Hello, Subtalk will be returning tonight. Sorry I was off by a day. My flight home from Madrid on Saturday was cancelled.
Thanks for your patience.
Any posts you saw purporting to be from me on any other web board services were forgeries.
-Dave
Fortunately they were forgeries - the one I saw looked quite convincing. I'm glad to see you and Subtalk (the passwords probably go a long way to prevent forgeries here) are back.
-Robert King
Welcome back! Glad to see the page up again!
Wow ... that post sure fooled ME too ... welcome HOME, guy! Glad to see the old place lit back up again!
Welcome home!
Amen to that!!!!
The bogus post gave me pause because it seemed like your "understated" style of writing. But it didn't make a lot of sense that you would post on another forum before mentioning it here.
Anyway, it's good to have you back safe and sound. Maybe that sounds like a worried mother, but in these times...
No news was good news in this case -- nothing big happening in Europe in late October, so I assumed everything was OK, and the half-day delay in the scheduled restart was due to jet lag, or some other minor problem.
Good to have you back, Dave.
Great to see you back. I hope you had a good time and I can't wait to see all the pictures I know you took.
Dear David,
Welcome home! I was afraid it would feel so good to stop, you
wouldn't want to host again when you returned!
welcome back, hope you had a nice trip
Sea Beach Fred checking in. Boy did I miss Subtalk. Fortunately, I came across another site that kept me in the groove for two weeks. Now I have two places to go. Welcome back Dave. Hope you had a great vacation.
#4 Sea Beach Fred:
I'm back on "SubTalk" once again. I also want to make you aware that the "N" & "R" trains are running once again.
#3 West End Jeff
What other site, and Fred really had wqithdrawls these past 2 weeks, his wife Linda told me he was running out of Prozac
We thought of Fred while at Coney Island. We checked out the Cyclones' ballpark, saw the Cyclone coaster, and ate at Nathan's. We also saw the old Parachute Jump, or what's left of it, up close.
Welcome home!
Welcome back hope you had a nice trip.
Welcome back, Dave.
Nice to have you back, Dave. And while I'm at it, I want to say hello to every one of my Subtalk penpals. Hello to all!
Glad to have you back, safe & sound, even if the board missed the 38th Anniversary of the end of Baltimore's streetcar service. (11/3/1963)
Welcome back :-D ... but I don't get why someone would want to write something in your name... then again, I didn't see the nature of the post...
Welcome home. It's good to have you and SubTalk back. I hope you had a good trip!
Now, when are you going to put the Washington, DC, Metro track map back up?
- Lyle Goldman
Why do you think I'm going to put the map back up? I said I'd put it back up if I had not received the request in writing, which I did, before I left.
Oh, you did get it in writing. I didn't know that. Still, I don't think they can do anything if you put it back up: the U.S. Constitution gives us all freedom of speech. What the heck: put it back up. We'll all defend and support you.
By the way, what was the text of the letter, and how do you know it's official? Who was this Fascist bastard who wrote this, anyway?
- Lyle Goldman
"Who was this Fascist bastard who wrote this, anyway?"
Just another one of the many who are doing their best to safeguard our lives.
And just how is trying to ban a harmless thing as a little map supposed to safeguard our lives? Didn't we have this discussion before Dave left? Most of you seemed to agree with my position.
- Lyle Goldman
"And just how is trying to ban a harmless thing as a little map supposed to safeguard our lives? Didn't we have this discussion before Dave left?"
Yes we did.
"Most of you seemed to agree with my position."
I guess you need to read the threads again.
while I am clear that one, M Adler retains copyright, and two, D Pirrmann is our host and sets house rules (and in passing thanks yet again for doing so, and welcome back), I also believe that the request to remove was USELESS and an insult to our civil liberties with no redeeming defensive merit. I defer to noone in my anger at the events of 11 Sept, and I salute all of the selfless public servants who gave the ultimate sacrifice for those of us still here. see ya on the subway.
It appears that many people, while paying lip service to those whose job it is to safeguard our lives, complain when security measures touch themselves.
I just found out that I may not be able to carry a cigar cutter on an airplane anymore. Instead of complaining about my loss of total freedom, I'll do my part by not making the job harder for someone who is just trying to safeguard my life.
As to the specifics of whether or not a publicized track map would be of use to terrorists, both sides of the debate were already discussed here.
OK, I've said this before and I'm going to get flamed to a crisp for it, but . . .
. . . get over it!
Metro requested that the map be removed in light of security reasons; said map was removed at webmaster's discretion. Done deal. Why do people continue to clog up this board with discussion of it? It's not like this was the Rosetta stone . . . just a subway map with nothing on it that you couldn't get in the 'official' system map save the location of a couple of switches.
Nothing personal, and I'm not addressing anyone in particular, but it's over! It's a stupid thing to discuss! Let's move on and talk transit!
C
You're just pissed probably because you didn't download it while it was up. That is the main reason I don't mind.
Actually, I have downloaded it from Jersey Mike's site shortly after he put it there (I'm not sure if it's still there; the guy who made the track map insisted that he take it down.). That's not the point. The point is freedom of speech. Also, the track map just belongs on this site. There are track maps for just about all other subway system covered on this site, so why not Washington? This is ridiculous!
- Lyle Goldman
Lyle, I think a lot of us agree with you... but that's not the point. This is a privately-run website and the webmaster is free to respond as he chooses to such requests. In this case, he has chosen to do so by removing the map. The map's copyright holder has also specifically denied permission for it to be published elsewhere (presumably, Dave still has permission to publish it here again at such time as it might be less politically incorrect to do so). So, whether or not we like it, that's the way it is, and no amount of squawking on our part is going to change it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Chris, thanks for keeping the real issue in focus. This is not really a first ammendment issue as it is a copyright issue. I think Dave's actions were clearly his own attempt to balance first ammendment concerns with the security concerns of the Washington System. Everything else is just prostituting the first ammendment to to try to circumvent copyright laws. Again, thanks for keeping the discussion on point.
Heya! How was the trip?
-5200 running on the W
I knew this many Sundays ago. Remember that post about "R68A, #5800"?
That was it. It was a lead car to Astoria last time I rode it.
: )
Railfan Pete.
Just because a particular car happens to be sighted on the W one day doesn't mean it always runs on the W. All R-68A's, IINM, are based out of Coney Island, so they could theoretically show up on the N, circle-Q, diamond-Q, or W. In fact, the W has an almost exclusively R-68A fleet, so it's most likely to show up there. The N has some R-68A's mixed in with its R-32's, R-40's, and R-68's. On the circle-Q an occasional R-68A appears. An R-68A on the diamond-Q is a rare occurrence but it's not unheard of.
Then "R68A - 5200"'s text of "-5200 running on the W" would expire soon.
Railfan Pete.
I saw a few R-68 consists on the diamond Q two weeks ago, but each time I was waiting for a diamond, a slant R-40 consist pulled in. Ya gotta love those frisky slants. One of 'em hit 44 on the downhill run to Newkirk Ave.
I've seen 4car set of R68 followed by 4car set of R68A, isn't that just wonderful? I think right now, there's 1 trainset of R68As on the N.
4284 on N. :-D
... when do cars get looped? I saw 4284 as the head car NB and some time ago, 4285 switched directions/positions with 4284. Now, 4284 (slanted side) is back to the head direction NB.
Welcome Back David,
Thank you for providing links to alternate Transit Boards, kept me from getting bored. Its god to be back, nothing can replace the atmosphere of subtalk, like a play, every subtalker has his/her own characteristic/personality to contribute to this transit and sometimes not discussion
Good to have Subtalk back!
Hope you enjoyed your trip.
:-) Andrew
Welcome back. It's good to be home. (Both literally and back at Subtalk).
--Mark
Good to see Subtalk is back on line!
Welcome back and regards to all.
Ed
Welcome back, Dave! How were Portugal and Spain? They do have some interesting trains over there, like the Talgo. It must have been nice over there.
The Photo Contest is still going to happen. I'll have it open this week. Look for more info posted here soon.
-Dave
If it's Tuesday it must be Torremolinos, Spain. It's actually Wednesday night and I've been in Spain for two weeks with just a few days to go. To reopen Subtalk I've written this travelogue in advance so that I can post it as soon as I arrive home. I'll try to post pictures quickly.
Barcelona, Thursday, October 18 - Sunday, October 21
I started out by flying to Barcelona, Spain, best known in the U.S. I suppose as the host of the 1992 Olympics. The Olympics still have visible results here as a number of the metro lines were built or extended as a result of hosting the games. Barcelona has several lines of Metro subway, commuter rail, three funiculars, a couple of "Skyride" style cable cars, and a historic tram line.
On Friday, October 19, I was joined by one of our friend and British correspondant Simon Billis for a day of exploring rail transit in Barcelona. We covered two of the three funiculars and a bit of Metro riding. Thanks to Simon for keeping me company halfway around the world!
The ride from the airport to the city center is via a commuter rail line that is sort of half suburban half metro operation. Fare collection is automatic via turnstiles and encoded tickets. The trains are very similar to those on the Paris RER system and in fact the Barcelona commuter system is operated very much like the RER with a tunnel under the downtown area connecting commuter lines from the eastern and western suburbs. The trains are operated from overhead catenary wire and feature piped in "Muzak" inside the cars. Transfer to the Metro can be made at several stations, mainly at stations "Sants" and at Placa de Catalunya. The main long distance rail station to western Spain is at Sants. Another main station serves trains to the French border.
The Barcelona Metro is really a conglomeration of two operating companies, the "Ferrocarril Metropolita de Barcelona" (Metro) which operates metro lines 1 through 5, and "FGC", Ferrocarrils de la Generalitat de Catalunya, which operates two city-only lines, U6 and U7, and several suburban lines all from a terminal station at Placa de Catalunya.
The "Metro" lines 1-5 were built beginning in the 1920s and several lines are still being extended today. The metro lines are right hand running, with various ages of rolling stock none of which have railfan windows. Robert Schwandl, webmaster of Metro Planet, wrote a book "Metros of Spain" so I won't try to be too specific about the rolling stock. I think it was all the same size but some lines operated off uncovered, over-running third rail and other lines used an overhead third rail and pantograph. However, there are two different track gauges in the Metro ("international" standard and a wider Spanish gauge) so the cars are not interchangable. All of the Metro lines 1-5 are in tunnels except one station on line 1, Mercat Nou. The stations are all mostly modern concrete looking and uninteresting; nearly all are side platforms. The station platforms have vending machines, signage showing time till next train, and flat panel computer screens with animated advertising and video. There's also piped in Muzak on the platforms featuring American songs Muzakified.
The FGC suburban station at Placa de Catalunya is quite nice, with 7 or 8 tracks fed by a two track tunnel; the trains turn within minutes serving many northern destinations. There is a small cafe at the head end of the tracks where you can watch the trains arrive and depart. The FGC lines are a cross between a true metro service and a commuter service. There are turnstiles with mag stripe ticketing (same tickets as the Metro lines if you remain within Zone 1). The coaches are more like those on the LIRR-- longer cars than true metro with side doors, but "commuter" seating. Some of the services, U6 and U7 are somewhat short serving destinations wholly within Zone 1, some services longer to several northern destinations.
At the north end of the FGC line U7, at Avinguda (Avenue) Tibidabo, is the southern terminal of a "heritage" trolley line known as Tramvia Blau, the "Blue Tram", the only tramway in Barcelona at this time. (However, Barcelona has many wide avenues that would do quite well with modern LRV light rail and in fact a test track was constructed along Avinguda Diagonal a few years ago for this purpose.) At the terminal there is a single track curbside on the northbound lane of a street. Just north of the terminal it becomes two tracks and runs in the middle (traffic) lane of the road. After crossing a bridge over a motorway, the Tramvia Blau heads up the side of the Tibidabo mountain, still street running, up a steep twisty road. Just before heading up the mountain, a small car barn is down a spur track on a side street.
At the top of the tram line is the base station of a funicular, also named for the Tibidabo mountain. This is the longest and steepest of Barcelona's three funiculars. It is also running somewhat older cabins than the other two, with manually operated doors and brakes. The cabins look like Volkswagen Microbuses and are painted by local art students (which at first looks like graffiti but looks right at home on vehicles that resemble Microbuses). At the top of the Tibidabo funicular is a "fun fair" (a small amusement park) and a large cathedral overlooking the city of Barcelona. This funicular only runs half-hourly during the off peak season but is only a five minute ride.
Another funicular is reached by a short ride on one of the FGC suburban lines to station "Peu de Funicular" and the funicular is known as the Vallvidrera funicular. This funicular also climbs the Tibidabo mountain but is mostly used as a "commuter" funicular for local residents. The FGC train from Placa de Catalunya first emerges from the tunnel and climbs a pretty steep grade up the foothills of Tibidabo. The station of Peu de Funicular is at the mouth of a tunnel through the mountain. The funicular station is up two flights of stairs from the railway platform making it an easy transfer. The tickets to and from Placa de Catalunya allow free transfer to the funicular. The Vallvidrera funicular has recently been upgraded, both the cabins and the operation. The operation is fully automatic, much like an elevator. Unusually, there is a station midway up the mountain just upwards of the midway passing point. To get your cabin to call at this station there is a button inside the cabin like an elevator button. At the station itself there is a call button for "up" or "down" and the proper cabin will stop as it passes by. The platform edges are protected by edge doors which open simultaneously with those of the cabin.
A third funicular climbes Montjuic, a mountain overlooking Barcelona harbor right at the edge of the Mediterranean Sea. Its lower station is inside a long tunnel (which is not very steep for a funicular), and offers transfer to the Metro lines 2 and 3 at Paral.lel station. This funicular's cabins are very large, almost as large as a transit bus, and there are two cabins coupled together. The grades are not that steep until the very top. This funicular is primarily used to reach former Olympics sites, the Fundacion Joan Miro museum, and a military museum located in a fort at the peak.
Barcelona has two different Disney World style "Sky Rides" (same exact technology). One starts at top of the Montjuic funicular and carries people up to very top of Montjuic mountain to the fortress. The other one is at bottom of Montjuic and carries riders over part of Barcelona's harbor.
The train from Barcelona to Madrid is operated with "Talgo" equipment presumably with tilt ability but the line is not high speed (7.5 hours to cover the approx. 650 km between cities). The line is mostly single track with passing tracks at stations. The line is operated with electric locomotives the whole way, even though electricity is apparently very expensive in Spain. A high speed line (TGV style, called in Spain "AVE") is being built in many places parallel to the existing track to cut the journey time to around 4.5-5 hours. (A similar AVE line runs between Madrid and Seville which makes the approx. 200 mile trip in two hours.)
More to come....
Great report, Dave... brought back a lot of memories. Next time I get home to NC I'll dig out my slides of Barcelona in '72-'73 and see if I have any rail pics worth scanning, just to offer a contrast to what I expect you'll be posting soon. Unfortunately, I wasn't nearly as focused (in more ways than one!) on transit at that time, but I think I have a couple of shots at Vallvidrera of the Ferrocarriles de Cataluña (Catalan wasn't allowed to be used officially back then so it was all in Castellano) and possibly one of the funicular at Tibidabo as it appeared at that time. Let's hope the E-4 Ektachrome hasn't faded too badly... they've been in dark storage for over 20 years though so it shouldn't be too bad.
Oh, and WELCOME HOME!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Looks like I missed the best funicular - never mind I shall have to go back:)
Simon
Swindon UK
The first set of pictures, covering Barcelona, have been uploaded here
Enjoy!
Dave
Great pictures,love the blue tram. Pity I missed it.
Simon
Swindon UK
Nice pics, Dave! Although none of the equipment looks familiar (with the possible exception of the older Tibidabo funicular - I think those are the cars that were there when I lived in Barcelona in '72-'73), the stations (especially the FGC station at Plaza Catalunya) bring back a lot of memories. Makes me want to go back someday soon.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Madrid, Sunday, October 21 - Tuesday, October 23, also
Friday, November 2 and Saturday, November 3
Madrid's rail transit consists of the Metro, 11 lines, mostly underground; three main line terminal stations; and a RER-like commuter rail system running through a downtown tunnel connecting north and south suburbs.
The Metro has trains of two sizes, wide and narrow. The wide trains are approx. the same size as New York IND subway 60 foot cars. The narrow cars are REALLY narrow-- smaller than New York IRT cars. The older lines are the narrow ones but unfortunately some of those are the most used lines. Line 6, a newer ring line, is a deep bore tunnel way, way below all of the others. For example at the transfer station at Cuatro Caminos between line 6 and line 1 requires *four* escalators the length of those at 53rd/Lex in New York or those at the PATH World Trade Center station. There is some surface running on lines 5, 9, and 10. Metro tickets are extremely inexpensive-- 80 pesetas each if bought in multiples of 10 (that's approximately 50 cents each!) The Madrid metro is left hand running like in London, and again, no railfan windows. The lines are all operated via overhead catenary wire, not third rail.
Madrid has no tram or light rail lines that I am aware of.
More to come...
Interesting report. Looking forward to more on Madrid as I was there for a week, working night shift and railfaning (half asleep) during the day.
Phil Hom
Which System in Spain has the best railfanning?
None really. Almost entirely underground and no railfan windows...
Madrid has maybe 10 surface level stations, Barcelona just one.
Lisbon, Friday, October 26
The Lisbon Metro is a small system (four lines with 40 stations). Tickets cost 90 Portuguese escudos each in packs of 10 (even cheaper than Madrid at 40 cents each if my math is right). The trains are "wide", left hand running. Some of the trains have the rubber pass-thru joints between the cars. All of the lines (confusingly identified by colors-- red, blue, green, yellow; symbols, and line numbers) are all underground, except the Green/Yellow line's current northern terminal at Campo Grande. The elevated station is mostly to provide easier access to the yards which are at this location. The underground stations are pretty much uninteresting- all side platforms mostly with no walls between the tracks; very plainly decorated, not brightly lit, and many long passages to various entry stairways on the surface made them slightly threatening at late hours. There is also a short surface running stretch on the newest (Red) line but no above ground stations.
There is construction going on to extend ALL the lines at least 15 additional stations. The red line is the newest built for the 1998 Expo. This line has some surface running north of Olaias station and very beautiful stations; Olaias station is probably the most beautiful metro station I've ever seen.
Lisbon also has five tram lines serving the hilly neighborhoods of Alfama, Barrio Alto, etc. surrounding and crossing the city center (Baixa). Four of the lines are operated fairly infrequently with old Brill single truck trams built 1936-40. The tram lines are narrow 900mm gauge. One of the lines, the #15, which does not go up into the hills but instead runs alongside the riverfront is operated with modern low floor LRV style trams built by Siemens, which are single ended with doors only on the right side.
A tourist tram is operated from Baixa district starting at Praca do Comercio along portions of all of the lines along with a guide narrating the sights. This ride takes about two hours, non stop, depending on the amount of cars and other obstacles parked on the tracks! The ride costs 3,000 esc., approximately $15, but for the budget minded the best of the tram rides would be the #28 which traverses most of the best portions of the lines.
A tramway museum is operated by the transit company, Carris, in the shadow of the Ponte de 25 Abril bridge (a suspension bridge modeled after the Golden Gate Bridge, with the addition of a lower deck for a rail line). The collection includes many preserved Lisbon trams-- however, the ones operating are just as old as those in the museum collection!
Lisbon has three operating cable hauled funiculars ("elevadors"). First off and easiest to find from the main tourist district is the Gloria funicular, running from Praca do Restoradores up to the Barrio Alto. The right of way is an active street with car traffic (although mostly for access to parking areas).
Another funicular, the Bica, runs from the Rua de Sao Paolo at the bottom up to the Rua Loreto. The right of way is also a street, but just for pedestrians. The Bica's bottom terminal is inside a building and the top terminal is down a few steps preventing actual car access to the street. The third funicular is the Lavra, running up a hill west of Praca do Restoradores also along a pedestrian street.
And that's the end of the transit content of my visit to Spain, Portugal, and Morocco...
-Dave
Sorry about the topic change, but I had to ask: What are the feelings towards a visiting American?
Basically: they want our tourist dollars. :) I was in a tour group and didn't really interact with any natives on a one on one basis... But I think the core of your question is this, Morocco is an Islamic country but very relaxed. Many people on the street (i.e., women) were casually (Americanly) dressed and our guide made a point of mentioning it, maybe to emphasize that Islam is not the same as anti-American.
-Dave
Nice report on Lisbon, Dave. As Dave knows, I just spent an extended weekend in Lisbon (got there after Dave had left) and got a chance to experience the public transit there. Just thought I'd add a few thoughts to Dave's report.
A municipal organization of some sort runs the metro, while a private company (Carris) runs the buses, trams and funiculars. Most tickets aren't interchangeable between the two systems, although 4 and 7 day tourist passes for non-residents are honored on both. I read that attempts are to be made in the future to better integrate the fare systems of each.
I found some of the newer underground stations quite artistic, although the graffiti ruined the effect a little. There was some sort of art program around when some of the stations were built. Also, I found the newer subway cars with articulated joints (built in 3-car sets) predominent on three of the four lines; saw the older cars (in 2-car sets) only on the green line. On weekends, trains ran in 2 or 3 car trains (rather than 4 or 6 car trains during the week), and were often terribly crowded.
Tram service is infrequent on most lines except the 15 (with the newer light rail vehicles Dave mentions providing most, but not all, of the service) and the 28, which is a must-ride for any tourist visiting Lisbon.
The restored and preserved trams at the Carris Museum are very nice. I believe Tram #1, which is used to shuttle visitors between the two parts of the Museum, was built in 1901.
For those of you who are also bus fans, the Lisbon system is quite good, although the headways could be better on some of the routes. Some 30 foot buses are used on the hillier routes. Bottom line - in my opinion, Lisbon is a very nice transit town.
Hope you had a good trip.
You were missed.
Allan
I second that, sounds like you had fun!
Dave, glad you are back and the rest of the RR buffs. I did miss all of the action. Hope to see some new pictures soon.
>Welcome back, Dave
> You were missed.
I agree with this post.
hope you had a very good good time !! became 50 years old nov 3 2001 !!!!
Congrats.
At least someone here is older than me (I turn 50 on Tuesday)
I turn 60 in March, 2002. Who cares! We're all subway fans.
Welcome back, Dave!!!
Chuck Greene
I turn 60 in October 2042.
Lucky you!
oh no !! ( smile ) ...lol !!
Welcome to the half century club !
Bill "Newkirk"
........yep .........whew !!! ........lol !!!
Congratulations on your 50th birthday.
#3 West End Jeff
The title of the thread would seem to suggest that you're 100.
Good to be back. ANd Happy Birthday!
:-) Andrew
thank you appreciate that .........lol !!!
FOGY!!!
I'll be 45 in two weeks, FWIW.
congradulations on your 100th birthday:)
yes ! thank you .... i needed that !!! ....lol !!!
Amtrak is going to spend 70,000 to study a new station in Rochester New York. Rochester, in conjunction with various state agencies wants to make the future of rail travel along the Empire Corridor a bright one. The new station will be designed a future hi-speed corridor. The curent station, built in 1971, was designed to replace the classic station, torn down in the mid-60's.
its been a LONG! time. i had to deal with that other site Railroad.net. its nice, but it aint the same tho. its kinda like having a imitation of a playstation. nothing beats the real thing altho i aint got a playstation. lol
Does anyone have an update of what going on at the Atlantic Ave Station on the Canarsie Line. Any new photos ?? Lat I heard they were to disconnect the flyover to the Broadway Line.
The flyover from the Manhattan bound track (J2A) is out of service for about a year. COnstruction is going hot and heavy-- steel is going up just South of Atlantic for the new track.
They have already done so, along with the Yard Lead. You can see where the new connection route to the flyover will go from the northbound train. Southbound flyunder is still there. Those hideous gooseneck/hatbox lights have sprouted on the west platform AND at Sutter Avenue. The tracks in the centre location are gone. It looks like the first new box girder elevated steel in MANY MANY years (someone let me know how many) is going up alongside the southbound tracks. They're moving right along with this project.
wayne
I have now seen some R142 cars with blue tape under the number plate. I think blue is the color for Livonia. If that is the case does that mean we will see some R142 cars on the 1 and/or 3.
BTW- Welcome Home, Dave. We missed you and we missed our favorite site's BBS.
Nope, not Livonia, it's to signal to the T/O that there was the brake modification that makes 40psi I think full service. I don't know the rest but it's to signal a brake mod.
I posted the hole bullinten before dave left on vaction. You can look it up in thge older posts.
Robert
Thanks, Clayton. For now all R142(and R142A)cars are based at East180. WIll they ever get the color tape system used on other IRT cars once they spread to other lines or will East180 continue to be the only location to service these cars.
At the moment, E 180 is the only barn capable of dealing with these cars. As time goes on, I'm sure Westchester Yard will be outfitted with the necessary equipment, followed by 239 St.
::GASP!!:: You mean we buy the CARS...
without buying the the EQUIPMENT first??
Shunt' it be the other way around?
Aren't you supposed to have a cardboard
box down BEFORE you get an armadillo for a pet?
The 'necessary equipment' is an overhead crane to take out/put in the roof mounted AC units. When E.180 barn was rebuilt prior to the R142 arrival, it was fitted out with just such a crane, making it, I believe, the only such barn in the IRT.
The BIG MIXUP. Originally, as posted here by someone, the blue stripe indicated to the T/O that the R142 car had TBU A+ brake modifications that had a higher pressure and those cars were not to be coupled with the unmodified except in yard movements...the crew wouldn't believe the 'new guy.' (There was a cross marked undercar.) They asked me then about pressure gauge readings...I said write down your measurements as you make them. When the flags appeared, so did more blue stripes (looked nice!) The blue stripes were then put on to let T/Os know that the cars had UNMODIFIED brakes and the strip would be removed when the mod was made (leaving a rectangular mark on the carbody.) Peter
10.5 Million dollard have been allocated to extern the new Amtrak "Downeaster" service from Portland to Brunswick. This is interesting considering that the regular service hasn't even started yet. The project is set to cost between 25 and 30 million $ and will involve rehabilitation of an existing RoW and a new 1800 foot bridge. The contruction of the bridge was set to begin next June, but there are some problems with obtaining a USCG permit.
IMHO, Amtrak should try to get the service startede and establish an actual market for a longer-than-bus-and-more-expensive trip, before going bonkers extyending a currently vaporware service.
Of course, I'm sure this service will be watched *very* closely, and if it looks floppy, it'll be killed fast.
It was the state of Maine that really wants the extention.
And since the State of Maine is paying, why not?
Now that they have provided electrification from Boston to Washington, are there any other locations that are being looked into to electrify? It's better than diesel...
are there any other locations that are being looked into to electrify? It's better than diesel...
I don't think AMTRAK is looking forward to electrification projects around this time. After all, everyone's been commenting on AMTRAK not making any profit at the end of fiscal years, with revenue taxes all in the way.
Also, to start an electrification project, you have to order equipment, select a contractor, and be sure the construction crew doesn't affect the freightliners that pass by on THEIR tracks that AMTRAK uses.
Take notice of NJ TRANSIT's electrification project and extension of the Montclair Branch Line.
AMTRAK only owns 3%, or 718 miles of the national rail that they travel on, including many bridges and tunnels. AMTRAK trains which operate trans-continental routes have to keep their schedule in order not to create chaos in the midst of freight companies which own their portion of the rail.
Someone here mentioned about a "bullet" train which could probably get from here to Los Angeles in 10 hours. I'll tell you, with the many speed restrictions, curves, electrification, budget, and all the backbreaking stuff, this can't happen.
As for you, get used to it, and I will too, likewise.
: )
Railfan Pete.
are there any other locations that are being looked into to electrify? It's better than diesel...
I don't think AMTRAK is looking forward to electrification projects around this time. After all, everyone's been commenting on AMTRAK not making any profit at the end of fiscal years, with revenue taxes all in the way.
Also, to start an electrification project, you have to order equipment, select a contractor, and be sure the construction crew doesn't affect the freightliners that pass by on THEIR tracks that AMTRAK uses.
Take notice of NJ TRANSIT's electrification project and extension of the Montclair Branch Line.
AMTRAK only owns 3%, or 718 miles of the national rail that they travel on, including many bridges and tunnels. AMTRAK trains which operate trans-continental routes have to keep their schedule in order not to create chaos in the midst of freight companies which own their portion of the rail.
Someone here mentioned about a "bullet" train which could probably get from here to Los Angeles in 10 hours. I'll tell you, with the many speed restrictions, curves, electrification, budget, and all the backbreaking stuff, this can't happen.
As for you, get used to it, and I will too, likewise.
: )
Railfan Pete.
I don't think New York to Los Angeles trips are the right job for rail anyway. I think that is an appropriate use of air travel, and where we went wrong was eliminating rail from the shorter trips where it makes sense.
Mark
Well, AMTRAK's main purpose to running trans-continental routes is for people who don't or are "allergic" to flying. It also provides service for people who have the freedom of time.
Also, some people are not in the mood to fly, so they prefer the train instead.
I hear you. Given enough time I always prefer to ride a train than to fly. But I just think that it's acceptable if don't achieve ten-hour train trips from New York to Los Angeles in the near future. I'd settle for a 3 hour ride from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh.
Which may be just as out of reach given all the usual resons...
Mark
"I don't think New York to Los Angeles trips are the right job for rail anyway. I think that is an appropriate use of air travel, and where we went wrong was eliminating rail from the shorter trips where it makes sense."
I agree that we need shorter-distance trains like the Northeast Corridor throughout the country, though not necessarily electrified -- speeds like 110 or 125mph can be achieved with diesel engines much more cheaply than electrification. I definitely want corridors here in the Midwest.
But there is NOTHING wrong with long-distance trains. As a replacement for air travel? Of course not. But what's wrong with having TWO (or more) modes available for a given trip?! Isn't America supposed to be about having CHOICES?
1) People DO ride these trains, to the point that in the summer and Thanksgiving-Christmas seasons the long-distance trains are booked up weeks in advance. There are people who are afraid to fly. More commonly, there are people with time on their hands who want to travel in comfort (flying sucks!) but not at the high expense of AOE-style tourist trains. Enough people to operate an hourly schedule like the NEC or the airlines? No, of course not. But enough to run two or maybe three trains daily on each route -- two trains 12 hours apart would guarantee that every station has at least one daylight or decent-hour stop -- and maybe add a route or two to the existing map, such as a Texas to Denver route or the obvious lack in the present Amtrak map, a Chicago to Florida route.
2) There are small towns inbetween the cities, places with no modern shiny 21st Century jetport, many with no scheduled air service, period. A train is eminently the BEST way to bring non-automobile transport (not everyone savors 10-hour marathon drives!) to such communities. Unlike a plane that connects one city to another and skips everything inbetween, it adds little to travel time and even less to operating expenses to have a train already traveling between Chicago and Los Angeles stop at selected smaller communities as well as the cities along the way. For these places, two or three trains a day would be more than ample service. On the Empire Builder, a route particularly isolated from air transport, where additionally the highways have a charming habit of snowing over in the winter, the annual ridership at some rural stops can be larger than the population of the county where the stop is located and even larger than some of the cities (Fargo, Spokane) along the route!
Maybe it's me, but I see your statement as "let them fly airplanes". The problem is, as with the French lower classes circa 1789 and cake, many of them haven't got any!
I agree that we need shorter-distance trains like the Northeast Corridor throughout the country, though not necessarily electrified -- speeds like 110 or 125mph can be achieved with diesel engines much more cheaply than electrification. I definitely want corridors here in the Midwest.
As a matter of fact, I have referred to a website which lists AMTRAK railcars and lines and history of service, and it marked in italics that no diesel has ever accomplished 125mph.
This I think was in the Metroliner section because the top speed for METROLINER trains is 125 mph en route to DC.
Electrified trains provide more versatility in speed than diesel. Consider the AMTRAK's Acela Express train. That train has two power cars to achieve 150mph.
AMTRAK does have some corridors out west. Consider the Auto Train from Lorton, VA to Sanford, FL (adjacent to Orlando), and "City of New Orleans" from Chicago to New Orleans. I don't know if there are others, but there are also THRUWAY services such as buses and ferries and whatnot.
Or a rider can choose to stay for a short time on a long distance train.
But the main reason for those whopping transit times are due to dwell times in stations. Consider if the "Crescent" train went non-stop from NY to New Orleans (besides signals, etc.). It would be very different from performing the same task WITH all the stops.
Dwell times weigh heavily on transit time on this route in Philadelphia 30 St. Station, and Atlanta, GA, for 20 minutes each. There might be other stations too with shorter times.
But this is a result for "slow" trains which operate long-distance.
AMTRAK does have some corridors out west. Consider the Auto Train from Lorton, VA to Sanford, FL (adjacent to Orlando), and "City of New Orleans" from Chicago to New Orleans. I don't know if there are others, but there are also THRUWAY services such as buses and ferries and whatnot.
Add AMTRAK's "CASCADES", and the "Pacific Surfliner" from San Luis Obispo to San Diego, CA. Both are short-distance trains serving stations in California.
"Add AMTRAK's 'CASCADES', and the 'Pacific Surfliner' from San Luis Obispo to San Diego, CA. Both are short-distance trains serving stations in California."
Correct on the Surfliner, but not the Cascades; that service does not enter California. The Cascades service is financed by the states of Washington and Oregon and operates in those states, with the exception of one round trip daily to Vancouver, British Columbia. Its main purpose is to connect Seattle and Portland, though it also extends north and south of those cities.
generally well said, although I doubt diesel power at 125mph. And, yes, I simply prefer rail for all but coast to coast (and I have done that a few imes). Here in Ca, we have steadily increasing corridor ridership in several areas and fairly packed trains from North to South in the valley. (five a day) In turn, the Coast tarlight, despite miserable time performance is mostly sold out all year long.
"Someone here mentioned about a "bullet" train which could probably get from here to Los Angeles in 10 hours"
A "Bullet" train runs on its own right of way, with NO freight cars in the way.
Can it be built. There are endless thousands of miles of suitiable right of way that can be used (called interstate highways). Just plant some nice elevated lines in the median. Wouldnt even cost much more than the original highway.
All Aboard!
Nice idea, but then there is that thing that happens out in the midwest, called tornadoes, which is bad enough for trains running on the ground, but will really be hard on an elevated line of any type.
Then there is the local town or village where the line goes through, and they may have an impact on if the line gets built or not - 'You won't stop here? - well then you won't go through here!' - and other vested interests of that type. Again, nice idea, but the obstacles just keep on coming.
But wouldn't the budget pile up with contractors, equipment, shipment, hiring and paying architects, and positioning of the railway?
You can't have a bullet train run alongside an entire length of a highway. There will always be different types of obstacles, including inclement and severe weather conditions in the MidWest.
Also, what kinds and companies of bullet trains are there in the U.S.?
A big thanks to Harry Beck for his board. He also runs a quality board and for one I appreciate his willingness to have us post there. I will continue to post to his site as well as this site.
Second.
I hope Harry doesn't junk his website. I have become a part of it and another subway site is like manna from Heaven. Harry baby, keep the site.
Harry has no reason to take it down. First of all, he's got a nice collection of pictures that you don't see here, and the boards are QUITE amusing normally. The influx of folks from here kinda twisted it around some steel as those of us who hang out there regularly are used to a handful of new messages a day instead of thousands. :)
But the beauty of Harry's place is that those of us who hang out there are either transit employees, former employees, people who do railroading in its many facets and of course our spiritual leader in exile, ayatollah HeyPaul. Heh. But those of us who hang their hats there do so as if it was the "terminal bar and grill" ... folks who do choochoos tend not to foam as much and don't have a whole lot to say other than general ball-busting and laughing at the industry. It's a GREAT place to shoot the sheet and not have to wade through a lot of dumbness.
I say that not to demean anyone here - hell I spend a lot more time hanging out here than Harry's place, but I certainly do enjoy the nicer environment ... like a good old fashioned corner bar. And Harry goes out of his way to make us all feel warm and cozy, absent the self-appointed "off-topic police" ... and folks who like to rip flesh just don't have a whole lot of fun there. :)
Harry ain't going anywhere though ... and I'm forever thankful that the rumors of this place's demise were ... well ...
W R O N G ! ! !
Moo. :)
Harry's place almost back to normal!
Subtalkers are gone Heh.
Thank you for the kind words.
-Harry
The Other Side Of The Tracks: A Website Devoted To The New York City Subway
Totally agrre, thanks Harry.
Simon
Swindon UK
Hey! Sign me up for that! Thank you, Harry for keeping us sane in Subtalk's absence.
:-) Andrew
So will I. It's good to know that there's two sites out there now (maybe more) where I can find out a whole lot of things I never knew about the NYC subway and other cities' rail systems.
First things first. Walcome back.
I was at Jay Street on Station on the North bound side. I saw a new type of holding light. I looks like a small silver boz with seven small LED lights around it. Had else have seen it.
Robert
Saw one today. It was green LED starting lights at Far Rockaway. Better to see in the sunlight.
why sun light?
When a station is outdoors, the TA doesn't have much choice.
It's about time they made better lights. Like Z Man said about the one in Far Rockaway, these new ones are much better to see. When the light is bright one can hardly see the old starting lights that were there. I don't think these lights will be as easy for vandals to break as the regular old light bulbs were.
Dang! Back in the "good old days" they had a boxing glove mounted on scissor metal that'd roll out and punch you in the head when it was time to close up. :)
LED's? How *civilized!*
Hey Kev - guess what? I had dream last night involving a prewar D train. When it pulled into the station I was in, I said I'm staying on it for the CPW dash whether I'm late for my bus or not. No headlights, all the marvelous R-1/9 sounds. Just like the good old days.
You bid to work Far Rock? Willingly? Or did you not bid and get unlucky or was it one of those awesome 1 trippers with a put in and a wash?
I was able to pick a job this pick. I had five thing to pick from. All of them were with "C" Division. I will be working the PM tour "C"
Division X-list, with Tuesday and Wensday off. The other were "C"
XX-list, with different days off and tours each week.
Robert
"C" Division is IND?
What does that translate to in routes? What could you possibly get?
C Division is Work Trains/Miscellaneous. It means Robert will most probably be the guy at the front end of the work trains letting the guy in the cab know what the track conditions are ahead. Nasty work in the winter.
Not Releay, the guy I am paired with was in my class with me. I told him that we are going to trade off from time to time.
Robert
C line is in the IND, North Division, which encompasses the A, C, J, M, L, and Z trains , and the Rockaway Park Shuttle
Division C? Have you received training on how to operate the TA's fleet of diesel and electric locomotives???
-Stef
No not yet, I have to put in a request for the training. This makes no sence. My name should be put in as soon as I pick in to C division.
Robert
You were one of the last to pick a job? What file number if you don't mind sharing? Was it on Monday they ran out?
My file nember is 3225. No there were three job left for Tuesday also C div. As for Vaction I was the last person the get anything passed Apr. I got the 2nd week of November.
Robert
Those C division "XX" jobs as you call them (actually 900 series temporary jobs) would've kept you on the PM tour for the entire pick, but all that would've changed through the pick were your days off. With those jobs, you rarely see the work trains and you usually work the road extra list. It's a sneaky way of possibly getting part of the weekend off since you can negotiate your RDO's.
No I pick a 3XX job. My RDO's and Tours stay the same all the time. My other two friends from School Cars had to pick a 8XX jobs there RDO's and tours can change weekly. There is still one this the same, I can also be put into road jobs if there is no jobs for me on the work train.
Robert
>>>>>>>My other two friends from School Cars had to pick a 8XX jobs there RDO's and tours can change weekly.
Next time, take a look at the pick board. You'll see that the 900 jobs that your friends picked say on the top "PM class". If they picked 700 jobs, then that will be listed as "MID class". They didn't pick the 800's for the AM class because that was closed even for me. Their tour will remain the same, but their RDO's will change.
I looked yesterday and say that there RDO's are the only thing that can change. They both have 9XX jobs. My mistake.
Robert
Hi Dave and welcome back Hope to hear all the details of your trip somewhere along the way, we had an interesting mini-trip on Oct 25 which included three anthrax scares, and loads of Redbirds and Slants, even on the "M". Nov 14 I am off to the other side of the Pond to see what is at Elephant and Castle and get a ride on some 1973 Tube Stock.
wayne
We will ,do better than that, how about some 1962 stock and perhaps 1938 :)
Simon
Swindon UK
Be sure to take in the original 1863 portion when you're there. Give it my regards.
BTW I thought your analogy to us being bounced around like ping-pong balls on the 25th was cute, but chances are people got the impression we were doing impressions of Sheriff
Ping
Ping
PING
Ricochet Rabbit.
OK, I couldn't resist. Let's just say we had to put Plan C into action. We skipped Plan B.
Did anyone hear about the shooting at Dekalb today. I have been watching and listing to the news all day, but no one said anything about it. Well if you did not hear about it, I was at 95st when it happen. It would seem the a man went nuts when another man was looking a his woman. The first man stated shoting and hit at least five people on the south bound platform. He then went into the tunals to hide. For what I heard at least three died at the seen with gun shots wound to the head. I heard that all five died at some point in time. The cops did get the men some were in the tunals. Severice was supened for about two hours at first though Dekalb in both direction, and later only serivce stoping going into the city later.
Anyone else can give more info about, please jump in.
Robert
Haven't heard anything either I was listening to WCBS and there wasn't any mention at all.
A shooting or a stabbing? I heard the latter from a TA worker of some sort who was riding a rerouted Q train with me. But you have more details, so you're probably right.
According to a C/R on an R that sat at Lawrence for about five minutes, it happened at around 6am. As of 11:30 or so, since the Q train in question was still blocking the bridge track at DeKalb, Brooklyn-bound N, R, and Q trains shared the tunnel, bypassing DeKalb. (Q trains ran express from 42 to Canal and made all stops via lower Manhattan, except of course Cortlandt and DeKalb.) Manhattan-bound trains were normal, including DeKalb.
Aside from the confusion issue, I wonder if it occurred to anyone to run the Q local from Astoria to Stillwell via Brighton and the N express from 42 to Stillwell via the bridge and West End. That would have alleviated the clog in the tunnel and the N train could have used the bypass track. (But it really would have been too confusing, especially on a day that already had its share of confusing GO's.)
Probably be in Monday's newspapers.
Did anyone hear about the shooting at Dekalb today. I have been watching and listing to the news all day, but no one said anything about it. Well if you did not hear about it, I was at 95st when it happen. It would seem the a man went nuts when another man was looking a his woman. The first man stated shoting and hit at least five people on the south bound platform. He then went into the tunals to hide. For what I heard at least three died at the seen with gun shots wound to the head. I heard that all five died at some point in time. The cops did get the men some were in the tunals. Severice was supened for about two hours at first though Dekalb in both direction, and later only serivce stoping going into the city later.
There's nothing in any of today's papers that I can find. Granted, crime news is a bit less newsworthy in the post-Sept. 11 era, but a multiple homicide like this - especially one in the subway - certainly would get a lot of attention.
In Tuesday's Newsday (page A40) there is brief article about the shooting on the Q train over the weekend. Quoting the article by Melanie Lefkowitz, two brothers, Chike & Kefentse Johnson, 20 & 22 years old were riding Q train in Bklyn at 5 AM when two 17 year old girls entered the train. Chike began talking to one girl when 5 other young gentlemen of the neighborhood boarded the train. They began accosting the second girl. Both Johnsons intervened at which point the five men pulled "sharp weapons". Chike, not to be outdone, pulled out a gun and shot his brother, presumably by accident. 6 were hurt and all 7 were arrested in the melee that followed. I smell another Darwin award candidate here.
Aaahhhhh...it's New York getting back to normal. Imagine if this had been an incident with Car Inspectors disputing the World Series! I'm smart...know zip about baseball and couldn't stay up past 4th inning. Peter
Well, if he shot his brother, he definitely caught the other five gentlemen by surprise -- No way they were expecting that...
Sortof similar to the Cleavon Little scene in "Blazing Saddles" where he holds the gun to his own head and threatens the crowd, "one move and the sheriff gets it!"
HERE are the details from the Daily News.
Peace,
ANDEE
>>>In the confrontation, one brother accidentally shot the other in the leg shortly before 5 a.m. Then each side pulled out knives and box cutters and began hacking away, spilling blood in the moving car and terrorizing passengers.
If McMahon reads this, he'll get a whiff to say
one of the brothers 'was to turn heel at the next PPV'
Last thursday and friday (maybe wed. too), the W was local in astoria at all times, with noticably less N's and W's in total. Anyone know if the w will ever return to 'normal' express service, with a service level back at what it was post manny-b bridge flip? inquiring minds...
bright side: at least the N/R/J/M/Z thing is back 2 normal...
Hey, some of us liked the extended J/M, especially on weekends.
Yea man, the M is a great train! It was a great replacement while the N was gone. Sure there weren't any R68s, but service was increased...
You're responding to someone who finds R-68's somewhat unpleasant and who (believe it or not) thoroughly enjoys R-42's.
The J/M has a bunch of great transfers in lower Manhattan, marred only by the inconvenient access at Fulton between the NB J/M and the 1/2. Transfer offerings on the N/R are pretty slim down there. For the first time since 1992, the J/M stopped at Fulton on weekends.
I have to agree with you on that. A lot of times, I just took the M home from lower Manhattan. Also the seats on R42s are nice. Their groove is better.
Are the seats on the R-42 any different than those on the R-32, R-38, or [insert favorite Redbird class here]?
I do find them somewhat more comfortable than the newer colored seats -- and need I even mention the hideous R-40 and R-142 seats, which are just shaped wrong?
I have nothing against the r142 seats. I like R68s because I can just look out the window if I'm fortunate enough to get a window seat. But yea, the seats on 32s and 38s are larger in height for the back. The seats on 40s are the shortest, and I think 42s are the same if not slightly taller, but the nice groove makes up for it.
Before you get too carried away my friend let's look at the big picture. The N is still off the bridge and now it isn't even headed to Stillwell but is 86thed at that station. Not exactly our finest hour is it?
I see your point. The N has been just getting dissed greatly this past year. On all fronts.
Nope. I also think that the actual quality of service has went down this year too. Just look at how they treat it when it comes back from the reroutes. They leave it the way it was for not even 1 week. They put it on the west end on the last days that it goes to stillwell. And now, a lot of confusion today on my way home as people started scrambling when they heard N to 86th.
be glad it is not a shuttle only
Glad I rode the M last a couple of weeks ago when they had slants all tjhe way
Therea re plenty of Slant R40s on the N train. One out of every three is usually an R40.
And 2 out of 3, you'll get the 32.
When I rode it it was on a Sunday, and it seemed like the service was 50-50 slants and non slants. The funny thing was they came in bunches, maybe 4-5 slants in a row, and then 4-5 non slants
I for one liked being able to go through Nassau Street to Brooklyn on a Saturday. Perhaps they'll be able to figure out a way to provide this service on the weekends on a permanent basis.
wayne
And I liked it on Sunday. (I don't ride the subway much on Saturday.)
Why not do away with the weekend W and instead extend the M to Coney Island? (To be consistent with weekday patterns, the N can serve as the 4th Avenue express.)
Woo-hoo! 4th Avenue express for the N :-D. But that would make the M look bad because of all the GOs on west end on weekends.
Anything is better than the N one-way loop that's been used since July 22.
OTOH, with the N platform now closed at Stillwell, I expect the one-way loop to be in use whenever possible. In most ways it's a pain (although I had a great West End ride on an R-40 today) but it would (temporarily) reconnect the Sea Beach line to Stillwell, at least in one direction.
Speaking of which, how much longer is it before the F and Q are cut back? If it will be a while, rather than having every single N terminate before Stillwell, why not share a platform with one of the other lines and have alternate trains on each line short-turn?
Is it possible to turn the F and Q at W8st? If so, and they do them one at a time, it wouldn't be that disruptive to service...
During non-rush hour times they could probably swing having the N bum track space off of the other three lines. You would need announcements telling people which track the next N would leave from, though. During the rush this may be impossible, but service on the W and N is frequent enough that people can go back to New Utrecht and transfer to the W.
As I pointed out on Harry Beck's board, the N and W already share a two-track terminal at Ditmars, so surely they could share a two-track terminal at Stillwell.
The only question is where trains get cleaned, and I don't have a great answer. Maybe W trains could terminate at Queensboro Plaza, relay on the middle track, and get cleaned there (can the car cleaners do their jobs without a platform to work off of?). That would leave Ditmars clear for the N.
Would it be entirely unreasonable to suggest simply doing without cleaning these two lines during rush hour?
As for turning the F and Q at West 8th, they'd need to relay on the tracks leading into Stillwell. I don't know if they can do that without extending to the platform itself.
It would be kind of tough terminating both N & W trains on the same platform at Stillwell. Yes, it is done at Ditmars Blvd., but at Stillwell due to all the switches, 4 platforms and 8 tracks (when everything is normal) moves to/from Stillwell Yard with Q and F trains using the interlocking entering and exiting, this may block the tracks used for the N & W for entering and leaving. Additonally, more trains are put in and laid up from Stillwell than at Ditmars. It may be tough getting them in and out on a combined 3 to 4 minute rush hour headway.
Why can't they just run a single-track shuttle train between Brighton Beach and West 8th Street and another one between the F-Train terminus and West 8th Street. That would be a great idea!
- Lyle Goldman
How many people would ride these shuttles?
How many people would ride these shuttles? How about everyone who would otherwise be without any train service, including myself, my family, and many other people.
In the past, they have always provided shuttle service to stations that were deprived of regular train service for long periods of time whenever possible. Why won't they do it here?
- Lyle Goldman
I think there will be shuttle bus service, although probably not on quite the same routes as the subway lines.
When the Franklin Avenue shuttle was out, it was replaced with buses. During the Lenox Invert project, the minimal and confusing 2 and 3 service was supplemented by bus service.
The Brighton and Culver will be easy to shuttle busses. What is the route of the N shuttle bus, I can only think 86th St to Stillwell and then down Stillwell
Two obvious possibilities:
(1) The N shuttle bus will connect to the W at Bay 50th Street.
(2) A single shuttle bus will serve the N and the F, and possibly even the Q.
We'll see what happens.
1 will be stupid, from Bay 50th to Stillwell is only 1/4 more mile so why have them change twice, it also would be easier to change at 86th/25Ave to the W. I figure the bus will go along 86th to Stillwell and down Stillwell to Mermaid where the 64 Bus terminates, or to Surf Ave
Or how about this radical idea: SHUTTLE TRAINS!
- Lyle Goldman
... but if the whole point of the shuttle busses are to replace trains that can't get to stillwell because of stillwell construction, then where will the trains go? Nowhere.
> where will the trains go?
Between West 8th Street and the termini of the F and Q lines, of course!
- Lyle Goldman
It would make more sense to run the bus to and down Shell Road, so it can also replace the F.
> When the Franklin Avenue shuttle was out, it was replaced with buses.
That's different. The entire line was closed. Where would they going to put shuttle trains?
> During the Lenox Invert project, the minimal and confusing 2 and 3 service was supplemented by bus service.
But they did have train service, too. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be bus service. All I am saying is that there really must be train service. The tracks are there! Why can't they have train service?
- Lyle Goldman
Because there will be only one open platform at Stillwell, and the W will be using it. Where do you expect all these shuttle trains to drop off their passengers? If there were platform space available, there would be no need for shuttles of any sort.
> Where do you expect all these shuttle trains to drop off their passengers?
How about West 8th Street? They can use single-track shuttles. Why not?
- Lyle Goldman
Let's see. We can have single-track shuttles that don't quite make it to Stillwell. Or we can have shuttle buses that go all the way to Stillwell, with full transfers to the other shuttle buses (and the W) there. Shuttle buses seem to make a lot more sense here than shuttle trains.
Why the insistence on trains rather than buses? Traffic isn't a big deal around Coney Island and I've never seen terribly large crowds on the Q (or D) south of Brighton Beach.
> We can have single-track shuttles . . . Or we can have shuttle buses.
Can't we have both?
- Lyle Goldman
What would be the point? How would you justify the cost of providing duplicate service?
There is partial duplicate service from Brighton Beach to W 8th via B68 Bus, they would not need a shuttle from Brighton, all they would have to do is extend the B68 to Stillwell
And pass out transfers at the stations, and allow passengers to board the extended B68 from Brighton Beach south for free, and add enough service to handle the crowds. Since that additional service would only be needed south of Brighton Beach, we could just call it -- a shuttle bus!
Q:The Q is able t terminate at Ocean Pkwy,but for W8 street that repuires a fw changes to it's schedule.
F:I think the F can stop at Neptune Avenue tell me if I'm wrong please.
More good news:
1) It appears, from my TA sources, that (tentatively) Manny B work is and will be proceeding, and we can still get four-track service established in 2004.
2) My Port Authority sources tell me that JFK AirTrain lost a grand total of one construction day, is currently ahead of schedule, and will open as expected. Newark AirTrain is operational. I will ride Newark AirTrain on Tuesday during a business trip. When you buy an Amtrak ticket to EWR (Newark Airport), the Monorail fare is included. My round trip Philly to EWR on Amtrak Acela Regional is $100 (but I saved at least $800 roundtrip by not flying from Philadelphia's airport).
3) Are we, on Subtalk, going to work together to keep the pressure on the TA and PA to restore the PATH service to the former WTC site, and the South Ferry line? I imagine those things would happen anyway, with time, but our voices do help.
NJT tickets to EWR station also include the monorail fare.
Notice: As of 10/28/01 W service will run local in Queens in both directions at all times that it is scheduled to run in Queens.
Due to complaints over the W express or for some other reason?
Is this a permanent change? Why does the map indicate the W is express?
Complaints over the W? Well tough tacos. The W has been in operation for only a few months and the W aficiandos are up in arms about its use. Well maybe now those characters can get a load of how we Sea Beach fans have been fulminating over the way the N train has been relegated to the subway scrap heap the past few years. Now we don't only get deprived of the Manny B, we get shortchanged at Stillwell as well. We been 86thed, so to speak. So let's not shed any crocodile tears for the W until justice is given to the N, ok?
So Fred, how do you feel about the Snakes winning the Series?:-)
The Yankees lost. That would make anybody red-blooded American thank the Heavens for some fair justice.
The Yankees are America s Team, Emblem, Uncle Sam, Colors Red White andf Blue. By the way Fred are you related to Joe Torre. Simnnce your name ends in Tore
Joe Torre is a real gentleman. I don't know how he's manage to stay on working for Steinbrenner, who Steinbrenner has had the best team that money can buy. Teams used to develop their players, or make clever trades to get them. The Yankees are a bunch of hired guns, mercernaries, no more, no less, and for many years. I'm with Fred here. I love it that the Yankees lost and I wish them the worst.
Thank you Q. You are a genleman and a scholar, and a friend. But I agree with you on Joe Torre. He is a class act and is headed to the Hall of Fame.
A lot of the Yankees are home grown, Spencer, Jeter, Rivera, just to name 3, Brosius, trade, Sojo Trade(will retire) O Neal trade(great trade) Bernie Williams Home grown. Sorriano Home grown, and more coming up. D Backs, all free agents and trades. Mostly free agents. how else would they get there in 4 years? Joe Torre, remember playing against him in Marien Park and Parade Grounds in 50s when he was know as Frank Torre s kid brother. I forgot Pettit, farm system
A lot of the Yankees are home grown, Spencer, Jeter, Rivera, just to name 3, Brosius, trade, Sojo Trade(will retire) O Neal trade(great trade) Bernie Williams Home grown. Sorriano Home grown, and more coming up. D Backs, all free agents and trades. Mostly free agents. how else would they get there in 4 years? Joe Torre, remember playing against him in Marien Park and Parade Grounds in 50s when he was know as Frank Torre s kid brother. I forgot Pettit, farm system D backs only one real superstar in Randy Johnson, the rest fair players having a Career Season. Let us see where they will be next year
Torre enjoyed a renaissance during his playing career after he lost 25 pounds in 1970. The following year, he walked off with the National League's MVP award.
The Bob and Fred Show is back, I see.:-)
Paddy Chaievski's "Network" has yet demonstrated itself to be reality, Though I'm WILLING to kick in to the cause. :)
HUH???
YUP, WE IS BACK
His name has two r's, mine only one. When he was growing up at the same time as me, he was a Giants fan. A Giants fan living in Brooklyn. The only thing more disgusting would be a Yankee fan living in Brooklyn. I was a Brooklyn fan living in Queens, though I spent much of my time in Brooklyn. So there is a difference between us. Maybe way back in the old country there might have been a relationship. My Tore or Torre means bulls, Pera or Peri means herder. We are a herder of bulls. I didn't even know they had bulls in Sicily. Probably before that my family tree goes back somewhere in Spain since the Spanish did settle for a time in Sicily.
I'm sure you've heard by now that Torre has a sister who is a Catholic nun and is pricipal of a parochial school in the city.
I remember when Torre cut his teeth managing the Mets. It wasn't his fault they finished last or next-to-last every year. He didn't have a whole lot to work with.
Joe Torre was fired as manager of the Mets, Braves and Cardinals. He announced for a time for the Angels. In about 13 years of managing he won only one division title. Now he's headed for the Hall of Fame because he has won five pennants and four world titles in six years as manager of the Yankees. He has done a fabulous job. He is one Yankee you just cannot help but like.
How about Jeter, Bernie, Tino(who i hope to be back next year) They won without the number 1 Superstars that everyone has. Where will Bonds Be next year. and Jason Giambi?
Did you notice thatthe base coaches for the Yanks are Brooklyn Boys. Now Joe should bring Matt Galenti from Houston
Casey Stengel went through a similar experience as a manager. I don't think he ever finished in the first division with the Dodgers or the Braves, but given the talent he had with the Yankees, well, you know the rest of the story. Unfortunately, his 3 1/2 years in last place with the Mets ruined his lifetime managerial average.
When the Mets won it all in 1969, the Ol' Perfessor was quoted as saying, "This is a team that came along slowly fast... Gimme another pineapple juice and vodka."
The change makes sense since express doesn't pay for a short line such as the Astoria. Also should reduce crowding on local platforms, which was reported when the W was running express. I'm glad the MTA listened to the complaints of those waiting at packed Astoria local platforms while an empty W went down the middle.
I knew they would eventually stop W Astoria Express service. If the WTC wasn't destroyed, it would have happened earlier.
Here's the thing though - there seem to be less of both N and W, thus the crowding is almost (just slightly less) back to pre W service levels.
i suspect i'll see them guys with the clipboards hanging around 39th av this week or next, and perhaps a 'return to normal', service level wise, after that... ...or so i hope!
If there's less Ns and Ws, then that means that where the N and W aren't together, the trains will be more crowded and wait times will be longer... great...!
Waited at Queensboro Plaza a couple of weeks ago, 5PM Friday Inbound 3 7s to 1 W
That's horrible... were there any Ns? If not, that's is just sad because both of them service Queensboro Plaza and for 3 7s to pass for one N or W... imagine what it's like when you only have the N or W to depend on like in south Brooklyn.
However, understand that the 7 has only 21 stops (compared to the N line which has 45+ stations). During rush hours, the 7 runs a train every two minutes (alternating local & express). The N (with the longer distance, but probably the same amount of trains) can only operate every 8 minutes during peak times for even spacing. And, if there's a bottleneck where the N has to share/switch tracks (such as Pacific St), the spacing of the trains is immediately affected.
Yea, I understand, just a little jealous though. The 7 after all is IRT. You are right though, the N has 45+ stations, so wouldn't you think they'd out more trains on it to reduce wait time? Then again, 4th Avenue and Broadway is pretty packed of trains.
During rush hour at Ditmars today, I noticed the complete opposite of what Brighton Express Bob saw. Trains came in, and out. It was like it wasn't even a terminal. I got off an N at Ditmars near the middle and walked to the end of the platform. I looked at the track and there were 2 trains headlights coming. By then, the bell rang and the N was ready to go.
This was the week before Halloween. the day before the Croton Open House
that's normal service. it's always been like that. sometimes up to 5, 6 7's before an N or W... 7's a more crowded line though.
That's too bad -- it was a nice service. But I predicted when it started that it wouldn't last, and I'm not surprised the MTA took advantage of the 9/11 disruptions to eliminate it. I womder how many riders will even remember it.
It was a nice service if your station was Ditmars or Astoria Blvd's! I'm sure there were uneven ridership patterns on the N vs. W.
It was pretty crowded on the days I rode it.
--Mark
If you REALLY wanted the express and you were on your way into Manhattan, you could of took a N to Ditmars and get a W fresh with seats at Ditmars. You get the express service in Queens and seats and through Manhattan also (if you want to call the Manhattan stretch express).
It is an express stretch on the diamond Q, especially with the slants. The Broadway Express is back with a vengeance.
And it was fun, but I had a Hippo
I was lucky in that I didn't have to let any R-68 diamond Qs go by. Every time I needed to catch a diamond Q, a train of slants pulled in first.
I did spot R-32 #3348 in the middle of a circle Q consist at Brighton Beach.
Aren't pretty much all diamond Q's slants?
Nope
As a daily Brighton Line rider, I beg to differ. With rare exceptions, the Q Diamond is served solely by slant R-40s.
David
Most of the diamond Qs I saw during my visit were slants; however I did see an R-68 consist or two each day - headed in the opposite direction. All of the diamond Qs I rode on were slants.
When I was on it yesterday, it was a little better than it was during the summer. I had a R68A W. It's still no Fulton Street A... doubt it ever will be...
The Union Square-34th St. express run brought back some nice memories of N trains of R-32s zipping along effortlessly on that same stretch all those years ago. Those slants are just as quick.
Welcome back, Broadway Express!
Bway express service is much slower than it was in the 1980's. I think they put a %$#@# wheel detector just north of Canal St.
Oh, I wouldn't say that. Northbound diamond Qs build up a good head of steam between Union Square and 34th St.
Try riding towards Brooklyn. You fly around the curve thru 8th St, then just short of Prince St. everything becomes a slow crawl down and around into Canal St.
I also experienced that slow crawl southbound just before Canal. I don't recall it ever being so slow there back in the old days.
Exactly. Not even in 1988, when traffic was identical and most service consisted of the new hippos. Some re-signaling must've been done here, or a wheel detecter was installed. I did notice some track replacement being done here, but this was on the uptown track.
And I love it. I never really appreciated the B'way line the last time the north side of the bridge was closed. Southern Brooklyn will have excellent subway service when the bridge is fully operational.
Those slants on the Diamond Q bring back memories of the N in the late 60s when the R-32s zipped effortlessly along Broadway. Not to mention the cars in your handle.
Too bad that by the time I began riding the system by myself in the mid 1980's, the cars in my handle were banished to the eastern division, or the old RR route. Once in a blue moon, an R30 would appear on the B train, and they sure did fly up both Broadway and Sixth Ave.
I used to hate the trains in your handle until they started making them red. I used them always on the J/M/L lines. When they started rebuilding the R40's and R42's I would always hope for one of the clean rebuilt ones............Now if only one of those trains(R27, etc) I hated would just pull into the station. How your views change......
Actually, they're my second favorite, next to the R16. Do you remember their last days on the J/M/LL? Ouch. But I loved em. I'd give anything to hear one sitting idle as it would whir, then stop, then whir again. I remember hearing them under the old Queens Blvd. J terminal as I'd x-fer to a Q49 bus on the street.
I used to hate the R16's. I would dread them. I would hate when one of them would pull into the station. They were so dirty.....again, if only now one would pull into the station, with that round window that opened. How our views change.....
I rode on a few R-27/30 D trains (one was signed as a DD) about 1980 and yes, they SMOKED on the 6th Ave. express dash.
Funny thing, I still associate those cars with the RR, as I remember them on that line back in 1967. There's a good chance we also rode on them in 1965 from 34th St. to Whitehall St. on a QT or RR.
Those things were DOGS ... looked like redbirds, WEREN'T ... pathetic pieces of four door per side IMPOSTERS ... only difference was it wasn't just ONE imposter, it was HORDES ... them things chewed the bag sad to say and they BELONGED on the RR, also a pathetic line telling its customers "Yo! You're living in a LOSER 'hood ... DO something ... MOVE!" :)
I must admit, the kiss of death, or the ultimate insult to your subway line was to run the R27/30 on it in the late 70's/1980's. It wasn't that bad when the rehabbed R30's showed up in 1985. In fact, many a local politician from Ridgewood/Middle Village became perturbed in 1985/6 because the J got the redbird R30's first, and the hellish R16's were increasingly shifted only to the M, especially after the M was removed from the Brighton line in April 1986.
I actually liked the original blue finish on their door interiors, although the teal on the R-32s was even better. We rode on an RR of R-27/30s from Brooklyn all the way to Times Square on April 30, 1967 after changing from an N at 59th St. At least I'm pretty sure it was an N; it was a train of R-32s and it pulled out of the station and kept going once we got off. I did get one question answered as that train left: the doors were in fact dark blue on the outside. I still don't know why my folks decided to bail out of that N train; it would have gotten us to Times Square much quicker.
I kinda liked the Blue doors better than the stainless steal. It gave them more character.
I can recall one Saturday about 1980 seeing an r27-30 D train (or at least it was marked that in the front. The rest of the signs on the side of the train seemed to all say that the train during the week was a rush hour N from Forest Hills to Whitehall St (with 2 extra cars tacked on in a hurry!!!!). It was probably around the time the R-46's and 44's were kicked off the D. I believe at the time, a train of R-46 D's almost went into someone's backyard along the Brighton run!!!! TOny
I rode it twice. Once to Manhattan, the W train still had available seats as it left Astoria Blvd at 8:15 AM. and whizzed past all those crowded local stops. The other was from Manhattan, and there were plenty of pissed off people who didn't realize it would skip their stop. And this was in early September, so confusion about the new routes cannot be used as an excuse.
I got on the 4th car of a W and tried to make it to the first at the next stop, Astoria Blvd. I missed the W and took the next N since it was a slant R40. Not a single W passed us. The express W only helps a select group of passengers which at 11 AM on a Monday isn't very large (8/20 was when I rode this).
It was a flawed concept which has been rightfully eliminated. Astoria should rejoice.
Unless you use Ditmars or Astoria Blvds.
A whopping 4 minutes the express saves. Is that worth the thousands of delayed Astoria local riders? There hasn't been express service in Astoria since 1949. Even with all kinds of service going there pre Chrystie. It wasn't necessary, and it simply delayed more people than the number of people whose rides were shortened.
>>A whopping 4 minutes the express saves.<<
Lately, a lot of posters have been denigrating the time saved by expresses, skip-stops, or potential express routes. Frankly, whatever happened to the concept of rapid transit? The whole point of the system should be to get you where you're going in the fastest time -- consistent with safety, of course. When you're running late for work in the morning, a whopping 4 minutes can seem like an eternity. Ditto for the 2- or 3-minute savings criticized by others on this board provided by various skip-stops, or the savings over the Manny B versus the tunnel, etc. Any "shortcut" route that potentially can be used should be used, in my view, if only during rish hour. All the third tracks should be used, the express bypass on the Culver should be reinstated, etc. Even if you only ran such trains on 15-minute headways, people who cared could time their arrivals to catch these trains. The system is TOO SLOW as it is. Faster service would lead to increased ridership, thus partially offsetting any increased costs.
It's not rapid transit anymore; it's leisurely transit.
No, it's "get you from here to there" transit. Time is secondary.
Someone will figure this out and get it right.
As I was walking around the 30 ave area during Friday's rush, I can see W and N trains crawling to reach the 30 ave station. I can understand having trains go local in the morning, but after a few weeks of trains crawling just to get to 30 ave (maybe even back to Bway) there will be people complaining to make it express again.
And I know it's senseless to have it local in the morning and express in the afternoon but oh well
=)
As of 11/03/01 untill 11/05 the "N" trains will be turning about at 86street. The TA is right now putting in a brand new switch from 2 on the "N" tracks into the "Q" tracks. I do not know if they are going to put the "Q" on th "N" platform and take out the track into the "Q" or what.
Robert
I don't know where I read it, but the N will be terminating at 86th Street during the Stillwell reconstruction.
I'd have to guess that the Q is going to be using the normal N tracks at Stillwell.
That's not quite right.
One GO poster announced that the N would terminate at 86th Street from November 3 until 2005 due to platform work. But another had the Brooklyn-bound N running over the W to Coney Island.
Here's what in fact is going on. Until 5am tomorrow, the N is running south on the West End and north on the Sea Beach, stopping at the W platform at Stillwell. Beginning at 5am tomorrow, the N will terminate at 86th. I assume this weekend's arrangement will be used whenever track work on the West End or Sea Beach warrants suspending the W and rerouting the N one way instead.
