Vorlage:Good article Vorlage:Use mdy dates


In the New York metropolitan area, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) runs the New York City Subway, which is mostly manually operated. The subway system currently uses Automatic Block Signaling with fixed wayside signals and automatic train stops. Many portions of the signaling system were installed between the 1930s and 1960s. Because of the age of the subway system, some replacement parts must be custom built for the MTA, as they are otherwise unavailable from signaling suppliers. Additionally, some subway services have reached their train capacity limits and cannot operate extra trains with the current system.
There are two different schemes of signaling in the system. The most used scheme is found on all of the B Division, which consists of lines originally built to the Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT) and Independent Subway System (IND)'s wider specifications, as well as on most of the A Division, which consists of lines built to the narrower specifications of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company (IRT). An older system was used on all of the A Division, but with the conversion of the IRT Dyre Avenue Line signals to the B Division scheme, this system is no longer in use.[1]:iv
As part of the modernization of the New York City Subway, the MTA has plans to upgrade much of the system with communications-based train control (CBTC) technology, which will control the speed and starting and stopping of subway trains. The CBTC system is mostly automated and uses a moving block system – which reduces headways between trains, increases train frequencies and capacities, and relays the trains' positions to a control room – rather than a fixed block system. This will require new rolling stock to be built for the subway system, as only newer trains can use CBTC.
Block signaling
The New York City Subway system has, for the most part, used block signaling since its 1904 opening. Vorlage:As of, the system consists of about 14,850 signal blocks, 3,538 mainline switches, 183 major track junctions, 10,104 automatic train stops, and 339,191 signal relays.[2] Trains used to be controlled by signal towers at interlockings, but this was eventually phased out in favor of master towers.[3][4] Eventually, these master towers were replaced by a single rail control center:[3] the New York City Transit Power Control Center in Midtown Manhattan.[5]
These signals work by preventing trains from entering a "block" occupied by another train. Typically, the blocks are Vorlage:Convert long, although some highly used lines, such as the IRT Lexington Avenue Line, use shorter blocks. Insulators divide the track segments into blocks. The two traveling rails form a track circuit, as they conduct electric current. If the track circuit is open and electricity cannot travel between the rails, the signal will light up as green, as it is unoccupied by a train. When a train enters the block, the metal wheels close the circuit on the rails, and the signal turns red, marking the block as occupied. The train's maximum speed will depend on how many blocks are open in front of it. However, the signals do not register the trains' speed, nor do they register where in the block the train is located.[2] If a train passes a red signal, the train stop automatically engages and prevents the train from moving forward.[6]
The New York City Subway generally distinguishes its current signals into automatic signals, which are solely controlled by train movements, approach signals, which can be forced to display a stop aspect by the interlocking tower, home signals, whose route is set be the interlocking tower, and additional signals (such as call-on, dwarf, marker, sign, repeater and time signals).[1]:110-111[7]:Chapter 2
Common automatic and approach signals consist of one signal head showing one of the following signal aspects:
- stop (one red light); with special rules for call-on and timer signals[1]:110-111[7]:68
- clear, next signal at clear or caution (one green light)[1]:110-111[7]:68
- proceed with caution, be prepared to stop at next signal (one yellow light)[1]:110-111[7]:68
Where different directions are possible, the subway uses both speed and route signaling. The upper signal head indicates the speed while the lower signal head is used for routes, with the main route shown in green and the diverging route shown in yellow.[1]:110-111[7]:75–77
The system is old, and some replacement parts must be custom built for the MTA, as they are no longer available from signaling suppliers. The old signals break down more easily, since some signals have outlasted their 50-year service life by up to 30 years, and signal problems accounted for 13% of all subway delays in 2016.[8] Additionally, some subway services have reached their train capacity limits and cannot operate extra trains with the current Automatic Block Signaling system.[6]
Types of block signals
The following indications are used for blocks where there are no divergences in the block immediately ahead.[7]:73–84
-
Proceed[7]:79
-
Proceed with caution, next signal is currently red[7]:79
-
Stop. Passing this signal trips the train stop[7]:79
-
Two-shot grade time signal, next signal is red only due to grade timing[7]:79
-
Two-shot grade time signal, next signal a home signal set to diverge and is red only due to grade timing[7]:79
-
One-shot grade time signal, timer has not yet run out.[7]:73, 82
-
Station timer signal, signal will clear if approached at the displayed speed.[7]:73, 82
Older signals on the former IRT lines may use different indications, which are not shown.[7]:73, 77–78 The lights on the older IRT signals, from top to bottom, were green, red, and yellow. The lights on current signals, from top to bottom, are green, yellow, and red.[1]:110-111
The system also has automatic and manual "key-by" red signals, where a key would be inserted into the wayside block signal in order to make the signal turn from red to yellow. They involve the operation of an automatic stop with an automatic or manual release, then a procedure with caution, with preparations to stop in case of debris or other obstructions on the track.[1]:xiv[7]:40–41
Until 1970, when a train paused at a red block signal, the train operator was allowed to pass the red signal by keying-by. The train operator would pause at the red signal, and then the operator would get out of the cab, descend to the tracks' level, and crank down the track trip with a key-like device. After a series of accidents, including a crash north of the Hoyt Street station in 1970, in which train operators keyed by and crashed into trains in front, the procedure was made against the rules, unless permission was granted by the train dispatchers.[1]:xiv[9][10]:178[11]
Speed control on the subway is ensured by "time signals". A timer, counting up, is started as soon as the train passes a certain point and will clear the signal ahead as soon as the predefined time elapsed. The minimum time is calculated from the speed limit and the distance between start of timer and signal. "time signals" are distinguished into "grade timers" for speed supervision at grades, curves or in front of buffer stops, and "station timers" to allow one train to enter a station just as another is leaving, as long as these trains are going at a reduced speed.[12] There are two types of grade-time signals. The first type, "two-shot timers", are generally used on down grades where the train must be under a set speed for a longer length of track. They are so named because a train operator would have two chances, or "shots", to pass the signal within the posted speed limit. "One-shot timers", on the other hand, are found at sharp curves, and are named because the operator only has one chance to pass the signal within the speed limit.[12][13]
