Calvin Posted July 3 Share #30901 Posted July 3 (edited) The single units of the R62As: 1960, 1938 and 1924 are seen to be transferred to Corona Yard for refuse service. Edited July 3 by Calvin 1926, maybe as well to Corona Yard but will find out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDL Posted July 3 Share #30902 Posted July 3 (edited) just sent out a survey about the branching and suggested improvements. Quote Dear Valued MTA Customer, We are conducting a brief survey about the A train. If you have taken the A train toward JFK Airport or the Rockaways, please take five minutes to complete this survey. Improving your transit experience is a primary focus of our efforts here at the MTA, and your response to surveys like this one is key to us understanding and addressing your concerns. Please click the link below to take the brief survey. This survey will only take a few minutes. Thank you, MTA Market Research Of course, the ideal plan would be on CPW local, CPW Express or vice versa. to Lefferts 8tph , to Far Rockaway 8tph, to Euclid 8tph. And in a perfect world, the RBB line would run to Rockaway Park replacing the . Edited July 3 by TDL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDL Posted July 3 Share #30903 Posted July 3 5 minutes ago, TDL said: just sent out a survey about the branching and suggested improvements. Of course, the ideal plan would be on CPW local, CPW Express or vice versa. to Lefferts 8tph , to Far Rockaway 8tph, to Euclid 8tph. If Cranberry goes down between Jay and Canal, the backup service plan would have trains local on Fulton, express on Fulton, and run via the , with service suspended. If we go down between Jay and Lafayette/Nostrand, Utica would be the turnaround point 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted July 4 Share #30904 Posted July 4 11 hours ago, TDL said: Of course, the ideal plan would be on CPW local, CPW Express so then what stops at the upper level at 50th street? 11 hours ago, TDL said: to Lefferts 8tph , to Far Rockaway 8tph, to Euclid 8tph. 24 TPH through Cranberry... that feels like a disaster waiting to happen... and we already have an H... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted July 4 Share #30905 Posted July 4 5 hours ago, Kamen Rider said: 24 TPH through Cranberry... that feels like a disaster waiting to happen... IIRC, isn’t Cranberry’s max capacity 25-26 TPH? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted July 4 Share #30906 Posted July 4 On 7/3/2024 at 11:47 AM, TDL said: just sent out a survey about the branching and suggested improvements. Of course, the ideal plan would be on CPW local, CPW Express or vice versa. to Lefferts 8tph , to Far Rockaway 8tph, to Euclid 8tph. And in a perfect world, the RBB line would run to Rockaway Park replacing the . There is one small problem with the 8th Avenue express on CPW: 13 hours ago, Kamen Rider said: so then what stops at the upper level at 50th street? And the other problem is those specifically looking for 50th Street. You would likely need in this scenario for the and to be express while the are all local. Not sure that would sit well with those in extreme upper Manhattan. Otherwise, with the 8th Avenue trains express, only the would be stopping at 50th as a local and you would need to in that scenario take either the or to 7th Avenue-53rd Street and switch to the for 50th, and for 23rd or Spring Street if on the or getting off at 42nd for the to 23rd or at 14th or West 4th for the to Spring. One advantage of this, however, is there would be no mergers south of 168th Street with the 8th Avenue lines merging there with the only merger the other way whichever of the is local merging at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. 13 hours ago, Kamen Rider said: 24 TPH through Cranberry... that feels like a disaster waiting to happen... and we already have an H... And this is a big reason why I would be as part of the SAS (either separate from the main build or as a new Phase 5) where a connection from the Fulton Local tracks to via goes via a new lower level tunnel that would run below the Transit Museum with a new stop from Clinton to Court Streets on Schermerhorn and then (railroad north) make a left turn on Clinton to State Street and then via a new State Street tunnel to either South Ferry or Seaport with the line going the planned route to Chatham Square (doing some of Phase 4 as part of this) with Chatham Square likely four tracks and two platforms to serve at least as a temporary terminal. This can be the train running at least initially between Euclid and Chatham Square (extended late nights to Lefferts) with the and being express on Fulton and the running to Lefferts (replaced by the late nights) and the running on a 4-3 split between Far Rockway and Rockaway Park with if necessary some trains short-turning at Howard Beach. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slantfan4281 Posted July 4 Share #30907 Posted July 4 On 7/3/2024 at 7:08 AM, Calvin said: The single units of the R62As: 1960, 1938 and 1924 are seen to be transferred to Corona Yard for refuse service. this might be a stupid question, but why use cars that are still usable for revenue service for trash trains? Do they only need 12 single cars for the shuttle and while the rest can't run combined as for 10 car trains? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted July 4 Share #30908 Posted July 4 41 minutes ago, slantfan4281 said: this might be a stupid question, but why use cars that are still usable for revenue service for trash trains? Do they only need 12 single cars for the shuttle and while the rest can't run combined as for 10 car trains? Two words: air conditioning. the purpose built work motors lack it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 4 Share #30909 Posted July 4 21 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said: Two words: air conditioning. the purpose built work motors lack it. so…why can’t they add it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielhg121 Posted July 4 Share #30910 Posted July 4 2 minutes ago, Lawrence St said: so…why can’t they add it? Prob cuz it’s CHEAPER and easier to transfer some cars to use as work motors than retrofit A/C on older work motors. The isn’t exactly struggling to make service. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulturious Posted July 4 Share #30911 Posted July 4 1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said: On 7/3/2024 at 11:47 AM, TDL said: just sent out a survey about the branching and suggested improvements. Of course, the ideal plan would be on CPW local, CPW Express or vice versa. to Lefferts 8tph , to Far Rockaway 8tph, to Euclid 8tph. And in a perfect world, the RBB line would run to Rockaway Park replacing the . There is one small problem with the 8th Avenue express on CPW: And the other problem is those specifically looking for 50th Street. You would likely need in this scenario for the and to be express while the are all local. Not sure that would sit well with those in extreme upper Manhattan. Otherwise, with the 8th Avenue trains express, only the would be stopping at 50th as a local and you would need to in that scenario take either the or to 7th Avenue-53rd Street and switch to the for 50th, and for 23rd or Spring Street if on the or getting off at 42nd for the to 23rd or at 14th or West 4th for the to Spring. One advantage of this, however, is there would be no mergers south of 168th Street with the 8th Avenue lines merging there with the only merger the other way whichever of the is local merging at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. At this point, the conversation would need to move to the Proposals chat. This isn't my place to say how service should be since I'm not, as Kamen Rider put it for someone else, "getting a check from the MTA." However, if I were asked what you could possibly do to improve service for the and it's branching issues without any new infrastructure involved, a lot would have been changed. I've spoken about this before in another chat and this is what I'd potentially do: remains the same (bear with me on this) Norwood-205 St to Euclid Av, express in Manhattan, local in Brooklyn rerouted to Coney Island via Rutgers Forest Hills-71 Av to Brighton Beach via 63 St and QBL local 168 St to Coney Island (pre-2001 routing basically) rerouted to WTC via 53 St and 6 Av local Bedford Park Blvd to Metropolitan Av via 8 Av Benefits: The only has to deal with the and along a much longer stretch from 145 St to Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts, Bronx riders keeps direct CPW express access, 50 St keeps direct CPW access, QBL gains Manhattan express service Disadvantages: The line gets shafted to run CPW local, QBL local loses a line to Queens Plaza The is a flexible line to which I doubt anyone would be angry about the lose of it going along QBL outside of foamers or as this forum calls them, buffs. Service throughout the week and the time of day still is something I need fixing, this ain't a permanent solution nor is it the only solution, just giving my 2 cents on. Have fun with this one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4 via Mosholu Posted July 4 Share #30912 Posted July 4 On 6/30/2024 at 5:07 PM, Calvin said: I wonder if the train will consider having platform conductors at Brighton Beach like the for now like Astoria-Ditmars Blvd in-case to double check which of their trains will go to Bedford Park Blvd during the midday hours. * Some trains may get scrolled to Harlem-145 St at that time. From what I saw during the winter pick (which lasted into the spring), platform conductors were assigned to Harlem 145 Street in the hour before the afternoon rush (between three and four) when the D would run express to sign B trains for Bedford Park. That didn't really used to be a thing until I took the B during that time period where I noticed that the top sign on the conductor car was different from the other ones. At the moment, they still have the Harlem-145 Street reading on top on all trains (to Harlem 145 and Bedford Park); I don't really think it actually sunk in just yet, or they are yet to update the service signs making note of every other B serving Bedford Park (besides the 3 B's that somehow appeared in the timetable for them to bypass 182-183 Streets to go to Kingsbridge Road). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 4 Share #30913 Posted July 4 51 minutes ago, 4 via Mosholu said: From what I saw during the winter pick (which lasted into the spring), platform conductors were assigned to Harlem 145 Street in the hour before the afternoon rush (between three and four) when the D would run express to sign B trains for Bedford Park. That didn't really used to be a thing until I took the B during that time period where I noticed that the top sign on the conductor car was different from the other ones. At the moment, they still have the Harlem-145 Street reading on top on all trains (to Harlem 145 and Bedford Park); I don't really think it actually sunk in just yet, or they are yet to update the service signs making note of every other B serving Bedford Park (besides the 3 B's that somehow appeared in the timetable for them to bypass 182-183 Streets to go to Kingsbridge Road). What’s even the point of those ‘s that end at Kingsbridge? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4 via Mosholu Posted July 5 Share #30914 Posted July 5 6 minutes ago, Lawrence St said: What’s even the point of those ‘s that end at Kingsbridge? They've been in the timetable for a while. @Daniel The Cool had pointed out that they were added to supposedly quell congestion at Bedford Park. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaPr03 Posted July 5 Share #30915 Posted July 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, Lawrence St said: What’s even the point of those ‘s that end at Kingsbridge? They are AM Layups to Concourse Yard, train get taken OOS at Kingsbridge Road on the middle track & run lite/light passing Bedford Park to avoid clogging up the terminal. Kingsbridge Road trippers are the 0752+, 0758+, and 0810+ from Brighton Beach. Edited July 5 by DaPr03 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slantfan4281 Posted July 6 Share #30916 Posted July 6 On 7/4/2024 at 2:58 PM, Kamen Rider said: Two words: air conditioning. the purpose built work motors lack it. do they still use R33WF cars during the rest of the year or are those all OOS now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted July 6 Share #30917 Posted July 6 2 hours ago, slantfan4281 said: do they still use R33WF cars during the rest of the year or are those all OOS now I don't know, that's more A division these days. All I see are R42s being used. Such as on the trash train that does the Queens Blvd line, which is usually in the formula when I'm reporting to work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted July 7 Share #30918 Posted July 7 8 hours ago, slantfan4281 said: do they still use R33WF cars during the rest of the year or are those all OOS now They still use them at times. Recently, it was paired with a flatbed and a single unit R62A #1903 from a video posted this week. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slantfan4281 Posted July 7 Share #30919 Posted July 7 50 minutes ago, Calvin said: They still use them at times. Recently, it was paired with a flatbed and a single unit R62A #1903 from a video posted this week. Impressive that they're still holding up given how most of R32s set aside for work service are being scrapped 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJHmarc Posted July 7 Share #30920 Posted July 7 11 hours ago, slantfan4281 said: Impressive that they're still holding up given how most of R32s set aside for work service are being scrapped Likely until the R62’s are retired from revenue service, then there will be plenty to replace the R33’s, funny part i just thought about is the 74 ft cars going into retirement and future ones probably won’t replace of the non revenue 60ft cars. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slantfan4281 Posted July 7 Share #30921 Posted July 7 1 hour ago, MJHmarc said: Likely until the R62’s are retired from revenue service, then there will be plenty to replace the R33’s, funny part i just thought about is the 74 ft cars going into retirement and future ones probably won’t replace of the non revenue 60ft cars. I can see the R62A single units sticking around for 20-30 years after retirement for work service like how the redbirds have, but yeah since there aren't any single/married pair 60 ft cars after the R42s the MTA might just use the R62/As all over the entire system 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted July 8 Share #30922 Posted July 8 11 hours ago, slantfan4281 said: I can see the R62A single units sticking around for 20-30 years after retirement for work service like how the redbirds have, but yeah since there aren't any single/married pair 60 ft cars after the R42s the MTA might just use the R62/As all over the entire system I was speaking to one of my colleagues about the issue of barn size and the other random stuff bandied about and he reminded me of something a motor instructor told us years ago. I’m surprised that no one else picked up on this. When the barns were constructed we had single cars and married pairs followed them. Barn size was never a problem for those who came before us. Our teacher foresaw the problem of the 4 and 5 car units. Some geniuses decided it was less labor intensive for the new types of cars ( less people needed to make yard moves ) . Maybe Bill from Maspeth can relate to the point I’m trying to make. Those who came after me are used to and comfortable with the NTT. I’m ambivalent about the issue because the older cars were easier for a