That'd be nice for the N to still have access to Stillwell. I still don't see why the N can't share the W platform at Stillwell. Sure there'd be a lot of trains, but usually on the W platform, there's only one train there anyway. As for this weekend, just say that the N's terminating at 86th street, but CI bound trains are running to CI over West End. So technically, actual terminating at 86th wont be until Monday. Yea, it's kinda late to be posting this now, but o well...
N trains were turning quickly at Stillwell today. My train pulled into track 7 (? - the one up against the F). I went down for a quick walk around the station and the train was gone when I returned. Another one pulled in on the same track and left within two minutes.
(FWIW, the D train did a similar quickie in-and-out at 2nd Avenue.)
I also don't see why the N cannot share the W platform. Lazy is a word that comes to mind. Maybe the tower operators have arthritis and can't throw the switches too often. Oh, how I long for the days of the old trackside towers...
Is it that hard to throw a switch? Do they just push a button or is it complicated?
Head to the "Subway Tech" part of the site for more infos on that in the "Signals" part. Then try it yourself here...
http://nxsys.nycsubway.org/
I have that thing, it's pretty cool. Is a new version gonna be made? The process doesn't seem that hard... but in real life, are the controls touch screen?
Thank about a bigger board, the whole yard attatched to it, more trains, more tracks, more switches, a non-scaleable board, some other people in your way, someone calling for a lineup then it sure is.
Is the N Running again or is it the M?
"Is the N Running again or is it the M?"
The (N) is running back on the old Sea Beach ROW while the (M) is back on the West End.
Bill "Newkirk"
... poor M... sorry it has to go back... :-D
This is what a dispatcher told me re; no n to stillwell
N trains are terminating at 86st to allow the n pockets (track 1&2)to be renovated. When they are finished the W terminal will be put on 1&2.At that time the f and Q will be terminating before stillwell(i think at bayparkway and brighton coud be wrong)
Comment on why the w can"t share the platform with the n? Remember what happens in astoria during the week yikes!
Wait a minute... so when the N platform is finished, they're going to put the W on the N platform? Argh... friggin W... can't they make the W terminate somewhere else and have the N to Stillwell?
Now you are talking sense. The reason for this sad situation is the fact that the TA has its balls out for the Sea Beach. They always seem to get short-changed. Something needs to be done but I am unable to do anything except complain. If I lived in New York I would try and do something about it, though. Some of you guys should find why the Sea Beach has ben getting the shaft for so long.
O Train Dude... where are you...?
The West End has more passengers then the Slow Bit line, so they use the West End as a more important line
Why is that? The Sea Beach has fewer stops, is less curvy, and has more of an express run in Brooklyn (N runs express from 59th to Pacific; W runs express only from) 36th to Pacific. I'll bet that if the N bypassed DeKalb and continued over the Manny B and up the Broadway Express tracks, it would be way more popular than the W, which would have to go into the Montague tunnel.
I hate to break it to you, but (railfans excepted) most passengers on the four lines to Coney Island aren't actually going to Coney Island itself. The N is the least used of the four lines because its intermediate stations are the least used.
Don't get me wrong -- I very much enjoy the Sea Beach ride. But if I lived in Brooklyn, I'd ride the train that took me closest to home -- and that's less likely to be the N than the F, Q, or W.
Maybe that's why they could get away with running eight-car trains of slants when the M was filling in for the N. Looking at my Hagstrom map, the N and the W run pretty close to each other except where the W goes through Borough Park. The Bath Beach area is also better served by the W. But Bensonhurst and Dyker Heights are better served by the N, I think.
I think Dyker might be better served by the West End, but Bensonhurst is so big that it's pretty much shared by the 2. I can take either, and have 3 choices of stops on the West End, 71st, 79th, and Bay Parkway. ALthough if I get off at Bay Parkway, I'd much rather take a bus. 71st is a long walk home, and I'd only get off at 79th if the exit for 76th st is open. The walk from Bay Parkway on the N is ~9 minutes, 71st is ~15-20 minutes, and 79th is ~10-15 minutes.
If you look at the riders on the W, most of them are chinese. Could this be because the W goes over the bridge and gets them to Canal faster? I'd bet that if the W went through Montague, and the N had the bridge, then you'd see all the chinese people off at 36th and wait for a N.
Exactly. Who wants to ride through that damn Montague Tunnel anyway. It is a 4th Avenue local route and fit only for that rotten line that never sees the light of day. The Sea Beach belongs on the bridge.
It was great on the WILLY b FOR A SHORT WHILE
It was great on the WILLY b FOR A SHORT WHILE Fred you have to realize it the Sea Beach Express is history, gone just like the Dodgers, into Brooklyn History
R142----Right on the button my friend. Nice going. I couldn't have said it better myself. Now if only the TA got the message.
The T/A has given the Sea Beach Line the shaft for too long. If they wanted to they could restore it to its former status.
#3 West End Jeff
N to Nowhere
If they relayed the W at Astoria Blvd and ran just the N to Ditmars, we wouldn't have all those dealys outside the Ditmars station.
When I worked the N around 1994, officially the N terminated at 86th St. (24/7) due to switch replacement at the Neptune Ave. end of Stillwell station. After the Sea Beach switches were replaced, (A & B pockets or tracks 1 & 2), the B trains used the Sea Beach pockets. However due to other GO's, from 10AM to 3 PM Monday to Friday and Sat/Sun for a longer period of time, the N was actually extended to Stillwell since one way it went regular and the other way it went over the B line due to overpass replacement on the N line. Same thing this weekend, coincidentally it happened jsut when the 86th St. termination started. If this weekends' "one way Sea Beach and one way West End" GO was canceled for any reason at the last minute (which never happened) then the N would have terminated at 86th St. The 86th St. termination is more like a new service plan (a GO # is assigned) and all other GO's (like the one this weekend only) works off the main GO (86th St. termination)
It allows for flexibility. With the N terminating at 86th St. for the next few years and track 2 being hooked up to the Brighton line, when needed the Q could terminate on the N tracks when the Q tracks/structure are being replaced and when that is accomplished, the W could utilize the N tracks when their tracks/structure are being replaced.
Didn't they rehabilitate part of the station a few years back? The N was cut back to 86th St. then.
Structural work and switch replacement at the Neptune Ave. end was the reason for the cutback to 86th St. a few years back.
I see. Will it be retained or torn out during the current rehab?
A big thank you to all of the SubTalkers who helped me nail down
the correct Chinese characters which used to emblazen the station
signs there. You will find a beautiful new Canal St. shirt (in
red or black) at the NY Transit Museum at GCT. So far, they have it
only in adult sizes, with kids and Juniors sizes coming soon.
I will also have these shirts up on my web site nycsubwayline.com
within a couple of weeks.
Couldn't have done it without your help as all traces of the original
signs had disappeared!
Don't they have Chinese characters on the signs at the Canal-Centre (J/M) station?
wayne
At least on the Northbound side, which I went through last week,
there were still there. But subway grrl meant the old signs on the
Broadway bridge and tunnel platforms. They only had signs meaning
"Chinatown" as opposed to the Nassau platform which both has
"Chinatown" and "Canal St." signs in Chinese.
BTW, Subway grrl, the London exhibit seems to go on for a while,
so I will see it and your "Canal" shirts as well.
Dear Wado and Wayne,
You guys helped me know which of the sets of characters was what I
was looking for. We opted to do this sign in black like the newer
ones, but I would love to revisit the concept with a white sign
with black letters, as some have said were the original ones in
that station.
Use red letters. Red is the color of luck and prosperity in Chineese.
Would you wear a shirt with red letters? I'm chinese and don't wear any red... hm... maybe that's why my luck's so bad... if it's red on black, it might be quite nice...
Yeah, I think it's nice that way, and in the reverse as well.
Let me know what you think when you see them. Your luck could
change!!
I think I got a picture of the one on the soon-to-be-closed northbound side.
Steve,
Is this the one with two sets of characters on the sign in the
middle of the platform?
IIRC the sign I spotted was near the southern/western end of the platform.
Just wondering subway grrl, do you own the company that makes the shirts? Can we get any discounts ;)? Any plans on making an M shirt?
Hi!
Yes, I own this company. As soon as I work out my true costs for shipping
off the web, I'll know if I can afford discounts for SubTalkers.
For now, I am anxiously awaiting the time when my ink will be black
instead of red!
This owning a company stuff can suck you dry.
I love the concept though!
Over theweek end is saw new expanded massage the these cars. For Exp. F train "1) to 179st/Jamica 2) Via 53 Street 3) Manhaton Local 4) Queens Blvd Exp.
I saw a new printed list of codes in the R46 I had today on the "R" train. There are new sign readouts for the "R", "G", "E" and "V". All of then are like to putting the "Via" the "Loc./Exp." Parts. The "G" train has a code for when it goes from 71st to Church Ave on the Weekend.
The sign read G Train "1)to Church Ave 2)Via Crosstown 3)Queens Blvd Local 4) Brooklyn Local. and there one for going back as well like this.
Robert
I noticed that some trains had the new readouts mixed with the old readouts. One train even had the right (west) half of some cars going to BAY RIDGE-95 ST (or was it 95 ST-BAY RIDGE?) with the left (east) half going to 59 ST-BKLYN.
I also saw one R train with all the side sign lights out. The train was in service and all other lights were on.
When side signs are off on R-44 and R-46, it means the car's air ventalation system is turned off. For some reason the two systems are joined.
I can't fathom why the two would be joined, but IIRC this was around Cortlandt or Rector, so perhaps the crew turned off the ventilation system temporarily to keep a certain unpleasant aroma out.
Another mystery like why we don't let customers ride on yard tracks. Just like that answer, this one won't satisfy you either:
In 1990, the R-44/R-46 overhaul contract did not include the electronic side signs. The signs were negotiated after the overhaul began (this despite 10 R-46s already had the systemon test before the overhaul). When the signs were added, in order to control them from any cab (on-off function), they were piggy-backed onto the train-line relay that controlled the HVAC function. They could not use the TLR for the lights because there are times when the lights are off and the signs are still needed such as when the F train is on the McDonald Ave. part of the line. Bottom line, it was to save the expense of adding another Trainline relay to each car.
I'm afraid this answer does, in fact, satisfy me. Thank you.
I'm still curious how riding on a train that is going through the yard anyway is akin to walking the tracks.
"I'm still curious how riding on a train that is going through the yard anyway is akin to walking the tracks."
I'm going to take one more crack at this. TA personnel are trained in track safety. Although it should become 2nd nature, the office of System Safety requires a track safety refresher course every three years. This is because we tend to become complacent and develope bad habits.
The TA policy is that in revenue service, certain safety devices are mandatory including trip cocks and proper signal protection. In the yards, not all tracks have signals with stop arms - hence no protection. While TA workers assume a certain level of risk in the performance of their duties, the general public does not. Therefore, despite the fact that you may not view operating a train without signal/air brake protection as unsafe, there is a level of safety that is not provided in the yards that is provided on main line, revenue service tracks. The increased danger may be negligable but there is an increased danger.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also took an interesting Black and White picture of a Sign read-out I have never seen before going on a downtown F train the sign read as follows
to Coney Island
via 63rd street
Culver Exp
I've noticed that the R-68s and R-68As got new rollsigns before the Manhattan Bridge changeover; Norwood-205th Street, Harlem-145th Street, Herald Square-34th Street, and Lower East Side-2nd Ave./Houston St. are some of the new variations on the rolls. It seems that the the TA is putting more emphasis on neighborhood names for terminal stations.
For many years the D was signed for "205th-Concourse." It is on the Concourse line, but the station is actually at Bainbridge Avenue.
I remember hearing that a northbound 5 train left East 180 and left for Morris Park via track 22 of Unionport.
Thanks for the response, but I'm afraid you answered a question I didn't ask.
Of course there are greater risks in running a train through a yard than running on mainline tracks -- I never denied it. However, the danger of riding through a yard differs in (at least) two ways from the danger of walking the tracks. First, each individual on the tracks yields additional risk, while an empty train is at no less risk than a full one (although, of course, the risk extends to all on the train). Second, walking the tracks requires special training to be done safely (even here, although most of us know not to step on the third rail, most of us have no idea how to alert passing T/O's of our presence); riding on a train through a yard requires no training beyond that necessary to ride a train anywhere else (the T/O, of course, needs special training, but in this scenario the T/O already has that special training; the question is whether to permit passengers).
That said, the safety issue still exists. However, a safety issue also exists in funneling an entire (largely confused, mostly annoyed, some not in excellent physical shape) trainload out of a single exit to the street, one that happens to be a significant vertical and horizontal distance from the platform. A safety issue exists in loading that trainload onto buses. A safety issue exists on the bus ride itself -- few of the subway's safety features exist on buses. A safety issue exists in unloading the bus. A safety issue exists in bringing the busloads into the station. These safety issues need to be weighed against the safety issues of the alternative plan.
My impression, from your posts and others', is that this was not done. Passengers are simply not permitted to ride through yards, period, and that's that. The question of whether the alternative arrangements might put them at even greater risk is simply not considered.
I haven't done a thorough analysis, but I suspect that the passengers were put through greater risk than necessary by herding them onto buses. If someone in the TA did a thorough analysis and concluded otherwise, I'll accept that. But as you said yourself, passengers are simply not allowed in yards, so why bother with the analysis?
(Incidentally, the small risk assumed by passengers riding through yards could be reduced if the T/O simply emptied out the lead car before entering the yard. The second and third cars would be crowded, but no more than the shuttle buses were.)
Hmmm, I wonder if this is the real reason the N was cut back. Will the W be next?
You are absolutely correct. I was in error.
The real safety issue is the safety of the transit agency from
being sued.
Look, we have enough trouble with passengers getting injured
because of collisions on the mainline. Now, suppose you take
trains through a yard track that does not have stop arms and
the m/m runs the ball and either derails or hits another train.
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the MTA willfully, knowlingly
and negligently allowed passengers to ride through an area which
was not up to passenger safety standards. These poor passengers
were not even given any warning of the danger they faced."
Are shuttle buses up to passenger subway safety standards? Of course not -- they're buses. Why is it deemed okay to subject subway riders to substandard safety standards on buses but not in yards?
Don't think logically. Put yourself into the mindset of
an ambulance-chasing lawyer. In general the fatality rate
for rail transportation is probably lower than for bus,
but that is heavily skewed by over-the-highway buses which tend
to skid off embankments and such. In NYC, I can't remember the
last time a transit bus passenger was killed in a collision.
Regardless, when the passenger steps on to the bus, he or she
is entering a known risk environment. It's not as if the bus
is less safe than an ordinary bus just because it is a shuttle.
But, the passenger being diverted through yard trackage is not
informed of the risk. An important safety device has been disabled
without the passenger's knowledge.
And remember also that lawyers who can't keep up with the ambulance are usually financed by their partners in the firm to run FOR OFFICE! And really bad lawyers who at least have a friend in office and have a firm that will do anything to keep them away from the bench will often intervene to get them a job as "counsel" at a political agency.
THESE are the lawyers who make the rules ... been there, seen it again and again and again and again ... remember also that in political subdivisions (MTA and its subdivisions are what is called a "political subdivision" as a quasi-public agency. Gravitation is suspended and rocks float. I love how people try to seek logic in many such decisions and even more amusing is subjugates OF the agencies trying to make it fit somehow. Rocks float. That's all ya need to know. :)
Here's my guess: departments. The Department of Subways doesn't want to be sued over an incident in the yard. But if the DoS forces all the passengers into buses, then, even if the risk is greater, now it falls into the DoB's hands, and the DoB takes these risks all the time.
I don't have the statistics, but I do know that, in the 60's or 70's, my grandmother was knocked to the ground by a turning bus. She wasn't on the bus itself, but every additional bus on the streets increases the risk of hitting random passers by.
The greater risk, I suspect, is in the emptying of the station, which is not designed to accomodate 1000 people all exiting at once, all through a single street exit. There was no attempt at crowd control. And as for putting passengers at risk without warning them, there was no warning to the frail that they were in for a real hike just to get to the street -- nor do I consider it much of a warning that they're told that if they want to go any further, they're going to have to assume greater risk. But if a simple warning is all you're after, an announcement over the PA should suffice. (Those passengers who ignore announcements apparently don't care. It probably would be a good idea to test the PA system in each car at the beginning of the run, though.)
Really, if T/O's were told in advance that they were not to exceed (say) 10 mph in the yard while carrying passengers, and all passengers were chased out of the lead car before entering the yard, how severe could any potential incident be? (Yes, it would still be faster than the bus, and more importantly, most passengers would be able to stay in their seats the whole way.)
Does this come under the heading of "GIVE IT A FRIGGING REST ALREADY", yet?
Ignore the thread if it doesn't interest you. I asked you a question and you answered it. Now I'm discussing the issue with others.
My suggestion, for what it's worth:
Since none of the people on this board (at least none I know of) are in a policy-making position for NYC Transit, and this is clearly a question about NYCT policy, maybe a letter to NYC Transit asking for the reasons behind this policy is in order.
David
Clearly, I need not ignore the thread - just one person who cannot accept fact because his mind is made up.
You?
Hi
I am sure this has been posted,,,Does anyone have a full readout of the ALL the latest signs
I will pay for this info,,,postage--etc
Steve
FDNY
Don't shoot the messenger. I don't have anything to do with
making these decisions. If it were up to me, I'd say "the heck
with it, just run the trains". In fact, this policy is fairly
recent. I recall a weekend G/O on the queens IND about 15 years
ago where trains were being regularly re-routed through
Jamaica yard loop.
Just evacuating the first car doesn't entirely remove the risk
though. The train could still get rear-ended or sideswiped.
Oh, no, I'm not shooting! Just discussing. Believe it or not, I appreciate your input.
Nothing removes the risk entirely. Not even funneling everyone into buses.
That track they used then is gone from the loop. You can see it to your left by the car wash as you go back out of the current loop.
It's a shame it's all concrete. They use it for G layups.
>>> Really, if T/O's were told in advance that they were not to exceed (say) 10 mph in the yard while carrying passengers, and all passengers were chased out of the lead car before entering the yard, how severe could any potential incident be? (Yes, it would still be faster than the bus, and more importantly, most passengers would be able to stay in their seats the whole way.) <<<
David;
Didn't you read Jeff's explanation of why passengers are not carried through yards? It is not a question of whether it is safer to carry them through a yard on a train or transfer them to a shuttle bus. It does not matter. The TA is not going to carry passengers on tracks that are not rated for carrying passengers. It is a liability issue decided by the legal department, not a safety issue. Therefore it is completely immaterial whether it would be safer to stay on the train through a yard or use shuttle buses.
Tom.
Is it reasonable to assume that liability is based largely on degree of safety?
Then why does the legal department summarily forbid one practice over liability concerns while permitting less safe practices?
Anybody got a saddle?
>>> Is it reasonable to assume that liability is based largely on degree of safety? <<<
No! Liability is more likely to be found if management ignores its own standards of what tracks are suitable to carry passengers. This is based on the idea that it is foreseeable that something might go wrong if trains are operated on tracks not up to the standards required for carrying revenue passengers. On the other hand, when using shuttle buses, the TA is using the proven technology of transit bus operation on city streets. In court, once the specter of ignoring a known danger is raised, the sky is the limit for damages, and in some cases criminal charges could be leveled.
Like many things in life, it is simpler to prohibit passengers on non revenue tracks at all times than to make an extensive study of whether it is safer to haul the passengers over a given portion of non revenue track rather than provide a shuttle for them each time a GO for repair is proposed which could be detoured around on non revenue tracks.
Tom
Fair point. (But it seems like the trampling concern was simply ignored.)
The TA is not going to carry passengers on tracks that are not rated for carrying passengers.
In this particular case there is a further item to obfuscate the issue. Some tracks in this particular yard were retrofitted to carry and did carry passengers in regular service. :-)
I didn't catch the start of the thread. If we're talking about
Jamaica Yard, then yes, the yard leads from Continental Avenue
were once considered mainline trackage because they were used
for World's Fair service. But, that was 60 years ago.
An important safety device has been disabled without the passenger's knowledge.
Just how "important" is this safety device. I'd estimate there is a rear end collision about once every 4 years on mainline track with this safety device in place. Is the incidence for rear enders that much more frequent in the yards?
I have seen some minor collisions in yards, once about 30 years ago at Concourse yard when a single R-9 car ran into a line of parked R-9's on a layup track. The operator must not have been paying much attention to how fast he was going. The cars looked none the worse for it, and I saw this from the platform of the southbound 4 line at Bedford Park Blvd. station.
Once, a few years ago, I was on a train that was full of passengers on the F-line, and because of a delay at Union Turnpike station ( I think someone jumped in front of a train durin the AM rush hour in a suicide attempt ), the train was diverted through the yard in Jamaica. The passengers were busy gawking at the equipment parked on the tracks, and all was quiet, and we went back to the regular route without incident. I guess that re-route was necessary because of an unplanned incident, not for a scheduled track repair.
I'm quite sure that the move you describe has not been allowed or made in many, many years for the reasons I have stated. I'm also quite sure that it wouldn't be done today under the same circumstances.
When did they change the message signs? And when does the G Train go to Church Avenue?
- Lyle Goldman
This probably dated to after the WTC disaster, from what I could tell.
They apparently started changing the signs last week since I noticed it first on Friday. Not all the cars have been changed yet. Is guess it's just a matter of changing a computer chip. The G is scheduled to terminate at Church Av only on Saturdays (don't ask why?) staring 12/15.
The G will go the Church Ave on the hole weekend. not just on Saturday. I have also had two R46 with new programing done to them. The "R" sign now read 1) 95st/Bay Ridge 2) Via Broadway Local 3) 4th Ave local. And 1) 71st 2)Via Broadway Local 3) Queens Bvl. Local.
I am not 100% shore if the is right word for word, but you can get a Idear about the sign. I know that they now can flip 4 time thought a set.
Robert
Although the new readings are easier on the eye, I'm not thrilled that they take longer to cycle. I can picture myself running up to the platform at Rockaway and having to pass up an A train since the display now takes too long to get around to the one piece of information I need, the destination.
Are the displays on the R-142's being adjusted as well? In particular, will the 2 finally stop declaring itself an express when it's making all local stops?
They must figure the current service pattern for the 2 is temporary, even if "temporary" in this case means 2-3 years. IMHO they should change the readout to "7th Ave. Local" until that damaged section of tunnel is rebuilt. I can see Mr. Bill now: "Define 'temporary'".
It reminds me of the side route signs on the R-1/9s for the E: "E-8th Ave. Express". My feeling was, 8th Ave. Express, my ass.
If it's temporary, why were all the signs at my local station replaced last week?
I thought one of the advantages to electronic signs was flexibility. The 2 doesn't have to be hardcoded as local or express -- since the train can be put into local mode or express mode (which determines whether local stops are announced), shouldn't the displays and announcements call any train an express if it's in express mode and a local if it's in local mode?
Even when the 2 ran express, it still ran local at night -- but signs and announcements referred to it as an express. The problem is not new.
Why does the TA find it easier to change station signage than R-142 signage and announcements?
Mr.Greenburger:
Dont worry im sure the "minor" changes will be adjusted. Remember I posted here that there was a memo out stating that the transfer changes due to Manny B would not be installed into the computers until late fall when the V train come out. Now the V train date has been pushed back. Dont worry it'll happen, it just not happening at your pace. I know as a C/R it is sometimes irritating to hear: "This is a Bklyn bound 2 express train, the next stop is 86th Street." But they will change and when they do, Im sure the side signs will be change to 7Av local.
PS get off at 72St(Uptown side) Look at the signs there. Ill give you something else to vent about in the meantime....
Am I wrong to believe that changing the transfer information is a much more involved process than it needs to be? I don't see why it should take more than 15 minutes. Apparently it takes so long that it was deemed preferable to confuse the passengers from July until November (and now December). Either that or the TA simply doesn't care about confusing the passengers -- but why, then, the fancy shmancy new equipment that makes crystal clear (if sometimes boring and inaccurate) announcements? (Yes, I know that C/R's are supposed to override the automated announcements at the relevant transfer points. I'm sure you do, but I've never been on your train. The one time I heard an announcement overridden, it was replaced with nothing more than a ping, and the C/R had been playing with the PA button for the entire ride, pinging out announcements left and right. Incidentally, if my count is correct, the announcements should be overridden at five stations on the 2 and at four stations on the 6.)
The express vs. local issue should have never come up. As you know, the 2 has run local at night since before the R-142's were introduced. The 2 should not be hardcoded as a local or an express; it should simply declare its status based on the station program in effect. This does confuse people; I've helped out many myself (and I'm sure you've helped many more).
I've seen the signs at 72nd. Let's see how long they last. Are they new signs or just overlays? At 86th we got brand new platform signs. Some of the new signs at 42nd were placed directly behind the brand new (not-yet-functional) light boxes.
You are right about the express vs local thing on the midnites. That was a big mistake. The platform signs change havent made it way to 14St(downtown side). Also 96St(uptown xpress). AFAIK, the 2 stops on both the local and express at 96St.
The 2 is only supposed to stop on the local track at 96th, since all switches are north of the station. In practice, many 2's run express. (I will be posting about messed up 2 and 3 service soon. For a change, I have no complaints about the 1.)
If anyone has these readings, It would be appreciated if they were put on a web site somewhere, then like that site here.
If anyone has these readings, It would be appreciated if they were put on a web site somewhere, then like that site here.
I think there are well over 1,000 of them.
...which still didn't include E to Canal St.
I've never liked those signs. They're hard to read, and ugly to boot.
:-) Andrew
Well, check out BusMan2000's site containing the NYCT bus sign readings. If he can do it for buses, it can be done for subways.
He, for the most part, already has.
Also, I was on a downtown "R" R-46 at 1:45 P.M., leaving Union Square, and noticed that the LCD signs said:
R Broadway Lcl
Bay Ridge
95th St.
I would assume they're reprogramming these systems to appear similiar to the newer roll signs that have been installed in (almost) all of the R-68 & 68-Alphas---and, IMHO, the appearance of this new programming does seem to be a bit more pleasant to read than the signs pre-9/11.
Stuart, RLine86Man
"He, for the most part, already has."
Where?
STILL NO E TO CANAL STREET SIGNS? WHAT MORONS COMMISSIONED THESE NEW READOUTS?
- Lyle Goldman
They're nor morons. They just didn't know there would be no World Trade Center as it was known before 9/11.
If the system was designed more like the Washington, DC buses, this problem would have been easier to solve.
But they changed the signs after 9/11!
- Lyle Goldman
They are putting Queens reading sheets with tht new codes in the cabs, and there is an E to Canal St.
It seems alot of the new codes are above 1100, so I don't know whether these are additions to the others or redoing of the whole thing.
That's good. I guess they're not as stupid as I thought.
- Lyle Goldman
Uh....(AHHEM!) I should clarify that it is the old LCD readings on the R44 and R46, the ones currently in wide use, that I refer to as not having E to Canal St on them. I actually don't know about the new ones.
Sorry about the confusion.
:>o Andrew
Well... in early 2000 Fdny posted the readings, THese are not in the posted order and they are not the new displays, but here they are
A
A TO 207 ST/MANHTN 8 AV EXPRESS
A TO 207 ST /MANHTN 8 AV LOCAL
A TO 168 ST/MANHTN 8 AV EXPRESS
A TO FAR ROCKAWAY 8 AV /FULTON EXP
A TO FAR ROCKAWAY 8 AV EXPRESS FULTON ST LOCAL
A TO FAR ROCKAWAY 8 AV /FULTON LCL
A TO LEFFERTS BLVD 8 AV /FULTON EXP
A TO LEFFERTS BLVD 8 AV EXPRESS FULTON ST LOCAL
A TOLEFFERTS BLVD 8 AV/FULTON LCL
A TO BRIGHTON BCH VIA 6 AV BRIGHTON EXP
A TO CONEY ISLAND VIA 6 AV BRIGHTON LOCAL
B
B TO 21 ST/QUEENS 6 AV LOCAL
B BWAY - LAFAYETTE
B to 168 st /manhtn 6 av express cent pk w.local
B TO 21 ST/QUEENS 6 AV EXPRESS
B TO 36 /BKLYN SHUTTLE
B TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV EXPRESS WEST END EXP
B TO CONEY ISLAND
B TO DITMARS BLVD VIA BROADWAY
B QUEENSBORO PL Z VIA BROADWAY
B TO BRIGHTON BCH 6 AV LINE VIA BRIGHTON
B TO BRIGHTON BCH VIA BROADWAY VIA BRIGHTON
B TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV LINE VIA BRIGHTON
B TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV VIA CULVER
B to 57 st/ 7 Av via Broadway
B to 57 st/7 Av Shuttle
C
C TO BEDFORD PARK 8 AV LOCAL
C TO 145 ST /MANHTN 8 AV LOCAL
C TO ROCKAWAY PK 8 AV /FULTON LCL
C TO EUCLID AV 8 AV /.FULTON LCL
C WORLD TRADE CTR 8 AV LOCAL
D
D TO 205 ST /BRONX 6 AV EXPRESS CONCOURSE EXP
D TO 205 ST/BRONX 6 AV EXPRESS CONCOURSE LOCAL
D TO BEDFORD PARK 6 AV EXPRESS CONCOURSE LOCAL
D TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV EXPRESS CONCOURSE LOCAL
D TO DITMARS LVD VIA BROADWAY
D QUEENSBORO PLZ VIA BROADWAY
D to 57 st/7 Av via Broadway
E
E JAMAICA CENTER QUEENS LOCAL
E WORLD TRADE CTR 8 AV LOCAL
E JAMAICA CENTER QUEENS EXPRESSS
E JAMAICA CENTER VIA 6 AV
E JAMAICA CENTER
E to 34 st/Bway via Broadway
E to Canal St via Broadway
E to Whitehall St via Broadway
F
F TO 179 ST ST/QUEENS 6 AV LOCAL QUEENS LOCAL
F TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV/CULVER LOCAL
F TO 179 ST /QUEENS CROSSTOWN LOCAL
F TO 179 ST/QUEENS 6 AV LOCAL QUEENS EXPRESS
F TO 47-50 /6 AV 6 AV LOCAL
F JAMIACA CENTER QUEENS EXPRESS
F JAMAICA CENTER QUEENS LOCAL
F JAMAICA CENTER VIA 8 AV
G
G JAMAICA CENTER CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G TO SMITH -9 STS CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G TO CHIRCH ST CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G TO COURT SQUARE CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G TO QUEENS PLAZA CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G 71/CONTINENTAL CROSSTOWN LOCAL
G HOYT - SCHERMERHN CROSSTOWN LOCAL
H
H TO EUCLID AV VIA FAR ROCKAWAY
H TO BROAD CHANNEL SHUTTLE
H TO EUCLID AV SHUTTLE
H TO FAR ROCKAWAY VIA ROCKAWAY PK
H TO ROCKAWAY PK
NO H-M
N
N TO DITMARS BLVD BROADWAY EXP
N TO DITMARS BLVD 4 AV EXPRESS BROADWAY LOCAL
N TO DITMARS BLVD 4 AV LOCAL BROADWAY EXP
N TO DITMARS BLVD BROADWAY LOCAL
N TO KINGS HIGHWY BROADWAY EXP SEA BEACH EXP
N TO CONEY ISLAND BROADWAY EXP SEA BEACH LOCAL
N TO CONEY ISLAND BROADWAY LOCAL SEA BEACH EXP
N TO CONEY ISLAND BROADWAY LOCAL SEA BEACH LOCAL
N TO KINGS HIGHWY BROADWAY LOCAL SEA BEACH LOCAL
N JAMAIA ENTER BROADWAY EXP
N JAMAICA CENTER VIA 6 AV
N JAMAICA CENTER VIA BROADWAY
N TO DITMARS VLD BROADWAY LOCAL VIA BRIDGE
N TO DITMARS BLVD
N QUEENS BORO PLZ
N QUEENSBORO PLZ BROADWAY EXP
N QUEENSBORO PLZ BROADWAY LOCAL
N to lex Av/60 st
N to 57 st/7 Av Broadway Exp
N to 57 st / 7 Av 4 Av Express Broadway Local
N to 57 St/7 Av 4 Av Local Broadway Exp
N to 57 st / 7 Av Broadway Local
Q
Q BWAY -LAFAYETTE
Q TO 21 ST/QUEENS 6 AV LOCAL
Q TO BRIGHTON BCH 6 AV EXPRESS BRIGHTON LOCAL
Q TO 21 ST/QUEENS 6 AV EXPRESS
Q TO DITMARS BLVD VIA BROADWAY
Q QUEENSBORO PLZ VIA BROADWAY
Q TO DITMARS BLVD VIA BROADWAY
Q QUEENSBORO PLZ VIA BROADWAY
Q to Atlantic Av
Q to Prospect pk
Q to Brighton Bch 6 Av Express Brighton Local
Q to Brighton Bch via Broadway Brighton Exp
Q to Brighton Bch via Broadway Brighton Local
Q to Coney Island 6 Av Express Brighton Exp
Q to COney Island 6 Av Express Brighton Local
Q to Coney Island via Broadway Brighton Exp
Q to Coney Island via Broadway Brighton Local
R
R TO 36 ST /BKLYN SHUTTLE
R TO 179 ST /QUEENS VIA 6 AV
R TO 95 ST /BKLYN
R TO 179 ST /QUEENS BROADWAY LOCAL
R JAMIACA CENTER BROADWAY LOCAL
R JAMAICA CENTER VIA 6 AV
R 71/CONTINENTAL BROADWAY LOCAL
R TO DITMARS BLVD BROADWAY LOCAL
R QUEENSBORO PLZ BROADWAY LOCAL
R TO 95 ST/BKLYN BROADWAY LOCAL
R TO WHITEHALL ST BROADWAY LOCAL
R TO CANAL ST BROADWAY LOCAL
R TO 34 ST/6 A VIA 6 AV
S
S to Atlantic Av Shuttle
S to Prospect Pk Shuttle
S to Kings Highwy Shuttle
S to Brighton Bch Shuttle
S to W 8 St / Bklyn Shuttle
S to Coney Island Shuttle
S TO FRANKLIN AV
S TO PROSPECT PK
S JAMAICA CENTER SHUTTLE
S TO UNION TPKE SHUTTLE
S TO DITMARS BLVD
S QUEENSBORO PLZ SHUTTLE
T
T TO DITMARS BLVD VIA BROADWAY
T QUEENSBORO PLZ VIA BROADWAY
T TO 57 ST/ 7 AV VIA BROADWAY
T TO ESSEX /DELANCEY VIA NASSAU ST
T TO CHAMBERS ST VIA NASSAU ST
T TO BAY PARKWAY WEST END LINE
T TO CONEY ISLAND WEST END LINE
T TO 21 ST /QUEENS VIA 6 AV
T TO 21 ST/QUEENS VIA BROADWAY
T TO 57 ST/6 AV VIA 6 AV
T TO 207 ST/MANHTN VIA 6 AV
T TO 168 ST /MANHATN VIA 6 AV
T TO DITMARS VLD VIA BROADWAY
T QUEENSBORO PLZ VIA BROADWAY
V
V TO BRIGHTON BCH VIA 6 AV BRIGHTON EXP
V TO CONEY ISLAND VIA 6 AV BRIGHTON LOCAL
V Jamaica Center via 6 Av
V TO 2 AV/MANHTN 6 AV LOCAL
V TO SMITH - 9 ST 6 AV LOCAL
V TO CHURCH AV 6 AV/ULVER LOCAL
V TO CHURCH AV 6 AV LOCAL CULVER EXPRESS
V TO KINGS HIGHWAY 6 AV CULVER LCL
V TO KINGS HIGHTWAY 6 AV LOCAL CULVER EXPRESS
V TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV/CULVER LCL
V TO CONEY ISLAND 6 AV LOCAL CULVER EXPRESSS
V TO 179 ST /QUEENS VIA 6 AV
V 71 /CONTINENTAL VIA 6 AV
V TO 34 ST/ 6 AV VIA 6 A
V TO WEST 4 ST VIA 6 AV
V BWAY -LAFAYETTE VIA 6 AV
V TO GRAND ST VIA 6 AV
V TO 21 ST /QUEENS 6 AV LINE
V TO 57 ST/6 AV 6 AV LINE
V TO 145 ST/MANHTN 6 AV LINE
V 59 ST /COL CIRC 6 AV LINE
V WORLD TRADE CTR 6 AV LINE
v to Brighton Bch via 6 Av Brighton Exp
V to Coney Island via 6 Av Brighton Local
V JAMIACA CENTER VIA 6 AV
V 6 AV
W
W Jamiaca center via BROADWAY
W TO BRIGHTON BCH VIA BROADWAY BRIGHTON EXP
W TO CONEY ISLAND VIA BROADWAY BRIGHTON LOCAL
W TO 57 ST/7 AV
W TO 34 ST /BWAY
W TO CANAL ST BROADWAY LOCAL
W TO ITY HALL BROADWAY LOCAL
W TO WHITEHALL ST BROADWAY LOCAL
W TO 179 ST /QUEENS VIA BROADWAY
W 71/CONTINTAL VIA BROADWAY
W TO CONEY ISLAND BROADWAY LINE VIA SEA BEACH
W TO BAY PARKWAY BROADWAY LINE VIA WEST END
W TO CONEY ISLAND BROADWAY LINE VIA WEST END
W TI 95 ST/BKLYN VIA BROADWAY 4 AV LOCAL
W TO 2 ST /QUEENS BROADWAY
W BROADWAY
W to Brighton Bch via Broadway Birghton Exp
W to Coney Island Via Broadway Brighton Local
W JAMAICA CENTER VIA BROADWAY
X
X TO 21 ST /QUEENS VIA 6 AV
X WORLD TRADE CTR VIA 6 AV
WALK THRU TRAIN
EXPRESS
LOCAL
SKIP-STOP
LONG ISLAND RR
METRO - NORTH RR
NYCTA
SPECIAL
SHUTTLE
LISTEN FOR ANNOUNCEMENT
NOT IN SERVICE
LAST STOP
TO KINGS HIGHWAY 6 AV/CULVER LCL
JAMAICA CENTER
SUTPHIN / ARCHER
JAMAICA /VN WYCK
TO DITMARS BLVD
TO ASTORIA BLVD
TO 30 AV/QUEENS
TO BROADWAY /QNS
TO 36 AV/QUEENS
TO 39 AV/QUEENS
QUEENSBORO PLZ
to Dekalb Av
to Atlantic Av
to 7 Av /Bklyn Brighton Line
to Prospect Pk
to Parkside Av
to Church Av Brighton Line
to Beverly Rd
Page 7
to Cortelyou Rd
to Newkirk Av
to Avenue H
to Avenue J
to Avenue M
to Kings Highway Brighton Line
to Avenue U Brighton Line
to Neck Road
to Sheepshead ( This is the exact reading)
to Brighton Bch
to Ocean Pkwy
to w 8 st/Bkln Brighton Line
to W 8 st/Bklyn
to Coney ISland Brighton Line
to Coney Island
(My longest post ever)
THough the material is from FDNY
This was in no way created by me
though poorly formatted !)
Actually there are quite a few new readouts. I have seen the R and F get changed ones. like R usually would say R 71/CONTINENTAL, R BROADWAY LOCAL. The other day i saw R FOREST HILLS, R 71 AV, R BROADWAY LCL. The F currently is F 6AV/CULVER LCL, F CONEY ISLAND OR F 6AV CULVER LCL, F KINGS HWY. now the F says F 6AV LOCAL, F CULVER LCL, F CONEY ISLAND. I wonder will they change any other programmed codes??
Here's one I saw today.
F 6 AV/63 ST LCL
F QUEENS BL LCL
F JAMAICA/179 ST
Here's one I saw yesterday.
F 6 AV LCL
F CULVER LCL
Fto CONEY ISLAND
One major drawback, though: If the bus signs are any indication, then by the time four or five lines of information have been displayed, the doors are closed and the train is leaving!
i think is up @ 207street.i think i saw it last night.with the lcd and everything.
r142man
Check the car numbers to be sure what it is! From a distance the R110A and the R142 will look virtually the same.
The R110A are still at Piken Yard as of last week. I was there last Monday and I will be there tommorw.
Robert
I hope that is the 110A. I remember it on display at the Transit Museum when that and the 110B were introduced to the public. I also rode them back in 1996. I love the interior, and I'll never forget it if it never runs again.
has anyone have one for sale.i just wanted to know.
r142man
I don't know if there are commercial ones out there.
My friend in Colorado and I are working on one. We have nearly completed 2 undercarriages (chassis, trucks) and are working on the carbodies. There will be one power unit and four trailers to each 5-car set. The cars will have detailed interiors with interior lighting. We don't yet have a timetable for completion.
How about the R-143 and R-68, are you or know someone else who will be making it.
I'm sorry; I don't know.
well when you finish at least on can you tell me @ b52bomber1@ignamail.com
Sure. This project will probably take a year, though, at least...
okay.great
I was doing my laundry in Great Neck and there was a construction order in effect with only the W/B track open. So E/B trains had to use the W/B track. The 4:57pm train to Penn didn't show until 5:25pm. It was waiting on a siding just east of the Great Neck RR station, since around 5pm. It had to wait for the Port Washington train to come in first, which didn't until 5:20pm. It was announced that the "Eastbound train to Port Washington is running 20 minutes late (we regret any inconvenience this may have caused you)". I don't know why they couldn't have let the Penn bound train go first, but I guess there was only one track back to Woodside. I feel sorry for those folks stuck on the W/B train waiting to get into Great Neck, I've never sat on a stuck train for 30 minutes, well...not yet.
That's the interesting thing about doing laundry in Great Neck I can watch the LIRR. The N20/21 buses were fine today. Usually it's the buses that are screwed up and trains keep coming. Things finally went good for a change (for me anyway). Also someone mentioned an Acela fire/derailment on the nycrail message board but there was an error and I couldn't read it. Any info on that?
And finally a big WELCOME BACK to Dave and everyone else here on Subtalk.
20 minutes sucks. There's only a few interlockings on the line, at Shea, at bayside, and Great Neck. So there's not much that can be done.
What's the track worlk anyway? Finally digging out the mud around the tracks at Douglaston? :)
Perhaps not transit related but I have to ask; Why do you take your laundry to Great Neck? Your BVDs need a change of scenery?
Umm, because there's NO laundry in Sea Cliff. Nearest laundromat is a 15 minute walk, and it is DIRTY and the washers skimp on water and the dryers are horrible. Nearest laundromat on N21 bus...GREAT NECK.
I'm much closer to N21 than N27, N21 don't go by any laundries in Glen Cove. That's more than you'll ever want to know about the perks of living in Sea Cliff. Someday I'll actually live in a place for people who have to do laundry, eat, work, and go shopping. For now I just dream! :-o
Don't most people on long island do do laundry in thier own homess???
ALOT BUT Not much people do laundry at home. Some people that live in Apt Buildings(LIKE ME!) have a laundry room (That's in my buliding!).
Besides, how many buildings allow people to have washers and dryers in their apartments?
Ummm.....
Gee, there's one on Glen Cove Ave right by the CVS / 7-11. Oh yeah, another (presumeably the dirty one?) right by the intersection of Glen Cove Ave and Sea Cliff Ave. Oh yeah, and there's one in Glen Cove behind the CVS right by the church. Oh yeah, and one on Glen Cove Ave on "the hill", right in that dump by the traffic light 1/2 way down (the other dirty one?). Oh hell, there's gotta be another 2 or 3 I'm missing here, and I don't even live in that part of town (I'm by the Lilco plant)
Face it, you used laundry as a cheap excuse to go to Great Neck and watch trains ;)
Face it, you used laundry as a cheap excuse to go to Great Neck and watch trains...
Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.
The one by CVS is the dirty one. The washers skimp on water, so the clothes don't get clean. The other one you're talking about (Sea-Glen) is just as bad. The one at the top of the hill on GC ave is across from the projects. There are good laundries in Glen Cove, but I'd have to take 2 buses. Yeah I got one of those push cart things, but they don't let ya on the bus with those. If they would, then I'd take the N27 to Glen Cove to the luandry on Glen st. by the 24 hour CVS. But since it's a walk to the N27, can't carry it that far.
So out of these options
1)use cart and go to dirty laundry (clothes don't get clean)
2) carry a load of laundry 15 minutes to GC ave for the N27 to Glen Cove
3)A short 2 minute walk and carry laundry take N21 bus to Great Neck
Option 3 just seems the easiest. Yeah I could walk to the Glen Cove laundry on Glen st by the church but that's like a 35 minute walk. It's just easier to take the bus.
Of course if that Sea Cliff-Glen Cove trolley still existed things would be much grander. Does anybody know exactly where that trolley went? Any web sites on it?
Of course those who drive and live in Sea Cliff might think all this talk is nonsense, right? :-)
Perhaps this discussion should be moved to WashTalk, a discussion group about Long Island NorthShore self service laundries. Check out
WWW.washee_shirtee.com
:-0
I'm sure that is more than anyone needed to know about laundromats on the north shore!!!
Nearest laundromat is a 15 minute walk, and it is DIRTY and the washers skimp on water and the dryers are horrible.
I think it's time for some revenge. Pour some concrete into the washer, by the time the cycle will be over it'll be a solid block!
Let me guess, you got that one from Seinfeld? One of my favorite episodes, Kramer is the funniest of them all!
Did anybody here vote for Kenny Kramer?
He might meet a nice girl in the laundromat!
If that's his objective, he'd be better off going to Main St. on the LIRR - Might make his trifecta - a single oriental girl who can cook and starch.
LOL!!! Sorry, I had to post it.
At this point in time - the "starching" (heavy, please!) would be best! Nothing like a good "starching" in an oriental "laundromat."
Hello to all, and welcome back Dave!! I hope you had a wonderful trip, and at the same time I'm sure all subtalkers are glad to see you back :-)
I was just wondering what was up with the R143s....did the 30-day test ever begin on 10/28, or are we still waiting? -Nick
Test was put off, some mechanical problem was found...
There are three new LIRR TVMs opposite the MTA Police station on the LIRR concourse. These new TVMs utilize touch screen technology just like the Metrocard MVMs. Infact, they are very similar to the Metrocard MVMs. Same manufacturer ?
You can buy the following:
One way/round trip/weekly/10 trip/monthly/Uniticket/Getaways/Packages.
Monthly rail ticket with $30 Metrocard
Weekly rail ticjet with $15 Metrocard
Round-trip ticket with $3 Metrocard. I purchased one roundtrip ticket from Penn to Farmingdale.It is printed on a fiber type Metrocard that's good for two rides. That's right Metrocard collectors, if these user friendly machines take off, they will probably replace the current TVMs at current stations that have them. That means more variety of used Metrocards for us to collect/
The TVM takes cash, credit and debit card. If you know how to use an MVM, this TVM is just a simple.
And who knows, if it takes off and does well, maybe they will show up on Metro North replacing their TVMs. That means more combo train ticket/Metrocards for us collectors to go nuts over.
If you are in the area, check it out.
Bill "Newkirk"
Are they are Jamaica yet?
Are those NEW TVM's are at Jamaica yet? And do it cost $3 more on the ticket price to get it?
"Are those NEW TVM's are at Jamaica yet? And do it cost $3 more on the ticket price to get it?"
Jamaica? Not to knowledge. Haven't been there lately.
$3 more? I assume you're talking about the combo round trip fare/$3 Metrocard?
First off, the round trip fare is basically two one way fares on one ticket (Metrocard). Not a discount like the old days. The Metrocard has $3 encoded on it. Remember, train fare + subway fare. If these new TVMs are put in place of the current ones in Nassau and Suffolk Ctys, then a commuter will opt for a round trip train fare that has the round trip subway fare on it. A combination Metrocard with train fare ticket, a one step process so the commuter doesn't waste time at the MVM machine buying a Metrocard.
It seems these are test machines to test the public acceptance which may render the old TVMs obsolete. Now if they can improve on the NJT TVMs !
Bill "Newkirk"
Someone who rides the LIRR every day would obviously go for a monthly pass.
Someone who doesn't ride the LIRR every day and doesn't ride the subway every day but rides both (or at least the subway) with some degree of regularity would most likely buy a standard round-trip LIRR ticket and MetroCards in increments of $15. I wouldn't pay an extra 28 cents per round trip for the "convenience" of having a single card.
Oh well.......different strokes for different folks !!
Bill "Newkirk"
I mailed in a suggestion about two years ago that TVMs print tickets on Metrocards. I guess they do read their mail, eventually!
BTW: For the round-trip ticket... How can the Conductors punch without ruining it?
"BTW: For the round-trip ticket... How can the Conductors punch without ruining it?"
Well, unfortunately they are made to be ruined. The Metrocard/ticket I bought was for a round trip on the LIRR and subway. Round trip is considered two one ways, no discount like the old days. After that, it's done. I haven't used it yet, but I assume the Metrocard will be punched so the second conductor will know if the card was already punched for trip #1.
Bill "Newkirk"
So it is a "two trip" ticket, direction irrelevent? I hope so, because I rarely make round trips any more. I usually purchase "via" tickets and get my discount through there. For 50 cents extra you can go from zone 4 to zone 3, then back to zone 4 again on a different line. ie: Hempstead to West Hempstead via Jamaica, $3.25. A lot cheaper than $5.50.
"So it is a "two trip" ticket, direction irrelevent? I hope so, because I rarely make round trips any more"
As printed on this Metrocard/ticket............
"Good for two rides in either direction for three months from date of purchase. Not refundable after one year from date of purchase"
Bill "Newkirk"
Those TVMs are much better. They are easy to use with the touch technology like the Metrocard machines are. Though like the Metrocard machines, when these new ones take your dollar, they zip the dollar away like nothing......could make for some nasty papercuts for some unsuspecting soul :-)
Am I the only one here who would prefer a keypad (perhaps with changeable key legends) to a touch-screen? I'm not a gorilla.
>>> Am I the only one here who would prefer a keypad <<<
The keypad vs. a touch screen depends upon the application the machine is being used for. In any production application where an operator will be sitting in front of a computer for hours at a time, entry through a keypad is much better. The "gorilla arm" syndrome referred to in the link is because of the ergonomically incorrect position of touching a screen which is at the proper height and distance for viewing when seated. On the other hand, for a TVM or other machine in a public place, where each user will be using the machine for just a few minutes to make limited choices, the touch screen is a viable option and has the advantage of eliminating the keypad which is subject to mechanical failure from dirt and moisture.
Tom
Touch screen? Geez, those are vandalism targets! Plus th EMF and temperature swings. I'm gathering these things are *not* going to be systemwide anytime soon!!! At least not in outdoors locations!
FYI, there are also new Metro North TVMs in GCT across from track 32. From Bill's description of the LIRR TVMs, they sound pretty much the same.
Ohhh........GAWD.......I can hardly wait to go to GCT and see this !!!!!!
Bill "Newkirk"
Channel 70 for Time Warner, dunno for elsewhere, tonight on Finders Keepers I will be on with my Metro Card collection!!!!
From #3 West End Jeff:
I'm back on Sub Talk again. Since the hiatus the N & R trains are running once again. I'm also trying out Netscape 6.1 as a web browser. It seems to be fast but I can also still use the old reliable Netscape Communicator 4.78 at the same time.
Any news on more "Redbirds" that are supposed to be dumped offshore?
#3 West End Jeff
This is for the trackworkers - when does the track grinder get called out to a particular line to work on the rails? I saw some badly beaten up tracks on the Queens bound E&F line express tracks that looked like someone with a sledgehammer took out some frustration on the rails. There is also a bad spot on the Northbound track of the F line at the 23rd street station in Manhattan. Who does the schedule for the grinding operations?
The trains beat those rails up. At 2 min a train during rush with full trains, it hurts.
I know that the rails get pounded by the traffic that they are subjected to. I just want to know when the track grinder gets called out to re-surface the rails. Does the Sperry car have to go over the tracks before the rail grinder gets to work on them?
A while back we were discussing the possibility of an ERA visit to the Kawasaki subway railcar plant in Yonkers. Obviously all was put on hold after Sept 11 - but any chance ERA can set this up?
I recognize there will be additional security precautions. And people polled at the time expressed a willingness to go even if photography were not allowed, in contrast to the 207 St yard visit.
I would love to go. How does ERA feel about it?
Count me in, photography or not. I'd definitely love to go. But who/what is ERA?
Chris
ERA (or at least the New York Division) loves the idea. Based on "Ron's" last postings on the subject of a shop tour of the Kawasaki plant, we're thinking about it.
Our tour slate for 2002 has not been settled yet. The Kawasaki plant will be in the running, though, of course, it's up to Kawasaki whether or not to allow us to have the tour.
David Ross
Director
New York Division
Electric Railroaders' Association, Incorporated
Thanks for your support. Welcome back to Subtalk, Dave.
The Electric Railroaders' Association is a railfan organization that was founded in the late 30's. It has a NY Division the meets on the third Friday on the month. Members buy, sell, trade, and talk subway, els, electric mainline, interurbans and buses.
Back to you Dave....
RE: NY Division ERA meeting
Some of you may not know this, but the ERA NY Division meeting usually held at the College of Insurance on 101 Murray St. has been affected by the September 11th attack.
While the building wasn't damaged, it was taken over by FEMA as a emergency field office of sorts. The Third Friday of the month meeting will be held at the Cooper Union at 41 Cooper Square in Manhattan. It's closest to the Astor Pl station (6) on the east side of 3rd Ave bet. 6th and 7th Sts.
Glenn Smith is putting on the show this Friday, Nov.16, 2001. It should be early next year when we return to the 101 Murray St auditorium. You know, Everytime I went there for the meeting and looked to the left before crossing the street to see one of the WTC towers, taking it for granted that it was a permanent fixture of the area. Now there'll be a empty void.
Bill "Newkirk"
So, the N train returns, and so does Subtalk. It just don't get no better! :)
Aquarium station opened 10/28/01 after a one-year shutdown. As of now the only entrance to the station is across the street from the customs house. Another new entrance will open new Quincy market from the looks of it will be ready soon. From street level to fare control the are only stairs no long escalators like their once were at the east end. After passing through fare control there is a large glass window overlooking the tracks this will provide greet photo opportunities. As of now escalators going from the fare control to the platforms run up regardless of time of day hopefully this will change. Other than the construction dust (how long do before it causes an anthrax scare) the station looks very nice the platforms are on a noticeable slope as the station is very close to the Boston harbor tunnel. As part of the big dig a section of tunnel including the part of the station that is currently open was completely rebuilt it is possible to look down the tunnel in either direction and see the old tunnel. The east part of the station not yet open is still narrow I am not sure whether it will be rebuilt wider or not. The station is bright but not too bright and has a false roof over the platform and track way. There is abstract are on the wall tiles that looks completely different from the fish pattern of the old station.
ADA elevators too, I hope?
Yes
What if the IRT, BMT and IND all were built to be compatible with each other? What kind of service do you think would be in place, if the all the lines that exist today are used? Any place where an IRT connection to an IND might be useful, etc.?
If they were the same standards, IMHO, the most likely "recapture" from the Mayor Hylan-I-hate-the-traction-interests era would have been the Broadway el north of 207th St., which would have been converted from IRT to IND division much like the Culver was switched from BMT to the IND, with the city building a ramp up from 207th St. `A' train terminal to connect with the el between 207th and 215 Sts. That would have given Van Cortlandt/Riverdale riders express service from 242nd Street instead of the local service they now have, while the 1 would have been scaled back to either 207 or Dykman St.
All the Contract 3 IRT subways are built to BMT standards and could be used for BMT/IND service right now, but they couldn't run both Division A and B without gap fillers or other platform arrangement.
How did this past GO in which Manhattan bound riders had to go to a shuttle bus if they were to travel between Van Wyck and Forest Hills?
It didn't make sense to me that trains going to Jamaica can pass and Manhattan bound trains couldn't....unless after Van Wyck the train would go to Jamaica Yard then go to Forest Hills from there.
=)
That's exactly what they did. Trains went through Jamaica Yard, around the loop, and out the other side. They should have allowed passengers to stay on the trains during this, Van Wyck Blvd station has a lot of stairs and long passageways making it very difficult on passengers going for the shuttle buses. On the plus side, when people got off the shuttle bus they all went for the express E, leaving the F local as empty as the R usually is on weekends.
[That's exactly what they did. Trains went through Jamaica Yard, around the loop, and out the other side. They should have allowed passengers to stay on the trains during this....]
Certainly Transit would have done that - and saved the expense of shuttle buses - IF it had been feasible to carry passengers through a rail yard, even non-stop.
Maybe the train operators and other SubTalkers "in the know" can offer some specifics on this issue?
BUT That would skip Union Turnpike and 75 Ave. I should say that there must be a way to get people from Union Turnpike and 75 Ave to get to the trains.
Um -- they can backtrack on a local. How do you think I got home to 86th Street this evening? I do it all the time.
Yes, those passageways went on a bit more than I had anticipated. Then the bus got stuck in a traffic jam in the Queens Boulevard service road. (Why couldn't it use the main road?) It would have been faster to walk from Union Turnpike.
I don't understand why passengers had to get off. Train Dude equated the danger of riding through a yard with the danger of walking the tracks, but I'm afraid I can't imagine how that's the case.
Who decided to run the E express? It made sense, but according to the posters the E and F were both supposed to run local. I think it would have made more sense to suspend E service, run the R via 63rd to Jamaica Center (local all the way), and keep the F as usual.
I have a feeling that C/R's on the E weren't aware of the D GO. On my train, at least, he didn't mention that Roosevelt would be the last transfer opportunity to 6th Avenue service until W4.
Passengers are not allowed to ride in yards. Period. This is by TA edict. In the yards stop arms are not at every signal. This would be a safety issue with passengers on a train. Employees only is another matter entirely. This matter was discussed fully on Harry Becks site. This GO will be completed 6 1/2 hours from posting of this message.
Maybe you could explain this to me, since Train Dude couldn't (or didn't). The trains are running through the yard anyway, despite the safety issue you cite. Is the danger somehow lessened if the trains are empty at the time?
As you might expect, it's a liability issue. Government employees have medical care and training and if something were to happen in the yards, they'd be covered for any injuries or death that would resultn from an accident, PLUS they as employees do not have the right to sue. For a government employee to even try to sue as the result of an accident, they'd have to ask permission from the state court of Claims which traditionally never grants permission to sue.
Not so for "customers" ... that's the reason for it - if anything DID happen, it'd be a litigation party for subjecting the innocent to the big bad nasty railroad ... that's why geese aren't allowed to ride a relay either ...
As I suspected. The issue isn't safety; it's liability.
But is there no liability issue in requiring trainloads of passengers to push their way up to the street, onto the buses, and back down into the station? Is there no liability issue in allowing passengers to ride buses? After all, those signals up on the streets don't have trip arms either.
Let us not forget that, as a safety feature, the trip arms rarely actually do anything but bob up and down. Most T/O's are always able to obey the signals without the help of the emergency brake. Even without trip arms, there would be few crashes, and of those crashes a small fraction would yield injuries. (The T/O's must realize that, or they simply wouldn't be willing to operate in yards.) Now, I'm certainly not calling for the wholesale elimination of trip arms -- but might it not make sense for the TA to compare the actual liability issues rather than ruling out one option from the start?
(At the very least, couldn't I sign a waiver in exchange for not having to shlep up to the street?)
As for relays -- I thought the issue was crew safety.
A single, or a handful of passengers on a relay is risky to a crew in the sense of a possible robbery, beating or other event that wouldn't normally happen on a train in revenue. But then so is an emtpy lead car on a regular run. Many relays (I got to do the 205th St relay often) involve running a train to a wall behind the 205th St station and the possibility is there on many relays that a brake failure could occur and the train could possibly kiss the bumper. I was involved in a collision at Stillwell that ended my own probie days. I DID receive a bloodied nose and lost two teeth. I'm sure that if it was a trainload of geese, everybody would have laid down for this major 3 MPH wreck. :)
But fact is, the TA is an easy mark since it's government. The public does have the right to sue over any slight, real, or perceived. Employees on the other hand HAVE NO rights if they're injured on the job other than the medicals that are part of their bennies, the ability to eat up whatever time they have banked and then it's onto worker's comp. The NYS Court of Claims will not grant permission to employees to sue no matter how out of control a state agency might become and THAT is the reason as far as I was ever told for the "employees only" zones.
As to whatever happens to folks climbing, I'm sure there's some barrister out there who can create out of whole cloth some chain of responsibility somehow, but if the steps aren't icy and there's no sign of negligence, the dice roll for the MTA is much better based on what they did. I've ridden and worked non-revenue track. Ain't no big thang. :)
No, the danger of running of a train in a yard is not lessened if no passengers are on said train, but the TA always has to worry about lawsuits caused by alleged passenger injuries. If a motorman operating in a yard runs a red signal, he may not be stopped since all yard signals do not have stop arms. And a collision or derailment can happen. Better for this to happen if passengers are not on a train.
The same could happen during a wrong-rail operation when there is no reverse signalling. They resolve this by allowing only one train into the affected section.
Would it have been feasable to allow only one train into the yard at a time? If a necessary yard operation would have to interfere, they could either hold the next train until the operation completes or kick the passengers off that particular train and wait for the next.
The problem with the TA's GO is that it makes no provision for handicapped access. Wheelchair bound passengers can board at Jamaica Center. They cannot exit at Briarwood and cannot enter at Forest Hills.
There are probably half a dozen different solutions that would have preserved such access. My guess is that it will take a massive law suit by handicapped access advocates to make the TA change their maintenance policies.
Many times the least expensive alternative might be to provide taxi service. However, the TA picked Marathon Sunday, when the Queensboro Bridge lower level is closed. It takes planning to pick the one day of the year when giving somebody a taxi ride will not work.
If that had happened this weekend the crew confronted with the situation probably would have sent for some forms for the handicapped patron to sign, or at least make him/her take some sort of oath. Or they would just let them through, there was a 100% chance of getting sued for denying him/her passage and considerably less chance of an incident.
I had that job over the weekend and walked to work, there seemed to be 2-3 access-a-ride vans there just waiting around. A coincidence?
Anyone in a wheel chair takes them Vs the subway. Door to door service and no mug me sign on you.
THe vator at Parsons Archer is out half the time anyway.
Eww no! Of all the TV networks out there, PAX is the worst. All of their stations are on UHF, is there anything good on UHF?
The G.O. could have been worked completely differently.
They could have wrong-railed on the northbound express (D4) from Parsons/Hillside to 71/Continental. The E would have to single track between Jamaica Van Wyck and Van Wyck Blvd to get southbound trains to the northbound express, though.
Great minds think alike.
But I doubt that track is reverse signalled, so the problem remains. Besides, then those trains that usually sleep on that track would have to be laid up somewhere unusual, like the yard.
Why did both southbound tracks have to be closed at once anyway? Couldn't the work have been done one track at a time?
I don't think there would have been enough room in the yard for all those layups. Sure they could have laid them up somewhere between Queens Plaza and Continental, (no reverse signaling translates to absolute blocks and fewer trains would be necessary) but perhaps the vandals would of had a field day since "new toys" were laid up there.....both tracks were down at one time because concrete was poured into the new switch area. If the TA used ballast in the switches instead of concrete, this GO and many other all weekend GO's would be unnecessary. I have lamented here that a concrete roadway translates into a harsher ride and takes a toll on the trucks (possible cracks due to the hard vs. softer roadway). Concrete however allows for higher speeds. Wait a minute! What did I just say? Since NYCT trains are so much slower than other urban systems, a softer, ballasted roadway would suffice in my opinion. The use of concrete roadbed by NYCT, however, is a business decision. Case closed!!!!!!
Concrete lasts longer. Concrete keeps the rails in place better (especially important over switches). Concrete is smoother!
Concrete saves the trees for the little boidies so they can sing.
Whats a matter for you. You no a lika da little boidies?
I love the little birdies--they're delicious!
Dan
I think you missed my point. I was making a case to use ballast instead of concrete to fill up the roadbed after the new switches were installed. The wooden ties are needed if you use ballast, the wooden ties are needed if you use concrete. Unless the TA becomes high tech and uses concrete ties, then they'll save the trees.
They only use full length ties on the structures.
There are tree free areas of the subway tracks.
Concrete now has 'give' by adding certain 'impurities' to the mix. The Romans added volcanic ash to their stuff, that is why it lasted so long.
Wanna bet they got their ash from Mt. Vesuvius?
What about express tracks elsewhere in the system? Many are unused at all times; many more are unused on weekends.
Actually, the cement makes sense in stabilizing the trackbed. It's not going to slowly shift to the side. Inside tunnels, the occasional movement of rails owing to centrifugal and centripetal forces is a more significant thing. Don't want sides of the cars peeling off on the steel if the tracks shift too close to the walls. On open cuts and traditional railroads, it's a lot easier to get in and shift the tracks back where they belong.
I assume the concrete pour is the traditional style and the rails themselves are still spiked to wood ...
There was a Diesel on the Local Tracks and there was workers on the Phlatform and there was a LOADS AND LOADS OF WORKERS OUTSIDE the 78 Ave exit at Union Turnpike Station. Even a Moble Office was there moveing nowhere BUT Bunch of workers comming in and out and workers are just eating Chinesse Food from a Chinesse Food place right by the station.
Until 5am tomorrow, the southbound D runs via 8th Avenue (local) to 2nd Avenue. On the return trip, trains run express on 6th Avenue. I was going to 14th Street, but I wasn't about to pass up such an offer.
They were going through the dash? Oh man I missed it again. I don't recall seeing that on the G.O. If I did I would've railfanned.
It was posted. There was no indication of whether the D would be running express or local, but usually on GO's of this sort it runs local. I was a bit surprised when the next stop was announced at W4.
The southbound dash is more spectacular since it's a downhill run.
Heh. You're showing your age, bro ... it was the NORTHBOUND dash that was great for eating your lunch since you could just drop the reverser and munch while fully wrapped. Southbound is timerland and you actually had to be ready to yank a handle. Even then. Between 59th and 103rd, you could actually cop a snooze. Heh.
Some misunderstanding. I was referring to the northbound 6th Ave. run between W. 4th and 34th. I agree 100% with you about the northbound CPW sprint. The R-10s would be at full stride by the time they bore down on 81st St; that station would be a blur.
Here's a question: how long would you keep a prewar D train under power on the northbound run before coasting? I'm trying to remember how long that very first D train I took on that stretch all those years ago coasted. I do remember the motorman reapplying power at about 103rd St; the bull and pinion gears sang out a resounding F# above middle C.
I took an A of R-38s on the CPW sprint for old times' sake during my visit. 37-38 was the best they could do. Not that it was bad; I've been spoiled for life by the Thunderbirds.
I wish I could experience a 6th Av. dash. Problem is they've discontinued it ever since the Manhattan Bridge Service Changes took place, and whenever a chance for a dash occurs (such as this one), I am not there.
I've never experienced this dash so I am interested in it.
Well, better luck for me, hopefully.
Railfan Pete.
It'll be back in 2004 (or so) for good. Can you wait a few years?
Personally, I don't think it's all that hot -- I generally need some sort of scenery (like local stations) before I find an express run exciting, but I know there are those here who disagree.
Apparently two Route 11 cars crashed on Saturday evening at 9th & Main Sts in Darby. From what I've heard, 9004 was outbound, turning into 9th St when its rear struck 9030, which had just left the loop headed inbound on Main St. Have not heard particulars but the area was closed for a few hours last night. Will pass along more info as it is received.
And, by the way, welcome back, David.
Now when I come to Philly. I won't be takeing the 11 from Darby!
Because 2 cars happen to bump each other, you won't take the 11???
Because 2 cars happen to bump each other, you won't take the 11??? Then I guess you won't take the 10, 13, 34, or 36 either. (sorry bout the repost)
Indeed! There are more 'bumpings' on the subway-surface than any of us ever hear about, according to those who know. I've seen enough just watching operators trying to couple up a dead car to its follower to push it out of the subway to wonder how many of these folks realize what they're doing.
I happened to be down there at the tail end of the emergency operation around 7 pm. My girlfriend and I were heading home after picking up our dinner on the other end of Collingdale when we saw the police activity. I went down to get a closer look, giving my girlfriend the excuse that I was going to get some beer (which I did a few minutes later).
From what I had heard, about 5-6 people were taken to Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital (which is about a mile up Main St/Lansdowne Av from Darby loop on the Darby/Yeadon border), though I think it was for simple observations. The accident didn't look to be too serious, however. At least not serious enough for that many people to go to the hospital.