"Repeater signals" are also used to maintain safe train operation around curves. These signals repeat the indication of a signal up ahead around a curve, and are located on the opposite side of the track from the signals they repeat.[1]:111
Another addition to the system's transit signals are "Wheel Detectors". These are sensors that can determine how fast a train is moving based on how quickly the axles of a given car are moving. First introduced in 1996 at interlockings, they further enforce the speed in which a train is traveling through an interlocking, and they are only active when a switch is set to the divergent route.[13] Wheel detectors prevent train operators from running slowly at the beginning of a grade timing segment and then increasing the spead beyond the allowable limit wihtout getting tripped. When the indication is flashing, the train is too fast and is about to be tripped.[1]:xv
"Gap filler signals" are used at the 14th Street–Union Square station on the IRT Lexington Avenue Line and at the Times Square–42nd Street station on the 42nd Street Shuttle station. They were formerly used at the Brooklyn Bridge–City Hall and South Ferry Loop stations. These stations are part of the A Division, which consists of lines built by the Interborough Rapid Transit Company (IRT). At these stops, gap fillers extend out from the platforms to bridge the space between the platform and the car body and door at the curved stations. The signal consists of a single red lamp and a "GF" indicator underneath. When the signal is red, the gap fillers are extended, and when the red light is no longer lit up, the gap fillers have been retracted, and the train operator can increase the speed of the train and leave the station.[1]:xv[7]:86[13]
Types of interlocking signals
Interlockings consist of two or more tracks that are connected by railroad switches; routes typically may conflict at these locations. They are arranged in a specific way, with switches and signals that prevent conflicting movements once one route is set up. Interlocking signals are fixed signals within an interlocking, containing two separate red-yellow-green signal heads and often other indications.[10] A home signal is defined as an interlocking signal at the entrance to a route or block to control trains entering that route or block. Most interlockings only have one controlled signal on each track.[1]:xii[7]:75 Some home signals contain a third, yellow aspect, on the bottom, and are known as "call-on" signals. These signals allow the train operator to press a lever near the signal to lower the trip arm, allowing the train to pass the signal at slow speed even if the signal is displaying a red light.[1]:xiv[7]:79 Similar signals can be found in yards. The three aspects on these signals, when all displaying yellow, allow the train operator to go past the signal at a slow speed without stoping the train.[1]:xiv
Interlocking signals are controlled by human operators in a signal tower near the switches, not by the trains themselves. A train operator must use a punch box, which is located besides the cab window in the station closest to the interlocking, to notify the switch operator of which track the train needs to go. The operator has a switchboard in their tower that allows them to change the switches.[1]:xii[7]:74[6]
Interlocking signals also tell switch operators which way switches on the subway are set. The top part of an interlocking signal indicates the condition of the block ahead, while the lower part indicates the route selected. The following interlocking signals are used on the New York City Subway, excluding on older A Division lines.[1]:110-111[7]:76–78
-
Proceed, switch set to straight[7]:76
-
Proceed with caution, switch set to straight, next signal is currently red[7]:76
-
Proceed, switch set to diverge[7]:76
-
Proceed with caution, switch set to diverge, next signal is currently red[7]:76
-
Stop and stay[7]:76
-
Call on (train has been given permission to pass red signal)[7]:79
-
Two-shot grade time signal, switch set to straight, next signal is red only due to grade timing[7]:76, 82
-
Two-shot grade time signal, switch set to diverge, next signal is red only due to grade timing[7]:76, 82
-
Two-shot grade time signal, switch set to straight, next signal is a home signal set to diverge and red only due to grade timing[7]:76, 82
-
Two-shot grade time signal, switch set to diverge, next signal is a home signal set to diverge and red only due to grade timing[7]:76, 82
-
One-shot grade time signal, timer has not yet run out[7]:75, 81
-
Station timer signal, signal will clear if approached at the displayed speed.[7]:83
Until the DeKalb Avenue junction's reconstruction in 1958, there was a unique situation in which there was a three-way switch. As there were three possible options, a special blue signal was used.[10]
Another signal type is a "dwarf signal", which is often used at switches to allow for occasional movements against the usual direction of train traffic. Controlled manually from a tower, they are not part of ordinary operations, and they generally do not include trip arms.[10]
After a collision between two trains on the Williamsburg Bridge in 1995, in which a train operator was killed after speeding his train into the back of another, the MTA modified both signals and trains to lower their average speeds. Trains' maximum speeds were throttled from Vorlage:Convert to Vorlage:Convert, and the MTA installed grade-time signals around the system to ensure that a train could only travel under a certain maximum speed before it was allowed to proceed.[12] Some of these time signals malfunctioned: they prevented trains from passing even if the operator had slowed down the train to the speed that was indicated, and so some operators slowed trains further in case a time signal forced trains to wait for longer than was indicated..[14] This resulted in overcrowded trains, since fewer trains per hour were able to proceed on certain sections of track.[15] By 2012, over 1,200 signals had been modified, and of these, 0.1% (13 signals) caused passengers to spend 2,851 more hours on trains per weekday, compared to before the modifications.[12] By 2018, that number had grown to 1,800.[14] Exacerbating the signal problems, some of the oldest block signals in the system were 80 years old Vorlage:As of, and they also broke down frequently.[16]
Vorlage:As of, some of the oldest block signals in the system were 80 years old, and they broke down frequently, causing more delays and prompting the MTA to declare a state of emergency for the subway in 2017.[17] An MTA investigation found that between December 2017 and January 2018, broken signals caused 11,555 train delays, holding up an estimated 11.1 million riders.[18]
Chaining
