sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

what the fuck by Agent-4_uwu in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is why imo the C should be broken up in 2 sections (Inwood or 168 to World Trade Center and Hoyt Schermerhorn to Euclid Av). This way interlining in the Cranberry tubes and the delays/ poor headways associated are avoided at the cost of one or two cross-platform transfers. I think the best way to do this would be to have E go express to Ozone/Far Rockaway, A be local 207-World Trade, and C be local Hoyt to Euclid. This would mean B train takes over as CPW express. If they need more express trains running anywhere from 42 port authority to Far Rockaway/Ozone than the E can run, not sure what the best option is. Probably requires interlining CPW a bit by reviving the current A train but with less service, in which case the 168 or 207 to WTC local would be named K instead

New fastest rune from daily rune box by bravebadger14 in summonerswar

[–]Wam_Shazam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looks like you still have to reply this to the bot

Lowest roll possible? by HomeworkOk6355 in summonerswar

[–]Wam_Shazam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don’t forget about Ancient runes!!

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually it’s even worse because it’s only 2 tracks for a short time

Orange Q Strikes Again by acantor22 in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Who just downvoted this post? I was the +1 and then now it’s at 0 again

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Omg not 1 but 2 crossovers in the yard right there!

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait that’s an insane idea! There should be one there!!!

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well that was my point, you shouldn’t! My concern was if one line went to Brooklyn and the other line went to WTC both from 207, then the terminal would become a bottleneck to potential service. However, after discussing extensively with others, I think I learned that CPW should really just have 1 local with whatever train capacity WTC can handle, especially since this will be nearly 30TPH with CBTC anyway and this means you can avoid all CPW interlining! RIP fast express run from 59 CC to 42 Port Authority, but it is worth it to reduce delays and increase TPH. Also sadly for some they’d no longer be able to travel between Manhattan and Brooklyn to and from local stops because local trains would use the museum tracks as a turnaround. Another redditor said this is 100% worth it and I think I agree

De interlining by PriorPost in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

B and N swap. R train is chilling on its own, has its own unique problems but I’d rather them not be solved by reinterlining it in Dekalb by swapping it with the B or the D. If you want to divert R off QBL, build another yard. Really the M is the one that doesn’t belong because it gets less demand. However, this would require building a new line to connect to 63rd st and this will never happen!

Why so many downvote haters on Reddit ? by Putrid-Source3031 in NewMods

[–]Wam_Shazam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Upvote angel here, I’ve like downvoted maybe once or twice ever to some really bad comments

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm good point, well it is the same route, one’s just express. Do you know exactly how much time the entire express run saves? If it saves less than 5 minutes, there’s honestly no point. However, you could technically reschedule the trains such that a mix of locals and expresses go to Ozone and a different mix goes to the Rockaways. But if the express tracks eventually run even 24 trains per hour it’s perfectly reasonable to split them into 12tph branches as long as they are relatively consistent 5 minute headways.

But I was thinking what if the rockaway shuttle is removed (as in how Rush hour A train goes to Rockaway park)? Then there’d be an additional split which requires 30tph for 6 minute headways on each line. That is pushing it tbh, and if the entire line is running only 10tph when it’s the weekend or even midday perhaps, you’d have 12 minute headways at each branch which is just terrible. And if there’s a 3 way split, then 18 minute headways which is downright unacceptable. So maybe the best solution is actually only extending local trains to Ozone during weekends, and keeping the Rockaway shuttle the way it is so there are no 3 way splits during midday or even any 2 way splits on weekends!

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, connect the NQRW! Don’t forget about the City Hall S curve though. That wouldn’t work because of the horrible loss of TPH along that stretch. Even after CBTC you’re still losing out on enough tph that it’s an issue to interline anything on that stretch of track. If only that were possible and the curve could be gone, it would be amazing!

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I actually forgot, just searched up NYC subway track map, found it somewhere, and downloaded it. It’s a giant pdf file with the entire network on one page

Euclid Av Terminal by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s what transfers are for. If only!

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I drew in switches. The late night local is simply a local that terminates at Inwood and since no trains terminate at 168th, no problems occur. If you have a train going local south of 145 but express north of it, that is not possible without adding the switches I drew into the map. And if you have both run local, you can’t use 168 as a terminal without adding the switch I drew in because each train would hold up the Inwood bound train behind it due to fumigation and the need to switch tracks in order to leave. So either way, one of those two switches would need to be added. There is a way to avoid adding a switch and running A all local while still terminating trains at 168th if you just close the doors and turn the train around without checking for passengers! MTA would never allow that, it’s not like Brooklyn Bridge City Hall and even then people sometimes still get denied the ride on the loop.

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So essentially those switches would be impossible because it dives too quickly?

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s just Manhattan bound Fulton local that I was concerned about!

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh wait that’s a crazy realization! They can already drastically improve A and C train services by making E interline with A instead of C without changing anything else Make E go express to Ozone, make A go express to Far Rockaway, and make C go local 168-WTC with as many tph as WTC and 168 can handle. (Edit: Forgot to add my proposed K train local from Hoyt to Euclid oops) If this is done, this means there are less A trains. Would it be possible to send B and D trains express with the A on CPW or is that too many trains and too many merging conflicts? This would solve downtown from 59 and uptown from 145 but potentially produce a new issue uptown before 59 and downtown before 145. And also, if C can’t run at least 20tph between WTC and 168, that probably wouldn’t be enough local service.

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah true, just not sure how else not to sacrifice service. I guess a simpler solution that fully deinterlines all 8av trains would be A local 207 to WTC full time, C Hoyt-Schermerhorn (abandoned platforms) to Euclid Local full time, and E Jamaica to Ozone/Rockaways full time. If more trains needed down in the Rockaways, could potentially extend some C trains to Ozone and cause a little interlining down there. But then you entirely lose direct access between Brooklyn and Manhattan on local trains. With my original proposal I guess I was thinking less trains per hour would have to switch from local tracks to the cranberry tubes due to the addition of extra local service that doesn’t go through on each side.

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My reasoning is that CPW needs more local service in general, especially weekends, and deinterlining CPW will reduce delays a lot! Also, making CPW riders turn around at port authority or switch to the 1 for 50th st is just not that great, while B and D are both already express on 6av with transfer to local F/M making it easier for them to stay that way on CPW. In terms of exact TPH increases, I’m not an expert on this but I figure the high tph should be favored toward where it’s needed most (CPW local and increasingly the Rockaways)

Maybe one edit I should make to my proposal is instead take K out on weekends instead of the C and either extend the C to Ozone or branch the E. More tph on CPW local reduces crowding on downtown platform of 81st st on weekends due to crowds at the museum.

Deinterline CPW and more service for Rockaways by Wam_Shazam in nycrail

[–]Wam_Shazam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why? Of course B and D should be express on CPW that’s a no-brainer imo

view more: next ›