Besides that, there really wasn't anything too noteworthy, except that Callowhill bus 5025 was shuttling passengers between Darby Loop and Woodland/Island loop.
It was posted a few weeks ago that when the new Queens Boulevard service pattern takes effect and the E and F TPH are adjusted that four E trains would be terminating at 179th in the evening and originating there in the morning. Does anyone have schedules for this yet? A friend of mine boards at 179th and needs the transfer to the 6 which will disappear when his beloved F train is rerouted through 63rd.
Also, does anyone know when the V service will begin operating?
Dan
PS: It's nice to have you back, Dave.
V service starts 12/10/01
Look in the archives, I think zman posted it.
He said he would, but I never saw anything.
Dan
Check the archives. I remember someone posting, I am quite sure it was him.
Yes I did post it earlier, thanks for noticing.
Cut & paste of message 274071:
The following runs will be effective at the beginning of the new pick (now December 9th)
Departures from 179 St:
7:12am
7:31am
7:51am
8:11am
--------------
3:57pm
4:16pm
4:36pm
Departures from WTC:
5:08pm
5:28pm
6:40pm
7:20pm
ticing.
Will these be Hillside expresses or locals?
We'll find out when they run 'em. Maybe local?
Thanks a lot--sorry for missing your earlier post.
Dan
Assuming R32's again predominate the E, will these "diamond" E's also get R32's, or get R46's since they run out of 179th like an F ?
i hope these E's are Express on hillside!
E diamond! i like i like!
They'll get whatever is available, but if there are 32's laying around, then that's what they'll get first.
Hillside express service finally.
I've been hearing a lot of things about the E going to 179 St. and the usual V starting sometime this month.
What might account for the E going to 179? Is it something that NYCT usually does or is something up?
I've never known the "kinks" for the SUBWAY before, especially this one.
Answers and responses would be greatly appreciated.
: )
Railfan Pete.
"V starting sometime this month"
The "V service starting date has been postponed til 12/09/01.
Danm the TA! Why can't just they start damn thing this week?
I' m tired of waiting! It pisses me off when they always delay everything around the clock.
E is scheduled to run to 179 according to the 63rd tunnel proposed plan and its nothing new because it was done in back late 70 and early 80s. And it will bring major confusion to most riders since E will be terminating both places (Jamaica Center and 179)
You're oversimplify-ing it. New service plans begin when a "pick" or new job assignments go into effect so the new line can have personel to work it and schedule adjustments be made to the E/F/G/R lines as well. If Osama's boys didn't crash a couple of planes into the WTC, then the V would have begun service on 11/12/01.
Well, F*** Osama and his immature boys, they can rot in hell! I hope our men bomb their ass sooner.
Pardon my anger.
So is the E always going to run through the 63rd St. tunnel then to 179 St? It should run express in Queens.
Then if you say that the E is going to 179 St. AND Jamaica Center, is it going to be normal service or temporary service?
Railfan Pete
In order for the E to go via Eighth Ave., it must go via 53rd St. since the 63rd St. route feeds only into the Sixth Ave. line. There are only a few rush hour E intervals to/from 179 St., they have been posted on this board several times in the past.
As usual, the MTA will be asking the impossible: They want riders to pay attention to the destination sign before they get on the train.
Remember how many people got on the E train right after the Archer Avenue Extension opened, and thought they were transported to another dimension when "Jamaica Center" appeared outside their subway car windows? Some of them didn't realize they were on the wrong line even after the train visited Jamaica-Van Wyck and they were treated to the new tile decor...
When the F is rerouted through the 63rd St. Tunnel, the E/F tph will be adjusted to adjust for the loss of 53rd St. service. Jamaica Center is already running at max turnaround capacity, so the extra E trains will have to be diverted to 179th St, which hasn't been running anywhere near capacity for years.
Dan
I got more film back and I have uploaded some of the better pictures. Comments are more than welcome on any topic. Style, content, etc.
To start things off, here are two images of a rebuilt MTBA PCC car rounding the loop at Matapan.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Matapan1.jpg
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Matapan2.jpg
Moving down to South Station here is an image of some of the classic PRR Position Light Dwarf signals that have been installed. God bless Amtrak. I caught this signal cleared for a commuter train.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/SouthStation-ClearDwarf.jpg
And here is that commuter train headed by MTBA F40 #1027
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/MTBA_1027.jpg
Moving down to New Haven we see F40 #301 hanging out with the future of the New England division, a GE P42. I caught these two on Aug 30th, just after my PCC trip and just before my tower tour.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NH84.jpg
Here is the cab of the M2 train that took me from GCT to New Haven on the 5:17 90 minute super express.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/M2-Cab.jpg
The following are the pictures I took on the final Newark PCC day on Aug 30th. First two interrior shots.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-interrior.jpg
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-interrior2.jpg
Here is a shot of an NJT painted PCC at the terminal.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-terminal2.jpg
Here is that same PCC at Penn Station
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-penn.jpg
Here is the trolley pole of another PCC with a wonderful hanging out the back shot.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-pole.jpg
The last shot I took before my camera died, another out the back shot of the RoW and some railfan onlookers who have staked out a primo location.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/NCS-RoW.jpg
Finally, we're going way back here, a shot of ChuChuBob at the NRSH summer picnic in South Jersey.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/chuchubob.jpg
BTW, incase you didn't see, I have posted a group shot of the Oct. 11th field trip to Boston. Left to right are: Nick B., Jersey Mike, Todd Glickman, the experimental "V-Train on Queens Blvd." GO printout, an R4, a PA4 stress toy, Lexcie and on the floor is non-Subtalker Austin.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/glickman-et-al.jpg
test
ok here is my shot ... how bout a ride on this beauty eh ???..........lol !!!
NOT BAD !!!
HEY! I thought you were not going to post pics :) btw, where is this thing in the pic from?
"marta" ha ha
No ""marta" ha ha "...lol!!......here !! This is one of my " hangouts" .......
Took that shot at the ORANGE EMPIRE MUSEUM in peris california back in 2000 sometime .....
with my sony DSC-S30 1-3 megapexel digital still camera !! 640 400 mode & in the posterrization
mode ( in the digital effects section ) ....lol !!
also not a lot of folks post thier pics I anit the only one !!! ..................lol!!! ......................
Nice shots, Mike.
Fortunately, the one at the NRHS picnic is dark enough that it shouldn't frighten anybody.
Bob we all knew you were outstanding in your field < G >
Mr t__:^)
Bob we all knew you were outstanding in your field
Right, Mr. T.
I used to say that about my uncle who raised corn on 2 acres in South Jersey (in addition to his job).
The first two are very seasonal, the orange coloration is somewhat pumpkinish, they would grace any Thanksgiveing celebration.
The third had a somewhat "Charles Dickensness" to it, the fog, the industrialization like flavor, a flavor that lacked the aromas of nature. An excellant capture of the moment.
These were the truly outstanding of a well done group.
Some looks as if the last few months have been more than kind, watch out for the coming holiday season.
avid
Outside the Union St. station on 4th Avenue in Park Slope (or nearby, I'm not too familiar with Brooklyn geography) in an old abandoned lot is a trolley car with SEPTA markings. It looks to be in pretty good shape. I can't remember the number on it, but it's in the 2000s.
Dan
I was taking pictures of that, How old do you think it is? more importantly how did that get there? its by some art store I think
I have a picture of that car. It's #2739. Take a look.
For those who can't do <tt>iframe</tt>, click <a href="http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/getimg.html?10/5/27.jpg">here</a>. The real image is located at http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/10/5/27.jpg, but click on the link before going there directly.
http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/10/5/27.jpg
yep
thats the one, im going to get a scanner soon so i'll scan my pics of t, I actually got close to it, wrote sumthin on it (sorry) the interior is actually there. didnt get iside though
Oh yeah. The one outside Carroll Street and 4th Avenue@the Brooklyn Lyceum.
Oh yeah, almost forgot. The Website for the Brooklyn Lyceum, the current owner of that SEPTA trolley at the empty lot adjacent to 227 4th Avenue is at:
http://www.gowanus.com/gowanus
It was built in 1947 by St Louis Car Co.
I posted a recap of my Croton-Harmon visit on October 20 in BusTalk. It's in three parts, parts one and three deal mainly with my godawful Greyhound trip there and back and part two with the actual open house, but you may enjoy all of it. I'll try to post photos soon as I took zillions of shots with my digital camera.
Part one - http://bustalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/bustalk.cgi?read=39077
Part two - http://bustalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/bustalk.cgi?read=39079
Part three - http://bustalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/bustalk.cgi?read=39083
Interested in knowing what y'all think . . .
Chris
When are the R-143 cars supposed to go into passenger service?
- Lyle Goldman
I just heard that the date is next Monday, but this can change again.
Robert
The word is going out that 239th may soon see R143s...but it still is just a rumor. TA knows the 142s are a big project...Bombardier built them with outside propulsion and now has their own...too late. Boms. lead tech told me that Kaws aren't working any better cuz there so new. Today I made a positive connection while assembling a 'gimmick light' for Redbird propulsion service...it was a D. Sup. who noted my frustration about Redbird 'analog technology.' NEW IS GOOD. Peter
THAT would be a sight to see, considering that 239th Street is a Subdivision "A" (IRT) barn and yard and the R-143 is a Subdivision "B" (BMT/IND) car. The cars could probably be trucked into the yard but wouldn't be able to go too far once there.
As to the R-142 propulsion issue, if I'm not mistaken the propulsion system is provided by Adtranz. When the R-142 contract was signed, Adtranz was not owned by Bombardier, but it is now.
David
I thought so.... IND cars....but it just still keeps coming up. The Bom. trucks are made by former Mercedes Benz company ADTranz but propulsion control systems are Alstom (Agate and Onix.) Bom. just introduced their own propulsion control system on their website. Am always looking for web-tech....frustrating. Bom. has nothing, Alstom has 'animation.' I work with several guys that want to learn...there is more to this work than making supervisor. Peter
That's where I made my mistake......it's the R142A cars and not the R143s....just read a post by Abercrombie & Fitch Boi about Plattsburg...which is not near Dusseldorf. 142As are numberworld...143s are letterworld. Do you think TA is busy teaching us??? I LEARN HERE. Peter
I would think that 207th would be the logical place for the R-143 delievery since its general close to the Plant and can handle B-Divsion car.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Home Sweet Home!
Did you have a good time while it was away?
(Remember: There's no place like home)
>Did you have a good time while it was away?
Pete,
F no!
Nothing beats the original.
I know. I've been to alternate websites but nothing was as good as SubTalk. The others had too many borders around their texts which makes me dizzy and uncomfortable to read, whereas Dave's site has no borders around everything and looks plain and easy to read.
how rough was going thru airport security etc?? did for example they INSIST on X ray all of your digital cameras & photography
equipment ? did they insist you turn it on and off and demonstrate it etc.. Was it difficult having show every single piece of your
down to the last detail examined ??Did you worry about your pictures being erased or destroyed by them...?? etc...
( my apology for any typo errors ) ...
Did you know that airport X ray equipment isn't powerful enough to cause problems in electronics, meaning that you don't need to worry about ruining the pictures stored in digital cameras and their related equipment?
-Robert King
Did you know that airport X ray equipment isn't powerful enough to cause problems in electronics, meaning that you don't need to worry about ruining the pictures stored in digital cameras and their related equipment?
Some of us older subtalkers remember when airport X ray equipment destroyed video cameras.
Good grief, what were they trying to do? Make the luggage glow in the dark after scanning. It takes quite a bit of xraying to ruin electronics.
at least I would insist on taking my digital memory sticks seprating them from the rest of my equipment & the exposed
35 mm film as well ( taken OUT of the small plastic film cans ) ...
On the way home you could send the film to yourself by fedex or UPS.
...YEP........U.....got that right ....!!!.....lol !!
Airport X-ray won't damage digital cameras/media but yes they did insist on X-raying everything including film canisters. The xray machines used to scan carryon items isn't strong enough to fog film. You should never store film in your checked luggage. Other than that security was just about normal as far as I could tell.
question again : so you mean they did INSIST on X ray -ing sony memory sticks wiping out all of your digital photos !!
Also many of my friends came home with thier entire film ERASED by the X ray-ing at airports !!!
it is not possible to seperate the exposed film ( taken out of the plastic cans ) ??? ..............thank you ...
Noticed on one of my trips on the N.On the walls of the s/b plat. there is a sign stating Sensitive devices above do not touch.If you look up above you can see them.Just wondering if any one else has seen them and if anybody has any idea what exactly they do?
They measure vibrations from the street above to make sure that all that extremely heavy equipment moving about (and removing debris) does not compromise the subway structure.
Hello all, it's good to have the site up and running again. Well our transit authority has changed much, it seems like things are getting worse. I caught an r142 from the Bronx a few days ago, I loved the ride. I got off at Times Square only to notice that most of it is missing or under construction, come on guys it's not like I ride all the time. I drive most of the time, okay all of the time, so when I get the time to ride the subway it's like taking a trip to Heaven. Anyway as I was walking through the Times Square platform, a couple of r62a's from Livonia pulled in running on the one line. These cars had some serios graffitti damage, it just blew my mind. I know the city is going through a state of shock of some sorts due to the Sept. 11 incident, but we or the transit can't afford to let our subway cars get torn up like this. I'm surpised they put those cars in service the way they looked, I guesse the T/A has alot of important things to contend with other than a few ugly looking subway cars.
Proabably a bad day. but we still got the Zero Tolerance so once a train completes its run it is supposed to run light back to its yard and get cleaned. Everything is going as normal and looks and feels fine. 99% of the cars are on track and working and looking great sporting the american flag look (now I wonder if they would dare put on the Bi-Centinial stripes on the R-44 again???)
Dont worry about it, it was just a horrible coincidence that day.
Speaking of changes, I got a big kick out of that "ellipse" at the northern end of the Times Square BMT station. You get a good perspective of just where that line ducks beneath the shuttle, especially where the express tracks spread apart to clear the now-unused underpass.
I know what you mean about the cars on the 1 Line (my home line). On Saturday nite about 10 PM, I was on a northbound 1 (not sure if they were form 240 street or Livonia) but of the six door panels on the car I was riding (second from front) only two opened, the middle door way did not open at all, both panels were frozen shut. And the of the end doors, only one panel on each opened.
The only time I ever saw one whole set of doors not opening was on August 9, 1967 while on the IRT for the first time. It was either on that rocket 5 train we took to the Bronx Zoo or that 2 train back to Times Square.
Funny you mention graffitti, in that "Amazing Race" show on CBS a few weeks ago they rode the subway in Italy, I think it was Rome and the graffitti was everywhere. The "Amazing Race" show is the only reality show I find interesting. Maybe they should have a race in NYC?
Across America by mass transit ONLY!!
I haven't seen any graffitti on the subways in NYC yet, things seem fairly clean except for dusty conditions.
Reminds me of the IRT lines in the 80's especially on the 1, 2, and 3 lines. How bad was this train, was this like the 80's? Just out of curiousity.
Please See Bustalk Entry Below For Items I Have Available For Trade:
http://bustalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/bustalk.cgi?read=39090
New signage is starting to appear on R-62As from 240th Street Yard (perhaps others as well). 5 of 10 R-62As that I observed at 14th Street yesterday now show signs for "14 St, Manhattan". The blank signage is going to disappear.
-Stef
Most of the 3 trains I saw yesterday had correct (14th Street) signage on some if not all cars.
They must have just starting putting those signs in. All of the 3 trains I saw two weeks ago had blank lower destination signs.
Yes, the signs started to appear about a couple of weeks ago. Like Stef said, they are only on the 240St R62A's cars.
The installation began less than a week ago. I live near a 1/2 station so I see 3 trains often enough. I rode one on Thursday (and saw a few others pass) and there were no signs. Yesterday they were all over the place.
It figures. I leave for home and the N and R come back the same day. And 3 trains get new 14th St. signs. Not that any of this is new. In 1965, we visited the city while on vacation and rode on the BMT Southern Division both days. Didn't see any Triplexes. Their last day of service was the same day we left for home.
Are you sure these are new signs? When the Williamsburg Bridge was closed and R-40s were terminating at Marcy Ave, a stick on sign covered up a seldom used destination on that curtain sign. But you never know with the TA.
Bill "Newkirk"
I'm unsure of this.... If someone can confirm for certain whether it's a new roll sign or a stick on, I'd like to know.
-Stef
It looks like a stick on to me. I had a job on the 3 yesterday and the first train I took out of Lenox, had these signs.
I saw one, it was slanted...heh another high quality sign job by the MTA. Take a look at 72nd street uptown, their signs above the platform indicate the 3 on the local and the 1 and 2 on the express. High qual.
Here's a stupid question: What are you favorite transit agnecy color schemes? My personal favorites are:
New Jersey Transit (blue, purple, and orange)
San Antonio VIA (red, purple, and orange)
Toronto Transit Commission (red and white)
New York MTA (blue and white)
I like the three-color schemes because they seem more balanced that a lot of the two-color ones, and I like the classy simplicity of the one-color schemes like Toronto and New York. (I'm not counting white as a color, but you can if you like.)
Mark
TTC: Red, White and Black too.
Ok, red, white, and black, but the scheme is still simple and classy, and among my favorites.
Mark
I like the MTA look. The new logo is kind of cool. The old "M" logo looked best when it was in a circle, like on Metro-North trains. I especially like the "blue stripe" look which the subways used to have, and which Metro North and some LIRR MU's still maintain. (I think the M1s and M3s look MUCH better with the blue stripe, and it doesn't hurt the R44s and R46s either.)
:-) Andrew
I wonder why they Used to call the old "Blue Stripe" scheme "battle of the states" SelkirkTMO(you hated it didn't ya) or anyone can you fill us in?
The only guess I can venture is that the blue stripe was on all trains that remain(ed) within New York State (Subway, LIRR and Conrail/Metro-North Hudson and Harlem lines) while the New Haven Line trains that ran to Connecticut had (and still have) the red stripe.
:-) Andrew
How strictly is this enforced? That is, how often do Connecticut cars stray onto the all-New York lines and vice versa? Is it like R-32's on the R (common) or like R-32's on the F (unheard of)?
You never, ever see New Haven Line MU's on the Hudson or Harlem lines, or vice-versa. But then I suppose you technically couldn't run them that way, since the NH line trains run on catenary while the Hudson-Harlem lines (like the LIRR) run on third rail. The diesel cars usually keep to their corners (ie: blue on Hudson and Harlem and red on New Haven), but it's not too unusual to see a defector or two.
Now west-of-Hudson, I have no idea. I think the Pascac Valley and Port Jervis lines use largely NJ Transit stock.
:-) Andrew
More than you ever wanted to know about odd car uses:
There is one train of all CDOT (or mostly CDOT) equipment which runs to Poughkeepsie every day (including weekends).
You will sometimes get mixed trainsets to Danbury during the rush.
The New Haven line MUs have been seen on the Hudson line, but that's very rare. The reverse is physically impossible.
NJTransit mostly uses their MNRR cars during the rush hours on the Port Jervis line and Bergen County locals to Waldwick, Ridgewood, and other non-NY bergen line destinations. The Main and Pascack lines rarely see them, and it's pretty difficult to find these trains during middays and weekends. Engines are fair game, though.
There is one train which starts on the Boonton Line, and after arriving in Hoboken goes up the Bergen County at 10:35AM, down the Main line to arrive at Hoboken at 1:09, then departs for the Boonton again at 1:47, and then comes back via the Morris & Essex lines. I don't know where it goes from there. This train sometimes runs MNRR equipment, sometimes Comet III and IV, but recently only has Comet Is (which are a pain at Paterson, Dover, and Summit).
There is one train of all CDOT (or mostly CDOT) equipment which runs to Poughkeepsie every day (including weekends).
So how can you tell if a train is CDOT? Anything with a red stripe or just the ones with the Connecticut state seal instead of the MTA logo?
:-) Andrew
I saw one of those CDOT cars with the Connecticut logo in Trenton once. How did that happen?
Mark
I would venture a guess by saying the blue represented the North while the gray represented the South. One of the postseason collegiate bowl games known as the Blue/Gray follows the same the theme.
One of the reasons why the stripe was "removed" per se from R-44 and 46's was that on the 44's, the part that WAS covered by that stripe (I believe) was NOT stainless steel, and there fore, when the cars were going into 207th Street (and I think CI Overhaul Shop) for GOH's, the powers-that-be decided that it'd be best to remove them, so the paint wouldn't allow the carbon steel below to rust thru, as for the 46's, I'm not so sure why they took it off, but my running hypothesis is that if they were going to do it on ALL of the cars during GOH--including R-32's (the doors themselves), 38's, and 42's, why not include the newer, but (really) full stainless steel 46's.
Stuart, RLine86Man
The old TA logo used in the 60s and early 70s is my favourite.
It is still displayed prominently at a Culver substation next to the West 8th St station.
--Mark
My favorite...San Francisco Municipal Railway's various schemes.
I have one:
AMTRAK 's logo: Red, white, and Blue! Colors of patriotism!
But AMTRAK recently changed its logo to a few green leaf-shaped objects, so I don't know if I have an interest that much.
AMTRAK's railcars with the old red, white, and blue stripes are running out of service, they are replaced with the new design: Dark blue, and thin stripes of red and white.
AMTRAK has also brought in Turquoise and yellow green and pine green railcars, also designed for the Acela Regional.
I also like NJT's tri-colored stripes.
PATH's logo might not be very interesting, but I still like the red colored P, and the border line across it, marking NY and NJ.
The invention of these logos are not by accident. It's pretty interesting to know how the logos of NJT and AMTRAK especially, have gotten their logos the way they are.
: )
Railfan Pete.
The PATH logo is great. I also like the Toronto Transit Commission logo, because it looks so antiquated. I don't know if its purposefully retro or if it really is very old, but I like it either way.
I also really like the logo of British Rail.
A lot of systems use red, white, and blue. St. Louis recently switched to that. The MetroLink trains look a whole lot better now, as the old scheme was an orange and yellow (or was it red and yellow?) that recalled any 1970s fast food joint. SEPTA is also gradually converting over to RWB from their old blue and orange colors.
Mark
Oh, yeah, I forgot about SEPTA. Red, white, and blue with two boomerang shaped figures.
I don't know of any other transit systems outside of the NE area, except for Santa Fe (yellow, and dark Turquoise)and BNSF (orange with light yellow, and black) railroad, and also CONRAIL (two white figures which cannot be explained). These may not be passenger transit agencies, but they still count as heavy freighting companies who do a good job at carrying their freight.
Also, does the BART system in San Francisco have a logo?
: )
Railfan Pete.
Yes, BART has a really neat logo. I almost mentioned it in the last posting. Check out the BART photos section on this very site to get a look at it.
Mark
I also like the Toronto Transit Commission logo, because it looks so antiquated. I don't know if its purposefully retro or if it really is very old, but I like it either way.
The present TTC logo appeared in 1954 with the opening of the first section subway. It was based upon the original TTC logo which were just the three letters staggered on top of eachother from left to right and top to bottom.
When it was introduced in 1954, the present TTC logo was 'Subway Red' (the official name for the colour used) and Cream in terms of colour. The TTC logo as it is now substitutes CLRV red for the original Subway Red, and white for the original Cream colour used in order to match the colours used in the new paint schemes, but it is otherwise the same. So, yes, you could consider the TTC's logo as being old except for the tweaks to the colours used.
In case anybody was wondering - during the transition years when new equipment, starting with the CLRVs, with new paint schemes and the red and white TTC logo appeared the TTC did not put the red and white logo on older equipment that still had the maroon or subway red and cream paint schemes like the PCCs, trolley buses etc.; instead they maintained a stock of red and cream TTC logos so there wouldn't be any clashes with the wrong logo being put on the wrong paint scheme. That is, untill one of my friends got a summer job at the Russell Carhouse and stuck a red and white logo on a PCC in the subway red and cream paint scheme for the heck of it!
-Robert King
This past Saturday, Thurston and I carpooled up to Shoreline Trolley Museum. We, along with Jimmy Boylan, helped Bill Young remove and replace 8 worn-out track ties. Following the R&R with the help of the track-tie machine (A god-send) we used the crane car to pick up and dispose of those ties and others that had been left from previous "Track Blitzes".
Thurston and I left about 8 PM and stopped for dinner at a local Italian Restaurant.
We proceeded home at about 8:30PM. While on I-95 we had Todd's favorite NYC station for traffic and weather together in case of any problems getting to the T-Neck Bridge. Fortunately there were no traffic problems on I-95. WCBS was using the Weather Channel for the weather but we heard Todd's voice reciting the praises of the Acela Train.
Todd----Thurston and I were wondering if you were in your pajamas when you did the commercial ??????????
Oh, so they play the commercial on weekends too? I thought it was only weekday rush hours.
[To answer the unasked question, WCBS contracts with The Weather Channel to do weekday middays and overnights, and weekends. Craig Allen, WCBS Chief Meteorologist, does weekdays 5am-11am and 4pm-8pm. I fill in for Craig when he needs a shift off, such as will occur this Wed afternoon and next Monday morning. I can work from either my home in suburban Boston via digital-gizmo, or live from the studio in NYC, as my schedule permits.]
I'll be doing an AE round-trip on Friday (business) then again Sun-Mon for my WCBS shift. I don't know yet if one of the benefits of my endorsement will be a cab ride, but I keep hoping...
...and that's Transit and Weather Together.
Hey, what happened to the planned Seashore trip this summer? Did i miss it, or did it not happen? :(
A set of circumstances prevented it. I am looking forward to doing it in 2001, so stay tuned to this Bat Channel.
Mr t__:^)
You mean 2002, I'm sure.
Opps ... sorry, just got in the habbit of writing 2001 :-(
Mr t
Dear Todd,
I hope the Acela gig is a union one! I think Amtrak could afford
it, especially with the prices on Acela tickets. They're out of my
price range!
As a fellow pro, I think you did a nice job of it!
Lynne
It was a very pleasent surprise to hear your voice & that commercial. Todd if I was you I would expect nothing less then first class treatment based on your testimonial. Good work my friend !
Mr t__:^)
That's "who guards the guardians?" for the Latin-impared. :^)
This morning as I was waiting for my Metra train, I saw the crossing guard posted by the village on the street at the west end of the station to keep kids from crossing against the gates CROSS AGAINST THE GATES! Very slowly and without concern. Right in front of a train approaching at a moderate speed (30-40mph), forcing the engineer to go BIE. The conductor opened a door as the train went slowly past the crossing guard and put a nice fat bee in the crossing guard's bonnet. Not that it seemed to phase him in the least, neither the near-death experience nor the dressing-down by the conductor.
This morning as I was waiting for my Metra train, I saw the crossing guard posted by the village on the street at the west end of the station to keep kids from crossing against the gates CROSS AGAINST THE GATES! Very slowly and without concern. Right in front of a train approaching at a moderate speed (30-40mph), forcing the engineer to go BIE. The conductor opened a door as the train went slowly past the crossing guard and put a nice fat bee in the crossing guard's bonnet. Not that it seemed to phase him in the least, neither the near-death experience nor the dressing-down by the conductor.
Maybe the crossing guard was rehearsing for the starring role in the upcoming movie, Train Girl - the Sequel.
Please: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
That’s “I will make my adjectives agree with my nouns, in case, number and gender (accusative, plural and masculine)” for the Latin semi-impaired.
John
Conductor Darwin is also back from hiatus I see. :)
First of all, its good to be back. Secondly, does anyone know what's going between Pelham Bay and Parkchester, so that passengers are being forced into shuttle buses every weekend until Dec. 3rd?
Looks like track replacement but I can't tell for sure.
Very strange if it was because they did a project like that not too long ago.
Maybe they have to redo some of the new signal work.
Having personally been introduced to this G/O by mere
arrival at Pelham Bay Park (sans advisement in advance),
I was supposing it could be.......those chipped blocks
of wood on the trackbed which are teasing to split
and (perhaps) cause a derailment??
IIRC, NY1 had a story about "poor track conditions on an
elevated subway line in the Bronx" and one of the samples
of defective boards was found at Castle Hill Ave.
Could be that.
(After sitting in Traffic approaching Parkchester for
30 mins Sat, the bus driver let us all off at halfblock
distance and we walked down to Parkchester for the 6...
So, perhaps the shuttle buses themselves might face
DELAYS in this G/O....).
Castle Hill Av. station is well within sight of the platforms at Parkchester; when I got off a train this past weekend, I didn't see any work being done at CH. In addition, because Pelham Bay station is the end of the line, with low speed restrictions ANYWAY, I assume no work was done there either. The only trackwork I know about was the track on approach to Hunt's Point for the past several weeks.
The project they did not too long ago was a total switch replacement. They took the old ones with the sharp angles out and put new ones with smoother angles in, and in the process put new stringers on the el structure at Pugsley tower. I assumed then (and still do now) that it didn't just have to do with the new signals but also had to do with preventing excessive wear and tear on the new trains the line would get months later.
If there is any signal work that needed to be done, it would have been in the Westchester Yard.
There has been an interesting GO of sorts for several weekends now on Denver's light rail line. Basically, it involves shutting down the line between I-25/Broadway and 14th St. downtown and running split service with shuttlebuses between the two sections. Trains were running between Mineral and I-25/Broadway and from the northern terminus at 30th Ave. to 14th St., looping via the unused turnout from Stout St. to 14th St. Single-car trains ran on the northern half, something you don't see anymore. Up until now, there were no flange marks on that short section of track. Now there are. Apparently, some operators were setting the destination sign to "Mineral" out of habit when leaving 30th Ave. Two of the three trains running on the northern portion were showing Mineral while the one I caught was sporting "14th Street" signs, which all LRVs have. I took a picture of that train as well as a shot of a train turning from Stout onto 14th. They're doing work at the location where the new Central Platte Valley Spur will join the existing line, although I didn't see any evidence of trackwork two weeks ago.
I also got a glimpse of three of the four new stations on the spur. The Pepsi Center/Elitch's stop will have three tracks and two boarding areas, with the third track branching off the southbound track just before the station and merging once again after the station. The Invesco Field stop will have outside boarding areas as well as one in between the tracks. Trains will be able to open up on both sides in both directions. Auraria West will have only a center boarding area. Don't know about the layout at Union Station. My guess is it will either have outside boarding areas or perhaps three tracks and two boarding areas. There will be substantial pocket tracks past the terminus to allow storage and quick dispatching of 3-car trains after Rockies games. Tracks have been put down as far as Invesco Field; they end right at Walnut St. and then one track picks up again on the other side of Walnut St. The new spur is still slated to open April 1 of next year.
With all these long term GO's will the A train become unbearable at night once the split service at 168 ends?
All the good homeless runs are gone and the platform people at 179 are actually doing their job now.
The D is short, the F will have 2 relays, the E has a relay the N will have one too. The local cops at Met are tough. The passengers on the L will set them on fire if they are too stinky.
I don't really get the point, what are "good homeless runs"? I would assume long underground runs. But doesn't the F always have 2 relays? What is changing? And doesn't the E have 2 relays (I assume relay means when they change ends and go back from a terminal. I'm saying I disagree (or agree), but I would like to get some more info on you post
Thanks
Bill/Piggo
Yes long runs are good to sleep on.
A relay is when you go into the pocket to change ends not when you change in station. The old E never left revenue service areas so you could sleep all night on it. The F only had to be cleaned out (removing the passengers) at 179 so it gave you a 3 hour sleep from 179 to Stillwell and back.
Most passengers are not really aware because at about 5 am the police roust everyone out of bed so the regular customers can have a seat. The homeless can smell in the air that Guiliani's time is over and are back in growing numbers plus post WTC many begging spots have dried up and fewer people seem to be on at night (that seems to be starting to change).
Do the E and J/Z relay at Jamaica Center solely to chase out the sleepers? Unless Peter's track map needs to be updated, trains still have to switch tracks between Sutphin and Parsons.
Do the south ends of the 5 and 6 count as relays, or must the train reverse course?
The loop tracks are not relays, because the same TO is in continuous operation. To qualify as a relay, the train must be dumped at least once AND must be operated into non-revenue trackage.
Thanks for the clarification.
I guess that means that, for instance, when the Q terminates at 42nd due to a GO (as it did yesterday), it doesn't strictly speaking relay, since the tracks it turns on are revenue tracks (they're used by the Q whenever it continues to 57th). Or am I reading too much into your post?
OK, OK, there are always exceptions. What the Q was doing at 42nd St is indeed a relay - it comes in here (4 Track) and goes out there (3 Track) and spends the time between here and there in what is considered non-revenue trackage in that particular instance. The normal relay locations are:
3 at 135 St (early Sunday AMs)
4 at Utica Ave
C at Euclid AND 168 St
D at 205 St
F at 179 St
G at Smith/9 St AND Continental
J at Broad St (assuming it doesn't leave from R1 and cross north of the station)
M at Bay Parkway
Q (I don't know how they work 57/7. If it goes like Brighton Beach on the diamond, then no; if everything comes in on 4 and leaves on 3, then yes)
R at Continental
S at Broad Channel
S at Euclid Ave (late nights to Lefferts)
W at Pacific St (weekends)
W at 36 St (late nights)
R at 36 St (late nights)
(I think that's all of them)
Other relay locations I've seen used:
5 at Grand Concourse LL relays south of Jackson on M track
4 and 5 at Grand Concourse UL relays north of station on M Track
1 at 137 St
Thanks.
The Q at 57/7 is like at Brighton Beach: pull in on either express track, drop off passengers, pick up new passengers, and pull out. There is seemingly no predictability as to where the locals and expresses end up (unlike at 34/6, where the B and D each have designated tracks).
There is a system to how the (Q) & come in to 57/7. The come in on 4 track and the (Q) come in on 3 track. The is why you have to punch a 42nd street to tell the tower at 57/7 who you are.
Robert
Usually, perhaps, but not always. I've seen diamonds on both tracks at once.
But it is a preference they are not going to hold a train for its proper track. If there is an open spot they will bring the train in.
I was held outside 57 yesterday for a to come off 3 track. A (Q) came off 4 track just as I came up to the station.
Robert
Are you saying both 3 and 4 were filled? I think then you would have to wait. But it sound like you got the first available.
No someome put the wrong train on the wrong track. The (Q) are suppose to go on 3 track and the are suppose to go on 4 track. So I had to wait for a to come off of 3 tack to go onto 3 track since I was a (Q).
Robert
The 6 near the yard entrance?
Add that onto the list - 6 at Parkchester. In the four years I spent in the A Div as both CR and TO, I can count on my fingers how many times I worked the 6.
So far, I only worked the 6 line........ONCE. Not that Im complaining to work over there. It was a good day over there too. Only two BIE's at the same spot (north of Cypress Av) at different times. Yes, both of the trains were R142A's.
57/7 appeared to be like Brighton Beach when I was there on 8/20. Signs stated things such as "Q to Coney Island on this or other side"
No one relays at Jamaica Center, the train turns in station. The J also turns in station in Manhattan at Broad (when it does Broad)depending on who runs the tower.
Really? The last time I rode out to Jamaica Center the J train I got off of proceeded east (north) after stopping. A month or two ago, I thought you (or maybe it was someone else) said the E and J/Z now relay at Jamaica.
How does the J turn in station at Broad? It's a wall platform station with (IINM) separate platform entrances. If the train pulls in on the SB track, nobody waiting for a NB train can board. If the train pulls in on the NB track, anybody who waited for the last minute to transfer to the M is out of luck. (Or is there a crossunder?)
The J has layups (pockets) at Parsons Archer. Those tracks don't cross over they just store one train each on either track. The trains depart on one track or two track.
You change on the S/B, there is a switch that the end of the station.
The SA knows when this is happening, there is no crossover that I know about. At those times there is no M service. The homeless can stay on the train. No one gets on there at those times (except for people that post here not real people). Actually that is a good place to get rid of a SA on weekends.
There is a crossOVER at the north end of Broad St where the "open all the time when the station is open" booth is located.
I had no idea. I am severely allergic to some of the stuff down there and get the heck out of there ASAP. You should see the respirator, antihistimines and cream I carry for my A and J jobs.
Of course that leads to another story I can't give all the details on.
I didn't know that there were 'special homeless trains.' This makes me think....say prayers for the CTAs and CI Carbody that have to do service. The election of mayor will 'bring good business practice to the TA???' Safer 'in the hole,' Peter.
The only thing that will end the homeless problem is Soylent Green.
I believe this will be a bad homeless winter. People are charitied out. Pissed at the WTC. No one in government except for a Rudy wiould start their term being so tough on the homeless. Many of the easy touches for panhandlers have passed away or laid off. Tourism is still down and the bargain hunter tourist are not as likely to give a bum a fiver. Last month I started seeing very young men riding the subways all night something I had not seen in 10 years.
I was hunting for my polling place which has been moved several times and my phone went off. The homeless guy down the block from the 63rd Street Station with the McDonalds cup whipped out his cellphone. Peter
[All the good homeless runs are gone and the platform people at 179 are actually doing their job now.]
This reminds me of when, about 10 years ago, the Partnership for the Homeless demanded that the subway system shut down overnight so that the stations could be converted into homeless shelters. That idea didn't last long!
Why does the system need to be shut down? The stations and trains seem to function just fine as homeless shelters while in service.
They only listened because Mary Brosnahan was HOT!
There are a lot more Homeless rideing on the No.1 Line. I'm starting to see a lot of new faces.
Longer line, better sleep.
Cmon Dave: you now the 1 line is known as the "homeless" line in the A division. Wait a couple weeks when pass 168 or 181 then you'll see.................
It's good to see SubTalk back. I actually thought of another way to re-route train lines when the 63rd Street Tunnel reopens. Some of these routes are a little radical, and some you have seen before.
Keep the Brooklyn-Lower Manhattan Ferry running, even after the lower Manhattan part of the Broadway line reopens. It gives subway riders on the 4th Avenue line an alternate route to lower Manhattan.
Clean up and reopen the lower level of the Bergen Street station.
E runs between Jamaica Center and Kings Highway. E runs normally between Jamaica Center and West 4th. South of West 4th, run it on the F to Kings Highway. The E runs express between Bergen Street and Kings Highway. On the 4 track portion between Bergen and Church the E runs express in both directions. On the 3 track portion between Ditmas and Kings Hwy, E runs express to Manhattan (weekday AM hrs) and from Manhattan (weekday PM hrs). Weekends and nights (after 9 PM) it terminates at 2nd Ave.
F still runs between 179 and Coney Island. F runs the same way it does now only that it goes through the 63rd Street tunnel and that it no longer have trains terminating at Kings Highway. It only terminates at Coney Island.
G runs between Court Square and Church Ave at all times. It runs local between Bergen and Church.
M runs between Metropolitan Ave and 95th Street. It goes local on the 4th Ave Line. It would run all times except nights when it would be two shuttles (Metro-Myrtle and 36-95th Streets).
N runs its normal route between Ditmars and Coney Island only that it goes local in Brooklyn at all times.
Eliminate the Q Diamond.
Q runs between 179 Street and Brighton Beach. It runs express on the Brighton and Broadway lines, then runs through the 63rd Street Tunnel and proceed express all the way to 179 Street. It would operate all times except nights.
R runs between Continental Ave and Coney Island at all times. It would run EXACTLY the same way that the Q Local ran temporarily (Brighton Local, cross the Manhattan Bridge, Broadway Local, through the 59th Street tunnel and then local to Continental).
V runs local between Continental Ave and 2nd Ave in lower Manhattan. It would run local in Queens, run through the 53rd Street Tunnel then run local on the 6th Ave Line. It operates all times except weekends and nights (after 9 PM)
W also runs normally between Ditmars and Coney Island, the only difference is that it would go express from 57-Canal instead of 34-Canal. If the MTA would replace the track on the southbound side that enabled Astoria trains to switch to the express track north of 57th Street, it would make the Broadway Line run a little smoother.
I think there are enough trains available to run it this way. I figure that the Brooklyn-Manhattan Ferry would help the 4th Ave Line during the rush hours so it will not need as much service heading into lower Manhattan. I also figure that with the WTC disaster and the WTC PATH station out of commission for a long while, you can get away with sending only one Broadway line into lower Manhattan.
I still support a Culver Express because of three reasons.
1. The railfan in me. (I'm not gonna pretend otherwise).
2. Three Queens Blvd. Express trains would probably mean less F service. Having a second Manhattan train on the Culver would (for the most part) cover up the loss of service.
3. A Culver Express could lure some people away from the crowded Brighton Line.
What do you guys think? Comments, critiques and questions are welcomed.
If the TA were able to squeeze three expresses on Queens Boulevard, don't you think we'd have seen three expresses on Queens Boulevard a long time ago?
You've also introduced a transfer to every current rider from Bay Ridge who needs to get north of Delancey Street in Manhattan (although you've offered an additional route to lower Manhattan, namely the ferry).
Keep the R, Run the M to Brighton, Run the V over the Brighton to Coney island V via 6th Ave, Q via Bdwy
Obviously that would have to wait for the Manhattan Bridge to be in full operation.
It's an interesting plan but V trains would have to switch from express to local at W4 or 42nd to reach the 53rd Street line. Perhaps we could run the V via Culver and the F(!) via Brighton -- 63rd Street is accessible from both local and express. OTOH, part of the idea behind the V was to supplement 6th Avenue local service.
V can change over at 34th St
It's not a matter of squeezing more routes. The number of routes is not the determining factor. It's a matter of capacity, in trains for hour. If you have a 30 tph capacity, you can run 12 E + 9 F + 9 Q just the same as you could run 15 E + 15 F. Notice, that the maximum turn-around capacity at Jamaica Center is 12 tph. Thus, 3 Es will soon be sent to Hillside Av.
Well, yes, but that entails a service reduction on the F and possibly the Q. Will the reduced service be sufficient in Brooklyn and on Broadway?
David, I believe it is possible. I would have the V supplement the F service on the Culver Line. I believe that, say for the morning rush, the southbound distribution via Queens Blvd. could be 12 E + 9 F + 9 Q and that northbound, there could be fewer E trains (by running some of the southbound Es to Euclid or Rockaway Park for day lay-up), fewer Fs (to be made up for by the V service, which would run on 8th, not on 6th) and 10-12 northbound Qs.
The Q back on Broadway
I think that the southern terminal is what most defines the letters of the former BMT southern division lines. So by definition an (R) train runs to Bay Ridge while the (Q) runs to Brighton. However you could always send the (M) (defined by its north terminal and route via Bwy elevated/Nassau St subway) down that way instead of West End to run local. They used to do that up through the mid 1980's.
:-) Andrew
Sorry it took a while to get back to you all. In terms of routing, the R running local on the Brighton Line would be temporary. When the Manhattan Bridge reopens fully, I would return the R back to it's normal route to Bay Ridge. I agree 100% with the Q Brightliner. I would run the D, M and Q Trains over the Brighton Line when the 6 Ave side reopens. As for the "whole new set of transfers" for Bay Ridge riders north of Delancey, if the M becomes the train to Bay Ridge, yes that legendary transfer to the L at Myrtle is VERY important. Seriously though, north of say Prince Street (the R stop closest to Delancey), how many Bay Ridge riders actually stay on an R Local to get to a stop north of Prince. They usually transfer to an express at either Pacific or DeKalb.
If I were going from a local R stop in Brooklyn to a local N/R stop in Manhattan, I wouldn't bother transferring to a bridge train and back unless one happened to pull in across the platform -- especially if my destination were Prince or 8th, in which case I'd have to put up with a longish walk at Canal.
Good point. If my hypothetical routing took place though, Bay Ridge riders who decide to go to a local stop north of Canal could wait for an R, which would still go local after crossing the Manhattan Bridge. They would just have to get off their collective butts.
I don't remember the details of your routing. (Sorry, there have been so many in recent days that I can't keep track.) But, in terms of track arrangement, the Manhattan Bridge is best thought of as the Broadway express while the lower Manhattan section is the Broadway local. Running a Manhattan Bridge train local on Broadway is as undesirable as switching any other line from the express track to the local track with through service on both.
>Running a Manhattan Bridge train local on Broadway is as undesirable >as switching any other line from the express track to the local >track with through service on both.
Well at least another person gets that fundamental.
BTW as unhappy as I am with the RR I am ready to start actually going to TPH stage on the A/C. A unintentional gain wa using 8 cars to Euclid! We might be able to queeze in on more rush hour train or introduce a 168-Euclid rush hour special. Any thoughts on rush hour skip stop, Euclid to Hoyt. (If you don't object no one will)
I don't see why you'd want skip-stop, especially with a perfectly good express track available.
As you saw in another thread, once sufficient cars become available, I'd be in favor of extending the C to Lefferts and sending all A's to the Rockaways. Obviously that would save Rockaways passengers much waiting time. I think I computed that the average time lost by a commuter from Lefferts would be two minutes, but that's assuming he doesn't transfer to an express, and in any case he spends less time on the platform.
Running a Manhattan Bridge train local on Broadway is as undesirable as switching any other line from the express track to the local track with through service on both.
Absolutely. And you only save three stops if you are going to Carnegie Hal, two to Times Square.
If you want an R express, better do it in Brooklyn, at or before Pacific.
David, yes his plan involves that switching at Prince but saves the relay switching at 57th/7th, by making both the Q and R through services (via 63rd and 60th). So if anything, his idea calls for less switching and fewer delays on Broadway. It would have to wait, though, until enough rolling stock is available.
In addition to what the Q Brightliner stated. I'm willing to bet that those at Prince, 8, 23, and 28 Street Stations would be happy to see one of the two Broadway Local trains go over the bridge. Not only would that save them time, but in some cases it would save them a transfer. While this may not be fundamental routing, I think passengers at these popular local stops (particularly 8th and 23rd Streets) would love that option.
P.S.: In case you didn't know, to see my routing proposal, hit the "First In Thread" button.
Ok the Culver Express is needed because of one thing, the existance of the Culver Express.
Sending the E down that line would slow up the F and G local Brooklyn service tremendously and affect A and C service indirectly.
Going northbound the E&F would conflict at Jay St throwing each other off. Then the E would conflict with the C train south of West 4th ( it does now at Canal) and this would further affect the F again and now the V.
Kings Highway is the natural place to drop out F service for easy access to Coney Island yard AND a middle track to clean out a train without plugging the service. I know it stinks if you live by Ave X but the train pretty much empties out around Church. Unlike the W or J there is no big reverse commute on the F train either.
You would also have to add lots of tower operators and dispatchers and line TSSes.
You are also forgeting that Stillwell will be shutting down soon.
As a TO and non Brooklynite I would say that 4th Ave people have the right to complain the most.
I have more but my JC Penney 25% coupon expires in half an hour
While I admit that my having a Culver Express is partially the railfan in me, it's not the only reason. The 1 (in Manhattan and the Bronx) and the 4 in the Bronx all have express tracks that are not used. I'm not arguing for express service on these lines because they all have neighboring lines that are not completely crowded. It makes no sense to have express trains on these lines. The same cannot be said for the Culver. The Brighton Line express AND local trains are pretty crowded, particularly during morning rush. I strongly suspect that there is a good number of people who avoid the Culver and head to the Brighton because the Culver only has local service. I'm believe that with a Culver Express, they would travel on the Culver instead on the Brighton, and the Brighton Line would not be as crowded. Plus trains traveling through tunnels would be quicker, than trains traveling over the Bridge.
I'm not entirely sure about the tremendous slowdown in service on the Culver. As it stands right now the F and G usually get in each others way, slowing both trains down. This is partially because there are a whole lot of F trains running. Under what I proposed, the only times there would be conflict affecting people going to and coming home from work in Manhattan is when northbound E and F trains both arrive at Bergen at the same time or when the G terminates at Church (which would slow down the F). The second case already happens when the G terminates at Smith-9th.
By the way, the MTA not being on time wouldn't be a new thing.
Q Exp: now that plan seems workable! But I think it better that you leave the E as it is now (but extending some of them to Euclid, instead of terminating all at Canal), and extending the V as Culver local, with return of the F as Culver Exp. Better yet, running the V via 8th Av. from 53rd St. to W 4th St., as it seems to me that additional trains connecting Penn Station and the Port Authority Bus Terminal to the east side might be in more demand than additional 6th Av. local service.
34-50 st on the 6ave needs it just as badly (PATH).
Does the PATH station at 33rd St. also hook-up nicely to the Broadway Subway? If so, then we would have a 7-block differential there (60th St. & Lex. instead of 53rd & Lex.), by using uptown Broadway locals instead of 6th Av. locals from there. Do you think that 7-block difference would be critical?
Nope, different level
Unless these are railfan/fantasy lines take the following into consideration.
Car cleaning. Running everything to CI makes cleaning tough as trains have lesstime at the terminal.
Route length. The A local to Far Rock is near the length of endurance 3 locals and one express is very tiring. More of the daytime incidents occur on the Far Rock A than the Lefferts A (like 2:1). Routes like the E to Rock Park all local are for the birds.
Costs. Extending routes need more equipment and longer headways don't cut it. Whenever 2 services cross or diverge you need a tower person 24/7 and possibly an ATD. Longer lines also need more TDs and TSSes.
Conflicts. Every time lines cross or share tracks problems happen. The E might need a battery to get back on track but if the other services are on time there is no way it can catch up because it shares track and lots of diverges and merges make it even harder to correct problems.
Ride the lines. It's nice to say take the trains from X but ride that line first.
Add to the reverse commute. Some lines have alot of people going the 'wrong' way these are the most efficient place to add service first. Reverse commutes also are a reason not to cut service.
Crush load. Extending lines like the 6 to Coop City would be fine except that it would just make things worse at 59-42 st.
Local opinion. At Kings Hway a Culver Exprees might be nice but all your local stop neighbors don't want it when they realize it would mean fewer F s for them. There is the same concern out on the Queens end of the F too. Lets be real those expresses come at the expense of local service.
Train sets are limited. There really is stuff that should not be on the road as it is. Extending its life is dangerous. They also take YEARS to order and put into service.
Yards. Service changes can't create huge light train moves to get equipment back in place or to the yards. Yards now specialize, an E at Kings Hwy would have to go back to Jamaica yard to be shopped as CI is not really equiped to handle it.
Longer lines, worse service. The longer the line the harder it is to keep on schedule and when you have services merging that creates more problems.
That said if I would extend the V to Church as a Brooklyn express. That would work only if it is the same number of TPH as the G AND the S.
Oh yeah TPH. Use 29 as a base and knock off 1-3 every time services crosses over.
Sensible advice.
All the dreamy fantasy services would be possible only during midday, nights, and weekends -- and only if you found some more money to subsidize it. During rush hour, all you want is the maximum throughput of trains.
A better solution is to actually eliminate as many crossings as possible.
I assure you that there was not anything dreamy about what I was saying. Every route that I thought of had a reason behind it:
Running the Q express from 179 brings a legitimate third option to Queens Blvd. riders who want to go to Manhattan. They could now get to popular stations such as Times Square, Union Square, and Canal Street quicker and without transfers. It also gives them quicker access to lower Manhattan. They now have the option to change at Canal for the J, M and N for lower Manhattan service.
Running a Culver Express gives Brooklyn riders a quicker way to get to Manhattan (read: tunnel vs. the bridge), and maybe ease crowding on the Brighton. I chose the E as the Culver Express because of three reasons:
1. It is an 8th Avenue Train. This gives not only Culver riders but F riders in lower Manhattan 8th Avenue service. They would no longer have to transfer at West 4th.
2. The C as Culver Express would be great except it would bring about what I call "The Jamaica Center paradox". The C running as Culver Express would mean the E running local on the Fulton Line. If I'm at Broadway-ENY station, we have two trains that go to Jamaica Center, however one (the E) will take MUCH longer than the other (the J) to get there.
3. The V as the Culver Express would bring about an unusual situation where the two trains traveling on the same lines (F and V) switch roles (express and local) in two different boroughs. This does not happen anywhere in the Subway System.
From what I have seen riding the 4th Avenue line during rush hours (on several occasions). The M train serves little purpose south of 36th Street. It's a waste of money running it on the West End. The R on the other hand isn't a particularly crowded train in Brooklyn and in lower Manhattan these days, unless you board by the Staten Island Ferry at Whitehall. It starts getting crowded around Prince Street. I feel that the best thing to do is to switch the R (temporarily) to the Brighton Line cross it over Manhattan Bridge and run it to Continental. This would free up Q trains for their run to Queens. There may be even spare trains available from this switch on the Q, which could be used on the G and V trains. Finally, having M trains run to 95th Street would make it useful.
Just thought I let you know.
Still though isn't there anyway that the MTA could streamline operations so that 24-7 control towers would operate where needed?
>I assure you that there was not anything dreamy about what I was >saying. Every route that I thought of had a reason behind it:
But you ignoreed most of my points and they are a short list of factors that plaaners think about.
Running the Q express from 179 brings a legitimate third option to Queens Blvd. riders who want to go to Manhattan. They could now get to popular stations such as Times Square, Union Square, and Canal Street quicker and without transfers. It also gives them quicker access to lower Manhattan. They now have the option to change at Canal for the J, M and N for lower Manhattan service.
>Running a Culver Express gives Brooklyn riders a quicker way to get >to Manhattan (read: tunnel vs. the bridge), and maybe ease crowding >on the Brighton. I chose the E as the Culver Express because of >three reasons:
It would not be faster, you would lose time where the services meet.
You lose time whereever services meet. Sit your butt down at Chambers during the rush hour and watch how the A and C mess each other up. Bergen to Jay st would become a mess. So would Church St with the F and G sharing local tracks. It is a problem now but the F does not have to make another merger at Bergen.
>1. It is an 8th Avenue Train. This gives not only Culver riders but >F riders in lower Manhattan 8th Avenue service. They would no longer >have to transfer at West 4th.
Only if you lived at an express stop and you would only save time if the E came first. if the F come first and you wait for the E you might as well get on and transfer at W4 or Jay.
To add the Service you are reducing regular F service. You think people at local stops want that?
>2. The C as Culver Express would be great except it would bring >about what I call "The Jamaica Center paradox". The C running as >Culver Express would mean the E running local on the Fulton Line. If >I'm at Broadway-ENY station, we have two trains that go to Jamaica >Center, however one (the E) will take MUCH longer than the other
>(the J) to get there.
I am surpised you did not suggset the J to Parsons Via Crystie.
>3. The V as the Culver Express would bring about an unusual >situation where the two trains traveling on the same lines (F and V) >switch roles (express and local) in two different boroughs. This >does not happen anywhere in the Subway System.
That is not a reason to design service.
From what I have seen riding the 4th Avenue line during rush hours (on several occasions). The M train serves little purpose south of 36th Street. It's a waste of money running it on the West End.
>The R on the other hand isn't a particularly crowded train in >Brooklyn and in lower Manhattan these days, unless you board by the >Staten Island Ferry at Whitehall. It starts getting crowded around >Prince Street.
The R has more reverse commuters than the F or D and the R gets big passenger load in Brooklyn, loses it to transfers and then build up another load in Manhattan. Which your complaint about trains dropping out at Knigs Hway is not legitimate. During the AMs if 10 people get off there when we go out of service it is alot.
>I feel that the best thing to do is to switch the R (temporarily) to >the Brighton Line cross it over Manhattan Bridge and run it to >Continental. This would free up Q trains for their run to Queens.
Sure but you would need more R's to do it.
>Finally, having M trains run to 95th Street would make it useful.
Eventually the M will teminate at 9th ave all the time where it will not plug the road as it discharges.
>Still though isn't there anyway that the MTA could streamline >operations so that 24-7 control towers would operate where needed?
You are still just ignoring everything. The MTA HAS streamlined operations into fewer 24-7 locations.
There are also other problems with the Q.
If you are serious dig up the list of trainsets used and add and subtract where you would take them from and put them.
"...trainsets used and add and subtract..." When the R143s get into service a year or so from now a train shortage would not be a problem.
Wannabe1,
I just read your post. I did not intend to ignore what you were stated. I thought you made some pretty good points. The R does more commuters than the F, under normal circumstances. But is this the case when the Brooklyn-Manhattan Ferry is running? From what I have seen, when that ferry runs, 4th Ave local trains are not that packed. More accurately, they're more crowded on some cars than others. Still having the N go local on 4th Ave gives 4th Ave Broadway service.
As for the switching problem. I think that your analogy to the A and C at Chambers is a little flawed. During rush hours, there are 3 different A trains (Far Rock, Lefferts, and Rockaway Park) in addition to the C. In other words they're running 4 different trains on the same track! You gonna have mayhem when that happens. The closest current switching that compares to the switching I'm proposing at Bergen is the N going from express to local (and vice-versa) north of Pacific. While that does slow down service, it's not the same the chaos at the IND Chambers station.
I don't think that Culver local riders will be that upset over the loss of F trains (considering that they come sometimes one after another and then don't show for a while at times). Except for Propspect Park, 4th Ave, and maybe Carroll the local stations aren't that crowded. I don't think we'll be dealing with a wall of people in more local stations if there is an express. And with the G train going to Church, those coming home from work would have two locals.
As for the express stops: Bergen, 7th Ave, Church, as well as 179, are popular stations. I think these stations that they're all express-worthy.
Here's my Idea.
Eliminate the B
Make some D trains run local in the Bronx Rush hours & Middays.And extend the D to West 4 street.
Re open the Bergen Street lower level and have the F run express to Church Avenue.
Extend the G to Ditmas Avenue.
Extend the to Ocean Parkway.
Extend The R local to 179 street and have the F run express all times.
"Extend the G to Ditmas Avenue."
Why not Church? It is by far much easier.
"Extend The R local to 179 street and have the F run express all times."
Can't do. Car shortage.
"Extend the to Ocean Parkway."
If you mean the Brighton exp, it makes it harder to turn around. They would have to wrong-rail all the way back to Brighton Beach, plus they lose those two layup tracks coming out of Brighton beach in case something goes wrong on a switch.
Last Thursday November 1, 2001 marked the 83rd Aniversary of the worst subway wreck in history.
May all the victims RIP
Does anyone know if the tunnel where the accident occurred is operational today?
Does anyone know if the tunnel where the accident occurred is operational today?
Not in revenue service. I believe it's occasionally used for equipment moves and the like.
A couple of months ago someone on this board gave a one day advance notice that the tunnel would be in use for a 24 hour period. Oh to be living in NY again.
That was me. Manhattan-bound Brighton trains (D/Q or Q/Q, I don't remember which at the time) were scheduled to bypass Prospect Park for platform work. I took this as an indication that the Manhattan-bound platform would be closed. Indeed, when the day came, I rode two shuttles through the S-curve.
What was it like? Did you get spooked? Is it possible to see anything out the front window?
See this post. Unfortunately, it's difficult to see much out of the front of an R-68, but I did my best. Also, a correction: I only rode south through the curve.
I forget if it was 1959 or 1979. There was a train that was going slowly thru the site. It was going about 3 MPH. And it derailed. Train hit the wall in the same spot as the other train did in 1918. No major damage to the train. But the shuttle was shut down for a while until the train could be righted up.
That was on December 1, 1974 with a train of R-32s. IIRC 3669 suffered a bent frame.
I can't understand how a train going 3 miles could have sustained damage. But, it does happen.
Had it been a train of BMT standards, the tunnel wall would have sustained damage and not the train itself.:-)
METROCARD & CARDHOLDERS COLLECTORS CATALOG
This is an 8.5 inch x 11inch 20 page booklet printed by the MTA. They later decided not to distribute it. It contains 20 glossy, color pages of actual size photos of 1997-99 commemorative MetroCards & cardholders. Full color photos of the Subway Series 97, Then and Now, Emigrant, JVC Jazz, Healthy City, Ferry Boat, Yankees 98, Subway Cool, Millennial Journeys, Mets International Week plus 63 Cardholders including the complete Great Subway series. All photos are actual size & full color! A beautiful collectors MUST HAVE. The supply is limited. When they are gone, they are gone.
Send $10.00 ea. plus $2. P & H in check or Money Order
made out to: Mike Makman, To: Prof. Putter, Po Box 755
Planet Station, NYC NY 10024
METROCARD MANIA BOOK - Fun With Used MetroCards!
This beautiful paperback book was published by Price Stern & Sloan. It is now OUT OF PRINT. It includes over 30 different projects using NYC MetroCards. Games, magic tricks, toys. Great for kids from 8 to adult. Autographed by author at buyer¹s request. To order send $7 each + $3.00 (s&h) (outside USA $6.00 s&h) in US money, check or money order made out to: Michael Makman. Send order to: Professor Putter PO Box 755, Planet Station New York , NY 10024-0539
I am sorry but those two lines are just a waste! The 3 and B lines should go until full service has been restored on those subway lines. A Diamond D and Circle D can be created for rush hour service. The Rest of the R-68 can go to the (yeah you guessed it) the C line. For additonal trains per hour. The 3 line cars go to the 2 and 5 for more trains per hour. The 3 line being eliminated will enable the 2 to run express again,
Am I the only one who thinks this should be done?
As for the B, it depends on CPW local ridership. If it's sufficiently high during daytime hours, I'd keep it.
If you drop the 3, what would you do about service from 148th St?
for the 3, simple provide a shuttle or shuttle bus, nothing major, 1 or two trains
A lot of people will perceive that to be a slight to Harlem. In fact, the "3" provides a very useful terminal up there, so cancelling it, except perhaps overnight, is ill advised. It would make as much sense as cancelling the #1 in the South Ferry loop before Sept 11 happened. (The South Ferry line will be running again within 24-36 months or so).
Nothing wrong with coming up with new ideas - but this one would be shot down pretty quickly.
As to the B, well, do you want that to be permanent, or would you restore it after the Manny B's tracks open to full service in 2004?
I would rather BEEF UP the "B", running it to Bedford Park all day weekdays, and running the "D" express to Manhattan up to Noon and from 12:30 to end of evening rush back up to the Bronx. Turning it at 145th Street, well....silly.
wayne
Kind of like the 7-11 arrangement. Makes sense.
What's the 7-11 arrangement?
The 11 is a term applied to the 7 express. AFAIK the R-62As have purple 11 signs. Not sure about the Redbirds.
Ok next question, how does it apply to what the previous poster said about the D?
The 7 express runs all day. The D express in the Bronx only runs rush hours.
ok thanks I didn't understand before
The D can only be a peak-direction express due to the Concourse only having three tracks. I suppose it could run all day, inbound AM and outbound PM, but you'd have staffing and rolling stock problems...
And I'm sure things haven't changed much on the concourse in the 30 years I've been gone, but there's no stacking up of trains and minimal slowdowns and the D train's maximum use is pretty much rush hour only. The rest of the day and night, the all local run isn't all that much of a pain in the butt and goes pretty fast despite the stops. There probably STILL isn't much need for non-peak express service there.
However, running it local on CPW *would* be a pain in the butt. I hear that's been done lately.
I agree. The bottleneck at 145th due to only 1 track on the lower level when B trains terminate there needs to be eliminated. If you don't want or need extended B service to BPB, then run it to 168th St. outside the rush hours.
What bottleneck? Train leaves 145, next train due to arrive 1 minute later - no problem. Problems only exist when trains leave late or arrive early.
Exactly. If one train is late, trains get held up. My not eliminate the problem altogether by sending the B either into the Bronx or to 168th.
If I send the B to Bedford Park, the same problem exists (I know. I sit outside BP on Monday mornings from 0742 until about 0748, waiting for the 0742 to leave. It's left on time once since July). If the B goes to 168, than the C is forced back to either 145 or Bedford Park and you still have the same problem, just on another line
I meant sending the B to 168th along with the C, with nothing terminating at 145th St. The bottleneck at BPB during the rush hours is unavoidable, but this only affects a handful of people going to BPB or 205th.
Does the B and C lines run on the same headways during the rush hours? It seemed when the C was running to BPB, it ran smoother in/out of the center track at this station, with less dwell times.
The B and C were scheduled to operate every 8minutes, but I get the feeling that the B came a bit more often.
Where will your simple 1 or 2 train shuttle turn around?
There's a third track at 135th for relay procedures.
There's a third track at 135th for relay procedures.
Is there a platform in the station for this third track?
Standard shuttle move from Lenox Terminal to 135 St (early Sunday AMs):
Leave Lenox from 1 Track, stop at 145, stop at 135, Discharge. Take train to 9 car reverse marker south of 135 on 2 Track and dump (1 Track beomes 2 Track south of White Plains line merge; 4 becomes 3). Other TO takes the train north into B Track to 9 car reverse marker north of 135 on 3 Track and dumps. Original TO takes train south into 135 on 3 Track to 9 car marker, dumps. CR opens, people board, second TO takes train north to Lenox terminal.
This move requires two TOs and 1 CR and can be done in about 10 minutes providing there is no 2 train getting in the way.
This move requires two TOs and 1 CR and can be done in about 10 minutes providing there is no 2 train getting in the way.
Let's assume that they are trying to do this during rush hour as has been proposed. The #2 is running at 4 minute headways in both directions. Is this really practical?
In a word: NO!
I think the smarter idea would have been for the 2 to run from White Plains to 14 St via the express, the 3 to run from Lenox to New Lots via the local and the 1 to run VC to Flatbush via the local.
I think the smarter idea would have been for the 2 to run from White Plains to 14 St via the express, the 3 to run from Lenox to New Lots via the local and the 1 to run VC to Flatbush via the local.
I totally agree. In fact I made the same suggestion a few weeks ago.
My guess as to why this was not done is inertia. Management and the unions had to reassign 2 services with the present linup (1 & 3); running the 1 & 3 to Brooklyn would have meant reassigning all three services (1, 2 & 3). Running the 3 to Brooklyn and the 2 express to 14th would have meant better service for Bronx riders and more reliable service for Brooklyn riders. Then again, the passengers' interests don't rank high on the TA's decision matrix.
We were indeed talking about this issue right before Dave P. went away and shut down SubTalk. Strong arguments in favor of turning #2 trains at 14th Street and continuing #3 trains on to Brooklyn exist, but NYCT has its reasons for not doing so.
I'm going to attempt to explain the thinking behind these routing decisions as I understand it from talking to the planners. I'm not taking a position on their decisions, nor will I attempt to defend them (such defenses often end up taking several days, which I do not have right now, and result in circular arguments):
The interlocking plant at 14th Street (where #3 service is terminating at this time) is not a full one (at this time -- it might become one in the future). Only one switch is present instead of the preferred two, limiting the ability to turn trains. There are more #2 trains coming from the White Plains Road Line than can be efficiently turned at this location. Trains would have to be turned north of 14th Street or south of 14th Street. South of 14th Street is not feasible, since turning more than a very small number of trains at Chambers Street would tie up the road going to/coming from Brooklyn. Turning north of 14th Street (Times Square being the next logical location) is feasible but doesn't serve busy 34th Street (Penn Station) very well.
In addition, as Mr. Bauman said, sending #2 trains to 14th Street and keeping #3 trains going to Brooklyn would have resulted in more extensive service changes in Brooklyn than were brought about by the present service plan. Why change the train designation for the heavily used Nostrand Avenue Line (#2), where the same route runs 24 hours a day, while leaving the more lightly used New Lots Avenue Line (a non-24-hour-a-day route, #3) alone?
In any case, various options are being discussed internally (and I won't elaborate) that would render the whole thing moot anyway.
David
Would it really? The 1 would have replaced the 2 if it stayed express and was cut back to 14th Street like I suggested after the current 7th Avenue service plan went into effect. Replacing the 2 with the 1 in Brooklyn, would have been no more harmful than the W replacing the B and the circle-Q replacing the D in Brooklyn on July 22. Would things have been confusing at first? Every new subway change causes some degree of confusion when it first takes effect.
Let's say the 2 was cut back to 14th. If a 2 train was at 14th Street, preparing to go back to the Bronx, couldn't someone in the Master Tower for the 7th Avenue line alert the crew on the train that another 2 train is at, say 42nd Street? Couldn't the person in the tower let the crew know that another train is on its way down and for them to get their train up and running? That way they could keep 2 trains moving in and out of 14th Street without causing delays on the express tracks.
Thanks for remembering the discussion about the relative merits of having the 3 instead of the 2 going to Brooklyn. I do find some of the arguments you presented have some technical shortcomings.
Only one switch is present instead of the preferred two, limiting the ability to turn trains. There are more #2 trains coming from the White Plains Road Line than can be efficiently turned at this location. Trains would have to be turned north of 14th Street or south of 14th Street.
