# Talk:Signaling of the New York City Subway

The article seems biased toward CBTC. Perhaps references to differing opinions are in order, eh? 98.113.229.245 (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, since my removal of this material was reverted, time to discuss this. I removed it for three reasons. First, it's completely unreferenced, so there's no real way to verify if it's accurate. Secondly, because this material is too detailed for an encyclopedia article, being essentially straight from an operators manual. 
Thirdly, it's not really that relevant; it doesn't describe anything about the planned system, nor anyting about its implementation, which is the focus of the article. It is sufficient to say that the current system is a version of automatic wayside signals, as the article already does, and link to an appropriate article, as again, it already does. Maybe if there were an article on current sgnalling of the subway, these charts woud bring there, but that is it here. And again, it's completely unsourced. oknazevad (talk) 18:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The main article says 28 tph, this says 26. Is the 26 the actual and 28 the possible? Lex line already runs close to 30 and that hasn't been updated yet, headways are as low as two minutes though that may be due to rounding error. CBCT and other ATO-related articles, including individual metro aritcles, don't give enough info let alone in a concise manner such as more mention of actual service  headways, not just tph. I've heard of headways on a heavy metro as low as 105 seconds, and possibly even 1.5 minutes, 90 seconds, but I think train length and also dwell time is the limiting factor on NYC subway. B137 (talk) 13:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm not the only person who has taken pics of one of these, but I spotted this signal at Hunters Point Avenue (IRT Flushing Line) back in November. I hope I'm not wrong in assuming this is a countdown clock, like on pedestrian signals. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  16:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

That is the speed required not to be tripped. It should be 20 here.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 00:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: I feel as though that this section will become bloated and too large, with too much of a focus on recent events, if it hasn't already. Maybe it could be cut back here and moved to 2017 New York City transit crisis? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:47, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613: I agree. We should probably leave out the specific details about which lines would be fixed. The last three paragraphs of "Signal modifications", starting with the paragraph that begins with "In summer 2018, the SPEED Unit ..." could probably cut back to one paragraph. epicgenius (talk) 22:57, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I took a shot at trimming it. Looks like much of the relevant info is already in the 2017 transit crisis article. epicgenius (talk) 23:09, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Epicgenius:, how would you recommend adding information concerning the CBTC Equipment Supplier Interoperability project and the Ultra-Wideband pilots on the Flushing and Canarsie Lines? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 23:25, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Kew Gardens 613, I personally wouldn't include details about the CBTC projects unless there were significant updates, such as the contract being awarded or the timetable being pushed back. The UWB project should be included, however - this in itself constitutes a significant update since it is the first time we're hearing about a specific location and timeline. I'll take a closer look tomorrow. epicgenius (talk) 02:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

In UK get lots of signal failures. Track Circuits fail often. If 2 Track Circuits are connected together with a pair of wires, create a false feed,  signal will show clear aspect, train will rear end another one. Ian C Burnett (talk) 14:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613, I found this source when looking for something unrelated:

"Signaling of the New York Subways: Independently-Owned System Installs Interlocking and Signals on New Extensions". Railway Signaling. Vol. 27, no. 4. 1934. pp. 190–195. ProQuest 895763321.
This source has a bunch of info about the original signaling system of the IND, such as details about grade-time signals, bidirectional signaling on the central track of the Concourse Line, and signal towers. There might also be another article about the Eighth Avenue Line's signaling in the October 1932 article of the same magazine, though I haven't looked into it yet. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I have seen this before actually-this was one thing far in the back of my head that I had wanted to add. Thanks for the ping. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 23:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
No problem. Incidentally, I also found this source about the Fulton Street Line's signaling:
"Signaling and Interlocking: On New Line of New York Subways Fulton Street extension, in Brooklyn, includes modern entrance-exit controlled interlockings, and automatic signaling with the new rectifier-fed control circuits". Railway Signaling and Communications. No. 1. Sep 1, 1949. pp. 578–583. ProQuest 882969491.
Though I'm not sure if we should instead add these to the IND Concourse Line and IND Fulton Street Line articles, respectively. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:26, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Thanks for adding the map. There is an error-Culver CBTC ends at West 8th-not Stillwell, and QBL CBTC goes to 21-Queensbridge. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613, thanks for bringing it up. I've edited the map, but now we have a little bit of faulty SVG code:The second line of code (which depicts the Culver Line from West 8th to Stillwell) doesn't actually display on the map. But this shouldn't be a problem because it's completely overlaid by the code for the Brighton Line, which does display on the map. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)