The entire set except 1918 also has the LED circle/diamonds @MHV9218 Such a bummer. Waste of money replacing signs that were in perfect shape (and far better designed than the single-line ones). Surprised to hear 1917 finally got the LEDs too, I actually thought they'd stopped adding those. The ex-240th cars have been rehabbed and all without them. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyMyself Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22678 Posted December 3, 2019 They must’ve SMS’ed 2321-2325 on the in the past week. It unfortunately lost its original rollsigns. However, there are a few sets that were SMS’ed and kept the original rollsigns at 240th. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewYorkElevated Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22679 Posted December 3, 2019 2356-2360 of the has the original side signs although the front one has been updated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q23 via 108 Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22680 Posted December 3, 2019 I was wondering why the older SMEEs (R32 - R42 & Redbirds) didn't recieve two tone door chimes during their GOH. Most cars got new everything minus the door chime. I dont know how expensive it would be to install those, but if they can get new rollsigns, new doors, new paint, I'm sure they could've squeezed in door chimes. Any insight as to why those cars didn't recieve those Door Chimes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22681 Posted December 3, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, CenSin said: This is another reason why the MTA shouldn’t be using infrastructure in ways not intended. Even with 4 tracks, there would be the same problem— trains terminating at 145 Street. 145 Street is not supposed to be a terminal. Bedford Park Boulevard and 168 Street are designed to terminate trains. The obvious solution is to terminate trains only at Bedford Park Boulevard, which the MTA is too poor to do. If you had re-read my post carefully before quoting, you would have known that I acknowledged that 145th Street was never designed to be a terminal. That is why I specifically said in the post that you quoted that today’s service would have run all day and evening long to/from Bedford Park while the remained express had GC been built as four tracks instead of three. Edited December 3, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22682 Posted December 3, 2019 There's nothing about three track lines that forces you to run rush hours only express service...look at the ! If they MTA wanted to (and I believe they should), they could easily extend the to BPB 19/5. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S78 via Hylan Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22683 Posted December 3, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, RR503 said: There's nothing about three track lines that forces you to run rush hours only express service...look at the ! If they MTA wanted to (and I believe they should), they could easily extend the to BPB 19/5. : You got to Bedford Park Blvd money? In all seriousness, I think they should do it also. Edited December 3, 2019 by S78 via Hylan 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 3, 2019 Share #22684 Posted December 3, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, RR503 said: There's nothing about three track lines that forces you to run rush hours only express service...look at the ! If they MTA wanted to (and I believe they should), they could easily extend the to BPB 19/5. Fair enough. It would also increase ridership too even if the is fully local b/w 59 and BPB while the (north of 145) is a one-way express. Edited December 3, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22685 Posted December 4, 2019 Why don't the and have the same announcement/FIND for Sutphin Blvd? On the it's "Sutphin Blvd, Archer Ave, JFK" on the its "Sutphin Blvd, JFK Airport" 23 hours ago, S78 via Hylan said: : You got to Bedford Park Blvd money? In all seriousness, I think they should do it also. Being that train's are starting to run faster, they can start to extend services by reducing running times for little to no money right? 22 hours ago, Jemorie said: Fair enough. It would also increase ridership too even if the is fully local b/w 59 and BPB while the (north of 145) is a one-way express. Have they increased speeds on Concourse? Of the Express trains I've been on, they cruised up Grand Concourse in a lethargic manor. Speaking of which, how are the speeds on CPW in both directions now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22686 Posted December 4, 2019 (edited) @N6 Limited: Trust me, the Grand Concourse Express is the worst in terms of speed. But I’ll say it is smooth. Central Park West Express is still the same. Heading uptown, T/Os apply the brakes around 96th Street or near 103rd Street, due to the dive at 103rd and the rise at 110th. They apply the brakes again after or around 116th, then pick up speed again into 125th. Heading southbound, T/Os apply the brakes near 81st, pass through smoothly, pick up speed again, apply the brakes again after passing through 72nd due to the nearby slight bend, pick up speed again into 59th. Edited December 4, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22687 Posted December 4, 2019 The concourse express is slow N/B cause it's going uphill and uses 68s which makes things worse. From what I heard, the Concourse express is fast S/B. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22688 Posted December 4, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, trainfan22 said: The concourse express is slow N/B cause it's going uphill and uses 68s which makes things worse. From what I heard, the Concourse express is fast S/B. Good lookout. Thanks. Shit last couple of times I rode it, I was soooo tight with going N/B on the Bronx Express. But then I laugh it off eventually lol. I was just too overexcited the first time till I went through it. But yeah, S/B wise, it’s decent. The 75 footers just have less horsepower combined with the removal of their field shunting. By the way, from what I heard, the R46s are the lightest 75 footers so they are slightly faster. Can anybody please confirm? Edited December 4, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22689 Posted December 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Jemorie said: @N6 Limited: Trust me, the Grand Concourse Express is the worst in terms of speed. But I’ll say it is smooth. Central Park West Express is still the same. Heading uptown, T/Os apply the brakes around 96th Street or near 103rd Street, due to the dive at 103rd and the rise at 110th. They apply the brakes again after or around 116th, then pick up speed again into 125th. Heading southbound, T/Os apply the brakes near 81st, pass through smoothly, pick up speed again, apply the brakes again after passing through 72nd due to the nearby slight bend, pick up speed again into 59th. The IND built for speed and probably thought the slopes and curves were not going to slow trains down. Current policies are to blame, but one might wonder whether CBTC might restore the original speeds. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22690 Posted December 4, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, CenSin said: The IND built for speed and probably thought the slopes and curves were not going to slow trains down. Current policies are to blame, but one might wonder whether CBTC might restore the original speeds. Me too. Call me crazy, but I would love to see the and whiz like rockets N/B on the slope between 103rd and 110th, and fast the rest of the way until 116th. Personally I feel like the only timer (or speed restriction, forgive me @Trainmaster5 if I got the term wrong again lol) should be located at just the south end of 116th Street, where T/Os should apply the brakes until they hit 5-10 mph closer to curve north of the station and pick up speed the rest of the way into 125th. I sometimes daydream on my free time of it being just like that lol. Sometimes, the and N/B hit 35-37 mph into 125th if it’s a really good T/O. Trust me lol. Other times, it’s the usual 30-33 mph. But still a good speed. But of course, as we both know, the shorter distances between the locals compared to the longer express distances. Edited December 4, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22691 Posted December 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Jemorie said: @N6 Limited: Trust me, the Grand Concourse Express is the worst in terms of speed. But I’ll say it is smooth. Central Park West Express is still the same. Heading uptown, T/Os apply the brakes around 96th Street or near 103rd Street, due to the dive at 103rd and the rise at 110th. They apply the brakes again after or around 116th, then pick up speed again into 125th. Heading southbound, T/Os apply the brakes near 81st, pass through smoothly, pick up speed again, apply the brakes again after passing through 72nd due to the nearby slight bend, pick up speed again into 59th. Wouldn't it make sense to speed down the downgrade and use the momentum to mitigate speed reduction through the climb at 110th? The slight bends shouldn't make the T/O's slow down, those IRT trains whip through curves all the time. 1 hour ago, trainfan22 said: The concourse express is slow N/B cause it's going uphill and uses 68s which makes things worse. From what I heard, the Concourse express is fast S/B. Are there timers and any point which make the train slow down before the incline which makes it harder to maintain speed? Perhaps if the T/O is allowed to speed into the incline it wouldn't be as slow? 53 minutes ago, Jemorie said: Good lookout. Thanks. Shit last couple of times I rode it, I was soooo tight with going N/B on the Bronx Express. But then I laugh it off eventually lol. I was just too overexcited the first time till I went through it. But yeah, S/B wise, it’s decent. The 75 footers just have less horsepower combined with the removal of their field shunting. By the way, from what I heard, the R46s are the lightest 75 footers so they are slightly faster. Can anybody please confirmed? Slow express trains are vexing, it defeats the purpose. Would the R-160s/R-179s get up Concourse faster? 9 minutes ago, CenSin said: The IND built for speed and probably thought the slopes and curves were not going to slow trains down. Current policies are to blame, but one might wonder whether CBTC might restore the original speeds. Exactly , it seems like the slowdowns are self defeating, If you're descending only to ascend then slowing down serves what purpose? For example, The Merrit Parkway is on rolling terrain, why even attempt to break going down hill, when you're only going to go up hill in 5-10 seconds? CBTC might restore the original speeds, the gets around those numerous curves without hesitation. I did notice a slowdown in the east river tunnel since CBTC was first implemented, does anyone know why? 14 minutes ago, Jemorie said: Me too. Call me crazy, but I would love to see the and whiz like rockets N/B on the slope between 103rd and 110th, and fast the rest of the way until 116th. Personally I feel like the only timer (or speed restriction, forgive me @Trainmaster5 if I got the term wrong again lol) should be located at just the south end of 116th Street, where T/Os should apply the brakes until they hit 5-10 mph closer to curve north of the station and pick up speed the rest of the way into 125th. I sometimes daydream on my free time of it being just like that lol. Sometimes, the and N/B hit 35-37 mph into 125th if it’s a really good T/O. Trust me lol. Other times, it’s the usual 30-33 mph. But still a good speed. But of course, as we both know, the shorter distances between the locals compared to the longer express distances. To me is odd that there are stretches where locals go faster than expresses simply because there are more stops. If the tracks are side by side and have the same grades/curves/etc then what's the problem? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22692 Posted December 4, 2019 I'm surprised no one is talking about the R46 that's on the right now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22693 Posted December 4, 2019 @N6 Limited, I’m thinking of a better professional response. But it’s too complicated for me lol. @RR503 and @Trainmaster5, I would gladly use a helping hand here lol. Please and thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted December 4, 2019 Share #22694 Posted December 4, 2019 (edited) The NTTs would certainly go a bit quicker given their younger age, though they tend to struggle by the time they reach the 40-45+ mph mark. The Canarise tubes were slowed down a little bit recently because of damage from Hurricane Sandy or the current policy of speeding or both. Anyone can confirm? Edited December 4, 2019 by Jemorie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RestrictOnTheHanger Posted December 5, 2019 Share #22695 Posted December 5, 2019 I remember @RR503 posted something on the timer thread about how timers were put in during the CPW resignalling to increase capacity with shorter control lines, that may have something to do with slower express trains 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted December 5, 2019 Share #22696 Posted December 5, 2019 Yes. A4 track -- the northbound express -- has GT40s from 86th St to 116 St, and then GT35 around the bend to 125. Those indeed do exist for capacity reasons -- under fixed block control, allowing trains to get very fast (especially as they approach high dwell station areas) tends to reduce capacity as your control lines get extremely long, thus requiring slower speeds/ST earlier, etc. CBTC would fix this issue without any capacity penalty and could potentially allow speeds well in excess of 50mph really all the way from 59 to 116 on CPW, but for that we must wait. The same is true on Concourse. The R68s are certainly underpowered, and have chronic issues when it comes to hill climbing, but that whole line is slathered in GTs -- two shots and one shots alike. What's interesting from a historical perspective is that many portions of Concourse express actually once had slower time speeds than they do today; a lot of the speed issues there (on a relative level, not an absolute level) are thanks to operator variability, signal positioning -- north of 145, there are some nasty GTs that hide behind curves -- car equipment power and signal reliability. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted December 5, 2019 Share #22697 Posted December 5, 2019 194x set on the still rocking original lights, original rollsigns, and original stanchions. Not to mention the bulkhead rollsigns every single car has. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted December 5, 2019 Share #22698 Posted December 5, 2019 (edited) 43 minutes ago, MHV9218 said: 194x set on the still rocking original lights, original rollsigns, and original stanchions. Not to mention the bulkhead rollsigns every single car has. 1942, 1938, 1926, 1924 (just one rollsign is single lined, the other one is original) and 1934: The single units set Also, just hearing it on an R142A arriving at Atlantic Av-Barclays Center: The next stop: Franklin Av is now known as "Franklin Av-Medgars College". The phrase will be expanded to the and trains as well as and Shuttle Edited December 5, 2019 by Calvin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted December 6, 2019 Share #22699 Posted December 6, 2019 26 minutes ago, Calvin said: 1942, 1938, 1926, 1924 (just one rollsign is single lined, the other one is original) and 1934: The single units set This was the 1947-1948 etc. set, which is also still original. If I remember right, on 1924 that rollsign is original but it's from an R62, with Akzidenz, not Helvetica. Also, has anybody checked if the original floors remain on 1958/the 214x set that had them (incl. a piece of redbird floor)? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted December 6, 2019 Share #22700 Posted December 6, 2019 22 hours ago, RR503 said: Yes. A4 track -- the northbound express -- has GT40s from 86th St to 116 St, and then GT35 around the bend to 125. Those indeed do exist for capacity reasons -- under fixed block control, allowing trains to get very fast (especially as they approach high dwell station areas) tends to reduce capacity as your control lines get extremely long, thus requiring slower speeds/ST earlier, etc. CBTC would fix this issue without any capacity penalty and could potentially allow speeds well in excess of 50mph really all the way from 59 to 116 on CPW, but for that we must wait. CPW, unfortunately, does not seem to be on the horizon for CBTC. 0 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.