 | |
| |
To The List:
Am thinking strongly of wandering across the Hudson next weekend for the first time since 9-11 (you know what the President said about not being afraid...).
So, does anyone know if the NCS is running on Saturdays & Sundays yet, or if not when it will?
Thanks in advance.
Regards and Happy Holidays,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
It will probably run weekends after they open the extension.
I do not live in New York. I have been reading in subtalk about the connection between the 63rd street tunnel line and the Queens Boulevard line. It was supposed to be in service by November. When I look at the NYC subway map on their website the connection is not shown. What is the delay?
The 9/11 thing.It should be done in November.
Sorry December
9/11 had something to do with the delay. In addition, there is a shortage of cars on the B division which may also have played a role.
I'm excited about the fact that there will be an extra tunnel connecting Queens and Manhattan. Once the TA works the kinks out, it should be a great benefit to us all.
Yes, the car shortage. Some on this list deny there is one, others say the fleet needs to be increased by a full third.
9/11 added stresses to the TA. Coping with the loss of west branch of the Montague tube as well as the demolition of the post-Chambers West Side IRT and the consequent effing-up of West Side IRT service is enough for us grunts to forgive the suits: they did have to divert themselves and their employees to unexpected (and terrible) duties.
It was a combination of the September 11 incident and the need to make changes identified during the "simulated service" on September 8 (remember that? E/F/R/V service was operated for much of the day on a Saturday...). There STILL is no "car shortage" in the classic sense. The fleet will be stretched until the R-143s are up and running, for sure, but there are enough cars to provide the scheduled amount of service on all BMT/IND lines (I will not get into whether the scheduled amount is sufficient--that's been hammered to death).
David
[September 8 (remember that? E/F/R/V service was operated for much of the day on a Saturday...)]
I was at the Transit festival in Hoboken until 11AM that day. I missed the PATH to 33rd Street, so I took the train to WTC and caught the E train there. When the train got to Roosevelt, I saw a V train of R40 slants across the platform.
Strange... that was the last time I passed through the WTC concourse. There was supposed to be a Customer Appreciation Day on 9/13 (according to some stuff I got in Hoboken from PATH), but with what happed on 9/11, it wasn't to be.
According to an answer to a question that I previously posted, we'll see R-32s on the F!
I think Zman and Bill from Maspeth always stress the "car shortage" argument when discussing the possibility of extending one of the local services on Queens Blvd to 179.
I have a better idea. Instead of all those n/b R-44's sitting on the local tracks, waiting to enter Continental during PM rush, why not send one of those lines to 179 where there would be much less congestion? In the time spent waiting, and waiting, and then emptying the train, you could run the local all the way to 179.
Also, does the M line really need 8 cars? Take two cars off every M train, and you'll have an extra two or three trains for the Queens corridor.
First off, there are never any R-44s waiting to enter Continental Avenue. They run only on the A and the Rockaway Shuttle. Perhaps these would be R-46s?
Secondly, there are not enough cars available to run, say, R service to 179th Street without cutting service frequency. The longer the line, the more cars are needed to maintain the same headway. It's unlikely that significant "terminal holdout" time is built into the current schedules (I'd have to check with the schedulers), so sitting outside Continental results in the train being late arriving and possibly leaving as well, not in time that could be spent traveling to and back from 179th Street.
Third, last I checked, J/M/Z riding was down since the Williamsburg Bridge reconstruction project necessitated removal of trains from the bridge over the summer 3 or so years ago. It MAY BE possible to cut train lengths on these lines to 6 cars without causing overcrowding, but I'm not sure how that would play politically -- such things tend to be viewed as service cuts (which, arguably, they are).
David
When you add in the time it takes for a G or R train to be cleared out and relayed at Continental, it could be more than half way to 179th st. That's what I don't understand. Why are so many cars wasting time at Continental being cleared out, and relayed, when they can be on the road? How many additional TPH would be needed to run the current headways if the R or G were to extend to 179th?
The same train that has to be cleared out and relayed at Continental Avneue would have to be cleared out and relayed at 179th Street.
As to how many trainsets, let's see: Round-trip running time, Continental Avenue-179th Street via local in the AM peak is 26 minutes (we'll assume that the amount of time scheduled for clearing/relaying is the same at 179th Street as it is at Continental). R AM peak service is approximately on a 6-minute headway. 26 divided by 6 is just over 4, so a fifth trainset has to be put into the cycle unless two minutes can be taken out of the clearing/relaying time. G AM peak service is approximately on a 10-minute headway. 26 divided by 10 is 2.6, so a third trainset has to be put into the cycle unless six minutes can be taken out of the clearing/relaying time (unlikely). So, either 5 600' trains or 3 300' trains would have to be scrounged up from somewhere. And remember, the G is not going to be running to Continental Avenue in the rush hours -- it'll be replaced by the V, which will be operating 9 trains an hour (roughly four 600' trainsets if extended to 179th Street).
As I and others have said on this board many, many times, the BMT/IND fleet is being stretched to its limits just by running the V, even after accounting for the cutback of G service to Court Square. Subway cars don't just magically appear.
And there's another issue here. The only stations served exclusively by one train on the Queens Boulevard Line are 179th Street, 169th Street, Parsons Boulevard, and Sutphin Boulevard. In 1999, the turnstile registrations at those stations were as follows:
179th Street: 6,890,494 (systemwide ranking: 38)
169th Street: 2,299,405 (155)
Parsons Boulevard: 1,929,766 (180)
Sutphin Boulevard: 1,304,930 (254)
What I get out of this is that 179th Street is one of the busiest stations in the system -- but it's also the terminal and trains come into it empty. The rest of the stations are in the middle of the pack of a 468-station system. Even if the cars could be found, I still have questions: Is more service than what is currently being provided required? Is it worth lengthening a route (with the knowledge that the longer a route gets, the less reliable it tends to become) to have the use of what may or may not be a better terminal facility?
I say, work on getting the Continental Avenue terminal to run as efficiently as it should, even under the constraint of having to clear trains before relaying them.
David
One time I asked someone clearing trains at Continental why there was so much congestion. He told me, "they're cutting G trains for the weekend".
They don't directly cut them. They take the trains they have sitting around in the yard, cut them and release them in 4 car sets while taking in the 6 car Gs. Every Friday night after about 7:30 PM you see 4 car Gs running the QB local, conductor in the rear car.
Strangely, Monday morning Gs are 6 cars long.
It's Official: December 16, 2001, the 63rd St. Connector service plan is activated.
The F train will run express from 21 St.-Queensbridge to Forest Hills at all times; the E train will provide local service at night; the V train will replace the F, running local from Manhattan to Forest Hills via the 53rd Street tunnel. The G train will run to Court St weekday day hours, and will run to Forest Hills during the hours when the V does not run (throughout the weekend, and weekday nights 8:30 PM-5AM). Free MetroCard transfers will be available for stations not physically connected in Long Island City, and also in Manhattan when transferring between Lex/63rd St and Lex/59th Street.
MTA brochures are available at token booths, and you may also go to the Straphangers' Campaign website to look at a copy of the MTA brochure.
I believe the new brochure is also on the MTA website. It was posted here recently as well.
Is the G line the only line on the system that will have better Weekend and Night service than weekdays and rush hour?
It is now the stepchild of the subway.........December 16th it will be an ORPHAN!!
Better in what sense? The 4 has a longer night route than day route, stretching further into Brooklyn.
Until 7/22 the 4th ave local had better weekend service than middays.
Nights and weekends 75th ave and Briarwood get "better service" (more lines) than middays and rush hours.
The Far Rockaway A branch has shorter headways in the middle of the night than in the middle of the day.
Well this sucks!
MetroCard.CitySearch.com will stop accepting new orders as of December 1, 2001. Current subscription orders will be processed through December 31, 2001.
Click on the Check Your Account Page to check the status of your account. Our customer service remains available to answer your questions.
Visit www.mta.info for information on how to purchase MetroCard from a location near you.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you.
--Mike
Bad links Mike - they just take you back to the Subtalk index page.
I can't do a linik but here is the URL
http://metrocard.citysearch.com.
I am curious to know why they are ending this service. I am an infrequent customer and send them an email asking why.
I'll bet it has to do with all the Metrocard machines.
I never understood the profit model for this service. No service
charge, and mailing included?
Reminds me of the old saying, "We lose money on every customer,
but make it up in volume!"
I assumed they were under contract from the MTA.
They probably regarded it as a 'loss leader' at the time they did the contract -- people who visited the site to order MetroCards, which they made no profit on, would use the site for other things and that would generate a profit. Remember, the service started back when conventioal wisdom said the dot coms and web-based service companies would rule the world by 2001...
Evidently; that contract went out for bid again last month.
Fascinating. Let's hope it's awarded soon!
--Mike
They do get a commision on every sale, just like all retailers. It's not much, but better then a sharp stick in the eye.
Mr rt__:^)
Todd seems to be talking about the service we used to provide at this depot. When the volume went down we asked nycDOT to let us out of the business.
BTW, "We LOST money on every customer ..." but it was a SERVICE that the public came to expect from us since we sold Express "tickets".
Mr rt__:^)
Yeah, I know the links were bad--I didn't fix the URLs when I lifted the HTML. But that info pretty much sums it up, so I didn't repost it. I will now.
Sorry for any inconvenience.
--Mike
Hmmm -- I placed a $23 order with them the day before Thanksgiving. The site claims it shipped on 11/23 but I haven't received it yet, and now it looks like there isn't much of a customer service presence in case it never arrives. Has anyone else been waiting a while for a shipment?
This may not be the answer at all, but my incoming mail in Manhattan got quite delayed in November. It took over 2 weeks for Metro-North tickets I ordered on the web to reach me. I was getting my weekly magazines up to a week late, and catalogs from department stores for 1- and 2-day-only sales got to me after the sales were finished. Things are returning to normal now, but I'm still getting the occasional old piece of mail mixed in with my current mail.
Actually, you have a good point. I just got a credit card statement dated 11/21 in today's mail. I suppose I shouldn't worry too much just yet about three MetroCards mailed out two days later. (And the MetroCards come from Texas -- I wonder why the USPS doesn't give a discount, at least to mass mailers, for mail sent locally.)
I wonder why the USPS doesn't give a discount, at least to mass mailers, for mail sent locally.
Think they're not allowed to by statute. If they did that (pricing more reflecting costs/demand) communities in places like Alaska would pay several dollars each for first class mail, whereas the intent of the original Postal Service was to knit the country together. Hence equitable pricing regardless of cost or distance.
Oh, phooey. Yet another government-mandated subsidy for the boonies. Hasn't anyone heard of rewarding people for making efficient choices in life?
Oh, phooey. Yet another government-mandated subsidy for the boonies. Hasn't anyone heard of rewarding people for making efficient choices in life?
I suspect the mandate is probably 150 years old, back when what we now know as the 50 states were considerably less unified by culture and communications than they are now. It was a nation-building exercise. And I suspect changing it might be very challenging. Alaska has exactly as many senators as New York does.
I suspect the mandate is probably 150 years old, back when what we now know as the 50 states were considerably less unified by culture and communications than they are now.
Originally there were differences in the rates for first class mail based on distance, but in 1863 a uniform rate was established for first class mail regardless of the distance carried. Westward expansion, albeit slowed somewhat by the War, was being officially encouraged by the government of the northern states, and this was part of that effort. Since that time the only significant exception to this rate was the "drop letter" rate for mail deposited at a post office or an associated postal drop box for delivery at that post office (picked up by the addressee, not delivered to their address). This rate was in effect for only a few years in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Oh, I agree. It's just amazing how much money we ship off to the rest of the country to promote wastefulness.
The shipment arrived yesterday.
One of the cards expires 12/31/01. Whoops. Time to find myself an MVM with the trade-in feature.
Had a customer complain the other day that her new card got stuck in one of our fare boxes. Driver did a "Road Call" on the bus & our Farebox Mech. found the card, but it came up expired when he dipped it. Hmmm, another City Search customer ?
Mr rt__:^)
Maybe someone forgot to rotate the stock. I received five fun passes from them all dated Oct. 2002.
A repost with working URLs....
Welcome to MetroCard on CitySearch.com--MTA New York City Transit's only online merchant of subway and bus fare media.
MetroCard.CitySearch.com will stop accepting new orders as of December 1, 2001. Current subscription orders will be processed through December 31, 2001.
Click on the Check Your Account Link to check the status of your account. Our customer service center remains available to answer your questions.
Visit http://www.mta.info/metrocard/index.html for information on how to purchase MetroCard from a location near you.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you.
When is the next subtalklive
Tonight, 7:30 ET.
If i shoot a video of the # 1 train this summer i will have to do it with a motorman who will allow me to shoot it from inside the
motormans cab because they are running R62 ( transverse cabs ) on the # 1 train all the way to where the # 3 used to run ...
Aint that right ?? ............comments please i would like the information is anyone knows it thank you ... ...lol!!
If you're lucky, you'll get some equipment from the Livonia yard that doesn't have a transverse cab...They're running on the 1, sparingly.
Some of the 1's equipment has railfan windows now. Wait for a train with blue stripes on the outside and it may (or may not) have a narrow cab.
FWIW, the 1 and 3 both run exclusively R-62A's. The R-62 is used only on the 4.
About the Canal Street Subway station for the J/M/Z lines (Brown Lines) or Nassau Street Subway Lines, is the current Queens Bound platform going to be closed in the near future? If so, is there a prediction on what month, year will this platform be closed?
First they got to tear down the wall and recconect the track there. Doses anyone know when that track was mad into a stub end track?
It always was a stub-ended track. At one time Canal was intended as a terminal station for one of the lines; not sure how long it may have actually served as such, or if it ever did (possibly a rush-hour turnback in its early years). All I can ever remember those tracks being used for was OOS layups - and that's been decades ago.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I remember when there was a rush hour service from Canal to Atlantic Ave. on the Canarsie line - early-mid '60's. I think it was called the Broadway short line or something like that.
14-Broadway Brooklyn Local
That was the train that made the local station stops permitting the Jamaica train to run express from Eastern Parkway to Essex St with only one stop in between.
correct
Until 1990 (IIRC), the J ran all the way to Broad on weekends. In 1990 it was cut back to Canal. Two years later it was extended one stop to Chambers. During those two years, it used the "express" tracks.
First they're going to tear down the dividing wall then what?
Peter Dougherty drew the new proposed track configuration in his book. Maybe he'll let us see it for free! :) Just kidding, Pete. Buy his book. It's worth it. I'll look over the map and come back and explain exactly what they're doing, if it hasn't been explained already.
Ok, I want to know when are they going to ever make little toy trains (not models) of New York City Cars. Like a 10 car set of toy Redbirds/ R-62, R-142, R-40, R-143, R-68, R32/38 and maybe older models. I think they would sell quickly. When I was younger I searched high and low for toy trains to play with instead of Thomas the Tank Engine toys. So if they exist tell me where I can find them, if not we got to make the suggestions.
What do you define as toy.
Three rail tin plate, Lionel,MTH,K-Line, Williams, and Weaver and others.
MTH makes R/42s as "E" and "D" trains. They have R/21 Redbirds and are do for R/32 pre GOH cars. Down the road are R/17 Blue stripe and Grey. They have a PCC trolley.
K-Line had L.I.R.R. commuter and diesel sets.
Atlas has a similar Commet Push-Pull commuter set.
Willians has Metroliner Amtrac,Penn and I think NJTransit.
Lionel has had a variety of MU54s, Penn, Lackawanna,New Haven,ILL Cent, Reading and Long Island
A wide range of manufactures made or are making Budd RDCs.
MTH also put out a handfull of Doodlebugs.
Whats your Pleasure?
Its only money and availability.
Good Luck.
avid
I mean the toy train that kids would use with out electricity that you move with your hands. That 3 years olds can play with. Not complecated $150 trains.
There are not many 3 year olds that want a push-pull or wind-up toy R-62.
Oh no???
You don't have kids, do you?
You'd be surprised what they DO ask for....
There are also those cheesy-looking tinplate R-12's from Marx, which sell for about $300
I thought they were CTA type transit.
avid
They are actually IRT el cars. They do look cheesey but they list for nearly $400.00. I've been trying to score a set on e-bay but they never go cheap. Apparently the people shopping on e-bay know something. Anyway, at $400 a set, I don't think that they qualify as a kids' toy.
Don't they have a 3 car trainset at FAO Shwartz?
If so, I'm not aware of it. What have you heard about it?
avid
The Post has a short story and the News a longer one on the approval of $15 million for the LIRR East Side Access project, and another $2 million for the (latest) Second Ave. subway study project.
From a political standpoint, the funding differences make sense, since the House is controlled by Republicans, Pataki is up for re-election next year and he needs Long Island votes, because Cuomo or McCall will win in New York City. (It's also why the extra WTC relief money Bush promised New York will get next year more than likely will get through, because of Pataki's re-election bid and Bloomberg's election as mayor).
It's also interesting to note that neither article on the Second Ave. line metions any talk about a "Stubway" anymore. At least that's a little progress, though as I posted in another thread, the full Second Ave. funding is far more likely to come if the MTA uses the Nassau St. loop, because then it can go to Washington and say the project is part of the WTC downtown rebuilding effort.
From a political standpoint, the funding differences make sense, since the House is controlled by Republicans, Pataki is up for re-election next year and he needs Long Island votes, because Cuomo or McCall will win in New York City. (It's also why the extra WTC relief money Bush promised New York will get next year more than likely will get through, because of Pataki's re-election bid and Bloomberg's election as mayor).
Hope you're right. Really hope you're right, esp. about the rest of the WTC relief money. I'll believe it when I see it though.
My only caveat would be if Schumer and Hillary join in with Daschle and Gephardt's recent statements that the Bush tax cuts and fiscal policies are to blame for the deficit and the recession (my stocks started going down when the dot-coms went splat in March of 2000 and most people are more concerned right now about terrorism, so I personally don't think this is a real smart strategy).
If both of New York's senators complain long enough and loud enough in an attempt to make the deficit a 2002 campaign issue, House Republicans will just come back and say "O.K., we'll just cut the extra relief funds for New York, and that will help lower the deficit if you're so worried about it."
People like Armey or DeLay don't really want to give New York the extra money next year, but would do so if they thought it would help a Republican get re-elected governor. But give them a excuse not to appropriate the funds while being able to blame it on Senate Democrats, and they will...
I think it's a stretch to consider the 2nd Ave/Nassau Street connector as part of the WTC & downtown rebuilding effort. Bush agreed to $20 Billion for rebuilding. Pataki asked for $50+ Billion, including some upstate rail link and tons of other stuff. This is just the kind of thing that is souring out of state members of congress on the rebuilding proposals. With people like Schumer and Clinton involved it's just going to get uglier. I now get the feeling that to them and others the terrorist attacks and deaths of thousands of Americans has become just another excuse to get the taxpayers to pay for un-related pet projects.
and the tax refunds to GE and others as part of the 'stimulus package' were directly related to WTC???
There two sides to that. You could also argue that, since other people will be trying to remove money from NY's $20 billion, it makes sense to ask for me to make sure we get what we were promised in the first place. It's politics.
The engineering study is worth $200 million, not $2 million. Maybe $2 million of it is coming from a specific pot of money.
I received reports of another R-142 Delivery, last night. Cars 6786-90 have arrived on TA property.
Note: This message is for those who are interested. If you don't see it as releveant, simply ignore it.
-Stef
Thanks Stef, Keep it coming, this information is VERY helpful and relivant to me keeping a tip top Subway Roster on the TransiTALK site.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I'm glad someone appreciates it.
-Stef
Don't be so sensitive since one person (as far as I know), told you that he couldn't care less! Keep it coming!
You're right. I just couldn't help but be annoyed with one knuckle head.
It's fine with me. People can say whatever the f@$% they want.
-Stef
IT ISN'T RELEVANT cuz the trainset probably won't be ready for revenue service. I learn every day from your posts.....and the Redbirds still 'rule the roost' except for the pigeons who fly into the barn and walk inside the R142s. Peter
Well excuse me! Hey Mr. Know It All, why don't you teach me some stuff?
Who the hell said the cars were going into service right away? They go through testing before heading into service. Thanks for pointing out the irrelevance.
-Stef
Stef,
You know *I'm* interested and that's all that really matters :-)
-Dave
Buddy, I thank you with the deepest respect, and I'll keep rolling out those notes.
-Stef
Me too!
HEY: me stupido!!! It's scary because i don't know whats revenue and whats going to be updated in the barn. I like the work..it's not using my skills...but anything the car desk sup gives me is welcome. Stef, the info you post makes me the 'know it all' and the foremen appreciate my interest and peserverance. The 'picks' are to come up this week...I don't know where I stand at the bottom of the list...BUT I do truly appreciate YOUR postings AND the other SubTalkers BECAUSE 'youse guys' give me the 'tweeks' to look and ask. New R142s?....more than half are O/S and I was given the most respnsible and easiest and dirtiest assignment to do: check TBUs and replace the worst of the brake shoes. There's a connection with the first week of Advent and the picks coming up...my faith keeps me going and the SubTalkers support can never be repaid. Peter
Well, SubTalk is the place to learn. And learn you shall....
-Stef
im interested
PS: I'm always interested!
I'll keep it coming...........
Cheers,
Stef
Forgive my sarcasm Stef....we are waiting for these trainsets and we want this new tech work....but the constant deliveries and O/S drives TA management crazy to the point where they put the whole runaround on hold. I want to be able to do a lot more than 'inspections' and all of these deliveries wind up back into the hands of Bombardier and its vendors for more and more modifications. Last week, I had brake inspection on TWO trainsets that were not in for maintainance. Each trainset is over 2 city blocks long, has eighty tread brake units and the work is in a pit underneath that you cannot stand up in. I and my helper changed out 25 brake shoes and the last two were on jammed parking brake units that ate the shoes down to the metal. R142s are far easier to deal with than Redbirds. Peter
Everyone is talking about the second av subway, and how it will cost so damn much but will make commuting easier for the UES. I think there is a transit issue that is much more pressing, and that is the Gowanus Expressway. Its time for it to be replaced, before it collapses like the miller did. take a walk under it in red hook sometime, it looks like the williamsburg bridge did 15 years ago. you could probably break hunks of steel right off of it. should we build a new elevated highway and scar the brooklyn neighborhoods again and spend very little money while having major service delays. or should we tunnel it like a bigger and more costly big dig?? or, of course, we could bandage it to try to hold it together before it eventually caves in. personally, i support the tunneling idea regardless of cost. any ideas???
IMHO tunnels for pollution concentration are not a swift idea. Secondly, my position is millions for transit not one cent for highways(can't remember the guy but the quote is really millions for defense not one cent for tribute)
You wanted to know about the quote "MILLIONS FOR DEFENSE, BUT NOT A CENT FOR TRIBUTE."
– Attributed to Charles Pinckney, American ambassador to France, on Oct. 26, 1797, "in answer to a demand for a $250,000 made on behalf of the French foreign minister Talleyrand before he would allow Pinckney, John Marshall, and Elbridge Gerry to plead America’s case with the French Directory to cease French attacks on our shipping…" Pinckney said what he really said was "not a penny, not a penny." From "Listening to America" by Stuart Berg Flexner (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1982).
This is termed "the XYZ affair", as I recall.
Thanks, my murky reccolletion was that it was Barbary Coast pirates fdemanding payoffs. In any case, my bowdlerization stands. Build rail scrap tarmac.
Actually, 'millions for defence' probably does come from the Barbary Pirates. The XYZ affair was a bribery shakedown by the French Directory, one that really angered President Adams.
Frogs win..Amerika loses with R142s. Gimme Dusseldorf. Peter
Well....I like transit.....but out here in the Isle of Staten, we ain't got much subway beyond SIRT. Lots of us (like me) ride Express Busses. Where d'ya think most of those run...on the Gowannus!!
So we really DO need the Gowannus. Personally, I think we should avoid boondogles like the "big dig", and simply maintain the old "Gowwie". At least that's doable....
Actually, in the past I've posted about a need to bring real rail service (ie: re-open the North Shore Line, connect it to NJ and run something to Penn Station) to Staten Island, but I don't ever expect to see it in my lifetime. A Tenth or Eleventh Avenue Subway is also an pipe dream of mine.....
They've been talking about this for years. I would not support a 'Big Dig' in Brooklyn. That kind of money would be better spent elsewhere.
I'd rebuild it double decker, with more lanes going away from Manhattan than going to it, and with some bus-only lanes.
They've been talking about this for years. I would not support a 'Big Dig' in Brooklyn.
Yeah, but only recently has anyone started to pay attention to the VERY STRONG desire in Brooklyn to have it tunneled to knit back the neighborhood and vastly improve the area and the quality of life of living there. The neighborhood and its elected officials pushed hard to get tunneling included in the project analysis.
That kind of money would be better spent elsewhere.
Depends. Tunnels last a whole lot longer than bridges and require a lot less maintenance. Depends how you prioritize things. And, at least it doesn't impact transit money available (except peripherally as part of total Fed funds).
I'd rebuild it double decker, with more lanes going away from Manhattan than going to it, and with some bus-only lanes.
Well, having lived in SF, double-deckers are a BAD idea. Even minus frequent earthquakes, any collapse or decay can drop stuff onto the lower deck. And a rebuild is likely to be much wider given current Fed design standards requiring full breakdown-lane shoulders (as in the rebuilt Miller Highway over the West Side Freight Yards).
I say let the damm thing collapse. Let all those fussy Staten Islanders who clog the damm Highway suffer on the ferry.Plus Maybe then the 4 th ave corridor will get the respect it deserves.Maybe they could make the N the express it should be.
What about all the "fussy" Brooklyn, Queens and L.I. commuters coming on to the Gowanus from the Belt Parkway. How dare these people use the Gowanus on their way to work every day. I understand why Sunset Park residents are sick of the highway, but it is an intersate (I-278) not some local roadway. If the Gowanus ever would become unusable, 3rd and 4th Avenues in Brooklyn will be overwhelmed with traffic. The DOT has been talking about rebuilding the highway for at least 10 years now. The tunnel proposal is too expensive so it looks like another long drawn out reconstruction project - starting and finishing who knows when.
The last serious talk I heard on this was a plan to turn 3rd and 4th Aves into one-way corridors, with much improved stop lights and with limited access for cross traffic. The Gowanus, then, would be emptied of traffic for the two-some years necessary to demolish and rebuild.
People forget that the Gowanus replaced the very ugly 3rd Ave El.
There is no unobtrusive way to rebuild the Gowanus. Some have suggested building a replacement highway over 2nd or 1st Avenues.
Union Square, that's really NASTY of you to attack us Staten Islanders. We're people, and we took lots of crap (very literally) for years from the rest of the city. I assume you're from the Union Square area. I have nothing but respect for your 'hood, I regularly eat, go to movies, shop, and find all kinds of ways to spend money there. I'm sure I'm not alone- I see lots of folks waiting at the X-bus stops at Bway/13th and Bway/8th.
I've also loved the subway since I was 4 years old, and use it frequently. Bring it out here (like I said elsewhere in this thread), and I'd be there. But I ain't holding my breath. In the meanwhile, we need the old rusty lady on top of 3rd Avenue....
Boston's ineptitude at building the underground road network on time and on budget pretty much has killed the chance for any similar project in Brooklyn, which would require a tunnel dropping back down from the Battery Tunnel/BQE interchange to at least a 40-foot depth to get under the Gowanus. That would be followed immediately by underground flying junctions to clear traffic to and from the Prospect Expressway, which would then have to tunnel under the BMT Fourth Avenue line, because you can't raise the grade fast enough from the end of the canal tunnel to Fourth Ave. to get the highway back above ground and have an interchange in between that would meet modern interstate highway standards.
The tunnel under Third Ave. would be a relative breeze by comparison....until you get to the split at 62nd St., where you'd again run into the problem of getting the connector to the Verrazano either back up to at least ground level or below the BMT Fourth Ave. tracks while dealing with the flying junction between that and the Shore Parkway. Or you could bring it out of the tunnel between the Prospect and Shore Pkwy. interchanges and back up to an elevated level, but that's going to create wall several blocks long between the terminal docks and anything east of Third Ave. where the tunnel emerges.
Given all that, a Gowanus bridge rehab starts to look like the lesser of two evils.
the RPA has a proposal that would reduce a lot of the trickier engineering work. take a look:
http://www.rpa.org/publications/gowanus-intro.html
basically they suggest killing part of shore parkway, tunneling from 72nd st, and letting the prospect interact with the gowanus by way of a rehabbed boulevard along hamilton which would be possible with the demolition of the overhead expressway.
If they're willing to downgrade the Shore and Prospect connections, it would make it a lot easier and would avoid at least one underground conflict with the BMT tracks at Fourth Ave.
Of course, the people living on Ocean Parkway and other areas using the Prospect might not be too happy about having to deal with an updated Hamliton Ave. drawbridge over the Gowanus, depending on the frequency or canal traffic that would cause the bridge to open.
Actually a friend of mine living on Ocean Parkway routinely uses local streets to avoid traffic on Gowanus.
Arti
He probably takes the last exit off the Prospect and uses Hamilton Avenue underneath the Gowanus. That's usually a lot faster than joining the two-lane squeeze upstairs into the BQE.
Sounds right, I'm no expert of Brooklyn geography.
Arti
But sooner or later, Prospect Expy. traffic will have to merge with Gowanus traffic. The RPA proposal simply moves the merge from the south side of the canal to the north side, near the Battery tunnel and BQE interchanges, which may or may not work out better, depending on how they design the entry/exit to and from both highways.
My own feeling is crossing Hamliton Ave. during rush hours will be impossible without a pedstrian overpass because the RPA plan basically creates a four-way interchange near the tunnel, with the Prospect traffic inbound during the AM rush running into the same problems inbound traffic at the Holland Tunnel has (PM rush probably would fare marginally better). Also, the folks on the southwest side of the Carroll Gardens area would NIMBY the thing to death anyway unless the RPA can figure out how to isolate the new boulevard traffic away from taking traffic jam-related detours through their neighborhood (these being the same people who've blocked Culver F express service for the past quarter century).
My own feeling is crossing Hamliton Ave. during rush hours will be impossible without a pedstrian overpass because the RPA plan basically creates a four-way interchange near the tunnel ...
I don't know the area at all. But, after reading almost all their text on the website (but no diagrams, are they in the .PDF?), IIRC, they note specifically that Hamilton Avenue would need to be redesigned and an underpass to get in/out of Red Hook constructed. IIRC.
If you construct an overpass or underpass to connect, say Smith Street with the Red Hook area, you're in effect trading a really high barrier for a low one -- it would be more aesthetically pleasing, but there would still be a barrier between Red Hook and the rest of Brooklyn.
The positive point of doing it would be if both Hamliton Ave. and the underground Gowanus had their own access ramps to both the BQE and the Battery Tunnel, you would eliminate the problem right now of Gowanus traffic south of the Prospect Expy. merge trying to get over into the right lanes for the BQE while Prospect traffic going to the tunnel is trying to cross over into the left lanes. The same would be true the other way -- BQE traffic trying to get to the Prospect has to cross tunnel traffic headed towards the Verazzano and the Shore Pkwy., and under the RPA's plan they wouldn't have that problem. But whether or not that would make a major difference in traffic backups, I don't know.
This suggestion is only perhaps crazy. At least the question should be asked and the bean counters made to calculate the costs.
They talk of a 'big dig' style tunnel under 3rd Av. With the Boston experience, I'd be leery of this: it's the cost of supporting the existing elevated Gowanus
So. What would be the cost differential if they (1) rerouted the 4th Avenue subway from south of 9th St-4th Ave and (2) used the remainder of 4th Ave as the site of the interstate highway tunnel?
Think about it: they'd have a heavy rail line easily linked to a barge terminal to carry away the spoil. They'd be working underground all the time, with no disturbance to the surface. It's essentially cut and cover, but without really disurbing the surface of 4th Ave.
The issue, of course, is maintaining the existing quality of service on the three affected lines. How much would it cost to build an entirely new subway line from the Sea Beach cut to 9th St and/or into the Culver (via Greenwood Cemetery to Prospect Park West). And would this cost offset what re-building along the 3rd Ave alignment (either as a tunnel, or reconstructing the existing elevated structure) will cost?
Food for thought, isn't it.
So. What would be the cost differential if they (1) rerouted the 4th Avenue subway from south of 9th St-4th Ave and (2) used the remainder of 4th Ave as the site of the interstate highway tunnel?
Read the RPA's study. The Gowanus is part of the Interstate system, very little of its traffic could be diverted to mass transit. The need is for a better road, not for substitute rail.
I think you missed my point. I'm asking if it would be cheaper to build a replacement for this stretch of the 4th Av subway elsewhere, and then align the interstate highway tunnel under 4th Av, using the present subway as a staging area.
no. the subway cut has pillars between each track and wouldnt be suitable for highway use. besides, the new gowanus will need to be at least 6 lanes and may be as high as 8 depending on what approach is taken concerning HOV lanes. the 4th ave subway is only 4 tracks and the cost of rerouting the subway, putting the gowanus into and then back out of the tunnel would be ridiculous. as far as replacing the gowanus goes, either replacing the expressway in place or in a tunnel plan similar to the RPA's there really arent many other options.
Carroll Gardens and other Brownstone Brooklyn neighborhoods are as big a bunch of NIMBYS as Garden City, LI. Hey, maybe the 'garden' in the titles is part of what makes 'em NIMBYS? ;-D
Well, you know it's all over when they open up a "Timid Deer Lane" at a cross street there. Nyuknyuknyuk.
A wise guy, eh? Why, I oughta....(head slap sound + eye poke)
;-)
> . . . the Shore Parkway
You mean the Belt Parkway!
- Lyle Goldman
Nope -- the section of the Belt south of Third Ave and 62nd St. is officially called the Shore Parkway, which is a sub-section of the Belt Parkway system that loops Brooklyn and Queens. The Laurelton Parkway on the Queens Nassau Co. line is the same way -- it's part of the Belt, but it also has its own specific name.
It is OFFICALLY called the Leif Erricson Parkway.
It is OFFICALLY called the Leif Erricson Parkway.
It's Leif Ericson Drive.
The section of the Belt along the Queens/Nassau border is the Cross-Island Parkway; Laurelton Parkway is only the short stretch between Sunrise Highway and the Southern State.
>> It is OFFICALLY called the Leif Erricson Parkway. <<
I believe this is purely an "honorary" designation in which no existing signs are changed-- only a few special signs are posted at key locations. Mail is delivered to "Shore Parkway," which remains the actual name of the road.
That is correct.
'Belt Parkway' is the name given by Moses (I guess his 'Circumferential' itea didn't fit on the signs) to the string of parkways forming a partial belt around Brooklyn and Queens: Shore, Southern, Laurelton, and Cross Island. For some reason, these names were dropped over time (or never used?) by the general populace, except on the Cross Island, which isn't considered part of the Belt at all (although historically it is). NYSDOT signage follows the general parlance (or does the general parlance follow NYSDOT signage?), while NYCDOT signage is mixed -- in particular, NYCDOT street sign blades use the section names. (Similarly, NYCDOT street sign blades still identify the old Queens-Midtown Expressway and Horace Harding Expressway sections of the LIE.)
Note that the Southern Parkway is not to be confused with the Southern State Parkway, which is now (erroneously, at least from the historical perspective) signed as the Southern Parkway. The two are separated by the short Laurelton Parkway.
But 'Leif Ericson Drive' is no more an official name for a section of the Belt Parkway than 'Tony "Anton" Hulman Memorial Way' is for I-70 in Indiana. Both are purely honorary designations. Some mapmakers are confused on this issue.
The signs identify the highway as the Belt Parkway and the service roads as Shore Parkway.
- Lyle Goldman
And how does that conflict with anything I wrote?
The Shore Parkway is part of the Belt Parkway. See Steve Anderson's Belt Parkway page, to which I see you are a contributor.
The BGSs give one name. The street sign blades give another. The street sign blades are not for the service roads alone -- NYCDOT often posts them on parkways and expressways with no service roads at all. (My two favorites are the corner of FDR DR and TRIBORO BR and the corner of CROSS BRONX EXPWY and AMSTERDAM AV. Yes, the latter is technically in error.)
"NYCDOT often posts them on parkways and expressways with no service roads at all. (My two favorites are the corner of FDR DR and TRIBORO BR and the corner of CROSS BRONX EXPWY and AMSTERDAM AV. Yes, the latter is technically in error.)"
Not to mention the signs on the Hutchinson River Parkway that mark "Co-op City Blvd."
But 'Leif Ericson Drive' is no more an official name for a section of the Belt Parkway than 'Tony "Anton" Hulman Memorial Way' is for I-70 in Indiana.
No; the legally mapped name of the Parkway from the Gownaus Expressway to Knapp Street is "Leif Ericson Drive;" the service roads are still officially "Shore Parkway."
i used to live in sunset park on 44th street between 3rd and 4th back in the early 90s, and i routinely walked under the expressway. ive thought for quite a while how to replace it, and i think the best possible way would be to trench it and cantilever 3rd avenue on both sides, like the Grand central in queens. also, expanding rail service thorugh queens, staten island, and parts of brooklyn would not only reduce congestion but also reduce pollution. personally, i think anyone who lives withing walking distance of public transportation and can use it to commute is a selfish son of a bitch if they own a car. all they do is contribute to the problems. and damn you robert moses, you bastard. you screwed NYC over bad, and ill see you in hell you sack of shit.
Hi Chris,
I'm afraid I don't understand your comment that anyone who lives within walking distance of public transportation and can use it to commute, but owns a car, is a selfish son of a bitch.
What if we go other places than to work? I frequently go to New Jersey, where public transportation is often unavailable (or at the very least a 20 or 30 minute drive becomes a 3-hour ordeal, requiring me to go INTO the city to get out of it (which is clearly counterproductive toward reducing congestion in the city). Many people I know who live and work in the city often must travel to laboratories far outside the city, so they need a car for that.
Did you mean to say that people who can use public to commute but drive anyway are selfish? That sounds a lot more reasonable (although I can give cases in which driving greatly reduces commute time, and reduces congestion in the city).
I do agree with you about Bob Moses, though. He did wonders, accomplishing things that could never get done today (usually by hook or crook), though he left us with some serious problems, particularly in the area of access to public transportation.
(I do agree with you about Bob Moses, though. He did wonders, accomplishing things that could never get done today (usually by hook or crook), though he left us with some serious problems, particularly in the area of access to public transportation.)
Moses wasn't a mass transportation guy, but the idea that he prevented mass transit improvements is a myth. Moses first came to power in the City in the LaGuardia years -- before that he had been active primarily on Long Island. Compare the extent of subway and transit initiatives in the Moses era (the 33 years from 1935 to 1968) with that in the post-1968 anti-Moses era, which has also lasted 33 years.
In the Moses era, we had the 6th Avenue line, the Rockaway Line, the connection from the Queens Boulevard Line to the 60th Street tunnel, subway unification (an expensive proposition with hundreds of millions in bonds -- several billion in today's dollars), the replacement of all of the rolling stock, the Port Authority takeover and rebuilding of the PATH (Moses had great influence on the PA), the Port Authority Bus Terminal, and, finally, the planning and execution of the Chrystie Street connection.
In the post-Moses era? From 1968 to 1982, the commuter railroads were rebuilt and the subway fell apart. From 1982 to 2001, the subway has been partially rebuilt -- but not to the same extent as in the period from 1940 to 1960. We have the Archer Avenue extension. We will soon have the 63rd Street connection. Anything else?
Of course, during the Moses era while all that was going on, Moses was also building highways and airports. In retrospect, should the mix have included more transit investments. Sure. But the anti-Moses NIMBYs have more to answer for the lack of transit than Moses does.
Hi Larry,
Thanks for your response. I've heard (but I can't personally vouch for it) that when Moses called for the Verrazano-Narrows bridge, he demanded that it be designed such that it could never hold rail tracks.
Now, if that's true, it makes a pretty strong case for Moses trying to stifle the development of mass transit.
Now, what you cite about such little development in the post-1968 era is absolutely true. But it has nothing to do with Moses. Rather, this is a more general change that has occurred in almost every area of life. New legal wrangling, lots of NIMBY, and so on have stymied virtually every public works project in the last few decades, keeping them locked up in courts and litigation for years on end.
The second ave subway - I'll believe it when I'm riding it.
The Gowanus - probably nothing will be done about it except for temporary patch jobs, and one day it'll collapse like the West Side Highway.
The Empire State Building - built in a year and a half. Most of the IRT in Manhattan - a couple years. Imagine trying to build something like the IRT today...
I'd imagine the same is true in most other cities as well.
In the Moses era, parkways were built such as the Southern State with purpose-built low clearance bridges and overpasses to prevent high profile trucks and buses from using the parkways in order to bring the masses to the shore beaches. WNET-TV just had a interesting and dramatic documentary verifing this fact, which I have known for many years.
Even LaGuardia had trouble roping in Moses.
LaGuardia used Moses to his advantage in the first years of his adminstration, since he had pretty much written all the laws setting up the state agencies and systems that FDR later took to Washington to create the New Deal, Moses could zoom through the grant applications and get federal money before any of the other states had touched pen to application form.
It was only after Moses lost in his run for governor against Herbert Lehman (interesting piece of trivia that New York State had two major party Jewish candidates for governor 39 years before the first major party Jewish candidate for NYC mayor) that he apparently decided to accumluate political power through his appointed positions instead of through elected office, and that's when Fiorello and others starting having trouble controlling him (circa 1937 or so).
thats what i meant
personally, i just don't understand who in their right mind would ever be a NIMBY and oppose a rapid transit line. unless its an ugly elevated line, they usually do more good for the community than bad, and it adds to the commuting convenience. less traffic and pollution also result. all the NIMBY rapid transit critics need to take their heads out of their asses and realize how much rapid transit benefits the city.
Of course, if building the line meant demolishing your house, or at least requiring you to vacate the premises for several weeks or months while underground work was done...
I do agree, though, underground subways should be less of a NIMBY problem than els, or automobile highways (god knows how many nbhds have been torn in half by well-placed highway routing...)
Me and R68A5200 saw the new December 16 map (not the strip map) on R142 6356 on the map area closest to the cab. Nice looking!
Queens Boulevard is very crowded on the map itself. That's how I noticed it. The G Line is dashed on Queens Boulevard from Court Square. And some official WTC changes.
Nice to see you back.
Also, on the SIRT section of the map, they list the new station as Stadium, rather than Ball Park. It's quite a cool map!
I saw it on two trains today -- first an A (R-44), then a 2 (Redbird with black stripes). Looks nice. I didn't spot any errors, but I didn't go over the map with a fine-toothed comb or I would have spent the day at the Rockaways rather than on ferries.
Are these Italian vehicles ever gonna make it on the road? I haven't heard any news lately, which makes me think the outlook is not so good. -Nick
I've read that the MBTA is building a test track between riverside and the Commuter rail line for the type 8s. They will have been on the property four years this January. It's a good thing the T rebuilt the Boeings LRVs in 1996 so they can take Breda to war on this otherwise there would be a car shortage.
The Subtalker who speculated about a one seat ride between Newark and Hoboken on PATH is getting his wish, and the October 12 Map & Guide is joining all the interim NYC Subway Maps in the history file. Starting tomorrow, weekends and the 7 PATH holidays from 9AM to 7:30PM, the two New Jersey railroad terminals will be directly linked. The Journal Sq-33rd St train is back, and the Hoboken-33rd St service continues. The platform crew at Journal Sq will have to switch the signs over the weekend (off-topic: why is it called the weekEND when calendars START with Sunday?)
I am guessing this is so that more commuters will be encouraged to take the Ferries.
What happens with the Newark-33rd St service?
Just on weekdays? If so does the Newark train end at Journal Square?
It's just on weekend day service. Newark trains terminate at Hoboken. 33rd St. service is available from either JSQ or Hoboken as it was before 9/11.
so on weekends there is no direct service from NYC to NWK???
That's right--until 7:30 PM when it reverts to a single Newark-Hoboken-33rd St. service. The transfer at JSQ usually is timed for minimal waiting time.
What is the point of this change ? I liked being able to go NWK-33 on weekends in 29 minutes.
I liked it, too, and I have no idea why they made the change.
The "official" handout that was being given to passengers today read:
"The change in Daytime Weekend Service allows pATH to perform essentail track maintenance and to provide more frequent service to 33rd St on Saturdays."
What track maintenance?? All tracks are still being used.
Why can't they provide the same frequncy of service on Sunday to 33rd St that they do on Saturday? The platform at Pavonia is very crowded on Sunday with people coming from the Newport Mall.
I think the Port Authority is trying to pull a fast one on passengers.
(off-topic: why is it called the weekEND when calendars START with Sunday?)
Well, in many parts of the world it IS the weekend. In most if not all of the Spanish-speaking world the calendars run lunes, martes, miércoles, jueves, viernes, sábado, domingo (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday). And some other calendars (the Hebrew calendar, for instance) don't even begin the day at midnight, but rather at sundown. The Sunday-Saturday week that we follow in this country, interestingly enough, is a holdover from the ancient Hebrew calendar that traces its origin back to the story of creation in Genesis. Saturday is the Sabbath, the day on which we rest, in honor of the seventh day on which G-d rested.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Likewise, the French week is lundi, mardi, mercredi, jeudi, vendredi, samedi, dimanche. And the Swedish week (easier for English speakers to recognize) is mĺndag, tisdag, onsdag, torsdag, fredag, lördag, söndag.
-- Tim
Where did you hear this? There is nothing on the website. I was the one who made the original posting asking why it couldn't exist and having no weekdays is illogical to me.
Rosanne and I were on PATH tonight. The new route maps are indeed posted on the trains showing weekend day service as posted by J C. Today they were running as they had been. I called PATH information and was told the new service starts tomorrow, and the timetables should be available in the morning.
Actually, in Europe, the calendar weeks start with Mondays, so it really is a week-end.
I went to Landover Metro Station to try to take the pictures of Acela Express Train #2254. A station officer told me not to take pictures. Because there is only 5 minutes left for me to take Train #2254, I exited the station, drove to New Carrollton, and got on the Amtrak platform. Luckily I took three pictures of that train.
I went to Landover several times and no one told me I cannot take pictures on the Metrorail platform. What are the rules of photography on Metrorail? I am curious about it.
Chaohwa
No flash, no tripod. Otherwise you are free. Ask the officer when the rule he is citing took effect.
Ask the officer when the rule he is citing took effect.
Just a fancy way of saying "since when!?"
Enjoy! :o)
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Sheridan Expressway? Peter
Correct!
its true .is this after hunts point.does the r142a in the middle have a signage
Na, It was off on that train but it was a <6>!
Trevor
3 no rail fan windows "crappers"
notice NOBODY looking thru the center storm window !!!!........................ugh !
Actually on the far left and middle train there WERE people looking through the sub-railfan window and with smiles no less.
If you're not gonna say something really positive, please keep it to yourself.
Haven't you learned anything from 9/11?
Trevor Logan
.....>>>>>>>""sub fan window""....???.............lol!!......
I am always POSITIVE & share it with evrybody !!!
lol !!
So you never get tired or irritated about salaamallah's "railfan window" posts which has accumulated to the millions (almost literally), and you get tired and angry off of me who just posted a few posts, which I don't even know why the people are angry at.
who is mad ?? .........lol!! ....... I am here to learn about rail transit .........& have a lot of fun .......lol !!!
Just out of sheer curiousity, do you laugh that much in real life or are you just that cheerful for us?
If you've been around, everyone on this board knows how much Salaam's Anti-Transverse Cab antics piss me off, it pisses me off to no end. It pisses me off to no end because people that can't let the past go PISS ME off.
I've said my peace many of days. So don't go there. REALLY don't go there. You have to realize how you come off. You've already got Stef unglued which I've never seen and your doing the same to me with Questions that even a Non-Railfan typically knows. Lemme ask you, how old are you, what city do you live in and are you a REAL railfan?
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Anyone who supports no transverse cabs for fronts and backs of trains is right in my opinion. Conductors need transverse cause passengers won't let them through. BUT T/O DON'T. they are already insulated. Also like railfan windows and am extream supporter of them (not violently but by words and writings)
OPTO
Shawn.
how is the driver going to get from side to side? transverse? bets the point, unless the doors can close automatically with out looking at them. Masher until there nothing in them.
revised copy
Anyone who supports no transverse cabs for fronts and backs of trains is right in my opinion. Conductors need transverse cause passengers won't let them through. BUT T/O DON'T. they are already insulated. Also I like railfan windows and am extream supporter of them (not violently but by words and writings)
Sheridan-Expressway
3,6 trains,2 Bronxbound
1 out of Service.
NICE
Nope! It was 1 Southbound, 1 Northbound Local, 1 Northbound Express (The Front Sign was out!).
Regards,
Trevor Logan
I really hope the R160 is going to be a IRT train because those R142's are awful.
Definately NOT! R-160 is slated as a B Division order.
Sorry!
Trevor
are there any pics of the intierior? or drawings?
I haven't seen any of the drawings of the R-160. All I do know is that this is slated to replace the R38 to R44 class cars. Leaving the R32s here to do more work.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
so sad there will be no more railfan windows
Is there any known pics of the R160?
Since it doesn't even exist yet... NO!!!!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Then how do we know it's going to the B division?In Retrospec my knowledge about this train is coming from you guys.
It's a follow-on order for the R-143. Whether it is a similar car or contains significant changes, based on the R-143 experience, remains to be seen. All I know (and my knowledge comes strictly from what has been posted by people with MTA insider's knowledge on this board) is that it is a B division car, 60' in length, with the same number of doors in the same locations as the R-143. Anything else is pure speculation.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Please tell me you have nothing against R32s...
I love them. I love anything that doesn't have a LCD in the cab and is not transverse.
I have one thing against them, the Faded Route sign in the front, They could've went with a brighter unit and since they are keeping them. They can put a Twin Vision MultiColor LED sign (Which Twin Vision currently produces) right up in there and it would make them perfect.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
RIGHT ON! you can't ever see them and also you cant ever see the signs on the busses
TNX. Know it cus on my last job the mutants tossed a glass bottle full of water going up the hump at my car and missed...of course the cretans have a smile on their faces...'hand grenade' must have hit its mark. Hope 'propulsion' shut down and they had to sit for an hour contemplating their sins. Peter
You've lost me! BIG TIME
Regards,
Trevor Logan
You bet I am!
Where did you find these? How about 3 redbirds all together?
One of those few moments in time where three R-142As gang up together at a point. This time, Whitlock Av. on the (6).
It was sheer luck and great timing!
Trevor
AND you just so happened to have your camera... do you carry your camera all the time? I wanna take pictures of the subway also, but I don't know what camera to get. Do all of you guys use digital cameras? (they seem nice and better than film...) Which do you have?
No, we don't all use digital - not by a long shot! Digital cameras have their place, but for quality and permanence of image, slide film (Kodachrome in particular) is the way to go. Getting quality equipment isn't cheap with either approach, but good older equipment (read: non-electronic, manual focus) from Canon and others can be had for a significantly more reasonable price than new. The cameras I use on a regular basis are a pair of thirty year old Canons that I purchased new (and Jr. has a third, just like them, that I bought on eBay earlier this year); I also have five Exaktas that date between 1936 and 1968 which I have used extensively over the years and still use on occasion. My older son uses a mid-'50s Kodak Retina - the closest thing to a compact point-n-shoot of its era - for his railfanning - no fancy interchangeable lenses or anything, but you learn how to make every shot count. So, personally, I think slide film is still the way to go.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Ihave to agree with you wholeheartedly about slide film, and particularly Kodachrome.
I am going on 51 now -- and started taking rail photos when I was 14. In those days, not having much income, I would use whatever film was available. And occasionally a roll of Kodachrome 25 or 64.
Believe me, the ONLY stuff that still retains its full clarity and color quality over all those years is Kodachrome 25 or 64.
I usedother stuff, such as Anscochrome, Dynacrhome (remember that crap?), store-brand garbage, etc. And none of it seems to holdits quality over the years.
My dad took 35mm slides of all the family stuff when I was really young, and he always used Kodachrome. The stuff still has great color after almost 50 years!
Digital technology is getting better -- most of the major newspapers, wire services and magazines use digital cameras now for their quicker traansmission capabilities -- but the cost of those cameras is still in the $4,000-$5,000 range, well above what your average person is going to be willing to pay.
That's down considerably from the mid-1990s, when the first digitals capable of simulating regular film cameras came in at a whopping $25,000 apiece, but it's still going to be a while before you can get one for about $400-$500, which is when it will start posing a real challenge to the semi-professional photo market (regular folks are big into the cheap digital cameras right now. Hopefully, they're remembering to make backup copies of their downloaded photos on disc or CD-ROM just in case their hard drive goes phhffttt in the future).
I've been finding that manual focus is desirable for taking pictures of trains because autofocus cameras, even with the 'fast action' modes don't focus as precisely as I can. Also, the inevitable autoexposure on newer cameras seem to be designed to ensure a blur free shot and sacrifice depth of field to obtain a high shutter speed, often one that's much higher than necessary.
Kodachrome is the film to use unless you want to do the odd roll of black and white slides in which case Scala is the best choice.
-Robert King
I keep my camera with me 24/7, never know what you may get, when I took that picture I originally aiming for one train and that was the Northbound Local, it just happened that the Northbounc Express came into view and that the Southbound was stopped by a red light, so I quickly panned back because I was actually zoomed closer and snapped!
Now, I love digital, I still use my 35mm with slide film ONLY but I'd take a digi any day. The Quality is beautiful. My Camera is a Olympus C2040Z Digi. It MSRP @ $700 but I caught a deal for $400. Digi is not for everyone and not everyone can master taking digi photos. I've seens some screwed up digi's in my time. But I fell the one I have does great.
Below is one of my ALL TIME favorites with the digi (Which I used to make the Subtalk Logo):
I've yet to date seen a 35mm Auto or Manual Camera pull of a night shot with lighting like that. The capacity of a digital camera to pick up and and adjust it perfectly has hightened my love for night and dusk photos!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
So true.
HELL!! I did this with a SONY DSC-S30 under $300.oo & only 1-3 megaplexel s !!! its the operator baby !!!
OH YEA I AM THE BEST IN THE WEST !!!
You can do good dusk/night pictures with film; I will be uploading some soon. You do need to know how, have the correct equipment and do some experimenting with your film of choice, though.
-Robert King
Yeah I've done some good night prints and slides, but I've been doing digital now for about close to 2 years and I feel I have mastered the art of it and getting it to do what I want it to do.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
1) Where is this?
2) What line is shown?
3) Where was the picture taken?
and
4) Were all three of them in service?
[1) Where is this?
2) What line is shown?
3) Where was the picture taken?]
Doesn't your first question make the next two irrelevant?
For the third one, I meant such as, on the platform..etc.
Stop calling people A-holes. Find something else to do with your life.
[Stop calling people A-holes.]
Why should I?
[ Find something else to do with your life.]
I have other things to do what makes you think I don't?
You've managed to criticize his questions, without actually responding to any of them. bravo.
To answer the original question(s),
1) In the bronx, near the Sheridan Expressway
2) 6 line
3) dunno
In the Bronx, photo taken at the southbound platform (photo looking south) at the Whitlock Ave Station, 3 R142As ALL in service, on the 6...
Cleanairbus
Questioned answered about four times already! Let's let this post fizzle off!
Okayokayokay...that's it...no more...
That's the end of that...!
Cleanairbus
1) The Approach to Whitlock Avenue from the Tunnel
2) The 6
3) Taken from the platform of Whitlock Avenue with luck and great timing!
and my own personal one:
4) What kinda railfan are you where you don't know your locations?
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Cut him a break. Not everyone can just look at a photo and instantaneously know where it is. We all aren't from New York and while I have taken the Pelham Line once, I didn't do photography at Whitlock. I bet without looking at the description, you can't tell me where http://www.geocities.com/otpdccars/dccar23.jpg was taken. There is something that will give it away but I am not saying what. Good luck...
PS: The challenge is open to anyone.
Washington DC
wha did I win?
hehehe
What station?
Van Nest UDC Station!
Trevor Logan
Van Nest UDC Station!
Trevor Logan
Union Station, Washington, DC metro.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Nope.
Van Nest-University of DC (Red Line)
Did you forget I told you I used to live in the Washington Metropolitan Area for a while before returning to the NY Area.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Van Ness-UDC. Wow, It couldn't be any easier...look, right next to the Metrorail train is a black sign with the name of the station there...fuzzy, but I was able to read, and I have little knowledge of the system without looking at my pocket map...
WMATA, you made it too easy. Next time, take the pic while trying to hide the station signs...lmao
Cleanairbus, still getting a kick out of that pic...
It was Van Ness, looking at the station signs doesn't count.\
Now, for a harder one (Trevor, don't answer since I already showed them to you).
http://www.geocities.com/otpamtrakpics/downeaster1.jpg
Good luck!
But every station in on the D.C. metro looks the same
Not really.
.........especially in atlanta !!! .............oh man !!! ...........
[2) What line is shown? ]
Haven't learned numbers yet?
Arti
I know this will never happen, but it would be more effective if all three trains were coming towards you.
You know, you're actually pissing me now off, it may be minor but I PERSONALLY thing the photo is effective enough.
It's shows a almost typical rush hour shot, the orignal point of the photo was to shoot the northbound local, the northbound express was sheer luck and show was still having the tip of the southbound in it.
THE POINT IS THE WHOLE PHOTO WAS SHEER LUCK AND GREAT TIMING!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
You know, you're actually pissing me now off,
Good use of mechanics.
I don't know what you're flamed about as I was just suggesting something and I wasn't even threatening or questioning you.
A suggestion that to me makes no sense since it will never happen in life during rush hour and even in a non rush! Make a suggest that could happen in this lifetime.
T.
like this ??
lol !!! lol !!!!
UGH! Los Angeles Equipment!
.......UGH ......!! .......r-142s...........UGH........lol!!
......ugh......los angeles equipment ??......hey man my brother i am the BEST WESTCOAST TRANSIT PHOTOGTAPHER !!
heres another good piece of good LOS ANGELES rail equipment !! ""who framed rodber rabbit PE car""......lol!!!
LOL !!!!
MAN NOBODY OUT HERE CAN WHIP ME !!! I AM # 1 !!!
Um brother, I'm sorry to say but I have a TransiTALK staff member with California photos that'll kick your ass badly. You'll see when TransiTALK Reopens Soon Enough!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I love a challenge !! & we will see whos ass gets kicked !! Tell your staff member to come on with his boxing gloves !!
LETS GET IT ON !!! ....................ha ha ha ha ha !!! ............lol!!
LETS SEE SOMEBODY BEAT ME DOING THIS ........LOL !!!
Whoever told Salaam the secret img src code...Shame on you. :-)
Actually it was to shut up .....the pigs..... lol !!
LOL !!
Boy you have no idea! Here is a little taste his work in here in NY, I won't give you the pleasure of the CA stuff just yet, you have to wait with the masses for that!
(and Yes I did place a code in to shrink to photo upon loading for a quicker load, But I have the full photo on file)
T.
I got a GREAT IDEA !! & like I said lets get it on ..............I am READY !!! ........................LOL!!
LOL !!!
...Man !! .......give me a break !! ........I was just "bullshitting" when I took this one ( for example ) .......lol!!
..... EH ??
boy now let me tell you something ....its like what james brown once said......... I GOT SOUL & I AM SUPER -BAD !!
your so called ""westcoast transit photographer"' .....( best ) vs my worst ...&...I did not have to SHRINK nothing here !!! ....lol !!!
AINT IT FUNKY NOW !!! AINT IT FUNKY NOW !!!
lol !!! lol !!!!
(and Yes I did place a code in to shrink to photo upon loading for a quicker load, But I have the full photo on file)
No you didn't. That's not the way the web works.
If you have a huge JPEG and you tell the HTML to scale it to next to nothing, the entire huge JPEG is still sent across the network. The HTML attributes are an instruction to the receiving machine to scale the image. To add insult to injury, web browsers generally do a pretty bad job of scaling compared to dedicated image processing software.
Scaling images through HTML is almost always a bad idea.
And there's nothing worse than a page full of "thumbnails" that are nothing other than full-size images with HTML scaling attributes. That page takes no less time to download than if it had the full-size images; either give me true thumbnails or just give me the full-size images from the start.
(In this case, I'm not sure why you even bothered. The original file was 440x330. You scaled it down to 400x300.)
Yes but trevor puts up this "shrunk" photo to say that his "westcoast connection" transit photographer can whip me in transit
photography out here !! I called his bluff & said to him ""lets get it on to see who is #1 out here ( out west ) put up or shut up !!
LOL Trevor I accept your challenge lets get it on BIG BIG time !!!
NOW thats a real lol !!!!
Hey, don't get me wrong -- I'm not knocking his connection's work, nor am I knocking yours. Watch out, though; the photo contest isn't over yet.
yes !! sir !! U R right about that... But I am telling TREVOR that his so called "" west coast ace"" etc...........
CANT WIHIP ME IN TRANSIT PHOTOGRAPHY out west & out here !!! hands down I will whip his ass !!
Big time !!! .............( smile ) .........lol!!!
Yes I know, remember I do run a website, I was dummying up the terminology for those that aren't webheads like you and I.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
No one can beat you because LA Transportation from what I hear is awful. No one wants to photograph it, much less ride it.
I am going thru the entire system BLUE GOLD (construction) GREEN RED & metrolink trains all the way to the san diego coaster !!
the orange empire museum & the entire fleet there then on to san diego to show eric hass how he should have done the san diego trolley!!
If i did live in NYC..... i would give the -transitphotographers- "eastcoasters" a run for your money .......oh yea !!!
Remember I said to TREVOR i am the KING of the ( west coast ) & i accept his challenge LETS GET IT ON !! >>>big time !!!
Ridership on all modes of public transportation is on the rise here in spite of what we all have heard the long beach blue line has added
thier fleet to 3 car operation .....hell the old laRy & PE systems should have never been scrapped back in the 1960s !!!
They aren't going in the same direction (or at least I hope not!).
.....oh no !!..............LOL .......!!
same thing here in the west coast on train heading to PICO the other to 7 th & METRO ... both trains speeding at aprox 50 mph...
yes it is some LUCK but the OPERATOR is the key to this kind of a PRO shot everytime !!!
LOL !!! how bout this one trevor ..............I am the best { in the west } .............LOL !!!
I CANNOT ''B'' BEAT OUT HERE !!!
Now what you need to get Trevor, is a picture of the R-143 pulling into the Manhattan-bound platform at Atlantic Ave. on the L, because those trains are going to be around a long time starting on Monday and that platform has about as much time to live, or even less, than the remaining Redbirds....
Very True, it will be a goal!
Trevor
I wish you guys stop this nonsense of insulting each other and
calling each other names, that's why i don't post much on this
board, because of MR AMERCAN PIG stupid comments, so please lets
try to get along with each other and have fun railfaning!!.
PEACE R-29
That response to Mr. JLee wasn't a insult, I'm taking him up on his offer to do the R-143 Atlantic Avenue Pre-Destruction shot!
Trevor
I think R-29 was responding to one of the other threads off the main post, but put his response in the wrong place.
Now that's what I'm talking about! Keep up the good work, pal.
-Stef
now stef this is what i am talkin bout !! lol !!
LOL !!! & at night !!!
I have finally started the Staten Island portion of my 2 Avenue plans.
Currently I have only made the stops.And since everyone is planning to re-model south Ferry I have started making a rough draft of it.This will be extremely unique and authentic.This will be the first time a IRT and IND line run adjasent to each other in a bourough.Anyway here is the South Ferry plan
1,9:From previous plans I heard, a 4 track configuration with the 1 on the outside and the Y in the middle.After south Ferry 9 Trains will go onto the express tracks and then into a middle track to turn around.
Y:From Rector Street the Y will seperate to 2 outer tracks and then continue to South Ferry.From there the Y will continue to Charleston.
St George:At St George there will be a 12 track setting.4 car trains will continue on the Eastern line while the y will continue with the 1 to Charleston.This is unique because no IRT train has ran on a route with a IND or BMT.Also never has a IRT train provide a transfer to a IND train for more than 1 stop.
South Carolina or West Virginia? Local or express?
Is "extremely unique" anything like "very pregnant"? Did you expect us to believe that your proposal was inauthentic?
Where's Charleton?
Nice idea. I doubt the ferry workers would think so though.
thats why there will never be subway service there from the other boro's
Didn't the IRT and BMT both run on the Astoria line at one point?
Charlestown is a section here on Staten Island.
The IRT and BMT did share trackage rights, however the BMT served it's share of service on the Flushing line with BU-type equipment, since at the time of dual service (1917-1949) the BMT had a severe shortage of steel subway cars. This is why for World's Fair service on the Flushing Line, the BMT rebuilt older, open platform MU's into the "Q" (for Queens) type units, which went on to serve the Third Avenue El and the Myrtle Avenue El in the 1950's and 1960's.
The IRT made do with it's standard stock of the time, which included the 1939 World's Fair MU's.
The N21 bus was pretty fast, and so was the 7. I went to GCT to pick up some MNRR schedules then it was off to 8th ave Brooklyn. I was looking forward to riding an N train across the bridge and express on 4th ave. I took a packed 4 (which I waited awhile for) to Union Square and just made an R32 N train which arrived just after I got down the stairs. The front window was available. All I could see ahead was reds and yellows. There was an R in front of us and it was very slow going (it took 10 minutes just to get to Canal). The conductor kept saying there's "several trains ahead of us, please be patient". We sat outside Prince for a few minutes after they let the Q go first (it should it was on the express track), then we had to wait for the R to enter Canal. There was not a happy camper with us, he was going to one of the local stops on 4th ave between Pacific and 36th. Finally we get on the bridge and we crawl the whole way, we sat for about 3 minutes waiting for an R ahead of us that seemed to be just sitting midspan. Finally it moves, we crawl some more (stupid track workers) and the guy in backof me mumbled "get the f* our of our way. I couldn't blame him, I'm getting sick of these track workers slowing things up. We stop outside the tunnel portal again, waiting for the R in front of us to move. Finally it does and we crawl all the way to Pacific with the R in front of us (apparently N and R trains are bypassing Dekalb and running express S/B to 36th.
The tunnel smelled of exhaust and diesel fumes, and it Dekalb I could see why. There were several work trains sitting in the station (on the inner track) and on the tracks south of Dekalb. It looked like they were working on the switch which connects the Dekalb tracks to the 4th ave line (that explains why no Brooklyn bound trains except the Brighton are stopping at Dekalb.
Once we got out of Pacific we started moving, then we wait again outside of 36th for that R in front of us. We switch to the local track, then to the west end (why they didn't keep us on the express is anybody's guess, I guess the tower crew was lazy). Yeah two divergings.
The C/R gave very good directions to those with bypassed stations. Those who were east of 62nd street had to take the N to C.I. and then back up the Sea Beach. Fortunately 8th ave is west of the station, so I can go downstairs and get the N there. The West End was slow, but the ride through the mini-tunnels in the beginning was interesting, since you don't normally get it from a railfan window (unless you take the M).
I got off at 62nd and waited about 15 minutes for an N train to arrive (also R32's). Got off at 8th ave and walked around on what feels like a day in May (where's Winter?)
Going back from there I took the N (Manhattan bound of course) to 9th and went upstairs for the F. I didn't have to wait long and the ride was pretty good, though it still sucks making all those local stops in Queens. It will be nice when the F is via 63rd street full time it will be express for a change.
Took the 7 back to Flushing at Roosevelt ave.
The N/R G.O. was a mess though. I left Union Square at 10:25am, I didn't get to 8th ave until 11:30am, that's an hour and five minutes. It could've been quicker driving! I bet I could've walked faster across that Manhattan bridge!
About the Chambers Street Station on the Nassau Street Subway Line (J/M/Z) referred as the brown lines on the subway map. Will it be repaired since the station is in heavy disrepair? The same thing goes with Canal Street Station on the same line for the Easter Platform (Queensbound).
Phil
The northbound platform at Canal street (the one unrepaired) and Bowery northbound will be abandoned when they realign the track to go into the stub end "express" track at Canal. I assume Chambers will be rehabbed along with the rehab of the Nassau line, but I don't think they will abandoning anything more there at this time.
Now I know they can't really abandon anymore portions of Chambers since the weekend "J" trains terminate here and they're extended to Broad Street on Weekdays.
Why isn't there any track maps of Staten Island.
Well, there's a track map from 1949 on this website.
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/maps/historical/1949sirt.gif
No one's yet made one. Are you volunteering?
I would, but I'd only do it from an express train, and now it's too dark to ride the express and clearly see the trackage. Wait 'till Spring.
Better to do it from a local, that way you have more time to get the details correctly drawn on your notebook while sitting still at a station!!
Trust me, tried to do some system maps in a hurry. Always little mistakes crawl in.
An even better way to do it -- videotape the line from the front or rear of a train if it is possible. Then go home and watch the video, if you "think" you saw something, you can rewind, etc. I know most trains nowadays are full-width cabs, so that might preclude duing this sort of thing in many cases.
Friday morning I took an F train to Manhattan. It was already signed for the 63rd Street connector, BUT the display read:
F - 6 AV/63 ST LCL - CULVER EXP - KINGS HWY
Culver EXPRESS?
ERROR or NOT?
Well if you love that, then check the new sign list on the R-46......apparently they have plans to run the V to Church Avenue. The other day while working the E, I noticed this listing in the new Luminator code list for V to Church Avenue. Lots of plans for the V huh!!
When they get enough cars they hope to run the V and G to Church while the F express between Jay and Church.
F Express on the IND South Brooklyn line? What about that fire that took out Bergen Interlocking? Is the interlocking repaired, or is Bergen now handled thru a Master Tower?
Bergen LL is absent of tiles or signage, I assume they plan to remedy this if this G and V extension to Church Avenue takes place. Church Avenue has the capacity to handle the turning of two lines in any event.
By the time the Car shortage is resolved Bergen IL will be 100% functional again. Isn't it supposed to be the NYCT prototype for SSI technology?
Indeed, it is. Bergen was/is to be the test for the new technology for the improved interlocking.
Time will tell what service is to appear on the IND Smith Street Line.
Great... every line in south Brooklyn will get 2 services... currently, West End W, M, Brighton, Q diamond, Q circle, Culver , F, and possibly (don't want to make it seem absolute) V ... and Sea Beach... ONE ... N. Sea Beach Fred, I hope you read this...
Are those the same kind of luminator signs used in buses?
I don't think so. I think the LCDs on the R44s and R46s look like an old calculator.
:-) Andrew
Luminator is a brand:
http://www.luminatorusa.com
Rail Products:
http://www.luminatorusa.com/rail/
Bus Products:
http://www.luminatorusa.com/bus
Shawn.
I'd love to see what else is programmed onto those signs...
It's an error, I've seen at least one train daily that has that sign, maybe the same conducter keeps entering the wrong code?
The Sign was not in error, The F has a few trains that run express and drop out at Kings Highway during the rush hours
That is not listed on any map or schedule. It used to be true. Is it still?
Am I alone in the belief that the new programs make things worse? Is it necessary to state that the R is the Queens Bl/60th St. local? Or that it's terminal is in Bay Ridge? And while I'm at it, what's with the recent obsession with the neighborhoods some trains terminate in? The D to Norwood?
Hell ... I may be one of the few (since I lived there once) who even KNEW that the triangle on the north side of Mosholu Parkway was "Norwood" ... that IS kinda dumb. But I guess dividing up a relatively homogenous city into little warring factions is a politically beneficial activity. 205th/Bainbridge would have been just fine.
I am in agreement with you. I would also like to know who in the TA decided that it is more important to tell you what neighborhood a line terminates in than what intersection. This is a particular problem with the bus destination signs. For example the Q36 and the Q43 both run to Floral Park, 257th & Jamaica Ave and 268th and Hillside respectively yet the destination displays only Floral Park on both lines. In this case a little more information would be nice. I'm sure there are other instances of this, both with the new train signage and the bus signage as well.
I also agree with your arguments - to a point. Sometimes, a neighborhood designation can be useful in a city where identical street names can show up in different boroughs.
Speculation: Does some of this reflect a marketing effort by MTA to help with local civic pride?
PS - While we're at it, can we change the F's destination to 179 St - Jamaica Estates? The Midland Parkway subway entrance is right at the gates to Jamaica Estates...
I can understand wanting to "market" a neighborhood aspect while trying a station name chage, such as Van Wyck Blvd to Briarwood-Van Wyck, which goes along with the naming of Jamaica-Van Wyck. It gives more differentiation between the two. I wonder, however, if civic pride had anything to do with it. I've never really gotten the feeling that the TA gave a rat's a** about civic matters. If they did, they would have listened to the people of Greenpoint and their complaints about cutting back the G service during weekday hours.
Another possibility is that the MTA wants to give its stations names sounding more like they do in Washington and London...
Either that, or there's plans to make some additional cash by selling converters that will tell you that 3108 is closer to "Norwood" than it is to "Bedford Park" ... as much as making whistle stops feel more politically empowered, finding your way to friends is a WHOLE lot easier when stops are street numbers instead of names. If I need to get out to 45th St and a buddy tells me to take the #7 train to get there, I'd be hard pressed to know if "Court Sq" is my stop or not ...
Actually, I believe their idea came from the Los Angeles system which would identify their terminus on the buses and bus stop signs 90% of the time by the town name and occasionally by the street that it ends at (at least it did in 1991). The new NYCTA bus signs reflect a very similar albeit more modern theme to the LAMTA signs.
Until recently, NY terminus names were very inconsistent. You always had Main St., Flushing, but you had just Coney Is. (no Stilwell). You had just Ditmars Blvd., though everyone called it Astoria. You Had E. 241st, White Pls. Rd, versus W. 242 St., Van Cortlandt Park. So they decided to standardize all of them (or almost all) to Street, Neighborhood.
Of course, there is only one Coney Island.
And I always wondered why there are no signs that say "Coney Island"
on the platforms at "Stillwell Ave.".
It is confusing for tourists.
But it's the last stop --they have to get off.
The less tourists the better, Yes I am a Nostalgia whore
Probably because W8 St. is Coney Island too. Making it even harder to figure out why they still leave "Stillwell Av." off of the new signs.
Actually, I found the old Hudson Terminal destination signs to be confusing when I started riding on the IND. My original impression was it was up north near the GWB. Eventually everything fell into place.
>>PS - While we're at it, can we change the F's destination to 179 St - Jamaica Estates? The Midland Parkway subway entrance is right at the gates to Jamaica Estates... <<
Come on, Ron. The residents of Jmaica Estates would NIMBY in their pants if the world found out you could take a subway there!
Sorry about that! I should know better.
Maybe if the token clerks at 179 wear bowties, cummerbuns and white gloves...
Sometimes the neighborhood names are inconsistent. For instance, the M96 and M106 run identically west of Central Park, yet the new DOT bus stop signs give a destination of "Upper West Side" to one and "West Side" to the other, even at the last stop. (I realize the TA had nothing to do with this.)
Neighborhood names at stations are fine if there is only one station in the given neighborhood. Often that's not the case. I'm afraid Harlem is served by many stations other than 145th Street (and one could argue that 145th isn't even in Harlem). When I go to the Lower East Side, I go to Essex/Delancey or East Broadway -- never 2nd Avenue, which is practically a different neighborhood entirely.
When I go to the Lower East Side, I go to Essex/Delancey or East Broadway -- never 2nd Avenue, which is practically a different neighborhood entirely.
Houston and Delancey are only three blocks apart; when I lived on Houston, I usually shopped on Delancey, and my post office was on East Broadway. Of course, before realtors came up with "Alphabet City" and "East Village" (and it was safe to walk around after 6:00 PM), everything from the Brooklyn Bridge to 14 St was the Lower East Side.
Sure, but the part of the LES I have any interest in is centered roughly around the corner of Essex and Grand. Why on earth would I get off the train at 2nd Avenue and walk from there (unless I'm on a V and don't want to wait for an F)?
I'm not saying the Lower East Side descriptor is inappropriate at 2nd Avenue. I'm saying it's inappropriate at 2nd Avenue if it's not also used at the other stations in the neighborhood, because it gives the impression that anyone bound for the LES should get off specifically at 2nd Avenue.
Neighborhood descriptors are inappropriate anywhere in Manhattan, since I don't think there's a single neighborhood that's only served by one station. 2 Ave gets the honor because it will be a full-time terminal; to the average tourist or idiot, a train going to "Second Avenue" could end up anywhere from Houston St to East 128 St, so the rollsign needs to be a bit more specific. "2 Ave-Houston St" would probably make more sense, but how often does something that makes sense happen?
145 St-Harlem is way off base. Heck, the A train doesn't even go to that station :).
145 St-Harlem is way off base. Heck, the A train doesn't even go to that station :).
It doesn't? Does the upper level station not have the neighborhood name as well as the lower level station?
Incidentally, out in Brooklyn, the 12/16 map has "Broadway Junction (Eastern Parkway)" and "Broadway Junction (East New York)" at the venerable transfer point. I like. They just need to add JUNCTION tiling under the BROADWAY tiles in the IND station.
It doesn't? Does the upper level station not have the neighborhood name as well as the lower level station?
Whoops... I was thinking of "148 St-Harlem" (aka Lenox Terminal). Just another reason "Harlem" doesn't cut it as a station name.
Whats all the static about? Howard Beach is Howard Beach, Broad Channel is Broad Channel. Some stations and Terminals are named for neighborhoods others for Streets. The newer technology allows more information to be given. We are no longer limited to the size of the rollers or side box. I think the TA should display where the train is from as well!
Welcome to diversified New Yawk!
avid
I just think it's overly complicating something when it isn't necessary. F /6th Av-Culver Lcl/To Coney Island seems good enough for me.
I see no problem with the signs saying 205th St/Perry Avenue, 205th St/Norwood or 205th St/Bronx. I have no problem with 71st Ave/Forest Hills or Continental Ave/71st Ave. I have no problem with Kew gardens or Union Turnpike. Personally, I think if this is all you have to complain about, you have entirely too much time on your hands.
Someone didn't eat his bran muffin this morning.
No, that's correct. The subway's signage is Manhattan-centric. Local and express refers to Manhattan service on the signs, usually, regardless of what the train does in the other boroughs. The F is, and has always been, the 6th Av local. The D is the 6th Av express (but you'll note it runs local through the Concourse in the non-peak direction).
.
Similarly, the E is the 8th Av local - but it runs express in Queens.
The J is known as the Nassau Street Express.
I disagree, Ron. The F should not be signed Culver Exp, but 6th Ave Exp/Culver Lcl. (Or, as the old roll signs had it, Culver L'c'l).
Um, why should the F be signed as a 6th Avenue express when it's actually a 6th Avenue local? (Yes, yes, I know the 2 is signed as a 7th Avenue express -- but it has a good excuse, at least on the Redbirds.)
My apologies, I have been having some technical trouble the past 30 minutes but the chat is open! Please come join us at www.subtalklive.com (new name, old URL).
I'm searching for a certain posting titled:
"NJT stinks"
or something similar to the matter.
I set my viewing option to "Two Weeks", and I checked the SubTalk archives for "Several Eons", and I did a Word Search through the website and had no luck.
Where are these posts?
Do you mean this thread:
here
Does anyone here know if the CSX freight from Fresh Pond Y-101 is hauling away wreckage and debris from the World Trade Center site? I have seen Y-101 many times lately working the W at Astoria in the AM, and the train comes over rating 4 "Big Blue" SD40-2s and hauling MANY refuse carrier boxcars, many of which are loaded with concrete, steel beams and scraps and concrete chunks north to Oak Point. If anyone here works at New York & Atlantic or works the NYC (ex Conrail) end of CSX, especially works Y-101, can you tell me if WTC debris is what this train is hauling, especially since the Staten Island landfill is getting cleared out, and the debris that's there, along with the garbage, is being transported, as planned by the state, by rail to other states trash dumps and recycling locations. An astute train watcher familiar with freight equipment wouldn't be able to help but to notice the MANY refuse carrier boxcars that seem to make up the main stream of NYAR freights and CSX East-Of-Hudson freight trains (Oak Point, Fresh Pond, Hudson Line).
They're using SD-40-3's now. Two of them replace those other GE ones they were using that I can't remember. There used to be like four or five of the old ones to pull the same train.
Shawn.
b-23-7's. they used them for at least 15 years + u23b's, u36B's, and going further back, occasional GP8's.
for a short time between the b23's and SD'sm they used some CSX b-36-7's, which still make it down to oak point for local service with CSX gp40's.
Y-101 from Oak Point now FULLY rates, each time, 2 - 4 "Big Blue" SD40-2 locos. The GE B23-7s don't show up anymore there. I haven't yet seen the few CSX B23-7s show up on this train, nor its northbound counterpart. CP Rail 274/275 (to and from the POND respectively) rates "Candy Red" SD40-2s. Providence & Worcester freight (call letter unknown, anyone who knows the P&W call letter do let me know what it is please) rates ex CR B23-7s, usually 5 or 6. The bix six axles owned by CR/CSXT (I prefer the nick name Big Six) seem to be the norm on freights here which normally used to rate nothing more than older GEs, maybe an occasional GP38-2, GP40, or even one of CR's older SW-1500s or 1000s normally seen idling at Oak Point for switching duties there. The old NY Connecting RR (now CR/CSXT)to and from the POND is seeing more traffic. Not to mention I think that CSXT has bigger plans for the line, evidenced by welded rail sections being laid out along the right of way by Roosevelt Avenue below the #7 train. Hopefully someday the line will be active with trains again, least for now the line has seen some increased use. And the motive power is better.
Let me know when that ROW is being double tracked again, like it was years ago, and concrete ties are being placed, and then you will really begin to see some heavy duty usage on that line. If you can, let me know the best times to see some of the freights running through that particular point, so that I can take pictures. Sounds exciting!
don't look for double track anytime soon - it's a short run from fresh pond to oak point, so many trains can use that single track per day without too much of a traffic backup.
best times are summer mornings - aside from the CSX round trip, you can catch the PW stone empties leave town, usually all between 7-11am. (pw mostly ran tuesday and fridays north/east...).
cp rail can be caught leaving town around 3-5pm - again, best during the longer days of summer.
CSX Y-101 comes southbound at around 7:30am, with the northbound counterpart at around 10 or 11, though sometimes if car numbers left for interchange at the POND are high, the train won't be finshed with the switching and setting up of the train, then the actual departure till around 1 pm. As for the double track, why do you think the extra space is left behind? If this freight tunnel under New York Bay from NJ to Bay Ridge becomes a reality, which George Pataki and Rudy Giuliani are pushing to make a reality, freight business will be booming for CSXT, for, as I previously stated, will have a whole new line to send freight to the Northeast from the west or the south, without the North Jersey congestion at Oak Island, Kearny, Croxton and North Bergen yards. Thus you can believe CSXT will fully utilize the line more for the operations to and from the Northeast. The second track, with the freight increase, would become a built up reality, and would be needed. Think of how much less hassle CSX would have to send NYC bound and Northeast bound freight thru the tunnel right here to NYC then on to New England without the long N. Jersey/River Line/Selkirk trip, with the NYC freight going on from Selkirk back south to NYC on the Hudson (east side) line. The second track, if the tunnel goes forward, could be a big time reality. Remember Pataki and want to get freight off trucks and onto rail. Means more business for NYC, CSXT. The money the business would bring to NYC, hell NY state as well would definitely make Pataki happy. True the second track won't be soon, but it definitely CAN'T be ruled out, especially with the tunnel plans go ahead and anticipated freight increase with the tunnel if it's ever opened.
OK, so if I position myself at Roosevelt Ave, I should be able to see some action around 7:30am? Just trying to be sure so that I can get good pictures. Any other good spots to take pictures from on that line?
yes... ditmars av. on the n/w is another good spot, along with some randalls is.
Hmmmmm.....lemme see:
1). Metropolitan Avenue . M line platform, east side of the tracks, just north of the Fresh Pond junction (now is best due to leaves no longer on trees blocking the view.....nice and clear!!)
2). The Queens Boulevard overpass, by the Port Washington LIRR branch overpass
3). Ditmars Blvd. N/W......BEST SPOT TO VIEW OUTSIDE OF FRESH POND
(look towards the north around 7:30 - 8:00 am) and maybe if you are lucky you might get the Acela southbound around the same time, side by side.
Give these a try. If you have questions about CP Rail's train....lemme answer before asked, DON'T BOTHER!! Train 274 comes down from Oak Point around 4:00 am. 275 heads north about 7:00 pm.....well after dark both times!! Providence & Worcester, ad I understand it, is yet another night time operation, although I don't know the times for the P&W trains. When I know more you'll be informed. If you get some good shots of the train (CSXT Y-101) post them at nycsubway.com, or anywhere that displays rail photos. Due list links where they are displayed. Thanx :-)
Another word to Mr. Jailhouse Doc....
Metropolitan station would be good between 9:00am and 11:00am, because you will be able to see Y-101's SD40-2s hustling around into position (with the roar of "Big Blue" SD40-2's EMD/GM 645E, 16 cylinder engines rumbling the platform as they pass) at the front of the freight train consist. Depending on the length of the train (nowadays that train is, minimum, 60 cars long, max somewhere in the area of 100-110 cars....NYAR's business is quite good atthe POND) the crew can, at times be seen from the crew readying the train for departure, checking brakeline and train connections, coupling and all. I find that this gives me something even more from my trainloving life, seeing freight action while working on board a train of my own right next to there on NYCT property!
THANKS! You made my day! Now this is something that I can use to get some really good pictures! Again, THANKS!
P&W comes down at night, and heads back north usually on a tues. or friday morning around 9-10am. summers only. they sometimes deviate a day or so from this schedule.
a second track might very well be needed with any cross harbor freight tunnel... but i'll believe they'll ever build that tunnel and replace the second track when it happens... it's be nice, and certainly smart for them to do, but so's the second av. subway, and we all know how that's gone...
the B-23's were retired and sold this last year or 2. so far as i know no csx b-23's evr came into town, although the b-36' did and continue to (just ot the bronx though).
csx would like to get more freight on the line, obviously. there's been lots of talk about them funding some small yard work to open new distribution facilities like the nY&A's team track at LIC - i know the old maspeth yard was on that candidate list, and some hope that the old phelps=dodge lot in LIC will be converted to a mini intermodal yard. it's right across the street from UPS... but things in the rail world (progess) moves very very slowly. it'll likely be years before the real fruits of the conrail breakup set in for NYC. NYA/CP Rail were apparently awarded use of 65th street yard in bay ridge for intermodal/possible float use, but the EDC has yet to hand over the keys... (the announcement was made in march...). give it a few years, and if CP's still coming to town, they'll have a nice foothold to increase their relatively scant traffic to and from NYC...
I think the only part of the line from fresh pond to oak point to get any serious trackwork is that roosevelt av. section - but that's more due to the highway being widened and the tracks moved. still, it's a nice sign that the rest of the line might someday get it's long overdue overhaul
Some GE units (5 or 6 usually) were running to Fresh Pond until a few months or so. Less than 6 months ago. As far as what I've seen. Only just recently have the SD40-3's replaced them.
Shawn.
Question......what's an SD40-3????? I only know of an SD40-2, SD40, and SD40T-2.
They are rebuilt locomotives, originally SD40, SD40-T2, and SD40-2 models. More than one rebuiler has used this designation so I assume it has something to do with the electrical package, but I don't know.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
An SD40-3 is an SD40 type unit which has been rebuilt and upgraded using a Woodard CLC module (Complete Locomotive Control) This replaces the PG governor and IDAC systems.
before anyone runs out to queens or the bronx looking for them, they're not here... they're straight former conrail sd-40-2s, all still in conrail paint, so far as i know.
Wrong. CSX runs the SD-40-3's in Conrail paint to Fresh Pond Yard. I know this to be a face because they have "SD-40-3" painted on them near the unit numer. Maybe I'll be able to get a picture of it some day. I've seen it with my own eyes though. I do live right across the street from the Bay Ridge line a few blocks from Fresh Pond Yard.
Shawn.
if they are '40-3's they're rebuilt straight from sd-40-2, as they look just like them... i think most folks think of rebuilt old tunnel motors and 45's, which look a whole lot different, as 40-3's, typically. call em 40-3's if you want, but they don't look much if at all different that sd-40-2s.
Also, i saw and have a quite a few shots of u23b's labeled as b-23-7's though (back when they went over the hell gate), so them labels ain't foolproof.
They do look pretty much identical to me. But from my point of view you can really see SD-40-3 painted on them. I'm not talking just about labels on some picture. I believe they're also louder than CPR's SD-40-2's. If I knew their schedule for sure I'd be standing on the corner with my camera.
Shawn.
it's labeled/painted sd-40-3, on the side of the cabs, under the numbers, no? I haven't seen them on the sd's, though on the old b-23's, u23s there was the model type on the actual side of the cab, in small print - and some of them, oddly enough, were wrong! (b-23's and u23's look different enough, so how that goof happened, or wheither they considered some of the u23's as being overhauled to b-23 specs is well beyond my knownledge. perhaps i can dig up one of my old shots of it & scan it tonight...
I suspect (though haven't had a chance to poke around and find out for sure) that the sd's were from a batch conrail overhauled in the 90's, so perhaps they considered them 40-3's?
whatever they are, they're loud as hell. I recall over the summer sitting on randalls island, across from the south bronx and new NYPost plant, when i was able to hear them coming over the main span of the hell gate!
There were a bunch of U23Bs rebuilt into B23-7Rs for a freight operation that was eventually absorbed into Conrail. They don't look like U23s. If I recall correctly, these were given dash 8 type cabs, and wings, a characteristic of GE Dash 7s,8s, and 9s.
SD40-3s? I don't know about that. If I could see them at Oak Point, I'd know. Everything should be 40-2s, but I could be wrong.
Also for locos to be utilized in NYC, plows must be notched in the corners, otherwise they wouldn't be able to clear the Hudson Line and it's 3rd Rail.
-Stef
I think i know which ones you speak of - there were 10 of them, for that coal railroad near pittsburgh that conrail bought in the mid-90's. they were 'super-7' rebuilds by GE.
I never spotted any of them 'super-7's' in the bronx or queens, likely due to that snowplow modification you mentioned that metronorth requires to clear the 3rd rail. csx has a batch of 10 sd-40's modified for this purpose, as well as the original 10 b-36's that took over from the b-23/u23/u36's that had been the mainstay of the hudon line/fresh pond freights. they've also got a few gp40's modified now, as well as the usual sw1500 yard power...
the u23's i spoke of were straight u23s, perhaps overhauled by conrail in the mid 80s. most were ex-LV units. (the u36b's were ex-auto train, just 4 of them - but they appeared in queens a lot since they were part of the dedicated pool of power for the line. they were retired sometime in the mid 90's...)
I've spotted at least one MP15 in Oak Point. The trucks in which the locomotive ride on, give it away.
-Stef
a'right, i dug up an old photo of one of the wrongly labeled engines so ya' know what i'm talking about... let's just hope the olde' html will work...
here's a string o' 5 b-23's going over hell gate in 1990 (taken 44th st. where the bridge ends on the queens side). nothing unusual, or so it'd see.
zooming in on the last engine, you can clear see it's labeled/painted/marked under the number as a u23b... which it is not, nor was it ever. so just cuz it says it's a u23, or anything else, doesn't mean it actually is! =)
that's not to say the sd's ain't really 'sd-40-3's, as i said before i recall cr rebuilt a batch of sd-40's in the 90s and they might have been part of that group (thus making them 40-3's in their eyes...) i'm just saying sometimes them side labels are wrong.
Sounds like someone in the locomotive shop got their engines mixed up. Heh.
-Stef
i wonder... ? Much of the CSX haul off of LI these days is trash. I know NY&A serves a large trash facility in Bushwick (waste management?), so maybe it's going through there?
It could also just be part of the usual trash-mix. the bread and butter of CSX these days is bringing food into hunts point market, and trash out of the south bronx and queens... making oak point yard both the arse and mouth of the city =) hehe!
did you post to the NY forum at railroad.net? i'm sure someone there will know, as there are some NYA guys on there...
Debris...you mean R-142's?
On a related topic: this afternoon at Fresh Pond Junction there is to be a press conference regarding the WTC tragedy in regards to the regional area RRs. As part of the event (with dignitaries), one of the CP Rail locos is to be presented in a new paint scheme making reference to the heroes of 9/11.
Has anyone else heard about this?
Event begins around 5:00 p.m.
BMTman
While channel surfing during a stoppage of play in the Flyers game a few minutes ago, I paused long enough on Larry King Weekend to hear Rabbi Marvin Hier illustrate a point by saying "It matters not which train you take - the Independent or the IRT..."
That's because only the BMT is the best ;-)
Sheesh, Larry King's from Brooklyn. You'd think he would have repremanded the rabbi for that little omission. I guess he's been in DC too long and only knows WMATA now...
Someone posted on www.straphangers.org a message that I found unbelievable. It contained the words: The 5 line is NOT scheduled to get ANY of the R142s. Say it aint so, because all of the redbirds need to be replaced.
That's a bunch of crap, the 68xx Series and up is for the 5 line!
E 180th Yard was rebuilt for basically dealing with R142s.
Don't believe the Hype!
Just because all of the redbirds need to replaced doesn't mean the 5 has to get R142s. They could get hand-me-down R62s like the 7 train. I'm not saying they aren't getting R142s, I'm not sure either.
Since the people making the car assignment decisions haven't made them yet, it's not surprising that SubTalkers are unsure about what the assignments will be.
David
Then what ws the purpose of rebuilding the barn at East 180th Street. They could've revamped Corona and sent the 142's there. The 5 will get their share of cars. Let the 7 get the hand-me-downs.
2s and 5s get R142s....the 180th Street crews were pulled out and moved to 239th Street....I have a lot of respect for them, their skills and their perserverance. 180 is now primarily for R142 acceptance and handles light troubles. Everyone who hasn't had R142 class is being pulled out for instruction even with experience on those trainsets. There's movement afoot. Peter
I saw a R-32 with it's LCD saying "3". but 3 is a IRT line so whats up with that?
The R-32 as well as the R-38 front signs have numbers 0 - 9.
Why is beyond me, perhaps when a train of R-32s shows up on the (N), they could sign it up as #4 to keep Sea Beach Fred happy!
Bill "Newkirk"
I saw it siting (end of express E service) on the express tracks on the hillside ave branch today. It was in storage.
I think it's possible to run 6-car M trains during weekdays, so that other lines can get those cars to make up some 10-car trains.
Does this sound realistic, or would the M line suffer from severe overcrowding if this were done?
I think it can be done, most intervals and those on the J/Z can certainly handle 6 cars. But there is a very political issue involved here. Firstly, the train crews will get the brunt of the complaints! Additionally, once the local politicians hear about people who used to get a seat now have to stand, and letters to local community newspapers get published and these become stories in the major NY papers, the heat would be too severe for the TA to handle.
I remember a common topic of discussion in community newspapers being about the ratio of J trains to M trains. People did not understand why they would sometimes see two J's before an M. Such minor complications. Let these people have to take the Queens Corridor everyday, and they'll see what real service complications are about.
You don't understand politics. The passengers who take the M do not care about the passengers who take the E/F. If anything, the M line passengers would simply look at a train every 2 1/2 minutes out there vs. 8 to 10 minutes on the M and would make the mutant excuse that they'll take the extra trains with the crowding to cut down on their wait! Everyone elses grass looks greener than yours! All they care about is the M line. The passengers who take the A only care about their line and no one elses. The average passenger is not a railfan! If a service cut is made to any one line, the passengers will eventually take it up with their own politicians who they elect into or out of office. I have gotten into discussions over the course of time with passengers over the 2 to 1 ratio of the J to M. I tell them because the running time from Bway/Myrtle to Jamaica is twice as long as the the M to Met, which means with all else being equal, the J would have twice as many riders and in turns needs twice as many trains.
Alright,enough.You guys leave my line alone.You want cuts,take them from the lines YOU ride........
Alright,enough.You guys leave my line alone.You want cuts,take them from the lines YOU ride........ Bill,i know you ''do'' the M line,so tell these guys to BACK OFF!!!!!!
Because of the logic I cited, 6 cars will never happen on the M. Especially in light of the fact of the M getting no respect in the southern division, it would be kind of difficult (lacking a better word) to reroute a 6 car train due to a delay in service to the Q/N/R/W lines.
tell that to these people on this board who feel the M has no standing, or the J for that matter. If they want cut they should recommende the line that they use....... and see how they like it.
I'm doing a term paper for American History on the impact of rapid transit on American cities in the late 19th century and I need help from you guys.
First, a few questions:
1. Where can I find information about the construction of the Chicago L?
2. Where can I find information about the San Francisco streetcars?
3. When was the S.F. streetcar network built?
4. Where can I find information about Boston's subway and streetcars?
5. Where can I find information on the construction and operation of NYC's elevateds and streetcars/omnibuses?
Thanks for anything you can find!
Dan
Streetcar Suburbs by Sam Bass Warner is the text on Boston.
as to Chicago, the best are the two volume CERA history, but that is Railfan stuff--if your teacher is serious they have no interest in 'our' sort of detail.
Sf had as with most cities many small lines come and go, merge, go bankrupt etc with a twist The Municipal Railway is the earliest major SOCIALIST transit system in the US. And indeed there were still new lines being built in the 20's.
1. Where can I find information about the construction of the Chicago L?
http://www.chicago-l.org/history/index.html
2. Where can I find information about the San Francisco streetcars?
http://www.sfmuni.com/aboutmun/indxabmu.htm
3. When was the S.F. streetcar network built?
The answer to question number 2 has limited information. I will see if I have any other good references in my internet archives.
4. Where can I find information about Boston's subway and streetcars?
http://www.mbta.com/schedmaps/index.cfm
5. Where can I find information on the construction and operation of NYC's elevateds and streetcars/omnibuses?
Look in the index of this website in the Table of Contents. It has just about everything that you could possibly need to know.
For Chicago's L system, the book Destination Loop (author: Brian Cudahy)is an excellent source of history and information. For San Francisco the book The People's Railway - the story of the San Francisco Municipal Railway, is an excellent history of the transit systems in the City by the Bay.
For Question 3 information on San Francisco, a good reference is:
http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/SanFrancisco/CableCar/
Here Are Two Books On NYC & Brooklyn Streetcars
New York Transit Memories
(See Futher Description In Bilbography On nycsubway.org)
Harold A. Smith (1997) (Manhattan Streetcars and IRT Manhatten El's)
Tales Of A Brooklyn Trolly Dodger
Stan Fishler(Sp?)
(B&Q, BRT Streetcar & El's, Brooklyn Public Service Co, Brooklyn Union Transit)
I Read This Book It is An excellent reading on the Streetcars of Brooklyn & Queens.
Thanks, everyone, for your help. This will make me and my social studies teacher very happy!
Dan
"This will make me and my social studies teacher very happy!"
Well, I'll bet it will be just another paper to him/her, BUT to you it will be a keeper. Hope you get an "A" !
Mr rt__:^)
I don't know if any of you know this. A little trivia about the Winthrop St. station on the Nostrand Ave. subway.
Up until the early 90's, there was a mosaic on the southbound platform pointing to the current and only exit. It said "Robinson St."
I was told that Robinson St. was the original name for Parkside Ave. Can anyone dispute or verify this ?
That mosaic is now gone, removed and replaced with bathroom tiles You can see where it was. There was a wooden sign covering Robinson St. stating " To Parkside Ave".
Now the funny part is today further up the south platform is a mosaic stating "Winthop St" but pointing to a non existant exit mezzanine at the far north end. There was a wooden sign covering it stating "Kings County Hospital, 2 blocks". You can see the two holes for the lead shields that held up the wooden sign. Better grab a shot of this before the sign patrol covers it up !
Bill "Newkirk"
That certain sign patrol can't determine what trains run local and run express. Don't keep your hopes up with them. :-)
I don't think anybody can determine locals from expresses, particularly when it comes to the 2.
Yes, you're correct, Bill.
In my high school days, my family lived on Winthrop Street. I'd always see that mosaic about 'Robinson Street'. At first a neighborhood 'old timer' said it was the original name for Clarkson Avenue, but later found out looking at old maps that it was the original street name for Parkside Avenue -- I believe it held that name prior to 1920.
Another bit of Flatbush street name history for you: Lenox Road was originally named Diamond Street...;-D (couldn't resist).
BMTman
I spent some time observing the Florence Station on the Los Angeles Blue Line this afternoon, and it raised some questions in my mind.
The station is about 100' south of Florence Avene, so south bound trains cross the street immediately before pulling into the station and north bound trains cross immediately after leaving the station. There is also a two track freight line running parallel to the Blue Line at this point. When a freight train crosses, the gates work as I would expect; they lower when the train is some distance away, and raise after the train has crossed and is some distance away. With Blue Line trains is different.
For the southbound trains, the gate lowers when the train is still some distance away, but raises as soon as the train pulls into the station, even though the back end of the train is only 100' from the crossing. For north bound Blue Line trains the gate does not lower until the train is stopped in the station with the doors open, and remains down for several seconds after the train has cleared the crossing going north.
I have several questions regarding this.
1. What causes the gate to lower when it does for a north bound train? Is the T/O punching in a signal when he is getting ready to pull out of the station?
2. What protects the crossing if a north bound train does not stop at the station? It is hard to believe that it would be possible for a run away train to charge through the crossing before the gates came down.
3. On the south bound side, if the gates raise when the train is only 100' away in the station, what protects the crossing if the train on the southbound side were to reverse out of the station or a north bound train were wrong railing on the south bound side.
I am sure this is not a unique situation and is faced by commuter rail lines all over the country, so there must be a more or less standard way to handle the problems. Does anyone know what it is?
Tom
3. On the south bound side, if the gates raise when the train is only 100' away in the station, what protects the crossing if the train on the southbound side were to reverse out of the station or a north bound train were wrong railing on the south bound side.
It has to do with how the the relays are set up. A grade crossing generally has 3 track circut blocks. There is an island circut that is basically the crossing and a few feet on either side and two longer approach circuts. The the approach circut it shunted the gates go down, when the island circut becomes shunted and then reverts back to normal the gates go up. Then the other approach block reverts from shunted to non-shunted the system is reset for opreation in either direction. For reverse moves, the gates will lower whenever the island circut is shunted go the train would have to proceed slowly until it gets onto the circut and the gates lower.
Thank you for that post.
If you observe stations like New Hyde Park on the LIRR (RR Crossing on either side of the station), you would see:
1) Gates lower as train approaches.
2) Gates open as train clears crossing and stops in station
One difference, though:
3) Gates at crossing in front of train in station remain down until train has left station and clears crossing. This is true for either of the two tracks.
In the case of NHP, there is circuitry which detects speed of the trains, and the gates "time out".
They do this "time out" thing on most railroads, if a train takes too long to get to a crossing, the gates start to go back up. As the train gets nearer, they are supposed to come back down.
An interesting thing is out here in California on the San Francisco peninsula. Now it's operated by JPB/Caltrain, but it was originally Southern Pacific. Many of the stations along the line had close crossings, and lots of traffic. The gates would go up if the train was slowing to make a station stop before fouling the crossing. There would be a microphone on a pole next to the track at the point where the locomotive would stop. The gates were sound activated, so the engineers would have to lay on the horns to get the gates to resume operation!! (It took a REALLY healthy air horn blast, too,not just some idiot in a car driving by on the adjacent frontage alley!!)
The crossing gates in advance of the crossing immediately in front of the train may "time out" as you call it. It the train is stopped in te station, they will open, permitting vehicle traffic to cross. However, when this happens, the engineer will receive a very restrictive code (either 0 or 15 MPH). Once the train begins to move and again shunts the local circuits, the gates will again come down and the code will advance to an appropriate reading. Some of the est examples of this are on the Ronkonkoma branch, Brentwood, Wyandanch and Farmingdale westbound and Bethpage eastbound.
If you look on the tracks of the LA Blue Line, there are signal boxes between the rails, and a wire loop. There used to be signs posted next to the trackfor each of these, signs said "TWC Loop". I don't know if the signs are still there as Ihaven't ventured around the Blue Line in a couple years at least. (no need to...)
The TWC loop is what controlled the signals....part of the Automatic Train Control system. If a train is going north, the gates won't go down until the train is ready to go. There is a manual switch on the control console of the train itself, so the train operator can set the gates to working manually if needed.
If a train on the southbound track needs to reverse and go north over such crossings, the train operator presses the "TWC" button on the console and down come the gates.
It's also this way at the Vernon station, and a few others as well all the way down into Long Beach.
Interesting setup. Is it possible for the crossing gates to be switched to manual mode, and then for the train operator to forget to activate them, so the train enters the crossing with no lights, no bell and no lowered gate arms? Or is there a fail-safe to prevent that?
>>> There used to be signs posted next to the trackfor each of these, signs said "TWC Loop". <<<
I did notice that sign at the Florence Station. Thanks for the explanation.
Tom
I know that the Nassau Street Subway lines are full of contrasts in many stations, because at Broad St. and Fulton St. stations, they've been renovated in recent years and there are some stations such as Chambers St., Bowery and Kosciuszko St. stations that are in disrepair. You think that the Nassau Street Underground stations (such as Chambers) will be renovated with the Grecian borders and the elevated stations (such as Kosciuszko) be repaired in their exits since it's in terrible shape.
Phil
Phil- They are renovating the Stations from Hewes to Halsey as I am writing this. Lorimer, Gates and Chauncey are completed and the Queens platforms of Hewes, FLushing, Kosciuszko and Halsey are just reopened. Still underway is the mezzanine rebuilding at these 4 and still to come is the Manhattan Platforms. Marcy is also being renovated and will include elevators and full ADA access.
Eastern Parkway is being renovated as part of the East NY Complex. Myrtle is completed and Alabama to Crescent is planned for this 5 year progam as is Chambers. I expect Bowery will wait for a future 5 year program.
They are going to abandon the Northbound platforms at Canal and Bowery. Chambers should also be renovated when they do the rest of the line, But I think they are keeping all the platforms. Does anyone know what is planned for Essex Street? Are they going to just use the center track at the island platform when they abandon the Northbound platforms at Bowery and Canal? Possibly, they may make it into two Wall platforms if they don't use the outer track anymore, but that would decrease the use of it if they needed it for diversions. Any word of what is planned?
Essex Street will still have three tracks. Trains to Jamaica Center will use the center rtack and open up on the island platform. Trains to Broad Street will use the wall platform. The current track used for Jaamica bound trains will remain for non-revenue moves.
The current Jamaica-bound track would need to remain intact in case the connection from 6th Avenue is ever used. (The connection only provides access to that track.)
I've suggested that, with no regular service on that track, a removable bridge be installed to allow passengers to exit on the south side of Essex Street.
I consider myself to be avid railfan since I was a kid, but today struck a raw nerve. I realize that from time to time, maintenance must be performed on the rails from time to time. Early this morning about 8:00, 2 Diesel locos, #158 & 153, pulled up right next to my apt. building here in Bayside, Queens, NY. The locos had a few cars filled with gravel for the rails. The train was stationary until 11:10 AM when it finally left westbound, and not before ringing its bell and tooting its horn. I just found it rather annoying and I am sure my neighbors on both sides of the tracks did not appreciate hearing and smelling the 2 Diesel locos parked there for a good 3 hours.
My point is, why is there no consideration as to when these projects are started in residential areas?
I know exactly what you are talking about. They (railroads) can be inconsiderate bastards. When the LIRR was building the Port Wash. branch they should have taken into account that some day, someone might build an apartment building adjacent to their ROW and they would become a nuisance. Perhaps railroads should poll the neighborhood and find out when it would be 100% convenient to do maintenance.
Building a railroad line isn't being inconsiderate.Having a dirtry smelly freight train waiting in a residential area is.Trust me there are plenty of places where a freight train can wait.Long Island(Which includes Brooklyn and Queens Geographiclly)is not one of those places.
As I thought even you would have realized, I was being sarcastic. When I bought my house, I took into account schools, taxes, distance from the LIRR (noise considerations), etc. I think that when you rent an apartment that overlooks railroad tracks, you must assume that you will hear train noise from time to time.For the same reason, I have little sympathy for people who move to howard beach or Rosedale and then complain about jet noise.
I have to agree.That's why I am getting sick of these people who move into New York 5 blocks from Grand Central and complain about the noise.
Then those same people move to Sea Cliff. Next on the NIMBY agenda, stopping a modern small gas powered power plant. Of course when the lights go out they'll all be crying foul. There's just no pleasing some people.
I believe the RR was there before the apartment house. Kinda like building a house next to the airport and then complaining about he noise.
Exactly.
Yes, my apartment building was built in the mid-1960's, after the Port Washington was established. My point is here again that it is inconsiderate of them not to think that no one would notice the noise of 2 idling diesel locos at 8AM on a Sunday. Yes, when I moved to this building in 1984, it was a luxury to say the least to be able to walk one block to the station and not have to worry about finding parking in the area. I guess you can all say we are spoiled by not having to listen to Diesel locos rummbling through the ROW everyday.
For what it's worth, you really don't want to shut down a loco for many of the reasons mentioned here as well as one that I'm surprised no one else brought up - the AIR COMPRESSORS ... on diesels, your "stay put" air also comes off the engine and if you shut one down, aside from "maybe it won't start up again" if air bleeds off and the compressor doesn't kick in because the power's down, them puppies can start rolling on you without the handbrakes.
Only thing I can tell ya is be glad it doesn't happen often but at the same time, rest assured that the crew probably couldn't have shut it down even IF they were "considerate" ... just thought I'd bring it up - hopefully THIS weekend will be more peaceful. It's not like you have ongoing construction down the street - that can get REALLY annoying going on day after day after day ...
Why exactly are diesel loco's hard to start up? I'd hate to have one stall out on the OB train in the freezing cold weather.
I didn't know Cummins supplied diesel train engines. :-0
Gee it happend one sunday. I get BULK PICKUP with RECYCLEABLES every SATURDAY at 5am in the morning. They take at least three trips down the block more when cars block some of the pickup.
The city won't change the schedule.
>>> I get BULK PICKUP with RECYCLEABLES every SATURDAY at 5am in the morning. <<<
Don't complain. The street was there when you moved in wasn't it? :-)
Tom
Wait 'til you get the Rail Grinder pyrotechnic show
What? The LIRR should have taken into account that SOME DAY someone might build an apartment building adjacent to their ROW? How about the building developers take into account that there is CURRENTLY a ROW adjacent to where they WANT to build? While I do agree that sometimes railroads can be inconsiderate, 99.9% of the time they were there FIRST, and nobody forced the people to move into houses or apartments built next to the tracks or yards.
Ok, I just realized you were being sarcastic. Please forgive me, I only had 1 cup of coffee so far!
I was referring to another poster.
Yes, I know. But weren't you being sarcastic when saying that the railroad should have taken into account future development when building the ROW? I hope so!
Of course I was.
Now now ... even out here in the woods, we have inconsiderate MOW people who feel that playing castinets with the spikes all through the night every couple of months is a good thing. However, we haven't had any trains land in our dining room lately, so I guess it's all for the better. :)
On the montauk branch there are a couple of late trains that go through town. One eastbound at about 3:15 AM and one westbound around 4 AM. Those DE30 horns raise hell at every rail crossing. Even a half mile away you can't miss it. But you get used to the sound and even miss it when they are late.
You'd LOVE CP-VO where I live ... every night between 2am and 6am there's at least 30 trains through here, and two crossings in the village. Fortunately for the railroad, most of the folks who live here are CSX'ers and those who can't stand the FRA-required music just don't live here anymore.
I must be a sicko, but when I'm treated to the nightly serenade, I SLEEP BETTER ... when I left the city, the one thing that got to me was the lack of noise. Couldn't sleep worth ... well ... a whistle. But if you don't like the sounds of long freights and 6 motors at the lead, this DEFINITELY ain't the place to live. :)
I'm a real NYC kid...used to go on vacations in Pennsylvania over three decades ago...and THAT sound of the rails!!!!!!! Peter
I have trouble sleeping when it's completely quiet. A background noise like a fan, bus engine or even a train actually helps. The drunks that come out and roam the village at 2am are quite annoying though. I've lost days of sleep thanks to them. I'd much rather live by an RR then put up with crazy animals. But for now close the windows and put fan or heater on, that helps alot.
You'd hate it around here then - you can hear the gnats making new gnats. Heh. You can hear the locos coming up from the yards nearly ten miles south of here. "A-weighted" background noise here is about 13 dB when there isn't a train around - you don't get it that quiet in most places. So the trains coming through is a delightful change.
And you DON'T want to shut down a diesel unless you have no plans of moving it for a while. :)
Im kinda putting together a study, what race, demographic are these drunks usually. This is for the purpose of science. Thanks
Hehehe, TMO, I'm with you -- can't sleep out in the woods when it's quiet!!
All my life, I've been in noisy environments. I started out living about 50' off Fordham Road in the Bronx -- US1. Lived in Bay Shore (Long Island) and the LIRR provided the music there. Came out to California in 1968, lived 1.5 miles east of the end of two major runways at Los Angeles Airport (400' below the 707's, DC-8's, etc.)
And now, I'm in Tustin....SR55 Freeway out the back window, Metrolink, Amtrak, BNSF out the side window, and 500' above the roof there are some 200 daily 737's, 757's, A320's, and one A310 landing at Orange County Airport. No skid marks on the roof yet, but there have been occasions when I've thought of checking!!
I go up to the Port Angeles, Washington, area annually -- can't sleep the week I'm there as it's TOO DAMN QUIET!!!!!!
Agreed, TD. I grew up a seven minute walk from the Albertson station
on the Oyster Bay branch. When I moved away to go to college, I
really did miss the whistles at 1:26am (and some later lite trains).
I really liked the haunting sound of the old diesel engines. They had a rich sounding horn. The DE's sound more like the M-1/3 horns.
Occasionally I still hear old diesels on the OB branch passing Glen Cove. I've seen some freight cars on sidings around Glen Cove, it could be the only way they got there.
With the variety of units that passes through here, each railroad seems to have selected their own tune. You can tell who's moving what and where just from the horns in the distance. You can tell the 38's from the 40's and the 50's from the 60's and CSX, ex-Conrail, D&H, CP or rental units just from the sound alone.
Must be boring living by just ONE railroad. :)
Actually, the DE/DM30's SHOULD sound like the old GP38-2's as far as the horns go; they are the very same type -- Airchime Ltd. K-5LA horns. Trouble is, when LIRR moved the horns on the DE/DM units, pipe welding flux, etc. wasn't blown out and it is now plugging the air inlet holes in the bottom of some of the horns (a 1/8 inch hole). So some horns sound like complete crap.
The cab cars (4000's) have the same Leslie S-2M two-note horn that the M-3 Metropolitans have....but it is mounted underneath the carbody so the sound is not as intense.
Funny you should mention missing the whistles Todd. Except for 2 years when I lived in Hicksville I have lived in East Meadow for most of my 48 yrs. And even though it is about 3 1/2 miles to the nearest crossing (School Street just E/O Westbury Station) I always heard the whistles especially late at night and as a railfan enjoyed 'em. When they got rid of the old diesels and got the tri-levels I only heard them half as much as you can only hear the E/B train whistles, the W/B cab car whistles don't carry. Now that they are reconfigured I never hear them at all. I do really miss that sound at night.
One sound I certainly don't miss in East Meadow though is the fire horns!!! Thank G-d they got rid of them!!!
Not in Sea Cliff. They can blow at any time, even at 3 in the morning. Sea Cliff is too "cheap" to have a pager system for firefighters. What a disgrace!
I think all the volunteer departments have pager systems. Some just still use the horns to make wives and girlfriends think there actually is a fire when they are actually summonsing the guys to a drinkfest!!
Uh oh....Jeff lets out the volunteer fire department secret!!!
When I lived in Bay Shore, my next-door neighbor was a volunteer fireman, and he told me they did exactly that once in a while!!!
We had just the siren out there -- but Oakdale had those damned horns.
I was doing some audio recording on the LIRR at Mineola about 12 years ago, and between the crossing bells, the train horns, ambulance sirens, the 6 o'clock siren near the station, and the fire horns in one of the adjoining towns, some of the tape came out really interesting.
Growing up in Wantagh, what I missed, starting in the autumn of 1968, when the elevation of the Babylon line between Wantagh and Bellmore was completed, was the clanging of the bells as the gates came down at the street level railroad crossings. On balance I'm glad that they did it - it does make driving a whole lot easier - but one of the reasons put forth at the time for the grade crossing eliminations was noise reduction because the bells and gates were no longer needed. I realized after the elevation that the bells, which were a couple of miles from my house, were more comforting than they were disturbing. But this was made up for by the sound of the trains themselves, which seemed to be louder once they were elevated.
Growing up in Wantagh, what I missed, starting in the autumn of 1968, when the elevation of the Babylon line between Wantagh and Bellmore was completed, was the clanging of the bells as the gates came down at the street level railroad crossings. On balance I'm glad that they did it - it does make driving a whole lot easier - but one of the reasons put forth at the time for the grade crossing eliminations was noise reduction because the bells and gates were no longer needed. I realized after the elevation that the bells, which were a couple of miles from my house, were more comforting than they were disturbing. But this was made up for by the sound of the trains themselves, which seemed to be louder once they were elevated.
Hmm I don't think OB trains run that late. But sometimes I hear the horns (even though the station is almost a mile away)when the wind is right in the middle of the night. It's especially nice and clear when there's a nice snowpack, but who knows if we'll get one this winter. Also if you listen closely you can hear the rumble of the DE's.
I've also heard the Cummins L10G's fighting up Glen about 4 blocks away.
On the montauk branch there are a couple of late trains that go through town. One eastbound at about 3:15 AM and one westbound around 4 AM. Those DE30 horns raise hell at every rail crossing. Even a half mile away you can't miss it. But you get used to the sound and even miss it when they are late.
Not everyone gets used to the sound ... if I recall correctly, the LIRR had to reduce the sound level of the DE30 horns thanks to some bellyaching area residents.
Yeah, frightened little children and whatnot. They had to move the horns to a more visible location, which ended up blocking the unit number so they had to move that... I liked the horns before the reconfig, (while on the train) you could swear there was another train honking at the same time, the echoes played tricks with your mind. Now, it's less noticeable.
But still, even as far as northern Rego Park I can hear the Lower Montauk trains honk at ~5:05 PM every day. Yes, that's right in the daytime in the middle of a city with all the buildings and blvds in the way you can still hear a train several miles away... I can't hear it in the morning, nor can I hear the westbound deadhead move at ~4:20 PM, which means the cab cars' horns ain't quite as loud as the engines'.
That re-cofiguration cost the taxpayers of NY a mere $125K per loco.
All to please some snobby NIMBY's. It is time we stop pleasing these small groups of people. If you live near an RR, then there's gonna be noise. I liked the original horn config on the DE/DM's, they did scare the heck out of you, but that is what the horn is for, to get your attention the train is coming.
The trouble with the original horn configuration was that the horn was mounted in a niche in the roof. So, the sound would spread sideways, instead of to the front of the trainwhere it is needed, i.e. at grade crossings.
All the newer stuff on Amtrak is the same way, their Genesis units and their F59PHI's out hee on the west coast. You can hear the damn trains five miles either side of the track, but stand at a crossing and you can hardly hear it bearing down on you.
The new Pacific Surfliner cab cars have their horns mounted in the best place I've ever seen on railroad equipment -- right above the coupler!!!! Pity anyone standing in front of the train if the engineer blows those horns.
That $125,000 price tag was NOT "per loco". That was what it cost to do ALL 46 units. It was approximately $2700 per unit to make the changes according to a contact I have in LIRR's Morris Park diesel shop.
The had to make a new horn mount for the front of each unit, run about 10 feet of piping to it, install a Viloco modulating air valve. The old piping was plugged, and the solenoid-operated valve mounted right under the horn (which is what gave it the sudden on/sudden off characteristic) was disconnected.
Thank You. I stand corrected
Could youse guys , maybe get closer and mount one of those babies on a MOW train to be parked on the "EL" for next years playoffs and Series at Yankee Staidum?
