|
|
| Re: Adding the C or V to the Culver Line (842749) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Adding the C or V to the Culver Line |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Oct 11 08:16:35 2009, in response to Re: Adding the C or V to the Culver Line, posted by lrg5784 on Sun Oct 11 08:00:51 2009. No. The issue is where shall you turn services, and where shall you have merges and complicated interlockings.Presently the (C) is an 8th Avenue Local train, and it must merge with the (A) service at Canal Street in order to access the Cranberry tunnel. It has come to the ears of this LION that this merge can be a source of delays on both services especially during pms. If the (C) goes to Rutgers and the (E) runs on the express tracks from 50th street, then the pm merge is moved north to 50th street, where each service has its own platform so that one (the (E)) can wait patiently for the other for a clean merge. This is an advantage since the trains are more lightly loaded at 50th street than they are at Canal street, thus mitigating the loading delays incurred enroute. Ergo a cleaner merge and quicker service leaving Manhattan at the other end. As for the length of the (E): who cares! What we as railfans (and/or employees)look at as one service the passenger sees as two different trains. When you stand on a platform in Manhattan you can take an (E) to Queens via the Boulevard, or an (E) to Queens via Fulton. Because almost all services must pass through Manhattan, this creates double length routes. But trains must be turned *somewhere* and turn abouts in Manhattan are rare enough, and particularly rare in the IND which was not designed to turn express trains in Manhattan. It is the design of the Railroad. Might the LION have designed it differently? Perhaps, but most likely not. There was then and is now no reason to do so. ROAR |
|
|
|