|
|
| Houston Dip (1349310) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1349310) | |
Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015 How come the express tracks at Houston on the west side IRT dip down about half a track level and then come right back up? |
|
|
| (1349346) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Apr 24 07:22:54 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. Do the express tracks dip? Or do the Local tracks rise?On the old IRT the Local tracks would rise as the entered the stations so that gravity would help slow them down. They went back down again leaving the station so that gravity would help get them going. ROAR |
|
|
| (1349347) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Fri Apr 24 07:26:06 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. Hmmm. I'll see if I can determine that. Interesting. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1349362) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:47:45 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Apr 24 07:22:54 2015. No. That is a myth. If it were true it would be present in every station, rather than being rare.Stick to things you know, like spelling puns and photoshops involving plush animal toys. |
|
|
| (1349363) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:48:14 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Fri Apr 24 07:26:06 2015. Not at all. |
|
|
| (1349364) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:49:32 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. The local tracks rise in order to be closer to the street level to minimize the need to climb stairs. The express tracks obviously do not stop, and have no need to be closer to the street, so they remain level allowing trains to maintain speed. |
|
|
| (1349365) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Fri Apr 24 09:05:47 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:47:45 2015. And model railroading |
|
|
| (1349367) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Apr 24 09:13:32 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:49:32 2015. But if that's the reason, why does it occur rarely, as you point out in your other post? |
|
|
| (1349374) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Apr 24 10:31:49 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by AlM on Fri Apr 24 09:13:32 2015. It only occurs on the original IRT route. It is as I have said. Those first trains had more trailer cars and fewer traction axles. After that more power was put into the trains and they needed no such contrivances. |
|
|
| (1349375) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Apr 24 10:35:10 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Apr 24 10:31:49 2015. But it doesn't occur at most stations of the original IRT route either. |
|
|
| (1349377) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Apr 24 10:46:58 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:47:45 2015. Having grown up along the Flushing Line,there are noticable dips between stations. Myth or not, the dips are there. If not to take advantage of gravity, why did the engineers design the elevated structures that way??Just wonderin. |
|
|
| (1349382) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:18:43 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Apr 24 10:46:58 2015. Changes in local elevation. |
|
|
| (1349383) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:20:21 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by AlM on Fri Apr 24 09:13:32 2015. It could take place only where the station is at the crest of a hill. It does not make sense otherwise. |
|
|
| (1349384) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:21:19 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by AlM on Fri Apr 24 10:35:10 2015. Which is exactly why his explanation makes no sense whatsoever. If it were true it would exist at every local station, or at least many of them. |
|
|
| (1349385) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:21:54 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Apr 24 10:31:49 2015. The subject station is not part of the original IRT. |
|
|
| (1349409) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Apr 24 14:47:04 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Apr 24 10:46:58 2015. The book that the IRT Company published when the subway first opened definitely referred to that practice of having the local tracks rise and descend for the purposes mentioned. Maybe it was only really done at a few stations, but it was certainly an idea the IRT really had. |
|
|
| (1349411) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Fri Apr 24 15:18:39 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:18:43 2015. Roosevelt Av is fairly level between 74 St and Junction Blvd. The tracks may heve been raised at the stations to make room for the mezzanines. The reason for the dips may have been to save steel (shorter columns) between the stations, or maybe they did think it would speed up the trains. There's a similar dip between 40 St and 46 St on the concrete viaduct. |
|
|
| (1349412) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Apr 24 15:23:37 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by VictorM on Fri Apr 24 15:18:39 2015. Funny to read this thread. Similar vertical discrepancies existed in Chicago. The folklore was the accelerate/decelerate story, later the added mezzanines story. AFAIK the major rebuilds of the L structures over the years eliminated the dips. Chicago Motorman, DH, what say you? |
|
|
| (1349416) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Fri Apr 24 16:05:28 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:49:32 2015. Is Houston St. that much deeper than other stations along the 7th ave. route? If so, I did not realize this. |
|
|
| (1349420) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 16:36:51 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Apr 24 14:47:04 2015. [citation needed] |
|
|
| (1349421) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 16:39:15 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Express Rider on Fri Apr 24 16:05:28 2015. Why would it be deeper? My description implies that it's of typical depth. |