Vorlage:Main article To precisely specify locations along the New York City Subway lines, a chainage system is used. It measures distances from a fixed point, called chaining zero, following the path of the track, so that the distance described is understood to be the "railroad distance," not the distance by the most direct route ("as the crow flies"). This chaining system differs from the milepost or mileage system. The New York City Subway system differs from other railroad chaining systems in that it uses the engineer's chain of Vorlage:Convert rather than the surveyor's chain of Vorlage:Convert. Chaining is used in the New York City Subway system in conjunction with train radios, in order to ascertain a train's location on a given line.[19]
Automatic Train Supervision
The New York City Subway uses a system known as Automatic Train Supervision (ATS) for dispatching and train routing on the A Division (the IRT Flushing Line, and the trains used on the Vorlage:NYCS trains, do not have ATS for two reasons: they are isolated from the main-line A Division, and they were already planned to get communications-based train control (CBTC) before the ATS on the A Division, or ATS-A, project had started). ATS allows dispatchers in the Operations Control Center (OCC) to see where trains are in real time, and whether each individual train is running early or late. Dispatchers can hold trains for connections, re-route trains, or short-turn trains to provide better service when a disruption causes delays.[20] ATS is used to facilitate the installation of train arrival displays, which count down the number of minutes until a train arrives, on the A Division and on the BMT Canarsie Line.[6] ATS was first proposed for the BMT Canarsie Line and the A Division in 1992,[21] after a 1991 derailment killed five people on a 4 train that derailed near the 14th Street–Union Square station.[6][22] CBTC for the Canarsie Line was proposed two years later.[6]
The deployment of ATS-A involved upgrading signals to be compatible for future CBTC retrofitting, as well as consolidating operations from 23 different master towers into the Power Control Center.[6][10] Parsons Corporation helped the MTA install the system on the Vorlage:Convert of A Division track, as well as did some preliminary planning for ATS on the B Division.[10] The project ended up costing $200 million. Its completion was delayed by five years, and it ultimately took 14 years to implement ATS-A.[23] However, ATS-A's deployment was delayed due to several issues. The unique specifications of New York City Subway's equipment, the MTA's choice to use its own workers rather than outside contractors, and the inadequate training of contractors all contributed to delays. In addition, the MTA kept missing deadlines for testing ATS. The single biggest issue during the project, though, was the fact that MTA and the contractors did not cooperate well, which was attributed mostly to poor communication.[6][23]
In 2006, 2008, and 2010, the MTA considered upgrading the B Division to ATS, but dismissed the proposal because it was too complex and would take too long. However, the MTA stated that due to high customer demand for train arrival displays, it would use a combination of CBTC and a new system, named the "Integrated Service Information and Management" (abbreviated ISIM-B). The simpler ISIM-B system, started in 2011, would essentially combine all of the data from track circuits and unify them into digital databases; the only upgrades that were needed were to be performed on signal towers.[6][24]:9–10 At the time, although the entire A Division had ATS, only seven lines of the B Division had a modernized control system (the IND Concourse Line, 63rd Street Lines, BMT Astoria Line, BMT Brighton Line, BMT Franklin Avenue Line, BMT Sea Beach Line,and BMT West End Line, as well as part of the IND Culver Line and the tracks around Queens Plaza).[24]:12 Originally slated to be completed by 2017,[24]:20 ISIM-B was later delayed to 2020.[25] In 2015, the MTA awarded Siemens a contract to install a CBTC-compatible ATS system on most of the B division at a cost of $156,172,932. The contract excluded the Canarsie Line (which already had CBTC) and on the IND Queens Boulevard Line and its approaches (which was set to receive CBTC by 2021). The Queens Boulevard Line routes are served by the Vorlage:NYCS trains, but since the N and Q routes also share tracks with the R train in Manhattan, they will also have ATS installed. The cost of the ATS contract for the B division was later increased by $8.75 million.[26]
Automation
Trains using CBTC locate themselves based on measuring their distance past fixed transponders installed between the rails. Trains equipped with CBTC have a transponder interrogator antenna beneath each carriage, which communicates with the fixed trackside transponders and report the trains' location to a wayside Zone Controller via radio. Then, the Controller issues Movement Authorities to the trains. This technology upgrade will allow trains to be operated at closer distances, slightly increasing capacity; will allow the MTA to keep track of trains in real time and provide more information to the public regarding train arrivals and delays; and will obviate the need for complex interlocking towers.[6] The trains are also equipped with computers inside the cab so that the conductor can monitor the train's speed and relative location.[28][29] The wayside controllers themselves are located in enclosed boxes that can withstand floods and natural disasters.[6] The traditional block systems will remain on these lines despite the installation of CBTC.[27]
The block system handles all control and supervision of routes through interlockings including switch (point) control and switch status, for broken rail protection, and tracking of trains with failed (or not equipped for) CBTC. CBTC lines are fully track circuited with power frequency, single-rail track circuits (Broken-rail protection is only guaranteed on one of the two rails, however).[6] Equipment aboard every train identifies the location of the train using wayside transponders as a basis. Once the Zone Controller has determined, based on track circuit information and train localization, that the CBTC train is a single discrete train, they use this information to grant movement authorities based on conditions ahead. The CBTC Zone Controller functions then as an overlay which only provides safe separation of trains and cannot do so without interaction from the Wasyide (Legacy) Signaling system.[6] Trains, with CBTC, can then operate closer together, although as before, platform dwell times and train performance are the true limiting factors in terms of headway performance. With the new system, signals and interlockings are still required, their job being done better by relay interlockings or Solid State Interlocking controllers.[6] The ATS system at the Control Center is not a vital (life-safety) system and serves only to automate the routing of trains based on the overall timetable. The location of the train is also used to inform passengers of arrival times. The MTA's form of CBTC uses a reduced form of the old fixed-block signaling system, requiring that both be maintained at high cost.[6]
Only newer-generation rolling stock that were first delivered in the early 2000s are designed for CBTC operation.[30] These rolling stock include the R143s,[31][32] R188s,[33][31] and 64 R160s (fleet numbers 8313–8376).[34][35] Future car orders, such as the R179 and the R211, are also being designed to be CBTC-compatible.[30] After the retirement of the R68 and R68A cars, all revenue cars, except those on the G, J, M, and Z trains as well as the shuttles, will be equipped with CBTC.[36] The BMT Canarsie Line was the first line to implement the automated technology, using Siemens's Trainguard MT CBTC system.[37]