train crew and/or an RCI to overcome a problem. The newer NTT equipment can tell you what and where the problem is but you can’t really fix anything without having more help on hand. They didn’t even want us to reset a circuit breaker back then. Many posters don’t even know that the R62/62A cars were single cars as delivered. The link bars were installed later. Even back then they told us new and shiny caught your attention but the riders didn’t care. They just wanted to get from point A to point B and they didn’t care what type of equipment showed up. That’s how I feel about this even today. My opinion. My experience. Carry on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted July 8 Share #30923 Posted July 8 2 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said: I was speaking to one of my colleagues about the issue of barn size and the other random stuff bandied about and he reminded me of something a motor instructor told us years ago. I’m surprised that no one else picked up on this. When the barns were constructed we had single cars and married pairs followed them. Barn size was never a problem for those who came before us. Our teacher foresaw the problem of the 4 and 5 car units. Some geniuses decided it was less labor intensive for the new types of cars ( less people needed to make yard moves ) . Maybe Bill from Maspeth can relate to the point I’m trying to make. Those who came after me are used to and comfortable with the NTT. I’m ambivalent about the issue because the older cars were easier for a train crew and/or an RCI to overcome a problem. The newer NTT equipment can tell you what and where the problem is but you can’t really fix anything without having more help on hand. They didn’t even want us to reset a circuit breaker back then. Many posters don’t even know that the R62/62A cars were single cars as delivered. The link bars were installed later. Even back then they told us new and shiny caught your attention but the riders didn’t care. They just wanted to get from point A to point B and they didn’t care what type of equipment showed up. That’s how I feel about this even today. My opinion. My experience. Carry on. Around the time longer sets were even being considered, revenue operations had increasingly justified the transition. As it turns out, a greater focus on sets also opened the door for increasing capacity of individual trains. That said, it definitely wasn't a free lunch, which your teacher correctly pointed out. Considering all the half-cabs on the R62/As and their B-Division counterparts, that definitely tracks. This really got me to thinking about that alleged proposal to consolidate all maintenance at 207 to save money and the absolute clusterf*ck that would've brought, particularly with the 5-car (equivalent) B-Division sets without expanding the barn. Speaking of which, I really hate the idea of activating 8th Avenue CBTC without addressing that first. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDL Posted July 9 Share #30924 Posted July 9 On 7/4/2024 at 2:01 PM, Wallyhorse said: There is one small problem with the 8th Avenue express on CPW: And the other problem is those specifically looking for 50th Street. You would likely need in this scenario for the and to be express while the are all local. Not sure that would sit well with those in extreme upper Manhattan. Otherwise, with the 8th Avenue trains express, only the would be stopping at 50th as a local and you would need to in that scenario take either the or to 7th Avenue-53rd Street and switch to the for 50th, and for 23rd or Spring Street if on the or getting off at 42nd for the to 23rd or at 14th or West 4th for the to Spring. One advantage of this, however, is there would be no mergers south of 168th Street with the 8th Avenue lines merging there with the only merger the other way whichever of the is local merging at Hoyt-Schermerhorn. And this is a big reason why I would be as part of the SAS (either separate from the main build or as a new Phase 5) where a connection from the Fulton Local tracks to via goes via a new lower level tunnel that would run below the Transit Museum with a new stop from Clinton to Court Streets on Schermerhorn and then (railroad north) make a left turn on Clinton to State Street and then via a new State Street tunnel to either South Ferry or Seaport with the line going the planned route to Chatham Square (doing some of Phase 4 as part of this) with Chatham Square likely four tracks and two platforms to serve at least as a temporary terminal. This can be the train running at least initially between Euclid and Chatham Square (extended late nights to Lefferts) with the and being express on Fulton and the running to Lefferts (replaced by the late nights) and the running on a 4-3 split between Far Rockway and Rockaway Park with if necessary some trains short-turning at Howard Beach. That's why I said "or vice versa" i.e. 8th Ave is CPW Local, 6th Ave is CPW Express. In this scenario. the would replace the in Brooklyn since it would be forced to run 8th Ave Express. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwell179 Posted July 9 Share #30925 Posted July 9 How come the trains have been going local from Marcy to Myrtle lately ? 1 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.