Jeeter hits a lone shot in the hole between center and left field...
BBBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooNK!
avid
Could youse guys , maybe get closer and mount one of those babies on a MOW train to be parked on the "EL" for next years playoffs and Series at Yankee Staidum?
Excuuuuuuuuuuuuse ME, but ** WRONG LINE ** ! ! !
Yankee Stadium is and always will be METRO NORTH territory (and a list of predecessor RRs for the history buffs). Use their horn.
You wanna use a LIRR horn? Park it at SHEA. *That's* on Long Island!
>>> You wanna use a LIRR horn? Park it at SHEA. <<<
But he suggested it for use during the World Series. Who knows how long it will be until there is one of those at Shea Stadium? :-)
Tom
They look like 5-chime horns but sound like shit. Did they strangle a few of the notes ?
The horns sound like crap because when the LIRR redid the piping, they didn't blow out the welding flux, etc. that got into the lines before they mounted the horns. First time the engineer pulls the handle, all the little pieces of crap in the pipe wind up in the 1/8" hole in the bottom of each individual horn. (Yep, all that noise comes from air going through a 1/8 inch hole!!) Result? Poor sound from that individual horn, making the unit sound awful.
Amtrak had this problem when the original AEM-7's were built; a contact who was high up in Amtrak's motive power department said that they went through the trouble to remove each horn, clean it out, blow out the lines, and reinstall the horns!! Actually, it's about half an hour's worth of work for each horn. Four 3/4-inch bolts is all that holds an air horn down to a locomotive, with a 1/2 inch hard rubber (i.e. hockey puck material...) gasket between the horn and the loco.
On the AEM-7 horn: Sounds if the morale factor at the EMD plant was on the down side as workers could not care less that EMD were losing their share of the locomotive market (quality workmanship died). EMD moved final assembly to London ONT in 93 then subcontracted assembly when more capacity was needed (such as the "Special" order from the LIRR).
Well given the LIRR's backyard toolshed style maintenance, the horns will never sound right.
LIRR has NEVER had decent sounding horns. NEVER!!
Back in the old days of the Fairbanks-Morse units, they converted all the road units to the expensive, high-maintenance Nathan Airchime M-3R1's. A well-tuned M-3R1 is one of the BEST sounding locomotive air horns in my book. They need constant adjusting to sound right....even when brand new. It was rare to hear one on the LIRR sounding very good. This lasted until the GP38-2's...which were delivered with Leslie S-3LRF's. Many of the GP38-2's got the old Nathan M-3R1's from the Alco's (and the way theysounded, I suspect they were the ones originally put on the F-M's, just rebuilt too many times). The last group of GP38-2's (272-277) were delivered with Nathan P-5A's. The 277 was switched almost immediately after delivery to an Airchime K-5LA and NEVER sounded right, like it couldn't get fullair pressure to the horn on that unit...but it was very musical.
I always wanted to know the name of that Alco/early EMD horn. So it's
Nathan Airchime M-3R1's. Most of them sounded all right. Some Pennsy E-8's had them too, I heard when I road the NNY&LB in 1972. One of the Power Packs had one up to the bitter end. Do you know of any still in use by other railroads ?
If anyone wants to know about almost ALL the air horns used by the railroads, I did co-author a couple of articles on them with Mr. Deane Ellsworth back in the mid-1970's issues of "Extra 2200 South". Photos of all the horns were in the article, as well as musical notes, etc.
I grew up (Kindergarden to 9th grade) near the Port Jeff branch. I would tell time by the PM rush hour and the grade crossing and new when I had to be home for dinner. Now if the train was running late I ended up being grounded for missing supper.
I live two blocks from 2 LIRR grade crossings, bookending the Cedarhurst station. I have found that earplugs, available in sets of 6 for 2 bucks at Duane Reade, blocks the honking out nicely during the overnight hours (not to mention my wife's snoring).
Ah, so *I* am not the only one with a snoring wife....
I bought her some of those "Breathe Right" strips, and by golly, they did cut the snoring down quite a bit.....
I lived in Bay Shore from 1964 to 1968 -- and if anyone's been out there, you know what *I* am getting at. Grade crossings EVERY block for a mile and a half!!! And a 65 mile an hour track speed to boot. While most trains did stop at Bay Shore, a few didn't....but ALL the engineers went crazy blowing for the crossings -- nice, long regulation 14-L signals!!!
It got to the point that I could tell which one of the C-420's or RS-3's was going through town just by the sound of those great Nathan Airchime M-3R1 horns!!!
I don't think you are going to get any sympathy from anybody on this board! Ah, the smell of a train! Ah, the rumbling of those engines! Most SubTalkers would salivate to live in your apartment and would have an (censored sexual word) over the fact of seeing a diesel worktrain visiting outside the window. It is not like this is a daily occurrence! Sorry to sound mean, but I'm sure that the railroad was there before you moved next to it and you must assume the occasional inconvenience involved of necessary track/roadbed maintance. Ringing the bell and sounding the horn at 11 AM is more considerate than at 6 AM! Generally you have the relative quietness (except for flat wheels) of electirc trains on a ballasted roadway vs. an elevated structure. Heck I live in Queens too! The airplanes occasionally fly right over my house! I don't like it, but the planes were overhead in Maspeth long before Bill was!
I'll never understand people who move into places where there are trains, planes, etc around making noise... if that sort of thing is really going to annoy you, don't move there. i'd never live towards woodside of jackson heights with all the airplane noise since i know it would get on my nerves after awhile...
If they were there 3 hours, ot doesn't sound like any sort of mjor rehab project that warrants the expense or even consideration of spending money to tell everyone in the area "we're doing work, at this time'. Even if they did make that effort, more than half the people wouldn't read about it and complain just the same.
railroads generally only shut down an engine for maintaince - thus if they're waiting around parked for a few hours, they're going to idle and pollute a bit. Think of it this way: that branch is all electric, right? consider folks who live along disel branches and have to smell that exaust all the time. an occasional work train is about as annoying as the occasional street repaving around town... it's got to be done, but it'll be done with soon enough...
no one wants to deal with noise on a sunday morning, i'm sure, but unfortunately, late night and weekends are the best time for them to get the work done without disrupting service and pissing off still more people.
The railroad lines were there before most of the housing. Anyone moving to a house or buying near a ROW has to realize it's there and there is a reason that homes may be a little cheaper near there. If the ROW is a potential problem to anyone considering moving near it, they should look elsewhere. The lines have to run through someone's neighborhood, and the tracks were there long before most of the homes.
You say you are a railfan? I would think a real railfan would welcome a diversion from the boring M-1's & M-3's that are normally only on the P. Washington Branch, especially on a day when you're off.
Perhaps you should move to Sea Cliff, it's a ghost town with little transit access, no laundromat, not even a place for Roast Pork Fried Rice. LIRR has a right to do what it wants, when it wants for it's ROW. They are doing some work on the PW branch with track closures on the weekend that is very nessecary. They may be putting in concrete ties so trains will ride smoother and quieter? Who are you to complain? Wanna trade apartments? You can enjoy having to travel 20 minutes for food while I can have access to an electrified branch of the LIRR and NYCT bus routes!
And with what happened in Bayside this morning I'd be out with my camera taking pics. Perhaps you should join the Sea Cliff forum!
I would gladly put up with hearing trains all the time, it has gotta be better then drunks at
How ironic that you are telling me to trade places with you in Sea Cliff. I adore Sea Cliff so much that I often stay at my best friend's place in Sea Cliff. He lives near the Russian church on Carpenter Ave.
Sea Cliff is a charming town, yes, very different from the other suburban communities, but guess what, I'd rather live somewhere quiet and peaceful than with the hussle and bussle of Bayside.
I just found that paricular situation rather rude of them to start their work project so early in the morning while most people are still asleep on Sunday morning.
What is the Sea Cliff forum anyway?....
"What is the Sea Cliff forum anyway?.... "
:-0 I was joking, there is no Sea Cliff forum.
I guess my real gripe was the fact that the the 2 Diesel locos were left to idle for so long which was annoying. Is it so difficult to restart these locos once they're off? It would have saved on fuel and certainly on the noise value. I live on the 3rd floor of an apart. building that is 2 blocks away of the station. I have lived here since 1984 and have put up with most of what the LIRR has to dish out in the way of noises. In 1989, I had to put up with the revised flight patterns that caused the planes to my area where they had never been before.
Yes, I do have the luxury of being close the station and hearing the M1s and the M3s, but listening the Diesel engines humming away on my line is not what I bargained for. Someone should have more sense to leave the locos on for such extend time since the engines did not provide any electrical current to the work team.
I guess thats why people living in Nassau and Suffolk near the ROWS are glad that the LIRR does not do heavy duty freight hauling like years ago. Noise has always been a issue with the LIRR in modern times.
It has been many years since I was an active railfan, but in the 1960's and 1970's most diesels were not shut down, but just idled until needed. I have seen diesels idle over night, waiting for their next assignment
Depending on the condition of the batteries, they might not restart if they were shut down.
It seems that the larger units are left running. When I lived up by Suffern, they used to leave them idling in the yard over the weekend, and I've seen some iding at Port Newark for at least a day.
The only equipment I've seen shut down and restarted are the TA's work units, which the operators shut down when they aren't actually moving anything. But I guess they are designed that way, otherwise they'd be smoking out the work crews.
Was the train parked by you supporting any work (in other words, was there actual track work or other maintenance going on) or was it just sitting there? If it was just sitting, perhaps a polite request to the LIRR to spot the train in a less-populated area would help. But then, from the stories I heard about the LIRR, I don't know if they would pay any attention.
Railroads in general alway leave their locos idling. At Port Jefferson yard they leave the weekday rush hour trains idling all weekend (or at least they did with the MP-15s and GP-38s). Ever try to get one of those puppies started from a complete shutdown? Bring a book or three.
You're complaining about them starting to make noise at 11:10 a.m.?????
If you don't want the smell or noise of the railroad equipment, then don't live near the tracks. That simple.
I live next to a major freeway in southern California. Along the south end of the complex (150' from my apartment) is Metrolink, Amtrak, BNSF freights, about a hundred trains a day total. And 600' ABOVE the roof are Boeing 737's, 757's, and Airbus 320's going into the county airport. RIGHT OVER my head.
I don't ever even pay attention to the noise. (Darn thing was, those three days in September, it was strangely quiet.) But I always laugh at fools who move in and then start complaining about the noise. Like they didn't SEE the freeway, and like a jet didn't go over while they were being shown the place....the trains, well, at the speed they're doing, you don't even notice them. But after abotu a week, new residents here are whinign already about the noise. CRYBABIES....that's what they are.
I think he was complaining about the diesels sitting there idling for three hours before that. To some of us that would have been music to our ears.
You live that close to a railroad? You lucky devil! Want a roomie? If you ever move out, I'll take that damn place! I know a guy in Brooklyn who lives so close to the J, that he can take a broom and touch the El with it! He says you become desensitized to the noise.
There could be a great option to utilize the tracks used by Amtrak (Hell Gate Line) and take two tracks and create a line to Co-Op City. Those tracks are used so rarely, that it would be a benifit, and it would give subway fans a delite. A line that goes from the Bronx to Queens to Midtown Manhattan, it might seem odd, but it would work or make it a Metro North Line. Either one would have beifits, and it would haul alot of passengers. It would work perfectly with the East Side Access Project. Opinions
Well, a question first: Does the planned LIRR East Side Access program (LIRR to GCT) provide an alignment for trains from GCT to go through lower-level 63rd Street tunnel and then get onto the Amtrak northbound route across the Hell Gate?
That'd be necessary for Metro North.
As for subway ... which line? how? from where?
Doesn't Amtrak need those tracks to Access Penn Station? Nice dream, put feasible....NO.
Feasible YES!! Metro North can get to Penn from the New Haven line via Amtrak (trackage rights), run a number of trains to Penn. Since the number of Amtraks using the line is not as many as the south end (NYC to DC), Amtrak trains won't suffer dramatic delays. Metro North's usage will make the tracks more active, with more to be seen on the bridge and the line. All the MTA and Amtrak has to do is sit down, plan the service out, even at a location or two in Queens (north end) and in the East and Southern Bronx areas make station stops where people (mainly the Bronx big time) could get to midtown faster, not to mention possibly be a means to alleviate the congestion on the Lexington Avenue line (#6 mainly, 5 as well) serving people in the south and eastern Bronx, giving them a quicker way to midtown, with less congestion. It could be feasible and work out, but you know as well as I do that the MTA top brass aren't real big thinkers!! Time will tell.....especially once someone with sense makes it to the top brass position.
Very hard to imagine swapping Amtrak runs for Metro North runs until they boost capacity at Penn Station (many years hence). Plus you gotta add third rail, now it's overhead catenary.
Metro North M-2, M-4 and M-6 equipment runs with overhead catenaries in Connecticut and eastern Westchester county. They are third rail shoe equipped for NYC operation and pantograph equipped for NE Corridor operation (12,500 volts for catenary, what NE Corridor north of NYC uses, and 700 volts for the MNRR 3rd rail zones)
M-2 cars running up to New Haven use catenary just east of New Rochelle Station, I believe. Third rail is prohibited in Ct, anyway, so that accounts for the dual mode electrics on the New Haven lines into and out of GCT. MNCRR should not have a problem with that at all.
It could be feasible and work out, but you know as well as I do that the MTA top brass aren't real big thinkers!!
It's called the Metro-North Penn Station Access Study.
http://www.mta.info/planning/psas/index.html
They are indeed thinking about it. But I don't think there is enough capacity at Penn Station to allow enough service to be worth the effort at this time. We'd probably have to wait until LIRR can divert some trains in GCT before you get the ability to schedule any kind of reasonable rush-hour service into Penn via Hell Gate.
I thought something like this wasa on the table years ago,but was dismissed by the MTA brass.... for not being feasable...what ever thats suppose to mean.
Not feasible....the only thing that made it not feasible is the fact that the top brass who are dumb as mules yet overpaid would suffer a drop in their six digit paychecks when the money MTA as a whole makes is used for something useful, like this idea as a new line to better serve the riding public in the New York metro area. This line is a good idea, but as I said we are dealing with top brass who are dumb as mules and don't know their brains from washrags. Whatever brains they do have they oughta apply it towards serving the riding public in NY and making travel in NY better......get more people out of their cars and onto the trains. They'll someday begin to think about something other than their paychecks.
On a similar note, what about a connection from the M line to the New York connecting Railroad, which is right next to it at Metro Ave anyway, to bring the line up to Queens Boulevard, and beyond, along next to the freight tracks which only uses one track anyway. It would also be good for some intermmediate service, that has no service now.
This idea seems good, but won't work. Think of this, if the state and city approves the building of a freight rail tunnel from NJ to Bay Ridge rail yards for NYAR & NYCH, which is being considered and pushed forward as we speak by Giuliani and Gov. Pataki, freight service could see a dramatic increase on this line since it could make for CSXT to have a whole new freight route from the west and the south to New England, not to mention the already increased traffic now, even consideration of a second track there now.
build tunnel from Verizano Narrows bridge to R train in brooklyn. Then have R train go up South beach line to st.george and then to NJ along north shore and maybe to newerk airport.
it can and ought to be done as follows - just to piss off the NINBYS: a big elevated line over the freight tracks, a-la the air train over the van wyck. =P
Very good point. The M at Metropolitian is right next to the end of the Bay Ridge freight line. It is two tracks at that point, BUT if the CP, P&W, and NY & Atl pump up the float business like they want to OR if the tunnel to NJ ever gets built, THEN that line will get very busy with freight.
Mr rt__:^)
and IIRC the Pennsy in its wisdom originally had a 4 track ROW. so plenty of capacity.
Right. The New Haven line to Hell Gate was four track, and it handled both passenger and freight traffic. Over the years, the tracks were removed, but the ROW remains.
Actually I think they provided for 6, with the two outter most being trolley. Go up to the bridge & look, you'll see what I mean.
Mr rt__:^)
Actually I think they provided for 6, with the two outter most being trolley.
Did the Hell Gate Bridge ever have 6 operating tracks? Did trolleys ever run over the bridge? (from where to where?)
not that i know of. 4 is all there is width for, and there were 4 until sometime before the 90's, when the norther/easternmost freight track was taken out and/or dismantled.
There is room for only four tracks. They were numbered (from geographical-not RR-South) 1,2,5 and 6. Tracks 3 and 4 from the Harlem River Yard join the NY Connecting in the Bronx (tracks 2 and 5 separate as the Hell Gate line crosses Bronx Kill.) BTW, these track designations might not predate the Conrail-AMTRAK era.
Track 6 has been out of service for at least 15 years, and might be the source of confusion as to how wide the HG bridge is.
EGGS!
Eye agree with the Joe. They probally provided for 6 but never used more then 4.
Mr rt__:^)
If there's one bridge that could easily handle subway trains, it's got to be Hell Gate Bridge. It's so strong, you could have stacked Triplexes on it and it would have responded, "Heh!! Is that the best you can do?"
I think you're confused with the Queensboro Bridge, which once ran trolleys on its outer roadways.
When did they take down the elevator that was from the middle of the bridge to Welfare Island?
Dunno - it must have been decades ago.
Sorry, wrong bridge. Try the Queensboro bridge for the elevator to Welfare Island.
Sorry, wrong bridge. Try the Queensboro bridge for the elevator to Welfare Island.
Right. Except now it's called ROOSEVELT Island and has been for at least 30 years! And it has its own subway stop, so presumably less need for the elevator ....
What is the latest on that tunnel they had planned there. I know Gulianni was a strong fighter for this, but I haven't heard anything in a long time. (even before the news was taken over by the events of Sept 11)
Funny how I just thought to ask this as someone posted the Daily News article, which I didn't see before I posted this. That answers my question!
metro north, maybe - they talk of doing it from time to time, but a subway? That'll never happen.
Using the AMTRAK ROW for MNRR would be no problem as the two share ROW through Ct. This would provide MNRR from Ct. West Side access that they don't have now. Not a bad thought BUT, Penn station is currently at capacity + during peak hours.
However, NYCT would not gain much, if anything by this. What is the market for subway service Bronx - Queens. Not much, I'm afraid. At least not enough to justify the legal and contractual issues raised by converting the NYCT to FRA standards which would be necessary under your suggestion. Putting track in every available space is what model railroaders do. When you are talking about $millions per mile, you need to do your homework.
Just run a certain nnumber of Metro North (selected services) from Penn via Amtrak NE Corridor north to New Haven, as capacity warrants. If there is a space zone where the runs could be added, find a way to add them. The idea is good, and promising. Ask the MTA brass to do the homework!!
I asked about that once a couple of months ago, and was told that PENN station was full to capacity and there was no room for any more trains. Pity.
We have to wait until LIRR can go to Grand Central, then they may have more capacity at PENN
1. it would have to have fare higher than a 1.50 to support the cost of building it.
2. Hell Gates is overhead wire, NO third rail
3. FRA territory, you would have to run specially modified cars over the bridge
4. where will it connect to in bronx? pelham line term? good idea, too little traffic.
Who says run a subway there. Metro North can run on it and make for the service there. M-2, M-4, and M-6 all operate both as 3rd Rail and via overhead catenary, enabling it to operate on the LIRR end and the Hell Gate line of Amtrak. Good idea.....FRA railcars, no need to modify anything....and believe me anyone who is tired of the slowness and delays on the Lex line would love the faster trip to midtown, especially since Amtrak doesn't make big big use of this end of the NE Corridor like it does on the south end to DC from Penn. And those people using the service to avoid the craziness of the Lex line delays would more than likely not mind the little extra fare to ride to midtown faster and less delayed. Ridership from Bronx stations on the Harlem and Hudson lines are good because those there are people who wanna get to GCT avoiding the 4,5,6 mad house. I think this could work as well in the favor of the east and southern Bronx commuters, giving them another option to get to midtown with fewer delays amd a better ride....faster too. This idea is good....all the MTA top brass has to do is something none of them know how to do.....THINK!! PLAN!!
USE THE BRAIN GOD GAVE THEM!!! Someday they will have someone to do all that, and maybe transit in the NYC Metro area will be improved significantly. Mr. Rivera should keep the ideas flowing, the Hell Gate idea is promising.
Note MNRR third rail is different from subway/LIRR third rail. You would have to install a new shoe with a new switch in the cab.
Let MNCRR use catenary only in PENN, if that ever comes to happen. No need for extra third rail shoes.
I like third rail cause there are no wires to fall but then you can't run high voltage without the possiablity of arcing. Even though I like third rail more than overhead but overhead is technological supirior.
I think you can handle further distances also, with overhead wire than with third rail
Let MNCRR use catenary only in PENN, if that ever comes to happen. No need for extra third rail shoes.
Nope. MNRR's only catenary line is the New Haven. The study looks at running all three east-of-Hudson lines (Hudson, Harlem, New Haven) into Penn (from both the east and west) ... 2 of them use only third rail.
I didn't think of that. If they assign some Metro North Trains to Penn, only Hudson and Marlem Trains, only Metro North can use the tracks assigned to them because of the third rail issue. How do they expect to solve that problem?
FL9s can run on both over-the-rail and under-the-rail sections.
So could the old "Standards" EMUs in the Western suburbs of Paris,
France. They could make shoes that can run on both.
How does that work on the FL9's? Goes up or down? Do the new Genesis units have that capability?
I didn't think of that. If they assign some Metro North Trains to Penn, only Hudson and Marlem Trains, only Metro North can use the tracks assigned to them because of the third rail issue. How do they expect to solve that problem?
Well, the West Side Line is easy. Don't think it has any electricity on it since it's used by Hudson Line trains to Albany and points north and west ... no catenary. So, add MN-spec third rail. Dunno what you do inside the Penn Station yard complex, maybe dedicated MN tracks?
New Haven Line is tougher. Do MN and Amtrak use same kind of catenary?
>>Do MN and Amtrak use same kind of catenary? <<
Yes. The very same wires are use by all trains on the Noerthest Corridor.
I think FL-9's have automatic dual position shoes.
Nice idea, but there are too many obstacles, like not enough traiifc from the Bronx to Queens to justify the connection, NIMBYs, the FRA, the costs, and I could go on and on. The Second Ave. subway still is not up and running, and it may languish for many more years to come.
You have a great deal of vision, and many wonderful ideas, but there are those out there who would throw an anchor to a drowning man because it is what they want. Keep those ideas coming, and never give up, because one day you just might have a gold mine on your hands.
I think it might be best for MNRR-New Haven Line to take the line. From Grand Central go thru the lower level tunnel at 63 St to Sunnyside yard. A new connection would have to be made to connect with the Amtrak tracks going across the Hell Gate Bridge to the South Bronx. Use the abondoned stops formally on the old Westchester to the E180 St area and then use the abondoned stops from there to the City Line on the New Haven. After it crosses the border it would continue running normal to Conn.
Excellent but how about a train using the compleate original New york, Westchester and boston railroad ROW to the end (Port Cheaster)
I believe much of that line has been torn up, built over with houses and the like, or allowed to revert back to nature, and trying to get it back for rail use would cause more headaches than it would be worth, not to mention the NIMBY factor, so you might have to forget that. Nice idea, though.
The ends of the NYW&B has been both nature and residence claimed. Not to mention good ol' #5 makes up the south end of the NYW&B.
Well for naughty neibors I have a TBM waiting to be use. They will notice no difference because it goes under there house with out touchung it. Anyways I would like a subway in my backyard.
The difficulty arises when that time comes and you want to SELL your house - and the market for it is zero because of its location. I love trains, but not everyone else does, and that is reality. Then there is the spouse, who has considerable input into major decisions and major purchases. In the past, railroad infrastructure was built without regard to who lived where, largely because most of the land where the ROW was to be located was vacant or thinly populated. Now, there is a large assortment of legal issues which must be addressed before one shovelful of earth is turned.
TBM with insulation? Or a law that a houses market value can't be reduced because of a nearby ROW.
The chances of that happening are very remote, so it would be like betting on a jackass in a racehorse race. No good.
Wishful thinking. But it won't happen!
First of all, transit often boosts housing values in the vicinity. Second, if people on the RoW complain, about descreased value you can make a permiment unlimited transit pass a part of the property. Every person legally residing on the property would be able to use transit for free. It costs MN or whoever next to nothing and provides just compensation to property owners.
With a limit so they don't start selling the unlimited rides!
Also thats not wishfull thinking cause thats already done on MNRR.
On commuter rail it would just be a special photo ID pass.
smart!
It will be reduced in value, because alot of people don't want to live near a ROW. No law will stop it from being reduced.
I guess you don't know what market value is.
Build an underground RR under a neighborhood? Sounds like a good idea. But the NIMBY's wouldn't like that one bit.
Well can't a lawyer say it benifits more people than it hurts by a vast ratio. Also were being nice that this isn't a grade leval type construction were talking about here.
Well can't a lawyer say it benifits more people than it hurts by a vast ratio.
The law works the other way right now. If anyone is affected in any way, you have to pander to their complaints to get anything built ... and even if you do, you still might not be allowed to build anything. The fact that it benefits many more people than it hurts is not a valid argument. Otherwise, we'd have a subway to LGA by now.
Then how did moses do it? He drew a staight line on a pic of the bronx skyline and it was built. Also doesn't the State have a right to condem and seize? or offer an alternative of building over? Maybe there should be anti-legal harrasment laws made so if the person sues because he wants money from potential profit when he sells his property, he will lose and the property will be seized:)
That is not how it works. The NIMBY crowd has politically connected friends in the State House who can and will block any proposal that is not to their liking. They can tie up a proposal in comittee for years so that it dies without even getting before the full body. If a lawsuit is filed, motions can be filed to delay the case so that years go by before an appointment is even made, and the litigant may be dead by the time the case is heard. Plus, life for anyone who displeases them can be made very uncomfortable, if you know what I mean. You have to do your homework on this one, because your opponents will surely have done theirs.
Let's see. Polluting highway in my back yard, OK. Airport in my back yard, OK. Nuclear plant in my back yard, OK. Naval base with missiles in my back yard, OK. Nonpoluting, efficient, cheap, reliable, safe, property value increasing train in my back yard, NO WAY! What is the matter with people? I'd love to live next to an El.
Then line up some political support for your viewpoint, and then you may get some clout. Otherwise, no way. You must do your homework, because the other guy will surely have done his.
Then how did moses do it?
Part of the reason why it's so difficult to build anything over NIMBY objection is because Moses did what he did. People got angry that the city and state could just build highways etc. through their neighborhoods, and the resulting changes in the way public works projects get built have caused today's situation, where practically nothing big can get built without spending millions of dollars and many years on planning studies and court cases.
how about njt-metronorth-lirr join service to the newark airport stop. there alot of land for turn around yard. of course you need the extra tunnels under the river
Would the joint service be going thru Grand Central or Penn Station? Thru service via Penn would be easier. To do likewise thru GCT means a new tunnel built in Manhattan as well as the Hudson.
I can't remember which, but there were studies into the idea of a tunnel from Penna into GCT, which were for all intents and purposes endorsed by the RPA. I think it was Penn Station Access.
No, the Penn Station Access Study is the MTA study on how/whether to reroute some Metro-North trains into Penn Station via the Hell Gate line or the West Side line.
The Access to the Region's Core study is including consideration of both another rail tunnel under the Hudson and a Penn Station-GCT link.
Where did the NYw&B go south of 180th ST is there still ROW there?
South of 180 St the Westchester ran on the current Amtrak line to the South Bronx. Some of the abondoned platforms are still standing there. However the connection from the Westchester to Amtrak is no longer there. MTA built a bus depot there. I had read that work trains coming from Linden Shops in Brooklyn could go to 180 St via LIRR Bay Ridge Branch and the NY Connecting Railroad to the Hell Gate and then via Amtrak to 180 St. But that was a while ago.
You'd have to plow thru a good part of Westchester County to do that.
I don't think a route via Queens would really be necessary for MNRR-New Haven unless rail usage increased to the point where the upper level at Grand Central reached capacity. But it would give the railroad an option of redirecting trains through the 63rd St. tunnel if there was some problem between 63rd St. and the Harlem-NH line split in the Bronx.
And if enough LIRR trains could be diverted to Grand Central, I'd like to see them electrify the West Side line south of the Harlem River bridge, which would give MNRR-Hudson line trains the option of going to Penn Station if there were some problem between Spuyten Duyvil and 63rd St. that backed up trains there.
Now that is what I like to see - some forward thinking. An alternate route like that would be a real godsend in case of an emenrgency condition blocking one of the lines. Good thinking.
If anything rerouting New Haven service via the Hell Gate would reduce congestion coming down Park Ave. Maybe there isn't much there now. But this way Hudson and Harlem service would be on the upper level and New Haven and LIRR would be on the lower level. MTA could make an agreement with Amtrak about using the Westside line. But I don't know how well Metro North and Amtrak can co-exist on the same line. How many tracks are there from Penn Station to Spuyten Duyvil? 4 tracks are one thing. 2 tracks would be another.
The WSFL is two tracks up to the Harlem River, where it joins the 4 track Hudson line. Capacity may be a problem, but since the line would need to be electrified and then resignalled, that will be addressed.
The WSFL is two tracks up to the Harlem River, where it joins the 4 track Hudson line. Capacity may be a problem, but since the line would need to be electrified and then resignalled, that will be addressed.
BUT, the actual West Side Connector (takes off from the old freight line north of Javits to feed into Penn) is just ONE track. They had to thread it through a lot of stuff including support columns for a big building above, and even at that they had to transfer loads and then remove one column footing.
I think that single-track section could be a bottleneck, though MNRR in their studies doesn't flag it. Yet.
In fact, part of the Amtk west side line is 2-track. You can see them from the HH Pkway in upper Manhattan. It narrows to 1 track to cross the Spuyten VDuyvil swing bridge. But this bridge once carried 2 tracks, and I bet it could again.
I recall that the Amtrak West Side line once had three or four tracks at some points. Laying new track is relatively easy.
The real question is station capacity at both Penn and Grand Central.
I recall that the Amtrak West Side line once had three or four tracks at some points. Laying new track is relatively easy.
NewHavenJohn & SteveBoatti: No, no, NO! The "West Side CONNECTOR" is the short but crucial piece of new track (c. 1990 or so) that takes off from the West Side LINE to feed into Penn Station.
THIS is what's single-tracked. It was major construction ($30 million in mid-'80s $$$ IIRC) that had to go through foundations under private property. Remember, Amtrak was formed about 1970 but it took another 20 years to consolidate all their NYC operations into Penn Station. It was a pretty cool construction project. Like the 63rd Street Connector, short in distance but complex in design and construction.
You could probably do four tracks on the West Side Line from the bridge to the Connector ... but you still have to neck down to a single run of track to get from the West Side LINE into Penn Station.
I stand corrected.
As a rail line is only as good as its least tracked portion, this means that there is not too much chance to put more MN trains into Penn.
If the 7 is extended to the Javits Center, could a line be run south from the Amtrak west side track to meet the 7?
As a rail line is only as good as its least tracked portion, this means that there is not too much chance to put more MN trains into Penn.
Someone who's more operational than I am can tell us maximum inflow/outflow. Nice thing is, Amtrak doesn't run THAT many Empire Line trains, so there's gotta be room for 1-2 MN trains/hour in and out.
The Hudson Line is pretty busy but they seem to accommodate everyone. I've laid by once in awhile on a MN train to POK as an Amtrak goes roaring by. Of course generally we pass it again sooner or later!
If the 7 is extended to the Javits Center, could a line be run south from the Amtrak west side track to meet the 7?
Well, given sufficient $$$, sure. By why on earth would you? Dumping passengers from commuter suburbs at the Javits Center is kinda useless. Remember, you can't get there from here. Much, much, MUCH better to run 'em into Penn Station where there are 2 N-S subways and the east end of the complex is 7th Avenue. Remember Javits is on 12th.
If you have a single track going to Penn (how long is it?), you are restricted in two-way operation. The Amtrak service isn't going to matter -- it's the question of what you do with MN trains once the reach Penn.
There are two ways to get these trains out of Penn -- send them to Long Island or send them back. If you have trains going both ways on the connector, it could get rather tricky once delays take place.
Too bad they got rid of the freight line that used to run down the west side of Manhattan to around (I believe) Canal Street. If they had kept that open, we could have another lower Manhattan access route.
Too bad they got rid of the freight line that used to run down the west side of Manhattan to around (I believe) Canal Street. If they had kept that open, we could have another lower Manhattan access route.
They didn't. It's called The High Line, and it still exists down to 14th Street. There is a well-connected community group that wants to turn it into a linear park, and they have just sued NYC to force them to comply with their own land-use processes and hold public hearings on the proposed demolition of the trestle, which the Giuliani administration is trying to ram through before departing.
They have quite a nice Friends of the High Line that gives you all the details.
Thanks for clarifying. The MTA Planning Sudy (preliminary alternatives document) does I.D. "possible double tracking of the Empire Connection" as a need for this route.
Also, I discovered that that document has TRACK MAPS of the Metro-North system (at least as far as Croton, North White and Stamford. Someone asked about these a couple of days ago.
The MTA Planning Sudy (preliminary alternatives document) ... document has TRACK MAPS of the Metro-North system (at least as far as Croton, North White and Stamford.
Is the paper version, or are they available online? (I wonder if they'd have been yanked off the Web since 9/11 .... ) If only on paper, how does one get a copy? I'd LOOOOOVE to have those track maps.
Go to MTA website, click on Planning Studies (lower left of page), then clickk on Access to Penn Station. On the Penn Station page, in the text at the bottom, click on Preliminary Alternatives. You will need Acrobat 4.0 to open that document. Within this long document, there are various alternatives, and in 3 of them, there are "figures" that show track maps of the MNRR system. They do not have a track map of Grand Central, however. There are various rail books that have GCT track maps. I don't rmemeber which ones.
Aha. I had been just reading the results of the initial screening -- didn't get to read all the others. Cool, and thanks!
Two issues here--ultimately linked. Do we expect ATK or successors to ever need more than two tracks? If we think yes, then as TD points out no Subway withou FRA . But, even if the tracks remain FRA there are possibilities. I have suggested before and still believe MN/CGOT servce from Jamaica would be useful. We have a growing suburb to suburb commute market even befor the attack. Secondly, when AirTrain is in service a CDOT connection for airport users will be useful. Very little new track need be built--mostly the issues are third rails and catenary. Nothing technically difficult only politics and traditions.
Good idea I don't have to go to GCT all the time
I can see the benefit's of a MNRR line on those tracks
-Non stop express from New Rochelle to Penn Station
-A possible connection to the 6 at Pelham bay park
-Since the tracks run within a few miles of the 6 there should be little complaints with NIMBY people South of Stillwell Avenue(Not the one with the amusement park)
-Amtrak can run trains into Grand Central as a commuter rail line(which is good for the MTA because more money will come into that station)
-Amtrak trains can still use the bridge for trains going south of Washington D.C.
-The fact that MNRR trains can go into Penn station(Which I previously mentioned)
Though to every good thing there's at least 1 bad thing
-Because I don't think the bridge has 4 tracks ,2 other tracks will be needed if Amtrak want's to continue running trains on the bridge.
-The stations already used by the MNRR might be abandoned(I should know,a Q local train at rush hour is empty until Prospect Park)because people like fast rail service.
Hell gates has space for four tracks, 3 were open when the bridge was opened and now it is 2 tracks. The space for the fourth track was used in constrution. If you want to check without a Amtrak ticket see how many overhead wires there are (porcelin insulators).
Isn't there a third track for freight trafic?
I believe there are 3 open tracks -- 2 for Amtrak and one for freight.
The line has great capacity for future commuter rail expansion if there is a market for it. First of all, you will probably not see any service into Penn Station due to tunnel constraints. The Hell Gate bridge is 4 track, 3 of which currently are in service with one being a slow speed, non-signaled freight track. Most of the New Yoek Connecting RR line from New Rochelle is a 4 or 6 track RoW. However there are some problems, namely:
-Most of the overpasses have been de-constructed (ie non-used trackbeds have been removed).
-Pellham Bay drawridge is only two tracks. There is room for a second span (the footings exist), but it would have to be entirely new.
-There might also be a problem with that bridge over the Bronx river. It is no wider then 4 tracks, but w/ the freight service on the branch you might need 5 or 6 tracks.
-The connection with the LIAR Main Line from GATE to HAROLD is only 2 tracks.
For the bridge you can have high speed frieght. Ever THNIK about it MTA.
If everyone would go to the MTA website and click on Planning Studies, they would see that this is an active study by the MTA -- to run NH line trains over the Hell Gate into Penn -- as well as Hudson and Harlem line trains into Penn via the Amtrak West Side line. There is quite a detailed discussion of alternative routes and transit modes.
"Those tracks are used so rarely, that it would be a benifit, and it would give subway fans a delite."
Lines aren't built for railfans, they're built for passengers. While Co-op City is in Dyre (sorry) need of rapid transit, the Hell Gate tracks are in an awkward position, way off to the East. As such, there is a reason those tracks are used so rarely.
MATT-2AV
Here's what I'd do:
1) Buy the Hell Gate line from Amtrak, along with Penn Station. Heck, they're desperate for cash, and that means pennies on the dollar prices (let's face it, wavbe $500 million in front of them they'd jump for it). Change Penn to 12kv 60Hz like Amtrak should have done 25 years ago.
2) Reconfigure Penn Station for commuter service, from track level up.
3) New MNRR stations :South New Rochelle (a tad south), Co-op city, somewhere in the Bron (no, that's not the name, just the location!), Astoria (connect with N - hey, let's extend the N to LGA, and we get direct service from CT to the airport!)
4) Use M-2/4/6 cars
5) Tell Amtrak they now get 15 minutes max at Penn Station for each train. End the layup in Penn crap. This gets us capacity.
6) Look into run through services with NJT. Maybe cross share Arrows, and run Newark to Stamford, etc.
7) Rewire the Bronx line like it should have been 15 years ago, and straighten the curves.
8) As a future thing, maybe buy up the freight portion from ConJob, and wire it to where it intersects with the LIRR line. Make a small junction here, and run to Jamacia. TaDa! A totally useless, but cool route from New Haven to LI. MN could then run say, Hicksville to Bridgeport, and other services. The LIRR could offer Greenwich to Montauk, thus connecting two vital pockets of supernobbishness in the area
9) of course, this could all be done pretty cheaply, and be really usefull, but it'll never happen :(
>>8) As a future thing, maybe buy up the freight portion from ConJob, and wire it to where it intersects with the LIRR line. Make a small junction here, and run to Jamacia. TaDa! A totally useless, but cool route from New Haven to LI. MN could then run say, Hicksville to Bridgeport, and other services. The LIRR could offer Greenwich to Montauk, thus connecting two vital pockets of supernobbishness in the area <<
NH to LI would be far from useless. It would connect with AirTrain, thus giving CT and Upstaters a one-change conenction to JFK.
"Tell Amtrak they now get 15 minutes max at Penn Station for each train. End the layup in Penn crap. This gets us capacity."
You DO realize that Amtrak operates not only Acela/NEC trains but also LONG-DISTANCE trains out of Penn, right?!? There's no way in hell to have a long-distance train like the Lake Shore Limited occupy a platform for no more than fifteen minutes and still do what has to be done.
Actually I agree w/ Phil on this one. ATK makes little effort to expedite either loading or discharging trains. (unless you count the stampede for late running trains when finally announced) Look at the 'dwell' for the supposed high speed Acela Expresses. All of the train support work should be at Sunnyside as in PRR times.
ATK makes little effort to expedite either loading or discharging trains. (unless you count the stampede for late running trains when finally announced) Look at the 'dwell' for the supposed high speed Acela Expresses. All of the train support work should be at Sunnyside as in PRR times.
Could well be ... but commuter trains don't have to load either luggage or food. Amtrak does. And IMHO Amtrak does a far better job of emptying their toilets than LIRR.
3) New MNRR stations :South New Rochelle (a tad south), Co-op city, somewhere in the Bron (no, that's not the name, just the location!), Astoria (connect with N - hey, let's extend the N to LGA, and we get direct service from CT to the airport!)
What ever happened to the planned extention of the N to LaGuardia?
no one of any 'importance' wants it. nimbys, the tlc, etc.
watched a quicky pbs history of NYC last night, and judging by the way Moses rammed his highway projects and 'urban renewal' (ie: housing projects) down the collective throat of the city, it's of little surprise that nimbysism rose in this town to the degree it's at.
Have you ever been to where Amtrak going to Hell Gate goes over the Ditmars Blvd Station on the N? It's quite a distance going up and down.
I didn't say it should go up the the Hell Gate Bridge, just an extention of the Astoria el to La Guardia. It was a little off topic from the original post, but someone had mentioned extention to LAG in a response.
Have you ever been to where Amtrak going to Hell Gate goes over the Ditmars Blvd Station on the N?
I didn't say it should go up the the Hell Gate Bridge, just an extention of the Astoria el to La Guardia.
No, he meant in response to the previous posting:
New MNRR stations: South New Rochelle (a tad south), Co-op city, somewhere in the Bron (no, that's not the name, just the location!), Astoria (connect with N ... )
Connecting a new MNRR line to the N would require a major vertical connection 'cause the Hell Gate approach is far above the N at Ditmars.
It would also destroy the Ditmars shopping area.
How? By adding to the traffic? Businesses love traffic.
All you need is an elevator from the street to the Astoria El and then to the Railroad.
I misread the earlier post. I thought he meant a track connection.
It's still on the MTA's radarscope. It's main opponent was Vallone, and now that he's left office, it may have a better chance of proceeding.
It has a much better chance of proceeding.
read: it'll still never happen
It's not the highest priority project now. Rebuilding South Ferry, completing the Manny B repairs, East Side Access (no NIMBY there), getting 2nd Av subway off the ground (no NIMBY there either) and even extending the 7 to help lower Manhattan's recovery are getting a lot of attention.
And with EWR and JFK now having rail access (or getting it soon), giving it to LGA is not as urgent (???) - perhaps MTA is looking at the NIMBY problem and putting off a decision.
Never say never - you might have to eat crow...
Wouldn't a trainline to LGA have a stop for Rikers Island? I got on a bus at Queensboro Plaza into Manhattan one night and I was greeted by a segment of the population that few see outside of jury service. Peter
There might be a transfer at Riker's Island. More than likely it will be on the Queens side of the bridge there. Probably there won't.
I remember one time I was working at Queens Plaza. There was this one woman crying. She said "I left my son at Riker's Island!". I had to avoid looking at her because I was laughing at that.
Not much to laugh about there. Her son must have broken her heart. :0(
I was thinking the same way.
i'd doubt they'd make such a stop at the end of th bridge - nobody would want anyone even related to someone on that island on the subway.
i fully suspect there will be a rail link to lga someday, though i highly doubt it will be an extended N line. i think i've just seen one too many threads about it not to say 'never' now... =)
And with EWR and JFK now having rail access (or getting it soon), giving it to LGA is not as urgent (???) - perhaps MTA is looking at the NIMBY problem and putting off a decision.
Not to mention the Newark and JFK rail accesses come from both directions, whereas an N train extension only really helps people from Manhattan and Astoria.
The whole idea of airport access by rail is widely viewed as being for passengers. In reality, it's projected to be at least 50% employee access. And I bet that few of LaGuardia's employees live in the parts of Manhattan served by the N train.
Robert Moses did more than try to wreck the subways. As Parks Commissioner, he tried to replace trees with pavement.
Happily, New York has undone some of that damage. Point your browsers to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/02/nyregion/thecity/02BROT.html
Good it will put abandoned parking lots to good use. Also it will have more vegiation which helps reduce polution levals in the City.
I'm not sure about one thing. If service was to go over the Hell Gate Bridge, would it go to Grand Central or to Penn Station?
63st tunnel, there was supposed to be a connection to sunnyside yard.
So it would go to Grand Central?
It might go to Grand Central provided that the connection via the lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel is completed. Otherwise, such trains would have to go to Penn Station.
#3 West End Jeff
I think MTA is trying to avoid using Amtrak's ROW. Every once in a when Amtrak goes out on strike the LIRR is not able to use Penn Station. Service from Long Island goes nuts when trains have to terminate at Jamaica or Flatbush or Hunters Point or Long Island City. That is why MTA is pushing for the 63 St tunnel.
I definitely agree that the 63rd Street tunnel is a necessity for the LIRR.
#3 West End Jeff
If the 63 st connector is finished then both.until then Penn Station
The 63rd Street tunnel has another set of tubes in it. However, I thought the LIRR was supposed to go to GTC. Only Amtrak goes over Hell Gate. You could send Metro North over Hell Gate, as well. Amtrak, LIRR and Metro North should all be using GCT in addition to Penn. It has over 100 tracks, and is certainly capable of handling the service. Anyway, Amtrak used to use GCT until the West Side connector was built from the West Side freight line. Aren't they planning a connection between Penn and GCT as well? How about New Jersey Transit stopping at GCT. New York would certainly be considered a very hot railspot then!
I'm always wondering about the people managing the the tracks at GCT, would they feel overwhelmed?
They managed the tracks in the good old days.
I thought the idea of this thread was to discuss if the subway or MN could travel over the Hell Gate and go to GC. I chose MN as going that route and explained what route it would go. It would be somewhat minor repair work. Rebuild the stations that were on the Westchester (south of E180 St) and the Amtrak line from that point up to City Line when the New Haven line currently comes in from Wakefield. Maybe the work would not be so minor. But it would be easier to do than to build tunnels from 42/Park south to 34/Park then connecting tunnels to 34/7.
"Amtrak, LIRR and Metro North should all be using GCT in addition to Penn."
I see the advantages to the commuter trains, and I would love to see GCT as the intercity gateway to New York City instead of Penn Basement, but IMHO Amtrak is better off having ONE downtown station in any city served by more than one route so that passengers changing trains don't have to lug their bags on a cab, subway, or bus to get from one station to the other. IIRC, the only place where Amtrak has (actually, will have, as of Dec. 15) split stations is Boston, where it is an unfortunate NECESSITY. To purposely contrive to make people ride subways or cabs to change trains in New York when they don't have to now would be utterly ludicrous.
"Anyway, Amtrak used to use GCT until the West Side connector was built from the West Side freight line."
And the connector was built so that Amtrak could have ONE New York City station for the convenience of passengers changing trains.
The lower level of the 63rd St tunnel was built for the purpose of providing the LIRR access to Grand Central Station. Metro-Morth trains already have direct access to Grand Central Station via the Park Ave. viaduct so running MNRR trains over the Hells Gate Bridge into Grand Central would be longer and of no advantage except for rail fans. West-Side access would be the only advantage.
The only possible advantage would be J.I.C. the Park Ave ROW was totally brought to her knees and given the "coup de grace" by a state or federal Legislature full of posturing Flagwavers.
avid
Actually, the late 1960s plan for the lower level of the 63rd Street Tunnel was for LIRR trains to access a NEW terminal on E. 48th Street in the vicinity of Third Avenue.
David
Really, it wasn't meant to go to Grand Central originily?
I think MTA was going to build a new terminal on the East Side. But when MTA was able to get Grand Central, they decided to take that instead.
The 1960s plan, as I said, was to go to the new Metropolitan Transportation Center. By the 1970s it was apparent that there would be no money to build the center. The LIRR-to-Grand Central idea got going in earnest in the late 1990s, though I believe it was discussed earlier, perhaps as early as the '70s.
David
The 1974 MTA Annual Report (page 21) talks about "technical studies" of improvements to LIRR service:
"Two studies concern plans for a new Midtown terminal. One plan is for a new terminal under Third Avenue in the vicinity of 48th Street, connecting with the lower level of the new 63rd Street tunnel under the East River, which will be used by Long Island Rail Road trains. An alternative plan would use a portion of Grand Central Terminal as the LIRR's East Midtown Terminal."
The 1973 annual report (page 25) also refers to the idea, but more briefly.
David
So I take it that in 1973 and 1975 the plan was for either 3 Ave/E48 St OR Grand Central and later on it was decided Gtand Central?
From page 15 of the 1977 MTA Annual Report:
"In July 1977, the MTA Board approved Grand Central Terminal as the site for the proposed East Side Midtown Terminal of the LIRR rather than another proposal to construct a new transportation center in Manhattan at East 48th Street and Third Avenue." The reason given was EXTREME opposition to the E. 48th Street location by elected officials and Turtle Bay residents. They determined that the cost would be about the same for either alternative, and connections to NYCT(A) facilities would be better at Grand Central. They were looking for $400 million for design and construction (I don't know whether that was to be the total price).
Guess that settles that...and guess that the more things change, the more they stay the same!
David
For once I agree with the NIMBYS. Grand Central is the best place for the LIRR access.
The MTA planning study on Penn Sta. access (available on the MTA website) has identified many benefits. These include eliminating the need for West Side commuters to transfer to subways, increasing Metro-North capacity into Manhattan, as well as easier connections to Amtrak, NJT, etc. The planning study also advocates running HUdson and Harlem line trains to Penn via Amtrak's west side line.
The MTA planning study on Penn Sta. access ... advocates running Hudson and Harlem line trains to Penn via Amtrak's west side line.
Actually, all three of Metro North's east-of-Hudson lines, IIRC. But, interesting differences among lines:
HUDSON LINE: This one's easy ... follow the West Side Line across the bridge at Spuyten Duyvil just like Amtrak, into Penn Station from the west. Possible capacity constraint at the single-track section of the West Side Connector, or not enough trains in/out even adding MN to Amtrak?
NEW HAVEN LINE: Again, conceptually easy ... follow Amtrak route across Hell Gate into Penn from the east. No mention of reactivating local stations on the old ROW in the alternative summaries, but could add a new local service I suppose. Anyone know more bout that one?
HARLEM LINE: Here's where it gets interesting. The study recommends running Harlem Line trains into Penn Station from the WEST ... down the West Side Line. They note this requires "track reconstruction at Spuyten Duyvil to connect the Harlem and Hudson Line track alignments".
Assume this would be reactivating the third side of the Spuyten Duyvil triangle so you could come northwest up the east side of the river, west through Marble Hill, then down the West Side. Is the triangle track at The Hub (real RR name?) already in use to connect SB New Haven trains to NB Hudson trackage and vice versa?
The "Hub" at the old Mott Haven yard is the northernmost interchange between the three Metro North East of Hudson lines.
There is a single track that allows trains to transfer from the Harlem / New Haven Divisions to the Hudson Division. If you got a train stuck there, it would take out at least two tracks.
The problem with routing trains from the Harlem / New Haven Divisions to the Hudson Division is that they run south to Mott Haven (138th Street), then north to Marble Hill (235th Street), and then south to Penn Station (33rd Street). A lot of extra travel. Also, at Spuyten Duyvil, the train would have to cross the inbound line to get to Penn.
The better plan would be to put New Haven trains across the Hell Gate Bridge, Hudson Trains across the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge, and leave the Harlem Trains alone.
Reopening the East Bronx stations on the New Haven would also provide a subway alternative.
A different point -- Aren't both Grand Central and Penn Station at capacity during peak hours? I know the problem at Grand Central comes about 6:00PM to 6:30PM, when all of the trains that started in GCT have left, but not many have come in on the single track used for inbound service.
The "Hub" at the old Mott Haven yard is the northernmost interchange between the three Metro North East of Hudson lines. There is a single track that allows trains to transfer from the Harlem / New Haven Divisions to the Hudson Division. If you got a train stuck there, it would take out at least two tracks.
Is there room to double-track it? I'd assume that if this plan ever comes to fruition and you're running regular service through that transfer, you'd want 2 tracks.
The problem with routing trains from the Harlem / New Haven Divisions to the Hudson Division is that they run south to Mott Haven (138th Street), then north to Marble Hill (235th Street), and then south to Penn Station (33rd Street). A lot of extra travel.
That's why I was surprised they chose to pursue this alternative.
The better plan would be to put New Haven trains across the Hell Gate Bridge, Hudson Trains across the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge, and leave the Harlem Trains alone.
Well, that may be likely. All the alternatives are being evaluated independently for ridership, etc. Each line's construction can be done independently. I'd bet that if any of this happens (once LIRR-GCT connection opens up slots at Penn for MNRR to use in the first place), Hudson comes first, New Haven comes second and Harlem third if at all.
Another note: According to the Metro North Penn Station Access Study from November 2000, they rejected the idea of putting Harlem Line trains across Hell Gate due to the "circuitous routing via reverse-direction connections". There are also problems with turning radii, conflicts with current GCT-bound operations, acquisition of operating industrial lands and parkland impacts.
So why not just put the New Haven Branch over the Hell Gate? Trains would leave Grand Central. Make a right to go thru the 63 St Tunnel. When it comes out into Sunnyside Yards it connects to the Amtrak line going to the Hell Gate. After it gets to the Bronx it could stop at the old Westchester stops at Casanova, Hunt's Point, Westchester Ave and West Farms. After passing the old turn off for what is now the Dyre line, it could make stops at the old RR stops at Van Nest, Morris Place, Westchester Square and I'm sure there were others. After the line crosses into Westchester County, it would meet up with the current New Haven Branch coming from the Harlem Branch at Wakefield and then procede normal into Conn.
This way congestion going thru Mott Haven would be cut by at least 1/3. There would be a "need" for the lower level of the 63 St Tunnel. And it would have more of GCT being used.
So why not just put the New Haven Branch over the Hell Gate? Trains would leave Grand Central. Make a right to go thru the 63 St Tunnel.
Not sure that the MN track complex is designed to tie into the LIRR 63rd Street flyunders. Anyone know? It would seem to make sense to design it that way, but then you're back to the problem of incompatible third rail.
When it comes out into Sunnyside Yards it connects to the Amtrak line going to the Hell Gate.
63rd Street is supposed to connect to the LIRR Main Line. Don't think it's currently designed to connect to Hell Gate approach. Would seem to make sense, again. Anyone know?
After it gets to the Bronx it could stop at the old Westchester stops at Casanova, Hunt's Point, Westchester Ave and West Farms. After passing the old turn off for what is now the Dyre line, it could make stops at the old RR stops at Van Nest, Morris Place, Westchester Square and I'm sure there were others. After the line crosses into Westchester County, it would meet up with the current New Haven Branch coming from the Harlem Branch at Wakefield and then procede normal into Conn.
That sounds like a VERY local route. How many stops (new & existing) to get to a major junction point? Sensible to make it an all-New York State route, thereby reducing funding and operational complexity by NOT involving ConnDOT?
This way congestion going thru Mott Haven would be cut by at least 1/3. There would be a "need" for the lower level of the 63 St Tunnel. And it would have more of GCT being used.
Well, the lower level of 63rd Street has its own justification: LIRR to GCT, which is the furthest along in planning, funding and govt/MTA support. Doesn't need MN to justify it.
Also, I *think* that GCT will be at capacity in 2012 (or whenever the LIRR connection opens) and then it'll be a matter of either expanding Penn and/or GCT or just swapping trains between the two. I suspect that's why the LIRR project now includes LIRR-specific new tracks, platforms and customer areas. They're also talking about new platforms at Penn.
First, I'll admit I know little about the types of 3rd rail. All I know is the type I see on the subway. The shoe goes above the rail and below the protection cover. I guess it is called overhanging. As one who doesn't know about it, I'd assume MN and LIRR have the same type. If not, well I've learned something tonight.
As far as the MTA plan for the LIRR going to Grand Central, I figure the LIRR would take the lower level and MN would take the upper. Maybe trains going thru 63 St wil be able to go to either level. If the 2 RR's can run on each other's road, great! If not, so be it. But MTA doesn't have plans for Metro North going over the Hell Gate. It was a question someone posted and I answered it. To me it makes sence because no new tracks would have to be laid. The roadbed is there and so is the track. All MTA would have to do is rebuild some of the abondoned platforms or in some places build new ones. It was just an idea that I had. Not some plan by a state office.
In regards with the route I had in the Bronx, I believe that most of the route is 4 tracks from City Line to just before the bridge. Some of the service could run local. The rest could be express. It would give people in the East Bronx some kind of service going to NYC. MTA might have to pay some kind of fee to Amtrak for use of the Hell Gate. But then it pays a fee anyway for the LIRR to use Penn.
Sometimes I have taken the LIRR home from work. As the train is leaving Sunnyside Yard I have noticed some LIRR trackage has the overhead wires and some of the turnoffs go in the direction of Hell Gate. How much of LIRR's trackage is interwoven with Amtrak? When the Pennny bought the LIRR I thought it was in part so that they could use Sunnyside Yard to store and turn their trains. Why else would that big turning loop be there west of 43 St in Sunnyside?
My perception of GCT and Penn Station is that Penn is at capasity. GC isn't. Penn is owned by Amtrak. GC is owned by MTA. MTA doesn't want to pay a rental fee for the use of tracks at Penn. Or at least pay a bit less by also using GC as a terminal. And MTA would have a terminal in Manhattan in the event that Amtrak goies out a strike. When that happens Penn is closed to LIRR. Trains from Long Island have to terminate at places in Queens and people have to use the already overcrowded subway to get to Manhattan. At least with GC people can get into the city.
some notes.
indeed the ex NYC and NH use Under wiping, and the ex PRR and LIRR use Over wiping (subway style)
The CDOT cars ALSO take AC from catenary, so they could electrically run into ATK Hell Gate Penn, I believe.
As to MTA plans, one part of their alternatives package DOES contemplate CDOT to PENN.
Did some of the FL-9s have a dual functioning 3rd rail pickup shoe?
The kind that could use under or over wipe contact.
Or was that a dream to be developed la dada da. I know the Fl-9s saw service on the MTMN and LIRR, but I'm not sure if they changed their shoes .
avid
I have no authoritative knowledge. My recollection is there was a 'division' of the fleet with some units then 'captive' to the differen lines. HOWEVER, the AC via catenary is I believe the key. Even if as I believe is the case the ex NH and PRR voltages are different, obviously engines (and MU's) can be set up to operate from DC to Boston under the wires. Thus CDot cars shopuld be operable to Penn easily. The next step in my view is the extension of catenary on two routes LI (reinstall to Bay Ridge and extend to Jamaica) and electrify the Empire connection as well as multitrack it. The major clue here is that it should be easier to overcome NIMBY's and be cheaper to add service on ROW already owned.
Back in the late '60s, the Pennsylvania Railroad ran GG-1's to New Haven, and the New Haven used its electrics to Penn Station. I don't recall any diesel service to Penn, however.
If some of the Long Island trains go to Grand Central, I assume that would open some space for Metro North at Penn and vise versa.
That's what they have in mind.
I thought the idea of using Grand Central was to avoid the problems of Routings when Amtrak goes on strike and LIRR trains are not allowed access to Penn.
I thought the idea of using Grand Central was to avoid the problems of Routings when Amtrak goes on strike and LIRR trains are not allowed access to Penn.
Nope. Or at least not primarily. Lots of LIRR riders go to GCT catchment area anyway. If you take them there, you reduce commute times, presumably increase ridership, and most importantly, free up platforms at Penn (now AT capacity) during rush hour to run other services like Metro North into there for the vice-versa reason.
>>The problem with routing trains from the Harlem / New Haven Divisions to the Hudson Division is that they run south to Mott Haven (138th Street), then north to Marble Hill (235th Street), and then south to Penn Station (33rd Street). A lot of extra travel. Also, at Spuyten Duyvil, the train would have to cross the inbound line to get to Penn. <<
Not really a lot of extra travel. The n-bound run from 138th to S. Duyvil, without stops, is less than 10 minutes. Then south on the West Side probably duplicates another 10 minutes of s-bound run time already used before the train got to 138th. This 20 minutes is worth the hassle factor of getting from GCT to Penn Station which requires 2 subways and lots of walking and stairs between trains.
The Planning Study does allude to the possibility of opening new local stations on the E. Bronx stretch of the Amtrak line.
More than the "south-north-south" routing for Harlem Division trains is the necessary switching. First, from the Harlem/New Haven tracks to the Hudson tracks at Mott Haven. This is simple in the AM - the train goes from the local southbound Harlem/New Haven track to the northbound Hudson track without crossing any other tracks. The second switch, at Spuyten Duyvil, requires a change from the northbound train to cross the southbound Hudson track and the northbound Amtrak track.
In the PM, the Spuyten Duyvil switch is easy, northbound Amtrak to southbound Harlem. At Mott Haven, however, the train would have to go from the southbound Hudson to the "northbound" Hudson track, then around the semi-loop, and finally cross from the "local southbound" Harlem / New Haven track to one of the other tracks. (You couln't operate northbound on the "local southbound" track because then southbound trains could not stop at Fordham.
Perhaps an alternative would be to rebuild the Woodlawn junction, so that the Harlem trains could switch to the New Haven, and then down the East Bronx line to Hell Gate.
>>Perhaps an alternative would be to rebuild the Woodlawn junction, so that the Harlem trains could switch to the New Haven, and then down the East Bronx line to Hell Gate. <<
The MTA study consdiered this but eliminated this becase of the expense of the necessary trackwork both where Harlem meets NH, and NH meets Amtrak in New Rochelle.
Putting in track as suggested would take major swaths out of heavily built up neighborhoods in Mount Vernon and New Rochelle respectively. So there's a major political factor as well as money.
It's about time they considered running some Hudson Line trains on the west line line that is presently used by Amtrak. This would be a boon for those who might want to take an NJT train into New Jersey and this would improve connections to Amtrak.
#3 West End Jeff
I was up in Portland Maine this weekend and caught this article in the local paper link to online version.
The much delayed Boston - Portland, ME amtrak service is scheduled to begin on 12/15 with a VIP train to run on 12/14.\
Also, was in Boston Sat nite with friends and rode the green line, tight curves and close headways!
At last! I really hope it's a success.
I hear that...
but I wish something could be done as far as getting to Kennebukport to go to Seashore. It isn't very helpful to us.
I'll be on site for the departure of the inaugural train on 12/14 with
my MBTA photo permit in hand... and will have pix for SubTalk.
From the AP tonight via Newsday. One was struck and killed by an F train at Second Ave. early Sunday and the other by a 6 train at Lockwood Ave. Saturday night. No other details right now.
There is something weird about the womans story. No one noticed (they were not even sure which crew did it) and the train did not go BIE. It may not have even been in the station.
You do not necessarily go right into emergency when you have a 12-9 (man under). If the body goes under the T/O's side of a B div. car, or the opposite side of an A div. car, then the train will keep on going since there is no trip cock on that side of the train.
Well if the 12-9 is between the rails or the train smushes them up.
There are trip cocks on both sides of the train so you can go BIE if they are right under you. It's just the front one that is opposite you in the IND.
So it was the victim's body that tripped up the cock, right?
In one of the incidents thwe train did not go BIE at all.
I have seen people throw coats ad pants in the middle track and once I did take a break because I thought the debris looked humanish or maybe the person was thrown in out cold way and they were hit by the train and not run over by it.
We were talking about these accidents at work today, trying to figure out if the arm of a body could trip....then I remembered something: all NYC subway cars I work on have a new 'snow block' replacement installed during each inspection. This is a hardwood block that fits inside the trip lever and against the valve body. Taped with five turns of friction tape, it allows the trip arm to 'skate through' piles of hardened snow or debris without BIE. R142s HAD a tripcock defect that would BIE unexpectedly but no more. Peter
The preceding train did go into emergency. The T/O found debris behind his train and assumed that it was the debris that caused the BIE. The body was found by the follower. That train did not contact the body.
In the IRT incident, the train went into emergency. The TOD told the train operator that the BIE was caused under the 8th car. She went back and didn't find anything. When she began to move, the train went BIE again. A TSS found the body.
In a 3rd incident, before the other two, a jumper shut down the franklin Shuttle around 5:45 PM. He jumped at the Botanical Gardens station but couldn't get it right. He survived.
Ouch someone lied and is on the bench. At the time they were hunting down crews to figure who did what.
So in both 12-9 instances, the T/O's are in hot water for improperly inspecting the train & roadbed, especially the IRT T/O.
I don't know where the axe of human error will fall but I feel that the IRT incident seems the more egregious one.
Serious indeed. Could the IRT T/O lose her job? Is a trip to the DA possible? Will there be a criminal investigation to determine if the death was caused by the initial fall to the tracks, or caused by the T/O recharging the train, and then riding over the victim while he was still alive?
First, because all of the incidents are currently under investigation, i'd perfer not to comment beyond the information in the reports that I read. To speak in generalities, let's seperate the fact from fancy. First if a train operator hits a person on the tracks, unless the train operator was impaired or negligent, they should not be held criminally libel.
The question is, what if the person was alive after being struck by the train but died when the train struck him again? Is it reasonable to expect that a train operator, walking in a dark tunnel with a 3 volt flashlight, and the pressure of a trainload of people on her shoulders, would be expected to see a body under a train after the train has presumably crushed and compressed that body. For anyone who's ever had to check for a reported 12-9, locating a body is never an easy thing. In a case where the train went into emergency for an unknown cause, the operator is looking for many things including:
Debris
Broken Rail
Derailment
Hanging Car Equipment
Signal trouble
or a body on the tracks.
Therefore, the train operator is not focused on looking for one thing but a whole range of symptoms. Should the train operator be subject sanctions. One could make a good case on either side of the issue. In any 12-9 incident a trip to the grand jury is possible. A trip to labor relations is possible.
We're obviously talking about an R-142 here. I wonder if this case was a suicide or falling victim?
Why do I ask? Because those R-142's can be difficult when walking from one car to the next. You have to use two hands to open both sets of doors, so you never really have your balance. If the train is going fast enough, especially around a curve, I can easily imagine someone losing balance and falling.
cont'd.............
I would not be surprised to see the TA lock those bi-parting doors on the new 142's. It's really awkward when walking between cars.
I wonder if there's still time on the option order of R-142s to go back to the orignial door style. From the thread on the R-143s, the MTA is going with the tried-and-true single leaf door on those, so either someone had a change of heart between the orders for the two different models, or it was decided the double-leaf doors would be OK with 51-foot cars, but not with 60-footers and their wider turning radus.
Next time you're on a 7th ave. express, try walking between cars when the train is operating at 30-35 mph. It's hard, especially if your hands are full. You really have to put some muscle into those doors.
I was coming back from Pelham Bay Park a couple of months ago right at school dismissal time when this REALLY, REALLY LOUD GIRL got on the train and started floating between cars to talk -- make that yell -- at her friend in each car. At that moment, I was kind of hoping the flaw in the R-142s door design would rear its ugly head, though that wouldn't have done me or the train crew much good in the long run...
Be careful. That statement can be taken as racist on this board.
Actually, the 6 trains are a little safer, as you can grab the door handles for some support. And, they open easier. On the 2, you can really grab the handles, you have to pinch/squeeze the handles, and put some serious muscle into it. By next year, I bet the TA will lock those doors so people can't walk between cars.
No, to the best of my knowledge doors will remain unlocked for safety issues relating to emergencies and the warning stickers will remain in place. CI Peter
I believe the R-142's have the biparting doors because of the smaller width. The wider R-143's allow for a single-leaf door.
Hopefully someone can help us out here.
>>> I believe the R-142's have the biparting doors because of the smaller width <<<
Since all the preceding IRT cars were able to handle a single door in that width, I do not think you can ascribe the design to the width. I am sure the theory was to prevent the doors from opening from lateral forces if not latched, but not enough thought was given to the difficulty of opening them when passing between cars. If the engineers who designed them were used to subway systems where only crews pass between cars, they might not have given enough thought to ease of use for the general public. Isn't New York almost unique in allowing passengers to move between cars while the train is moving?
Tom
Here is what I think the TA's goal is. To create a wider space on doors between cars, and on side doors.
They want to offer a wider door for passengers moving between cars. At the same time, a wider door will not fit on the R-142'.
So either you can either,
a) Stick with the current dimensions, and have the current narrow storm doors, OR
b) Install a bi-parting door that will offer a wider space for those transporting between cars.
I guess the city opted for choice B.
>>> Here is what I think the TA's goal is. To create a wider space on doors between cars, and on side doors. <<<
Wider side doors make sense to allow more people to move through them quickly when a train is in the station, but the storm doors are used by one person at a time, so there is no reason for the TA to widen them beyond the width of the biggest passenger. The old doors were wide enough for that. BTW, is the R-142 storm door opening wider than the opening on the older cars?
Tom
>>>BTW, is the R-142 storm door opening wider than the opening on the older cars?<<<
Yes, it is wider. For wheelchair passage (really!).
Peace,
ANDEE
Isn't New York almost unique in allowing passengers to move between cars while the train is moving?
AFAIK, yes.
I think the subway here in Stockholm is more typical. One thing we check before taking a train into service is that the end door at the non-cab end of every car is locked. The cabs are full-width (though the initial orders of cars had half-width cabs and railfan windows).
-- Tim
The question is, what if the person was alive after being struck by the train but died when the train struck him again? Is it reasonable to expect that a train operator, walking in a dark tunnel with a 3 volt flashlight, and the pressure of a trainload of people on her shoulders, would be expected to see a body under a train after the
train has presumably crushed and compressed that body. For anyone who's ever had to check for a reported 12-9, locating a body is never an easy thing.
That's not hard to understand. Consider the number of incidents when pedestrians are run over by hit-and-run drivers, and later are run over by other vehicles while lying in the road. It's obviously a lot easier to see a dead/dying person on a road than under a train, yet these incidents happen.
Got a quick question: Does the TA offer counseling to the train crews involved in tragedies like these?
Everyone in TA is offered counseling for any type of incident that takes place on the job. You can go through the system or get help outside through the union (losing earned time off) but the big point is that a record is kept of EVERYTHING, just like lateness and absence. One must remember that most accidents occur without the train crews participation and no matter how bad you feel, it is always Cover Your ASS Dummy CYAD.
About the 6th Ave. Lines (reffered to be Orange) of B / D / Q , once the Manhattan Bridge is fully reopened, will the regular serivce be reopened? This means that "B" will replace "W"; "D" will replace "Q" (orange) and "Q" (Orange) will replace "Q" Yellow in Brooklyn.
The (Q) will become the (D) once again. The <> will probably stay on Broadway and become the (Q). The (W) will become the (B) again. I would assume that the (B) and (D) are what will run over the bridge from 6th Avenue, and the (Q) and maybe the (N) will run over the bridge from Broadway. These are just assumptions.
When you see <> I meant the Q in a diamond. I forget how to post that here. :)
That seems reasonable. What is an open question is whether one of the Broadway routes will use the 63rd St Connector on a regular basis. Whether or not it does, the Connector provides a way to reroute trains from 6 Av to Broadway, or vice-versa, should there be a problem in a tunnel.
The New York Times had a graphic today showing the bracing work being done. The Manny B's repairs are on schedule so far. The trackbed will be reinforced and the tracks will be replaced as part of the work. Full four-track subway service will resume in 2004.
Wouldn't it be neat if the South Ferry line could be ready to reopen then too?
The South Ferry line's repair cost will be $1 billion, much covered by insurance, the rest by federal rebuilding funds. Time to completion: 3 years. We just might make it!
PATH will reopen in two years.
>Full four-track subway service will resume in 2004.
Hopefully, it will remain in full service longer than the last time, which was about 12 weeks ...
Keep your fingers crossed.
Knowing what I know, I cross my fingers every time i cross the bridge and we clear the water.
I know what you mean.
When I was a kid riding standards or Triplex I always stepped back from the open window, because i was afraid my glasses would fall out into the river
Nothing has been determined as yet, but you can safely assume that the B and D trains will be through-routed to Brooklyn via the A/B tracks. As far as the Broadway service goes, who knows what the fate of the (Q), and W lines will be. Stay tuned.
Mark
That sounds like what the service was before the entire MB reconstruction began. Probably what they will go back to.
This is the most logiical scenerio.
All speculative right now. I would bet, though, that the B and D will be restored as they were before, and that the Q and N will run express on Broadway; the W will be Broadway local from Whitehall to Astoria.
I would hope that the (Q) would remain on Broadway. That is it's proper home, after all. More importantly, the Broadway BMT needs it more than the Sixth Ave IND, which already would have two expresses and two locals.
:-) Andrew
Just from a TPH set-up, running two lines Sixth Ave.-Manny B express and two lines Broadway-Manny B express makes the most sense. Anything else cuts rush hour capacity below 15 tph for the B and D trains.
I don't know if the W will survive the change -- they may just keep the N going to Astoria, the R to Continental and terminate the Q at 57th-7th instead of running the W from Whitehall to Astoria and ending both the N and Q at 57th-7th (the W has no nearby yard under the second plan).
Wasn't the original plan to run the "W"--the to be exact--from Astoria to Whitehall in the first place? (The plan before all the Manhattan Bridge madness)
And Astoria seems to be enjoying all these additional service so cutting the W may bring chaos from the activists there...
With the "future" W just running between Astoria and Whitehall, how many trainsets would you need? Can they just be stored in the layup tracks between Canal and City Hall plus the middle tracks of the Astoria line? Yes, you would need to move the trains out of the way if they need to go to a yard for maintenance.
Well, the TA went for over a decade with the RR between Astoria and 95th St. having no yard, so it's not unprecedented, but I'm not sure there's enough storage capacity between Astoria and Whitehall to lay-up the W trains during off hours.
Nothing's been decided yet.
One suggestion: Don't think of the current plan as temporary and the previous plan as regular service. Both then and now, only half the bridge is available. I hope, once both sides of the bridge are open, that the TA uses both, sending some service to Broadway and some service to 6th Avenue. In particular, the Q is traditionally the Broadway express; it ran on 6th because there wasn't much choice in the matter.
Here are my guesses (based on other posts here). They are only guesses.
B: pre-7/22*
D: pre-7/22
F: post-7/16
M: current
N: Astoria local, Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4th Avenue express (local on weekends), Sea Beach; full local at night
Q: current diamond only
R: current
V: post-7/16
W (weekdays only): Astoria local, Broadway local, to Whitehall
*This includes weekend service via CPW local. An alternate plan would send the weekend B to Queens via 53rd to take the place of the V, which only runs weekdays and which some fear is needed on weekends as well. This would entail switching the B to the local track, either at W4 or at 42nd. Alternatively, the weekend F would run via 53rd and the B would run via 63rd; that would minimize switching but maximize confusion.
This makes sesne. Both Brighton and 4th Ave would have a choice of either Bway or 6th Ave service. Bway would have 2 locals and 2 expresses weekdays. Ah, the good ole days.
I don't remember the good old days quite as well. 4th Ave. only had one local, and Brighton riders had no real choice but to crowd the D, as the other choice was the useless M. During the rush hours, the QB ever ran enough to make a difference.
What was the reason they took the M off the Brighton line to Coney Island, and moved it to West End. Wasn't that because of when they first started the MB reconstruction? Will it stay on the West End when all MB service resumes?
If it ran via Brighton, where would it terminate? Stillwell gets clogged as it is with just the circle-Q.
The M used to run all the way to Stillwell on the Brighton until about 10 to 15 years ago. The orange D ran express & the yellow Q and the M ran local, before the last time the MB was closed to 6th Avenue traffic in the late 80's and early 90's. That is when they took the M off the Brighton line, I believe, when they started work on the 6th Ave tracks on the MB the first time.
But headways overall then were lower than they are now, and I don't know to what extent cars were cleaned at Stillwell.
I don't know to what extent cars were cleaned at Stillwell.
Obviously alot less than they are now! They were pretty bad!
The R46's on the F at this time, as well as the R46's & R32's on the N were regularly cleaned at Stillwell (1985ish). But the QB/Q, M and B cars were never even swept!
I can vouch for that. I used to ride the M everyday around 1985, and they were BAD!
They never were cleaned during this period....LOL.
To answer your question, the M and Q routes during this period were basically one line divided in two. Headways never exceeded 12 TPH, but 6 went to Nassau & 6 went to 57th St. Or something like that.
The only way the D, M & Q could run together through the Flatbush Ave. corridor would be by limiting headways on the D & Q. I'm assuming that once the bridge fully opens, 12 TPH on both the D & Q would be the optimal service. Adding a useless M line would only clog everything up.
Brighton riders do NOT miss or want the M back.
I believe the reason for the M being moved to the West End was due to the sharing of the B, D, and Q of the same track. This increased headways (three trains, B, D, Q, instead of two, B and D, on the same track), and thus decreased the amount of West End service. To take up the slack more proportionately, the M went to the West End. I hope and believe that a Nassau St. rush-hour service will join the D and Q when both sides of the MB re-open. Three services were standard on the Brighton for many years.
The current roll signs have the J running to Coney Island[dimond J]during peak hours=JAMAICA NASSAU ST.BRIGHTON.
I don't think that ever happened in the past?!?!?!
The QJ?
Yes the QJ
It did, for 5 years (1967 to 1972), known as the QJ.
Man, that ust've been one murderous route to be assigned to.
What a long ride! It must have been endless!
With the demise of WTC, I think that running two Nassau St. services through to the southern division (pick J, M and or Z) and one Broadway local (R) is worth scrutinizing. Pre-Chrystie, 4 services ran through Dekalb Track 2 (northbound local) in the morning rush: QT and RR to Broadway, M (Brighton special) and TT (West End local) to Nassau.
I don't think the TT ran during rush hours. West End service was made up of T service via the bridge. I don't think it operated at the same time as the TT.
Actually during rush hours in the BMT Days there was as follows thru DeKalb Brighton Exp(Bridge) Brighton Local(Tunnel) 4th Ave Local(Tunnel) West End $Exp(Bridge) Sea Beach Exp via ByPass(Bridge) Culver Local Tunnel Culver Express via Loop a total of 7 different trains
Chris, you now have it from a direct witness, at least for Sept. 1965 through Nov. 1967. The TT ran during morning rush hours. The trains were R32 Brightliners. Yep, four lines through Dekalb Track 2 during the morning rush.
During rush hours, the TT turned back at 9th Ave. or Bay Parkway. During middays, the T didn't operate and the TT ran all the way to Coney Island.
I remember seeing a TT of R-32s laid up at ENY Yard on July 20, 1967 while waiting for a Manhattan-bound Canarsie train at Broadway Junction. Then I saw the BMT standards for the first time. Made me want to ralph.
Who was Ralph? You don't mean Ralphie of the then last place New York Yankees, do you? BTW, I saw the return (southbound) T with south destination sign 9th Avenue. Apparently, they were taken out of service there. The T, as far as I know, ran only during the rush hours. Morning rush southbound I would see the N running local at Pacific St., with T running express.
The T ran Mon-Fri rush hours and Sat and Sun during the day. The TT ran Mon-Fri rush hours and midday, and as a shuttle to 36 St every night.
4 lines, but how many TPH's? I bet it didn't exceed 36.
I think pre-Chrystie the M ran on the Myrtle line to Broadway (Brooklyn) and then to Chambers St.
Reading down the thread, the TT did run in rush hours, as stated here.
Actually, the Brighton Banker's specials were labeled as "M" when R27's were assigned to the route. Here's one in 1965:
Nice picture Chris. By September, all of the M Brighton trains were R32 Brightliners.
The M was listed as a Nassau St. Express on the "Know Trains at a Glance" placards posted at Southern Division stations in the mid-60s.
The M was listed as a Nassau St. Express
How can they run express on Nassau St? There are no local stations. Unless they mean skipping Bowery like the J does now.
The J has stopped at the Bowery since 1999, along with the Z.
Has it, I didn't realize that. I have only used the M recently and when the M is not running the J stopped there anyway, so I didn't notice. I don't get there much anymore.
Years ago, the F signs said "6th Ave. Express", yet they were never express on 6th Ave., in Queens they were.
Because when those signs were made, IND routes used single letters for an express line and double letters for locals. I saw "FF 6th Ave Local" on those signs but AFAIK it was never run. There wouldn't have been any point prior to the "dash" opening in the 1960s.
That makes sense. I forgot that they used double letters. When they changed to single letters, it would probably confuse less people by saying "F - 6th Ave Express", then saying "FF - 6th Ave local".
That was a throwback to the days when a single letter meant express and a double letter meant local. The M marking was used for Banker's Specials prior to Chrystie St., and these trains did run express in Brooklyn, but obviously not along Nassau St.
I may be wrong but: when the M started going to Met and ceased being the bakers special, it kept a single letter designation because it went express in the peak direction from Marcy to Bway/Myrtle (took the spot of the Myrtle/Chambers rush hour route). Eventually the decision was made to send it local from Marcy to Bway/Myrtle during all hours of operation. Rather than confuse everybody and give it the politically correct (at the time) double letter designation, it was kept as a single M.
that happened in '76 when the K,EE,GG,B,AA A,F,and E services were changed.
Yes, the M did run express in the peak direction along Broadway-Brooklyn after Chrystie St. It was a rush hour-only service initially, then when the MJ was discontinued, the M became a weekday operation. SS was used to denote shuttles in those days, and there were many of them. Maps issued in late 1969 showed both an M, from Metropolitan Ave to Chambers St., and an SS from Metropolitan Ave. to Myrtle Ave, and indicated "operates when M not in service" for the M's SS counterpart.
My 1972 map has an SS route for the M, 5 (Dyre Ave shuttle) as well as the other 3 (Culver, Franklin and Grand Central).
The M was probably listed as an "express" because until 1976, it ran express from Myrtle to Marcy Aves.
Gloria, the M that I was familiar with was out of Coney Island, switched to the express tracks south of Kings Hway., and ran via tunnel to its north terminal, which was Chambers St. The side curtain signs on the Brightliners had: "M/Nassau St Exp"
Didn't they deadhead over the Manhattan Bridge when running against traffic flow?
I wouldn't be surprised if they did and if their mid-day lay-up was 9th Av.
You mean the way service was between September 17th and October 28th, except with one Broadway local service? Hmmmm, sounds like an interesting proposal. What would some of the advantages be to this?
Actually, I have two Broadway local services in mind, the R and the W, which would run from Astoria to Whitehall rush mid-days and evenings to 9 PM. There would be several advantages to making the Nassau St. lines through services. For one, I believe that best efficiency through the Dekalb bottleneck could be provided by 24 tph on each track (tracks 2, 4, and bypass), and with the destruction of the WTC, there would be proportionately more demand for the eastern side of the downtown business district.
So I take it, with the W running local to Whitehall, the N would take its place on the Manhattan Bridge and run express in Manhattan again, right? Would the M replace the W and run full-time on the West End line? Where would the J go if it were extended onto the BMT South?
I would have the M go as rush hours Brighton local. J via West End from Bay Parkway to Jamaica Center, short-turning after rush service at Broadway Junction (northbound) and 9th Av. (southbound).
The J has a Brighton designation.It's on all the R32/38 cars.The M is West End now for the forseable future..... I would have the J running to Brighton Beach express[ between KINGS HWY and PROSPECT PARK ]rush hours if only to speed up the long running times,and express on Brosdway Brooklyn rush, midday and evenings.Iwould also keep the skip stop,and extend the hours like like a ''real rush hour service''.1HOUR IS NOT ENOUGH!!!!!!!
I also hope that M returns to Brighton when the Bridge fully opens. If it can't return to Brighton then at the very least run it local to Bay Pkwy on the West End and have the B run express on the West End Line to Coney Island.
I wonder if that has ever been done in regular service? I could never figure out why it wasn't, certainly in my lifetime. It's a route comparable to the Culver in spacing of the express stops, with a good place to terminate the local prior to going to two tracks.
It really wasn't 3 services. It was really two, with a few of the M's being sent up Broadway via the H tracks on the bridge as Q's (QB's). Full D/M/Q service through the Flatbush Ave. corridor would limit headways on all the lines.
No more than three services on the bridge already limit headways.
The greater concern, IMO, is how to turn two services at the same platform at Stillwell. The N was cut back to 86th because it can't share a platform with the W, even on weekends.
Can you imagine the nightmare north of Atlantic Ave where the D, M & Q would have to merge/split?
No, actually, I can't. The D/Q goes one way; the M goes the other. No different in principle from today's Q/Q/W split (southbound into DeKalb): the Q/Q goes one way; the W goes the other.
But there is only a short section of track which the M occupies by itself before merging with the R. I don't think more than 1 or 2 could occupy that section of track. Which means it would back up other trains. Once the W splits off the Q/Q, it runs on it's own track for a fairly long stretch thru Dekalb to just north of Pacific.
True.
How about today's split between 34 and 42 BMT? The W switches away from the Q/Q directly into the N/R northbound (vice versa, southbound). That does cause backups, but at least it's manageable.
I think what happens is that by the time before (W) reaches Times Square (Queens Bound), it switches to the local tracks and the (Q) or will remain in the express tracks. For the (Q) or , once it reaches 57th Street, the terminating (Q) or trains drop off passengers at the Queens Bound platform and goes well into the tunnel north of 57th Street station, with the whole train passing the crossover. This is more convenient for passengers, because of the station layout (Where all except for the "Q" trains use the outer tracks). With the Brooklyn Bound "Q" trains using the Southbound platform to pick up passengers, it would be much more convienient than placing an indicator for the platforms that are being used by the "Q" trains.
This is assuming that the 57th Street platforms for the "Q" is a wall based platform (Tracks between the 2 platforms).
You are correct regarding the express-to-local switch south of 42nd, but the Q does not relay at 57th. It simply pulls into one of the express tracks, dumps, and eventually pulls out southbound.
No, it's a typical express platform. Both Q's use the inner express tracks to terminate, crossing over SOUTH of the station. Circle Q's terminate on the southbound platform, diamonds on the northbound (Queens). This did lead to several problems with people getting on southbound Q's expecting to go to Queens when the reroutes first began.
Why don't both Q's simply pull into the northbound track, relay north of 57th, then go back into service on the downtown side, like the C does at 168th St? That would seem to eliminate any logjam of trains in service south of the 57th St. switch which always occurs (especially during rush hours, while simplifying service.
That does seem to run fairly smoothly, especially going downtown. I guess scheduling has a lot to do with it.
David, I read on this site some time ago that that possible problem at Stillwell is being addressed. There is a 9th track being constructed from the Coney Island yard to the Brighton, bypassing Stillwell, addressing the put-in take-out problem. IIRC, this 9th track was said to be related to the Queens Boulevard connector (Q service to 179th?), but your guess is as good as mine if this turns out to be the case.
But how does that assist in turning trains? As it stands, the circle-Q uses both tracks at its platform. There's no room for the M in addition.
The only solution I can think of -- and it might work -- is to clean D trains (assuming the D returns to Brighton local service) in the Bronx and M trains in Queens. Then the two tracks should suffice for two services -- witness the Q/Q at 57th, the N/W at Ditmars, the 2/5 at Flatbush, the B/D at 34th, etc.
Quite a nice suggestion!
I believe this track is being installed to allow Q trains to get from the CI yard to Brighton Beach without interfering with N service, as it has done in the past. Incoming N's had to use only one track as Q after Q used the outermost track to access the Brighton line.
Today, the inner N track has now been connected to the Brighton line, and the outer severed.
"It wasn't three services, it was two" Chris, you're getting into semantics here. The QB ran 5 tph, and then there was the D and the M. Pre-Chrystie, there were also three services, the least frequent of them being the M (express Kings Hway to Prospect Park). Track 2 at Dekalb served FOUR lines! Also, the N, Q, and T merged north of Dekalb all the way to Times Square, for over 40 years. And we have now 2 Qs and the W over the same stretch. In my estimation, the denominator is not how many services you run, but how many trains per hour are run over the same stretch of track. Sure, switching takes a toll, too, but much is in the timing and scheduling.
I agree, but do you see them running 12 Q's, 12 D's, and 8 M's thru Atlantic Ave? Currently, the Prospect Park to Atlantic Ave. section runs 20 TPH during the rush, and things somethimes slow to a crawl. I can't see them running more than 24 TPH when both sides of the bridge are operable.
Let's hope that you guys are right about the changes in 2004. The B should get the R-46's if they go to Queens as well as the F and V. Note, within a few years, the R-160's should come in taking away the slants that are on the and the N. The Q will probably keep the the R-68's as well as the D and B giving the N and W the R-42's and R-32's on the shorter runs. The R will have the 32/46 combo as it is now. I can't wait for these changes.
I doubt the B will ever go to Queens, it has always been a 6th Ave-CPW Local
That's true, I forgot about that with the B. Guess the Q might see some of that then from the Broadway Line via 63rd St. to Queens. Guess we will be kept posted.
Oh no, it's starting already. Anyone else wanna give the "nothing's decided yet because it's way in the future" speech?
I would like to see the D once again as the express to Brighton Beach.
Wayne
I just passed my two written exams so I'm now well on my way to becoming the first African-American conductor/motorman in the thirty plus year history of the Baltimore Streetcar Museum. Is that wild or what?!
Eric D. Smith
Good for you!
Long overdue, buddy! But here you are the trailblazer. Strong work!
Fantabulous! Congrats, guy!
Eric -
Glad to hear that you are on your way to motorman status - I know it takes a significant time commitment to do that, which is one reason I haven't gotten trained at either of the museums of which I am a member (Branford and National Capital). But it bothers me a bit that you are making so much of your ethnicity - in my view, that's irrelevant. It takes the same amount of effort and commitment to achieve that status no matter if you are white, black, or green with purple polkadots. The achievement stands by itself - qualifying it, as you have, doesn't make it any more significant, since a person's ethnicity has no bearing on their ability to accomplish that goal.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Congradulations.I'm rooting for you.
Will there be a party? :-)
-Dave
I've celebrated with friends but that's about it.
Eric D. Smith
I hope the benefits are good! The pension pays well!
It's all volunteer.
Eric D. Smith
Good for you! Congratulations!
Congratulations. Have you driven a streetcar before or is this going to be your first crack at it?
-Robert King
This will be my first time.
Eric D. Smith
That's great, the first time you operate a streetcar is a big thrill.
-Robert King
I think it wonderful....but sad that it took so many years for the event to take place....into the 21st Century at that. Good luck and God Bless: PLEASE do be careful. Peter
When would be a good time of day to photograph trains running over Hell Gate? I waited there once for almost two hours and nother came by. I mean Hell Gate on the Queens end. I got off the N at the last stop, Astoria, and took a bus to the West shore of Queens and waited there.
There are eight Acela Express trips per day in each direction, as well as a number of "regular" Acela Regional electrics. Just get an Amtrak timetable, and figure about 10 from Penn Station.
I recommend that you go there between 10 AM and 1 PM to take pictures at the Queens end of Hell Gate Bridge. On weekdays, Acela Express Train #2154 arrives around 10:15 AM, #2155 arrives around 10:30 AM, #2157 arrives around 11:30 AM, and #2159 arrives around 12:30 AM.
On weekends, Acela Express #2251 arrives around 11:30 AM, and #2250 arrived around 12:15 PM. For other Amtrak trains, please look up the Northeast schedules for details.
Chaohwa
If you were there on Sunday 12/02/01, Amtrak had a major power problems in Boston. They had delays up to 3 hrs and some cancellations including Acela Express. That is why you may have not seen any trains.
mornings, weekdays. anywhere from 7:30 to 12... acela, csx, and if your lucky, a p&w stone train. there's at least one amtrak per hour in general.
About the "F" line, is there a possibility for an extension for that line beyond its Queens Terminus "Jamaica 179 St."?
There has been talk of that for years.
The original F line terminated at 169 Street. The line was extended to 179 St. The tail tracks reach 182 St.
A mile-long extension would be handy. Long enough to do a lot of good in areas where people need subway service; not long enough to raise a lot of NIMBY. The area could use another couple of stations, and they would serve to reduce the bus ride for passengers on Long Island Bus who are headed for the subway.
Such an extension would increase demands on rolling stock, though, so the MTA would have to increase ordersfor new R-160's.
The line was supposed to go well past 179 St. I think there is a spot along Hillside (200's?) where the road is very wide and supposely there is a station underneith. It wasn't connected with the rest of the line.
The popular cult story puts that phantom at about 212St Look for air grates in sidewalk. Or was it Frances Lewis Blvd.?
Anybody in the mythology Department care to throw some fuel on the fire?
avid
Hillside Av. widens at Springfield Blvd/Braddock Av. (My aunt and uncle have lived there since 1951!) The center area was once used for parking. In any case, I've heard that that was intended to be the end of the line. I never heard that a station was actually built. Springfield Blvd. is at about 220th St.
Bob Sklar
If anything was built there it was probably just the shell of the station.
I'll have to write to the TA and ask about that...
The line ends at 184th Place.
David
Thanks...
When the line was built, it was planned to go further than that. But as it turned out it only went to 184 Place. Maybe it will be extended in the future.
I know. Wishful thinking!
Well, I'm all for it, as far as it could go. I'd say go at least to Francis Lewis Boulevard, and give a further extension to Springfield Boulevard serious consideration. Heck, if they could go all the way to the Nassau line it would be fine by me.
:-) Andrew
All the way to Belmont Raceway. This is my final offer, otherwise we will be crossing into the burbs.Then a whole new can of worms will be opened.
avid
I don't know if Belmont Racetrack is a a natural terminal for the Hillside line. Maybe if there an extension of the (J).
:-) Andrew
During mid day and evenings, especially during overnight hours, I know that shorter trains are a necessity for the city to reduce financial burden, but does this always lead to inconvenience to the passengers?
During mid day and evenings, especially during overnight hours, I know that shorter trains are a necessity for the city to reduce financial burden, but does this always lead to inconvenience to the passengers?
Running shorter trains is not a realistic alternative any more, thanks to link bar mentality. Only two train lengths are now possible: full length and half length. Half length is not adequate on most lines during off peak hours.
what if you took every off peak train, split it in two and ran each with only one crew member? operation would be feasible and headways cut in half. only problem being resistance MTA gets on the grounds of passenger safety. course, i think thats silly cause in one person train operation you still cant be further away from the train operator than you would be from the conductor if you rode the back car of a full length train. besides, cuttign late night headways from 20 to 10 minutes would probably just make the system safer because passengers wouldnt have to wait nearly as long on an isolated platform.
what if you took every off peak train, split it in two and ran each with only one crew member? operation would be feasible and headways cut in half.
I thought your object in running shorter trains was to save money. Running two half length OPTO trains twice as often is more expensive than running a single train at regular intervals due to the increased pay for OPTO operators and the pay difference between T/O's and C/R's.
There are also practicality problems. Midday headways are generally less than twice that of peak headways. This would mean 30 tph for most trunk lines. The increased dwell time due to OPTO would make maintaining schedules difficult.
cuttign late night headways from 20 to 10 minutes would probably just make the system safer because passengers wouldnt have to wait nearly as long on an isolated platform.
I'm pretty sure that the 20 minute figure was chosen to permit single track operation on segments of 2-track lines for maintenance. The switches being placed around 10 minutes of operating time apart.
I can't think of any line where mid-day trains are cut. As for over-night service, it's sometimes necessary. Take for example, the G line. By cutting R trains and running 4-car units in G service over night, it permits the entire G line fleet to be layed up at night for cleaning & maintenance. Something that would not be possible otherwise.
Back in 1970/71, they USED to cut 8 car B trains at 168th into 4 car AA trains. One of the reasons why I didn't want that tour myself was the perpetual cut/add cycle in and out of rush hours, and it was done at the platform with supervisors out the wazoo there to critique your methods. :)
Can someone please tell me where the Fulton St EL used to terminate?At park row or at montague st..? I've looked at old maps but I cant figure it out.
Originally it terminated at Fulton Ferry. After 1898 through
trains were operated across the BB to Park Row.
Can someone please tell me where the Fulton St EL used to terminate?At park row or at montague st..? I've looked at old maps but I cant figure it out.
Park Row, Sands St and Fulton Ferry
And later on at Rockaway Avenue, after this route was shortened due to the opening of the IND Fulton Street Line.
There was also a station on the Fulton Ferry line called Driggs Avenue. It was Marcy Avenue-Driggs Avenue-Fulton Ferry.
I read somewhere that Fulton Ferry was still standing as late as 1940. I don't know if it was still used by that time.
I think we have the Fulton line and the Broadway line mixed up here, or was there also a Marcy ave on the Fulton line.
I think that the confusion here is due to the fact that the old BMT maps from the 1920s and 1930s neglected to put a station name on the Fulton Ferry terminal.
-- Ed Sachs
I think by the 1920's and 1930's Fulton Ferry Station was no longer in servce.
This weekend has to be the worst in 4th ave access to Manhattan. First of all the N has split service replacing the W, Do you think they increase the headways during Holiday Knowing everyone and there mother is shopping,OFCOURSE NOT 11 MIN waits .I am at 18th ave were the Platform was full of angry passengers,all of them yelling at me (I was in uniform).Then we get to 59 st guess what Train goes OOS (Out Of service).All us Italian and spanish people get the short end of the stick on 4th ave. On weeknights no more W's after 10 pm Then on weekends then N and R are the only trains Neither of witch go express.Forgive me but it is fustraiting To travel on 4 th ave.I Guarentee if the neighborhood was like Boropark or the westside of Manhattan this would Not happen.
I think Fred's blood pressure just went off the chart.
In case you were unaware, the TA lists service advisories on its web site. Look before you travel or you may find yourself surprised. At the very least, read the notices at your station.
Your facts are wrong. This weekend there was express service -- all southbound trains, N and R, ran express from Pacific to 36th. Access to Manhattan was unchanged (the W never runs to Manhattan on weekends).
I don't know why your train went out of service. Presumably there was something wrong with it. What did you expect the TA to do, teleport another train into the station to pick you up?
I'm trying to figure out how the TA manages to give "Italian and spanish [sic] people" the short end of the stick while providing better service to others on the same line.
You bring up Boro Park. The West End line through Boro Park this weekend had only southbound service. Northbound passengers had to backtrack via the Sea Beach at 62nd or Stillwell. I suppose you're right -- Boro Park didn't have "only" two local services and no express service; it had half of one local service.
You bring up "the westside of Manhattan." I assume you mean the Upper West Side (the West Side is over half of the borough). Most weekends this year, the UWS has had no local service in one direction either between 42 and 72 or between 72 and 96 (and sometimes both). This weekend, for a change, all service was local (except southbound from 96 to 72). And, incidentally, I had to stand yesterday morning. When was the last time you had to stand on a 4th Avenue train on a Sunday morning? Or late on a Saturday night? In this incident that you're complaining about, did you have to stand in the end? I've never had to stand on a Brooklyn BMT train on weekends or middays. That indicates to me that your line gets more weekend and midday service than it needs.
Even worse than that, Sunday afternoon around 4:00 we were preparing to get a (hopefully Slant) 'N' from the Canal/bridge platform over the Manny B, down the 4th Avenue express and out the West End el. I had parked earlier near 86th and Stillwell (by the only Roy Rogers I know to be left outside of Manhattan) for just that purpose. Usually I park nearby in Queens before an afternoon expedition, but figured with the early sunset it was easier to drive to Bensonhurst and work everything backwards.
Everything went fine for the balance of the afternoon, except that every 'N' we saw passing by while at Roy's, and riding the inbound 'N' along its normal Sea Beach routing seemed to be an R-32. Funny, but since July 22, we hardly had to wait for a second train before a Slant would come, especially on weekends.
We came down the stairs from the downtown '6' platform to see an R-32 with its doors open and a lot of people standing around confused. This wasn't surprising; I figured a lot of passengers were confused by presumed announcements that the next stop would be Pacific Street. A lot of people were asking if this was going "downtown" and looked utterly flabbergasted when I told them the next stop was in Brooklyn- routine weekend GO stuff.
We sat with the doors open for five minutes, and noticed a lot of people were walking towards the front of the platform. An extremely garbled announcement mentioning something vaguely phonetically resembling "fire" came over the PA.
I asked the conductor if we had heard right. He advised us that yes, there was a fire on the bridge. not wishing to risk a long, frustrating wait, we immediately went back to the downtown '6' platform to find a different way back to Brooklyn.
Things were confusing enough for the average non-railfan commuter with two services being rerouted over the bridge, skipping six stops in downtown Manhattan and Brooklyn. When the diversion route goes out of service, that really rubs salt in the wound. Very few other people went up to the '6'. It's nice to be a railfan and know alternatives.
We got the '6' to Brooklyn Bridge, the '4' to Borough Hall, went outside, walked to Jay Street, got the 'F' to Avenue U (gourgeous sunset on the Smith-9th viaduct), and the B3 back to Stillwell. When we got there, a Coney-bound R-68 could be seen curving from 86th onto Stillwell. Apparently, service was back to normal at that point. There was no mention of a fire on the bridge on the radio, today's paper or on this board.
It's a big problem when so many stretches of lines are out of service and a mishap occurs on the alternative.
So, Union Square, if you think YOU were frustrated that morning trying to get from Brooklyn to Manhattan, being at Canal yesterday afternoon was much worse. And you're right; sometimes I think there SHOULD be a moratorium on GOs between Thanksgiving and New Years'. A lot of people trying to get the 'A' train to JFK/Howard Beach in order to get out of town the Sunday after Thanksgiving would agree.
'A' service towards JFK and rockaway blows. they oughta send them all to far rock and make that lefferts line into a shuttle between lefferts & where the 2 lines meet...
Actually, I was making a veiled reference to the never-ending weekend GO that shuts down the Jamaica Bay trestle, hence resulting in anyone needing to get to JFK or the Rockaways to get off the Lefferts-bound 'A' at Rockaway Boulevard, go downstairs, and crowd onto a shuttle bus while making sure they're getting on the right one, since there are two different ones: to Beach 98th station and resumption of train service; or to JFK/Howard Beach station and PA shuttle bus service to the terminals.
It seems very poor judgment to suspend service and force people onto shuttle buses- at least to HB/JFK during a holiday weekend when many out-of-towners unfamiliar with subway system, let alone GOs, are trying to catch flights. It can't be much fun carrying luggage down to the street, onto a bus, off a bus, up and down another staircase and onto another bus. (True, when the trains are running normally to HB/JFK, you still have to do the up-'n-over to the bus.)
It doesn't help that most Queens-bound 'A' platforms from 59th on down don't have advisory signs (well, they could've been torn off the pillars), and that a lot of conductors on Lefferts trains don't announce the necessity of getting on because the Rockaway trains aren't running. Oftentimes, the only time the shuttle bus is mentioned is at Rockaway Boulevard, where you actually get it.
I've rescued quite a few people waiting in frustration while Lefferts after Lefferts train goes by but no Far Rocks, especially at 42nd, 34th, West 4th and Broadway-Nassau. They're none too pleased to find out they've been waiting a long time for nothing, and that they're going to have to change to that damn shuttle bus AGAIN!
Similarly, a bunch of Red Cross workers were trying to subway back to Midtown from Belle Harbor and initially didn't know they'd have to get off at Beach 98th for the bus. At least announcements were good at that end.
Is this eternal GO because of Airtrain? I'm willing to bet when Airtrain opens, that GO will go bye bye for good. Perhaps the TA wants the line in good long term shape so they don't have to suspend it once Airtrain is up and running.
No, the GO is due to track replacement work from north of Aqueduct Racetrack to Howard Beach.
Also building a 3rd track from Broad Channel to just before the North Channel Bridge. Not to mention building a passenger connection from AirTrain to the subway station at Howard Beach.
The 3rd track is already in place. I'm sure that there is some AirTrain activity during the G.O.
The third track's been in place for a while, and has been used for testing and such since Spring.
And I thought the G.O. was for South Channel Bridge repair...
They're probably doing two things at once with that G.O., I'll find out in a couple days when I go back to work.
Wouldn't it be nice if the TA and the Port Authority could find some way to pool their resources and merge the two shuttle buses when this GO is in effect?
time the shuttle bus and the loooong trin over the bay and then wait for the shuttle train. The Bus is faster, I am a very frequent visitor to the rockaways (several times a week) and I actually prefer the shuttle bus timewise.
There was a car fire around 3:30pm closer to 4pm on the Manhattan Bridge. It was a real blazer from the looks of it from the FDR from reports of my family that were driving at that time.
Hey guys, do you think these problems will fixed by next summer and fall? I hate the idea of having to take a cab to get around. Too damn expensive.
How come shuttle busses stop in boro park run free to Willamsburg?I have seen this only on weekends any info would be Helpful.
There is BusTalk for this kind of question! The company who operates this service is Private Trails. A phone call to them can easily answer the question.
True this is a Bus-Talk question. The company in question is called Private TRANSPORTATION, not Trails. They're in the phone book, IIRC their garage is on 3rd Av & 16th St Brooklyn. The company is owned by Othodox Jews and the B-110 Route does not operate from sundown on Friday until Sunday.
My bad! Private Trails, I think, may be a subsidiary company.
To Karl and anyone else who wanted to know, the 2 add-on cars for the MTH 'E' train were numbered 4600-4601.
Thank You!
I have recorded them this time.
It's a shame that 4904/4905 were sold as a add-on set.
Why?
It just seems to me that the correct cars should be in their own boxes. Some guy may buy the add-on set with 4904/4905, get it home, and find he has the same numbers in his four car set.
Today, Monday December 3rd 2001 the R-143s are to enter service on the BMT 14th Street Canarsie Line ("L" train). Anyone who happens to see them please tell me what they are like and how well they run.
#3 West End Jeff
I don't think it was in service today. I spent 3:30 to 5:00 today looking for it. It never came.
If it was in service, the first trip was supposed to be the 05:59 out of Rockaway Park.
The R-143 did NOT run today as many may know, I did a little more research. The R-143 WILL run tomorrow on the 5:59am schedule out of Canarsie and the 6:44am Schedule out of 8th Avenue (For those that don't wanna travel out to Canarsie 1st).
This information is as per Dispatcher, TSS, and several other personnel at Canarsie. Expect the TA Big Wigs to be on the train tomorrow along with the Kawasaki personnel and possibly the media.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Thanks for the information on the R-143s.
#3 West End Jeff
5:59 am? Good. Ya'll will have to wake up at 4 am like I do every day. Remember to bring toothpicks to keep your eyes open. Heh.
I hate waking up at 4AM. That why I went PM's but now I go to sleep at 5AM
Then whatever you do, don't go midnights! I spent 7 months taking what amounted to two long naps instead of one good sleep.
I don't think Midnights would work for me.
I'll work midnights when the Expos win the world series.
Well I hope so! I'll try again tomorrow to catch the R143. Hope it happens.
> The R-143 did NOT run today
Why not?
- Lyle Goldman
Here's the proposed L line schedule for the R-143:
Daily
LV CNR 0559 ARR 14/8 0636 LV 0644 ARR CNR 0721
LV/CR 0728 AR 14/8 0808 LV 14/8 0813 ARR CNR 0851
LV CNR/0901 LV 14/8
1032 0946
1208 1120
1344 1256
1517 1440
1652 1604
1823 1735
1955 1910
2040-ARR C2117 L
Going by how I read it the list of numbers go (and correct me if i'm wrong)
9:46 L 14/8 10:32 A Canarsie
11:20 L Canarsie 12:08 A 14/8
etc... Am I right?
No! After 10:32 the TEMPORAL DISTORTION SYSTEM kicks in, heypaul and his his acolytes seize control and travel back in time.
avid
No! After 10:32 the TEMPORAL DISTORTION SYSTEM kicks in, heypaul and his his acolytes seize control and travel back in time.
Well if we're going to initiate a subway-related space-time distortion, please save a spot for me on a the Fulton El running through Atlantic Ave, leave room for me up front on a BMT Standard or maybe an R1/9 on the Culver shuttle!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
And leave me a space on a Triplex!
Sure, maybe on paper. I am sure every once in a while, the train across the platform will go in an out and the R143 will drop back. Why? Because there will be support people riding besides the crew. Reps from Kawasaki, TA TSS, CED RCI, etc. After all, once in a while wouldn't they have to get off the train to pee? Remember: the R143 is a machine, the working man is not.
If I can hold it as long as it takes to go between 8 Av and Canarsie several times, they can.
Right? Good machines take the work of skilled HUMANS to assemble and test. I wish this project well...that they have the BEST RCIs on board to make it go (if it stops.) TA needs new trainsets...passengers need a better and more reliable ride...Kawasaki needs to get its act together...and I want 'new tech' work. In my prayers...Peter
unlike you scavenger hunters of the R-143, i woke up at 8 o'clock in the morning and left my house at 8:30. i went to 6. ave on the L and waited to experience the new machine. of course it pulled in to 6 ave. and went straight through with the sine lit up in orange "NOT IN SERVICE". I got the R40 behind it and took it over to 8 ave. it stood there on the westbound track. MTA personnel and wasaki(kawasaki) personnel was at the station. they took a digital pic in front of it and it then went into the middle track in the tunnel between 6 and 8 ave. and stood there. of course i didn't have time for it to see if it would come out and go into passenger service so i left. had priorities to take care of. i will just assume for now that it was out for show and not for its test because i didn't have time to wait.
my verdict of the machine is that i liked the new electonic signs and the electronic ads it carries inside them. but it isn't suprising to look at. it sounds like an R-142A and looks like a stretched out R-142A on an R-68A body minus 14'4". same thing for the interior. i don't like the design of the carbody and wished it was designed like an R-32 without the ridges. i will not say more because i didn't ride it and get a full examination and evaluation for myself to give a true opinion. but, i do feel that i will dearly miss the R-40 series over the R-143
I saw it too, possibly at the same time and place you did. (Well, it was more like 9:30.) And I was also astonished to see that the signage at that station now carries the (V) instead of the (S), almost 2 weeks early.
:-) Andrew
me too. the V sign is because in two weeks it will be running. they did the same thing with the signs for the W service. about, the R-143, maybe i will go back down there to take pics if it is in service. if not, then i will do it tomorrow. the only thing that would stop me from trying to ride the 143 is that the Canarsie line is boring to ride in the first place.
Above ground is nice, I've done the L from Bway Junction to 14/8, but all the stations below ground are so repetitive...But hey, I think the R143 might change my mind!
Are the V's found over at 6th Avenue? I saw them at 7th Avenue (at the street entrances and over the turnstiles) this evening.
While reviewing an old subway map, I again mused over the failed "K" line.
Why did this line fail? I could certainly use a line going from the Lower East Side to 6th Avenue without changing trains. It would come in handy for shoppers - it would connect the Lower East Side bargains and Macy's in midtown.
The TA said low ridership. Passengers were prevoiusly in the habit of taking the F to Essex/Delancey and changing to the J (or whatever it was called at the time). The ratio of F vs. K service on Sixth Ave. was something like 2 or 3 to 1. So it was just as easy to take to F and change for the J or M.
It was not only the small number of trains on the KK, it was also that folks really didn't like the R1/9's (geese always whining about them being noisy and "smelly") ... it wasn't something you'd WAIT for. Then there was the silly skip-stopping on the Jamaica El which had the KK stopping at places where there weren't that many boarding. It was doomed from the git-go and that expensive connection that was built for the KK was quickly abandoned ... and DAMN expensive to build.
you are right,''kirk''. I am one of those that remember the KK/K LIKE IT WAS YESTERDAY... The R1/9 made up over half the Eastern div. fleet at the time and the KK/K WAS ALL R1/9.
Every once in a while there would be an R-40M/R-42 KK train out of the East New York yard that would pop its head up on Sixth Ave., sometimes running behind or in front of an R-6 of F trains, which was always a surprise. But mostly they were the R-7/9s, in the latter years with the MTA corporate colors and the phlegm green interiors. Not really appealing to the masses, if they have a choice between that and a Slant 40 F to Essex (though the one I really would have loved to have seen was the KK train of BMT Standards running on the Sixth Ave. line in 1968. Talk about a fish out of water, especially at 57th and 6th...).
BMT standards running on IND lines was not that unheard of. They probably saw lots of service on the Queens Blvd. local after the 60th St. connection was opened in 1955.
I thought 60th Street only fed the Astoria side of QBP?
But not on the Sixth Ave. mainline in regular revenue service, barring a problem in the 60th St. tunnel that would have forced a reroute along 53rd St., Sixth and the Culver line to CI. And especially not at 57th St. and Sixth Ave., which would have been a brand new station in 1968 with an about-to-be-retired class of cars (exactly the opposite situation I metioned to Trevor yesterday about the R-143 and the Manhattan-bound Atlantic Ave. station on the Canarsie line).
The standards ran on the Queens Blvd line and with Brighton Local Markings Mon-Fri
I knew that, what I was saying is if there was some problem getting Queens Blvd. trains through the 60th St. tunnel back in the late 50s or early 60s, they could have run the Standards through 53rd St., down Sixth Ave. and then down the Culver line to CI, where they could then return to Brighton service. I don't know if it ever happened, but the routing was possible.
But as far as regular revenue serivce operation on Sixth Ave., and definitely revenue service to 57th and Sixth, only the few Standards on the KK in 1968 would have fit the bill.
Many KK's terminated at Eastern Parkway; however, in the PM Rush,some were signed Rockaway Parkway.
"BMT standards running on IND lines was not that unheard of"
The 2800 series BMT Standards had roll signs for the (GG), though there are not reports they ever ran there.
Also, a reliable source told me there a train of BMT Standards ran on the (KK).
Bill "Newkirk"
Wayne says he saw such a train once. It was signed up as a Broadway-Brooklyn Local. It would have made sense, since the standards were stilll very much around in 1968.
Guys,I have always said the Eastern div.got the short end of the stick for years.The KK/K could have worked if it was operated as conceive,168th st WASHINGTON HTS to 168th st Jamaica.The KK/K should have been the primary[if not one of the]services out of Broadway Bklyn,with peak direction express service along the Jamaica line and better rolling stock other than the R1/9 cars.The R 27/30 were there by then,so those cars should have been used[1968]. The B should have stayed on Broadway as the T,with the D,F and KK RUNNING 6TH AVE. The KK would have gone to 57th street middays late evenings,and some short turns during rush. could have been done,if theh TA wanted the line to suceed.
They obviously didn't want it to suceed. They made it so inconvienient that they could justify not doing it anymore. It really should be given a second chance.
It was pretty straightfoward when it ran in the 70's. People still ignored it, as they would today.
They were and still are my favorite car in the system that was OPERATING when I was ... if the older BMT cars were still plying the rails, I'm sure I would have managed a stiffer for those instead but they were gone. I missed the chance for a Q car pick by just over a year (MJ line) ... but the geese HATED the R1/9's ("old wrecks" was what they were known as) but for me, a whiff of phenol and genuine TA "blue smoke" was like a good pipeload of Boerkum Riff in a Meerschaum. I *loved* the "old wrecks" ...
I'm sure they didn't help attendance though ... made people on that line stop whining about the 27/30's when the alternative was IND steel. :)
Was the KK a part-time (rush hours only) service like the EE or did it run all day?
I think it may have been part time service, another reason it was doomed.
The KK was a rush hour-only service. I saw one such train along 6th Ave. in 1968.
The KK ran rush hours only. That's one reason why it didn't last.
Exactly my point. People are creature of habit. If they're regular riders of the QJ during the mid-day hours they may not even be aware that the KK and a one seat ride to 6th Avenue existed.
Exactly. It just seems they have no desire to even try it again. If they did it would have to be an all day train, not just rush hours. They could stop it on nights and weekends though.
Now, operation is all but impossible. What would be the "new" KK's northern terminal? The connection from Essex only routes into the local tracks near B'way Lafayette. Therefore, the line would have to go to Queens via 53rd. or 63rd. Sts. With the 8 car limitations eastern division BMT lines must deal with, this is practically impossible. Any routing up Central Park West would require a traffic snarling switch somewhere on 6th Ave.
Let the new V train run on this route!!
Yes, run it to Canarsie once work on the Atlantic Avenue station complex and flyover is complete.
wayne
Why? L ridership is predominently EAST of Broadway Junction. Why limit their service by allocating capacity to a line that diverts to Broadway, which is adequatley serviced by the J & Z? If Canarsie riders need more service, then add extra L service.
Besides it being really really cool to ride on again, no one can come up with a legitimate reason to revive this route. I know it seems wasteful to not use this part of the Chrystie St. connector when it cost millions of $$$$ to build. It should never have been built.
But the fact remains, IT WAS BUILT, so why not use it?
Because it isn't needed and it's use creates more problems than it solves.
The line wasnt used ''as conceived''.this was suppose to be a connection to the second ave line,along with the Manhattan Bridge section,insted it was diverted to the Houston street line,thus killing off its sole purpose.As I've said before,the KK/K route could have worked,if the TA used it as an express along Broadway/Jamaica avenue to 168th street's.[and some modern rail cars,not rolling rust buckets]Today,we suffer from the same short sightedness of the past,480ft platforms,lack of a true express,silly skipstop service,and no direct service to upper Manhattan.There are some on this board that feel this service is not warranted,but it just that kind of thinking that made the J,M and Z lines the butt if the system for years........
but it just that kind of thinking that made the J,M and Z lines the butt if the system for years........
And that it has.
I agree the antiquated infrastructure has limited J/M/Z service, but it has rebounded quite nicely from the dregs of the 1970's/early 80's to be fairly reliable. It is no longer a joke.
And not everyone wants to go to midtown!!! I never hear Brighton riders complaining that they have no direct service downtown.
Send it up 8th Av. from W 4th.
Would the switch from local to express really tie up traffic on 6th Avenue? The W currently switches from local to express between 42nd and 34th. If the B switched from the 6th Avenue express to the 6th Avenue local tracks between 42nd and 34th, it wouldn't be any different. The B would run with the F and V from 34th to Broadway-Laffayette, a total of five stops, just like where the W runs with the N and R from Times Square to the 11th Street cut. Then the B could merge with either the J or the M.
Well ... at the time, the KK stopped here, the (QJ was it?) stopped at other stops. If YOUR station was a KK stop, then KK you GOT. No other options at most skip stops. But man, at the shared stops, those KK's emptied out.
The KK was rush hours only, while the EE was a 5:30 a.m.-8 p.m. service weekdays and alternated with the RR while running usually R-6s, R-16s and the occassional R-40M/R-42.
Rush hour only, and the EE ran all day during the week.
There were 3 trains I never saw signed and running when I lived in the city: the KK, NX, and RJ. See a pattern?
All 3 were flawed in conception ...
Those oldtimers knew you loved 'em, if they gave you as little trouble as you say.:-)
Heh. ABD's meant a short run, and you were still on the clock. After all, when you got to your "end run" there was the wonderful "write-up" time ... "why was your train ABD'd?" I was happy to take my time 'splaining ... the BEST part of it all was while the train "laid down" and watching the mighty RCI's do their hammer thing in hopes of making the pig fly again. "Everybody off, this train is no longer in service" was the sweetest words a motorman could hear. :)
Oh really? How about the public that's paying $1.50 a pop to ride those trains? Ever think about them when hearing those "sweet words?"
You guys never cease to amaze me.
For what it's worth, the subways are a WHOLE lot more functional than they were in the 70's, which is the period of time I was describing in my post. If you think it was hell for the riders, it was a whole lot worse for those of us who tried to keep the trains moving on bailing gum and bubble wire. :)
Did you ever have to pilot one of those mixed-consist nightmares?
If you did, were they very unruly to control? Not so much the doors, but the braking, accelerating, etc.?
After seeing the R42-R10 monster pic, the mixed R14, R15, and R22's of the early 80's No.s 2,3, and 5 don't seem so bad.
I got to do some odd oggs with the R1/9's but they were pretty close to each other in performance. Sure you'd have cars kicking one another owing to the minor differences. But I never did any TRUE mongrels. I *have* ridden them though and some of the folks I worked with ran them and it was an adventure at every stop.
Although there were always standards for braking and taking off, each car design implemented them in unique ways and in combination, the "standards" would be blown to hell. Fortunately I'm not aware of any situations where the bucking and heaving was sufficient to cause a car to mount a platform, but there were times that it felt like it came THAT close. :)
I thought so...:)
I'm thinking that motorman on the R42-R10 beast was glad to bring THAT beast back to the yard.
I'd be curious as to how an R-10/R-16 lashup behaved back in the 50s. Supposedly, those two car classes were intermixed from time to time. If anything, the R-16s compromised the sheer brute speed capabilities of the R-10s.
And what about the poor motorman of this frankensteinish train of R32's, R40 slants and R42's?
OI VAAAYYYYYYYY!!!!
If the pattern continued, then the front 4 cars were probably made up of R30's and R38's. Which is why I call this train "Noah's train". 2 of everything ...
My bet's a pair of R10's ... Thank GOD R1/9's wouldn't play that. :)
For those who haven't seen it, here's the pic in question:
If I had a time machine right now, you know where I'd go first??
