|
|
| Re: R-160 Update (314763) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Sep 24 06:22:17 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Future Motorman on Sun Sep 24 03:59:00 2006. But at the end of the line, at the terminals, with so many trains so close, wouldn't that mean a bunching of trains waiting to make their final drop.Most NYCT reversing terminals cannot handle 40 tph. They don't have to because there are usually multiple branches or stations where trains can be short turned. The exceptions being Times Sq on the Flushing Line, which uses tail tracks and has a capacity of 40 tph, and the IRT local downtown terminals, which use loop terminals. The capacity of stub terminals is 24+ tph. Two such branch terminals and 40 tph is still viable at the intermediate stations. The BOT had no problems operating stub terminals in excess of 20 tph. Their documented record was 25 tph at E 241st St between the Lex Ave express and the Third Ave Thru Express. The Queens Blvd line has 5 reversing terminals, making both the local and express tracks capable of 40 tph operation. There's another reason for the bunching at terminals. The schedule has been padded to make on time performance better. Case in point - the Broadway local. Current scheduled running times are between 52 and 59 minutes between 242nd and South Ferry. The running time used to be 49 minutes back in the 1970's and earlier. Most runs do not need the extra 3 to 10 minutes. Most arriving trains appear to arrive early, with no pockets available. Departures go according to schedules based on the padded running time. The result is a long line of trains waiting for the terminal to clear. Another problem is NYCT's insistence to schedule all the recovery time at the terminals. Recovery time should be divided into the dwell time at each intermediate station. |
|
|
|