Most subway services are already at capacity, in terms of train spacing, during rush hours, except for the , G, J/Z, L, and M trains (the L service already is automated with CBTC). Therefore, transit planners are viewing the installation of CBTC as a way to free up track capacity for more trains to run, and have shorter headways between trains. However, installing CBTC in the New York City Subway is harder than in other systems due to the subway's complexity. The MTA hopes to install Vorlage:Convert of CBTC-equipped tracks per year, while the Regional Plan Association wants the MTA to install CBTC signals on Vorlage:Convert of tracks per year.[2][38]
However, even without CBTC, the system is currently retrofitted to operate at frequencies of up to 60 trains per hour (tph) on the IND Queens Boulevard Line (30 tph on each of the local and express pairs of tracks made possible by the Jamaica–179th Street terminal, which has four sidings past the terminal for each set of tracks) and 33 tph on the IRT Flushing Line. The BMT Canarsie Line is limited to a 26 tph frequency due to the bumper blocks at both of its terminals; however, the IRT Lexington Avenue Line operates at frequencies of 27 tph without CBTC.[39] By contrast, lines on the Moscow Metro can operate at frequencies of up to 40 tph, since lines in the Moscow Metro, unlike most of the New York City Subway (but like the Jamaica–179th Street station), typically have four sidings past the terminals instead of bumper blocks or one or two sidings.[40]
42nd Street Shuttle automation
The 42nd Street Shuttle, which runs from Grand Central to Times Square, was briefly automated from 1959 to 1964. The chairman of the Board of Transportation, Sidney H. Bingham, in 1954, first proposed of a conveyor belt-like system for the shuttle line,[41][42] but the plan was canceled due to its high cost.[43][44] Subsequently, in 1958, the newly formed New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) started studying the feasibility of automatically operated trains which did not have motormen. The NYCTA conducted the study in conjunction with the General Railway Signal Company; the Union Switch and Signal division of the Westinghouse Air Brake Company; General Electric; and Western Electric. The next year, NYCTA president Charles Patterson made a speech about the results of the automated mass transit study. It was estimated that on the 42nd Street Shuttle alone, full automation could result in a $150,000 annual savings.[45]
Sea Beach Line test track
Starting in December 1959,[46] the fully automatic train was tested on the BMT Sea Beach Line express tracks between the 18th Avenue and New Utrecht Avenue stations.[47] The idea of automation at that time relied on commands that were sent to the train while the train is at a station, to keep its doors open. The train was equipped with a telephone system to keep voice communication with human dispatchers at the two shuttle terminals. At each station there was a cabinet that housed 24 relay systems that made up electronic dispatchers. The relays controlled the train's starting, acceleration, braking, and stopping, as well as the opening and closing of the car doors. When the commands cease, the doors would promptly close. A new series of commands would start the train and gradually accelerate it to Vorlage:Convert, its full speed, slowing to Vorlage:Convert when coming into the two stations. When entering stations, the train passed through a series of detectors, which caused a series of tripper arms at trackside to go into the open position if the train was going at the speed. If the train was going too quickly, the tripper arms would stay upright and the train's brakes would automatically be set.[47]
The equipment was built and installed by General Railway Signal and Union Switch and Signal. The NYCTA contributed between $20,000 to $30,000 on the project and supplied the three R22 subway cars to be automated. The bulk of the money, between $250,000 and $300,000, was contributed by the two companies, which paid for installation, maintenance and technological oversight of the automation process, including signaling. The automation of the shuttle was opposed by the president of the Transport Workers Union, Michael J. Quill, who pledged to fight the project and called the device "insane."[48]
The R22s were fitted with different types of brake shoes, to see which one would negotiate the rail joints better. It was eventually found that the automated trip took 10 seconds longer than manual operation (about 95 seconds, compared to 85 seconds). As the tests on the Sea Beach Line progressed, grade time stops were added to ensure safety on the line, and on the 42nd Street Shuttle. The train was dubbed SAM, and was to operate on Track 4 of the shuttle line.[48]
Implementation and demise
In the afternoon of January 4, 1962,[49] the three-car automated train began service, with a ceremony.[50] The trains carried a stand-by motorman during the six-month trial period. The train had scheduled to begin service on December 15, 1961, but Quill threatened to strike all city- and private-owned transit in the city if the train ran.[51] Under the new contract with the TWU, the NYCTA agreed to put a motorman in the train during the experimental period.[52] While in its experimental period, the automated train was only operating during rush hours.[53] In July, the test was extended for three more months, and in October the test was extended for six additional months.[54] The chairman of the NYCTA, Charles Patterson, was disappointed by the automated shuttle train, doubting that the train could be operated without any transit personnel on board.[55]
Initially, the automation of the shuttle was expected to save $150,000 a year in labor costs; however, with one employee still required on the train, there would essentially be no savings.[55] If the test succeeded, it was planned to automate the IRT Flushing Line, the BMT Canarsie Line, the BMT Myrtle Avenue Line, the Franklin Avenue Shuttle, and the Culver Shuttle. These lines were chosen because the train services on all five lines, as well as the 42nd Street Shuttle, did not regularly share tracks with any other services.[45] At the time, the NYCTA did not have plans to automate the whole system. The rest of the system included a myriad of instances where several different services merged and shared tracks, and automating the rest of the system would have been logistically difficult. The Canarsie and Myrtle Avenue Lines were later cut from the plans, but it was expected that the other three lines would be automated if the test was successful.[56]
A severe fire at the Grand Central station on April 21, 1964, destroyed the demonstration train.[43][57] The fire began under a shuttle train on track 3, and it became larger, feeding on the wooden platform. The train on Track 1 was saved when the motorman saw smoke, and reversed the train. The basements of nearby buildings were damaged.[23] Tracks 1 and 4 returned to service on April 23, 1964,[58] while Track 3 returned to service on June 1, 1964.[59]:83 The reinstallation of Track 3 was delayed because of the need to replace 60 beams that were damaged in the fire.[60] Reconstruction of the line persisted until 1967.[61]