According to the August 2001 timetables that were on the MTA website, the #2 headway is 5-8 minutes and the #3 headway is 6-8 minutes. It should not be difficult to turn a service at 5 minute headways in the single pocket at 14th St. Assuming that it takes at most 2 minutes to clear the interlocking north of the station (probably closer to 90 seconds), then that would leave 3 minutes for the #2 in the station vs. 4 minutes for the #3. The difference is not significant because any rapid transit service should be able to turn around a train within 3 minutes.
Turning north of 14th Street (Times Square being the next logical location) is feasible but doesn't serve busy 34th Street (Penn Station) very well.
You seem to hint that Times Sq might be the last station. If the switch bewteen 42nd and 34th were used, then Penn Sta would be the last stop.
There is very little downtown service provided by the express at Penn Sta with the current arrangement - only 14th St. It's not like the normal configuration with the downtown express providing the bulk of the access to the Financial District. While turning the trains at Penn Sta is not necessary, it would not be catastrophic because the locals provide downtown access.
Why change the train designation for the heavily used Nostrand Avenue Line (#2), where the same route runs 24 hours a day, while leaving the more lightly used New Lots Avenue Line (a non-24-hour-a-day route, #3) alone?
You may wish to check the station counts. According to "Better Transit for Brooklyn" Table 4, p. 8 the New Lots Line has 22% more daily passengers.
Again: I am presenting arguments, not making them. I will not attempt to defend the arguments.
However, I will say two things.
#1 - Mr. Bauman is correct in his assertion that a train should be able to be relayed within three minutes. However, as usual, he fails to take into account the employee-safety-necessitated rule that trains be cleared of passengers before relaying.
#2 - While the numbers presented in the report Mr. Bauman cited jibe with the numbers I've got, what Mr. Bauman may not realize is that NYCT's definition of "New Lots Avenue Line," and thus what was used in the report, includes the Utica Avenue, Kingston Avenue, and Nostrand Avenue stations. I should have been clearer in my use of the term "New Lots Avenue Line," which, for my purposes, encompasses only the stations between New Lots Avenue (the terminal) and Saratoga Avenue (after which the line changes to a four-track express/local line). The three stations (Utica, Kingston, and Nostrand, which are really under Eastern Parkway and which I considered to be part of the Eastern Parkway Line for this effort) account for approximately 35,000 weekday passengers, more than half of the New Lots Avenue Line's total of 66,000 or so. Thus, I stand by my previous statement, that the Nostrand Avenue Line is busier than the New Lots Avenue Line. (Of course, the fact that only Seventh Avenue service operates to/from New Lots Avenue for most of the day, while both Seventh Avenue and Lexington Avenue service operates to/from Flatbush Avenue, must be considered as well -- I don't have a passenger split available, though it's my understanding that the split is in favor of the Lexington Avenue Line. Then again, I don't know how many passengers boarding at the elevated New Lots Avenue Line stations transfer to Lexington Avenue service at Utica Avenue, either, though my educated guess is that it's significant.)
David
#1 - Mr. Bauman is correct in his assertion that a train should be able to be relayed within three minutes. However, as usual, he fails to take into account the employee-safety-necessitated rule that trains be cleared of passengers before relaying.
According to the track map on this site the switch is north of the 14th St Station. No relaying operation south of the 14th St station should be necessary or even possible.
The only benefit for a move south of the station would be for a layup. I don't think it would be advisable to take trains out of service at 14th St during the rush hour peak. I'd expect all trains would be sent back uptown to serve uptown bound passengers entering at Penn Sta. Layups after rush hour peaks makes some sense, but there would be longer headways at that time.
#2 - While the numbers presented in the report Mr. Bauman cited jibe with the numbers I've got, what Mr. Bauman may not realize is that NYCT's definition of "New Lots Avenue Line," and thus what was used in the report, includes the Utica Avenue, Kingston Avenue, and Nostrand Avenue stations.
Thank you for that clarification. I was not aware of the TA's definition for the New Lots Line. Logically, I would think that Kingston and Nostrand should be included on the New Lots Line because their service is identical to the stations east of Utica. The distinguishing feature for the Eastern Parkway Line would be that both local services were combined.
I stand corrected as to the location of the 14th Street switch. This, of course, takes clearing the train out of the equation. Nevertheless, as I've said twice, and will say now for the third time, my place here is not to defend reasoning behind the routing, just to report it.
David
David:
The New Lots line is from New Lots to Sutter Ave. As a PM C/R along that normally work the line as well as live by the line my entire life, I can assure that you are correct. In the late night hours(#4 train), the bulk of passengers after Franklin gets off at Utica(Eastern Pky line). During the daytime hours,(#1 train) the heavy stations are:
Pennsylvania Ave: Two High Schools, numerous public schools. High two-fare zone station.
Rockaway Ave: Two-fare zone station.
Saratoga Ave: Brookdale Hospital.
Sutter Ave: (Rush Hours only) High two fare-zone station(the B78, which btw doesnt run after 11:30pm)
Two of the stations on the list:Sutter and Pennsylvania, are two fare zone stations but the buses that connect to these stations are not 24 hour buses. Late night customers most likely have to get off somewhere else to get home. For Sutter, most get off at Utica anyway to grab the B17 or the B46 buses which both duplicate the B78 for the most part. IDK about the Starrett City pax, maybe try to get to Penn Ave before the last B20/83 buses or take it to New Lots to grab the B6 which is the nearest bus to the neighborhood.
All the buses along the Nostrand line, with the exception of the B11 are 24hr buses. Only President and Newkirk have the least pax drop off along the line.
These are from personal observations.
No, it's quite impossible. These shuttles would invariably delay # 2 trains.
I agree with the 3 disappearing. Having the 2 run its normal route would be great, and a 3 shuttle would be a good idea. The 1 could still run local in Manhattan. As for the D diamond, I'm not too sure. I've always thought that diamond service should be express in one direction (like the 5 and 6 in the Bronx or the 7 in Queens). I believe they should not be like the Q diamond in Brooklyn. To people visiting NYC, that could be very confusing. What they could do is run the B only during rush hours.
The question has already been raised here.
The 2 would save eight minutes if it ran express. In exchange, the 119,291 daily passengers (1999 average) from local stations (plus those at 59th, not included in this count) would have to wait twice as long for a train. It's simply not worth it.
If you want to eliminate the 2 local, start by doubling 1 service south of 96th.
(I find it interesting that you'd give the 3's cars to the 2 and 5, not to the 1, when the primary service you'd be cutting is the local in Manhattan.)
Am I the only one who thinks this should be done?
I'd rather the R68s go to the N...
"I'd rather the R68s go to the N..."
Why? There are other cars in need of them, the N has enough don't you think?
Not 68s... The N used to be only 68s now, it's a surprise every time...
No the N doesn't have enough R68's. In fact it has fewer than it used to. If other lines need cars, why can't they get slant-R40's or R32's?
The 7 avenue line is a long line.Even though I agree I don't think some people will be happy about that.
For the B:SIONARA
There already is a Diamond D and a Circle D - we call the former D and the latter B. Calling them Circle and Diamond will not accomplish much -they'll still need to be split at 34 St; the only riders to see an improvement will be along the Grand Concourse.
Today on three separate trips, I and my B train followed right behind a C local on CPW and found all the stations crowded; apparently, everyone wanted to go to 6th Ave today.
I'm surprised they didn't get on the first train to arrive and change at 59th to a B or D, whichever happened to come first.
That would make sense, but we're talking about the riding public of NYC - sense is NOT their strong suit.
I've had people at Rock Center curse me out because my southbound B didn't make the connection with their southbound F (Give me one good reason why it should have).
Upon resumption of 'normal' service on 10/28, I had people screaming because I suggested they take the N/R to 8th St since the W was terminating at Pacific. They wanted to know why they should take the ****ing LOCAL. The fact that 8th St is a local stop didn't seem to affect them.
Give me time and I can do more; these are fairly recent occurances.
Don't you hate it when that happens? I'm 15 so people don't think I'm a reliable source of information so they never ask me and they end up asking some moron who doesn't know what they're talking about and it's so funny to hear their answers...
I know what you mean. Back when I was in high school, around 1976, I was on a Queens bound M train around Canal Street, when an elderly lady asked me how to get to Radio City Music Hall. I told her to get off at Delancy Street and change for the uptown F train. She just waved her hand in disgust, and I said "F--- you, next time don't ask me, then". I got the last laugh though, when I saw the look of horror on her face when we came out on to the Williamsburgh Bridge heading for Marcy Avenue!
Actually, I did tell the lady "Essex Street", not Delancy, for anybody who caught that.
Haha, I don't get why she would wave her hand in disgust though. She asked you for directions and then she's like, I don't like your directions... what's wrong with people...
Chances are she didn't hear what she wanted to hear.
They don't trust me to give reliable info, and I work there.
Some people just don't know how to ride the subway. You know how I feel about locals bypassing local stations, but we all know it happens on occasion. If you're waiting for a specific one of multiple local trains, it couldn't hurt to ride the first local to the next express stop just in case.
Perhaps your B should have caught the F, but that's not in your control. Maybe the TW/O decided not to hold the F for the B; maybe the F was supposed to wait but it didn't; maybe the TW/O was asleep and should have held the F but didn't. But what did they expect you to do about it?
On a 2 train between 42nd and 50th, I offered to help a man who was staring at the maps. I confirmed that, despite what the maps, signs, and automated announcements claimed, we were running local. (Just at that point the C/R piped in to announce the 72-96 express run due to the weekend GO.) He had trouble believing me even though the train stopped at 50th and 59th. At 66th he thanked me and hopped off. If he was going to 66th and he was so certain the train was an express, why did he get on (or remain on) at 42nd?
Original Post
I've had people at Rock Center curse me out because my southbound B didn't make the connection with their southbound F (Give me one good reason why it should have).
Your response
Perhaps your B should have caught the F, but that's not in your control. Maybe the TW/O decided not to hold the F for the B; maybe the F was supposed to wait but it didn't; maybe the TW/O was asleep and should have held the F but didn't. But what did they expect you to do about it?
My Clarification
It was MY southbound B - I was operating. We were sitting at Rock Ctr when the southbound F arrived. People coming off the F cursing at me because the doors closed before they could get on. Now the question: why is anyone transferring from an F to a B southbound at Rockefeller Center? Two stops on the F take just as long as two stops on the B.
Oh -- these people wanted to transfer from the F to the B? I guess that makes so little sense that I assumed they wanted to transfer the other way. If anything, the F is faster (since there's a chance your B would have to wait for another B to leave the station).
The bottom line is: PEOPLE ARE MORONS!!!
They just don t want to see and hear. Why did nature give us 2 eyes, 2 ears and only one mouth?
We have two eyes for depth perception, two ears for direction. Why would anyone need a second mouth? Well, maybe to eat and talk at the same time. The layout of the face has been around longer than man's ability to speak.
I'm not saying this is the reason or that it is a good reason but here's a guess. Coming in from Queens, especially at rush hour the F is PACKED! When it comes into Rock Center with a B/D the B/D usually is much less crowded. Sometimes there aren't even standees, therefore, packed in F passengers want to get more comfortable. Once or twice I almost tried to jump over to a B/D from an F at 42nd b/c I couldn't take the cursing and arguing that was going on in my F.
Hopefully,you were only going to 34/6. If you were travelling further south on 6th Ave, it ain't worth it.
Right of course I was only going to 34th, for a Q out to Brighton {one of them}
If you think this is funny, go to 59th Street/Columbus Circle during the weekday morning rush. More than a hundred people transfer from a southbound B to the Sothbound D across the platform and vice versa. Yes, the D usually gets to depart the station to gain access to 53rd Street before the D, but I don't believe most commuters know that.
Meant before the B.
Currently, I'm there (Columbus Circle) 5 times on one day of the week; come next pick, I'll be there 3 days, 11 times. The commuting mentality never ceases to amaze me.
Maybe they still think the 'B' goes express down 6th Avenue and to Brooklyn like it did before July 22. Some people STILL haven't adjusted to these official changes, let alone the emergency ones put into place in September.
People still look utterly confused to see an R-32 train signed as on orange 'S' running local on 6th Avenue.
i love the idiots who rush off the northbound F at Broadway/Lafayette to catch an "express" across the platform. One day I'll follow one of these people to see the expression on their face when the train gets to Grand St.
What about the ones who hop off the downtown local at 14th Street onto the 3 waiting across the platform? Or to those who stand all day waiting for something to pull in on the uptown express track?
Yes, I did see these people. My favorite is watching lost tourists get off at Chambers St on the Nassau St. line, to x-fer to an "express" on the center tracks. LOL.
The other night I gave a customer the travel directions they wanted. They called me a liar and asked the nearby police officer who told them to see me. They replied that I gave them (customer )wrong info. The police officer then told them "They gave you the right uinformation". The customer then proceeded to call the officer a liar for agreeing with me and left the system.
They probably didn't hear what they wanted to hear.
Wait a second. They reported you to a cop because they though you gave them incorrect instructions? Morons ...
I know how you felt.
I'm training to be a T/O in Stockholm. This past Wednesday, I was operating an extra as part of my training, with an instructor beside me.
Being inexperienced, I forgot to flip the little wheels in my cab that light up the correct destination on the signs on the platform. (My train was going to Akalla, and should have lit up "11 Akalla" on the platform, but I was putting up "10 Hjulsta" instead.) The second stop northbound is the major interchange at T-Centralen.
I stop and open the doors, and having noted my error, I immediately step out of the cab and begin announcing that the train is going to Akalla.
Does anybody believe me? OF COURSE NOT! I'm standing there announcing "Train to Akalla, to Akalla, to Akalla..." over and over again on the loudspeakers, and the passengers are milling around on the platform, uncertain what to do. I hear comments like "But the sign says 'Hjulsta'!"
Geez, people, wouldn't you suppose that since I'm at the controls, I might have a tiny clue WHERE the fscking train is going?
Grrr.
(Otherwise, I'm having a lot of fun with my training!)
-- Tim Kynerd
At least they read the signs.
Good point. Hadn't thought of it that way. :-)
But not always. I've operated short turns on light rail trains here, correctly signed at both ends, and made several announcements before reaching the point at which the train goes out of service, and STILL had to chase people off the train at the last station.
(BTW, for the interested, I have a Web site with photos of Stockholm transit at http://www.kynerd.nu. What I have marked as "the line I work on" is the light rail line where I worked before starting my subway training.)
Regards,
Tim
Apparently, this is a world-wide phenomenon. On the weekends, i work on a short line and at the last stop i have to always ask people to get off the train. Most do with no problem, but there are always the stubborn ones who have to argue, scream, curse and threaten before complying.
Geez. At least Swedes are too repressed to scream and curse, unless there's a delay in service.
I operated my first regular turn on the subway yesterday (Thursday; it's Friday morning here) with a more experienced driver. What a blast!
-- Tim
Was it a C20? I hear those articulated cars are nice. They have a nice-looking exterior design. I sure would like to see a similar-looking car in service here in New York!
I was operating both C20 and older (called "Cx", can be of various types, the train I had yesterday had C8s at both ends) stock.
I think the C20 is terrific both to operate and to ride in, but then I have a history as a software consultant, so I'm not bothered by the fact that each car contains 99 separate computers.... ;-)
The C20 also has better acceleration and braking than our older stock. It is a tad difficult to stop them smoothly, which is something I'm still working on.
Regards,
Tim
To make the B more useful, much more useful, it can switch onto the local tracks before 34th Street. The 6th Avenue Shuttle and later the V (which would come from the 63rd St tunnel, not the 53rd as the TA is planning) can terminate at 34th. The B would continue on the local tracks to the Chrystie St connection then run across the Willy B to Metropolitan Avenue. This was something I saw on the CCS website (www.communityconsulting.org) in their report on transit improvements in Brooklyn and I think it's well worth considering.
Could work
Running an extended B over the Willy B and to Metropolitan is impractical. The Myrtle Ave spur really needs only 7 or 8 TPH during the rush hours for adequate service. This is inadequate for CPW and Concourse local ridership.
I wish they'd sever the damn Essex St/B'way Lafayette connection permanently so other people would stop coming up with plans to use this connection. It failed once, it'll fail again, and no proposed plan to use it would be completely satisfactory. If J/M riders want 6th Ave service, x-fer to the F at Essex.
A Diamond D and Circle D can be created for rush hour service.
What does changing the signs solve apart from confusing people more?
The 3 line being eliminated will enable the 2 to run express again
Why should the 2 run express. Local service is more important than express service. Trains should run local until there is enough service, then excess service should run express.
The crowds at the local stations clearly demonstrate that the 1 alone is not enough. I guess you never rode the 1/9 before September 11.
I could care less about the B,but if the 3 goes then what's going to serve 148 and 145 street?
Last Tuesday evening, got on R train at Court Street for 5 stop trip to 9th Street....When we got to DeKalb, I thought I heard an announcement the train would be making only express stops to 36th Street but was not sure...got to Pacific Street still on local track but then I heard the conductor say the next stop would be 36th Street.
Now I don't understand why they would send a train on the local track and skip several statins which obviously some passengers wanted. I hard to wait about 6 more minutes for the next R train to arrive.
This makes no sense if they are sending the train on the local track anyway. Why would they suddenly do this and disenfranchise the passengers who wanted the stops they suddently decided to skip? And for what, to save 2 minutes.......
No sense at all....
Jaguar,
Reason why they skip those stations sometimes is that the timetable has already been sooo severely disrupted that they have to sacrifice several train's local "orders", despite being on the local track---and they, actually have no choice, see...there's no crossover south of 36th street that's going to switch to 4th Avenue local before 45th Street--the nearest crossover that late in the game per se, would be the one that switches the express track (I think B4) to B2 (S/B Local---aka "R") PAST 59th Street. Hope this answers (some of) your questions.
Stuart, RLine86Man
While there is no crossover that will allow a train on the express to crossover south of 36th, there is one just to the north of 36th. They could of had it run on the express track and send it back to the local just before 36th street.
Why bother.
Everytime extra switches are thrown during rush hour there are more chances for stupid things to happen.
When you are running express on the local, the road ahead is clear, if you swich tracks you may start plugging another line.
It's F4 and F2. Tracks B4 and B2 end at DeKalb Avenue.
They pull that stunt on the 1 almost every rush hour (or at least they did when the 2 ran express), and the 1 local stops have many more riders than the R local stops.
The only reason that I could see them doing this to an R is because the schedule has been so severly messed up that it needs to catch up. They do this with the N on occasion because there might be a W on the express just coming in from the bridge. Instead of making the N wait for the express track to clear, they just make it go express on the local track.
The Brighton lcl almost once a day runs exp from Prospect Park to Kings Hwy or Kings Hwy to Sheepshed Bay, or occasionally both to catch up. No GOs.
A similar experience was felt on the Flushing line from Times Square to Queensboro Plaza.
In the first-half hour of 10 o'clock in the morning on a Sunday many weeks ago, my mom, brother, and I boarded a R33 single to get to 40 St. Thinking this train would do the usual, I slumped on the bench-seating inside the train.
The next thing I know, the conductor comes on the P/A and says that we will be skipping Vernon-Jackson Avs., Hunters Pt. Av., and 45 Rd. - Courthouse Sq.
Ooh, boy, that stretch from Grand Central to Queensboro Plaza was probably the longest one I've ever experienced on the 7. (I don't get to ride the 7 that much)
Of course, the motorman honked his horn (it sounds just like the R46 horn, I've noticed that some trains have a jumbled up sounding horn)
around 6 times in increments of 3 each station it passed.
The passengers on these three platforms were standing there wondering what our train was doing.
But after Queensboro Plaza, everything was back to normal local weekend service to Main St.
I might guess this happened because of "Timetable Discrepancy", because that's what everybody here is talking about.
1) How often might this happen on the 7?
Answers and responses would be greatly appreciated.
: )
Railfan Pete
I was on a 7 that did that last week. Some lady really flipped her wig yelling at the T/O from outside the front of the train at QP - saying there was no announcement... which there was... funny thing is the 5 minutes she spent standing there venting woulda been muuuuch better spent just walking down the stairs and catchig the next train... she'd probably have lost 4-5 minutes instead of the 10 whining and riding back...
guess she was in a rush...
...right.....
"it sounds just like the R46 horn"
Why shouldn't it sound like an R-46 horn. Both are Wabco pneuphonic horns.
I just mentioned that some are jumbled up, but that may be rare.
Also:
I've been noticing that some NJ TRANSIT Arrow EMU's have been losing their "tone" of their horns. Some of them are too low-pitched, and sound like a foghorn, some are too high-pitched, and some sound just like a regular Arrow III horn.
Any reasons for this defect?
Railfan Pete.
I've noticed that the R-46, R-68, and R-68A cars have basically the same kind of horn, but the Slanty R-40's have a much higher-pitched horn. What kinds of horns do those four car types have?
- Lyle Goldman
They all use the same WABCO horn. The only differences in sound perceptions are the result of different mounting positions. Speaking of which, those who complained about the horns on the LIRR DE & DM30s would love the horns on the Acela. I got off the train at Hunters Point and an Acela passed under the overpass entering Line #2. The horn is the loudest I've heard yet on any loco.
You got that right, TD. The other day I was visiting friends in Attleboro, MA, about a half-mile from the main line. We were inside with the windows closed. An Acela Express blew one blast as it passed through Attleboro station, and it sounded like it was right outside the house.
Redbirds have whistles; the R46 have air horns. Are you sure they are the same? They've never even sounded remotely the same to me.
Listen to Train Dude. He knows the kinks. If he says both are WABCO horns, then they are WABCO horns. He's a full time worker of NYCT and he knows everything about subway cars.
I've listened to an R36 horn. It sounds just like an R46 horn. You may have heard it differently because not all trains have the exact "mounting positions", as TD has mentioned in his other post within this thread.
: )
Railfan Pete.
Pete, I, too, am a full-time worker for NYCT. I actually operate the trains that TrainDude is in charge of. While I know TD knows more about them than I do, he has been known to occasionally make a mistake (much like all the rest of us, myself included). He has also many times mentioned that his knowledge of the IRt is less than complete; hence my question. When I sound the horn on an R46, it sounds nothing like the whistle of a redbird.
IIRC the horns on the Redbirds sound an octave higher than those on the R-46s.
When I sound the horn on an R46, it sounds nothing like the whistle of a redbird.
I'm not saying every Redbird has a horn that sounds like a R46.
The Redbird (R36) that I was on many months ago to Main St. that made the express run sounded identical to the one on the R46.
Trust me. I've heard them both.
One R46 E train at 34 ST. Penn Sta., and the Redbird.
Railfan Pete.
I rode on a couple of 7s making battery runs during my visit two weeks ago. The first was on Monday, the same day I flew in. I was out at Flushing Meadow Park taking pictures, mostly of the old NY State Pavilion and towers from the World's Fair, and the train I caught for Manhattan skipped 111th and 104th Sts. No announcements were made. Then on Thursday the 25th, while railfanning with Wayne et al, we got a Flushing-bound train at 74th St. which stopped only at Junction Blvd and Main St. This time, the C/R repeated the announcement several times. There had been police activity on the 7 and they were trying to restore some semblance of normalcy. It took some doing just to get to 74th St; at Times Square we found out the 7 was out, so we took the shuttle to GCT, only to find the 7 was still out. So we took a 6 to 51st and changed to the E, letting a crush-loaded train pass first. Luckily, we ran express to Roosevelt Ave. Once we got to 74th St., we must have waited a good 15 minutes for a train while expresses kept going by. We were supposed to meet Thurston and Lou from Brooklyn at Main St. at 3:15, and we were a half hour late. They were still waiting for us when we got there.
The other day I was on a 7 express on the local which was at some point passed by the 7 express on the express. This made no sense since the train was ordered to do this before departing Queensboro Plaza: It could have used the express track and saved me the hassle of overshooting my stop (she didn't make the announcement until after closing the rear section; When boarding a train on the local track at Woodside you expect it to run local).
That is bad operation. I don't move until the C/R reopens and makes the announcement or tell Control I will make one more local and make the announcement if I am already moving when they tell me to skip.
And I appreciate this sort of thoughtfulness.
> tell Control I will make one more local
Can you do that?
- Lyle Goldman
Yes and no. I was terrified of control until I realized they are idiots. There is one guy on the midnights that is OK and a woman on the AMs, the rest are morons. They give permission to key home signals and don't even check with the tower (incorrect and DANGEROUS).
They tend to be too conservative no battreies even if you are 30 min late on the midnights or reckless like the other example.
Remember they can't 'see' me, at least not yet on the IND/BMT so they don't know where I am when they tell me that. They don't want people complaining. I don't say well I want to make more local stops I actaully say I was on the move when I heard that I need to make another local to let people get off so no one complains. That so no one complains part really helps. One C/R refused to reopen and after a minute I gave up but he too was a moron. They movd the board so he refused to open (OK he is probational too) but he did it at the same stop every trip even after the other C/R's told him it was down for repairs. Every trip I had to call the tower for a person to tell him to open. The fact that he could see me at the other end of the station menat nothing to him EVERY DAMN TRIP. The first time my radio hada bad battery and the IC did not work, I was begging him on the PA to open as people were banging on my door.
Heh. I enjoyed that one - what you've seen actually isn't a new problem either - but at least you don't have to walk half the train back to the middle to tell the guy that you did INDEED hit your mark and nobody's going to step off into a hole. We had radios, but they only seemed to work out in broad daylight. As soon as you got deep into the tunnel, the troublesome stations were always in the dead spots. Thanks for the chuckle - some things never change. :)
It was humiliating and beaks one of my rules. The only thing worth begging for is sex.
Hahahaha ... I tell ya, I enjoyed your other comments on WHY things are down under ... one of the reasons for my continuing flippance here is having done it and wondering (much like Train dude) why there aren't more internships at the MTA ... it'd cure a LOT of "here's what I'd run" completely ignorant of what it does to charge up and do it. Heh.
And when I've read over the past couple of years such things as "salute the wood" and so on coming out of the adminiswigs, it just has me rolling on the floor and damned grateful I no longer possess a cutting key or my church key. I'm a peaceful soul, but from what I'd read, I'd carry a sidearm these days, ready to USE it. :)
Back in the very early 70's, running the road was a chore and all sorts of new toys were coming onto the railroad where some of us lived without dynamic braking, had to open the doors by climbing out the car, had to start breaking BEFORE entering the station and were allowed to "wrap it" as long as the tracks were straight in front of us and yellow balls meant something was about to go wrong up ahead.
In my day, it was green over green all the way (and we had MUCH more TPH than now, and you wouldn't see a yellow until you hit the timers north of Prospect (well yeah, outer markers for stations but they cleared LONG before you got to them) and the only timers to speak of on Brighton north to da Bronx was the Prospect Park area, the bridge, W4th, coming into 59th, 103rd and into Tremont. Others on the downgrades going back ... you just wrapped it and went.
You stopped on your mark and the conductor actually KNEW where the proper place on each platform was and didn't have to look for the jailbars. They *KNEW* their spot ... yipe.
All I can say is glad I ain't with the show now. :)
The old timers say that back in the 70's there were NO conductor's boards on the L. That must've been interesting.
Vandalism was in its prime in those days ... conductors would spot "Greek 167" splashed on the pole at 42nd, or the Adams gumball machine at 7th Ave or "gasp! there's the bottom of the STAIRWAY!" ... conductors KNEW where the 10 car marker was hit and what should be in their face if the jailbars weren't ...
I mean, c'mon ... visitors and fomares may not know where your stop was as a conductor, but after how many trips in both directions, per day, per week? Newbies would be screwed if the jailbars were missing, but if they paid attention to their trainer, they picked it up quick and didn't drop geese into the trash compactor. :)
Yeah, you'd figure after a while you'd start recognizing certain features at certain stations that would tell you it's OK to open up.
Ah, the good old days....
ARGH.
That is the other thing 40 TPH. You tell these yutzes that it no longer works like that and you get 'The system was designed for it', 'look at the leaving end signals'. The fact that you are conga lined at 27 TPH means nothing or that you can't key automatics at will anymore.
I remember two trains in the station all the time. Now you need a complete lineup in.
The wood is good! I had a total break failure the C/R opened up on an overrun. He was a senior man on a pick job.
Wowsers ... jailbars were the rule a long time ago - I guess actually being out between cars had its advantages. I'm also guessing there's no "Beulah the buzzer" for an overrun these days either? buzz-buzz-buzz wasn't just a drug induced stupor. :)
And yeah, it was a brake failure that got me at CIY ... "you broke it, you bought it." I shake my head in disbelief ... it's not like you don't get to know your route pretty quickly, even as a monkey in the middle.
It's kind of difficult as I am on probation and at least one person here actually knows what I look like (not that I think they would bang me in). TSSes actually read this board so I am skimpy on certain details.
As it turned out, I pretty much did the right thing (I did not give all the details) it was the C/R that messed up. Supervision and fellow employees were there and said nothing, it was a station with a tower and I was so intent on stopping the train I noticed little else.
I have had problems and the C/Rs have covered so I just made sure no one got hurt and did something that covered for the C/R before we called it in.
Unfortunately the TSS in my school car did not give us the ways to get out of trouble, I sort of had to guess at them.
"Left to your own devices" isn't a new thing - back in the mass wave of retirements that caused conductors who were on the road for a few weeks to turn up in motor instructor land times, we also got the "sheet through the goose" method of training and I'm convinced it too was motivated by the same "OK, genius" mentality you see today. They were in such a hurry to post us that training sure wasn't all it could be.
When I lost air on a layup, I didn't know that throwing the reverser and trying to pull all the power you could was an option - they told us that it would do a lot of damage and not to even try it. And yes, I overshot a couple of times myself the first week. Tremont southbound on the D was not a fun stop. Took several trips before I hit the mark just right.
And yeah, when you're trying to stop, DCO isn't immediately on your mind until the holy sheet moment. I DO understand. Amazingly, the job isn't as easy as it looks. Glad you guys are at least looking out for one another. :)
Now you overshoot you get retrained, you do it again you get canned.
But if you are late some TSSes will threaten to wrtie you up for improper operation (apparently they can't).
I think I only had DC1 which is my side, we opened on the other and I think I would have to be in the number 2 end for that to work. The D8 should work too but that might be in the number 2 end also. I was trying to save the stop because there was a homeball there, in retrospect I should have placed it in emergency with my handle, the deadman did not work either and emergency was slow and so was the cord. The more I think about this the luckier I should consider myself. At a terminal I would have been dead.
Yep you can go into reverse but you have to flip the CC before you take power the other way or so they say (that really makes no sense). I did ask about that exact situation in schoolcar but I think that is one you have to practice (or grow a third hand) and I have a death grip on the deadman.
Heh. One advantage of the prewar cars is they were nice and SIMPLE. DCO disabled both sides and you had it on both ends (since you could light either cab in those cars) ... not all breakers were present on both ends though. The ones that MATTERED were. :)
But yeah, there was a hell of a lag between dumping and actual grabbing. I'm sure that hasn't changed much either and with the cinderblock shoes they're using nowadays, I'll bet there's a whole lot LESS grab than there used to be.
The cord and other BIEs give a very smooth and slow stop.
Heh. Even THAT didn't happen fast enough and this is back in the days of cast iron "footwear" and not the blimpie breads they're using now. I can imagine geese don't go through the storm doors anymore with the composites down there now. Used to be fun seeing how far we could toss the foamer ahead of the train on a dump while rolling. :)
I hear the R-10s were the ultimate power brakers.
I hear the R-10s were the ultimate power brakers.
The maximum stopping distance spec for the R1-9's was 250 feet; the spec for the R10's was 275 feet - a 10% degradation.
The ultimate power braker title would have to go to the Bluebirds and their track brakes. Conventional emergency braking rate is in the 3-4 mph/sec range. The Blubirds emergency braking rate was 7 mph/sec. That would place its maximum stopping distance in the 125 foot range.
The closest I came to experiencing such braking came while riding a PCC on Boston's Highland Branch. Some golfer decided to play through at Woburn and the driver hit the emergency brake while travelling at close to maximum attainable speed. I was standing near the rear door and was thrown to the front of the car. I still remember that incident after nearly 40 years.
That would have been Waban on the Highland Branch. Woburn is northwest of Boston, on the Lowell commuter rail line, and home to the new Anderson Regional Transportation Center.
Yes, it was Waban. Thanks for the correction.
I stand corrected.
SMEE had its benefits ... dump one of those, and they'd be picking you out of the bulkhead. Heh. Never ran an R-10, rode in plenty of them though. They WERE able to stop. :)
Yeah, especially when a southbound A train would come screaming into 42nd St. after that runaway downhill dash from 59th St. They stopped on a dime every time. Never saw one overshoot the platform.
It HAS happened ... but the trick southbound on the dash is you got your yellows like clockwork just south of 72 and if you didn't let off and give her some air, there was a TOWER at 59th that wanted to have you breathe in their faces. And it was at the NORTH end of the other platform. You just didn't go there. :)
And though I didn't work 8th Ave, rode it all the time - GT's were waiting on your bones there too into 42 ... at rush with the E's cutting in, it got ridiculous too. That was the slowest part of the railroad back before the REST of the system came down to that speed.
I still remember that prewar A train I caught once at 59th. Southbound, not northbound (bummer). When it started up, I was serenaded by a heavenly harmonious double gear moan a major third apart. Once the train reached the point where the crash wall between the express tracks started, the bull and pinion gears reverted to the familiar one-pitch whine, singing out a resounding F# below middle C and rapidly rising. I don't remember how high the gears got up to on the downhill sprint; chances are the train was coasting. It stopped on a dime at 42nd, and I got off very, very reluctantly. That was one of the very few prewar A trains I ever rode on.
P. S. I got an R-7/9 LL train once whose bull and pinion gears sounded the same way - two pitches a third apart. I also noticed that phenomenon on the District Line in London.
They'd still groan in coast - just a little less forceful. The LoV's had that kinda sound to them as well. I remember when the redbirds and the 32's first started showing up and the "whirr" was unnatural. :)
I had a little tete-a-tete myself the other day, but I just missed overrunning.
I came into ENY southbound on the A and took some brake..........and got NOTHING! So I put it to coast hoping to reset whatever was wrong then put it in full service. Oh gee look, I actually got 40 lbs. I put the cab out, but the first doorpanel somehow stayed in. Considering that my train was packed, you could have imagined what I would have had to go through if I had sailed out.
Called Control, picked up a TSS at Euclid, he took a full service brake and got 30 lbs., immediately taken out of service at Grant Av. Considering the headways of Far Rockaway service, the geese weren't pleased. Told 'em the brakes worked as often as a wino, they still didn't wanna hear it.
I hope it was not 4107 in the consist.
No, it was a R44......car 5414.
CIYD GOH! Figures.
The one good thing about the CI GOH R44's is that they have very very quick closing doors.
No need to pay a dentist for an extraction, just get in the way of the doors on these. Of course you may lose more than you'd planned.
At least it was not Utica. From, my expreiences it seems like Uitca on the A is a "fast" station. Whether on the R44 or R38, the T/O brakes WAAAYYYY before they come into the station.
Was it an R44? I assume it was. Between the size of the cabs vs. the size of me and the lousy unpredictable brakes of the R44, I will never work the A line until those cranky cars are retired. It is unfortunate. There are lots of great paying jobs over there for me with not that much cab time.
>>>>>Was it an R44?
Of course it was.
>>>>>>It's kind of difficult as I am on probation and at least one person here actually knows what I look like (not that I think they would bang me in).
Oh c'mon. I would never bang you in.................if you greased my palm. Dolla dolla bill ya'll.
You are asking for a poison tamale. I only hesitate becasue that little old lady is so sweet, I'd hate to think of her in the big house for your murder.
A poison tamale? What is that, one that's loaded with ex-lax?
That day with the tamales, the guys in the Q room acted like even looking at tamales would give them the runs.
I think the regualr ones have exlax.
Nothing personal I have to poison you so no one learns I am really .....(Batman, Moon Knight, the Red Skull, Elvis, ...)
Well when you're switching, you can take a chance with the tamales. If I was on the road, I'd have to take a pass on 'em myself.
And don't worry, your Elvis secret is safe with me.
You are asking for a poison tamale. I only hesitate becasue that little old lady is so sweet, I'd hate to think of her in the big house for your murder.
Doesn't the T/O have access to doors as well?
Yes, but the C/R has to De-Zone first. Plus, if it's a half-width cab, he can only open the doors on the right side.
There is a poor calibre of dispatcher in the control center because it is so crazy to work down there, most of them are very snooty on the radio or don't have a clue as to what is going on. They can't make it as a train operator or terminal dispatcher, so they go downtown. The good guys on the road are too smart to go down there! These guys would never make it as air traffic controllers....Then again, and maybe I'm grumpy after 22 years, there is a poor calibre of dispatchers period. These new guys are absolutely clueless. And they lie as to the on time performance and screw the men out of their pay just to have an on time railroad. Case in point: last nite on my last trip, there was hand throw switch trouble entering the yard, and I had to hold one station away. He clocked us in 5 minutes late. That was b.s. since I was still at the previous station at the time he said I arrived at the terminal. My conductor and I balked, but he was pretty cool, he completely ignored us and put his head back into the sheets. Sure we could have put in the time we said we arrived, but he would have then denied the claim. Now I have to do the hassle of making out the wage shortage claim, fast forward to perhaps going downtown on my own time for a grievance hearing. The dispatcher is the judge and the jury. The TA will believe him and not us as to the arrival time.
Yes, I was told that you are not allowed to go out more than 10 minutes late that technically it is an ABD, it happens all the time on the MID. Now as a crew you don't get a break becasue you go out as an extra but as a newbie it sucks to get questioned by every tower (before they lie anyway) and yelled at by TSSes. I picked up an F job and went out 15 late and with flagging it became 20. EVERYONE stopped to pester me and no one passed it on I was official out 3 mins late. Fianlly I told W4 that if they did not pass it on and Jay stopped me I would dump the train.
You are late and lose 1 more minute at each tower explaining yourself.
I am tempted to call control more often but am nervous the TD will find a way to screw me back. There is no way I will operate for 5 hrs straight like I have in the past with no break unless there is an emergency.
With fewer towers out there today, one would think that info. regarding the status of the intervals would be passed from tower to tower more efficiently but it is not. Being asked for call letters and where did you lose your time are all too frequent questions. And of course it is completely uncalled for. Now when you reach your destination, your dispatcher is pissed, not at you personally, but out of frustration of your lateness. He does not want to show a late train and now you get screwed out of your recovery time, no lunch or late clear. Then the TA brags about how great the on time performance is! Ya gotta love it!
I think you witnessed an example of how TA operations fudges statistics without improving service. The "lateness" statistic is based on the time that the R reaches the 95th St terminal. If it's more than 6 minutes behind its scheduled arrival it is late, if it is within 6 minutes it is considered "on time". They could make up a couple of minutes to bring it home 5 minutes late and be "on time".
This manoeuvre is normally practiced at the beginning of a run when most passengers are bording not at its end when most passengers are departing. It is designed to equalize loading and thus reduce dwell time. Dwell times for both the leader and following trains are reduced.
This manoeuvre does not work for departing passengers at the end of a run. Dwell time for the following train is increased without any dwell time decrease for the leader.
I don't know about that it depends on the line and the time. The F goes express after Church and the N at 36st.
Last week I had an N job and was held 18 minutes due to single tracking at Queensboro and my follower is a fast operator. I did not get to skip stops until 36st. and only because at that point they realized they needed the train at CI.
You also forget that they just flat out lie about what time the train arrives.
Last week I had an N job and was held 18 minutes due to single tracking at Queensboro and my follower is a fast operator. I did not get to skip stops until 36st. and only because at that point they realized they needed the train at CI.
I'm assuming that they were running a single track in the 60th St tunnel, from what you've said. There is no way such single track operation should result in an 18 minute delay. That's enough time to make the run between Lex and the 60th St portal 3 times over. A 6 minute delay is the max I'd expect. Also, I also assume this was not scheduled during the PM rush hour as the was the case for the reported incident.
That being said, if your train was 18 minutes late by the time it reached Lex, then dispatcher should have known there would be a problem for at least 40 minutes (travel time between Lex and 36th St). He should have had many options for filling the gap at CI, rather than adding to the already 18 minute delay for passengers who boarded your train and expected to exit at one of the bypassed stations in Brooklyn.
You also forget that they just flat out lie about what time the train arrives.
All the more reason for placing automatic data recorders on trains and at stations.
>I'm assuming that they were running a single track in the 60th St >tunnel, from what you've said. There is no way such single track >operation should result in an 18 minute delay.
Work train, too. 18 minutes.
The running time from Queensboro Plaza to Stillwell is 72 minutes. The dispatcher had that much warning that there would be an 18 minute gap in 72 minutes. He chose to ignore the situation for 40 of those minutes (until the train had reached 36th St) and provide a solution which inconvenienced passengers who were already on board your train.
Whether this delay was caused by single track operation or a work train is immaterial. BTW, why would it be necessary to operate the work train in the running tunnel, when the other tube was closed to normal traffic?
Because when a tube or track is closed for a G.O., only work trains that are assigned to do work on that track/tube can access it. Otherwise, they have to follow the G.O. like the road trains do.
If the work train that caused the delay happened to be assigned to that closed tube, then it is likely that the train was unable to operate through the entire tube due to scaffolding on the roadway or a similar obstruction. The TA isn't gonna purposely hold a road train for 18 minutes, there's got to be a reason for such a lengthy delay.
"manoeuvre"? Are you turning into Jersey Mike now? (:-)
- Lyle Goldman
Any train that bypasses stops it was supposedc to make is considered an 'en-route ABD' and can no longer be considered late (or on time or early). Bypassing stations is done solely to put the train physically back where it belongs - halfway between its leader and follower.
It also depends if it is an official thing or not. The TD has sent me express without controls knowledge at least once or twice. A SA banged it in at a customers request. The regular c/r booked off but the crew office said nothing and they thought they were covering for a senior man. We went out 20 late on the J. The nly C/R they could get was one of those guys who swore never to work with off the street people.
And another story I can't put onto paper
The more I think about, I am one lucky SOB. I get into situations at least once a week it's just that someone else would look worse and set the ball rolling and they never pursue it.
Any train that bypasses stops it was supposedc to make is considered an 'en-route ABD' and can no longer be considered late (or on time or early).
Let's see if I've got this right? Suppose half the trains would be late. The dispatcher sends these trains express for a few stops, resulting in these trains arriving at their terminals a few minutes earlier but not being included in the "on time" statistics. His record now shows that 100% of the trains arrived on time.
Bypassing stations is done solely to put the train physically back where it belongs - halfway between its leader and follower.
The mission for running the subway is to carry passengers from one station to another. Removing passengers from an already full train in order to bypass their normal departure stations does not further this mission.
Yes.
Lets go back to my problem being 18 minutes late.
My follower was likely running warm as I had all his passengers his train was basically empty and I was missing connections with the other trains I should have met. Plus I had a double load of passengers still a light load Vs. Rush but lots of mad people to hold up the C/R with bitching and moaning. Now my train is also supposed to go out and as it was around 5ish the headways were clsoing up, my train was needed to leave CI. By not giving me the run uptown service would have been screwed up too because they needed my train. Now this would have only gotten worse as the day came on and there were larger numbers of riders. There really was a train right behind so making part of one trainload wait 2 mins Vs. clogging the system is not a real choice.
One train does not matter the system does. It is mass transit
Lets go back to my problem being 18 minutes late.
Your train was 18 minutes late arriving at Lex. The combined N/R headway was 5 minutes. There should have been 3 trains stacked up behind you and a gap of 3 missing trains ahead of you. This means that there were probably 3-4 times the normal number of passengers waiting at each station.
The time to have taken action was when your train arrived at 57th St (Manhattan) because it is an express stop and has resident supervisory personnel. You and your immediate follower should have taken 1/3 of the stations. You would have started at Canal and your follower at Herald Sq. This would have given all the local trains near normal loads going into Brooklyn and be fairly close to a normal headways.
Instead, nothing was done for 40 minutes. Your train was permitted to load up with 3 times the normal number of passengers. It was already past its maximum load, when the train arrived at Pacific. Operations then decided to further inconvenience more passengers (making some 20+ minutes late) by forcing them off the train to take the follower.
Now my train is also supposed to go out and as it was around 5ish the headways were clsoing up, my train was needed to leave CI. By not giving me the run uptown service would have been screwed up too because they needed my train. Now this would have only gotten worse as the day came on and there were larger numbers of riders.
The dispatchers had a 20 minute window of opportunity to act - when your train was between Queensboro Plaza and 57th St. They blew it. I assume not having sufficient trains to make the uptown run out of CI would have raised some alarms. They decided on a grand, meaningless gesture to show they were "on top" of the situation.
MIDNIGHTS, MIDNIGHTS, MIDNIGHTS
There were no R trains, we were on 20 minute headways.
I would have gone 59th, 42nd, 34th, 14th, and Canal. I still would have been late but it would not have been so ridiculous.
Thank's for the clarification. It's cleared up the confusion on my part as to why they might run a single track operation during the day.
It also means that other options were available. One of them would have been to run your train as an express over the Manhattan Bridge from 57th St. That would have put you back on schedule and permitted most of the passengers already on board to exit at their intended stations. Moreover, if the dispatcher were at the top of his form, he would have sent out the Q before your arrived at 57th as a local via the tunnel to take care of the passengers entering stations in Manhattan.
Again the time for action was prior to your train's arrival at 57th St, not 40 minutes later.
>>>>>>>>>>The dispatcher sends these trains express for a few stops, resulting in these trains arriving at their terminals a few minutes earlier but not being included in the "on time" statistics. His record now shows that 100% of the trains arrived on time.
Technically that would be correct. But the amount of ABD's (abandoned runs) would be grossly high. A line superintendent would much rather have a bunch of late trains over a bunch of ABD's. It's gotta do with his bonus $$$.
I'd bet that unless control is involved (AND THEY ARE NOT ON MOST MIDNIGHTS) it is not recorded as an ABD.
As I was told by a TD, everyone is ontime on the midnights.
Yeah, I'd bet you're right. Of course this situation normally happens during the day.
It's gotta do with his bonus $$$.
I have no problem with incentive pay. The problem is to devise a metric that also benefits the customer.
does anyone remember the font type used in the NYC subways signs?
I like it because it´s very clear to read it.
thanks!
helvetica, though some letters are a bit custom it seems - like the "R".
Helvetica or Helvetica Neue, with variations
The NEWEST signs are Arial. I'm no kidding. Don't correct me. Look at the R on your computer. Then head to DeKalb Avenue's fare control and it's the same R. And the 2, head on a NEW train and look at the number next to the door.
What about the "font" used for the wall tile from the days of the building of the IND--and the individual letter tiles used to distinguish the direction of exits within the IND stations?
Has anyone ever seen those particular font styles transferred to Windows fonts before?
i recall that more or less the same question was posed sometime ago on this site, perhaps as far back as August 2000. I also recall that some bright spark provided a very thorough and definitive answer. Perhaps you could search the archives?
I've been noticing from my past experiences at railfanning at Metuchen station (my home train station), during the PM rush I would notice something odd.
After the 6:10p train arrives [100% of the time this train consists of 6 Comet cars (III or IV) & the loco. would be pushing] and serves passengers and departs for New York, I would see a 12-car pair of Arrow III EMU's skipping past this station around 6:15p.
Sometimes this train would "suck" the station in or it might slow down, or even sometimes if the Traffic Controllers permit it runs on the express track #2.
Strangely enough, this train is not listed an any full timetable of NJ TRANSIT services.
Can anyone please tell me:
1) What is this train's purpose? and
2) How come this train is not in any timetable? Is it a special train?
Answers and responses will be greatly appreciated.
: )
Railfan Pete.
Most likely deadheading back to New York or the yard. Deadhead trains are not on the schedule because its not a passenger train.
I know THEY, are not on the schedule, but I was probably guessing a shadow of what your answer was. Thanks for the clarification.
More details from experts would be greatly appreciated.
: )
Railfan Pete.
I remember when I was in second grade when an article (including a PHOTO on the paper) in the Star Ledger reported of a NJT accident involving two locomotive hauled trains.
I know this for sure because I still have a shadow of the picture still in my head. It was maybe a Comet 2A or some other car which has a thin black line, but no center door.
The accident happened in an area where one track switch involving one track splits the track into two tracks. (Anyone know what this type of switch or track is called?)
Each was headed in opposite directions (I don't remember any details, where it happened, or most anything), and the first train to switch and head on to the opposite track was passing the switch.
Then headlong, comes another train towards the "switching" train, and since the other train couldn't stop quickly enough, that train impacted a couple of cars on the "switching train".
(Sorry for the weird names but without details, my writing is disfigured)
I don't remember how many people were injured and such, but if ANYONE recalls this incident please let me know with MORE DETAILS.
: )
Answers and responses would be greatly appreciated.
Railfan Pete.
That was the Feb. 9, 1996 crash. The Cab Car was destroyed and the locomotive rebuilt by Conrail. This prompted the Comet IV order.
Thank you for the info. By the way, what does your handle "NJSTA" stand for?
Railfan Pete.
The two trains were the Main Line (outbound) and the Bergen County Line (inbound). Both engineers were killed and one passenger in the cab car of the Bergen County line was killed. For weeks afterward passengers on the two lines avoided the cab cars like the plague (and some trains ran with engines on both ends since 2 cab cars were taken out of service, one permanently). It was then determined that all the Comet / Shoreliner cab cars on NJT and Metro-North didn't provide adequate protection for engineers, prompting the redesign for the Comet IV / Shoreliner III.
I have the Daily News article. It was the first major accident in NJT history. The MAS for the interlocking at Secaucus was reduced because of it.
Thank you for the extended info. Did the incident occur on the tracks which met after Glen Rock station?
The Comet that was wrecked was #5145. It happened in Secaucus, there were several fatalities.
wayne
It was 5146. 5145 is still active, I think it may have been rebuilt already.
Are you referring to a gauntlet track or a facing point crossover. I know there was an accident on the NEC around Bergen interlocking where an NJT train was taking the curve too fast and it tilted over into the oncomming track and clipped another train.
Are you referring to a gauntlet track or a facing point crossover.
I don't think it's a crossover, since one track divides into two tracks, with one switch accomodating it. Picture the Eiffel Tower, except the beams will be one beam.
I know there was an accident on the NEC around Bergen interlocking where an NJT train was taking the curve too fast and it tilted over into the oncomming track and clipped another train.
Where and when did this happen? I am interested in knowing.
: |
Railfan Pete.
The big curve into the North River Tubes.
North River? I'll take it as the 2 tracks which are sharply banked near the Hudson River tubes. These tracks have a restriction of 50-60mph.
If the train goes slow enough, you can feel the tilt.
Railfan Pete.
MTA has indicated that full-time service through the 63rd St Connector should commence before the end of 2001. The current emergency has not prompted any fundamental change in schedule or intentions. Look to see the rerouted F, and the new "V" train by December...
Ron,
12/10/01 is the scheduled start date for the V and F via 63rd
NYCT President Larry Reuter has re-affirmed NYCT policy to all employees that prohiits the sale of NYCT books, manuals and other collectibles on E-Bay and other internet sites. I presume that lots less 'stuff' will be around for the collector.
Maybe less stuff on the net. If I understand your post correctly the directive only applies to internet sales? If so maybe the old avenues will still carry such items?
Alan Glick
That is to NYCT employees. What about to non-employees?
They can't hold us to their directives.
I think the problem occured when things like vests, flashlights, hardhats etc were starting to appear on ebay. There was even a TA radio that was offered (but that was stopped since the item was stolen).
I don't think this will stop items in private hands from being bought and sold on ebay.
Not enforceable. How does one knows the seller is a NYCT employee?
Doesn't say you can't buy. Says TA employees can't sell, presumably upon pain of discipline or dismissal.
Does this apply to historical "stuff" - that is rollsigns, controller handles, etc from BMT Standards and the like?
Transit needs to make up a big 'yard sale' project. Where I stash my plastic cartons to sit/stand on there is tons of old neat stuff that I wouldn't put a finger on. Anyone for a 'Master Controller?' Peter
"Transit needs to make up a big 'yard sale' project"
They used to !! There were two successful "tag sales" held at the Transit Museum in Brooklyn some years ago. They had all sorts of neat stuff at good prices. They were selling original R-42 side rolls signs
for $5 each. You know one of those "cluster" lights with the round cover seen near switches etc, the one with five light bulbs ?, I bought one for a friend for $1, new in a box. The enamel lid had a dent on it. I rewired it for A.C. and he had it installed on his porch !
There were two of these "tag sales" that a long line around the block waiting for the museum to open. My friend even bought a like new side roll curtain sign for the R-11, BMT destinations !! On both tag sale events, they had auctions of some juicy stuff in the R-42 theatre. Rare porcelain signs, fareboxes etc.
Thejn something happened, maybe the Transit Museum became upscale or got religion, and the tag sale was never revived. Those were the fun days.
Bill "Newkirk"
At the last Transit Museum Auction & Tag Sale, I bid for (and won) a day on the Track Geometry Car.
I had heard that it was a great deal of work to set up this kind of sale, and the money that came in, while in the black, wasn't enough to justify doing it again in the future. I'm pretty sure I was told this by a member of the TM staff a number of years ago - his first name was John (a real, real nice guy, too).
Maybe for the 100th birthday, we'll see it back.
I remember those long lines. I got to the museum early that day (no lines) and spent the entire day there.
--Mark
I hope to get to see the Transit Museum one day but right now, I'll have to settle on fixin those 'museum pieces' that still run remarkably well. 'Five light fixtures' are really neat if you can run a long extension cord off the third rail! Used one today. Peter
When you use the 5-in-series units, do you clamp electrodes directly to the third rail and a running rail, or do you get the 600 from a junction that feeds the rails? Or do you just do whatever's most convenient?
Mark
Always GROUND first!!! Then stick it on something hot like a third rail or a shoe shunt (non-moving train of course.) Actually, I clamped the 'shoe beam fuse' that links up the Redbirds DC motors and the arm of the knife switch (in the little red box) so I could run up the propulsion system without moving the train (the bulbs light up when you engage the controller.) On the juice, Peter.
I remember before they even had the tag sales in the late 70's early 80's, they were selling the old rollsigns, rollsign boxes, enamel signs etc.. in the little shop in the museum (as well as hotdogs).
I worked in Downtown Brooklyn then and remembered going there a lot at lunch time, seemed like it was always empty. The guy who used to work there would let me in without paying because I was going to the shop to buy things. Everything was really cheap there, and old enamel sign from the 40’s that said NO SPITTING, SMOKING etc.. was $2.00.
I later read in the newspaper that that guy was fired or something for selling that stuff. It was shortly after that, that they had the tag sale. I was amazed at the high prices that the stuff was going for after that.
Most of the roll signs were probably from the last of the R-1/9s. Cityana Gallery also had roll signs for sale during that time; I picked up my bulkhead route and destination mechanisms there. My sign box was acquired at Branford in 1980; however, it had Eastern Division signs. Luckily, they also had IND curtains available with and without mechanisms. I got what I needed and retrofitted the sign box with IND curtains, and for the past 21 years have displayed mostly A and D combinations, with the F getting occasional exposure. Currently, it's signed for the A to Far Rockaway.
If it's prohibiting employees from selling, well, Larry is going to be surprised to discover one of these days that the internet gives people anonymity.
If he's prohibiting all sales by anybody, well, there are loopholes around that too (I'll sell you this plain white napkin for $50. With every sale, I'll also throw in a free 1948 subway map..).
But hey, he's a politician, this is his job, so I can't complain too much.
I'm sure selling rollsigns, number plates, and other useless shit (in the TA's eyes) will not be affected, if it is then whoever makes the bust must have a rod shoved a bit too far up...
Useless junk in shops attics it may be but none of it is worth losing a really good job over...you might have a vest, flashlight, keys, gloves, oil, wipes, some odd tools or brushes...because they're needed to be TA handy or clean up the greasy stains...but if someone doesn't like you...there are rats. Peter
>>>>>>>>...but if someone doesn't like you...there are rats
What? The rats are TA property too?
What? You never saw the yellow paint on their feet? :)
And their vests?
The rats are the guys you work with trying to make themselves more valuable to TA by killing their brothers. The yellow paint is the mark of the Devil. And the vests??? Wanted an extra to stick on my dashboard and got one today after a maggot got flattened out. MTA gets you there...car inspectors assure your safety. Peter
Unlike SOME TWU brothers, el ratas matas have learned to EAT the damned vests instead of waiting for a 5 minute lunch break. After all, when you have beady little eyes that catch headlights, you don't need no damned dayglow hippie love jackets. :)
Could it be that the administrative types are afraid of some nutjob getting into restricted areas by masquerading as an employee? Railfans like us would not do that, but there are some out there who would do anything to make trouble - witness the clowns who showcased themselves on September 11th of this year. The realy serious among them will find a way to get what they want, and not just from E-bay.
All this points out is that vigilance is what is needed, and it comes with a price, sad to say.
The official party line is that all such material & manuals are actually the property of the NYCT. As such, employees and, for that matter, non-employees, have no right tosell TA property. In reality, keys and handles floating around pose a real and foreseeable danger. Similarly, technical manuals can give a motivated nut-job a little too much information.
'Keys and handles pose a forseeable danger.' Right, I'll hijack a R142 and drive it to Cuba. Damn brake handle weighs five pounds...just finished welding a bootleg in the basement that weighs six ounces. TrainDude, you and I are about the same age....remember 'skeleton keys?' Keys, reversers, portion wrenches and brake handles are easy to find or make. The safety of the system depends on us. Peter
True, and I would not be surprised if a really motivated clown found his way into a tower and started making havoc with the route switches.
Ther are just some folk who have nothing to do, and idle hands are the devils workshop.
Don't go overboard...anyone can dupe keys and wrenches. Idle hands got swami bendover in big trouble several weeks ago on 239th trk 69 in the end cab of an R142 right in front of all the Car Inspectors...and i missed the action before my eyes. If it's going to happen...it will...and we all must be vigilant...and we must be prepared...with 'Tough Guy' and blue wipes. Laugh TrainDude!!!! I swim amongst the sharks. Peter
Darius McC, a year or so ago, got into the tower at 57/7 and tripped an N train by "dropping" a home ball in front it.
Greetings, all... Glad to see SubTalk back up and running.
Some of you may be interested in an update of my car situation (read here for the background).
Last Tuesday evening I was driving inbound on the Northwest Tollway, and the engine seemed to be doing okay. (That said, over the prior few days I had noticed a slight loss of power and it been idling rougher than usual. It was still burning about a quart of oil per 100 miles.) I pull into the O'Hare toll plaza, just before the merge with the Kennedy Expressway, pay my toll, and speed up to merge back into traffic. The car goes into overdrive, and when it comes back down out of overdrive, I hear this rapid BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM from the engine. I get off at my exit, which wasn't far away, and manage to limp my way home. Huge amounts of smoke were coming from the tailpipe, and the engine was convulsing violently, even stalling out a couple times. I couple days later I got the car to a trusted mechanic and he confirmed that the piston rings had a meltdown. Two of the car's four cylinders have no compression whatsoever.
It's going to be at least 2-3 months before I can afford to replace the engine, so I had to scramble to find a set of wheels so that I could hold onto my job, which requires a car. My friend Eric has a 1972 Buick Skylark which he graciously let me borrow for a few days in return for an oil change. Meanwhile, I began to search the listings for a $500 beater to drive around until the Saturn gets fixed.
I found my beater in the form of a silver 1986 Pontiac Trans Am out in Elgin, complete with T-tops and 5-speed stick. The body has some minor accident damage up front, the brakes need some work, and the engine is running a bit rich. But at least it runs well, which is more than I can say about the Saturn, and it's actually a very comfortable car as long as you're not attempting to sit in the back seats. As an added bonus, there's very little body rust. Also, it's a fun car to drive... Not bad for $455. I figured if I had to drive a beater for a couple months, I may as well drive something that's got some character. I'm thinking that, assuming this car doesn't have any major mechanical issues, I may even hold onto it after the Saturn is fixed, and make a project out of fixing it up. The Saturn is ideal for day-to-day commuting and running errands, but the Trans Am is perfect for a good drive out on the highway, like out to IRM or up to Wisconsin on warm summer weekends.
So... Anybody know anything about maintaining or fixing up old GM F-body cars? Now I just need to grow a mullet, dig out my old Journey CD's, and move to New Jersey!
As far as the Saturn goes, I'm hoping I can get a decent used engine installed for under $2000. Hopefully I'll be able to recover that from the dealer via small-claims court. I'm tempted to just ditch the car, but since I still owe a ton of money on it, I'm pretty much stuck with it. Right now it's parked on the street, but I have a friend who may be able to rent me some space in his garage to store it for a while.
That's all for now...
-- David
Chicago, IL
Buy a new Toyota, it will run for years and years. I didn't think there were any 1972 Skylarks left on the road. My first car was a 1969 Olds Cutlass-S. Those old GM cars devoured gasoline but were easy to maintain and fun to drive. A 1986 TransAm that is still running is amazing. The GM cars of the 1980s were awful. Good Luck!
Buy a new Toyota, it will run for years and years.
Easier said than done if you're drowning in debt and have a rotten credit history.
I agree that Toyotas are nice, though. My boss just bought a new Camry, and the way the car fits together is flawless. A good friend of mine has an older Camry with well over 150,000 miles on it, and it still runs perfectly.
How's that phrase go about hindsight being 20/20?
-- David
Chicago, IL
Buy a new Toyota, it will run for years and years.
I agree that Toyotas are nice, though. My boss just bought a new Camry, and the way the car fits together is flawless. A good friend of mine has an older Camry with well over 150,000 miles on it, and it still runs perfectly.
And yet Toyotas may be a bit overrated. My mother bought a new Corolla four years ago and has been disappointed with it ever since. It's underpowered (and she's definitely a non-gear head!), very cramped in the back seat, has only so-so handling, and almost worst of all, its windows fog up incessantly. And hers is not an isolated case. I've known of other people who've found Toyotas to be over-hyped. You have to pay a lot for a Toyota, and I really suspect they're not worth it.
that is true. toyota, honda, nissan are all hyped up cars. you pay an arm and 3 legs for a bland automobile with next to nothing all for the sake of "quality". because of their bland and overated reputation, the korean automobiles: Daewoo, Hyundai, and Kia are taking their sales away. Toyota and honda has lost some sales this quarter while Hyundai and Kia have picked up sales. since the koreans all you can eat at a low price concept with the 10 year warranty kicked in, plus improved quality, the japanese error looks like its heading for the grave. even the american autos are gaining back some of the ground they lost back in the 80's.
Our 1987 Camry is in perfect condition functionally and cosmetically. It's a great car. Maybe the next time you buy a car sometime in the future, think about getting a good used Toyota if a new one's out of reach financially. They're definately excellent cars.
-Robert King
as you have a perfect running 87 camry, my sis has 90 camry that is about to bite the dust. cuts out constantly. failing breaks, poor steering, and it only has 85 miles on it.
The GM cars of the 1980s were awful.
In 1993 I bought an '85 Olds Cutlass Ciera from a guy at work for $1000. It had an underpowered fuel injected 4 with 103k miles on it. I got rid of it in 1999 when the air conditioner blew in a very hot August and I was in a carpool, so I needed AC. The engine was in excellent condition with 230k miles on it, but the car wasn't worth the cost of AC repair. I put $1700 in repairs into the car over the 6 years. I guess I was lucky.
My replacement is a $3000 '91 Pontiac Grand Prix with 107k miles in August 1999, 160k now. Accelerates like a jackrabbit and gets 28 mpg (100 miles round trip to work). $950 in repairs so far. I like my shitty GM cars.
I'm stuck with an '87 Chevy Celbrity station wagon (Eurosport!) now, for the winter (bike's sleeping now). Talk about POS. Crap steering, no acceleration, the damm check engine light is popping on/off and the car drives the same crappy way it always did...The tranny (automatic), can't make up it's mind what gear to be in, and the dumb lockup solinoid died years ago...
I've driven 70's musclecars, and they're fun, and the power steering's great on them, but 80's GM cars? yuck! As far as Brand J goes, I despise the 4 cylinder compact automotive appliance, but my mom's got an Acura and loves it. *shrug*
I figure once I get hooked up with a job and get rolling, I'll pick up an old Nova (with a real engine, not a wimpy 350), and ditch the wagon. the wagon's *only* redeeming feature is it's a great hauler, and can offroad pretty well too...
years ago, my mother had an old's cutlass ciera pushrod 6. never gave a problem until after 5 frontal crashes, plus she never took good care of it, it malfunctioned. the engine was running well but, the computer went wacko and the modulater stopped working causing the car to cut out. then accident 6 happened when she pulled out on an intersection caused by truck that was blocking her view. she then put it in a so called "friends driveway until she could carner the money to fix the computer and the modulator, but the friend of the family decided to have the car junked because of her demeanor.
Don't know about that; my 1984 Buick Regal went for 16 years and logged a mere 143,000 miles.
wayne
My Jeep is now at 441,000 miles. The other day, I saw a beautiful '68 AMX with a 390. That's one car I fantasize about owning someday, with a 4-speed and the Go-Pack option. The only downer is that those were leaded premium gas engines; I'd have to have the heads redone for unleaded. I'ts nice to dream.
New engine? I guess it melted real bad!!! Ring jobs on 4 bangers aren't really that hard. Pop the head off, pull pistons, new rings, run the honer thing throughthe bores, pop the pistons back in, bolt it all together, drive it easy first 500 miles. I'm amazed you blew up a Saturn - my dad's has over 200k on it and still isn't falling apart.
As far as chasing the dealer over it, well, if there was a 90 day warranty on the powertrain, and you notified them well within that warerenty and they failed to fix it, they're kinda in a bad spot. You're in a bad spot, though, as it was an "as is" car. Of course, if you can prove it couldn't pass emissions at the time you bought it....
Lemon laws, I thought, applied to safety related defects, but they varyfrom state to state. Check with a lawyer, I guess...
The '86 Pontiac - it a V8? Don't do any burnouts or holeshots - you'll wreck the T tops (a friend did that once drag racing it). Anyway, IIRC, those were based off the old Chevy shortblock (still in production! Great design). Those things run forever, and they're easy to fix. BTW - you'll need a set of metric and English tools. I'd hit Sears and get a set (and you're from Chicago anyway - hit Sears :) It'll set you back $75, or less if it on sale, but the quality is way beyond the chepie sets, plus the lifetime warrenty is good. Learn car repair :) It's not that bad, really. For rich running, check the carb and all your emissions hoses, and the EGR, IIRC. Should be able to get it back in spec.
Oh yeah, and you *need* fuzzy dice for it!!!!
Have fun! :)
Sorry to hear about your car. As much as I hate to say it during these times of patriotism I think you're about getting a Toyota. I've had 6 cars since I started driving in 1971: three American cars and 3 Jap cars and I must say the Jap cars were much more reliable. The only American car that was good was my first, a '67 Olds Cutlass Supreme, I don't recall any problems with it. But my '74 Caddie and my '85 Buick Century were real nightmares. My 3 Jap cars were really great, although my first, a '79 Datsun 210 (bought new) did have an engine seize in in '87 with 150,000 miles. Last January I was breaking down left and right with my '85 Buick when an old man neighbor of my brother in law gave him his '89 Toyota Corolla cheap. Well after a week of rolling back on hills my brother in law realized he will never master a standard transmission and gave me the car for $300. Since then I replaced only the radiator & alternator for only $300. So $600 for 11 months is pretty good knock on wood.
In 1990 I got the urge to get a motorcycle And bought an '82 Yamaha Virago for $1300. About 6 months later I got the urge to buy a Harley and bought a brand new Police Special for $12,000. The engine seized the day after I picked it up and was in the shop for 3 weeks before I made my first payment!!! By the way I still have both bikes now along with the '85 Buick & '89 Toyota.
In my opinion from driving police cars and yellow cabs my whole adulthood, if you are going to drive American, stay away from GM. The old Plymouth Grand Fury radio cars were really great, and the Ford radio cars were OK, but the Chevy's were/are terrible. Also when I drove a medallion cab in the 70's we had Checkers which had GM Chevy engines and parts and they were always breaking down.
Just my opinion.
Heh. Siezed the engine up? They do need oil, ya know :)
Evos need a certain amount of pressure of they'll start ticking like mad (lifters).