|
|
| (1349425) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Apr 24 17:05:16 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 16:36:51 2015. Take a look at http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/The_New_York_Subway:_Chapter_01,_The_Route_of_the_Road, the section headed "Grades and Curves". It mentions using downgrades "to assist in the acceleration of the cars". It doesn't specifically mention that upgrades would help with stopping, but it's hard to build one without the other. |
|
|
| (1349441) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Apr 24 18:42:30 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Apr 24 14:47:04 2015. Manhattan Elevated went to town doing that for the center track express services which is why they rose to an upper level at most stops. That was indeed part of IRT's design although it wasn't done at a good number of stops in the subway. |
|
|
| (1349445) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Apr 24 19:01:32 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:47:45 2015. So what is the real reason? If not to assist with necessary speed changes, why? And why would the express tracks stay level? I can't think of any other reasonable explanation. |
|
|
| (1349446) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Apr 24 19:03:13 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:49:32 2015. The difference isn't enough to matter to most people climbing stairs. |
|
|
| (1349454) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Apr 24 19:47:11 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:21:19 2015. The explanation is correct and it is documented in several publications issued by both the IRT itself and the PSC. Why it wasn’t done at more stations is anyone’s guess but it may have been intended for more stations and the physical characteristics of various areas may have precluded its application in more locations. |
|
|
| (1349455) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Apr 24 19:49:13 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 11:21:54 2015. Although it is not a part of the original; IRT it may be that the physical characteristics of there area may have allowed the station to be constructed that way even though it wasn’t used in all areas of the original subway. |
|
|
| (1349467) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 20:56:02 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Dyre Dan on Fri Apr 24 17:05:16 2015. That still doesn't make sense. If the grade in the station is 2.1% to assist starting, wouldn't it make it harder to start in the opposite direction? It also says the feature is at many stations, when I know of only two.That pamphlet seems more like corporate propaganda and not necessarily completely accurate. |
|
|
| (1349470) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 21:03:14 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Apr 24 19:01:32 2015. Huh? I've posted the most likely answer hours ago. |
|
|
| (1349471) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 21:04:12 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Apr 24 19:03:13 2015. I disagree. Even a few feet is noticeable when ascending a staircase. |
|
|
| (1349477) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Fri Apr 24 21:52:44 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. I'm pretty sure they dip so the express trains can "whip" through the curve by banking into the turn at a high speed. If I remember correctly, the downtown ride is thrilling, but the uptown ride has been slowed by timers. |
|
|
| (1349480) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Fri Apr 24 22:16:59 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. The express run from 14 St to Chambers St is over a mile and a half long, and generally runs downhill. Perhaps the grade is more gradual on the express tracks to allow trains to maintain speed. |
|
|
| (1349494) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sat Apr 25 00:03:42 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. Posted speed limit of 40 MPH southbound through that curve. |
|
|
| (1349498) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 00:49:38 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by G1Ravage on Sat Apr 25 00:03:42 2015. Wow. That's kinda "Ramming speed" in modern MTA WD land. Do motorpeeps have to kick in an afterburner to do that? :) |
|
|
| (1349516) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Sat Apr 25 07:59:11 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 16:39:15 2015. Correct me on this if needed, but isn't Houston St. the only station on the lower west side IRT where the express tracks are lower than the local tracks?Your explanation, "The local tracks rise...to be closer to the street level to minimize the need to climb stairs." made it sound, to me anyway, like you were describing this station's depth as being an exception to the others on this route (and, if this is the case, I didn't know it previously). Or, maybe what you meant when you wrote this was just stating a general principle - that local tracks are nearer the street, so there's less stairs. A couple of more thoughts, looking at a map, 7th ave. south curves slightly east as it meets Varick Street - the tunnel, following this route, may have had the exp. tracks constructed lower, so that if these tracks were banked, at an angle, for the exp. trains to maintain speed (someone just posted that the signage for exps'. speed at this point is 40 mph), their grades, due to the banking, would not be higher than the local track' grades. Ultimately, to find the reason for the exp. tracks' lower grade may require some digging through articles in Street Railway Journal and Engineering record* that focus on dual contracts construction, to see if this segment of the route is specifically discussed. *Fred Lavis's book has compiles several articles from Engineering record on the dual contracts. There may be others that are not included. Randy O's post, also sounds like the most plausible eplanation, re: why there aren't more stations with uphill grades on the ROW approaching them and downhill grades when leaving them: "...it may have been intended for more stations and the physical characteristics of various areas may have precluded its application in more locations." |