Automated rapid transit technology was later installed in the San Francisco Bay Area's BART system and the Philadelphia metropolitan area's PATCO Speedline.[62] After the fire that destroyed the automated shuttle subway cars, ideas for New York City Subway automation lay dormant for years, until an intoxicated motorman caused a train crash at Union Square station that killed 5 people and injured 215. The collision was a catalyst to a 1994 business case outlining arguments for automatic train operation (ATO) and CBTC, which led to the automation of the BMT Canarsie Line starting in the early 2000s.[2][63] In 1997, the year the Canarsie Line project started, the whole subway was to be automated by 2017, but by 2005, the completion date had been pushed back to 2045.[8]
CBTC test cases
The first two lines, totaling Vorlage:Convert of track miles, received CBTC from 2000 to 2018. The two lines with the initial installations of CBTC were both chosen because their respective tracks are relatively isolated from the rest of the subway system, and they have fewer junctions along the route.[3]
Canarsie Line CBTC
The Canarsie Line, on which the L service runs, was chosen for CBTC pilot testing because it is a self-contained line that does not operate in conjunction with other subway lines in the New York City subway system. The 10-mile length of the Canarsie Line is also shorter than the majority of other subway lines. As a result, the signaling requirements and complexity of implementing CBTC are easier to install and test than the more complicated subway lines that have junctions and share trackage with other lines.[28] Siemens Transportation Systems built the CBTC system on the Canarsie line.[64]
The CBTC project was first proposed in 1994 and approved by the MTA in 1997.[28] Installation of the signal system was begun in 2000. Initial testing began in 2004,[27] and installation was mostly completed by December 2006, with all CBTC-equipped R143 subway cars in service by that date.[37] Due to an unexpected ridership increase on the Canarsie Line, the MTA ordered more R160 cars and these were put into service in 2010. This enabled the agency to operate up to 26 trains per hour up from the May 2007 service level of 15 trains per hour, an achievement that would not be possible without the CBTC technology or a redesign of the previous automatic block signal system.[37] The R143s and R160s both use Trainguard MT CBTC, supplied by Siemens.[65] In the 2015–2019 Capital Program, funding was provided for three more electrical substations for the line so that it could accommodate even more trains per hour.[3] Also included in the Capital Program is the installation of automatic signals on the line to facilitate the movement of work trains between interlockings.[14]
Flushing Line CBTC
The next line to have CBTC installed was the pre-existing IRT Flushing Line and its western extension opened in 2015 (served by the Vorlage:NYCS trains). The Flushing Line was chosen for the second implementation of CBTC because it is also a self-contained line with no direct connections to other subway lines currently in use. The 2010–2014 capital budget provided funding for CBTC installation on the Flushing Line, with scheduled installation completion in 2016.[66] The R188 cars were ordered in 2010 to equip the line with compatible rolling stock.[67] This order consists of new cars and retrofits of existing R142A cars for CBTC.[68]
In late winter 2008, the MTA embarked on a 5-week renovation and upgrade project on the Vorlage:NYCS trains between Flushing–Main Street and 61st Street–Woodside to upgrade signaling and tracks for CBTC. On February 27, 2008, the MTA issued an Accelerated Capital Program to continue funding the completion of CBTC for the Vorlage:NYCS trains and to begin on the IND Queens Boulevard Line (Vorlage:NYCS trains). The installation is being done by Thales Group.[69] CBTC, as well as the new track configuration added in the line's 2015 extension, would allow the Vorlage:NYCS trains to run 2 more tph during peak hours (it currently runs 27 to 30 tph, but has a built-in capacity for 33 tph).[40]
The first train of R188 cars began operating in passenger service on November 9, 2013.[70] Test runs of R188s in automated mode started in late 2014.[71] However, the CBTC retrofit date was later pushed back to 2017[72] or 2018[22] after a series of problems that workers encountered during installation, including problems with the R188s.[72][22] The project also went over budget, costing $405 million for a plan originally marked at $265.6 million.[72] In February 2017, the MTA started overnight testing of CBTC on the Flushing Line from Main Street to 74th Street, with CBTC being used in regular passenger service by August and full implementation in October. By February 2018, the rest of the line from 74th Street to Hudson Yards was projected to begin operating in CBTC service in late-2018.[73]
Wider installation of CBTC
As part of the 2015–2019 Capital Program, there will be Vorlage:Convert of lines that will get CBTC, at a cost of $2.152 billion (part of a $2.766 billion automation/signaling project that is being funded in the Capital Program). Another $337 million is to be spent on extra power substations for CBTC. This installation of CBTC would require Siemens and Thales to cooperate on the installation process for all of the lines; they had worked separately in installing the Canarsie Line's and Flushing Line's CBTC systems, respectively.[3]
Culver Line CBTC
Funding is allocated for the installation of CBTC equipment on one of the IND Culver Line express tracks between Fourth Avenue and Church Avenue. The total cost was $99.6 million, with $15 million coming from the 2005-2009 capital budget and $84.6 million from the 2010-2014 capital budget. The installation is a joint venture between Siemens and Thales Group.[74] The test track project was completed in December 2015.[75]:28 This installation is expected to be permanent. Should Culver Line express service be implemented, the express service will not use CBTC, and testing of CBTC on the express track will be limited to off-peak hours.[66] Test trains on the track were able to successfully operate using the interoperable Siemens/Thales CBTC system. That system is now the standard for all future CBTC installations on New York City Transit tracks Vorlage:As of.[65] A third supplier, Mitsubishi Electric Power Products Inc., was given permission to demonstrate that its technology could be interoperable with the Siemens/Thales technology. The $1.2 million Mitsubishi contract was approved in July 2015.[76]
The local tracks would also get CBTC as part of the 2015–2019 Capital Program, as well as the entire line between Church Avenue and West Eighth Street–New York Aquarium. The Ditmas Avenue, Kings Highway, and Avenue X interlockings would be upgraded.[3] Completion is expected in May 2022.[75]:14
Queens Boulevard Line CBTC