Right onto that goldurned train
:)
I'd be right behind you hollering, "Break it up! BREAK IT UP!!!"
Can you imagine if the TA had stuck with single cars after the R-16 order? You could have as many as 8 different car types in the same consist. Eee-eewwwwww!!
(and you wonder why us old-timers have such chitty attitudes) Heh.
I dislike mixed consists about as much as I disliked the BMT standards back when they were still around.
Looks like things never change. The N train gets the biggest smorgasboard of car types:
As Snagglepuss used to say, heavens to Mergetroid (sp).
It's crazy. I forgot that they even did things like that back then.
I'd bet he banged in sick for a couple of days after that run. :)
If intermixing the cars like that caused so much trouble, then why didn't the design engineers come up with something so that problems with compatibility would be minimized? I had no idea that the R-1s would have problems if lashed up with R-9s, even though they looked the same on outward appearance. You learn something new every day, and not just by asking Martha.
Unlike the mongrel trains, the differences weren't THAT pronounced. They would make a consist a little less smooth in operation than one made of the same "class" of cars. Over several purchase cycles, the car makers got a bit better at it and bear in mind that some were ACF's, some were St Louis Car Co, others were Pullmans and some had GE fittings, others had Westinghouse gear ... those small differences were what made them a bit different. Compared to the "Smorgasbords" they weren't all THAT bad together and I'm sure the differences weren't so pronounced when they were "new."
Now I DEFINATELY miss the mixed monstrosities.... *L*
Heh. You had to RIDE those things to realize that they were an invitation to wait for the NEXT train in. :)
Heck, what woould have come NEXT??
A train made up of Slant 40's coupled to R-38's, probably
:)
R12's would show up in there too ... dunno what they were smoking overnight in the yards, but the results were psychedelic. :)
R-12's??
You mean IRT R-12's??
How??
Heh. It's one of the things I *know* I saw out there that others here have insisted never happened - we've all agreed to what they call a "push" in card-playing but I know I saw what I saw - R12's in the consists with 8 inch gap from the platform and all in the middle of some of those sausage trains.
Like I said, good drugs to be had in the yards back then - a case of subducktion, someone smoking quack. :)
Uh....
in the words of a good, old friend of mine...
That doesn't make any sense.
WHY???
Why would the guys who put the trains together do that?
Why was there a non-work train R-12 in the yard to begin with?
Wouldn't the motorman say "No way in hell am I taking that out"
I don't get it
R-10's with R-42's, sure, why not?
but an R-12?
*hysterical laughter followed by hysterical crying* :)
Or:
You're having too much fun ... we're gonna have to drop dime on ya. :)
Or:
So, this question bubbles up from the sewer of desperation.
After the last G.O.H. of the R/40s,R/40Ms and R/42s, or the R/32s and R/38s, can they be mix/married without suffering transplant rejection syndrom? I always think there are two lonely unmated individuals seeking a short term fling to pass the time until the spouse comes home.
avid
But they had plenty of $$$ in the budget for blue and silver paint, so everyone would know they were now riding Professor William Ronan's MTA subway cars.
Maybe they should have just tried painting everything to hold it together instead of using the bailing gum and bubble wire :-)
They did that with the redbirds ... but even paint lets go after a while. :)
You forgot to mention duct tape.:-)
I didn't mention duct tape because, unlike paint, duct tape HOLDS. :)
You know what, friend? It's funny- I used to HATE those mixed type trains, but since we've all been reminiscing about them so much, I'm actually starting to grow fond of 'em, and miss 'em..Call me crazy, but the R10-R42 picture actually puts a smile on my face.
The good ol' days, eh??
:)
It is pretty crazy looking. You wouldn't even expect something close to that happening today.
If revived today, do you think the Christie St connection would be a success?
I've discussed this with planners at NYCT. The prevailing opinion is that there is still not enough demand for an Eastern Division/Sixth Avenue service to warrant reviving a "K"-type service.
David
That's probably because everyone over here has been systematically pushed onto the L, and especially in Ridgewood, private vehicles.
The F already connects the two.
As for why it failed, its part-time full-local status had something to do with it, as did demographics. It might be worth a second shot now. In particular, a C-M merger might help passengers on both lines (or it might not, but the matter could and should be studied).
The connection between the Nassau BMT and 6th Avenue Line looks like its being maintained (roadbed pretty clean, rails not rusty, tunnel lights working, et al). Why not use it?
The question is whether it would help more people than it would hurt. My guess is that it would, but I haven't taken a survey. If most of the passengers would prefer service to remain as it is, then the connection shouldn't be used just because it's there.
I think it should be given a second chance In the late 60's it was a totally different climate. That Broadway part of Brooklyn (and much of the city) was in decline. There is a sort of rebirth in Brooklyn, at least it couldn't get worse in that part of Brooklyn, and in New York as a whole.
How about running the M through to 6th Avenue, and running the J/Z skip stop weekdays all day (except nights) to replace the M on Nassau St. The only problem would be that either the J or Z would hve to be extended through Montague Street rush hours.
If you're going to run a 6th Ave/Broadway Bklyn route, it should run on the J line. Passanger demand on the M line doesn't warrant it. The trains would run empty.
Chris I know that you are an experienced and (long-suffering perhaps) rider of the Jamaica Line. What do you think about running the K from Broadway Junction through Chrystie and up 8th Av. to Wash. Hts.? This idea would provide cross-platform transfers (preferably scheduling the J or Z to meet an outgoing K at Broadway Junction an another J or Z meeting the K at Myrtle) and would entail running 6 tph each of J K M Z, thereby not only providing service to midtown but allowing the J and Z to go express and skip 8 stops, making service from Queens more attractive.
I'd rather have more frequent J/Z service than a confusing new route. We railfans have to understand that our fantasy routing schemes are often times impractical.
Would you use this service,if available?
If I needed a 6th Ave train, I would ride the "K", if it came first. If a J did, then I'd take it to Essex and x-fer to the F. I would not "wait" for it to avoid a trip down a flight of stairs. I'd take the first available train.
When I was little, I recall seeing "K" trains pass (R1-9's in MTA colors), and they were virtually empty always. The only time they were crowded is if it was REROUTED in the PM rush as an "F" filler train!!!! Plus, during that time, there were financial cutbacks all over NYC, and the "EE" runs were absorbed by the N-limited, the South Fery shuttle closed, E trains stopped going to the Rockaway, etc. Back then, I realize now, the ridership on the Broadway Bklyn segment was in decline, but that's changed today since there is an upturn in the population in that area. The K would be successful today I think. Tony
So how can we get them to try it again?
Track capacity and car availablity -- that's what all the threads over the past couple of months about where to send the V train have been about.
The KK/K ran Sixth Ave. local with the F. It can't do that now because the V train is there, and in order to get as many people as possible into Manhattan from Queens, the V will run 600-foot trains. That means it can't run on the Eastern Division, which can only handle 480-foot trains.
Of the current Manhattan north-south lines, only the C runs 480 foot trains, so that's the only line that could be routed across the Willie B without major changes. But then you need to find a replacement for the C south of West Fourth. The options would be to run the V or E to Chambers-WTC/Hudson Terminal and the other to Euclid, but right now, there aren't enough available cars to do that.
The other problem is where does the train terminate in Brooklyn? Onre suggestion has been to route the merge the M and C trains into one line, but that creates a big loop south of 14th. M passengers headed to midtown would probably change at Wyckoff for the L and then change again at Union Square, Sixth or Eighth Aves., instead of riding the train all the way down to Delancey and back again. It could terminate at East New York and take the place of the Z as B'way-Brooklyn local, though that would eliminate skip-stop service between there and Parsons-Jamaica Center.
My own personal favorite would be to route it over the flying junction at ENY to Rockaway Pkwy, giving Canarsie passengers a one-seat ride to midtown without the big loop the M option would have, though that would still kill the J/Z skip-stop. But with CTBC coming, the Canarsie line will have to be a stand-alone line for the next several years while the new signal control system is tested.
I'll take the "loop". It may be slightly longer than the L, but for people who don't live along Wyckoff, it beats getting to the L, and then having to change again (all stairs/ramps, etc) to get to midtown. It probably wouldn't require more cars, because the C would take cars from the M and whatever goes to Brooklyn would take che cars from the C. It's not really adding service.
And it really should be done on weekends, when not that many people are going downtown. Between the J and M, I would through route one with the C, and send the other to Queens Plaza (D5), which would replace the V on 53rd St. Put a shuttle on Nassau between Chambers and Essex. Perhaps many others would follow from the L and its transfers.
The change between the L and the M at Wyckoff is a pain. The stairs are unbearable. I would rather take a little longer to get to midtown with a one seat ride. It averages out because in addition to all the stairs at Wyckoff, you still got to wait for the M or L to come when you change trains, and if you just miss one it could be a while.
I haven't taken a survey, but (at least when the M is running into Manhattan) I think more passengers would be inclined to stay on the M to Delancey, Canal, Chambers, or Fulton and transfer to an uptown train than to transfer twice (to the L and again somewhere on 14th Street). Between the stairs and the additional wait for a train, I don't think it's worth it.
My inclination would be to merge the J with the C. The Z would run to Broad as it does now; when the Z doesn't run, or for passengers boarding at J-only stations, lower Manhattan is a same-platform transfer away at Marcy or Essex.
Using the connection to the L would entail a service boost on part of the Broadway line and on part of the Canarsie line (since the current L and J/Z services need to remain in place). Do the inner J/Z and outer L need service boosts? If not, this arrangement is wasteful.
From a logistical standpoint, the C train running via Essex makes the most sense -- C and J (or M) are eight cars long, so no cut in service on Eighth Ave., and the C could swap Livonia for East New York to go along with 207th St. as it's yards. Unless the MTA decides to reactivate Culver express service, there's no reason why the V (or the E) couldn't take the C's place on the Fulton local run once the B Divsion has enough available cars. That would also add to local service capacity in Brooklyn, since the E or V trains would be 600-feet instead of 480.
As far as the C/M combo, I guess people living along the M north of Wycoff and working in Midtown would try it out at first and see how their time compared with transfering to the L and the again in Manhattan. If there was little or no difference, they would stay with the single seat ride, while if for some reason there were delays (if the J/Z was given priority at Myrtle, the F was given priority at B'way-Lafayette, and the E was given priority at West Fourth), then they would go back to the Canarise line transfer and the route would fail once more.
A 168th Washington Heights/Rockaway Parkway route once CTBC is expanded to other lines still seems like the most logical future routing to me -- it creates a one-seat ride to Midtown that doesn't loop back below and above any crossing lines like the M does with the L, and would free up the J to run Broadway Junction/Myrtle/Marcy peak direction express full time during regular hours, the same way the 7 does now. Track capacity limits would kill the Z skip stop east of B'way Junction if the C used the route west of there, but the loss of that should be just about made up for rush hour riders by the expanded express run along Broadway.
So if the "C" merged with the "M" and the "V" extended to Euclid, this would necessate a route change south of West 4th St. What colour would you give to each.
Perhaps a dashing line of blue and orange.
They could have the option of using either or 6th/8th ave from 59st south in the event of a reroute.
Nice idea, sign me up as a supporter for it.
avid
Line colors are assigned according to their midtown trunk routes (G, L and 7 excepted), so a combined C/M route would be dark blue, while the V would be orange -- though I suppose they could start doing striped routes to go along with the solids, like with pool balls, if they really wanted to. (:
I think the c would probably become orange, like the B was orange on both 6th and CPW. I believe the color coding is for the midtown section of manhattan.
But the C would only be on 6th Av. at Bway Lafayette. In Midtown it would still be on 8th Av. and thus remain blue.
There's a switch at W4th? I didn't realize that. I thought it had to go up to the switch to 8th Ave line after 47th, that's why I figured orange.
Yep, Local Track on the A-C-E to Local Track on the B-D-F and vice versa. it looks on this site like a one-for-one swap could work, though I'm told that in reality, this could not work as, for some reason or other, it would lower tph.
Yes, a combined C/M line would be a loop down and back up. But I think that a lot of M riders may feel that the long way down to transfer to the L at Myrtle-Wyckoff and then another transfer at Union Square, 6th Avenue or 8th Avenue is not worth it and they ride down to Essex-Delancy already to change to the F. And considering how narrow the stairways at Essex-Delancy are and how many people use that station to transfer to the already-overcrowded F, having the option of a direct line to Midtown from Willy B would become a very popular option.
The E could easily replace the C south of West 4th. With the WTC stop on the E out long-term, there's no reason why the E couldn't go to Brooklyn. I think a combined C/M train could really work.
I know I would use it. I used to ride the M all the way to Canal or Chambers for the N/R or 456 (depending on where I was going)n just to avoid all the stairs at Wyckoff to change to the L. A little longer, but it at least seemed like less walking. A one seat ride via Chrystie St would have been great.
Lack of use, budget cuts, etc. K service never caught on, even when it was extended all the way to 168th St. Some people said it was intended to ease congestion on the F line from Jamaica, which is laughable. Who would choose to ride a slow, creaky R7/R9 K train through every blighted neighborhood in Brooklyn to get to midtown when you had a fast, underground express route sporting some of the newest cars in the system?
Some people think the V will be little used....but MAYBE if we ran the V with 480 ft cars, then thru Chrystie Street over the Willy B (and forget the Skip-stop), this would sort of "float all boats"....Broadway (Brooklyn) riders would get direct service to Midtown and Rock Center, and Queens riders might notice, appreciate, and USE the V.
A nice way to actually ad some NEW service as a result of the 63rd St connection! It may have made the cost somewhat justifiable.
My name is Kytja Weir and I am a reporter from Columbia Journalism School looking for some information on the inside of New York’s subways.
I know much has been written about the subway workers, the “mole people,” and the graffiti artists, but I am interested in the inner tunnel environment. I am trying to write a story about the things that live in the tunnels – rats, mice, bugs, people, mold, etc. – and was wondering if any of you might be able to help me.
Do any of you know about the biological life inside the subways? Or do any of you know anyone else who might know about the things that creep around in there?
Any advice or contacts you can provide is greatly appreciated. I can be reached at kew2001@columbia.edu or 646-256-0877.
Much thanks.
Kytja
My name is Kytja Weir and I am a reporter from Columbia Journalism School looking for some information on the inside of New York’s subways.
I know much has been written about the subway workers, the “mole people,” and the graffiti artists, but I am interested in the inner tunnel environment. I am trying to write a story about the things that live in the tunnels – rats, mice, bugs, people, mold, etc. – and was wondering if any of you might be able to help me.
Do any of you know about the biological life inside the subways? Or do any of you know anyone else who might know about the things that creep around in there?
Any advice or contacts you can provide is greatly appreciated. I can be reached at kew2001@columbia.edu or 646-256-0877.
Much thanks.
Kytja
There is no biological life in the subways (and includes some "people").
I'll drop you an email. outside of rats and an occasional homeless person, there's no life outside average commuters in subway tunnels. you might find occasional mummified cats and the such though. =)
Do any of you know about the biological life inside the subways? Or do any of you know anyone else who might know about the things that creep around in there?
There are quite a few two-legged creeps down there. Sorry, I couldn't let that pass.
Seriously though, I only know of rodents, but it will be interesting to find out if anyone knows of anything else
There used to be a well-know female cat living at the Times Square Shuttle station. The 70s I think. People fed the cat and sometimes adopted the kittens that the mother had.
Also there was a article in the NY Times about the cat I mentioned. Also the cat lived at one of the bumpers at track leval.
Totally off topic, but IMHO adopted stray cats are the dearest. Mine is from East Village streets, and you can't find a cat sweeter than her.
Arti
What kinds of "life" are you refering to?
The least I think you'll find are rats. Maybe you'll also encounter some discarded pets (cats and dogs) and maybe some of the "urban legends" that are part of NYC history.
hey now, i almost had my rear bitten off by an alligator down there. =)
One of the "legends" lives on!
Maybe she is thinking of heypaul.
Yes there are many life forms in the subways. They include a few stray pets, tons of rats, some homeless, spiders, bacteria, virus and of course animals with two legs.
What Kytja needs is a real inside tour of a Redbird, undercar and all. Even a TA spokesman said that the enviroment is so bad that Anthrax probably wouldn't survive for long. Peter
Now that is a scarey thought. Something more dangerious than Anthrax. I hope certain parties don't have acesss to this site.
No, it's not more dangerous than anthrax....it's just that the 'food' needed by such virus' is not too good....and I'm still scrubbing my hands five hours off duty later. The NYC Subway system is probably one of the safest places to be in....just that passengers never get to experience the work that makes it go and go and go. Peter
Peter, et al.
I would love to talk to any of you about your experiences working/exploring in such a nasty environment that even anthrax couldn't survive.
And hey, a tour of a Redbird, undercar and all, sounds good to me. Can't say I really know what that even is, but I'd at least love to hear about it.
My email is kew2001@columbia.edu and my phone is 646-256-0877. Please let me know if you would be interested in talking to me directly.
thanks.
Kytja
A redbird is a class of subway car that was built in the 1960's (Give or take) Later on they were painted a dark red color and the name redbird was unofficially given to them.
The 'Redbirds' are actually a long series of all steel bodied subway cars that were painted in rust resistant red paint and are fourty years old. They continue to run, carefully inspected and repaired, as the new replacements the TA received continue to have problems. As far as any 'tours' are concerned, the Transit Authority is always looking to show its 'best side' which would not include the 'worst.' A little effort with the public relations department with some small emphasis on programs to aid the homeless and distressed might get you a peek. Safety is a priority and escorted trips down beyond the tracks into the Netherworld are almost impossible....most ventures took place by trespassers at their own risk (not recommended.) Peter
I love to have adrenalin rushes when the trains come and you must hide between colums. Highly not recomeded cause you don't have a right to be there and no vest/ lights/ light codes.
The oddest creature I've come across underground was a bright orange chicken. It was wandering around a certain tunnel pecking through piles of trash.
Well, I'm pretty sure it was a chicken- that or a large radioactive pigeon.
heh! i emailed that story. I swear, next time we run into a *%(*& chicken down there, we're talking lots of photos.
at least it wasn't pecking at the dead dog!
I think a King Cobra is a biological life form ...
seen plenty of those in the tunnels.
Or dead rat. Look at the back (where the trains go after dischraging there passengers), manhatten-bound on the against-the-wall track and you will see 5 dead rats and a fallen down wall. Hope someone takes some pics of that. It shows the old color strip which is covered now.
I personally like the live pigeons that fly into the barn and walk about inside R142s. It's home. Peter
Don't know why, but pigeons seem to love car barns. Our (Baltimore) Irvington Car House, of 1898 vintage, housed 91 cars in 1960 and had to have at least 16 times that many pigeons. When streetcar service ended in 1963 the barn was abandoned and torn down in early 1965. Where the pigeons went after then nobody bothered to figger out.
Funny pigeon in car barn story - absolutely true.
After the Carroll Park Shops were closed to streetcars in 1959, car maintenance moved to Bay 1 of Irvington. Cars were even painted there. (by brush - they tried spray painting with a portable paint booth, but the Fire Department put an end to that.) One day, a pigeon fell into a paint can of the horrendous yellow that the NCL management of BTC adopted in 1951. The bird was covered from head to foot in yellow - and lived to tell about it. The Irvington birds tended to fly uptown to the campus of the City College, where in 1962 I saw a yellow pigeon pecking at something on the ground - the very same bird.
When things in life are bad and I start to remember how bad some of my work experiences were, the pigeons fly in the barn and peck about. If someone left a R142 transverse door open, they'll fly in. The pigeons know where home is just like me, welcomed by the TA. R142s are for the birds. CI Peter
I think that any car can be for the birds if the doors are left open. Just hope that the car cleaners have the presence of mind to clean the bird poop before the cars are placed into service for the day.
#3 West End Jeff
I can tell you that my CTAs earn their keep. Boid poop ain't nuttin compared to whats under Redbird seating. If I do Redbird Carbody, my first task IS to crack open all the seating and I leave all the gold underneath undisturbed. CI Peter
I guess what you are trying to mention is that people do their business underneath the seats. Yuk!!
#3 West End Jeff
Oh great! Another urban legend! :-)~
Just read a bit of news that London Undeground is considering ZPTO. First train to be on-line in 2008.
Arti
The Docklands Light Rail is "ZPTO" (there is an attendant on board but he doesn't operate). I would think that the Waterloo & City Line or the Central Line Woodford-Hainault shuttle would be the top candidates for LU "ZPTO".
The Aldwych shuttle would be a good candidate, although maybe a little short, if it still existed.
-Robert King
The shuttle albeit abandoned still exists. However there's practically no shot of the Aldwych shuttle coming back into service.
One other short shuttle that could be used instead is the Chesham-Chalfont & Latimer branch of the Metropolitan Line. But who knows what line they could start out with?
I know - reinstate the Ongar extension!
Chances are they'll go to total automation by turfing the ticket inspectors from the DLR.
-Robert King
It looks like they want to do away with the attendant aswell.
Arti
Is there a link to the article? I would imagine that they would install platform doors, so since part of the Jubilee line already has them, they might start with that line. Like Zman said, Waterloo and City would make sense, too. The Victoria line is automated, correct? It would be easy to make that one ZPTO.
[Is there a link to the article? ]
Unfortunately the link wouldn't do you any good as it was an Estonian online news portal. It mentioned the source of being The Times.
As for platform doors, they didn't say anything about it, but it would make a lot of sense.
Arti
Found the link to full article in Times.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2001560449,00.html
That states that Victoria line is not fully automated but will be by 2008. Main reason is to spend less on personell and to make management to have a better position in labor disputes.
Arti
Well the Victoria Line was the first line to have ATO in London, so this doesn't surprize me. As far as the "train captain" scheme, that'd be a hoot on the Vicky. That line can get quite crowded.
[As far as the "train captain" scheme, that'd be a hoot on the Vicky. That line can get quite crowded. ]
Also would one bother to walk around instead of just sitting in one place and reading a book? :-)
Arti
The Victoria and Central lines have ATO. It was first introduced to the riding public on the Woodford-Hainault shuttle (Central Line) I believe around 1965.
In 1999, the total NYCT subway operating costs of $2.0 billion broke down as follows: $0.8 billion (40%) for Vehicle Operations; $0.4 billion (20%) for Vehicle Maintenance, $0.5 billion (25%) for Non-Vehicle Maintenance and $0.3 billion (15%) for General Administration. Of the nearly $2.0 billion dollars of operation expense, labor and wages for vehicle operations came to $0.2 billion or roughly 10%.
The question for NYCT is whether is is prudent to go after 10% of the operating cost or to get a handle on the remaining 90%.
Hehe 15% for GA, I'd start there :-)
Arti
question: with segway/ginger/IT on the horizon, will subways become less important, and cars banned from manhattan (finally)?
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,186660,00.html
(no, it won't happen overnight, and it's a bit to speculate on, but hey, everything else gets speculated here!)
question: with segway/ginger/IT on the horizon, will subways become less important, and cars banned from manhattan (finally)?
My fearless predictions: no, and no.
Ask the same question a year from now. For the moment, it's unenclosed, unsuitable for foul weather.
But: it does allow door-to-door travel, better than a cab, better than a car stranded out in acres of parking lot, and with less effort (and less space) than a bicycle.
It is genuinely revolutionary. I could see the subways being adapted for it. But for the moment, we wait and see its evolution.
Ask the same question a year from now. For the moment, it's unenclosed, unsuitable for foul weather.
I completely forgot about that, there's another big minus.
But: it does allow door-to-door travel, better than a cab, better than a car stranded out in acres of parking lot, and with less effort (and less space) than a bicycle.
All of that depends on where you are going and most importantly, how far. Bicycles do not take up much space to begin with and most importantly, bicycles have a transmission. They can move up steep hills and at hi-speeds on flat surfaces.
It is genuinely revolutionary.
It's just another contributor to heart disease and obesity. Designing a machine that can do what feet have been doing for millions of years is only a testiment to the extreme lazyness of our society. As Chuchubob can attest to, walking can be a perfectly acceptable way to get places quickly.
It's just another contributor to heart disease and obesity. Designing a machine that can do what feet have been doing for millions of years is only a testiment to the extreme lazyness of our society.
At 17 mph, which is roughly 4x brisk walking speed, it allows users to travel more quickly to places they CAN'T walk to but would otherwise drive to. That's a net benefit.
I see it as a BOON to industrial use - whether it passes muster in the suburban or extraurban mindset matters not. In large commercial properties, it will be a boon. Letter carriers who do foot patrol will also benefit. I don't see it being a benefit for bicycle messengers or those equipped with faster wheels, nor do I see "consumers" having any benefit until it drops under $500 a shot. And it WILL eventually.
Having taken it all in though, I DO see a market for it as a substitute for faster commuting in WALKING spaces ... the hype though, nothing can measure up to hype ... this thing's pretty neat though if used for moving small items quickly.
I see it as a BOON to industrial use - whether it passes muster in the suburban or extraurban mindset matters not. In large commercial properties, it will be a boon.
Good point.
I see it's main usefulness to be among senior citizens and others who for whatever reason may have difficulty in walking long distances. While for now I can't see how it gets around the snow and rain hazards along with street and sidewalk congestion problems, it does have the potential to restore mobility to a significant number of people who are hampered by age and/or infrimites.
It may not eliminte the use of vehicles and mass transit in big cities (unless some really buttinski lawmakers get into legislating Segways and banning cars and diesel buses for all people in those areas), but it does have the potential to play a major role in transportation for a significant group of people.
I see it's main usefulness to be among senior citizens and others who for whatever reason may have difficulty in walking long distances...
Possibly, but if its motive power comes from sense of balance, would an unsteady person be able to use one?
The stories I've read say it's "almost impossible" to tip over because of the number of gyroscopes involved. I would guess those would be able to compensate for some natrual balance problems, unless a person had some sort of inner ear defect or infection that caused an ongoing loss of balance.
Adult homes and population control? I noticed the people demonstrating them were wearing helmets!
avid
>>> Having taken it all in though, I DO see a market for it as a substitute for faster commuting in WALKING spaces <<<
The hype on this thing reminds me of the days when it was suggested that every commuter would have his own helicopter to travel around in. Could you imagine the death toll with helicopters crashing into each other everywhere? The same goes with a personal vehicle that can travel at 17 mph. It certainly should not be in the same area that pedestrians are walking at 2 mph, and if two collided at a combined speed of 34 mph, serious injuries would be inevitable.
Tom
I'd agree with you in general but at the same time, there's a lot of bicycles out there and they go even faster than these whizzers. And yet, somehow most of them survive. I *see* though why the creators were saying urban areas would need to adjust policy and modify some infrastructure for these things. For now though, I see them being used mostly inside enclosed spaces such as warehouses and perhaps large department stores, postal distribution centers, that kinda thing.
I'd get a serious dose of the shivers trying to pilot one of those across 42nd St in the dead of February. :)
I'd agree with you in general but at the same time, there's a lot of bicycles out there and they go even faster than these whizzers. And yet, somehow most of them survive.
Pedestrians do get seriously injured when hit by a bicycle.
Segway's creator says, "If a Segway hits you, it's like being hit by another pedestrian." If it's going 17 mph, it won't be like being hit by a pedestrian. Evidently, Mr. Kamen can explain the theory of general relativity, but doesn't comprehend simple mechanics.
It'll be a bonanza for 1-800-AMBULANCECHASERS then ... but do bear in mind that the number of people killed in fatal bicycle accidents is pretty low compared to "personal helicopters" which is what I had replied to. I've been knocked down by wayward pedestrians on FEET far more often than bicycles. :)
I saw a picture of the "Segway" and couldn't stop laughing. What a joke!
Well, if Lawrence Taylor was a pedestrian and he hit you on the street, it probably would feel about like that...
>>> there's a lot of bicycles out there and they go even faster than these whizzers <<<
That is not really true. The number of bicycles traveling on the sidewalk are relatively few because of their bulk compared to the size of the Segway, and generally travel much slower than 17 mph, where there are pedestrians. Your suggestion that they might be used in an industrial setting is probably correct, with a strict limitation as to how many there are in use at any one time, and with some kind of a warning signal on them. But I do not see them as a common general consumer method of urban transportation.
BTW, I have seen a low tech alternative out here; motorized razor type scooters which travel at about 10 mph. The handle part folds down onto the board, so it could be carried on public transportation with a smaller footprint than a folded baby stroller (but is not allowed because of the fuel). The engine which is not much larger than a large model airplane engine drives the rear wheel. It is started by pushing off on the scooter which cranks the engine, and when you stop, the brake also kills the engine. I have not inspected any of these things closely, but have observed kids riding them and starting and stopping.
Tom
I guess we'll see how they do. Out in the sticks where I live, it'd never be quite practical with steep hills, rought terrain and brutally cold winters. They'll never sell as well as they've been hyped, but I do see a number of situations where they could be quite useful. I suppose we'll all see in time.
"where I live, it'd never be quite practical with steep hills, rought terrain "
The "segway" wouldn't last a day in Sea Cliff either. I'm still having a good laugh over this over-hyped piece of garbage. And it's 3 grand by the way, you could buy a used car for that much.
Ummm ... try EIGHT grand for one of those - $3,000 is a future target price. Like I've said repeatedly, it's CUTE ... it has some possible uses. Then again, so does a forklift but I don't see many wanting to drive one to work. :)
That contraption?
I GUARANTEE I will fall off it within 5 minutes of getting on one...
www.forgotten-ny.com
For $8,000.00 current MSRP right now, it had better reach over and pick you up. :)
For $8,000.00 current MSRP right now, it had better reach over and pick you up.
I'd guess that their largest single cost item is product liability insurance.
Even if you don't manufacture a personal floatation device. :)
But yeah, I'd guess they have not yet underestimated those vying for Darwin awards ... I can see the 12-9's now.
Quite to the contrary, I see it being quite complimentary to the subway. People will be able to live and work further from the subway, and use a Segway to get to and from the nearest station. And the Segway looks much easier to take with you on the train than a bike, which can be quite cumbersome.
I'm very dissapointed in the price, though. $3000 is very steep, and apparently that's even an optimistic price - $3000 is what they *hope* to get it *down* to. I think they need to get it down near the $1500 range for it to really be successful.
As one of the stories about it said, it's about $2000 and 40 pounds too much.
I'd give it a couple or three years. Certainly, if they start producing millions of units per year in Asia, the price should come way down. Design refinements will also come along. And further ideas about integrating it into the current transportation infrastructure should will have developed.
I think if anything, it'd be a boom to transit (provided it doesn't weigh a ton :) Roll up to station, get on, get off, roll to work? I can see it.
How about a 4ft 8.5 inch + flanges extender for the wheelbase? When Amtrak breaks down again, pop a door, roll along the tracks ;)
Heh. FRA would require handlebar signalling and an FRA cert to ensure that you knew what to do when you rolled up to a red/red. :)
I think if anything, it'd be a boom to transit (provided it doesn't weigh a ton :) Roll up to station, get on, get off, roll to work? I can see it.
Provided they are allowed on trains at peak times. You would like to be the person trying to segway himself into an SRO 5-bird at rushhour?
One thing I noted in the photo op is that folks seemed to be standing in place on them without falling over, so it's quite possible given the design that you could stand on yours on the train. Perhaps that's the reason for the 2.5 MPH accel/decel curves for subway cars these days to prevent them from tipping. :)
It still takes up more space.
I don't even think that'd be the major issue ... think about the staircases ... much more of an issue there I would guess than on the trains themselves.
How much is the weight again? I consider myself fairly fit and generally have no problem lugging my mountain up and down stairs at a run, but I can see how many other people would have problems w/ that. My bike weighs about 25-40 pounds.
I have no idea ... the economy sucks SO badly, can't even think about getting one. It'd only be depressing. :)
The illustrations in the patent application show a six-wheeled device that can climb stairs (I assume this is the iBot?). Look, it already has optional equipment!
As far as bringing these things onto buses and subways goes, I agree that it's right up there with bicycles, strollers, and backpacks. And if this thing moves by the operator's thinking about it moving, I hope it's "smart" enough to know the difference between someone "thinking" about diving off a platform edge and their actually wanting to go ahead with it.
One way to cut the price dramatically would be to replace the balance sensors and computing power with a simple joystick, but then it doesn't seem so revolutionary.
I agree.
Where do you tie the thing up when you're not using it? At $3000 a pop, there'd be a hell of a market for stealing and reselling them.
At that price, they could just as well be considered cars (since $3000 is about what you might pay for a half-decent used car), and look at the amount of security features you need there! (On top of that, you can't exactly pick up a car and walk away with it...)
I say, until the price gets below about $500, there's virtually no market, except among postal workers or couriers. A bit lighter, too, would be good.
Sounds like a passing fad to me. I expect to hear nothing more about it in a few months.
Think zero degrees and no heater ... in the summertime, seems a wonderous idea. But I don't see the money for the changes to urban infrastructure and mad money in people's pockets to do it right away. A very interesting idea though. Eventually, it will make an impact.
Maybe they can strap a belt attatched to a snow plow around the scooter rider's waist and he can plow the snow in front of him as he speeds along at 14 mph in the middle of January. They can call it the Special Upstate New York Attatchment :-)
Since the post office is ordering them to be tried out in selected locations, I want to see the 14 mph scooter get its first mail carrier test against the target neighborhood's 32 mph Rottweiler...
Hahahaha ... well, up here where 3 feet of snow are the norm for many given dumps up in the hills, the thing would need to be equipped with a biggie fan on the front and a periscope if there's any hope of travelling between a couple of weeks from now and March. And obviously handlebar gun mounts to take out the neighborhood Rottweilers ... a good war time ride. Heh.
This thing is all hype.
First of all, the Segway furfills a role already covered by those little Razor scooters. Second, it is much more expansive, prone to theft and damage, harder to store and carry and probably has trouble w/ water, steep inclines, non-paved surfaces and general city grime.
If people do use this product for some reason it might replace some forms of city driving (ie anything that dosen't require cargo or passengers), but most of those people usually walk or bike or scoot as it is, so I anticipate the market to come from current pedestrians or from corporations.
This will probably not hurt mass transit travel as a subway moves MUCH faster than 15mph and you don't have to content w/ throngs of pedistrians OR crossing other streets. This might stand to enhance mass transit as a big complaint is that transit rarely takes people exactly where they want to go and many people abhore walking any great distance. In theory, mass transit stations could serve as a hub and spoke system for people on segways. This would increase the popularity of hi-speed, limited stop services such as light rail, express busses and heavy rail.
This brings up an interesting point. The popularity of this product could be directly related to its accpetance on mass transit. If various TA's treat it like a bi-cycle, restricting its use on trnsit vehicles, then fewer people will be inclined to get one.
R/160 to incorporate overhead Segway storage racks. ADA compliant stations to be rushed to provide lift for Wheelchairs and Segway. Mothers with Strollers compete with Segway for space! Hoverboader replaces Segway! Second Ave Line to get Funds for Study and Impact Evaluation! There is a Tooth Fairy.... Gay Dentist opens office.
avid
Some random thoughts about the Segway.
Its use would have to be licensed. About 25 years ago, the moped manufacturers convinced New York State that a moped limited to 20 mph need not be licensed. It was a fairly irresponsible law and such mopeds are now classified as Class C limited use motorcycles and must be licensed.
The fact that the Segway has no seat and the user is standing means that it cannot be considered a motorcycle under NY State Law. I have not checked but the NY State definition probably uses the Uniform Vehicle Code definition for motorcycle and would be used by most other states. My guess is that under the present NYS V&T the Segway must be licensed and there is no povision for describing it other than a limited use motor vehicle. It looks like AASHTO will have to figure out how to handle this potential street menace before it appears in quantity.
The small wheels would appear to make the Segway have problems with street surface irregularities. A small depression (aka pothole) that would be no problem for a 13-15" automobile tire or a 27" bicycle tire will seem like the Grand Canyon for the Segway's shopping cart sized wheels. Even if the Segway's gyros keep it upright, the passenger will still be subject to Newton's Laws.
The 17 mph speed is equivalent to a very good bicyclist. Professional racers will average 25 mph. How good are the brakes? What will keep the passenger from separating from the vehicle in a panic stop? Wearing brain buckets will have to be required.
The publicity seems to indicate a 17 mile range and a 1 hour charge time. Such chargers would use a lot of amps and weigh a lot. My guess is that the charger would be a separate unit and not carried on the relatively light (40 lbs) vehicle. This will define its initial use. It will be from the home to a destination that is in the 4-6 mile (15-20 minute) range.
If this is successful, it should prove ideal for Manhattan residents. Everyone below 110th would be within the Segway's range to midtown and downtown. The $3K price tag would be just right for the Upper East Siders. It's a good thing the MTA will not dig a single shovel for the 2nd Ave Subway until 2005. It would no longer be necessary by then.
This is not quite what the power companies need capacity-wise. An added demand that is more likely in summer and during daylight hours.
Inquires from Stop & Shop, White Castle and Space Mountian are expected to speed through put.
avid
Okay, you early-bird railfanners -- where are the R-143 shots? I expected at least Trevor to have one or two shots up on SubTalk by now...
BMTman
It's too early. They're still in foreplay. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
He's probably riding it for the millionth time.
Story here.
That's the train that runs with ex-Amtrak Clocker cars.
Was it IRT, BMT or LIAR? Why would a tourist train be running in that area anyway? I didn't know Flatbush Ave was such a hot destination. Was it some sort of railfan excursion?
Did the Culver Shuttle ever get as far as the R-30's? Or something older? Just curious.
I think it only went as far as R16's
The most recent picture I could find on the site is R32, if you take a look at the Culver Shuttle Page.
I find that photo very interesting
http://www.nycsubway.org/bmt/culver/shuttle/r32-3525a.jpg
I have never seen R-32 MU'd with what appears to be earlier R units (looks like -27s) before while in service.
"Smorgasbord" trains were the WAY back then ... kept the railfans happy. If you didn't like a 27/30, you could go back 2 cars and ride in a 32, two more back a 38, or you could move from an R10 into a 42. You could have any car you wanted on any train at times.
Yes, Virginia ... once upon a time, the subway was INTERESTING. :)
I remember "smorgasboard" consists well. I thought they were great. Many crews did not share my enthusiasm, though. I remember one T/O in the late 70's describing his mixed R-27/30/40m/42 as "braking like a rubber band".
Peace,
ANDEE
Ummmm ... railfoamers and people who actually gotta "work this thing" are often at absolute odds over "reality" (patent pending) and yes, mixed consists were like a damned rodeo in the cab. But that didn't stop dispatch from ordering bizarre mating rituals in the yards. The geese at the window couldn't be happier though. :)
Fortunately the R1/9's wouldn't play nice *AT ALL* with the other kids even though each class from R1 to R4 to the 3 6's to 7's to 9's were each VERY different and would play "ride 'em cowboy" in their own unique idiom as well. They were NEVER classed into their own consists as one type either, at least not on the D train. But if we had to mix SMEE and AMUE, it would have been MOST interesting indeed.
>>>Fortunately the R1/9's wouldn't play nice *AT ALL* with the other kids....<<<
HAHA... sorta like todays R-68s not being able to play with R-32/38/40/42. The more things...oh never mind.
Peace,
ANDEE
Ok what was the oldest, Lo Volts are Q Cars
The Q's ... more lives than Morris the Cat.
Lo/V's were about 10 years younger (1916-1917) than the Q's which were originally gate cars from 1903-1907.
That's OK ... word is the 142's and the 142A's don't get along either. Whoda thunk that train couplers were capable of a good old fashioned Bronx handshake? :)
sorta like todays R-68s not being able to play with R-32/38/40/42.
I did see yard moves where an R-40 was coupled to some R-68s .... so I guess they can, er, mate ... but it probabyl would be unsafe for pax trying to move between cars in general ....
--Mark
They have the same couplers and I would assume the same pin arrangement on the electric portions, so you could couple them together. They'll probably never intermix 60-footers with 75-footers for revenue service, though.
Ooops! Was that second car 1575?
Heh. Wiseass ... that one performed NICELY with the other kids. It was when some putz tried to lash it up to R10's that the adventures began. :)
Heh. Wiseass I resemble that remark. When they mixed the equipment, did they go out of the way to install triggers at the conductor's position or avoid that like they did in the IRT?
Well, in the case of the "imposter" the R1/9's and the R10's had bottles on the ends to begin with (must have made for interesting times when the 10's were lashed to 42's) but as far as I know on the electric section, they must have done something amusing to make them open and close as expected since somehow it worked. I don't even want to guess how.
But on the motorized doors, I'd bet it didn't matter all that much. Like I said, I tended to get solid R1/9'ers and once or twice, got to take out 32's ... never did any smorgasbords on either trainsets. Sure did hear the griping in the crew room from those who did take out "bucky beavers" though. Seems the biggest problem was getting and holding indication.
Well, there's that classic photo of R-10s and R-42s in the same A consist, and in it the R-10s appear to be on the ends with the R-42s in the middle. Larry Redbird R-33 says there was one consist of 8 R-32s with an R-10 tacked onto each end. Since the pins on the electric portions were arranged the same way on all SMEE cars, they were compatible. Train Dude explained that it didn't matter what was actually controlling the doors as long as the trainline circuits matched up. In other words, the doors on the R-10s would respond to a key and button in the same manner as a trigger box.
Luckily the R-10s were rarely intermixed with other cars. They were in a class by themselves and deserved to run in solid trains.
Yep ... just like I managed to avoid the "trucks" and the "docks" in the west village and I hung out on Christopher Street in the 70's, amused by the "catfights" among beavers with kickstands, I'm JUST as glad that I never had to operate mongrel consists. There was a REASON why I was willing to take R1/9 duty ... as much as those could be bucking beavers, wasn't diddly compared to mixed 32's and 38's and even more bizarre rolling stock sexual mixes. :)
I probably would have preferred running oldtimers as well, had I worked for the TA back then. Their marvelous assortment of sounds would have mesmerized me. Come to think of it, I was always mesmerized whenever I got a prewar train.
I came in during a flurry of replacements for a big bulge in retirements. Most of us were newbies at the time and damned few of them wanted to hear about taking out the "oldies" ... there were plenty of jobs on the R1/9's and I *really* wanted to work the D. So by picking what I picked, I had my chance. Of course by the time we got down to *my* number, all the 32's had been taken.
It was the opposite when I came out. The CC was the senior line because of the one trippers that made the line up. My first picked job on the Concourse was R27/30 cars, but my time on the XX gave me plenty of time on the rolling thunder.
Forgive me ... when was your "coming out party?" Heh. 27/30's on the concourse? Yipe! Once upon a time it was 32's or R1/9's, if anything else came up from 145th it was usually taken out at 161st with a grenade. :)
(Luckily the R-10s were rarely intermixed with other cars. They were in a class by themselves and deserved to run in solid trains.)
However on the IRT the R-12's (which were pretty similar to the R-10's) were very ofter coupled with newer cars. I don't ever recall them being in the conductor's position so they never used the triggers.
R-27/30's. And they were loaded with graffiti.
BMTman
Absolutely right, Selkirk. My first year in motors was the last year of the RR from Astoria-95. One trip I took a train of 4 cars of R27s with 4 cars of R16s. That trip was an ADVENTURE. Thank goodness it was 2AM or somebody would have ended up on the floor.
Mixing R27's with R16's was quite common on the Eastern Division. Those R16's didn't like getting tugged along any fatser than they normally wanted to go.
The craziest consist I ever rode was 8 cars of R42,R32,R27,R42
At least the R-16s blended in well with the R-27/30s from a stylistic point of view. Kind of like the R-32s and R-38s or R-40Ms and R-42s.
I never cared for smorgasbord trains. Give me a solid consist.
Heh. I only rode the mongrel trains, sometimes as an employee. Knowing the job though and what an adventure a train of similar bad order cars were at the time, mongrels were truly "hands full" operation. Pity they didn't sell DEPENDS at the time. :)
Indeed, or at least bring a raincoat with you because you knew you were going to spill your coffee on your pants.
Back in the old days with dead motors, hung shoes and all sorts of other "surprises," you just knew not to bring a beverage with ya into the cab. I lived on ring dings and devil dogs. If you put up the bench, you'd usually be able to find them when you needed them on the floor up against the panel. :)
Sometimes you just had to live dangerously. Midnights on the road is a bitch. Ya just gotta have the caffeine. Come to think of it, it's the same on AMs too.
"Splits" was even worse ... it's funny ... I never had a problem with feeling like I was going to doze off, especially on the road. As long as I had plenty of sugar of course. :)
"I lived on ring dings and devil dogs"
How about twinkies !
Bill "Newkirk"
Ring Dings and Devil Dogs were products of Drake's Cakes. I remember them well. They also had Yodels, Cream Cups, Fruit Doodles, and Yankee Doodles. Compared to what Hostess had to offer, the analogy was thus:
Ring Ding - Ding Dong
Fruit Doodle - Fruit Pie
Cream Cup - Cupcake (I think)
IIRC Hostess didn't have a counterpart to the Devil Dog.
The Maytag Repair Man once did a Devil Dogs commercial.
Drake's started to offer Sunny Doodles in 1972 to by best recollection.
#3 West End Jeff
Drake's started to offer Sunny Doodles in 1972 to my best recollection.
#3 West End Jeff
Geez ... what is this? If you can't beat it, EAT it? Heh.
That is the idea of this post. If you can't beat it, EAT it.
#3 West End Jeff
Food Talk has reared its ugly head again.:-)
You forgot the BEST thing about Drakes: Their uncomperable coffee cake! Absolutely THE best accompianment to a hot cup of Chock Full O'Nuts coffee...Hostess coffee cake can't hold a candle to it....
I think you're right about Drake's Coffee Cake. They're still probably the best Coffee Cakes that you can buy.
#3 West End Jeff
Oh man, I forgot about them. They were delicious!
Hostesses' counterpart to the Devil Dog would be Suzy Q's. (abeit wider). Drakes' chocolate was unique. All the other companies' devils food is the same.
I've never heard of Cream Cup. The Doodles are Drakes' cupcake brand. For many years the Ding Dong was called "Big Wheels" in areas where Drakes were sold, because of the fact that it was ripped off of Ring Dings and there was some legal action or something. When ITT Continental bought Drakes in 1987, then "Ding Dongs" appeared in NY, briefly. But this near monopoly was quickly broken up, so then Hostess came up with "King Dons". Now, they've all been bought out by Interstate (Dolly Madison), so the Ding Dong brand appeared again. Noone has been able to break up this even greater monopoly.
I wonder how many people are aware that as big as Drakes is here, you cannot find them between Delaware and Florida, and anywhere West of those states. It is purely a Northeast product, although it has been briefly distributed other places (including California in '89), and now under IBC, they are trying once again to expand, I hear. They are all over Florida, because many Jewish people from NY retired there, bringing the kosher cakes with them (most of the others used beef fat and lard --ugh! as shortening, and some still use beef, although Hostess is slowly going kosher). From Pennsylvania to Virginia, Tastykake has the place Drakes does here. Elsewhere, Dolly Madison, which we see here loosely distributed by Lady Linda and Betty Jane, usually in bodegas, is the big competitor to Hostess, and as I mentioned, they are now owned by the same company.
I liked the swiss rolls, which have come back in recent years, and they also had an imitation Twinkie called "shortcakes", which were filled with strawberry, and then banana and chocolate filling at first.
And I used to complain because my 'SnoBalls' cost twelve cents in California when I paid only ten in New York City?? What TA really needs is some Twinkies in R142 propulsion! CI Peter
Perhaps a couple of wads of drake's cakes in the motor housing will slow them down to specs. :)
Slow down??? CIs are already starting to grease the motor zerk fittings which will have catastrophic results. Those Hostess 'morning coffee buns' have 27 grams of fat. CI Peter
Nothing beats Entemann's, not even Krispy Kreme!!!
Maybe Freihofer's..even though THOSE two are now owned by the same conglomerate......actualy Freihofer's makes the best BREAD anywhere...including those great New England frankfurter rolls....
Now that you mention Big Wheels, I remember those, too. There was an animated commercial with an Indian, er, Native American chief plugging them.
Drake's also had Vanilla Ring Dings, which I didn't particularly care for. Their Cream Cups were the counterpart to Hostess's Cupcakes.
don't forget the drake's coffee cake!!
Not enough SUGAR! Heh. I wasn't unknown for heading for a wayside street vendor, but the reality of my "ta" employment was that given my bizarre hours, I would grab a couple of bottles of RC or CocaCola which of course wasn't a problem in a wayward car with the cap sealed, and of course my ding-dongs on the rails.
Ask anyone - the MUNCHIES getcha when operating. You keep your fluids safe (since no cab is equipped with a cup-holder even if they come with a coat-hook nowadays) and captive, and the shirt pocket is there to hold your ding dongs. Heh. Life on the road, munch-munch, oh sheet.
Yumm! Ring-Dings and Devil Dogs -- the REAL Breakfast of Champions!
;-D
LOL!
AMEN
Heh. Not everybody likes "Little chocolate donuts" for breakfast. And with the 42's and 44's beginning to show up in earnest at the time, there was something "totally ta" about eating "ding-dongs" on the job. :)
It's worked for me quite well for nearly 40 years now :)
--Mark
IIRC the R-1/9s were kept segregated by car class. One yard would have, say, R-1s while another would have R-6s. Wayne says all the prewar F trains he rode on were R-6/7 mixes. The D was almost all R-4s when you did trigger and handle time. It would make sense, as just about all the prewar D trains I ever rode on didn't have headlights, and some R-4s never got them.
They all had their own characteristics ... the R6's were considered "trophies" by yardmasters and they WANTED THEM BACK at the end of the tour. As much as the R6's were considered a treat, there were 3 different flavors of them that didn't get along. The R4's were fat city but were often put into other consists because they had MOTORS AND BRAKES in the same carbody ... the R1's were nice but blew blue smoke and the R9's were in somewhat better shape but just didn't have the "oomph" of the older cars ...
Now picture all this shit put together in one consist. That's what I woke up to most every morning ... Bucky Beaver, Bullwinkle and Rocky with a tad of Snidely Whiplash thrown in just to sour the milk. There's a reason why they were separated out into stable bunkmates ...
I envy the elderly
Yo, stranger! Hand me down my cane, boy! Heh. Good to see you're still around ... moo.
Wayne considers the R-6-2s the alltime speed champions of the prewar fleet, 1233 in particular. We've dubbed it "A-440 1233" because it headed an F train whose bull and pinion gears got up to A-440 (that's A above middle C) on the Union Turnpike-Parsons Blvd. racetrack once. Wayne was afraid that train would become airborne, it was moving so fast.
The 6's would often wind up on the ends. The problem was what was stuck in the middle. All it took was 2 R9's in the consist and the 6's would go *BANG!* everytime you wrapped it since the R9's were like a burro sitting down. You'd end up dragging them 300 feet before they got with the program. Heh. 6's and 4's didn't get along too badly and some of the R1's that still had motors were pretty peppy too.
(the R1/9's wouldn't play nice *AT ALL* with the other kids...)
I don't know the technical aspects of it but I do have to tell you that at Branford they couple The R-9 1689 with a Low-V and it seems to work OK.
The last ones to run on the Culver Shuttle were the R27/30. The most recent vintage was R32.
wayne
i dont believe we once let trains get that dirty...
To be honest with you I stopped riding the Culver when they stopped running Standards. I remember railfanning on it with 2 car Standards that looked like they came out of a junk yard, broken windows and all. The Standards on the "LL" weren't nearly as bad at the time. I always talked to the crew. I got the feeling it was a small town railroad, like the Cannonball on Petticoat Junction.
By the way, who remembers R-11's on the Franklin Shuttle. If I remember correctly they replaced the Standards there.
I think that by the time the put the R-11's on the Franklin Shuttle, they had become the R-34 (the rebuild designation).
If you can find out when they were rebuilt, that'll tell you approximately when they were there, I would think.
The rebuild happened somewhere around 62-64, AFAIK (obviously between the delivery of the R-32s and the R-36s).
BMTman
the R11"s were rebuilt in 1965
The NY Times had a big article regarding the Manny B in the Metro section today (Monday). Besides it being interesting and containing a full colour diagram, it made an accersion that I believe to be in error. It said that most of the Manny B problems come from placing the subway tracks on the outside (true), but then it stated several times that this design was odd and nobody knew why the engineer did not put the tracks in the middle like on "most" other suspension bridges.
The only large bridges that I know of that have both rail and road tracks are the manny B, the Willy B, the Ben Franklin B and the Sydney B in austrailia. Amoung those only the Willy B has the tracks in the middle. In fact, the BFB was designed by the same guy (Moisseiff) and exhibits none of the problems of the Manny B.
I think that the problem is more than just placing the tracks on the outside of the bridge (logically I might add as the greatest load should be placed nearest the supports (cables)) and that the times is making an unfair generilization.
Are there any engineers that wish to comment? (Phil?)
The URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/03/nyregion/03BRID.html
The original design for the second level of the George Washington Bridge had four tracks in two pairs. Each pair was located about halfway from the center to the edge, with a gap in the middle. (The present lower level keeps the gap.)
Could some of the Manny B problems be caused by the weight of the trains being in excess of the original design limits?
That may be it. I seem to recall that the twisting problem was partly due to unequal train frequency across the bridge compounding a desigfn flaw that was more than just the trains being on the periphery.
In any event, the new steel braces should substantially take care of the problem.
(In any event, the new steel braces should substantially take care of the problem.)
I hope so, but I'm not optimistic. The article conceeded the bridge will still twist. Eventually, the steel will start to crack. And there is less of it than there was 50 years ago, thanks to 50 years of unrelieved rust.
After an investment of $500 million and 22 years of reconstruction, if the bridge is a wreck again in 20 years, it will be a disaster for the City.
That's not a concern by itself. All bridges twist to some degree, especially suspension bridges. All NYCDOT has to do is bring the twisting down to a magnitude similar to other bridges. If they do that, and not neglect maintenance, it'll last a lot longer than 20 years.
My experience is that not all engineers are sure of that.
Then again, the bridge lasted from, say 1920 to 1982 the first time. So if they bring it back to its initial state, perhaps it will last another 62 years -- enough for me and my kids. Grandkids are screwed.
Then again, the bridge lasted from, say 1920 to 1982 the first time. So if they bring it back to its initial state, perhaps it will last another 62 years -- enough for me and my kids. Grandkids are screwed.
What matters is not whether it lasts long enough for our grandchildren, but whether it lasts until the current politicians are out of office.
I'm not an engineer, but a physicist, so I'll comment on the track location issue.
Having the tracks near the longitudinal axis is the way to go, and the location of the tracks relative to the vertical cables is not the main issue.
You see, if a train passes on one track on one side of the train, there's an off-balance load on the roadway, and the roadway under the train twists in response - the side with the train moves down and the other side goes up. This, in turn, can (in really bad cases) set off oscillations of the type seen in the footage of the 1940 collapse of the first Tacoma Narrows Bridge, as the entire road bed shifts up and down in an oscillatory response (i.e. "doing the wave").
This repeated torsion takes its toll on the road bed and the girders supporting it, which are intended to remain as rigid as possible.
On the other hand, if the train runs on or near the longitudinal axis, the effect of the passing train is mostly to cause the entire road bed to pitch downward, stretching the vertical support cables and the main suspension cables. But that's the major load-bearing mode of the bridge anyway, and they're designed to do that.
Simple up-and-down translation of the road bed, and stretching of the support cables - designed for and intended. Torsional twisting of the road bed - not designed for and not intended.
Now, you have the fact that the load on the Manny B has been very unbalanced, with one set of tracks used vastly more than the other (I think it's the north side, but I might be wrong on that), and you have a recipe for major problems.
Are there other design flaws with the Manny B? I have no idea - you'll need an engineer with experience in this for that.
As for the Benny B, I understand that the trains running on it are much less frequent and significantly smaller (6 cars, IIRC), so the unbalanced load is comparably less. Willy B has the tracks down the longitudinal axis.
Ben Franklin Bridge has, except for rush hours, 2 (x 67') car trains every 20 minutes. On each side.
Manhattan Bridge has 8 (x 75) car trains about every 4 minutes. On one side. South only in the 80s, North only in the 90s, and now South only again in the 00s.
The service is 20 minutes only late at night and on Sundays. Usually it is 5-15 minutes.
2 (x 67') car trains every 20 minutes. On each side. - Henry
The service is 20 minutes only late at night and on Sundays. Usually it is 5-15 minutes. - Mike
I think you missed the "2". Or the "On each side".
Suspension Bridges are really not the ideal choice for rail traffic, that is why you don't see it too often, and why the Manhattan Bridge is in such bad shape, besides neglect.
On the R and N line south of Whitehall St there is a turnoff for a line that would have went somewhere. Does anyone know where?
It's the Broad Street turnoff. And it's in use.
Before that. As the N and R leaves Whitehall and before it meets the M coming out of Broad, there is a short piece of tunnel from the 2 tracks. (After the express track at Whitehall switches to the 2 tracks)
The Broadway line was original supposed to enter Brooklyn at a point south of where it currently does. When the line was built the plans were changed.
Or it is the beginning of the tunnel to Staten Island.....
The SI tunnel bellmouths are south of the 59th St. station in Brooklyn. The BMT never had any plans to build a 5 1/2 mile long tunnel under New York Harbor when a 1 1/2 mile one from their home base in Brooklyn would be a lot cheaper (but, unfortunately, still not cheap enough to ever have gotten built).
The SI tunnel bellmouths are south of the 59th St. station in Brooklyn.
Where exactly are these located? I've known about their supposed existence for years, but I've never seen them or met anyone who knew exactly where they were. If I can find out more about these I'll include a short section in version 3.1 about them.
Heck, maybe I should do a whole section on bellmouths and what/where they were intended to serve!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Bell mouths sounds good. The S.I tunnels were started, with the hope of being pickedup by the city. Check the slope of 63rd st. I beleive there were once manhole covers marked NYCTA of some such in the area.
avid
Bell mouths sounds good. The S.I tunnels were started, with the hope of being pickedup by the city. Check the slope of 63rd st. I beleive there were once manhole covers marked NYCTA of some such in the area.
If you or anybody else can show me where the bellmouths are located south of 59th St. I'll gladly include them in future editions.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
I left Bayridge twentseven Years ago. When I did live there it was for only three years.
On the surface, It is where the Belt Parkway seperates from I-278. On the southside of this divide, there is a street that slopes down towards the water. There are homes on the south side of the street and the complex of parkways, exits and entrances. I'm going to see what I can find on the "maps" . I'll be back.
avid
Wakeman Pl. I bekeive it is under wakeman Place. It all happens around the place where the N splits off of 4th Ave.
I hope this helps.
avid
Wakeman Pl. I bekeive it is under wakeman Place. It all happens around the place where the N splits off of 4th Ave.
I hope this helps.
I don't mean to sound like I'm doubting you, but I'm just curious as to what your source is and how is it verifiable, other than just manholes on the surface?
My original map from the 70s even shows a dashed line west of the Sea Beach cut, but so far I've seen nothing to prove that there was ever anything related to this tunnel there--no bellmouths in the tunnel that I ever saw.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Bay Ridge is mostly a gentle slope downward to the 90s, where a distinct downslope becomes apparent. As you go along Shore Parkway, it becomes a cliff in sections, particularly along Shore Road, all the way up to Owls Head Park. Nonetheless, Bay Ridge is largely 'flat'. It's 4th Avenue that 'slopes down to the water'. 5th Av joins 4th, while 3rd Av ends at Shore Road. The main commercial streets are 5th Avenue, and between 4th & 5th Avenues, 86 St. Remember the good old days of Birnbaums, before Rockbottom took it over?
The 4th Ave subway is oversized down there. On occasion, at 86th St., I saw some open doors: the mezzanine actually extends the full width of 4th Ave. I would not be suprised if a trackway exists under the mezzanine, paralleling the current alignment.
As for 4th Avenue, you have to realize it is quite wide, from Atlantic Ave until it crosses the Sea Beach cut, it's six lanes, sometimes with a concrete median. I mention this because readers here seem to not understood my question about routing the Gowanus under 4th (after moving the current subway elsewhere).
As for the most prominent monument (particularly from I278 coming from the VN bridge), this is Our Lady of Perpetual Hope Church, which is actually in Sunset Park. I mention this because this is a genuinely gargantuan building (it's a double church); it subs for St. James Cathedral whenever anything big is done.
At the sound end of the station at 59 St there is something lke 3 "doors", I can't think of the correst word. Naybe that's a type of bellmouth. One is for the ramp for the N. One is for the R and the 3rd was supposed to have been for the line to Staten Island.
At the sound end of the station at 59 St there is something lke 3 "doors", I can't think of the correst word. Naybe that's a type of bellmouth. One is for the ramp for the N. One is for the R and the 3rd was supposed to have been for the line to Staten Island.
Thanks. Next time I'm lucky enough to find an R-32 R train I'll go and take a closer look. I've taken the N to 59th and looked like crazy at the south end of the plat and nothing's jumped out at me.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
IIRC, there's a bit of a notch about 50 yards or so past 59th St., though it's not as big a bellmouth as at some other spots on the system (a baby-bell mouth?)
IIRC, there's a bit of a notch about 50 yards or so past 59th St., though it's not as big a bellmouth as at some other spots on the system (a baby-bell mouth?)
Groannn. OK, very cool. I'll take a look next time an R-32 R pops up Going My Way.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
They're not really bellmouths, but the tunnel does not narrow south of 59th St., thereby leaving two trackways- one on either side of the 4 active tracks. Looking South on the S/B platforms, the MoW building that you see 100 feet into the tunnel is sitting in one of the trackways. The view from the N/B platform is unobstructed, albeit much darker. The trackways run for about 150 feet. The one on the N/B side ends in a brick wall, with evidence of some sort of space beyond. Even further South, the bridge over the Bay Ridge cut has four trackways, with the 2 active tracks of the 'R' line occupying the two westernmost ones (by this point, the Fourth Av line swings over to the Western half of 4th Av).
P.S. Love the idea of a section on bellmouths and misc. unused provisions for expansion!
EGGS!
That's a derail. There used to be switches there. In theory, runaway trains that flew through the station too fast would trigger the switch to move, and be sent straight into a solid wall. Better than what would happen if a runaway train made it into a river tube, I suppose...
The derailer is on M Track at the south end of the station. Should a train start to roll out of the station while the switch is set against it, the derailer will put every truck that passes it on the ground.
Isn't the derail always activated unless that homeball going
south out of M track pocket is clear? Boy, you'd sure have
to respect that ball!
The derailer can be set aside, even if the homeball stays red. It's a separate switch I believe.
Your can probably set the derail aside only if the conflicting move into the SB local is not set up, or has timed out
...or the middle track is cleared for reverse traffic running NB from the SB tube.
I looked there, and the derail is directly south of the Homeball. It looked like it would throw you in the dirt regardless of the facing point position.
I'd be interested to know how the presence of the derail affects conditional cross-locking...
Does the derail have a lever number?
yes, seperate from the homeballs or switches
While everyone else calls 'em DE-rails, the TA calls 'em de-RAIL-lers.
As one has probably noticed all token booths have a number to them. Does anyone know what were the booth numbers for the former Fulton St El? The Lexington El? The 2nd Ave El? The 3rd Ave El? The old Culver Line (previous to 1954)?
I know the pattern was like N=IND, M=BMT, and R=IRT. So N-2120 was an IND booth. That's all I know about the booths.
Phil Hom
IND booths have the N numbers
IRT Booths have the R numbers
BMT booths have the A thru K.
F was the Culver line (abondoned).
G is the Coney Island area.
I is unknown
K is the Myrtle El East of B'way.
L might have been the Lexington El.
Does anyone know what were the booth numbers for the booths that no longer exist? If the booths had numbers.
2nd, 6th and 9th Ave Els in Manhattan.
Lexington, Fulton, 3rd and 5 Ave Els in Brooklyn.
Will the TA put any new trains on the A-line? I think It would be great to ride new trains, especialy on the Rockaway branch.
....right.....no railfan window view ............right .......!!
The A has the R38s, if you are willing to wait. I waited 45 minutes for one and it was well worth it.
Don't be too picky or that first R-38 will be on the wrong branch of the A.
From what I've seen, most of the R32's and R38's on the A run the Lefferts branch.
They occasionally run down to Far Rock, but they're rare.
I don't think they're systematically assigned either way. Until I learn otherwise, I'm afraid I'll take your observation as anecdotal. (It could be just psychological -- if, say, you tend to wait for a railfan window for the Far Rockaway run, you're not likely to quickly forget the two hours that went by with every R-38 train going to Lefferts.)
IINM, the Rockaway Park A specials are (just about) always R-44's, as are the RP shuttles (I don't know about the midnight Lefferts shuttles).
The midnight Lefferts shuttles are both R38s and R44s.
I've ridden on R-38 A trains out to Far Rockaway. One of these days, I'll have to get a picture of the manhattan skyline from there. It seems a million miles away.
I did not know that there are some R-32's on the "A", as well as the "C".
None are assigned to the A, but they occasionally show up there, the same way R-32's have lately been popping up en masse on the R.
how many of em ' on the A train is there ?? - r 38s ??...
See the car assignment FAQ. As of August 1, 2001, 110 R-38's (11 trains) and 216 R-44's (27 trains) are assigned to the A. The remaining 40 R-38's (5 trains) are assigned to the C, along with 112 R-32's (14 trains).
That makes 150 R-38s. What about the rest of them? Spare factor, perhaps?
Suppose so. How many are there?
There are 196 R-38s (unless I'm forgetting about some recent incident).
David
So 23% of the R-38's are spares. Is that typical? It sure seems high.
I wonder if the C will be giving up some of its R-32's to Jamaica to support the V. (I doubt the R-38's themselves will go anywhere, although I suppose a few E's could run out of Pitkin.)
I haven't seen the December 16 car assignment yet. As for 23% of the R-38s being "spares," I can say that's not quite true. Some of them are held for SMS work or for other reasons that require them to be unavailable for a long period of time. If I had the previous car assignment in front of me, I could say how many that is, but I don't so I can't.
David
Did the R38's ever run on the Eastern Division. Back in the early 80's I thought I remember them vaguely, but they may have been unrebuilt R42's, I really didn't know different types back then, and wouldn't have said, "Hey this is a R38!"
AFAIK the R-38s have never run on the Eastern Division. I could be wrong, though.
They have spent nearly their entire lives either assigned to Jamaica or 207th St, which makes it impossible for them to ever run on the eastern division.
Thank god, I %$#$!^*^@% hate them.
So I get your reaction to the R38's are is that you dislike them. You haven't been very clear. hehehehe
Aw, come on....*L*
Great car, the R-38 is
:)
Dark, leaky, bouncing rolling pile of manure it is.
Hey, now....
:)
At least I get a nice railfan view along CPW. Given a choice between the R-38s and R-44s, I'll take the R-38s anytime.
Both are crap,thats why they are going to scrap heaven as soon as the R160 gets here...... and thank goodness for it ,too.....
Not necessarily true. The car crunch might keep all cars around longer than anticipated. The R38's and slants are the first on the scrapper's list anyway.
I've been reading here for quite some time about how the R-38 will be gone before the R-32. Fine. I love the R-32. But what about them makes them so indestructable? Especially concidering they are more similar to the R-38 than any other car on the system?
The R32 is made completley of stainless steel, as opposed to the newer 60' cars, which have bodies made of carbon steel. Stainless steel doesn't rust, so the R32's can run until metal fatigue or maintenance costs become too great. Which means they'll be here 10 to 15 years longer, and maybe longer.
Budd products always last the longest. No rusting with stainless steel.
The R38, R40, R42 contract could have gone to Budd if the contract was written to favor the construction method employed by Budd. I remember seeing Budd drawings for the R40 at 370 Jay Street in the new car design department.
Then as is now, the TA wanted to save a couple of bucks per car and had to follow the law in taking the lowest bid. In hindsight they should have kept the same specs but who knew then that the cars would still be needed at the turn of the century.
Hmmmm, Budd slants? Another missed opportunity.
Budd slants sounds like some new type of beer bottle :-)
"I remember seeing Budd drawings for the R40 at 370 Jay Street in the new car design department. "
Question-
Were they slants, or their own design?
Why would the TA stop using stainless steal? Hadn't they already seen rusting cars? Isn't that why they went to stainless for the R-32s in the first place?
It won't. Every rapid transit car built in the previous 25 years has been all stainless steel. Like wooden cars and steam propulsion, carbon steel is obsolete.
Your wait would be long, considering most of the A is now R44. Thank God.
I've been known to let as many as four or five R-44 trains go by before getting an R-38 consist. Once in a while, I'd get lucky and the first A train to pull in would be of the R-38 variety.
The A still isn't the same without the R-10s.
I rode one on the (Brighton) M circa 1981.
David
yes they have.How could I know? I RODE ONE ON THE M LINE YEARS AGO FROM FLUSHING AVE TO ATLANTIC AVE. Those days the 38's were the B mostly.As for the R 32,they were used over there when the R27/30's went out for rehab,mostly on the J.All clear? ok....
Mystery solved! It was the R32's. I didn't know car types back then, but I knew what I remembered riding was not an unrebuilt R42. I thought it was a R38, but it must have been R32's.
Could have been.'84,the R16 were in full force on the J and L lines untill about they retired[some ran in M service in their finall days]and the R32's arived when the 27/30 went to G.O. Believe me,the stay was short....
It was in Fall 1984 to be exact, when I started High School and took the M every day. It was definitly R32's then, that I remember. Because it had green-blue seats like the shape of the pinkish R27, R30 seats.
There are photos of R-32s on the M from that time period.
yes they have.How could I know? I RODE ONE ON THE M LINE YEARS AGO FROM FLUSHING AVE TO ATLANTIC AVE. Those days the 38's were the B mostly.As for the R 32,they were used over there when the R27/30's went out for rehab,mostly on the J.All clear? ok....
Now I'm confused again, maybe I did ride an "M" R38. I guess I'll never know, but it may have been possible according to what you are saying.
It should be noted that R-38 subway car numbers 4140-4149 were experimental air-conditioned models when the entire R-38 fleet was delivered. These 10 cars were not assigned to a particular line, but rather to all B-Division routes for crew familiarization and to show riders the comforts of air conditioned subways. Therefore, it was possible that these cars were seen on the BMT Eastern Division Lines.
Danny the bus addict
While CIYD barn was being renovated in the early 80's, long before the R32's underwent GOH, they were assigned to ENY for maintance. They ran on the M (pictures in the R32 section) and also on the LL. I actually did operate a few on the Canarsie line. I spotted a few on the J, never operated one tho because the line was (and still is) a high seniority line........As for the R38's (after being transfered from Queens they went to CI primarily for B service, later transfered to the A line) I did operate at least one as a conductor (11/79 to 2/81) on the M during the midday hours (Met to Stillwell). Yes, a 4 car train! But for the PM rush, the dispatcher added them wrong and many consists had 4 R38's and 4 R32's. Just after I left school car as a new rookie motorman, one day I was assigned to Stillwell M/QB/D. I deadheaded to CIYD to get a train for M service. At that time ok cars were so scarce that whenever a line needed a train not much attention was paid to sticking to published car assigments. I made up an R38 with M signs with the idea being it would be ran there if needed, and with the understanding I would take it to Stillwell Yard and change them again for PM QB service if not needed on the M. As soon as I got to the station, they needed that train for M service so away it went.
It seems that years ago, trains were switched between lines quite often. Today, trains seem to stay on one or two particular lines. Is that true they don't really travel too much?
Before the GOH and the current SMS programs, cars weren't maintained nearly as much as they are today, so today's assignments much more closely relate to the yard a car type is assigned to. Prior to this, it didn't matter much if an R27 B train which was assigned to CI occasionally ran as an AA or CC.
The AA drew all of its equipment from C.I. as it was non-rush version of the uptown B.
I wonder if the R-32s and the R-38s will live out their last days on the eastern division.
#3 West End Jeff
R38's will soon fill out their last days on the A & C. The Eastern Division will get R143 and R160. R32's will likely die where they were born - on the Southern Division (ie. diamond-Q train).
I hope the R-32s, at least some of them, close out their lives on the Southern Division, but given the politics involved in getting new trains onto the "right" lines, I have the feeling that unless the Broadway-B'klyn/Jamaica Ave. line is next up on the B Divsion for CTBC after the Canarsie line, the attitude will be that the Eastern Division got the R-143s, so lets put the R-160s on the more heavily used lines like the E, F, N, Q and R and move the R-32s over to the J/M/Z.
They plan to get enough R160's in 4 car sets to completely take over the Eastern Divsion with the R143. OPTO is the motivation, not CBTC.
The difference between what's on the A, C, E, F and R lines now compared to the R-160s is nowhere near the visual difference (let alone the AC difference) between the R-40Ms and R-42s and the R-1/4s and Standards that they replaced back in the late 1960s and early 70s. But by the middle to end of the decade when the R-160s are scheduled to arrive, politics could play a role in splitting the fleet among several lines to get the maximum PR boost, the same as was done with the R-40M/R-42s.
Eastern Division OTPO could be handled with just some of the R-160s, the same way the 5 got its 10 R-62s just for OTPO on the Dyer shuttle, but kept the Redbirds for most of the other train consists. If the MTA decides that, for example, they want some R-160s for the A and C fleets at 207th or the E/F/R/V fleet out in Jamaica because some pols want happy riders/voters in Queens and on the west side of Manhattan, then the Pitkin or Jamiaca R-32s could go to East New York to fill out the remainder of the fleet. But if there are plans to extend CTBC to the other Eastern Division lines within the projected remaining lifespan of the R-32s, then the R-143s and R-160s would have to make up all of the Eastern Division fleet.
I don't see the political pressure to get new cars anymore. Before the 1990's, new cars meant no grafitti, air conditioning, higher reliability and a quieter ride. With all cars now sporting these benefits, who really prefers an R143 over an R42?
I've noticed over the past year or two one or two posts from people stating basically that they can't wait until those #@$##$%$#^$#^ Redbirds are removed from service and the new trains could be put on their lines, so the "new train, old train" complaints live on.
Now, while the visual difference between an R-160 and an R-40M and R-42 railcar are far less than that between an R-36 `bird and an R-142A on the Pelham Bay line, even non-railfans can tell the difference between a 32-year-old R-42 and a 14-year-old R-68, and they'll be able to tell the difference between a Slant 40 and an R-143 on the L. And a majority of subway riders think their line deserves the newest trains.
Going by that, the longest routes and/or the ones with the highest passenger loads are going to be the ones the politicians will hear the biggest shouts about from people demanding the newest trains, because they serve the most voters.
If there are enough R-160s to fill the Eastern Division with a decent number left over for the main Manhattan trunk lines, it may not be a problem. But I would be stunned if the MTA allowed two straight B Division train orders to never be seen by the people north of 14th Street.
I believe that as they rebuilt some of the classes of cars, your average passenger thought they were new trains. Do you think that as the R42's, for example, were rebuilt and replaced the R27's on the Eastern Division, most people noticed they were the same "junky" (meaning dirty, grafitti, etc) trains they were riding in the past? The NYCTA got everyone believing they had "new" trains. I can gaurantee that your average subway rider would not have said, "Hey, that's a rebuilt R42 pulling into the station." More likely they said, "Look at the nice new train we are on" The PR worked for even the rebuilt cars.
I understand that even T/Os clamored to operate rebuilt trains.
Yup, nothing like a clean train that won't fall apart every 3 days.
The GOH'd R38's caused a sensation in mid 1987 when they first appeared. They really did look absolutley new.
That's true. The GOH R42 cars were so much different looking, especially on the inside, that they almost screamed NEW. In fact, they looked like larger R62's at first glance.
From what I've understood[concerning the R160's]these cars are due to replace the 40/40m/42 cars on all Eastern Div. lines.All 4 car sets will go there,and the rest[5 car sets]would go to the A and C lines over at Pitkin yard.[got this from the MTA proposal posted on there site].So the Eastern Division will have all new rail cars for the first time since the R16 SHOWED IT GRUESOME head over there. About time.......
Well, some R42's were put in on the eastern division when they were brand new too.
But in 1955, the R16 made up only 1/3rd of their equipment allotment.
The Canarsie & Myrtle routes hardly ever got them, and the Brooklyn local got only the R16's in excess to Jamaica route's requirement.
Looks like an attempt was made to spruce up the Jamaica line, which ultimately failed, given that it was hacked to pieces in the 70's and 80's.
Besides, in my lifetime the J has gotten priority over the M and L lots of times. The J received the overhauled R2730 redbirds 18 months before the M and almost a year before the L, and the GOH'd R42's appeared on the J 6 to 9 months before either the M or L. When the redbirds first appeared in 1985, the R16's it replaced went to the M (with horrific consequences for that line's riders) and the L was the last eastern division line to use them, as late as 1991.
The Canarsie line has always been the last stop before the junkyard.
(Along with the Franklin and Culver shuttles.}
I see you don't think very highly of the R-143. (Nor of the R-42, which happens to be among my favorites.)
Actually-
I think the Jamaica line is...
R-16's (both yours and my favorite car) didn't end their careers on the Canarsie Line, they ended them an the Jamaica line.
Same with the R-6-9's, I'm pretty sure. And the BMT Standards.
The BMT standards made their last stand on the M in August of 1969. The last revenue R-7/9 trip was on a put-in J train on March 31, 1977.
Where did the last red R27-R30's train last run. Was it an Eastern division line?
Cline.....
Their last stand was on the C, I believe.
I believe the R27/30s ran their last on the 'C' sometime in late 1992. The last time I saw one on the Eastern Divison was on the 'L' in July 1990, although other posters have reported seeing them there and on Franklin well into 1991.
They were supposedly banned from the Jamaica lines in favor of Mod 40s and 42s when Archer opened, but the first time I went into Jamaica Center, the Friday after the connection opened (was in London riding the Tube on Opening Day), the only 'J' in the terminal was a 27/30 with red exterior and the old pink seats. Every Jamaica el train I've seen since has been Mods and 42s.
R30's were plentiful in the early days of the Archer Ave. connecor opening. I remember seeing "Z" trains signed up with only a brown circle Z bullet, with no writing, as the ones marked J always said "Nassau St. Express". They were gone by March of 1989. I saw R30's on the L in April of 1991.
For a bit AFTER Parsons Archer opened, there were still some R-27-30's on BOTH the J and Z trains (but only briefly). On that snowy December 12,1989, I recall in the AM rush hour riding a J EASTBOUND to see the Manhattan bound J and Z trains, and I can HONESTLY say I ONLY saw 2 Z trains coming into the city!!!!! They were R-27's and there was a lone round circular Z on the side rollsign. I understand that snowy morning that lots of trains had door problems in the yard due to the freezing. That same Am rush hour, the F ran as a Hillside local due to delays in R service getting to 179-Hillside. AND a man had a heartattack on a southbound #5 train. Hellish morning!!! Tony
C train, March 1993.
Untrue. The R16 ended it's life on the M line. Except for a rare instance, the R16 was gone on the J by the fall of 1986. In their final months, several R16's were used as rush hour put-ins on the B and R lines as well.
The R16s probably have the strangest history of any equipment. I remember seeing them plenty on the 'EE' and 'GG' from 1970 through the September 1976 service changes- and even right after that, I saw one on the 'N' on its new routing.
In early 1977 after the R9s were retired, the 16s started to become more frequent on the 'LL', while the other Eastern Division lines were mostly 30s, with the rare 42 thrown in (much more often on the 'M' than the 'J') for A/C relief. Then the 16s seemed to disappear altogether until I found them again on the 'J' and 'L' around 1983 or '84. I was at college upstate from September 1978 through December 1981, so probably missed a lot of equipment shifts during that time.
It was only when browsing the Rolling Stock pages of this site that I discovered the R16 ran on the 'B' around 1976(?). At that time, adolesence and the pressures therein were severely cutting into my railfanning; I think I may have gone the whole summer of '76 without riding the subway at all!!
The last R16 I rode was on the 'L' in October 1986, although a month later I saw one passing by overhead on 31st Street in Astoria. I was sure I was either hallucinating or the train was out of service, because the throught of an R16 on the 'R' was just too absurd.
Someone on this board, possibly Chris, verified that I was not seeing things.
No you weren't
I rode several R16 R trains to Astoria in late 1986, a few on the B (rerouted B'way version) as well as the usual M and L.
One R16 B train always left Astoria at 8:10 every morning. I'd ride it to CI where the train would go OOS.
Was it 8 or 10 cars ?
I don't remember. I'd assume 10. 8 cars would be too short for the B.
All "B" trains ran at a maximum of 8 cars until 1985. Tony
Nope, I saw plenty of 10 car B's at that time. And in 1986, it was always 10 car.
Wasn't that when B's alternated 57th and 168th ? Maybe one was 8, the other 10.
I rode both, and all were 10.
It went o/s service because the STL B dispatcher didn't want to press his luck! Alleluia! We got a half trip out of it! Now just maybe we'll lay it up, and just maybe we'll get another 1/2 trip out of it for the PM rush!
Did you ever operate that train? If so, we may have met, a looooonnng time ago, as I had a rather long discussion with a motorman on that train, asking the usual dumb questions an ignorant train buff kid would.
The only lines I'ver operated R16's was on the J/L/M.
Did R-16s ever run on The Concourse IND?
Peace,
ANDEE
Hmm...
I don't know, but I seriously doubt it.
I never saw it on the CC or D, and I rode those trains a whole lot between 1970 and 1990.
Except for the G and AA, and a few times on the A itself, it really was more of a BMT lines car, in my opinion...even when it ran on former IND lines, they were lines like the F and B, which are basically BMT in Brooklyn.
Anyway, now you've got me super curious.
Here's a list of the lines I KNOW it ran on, at one time or another:
A, AA, B, EE, F, GG, J and all its subsets (QJ, JJ, RJ), LL, M, N, QT,and TT, as well as the Culver Shuttle.
Can anyone name any I probably missed?
RR:
QB:
Shucks-
:)
I can't believe I missed the RR and QB
I actually knew those *L*
OK-
back to the question
You like the R-16, was it ever on either of the Concourse (Bronx) Lines- CC or D??
I highly doubt it.
So do I, although if the R-16 was ever based out of Coney Island Yard, it's possible...I don't think it was ever based out of Concourse Yard.
The R16 basically ran on the eastern division, except from 1968 to 1976 when it was assigned to Jamaica. Some made it to the AA and B line afterwards, so this would be the only time it might have made a run or two on the D.
Then they would have had to remake the consist to be 10 cars. AA & B were 8 in those days.
I can't account to anything before September 1985, but I never ever rode or saw an 8 car B train from that day on, either to 168th St or 57th St.
R16 was seen in plenty on the "RR" in 1969, right before the shift to Jamaica Yard, also I have seen them on the "E" during the fill-ins for the R46.
wayne
Franklin Shuttle?
I would think so....
Actually, definately...
Look in the R-16 pictures page on this website, there's a picture from 1969 at Prospect Park Station.
Yup:
1976:
1969:
There are more, but this page would take too long too load if i attached them.
Doubtful, although some may have operated on it in the 1970's on the D line.
Man, I missed out on more than I thought. I only saw the R-16s on the Eastern Division, but then I rode on them only twice, 19 years apart. My subway riding was near zero during most of the 70s; it wasn't until 1977 that I started coming down to the city from Connecticut periodically and resumed railfanning.
Yep, I remember it well.
At least they'll finish there working days where they started.
#3 West End Jeff
At least they'll finish their working days where they started.
#3 West End Jeff
They will have gone full circle, so to speak, if that turns out to be the case.
Lets hope they do go full circle.
#3 West End Jeff
Here's a wacky idea I proposed a year ago:
Swap the R42's in ENY with the R32's in Jamaica. With their stainless steel bodies, the R32's would be the more preferable choice to operate on the mostly above-ground lines of the eastern division. The R42's, and as many R40M's as need be, can run their remaining days in safety on the entirely underground routes of the E, R, and V lines. Perhaps they might even last longer before they completely fall apart.
In addition, make the C line entirely of R38's, for exactly the same reason.
Great partial idea. They are stored OUTSIDE!
avid
But they'd be sheltered when in service. And many are stored underground on the Hillside Ave express tracks.
Agreed. That would be a plus for their life extension.
avid
The TA does not want to waste their masterpiece R32's on the lowly Eastern Division. The only way an R38 will get there again if they take my proposal (among others) and through route the C to Fresh Pond.
Is the R32 a markedly more reliable car than the R42? If not, I think Queens riders would prefer the more asthetically pleasing R42.
Both cars are old anyway.
The most recent MDBF figures I have handy are from July 2001:
R-32: 102,851
R-42: 106,129
From June 2001:
R-32: 122,062
R-42: 98,955
12-month moving average, August 2000-July 2001:
R-32: 104,575
R-42: 110,788
Not much difference in my book.
David
Then why the preference for the R32's on Queens Blvd?
It's certainly got nothing to do with public opinion. It's got more to do with maintenance issues (keeping the number of car classes at a given shop at a minimum, etc.). Perhaps "Train Dude" or someone else in Car Equipment can and will elaborate.
David
Probably becuase the R32 is all stainless and the St Louis cars are more apt to leak. The R32/38 also have more comfortable seats.
The R/32-38s seem to have a little more interior space. This gives a smidgen of more seating room at the three seating locations between the doors on each side. This is very evident when one compares the R/32-38s to the R/40-40Ms. The R/42s may be on par with the R/32-38s.
I'll have to have a looksee. The R/42s were an attempt to make up for the esthetic designs theft of interior space. Perhaps some devotee of those styles could aid with dementional input.
avid
The R-32s have narrower doorways than the R-42s, but 6 more seats (50 vs. 44).
David
I always thought the reduced seating was caused by the lose of room due to the original Slant R/40 configuration and subsequent floor plans of the r/40M and r/42s.
I hadn't realized a door demension difference. What is the difference, if you have it handy?
avid
46" on cars through R-38, 50" R-40 to R-68A.
David
Brighton riders complained when the R-32s made their debut in 1964 that there were fewer seats than on the crowd-swallowing Triplexes.
Hey I'm with you on through-routing the C to Metropolitan through the Chrystie Street connection.
In 1970 and 1971, and even on into 1972 I saw quite a few R32 in service on the "QJ". It seemed like these were the "extra" "QJ" cars, when they were pulled off the "QJ", they were replaced by R-7a and R-9s.
wayne
While I can't say for certain that no R38 ever ran on the eastern division since their delivery in 1966, I never have seen one in the nearly 25 years of memory I have riding the J train. The R38 was always an "IND" car to me, as much as the R30 was a "BMT" car.
So it probably was unrebuilt R42's. I didn't pay much attention to the type of cars back then, although I do remember the R16's, even if I didn't know what type of car they were at the time. I hated them and they were so filthy. Now I wish I could ride one of them again!
Ditto. I miss those old beasts too. Unrebuilt R42's were not unusual sights on the J line in the early 1980's.
Right...
as an 80's J rider, I remember the unrebuilt 42's
I remember the J was in a black circle on the rollsign
I always pestered my father on why the R16's said "JJ" or "QJ", as they never had a simple single J on their rollsigns.
They never did replace those multicolored roller curtains on the R-16s. I rode on them for the last (and second) time in October of 1986 on the M, and sure enough, the M was light blue.
hell, if you hunted thru those rollsigns (you could turn them by hand), which I used to do on long J rides...
you could see all KINDS of lines represented...all in the colors of the 67-68 map
I used to LOVE doing that :)
They used the orange JJ signs on the R-16s towards the end of their careers. Chances are people got the drift (knock on wood).
You know....
I don't think there WAS a "J" on those rollsigns..
if there was it certainly wasn't a brown J
I think it had RJ JJ QJ and that's it
Only a black QJ and an orange JJ. Until I found this site, I never knew what the real JJ route was.
The signs were put in too late for the short lived lines like the NX, RJ, or MJ.
What was the orange JJ - 168th st to 57th ST?
The JJ ran to Canal Street from 168th Street and from Canarsie.
So the Orang edid not mean 6th Ave, it was the old route colors like the light blue M, etc?
Exactly. Before 1979 the colors meant nothing other than to distinguish them from each other. The QB was red and the RR was dark green, but neither was an IRT line....LOL.
Yes, the same as the old #14 route, replaced by the KK on 7/1/68.
From the 1967 TA map, post-Chrystie St:
AM rush hours: 168th St. - Canal St. Skip-stop along Jamaica Ave.
PM rush hours: Canal St - Crescent St. or Atlantic Ave. or Rockaway Parkway. All stops.
All other times: 168th St. - Broad St.
It does appear that the QJ was always called the "QJ", no matter what time it ran, even if it dodn't go south of Broad St, from 1968 to the end of 1972. Which makes absolutley no sense ...
That wasn't true initially. The JJ ran rush hours, and as a QJ replacment when terminating at Broad Street. I remember being at 168th 7-8pm seeing them crank QJ and Brighton Beach (later C.I.) signs to be JJ and Broad Street, also cutting 2 cars to make 6 cars. It also got interesting when RJ's were also coming in. If it was an R16, it went out of service; if an R27, they either went out of service or became JJ.
At first, the QJ was a weekday 6 AM to 8 PM service. On July 1, 1968, it became a 24/7 operation. On weekdays, it ran initially to Brighton Beach, then beginning on August 19, 1968, to Coney Island. During evenings, nights, and weekends, all QJ service ended at Broad St. It was renamed the J and permanently cut back to Broad St. in early 1973.
The (JJ) was orange back before 1979 when the route colors had nothing to do with the avenue in Manhattan it operated on. It was actually sort of the opposite of that; they went out of their way to make sure that different routes along the same line were in different colors. Thus the "Spaghetti Map", one of the most confusing maps I've ever seen.
:-) Andrew
Now it makes more sense. And by the way that WAS the most confusing map!
The map was probably not the ony thing that was confusing back then. How did the T/O get their assignments each day? How were the subway cars assigned to their lines? And how did the MTA have enough cars to run all those different services?
Not much has changed as to T/O's getting their assignments. In those days they just sat around a lot in the crew room if your trip was dropped due to car shortage. I never got dropped because us rookies needed the practice.
But the "JJ" never existed past 1968. After that, the QJ was black, as was the single letter J after 1972. The R16 never had a single letter J, so they used the orange JJ. Which always confused me as a child, since I knew the JJ was different from the regular J, but never knew how until I discovered this site.
In retrospect, they could have spliced in a QJ sign on the R-16 roller curtains. By the time those multicolored curtains started to appear on rolling stock, the JJ had already ceased to exist.
One thing I found odd: very, very few R-27/30s got those multicolored roller curtains. I know I never saw one with them. They kept the route and destination configuration on their end bulkheads.
All the R38's and a lot of R32's got them as well, but they were removed in the late 1970's. Except for those 10 experimental AC R38's, which kept them through the 1980's.
I remember seeing those multicolored curtains on the R-32s as late as 1980, when I left the East Coast for Colorado. There was one RR train of R-32s which had original route and destination curtains on the bulkheads. Frankly, I always had a gut feeling the R-32s and R-38s would get bulkhead route and destination curtains once again eventually, and they did.
The R16 has signs A thru HH and 10 thru 16, so they had to get new signs right away, but a few got QJ cut into their old sign. The R16 displayed JJ right up to the end. I rode one in January 1987.
The R27/30 had all alpha signs to begin with, and very quickly were given splices for QJ and RJ, which sufficed. The R27 to 38 got the BB route sign patched with a B so thay it would read B with 6th AVenue Local.
There initially was no "M" sign, so black tape was used over "MM" to just show 1 M. Tony
There were in the R27-30 and R32's, from the day they first went into service.
True. The pre-1967 Brighton-Nassau service used equipment from the Q train pool and unofficially designated M. Eastern Division routes were at the time officially non-designated, but in the rarity that a Myrtle-Nassau got an R16, it was marked 10.
<<<"The R16 has signs A thru HH and 10 thru 16, so they had to get new signs right away, but a few got QJ cut into their old sign. The R16 displayed JJ right up to the end. I rode one in January 1987.">>>
From the pics I've seen (I really don't remember the 16s- never used the Eastern Division back then), the R16s got the early color signs- rather than a "bullet" with the letter inside, the whole curtain was the route color, and a white circle around the letter in question.
even a few R-32 were like that, and certainly the R-38's had those.
From the pics I've seen (I really don't remember the 16s- never used the Eastern Division back then), the R16s got the early color signs- rather than a "bullet" with the letter inside, the whole curtain was the route color, and a white circle around the letter in question.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those were the replacement rollsigns for the R-16 which were put in the cars after the Chrystie Street Line opened. Each line had a different color. They had readings for
A-dark blue
AA-violet
B-black
CC-green
D-orange
E-light blue
EE-orange
F-violet
GG-green
HH-red
JJ-orange
KK-dark blue (6 Av)
LL-black
M-light blue
MM-green
N-yellow or buff
QB-red
QJ-black
RR-green (Bway)
RR-green (Nassau)
TT-dark blue
S-white
SS-dark green
Note that they were installed after the 6 Avenue Line was extended to 57 Street (July 68) and did not have NX and RJ readings but did retain the TT.
Larry,RedbirdR33
The AA and F color isn't violet...it's magenta
violet is a pale purple.
Here's a good pic of what they looked like. It's an R16 on the M route at a Brighton local stop in 1976. Notice that the bulkhead route bullet was circled, but the entire sign was the color of that particular route. You'll also notice that the side route signs were COMPLETELY made up of the color of that route, with white lettering in it (this one says M Express via Nassau St):
Till this pic, I never knew of the full-color side signs. Thanks.
They were the only cars to have this style of side sign.
I saw 10 R38's which had them in 1987. They were definatley the 10 experimental AC ones, as they were pre-GOH and had AC, something I took notice of.
They were on the K line, but had their side signs set to "KK 6th Ave Local" as opposed to the confusing but proper AA sign.
The R16 curtain roll sign DID have "QJ". They started using the orange "JJ" again once they dropped the "Q" and went with just the single "J".
wayne
I can understand when the used EE or JJ, or CC, but what was the point when they used mixed letters like QJ or MJ, etc. I don't get it.
The QJ was a rush hour line added to speed service on the J line. As for the MJ, that was the Myrtle avenue el. What was confusing was the map that showed all service all hours of day.
Mixed letters were for inter-divsional BMT routes (southern & eastern division). QJ was Brighton Local and Jamaica Express. RJ was 4th Avenue Local and Jamaica Express. MJ was the Myrtle local that ran south of Broadway onto a non-dual-contract compliant el to Jay Street.
When the M was extended onto the Sea Beach line 9/11 to 10/27, it could have been called NM, and the J the RJ. The "Bankers" RR trains that ran to Chambers Street in the 1980's were marked "S" but called RJ by some operating people and token clerks.
Chicago's CTA flirted with this scheme around 1980. Today's Blue line was called CM and DM (Congress-Milwaukee and Douglas-Milwaukee).
I wish the NX Super Sea Beach Express still existed.
Here are some signs I picked up on eBay recently:
how do you add a picture?
You need to upload it to a webserver somewhere, then add a link here like this:
< img src= " http://www.yourwebserver.com/yourimage.jpg " >
thanks
Cool.
here is a rollsign i got on ebay recently
< img src= " http://i10.yimg.com/10/9086bf81/g/8b697fa8.jpg " >
You need to remove the "spaces" from the code for it to work.
Wow!! I didn't think the TA actually made signs like that for those lines, especially the MJ. I thought the MJ designation only appeared on maps....
Is there any chance soembody's got a sky-blue number "8" sign from the Third Avenue El?
I think that sign was probably only put up at either Metropolitan Ave or Wykoff Ave, as most other Myrtle Ave. line stops had no signs, certainly none below Broadway. If so, it's a rare bird indeed.
Yes some stations had these signs, but there were no MJ indications on the trains themself.
I remember the Nassau St. RR specials in the 1980's and they were never maked "S". They were always marked "RR" via Nassau (if they were R16 or R2730) or just RR if they were R42.
Resigning the R16 was a 2-step process. In 1967-8, a few of the original route signs got the splice for QJ, etc. Others got white cardstock signs plastered on the ends for "RR" and "95 STREET" on the south side sign. Why the latter was done is beyond me. The rolls could display "95th St Ft Hmltn".
Then both end signs and side route signs were ripped out, and 1967-era route rollers were placed in the destination window leaving no destination sign as such on the ends.
Chris: The JJ (orange) was only used from November 1967 to July 1968.
JJ was originally intended to replace the #15 Jamaica Lcl whereas the J would have replaced the #15 Jamaica Exp. However the TA elected to use the JJ for a about a six month period to cover both the rush hour Broadway-Brooklyn Lcl service (formerly the #14) and the late evening and weekend 168 St-Broad St Lcl service (formerly the #15).
The QJ ran between 168 St and Brighton Beach during this period and used the color black. It was supplemented by the RJ between 168 St and 95 St-4 Av and used the color red.
Effective July 1,1968 when the 57 St-6 Av Station openned the following changes were made. The JJ was discontinued to be replaced by the KK 6 Avenue-Broadway Bkyln Lcl between 57 St-6 Av and 168 St.
This line used the light blue color.
The QJ was now used to cover both the 168 St-Brighton service and the 168 St-Broad St service.
The RJ was discontinued and replaced by a branch of the RR between Chambers St and 95 St using the dark green color.
The current system of color-coding lines according to their mainline of operation did not come into effect until the Diamond Jubilee Edition of the subway map was issued in the summer of 1979.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Did anybody ever mention what the "MM" was actually going to be? I have seen it on R16 and R32 bulkhead rolls.
I think the "KK" was same color as the "A".
wayne
Wayne: The MM was supposed to run between 57/6 and Metropolitan Av on the Myrtle Avenue Line. The color was to be light blue as oppossed to the dark blue of the KK. Although it never ran as such 4 KK trains did cover the route starting on July 1,1968. They left 57/6 between 726am and 809am and made all local stops to Metropolitan after whcih they laid up in the Fresh Pond Yard.
Larry,RedbirdR33
That time period brings back memories of the "NX". Someone once told me that "NX" stood for "Noble Experiment".
Peppertree: Please note my correction to this post. The MM color would have been green,not light blue.
Your right the NX did use the light blue color. I remember riding an R-27 which carried a large blue disk with "NX" on it on a chain accross the front of the train.
The NX was shortlived but was a great treat for those of us who never rode the BMT #7 Franklin-Nassau on the Sea Beach express tracks.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Mr. Greller's book even has a picture of an R16, dated 1986 (must have been near the end) signed with the orange "JJ". I gues they never did update those signs.
No, they never did, I can testify to that.....
I just assumed at the time, that the JJ was from the double letter times, and as to the color, I just figured it was left over from the "spaghetti map"
Besides, the J was never an express, as far as i could tell...even the skip-stop isn't really an express, they still went thru the stations, just didn't stop...besides, skip stop was still pretty slow.
When the QJ was eliminated in 1973, the line was still a rush hour express from Eastern Parkway to Marcy Ave, which is probably why it was renamed J, not JJ.
I also remember seeing R-16s on the J sporting the orange JJ signs in the mid-80s.
That's because there wasn't a "J" on those R-16 rollsigns.
Actually, the "JJ" ran accordingly:
AM rush hrs 168-Jamaica to Canal St via. Skip Stop along Jamaica Av and Bway Bklyn local.
PM rush hours Canal Street to either Crescent St, Atlantic Ave or Canarsie via. local.
All other times local from 168-Jamaica to Broad Street.
This was taken over by the QJ and KK in July 1968. Tony
There was no RJ. There was, however a green "MM" as well as the aforementioned orange "JJ".
wayne
I did too. I once even got yelled at by a conductor on an M at 9th Ave for doing that. I told him I was merely changing the "Bay Parkway" to 9th Ave. He laughed and said it was OK, that he'd finish the job.
I used to love those, because they had routes I never heard of at the time. KK? EE? TT? MM? (never existed).
MM was on a green background but never used except as an improper sign on an M train. BTW: when the R16's were on the M during their dying days, every so often I would see a functioning end sign with crank with clear unpainted outer glass. So I (and another motorman who is now a TSS) would crank up a "10 Myrtle Ave" with the customary M on the other side!
Pretty cool. It must have been interesting. I was too young at the time to notice that it was "wrong". But I do remember seeing the Light Blue M and the Green MM on trains. I knew something was different, even then, but didn't understand the whole concept of why.
What was the green MM...?
I remember seeing it on that crazy rollsign :)
But I don't remember if it said Nassau St Exp or L'c'l
MM was planned to go via the Chrystie connector to 6th Av with the KK/K. It wasn't a Nassau St line, nor did it ever run.
Sixth Ave/Broadway/Mytrle. It never ran.
The R-7/9 Eastern Division side route curtains had an MM sign.
I wonder if any of those original R-16 number route curtains were salvaged.
i never seen them on the Eastern division. in fact only place i have ever seen them besides the C is on the E. they have been on the E last time there was the E to Euclid and the WTC E to euclid again so. but the R32s were on the J tho when R was suspended
Safety
Attentiveness
Train control
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
Maybe they were R32's on the Eastern division I was thinking of. Did they run there. This may be my mystery solved.
Did the R38's ever run on the Eastern Division. Back in the early 80's I thought I remember them vaguely, but they may have been unrebuilt R42's
It occurs to me that the side exteriors of these cars are somehwat similar. If not for totally different rollsigns, one might be mistaken for the other. I think they're sort of a different shape, though. Of course, the front and rear ends look nothing alike.
:-) Andrew
The sides of the R42's bulge out a bit while the R38's are straight. The front end of the R42's looks kinda like the front end of the R44's and 46's.
The R38's seem like a cross between The R42's and the R27-R30's. The seats were the same shape as the R27-30's, but the same color as the R42's. Although at quick glance head on, they did look a little like the R44-46's, even if just for a second.
Considering the car crunch, how can 46 R38's be considered "spares"? That seems excessive to me.
I located the July 22, 2001 car assignment sheet. Of the total of 196 cars, 158 cars wee listed as "available." The rest? 38 "unavailable" and 8 "spares." "Unavailable" means that the cars are undergoing modification or SMS (Scheduled Maintenance System, meaning component upgrade/replacement), being inspected, on long-term hold, or pending scrap (none of the R-38s are being held pending scrap as far as I am aware). 8 out of 158 is a "spare" ratio of 5.1%.
David
Of the total of 196 cars, 158 cars wee listed as "available." The rest? 38 "unavailable" and 8 "spares."
158 + 38 + 8 = 204 not 196.
Perhaps, you meant that of the 158, 150 were operated in maximum service (110 on the "A" and 40 on the "C") and 8 were spares?
8 out of 158 is a "spare" ratio of 5.1%
The National Transportation Database uses a different definition for spares ratio. According to the 1999 data, there are 5768 rail vehicles of which 4897 are operated in maximum service. This represents a spare factor of:
100 x (5768 - 4897)/4897 = 18%.
Applying this formula to the R38's results in a spare factor of 31%.
It would appear that at that time the R38 fleet was underperforming availability-wise.
Correct - I meant 150 in service, plus 8 spares, plus 38 out of service for various reasons. As to differing definitions of spare ratios, I don't define 'em, I just report 'em.
David
....right.....and the MTA has railfans as their top concern when purchasing subway cars..............right.......!! :-) hehehe
....U......R........right ...bout' ...dat'........!!
he he ?
They should, IMO. If only...
Not for a while. The forthcoming R143s are being assigned to the L and M lines. It's possible that under the next B-Division car order, the R160s, some may go to the A to replace the R38s currently running there.
The M & L lines are getting new trains!?!?! Not hand-me-downs(not necessarily bad for railfans) I'm shocked.
By the way, where did the R42's originaly run, before being rebuilt for the Eastern division. Before they ran there I remember R16, R27, R30 (I think - I can't tell the difference b/t R27 & R30), and an occasional unrebuilt R40 slant or R42. They all got bumped as the R42's were rebuilt (and some rebuilt R40) Where were they originaly?
According to all the R42 photos from 1969-71 that I've seen, it looks like they ran everywhere. There's pictures of them on 8th Avenue, 6th Avenue, Broadway, the Eastern Division, Astoria, Brighton, Canarsie and Sea Beach. I guess with all the mixed trains that ran then, the R42 had no one assigned yard when they were new.
The R-42s were among the first air-conditioned NYCT(A) subway cars. As such, a determination was made that they should run all over the system (mixed, if necessary, with other postwar R-type cars) so that riders of all BMT/IND lines could have a chance to ride in comfort in the summer. That's why some of the pictures on this site (from the early 1970s, mostly) show trains of R-42s mixed with just about everything the BMT/IND had to offer from the R-10 up.
David
They really ran with the R-10s? I only remember them mixed with R-32s, R-38s, and R-40s (both versions).
The MTA in the late 60s and 70s put all the air con cars when new on the E and F Lines the first couple years, and then when the 44 and 46s came,the E & F got those and the 42s were scattered.
Once again, making it's bi-annual appearance on the SubTalk message board for those who can't believe the unbelievable, it's the photo of the B Division's "Consist From Hell," available elsewhere at Dave's website.
This lashup was short lived because of the air dooes on the R-10s and the non air doors on the R-42s. They worked but, they were not in sync with each other.
Bill "Newkirk"
I always wondered about when the door locks would release on the R-10s and when their doors would actaully open relative to the R-42 door controls. It's safe to assume the doors wouldn't open together but they probably closed simultaneously.
Wery strange to see a mix like that.
By the way, if looks could kill the photographer. I can hear the guy in the window, "What the f*** are you taking my picture!"
A John Gotti associate. Don't forget, Gotti's fishing club is based out there in Ozone Park!
Thank goodness I never, ever saw such a lashup. I would have had a stroke. It was bad enough seeing R-32s and R-42s intermixed on D trains.
Actually, I remember the locomotive-hauled trains that were on the New Haven well into the 1960s. They would mix cars of every possible vintage.
I can remember taking trips to Coney Island in the early 70's when R-42's would be linked to R-27's and R-30's. Naturally, when trying to escape the brutal summer heat, everyone would crowd into the comfy R-42's. The AC in those cars, when new, was so frigid, you could hang meat in there.
From as far as I can remember (the 80's), the D line had a lot of R42's with doors that were originally orange that were re-painted blue, just before they were refurbished. The AC still worked in some of these R-42 trains. A few ran on the M and QB (later Q lines) but most were D trains. The slant R-40's were usually B trains, (though once in a while you'd find one on the D).
No. 38's and 44's (and one or two 32's) will be working on the A for quite a while longer..
People will associate the R-44s with the A in the same way the R-10s are associated with the A, if it hasn't happened already.
Which people? I doubt the average subway commuter can tell the A's R-44's apart from the E's R-46's.
Last time I was in White Plains was when there was that Bee Lines strike. That was a long time ago. Today I returned to White Plains. Going I took the 10:41am train to Brewster North that ran express to Scarsdale, then local stops (stopping at 125th of course). An M-1 of course. I like the windows on the MNRR M-1's they open at the top, whereas LIRR's have no way to open them. The ride was pretty fast, they take those curves on the Harlem branch pretty fast. The lights seem to flicker a little more, perhaps because of MNRR's under-running 3rd rail system.
Got off at White Plains and spent time in both the Galeria and Westchester Malls. They are two very different malls. The Galleria is more budget and midscale whereas the Westchester is upscale. Westchester is a nicer mall to walk around but the only stuff I bought today was in Galleria. Both malls weren't too busy, I would say Galleria may have been a bit busier tho.
White Plains is pretty pedestrian friendly I guess because it is a City. Lots of 10 and 20 story office buildings too. I sure wish Glen Cove would've been more like White Plains but Oh well.
Going back I took the 4:25pm express train to GCT stopping only at Fordham and 125th. It arrived on the GCT-bound track, while the northbound train was stopping at the S/B track. That was wierd, MNRR seems to like to change all the tracks around, there are no regular eastbound or westbound tracks. It was very fast. Real aggressive engineer around those curves, must've been going close to 80mph in some spots. Then another nice stretch in the Bronx. The MNRR M-1's seem to stop very quickly. We pull into a station at full speed and stop, LIRR usuallu brakes a train length ahead of the station. Generally the MNRR M-1's are in much better shape and give a smoother ride than their LIRR counterparts.
Got to GCT and got a regular level (2 digit) track. On the train going to White Plains my train was on 114, on the lower level. GCT is so huge, it takes 6 minutes just for the trains to negotiate all the switches coming and going from GCT. What a complex. I wonder where I could get a track map. Looking out from the front window all you can see is a maze of tracks.
Also saw a few Genesis hauled trains, I sure wish we had the Genesis engines instead of the unreliable DE/DM's.
So which is better? Over-running or under-running 3rd rail? NYCT and LIRR use over-running 3rd rail, which has a wooden or synthetic 3rd rail cover for protection. The MNRR is different though and uses under-running, which does not use covers since it is clamped on the top. As far as reliability in bad weather, which is better?
Well, think! Rain cannot loop around and up, so therefore it can't make the 3rd rail on the MNRR rust away. I'm not sure about this, but I think you can touch the top of the rail on the MNRR and be safe...Don't hold me to it, but if it's true, safety is #1.
You reminded me of an old teacher I had. He said he and his friends would do this on the subway. One guy would hop on the 3rd rail, careful to make sure both feet landed on top. (You can do this as long as nothing is touching the floor.) Another guy would stand on the trackbed. They would almost touch fingers, and this guy claimed it formed an electric arc between the fingers. I do not know if he was just pulling my leg. However, this guy was missing 3 finger tips from a fire cracker accident when he was a kid, so who knows. He was really a teacher. Scary, huh? Nice role model for kids. No wonder I grew up insane. ;)
Are you sure it was a firecracker accident? :-)
I think he was pulling your leg. The story is extremely far-fetched
How did you communicate with your teacher?
Arti
This teacher was really doing the kids in his class a big favour by telling them how to do that. I'm surprised that anybody would even try jumping on top of a live third rail, one wrong move, you miss, stumble or whatever and you'd be fried.
-Robert King
Underrunning has covers in the form of a wooden or plastic sheath covering the top and sides of the rail. You can touch it and be perfectly safe as I have seen idiot kids do on Philly's MFL.
Underrunning is perhaps safer, but over running is cheaper to install, insulate and maintain. I would also think that trains can maintain a better contact on overrunning rail.
Underrunning is good because if you get snow on the third rail, you don't have to worry as much.
In the weekly press release, the first upcoming event was this one. I am a little surprised they announced the station since initially it was not disclosed.
December 5, 12:15 a.m., Emergency Exercise,, sponsored by Metro and the Departments of Transportation, Justice, and Energy, Smithsonian Metro Station, featuring the effectiveness of organizations and emergency services in responding to a simulated release of a harmful chemical agent in a subway station.
Seriously, I would not be surprised if part of this exercise is to make a bit of a PR show with a press conference on site to demonstrate how the local emergency services are well prepared to deal with a chemical/biological attack on the subway in the wake of September 11th. If that is true, the news crews have to know where to go.
-Robert King
What is interesting is that the last train will have just left the station a few minutes before. I wonder how that will effect the drill.
I'm pretty sure they meant 12:15 PM. WMATA makes a ton of typos on their website. Plus, could you imagine all these government people staying up late to do this? LOL.
maybe, maybe not. SF MUNI recently did some drill in the wee hours of a Sunday morning 2-3 AM IIRC
That's true. Since they are going to be creating a "scene", maybe they wish to do it after the last trains have rolled through so they could do this vs. doing it in the middle of the afternoon at lunchtime when there are hundreds of people wandering around. That does make sense.
WMATA has never done an emergency drill on a weekday. They have done drills on the weekend on the Fenwick Bridge, during which yellow line trains run via the blue line from L'Enfant Plaza to Pentagon, then resume normal routing. They can't hold a drill at Smithsonian in the middle of the day.
If the 7th Avenue line is rebuilt South of Chambers Street, South Ferry should be rebuilt a 4 track station so people could catch the 1 or 5 trains. The station would have access to both the East and West side IRT lines as it does now, but be cabable of handling 10 cars. Also, if we're going to rebuild it, how about a link to PATH. This is doubtfull, but I can dream. "242 Street, Van Cortlandt Park to Newark." Interesting...
I could see at least a 2 track stub at South Ferry. The front of the platform would probably be just before the curve in the station now. If nothing else MTA should not use that tight curve or the short platform as a stop. The platform could be extended up the line aways to make it accessable to the current 1 line. There would be a stop at Cortlandt. Rector would probably be abondoned. Maybe the new station at South Ferry could exit at the Ferry ar one end and exit at Rector or whatever was the name if the street at the south end of the station (Morris?)
Maybe the Lexington line can have a connection to the new South Ferry. It all depends where the current line goes from Bowling Green.
Interesting ideas.
The line IS being rebuilt.
I doubt that a new South Ferry connection would be built to handle Lexington Avenue trains for the same reason Lex trains stopped using that station in the first place: There are two rush-hour express lines (#4 & #5) coming into Manhattan from Brooklyn that stop at Bowling Green. A Lexington train that ran to South Ferry would either have to displace some Brooklyn trains (which would worsen service in that borough) or else, additional trains would have to be added, which would cause a bottleneck at Bowling Green.
Even if a new line was built, which I doubt, I also agree it would not connect to Lexington. THey would continue to use the old South Ferry to reverse direction, however.
Now if they could find a way to connect the 6 to south ferry, that would be something.
Cool plan. I reckon there would not be any problem terminating the 5 at South Ferry, but it'd require something they simply are NEVER going to build: an IRT 2nd Av Subway. This would mean that the current diamond 5 trains - oh, why can't they call it the 8? - could run from Flatbush, through the Joralemon, up 2nd Av and say to QBP or something.
Too many people of color think that because something is all white, that it is racist. That is far from the truth. An organization's ethnic makeup does nor necessarily mean it is racist. Yet too many people of color think that is so. We as minorities must be more willing to "crash the party", to let the racists show themselves and deal with them accordingly. Case in point, the Baltimore Streetcar Museum has welcomed me with open arms. The fact that no minorities have preceded me is because none have applied. As such I welcome all people of color to join organizations devoted to railfanning for you are welcome.
Eric D. Smith
Good point. I must point out though that railfanning can be quite a costly hobby and that many minorities may not have enough money to maintain a living and railfan. I think money and power has something to do with this because if more minorities had the money to purchase a good camera, film, pay for processing, a computer, Internet, and a website server, we would possibly see more of them. I have a feeling there are many railfans of color but due to the lack of the money to buy those things, those people probably are merely trainspotters, not photographers or webmasters.
Just my opinion, feel free to comment.
[I must point out though that railfanning can be quite a costly hobby and that many minorities may not have enough
money to maintain a living and railfan.]
Bigot
It is. Maybe you are Bill Gates in which case a few million dollars is pocket change but railfanning is not a cheap hobby. Digital photography runs the costs down quite a lot but for those of us who have yet to go digital, we are still paying for processing, film, etc.
[railfanning is not a cheap hobby.]
I didn't say that wasn't true what I said was that your statement that the reason more minorities aren't railfans is because they are poor is very racist.
I am not intending to be racist, I am merely laying out facts. Nowhere did I say that minorities are dirt poor and I said it was due to corrupted power earlier on. You can't change history and its not very fair to get on my case if I do.
Yes we should get on your case because you simply can't make that assumption and I want to know where you getting these facts from? Wherever you are "getting your so-called facts" you need to ask for an UPDATE quick fast and in a hurry. Because the message you made offends me and disrespected as a female and a minority. Keep in mind to DO NOT GENERALIZE on a SUBJECT you don't know NOTHING about. You may have alot of railfanning yrs under your belt but times have definitly changed and you need to WAKE UP and SMELL the COFFEE.
PEACE OUT!
MS.SEPTA
amen...Ms septa...couldn't of said it better myself,
Peace,
ABDEE
I have basis on which I make my statements although it is very off topic. If you wish to contine this thread via e-mail, feel free.
My last word on this. I see your point and it is not racist. What it is might be truthful. Caucasians who are real poor aren't all that interested in the rails either because they have more important things to worry about. And let's face it, there are more African-American poor that other groups. Maybe it was the way in which it was said. I do know that we have a number of AA males on Subtalk so even aren't devoid of people of color here.
Actually railfanning CAN BE a cheap hobby. It all depends on what TYPE of railfanning your're talking about. For instance, if you are into mainline cross-country railroading, then you ARE talking expensive (if your goal is to follow the equipment and snap some shots). Urban railfanning, (rapid transit and lightrail) is quite inexpensive since all it takes is a couple of bucks and you can basically ride ALL DAY (or night) to your hearts content.
BMTman
Thank you for that statement BMTman
I said the same thing myself in a just completed post. If I had read yours first I could have saved myself the trouble. But yes, what you say is true. You have a field day on the rails in New York for $5 bucks. One dollar and half for carfare, and three and a half for some snacks and you in for a fun day.
your statement that the reason more minorities aren't railfans is because they are poor is very racist.
Statistics cannot be racist. It is a fact that minorites in America have not acheived the same levels of economic success as has the majority. Minorites themselves bemoan this fact. I don't hear you calling them racists.
This is yet one more example of someone yelling "racism" where none exists. Many people on the extreme left seem to have this need to show off their imagined sense of moral superiority. If no evil exists to yell at, then evil must be created. I wish the extreme left had as much courage in attacking real evil, for example: terrorists and their supporters, and other criminals. But that's asking for too much.
Alan Glick
statistics can and indeed often are racist. numbers are collected and analyzed by people. therefore human interpretation is always going to follow through to the final result. ive heard that one reason that newspapers were sure enough of johnsons defeat (it was johnson wasn't it - forgive me if im wrong, im no history scholar) to print it before official verification proved otherwise had something to do with the fact that polls were taken in a very biased manner that misrepresented actual population groups.
as for "minorities" (im assuming that by minority, wmata-moron was probably reffering primarily to african-americans and latinos) and their wealth. it is true that some groups over all tend to be wealthier than others, but that doesnt mean that there isnt a wide distribution of wealth throughout every ethnic and/or racial classification.
the fact that the absense of non-whites in railfaning was suggested by ANYONE to be a result of "minorities being poor" only goes to show how ignorant many americans still are and how far we must go before we can ever think of becomming a colorless society.
[were sure enough of
johnsons defeat (it was johnson wasn't it - forgive me if im wrong, im no history scholar) to print it before official
verification proved otherwise had something to do with the fact that polls were taken in a very biased manner that
misrepresented actual population groups.]
It was Truman and last year the Gore Lovers in the media stated that he won Florida before the polls had closed.
oh woops, see now i feel like an idiot. shows you what happens when you're too young to live it and the new york city public schools were too shortchanged by albany to teach it to you right. we used to have these sessions where everyone in school would copy letters off the board asking for better school funding and the teachers would put them all in a big bag and mail them to koch and whoever the governor was back then.
There are exceptions to the rule. Just because the average person falls into a certain income bracket, it doesn't mean their equal won't be Bill Gates.
Don't take everything literally. Read it, think, try to comprehend, then question, don't bash.
>>> Don't take everything literally. Read it, think, try to comprehend, then question, don't bash. <<<
The corollary to that is to think a bit before you write. If your comments are perceived by many to be racist, but you did not mean them to be, than you have done a poor job of communicating your thoughts.
Tom
If your comments are perceived by many to be racist, but you did not mean them to be, than you have done a poor job of communicating your thoughts.
Or there are a hell of a lot of people in the world with BIG chips on their shoulders.
Geez.
-- Tim
>>> Or there are a hell of a lot of people in the world with BIG chips on their shoulders <<<
Whether people have chips on their shoulders or not is immaterial. When one fails to communicate his real thoughts to another, his use of language has failed. If the failure to communicate is with only one person of a large group, it is reasonable to assume the problem is with the one receiving the communication. If the failure is with a large group of people (with whom one is attempting to communicate) then the failure is in the choice of words.
Tom
Whether people have chips on their shoulders or not is immaterial. When one fails to communicate his real thoughts to another, his use of language has failed. If the failure to communicate is with only one person of a large group, it is reasonable to assume the problem is with the one receiving the communication. If the failure is with a large group of people (with whom one is attempting to communicate) then the failure is in the choice of words.