Shovels need a lot less, Pans just need oil sloshing around in there! BTW, if it's got noisy lifters, check the screen, it's dirty. At least the nice thing about Harleys is the motors don't really wear out, and they're infinitely rebuildable anyway, at least till the lower cases crack. All roller and ball bearings. BTW, if you ever put a cam in there, change the INA bearing for a Torrington :) And ditch the crappy stock carb for an S&S. There's a big reason why S&S's are so damm popular....
Phil, that was the second day I had the bike with only about 30 miles on it. I didn't think I had to check the oil so soon!! It turned out to be a factory defect where the oil pump wasn't pumping oil properly. I was going over to my ex-girlfriend's house (that was 11 yrs ago before I was married) to show it off when it happened. (She was into sport bikes, and had a Honda Intercepter) I never made it to her house and luckily I was close enough to walk it home. Hempstead Harley wouldn'd give me a new engine. They rebuilt it and gave me some BS that a hand rebuilt engine is better than any assembly line new engine and that I was actually lucky it happened!!
In all honesty however I now have 47,000 miles on it with no real engine problems after it. Electrical problems are another story, I've had one after another!! My Yamaha on the other hand is like the Ever Ready Battery. I just give it oil changes and it keeps going and going and going.
I must be a glutton for punishment though as I'm itching to buy an 883 Sportster when & if I retire next year.
Heh, Too bad you couldn't have brought it over to Rolling Thunder. As far as electrical gremlins? Welcome to the joys of Harley ownership :) I've had a few. BTW, I'd pass on an 883 and get the 1200. The 883 is too freaking slow. The 1200, on the other hand, is fun out of the box, and is a hell of a lot more fun once you punch the baffles out , add an S&S E, a decent cam, headwork, high comp pistons. or, bore it out, go for Axtell jugs and *really* have fun.....
(Heh, Too bad you couldn't have brought it over to Rolling Thunder)
Phil,
I have been going to Rolling Thunder for over three years now. Three quarters of the mechanics there are former Hempstead employees.
Dodge is the worst. I remember when I was growing up we had a Dodge Dart that would stall all the time. And it would not re-start. It was a lemon, but the dealer couldn't fix the problem. I don't see many Dodges on the road today, I guess since they are so unreliable. They say it is the new Dodge but I have a feeling it's the same old Dodge it's always been.
Japanese cars are better. Honda, Toyota, Nissan. They last longer and are more relaible. Too bad the Japanese don't make buses. They could put Orion out of business.
You could have had a vacuum leak somewhere. Our '68 AMC Ambassador stalled repeatedly when stopped or when backing out of the garage in the morning. IIRC there were no vacuum leaks, but a technician finally told my father to try a different gasoline. It seemed to help, plus I suggested letting the engine run for half a minute or so before trying to back out of the garage. That helped, too. I learned to drive on that car, and it almost never stalled for me.
They have had Orion 5 buses here in Westchester County since 1995 and I'm not aware of any problems with them that I know about. I have a feeling that if the transit systems in this country tried to buy Japanese buses they might not be popular with some people. It is entirely possible though that the Japanese buses might outlast the American buses but, I don't know that for a fact.
#3 West End Jeff
the fact about Japanese buses is that, they don't last that long. plus they are harder to fix and uncomfortable to the passengers. Tri-boro coach tested one and scrapped it. In many other countries where Japanese buses are used, they don't last no more than 6-10 years.
I had a '75 Mercury Comet that came from the Flintstones era. It has so much rust that you could lift up the drivers side carpet and see the street beneath you. In fact, the dealer that sold me that car gave it to me with no padding left on the brakes and if I went through a puddle, I'd need to put my feet down to stop the car!
--Mark
Didn't they call them the Mercury Vomit?
Ah to be young again!!
Chuck Greene
again 1980's generation of autos. pull out of that era. speaking the japanese making buses, Tri-Boro Coach tested a Japanes brand bus. major mistake. FYI: Orion is under the clutches of Daimler-Chrysler and is stationed out of Canada. don't know if they were under Mercedes benz since day one but, go to Daimler-Chrysler and you will see it there. it is joined with Freightliner but has its own link
You had a problem with a Caddie? Never heard of such a thing in my life. I believe Cadillac is the best car company especially since it is an AMERICAN COMPANY.
Mike
"Mr Mass Transit"
BUY AMERICAN TO SAVE JOBS!
Uh, about two or three months ago GM themselves admitted that Cadillac's reputation had suffered because they were producing crummy luxury cars that costed a fortune but had problems like leaking roofs etc. They apparantly lost a lot of customers because they reasoned that an expensive luxury car should be well made: no transmissions falling apart, no leaky roofs, no poor workmanship and so on.
Buying American cars saves lots of jobs. The crap that comes out of Detroit keeps a lot of mechanics in business. Personally, I stick with the Japanese because I believe cars should be well designed and built and that cars belong on the road, not in repair shops all the time.
-Robert King (I especially hate Chevrolet Citation IIs)
again, auto experiences from the 80's. that era is over. cars are all alike in the reliability level. some just cost less to maintain than others. GM now gives better gas mileage than Hondas i.e. the Pontiac GrandPrix GT give better mileage than the Honda Accord V6 go research.
i do respect your opinion, but your experiences as much as many others are from a previous generation. todays car, whatever you buy, is a chance of having problems from audi to volvo. even the influencing toyota and honda will give problems. recently the Toyota Highlander just got recalled for breaking problems. Lexus IS 300 is being recalled for chassis mishaps. Ford is recalling its explorer for a problem not dealing with the engine. Honda recalled the Accord back in 98 for wiring problems. of course all the cars get recalled, but at least all cars up to this day do not give engine trouble which is the most important aspect that the customer cares about. today, if a car is considered unreliable is because it niggles. for example, interior pieces don't work right, or a mechanical hickup with the drive train. but the engine screwing up on you will less likely happen with cars no matter from what continent. its time everyone get from under the hypnotism of Toyota, honda, mercedes, and start noticing that the other cars are now reliable and a better value.
I own a 1998 Honda Civic DX 2 dr.hatchback which I bought new on February 15, 1998 and took delivery of on February 19, 1998. It has About 28,800 miles on it presently and has given me no major problems so far. My sister drives a 1991 Honda Civic DX 2 dr. hatchback that has 117,600 miles on it and it is still running. It burns a little oil now but it probably is a quart every 1,500 to 2,000 miles. It has had its problems in recent years but they are more of the nature of items which you expect to give out in time naturally such as the most recent problem which is a defective radiator and since the radiator was under warranty my sister won't have to pay for it. The important items, the engine and the transmission are still going strong. It also gets good gas mileage.
#3 West End Jeff
1500-2000 miles on a quart of oil is quite good, actually. Some oil is inevitably used between changes. For years, the rule of thumb was 1000 miles per quart was considered not excessive.
Some oil is inevitably used between changes.
I never lost any oil between changes on my '85 Cutlass (aquired with 103,000 miles and discarded with 230,000), changing oil every 5000 miles.
Did the oil level on the dipstick stay exactly the same for 5,000 miles? I don't mean to nitpick; engines are designed to use some oil without it being considered "burned". The oil control piston rings scrape most of it off the cylinder walls, but a microscopic film remains. My Jeep uses less than a quart of oil in 5,000 miles even after over 440,000 miles on the original untouched engine. And I use Castrol Syntec 0W-30 or 5W-30.
Did the oil level on the dipstick stay exactly the same for 5,000 miles?
Within normal variations of measurements based on how level the car is, reproducibility of inserting the dipstick, etc, the oil level was never measured as much as one-half quart low in 5000 miles.
My 1998 Honda Civic DX hatchback uses hardly any oil between changes which isn't unusual for a relatively new car that has about 28,800 miles on it.
#3 West End Jeff
Agreed. Take care of it and hopefully it will remain oil tight.
I change the oil in the engine every three months and the filter.
#3 West End Jeff
That's a good timetable. Keep it up.
I certainly plan to keep it up so this way I'll have the car for a good long time.
#3 West End Jeff
My Uncle drives a Saturn and has never had a problem. It's almost 8 years old I think. I think that your Saturn may be one of the ones with the experimental Cummins gasoline engine in it, which could explain the problems. :-o
Seriously I hope your car situation gets better. I don't drive a car and as many of us know all too well, if you're in the 'burbs or the rural areas you're pretty much screwed without a set of wheels.
"6) Occasional sputtering and stalling in heavy stop-and-go traffic."
Ya know Cummins engines seem to do the same thing. The LIB Orions with the Cummins like to sputter alot in heavy traffic, and often stall out. (Alright I know this belongs in Bustalk!)
Just buy a Ford and save yourself some trouble.
Mike
"Mr Mass Transit"
My 1987 Ford Econoline 150 has 153K on it and has no problems and only burns oil when I punch it, that straight 6 still has some kick left.
One of the reasons why Jacques Nasser was replaced recently was because Ford had more or less stagnated on the quality control in their car production; the quality of a new GM car is apparantly better than a new Ford car but it varies with used cars, of course.
-Robert King
The fuel injection on my '99 Camry (bought new) is shot. So Toyotas aren't givens either.
Just buy a Ford and save yourself some trouble.
FORD = Found on road, dead.
FORD = Found on road, dead
U mean
FORD= First on race day!
Mike
"Mr Mass Transit"
Ford = Fix or repair daily.
Not so much anymore with the new ones . My 2000 Windstar is a good car!
Chuck Greene
I have had no trouble at all with my 1998 Ford Escort, which I've actually had since late 1997. I drive it in both city (stop-and-go) and highway traffic, and the only time I've had to have it in the shop other than for routine oil changes was for minor body work from car accidents (neither one was my fault).
And don't forget,
For One Resplendent Driveway
Far Out Ride, Dude!
I'll second that! Our current family fleet consists of four Fords, three of which ('92 Thunderbird, '94 Mustang, '96 Windstar) have over 100K on them (the 2000 Taurus has less than 15K), and I've driven several Fords past the 200K mark.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I read what you said about bad credit history. Now lending institutions seem to be more willing to give loans. As far as cars go - I generally advise people to steer clear of American cars from the 1980's. I still don't have much confidence in Chrysler cars. I'm big on Honda. My '92 Accord has 184,000 miles and it runs like a champ and still gets 30 MPH on the highway. Just yesterday I purchased an '02 Honda Accord.
Good luck with your replacement car and getting another engine for the Saturn. Did your Saturn have the SOHC-8 Valve or the DOHC-16 vavle engine?
Wayne
BRING BACK THE CHEVY CORVAIR!!!!
Can we bring back the original Ford Pinto too?
-Robert King
BRING BACK THE CHEVY CORVAIR!!!!
An army buddy of mine had a Corvair. He routinely shifted into second at 30 mph and into 3rd at 60 mph. He stopped accelerating before shifting into 4th. That car MOVED!!!!
How long did it last?
He was still driving it with 75,000 miles on it when I got out of the army. He was stationed at Homestead AFB and lived in Vero Beach, so he drove a lot going home on weekends.
Better yet:
BRING BACK THE EDSEL!!!!!
But I want a Pinto!
-Robert King
At least the Pinto wasn't the butt of jokes the way the Edsel was.
At least the Pinto wasn't the butt of jokes the way the Edsel was.
You've never seen Best Defense? :)
I could be wrong, you know.:-)
FWIW - I put 370K on an ?86 Nissan Sentra. I bought it new and retired her in 1999 when the seat began to collapse. Seat wear and body rot were part of the ongoing aging process with that car. But the drivetrain did quite a bit better. I had to rebuild the 5 speed stick at 193K (bearings were shot.) But the engine never had more than valve cover gasket replacement. When I donated the car, the motor still went 3K miles without more than a half quart drop on the stick. ?P?Between all the Japanese brands, I think Nissan has received least amount of credit for most mechanically solid cars. ?P?As for domestic manufacturers - I wanted something more comfortable in ?99 and bought a brand new Chevy Monte Carlo. She runs great, has a predictable feel and is in general - more comfortable than any Japanese car I?ve been in.
My Jeep's 5-speed is still untouched and shifts OK; however, it sometimes howls between shifts. I'm sure its bearings may be going. It also balks between first and second after the car has sat in the cold all day unless I shift into second immediately after I get rolling. Since I use synthetic gearlube, it never feels as though I'm stirring molasses. The vehicle is on its second clutch, which has outlasted the original by 239,000 vs 202,000 miles. It's also on its second set of brakes, and they have over 190,000 miles on them vs almost 250,000 for the originals. The front axle has new bearings, replaced in 1998. The rear axle is all-original as is the transfer case. It's also on its fourth alternator and sixth or seventh water pump. The muffler and exhaust system are still original.
Steve, it sounds like your synchro ring may be bad or going bad for second gear. But so long as you don't force or grind it, you won't have a problem. As for howling beteen shifts - could be a throw out bearing in the clutch. But at 239K on your clutch - still nothing to complain about.
I'm guessing you have the inline 6 engine. It's a great motor with a long history. Who knows? it may never go bad.
You've definitely got me beat on brakes. The nature of my driving is typically stop and go mixed with let's do 70MPH and then have to come to a hard stop for traffic jam up ahead on the highway. I'll never see the mileage you get on your brakes.
Good luck with your Jeep!
Yes, my Jeep has the inline 4-liter six. It's proven to be as tough and durable as a BMT standard. I've heard from more than one technician that the 4-liter is practically bulletproof.
Most of my driving - I'd say around 80% - is highway. It's a 30-mile nonstop shot every morning, kind of like the CPW express jaunt. And when I do slow down, I gear down. I'm on my sixth set of tires and have averaged well over 80,000 miles on a set. My first set of Michelin XA4s lasted 107,000 miles.
The funny thing about the transmission balking is that I didn't have that problem when it still had the original petroleum-based gearlube. OTOH it's much quieter in fifth gear with the synthetic stuff, which I put in a year after buying the car. As I said, if I shift quickly into second after just getting the car moving when it's cold, there's no problem, and after a mile or two, it works fine.
The clutch has a slow leak in the hydraulic line. I had the master cylinder replaced a year and a half ago and the problem went away for a while, but now it's back. It could be the slave cylinder, which is integral with the throwout bearing in my case. I just keep an eye on the fluid level in the reservoir and add a splash of brake fluid when needed.
It has served me well and has been faithful. As long as I can get parts for it, I'm keeping it.
There has been some talk in the newspapers of reopening Hudson Terminal, as if the tracks and platforms still exist underground. Looking at this site and others, I was unable to determine exactly where it was.
Was it west of Church Street on the WTC superblock, perhaps under the two lower buildings? Or was it across Church Street, under Century 21? And what, if anything, is left?
Yes, Hudson Terminal was/is in the blcok from Church to Greenwich and yes, it is substantially intact, and yes, the PA is considering reopening it as one of its options.
I hope it does. It's much better situated than the PATH WTC terminal.
Of course there was more than just the underground station to Hudson Terminal, like the WTC there were a pair of office buildings which shared their lobby with the concourse. I like the idea of using the old platforms though, since it would put the station in an area less threatened by the site clearance and subsequent construction sure to take years. Turning the area back into a subway station will be a project in its own right though!
Welcome back Subtalk!
Gerry
For an extensive discussion of Hudson Terminal and other matters in relation to temporary/permanent alternatives to the WTC PATH station, click here.
PATH's GM spoke at the APTA convention here in Phila in early October and outlined that PATH was very seriously looking at returning to some portion of Hudson Terminal as soon as feasible. The big concern remains the water in the river tunnel, apparently still being fed by broken water mains, and the protective bulkhead which will remain in place until the WTC slurry wall situation can be determined.
10-20-01 First New ALP46 Unveiled
Bombardier Transportation presented the first of 29 electric multipurpose locomotives for New Jersey Transit (NJT) at a roll-out ceremony at its facility in Kassel, Germany. The design of the Class ALP 46 type electric locomotives is derived from the German Railway's Class 101. More than 145 locomotives of this type have been operating successfully for the German Railway (DB) since 1996. Press Release
7,100 Horse Power, not bad at all. To bad they couldn't have Americanized the carbody a little better. Maybe a nice hood design like the E44. Why did they limit them to 100 mph? The outside tracks on the NEC are rated for at least 110, possibly 125.
The locomotive definitely has a very sleek appearance.
Why did they limit them to 100 mph? The outside tracks on the NEC are rated for at least 110, possibly 125.
This may be true, but I don't think NJT needs to have super-fast trains running to meet their schedule needs. Of course it would be a PRO to have them at a higher speed, but during a normal local or express run, NJT trains never reach over 100mph.
By the way, the longest stretch of performing a constant speed is between New Brunswick and Princeton Jct. NJT trains travel at around a high speed for 8-10 minutes before they need to slow down.
Years ago, I was on an Arrow III EMU that did 96mph on the little stretch between NWK and Broad St. Elizabeth.
The engineer had the silverplate down and I peeped through the red digital speedometer and it read 96.
After all, the Comet IV cartype design by Bombardier has its maximum speed to 77 1/2 mph. I honestly don't know why it has to be that slow, but they made it that way.
The overall performance of ALP46 is better than that of ALP44's currently in NJT service, since it can produce more power to pull more cars.
I can't wait to see them in service.
: )
Railfan Pete.
I'm putting together a quick checklist to help myself recognize the various R-types currently running. By observing things like whether the storm door is flush or recessed, whether the anti-climber is full width or only as wide as the door, and the orientation of the headlight/taillight pair, it's pretty easy to tell the types apart.
But here's where I'm stuck. How do you tell the difference between these three pairs: R40M vs R42, R44 vs R46, and R68 vs R68A? They look identical to my untrained eye. (And, yes, I know the car numbers are different, but that's "cheating".)
And, by the way, were the R44/R46 dot matrix destination signs part of the original build or were they added during the overhaul? If original, why did the 68's go back to roll signs?
Thanks,
Bill
As far as the R40M and the 42, the 40M still has the side body panels from the R40 - a notch for the blue belt rail. Plus the 40M has a stiffern under each passenger door. The R42 has none of these items. Also the R40M came with a shorter end window.
Phil Hom
And as to the LCD side signs on the R-44 and R-46 cars, they were retrofitted onto the cars during their General Overhaul (GOH) circa 1990. The R-68s were ordered in 1982 and came in from 1986 to 1988.
David
AND the R40M has the same elongated storm door window at the "B" end as well as the cutout notch on the left side of the door jamb. The handholds opposite the cabs are the same as the R40s, not like the 42s
wayne
Is it accurate to say that, except for the A ends, R-40's and R-40M's are identical?
Hey Wayne, should we tell everyone about the carspotting lesson you gave to that T/O on the M line on the 25th? He didn't realize there were R-42s on the M.
How about his tip on how to ID a modified/unmodified R-32, i.e. square vs. round door key slot.
Mr t__:^)
The R-40M have the same side panels as the R-40S, that is, they have a notch about 2/3 of the way down the carbody as well as finer grooves below it, as visible in this picture: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r40/r40-4294.jpg
The R-42 have no notch and wider grooves, as visible here: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r42/r42-4685.jpg
The R-44 and R-46 are nearly identical both externally and internally. Luckily, there is a major difference both on the inside and on the outside that sets them apart. On the outside, both classes originally had a stripe running around the car. On the R-46s, this was either painted stainless steel that was later stripped, or painted LAHT that was replaced with stainless--either way, the R-44s merely had theirs painted over silver. You can tell an R-44 by the dull silver stripe covered in rust-spots.Here is a picture: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r4446/r44-5329.jpg
Inside, the R-44 have glass shields in the frames between the seats and the doors, presumably to protect the passengers from weather and people leaning near the doors. These are absent from the R-46.
As for the R-68/68A, I've never noticed any visible differences. The machinery is slightly different and makes different noises, but the most reliable way to tell them apart is car numbers: R-68s have car numbers in the 2000s, whereas R-68As have numbers in the 5000s.
Dan
PS: Sorry for not posting links, it wasn't working. Don't know why.
The R68 has gutters above the door that run the length of the cars like the R44 and R46. The R68A has gutters just above each door. Also, I think that the R68A has a greyer, more brushed, less reflective stainless steel. I think that there are other differences as well.
This has been discussed in the past but there are at least 12 cosmetic differences between the R-68 and 68As.
In addition to the 2 mentioned above by Marc, here are some of the others:
Side sign boxes are smaller on the 68s, the holes used to change them are protruding on the 68s, flush on the 68As.
The window that has the sign box in it is 2 pieces on the 68, one piece on the 68A.
The point where the lower hand rail meets the vertical grab bar is welded on the 68A's on the 68s it is fittings (upper meeting point is fittings on both).
Full width cab doors are pocket doors on 68As, hinged on the 68s.
HVAC access panels on 68As have small pieces of plastic which are there to prevent the paint from being chipped when the doors are open (placed stategically where the open panel would contact the grab rail).
Door motor access panels have smaller mouldings on the 68As.
Small window on "B" end cab doors is flush on 68As, not so on 68s.
Underseat heating units are larger and bulkier on 68s.
There are also differences in the window latches.
There are more that I can't recall right now.
Peace,
ANDEE
The R-40M and R-42 have very different interiors as well. Basically, the R-40M is just like the R-40 except that the front end is borrowed from the R-42. The R-40M seats are shaped funny; the R-42 seats are very similar to the R-32, R-38, and Redbird seats. The R-40M has a cutout in the frame for each rollsign; the R-42 has a unified sign box. The R-40M has a lot more painted metal than the R-42. Personally, I find the R-40/40M interior quite dated, almost worn out (much moreso than the interiors of even older cars still running), while the R-42 still has pep -- but if you don't happen to share my opinions, this won't work for you.
Dan gives the most prominent distinctions between the R-44 and R-46. Another is that the cab door slides on the R-46 but swings on the R-44. (It's also narrow on the R-44, as is the cab itself.) And this is cheating, but it works: if it's on the A or the Rockaway Park shuttle (or the overnight Lefferts shuttle, I presume), it's an R-44; otherwise it's an R-46.
The most obvious difference between the R-68 and R-68A is in the (transverse) cab door. It swings on the R-68 (but it's not narrow) and it slides on the R-68A (and even has a little cut-out notch for the handle, like on the R-40). Another difference -- very minor -- is that where the overhead bars join on the R-68A, they do so seamlessly (like on the R-62/62A, which also has seamless joins down below). (I didn't explain it well; look at the overhead bars and you'll see what I mean.)
Now for a real challenge: R-62 vs. R-62A. Any takers?
Now for a real challenge: R-62 vs. R-62A. Any takers?
Been there, done that.
I know the differences between the R-62s and the R-62As. Look at the car numbers. The R-62s are numbered 1301-1625. The R-62As are numbered 1651-2475.
#3 West End Jeff
Hmmmm, maybe I better ride in the R42s again. Their seats felt more like R40 seats than Redbird, R32 or R38 seats to me. They also should have kept the larger storm door windows that the R40M's and R42's originally had. The smaller ones look so out of place on those cars.
As for the R62's and R62A's, the R62's have exterior speakers just like the R142's, R142A's and R143's, while the R62A's don't.
Personally, I prefer the shorter-but-wider railfan windows on the non-R-40's -- if nothing else, they're better when two people (of similar height) are attempting to share the window. The tall R-40 windows do provide a dash of excitement, though.
No, no - I meant the original longer and wider railfan windows on the R40M's and R42's, the ones they had before they were GOH'ed. When the R40M's and R42's were GOH'ed they got the same size railfan window as on the R32's, R38's and Redbirds. The smaller railfan windows look grossly out of place on the R40M's and R42's with their large bulkhead windows.
Actually the front windows on the R40M are just a little bit shorter than those of the R42.
AND there are NO handholds between the B ends on ANY R40M.
wayne
You guys are right. I wish they rebuilt those cars using the same size windows that they had, just like the R-32's and R-38's did.
Yeah but, what is the difference between the r1's and the r9's?
OK, here goes.
The R-1s and R-4s had storm doors with one large pane of glass. The window kicked in by Sylvester Stallone in Nighthawks is that of an R-1 or R-4. R-6s, R-7s, and R-9s had storm doors with a split window. I also seem to recall the R-1s had brass moldings around each side sign while later cars had rubber weatherstripping. This is based on observations of R-1 100 and R-4 484 at the Transit Museum. The doors sounded differently on R-1s and R-4s than on later cars. On the former, they sounded like a sheet of construction paper being shaken while on the latter, they made an "uurr-rrrrr" sound as they closed.
None of the R-1s ever got headlights. Some R-4s got them while others did not. All R-6s, R-7s, and R-9s got headlights.
All cars from the R-1 through R-9 classes could and did operate together.
I'm sure other regulars can point out other nuances.
Yep, the R-44s are assigned exclusively to the A (Boooo!) and Rockaway Park Shuttle. The R-46s all originate from Jamaica Yard and are found on routes based from that yard.
Now for a real challenge: R-62 vs. R-62A. Any takers?
The biggest difference I can see is in the rollsigns. The destinations are in a single line on the R62s and a double line on the R62As.
:-) Andrew
I don't think they're always like that. Usually, yes.
The end sign on a 68A is 90% of the time situated higher than on a 68. There are a couple exceptions (2900 comes to mind).
R68: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r68/r68-2614.jpg
R68A: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r68/r68-5106.jpg
One surefire way to tell the difference between a 68 and a 68A is to look at the upper sash window. The sash is noticeably larger on a 68A than on a 68, and the 68 uses a smaller sheet of glass.
R68: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r68/r68-2604.jpg
R68A: http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r68/r68a-5172.jpg
Gee you can't tell a Hippo (R-68) from a Rino (R46) ... just kidding.
Some of us just don't care, but keep the faith.
Mr t__:^)
Oh, I know the difference between a Hippo and a Rhino. I'm trying to differentiate 30 year old Rhinos from 28 year old Rhinos and 15 year old Hippos from 13 year old Hippos.
And actually, Thurston, this is a bold new step from me. I'm finally acknowledging that there may be life after the redbirds (but not much).
Bill
Yes we have to adjust ... so keep on the lookout for a R-62 with a Railfan window or catch a Slant 40 or a R-32 or a R-38. Hippos, Rinos & the rest are just for commuters :-(
That is unless you bring your own entertainment ... on the special Fall Foilage trip out of the yard at the Croton-Harmon we had a birthday party for our trolley mentor.
Mr t__:^)
Telling an R40M from an R42
Exterior
R40M-ridges are narrow and close together, like the slant R40
R42-ridges are wider and further apart, sort of like the R32 and R38.
Interior walls:
R40M-like the R40 slants, and R32 and R38 and redbirds, the interior is just about all tan.
R42-interior is stainless steel on the sides, a precursor to the R62/62A and R68/68A. The front and rear interior is still tan.
Rollsigns
R40M-as with the slants, the interior rollsign is in oval frames.
R42-not in frame, sort of like the R62/A and R68/A.
:-) Andrew
OOOOO, I love this... pick me! Pick me! ... hehe, anyway... :
40M and 42:
The interior of the 40M is just like a 40 except one end has the shorter window like a 32 while the other end has the window like a 40S. The thing with the red light bulb that lights up on the 42 is stainless steel while on the 40M, it's yellow. Like MisterK said, the roll signs are different. (oval, and not oval) Another thing about the rollsigns are on 40Ms, they just don't look like they fit. They look older and on 42s, it seems smoother. Also R40M seats are just like the R40S seats. The seats on the R42 have a bigger and better ass groove. I personally do not believe that those seats on the 42 are like 32 seats (definetly not) or the redbirds. I say that because the seats on the R32 are WAY taller (on the back for back suppport) than those on the 42. The seats on the 42 only go to the mid back, while the seats on the 32 go to the upper back or the neck depending on your height.
44 and 46:
I've learned a lot from you guys. There's the window/glass on the seat next to the door for the 44, but everyone knows that. I figured it out by sounds from the brakes. The sound from the 44 is louder and has more of a pffffft or earrrrrrkt sound, or maybe both of them combined. I can't explain it... The ones on the 46 seem more quiet and smooth sounding.
As for 68 and 68A, there's plenty (some I'm not gonna explain well, it's like a 6th sense for me...):
68As seem shinier on the outside and the end signs are brighter and clearer. (one of my 6th senses that can't be explained well) One difference that I saw no one mention are the seats. The seats on 68As look like they have lines, like the back of your hand, except the lines are farther apart. The molding under the side windows, the color of rollsigns, and the ceiling are also smoother (if there's no grafiti), glossier, and more brownish then the 68. Someone mentioned the way the bars are connected. The bars themselves are differnt too I think. The ones on 68As are more like a mirror while those on 68s are more like the smooth-touching kind of stainless steel. The rollsigns are differnt too. Ones on 68As are flatter while ones on 68s have a "slight overall" curve outward. The interior rollsigns on 68s also have the little round silver thing to the side of each sign, the left letter, and right of both terminals unless one fell off or something. Also the windows on the sides. The ones on 68As have the flat black strip running around it with the stainless steel border between the window and the before mentioned black rubber thing. The 68, I'm not sure if it has the stainless steel border, but the black rubber has a bump in the middle of the rubber. It's like another layer of rubber that can be peeled off, if it's peeled off, it leaves a deep groove in the surrounding black rubber. The 68A windows seem higher and thinner than the 68 windows. The lighting effect effect of the 2 cars are different as well. It's not the brightness, but the color effect, guess this is one of my 6th sense things...
If I'm wrong on anything please do say so, I'd like to see how much I actually know...
I learned on an R68 something. When I finally got my hands dirty, it was a Redbird something. Now I switch back and forth between DoityBoids and R142s. I have no idea of car diffences other than letter/number WORLDS and sure am grateful for what I learn here. Peter
One more: IINM, R-44 doors close more slowly than R-46 doors.
I noticed that, too. I liken the R-44 doors to those on the BMT standards in terms of how fast they open and close.
Dear Bill:
For what its worth (apologies for any repitition), here are some quick ways to tell:
R-32s have narrower doors and exterior fluting all the way from eaves to floorline. R-38s have wider doors and fluting only halfway up the sides. Number board styling entirely different.
R-40M and R-42 have different side fluting. 40M has middrif notch and finer fluting.
R-44s have sheet lengthwise metal middrif body panel now painted silver. This was done by St. Louis Car during construction to save $$$ and weight. In days of yore it was the blue stripe. Pullman-built R-46s have total stainless steel external shell.
Not sure about now but R-46s had little door panels on the fiberglass beneath the headlight/marker cluster. R-44s had no such panel.
End rollsign positions differ on all three R-68 types. 2500-2724 have LOW, low signs. 2725-2924 have slightly higher signs. R-68As have fairly high signs.
That's what I recall off top of my head.
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
This afternoon I headed to South Station, to take MBTA Commuter Rail train #815 to Mansfield. The "slots" on the Northeast Corridor from Boston to Providence are very tight, as it's three-tracked from Boston to Readville, then two-tracked to Providence (and beyond). All of the MBTA service is meshed between the newly expanded Amtrak service, including the hourly Acela Express runs. (See map at: .)
815 is due to leave South Station at 4:35pm, and stop at Back Bay, Ruggles, Route 128, Sharon, and then arrive at Mansfield at 5:16pm before continuing on to Providence. We were delayed ten minutes at South Station. Why? Someone found a "suspicious package" and the police had to be called to check it out. The result? Someone's lunch trash bag. Wonderful. But by then, the dispatcher had thoughtfully allowed #917 to depart, the 4:40pm local to Stoughton. Stoughton trains share trackage with Providence trains until Canton Junction. So we on 815 crawled behind 917, which makes additional stops at Hyde Park and Canton Junction.
Finally! We have clear track ahead. But lo and behold, it's raining out, and freshly fallen leaves have been crushed on the rail, making for steel more slippery than ice. From Canton Junction it is uphill through Sharon, and half-way to Mansfield. The lead engine, we were later told, had no sand. So the poor F40PH 3000hp engine is trying to pull five bi-levels and two single-level coaches (with well over 1000 people on-board) uphill. The spin-slide system kicks in, and we inch forward at two or three miles an hour from Canton Junction to Sharon. It's now 5:45pm, and trains are backing up behind us. Sharon station is on an uphill, and the grade becomes even steeper ahead. We creep and crawl; I'm in the first coach behind the engine, and can feel the spin-slide work. About one mile from the crest of the hill, the engine just won't go any further. The conductor goes into the engine to confer with the engineer, and then I see him head to the rear end. They have an idea -- get permission to back-up, and spread what little sand is in the control cab (at the rear end) onto the rail, and they try to get a running start up the hill. So back we go; then stop; then begin forward. It worked! By 6:15pm, we made it to Mansfield -- an hour late. The conductor told me that the train following, the 5:03pm departure #817 to Providence was stuck too, and the Acela Regional following it was trying to push it up the hill. (I asked if the AEM-7 had compatible couplings for air, and he said it does!)
SINCE THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM EVERY YEAR DURING THE AUTUMN, WHY DID THE MBTA SEND ITS ENGINES OUT WITHOUT SAND?
At least I'll get a refund, under the "Service Guarantee," patrons receive a round-trip voucher for trains over 30 minutes late. Even we pass-holders can exchange these for cash.
Postscript: While chatting with the conductor, I told him about the NYCTA gel train. He had never heard of such a thing!
>>SINCE THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM EVERY
YEAR DURING THE AUTUMN, WHY DID THE
MBTA SEND ITS ENGINES OUT WITHOUT SAND?<<
And who actually operates these trains for the T? ATK I believe.
BTW on the Friday before Labor Day weekend I was on an Acela Exp. which "according to an ATK employee" had come south from Boston with NO WATER in the First Class car. So the operative questions are what are the procedures for "correctimg" these lapses by personnel? Can ATK EVER get a handle on service quality?
You are correct, David.
Amtrak operates the MBTA Commuter Rail under contract.
Compared to the LIRR, the MBTA Commuter Rail is a gem. Then again, there are days like yesterday...
Todd, Although a train freak of many decades I HAVE NEVER ridden the route of the square wheel (old name for LIRR) To me the standard for commuter service was the IC 'Suburban Service' MU Electrics with impeccable on time habits, and when I lived in Chgo years back very frequent service. And the cars were well maintained and clean.--sort of like how it should be.
The LIRR's 'square wheel' problem is more related to an aging signal system and aging speed control on an aging fleet. It's very common to be traveling at 70+ MPH and get a code flip or loss of speed control signal that'll put the train into emergency. We had one on the Babylon Branch friday AM around Lynbrook. Once I felt the jerky stop and smelled the composition shoes burning, the result was predictable. When we started up again we had 3-4" flats on all wheels (guestimate) and a sure trip to the wheel truing machine.
Doesn't sound too good for those M7's when they arrive. I smell and hear the flat wheel problem on them too!
They have that problem with the Bi-level cars. Remember the old diesel coaches going up Cold Spring Hill, on the Port Jeff Branch? That was part of it as well.
Much will depend on the braking system that's chosen. Keep in mind that once the M-1 or M-3 goes into emergency, just as on the NYCT fleet, there is only a pneumatic brake to stop the train. As I understand it, the slip-slide is taken out of the loop. If the M-7s employ anti-lock technology - even in emergency, this problem can be avoided.
If the M-7s employ anti-lock technology - even in emergency, this problem can be avoided.
If memory serves me right wasn't this feature included on the R44's? Also, if I remember correctly didn't this feature substitute flattened anti-climbers for flat wheels - especially on the SIRT?
The A-13 brake package certainly had slip-slide technology. I don't remember whether it was enabled during an emergency brake application or not. The R-46 had a similar system in its FL-85 brake package with axle tachs and a comparitor card, etc. When the Rockwell trucks were replaced, the axle tachs were gone and so was the slip-slide. In any event, by 1991 the R-44s and R-46s were reduced to normal SMEE-type railcars. As for the collisions you allude to on the SIRT, I must plead ignorance.
As for the collisions you allude to on the SIRT, I must plead ignorance.
The limited slip emergency brakes were implicated in the attempts by several R44's to board the ferry at the St. George Terminal. :-)
The limited slip feature was disabled.
Thanks. I hadn't heard about that incident.
Wonderful use of scarasm. Best line I have read all day.
Question, would not the process of flattening wheels improve stopping distance as the flatter the wheel gets the more braking area there is to stop the forward momentum by turning it into fictive heat? Yes it ruins the wheel, bit technically a BIE is for "emergencies" and in such a case maintainance should be sacrificed for safety.
"Wonderful use of scarasm. Best line I have read all day."
I guess it was a slow day in the Jersey Record, comic page.
Question, would not the process of flattening wheels improve stopping distance as the flatter the wheel gets the more braking area there is to stop the forward momentum by turning it into fictive heat? Yes it ruins the wheel, bit technically a BIE is for "emergencies" and in such a case maintainance should be sacrificed for safety.
The question is what to do after an emergency. If the train is to operate without major repairs, then the approach of intentionally flattening the wheels has serious problems. One alternate would be to make the braking surface different from the wheels. This is the principle behind track brakes.
OTOH, if this is to be a one-shot deal regardless of the consequences of an application, then you might want to consider eddy current brakes. Who cares, if the tracks have to be replaced after a brake application? :-)
"One alternate would be to make the braking surface different from the wheels."
You might want to re-think this statement. The flats are not due to the brake-wheel interaction. They are due to the wheels skidding along the rail after the wheels lock. Even if you opted for disc brakes with an inboard disc & caliper, flats would still occur if the wheels were permitted to lock.
You caught me with imprecise use of the English language.
When the wheels are locked then braking takes place between the wheel/track interface and not the brake pad/rotating surface interface. My statement, while correct, is ambiguous. I'll take your suggestion:
One alternate would be to use a surface different from the wheels to provide the friction braking effort to the rails.
Thanks.
I saw in some sort of automotive magizine a test between anti-lock brakes and normal brakes and the stopping distances for the lock brakes were shorter in many of the conditions tested. I was wondering if this was true for railroads. There are two competing factors namely wheel to rail surface area that provides stopping friction and a tendency for locked wheels to skid with reduced friction. Do you knwo anything about this? One hint might be that sanding equipment is required on locomotives to help with braking not traction. This suggests that in a true emergency you lock the wheels and apply sand for maximum stopping power (or put the train in reverse).
Reversing the motors is the same thing as applying the wheel
tread brakes. The use of sand or friction modifier gel increases
the coefficient both of static and sliding friction at the wheel/
rail interface, thus raising the amount of tractive effort that
the wheel can exert before sliding starts.
I've never before heard the suggestion that it's a good idea to
flatten wheels during emergency braking. I suppose that as the
contact area increases, the amount of sliding friction must increase
somewhat, though I doubt it would ever come close to the static
friction (non-slip) point. The maximum braking effort is attained
without slipping.
As for automotive anti-lock brakes, bear in mind that you are
dealing with a tread surface which is irregular and easily
deformed, and is also different from the roadway surface.
'Flattening the wheels' is a byproduct of high speed emergency braking...dynamic braking is shut down along with all power and the composition brake shoes stick like glue to the wheel. Flats do great damage...cars discovered during inspection are pulled for wheel truing. As for REVERSE brakage...I've done it on an icy hill with a rear wheel drive car but trains don't have transmissions, power applied isn't proportionate and cars would probably jump the tracks as a result. Peter
Understand that in a true emergency, the last consideration is whether you flatten wheels or not. The idea is to bring the equipment to a safe stop without any unplanned contactwith other objects. If the wheels are flattened and no other damage results, you're way ahead. Reversing the motors might sound like a good idea but is largely a fantasy. Once the train is in emergency, the propulsion system is disabled. Reverse - foward - makes no difference. However, if you did try to stop via this method you'd likely find that you'd trip the overload from the excessive current needed to overcome the motor's normal rotation at speed. As for sanding, I don't believe that in modern locomotive operation, sanding is provided for stopping. If you have a source that states otherwise, i'd love to see it.
Hey TD - have you been on any DDs that have popped into emergency at speed? I swear, those new cars can stop a hell of a lot quicker than the M-1s can. I remember the first few weeks of service, stops were really choppy and hard, as the crews were still not really used to the brakes on them.
i'm curious as to how slip slide works on a railcar. I doubt it can be like an auto, where you pulse the brakes. I'm guessing it's more an issue of sensing a wheel is decelerating too quickly, then backing off the brakes a certain amount, in hopes of getting to stop slipping. i once read a thing about the wheelslip control patents ASEA did back in the 70's, and it was neat. I believe the patents were eventually used in the AEM-7, FWIW. The system could react to wheelslip even if all the wheels were slipping.
I haven't been on any of the double-deckers in emergency yet. This is one reason I think the M-7s will do better than the M-1s or M-3s. Same signal system but improved ASC. The locos have conventional tread brake units supplimented by disc brakes. That accounts for their excellent brake characteristics.
Sometimes the rails in the autumn on the West Hempstead and Far Rockaway branches, particularly at Westwood and Woodmere with all the overhanging trees, are so slippery, no device but sand will work. I have been on trains with their wheels alternately locking and rolling at 30 MPH with no ability to stop, and they overshhot stations by a train length. They often run a locomotive during the night to drop sand.
The MBTA needs to borrow the TA's VAKTRAK.
Excellent idea!!! They could also have WEP workers sweep the tracks with brooms.
Hey Todd, this would be a great subject for a "write to the top" email. Let us know what Stephen Jones says!
Somehow the link to the MBTA commuter rail map didn't post right in my original message. Here it is:
MBTA Commuter Rail.
VacTrak Sucks (pun.) What was really needed was the TA Gel Train..it puts some kind of caustic glop on the rails to dissolve leaves. Peter
Todd, despite the LIRR's shortcomings, they take a more pro-active approach to fallen leaves and slippery rails. They run a 'slime train' during the early morning hours. This train spreads an adhesive goop on the rails to overcome the problem. The TA also uses this procedure in many areas such as on the Brighton line south of Newkirk Avenue.
right you are. I have made many $$$$$$$$$$ working my relief days the last few weeks as a Brakeman on the "Slime Trains"
Question about the slime train if you don't mind. What is the current consist of the train? I thought I saw a single M-1 sandwhiched between to MP-15s last week staged out at Hillside.
Several weeks ago, I saw the slime train (Gel train?) in the 239th shops. My buddy Fred was changing out brake shoes and pointed out what the car was for. I'm no expert (yet) but I thought it was just an ordinary emptied out subway car with no windows attached to to or three utility wagons. Peter
I was referring to the consist of the LIRR Slime train but thanks for the info.
IF there is some way to bring back subway lines today that were taken away in the past I said we would all be greatly benifiting from it. Like the NX line, dashes people from Coney Island to Lower and Midtown Manhattan with in 30 minutes. The MJ line to get you from Queens to Downtown Brooklyn. The KK line would get people From Jamaica Center or Metropolitan Avenue to Midtown Manhattan without transfering. The JJ would get people from Carnarsie to Downtown Manhattan.
I say these lines would be such a great help today, and it doesn't need any new expensive connections, just more subway cars.
A lot of the switches to allow these configurations are probably still in place.
I agree with you, Chris. For example, the "V" - why terminate it at 2nd Avenue? Run it the heck out to Canarsie, with 8-car trains of Jamaica R32s. It works on the "C", should work here too.
wayne
Speaking of Canarsie, why not extend the Canarsie Line to the pier as it used to be!
Much of the ROW has been built over.
They could go down the middle of Rockaway Parkway! :)
Sure, if you'd fit the cars with trolley poles or pantographs.:-)
Naw, just concrete barries to separate the trains from the roads and four point crossing gates at the intersections.
I'll buy that.:-)
A more useful extension would be to continue south, turning west onto Flatlands Ave. No subway service currently exists in this heavily populated area of Brooklyn.
It never wemt to the Pier, there was always a free transfer, to trolley or bus
I don't think Blimpie's, the Wicker Man (the furniture guy on Glenwood), the Knights of Colvmbvs or the guy that runs the Doghouse Yard on Flatlands would appreciate that.
wayne
I can just see a train BMT standards slamming through those buildings that now occupy the former ROW.
We ate at that Blimpie's on our first railfanning expedition.
What doghouse yard? The gravel parking lot of the Canarsie Grill occupies the row on Flatlands.
Wouldn't that mean getting rid of the Z, and making the J all stops east of ENY, express West of ENY ?
why not use the old connection between the 6th IND to the Nassau BMT and bring the V out to replace Z service in brooklyn (at least) instead of this dumb 2nd Ave terminal?
Then Queens Blvd and 53rd Street gets 8 car trains. WIth 53rd Street service cut 25%, that is not a good idea.
If the V went via 63rd. St, then 8 car R32's would be acceptable. These trains would still be longer than current G trains and would run more frequently.
The V would do more if it were extended to Church Ave. Eastern division ridership doesn't justify another route. And running extra trains into Canarsie limits the amount of L service to 8th Ave, and the Canarsie line's heaviest usage is west of Atlantic Ave.
I would definitely support the return of KK service. While reading the CCS transit improvement plan for Brooklyn, I noticed they had an idea for a Willy B-6th Avenue service as part of improving that line's service to Midtown Manhattan. It basically sounds like it combines the B and M trains into one line. I think it could be really popular, especially if it runs full time or at least all times except midnight-5 AM. I guess it would run from 168th Street/Broadway to Metropolitan Avenue through the Chrystie Street connection, which means the C would go back to terminating at Bedford Park.
(I would definitely support the return of KK service. While reading the CCS transit improvement plan for Brooklyn, I noticed they had an idea for a Willy B-6th Avenue service as part of improving that
line's service to Midtown Manhattan. It basically sounds like it combines the B and M trains into one line.)
The way to do it is to combine the V with the J/Z as a 6th Avenue local train (the connection from the Willie B is to the local track, not the express). I wrote a letter to the MTA suggesting this, before joining the TA. Nearly 3/4 of the CBD's jobs were north of Grand at the time I wrote the letter, so having 2/3 of the Willie B trains go north made sense.
It makes more sense now, even though the V would have to use 60 foot cars.
But the V would also be restricted to 8-car trains, which would underserve Queens Boulevard.
When this came up last, I suggested merging the C and the J. Both already run 8-car trains. The V could continue, via the Cranberry tunnel, to Euclid (or, better, Lefferts, taking the place of the A). Or terminate the V at WTC and send the E into Brooklyn. (Or something like that.) Passengers from the J headed for lower Manhattan would transfer to the M, or perhaps the Z would keep its current south terminal (I'm not sure how the numbers work out).
Run the Via via Brighton Local to Coney Island, The Q as a Broadway Exp, Run the KK and B as one to Bedford Pk Blvd
For that you'll have to wait until 2004 or so. My plan could be put into action now.
Oh POOH with the 8-car trains! They'll do, they'll do! If you run enough of them, they'll do. I have yet to hear many complaints about the "C" or the "L" being 8 @60'-cars.
wayne
The whole point of introducing the V is to increase Queens Boulevard service. Unless you want to prove that the 63rd Street connection was a waste of money, all trains on the line should be full-length.
Then if the "V" isn't the logical test for a new Brooklyn-Manhattan service, why not try the "B" (renamed the "K") from Concourse/Upper Manhattan via 6 Ave? I know, they run R68s. That can be changed by obtaining R32 cars from the "C" and assigning that R68 squad to Pitkin. It would be less of an impact running 8-cars on THAT line than it would on a key Queens service.
Somehow, I feel that the Chrystie connection is viable. Perhaps someone could spend some time down at Delancey & Essex polling the transferring "J" to "F" riders to see if reopening the connection would be welcome.
wayne
The B is definitely a more viable option than the V. But why not the C, which already has trains of the necessary length? The 6th Avenue local tracks will get crowded if they're shared by the B, F, and V.
They don't have to be. The V could run through the 63rd St tunnel (instead of the 53rd as the TA is planning to run it) and enter Rockerfeller Center on the express tracks with the B and D. The B, D and V would share tracks at 47th-50th and 42nd, much like the B, D and Q did before July 22nd. But between 42nd and 34th, the B can switch over to the local tracks and continue past 34th over the local tracks to the Willy B connecting tracks.
The advantage the B has over the C is that more office buildings are closer to 6th Avenue and 53rd Street than to 8th Avenue. The C can always go to eight-car trains of R68's.
It's not a bad idea, but the TA has good reason to run the F through 63rd.
> the B can switch over to the local tracks and continue past 34th >over the local tracks to the Willy B connecting tracks
Where do you take the train sets from? Everytime services cross you lose time. That is part of the reason you have no Manhattan expresses from Queens.
>The C can always go to eight-car trains of R68's.
Not without realigning all the yards. Who will shop that equipment? And will you redo Bedford to take 38's?
They could swap the B and C terminals back to what they were and realign them once again with the original IND letter code.
A) The D/Q and B/W will be reunited and no changes are intended to give any contrary impression.
B) The current C is a perfect job, not too much work not too little and is almost aligned with the right number of relay and layup tracks.
Yes, I am lazy but I have also managed employees, getting not too much work out of them and nmot too little is important.
C) More choices sounds nice but segregating the 8th and 6th ave service keeps things moving better.
D) if 50th st was not a problem they could make the A/C both manhattan expresses and the B/D both locals (switching the F and V to expresses) and move even faster.
There has always been along CPW a 6th Ave Exp and 6th Ave Local, and a 8th Ave Exp and 8th Ave Local
True but and 50th st is a problem so that won't change. I do think it would be an interesting proposition. It would also allow the same signalling they are putting on the L to be practical for a large strectch of the A/C and B/D line.
59th St might become the Roosevelt Ave of Manhattan and that alone is enough to kill the idea
It would also make the D a horrible line to be a T/O on once the bridge is back and I won't be a party to that.
59th St might become the Roosevelt Ave of Manhattan and that alone is enough to kill the idea
How do you mean?
Dan
Massive numbers of people transfering, people gettting pushed to their deaths (I got to witness that in 85 or 86).
Roosevelt is certainly one of the worst stations in the system, crowding-wise. 60th/Lex BMT is worse during rush hour at the west end of the platform.
Dan
Doesn't segregating services lead to unbalanced loading with the expresses more crowded? The incentive to stay on the local (B, C, or Q local), less crowding, is counteracted by the preception that the express (D, A, or Q express) is much faster. I have head that this is one reason the TA does not want F Brooklyn express service as it existed in the early 1970s: the expresses would be overcrowded relative to the locals. At least when the express and local offer different Manhattan trunk line services, there is more incentive to ride the local.
This is all really short-changing lower Manhattan. First Z trains gets diverted up 6th Avenue, already E trains are cutback to Canal, now C trains would no longer go to either Chambers or Bway/Nassau/Fulton.
By my proposal, the V would go to WTC (which, as I said, could be reopened) and the E would go to Euclid or Lefferts.
Lower Manhattan is overserved now. Some of that service should go uptown.
The TA doesn't like using West 4th crossovers, or for that matter, Dekalb's, and is screaming and kicking over 96th Street.
Any use of the Chrystie St. connection without using the V train will mean three lines will have to share trackage at some point, either south of Rockefeller Center or at least between West Fourth and B'way-Lafayette.
Using the C train makes the most sence from an 8-car train standpoint, but that would leave Fulton Street in Brooklyn without any local service unless the V train was routed either at West Fourth or at Jay Street onto the Eighth Ave. tracks, which could handle the V's planned 600-foot trains.
Whether or not the MTA would want to add the extra switching is another question, and IMHO, the resumption of the Chrystie connection only makes sence if the train is routed down to Rockaway Pkwy., giving passengers there a one-seat ride into midtown. But with the CTBC testing of the R-143s coming up, the L line will have to be isolated for at least the next 6-8 years, and a Chrsystie St. link teminating either at Broadway Junction or Parsons-Archer would probably meet the same disappointing ridership fate at the KK trains did 30 years ago.
Why can't the Chrystie St service terminate at Metropolitan Av?
Three trains shared the 6th Avenue express tracks from 1989 to July 20, 2001: The B, D and Q. If the B runs through the Chrystie Street connection over the Willy B, it could share the express tracks with the D and V at 47th-50th and 42nd, then switch over to the local tracks before entering 34th Street.
So long as the V doesn't terminate at Second Ave. and runs through with the F to Brooklyn, you probably could get away with it. But if it ends there then you would have three different lines going in three difference directions south of B'way-Lafayette -- the B or C train to Essex, the F to the outer platform at Second Ave. and the V to the inner platform. Very convaluted to try and run trains to three seperate locations without delays. The B, D and Q only had one split at either end -- the Q splitting from the B and D at Rockefeller Center and the B splitting from the D and Q between the Manny B and DeKalb.
Assuming the MTA has the cars after the R-143s fully arrive, sending the V either to Church Ave. or Euclid would solve part of that problem.
As for terminating the B or C (or V) at Metropolitan, I don't know if the loop down to B'way in Brooklyn and then back up would be faster for passengers north of Wycoff than to just transfer there to the L and take it in, either to Sixth or Eighth Aves and transfer back to the V or F (at Sixth) or the A, C or E (at Eighth). Running the line to Rockaway Parkway in the future after CTBC is added to other lines would make more sense, since that route would provide a service that wouldn't have such an obvious "shortcut route," unless someone wanted to change to the A/C at East New York and swtich back at West Fourth. Given the trip downstairs and the straighter route of the B'way-Brooklyn line, I doubt they'd save any time at all going that way.
What about Broadway Junction? It's going to be a long time before CBTC is added to the main B-Division trunk lines. In the meantime, the B could operate to Broadway Junction. And it could run express from Bway-Junction to Essex during rush hours.
You may be right about M riders transfering to the L at Wyckoff. That may be faster than looping down to Bway-Brooklyn, over the Willy B then back up 6th Avenue, even with the need to make two transfers. Then the B should run to Broadway Junction.
Oh, just to add - the old K service that ran from Broadway Junction to 57th & 6th only ran during rush hours and was local in Brooklyn. The new B service should run full time or at least all times except midnight-5AM and should run express from Bway Jct to Essex. That would make it much more useful.
Why can't the Chrystie St service terminate at Metropolitan Av?
It could, but 6th Ave service would require more service than the current M train. This would mean more service than necessary on this end of the route.
Three trains shared the 6th Avenue express tracks from 1989 to July 20, 2001: The B, D and Q,
these trains never ran at more than 10 TPH, or 30 TPH in total. with your proposal, it would mean 36 TPH. remember, the f train runs at a very tight 14 tph during rush hours to/from queens.
Your first and second paragraphs contradict. If the C runs over the Manhattan Bridge and the V takes its place south of W4, at no point (in this picture) do three lines share the same set of tracks.
Technically, they wouldn't share tracks. But a switch at West Fourth would require the C and E trains upstairs to coordinate pretty precicely with the F and V trains downstairs to make sure there weren't any backups since you'd be doing a double switch south of West Fourth -- C to the Houston St. tracks and the V continuing along Sixth Ave. to Spring St. -- which would be as delicate a situation as having the three lines sharing the same tracks between W. Fourth and B'way-Lafayette.
I would think the easiest switching pattern with the best use of the rolling stock would be to switch the Cto the Houston St. tracks south of West Fourth and then to the Chrsytie connection east of B'way-Lafayette, while the V would continue through the Rutgers tunnel and then switch to the A-Fulton tracks at Jay Street. That would eliminate the extra punch at B'way-Lafayette to the center tracks at Second Ave., and while it would cut service on the Eighth Ave. line between Jay and West Fourth, to be honest, that route probably isn't going to need the same level of service to lower Manhattan for the next few years.
O run the V out as a local to Coney island via the Brighton. Keep the Q on Broadway as Express, and eventually the D will be back
Unless you want to prove that the 63rd Street connection was a waste of money, all trains on the line should be full-length.
The new Queens Blvd routings will result in fewer cars per hour going into Manhattan than they had in the 1950's.
But there will be more cars per hour than in 2000, correct? I think we all know by now that, for better or for worse, operating procedures have changed over the past 50 years.
The major change in "operating procedures" has been to reduce service. Management has raised some "operating procedure changes issue" to deflect criticism that they are not making full use of their capital resources.
However, if the TA's equipment had the braking performance and operational flexibility of the R1-9 rolling stock then they could use today's operating procedures with the schedules from 50 years ago. Was the 63rd St connector necessary - no.
No they could not. Signal control and operating rules keep distances between trains are longer than they were in the past. Yes faster equipment would help but too many reckless T/Os and sharp lawyers killed that.
20 years ago people on the IRT between 42nd and 72 would fall on the floor regularly from the speeds on those trains and the braking.
Dwell times are up because of fewer C/R's on the train and the platforms.
The signals on the bridges are also time killers that extra speed would not help.
The 63rd street line ''as conceived'' was a great idea,as built,well thats another story all together.but the point is ,it was completed and should be used. I MAY disagree with the T.A from an operational standpoint about how the new tunnel and subway route will be used,but it WILL BE USED. And thats what its all about,isn't it?
It already is a winner. It has saved some bad days in Queens from being worse. Brooklyn had more flexibility with the Tunnel and half a bridge and the A/F crossovers than Queens does. A dead train is not as disasterous as it was before the cut was used.
Those single track GOs between 53/Lex and Queens Plaza were nightmares.
Those single track GOs between 53/Lex and Queens Plaza were nightmares.
They were not a problem in the past. It takes less than 5 minutes to go between 23-Ely and Lex. That means a single track would work with 10 minute night time headways in each direction. All it takes is alert tower operators and maintaining a properly designed schedule.
First of all timetables rarely survive the midnights, they never consider the slow worktrains that always need some sort of reverse move.
Did you ride them? I did and while I did get by in 10 minutes, 20 was more likely and 40 was possible. More like they held you at 5th until the S/B cleared lex and N/B I believe you had to change trains and platforms at QP.
The 63rd st connector gets rid of this completely.
Did you ride them?
I most certainly rode the subways when there was single track operation of the 53rd St tunnel (at night). They maintained their normal schedule. Unlike the Flushing line they did not even have to post notices because there were no platform changes.
Of course in those days the schedule makers were sufficiently intelligent to make the schedules to acommodate single track operation without any delays. Today's schedule makers provide conflicts for such operation.
This was a restricted speed affair and to continue north I had to go to 3 track at the Plaza.
This thing was long enough that I started riding the 7 or taking the LIRR.
Since I was not in Transit at the time it is hard to go back and pick up clues as to what went on back then. Either the flagging was over a wide area or it was run as an absolute block not signal protected.
As an aside it is infuriating for someone to tell me something did not happen because the timetable says ..... or the bridge timers say 25 mph and you are only going 19 you are not a good TO.
Signal control and operating rules keep distances between trains are longer than they were in the past. Yes faster equipment would help but too many reckless T/Os and sharp lawyers killed that.
Your are confusing operating frequency with operating speed.
Minimum distance between a leader and its follower occurs when a train approaches a station. These distances have not changed. The only times that are important for operating frequency are the time it takes a train to come to a stop within a station, the time it takes a train to get out of a station and the time that a train remains in a station. The time that it takes to go between stations does not influence minimum headways.
Dwell times are up because of fewer C/R's on the train and the platforms.
Dwell times are up because headways have increased relative to passenger loads. More C/R's on the train would decrease dwell time. My measurements show that platform codnctors increase dwell time.
>Your are confusing operating frequency with operating speed.
I don't think so. You raised the chimera of the old timetable being possible with faster and better breaking trains with current rules. I am saying you can't do it with current rules becasue there is no where for these trains to fit anymore. The conga line kicks in much faster now.
>The only times that are important for operating frequency are the >time it takes a train to come to a stop within a station, the time >it takes a train to get out of a station and the time that a train >remains in a station. The time that it takes to go between stations >does not influence minimum headways.
Maybe the official distances have stayed the same but 50 years ago I could key up much closer to my leader. Even as a teen I remember seeing trains 10 feet behind their leader. You do this at the risk of your job now.
OK before I get stomped on let me clarify this. With faster equipment you could get more tph with current rules but no 40 TPH.
With faster equipment you could get more tph with current rules but no 40 TPH.
You could proabably get to 40 tph with current equipment. You can also prove it to yourself. There's usually a signal just beyond a station that controls whether of not the train can leave the station. Go to any station that this signal does not also protect an interlocking. For each time this signal is green record the time between a train starts to leave this station until it turns green again. This time interval will be less than 90 seconds (usually in the 75-85 second range).
You should certainly get to the 32-35 tph range. They are currently running in the 25-27 tph range (103 second headways).
>For each time this signal is green record the time between a train >starts to leave this station until it turns green again. This time >interval will be less than 90 seconds (usually in the 75-85 second >range).
Yes, yes, yes.
What you guys don't get is that if I am behind him at a stop as close as allowed (without keying a signal) I can't get in, stop, open, close and be ready to leave by the time that signal turns green at many places.
On the midnights I experience this all the time. Even with no passenger load and a fast C/R in some places I can do it perfectly and just get the yellow and in others the leader disappears in a sea of green and he is for sure more than 2 minutes away from me.
What you guys don't get is that if I am behind him at a stop as close as allowed (without keying a signal) I can't get in, stop, open, close and be ready to leave by the time that signal turns green at many places.
If it takes 75-85 seconds for the signal to turn green after a train starts to leave a station and if trains are running with 90 second headways, then one would expect that your train should wait until the signal turns green for 5-15 seconds before starting to leave to maintain that 90 second headway. Similarly, if they are running 120 second headways (30 tph), one would expect that the signal would be green for 35 - 45 seconds. The train that leaves too early is as much a menace to maintaining a schedule as to one that leaves too late.
Clearly you have no direct knowledge of how far your train is from your leaders. Also, when you do have such direct knowledge it usually means that you are too close. The signal system is not designed to provide this information. Systems that do provide 40+ tph operation have another mechanism for maintaining proper train separation.
On the midnights I experience this all the time. Even with no passenger load and a fast C/R in some places I can do it perfectly and just get the yellow and in others the leader disappears in a sea of green and he is for sure more than 2 minutes away from me.
It sounds like you are trying to run up your leader's tail and are disappointed when you can't. :-)
>It sounds like you are trying to run up your leader's tail and are >disappointed when you can't. :-)
Actually it is intellectual curiousity. Even though I think 40 TPH is BS I tried it your way and it just does not work.
>If it takes 75-85 seconds for the signal to turn green after a train >starts to leave a station and if trains are running with 90 second >headways, then one would expect that your train should wait until >the signal turns green for 5-15 seconds before starting to leave to >maintain that 90 second headway.
To stop a train in station is supposed to take from 18-28 seconds or soemthing like that from the time you come in to the time you completely stop (not crawling in and no sharp breaking), you are supposed to open for at least 10 seconds.
You have blown a third to a half of your 90 second budget and you
still have to get to the next station from a dead stop.
>Clearly you have no direct knowledge of how far your train is from >your leaders. Also, when you do have such direct knowledge it >usually means that you are too close. The signal system is not >designed to provide this information.
Not formally but you know. At 207 yard or CC when there are no other trains, I truthfully have no idea of what 600 ft is. In straight tunnel with my leader ahead I do within 100 ft. You get a very good feel for how far apart the signals are from each other. KP74 may not be 100 ft from KP75 but KP 90 is likely between 1700 and 1500 feet away.
To stop a train in station is supposed to take from 18-28 seconds or soemthing like that from the time you come in to the time you completely stop (not crawling in and no sharp breaking), you are supposed to open for at least 10 seconds. You have blown a third to a half of your 90 second budget and you still have to get to the next station from a dead stop.
There is a signal that controls an entering train's access to the platform. This signal is usually located witin the station and has only yellow and red aspects. (sometimes this signal also has an st aspect). If one were to record the time from when a train starts to leave until the time that this signal permits platform access (st20 or yellow) one would find an average of 25-35 seconds.
Suppose a train leaves a station. In 25-35 seconds the following train can enter the station because the abovementioned platform signal is now yellow. Another 18-28 seconds elapses for the entering train to stop. A total of 43-63 seconds has now elapsed. The train should not leave until 90 seconds has elapsed. This allows a dwell time of 27-47 seconds. This is more than adequate for 90 second headways.
What will the signal be for this following train as it leaves the station? It will have been green for 5-15 seconds before the train starts.
The problem is that they do not run 40 tph - they don't even run 30 tph. This means that the signal at the front of the station has been green for an additional 30 seconds. It means that the following train has no reference as to when to start the train relative to its leader. The follower ususally spends too little time in the station and starts to catch his leader's tail. This causes a gap somewhere with the result that the scheduled dwell times are no longer adequate.
>There is a signal that controls an entering train's access to the >platform. This signal is usually located witin the station and has >only yellow and red aspects. (sometimes this signal also has an st >aspect). If one were to record the time from when a train starts to >leave until the time that this signal permits platform access (st20 >or yellow) one would find an average of 25-35 seconds.
First station time is a good way to lose your job. ST is not uniformly used and signal blocks are not uniformly spaced.
Second the slowest point is likely at terminals that end in a block. Especially since switches are slow speed. Interlockings also have much lower clearing times now. If the C beats you into as an A to Chambers getting into the station it is a two minute affair. Now matter how good the timetable the lines will unsynchronize and mess each other up.
Third
Fourth you are also making the same mistake of making a system wide analysis based on the fastest factors of the system not the slowest limiting factors. The 43-63 seconds is 53-73 because of the doors BUT that is assuming I can get there in that time. That was the whole point of my other post, I tried it on the midnights. I tok heavy breaks and all the other sppedy habits except going past yellows agressively ( I don't see you guys risking your job for me so I won't for you). When I am late and a line crosses me and what should have been my follower is my leader (at least until we diverge again) like the N and Q I have a valid reason to try it your way. I am trying to get back closer to my proper headway.
Fifth you forget about gap stations, they do hold you to time.
First station time is a good way to lose your job. ST is not uniformly used and signal blocks are not uniformly spaced.
We are talking about 3 different signals 1, 2, 3 in the order that they are passed. Signal 1 is in the tunnel just before the station entrance, with red, yellow, green aspects. Signal 2 is in the station with red, yellow and maybe ST aspects. Signal 3 is in the tunnel or at the station exit, with red, yellow and green aspects.
Why some ST's? Sometimes, it is not possible for an exiting train to leave with maximum acceleration due to goemetric considerations - curve or diverging switch. Signal 2's tripper cannot come down until S3's tripper can safely stop an incoming train at its maximum attainable speed (MAS). If the incoming train is going at 20 mph instead of 50 mph when it approaches S2, then its MAS when it reaches S3 and its stopping distance will be less. S2 does not change from red to ST aspects, until the S3 tripper will safely stop the train going at the MAS derived from the ST speed from S2. There is nothing unsafe about going approaching an ST and passing it at its rated speed. The ST aspect buys about 10-15 seconds over a yellow aspect for S2. This is important for 40 tph; it is not for 30 tph. Signal 1 shows a yellow or green aspect, when S3 shows an St or yellow aspect.
Second the slowest point is likely at terminals that end in a block.
The limiting factor for any line's service level capacity is its terminal facilities. The solution is to have multiple terminals at each end.
If the C beats you into as an A to Chambers getting into the station it is a two minute affair. Now matter how good the timetable the lines will unsynchronize and mess each other up.
A schedule is good only if every train follows it at every single station.
Fourth you are also making the same mistake of making a system wide analysis based on the fastest factors of the system not the slowest limiting factors.
Actually, I'm using average times at each station. The variability is between stations. I've also recorded variabililty within each station. My statements are not based on a best case scenerio.
Fifth you forget about gap stations, they do hold you to time.
If one wants to operate close to peak theoretical service levels, then a properly constructed schedule must be adhered to at every single station. Systems that operate at 40+ tph provide such corrections at every station. The operators can adjust their departure down to the second. The existence of gap stations is an admission that management is not making full use of their facilities.
>My measurements show that platform codnctors increase dwell time.
Vs. having them on the trains like in the old days?
Or Vs. not having them around at all. if that is what you mean I think we all would like to hear this in detail.
David, I cannot resist the temptation to throw in my plan at this juncture, too. I admit, I am plagiarizing you, Q Exp, R142 #2, and others. This could only work once the R143s arrive, as it has increased services, and assumes the current situation of northside MB and Bergen Tower out of commission. No capital projects needed. All tracks would have no more than 24 tph, except MB (27), QB exp (30), and Montague tunnel (27), this at morning rush hour:
A, B, C, D, L, S. as now.
E 12 tph southbound (with 3 of them continuing on to Euclid or Rockaway Park), 9 northbound. Jamaica Center, Queens Blvd. Exp., 53rd, 8th Av. local (9) to Canal, and express (3) via Cranberry tunnel to Euclid/RP via Fulton local.
F 9 tph southbound, 6 northbound. Hillside, Queens Blvd. Exp., 63rd, 6th Av. local, Rutgers tunnel, Culver (exp. Ditmas Av. to Kings Highway), Coney Island
V 9 tph both directions, Continental, Queens Blvd. Loc., 53rd, 8th Av. local, Rutgers tunnel, Culver Local, Kings Highway.