The MTA is planning to implement CBTC on the IND Queens Boulevard Line. CBTC is to be installed on this line in five phases, with phase one (50th Street/8th Avenue and 47th–50th Streets–Rockefeller Center to Kew Gardens–Union Turnpike) being included in the 2010-2014 capital budget.[66] The 63rd Street Connection to 21st Street–Queensbridge would also be retrofitted with CBTC.[77]:16 Following the success of the Culver Line CBTC test track, the MTA awarded a $205.8 million contract for the installment of phase one to Siemens and Thales in 2015. These two suppliers were the only MTA-qualified suppliers that could install CBTC on New York City Transit tracks.[65] Of this initial cost, the MTA will pay $156.2 million to Siemens and $49.6 million to Thales. Both of these suppliers would install the new signaling system on the tracks themselves. Seven of 8 interlockings in the first-phase section of the line would be upgraded under this contract.[65] In addition, 309 four- or five-car sets of R160s will receive Trainguard MT CBTC, the same CBTC system installed on trains assigned to the BMT Canarsie Line, which will be compatible with the SelTrac CBTC system installed on the tracks. Of the 309 units set to be converted for CBTC-compatibility, 305 will receive new onboard equipment, which NYCT contractors will install in 301 of these 305 units.[65]Vorlage:Efn
Planning for phase one started in 2015 and was complete by February 2016, with major engineering work following in November 2016.[76][78] In January 2017, L.K. Comstock & Company Inc. was selected to fulfill a $223.3-million contract to upgrade existing signals and install communications, fiber-optic, and CBTC infrastructure for the new signal system.[79] The core of phase 1 would be completed by 2020 or 2021.[77]:18 However, by April 2018, the MTA projected that most of the infrastructure from 50th Street to Union Turnpike would be substantially completed by mid-2022. The MTA will start to train operators by December 2018, and the 309 sets of R160s will be CBTC-eqipped by June 2020.[80]:59–65
The total cost for eventually automating the entire Queens Boulevard Line is estimated at over $900 million,[66] The automation of the Queens Boulevard Line means that the Vorlage:NYCS trains will be able to run 3 more trains during peak hours (it currently runs 29 tph). This will also increase capacity on the local tracks of the IND Queens Boulevard Line.[65][66] However, as the line hosts several services, installation of CBTC on the line can be much harder than on the Flushing and Canarsie lines.[38]
Eighth Avenue Line CBTC
Funding for the design of CBTC on the IND Eighth Avenue Line from 59th Street–Columbus Circle to High Street is also provided in the 2015–2019 Capital Program, along with the modernization of interlockings at 30th and 42nd Streets.[3][14] The design of the Eighth Avenue Line CBTC project will be done concurrently with the Queens Boulevard Line automation, allowing the majority of the E route to be semi-automated when the project is done, since nearly all of the E's route runs along these two lines. It will get two new electrical substations to support CBTC upgrades.[3] Construction is scheduled to begin in October 2018.[14]
Other lines
Vorlage:As of, MTA projects that 355 miles of track will receive CBTC signals by 2029, including most of the IND, as well as the IRT Lexington Avenue Line and the BMT Broadway Line.[36] The MTA also is planning to install CBTC equipment on the IND Crosstown Line, the BMT Fourth Avenue Line and the BMT Brighton Line before 2025.[81]
On the other hand, Regional Plan Association prioritizes the Lexington Avenue, Crosstown, Eighth Avenue, Fulton Street, Manhattan Bridge, Queens Boulevard, Rockaway, and Sixth Avenue subway lines as those in need of CBTC between 2015–2024.[2]
In March 2018, New York City Transit Authority president Andy Byford said that he had created a new plan for resignaling the subway with CBTC, which would only take 10 to 15 years, compared to the previous estimate of 40 years. However, this would be very expensive, as it would cost $8 to $15 billion.[82][83]
Ultra-wideband signaling and other proposals
In 2017, the MTA started testing ultra-wideband radio-enabled train signaling on the IND Culver Line and the 42nd Street Shuttle.[84] The ultra-wideband train signals would be able to transmit more data wirelessly in a manner similar to CBTC, but can be installed faster than CBTC systems. The ultra-wideband signals would have the added benefit of allowing passengers to use cellphones while between stations, instead of the current setup where passengers could only get cellphone signals within the stations themselves.[85][86]
The same year, it was reported that full implementation of CBTC systemwide might take 40 to 50 years. Following the subway system's state of emergency that year, MTA Chairman Joe Lhota described the timeline of CBTC installation as "simply too long," instead proposing ways to speed up the work and hosting the Genius Transit Challenge to find quicker ways to upgrade the signals. Some of the proposals included a wireless signaling system, a completely new concept that had never been tested in any other railroad or subway network.[22] In March 2018, the MTA announced that four entities had submitted two winning proposals to the challenge. One of the proposals used ultra-wideband signaling technology. The other proposal entailed installing sensors and cameras on trains, with minimal installations on tracks.[87] New York City Transit Chairman Andy Byford stated that he wanted to deploy the technology as rapidly as possible. Under Byford's plan, all New York City Subway stations would be equipped with ultra-wideband signaling within a shorter time period than it would take to deploy CBTC.[84]
Notes
References
External links
- Vorlage:Commons category inline
- Block signaling in the New York City Subway
- New York City Subway signals
- Emergency Brake Stopping Distances For Customer Cars
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Vorlage:NYCS const Retrieved April 30, 2018
- ↑ a b c d e Moving Forward: Accelerating the Transition to Communications-Based Train Control for New York City’s Subways. In: rpa.org. Regional Plan Association, Mai 2014, abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h MTA Capital Program 2015-2019: Renew. Enhance. Expand. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 28. Oktober 2015, abgerufen am 12. September 2015.
- ↑ Vorlage:Cite AV media
- ↑ The most powerful block in NYC that you’ve never heard of. In: Untapped Cities. 8. August 2011, abgerufen am 13. September 2016.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p James Somers: Why New York Subway Lines Are Missing Countdown Clocks. In: The Atlantic. 13. November 2015, abgerufen am 20. Mai 2016.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af Rules & Regulations Governing Employees of MTA New York City Transit, Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority and South Brooklyn Railway. In: hts4u.com. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, November 2003, abgerufen am 24. April 2018.
- ↑ a b Emma G. Fitzsimmons: Key to Improving Subway Service in New York? Modern Signals In: The New York Times, May 1, 2017. Abgerufen im May 2, 2017
- ↑ Andy Newman: Inquiry Into Subway Crash Focuses on Misplaced Sign In: The New York Times, November 22, 1997. Abgerufen im July 17, 2016
- ↑ a b c d e f Brian J. Cudahy: Under the Sidewalks of New York: The Story of the Greatest Subway System in the World. Fordham Univ Press, 1995, ISBN 978-0-8232-1618-5 (englisch, google.com [abgerufen am 30. April 2018]).
- ↑ Oversight, Design Problems Cited in NYC's Subway Crash. In: www.ntsb.gov. 19. März 1996, abgerufen am 17. Juli 2016.
- ↑ a b c d Christina Lee: ‘The Trains Are Slower Because They Slowed the Trains Down’. In: Village Voice. 13. März 2018, abgerufen am 14. März 2018.