|
|
| (1349525) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Apr 25 10:35:15 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 20:56:02 2015. It goes up hill into the station. The incline helps slwo the train saving on brake shoe. It goes down hill leaving the station, giving the consist a little shove.What other directions are there? ROAR |
|
|
| (1349527) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Apr 25 10:37:46 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:47:45 2015. My stuffed animal trumps your stuffed head!ROAR |
|
|
| (1349528) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Sat Apr 25 10:50:51 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 20:56:02 2015. The "pamphlet" was actually a large, folio sized, hardcover (green buckram, limited run of leatherbound copies for company officials etc.) book of something over 100 pages that was published by the IRT at the time of the subway's opening.It was a detailed explanation of all the major aspects of construction of the first subway, it's signalling, power, rolling stock characteristics and so on. It was a sought after book for many years by railfans and still fetches high prices as a rare book. It was finally reissued as an edition about a 3/4 size, of the original, by the NY Times' Arno press, and subsequently reissued by Crown publishers, another publisher in much reduced size as a paperbound copy, and then by Fordham U. Press - this latter with an introduction by Brian J. Cudahy. The book, as I can best understand it, was probably written as the subway was being built (copyright date 1904) and so might explain, what could be called 'forward looking statements' about the subway's construction and operation, which might have been revised/changed to meet specific issues that came up as it was being built. Specifically referring to the grades approaching and leaving stations, this may be one explanation why, though this was written about as a principle* in the book, the geography of Manhattan etc., may have prevented this from being done at various station locations. One other reason this may have been planned by the IRT (and written about) was because at the subway's inception, the rolling stock was using full pneumatic braking without an electric portion which increased efficiency in stopping, which these cars did not receive until upgraded to an ME-21 braking system. |
|
|
| (1349531) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Sat Apr 25 11:34:11 2015, in response to Houston Dip, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Apr 23 23:16:02 2015. Well, take a look at this shot of Houston St from Dave Pirman's site. Looks like the local track is inclining into, or declining out of, the station. (don't know if the view is up town or down). You can also see the lower express track in this shot.http://nycsubway.org/perl/show?83173 (Sorry for the cold like _ I'm away from my HTML notes) |
|
|
| (1349535) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Apr 25 12:22:03 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Express Rider on Sat Apr 25 07:59:11 2015. Randyo's post implies that his is not the true reason. Because it's so rare, it means that the true reason it was implemented where it was is because of geography, as I intimated.The banking is also a plausible explanation and it seems the most plausible of all those given here. |
|
|
| (1349555) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Apr 25 14:51:51 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by gbs on Fri Apr 24 21:52:44 2015. The uptown timers were installed due to the former presence of St Vincent’s Hospital since it was found that the vibration of the newer cars was greater than that of the Lo-vs and Hi-Vs that ran there in the past. Now that St Vincent’s has been closed, the continued need for the timers is debatable. |
|
|
| (1349582) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sat Apr 25 17:29:03 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 00:49:38 2015. Wrapped up, you'll only hit 43 tops.... |
|
|
| (1349583) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sat Apr 25 17:29:03 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 00:49:38 2015. Wrapped up, you'll only hit 43 tops.... |
|
|
| (1349590) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 18:09:40 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by G1Ravage on Sat Apr 25 17:29:03 2015. I'm honestly surprised you can crank them past 25 these days. :) |
|
|
| (1349603) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Apr 25 19:54:12 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Apr 24 15:23:37 2015. IIRC Montreal's Metro has dips between stations. |
|
|
| (1349604) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Apr 25 19:56:46 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 18:09:40 2015. I've seen the R-160s get up to 46 mph on the Brighton express. This was during a G. O. when s/b Queasy trains were running express. |
|
|
| (1349625) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 23:51:07 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Apr 25 19:56:46 2015. That was always a pretty fast run too. But like I was busting on Ravage about, it seems as though they'll pull you over with the radar gun these days for breaking 20. :) |
|
|
| (1349663) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Apr 26 08:30:16 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Apr 25 23:51:07 2015. Yeah, pretty soon we won't be calling it even "leisurely transit" anymore. It'll be you-can-get-there-faster-by-walking. |
|
|
| (1349684) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Apr 26 10:16:18 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Apr 25 19:54:12 2015. Heck. We even have dips riding on the trains. Usually drooling all over the railfan window.ROAR |
|
|
| (1349742) | |
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Sun Apr 26 16:43:16 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 20:56:02 2015. There's 168 and 181 also. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