G 6 tph both directions Court Square to Smith/9th.
R 6 tph both directions, Continental, Queens Blvd. Loc., 60th, Broadway Local, Manh. Bridge, Brighton Local, Coney Island
Q 9 tph southbound, 12 tph northbound. Hillside (exp.), Queens Blvd. Exp., 63rd, Broadway Express, Manh. Bridge, Brighton Express, Brighton Beach.
Z 6 tph both directions. Jamaica Center, express Eastern Parkway to Essex via WB, Nassau St., Montague tunnel, Brighton local to CI
J 6 tph both directions. Jamaica Center, express Eastern Parkway to Essex via WB, Nassau St., Montague tunnel, 4th Av. local to 95th St.
K 6 tph both directions. Wash. Heights, CPW local, 6th Av. local, Chrystie, via WB, Broadway Brooklyn Local to Eastern Parkway.
M 6 tph both directions. Metropolitan Av, express Myrtle to Essex via WB, Nassau St., Montague tunnel, West End (exp. 4th Av.)
N 9 tph both directions. Astoria local via 60th, Broadway local, Montague tunnel, Sea Beach local (local on 4th Av. as it would be the only service from Brooklyn to Broadway tunnel stops)
W 6 tph southbound, 9 tph northbound. Astoria express, via 60th, Broadway express, Bridge, Dekalb Bypass, West End Express
R 6tph both directions? Queens Boulevard local service is plenty bad enough, thanks. Besides, adding 9 V trains would help much less then adding more R trains. Broadway is much more useful then 6th or 8th Avenues, and Lex/60th is a better transfer point then Lex/53rd--it's an express stop on the Lex and it has a much shorter walk. The Broadway platform is horrendously small, but that's just details. If anything, increase R service to 9 or 10 tph and leave the V at 6tph.
Also: Your plan underserves 53rd St. with only 21tph Southbound. IINM, the current 53rd St. service plan has 30tph, and each of those trains is packed. A very, very large number of these passengers debark at Lexington Ave. Your plan to cut service to both 53rd and 60th Sts. would cause ridiculous overcongestion. What we need is more 60th and 53rd St. service.
Dan
Dan, thanks for your comments. Regarding 53rd/Lex., I think that 53rd/Lex. is not going to have 30 tph as now, once the TA plan to send the F via 63rd begins. I assume that the E would have 15, I suppose the V will have 6 or 9, for 21 tph or 24 tph. As for QB local service to Manhattan, I would guess that it has somewhere from 9 to 12 tph now. What I called for in my plan would then be an increase, to 15, more than the current number, in any case.
Harry
Only problem with the V is that it would not be able to run with more than eight 60-foot cars, due to Eastern Division platform lengths. That could cause major overcrowding on the V while it is running on its Queens Blvd section. You can expect any train running from Queens Blvd to Manhattan to be overcrowded, so all trains headed to Manhattan need to be as long as possible (at least 600 feet long).
That's why I suggested the B instead of the V. The B can get away with eight 60-foot-car trains because the CPW IND line does not see the huge crowds that the Queens Blvd IND does thanks in part to the nearby West Side IRT line. The C can get the B's R68's and run with full-length 600-foot long trains and run from Bedford Park in the Bronx. I suppose the B could be merged with the J, but the J is a much longer route than the M in Brooklyn and Queens and the A, E and L (which all connect to the J) get to Manhattan faster than the J. That's why I suggested the M instead of the J.
And to minimize switching delays between 42nd and 34th Streets, I would run the V through the 63rd St tunnel and leave the F in the 53rd St tunnel (when the V is running). This way only the B has to switch tracks between 42nd and 34th Streets. The V would come into Rockerfeller Center on the express tracks and relay at 34th.
[That could cause major overcrowding on the V while it is running on its Queens Blvd section.]
QB locals currently don't really overcrowd.
[I would run the V through the 63rd St tunnel and leave the F in the 53rd St tunnel (when the V is running).]
When you do that, you most certainly can run 8 car trains.
Arti
If locals don't overcrowd, then the 63rd Street connector was undeniably a waste, since it doesn't increase express capacity an ounce.
My very limited experience is that the R is quite crowded pulling out of Queens Plaza. (The G is a different story, for obvious reasons.)
[If locals don't overcrowd, then the 63rd Street connector was undeniably a waste, since it doesn't increase express capacity an ounce. ]
That's why it is neccessary to divert an express, not local via 63rd Street, forcing people to use locals hopefully will ease exp overcrowding.
[My very limited experience is that the R is quite crowded pulling out of Queens Plaza. (The G is a different story, for obvious reasons.) ]
They are not as crowded as expresses. Few years old data showed that expresses were over 100% capacity when R was below.
Arti
My nearly unlimited experience is that the R approaches 85-90% capacity as it leavs Roosevelt and by Queens Plaza it's usually packed to the limit of comfort; i.e. there's enough room to read a book and if you let go of the pole you won't be held up by the solid mass of bodies surrounding you, as is the case on the expresses.
Dan
I would prefer the C instead of the B.
Run the C from 168 - 8th Ave.- Bway/Lafayette - Essex - Met Ave.
The V 71/Continental - 63rd or 53rd - 6th Ave. - Canal - WTC or Euclid
This would give people in the Lower East Side and Williamsburg one
seat ride to Penn stn, PABT and Central Park and people in
the Rockefeller Center a ride to the WTC.(assuming it will be rebuilt)
The C is already mostly run by 8-car trains, so people shouldn't
complain too much.
Oops, I see David already suggested a plan close to this one.
I haven't read the whole thread yet when I posted the first message.
1. running 2 completely different routes skip/stop defeats the purpose of skip/stop service.
2. the Z runs on 10 minute rush-hour headways. the proposed new route would need to be increased to at least 6 minutes. this would be excessive for Z service, and J service would be have to match it. result: empty trains galore on the eastern division.
3. it would be impractical to end any route at eastern parkway with the loss of the center platform at atlantic ave.
4. besides eliminating a transfer at essex st, why would the eastern division need this new route? are those riders exceptionally lazy that a x-fer at essex st. is too much to bear?
Didn't the MJ run on the Myrtle Avenue El? And wasn't the Myrtle Avenue El demolished in the early 70's? I guess to resurrect that line, that would be considered an "expensive connection".
Yep, it sure did. Incidentally, the MJ marking only appeared on maps and possibly station signs. The Q cars didn't have route signs and therefore never displayed this marking.
The only time I ever saw it on a sign was at Myrtle/Broadway, where it was on ONE sign, a white one, with a Raspberry bullet "MJ" and an arrow pointing to the transfer stairs. Never saw it on any train.
At the outset, BMT Standards that infested the "M" had only their side signs. AND the R-7a/R-9s went blank signs until the Eastern Division rolls were installed.
wayne
I never saw an R-7/9 train on the Eastern Division with a blank front end route sign, although I suppose they could have gotten away with it on the LL. OTOH blank destination signs were the norm, since they weren't used.
How about the N.Y.W.& B. railway ? i bet that would make plenty of people happy as the main highway is a narrow highway that follows the same route to Westchester County...i've never been there so i'm guessing,but i've herd people mention this. too bad the right of way is mostly gone.
They should have the "NX" train once again. There would be no quicker way to get to Manhattan from Coney Island or vice versa.
#3 West End Jeff
The only people it would serve are those in Coney Island, and there are not that many to warrent the expense
True, but since during the summer of 2003, only one train will serve Coney Island. Thus, at least the idea should be given consideration at least for that time period.
If there's only one train serving any corridor, there's no reasonable choice but to make it a local.
The B would be much quicker than any NX route. Fewer stops doesn't guarantee a faster run.
IF there is some way to bring back subway lines today that were taken away in the past I said we would all be greatly benifiting from it.
They were cancelled for a reason, for that same reason they remain gone.
Like the NX line, dashes people from Coney Island to Lower and Midtown Manhattan with in 30 minutes.
Why not just have races along those tracks with empty trains, it'll serve just as many people.
Turtle races would be more exciting.:-)
I agree. The NX is a useless route. I can get from Brighton Beach to 34th St in 35 minutes via the diamond Q. I bet thats MUCH faster than an NX route could possibly be.
Except the old Myrtle MJ route, all of those routes are redundant. Totally unecessary. As a railfan, I yearn for the opportunity to ride new, or old, routes. But that doesn't make these routes practical or worth the expenditure.
On Sunday afternoon I took a bunch of photos of the southern portion of the SNJLRT to document progress of the construction. The pix are online.
light rail Camden to East Riverton 11-04-01
Nice collection of photos, thanks for sharing Bob.
Mr t__:^)
The rest of the SNJLRTS photos that I took on Sunday have been uploaded, going north from East Riverton to Delran, including shots of the formerly ill-fated Rancocas Creek bridge now in its proper position (and presumably in use). Additionally, photos taken yesterday from Burlington to Bordentown complete the 36-thumbnail page. These include a shot of track in the middle of Broad Street Burlington with the old clock in the picture, and Crosswicks Creek bridge bereft of rails.
more interesting SJ light rail photos
There you are again with another OUTSTANDING photo at Florence at Delaware Ave. ... Thanks for sharing.
Mr t__:^)
Thanks, Mr. T.
I just looked at them again and saw that I put the same photo in twice and mislabeled one of them. The application crashed a couple times when I was uploading them. (lame excuse)
Bob
I didn't notice.
Mr t__:^)
I removed one of the duplicates and put in an archive photo of the mock-up of a light rail car. It is the last thumbnail.
Very nice, would look marvelous in my back yard < G >
Mr t
In a Simple Memo, F.Y.I., a Tense Tale of Survival . . .
from Monday's NY Times' Tunnel Vision, a description of the journey of a TA Station Superintendent to the N/R Cortlandt Street station on 9/11.
Wow.
While riding the 4 uptown yesterday I observed that a wooden wall has been erected along the edge of the shuttle platform at Bowling Green, almost completely obscuring the view of the platform.
Anyone know what's going on?
Thanks to Joe Brennan, who advised me that asbestos abatement is taking place there. The project started before 9/11.
Thanks Joe.
Yes I've seen this too on the Saturday after the attacks. (9/15)
Something to do with Asbestos Abatement, which was my question earlier before.
Funnily enough, they had a white plate stating the construction info. and their contractor and whatnot, and it said:
"WE ARE REPLACING 8 ESCALATORS AT THIS STATION".
A fellow SubTalker told me, though, that none of the escalators at Bowling Green need to be replaced.
When we reached the lower level of the station to transfer to the UPTOWN side, I noticed on a sheet of 8" -11" paper it clealy stated that the T/A was going to remove the asbestos from the walls of this station.
This same sheet (copies) of the paper were also found on the I-beams of 34 St. Penn Station on the 8th Av. Subway.
Why are they removing the asbestos?
When did they start?
These two questions I haven't gotten an answer to either of them so I am awaiting.
Railfan Pete.
Would it be possible to replace the Newark Monorail with the JFK AirTrain Cars? It doesnt look like PATH will be extended to EWR anytime soon and the problems with the monorail are well noted. If the JFK Cars work better could they refit the Monorail to improve performance?
In a word: no.
They would have to rebuild the structure, replacing the monorail beam with a deck and lay tracks on the deck. It would be a major rebuild.
It doesnt look like PATH will be extended to EWR anytime soon
Why would PATH ever stretch to EWR? Its service is doing fine from NEWARK.
I've passed through NWK and EWR many times and it looks like PATH doesn't even have a chance to get there because there are many tracks in the way. Also, how can PATH install a new 3rd rail to get to that station anyways? Just more unnecessary traffic control wlll take place.
Also, I don't even know if the station was built for PATH.
the problems with the monorail are well noted.
What types of problems? The monorail cars are the same as that which are used within the 3 terminals, and the first time I rode it, I was impressed. I was in one of the monorail stations at the time. It would be very helpful if you let me know.
Also, if possible, where can you find the photos for the JFK AirTrain cars?
Thanks.
Railfan Pete.
pete---jfkairtrain.com
As for AirTrain I saw one car foing test run passed the station befor the a Train. It stop between station and open it's door. Can we say law suit if this happen in serivce. I know it was only a test.
Robert
The URL is now:
http://www.kennedyairport.com/airtrain/index.html
Wow. Those cars look great. Do they run it in 2-car pairs?
The Logo for the AIRTRAIN looks identical to the EWR one except different colors.
Wow. Those cars look great. Do they run it in 2-car pairs?
The Logo for the AIRTRAIN looks identical to the EWR one except different colors.
I understand your opinion, but why increase the budget?
The EWR's monorail cars are the same as that of the ones that formerly connected the 3 terminals and 2 parking lots before the Airport Station opened.
Also, I don't know if JFK cars are "compatible" with the rail on EWR.
And if the JFK cars have a JFK logo on them, why use more money to paint over them for NEWARK?
If JFK cars were to run in EWR, shipping costs would be great.
I think we should get used to the plan now.
Question: When Short turn G.O. service ends, isn't there usually a train or two added to fill the gap left by the next train(s) going long? Case in point:"L" Broadway Junction from Rock. Pky; after this one left B.J. at 6:55 P.M. Sat to Rock Pky and a Manh. Bound leaving at 7:00, the next Man. bound at B.J. was this former shuttle at 7:18 P.M. Why could there not have been one (or two) trains to Manhattan added at, say Atlantic, to shorten the ensuing longer turn around?
Is it true that this Sunday, November 11th, 2001AD, we will see the full time 63rd Street Tunnel service begin? Will there be other changes as well? Will the E, F, G, R and V service changes all go into effect begining this Sunday?
Now that the N and R service is restored, is it possible that they can switch the northern routes and terminals of the N and Q Local? They can run the N express to 57th Street-7th Avenue at all times. Trians will bypass DeKalb Avenue when express in Brooklyn. The Q Local can be rerouted via the Montague Street Tunnel, and run local all the way to Astoria. This can simplify the confusion of the Q Local and Q Express at 57th Street-7th Avenue.
Absolutely not. The service change was pushed off to December 5. (Don't you think you'd have seen at least some sort of prior notice in the trains before the change?)
The two Q's are currently identical north of Prospect Park. Whatever confusion exists (and I don't think it's much) would only get worse if they differed in Manhattan (and Queens!) as well. Especially now that it's been cut back to 86th Street, N ridership in Brooklyn is much lower than circle-Q ridership, and I don't think many Brighton riders are interested in lower Manhattan service.
>Whatever confusion exists (and I don't think it's much) would only get worse if they differed in Manhattan (and Queens!) as well.
I am thinking that people must have gotten used to differing circle/diamond Q service in Manhattan and Queens since its already been done in the past two months.
The idea of sending N via Broadway exp. and bridge and circle Q via tunnel has been gone over before. Doing that would cause massive overcrowding on the diamond Q express.
Running the circle-Q throught the Montague tunnel and local to Astoria while keeping the diamond-Q as it is, would only add more confusion. Better to leave both Q services identical from Prospect Park to 57th & 7th, because both are, well, Q trains.
Change the Q diamond to say a K would eliminate some confusion
I have a few ideas for the E line BVE route I'm making. I'll tell you what they are and I want to know what you think of them.
5th Avenue
The "gallery" on the south wall of the 5th Avenue station would have graphics honoring the rescue workers and pictures of the Twin Towers and 7 WTC. (Pre-attacks, of course.)
World Trade Center station
A mural wall placed at about 891+15 (the entrance to WTC concourse is at 891+10, the buffers are at 892+00). I think it should either go there or at around 891+75, which is just north of the turnstile barrier.
Just so you know, the numbers I'm giving you were collected before 9/11/01, as I was researching the station. I made my own turnstile objects.
For these two stations, I would need to know the location of good pictures that I can use for this purpose.
23-Ely, 14th St, and West 4 St
I need assistance making the staircases/ramps at the end of the station. I'm using 4-meter ceilings.
Lexington Avenue
I need assistance making the escalators at the south end of the station. I'll give you the (x,y) coordinates for the central arch of the station.
All measurements are in meters and rounded to 4 decimal places. This set of (x,y) coordinates roughly follows the equation y=(sqr(2.8²-(x+6)²)/4.5)+3.375
(-8.8,3.3750)
(-8.0,3.8105)
(-7.2,3.9372)
(-6.4,3.9908)
(-6.0,4.0000)
(-5.6,3.9908)
(-4.8,3.9372)
(-4.0,3.8105)
(-3.2,3.3750)
Thanks in advance!
You're missing a parenthesis somewhere.
Actually, I'm not.
y = (sqr(2.8² - (x + 6)²) / 4.5) + 3.375
I read which amazement this evening Nov 6 at 17:00 GMT on the front page of The Manchester Evening News (MEN)newspaper that the Greater Manchester tram network operator Altram is to purchase surplus 15 year old Boeing/Verton (sp?) trams from San Francisco to ease a chronic capacity passenger overcrowding problems on rush hour services. Trams were reintroduced to manchester in 1991 after a 43 year absence and had proved to be extremely popular if not too popular.
The MEN's page picture actually showed a picture of a Bay Authority metro train but this would certainly be outside the narrow U.K. loading gauge! These trams which are apparently being sold at scrap prices, will be tranfered by road to L.A., then by ship via the Panama Canal to the U.K. at a cost of approx $22,000 per tram (i assume per vehicle). The article also noted that Manchester actually pioneered the use of trams (horse-drawn) in 1877 and the nearby seaside resort of Blackpool which is also in Lancashire pioneered the use of electric trams in 1888.
I wonder why San Francisco is getting rid of these relatively youthful trams and also whether this would be the first use of USA built trams in Europe? Comment/answers would be welcomed.
It's kind of an od twist that San Francisco, the home of the rolling transit museum in the form of its historic trolleys on Market street, is sending its own "old" equipment somewhere else, I think.
Mark
After you experience the problem-plagued Boeing/Vertol LRVs, you'll know why San fran was so eager to get rid of them :)
--Mark
The MEN's page picture actually showed a picture of a Bay Authority metro train but this would certainly be outside the narrow
U.K. loading gauge!
Yes, the SF bay area BART system is a wide gauge but the SF trams and the Manchester trams are both "international" standard gauge.
the first use of USA built trams in Europe?
Recently yes since I don't think we have any domestic production of tram cars right now. But not the first by any means. New York sent a lot of its old tram cars to Vienna after WWII and several cities in Europe used cars very similar to our PCC cars, but I wouldn't know offhand where they were built or did they just use the same design and technology patents.
And as for why SF is getting rid of them (and Boston is as well)? They apparently suck. :-)
-Dave
Dave Pirmann says....."They apparently suck. :->"
Now THAT is giving them a compliment.....
That is the LEAST that Muni says about them. Actually, they are down to about 20 of them still in service....most of the rest have been scrapped already. Probably one of the shortest-lived models of railcars in the USA.....
On a trip to San Francisco a year ago, most the system (excepting of course, the historic cars used on the F route) was operated by the Boeing LRVs, some of which came from Boston. The Breda LRVs, at that time, were far fewer in numbers. they are also a far heavier and noisier car. Surprisingly, the Boeing LRVs, while a bit shabby in appearance, were, at that time, extremely reliable and fast. I had stayed at a motel near the Pacific Ocean, and used these cars daily for five days to commute to downtown San Francisco. There was not one breakdown or problem. I was told by SFMR personnel that Muni had been taking fairly good care of these cars, at least mechanically and electrically, for the past few years, and the most problems were long gone. Thus, Manchester may actually be purchasing units that operate fairly well.
A little more to the east, Salt Lake City, anticipating a trolley shortage for the Olympics next year, is borrowing cars from Dallas, which doesn't need all it has on the property at this time (purchased for extensions not yet completed). It is believed some of these cars may be in operation at this time. And some of the soon-to-be surplus San Jose cars have found their way to Sacramento and it is rumored a few might also go to Salt Lake City (which is also borrowing a number of buses from San Francisco, among other cities, for the Olympics). Perhaps, then, it is not too far-fetched to think that a few of San Francisco's Boeing LRVs might also spend some time in Salt Lake City.....
.....after which perhaps a few can join San Francisco’s historic fleet!
We could use some extra cars here in Denver.:-) RTD can't order equipment fast enough to keep up with demand. Currently, six LRVs are slated to be delivered in time for the opening of the Central Platte Valley Spur, and 12 more are on order for the highly successful Southwest Corridor.
The Boeing LRVs have been plauged by various problems since they hit the rails on the N Judah in 1980. Boeing got out of the streetcar making business after Boston decided they were lemons. MBTA sold Muni several of its lemons in the early 1980s.
The MUNI fleet will eventually be all Breda LRVs. The Boeings still ply their way along the L and M lines. Several Boeings sit in various stages of canibalization at the extra yard along San Jose Avenue and some have been laid up before scrapping at the end of the King Street right of way underneath Interstate 280.
My big complaint about the Boeings was they lacked air conditioning or even good fresh air ventilation. MUNI installed sliding top third windows on the LRVs in the late 1980s. THis came after they insisted the cars had sufficient ventilation. The Bredas carry air conditioning.
Back in 1977, MUNI sold a number of its retired 1950's vintage trolley buses to Mexico City. I understand some of them might still be running.
George Devine
San Francisco
The lack of air conditioning will not be a problem in Manchester, just so long as they are water tight!
Lack of Air CXon in SF is not unusual. Very rarely it is needed
Yeah, that's why all their new equipment is now getting it...the Breda LRV's, their new NABI and Neoplan buses.
It may not be needed much, but when it IS needed, it is NEEDED!! A couple years ago, my wife and I were up there for four hot, steamy, uncomfortable, nasty 98-degree days. We made the mistake of needing to use the J-CHURCH line, which of course, at the time, was all Boeing LRV.
Ever get into an LRV that was sitting in the yard all day, and then do a top speed of about 20 miles an hour into downtown??? I must have sweated off 15 pounds on that trip.
We actually rode BART over to Concord and back just to sit in some air conditioning.
Natural air conditioning in SF...that's what the natives all claim. Yeah, right, they're all standing on street corners blowing each other.
Suggestion: Bring your umbrella if it looks like rainif you intend to ride one of the ex-SF Muni cars.....you won't be sorry.
Across the street from the Geneva Yard is chock full of the old Boeing LRV's. My MUNI connection told me a few months ago that they had to pay a company from LA to come scrap them. The project was behind schedule which gave me a chance to "raid" the yard on a rainy day to extract two side signs from two different cars :)
He also said that many circles were not pleased with the Bredas as well...(they don't just suck in Boston :) ).
So how much will you be offering the Boeing rollsigns for on E-Bay?
A lot of 3rd Ave cars built just before WWII went to Vienna. The Hague Netherlands had as recently as 1992 US Made PCC cars
The Hague Netherlands had as recently as 1992 US Made PCC cars
Nope.
HTM had two St. Louis built cars, 1001 & 1002. The balance of the Hague's PCC's were built by La Brugeoise et Nivelles in several batches over 20 years. National Capital Trolley Musuem has HTM 1329, a 1971 product.
When i was there in 88 there were a number of American Built PCCs
Bob, they were not American made. Other than the two St. Louis built cars, 1001 & 1002,(which were shipped in knocked down condition and finished in Belgium.) all other Hague PCC's were built by La Brugeoise et Nivelles. La Brugeoise was a licensed builder of PCC cars after 1948. HTM used the same design as 1001 & 1002 for all their cars, thus the "American" appearance.
They might look it, but they're not.
Go up to National Capital and look at HTM 1329 next to TTC 4603 and you'll see the "family resemblance"
I swore they looked exactly like US PCC except they had pantographs rather then poles
Shore Line's 629 was one of them. It was sent to Vienna as part of the Marshall Aid Plan to help rebuild western Europe. They used military transport boats, transporting goods and materials to Europe in one direction and bringing refugees admitted to the US under the auspicies of the Displaced Persons Act on their return trip. My folks came to the US thanks to the DP Act.
629 (my favorite car at Branford) became number 4239 in Vienna. 631 (Vienna 4216) is at Seashore, also from the same batch of cars... 678 (Vienna ????) is at National Capital in Maryland... 637 (Graz number unknown to me) has been restored to TARS livery in Graz, Austria... Vienna 4208 (TARS number unknown to me) is preserved in Vienna.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
There's also a TARS Vienna car at the National Tramway Museum in England. It's in TARS livery wearing # 674.
San Francisco is getting rid of them because they were genuine pieces of shit.
Lotsa luck, Manchester!!!!!!
Indeed. Yes, let's be brutally honest about the Boeing Vertol LRVs: Those cars were the reputation stain of the light rail transportation movement in the late 1970s/early 1980s.
-Robert King
You could almost say the Boeing Vertol LRVs are the R-16s of light rail transit.
Can you fill me in on the R16s?
-Robert King
Overwight maintenance headaches with zero tolerance for snow, for both the door motors, and the GE cars in general.
One word: lemons.
Maybe they should send them to Denver instead
Better still, maybe they could be used to form a barrier reef someplace!
Joe V in his previous response has correctly stated the R16s problems. These were our 1954-model B Division (then BMT) subway cars, built by ACF. There were 200 of these beasts. These were among the most sluggish subway cars that I have ever ridden on, and that includes today's slowpoke kings, the R68/R68A. Oddly enough, six of these cars survive to this day (not in revenue service, of course), I believe at least three are operational.
wayne
They were also the last single unit 60-footers built for the NYC subway system.
The did all right downhill on the Jamaica-Broadway Express in the 60's. You could forecast a snowstorm coming when the Standards showed up instead, and the R16's went to the 14th Street line. Unfortunate;y, the Standrads were never 7 or 8 cars when that happened.
Its funny that the R17s were such good cars
The Carter adminstration encouraged the aerospace industry to try their hands in providing their knowledge in mass transit. The results... you guess it, all left the transit market and back to aerospace.
Phil Hom
Thanks for the cars guys !
Simon
Swindon UK
From what I've been reading this morning "Thank's" may not be an appropriate response. Having said that, as a regular tram user in M/cr I don't care! Bring them on over.
Hehehehe, have fun trying to keep 'em running!!!!
Will MUNI be paying you to take those things of their hands?
Seriously, those Boeings really are horrible cars.
-Robert King
Hmm, maybe the Newark PCC cars are really heading west after all.
wayne
Nope, all of them are staying right in New Jersey.
Shoreline just worked out a trade with Minnesota Transportation Museum
of ex-Minneapolis,ex-Newark/RTA PCC 27 (ex TCRT 416) for car parts. Shoreline will restore it as PSCT 27 since they couldn't get one from NJT.
Nope, San Francisco doesn't even want the Newark PCC's.
They actually found four of their own old ones....1027,1028,1029, and 1035 near Lake Tahoe....and have worked out a deal with those cars owners to buy them back, and in the next couple years they will be rebuilt to run with the rest of the PCC fleet!!!
"They actually found four of their own old ones....1027,1028,1029, and 1035 near Lake Tahoe....and have worked out a deal with those cars owners to buy them back, and in the next couple years they will be rebuilt to run with the rest of the PCC fleet!!!"
I'm glad to hear those cars are headed back to San Francisco. Do you know anything about this group near Lake Tahoe? Andrew Young's 1996 book "Veteran & Vintage Transit" listed a group known as Tahoe Airport Generic Rail that owned quite a few cars - mostly SF PCC's, but also some historic cars. I have never heard of this group since. Any info would be greatly appreciated.
There's a snippit of info on
There's a snippit of info on a German site (fortunately with some pretty good English translation) but not much. This page indicates the numbers as 1026, 1027, 1028, and 1034.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
This is the craziest idea you're ever gonna hear but hear me out, I KNOW IT WONT HAPPEN but this would bring around so many jobs it could really help out, and in the end the city will move around so much faster then it is today.
1. Building the Second Avenue Line This would allow for a serve decrease in crowding on the bus lines and Subway Lines on the East Side of Manhttan.
2. Takeing the B.Q.E. and making it open cut highway Normally when it is in brooklyn its along an elevated route and in an industrial area to boot. So I say rebuild it as a ground level express way with 8 lanes, and put trees and other things to make the surrounding areas nicer, and rebuild other sections in the Queens Park of the B.Q.E. in the same mannor. This will build up land value and attract people to that area of brooklyn for commerical devlopment.
3. Build the Cross-Brooklyn Expressway This highway if built will take congestion off the Southern State, Grand Central and the Belt Parkway, people will now have more direct access from Long Island to Downtown Manhttan by haveing the Cross Brooklyn Expressway go directly into the Battery Tunnel. Save Time, Save Money on Gas,
4. Build the F.D.R. and Henry Hudson Highways Underground by doing this we can create a 10 lane highway for both highways. So that traffic moves quickly, the sections can be converted to beautiful parks on both sides of manhattan attacting Commecial Markets, also a light rail can be put in the parks to whisk people from the tops of Manhattan to Lower Manhattan as a scenic alternative to the subway. The parks will attrack visitors as well. Better off and on ramps will be get people on and off the highways faster. Also Carbon Monoxide levels will drop dramatically.
5. Build New Manhattan and Willamsburg Bridges These bridges have cost the city alot in repair constantly because of the way the were designed. It is time to replace these bridges with new strong, attractive deisgns. Like Box Girder or Cable Stayed Bridge types. The bridges will be strong enough to hold rush hour traffic and trains at the same time with out damaging or causing it to bend or drop.
This thing would cost well over 100 Billion dollars to build, but the after effects would be great. A nicer looking, faster city.
So what do you think (please dont say it is impossible or you're crazy) because I know it would never happen for many reason. Just give opinions on the benifits and stuff.
IMHO, we will see at least one of the bridges into Manhattan torn down and replaced within the next 20 years. The manhattan anbd Williamsburg are both at the point where they will simply have to be replaced, or very heavilly overhauled. IMHO, the manhattan should have been torn down and replaced years ago. Putting the rail lines on the outside of the bridge was the biggest erngineering boner in NYC history.
As far as dropping the highways into an open cut - I wouldn't be so fast to do it - look at the Big Waste Dig in Boston, and what that's done. I think some push for highway beautification, though, would help.
Building the 2nd ave line has to be done. It's that simple.
I think a new Penn Station / MSG complex on the existing site, with a new streamlined yard, and better passenger facilities, is more important that the Farley Post Office boondogle being pushed by (sl)Amtrak and Pataki. I'd want to see commuter-optimized tracks, a clean up and redo of the track level, featuring higher clearences there, and a better ceiling, a single level passenger space above for all 3 (2) operations, a high ceiling through there, then a new MSG on top of that. This isn't beyond the realm of engineering. I'd raise the station's ceiling to slightly above street level, and go for a somewhat retro-50's look - clean simple, and beautiful. I despise Airport Modern, and the Mall Look. Hell, I'd love to see an Art Decco, or Googie style Penn. The latter would really be weird, though :)
How about this:
Tear the Manny B down (since the Williamsburg has been somewhat rebuilt in recent years) and replace it with a cars-only bridge. I believe that it is feasible for a tunnel to be built from the old Myrtle Ave to the 2nd Ave station (Stub is allready there) or Grand St by creating the side platforms that were to be created at this station (this way, the center tracks could be used for the new 2nd Ave Line).
I agree with not building the underground highway. The Big Dig has been going on forever... and the end seems nowhere in site.
I am not anti-highway. One thought I've long cherished is a rebuild of the BQE and LIE adding three or so additional *eastbound* lanes (perhaps tolled), to include a new *one-way* East River crossing at Houston St., going east. Getting cars more quickly out of Manhattan is one solution to the mess.
And you have a reason to cheaply build four tracks of subway on such a Houston crossing, probably going into the box left for the never-built second IND at S. 4th St.
To get new subway lines built, you have to get in bed with the highway people.
What's going on at East 180th Street on the 2 and 5? First, they were painting everything, EVERYTHING orange. The place looked like a kiddy playhouse at McDonalds. Now, they've REPAINTED everthing green. Was the orange just some kind of base paint or something? Or, did someone just change their mind. The TA definately needs a good interior decorater. :)
Its fall. The station should turn from green to orange, not the other way around. :)
Mark
Also on the same line (of discussion, not the same subway line), I noticed last week that the southbound platform walls at 86th Street on the N had been painted white (including the formerly green columns). The northbound platform was still the traditional beige and green.
Sometime ago here in Philadelphia they repainted the concrete surfaces at the Erie station on the Broad Street subway. All the tile had been masked so that paint wouldn't get on it, but they forgot about the tracks, and the spraypaint left them looking as if a light early winter snow had dusted the tracks like so much confectioners sugar.
Mark
If you scrape away the paint on a lot of the TA elevated structures, you will see an orange base coat or primer. It's an anti-rust paint. Something very needed in NY's humid climate.
We had a similar situation here too at Metuchen several months ago. They repainted the station house with red orange and sandy beige color paint.
The house used to have a dark shade of turquoise and a beige color. When I first saw it, it felt weird with the change, but after awhile you get used to it.
Ironically as I come to think of it, the establishment date of this station is 1888! Did the PRR operate railroad cars in this area for that long? (It was renovated in the 1970's)
It's not like everything gets painted bi-annually, but I don't know about the MTA. They don't repaint the Flushing elevated line.
: )
Railfan Pete.
I have used MetroPark since 1994. At that time it was a solid turqoise color then it was two tone beige upper with dark green upper. The green has since been replaced with dark red.
Enjoy!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
God, that thing's ugly!!!!
So much for Sunberg - Ferrar's 1960's vintage design lasting another few generations :(
Why the hell does Bombarder make such crappy equipment, anyway?
Why the hell does Bombarder make such crappy equipment, anyway?
Just wait till it hits daylight. I'm sure things would lighten up a bit at least.
Bombardier does NOT make crappy material. It is actually a major company focusing on five major aspects to contribute to affecting the economy it serves.
It not only manufactures trains, it also manufactures aircraft and recreational items, and takes part in an international program called Bombardier International.
Bombardier's contributions to rail cars in the NE area include the 20 Acela Express car sets, (2 power cars on each end and 6 coaches), NJ TRANSIT's Comet IV push-pull cars, and this, the M-7 for the LIRR.
Bombardier also creates railcars for transit systems around the world. FYI: visit Bombardier's website.
: )
Railfan Pete.
Only the recent Plattsburgh products are crap! Al la R-142.
KAWASAKI R-142A FOREVER!
Trevor Logan
Bombardier's contributions to rail cars in the NE area include the 20 Acela Express car sets, (2 power cars on each end and 6 coaches), NJ TRANSIT's Comet IV push-pull cars, and this, the M-7 for the LIRR.
Add the Comet II, III, and V cars.
Bombardier is actually a Canadian co. with its headquarters in Montreal, QC (I think it is).
It is a French speaking region, so the Bombardier website has options for English and French.
Hmmm. Not that different from the M1s and M3s. However it seems as if the blue stripe motiff is gone for good.
:-( Andrew
Well a few orange reflective safety strips should brighten her up.
Cool, different, I like when things change in design, it says we still got an imagination. So keep it up
Why couldn't they just pull out the existing design without going through the expense of this ? The last were built as M-6's in the early or mid-1990's for the NH.
actually i think those M7s are gonna be hot! Can't wait till they pass my home station which is rosedale. They look like R142s sort of. And i think the Commuters will like it. Some commuters complain that LIRR sends all the Diesel equipment to the good lines, and they never see anything new besides the M1s and M3s. So when they see these new electrics whenever they hit the road, i think they will like it. passengers do not care what a train looks like ugly or good looking. as long as it takes them where it goes, they will be fine. If a Work train stopped, and opened up, they would board it. lol
Since they cars will be so heavy, rivalling MP54's, the LIRR is already planning to stretch their schedules.
I wish they'd bring back those MP-54's. That there was an MU!
The first time I rode in an MP-54 trailer (P-54?) on the Paoli Local, I was pleased with how quiet it was, making reading very pleasant. After a few miles I missed the sound and vibration of the motors. I never rode a trailer again.
The Pennsy ones grinded and vibrated much louder and hotter than the LIRR ones. But they all ran 40-50 years, some without ever getting an overhaul.
Is that the R142 for the LIRR? I hope the MTA gets off this black front scheme.
R142? This is LIRR my friend. They use only M -car types here. R-class types are for the NYCT.
I don't mind the black front schemes. Although one more set would push for a change.
By the way, what car types are currently in service on the LIRR?
: )
Railfan Pete.
He was making reference to the R-142
Current models running on the L.I.R.R. are the M-1,M-3, and if I'm not mistakened M-4 or M-2. I am not a constant rider or constant watcher of the L.I.R.R.
Just M-1 and 3. M2,4,6 is the dual-voltage orange fleet of Metro North.
Black fronts on a grade-crossing intense LIRR is extremely stupid. After their first crossing accident, some savage, ambulance-chasing lawyer will have a field day with that one and win, while hapless LIRR management will act like victims as they always do.
I was asking if the front was LIRR's version of the R142. I know LIRR doesn't use the R142, but the front of that thing looks very similar (and just as ugly).
As Philip has duly noted, it is decidedly UGLY, but it is in keeping with the current motif - this is to the R143 as the M-1/M-3 is to the R40M, R42, R44 and R46. It does look more like the R143 than it does the R142 due to the positioning of the headlights and the roofline. It would look better if they could get rid of those little pantograph gates.
wayne
I would rather see the Sundberg-Ferrar design from the late 60's on the M7 rather than this. This reminds me of the Shoreliner II design up front in a way.
Single leaf doors on the M-7, am I right?
--Mark
"Single leaf doors on the M-7, am I right?
That's right Mark.
I don't think this design is ugly. You want to see ugly, try the GO Transit bi-level commuter cars.
Bill "Newkirk"
The GO cars just have a poor paint scheeme.
Whats with these new single leaf door plans
Another GREAT idea by the LIRR. Cutsdown on door motors maintenance.
Now when a motor goes, the entire vestibule is useless. They're not old enough to remeber the Lo-V's.
very smart
:)
Since I relocated to South Florida shortly before the Sept. 11th terror attacks please help me with these service changes.
#l Line- I understand that the #1 line operates to New Lots Avenue at all times. Where does the # 4 line now terminate during late night hours. (The 4 would operate to New Lots Ave when the 3 did not operate)
#3 Line- does the 3 train use both express tracks at 14th Street?
E Line- With the last stop now being Canal Street how does the E turn around. Does it go into the middle track at Chambers Street or does the E opearte light into the closed World Trade Center Station.
Thank You
OK here is the current service plans
1 - 242 Street To New Lots Avenue: All times EXCEPT Nights where 1 trains operate to Chambers Street
2 - 241 Street to Flatbush Avenue (Local): All Times
3 - 148 Street to 14 Street
4 - Woodlawn to Utica Avenue (All Times) At Night 4 train runs to New Lots Avenue
E - Jamaica Center to Canal Street (trains turn back using the cross over at World Trade Center
There you go
Thank You for the update
well as for the 4 i cannot comment, but i see no reason why they cannot continue operating to New lots. anyways get this! 2 trains are now making all stops on 7av! 9 trains are suspended. N and R has been restored recently, however they bypass cortlandt street at all times both directions. I have Motorman friends on the E and the E is my home line. The E sign used to say E world trade CTR. now the R46s say only E 8 AVENUE. The R32s have returned to the E. they were all over the Q local so the E was almost 100% R46 for a good 4-5 weeks, because of R train suspension. The E train does continue into the WTC station which is closed. the Motormen and Conductor still do the usual crew changes, but no passengers. they even allow E's to sit at Canal for Train emptying purposes. Also A and C have been stopping at Chambers once again. J and M W and Q have been restored. that was the worst because Z was suspended, Q locals came to Queens with R68s too! Also the J had to go all the way to 95th! all the Motormen hated that! except ones who had one trip! My friend operates the R, but for his supplement job, he only had a Q trip halfway! A division IRT lines remained normal with the exception of the 1,2,3. The one line that remained unaffected was the 7. As a matter of fact i think when the towers were done collapsing. the 7 immediately began again.
E,1,2,3 are most likely to remain the way they are for a GOOD while! i dunno when all will return. anyways i miss the 9 tho :(. at least the Z is back
Hey you wanna here interesting things, the WTC station is nearly in perfect shape so see it open as early as March, April or May. Amazing speeds.
I don't see why the WTC E station is still closed. Despite the name, it's a good distance from the site of the towers. From the A/C platform, it looks fine. Obviously the south exit would be closed off, but the north exit and transfer could be reopened now, from what I can tell.
The 9 isn't suspended; it's simply subsumed into the 1. Going by the numbers of passengers served, it appears that the 9 hurt more than it helped. It shouldn't return.
IINM, the first line to be restored was the A (operating local, of course, and via the Rutgers tube). But the 7 started up pretty quickly, too, and I may have the order wrong.
The B, D, F, G, L, 7, and shuttles were all unaffected (at least directly) by the attack once service resumed.
The Q's in Queens had nothing to do with the Z's suspension (or, rather, subsumption). They ran to Queens to take the place of the R, which was suspended.
I don't see why the WTC E station is still closed. Despite the name, it's a good distance from the site of the towers. From the A/C platform, it looks fine. Obviously the south exit would be closed off, but the north exit and transfer could be reopened now, from what I can tell.
Transfer to where? The only transfers that could take place at the WTC station on the E is through the Concourse basement under the twin towers to the 1,2,3,9,N,R,A and C lines. (May give you a clue)
The E line has a station of its own. If little damage at all, was done to the station, the MTA will still close it for safety reasons and will not allow its passengers to cross "the realm" of the debris.
The 9 isn't suspended; it's simply subsumed into the 1. Going by the numbers of passengers served, it appears that the 9 hurt more than it helped. It shouldn't return.
The basic purpose of the #9 train is to provide faster and additional service on the 7th Av. line in mid-upper Manhattan. For this service, the MTA must distinguish the skip-stop service train as a separate # for service. I've, in the history of my riding NYCT, seen only one 9 train s/b when it was slowing down at 50 St. (I was on a #2 UPTOWN at the time) The #9 train uses R62A equipment.
Railfan Pete.
Wrong on all counts.
The E WTC station is connected directly to the A/C Chambers Street station, which in turn is connected to the 1/2 Park Place station. This is all a few blocks north of the WTC; all transfer stairways and corridors are still in place.
The 9 does (did) not provide additional service. North of 137th Street, half of the trains served one set of stations and half of the trains served another set of stations, and they were called 1 and 9 so the two varieties could be identified. The entire skip-stop procedure saved a whopping two minutes or so from top to bottom, but anyone boarding at an intermediate station skip-stop station had an increase in waiting time of well over two minutes. It was a nice experiment but it clearly failed. Note that there's nothing stopping the TA from reviving the 9 today, but instead the 9 bullets have been disappearing from the stations. Folks, I think the 9 is gone for good.
That is not true. In some aspects, the "9" did provide additional service to "SOME" stations, mainly stations served by both "1" and "9" trains (i.e. 168 St, 181 St, 191 St, 231 St and 242 St). Before the advent of the "9" service, during weekdays from 6am until approx. 7pm, every other "1" train terminated at 137 St-Broadway, thus during rush hours, while south of 137 St experienced headways of 4 to 6 minutes during rush hours, anything north of 137 St experienced headways of 8 to 12 minutes which was unacceptable. God forbid if a train broke down, especially if it was a 242 St train.
However I do agree with you about the skip-stop service. They need to just end that. Either run one of those trains non-stop from 96 Street until 145 Street (am rush downtown, pm rush uptown, if possible) or just make all "1" trains make all stops to 242 Street.
I hold by my position that the 9 was nothing but a rebranded 1. At the beginning of rush hour, when skip-stop began, did headways at all-stop stations suddenly drop in half? At the end of rush hour, when skip-stop ended, did headways at all-stop stations suddenly double? No. The extra rush hour service was just that: extra rush hour service. (Nearly) all lines get that.
Yes, historically, alternate rush hour 1's dropped out at 137th. I'm comparing skip-stop service to the arrangement today when skip-stop doesn't operate (like now).
If the 2 is ever restored as an express, 1 service north of 137th should remain as it is (perhaps running express between 96th and 137th) but there should be supplemental local service south of 137th. I don't have all the numbers, but I have a strong feeling that my local 1/2 station (before the 2 started serving it) ranked very high (top ten?) in passengers served per train, rush hours and possibly weekends as well.
Amen, I live by an intermidiate stop, 238 and the 9 drove me nuts, not so much in the AM (when you're not in a real hurry to get TO work) but in the evening. I would rush to the train only to find it was a nine and had to wait for the next 1. Even worse, just miss a 1 and I'd have to wait for the next 9 and then again for a one.
Take whatever comes and go to VC then leave on the next southbound - probably faster.
WTC tracks no longer end at the block. You can't fully berth a train in the station anymore.
The Plaza which is where most people came to or from is closed. It stinks even after repeated cleanings and yes somehow much worse than Chambers St.
Well, that explains that.
Is something (debris?) blocking the tracks? If nothing else, reopening the platform would allow E trains to expeditiously get out of the way of C trains at Canal. Besides, I'm sure a few passengers would exit at the rear or transfer to the 1/2.
Nothing is blocking the tracks. For some reason, they've pushed back the area to stop at and have installed temporary banker lights and a trip.
FYI, the entrance to the WTC concourse has been replaced with a solid steel barrier. There's still plenty of dust on the floor and it smells like burnt rubber.
I would guess that they will hold off on a plan for the WTC IND station until they know what is going to happen to the NE corner of the WTC site. It probably isn't worth the trouble to get the station in proper order for passengers just to connect to the Park Place IRT station. All passengers would have to be funneled to the north end transfer stairs. I cannot see them opening the south end fare control area to the stairs on the east side of Church Street.
Once there is some plan for the WTC site, they can come up with a plan for the south end of the WTC IND station and the west side of the Cortlandt Street BMT station. Perhaps a transfer??? The plan would have to be adaptable to whatever is done for the site as a whole.
Does anyone have any idea what percentage of the traffic at the various WTC stations (Chambers/WTC IND; Cortlandt Street BMT; Cortlandt Street IRT; and PATH) went to the Trade Center complex? That might give an idea what kind of volume they would need to serve without WTC.
I saw an equal amount of R-32 and R-46 consists on the E, and on the R-32s the lower side destination signs were set to Canal St. Manhattan. Didn't see what the R-46s said.
it said E 8 AVENUE
by the way, a Subtalker said he moved to florida and wanted to know if the 4 still goes to New lots. I did see a 4 stopping at borough hall, coming from New lots headed for woodlawn. Anyways its good to see that most subway lines have returned to normal.
until we meet again
step in, stand clear
That 4 was most likely coming from Utica, not New Lots, unless it was at night. The 4 is running exactly as it did before September 11.
10-4. Thanks.
The 1 terminates at Chambers Street at night.
The 3 turns on the northbound express track at 14th Street. This causes no end of confusion on both platforms (passengers trying to go south board northbound trains while passengers trying to go north wait by an unused track).
The E operates as always, turning at WTC, but passengers are chased off at Canal. The WTC platform is closed to the public.
Maybe the E cut back to Canal with a forced transfer to go further south is encouraging Jamaica - lower Manhattan riders to use the J/Z.
It doesn't take any longer, is less crowded, and probably has far better OTP.
The 3 uses only the downtown track at 14th Street.
I just got off to see the MTA website and I found within the set of links one link marked "Surplus Material Sales".
It's about how MTA, the largest urban mass transit system in the nation, has a large inventory of surplus and used material and equipment for sale.
Visit the website: Surplus Material Sales.
Would this be one of MTA's milestones? or is it just a normal thing MTA does every year or something?
It does it every year, nothing special, makes additional money
In a previous job, when I was working Off-B'way, a show I was working on took place on a bus. Everyone was quite surprised when I showed up with 5 two-seater bus seats, some aluminium poles, and the black rubber matting from the floor.
Wow, are you a T/A bus driver? If so, do you like BusTalk better or SubTalk?
I just got off to see the MTA website and I found within the set of links one link marked "Surplus Material Sales".
Would this be one of MTA's milestones? or is it just a normal thing MTA does every year or something?
I recall seeing an announcement of surplus material sales on the MTA site three or four years ago. The MTA's probably been making these sales for years.
It's common, even in industry. Pratt and Whitney has a surplus store where you can get old and surplus stuff, (not engines ;) sometimes you get a bargain, sometimes it's a rip. They do stuff like buy enough cable to network an area, then have some leftover boxes so they sell it. Or, they buy too much then sell the leftovers. Get a quantity discount and hopefully make some $$$ selling the leftovers. Or, a product line gets dropped or outsourced, and the tooling is leftover. Not like the average Joe needs a spindle from a G&L 8000, but drill bits, reamers, taps, etc, are often had for decent prices, and are "aerospace quality", not like the cheap stuff you buy at Home Depot or loews.
Anyway, I'm guessing the MTA does the same thing.
It was a PAST milestone, circa 1977-1982, when the system was constipated as hell, to use David L. Gunn's words, whereas you would have 20X the needed supply of pick up shoes for a R16 which was soon to be retired, yet nothing for a R42.
This has been part of the website for a while. Usually sell stuff most of us will never need. On the Memorabillia part, they have sold various decals, signs, and the like...Only problem they don't sell in ones and two's but lots of 50-100 items. Therefore if you bid on something and only want 1 or 2 how do you dispose of the remainder. Also they may group many decals into one lot.
There are currently 7 services serving the line Far Rock, Far Rock local, Lefferts, Lefferts Shuttle, the C, the H and Rock park expresses.
Any ideas the maintain current service, do not involve other lines, don't add to the number of services (OK maybe 1 more) and get rid of the Far Rock local to 207.
Remember, no E to Euclid.
No infrastructure builds.
No busses ( busses are a good idea but would never fly)
Stuff also has to get shopped and cleaned.
No armies of switchmen.
No wrong railing and single tracking.
The only way to eliminate the Far Rock local is to replace it with a shuttle. I'm not thrilled with that idea but I know why you want it, so I'll play along.
Is a service improvement okay?
How's this:
(A)
All times except nights: Far Rockaway to 207th Street. Express between Euclid Avenue and Hoyt-Schermerhorn Street and between Canal Street and 168th Street.
< A >
Rush hours: Rockaway Park to Dyckman Street, peak direction only. Bypasses Rockaway Boulevard and 88th Street on the center track. Express between Euclid Avenue and Hoyt-Schermerhorn Street and between Canal Street and 168th Street.
(C)
All times: Lefferts Boulevard to 168th Street. Local. Nights, extended to 207th Street.
(H)
All times except nights: Rockaway Park to Broad Channel. Connect at Broad Channel to (A).
Nights: Rockaway Park to Far Rockaway to Euclid Avenue to Rockaway Park (round-robin shuttle). Connect at Euclid Avenue to (C). Northbound trains bypass Rockaway Boulevard and 88th Street on the center track.
(If possible, on the night H, schedule opposing trains to meet at Broad Channel, Beach 90th Street, and Beach 67th Street.)
Actually there is a valid reason to kill it. Even factoring the number of trips made a disproportionate number of incidents occur on the Far Rock jobs.
The Euclid shuttle is a total waste of cleaning staff at Lefferts. There are three trains that after the first two hours are spotless and still get cleaned for another 3 hours
Are you arguing with me? I didn't disagree! All I meant is that, from a service standpoint, shuttles are a pain. (Are there any late night flights at JFK?)
What do you think of my proposal? It seems a bit untraditional to run the C all night, but if during the day the C is the only route to Lefferts, it seems to me that a local from Lefferts to 207th is more similar to the C than to the A.
I was half expecting for someone to bring the other two Hoyt tracks into this.
A night OPTO from 207 to 168 was also on my mind.
There is a HUGE passenger load north of 168 st otherwise ending the A at 168 and extending the C to 207 would be the easiest.
A daytime 3 tripper Express from Lefferts to 168 was a thought as well as 2 tripper C local to Far Rock.
JFK is open 24/7. The H would be a S
You are not happy with it but it is a service improvement?
I came up with almost exactly the same thing but you can't skip those stations people may want to get off (no nighttime expresses!). The only way to reduce unneeded service is to start the round robin at Rock Blvd, which in winter is a b$%@^.
The fact that Euclid to Rock Blvd currently has more service at night than everywhere but the Queens and Brooklyn corridors is nuts.
At 20 minute headways, the level of coordination on the H is too much to ask for.
There is a daytime service improvement, in particular on the Lefferts and Far Rockaway branches, which would see double the service they see now. The loss is to the Far Rockaway branch at night, but as you point out, Far Rockaway shuttle service is probably the lesser of two evils.
I doubt there are many nighttime riders from the Rockaways to the two bypassed stations. The few who make that trip can backtrack. (If there are more than a dozen such passengers all night, then I take back my suggestion of bypassing the stations. Better yet, bypass them northbound unless a passenger has asked the crew to stop. There's no reason for anyone on the platform to board a northbound H except, I suppose, for those few only going a few stops or those preferring to wait for the C underground.) In either case I'd run through to Euclid, at least in the winter, even if it's not strictly necessary.
Double is too much where do you get those trains, I assumed we would rebalance the numbers on the services to keep it fairly close to current levels. First get workable routes then play with TPH and train sets on each service. Extending the C to Lefferts steals one or two sets from the Far Rock A.
>If there are more than a dozen such passengers all night, then I >take back my suggestion of bypassing the stations.
12 is right, half transit workers and the rest fast food workers going back to Lefferts. And another 12 going the other way and the same types too. If they all could just swap jobs we could cut the service.
We couldn't rebalance the numbers on the branches without cutting service drastically all through Brooklyn and Manhattan. But the branches are currently in the awkward position of being the only lines that have more frequent night service than midday service. (Night headways are 20 minutes. Midday headways on the A creep a bit over 10 minutes, but only alternate trains serve each branch.) Fixing that wouldn't be a bad idea, especially if the Port Authority expects an increase in ridership to Howard Beach (I'm skeptical). Yes, it would require extra cars, but we'll have extra cars soon. (I do realize that, if all of the dream proposals posted here are put into action, we'll need a supplemental order of at least 10,000 cars.)
My H proposal had southbound trains stopping at 88th and Rockaway; only northbound trains would bypass them (and, as per my later emendation, even they would stop if a passenger so requests), so it would only be an issue in one direction.
(Incidentally, notice that even the midday S became the H. We have too many S's, it's already known as the H internally, and IINM the rollsigns all have blue H's. I dislike the practice of giving every short route the letter S.)
Was it the 73 map that had 4 S trains?
I don't know, but the 2001 map has five S trains plus overnight shuttles.
I taped that half hour cable show put out by NYCT called TRANSIT TRANSIT. While last months show looked into the attack of 9/11 and how NYCT was affected and reacted, they continue that with the November installment.
There are some below ground zero shots of both Cortlandt St stations. Also an eye opening shot of the cave in of Cortlandt St station from the street above. Transit Transit was always sappy in the past with their homogenous stories, but the 9/11 attack gives us a perspective not seen on usual network news.
Check the MTA website after you click on NYCT and click on Transit Transit on the left. They should have a listing of what days/nights this show airs and what channel it's seen on which cable supplier.
Bill "Newkirk"
Sappy is an understatement. That show reminds me of the Brady Bunch, where everything is picture perfect.
And what do you expect from a employee newsletter put out by the PR department ?
I think they try to inform & make it interesting, the Brady Bunch attitude just goes with the territory.
Mr t__:^)
For the naive non electric traction buff/fan/nut, it is a decent show.
Otherwise, fugetabouit.
There is another one on LI, it's called the Train Show.
A long time sponcer has been Train Land/Train World, but they have added a few other Nassau County hobbie shops recently.
It's mostly model stuff, but some times they feature the big stuff, e.g. #7 Wrap Train with Pataki, Giuliani & Becker getting off at Shea; NY & Atlantic operation on Bay Ridge branch; etc. (www.mrli.com)
Last Friday was for modelers with shots of the layouts at Willis Hobbies.
Mr t__:^)
I would watch it for the hobbyist in me, especially for O gauge action. HO and especially N doesn't cut it for me!
That show I believe did some shots at the BRMRR (Bay Ridge Model Railroad Club), Marive Avenue and Oliver Street, Bay Ridge.
If you call & invite him over, he'll show up with his son in toe & do your layout. This past Friday a young woman was showing how she made her layout interesting in the creative way she painted the people, e.g. a Boy Scout camp on her Mt. Also a company has come out with some very neat billboards that you can custom make. A previous issue featured engine 35 & the prep. for her going to Oyster Bay ... see their site for some August photos of the event.
(www.members.AOL.COM/belpaire/loco)
It's an interesting 1/2 hour most of the time.
Mr t__:^)
They should have a listing of what days/nights this show airs and what channel it's seen on which cable supplier.
It's on channel 25. That allows someone to watch it while avoiding the HORRORS of cable TV.
At around 1:30pm today, SEPTA was forced to run shuttle buses between 69 St Terminal and 30 St (later cut back to 63 St) due to a disabled train on 2 track heading out of 69 St. The 6 car train suffered brake failure as it left the terminal, with only 2 of the 6 cars making it out of the station. The stalled train was merging onto the eastbound track when it stalled. This prevented trains from using 3 track since there was not sufficient clearance for trains to pass by the stalled train. Service was restored about 45 minutes later. I find it hard to believe that it took nearly an hour for a train to be towed back about 5-10 feet. Even if only one of the two outbound tracks were available, service could have operated with only minor delays had SEPTA been able to move the train back about 5 feet or so.
How does one move a stuck subway or other MU train? Can it be pushed or pulled by a service engine of some sort? What did they have to do to move it?
Mark
Another train can always be hooked up to 'tow' the disabled one. Being within the proverbial spitting distance of 69th St yard, it is puzzling why SEPTA didn't merely grab a train from the yard and do just that. Then again, we are talking about SEPTA...
Hi,
I collect subway maps. I'm trying to focus on current maps and pre-WWII maps. I have a nice pre-war London map, a nice pre-war Chicago map, and am working on other cities.
Looking for a New York map, I've noticed that every pre-war New York map I've seen is issued by a bank or some other non-transit business. Were there "official" New York transit maps in the pre-war years, or are they just so valued that they rarely come to market?
Thanks for any info you can provide,
Eric Mathiasen
eric@mathiasen.com
Chicago
Before 1940, parts of the subway system were either private or public.
The IND, which was public owned from the start (1932-) usually had maps printed in the telephone books of the time, some maps were also printed on bank flyers.
The BMT, which was private until 1940, had their own maps printed, that did not show other lines, as the IRT and the IND.
The IRT, which also was private until 1940, was unique in it's maps displayed it's routes in a horizontal fashion, rather than vertical, which was the standard, even today. The IRT also did not show connection with (then) competing lines.
>>> The IRT also did not show connection with (then) competing lines. <<<
The IRT map did not show the competing lines at all, except the Astoria and Flushing lines shared with the BMT. The IRT was busy promoting where one could go on their system, not providing a public service. They did not show connections with competing lines, because at that time there were no connections within the fare controls. There is an IRT (as well as BMT and IND) map on this site in the historical maps section.
Tom
Hagstrom's put out subway maps for many years.
Welcome back to all!
Still searching for the revised Mary schedule, Zman gave me approx. times for the expanded service, but the Web site is still gung-ho on the service disruptions, which are mostly eliminated.
What do you mean by expanded service? When the M went from Metro to Stillwell? I think that for about 2 weeks after 9/11 TA was more concerned about having service operating that coming up with a timetable as to when it would come. The idea was to have the trains moving as best as possible.
No, he is not talking about that. He is talking about later service to and from Bay Pkwy. The last train now leaves Met at 9:04 PM and leaves Bay Pkwy. at 8:51 PM. The extra service is a complete waste of money, it is Pataki lollipop to the Chaintown commmunity. The last train out of Bay Pkwy is empty all the way to Broad St. If that train follows a J from Broad to Bway Myrtle, it is still empty to that point, with a returning shuttle leaving BM right behind it. A bus could pick up the "crowd" easily! MTA: Money Thrown Away.
How popular is the midday extension to 9th Avenue?
Has the Bowery seen a surge in ridership?
From what I can see, not many people ride thru the Nassau cut middays, however, I have seen an increase of ridership at the Bowery, definitely not a surge.
Expanded service that was put into effect in August, with Mary's extended to 9th Avenue or Bay Parkway, West End.
My post had NOTHING to do with the service changes on 9/11.
I notice that since the N Train started terminating at 86th Street, the destination signs have them terminating at Kings Highway. Don't the destination signs have 86th Street on them (particularly the new ones)?
- Lyle Goldman
The old ones definitely do not. Don't know about the new ones.
The R68s have it, at least now since the new ones have come out. I don't think any of the other models do.
I've seen a few R-68s on the N line and all of them say they will terminate at Kings Highway. You'd think that the MTA would've put in an 86th St sign in the new ones. I don't believe the new signs were put in too long ago and the MTA probably knew the N was going to terminate at 86 at the time.
--Kenny
Especially since this will be in effect until 2005.
I think it would do the city some good if they posted new destination signs saying "86th St/W 8th St."
If the Nancy had a dedicated fleet of cars, a la the IRT #7, they could improvise and put in temporary signage, but since the N's alphabet soup-mix of MU's (R32, R40, R68) is in place on the line, that's not possible.
The 68's and 68A's have it, the 32's and 40's don't.
But the R-68 and R-68A cars also say Kings Highway.
- Lyle Goldman
Yeah, I know. But I don't know why. I'll see if I can find out. But the 68/68A's do have a reading for 86th St. I remember seeing it when I scrolled through the new rollers when they were first installed. They say Brooklyn/86th Street. Maybe they don't want people to think the train goes to 86th and 4th Avenue? Who knows with the TA. I'm working for them almost 20 years now and still can't figure them out.
Could be. The other day some guy at Union St. asked me if I go to 86th St. I asked him if he wanted 86th on the R or 86th on the N. He got all snooty and told me: "The one and only 86th St." I told him that I am not a mind reader. As I moved the train out, I heard him screaming and cursing me out. No wonder why I'm a grump. Here I think I'm helping the guy and it was obvious he knew damn well that he needed the R and not the M.
Maybe 86th on the B-C or 1 or 4-5-6 or ride along 86th on the W
Hell Bill, he must have been a Brighton fan. You know those guys. They can't fine their way around and catch walk and chew gum at the same time. Come to think of it though, only one guy comes to mind so maybe I should refrain from going any further. No Q, I am not talking about you.
Lucky for me, I don't chew gum.
Must of been a Italian Republican
Aw Bob, stop trying to pass the buck---you know it was you I was talking about.
I know what that's like, I was on a R32 N coming home one day and I was in the same car as the conductor. This guy goes to him and asks him how he can get to some place, I didn't hear him. Then the c/r tells him that he told him a while back that he needed to transfer (I'm guessing to the R, possibly a 86th street confusion, or maybe something with B [back then] and N since they have a lot of stops with the same name) but he didn't. Then the c/r tries to be nice about it and asks where he needed to go. Somehow they ended up cursing at each other from New Utrecht to Bay Parkway (where the guy finally got off the train). This caused ~10 minutes of delays with the conductor and the lost guy cursing at each other back and fourth. When the guy got off they were still cursing at each other through the window.
Hell at this rate why don't they just curtail the Sea Beach at 59th Street and get it over with? They are messing with my train and I'm getting more pissed off about it by the second. I'll tell you this. When I get to New York again I am going to the TA and g et some damn questions answered as to why my line is getting barfed on. UUUGGGGHHHHH!!!!!! If only assault and battery was legal I actually think I could go after some of those morons.
I guess we have to get Sarg to stay with you. Good idea through run a shuttle on the Sea beach from 59th to 86th St, nobody rides that portion anyway
Hey! That where we pick most of our passengers during rush hour. 8th Avenue, Ft Hamilton, Bay Parkway, and possibly Kings Highway have densly packed stations. Hm... am I the only one who takes the Sea Beach nowadays on Subtalk?
"But the R-68 and R-68A cars also say Kings Highway."
That would also come in handy for the Brighton and Culver lines if service had to terminate there.
Bill "Newkirk"
What I meant was, even the R-68 and R-68A cars on the N line were displaying the Kings Highway signs, even though they have 86th Street signs that they could have (and should have) displayed.
- Lyle Goldman
How is the railfan view out the front of an R142. I know that there is a transverse cab, but many subway designs still offer a view. The worst would be a sheetmetal barrier like on NJT MU's. Slightly better would be the tennis ball sized hole on the R44/46. Next would be something frosted or barred like on the BSS or DC Metro and the best would be like the view from a SEPTA silverliner. Can you see the driver's controls and the speedo? Also how do you pass through between A ends?
Frosted, like on the R-46, R-68, and R-68A. The window is a bit larger but the view is still fuzzy.
(The clear peephole is only on the R-44, not the R-46, and I'm not sure if all R-44's have it.)
The public can't pass through A ends, but A ends are only at the front and rear of five-car sets.
What about if/when the lines go OPTO? Could you pass through then? IE are the cabs halfable?
No, I don't think so. Incidentally, there are no cabs at all at B ends -- there are only four cabs per (ten-car) train, all transverse.
Frosted, like on the R-46, R-68, and R-68A. The window is a bit larger but the view is still fuzzy.
It's not frosted, it's polarized. You can see something straight ahead, but everything even a slight angle off is distorted.
Story on cnn.com
On the news this AM, they said it didn't help.
Mr t__:-(
It was interesting to find out that for several rides the woman used 2 stations (77 st and 86 st IRT) near me and not the one nearest to work (68 st).
Could have been a computer problem, i.e. I don't think anybody check that it records the correct address/type of mass transit when you use it.
At my depot if the driver logs in wrong ... well garbich in garbich out ... thankfully the boys & girls do it right most of the time (yes I check). Doing my end-of-the-month throw away the Cubic "hiccups" right now ... some times the computer spits up or hiccups, then it's fine again ... why, good question.
Mr t__:^)
I read somewhere that the Redbirds are being stripped at 207 St yard prior to loading onto barges for onward burial at sea with full honours. Does anyone know whether it would be possible to salvage any rollerblind units from this site i.e. would NYCTA be amenable to approaches for purchase or are the units simply dumped in dumpsters and taken away for recyling? I'd love to have one of these in my home in Manchester - would make a great partner for my 9' long NYC Subway Uptown 7th Ave Express (1 2 and 3 trains) platform edge sign from Chambers St. It seems a shame if all of that great transit stuff goes to waste.
>It seems a shame if all of
>that great transit stuff goes to waste.
AAAAAAAAMEN!!
Sell the rollsigns for 5 bucks a foamer, and PRESTO!
you have enough finances to cover the rebuilding of
the IRT tunnel and the resurrection of 2nd Ave Stubway!!
I'd rather see the removable stuff sold to trolley museums around the country for charitable resale with profits going to a 9/11 disaster relief fund. I think railfans and tourists elswhere in the country would buy stuff they otherwise wouldn't if they knew it went to a good cause.
Yeah, can't argue with that.
New York City has really shown its class by the way they have come together in the wake of the September 11 tragedy, and I will make every effort to come to New York next summer and spend my vacation money to do my part to help the economy. I'm hoping my wife will come along with me so we can see some Broadway shows and make the tours of the great city. It won't hurt a bit to know that New Yorkers didn't buy any of that phony Mark Green's propaganda and rejected him as Mayor of the greatest city in the world. Riding the subways next summer will be a pleasure knowing the city is not in his hands. When he said he could do as good a job as Rudy in dealing with the city's reaction to the Sept. 11 crime it showed he had a lot of chutzpah and a lot of nerve to even suggest such a thing. Good for you New Yorkers. You did the right thing.
Thanks, but lets see what Bloomy does.
Bloomberg does have the right attitude to be mayor of New York -- that of a supremely self-confident, arrogant SOB. Admittedly, this is not the type of person you would like to pal around with, but in terms of dealing with all of the varying interests a mayor of New York has to deal with, anyone without a lot of self confidence or anyone wanting to "be loved" by everyone is going to get eaten up and spit out by the special interests in no time at all.
The only qualifier here is that along with the self-confidence and the willingness to hurt other people's feelings, the new mayor has to have a plan for what he wants to do, and the ability to execute it. Most of the really successful mayors of the city have come into office with a definite idea of what they wanted to do -- LaGuardia and Koch to restore the city from the brink of bankruptcy and Giulinai lower the crime rate that had annual murders up near the 2,000 mark. If Bloomberg doesn't have a plan down by Jan. 1 on what he wants to do, his personality could turn into a negative, if the public sees him to be arrigant and over-confident but with no vision of where he wants to take the city.