In principle I agree with you. However, the responses to this message have made it abundantly clear that the people who took offense do, indeed, have enormous chips on their shoulders about this which *caused* them to take offense (and yes, in this situation that is unquestionably material). Those responses were highly charged and emotional answers to a post that clearly wasn't intended to give offense. If it unintentionally did so, then it should have gotten more measured responses explaining why. The sharply worded, angry responses were simply out of line, given -- again -- that any reasonable reading of the original post would make clear that it wasn't intended to be offensive in any way. And those sharply worded responses made clear that those people are wearing tinted glasses that cause them to see racism where there is none. That being the case, the failure in communication is indeed theirs.
I don't think WMATA(whatever the rest of his handle is ;-) ) deserved the thrashing he got here, period.
-- Tim
If your comments are perceived by many to be racist, but you did not mean them to be, than you have done a poor job of communicating your thoughts.
No, it means that there are people who like to yell "racism" where none exists.
Alan Glick
I don't think anyone enjoys saying something is racist. They usually say it because they're unhappy that they feel something is racist.
Think about it- I think whoever you're referring to would rather never have to use that word again.
Not only that-
Just because one person says that something isn't racist, doesn't mean that it isn't.
I don't think anyone enjoys saying something is racist. They usually say it because they're unhappy that they feel something is racist.
Think about it- I think whoever you're referring to would rather never have to use that word again.
Not only that-
Just because one person says that something isn't racist, doesn't mean that it isn't.
I doubt that people who cry "racism" with no justification, as here, would be a bit happy if they never had to use that word again.
And just because one person says something *is* racist doesn't mean that it is, either.
-- Tim
A lot of times people say racist things even when their intent is not racist-
Just because someone doesn't intend to make a racist statement, doesn't mean they are not making a racist statement.
Now, I am not specifically referring to WMATA, I am responding to all those who keep referring to "people" who "see racism where there is none."
I hear this constantly, everytime one person says something is racist, I hear something along those lines.
That's such a common assumption, "because I don't think something is racist, if another says it is, it isn't"
Again-I stress this-
I am NOT referring to specific statements or specific individuals here-
I am simply commenting on some of the statements that keep surfacing in this debate.
Just because someone doesn't intend to make a racist statement, doesn't mean they are not making a racist statement.
Uh, yeah, it does, if we want the word "racism" to mean anything. Racism is an attitude (or a set of attitudes). This/these attitude(s) *must* lie behind a statement for it to be racist. A person who makes a statement that might be considered racist otherwise, isn't making a racist statement if he or she doesn't hold these attitudes; the person is probably just ignorant in one way or another. NOT the same thing at all.
The right response to racism is condemnation. The right response to ignorance is education.
-- Tim
Well put, I agree.
>>> Uh, yeah, it does, if we want the word "racism" to mean anything. Racism is an attitude (or a set of attitudes). This/these attitude(s) *must* lie behind a statement for it to be racist. <<<
You are right, racism is an attitude, but that attitude is not limited to hate or antagonism. In the heyday of the British Empire, many among the British were famous for believing it was "the white man's burden" to bring civilization to the darker races. Many spoke fondly of serving in colonial India with a liking for the Indian people, but with a firm belief that the "wogs" could never govern themselves. Those people were racists just as much as the KKK or the Nazis without (thankfully) the violence.
In the United States, the treatment of native Americans through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, especially the establishment of Indian Schools to displace native American culture was racist, although many of those involved had benign motives.
The original post which started the furor was condescending in tone. It was not name calling and presumably was not intentional. The person who posted it has apologized for any offense taken to his words. Some of the reaction to it was much more strident than necessary, but I understand the feelings of those who were offended.
One needs to be much more careful with the written word than in face to face conversation because of the lack of immediate feedback and non verbal clues from facial expressions and body movements. A misspoken phrase that brings a frown or a surprised look (or a cocked fist) can be quickly modified. The written word does not get the immediate feedback, and therefore needs more thought.
Tom
You are right, racism is an attitude, but that attitude is not limited to hate or antagonism. In the heyday of the British Empire, many among the British were famous for believing it was "the white man's burden" to bring civilization to the darker races. Many spoke fondly of serving in colonial India with a liking for the Indian people, but with a firm belief that the "wogs" could never govern themselves. Those people were racists just as much as the KKK or the Nazis without (thankfully) the violence.
Interesting historical factoid: the phrase "white man's burden" was not used originally with respect to British colonial rule in India, as almost everyone believes, but rather with respect to American colonial rule in the Philippines.
>>> Interesting historical factoid: the phrase "white man's burden" was not used originally with respect to British colonial rule in India, as almost everyone believes, but rather with respect to American colonial rule in the Philippines. <<<
I'm afraid you are wrong on this one Peter. The Rudyard Kipling poem "The White Man's Burden" was published in McClure's Magazine in February of 1899, and was considered either a warning against or an exhortation to America to extend imperial rule to the Philippines, and thus join the European nations in carving out empires. The first lines is "Take up the White Man's burden -". Kipling (1865-1936) was born in India to an English civil servant, but was educated in England, then returned to India as an adult. He was familiar with the term long before he wrote the poem. An extremely thorough discussion of the poem and the attitudes at the time it was published can be found at http://www.boondocksnet.com/kipling/index.html#haskins
Tom
So, in other words, people get a kick out of it, enjoyment, if they feel someone is acting or talking in a racist manner against them?
How would that be?
Why do people assume that because they don't understand another persons viewpoint, that their viewpoint is wrong, or that they are not being honest?
To cry racism for an ulterior motive would be dishonest.
I don't assume people are being dishonest because I have a differing viewpoint.
"I don't assume people are being dishonest because I have a differing viewpoint."
As well you shouldn't. However, when people cry "racism" in its absense that should tip you off that something other than honesty is being displayed.
Alan Glick
Who are we talking about? Al Sharpton? Come on guys, let's put this one to rest before tempers really go off.
So, in other words, people get a kick out of it, enjoyment, if they feel someone is acting or talking in a racist manner against them?
Yes.
How would that be?
They have a lot of emotional capital invested in feeling like victims. I.e., what's commonly known as "having a chip on your shoulder" (oops, I said it again).
-- Tim
That I somewhat agree with-
Overcompensation for feelings of inferiority-
Still- I wouldn't call that enjoyment-
I would call that a "program", if you will- or better, learned behavior, or better still, self-fulfilling prophecy.
Now, why would someone feel like a victim?
Maybe because they've been victimized?
If you have been victimized, wouldn't you be on guard so you wouldn't be victimized again?
As in, if you get bitten by a snake, wouldn't you be leery of snakes?
"As in, if you get bitten by a snake, wouldn't you be leery of snakes?"
That's a lot closer to racism than anything anyone else has said.
Alan Glick
Just because one person says that something isn't racist, doesn't mean that it isn't.
Then, why can't you accept my point that, just because some says something is racist, that doesn't mean that it is?
Yelling "racist" is a tactic sometimes used by those who wish to hide their own racism. For one example, anytime Al Sharpton uses the word.
Alan Glick
The politically correct determinant is that it is the perception of the recipient and not the intent of the speakerthat counts. This is the principle that seems to drive most if not all Title VII cases in the courts. In fact - this usually conveys a presumption of guilt upon the majority.
Right on Alan. There are a few of us that can see that.
(Opps I read the post even thought he is in my killfile)
Wow this is really something. I get an Email telling me how I am a "right wing nut" and reply telling me that I am in the "extreme left" for saying the same thing.
For anyone who has never read my post and thinks that I am on the extreme left I support welfare reform, cutting the federal income tax to 12%, oppose gun control and affirmative action and voted for more republicans than democrats last year.
Worms from cans. People need to work, federal taxes should support working peoples incomes, firearms licensing doesn't equate to crime control, every qualified person is entitled to specific employment and I'll hold 'the party line.' 'Labeling' is an undefenseable act of the ignorant and unsupported. MORE TRAINS, we need more subways that work and the people who really want to make them go. Peter
(Opps I read the post even thought he is in my killfile)
Wow this is really something. I get an Email telling me how I am a "right wing nut" and reply telling me that I am in the "extreme left" for saying the same thing.
For anyone who has never read my post and thinks that I am on the extreme left I support welfare reform, cutting the federal income tax to 12%, oppose gun control and affirmative action and voted for more republicans than democrats last year.
If the above is true, that doesn't change the fact that yelling "racism" where it doesn't exist is a tactic of the left.
Another tactic is to call oneself a moderate, middle-of-the-roader who supports more Republicans than Democrats.
How does one read messages of a person who has been supposedly kill-filed? And why would one do so?
Easy.
When you have sombody in your killfile, when you click on a reply to a message posted by the killfiled poster, the link to the killfiled message is there at the top of the reply post.
You are still off the mark there. Salaam, is African-American and from what I know he isn't Bill Gates in the money department and yet he makes films of the trains of the New York Subway. Anyway, can't you be a railfan just by enjoying riding the rails and picking a favorite line, and buying a shirt, and getting on Subtalk. Hell I'm no millionaire and I live three thousand miles away, but would anyone in their right mind say that I am not a railfan? Hell fanatic would be a better word for it. So I can see What's point.
I keep telling you fred 2440 air miles, 2770 by car via I10-15-40-81-78. first stop toll booth in Jersey City
All right already, cut out the math lesson. 2700plus miles it is.
Geography, not math
Take a look at Wayne Whitehorne's carspotting notebooks and you'll realize that you don't need to spend megabucks to be a serious railfan.
I mentioned that, while I have never seen them myself. I was saying someone who has very little income is not as likely to show up on the internet with photos as someone with a higher income.
That's bullshit, when I first started in the Webmaster game I got me a little cheapy free website, and I was taking pics with cheap ass disposible cammies. AND I WAS 17 AT THE TIME NO LESS! AND A COMPUTER, shit you can get a decent Compaq Presario at about $600.00 or get a second hand for as cheap as $200.00.
The point is that this post should really never have even surfaced because now you are up against a subject I guarentee you will lose. This is A LOT of "minorities" as you would call them, on this board.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
People can find ways to do things without money. I'm broke and yet I am fully up on most of the passenger equipment that plies NY area tracks. It's not the money, my friend. It's whether you are interested enough to railfan or not.
The point is that this post should really never have even surfaced because now you are up against a subject I guarentee you will lose. This is A LOT of "minorities" as you would call them, on this board.
And one of my favorite things about SubTalk is that it doesn't *matter* what race (or sex, or sexual orientation, or ... or ... or ...) you are. Being a railfan is sufficient.
Obviously there is [ahem] a wide spectrum of political viewpoints expressed on here, some less politely than others. But it's still impossible to correlate views with personal characteristics.
As the famous cartoon says, "On the internet, no one knows you're a dog."
Hah! I can't resist:
That's really funny Mr.Pirmann two thumbs up.
That's the way you should have said it in the first place instead of generalizing a group of people. DON'T try to clean it up now WE ALL saw what YOU posted. Let this be a lesson learned and DON'T repeat it again. What my mother always told me "THINK before YOU say something 'cause you don't know how poeple will react to such ignorance".
Wayne has been a carspotter for over 30 years and still carries a notebook with him to jot down car numbers. His dedication is amazing.
That is so true.
Railfanning is a lot cheaper, on average, than a day at Disney World.
The only money I ever spend on railfanning is on fare. To me, railfanning is just riding subways noticing the things that interest me. I never even took pictures while railfanning until I started contributing to this site.
I started out railfanning by leaving my nose print on the inside of the storm door. Anything after that is all frills. You determine your own . Who you are and how you do it is up to you! Technology has created many avenues and introduced a lot of friends that didn't know each other. It's NOT them and us, It is WE.
avid
THANK YA! I was hoping to see something a little more neutral in this thread. One of the great things about the internet is that nobody knows you're a puppy unless you TELL EVERYBODY. One of the FEW equalizers left. :)
I'm plain old whitebread myself, but never bothered photographing the "railfan experience" ... the old MEAT ROM stores all for posterior and costs nothing. I guess I shoulda had a camera. Still, the memories I've chosen to keep are quite vivid and don't fade with the chemicals.
While someone literally set themselves up, I never considered enjoying trains as something that was based on economics or racial background. We're *ALL* sick individuals if we get a hardon for trains. Heh.
[Technology has created many avenues and introduced a lot of friends that didn't know each other. It's NOT them and us, It is WE.]
As Will Rogers once said: "I never met a railfan I didn't like"
That is not a bigoted statement. You don't have to be a genius to know that African-Americans, for the most part, live in many of the poorer areas of New York City and are not as economically endowed as some other groups. Poor housing, poor schools, and lack of opportunity are still problems faced our black brothers, and puttting our heads inthe sand and saying that this does not exist is ridiculous on the face of it. On the other hand, you can still be somewhat poor and be a railfan. Hell you could ride the whole subway system all day for only a buck and a half.
Thank you. While I was not by any means intending to offend anyone, the main intention of my post was to say that many minorities do not have the money to make appearances on this board. Anyone can ride a train. They are cheap for a reason, to get people out of cars, which are costly to maintain. Unfortunately, Kodak, does not care about low income people who have interests in trains and photography, and no ISP is going to determine their rates by income bracket. If they did, more people would have access to these things, but they don't. Please understand, I am not racist by any means. I was simply saying it is a fact of life that a poor person, whether they be white, black, green, blue, or pink, may not be able to afford film, photography equipment, and internet access. Any part of that might be why they either aren't posting here.
I do not claim to be smarter than anyone else and I'm not, but I was surprised at the negative reaction you received. To read carefully what you wrote would be clear for anyone. At least I thought that. However, as an educator that teaches a speech class I should know better than anyone that words can be misconstrued. But here is some advice for you. Never claim that you are NOT a racist because that automatically puts you on the defensive. Go on the offensive if someone calls you that. Put him on the defensive. He will be very leery about calling you that title again.
Hehe, thanks. I was surprised, too, but then again, this is SubTalk and we have quite a unique and diverse group!
A thought the original post sounded like 'all black people are poor and all poor people are black therefore anyone who opposes welfare reform is racist". While it is true that on average black people are not as well off as white people the gap is not as large as many people think it. I believe that last year's census said that black people make around 85% of what white people do. also keep in mind that poor African-Americans tend to live in cities and poor white people tend to live in rural areas so middle class people are more likely to see poor blacks than poor whites.
I know that's right Dand124 that's part of the FACTS that WMATA(whatever his name) failed to mention.
How come if someone believes a stereotype (whether its right or wrong) many people consider them to be a bigot? I personally consider your one word answer to WMATAGM... is a lot more bigoted than anything he said in his initial post because your answer seems to border on dislike. Whether WMATA...'s post was factual or not I believe he was sincere and didn't mean any disrespect for anyone, neither you nor the poster who called him a moron in a later post. However your one word post has a lot of animosity showing through.
Here is the dictionary definition of bigot:big·ot [bíggt ] (plural big·ots) noun
intolerant person: somebody who has very strong opinions, especially on matters of politics, religion, or ethnicity, and refuses to accept different views
By the way, I've never understood why many people think "some of my best friends are _____...)" is a bigoted statement. Couldn't it be that some of ones best friends ARE .....??
Well Jeff thats whats wrong with the NYPD. Beliving in all those stereotype. Read the other posts JEFF, your in the minority here.
Well Jeff thats whats wrong with the NYPD. Beliving in all those stereotype. Read the other posts JEFF, your in the minority here.
Any kind of profiling attempts to limit searches to those who reasonably fit the description of the perpetrator. This makes it more likely that the police will eventually aprehend the criminal. If the description of a criminal is of a white male, it would hamper efforts to find the criminal if police checked non-white females. And visa versa. Opposition to profiling of any kind helps criminals. Black demagogues and white liberals put a low priority on apprehending criminals and a high priority on protecting criminals of the "right" color.
As for Jeff being in the minority here, he should consider that a compliment.
Alan Glick
So your saying that racial profiling is good? If white were put in the same position as minorities, man they would be screaming bloody murder.
Try being a black man for a week or so and you will see why. People like you who want to pick on people base on skin color even if they did nothing wrong at all are damn losers. Try telling your story to the black community.
So your saying that racial profiling is good? If white were put in the same position as minorities, man they would be screaming bloody murder.Try being a black man for a week or so and you will see why.
Wrong. If I am stopped by the police because they were looking for a white criminal I would aid their investigation and wish them well in capturing a criminal who is a danger to people of all colors.
People like you who want to pick on people base on skin color even if they did nothing wrong at all are damn losers.
No one wants to pick on innocent people. Innocent people should be willing to help catch guilty people. What I am clearly saying is that people of all colors can fit into a profile that the police may be searching out at any particular time. People of all colors should be willing to aid investigative efforts. You do not wish to understand what I am saying. You'd rather yell "racist" (or loser) becasue that's easier than dealing with the force of my logic.
Try telling your story to the black community.
My point would be accepted by those in the black community who are for law and order. It would not be accepted by those who wish for criminals of their same skin color to go free.
Alan Glick
how about all the innocent people that were killed?
What if they were white? What would you say?
how about all the innocent people that were killed?
What if they were white? What would you say?
We weren't talking about people getting killed. We were talking about people getting questioned. Your apparent evasion of the issue shows your inability to debate this (or any issue). Goodbye.
Alan Glick
How would you know that Glick? You show that you dont care about people complaining that they are being harassed. So blame yourself when blacks look at you like your their enemy. How do you know that I cannot debate any issue Glick? Your lack of understanding on this issue (or any issue) shows through. Thank God we don't have many of your kind around.
David, I put the jerk in my killfile you should do the same.
David, I put the jerk in my killfile you should do the same.
It would be awful if you were exposed to differing viewpoints wouldn't it?
Alan Glick
>>> Thank God we don't have many of your kind around. <<<
Are you sure we don't have many?
Tom
What about Rodney King or that young African American man who was shot forty one times because his color made him look like a criminal? You are not only a racist but completely out of your mind if you think that profiling of any kind is good. When I was doing research for my book on the New York Els those white policeman patroling the elevateds looked at me and other black riders with as much "affection" as the Nazi SS looked at the Jews. In going through Brooklyn, the Bronx, and the South and West Side's of Chicago, I felt that I had a better chance of being killed by a racist cop than an African American thug. So pardon my tone and language but take that "profiling is good" bullshit and shove it up that part of your anatomy where the sun don't shine.
Eric Dale Smith
P.S. If you took that racist position into the black community I guarantee that they'd hang you from the nearest lampost and with good reason.
[ If you took that racist position into the black community I guarantee that they'd hang you from the nearest lampost and
with good reason.]
hold on as much as i disagree with Mr. Glick's views he does have a right to free speach like everyone else
I'm not questioning his right of free speech but come on, am I supposed to accept those onerous positions without comment? As I've said all along I assume the best in everybody but if you expose your true colors in matters such as these, watch out.
Eric Dale Smith
no matter how vile someones views are no one has the right the kill them over it.
You're right. I was WAY out of line to even suggest such a thing. My apologies to Mr. Glick.
Eric Dale Smith
You're right. I was WAY out of line to even suggest such a thing. My apologies to Mr. Glick.
Eric Dale Smith
I'll accept your apology if you can refrain from personal attacks in the future and stick to debating the issues.
Alan Glick
I'm not questioning his right of free speech but come on, am I supposed to accept those onerous positions without comment?
What's onerous about investigating crime?
As I've said all along I assume the best in everybody but if you expose your true colors in matters such as these, watch out.
The criminal mind now threatens? Hardly surprising.
Alan Glick
E Dog: Wow!!! I hope tempers will cool somewhat. If you are a person of color racial profiling is horrible because you are singled out. There has to be a better way. But here is the rub. It has been chronicled that African-Americans are more involved in crimes than other groups. It is not a pleasant thing to say, but it happens to be true. That is not racist but fact. It does make profiling seem necessary to the police. I don't like it at all and believe there should be a better way. What is a better way? I'm afraid I don't know. What does get me are those cops, a very small minority, by the way, that abuse this and treat blacks like dirt. Those cops should be brought on the carpet, but like the vast majority of AA's our police are overwhelmingly good guys who protect and serve and do a very good job under trying circumstances. Now please can we put this topic to rest?
The Black experience in America has not allowed for the cultivation of Railfans. As the lifestyle of Blacks changes, maybe more will find an interest in trains.
There is a reason why as of now, nearly every railfan is white, overweight, and gives off a weird vibe.
One day I was looking at pictures of one of those railfan trips, and I don't think I saw one Black person in those photos. And if there was one black person, that's still a disproportionately low number considering the number of Blacks as a percentage in NYC
You obviously did not ride on the D-Type trip sponsored by the March of Dimes this past August.
There were black faces in the crowd. Even one young black FEMALE FOAMER (I'm making an emphasis here since she DID stand out in the crowd, so to speak).
If you met her you'd know what I'm talking about...
BMTman
You're right. The black experience in America does not allow for the cultivation of railfans. That's why I'm so proud to be one.
Eric D. Smith
Wait a minute. Isn't this the exact statement, made by another poster here, that got you all riled up a few days ago?
Proud to be black? Bravo for you! Not interested in rails? Come on, we've got to get more interested in the subway. Isn't it a fact that on many of the lines black neighborhoods intersperse the lines? Isn't Houston, Wayne Johnson, N Broadway Line, and others African-American? So there is representation on Subtalk. The aim is to get other AA's interested, and while we're about it, how about some of the newer immigrants, the Dominicans, the Russians, the Koreans? Hell, the subway of New York is one of the wonders of the world. New Yorkers should revel in it, all that is, but those snobs on the u pper West Side who feel it is beneath them to ride the rails.
Which snobs on the Upper West Side are those? (Must be the ones who can't fit on the train.)
You're right. The black experience in America does not allow for the cultivation of railfans. That's why I'm so proud to be one.
Eric D. Smith
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But it will change. Eventually, you'll start hearing Blacks who speak of the Taking of the Pelham 123 with reverence, just like white rail buffs.
BUT,to GOD.....we are all the same......so stop this nonsence,ok?
We are all different, vastly different. Even identical twins are different.
Just what I would expect from you........onk onk onk.....
Someone accused me of being a TA recruiter...let me just say that I never knew about the opportunities that TA had to offer. LuchAAA should find some time to go into the schools, standing up against the Board of Education, to present what railfanning/technical employment can give to 'minorities.' TA is an equal opportunity employer...everyone is welcome...AND if the 'minorities' don't discover or want the work, the empty spaces WILL be filled by immigrants who do. Make me dirty, make me greasy, make me black from head to toe...TA work is GOOD work even if they NEVER put my technical skills to work. Electrical/mechanical/electronic skills are far more valuable than a n y t h i n g. I work with Russian engineers who came here and took the work, sometimes doing nothing but cleaning and inspecting. WE are the TA, WE make the trains GO. CI Peter
Please explain why I was singled out in your post.
There would have been no problem with me in that regard if I had not moved to California with my family in late 1954. I would have gone to work for the TA as sure as the sun rises in the East. I wanted to be a motorman in the worst way, but when we moved west there were no subways and that dream went by the boards. I always had visions as a kid motoring a #4 Triplex Sea Beach to Coney Island. But within a decade the Sea Beach was no longer #4 and the Triplexes were no more.
I spoke to my 'undercar' partner whom, not that it should matter, is a 'minority member,' about this FLAK on SubTalk. He laughed his heart out and said in ten or fifteen years time when the glutted IT industry has been long overshadowed by EVERYONE having/using IT skills, minorities will be flocking to TA for the technical work. I may already be too old to see it happen. CI Peter
What makes me sad is that young blacks are steered away from the TA opportunities. Where are the young men who'll keep the system moving??? As the city population of minorities grow, where will the representation figures of the TA go? Where will TA get semi-qualified employees from? All India Railways??? Thankyoyverrymuch CI Peter
What makes me sad is that young blacks are steered away from the TA opportunities. Where are the young men who'll keep the system moving???
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Explain. Why do you say that young Blacks are steered away from TA opportunities?
There not there. Period. Car Inspectors require some kind of experience...they weren't in our classes. When I got to my first assignment, I can count only two permanents. I had asked the black people I know and trust in TA and got an answer: black kids are taught not to take work that'll make them dirty and lose respect in the community. All the 'blacks' on the job are 'yah mon West Indians.' So who does newbie CI Peter have the greatest respect for: it's the black kids in apprenticeship programs that the TWU balks about. THEY will make their lives better, THEY will have opportunities I never had. The minority population of NYC increases...the opportunities exist...and the Black (A/A) and Puerto Rican parts of the society don't have proportionate memmbers in the technical parts of CED. TA needs new blood and how far can they go hiring 47 year old guys like me. I got chewed out by the Jamaican lady at 1250 B'way for not coming to TA before....I didn't know about the opportunities...and now I work so very hard to proove myself of worth. So why should TA have to hire immigrants when we have a standing population of citizens who need good work??? Answer is simple: no one wants to get dirty (TA school didn't warn us.)
Pleeese watch the closing doors thankyouverrymuch, CI Peter
I respect your opinions, and think it's great that you are expressing yourself here. But be careful. If someone on this board does not like you, or what you have to say, they'll send a copy of your opinions to 1250 Bdwy, and you'll have a second meeting with that Jamaican lady. Except this time she'll be handing you your termination papers.
If you really want to get fired, at least do it for a good cause. Prove that the TA closes the express tracks bet Roosevelt and Manhattan every weekend, and eliminates E service while there is not even any track work taking place, causing an unnecessary inconvenience to passengers.
Understood thoroughly....and thankyou. I'm well aware of what I say and post...and try to share the gift that TA has given me. People who know me readily recognise that I love this work because I have a place for my technical skills. The opportunities are going to waste. That Jamaican lady who busted my chops on the line and then queried me about why I didn't come to TA sooner...could never hand me the papers because she saw the tears in my eyes when she said, "Welcome." Someone got busted for 'insubordination' for naming another in a posting...there are TA personell checking out the internet. I am very careful about all of this...my comments are usually of a technical nature regarding what TA has received for our tax dollars. The whole E DOG debacle has made me sick and i know i don't need to respond to a G-2. The NYC Board of Education needs a good sweeping out...I grew up next to the High School of Aviation Trades on East 63rd Street..AND only wish I had someone to introduce me to the oportunities thirty years ago. God Bless, CI Peter
P.S. Racism, perceived or otherwise, not lifestyle, has everything to do with this.
Eric D. Smith
Please explain. I'm lost.
"The Black experience in America has not allowed for the cultivation of Railfans. As the lifestyle of Blacks changes, maybe more will find an interest in trains."
What exactly does this clap-trap mean? Sounds like politically incorrect thought trying to impersonate the politically correct.
I have been a railfan since I was a child, so I cannot figure out that statement for the life of me. I grew up in Bedford -Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn, and enjoyed the subways that I lived near :the A train on Fulton Street, the Franklin Ave. shuttle and the Brighton Line, and the IRT lines on Eastern Parkway. If I felt adventurous, I would go across Prospect Park and check out the IND F-line on 9th Street in Park Slope, and sometimes ride to Coney Island. I am about to turn 50 in a couple of months, so I have seen many things. I also did not choose to get into many things, which is why I am still walking around and many individuals who grew up with me are now in the graveyard.
Thanks. I thought that I was going to be out on the limb alone again. I grew up believing that black children didn't play with electric trains. Of course, having moved from Brownsville to Massapequa in the 50s, my familiarity with what was going on in the basements of black kids was very limited. Therefore black boys my age didn't like trains. I also didn't move back to Queens until the 60s and then didn't ride the subway for fun very often. When I did, it was on the 'safe' lines. So black kids didn't ride the subways for fun either - as far as I knew. Thankfully, most of us grow up and realize that our perceptions are wrong and our commonalities easily outnumber our superficial differences.
One note though - While growing up in the 50s and 60s, I eagerly looked forward to each new edition of the lionel catalog. In retrospect, I remember lionel liberally sprinkled images of boys, together with their dads throughout the catalog (Usually craning over a large loco or accessory). Those images were virtually always of white boys with white men. I don't recall images of minority train fans. (I hope someone has photos from old lionel catalogs to show). Not only did lionel miss the boat to bring thousands more people into the hobby. They also give a sad commentary about corporate thinking in the 50s.
Back then, especially during the 1950's, black people were almost rendered invisible,except in areas like entertainment, sports, or crime. during the late 1960's civil rights era, more visibility began, but still things were limited. There is still a long way to go, but hopefully we as a nation have become more educated and aware of who we are and resist retreating into the realm of ignorance which was plentiful in the past. I saw on a documentary on the FBI on the History Channel the comment was made that one of J. Edgar Hoover's biggest mistakes was not to make the ranks of the FBI more inclusive of minorities, in that by having a force of agents of one particlar stereotype, they were usually spotted by organized crime figures and that policy also helped organized crime to grow in this country, as law enforcement culd not effectively blend in with them. Just another point of information to ponder.
and while you are at it where were the girls/moms/ We made sure both kids had their own trains when small--result two adult railfans--not raving foamers but they go on excursions for fun.
Lionel did have the 'girl's train' in the 60s, complete with pink locootive and pastel cars. It is wortha small fortune today. K-Line just released 2 versions of the same train. $550 for the command control version.
we didn't do that. she got legit cars and engines lettered for local rr's here (SP/SSW) her brother got WP & BN stuff.
The Lionel Girl's Train, set number 1587, was released in 1957. It was a flop and many sets (mostly from large retail chains) were returned to Lionel's distributors for credit. These sets were resold at a fraction of their original cost to hobby shops, who repainted the cars and locomotives for local roads not represented in Lionel's inventory, and were then sold to the public as individual pieces. Many a Girl's Train transformer (yes, even the transformer was pink) ended up being the test track transformer in these shops. Those shops who didn't repaint the equipment sold it piecemeal to hobbyists who would, or cannibalized the cars for parts.
From the mid-'80s through its ultimate demise earlier this year I was involved with a retail hobby shop (founded in 1946) in North Carolina. We would periodically see these repainted cars as we acquired collections from various estates. Many - 40%, I'd guess, of the ones we saw - had been converted to scale O trucks and had had significant modifications made to the body, either in terms of detailing, combining two cars together to make a longer one, or both. Those which still had the Lionel trucks and couplers were typically just repainted and relettered. Repainted locomotives typically weren't modified for scale operation, and didn't turn up as often as I might have expected, given the number of cars that we saw. This may be because they had a shorter mechanical life and were junked in earlier years, while the cars soldiered on, or because they were more often cannibalized for parts by the hobby shops and never offered for retail sale, or both.
In about 1992, some time after the death of the shop's founder, his son, my older son, and I were going through a large warehouse owned by the estate, in preparation for the sale of several of his father's antique cars that were stored there. It had also served as a storage area for the shop, and had many, many unidentified cartons of excess merchandise that had been taken there and forgotten about. We had periodically gone over there and found classic merchandise - mostly old plastic car and aircraft models, with the occasional box of HO slot car accessories or Athearn cars thrown in for good measure - and brought them back to the shop for sale. While moving a couple of hundred cartons out of the way of a mid-'20s sedan that probably hadn't moved since the mid-'50s we found several cartons that were much heavier than most, and decided to investigate. Inside were a total of twelve original Girl's Trains that had never been out of the box. Needless to say, over the next three years they contributed significantly to the shop's profitability.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'll dig out my GG-1. A little beat up cuz little kids do stupid things...big kids reef Redbirds. CI Peter
Which GG-1 do you have, 2330, 2332, 2340 or 2360?
Lionel did have the 'girl's train' in the 60s, complete with pink locootive and pastel cars. It is wortha small fortune today.
During the late 1950's, Cadillac tried to market a woman's version of the DeVille sedan ... which differed from the regular version mainly by being offered in only one color. Yes, pink.
As you might imagine, it wasn't a sales success.
Would this be the famous pink Cadillac in the Clint Eastwood movie?
Ford tried the same thing as late as 1976, with its Thunderbird "Lipstick Luxury Group."
>>> I remember lionel liberally sprinkled images of boys, together with their dads throughout the catalog (Usually craning over a large loco or accessory). Those images were virtually always of white boys with white men. <<<
It is hard to single out Lionel. Until the mid ‘60s the same (with regard to the ethnicity of the models) could be said for any national catalog including Sears and Montgomery Ward, and national advertizing for everything from automobiles to Coca Cola. Even the automobile ads in Ebony magazine in the ‘50s depicted only white people.
Tom
<LuchAAA- When you were a young boy, and dinosaurs roamed the earth.
<>
LuchAAA- So what? All you have to do these days is go to your local newsstand, pick up any magazine devoted to model railroads, and almost everyone in the magazine (i.e.- people who send in pictures of themselves, alongside their model railroad)is white.
<>
LuchAAA- It's called "demographics". You're a motorcycle aficionado. Right? Just look through any magazine dedicated to motorcycles. How many people pictured in these magazines are minorities? Does this mean that there is a deficiency in the corporate thought process in the motorcycle publishing industry? Of course not. They're targeting a specific market, and want to be as accurate as possible in reflecting that market in their magazine.
Jailhouse Doc was more on the money when noting that Sears catalogs did not fairly represent blacks in the past. That's a valid argument. Sears is a national chain, and should adjust to the needs of a powerful buying segment by changing their marketing techniques to include that segment.
But in the case of niche markets, such as Lionel trains, or model railroads, it would be foolish to include demographics that show little interest in your area, just for the sake of being politically correct.
I'm an avid swimmer. I never see minority models in the catalogs or magazines that I buy. Is this a "sad commentary about corporate thinking" in the world of swimming? Or, is it an accurate representation of those who are really involved in the world of swimming?
Actually I'm 52 years old.
LuchAAA- It's called "demographics". You're a motorcycle aficionado. Right? Just look through any magazine dedicated to motorcycles. How many people pictured in these magazines are minorities?
You are, of course referring to the few pictures that don't show women riders. Look at some of the news tapes of some of the larger bike rallies. Lots of minorities including women. I guess you don't get out much.
"Sears is a national chain,"
I'm willing to bet that the Lionel orange/blue scheme & logo is as universally known as the sears logo
Besides which, I mentioned lionel because it was subject relavent. What does sears have to do with railfans and minorities. Once again, my friend, your thought process is starting to drift - off track.
I mentioned Sears, because one subtalker, I believe Jailhouse Doc, mentioned it in his post, which tied in with this whole thing.
So let's get back on track. Respond to my post regarding Metrocard machines, and understaffed token booths.
"I mentioned Sears, because one subtalker, I believe Jailhouse Doc, mentioned it in his post, which tied in with this whole thing."
Yes but if you follow the thread back, I mentioned Lionel before JHDoc mentioned Sears. Lionel was clearly more related to the issue of developing railfans than sears was - or am I missing something? That was the issue we were discussing, was it not?
"Respond to my post regarding Metrocard machines, and understaffed token booths."
Gee - I hadn't realized that our relationship had progressed to the point where you are now giving me orders. If and when I read that post & if I feel it merits a response, I'll respond to it.
WRONG! Only those who have victim status have the right to free speech. Anyone else is a racist, sexist, homophobic, etc... in America.
No everyone should have the right to free speech even if his or her views are truly racist, sexist, or homophobic.
No everyone should have the right to free speech even if his or her views are truly racist, sexist, or homophobic.
But it's OK if someone's views support criminals?
Alan Glick
Sometimes when a women is RAPED, the newspapers give a description like this:
"Suspect is a Male, 5'10, 180 lbs, with a mustache, and scar on his left cheek." The newspapers are so afraid to mention ethnicity because certain groups are so sensitive. Amazing how the media would actually jeopardize the case, and safety of other women, so as not to piss off a few hot headed citizens.
Imagine if your sister, mother, or wife is raped, gives a description to the police, and the media modifies that description, or leaves out a police sketch for the sake of being politically correct?
I'd also like someone to explain why the infamous Upper East Side rapist is not classified as the perpertrator a "hate crime" in addition to a "sex crime". And before you answer, imagine the outcry if a white suspect were wanted for raping more than 10 black or Latino women in Harlem.
["Suspect is a Male, 5'10, 180 lbs, with a mustache, and scar on his left cheek." The newspapers are so afraid to mention
ethnicity because certain groups are so sensitive.]
Thats plain stupid Do the PC Nazis have that much control of the press.
[I'd also like someone to explain why the infamous Upper East Side rapist is not classified as the perpertrator a "hate crime" in
addition to a "sex crime".]
I personally don't think there should be any difference between hate crimes and regular crimes. A crime is a crime no matter what motive.
There is nothing wrong with mentioning a that a suspect is a member of a certain ethnic group. Its just part of the discription. It is WRONG, however to stereotype EVERYONE of a certain ethnic group.
Who doesn't agree. If so explain why. Thanks.
There is nothing wrong with mentioning a that a suspect is a member of a certain ethnic group. Its just part of the discription. It is WRONG, however to stereotype EVERYONE of a certain ethnic group.
Who doesn't agree. If so explain why. Thanks.
NO ONE has said such a thing. What has been said (and what you continue to ignore) is that if someone fits the descrription of a criminal, the police should investigate.
Alan Glick
First a crime any crime is a hate crime. Ha crime is commited against someone is a show of hate, reguardless of what the crime or motive is.
"And before you answer, imagine the outcry if a white suspect were wanted for raping more than 10 black or Latino women in Harlem"
The outcry would be the same. Why should it be any different? He has the hots for Lantino and black women.Personal sexual preference, why should it matter?
BTW: what does this have to do with Eric's post?
BTW: what does this have to do with Eric's post?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does any of this have to do with the NYC Subway, as in NYCSUBWAY.ORG?
What about Rodney King
He was a criminal evading arrest. Watch the entire video clip. Not just the final few seconds where the cops wanted to be sure he had stopped standing up and throwing them around.
If you took that racist position into the black community I guarantee that they'd hang you from the nearest lampost and with good reason.
I'm sure that's exzactly what the criminal element in the black community would do to anyone who advocated that criminals of all colors should be investigated and hopefully arrested. Nice of you to show your criminal inclinations. It bears out what I've said.
Alan Glick
If you are going to talk about minorities who were victimized to argue racism, I would not use Rodney King as an example. Personally after what he's done since the celebrated case was settled, I think they should cut his feet off and beat him over the head with them. You might as well be using tawana brawley as an example of virtue and honesty.
what did he do?
He's been picked up over the past six years at shorter and shorter intervals for either drug use (PCP at least onces) and domestic violence charges in the L.A. area. I think he was arrested three times this summer alone, but I'm sure based on what happened 10 years ago, the treatement he gets downtown nowadays is probably about like what Sheriff Taylor gave Otis Campbell at the Mayberry jail on "The Andy Griffith Show" :-)
Any kind of profiling attempts to limit searches to those who reasonably fit the description of the perpetrator.
Y'all are talking past each other.
"Racial profiling," as the term has come to be used lately, has absolutely nothing to do with searching for perpetrators of specific crimes. It refers to the police practice of singling out people for traffic stops and the like based on their ethnicity. (My favorite way of describing this is that African-Americans can get arrested for "driving while black" -- maybe it wouldn't be funny if I were black, but the bitter irony of it always gives me a little chuckle, even though the practice itself is awful.)
-- Tim
Actually, RAILFANNING is very inexpensive. I'm not the richest of folk, but it was quite easy to get my start as a youth of five. All I had to do was walk to the tracks and watch to my hearts content. Don't you realize that most poor, mminority areas are chock full of railyards? And buying a camera can be as cheap as ten dollars. Come on now.
Oh my..."if more minorities had the money to purchase a good camera, film, pay for processing, a computer, Internet, and a website server, we would possibly see more of them." What are you trying to say, that most/close to all minorities don't have a lot of money? That makes *YOU* the racist...I know MANY people that are quite the contrary to what you say.
First off as a Ethinically Conscience African American Transit Fan, we are NOT the minority.
Hold the fucking phone. I work from paycheck to paycheck and yet I found that I could splurge out 400-600 bucks EVERY 6th months to upgrade to a new Digi camera to keep me going, I'm not the most richest person in the world. Enough about me!
Secondly, Railfanning and Busfanning does not REQUIRE a camera to enjoy the hobby, Prime example I met a kid today at E180th who was just there enjoying the trains flying by. And do not pull a friggin' Ross Perot with the "those people" comment. Do your research before you go make such statements. There is plenty of Minorities in the field and just as plenty with pretty expensive equipment rolling around.
Your statement would be true if it was pre-1990. Of course back then you had the quote "Whiteboys" unquote running around with the expensive cameras and the awesome slide archives. But the deal is now that it is the new Millennium, Minorities (Such as Myself) are kicking down those doors, coming out as webmasters, banging out just as good photos, and buying them expensive Cammies to do it.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
P.S. for the record, I'm far from a racist, so don't take that "whiteboy" comment out of context, I just didn't know what other word to use
[Secondly, Railfanning and Busfanning does not REQUIRE a camera to enjoy the hobby, Prime example I met a kid today at E180th who was just there enjoying the trains flying by. And do not pull a friggin' Ross Perot with the "those people" comment. Do your research before you go make such statements. There is plenty of Minorities in the field and just as plenty with pretty expensive equipment rolling around.]
Trevor, I don't always side with you on alot of your postings but found the above paragraph of this posting to be 'right on the money'.
BMTman
That is certainly a piece of good news. However, I still see a lot of poor minorities when I traverse various New York neighborhoods. So the fact some African-Americans have made a big jum economically cannot hide that many are still left behind, and when a recession hits it makes it even worse.
Keep in mind that poor African-Americans tend to live in cities and poor white people tend to live in rural areas so middle class people are more likely to see poor blacks than poor whites.
It really don't take much to be a Railfan. I started to get really into it when I was 15 Years old. I was able to enjoy myself with a Disposable camra and a $10 metrocard and maybe $5 for lunch. Today the only thing has changed is I have a job and my subway and bus rides are free.
I'm not going to comment on this response.
Well I for one, speaking from a minority/female perspective it's definitly hard to go on charters when it's only middle age to elderly caucasion men who look at me thinking why am I here (ASSuming that I was going for a free ride, NO) and at first when i was seventeen yes I couldn't afford to go on all the charters I wanted to attend BUT that was 5yrs ago. Now I've become quite successful at age 22 and now I have the legitimate means to purchase an excellent digital camera for railfanning and charters that I choose to go on. And just like someone mentioned YES I definitley CRASH the party everytime and the knuckleheads always show their face. BUT unfortunatley "they" will get over it. In conclusion people should not generalize a group of people (i.e. minorities) that you don't know nothing about based on looks or whatever 'cuase some of you be on charters look & smell like you don't have a pot to pee in nor a window to throw it out of. But I don't make that type of assumptions nor do i generalize a group of people that I know nothing about. That's not fair and it is wrong for anyone make that assumption. Becuase I can make a few generalizations myself for real! Please give me your feedback on my VALID statement.
Thanx,
MS.SEPTA
Well said Ms. SEPTA. Upon reaching adulthood... your area was one of those I first spread out into. Now I'm in my mid 30's and I live a comfortable lifestyle (and I very grateful for all I have) , but I remember the old days very well when I had to rail/bus fan on very little money. I would continue to "crash" also. In the beginning I rec'd strange looks - I didn't get discouraged.
Wayne
Right on Mr. Wayne.
It can be costly, but it certainly doesn't have to be. I was a rail (and bus) fan for as long as I can remember. In my early teen years I used to ride the TA's Nostalgia Special every week as well as plenty of riding on the buses/subway. Granted, I couldn't ride as many buses as I wanted because in most cases additional fares would be required. Being a kid from the Bronx (OA territory) I was always interested in riding TA buses. I often took rides on the subway and then rode a bus that had free transfers to/from the subway like the B35, B54 and BX55. I didn't have a camera, but I rode often to learn and stay "in-touch" with the NYC area transit scene. I also ventured into NJ on PATH and NJTransit bus routes as well as MSBA and Bee Line areas. I was doing all of this on very little money because we just did not have a lot of money. One thing that also came in very handy was that fromthe 4th grade right though to high school I always had a bus pass which I used to ride just about every OA route as well as a few TA routes.
I had very little, but my fascination with the transit scene made me quite resourceful.
Wayne
I guess that WOMEN don't have money for cameras, film, processing,etc., either? I don't think it has anything to do with money. It has to do with BEING INTERESTED in the hobby! I realize there are minorities and women out there who ARE interested in trains and buses, but not in big numbers. It must be that MOST are just not interested in this particular hobby.
That last sentence is believed by most to be correct.
Well !! count me in on " THROWING A FLY IN THE SOUP" .......man i ruin everything !! I hav always enjoyed electric powered
rail transit systems ( especially railfan window equipped ) ....lol!!
last year we rode AMTRAK @ the southwest chief to the @ lakeshore limited ....all the way to my home & birthplace nyc !!!
& all to shoot videos of the subway & take pictures as well . So hows DAT' ...fo' ....being BLACK and being a railfan as well...LOL !!
shown below is myself & my wife back in 1991 when the los angeles blue line ( long beach to anaheim station only ) FREE RIDE DAY !
ENJOY !!!
2 ALL BLACK RAILFANS YEA !!!!!! ......lol!!
Wasn't that 1990? Long Beach Loop opened late in 1990, and 7th/Metro opened February 14th, 1991.
U might B right about that @ 1990 .....during the grand opening all free ride wekend ( 7th metro to anaheim station )
took this pic ( with my wife since 1972 ) at the washington station platform on saturday during that free ride weekend...
MAYBE IT WAS 1990 I STAND CORRECTED !!! ..............................lol!!!
Even my wife got off riding the redbirds with me sure enjoyed the express rides (s) .. # 7 i shot on video MAN DID WE ENJOY IT !!
duing the 2000 world series ........wow !!
HERE ARE YOUR 2 BLACK RAILFANS !!!
I'm black and a railfan also.I'm a college graduate also,My dad worked for the TA for 37 years, I wanted to be a T/O in the worst kind of way but my dad talked me out of it, and said I should go to college, I have a computer, scanner and a camera, sometimes I take pictures, sometimes I dont.I just enjoyed the subways, I walk around the trains stations whatever.Most of my friends have comps and digital cameras, It took awhile for Blacks to get into comps and things, but being a black person, I see it everyday.
Your Dad gave you great advice. There are far to many T/Os in the worst way. We need more T/Os in the Best way!
LOL
avid
If people of color think railfanning is "white" it appeals to me to be a relatively recent phenomenon. If true, it's a sad commentary on a society has stratified at the same time as it appears to become more inclusive.
Back in the '50s (still had Jim Crow laws, Brown v Board was a recent phenomenon) one of the appealing things about railfanning was how totally inclusive it was. Either you were a railfan or your weren't. If you were self-conscious about being a "loon" you certainly weren't concerned that you looked a bit different.
There was one NY-area chapter of a national organization that had a reputation of having only members who were of the "right people." If you were black or Jewish or too ethnic you could only get in if you could "pass"--i.e., had some kind of prominence in railfandom. I knew many railfans who were the "right people" who wouldn't jointhe organization for their attitudes.
I'm coming late to this thread, so I may be saying things that have already been said, but...
I think that more minorities should be railfans for the same reason I think more white people should be railrans...it's fun, and I want as many people to be able to enjoy the fun as possible.
I had another thought...In the first half of the 1900s, when lots of African-Americans were employed as train porters, wasn't the train porter's union a cradle for civil rights activism? I don't know any of this for certain, so others will have to fill me in.
Mark
Here's more information...
The union was called the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, and it was organized by the African-American labor leader A. Philip Randolph in 1925. If anyone knows more, please fill me in.
Mark
>>> If anyone knows more, please fill me in. <<<
A. Phillip Randolph, a socialist once jailed for treason, was a giant of both the labor movement and the civil rights movement. Because he was a socialist, you probably did not hear much about him in American public schools. To really learn about him you need to visit your public library and do some in depth research. Here is a short biography.
Tom
A major reason why you do not see more minorities -- assuming we're referring to Blacks and Latinos here -- is that for the most part if you were to admit to (or are 'outed') as being a railfan the ridicule from peers would rain down like a monsoon.
For the most part hobbies like railfanning were not considered 'cool' -- at least from my experiences having grown up in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn which was largely a black neighborhood while I lived there (1970's).
Things have certainly changed alot over the years, but Black and Latino railfans are for the most part not visible. I KNOW there are plenty out there, but for the most part they are 'lurkers' in the hobby (many of them work for NYCT and that might be part of the 'low profile' attitude many of them take).
Just some observations from experience...
BMTman
I must agree with you BMTman 'cause I recieved the same treatment as a teen and still a little bit now from time to time. BUT I DON'T GIVE a DAMN because I like what I like that's all it is to it. My motto is
"To Keep it Real".
Good to read your posts, Ms.SEPTA.
BMTman
Amen to that. We're fortunate to have her.
Eric Dale Smith
BMTman:
You're correct. Growing up in the Bronx (West Farms section and later Concourse/Tremont) - I know for a fact that it wasn't "cool" to a lot of folks. Unfortunately - this included some relatives. In those days a was quite reluctant to share the fact that I was a transit enthusiast. Basically, I just felt people out because I did have a couple of peers that knew about my hobby. Now as an adult I have no problem with people knowing about my hobby.
However, there were those who would joked with me (and encouraged me) about my fascination with buses/trains. They would often say things like... Remember how Wayne knew all of the bus routes and could tell which bus was approaching from far away?
Wayne
I have an aunt who used to always make sure I had enough money to ride the Nostalgia Special every Sunday with some spending money.
Wayne, seems you had a very nice aunt, encouraging your interest in railfanning...
Thanks for sharing your story...
BMTman
My apologies are extended to anyone who was offended in any way by my post of yesterday evening. It was not intended to offend anyone, although, unfortunately, it did. Now, let's get back to trains, which is why we post on that board. I, nor anyone else, has or should have the intention of posting there with the intention of being racist and I am quite sure that those who do so by accident, do not mean for their comments to be taken that way when they are posted. Sometimes, no matter how much one proofreads, they only realize after publication that what they did was not right. That happened to me last night.
Once again, I do apologize. If anyone wishes to respond, please e-mail me.
Sincerely,
Oren H.
Webmaster of Oren's Transit Page
http://www.orenstransitpage.com/
What's Comet Cursor?
Arti
You went to the website?
Comet Cursor just gives you a whole bunch of cool mice. Not necessary to download but most people I know have it, so that is why I do.
[You went to the website? ]
Yep.
[Comet Cursor just gives you a whole bunch of cool mice.]
That's what I thought. I prefer not to install unneccessary stuff, so I didn't download it. BTW it's little annoying that it want's to download it on every page, if I opt not to get it.
Arti
More Comet Cursor Info.
I don't know what to tell you. Those JavaScript things are annoying too when it tells you there is an error. Why not have the webmaster correct it?
[Why not have the webmaster correct it? ]
You're not the webmaster?
Arti
I was reffering to the Java scripts.
What's Comet Cursor?
Comet Cursor is a "Spyware" program that tracks where you go while on-line and sends that information to advertisers.
Good thing I have a policy to not download anything I don't know about or need.
Arti
Beware of geeks bearing "gifts." :)
Call me niave but I can't understand why we need to let the groups we belong to, define us. It seems to me that the commonality should be the activity that we draw pleasure from and not the demographics of those that share that pleasure.
In this month's issue of "Classic Toy Trains" magazine, there was an editorial that touched on just this issue. While there are an estimated 130,000 people in the US who are seriously into model railroading - most are white middle-age males. While the thrust of the article was the economic issue of new trains flooding the market - deminishing the value of older trains, it did raise the issue of bringing new blood into the hobby.
Personally, I don't care if the person who shares my hobby interests is a male or a female, white or black or even a lesbian eskimo. As long as they share the interests that I do and accept my enthusiasm as I accept theirs, it matters not what they are - just who they are. I just think it's a shame that some people in this day and age need to identify themselves by some subjective demographic group and its relative size - compared to other meaningless groups.
Way to go Train Dude you hit the nail on the head.
AMEN TrainDude: how many years did it take for women to be able to drive a city bus or operate a subway???? The opportunities in both the hobby and TA employment for all who have interest is there. Problem still remains that such hobbies and work are 'dirty/lower class diversions' from making money in a nice clean office environment. Peter
Got my first motorcycle in 1966. My grandmother said Jewish boys don't belong on them. Oye Vey Talk about group stereotypes....
I'm a minority: I speak English and willingly do the 'dirty work.' Peter
In this month's issue of "Classic Toy Trains" magazine, there was an editorial that touched on just this issue. While there are an estimated 130,000 people in the US who are seriously into model railroading - most are white middle-age males. While the thrust of the article was the economic issue of new trains flooding the market -
deminishing the value of older trains, it did raise the issue of bringing new blood into the hobby.
Heh heh, that reminds me of something ... lately I've been listening to the jazz music channel on Direct TV, even though up to now jazz never interested me much. But then I began to feel very old, because I recalled reading not long ago that the vast majority of jazz fans, like model RR fans, are middle-aged, as well as white* males. Ah, the days of youth have passed (sigh).
* = the fact that most jazz fans are white is rather strange in a way, as of course most jazz musicians aren't.
Depends on the age group you're talking about.
I'm a jazz musician, actually, and I'm half-Italian half-Irish, and 36 years old...jazz has become VERY diverse, as far as the players.
Among the under-30 age group, it's very diverse these days. That's one of the things I happen to like about it, it's many different people with many different musical influences.
Just thought I'd add my 2 cents. :)
Talk about getting old, my wife and I were watching the Rock & Roll show on channel 13 Saturday Night. Can't believe jay Black is 62 years old.
Talk about getting old, my wife and I were watching the Rock & Roll show on channel 13 Saturday Night. Can't believe jay Black is 62 years old.
And I can't believe he hasn't retired yet ;). He's been doing that same schtick about being pitied for his gray hair for at least ten years now.
BTW, on the WCBS-FM simulcast, in a "backstage" interview with Cousin Brucie, Sammy Strain of the Imperials mentioned that the subway was one of the best places to rehearse.
Yeah, I'm a into Jazz, although to the 'purists' they'd hate to hear that I listen to CD 101.9, which many consider to be 'pop' or 'commerical' Jazz rather than a 'classical' Jazz station.
To each his own Jazz.....man.....
Yeah, I'm a into Jazz, although to the 'purists' they'd hate to hear that I listen to CD 101.9, which many consider to be 'pop' or 'commerical' Jazz rather than a 'classical' Jazz station.
You call that jazz?! ;) 88.3, man...
If I'm not mistaken, the correct format of CD 101.9 is "smooth Jazz". Kind of like K-Rock is "modern Rock", the distinction is made.
"Smooth .... Jazz .... CD 101.9!"
is the chant often heard between songs.
Though most of the stuff they play is smooth jazz, a lot of it is more R&B and even Motown (I don't think Gladys Knight or Marvin Gaye could pass as smooth jazz ...)
But Paul Hardcastle, Acoustic Alchemy, Spyro Gyra, Richard Elliot, Dancing Fantasy, et al are most definately smooth jazz.
Then you have some gray areas, such as Grover Washington Jr, who tends to lean toward funk jazz, and Gato Barbieri, Herb Alpert, and Chuck Mangione, who are more Latin Jazz.
Pat Methany (& his Group) are one of my favs on 101.9 (got most of his best stuff).
BMTman
That's all great stuff. I once attended a Gato Barbieri concert at Town Hall.
I hate when 101.9 plays R&B and Motown stuff. But the demos of the market may dictate such a strategy. I find that the later you listen, the better they are about playing "smooth Jazz".
p.s.- Expect this threat to be removed, while everyone else rants and raves about the relationship between minorities and railfanning.
Naaa. I expect that Thurston will add something here since I KNOW he listens to 101.9 too.
If you're ever driving in or around Philly, be sure to enjoy the sweet sounds of "WJJZ, 106.1"
"The Cat" (Gato Barbieri ;-) is one of my favs, along with the others I listed.
How do you like these -
Gato -
"Caliente" (entire album). "I Want You" is my favorite song on there, though they're all great.
Chuck Mangione -
"Give It All You Want"
"Hill Where the Lord Hides"
"XIth Commandment"
Herb Alpert -
"Rise" (entire album)
Grover Washington Jr -
"Mr Magic"
This is all serious kick-ass stuff.
Then there's everybody's favorite -
"Careless Whisper" by George Michael ...
Only WBGO, 88.3 plays real jazz.
>>> the fact that most jazz fans are white is rather strange in a way, as of course most jazz musicians aren't. <<<
Even more ironic is that the audiences for the blues are overwhelmingly white. Several well known blues musicians have stated that if it weren't for the white fans they could not make a living from their music.
Tom
Nicely put, TD.
Thar be some wisdom up at Concourse, I see...;-D
hre is one of my proffs i am a railfan & a blackman etc.. & semonole indian ....
lol !!!
And you know what that makes you?
An AMERICAN!!!!!!
hre is one of my proffs i am a railfan & a blackman etc.. & semonole indian ....
I know where the Seminole Indians come from but where do the semonole's come from? BTW: I couldn't view your proff either.
it is a original tribe ....black & native american indians ....
it is a original tribe ....black & native american indians ....
oh yes when you see many seminoles its hard to tell them from black american
i go out to this transit musum as often as i can.. see a few persons of color threre ...
its worth seeing these in operation !!
a lot of persons of color have been railfans for years !! This is one of the most unreported & underrepresented group of all time ...
Your photos are the best.
thank you very much i do it for the love of it ....thank you ....( smile ) .....lol!!!
This is one long assed thread.
Eric D. Smith
Hello all, I just got back from visiting your wonderful city yesterday!!
I actually managed to get a fair bit of railfanning in on the subway, and the great news is I got to try out almost every type of car (didn't manage a ride on an R40M or an R42). In an effort to keep my posts short I'll post in three parts. Part 1... Friday.
I flew Air Canada into Laguardia Friday afternoon and caught an M60 bus (an RTS) to the Astoria el, where I got on an (N)-train. Lo and behold what pulls in but one of the trains I most wanted to see, an R40 Slant!! I thoroughly enjoyed the (N) ride to my hotel near 34th-Herald Square station, where I met up with my parents who drove down.
Once checked into the hotel my parents went out to eat and since I wasn't hungry, what better way to spend supper time than riding a (Q) of R68's (or maybe R68A's, I can't tell the diff, the number was in the 5000's) across the Manny B. Boy, you guys aren't kidding about the snails pace across the bridge into DeKalb!! Were trains going that slow when the north side tracks were open?
I got off at Atlantic Ave and transferred to a Manhattan bound <5>, which much to my delight was a train of redbirds! I rode that until 14th street station when I decided I wanted to get a good look at some of the local stations rather than fly by them on the express (although that was cool too). A(6) of R62's (R62A's?) pulled in and brought me to 42nd-GCT, where I saw none other than the same <5> I had just gotten off pulling out!! Now I understand people's complaints about some expresses not being very express!!
I grabbed the Shuttle to Times Square just to ride what has got to be the shortest subway line ever. From TSQ I rode an (A) train of R44's to West 4th and transferred to an (F) train of R46's, so now I know the difference between an R44 and R46!
I got off the (F) train at 34th and met up with my parents again at the hotel, and such ended my Friday railfanning (but began a nice late night walk up to Times Square, it never ceases to amaze me how this city is still bustling at 11:00 at night!!).
Tomorrow... a Saturday of Q's, 4's, 5's, C's, F's, D's, 1's, S's and N's.
5001-5200 is R68A, north side was just as slow as south side.
I've been away from the board for a few days (moved to new apt.), so I don't remember if we ever came to a resolution on the "Brown N" thread from a few weeks ago....
However, just today, I saw what was probably the "Brown N" myself, on the last car of a "Slant" pulling out northbound from 8th Street around 5:40 PM.
Hard to say exactly what color it was- a white letter against a background that looked to me a perfect blend of Sixth Avenue Orange and J/M/Z Brown......
It definately was NOT the Yellow used on the N from 1967-79- I have a few maps from that era, and also remember the R46s on Queens Blvd with the Old Yellow N.
I can't figure what color it's supposed to be, but the picture that was posted was accurate.
Was there ever a plan to run the Sea Beach permanently along the Eastern Division, OR along 6th Ave to Queens Blvd, CPW, or Concourse?
Cool! Thanks for confirming my experience.
I take it you didn't have a camera handy.
<<<"I take it you didn't have a camera handy.">>>.
No, sorry, I wasn't railfanning, and had actually forgotten the whole matter- I was just watching the train leave the station and I saw it, and it hit me.
I was going to post about this on Saturday and take a picture but i didn't get a chance because I am the leader of a gaming team...well anyway I saw the car, the lead car....#4192 with the Brown N...I was at 34th Street when I got it but I couldn't get off the train in time to take the picture of the sign. Ahh, Well....better luck next time.
Vek
Could it be a remnant of when the ran a train through Montague terminating at Chambers? The problem is I think that was an R.
As has been mentioned here many times, the Fourth Avenue/Chambers Street service was indeed a branch of the R, not the N.
David
I prefer to call it white on orange. It was in service on the N Line this Saturday the lead southbound motor when I went R68A sound recording for BVE.
I'm going to guess it was/is on the R40 rollsigns "just in case" (as are other designations which aren't used.) It is technically possible to route the Sea Beach via Nassau St, after all.
(Deep breaths, Fred. I just said it was possible.)
:-) Andrew
Why would Fred mind? It would run via bridge -- the Williamsburg Bridge.
However, just today, I saw what was probably the "Brown N" myself, on the last car of a "Slant" pulling out northbound from 8th Street around 5:40 PM. Hard to say exactly what color it was- a white letter against a background that looked to me a perfect blend of Sixth Avenue Orange and J/M/Z Brown......
Now this is getting interesting. I also saw a DIAMOND N with a brownish background in the middle of an R-46 R train running through Grand Ave. this afternoon. I thought it was just my frazzled braincell playing tricks on me (grin). Glad to know that others have also seen it!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Nice cover pic!
Wait till ya see the rest of the book and the full colour back cover as well!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
does it have the new 63rd street connection? and the post Manny Bridge Tracks
does it have the new 63rd street connection? and the post Manny Bridge Tracks
Hi Bob,
You betcha! All the post-9-11 changes as well. The only things I couldn't find that I was really looking for were the car/yard assignments for services post Dec. 16th, the track layout of Clifton Yard on the SIRT and the new homeball numbers on the West End line (although I think I will have these soon).
All the route markers are effective the 16th (without seeing the new official map a few might be off, but the V is on there, the F is through 63rd, the G is shown as owl-service only on Queens Blvd and a terminal at Court Square).
There's a to-scale closeup of South Ferry and a few pages have been re-done to improve page flow. There's a map of what used to be at both Queensboro Plaza and Atlantic Ave (L). I now show most of the PATH signals and a few more signs, new full-colour front and back covers and a whole lot more.
The book is in final production today and tomorrow, and I expect to have a good quantity in my hot little hands ready to ship on Friday. I've received a good number of orders this past week and I've ensured that I will have enough copies to send out on the weekend.
For some reason the Transit Museum hasn't been returning my calls, so don't look for it there unless they order some from me. If anybody wants to drop by Grand Central and request it from them, it might help.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Are you still going to produce foldups; color maps; laminated? Lots of people who've seen the book would like that.
Are you still going to produce foldups; color maps; laminated? Lots of people who've seen the book would like that
Funny you should mention those....
I spoke with my printer this afternoon about doing a laminated version and the best price I could get was 75 cents per page in addition to the printing costs. That would add $48 to the cost of every book!! Safe to say, there ain't going to be any laminated versions any time soon < grin >.
Colour fold-ups or large-scale is indeed a possibility, but after putting in 2 1/2 months of 18+ hour days, I'm not planning on doing it any time soon. I want to start flying again in the wake of post-911 airspace, and I'm going to donate a fair percentage of my free time to that hobby as well as spending some more time with my better half! I might get back to the colourization of everything in the new year.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
I think I've seen the R-40 N you are talking about. The color appears to be burnt orange, not unlike the color used by the Texas Longhorns sports teams (I'm definitely overanalyzing here). I think it's supposed to be orange, but the window is probably so dirty that it almost looks brown.
While the maps used a pure yellow, some of the signs lookd orange with the light shining through. On the R-46's, the background of the N definitely looked orange, almost like 6th Av. This was obviously to make it more legible. Since it is hard to darken yellow, they cheated by adding red. But then with the 1979 colors they switched to the lighter yellow with black letter. Even today if you magnify the maps, you'll see that the yellow used is filled with red dots to make it darker. Then right before the Metrocard were systemwid, there was a poster listing all the stations that had it so far that used the light orange normally used for 6th Av. on the N & R bullets, with white letters, while BDF&Q were a deep orange that was almost red. So this sign people are seeing was probably either an experiment (I'm sure it's probably cheaper to use all white letters), or perhaps printed by different people or something. I think the best way to darken it without compromising the hue is to use gold.
I was on the said slant N train riding northbound from Court Street to Lexington Avenue around 3:30 PM this afternoon and I can confirm the brown N on the tail.
It's like I've thought since I've been reading the Brown-N posts.....we need a picture.
Any of you MTA guys can help??
I posted one before.
aw shucks....I must have missed it.
Mr. Greenberger:
The first time I saw you pic, it defintely looked brown...now it looks orange...when I saw it myself, it was in motion, and I honestly couldn't tell for sure the color...
I've said it a number of times during this discussion..maybe the plan wasn't an N to go from Sea Beach to Eastern Division, but to the IND instead......
I should mention that the R train behind that had one of my favorite conductors (must be between middle and old aged) who always talks with flair:
(This is-uh Lexington Avenue, 59 Street, transfer here for your 4, 5 and 6 trains, wait here for the N and W trains. This here is an R train, it is Queens bound, local stops, to 71st/Continental, Forest Hills, our next stop will be Queens Plaza, step in and watch the doors...)
Anyone know who I'm talking about? This conductor was on the R-46 R train behind the said slant N train this afternoon. I also heard him last week on an R-32 R train consist.
With the MTA now having reached V, W and Z, there are precious few letters left for any 2nd Avenue line or any other new lines in the future...apparently.
There's a parallel in MTA nomenclature and abandoned right of ways. The Rockaway and Evergreen Branches were allowed to deteriorate to non-use, and the Bushwick and Bay Ridge branches are used by a few freights. Once abandoned--never revived.
In the past, the MTA has used H, K, T and #8 for routes. You have perfectly good symbols lying around that aren't being used.
Can someone explain the peculiar policy of abandoning a designation once that particular line has been eliminated? (Yes, KK/K have been used for two different lines).
www.forgotten-ny.com
Dunno myself, but now that UPN is bankrupt, perhaps the TA can recycle the square, circle and triangle as 2nd avenue line designators. No numbers or letters, just shapes. :)
X and Y can always be used for the main 2nd Avenue services, while Q (extended from 57th Street) will most likely be used for the 2nd Avenue/Broadway service. You still got H, K, P, T and U left. The #8 can be the new designation for the weekday Parkchester #6 local.
I still maintain that the TA made a mistake in converting to
single letter routes in the late 1980s. Doing so considerably
reduced the mnemonic value of the system.
The H and K share the distinction of being twice used for
short-lived routes (modulo the single/double letter thing).
Both were revived in the 1980s, or was it the early 90s, the
K 8th avenue local service and the H for the rockaway
three-way (HHH) shuttle.
The letters I and O are traditionally avoided because of numeral
confusion, although since there isn't a zero train, I don't see the
problem with the latter. There seems to be some superstitious
reason why X isn't used, and of course the P train, well,
make your own joke. The U, I dunno, looks too much like a V?
I couldn't even guess why in this latest go-round of the MB
reconstruction, powers that be chose W for West End rather than
T which had been used in the 1970s.
Dammit, Jeff! There you go being LOGICAL again ... we'll have none of that. (should I say "LOL"?)
BRAILLE.
avid
I couldn't even guess why in this latest go-round of the MB
reconstruction, powers that be chose W for West End rather than
T which had been used in the 1970s.
For the same reason the President's nickname is "Dubya" not "Tee"?
Moo! :)
I think U is avoided for the same reason that 'i' is avoided.
Notice that they both can be used in conversation meaning yourself or an individual. Obviously, this could cause confusion when referring to the 'U' or the 'i' train.
BMTman
I can't take the U train but U can I belive??
"T" was used in the 1960s and was gone with the opening of the Chrystie Street Connection in November 1967. There probably aren't many riders (outside of railfans) who would either recognize "T" as an old West End designation or care.
David
Oh, was that the lineage? I thought there was still a TT
shuttle on the books into the early 70s?
Nope, the TT rode off into the sunset on Jume 30, 1968. The B began running 24/7 the following day, when the 57th St.-6th Ave. station finally opened.
I will never forget it - and I resented the TA for years for cancelling it because it removed a decent Astoria - Broadway EXPRESS, replacing it with the horrible RR. Long live the W (now if they could only re-name it back to T) ;-)
Today I saw 10-car #3 trains. I guess they've been that way since the 3 train has been shortened in route. Also, a couple of weekends ago, I was waiting at the 116-Broadway sta., and I saw a northbound #1 train bypass the station on the center track. I never saw a train on the center track--until then!!!!
PS> Does anybody know why Z-train service is still suspended?? Did the peak hour J service increase or remain the same since the Z suspension--and is that temporary??
Tony
Z Train is NOT suspened, I saw about 3 of them this morning @ Eastern Parkway, loaded with passengers and heading into Manhattan! (Note: This was at about 7:15am today or yesterday for that matter, LOL!)
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
today i saw that i still an the # 1 WEST COAST transit photographer ...............period !!!
yea man bring your chumpion you said can wihip me in WESTCOAST TRANSIT PHOTOGRAPHY ............lol!!
Regards, Salaam Allah to ........
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Yes the No.3 Line is now a 10 car line using the 240th fleet.
Which of the following car will be seen on the first V train on Dec 16?
A. R-32
B. R-38
C. R-44
D. R-46
E. others (R-40S,40M,42; or R-68,68A)
F. any above
If you chose E, please specify
D
I really, really doubt it will be anything other than an R46 or maybe R32.
:-) Andrew
D. R46 exclusively. The TA wants to put the best cars appearance wise on the new line.
R46 exclusively. The TA wants to put the best cars appearance wise on the new line.
Aparently the TA's idea of best looking cars is different from mine. Yech!
:-) Andrew
Sure the windows are scratched, just like any other cars. But look at the walls. No scratches at all due to the material used. The brown wall paneling is not scratched either. The yellow and red seats do not have chipping paint like the R32's. The R46 has a very dependable HVAC system. Jamaica takes better care of the R46's than they do the R32's. Not too many dead motors on the R46 either.
True, true and true. I just think the R46 is a gernerally ugly car.
:-) Andrew
hmm... i can always send you some marta cars in trade for the r46... i would trade these wood-paneling opto craps for anything nyc has ....
love your nyc subway cars :)
I just think the R46 is a gernerally ugly car.
Respectfully gotta disagree. While I actively dislike the absence of a railfan window, I have to say they are not half bad from a passenger's point-of-view. The yellowish-bron colours work much better than the 68s' stainless steel and I like the door guard partitions better than the R-44's (as a Big Guy, I like to sit on the transverse seats next to these and allow my shoulders to intrude into the doorway when seated). I'd prefer an R32's bench seats and railfan window, but for everything else, I gotta go with the 46s.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Go figure. I just think the fake wood motiff is very retro, and not in a good way. I actually kind of like the stainless steel interior of the R62 and R68 series. It's not gorgeous either, but it's cheery. The traditional tan interior of the redbirds and R32, R38, R40, and sort of in the R42, R44 and R46 isn't ugly, per se, just dull. For interiors, I guess the best is the R142.
But what really makes the R44 and R46 ugly in my eyes are the exteriors. Big and grey and featureless. And those LCD's seen on them since the GOH--they look like an old calculator! (The R68 series isn't gorgeous either, but at least they're more silver than grey, and have rollsigns.)
All purely subjective opinion. The R46 seems to be a good, reliable car class, and should indeed be in serivice for many years to come.
:-) Andrew
Well, gotta understand, the R-46's were initially intended to be used for the still then unbuilt Second Avenue line--the one they were starting to build in the mid-late '70s....and the general appearance is soooo similiar to that of the LIRR and MNRR electric/third rail powered MU's....I mean, take a good look at a typical LIRR M-1 or M-3, and take a look inside a R-44 or R-46, and tell me, do they have very similiar interiors? :-D
Stuart, RLine86Man
I'm on your side here. Faux wood has been out of vogue for a long time -- and for good reason.
The R-46 goes overboard on the plastic. Sure, it's cheap and it's relatively easy to clean. It's also tacky.
(And, from the functionality perspective, do your hands fold up nicely into squares? Mine don't, but most of the handrails have square cross sections. Ouch.)
My vote for most attractive? The R-42 (not to be confused with the R-40M, which looks very "worn out"). Simple but elegant. The R-38 is a close second.
Do your hands fold up nicely into squares?
Well in may case, due to nerve damage in my left arm/hand, the left hand more or less does!
As opposed to those rolling garden sheds? If it comes to asthetics, the R46 wins hands down. Longevity, well that's something the R32 will forever be known for.
R46 air conditioning is generally for the birds while R32's are iceboxes. That's gonna come into play in this Winter of Global Warming (eh, Mr. Glickman?)
www.forgotten-ny.com
Gotta surprise: all subway cars I know of have AC fully operational year-round as enviromental control. It's management that sets the priorities during inspections....keeping the passengers comfortable on their way to work is the TA's goal. Thanks Alot. Peter
It ain't gonna happen, but it would be funny as hell if on the opening day of V service the first train that showed up was a 10 car group of R-26/28 Redbirds with platform extenders on the doors.
A video camera pointed outside the cars to get the reactions of the passengers waiting on the platforms would bring back some classic looks of suprise, shock and probbly some disgust as the train pulled into the station...
my answer:A. R-32. i assume because there are more R-32's than there are R-46's available for use. the R-46's are taken up on the G, F, and R. but, then as usual i could be wrong.
"i assume because there are more R-32's than there are R-46's available for use"
There are 595 R-32s (not all of which are assigned to Jamaica) and 752 R-46s (all of which are assigned to Jamaica. In what universe are there more R-32s than R-46s?
By assignment, the V is to be all R-46. Will an occasional R-32 make its way to the V? Best answer: maybe.
David
They have shown with the (F) that if they want to make a route absolutely, positively no exception, nothing but R46, they certainly could.
thats why i said that i was assuming. i wasn't sure about how many R-32's and R-46's there are. i see more R-32's than i see R-46. so no need to get jumpy. thank you for clearing it up for me though.
D
E: As we speak, Mike H. & his crew down in CI are preparing an 11 car
train of R1-9s to be used as the ceremonial first train. This is
in keeping with the new slogan: Queens Blvd Service Changes: A
Step Backward". After all, as Mr. Bauman likes to remind us, service
levels WERE better in the 1950s.
I got info that the motorman for that consist MUST be OPTO qualified and will have to reach around the windshield to operate the triggers and caps.
ROTFL!
I would love to see the R-42 and R-68 on the V. But, eventually it won't happen since 1/2 of R-46 desination sign already programmed into "V QB local."
So? The R-46's electronic signs have routes other than the E, F, G, R, V, and Grand Street shuttle. That doesn't mean you're going to see one on the W (although one was spotted on the Q).
Obviously, no one actually read the question. The only answer is the one that was not listed: None of the above. If anyone can find me a V train in service on Dec 16, I'll pay them $1.00.
If I crank the sign myself, do I get the dollar?
Or what if it's before December 16? I boarded a V at Coney Island on November 1:
(And no, I didn't touch that sign. The only sign I changed in recent memory was on a southbound 5 that became a northbound 2 at the South Ferry loop during a GO early this year. Naturally, I set it to one of the 2/5 combo signs -- not that it helped, since it pointed the wrong way after going through the loop.)
Hi, all. Obviously, the poster meant 12/17.
On Dec. 17,2001, a gaggel of R/46s and an Eyecatching R/110B will blaze a trail into the 21st Century. (I Hope). Be nice to see it in revenue service again.
Even on the "L" to give the lone R/143 a companion for balance.
avid
An R110B on the V? Is that what you're saying?
:-) Andrew
Yes
avid
how about a train consisting of... , an R1, a pair of R30, Apair of R32, and a 4 car set of R143s
Will there be any R-143s running on the BMT 14th Street Canarsie Line today? If so please let me know.
#3 West End Jeff
I saw one today! It was at the 6th Ave/14th St station, heading westbound on the (L). The LED read "not in service".
I also had another surprise at that station. The signs suddenly have the (V) instaed of the (S)--almost 2 weeks early.
:-) Andrew
Did you or anyone else on Sub Talk ride on the R-143s?
#3 West End Jeff
I did, after waiting almost a half hour for it. It was well worth the wait!
How were the R-143s. Were they nice and quiet like their R-142 brethren?
#3 West End Jeff
Quieter than the R142As, which are fellow Kawasaki cars, but a little noisier than the Bombarider R142s. But only because you can hear the traction motors. The R143 rides better than both R142 classes, I think.
it is comfortable, but there is room for improvement. i still find the Bom. R-142 to be the most comfortable, most stable.
Yes but you just have to hope they don't stall out between stations.
I'm planning to go into New York one of these days and ride a train of R-143s. I hope too that the train doesn't stall between stations. That would be a drag.
#3 West End Jeff
I guess a ride on the L will be on my list of things to do next fall.
I hope the ride on the "L" train wthin the next few weeks just to see what the R-143s are like.
#3 West End Jeff
Im going to try to ride that train the Next coming Wednesday. Im going to try to make it for the 12:56 8 Ave.
If you ride on the R-143s please tall me what it is like.
#3 West End Jeff
I will and I'll also try to see what the diffrances are between the R142A and R143.
I hope to have the chance to get into New York and do some railfanning and one of the things to do would be to try and ride a train of R-143s.
#3 West End Jeff
I have not yet had the pleasure of riding an R143. I look forward to doing so, but it may be awhile.
:-) Andrew
At what time(s) does this R-143 arrive at Union Square sta.?
I took a quick trip to South Station today at lunchtime, and saw on Track #1 the following MBTA Commuter Rail consist:
N-1712-768-767-769-770-702-505-1124-S
768-770 are the four newly accepted bilevels (out of 15 due). I walked through 768, and they look like exact duplicates of their older sibilings (of course they have that "new car smell"). On the outside, however, there is one addition: pantograph gates inbetween the cars.
Here's a link to the NETransit Web site, with all MBTA car rosters.
The Kawasaki bilevels in particular are here.
I rode it this morning from ENY Yard to Eighth Avenue for the ceremonies. Festivities were from 9:35-10:15 with many TA and Kawasaki people there. The train made the 10:16 interval. No problems at all. It ran great. Train was laid up after arriving in Canarsie. It will re-enter service this afternoon in time for the rush. I shot a ton of video and a cab ride from ENY to 8th Ave. I will try to get some images to Dave as soon as I can.
-Mark
cool
i wonder what its first problem will be.
Overcrowding, natch.
how were the voices, signs etc.? what was your opinion in the interior?
The female voice is a bit peppier. It's probably a different person doing them on the 143's. She also lists the transfers instead of the male voice (the same one from the R142's), who is limited to the "stand clear of the closing doors, please."
The interior is like that of the R142A. The interior "moving ad" signs were cool.
Oh yes, the "moving MTA ad" signs. Those are cool. First of their kind that I've ever seen in the NYC subway. They're fun to watch. Also I like the female voice better on the R143 (it sound more real) and that it announces all transfers (the way it should have been done on the R142s and R142As). And it announces the correct transfers at Union Square as well as the soon-to-be correct transfer at 6th Avenue.
What about the railfan view and passing through?
You can pass between cars, but I haven't checked the railfan window.
Can they "half" the full width cabs when not in use to allow passing through or extra seating?
No. The instant they did, someone would cite a safety concern.
The design for new tech is basically the same....WMTAGMOAGH is correct. 'A' cars, the end of each trainset (there are two in a series totalling four) cannot be 'passed through' by riders. CI Peter
They should, it is that much more capacity. You also need to remember that some NYers would immediately freak out as soon as they saw the potential for someone to hide in there and then jump out to attack them.
Is the cab full width or is there an empty space? CI Peter
Transverse cab like on WMATA.
The Philly BSS trains are set up this way and nobody has ever complained.
That royally sucks. I hate these new designs. Maybe when the trains go OPTO they can half the cabs.
I was on the R143's today. Interesting story: I was on a Canarsie-bound L train arriving at Broadway Junction. I decided to stay on the train to East 105 Street. Lo and behods, as the train was entering E105, I saw the unmistakable end of the train of R143 cars on the layup track. I waited a few minutes for the train to come in and I rode it back to Broadway Junction, where I got off at around 12:20.
Hey Mark----was your favorite "Coney Island Historian" on board ?????
So Mark, how will Div. B fare with it's new toys?
Did you like the train?
How about from your job's point of view, as a C/R did you like it?
If the cab set up is anything like the R142/142A the Conductors and Train Operators will love that train.
Funny, I haven't been qualified on the 143 yet. I probably won't now until more cars come in. But I hope that you're right about that.
Some of the Highlights the Crew liked about the R142/142A's were 1. Seat is comfortable 2. The fast acceleration and deceleration rate of the train. 3. The cabs are almost sound proof. You can't really hear whats going on outside. Also any trouble that comes up will be noted on the computer screen in front of you which is the TOD. Then again some of our R142 have defects and it don't show on the TOD. I had a hung gard light but the computer showed no problems train line.
How bout the TOD messages of problems that do not exist???? Hey, had any of the wonderful door warnings??? Soundproof is great, there is even a microphone for the 'vertically deprived' but there is no adjustment for mike gain. Wanna howl? Just ping your PTT with the door wide open. Love that 'last stop' message.....great for end of the day. CI Peter
Can someone tell me what the automatic annoucement says upon arrival into Rockaway parkway . Does it announce Canarsie or mention anything about the B42 Bus.
I don't remember, but I did note that it announced the transfer for the B15 to the Airport at New Lots. So it probably does mention the B42.
The R142A announces the M60, why not announce the B15, although it gets much less publicity. Maybe they should announce that the A train goes to JFK as well.
it does anounce the B15 bus except at night
I know.
The female voice announces "This is Canarsie, Rockaway Parkway."
Yes you mean when sometimes you open the doors and the TOD reads Car 6337 R2 is stuck open when all the doors should be open. Then goes out when you close the doors. The last stop message goes great after waiting 10 Minutes to get into the Terminal.
We can't even test those announcements properly....you punch em up and wait....and wait....and wait....then you pick up your tools and lunchbag to hear em just before the system 'outs de lights.' Hey, it's a lot of fun. CI Peter
Any pictures?
:-) Andrew
Great! Now next Wednesday I will try to ride the R143 for maybe 2 or 3 trips.
Yes, the R143 really is a nice train. So nice, that I thought about changing my handle to "R143 L". Just kidding, but it is my new favorite train. I rode it today from 2:30 to 4:00 from 8th Avenue to Canarsie and back and then to Union Square. It didn't take very long for me to catch it. I took the 6 to Union Square and headed to the L platform. After 20 minutes, I got tired of standing at Union Square so I boarded the next L train (slants) and got off at 8th Avenue. A few minutes after my slant R40 train entered 8th Avenue, I saw a train in the distance at 6th Avenue with a red light over its two headlights. Sure enough, it was the R143. As it got closer, I could see the red LED circled L. Time for my first R143 trip.
While the R143 was relaying, I looked at the L line map. It had all the correct transfers, including the V at 6th Avenue. It also has new subway maps that show the V in service. The walls have a bluish-gray tint, so they're not as bright as the R142/R142As (a good thing), but brighter than the R40s and 42s (also a good thing). They ride nicer and are quieter than the R142As. Also the female voice does all transfers and announces the V at 6th Avenue (even though it's not stopping there yet) and the Q and W at Union Square. But you can still hear the traction motors which sound exactly like the R142A. Also nice is the single-leaf door at the car ends. I like it better than the double-leaf doors on the R142s and R110A. Overall, a very nice train. Hope it's a success.
In my opinion (hate to be the killjoy), this is Kawasaki's last chance to endear the MTA and New Yorkers after the whole GOH debacle with the R-142A order. If this series comes up with the amount of bugs and defects that their IRT sisters did over the past two years, then I will be one of those who see to it that KHI will never get another contract in this town. And I can back that up to, because I know the head of my school's NYPIRG branch on a first-name basis.
What debacle with the R142As? From what I've been hearing on this board and from what I see in service, it's the Bombardier cars that are having the really big problems. I've noticed a few doors getting stuck and that the brakes squeal. I did hear of a piece falling off of one R142A, but where are all the major problems that are keeping the whole Kawasaki R142A fleet sidelined? I've only heard of a large number of Bombardier R142s being sidelined for brake mods. But you know what? I still see a lot of R142s in service too.
Don't blame Kawasaki or Bombardier, it's not their fault! They build quality products for other transit agencies. The blame should be placed squarely on the politicians up in Albany. They're the ones who insisted the cars be made in New York state, even if the companies didn't have a plant in New York to make them in. From what someone posted here, I thought I read that Bombardier's Plattsburgh plant amounts to nothing more than a makeshift facilty in the old Air Force Base and that the people building them are temporary workers who will be out of work once the contract is finished, just as they were before Bombardier came to town. But look at many other transit and railroad companies around this country and around the world that use Bombardier products. Bombardier has a lot of products on order too. Would they, if their products were crap? I don't think so.
OTOH, Kawasaki has something a little more permanent in Yonkers, converted from the old Otis Elevator plant. I heard that only the final assembly is done in Yonkers on the R142As. But other orders were done there too, if I'm not mistaken. PATH's PA4 cars were done there as were the bi-level LIRR cars and the MBTA/MARC/VRE double-deckers. Does anyone know if any of these are trouble-prone cars?
Blame Albany if these cars fail. You and your friend in NYPIRG should be pressing Albany to actively recruit companies to build permanent facilities in New York state and locate permanent business here, instead of forcing companies to build subway cars here for a year or two, just so they can inflate their already huge egos some more.
[instead of forcing companies to build subway cars here for a year or two, just so they can inflate their already huge egos some more.]
By that I mean Albany doing the forcing. They should be out recruiting companies to build permanent facilities here, encouraging them to come to New York on their own free will. Not forcing companies to create makeshift faciliites just to win a contract. The way the car contracts are being handled now is not only bad for the people of New York, but it's also bad business for Kawasaki and Bombardier.
There was an article done on the way Kawasaki does business and finishes car-building at its Yonkers plant, and in the process stirring up a lot of controversey. People in that town were screaming at the Yonkers City Council to do something about it but they were non-responsive. I don't exactly remember whether they pressed their assembly members or state senators about this, but considering that Ass. Silver and Senator Bruno disagree on EVERYTHING (with Gov. Pataki caught in the crossfire at times) it wouldn't have helped much. So yes, more pressure needs to be put on Albany to whip these companies into shape.
I didn't know that Bombardier used an old AF shed for its final assembly of its cars. Maybe that explains why cars that are produced at the more permanent facilities in Michigan and the Western Ontario come out better than stuff that goes thru Plattsbugh (consider the early electrical problems that the R-62As had, which incidentially also came thru Plattsburgh). Thanks for the tidbit.
R-62A's never came through Plattsburgh because plattsburgh never existed back then. they started from La Pocatiere Quebec, then stopped at Barre Vermont, then the last Assembly was Auburn, New York
In terms of travelling subway cars, that's not a bad road trip, but the transatlantic cruise wins hands down!
-Robert King
"then the last assembly was Auburn, New York" -- Bombardier's Auburn plant never assembled any rail equipment to my knowlege. BTW, that Auburn plant once was Alco's diesel engine plant. 18V251C, anyone.
oh. because everytime i ride and R-62A, it mentions assembly at Auburn New York on its name plate
Ok, I'll check it out.
ok
Bom. crews at 239th are out of that Yonkers location...I don't know about 'final assembly'....seems they tie up tracks with trains that do not go and TA is now on the move about it. Peter
I recommend getting the cars from anywhere in the world, the MTA should try to get succesful companys from Russia, China, India. The railroad from thoses countrys build there own cars from scratch. I read a book on how after independance from britain, India mantained and built from scratch their own steam engines.
OUCH! Trainsets from 'All India Railways.' Thankyouverymuch. Biggest problem with that idea is logistics: the VacTrak vacuum train is German built and had a problem found by TA techs...the part wasn't readily available by itself so a whole axle was shipped air freight...Coney Island shops found their equipment didn't fit the installation...so the engine was towed to Pennsylvania with the part.
China, Russia and India have their part in TA...I work with these guys every day and I love it. We need something more like GM/GE/Westinghouse. CI Peter Thankyouverymuch
The R142A had it share of problems. They had about 3 or 4 cases where the Trip cock fell off sidelining the R142A fleet. Also the R142A had it share of Door problems and cases of stuck brakes.
Now the R142 (BOM) they seem to had door and brake problems also but they also just seem to drop dead between stations. This past Saturday a R142 Uptown No.2 train stalled out at Hoyt Street messing up the No.1,2 service for 40 Minutes.
But that was in the beginning, right. It's not still happening now, is it?
I don't know about the r142A's but the R142 No.2 trains are still having problems.
In your daily life there are engineering standards which assure your safety. In the home there are electric and plumbing standards. In the car, the most obvious is the brake light lenses. On subway cars are standardised brake control systems specified by TA contract. These brake control systems are 'rail common' and assure your safety...as yet, combined with regenerative braking systems of the SOACs, are not working properly and have been adjusted to 'make trains go.' Bom. and Kaw. have problems to be resolved...the trains do stop properly...but sometimes they don't start... or stop prematurely. 'Let MTA get you there...Car Inspectors assure your safety.' CI Peter
it might not get the next order anyway. when the next order is set up for bids (thats if financial problems don't stop it) they might be out of the question, because of disability to crank out big orders.
why are you saying that this is their last chance?
What was the reaction from the unwashed masses. Dick and Jane Commuter. How were they impressed, or ho-hum.
avid
I wasn't there, but my boss was. He told me that while the train accelerated nicely and moved well between stations, it ran late because passengers were "oohing" and "aahing" over the new train, which impacted on the dwell time. It's hoped that people will get over this quickly.
David
"it ran late because passengers were "oohing" and "aahing" over the new train, which impacted on the dwell time"
Were the passengers oohing and aahing in the doorways preventing the doors from closing? Oohs and aahs don't usually cause trains to run late !
Bill "Newkirk"
IF the door control system works like R142s, passengers can stick a foot in the door...it'll jog 3 times...fourth time it stops. Now the C/R has to jog the doors, wait, punch a canned announcement up, wait, jog, wait, make an 'inoffensive announcement' and... CI Peter
I'm not surprised that the passengers were oohing and aahing since thay haven't ran new cars on the 14th Street-Canarsie Line "L" train for more than thirty years. Its about time they ran new cars on that line.
#3 West End Jeff
30 years??
nah, they got slant R-40s, and R-40M's in the 80's.
before that they had 16's and 27/30's.
I think what Jeff means is brand new cars -- other than a few trainsets of R-42s in 1969, the R-16s back in 1955 were the last fleet to make its debut on the Eastern Division (minus the Wavecrest A train, of course). All trains since then have been handed down from either the IND or the BMT Southern Division after newer cars arrived for those lines (and after the R-160s start showing up to replace the R-38/40/40M/42s, I fully expect the R-32s to close out their lives on the Eastern Division while the new trains go to the other lines).
You're right that I meant brand new cars on the Canarsie Line
#3 West End Jeff
Oh, I gotcha--right, NEW cars. oops, sorry, Jeff.
You're probably 100% right about the R-32's, unfortunately.
The R160 are due to replace the current cars on the Eastern div. lines. got that from the mta web site awhile back. they are suppose to go EAST NEW YORK YARD and PITKIN YARDS[five car sets=pitkins,four car sets=eny]Bye bye R42 40M,you were nice in your day,but the time has come for you to away.........
What they say now about where the R-160s will go and what they do when they arrive may be two completely differnt things. I'll applaud the MTA if they actually do a 1-for-1 replacement on the Eastern Division, but given the fact that a lot of the MTA brass and pols in the past have wanted their new trains running through midtown Manhattan (more exposure, more good publicity, more votes), I'd be really surprised to see two car orders in a row end up at the East New York Yard.
If MTA wants to showcase the R-160 cars (when they come out) they should do so on a line with plenty of customers to show off to, the A, E, or F lines would've been the best choices. In fact I think it's fitting they test them on the BEST (by far) line in the whole NYCT system, the A line. Takin' The A Train.....In Style!! lol As for the new cars orders, do remember the MTA brass are not truly the brightest bulbs in the box, and the cars could end up anywhere they choose unfortunately.
I heard either the R160s or the R160As were to go to the A and C lines, the other to who-knows-where...The order will be split between Kawasaki and Bombardier...ack!
Cleanairbus
[The order will be split between Kawasaki and Bombardier...ack! ]
How can you say that when the contract has yet been awarded, no less bids received from these or other companies?
That doesn't follow. Even if the R-160's end up at East New York and Pitkin, that doesn't mean they will displace the equipment currently at East New York at Pitkin.
If the R-44's go, I won't miss them one bit.
damn u got hate in ur blood for the R42s and stuff. Don't get me wrong. i love the new technology and all, but once the R42s R40s all leave, the Eastern division aint gonna be the same. after all the good cars leave stuff like redbirds, and some old equipment go, subways won't be the same. i love the new tech, but some of it sux. think about it. MTA wants to try this CBTC crap, and when they do, Motorman will be hired less, and then eventually will do something else other than operating a train. they gonna have them sit in the cab and monitor the systems. but for me to sit in a cab and watch a train run itself? gimme a newspaper, cause i will be bored before the first trip is over. besides they cannot automate all the subway lines, not enuf money and not enuf time. they prolly will not even pay them as well as they pay them today.
CBTC blows!!!!
Safety
Attentiveness
Train control
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
TESTIFY! TESTIFY! WOOHOO! :D
I have the book (New York City Subway Cars) by James Clifford Greller which has pictures of R-42s running on the 14th Street-Canarsie line when those cars first entered service.
I remember riding on brand new R-42s on the Canarsie in 1969-70.
It must have been great at the time the R-42s first entered service on the Canarsie Line since before the R-42s entered service they were still running some BMT "Standards" on the Canarsie Line up until 1969.
#3 West End Jeff
Yep, rode on those, too. The R-7/9s began appearing on the Canarsie before the R-42s debuted; the first time I saw an R-7/9 train there was on January 5, 1969.
If I'm not mistaken the R-7/9s finished out their service life on the BMT Eastern division lines.
#3 West End Jeff
The same here I remeber the R 42 first coming to Canarsie and how exciting to see something new. My mom said to me Canarsie always had old trains. She was refering to the Standards.
but the oohs and aahs were not alot. i rode it again today and it was less than on tuesday. people don't care because they think its the R-142
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH! What line will it be running on? I assume the L. I'm there! Anyone have a timetable for it yet? I'm willing to wait for it. Is it running tomorrow?
It's been running on the L since Tuesday, about 15 hours a day, and is scheduled to run 7 days a week.
David
Anywhere a link to a photo of an R143? Haven't seen them yet.
RightHERE on this very site.
Peace,
ANDEE
I cannot believe what you've written. IT IS MOST OFFENSIVE!!!! Those dumb assed sentiments have been causing people like me trouble for years. HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT THERE AREN'T MORE MINORITY RAILFANS BECAUSE "ALL" MINORITIES ARE, OR ON THE WHOLE, DIRT POOR?! There were railfans long before there were computers and the Internet you know? When I started riding the Els and taking photographs back in 1972 I was seven years old and I'd already been collecting books, riding beneath them, and drawing the same for five years. Back in 1972, the fare on the NY system was fifty cents (it may have been thirty-five). Just think, my father and I used to ride on the whole system for a buck or less. You CANNOT judge a race (or an individual for that matter) by the size of a bank account. You're barely fifteen years old for Christ's sake! How did you get so dumb so quickly? These type of sentiments serve only to reinforce the misguided perceptions among people of color that all predominately white operations are racist and that is a damn shame. You're still a child, wholly dependant upon your family for support. How would you like it if someone judged you because you were incapable of paying your own bills? Under the circumstances, think about how ILLOGICAL that would be. It's time to grow up and think in terms of what it is to be HUMAN rather than what it is to be black, white, yellow, or whatever. That's what we all share you know, our humanity, and railfanning only serves to enhance the human experience. Black, white, rich or poor, ANYBODY can ride or watch a train. To do so is a very enjoyable experience and I can only hope that despite sentiments such as yours, that more people of color can come to enjoy it as I have.
Eric Dale Smith
All right, all right take it to email please.
I knew this was going to happen which is why I didn't post any comments on earlier threads.
Eric - you knew what you were in for but you went ahead anyway (this is not the first time you have done something like this - start a big controversy).
To be completely honest with you - if your intent is to disrupt this board and set people against each other, then you have achieved your goal (and if it wasn't you succeeded anyway).
Until now we were all content with just being railfans. Was it necessary to start breaking down along other criteria (alright I'll say it - racial lines). Nobody here cared what a person's ethnic/racial etc. background was until you brought it up.
Dave - I apologise for taking this a bit further. Personally I think that the comaradery that that all of us shared with each other in here has been dealt a serious blow. How it will be repaired, only time will tell. But I think you should keep the all the postings on this subject for a while longer and then delete them so people can see just how stupid and out of hand certain subjects can get.
Allan
Allan:
My intent was to relate a positive development and take pride in being a part of it. I refuse to stick my head in the sand and avoid controversy just so you and others can be "comfortable." Race and railfanning is a legimate subject since as a fellow white motorman/canductor at the BSM pointed out to me it has been (or at least perceived to be so) lilly white for too long. That said, if I make anyone uncomfortable by pointing out my blackness, then the problem rests with them, not with me. Remember that racism or the perception of such, is part and parcel of EVERY component of American life, especially railfanning, and as such it is a legitimate area to explore. If that means being controversial then so be it.
Eric Dale Smith
That said, if I make anyone uncomfortable by pointing out my blackness, then the problem rests with them, not with me.]
So if a white person is "proud of their race" that's racist but when a black person does it it's ok?
Nope. Every race or ethnicity has much to be proud of. My grandmother was of Italian descent and I celebrate her heritage gladly. It is one thing to promote one's ethnic background in a spirit of celebration of one's accomplishments; it is quite another to do so as a means of putting another group down. People are generally smart enough to know the difference.
Eric Dale Smith
>>> My intent was to relate a positive development and take pride in being a part of it. I refuse to stick my head in the sand and avoid controversy just so you and others can be "comfortable." <<<
Give your righteous indignation a rest Eric. Why did you start a new thread rather than responding to whichever message bothered you? Quite a few of us have already commented on WMATAGMOAGH's post. That is where your original post in this thread should have been without a flaming headline.
Tom
Amen! That's why I stood clear of it as well. It doesn't matter who or what you are - at least not here. That's one of many reasons I really like this place. And I feel largely that we'll continue on enjoying each other's company despite a few nasty turns. All of us are into a common thrill here, and I don't see that changing a bit. Hopefully a few have learned something else new here.
E mail & or a Chat Rooom ( elsewhere ) ...........yea !!!
thats how U do it !!!
Dave,
I do hope that this conversation goes to e-mail. But if it does get aggravating on here, please do your best to punish (i.e. remove handles) the individuals involved, not the majority of subtalkers. We realyl appreciate your site and would truly miss it!! -Nick
Exactly!
[You're barely fifteen years old for Ch---t's sake!]
Funny how when flaming him for making racist comments you yourself make ageist comments.
[You're barely fifteen years old for Ch---t's sake!]
Funny how when flaming him for making racist comments you yourself make ageist comments.
I'll have to agree, that was WAY out of line!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WOW!!!! Hot stuff that needs a little cooling down. When I started in TA class, I was a little surprised by the small number of Black/Latino Car Inspectors. Arriving at my first assignment, there were even less. Most of the Black CIs are 'West Indian.' I asked people I know in TA offices and the answer repeated BY THE BLACK EMPLOYEES was that they don't want this work, that it is too dirty and beneath them. The opportunity is THERE FOR ALL, especially in programs run by TA for young men, especially 'minorities.' The pay is good and the future is bright for all who want a job. I only WISH I knew about this work years ago.
It is no different for subway/rail buffs. It is the interest in the trains, the tracks and the machinery that makes it all go. Most young African/Americans are being pushed into computer skills and IT employment because they can get a higher paying job without a complete college education. Such employment is coming to an end as more and more people become 'computer literate.' I was surprised to find out that you are the 'first' as no 'other' had any interest. I hope you are not the last. I had a machine shop teacher in High School many years ago who pushed the minorities into learning tool skills...THEY just weren't interested. Thirty years later, it's all the same. Peter
[Young A/A pushed into the IT arena because they can get decent pay without a college education]????
Are you speaking of entry level IT jobs?
I ask because I'm an African-American IT professional (with my college degree and certifications) and I can tell you that I'm in this profession because I enjoy working with networks and the challenges that come with it. Yes, the pay is very good, but that wasn't the factor for me choosing an IT career. I did consider a being a TA B/O and aiming towards moving on to being a T/O. I even went through the testing and pre-hiring process, but I realized that I would've enjoyed it in the beginning, but not too much longer than a few months.
I have a few friends who are IT professionals (also college educated, some grad level) too and I'm certain that they desired and chose IT careers and not "Pushed" into it.
I know for myself it was either this or a CPA.
Wayne
Eric, I think you took his remarks the wrong way.
He stated a demographic fact, that members of racial minorities are statistically poorer than nonmembers. This fact, AFAIK, is correct. That doesn't mean that every member of a racial minority is poor. (It certainly doesn't mean that every member of a racial minority is poor!)
He also pointed out that the typical railfan has significant expenses. Sure, it's possible to be a railfan without incurring such expenses. (Since I do most of my railfanning on the subway, but I take a lot of pictures, I have substantial costs for film and processing, but fares are cheap.)
He arrived at the conclusion that there are probably disproportionately few members of racial minorities in the railfan community. Not that there are none. Certainly not that there should be none. Where do you get the idea that he's judging anyone? He's simply making an observation based on demographics.
I think it's great that so many of us share this interest. I don't think it matters if some of us happen to be white, some black, and some the color of R-142 seats. (There! We're back on-topic.) Let's discuss our shared interest, shall we?
TUNNEL VISION
Taking the A Train, and Picking It Up With One Hand
By RANDY KENNEDY
"The New York City subway has not been whole since Sept. 11.
"But there is an alternate universe where it still is: unharmed, preserved, pristine.
"In this universe, the subway does not simply look the way it did on Sept. 10, 2001. It also looks the way it did in 1981 and 1941 and on Oct. 27, 1904, the day it opened. Sometimes it is covered in graffiti. Sometimes it is furnished with ceiling fans and cane seats. Sometimes it is on its way to the Polo Grounds."
Click link above for full story. (Registration required.)
--Mike
I shot this movie with my new digi cam on Saturday, Try this if you have the QuickTime browser plugin, if it doesn't work or you don't have the plugin, then go>
Here, and right click on PC010048.MOV and select save target or save link as and dl it
If all that happens is you hear sound and you see black, your monitor brightness is low, turn it up, and you'll see something!
Enjoy!
It won't download. Too many users maybe.
I'll violate my license and increase it to 1000 users:-)
On IE 5.0 with Quicktime plugin, it looks like it's not downloading, but it really is. Takes a few minutes, even with a highspeed connection.
It downloaded fine for me. That video is almost creepy. The station seems to just come out shawdows, yet still be in the darkness. What was that lit up object (like a booth), it looked like something blue was in it?
That booth was a NYPD booth that can be considered as trash...It's been sitting there unoccupied for like 2 years.
The movie was shot in between R142A cars with a Olympus C-3000
Click here for the movie you can see (QT Plugin required for this link)
Click here, and then right click on cityhall.mpg and click save target or link as and download away! You can actually see it now!
Link to NY Times article on subway modelers. I prefer the 1:1 scale models, however.
I prefer the 1:1 scale models, however.
So do I, but derailments and truck swaps are easier
in HO.
Good point, Jeff.
Also, tie replacement in HO won't give you a bad back or make you sweat either.
;-D
BMTman
I thought Jeff's scale was 12:1 or 12 inches to a foot.
I prefer the 1:1 scale models, however.
So do I, but derailments and truck swaps are easier
in HO.
Most importantly, storage space!
HeyPaul beat you to that Todd. He did say models.
A small group of us were at the Bay Ridge Model layout this past Saturday for the last week-end of their "Open House". Vern was there. He operated the R-21s & PCC for us.
I've seen some of his stuff (none of these were his) & they are very impressive.
Mr rt__:^)
Vern was there. He operated the R-21s & PCC for us.
Not just R-21s... you want to talk about mongrel consists? :)
What scale is that? I can't tell .....
--Mark
That's the MTH O scale Chicao & NYC sets, incl. one specially painted late one night < G >
Mr rt__:^)
Got your attention have I ?
Last week I needed to visit the TA's CES (Ctr Elect Shop) in Woodside & took BQE to get there. The RxR line to the Hell Gate bridge comes close to it near the Grand Central Pky. Anyhow, as I drove along there went by a ConRail, yes some of the cabs haven't been re-painted.
Then next came a Acela with MARC big and bold on the side. I thought how strange, first why does MARC has Acelas, second why was it going to Boston ?
That Saturday I picked up a copy of RailPace that explained that they were being tested on the NorthEast run. Sometimes you end up in the right place at the right time !
Mr rt__:^)
No offense but are you sure you don't mean a MARC AEM-7?
I suspect what Thurston saw was one of MARC's HH8's. MARC has joined the HH8 parade since commuter traffic on the Penn Line is growing rapidly. More electrics mean faster trains, as diesels are limited to 90 MPH while electrics are ok'd to 110.
If the motor had a big MARC on the side, then it's an AEM-7. The Baltimore Chapter NRHS's newsletter has a picture of MARC 4911. The HH8's have a big white side panel above a small MARC on the side. Rumor has it that the big white panel will be used for ads.
Ahh. Didn't know that; haven't seen any pictures. But I'm taking the train to Bal'more in a couple weeks so I'll check out Baltimore Penn Station for any signs of them...
Now only if Marc would run trains on weekends, especially on the Brunswig Line which is the closest to my place 22 miles away in Martinsburg
That was it Dan, i.e. a HHP-8 vs. the box cab AEM7s.
I've also been amazed at how M-N will use a lot of CT equip. on Harlem & Hudson lines. I guess what ever comes out of the Croton-Harmon goes with the next train they make up, regardles of who bought it.
Mr rt__:^)
If you look closely at the New haven Division cars, some will say Conn DOT others will say MTA, they run mixed.
I called my contact at MARC. MARC has purchased 6 High Horsepower (HHP) motors. They took delivery of one last week and is now being tested. He didn't know where it was.
Next, the top speed for AEM 7 electric motors is about 130. MARC I and II equipment is limited to 110 mph but MARC 3 (double deckers) can go to 125 mph. They aren't permitted east of Bergen interlocking, which is why they can't go to New York over the busy Thanksgiving period. The MARC III's ride exceptionally well, better than Amfleet, NEC Direct (or whatever the equipment is called this month).
Michael
For those that wanted to know lots of detail about the Oak Point & Harlem River yards (yes there are two, it's not two names for the same one) as well as the recently completed "Oak Point Link" pick up a copy of RailPace, December contains a very nice article with a one page map.
BTW, I remember a worker THERE who also volunteers at Shoreline that asked me about this subject. I thought there was just one yard & told him the same ... opps.
Mr rt__:^)
Though well intended, I get the impression that the title of Eric's original post Why more minorities should be railfans may be off the point.
Some people collect stamps, or coins, or dolls, because they love those things. But I've met some who just like to collect stuff, and later decide to specialize in one particular thing. And then they may specialize in a sub-area, like coin collectors who specialize in Bust Halves or Half Dimes.
But just about every railfan I've ever known is "organic." They never decided to be railfans. Likewise, if their main interest is BMT or IRT or Insull Interurbans, they came to the interest more or less naturally.
The problem (especially when you're younger) is that railfanning is a pretty intense hobby and is not "cool" in just about any social or racial group. The young railfan may have to deal with the disapproval of peers and even parents. Hey, even their own kids. My older daughter (who likes riding trolleys and trains) sees yet another train picture on my monitor and says "Are you looking at trains AGAIN."
I think that any person who wants to be a railfan IS a railfan. The question is why they don't participate if they ARE railfans.
Paul your words will be etched in bronze on a plaque I will present to you at the next ERA meeting....;-D (uh, I also have a bridge to sell you BTW).
Well said!
BMTman
PS You know I HAD to tease you!
excellent point, the fact that its not a common interest can make it discouraging, but for some reason this board DOES exist and is abounding every day in numerous posts. When someone tells me I'm the only one in the world that has my interest I give them a link to this board and they are silenced.
To anybody who complains about my being a railfan -this is something that cannot be found to be offensive to anyone regardless of age, race, religion, creed, national origin, gender, or sexual orientation. If anyone even thinks about criticizing me for looking at trains, I can write them off as being in need of a life of their own, and then forgetting them. How this pasttime can be a problem for anyone is beyond me, so for those who do not like it, you lose, I win.
Most in my family certainly don't understand why I ride the subways just for fun, or spend SO MUCH TIME at that TROLLEY museum.
To which I say, riding with some friends gives me great pleasure & getting dirty at Branford is a labor of love. If you're going to only come this way once, might a well enjoy the trip !
Mr rt__:^)
Thrston - I get the same from my family. I just smile and say that my wife is lucky that she's not a "sports widow" and that she never has to worry about me being on the streets - I'm either above them or below them :)
--Mark
I happen to be into stamp (global) and coin (20th century US) collecting myself. Not to mention American Flyer trains.
I enjoy coin collecting and lately have done a little rag picking(Paper money) The Bureau of Printing and Engraving has had some nice offering recently and in the not ot distant past. I find it a nice way to build an inheritence for the fruit of my loins.
avid
I remember hearing that someone proposed converting one of the two existing LIRR brances through SE Queens to subway service. Does anyone recall which branch and who proposed it? Does any one what became of that proposal?
It was the Atlantic Branch, south of Jamaica Station to Springfield Gardens/Laurelton.
I believe the plan was to extend the line from the present Jamaica Center onto the LIRR line. Some comments have been made here in SubTalk about how the tracks extend and curve beyond the platforms at the Jamaica Center station nowadays, apparently this was done with the eventual LIRR conversion/connection in mind.
In 1968 the MTA proposed a major expansion of the subway system. The plan was to build the new Archer Ave Line with two seperate routes. One from Queens Blvd(the current E Line) and one replacing the Jamaica BMT el (today's J/Z Lines). The Queens Blvd line was to take over the Atlantic branch of the LIRR (today's Loucst Manor,Laurelton and Rosedale Stations via the Far Rockaway,Long Beach and West Hempstead Branches currently operate there). I have been told that the tunnel was built from Parsons Blvd to South Rd and under South Rd to near the LIRR tracks. I believe there is a church just east of the tracks. Since I now live in South Florida someone needs to confirm this but I believe there is a vent near that church. This part of the LIRR was to be taken over for Subway Service.
Again I am not 100 % sure
Thank You
I think you're right!
Vision 2020 Committed Projects
Highlights:
- The routing of the NCS from Penn Station to Broad Street (misnamed "NERL MOS 1"), with a MAP! Looks like they've given up on the idea of using the branch that parallels route 21 to extend to Clifton.
- A picture of the HBLR terminal at Hoboken as it will look when it's fully constructed
- Completion date estimates for all of the above
Thanks for the link. I have no time so I just skimmed through it.
I guess the HBLR's MOS1-2-3 construction will be quite a time before completion!
today i retried the attempted ride of the R-143. bording around 3 oclock and 14th union. my opinion about the R-143 vs. its R-142A cousin is that it seems far (10 times to the 10th power) more better than the Rushed R-142A. it was smooth from acceleratiion to stopping. it was quieter than the R-142A. build quality seemed suprisingly excellent from a car coming from Kawasaki. so far i was impressed with the machine.
Design wise, i truly didn't like the exterior style. i am not too fond of the vacuum canister design and the small windows. missing extra cab window negated its style even more, but earned it its nickname by me, i call it The Pirate. it looked like a shortened R-68A with a black mask at the front. of course it didn't strike much attention because it looked soo similar to the R-142A. the Front end fiber glass construction, though looks nice, screams fragile and is low tech. most new rolling stock do not use fiberglass because it is harder to replace ( what i have heard).
the Interior is more tasteful than the R-142A, also seems more durable and less prone to vandalism. the gray gave it a nice look and tint along with the cream colored ceiling. the styling was impressive. less parts used for paneling gave it a solid look and enhanced its quiet ride, on the other hand the interior made the R-40 series look brighter. the styling looked like Siemens or Bombardier designed it instead of Kawasaki because of the way most of the panel looked.
the Anouncements felt more lifelike than the R-142A however it wasn't loud enough. As mister Pirman, mister Logan, and the rest of the train fanatics drueled over the train i studied the riding manerisms of the train. nothing different. just like the R-142A. it didn't take the rails to well even though it was way more comefortable than the R-40 series. the breaking was the same loud groaning squeaking, and the traction motor did the same loud whining 3 times which makes me grind my teeth at times. however, the train wasted blasted fast, very impressive.
Overall, i welcome the new R-143 with warm open arms. it is a nice ride and more comfortable than the other older cars. in many ways it mocked the R-142A making it feel like nothing new, but it shows promising performance than what crappy one that the R-142A delivered. but, it is too early to tell if it is reliable. but as usual a new machine will fall apart in someways before it comes reliable. it is a no niggling, no nonsense train that i as a non kawasaki fan have grown to love. R-143 makes the R-142A feel in some ways like a mistake. however i wish the carbody was more R-32 inspired.
Oh well...the Kawasaki R143 and its smaller R142A basically share most of the 'tech.' Apart from the dreams of CBTC, I do hope Kawasaki will get serious and make it go. Peter
Looking at the pictures, "The Pirate" sound goods to me.
I can't wait until I get a chance to ride the R143. I am hoping for next Wednesday to ride it and also get a chance to ride on the J/M/E Lines as well.
If anyone is working on the J/M/L/E Lines Wednesday Dec. 12 let me know by Email and maybe meet up somewhere.
I actually studied the mechanics of the train when it was in testing and today, aside from "drooling" over it.
I didn't see fit to study it as it is basically the twin to the R-142A, the only reason its a smoother ride is because its a heavier car, but the undercarriage and specifications (EXCEPT for the CBTC Mechanics) are that of the R-142A.
Compare specs sheets and you'll see like I have!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
# 1 new " no railfan window " ...JUNK ..!!
#2 my challenge to you still STANDS TALL ....
your westcoast transit photographer....BEST...vs ...MY WORST......
transit photography ........ i { whip will him hands down } .....lol!!!
cone on !! lets git' it' oooon' big time !!!! .............lol.....!!!
You know what, I'm sick of this, Save this shit for e-mail or a post of it's subject, thank you!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I know, the same kind of statement (bitching about the lack of a railfan window) gets really stale after a while.
I stand ready for his challenge about his SUPERIOR west coast transit photographer he said could wip me !!!
put up or .............!!!
Yes, why don't you shut up? We've been through this non railfan window = junk hundreds of times and it's just getting silly the number of threads that are punctuated at random intervals by southern california transit system (salaamallah) whining about the same, usually irrelevent, fact that the new subway cars are rubbish because the don't have railfan windows.
Grow up.
-Robert King
if you stop responding he will stop
no, I think he can probably continue forever, even if unprovoked.
well let him continue and save your fingers for more meaningful posts.
look you may have your New Junk that you love ... Fine !! but it aint no fun like the good old days .....
I was calling TREVORS bluff & he backed down .......lol!@!!
again i stand ready for the challenge that trevor said to me that his westcoast tranist photographer can whip me ......!!
lol !!! big time !!! & dont slime away & hide & say he did not say that to me on a thread here ......lol !!
Hell no !! U were the one who said your WEST_COAST-transit photographer could whip me in bus & rail transit photography !!
then when i put the CHALLENGE up- to you and accepted your offer. A WESTCOAST TRANSIT PHOTOGRAPHY duel .....
U back down !!! ...........................ha ha ha ha ha ha ......lol............!!!........aint dat right ???................oh yea .....
oh yea !!! ..............
Grow Up and Shut Up.
the one who needs to grow up is the one ( trevor ) who ""back downs" after HE said his weatcoast transit photographer could whip me
in rail & bus transit photography !! Now I accept HIS challenge HE ( trevor ) BACKS DOWN in defeat ...!!!
who is......... ( @#$#%&^&*^& ) .....who now ???.........
the one who needs to grow up is the one ( trevor ) who ""back downs" after HE said his westcoast transit photographer could whip me
in rail & bus transit photography !! Now I accept HIS challenge HE ( trevor ) BACKS DOWN in defeat ...!!!
who is......... ( @#$#%&^&*^& ) .....who now ???.........
if you don't respond then he will stop
This guy is either great at winding everyone up intentionally with an extremely sarcastic albeit irritating sense of humour or he's just a really really sad b*****d!!! I suspect in view of his tenacity on the "railfan" subject I suspect that he is probably the latter. Shame on NYCTA for not considering the feelings of transit fans in not designing in a railfan window!!!
again remember you posted that i did not know how BAD your westcoast transit photographer is & i had better watch out !!
gee i am scared stiff !!!
so much so.....lol!!!.... I responded with a CHALLENGE to you & your "westcoast representive of superior railfan westcoast photography' So I could win hands down with EASE ... !!! ....lol !!!
again remember you posted that i did not know how BAD your westcoast transit photographer is & i had better watch
out !!
gee i am scared stiff !!!
so much so.....lol!!!.... I responded with a CHALLENGE to you & your "westcoast representive of superior railfan westcoast photography' So I could win hands down with EASE ... !!! ....lol !!!
@..... response to ""T -Dirive Crusr"".....threads......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cool. where can they be found?
Call up to Kawasaki or even e-mail then, they'll gladly send you copies!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
really? i tried that and they gave me a hard time
Same squealing brakes, same rough ride, same loud pickup, fiberglass bulkheads. Sounds like a chip off the old block to me.
I've learned my lessons from standing on platforms for upwards of an hour waiting for the R-142(A) last year. This time I'll just wait for the lion's share of the L line (or for that matter, the BMT Eastern Division) before I'll take a closer look.
I rode the train yesterday by sheer coinceidence. I only wanted to see the rebuilt Metropolitan-Lorimer station and ran right into the new train. You're right, it reminds me more of the new trains on the 6 line than anything else. The doors though are a little smaller and curves outward, more similar to the R-44, 46 and 68's. It also has some funky bar on the ceiling, does anyone know what purpose it's supposed to serve? I was very impressed. I love the new train.
I also saw the new subway map on the train. All I can say about the map is that I feel very sorry for tourists who want to ride the subway on or after 12/17/2001, particularly the G Train.
The purpose of 'the funky bar on the ceiling' is to attract taller passengers to place themselves in the middle of the car when there are higher numbers of riders (rush hour.) CI Peter
Thanks for the info. I guess taller people will no longer feel oppressed on subways.
Does the R143 have all those S/S monkey bars all over the place??
Yeah, it does, just like the new 6 train. From what I remember it has the "tall people" bars in the interior between doors and the more "traditional" bars near the lights. The bars though did not annoy me that much.
In his eulogy of Humphrey Bogart, Director John Huston said that "he (Bogart) didn't take Bogart the man too seriously but that he held Bogart the Actor in the highest reverence." The same thing holds true to me in regards to my being a writer of transit. I hope to one day so elevate my craft to win a Pulitzer Prize and forever make railfanning a respected field of study the world over.
Eric D. Smith
Mr. Controversy? Now, can we move on?
Story here
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Washington's subway system will stage its first chemical warfare drill on Wednesday, nearly two months after a gun-toting passenger triggered a toxic scare by spraying liquid around a train.
The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, which moves 600,000 people around the capital by train each day, will run the simulation with local fire and ambulance services at 1 p.m. EST at the Smithsonian Metro station on the system's blue and orange lines.
``It's the first time we have done an emergency drill which simulates the release of a chemical agent,'' Metro spokeswoman Lisa Farbstein told Reuters.