- ↑ a b c Joe Korman: The JoeKorNer - Looking out the Front - Signals. In: www.thejoekorner.com. Abgerufen am 12. Februar 2017.
- ↑ a b c d e Adam Pearce: How 2 M.T.A. Decisions Pushed the Subway Into Crisis In: The New York Times, 9. Mai 2018 (amerikanisches Englisch). Referenzfehler: Ungültiges
<ref>
-Tag. Der Name „:2a“ wurde mehrere Male mit einem unterschiedlichen Inhalt definiert. - ↑ Brian M. Rosenthal, Emma G. Fitzsimmons, Michael LaForgia: How Politics and Bad Decisions Starved New York’s Subways In: The New York Times, November 18, 2017. Abgerufen im March 14, 2018 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ Dan Rivoli: NYC subway relies on decades-old, outmoded signals and switches. In: NY Daily News. 22. Mai 2017, abgerufen am 14. März 2018.
- ↑ Dan Rivoli: NYC subway relies on decades-old, outmoded signals and switches. In: NY Daily News. 22. Mai 2017, abgerufen am 14. März 2018.
- ↑ Sarah Maslin Nir: How Often Do Subway Signals Fail? Ask Twitter In: The New York Times, March 28, 2018. Abgerufen im March 30, 2018 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ Joe Korman: New York City Subway CHAINING. In: The JoeKorNer Index. Abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ Know Before You Go with MTA Subway Time. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 28. Dezember 2012, abgerufen am 11. April 2014.
- ↑ PARSONS PROJECT OF THE MONTH—JUNE 2004. In: parsons.com. Parsons Corporation, Juni 2004, abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ a b c d Marc Santora, Elizabeth Tarbell: Fixing the Subway Requires Pain. But How Much, and for How Long? In: The New York Times, August 21, 2017. Abgerufen im August 23, 2017 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ a b c California Division: 8.5.1 New York City Transit Automated Train Supervision (ATS). In: www.fhwa.dot.gov. United States Department of Transportation; Federal Highway Administration, 20. September 2016, abgerufen am 21. Mai 2016.
- ↑ a b c Capital Program Oversight Committee. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 23. Juli 2012, abgerufen am 29. März 2018.
- ↑ Andrew Tangel: More NYC Subway Countdown Clocks Won’t Arrive Anytime Soon In: Wall Street Journal, October 28, 2015. Abgerufen im May 21, 2016
- ↑ Transit and Bus Committee March 2018. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 19. März 2018, S. 155-156, abgerufen am 29. März 2018.
- ↑ a b c Michael Luo: The Next Stop for the Subway Is a Fully Automated Future; Testing a Computer-Controlled Train Line. In: The New York Times. 23. Juni 2004, abgerufen am 10. August 2016.
- ↑ a b c Sewell Chan: Subways Run by Computers Start on L Line This Summer In: The New York Times, January 14, 2005. Abgerufen im May 24, 2007
- ↑ Vorlage:Citation
- ↑ a b Sewell Chan: New Subway Cars Promise All Kinds of Information In: The New York Times, November 30, 2005. Abgerufen im October 27, 2007
- ↑ a b MTA Capital Program Oversight Committee Meeting. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Januar 2016, archiviert vom am 29. Januar 2016; abgerufen am 23. Januar 2016.
- ↑ Gene Sansone: New York Subways: An Illustrated History of New York City's Transit Cars. JHU Press, 2004, ISBN 978-0-8018-7922-7, S. 273–282 (google.com [abgerufen am 30. April 2018]).
- ↑ Capital Program Oversight Committee Meeting. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Oktober 2012, archiviert vom am 5. Februar 2016; abgerufen am 14. Juli 2016.
- ↑ Press Release: MTA NYC TRANSIT AWARDS NEW CAR CONTRACT. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 31. Juli 2002, archiviert vom am 3. Februar 2006; abgerufen am 14. Juli 2016.
- ↑ Randy Kennedy: 1,700 Subway Cars to Be Built Under Largest Such Contract in New York History In: The New York Times, July 31, 2002, S. B3. Abgerufen im April 30, 2018
- ↑ a b Twenty-Year Capital Needs Assessment. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, August 2009, abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ a b c William Neuman: For Less Crowding on L Train, Think 2010, Report Says In: The New York Times, May 22, 2007. Abgerufen im May 24, 2007
- ↑ a b Stephen Smith: Advanced Signaling Makes the Most Out of Old Subways, But Can New York Handle It? In: nextcity.org. Next City, 2. Mai 2014, abgerufen am 6. August 2016.
- ↑ How Much More Williamsburg Development Can the L Train Handle? In: The Observer. 5. März 2013, abgerufen am 12. September 2016 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ a b Tom Parkinson, Ian Fisher: Rail Transit Capacity. Transportation Research Board, 1996, ISBN 978-0-309-05718-9, S. 70 (englisch, google.com [abgerufen am 30. April 2018]).
- ↑ Endless Train to End New York Subway Jam. In: Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation, Mai 1951 (englisch, google.com [abgerufen am 30. April 2018]).
- ↑ TRANSPORTATION: Subway of the Future. In: TIME. 15. November 1954, abgerufen am 17. Januar 2017.
- ↑ a b Bernard Stengren: SHUTTLE IS SHORT, EXCEPT IN HISTORY In: The New York Times, April 22, 1964. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Stanley Levey: Times Sq. Shuttle Keeps Trains; Belt Plan Dropped as Too Costly; TIMES SQ. SHUTTLE WON'T GET A BELT. In: The New York Times. 21. Oktober 1955, abgerufen am 17. Januar 2017.
- ↑ a b Ralph Katz: Crewless Subway Train Studied For Test on Times Sq. Shuttle; SUBWAY MAY TEST SELF-RUN TRAINS. In: The New York Times. 27. Januar 1959, abgerufen am 25. April 2018.