Well he has made his point clear, and it will be like koch and la guardia and that is to boost the economy, either by new towers, by lowering crime, by any means, even by starting new constuction projects (second avenue line)
something to boost the economy, thats the most important thing right now for this city. and luckily we have a mayor that knows how to make money
Like every other new mayor, Mr. Bloomburg will be 'hit upside de head' with his electoral promises. The one that stood out to me: "Lets make the subway trains and station platforms longer to handle more passengers." That is a BIG ONE. I hope his business sense does TA well. Peter
Reminds me of the days of Lindsay
The only qualifier here is that along with the self-confidence and the willingness to hurt other people's feelings, the new mayor has to have a plan for what he wants to do, and the ability to execute it. Most of the really successful mayors of the city have come into office with a definite idea of what they wanted to do -- LaGuardia and Koch to restore the city from the brink of bankruptcy and Giulinai lower the crime rate that had annual murders up near the 2,000 mark. If Bloomberg doesn't have a plan down by Jan. 1 on what he wants to do, his personality could turn into a negative, if the public sees him to be arrigant and over-confident but with no vision of where he wants to take the city.
I would imagine that the city's recovery from September 11 is going to be Bloomberg's number one priority. He really doesn't have any choice in the matter.
Looking farther ahead, I imagine that he will be better for transit than Green would have been, the "taxis are transit" comment notwithstanding. Bloomberg is a businessman, and as such he knows that good transit is absolutely essential to a good business environment in the city. Green supported transit too, of course, but his support probably was more a matter of political expediency than a calculated dollars-and-cents decision. And it's the latter sort of decision that leads to action.
When did Bloomberg ever ride public transit?
When did Bloomberg ever ride public transit?
Probably not for many years. But that's beside the point. What matters is that he understands the importance of transit to the city's economy, based on his business experience, and therefore hopefully can be counted on to support transit improvements.
When [Mark Green] said he could do as good a job as Rudy in dealing with the city's reaction to the Sept. 11 crime it showed he had a lot of chutzpah and a lot of nerve to even suggest such a thing.
I don't get the logic behind this argument. Why attack someone because he thinks he can do as good or better than the current mayor in a crisis. If you ask me, the next mayor had better think that!
Boomberg had a lot of nerve to attack Green for that. And he had a lot of nerve to claim he had the better experience--he's never held public office before!
New York didn't "reject" Green wholesale. The election was evenly split, and I don't think most of the voters cared that much for either one of them.
:-) Andrew
Fred always has to bring his Republican Politics into it. Well at least Virginia and New Jersey went Demo, thanks toi the Bush Recession. And don t say it started with Clinton, it did during his term, but after Bush was elected, and people saw the handwriting on the wall
Bob, I know you can read and since you can you know I never mentioned the word Republican at any time. My point was that Mark Green is a big publicity hog and makes all sorts of statements and never follows it up with anything. Most New Yorkers knew that and, hell, I even knew it even though I live almost 3,000 miles away. I think even you knew it. BTW, did the mail arrive?
#4 Sea Beach Fred:
My father didn't care for Mark Green anyway so you have another person that didn't care for Mark Green. Though I'm a registered democrat I might have voted for Mike Bloomberg if I lived within the New York City limits.
#3 West End Jeff
Same here. :-)
Bloomberg was a big Clinton supporter, both during his 1996 re-election and during his 1998 problems with the intern, and as has been mentioned often, he swtiched to the Republican party because he decided (correctly, as it turns out) that with the crowded Democratic field, it was his best chance to get elected.
While Bloomy's self-confidence and autocratic business nature can serve him well in the mayor's office if he's focused and knows what he wants to do, the fact that he's only a nominal Republican means it wouldn't surprise me at all a few months down the line to find those personality traits have put him him at odds with Pataki over the direction of spending funds for the city's downtown restoration (and I'd also guess there's about a 40-60 chance he would switch back to the Democratic party to run for re-election in 2005, if he and the state/federal GOP leaders really have a falling out).
Don't count on it. Blomberg does a good job and he can run for higher office some day, say Governor of US Senator. The office of Mayor of New York can be a great stepping stone for one who has politcal ambitions, and if he can win as a Republican in New York City he can certainly win as one statewide. Maybe he and Rudy will both serve in the Senate, and don't be surprised if the outgoing Mayor doesn't run for President and win some day. He has certainly shown he is a great leader.
No outgoing Mayor from NYC since 1900 ever went to higher elected political office.
Always a first time for everything and this is probably the time.
It would be interesting if Mike Bloomberg does run for higher office. The questtion is will he win?
#3 West End Jeff
Yes, on Monday. I e mailed you rthe other day didn t you get it?
I did not get it for some strange reason. Good to know it arrived. Well you should be happy, you got a Democrat governor for your state, but we'll get it back in 2005. Too bad about the Yankees, eh? ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!! Have a great day my good friend.
Yea, but where were your Mets, the closest they got waS 3RD Place in a weak Eastern Division.
>> ...thanks toi the Bush Recession. And don t say it started with Clinton, it did during his term, but after Bush was elected, and people saw the handwriting on the wall <<
You don't really expect anyone with an IQ over 100 to believe that, do you?
This is not a "Bush" recession. It is more like a "venture-capitalists-fianlly-got-tired-of-dot.coms-with-no-business-model-buring-through-millions-of-dollars-of-VC" and "idiot-stock-market-players-who-finally-learned-the-hard-way-that-dot.com-companies-trading-at-eleventy-billion-times-revenues(earnings? HAH!)-were-eventually-supposed-to-make-money-to-survive" recession.
Blaming the recession on Bush is as idiotic as crediting the (reckless) dot.com boom to Clinton.
=Rednoise
(NewQirQ)
Save your breath rednoise because Bob doesn't hear a word of what you are saying, and he never will.
As Georgie would say is Hee Haw still on
Mark Green's chutzpah and arrogance lost him the election. His imperial know-it-all, professional politician attitude did him in.
He looked positively shell shocked during his concession speech. he must have been thinking "this can't be happening to me", but it did.
His "kill it, kill it" at the last minute was the sign of a desperate man. While raising Bloomberg's (alledegedly) sexist remarks at a press conference may be a legimate tactic, doing alongside Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton was DUMB. How can you discuss alledgedly sexist behavior with two of Washington's biggest whore-masters standing next to you ?????? BIG MISTAKE !!!!!!!!!
Also not reaching out to the black community hurt. According to a graphic Green got 75% of the black vote and Bloomy got 22% as a Republican. Democrats usually get 85 - 90 of the black vote. Had he reached out harder to the black community and tried to mend fences with Ferrer he would have had the election.
BTW - Has Mark Green ever worked for an entity whose website didn't end in either .org or .gov? Another words has he ever worked in private industry to understand what is needed in a recovery from a disaster ?
To paraphrase Thurston's post on Bus-Talk regarding the Nassau County
Elections - "Green was blowing his smoke up New Yorker's asses, but they weren't buying it"
Arrogance doesn't even begin to describe the things that did Green in. Or for that matter, the Democrats in particular. In essence, they ran this election in a way that told everyone "Well give you a BS candidate because a) never, in NYC history, has the GOP won three straight times, and b) Bloomberg is part of the 'special interests.'" A) First of all, I never thought the WTC would be knocked down in the manner that it was either, so now I'm in the anything - can - happen mode, and B) Tell me something I didn't know.
Even though I'm a registered Democrat, let me say this: Green and the rest of them deserved to lose. Period.
never, in NYC history, has the GOP won three straight times
COUGH:::LaGuardia:::COUGH
"COUGH:::LaGuardia:::COUGH"
I thought LaGuardia was from the third party.
I thought LaGuardia was from the third party.
Such a thing has never been done.
LaGuardia ran both as a Republican and on a third party line, similar to the way Giuliani ran on the Republican and Liberal lines in 1997, in order to offer voters who couldn't stomach pulling the GOP lever a chance to cast a ballot for him on another line. And like Rudy, the third party line Fiorello ran on was nomimally to the left of both the N.Y.C. Republican and Democratic parties (though it's hard to say that about the Liberal Party as it exists today).
Well it will be a pleasure that the things Bloomberg has will keep most of the Gullianni regime intact. I liked the way that Rudy ran the city, and I know that Bloomberg will do everything to help rebuild it.
I think that the Democratic party stepped on its own proverbials yesterday. Mark Green ran one of the dirtiest campaigns in recent history - angering members of his own party. The handwriting was on the wall when Charles Rangle threatened to cross party lines. Then there was Greens refusal to kiss Fernando ferrer's ring or Sharpton's ass (or is it the other way around?).
My own theory is that the state democratic machine felt that the city will be in worse shape than is publicly pictured and was afraid that Green (or any of the democratic light-weights) would only fail under the glare of the national spotlight following 9/11. Add to this a Republican Governor and an enormously popular republican former mayor, in a leadership role in the rebuilding of the city. I'd say the democrats might have thrown green to the wolves by throwing the election. Had Green won, the party would have suffered a major meltdown when Green failed to deliver the city from the devestation of 9/11.
Green lost because the majority of New Yorkers suspect that in a Democratic administration, the vested interests that are the foundation of the machine would get even more, leaving even less for the rest of us. Divisive racial politics didn't help either.
The same thing happened in NYs Nassau County, where the Republican machine was thrown out after bankrupting the county.
Green's campaign was very dirty. Mark Green really turned me off. He sorta reminded me of these corrupt lawyers that tell lies (I knew a few).
After Sept.11th my own opinion is that Mike Bloomberg was clearly the better candidate. Although he didn't have much political experience, his business experience will be a great asset to the City Of New York. I think he can get to rebuilding the WTC and improve NYC's economy. Mark Green would've been using his big mouth to stir anger and division, something we do not need in these times. I'm much relieved that the election is over and Mr.Bloomberg won. The voters of NYC made the right choice. I don't live in NYC so I couldn't vote in the Mayoral election. I did vote in Nassau and did not re-elect Gulotta's machine (even though he wasn't running).
Political party really doesn't matter as much to me as the candidates. Especially after September 11th, people should act together. Guiliani has done the best job a mayor could do under these circumstances, and Bloomberg will try his best to live up to that. As far as the 2nd ave subway goes, as much as a transit supporter as I am, rebuilding the WTC and strengthening NYC's economy are the priorities.
I for one have lost all faith in New York (if I had any). I can't wait to point and laugh while Bloombirg cuts city services in order to finance a tax cut for himself and his billionaire friends. So much for subway improvements. HA ha. Everybody come on over to New Jersey, we now have a government that cares for the "insignificant" 95%. It looks like Rudy managed to extend his dictatorship for another term.
Thanks for the flowerly nonsensical oratory Comrade.
Did you know the Nazi s also used the word Comrade ?
I wouldn't know that since I am not a Nazi. How do you know it? Kidding. Actually I never knew those racists used that term, but if you read Jersey's post you have to conclude that he way out in left field, in fact out of the ballpark, so I used the word comrade in jest.
Komaraden)Comrad in German)
Thr Russians also use the term Comrade.
Bob knows that Steve. BOY DOES BOB EVER KNOW THAT!!!!!!! I'm thinking of getting him a picture of Brezhnev for his birthday.
Why would I want a picture of a dead man, Oh I know one live dead person Fred likes The Former Actor, Gov and Pres, The Gipper. Or is it one dead live person?
The great President Reagan has just written his auto-biography. You want a copy sent to you? You will love it. It is called "All My Fine Memories". It's in the mail
I read it, all 120 blank pages
Nice to know that you can still walk upright will stepping on your own knickles.
I don't have any knickles, I cashed them in for dollar bills.
FYI its not just me that think Republicans are the evil scum of the earth and do nothing but further their own greed. Furthermore, the endorcement of the current mayor does not qualify someone to become mayor themselves. A good deal of NYCers seemed to think that was the case.
First, the current mayor gave his endorsement, not his "endorcement".
Second, I have no interest in the political opinions of a person who would supply information to terrorists in the name of the first ammendment.
On the nightly news they called it "king making" and esticated that 75% of his support came from the "Gulliani Effect".
50% of the participating electorate voted for Mr. Bloomburg while 47% voted for Mr. Green. Yet less than 2 million votes were cast in a city of 7+ million. Do not blame the current mayor for verbally expressing his preference as to who succeeds him or for votor apathy. Ferdie Ferere and Shady Sharpton had the same opportunity and opted not to endorse the Democratic party choice. Also keep in mind that there is a 5:1 ratio of Democrats to Republicans in the city. If the Republican candidate was victorious, it indicates that the participating electorate thought more of the Gulliani endorsement than the extremely negative Green campaign. Of course the Dems can always claim voter irregularities, confusing ballots, hanging chads, pit bulls at the polling places, etc.
Yet less than 2 million votes were cast in a city of 7+ million.
Yep, fly the flag proudly from your car as you drive past the polling station without stopping to vote. What patriotism!
Mark
If you're driving your car past the polling station, chances are that if you do stop to vote, you'll come back to a parking ticket.
Tell you what Jersey. I'll start saving for a ticket to Pyongyang or Havana. As soon as I save the dough I will contact you to ask you your choice of destination and you can have a free trip. I'll also throw in a portrait of Stalin to keep you warm at night.
Cuba's a lovely place to go on vacation over March break.
-Robert King
Would love to go to Cuba, beautiful beaches, warm weather, the dollar goes further then San Juan or St Thomas.
Right Bob, and the real kicker is that you could get to meet your idol, that macho cigar smoking man about town Fidel. That would be a real hoot for you, eh?
Fidel, who cares, a cigar that will go good,
Bob ... ever been up to Canada? The most amusing part of it all is along the borders are duty-free shops and guess what *THE* most popular stop before Doanes/customs is? Yepper - stores RIGHT on the border selling tax free Cuban cigars ... heh.
If you're ever up this way (upstate) and feel like going over the fence, buy Unca Fred a box of Cubans ... then drop dime on his butt. :)
The way to support Communeism is to foster unrestrained capitalism. Abused, neglected and unhappy people who have nothing to live for turn into terrorists and revolutionaries. I stand for Darwinism, not wealth perpetuation.
Yo, you can't even spell communism so how can you understand the collective environment spelled out by your leader and master Stalin?? I stand for genetic purity enabled by my leader, the 'Big Bug.' If you're stupid and careless, the 'Big Bug' will fry your miserable ass and assure the end of your collective genetic heritage without discrimination. BIG BUG FOR BIN LODEN On the Juice Peter.
You're lucky we live in a society that offers some protection for the weak. If it were survival of the fittest, you'd have perished long ago. And if I told you once, I've told you a dozen times, "Standing on your knuckles impresses no one here".
Assume all unidentified fish are sharks. Peter
I am not crazy about either candidate, but I get unnerved when someone spends $50 million + on a bid to become Mayor at $150K salary.
Wouldn't he be better off buying a town and enacting Bloomberg's Law upon it's dwellers?
Why does that unnerve you? It would make you feel better if people running for office did it for the salary?
Actually, yes. In that case, we know his/her purpose for trying to get the job. What does this man want? A power thing?
Well, I think that most people capable of becoming mayor can get a much higher paying job in the private sector. Anybody who runs for office does so to seek power. There might be some altruism involved, but there is no such thing as a true altruist.
"Well, I think that most people capable of becoming mayor can get a much higher paying job in the private sector. Anybody who runs for office does so to seek power. There might be some altruism involved, but there is no such thing as a true altruist."
Neither is there such a thing as someone who is 100% concerned with power. On the other hand I believe most public servants have a greater portion of what you call altruism than greed for power. Anyone in a position of power in the private sector has much more power than any politician. Much of what a politician does involves compromise. Leaving the private sector for a position in government involves loss of power.
On another note, what you call altruism is, in many cases, not altruism but ideology.
Ah ... the truth here though is it's pure *EGO* ... politics is the ultimate popularity contest and massage of ego ... haven't met one yet that cared more about their constituents than they did about themselves, and how much adulation they could score. They're worse than TV anchors ... but they're in it for the ego massage. Wish I could say it runs deeper than that, but I've met just about every politico in New York and many of the bigger fish too.
That might be the reason, future service down the road in the public or private sector. I can't fathom of any other reason, except the power trip thing as Train Dude pointed out elsewhere.
"I am not crazy about either candidate, but I get unnerved when someone spends $50 million + on a bid to become Mayor at $150K salary."
If Mr. Bloomberg is a billionaire, $50 million amounts to 5% (or less)of his net worth. If you eally want to be mayor, 5% of your worth may be a small price. Think about what Ivana must have cost Donald since the divorce. One thing is sure, he'll likely not give into small payoffs from corporations.
Ivana and Donald Trump (I assume) had some sort of pre-nuptual aggrement, but I can't compare a marriage to becoming mayor.
It just tells me he is not prudent in a financial sense, unless this was an absolute must for him. Go figure.
Re; your posting to Pig, what does he want? My point was, what does the man want who has the drop-dead gorgeous girl on his arm, knowing that she's only with him because of the size of the green bulge in his pocket. It may be ego. It may be a power thing. It may even be a higher sense of purpose. If he's willing to pay the price and do the job, why should his motivations be second guessed.
I wasn't second guessing his motivations, just his sanity. But this is NYC, and anything goes.
Uh, Fred...last time I checked you were situated 1,000 + miles from Nueva York. You have some pair of ballz to tell bona fide New Yorkers how to vote. I'm not going to comment on how Los Angeles citizenry choose their city officials so why do you have to 'sound off' on us?
BTW, you'll love this: Bloomberg is a Democrat at heart. (he used the Republican ticket solely to get elected).
Adios Amigo!
BMTman
Try 2,800 miles Amigo! And I wasn't telling you New Yorkers how to vote, just congratulating the wisdom and smarts of you city dwellers on how you voted. You mean I can't express my opoinion Doug? Shame shame. BTW, why did it take you so long to respond to my first piece on this subject anyway??? Uh oh, I get it, you were a Green supporter. And I had you figured for an intellengent guy. Oh well. And if you want to comment on things in Los Angeles, go right ahead. It is your privilege. Remember this, though. I am a native of New York City, try to visit the place as often as I can, and feel a certain attachment to the place, especially after September 11. Can you dig that my friend? As for balls, I am a man with the guts to say what he means. You can't tell me that's bad, can you? At any rate, have a great week.
Does anyone know whether he thinks its a priority?
He has termed it "a non-starter".
He also thinks the cross-harbor freight tunnel is a dead issue.
He seems to be of the Robert Moses school of mass transit. He thinks we need more express bus service and that will make everything better (at least that's what he said in the last debate).
=Rednoise
(NewQirQ)
Oh, well. We've been waiting 75 years, so what's another 75 or so?
Before 9/11 he was in favor of a scaled down version. Yes that depend what you consider the 2nd ave above 63 only or the 'full monty' all the way to Wall St.
He was talking about a UN to Wall St type service.
There is a 6 Billion shortfall projected and major union unrest, I think new capital project are off the table for a bit.
I don't understand why so many people are against the scaled down version. Yes the full would be better. BUt let's see the alternative: A full 2nd avenue or NONE. Let's get the scaled down version first, and then try to get the full one. They've been fighting for the full one for years and we still have nothing. Wouldn' it be better to at least have half?
Of course a 2nd Avenue "stubway" would be better than nothing, and we could have it, if the congressional, assembly, council, and both Senate districts were all one and it lay over the entire length of the route. Ol' Shel Silver, speaker of the house, will never permit an Upper East Side line without it extending to serve his Lower East Side district, for example. Politics, politics, politics.
A real shame. Looks like it will never happen at least not while any of us (or our children) are alive. (Especially after 9/11)
I kinda like the stubway, it moves people from where they live right into the center of midtown. I mean, even if you work on Lexington, Park, or Madison, it's still a bit of a trot from 2nd Ave, and if you work more centrally in midtown, forget it. I'm not sure that many people would really use a 2nd Ave to get work.
Also, I would build it down 1st Avenue anyway. I mean 3rd Ave is already closer to the Lex Line. A 1st Ave sub would serve York-2nd pretty conveniently.
It's all a pipe dream anyway (hey, is that a pun?) but what else is SubTalk for?
Keep in mind that below Grand Central, the so-called Lexington Avenue line is on Park Avenue South. I worked one summer at NYU Medical Center. It's a shlep.
I do agree that a stubway is better than nothing. But, please, build it so (a) it can be extended to the south and (b) two more tracks can be added later for express service.
We'll take what we can get, but yes, it should be 4-track, at least from Houston to somewhere north of 63rd.
I think if Shel Silver wants to stand in the way of building the 2nd Avenue subway because the first phase of construction does not include his neighborhood, he should be tied to a pole and horse-whipped! This is not the time for elected officials to be playing politics and only caring about themselves (there should never be a time for that). Not after all that New York has gone through in these past two months! Any politician that goes back to playing politics deserves a serious beating!
Sorry, I had to get that out. It really angers me to hear that any poltician would even consider going back to playing politics after all we've been through. Have they learned nothing from the huge tragedy that we went through on 9/11?
Well he's been saying things along the lines of, a 2nd Avenue Subway is still badly needed, but there's no way we'll find the money for it anytime soon, thanks to 9/11. He's probably right about that. Of course, we didn't have the money for it before 9/11 either, just no one was admitting that that was the case. His stopgap measure is the bus-lanes-with-camera-enforcement idea.
(His stopgap measure is the bus-lanes-with-camera-enforcement idea.)
His neighbors will talk him out of taking space away from cabs.
Bloomberg definately knows more about transit than Green. And Bloomberg is straight forward, and has the know how to run NYC and keep it's economy going. Even before Sept.11th I felt Bloomberg was the better candidate. Unusual coming from a guy that usually votes Democrat. Lately I've been crossing party lines more often.
[Lately I've been crossing party lines more often.]
So the communist have the New York Republican Party now to. Oh well thank God there are choices other than the Democrats and the Republicans.
Go ahead, throw away your vote.
Face it, they're both one-eyed space monsters. It does not matter for whom you vote, either way, the planet is DOOMED, DOOMED.
Abortions for all
BOOOOO!
Abortions for no one
BOOOOO!
Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others
YAAAAY!
Bloomberg definately knows more about transit than Green.
He is, however, pretty adamantly opposed to the freight-rail tunnel that has been supported (to varying degrees) by most other politicians. His concern is truck traffic in Brooklyn, a valid concern but hardly one to cashier the whole project.
Would love to see some discussion of pros/cons of the freight-rail tunnel here (now that I've returned to SubTalk). Apologies if it's been covered/hashed over/rehashed to death .....
My own view is that they should build a whopping big combination highway and rail bridge instead, built to carry heavy rail for freight and passenger service, connecting the LIRR to the NE corridor. This would entail building the Cross Borough Expressway (I think that's what they called it), essentially in the Bay Ridge branch r.o.w. out to the Grand Central and Van Wyck.
It seems much easier to build bridges and highways than it does rail lines. With ramifications out in Nassau, such a highway and bridge would be toll, and would provide some obvious relief for traffic that now has to go thru Manhattan. Direct rail service from Nassau County into the NE corridor, without having to go thru Penn Station is of obvious utility. The bridge and highway would pay for themselves. The rail line[s] would be the bonus.
Pro Freight Tunnel: IF built to handle four tracks -- sectioned two by two -- then passenger service could theoretically be included in the service. Getting trucks off the road would be the major benefits right away.
Con Freight Tunnel: Too costly. Would have to have near 'constant rail traffic' to make it cost effective. The gradients for the tunnel mouths at either end might require land aquisitions (uprooting residents ala Robert Moses).
BMTman
Well he's been saying things along the lines of, a 2nd Avenue Subway is still badly needed, but there's no way we'll find the money for it anytime soon, thanks to 9/11. He's probably right about that. Of course, we didn't have the money for it before 9/11 either, just no one was admitting that that was the case.
To repeat a point I made before Subtalk's hiatus, the events of September 11 may, strange as it sounds, make it easier to get funding for the Second Avenue line. If the MTA repairs the 1/9 tunnel and Cortlandt Street station within budget and in a reasonable period of time, it will help show that yes, it is competent and can be trusted to spend federal funds wisely.
If the MTA repairs the 1/9 tunnel and Cortlandt Street station within budget and in a reasonable period of time, it will help show that yes, it is competent and can be trusted to spend federal funds wisely.
I would suggest that opposite behavior is more likely to get more federal spending. Look at the military. They're almost always over budget and most of their weapon systems fail to meet their design objectives. That has rarely stopped Congress from giving them more money even if these systems are more dangerous to our troops than an enemy's. Look at the Osprey or before that the F-104 - the plane that broke the back of the Luftwaffe. :-)
The military is spread out across the country in literally dozens upon dozens of congressional districts, which helps give them clout in their lobbying with Congress. New York doesn't have that luxury, though for the time being, the reps down in D.C. are more sympathetic to the city's situation than at any time in recent memory.
But there are without a doubt people around the country just waiting to say "Same Old New York" if cost estimates go spinning wildly out of control or if the initial projects suddenly start blowing their budget estimates. Those folks would like to cut the city off right now, but can't do it because they would take a major public relations hit and be labeled "heartless" going into the 2002 election cycle. But give them a reconstruction spending scandal to work with and they'll slash the city's disaster relief funds in no time at all.
If New York can keep those things from happening, and given Pataki's re-election bid next year plus Bloomberg's win Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House is probably far more likely to actually give the city some additional cash in 2002 than they would be under any other circumstances, though I doubt Tom DeLay is going to be happy about it (he isn't too happy about the pro-light rail vote in Houston on Tuesday, either). But the Sept. 11 anniversary will fall right in the middle of next year's election cycle, so if the city plays it's cards right and keeps everyone on the straight and narrow, there could be additional funds coming next fall.
(given Pataki's re-election bid next year plus Bloomberg's win Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House is probably far more likely to actually give the city some additional cash in 2002 than they would be under any other circumstance)
Being anti-New York isn't just fun, its profitable. That's why suburban, upstate and Washington polticians still talk about big spending NYC, even though there hasn't been any big spending for 20 years. They need that to justify their own big spending, using money collected and needed here.
Just for the record, there are some Republicans that are very much pro-public transportation. I know of one real nutty subway fanatic that has this almost messianic devotion to some line with a strange name in Brooklyn. And, yes, the House of Rep will probably be more in tune to helping New York now.
Hey! There is NOTHING wrong with the F-104. It was revolutionary and incredibly effective...IF used it its intended role. The F-104 is a Mach 2 interceptor, NOT a slow speed ground attack aircraft. It's like using an ACELA train on the NYC Subway. Using the F-104 to strafe and drop bombs was insane. Just look at the aircraft. It was made for getting airborne and stopping enemy bombers.
From:
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f104.html
In June of 1958, English Electric test pilot Roland Beaumont test flew an F-104A. He was quite critical of the Starfighter. He found the aircraft to have inadequate directional damping, evidenced by a persistent low-amplitude short-period oscillation throughout most of the flight regime. The use of a thin, highly-loaded wing had a severe adverse effect on the turning maneuverability. There were excessive break-out forces of the power-controlled ailerons. At high angles of attack, the high-set stabilator would tend to stall in the wing downwash, and a departure into a flat spin was often the result. Recovery from such a flat spin was usually possible only if there was sufficient height so that increased engine power could be applied to accelerate the aircraft back into controlled flight. Beaumont found that subsonic handling properties were unpleasant and particularly dangerous in take-off and landing configuration and were not compatible with bad weather operation. He predicted that the F-104 was likely to suffer a high accident rate in operation.
Ok, that may be a bit harsh:
However, the high rate of crashes while in Luftwaffe service could be blamed more on the hazards of flying low-altitude missions at high speeds in the bad weather of Northern Europe than on any intrinsic flaw with the F-104G.
However:
Nevertheless, some of the Luftwaffe crashes could indeed be traced to technical problems with the F-104G itself. Engine problems, including difficulties with the J79's variable afterburner nozzle, and contamination of the Starfighter's liquid oxygen system causing loss of consciousness of the pilot were listed as contributing factors in some of the accidents. There were also problems with the automatic pitch-up limiter during high-speed low-altitude flying and in tight turns, resulting in its temporary removal, with accompanying restrictions on the maneuverability.
To say the least, it was a controversial aircraft (German press nicknamed it "The Widowmaker"). Incedently, it is one of the few aircraft (only?) to ever be fitted with a downward firing ejection seat, though that was retrofitted later on (probbably with a zero-zero seat of some kind). The engines were troublesome at first - the variable nozzles would get stuck in the full open position, killing all thrust in non afterburner mode.
Anyway, it wasn't a really sucessful plane domestically, though they sold a lot overseas.
I'm not sure how fair it is to be critical of it's safety recod. Most early jet aircraft had pretty aweful records, as there was virtually no operational experience, and not much practical design experience to work with.
Incedently, it is one of the few aircraft (only?) to ever be fitted with a downward firing ejection seat, though that was retrofitted later on (probbably with a zero-zero seat of some kind).
The B-52 has some and the F-104's seat (installed in the interest of space and weight) was changed early in production (I think only the A and B models had them). The F-104 was one of the first non-delta Mach 2 fighters and is routienly listed in "World's Geatest Aircraft" type books. I believe it even set some speed and/or altitude records.
Yes is was a challenging aircraft to fly, but nothing a well trained pilot coudln't handle in its intended mission as a theatre interceptor. I will never know how it turned into the F-5 like export fighter of choice.
Yes is was a challenging aircraft to fly, but nothing a well trained pilot coudln't handle in its intended mission as a theatre interceptor.
It did manage to kill over 60 German pilots. I guess they just weren't well trained.
I will never know how it turned into the F-5 like export fighter of choice.
Possibly to spare Lockeed product liability suits under US law?
I believe that the Germans used around 1000 F-104 well into the 80's so it's not like half of them crashed or anything (89 was the total I recall). Heck, Italy might still be using its F-104's so for a fighter designed in 1952 a 40+ year operational lifespan isn't bad. They are like the Redbirds of the military aviation world.
Anyway, the F-104 was designed to stop ememy planes. How it was marketed as a multi-role fighter I'll never know. I blame the accidents on poor marketing, not poor engineering.
Slightly less than 30% of the total force was lost due to accidents (270 planes), with about 110 deaths. In reality, the death rate was only a bit higher than everyone elses, but it was high by standards back then, and certainly high by modern standards.
The Canadians lost about 46% of their fleet, however, their planes had about 3X the amount of time on them when retired. I'm not sure if the losses were acidents, or failure of the planes. The F-104's test phase wasn't very smooth, and quite a number of aircraft were written off. Of course, the F-14's test phase was equally a disaster, and yet the plane has been very sucessful.
Had the F-104's export market not been as large, the plane would have been a footnote in history. It's poor slow speed manuverability, and lack of all weather capeability, made it a poor fighter. It also had limited distance, and was a bear to maintain.
It's interesting to note that most modern fighters do not have Mach 2 capeability, as it is very difficult to design*, and pretty much worthless anyway**. The trend has been more and more towards supermanuverability, as evidenced by the F-22, JSF, and that forward swept wing fighter Sukoi was testing a while back.
*I won't go there, it's really bizzare.
**A minute or two of Mach 2 dashing is about all you can get anyway, before you either run out of fuel or waste the engines.
Slightly less than 30% of the total force was lost due to accidents (270 planes), with about 110 deaths.
I guess that's what I get for using a Great Aircraft of the World book that was dated 1986.
Anyway you need to look at the F-104 in context of 1952 when it was designed. Back in 1952 that plane was hot shit with wings.
It's poor slow speed manuverability.
Interceptors don't need slow sleed maneverability.
It's interesting to note that most modern fighters do not have Mach 2 capeability, as it is very difficult to design*, and pretty much worthless anyway**.
Worthles until you have another hijacked jetliner on a collision course with something. That is the whole reason to have interceptors. You point them in a line and they GO like a pig on fire to shoot down that incomming hostile. Our country is getting used to fighting wars that don't involve incomming aircraft. When you're over Boston and they are attacking New York you need to get there yesterday.
I think we should bring back inexpensive point defence interceptors like the Me 163 or the Ba 343. You could mount them on top of tall buildings. They bring the concept of disposable rocket launchers and SAM's to aircraft.
BLOOMY IS A BIG MISTAKE. YOU WILL FEEL HIM LATER IN THE YEARS TO COME
And, of course, Mark Green was the answer to a maiden's prayer. Come off it, the guy is a big blowhard and Democratic New York City knew it.
yeah ok. just fasten your seatbelts because this gonna be a bumby term.
So was Bloomberg until a couple months ago, said the Post
Mike, Mach Two capeability is worthless because you can't sustain those speeds for much more than a minute, before the plane runs out of fuel!!!
At full afterburner, most millitary engines draw 3 or more times the full military power's fuel consumption. Since fighters have crap fuel capacity to begin with, this leads to a big problem real fast. There is only *one* engine in the world that's even capeable of withstanding full afterburner operation for more than a few minutes anyway, and that's the Pratt and Whitney J-58. And it's a ^&^%&$% huge engine, and primative as hell. Well, antique is more like it.
Anyway, there's a lot of technical problems with just getting engines to work at those speeds, and avoiding compressor stalls from various transients. They need all sorts of variable geometry inlets, and convergent-divergent nozzels.
The capeability was great when everyone was obsessed with top speed as a determining factor in a plane's worth, but the reality is that superagility and all weather capacity far outweighs the ability to dash at high speeds for a few minutes.
Mike, Mach Two capeability is worthless because you can't sustain those speeds for much more than a minute, before the plane runs out of fuel!!!
That is a gross overstatement and you know it! The Su-7, the fighter with the dubious destinction of having the worst fuel economy/capacity in the world, can last 7 minutes on full afterburner. Modern turbo-fanned jets with half a lick worth of internal fuel and disposable tanks have an impressive endurance at full afterburner. There is a role for both hi-speed and highly maneuverable aircraft. Besides, hi speed is needed to avoid AAA fire as well as manpack SAMS.
Beats me mike, I heard it from the guys who design those planes. I'd think they'd know the capeability more than anyone else....
Remember, too, you need fuel to get home too!
(BTW, the fighter jock friend of my dad's says the F-16's *absolute* limit for A/B operation is about 4 minutes)
You're more likley to see a 2nd Ave Limosineway.
Remember Bloomberg's "air travel" comment: The worst thing about flying is having to pass through Queens to get to or from the airports.
Given that, my guess is that he MIGHT support some form of subway under Second Avenue - as long as ONLY Manhattanites get to benefit from it. In other words: NO allowance for a Bronx extension, NO connection to the Broadway BMT, and NO transfers to/from other lines.
Given that, my guess is that he MIGHT support some form of subway under Second Avenue - as long as ONLY Manhattanites get to benefit from it.
Lots and lots of Republicans live out in the boroughs. I don't know what Bloomberg's future political aspirations are, but ignoring the needs of the outer boroughs is a path to political oblivion.
Having said that, it sucks generally to get to the airports, from whatever borough you live in.
The 2nd Ave would be a colossally expensive ten-year hole in the ground. It's not gonna get finished in whichever Mayor's or other politician's term of office it gets started.
Ultimately, if it gets built it will because the real estate interests will become frightened that all those enormous buildings will become white elephants because everyone is moving out to the 'burbs.
Well once JFK Air train is built it will be non-stop between Jamaica and JFK. The whole LIRR-Airtrain station is going to look very nice, at least from what I've seen in the drawings. I don't fly, but whenever I take the A to Far Rockaway I see these people lugging this heavy luggage up and down. I'd opt for the car service now. And the bus from Jamaica, all I can say is yuck! Once Airtrain is built it will help JFK and Jamaica.
It’s not just the lack of funds that have delayed the construction of a Second Avenue Subway; divisiveness has plays a major roll too. The attitude that a Second Avenue line is not needed because it doesn’t go through one’s neighborhood is purely individualistic and fails to consider the City as a whole. We are a society, not just a collection of individuals. I really tire of that anti-Manhattan attitude.
Bronx residents will benefit indirectly from any degree of construction of a Second Avenue subway in Manhattan. Remember, the purpose of the 2nd Avenue line is to reduce crush load crowding on the Lexington Avenue IRT. Doesn’t crowding affects those boarding a train, as well as those passengers who already happen to be on board? Of course. Even a limited 2nd Avenue subway (one that runs from 63rd Street to 125th) will siphon boarding riders away from the Lexington Avenue in that region.
The Lexington Avenue line already runs in an awkward location. Based on the ridership demographics of the region, the vast majority of those using the line reside only to the east of the right-of-way. It is highly probable that many will board a Second Avenue line instead.
The logic for how a 2nd Avenue line will indirectly affect those in out boroughs is a little more complex, and beyond the scope of this post. In short, those transfers that are feasible will get built, and help redistribute riders accordingly.
I am not opposed to a Bronx extension of the Second Avenue line. In fact, I believe quite the opposite. I have argues in the past on this board that the station at 125th Street should be oriented North-South as the MTA planned, so as not to preclude further extension under the Harlem River.
However, with limited funds and the location of existing tunnel, by far and away the most logical place to begin construction is at 63rd Street and work Northward. You have tunnel segments in place north of 99th Street, and the connection to the Broadway BMT at 63rd Street, which create an interim full-length line.
MATT-2AV
The Lexington Avenue line already runs in an awkward location. Based on the ridership demographics of the region, the vast majority of those using the line reside only to the east of the right-of-way.
Many, yes, but a "vast majority?" I don't understand how the ridership demographics could lead to such a conclusion.
I'm sorry, Peter, I was writing in a hurry. Permit me to rephrase:
Of Manhattan commuters who use the Lexington Avenue line, the majority of those commuters reside East of the ROW.
This information comes from the original planning study, although I don't recall what the percentage is, and I couldn't find the link. Because I can't state the actual percentage, I will replace "vast majority" with just "majority".
For a non-scientific verification, disembark an uptown train at East 86th during the evening rush, and watch which direction the majority of the people walk.
MATT-2AV
(Of Manhattan commuters who use the Lexington Avenue line, the majority of those commuters reside East of the ROW.)
Explanation: the super rich on Park and Fifth Avenues don't ride the subway. The Yuppies on 3rd, 2nd, 1st and York do. Moreover, while not part of the CBD, the Upper East Side has a large employment base -- hospitals, universities, stores. Most of that is East of the Lex also.
Hey,
Who you calling a Yuppie?
MATT-"if the shoe fits"-2AV ;o)
Explanation: Most of the East side is located east of Lexington, not west of it. The density on the west side of Lexington would really have to be much larger than that of its east side in order to have more people come from the west.
Where Does Bloomy Stand on the 2d Ave Subway?
He doesn’t stand on a subway, he sits in a limo.
Why is there no express service on the 1/2 (West Side IRT) northbound between Chambers Street and 14th Street? Why are all riders subjected to the local stops?
lack of crosstrack switchover capability at Chambers???
Step one: Due to the placement of crossovers between southbound and northbound tracks, southbound trains can terminate at only the following points along the four-track 7th Avenue line: 96th Street, 42nd Street, 34th Street, 14th Street, and Chambers Street. All crossovers are between the express tracks.
Step two: Except at night, through service cannot operate on the same track used by a turning train.
Step three: There is an extra track between the express tracks south of 42nd Street that can be used to relay turning trains. Elsewhere, there is no choice but to turn trains in-station on one of the through express tracks.
Step four: The local tracks at Chambers Street are out of service as they lead directly to Cortlandt Street. All trains to Brooklyn must use the express tracks.
Step five: Of the three 7th Avenue services, no more than two can be assigned to the same section of track.
Put these together and you'll see the problem. If the 3 terminated at Chambers, it would have to turn on the same tracks used by through 1 and 2 trains, which isn't an option.
That leaves us with two choices: (1) Terminate one express service at 96th, 34th, or 14th; all through service must pass by on the local track. (2) Terminate one express service at 42nd; through service may use both the local and express tracks.
The TA opted for choice (1) (wisely, IMO).
Northbound 2s could run express w/o interfereing with the 3. Southbound, they could run express with the 3 until 42nd, then switch local. The reason I suggest this is that people going from Brooklyn to the Bronx (and back) are now inclined to use the Lex lines. And, people who need to go from Bronx to Lower Manhattan will prefer the Lex. West side express service is vital!
The northbound 2 could run express straight through, but that's a recipe for confusion.
Sure, the southbound 2 could use the express tracks to 42nd. That would send it skipping right by some of the busiest stations in the system while obediently making every lesser-used local stop downtown.
My local station, according to the 1999 numbers, is the 55th busiest station in the system (it's a local station in a residential area). Don't you think it should have somewhat more service than the one ranked 214th? Yet before 9/11, number 55 had less service than number 214 (since many rush hour 1/9 trains bypassed 86th Street while I don't think bypassing 181st Street was common). Virtually every other Manhattan local splits into two different services once past the busier central stations -- the B/C, the C/E, the N/R, the F/S, the JZ/M, the 6/6, the 7/7. My station alone has 50% greater ridership than the entire Dyre Avenue branch. Yet you think I should stand on the platform 2-3 times as long for a train so a handful of Bronx-to-Brooklyn riders who apparently aren't in a great rush (since the 4/5 is faster regardless) can save eight minutes while seated (most likely) in a climate-controlled car?
Either the 2 (or 3 -- I don't care) should remain a permanent local or the TA should find some other way to boost local service around here. Express service is a nice frill but locals are more versatile.
I saw a southbound 2 train about to pull into 34th St. on the express track when it switched over just before the station. And it was a Redbird train to boot! The marker lights gave it away. It would have been fun, but I understood.
I also saw a northbound R-142 2 train pull into 14th St. on the express track. Some 2 trains do run express. Very few.
Just the other day I decided to see the 7th Av. service for myself, and then catch the L at 14th. At Times Sq an R-62 pulls up, but it has @ in the front, but half of the side signs are set for 3 All of the side signs have #3 destinations, but half are 2 and half 3. It runs express to 14th, and then says it will continue to Brooklyn. Next, a #3 pulls in and terminates.
The problem is that now that everyone needs to be on the local trains, where previously people were better distributed between local and express service. The other problem is that broadway service north of 96th is mucho crappy now. I've never seen a rush hour 1 train that wasn't jam packed. You practically can't get on an uptown 1 at 96th in the evening rush.
My suggestion: run the 9 local on broadway, express south of 96, and turn it around at 14th, send it back. Maybe just as a rush hour service. Run as many as you have demand for. Yay, more broadway local trains, more express 7th ave! Of course, then there is a wild ballet happening on the 96th street switches. (Maybe this has been suggested already, I don't read here as much as I'd like to)
You could also try something nutty like 2-diamond service running from the bronx to 14th, that maybe would push some people off the local tracks.
How well are the 1&2 trains matching their demand in Brooklyn?
The busiest 1 stations are between 96th and 34th, not north of 96th. See posts 276490, 276535, and 276621 in the archives.
On 11/05/01, I saw an empty train of R143 on the Eight Avenue line passing through the northbound express platform at West 4th Street. I suppose they'll be up and about and running soon. I'm looking forward to riding one.
Are you sure it was the R143? That same day around lunch time I saw the empty R110B train going through Jay Street on the A line into Manhattan. At first I, too, thought I was seeing the R143, but the seats were criss-cross style, and the last car number was, if I remember correctly, 3006. None of the side signs were lit up.
If you saw 3000-series, it was the R110B (R131). If it was 8000-series, then it was the R143.
wayne
Was it that, or an R-110B?
the 110b.last time i saw it looked nothing like a r143
You are correct. The 143 has all digital signs with larger head and marker lights than the 110B which has a standard curtain roll sign up front and has smaller head and marker lights. Note the interiors on each one are different.
Comparison:
R143
R110B (R131)
Glad you decided to show the differences for the others who did not know between these cars.
Thanks
Neil E. Feldman
NNEILEF@AOL.COM
I love the R32's (Brightliners). The TA should keep them as long as possible. I wonder if they will ever be remanufactured with updated technology, but with R143's coming that's highly unlikely. The R44/R46's and R68's are favorable because they have ample space. All the redbird cars--R26, R29, R33, R36--I like; they really had defined the IRT over the last 40 years. Slowly but surely, they're disappearing and R142's are taking over. They should've had manufactured updated models of these cars. Lastly, the retired R27/R30 cars looked greated aesthetically; too bad the last one was gone by 1993.
r10 and r22
When I was a kid: R30--being able to move in between cars on the Brighton Local is a none-too-far memory :(
Now: R142 and soon to be R143
Stuart, RLine86Man
THE BMT TRIPLEX and Sea beach Fred would agree
Me Too!
Nothing built before or since compares with the good old D-Types on the Brighton Express!
-- Ed Sachs
The Triplex without any doubt in the world. Someday, someday, I am going to ride a Triplex #4 Sea Beach out to Coney Island. I have got to do that once again.
Would love to join you, as long it is on the Brighton, since the Slow Beach only goes to 86th Street
Brighton will be next to get the cut back. The only one to serve Stillwell will be the West End....#3, I believe.
Yea, right on Bob. The Bob and Fred show is back and moving as strong as a #1 Brighton Exp Triplex.
Their banter reminds me of a morning show we have in Denver. There are two personalities who have been on the air together for 11 years now, and when the former producer was still around, these two would start arguing about something. Finally, the producer would cut in and yell, "WILL YOU SHUT UP?!?" Both would start mumbling, at which point the producer would say, "Get on with the show, for God's sake." I think it was all an act.
Should of heard us on the subwAY
Maybe when we retire Bob we can move to New York for awhile and see if we can't get a talk show going, the Bob and Fred. Fred and Bob, the Transit Show, something. We seem to entertain a lot of people here and maybe we could unite all railfans and spread the word just what a classy bunch the whole lot of us are.
It should be called "The Brighton and Slow Beach Show".
Fred would never leave the shelter of his upper Middle Class town Arcadia to go to NYC. Too many poor people
Why don't you tell them the truth that on a few major issues I'm the liberal and you're the Conservative. Go ahead. Be honest. Forget for a moment that you are a Clinton clone. The truth shall set you free.
Clinton was the lesser of 2 evils in 92 and again in 96. I do like some Republicans like Sen McCain. I just can t stand the extreme Right Born Again trying to tell anyone what they can do with their bodies, well I will not go into it here. This is not the place
One can broadcast from distant points and re-transmit. Still, I think my title for the show is the best.
Maybe
I would name it Odd Couple 2001
Which one of you would be Felix?
Probably Me,
Do you ever go, "HMAAAAAAAAAAHH!!!!!"?:-)
Actually, you should have been with us during our Oct. 25 expedition. We were on a slant diamond Q, hauling ass on the Brighton, and as we blew past a Q local, we'd yell, "Hi!', then "Bye!", waving all the way. Not to mention, "So long, screwy. See you in St. Louis!" Even the T/O got into it. It was a blast, especially when he kept the juice going on that little jog in the express track between 8th St. and Union Square.
You had to be there.
I was there a week to soon, I went up for the Croton Open House, or was it that weekend. My CRS is getting worse
Well Bob, I'll get "Go N Train", "N Broadway Line", "Sea Beach Express", and together we will commmandere the train and ride it into Stillwell. If not, then I can take the Brighton instead. But no damn D or Q or anything like that. It has to be a #1. OK?
I will join you, as long as it is on a Triplex, Maybe invite 8th Ave Steve, to see what a real subway train looks like
Hey, I'm game. I'm DYING to ride on a Triplex!
wE JUST HAVE TO FIND OUT WAY IN ADVANCE WHEN THE MUSEUM WILL HAVE A FAN TRIP AND COME TO NYC FOR A WEEKEND
Steve8AVEXP, #1 Brighton Express Bob, and #4 Sea Beach Fred on the same train? Wow!!! All we have to do is get #3 West End Jeff and a few other hellraisers on board and we'll really be in the tall cotton. Just to make sure everyone behaves themselves, we'll have to get Train Dude in the front car to keep everyone in line.
We'd get thrown off for creating a disturbance.:-)
We would have to Bring Sarge Rosen for Protection
That's the biggie: timing.
"But no damn D or Q...." Watch it Fred. You have Q friends here. As for me, Q Brightliners were the best, but I admit, I just missed the #1 Triplexes by a few months. From the descriptions of Bob and yourself, too bad for me.
Try being in the city when they were still running and not seeing them.
I'd love to join you guys for a ride on a Triplex, too, but it seems that the outings are few and far between.
Well Q, then we must include you in our entourage. You would love th Triplex, and to give us old warhorses our due, let us relive our youth and ride on the #1 or #4 BMT cars. You would never see a bunch of senior citizens acting more like a bunch of kids than any you might have seen before.
Fred, I'd love to join you and #1 Brighton Exp Bob and Steve B 8th Av Exp on such a journey. And I agree that having Train Dude along would help us ensure that we behave like mature adults instead of kids enthusiastically engaged in their hobby. But those outings are few and far between and my journey to get to NYC is a quite a bit farther than California, so I have to plan WAY ahead of time.
Web all have to plan way ahead of time for the best airfares
Whoh, Whoh Q. Farther than California. Where the hell do you live? London? Just exactly do you hail from anyway?
I'd love to join you on a fantrip on those gentle behemoths someday.
Pick a time, but Fred has to do 3 things. Go to Coney island, and ride the cyclone, eat at Nathans, and walk to 86th St to catch his N train since it don t go to Coney any more, and 4 eat dinner in Little Italy
That is exactly right Bob. Get that Steve? That is my idea of a perfect day in New York. It doesn't take a lot of fancy things to make me content, those four things will suffice. However, since I am a morning person, an early rise, some pushups and stomach crunches, and a walk in Central Park will get the energy and blood moving for the rest of that fine day. I would really love to get a group of railfans together and do that. Last April 1, Doug Wengeroff organized such a trip and it was a blast. I had as much fun as I have had in any other day I can remember since I was a kid. Reprise? Yes, sir.
I m hurt, you did not have any fun when we went.??? I know the IRT thru the Bronx bored you
As much Bob, as much, not more or less. Yes, for a week the two of us had a real blast. What I was saying that I never had as much fun for one day than April 1. Hell, if I could make it a week of riding the rails with my railfan buddies and watch them gape as you and I traded barbs with the Sea Beach and Brighton, then it would make everyone's day----err week.
Ever been to Taormina's on Mulberry St.?
Why not Steve, 8AVEXP, there's always room for one more. And you can add a little class to us grizzled veterans, and play peacemaker when Bob and I go at it with our Sea Beach vs Brighton diatribes.
Just no right wing Republican Bull
Fine--just as long as you refrain from givng me the socialist Democratic left wing crap as well. No politics.
Ja vol mein Kamaraden
Please Bob. I'm beginning to think Heinrich is going to rise from hell and start me marching to his tune. Jawol Kamoraden? Yuk!!!!!!
I'll be ROTFLMAO.:-)
More Republican vs Demos.,
I've been reading the favorites nominations for a few days and decided to add my token's worth.
My all-time favorites (though I grew up mostly with BMT Standards, Triplexes, IRT Lo-Vs, and PCC cars) are the Compartment cars (also known as 'Bluebirds'), absolutely the finest rolling stock ever to run in the City, if not the country. Mohair seats, picture windows, great railfan seats, red tile floors, mirrors on either side of the articulation joints, PCC lighting.
Externally, the Zephyr was beautiful; I never saw the inside although I saw it for several years stored on the Fulton elevated just east of Atlantic Avenue (ENY) station.
I'm surprised nobody mentioned the R-11; if nothing else, the back-lit gold IND Division map was unusual and the exterior and round windows gave it a nice look. .
Others have mentioned the R-15 in original maroon and silver-grey livery, with its round windows in the bulkhead and side doors; of all IRT cars, it was probably the handsomest.
Of more modern cars, I like the R-62, R-68 and R-68a, though I'd like their ends a bit less rounded and it would be nice to see route and destination signs on the end again.
Biggest problem I have with cars from the 1960s on is the stone-hard seating and the slipping and sliding that comes from that modern version of early 1900s wooden seating.
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam, New York
I would also like to see the bulkhead destination signs brought back. That Triplex innovation was a great idea and I have not heard a single explanation as to why they were discontinued on the post-R38 rolling stock.
I must say that my favorite is the BMT Bluebird, although I only know it through pictures and books. Of the cars I actually rode in, the D-Type Triplex is my all time favorite - never to be forgotten - with the BMT Standard a close second.
Nothing that followed has any aesthetic appeal to me.
I'm with you - Triplexes and Standards (Q cars too!)
I know Hot Lunch would agree with you in a heartbeat.
Also the Gate Cars on the Myrtle
Those are Karl B's favorite cars, although he'd vote for the Lex elevated.
I don tremember riding the lex El, but remember the Moitle L
I saw a train of Q cars on the Myrt once, from the railfan window of a QJ train at the Myrtle Ave. station. I thought, whoa, those cars look different.
The Q s had one hell of a history
Yes, indeed.
I liked the Lex and Myrtle both!
It was pretty nice riding the BU's all the way out to 111th St too! That meant riding on Broadway, Fulton St, Crescent St & Jamaica Ave.
That was over 50 years ago, you must be older then Fred
I am more than five years older than Fred.
He was very disappointed when he found out he wasn't the "old man" on the board.
So Karl, how was the York meet? Do you by any chance know a fellow named Bill Parr from Langhorne? I bought a bunch of stuff from him a few years ago. You can email me privately if you wish.
York was apparently the biggest yet. 14,000 members and 3,000 tables from preregistration alone. We were so busy with at-the-door registration that I got very little time to walk around. I did not personally find a "treasure", but talked to several friends who did.
I got the impression from others that while there was a lot of stuff there, people seemed to have cut back their buying. I heard that some of the recent stuff from both MTH and Lionel was available at blow-out prices.
There was additional security evident because of the national situation, and some unusual restrictions on food. I mentioned this on Harry's board and it started a monstrous thread that really went overboard so I better not bring it up again.
Even though I worked a lot, I still enjoyed myself, but I always do.
Yes I was Karl. How did you ever know? I wanted to be the "Dean", so to speak. But since you're an ok guy I will be more than happy to be the assistant "Dean" if it's ok with you.
I'll defer to you as far as being "Dean" because I'm on too little to know what all is going on and you definately are more qualified.
I'll just sit back in my rocking chair with my Geritol and observe, OK?
Ok!!! Since you are abdicating this title, I am now #4 Sea Beach Fred, the Dean of Subtalk. I kind of like the title, but if you decide to get more active I will be more than glad to step aside. However, I will not change my handle to be known as the Dean. I will hope others will just acknowledge it. Really it is a hollow title so no one should get too bent out of shape over it.
Bring on the Onion Juice
I'll defer to you as far as being "Dean" because I'm on too little to know what all is going on and you definately are more qualified.
I'll just sit back in my rocking chair with my Geritol and observe, OK?
Steve,
Right you are! Nothing beat those ABs and D-types. My only complaint with the D-types (sorry Fred)was/is that the cross seats are so tight up against each other, not leaving much leg room, while the ABs seating made it feel like you were in a living room!
Sure do miss them both, but there is hope: those Kawasaki 142s make some wonderful sounds, both accelerating and braking (not so the Bombardier 142s) Right behind the R32s , they are my favorite present running stock, even if they are IRT.
We've got: Hot Lunch!
You must have been on an eating spree because I haven't seen you online here in a dog's age. Maybe we should call you the Hot Lunch Trencherman. Anyway, good to know you are contributing again.
"I love the R32's (Brightliners). The TA should keep them as long as possible"
Your comment is a statement of the obvious - from a non-railfan point of view. The TA seeks to operate every piece of equipment for as long as it's economicly feasible and safe to do so. They don't make decisions based on railfan concerns.
The R-32 is still a very sound railcar - structurally and mechanically. You can expect it to survive at least one additional Heavy SMS (12 year overhaul).
Barring a catastrophe, the R-32s are a slam dunk to make it to 50 years.
Favorite of the past was R-15. As a child I loved the round windows in the door and the fact that it was low enough for a youngster to look out of as well as the round rail fan window and curved roof. All the rounding made it look smoother than the R-14's.
Favorite of the present R40----loved the slant. Made it look futuristic.
The R-44 has the nicest lines, but it was much prettier with its blue band. My favorite cars to ride were the R36WF's before the overhaul. And of course, they looked much prettier in blue.
My favorite subway cars of PAST have to be the MS (MultiSection), the R-6-2, the R10 and the R16. Honorable mention is the R21.
Present day: Why, the Slant R40 of course.
wayne
All-time favorite: tossup between the R-1/9s and R-10s. Honorable mention: the R-32s as delivered from Budd (blue doors, bulkhead roller curtains, green backlit side destination signs). I'm sure I'd also cast a vote for the Triplexes, had I ever ridden on them regularly.
Today: R-32s, R-38s, slants, Redbirds.
What would you know, you live in Denver, The Fred and Bob show now turn to Denver
How would I know what? I became immersed in the subway when we moved to Jersey and I started attending Saturday school in Brooklyn. As I mentioned before I just missed out on the Triplexes in 1965 when we were in the city during their final week of service. I did ride on the BMT standards for two years, but didn't care for them then.
You missed the point, time Fred and I pick on someone else beside each other, and you lost. My favorite IRT car was the R-15, especially when they were the 2 tone maroon and white on the 7 Line
I really like Toronto's T1 cars, I think just because I like the color of brushed aluminum. For some strange reason I also like the old Kawasakis on the Broad Street Subway here in Philadelphia. I got a chance to ride Atlanta's newest MARTA cars recently, and I like those a lot, too.
Mark
Favorite subway car. Why the Brightliners, obviously. With the original bulkheads, colors, and yes, straps, thank you!
On purely subjective grounds:
R38
R40s
R42
R62A
R142A
I've only been riding since the 1980's, so the only retired cars I remember are the R10, R27 and R30. All were poorly ventilated garbage by that time, though aparently the R10 had a proud history before then.
:-) Andrew
Too bad you never got to experience an R-10 express dash up CPW. It was second to none.
Since the only times I rode the Central Park W route was to either go to Yankee Stadium or to the bus connection for Yonkers Raceway at Bedford Pk Blvd I always took the "D" so mostly took R1-9's instead of R10's. They were definitely an experiance too, shaking side to side with that brake thing up front clanging back & forth.
By the way, it was also an experiance waiting at one of the CPW local stations when the express went through. As a kid that was one of my favorite parts of going to the Museum of Nat History. If our local train came in first before an express went through I really felt cheated!!!
By far my favorite car was the R1-9's. I loved the looks, (a handsome car) the sounds,(compressor & brakes) and even the distinct smell. As a kid I always dreamed of driving one and I finally got the chance with 1689 at Branford last month compliments of Jeff H. and a membership. A dream come true.
Of course I also loved the BMT Standards. When I found out they were still on the 14th Street Canarsie Line in the late 60's I railfanned that line many times just to ride em. The seating arrangements were the best of any train. But I still have to give the edge to the R1-9's.
fave present: R46
fave past: R16
fave i never rode: BMT B-types
BMT D's. The Triplexes were the greatest, a superb train. What a powerful load.
I can only relate to these car types as a visitor to the TA museum, sitting on the cars on display. Never rode them in motion.
Well then Chris, you can just take my word for it. The Triplex was quite a ride.
You're just saying that, Fred. You liked the D types because they ran on the Sea Beach.
You know that the best model subway car ever to operate in New York was the R-10!
Yep, those Thunderbirds were second to none except for perhaps the R-1/9s. The way they smoked along CPW made you feel they were invincible. Too bad they didn't keep their teal-and-white racing stripe scheme longer.
The R 10 was a piece of junk, small fans, very hot in the summer, the only thing that was good for them was their speed up CPW, but any train that could do 40mph+ was speedy. The Triplex were great.
Not to blaspheme my buddy Steve, but the single most objectionable thing about the R10's was that they were perennially flat-wheeled and made enough noise to wake the dead when they were running. R1/9's were a bit more tolerable with flats in that they sounded more like the clop-clop-clop of a horse. The R10's though made such a racket, the "ta" was perennially trying to develop "noise abatement" and failing miserably at it. I can only imagine what they must have sounded like on an el. :)
When you rode on as many A trains as I did, the R-10s kind of get to you after a while. I didn't go into the city very often during the summer; my Saturday commuting was during the school year; i. e., fall, winter, and spring. I never felt uncomfortably warm on those immortal speedsters, nor were they excessively loud back then.
The R10's were the best, especially when they were used on the H Shuttle and C line to Rockaway Park, and were cleaned up in their green color at the end. It was always great to here them speed out on the Rockaway line with all the windows open and doors between cars open.
To me, they will forever be synonimous with the A. Talk about a tailor-made subway car for that line - the R-10 was it!
Ever ride a non-GOH (not green) R10 in the summer thru the Cranberry St. tube. None of those tiny fans worked, the doors were latched open, and the ears-shattering din made your ears rung for hours. Thank god they were scrapped. Sorry, Mr, Padron ...
Ever ride a non-GOH (not green) R10 in the summer thru the Cranberry St. tube in their final days? None of those tiny fans worked, the doors were latched open, and the ears-shattering din made your ears ring for hours. Thank god they were scrapped. Sorry, Mr, Padron ...
I rarely rode the A Train, but when I did I just enduredit
You endured it because you were getting the best ride on the entire system if you were on an R-10.
They honestly weren't so bad 30+ years ago. I never had to hold my ears while ripping past station after station along CPW. Chicago OTOH was a whole different story. The R-10s were quiet as mice compared to an ear-shattering run along the State or Dearborn St. subways.
When I went back to New York for the first time in 20 years back in 1974, the first train I rode on was the A. I was staying for a few days in hotel near Kennedy and bussed to Lefferts where I was shocked to see an elevated IND train. Apparently just after I left New York they extended the A from Euclid to Lefferts. I had been under the impression that only the G and F of all the IND lines ever made to the great outdoors, and only for one and two stops respectively, Smith and 9th St, and 4th Avenue. It was a surprise, but after that I saw nothing about the A that made stand up and take notice. I couldn't wait to take the #4 Sea Beach when I got another surprise and found out that is was now the N train.
Heh. Shouldn't have surprised you THAT much to see an IND line on an elevated - it ran on the old BMT Fulton el ... so relax, boobie ... your memories of the IND being a line that ran in the sewer remains intact - it was running on a commandeered el ...
In fact all of the IND L Service was originally BMT or LIRR, except the short portion on the F/G
Nothing about the A made you stand up and notice? Not even the sheer brute speed of the R-10s which were still dominating that line then?:-)
Back in 1967, the R-10s were sporting a teal-and-white racing stripe scheme, which is still my all-time favorite. Their speed, especially along CPW, got my attention.
Of course, before all that, the R-32s on the N were a sight to behold.
Noiest cars I ever heard are on the T in Boston, even last year with new equipment on the blue and red lines, so much screaching and screeming around curves, and stopping
I guarantee Wayne would love that. Screeching wheels on curves are music to his ears.:-)
I was a kid then and the A was fast, but all underground. I usually went to Dyckman Street to Visit Family(Thius was the 50s) and found the 7th Ave Express was faster, and went out side at 125th. I used to love to look out from 168 at the Portal at Dykman Street, and watch it become bigger and bigger.. Also in able to me to get to the A I had to take 3 trains from Kings Hwy and E 16th.
We had about 30 R-10's over on the Jamaica BMT in 1953/54. They were there to familiarize BMT crews for the pending arrival of the R-16's. They did very well on the el, and I don't remember hearing a single flatwheel in those days.
Then they were only 5-7 years old.
The 60-foot length and SMEE braking were understandable. The outboard door controls weren't, as the R-16s had door controls in the cabs.
I often wondered how the BMT conductors liked climbing out between cars on the R-10's on the els in the winter.
Can you imagine a wintry snowy day at Crescent St going east. I'll bet that he would close the doors, and get down fast before that sharp turn.
>>> I often wondered how the BMT conductors liked climbing out between cars on the R-10's on the els in the winter. <<<
That was the job back then when both the trains and those who ran them had much more steel in their bodies. I imagine some of the motorman's cabs could get pretty chilly back then also.
Tom
My uncle did it for 20 years on the Brighton Triplex, They just dressed very warmly. He said it was worse in the blizzards of 47 and 56
Grab irons were your friend. That's also why conductors were referred to as "car monkeys" back then. The job was everything you expected. That's why I hated the Brooklyn portion of the D train on R1/9's but it wasn't bad at all once you got across that stupid bridge and into the tunnels where it belonged. :)
If the step plates picked up ice and snow while the car was on the el, I bet they continued to be a problem in the subway.
True, but you wore boots if you had anything between the ears and you'd kick it off once you got "inside" ... usually one side of the car would have a bit more accumulation than the other side and in all sincerity, those foot irons were wider than they look. You just had to be careful and believe me, you WERE ... the old cars had grabirons wherever you needed them to be nice and sure footed.
Even when I lost a footplate, didn't come close to falling off though we had to sit for a few minutes while I relocated position for the rest of that trip.
My shoes fit nicely on those step plates when I assumed the position between 100 and 484 at the Transit Museum. All I needed to really fit in was a conductor's uniform.
Heh. Pity monkey suits are a "controlled substance" ... back in 1970 they were actually pretty snazzy for the time. The blue shirt especially and a nice LIRR style cap. The chickies loved it.
The R1/9s belonged underground. They should have never let them on the post-Chrystie D train.
They ran on the D Culver from 1954-67 pre Christie
And he probably muttered, "Gimme back my BMT standards". Those conductors had it made on the standards - nice and cozy, with the door controls inside.
As a kid I thought it was a wonderous thing that he could press one button and open the doors of all six cars. If they all worked, he was opening 36 doors with one button. I soon figured out that he was using three different buttons to close the same doors. If I couldn't get a job as a gateman maybe I could get a job as a conductor on the Standards. I was really young and impressionable then.
No! I absolutley despised those horrible behemoths. Thankfully, by the time I got to ride them, they were never allowed out except for rush hour CC service!
I always wished they'd kept a set or two of them on the A. After 1977, they still made a cameo appearance there once in a while. I got one such train on the A around 1979 or 1980 and was in SMEE heaven. They held their own along CPW. For that day at least, those Thunderbirds were back where they belonged.
In my mind, the A will always be associated with the R44. I love those lemons ...
You know, the R-44's really aren't that bad. It's just that everybody automatically associates them with their original form, the one that really did suck. But nowadays, the cars give decent service.
I associate the R-44's with the A because they've always been on the A since I've been alive.
If I remember correctly when they 1st came out, the E and F Lines received them 1st. It seems back in the late 60s all new equipment went 1st to E and F
I remember riding my first r38 on the F Culver line in Brooklyn when they first came out, when I was a little kid. The thing I remember was that the railfan window was higher off the floor that on the r9's and I couldn't reach it unless I stood up on my toes. I wound up mostly looking through the keyhole and getting windburn on my eyeball.
I used to tell my father (we would go from Kings Highway to Delancy street to his dentist on Saturdays, glad he needed lots of dental work) to wait for the "old" trains (didn't know what they were called back then.) I even remember when they switched the Culver line fron the D to the F even though I was about 3 years old then.
Then when the new r40's came out and I was able to see through the railfan window again.
That too was Ronan's doing - obsessed with the LIRR as his own personal toy, he felt that anything going to the city from his railroad also had to be the shiniest, newest and slickest ... except for the E of course. I guess he considered the F an extension of the Oyster Bay line. :)
And that's OK. The way things are going, the R-44s may stay on the A longer than the R-10s did.
Naaahhhhhhhhhhh.
The BMT standards? I rode on 'em on the Canarsie during their final years of service. Didn't like them then, have come to appreciate them now.
any railfan ( storm front dirct window ) equipped transit rail car will do
TO HELL WITH TRANSVERSE CABS !!!
Chicago's 4000 series cars, specifically 4251-4445, built by Cincinnati Car Company, affectionately known as "plushies".
but they are all ""OPTO"" now right ........>>>>>>.......railfan window gone !!!
CTA's 4000 series cars are all retired; none survived into the OPTO era. They were last used on the Evanston Express. Two cars were saved for the CTA's historical collection, 4271 and 4272, painted in the Chicago Rapid Transit orange and brown scheme. Rest assured that the railfan windows are intact.
Incidentally, I rode this equipment at the East Troy, Wisconsin museum this past summer, which brought back pleasant memories of Chicago some 25 years ago.
did any of them go the the illinois rail transit museum ???
The Illinois Railway Museum at Union, Illinois has five of these cars in its collection: 4146, 4290, 4321, 4410, and 4412, according to the museum web site's roster of equipment, at www.irm.org.
And there's a photo of a four-car train of them on the mainline! Hopefully I can get out there someday when they're running. Or when the Green Hornet is buzzing on the loop line.
The 4000s are popular when it comes to museums. IRM has at least four; Warehouse POint in Connecticut also has several. Shore Line has one - 4280. Those cars you mention all came with trolley poles, so they were basically ready-to-run when acquired by museums - assuming they were still in running condition.