In October, less than a month after the Sept. 11 attacks and with fears of a biological or chemical attack running high, a fare-dodging passenger fired a gun and sprayed liquid on a subway platform and inside a train.
Tests later showed the substance was a nontoxic carpet cleaner, but Metro officials came under fire for allowing the train to pick up passengers from five more stations before sealing it off as a crime scene.
The release says 12:15 AM, which to me is more logical.
I saw a post here about the R-143 schedule for us so we can catch it. Problem is, it started out fine but was confusing at the end.
We would appreciate it if anyone can post an R-143 schedule minus the military time. Thank you.
Bill "Newkirk"
Hi, friends...
I want to quickly introduce myself. My name is Anthony, and I grew up in The Bronx in the shade of the White Plains Road elevated line. I like this site very much, and I love reading all the posts, it's nice to see that I'm not alone in my NYC subway obsession :).
Which brings me to the point of my post- I have been a subway freak my whole life, and believe me, we ARE a minority, most of the people in my life who have found out that about me, think it's odd at best, downright crazy at worst.
J-TrainTony
NYCSMF thinks your..
//Crazy
j/k ,Hysterical laughter.
HEY!!!!
I'm a subway MAP fan too!!!
Love the 67 and 68 ones with KK, NX, RJ, JJ, etc.
:)
mph..
very hard to come by...
I'm sticking with collecting the new Ones..stuffing them in my closet, letting it build and build, then one day watch while my closet falls into the basement.
Don't worry, you're in good company...
I can count about 90 railfans that I've met in the past few years, most are SubTalkers. They also include fans from far and near (London, Boston, Denver, Calif., Minn., etc.). So, check the coming events area of this site & join us on a "Field Trip" or at a ERA or UTC meeting.
Mr rt__:^)
Hello all, as promised here's part 2 of my trip to NYC...
My parents and I visited ground zero early Saturday morning. Seeing it first hand really brought it home, how anyone could justify killing thousands of people like that is just beyond words. Well, now I saw and I won't forget. Again my condolences to all those who lost loved ones in this tragedy.
As well, my family and I attended the Canada Loves New york rally at the Roseland ballroom Saturday afternoon, which was the purpose of our visit. I was happy to hear that the current estimates are about 20000 Canadians showed up in NYC over the weekend to show our support to New Yorkers. WE ALL LOVE NEW YORK!!!!!!!!
Anyways, now for the railfanning...
Most of Saturday was spent touring and going to the rally, however my parents and I did take the subway to get between places. We took a (Q) of R68's from 34th Street to 14th-Union Square and a (4) of R62's to Fulton Street to get to ground zero. I got my first glimpse of an R142 (R142A? whichever runs on the 6) leaving 14th Street. I love the sound of those AC engines!!!! The T1's in Toronto have similar sounding AC engines, but I like the R142 sounds better!! I also got to see moving platforms for the first time, I've never seen those before! Does anyone know of any other transit authorities that use them? The O-Train here in Ottawa has gap fillers at all the stations, but they stay extended all day while the trains are running and are manually turned up at night to allow freight trains to use the line.
Coming back up we got a (5)-bird at Fulton Street all the way up to GCT. That train was flying up the express!! Much better than on Friday when the local kept catching up to it!!
After doing some sight seeing around 5th Avenue and Central Park, we got a (C) of R38's from 59th to 81st to see the George Harrison memorial, and a (C) of R32's back down to 50th for the rally. I find the R38's give a slightly smoother and quieter ride (but only slightly), and I find they look a little better than the R32's, with the corrugations going only halfway up rather than all the way to the roof. However, I like them both, especially because they can both really move!!
Later that evening I managed to get another hour of railfanning in while my parents took a rest at the hotel. I took an (F) at 34th Street intending to go up to Lex, only to remember there was a GO in effect that was causing the (F)'s to go via 63rd Street. Not having a lot of time and therefore wanting to stay in Manhattan, I decided against going up the Queens Blvd line and instead got off and took a (D) of R68's to 59th Street, where I got on a very crowded (1) of R62's that stopped in the tunnel a lot. The C/O said that (1),(2) and (3)'s were all using the local track at 42nd-TSQ... were the (3)'s running on the local track only at Times Square or throughout the rest of the line as well?
From there I got the shuttle over to GCT, a (4) of R62's that again ran very quickly down the express to 14th Street, and finally an (N) back to 34th Street. The local stations on Broadway are under construction (I gather from the tileless cement walls at these stations), are they going to restore the original look of these stations?
Anyways, that was Saturday... tomorrow in part 3, my adventure to Stillwell-Coney Island...
"I got my first glimpse of an R142 (R142A? whichever runs on the 6)"
Yep, its the R142A that runs on the 6, and is built by Kawasaki. You can find the R142 on the #2, and it was built by Bombardier. -Nick
Both express tracks were blocked for station rehabs at both 42nd and 72nd this weekend. That forced expresses onto the local tracks southbound from 72 to 42 and northbound from 42 to 96. (At 42, the switches are south of the station. At 72, the switches are on the arriving side of the station -- that is, north of the station for southbound trains and south of the station for northbound trains.)
The southbound 3 ran express from 96 to 72 and from 34 to 14. The northbound 3 ran express only from 14 to 34.
I was on a southbound 2 Sunday morning that was delayed for a minute or two at 59 thanks to the congestion.
Both express tracks were blocked for station rehabs at both 42nd and 72nd this weekend. That forced expresses onto the local tracks southbound from 72 to 42 and northbound from 42 to 96. (At 42, the switches are south of the station. At 72, the switches are on the arriving side of the station -- that is, north of the station for southbound trains and south of the station for northbound trains.)
The southbound 3 ran express from 96 to 72 and from 34 to 14. The northbound 3 ran express only from 14 to 34.
I was on a southbound 2 Sunday morning that was delayed for a minute or two at 59 thanks to the congestion.
Just wondering that Packed downtown No.1 train you got on at 59 Street wasn't around 6:55-7:00PM Saturday ?
If so you may have been on my train because it was packed do to a earlier delay in service and we came to a dead stop at 59 Street and stop and go to Times Square.
Actually, it was around that time!! I did my railfanning between about 6:30 and 7:30 on Saturday. The train waited for a bit at 59 Street and then it was stop and go all the way to Times Square like you said.
You must of been on my train because there was a Stalled train at 157 Street that cases a 20 Minutes delay in service leaveing 242 Street. I left 12 Minutes after the first train at 6;21PM and getting to Times Square 6:59PM.
I keeped on making my announcement like this "Ladies and Gentleman we are being delayed do to Train Traffic ahead of us do to all No.1,2,3 trains running local from 72 Street to Times Square we should be moving shortly".
Yup, I was definitely on your train, I remember those announcements!!! Cool!!!!
Thats cool you did get to ride my train. You can't forget my style of announcements! Besides that hold up between 59 Street and Times Square the trip went well. They did however send that No.3 ahead local to 14 Street and then tailed behind another No.1 train below Chambers. If you ride my train again hopefully you will have a better ride next time with a lighter load and faster service.
Back around 81-82, I remember they started painting all the No. 2 trains white, supposedly to stop graffitti, which I at the time even thought was ill-advised....it was like giving them a CANVAS, fer christsake.
My question is, what other lines besides the 2, 3, and 5 got this paint job? I remember the 1 being rusty dirty MTA blue/silver, and the 4 being rusty dirty maroon, but what about the R27/30's and R16's?
Thanks.
//Thinking..
Um..
the 7 i suppose?
I seem to remember the 7 being baby blue and white (WF colors), till they got rebuilt.
Could be wrong, tho.
7's got some in MTA colors, most of them if not all were put in the non escaping White scheme before the current "Redbird" scheme took in effect in the late 80's.
The 7 too, eh?
Jeez *L*
But no IND/BMT cars??
I remember riding "M" trains in the late 80's painted green.
Nope...not on the M. The only green BMT/IND equipment in that era was the 110 rehabilitated R-10 cars, which ran exclusively on the C.
David
Some of the 7 Line stuff went from the light blue/white World's Fair colors to the MTA blue/silver. I'd say about 75 cars total, then they started doing them in solid white. I have photos at Corona Yard of all three color schemes together.
Me too!
I remember those days very well too. I lived, and still live today, three blocks west of the Burke Avenue #2 train station. Painting the cars white was a real MTA blunder. Talk about the TA shooting itself in the foot on this one. Within days of painting the cars white, the graffitti was back. White wasn't limited to just the 2, 3 and 5 lines. I saw it on the 1, 4 and 6 lines as well. You'll also find pictures on this web site showing the 7 and 42nd Street Shuttle trains running with white cars. I think the white scheme was only done on the IRT lines.
Thanks??
Burke Av, eh??
Know where The 3 Boys From Italy pizzeria is??
I'm from Cruger and Burke.
Yeah! I eat there often. Three Boys is still there. My home's on Bronx Park East and Adee, the big Adee Towers apartment house. Unfortunately, the Pearl Pharmacy, where I used to buy Trains magazine and which sold model railroad trains, is gone. I think they left early this year. Hoft's Lunchonette is also gone too.
I've been in North Carolina for 11 years, but still go up once a year for my NYC and NYC subway fix.
My family still lives in the neighborhood, my family has been in that neighborhood since the 20's. My mother STILL complains about Finast and Hoff's Ice Cream being gone :)
Remember the Cameo? The little social club off of Burke and Cruger?
I think the Cameo may have been before my time. I'm only 23. But even if it was still there, I don't know if I would have gone there.
I've been in North Carolina for 11 years...
Whereabouts? I'm from Bunn (Franklin County).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Hey, cat...
I'm in Chapel Hill
Neighbors! (Well, almost.) Bunn is home and I still maintain a house there, but my job has had me in New Jersey for the past six years - a "temporary" assignment, so they said when I took it. So I have a house in Eatontown, NJ as well. My wife goes back and forth but I only get home a couple of times a year.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Supposedly, the thought was, "Let's paint the cars white. That way we can get the graffiti off as soon as it's applied". Huh?!?
"Supposedly, the thought was, "Let's paint the cars white. That way we can get the graffiti off as soon as it's applied". Huh?!?
Uh....no not really. The first white car was a an R-33 or 36 stored in Corona yard. The idea was a "dare" for the graffitti artists to see if they would attack that car.
That was back in the days when the double fencing went up around the yards and vicious guard dogs patrolled the perimeter. Eventually, most of the IRT went white, they grafittied those cars anyway.
I also remember when TA chief John Simpson (not related to OJ or Homer!) came up with the brainstorm to fight grafitti on the IRT by painting the interiors tan and light brown. The paint used was latex ! I did say brainstorm, didn't I ?
Bill "Newkirk"
I recall some BMT cars painted white for "Beat Street" and stored @ Fresh Pond for a minute...And most of the 7 line also had this "Snow White" till 1984 when Kiley or Gunn decided to repaint then in our popular "redbird" getup.
I remember that this actually started on the Flushing line. This is around the time that the TA had dogs at the Corona Yard along with those fences with razor sharp wire. IIRC a single R-33 was painted white sort of as bait. After that full trains of R-33/36 were showing up on the Flushing and eventually the white paint scheme spread throughout the IRT. I didn't like the white paint scheme because the cars looked terrible once they got dirty.
Wayne
The 7 definitely had the white cars. I have a "Newkirk" post card purchased at Shoreline that shows a full train set. The card gives credit for the pic to Glenn Smith and dated 3/24/84.
There are some pix right here on nycsubway.org:
www.nycsubway.org/slides/r3336wf/r36-9647.jpg
www.nycsubway.org/slides/r3336wf/r36-9657b.jpg
That's the truth. Once they aged a little they reminded me of Garbage trucks, White, but soiled!
avid
This was the single ugliest look any subway car has ever obtained. And yes, for the opportunity they provided to grafiti writers it might as well have been looseleaf paper.
:v) Andrew
Actually, the cars did NOT look bad when they were freshly painted, or even freshly cleaned.
Supposedly that white paint had some graffiti resistance to it, when run through a wash rack the graffiti would come off. Well, if they washed them once in a while, it would -- but once the graffiti paint cured, it stayed.
The wash rack or the cured paint didn't ruin the grafitti resistance properties that much...One real trick was applying some paint thinner
on the area before the vandals "bombed" the trains.
Oh, I think it was pretty ugly even without the grafiti.
The World's Fair and Redbird looks were/are much more attractive.
:-) Andrew
Most of the cars on the 6 line seemed to have it when I photographed them in 1980.
Something happened to me today on the LIRR that I wouldn't have expected in a million years. I boarded the 5:41 to Ronkonkoma at Penn Station, taking the window seat in a three-across. Someone soon took the aisle seat. A young woman then sat in the middle seat - and, to my extreme astonishment, turned to ask me if I had enough room with her there! I told her that in my several years of riding the train, she was the very first person ever to ask that question. I would have been less surprised if Elvis or Bigfoot had plunked down in the middle seat.
The real odd part - the woman was very small, probably not much over 100 pounds.
wooow...hmmm Peter *wink* just kidding
Stuart, RLine86Man
On the topic of the 5:41 train. I was on that train once, IT WAS PACKED TO SARDINES. It's a 3 connection train, Greenpoint, OB and one other. But shizat, I was amazed!
On the topic of the 5:41 train. I was on that train once, IT WAS PACKED TO SARDINES. It's a 3 connection train, Greenpoint, OB and one other. But shizat, I was amazed!
Greenport's actually the only connection, and I doubt if more than a few per cent of the people boarding at Penn make that connection. The train has only three stops - Hicksville, Central Islip and Ronkonkoma. Hardly anyone gets off at Hicksvile and only a modest number at Central Islip. I'd guess that at least 80% of the riders end their trip at Ronkonkoma.
Peter, if you weren't married already I'd say MARRY THAT WOMAN! (That was a rare breed of a Lassy).
BMTman
The funny thing is it is too common to see small women like that paired up with big, tall guys in marriage. That really irritates this small guy!
Also on the bus big people always want to sit next to me while all the cute women only sit next to other women. Often I'll just put my bag or coat down on the seat next to me, I know it's rude but I don't like being squashed. That's why I like NYCT buses with the single seats on one side.
On the LIRR it's best to avoid the three seaters facing eachother (I think they are near the door entrances) people always like to put their feet across.
So here's a n interesting question. Where do most people prefer to sit on the train or bus. On the bus I like to sit in the back near the window. On the train, well if there's no railfan window I'll take any window seat, I prefer to face forward. I do get dizzy sometimes in those backwards seats.
Also on the bus big people always want to sit next to me while all the cute women only sit next to other women. Often I'll just put my bag or coat down on the seat next to me, I know it's rude but I don't like being squashed. That's why I like NYCT buses with the single seats on one side.
Much the same happens on the LIRR too. In one pair of seats, there'll be two women each of whom weighs maybe 120 pounds, tops, and they've got ample room; in the next seat pair, there'll be two 250-pound men, jammed in with hardly any room to breathe.
I guess I shouldn't introduce you to my wife....
[Where do most people prefer to sit on the train or bus.]
With the LIRR's 2-3 seating, there seems to be a definite pattern in the way the seats fill up. The first to go is usually the window seat on the 2-seat side, followed by the window seat on the 3-seat side. Then, the aisle seat on the 3-seat side, the aisle seat on the 2-seat side and finally the middle seat on the 3-seat side.
By the way, today I rode the entire trip from Mineola to Penn Station at the railfan window. For once, the train operator didn't have his door open, as they usually do!
The same pattern of "fill-up" occurs on the 2-3 seats on the MBTA Commuter Rail. Smart passengers know, however, that on every train there is a car with 2-2 seats. They are the 500- and 1500-series coaches that have the lav. The cars are usually at the end (1500-series cars are control cab cars; 500-series cars are trailers). The 700- and 1700-series bilevels (OK, Sarge, trilevels) also have 10 single seats per car (2 at each end on each of the upper and lower levels, and 1 on each end of the entrance door level; all adjacent to the stair cases).
Speaking of the 80's, I remember seeing the ("V" 6th Ave.) on a R32 rollsign in about 87....anyone else remember seeing that??
Me and my friend talked about it for two days!!!
There are many lines that are on rollsigns that either did exist, or might exist in the future. Yes, the MTA does know how to plan! :-) -Nick
"Speaking of the 80's, I remember seeing the ("V" 6th Ave.) on a R32 rollsign in about 87....anyone else remember seeing that??"
Yes, the sign says:
(V) VIA 6TH AVE (The V is an orange bullet)
Bill "Newkirk"
Looks like a half rolled "N" to me. The right leg looks perpindickyouliar.
avid
R32
For those who can't do <tt>iframe</tt>, click <a href="http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/29/23.jpg">here</a>. The real image is located at http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/29/23.jpg, but click on the link before going there directly.
R40
For those who can't do <tt>iframe</tt>, click <a href="http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/29/26.jpg">here</a>. The real image is located at http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/29/26.jpg, but click on the link before going there directly.
Thats much better! Was this from abortion Saterday?
avid
[Was this from abortion Saterday?]
I don't know what this means, but these pictures were taken on September 8, 2001.
Interesting how they knew for many years that the V would run on 6th Avenue (Greller's book, pub;lished in 1993 or so, said the same thing, and has a pic of a Slant with an orange V), but didn't seem to be sure wheter it would be local, express, or where its exact terminals might be. So rather than describing it as "6th Avenue Local" (actually, that would be IRT style), or as "Queens Blvd/6th Avenue" or "Concourse/6th Avenue", they chose the truthful, but incomplete "via 6th Avenue", having already settled on orange as the color.
In 1996 or so, I saw an R32 with a yellow W showing, just like Mr. Greenberger's V sign- I don't know what text accompanied the bullet.
Well, not to be a wiseacre, but since it was in an orange circle, what else line COULD it have been besides 6th?
Wonder why they didn't print "Ave of the Americas" rather than 6th?...[slightly kidding :)]
Trevor's new R-143 Pics are up!
And for those interested I have a Quick Time Movie of it in motion at Union Square, I will send it to you if you e-mail me at metrod3700@cs.com
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Trevor, You've out done yourself again. Thanks for sharing. I particularly enjoyed the R-32/R-143 shot & made a copy for my own use.
Mr rt__:^)
Thank You Thurston!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Thanks for the pix guys. Looks nice.
Well worth the wait! Thanks Dave and Trevor. I'm gonna Email you for the MPEG!
Thanks, Trevor and Dave! She's pretty ... and from what I heard from testing, it's not at all the IRT experience either.
Nice shots -- I like the interior "retro" look, minus the grip bars and the digital bells and whistles, of course. Looks more like a cousin of the R-32/42 series than of the R-142s at first glance (and are the seat angles better than the 142s as well?)
Trevor,
NICE PICS!!!! :-) Thanks for getting them up so quickly, Dave!! -Nick
i am not knocking the good pics ... digital photography is the big bomb .......
i am asking why every new piece of ( not made in the usa built ) rail transit cars HAVE to all have transverse cabs !!!
whatsuuuuup wit' dat'...???
I've said it before and I'll say it again.
OPTO
Shawn.
you said ...
"I've said it before and I'll say it again.
OPTO
Shawn. ""
& I say TERRIBLE !! 100% agreement with your post !!!
The MTA ordered it that way due to OPTO considerations. The R143 would have transverse cabs because it's in the MTA design specifications regardless of who it's built by, be it Kawasaki or the Yankee-Doodle Railcar Co. division of Stars & Stripes Inc.
-Robert King
OPTO doesn't require transverse cabs. Video cameras and monitors (surely not too high-tech for the R-143!) would have done the job just as well.
"i am asking why every new piece of ( not made in the usa built ) rail transit cars HAVE to all have transverse cabs !!!
whatsuuuuup wit' dat'...???
To prevent you personally from having a railfan window view out the front. I'm serious. Check the specs. They say:
"All cabs shall be transverse in construction so as to prevent the Californian Salaam from getting a good view out the front."
And to think you just thought it was a general trend and not a conspiracy?
All kidding aside, it makes total sense from an O&M point of view to have transverse cabs. Subways aren't designed for railfans.
MATT-2AV
Where's the Beef Trevor, where IS the Beef?
I can't see any peeeeeeeepole!
Where's the beef?
avid
hidden bhind the blocked away view of the ""TRANSVRSE CAB""......that everybody LOVES so much more than railfan window
equipped rail transit cars ........lol!!!
There is a love amount of window for you to see out the front, JUST like the R-142s!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
> There is a love amount of window
Uh, what?
Oops MAJOR MISTAKE!
I was responding to a IM the same time I was typing that response, that was supposed to be huge amount, not love amount, LOL!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Trevor's new R-143 Pics are up!
On that page: "A representative selection of images of the R142/R142A". I can guess where you took the layout for that page from :)
other than that, nice pics
Dave,
Thanks so much for putting up Trevor's new R-143 pictures. I was instantly struck by what an amazingly beautiful piece of machinery they are.
While beauty is subjective, I suspect that these cars will receive the same overwhelming warm reception from the general (non-railfan) public as the R-142 series.
You know, I believe these new cars are prompting the public to be discerning about their rolling stock for the first time. I now know of many other East Side commuters who will deliberately wait for the next train hoping it is "one of those new cars with the red bulls-eye", meaning of course an R-142. Of course, they don't know what an R-142 is, but they know a more comfortable ride.
Last summer, I brought a friend on the subway for the first time. They had many stereotypes and misconceptions, as well as reservations. Would it be full of grafiti and people sleeping in their own urine like the bad old days? Luckily for us, and southbound R-142 (6) pulls in to 96th Street station, and their first comments when boarding the train were: "Wow! This is nice!"
Time Out New York Magazine listed the R-142 as one of the best things about New York in their recent annual publication on the matter. I accidentally discarded my copy, and have been looking for their text and picture to share with he board.
Thanks so much again, and at first glance, these cars appear to be more good news for the commuter,
MATT-2AV
P.S.: What color is that LED display? It looks pink on my screen.
Red, like the R142's.
I'd have preferred full-color LCDs, but what can you do? At least it's not pink as I had thought,
MATT-2AV
Very cool! Thanks for sharing.
Will the R-143s, as they come in, be tested on the Sea Beach in the same way that the R-142(A)s are being tested along the Dyre Ave line?
--Mark
Now that would make NO sense. But knowing the MTA, prolly yes, sadly.
I've used the Herald Square baby MVM's (I forget the proper term -- I'm referring to the little ones that don't take cash) to "trade in" cards.
I tried to trade in a card a block away at 34/7 but the mini-MVM I used didn't offer the option.
You can no longer "trade-in" cards via the MVM's.
Peopel had found a way to add value to an empty card w/o putting money into the machine. As a result the MTA removed the option. Perhaps it will be restored one day if the proper program can be written.
If you want to trade in then you have to use the token booth method.
When the new mini-MVM's were first introduced at 34/6, trade-ins were available. (This was well after the feature was removed from the full-size MVM's.)
I guess someone realized that the programs had not been changed.
Vending machines make more money by 'forced sales.' Put in a buck for a 75 cent candy bar (that cost 23 cents) and you can't get your money back if you change your mind. Stinks, won't take TA Revenue Maintainer job but at least you can transfer at the booth your credit. CI Peter
Visit your friendly neighborhood station agent in the booth and we will trade in your cards!
I have a recurring problem with Metrocards. About 20% of the time, when I use it on a bus and then transfer to another bus, I get a "READ ERR". Fortunately, this seems to be common enough that the driver just waves me onto the bus.
After that point, the card still works fine on the subway. But even if I use it twice (and thus re-write both of the volatile tracks) it still won't work on a bus.
So, I go to the booth and say "this card doesn't work on buses any more" and the agent usually looks at me like I'm a space alien or something. Sometimes they'll exchange it without further comment, sometimes I have to go into a long discussion of how it doesn't work on buses any more.
This has happened at least a half dozen times (I don't ride the buses all that often). It isn't the same bus (it's happened at least on the M14, the M34, and the M5). It happened to two other passengers who got on at the same stop I did and transferred to the same bus as me, so it seems that some bus fareboxes damage all cards inserted in them in some way.
Are there bus fareboxes out there that are eating cards? Is there anything being done to track down the problem and take those boxes out of service? Depending on what exactly the farebox is doing to break the card, I assume that there should be some history, either on the card or in the farebox, of where the card was used.
Is there some program in place in the booths to send cards with oddball problems to a central location for failure analysis? I know I could mail my card in instead of exchanging it in at the booth, but that inconveniences me with no guarantee that the people who receive it would do anything other than issue me a new one (no analysis of the problem).
Are there bus fareboxes out there that are eating cards?
I had one bus where clearly the farebox wasn't reading anything. The driver let everyone try, every card rejected, and he sighed and then let everyone pass in for free.
We agents at the booths are suppoded to clean the turnstile heads ar the beginning of our tours. How often do bus drivers have to use a cleaning card on their fare boxes?
I don't think this is a cleaning issue. Normally, when that is the problem, the card goes "zoop-zoop-zoop" in and out of the slot a number of times. Plus, the subway turnstiles have no problem reading the card (and writing it), yet no matter how many times I use it in the subway, it will reject in any bus. It's like the control track is being damaged. Hmmm. The next time it happens, I'll run the card through some developer and see if in fact there's a problem with the control track. For some examples, click here.
Terry, for the benefit of the technically challenged, could you explain what we're looking at?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Apparently, a visual representation of the magnetic patterns on the metrocard. So it's serial, one bit wide.
In the "old days" of video tape recording (2" and 1" open-reel tapes) it was important to see when the heads were starting to wear down, and other irregularities in the info the heads were writing. So companies produced "tape developer" which was incredibly fine ferrous particles in a rapidly-evaporating solution. You'd brush it on or dunk the tape in it, wait for it to dry, and look at the results. It also works fine on mag-stripe cards like the Metrocard. You can see the thin stripe, which is written once when the card is coded - it contains the card lot number, serial number, and expiration date - the same info printed on the back of the card. Then there are two fatter tracks, each half as long. Those contain the transient information (card type, current value, etc.) and are written in an alternating manner (front/back/front/back/etc.).
Thanks. I'm less in the dark, at least!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Terry I beg to differ with you.
1. All the R/W Heads at the Turnstiles were changed a year or so ago. Meanwhile the TA/Cubic said the R/W Heads in the bus Fareboxes were just fine, so they are still the originals.
2. The R/W Heads in the buses do get dirty. There is a pad that you use to go "zoop-zoop-zoop". We can also shove a wand down there with some alcohol on it or even try a little paint thinner (the latter we use for gum, etc.).
The heads cost over $200, so we do a lot of zoop zoop zooping at this depot.
Final point, do the fareboxes eat cards, they sure do. It's usally a 80 cent O-ring. Again at this depot we try to change them BEFORE they snap.
Mr rt__:^)
Ok, but I still don't see how the bus farebox is doing something which makes the card unreadable by buses but still working in the subway, even after both volatile data tracks are re-written by the subway turnstiles (by using the card twice). At that point, there shouldn't be anything left on the card that was written by the bus.
There is no physical damage to the card and the encoding is still OK - if I used the card on the first bus which trashed it, and the second bus gave "READ ERR", then when I go to the subway I get "XFER OK" and use the card for a couple days on the subway, then I go back to a bus and get "READ ERR" again.
>>> I still don't see how the bus farebox is doing something which makes the card unreadable by buses but still working in the subway, even after both volatile data tracks are re-written by the subway turnstiles <<<
This is only a guess since I have no first hand knowledge of the system, but it is possible that the bus read heads are reading left or right of the subway read head by a small amount, and the part of the card being damaged is just the part read by bus read heads. In the early days of computing when floppy disks were really floppy, it was not unusual to find a diskette written on one drive that could be read by another drive, but the same diskette written by the second drive could not be read by the first one.
Tom
Could be, but I don't think it is likely - the volatile data is a pretty wide swath (because customers might lift the card up while swiping in the subway) and it shouldn't be writing on the read-only control track. But I'll have to develop one of these bad cards and see what is going on.
>>> the volatile data is a pretty wide swath <<<
That supports my theory. Although the write heads write a wide swath, the read heads probably are much narrower to take into account the possible side to side movement of the card. If the first bus read head damaged the medium, i.e. left a path the width of the read head which would no longer accept data, the write head would still write the data on both sides of the "furrow" of damaged medium. If the turnstile reader reads parallel to the furrow, it will read ok, but subsequent bus readers with the heads directly over the furrow will have read errors. BTW, do you swipe the card on the bus, or insert it into a fare box reader? As you pointed out, swiping requires some tolerance since slightly different ways of holding the card could cause the read heads to read a different area of the medium. If it is inserted, the read head will be much more likely to go over the exact same area.
Tom
BTW, do you swipe the card on the bus, or insert it into a fare box reader?
You insert. Box swallows card, thinks about it, regurgitates it, and in due course shows you how much is left on the card. Noticeable delay (1-2 seconds?) before this last step, however, which has always baffled me.
>>> Noticeable delay (1-2 seconds?) before this last step, however, which has always baffled me. <<<
Assuming there is no wireless network to a central computer, the fare box must have an extensive local memory to check to validate the card, possibly arranged serially, then it must record the card number into its memory and do the arithmetic to charge the fare and update the card. It is doubtful that it operates at the speed of the latest computers, and that is probably the reason for the delay.
Tom
The read/write process is a two step one. So if head or card has any probelem of R/W process doesn't go well you get an error.
Two critical items inside are the O-rings (if one snaps the machine stops taking cards) and a pressure roller (a little ware or a nick & the machine goes crazy). This on top of the cleaning of the head means that you have to service the box frequently. The route/depots where customers are haveing more errors may be where service isn't what it should be.
P.S. Some times the customer complains about an error on his/her card that he/she brought with them .... yuck.
Mr rt__:^)
This happened to me once, a few years ago, with a Fun Pass. I had been using the card all day, most recently on the B42. When I tried to use it on an M2, I got that error message. The driver ran some sort of test and confirmed that the farebox was working properly, but it simply would not accept the card. I had no way of proving it was a Fun Pass, but seeing as by that point we were approaching the last stop (I had boarded southbound at 14th Street), he let me stay on.
If a customer has trouble entering the subway they should ask the S/A to check the card. If the S/A does their job and checks the card we can see if it is an unlimited card. If it is we are instructed to allow free entry. If we cant read the card in our in booth terminal then we must give the customer an envelope and instruct them to send the card to 370 Jay Street and request payment of fare, Uf they dont pay then they are a fare beater subject to a summons, arrest, ejection by NYPD.
The problem comes when the S/A refuses to check a card. Any S/A not checking card should be reported (Assuming the computer is working.)
Perhaps I wasn't clear. These damaged-by-bus cards work fine in the subway, both in the turnstiles and in the "check your balance" readers. That's why the agent usually looks at me funny when I say "it doesn't work on buses" - when they read it, it looks like a perfectly good card, despite it saying "READ ERR" on every bus it is tried on. Sometimes they'll exchange it right away, sometimes they need a bit more convincing.
I'm wondering a) what is actually wrong with the card (which I'll see when I develop the next one trashed by a bus) and b) if there is any procedure for sending these oddball cards back for analysis (or do they all go in some sort of recycling/garbage bin once the value is transfered to the replacement card)?
The bus's card reader is dirty. try the next bus.
Is this such an unusual problem that nobody else has run into it? To answer your specific comment, no bus will read the card once it has been damaged in this way, until it has been replaced. The first time this happened, that is what I assumed, particularly since it continued to work on the subway with no problems. I would have kept going with the card, except that the 5th bus driver wouldn't let me on with a "READ ERR" card, so I traded it in the next time I was in the subway. People before and after me were having their cards read by the bus just fine - the only exceptions were people who made the same transfer as I did (first bus to second bus) - all of their cards were unreadable by the bus farebox.
Alot of times at work when I have a customer with a bad card, (or they swiped their card into saying "Just Used") I tell them to swipe it as the turnstile at the left or the right. Whichever is agent operated. As they swipe their card (the one that shouldn't work) I hit the yellow button and they get in. I'm not going to get into an arguement with a customer about their card.
Good idea! It's just not worth the aggravation.
-Stef
Same routine on a bus where the customer is more in your face.
Mr rt__:^)
I know. They get pissed off and they might just have a few choice words for the driver.
Let me tell you. I had an irate customer at the booth about 3 days ago who said her fun pass wasn't working. I checked it on the computer, and found nothing wrong with it, except that it had expired. She was pissed. The customer thought I could give her a new pass, I said no. We don't have that capability. What's so hard in believing that a card was expired?
-Stef
WORDS are not what the bus drivers are concerned about.
Mr rt__:^)
I don't drive a bus. But the only words that would affect me are:
BAMN!
POW!
OOOOF!
All said in body english!
I think she was trying to bluster her way past you. Say a few choice words with a high volume voice with the hope that you'll cower and give in. Usually when someone trys that to me I yawn before continuing to talk.
The policy is to let them in! I do the same.
But first I ask to look at the card. I'm not going to allow someone to go in saying they have a card that they just used at the HEET if the card hasn't been good in the first place.
Right! I ask them "May I see your card" and then I check their card. If I get the verification that is has been just used then I let them in.
well if they think an expired car will work they need to be carted off to the crazy house (creedmor)
For the sake of not paying $1.50 they might risk it.
They are called MetroCard Express Machines - MEMs-
Since 9/11/01 they credit/debit card feature has been very cranky and at soem stations is still completely out.
About the R143, I know it was debuted on the "L" line, but will it be available to anyother line other than the "L"?
The spare cars 40-50 of them are supposed to see (M) service becuase the (L) line only needs 160 cars (16 Trains Sets) To Operate full service.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I thought that spare cars are to be used by the same line in case several of them break down.
Notice I only said 40-50, after the needed 160 cars on the (L) line, there will be a exact 58 car surplus.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
for the past week, i have been hearing about some bombardier R-142 cars have been held over for usable parts. is that true? can somebody that knows about it clear it up?
Does anyone here know what happen to those R40S and R42 with L signs. Are they still sitting in canarsie yard. Are they all went to the JMZ lines? Are they still operating along with the R-143?
Not a thing! There is only 1 R413 consist. Cars will not be shifted around because of 1 extra train!
There is only 1 R413 consist.
R413.....
Psychic Bill from Maspeth, Reporting
:)
I mean they R ugly to the bone ...........damn .....even brand new ...!!!
nice pictures of that new OPTO junker clunkers !!! .....lol !!!
OK wait, lemme guess, all because of their lack of a railfan window. You're so predictiable :-)
aw man !! i can see ( it seems that ) U dont lik to have any fun !!....like riding on the first car on a roller coaster
for example .....lol!!!
aw man !! i can see ( it seems that ) U dont like to have any fun !!....like riding on the first car on a roller coaster
for example .....lol!!!
Roller coasters don't have any railfan windows either, and yet you seem to like them. What gives?
Dan
correction ....used to like em when i was younger & could take it a bit more .....( the pike in L.B. & pop )
Like a fool i let my son TRICK me into riding this KILLER COASTER at 6 flags magic mountain !!!
been sore ever since ......lol!!! i was told waht a KILLER coney island is whoa nelly !!!
Now now ... EVERY train has a railfan window in the cab. It just means ya gotta take a civil service test to get your cookies. :)
I'm sure that if you're lucky you can see out the front of the R-143s from the "railfan" window. The view though might not be so good because of the type of glass that they use. If anything I would expect the "railfan" windows to be the same as the ones in the R-142s.
#3 West End Jeff
Give a R-143 a break...they are new to TA family, They don't look as ugly as the slants were. But I gotta admit that R-143 are somehow little ugly. Butm, for those slants....OH MY GOD they far more hidiously ugly on the book. Imagining see them cruising out the tunnel with their little R-40M, 42 looks that are half busted ...They do need serios makeovers. I rather see them retire first be4 R40M, R42 does!
Peace
I liked the look of the slant 40s (w/o the extra hardware grafted on front).
if you don't respond he will stop.
come on man !! ....this is subtalk .... I agree that the slant R 40s could have been drawn a bit more beautiful ....
like the R38s -R32s -& older traditional rolling stock looks !!! ....
i don't have anything agaoinst the R-40's. to be honest i like them more than R-143's design. what i was saying is that if everyone is finding salaami annoying, just don't waste their precious fingers to responed to him. thats what i have been doing and my fingers have seen less blisters
damn!!! that e key needs to b replaced got a new mac ally keyborad on order ...ups ...
In my opinion, i think they look better then the R142's.
3 days without mishap.
so UNLIKE their 'Rmadillo cousins.
SOUTH FERRY !! ( my soul brother )......man !! they R so hurt ....& sooooo "f" dammed ugly ...........UGH !!
oops!
CPR rolled in a few minutes ago with a rather strange consist. There were four or five CPR box cars. Three or four other freight cars. What appeared to be one of those office trailers on the back of a flatcar sporting the NY&A logo. And strangest of all. It had an what appeared to be a passenger car on the end which was illumiated.
This is very strange :)
Shawn.
And not their usual power either. It was one SD-40-2 and I think a B23-7. I can't get my GE power straight for some reason.
Shawn.
No, it looked more like a C44-9W. Sorry about that.
Shawn.
What?!?
Widecabs are hard to find in this neck of the woods............
-Stef
That's the CPR holiday train.
For more info see:
http://www.railpace.com/hotnews
search for "holiday train".
Thanks for the info - I saw this train heading north through Yonkers last night (just after 9PM? - I was too stunned to look at my watch.) It was a beautiful train - it looked like every car was illuminated with strings of lights. I never saw anything on the rails like it before.
Last week, during the thread "Ferry Questions" someone asked for the names of several classes of boats. When I replied to that message, I provided information that was in error.
The KNICKERBOCKER, TOMPKINSVILLE, and DONGAN HILLS were the three sisters built in 1926. I had identified the AMERICAN LEGION (I) as the third sister. She was actually built earlier and was used as a "tester" to built the other three, but, as there were many mechanical differences, she is not a sister.
Sorry about that.
The KNICKERBOCKER, TOMPKINSVILLE, and DONGAN HILLS were the three sisters built in 1926. I had identified the AMERICAN LEGION (I) as the third sister. She was actually built earlier and was used as a "tester" to built the other three, but, as there were many mechanical differences, she is not a sister.
Chris: It the other way around. The "AMERICAN LEGION" was built as a single unit in 1926. The three vessels of the "DONGAN HILLS" class were built as follows; "DONGAN HILLS" (1929), "TOMPKINSVILLE" (1930), and "KNICKERBOCKER" (1931).
Larry,RedbirdR33
In connection with the recent posts on the proposals to run Metro North trains to Penn Station, and the plan to run Long Island trains to Grand Central, there has been some discussion of the capacity of these facilities.
At present, Penn Station is operating at capacity. As far as the tunnel connections are concerned, there may be some extra room -- just nowhere to put the trains.
Grand Central is not at capacity. The problem there is that the tracks in and out are effectively at capacity. So, once the trains that were in GCT at the start of the evening rush have left, the limitation is getting them back for a second run on the one inbound track.
When the LIRR goes to GCT, it will get new tracks to GCT and new platforms. (I am told that the lower level may lose two tracks to pedestrian access.) So, that will not affect Metro North service directly.
However, by opening up capacity at Penn, Metro North trains could run there. As others have pointed out, there are power issues (over-running shoes on the LIRR, under running shoes or catanary power on Metro North and, I believe, a different voltage on the catanary for Amtrak). But, this would be a good opportunity to finally overcome the legacy of the separate, competing, rail lines and come up with a single system.
Nice roundup, thanks. So Penn needs more platforms/layover tracks, and GCT needs more tracks in/out (which it'll get with LIRR connection).
this would be a good opportunity to finally overcome the legacy of the separate, competing, rail lines and come up with a single system.
That would be great, though I should think you need to include NJT lines too. And remember Metro North has two systems: Third-rail and ConnDOT catenary.
Are you proposing we should even THINK about a single power system for all regional electric trains?
OmiGAWD ... what could that possibly cost? [ulp]
If the capacity of Penn Sta were increased, then would routing part of the LIRR to Grand Central be necessary?
Not so much necessary, but desirable. The project is called "East Side Access". To allow comuters from LI to arrive on the East Side, now, those going to the East Side pull into Penn and must take the E (and maybe the Lex) to get to their destination.
What's so special about the East Side that it needs its own access? Most commuters end up taking the subway anyway and people need more exercise anyway.
I'm not for or against the East Side access plan. I more or less agree with you; it seems like A LOT of money for a modest benefit. But our politians looking for suburban LI votes think it is needed.
The east side access plan was a Senator D'Amato project. 'Nuf said.
What's so special about the East Side that it needs its own access? Most commuters end up taking the subway anyway and people need more exercise anyway.
Apparently they've studied it and a significant proportion of LIRR riders work in/near the GCT area. Reduces their total travel time AND frees up slots at Penn for possible MN service ... net benefit overall ... not to mention possibly attracting more riders.
Adding flexibility, basically.
Plus Amtrak owns Penn Station and the MTA Owns Grand Central, and at times they don t get along
You're such a flame baiter, Meriden Mike. Considering that
you've actually taken the NYC subway what, 5 times in your life,
what do you know about commuter patterns down here?
Fine, it's a 12 NYC block walk. People need more exercise. I see billions being spent to violate the sacred seperation of NYC and PRR just so that people can be lazy.
I see a lot of your parents' hard-earned money being wasted sending you to college, since you're obviously not doing anything productive with your education.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
So you think it is ok so to spend billions in public funds to save people a 12 block walk (or subway ride).
So you think it is ok so to spend billions in public funds to save people a 12 block walk (or subway ride).
You betcha.
So you think it is ok so to spend billions in public funds to save people a 12 block walk (or subway ride).
Not necessarily, but there is the issue of capacity on both the existing subway lines and the sidewalks (ever tried walking from Penn to GCT at rush hour?). Your comment about the "sacred separation" of the PRR and NYC is also totally inappropriate in the context of current times. I'm as big a Pennsy fan as you are (and was, long before you were born) but the needs of today's society must take precedence over a rivalry that few remember and even fewer care about.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Not necessarily, but there is the issue of capacity on both the existing subway lines and the sidewalks (ever tried walking from Penn to GCT at rush hour?).
GCT has even worse subway service than Penn, how would this make things better as many GCT terminal riders would still have final destinations downtown and the Lex is a horror show. Penn needs 2 new tunnels under the Hudson and 2 new East River tubes under 32nd St. for expanded NJT service and for the Albany Hi-speed rail project. Two new ER tunnels would not have to curve uner occupied city blocks and could probably be built close to the same cost as East Side access. It would also be a much easier connection at F interlocking. Before you start trying to be fancy, try going with what fits in with the current layout.
I'm as big a Pennsy fan as you are (and was, long before you were born) but the needs of today's society must take precedence over a rivalry that few remember and even fewer care about.
You should have to turn in your membership card for a statement like that. I guess you're also against taring down GCT and building Madison Square Garden V in its place.
Remember was in 66-67 PRR + NYC=PENN CENTRAL+197? BANKRUPCITY
HA, in the 1998 Conrail slpit up the CSX parts are held by the NYC LLC and the NS parts are held by the PRR LLC. Some NS locomotives even have PRR reporting marks. Things die only if we let them.
okay, the PC was a mistake, and the Can't Ship eXpeditiously and Naturally Sullen at least pulled it apart. That's FREIGHT. We are talking warm bodies here. In my view, the electrical standards of the third rail and catenary operations around NY should be coordinated. The NYC underrunnig third rail may be a wonderful design(can you say BetaMax?) but in this case the VHS rules. In turn the voltages should be coordinated, and LIRR should be taken over by the MN management--they couldn't do worse and apparently their MDBF are better on essentially identical hardware.
Ultimately, many NJT trains should run out to perhaps Jamaica. CDOT should also come there. Suburb to suburb commuting is growing--think of the ex downtowners now going to New Brunswick. This is not likely to fade anytime soon. Think about the ATK specials from the Empire Corridor to Shea Stadium, or for Tennis matches. The point is maximizing passenger convenience. The history is fascinating (And I admire PRR's massive and elegant engineering of what we call the NEC today) but I want to see more and better, and just as 'unification has mean throughrouting and more transfers, so should common ownership or at least 'allied' ownership of the FRA segment of rail transit in the metropolitan area. BTW when I was living there in the sixties the PRR and LIRR had "joint-tariffs" for vaious monthly commuter tickets from/to destinations on each others lines. (you could buy a monthly from Trenton to Jamaica for example) So think tradition when it serves well think innovation when tradition is insufficient to the needs.
The trouble with suburb-to-suburb (or city out to suburb) train trips is that the density out there is less and you have to be really lucky in your job location for it to work. I've worked in White Plains, but the walk + bus + walk from Metro North was 40 minutes. I've worked in Red Bank, but the walk from the train (no bus available) was 40 minutes. I've worked in Freehold, NJ (no train, 15 min walk from the NYC bus). So I ended up driving much of the time.
I realize there are people who work really near a good suburban transportation hub, but it's a relatively small percentage of all suburban work locations.
I've worked in Red Bank, but the walk from the train (no bus available) was 40 minutes.
Where in Red Bank did you work? Even Riverview Hospital's only a 25 minute walk from the station for me - and I have difficulty walking a great distance due to arthritis.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The complex on the corner of Newman Springs Rd and the Garden State Parkway. Officially actually in Middletown. Maybe only 30 minutes walking.
Yes, that's definitely Middletown. Although North Carolina is where I call home (and where I still maintain a residence), I've worked in Middletown for the past six years and owned a house in Eatontown for the past four. So I know the location well.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The last time I went to Red Bank, to anwser a ridiculas summons by the nazi like police in that town, I made sure to take the train. I didn't care how far the walk was. The cop who arrested me for sitting in a parked car (on suspicion, of what he never told me, but did charge me with felon weapons possesion for having a baseball bat and other baseball equipment in my trunk) told me that if I ever came to Red Bank again, he would find some reason to arrest me.
I do my best to stay out of New Jersey in general and Red Bank in particular.
Speaking of trains running right through Pennstation to Long Island, did't Amtrak have a proposal of running a train to Port Jefferson a few years back. Although I think that may have been over Hell Gate. I don't know what ever happened to that idea. I don't think it was really a necessary service however. Why Port Jeff and not Montauk Line? (Hamptons etc.)
You should have to turn in your membership card for a statement like that. I guess you're also against taring down GCT and building Madison Square Garden V in its place.
How many years have you been a member of the Pennsylvania Railroad Technical and Historical Society? I couldn't afford to join for many years (raising four children isn't cheap) but have now been a member for close to twenty years. And, like any rational person, I am opposed to the senseless destruction of any architectural masterpiece, regardless of its association - just as I was opposed to the destruction of Penn Station in 1964. (The current Madison Square Garden is an abomination, doubly so because of what it replaced; I would be delighted to see it torn down and replaced with something useful and, hopefully, more attractive.) The loss of Penn Station was the catalyst which sparked the modern historic preservation movement. People were moved to action, and as a result a lot of significant old buildings have been saved that might otherwise have been lost.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Not that there could be any excuse for the destruction of the old Penn Station, but it's like a double blow when it's replaced by a totally unaesthetic building like Madison Square Garden and that ugly office tower. MSG would be an abomination of a building even if it replaced non-descript tenement buildings. But for NY to have lost Penn Station for that piece of garbage is unimaginable.
The Hudson Terminal from the photos looks like it used to be a fine piece of architecture too.
The Hudson Terminal from the photos looks like it used to be a fine piece of architecture too.
It was nice, but not absolutely spectacular, as I recall. I was only there a couple of times though.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Yeh, well I'm both too young and the wrong side of the Atlantic to have ever seen it!
Wrong side of the Atlantic I figured (although we do have a couple of regular British posters - Simon Billis for one - who seem to manage to make it to the City on an annual basis) but age I didn't know, of course. I'm not the oldest rat out here, but I've been around long enough to be the father of four and grandfather of two, so I'm not the youngest either by a long shot :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Yeh, well, there's much that I find admirable and infuriating about NYC's subway, although I try never to be too critical as I am merely a fan, not an user.
In terms of age I'm 18 and have just got back from interview at Oxford University and, to the best of my knowledge, I have no children.
Good luck getting into Oxford... I understand that's a tremendous school. I went to small schools, both for undergraduate (Marist College) and graduate (College of William and Mary and the University of Richmond), and have done virtually nothing with my degrees - not that I didn't want to teach history, but I found a much better paying job in the computer industry and ended up following that path (I'm now a project manager for a major telecommunications firm). And while I have no real complaints about it either - it's been an interesting career, one that for the most part I have enjoyed - it wasn't my original goal, and I regret not having been able to follow through with that. Along the way I've also been involved in the retail hobby business and dabbled in a few other areas as well.
Now, if you'll pardon me, I'll get up on my soapbox for a minute (remember, I have four children, and they've all had to listen to this speech, or at least some variation on it), and while I'm directing these comments specifically to you, they're really applicable to everyone everywhere.
Whatever you do in life, do it well. Do not be afraid to follow an unpopular path, if you know in your heart that the path you have chosen is the right one. Believe in yourself. Do not be afraid to make a mistake - once. Learn from your mistakes, though, so that you do not repeat them. Live each day as though your entire life depended on it - because it does. Be honest in all your dealings. Guard your reputation carefully, for once it is besmirched it is nearly impossible to restore its lustre. Remember that you are not alone in this universe, that others depend on you; remember also that you depend on others and on G-d. Learn from the wisdom and the mistakes of others, but think for yourself, remembering that whatever decision you make is better than not making a decision at all. Know when to follow, but always be prepared to lead.
Soapbox mode off.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Thanks!
(applauds soapbox mode speech)
You're welcome! After all, it has often been said that we are like one big family here on SubTalk, and my children (and grandchildren) have had to put up with me getting on my soapbox from time to time, so everyone else here should have to too :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I see billions being spent to violate the sacred seperation of NYC and PRR just so that people can be lazy.
Are we in the 2000's here of the 1950's? Violate sacred seperations ---- Come on.
Are we in the 2000's here of the 1950's?
Obviously 2000 as rail travel was a lot better back then and it is a goal we should re-apspire towards.
Or for a more obtuse arguement, if we don't honour our traditions then how can we honour anything.
BTW Did you even take the railfan examination?
Back in the days before Amtrak, the New Haven line ran a good number of trains (as joint service with the Penn RR) to Penn Station. So, there never was a firm "separation" between these two.
NY Central . . . a different story.
The Trains that the New Haven ran to Penn Station did not terminate there, they were thru trains joint operation with the Pennsy to DC. The trains that terminated in NYC went to GCT
The New Haven is a non-bias third party that can freely associate between the rival camps and mediate any disputes.
Oh shit, thanks for reminding me! The sacred seperation {sic}
between two railroads that no longer exist but which merged
prior to their demise. How could I have overlooked that?
I'm going to write a letter to the MTA right now demanding that
they un-violate the sanctity of the subway trinity, the IRT, the BMT
and the IND. All those inter-divisional free transfers must stop!
This issue of LIRR East Side Access is far beyond any issue of simply transferring between commuter rail and subway. It is an important, significant benefit to the entire NY region that is long overdue. LIRR service into Penn is maxed out and there is no capacity to absorb new riders. East Side Access gives LIRR 50% more capacity into Manhattan so that additional riders can be accommodated. Even at present, half of the LIRR customers have East Side destinations, so these folks will be delivered to exactly where they want go anyway.
The issue is beyond increasing LIRR capacity. The rush hour jams on the #7 at Hunters Point and the E uptown at 34th St. will be history because LIRR patrons will have direct access to the GCT area. NYC Transit customers from Eastern Queens who now take buses to Flushing or Jamaica and then overcrowded subways to the East Side will have the choice of a much faster trip to Manhattan by taking LIRR to GCT. So NYC subway riders will benefit from less crowding as well. NJ Transit is going to expand its Penn Station services when the Secaucus Transfer opens - and will that ability because LIRR can divert some trains to GCT. Remember that NJ Transit equipment must also move through the East River tunnels to access Sunnyside for servicing and inspection.
Metro North at present has the physical ability to run trains to Penn from the New Haven line (via Hell Gate) and from the Hudson Line (via Empire). The issue is its equipment - it can't interfere with the LIRR overruning third rail. The solution is probably a dual mode loco that can use overruning third rail, with retractable shoes so it can operate on the Hudson Line.
And for the poster who said this is Senator D'Amato idea - it's true that he spearheaded this project, but LIRR East Side access has actually been on the drawing boards since 1968 when the MTA issues its first comprehensive action plan. You can't fault D'Amato for running with this - after all, Long Island was his prime constituency. And while I am a Nassau resident, I was never a fan of Senator D'Amato - so let's be fair and not bring politics into it.
East Side Access is probably the most significant rail project in the New York region in the last fifty years - and should not be criticized at a time when there is no longer any question about its need.
so let's be fair and not bring politics into it
Why not? The entire project is nothing more than sheer politics. (Don't read that as a judgement call, because it's not.)
Mark
I remember reading about running the LIRR into Grand Central back in the early 70s, with 2 track tube either alongside or under the 63rd St Tunnel, coming out just east of Sunnyside yards, that was supposed to go into the lower level of GCT
Anyone who dismisses LIRR East Side Access as "politics" has no sense of history. This project was first proposed in 1968. Many posters here were not even born then. I was a young adult then - and I have seen the results of lack of investment in our older rail systems. East Side access was needed then; it is needed now. The key link - the actual under-river tunnel, is already completed and sitting useless for years. I guess it makes more sense to let a key piece of transit infrastructure sit until it rots. The critics who dismiss this project as "politics" are content to let New York's transit infrastructure remain in a pre-World War II mode, unimproved. Go to Paris, London, and Chicago, for example, to see the positive impacts of sensisble rail transit expansion to older, early 20th century systems.
What about expansion of the subway system? Many expansions were first proposed long before 1968 (most notably the Second Avenue line, but there are numerous other examples -- look around this site).
What about expansion of the subway system?
Three words for ya: One-Seat Ride.
Please elaborate. (I don't see what your response has to do with my question.)
Sorry. Connecting LIRR to GCT will allow a substantial portion of LIRR riders (apparently) to have a one-seat ride to their destination or closer to it. Studies show that a substantial portion of LIRR riders now dropped at Penn Station actually work around GCT. Currently they have to walk, or take an inconvenient double-subway ride. Taking them to GCT makes transit a more attractive alternative.
Expanding subway capacity seems a less direct way to get suburban commuters closer to their ultimate destinations, unless you build a brand new Penn-GCT subway shuttle. And I have to think THAT would be as expensive as the LIRR's East Side Access project, without the added benefits of increased LIRR/MN flexibility, freeing up slots at Penn, etc.
Expanding subway capacity seems a less direct way to get suburban commuters closer to their ultimate destinations, unless
Maybe they should try moving to WestChester. Places to live should be marketed according to what area of the city the traisit takes you to. In Philly the rail transit dosen't usually take people where they want to go so people use the purpose built underground pedestrian tunnels. They're cheaper than new subways and they help us work off all those cheese steaks.
You're also forgetting the potential impact from the Segway :)
Maybe they should try moving to WestChester. Places to live should be marketed according to what area of the city the traisit takes you to.
That works better when your job lasts as long as you stay in your house or apartment. These days, everyone I know switches jobs FAR more often than they move.
I'm afraid I'm the one who wasn't clear. Recall that the commuter railroads receive much greater subsidies per mile than the subways. I'm suggesting that we reward the subway riders and encourange efficient travel by not pouring even more of their money into the suburban commute. The city has gotten the short end of the stick since the days of Moses (Robert, that is, not the earlier major figure of the same name). Perhaps some of the fantasy expansion schemes that posters here have developed -- or components of the IND Second System -- are worth implementing.
I agree that direct LIRR access to GCT would be nice. I don't think it should have priority over a subway expansion of similar cost. (And if it is built, it certainly shouldn't open before the 2nd Avenue subway. The 4/5/6 has finite capacity and we're pretty close to it.)
As both a rail and subway commuter, I fully agree. The subway should get priority.
However, it seems that suburban voters (especially on Long Island) were able to get their wishes granted first. The LIRR to GCT connection was Senator D'Amato's primary contribution to mass transit. Where all those people will go when they get to Grand Central is the issue.
However, assuming that the LIRR to GCT plan is a done deal, we then should see if we can reroute Metro North lines to Penn, to rebalance the situation. And, we ALL have to push for the Second Avenue Line.
NewHavenJohn already made the point I was going to about where the politicians come from. My bet is we won't have any New York senators from NYC any time soon; they have to be suburban to get the suburban voters and 'cause that's halfway between the city (which the rural Upstaters distrust) and the upstaters (who NYC Democrats never vote for).
I do agree that LIRR to GCT shouldn't open before the Second Avenue Subway. But even if planning for the whole line is done at once, you gotta believe that the Stubway section (125th to 63rd) will get done first, so that won't help with increased GCT ridership.
Do you think it's at all possible to design, FUND, and build the lower portion of the Second Avenue Subway by 2012 to 2016, when the LIRR East Side Access is supposed to open? Hard to imagine. Very hard.
Especially since they have been planning for the 2nd Ave subway for a good part of the 1900's
Frankly, I find it hard to imagine that any portion of the 2nd Avenue line will ever open.
But a new East Side subway line must be in operation past 42nd Street before more suburban traffic is pushed into GCT. The MTA simply cannot allow one of its facilities to flood another. If that means a completed LIRR line into GCT lies fallow for a few decades, so be it. (Alternatively, the line could be opened but there would be no subway entry at Grand Central in the morning rush hour, strongly encouraging all subway-bound LIRR passengers to use Penn Station. I don't like that because it penalizes preexisting Metro-North riders and area residents who currently enter the subway at Grand Central.)
There could be less drastic ways of keeping LIRR riders into GCT off the downtown 4 and 5. Maybe charge them $.50 more to GCT than to Penn Sta; that would keep all the stingy people going to Penn. In normal (pre-9/11) times there's perfectly good service from Penn to the financial district, after all.
Banning Metro North commuters from the downtown 4&5 at GCT would be a disastrous blow to the city's economy. You'd have Wall Street firms (what's left of them) moving to Stamford in 5 minutes flat.
I think the key benefits of the LIRR project (and these have been mentioned by various people already) are:
- Tens of thousands of people save 15 minutes twice a day (LI to east midtown and Westchester/CT to west midtown) if some LIRR trains can go to GCT and some Metro North trains can go to Penn.
- Reduce serious congestion on the 7 from Hunters Point to GCT and on the E from Penn Sta to E 53rd.
By the way, I'm sure I'm missing somthing but if there's $4 billion for a new LIRR connection why isn't there half a billion or so for the signaling and track work that really allows 40 tph on the 4 and 5? That project would massively benefit both suburbanites and city-dwellers.
but if there's $4 billion for a new LIRR connection why isn't there half a billion or so for the signaling and track work that really allows 40 tph on the 4 and 5?
Since the Second Avenue Subway is HIGHLY unlikely to be up and running when the LIRR GCT connection opens, this may be the interim solution.
How long would it take to design, spec, contract for, test and install that kind of equipment?
(And do the track work -- parts of it are teeth-jarring at the current reduced TPH rates ... )
"but if there's $4 billion for a new LIRR connection why isn't there half a billion or so for the signaling and track work that really allows 40 tph on the 4 and 5?"
I believe that the LIRR-GCT connection was a "special mass transportation demonstration project" (i.e. pork) that went through Congress and that conditioned the receipt of federal funds by MTA on their implementing the LIRR-GCT portion. LIRR-GCT funds are earmarked. There needs to be another source for any other improvements.
Practically, the LIRR-GCT connection and Metro North-Penn connections are going to happen. Reconstruction of the downtown lines is going to happen. The Second Avenue subway and/or improvements to the Lex are not likely to happen in the near future.
So, the best way to relieve Grand Central crowding is probably to reroute Metro North trains to Penn and use the WTC recovery fund (if we ever get them) to improve the west side and lower Manhattan lines.
I doubt Metro North will go to Penn, Amtrak owns the ROW down the West Side, and Penn Station, plus Penn Station is over capicity. Why if you were going to run LIRR to GCT which is MTA property, and relieve the burden at Penn, then use up the space to run some Metro North Trains, which would on;y come from Hudson Div. If people on the New Haven want to go to Penn Station, they could take Amrtak from Stanford and New Rocjelle and pay the extra.
I doubt Metro North will go to Penn, Amtrak owns the ROW down the West Side, and Penn Station, plus Penn Station is over capicity. Why if you were going to run LIRR to GCT which is MTA property, and relieve the burden at Penn, then use up the space to run some Metro North Trains, which would on;y come from Hudson Div. If people on the New Haven want to go to Penn Station, they could take Amrtak from Stanford and New Rocjelle and pay the extra.
Au contraire! The deal is that if LIRR goes to GCT, that frees up some slots at Penn. Those are LIRR slots, and presumably the MTA believes its deal with Amtrak includes any of its RRs that may want to use them.
If you look on the Metro North Penn Station Access section of the MTA Website, you'll find they're studying ways to get all three lines into Penn.
HUDSON: The easiest ... down the West Side Line and in from the west through the West Side Connector. Only issue is third rail.
NEW HAVEN: Also easy, follow the Amtrak routing over Hell Gate and in from the east through the East River tunnels. The overhead wiring is (said to be) the same as Amtrak's.
HARLEM: This is the hard one. They're looking at routing incoming Harlem Line trains from southbound tracks at Mott Haven onto northbound Hudson tracks to Spuyten Duyvil, then turning south across the Amtrak swing bridge and down the West Side Line. Circuitous, but the only way to get 'em in.
There is a freight connection from Mott Haven to Oak Point. They could use that line.
The freight connection (one track) has a very low speed limit (15 mph, I believe).
HARLEM: no one would take that circuitous route; it would take too long. It would also screw up service on the Hudson Line.
To make it work, they'd have to spend the big bucks and do something else. Upgrading the line under St. Mary's park the cheapest possibility, though without a couple of new flying junctions that would screw up service on the Harlem and New Haven lines.
Hey, Larry, haven't seen you post for a while ...
Upgrading the line under St. Mary's park the cheapest possibility, though without a couple of new flying junctions that would screw up service on the Harlem and New Haven lines.
Uhhh ... where are we? Where's St. Mary's Park? Within NYC or outside?
Upgrading the line under St. Mary's park the cheapest possibility, though without a couple of new flying junctions that would screw up service on the Harlem and New Haven lines.
Uhhh ... where are we? Where's St. Mary's Park? Within NYC or outside?
It's in the south Bronx.
I doubt Metro North will go to Penn, Amtrak owns the ROW down the West Side, and Penn Station, plus Penn Station is over capicity. Why if you were going to run LIRR to GCT which is MTA property, and relieve the burden at Penn, then use up the space to run some Metro North Trains, which would on;y come from Hudson Div. If people on the New Haven want to go to Penn Station, they could take Amrtak from Stanford and New Rocjelle and pay the extra.
Au contraire! The deal is that if LIRR goes to GCT, that frees up some slots at Penn. Those are LIRR slots, and presumably the MTA believes its deal with Amtrak includes any of its RRs that may want to use them.
If you look on the Metro North Penn Station Access section of the MTA Website, you'll find they're studying ways to get all three lines into Penn.
HUDSON: The easiest ... down the West Side Line and in from the west through the West Side Connector. Only issue is third rail.
NEW HAVEN: Also easy, follow the Amtrak routing over Hell Gate and in from the east through the East River tunnels. The overhead wiring is (said to be) the same as Amtrak's.
HARLEM: This is the hard one. They're looking at routing incoming Harlem Line trains from southbound tracks at Mott Haven onto northbound Hudson tracks to Spuyten Duyvil, then turning south across the Amtrak swing bridge and down the West Side Line. Circuitous, but the only way to get 'em in.
Amtrak doesn't allow you to buy a ticket from New Rochelle or Stamford to NYC. I suspect that's because they don't want to be in the commuter rail business, which is what they'd find themselves in if they sold those tickets.
Amtrak doesn't allow you to buy a ticket from New Rochelle or Stamford to NYC. I suspect that's because they don't want to be in the commuter rail business, which is what they'd find themselves in if they sold those tickets.
WRONG! I saw an enderly couple buy two one way tickets from RCH to NYP. The conductor looked at them funny and said they should just take Metro North as this ticket would cost them $50. They replied they preferred Amtrak.
Last time I looked at the fine print of an Amtrak schedule the note for Stamford, New Rochelle, New Haven, etc. said no tickets for points NYC-Penn and east, but that's probably been a few years and I guess they've changed their policy. $50 for 2 tickets is probably as good as banning them altogether. I wonder whether it's cheaper to buy a ticket from Stamford or New Rochelle to Newark than to NY-Penn?
I wonder whether it's cheaper to buy a ticket from Stamford or New Rochelle to Newark than to NY-Penn?
Very interesting question!
Like buying two cheapie round-trip airline tickets between the same cities in opposite directions, then using the first half of each -- which the airlines hate like hell, but can't do much about. Especially if you do it on different lines. Works out far cheaper than a non-weekend-stayover round trip, if you can plan ahead enough to get the three-week weekend-stayover fares. I know one guy who basically commuted coast-to-coast who kept a slew of advance purchase roundtrips in both directions, and tossed half of each of them.
Airlines have always known that folks are doing that, of course, but they do officially prohibit the practice and are not above banning flagrant violators. I too had an acquaintance whose wife was a cross-country commuter, from Raleigh to San Diego (she taught at San Diego State University) for a couple of years; she was eventually banned by at least one airline (and I think two) for violating the terms of the fare.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The right way to do it is to use 2 different airlines. Then you use all your ticket coupons and neither airline sees the trick.
Example:
Airline 1: Raleigh to SD Monday Dec 3, return Friday, Dec 14.
Airline 2: SD to Raleigh Fri Dec 7, return Monday Dec 10.
This gives you 2 cheap round trips Raleigh to SD even though you've never stayed actually over a weekend. It still works; it just needs careful planning.
Except that the airlines have been sharing this kind of data for quite a few years now. Also, a pattern of incompleted flights by one passenger raises a red flag.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
>>> a pattern of incompleted flights by one passenger raises a red flag. <<<
The example posted by AlM leaves no uncompleted flights, and would not violate any of the terms of the tariffs. There is no requirement that a passenger stay in a destination city between the first leg and return leg of a round trip ticket. What the airlines would object to is the sharing of one round trip ticket by two people (possibly from the same business firm). The close scrutiny of identity for security reasons has put a stop to that.
Tom
Like buying two cheapie round-trip airline tickets between the same cities in opposite directions, then using the first half of each -- which the airlines hate like hell, but can't do much about. Especially if you do it on different lines. Works out far cheaper than a non-weekend-stayover round trip, if you can plan ahead enough to get the three-week weekend-stayover fares. I know one guy who basically commuted coast-to-coast who kept a slew of advance purchase roundtrips in both directions, and tossed half of each of them.
Or you can just fly Southwest.
Or you can just fly Southwest.
But what if you're heading northeast?
and Penn Station, plus Penn Station is over capicity.
Yeah, but LIRR going to Grand Central will give some capacity to PENN.
$.50 won't stop too many people if it is more convenient
This is an example of the piecemeal "solutions" that cause so many problems.
To put thousands of more commuters into an already overcrowded subway system is simply insane.
Somehow, I feel that the current recession will kill the Second Avenue line (again) but not the LIRR connection.
How about Chuck Schulman, he is from Brooklyn
Go to Paris, London, and Chicago, for example, to see the positive impacts of sensisble rail transit expansion to older, early 20th century systems.
One problem is that the current "solutions" completely ignore the Paris experience. I would suggest that a RER model would be very beneficial for NYC.
The Penn Station and GCT access plans ignore this model. They fail to integrate the commuter rail system into the central city and its transportation infrastructure. This is hardly surprising because most existing rail stations never went into the central city. They stopped at the 1840-1860 borders, or in the case of Penn Sta the 1910 commercial border. They ignore the older city core - the Financial District.
The RER broke that mold. It has been enormously successful. It has also opened up vast suburban areas to commercial development - e.g. La Defense. NYC's forgotten secondary business hubs would benefit from stations in Downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City. The city could also open up new areas for office space within its boarders by by judiciously placing commuter rail stations integrated with the existing subway system.
The RER has been so successful that any planner who advocates a commuter rail expansion that ignores its architcture should have his credentials examined.
The RER has been so successful that any planner who advocates a commuter rail expansion that ignores its architcture should have his credentials examined.
Yeah, but remember the French government accepts the principle that national governments should fund basic infrastructure to, from and in their capitals. NYC is not the capital of the USA. I'd argue that the Washington Metro is our government doing what you've advocated. NYC, otoh, is widely disliked by much of our elected national government, recent events notwithstanding.
ALSO, I'm not sure about Paris, but one of the reasons that London has been able to pursue new subway lines and things like CrossRail is because it's built largely on clay. Much of NYC is built on granite, and that radically impacts the cost of construction. Boring your way through Manhattan schist is far pricier than pushing a tunnel through packed dirt. Cost of construction of any such kind of connection in NYC exceeds that for most other cities.
These two facts mean that NYC transit planners have to start with what's there and look at incremental improvements. That's why the Second Avenue Subway is such a radical and wonderful idea. First time since about 1940 that something of this scale is seriously being considered.
[Much of NYC is built on granite, and that radically impacts the cost of construction. Boring your way through Manhattan schist is far pricier than pushing a tunnel through packed dirt. ]
I wouldn't bet on that. Current TBM technology has come a long way, including cost.
Arti
I wouldn't bet on that. Current TBM technology has come a long way, including cost.
I certainly wouldn't know the relative differentials. But I've read that boring through granite, the cutting teeth have to be replaced OFTEN (every few feet).
I'd imagine that even if you could use identical machines, the main problem with boring through clay is hauling it out fast enough from the other end of the borer. And the speed of cutting through clay has got to lower overall costs substantially. Those are expensive machines to operate.
Any boring technology experts on SubTalk ???
Don't forget, that it costs much less to support the tunnel through granite than clay.
You might find something useful at www.tunnelbuilder.com
Arti
Also another thing to note, is that if you go to that site look at per km prices of European tunneling which is up to more than 10 times that of MTA projected cost.
Arti
Is not the blue clay of London self supporting? That's why subways got built there so early.
Is not the blue clay of London self supporting? That's why subways got built there so early.
Indeed, and worth keeping in mind in comparisons of NYC transit and new-line plans to London, Paris, etc. It's just EASIER to build new lines in London!
That's what happens when you have a planning system which is too open to litigation - nothing gets built and the lawyers get rich. London is bad enough for it, but at least a decision can be made by the local authority then enforced. The only appeals allowed are if a planning application is rejected. This speeds matters up no end. Perhaps there is some way of liberalising American planning law.
That's what happens when you have a planning system which is too open to litigation
Ummmmm, I'm sure you'll find plenty of support for this line of thinking, but my point had nothing to do with this. It was simply that deep tunneling through (London> clay is far easier and cheaper than deep tunneling through very hard Manhattan Schist, which is granite by another name.
Perhaps there is some way of liberalising American planning law.
Geez, first you want to rearrange the boundaries of the States, now you want to change our ability to sue at will? Sheeshh ....
(FYI, I was born and spent 5 of my first 10 years in London. Riding the Tube is what instilled a love of subways. I lived closest to the closed Brompton Road station. One day, it will be reopened!)
I'd imagine that even if you could use identical machines, the main problem with boring through clay is hauling it out fast enough from the other end of the borer. And the speed of cutting through clay has got to lower overall costs substantially. Those are expensive machines to operate.
I saw a PBS special on the Tunnel 3 aquaduct. The TBM moves about 3 feet per day and they have to change the cutting heads every 40-60 minutes. They should just go back to blasting.
The reason why NYC's transit and commuter rail system look the way they do is that private competing companies operated them. So your criticism is correct in one sense, but there is nothing to be done about it now; the sensible thing to do is, in general, what is being done.
A second tunnel under the Hudson (proposed and a bill introduced) will also help a great deal.
The reason why NYC's transit and commuter rail system look the way they do is that private competing companies operated them. So your criticism is correct in one sense, but there is nothing to be done about it now;
Paris faced the same situation in the early 1960's. They had about half a dozen major rail stations at their 1848 outskirts that were used by commuter trains. They merged two dissimilar services - subway and commuter rail - into a single integrated system. They did not expand one or more of the rail stations. They built a two track line with 5 stops from west to east and diverted commuter rails into this tunnel to provide through service. They decreased headways to approximate subway service. They also gutted the charming suburbs of Courbevoie and Puteaux and erected the archtectural monstrosity known as La Defense.
This was so successful that they then linked trains coming into the Gare du Nord and Gare de l'Est in the north to the Gare de Luxumbourg in the south.
The difference is that they planned for a total solution not a patchwork. They also had their share of municipal vandalism and did not like it. The Gare Montparnasse was replaced by a skyscraper before Penn Station.
A second tunnel under the Hudson (proposed and a bill introduced) will also help a great deal.
What is needed is a two track tunnel that connects to Metro North and the LIRR in midtown, goes to the Financial District and then out to Brooklyn and on to Jamaica via Atlantic Ave. Such a project would benefit far more people than the LIRR East Side Access.
If you think the LIRR is bad, try NJT! many times I have sat or stood on an NJT train waiting for entering or departing trains so we ould proceed. Sometimes the bridge is open and/or we have single tracking. That means an automatic delay.
Monday evening, I'm on the "F" train. We're at Union Turnpike, as we start to pull out towards Van Wyck, an "E" pulls in on the express track. It's madeup of R/32s and the lead pair 3444/3777 are in wedded bliss.
Is this creative match making or cognative coitus?
avid
I've seen that pair. Somebody somewhere has a sense of humor.
A creative one at that.
avid
Maybeit isn;t a sense of humor, but sheer necessity. perhaps the mates both had major defects, so instead of downing four cars total, they put the two good ones together and only lost two cars out of service.
It is NOT anything new; mis-pairing the cars has gone on for decades.
If that is so, how come they are still mated? I thought that once a car was repaired, it was re-united with its spouse. Is this not so? Are the original mates still in intensive care?
Has an R/40 slant ever been mated to an R/40M?
Are there any mateable singles (R/40-R/40M) wait for there spouses to finish repairs?
Are they more than visually incompatible? (Brakes,doors propulsion, anything) Things that would prevent smooth,seemless trnaparant operation?
I beleive there has been an instance when an R/32 and R/38 had been linked. I wish I knew the numbers involved.
I'd like to see a .../======||======||======|======\ 4-car set.
avid
avid
>>>>>>>It's madeup of R/32s and the lead pair 3444/3777 are in wedded bliss
Funny you should say "wedded bliss". I met my wife working those same cars as a C/R on the E.
>Funny you should say "wedded bliss". I met my wife working those same cars as a C/R on the E. <
You had better hope they never get broken up.
Someone had told me once that because of a delay in certain switch equipment that the switches to/from the 63rd St line can only be operated in a limited fashion. That may explain why the F had to go local along QB during the GOs in order to get over to the 63rd St line and why starting 12/16 the F will be express 24/7.
Can someone confirm this and provide additonal information.
The F will be express 24/7 because you do not need 3 locals on QB in th middle of the night, the E and G will be local, so they made the F express.
That is no longer the case. The 63rd Street connector is fully operational now.
Thanks.
So that is ONE benefit of the new service on Queens Boulevard - 24/7 express service.
For now, who knows what will happen down the line
Has anyone out there seen Amelie yet? In addition to being an overall delightful movie, it has lots of shots of elevated sections of the Paris Metro. One scene takes place in an underground Metro station, clearly marked "Abbessess." In addition, there are lots of shots of Paris commuter trains, one scene takes place on board one, and there are several scenes in various Paris train stations, with lots of shots of commuter trains and occasional shots of TGV locomotives parked nonchalantly beside.
Mark
Cars 6731-35 and 6781-85 are now running in simulation mode, observed moments ago leaving Jackson Av and heading southbnound.
This still leaves 6726-30, 6736-40, and 6786-90 to undergo simulation runs down 7th Av and to head into future passenger service.
-Stef
questions about those simulations:
I saw one and a bunch of guys were in the first car with a laptop plugged into the ceiling of the car somewhere. On the next R142 I got on and tried to find some sort of computer port but no luck. I'm guessing it connects to the computer in the car (which I'm guessing R142s have, at least for the displays and announcements)
1) what type of connection is there up there? (if this info is confidential, then ignore it)
2) what prevents normal people with laptops from coming along and plugging into them?
3) why wouldn't they put a connection to the computerized system somewhere more protected, like in the cabs?
4) what info are they monitoring when they do this?
I know, these questions are off topic but it's been bugging me for a while. I also realize that they sound like they could be used for evil, so use your best judgement in answering, since I don't want anyone to lose their jobs over my curiousity.
The port to which Bombarider Personnel connect may be concealed behind a ceiling panel. So folks aren't going to notice them. Besides, everyone is trying to get to work, who has time to think of that?
Not sure exactly what type of port is utilized.
But there are ports in the cabs, when the cars go into the shop, the CIs have to diagnose problems with the machines.
As to what's being monitored, the functions of the cars were being programmed by techs at Bombardier, whether it be strip maps, announcements, so on and so forth.
-Stef
Hmm, Maybe thats where they can upgrade the software problem R142 have been having.....R142 Second Edition (lol)
Nothings evil or secret that I know of so I can explain a little without going into detail about the names of the units. I call the R142s my 'pinball machines' as basically they are on a much larger scale.
1. Trainsets are connected with 'Lonworks' LAN and I guess the system comms with laptops via serial ports.
2. The connections use a Canon MS-type plug of their own wiring connection incompatible without an interface box.
3. The connections are all over the place for different systems. For example, theres one in the cab for system. Theres ones overhead for air conditioning. Theres two undercar (one in B car) for propulsion control systems and so on. We don't always have access to a laptop but we can key up the TOD for the 'maintainance screen.'
4. Pinball machines have three processors: system, sound and display. R142s are LOADED with stuff I haven't gotten into but: trainline system, propulsion and braking (regenerative,) air conditioning, door control, lighting, system comm are just a few I've touched upon. There is even a 'black box' to record all events for twelve hours past and is located in the head on ceiling of every A car (that is probably the connection you saw made.)
By the way, R142 is up to at least Revision Seven and TA is on the move to make Bombardier and its vendors to MAKE THEM GO. I look foward to this work. CI Peter
I had spotted it, coming home from a long boring day at Evander Childs......;^)....People were fooled when the doors opened on the other side at 180th street, hahahaha....
could someone who's seen the new map please explain to me what it looks like. any major changes or just minor retuning?
Which new map? The December 16?
Someone somewhere reported they saw one in a subway car but no details yet.
Yes, I'll give you the details, no more dotted line from 21st to 36st. N cut off from CI, G dotted along queens blvd, post-WTC changes, V train changes. Elimination of the double line on the Q and in brooklyn. That's all I can remember.
That's about right, though I thought I saw a double line on the Q. It also shows walking metrocard transfers which are shown by dashed lines. If I wasn't a subway rider, it would be a very confusing map to me.
The double line for the Q is still there (as are the double lines for the 6 and 7).
I think what's been confusing people is the map on the web (and on the 11x17 printouts). That map never had the double line for the Q at all. Instead, it had a double line for the 1/2/3. The full-size printed map has had the double line on the Q since 7/22 and has never had the double line on the 1/2/3.
Also, the knocked out lines in lower Manhattan are very light pastel shades rather than dotted lines.
1. Express stops are now correctly shown with white dots on the Broadway / Astoria Lines.
2. The J is no longer shown to run on 4th ave (it was on the 10/28 map).
3. The metrocard transfer, unusually large local dot symbols, and dotted green line are now in the key at the top (who here has ever checked that?).
4. The [W] is present at Pacific to indicate it turns there sometimes (wasn't there before).
5. The E to 179 is mentioned in the "Subway Service Guide".
6. The N/R and Q/W share a dot (again) at Canal Street.
As of 12/6 we probably haven't noticed the changes because the map isn't out yet. Maybe the maps are being posted in the subway cars. But I don't consider a map out until I get it at a booth.
It reflects the upcoming changes in Queens Boulevard service, the post-WTC changes, and the N's exile from Coney Island.
I recorded sound from my trip on the R143 cars. You've seen it, now hear it!
If you've already heard it, hear it again.
My pics will be on my Transit Pictures 31 page.
R143 Sounds
I guess I was on the 12:08 out of Canarsie because I got off at Bway Jct. at approx. 12:20.
You've seen it, now hear it!
Ahh yes, but you can't smell it.
There's nothing like "new train smell"!
AAAAHHHHHHHHHHH........that wonderful smell of polystyrene resin and urathane insulation with the windows closed must remind you of 'Bohpol' or Newark or a body shop. CI Peter
I do miss the smell of an old R-9 though.
Is that weird?
You must like gear oil mixed with castor oil, great for the hands and really flushes you out. CI Peter
to me, when i first saw it passing 6 ave. it smelled like candy but when i got on it, it smelled like rubber and hot break pads.
"Ahh yes, but you can't smell it.
There's nothing like "new train smell"!
With exception of a T/O after dining at White Castle letting them rip in the transverse cab...........oh that's why that R-142 laid down between stations !!
Bill "Newkirk"
uh huh !! no wonder most of U love transverse cabs ............!!!
With exception of a T/O after dining at White Castle letting them rip in the transverse cab...........oh that's why that R-142 laid down between stations !!
I really needed that picture in my head... thanks.
Great to see you're back in full force, Bill! :)
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! The sounds of high power inverters cranking up those BRUSHLESS motors. Can't wait for the sounds of the first graffiti artist being fried. CI Peter
Fried?
What else would you do to the first R143 grafitti artist but hook em up to the inverters and lean on the throttle? FRIED! CI Peter
Ohhh, ok, I thought that there was a anti-grafitti mechanism that would magically fry the grafitti artist lol
Very annoying, sounds like my old car with the automatic tranmision changing gears and RPM speeds changing. Also I noticed there is a lack of the BSCO (red), SCO (yellow) box, and to change ends the train must shut it's doors and that annoying and I don't think pasengers will like that them running up to there train thinking it is going to leave and then seeing the doors reopen.
Haven't worked a Kaw yet. Boms have bent metal levers with red and yellow handles linked upstairs like motorcycle brake cables. The levers are pinned to the valve body shaft and are starting to loosen up...the handles stick out too far. Haven't done the end change process as stated...we fight over which end gets charged up during inspection over the intercom till someone dumps. CI Peter
The box that I'am refering to is on the floor near one of the end doors.
'B' car interface for laptop...ur mainline connection for THAT car. What you didn't see was the lever engaged inside the wall: if someone opened the door the cable and maybe the RCIs hand gets chopped. CI Peter
Nice sounds. I happend to notice that if you use a quicktime player and hold the fast foward button to listen to the sound. It sounds like a haywire R143 announcement system. Try it for yourself.
Today's DAILY NEWS, Brooklyn/Staten Island section has Jerrold Nadler's (D-Manhattan) article on approval in the House for $5M for a study on the construction and enviromental impact of a Cross-Harbor Tunnel from Howland's Hook, Staten Island or New Jersey to the Bay Ridge Piers at the old LIRR ROW and Float Bridge.
Pick up Today's DAILY NEWS Brooklyn/Staten Island edition for the full story, as the Daily News web site doesn't not list articles from local editions.
...the Daily News web site doesn't not list articles from local editions.
It's in the City Beat section.
This brings up an interesting thought, what mode of engine(s) will be used to pull freight through the tunnel.....diesel or electric ?
Bill "Newkirk"
Are you choking-on-SO2/MO2/CO2 crazy Why would diesal be used under a 2 mile tunnel?
"Are you choking-on-SO2/MO2/CO2 crazy Why would diesal be used under a 2 mile tunnel?"
I wasn't advocating using diesel power through the freight tunnel. BTW, NY & Atlantic uses diesels throught that long East New York tunnel. I don't know how long it is, maybe Bob Andersen knows.
Bill "Newkirk"
hey stupidity is ubiqitous--The Moffat Tunnel is diesel approx six miles IIRC--really fun if your Amtrak coach attendant is a slacker and forgets to shut the "fresh air intake" on the car.
The Moffat Tunnel is diesel approx six miles IIRC
And the Moffat Tunnel is where?
D&RGW now Union Pacific tunnel in the Rockies west of Denver. It is the crossing under the 'continental divide'.
The tunnel is about 1/2 mile long. Believe me -- I've ridden on a diesel through there last year @ 10 miles an hour and it seemed like it took forever to see the light of day again!
BMTman
Why not? Cars and diesel trucks and buses go through long tunnels all the time. Besides I'm sure there are some very long rail tunnels around the world that doesn't have electric trains.
that's good, cuz according to talk over at the NY state railroad.net forum, Cross Harbor RR is being kicked out of 1st. av yard on the brooklyn side. they might get to work with NY&A at 65th street though... ...if that yard is ever actually opened.
The article doesn't say when the tunnel would be built, how much it would cost and any projected ultimate completion date.
While its a good idea in theory that it would take a million trucks annually off the roads, I have to wonder what the Teamsters would say to the loss of jobs.
If the tunnel would be built would that really take one millon trucks off the road or open up the capacity to move freight and not reduce traffic all that much. Look at what happens when a parkway is built. Intially traffic moves well and then when more houses are built and more people move into the area served the road gets as clogged as the route its supposed to relieve. It could turn out that more factories are built and the tunnel can't handle all the traffic so here come the truck again.
Also why can't the tunnel be a dual use tunnel and hook-up either the subway or the LIRR to SIRT?
Unless it's a dual-level tunnel (assuming they pick the SI-Brooklyn connection) that could hook one level into the subway, the FRA regs would get in the way of any passenger service on the single level line, unless it was a really roundabout route into Manhattan via NY&A all the way out to E. New York, and then back north through Ridgewood.
However, a single-level tunnel could be used as part of the Amtrak through passenger service between New York and Washington, with a few trains in both directions each day bypassing Penn Station and Newark and instead making stops in Queens or East New York, South Brooklyn and Staten Island so people there wouldn't have to travel all the way into Manhattan to make connections.
Arlingtoon via north shore to st. george, down south beach line to verrizzano area, then to brooklyn and assorted lines LIRR and subway lines, The Staten Island ferry will go the way of the Redbirds. Sorry to see another piece of New York vannish yet again.
[While its a good idea in theory that it would take a million trucks annually off the roads, I have to wonder what the Teamsters would say to the loss of jobs.]
Good point my friend. Also consider what has happened to the CP's interest (working with NY & Atl) in the float barge that already exists. They cleaned up the line & have been says how interested they are in bringing freight across the Hudson, but none has come.
Another point, the LIRR built a yard for off loading trailers on the Central Branch at Mitchel Field, but the business never came.
I still think it would greatly reduce traffic into/out of NYC, but something is preventing it happening. Is it the Teamsters, political will, ?????
Point last, this study seems to relate to the other end being SI vs. NJ ... bad idea, how do you get the freight off SI.
Mr rt__:^)
Point last, this study seems to relate to the other end being SI vs. NJ ... bad idea, how do you get the freight off SI.
But this is where the politics get interesting. Should it be an all-NY State project, or a bistate project (NY/NJ)? Port Authority might be more logical for the latter, since that's what the PA was originally formed to do in the 1920s -- though it never happened.
Probably advantageous to have two states involved in getting Federal funding for the project, though not clear how it's NJ actually benefits from this. Increased rail traffic and enabling a competitor to the Port of Newark (Brooklyn deepwater containerport) doesn't seem to be something that NJ would want to help with.
Other issue is that if it's all within NY State, then it may be easier for NYC to ship garbage. Right now garbage is barged to NJ, and I think Union City tried to stop it arriving to a transfer station sometime this year or last.
Any informed speculation?
Some thoughtful remarks JV. The Brooklyn/SI vs. Bklyn/NJ tunnel route may serve to make it more likely to happen, however once they start digging they'll have to deal with the NIMBYs on the north shore of SI (where the freight line would need to be re-activated). The additionl benifit could be passenger rail service on SI's north shore. Note I'm not even considering a subway under the Hudson.
Mr rt__:^)
Some thoughtful remarks JV.
Why thank you!
The Brooklyn/SI vs. Bklyn/NJ tunnel route may serve to make it more likely to happen, however once they start digging they'll have to deal with the NIMBYs on the north shore of SI (where the freight line would need to be re-activated). The additional benifit could be passenger rail service on SI's north shore.
NIMBYs: Yeah, I've heard before that they're NOT excited about RRs on a formerly dormant line. But I've also heard that there aren't nearly enough possible riders to make the North Shore RR a viable passenger transit line, under whatever kinds of metrics the analysts use. Anyone know?
Note I'm not even considering a subway under the Hudson.
Oh, but we should ... if it hasn't been built yet, it could be EITHER bored OR pre-fabricated and dropped onto the harbor floor (like BART's SF-Oakland tunnel and, I believe, the 63rd Street tunnel). If the latter, "we" should absolutely push for a second level for transit use T.B.D.
That transit use could be either subways or (probably more fundable) cross-harbor passenger rail to connect NJ/SI to Brooklyn/LI.
[... I've also heard that there aren't nearly enough possible riders to make the North Shore RR a viable passenger transit line ...]
But you just have to look at a bus map of SI to SEE all the folks that live there. The "volume" can easily be obtained by looking at the bus ridership data. It all in there, at least at this depot we look at it once in a while :-(
[Note I'm not even considering a subway under the Hudson.
Oh, but we should ...]
Didn't want the "plan" to sink to the bottom of the Hudson from the weight of it, but then maybe I should be optimistic that the City/State politatians would be willing to do it right the first time.
Mr rt__:^)
a lot of trash is also going out by rail from bushwick and the south bronx. i believe csx runs a dedicated, 3 time a week freight train just to haul out that trash. a cross harbor tunnel would eleminate the 300+ round trip to selkirk and NJ it takes (i think it goes to VA, if i recall right...). I wonder if some nimby's will emerge along the bay ridge branch should some of that trash be re-routed through any new tunnel? a train of 100 trash cars/containers can't smell plesant in the summer...
I wonder if some nimby's will emerge along the bay ridge branch
During the mayoral campaign, Bloomberg's opposition to the Cross-Harbor Tunnel was based on the idea that it would radically increase truck traffic around whatever freight yard was used in Brooklyn.
Where ARE those freight yards? Are they in Bay Ridge?
[I wonder if some nimby's will emerge along the bay ridge branch.]
[... Bloomberg is opposed because it would radically increase truck traffic around whatever freight yard was used in Brooklyn.]
[Where ARE those freight yards? Are they in Bay Ridge?]
FIRST: The Bay Ridge freight line runs thru Bay Ridge & terminates at 65th Street & 1st Ave. (the Hudson River). The Brooklyn Army Term. is right next door. The Belt Parkway is a buffer between it & residents. There is also a sewage treatment plant next door. So not too many NIMBYs there.
SECOND: The goal is to move freight onto Long Island while it stays in the freight cars. True there would have to be a freight yard somewhere to transfer freight to trucks for those customers that aren't getting a full box car, but that may very well be somewhere else. Also it very likely that the trucking companies will establish their own facilities where they receive full cars & transfer them to their own trucks or drive the trailer right off the flat.
Mr rt__:^)
FIRST: The Bay Ridge freight line runs thru Bay Ridge & terminates at 65th Street & 1st Ave. (the Hudson River).
Since when is the Hudson River located outside of Brooklyn Army Terminal. I think you mean Lower New York Harbor.
BMTman
It's a genuine bouquet. :)
It often sits outside of Selkirk in the town of New Scotland (where I live) ... waiting for a clear. It's a delight in August but fortunately, the "fresh country scent" of manure out here at about the same time trumps NYC's garbage. Heh.
Well as for the tunnel I think if NY State wants to bring freight from off the road and onto the rails, the tunnel would be a great idea. The St. Clair tunnel in Detroit (CP/CN/CSX....if my knowledge is correct) is quite busy and successful. They should use the success of that tunnel as a guide for a rail freight network here, where with all the ports and new companies shipping via rail here in NY, the tunnel would see more business than the cross harbor floats ever saw. As for the train CSX runs, that train (Y-101) is a 5 - 6 day a week operation. As for the trash issue, the tops of the refuse cars are tarped and covered over, so smells should be reduced.
As for NIMBY, lemme say this freight activity with NYAR is already humming, with the carloads on RS-301/302 (NYAR Bay Ridge Line freights) becoming more numerous. But whenever the tunnel becomes a reality, the locals will be pissed to say the least, but as in the Air Train in Queens, the business concerns of the city and the state will more than likely take preference over the local residents concerns, and the trains will roll.....more numerous than ever.
But one slowing factor before the trains would roll over the line, the Bay Ridge line will need extensive trackwork and upgrading, including a signal system to accomodate the new freight traffic, because the line is not, at this time, in any shape to have the anticipated freight traffic this new tunnel will bring roll over it, for much of it is in pretty poor shape from years of low use. And believe me, CSXT will be very pleased with a newer, much more convenient route for freight traffic from the south and the west to reach the Northeast, thereby eliminating a train going to NYC (east of the Hudson) to go 150 miles north to Albany Selkirk Yard just to go 150 miles back south on the Hudson Line on the east side of the Hudson...much more convenient (I wouldn't be surprised is CSX train K-650, bka The Tropicana Juice Train has a whole new route and market in the Northeast, bigger than the one it presently does in NJ, and is routed to the Northeast via the new Bay Ridge line and the tunnel if built). Business would boom for CSX as it presents opportunites for increased rail freight and reduction in truck freight, which will in turn make our governor and our city mayor happy to say the least. Whether or not this rail tunnel becomes reality we'll have to see how modern day politics plays out.....the idea is a great one, the politics behind it are the problem. Time will tell.
The freight would use the existing Arthur Kill crossing the B&O railroad built from New Jersey to Staten Island. The advantage of that is you knock a mile off the underground tunnel's route by having it go from SI to Bay Ridge, as opposed to a Bayonne route. Also the main NE corridor tracks are a much closer shot to SI at Elizabeth than they are to Bayonne because of the peninsula, which would require extending trackage south from the Jersey City area before it could turn east towards Brooklyn.
NIMBY objections are there to the route in SI -- I was asked to sign a petition against it when I was at Snug Harbor last year -- but the line could be dug out cut-and-cover under Richmond Terrace to eliminate their fears they would lose access to the Kill Van Kull waterfront (yeah, that desire kind of puzzled me too).
Politically, though, it's always better to have as many people possible in the mix down in Washington, so if a Bayonnne-Bay Ridge tunnel can get the support of both New York and New Jersey's senators and reps, it increases the liklihood of getting funding approved (and if New Jersey balks over fears Newark will lose port traffic, there's still the SI option to fall back on, and the city can try and get the support of pols from Connecticut, RI and Massachusetts, which would also benefit from a more direct freight route compaired to the Renssalaer crossing 150 miles to the north).
if a Bayonnne-Bay Ridge tunnel can get the support of both New York and New Jersey's senators and reps
But why WOULD the NJ pols support it? Could impact Port of Newark, and I bet the traffic impacts from taking trucks off the GWB are less in NJ than they are in NY. Might be wrong though.
It would eliminate a substantial amount of choking traffic congestion in Newark and the Hudson River crossings. The goods that would go through the tunnel will be going to New York anyway. This will improve the circulation of local New Jersey pick-ups and deliveries.
Because rail freight could now enter the N.Y. Metro area from both the north and south, and because of hte relative costs of land, property taxes, etc., a line like that could make the area along it in the area between Elizabeth and New Brunswick more valuable for manufacturing/assembly plants, since things could easily be shipped in and out of the area. Also port traffic might not be a zero-sum game with the new line in place, and shipping could increase to the point where there was enough traffic for both Newark and a revived B'klyn port (and one of the things originally mentioned with the harbor tunnel was that the channel locations meant Port of Newark couldn't handle the super-cargo ships while the water was deep enough near Brooklyn for those ships to dock, which means the two ports could serve two completely different classes of freighters).
a line like that could make the area along it in the area between Elizabeth and New Brunswick more valuable for manufacturing/assembly plants, since things could easily be shipped in and out of the area ... shipping could increase to the point where there was enough traffic for both Newark and a revived B'klyn [deep-water super cargo freighter] port
Ah, now THAT makes sense! OK, I'll count the NJ elected reps in. Though I still think there'll be a lot of instinctive reaction against perceived damage to Port of Newark despite the impossibility of dredging an already-inconvenient channel.
Wait, though. Didn't they just agree to dredge to handle a new class of ships? Are the super cargo freighters you mention even beyond THAT? (I don't follow cargo ship technology)
An enviromental study generally means the MTA/LIRR/FTA/FRA is reluctant to build it and generally it won't be built.
An environmental study is a legal requirement before a tunnel could be built.
David
I know but can't they put "none" on the building permit field "Enviromentsl Impact:" also they could preform one but look the 2nd ave subs has had 3 impact studys and still no contract is out?
To put "none" would be a blatant lie that would be seen through by anybody reading the report. Of course there are impacts on the environment! There are negative impacts while the thing's being built, followed by positive ones once it's open. All of this has to be described in detail.
David
Today's DAILY NEWS, Brooklyn/Staten Island section has Jerrold Nadler's (D-Manhattan) article on approval in the House for $5M for a study on the construction and enviromental impact of a Cross-Harbor Tunnel from Howland's Hook, Staten Island or New Jersey to the Bay Ridge Piers at the old LIRR ROW and Float Bridge
"Study" is the key word. It means, in essence, all talk and no action.
"'Study' is the key word. It means, in essence, all talk and no action."
Umm, like it or not, NO major infrastructure can be built without a study, enivronmental impact statement, etcetera. A study is no guarantee that a project will be built, of course, but the LACK of a study is an absolute guarantee that a project will NOT be built.
There's a fine line between skepticism and defeatism.
Good point John, and also the other posters point about it being a fall back plan if NJ doesn't want to become a full partner in a Bayonne/Bay Ridge tunnel.
Mr rt__:^)
Umm, like it or not, NO major infrastructure can be built without a study, enivronmental impact statement, etcetera. A study is no
guarantee that a project will be built, of course, but the LACK of a study is an absolute guarantee that a project will NOT be built.
I'm referring to New York. Not Chicago. Projects here are "studied" into oblivion.
There's a fine line between skepticism and defeatism.
Considering New York's disgusting record in getting any sort of transit improvements built, it's hard not to be defeatist. Just think of the fact that the Second Avenue subway was first seriously proposed almost 75 years ago.
I would rather be a skeptic with John on this one. After all it would benifit more then just commuters of the subway system (that is if they expand it to include additional tracks for a subway link to SI). The fact that auto drivers as well a MT riders would benifit might give it a better chance of success. The additional fact that the NJ, CT & NY delagations to Congress might all be for it, is another point in it's favor.
Mr rt__:^)
Ok so I'm 16 and I have a rare hobby amung youths...and I kept my dream of running the system and making my ideas a reality. To be honest though how do you get around to that? Where would you have to start at? I know some people do alot of political sucking up to make it up the chain, but I defintly want to work my way up without having to suck up to anyone, and run the system. I dont want to be some old guy who sits in a chair and counts money, I would ride the system get out there, and enjoy my system and get it running at a pace that would have as many lines and the speeds that the trains had in the 1970's but clean and effective like the system today.
I even have a new slogan, but I want to know how would I go about working my way up. Where do I start?
Working for the actual TA is a good way to move up. From what I understand, the GM of MBTA was once a linebacker for the Kansas City Chiefs, ended up as a bus diver with MBTA and worked his way up.
Of course, a lot of people in the higher up positions were 'air lifted' in as favors to the politicians that fund them, too, but you have to start somewhere.
How to start at TA: If you are 16 and are really serious about TA work, check out the apprenticeship programs and prepare yourself to go after High School graduation. 'Hardware hobbies' like cars/motorcycles/computer building/ham radio will give you needed hands on basics for Car Inspector or other positions in the program. In five years, you WILL have the title and the pay AND the experience in the system to go on with promotional tests. TA will send you to their schools for training, you can express interest in skills applicable and request training and any college/tech courses are a plus. TA wants and need people willing to work and who can handle the 'new tech' coming in. You don't need 'connections' to move up...just the will TO DO. You don't need a high IQ either....just the will to learn and apply. If you put everything together, THEY will find YOU and put you to work FOR REAL. Just one thing: the TrainDude told me, "My instructor twenty years ago told me not to tell anyone how I love the work because they'll try to make you do it for free....and it's coming true." Well, I'll be getting to that point REAL soon....just be prepared to ge dirty (they didn't tell us that in school.) I can count the young people in my shop on one hand....the opportunity waits for you to come aboard. CI Peter
Joyrides on rush hour commuter trains in the locomotive seem to be a reliable method. At least it worked for Stangel
You got compatition! Maximum salery is 60,000 a year under me all the other money goes for restoring and improving the system. I hope to pay off a politician, because as much as I heard you get appointed by the mayor to be MTA chairman.
The first four cars, 7812/3 and 7830/1 have entered the main shop/207 for stripping for the ocean. So much for keeping spares handy.
YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been doing more special troubles inspections on R142 trainsets not in for SM....all good work.
Today I was assigned to 180th Street crews for Carbody Inspection....I always put a little more into my work and get extra dirty....good work is always OK but better being clean.
Can I pass on the news to 'selected' CIs???????? CI Peter
Why not, the cat is already out of the bag. I was reading the inspection report of 8685. That one of yours? After one and a half million miles, its time to go. BTW, is it a commmon defect for friction wear plate welds to go bad? Seems to be alot of cars with that defect sitting in scraplines, unless they are targeting cars with misc truck defects, instead of major defects with truck/prop.
THANKYOU EB. 239th is 2s and 5s...range looks ok...did carbody today on 8949 for 180th crew...and those guys have my respect...and their sup was happy to have me. In just two short months I'm qualified to do all inspections and I was happy to be able to refuse new tech training and get some REAL WORK doing unsked R142 inspections (like 25 shoe swaps on four R142 trainsets...getting stuck with two locked pins the next day and having everyone tell me I didn't know what I was doing...until ALL the circumstances came out...a really, really good feeling of accomplishment all by myself.) The friction wear plates don't go bad (I assume it's those metal plates tacked onto trucks.) What happens is that the tacking FAILS and they come loose. Inspectors chalk the defect, some cars go out, others have the plates tacked back on with welding that doesn't look good to me. I don't know the process BUT I could do that work with a portable wire-feed MIG or flux core welder. Blitzed propulsion is usually fixed....my only chagrin is Redbird prop with a smoked group box and one foreman must have balked when I had an arced wonder that tested my confidence. Hey, if it sequences properly, reset works, dynamic braking is working and you don't find any melted tips, I've learned to be very careful and IT GOES out until another SM. There's no reason to scrap the machine. The Redbirds have earned my respect too...they're almost as old as I am and just as reliable. TA is moving at 239th...we don't need a parking lot for Bombardier anymore. Thankyou so very much for the good news...I can only hope and pray that my pick in January comes close. CI Peter
I wonder if we will be the only ones cheering on as the "shell" game goes on with a splashing sucess. Perhaps one day, I'll treat you to a ride to Kingston where you can practice your welding skills on BMT Stagecoaches that need some TLC
Thankyou...that might be good for me. The posters LOVE the new tech and HATE the features, never understanding that 'too new ain't so good.' Let us keep on cheering...it's not nostalgia anymore. CI Peter
One more thing: I know scrapping is nasty work and we were warned at PS248 that the last class got those assignments BUT it is good to hear that your guys have some REAL WORK to do now as when they finish, the new trainsets should be in. NEW is good but REAL WORK is so much better. Pass my greetings on to new crew from September 17th...we all went through a terrible time together. CI Peter
Thanks, please keep me informed for the scrap list....
I was told that Stipping resumes at CCY today as well.
Robert
If by CCY you mean Concourse yard, there is no stripping going on - at least authorized stripping. There are 90 or so redbirds in storage there along with 45 R-142s.
Can you explain what unauthorized stripping would be? Heh, sounds unreal...
I think you can use your imagination.
I'm surprised some foamers don"t go over there wih a big truck and
REALLY STEAL a redbird :~>
Don't give me any ideas :)
Come to think of it, I remember riding by the yard (on the L Canarsie line) near New Lots where they stored all of the retired R-16s, and though about grabbing one myself.
Wonder how much it'd cost to drop ship one for Salaam? :)
Unauthorized stripping is the mother of invention! If TA employees cannot bring home souveniers, guess where the little bits and pieces DO go. CI Peter
Being an old Bronx boy myself, I would imagine that some of the kids that could pick a car clean at a red light are working overtime in TD's train garage. Wonder what a redbird looks like up on blocks. :)
Nah, Aint much market for the group switch off an R29 on the street
Heh. Anybody seen Heypaul lately? :)
Surely not I! In fact, I finally got a hard-copy of the Tuesday NY Times article and was disappointed that the master of 'self-promotion' was not even mentioned.
Rumor has it that he hangs out on Harry Beck's board.
Yes, he's been spotted On the Other Side of the Tracks. Something tells me we may not be seeing him on Subtalk anymore.
You don't see much of him on "The Other side of the Tracks" either.
He hasn't even posted on elevator talk for a while.
That thing is still going?
Duh - hit me with a stick. I thought Elevator talk was another of his jokes.
Not really, but it does have it's UPs and DOWNS....
BMTman
For that, you should also be hit with a stick.....
OUCH!
Thanks you Dude for a good laugh at the BMTman's expense.
Mr rt__:^)
And thanks for that Mets hat you gave me. I still wear it and it is still in great shape. And send my regards to heypaul. I do miss him online. His posts were always relaxing to read. He made me feel good. Tell him to get his butt back online. We need him.
Yes, his posts here made you realise that you shouldn't take things THAT seriously. He also made you think some times, if you read between the lines.
There were four of us that hung out at that model show & had a long talk with Vern (he showed us a slip switch that he's working on). I'll pass on you kind words the next time I see him.
Mr rt__:^)
Speaking of laughs, could the rumors be true? Could heypaul have gone over to Afghanistan to entertain the troops? Of course, if the taliban didn't appreciate his sense of humor, that could explain his absense now. Wait a minute!! Heypaul is missing. Mullah Omar is missing! Could Lois Lane be right?
Naaahhhhhhh.
Nahhhhhh. Heypaul surfaced on the other board with his bicycle. Mullah Omar is still missing.
Rim shot!!!!!
Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.
Yes he does! He's posted a few things there including his feelings that some "Subtalk neanderthals" are not warm and fuzzy enough for him.
He biked over to the Bay Ridge Model layout this past Saturday, then left before it got dark.
Mr rt__:^)
yea .. leave heypaul alone .... he is not bothering anyone ......
geee...
Kev, I think he's on a secret mission to 'smoke out' Osama Bin Hidden...at least that's what my sources at the Pentagain tell me....
Nyuk! Nyuk! Nyuk!
;-D
He should serve up some of that cheap birthday cake he buys. I hear the icing is laced with Ex-Lax.
People like Osama shouldn't be smoking ... they could go Kabum. :)
He has been heavily breathing the Diesel fumes over at his Yahoo greyhoundthruexpress 'club'.......taking pictures of buses and posting them on a Photopoint page.....
Yo guys how can I get a redbird car, or full set of ten cars? I'am serious. I got space to store them!
And I got an offer from the car desk this morning after announcing the restart and I don't think it was too serious. I have eight acres, could run a track around the perimeter IF I had the DC power but the hill is too great for the flatbed. And the zoning board would........ CI Peter
81 acres. Zoning board that doesn't care. What do you mean by flatbeds?
Eight acres....flatbeds won't make it up my hill....and the zoning board would go wacko. The 'Land of Make Believe' is just down the road but they already have their choo choo. I do know through my yard sales hunts that someone in Warren County has trackage on their home lot with short work trains....the little ones that look like motorized flatcars with canopies....but they are stationary. Mebbe a small armored personell carrier is more practical. CI Peter
81 acres. Zoning board that doesn't care. What do you mean by flatbeds?
Flatbed trucks to transport the cars, of course. If you need any help, I'm in. You, me, and Peter, 11:57 tonight. We'll load a couple of R-26s onto trucks, cover 'em with tarps, and if anyone asks, they're R-142s going back to Bombardier for warranty work. Maybe Train Dude can provide some assistance, too :).
Contact the MTA/NYCT Department of Procurement. It should be listed somewhere in their website.
Other than that, you might have to settle for a Redbird set at 1:48 scale...
BMTman
They way things are going...Redbirds are in sidings, still running or subject to 'unauthorized scrapping.' How bout' a wheel with flats? CI Peter
If by CCY you mean Concourse yard, there is no stripping going on - at least authorized stripping. There are 90 or so redbirds in storage there along with 45 R-142s.
What's this you say? They're scrapping 45 R-142's along with the Redbirds?
Mebbe TrainDude had a Freudian slip....it's a good idea. CI Peter
I did say 90 redbirds in STORAGE with 45 R-142s
Just wishful thinking.
Hey! How about dressing up just one R-142 with a few of the interior components off a Redbird? The seats and the straps at the very least. That way I could ride in comfort at least once in a while.
Redbird seats in an R142? Yes. Straps? No way! Hate the straps, especially duing rush hours, when two or three people have their hands on those small narrow straps. I definitely won't miss the straps.
By the way, when they rebuilt the R32s, R38s, R40s and R42s, they put grab bars in them. But when they rebuilt the R26s, R28s, R29s, R30s, R33s and R36s, they retained the straps. Why?
Consider those poor New Yorkers who are too short to comfortably reach the overhead bars. Without straps, what are we supposed to hold onto? There aren't enough vertical bars to go around.
Perhaps the best compromise is what's found on buses: small straps attached to horizontal bars. I don't know why that was never tried on the subway. (No, the R-110 doesn't count; those straps are too small to be of any use.)
One Redbird was rehabbed with fixed grab bars and other cosmetic changes. IMO, the result is hideous. Here are four photos:
(Two passengers remained on board through the City Hall loop. One was unconscious.)
This car was retired over the last month. It will become part of the Atlantic reef programs
Hey Harold,
What became of the R-22s last used on the Signal Dolly? Did they get shelved yet?
-Stef
7366, and 7420 are on scrap trucks. The replacements are using their old trucks. 7307, 7460 and 7371 are spares for hold and track test, and 7349 is no where to be found anywhere. The 7366 and 7420 will be reefed at some time in the future, according to Widecab and info I heard in the field. None of them were field shunt modified, probably the only thing I'll miss of the stagecoaches.
Good riddance. It's the only Redbird I disliked.
Sorry to disappoint you guys but cars 8660 and its mate 8661 are in storage on 27A track in Concourse yard. Not destined to sleep with the fishes any time soon.
It's uniqueness should put it in a museum. I always thought that is easier to preserve the car as is then to try and undo numerous modifications implemented by the TA all these years. Just a thought.
-Stef
Every car that was in dry storage is now in wet storage. Is there anything about these cars that will be different this time? They are scrapping now 7812/3 7830/1 7878/9 and two others. Mostly GE R26 cars awaiting stripping here. I would have figured the better of the SCM cars would be saved for a while.
Well, at least I got to see what goes on at 207th and will keep my big mouth shut about the buzz in the locker room Friday afternoon. David Greenberger thought the Redbird 'strap mod' was hideous but I immediatly related it to the R142/R142A 'monkey bars.' Mebbe TA thinks passengers need restraints?? So 'uncool.' CI Peter
These cars have been in storage since the before the first redbird made its splash. I'm told there'll be 140 redbirds that'll be kept ready in case the R-142s need to come out of service for a modification.
BTW: The MDBF for November for the redbirds was over 70,000 miles. All in all, that's not bad considering the growing pains.
TD: the work is there for me to do and when Ortiz gives me ANY assignment, I'm happy to do it even if it's a 'Deadbird.' From the shape up room: "Hurricane, did you touch anything??? No Mr. Tony, everything works and nothing was fried. Good work Hurricane." Just a fewe simple words makes me happy and the trains go. CI Peter
Maybe when the Transit Museum reopend they will be the newest additions.
Forgive me,I copied off the post BUT the idea of scrapping some R142s
KNOWING the error and found it a little humorous. Some posters have read of my Redbird upgrade ideas but WE know that ain't gonna happen...the R142s are here to stay and THAT is my work. Funny about the job: if I see Redbirds...I'm farmed out. if I see silver birds, there's no assignment and I'll be on troubles. Today, changing out gear oil on R142s. TD, all the best, CI Peter
Oh man, you're going to throw Salaam into an absolute TWIRL with that prognostication. :)
This morning, my partner and I were assigned for 'Safety/Hazmat bio/chem' at 207th. Old stuff...now qualified to pick up hypodermic needles! So my partner wanted to check out the cafeteria and we wandered down the lane and there they were: The Redbirds, sitting high on yellow steel pylons, emptied, gutted, trucks gone, everything undercar gone but the resistor grids. Lined up like tombs or temples, waiting for the end. Would've made neat diners. On the other side was the propulsion shop, just like Coney island, with trucks lined up as far as the eye can see. On the edge of the path were two R142 trucks, brand new. I said to my partner, "This would be so easy...pop out the DC motors, replace them with AC ones, hang in a SEPSA control system with inverters, come up with a simple T/O control and voila: new train." Then went back to 239 to check out an R142 that went BIE this morning that didn't: the MLS clocks are all wrong and no TOD indication of anything (although the graph printout showed all the starts/stops and then the brake pipe down to zero/shutdown.) Laughing to the ocean we go, CI Peter.
Hi folks,
Got a bit of bad news, I'm afraid, and I'm asking for a bit of input from folks on this board. I spoke with the head buyer at the New York Transit Museum this afternoon and they will no longer be carrying my book--at least for now--due to "security concerns." Aparantly, someone from the MTA saw it and blew a fuse. Bollocks, I say.
While I'll be trying to sell it to them again early next year (assuming things calm down a bit), I'm afraid that my biggest customer is now out of the picture and the only people carrying it are a couple of hobby stores in town and the Boston Street Railway Ass'n for now (in addition to getting it directly from me, of course). Unfortunately, this also means I'm taking a huge loss on printing costs (in the short term) for the two full-colour covers and inserts.
I'm extremely grateful to everyone who's ordered from me so far, and I have a small favour to ask. Can you think of any good rail book vendors or hobby shoppes that I could approach? Places like Amazon and B&N, etc, are not possible for a variety of reasons, but I'd seriously like to consider other venues that any of you may know of and may have had good business relations with.
Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Believe it or not railfans are not the only ones buying your books. TA Workers as well. I know at least 11 other Train Operators and Conductors that carry around your book. When I was Extra I used your book to study the Yards and still do.
Believe it or not railfans are not the only ones buying your books. TA Workers as well. I know at least 11 other Train Operators and Conductors that carry around your book. When I was Extra I used your book to study the Yards and still do.
Thank you very much, No. 6! You know, that's one of the most flattering things you could ever say about this book. I originally made it for railfans, but I'm happy as a clam to see it in use by the pros who make this railway tick. I guess all I can ask is that you "spread the word." (grin)
Seriously,
THANK YOU!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Your welcome!
Try Rails and Shafts and Ron s Books in Harrison
Try Rails and Shafts and Ron s Books in Harrison
Can you gove me more info on Rails and Shafts? Never heard of them.
Ron's stopped carrying my book 2 years ago for some reason; guess it was never a hot seller for him. Too bad--he was always great to deal with, and had a wealth of knowledge!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Rails'N'Shafts
P.O. Box 300
Laurys Station PA 18059
Phone 610-261-0133
Fax 610-262-7962
The owner's name is Paul, and like Ron, he has full page ads in some of the railfan mags like Railfan & Railroad.
Ron was still selling your book at the Gaithersburg Railroadiana Show.
I was there with my niece and nephew, boy where they bored, and I was disappointed. Thought that they would actually have working toy trains for the kids. Planning to go to greenburgs in Fairfax Later this month
You should see some operating layouts at a Greenberg show.
Gaithersburg has never had anything like an operating layout, but of course it is a railroadiana show, which is technically different than a train show.
I have been to many trains shows that didn't have a layout operating though.
Thanks for the info
I carried it with me while in School car; it was a much better set of track maps than the ones we were given by Transit.
I carried it with me while in School car; it was a much better set of track maps than the ones we were given by Transit.
Thank You. Very much. I'm flattered and quite humbled that you and apparantly several of your colleagues have used it professionally. Glad to be of service.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Hmmmm ... wonder if you could sell it to the MTA as an employee reference manual?
Have you considered Kevin T. Farrell (http://www.trainbooks.com/)?
--Mark
Have you considered Kevin T. Farrell (http://www.trainbooks.com/)?
No, I actually didn't. I never even heard of them. They're on my to-call list for tomorrow.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
The Shore Line Trolley museum has carried your previous
editions in its gift shop.
The Shore Line Trolley museum has carried your previous
editions in its gift shop.
Yup, and they will have the third edition as well. The wholesaler I normally deal through has an order for 18 books in with me--and he supplies them--so they'll have stock.
Thanks!!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Try the New Jersey Transit Gift Shop,SEPTA Gift Shop
You could buy an ad in the monthly ERA New York Division mailing. I'm guessing one of the hobby shops you deal with is Red Caboose on 45th St. You could get yourself the ability to accept credit card orders for mailorder on web hosts that sell that service cheaply. Other area museums: Trolley Museum of New York (Kingston) has a small gift shop/bookstore, you know of Shore Line already, Seashore in Maine has a big bookstore and also sells over the net, Baltimore Streetcar Museum has a nice giftshop too.
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the suggestions. I like the idea of an ad in the Bulletin! I'll drop them a line if I can find the contact info. I will also be going there this month and next to sell before the meetings.
I know the museums you mentioned are all serviced by my wholesaler, so they're covered. I can do CC orders via PayPal, but if you can maybe point me to an easy way to take CCs the normal way I'd be very interested. Every time I looked into it I was told that I'd need a five-figure deposit to cover potential chargebacks, abuse, etc. I can't afford that.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Peter,
I used to use CCNOW for my cc transactions. They take a bit bigger percentage but are AWESOME for support and the transactions are seemless unlike paypal... check them out here:
http://www.ccnow.com/
BTW, I am in Atlanta, miss the nyc subways and think I will be sending you a check tomm. for a book!
As for places to sell it, you might try using ebay... at least give it a try... also you might try doing some marketing with some online search engines... as people search for NYC transit, your ad would pop-up... if you want any help with marketing online, email me mightyman@onebox.com - i will help ya for free as we are fellow railfans :)
Allen
I know the museums you mentioned are all serviced by my wholesaler, so they're covered.
David mentioned the Trolley Museum in Kingston, NY. Does your wholesaler also supply to the small Empire State Railroad Museum (Phoenicia, NY) and the Delaware & Ulster RR Gift Shop (Arkville, NY)?
(All three are on parts of the old Ulster & Delaware RR through the Catskills ... for more info on that RR, see the Ulster & Delaware RR Historical Society website.
Does your wholesaler also supply to the small Empire State Railroad Museum (Phoenicia, NY) and the Delaware & Ulster RR Gift Shop (Arkville, NY)?
I'm not sure. I know of the Sea Shore and Shore line, and he's mentioned a few others. I don't want to step on his toes by doing an end-run around him, but I'll ask him on Friday when I drop off his supply.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
"You could buy an ad in the monthly ERA New York Division mailing"
You'd better scratch that ! I tried that for an ad for my subway calendar, but the "NY Division Advertiser" has been defunct for about a year.
Bill "Newkirk"
A REALLY big model railroad/hobby shop that I'm sure would be interested in carrying your book would be Willis Hobbies in Mineola, Long Island.
I do not have the full address, but they are located on Willis Avenue just around the corner from Jericho Turnpike. Another would be Nassau Hobby Shop in Freeport, Long Island.
Hope that helps.
BMTman
A REALLY big model railroad/hobby shop that I'm sure would be interested in carrying your book would be Willis Hobbies in Mineola, Long Island.
I do not have the full address, but they are located on Willis Avenue just around the corner from Jericho Turnpike. Another would be Nassau Hobby Shop in Freeport, Long Island.
Thanks for the great suggestions. I'd never heard of either of these, so I'll give 'em a shout tomorrow. Thanks agian!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Just a thought Peter but what about the SEPTA transit museum store here in Philly? Of course they may object just like New York. By the way I just sent my order in for the book this morning.