- ↑ CREWLESS SUBWAY TESTED IN BROOKLYN, February 16, 1960. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ a b Bernard Stengren: Disputed Automated Train Put Through Test; Electrical Impulses Start, Monitor and Stop Shuttle Runs AUTOMATED TRAIN PUT THROUGH TEST, December 13, 1961. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ a b Ralph Katz: Automatic Subway Train Tested For Times Sq. Shuttle Service, October 14, 1960. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Automatic Shuttle Has Lost Novelty For New Yorkers, April 4, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Ralph Katz: First Automated Subway Train Starts Run; Shuttle Riders Find Trip Without Crew About the Same STRIKE ENDED ONE-YEAR PACT All 3 Will Benefit, January 5, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ T.W.U. Will Hold Strike Vote In Protest of Automated Train, December 11, 1961. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Ralph Katz: SHUTTLE TO BEGIN AUTOMATED RUNS; Public Tests Start Today With Stand-By Motorman Pledge on Manning, January 4, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ A Better Shuttle, January 6, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ AUTOMATED TRAIN GIVEN EXTENSION; IRT's Shuttle Will Continue Running Until July 1, October 28, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ a b Bernard Stengren: AUTOMATED TRAIN DISAPPOINTS CITY; Patterson Says High Hopes for Subway Device Have Been Diminished RESEARCH IS EXTENDED IRT Shuttle to Be Tested for Nine Months More-- Some Savings Seen, September 19, 1962. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Stanley Levey: CREWLESS TRAINS TO FAIR STUDIED; 3 Lines May Be Automated if Shuttle Test Succeeds, October 25, 1961. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Subway Fire Jams N. Y. Traffic (April 22, 1964). In: Chicago Tribune. 22. April 1964, abgerufen am 17. Januar 2017.
- ↑ Robert Trumbull: Shuttle Nearly Back to Normal, April 24, 1964. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Joseph Cunningham, Leonard O. DeHart: A History of the New York City Subway System. J. Schmidt, R. Giglio, and K. Lang, 1. Januar 1993 (englisch, google.com [abgerufen am 30. April 2018]).
- ↑ REOPENING PUT OFF ON ONE 42D ST. BLOCK, April 25, 1964. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ Reconstruction Cuts Shuttle Service in Subway; 8-Month Project Curtailing Daily Travel of 24,400-- Job Will Cost $419,000, October 9, 1966. Abgerufen im January 15, 2017
- ↑ United States Congress, Office of Technology Assessment: Automatic Train Control in Rail Rapid Transit. Princeton University, Mai 1976, Chapter 6: THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, S. 135 (princeton.edu [PDF; abgerufen am 25. April 2018]).
- ↑ Robert D. McFadden: Catastrophe Under Union Square; Crash on the Lexington IRT: Motorman's Run to Disaster. In: The New York Times. 1. September 1991, abgerufen am 11. Juni 2014.
- ↑ Canarsie CBTC goes live. In: Railway Gazette. 12. März 2009, abgerufen am 18. Januar 2017.
- ↑ a b c d e f William C. Vantuono: Siemens, Thales land NYCT QBL West Phase 1 CBTC contracts In: Railway Age, August 27, 2015. Abgerufen im January 31, 2017 (britisches Englisch).
- ↑ a b c d e MTA 2010-2014 CAPITAL PROGRAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, S. 11–12, abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ R188 Acceptance. In: Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc. Januar 2014, abgerufen am 13. September 2016.
- ↑ Michael P. Wetherell: NYCT Subway Car Program Progress Update to CPOC. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 26. November 2012, abgerufen am 13. September 2016.
- ↑ Thales selected by the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority to modernize the Queens Boulevard Line. In: Thales Group. 10. Januar 2015, abgerufen am 13. September 2016.
- ↑ Ted Mann: MTA Tests New Subway Trains on Flushing Line In: The Wall Street Journal, November 18, 2013. Abgerufen im November 19, 2013
- ↑ New Subway Cars Being Put to the Test. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 18. November 2013, abgerufen am 29. April 2018.
- ↑ a b c Vincent Barone: 7 train signal upgrade on track for 2017: MTA In: am New York, August 21, 2017. Abgerufen im August 23, 2017 (englisch).
- ↑ Capital Program & Oversight Committee. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 23. April 2018, abgerufen am 24. April 2018.
- ↑ Gabriel Colceag, Gerard Yelloz: CBTC Interoperability: From Real Needs to Real Deployments - New York’s Culver CBTC Test Track Project. In: alamys.org. Metrorail, London, 28. März 2012, archiviert vom am 26. November 2015; abgerufen am 12. September 2016.
- ↑ a b Capital Program Oversight Committee Meeting. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 25. Juli 2016, abgerufen am 29. April 2018.
- ↑ a b $205.8M in Contracts Approved to Install Communications-Based Train Control System. In: www.mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 20. Juli 2015, abgerufen am 6. August 2016.
- ↑ a b Capital Program Oversight Committee Meeting. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 24. Juli 2017 .
- ↑ Install Communication-Based Train Control on the Queens Boulevard Line West - Phase 2. In: web.mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, abgerufen am 29. April 2018.
- ↑ Mischa Wanek-Libman: MTA awards L.K. Comstock Queens Boulevard Line signaling contract, January 5, 2017. Abgerufen im January 31, 2017 (britisches Englisch).
- ↑ Capital Program Oversight Committee Meeting. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 23. April 2018, abgerufen am 20. April 2018.
- ↑ Chapter 2: Project Alternatives. In: mta.info. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2004, S. 4, abgerufen am 12. September 2015.
- ↑ Paul Berger: New York City Transit Chief: Subway Signal Overhaul Could Be Done in 10 to 15 Years In: Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2018. Abgerufen im March 30, 2018 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ Zoe Rosenberg: NYC subway’s aging signals could be fixed in 10-15 years, says transit head In: Curbed NY, March 29, 2018. Abgerufen im March 30, 2018
- ↑ a b Emma G. Fitzsimmons: M.T.A. Pins Its Hopes on Unproven Technology to Fix Subway In: The New York Times, April 23, 2018. Abgerufen im April 30, 2018 (amerikanisches Englisch).
- ↑ Dan Rivoli: MTA begins testing technology to help failure-prone signal system In: NY Daily News, December 21, 2017. Abgerufen im December 22, 2017 (englisch).
- ↑ N.J. Burkett: MTA testing Ultra-Wide Band Radio Technology. In: ABC7 New York. 21. Dezember 2017, abgerufen am 22. Dezember 2017.
- ↑ William Vantuono: MTA Genius Transit Challenge winners announced. In: Railway Track & Structures. 12. März 2018, abgerufen am 14. März 2018.