I remember seeing the 4000s on the Evanston Express, but never rode on them. I could always tell when they went by; they had a distinct sound that was quite different from the 6000s.
Did anyone spot any new R142 deliveries while I was away? The delivery list needs some updating!
Thanks
Dave
I spotted 6726-6730 and 6711-6720 in East 180th Street Yard with "Test train - Not in service" signs taped to their windows. Also rode in car #6705 on the 2, so 6701-6705 are in service now. I thought I also spotted 6741-6745 at East 180th, but I'm not sure.
I believe I've seen several new 7400-numbered cars within the last week or so, fyi
Stuart, RLine86Man
I'd like to introduce myself as a new subtalker but have been reading the posts for almost the last year. Anyways..
I saw an R142A at the 33rd street station, I didn't get a glimpse of what other set it was coupled with, but R142A set 7511-7515 is in passenger service.
Lawrence
Saw R142's 6711-6720 on the 2 at 3rd Avenue earlier this evening. It made simulated stops (where the doors open on the opposite side of the platform). A few minutes later R142A's 7531-7540 went by. They were not in service, so I assume they were being transferred to the 6. Also saw 6736-6740 at East 180th Yard.
7511-7520 #6 were at Grand Central around 5 pm yesterday with passengers
7531-40 are definitely recent arrivals; they were still in Yonkers on October 20! (Photos)
I'll try to get it together for you a bit later if I can, but there's more equipment on the road.
-Stef
i spotted 6716-6720 on the drye test track one day last week along with them seen 6701-6705 in service
6711-6720 I see in service last Friday at Grand Army Plaza.
Ok R142'S
In Service 6666-6670 6696-6700 6701-6710 6711-6720
R142A's
In Service 7461-7465
the R-142's that were called out for breaking problems are being prepared for service. 6381-6390 left Concourse/jerome yards.
Don't hold your breath: door problems are locking out service!! Peter
Once great weakness to the J,M,Z lines is the fact that is 3 tracks for the most part and only 4 tracks in Manhattan, I think that a major investment should be made to a 4 track line in Brooklyn so that expresses can go from Jamaica Center to Broad Street instead of Skip Stop, also the J, and Z lines can run express through the main section once the M line joins at Myrtle Avenue. I think people can save time and it would take a significant amount of riders OFF the Queens Boulevard Lines.
the Z and J can both Terminate at Chambers Street
and the M can go to Bay Parkway
Simple, yes
expensive, yes
benifits, great
Is there space on the els to put the extra track in. When I was on the D-Types to the Dock trip in August, I went ahead over the Willy B to take pics at Marcy Avenue. There were people looking out the windows of the building near the station. They seemed pretty close. Don't think there is room to put in a 4th Track without widening the el, which may not be do-able.
Also with the Wily B under construction, the time to have planned and implemented your suggestion is long passed for at two generations.
A four-track el structure is too wide for the average New York street.
and having the J/Z terminater at Chambers is wacko,dude.Are you a Jline rider? If you are,then you know that wouldnt be a good idea...
Put it this way: I was a semiregular QJ rider back when that marking was in existence.
and so was I....been riding for over 30 years[i'm talkin'R16/RI-9/R27-30 and last ,the R42'S when they were new]
I rode on that same rolling stock myself, although in my case most of the time it was R27/30s. I rode on the R-16s a grand total of two times, 19 years apart.
It could work if a 4-track subway were built... and, you could have it connect to the S 4th St station... this way, you can eliminate having trains using the Willy B.
Though the bridge has been repaired in recent years, it costs a lot less to maintain a tunnel then a bridge. By building a tunnel and connecting it to the Essex St station, it would solve transportation problems in the area.
Once over the Willy B, that line is refered as the Broadway-Brooklyn. Nassau Street does not extend into Brooklyn.
Phil Hom
In fact, the Nassau Street line only runs along Nassau Street between Broad Street and Chambers Street.
Before the portion between Chambers St. and the Montague St. tunnel opened, the line was known as the Centre St. line.
Four tracking may not be posssible. But extending the three track express, and using it for more hours, woould be a great idea if it could be pulled off.
The (J)(M)(Z) lines have a lot of potential, especially the (J)(Z) which could take heat off Queens Blvd. They are also the only real direct link between northern Queens and most of Brooklyn, seeing how isolated and indirect the (G) is.
:-) Andrew
The two-track section of the J/Z has island platforms. Installing a third track would require also installing new side platforms. Oh, an express station or two would be nice -- otherwise passengers boarding between Sutphin and Eastern Parkway would be rightly annoyed.
The two-track section of the J/Z has island platforms. Installing a third track would require also installing new side platforms.
Right. I didn't say it would be easy or cheap.
Oh, an express station or two would be nice -- otherwise passengers boarding between Sutphin and Eastern Parkway would be rightly annoyed.
Agreed! Hmmm. How about Woodhaven Blvd and Crescent St, and maybe one or two others.
:-) Andrew
According to the track map, the 2-track section of the J/Z has side platforms, not island platforms. Also, I believe the el structure was built to accommodate a third, center track. It would not be terribly expensive to build this and allow peak-hour express service a la the 7 and 6, and the late lamented W in Queens.
Several stations on the (J)(Z) have island platforms, I believe arround the infamous S-curve. They are the minority though.
:-) Andrew
Alabama, Cleveland, Norwood, Van Siclen and Crescenbt have island platforms. Starting with Cypress Hills to and including 121 the platforms revert to side platforms. Marcy, Hhewes, Lorimer, Flushing, Kosciuszko, Gates, halsey and Chauncey are also side platforms.
According to Joe Cunningham, the BRT (predecessor to the BMT) did have polans for third tracking the line. Leaving Eastern Parkway you will see a flyover heading in the same direction as the J and ending at Alabama Ave Station. While he was unsure, the thinking was it would be a second level at Alabama and was to bypass the S curve.
While this **might**be feasible today the question is do we need it and what do we do with the rooms that were built in many locations in the space where the third track would go-extend the platforms, over the platforms, under the platforms (additional mezzanine rooms in closed space)
I don't ride the J, but it's one of the longest (if not the longest) outerboro lines without express service. Ditto for the 1 north of 96th -- which is why skip-stop was instituted on these 2 lines. But skip-stop is a pale imitation of real express service.
The Broadway EL is the longest in the city, if not the whole country. It's also one of the oldest still standing.The short comings of this route is the configuration. It is out dated. Other cities that still have them have upgraded them to meet travel needs,such as line relocation in some places to provide a more direct service to the central business district[see Boston's Orange line]. While the idea of placing a forth track for express service is impossible[Broadway's too narrow],there are other ways to speed up service,such as rerouting the EL in East New York to eliminate the sharp curves,direct connections to other lines there[A/C and L],and full time express service to and from Jamaica based on the service patterns used today on simular lines[Flushing,Pelham and so on..]. There are many ways can inprove this line,but as we all know.. that takes capitol and manpower which [both]are in short supply.
Not that I really agree with the original post but I must say a forth track IS feasible even without widening Broadway or Jamaica Av by putting it on a different level. (for example there are 4 tracks between Stillwell and W.8 Street)
"by putting it on a different level"
The dual level BMT tracks in brooklyn are in the wide open, with no buildings closing in on them on both sides.
While in therory it may be possible, I do not believe that the existing structure will be able to bear the load. It is after all the oldes surviving structure in the city.
I was thinking of the idea of running a parallel rute on the next block over, say the southbound lines on Jamacia Avenue, and the northbound lines on... on.... er..... HEY, THEIR AIN'T ANOTHER GOOD ROUTE TILL YOU GET TO ATLANTIC AVENue....... HMmmmmm......
Suppose we do build a new LIRR line via the LIC route, and then south into manhattan..... That would make the LIRR Atlantic Line surplus and.....
Elias
The locals in that neighborhood are not going to have that, so go back to the drawing board.
>>>>>>>>>One great weakness to the J,M,Z lines is the fact that is 3 tracks for the most part and only 4 tracks in Manhattan....................I think people can save time and it would take a significant amount of riders OFF the Queens Boulevard Lines.
Wrong. The TWO weaknesses are:
1) Current ridership is too light to warrant express service
2) The lines do not serve Midtown Manhattan, thus making the Queens Blvd thing moot since it does not interest them.
This is an example where capitalist competition would help. If the J were turned over to a competitor, they would put in express service and resurrect the K line to midtown, thus relieving the ridership crunch on the E/F from Jamaica.
The lines currently don't serve midtown Manhattan now, but the potential exists with the Christie St connection they used in 68 to Broadway-Laffayette and up 6th Avenue after Essex Street. If they did this however, I don't think the current Broadway line could handle the extra trains.
When is the last time they used the Chrystie Street connection from Nassau St line to 6th Avenue for revenue service? Was the K the last time? Why did they stop using it?
The connection has not seen regular revenue service since 1976. Low ridership had a lot to do with it.
Once great weakness to the J,M,Z lines is the fact that is 3 tracks for the most part and only 4 tracks in Manhattan...
A greater weakness is that less than 26,000 passengers use the services over the Williamsburgh Bridge during the morning rush hour. They are running only 20 tph. This figure could be increased by 50%, without any construction, should increased demand warrant it.
One of the problems[concerning low ridership],not enough services offered.While there is a direct connection to the 6th Avenue line to upper Manhattan/Middtown and another to Rockaway pky,and yet another potential route to the Rockaways or Queens Blvd [IF the T.A.CHOSE TO build THEM],the T.A has chosen not to offer any type of service improvement to the riding public.AT THIS MOMENT,the services on the 6th ave line under 34th street are basicaly half of what it once was[B/D/F/Q replaced by the F/S-63rd st and S Grand st].IF by chance,one of the Nassau st line trains could be diverted up 6th ave,the transfer at ESSEX/DELACEY would be less crowed than it is,SOME ridership/service to and from the Queens blvd line could be sent up the Jamaica line[provided if a direct express is availble].There are many possiblies as far as routing goes,but you have have them in place for the riders or at least make it available. I've felt for years,that the T.A offen gave riders on the Eastern division the shaft. Now we have the chance to make things a little better with the avent of the R143 cars. Longer skip stop hours full express service from Essex st to Eastern Pky,better rolling stock, platform extentions and route extentions etc...you get the idea. I can go on and on but nothing will change unless rider voice their oppositon to whats happening to their line [like the riders of the Queens Blvd and Flushing lines].Thank you for the time to voice my opinion.
I think the since the 6th Ave. line has been so diminished because of the construction on the Manhattan Bridge, now would be a great opportunity to increase service on that line by using the Crystie Street connection again, from Essex Street.
MY point exactly.
I've felt for years,that the T.A offen gave riders on the Eastern division the shaft.
That's a very parochial view. They've given everyone the shaft.
They have,
But the Eastern division always gets the worse -- The oldest trains, last to have stations upgrades, Almost last to loose the grafitti, etc.
And look at the condition of Chambers, Bowery, and until recently how Canal used to look on the Nassau Line.
Who says the oldest trains are the worst?
The oldest aren't the worst (the best actually) What I meant to say is "run-down" If they would have kept them maintained. Beleive me, I was sorry to see the "red trains" (R27) go, when they rebuilt the R42's and R40's. It's just that as they painted and cleaned the trains up, the Nassau line always had the unpainted graffitied dirty trains. (I even miss the R16's which were always the dirtiest messes!) They never even got the chance to get cleaned up. Most of them were a mess right up to the end.
I LOVE the idea. That would not only help out Queens Blvd. riders, but it gives LIRR riders a fast way to reach lower Manhattan. In the interest of saving money, the only thing I would do differently is to construct a single middle track between Crescent and 121 Street (which already exists in some areas) as opposed to two express tracks and have the express train skip Marcy. I would designate Myrtle, Eastern Pkwy, Crescent and Sutphin Blvd (along with Jamaica Center) as the express stations. The express (probably Z) would skip Alabama, Van Siclen, Cleveland and Norwood the same way that the LIRR skips stations, only that it would be in the peak direction. The express would always have priority over the local. I would also extend the middle track at Marcy to connect with NB and SB tracks west of the station. It gives express riders one less stop to deal with.
That would be a much more feasible idea. There is no way they are going to rip all the stations up from Cypress Hills to 121 street to add a fourth track. But using the middle for the express track can work without major reconstruction.
I LOVE the idea...The express (probably Z) would skip Alabama, Van Siclen, Cleveland and Norwood the same way that the LIRR skips stations, only that it would be in the peak direction.
Really? You should be able to do the math. Look at the J/Z schedule. The running time between Eastern Pkwy and Crescent St as a local is 9 minutes. The skip-stop time is 7 minutes. Therefore, the express time would be 5 minutes.
Given that the minimum headway between trains on the same track can be 2 minutes, tell me what the minimum headway can be with simultaneous local and skip-station express service. Justify your answer.
Next, compare this to the present 3/6 minute scheduled headway for the 1/9 skip stop service. Which has the potential for more service?
Is it really that long? I didn't think that local trains traveling through that stretch would take that long. Anyway, what I'm thinking of is to alter the timing of the trains. I would have the express train leave its terminal first and have the local leave almost right behind it in its wake. Wait about 7 minutes and repeat the process again. I'm gambling is that by the time the local reaches Cypress Hills, there should be an express passing it. In any situation where there is an express anywhere near a local and both have to share a track, the local is held up. This could get ugly along the stretch you're talking about, but I think this could work.
On second thought, I admit that you have a very good point. This is the MTA; trains rarely run with pinpoint timing. What could be done in this situation is to run skip-stop service between Eastern Pkwy and Crescent only. The skip-stop express (probably Z) could go express between Essex and Eastern Pkwy and between Crescent and Sutphin Blvd. The skip-stop local (probably J) would have to run completely local in order to avoid total confusion. I think I still have a headache coming on.
That would penalize riders at J only stations. It would make the Z a more desirable train to ride, people would crowd it, thus defeating the purpose of skip-stop service to begin with.
Service is fine as is. Running one route down the middle track would only save what, about 2 minutes, over the current skip-stop?
You don't seem to like express service much, do you? Or do you just think eastern Queens riders don't deserve them?
An express run down the Jamaica/Broadway el could conceivably make a BIG difference, considering how many stops it might skip.
:-) Andrew
I think they mean as it currently is set up. Running the Z as and express from Eastern Pky to Myrtle would make the J a longer ride because the J would have to stop at the four stations in between, thus make the J line a longer route for all the J only stations before Eastern Pkwy. What they really need to do is put in the express track in between 121 St and Cypress Hills, run the J local, the Z express. And to deal with the island platform area from Alabama to Cypress Hills, without having to do major construction, unfortunately, just have to make the J and Z stop at them. I don't see how else to deal with that without major reconstuction.
An express train running between Crescent and Sutphin and between Essex and Eastern Pkwy, with a skip-stop in between, would save riders in Eastern Queens at least 7 to 10 minutes over a pure skip-stop. I don't think that trains would be that packed when they roll into the hypothetical skip-stop section of the line between Crescent and Eastern Pkwy. People don't ride the J/Z because skip-stop service isn't the same as express service. People that have stops at a local station would love to take an express first-until they see how packed the express is. I'm guessing that, like riders on the 7, they'll rather have a seat on the local instead of being cramped on an express.
I agree. However, no such track exists, and will never exist. I was talking about current service which was possible with the present infrastructure. I know all to well how "slow" the J line is, as i ride it every day. With the 2 tracks, only skip-stop service is viable.
You're absolutely right. The way it's set up now, skip-stop is the best option for the Nassau Line. I only wish that someday in the future, the MTA finally decides to put a complete center track between Crescent and Sutphin. Until then, I can only dream...
That will be the next project as soon as they finish the Second Ave Subway.
Oh goody. That means it's SURE to be done by 2005!!!!!!
An express track between Supthin & Crescent is useless if the express trains have to merge again with the locals from Crescent to Alabama. All that merging will cancel out any time savings. The real soulution is to demolish the ancient Fulton St. elevated structure and to move it north to Jamaica Ave, with a 3 track line all the way from the present Eastern Parkway thru 121st. St. Chances of being done: 1 in a zillion to the zillionth power.
I don't know about that. If you think about it, the Jamaica Express train with the skip-stop section included between Crescent and Eastern Pkwy would skip some 17 stops, in comparison to about 10 skipped stops for the current skip-stop service. Also remember that in my scenario the express would always have priority over any local. While, I admit that having three merges could cause some delays, more often than not the express would not be delayed. We wouldn't have to destroy the old el between Eastern Pkwy and Crescent.
One more thing, I would extend both J and Z trains to Broad Street. Still, your idea, in my opinion, is a very good idea.
Idea good: Yes
Worth the money: Yes
TA Cheap: Yes
TA run by rich businessmen instead of railroad people: Yes
The second Avenue subway needs to be built too.
From what I'm getting from this board,there a a few nay sayers and a few thumbs ups....... if you are a regular passenger or rider useing these lines .. then you would know exactly what I'm talking about.Service is not that bad,but... it can be MUCH BETTER!!!!!!!
Gentlemen,gentlemen,
Please, we have kicked this dead dog around enough!
Here is MY FINAL SOLUTION!
1) Add a third,center track for express peek direction were the present structure will allow. That is above the Jamaica avenue segment.
2) Construct a single track structure from Cypress Hills to Eastern Parkway on the north side of Jamaica Ave to Eastern Parkway, NO STOPS!
using the same type of construction as the AIRTRAIN for this SINGLE trackbed. A flyover or fly under at either end to rejoin the Right-Of-Way .
This would be a reduced version of the break-a-way express dash employed on the Queens Blvd. line of the "E"&"F" expresses.
We would then have:
A new express service, little or no disruption to current Local service, and a very quite run next to a cemetery. Elemination on the express dash of those two Curves BRTman knows and loves so well. Preservation of the oldest "El" this side of the Black stump. Possible use of the 75ft behemoths on the Eastern Division.
avid
Great Idea
avid
here is my comment on your plan by item numbers:
1- East of Cypress Hills the line does have shoret third tracks at 121 and possibly (disputed)at other location(s).While the line might hold a third track the question is if the line is strong enough for the weight load and where to move all the rooms (near stations) built in this space. Also to be decided is do we want/need express srops ie Woodhaven Blvd and hwo to make them express tops ie switches widen the structure by tearing down houses and making a full express stop such as Eastern Parkway or Broadway/Myrtle
2-The flyover was actually proposed by the BRT before the demise precipitated by Malbone Street. Joe Cunningham has advised that the BRT had poor records but he guesses the myserious flyover East of Eastern Parkway ending at Alabama Ave station was the start.
3- I think it has been dsicussed here that the Willie B can not handle 75 foot cars along with other locations.
Youe post and suggestiosn are good and intelligent.
Isn't the short third track further west, like at 111th St.
There is also third track in place on Crescent, between Crescent and Cypress Hills stations on the old portion of the el.
The track is in at 111th Street, sometimes they store trains there.
Does the center track have a wye switch at each end?
avid
Fifty Five years ago 111th St was the eastern terminal for the old Lexington Ave el during rush hours. They put together, broke down and stored the old gate cars there during non-peak hours. The old building at the east end of the north platform was the control room of the operation. This ended in 1950!
Good lord, that building is in horrible shape. I thought it housed the switch equipment for the interlocking here. And speaking of horrible condition, I bet that center track hasn't been replaced since the days it was used to store these gate cars!
As small as the building was, they must have had a crewroom in there too. I often saw an new train coming out of the center track stop there to pick up a couple of gatemen. A three car gate train seemed lost when stopped at the station. It was less than 150 foot long, and non rush hour Standards were almost 400 foot long. Even at the height of rush hour they only ran five car gate trains.
402 feet, to be exact, for a 6-car train of BMT standards.
Some of the houses or shacks could be underslung where some of the station mezzinenes were removed, or on platform extensions.
Express stops, every third or fourth station or at major intersections with connecting bus routes would probly involve
1) Center track installation.
2) One side of local tracks removed and a Platfom built over the local track location.
3) Two tracks used while old platform is removed on side with new Platform.
4) New local tracks built were theold platform was.
5) Repeat for the oposite side.
You would always have two tracks in service. In the end you would go from two side platforms to two island platforms in almost the same space. Hopefully no property would be lost by private owners.
I guess a close look at the express stops on the #7 Flushing line would be most helpful, that and the Atlantic Ave relocation on the "L" train.
What thoughts do you have? Maybe BRTman could throw some fuel on the fire? I'd extend these new stations to 670ft during construction JIC.
avid
(First some background, then a question:)
For those who don't know, SEPTA is curently in the middle of upgrading the MFL to ATC, and eventually removing all of the wayside signals in the process. They are also upgrading the power system, and adding huge cables for return-power from regen. braking. They are also installing a new crossover at 40th St, to allow them to run trains to 40th St during times when the West El is closed for reconstruction.
Now, a question:
Why did they remove the crossover at 5th St? They have been working on this for a few weeks now, and it looks like they are pretty much done now. Is it just to conserve on maintenance, since they are adding one at 40th? Won't this cause much longer delays when running 1-track downtown? Why decrease flexibility in rerouting?
Okay, I just had a brainstorm... Is it possible that they are MOVING the crossover from 5th to 40th, to save $$ over buying new interlocking equipment (which would immediately become obsolete in a couple years when they finish ATC.) That would make more sense, I guess. Does anyone know if that is what they are actually doing?
Is the 40th St interlocking inside the tunnel? It is a siscors crossover? Are they keeping US&S EP (either A-10 or A-5) switches? How are they "removing" the 5th St. interlocking? I could just be an upgrade. W/o the 5th St interlocking they would have to cross trains over at String Garden, but that has a pocket track that is usually occupied. This is going to create a huge gap.
There is a new crossover to be installed at 40th St, mainly to help when the Market El work starts (the bus shuttles will end there rather than at 30th), but to add future flexibility. The crossover is in the tunnel and, I believe, west of the station. On the stretch of subway between 30th St and the 44th St portal, there were gaps left in the center columns on either side of 34th and 40th for future crossovers at any of these locations.
As far as I know, the 5th St crossover is only out of service temporarily, although I don't know how long 'temporarily' is. It is really needed since the only other one in the subway in Center City is west of 15th St. The next eastward one is at Spring Garden and too far away to be effective for single tracking, emergency turns, etc.
Well, they've almost completely REMOVED all of the equipment and special track for the 5th street crossover. It's almost just two straight-through tracks there. Maybe it is a replacement (I hope so) but you'd think the track itself or some of the quipment would be salvagable...
I don't think there are gaps directly on either side of 34th St. There is a working crossover on the west end of 30th.
As for 5th St, there are also gaps at 8th and either 11th or 13th (can't recall which.) I think a crossover at 8th would make more sense than 5th, but this is SEPTA, so who knows.
8th woudln't make as much sence as they currently have a crossover about every 10-15 blocks. You'd end up w/ a small gap and a large gap.
Distance-wise, maybe, but not station-wise. There's one at 15th and one at Spring Garden. With a crossover at 5th, it's two stations to a another crossover going east, and four stations going west. If they moved it 8th, there would be another crossover three stations in either direction.
Good thing I posted those signaling diagrams as they are now a part of history. I am opposed to this cab signal project as it is replacing a perfectly good US&S penumatic system and the in cab displays are rather crapy. What is the point of a railfan window without all the pretty signals? I hope they don't impose some lame speed limit like 50 mph. Right now there are some stretches where the T/O's can get all they can get.
Pneumatics aren't cheap or easy to maintain. They leak, collect water, dirt screws them up, compressors crap out, etc etc etc. Anyway, IIRC, this signal system was a freebie from the settlement with ABB. Might as well get a "free" signal system...
From what I've read, even in industry, pneumatics are starting to get phased out, as better and cheaper linear actuators and stuff are developed.
(and before pointing out that the gas untitly effectively maintains a low leakage pneumatic system, realize that gas lines are fairly low pressure (40psi, and useually down to 1 or 2 psi in your home, IIRC), and that their valving is seldom used, and the stuff they're blowing around is moisture free)
Settlement with ABB for what? Didn't ABB get bought out years ago?
Yes ABB was bought out. That was part of the problem. AdTranz, as they are named today, settled the delay issue in delivering the machines with the new signal system.
Now if they could only get a modern fare collection system...
What's wrong with the current system? The turnstyles accept change! How convienent is that, no having to buy some silly card if you are in a hurry.
Yes, the turnstiles aren't bad - they accept cards, tokens, and change - even golden dollars.
BUT SEPTA doesn't make cards that make any sense. If you use regional rail, they make sense, but you still have to buy them weekly or monthly. They don't have any stored-value cards.
And if you only use the bus, trolley, or subway, tokens are much cheaper. There's nothing like the Metrocard for people who just ride the subway or a bus every day to work. Ridiculous.
What is wrong with tokens? They can't get de-magnitized and they government can't track you with them.
It's a pain to buy and carry them. I'd much rather load up a card once a month and not have to worry about it.
The fact that SEPTA might be able to know where I am is the least of my worries... Consider DC... (farecards, not the new system) your name is not on the card. Even on a stored value card, it would not have to have your name directly on the card.
This is an addendum to Rechaining BMT Route Q (L Line)?, posted by me on Fri Aug 31 11:15:03 2001.
I just noticed that new location plates are being installed. I spotted this example at the Graham Avenue station. On a column at this station, there is an old location board that reads Q1 175+00. At the next column towards Manhattan, there is a new board that is covered by a white piece of paper, but you can see the Q1 on it. The number 193+00 is written on this paper.
Someone said that there was a reason for the rechaining, but didn't say what it was.
HAS ANYONE TRIED TO LOOK AT THE NEW SUBWAY MAP ISSUED BY THE MTA ON THE SITE? I HAVE TRIED FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS BUT COULD NOT ACCESS IT. ANYBODY OUT THERE HAVE ANY PROBLEMS?
I just checked it now. You can access it by opening a *.pdf file within the browser or downloading it to your computer. Perhaps your browser Acrobat plugin is not working.
I can't stand Adobe Acrobat. Whenever it opens in my browser it downloads bits of the file at a time. It sometimes causes the browser to get stuck. To avoid this I right click the file, choose "save target as" and download the file as a whole, and open it up with Acrobat later.
Still using Acrobat Reader 3.01, I see... a lot of the newer files out there now are created with 4.0 or 5.0, which aren't 100% compatible (despite Adobe's claims) with 3.01.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The map is in PDF format. Do you have Adobe Acrobat installed?
Go to a token booth and ask for a copy!
In Greller's book "Subway cars of the BMT", the author relates
a reputation that the BMT MultiSection cars had for failing to
stop, including one eyewitness account.
The MS cars were technologically decades ahead of their time.
Arguably, they were more sophisticated than equipment the TA
was ordering 30 years later. Did you know that these cars
actually had an accelerometer in them for closed-loop control
of acceleration and braking effort? They also delivered both
dynamic and friction braking during emergency and had service
accel and brake rates of 4.0 MPH/s. If our current fleet had
that kind of performance, imagine what the service levels would
be without any additional equipment purchases.
The control and braking systems, however,
were overly complicated. I recently came across an air brake
instruction manual for the MS cars, and I can spot a number of
places where brake system failure could have taken place.
Now, some of you guys are old enough to remember first-hand.
Was this bad reputation founded or unfounded?
Did you know that these cars actually had an accelerometer in them for closed-loop control of acceleration and braking effort?
Are you talking about an accelerometer or tachometer pickup off the shaft? There would have been some major theoretical problems to using an accelerometer for closed loop control.
Yes, an accelerometer. To be precise, a weighted pendulum.
One of the things I can't figure out is how WABCO intended to
address wheel slide issues under variable loading, because there
is no apparent load weight compensator mechanism such as was
present on the ABs, D types, etc. If the wheels began to slip
during braking under light loading, the pendulum would do the
wrong thing and apply more brake pressure.
Yes, an accelerometer. To be precise, a weighted pendulum. One of the things I can't figure out is how WABCO intended to address wheel slide issues under variable loading, because there is no apparent load weight compensator mechanism such as was present on the ABs, D types, etc. If the wheels began to slip during braking under light loading, the pendulum would do the wrong thing and apply more brake pressure.
Wheel slip wouldn't be the only problem using a PIGA (Pendulous Integrating Gyro Accelerometer). The General Theory of Relativity comes into play. One cannot design an instrument that can distinguish between gravitational and other accelerations. The only way such readings can be used is to subtract out gravitational acceleration using an analytic model. The problem with this approach is that the errors are cumulative. This cumulative error would not be significant for the duration of the guided portion of a ballistic missile flight but would present problems for the run between 8th Ave and Myrtle Ave on the 14th St Line.
My guess is that the system never worked. Now, had they only used a generator-tachometer they might have had something that had a chance of working within the technology of that day.
Hey, you must have been around during the Multis' reign, do you
have any actual facts about them or just theoretical speculation>
I don't see why gravity would produce a cumulative error effect.
It's not like the accelerometer reading is being integrated to
derive velocity or position information. The primary purpose
of the pendulum device was, as far as I can tell, to automatically
graduate off the brakes to maintain a constant braking rate,
and to adjust the motor current for constant acceleration. There
would certainly be an error introduced by gravity but it would
only be as much as the percent grade being ascended or descended.
The mercury retarder on London Underground 1938 stock operated on the same principle as the pendulum to regulate braking. It worked quite well.
-Robert King
Hey, you must have been around during the Multis' reign, do you have any actual facts about them or just theoretical speculation
My personal experience with the Multis was after they had been exiled to the Myrtle Ave Line which I did not ride all that often. I was more unfavorably impressed by their lack of a rail fan window than their performance at that time. They were gone by the time I'd read about their technical virtues in my college's engineering library a few years later.
I don't see why gravity would produce a cumulative error effect. It's not like the accelerometer reading is being integrated to derive velocity or position information. The primary purpose of the pendulum device was, as far as I can tell, to automatically graduate off the brakes to maintain a constant braking rate, and to adjust the motor current for constant acceleration. There would certainly be an error introduced by gravity but it would only be as much as the percent grade being ascended or descended.
A pendulum accelerometer measures acceleration in only one direction. One method for removing the gravitational errors is to mount the accelerometer on a gyro stabilized inertial platform that is orthogonal to the gravitational force. I assumed rightly or wrongly that this was done with the Multis. The problem with this approach is that the gyros will drift with time and the errors will be cumulative.
If the accelerometer was not gyro stabilized then let's estimate the errors intoduced by gravity.
4 mph/sec = 5.88 ft/sec2 = 0.18 g
The horizontal component of gravity on a 2% is approximately 0.02 g. This means that the measurement errors introduced by gravity can be around ±10%
Next, there is the problem of errors introduced by the sensor itself. The pendulum is restricted to a very small displacement relative to its length at its maximum reading. Its motion is also heavily damped (usually a viscous liquid). Whatever method is used to measure the displacement would require amplification and linearization of the base displacement to get a useful signal. Considering how crude the equipment was at that time, I would be surprised if the total acceleration reading error was less than 25% of the actual reading. This is assuming that there are no additional failures.
Would 25% be good enough? Hard to say. But it would go a long way to explain the anecdotal evidence of platform overshoots.
What did cause the braking failures in the Multi Section cars?
#3 West End Jeff
A pendulum accelerometer measures acceleration in only one direction. One method for
removing the gravitational errors
is to mount the accelerometer on a gyro stabilized inertial platform
No, I assure you nothing so sophisticated! As far as I can
tell from the drawings, it was just a weighted pendulum (mass
unknown) a few inches long. There were two actually. One,
working against a spring, controlled electrical contacts to
affect the accelerating current setting. The other worked against
air pressure in a diaphragm which was relayed from the brake
valve. It also worked contacts which were connected to the
application & release magnet valves. The purpose of this device,
called the "Retardation Controller", seems to have been to modulate
the brakes at low speeds to prevent stonewall stops. Yes, a
malfunction could have easily caused blown station stops.
The horizontal component of gravity on a 2% is approximately 0.02 g.
Isn't it _exactly_ .02g?? Nonetheless, you are right, that would
introduce a 10% measurement error.
So far I've found a number of reasons why the Multis might have
experienced sudden long braking, including poor emergency brake
response when operated in the fallback pneumatic-only mode, but
nothing to explain the accounts of these trains becoming completely
unstoppable even after being dumped.
I can't vouch for any technical aspects of these cars, but when I was in high school in Manhattan (lived in Queens at that time), I'd go out of my way to ride these cars home almost every day, picking them up at Union Square, sometimes riding them to Canarsie, or, during rush hours, to Lefferts Boulevard. The Multis were the fastest accelerating cars ever to grace the New York City subway system. They were not the most beautiful, and the interiors were spartan, but they served well. The acceleration was so rapid that there were signs posted on the insides of the cars to the effect of directing passengers to hold on at all times. They also had a sound unlike any other cars. They had a Cineston single-handle controller, and you could easily see the motorman (yes, motorman, not train operator in those days) effortlessly piloting these gems. Unfortunately, they were retired in 1961 and had a farewell fantrip which I was on. Regrettably, none were saved, probably the only major class to be completely scrapped.
The Multi's never had a Cineston. Thet was the Bluebird.
I only saw the MS ONCE and that was at Broadway Junction as a VERY young child. While I can't vouch for their safety or their braking reliability, I can say that they were among the most unforgettable cars I have ever seen and I can remember the sight of this unique train even to this day.
wayne
The MS cars were quite interesting in their own way. It is too bad that none of them were saved since I'll NEVER get to see one. They were retired in September 1961 which was 1 1/2 years before I was born.
#3 West End Jeff
I can only imagine how those multis would have taken the CPW express dash. They would have dusted even the R-10s. Or the 14th St. tunnel. I'll bet they galloped on the upgrades compared to the BMT standards, whose gear pitch would drop steadily as they labored uphill.
I read the multis had a balancing speed of 58 mph.
I wonder how fast the Multis would have gone if they were on the stretch between Howard Beach ands Broad Channel.
#3 West End Jeff
The Multis' forte was acceleration/deceleration rates not top speed. When intermixed with conventional equipment they made express/local service possihle on two track lines like 14th St.
What was the maximum speed of the Multis?
#3 West End Jeff
Balancing speed was 58 mph.
60 doesn't sound farfetched.
i finally obtained everything i wanted...an R key, a vapor key, redbird keys, a reverser key and a brand new brake handle! all from ebay! im so happy..lol this is the greatest thing ever!
Now you need to either get a job with the TA or volunteer at a museum to use them on the real thing ... that is unless you also plan to build a cab in you house. Heypaul will be right over.
Mr t__:^)
Let's see him get a CONTROLLER off eBay ... 'nuff said ...
All you need now is a butt plug.:-)
Do not brag about it in public.
If you haven't heard, TA President Reuter issued a memo to all TA employees that no TA property is to be offered for sale (especially via auction). Don't be suprised if that new brake handle was stolen merchandise.
If anyone knows the exact wording of the memo (and can get a copy for us to see), please post.
lol it wasnt stolen..i know that for a fact...and the reverser is old...not stolen either...i dont want a controller though i wouldnt mind one..but i now can steal a train. j/k y take a controller when i can take the entire train..lol this is all a joke...i mean yes i really do have the stuff but its ok i aint planing to use it
Danny
Been Reading / Watching DVD Frame By Frame "Taking Of Pellham 123" Alot Recently?
That's how I was able to identify that R-17 on the end of the first train visible as Martin Balsam enters the subway. It's car 6762, and it had graffiti on it.
Whoppee! And I'm still afraid of power testing. You wouldn't want to drag the brake handle around all day...makes a great hammer. Peter
I believe you when you say that you won't use those tools. but Reuters' point is that the TA has to jump on the national bandwagon in regard to tightening security. These kind of tools, if they are numerous in number, can easily get into the wrong hands, and already have in the past (remember Darius Mc?) I've heard (I cannnot confirm) that TA operating employees have offered unwanted TA uniforms for sale on E Bay. This kind of thing always has been a security breach, it is only since 9/11/01 that this matter can't be kept under wraps anymore.
If you are in possession of a brake handle, reverser, train keys, uniforms, etc. in public, and you are not an MTA employee, you will be arrested and charged with "possession of stolen property." It does not matter how you got them: ebay, employee, train show, whatever. If anyone has these things in their collection, that's cool, but don't leave your house with them.
This time it is part three of Life in Commuter.
The Electric District is the former Illinois Central (and later Illinois
Central Gulf) Electric District (and also known as the Suburban Division and
the Lake Shore Electric District at one time) that was sold to Metra in
1987. It is broken into three sub-districts; the University Park Line, the
South Chicago Branch and the Blue Island Branch. The University Park (UP)
Sub is the main route that extends from Randolph Street Station in downtown
Chicago to University Park, a suburb some 32 miles south. The South Chicago
Branch breaks off at 67th Street about 8 miles from Randolph heading
southeast ending at 91st and Baltimore on Chicago's Southeast Side. The Blue
Island Branch breaks off just south of Kensington on the far south side of
Chicago, some 14 miles from Randolph, terminating in that namesake town.
At one time, all three of these lines had freight service. This freight
service consisted of switching the on line industries. No through freight
traffic normally operated on these lines though. The South Chicago Branch
was the first to go all passenger, long before I ever arrived on the scene.
The Blue Island Branch had a single freight customer left, a lumberyard in
Blue Island right across from the depot. This customer ceased to exist by
1992. The UP Sub had its very last freight move in late 2000. This was when
an outfit called Recyclers in Chicago near Kensington burned down. The
switch is still in place to reach the remains of the plant, but no rail
service occurs there anymore.
I began my qualification runs on the Electric District after qualifying in
diesel service. After about a month or so, all three of us hired were given
tests on the equipment and the physical characteristics of the line. Upon
the successful completion and a qualifying run, we were all placed onto the
extra board.
The Electric District has three extra boards, one at University Park, one at
Blue Island and one at Randolph Street. The UP board normally covers all the
jobs that went on and off duty at UP and Richton Park. The Blue Island board
covers jobs at Blue and the Randolph board covers jobs at Randolph Street
and the 18th Street MU (Multiple Unit) shed where the Highliners are
serviced. If for any reason the board at one location was exhausted (no
rested or available Engineers), Engineers from the next closest board could
be used to cover the vacancy. It was not uncommon to be pulled from one
board to protect a job on another board's territory
We were all placed on the Randolph board. My first day was working the
Hostler job at the 18th Street MU shed. Aside from several student trips
here, I knew virtually nothing about the job. Another Engineer working here
took the helm and ran the show. It involved switching out the cars and
sending them into various tracks for inspections, maintenance or just
routine servicing, such as cleaning and changing light bulbs in between
trips.
Working the Randolph board had me at the 18th Street Shed quite frequently.
There were several jobs for Engineers there in the morning and midday. Many
of them were normally vacant as many of the Engineers did not like to work
there. The reason was the Hostler. He was a crabby and cantankerous old cuss
who could really be miserable to work with. No wait, miserable is far too
kind. On a good day he was a huge pain in the ass to work with. I believe he
ate gunpowder for breakfast and washed it down with a mixture of vinegar,
lemon juice and cayenne pepper oil. He would scream and yell almost
constantly, or at least so it seemed. I firmly believed his away from work
life was totally miserable so he took it out on us.
Eventually, I developed enough seniority to move to the UP board, which was
much closer to home. I did manage to work every single assignment on the
district. We had forty-three passenger combinations (passenger runs), five
MU Shed jobs and six relay jobs at Randolph Street.
The combinations were the combined runs of each particular assignment. Some
combinations made multiple trips, while others made one "middle trip" and
still others were "one trippers." Middle trips were short trips after making
your initial trip. You might work a combination that went on duty at UP. You
would take a morning rush hour train into Randolph, get a brief or extended
layover there, make a run to either Blue Island or South Chicago, get a
short layover there, work a train back into Randolph. You would then get
another layover and either getting another short trip or work your way home
on UP bound train.
Some combinations had you make two runs between UP and Randolph. Others
might make two runs between Randolph and South Chicago. Still others did a
run from Blue Island to Randolph, a run to South Chicago and a run back home
to Blue later.
There were several combinations known as "one trippers." On these trains,
you worked a morning rush train into Randolph, took your empty train to the
18th Street MU Shed or to the storage track across from the Van
Buren/Jackson Street Station and either hung around downtown or caught the
next southbound train home. In the afternoon, you caught a northbound train
in, went to either the storage track or 18th Street MU Shed and got your
train. You would run it into Randolph when it was your turn, load up and
head for home. We had quite a few of these jobs, with all but one based out
of Richton Park Yard. The other was a Blue Island job.
The basic train system for morning and evening rush had "zone" trains and
locals as well as the Blue Island and South Chicago trains. Morning zone
trains would originate at UP or Richton Park Yard. UP zone trains would
depart from there making stops at Richton Park station, Matteson, 211th
Street and Olympia Fields. From there, they were express trains to Randolph.
Some might make either a Kensington or Hyde Park (55th/57th Street or 59th
Street) stop, or both. These trains carry 700 series symbols.
Flossmoor zone trains originated at the Richton Park Yard and ran empty
equipment to the Flossmoor station. They then made stops at Homewood,
Calumet and Hazel Crest. Again, they were express trains to Randolph
possibly making a stop at Kensington and/or one of the Hyde Park stops
before reaching downtown Chicago. These trains carried 730 series symbols.
Harvey zone trains also came out of Richton Park Yard, running empty
equipment to the Harvey station. From here you made stops at Sibley
Boulevard (147th Street), Ivanhoe (downtown Dolton) and Riverdale. Again,
possibly with an intermediate stop as well. These trains carry 750 series
symbols.
In the evening, the southbound zone trains worked very much the same. You
might make a Hyde Park or Kensington (or both) stops, and then express to
your zone. Southbound zone trains were allowed to leave any station within
their zone in advance of the leaving time except the Hyde Park and
Kensington stops. They did not pick up passengers for transportation between
stations within their assigned zones.
After arriving back at Richton Park Yard, you spotted your train on the
designated track and secured the train. The Conductor and Assistant
Conductor would shut the train down according to the instructions required
based upon weather conditions. In the warmer months, the entire train would
be shut down killing all power to it. As the weather grew colder, you would
have to leave certain functions running in the train, such as heat, motor
generators and air compressors operating to keep things from freezing up.
Some Engineers on evening UP zone trains worked a train back into Randolph.
Others pulled their trains into the yard there and tied up. As required, you
might pull into the yard, cut off two or four cars as instructed by Randolph
Control, pull back into the station and then work a train north.
One morning UP zone train had the crew departing Randolph at 0420 and
working a local train to UP. You had a short lay over at UP and then worked
train 702 downtown. You did a quick turn to South Chicago, laid over there,
then worked back to Randolph and your day was complete.
We also had jobs called the South Chicago Loop and the Blue Island Loop.
These were both post evening rush hour trains that basically looped back and
forth. The South Chicago Loop would operate as follows; First a run from
Randolph to UP, a quick layover there and a return trip to Randolph. Then a
run from Randolph to South Chicago, a brief layover and then run north. We
would run as far as 59th Street Station on the UP Sub and unload everybody
for destinations north of here. These folks would transfer to the inbound
train out of UP. Once we met this train and received any passenger from them
going to points on the South Chicago Branch, we headed back south to 67th
Street. The 67th Street platform was only used for connecting Loop trains
with southbound UP trains. We would meet the southbound UP trains, swap
passengers and depart back to South Chicago. We repeated this procedure all
evening making the final southbound run after meeting the last train out of
Chicago. The last train would leave Randolph at 0045. After meeting him at
67th Street, we made our last run to South Chicago, quickly turned back and
made a dead head equipment run back to Randolph and tied up.
The South Chicago Loop was referred to as a "blood money" job. It was
grueling, as you never got a particularly long break. You had to eat fast in
between loops. The two regular Trainmen on the job, Conductor Greg Harris
and Assistant Conductor Hiram McRainey made it fun though, as they were
pretty good guys to work with. They even had a system worked out with a few
of the eateries along the way. They would call the place we decided to have
dinner from and place the order. As we came up to them, either Greg or Hiram
would run over to get our food while we paused for a moment across from the
place, or an employee from the establishment would come out to the train
bringing our food to us.
This train operated nightly and also all day Sunday. On Sundays, all service
on both the main line and the South Chicago Branch was every other hour.
This resulted in long layovers at South Chicago on Sundays, so you brought
along plenty of things to read and keep yourself occupied.
The Blue Island Loop worked in a similar fashion with a few notable
differences. On this loop, we ran from Blue Island to Kensington and met
both the north and southbound UP trains at the Kensington platform. The
stops along the Blue Island Branch all became flag stops after the 2100-hour
trip. Northbound people traffic was virtually negligible as the evening
progressed. Most of our business was southbound passengers heading home. The
layover at Blue was longer allowing for a better chance to eat. On occasion,
we would order a pizza and have it delivered here. The Blue Island Loop
would conclude with a trip south after meeting the 2300-hour train out of
Randolph.
The layover facilities at both Blue Island and South Chicago were spartan at
best. As a result, you spent most of the time on the train. The facilities
at Randolph were much more accommodating. We had a pool table, a kitchen
area, a couple of soda machines, a 27" color TV with cable and a VCR,
overstuffed chairs around the TV area, tables and chairs, a bunk room and
shower facilities. The cable was paid for from a fund that came from all the
aluminum cans we collected there. We had our in resident chef, Wayne Pinnow.
Wayne worked a trip in to Randolph, laid over and sold hot sandwiches and
other goodies from the kitchen. We had two microwave ovens paid for by the
employees. There was also a coffeepot, toasters, a refrigerator and a
toaster oven as well. Yes, we railroaders really know how to eat.
One drawback to Electric District trains was the way some of the
combinations were set up. You might go on duty at Randolph Street and
complete your tour of duty at UP or Blue Island. Or go on at Blue and finish
at Randolph. This was a pain as you then had to wait and ride the next
departing train back to your on duty point. We did get paid for this though.
The rate you received varied depending upon your hire date. Pre 1988 hires
got return miles for this. Return miles were the rail miles. Post 88 hires
got return time. This was time paid by the minute from your arrival to the
time the train you were required to ride back actually returned to your on
duty point.
A few old heads chided us as they thought they were making more than us on
this system. A sharp eyed post 88 Engineer noticed something in the
agreement that required Metra to pay us overtime if the return time made our
total day in excess of eight hours. Suddenly, in many cases we were actually
making more money for our return trip than the pre 88 guys, a lot more.
Their laughter quickly turned to tears as they realized that we were now
getting more money for this than they were. Then you should have heard them
whine and howl.
"Who's sorry now?"
In some cases, such as the Blue Island Loop, you went on duty at Randolph
and finished at Blue. Being there was no train to catch back to Randolph,
you had to make provisions beforehand. Normally you went to Blue Island,
parked your vehicle there and caught a train downtown. This way your car was
in position when you tied up. You did this on your own time though.
On occasion, you could work out an arrangement with another Engineer and
they would drive your car, or you theirs to the final location you would
operate the train. This would have both of you in position for a quick
getaway and home at least an hour sooner. Another method was to park your
car at the final run terminal and ride a train into your on duty point. This
normally worked well. It did have you giving up some of your own time at the
beginning of your day though. Also, should something go horribly wrong
causing the train you were riding in to be delayed, you were caught in it
and late for work. We'll discuss being late in a bit.
It seemed that just like the freight railroads, Metra was perennially short
of Engineers and sometimes Trainmen too. They would attempt to call you on
your day off and even while off on a personal day or vacation to come in and
work. They had an agreement that obligated you to work if they got a hold of
you to come in. Guess who quit answering their phone when they weren't
required to?
Extra board employees did not have regular days off. Instead, we were given
what were known as "20d days." This was article 20 section d of the
Engineers agreement. It allowed for two of them per month if you protected
the extra board for fourteen straight days. If you didn't use them, you lost
them. They did not carry over from month to month. You would call the caller
in the evening and request one. If they had the people, you would get it. At
0001 hours the following day, you automatically went back to the bottom of
the board. Needless to say, we all took part in their use. And again, when
the phone rang while I was off on a 20d day, I did not answer.
We would get a three-hour call on the Electric District as opposed to two
hours everywhere else. University Park extra Engineers also protected the
two Heritage Corridor jobs if either of these two Engineers marked off. The
three-hour call was great.
I interviewed with the then, Director of Suburban Operations (known
everywhere else and by the help as the Superintendent) Andy Selph. Andy was
old GM&O from Missouri. His personal crusades included rule G (the
prohibition of use of drugs and alcohol), being late, speeding and about
every other rule in the book. You did things one way, Andy's way. He
explained this all to me at the interview and asked if I would have problems
with his way of doing things. I responded "I cut my teeth at the Missouri
Pacific. It was once said that MoPac management had the mentality of
plantation overseers. I served discipline once on some six and half years
there and vowed to never serve any again. I think I can survive in your
world."
He loved it. I thought my analogy of the MoPac management was great. I think
he wished he could be thought of in that way. This response is probably what
landed me the job there.
Andy clearly stated in his Missouri drawl, "I'll smile when I hire you and I
'll smile when I fire you." I never saw anybody who so seemed to love to put
people out on the street. I'll bet NS managers aren't even as bad as Andy
could be. I wonder if they ever came in the attempt to recruit him?
I was determined that Andy would never catch me doing anything wrong that
would result in any discipline. And I lived up that vow. In the year plus I
worked under Andy's regime before he retired, we never even exchanged a
cross word. Never once got called into the office to explain myself for
something that happened. Most of my conversation with him was usually just a
greeting to him as we passed in the halls.
With exception to the relay jobs at Randolph and the 18th Street, you were
normally on duty about 20-25 minutes before your train was scheduled to
depart. There were a few exceptions, the first job in the morning at UP,
Richton and Blue Island were required to be there like an hour before train
time. You would be used to hostle and equipment around that might have to be
switched out for whatever reason. During your pre-train prep time, you would
get your air test if the relay person hadn't done it for you. You also had
time to get a time and radio check, and also to check the bulletin boards.
Needless to say time was critical.
The relay jobs were akin to switchers. The Relay Engineer would move the MU
Highliners around the station at Randolph Street. This might include
coupling up several small sets of Highliners to make an outbound train of
four or six cars. It might involve splitting up an inbound four or six car
train into several sets of two car trains. On occasion you would take some
equipment over to the 18th Street MU Shed or bring some back. I would
normally handle air tests for most of the outbound trains when I worked the
relay jobs. Many of the others that worked them would do the same. These
jobs paid yard rate and unlike the passenger combinations, made Holiday pay
if you worked a Holiday. They were pretty good jobs and I enjoyed working
them. They either had one or two days off, that being a weekend day or days.
The MU Highliners had tightlock couplers like Amtrak coaches and rapid
transit electrical grids instead of jumper cables in between them. They
always operate in pairs with one facing north and one facing south. Unlike
the South Shore cars, which can operate as a single car, the Highliners
cannot. The South Shore cars have an Engineers compartment at both ends of
the car on all powered coaches. The Highliners do not.
All even numbered Highliners face north and odd numbered ones face south.
There is a reason for this owing to the rapid transit electrical grids. They
are not universal like the MU receptacles on a locomotive. Therefore it you
turn a Highliner, none of the buttons on the grid will line up correctly and
thus, the cars will not MU properly.
Coupling and uncoupling them is accomplished through the use of a
coupling/uncoupling button. Unless the system hangs up, you need not step
outside of the car to engage or disengage the coupling. Should there be a
failure in the system, you had to step out and do a couple of fairly simple
tasks, but quite honestly, I cannot even recall them anymore. I really
quickly deprogrammed myself from the policies and procedures when I left.
Andy had what was referred to as the "snitch rule." You were required to
turn in somebody for being late. The rule required you be on the platform at
your train or in the office at the on duty time depending upon the location
and situation. If you were even one minute late, a fellow crewmember was
required to turn you in to Randolph Control. If you knew you were going to
be late for any reason, you could call Randolph Control in advance to advise
them. They could make contingency plans as needed if you were not there for
train time.
There was one time when a certain female Conductor (who was not well liked
and considered by many to be a . well, it's a word that rhymes with witch)
turned her Engineer in for being late. He was walking across the parking lot
towards the platform and even waved to her. It was on duty time, so she
walked over to the radio, called Randolph Control (the Electric District's
version of a Dispatcher) and turned him it. She justified it as reasonable
as it was on duty time and he was theoretically late. Talk about splitting
hairs. Andy loved this sort of attitude. Certainly not the way to win
friends and get invited out to social activities with fellow employees.
Also, you were supposed to turn yourself in should you take a door or two or
more off the platform. On occasion, you might misjudge the stop. Other
times, an attractive female on the platform may impair your thinking. When
this happened, I referred to it as a "vision test." I could see her very
clearly. However, I lost sight of what I was supposed to be doing. A routine
equipment failure common to the Highliners could also have you overshooting
the mark. More on that in a minute.
Should you get a door or more off the platform, you were supposed to call
Randolph Control and report such an occurrence. On occasion, I would get a
door off. I only ratted myself out when it was equipment trouble. This was
taking a chance though. Periodically there were spotters riding the trains
to observe the crews and watching for compliance. Should you take a door off
the platform, they would note such an event in their report. It would be
checked against the any reports from Randolph Control. If there was no
report made by the Engineer and the spotter turned it in, you were busted
and summoned to "7800's" office. 7800 was Andy's radio call sign. It was
also the extension to the phone in his office.
I can honestly say though, I never got caught. Guess I owe it all to clean
living. Excuse me while I step aside so that the lightning bolt misses me.
The Illinois Central and later, Illinois Central Gulf purchased the MU
Highliners in two separate orders. The first order was built by the St Louis
Car Company. There were the 1500-1630 built in 1971 and 72. Bombardier built
the second order 1631-1666 in 1978. These cars were doomed from the start.
St Louis Car had no overhead electrical supply and could not test the cars
for operating quality. They had to be tested on the IC. And they had all
sorts of problems right off the bat.
The biggest complaint was their braking abilities. They had a blended
braking system that consisted of air, dynamic and hydraulics. The dynamic
and hydraulic worked together, when they worked at all. The hydraulic was
prone to failure, operated inconsistently and was a maintenance nightmare.
Early in their careers on the IC, Engineers were constantly complaining
about braking problems with them. Modifications and adjustments were
routinely made in the attempt to correct and solve the problems. A fatal
crash occurred and was in part, the result of braking problems. In 1972, a
train of Highliner equipment overshot the stop at 27th Street in Chicago.
The Engineer backed the train up into the station. Based on the signal
system in place at that time, he cleared the block behind him and then
backed into it. Unfortunately, the train following him then got a proceed
signal when the first train cleared the block, and began to accelerate.
When all was said and done, the second train plowed into the first train
that backed back into the station and the block, now thought to be clear by
the second Engineer. There was a high death toll and injury rate from that
collision.
There were sweeping changes made as the result of that collision including
more modifications and adjustments to the braking system. One of the items
pointed out was the dark ends of the cars. They were silver and not very
visible, as they tended to blend into the background. After this disaster,
the ends of all the Highliners and the old green coaches that remained in
service were painted a high visibility orange. The Highliners had very small
red markers on the ends. There were complaints of them being hard to see.
Soon, large red markers were added right next to the little ones.
The biggest change of all came in the rules. A new rule was enacted that
prohibited any back up moves on the Electric Lines. Should you overshoot a
station or for any other reason have to reverse directions, you could not
accomplish this with a back up move. You had to change ends, get a new air
test and then permission and an absolute block from Randolph Control to make
a move in the opposite direction. The rules are very clear and concise and
state "UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL AN ELECTRIC TRAIN MAKE A BACK UP
MOVEMENT." The only time an electric train is allowed to make a back up move
is during switching in the yard.
The hydraulic and dynamic referred to as the "Hy and Dy was phenomenal when
it worked. The braking distances were amazingly short. You could hit the
end of the platform at 30 to 35 mph and dropping and be stopped smoothly in
six or seven car lengths. Sometimes you would be having a great run with no
problems, everything working as designed. Then, without warning, the hy and
dy would suddenly quit. Then you were wondering if you were even going to
get stopped for the station yet alone have a door or two off.
The Highliners also had an electric assist on the braking system. This was a
great feature. It allowed you hold the brake set on the train while
recharging the brake pipe, akin to a retainer on a freight train, but
electronically controlled. Normally, this worked very well, but on rare
occasion, something would go wrong here too and again, you might overshoot
the stop as a result. All of a sudden your brakes would be releasing when
you did not release them yourself. I think I can count on one hand how many
times this happened though.
Several cars were rebuilt in the late 80's with major modifications to the
braking system. Every Highliner in the fleet received a new hand brake
system. The old system used hand cranking to apply the brake. The new system
used air to apply and release the brake. In 1993, a project rebuild program
was undertaken by Morrision-Knudsen to completely overhaul and upgrade 130
of the MU Highliners. The hydraulic system on these cars has been replaced.
The badly rusting and deteriorating car bodies were repaired. New interiors
with softer colors were installed. There were numerous mechanical and
electrical changes and upgrades made as well. Alerters were added even
though the cars already had dead man's pedals. Even 97 channel radios were
added for whatever reason. These cars could not operate anywhere but on the
Electric District or perhaps the South Shore, but they got these new radios
just the same.
We'll take a look at operations as well as some interesting stories and a
closer look at the Highliners themselves in the next chapter.
And so it goes.
Tuch
Made in the USA
Visit the BLE Division 10 Web site at http://div10.tripod.com/homepage.html
Hot Times on the High Iron, c 2001 by JD Santucci
Yesterday I heard one of our former mayoral canidates mention a connection with Staten Island And Manhatthan.And with my Second Avenue plan I got a wild idea.How about a mega tunnel.A road tunnel with 2 subway tracks in the middle as the divider serving South Ferry,Red hook and St George with acess to each other.
The tunnel will be 5 miles long and will be 50 feet high.The tunneling method,TBM.The speed limit for cars will be 70 mph.The drawback,faster IND,BMT or IRT(Seeing the R62 is one of the fastest trains in service) cars and Very few signals.This will bring subway service to Staten Island for the first time.
I'll sum up the main problem with your plan in one symbol:
$
What you smokin'fella,and can everybody else have some? This will never happen in your life time or mine.... so even though the idea was nice,face it......its a pipe dream...
In addition, most have lower Manhattan is inundated with tunnels. The only way it could work is to create a link for the #1 tunnel (connect it around the Rector St station) to Staten Island. By the time the tunnel is complete, service would have resumed on the 1 line south of Chambers. What you can have is 4 types of services on 7th Ave beginning say... 2005:
1 - 242nd St / South Ferry (local)
2 - 242nd St / Flatbush Ave (local)
3 - 148th St / New Lots Ave (express 96-Chambers)
9 - Staten Island / 137th St (local to Chambers, express to 137th)
That way, it could take some people off the Lex line 4/5 by not having to take the Ferry to Manhattan to hop on a train at Bowling Green.
It's a pipe dream, but it would be nice.
How much is the one-way ticket to FantasyLand?
Since we're now in Fantasyland; maybe I can really go off the wall with a strange suggestion. How about taking the R train route, extend it to the Verrazano Bridge and build track there and extend the subway to Staten Island. You could ramp the R train out of the tunnel just after 95th Street, and use the bridge to extend the subway. That was it would be less expensive that boring a five mile long tunnel. So I'm now in fantasy land, too. But what the heck, I kind of like it myself.
The Verazano can't support trains, and in order for a ramp which trains could negotiate to go that high to be built, it would have to be over a mile long. I doubt it would start at Bay Ridge.
:-) Andrew
I suppose tunneling under the Narrows would be easier than tunneling straight from Manhattan to Staten Island. Not that it'll happen, but it's fun to ponder.
Mark
Besides, tunnel stubs are already in place south of 59th St to connect to Staten Island (I guess somewhere around Stapleton).
I disagree, the Verrazano's dead weight loading is many times that of the ancient Manhattan or Williamsburg. You would not need a grade to begin in the area of 80th Street to make the bridge, even at 6%. The grade from West End to 4th Avenue is steeper than that.
Well then, maybe my idea is so far off the wall at that. Thanks my fellow piasan, you have just restored my faith in me as someone who knows a little of what the hell he is talking about.
Being a Bay Ridge resident all my life for at least some point of the year, I can attest to the V-Z. =).
I disagree, the Verrazano's dead weight loading is many times that of the ancient Manhattan or Williamsburg. You would not need a grade to begin in the area of 80th Street to make the bridge, even at 6%. The grade from West End to 4th Avenue is steeper than that.
I've been told it's impossible to put subway trains on the Verrazano Bridge -- but that nothing would forbid light rail, and considering the train lengths you get on SIRT, something like that would make more sense. Such a service would have to get itself to the Sea Beach cut, and there, meet Sea Beach trains for a cross-platform transfer.
You could cut into 4th Ave line at 92nd St or thereabouts and convert the Bay Ridge portion of the 4th Ave subway to light rail, or (better) follow the expressway, either el or as subway to Sea Beach. With some work, a light-rail to subway transfer at 59th is probably possible, but something near the Sea Beach 8th Ave station would probably be better.
That sounds good, lets do it!
I completely agree -- why not consider a light rail connection over the Verrazano Bridge to Bay Ridge? It would definitely shock the hell out of the evil spirit of Robert Moses to have a tracks on the Verrazano, the crown-jewel of his car-oriented public works projects!
I think having the Brooklyn-SI light rail connect to the N at 59th St would be better. Since the light rail would be replacing the R, you could make an easy cross-platform connection to the N at 59 St. Given the layout of the 8th Avenue station, it might be harder to build a connection to N train there. It would also require more on-street running to get from the Brooklyn side of the Verrazano to the 8th Avenue Station, even if it follows the Gowanus expressway. If you connect the light rail into the Bay Ridge portion of the 4th Avenue subway, you only need to have street-running on a small stretch of 92nd Street. The less street-running there is, the faster it will be.
K---you just let all the air out of my balloon and have said in a nice way that as an engineer I ain't worth beans. You're right. But it was a helluva idea anyway. OK?
BTW Fred Slept thru Staten island on the way back from our day trip to the Big Apple
You know the old saying---"Take the bus and leave the driving to us." Only this time it was a car and I had you, my good buddy, take the load off me by doing the heavy labor. I did thank you, didn't I?
You know, that was very possible, had not Bob Moses kept the TA off the bridge. A flying junction could have been made at 92nd and 4th, and 1/4 mile of new construction to the bridge leads. Oh well.
Moses? Oh yes, he is the guy who forced Walter O'Malley's hand by refusing to get him the decayed land around Atlantic and Flatbush for his new Brooklyn Dodgers stadium which resulted in the Bums leaving New York. Moses!!!! What a turkey.
Walter O'Malley was a bum in '57, and if he still were alive, would still be a bum. NL belongs in Brooklyn, no matter what.
They weren't forgotten (what was that place again - Oh Yeah) we are just waiting for the closing on the sale of SI to New Jersey (plus getting the rest of Ellis Island back).
Yes the span from Manhatthan to Staten Island is great.But there will be very few problems when New York county is connected to Richmond County.I have drew up 3 plans if the unexpected happens.
1-Connect the Second Avenue line with Staten ISland via Brooklyn at Henry street.
2-Build 2 connections with the 4(South of Bowling Green)and the 1(South of Rector Street).If both are finished in time you can see 8 trains to Staten Island by 2010.
3-If Staten Island does go to New Jersy then a commuter rail line can be built between Penn station,Hoboken and St George.
Don't forget to extend the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail across the Arthur Kill to Staten Island as well!
Mark
Speaking of pipe dreams, how's this for mine. The Sea Beach becomes an express, goes over the Manny B, terminates at Stillwell, and they fix the express tracks in both directions and call it the Brooklyn Cyclone Special and giving it the #44, my favorite number. Hell, Brighton Beach Bob will become a conservative Republican before than ever happens.
NEVER
Yes the span from Manhatthan to Staten Island is great.But there will be very few problems when New York county is connected to Richmond County.I have drew up 3 plans if the unexpected happens.
1-Connect the Second Avenue line with Staten ISland via Brooklyn at Henry street.
2-Build 2 connections with the 4(South of Bowling Green)and the 1(South of Rector Street).If both are finished in time you can see 8 trains to Staten Island by 2010.
3-If Staten Island does go to New Jersy then a commuter rail line can be built between Penn station,Hoboken and St George.
If you have any ideas e-mail me.
I thought Staten Island was the forgotten borough because a significant percentage of the people who live there WANT it to be "forgotten". The island seems more suburban than urban from what I saw of it (once), and the higher density that would come from a direct subway link to the island is what many of the people who moved there were trying to avoid.
In short, wouldn't a subway to Staten Island get NIMBYed to death even if you had a blank check from the federal, state, and city treasuries to pay for it?
I thought Staten Island was the forgotten borough because a significant percentage of the people who live there WANT it to be "forgotten". The island seems more suburban than urban from what I saw of it (once), and the higher density that would come from a direct subway link to the island is what many of the people who moved there were trying to avoid.
In short, wouldn't a subway to Staten Island get NIMBYed to death even if you had a blank check from the federal, state, and city treasuries to pay for it?
I'm far from an expert on Staten Island, but from what I've gathered, residents tend to be more oriented toward the city vs. the suburbs than was the case ten or twenty years ago. The old-time residents are becoming less dominant politically, demographically and culturally, as an influx of people from other boroughs (particularly Brooklyn) has increased the island's population. It's a reasonable assumption that many or most of these newcomers are being attracted more by Staten Island's lower-density housing choices and decent schools than by any aversion toward urban life.
It's hard to say whether a majority of Staten Islanders would favor a subway link if one became possible. No doubt the in-favor percentage is steadily increasing, but it still might be a minority viewpoint. I really don't know. But one thing I do know is that nothing's going to get built even if there is very strong majority support. In New York today, a very small but determined minority can stop major infrastructure projects, usually on some specious environmental grounds, even if the vast majority of the population is in favor.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: It's a bitter irony that environmental concerns are used to prevent subway construction when mass transit does so much good environmentally.
Mark
Yes... from my understanding,the Islanders didn't even want the bridge across the Narrows,in fear of the ''unhealthy elements''it would bring,and the change it would bring to their way of life. I would love to see a new line to S.I.,besides the fact it would save lots of time as far as commuting goes....less waiting and less transfering...no more 25 minute ferry ride to/from Manhattan,timing the boats so you won't miss it,avoiding the crowed express bus and the BQE[RUSH HOURS? WHATS RUSH HOUR?]But this,as I said before will never happen.sorry......Most S.I. want it,but most don't[the ones in power]so no,we wont see a SI subway......ever.
Speaking as a non-native Staten Islander, the people out here will NIMBY almost anything you propose. They have shot down local road improvements, Expressway improvements, a couple of major shopping developements, new ferry services, new schools (go figure) etc. They almost managed to get the mini-power-plant and the minor league stadium, too.
But yet they're the first to complain about being the "forgotten" borough.
The city's response:
SH*T! EVERY TIME WE TRY TO IMPROVE THINGS, YOU SHOOT THEM DOWN. AND WHEN WE DON'T BRING ANYTHING FORTH, YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING FORGOTTEN. STOP SUCKING UP THOSE FRESH KILLS FUMES YOU MORONS.
Amen...suck those gasses into plastic bags and burn em to cook your free range chickens. Peter
Today, It's thrills, chills and spills as we partake in yet another exciting
episode of
2001: A Train Odyssey
I was called for train M32261-12 on October 12th out of Glenn Yard. This day
's call time was 1215, on my rest. It was not the normal 1130 time as we
tied up too late this morning to get out at our regular time today. I had
marked to this assignment on a temporary vacancy as the regular Engineer was
on vacation. As some of you may recall, this 322 turn was my regular
assignment for much of last year.
When I arrived at Glenn, I discovered, to no surprise that the train was not
ready to go. Job 16 was finishing up a little switching and preparing to
double the train up to give it to the Carmen to work up and get the air
test. When all was said and done, we were driven up to the power by the
Yardmaster. After completing the inspection of my power and when the train
was sufficiently charged to the proper brake pipe pressure, we would perform
the air test.
After boarding and doing my normal in cab "pre-flight" routine, I went
outside to inspect the power. Today I would have the IC 1000, CN 5606 and a
dead in tow unit, the CN 4036. The 4036 would be set out at Markham to be
repaired at Woodcrest. It had been involved in a derailment and sustained
some damage.
As I inspected the power, I noticed or maybe heard would be the correct
term, air blowing in between the 5606 and 4036. Upon closer inspection I
discovered a serious air leak on the in the front brake pipe on the 5606. I
called for the Car Inspectors to take a look, as it was far more serious a