Just a thought Peter but what about the SEPTA transit museum store here in Philly? Of course they may object just like New York. By the way I just sent my order in for the book this morning
They're on my to-call list for tomorrow morning for sure! I'm also going to see if I can get hold of the London Transport museum--sounds like something they might want to carry.
I'll look for your order in the mail. Looks like the books will be ready tomorrow, and the rest on Friday.
By the way, I finally got the covers back from the printer and all I can say is WOW! They did a terrific job. There were a couple of small problems on the back cover but nothing too evil. I got the colour inserts done offset rather than one-by-one on my inkjet like I've been doing for years, and they also look really good. All told, this book is going to be kick-ass! I've printed it on decent quality 24# paper this time (everything up until now has been on 20# copier paper) and it will hopefully make it a lot more durable than previous books have been.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Geez ... the terrorists ALREADY HAVE the "track maps" if they were going to collect any at all. Put me down for a copy when it's done, I'll lock it in the onion cellar to do my bit to keep the subways safe.
Geez ... the terrorists ALREADY HAVE the "track maps" if they were going to collect any at all. Put me down for a copy when it's done, I'll lock it in the onion cellar to do my bit to keep the subways safe.
Ha! Exactly. As I've said a gazillion times before, EVERYTHING in that book, with the exception of yard maps, is easily visible to the general public, and knowing what tracks go where in a yard isn't going to do an idiot bent of killing people any good whatsoever. No precise locations of anything critical is given (i.e. power stations, underwater tubes, etc) and descriptions are specific enough to benefit those who either want or need to know. Believe me, I wrestled with that proverbial alligator in the weeks following 9-11. If there was ANY serious chance that my book could EVER aid some murderous lunatic, I'd pull it from general sale immediately and only sell it to people I know.
What, is a group of ne'er-do-wells going to re-wire an enitre interlocking machine, re-wire the all the signal heads and hope two trains hit at 10 MPH or something?
Hope it keeps your onions nice and safe, or at least heading onto the right track! It's available now and will ship tomorrow afternoon. See the link below for details!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Also remember the MTA is installing CCTV systems in stations. Also the terroists would be after blueprints not trackmaps.
Also remember the MTA is installing CCTV systems in stations. Also the terroists would be after blueprints not trackmaps.
Not even the blueprints could do them much good (in most cases). What benefit would they be? If their sick goal is to do as much damage and kill as many innocents that they can using the NYC transit system, believe me, there are easy and VERY effective ways of doing it. And no, I'm not going to give any examples. None of them require blueprints, however.
Some type of sabotage using the system's infrastructure is more along the lines of a 1950s or 60s cold-war thriller than a modern reality if you ask me. And in my opinion, Pelham made for better fiction than anything using blueprints, etc, could. No, this is called Paranoia, plain and simple.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
I don't think this point has been mentioned yet: Given the amount of preparation that seems to go into these attacks, terrorists could just as easily pretend to be railfans and draw up their own track maps of the parts of subway system they want to pay attention to if they can't get the book.
-Robert King
You could also try listing them on eBay. You could set up a store there or put a batch of them up at a time as a "Dutch" auction. I'm sure you would get a good response there.
You could also try BidBay.com, they let you list for free.
Grat Idea!! I never thought of selling them on e-bay. I sold a few old radio bits there in the summer, but that was about it. I never understood how folks could operate a regular "store" on an auction site. Maybe I'm just too old fashioned, eh?
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
And there's no shortage of suckerscustomers perfectly willing to pay more than list, plus exorbitant shipping charges, for readily-available books. A dealer has recently sold at least three copies of the limited-run, signed and numbered hardcover edition of the new book on the Poughkeepsie RR bridge for full list or higher, plus twice the shipping charge imposed by the publisher (from whom I bought my copy).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
And there's no shortage of suckerscustomers perfectly willing to pay more than list, plus exorbitant shipping charges
Eeeek! Sorry to hear that. Or should I say GLAD to hear that < grin >. I'll look into this for sure! I don't like to goose people for shipping. I charge what it costs for postage, a decent bubble-mailer envelope and a pittance for my time to drive to the Post Office and Staples and to write out the address lables. I'm going to experiment with sending them by Priority mail in the USPS-supplied cardboard mailers and see if they arrive in decent shape. If so, that will cut down mailing costs a bit.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
BTW Fedex Ground has comparable to USPS rates, and no standing in the line.
Arti
For those who aren't in a rush, have you considered USPS book rate? It's dirt cheap. It's also slow (about two weeks at best, IME), but you could offer it as an option. At least one of the online book retailers offers book rate shipping for free.
And there's no shortage of suckerscustomers perfectly willing to pay more than list, plus exorbitant shipping charges, for readily-available books.
For example...
Good Lord! Somebody's got DEEP pockets!
Actually few, if you look at the bid history.
Arti
Well, Mr. Funnygarbage wanted it real bad apparently... but couldn't muster the 'strength' to go the distance...
Or he didn't make it back to his computer before the bidding closed ;).
No, eBay does proxy bidding. We will never know (unless he tells us himself) how much the top bidder put down as his maximum bid. It doesn't matter, since in the end he only pays one bid increment above the next highest bidder's maximum bid.
Yes, but that didn't stop Mr. Funnygarbage from upping his maximum bid twice.
Well, Mr. Funnygarbage wanted it real bad apparently... but couldn't muster the 'strength' to go the distance...
I think I'm about to make his day. I'm going to send him an e-mail telling him he can get the latest and greatest for about 2/3 of what the other old one went for. Methinks he'll have a smile on his face shortly thereafter.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
I think I'm about to make his day. I'm going to send him an e-mail telling him he can get the latest and greatest for about 2/3 of what the other old one went for. Methinks he'll have a smile on his face shortly thereafter.
Ummmm ... I'd think twice. I'm pretty sure that it's explicitly against eBay's rules for vendors to contact bidders, successful or not, and offer to sell them similar items. Not sure, but check before you e-mail!
Excerpt from an outbid notice:
"Safety Tip:
It is against eBay policy for a seller to contact you about buying a similar or identical item outside of eBay. This type of transaction is not covered by the services we provide to protect you - such as feedback, insurance and dispute resolution. For your own protection, please do not participate."
:(
It is against eBay policy for a seller to contact you about buying a similar or identical item outside of eBay.
So what you have to do is list it on eBay then send a link to your auction. :-)
I would just keep quiet and let them bid on it without letting them on that a newer one can be brought for less.
Good Lord! Somebody's got DEEP pockets!
And a VERY shallow brainpan. My goodness, all the prospective dealer would have to do is e-mail me and I'd have run off a brand new "old" edition, personally signed and shipped to him for $42! I have all of my "final" files going back to 1997 and it would have taken me a week to do.
Hell, I should e-mail the poor bloke!
I think I know what I *will* do, however, is auction of a couple of my pre-release "edit" copies with hand-written notes, etc. I'm sure someone would bid on that puppy! I normally just toss them, or keep one or two around for reference.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
My company, which I'm not going to name for obvious reasons, has a steady program of putting overstock onto eBay rather than selling it to a jobber for 18% of retail value.
On average, we make 8-10% over our cost. But for specific items that are collectible or more specialized, we can occasionally make MORE THAN RETAIL. This is clearly a case of someone not doing his research to find Peter's site on the web.
PETER: Think about putting a few copies up on eBay. It might make you some extra $$$, and the rest of us can order from your site at the standard cost.
Damn it irks me that the Transit Museum won't stock your book. I will *definitely* complain the next time I'm in there. Though their clerks vary widely (the "music" being played at loud volume is about as far from a "museum" atmosphere as I can imagine), maybe the message will get through?
I don't really think complaining to the museum sales clerk is going to get you anywhere... Somehow I think it'll be one of those "la la la I'm not listening to whiny customer" situations :-) Write a letter to the museum management if you want to be heard on the situation.
I don't really think complaining to the museum sales clerk is going to get you anywhere... Somehow I think it'll be one of those "la la la I'm not listening to whiny customer" situations :-) Write a letter to the museum management if you want to be heard on the situation.
You may be right, but generally the staff there are somewhat more helpful and friendlier than your average McDonald's counter staff even if I hate their music choices.
As for writing a letter ... I know, I know, I *should* ... but it's the old "write a letter, print it out, find an envelope, find a stamp, find a mailbox" routine ... and of course I'm not aware that the Transit Museum accepts e-mails from the General Public.
Snail mail works. You could address it to Gabrielle Shubert at:
New York Transit Museum
130 Livingston Street, 9th Floor, Box E
Brooklyn, New York 11201
--Mark
Snail mail works. You could address it to Gabrielle Shubert
Although a later SubTalker said it's not the Transit Museum folks per se, but the MTA Legal Department (perhaps responding to advisories from the US government). [sigh]
PETER: Think about putting a few copies up on eBay. It might make you some extra $$$, and the rest of us can order from your site at the standard cost.
Y'all talked me into it. Once I get this batch of pre-orders mailed out in the next couple of days I'll learn how to do it on e-bay and get 'em up there!
Damn it irks me that the Transit Museum won't stock your book. I will *definitely* complain the next time I'm in there.
I'm generally not one to urge others to make people's lives unpleasant or say anything unkind, but if you can complain nicely and politely, I wouldn't mind at all (I guess I'm still a Canadian deep down after all < grin >).
Seriously, though, thanks. They told me this might not be a permanent decision, but in the present climate she's not allowed to order or stock it. And it's not just my book--she was told to remove other things as well (for example, the old bus operator's badges that could ostensibly be doctored and used to get past security checkpoints or something, I'm guessing...).
Sigh.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
$76.00????!!!!!
Maybe I should offer my copy for sale on ebay.
Peter - I had been wondering about that and sort of figured that the TM would balk at carrying the book.
Actually - don't blame the TM they sell what they are allowed to/told to sell - it is the MTA legal department that is behind it.
And you're already set up for PayPal, so you got it made!
I just sent an order via Pay Pal - gotta get it before it is banned ;-)
I just sent an order via Pay Pal - gotta get it before it is banned ;-)
Please, don't even JOKE about that < grin >. In this era of twitchy trigger fingers and twitchier lawyers, I fear the First Amendment is more of an annoyance than anything else to many.
Thanks for the order! I'll do my best to get it out to you tomorrow night.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Apparently the NYC Transit museum is letting the terrorists win! Just like not rebuilding a decent World Trade Center, we are cowering in fear. If they aren't carrying your track book then why even bother calling it a transit store. Shame on them!
Try the National Capital Trolley Museum, near the nation's capital.
www.dctrolley.org
(301) 384-6088
Ask for Ken Rucker. Call on the weekends. In December, the museum is open 5 - 9 PM for Holly Jolly Trolley.
In January, schedule reverts to regular hours, weekends 12 - 5.
Michael
Try the National Capital Trolley Museum, near the nation's capital.
Thanks for the tip. They'll be getting a call tomorrow.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
> National Capital Trolley Museum, near the nation's capital.
You mean the nation's capital which didn't like their track map on this site? :-) Good luck!
NatCap is a private organization, no connection to WMATA... I'm a member there, just like I am at Branford. They're on Bonifant Road in Silver Spring, Maryland, less than three miles from my daughter's place.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Yes, I know that. My point was that maybe they will hesitate a little more than some other trolley museums because of their proximity to D.C.
I doubt it. The book is about New York, not Washington. I don't see any problem with them selling it. I'm sure they will tell all terrorists "now save that receipt!"
LOL
Michael
(I spoke with the head buyer at the New York Transit Museum this afternoon and they will no longer be carrying my book--at least for now--due to "security concerns.")
I find it hard to understand what your map tells people that the route map doesn't, as far as a terrorist is concerned. If it showed the location of emergency ingress and egress, power supply, etc. that's one thing. It just shows the tracks and switches.
Back when, I was an agency representative on this telecommunications task force for NYC. The big fear was that terrorists would find out the location of the main Nynex (Bell Atlantic, Verizon) facility and bomb it, knocking out Wall Street.
So what happens? Terrorists hit a building that falls on it. I'm more worried about a dirty nuke killing the whole city than someone taking out a switch because he saw it on a map.
I'm more worried about a dirty nuke killing the whole city than someone taking out a switch because he saw it on a map.
As I understand it, a so-called "dirty nuke" is actually a largish conventional explosive (somewhere between a suitcase bomb and a truck bomb) with a covering of radioactive material. The explosive does damage and kills "a small number" of people, but the radiation isn't generally fatal to many people especially if Iodine pills (IIRC) are taken immediately.
This is all IIRC, but I found it *somewhat* reassuring ....
The idea of a "suitcase nuke," OTOH, was still pretty frightening.
The following should be the proposed subway routes if and when the Manhattan Bridge ever has all 4 tracks reopen.
B Line- Stillwell Ave to 145th Street extended to Bedford Park Blvd peak rush except midnight hours via West End, 4th Ave,Manhattan Bridge,6th Ave and Central Park West.
D Line- Stillwell Ave to 205th Street via Brighton Local,Manhattan Bridge,6th Ave,Central Park West,Concourse
N Line- Stillwell Ave(86th Street temorary)to Ditmars Blvd via Sea Beach,4th Ave(Express weekdays),Manhattan Bridge,Broadway Express,60th Street,Astoria Line
Q Line-Brighton Beach to 57th St/7th Ave weekdays via Brighton Express,Manhattan Bridge,Broadway Express
R Line-95th St to Continental Ave via current route. I believe they will have to return the R Line to 24 hour service and if and when they ever get more equipment the R will be extended to 179th Street.
W Line-Ditmars Blvd to Whitehall Street via Broadway Local,60th St and Astoria Line weekdays.
Thank You
D Line-Stillwell Ave to
D Line
Am I right in assuming that you'll have the D run to Coney Island when they finish working on the Coney Island complex? Another question I have is what happens to the Astoria Express? Personally, I would have the N run as the Astoria Express and the W as the Astoria Local on weekdays. Other times the N could make all local stops on the Astoria Line.
I like your idea, it's very similar to what I believe how the MTA should run these routes when the Bridge reopens. The only area where I don't agree with is having the R run to 179. I'm convinced that more people in general (71 Ave-179 Street in particular) would ride the Q as a Queens Blvd/Broadway/Brighton Express (via 63rd Street Tunnel), than the R Queens Blvd/Broadway/4th Ave/slower than a turtle/Local. I think they'll be happy to have the Q run express all the way to 179, especially those heading to/coming from eastern Queens and Long Island.
When the R Line was switched with the N Line in 1987 the following were proposed in the Route plan which i had until i moved to South Florida the beginning of September.
It said that the N and R Lines should have no morw than a 10 minuate headway at all times between 59th Street in Brooklyn and Lexington Avenue in Manhattan
The Orign/Destination surveys that the TA uses to determine line changes indicate that Queens Blvd Line prefer connections with the Lexington Avenue Line and local stops on Broadway.
Also the Q Line will only operate weekdays while the R Line should run at all times. For many years the Brighton Line only ran local service at all times and the D Line has to operate 24 hours a day.
To operate the Q Express 24 hours will be a waste of money
Thank You
The Brighton line has run express service 16/5 for many years. Until the early 60s, 16/6. Before that, 16/6 PLUS Brighton-Franklin expresses in the summer months. I would like to see trying out day-time weekend service, at least during the summer months. Headways on Saturday locals are 8 min. Why not have 10 min. headways for both express and local service, as in mid-days on weekdays?
If Fulton St deserves weekend express service, than so does the Brighton line, especially during the summer!
Fulton Street is a longer run, and local service there was provided by extending an existing line in Manhattan. The Brighton line is shorter and would require running an additional Broadway service. (West End riders, I'm sure, would notice that Brighton had two direct Manhattan services while they had none.) There is nowhere to turn the second Brighton service in Brooklyn unless the north side bridge leads are reopened, and even that is a bit of a mess.
The Brighton had 2 services for decades. The West End only one, until the M started over it. Worse comes to worse they can terminate the train at 57/7th
I don't see the difference. Expansion of express service should be based on ridership patterns and demand. I've ridden the Brighton line on Saturdays, and it's certainly in demand. All this should be done after the bridge is open full time so that 57th St isn't handling all that extra diverted service.
My point is that, without Fulton Street express service, the ride out to the Rockaway or to Lefferts takes a really long time. It's less critical on the Brighton.
I would like to see weekend express service there, but I can understand why Fulton got its weekend express first.
Incidentally, what do you mean by "in demand"? I very rarely come across a weekend B Division train with no empty seats. Even on Sunday mornings, I usually have to stand on the 1.
Try riding the circle Q on a hot summer weekend afternoon. Demand isn't quite as high now, but I routinely see "empty" A and C trains on Saturday.
I very rarely come across a weekend B Division train with no empty seats.
Check out any train that goes to chinatown. In particular, the N and Q. N at dekalb or 36th and Q at Canal. Try the Q going through Brighton also. Another good spot is 34th Herald Square on the Broadway platform.
I ride them all the time on weekends. I don't think I've ever had to stand. I usually have a large choice of seating arrangements, in fact.
Sunday mornings on the 1/2 I often have to stand. Sunday evenings on the 1/2 I almost always have to stand.
There's no comparison.
Barry,
You make a good point; but as you yourself have pointed out the survey was in 1987. A lot has happened since then (the MetroCard, free transfers between LI Bus and Subways, etc...). More riders from Eastern Queens and LI are using buses to reach the F at 179. On top of that I must question the survey itself. Who exactly were surveyed? Those who live between 71 Av-Queens Plaza or those who live past 71 Ave? I'm pretty sure that if you survey the people that live in Eastern Queens and LI they would like to see a Hillside Express train. Imagine an express train from Queens Blvd. Line that goes express in Manhattan stopping at Times Square, Herald Square, Union Square and Canal Street, four very popular stations with a lot of transfers, in succession. Running a Q train express to 179 Street would not only open more options to riders in Eastern Queens and LI, but those at the three stations on the 63rd Street line.
As for the Q train service hours after the bridge reopens. I'm convinced that a Brighton Express could have decent ridership at all times except nights. Even on non-summer weekends, there have been several occasions where I had to stand. In my opinion, I believe that the Q should operate all times except nights.
Sir, you are correct. It has been a long time since 1987. If the TA is smart they should do a new origin/destination survey prior to the bridges reopening to determine these new routes. It is about time.
Look what happened when they tried to implement the same service plan regarding Grand Street prior to the July service changes. The TA was creamed.
Why? They do not take ridership changes in effect.
The head of Operations and Service Planning just does not know what is going on. It is a shame that it takes up to 2 years to change a bus route and its sure easier to change a bus route than a subway route.
Thanks for your comments
>If the TA is smart they should do a new origin/destination survey prior to the bridges reopening to determine these new routes.
Several years ago (before the bridge flip was pushed back to the present), Operations Planning officials told me that they would do exactly this (or some kind of "major" rider input) to determine "what should run where" when the final bridge fully open pattern goes into effect. I imagine they still plan to do this, especially after all the flap they got about making changes without public input.
No matter what though, there will always be this one group who will complain that the changes shouldn't occur because it inconviences THEM. For instance, the G riders with the G getting cut back to Court Square.
Q Brightliner and Chris,
I agree with you, especially about the 10 min headways on express and local trains. I even think that Sundays you could run a Brighton Express
A few years ago, when some major switch replacement sent the N via Brighton express on weekends, it did seem to have decent ridership, (trekked all the way over to the other side of Brooklyn to see what express and local service at the same time would look like.) Alot of people on the train are getting off at express stops, so you could get away with thinning the headway on the local stops. What I used to suggest is to rebuild the shuttle to 2 track full length capacity, and extend it for the local stations, but of course, they destroyed that option. Having the express switch over at Kings Hwy and stopping at Ave. U and Neck Rd. and continuing to Coney Island would insure it would have enough riders, while still skipping ther bulk of the local stations.
They actually did that? Wow, I wish I knew about it. Why didn't they put it over West End like they usually do?
Yes, the brighton locals get pretty full on weekends...
Run the Q Mon-Sat 5A-10P
I wouldn't take it for granted that the (W) will survive when bridge reopens.
:-) Andrew
I think it will, as the Broadway local needs more than one line (R). People in Astoria will also whine about the loss of direct downtown service that they've enjoyed since 1949.
How about this extravagant plan, which will restore West End and Culver express service on weekdays. (I'm assuming an unlimited number of cars are available.)
(B)
Rush hours: Bedford Park Boulevard, the Bronx, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Concourse local, Central Park West local, 6th Avenue express, Manhattan Bridge, DeKalb Avenue bypass, 4th Avenue express, and West End line (express mornings northbound and afternoons southbound between 9th Avenue and Bay Parkway; local otherwise).
Middays and evenings: 145th Street, Manhattan, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Central Park West local, 6th Avenue express, Manhattan Bridge north side, 4th Avenue express, and West End line (express mornings northbound and afternoons southbound between 9th Avenue and Bay Parkway; local otherwise). All trains bypass DeKalb Avenue.
Weekends and late nights: No service.
(D)
Weekdays: 205th Street, the Bronx, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Concourse line (express weekday morning rush hours southbound and weekday afternoon rush hours northbound; local otherwise), Central Park West express, 6th Avenue express, Manhattan Bridge north side, and Brighton local.
Weekends and late nights: 205th Street, the Bronx, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Concourse local, Central Park West local, 6th Avenue local, Manhattan Bridge north side, and Brighton local.
(F)
Weekdays: 179th Street, Queens, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Hillside Avenue express, Queens Boulevard express, 63rd Street tunnel, 6th Avenue local, Rutgers Street tunnel, Smith Street/9th Street express, Culver line (express mornings northbound and afternoons southbound; local otherwise).
Weekends and late nights: 179th Street, Queens, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Hillside Avenue local, Queens Boulevard express (between 71st Avenue and 21st Street), 63rd Street tunnel, 6th Avenue local, Rutgers Street tunnel, Smith Street/9th Street local, and Culver local.
(V)
Weekdays: 71st Avenue, Queens, to Kings Highway, Brooklyn, via Queens Boulevard local, 53rd Street tunnel, 6th Avenue local, Rutgers Street tunnel, Smith Street/9th Street local, and Culver local.
Weekends and late nights: No service.
(G)
Weekdays: Court Square, Queens, to Church Avenue, Brooklyn, via Crosstown line and Smith Street/9th Street local.
Weekends and late nights: 71st Avenue, Queens, to Church Avenue, Brooklyn, via Queens Boulevard local, Crosstown line, and Smith Street/9th Street local.
(M)
All times except nights: Metropolitan Avenue, Queens, to Chambers Street, Manhattan, via Myrtle Avenue line, Broadway (Brooklyn) local, Williamsburg Bridge, and Centre Street line.
Late nights: Metropolitan Avenue, Queens, to Myrtle Avenue-Broadway, Brooklyn, via Myrtle Avenue line.
(NOTE: I'm not happy about this but I don't see anywhere to turn trains in Brooklyn aside from 59th Street, relaying on the Sea Beach express track, and that would overserve the 4th Avenue corridor. Any ideas?)
(N)
All times except nights: Ditmars Boulevard, Queens, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Astoria local, 60th Street tunnel, Broadway express (between 34th Street and Canal Street), Manhattan Bridge south side, 4th Avenue express, and Sea Beach local. Trains bypass DeKalb Avenue weekdays only.
Late nights: Ditmars Boulevard, Queens, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via Astoria local, 60th Street tunnel, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4th Avenue local, and Sea Beach local.
(Q)
Weekdays: 57th Street/7th Avenue, Manhattan, to Brighton Beach, Brooklyn, via Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge south side, and Brighton express.
Weekends and late nights: No service.
(R)
Weekdays: 179th Street, Queens, to 95th Street, Brooklyn, via Hillside Avenue local, Queens Boulevard local, 60th Street tunnel, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, and 4th Avenue local.
Weekends: 71st Avenue, Queens, to 95th Street, Brooklyn, via Queens Boulevard local, 60th Street tunnel, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, and 4th Avenue local.
Late nights: 36th Street, Brooklyn, to 95th Street, Brooklyn, via 4th Avenue local.
(W)
Weekdays: Ditmars Boulevard, Queens, to Bay Parkway, Brooklyn, via Astoria local, 60th Street tunnel, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4th Avenue local, and West End local.
Weekends: Queensboro Plaza, Queens, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via 60th Street tunnel, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4th Avenue local, and West End local.
Nights: 36th Street, Brooklyn, to Coney Island, Brooklyn, via West End local.
Thoughts? This gives us nearly balanced bridge service, with two services on each side on weekdays and one service on each side on weekends. On weekdays, there is direct service to both Broadway and 6th Avenue from both the Brighton line and the West End line, with locals and expresses swapped. On weekends, Brighton passengers for Broadway and West End passengers for 6th Avenue may transfer at DeKalb Avenue.
So never any Nassau St service to Brooklyn (J to Broad, and M to Chambers) all the time?
As I said, that's one bit I'm not happy about. Do you see any way out? Where would you turn the M? Only one service can turn at each Stillwell platform nowadays. The M could terminate at 59th and turn on the Sea Beach express track, but what would be the point? It would overserve 4th Avenue, which certainly has no need for five services. The M could terminate at Broad along with the J/Z, but I don't see how it could go any further.
Had the Culver shuttle survived, the M's logical routing would be to Ditmas Ave.
Had the Culver shuttle survived, the M's logical routing would be to Ditmas Ave.
That's not a bad idea - doesn't 9th Av still have a Lower Level Station? That might be useful as a terminal, even though the tracks beyond there are no more.
It can't be used as a terminal without a little bit of wrong-railing on the Manhattan-bound track in use by through trains. See the track map.
Not to mention that it's in awful shape, and would require millions to upgrade. As a completely underground station, modern lights would be a must.
Not worth it.
There's no point in using the lower level, as it has to share a track to 36th St. with the W anyway. Might as well keep all the service upstairs.
You're forgetting about the Brighton. In fact, there were some plans in the East River Crossing study that placed the M back on the Brighton in the bridge fully open scheme. ERC Plans
I forgot nothing. The reason I didn't consider the Brighton an option was lack of space at Stillwell to turn five services on four platforms. However, if the D and M are both cleaned at their north ends, they should be able to share a platform at Stillwell (much as the N/W, Q/Q, and 2/5 each share a pair of tracks at one end). Stillwell is only a bottleneck currently because trains are cleaned there.
With that in mind, I'd send the M via Brighton express, all the way to Stillwell, all times except nights. That would introduce Brighton express service on weekends and eliminate the annoying M weekend shuttle (that should please you) while still not flooding Broadway with excessive weekend express service and not eliminating direct access between Midtown and Brighton local stations. Weekdays, the Q and M would both run express (perhaps with a few M's switched to the local tracks to fill gaps). And weekend Brighton passengers, local and express alike, can transfer at DeKalb to an N for Broadway express service (why else do you think I'm having weekend N's stop at DeKalb?) or an R for Broadway local service.
Re-hab 9th Avenue lower level and turn M trains there. The M's not often frequency would allow your B,W and M on the section between 36/4 and 9.
But does 4th Avenue between Pacific and 36 really have any use for the B, M, N, R, and W? That's just too much service.
It turns out that the M should be able to turn at Stillwell, and the Brighton line could use a few more tph, including weekend express service. Problem solved.
True. Run the (W) as a weekday service from Astoria to Whitehall, increase (Q) and < Q > frequency (in balance to capacity), and continue M to Bay parkway as is now.
You were responding (a few levels down) to this extravagant plan of mine.
The financial district is nowhere on the weekend. Having the M as the weekend Brighton express would be a train to nowhere. Post MB re-opening, the best way to provide weekend Brighton Express service would be having the Q operating weekends, and as proposed by myself and others on this site, its regular route would be from Brighton Beach to Jamaica--Hillside Av., express all the way.
Running the Q on weekends would overserve the Broadway express and would severely overserve the Queens Boulevard express. (And if you're thinking of running the Q to Queens on weekdays, stop right there. It can't fit on the express tracks; the E and F fill them up already.) If you will look closely at my plan, you will see that I have service on the two sides of the Manhattan Bridge balanced at all times except nights: weekdays, B/D vs. N/Q; weekends, D vs. N.
The M is useful not so much for where it goes (although direct Brighton service to downtown Brooklyn and lower Manhattan would be useful -- and, yes, they are weekend destinations; the past two times I've ridden R trains over the Manhattan Bridge, I've directed tourists to the 4/5 to Bowling Green) but for the excellent transfers it provides.
The Q past 57 is just not an option. There's room for 60 tph on Queens Boulevard and 75 tph is available in the tunnels (allowing for 15 tph to Astoria) -- 30 at 53rd, 15 at 60th, and 30 at 63rd. Since 63rd is the least useful of the tunnels, the unused capacity should be through 63rd.
The M is useful not so much for where it goes but for the excellent transfers it provides
The Nassau line, for the small area of Manhattan that it occupies, connects to almost every line, at almost all of it's stations!
This is exactly why I objected a decade or so ago when the weekend J was cut back to Canal. Its later extension to Chambers was a relief but the J still doesn't reach Fulton on weekends.
Until the J was cut back, BTW, each station in the system was open at all times.
This is exactly why I objected a decade or so ago when the weekend J was cut back to Canal. Its later extension to Chambers was a relief but the J still doesn't reach Fulton on weekends.
Until the J was cut back, BTW, each station in the system was open at all times.
I never understood why they did that. Even now when the J only goes to Chambers. Canal was totally crazy to end at, keeping the rest of the stations closed. How much can they possibly save by ending the J at Chambers on weekends. What's the big deal of extending the two stations to Broad. The J really needs to connect to Fulton, where you can do your transfers. The savings doesn't seem to make much sense. Aside from an extra 5 minutes on the run, they would only have to have one extra token clerk at Broad on the weekends. Fulton has them anyway from the other lines.
I assume that tracks and switches are not at issue here?
I didn't mean end at Fulton St, which I don't think you can terminate there, just keep it open to Broad Street all times.
I believe it was a cost-saving measure. The Broad St. tower has to be manned to relay trains south of the station. The interlocking at Chambers St. is controlled from Essex St, a tower already manned 24/7. Cutting back the service allows the Broad St. tower to be closed.
That may be the reason, but it still seems like such an inconvienience to passangers using the Fulton Street transfers. Just think of the problem and transferring you have to do to get from the J line to the 8th Avenue line with the Fulton Street transfer closed on weekends.
Take the J to Chambers, grab the 4/5 one stop to Fulton, go downstairs and grab the A/C. Or even better, get off at Essex, transfer to the F, and take that 3 stops to W.4St where you can the A,C, or E.
Or use "gulp" Broadway Junction. The cutback wasn't ideal, but at the time, a fiscal crisis demanded something be cut.
There are lots of stops west of Broadway Junction. And where do I find the 1/2 at Broadway Junction, again?
Everyone cannot be pleased when cuts have to be made. If you need the 1/2, i suggest using the paralell 8th Ave line, of transfer to trains that can get you to Fulton St.
The A/C is not a reasonable option if I'm coming from, say, Williamsburg.
My point is simply that the weekend J is one of a number of lines that terminate one stop short of a transfer point, and one of only two (IINM) that do so even though the tracks continue through the transfer point. (The other one is the G in Brooklyn, but at least in that case the F stops at the same platform as the G.)
My point is simply that the weekend J is one of a number of lines that terminate one stop short of a transfer point, and one of only two (IINM) that do so even though the tracks continue through the transfer point. (The other one is the G in Brooklyn, but at least in that case the F stops at the same platform as the G.)
The V terminal at 2nd Avenue is one stop short of a transfer point to the J/M/Z.
Thank you! I knew I was forgetting something.
How about the V terminating at Essex Street? It would be a direct connection to the 6th Avenue line and Queens Boulevard line for Eastern division Passengers.
If you look at the track map, there's no way to do that. You'd need to add a crossover, but I still doubt that 1 track terminal can handle V-s tph.
Arti
Can't be done. The Chrystie Street cut connects only with the side platforms at Essex. Besides, even if it could, I don't think we want to limit the V to 480-foot trains.
Could the V be extended to Jay St without a major increase in cars needed? The G would not have to be extended past Smith/9th, and the extra service at Jay and Delancey could be put to real good use. The trains can relay underneath Bergen St.
Yes, it can be done, but it's an unnecessary extra transfer.
As Chris points out, the issue was Broad Street tower.
Not even the Broad Street token booths needed to be kept open. Fulton Street could be the last stop, with trains running light to and from Broad to turn. Getting from the J to the 1/2 or A/C is a real pain now, although it was much worse when the J terminated at Canal.
David, I think that Q service would substitute for F service, or part of F service. As is, 18 tph run out of Hillside Av. in rush. Was 18 F, now 15 F 3 E. Make that 9 F, 9Q. Run Q exp. under Hillside Av. (I stated this idea in a plan I posted months ago.)
See my response to your near-namesake. (Are you related or something?) It might work, but I do have some concerns.
No, we're not related and don't know of one another except through this site. Our namesakes and opinions vis-a-vis the subway are similar, though.
David G,
Er...I wouldn't go that far, we're not related (unless he's the long, long, long, lost cousin that I didn't know about). I don't know anyone on this site personally. I must admit though that many of my namesake's opinions on the subways are very similar to my own. We might be the SubTalk equivalent of the Q Diamond/Q Circle.
I'd say more but I gotta run! I'll post a response to your other post on your routing plan soon.
You can't run the Q as a Queens Blvd. express without major E/F cuts. SO let's stop suggesting that.
However, after the bridge fully reopens, a Q from 57th to Brighton Beach operating on the weekends makes sense. And as long as you're going to have Brighton express service every single day, some consideration should be given to making the Q the Brighton local to Stillwell, with the D as the express terminating at Brighton Beach. That run from the Bronx to Coney Island is a bitch for the crews, and the Q express is a ridiculously short run.
You're absolutely right in saying that E and F service will be cut if the Q runs as the third Queens Blvd. Express. However, will that make passengers life absolutely miserable, during the weekdays and weekends? I honestly don't believe so. I'd bet the house on that. I think Queens Blvd passengers would be thrilled with for example, a summer-time one-seat express ride to Brighton Beach, or a subsequent transfer and short ride to Coney Island. This does not even include the many transfer options that the Q would bring to express riders in Queens. As I stated before, I'm convinced that the E and F trains would not be as crowded as you might think, despite the cuts in service.
As we've seen, Queens IND riders are spoiled brats who whine whenever anything is changed. They whined when the R replaced the N, even though it went to the same places! They whined about the Archer Ave connection, even though that increased the number of trains serving Jamaica. They'll whine about your change. And Rey Sanchez will find some idiotic justification for it.
Happy holidays and sorry for the long delay on a response. I just have not had convenient access to the internet for a while.
I think that Queens IND riders are express-aholics. They probably love express service more than anyone else. How else could you explain the good number of people I've seen during the evening rush who get on the V at the Lex and 5th Avenue stations and ride it towards 47-50th just to get the F express heading towards Queens?
I think Queens IND riders complained basically because they lost express service. The Archer Ave. connection basically meant the end of Hillside Express service. I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think the N/R terminal switch meant that they lost a Broadway Express train (N) in favor of the notoriously slow R train. To be sure, some will complain just for the sake of complaining, others because they hate change. I believe that once Queens riders find out that the Q is a relatively fast express train with lots of transfers, the majority would be happy with the change.
Some believe the lost express service. They have not. Queens Blvd. has the same amount of express service it did before - just redistributed. Moreover, they have gained an additional local service.
How do you know that a good number of people are taking the V to 47th - 50th Street just to get an F express. Did you ask them? Could they have been possibly going across the platform to catch an uptown B or D?
Archer Avenue did mean the end of F express service, but the N and R terminal switch was inconsequential. If you remember back to the time of the terminal switch, the N became a Broadway Local because of the first Manhattan Bridge flip which brought us the yellow B, D, and Q up Broadway. If I'm going to Midtown, the N skipping 49th Street after running local along Queens Blvd. doesn't mean a thing to me. And if I'm going downtown and the N is running express over the bridge, I've got to change for the local at Canal anyway. No real savings in time.
Also, the Q will never make it to Queens Blvd. There is just not enough capacity to handle the additional load.
Have you ridden down the Broadway Express lately? Remember what the BMT stood for - Barely Moving Trains.
I think that if you run the Q as the third Queens Blvd. express, you HAVE to slash E and F service. I believe that it won't be doom and gloom because the Q stops at many popular stops, with many transfers, in Manhattan (Times Sq, Herald Sq, Union Sq, and Canal St). I'm convinced think that a good chunk of Queens riders would use the Q; and because of this E and F trains will not be as crowded.
What parts of Manhattan are best reached by a Q from Queens Blvd.?
- The areas around 5th and 60th and 7th and 57th are not major office areas.
- The area around Times Square has office buildings, but 6th Ave and 8th Ave are each just one block away, so it's a limited audience.
- Herald Sq is already served by the F.
- Union Sq. is very busy, but more as a transfer station than as an end destination.
- Canal St is not a big destination; again it's more of a transfer station.
Many other areas of Manhattan could easily be reached by taking a Q and then changing to something else (e.g., the insurance buildings above 23rd at Madison and Park), but if a change of trains is allowed many other choices are already possible (such as changing to the 6 or the R).
Certainly there is some traffic that would most want a Q, but is it enough to warrant splintering the express service further? In the morning you could argue that people with multiple useful choices can take whichever comes first and then plan their trip accordingly, but in the evening you have to pick a train, and now you're down to only 10 trains per hour per line.
I'm pretty sure that a Queens Blvd Express Q would have plenty of riders during the evening rush, without severely overcrowding the E or F. One of my posts (posted on Dec. 19), which is on this thread, details my reasoning behind having a Q Queens Blvd. Express.
This may be a dumb question to some, but does anyone out there know how to re-post an old post???
If it was on this thread, click "first in thread" than find your message in the list, copy and paste to a new message and post, or just tell everybody the post number to refer to in a new post.
Ooops. I thought it was once there the first in thread button. I don't see it anymore.
It usually says "first in thread" something got screwed up on this thread, along with the "lingering old signs" thread
If the root of the thread has been bumped to the archives, the rest of the thread isn't adjusted to point to it.
Oh, so the Lingering old sign thread is very old also. I was wondering what happened, because the Lingering Signage thread was such an interesting thread!
The Q from Queens Blvd. would not stop at 60th/5th. It would stop at 63rd/Lex.
You're right, I did not pick up on that.
Certainly there is some traffic that would most want a Q, but is it enough to warrant splintering the express service further? In the morning you could argue that people with multiple useful choices can take whichever comes first and then plan their trip accordingly, but in the evening you have to pick a train, and now you're down to only 10 trains per hour per line
10 TPH on the E is inadequate to say the least, and totally unacceptable for Brooklyn F riders. The above 2 lines would have their non-Queens riders totally screwed by the cuts necessary for a Queens Blvd. Q route, something which has almost no benefits to Queens riders. Unless you can increase the total number of trains servicing Queens Blvd, this is a silly idea.
And to stress again, the Broadway/63rd. St connection was NEVER meant to be used by trains going to Queens, but meant to serve upper 2nd Ave.
I'm convinced that enough Queens IND riders would ride the Q that would warrant splintering Queens express service. I agree that the E should have the most service if there are three Queens Blvd Expresses. I'm no expert on this, but I think that some of the speed restrictions on the Queens Blvd Express tracks are unnecessary, especially if the tracks are re-habbed. You could add at least one train to each line if some of these restrictions are lifted. If I'm wrong, please forgive me for saying all of this. This is why I'm strongly advocating having the Q as the third Queens Blvd Express (this is from one of my older posts):
57 Street: Has an exit that is only two blocks from the E at 7 Ave-53rd St. A decent amount of office buildings in the neighborhood.
42 Street-Times Square: Many transfers, which are much more convenient than the E transfers at 8 Ave-42 Street. Access to lower Manhattan could be had via the 7th Avenue Line. The one flaw is that the Q is further away from the Port Authority Bus Terminal. Office buildings are present and increasing in number here.
34 Street-Herald Square: A legitimate second Queens express option to the F for Queens riders at this station. A high number of offices and businesses in the area.
14 Street-Union Square: Transfers to the Lex Ave line to lower Manhattan. Another way for people to reach lower Manhattan (though not advisable). Some offices present here though not as much as the other three stations.
Canal Street: Transfers to the underused J, M and Z to lower Manhattan. This is the transfer that I would strongly recommend to Queens riders heading into lower Manhattan. Also brings the heart of Chinatown (not just E. Broadway) closer to many Queens Blvd. riders. Smaller businesses here and there are even some office buildings not that far from here.
DeKalb Ave: Many wouldn't think much of this station (except for its transfers) until they realize that it has an exit that basically sits at the east end of MetroTech in Brooklyn. Queens Blvd. riders could now conceivably get to MetroTech relatively quickly.
Not to mention that Q could fly (for the most part) through this stretch in about 20 minutes.
As for the Brighton and Culver lines. In my MB reopening service plan, we'll still have the D and M on the Brighton as the locals, and the V on the Culver as the local (the latter was David G's idea). I think passengers wouldn't be too upset at this loss of service, and could adapt. Meanwhile the E and F trains in Queens would not be as crowded as you might think, despite cuts in service.
All of your arguments for the Q express in Queens are negated by the fact that these Broadway stations are already served by the R. Once the 2nd Ave. line is built, this Q service would have to be eliminated anyway. And no, sufficient track capacity doesn't exist, even if you remove the speed limits (something that's not worthy of discussion). The E & F needs it's entire current capacity, and cannot be cut for any reasons.
You've got to forget that the Broadway line can access 63rd. St. It's NOT meant to be used for Queens trains.
"Once the 2nd Ave. line is built...." We should only live and be well.
It looks like we're not gonna agree here, which is cool. My whole thing is why should Queens riders (particularly Eastern Queens and LI riders) have to wait to transfer to a Queens Blvd/Broadway Local when they could have a one-seat ride on a Queens Blvd/Broadway Express. That's partially the reason why Queens riders generally avoid the R and the Broadway Line. They're avoiding an extra transfer (or two) and a perceived slow train. A Queens Blvd/Broadway Q Express would make the Broadway Line a more attractive option to Queens IND riders. I think the MTA should at least give this a shot. If it does not work, then return to standard E, F, Queens Express service.
As for capacity issues, regardless of speed timers, I agree with the Q Brightliner. If you run a 12 E, 9 F and 9 Q schedule for a total of 30 tph on the Queens express tracks, I'm convinced you'll have better service for Queens riders, as long as the E and F run through the 53rd Street Tunnel. The V along with the Q could run through the 63rd Street Tunnel.
As for the 2nd Ave and it's completion (if it's EVER completed), upon completion planners (with input from affected communities) could then decide what to do with the Q.
No plan is worthy of consideration if it doesn't actually increase the number of trains on the Queens Blvd. express. Since the tracks are now at near-full capacity during rush hours, adding a Q route and cutting E/F service is pointlessly complicating and serves almost no benefit to the riders. 53rd St needs all the E trains it's currently getting.
I don't think adding the Q complicates things. Basically, we're going back to about a month ago where the E and F ran through 53rd Street. All I'm doing differently is running the V through 63rd Street. Your argument about E riders is correct if running a Q has very little effect on it. The only way we know for sure this does not work is if it's attempted.
As for the Q serving little benefit to Queens riders, I don't know about that. If fully restoring the Hillside Express, bringing more options to 63rd Street riders (express and local), giving many Queens Express riders the ability to transfer to just about every train in Manhattan in one shot (or one less shot), shortening the time it takes to get to MetroTech and Downtown Brooklyn (without a transfer) and bringing back a Manhattan express train to Queens Blvd riders all constitutes serving little benefit, then somebody shoot me.
I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one.
Does either the F or E run express past 75 Ave and Briarwood-Van Wyke, or does all express service end after Continental?
The E runs express to Jamaica-Van Wyck, skipping 75th, and Van Wyck Blvd. It then visits Sutphin Blvd and the last stop, Jamaica Center. I blieve the E's that run from 179/Hillside in the AM rush do so on the express track (somebody correct me if I am wrong).
The F runs local east of 71-Continental.
Thanks I wasn't clear on that. So basically the only local stations not skipped is the old Sutphin and 169, unless those few E's running to 179 ( to 179 for whatever reason-to confuse people) skip those.
Exactly. Those who say the express tracks east of Continental are not being used are mistaken. The E uses them to Van Wyck.
This is why I don't see what all the fuss is about. So what is only two stations aren't being used, as local only, with the express skipping them. If the express wasn't being used at all past 71, which I thought everyone was complaining about, I see the problem. But now that I know that the E does run express, till it leaves for it's route to JC, it's not worth making a big deal about 2 stations.
I'm not so sure about that. While you're correct in saying that only two local stations on the Hillside portion has express tracks that are generally not used, if I'm heading to Manhattan from LI or Eastern Queens via bus and get off at 179 (which many do), I'm a little upset. I either have to endure four local stops that I can skip with a Hillside Exp (169, Sutphin, Briarwood-Van Wyck and 75th Ave) or transfer to the E at Union Tpke, which would be utterly pointless. Discontinuing the Hillside Express basically lengthened my commute. That's what some of these riders were complaining about when the Hillside Express was discontinued.
I specifically chose the Q as the Hillside Express in an attempt to lure some riders off the F (and the E to a lesser extent). Running the E local between 71 Av and Jamaica Center may (or may not) unclog the E a little and add more Queens passengers to the Q, who are always looking for the express.
It totally slipped my mind that if you get on with the F at 179 you either have switch to the E or endure the local stops to 71. OK, you converted me, I do now see what all the fuss is about.
It's 4 %$#@ stops! Not the end of the world.
That's what some of these riders were complaining about when the Hillside Express was discontinued.
Even more complained when it was running, which is why it was eliminated in 1992 when the R was truncated to Forest Hills 24/7. It was community pressure which killed it, not the TA, so you should be yelling at your neighbors if you hate using the F as a local...LOL.
Besides, without using another express route as the local east of Forest Hills, running the F express is pointless. No one will want to use the local. And for years, that other express was the E, now rerouted elsewhere, permanently.
As I said before, passengers on the Hillside end of the Queens Blvd line we're not so much complaining about the F being the Hillside Express as they were about having to TRANSFER to an express train if they lived at a Hillside local stop. They generally did not want anything to do with the R Local. They would have had no problem if you ran a Hillside Express...as long as the Hillside Local became another Queens Express.
As for making four extra local stops not being such a big deal; Imagine for example if the MTA made the W local in Brooklyn, the J and Z local in Brooklyn (between Myrtle and Marcy), or the 5 local in Brooklyn during rush hours. All of these trains skip around a total of 4 stops in its borough. Now imagine telling all of these passengers that running their express local isn't a big deal...
For the record, I do not live in Eastern Queens or LI, but I do sympathize with their situation.
True, but you can't cram yet another train onto the express track so easily. Now, perhaps selected R trains, or V trains, running from 179 could "skip stop" or do "A" and "B" stations, like the 1/9 did, or like SEPTA does in rush hour on the Market-Frankford line. It would do so on the local track. The train would have to honk upon entering the station, and continue through at reduced speed, accelerating as it leaves.
I don't know how Queens Blvd. commuters would feel about that...
They wouldn't feel so great about it. That's because the R and V part ways at Queens Plaza and they go down different routes in Manhattan. Too much unnecessary transferring would have to be done.
There is a fantasy map that shows the Q and R trains running skip-stop on the Queens Blvd local tracks. But even that might not work because the same map shows the Q and R parting ways at 36th Street. This same map also shows the E, F and V running express (no G service at all) on Queens Blvd. I wouldn't count on that happening either.
As we seen before, Queens passengers are not fooled with "skip-stops" (ride the J/Z during rush hours). In their mind trains are either expresses or locals. RonInBayside was right in saying that cramming 3 express trains on Queens Blvd wouldn't be easy, but that has never (to my knowledge) been attempted before. I would at least like to see it attempted before we can state that it's not possible.
"RonInBayside was right in saying that cramming 3 express trains on Queens Blvd wouldn't be
easy, but that has never (to my knowledge) been attempted before. I would at least like to see it attempted before we can
state that it's not possible."
Bad idea. Plus, a test like that isn't necessary. If you increase the number of trains per hour through a track to the point where a) the trains are running into lots of red signals; b) they all start crawling past yellow signals - then you've got too many trains on that track. It doesn't matter whether you have three lines or one.
You also have to contend with the bottlenecks called East River crossings. It doesn't matter whether you are local or express at that point. The TA tried to see if they could run the G to Continental along with the the new trains. It was a disaster.
The TA has proved, that, yes, Queens Blvd's express track is maxed out.
My fault, I should have been more specific. The current capacity on the Queens Blvd. line is 30 tph with 15 E and 15 F's. I'm wondering whether the MTA has ever attempted to divide the 30 tph among three lines on the Queens Blvd express tracks.
The G train running to Continental with the R and V was doomed to failure, because 71 Ave cannot turn around three different train lines at the same time. Very few terminals has that capability. However with the Queens Express, you have the 179 terminal (which CAN turn around two different train lines) and the Jamaica Center terminal, which would be turning one line from Queens Blvd.
So what you want to do is redistribute capacity among three different lines.
If riders are willing to accept longer headways between a given preferred train (and/or enough of them could take either of two out of three trains with no preference between them), and the service plan does not degrade service esewhere in Manhattan, the Bronx or Brooklyn, then I don't see why not.
So, back to the idea of 10 Es, 10Fs, and 10 Qs per hour:
- Probably not enough Es in the reverse direction from Penn Station to East 53rd. Those were packed when there were 12 of them.
- Now you have only 20 tph to East 53rd from QB (10 E, 10 V). Is that enough?
- Does the Q really give you enough diversity from the F to make it worth splintering the QB service into 3 parts? Q stops are never more than 1 long block from F stops until you get to Union Sq and below.
All 3 points are well taken. The idea of running the Q into Queens is silly.
An idea that has never been attempted before isn't "silly", until it's tried. Some of history's greatest scientists had theories which we're widely dismissed as "silly" which ultimately were proven correct. If you think about it, urban planning is a science.
Chris, all-inclusive adjectives such as "silly" detract the points you made. One of the points you made I do agree with you would be problematic, that is 9 tph on the Q would be inadequate northbound in the AM rush (for Brighton Express riders), southbound in PM rush. But I believe that there are possibilities for getting around this, too.
Are there more than 9 Brighton locals now? After all, the Brighton expresses would be D trains on a totally different track.
After the whole Manhattan Bridge reopens, they'll likely run 12 TPH on the Brighton express & local (they need this level of service bad!). Current headways are 10 TPH.
If true, that kills the proposal, which is for 9 tph on the local.
That's about what the M runs these days, inadequate for the Brighton line, express or local. They need more, not less service.
What you just said is a reason why I am also calling for the creation of a Culver Express. I'm not totally sure about this, but I believe some who ride the Brighton Line live closer to the Culver but avoid it because it's a slower line, with no express service. Creating a Culver Express I believe would draw some passengers off the Brighton and onto the Culver.
As a rider of the Brighton Line, I think for the most part, the two Q's are doing relatively well with a 10 TPH schedule (each). I mean, it's not the mess that the 1 train is now. Cutting 1 TPH off the Q line when the bridge reopens may not mean the end of life on the Brighton. The D will probably be more popular than the Q during rush hours because it's the 6th Avenue train. If anything, the D as a Brighton Local should have at least 11 TPH. Also running the M as a Brighton Local will help bring a lower Manhattan option to Brighton riders, many of whom currently transfer to the IRT or the N or R. As a kid, I distinctly remember the Brighton M as being a relatively popular train, not the ghost train it is today on the West End line. Once riders figure out that the M basically makes many of the same stops that the IRT (1,2,4 and 5) makes in lower Manhattan, the M may again become a popular choice.
Creating a Culver Express I believe would draw some passengers off the Brighton and onto the Culver
This idea was tried when the original Culver express was instituted in 1968. It didn't work. Most of Brighton ridership consists of people who live east of the line, many taking busses to Kings Highway & Sheepshead Bay.
Good point. I wasn't around in '68, I wasn't even born. If the ridership patterns are the same today as they were 30 years ago, then the Culver Express probably won't help the Brighton. I have a question; do you think that the MTA should even run a Culver Express?
I think the V should service Brooklyn, and the only way that can happen is if the F is run on the express tracks between Church Ave. and Jay St. It won't really save a lot of time for F riders, but it allows a lot of extra service between Church Ave & 2nd Ave in Manhattan.
Any planned lines to serve the area East of the Brighton Line? I know there was one in the IND Second System. Has anyone planned anything since?
What street do you have in mind. Nostrand Ave. extension? Have there ever been plans for a Flatbush Ave extension?
"South 4th Street-Utica Avenue Line: This would have gone (as subway) from the Houston St. river tunnel to Grand St. in Williamsburg, southeasterly to S. 4th St. and Driggs Ave., then along S. 4th Street (easterly and parallel to Broadway), then along Union Avenue and then Beaver Street to turn south along Stuyvesant Avenue until moving to Utica Avenue at approximately Fulton Street (where the never-used shell is in place today). The Utica Avenue Line would then have continued as subway to Avenue I, emerged as an el and continued to Avenue S, where it would have moved to Nostrand Avenue and continued to its terminal at Voorhies Avenue in Sheepshead Bay. There would have been 2 tracks from the river to the S. 4th St. junction, then 8 tracks (!!) (two levels of 4 tracks, with the other level for the Myrtle-Central-Rockaway line outlined below), to the cut-off for the Stuyvesant-Utica line, then 4 tracks to Avenue S, then 2 tracks with a provision for expansion to 4 to Voorhies Ave."
is what it says on this site.
That would have been some subway line. Too bad we will not see it built and operating.
Actually, S4th St. would've been an interesting station, where the Utica And Rockaway lines merged. IIRC, it was to be an 8 track, 6 platform station.
Plus on later versions of the plan there was an extra four track line along Flushing Avenue, somehow reaching Horace Harding Boulevard. Think what that would have done for Queens!
There was every intention of building the Nostrand Ave. line beyond Flatbush Ave.; that's why it has side platforms. At the time there were enough funds to finish it as far as Flatbush Ave. Unfortunately, that's as far as it ever got.
I think there were problems with the soil under Nostrand Ave. which caused construction of the IRT to terminate where it does now.
The same problem that caused all the other lines south of Ave. I to be elevated. At least not subway.
Interesting. Can you provide more info on this? I'd always thought the reason was that less street congestion in Brooklyn allowed this cheaper alternative to subway tunnels.
Alan Glick
The 1968 plan for action had the IRT extended from Eastern Parkway down Utica Ave into the Flatlands.
I think 20 tph (perhaps 18?) are sent on the Brighton now, half express and half local. Certainly the line could handle more, at least 24 perhaps 30, but the number is restricted because of MB "rehabilitation". Current service to mid-town of 20 tph could, I believe, be supplemented by adding (and thus restoring) a Nassau St. train at 5-6 tph, but this would be possible only once there is enough rolling stock available and would be facilitated when the MB is fully re-opened.
Yeah, but why? All the problems of the Q being routed into Queens Blvd. can be eliminated by NOT doing it. No advantage is given by trading 6th Ave and 8th Ave access for Broadway access.
Chris, there are a bunch of factors to be considered in operations planning (and I believe that the TA is doing a pretty good job of it what with the limitations, such as closure of 1/2 of the MB). Two prime factors are in contradiction: On one hand, a variety of services should be available to passengers. On the other hand, more switching usually means more delays. Another factor is the number of trains per hour that can be run on a given track, which, given the information by other subtalkers, is today from 24 to 30 (albeit higher in the past), depending where. Another factor is how fast turn-arounds can be made at terminals (today, slower than in the past partly because of longer trains). Another factor might be usage of a particular line. For example, the C runs relatively infrequently and with shorter trains than a number of other lines. The same can be said of the eastern division lines. Thus, a marriage of them may have benefit. Likewise, I believe that linking of one heavily used line, the Brighton, with another, the Queens Blvd., would be beneficial to both. For one, I believe this would bring about renewal of Brighton Express service on weekends and Hillside Av. Express service. Interesting, though, that there are several arguments for both sides, but none of them are compelling! For my part, I take heart in that sending the Q out to Queens as an express all the way was not my original idea. I think JoeKorner posted this idea several years ago....
I've never seen Korner's post!!! And to think that at one time (some couple of years ago) I was the only one who thought of the whole Q to 179 idea!
I'll post my version of how trains should operate through a fully operational MB in a couple of days. As a hint; the amount of switching needed in my version will not be much more than it is today.
The T.A floated the idea around sometime ago for Q service along Queens Blvd....
Joe Korner's idea was not posted, but was (perhaps still is) on his site: www.quuxuum.org/~joekor. I'd be interested to see your full plan. And David G.'s too. Maybe you two guys should get together. Somehow, I had a feeling that David G. was going to slate the Q for Jamaica Center (with its 12 tph capacity, fits perfectly the frequency of what the Q should be running in 2004).
Hmmm! Interesting idea. It hadn't even occurred to me. I'll think about it. (No promises!)
Is each Q running 12 tph now? That seems like more service than is warranted, I'm afraid.
Again, I have not lived in the big city for quite sometime. But if other posters are to be believed (including Chris, many of his opinions could be described as those of a devil's advocate), the 5 minutes headways on the express would relieve very unpleasant overcrowding. As a 9th grader at Brooklyn Tech in 1965, I can still remember trying to exit a Q Brightliner at Dekalb Av., and almost failing to do so, were it not for somebody yelling "Let the little guy out!" All that was missing were professional pushers, a la Tokyo. Seriously though, it seems to me that the Brighton should be operating 24-26 tph through the Prospect Park--Dekalb Av. corridor rush hours (IIRC, it's 18-20 tph now).
Q Brightliner,
You've gotta be kiddin' me!!! You went to Brooklyn Tech in '65!?! I went to Brooklyn Tech from '89-'93!!! Yes, I can also relate to your adventures on the Brighton Line. I still have vivid memories of my dad pushing me (as a little kid) onto crowded trains because he couldn't fit onto it. I think the Brighton Line can still get ugly at times, but compared to about 15 years ago, today is heaven.
I think the big problem back then were the trains themselves. They had an annoying tendency to go out of service, due to some mechanical failure. This usually resulted in overcrowded trains. I believe today's Brighton problems is related more to routing. The M not going over the Brighton Line today does not help.
It turns out that there are other Tech graduates on the site. For one, Train Dude, and our stay there overlapped for 2 years though we've never met each other. About trains going out of service, I doubt that the frequency could be matched with that post-Chrystie, with the R1/9s inherited from the former IND. The major problem today is not the routing but the restricted capacity with only 1/2 of the MB tracks operating. I believe that the TA is right sending the Brighton trains to mid-town. When capacity comes back in 2004, Nassau service should return as a rush-hour supplement, like pre-Chrystie.
Again, I should have been more specific. The Q Brightliner had a breakdown of trains which I thought was great: 12 E's, 9 F's and 9 Q's.
- The reverse direction E's to Penn Station and Port Authority is THE one flaw I'm worried about. I'm hoping that the Q stopping at 57 Street (which has an exit two blocks north of 7 Av-53rd Street) and 42 Street (one long block from Port Authority) could get some passengers off the E.
- 21 tph I think is enough, if the Q could draw passengers that do not HAVE to go through the 53rd Street off the E and F lines. I believe that there are a good number of people that fit this category. I was hoping to bring the F back to 53rd Street. From what I've seen so far, people are INVENTING ways to avoid the V. The V could run up 63rd Street, being about as empty as it is now heading to Queens.
-While it's true that the Q parallels the F to a degree, the Q has much more (and more convenient) transfers than the F. In addition, the Q would make less stops than a 53rd Street F between Roosevelt Ave (Queens) and 34th Street in Manhattan. If I guess right, people would be drawn to the Q based on these two factors.
Not that a single sample makes a survey, but I just took a V yesterday at 11 AM from 14th St to 5th Ave. I was very near the back and nevertheless the train was moderately full - a few seats left but not many.
At 50th St at least half the people got off, but they were replaced by an equal number who got on.
I've ridden the V several times during rush hours. I can say that your experience is the norm with the V nowadays. People are using it at a fair clip.
I too was concerned about that point concerning uptown E. But I was calling for, with 12 E + 9 F + 9 Q tph, for the same number of E trains as now.
There are 15 Es now, but admittedly there were only 12 before December.
This still reduces trains to E 53rd to 21 (was 30 before December, now 25).
And splintering of lines is a real nuisance; everybody wait longer.
Not a terrible idea provided 21 trains to E 53rd is enough, but is it a good enough ides to warrant the confusion and the splintering?
You hit it on the head, Chris!
What about resurrecting the old Jamaica underground where the (J)/(Z) formerly went into before the Parsons/Archer Terminus?
I think that was the point of running the J under Archer. It wasn't supposed to end at JC. It was supposed to run further, I'm not clear, but either under Archer, or along the LIRR ROW. That was the real intent of removing the el from Jamaica Ave, of course the money ran out.
Only the E was intended to run past Jamaica Center. The J's intended terminating point was always where it is right now.
Oh I see. I new it was one of them. But least the E would have replaced the Jamaica El.
Only the E was intended to run past Jamaica Center. The J's intended terminating point was always where it is right now.
Now that is the stupidest idea I've heard in AAAAAAAAAAGES. extend the busier line and make it even more packed.
The J line was supposed to continue along Archer Ave. out to Hollis, IIRC.
Not according to what I've heard. It may have been proposed, but it was never approved.
"Steve B." is correct, at least in part. According to page 25 of METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION - A PROGRAM FOR ACTION (the 1968 MTA plan), the Jamaica Avenue Line was to be razed in the Jamaica business district and its service incorporated with the Southeast Queens Line that was to branch off the Queens Boulevard Line (the truncated version is today called the Archer Avenue Line). The line was to be extended to Hollis, but the book does not say which level was to be extended (or whether both were). Later it was decided that the branch coming off Queens Boulevard would be extended but that the branch coming off Jamaica Avenue would not, and still later it was decided to do nothing.
David
If you extended the J to Laurelton, it would merely act as a shuttle to Jamaica Center, where people would empty the J trains for the E line.
Under the 1968 MTA PLAN FOR ACTION,The Jamaica line was suppose to travel farther along Archer ave,in Phase 2 of construction.
Did the old Jamaica El terminate underground? Was 168th Street an underground station?
No it was above ground.
Thanks. I thought that was the case, but I had never ridden the original Jamaica El, so I wasn't sure.
Ron, there are several pictures of 168th St.--Jamaica on this site.
Thanks.
On weekdays (and, IME, sometimes the E runs local non-rush hours). Weekends, the express tracks are used for layups, and all service is local.
I suppose you know that I'm one (of what is apparently a minority) of those that agrees with you.
Hey,
Thanks for the support! I only wish that the MTA at least TRY to run the Q express in Queens. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. I believe it could though.
As for the Q serving little benefit to Queens riders, I don't know about that. If fully restoring the Hillside Express, bringing more options to 63rd Street riders (express and local), giving many Queens Express riders the ability to transfer to just about every train in Manhattan in one shot (or one less shot), shortening the time it takes to get to MetroTech and Downtown Brooklyn (without a transfer) and bringing back a Manhattan express train to Queens Blvd riders all constitutes serving little benefit, then somebody shoot me.
Bang bang. LOL.
Seriously, I don't see any benefits of running Broadway Q service on the Queens IND express tracks. People are used to the E & F, can use the R to access all Q stops in Manhattan, and is impossible without limiting E & F headways to unacceptable levels on all parts of both lines. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here.
One more thing I forgot to mention; in a good amount of instances in urban planning, there are instances where things which are designed for one function wind up doing a lot better job doing a totally different function. The two sides of the MB are a good example of this. The South side was originally for Nassau St Line while the North for the Broadway Line. Can you imagine how packed the Broadway side would be if this was the case today??? I believe the same may hold true for the 63rd Street Tunnel, considering the politics of constructing subways.
Can you imagine how packed the Broadway side would be if this was the case today???
I don't have to imagine it. It's already a reality.
My fault; what I should have said is how useless the Nassau side in a Nassau-Broadway alignment would have been, in comparison to the 6th Ave-Broadway alignment today on the MB (when its fully opened).
That was an unlikely scenerio. Had the pre Chrystie configuration been in effect during the rehab, whichever side that was open would have been connected to the Broadway express tracks. A simple track realignment under Canal St would have made this possible (like the realigning of the southern tracks to meet the Broadway line in 1967).
And to stress again, the Broadway/63rd. St connection was NEVER meant to be used by trains going to Queens, but meant to serve upper 2nd Ave
Wasn't it to be used by trains from upper 2nd TO QUEENS?
No, from upper 2nd Ave to Broadway, with a cross-platform transfer at Lexington Ave. The current Lexington/63rd. St station has an unfinished platform behind that red brick wall.
Oh yeah that's right, the unused side is for 2 Ave service. I assume across the platform transfers?
Yup. This was the intent of the Broadway/63rd. St connection.
It's already been proven that you cannot even improve Queens Blvd. service without the riders whining. Cutting E/F service would be intolerable. Also remember that the F train operates in Brooklyn and cannot be cut much beyond it's current headways as it is. There'd be no Q service in Brooklyn to help these people.
But if the V is extended to Kings Highway with the F running express, then F service could reasonably be reduced.
But that would be too much service. The Culver line below Church Ave doesn't need 2 routes.
Not too long ago Kings Highway F's ran express. Maybe they could extend the V to Kings Highway, and run the F express from Smith Ninth to Coney Island, of course when more R143's come and maybe some of the R42's could provide for the car shortage that seems to be preventing this.
That express service was acheived by splitting one route (F) in half. Extending the V would create excessive service and a logjam @ Kings Highway.
So how did that work, they ran alternating F's to Kings Hoghway?
Those marked "Kings" Highway ran local, those from "Coney Island" ran express.
How? Wouldn't that cause the Local to have to lay up on the THROUGH express track at King's Highway? Surely they'd've had the sense to turn the express early and run the local to Stilwell.
That's not how it happened. In the AM, trains from Coney Island switched onto the express track using a now rwmoved switch just south of the station. Locals relayed farther down the express tracks.
You're kidding! The switch that facilitated a perfectly reasonable (although perhaps unwarranted) routing was removed?!
I kid you not. There is no way a Manhattan-bound F train can access the express track south of Kings Highway anymore.
Yes, I see that from the track map. Northbound express service has no choice but to bypass Avenue U. If the service plan from the 80's is reinstated, with locals beginning at Kings Highway, that yields no northbound service to/from Avenue U at all in the morning rush. Not good.
It looks like I'll have to rethink my fantasy service plan, either cutting back express service to Church or extending the local to Stillwell (with the local and express merging/diverging between U and X in both directions). The big question is whether Stillwell can handle both lines in a single pocket; that, of course, depends on headways (and whether it's possible to clean the cars at the lines' north terminals).
Excessive service would not be created by halving F service to 9 tph, keeping V 9 tph, and extending 9 tph Q to Jamaica to replace loss of 9 tph F. But this would be feasible only when both sides of the MB re-open and there is enough rolling stock.
But with the Manhattan Bridge reopening, the Q will go to 12 TPH for sure during the rush hours. Now you're screwing Brighton express riders. Running the Q on Queens Blvd. is unworkable & silly. It complicates things and serves no useful purpose.
When and if all 4 tracks on the Manhattan Bridge are useable this is the tenative service plan:
B Line-Stillwell Ave to 145th Street except midnight hours. Extended to Bedford Park Blvd-rush hours via 6th Ave Express/West End
Midnights-Shuttle Stillwell Ave to 36th Street.
D Line-Stillwell Ave to 205th Street at all times. Via 6th Ave Express/Brighton Local
N Line-Stillwell Ave(or 86th Street until Stillwell Ave Terminal is complete) to Ditmars Blvd via Broadway Express/Sea Beach Local
Q Line-Brighton Beach to 57th St/7th Ave-daily except late night via Broadway/Brigthon Express
R Line-95th St to Continental Ave via Broadway/4th Ave Local all times
W Line-Ditmars Blvd to Whithall Street-weekdays only via Broadway Local
Queens Blvd Service
E Line-Jamaica Center to Chambers Street/Hudson Terminal-WTC with peak rush service to/from 179th St peak direction only
F Line-179th Street to Stillwell Ave(alternate trains to Kings Highway rush hours) Express Continental to 179th St weekdays only and Stillwell trains express peak direction on Culver
G Line-Queens Plaza to Church Ave all times
R Line-See above
V Line-Continetntal Ave to 2nd Ave daily except late nights. Extended weekdays Continental Ave to 179th Street
K Line-Rush hours Limited service-179th Street to Eastern Parkway via Queens Blvd Local,53rd Street,6th Ave,Broadway Brooklyn Line
The K and V Lines will operate every 10 min. rush hours
Any comments
Thank You
wont happen....sorry.
Why not?
This is WHOSE tentative service plan? To the best of my knowledge (and I talk to NYCT's service planners quite frequently), there is no official service plan, tentative or otherwise, at the moment.
David
Sorry the plan is mine and i should have indicated as such. I did not mean to say that its the MTA's.
Besides Operation and Service Planning is still 15 years behind the times. Just look at the Manhattan Bridge-Grand Street Mess
Again my apoligies
Thank You
The Manhattan Bridge is not Operations Planning's mess. It's the city's and state's mess. That's been said here many times and it remains true.
David
No, but the TA is responsible to what train goes over the bridge and mine has been screwed off it for almost 15 years. For that the MTA is guilty as charged.
Hell Barry, I knew it was yours as soon as I saw the Sea Beach back on the Manny B. The TA would never let that happen.
I understand the pessimism expressed about certain parts of this plan (G line extension, V to 179th, K line). These issues have been discussed at length and actually have nothing whatsoever to do with the MB reopening. They have to do with availability of rolling stock, pasenger demand, and the ability to turn trains around at Continental.
The Manhattan Broadway "BMT" part of the plan seems very reasonable to me, though, and should seem reasonable to the MTA too.
- It hardly expands service relative to current service levels.
- It hardly expands service relative to what was provided after Chrystie St opened and before the first MB problems, a time of even worse financial distress than now.
Compared to the current service:
- There is one additional express over the MB.
- In return, some redundant/inefficient services get deleted: the Grand St Shuttle, the second Broadway local through the Montague tunnel, and the duplication between 34th and 53rd where we currently have both B and W, and both D and .
Compared to 1980 or thereabouts, there is also little added service. In 1980, there were:
- 2 Broadway locals, one terminating at Whitehall and one through the Montague tunnel (the EE from Whitehall to Continental and the R from Bay Ridge to Astoria respectively).
- 2 Broadway expresses via the bridge (the Sea Beach and the Brighton Local, both to 57th).
The only addition relative to 1980 is that a second service is extended from 57th to Astoria. And that is justified by increased traffic. Besides, I think the R ran more frequently then than either the N or W does now, so we're talking a handful of extra tph from 57th to Astoria.
So I don't see that the MTA could consider the B/D/N/Q/R/W portion of this plan expensive.
The EE was eliminated and replaced by the N in 1976. In 1980, Broadway had the N (Continental/Sea Beach via bridge or some Continental/Whitehall rush hours), QB (57St/Brighton via bridge) in rush hours and RR (Astoria/4Av). N & RR both ran local on Bway. In rush hours, that was 2 Bway services going over the bridge and one through Montague, where the RR "Nassau specials" and the M joined it.
I knew I wasn't sure of the exact dates, which is why I said 1980 or thereabouts. So what I said about 2 local services and 2 expresses applied to 1975.
But my main points are still (a) the proposal (at least as it applies to the Broadway "BMT" line) is not excessive by historical standards and (b) the proposal is not a significant increase in resources over what are required today.
If service is reduced on each route, total Culver service won't be much more than it is now. Counting by number of route designations is pretty much meaningless. Remember how many people thought that service on the 1/9 and J/Z was cut in half when the 9 and Z were suspended/eliminated after 9/11?
Is the Z running again? I guess it was just when the J & M took over the N & R
Skip-stop J/Z operation is in effect.
If Archer meant the end of the express to 179th because the E went to Jamaica Center, why can't they just extend one of the locals to 179, so the F can run express? The E and the F used to run there together with no problem, and now the E is gone, so there must be room.
How much time does the express vs. local really save along Hillside if you are riding all the way out to 179? Are we talking all of like 5 minutes?
Why inconvenience riders getting off at a local stop along Hillside by changing from the F express to an R or V local at Forest Hills if you are not really saving any time.
Also, wouldn't running the F express create a bottleneck with the E when it joins up at Union Turnpike?
Also, wouldn't running the F express create a bottleneck with the E when it joins up at Union Turnpike?
That's where I assume the problem is, otherwise I feel they would have continued express service.
So if an F express is running up the behind of an E when it comes in at Union Turnpike, just run the F local along Hillside.
Also, you save passengers the hassle of switching from the R or V local to the F express which has already been slowed by the bottleneck, and passengers from 179th don't know the difference.
It has nothing to do with the E ans F merge.
Read the archives. The F express to Hillside was cancelled specifically because a lot of long-distance riders did not want to transfer at Kew Gardens or Continental to get on an express. With the F running local east of Continental, riders who get on in the morning are assured that their train will switch to the express track and most will have seats all the way.
That's been tried before. Too few passengers willing to get on a train at Hillside Av. that will be a local along Queens Blvd.
I kid you not!!! On a couple occasions, I rode the V Train from Lex to 47-50 Street to transfer to the Queens-bound F. This was during evening rush hours. I went to Lex-53rd because I don't work too far from there and was a little curious. I observed and sure enough, there were some of the same passengers who I saw get off the V at Rockefeller Center waiting for the Queens-bound F! For its part, the F's I rode out of 47-50th Sts were not crowded. I guess the passengers wanted no part of the packed E Train or the slow V.
The Broadway Express run is a relatively fast run when there are few trains routed on it. It's not the Flushing or Brighton Express runs, but it gets the job done. When you put a lot of trains on it, (as is the case now) it's slowed big time. You're right about the lack of time savings, but I think many passengers have the mentality that expresses are MUCH faster than locals, even when it's not true. This is why Queens IND riders complained.
As for the loss in express service; Queens Blvd/Hillside riders really did lose some express service. They loss their only Manhattan express train and they lost the Hillside Express. I can't think of any place off-hand where they gained express service to offset these losses.
Running the M on the Brighton is a useless waste of capacity. No one will ride it. Increased D/Q service after all 4 tracks are operating will suffice.
Once again: running the Q on weekends in my plan would overserve Broadway and would lead to unbalanced bridge service. In the course of traveling the nine stops from Atlantic to Essex, the M would hit transfer points to every single other line in the system aside from the 1 (assuming service to South Ferry is restored), 7, E, G, L, and shuttles. Many Brighton passengers have to transfer no matter what. They'll use the M.
I would be running 2 trains on both sides of the bridge. The B would remain as it was pre 7/22. The Broadway line would not be overserved with the Q running on weekends. And the Brighton line could definatley use weekends expresses.
Completely unnecessary. Where would the B go? CPW doesn't need two locals and two expresses on weekends. (Notice that my plan gives it two locals and one express. Neither express comes close to filling up on weekends. Might as well give local passengers better service.) It can't go to Queensbridge anymore. And two 6th Avenue expresses are unnecessary. Similarly, two Broadway expresses are unnecessary on weekends. Service with the N express and the R/W local would be similar to today's service, which comes quickly and isn't crowded (on weekends). The M would be the Brighton express; it's a cross-platform transfer from the N (which would stop at DeKalb on weekends) or one flight up at Canal.
Hey Dave, I noticed you never mentioned my poor Sea Beach, mired in that vermin infested Montague Tunnel. It seems like my lady can never catch a break. How about a new plam that puts in on the bridge, and gets one of those damn Brightons off of it. How about that?
The city won't run a Brighton/tunnel route because it says it cannot do so without congestion at Atlantic into Dekalb.
But if the N ran over the bridge, there would be room to put some Brighton trains into the tunnel.
R headways will be increased. Besides, with the 3 routes as it is movement is slow. Fewer trains might make things move quicker.
The City simply will not run a Brighton-tunnel service. End of story.
Sorry Chris, this is not the end of the story. You will hear it again and again, whether you want to or not.
My friend, that makes too much sense for the vapid TA to grasp.
Fred this is almost 2002, not 1950 when the Brighton had both tunnel and Bridge Service, even though it is not a bad idea, But the only time back then when the Brighton ran via Tunnel is when the Express Ran, when the Express was not running the Brighton Ran Exp in Manhatten via Bridge and local in Bklyn(nights and Sundays)
And there were Brighton-Franklin expresses on Sundays.
The Brighton will always be a Bridge Line, you are Lucky that the Sea Beach runs at all asnd is a 24/7 Line,
I guess you didn't see my plan.
The Q should also run on Saturdays
Not a bad idea, but I'd limit the V to Church Ave. only. The terminal at Kings Highway is busy enough with only current F service.
I also hate to see the loss of Nassau St. service through Dekalb Ave, but given M ridership, it's a justifiable move.
Is there any reason a brooklyn rider would take an M train over an N or an R? You can even transfer to a 4 or 5 at Court St/Borough Hall and end up in pretty much the exact same place, and with more frequent service. Only thing you can say for the M is it Can drop you off right in front of the Stock Exchange.
Better access to the financial district. Transfers to the A/C. Easier transfers to the F than in Brooklyn. Direct access to the 6 (local). For those who can't use the bridge itself, easier access to the bridge line at Canal. Direct access to Williamsburg and beyond.
For most, Broadway is the more useful route, but the M is still of use to some.
Once the full Manhattan bridge service goes back into effect, and the tunnel loses the N line, those R trains will be pretty crowded. I must admit, as I stood on the northbound side of Broad Street, waiting for a J/Z on Tuesday, I noticed that the Brooklyn-bound M's were packed. Perhaps that's due to the Cortland St. station being closed. But the M does provide a usefull service, at least during rush hours. After 10 AM and after 7PM it's basically useless.
Lots of people work well east of Broadway in lower Manhattan (e.g., many tall office buldings on Wall St and on Water Street). They could walk 2 short blocks west from Broad St. station to the N/R at Recotr St (which is open), but the M at Broad is clearly more convenient if they're headed to Brooklyn.
Also, from the municpal office/courts area, the N/R is again considerably less convenient than the M, since they have no station at Chambers St, but only a few blocks further south at City Hall.
So there are legitimate uses for the M or some other Nassau St to Brooklyn line.
They could walk 2 short blocks west from Broad St. station to the N/R at Rector St (which is open),
Hey, it's open again, when did they open it?
Rector St. was open the first day N/R service was restored, on 10/28/01.
The day I flew back from NYC to Denver, as it turned out.
I remember it well because I cursed the timing. I had to endure the crowded J trains when they ran to 95th St, because no Z's were operating. My last day working for Morgan Stanley was the previous Friday (the 26th), so as of 10/28, i had no job to commute to!
Sorry to hear that. Have you found employment elsewhere?
I left voluntarily. I have sufficient $$$ to remain unemployed for quite some time: the wife is supporting me....lol.
What are your plans now (happy holidays and here's hoping you find a satisfying job very soon).
The M actually does get pretty good ridership. I've had my fair share of experiences with it and can't imagine it gone.
David, 2 quick thoughts. 1. Expand Q service to Saturdays. 2. R service to 179th was tried a few years ago, and failed. Apparently, people out there do not want a local. Possible alternative: run F local on Hillside. Extend Q to 179th via express. (Loss of some F is balanced by the V for Culver.)
David,
I like your service ideas. I feel that it is a well thought out plan. It shares many similarities to my own ideas though I did not think of the W becoming the West End Local, which is a very good idea. I think there are a few minor areas where you would have problems.
The Yankee Factor: People riding on D Trains from a Yankee night game (among others) would be extremely upset to find that their train will make 8 more stops on the Central Park West section. They're many Yankee fans that ride the D. I think the MTA is right in having the D run express in Manhattan 24/7.
I'm convinced that the R going to 179 will not be popular among those on the Hillside Line. What's gonna happen is that those who are forced to get on the R at the Hillside Local stops will get off to get an express. It adds a transfer. My solution (which I think you have seen before) is to extend the Q as the Hillside/Queens Blvd. Express to 179 and have the F run its usual Hillside local/Queens Blvd express route. The Q could go through the 63rd Street tunnel and continue as an express. I think there would enough passengers on this Q train route to run all times except nights (after about 10 PM). I'm convinced that doing this would be more convenient for everyone.
The N going express from only 34-Canal means that it would have to switch tracks. That switch always seems to slow EVERYTHING down. I would just run the N express from 57-Canal. Astoria riders that want 49th Street should just take the W, or on weekends transfer for the R.
The M, I think could return to the Brighton as the Brighton Local during rush hours. It could run all the way to Coney Island sharing the tracks with the D. However this means that trains would have to turn around and leave Coney Island quickly.
Still, it's an impressive plan.
(Sorry for the delayed response. I put this aside so I could spend some time on a reply and proceeded to forget about it.)
The Yankee Factor: People riding on D Trains from a Yankee night game (among others) would be extremely upset to find that their train will make 8 more stops on the Central Park West section. They're many Yankee fans that ride the D. I think the MTA is right in having the D run express in Manhattan 24/7.
So the TA should base its general, year-round, everyday schedules on occasional sports events? I don't think that's a good idea.
Besides, some of those Yankee fans are going to the CPW local stations. Which is preferable, having them wait on the platform at 125 for an average of ten minutes (and up to twenty minutes) for an A local, or having everyone else wait in the comfort of their seats for the extra three minutes? (Really, that's all the local adds -- check the B/D timetable.) Furthermore, doesn't the TA run extra post-game service? The extra post-game trains could easily run express while still retaining the scheduled A/D local service.
A few years ago, the TA decided to run double local service at night on most Manhattan trunk routes, recognizing that halving the twenty-minute headways is more useful than saving a few minutes for through travelers. For some reason, this policy was never extended to the CPW line, the 6th Avenue line, or the Broadway line. My plan corrects that, and also fills in for the weekend local service reduction that took place (unannounced) on 7/22 when the B became a weekday-only line. (The A still runs express on weekends.)
I'm convinced that the R going to 179 will not be popular among those on the Hillside Line. What's gonna happen is that those who are forced to get on the R at the Hillside Local stops will get off to get an express. It adds a transfer. My solution (which I think you have seen before) is to extend the Q as the Hillside/Queens Blvd. Express to 179 and have the F run its usual Hillside local/Queens Blvd express route. The Q could go through the 63rd Street tunnel and continue as an express. I think there would enough passengers on this Q train route to run all times except nights (after about 10 PM). I'm convinced that doing this would be more convenient for everyone.
I don't think this would work. With the E and F alone, the Queens Boulevard express tracks operate at 30 tph. How could you squeeze in the Q without drastically cutting service on the Brighton and Culver lines?
Queens Boulevard commuters have some sort of allergy to locals. Sending the F through 63rd will force some of them onto the local, but for anyone east of Forest Hills, not only is the local slow, it's also a required transfer. Sending the R local all the way to the end of the line would force more onto the locals and would allow those with spare time to ride the roomy local all the way from 179.
The N going express from only 34-Canal means that it would have to switch tracks. That switch always seems to slow EVERYTHING down. I would just run the N express from 57-Canal. Astoria riders that want 49th Street should just take the W, or on weekends transfer for the R.
I don't see what you're getting at. The N has to switch tracks in either case, south of 57 or south of 42. If anything, switching south of 57 increases the likelihood of N's getting tied up in delays on turning Q's. Traditionally, 60th Street trains stop at 49, and since 49 is a busy station, I see no compelling reason to do away with that tradition.
The M, I think could return to the Brighton as the Brighton Local during rush hours. It could run all the way to Coney Island sharing the tracks with the D. However this means that trains would have to turn around and leave Coney Island quickly.
Yes, I would take this even one step further: send the D local at all times to Stillwell, send the Q express weekdays to Brighton Beach, and send the M express weekdays and weekends (only a few tph) straight through to Stillwell. If D and M trains are cleaned at their north termini, they should be able to fit at Stillwell.
As for your remark about the N at DeKalb -- if the N doesn't stop at DeKalb on weekends, Sea Beach passengers won't be able to reach 6th Avenue without a double transfer or a long walk at Atlantic-Pacific. (Remember, the B only runs weekdays.) I realize the extra switching to stop at DeKalb is best avoided, but in this case I don't think it's fair to avoid it unless, perhaps, the N happens to pull in across from an R or W at Pacific (still, that doesn't help Brighton passengers aiming for the Broadway express).
David G,
I've just read your post. Sorry for the delay on a response:
The Yankee Factor: Is it only a three minute difference???, it seems to be more (this must be a mental thing). I believe that while there are some Central Park riders coming from Yankee games, the vast majority of the Yankee D riders are either from LI, NJ (which means they get off at 34th Street) or from Brooklyn. You'd be very surprised how many late night D riders exist (or used to exist before the MB north side closed), particularly after a Yankee game. Plus there are political issues involved. Suburbanites want to get home in a hurry. They usually have to go to work the next day. Do you think they'll just accept the D going local??? Even though it's only 3 minutes, it would seem to be an eternity for them. Finally this would just slow things down for those coming from a night in midtown and trying to head home to Brooklyn or the Bronx. Again there are a lot of passengers that fit into this category (or used to fit).
R going to 179: The MTA already tried this before. What happened was that people abandoned the R like it had the black plague and fled to the F. Even though the R would go to 179, it wasn't a true option for those beyond 71 Ave, because its a local. The majority of NYC riders (not just Queens riders) HATE locals. They only use it when necessary. Bringing the Q and making it an express at first glance seems to be a natural disaster waiting to happen; but if you look closer, you'll see why I'm strongly advocating the Q to be the third Queens Blvd. Express:
57 Street: Has an exit that is only two blocks from the E at 7 Ave-53rd St.
42 Street-Times Square: many transfers, which are much more convenient than the E transfers at 8 Ave-42 Street. Access to lower Manhattan could be had via the 7th Avenue Line. The one flaw is that the Q is further away from the Port Authority Bus Terminal.
34 Street-Herald Square: A legitimate second Queens express option to the F for Queens riders at this station.
14 Street-Union Square: Transfers to the Lex Ave line to lower Manhattan. Another way for people to reach lower Manhattan (though not advisable).
Canal Street: Transfers to the underused J, M and Z to lower Manhattan. This is the transfer that I would strongly recommend to Queens riders heading into lower Manhattan. Also brings the heart of Chinatown (not just E. Broadway) closer to many Queens Blvd. riders.
DeKalb Ave: Many wouldn't think much of this station (except for its transfers) until they realize that it has an exit that basically sits at the east end of MetroTech in Brooklyn. Queens Blvd. riders could now conceivably get to MetroTech relatively quickly.
Not to mention that Q could fly (for the most part) through this stretch in about 20 minutes.
As for the Brighton and Culver lines. We'll still have the D and M on the Brighton, and the V on the Culver. I think passengers wouldn't be too upset at this loss of service, and could adapt. Meanwhile the E and F trains in Queens would not be as crowded as you might think, despite cuts in service.
N switching at 57 instead of 34: At first glance this does not seem like such a big deal, but the switch at 34 invariably slows everything on the express and local between 34-14 (and sometimes as far as Canal) northbound and 49-34 southbound. People trying to get to major stations are almost always delayed. A switch at 57 would not cause a major slowdown on all tracks at the middle of the Broadway line.
M as a Brighton Express to Coney Island: The idea is very intriguing, but people at the local stations would miss out on a one-seat ride to lower Manhattan. This also makes it less likely that they'll transfer to the M to reach lower Manhattan. They might end up transfering for the N, R at DeKalb, or worse, to the 2,3,4,or 5 which already has too many passengers. M becoming a Brighton Local would lure a lot of people to it as an alternative to lower Manhattan. Before it went on the West End, the M had pretty good ridership during the rush hours. The M going local also keeps the number of switching and possible conflicts on the Brighton Express down. On weekends, I don't know whether there are that many M riders who travel down the Brighton Line. Still the weekend Q Brighton Express could be had for Jamaica/Myrtle riders at Canal.
N stopping at DeKalb: You're absolutely right in stating this problem. I would easily solve this problem by having the B run the West End at all times. It would run to Manhattan all times except nights. Both the B and N would skip DeKalb at all times except nights. Nights, the B would be a shuttle between 36th and Coney Island. I'd scale the W back to Whitehall. During rush hours, the W would still go to Bay Parkway as the West End/4 Ave Local, while the B would be the West End/4 Ave Express to Coney Island. I think your idea of the W to Bay Pkwy is a great idea, one I never thought of.
You're also absolutely right in your Culver Line patterns. I admit that your F express/V local Culver service pattern is better than my E express/F local Culver service pattern.
P.S.: Comments from anyone are welcomed
The Yankee Factor: Is it only a three minute difference???, it seems to be more (this must be a mental thing). I believe that while there are some Central Park riders coming from Yankee games, the vast majority of the Yankee D riders are either from LI, NJ (which means they get off at 34th Street) or from Brooklyn. You'd be very surprised how many late night D riders exist (or used to exist before the MB north side closed), particularly after a Yankee game. Plus there are political issues involved. Suburbanites want to get home in a hurry. They usually have to go to work the next day. Do you think they'll just accept the D going local??? Even though it's only 3 minutes, it would seem to be an eternity for them. Finally this would just slow things down for those coming from a night in midtown and trying to head home to Brooklyn or the Bronx. Again there are a lot of passengers that fit into this category (or used to fit).
It's three minutes. Really. Look at the B/D timetable (if you can find it).
More people than you imagine live along the CPW line, which happens to skirt the edge of the most densely populated neighborhood in the country. I don't see why the users of those stops, who are already paying more per mile to get home from the Bronx than the Brooklynites are (let alone the suburbanites, who pay even less per mile on their commuter rail lines), should have to get off and wait up to 20 minutes for a local, just so the suburbanites can avoid the impression (but not the reality) of a slow ride as they're seated comfortably on a safe, well-lit train.
And again, this is an issue a few nights of the year, for an hour or so each night. What about every other night of the year? AFAIK, the TA runs extra D trains after Yankee games -- those extras could continue to be expresses, with the regularly scheduled service still running local.
Expresses make sense when either of two conditions holds: (1) The local stops already have ample service, but another line needs to run along the corridor to reach points at the other end; (2) So many people need to go past the local stations that they can fill up a train. On the average night on the CPW line, neither condition holds.
R going to 179: The MTA already tried this before. What happened was that people abandoned the R like it had the black plague and fled to the F. Even though the R would go to 179, it wasn't a true option for those beyond 71 Ave, because its a local. The majority of NYC riders (not just Queens riders) HATE locals. They only use it when necessary. Bringing the Q and making it an express at first glance seems to be a natural disaster waiting to happen; but if you look closer, you'll see why I'm strongly advocating the Q to be the third Queens Blvd. Express:
[...snip...]
As for the Brighton and Culver lines. We'll still have the D and M on the Brighton, and the V on the Culver. I think passengers wouldn't be too upset at this loss of service, and could adapt. Meanwhile the E and F trains in Queens would not be as crowded as you might think, despite cuts in service.
Your idea has merit. I'm willing to consider it. I still have concerns. Most notably, with the F and Q both running through 63rd, there will be even less service connecting with the 6 at 60th and 53rd, and in particular, only one-third of the expresses (and none from 179) will have transfers to the 6. This concern will vanish if the TA builds a passenger-friendly transfer corridor from one level above the upper level Lex/63 platform to the 4/5 platforms three blocks down. Also, if two services run through 63rd, IMO one should be a local. Perhaps we could swap the F and V. Perhaps the most significant problem is that the more different services have to merge, the more likely merging delays will be. If the problems can be worked out, I do like the idea of direct Broadway access from the Queens Boulevard express.
N switching at 57 instead of 34: At first glance this does not seem like such a big deal, but the switch at 34 invariably slows everything on the express and local between 34-14 (and sometimes as far as Canal) northbound and 49-34 southbound. People trying to get to major stations are almost always delayed. A switch at 57 would not cause a major slowdown on all tracks at the middle of the Broadway line.
Unless there's something peculiar about the switch at 34, all you're doing is shifting delays. That doesn't accomplish a thing. Don't get me wrong -- personally, I'd love through trains to bypass 49, as I ride from Lex to 42 semiregularly but I haven't used 49 for at least ten years. I just don't see what the masses would gain.
M as a Brighton Express to Coney Island: The idea is very intriguing, but people at the local stations would miss out on a one-seat ride to lower Manhattan. This also makes it less likely that they'll transfer to the M to reach lower Manhattan. They might end up transfering for the N, R at DeKalb, or worse, to the 2,3,4,or 5 which already has too many passengers. M becoming a Brighton Local would lure a lot of people to it as an alternative to lower Manhattan. Before it went on the West End, the M had pretty good ridership during the rush hours. The M going local also keeps the number of switching and possible conflicts on the Brighton Express down. On weekends, I don't know whether there are that many M riders who travel down the Brighton Line. Still the weekend Q Brighton Express could be had for Jamaica/Myrtle riders at Canal.
Especially if Q service is reduced, the M should run express. Most passengers are destined for points north of Canal/Grand, and they'll use the D and Q. Local passengers who want the M will transfer at Brighton express stops, and for the first time in a long while, there will be direct express service to Stillwell.
N stopping at DeKalb: You're absolutely right in stating this problem. I would easily solve this problem by having the B run the West End at all times. It would run to Manhattan all times except nights. Both the B and N would skip DeKalb at all times except nights. Nights, the B would be a shuttle between 36th and Coney Island. I'd scale the W back to Whitehall. During rush hours, the W would still go to Bay Parkway as the West End/4 Ave Local, while the B would be the West End/4 Ave Express to Coney Island. I think your idea of the W to Bay Pkwy is a great idea, one I never thought of.
See my response to Chris about the B. And, like weekends on CPW, it makes more sense to have two locals and one express on 4th Avenue (R/W local, N express, as per my plan) than to have one local and two expresses (R local, B/N express, as per yours).
You're also absolutely right in your Culver Line patterns. I admit that your F express/V local Culver service pattern is better than my E express/F local Culver service pattern.
Watch out. My next proposal will make some radical changes on this front. I haven't worked out the details yet, but it will probably be something like E express, V local, with the C becoming the J and the F running to Lefferts as the Fulton local. Something like that.
P.S.: Comments from anyone are welcomed
Likewise. And thanks for yours.
"Perhaps we could swap the F and V". David, I had been thinking along those lines, too. I believe that 21 tph (12+9) QB expresses (E + F) would be better through 53rd. Send the 18 tph (9+9) Q and V via 63rd.
Happy holidays and sorry for the long delay on the response. I just haven't had convenient access to the internet. You make some interesting points...
The Yankee Factor: It looks like we're not gonna agree on this (which is cool, especially during these times). From what I've seen; the majority of nighttime Yankee West Side riders take the D to 59th and transfer to the uptown Broadway-7th Ave Line. It's less waiting time for them for the most part because the B'way-7th Ave Line has two nighttime services (in comparison to one CPW Local). They seem to avoid the CPW Local. While it's true that the CPW line runs along the most densely populated neighborhood, that doesn't necessarily translate into the most nighttime subway riders for that line. From what I've observed in the past, there were more riders heading to Brooklyn or the Bronx than heading to the upper West Side on just about any given night on the CPW route. It's true that Manhattan riders pay more per mile than Brooklyn or Bronx riders. It's also true that many of NYC's premier attractions are in Manhattan, which is partially the reason why living in Manhattan (in general) is a little more costly. Without turning this into an borough war and with all due respect; I believe that nighttime Brooklyn/Bronx riders should not have slowed on account of what appears to be a relatively few CPW nighttime riders. I agree with the MTA's present pattern.
Q going express and F/V service patterns: I agree with bringing the F back to the 53rd Street line, while running the V through 63 street. I was already leaning in that direction before the 12/16 switch. After two weeks, I'm now convinced that the V going through 53rd isn't the best option.
N switching at 57 instead of 34: I don't know...having a train switch from the local to express track (and vice-versa) at the middle of the entire line always seemed a little odd to me. I don't think that happens anywhere else. Having three trains stop at a local station while having only one train skip it, is also very odd, in my opinion. I'm convinced that once the MB is fully reopened, 49th Street will not be as crowded, thanks to the Rockefeller Center station (though I could be wrong).
M as a Brighton Express to Coney Island: It looks like we're not gonna agree here either. While I would love to see a Brighton Express to Coney Island, the layout of the Brighton Line just doesn't help, unless you only have two services on the Brighton. In that case, trains would have to enter and leave CI in a hurry. If there are enough trains out there, I'm not sure that Q service will be reduced. Remember that the Q once shared tracks with the B and D, and there didn't appear to be too much of a glitch on the Brighton Line. Even now the Brighton Express Q shares tracks with two other trains (The Brighton Local Q, which is a different train, and the W). In addition, if there is less Q Brighton Express service I'm not so sure that will be such a big thing considering the fact that people will probably favor the 6th Ave. Train (D) over the Q. There are more corporations along 6th Ave than Broadway at Midtown. As for the M running express; riders at local stations could conceivably transfer to the M at Brighton Express stations, but you could make it more convenient by bringing the M to them. Finally, the M running on weekends on the Brighton I think is not a good idea. From what I've seen, there just isn't enough weekend M riders to justify this. What I would like to see though is to have both the J and M terminate at Broad on the weekends. M riders could transfer for the Q at Canal to head towards Coney Island. Maybe on summer weekends, the MTA could run the Q as a Brighton Express to Coney Island.
N skipping DeKalb: I've seen your response(s) to Chris. I do not believe in a rigid two local one express rule. On some lines on the weekends it just slows things down. Some weekend lines are better served with two expresses and a single local. I'm a big believer in giving riders options, while granting them relatively quick service, even on weekends. You've already read my opinion on the D being the CPW local. Having the B run on weekends would do two things:
1. In Brooklyn it would give 4th Ave riders a more convenient 6th Ave. option, while reducing travel time for West End riders, because it would be a 4th Ave Exp.
2. In Manhattan, it would give CPW riders direct 6th Ave access, without slowing things down for Bronx riders.
I would probably put both the B and N on 12 minute intervals on weekends. The R would have only 8 minute intervals on weekend because it would be the only local for a long stretch.
F/V service: F going to Lefferts??? C becoming the J??? Sounds interesting, but I like your F/V Culver service idea better. My post Manhattan Bridge plan includes bringing back the old C Express and the 8th Ave K. Stay tuned...
The Yankee Factor: It looks like we're not gonna agree on this (which is cool, especially during these times). From what I've seen; the majority of nighttime Yankee West Side riders take the D to 59th and transfer to the uptown Broadway-7th Ave Line. It's less waiting time for them for the most part because the B'way-7th Ave Line has two nighttime services (in comparison to one CPW Local). They seem to avoid the CPW Local. While it's true that the CPW line runs along the most densely populated neighborhood, that doesn't necessarily translate into the most nighttime subway riders for that line. From what I've observed in the past, there were more riders heading to Brooklyn or the Bronx than heading to the upper West Side on just about any given night on the CPW route. It's true that Manhattan riders pay more per mile than Brooklyn or Bronx riders. It's also true that many of NYC's premier attractions are in Manhattan, which is partially the reason why living in Manhattan (in general) is a little more costly. Without turning this into an borough war and with all due respect; I believe that nighttime Brooklyn/Bronx riders should not have slowed on account of what appears to be a relatively few CPW nighttime riders. I agree with the MTA's present pattern.
I still don't understand why you want to set year-round overnight service based on what you think would be best after a Yankee game. Most nights there are no Yankee games, there are never Yankee games at 4 in the morning, and the extra post-game specials can run express regardless of how the scheduled service runs.
There are relatively few CPW riders -- in comparison with the 1 a few blocks over. I don't think the CPW local stations have few riders on a systemwide scale. I haven't seen the official numbers, but I doubt the Bronx D stations have many more passengers than the CPW stations.
I really don't see why you consider it preferable to ask CPW passengers to wait an average of 5 minutes extra (and up to 10 minutes extra, or 20 minutes total) standing on an unpleasant, poorly lit, rat-infested platform rather than to ask Bronx passengers to wait 3 minutes extra while seated comfortably on a well-lit, safe, climate-controlled R-68.
I repeat -- the TA decided a few years ago that, overnight, on a line with two services, both should run local. I don't see why CPW should be an exception, especially as the CPW express skips so many stops.
Q going express and F/V service patterns: I agree with bringing the F back to the 53rd Street line, while running the V through 63 street. I was already leaning in that direction before the 12/16 switch. After two weeks, I'm now convinced that the V going through 53rd isn't the best option.
Woah, hold it. With 63/Lex as it is now, the F and V cannot switch places. Who would ride the V? They can switch places only if a simple direct connection is built between 63/Lex and the 4/5 platforms three blocks away. At that point 63/Lex would be the preferred transfer point to the 4/5/6 over 53/Lex (which has a long escalator ride and no access to the express).
If the passenger connection is built, then the F could go back to 63, with the V and newly extended Q using 53. That would give Queens local passengers access to stations along 63 without the need to backtrack.
N switching at 57 instead of 34: I don't know...having a train switch from the local to express track (and vice-versa) at the middle of the entire line always seemed a little odd to me. I don't think that happens anywhere else. Having three trains stop at a local station while having only one train skip it, is also very odd, in my opinion. I'm convinced that once the MB is fully reopened, 49th Street will not be as crowded, thanks to the Rockefeller Center station (though I could be wrong).
As I said, this isn't a big deal as far as I'm concerned. I will say that yesterday morning at 42, I pushed my way onto a NB R that appeared to be jam-packed. In fact, half of the seats were empty; the jams were only by the doors. At 49, the crowds by the doors all got off. Now, I cannot comprehend why they all felt compelled to get up and stand by the doors while we were still stopped at the prior station, but I can tell you that 49 is a busy station.
M as a Brighton Express to Coney Island: It looks like we're not gonna agree here either. While I would love to see a Brighton Express to Coney Island, the layout of the Brighton Line just doesn't help, unless you only have two services on the Brighton. In that case, trains would have to enter and leave CI in a hurry. If there are enough trains out there, I'm not sure that Q service will be reduced. Remember that the Q once shared tracks with the B and D, and there didn't appear to be too much of a glitch on the Brighton Line. Even now the Brighton Express Q shares tracks with two other trains (The Brighton Local Q, which is a different train, and the W). In addition, if there is less Q Brighton Express service I'm not so sure that will be such a big thing considering the fact that people will probably favor the 6th Ave. Train (D) over the Q. There are more corporations along 6th Ave than Broadway at Midtown. As for the M running express; riders at local stations could conceivably transfer to the M at Brighton Express stations, but you could make it more convenient by bringing the M to them. Finally, the M running on weekends on the Brighton I think is not a good idea. From what I've seen, there just isn't enough weekend M riders to justify this. What I would like to see though is to have both the J and M terminate at Broad on the weekends. M riders could transfer for the Q at Canal to head towards Coney Island. Maybe on summer weekends, the MTA could run the Q as a Brighton Express to Coney Island.
Only a single service can use each pocket at Stillwell now because the trains are cleaned there. If M and Q trains are cleaned at their north terminals, they'll be able to share a single Stillwell pocket. Look at the N/W at Ditmars, the Q/Q at 57, the B/D at 34, the 7/7 at Times Square.
If your plan of running the Q along with the E and F in Queens is enacted, Q service would probably have to be reduced.
I disagree with your assessment of the D vs. the Q. Outside of rush hours, when office buildings are less of a destination and transfer points are more important, the Broadway BMT is the clear winner.
Of course you don't see many M weekend riders; the M is a shuttle on weekends. The number of M riders depends on where the M goes. If it goes to Coney Island, it will have riders, and they will be able to transfer to their hearts' contents in lower Manhattan. Running both the D and Q on weekends would yield too much express service on either Broadway or 6th Avenue; today's weekend Q alone usually has empty seats all the way.
N skipping DeKalb: I've seen your response(s) to Chris. I do not believe in a rigid two local one express rule. On some lines on the weekends it just slows things down. Some weekend lines are better served with two expresses and a single local. I'm a big believer in giving riders options, while granting them relatively quick service, even on weekends.
Options are great but costly. Either each option runs very infrequently or trains run empty. (On many weekend lines, trains already run empty.) I'd rather use that money to push off the next fare increase, or to implement capital and maintenance projects, or to increase service on lines that do routinely get crowded on weekends (like mine).
[...]
F/V service: F going to Lefferts??? C becoming the J??? Sounds interesting, but I like your F/V Culver service idea better. My post Manhattan Bridge plan includes bringing back the old C Express and the 8th Ave K. Stay tuned...
C express? K? Today we call them the A and C, respectively. What do you have up your sleeve?
Please hold off on your judgment of my new plan before I've even posted it! (One more sneak preview: You'll be happy to hear that the D will never run local on CPW. You'll be less happy to hear that the B will take its place as the full-time Concourse service.)
Okay, I'll take it easy! Hmm...the D to be replaced by the B in the Bronx, but is still an express? Sounds interesting...I'll be looking for your post. As for my version of the C, my little hint is this: The C will once again become the Bronx version of the A, as it was in the earlier days of the IND. I'm not sure when I'll post my plan, but I'll post my plan hopefully soon.
"(One more sneak preview: You'll be happy to hear that the D will never run local on CPW. You'll be less happy to hear that the B will take its place as the full-time Concourse service.)"
David, that sounds interesting!
And keep both of those damn lines off the Manhattan Bridge in perpetuity so I can get my Sea Beach back on where it belongs.
Oooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
David:
Are you fairly certain of the B going up the IND Concourse line full time when the Bridge reopens in 2004/2005?
David is preparing a plan of what he thinks would be optimal service, under the given conditions, come 2004. I think it is a reasonable assumption that the B will return to its former route Coney Island via West End, 6th Av., and Concourse. The modification that David stated in his post (having the B serve Concourse 24/7) would be new, and with other hints he's given of the new plan he is preparing, I am in great anticipation of reading all of the details.
Likewise. I look forward to reading it!
David G,
One more thing. You've guessed correctly that many of these weekend options I'm giving to riders will be on at least 12 minute headways. As for the M (I admit I'm not as familiar with the M as I am with other lines), if there are that many M Train riders, why is their train a shuttle the majority of the week?, or have I missed something.
Again, now that I analyzed your hint more closely, I believe you may have something with the B being a 24/7 operation. I will definitely look for your post.
As for the M, I think the point of alot of the shuttles during weekends and nights, on any of the lines that do this, are to avoid overlap service when not needed. So the J or M run together after Myrtle-Broadway. You got to kill one of them, it would be dumb to kill the J, because the M is basically the branch line, and the J has a longer run befor Myrtle, and more passengers. So if one has to die, the M gets cut to shuttle at Myrtle during nights and weekends. I'm sure it's a similar idea for all the other lines that become shuttles, off hours.
At 12-minute weekend headways for each line, overall service would be unnecessarily great but local stations would be underserved. Express passengers would get nice, quick, direct rides in empty trains while local passengers have to wait on the platform. That's not a wise use of resources.
The M is only a shuttle nights and weekends. It's a shuttle because there's marginal demand for both J and M service into and through Manhattan at those times. Besides, if it is little-used, it's not little-used on account of the letter -- if the M is extended to a popular corridor, the M will be popular. The weekend Brighton express service should be the M because Broadway and 6th Avenue are perfectly adequately served with one express each on weekends and some people need to go to lower Manhattan or its transfer points.
David,
Sorry it took a while to get back to you. Some local stations on express-local lines deserve 8 minute headways on weekends (B'way-7th Ave, Broadway, 4th Ave (Brooklyn) and Lex), because there are a decent number of people at these local stops. The majority though just don't (Fulton Line and Central Park West immediately comes to mind). There just aren't enough local passengers to justify slowing down those on expresses, especially when the amount of those on the express clearly outnumber those at local stations.
CPW doesn't deserve 8 minute headway on weekends? There are hordes of tourists (including local New York tourists) at the 81st street stop. I suppose that's the only busy stop, but 12 min headways would make a terrible impression.
I wouldn't be surprised if, on the average Sunday, more passengers used the single 81st Street station than all of the Bronx D stations combined.
Even if not, the slowdown is three minutes (according to the schedule, and I've timed it myself -- I was on a NB D that met a C at 59; at 145 I got off and went upstairs, and the C pulled in under three minutes after the D had opened its doors), and that's three minutes seated on an R-68, not standing in a dark, cold (or hot) station with rats.
I just read your post. I don't know about the 81st Street station thing on a Sunday, considering that the 161 Street station alone is a popular transfer point between the D and 4, even on non-Yankee Sundays. I'm getting a picture of 81st Street being a very popular station, perhaps worthy of two weekend trains.
As for the three minute express vs. local thing I don't know. I don't know if Bronx riders would be happy with running their train local on the CPW line. In a couple of days, I'll post my version of how trains should run through a fully operating MB.
Making the D run local would be equivalent to turning the Q into a shuttle between Prospect and Newkirk ... you'd have riots. :)
The American Museum of Natural History is connected to 81. That's why it's busy, especially on weekends. The other stations are desolate compared to the nearby IRT line on Broadway but, I suspect (without proof, or even proff), are somewhat better used than the Concourse stations.
The transfer at 161 does get some use, but I don't see it as a major generator of traffic. Certainly, anyone who might transfer from the 4 to the D for an express ride to Brooklyn could just as easily stay on the 4 to Brooklyn Bridge or Atlantic and transfer there to the M or D. Even if the D did run express, the 4 moves faster through midtown Manhattan.
My three minute claim comes straight off the TA's published timetable. I also tested it myself -- of course, a sample size of one doesn't prove much, so I encourage you to do the same. (Go to 59 and wait for an express and a local to enter at the same time. Board the express and ride to 145. Wait for the local on the proper platform.) I also once had an interesting ride on the C from 86 to 168 -- we were passed by an A but we passed it right back, and we ended up reaching 168 ahead of that A and perhaps ahead of the A in front of it.
I really don't care how Bronx riders feel about local service. As a matter of fact (as opposed to feeling), Bronx riders are outnumbered by CPW riders (I think), Bronx riders are being asked to wait less than CPW riders are currently forced to wait, and Bronx riders are being asked to wait in better conditions than CPW riders currently endure. Assuming that the three-minute figure is correct, how could it possibly not make sense to run the D local on weekends?
As for the M Train, if what you state is correct, then there should be a good number of riders pouring out of the M between Essex and Broad if it's extended to Broad. From what I've seen in the not-so-distant-past, a surprisingly good number of weekend riders come from uptown or the Bronx to get to Coney Island during summers (which is another reason why I've argued that the D should remain express in Manhattan). If Queens Blvd riders want to ride to Coney Island during summer weekends, the Q would be the best option, if it's extended to 179 as an express. The big question here is whether the amount of summer weekend riders on the M would be greater than the number of summer weekend riders on a Queens express Q. On a hunch, I don't think that would be the case; which is why I think the Q should be the Brighton Express on weekends.
I also believe that this particular aspect that David G. is proposing would fail. I believe there is an advantage to connecting one popular line (Brighton Express) with another (Queens Express), for one when it comes to scheduling. Having the D run 24/7 as Brighton Local and Q run express all the way 16/5 all year + 2/14 (weekends) in the summer (Memorial Day to Labor Day) I believe has a better-than-fair chance of success.
As usual, I'm in agreement here.
The problem with connecting all the popular lines as expresses is that it leaves the dregs to the local passengers, who have no choice in which line they ride. On a systemwide basis, it makes more sense to scatter a few positive features in the direction of each line so that none becomes too popular (consider the E/F vs. the G/R before 12/16) and so that local passengers aren't forced to transfer to get anywhere at all.
Here's why, if there is a weekend Brighton express, it should be the M:
(1) On weekends, Broadway receives more than ample service with three services and 6th Avenue needs only two. (This is, IMO, the real reason the W doesn't run to Manhattan on weekends -- it would be a waste of money. The last time I rode a weekend W from Stillwell to Pacific, on a late Sunday afternoon, my car never had more than three passengers.) According to the plan I posted earlier, the D and F cover 6th and the N, R, and W cover Broadway. Sending any additional service up 6th or Broadway would be a blatant waste of money; if the TA wishes to spend money on service, it should be spent on the lines that actually get crowded on weekends. Any Brooklyn BMT services added to the basic five listed above need to go somewhere else. The M is the obvious choice, as (a) it brings passengers to a somewhat different part of the city, and even if it's not a popular weekend destination, it has some excellent transfers, particularly at Fulton, and (b) the M already runs as a shuttle further north, and this provides a convenient excuse for replacing the shuttle with through service.
(2) Okay, now we have room for six Southern Division services: 4th Avenue local, Sea Beach local, West End local, Culver local (which is stuck with the F, but I'm including it since I included the F above), Brighton local, and Brighton express. One of them will have to go to a destination that isn't terribly popular in its own right. If possible, we shouldn't force this destination on anyone, offering it instead as an option. Is this possible? Yes! If the M runs on the Brighton express, then no one is forced to use a line that goes somewhere unpopular. Passengers at Brighton express stations going to, say, the Bronx have two choices: ride the D local all the way or ride the M express and transfer to, say, the 2/3/4/5 at Atlantic or Fulton.
I now understand your reasoning behind routing the M as the Brighton Express. You're looking more in terms of achieving service balance and less on passenger ridership patterns. That's a interesting point. I believe though that the W should be running on weekends. I recall on a couple of occasions riding the B to Brooklyn on weekends a while back, there were people riding the train. It was not as popular as the old D on weekends, but I wouldn't say running the weekend B to Brooklyn was a waste of money.
In about two days, I'll post my own version of what I think the Manhattan Bridge reopening should look like. People at local station
I now understand your reasoning behind routing the M as the Brighton Express. You're looking more in terms of achieving service
balance and less on passenger ridership patterns. That's a interesting point. I believe though that the W should be running on
weekends. I recall on a couple of occasions riding the B to Brooklyn on weekends a while back, there were people riding the train.
It was not as popular as the old D on weekends, but I wouldn't say running the weekend B to Brooklyn was a waste of money.
In about two days, I'll post my own version of what I think the Manhattan Bridge reopening should look like. People at local stations will not (for the most part) be regulated to the dregs of the NYC Subway.
I now understand your reasoning behind routing the M as the Brighton Express. You're looking more in terms of achieving service balance and less on passenger ridership patterns. That's a interesting point.
I'm looking at both, actually. The two needs should be balanced.
Consider what happens if they're not balanced. If my only concern were service balance, I'd flip a coin to decide which line goes where. If my only concern were convenience to passengers, I'd run four versions of each Brooklyn service -- one to 6th, one to Broadway local, one to Broadway express, and one to Nassau. Obviously, neither extreme makes sense.
Running too much weekend service on (say) Broadway is a problem. While the TA is pouring money into keeping Broadway trains running nearly empty, other lines are crowded. Shouldn't that money be going towards service improvements on the busier lines?
I believe though that the W should be running on weekends. I recall on a couple of occasions riding the B to Brooklyn on weekends a while back, there were people riding the train. It was not as popular as the old D on weekends, but I wouldn't say running the weekend B to Brooklyn was a waste of money.
According to the plan that I first posted, the D (Brighton - 6th Avenue), W (West End - Broadway local), and N (Sea Beach - Broadway express) all run on weekends. They all meet at DeKalb, so transfers between the lines are easy. (Remember? You didn't want the N to stop at DeKalb, but I insisted it was necessary.)
With the bridge in its current shape, I'm afraid running the W to Manhattan on weekends would be wasteful. The last time I rode a weekend W from Stillwell to Pacific, on a late Sunday afternoon, my car topped out at three passengers. I don't think the TA should run a full 600-foot train into Manhattan for the convenience of 28 passengers -- that's a taxi service.
If such technology existed, I'd propose running the Q and W as four-car trains on weekends (or, perhaps, run the Q with six cars and the W with two, or something like that), linking into a single eight-car train at DeKalb.
My only complaint is that the TA could find a way to run the W through to DeKalb, for the direct, same-platform transfer to the Q. (It's possible, although a bit messy.)
In about two days, I'll post my own version of what I think the Manhattan Bridge reopening should look like. People at local stations will not (for the most part) be regulated to the dregs of the NYC Subway.
Excellent. I look forward to it. Thank you for your interesting comments, even if I may disagree with many of them.
David, you have interesting ideas (as usual). Somehow, and mind you I have not lived in the NYC area for some 24 years but if there have not been some basic changes that I don't know about, I don't think an M Brighton Express would survive, even in the summer, due to low ridership. Wouldn't a 4th Av. M train (West End) on weekends, be a suitable alternative. BTW, I checked recently the MTA schedule for the weekend Q. I was surprised that the frequency of a train every 8 minutes is for so many hours on weekend! My preference would be for having N, Q, and R on Broadway, (M on Nassau or B on 6th), and D and F on 6th for the weekend.
There's no need for two weekend West End services. Ridership simply wouldn't justify it. I'm not even sure if the Brighton line could support two weekend services, but I'm willing to consider it.
For those transferring, the M is as good as any other line, if not better. Those not transferring can opt for the local (or can transfer, whichever they prefer). I don't think it's fair to force those boarding at local stations to transfer if they want to go north of Delancey in Manhattan.
Are the Q headways longer or shorter than you had expected? I'm curious.
My original plan had the D (Brighton local - 6th Avenue local), F (Culver - 6th Avenue local), N (Sea Beach - Broadway express), R (4th Avenue local - Broadway local), and W (West End - Broadway local) on weekends. My new plan, which I haven't posted yet (and is not yet finished, so this may all change tomorrow), will probably have the B (West End - 6th Avenue local), E (Culver - 8th Avenue local), M (Brighton express - Nassau), N (Sea Beach - Broadway local), Q (Brighton local - Broadway express), and R (4th Avenue local - Broadway local).
The E running to Coney Island via Culver. That could work, but would it be an improvement over the F? As far as the N train is concerned, your older plan is better. The N should not remain local. Broadway does need two locals, but why not retain the W as the other Broadway local?
And how about this: Run the D express to Brighton Beach and the Q local to Coney Island. The way it was before the 6th Avenue bridge tracks were shut down for the first time in 1986. But it might require the M to run local on the Brighton Line, depending on how frequently the D runs. I suggest this because the pre-7/22 D line from 205th Street to Coney Island via Brighton Local was such a long route with a lot of stops. The present diamond-Q line from 57th to Brighton Beach via Brighton Express (which would be the sole Q line under your new plan) is a fairly short line with not too many stops. With the Q local and the D express, you equalize things somewhat.
The E running to Coney Island via Culver. That could work, but would it be an improvement over the F?
I was hoping no one would notice. I'm planning on totally reorganizing the local services at W4; this is one artifact of that plan. I ask you to wait for the details before critiquing this point.
As far as the N train is concerned, your older plan is better. The N should not remain local. Broadway does need two locals, but why not retain the W as the other Broadway local?
I was only posting weekend service here. I initially had the D and W on weekends, but I swapped the Q for the D, so I also had to swap the B for the W (or there'd be no 6th Avenue bridge service on weekends). That means the W wouldn't run on weekends, so either the N or the Q would have to be bumped off the bridge. I'm still wavering on this point, though; we'll see what I come up with in the end.
And how about this: Run the D express to Brighton Beach and the Q local to Coney Island. The way it was before the 6th Avenue bridge tracks were shut down for the first time in 1986. But it might require the M to run local on the Brighton Line, depending on how frequently the D runs. I suggest this because the pre-7/22 D line from 205th Street to Coney Island via Brighton Local was such a long route with a lot of stops. The present diamond-Q line from 57th to Brighton Beach via Brighton Express (which would be the sole Q line under your new plan) is a fairly short line with not too many stops. With the Q local and the D express, you equalize things somewhat.
Good point. I'll keep it in mind. I might extend the Q to Queens, however, in which case the Q wouldn't be much shorter than the D (if at all).
(BTW -- as for your post on the 2 local, I'm deferring response until I have more time to spend on it, probably tomorrow night. You do make some good points, but I'm not convinced you have your facts are correct.)
I agree - there has to be both Broadway and 6th Avenue bridge service on weekends. From what I read, it looks like there would be three services over the bridge on weekends. I won't make any further comments you post your full plan. I hope to see it soon.
As for my post on service on the 2 running local, I'm only posting what I see or what I think can or should be done. Given how unpredictable 7th Avenue service has been, the things I've had to deal with may not be what others have had to deal with. The current service pattern may very well be the best possible pattern, given the present circumstances, and turnback facilities at 14th Street.
David, the Q headways are definitely shorter than I had expected. I thought that they were as short as 8 minutes for a few hours on Saturday, only.
I believe you have the right approach in operating the Q instead of the D for the weekend Brighton service, because north of 34th St., 6th Av. is more of a business district and Broadway more of an entertainment district. I still don't believe a weekend Nassau St. service would be viable, and I hope you might re-consider that part of your plan. Seems to be better retaining the D 6th Av. express on the weekend, operating over that same period in which today the Q operates under 8 minute headways. Following this thought, if the Q is extended to Queens Blvd. express (as Q Exp, myself, and others have proposed), it should remain as the provider of express service on the Brighton, with the D as the local. Otherwise, since the D would become the part-time service provider and the Q 24/7 but only as far as 57th/7th, they should switch roles on the Brighton.
I also think that what you have revealed so far of your new service plan looks realistic, original and very promising and I look forward to seeing it.
Hi guys,
I am sure that the D will return 24/7, but I also think the Q will do the same as well providing service to Queens via the 63rd St. tunnel to 179th St. At night, the D would operate, and the Q would not. The D and Q will operate everyday though. I am a fan favorite of the Q and I always will. The Q will keep the R-68's along with some R-68A's with the retiring of the slants and the R-42's coming up. The N would have the older R-32 with the B getting the slants back and half of the R-68A fleet until the R-160 arrives. Don't forget that the D has the R-68's also. Remember, the Q had the R68/68A up until the B/Q swap of equipment in 1997. When both side of the Manhattan Bridge opens, there is no longer a terminus at Queensbridge anymore due to the opening of the connector to Queens Blvd. provided by the F, so with that in mind, the B will go to 145th/8th Av. the D back to 205/Norwood, the Q still on Broadway to 179th/Hillside, or to Queens Ctr., bringing the E back to Hillside, the N, R staying put, and the W only used during rush hours going to Astoria as a backup to the N.
Where is the Brighton Express in all of this?????
(Not that I really care, since I haven't used the ex-(Q) in over a year)
Stuart, RLine86Man
Q would be local and the D would be express.
I hadn't meant for two West End services on the weekend. It should be B or M, preferably B. It doesn't appear that many are headed for the Wall St. area on the weekend. Sending the E via Culver as Q Exp and you have suggested is an interesting thought. Especially since it might better balance service on the weekend, as 6th Av. would not need more than two services over the weekend. And there is the entertaining idea of sending the Broadway Q to Jamaica Center and the E to Hillside Av. The problem I run into trying to work out this idea is how to maintain enough service (at least 12 tph) to connect the 8th Av. stations with 53rd/Lex.
OH NO YOU DONT! your not going to force me on the local tracks again.. M via FOURTH AVE FOREVVEEERRR!
N 4th Avenue Express
One more thing, I'd have the N run as the Astoria Express whenever the W runs to Astoria. To Manhattan AM from Manhattan PM. Still your proposal is solid in my opinion.
One last thing, then I'll take it easy. I would have the N skip DeKalb all times except nights. Having the train stop at DeKalb and run express after Pacific involves a lot of switching. It also slows things down for every other train. Everything becomes a lot smoother if the N skips DeKalb and proceeds express, coming off the bridge.
O boy... you could imagine the experimenting period that the TA's gonna have again with all the new changes with the switching, the timetable adjustments... it'll be hell for at least a month...
Now for a new idea: maybe it would be wise to route both Brigton local and express to CPW and the Grand Concourse north of 53rd Street. Brighton locals would also be CPW or GC locals, and Brigton express trains would also be CPW express, with diamond service running GC express. The R would be as is, and the N or W (both broadway express) would either serve Astoria or Queens through the 63rd Street tunnel. The F would go back to 53rd Street. The only problem is the 57/6av station.
I think it's generally beneficial to provide as flexible a service pattern as possible. Notice that in my plan, Brighton locals and express go to different places and West End locals and expresses go to different places (and I'll soon add the Culver line to the list).
I don't see the 1 service on weekends on south side.
Good idea for West End, but I'd rather the M go down to Bay Parkway on West End. After all, it brings out Nassau Street.
How far down will the F operate express? I assume to Kings Highway?
Hmmm, if the West End could have the B and M, then Sea Beach could have W and N... 2 services...! :D ... Better yet... can Sea Beach get the M?
I don't see the 1 service on weekends on south side.
The N. (In case you've lost track, here's my proposal.)
Good idea for West End, but I'd rather the M go down to Bay Parkway on West End. After all, it brings out Nassau Street.
It also denies midtown service to West End local passengers. (Or if you want to run both the B and M local, look at how empty the M runs now and at the wasted express track.) If two services run on a Brooklyn line, one should run on Broadway (local or express) and the other on 6th. That's why my revised plan has the M on the Brighton line, as a supplement to the existing Broadway and 6th services.
How far down will the F operate express? I assume to Kings Highway?
Yes. Somebody's gotta make local stops past the V's terminus! (You're right, though, I should explicitly mention it.)
Hmmm, if the West End could have the B and M, then Sea Beach could have W and N... 2 services...! :D ... Better yet... can Sea Beach get the M?
Totally unnecessary. The N should run a bit more frequently than it does now, but that would be adequate. There's certainly no need for a Sea Beach express (much as we'd all enjoy the ride), which bypasses every single station on the line.
Totally unnecessary. The N should run a bit more frequently than it does now, but that would be adequate. There's certainly no need for a Sea Beach express (much as we'd all enjoy the ride), which bypasses every single station on the line.
I didn't have express in mind at all. This would be a good thing though if the Sea Beach gets the N and M. ...
It also denies midtown service to West End local passengers. (Or if you want to run both the B and M local, look at how empty the M runs now and at the wasted express track.) If two services run on a Brooklyn line, one should run on Broadway (local or express) and the other on 6th. That's why my revised plan has the M on the Brighton line, as a supplement to the existing Broadway and 6th services.
This way, West End would have 6th Ave, and Broadway, and Sea Beach would have Broadway and Nassau.
I didn't have express in mind at all. This would be a good thing though if the Sea Beach gets the N and M. ...
But why would it be warranted? It's not like the Sea Beach is terribly popular. The Brighton line, even though it already has more service than the Sea Beach, is more crowded.
This way, West End would have 6th Ave, and Broadway, and Sea Beach would have Broadway and Nassau.
My plan would give West End direct access to Broadway and 6th Avenue, Sea Beach direct access to Broadway, and Brighton direct access to Broadway, 6th Avenue, and Nassau. And there's really no need for the B, M, N, R, and W all on 4th Avenue.
David, consider running the M on the Brighton as in the old days: from Coney, as you stated, but switching to the express track just south of Kings Highway, then express via Nassau.
Why? The M is useless outside of rush hours. No use in wasting Brighton capacity with it.
Chris, I agree, have the M on the Brighton only in rush hours. But capacity would only be a problem in the rush, not in non-rush.
The Brighton line would be better served by extra D/Q service, not additional M service. M trains should remain on the 4th Ave line, which can handle more trains than the Brighton.
Why Kings Highway instead of Sheepshead Bay? Do the intermediate local stations have unusually heavy traffic volumes?
That's how it was done pre-Chrystie. IIRC the figures that David posted some time ago, Av. U is the local station with the greatest number of passengers (or 2nd to Av. J).
If you can find the post with the numbers, I'd like to see it.
No sweat to you Q. You have two of your boys on the bridge while my train is still waiting the invitation to join the parade and get out of that vermin infested Montague Tunnel.
Fred, you ought to go into Brooklyn with a bullhorn, roaming the streets parallel to W. 7th, in an effort to increase ridership. Only with sharply increased ridership will your train have any chance of getting back on the bridge again before 2004, if it does then.
Sounds like a plan Q. Could I get some of the other closet Sea Beach fans out there to join me in that venture? Hey Q, how about some moral support?
Fred, you ALWAYS have my moral support, even when I disagree with you. And especially when it comes to bantering.
(The N. (In case you've lost track, here's my proposal.)
I liked your old proposal better:
1) Have the B run full time on the MB north side and Concourse line, including nights and weekends
2) Have and the Q run full time on the south side and Brighton local.
3) D weekdays only, Brighton and Concourse exrpess via north side.
4) N express via south side when the D runs, local via tunnel otherwise.
I'd run the M to 9th Avenue all times except nights. Otherwise, how will BMT riders get to what is left of Downtown on the weekend with Cortlant Street closed? Rector and City Hall are too far from the South Street Seaport, etc.
The Brighton needs more service, but there is a car shortage. I'd shave a couple of D and Q trains, compared with today, and run the Z express on the Brighton. You'd have, say, 24 tph instead of 18 to 20, but 6 would be short trains.
V to Church and F express? At rush hour, it's 24 minutes from 2nd Ave. to Church. With a six minute headway, that's eight trains, plus one spare -- 90 additional cars. You save a couple by shortening the F run, but you lose a few by running the G to Church, as you would have to. Lets call that a wash. 90 cars at $2 million a pop is $180 million. It would cost at least $14 million per year to pay that off over 30 years. Add in the T/Os and conductors, and additional car equipment staff, and you are looking at $30 million per year -- even if no additional track maintenance or tower operators are required. I don't see it happening.
My old proposal was based on a set of fairly strict operating constraints.
My new proposal assumes that the bridge can be used in any fashion (although you'll notice that I do have balanced service except at night, when the south side is vacant but the north side has the D). It also assumes that the TA has essentially unlimited funds. A fantasy, in other words.
My revised plan has the M as a Brighton express all times except nights (in addition to the weekday Q), which takes care of two of the problems you raise.
Well Big Dave, let me just say that I stand corrected. I like your plan, which means in reality that I have an ax to grind and applaud anything in this case that I agree with. I agree whole heartedly and hope your plan will someday be taken up by the TA.
The following should be the proposed subway routes if and when the Manhattan Bridge ever has all 4 tracks reopen.
B Line- Stillwell Ave to 145th Street extended to Bedford Park Blvd peak rush except midnight hours via West End, 4th Ave,Manhattan Bridge,6th Ave and Central Park West.
D Line- Stillwell Ave to 205th Street via Brighton Local,Manhattan Bridge,6th Ave,Central Park West,Concourse
N Line- Stillwell Ave(86th Street temorary)to Ditmars Blvd via Sea Beach,4th Ave(Express weekdays),Manhattan Bridge,Broadway Express,60th Street,Astoria Line
Q Line-Brighton Beach to 57th St/7th Ave weekdays via Brighton Express,Manhattan Bridge,Broadway Express
R Line-95th St to Continental Ave via current route. I believe they will have to return the R Line to 24 hour service and if and when they ever get more equipment the R will be extended to 179th Street.
W Line-Ditmars Blvd to Whitehall Street via Broadway Local,60th St and Astoria Line weekdays.
Thank You
The following should be the proposed Queens Blvd service changes
E Line-Jamica Center to Manhattan via 53rd Street/8th Avenue.
Midnight hours local stops Continental Ave to Queens Plaza. Additional special rush hour service 179th Street to Manhattan via Express similar to A Line Rockaway Park service peak directions.
F Line-179th Street to Stillwell Ave via 63rd Street/6th Avenue
Express stops-21st Street/Queensbridge to Continental Ave (all times)and to 179th Street weekdays
G Line-Church Avenue to Court Square at all times. Extended to Queens Plaza except weekdays 5AM to 9PM. Timed connection at Queens Plaza to E or V Line
R Line-95th Street to Continental Ave at all times via 60th Street
V Line-Continental Ave to 2nd Ave daily except midnight hours via 53rd Street/6th Ave. Extended from Continental Ave to 179th Street weekdays 6AM to 8PM via Queens Blvd Local. If you ever get more equipment extend V Line to Eastern Parkway/Broadway Junction via Williamsburg Bridge Broadway Brooklyn . Must then use 8 car 60 feet trains only.
Just my opinion
Thank You
Well, you know the cars don't exist so let's assume we have an unlimited number of cars.
You have no weekend service to 179th Street. Either the F or V needs to be extended at some point.
Using track 5 at Queens Plaza, even outisde of rush hour, is pointless. You might as well run trains all the way to 71st. A timed transfer in the MTA doesn't work often enough to tell people to use it. As soon as the MTA were to propose this, you would have a major problem.
The E is going to have select runs to/from 179th Street under the current plan.
Yes the F Line goes to 179th Street at all times. Weekdays between 6AM and 8PM it makes express stops between 179th St and Continental Ave as the V Line will run then. At all other times the F Line will make all local stops.
Also if the R Line runs 24 hours per day and it should you do not need 3 local services midnights on Queens Blvd.
By the way when the R ran 24 hours before the G Line then terminated at Queens Plaza(1987 to 1990)
Thank You
I know the R ran all night at one time but I forget to where and if the G ran as well. I think at that time, the F terminated in Manhattan at night.
Also, while the Hillside express is not a bad idea, how many people at Hillside local stops are going to want to go local all the way to Manhattan? Maybe they should do this:
B-205th Street to Coney Island via CPW, 6th Avenue, and West End, express, all times, local in Bronx except in peak direction.
D-145h Street (Bedford Park Boulevard during rush hours) to Brighton Beach via CPW and 6th Avenue, local north of 59th Street, express south of 59th Street and in Brooklyn, nights between 205th and 34th only
E-Parsons/Archer to Canal, express all times via 53rd
F-179th to Coney Island, local all times via 53rd and Culver (express in Brooklyn when tracks are available)
G-Smith-9th Streets (Church when express can be used) to Court Square, weekdays, 6 AM to 8 PM, all other times to 71st Avenue
Q-179th to Coney Island via Hillside, 63rd, Broadway, Bridge, and Brighton, express in Manhattan and Queens, local in Brooklyn, all times.
R-As currently running
S-57/6 to 2nd Avenue, all times (to increase frequencies on 6th Avenue local)
Essentially, the D and Q and B and D have reversed themselves. Also, the Q is now the 63rd Street service and the V is eliminated.
This plan is made with the assumtion an infinate number of cars are avialable (optimisitic, aren't I?).
Hillside express shoud be mandatory and on the map
F- Express to 179st
R- Local to 179st
Like in 1988!
Also the Q be as you said and not stop at 57st, that ___, why on the northbound platform there is a line-up from express tracks to 63st or 60st tunnel? Because it was ment to be that way, not the MY F train going through there.
Not bad, but I still like the E and F through 53rd at all times.
In all do respect to everyone involved....
Everytime I refresh the index page, I see another answer/response to the "Railfan Minority" debacle.
NOW the threads are about who's a criminal, helping criminals, profiling, you're criminally minded, etc.
I would much prefer reading and posting about the V train, personally.
There are other forums for that stuff, we come here to get away from the world and enjoy our hobby and passion, NYC subway trains, no??
I don't personally have any interest in anyones political views, in here.
Again, I mean this in all respect to all of us.
Probably the best thing to do about that thread or other threads like that is to just IGNORE it. Pay it no mind. When I go over the threads, I by-pass it. I don't care if a railfan is majority or minority.
If there are people calling each other names, let them have their way. Let them say what they want. When their attacking and infighting gets too much, the web host will step in and lock thrm out. Get involved and someone draw you into their conflict.
Man, you're so right....thanks :)
When things get racial I stop responding. I don't want a gang like fight where we all wind up on different gangs or something here!
That one got real ugly, if you ask me.....went from race, into all kinds of craziness
IF YOU LIKE TRAINS, YOU ARE WELCOME. IF YOU HAVE HANGUPS ABOUT THE ETHNICITY, RELIGION, SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR GENDER OF A BROTHER OR SISTER RAIL ENTHUASIST, THAT WELCOME IS REVOKED.
John J. Blair
Thank you, sir.
I couldn't agree more.
I have a general question--
Why weren't the R-16's rebuilt in the 80's?
They seemed like they had potential for a few more years of service-
They seemed pretty solid, although totally neglected, especially in the 80's on the Broadway Brooklyn line.
Were they really THAT shot out??
I know they must have had a lot of miles on 'em, but them and their little sisters, the R-17, were good cars.
I don't think that the R-16's were maintained at all in the 80's. I clearly remember the fall of 1986, when they came to the M line, and the T/O's were going crazy b/c the 16's were falling apart at the time.
Same with the 17's...I remember catching the 4 at Woodlawn once in 85, and hearing the Motorman let loose a stream of curses at the train from in his cab.
:)
I never really had any problem while riding the R17/R21-22's in their final days. But I never saw them anywhere outside the 3 or 5 lines.
Hehehe, maybe this is a good time for me to re-tell my R16 horror story from October 1986:
I was cutting school, doing some railfanning on the M. I was at Metropolitian Ave. when an R16 pulled in on the west side and discharged. Shortly after, the switch malfunctioned so the next train, an R30 M on the east side couldn't be switched over to the Manhattan bound track. So it was decided to send the recently arrived R16 out first. Only one problem: It wouldn't budge. The TO went down on the track bed to see what the problem was. By this time, the station was full of anxious & delayed riders (It was about 7:30 AM). One guy complained at the guy down on the trackbed. He then barked up "Hey asshole, if I let this train out, it's going to derail before you get to Fresh Pond Road!". It was decided that the problems were in the rear cars and that if the front 4 cars were removed from the R16 M, a shuttle to Myrtle could be run. This was done. So we left Metro on half an R16 M train. Needless to say, this short train, delayed 20 minutes, was PACKED by the time we left Fresh Pond. It was further delayed by people trying to squeeze on the short train at Seneca & Forest. Some relief was gained when we got to Wykoff and people fled to the L train. Things seemed to be getting better until the short train got to Central Ave. Then, an electrical explosion under one of the cars caused the packed train to be evacuated and removed from service. People were told to go to the Metro bound platform to get an M train back to Wykoff for the L. Only one problem: some other non-related problem caused the suspension of Metro-bound M service. After 15 minutes of waiting for another M train, cursing the dead and burning R16 across on the other side, they finally decided to give us block tickets to x-fer to the Myrtle Ave. bus. Needless to say, no one could get on these busses (It was 8:30 now). So I walked down Myrtle to get the J at Myrtle B'way. Me, a naive teenaged white boy walking through the 'hood at the height of the crack eidemic. LOL. Needless to say, I avoided the R16 from then on.
Hey, so you also went to Christ the King in the mid 80's?
Nope, Franklin K Lane.
Oh, I figured that since you were at Metropolitan on the M cutting school that early in the morning, you went to CK. But since you went to FKL you were far from Elderts Lane by that time already. (or never made it to Elderts!)
I liked the M for it's R16's at the time, so I often rode it end to end.
Best school in Brooklyn!!!
Ah so now we've got TWO FKL alumni on Subtalk! The more, the merrier.:-)
I still remember going to that recital there in March of 1968. Talked my folks into letting me ride on the Jamaica el from Elderts Lane to 168th St. and back. It was the only time I ever rode on a JJ. I tried to talk them into letting me go for another ride, but nothing doing. We spent the evening at that Lithuaninan doctor's house on Forest Parkway. My father knew him very well.
Steve, I talked via email a few months ago with a faculty member at FK Lane, and he updated me on a lot of changes at my alma mater since my departure 47 years ago. Some other things have stayed exactly the same.
The big surprise is that he said the large sports field between the el and the school is now astro turf. That must taken a bundle of taxpayer money.
It was necessary, as vandalism & fire destroyed the old bleachers and made the field unplayable. My sister went there from 1978-82, or as she said, the "bad" years.
I can vaguely remember the field in front of the school. That was the only time I was ever there, and I haven't been on a J train along Jamaica Ave. in more than 10 years.
In 1950 maybe. Now it's the worst school in Queens!
*L*
Oh man- welllllll, see, they were not taken care of...neglected.
By the way, in 1986 I was living not too far away, near the Marcy Av. station of the J...
Another not-so-cool place to live at the time, especially for a 22 year old Italian-Irish jazz musician :)
The Times had an article in December of 1986 about the demise of 6321. It was sort of a microcosm of the R-16 fleet.
Wish I would've taken the number of the car that exploded. It was definatlety a 6300 series, though.
The 6300s were the last ones standing by the time the R-16s were finally put out of their misery. Most of the 6400s had already kicked the bucket.
Put out of there misery is almost an understatement. They were all but beaten to death. Must have been the most abused class of cars in the system.
At one end, you have the R-16s, which were mercifully put out of their misery. Then on the other end (here we go again) you have the Triplexes, which were still running beautifully when they were sent to the slaughterhouse.
The Grim Reaper is very Democratic!
His scyth is blind, as once was the scale of Justice!
avid
you mean to tell me you walked thru Myrtle and Bushwick,the ''CRACK CORNER?'' WERE YOU ON DRUGS TOO>>>>>....
No, completely naive. I had no idea what was going on at that time.
The R16 was proably the most problematic car ever bought by the city. They weren't rebuilt because they were intended to be scrapped as soon as enough R68's were on the property in 1987. In May of that year, the R16's were mercifully euthanised.
I asked on here a long time ago why they weren't painted green and put into service on the C line instead of the older and more antiquated R10's. The answer I got was that the older and more antiquated R10's were much much more reliable.
Why is it that made the R16's so bad ? What made them different mechanically than an R10 or R17 ?
Not sure. They weren't much different from the R17, but i'm sure the IRT cars were maintained much better than the R16. In the late 1960's, they were removed from the eastern division and sent wandering all over the system. When they returned to the eastern division when the R7/R9's were retired, they were in awful shape.
The main difference between the R16 & R10 was the electric doors, not the pneumatic ones the R10's had. If you remember, this meant they had to be operated in a prone position by some very brave conductors. That, combined with the better axial flow fans (when working) would have made the retention of the R16 until the end of 1989 more desirable. It's a testament to the R10's longevity that they outlasted the R16, and most of the R27's, which were 12 years newer!
There were also WAY more R-10's, no?
400 R-10s to 200 R-16s, to be exact. The 6400-series R-16s were especially problematic. Many of them were yanked much sooner than 1987.
Most of the operable 6400 series were mothballed in the late 1970's, but brought back during the R46 problems in 1980. Many were kept in service through the GOH program in the 1980's. I remember them on the J in 1984.
Not in the end. About 120 were GOH'ed (painted green). About that many R16's were still left in 1985.
110 R-10s were cleaned up and painted green, to be exact.
Nothing...they were GREAT cars, but as I maintain, they were neglected...
They were a small fleet, only 200 cars.
Anonther small fleet, the R-38's, were ALSO neglected. They just happened to be younger than the 16, which is why they were in better shape than the 16 when the MTA started the rebuild program.
It is my assumption that smaller fleets suffer..less spare parts, etc.
Maybe some of the train repair guys could shed more light on the subject.
The R38's were also stainless steel as opposed to the R16's.
Plus the R-16s were single cars, and as such were the heaviest 60-foot SMEEs, at 85,000 pounds, ever built.
Maybe that explains their sluggish performance. Unless they were on an incline, like the 60th St. tube, they never really went fast. Perhaps they should be called grandhippos....lol.
R38/40/42 had no stainless for the chassis or rooves. They are starting to rot.
Only their outer shell. They're rusting on the inside, as are the R40's and R42's, which are right behind the R38's on the scrap list.
You must be happy about the R38's on THE LIST!
Yup. Not so for the speedy slants and R42's.
I'm going to really miss the slant R40's, and even the R42's, but they are not as unique.
I have done some railfanning this week and the r-143 is cool except I don't think it accelerates as good as the R-40s. I was on it around 8:00 tuesday. It was late I think but thats besides to point. Today I rode through 51st/lex satation and it made me see one thing! THE SECOND AVE SUBWAY IS NOT A JOKE!
The trainset with car 7455 (last car) R-142-a wasn't working and 5 minutes without train service was so packed it was not even funny!
The train came through around 5:45 through 51st/Lex uptown. While downtown train was so filled that it seamed to be sexual harrasment. I had to jump backwards so the doors don't hit me. Guys were cursing that the train system in canada (I don't know what system) isn't as bad as this.
I think if the Second ave subway was built it would aleaveate massive congestion on the local 6 line. I have also thought as I was uncomfortable close to a transvestite a couple solutions to solve the problem.
- widen platforms at 51st/lex and install another pair of escalators
- build shuttle between 51st/lex and GCS (with seperate platform)
- make 6 line platform wideir at south ends
- remove the old-fashioned-looking-but-new wall at 6 line platform like they did on the broadway line local stations
- Make the station Express with 4,5 trains stoping, have a walkway from E, F or V platform to 4,5 trains directly without going to mezzanine
- build double side platform allowing trains to discharge on both sides, one for getting onboard, other for getting off
I think the plan of making the 51st/lex station express (to 4,5) is better.
All the train lines need relief and I do not want to be the one calling shots about Bombardier and Kawasaki. Passengers only know that they are in what appears to be a brand new car that is stuck. Period. MTA is on the move...now...for sure!!!!!!!!!!
R142AS and R143 are experimental...they have not passed acceptance yet! So, they will have problems...they will go out of service...and lose revenue...AND might go the way of the R110s.
R142s were accepted...they 'had' passed acceptance...and delivered trainsets go out of service...and lose revenue. There is great pressure on now to make them go...I'm on the end car.
If you loan someone ten bucks, you own them. If you loan someone 1.4 million, they own you and your business. Multiply that by the number of cars TA got from Bombardier and you can see the problem, especially if Bom. did a 'belly up.' The Kaw. situation isn't much better. So please have patience...the #6 line will get relief...one day. CI Peter
Correction: The R-142A and R-143 are not experimental. The R-110A and R-110B were experimental. The R-142A and R-143 are full-blown orders. The CBTC aspect of the R-143 (and the equipment on the Canarsie Line to go with it), however, IS experimental.
David
My error...my observation was based solely upon the number of already delivered cars and the number of O/S already reported. EngineBrake: hold down the reefing...we need more RUNNING trainsets. As far as I'm concerned, it may be a long while before #2s and #5s can ever run Kawasakis experiment on revenue service (I know the plans...239th isn't sked for R142As as of yet.) Toughest part of all this new tech: limited documentation and lack of running spares (warranty repair.) Mebbe Boston has a few Redbird spares left. CI Peter
build double side platform allowing trains to discharge on both sides, one for getting onboard, other for getting off
This would be a great help, but I think that at first, this would be too confusing for passengers to get used to. They could just make double platform, and let passengers get off on either side and have a crossover or something in case passengers getting off get off on the wrong side. Also, it would tkae time for one side to open up, then the conductor has to go to the other side of the train to open the doors there... it adds to dwell time.
Until the 2 avenue line comes here are 10 idea's I got since I last was here.I know some won't pass(and some you may have heard before) but it will provide temporary relief.And for your exitement I will have one pro and one con.
-8 Avenue local:Provide temporary relief to local service,Not enough track capacity.
-New bus route:Again,temporary relief,Bus routes tend to get crouded very quickly
-A addon fleet to the IRT:Will rreplace dying R142's.This sort of have the same problem as the busses
-A street car along the same route as the 4:And Again,relief on the subways,This is going to be temporary plus more traffic problems
-Transfer points:A point where a train can have oppostie service (ex:Express trains run local after 14 Street):Provide more choices for passengers,Straphangers can be very confused.This also incresae chances of delays and accidents.
-Bigger waiting rooms at more crouded stations:Will clear up platforms,Some waiting rooms are very empty.
-Wider tunnels to accomidate trains from other divisions:B division trains are wider than A division trains,Again won't work in temporary conditionds
-Wider platforms:More room for travelers,Sorry I can't see any con.
-4 express in Bronx:Quicker traveling from North Broonx to Lower Manhatthan(Also extending times for outer Manhatthan express service),Besides confusion I can't see any other con.
-Shortening late night time and extending Rush hour time:This will provide relief to early bird travelers,Confusion and increase chance of car breakdowns.
I obtained a 1985 subway map on EBay and received it today. I will not disclose the amount of money I paid. =D
I also bought a 1979 subway map which is on its way.
It's amazing to look back at how service once was.
The scenario is Fall, 1985, when I was a measly 2 1/2 years old.
DO YOU REMEMBER THE FOLLOWING SERVICE BACK THEN? (As I translated it from the official map) Read carefully...
A train:
Rush Hours: 207 Street to Lefferts Blvd or Far Rockaway, express in Manhattan from 168 to Canal, express in Brooklyn from Hoyt to Euclid
Middays, Evenings, Weekends: 207 Street to Lefferts Blvd or Far Rockaway, express in Manhattan from 168 to Canal, LOCAL in Brooklyn
Nights: 207 Street to Lefferts Blvd: All stops
B train:
All Times except Nights: 57 Street/6 Av to Coney Island, local in Manhattan, express in Brooklyn from Pacific to 36 Street, skips DeKalb during rush hours:
Rush Hours (must be in addition to the service above): 168 Street to Coney Island, local in Manhattan north of 34 Street, express from 34 Street to W 4 Street, express in Brooklyn from Pacific to 36 Street, skips DeKalb.
Nights: Shuttle #1 from 57 Street/6 Av to 47/50 Sts; Shuttle #2 from 36 Street to Coney Island, all stops
C train:
Rush hours only: Bedford Park Blvd to Euclid Avenue OR Rockaway Park, all local stops
D train:
Weekdays, 6:30 AM - 8 PM: 205 Street to Brighton Beach, express in Bronx in peak direction, express in Manhattan from 145 Street to W 4 Street, express in Brooklyn from Prospect Park to Brighton Beach
All other times: 205 Street to Coney Island, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 145 Street to W 4 Street, local in Brooklyn
E train:
All times: 179 Street to World Trade Center, express in Queens from 71 Av to Queens Plaza, local in Manhattan
F train:
Rush Hours: 179 Street to Coney Island OR Kings Highway, express in Queens from 179 Street to Queens Plaza, local in Manhattan. In Brooklyn, trains to/from Kings Highway make all local stops, trains to/from Coney Island operate express from Kings Highway to 18 Avenue in peak direction.
Middays: 179 Street to Coney Island, express in Queens from 179 Street to Queens Plaza, local in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Evenings and Weekends: 179 Street to Coney Island, express in Queens from 71 Av to Queens Plaza, local in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Nights: 179 Street to Coney Island, all stops
G train:
All times except Nights: 71 Avenue to Smith/9th Streets, all stops
Nights: Queens Plaza to Smith/9th Streets, all stops
H train:
Rush Hours: NO SERVICE
Middays and Evenings: Euclid Avenue OR Broad Channel to Rockaway Park, all stops
Weekends: Broad Channel to Rockaway Park, all stops
Nights: Broad Channel to Rockaway Park, to Far Rockaway, and back to Euclid Avenue, all stops
J train:
Rush Hours: 121 Street to Broad Street, local in Queens, express in Brooklyn from Myrtle Av to Marcy Av in peak direction, local in Manhattan
All other times: 121 Street to Broad Street, all stops
K train:
Middays, Evenings and Weekends: 168 Street to World Trade Center, all stops
Rush Hours and Nights: NO SERVICE
L train:
All times: 8 Avenue to Rockaway Parkway, all stops
M train:
Weekdays 6 AM - 9 PM: Metropolitan Avenue to Coney Island via BRIGHTON line, all stops
All other times: Metropolitan Avenue to Myrtle Avenue, all stops
N train:
Weekdays 6 AM - 8 PM: 71 Avenue to Coney Island via Manhattan Bridge, local in Queens, express in Manhattan - uptown only AM, downtown only PM, express in Brooklyn from Pacific Street to 59 Street, skips DeKalb Avenue
Rush Hours (in addition to service above): 71 Avenue to Whitehall Street, all stops
Evenings and Weekends: 57 Street/7 Avenue to Coney Island via Manhattan Bridge, express in Manhattan both directions, express in Brooklyn from Pacific Street to 59 Street, STOPS at DeKalb Avenue
Nights: 36 Street to Coney Island, all stops
Q train:
Rush hours only: 57 Street/7 Avenue to Coney Island, express in Manhattan, local in Brooklyn
R train:
All times: Ditmars Blvd to 95 Street, all stops
Rush Hours (in addition to service above): Chambers Street to 95 Street via Nassau Line, all stops. Operates peak direction only (To Chambers AM, from Chambers PM)
S train:
42nd Street Shuttle - Times Square to Grand Central
Franklin Avenue Shuttle - Franklin Avenue to Prospect Park
JFK Express: 57 Street to JFK Airport. Operates via 6 Av express from 57 Street to W 4 Street; via the A line thereafter. Weekdays and Saturdays every 20 minutes, from 57 Street, approx 5 AM - 12 Mid, from JFK, approx 6 AM - 1 AM. Sundays every 24 minutes.
1 train:
All times: 242 Street to South Ferry, all stops
2 train:
All times; 241 Street to Flatbush Avenue, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 96 St to Chambers St, local in Brooklyn
3 train:
All times except nights and Sunday AM: 148 Street to New Lots Avenue, express in Manhattan from 96 St to Chambers St, local in Brooklyn
Nights and Sunday AM: 148 Street to 135 Street shuttle
4 train:
Rush hours: Woodlawn to Utica Avenue, local in Bronx but skips 138 Street in peak direction, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, express in Brooklyn from Borough Hall to Utica Avenue
Middays: Woodlawn to Atlantic Avenue, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, all stops in Brooklyn
Evenings and Weekends except Sunday AM: Woodlawn to Utica Avenue, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, express in Brooklyn from Borough Hall to Utica Avenue
Nights and Sunday AM: Woodlawn to New Lots Avenue, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge EXCEPT from 1 AM - 5 AM, all stops in Brooklyn
5 train:
Rush Hours: Dyre Avenue OR 241 Street to Flatbush Avenue, express in Bronx from E 180 Street to 149 Street, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, express in Brooklyn from Borough Hall to Franklin Avenue
Middays: Dyre Avenue to Atlantic Avenue, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, all stops in Brooklyn
Evenings and Weekends: Dyre Avenue to Bowling Green, local in Bronx, express in Manhattan from 125 Street to Brooklyn Bridge
Nights: Dyre Avenue to East 180 Street, all stops
6 train:
Weekdays, 6:30 AM - 7 PM: Pelham Bay Park to Brooklyn Bridge, express in Bronx from East 177 Street to 3 Avenue in peak direction, otherwise local. Local in Manhattan.
Weekdays, 7 AM - 6:30 PM: East 177 Street to Brooklyn Bridge, all stops
Evenings, Weekends and Nights EXCEPT from 1 AM - 5 AM: Pelham Bay Park to Brooklyn Bridge, all stops
Nights from 1 AM - 5 AM: Pelham Bay Park to 125 Street, all stops
7 train:
All times: Main Street to Times Square, all stops
Rush Hours Only (in addition to service above): Main Street to Times Square, express from Main Street to Queensboro Plaza in peak direction, local from Queensboro Plaza to Times Square.
PHEW!
Any comments or comparisons to today's service?
Off hand I'd say things haven't changed much in 16 years. There has been some changes of course. But it looks more or less like the same map as now.
Out of all of these here are the services that didn't change:
L:Remained the same for as long as I can remember(exept for the Name)
S:Only name changes(and a few repair periods)
7:None I can remember
Pretty pathetic huh.
I obtained a 1985 subway map on EBay and received it today
I also bought a 1979 subway map which is on its way.
Yes, those are real nice maps, but what I really like is the 1969 subway map. :-)
I choose the 68 map, with the NX, RJ and either the new KK (post July 1) or the old JJ (pre July 1) as well as the TT.
Ahhh, how times have changed in my Aunt's old neighborhood of Forest Hills! (71st-Continental Ave)
up to Mid 1980s: E F G N
Mid 1980s-December 15, 2001: E F G R
Beginning December 16, 2001: E F V G R
Up to early 1990s: E & F: R44/R46 G & R (and N?): R32s
Early 1990s-December 15, 2001: E: R32/R46 F,G, & R: R44/R46
Beginning December 16, 2001: E,F,& V: R32/R44/R46 G & R: R44/R46
(for those who are not keeping up-to-date: R68 will not be used on the G)
-Nick
R44s don't run on the R. They only run on the A and Rock Park Shuttle.
and they havent been since the early to mid 80's[the R46 truck fiasco]
We're mostly a lot better off today in terms of express service and transfers, not to mention equipment. Of course, some of our better express service has been severly hampered since September 11, but that's another story.
What's gotten better?
In 1985, Fulton express service was available only in rush hours. In December '88, it started running all day weekdays, with the existence of four tracks enabling expresses to run in both directions. Sometime in 1999, it expanded to all times except nights, putting it on level with Lexington and 7th Avenue (between the nighttime localization of the '2' and 9/11).
The Rockaways had only the round-robin service overnight, requiring a very circutuous trip and transfer at Euclid. In October '92, the Far Rockaway branch got full-time through service, while the much less used Lefferts branch got a nighttime shuttle.
In 1985, there was only one local service along CPW outside of rush hours, the 'K', previously 'AA'. In 12/88, the 'B', which had connected 6th Avenue and CPW peak only since 1940, began running all day weekdays. For a brief time earlier this year before the July switches, it was running on weekends as well.
In 1985, there was only one local service along QB on weekends and nights, the 'G'. Local stop passengers had to change at least once to get into Midtown or downtown, and more than that if headed uptown. In May 1987, the 'G' was cut back to Queens Plaza and the 'R' was switched from Astoria to serve as a full-time QB local (although overnight service ended in 10/90). This allowed easy transfer to both Manhattan IRT trunk routes, gave passengers from Rego Park and Elmhurst a one-seat ride into Manhattan, and relieved crowding at the Jackson Heights transfer to the '7'. Of course, the opening of the transfer at 51st-53rd/Lex in June 1989 made the 'R' between Manhattan and Queens somewhat less crucial, at least for transfer purposes.
Similarly, in 1985, those passengers trying to get the Forest Hills-bound 'N' from Manhattan on weekday evenings could never be sure just how late it was available. There were times one would be seen pulling into Lexington as late as 9:30, other times you'd see nothing but Astoria trains from 6:00 on. With the 5/87 switch, Astoria and QB locals
In 1985, the only subway service Jamaica had was two lines along Hillside Avenue. The only was to get to the LIRR station was to walk five blocks on Sutphin Boulevard from Hillside Avenue (where, during weekdays, only the 'E' stopped, while the 'F' ran express). Either that, or the free Q49 bus from the temporary 'J' terminal at 121st.
In 1985, the peak-hour Pelham and Flushing expresses only ran during rush hours. I'm not clear on dates, but during the nineties both lines started using the center express track inbound all morning and outbound all afternoon, with a misleading ad line about "all day express service" on those lines. Similarly, the Broadway/Jamaica line upgraded from rush hour to the same type of 'all day' peak hour service between Marcy and Myrtle when Archer opened.
In 1985, there was only one West End service all times, the 'B'. The mid-eighties Manny B construction, which mirrors today's, took the 'M' away from the Brighton to run down 4th Avenue as far as 9th Avenue middays and to Bay Parkway in rush hours. It continued to do this when the Manny B switched sides in 12/88- not so much because of popularity, but to eliminate an awkward crossover from Montague to Brighton trackage south of DeKalb.
In 1985, there was strictly local service rush hours on the outer Jamaica and upper Broadway lines, which got skip-stop service in 12/88 and 9/89(?) respectively. This made for extremely long commutes from Richmond Hill, Woodhaven, Cypress Hills, Inwood, Kingsbridge and Riverdale and as a result caused extreme congestion at transfer points to faster services at Broadway Junction and 168th.
In 1985, there was only one service along Lexington Avenue overnight, the '4'. The '6' was a shuttle from 125th to the Bronx. It was revived in Manhattan back in 1998(?), which left the Lex with two services at night, albeit both local.
In 1985, all IRT lines except the '4' still were running decrepit, graffitied equipment, some of which live on as overhauled Redbirds. The '1' and '3' in particular still ran mostly un-air conditioned, straight-seated R21s and 22s. Today both lines are entirely R62A. On Division B, everything older than R44s was in pretty rotten shape as well. A/C cars were very rare on the 'G' 'J', 'L', 'M' 'Q' 'R' and Franklin Shuttle. The 'G' was largely R10s and 32s with the rare R46; the others were largely 16s, 27/30s or 32s mixed with 42s, whose A/C seldom worked. The 'C' NEVER seemed to have it at all.
In 1985, not only was there no transfer at Lex/53, but the 8th Avenue lines were still disconnected from Times Square. The lack of transfers at both locations required a lot of changing, going out of your way, or paying another fare.
In 1985, Roosevelt Island had no subway service at all, just the tram or bus the wrong way to subway in Queens.
In 1985, most stations didn't have the detailed exit signs telling you what corner you were about to come out on or what buses were available. That could be very disorienting. The extremely helpful neighborhood maps were just starting to appear by token booths. As it happens, some still carry a 1985 copyright to this day!
What's gotten worse- at least from a railfan perspective?
In 1985, many more lines still had railfan windows. Today, some lack them completely, or require waiting for certain equipment at limited times. Upper Broadway and New Lots el are available only on a Livonia transplant; Pelham and Woodlawn only on a Redbird; Brighton, Broadway express and Manny B weekdays only on a Slant; West End rush hours only on a Mod 40/42; Crosstown only a very rare R32. Concourse, Franklin, Rock Park, outer Hillside, lower West End and lower Brighton don't have them at all. (At least we have regained them on
the 53rd/QB express corridor.)
In 1985 there was more variety of equipment overall, broken-down and graffitied as it might have been. The 'B', 'D', 'G', 'L', 'M' and 'R' generally ran at least three different models of varying vintage. The IRT was still an incredible crapshoot; a ten-car train could have an R17 through 36, and sometimes everything in between. Today only one model runs exclusively on the '1', '3', 'B', 'D', 'F' and shuttles. The '6', 'A' and 'N' have three, the others two.
In 1985, you were guaranteed two express services on Queens Boulevard on weekends. Not so lately! This will hopefully be resolved December 16, but since around 1995 it's impossible to predict whether there will be QB expresses any given weekend. There's been all three services running local both ways partly or all the way from QP to FH; only one or two services available due to GO; one 'express' running local one way but not the other; an express becoming local at Roosevelt. An 'E' could be sitting on the local track at Roosevelt opposite another 'E' on the express track, with the dispatchers trying to figure out which wsas local or express, or would leave before the other. To paraphrase Alice Kramden (when describing her decripit apartment fixtures), when riding the QB lines on weekends, you never know WHAT to expect; it's an Adventureland!
It may be out of necessity, but it seemed much easier to navigate the system on weekends in 1985- you just had to look at the map. While GOs are needed in part to make up for the deferred maintenance of decades past, there are weekends when it seems like no line in the system is running normally. If an area is served by three lines, chances are good there's diversions on two of them, forcing everyone onto the third. Due to lack of coordination, you can enter Columbus Circle to find all downtown IRT service running express, and 'D' trains diverted down 8th Avenue on the same weekend.
Perversely, the improvements to the system and the fare incentives implemented over the nineties have left trains impossibly crowded all the time. In 1985, it was easy to get a seat or railfan window on weekends, and you generally didn't have hordes of tourists unwittingly blocking doorways to preventing you from entering OR exiting the train. There also seems to be a profusion of people with huge, space-hogging suitcases and those annoying rolling suitcases that can't be seen until you trip over one. But then, I shouldn't complain about excessive ridership from tourists. The city would be in the crapper without them, and in light of 9/11, their presence is ever more welcome.
Somehow I can't think of any other way we're worse off now than in 1985. I must be mellowing in my middle age.
Skip stop did not do anything for people from Riverdale, unless you got on at an allstop station, the 1/9 skip stop was universally hated (unless you used an all stop station). I and feel many others hope the 9 is gone forever.......
Except for those who have to go thru Dekalb Ave, today's service is much better. I can also tell your map is pre-April 15th. Anyone care to guess how I know?
I'm beginning research on a new book about streetcars. Anybody have any suggestions as to what books on the subject are out there?
Thanks.
Eric Dale Smith
there is practically one or more on each city that had same. CERA over the years and 'Interurban Press' have each covered most of the well and less well nown traction otfits. Many other 'samizdat' authors have covered everything from the history of trolley barns in Philly to major histories of large urban sysrems--Chgo, DC, and of course PE.
There's also the classic "An American Original: The PCC Car" by Cashin & Demoro.
Also the Classic Time of The Trolleys, A Rainbow Of Traction and From Bullets to Bart
South Jersey farmer Bob Stanton self-published a unique paperback called The Trolley that Replaced a Bus. I donated a copy of it to the Baltimore Streetcar Museum when I visited last June. I gave it to Dan Lawrence, who conveyed it to Raymond Cannon for evaluation.
Bob
It would seem that a lot has already been written about trolleys from the turn of the century thru WW II. How about since then ?
Boston, Philly, Newark, etc. have had or now have a new LRVs. You may find more interest in recent events, as fewer & fewer folks are still around that rode the old stuff. At the trolley museum that I work ar we put less emphasis on "A Ride Down Memory Lane".
To get you started there is a web site called "Light Rail Central" where you'll find everything post PCC (so you won't find a few lines that are still running PCC or post PCC trolleys, e.g. Kenosha, New Orleans, San Francisco).
Mr rt__:^)
There was a nice softcover book published in the past year about New York's streetcars. It was authored by Fred Kramer, and called Third Avenue Railway.Loaded with B/W pictures, the book was about 80 pages, and sold for around $16.00.
A great source for the history of streetcars, trolleys, and interurbans is the author William D. Middleton, whose canon can be found on Amazon.com.
I especially enjoyed:
The Time of the Trolley...
and
Interurban Era.
Alas, both books are out of print. I read borrowed copies.
There's also one listed which I haven't read:
Traction Classics: The Interurbans...,
which may also be out-of-print.
Middleton's books are extremely well-written and are very informative. I have copies of the "Traction Classics" thee-volume series, as well as "Interurban Era" and "Time of the Trolley." The third book that accompanied those two was "When The Steam Railroads Electrified," which covers all the mainline electrifications from the New Haven to the Great Northern. All of these books are, in my opinion, indispensible resources to anyone interested in acquiring as wide a view as possible of American traction history.
While posting previously, I found that a new edition of "When The Steam Railroads Electrified" is being published. The cover has a picture of an Acela Express trainset. I've asked Santa to bring it this year! :O)
!
I've got a copy (original edition) that I borrowed from a friend on my dresser and I need to give it back on Monday.
I think I'll put the new one on the list for Santa, too.
-Robert King
Upon further review, I noticed that the edition is scheduled for publishing Jan 15, 2002. Oh, well. Maybe Santa will bring a gift certificate.
Sure, and Santa also knows with plenty of time in advance to get the special order in at the book store in time for Christmas next year...
What happened to the two people who wrote the books PCC: The car that fought back and its companion book covering all of the cities on the continent that ran PCCs? The books themselves are out of print and priced out of what I can afford at the moment, but I was reading them in a library and neither of them go past the very early 1980s.
The logical followup to those two books would be to write a book on North American PCC operations from 1980 to date. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has done that yet. Such a book would be an interesting read but not a massive undertaking to write due to the smaller number of operations using PCC streetcars in existance from 1980 onward.
-Robert King
There are a couple of hundred books on American streetcars just in my own library, even though additions have not been made to it for more than a decade. However, during that time there has been a continuing proliferation of excellent books. You would do well to propose a topic or two here on Subtalk and have folks with libraries respond and let you know what's already out there. Ironically, the area most lacking major books is New York City, including Brooklyn. Almost all the the masters of knowledge about New York City's systems have gone on to the great trolley museum in the sky, but there are no large definitive, popular works on New York City's streetcars. There are a lot of rosters and things of that nature that have very limited appeal, but no master books of hundreds of pages on a single system or borough written from a point of view that would interest the average citizen. What needs to be protrayed is the interaction of streetcars with the development of the City and its neighborhoods, not more "railfan stuff". "By the El" is a popular book because it puts the el into its social context. It explains why it was there, how it interacted with its surroundings, and what it meant to the neighborhoods through which it travelled. When one sees a volume full of posed empty streetcars identified by trucks and controllers, one sees a book that has little public use or value. It is strongly suggested that you decide what the philosophy of your proposed book will be before you choose a topic. Stay in touch.
Ray:
The title of the book is "Agent of Change: How the Streetcar Transformed America." The book will be a major study of how the streetcar changed the United States from a rural to urban society and how that transformation became the reason for America becoming a world power.
Regards,
Eric Dale Smith
I think the transition applicable was the one from agriculture to industry which brought about the transition from rural to urban society. I also think that the resultant population growth in urban centres was responsible for the construction of streetcar systems and expansion of existing ones until the streetcar ceased being the mode of transportation of favour.
-Robert King
this is a test of the subtalk emergency posting system. we now return to ur regularly scheduled posting
What are we testing for?
message recieved .........lol
The center track between howard beach and aqueduct is being repaired. Does any know why?
Some trains on occasion have had to by-pass Howard Beach and return to the local switch Via the switch above the Belt Parkway. The express tracks date back to when the Line was rebuilt after the TA assumed control from LIRR, 1955-56 I don,t know if work is to be done from Acquduct north to Rockaway Blvd. The ceter tracks there are a combination of rotted tie and under weight rails.
Bring on Cement ties and welded rail!
avid
Lets hope maybe some A's during rush bypass North Conduit,and during no-rush maybe store trains there.
Let's not. Headways are quite long out there already.
A center track is unnecessary to bypass one stop at the A's headways, anyway.
not only did i catch the L R143 yesterday, but i caught it 2 times today. I met a new Railfan named Miguel. i dunno if he got a handle here yet, but shouts to Trevor, Frankie and all other people from the Transitalk.com fam. i love bein a buff. cause when the R143s came, people were so surprised all of us on the train knew all that we knew. miguel even stumped a Motorman by asking what was the first train that ran? he was like uhhhhh! not only that, those trains are like basically R142A twins. I don't mean to play favoritism, but i like the R143 better.
lol what made me laugh is i notice MTA is putting these funny lil stickers. stuff like
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
AND
WHAT WAS THE COLOR OF THE SIGNAL U PASSED?
Damn, I was waiting at 14/8 from somethin like 3:45 to 4:15 I think, no luck...
The matrix has still not been released but as of this evening the plan is for Pitkin to Surrender 38 R-32 Phase I and Coney Island to surrender 60 R-32 Phase II - all 98 cars to go to Jamaica for V service. That will bring Jamaica Shop to 1,128 cars - I believe an all-time high.
where will the 42s displaced from the l by the r143s go
Not yet. There is only one trainset of R-143s on the property, and its 30-day in-service acceptance test has just begun.
Whatever car moves are made because of the receipt of R-143s will have to wait.
David
Rumor has it that the L will lose it's slants as the R143's are phased in. When all 212 are delivered, all the R40's, both straight & slants, will be in Coney Island.
The R-143 Testng have started and it won't be until Summer of 2002 the R40S and R42 (L) Fleet would be displace. As recording to the TA. They would send the R40S and R42 (L)Fleet to the (C) Line. As for the R-32's might go to CI.
The even bigger question is, What will Pitkin and CI get in return for the car loss.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
And if they is no swap with Pitkin and CI, are any personnel going to be moved to Jamaica Yard to handle the larger car maintenance load.
Pitkin has actually been supplying extra trains to the A & C lines over the past few weeks. The loss of cars will make this less possible but should not impede full service. As for Coney Island, I don't know how they will make out. Perhaps those 2 'Standards' in the overhaul shop might yet be needed.
Why do I see a midnight raid on ENY and some sort of cut in J/M service in the near future?
So the V will use R32's?
He didn't say that. He said R-32s were moving to Jamaica Shop to SUPPORT the introduction of V service. That doesn't mean they will be running on the V line, just that they'll be available to whatever lines run out of that shop (and, for the most part, will be running wherever they're assigned to run). R-46s will be assigned to V service, as has been posted here several times over the past few weeks.
David
I'm thinking the R32s will cover the E and R lines and the displaced R46s from there will go to the V.
Any word if these R-32 cars will be used for the F train?
Ha Ha Ha only once in 1995 I saw a R-32 signed as a F.
I've heard they might, since the V and especially G seem to have the priority on the 46's now. If true, I wonder how they got the F supt. to bend on this.
I wonder if ENY will have to surrender some slants in order to help CI a bit.
They can have the 8 cars from my put in. I'll gladly make this sacrifice for the good of the service. :)
Sure. The TA called and said that they want 3 a day from you down to South Brooklyn.
Oh wait. That's for Bill.
NOOOOOOO! The R32s... *sob* *sob* Most of them are on the N line right? If by 12/16, they take the R32s, and there aren't any R143s yet, then will the N line get EVEN less service? Or are these R32s, "extras"?
Also, long is the V train going to be? 38 seems a little odd.
When did the R16s run on the A line?
I believe when they came out, in 1955.....they ran on the new Rockaway Line to Wave Crest.
Then probably occasionally after that...
The R-16 were 200 cars designed to replace older cars taken out of service.
No only the r1s and r9s ran on the rockaway line in the 50s and early 60s
Find a picture of opening day on the Rockaway line....it's an R-16 in the pic.
Until the Rockaway Line's power system was completed, four-motor cars (R-10 and up) were banned from the line. However, the ceremonial "first train" was R-16s since those were the newest BMT/IND cars in service at the time.
David
What was the reason four motor cars banned?
J-Train Tony is right; I rode the first train the day Rockaway opened and it was made up of a set of R-16s. The terminal was Wavecrest. Sorry I never wrote the car numbers down.
Robert Wagner, mayor at the time, and the Transit Authority band were on the train as part of the festivities.
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam NY
Knew my memory wasn't THAT bad :)
Now I'm curious, though....
Did they run on the A after that, or just for the opening?
They ran occaionaly in the early 80s. Thanks for the info on the opening day. The R10s came to the rockaway line in 1967
Really??
Early 80's?
I rode both the J and the A lots in the early 80's....only remember slant 40's and 44 or 46's on the A, and the occasional R-38...
Sure it wasn't late 70's?
It could have been 79 or 80
That's what I'm thinking, michael....
...pretty darn sure they were on the Eastern Division by 81-82.
R-16's ran EVERYWHERE in the 70's,
I saw 'em on the F, EE, B, among others.
Beautiful car, eh? :)
MY favorite anyway.
I used to hate them. They must have been one of the most neglected cars in the system (As all in the 70's) But now I wish one would pull into the station. It's a shame they didn't survive to get cleaned up. All my vivid memories of them are of trains that were the dirtiest in the system, and one that most people would hate when they pulled into the station, because they looked even worse that all the other dirty trains of the time. How your ideas change............
You should have seen them when they were brand new.
They were the pride of the Eastern Division.
Unless it snowed, where the embarassingly old standards took over.
The BMT standards weren't allergic to snow the way the R-16s were.
michael-
I've been wracking my brains over the R-16's on the A problem-
I definately remember seeing them on the AA in the late 70's (1975, maybe), but I can't ever recall seeing an R-16 on the A line, except for the Wavecrest/Rockaway opening.
I'm not saying it's impossible, but as a R-16 fan my whole life, I doubt it.
Question ...how did you like thiose BAD ASSED r-17s ....man they were the bomb !!!
It's a nice car
I prefer the "Phat Sleds" of the IND/BMT though
ok
It was sometime 79mor 80 right after a big snowstorm. Ithought it very odd to see a r16. Never happened after that time. As late as 82 they were still using one r10 on the A train to Far Rockaway.
R-16's were on the A train in the mid 50's as I used to ride them. As I remember, it was for a short period of time.
Ron J.
So, they WERE on the A
Thanks for the info
50 R-16s were assigned to the A during the late 50s. During this time, 30 R-10s were over on the Eastern Division. IIRC by 1959 the R-16s were back on the Eastern Division and the R-10s were back where they belonged on the A.
There is a photo on the car section (R-16s, I believe) of an R-16 lashed to a train of R-10s. Supposedly they were intermixed occasionally back then.
Yes they were. I remember one in particular , it was painted GOLD for the 5oth anniversery of the 5th Ave Association or something like that. It was a single with nine R/10s. They had nice seats too! the same pattern as the r/10s with the exception of the seating at the car ends. No single seats or three seat combinations. IIRCC.
avid
There is a photo of this car in New York Subway Cars.
As David pointed out, only pre war R units were allowed on the Rockaway Line since the power substations were incomplete. Post war R units had four motors per car, pre war units had 2.
The R-16s actually didn't replace anything. Keep in mind the main reason they were assigned to the BMT initially was because of a chronic shortage of steel subway equipment.
I recall reading somewhere that the car shortage on the BMT in the mid-'50s was serious enough that at least some West End trains were cut back to 86th Street, where wooden C-Types ran as shuttles to Stillwell Avenue. This freed up some extra steel cars, though I don't think the practice lasted very long. It also brings to mind the use of the modified IRT Lo-Vs and ex-Staten Island cars on the BMT in the '50s.
As I posted numerous times, the West End in AM Rush Hours ended at Bay Parkway, There were 3 shuttle trains used to continue or actually start at Coney island. I set of triplex, 2 A Unit Standards, and 3 Q Cars. This was only done in the AM Rush Hours. On the Culver they used 3 3 car Q cars both AM & PM Rush Hours from Coney island to Kings Hwy. When the R16s came in, most of the standards were sent to the Southern Division, and the shuttles were stopped.
Prior to the arrival of the R16s (when the R10s arrived in 1948), several sets of R1s were transferred from the IND to the BMT (usually running on the 4th Ave. Local line, then #2, now the R train). Most of these cars went back to the IND when the R16s arrived, although an occasional train of R1s ran on the 4th Ave. Local line into the late 1950s.
-- Ed Sachs
Also keep in mind that only 50 R16's were on the A during 1955-58 while 30 R10's were on the Eastern Division.
About 40 R16's went to the GG in 1965 or 66 as the R-1's were falling apart faster than the R38's would arrive. Several dozen Southern Division Standards were pulled from the scrap line and sent to the #14 line to take their palce.
The 30 R-10's (3320-3349) were sent to the BMT in the fall of 1954 to help familiarize crews before the R-16's arrived. The 50 R-16's (6300-6349) on the IND didn't happen until they were 18 months old, which was about 2 years later.
Ah, yes, the Jamaica Yard Crisis of 1966. The BMT standards came to the rescue at the last second.
I think, and have since the R-14s and R-15's were taken out of service in the 80's, that instead of desingning NEW cars, they should just build remakes of the older models.
I mean, why not?
What was wrong with the original R-16 design?
Or the 38, another fave of mine?
Sure would like to see a Budd Silver Zephyr on the V.
Wouldn't all of youse??
I KNOW you would.
:)
I never saw them in the first place, but given a choice between bringing back old models and riding in those annoying 21'st-century 'high tech' cars, I'd go with the old models.
Never??
Oh, man...
Check this out :)
I've rode, in my 37 years....
World's Fair Lo-V's on the Bronx 3rd Ave Line (early 60's)
R1-9's (not sure which of the 1-9's, though) on the IND in the 60's
BMT Standards in the late 60's
everything after R-10 (except the R-11)
miss em all dearly :)
I was born in 84, so I never really had a chance. The only old rolling stock I see is in the museum and in pictures.
It's a shame. They didn't kill off all the horses once cars were invented, I don't understand why they had to get rid of all the old trainsets.
They didn't kill off all the horses once cars were invented
True, but you don't see today's horses delivering milk, pulling garbage trucks, etc.!
I don't understand why they had to get rid of all the old trainsets.
Purportedly better performance, limited number of spare parts & tools & training manuals ... in a word, standardization. And simplification.
In 25 years the R-142 will be scrapped because it doesn't meet standards. This is stupid cause why don't they stick a new model trunk on a anceient train and most problems are fixed. I think most of the reasons the trains are scrapped because the trunks which contain most of the mechanical gear crack/cauk-up/stick/etc. Can't they just rebuild the carbodys?
I agree totally based on hands on/personal examination BUT the die has already been cast. CI Peter
The carbodies on the "Redbirds" are beyond help, and those on the R-38 through R-42 cars aren't much better (framing made of junk metal). As to whether the R-142s will be outmoded in 25 years, I doubt it. NYC Transit has a program called "SMS" (for "Scheduled Maintenance System"). Under SMS, the life cycle of every component on the car is determined, and the components are replaced with overhauled or upgraded units before the time arrives when their performance is expected to degrade. Assuming SMS continues, the cars will be well cared for throughout their service lives.
David
Wouldn't the redbirds also fall under the SMS so that they aren't scrapped? Also since parts for the redbirds aren't being made what will happen to the R-142s when there part stop being made for the R-142s. Under SMS it seems to me to be that a car can last forever if they replace failing compoents. I'am I right?
buildmorelines..you are right but...the Redbirds have survived far beyond their lifetime because they were built in a time of craft and skill for railroad tracks over five decades old. 'New Tech' is built in a time of 'cover your ass' with a hodgepodge of vendors parts to run on ideal trackage. Standard rail parts will be available for both lines...problem is that new tech has hardware/software which can disappear as fast as yesterdays video game and was never long term proven out on roadbeds dating back almost to the nineteenth century. Under SMS, cars should last forever when failing components are replaced. Expect R142s/R142As to become neighborhood diners within your lifetime. CI Peter
Or container freight boxes which are put on flat beds.
We got flatbeds...pulled by EPs...more reliable too. CI Peter
The Redbirds WERE under SMS for a few years after overhaul, but everything has its time, and the time has come for the Redbirds to go. The main problem with the Redbirds is the carbody, which is made of LAHT steel and is rusting away. Component-wise, the Redbirds were hardly modern, but they were (and still are, for the most part) reliable. However, reliable components don't do anybody any good if the carbody to which they are attached is falling apart.
As to what comes next -- a suggestion to put the old parts into a new carbody -- why bother? The carbody is just about the most expensive part of the subway car, and there is no point in putting old, outmoded parts (even if they are functioning properly AT THE MOMENT) into a carbody that you expect to last 35-50 years.
David
You don't know that. Where do you get this information from. You got some kind of crystal ball or something?
Educational guess. Also I read everything (nearly) you guys post so thats how I know. Also sometime earlyer I read a thread where 2 guys were arguing about wheather the redbirds need to be scrapped and one guy wrote the engines are covered in break pad dust as thick as glue and that there is not enough ducktape in the world to keep them running.
Steel mafia. Melt'em make new ones.
Better yet, it's logistics. Each TA facility can have only so much for X models of cars. With the phenomenal amount of money spent on new tech, it's like having five kinds of imported beer in my fridge when I only drink Genny Red Lager. The system has to make room for the change-outs and cannot spare room for the aged. CI Peter
yep !! I agree SIMPLE IS BEST ...the way it used to be !!!
Personally, I think the right answer to replacing the Redbirds (and the 38s, 40s, 42s, etc.) would simply be to order more R62s, some 68s, and a simple car capable of running on the Eastern Division. The 62s and 68s I hear are very simple- no fancy stuff to get ground to bits taking the turn between Chambers Street and Park Place (or between Cortlandt and City Hall).
Remember the R-68 is a 75 foot car and can't go on the former BMT division (Div B-1) so you will only add cars to the IND.
Miss them all dearly???
Go to Branford during Spring or Autumn in New York and relive memories by riding in the R-9 or Low V. If you become a member you might even get to drive one!!!
isn't the R-142 shaped like the R-16, R-27/30, redbirds,R-32,R-38? i hope that the R-160 ( if still in the future) will look like the R-32
HA HA HA Only once there is a preservationist on the MTA's board will that happen.
I sort of think the R142 and R143 have a look that is based on what we now call the redbirds, that flat look everything had from about the R16 through the R36.
:-) Andrew
Bottom line: passengers feel comfortable in busses. CI Peter
I board a bus
With a gun
Everyone goes crazy
Shoot them down
Cut em up
Steal all their money
Leave the bus
Go home
Buy my self a beer
Hear the cops
In the distance
And so on and so on.
The bus I take every day home has been robbed 2 times the year (Q46). Maybe more I don't read the newspaper and most newspapers don't report this cause it is nothing new.
Time to find alternate means of transport
Light rail money hole anyone?
""I think, and have since the R-14s and R-15's were taken out of service in the 80's, that instead of desingning NEW cars, they should just build remakes of the older models. ""
@ NOW U ARE TALKIN ' .......!!! ...lol
The trouble is, it's pretty expensive always pulling cars out of service to inspect traction motors, check controller adjustments, inspect this, clean that...
I've read the maintenance schedules for the NJ Arrow cars before their rebuild, and it's enough to make your head spin.
Semiconductors, solid state sensors, and AC motors don't need much attention beyond keeping them clean and not abusing them. Contactors and DC motors and such are forever in need of something.
No, no
I meant build NEW cars, only instead of building R-143's or whatever the hell they are, give the builders the plans to the R-10, say, and tell 'em to build 200 of 'em. :)
DAT is what they should do !!!
But they would probably build it with full width cabs (hearing faint plopping sound as salaamallah reads this), so no railfan window.
When I become MTA chairman you watch and see. (conducters you will have full width cabs)
the builders use standard parts that are the latest technoligy. You won't find an exact duplicate of a R-1's moters being mass manufactured.
Unfortunately, the NYCT system needs new technology, and fast.
When the last order of cars was placed along the lines you suggested,
i.e. replicate an older design, this being the R68A order, it was
already 40 years obsolete. Electromechanical controllers and
DC motors are from an era when material and manufacturing costs
were key and the labor for maintenance was cheap. Each old-tech
car on the road costs the system thousands of dollars a year in
inspection and maintenance costs in the control group alone.
Ask "OnTheJuice" about propulsion group inspections on a redbird
vs a 142.
The use of modern solid state, microprocessor-controlled propulsion
and braking systems is a no-brainer. Yes, they are intellectually
more complicated than a WH CAM or GE SCM group switch, but the
guy in the pit doesn't sweat that. It's a lot easier to change
out a blown inverter IGBT module, which the computer isolates for
you, than to try and find that worn interlock finger on the M2
contactor. With computer-based fault monitoring and diagnostics,
you actually know when something is failing instead of having to
wait for flat wheels, glowing grids, or a slow accelerating train.
Howwwwwever. In choosing new technology, there is a decision
process of where on the technology curve you want to be. Apparently,
the TA has chosen to leapfrog from the depths of obsolescence, right
past proven technology, and onto the bleeding edge, both in terms
of car equipment and signal design. It is with this that I differ.
The R142 and 142A were not well engineered from a technology planning
standpoint. Too many "features" were introduced and either not
tested in the R110 pilot project, or the implementation was changed
so radically that there was no effective beta test.
As for "old tech" trains, I love em too. But, you can't ride
the Jamaica/Broadway el behind a Forney anymore, can you?
Every piece of rolling stock has its day. So, if you'd like
to ride on an R-16 or a Lo-V or an R-9, try your local railway museum,
because that's where they belong in 2001. Also, if you'd like
to try your hand _maintaining_ pneumatic door engines, unit switch
groups and triple valves, email me, Engine Brake or Mark W. and
we'll set you right up in our respective groups.
Jeff: Wonderful and well-written response. From someone who probably wouldn't know a pneumatic door if it slammed on my arm (I'm an infrastructure kinda guy), I chuckled as I read. And that's *before* the coffee takes effect ....
Nothing like having R-10 doors whip shut. They were the fastest doors in all of New York.
Well stated!
New technology is progress in both hardware and the idea that helps support it. I remember going from Underwood typewriter, IBM Selectmatic, WANG word processor, and now the multi-purpose desktop. In relating in going back to SMEE cars, going to back SMEE is like going back to my Underwood - No Thank You.
The riding public do care in what they get to work in, and without them we would not have the "toys" to talk about.
Phil Hom
Absolutely on target, Phil. While the SCM is currently the backbone of the NYCT, its roots are a half-century old at least. Wasted manpower and wasted material in maintenance = wasted $$$$$$$. I doubt that anyone here would be connected to the internet using a computer driven by triode and pentode vacuum tubes.
BTW: Congrats on your photo in the NYC Subways 2002 calander. I must say that I approve of the subject matter.
That photo should be entitled, A D-Fining Moment on the Brighton.
Thanks
Note the R-9 is a layup, not in servce.
Phil Hom
Each old-tech car on the road costs the system thousands of dollars a year in inspection and maintenance costs in the control group alone.
Maintenance cost per car is in excess of $50k/yr. Each dollar spent on maintenance will permit the average car to travel slightly less than 1 mile.
One would hope that there might also be performance gains that might permit the new equipment to outperform the old.
As for "old tech" trains, I love em too. But, you can't ride the Jamaica/Broadway el behind a Forney anymore, can you?
The scheduled running times were quicker for the Forney's.
The scheduled running times were quicker for the Forney's
Alright, show me the numbers. I'd have a hard time believing
that schedule speed today is actually lower than in the steam
hauled days, considering the latter accelerated at about 0.5 mphps
tops.
"I KNOW you would."
No I wouldn't.
Do you have to commute by NYC subway every day? I'm going to guess not, as you would realize that the old cars are exceedingly uncomfortable, especially in the summer without air conditioning. Also, you would realize that the old car designs are difficult to operate and maintain, and you wouldn't want to pay more than a $1.50 per ride, would you? The cost of design, O&M, and graffiti removal would certainly force NYCT to raise the fare. Probably over 99% of the passengers on a subway are not railfans, and wouldn’t appreciate any of the above results from using older rolling stock designs.
Instead of building new automobiles, we should just redesign the horse and carriage, right?
Don't get me wrong. I love the old cars. I just love them in a museum, where they belong -- they have absolutely no business in revenue service. That goes for the rustbirds too.
MATT-2AV
:)
Man, I rode those cars for 26 out of my 37 years-
In the summer with no air-conditioning, in the winter with very little heat, etc.
I still would prefer to see those old friends every day.
Although, I DO concede your point about the majority of the riding public.
And, after all, the subway is about serving the public, not indulging subway wackos like us.
:)
"Wackos." LOL! :) How many times have I heard THAT from family and friends. When someone asks me, "How can you just ride a train for fun?" I answer, "If you have to ask that question, then nothing I say can ever make you understand." That's about it.
So true, so true :)
*L*
<<<"When someone asks me, "How can you just ride a train for fun?" I answer, "If you have to ask that question, then nothing I say can ever make you understand." That's about it.">>>
And that just about sums up where we all stand here, I think.
Very well put.
MATT-2AV
I want to hear everyone in 25 years when the R-142s are rusting and coming apart. Just like in today's society, no one respects the elderly. As a railfan, I love EVERYTHING. Old, new, I don't care. Riding a train is a great experience, everytime, no matter if it's a Redbird, R-142 or Low V. I see some railfans are like so called "music lovers." I have 200 mp3s on my player, from Mozart to hard core rap. If you only listen to one kind of music, you're not a music lover. And if you knock a train because of its age, you're not a true railfan. Air conditioning doesn't make a train any better. Not in my view. More comfortable, yes, but that's about it. I'm certainly not trying to insult anyone, but let's chill. And, as far as "rustbirds" are concerned, I won't even comment. My handle says it all.
Peace and love
Tony :)
Riding a train is a great experience, everytime,
Not an R-44/46/68. Trains are only fun if they provide some level of thrill. Those, and cars like them, provide none w/ slow speeds and no views.
I like the old stuff, too. Without the old stuff, we wouldn't be where we are today. However, the point of this thread is to say that we should keep old shit for old shit's sake, which is a stupid idea. Tell any engineer this, and he or she will laugh at you. Example: new autombiles are way more complicated, safer, cleaner and reliable than the old ones. It was a miracle to have a car from the 50s last more than 100,000 miles. Today, it's no big deal.
My point: I want to feel like I live in the 21st century, not the 19th.
I see some railfans are like so called "music lovers." I have 200 mp3s on my player, from Mozart to hard core rap. If you only listen to one kind of music, you're not a music lover.
AMEN. Variety is the spice of life. I like all types of music, too. I'd get sick of just listening to one type of music. Techno, rap, 80s, rock, oldies, etc, there's a lot I like. The only music I can't stand is pop/prefab music and country. 200 mp3s ain't bad, my friends and I have a computer with 50 GB worth of songs (like 15,000!!), we are thinking about making it accessed via a password protected FTP site. That'd be so cool.
That wasn't really my point.
I didn't mean to keep the old stuff so we could still have the old stuff, it was that the old cars were more enjoyable all the way around.
Wicker seats on the R1-9's,
the red leather on the original R-16' and 17's, etc.
I find the new cars sterile and plastic and uncomfortable.
remember when the 1 got the new cars in the late 80's?
those seats sucked, still do.
and the R-44/46...ugly. Hated 'em, still do, and they're old, and I don't want to keep them because they're old.
Is it stupid to prefer riding in an R-17 or 38 to a R-68?
Is it stupid to prefer riding in an R-17 or 38 to a R-68?
No, it's not, that's your opinion and I respect that. But sometimes we just gotta move on. At least you got the memories. It's just that there comes a point that a design isn't as efficent as what is availible now, so new stuff is made.
Are you claiming that the design of an R-68 is more efficient than the design of an R-38? In what way?
In some ways, it is. An eight-car train of R68s is the same length as a ten-car train of R38s (600 feet long). It has fewer wheels, motors, A/C units, heating units and other parts per train. That translates into savings for the TA. Also 75-foot cars carry more passengers per car than 60-foot cars. Were it not for the short platforms and the tight curves on the Eastern Division, the R143s probably would have been 75-footers.
Trivia question: how many air conditioning units/more BTUs are in
l o n g e r cars of LETTERWORLD??? CI Peter
I'm not claiming anything. I was making an overall statement. However, the R68 does have one of the highest, if not the highest, MDBF in the fleet.
Are we here again? In some ways the answer is yes. The R-68 has a higher miles/mtce.$ and higher miles/mtce. man-hr. than the R-38. The R-38 with 25% more door openings per 600 foot of train has a shorter dwell time in stations. I really think such comparisons are meaningless unless you very narrowly define your criteria.
I asked about the design, not the current condition of the cars.
If the brand new R-68 order had been for 60-foot cars -- the R-38 II, if you like -- would they have been more or less efficient than the R-68's we have now? It seems to me they'd be more efficient -- they'd be in just as good repair as 60-footers as as 75-footers, but dwell times would be shorter.
That's pretty much exactly what I'm saying.
I would have liked to have been able to sit on those red leather seats in the R16s and R17s. Unfortunately, they were attractive to vandals and so by the time I was born, they replaced them with plastic. Unfortunately, we have people who like to deface things and ruin them for everybody else. It sucks, it really sucks.
Wait, wait, wait a minute.....what trains had wicker seats???? They replaced the wicker with some yellow nylon-like plastic material that you couldn't cut but when it broke it cut you.
The pre-war IND cars had wicker seats. I think so did the BMT Standards and Triplexes and IRT cars.
They had the seats in the 1960's as I rode the Standards from Canarsie.
GaryTalky must be right because I'm not of the 'pre-war' generation. So, red leather seats??? Real classy...certainly wasn't 'Upper East Side' unless you're pre war.
>>> So, red leather seats??? <<<
Leather?? Only in your dreams. But they almost wiped out the entire population of Red Naugas to provide the Naugahyde coverings when they replaced the wicker seats. :-)
Tom
Rattan covered seats and for the fabulous Fabled R/10 synthetic Rattan, Yellow with a light blue stripe. The rattan covering was the covering of choice for trollies, elevates, commuter railroads and subways. The R/10,R/11,R/12,R/14 and R/15 I think had the synthetic Rattan. I'm guessing about the R/15.
avid
Example: new autombiles are way more complicated, safer, cleaner and reliable than the old ones.
God forbid you get into an accident though. A 5 mph collission can cause $2000+ in damage even when you impact with the BUMPER. Are not bumpers suposted to BUMP! My 74 LTD could turn a modern car into confetti. Heck, in a 50's car you could hit a tree and fix the body with a HAMMER. Now you have to get a $1000 body pannel from the dealer IF your car wasn't rendered undrivable. Cars need to be required to be made from 1/8 inch sheet metal and have chrome steel bumpers.
Are you kidding! I'd love to see an Triplex "D" type slam head on into an R-143. With no one aboard, of course. You could rig them. I'm betting that if you put a cow catcher on the D type, it wouldn't even derail! Heaviest NYC subway car ever!
That's just what we need: Subway cars tearing each other apart instead of adsorbing the impact via deformation of the carbody.
MATT-2AV
Most subway accidents will not be head-on collisions. In other accidents you would the subway to deform what it is hitting rather than the other way around.
Hey, remember how well wooden cars "deformed" in an accident? Why don't we just go back to them.
Cool to see the trunk of the next car over your head :-)
"Most subway accidents will not be head-on collisions."
Now you're not even making any sense. Other than grade crossing accidents, how else would subways collide with each other? The only other type of accident is the sideswipe, at which point, the same principles apply.
"Hey, remember how well wooden cars "deformed" in an accident?"
I also suggest that you take the time to learn about the basic properties of materials before you make such claims. Metal, wood, and glass are all as different from each other as can be. It's kind of frightening that you don't realize this.
When a metal subway impacts an object, if the carbody doesn't adsorb the impact, what (or who) else will? If two rigid bodies collide, the deceleration will be tremendous. For an apparent layman such as yourself, anyone not strapped down will go flying. However, if the carbody adsorbs the impact by deformation, the deceleration will be reduced; the deformation of the front end will cushion the impact.
Why do you think Formula-1 racecars fly apart? Flimsy construction? Apparently you would think so, but you couldn't be more wrong. The car is specifically designed to dismember upon impact to adsorb as much force as possible, thus protecting the life of the driver.
MATT-2AV
First of all I would like to say that my arguement is for automobiles and automobiles only and it has nothing to do with physics, but that small accidents should result in small repair bills. But anyway:
Now you're not even making any sense. Other than grade crossing accidents, how else would subways collide with each other? The only other type of accident is the sideswipe, at which point, the same principles apply.
Most accidents are derailments where the subways hit lineside objects. Like Union Square or Malborne St.
When a metal subway impacts an object, if the carbody doesn't adsorb the impact, what (or who) else will? If two rigid bodies collide, the deceleration will be tremendous. For an apparent layman such as yourself, anyone not strapped down will go flying. However, if the carbody adsorbs the impact by deformation, the deceleration will be reduced; the deformation of the front end will cushion the impact.
You can think if it from a different point of view. If you make one body rigid enough it will deform what it is hitting and remain intact itself. You get the best of both worlds. Since most accidents do not involve a subway hitting an rock solid immovable object, you can safely make the subway rolling stock as strong as possible. It is like a tank hitting a race car. The best example of this is the GG1 that lost its brakes comming into Washington Union Station. It slammed through everything in its path while gradually comming to a halt. Nobody was killed and the locomotive was extracted from the station and easily rebuilt.
Finally, from an economic point of view, since most subway mishaps are minor (usually a lo-speed rear end collision), would you want a million dollar train to crumple like a tin can when there is little real risk of injury? Budd build Silverliners do a good job with this in that at moderate speeds the vestabule area gets flattened, but the rest of the car is perfectly intact. Then again you can't have your T/O's getting gooified in lo-speed collissions.
Mushing and mangling is generally a bad idea for big rolling boxes packed with people. Bounce and slide would be ideal.
Flimsy construction?
No, they are just lightly built. They need to project the driver and have light weight for hi-speeds. Average people who do not need to drive that fast do not usually have the where with all to afford the repair bill if their vehicle flys appart after a minor mishap.
"...it has nothing to do with physics."
We're talking about collisions. Everything has to do with physics, whether it gives you the answer you want or not.
"If you make one body rigid enough it will deform what it is hitting and remain intact itself."
Hitting what? A support column? I said it before: better in the red than dead. No, you don't want what you're hitting to be destroyed, because that's when the tunnel collapses and everybody becomes, well, dead.
And what about the GG1? What happened to it? It went extinct, just like countless incarnations of rolling stock before it. Why? Because it was no longer economically practical to operate and maintain.
You seem to erroneously think that nobody did their math when designing the r142. You're presumption and arrogance towards the designers are almost laughable. The MTA made an economically practical decision, whether you see it or not.
MATT-2AV
It went extinct, just like countless incarnations of rolling stock before it. Why?
Frame cracks and the ability to manufacture large scale castings being lost to the ages.
You seem to erroneously think that nobody did their math when designing the r142.
This isn't about the R142. I don't have any problems with it aside from the fact that it has transverse cabs you can't pass through and a route indicator that can only be red.
I am meerly bringing up the fact that nobody has considered updating existing designs for current uses. Railroad freight locomotives can last for 40+ years with the design constantly being updated. An EMD SD70 looks like an SD60 looks like an SD50 looks like an SD40 looks like an GP30. That's a 45 year design still running strong. What's under the hood? AC traction, microprossor control and an engine that packs twice the power, but its still the same design. Many parts are still compatable. Locomotive shops have not had to completely re-tool.
Maybe it costs more to fix a car today, but I'd rather an auto-mechanic have to deal with a car accident than a trauma surgeon.
"Cars need to be required to be made from 1/8 inch sheet metal and have chrome steel bumpers."
That'll do wonders for the fuel efficiency! There's a reason why the Japanese automakers were close to putting the big three out of business circa 1980; American car design was as you describe!
"God forbid you get into an accident though. A 5 mph collission can cause $2000+ in damage even when you impact with the BUMPER."
As us Engineers like to say, better in the red than dead.
Prior to 1956, safety was not a concern to automobile manufacturers. Electric starters (1911?), hydraulic brakes, air bags, seat belts, deep-dish steering wheels, padded seatbacks, swingaway rearview mirrors, safety door latches, seat belts, padded dashboards, padded sunvisors, seat belts (again for emphasis) and rearview mirrors are (gasp!!!) all modern inventions. I'll take $2,000 in damage any day over being seriously injured.
Just because you're romantically involved with the stonae ages, that doesn't mean the rest of us should put our lives at risk or, in the case of subway cars, forgoe comfort.
MATT-2AV
Right and guess why I don't like forign built things! Everything nowadays requires you to go and buy part, before you could do anything with a $4 Blowtorch, now you need a $50,000 microscopee welder.
<<<"My 74 LTD could turn a modern car into confetti. Heck, in a 50's car you could hit a tree and fix the body with a HAMMER. Now you have to get a $1000 body pannel from the dealer IF your car wasn't rendered undrivable.">>>
Well, this is partly true, and partly not. The first car I ever drove (with a license) was my parents' 73 Buick Century, and the first car I ever owned was a 78 Delta 88. No doubt those cars could take impacts that my Toyota probably couldn't. However, I saw soemthing on the Discovery Channel once about how pre-1970s cars had lots of sharp edeges and no seat belts, and you could easily be de-capitated in minor accidents. Also, get a look at any pre-WW2 car- look how top-heavy it was.
Also, ask anyone (including yourself, if it be the case) who owned any US Made product in the 1970s and 80s- broke down ALL the time and inpired Lemon Laws. Today's cars often don't need tune ups and/or plugs till 70K miles or so.......
There is definitely some improvement with new technology.
Hey, I'm all for combining the best of each era.
I think I might not have made myself entirely clear. Please don't get me wrong. There isn't a train in the system I don't like; I just don't feel some trains belong in the system anymore. I hope as many rust-, er, redbirds can be preserved as is possible. They are a piece of history.
MATT-2AV
But where can you go at 45 mph with your hand on the controller in a museum.
Or look at awesome views from inside an awesome old train??
But where can you go at 45 mph with your hand on the controller in a museum.
Branford CT. Admittedly, you can only maintain that speed for
about 5 seconds before you have to slow down.
Illinois Railway Museum has a long stretch of track too... when I was there some years ago I remember having a North Shore train in full parallel for quite a while :-)
Yup, and if things go alright they'll have a pair of R26s
soon. OK, it's a long trip for a joyride.
I'd heard of Branford mentioned on this site before, but I never had the chance to inquire. Could someone who knows about the place please give me the basic information? Thankx,
MATT-2AV
Branford Electric Railway, a.k.a. Shore Line Trolley Museum
Jeff Hakner, to whose post you responded, is a very active member, as are Thurston, BMTman, Stef, and a number of other posters. I'm a much less active member, but I enjoy it when I can get there.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
And the next three weekends are the end of public operations until April, so come on up if you can! (Sorry, our newest technology is 1955...)
Really???? Don't tell that to Mr. SMEE...
Or Captain Hook :)
I have been there. (thats the place in east haven with alot of trollys and overhead wire and they retrofit the subway cars for overhead wire). I don't think you can reach 45mph without derailing even if you could stop in time. Also they don't have welded rail there so thats even out of the question.
Hey, I'll have you know the track there is among the finest in
the railway museum world! We do reach 45 on the straightaways
with certain cars, but that speed is only maintained for a few
seconds before a curve or the end of the line comes.
I can't go anywhere at 45 mi/h with my hand on the throttle in the system. The majority of railfans can't either.
We can dream, but untill they let average commuters drive the train, I'm more concerned about the ride. I think your fellow commuters are too.
MATT-2AV
The Illinois Railway Museum in Union, Illinois. Five miles of perfectly straight track through the cornfields of McHenry County, plus a one-mile trolley loop around the museum grounds.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Also, you would realize that the old car designs are difficult to operate and maintain,
I don't know about that. Simple technology is usually more robust and definitly cheaper to fix and replace. When old technology breaks you fix it, when new technology breaks you replace it. There might be something to say that older tech breaks more often, but is easier to fix. However, I would like to see someone apply today's enginering and materials standards to simple, well proven technology.
My big problem is with design. There is absolutely no need to change the exterrior shape or interrior layout of the subway cars. Can anyone say R32AC with CBTC?
I just love them in a museum, where they belong
That's like saying that animals in a zoo are the same as animals in the wild. It just isn't true, especially when the replacement animals suck.
I KNEW there were others with the same view as me...
Well put, Jersey Mike
:)
(When old technology breaks you fix it, when new technology breaks you replace it.)
New technology is designed to be replaced, not fixed, because the cost of components is cheap, but the cost of labor is high. New automobiles last much longer than old cars. As for computers, I've never had one wear out. They become obsolete long before that.
Yes, solid state electronics components of the sort used in modern subway and street car traction systems are generally trouble free until something dies in which case the dead part(s) need to be replaced entirely because they simply cannot be repaired.
Now, with respect to computers wearing out, I take it you've never had a hard drive crash? >8-O (That smiley approximately conveys the expression on my face when I discovered my HDD crashed.)
-Robert King
"That's like saying that animals in a zoo are the same as animals in the wild. It just isn't true, especially when the replacement animals suck."
Judging by your safari metaphor, which entails observation instead of use, I'm going to guess that you use the subway for trainspotting rather than commuting? How about the millions of commuters each day?
"Simple technology is usually more robust and definitly cheaper to fix and replace."
It isn't easier or cheaper if the replacement parts aren't manufactured anymore, for one.
Let me ask you this: How old is your car? Would you buy a 1953 model with 500,000 miles on it? Would you still own it and pay to maintain it for another 30 years? What if you had to drive it 20 miles to work each day? What if the model was discontinued, and the manufacturer went out of business years ago?
No? Well then why would you demand the MTA to do the same?
MATT-2AV
And who would fly Delta if they only operated 1940s DC3 propeller planes? I just don't understand why so many people on this site flat out hate ANY new train. I don't hear them whining about new cars or planes. But why new trains? I don't hear anyone here saying that a 1970 Pacer will last longer than a 2002 Camry. Nobody says that a McDonnell-Douglas DC8 will outlast a Boeing 777. We insist on modern technology in our planes and cars, don't we? Why should we accept any less in our trains? Somebody tell me why.
Hey, maybe if more of us rail buffs started pushing for modern 21st century trains, maybe Congress and Albany might actually fund more rail projects. If we, as train riders, shun new trains, how on Earth can we expect our own state and federal governments to stop seeing rail as an obsolete form of transportation?
I don't hear anyone here saying that a 1970 Pacer
There's a big CSX fan site called the Pacer Ranch. Not ony does the guy have several pacers, the CSX main runs through his back yard. I would really love to have a Pacer if time and storage permitted it. AMC was one of the finest automobile companies to grace this fine land.
Does anyone remember the Ambassador? or the AMC Hornet? Also, though not an AMC, does anyone remember the Plymouth Fury?
Heck yes. I owned a '71 Hornet Sportabout briefly and a '74 Fury Gran Sedan for somewhat longer (one heck of a machine - ex-state police undercover vehicle - as a four door hardtop with a vinyl top, it blended in with the civilian barges, but under the hood there was a 440 4-bbl that sipped premium at the rate of 8 mpg and a suspension that could hold its own with almost anything on the road). And our neighbors had an Ambassador - a '56 Nash Ambassador, back before Nash became Rambler which became AMC.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
>>> And our neighbors had an Ambassador - a '56 Nash Ambassador <<<
Back in high school we envied one nerdy kid who had the use of his parents' Nash Rambler because the seats reclined into a bed. A great feature, better than any powerful engine. :-)
Tom
>>> I don't hear anyone here saying that a 1970 Pacer will last longer than a 2002 Camry. <<<
The AMC Pacer did not come on the scene until 74/75. I know, I owned one.
Peace,
ANDEE
Which auto was built with more quality? Which will last longer without repairs?
Let me ask you this: How old is your car?
32 Years. 1969 Ford Mustang, 90k original miles. I have been able to effect repairs with masking tape and a screwdriver.
Would you buy a 1953 model with 500,000 miles on it?
It depends on the amount of rust and the presence of frame cracks.
Would you still own it and pay to maintain it for another 30 years?
Depends on how cool it is.
What if you had to drive it 20 miles to work each day?
I had to drive my Mustang 20 miles to work each day. My mom drove the '74 LTD 60 miles each way every way. My dad drove the 72' Mustang 20 miles each way. Needless to say my parents cars litterally fell appart due to age and use. I would never drive my car that much as it is irreplaceable. If I coud still but genuine 60's and 70's cars then yes I would drive them 20 miles to work.
Anyway, using old technology does not mean the parts are not made any more. If the NYCS is demanding parts then someone sill supply them.
No? Well then why would you demand the MTA to do the same?
Looks like you bit off more than you can chew.
"Looks like you bit off more than you can chew."
Bit off more than I could chew? Bwah ha ha ha! I'm literally ROTFLOLl! My friend, you need to pause before you type!
"Needless to say my parents cars litterally fell appart due to age and use."
Thank you for proving my point. So are the rustbirds.
"I would never drive my car that much as it is irreplaceable."
Thank you again for proving my point.
NYCT doesn't really have a choice as to how much they can use their older rolling stock. That's because they are a business and not a museum, as you think. If ridership demands it, they have to bring out the less desirable cars. Heck, if the rustbirds only made one run a week, they would certainly be in better shape, and I would never be so in favor of their retirement. The money could be better spent elsewhere.
I'm really curious as to why you think the MTA has retired cars over the past century?
Listen, if this is about the appearance of the car, that's subjective, and there's no point arguing over that. Style changes, and if you’re trying to hang on to the past, you’re arguing on the wrong side of entropy.
But if this is about keeping older rolling stock just for the sake of avoiding change, well then, I'm sorry I hit such a sore spot with my previous post ;-P
MATT-2AV
NYCT doesn't really have a choice as to how much they can use their older rolling stock. That's because they are a business and not a museum, as you think. If ridership demands it, they have to bring out the less desirable cars. Heck, if the rustbirds only made one run a week, they would certainly be in better shape, and I would never be so in favor of their retirement. The money could be better spent elsewhere.
The point of the thread was not about keeping the old cars, but buying new cars with the same technology as the old cars. I would prefer driving old tech cars to new tech cars and I wish that more were available. The MTA just buys an R32 machine that churns out new ones as needed.
Now I understand. You're a technophobe!
I knew there had to be an irrational motivation behind your rejection of new technology in favor of old; fear it is.
"...but buying new cars with the same technology as the old cars."
Air conditioning is new technology. Should the MTA buy cars without air conditioning? Where do you draw the line? What old technology do you want to keep, and what do you want to discard.
You know, having a fear of change is a pretty bad position to be in in this world. Change is inevitable -- you can't avoid it.
And you never answered my question from before: Why do you think the MTA has disposed (literally) of old technology in favor of new technology? Also, why do you think the MTA doesn't have, as you put it, an "R-32 machine" for manufacturing their own rolling stock?
MATT-2AV
Now you've got it!!!
There's been a little bit of a misunderstanding to my original post...
people seem to think I meant that they shouldn't retire older cars, when I simply meant they should build NEW cars, to the same tried-and-true DESIGNS as the old cars.
Just wanted to clarify.
with bule-white inside, no railfan window, led next station sign, blue benches, variable alternator, ac motors, one stick speed contol, onboard computer display board, automated train annoucment, etc.
I don't see a need to make things more complicated if you don't have to. If the onboard computer gets fried I want the subway to keep moving. If the means of production I want the ability to fashion replacement parts on sight.
Why do you think the MTA has disposed (literally) of old technology in favor of new technology?
As I have said before I could really care less about the underlying technology. I have a problem with updated design. Is the size and shape of an R143 an integral part of the AC traction system? Save money on design, just update the fuctional pieces.
Also, why do you think the MTA doesn't have, as you put it, an "R-32 machine" for manufacturing their own rolling stock?
Like Greek fire the art of making Budd products has been lost to the ages. You can't deny that Budd made better carbodies than anything you see today. In terms of mechanical engineering they made almost everything better back in the day.
My two demands are easily fixed and built to withstand. Today neither of these demands are being met.
If the means of production I want the ability to fashion
replacement parts on sight.
This is a valid concern for a museum, but not a transit operation.
By the time the spare parts become unavailable, the theory goes,
the cars are retired or the technology has been updated.
Unfortunately parts you can make yourself are either not very
reliable, not very efficient, or not very cost-effective when you
factor in the cost of labor.
As for carbody design, it evolves to meet custengers' needs
and changing circumstances. The new cars have drop-in HVAC
units. Great labor-saving device, should improve HVAC availability.
Can't do it on a redbird body. Feedback from the public in this
security-conscious age is they want to be able to see through
into adjacent cars. Again, not exactly easy with the existing
body designs. As social mores change loading and unloading
behavior, so changes the width and arrangement of doorways, seating,
aisles, stanchions, etc. You've got to keep moving. Even the
"standard" PCC body design changed several times within the
course of less than 15 years.
The new R142s don't exactly have 'drop in AC.' The two AC units are inside the ceiling and require special equipment to remove. They are computer controlled like everything else. Redbirds have one central compressor undercar with a simple control system that can be fixed.
Feedback from the public in this
security-conscious age is they want to be able to see through
into adjacent cars.
Then they should should also be allowed to pass through all the cars. One of these days we'll get a tunnel fire or a terrorist bomb and people will get trapped and die. Then we'll see some changes.
They already are allowed to pass through cars, except on the 75-foot R44s, 46s and 68s. That was probably one reason why the TA went back to 60 feet for the R143s and will probably continue to do so with all future B-division car orders.
They already are allowed to pass through cars, except on the 75-foot R44s, 46s and 68s. That was probably one reason why the TA went back to 60 feet for the R143s and will probably continue to do so with all future B-division car orders.
The R143's were for the L and the L is a 60 foot car line. You can't pass through all the cars. The transverse cabs cannot be "halfed" to permit people to pass through when not in use.
But there's a conductor who could open the storm doors when need be.
Arti
They can't be halfed, but the train crew can unlock the doors in the cabs and allow passengers to pass through the cabs to one end of the train in an emergency. And you can pass through the non-cab ends of the R143s, as those doors are kept unlocked.
They can't be halfed, but the train crew can unlock the doors in the cabs and allow passengers to pass through the cabs to one end of the train in an emergency. And you can pass through the non-cab ends of the R143s, as those doors are kept unlocked.
In addition, the cars have emergency intercoms, lessening the need that passengers will have to go between cars to look for the conductor or TO in case of emergency.
Didn't PATH have it a long time ago?
Arti
re emergency intercoms
Didn't PATH have it a long time ago?
Yes. Just like air-conditioned cars.
I didn't say they necessarily got it RIGHT. I just object to
the notion being advanced that there is no need for innovation
in car body design.
As I have said before I could really care less about the underlying technology. I have a problem with updated design. Is the size and shape of an R143 an integral part of the AC traction system? Save money on design, just update the fuctional pieces
If you are going to change the underlying components, chances are the body will have to be resigned also. Even if you are going to keep the same style. So if the body is going to be redesigned anyway might as well make it look new.
My two demands are easily fixed and built to withstand. Today neither of these demands are being met.
You have no first hand experince in this area, so how do you know?
The idea that subway cars should be manufactured locally has a certain appeal. The cost of such locally made cars, however, would likely be much more than currently.
"As I have said before I could really care less about the underlying technology. I have a problem with updated design."
So you really just don't like the way they look.
MATT-2AV
"Is the size and shape of an R143 an integral part of the AC traction system?"
Mike, your thoughts are a bit niave. Of course you can put AC traction into an R-9 clone. You can air condition it with latest in HVAC technology too. The fact is that when you spend $1.2 million per unit for a railcar, the majority of the public want's the pretty bows along withthe bells and whistles. Getting the public to accept a high-tech R-9 would be a very hard sell.
You should offer that speech to Chrysler engineers. Maybe then they wouldn't build butt-ugly cars like the PT Cruiser...
:0)
Retro is in - in some industries. The Prowler has an intriguing look and so does the new t-bird. The Indian motorcycle has made two comebacks - one as the Kawasaki Drifter which has had limited appeal and a bike called Indian with a harley engine. Retro has limited appeal. In the world of trains, people want sleek, shiney and working railcars. Old looking subway cars would convey the message of the old days when trains were not sleek, shiney and didn't work well.
The Prowler has an intriguing look and so does the new t-bird.
According to my wife, the new T-bird has a sufficiently interesting look that, when the time comes to replace her Mustang in two or three years, I will be accorded the privilege of buying her one.
Anybody got a spare money tree?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The Prowler has an intriguing look and so does the new t-bird.
According to my wife, the new T-bird has a sufficiently interesting look that, when the time comes to replace her Mustang in two or three years, I will be accorded the privilege of buying her one.
Rumor has it that Ford was trying to make buyers of the new T-bird, as a condition of being allowed to get one, to sign contracts prohibiting resales for a set period of time. I heard both six months and one year mentioned. Company lawyers supposedly kiboshed the idea.
If people want retro why does not Ford et al just make replicas of the classis 50's T-bird, 30's roadsters or woody station wagons. If you want a new car, buy a new car. If you want a retro car, buy an old car. Ugh, people shouldn't settle for simulated, it's a sign of hypocracy and phonyism. It's like replacing your windows with LTC screens that show nice mountain scenes. One of these years humanity is going to end up spending all of its time in some sort of holodeck.
R9's are a poor example as they do represent an older technology of body manufacture.
I think the public would be perfectly happy with a brand spanking new R32 with an R143 style (functionality wise) inerrior.
I agree - Budd made excellent railcars, except for the SPV2000 a.k.a. the Seldom Powered Vehicle. The R32s, on the other hand were very good subway cars. The TA should have bought a lot more cars from Budd, but they didn't. Budd also made better products than most of their competitors in its heyday, which is why R32s will likely outlast the newer R38s, R40s, R42s and possibly R44s, all St. Louis Car products. Now the TA has to replace what it has due to problems with rust, leakage and general old age.
[ I would prefer driving old tech cars to new tech cars and I wish that more were available.]
You can get a brand new old (low) tech car from Russia, the supply is not limited.
Arti
Well, OK, Matt...I would like Ford to make a NEW '69 Mustang
beautiful car, plus, you could work on it yourself.
And as to parts, so what?
Make new old-design parts, too.
Since they are less complicated parts, they should be cheaper and easier to make.
And, you know as well as I do that older stuff is way more reliable, especially newly made old-design parts.
I'd fly a DC-3 if it was made last year, surely.
And, you know as well as I do that older stuff is way more reliable, especially newly made old-design parts.
Not really. I enjoy old cars nearly as much as I enjoy old trains, but it sure is nice not to have to change points and plugs every 10-12K miles, or tires every 12-15K miles (that was the typical life of a bias-ply tire in 1969). Just to compare, I changed the plugs on my '96 Windstar at 89K - earlier than the manufacturer's recommendation, but I had gotten some VERY bad gas and they were somewhat fouled as a result - and I still have two of the original radial tires on it, after 112K miles.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I changed the plugs on my '96 Windstar at 89K
They actually let you change the plugs on it? I thought you'd need some sort of special computer that only the dealership has and that nobody can understand in an intuitive way.
but it sure is nice not to have to change points and plugs every 10-12K miles, or tires every 12-15K miles
People complain about the lack of todays family oriented activities. Maybe its due to the desceased need for auto-maintainence. I remember when my dad showed me how to change the plugs on the '72.
guess why auto repair stores can rip you off? cause it is all sealed and propriatery and you must replace it if you take it off (door panal cover, the plactic plugs break when you take em off)
A brief economic analysis is in order.
First, a definition: "light motor vehicle" includes passenger vehicles capable of carrying ten passengers or less and trucks with a one-ton rating or less.
Second, the source of these statistics is our friendly United States government, in a report released in 1999. All figures are extrapolated based on prevailing failure rates and include all vehicles sold in the United States during that model year with a unit quantity in excess of 5000 (in other words, no Ferrari Testarossas in the mix). Figures are as reported and may include some rounding (I'm sure the life expectancy figures are, others I presume have been.)
Gasoline mileage and price information is from the 2000 report of the Department of Energy, as posted on the web. Leaded regular was the manufacturer's recommended fuel for approximately 80% (on a per unit basis) of model year 1960 vehicles; unleaded regular was the manufacturer's recommended fuel for approximately 96% (on a per unit basis) of model year 1995 vehicles.
Average life expectancy of a light motor vehicle, model year 1960: 70,000 miles.
Average life expectancy of a light motor vehicle, model year 1995: 145,000 miles.
Average cost, 1960: $2762
Average cost, 1995: $16,385
Average cost, 1995, in 1960 dollars: $3182
Purchase cost per mile of life expectancy, 1960: $0.0395
Purchase cost per mile of life expectancy, 1995: $0.113
Purchase cost per mile of life expectancy, 1995, in 1960 dollars: $0.0219
Average total cost of repairs and maintenance, 1960: $2576
Average total cost of repairs and maintenance, 1995: $4816
Average total cost of repairs and maintenance, 1995, in 1960 dollars: $935
Average cost per mile of repairs and maintenance, 1960: $0.0368
Average cost per mile of repairs and maintenance, 1995: $0.0332
Average cost per mile of repairs and maintenance, 1995, in 1960 dollars: $0.0064
Average gas mileage, 1960: 11 mpg
Average gas mileage, 1995: 19 mpg
Average gas price, leaded regular, 1960: $0.31
Average gas price, unleaded regular, 1995: $1.15
Average gas price, unleaded regular, 1995, in 1960 dollars: $0.22
I don't have insurance cost information, but it would be difficult to extrapolate a reasonable comparison between a "new" 1960 vehicle being driven in 1995 and a 1995 model vehicle being driven that same year, as there are too many variables.
As you can see from the comparisons above, the ownership cost per mile, excluding insurance, is significantly less in constant 1960 dollars for the 1995 model vehicle as compared to the 1960 model vehicle. In addition, the 1995 model vehicle is, on average, significantly better optioned than the 1960 model vehicle (air conditioning, automatic transmission, stereo system, enhanced safety systems, just to name a few). So, while I enjoy older cars, I'll stick to my new iron for daily transportation.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Good job, Anon_e_mouse. Let's see if they will argue with that.
One word: Cuba.
People complain about the lack of todays family oriented activities. Maybe its due to the desceased need for auto-maintainence. I remember when my dad showed me how to change the plugs on the '72.
Mike: This is the first time I have laughed out loud at one of your postings. The logical extrapolation of your post is that automakers should deliberately make cars that require un-needed maintenance so that fathers & children can have more time together?
Sheesh!
And, frankly, most of my peers (age 40-ish) who are fathers spend FAR more time with their kids than their fathers did with them. Perhaps you were lucky.
I need every bit of ammunition that I can hurl.
Here's another one. Older design cars promote safer driving because:
A) At high speeds the sound and feel like they are about to fall appart.
B) If you get into any sort of serious accident you're pretty much toast so you drive accordingly.
C) Reckless drivers remove themselves from the driving population through B above.
I know what when my mom went from the LTD to the Accord she had a little problem finding herself suddenly at 80+ mph. The ride was so smooth that she didn't get any of the traditional cues that she was going to fast.
B) If you get into any sort of serious accident you're pretty much toast so you drive accordingly.
So what? Modern cars make serious accidents less likely, and if they do happen, they're less deadly. Wouldn't it be better to drive recklessly without the risk of death?
C) Reckless drivers remove themselves from the driving population through B above.
Yes, and they take other people with them.
Well then don't be around people might cause something and get you killed. Unfortunatly that isn't a possiablity for some of us (I am not calling for saftey reforms).
>>> People complain about the lack of todays family oriented activities. Maybe its due to the desceased need for auto-maintainence. <<<
And if we could get rid of those damned new fangled washing machines, mothers and daughters could bond all day long while scrubbing clothing on a washboard. :-)
Tom
>>> What if the model was discontinued, and the manufacturer went out of business years ago? <<<
Hey, don't diss the ‘54 Studebaker Speedster, (aka the Banana Boat). :-)
Tom
Sorry, JM, but where do you get spare parts for a GE PC (Pneumatic Cam) controller in 2001? Field coils and armatures for WH 49 and 56 motors? Gaskets for brake valves and compressors that were built when Teddy was in the White House, brake shoes for a car that is from the same era?
You make them yourself, or pay lots of $$$. BTW, it takes about 21 hours to machine the contactor holders for a PC Controller, and about 30 hours for brake shoes - assuming you have a machine shop and people to run it who know what they are doing.
Well, there is a very simple solution...
make the parts. Parts are going to have to be made, anyway, new or old.
Oh, yeah. The MTA will just go into the parts business now. Great. Everyone, get ready for a $1.75 fare to cover the higher cost. Have you ever heard of eceonomy of scale? It would cost much more for the MTA to manufacture (most) parts than an outside company.
MATT-2AV
Again, why can't the manufacturers make the parts needed?
If they're building the cars, they have to build the parts, no??
Three words: The bottom line.
Instead of using a computer, why not use a feather pen and ink by candle light to write letters to every Subtalker about this subject? I mean, who needs new technology anyway?
Hey they did it with cars, witness the P.T. Cruiser. But then again they might screw it up like the super ugly new VW Beetle.
I like the current models we have(exept of the Redbirds no offense to Redbirds rule)
Well, I agree with you in part. I don't see why we have electronic signs- they seem far more prone to breakdown, and far harder to fix than old roll-signs. I also really don't see the need to replace they entire signal system. The one we've got is tested and true.
On the other hand, SOME new technology is definitely worthwhile. Examples: 2-way radio, Air Conditioning (J-Train, I'm sure you remember what summer on the subway was like previously, while 4th Ave Local might not), and flourescent lightning- it's brighter AND cheaper!!
Also, get a look at Redbird car bodies- huge rust holes appearing. I'll miss the 'birds too, but they really do seem shot now. On the other hand, the R32, 38, and 40/42s don't have the rust problem so bad, so stainless steel is also a good thing....
"(J-Train, I'm sure you remember what summer on the subway was like previously, "
ay ay ay, I sure do :)
I rode R-14's and 15's in the Bronx till they disappeared (maybe 83-84)...AND 17's in the Bronx and 16's in Brooklyn.
It was rough, but I always accepted it as just the way it is.
(I also really don't see the need to replace they entire signal system. The one we've got is tested and true.)
Actually, it's old and expensive to maintain. On one line, a brand new old style signal system is being installed because replacement can't wait for the full implementation of CBTC. Subway cars also wear out.
You have to replace things, so do you replace them with something like what you have, or something new? The marginal benefit of new technology may be small, but the marginal cost (since you are replacing something anyway) is also small. Often, the operating costs of the new stuff is cheaper.
<<<"The marginal benefit of new technology may be small, but the marginal cost (since you are replacing something anyway) is also small. Often, the operating costs of the new stuff is cheaper.">>>
Theoretically true. However, if you replace technology that WORKS WELL with soemthing new that turns out to be a flop (can anyone say R44 & R46??), the marginal cost can be infinitely greater, in terms of repairs, workingt out bugs, and even, heaven forbid, a system failure that resulted in loss of life.
While CBTC might work well on some new transit sytems, I could anticipate a lot of problems with the tight curves, numerous interlockings, express and lay-up tracks, etc., that are on the NYCT.
"I could anticipate a lot of problems with the tight curves, numerous interlockings, express and lay-up tracks, etc., that are on the NYCT."
Chicago's L system has all of those to a greater (tight curves by the bushelful!) or lesser (express tracks) degree, and uses a cab signaling system, not wayside signals. A train gets too close to another train, or exceeds the speed limit, an alarm goes off. If the alarm is on for more than a couple of seconds, the brakes automatically apply.
Mind you, the only signaled portion of the system before the cab signals (IIRC) were the downtown subways (1940s) and the Congress Expressway line(late 1950s). CTA went, on most of the system, directly from NO signals at all (!) to state-of-the-art (at least in the 1960s) cab signaling without ever employing wayside signals except at switches.
I think what bothers some people on this board is the presumption that new tech will always be "a flop" and therefore let's never ever buy or use new tech. Are you writing your messages to this board on an old Selectric typewriter?!
The flip-dots are a joke like win98 on a computer sold by a fly-by-night operation with corrupted BIOS (4 gigs becomes 8 gigs nice). On the buses the flip-dots are always broken, no buts! But the LCDs are never. On the R-44\46 the LCD crystals are also never broken but the signal going to them, I thinks it is a controller failure or line failure or short in the controoling circets. The LCDs are more accurete cause a TO doesn't have to switch them all with a key. Instead he can switch them all with a buttton. also if you don't want to use a LCD or LED and a rollsign you need a selector that will turn them all with a button form a single place.
Also I've seen duct tape on the roofs of some R40s and 42s. I think they may be having leakage problems. Duct tape can only solve those problems for so long.
Returned from Fresh Pond Jct. where I saw the CP Holiday Train all lit up.
Also saw a lot of new R-142s on flatcars in the NY & A yard.
The highest number I saw was #6800.
Bill "Newkirk"
there are only 2 redbirds left on the 2 line. expect 6801 and up to be on the 5
Are you sure??? Are we talking married pairs or ten car trainsets? Seems we still have a gaggle of birds to take care of yet. CI Peter
those gaggle of birds will be out the door soon or go to the 7 line. (my prediction)
Roger that! The TA is moving on all of this for sure. No more old birds, no more R142 parking lots AND if R142s go to broke AND if KHI makes their trains go, more R142As. I get to stay clean. CI Peter
i believe both will have their trains moving. no broke ones are gonna be in th system.
I mean that one Bom. division might go belly up and stick TA with trains that don't go and make an opening for KHI. CI Peter
i doubt it. with the politics going around, most likely KHI will not get another order. if there is gonna be more orders its gonna be someone else. mostlikely BOM. again. hopefully they let the experienced build the next contract cars. trust me the next new contract will not be KHI (if thats what you are talking about)
Hey, Bill. Was there a special CP loco made up for the holidays with some kind of reference to the heroes of 9/11? I was tipped off that there was supposed to be some PR and local politicos there (Pataki or Rudy G?) for the 'unveiling???
Can you give details?
BMTman
It rolled through here at about 4pm and departed after dark from the Saratoga station northbound. *VERY* pretty ...
This shall be the 290,000th post on Sub Talk
#3 West End Jeff
Since you're off by one, why bother posting at all? Who cares?
I just said that I was off by one. Nobody's perfect.
#3 West End Jeff
Well it was post No. 290,001, missed by one but, tried anyway.
#3 West End Jeff
I wonder, if I posted 10,000 messages (in one night) in a holy crusade to get to 300,000, would I be honored or perminantly banned?
Don't worry, I won't try it
Dave doesn't like 3 gigs of messages showing up over night.
B.F.D.
I tried for post No. 290,000 but, it turned out to be Post No. 290,001. Oh, well I missed by one.
#3 West End Jeff
Was on a #1 this morning northbound ...noticed it originated at Chambers St...and every 2nd or 3rd southbounds were signed for
Chambers....is this something new???...wonder how they relay
north???
I wonder how they relay also.
#3 West End Jeff
I've seen them too. At night, all 1's terminate at Chambers. I assume the trains in question are running through to Brooklyn but simply never got resigned.
I've seen them too. At night, all 1's terminate at Chambers. I assume the trains in question are running through to Brooklyn but simply never got resigned.
No, they actually do terminate at Chambers. I got off there a week ago (I wanted to see how far down the tunnel I could look and see the plug). Just as I got on a northbound 2 a terminating southbound 1 (in revenue service) came into the local track and dumped. All I can guess is they run express uptown to 14th St. When I was going down to Chambers I caught a redbird 2 and we ran express from 14th TO Canal.
I guess at Rush hours, making a couple of extra moves isn't all that hard to do.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
On the local track? That hadn't even occurred to me. The only conflict (assuming all service to and from Brooklyn is running local) is on crossing paths with southbound trains.
As for your 2 express, that's not uncommon (although you should have been very surprised if it had only run express to Canal, as you had written). It's become a tradition by now to give the local stops on that line less service than they're scheduled to get. A few Sundays ago, when all northbound service was express between 72 and 96 and all southbound service was express between 72 and 42 by GO, the tower at 96 wasn't bothering to switch 2's to the local track, leaving two stations with approximately 1/4 their scheduled service.
When I was in NY over the holidays, there was an incident at 34th St (unclaimed bag on the platform) so apparently all trains were running express. I was at Chambers late one night and the announcement came in that there was a #1 arriving...only to see it switch on the SF local track. The conductor (very happy about the diversion and the break) told me that they would go across to the uptown express track and run express to 14th St. That doesn't sound logical during rush hour...
I also saw many 1's signed for Chambers Street as well (having grown up on the 2 and 3, the 1 to me has been the "ugly step-child" and I saw WAY more 1's than I cared to see :))
Ok the No.1 Trains terminate at Chambers street weekday after 11:30PM and weekend after 11PM.
Ok about the move at Chambers I do it every weekend. There are 2 ways to do it.
1. The No.1 train comes into Chambers on the Downtown Local track like it use to going to South Ferry. The Crew drops back or changes ends and goes back uptown Express to 14 Street and then all local stops.
2. Comes into Chambers on the Downtown Express track and change end or drop back then take the switch to the Uptown Local track making all stops.
No.2 is done most of the time at night and No.1 is done when the 5 daytimes turn arounds are done.
For those of you who missed this train.... the consist was an 11 car train mostly boxcars covered hopper cars and hopper cars with a generator car in the middle of the train ( the generator car is for the lights) and a special Observation car on the end. the power was 1 CP Rail SD-40-2 # 5698 and 1 Brand New GE AC4400. # 8638. This train was AWSOME with all christmas lights on every car even the engine(only the 8638 was lit. The 5698 wasnt decorated.) for further info. go to railroad.net Click on NY forum.
I saw it coming in, but I didn't see it lit up. Too bad, I would have liked to catch it. AC4400, heh I had to go back to the books for GE power, I thought that thing was a Dash 9.
Shawn.
They had to notch the plows on that thingie. Gosh, I wander if we'll see more widecabs in the future?
-Stef
Yes the plows were cut. Only thing missing was the speed control. Otherwise, it would have led. That was 1 awsome looking engine as well as the entire train itself.
You should have seen the inside of it! It had that "new car smell" very nice!
Does anyone have pictures? It was dark when it went past my window and I didn't see the paint job on that AC4400.
Shawn.
Leader of plane-spotters admits he was guest of Turkish armed forces
By Terri Judd
03 December 2001
The case of the British plane-spotters being held in Greece has been damaged by the group leader's admission that he travelled to Turkey as a guest of its armed forces only six months earlier.
Paul Coppin is said to have visited Greece's long-term enemy during a week-long trip in May. Yesterday his lawyer, Iannis Zacharias, admitted his client had made the trip but insisted it was "irrelevant" to any accusations of spying being levelled at Mr Coppin, his wife Lesley, 10 other British and two Dutch plane-spotters.
Richard Howitt, an MEP, warned that the claims, which he said were being taken "seriously" by Greek foreign ministry officials, could damage Mr Coppin's case. Bitter enmity has existed between the two countries since the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and Mr Howitt said both sides were sensitive about security issues.
Mr Coppin, the owner of Touchdown Tours, which organised the plane-spotting trip, made his admission when interrogated by intelligence officials last week. The Greek authorities, it was claimed, are investigating links between the 45-year-old and Turkish intelligence services, fearing he may have passed on information.
Mr Coppin insisted that he had merely been invited to an air show as a member of the press working for the magazine Air Britain.
Mr Howitt, the Labour MEP for the East of England, said Mr Coppin discussed his Turkish trip two days ago, when the politician visited the 11 British men being held in Nafplion prison, near Athens.
"Given the long-standing enmity with Turkey, this report is bound to have a damaging effect in Greece itself," he said.
"Yet I believe it is just one more example of the rumours and misinformation thrown up because of the inordinate delay in dealing with this case. When I met Paul in jail two days ago he volunteered the information to me that he had been questioned about attending an air show in Turkey, explaining his only connection was as an accredited aviation journalist, something he has done in many countries around the world.
"Paul has been questioned for two hours at a time when others have had 15-minute interviews and I know he fears being made a scapegoat so that the Greek security forces can save face."
Mr Zacharias said: "We were very surprised they put this question, but I want to keep it in perspective. It has not been a major issue during the investigation. It was just another question."
The group, which has been held for more than three weeks, appeared before an investigative judge on Tuesday last week in a closed hearing. An assessment of the evidence against them is due to be presented to three judges today. It is hoped the judges, who meet in private tomorrow, will make their decision by early Wednesday.
Mr Zacharias admitted that he now felt there would be a trial for some, if not all, of the British group – a matter which could take up to a year to come to court, with the accused facing a maximum jail sentence of 20 years for spying.
Hi all,
I would like to get your suggestion(s) on how New York City Subway Resource's online subway map should look like when V starts to run on December 16th.
1) Should G line be dotted line between Court Square and 71-Continental Avenues?
2) I understand that E will run to/from 179 St. with few trains, again should that be dotted on Hillside Avenue portion?
3) Should I retain double line for the Q on Brighton section? If not, how should I note which circle/diamond stops on Brighton section?
4) Any other suggestion(s) will be considered as well.
I'll need few SubTalk fans to actually proofread "DRAFT" December 16 edition.
I would like you to post your suggestion(s) on this thread.
Thanks,
Michael Adler
adler@nycsubway.org
adler1969@aol.com
My suggestions,
1) Dot the G only from Court Square to Queens Plaza, and stick in a note saying "V operates weekdays, G operates weekends over same route", something like that.
2) Some E trains will go to 179 but I wouldn't bother with that. After all does the real subway map tell you now if, for example, an R train is terminating at Canal Street or Whitehall Street?
3) Leave the Q and Q diamond separation as it is, so we can differentiate between the two more easily.
I assume you saw post 289908 earlier today ("NEW MAP") and its predecessors, on how the official map is handling these matters?
I would include dotted lines of both the (G) to Forest Hills/71 Ave and the (E) to 179th St.
I guess do the (Q) like the IRT 3-tracks.
:-) Andrew
1) Since the G will be part time to 71 Av., it should NOT be dotted, but should have a light type face to indicate a part time line, just as is with the present TA map.
2) Again, it should have a light type face (E to 179).
3) No. One single solid line, and at express stations, indicate (Q) and < Q > at Brighton and 57/7, indicate [Q].
2) Not sure it's worth the added confusion for just a few trains. No maps show Whitehall St as a possible terminal, although a few trains start/end there.
3) I'd prefer to see the Q local/express treated the same way the 7 local/express is ... one line, express stops designated with an express (filled-in) circle.
traditionally, any service that operates beyond just late nights has been shown on the map (ie. Q, B to 21 st. - B ran some odd hours but was still shown) whereas late night only services have been left out (ie. late nights 4 to new lots is left out).
The (G) should be shown all the way to 71st. 71st and court sq should both have [G] terminal boxes. along queens blvd the G could be shown as to represent "special service." the E should not be shown to Archer unless better information proves that this will be a regular, reliable service rather than just a few hodge-podge runs during peak hours.
The 6, 7, and Q should all have uniform representation, i'm indifferent to single or double line. meanwhile, the N and W to astoria should be shown as a single line as the D, Q were when they had separate route names.
as for the walking metrocard transfers, there really isnt any precedent in NYC that i know of.
why not put a link to your "draft" map on the message board?
About the Brighton line, I don't think it should have been shown as a double line in the first place. That's used elsewhere on the map only to show peak hour express service on 3-track lines. The Brighton doesn't have that so should just be shown as a single line. You can use the circle symbol for local trains and the diamond for the express. Maybe show both "Q"'s at the stations and just draw a little diamond around the "Q" letter at the express stations to show the difference.
I'd have to agree, as a Brighton Customer those skip lines on the 6/7/D indicate single direction (Some peak only) express service where as the Brighton has experss both ways all day.
Or label each stop QL and QX :-)
The double line is used on the TA map wherever the same number or letter is used for local and express service at the same time (in either direction). Hence the 4, 5, 6, 7, D, J, Q, and W. In all cases, some trains run express while others run local. The double line is necessary to identify which trains stop where.
According to this system, the 12/16 TA map is perfectly consistent (well, except for the Z, but where else would you put it?). The online map is inconsistent, with its double line for the 1/2/3.
1) No
2) It shouldn't even appear on the map IMO
3) Yes
I will "proofread" the map if you e-mail it to me...
Does anyone have any idea which trains within the New York City Subway are accessable (wheelchair compliant)?
Please give the response in the following order IRT; BMT/IND.
I would think all subway cars are. Getting to the cars are another story. Not all stations are accessable.
Dear Phil,
You can call the MTA and get a list of stations that are wheelchair
accessible. But please be careful! With all of the construction
especially, many stations are having work done that may impact someone
in a chair, and the MTA may not have been informed, or the information not gotten to the right person to be disseminated. A friend of mine in a chair, once was forced to drag herself up some stairs to escape a station where the elevator was broken. Since then, she only
uses Access-a-Ride.
Might I suggest traveling with a companion, so if there are any
surprises in the way of broken elevators, etc, there is someone to
help get you back on track, so to speak.
Subway grrl
There is a number to call for the status of elevators and escalators. Unfortunatly, I forget it. You can pick up a subway map and it will list all accesible stations.
Also do you know that a special MetroCard exists, it's called a "AutoGate" ?
Mr rt__:^)
For a disabled person to use it, they have to have a AFGE-Disabled Metrocard to use it. A friend of mine has it. He loves being able to get in and out without trying to get the agent's attention.
that assumes the autogate is not jammed by someone wanting the gate andforcing a regular MetroCard into the slot and then waiting for a maintainer.
The autogate opens only if you have an AFAS fare card
ADA
Fare
Access
System
These RFMs (Reduced Fare MetroCard) are only issued to a person using a wheelchair nad not to one using a cane, walker, etc.
In the event the autogate is jammed, the Station agent will operate the gate. Another reason to keep the booths! We do have a button in thed booth that will open the autogate just as if the person had an AFAS RFM.
All trains can be ridden by wheelchair passengers but only the R142/142A models have space set aside (folding seats)and then only in the "A" units (that is the ones with the cabs - indicated by red stripes on the outside of the car). On the older models the wheelchairs will have to mix in with the rest of the crowd which would not be an easy thing.
Of course, as was mentioned by others, only some stations have elevators. If you check a regular full subway map you will see a list of stations equipped with elevators or otherwise wheelhair/handicapped accesable (there will be a wheelchair symbol).
I will put a few on this response:
A line: 207th St, 175th St, 42nd St/8th Av
E line: 50th St/8th Av (downtown side only), 42nd St/8th Av
S (soon to be F) Roosevelt Island, 63rd St/Lexington Av
B,D,F,N,Q,R,W 34th St/6th Av/Broadway
L,N,Q,R,W 14th St/Union Square
1,2 66th St/Lincoln Center
3 34th St/7th Av (express platform only)
You get the idea. There are so far 33 stations listed on the map. There will probably be others added as time goes on.
Will all the stations be ADA compliant? I doubt it, at least not for a very long time. The physical layout and location of a lot of stations would make it nearly impossible to install elevators.
Here's a list of accessible stations. Note that Chambers St IRT is not listed, as you had asked in a previous thread. Brooklyn Bridge is the only ADA-compliant station in Lower Manhattan. It's also best to call ahead to make sure the elevators are working so you don't have a nasty surprise at the station.
Hello All- Weve been busy digging up the streets of Brooklyn. Were half done with excavating the second block now. Rails and ties were already placed into position on the first block.
Work on ex-Shaker/Buffalo PCC # 70 also continues- all the "heavy" work has now been done, with the recent completion of the roof repair task. What an arc-welding job that was!
Bob D.
Bob
Keep up the great work!
Do you need any help with construction or anything else to help get these girls rolling faster in Red Hook?
Please email me at italianguyinsi@aol.com if this is the case, it would be my pleasure to help!
Regards,
Al V.
Wow! Glad to hear things are finally moving along! Betcha you can't wait to roll one down those tracks. :)
Its going to be really special rolling down the streets of Brooklyn !!
Man, you can say that again!
Is the Atlantic Ave. tunnel still part of the overall plan?
Still part of the plan to use it on the route to borough Hall.
I can't wait to check it out!
Maybe you'll unearth that locomotive supposedly buried when the tunnel was sealed off in 1861 :-)
What are the people in Red Hook saying about the project. Also do the track go anywere near the B77 route turn around.
Robert
The locals all love it. It doesnt go near the turnaround.
What is the route going to be? How long, what streets?
Any plans to get back into your barn. From what I understand since the Tug Boat thing your tracks are cut off from the barn where the restored PCC is.
Thats supposed to be repaired in the spring.
It's great that streetcars are returning to New York City. I'm curious about how the restoration of the PCC's is going. Do they have much in the way of body rust? A lot of the ex-Shaker cars did, but I don't know about the rebuilds. Also, do you have any plans about what you're going to paint the cars? I hope you don't keep them in Cleveland RTA colors (yecch!), but are you considering painting them in a variety of colors like San Francisco and Kenosha?
Best of Luck!
Frank Hicks
[Do they have much in the way of body rust? A lot of the ex-Shaker Heights/Buffalo cars did ...]
When the BMTman & I were there a couple of weeks ago we were VERY impreseed at the work in progress on #70. Outside they were welding new pieces to eliminate the rot, while inside she had been stripped to the frame. Plus there were folks active extending the ROW. Bob & company have all my good wishes.
Mr rt__:^)
These cars are easy to fix- if you like to arc weld ALOT.
Some will be green & silver, we are also thinking about doing some in other colors too-- other than the RTA colors.
Bob D.
"These cars are easy to fix- if you like to arc weld ALOT.
"Some will be green & silver, we are also thinking about doing some in other colors too-- other than the RTA colors."
I'm no welder, but as I understand it the hard part is removing the interior appointments beforehand so that you don't torch the car! 8-)
It will sure be nice to see those turquoise & silver cars in New York again. If you're considering painting other cars in other liveries, how about Birmingham? That city is the "forgotten PCC operator" IMHO.
Just noticed on one of my trips.On a transit pay phone in astoria (N line)there is a sticker. For info on service changes press #3333. Its an automated and free way to find out all the service changes in effect.This is a great idea just hope they advertise it better!
especially taken with what appears to be a 35 mm film camera !!
nice shots indeed !!
You guys probably already know about this, but in case anyone doesn't,
I happened on a wonderful model train display in midtown NY at the
Citigroup Center (53rd between Lex and 3rd) There are three scales of
track, an elaborate surround, set somewhere in the 1940's and 1950's.
There is even a drive-in movie theatre showing "High Noon" - the actual movie is showing, not a still! The lighting takes you from
sunrise to sunset. Lots of nostalgia there for
railfans of a certain age, I would think. Best of all, there are an
enthusiastic group of volunteers making everything run smoothly, and
they love to talk trains and model trains. It's open until Jan. 4th.
Put together by Clark and Barbara Dunham.
For you out of towners, the #E, #F, and #6 trains all stop within
a block of the building. Within a couple of weeks, you can even buy my subway shirts across from there at City Sports (that's how I stumbled on the display!)
Subway grrl
I recently saw the videotape of the exhibit. It's a marvelous toy train layout of O S and HO gauge trains. I hope to get to see it up close on Tuesday.
There used to be one of Clark Dunham's layouts on display in Williamsburg Va in the Village Shops @ Kingsmill, near Busch Gardens. It was called America's Railrods on Parade. I saw it about five years ago, and it was just about the most beautiful display I ever saw.
IIRC the layouts had originally been displayed at Citicorp in NY about ten years ago, or at least so I was told. The Williamsburg layout closed about a year ago, and the displays went back to Clark Dunham.
I wonder if this same display is the one that is back in NY.
From the info given on the video tape, I'd doubt that this is the same layout. They stated that it took over 1 year to build and had videotape of the construction. The shots seemed too contemporary for ten years ago.
The layout depicts NYC and upstate NY in 4 areas reppresenting the 3os 40s and 50s with another winter scene. It's obvious that Mr. Dunham has lots of experience with 'forced perspective' and stage lighting.
I have always been an admirer of Dept 56 Snow Village buildings. Dunham had included a lot of them in the O gauge display that I saw. I think that the display was the subject of a Classic Toy Trains article some years ago.
I used to get to Williamsburg once a year for a square dance festival, and always took an afternoon off to revisit this Dunham display.
I think that lack of patronage put them out of business, but I suppose people don't go to Williamsburg to see model trains.
Yeah, I did post about this a few days prior to its opening.
I too was impressed with the little drive-in movie display too. Must be the same technology they use on those airplane seat-back personal video screens. The picture is very clear, so it must be DVD.
I work in the building, and I look forward to the display every year. Last year, Citigroup did not renew the contract for the display. There's still some gossip about whether this was an oversight or a deliberate snub. Rumor has it that the CEO is averse to the "shopping mall" aspect of Citi's flagship tower (incidentally, NOT its headquarters, however.) Apparently, according to one of the "Station" volunteers, many an influential stockholder complained about its absence last year, which may explain why it's back. Or maybe the building's owner, Boston Properties, had different ideas about what to do with their public space.
I believe the display was in Chicago last year, but I don't know how much the layout was altered for the new city. I doubt much, since it's much as I remembered it from 2 years ago.
When I went down for a visit last week, the trolley which usually plies a long trestle on the "Weehawken" (sp?) side was not running. I joked with the attendant there ought to be little workmen on the display ripping up the track, with a large sign in the background reading,
PLEASE PARDON OUR APPEARANCE
COMING SOON!
TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS
TROLLEY SERVICE TO BE REPLACED
BY BUS SERVICE
Brought to You In the Name of Progress
By
The General Motors Corporation
The Firestone Tire and Rubber Corporation
Standar Oil
and
Robert Moses, Commissioner
Don't forget the Trolleys that are running in the layout as well >G<.
Atill waiting for a Q Shirt
Momentum is building for the Q! I just got asked about the V
for the first time today. The other candidates for the next shirt
are the G and the J.
Shall we take a vote among SubTalkers?
Subway grrl
This gives a whole new meaning to "regenerative braking":
An MIT scientist and a colleague have invented a semiconductor technology that could allow efficient, affordable production of electricity from a variety of energy sources without a turbine or similar generator. Here's the link from the MIT newspaper, Tech Talk.
Nice idea.
Why don't we just connect to radio stations - there is enough hot air there, we could generate as much electricity as we needed.
(Whoops - sorry Todd )
History repeats itself :)
The Russians, back in the 30's, had thermogenerators that went around oil lamps in homes to power radios. It worked, too.
"Ve inwentid it furst!"
Listen, heypaul and I have been working very hard to convert electricity to waste heat for years.
We are on the brink of a hugh break through.
We are waiting for BMTman to come through with an "Octagon Skillometer" for sequencing and heat and mass transport.
Keep your finger crossed!
avid
[By petition filed on November 2, 2001, New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC)...
NYCEDC indicates that it intends to ask the Board to find that the public interest is no longer served by New York Cross Harbor Railroad's (NYCH) use of the railroad tracks and terminal facilities at the "Bush Terminal Yards" (a/k/a "First Avenue Yards") and the floatbridge and related tracks at the Harborside Industrial Center (a/k/a "Brooklyn Army Terminal"), (collectively the tracks and facilities), both of which the City owns.]
Apparently on Dec 3rd, the City won in court.
Possible results:
- NYCH serves 65th Float facility, not likely as NY & Atl/CP wants to.
- NYCH makes some sort of deal with the City (understand the problem relates to them not paying taxes)
- SBK serves 1st & 2nd Ave tracks from 65th St yard (would seem more likely that NY & Atl would do it)
- NYCH tracks & Bush Term yard go away for ever.
Boy am I glad I was there this year & saw NYCH in action on the streets.
Mr rt__:^)
Thanks for the post Mr. T.
Man, is that bad news or what?
I knew the 'handwriting was on the wall' once there was news of a management 'purge' at NYCH about two months ago.
Once Rich Abramson was gone I figured things for them weren't going to be pretty.
BMTman
Does anyone know where Rick went? I remember him as an assignment clerk on AMT before he moved on to...other things.
Don't know, but I hope he gets picked up by NY&A.
BMTman
i went down there today to get some photos of 'hood, and actually came across a run up to the sbk/scrap yard.
their little leased ex-SP SW unit dragged about 5 gons up and parked them next to the exit ramp & costco (running into the scrap yard, of course to do it). (They made 2 runs to move the cars - maybe due to short tracks in the scrap yard?).
I can only assume that the cars are for the subway - perhaps containing rail and ties - if this is the case, does the subway system accept delievery of all rail & ties via the NYRR? what will come of this should the trackage be abandoned? more trucks?
there didn't seem much else going on. davidson was unloading some pipe, there was a string of other cars in the yard, and just inside the engine house you could make out that one alco, and another switcher, are still stored inside. on their return from the scrap yard, they pretty much parked the engine on the turn into 1st av waiting for some idiot to come and collect the truck he parked on the tracks (who'd park a truck on active tracks on a blind curve is beyond me).
also - does anyone know WHEN they'll be kicked out of the yard, or if it's being appealed somewhere? the operation today seemed as normal as it gets.
ALSO: In the scrap yard, there's still just the old wood Q cars by the gate.
also - does anyone know WHEN they'll be kicked out of the yard, or if it's being appealed somewhere? the operation today seemed as normal as it gets.
It sounds like the whole affair is some sort of dispute over taxes. I would imagine that the state will agree to a settlement that allows NYCH to stay in business. After all, while it can be hard to collect delinquent taxes from an operating business, it's a lot harder to collect them from a defunct business!
That route from the NYRR is the primary route for maintenance of way supplies for NYCT, as well as the route for scrap cars being taken off the system and to the NYRR yards (Bush Term) for shipment away for scrapping. As for trucks, not likely, NYCT has another outside connection to the outside world to receive MOW equipment and supplies, the Linden Yard, a maintenace of way yard in Brooklyn near the L line, where there is a connection to NYAR from NYCT rails. If the NYRR trackage was to be abandoned, then the supply delivery route will be the Linden Yard connection and flyover. But right now no plans are in the works for the abandonment of any tracks there. The trackage is still an active MOW supply route from the outside rail system to NYCT, as well as the best route for the transport of scrap cars to be sent out on outside rail lines to scrapping locations. One who sees it thinks its not used, but if one was to come there in the late night or wee wee hours of the morning, that's when the line would be used so trains to the location don't interfere with M line (daytime) and W line (all times) operations on the line.
Also the Linden Yard connection and flyover is the active route for delivery of R-142/142A equipment from Fresh Pond junction (CP Rail train 274 at 4am delivers the 142/142A cars there) via the NYAR Bay Ridge line to the Linden Yard connector and the Linden Flyover.
I worked late last night and was riding Jamaica-bound on the Atlantic Avenue Branch of the LIRR (Hempstead train 9:33 out of Flatbush).
When we pulled into the East New York station, at approx. 9:45 pm, I glanced up at the Atlantic Ave. Canarsie station and noticed that the train sitting up on the structure had much brighter-than-usual interior lighting. Being a good distance away, it wasn't till I also noticed the digital side signage that I realized I was looking at a train of R-143's. I was able to the Canarsie-bound train pull out of the station before my M-1 started out, so I got a glimpse of the end -- very similar to the R-142. And I LOATH that red digi-route sign on the car's bonnett (too small and the red color is not very readable from a distance).
BMTman
Is the IRT Chambers Street (7th Ave. Lines) station accessible?
It is fully accessable and operational.
I meant accessibility for the physically challenged?
This station is not accessible for the physically challenged.
For a current online list of stations that are accessible go to:
http://www.mta.info/ada/accessible.htm
Not for those who can't climb down two flights of stairs.
Brooklyn Bridge is accessible and is only a few blocks away. Of course, it's also on a different line. Where are you trying to go?
In case anyone is interested, there was a large "23 Street" station sign at one of the flea markets along 6 Ave in the 20s last weekend, which probably came off the "refrigerator tile" walls from the BMT Broadway station. Unfortunately, I don't remember exactly which flea market it was, so you'll have to do some wandering, but it's hard to miss something that large. I also don't know the asking price.
Whatever happened to the auction the Transit Museum had years back. They used to have it every two years. I picked up some nice signs back then, like a black on white 42, and a track destination sign, 10 years ago for $20, "E to World Trade Center all times", and they had about 20-30 of them for sale! Now, I'm glad I picked that up! (But I gave it to a friend about 5 years ago!) Who knew.
The funny thing is that I took the subway to the auction, not expecting to buy anything too big. I had to take it home again, and I rode the subway (IT would have been nice to have the Myrtle El) from Jay St on the F to Essex, the J to the M at Myrtle, and the M to Forest, with all these signs in clear view, AND NO NO GAVE ME A SECOND THOUGHT! The signs where taller than me, and I was only about 18 at the time, so it was hard to miss a teenager walking around the subway with signs in his hands! I had the receipts to prove that I bought them, and it was a Saturday, but I was suprised no one stopped me, not even the token clerk at my home station at the time of Forest Ave, as I walked out.
But what do they do with all the old signs now, and why don't they do the auction anymore.
Now they just hoard stuff -- the tightwads.
BMTman
The excuse I've usually heard is that the auctions weren't profitable enough.
Station signs actually pop up on e-Bay all the time, and the seller describes himself as a sign contractor hired by NYCT to perform sign replacement. I wonder if it's the same guy who did some chandelier replacement at GCT a couple of years ago ;).
Yeah, could also be the guy hawking O.J.'s Heisman Trophy...;-D
BMTman
The last time they had an auction/tag sale it was on a rainy day and not a lot of people (to their expectations) showed up. Someone got the idea that no one is interested anymore so they stopped the event.
I guess no one questioned Heypaul about his motorman's cab.:-) On second thought, he must have assembled it in his apartmant.
I haven't been there in a while, and it will be a while until I can get over there again so:
1. What are the express stations on the Sea Beach line?
2. When was the last time they ran express service there (all 4 tracks)
3. When did they take the 4th track out of service. (I believe it is out of service.) and which is the active one NB or SB. Is it still in place?
4. Was there or is there any talk of running express service again, at least on the 3rd track as peak direction service?
Thanks in advance
The express stops are in Brooklyn : Pacific, 36 and 59 but only rush hours and mid-day. Other times it runs local.
1. What are the express stations on the Sea Beach line?
59th St, 36th St, Pacific St.
2. When was the last time they ran express service there (all 4 tracks)
1969, when the NX rush hour service ended.
3. When did they take the 4th track out of service. (I believe it is out of service.) and which is the active one NB or SB. Is it still in place?
Soyuthbound (to Coney Island) track is out of service between the portal at 4th Ave and (I believe) Kings Highway. The Northbound track is signalled for both directions now. The rails on the SB track were supposed to be removed but I don't believe this has been done yet.
4. Was there or is there any talk of running express service again, at least on the 3rd track as peak direction service?
No - ridership doesn't warrant it, although the track is sometimes used for GOs (i.e. West End trains run express to Manhattan via Sea Beach, from Manhattan via normal route). I am pretty sure that this track will be used to test R-143s before they are put into service, if history is any guide.
--Mark
Thanks!
The NX Service actually lasted from November 1967-April 1968!! Its' purpose, I read, was to serve the housing developments in the Coney Island area with a SuperExpress ride to midtown. The NX trains must've held the record for the emptiest rush hour runs!! TOny
Probably true---but the legend lives on!
Heh.......I bet if that service ran now, it would definitely hold up better.
There are no express stations along the Sea Beach trench. It's a nice express run but it doesn't actually serve any Sea Beach passengers, limiting its utility somewhat.
IIRC, the northbound track is the one that remains in service. It can be used by trains running either way.
Until this summer, it was regularly used by B trains rerouted to the Sea Beach line due to GO's. Now the express track is the R-143 test ground and revenue service is kept off -- when the W is rerouted, it, like the N, runs local.
That's what I was trying to figure out. I knew about the express stations on the 4th Ave line. I wasn't sure if there were any on the actual Sea Beach route, after it leaves the 4th Ave subway.
The switch lay out at Kings Hwy you can switch local make Kings Hwy a stop and then get back on the express track going southbound. Would have to check Peter's book for northbound >G<.
Nope. It's a very enjoyable express run but it would almost be fraudulent to use the Sea Beach name.
The Sea Beach express tracks were part of a now-defunct Coney Island Express service pattern, also known as the Franklin-Nassau Special.
Interesting. Any details on this route?
I believe he's referring to one of the routings of the "Sunny Summer Sunday Specials." It started on the Franklin shuttle, down the Brighton to CI, across to the Sea Beach express tracks (a la the NX) and then up 4th Av and the Manhattan Bridge to Chambers. The tracks from the Manny B to the Nassau St line were severed when Chrystie St opened.
Cool ride.
Isn't that just swell. We have the Sea Beach running local and when the express tracks are used it is some foreign line that runs on it. And to boot, the express tracks run only one way while the other side was torn up. Just swell. Is there not anyone out there who is now convinced that the Sea Beach has been getting shafted for the past three decades? If you're not, then you are probably off your trolley.
The Sea Beach express tracks are irrelevant to commuters from Sea Beach stations. The express bypasses every single one of them. Why would you want the N to run express? You wouldn't be able to get on.
You could have a Sea Beach express running without a stop south to Coney Island for people who want to have an excursion to the beach in the summer or weekends, or for summer evenings for those who want to go and watch the Brooklyn Cyclones. Of course, the tracks don't run south, do they? There's a snafu for you. As far as express is concerned, the Sea Beach could run express on most of the 4th Avenue route instead of just two stops, 45th and 53rd Streets. And it could run express in Manhattan as it once did. Am I now clear on this?
Demand for a nonstop express to Coney Island is low, and I'm not sure why someone who lived along the Sea Beach line would want such an express, since it would just go zipping by his station.
The single remaining track is bidirectional.
On weekdays, the N does run express straight through from 59th to Pacific. On weekends, it runs local, but the only express terminates at Pacific.
Yes, the N could run over the bridge and express in Manhattan, but I'm sure some Sea Beachers would be unhappy by such a change. Locals are neither better nor worse than expresses; locals are more convenient for those bound for local stops and expresses are more convenient for those bound for express stops. What gives you the idea that today's Sea Beach riders would prefer a Manhattan express over a Manhattan local? Have you taken a survey?
What 4th Avenue riders want are consistent, predictable, and reasonably frequent West End and Sea Beach expresses that predictably meet R trains. They were once able to do this.
For nights, my experience was that 4th Ave would have likely been better served by a very frequent, high-quality shuttle bus service.
You've conducted a survey, I take it?
Does having used it for 10 years count as taking a survey?
No. I'd count it for something if you were riding the line today, but as I recall, you don't currently live in New York. Riding patterns change over time. What made sense when you rode the line might not make sense today. (I'm not ruling out the possibility that it would still make sense; I just don't have enough information, and neither do most posters on this board, including you and a particular Sea Beach fan who hasn't lived in Brooklyn since the Sea Beach's route was numbered.)
I heard that David. Yes I haven't lived in New York since 1954 but I have my opinions and feelings and, as you know, I will give them. I do admit that my affection for the Sea Beach is very visceral and deeply emotional, so for that reason I sometimes get real carried away. But anyone will a modicum of intelligence knows my line has been given the shaft in recent years and if some respect were shown to her perhaps ridership would improve. Going over the bridge, for instance, might save a wad of time getting back into Brooklyn or going to Manhattan and time saved means money earned or time not wasted. And why was the Sea Beach thrown off Stillwell? Traffic there is not meager. No, it does go deeper than that. There!!! I have had my say.
"And why was the Sea Beach thrown off Stillwell? Traffic there is not meager."
In 1999, total registrations at Stillwell Avenue were 3,366,806, placing the station 108th out of 424 (yes, there are 468 stations, but some -- like Grand Central on the Lexington Avenue, Flushing, and 42nd Street Shuttle Lines -- are grouped together). The station nominally has four lines terminating at it -- Brighton (very busy), Culver (somewhat busy), West End (somewhat busy), and Sea Beach (not very busy). Unfortunately, I have no data available to tell me the breakdown of ridership at this station, only the total registrations. However, I've posted the numbers for the various Sea Beach stations before, and, frankly, they range from fair-to-middlin' to pretty dismal. Of the four services, the Sea Beach is the logical one to remove from Stillwell Terminal for the duration of the project, given that one service has to go. It should be noted, however, that the West End will be the only line to serve Stillwell Avenue throughout the four years or so that the project will be underway -- even the Brighton will be cut back for a short time.
I agree that faster, more reliable service would increase Sea Beach ridership. However, with the Manhattan Bridge at half-capacity for the next few years, the options for improving Sea Beach service are limited at best.
David
In 1999, total registrations at Stillwell Avenue were 3,366,806, placing the station 108th out of 424
Is there a list for total registrations at all 424 stations? I'd be very interested to see it!
There's nothing posted on the Internet as far as I am aware. I have a book detailing this information. To post it would be a massive effort. I do it in pieces as required by an individual posting.
David
And we all appreciate it when you do.
Remind us, where and how do we obtain copies of this book? If I went down to 370 Jay tomorrow, would I be able to pick up a copy? How much would it cost? (IIRC, you did state that it is available to the public.)
I'm not sure I said it was available to the public, but if it is it should be obtainable at no charge by writing to NYC Transit at 370 Jay Street (Brooklyn NY 11201).
David
Would the Customer Infomation Center on the Street leval have it?
Not very likely. It's an internal document, though, as I said, I imagine that it would be made available to anyone who asks for it.
David
So who I have to ask for something like that? Sounds like something that Division of Stations would have.
Not necessarily. Stations didn't compile the information or print the book...it came out of the Office of Management & Budget.
David
David, thanks now as always about the data you've posted concerning ridership.
No survey, just a gut feeling of what would be better. A Sea Beach local that doesn't go over the Manny B, and doesn't enter Stillwell, and isn't an express simply bugs me because as one who once lived in New York and is big on nostalgia I remember when the Sea Beach was a prize line. That is what bugs me, capice?
As my home line is the R(arely) as opposed to your N(ever), I can feel your pain. I especially think it unfair that whenever the North side of the Manny B is shut down (now, and at least once in the '80s)the N gets shoved over into the Montague St tunnel to make room for the precious B and D (now W and Q) on the South side. But take heart-it used to be that the R was a 24/7 operation and the N operated as a shuttle at nite.
EGGS!
"...it used to be that the R was a 24/7 operation and the N operated as a shuttle at nite." Yea, tell him! Even better, for a number of years the Slow Beach ran local in Brooklyn while the two West End services ran express. The lesson -- things may not be so good but could be worse. Poor Fred.
Hey Q, you are trying to rain on my parade. Not nice. I owe you one.
Nice to know you're out there Fred and that I can get your attention.
As my home line is the R(arely) as opposed to your N(ever)
That about sums up those lines. This is why I usually avoid the Broadway line in Manhattan. The service is pretty bad compared to other lines.
Unfortunately, those of us out in Western Brooklyn (Bay Ridge) don't have a choice. Our stations, especially 77th & 69th streets, look as bad as they did when Tony Manero rode 'em in "Saturday Night Fever". I get the feeling that we're never going to get rid of the "refrigerator tile", which I can accept. However, it seems as though these stations are never even cleaned. And, the stench when exiting through the "iron maidens" is unbearable! You'd think that such a neighborhood, staunchly middle-class, and with a solid tax base, would get better treatment than it is. Ever since they took out the neewsstand @ 77th, it's been all downhill.
Shouldn't that be "capisce"?
Actually, up in The Bronx, it's "gabeesh"
actually, my great grandfather actually pronounced it "gabeed"
Actually we used to pronounce it at Cabeeesh. Anyway, who cares. Stop splitting hairs will you. I mean you Brighton guys, what a bunch of characters. Smell the damn freeking coffee.
Why must it be express to be a prize line? Sometimes the prize should go to an express. Sometimes it should go to a local. I'm sure everyone who uses Lawrence, Court, Whitehall, Rector, City Hall, Prince, 8th, 23rd, and 28th is glad the N is a local -- otherwise it would be a mighty long wait for the R.
(As I pointed out to you, the N does run express in Brooklyn on weekdays. On weekends there's no through express service from 4th Avenue to Manhattan.)
I agree-
I LIKE local runs, they're more relaxing, plus as someone who likes to check things out up close, I like seeing all the different stations (their architecture etc.), and if you're lucky to be on an elevated local, you can look down off the el and see the neighborhoods.
Can't do that from a speeding express. :)
Besides, locals are the irreplacable backbone of any transit system.
Fine, then let the R and W do that. I am still holding out for the Sea Beach. But then you already knew that, didn't you?
As a railfan, I enjoy express runs.
When I'm actually trying to get somewhere, I prefer whichever train will take me there. That's often a local.
If too many trains run express, the aggregate time lost by passengers waiting for locals will exceed the aggregate time gained by passengers who could use the express.
Expresses are great, but not if they starve the local stations of the service they need.
The N will probably runn express again once the MB is open again.
Create a express stop where the westend crosses over
That's easier said than done.
1. What are the express stations on the Sea Beach line?
None.
3. When did they take the 4th track out of service. (I believe it is out of service.) and which is the active one NB or SB. Is it still in place?
All I know is the NB one is still working. The SB is cut off from Kings Highway northward. It used to be B trains going over the express tracks because of GOs. They ran both directions (not at the same time, lol). That express run was pretty crappy anyway. The train always got held somewhere along the way. I remember this one time when I could see the N train's headlights catching up to us. And that N was from 36st too!
4. Was there or is there any talk of running express service again, at least on the 3rd track as peak direction service?
I'm guessing it will be a while since the N platform at CI is closed. It'll be an express to nowhere.
Of the many times I rode northbound rerouted B trains on the Sea Beach express track, every time with one exception, just after passing an N approaching 8th Avenue, the B was held while the N stopped, picked up its passengers, and proceeded into the tunnel ahead of us. If the B had gone first, it probably wouldn't have held up the N at all, but NOOOOO! For a change, the N had priority.
"For a change the "N" had priority" Is that so? Hell, and I thought pigs couldn't fly. I hope you don't begrudge the Sea Beach for catching a break here and there because it doesn't happen very often, does it?
Folks, I'm back..
Yes, the N does get to go first into 59th Street the many times the W or the old B train went over the Sea Beach express tracks...and why shouldn't it?? The only people they are screwing are the West End folks between CI and 62nd St...they're crowds of annoying West End folks who get on at the front of New Utr. station...noisy too
But that's another story, enough about annoying West End folks...
Think back to the mid to late 1990's...mainly the 93 to 98/99...hmmm...N's were the ones running Express over West End....now that was an interesting ride...but let's see, who got to enter CI first, or 36th Street first...
going toward Manhattan, the N was scehduled to get to 9th Avenue minutes after the B left....going toward CI, the N would often catch up with the B at Bay Parkway. It was really a coin toss...the N would sometimes zip into CI first, crossing over right after Bay 50th St...or sometimes, it would sit at BP and wait there for the B to go...either way, the B was never close to its schedule..
The N would have to cross over the Manhattan bound West End tracks to get to its terminal, so sometimes it would have to wait for the Manhattan B to leave the terminal first...
Today, if they were smart, the W could possibly just make skip-stops along Sea Beach, so that it could stop at BP (some people can take the B6 bus) and go further up BP...lots of B6 service, now with "limited" B6's, and more importantly, 62nd St/New Utr. and transfer upstairs...Kings Highway doesn't really help West End folks...so there, W making stops at CI, BP, NU...this would resemble the West End Express stops. And perhaps 8th Ave or Fort Hamilton, but those buses don't come too often. So, I can't really find a stop that is close to the West End's 9th Ave stop...
So, there, West End folks, you got the bad train, at least currently...
So listen up everyone, my pro Sea Beach article will be posted in a few days, so all you non believers, you can gear up now.
SeaBeach53
So listen up everyone, my pro Sea Beach article will be posted in a few days, so all you non believers, you can gear up now.
Don't warn them! :) ... I hate the B6, BTW...
Tell me where and when my friend. I want to read it. BTW, I have nothing at all against the West End. That train and along with ONE Brighton and the Sea Beach should be allowed to go over the bridge, but not TWO Brightons.
Bob has been conspicuously absent through all this.:-)
1.Pacific street,36 street,59 street,Coney Island
2.I belive in 1969 when the NX was running(though I belive a few trains was running on the 2 middle tracks due to Construction)
3.I belive the NB track was disconnected.I don't know about the other question.
4.I don't think so.
The N/B (E4) track IS connected, it's the only inner express track on the Sea Beach still connected to the rest of the line and, occassionally, used for light trains, work trains, R-143 tests and the occassional reroute of W services to/from Stillwell. It's the SOUTHBOUND express track (E3) that's physically disconnected from the Sea Beach line tracks. E4 (formerly Sea Beach N/B express track) is bi-directionally signalled, and if used other than for work, light, R-143 test trains or reroutes, would have an express that would be northbound during the AM rush hours, and southbound during the PM rush hours, which is the only logical passenger express service that could be used on the line. Given the condition and age of E3 track, I don't think NYCT would even bother rebuilding and reconnecting the track for an express service on the Sea Beach line.
Ah, another A fan, I see.:-) The more, the merrier.
Will the MTA propose any more stations by offering elevators and barrier free access to stations?
All renovated stations are required to be ADA 1990-compliant.
Not true. Most rehabbed stations retain the same access they had prior to rehab.
Only key stations (whatever that means) are required to be brought up to ADA standards.
Actually, I believe the requirement varies on the degree of rehabilitation that is done. A major reconstructio project may require involvement of ADA specs, but I'm not clear on the details.
ADA compliance refitting is expensive, but it since it increases the capacity of the station to take a lot of people in comfort, and offers much better access to the elderly, people with kids, shoppers, airport travelers etc. (and therefore can increase ridership), it can be cost-effective.
ADA compliance refitting is expensive, but it since it increases the capacity of the station to take a lot of people in comfort, and offers much better access to the elderly, people with kids, shoppers, airport travelers etc. (and therefore can increase ridership), it can be cost-effective.
I have to disagree with this one on a gut feel. Station usage is rarely impacted by changes in decor or new access methods, with the exception of conncections among lines.
If an elevator costs somewhere between $1 million and $5 million to install, it's VERY hard to imagine that incremental traffic at a station due to that elevator alone would offset that in any kind of reasonable payback period. At $1 million, you'd have to generate 667,000 new fares at that station ... at $5 million, it'd be more than 3 million. I can't see that happening.
>>> it's VERY hard to imagine that incremental traffic at a station due to that elevator alone would offset that in any kind of reasonable payback period. <<<
If anyone could see the ADA requirements paying for themselves, they would have been installed years ago on a voluntary basis. That said, I still think it is an important societal goal to "mainstream" as many disabled as possible, and therefore support the modification of subway stations to make them accessible as quickly as it is reasonable to do so.
Tom
"If anyone could see the ADA requirements paying for themselves, they would have been installed years ago on a voluntary
basis."
History is full of people who thought that way about a lot of things and got it wrong!
I'm not saying every ADA-conversion will pay for itself. Overall however, the increase in passengers can be very significant.
Example: Let's say the LIRR completely ADA's the line to Brooklyn (the terminal will be, in reality). So now the disabled can get in and out of there. Fine. But now shoppers can too. And passengers wanting to go to the airport can get on with suitcases and feed onto AirTrain at Jamaica Station (and return).
Injuries due to people trying to navigate stairs, who now have an elevator, can be reduced, so claims against MTA are reduced.
You're thinking too narrowly about this, Tom. So did the previous poster.
"That said, I still think it is an important societal goal to "mainstream" as many disabled as possible, and therefore support
the modification of subway stations to make them accessible as quickly as it is reasonable to do so."
Bravo. Isn't a society ultimately measured by the care and compassion it shows to its most vulnerable members?
>>> History is full of people who thought that way about a lot of things and got it wrong! <<<
Any examples? i.e. something that private industry did not think would be profitable but turned a profit when done by government. (Not spin offs from the space race, or defense R & D).
Tom
"Any examples? i.e. something that private industry did not think would be profitable but turned a profit when done by
government. (Not spin offs from the space race, or defense R & D). "
A completely invalid set of restrictions. It is not government's primary mission to turn a profit; many government projects begin as ideas scoffed at by private industry at first. Space race and defense spin-offs are valid examples, Tom. Examples include the CFM-56 series of jetliner engines (Airbus, 737's, 757) - which began life as the engines for the B-1 bomber. Take off the afterburner, add a large fan and gearbox, and you have a stunning commercial success. Would private industry have done it on their own? Not really.
Medicine is similar. How many drugs have started as NIH projects nobody else wanted to do and ended up being licensed to drug companies
It appears you are suffering from hardening of the categories (a euphamism for close-mindedness).
But ADA cost-effectiveness isn't just about paying for itself by bringing passengers in through turnstiles. It is also all about finding cheaper alternatives to building whole new lines when budget is not available, and when renovating will be just as effective (and/but the Second Av subway/Lexington Line is a counter-example to that).
A good example of the cost-effectiveness of ADA is, actually, AirTrain. AirTrain itself would have cost $5.7 billion to run on its own dedicate ROW to 59th St - Manhattan. A heavy price tag indeed.
Instead, we have a train going to Jamaica Station for $1.5 billion. Jamaica Station is fully ADA-compliant, and its renovation is already underway. Penn Station is ADA compliant.
To get to western Queens or Manhattan in an ADA-compliant manner, therefore, you need only transfer at Jamaica. Woodside is ADA compliant; assuming that you must rebuild Kew Gardens and Forest Hillsto provide additional access, you might pay another $10-$15 million to accomplish that. Now, not only have you provided a "luggage-friendly" route with 100% ADA compliance between Manhattan and Jamaica, but you've also opened access to the LIRR for all kinds of people, regardless of whether they're going to the airport or somewhere else. You can't really know for sure how many would ride because Many have never had the option. And of course there's marketing to consider. The MTA doesn't do a good job of that.
And you've done it at a fraction of the cost of a full-length new line. That is cost-effective construction.
How bout the West side restaraunt that got nuked cuz the spaces between tables wouldn't allow for handicapped waiters in wheelchairs?
That sounds to me like a vast oversimplification of what really happened. I suspect that there wasc a lot more to it.
Where did you hear this story?
The problem is that with the huge costs and delays in getting anything done with the system, you wind up with one elevator per platform, which will frequently be out of service. When you have riders that would depend on that elevator working, they can't depend on the system. For example, wheelchair employee to boss: "I can't come in today - the elevator at my station is broken. No, they don't know when it will be fixed. I'll let you know when I can come back to work.". That just means they will use other transportation that they _can_ depend on.
"The problem is that with the huge costs and delays in getting anything done with the system, you wind up with one elevator per
platform, which will frequently be out of service."
Nonsense. It's very common to exaggerate the breakdown rate of elevators in the New York transit system (and exaggerate lots of other things as well). There are examples of problems, of course, but in general, ADA access points in New York, Washington, and other cities have done quite well.
"Wheelchair employee to boss: "I can't come in today - the elevator at my station is broken.
No, they don't know when it will be fixed. I'll let you know when I can come back to work.". That just means they will use
other transportation that they _can_ depend on."
And how many employees use the excuse of their used car-turned shop queen to not come to work? Again, an example of a problem which does occur; using it to argue against ADA improvements is plainly irrational.
I'm sure that the elevators that they will use for the stations will have to be quite reliable and, if they do break they'll have to have them back in service as quickly as possible. Sometimes my movements are a little funny because of having Asperger's Syndrome but, the problem is so slight that it doesn't effect me.
#3 West End Jeff
No, I'm not arguing against ADA improvements. I'm saying that they need more (additional/redundant) elevators/escalators, etc. if they plan on making the stations useful to the handicapped instead of just compliant with the ADA.
Regarding out-of-service conditions, all you need to do is to look at some of the existing escalators, either the ones that are on "closed for [permanent] repair" or the ones that are just not operating, with no sign posted.
And as far as construction delays, take a look at the 14th St/8th Ave elevator. Oh, wait - you can't. There is a shaft and an enclosure, and no elevator. It has been that way for several years now. Is there any truth to the rumor that parts to complete it are no longer manufactured?
And as far as construction delays, take a look at the 14th St/8th Ave elevator. Oh, wait - you can't. There is a shaft and an enclosure, and no elevator. It has been that way for several years now. Is there any truth to the rumor that parts to complete it are no longer manufactured?
Or the elevator serving the IRT express platform at 34th-Penn. It was under construction when I started using Penn Station in mid-1997 - and looked like it had been u/c for quite some time - and wasn't finished until maybe a year ago. Ridiculous.
"Regarding out-of-service conditions, all you need to do is to look at some of the existing escalators, either the ones that are on
"closed for [permanent] repair" or the ones that are just not operating, with no sign posted. "
I do see them. But you can't look at a few escalators and then generalize about the whole system. Elevators tend to do better, anyway.
Yes, elevator construction takes a while - so what? Main Street's elevator took a long time to install. But it's here now.
While I agree with your point about redundancy, I perceive the rest of the argument to be not well-supported by facts.
Is there a limit for this 'physically challanged thing?' The TA has gone far beyond expectations to provide access for the handicapped. Some stations and platforms just are too old to be updated...the handicapped can access from an adjacent stop. Cheaper to provide limousine service than to dig elevator shafts, better for the handicapped who want to travel.
Of course there is a limit. Budgets are not unlimited.
I agree with you in that not every station will be upgradable. However, I do think that a goal of making at least a third of all stations accessible is not unereasonable.
MTA has done a great job with commuter rail. The LIRR has a very high number of fully accessible stations (cheaper to do when they are at street level), including many with elevators. The Port Washington Branch will soon have only two ADA-inaccessible stations. I don't think anyone would have reason to complain about that.
There are less than fifty accessible subway stations now. MTA has designated 100 key stations to receive ADA upgrades; that number will increase when the 2nd Av subway's construction begins. I want to see that number go up to 200, over time.
Cheaper to provide limousine service than to dig elevator shafts, better for the handicapped who want to travel.
The TA tried it. Their livery service was so poor that the courts ordered universal access.
So, it's not the systems fault but a handful of people who should have monitored the contractors. The court orders, a million bux spent, the work is done...and one week later, the complaintent decides that they really don't like the ride. It's over Johnny.
You're missing the point. The ride service is a band-aid anyway, and in the long run solves nothing.
"The TA tried it. Their livery service was so poor that the courts ordered universal access. "
When was that? The verdict in the EPVA lawsuit came shortly before ADA happened in 1990, which is before Access-A-Ride came into being -- and when it started, Access-A-Ride was operated by NYCDOT, not by NYC Transit. Besides, "universal access," at least to me, means that every station would have to be accessible. As has been mentioned recently on this board, that's not the requirement. Under the EPVA verdict, NYC Transit developed a list of "key" stations to be made accessible. Because of the configuration of some stations, they can't be made accessible (there was one station -- 36th Street-Fourth Avenue, I think, or maybe 59th Street-Fourth Avenue -- where the elevator shafts would have come up in the middle of the street).
David
David
"I think, or maybe 59th Street-Fourth Avenue -- where the elevator shafts would have come up inthe middle of the street..."
Is that the elevator we want NIMBYs to use?
:0)
59th St is easy to make ADA-compliant, tho' it gets pricey. Elevators at the ends of the platforms; another on the mezzanine going to the street. You condemn one building at the maximum.
When was that? The verdict in the EPVA lawsuit came shortly before ADA happened in 1990, which is before Access-A-Ride came into being -- and when it started, Access-A-Ride was operated by NYCDOT, not by NYC Transit.
There were numerous court cases between 1970 and 1985. They first centered on buses and wheelchair lifts. The TA was opposed to the lifts and proposed an alternate service. This was the first of such services that proved unsatisfactory. There were also several incidents where people in wheelchairs placed themselves in the paths of buses to force their entry because the TWU refused to operate the lifts, when they first appeared. There were several newspaper articles.
The TA also gave out summonses to people in wheelchairs, who ventured onto the subway. Their involvement with the EPVA started from one such summons.
Because of the configuration of some stations, they can't be made accessible (there was one station -- 36th Street-Fourth Avenue, I think, or maybe 59th Street-Fourth Avenue -- where the elevator shafts would have come up in the middle of the street).
The lack of the TA's engineering and design skills never cease to amaze me.
The question was to when NYCT tried a "livery" type of service for the disabled. This response does not answer that question; it merely indicates that such a service was "proposed." Incidentally (though we're straying into BusTalk territory here), NYCT's first lift-equipped buses were 200 of the Grumman Flxibles from 1980-81. Prior to that, two orders of (Rohr) Flxibles (7500 and 9000 series) came with kneelers but not lifts, after a kneeler was tried out on a "fishbowl" circa 1973.
Frankly, I don't remember any newspaper articles about Bus Operators' refusal to operate the wheelchair lifts, though I assume there was some resistance. I do remember summonses being issued to wheelchair-bound people in the subway.
As to a lack of engineering and design skills among NYCT's engineers, I am neither an engineer nor a designer and thus am not qualified to comment as to whether there is a way to put elevators in at either 36th Street or 59th Street on the Fourth Avenue Line (whichever it was), nor am I qualified to cast aspersions upon their abilities. Is Mr. Bauman? However, from the looks of the stations, I'd guess (as an amateur) that ADA-compliant ramps are out of the question due to a lack of space.
David
Because USDOT ADA regs require ADA ramps to have no more than a 1:12 slope (1 foot drop for every 12 feet horizontally) there is always a challenge in getting such a slope fitted into a confined space. You have to use switch-backs (and ADA requires landings on a switchback to be of a certain size, I think five foot square at least).
ADA ramps to have no more than a 1:12 slope (1 foot drop for every 12 feet horizontally)
That's a fairly steep grade (8.3%) The Brooklyn Bridge is only 5%. The Verrazano is slightly less.
"That's a fairly steep grade (8.3%) The Brooklyn Bridge is only 5%. The Verrazano is slightly less."
Please note that the regs specify that the ramp must be no steeper than 1:12. A ramp can be more gentle than that and be in compliance.
It is not an unreasonable drop for a wheelchair, though. Most people in manual chairs can handle it, and electrically driven chairs negotiate it well.
Where I live now, SEPTA's Manayunk station on the R6 Regional Rail has a 1:3 ramp on the outbound side leading to the street. Now that's steep!
How do ramps with switchbacks help those carrying (not wheeling) luggage or groceries?
>>> How do ramps with switchbacks help those carrying (not wheeling) luggage or groceries?
I doubt that ADA was intended to cover those carrying luggage or groceries. :-)
Tom
I didn't think so, but my question was addressed at Ron, who made this comment early in the thread: "ADA compliance refitting is expensive, but it since it increases the capacity of the station to take a lot of people in comfort, and offers much better access to the elderly, people with kids, shoppers, airport travelers etc. (and therefore can increase ridership), it can be cost-effective."
My point is that if these are our primary desires, there are better ways to meet them than through ADA compliance. Consider escalators vs. long, winding ramps -- escalators are better (faster and easier to use) for just about everyone who can use them, but they're not ADA-compliant.
I have nothing against ADA, but it should be evaluated in terms of its own goals.
"My point is that if these are our primary desires, there are better ways to meet them than through ADA compliance. Consider
escalators vs. long, winding ramps -- escalators are better (faster and easier to use) for just about everyone who can use them,
but they're not ADA-compliant.
I have nothing against ADA, but it should be evaluated in terms of its own goals."
Very laudable, Dave, but how do you do that? ADA regulations arose as a result of debates about how to implement the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you didn't have a consistent set of regulations, how would you know whether a company, a state, a county, etc., is or is not complying with the law?
I agree with you that this brings on some difficulties. Public agencies always seem to find ways to spend more, rather than less money. But if you don't agree on a standard, then there would be no end to arguments over who needs to do what - because someone would always disagree.
ADA regulations serve two useful purposes: If a disabled person complains he has no access to facilities (subway or any other facility), and the facility operator renovates it according to ADA, the operator can say "hey, I followed a standard" and be free of lawsuits. You may argue with the standard, but we do need standards, for that reason.
Complying with ADA also provides a "neutral" objective, recognized guide to renovation in general when you want to effectively increase station capacity - again, you use it to avoid a lot of squabbling.
I understand what you're complaining about. Do you offer an alternative vision of something which is as effective at helping government accomplish something in an objective way.
How do you measure ADA on its own merits? That's a nice slogan, sure - can you present a practical plan to accomplish that?
Are you arguing with me?
My point is simply that ADA provides accomodations to the disabled. Period. Sometimes ADA accomodations happen to be useful to others (say, those carrying luggage). Sometimes they happen to be detrimental to others. As I pointed out a while ago, for someone who walks in pain (but does not use a wheelchair), a long, winding ramp is worse than an escalator.
ADA does not increase capacity. In some instances, ADA accomodations happen to increase capacity. In others, they happen to decrease capacity. (For a simple example, think of a basic station with narrow platforms but with many staircases to the street, enough that there is no exit jam. Now install an elevator. Poof! The platform has magically shrunk and passenger circulation is likely obstructed.)
I'm not arguing against ADA. I'm only asking that we don't pretend that ADA is more than it actually is.
"ADA does not increase capacity. In some instances, ADA accomodations happen to increase capacity. In others, they happen
to decrease capacity. (For a simple example, think of a basic station with narrow platforms but with many staircases to the
street, enough that there is no exit jam. Now install an elevator. Poof! The platform has magically shrunk and passenger
circulation is likely obstructed.)"
Of course, in that specific instance, the elevator would help you in particular. Still, in cases like the one you cite, you are correct.
I wouldn't expect every station to be ADA compliant, unless the station were to be enlarged. And not every station cries out for it.
For example, take the Murray Hill station on LIRR's Port Washington Branch. I wouldn't mind seeing that station get a touch-up (new paint, remove broken concrete, fix the railings if that is necessary). But I don't see LIRR spending a lot of money converting it into an ADA-compliant station.
On the other hand, with the WTC-area station on the South Ferry line wrecked, the MTA is going to spend $1 billion fixing the line anyway - it would make sense to select a new station geometry which would guarantee a full length platform and ADA access to the station. It will not significantly add to the cost of the station, because the station is a total loss anyway and the architects might as well start from a clean sheet of paper (or new CAD screen).
On the other hand, with the WTC-area station on the South Ferry line wrecked, the MTA is going to spend $1 billion fixing the line anyway - it would make sense to select a new station geometry which would guarantee a full length platform and ADA access to the station. It will not significantly add to the cost of the station, because the station is a total loss anyway and the architects might as well start from a clean sheet of paper (or new CAD screen).
While I'm not completely familiar with every aspect of the ADA, I'm pretty sure that a station which is totally rebuilt, as Cortlandt Street will have to be, must be made accessible.
You still haven't answered my question.
How do you accomplish assessing ADA? How do you get a transit agency to resolve squabbling about how a station rehab should look?
You've posted the easy stuff; now do some hard thinking and answer the question.
I don't understand the question. A transit authority is obligated to abide by ADA. Period. No assessment is necessary. Even if it's a total flop, it's required by law. End of story.
When a bunch of random people are discussing ADA (like here), they can assess it however they like.
"I don't understand the question. A transit authority is obligated to abide by ADA. Period. No assessment is necessary. Even if
it's a total flop, it's required by law. End of story."
Properly dsigned, ADA enhancements are not a flop.
"When a bunch of random people are discussing ADA (like here), they can assess it however they like."
Translation: You don't like ADA standards, but you haven't given any thought at all to what kind of guidelines you would use to increase access to the disabled and others.
What I'm getting at, Dave, is, it's easy to criticize, as you did here, but it's much harder to describe a plausible alternative to what is being criticized.
Properly dsigned, ADA enhancements are not a flop.
I never said they were.
Translation: You don't like ADA standards, but you haven't given any thought at all to what kind of guidelines you would use to increase access to the disabled and others.
What I'm getting at, Dave, is, it's easy to criticize, as you did here, but it's much harder to describe a plausible alternative to what is being criticized.
You must be mistaking me for someone else. All I said is that they should be evaluated as accomodations for the disabled, as that's their designed function. They often fail miserably in any other context. That's fine as long as we don't pretend that ADA can solve all our problems.
"They often fail miserably in any other context."
No, Dave, they don't. That reflects a lack of experience with it.
"You must be mistaking me for someone else."
No. I think I have you pegged pretty well. :0)
From my very limited experience with a bad knee, I can tell you that ADA accomodations aren't ideal for everyone. I found walking painful in general, descending stairs and ramps especially. Ramps were worst of all. Elevators were helpful (except where accessed via winding ramps, like at Union Square); escalators were excellent.
So ADA accomodations sometimes came in handy and sometimes didn't.
But that's fine! Because ADA wasn't designed with people like me in mind. Nor was it designed to increase capacity (as you claimed it does, which I doubt except in rare instances).
I don't know what you're arguing about. It doesn't seem to be anything I said.
I remember your complaining about your knee a long while back.
Is your condition degenerative (if you don't mind my being nosy). Do you have osteoarthritis?
What do you do to manage your condition?
All indications are that it's nothing serious. I spent a few weeks doing knee exercises and the pain subsided around August. It comes back if I walk too much (three miles or so in a day, from experience) or if I overdo it on the railfanning (staircases and all). I don't often walk that much, but when I do and the pain comes on, I live. The last time it happened, I decided to use elevators where available. Unfortunately the elevator in J&R refused to stop on my floor (I guess it was an express), but I did use the Brooklyn Bridge elevators, at the expense of missing a train. I even deliberately overshot my station and took a bus back practically to my door, since by then I wanted to avoid walking even on flat ground. (Incidentally, I've tried all the major pain killers and they don't do a thing. Still, before partaking in a long walk, I'll take an Aleve just in case it decides to work that day.) But in the larger scheme, it's nothing.
Thanks for asking.
I have a mild form of cerebral palsy. I walk asymmetrically, so my orthopods tell me I'm at some risk of osteoarthritis later in life owing to the atypical motion and stress imposed on my hip joints. I also have one flat foot and one over-arched foot (same root cause). Thankfully I haven't had a problem yet (I am a good long-distance walker), but I may have to deal with it eventually...
Tank goodness for mass transit. I owe it, and my walking, for not being overweight.
>>> My point is that if these are our primary desires, there are better ways to meet them than through ADA compliance. Consider escalators vs. long, winding ramps -- escalators are better (faster and easier to use) for just about everyone who can use them, but they're not ADA-compliant. <<<
The problem comes in when the responsible agency, whether public or private is designing a station or any other space to meet the minimum requirements of the ADA rather than in spirit of the law. Long winding ramps usually appear in locations made compliant after the fact rather than in original construction. Elevators on the Los Angeles Green Line are located at the extreme ends of some of the stations and the escalators are in the up direction only, meaning those who need the elevators have many extra steps to and from trains on the platform. But this line was built in the existing median of a freeway and therefore stations are narrow, so placing elevators at the center of the platforms might cause safety hazards. The Los Angeles Red Line, built from scratch has more centrally located elevators, but in a few cases suffers from having only one of two entrances to a given station equipped with elevators. This might be due to cost savings introduced later in the project when the construction was running way over budget and the taxpayers were in revolt.
The worst example of this I have seen was in San Francisco beneath Market Street. As I was entering the Muni on the mezzanine level, I asked the station agent where the escalators to the platforms were. The agent told me to go to the elevator at the far end of the mezzanine. I started walking, and found the mezzanine was more than three blocks long, with only one elevator at the extreme end. Once on the platform I had to walk back 1 ˝ blocks to get to the place the trains stopped. A 4 1/2 block walk to avoid a staircase.
A properly designed new subway station (regardless of the minimum requirements of the law) should have both up and down escalators, stairs, and at least two elevators. Ramps are appropriate only where the differences in elevation are small, and there are too few steps, (1-10) to warrant an elevator. They should not be necessary in new construction.
Tom
I agree with most of your points Tom. Very clearly elucidated.
"A properly designed new subway station (regardless of the minimum requirements of the law) should have both up and down
escalators, stairs, and at least two elevators. Ramps are appropriate only where the differences in elevation are small, and there
are too few steps, (1-10) to warrant an elevator. They should not be necessary in new construction. "
It should be noted that ramps do have one important advantage over elevators: they don't break down, and preventive maintenance is cheaper. This is not a trivial consideration.
Tom, there are ESCALATORS at both ends of each BART/MUNI station under Market St. Indeed the elevator placement is disgusting--it was post hoc. Before ADA, there was a Federal requirement for elevators for UMTA/now FTA transit funding. (Thus the famous 'cheap' San Diego line gave its middle finger to both Fed money and accomodating 'persons with mobility challenges')
"Before ADA, there was a Federal requirement for elevators for UMTA/now FTA transit funding."
Ah, yes. The old Rehabilitation Act. It contained many of the same provisions that surfaced later in the ADA, but applied only to organizations (including state and local governments) receiving federal funding.
Its effects can (sorta) be seen on the CTA Blue Line. The lines built by the CTA down the Dan Ryan and Kennedy expressway medians, which opened in 1969-70, had no elevators. All three stations on the extension of the Kennedy line to O'Hare, opened in 1983, DID have elevators. The difference was that the Rehab Act had taken effect in the meantime. The truly odd thing is that there were no elevators at any downtown stations until a few years later (1986 or 87, I think) when Lake Transfer was made a single L-subway station -- at first, a handicapped person could travel only between Harlem Avenue and O'Hare (and the two stops inbetween)!
No argument there.
Recall that the NYC subway has 468 stations, 462 of which long predate ADA. Accomodations of any sort are often an extreme challenge, and sometimes ramps are the result.
Now, this doesn't explain the awful network of ramps at Times Square. Does anyone know when and why they were installed?
Now, this doesn't explain the awful network of ramps at Times Square. Does anyone know when and why they were installed?
Do you mean the stacked ramps between mezzanine and platforms of 8th Avenue IND station?
OR the horrendous underground connection from Times Square complex to Eighth Avenue, which seems to use portions of one 7 train station and lord knows what else? THAT'S what I'd really love to see cleaned up and rebuilt, though I'd imagine it'd be brutally expensive.
I mean the two sets of ramps connecting the mezzanine above the 1/2/3 to the mezzanine below the 1/2/3 (and above the 7, leading into the passageway to 8th Avenue).
I mean the two sets of ramps connecting the mezzanine above the 1/2/3 to the mezzanine below the 1/2/3 (and above the 7, leading into the passageway to 8th Avenue).
??? I only use the north end mezzanine, so I'm not familiar with these ramps ... are they in the "middle" of the platform, under 41st or so?
Yes, under 41st Street.
I rarely use the north end mezzanine unless I'm going to the shuttle or exiting to the street. From the BMT to the IRT, ir's a slightly longer walk via 41st but it's less chaotic. It also takes me closer to the turnstiles at my home station (about 1.5 cars from the south end).
There has been major construction on that mezzanine for the past few years. It's been significantly widened above the IRT, and there's a wonderful new mosaic on the wall. I recommend that you take a look one of these days.
I rarely use the north end mezzanine ... ir's a slightly longer walk via 41st but it's less chaotic. It also takes me closer to the turnstiles at my home station
Same reasons I use the northern mezzanine, since I exit north end of the BMT train at Union Square.
There has been major construction on that mezzanine for the past few years. It's been significantly widened above the IRT, and there's a wonderful new mosaic on the wall. I recommend that you take a look one of these days.
I will, thx for the tip. There's a new mosaic above the northernmost ramps to the BMT (over the circular cutout, which I'm not wild about) which is nice as well. Love the replica BMT tilework, though.
It was so bad they had fake passengers in wheelchairs (TA employees) to test the drivers to make sure they stopped.
>>> Cheaper to provide limousine service than to dig elevator shafts, better for the handicapped who want to travel. <<<
I felt that way too when I saw bus fleets being modified with wheelchair lifts, but providing limousine service is not the answer. It is necessary to mainstream the handicapped as much as possible, so the rest of society recognizes them as part of society. Getting from point A to point B is not as important as being able to do it as much as possible just like everyone else. This is what ADA is all about. As was said in another context, separate but equal is never equal. Providing completely separate transportation facilities for handicapped persons puts them into a handicapped ghetto.
Many communities do also offer some sort of subsidized limousine service to severely disabled person. Usually though, it requires 24 hour advance reservation, and may have severe area limitations. It is used in this area mostly to transport people to doctor's appointments and back home again.
Tom
I think that was one of your finest posts, Tom.
Bravo!
Well put, Tom. As one who benefits to some extent today from the accessibility changes (and who will benefit more as time goes on and my arthritis worsens) I am glad that I will not be shunted to the margins as my ability to walk becomes more limited. Little things, like curb cuts and handicapped parking spaces, mean a lot, and when it gets to the point where I can no longer drive accessible public transportation - the same public transportation that everyone else uses - will become important too.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
as usual this discussion tends to assume that "they" travel alone--NOT. The point is indeed mainstreaming for all--when I come to New York to hang with the step-daughter(wheelchair courtesy of Bambi some years back)., we tend to go places together. A limo for her would be dumb especially if the destination is right by a major subway stop. (She lives very close to 6th & 14th which when it becomes useable will be great.) We are both lovers of multiple flavors of ethnic foods--looking forward to cruising some of the well reccomended spots out along the 7 when it becomes feasible.
the contractor of 14/8th is Cab Associates. They are famous for running way behind schedule. They did the WTC stations on the IND and Park Place and finished almost 3 years late. They are now working on Delancey/Essex. Perhaps we can avoid a fare increase if we hold a lottery on when they will finish 14/8 and Delancey/Essex.
Also not helping is the financial straits of RWKS who I think is doing the elevator work.
the contractor of 14/8th is Cab Associates. They are famous for running way behind schedule. They did the WTC stations on the IND and Park Place and finished almost 3 years late. They are now working on Delancey/Essex. Perhaps we can avoid a fare increase if we hold a lottery on when they will finish 14/8 and Delancey/Essex.
If this outfit has performed so poorly, then why in the world did NYCT hire them again???
>>> why in the world did NYCT hire them again??? <<<
You live in New York, where everyone has his hand out, and you have to ask that?
Tom
Yourpoint is well taken, Tom.
In fairness though, many private contractors are constricted by the political appointees who hire them. I know a consultant who is trying to do a good job, and takes great pride in doing excellent work, but his client is so incompetent, waste becomes inevitable. He does his best to advise his client as to how to utilize consulting and contracting services more efficiently, but the client ignores him and issues orders which do the opposite. What the hell, it's only taxpayer's money...
Aside from the obvious answer, there was a huge disagreement about the floor tiling job at the WTC stations. The tiles were cracking and coming up, and as part of the "discussion" about it (which I believe was actually binding arbitration, but I was out-of-the-loop by the time this happened) an independent test was done by expoxying anchors to many of the tiles (it was something like one out of every two dozen) and trying to pull them off the floor. I don't recall the outcome, but I could certainly believe it was something like "you have to give them another chance".
All renovated stations are required to be ADA 1990-compliant.
Yeah, except I think there's a difference between thorough renovation and cosmetics. The Broadway local stations (Prince, 8th, 23rd, 28th) aren't getting elevators, for instance, but most of the rest of their systems are renewed. Times Square is.
Think the TA is focusing on express stations and transfer points first.
I don't know the specifics of the law, but it requires "new construction" to be compliant, including certain renovations. The requirement is probably related to the extent of renovation, most likely measured by the cost.
Phil,
You have posted quite a few questions on the subject.
Can I ask what is your interest in the matter? Are you physically challenged? Are you asking for someone who is? Or are you merely an advocate for the physically challenged?
If we knew it might help us put the your questions in better perspective and allow us to respond in a more cognitive fashion.
>>> Can I ask what is your interest in the matter? Are you physically challenged? Are you asking for someone who is? Or are you merely an advocate for the physically challenged? <<<
Do the answers change depending on the status of the person asking? I doubt it.
Tom
They can.
If it someone who we know, we all have a tendency to go into heavy detail in our answers.
If it is someone new (like Phil is) we tend to be more general in reposnses.
One of the physical challeges not very aggressively met by the MTA is the
braille signage. Even where it exists, a visually impaired person
would have to find it on the one or two columns in the station.
I just made a shirt with the City Hall braille sign on it - in Braille
and raised lettering, in part to help call attention to this.
I am amazed when people with major disabilities can navigate
our city.
How are other cities doing on this?
sometime ago I went on a tour of the sign shop and they discussed raised letter signs and braille signs. The question came up on how they will know where the signs are and the answer was "They are told where to find the signs."
Hi! I find that silly, don't you? Who tells them? What are they told, "it's by the column next to the stairs"? First they have to
find the right stairs, the right side, etc...
I think it's a matter of the blind not being a big enough group to
rate signs on every post.
I repeat that their ability to navigate is amazing.
I don't know about you, but I try not to touch the columns, and I can see which ones look more disgusting than usual. I imagine there is a bit of reluctance among blind people to hunt for them because of this.
On the other hand, the blind people I know tend to have a set routine of places they travel to, so transient information (like "what train is it that just pulled in to my right?") is more important than static information (like "this is the Chambers St. station on the IND and you are on the uptown side").
Also, because of the usefulness of routine, are the Braille signs located at the same position in all stations where they are present (for example, on the last column at the south end of the station)?
>>> are the Braille signs located at the same position in all stations where they are present (for example, on the last column at the south end of the station) <<<
I would hope there is some uniformity, but the last column would not be appropriate because a blind person would have to go to the end of the station and come back to find out which column was the last one. The signs should be at a uniform height and in a relative position to something that makes noise, i.e. on the wall, ten feet to the right of the turnstiles. With signs on a platform itself, they should be located toward the center of the platform near where the C/R will be pointing to his board. This would help in directing the blind person to a car near the C/R, the better to be seen when entering and exiting the train.
Tom
I am always amused when using Citibanks ATMs: affixed plaques aside the touch screen CRT are engraved in Braile. CI Peter.
I am always amused when using Citibanks ATMs: affixed plaques aside the touch screen CRT are engraved in Braile.
There was a thread on misc.transport.road a while back about why drive-up ATM screens have Braille plaques. It turns out there are a couple of good reasons. First of all, at least some ATM manufacturers make a single screen style for both drive-up and walk-up purposes. More importantly, Braille screens on drive-up ATM's are useful for blind people riding in the back seats of vehicles, especially taxis.
That makes so much sense now. Having Braille plaques aside touch screen CRTs which change displays so rapidly makes as much sense as Morse Code for the deaf or teletype machines for the handless. How about roller blades for the legless or directions plaques in the subways for the sightless? How about asking Car Inspector Peter for subway directions??? CI Peter
Does anyone posting here read Braille? Maybe they say something like "pick up phone for assistance". I doubt they say "Hah Hah, you can't use this".
>>> I am amazed when people with major disabilities can navigate our city.
How are other cities doing on this? <<<
I think it really depends on the age of the transportation system. In L.A. all of the train stations are fully ADA compliant, including braille instructions on ticket machines, and voice announcements of stations on trains. Elevators seem to work at least 99% of the time, and have an 800 number to call posted if one is out of order, but are sometimes in inconvenient locations (at the far end of a station). Escalators are less reliable, and in many stations only go up. All new buses are low floor models with easy to navigate ramps. All of the older high floor buses are equipped with wheelchair lifts, which usually work.
Tom
Chicago seems to be moving toward complete service for those in wheelchairs and with motor impairments, by including in major renovation projects the overhauling of stations with the addition of elevators and by individually adding stations to the rest of the elevated system at the most-used stations first. I don't think that the elevators work all of the time, and I've read letters to the editor flaming CTA for this (as well as changes to bus routes that were made even as lifts were added; I can't substantiate the charge, but it had to do with loops and detours added, which, in the busier areas of the city, can be more of an inconvenience to just about anyone; however, the idea I think may have been that, although, those of us who can walk are not asked too much by going a few blocks out of our way for a faster route, those who cannot may have severe trouble getting to the bus).
Thus far, many (if not all) of the downtown stations have elevators, and almost all of the green line has elevators. More and more of the blue line stations do, and the Douglas branch stations will all have elevators after the renovation is complete.
I've seen [sorry] no braile signage, and, although the bus drivers seldom call out stops, they'll call out stops if there is someone noticeably visually impaired (i.e., with a cane).
Right now the MTA and NYCT are working on adding ADA access to a group of "Key Stations". While this is not the complete list, elevators are planned or being built for 179, 74/Roosevelt, Times Square Complex (All platforms), Euclid, Gun Hill on the 2, 161 Complex, Marcy on the J, Myrtle Wyckoff Complex, Utica IRT, 34 Penn IRT Local, 34 Penn IND all platforms. In addition, all new work(such as 2nd av if it is ever built) will require full ADA,
The ADA does not require every station to have full acess. The law realizes structural problems such as 14 on the Lex will prevent full elevators at all stations.
I recently acquired a 10th Edition Hagstrom's Atlas of NYC, published in 1961, and noticed that the subway map departs from the usual practice in that it depicts BMT lines in green, rather than yellow. The IND and IRT are shown in the usual red and blue, respectively.
Does anyone know the reason for this change? I certainly don't think it an improvement, as the colors are barely distinguishable. Did Hagstrom's subsequently revert back to the old color scheme?
I have always felt these maps were beautiful, and the original color choices seemed, from a practical and aesthetic view, so very "right."
How appropriate for the bold newcomer, the IND, to be colored red.
Yellow always seemed right for the warm, homey BMT, and blue for the
electric, speedy IRT.
Hagstrom has produced subway maps with green for the BMT, red for the IND, and blue for the IRT for years. Only recently did they adapt the 1979 color-coding from the official map.
I have a 1967 Hagstrom atlas where the BMT is green, IND yellow and IRT blue. Maybe they couldn't make up their minds in the 1960s.
Don't forget the thin solid black lines for the Myrtle and the Third Av Els.
Old editions of Hagstroms can only increase in value, now that the gorgeous hand lettering has been scrapped in favor of cheap digitization.
www.forgotten-ny.com
The good thing about those old maps as that I could draw in different sections that were either never put in or have been long taken out.
That edition of the Hagstrom atlas changed the color from yellow to green in order to enable showing letters for the BMT routes. For years they had shown the IND letters (A, AA, BB, CC, D, E, F, GG, possibly HH) in red. They added the letters (N, Q, QB, QT, RR, T, TT) for the southern division BMT routes with the edition you're referring to. I'm not sure whether or not they added numbers 1 thru 7 for the IRT. That may have come later.
By the way, the new digitized atlas is terrible - I call it the "map with osteoporosis", due to the unbelievable distortion. Ex-mayor Ed Koch must be willing to endorse almost anything.
Bob Sklar
Has selling the air rights above the sea beach line ever been considered. I f the system is looking for extra money covering the line and putting development on top could raise a good amount of money with no negative effects.
Has selling the air rights above the sea beach line ever been considered. I f the system is looking for extra money covering the line and putting development on top could raise a good amount of money with no negative effects.
Air right transfers are only valuable when there's very dense zoning adjacent, like in midtown. I'd be shocked if the surrounding density was high enough to make this worthwhile.
There was a proposal to deck over some portion of some sunken line a few years ago in Brooklyn (forget where) to put a Home Depot and other big-box retailers there. The neighborhood went ballistic and I don't think it ever happened. To me it was sorta dumb; if there are houses along the street on both sides, why put huge commercial stuff in the middle? But then, like I said, I don't know the nabe.
It's low density IMHO. It has allways suprised me why West End gets cut at night instead of Sea Beach.
Arti
To let people sleep w/o the El running under their windows?
It still runs on West End but not to the City.
Arti
It still runs, just not to Manhattan. Longer headways, maybe (so people can sleep in 20 minute blocks instead of 15)?
All lines run every 20 minutes at night. Neither the Sea Beach nor West End line have two trains running at night.
KMA: We have a lot of people on this website who seem not to know barf from branola about the Sea Beach. Thank you for your short post. What has made the Sea Beach such a great line is the fact that it doesn't cut through neighborhood like the West End, Culver and Brighton, and the noise is much less of a burden to homeowners and renters in the area. But for some reason, many of the subtalkers haven't a clue about this.
sea beach runs on broadway. west end runs 6th ave (traditionally at least). late nights 6th ave has 2 routes: F, D. broadway has none. therefore the one 4th ave line that runs full length at nights has to be one to broadway.
in high school i used to work weekend nights under the west end. getting back to brownstone brooklyn at 2/3 am was always a multi-transfer pain in the ass but to be quite honest none of 4th ave's three branches has many riders late night (unlike some lines like brighton and nostrand that have more) so it doesnt really matter which coney island route you run (95 wouldnt make sense cause its so short after sea beach split).
sea beach runs on broadway. west end runs 6th ave (traditionally at least). late nights 6th ave has 2 routes: F, D. broadway has none. therefore the one 4th ave line that runs full length at nights has to be one to broadway.
This makes no sense whatsoever. First, if you want to talk about tradition, the West End line included Broadway and Nassau Loop service.
How does Broadway have none? The Broadway line has the N. Before the N/R Queens terminal swap in 1987, the R was the full line at night, the N was the shuttle.
And the N doesn't run 4th Avenue fully, it turns away after 59th Street, leaving the rest of the line to the R shuttle.
Night service on 4th Ave has always been poor, even tho' one must admit it fits the passenger load. Before the ManBridge mess, the N and R departed Carnegie Hall almost simultaneously; the R you eschewed at Herald Sq would be the same R you waited for at 59th St/B'lyn.
R shuttles were and probably still are confusing. You never quite knew which platform they operated from at 59th St.
With the advent of MetroCard and the flexibility it offers, I'd operate a frequent version of the 5th Av bus at nights, looping around a convenient entrance/exit at 59th, and do away with the night time R altogether.
"There was a proposal to deck over some portion of some sunken line a few years ago in Brooklyn (forget where) to put a Home Depot and other big-box retailers there. The neighborhood went ballistic and I don't think it ever happened. To me it was sorta dumb; if there are houses along the street on both sides, why put huge commercial stuff in the middle? But then, like I said, I don't know the nabe.
"
the developer's name was katz (brooklyn free weeklies always represented him as a big mean cat). he wanted to deck the sea beach from 8th to 14th and create a linear suburban style strip mall with modest (at best) improvements to 8th and ft. ham. stations. wouldve been more like a row of big boxes lining about a mile of the ROW w/out any comprehensiveness to tie them together. i believe the deck wouldve also covered the lirr bay ridge which pissed off pro-freight-tunnelers because the deck wouldve been too low for trains as high as they thought necessary.
i always thought that a better plan would be to line either side of the street with row houses or small apartments and create a pedestrian mall the length of the route where backyards would be on a normal brooklyn block. the row houses could face the street but their first floors could be used by mom and pops and medium sized local chains with storefronts facing the ped mall.
I would go ballistic if such a ridiculous plan even came about. The subway line has undergone enough indignities to last four lifetimes. Enough is enough. Leave the Sea Beach alone. Make it express, put if over the bridge, route it to Stillwell when the work is done and then get the hell of of its way.
I would go ballistic if such a ridiculous plan even came about.
Although, with respect, that is unlikely to stop any such events.
Unless I happened to be a psychotic with mayhem on my mind. Then they would be cautious, I think. But since I am a mild mannered Mr. Nic Guy type, you are very correct.
I would certainly be pissed as hell of they put a Home Depot over the open cut of the Sea Beach Line. They have no business treating the Sea Beach Line like dirt. They already treat it badly enough already so what gives them the right to treat it even worse.
#3 West End Jeff
And bring the Triplexes back, too, right?:-)
I know when it comes to the New York Subway I am living a lot in the past. But remember this: I do not live in New York anymore and haven't in 47 years. I come to New York as a tourist and am now 61 years old. When I ride the rails I am tranported back in time to when I was a kid, and there wasn't any bigger thrill for me than riding the subway. Oh yes, taking the Brighton to Prospect Park Station on my way to Ebbets Field was a thrill of thrills, as well as the Sea Beach to Coney Island or my Grandparents' places. When I ride the subway I get to the railfan window and make believe I'm a kid again. Silly as that sounds, I feel like a youngster when I take the subway. To me it is one of my most cherished memories and I replicate that as often as I can get back to the big city.
That makes two of us. Put me on the subway and I'm a kid again.
And to think I've never even lived in NYC!
The idea of building usable space on top of an open-cut subway is a good one. You are correct, however, in observing that what kind of development is an important issue to consider.
Has any one thought of building something over the open yard portion of 207 Street shops, or Coney Island Shop? Like a building, shops, a factory or something else?
Advantages: Subway cars in yard now protected against rain and snow; productive use of air rights with business $$ and tax revenues; more jobs.
Disadvantages: If inappropriate type of development, problems for area; more energy consumption in subway yard (because now you need lights all the time); modifications needed to yard???
More disadvantages: Becomes disgusting like 174 yard or 179 layup tracks. Also limits things like building new barns and car washes. Would anyone want to be above the garbage tracks at 207?
Advantages: no more herbicides train so no more web-fingered children of yard employees.
174th Street and 179th St are not examples of building over existing yards. They are lay-up tracks that are in tunnels. I think the original poster was thinking more along the lines of Tracey Towers built over jerome yard or the towers over Pitkin yard.
OK, nice high ceilings, so you get the flying rats pooping on you (CCY) and vandals throwing crap on you (Pitkin). Diesels are better in the open too (fumes).
Apartment complexes were been built using air rights over NYCT's Pitkin and Mosholu Yards, about 30 years ago.
David
Yes. Good examples.
Hypothetical: What do you think could be built, appropriately, over the 207 St shops?
Me? Sorry, but I choose not to speculate on such things...I don't see a point.
David
When my rent controlled apartment house site 'goes to Trump' and i get big bux to leave, I'd live in a TA apartment over the 207th Street Yards. Great site, great view (sic.) Never have to worry about breakfast: haught cusine cafeteria and mobile 100% comidas y criolllas. It's real NYC, it's my home. Hey, FREE parking! CI Peter
Hypothetical: What do you think could be built, appropriately, over the 207 St shops?
It would be suitable for a large retail development, but I'm not sure if the neighborhood is economically strong enough to support such a thing. Industry is another option.
Adjacent to 207th St yard is a large bus facility. Perhaps that huge bus facility could have been built over the 20th St. yard. Thereby, the TA owns less real estate and the unused parcel of land could be used for housing or industry or a park. In any event, there was a potential for savings that was missed.
Interesting point.
Lots of people have their backyards backing on the Sea Beach. I don't think they'd be crazy about having some different kind of development literally in the back yards.
[I don't think they'd be crazy about having some different kind
of development literally in the back yards.]
Give the property owners the right to match whatever the highest bid is.
FWIW, in some places along the line, there are houses directly above the platforms. Air rights?
Late last night, Mayor Daley and Governor Ryan finally reached a deal on much-needed expansion of O'Hare Airport. Highlights of the plan include:
Reconfiguring the existing seven runways and adding one additional runway so that the newly-expanded airport will have six parallel east-west runways and two parallel northeast-southwest runways. By eliminating runways that cross each other, this will essentially double the capacity of the airport.
An additional international terminal adjacent to the existing Terminal 5.
An additional domestic terminal adjacent to Terminal 3 (where the utility plan is currently located, which will be rebuilt elsewhere).
A huge new western terminal that, according to the schematic drawings I've seen, will itself be roughly the size of Denver's new terminal. This new terminal will be connected to the other six terminals by people-mover trains and possibly the CTA Blue Line.
Western access to the airport. Presumably, the Elgin-O'Hare Expressway will be extended so that it actually goes to O'Hare. (It doesn't really go to Elgin, either!)
An additional $450 million for our sound insulation program. Looks like I've got pretty good job security for a while.
It's not officially part of the deal, but one of the ideas to sweeten the expansion to suburbanites is to extend the CTA Blue Line to Schaumburg. However, this may simply be a political ploy. Other unofficial transit projects include express trains from the Loop to both O'Hare and Midway, and a crosstown CTA line that links O'Hare and Midway. Another plan is a spur of the Tri-State Tollway that will bypass O'Hare to the west and connect to the Northwest Tollway.
It hasn't been discussed in official circles yet, but there exisits ample opportunity for at least two high-speed rail terminals at O'Hare. The Wisconsin Central tracks run just east of the airport, with room for a passenger station on what is now a long-term parking lot near the end of the people-mover route, and there's a set of Union Pacific tracks that skirt the western edge of the airport. The new western terminal, ideally, should include provisions for rail connections here.
Senator Dick Durbin is pushing to get the O'Hare expansion deal signed into federal law soon, possibly by amending it to a defense bill that could be passed by the House as early as today. This would more-or-less seal the deal, and hopefully prevent future governors from undoing it. (Hint to NY politicians: This is how things get built!)
A rabid group of NIMBY's called the Suburban O'Hare Commission is filing suit to block the expansion, but with the city, state and feds on board, I'm pretty confident that they'll soon be crushed.
The timeline for the expansion is about 10-15 years... More news as it becomes available.
Tribune editorial: O'Hare will grow for the future
-- David
Chicago, IL
How is all this being paid for.
How is all this being paid for.
Our federal tax dollars, just like most air and road transportation projects.
The airlines that use O'Hare, particularly United and American, will also be footing a substantial portion of the bill, since they have the most to gain from the expansion.
-- David
Chicago, IL
I'm trying to send you an e-mail but it keeps bouncing back as undeliverable. Please send me your current e-mail address.
---Dave Steckler
My e-mail address is still current, but Excite@Home went bankrupt last weekend and cancelled internet service to AT&T Broadband, my own provider. I'm now back online, but I still need to change my NthWard.com address to direct mail to AT&T's new service. In the meantime, try dscole312@yahoo.com.
-- David
Chicago, IL
With money that should be going to Amtrak.
Let's have a three-way completion contest:
Chicago's O'Hare expansion
Boston's Big Dig
New York's Second Avenue subway.
No fair! You (Boston) have a head start already!
No fair! You (Boston) have a head start already!
I guess I should take that back. We started digging back in the 1970's :-)
Let's have a three-way completion contest:
Chicago's O'Hare expansion
Boston's Big Dig
New York's Second Avenue subway.
You mean a TWO-way contest. We already know which project will be completed last (if ever). Hint: it's not in Boston or Chicago.
The big Dig should be complete in 3 or 4 years with 90% of it done 2 1/2 years. Northbound traffic will start running in the underground tunnels in about a year.
Yeah, I know what the "official" schedule is. Somehow... it seems as though it's one of those projects that may never end!
1. Boston's Big Dig
2. Chicago's O'Hare expansion
3. California breaking off into the Ocean
4. Second Coming of Christ
5. The Sun becoming a Supernova
6. Second Ave Subway
Oh great, just what we need. More Federal $$$ for airports. This is the absolute last thing we should be doing. People need to be encouraged to get off planes and onto trains.
I'm in complete agreement, if AMTRACK got 10% of the subsidies (direct and indirect) that the ailines get (or say 25% of the 9/11 aid the airlines got), it would attract MANY MANY more riders and could offer superior service.
O'Hare is like Atlanta. Even if you're going to Hell, you'll change flights at one or the other.
Congress has gotten involved because the whole Midwest is pissed off at the situation at O'Hare: it's horribly crowded, flights are chronically delayed, and you have to walk forever to change flights. Everybody hates changing at O'Hare.
Consequently -- thru their own experiences, or thru the irate letters of constituents -- quite a few members of Congress have intervened. The result is that Congress is preparing a very blunt instrument to apply to Chicago and Illinois' heads: they get their act together or Congress will impose a solution.
Chicago has consistently refused to build a second airport. Were things the way they should be, a 2nd airport should have opened 15 or 20 years ago, with a 3rd airport in the advanced state of planning today.
If greater New York is to ever have another airport, I suggest McGuire AFB/Fort Dix is the only realistic site. If they built such a thing (a 12 runway monster) this'd guarantee additional rail connections across the Hudson.
Congress has gotten involved because the whole Midwest is pissed off at the situation at O'Hare: it's horribly crowded, flights are chronically delayed, and you have to walk forever to change flights. Everybody hates changing at O'Hare.
Given its size, O'Hare is actually very well designed. As long as your connecting flight is within the same terminal (it usually will be; most of United is in Terminal 1 and most of American is in Terminal 3), walking distances are comparable to most other major airports. Even if you have to go to another terminal, there's a nice people-mover system that makes it tolerable, and there are moving walkways everywhere. You typically do more riding than walking at O'Hare. While not as efficient as Orlando (consistently ranked as one of the country's best-designed airports), O'Hare is still vastly preferable to Hartsfield, LAX, JFK or some other major airports. Try changing flights at DFW someday -- you're guaranteed come running back to O'Hare.
Chicago has consistently refused to build a second airport. Were things the way they should be, a 2nd airport should have opened 15 or 20 years ago, with a 3rd airport in the advanced state of planning today.
Chicago already has a second airport called Midway, which has undergone a massive expansion in recent years, and has found its perfect nitch serving low-cost regional carriers such as Southwest and ATA. And we've been trying to expand O'Hare for a couple decades now, but unfortunately, Illinois is one of a handful of states that allows the governor to approve or veto any airport expansion anywhere. Most of Illinois' governors have been politically beholden to the rabid NIMBY lobby of DuPage County and the powerful legislators they send to Springfield. Thankfully, Gov. Ryan finally gathered the backbone to do put the interests of the region above selfish NIMBY concerns.
There is ample room to expand O'Hare, negating the need for a third regional airport for the time being. And even if/when a third airport becomes neccessary, an already-existing airport such as Gary, Rockford, or even Milwaukee makes a hell of a lot more sense than the pipe dream known as Peotone. But most of the people in Springfield have shady fianancial dealings that give them a vested interest in building Peotone, so that's what they're pushing for.
-- David
Chicago, IL
>> But most of the
people in Springfield have shady fianancial dealings
that give them a vested interest in building Peotone, so
that's what they're pushing for. <<
Wich is why this deal IS NO GOOD. Peotone will be built though unneeded. more "expressways" will be built and HSR will remain with the 2nd Ave Sub. NO NEW AIRPORTS, N NEW RUNWAYS, and NO Airline service less than 600 miles.
You misjudge the level of resentment over O'Hare in the Midwest. Much of the resentment is a reflection on the practices of United and American Air Lines, but it's also just the crowding, delays, and miles of walking.
I live where you have to take what used to be Air Wisconsin, etc, i.e., feeder airlines going to the upstairs and downstairs and twice thru milady's security bedchamber to change flights.
My own view is that Wisconsin and Indiana should have unilaterally built international airports well west and just south of metro Chicago, right at the state line, a la Westchester County Airport, such that all the takeoffs and landings are done over another state (the people of Greenwich, CT are apopleptically angry at their powerlessness over the situation).
This nation needs 10-15 new world-class airports. Few, however, are likely to be built.
"twice thru milady's security bedchamber to change flights"
A few years back -- I don't recall when, as I almost always fly out of Midway -- they moved the security cordons at O'Hare so that the walkways connecting the terminals were within the security zone and travelers didn't have to pass out of and back into the secure zone to change flights.
Admittedly, it was a pain in the ass before then, but...
Yes, they did, and then they changed it back the way it was before, or rather, as I recall, moved the connecting flights to another terminal. Admittedly, I have not been to O'Hare in about five years.
O'Hare has always been an unpleasant experience. Even LGA was nicer.
LGA is only a small fraction of the size of O'Hare. I'm sure the airport in Topeka, Kansas is even easier to navigate than LGA.
-- David
Chicago, IL
I beg to differ. Have you ever transferred between an American Airlines flight and an American Eagle flight? The experience is most unpleasant. There are no moving walkways at all to help out, and some of the walking appears to be totally superfluous, included only to provide space for more shops. I'll go to a shopping mall if I'm looking for shops; in an airport, I'm trying to catch my flight.
...some of the walking appears to be totally superfluous, included only to provide space for more shops. I'll go to a shopping mall if I'm looking for shops; in an airport, I'm trying to catch my flight.
Maybe so, but other people like to be able to pick up travel supplies or books or a newspaper while they're waiting for their flight.
There's a lot of "behind-the-scenes" services that must be accomodated into the design of airports that the public never sees; the shops take up relatively little space at O'Hare compared to other areas. But if you can design a better airport, I'm sure the Chicago Department of Aviation would be happy to see your proposal.
I'm not saying O'Hare is perfect, but compared to the other two "mega-airports" in the US (Hartsfield and DFW), I maintain it's at least as good as Hartsfield and certainly far better than DFW in terms of wayfinding and walking distances. Orlando has arguably the best airport design I've seen so far, but they're a much smaller and newer airport than ORD, so it's like comparing apples and oranges.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Maybe so, but other people like to be able to pick up travel supplies or books or a newspaper while they're waiting for their flight.
Yeah, but come on, David, that is NOT what (pre-9/11) the whole shopping in airports thing was about. Look at the new Pittsburgh Terminal, which I toured pre-opening in 1990 or 1991. Shopping was THE major news story there ... and while I'm all for news stands and a rational supply of gift shops, somehow it's hard to imagine how The Gap really benefits air travelers.
Post-9/11, I'm sensing that shopping in airports (takes up space, brings more freight & more people into secure areas) may get a hard reassessment. Remember, at PGH the airport authorities welcomed non-fliers into secure areas to shop -- there was even talk of buses to the airport for shoppers, just like Mall of America. I'm sure that scheme is now deader than a doornail, but the problem remains. Airports liked shopping 'cause they made money on it. More shopping, more $$$.
I've never been to Pittsburg's airport, so I can't really comment on that particular case.
At O'Hare, I think the number of stores is within reason, and most of them are focused toward the needs of travellers. Mostly your typical airport stuff, like a variety of small eateries, Starbucks, one or two nicer restaurants, newstands, things like that. Even before 9/11, nobody was taking the L to O'Hare just for shopping. If other airports like Pittsburg want to turn themselves into the next Mall of America, that's their business, but O'Hare is built primarily for travel.
-- David
Chicago, IL
I guess that's true in general.
Once, I spilled Coke on a white dress shirt on my way to an interview in Pittsburgh. Lucky for me there was a tie and shirt kiosk right at the airport; they fixed me up quickly with a new shirt and tie. It was a bit overpriced, but this was an emergency!
O'Hare is still vastly preferable to Hartsfield
I don't think so. When I was walking from Concourse L to the United Termial, it took a good 20 minutes or so of straight walking. The international concourse is way off from the rest of the airport. Also, the people mover is outside security At Hartsfield, you can be at any concourse in less than 10 minutes on a people mover inside security. I've read Airport Engineering books, and Hartsfield is always used as an example of good design.
If you're going all the way from Concourse L to the United terminal, you would have been better off leaving the secured area and taking the people-mover train. That would have easily cut your time in half.
The new international terminal (Terminal 5) is isolated from the rest of the airport for two reasons: 1) It was the only available site to build on at the time, and 2) The FAA has very strict design quidelines for international terminals, which usually require it to be isolated from the rest of the airport. Heathrow is the same way. Besides, the ride on the people-mover train from Terminal 5 to the other terminals is less than two or three minutes.
I've only flown through Hartsfield once, but I remember having some incredibly long walking distances to get to/from the MARTA station, and the fact that there's no clear seperation between arriving and departing passengers; ticketing and baggage claim are on the same level, resulting in what I'm sure is mass chaos during busy travel times. O'Hare was one of the first airports in the worl to pioneer the concept of putting arrivals and departures on seperate levels.
I spent three years working for an architecture firm that specialized in airport design, and I'm on a first-name basis with the architect who designed Terminal 5 at O'Hare. Hartsfield's big contribution to airport design was the concept of having concourses arranged in rows and connected by underground passages within security. This concept has since been adopted in Denver and parts of Cincinnati and O'Hare. But for the most part, Hartsfield is not one of the airports that designers try to emulate these days. If cutting down on walking distances is the overriding concern (which isn't necessarily the case), then Orlando would be the airport to emulate. Remote "pods" that contain three short concourses each are connected to the large main terminal by above-ground people-mover trains. All in all, it's a very easy airport to go through, and it has the shortest delays of any airport in the US (probably due to its favorable climate more than anything else, though).
-- David
Chicago, IL
I would have used the people mover, but I got lucky with only a five mintue wait at security, and I didn't want to risk having to wait longer at the United terminal.
I can understand about the land issue at Ohare regarding Terminal 5, but international concourse E at Hartsfield managed to be seamlessly integrated with the rest of the airport, yet have all immigration and custom functions within the concourse, keeping it isolated from the rest of the airport. Also a new terminal at Concourse E is going to be built by before 2010, so now you won't even need the poeple mover to get to the terminal anymore. Hopefully, a MARTA station can be built there, the provision exists for a line to be built in that direction.
When did Ohare come up with the concept of putting arrivals and departures on seperate levels? The old Hartsfield terminal built in the 40s or 50s had that feature. There is a clear seperation at Hartsfield, as the people mover has two seperate stops for ticketing and baggage claim. The Baggage claim station dumps directly into baggage claim and same situation with Ticketing. Also, why was your walk to MARTA so long? Did you come from Concourse T? It couldn't have been any longer than it takes to walk to the CTA station at Ohare. Just curious, when did you come thru Hartsfield? If it was before 1995, you should see it now, they renovated it and it looks way better.
I would consider Denver to be an airport of "these days" since it's one of the newest airports. Also the new Detroit Metro Airport under construction has a Hartsfield-like midfield design, two concourses connected to the terminal by a people mover.
The Orlando design can afford to be "intimate" and offer short access to gates because it handles less than half the passenger load of Hartsfield. Once you begin to talk about passenger loads of Ohare and Hartsfield, the Orlando design would be an extreme failure. For me, the most convinent airport I've used is Sao Paulo Int'l, two steps outside of customs and you're practically outside, but again, it only handles around 15 million passengers.
I was at Hartsfield in the summer of 1994. I don't recall which concourse I used, but it just seemed to be a huge pain in the ass at the time, and not very intuitive in terms of wayfinding.
The original three terminals at O'Hare were completed in October of 1954. (Two of them still exist, although extensively renovated over the years. The original Terminal 1 was replaced by the current United terminal in the 1980's. Terminal 5 opened in the early 1990's. Terminal 4, which no longer exists, was the former makeshift international terminal in the lower level of the parking garage before Terminal 5 was built.) I didn't claim O'Hare was the first to have the feature of arrivals and departures on seperate levels, just one of the first. Some modern-day airports still haven't grasped the concept, though.
You're right that Orlando is a much smaller airport than O'Hare or Hartsfield; when it reaches 60 years old and handles as much traffic as ORD and ATL do today, I'm sure it will be just as cumbersome. However, Orlando was designed to deliberately minimize walking distances (must be all those retirees in Florida), and has a very efficient design. There's no reason similar design principles couldn't be used on a much larger scale.
I don't deny that O'Hare can sometimes be a pain in the ass, but I challenge anybody to show me an airport that handles as much traffic and doesn't have at least some long walking distances. That's the nature of any large airport. Given all the factors of age, traffic, and land availablility, I think O'Hare does a very good job.
This isn't directed personally at you, Rob, but this reminds me of the debates people have had on SubTalk about the WTC collapse. Lots of people who know nothing about airport design (or skyscraper design, as the case may be) all like to bitch and complain about the supposed failings of [fill-in-the-blank] airport or skyscraper, but I bet if you give them a pencil and paper and tell them to design something better, given all the complex criteria that airports and skyscrapers must meet, they'd go away sputtering.
-- David
Chicago, IL
The old terminal at Hartsfield was built in 1961, so Ohare was before ATL with the two level thing. If we were having this conversation in 1940, ORD would be way better than ATL. ATL was just converted military hangers on a old racktrack, and in 1940 it was already one of the busiest in the country.
but this reminds me of the debates people have had on SubTalk about the WTC collapse
I hope we sound more intellingent than some of those threads :) I love talking about airport design.
I don't deny that O'Hare can sometimes be a pain in the ass, but I challenge anybody to show me an airport that handles as much traffic and doesn't have at least some long walking distances. That's the nature of any large airport. Given all the factors of age, traffic, and land availablility, I think O'Hare does a very good job.
That is what my point was about Orlando.
There's no reason similar [Orlando] design principles couldn't be used on a much larger scale.
You mean a central terminal with outer concourses connected by people movers? Sounds like ATL to me :) Seriously, making a larger Orlando design would probably mean lots of transfer traffic. So connecting the outer concourses together would be preferable so that people would not have to always go to the central area to get to another concourse. ATL already takes care of that problem.
Wasn't Orlando's airport originally McCoy Air Force Base? When I flew down there with my high school band in 1973, that's where we landed.
Wasn't Orlando's airport originally McCoy Air Force Base? When I flew down there with my high school band in 1973, that's where we landed.
Correct. That's why the airport code is MCO.
Wasn't Orlando's airport originally McCoy Air Force Base?
Correct. That's why the airport code is MCO.
So then why'd JFK get "JFK" as its airport code when the name was changed from Idylwild? I'd have figured if they renamed the airport they'd change the code ... although perhaps not for something like Reagan National Airport in DC, which only Republicans seem to call "Reagan". [chuckle]
Wasn't Orlando's airport originally McCoy Air Force Base?
Correct. That's why the airport code is MCO.
So then why'd JFK get "JFK" as its airport code when the name was changed from Idylwild? I'd have figured if they renamed the airport they'd change the code ... although perhaps not for something like Reagan National Airport in DC, which only Republicans seem to call "Reagan". [chuckle]
JFK is actually an unusual case with respect to the code change. It's possible that the FAA, or whoever assigns airport codes, wanted to honor the recently assassinated President as much as possible.
There are a number of airports around the country whose codes reflect former or obsolete names. Some examples:
ORD (O'Hare) - it was once called Orchard Field.
CVG (Cincinnati) - located in Covington, Kentucky, and it was called Covington Airport/Field/whatever many years ago, before it became the Cincinnati area's main airport.
MCI (Kansas City) - there were plans to name it Mid-Continent Airport when it was built more than 30 years ago. I don't believe this name was ever actually applied.
SNA (Orange County/John Wayne) - located in the city of Santa Ana.
Cincinatti's Airport is actualy Cincinatti-Northern Kentucky International.
Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International, but who's counting?
Correction: Greater Cincinnati - Northern Kentucky International.
The name actually traces its origins back to a long-running fued between the governments of Cincinnati and Covington. The airport was simply named Cincinnati International for years, back to when it replaced Cincinnati's small and prone-to-flooding Lunken Field as the city's primary airport.
But you see, Cincinnati is pissed as hell that they don't get a dime of tax money from "their" airport and all its surrounding development; it all goes to Covington. The airport's not even in the same friggin' state, they complain. So every once in a while Cincinnati floats plans to build its own major airport out near Blue Ash. Naturally, this provokes a hostile reaction from Northern Kentucky civic officials. During one such episode, Northern Kentucky officials, in a fit of rage, renamed the airport Greater Cincinnati - Northern Kentucky International Airport just to stick a finger in Cincinnati's eye and remind them whose side of the Ohio River the airport is on.
I'm not sure what's become of the Blue Ash proposal; it's been a while since I've seen it mentioned in any of the Cincy newspapers. Property values in Blue Ash were known to rise and fall depending on how strong the airport rumors were. But since CVG became a major hub for Delta a few years ago and embarked on a major expansion, I'd be surprised to see anything happen at Blue Ash for a long time.
-- David
Chicago, IL
BNA - Nashville, TN. It was named Berry Field in honor of Colonel Harry S. Berry, State Administrator of the Works Progress Administration (WPA). So the three letter identifier, "BNA" stands for Berry Field Nashville. In 1987 it was renamed Nashville International Airport but the identifier remains BNA.
I can understand why they might be angry. I'd be upset too.
I've often wondered that myself, given that ORD hasn't stood for Orchard Field for about 60 years now. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
You're right that Orlando is a much smaller airport than O'Hare or Hartsfield; when it reaches 60 years old and handles as much traffic as ORD and ATL do today, I'm sure it will be just as cumbersome. However, Orlando was designed to deliberately minimize walking distances (must be all those retirees in Florida), and has a very efficient design. There's no reason similar design principles couldn't be used on a much larger scale.
O'Hare and Orlano serve quite different purposes. A significant percentage of O'Hare's traffic consists of people changing planes. As far as I can remember, it's something close to 60% of the airport's traffic. Very few people change planes at Orlando; unlike O'Hare, almost all of its traffic consists of people beginning or ending their journeys ("O & D" traffic). I claim no special knowledge in airport design, but surely these traffic differences must have significant effects on optimal design.
Even Denver International Airport has its shortcomings. With the new security guidelines, this was a problem for a time because everyone passes through security in the main terminal. It's gotten better, and they're looking at ways to expand capacity.
Lack of pedestrian tunnels to the concourses is probably the biggest blunder made. The designers were naive enough to believe that trains never break down. Well, Hel-LO, they do break down every so often.
I don't want to appear overly negative, since I've supported DIA from Day One and still do. There are things that could have been done better.
The sixth runway is still on. Grading should be completed by the end of the month. I saw what appeared to be grading for this runway when my flight from LGA touched down on October 28.
Outstanding!
Reconfiguring the existing seven runways and adding one additional runway so that the newly-expanded airport will have six parallel east-west runways and two parallel northeast-southwest runways.
They already *have* two parallel NE/SW runways (4L/22R and 4R/22L). It's about time they closed 18-36 and did something with it. Am I to assume that they're going to get rid of 14R/32L and 14L/32R? What a colossal waste, especially 14R/32L.
My big question is did they finally find a way to keep Meigs open? Daley desperately wanted to close it but the Governor wants it open--and last I heard there was a deal afoot to keep Meigs open for 25 years.
As one who flies in a major metropolitan city's airspace (I fly from Republic in Farmingdale), I'd give my left nut for an airport like Meigs in NYC.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
They already *have* two parallel NE/SW runways (4L/22R and 4R/22L). It's about time they closed 18-36 and did something with it. Am I to assume that they're going to get rid of 14R/32L and 14L/32R? What a colossal waste, especially 14R/32L.
Here's a complete list of O'Hare's present runways and their respective fates under the new plan:
EXISTING RUNWAYS:
9L/27R: To remain open and renamed 9L/27R Departure
9R/27L: To remain open and renamed 9R/27L Departure
14L/32R: Closed to make room for 9L/27R Arrival and 9/27 North
14R/32L: Closed to make room for 9L/27R Arrival, new western terminal, and 9R/27L Arrival
4L/22R: To remain open
4R/22L: To remain open
18/36: Already closed, to be used as a taxiway for 9/27 North
NEW RUNWAYS:
9/27 North, at the northern edge of the airport
9L/27R Arrival, just north of 9L/27R Departure runway
9R/27L Arrival, just south of 9R/27L Departure runway
9/27 South, at the southern edge of the airport
Here's a graphic put out by the city that shows the new configuration, along with the three new terminals:
(Existing terminals are shown as outlines, proposed terminals are shown solid. Just to get an idea of the scale, the new western terminal itself would be roughly the size of Denver's entire new facility.)
My big question is did they finally find a way to keep Meigs open? Daley desperately wanted to close it but the Governor wants it open--and last I heard there was a deal afoot to keep Meigs open for 25 years.
Daley's big concession on the deal is to allow Meigs to remain open for the next 25 years. However, Meigs can be shut down anytime after 2006 if approved by the Illinois General Assembly.
As one who flies in a major metropolitan city's airspace (I fly from Republic in Farmingdale), I'd give my left nut for an airport like Meigs in NYC.
Meigs doesn't handle any commercial traffic that I know of; it mainly serves general aviation and corporate bigwigs and politicians who are too important to use O'Hare or Midway like the rest of us. And since 9/11, there have been heightened security concerns about having an airfield so close to the Loop and McCormick Place. If NYC had something like Meigs, you can bet it would have been permanently shut down after 9/11. It has long been a dream of Daley to shut down Meigs and convert it into a large lakefront park, but it looks like he'll have to put that idea on hold for at least a few years. Fortunately, he was smart enough to realize that a vastly expanded O'Hare far outweighs the fate of little Meigs Field.
-- David
Chicago, IL
>>> Meigs doesn't handle any commercial traffic that I know of; it mainly serves general aviation and corporate bigwigs and politicians who are too important to use O'Hare or Midway like the rest of us. <<<
Do I detect a prejudice against general aviation?
Do O'Hare and Midway handle general aviation efficiently? Somehow I cannot picture myself in a Cessna 120 in a lineup of 747s and Airbuses waiting to take off.
Tom
General aviation is not as big a market as commercial and cargo aviation, so its political and economic clout isn't going to be as big. That's a fact of life in a (relatively) free market.
Meigs Field is a convenient little field, I'll agree. And it does help keep little planes out of the way of jetliners. My personal opinion is they should keep it open, but if they don't, I would certainly understand why.
O'Hare and Midway each, in fact, handle some general aviation. It's rare, but not unheard of to see a small corporate jet take off amongst all the jumo-jets at O'Hare. I'm not as familiar with Midway's operations, but I suspect that general aviation forms a somewhat larger percentage of their flights.
However, most of the general aviation action in Chicagoland takes place at several smaller regional airports thorughout the area, such as Palwaukee, Waukegan, DuPage, and Joliet. Palwaukee in particular is fairly close to O'Hare, so there's little reason for a Cessna 120 to be buzzing around a bunch of 747's. As far as I know, none of these smaller airports will be affected under the O'Hare expansion plan, except to pick up the traffic from Meigs if/when that closes.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Meig's runway is too short for anything excepr private and corporate aircraft.
Are all of O'Hare's runways in the new configuration long enough for any jetliner?
Are all of O'Hare's runways in the new configuration long enough for any jetliner?
As far as I know, yes. I haven't read anything to indicate otherwise.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Are all of O'Hare's runways in the new configuration long enough for any jetliner?
Looking at the Graphic posted by David Cole, the two new north and south parallels (the northernmost and southernmost) would NOT be long enough for anything bigger than 757-class aircraft. If I recall without reaching for my manuals, 4L/22R is about 7000' which is about the same length as the two runways at LGA. Plenty long for MD80s, 737s, 757s, etc, but a little more real estate is generally required for 747,s 767s, A340s, A330s, etc, especially when fully loaded with PAX, fuel and baggage on a hot midwest day. I've heard some 767 jockeys have to touch main gear pretty well on the numbers at LGA, and I don't want to think where they have to rotate when fully-laden.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Looking at the Graphic posted by David Cole, the two new north and south parallels (the northernmost and southernmost) would NOT be long enough for anything bigger than 757-class aircraft. If I recall without reaching for my manuals, 4L/22R is about 7000' which is about the same length as the two runways at LGA. Plenty long for MD80s, 737s, 757s, etc, but a little more real estate is generally required for 747,s 767s, A340s, A330s, etc, especially when fully loaded with PAX, fuel and baggage on a hot midwest day.
Air France 747's routinely serve St.Maarten (SXM), whose sole runway is about 7,000 feet. I've heard, however, that the 747's have to take off with very low fuel loads, so low that they have to stop and refuel (IIRC at Santo Domingo) before continuting on to Europe.
In addition, SXM is at sea level, while ORD isn't.
On test runs, empty of passengers, and with minimal fuel, a 747 can be airborne in 4,000 feet.
On test runs, empty of passengers, and with minimal fuel, a 747 can be airborne in 4,000 feet.
Ahhh, I still like my 172s, damn it! Cold day (-10C), 10kt headwind right down the chute, brakes on, full power, brakes off from right at the threshold--I was off before the end of the numbers!
Commercially, I flew on Canadian Airlines (RIP) from Boston to Toronto three Januaries ago. It was a bloody cold morning--air temp -30C, wind 330 at 25 gusting 35 knots. We lined up on 33L at Logan and I swear we were off well before the fixed distance mark on the runway, at 1000' from the threshold!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Keep in mind that the graphic is simply that, a graphic from what is essentially a marketing brochure for public consumption. I wouldn't assume that it's drawn exactly to scale. I have a couple more detailed engineering drawings of the airport, but none of them specifically show the lengths of the new runways.
However, I have a detailed drawing that shows the exact lengths of O'Hare's existing runways, as they are today:
9L/27R: 7966'
9R/27L: 10,141'
14L/32R: 10,003'
14R/32L: 13,000'
4L/22R: 7,500'
4R/22L: 8071'
18/36 (closed): 5341'
Based on these figues and the graphic (again, not necessarily to scale), the new 9-27 North and 9-27 South runways appear to be the same length as 4L/22R, which is 7500'. The other two new runways (9L/27R Arrival and 9R/27L Arrival) appear to be about 10,000' long each. I don't recall seeing any 747's take off from 4L/22R, but I've seen them land on that runway at least a few times.
Even if 9-27 North and 9-27 South aren't long enough for anything larger than a 757, they still add plenty of capacity to the airport. Based on my exhaustive scientific research (staring at planes overhead while out on construction sites), I'd guess the vast majority of planes at O'Hare are 727's, 737's, MD80's, and 757's. Keep in mind that international flights, which tend to use the jumbo-sized aircraft, form a smaller percentage of O'Hare's operations than the major coastal airports like JFK and LAX.
-- David
Chicago, IL
According to a recent thread on airliners.net, Meigs indeed will be kept open.
The Chicago Tribune's Pulitzer Prize-winning architecture critic Blair Kamin examines the collapse of the WTC. Article includes photos and diagrams.
What made New York's twin towers collapse?
-- David
Chicago, IL
The Chicago Tribune's Pulitzer Prize-winning architecture critic Blair Kamin examines the collapse of the WTC. Article includes photos and diagrams.
Thanks for the link. Much of this material has already appeared (by other authors) in a series of very good NY Times articles on similar themes. Even the Wall Street Journal did a piece, focusing on the main structural engineer who designed the Twin Towers.
In this case, the Tribune seems a little late to the party.
Very interesting article, thanks for posting the link.
At the risk of getting too far off-topic, it's occurred to me that the towers' collapses probably did not result in any great number of deaths that wouldn't have happened anyway, with the exception of the FDNY deaths. It's well-known that over a thousand people were trapped above the impact site on the north tower, especially those at Cantor Fitzgerald and Windows on the World, and that many of them placed frantic cell-phone calls to their families. What I've only seen mentioned once, however, is that this flurry of calls ended before the tower's collapse. I believe the last call whose time can be ascertained was made 12 minutes before the collapse. Coupled with the photos showing the upper floors of the tower to be almost entirely engulfed in flames before it came down, it's a reasonable inference that most or all of the trapped people had died from fire or smoke before the collapse. Note also that even had the north tower not collapsed, it would have been hours or even days before the FDNY could have gotten to the upper floors.
It's a little more difficult to account for the south tower deaths. I would presume that many people were still above the impact site (which probably was around the 70th floor) when the plane hit. Whether they would have survived in the tower had there been no collapse is hard to say, although it's entirely possible that the fire would have spread all the way to the top of the building. Even so, the employer-by-employer counts I've seen indicate that the number of dead of the upper floors (as opposed to the impact floors) of the south tower was not overwhelming.
In addition to the people I've just mentioned, it's reasonable to assume that many people died from the planes' impacts. It's not as if the planes disintegrated immediately on impact with the outer frames of the towers. More likely, the impacts probably devasted just about everything on each of the several floors directly hit. These impact deaths easily could add up to several hundred, maybe more than a thousand. Count in the deaths on ground level caused by flying debris - the videos of the second plane's impact make it clear that there was a lot of flying debris, plus those on the planes themselves, and it becomes apparent to me that the death toll still would have been very high had the towers remained standing.
>>> Even so, the employer-by-employer counts I've seen indicate that the number of dead of the upper floors (as opposed to the impact floors) of the south tower was not overwhelming. <<<
Were these death tolls lower because they left before the second plane hit? Did anyone above the 70th floor escape after the impact?
Tom
Even so, the employer-by-employer counts I've seen indicate that the number of dead of the upper floors (as opposed to the impact floors) of the south tower was not overwhelming.
Were these death tolls lower because they left before the second plane hit? Did anyone above the 70th floor escape after the impact?
Many people began evacuating the south tower after the first one was hit, so at least some of the people on upper floors had gotten below the impact site by the time the second plane hit. More might have left if it weren't for PA annoucements urging people to stay.
Gee, I didn't know news travels so slowly over there.
Who knows Chicago may even get electric generators one day so then the hamsters will be able to rest.
You can't rush perfection. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
Actually, the Tribune had the architectural perspective online the day of the collapse (although I don't know for sure whether it was in the print edition that or the next day). It was a more perceptive story than that published yesterday, with more of an investigative bent than the more recent (which as everyone has aptly pointed out has shed little new light on the collapse).
Hey did you know there is a Model SubTalk?
Was just looking to see if there were any users from here over there.
There are several folks who post on both boards (I don't happen to be one of them, but I have lurked over there on occasion).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'm there once in a blue moon. Still waiting to add the brass R-40 slants to my collection.
I was at the Northbound platform at 72nd on the Broadway line today. Have they widened the platform? I know they were doing it to build a new exit, but I didn't think they would have gotten it done so quick. It appears as if they've straightened the local track, and put in a new wall. The whold platform looks clean, as if it's been recemented or sandblasted. I also saw some new pilars. They moved the track while retaining service on the express? Pretty good.
What I read about this project was that they were lenghtening the platform, but not widening it.
Well, the platform is now the same width all the way to the end. They had to widen it to fit the new exit.
OK -- but they didn't widen the central part -- that is already too narrow to start with -- right?
OK -- but they didn't widen the central part -- that is already too narrow to start with -- right?
Correct. But still, it's an impressive piece of work. They first dug up the street (closing northbound Broadway between 72nd and 73rd permanently) and then built new outer walls, then moved the tracks (I presume) and then widened the platforms at their northern ends.
They may also lengthen them beyond the front of the train ... don't know where the elevators are coming in exactly.
That station DEFINATELY needs improvements. The stairs are downright dangerous. I also hear they are reopening the Northbound-Southbound transfer.
. I also hear they are reopening the Northbound-Southbound transfer.
[chuckle] The one they took out in the last renovation, 10-15 years ago. Really just putting the fare control gates running E-W in the little station house, rather than N-S on each side as they are now.
Pros & cons to both approaches. Current approach gives more room inside the station house for fare-buyers to congregate out of the weather, but doesn't allow for NB-SB crossovers.
Don't know if they're planning another little "house" building at the north end. Would be nice if they did. Maybe one could have crossover, one wouldn't?
Don't know if they're planning another little "house" building at the north end. Would be nice if they did. Maybe one could have crossover, one wouldn't?
FOLLOWUP: Spoke to a construction worker on the site. The new entrance houses will not cross over. From the foundations, I think there will be two separate ones, one to each platform, each with its own elevator.
He knew nothing about any plan to restore the crossover to the existing 72nd Street entrance house, although as a heavy-construction guy he might not have since that would just be moving the location of the turnstyles.
The north end of the northbound platform was widened and lengthened. Before this work, both platforms tapered at either end. The new entrance between 72nd and 73rd will be past the north end of the (pre-work) northbound platform, so it had to be lengthened -- and to do that, it had to be widened. The southbound platform is offset from the northbound platform; it probably already reaches the future entrance.
This work didn't involve the express track. It did involve the local track, which had to be moved east. Many weekends over the past year, there has been no northbound local service as a result.
The new entrance, IINM, will have elevators and will offer free crossovers.
Unfortunately, while entry and exit to the station are currently pretty awful, the more dangerous crowding is on the platforms themselves, with passengers waiting to transfer from the express to the local. This rehab will do nothing to alleviate that problem. The simplest cure would be to increase local service to reasonable levels, but I don't think the TA scheduling guys realize quite how bad local service is, since many scheduled locals in fact run express.
I hear you on that, not enough local service. As you have pointed out, the population density makes just about every stop very busy, but it seems that since 59, a major transfer point is a local stop and since many more people want to go up Broadway than Lenox, the local get so much more demand. If 50 were an express stop and express went up Broadway (as the #3 did during the Lenox reconstruciton), I think demand would be a lot more even. But still the population density is something you really cannot overcome, nor can you really make 59 an express with MAJOR costs. So, the only viable option to help things, would be to reroute the 3 up to 137 permenantly. Any comments...............
I know crossing over at 96 is a problem, but this is my best proposal.
Sorry typo, I ment if 59th were an express stop!
I doubt that MTA has balls to abandon 2 stations.
Arti
You are most likely correct, but couldn't a few 2's and a shuttle run from 148 and 145? That would give more service where it is needed, on the Broadway end of the split north of 96th Street and still service the two end of the line #3 stations.
I know we have the ridership figures here on the board somewhere, just how many people use 145 and 148?
It would be very difficult (probably impossible) to run shuttles during rush hour. Of course a bus would probably fill the ridership needs.
Arti
That's an interesting idea. However, it wouldn't help the situation at 72nd, since everybody transferring from express to local there is going to 79th and 86th, not to points north of 96th.
Perhaps (assuming the 2 and 3 are restored to Brooklyn service) the northbound 3 could switch to the local track between 34th and 42nd, either continuing up to 137th as you suggest or switching back at 96th and running to 148th. The TA doesn't like to make such switching moves, but the demand for local service is much greater between 42nd and 96th than it is south of 34th and north of 137th (I'd put 96th-137th somewhere in the middle). Without switching, either the five stations north of 42nd are underserved or the seven stations south of 34th are overserved. Right now we have both.
The situation Monday evening around 8 was amusing. I arrived on the platform at 42nd as the C/R of a mobbed 1 was attempting, with difficulties, to close up in front. I decided not to make his life harder and stayed on the platform. Shortly thereafter, a 2 arrived on the local track and a 3 arrived on the express track. I took the 3, which, after boarding, still had half of its seats free. We arrived at 72nd shortly before the 1 (which apparently had skipped 50th and 66th), and the 1 C/R announced that the next stop was 96th. The end result, with two trains in the station both running express to 96th: one nearly empty train, one half empty train, and one very crowded platform. This was around 8pm. Does any other line have to put up with this sort of nonsense nearly every day, weekends and weekdays alike, rush hours and non-rush hours alike?
Then again, I think I got my just desserts Tuesday evening: too much local service. At 14th, I just missed an express, so I crossed over and pretty soon caught a 2 on the local track. We very slowly made our way uptown, and out the back of the train I saw a 1 trailing us. In the meantime, another 3 had come into 14th and turned around, beating us into 42nd. I figured that either something was wrong with the local train or there was congestion ahead, so I switched to the express. We passed another 2 at one of the local stops and pulled into 72nd as a 1 was pulling out. In other words, at least four locals were stacked up. In this case, it would have made sense for one of the trains to switch to the express track so the ones behind it would have a bit of breathing room. (None of the trains were crowded.)
I think I was on that #1 that ran express to 96th Monday evening, it than went express to 137, in all a great trip for me as that was where I was going.............
This afternoon while riding back on the F train in R-46 car 5922, I saw the new map posted. (eff 12/16)
According to this map, from what I can tell the G has a solid line to Continental Avenue, and the Q service in brooklyn remains as a double line. Not sure if the E train to 179 was included, though.
Neat. I wonder when they'll offer them to the public. The first map with the V will have historical value. :)
The 7/22 map had the V stopping at Roosevelt.
The new map has the following additions:
The G line from Court Square to Continental Av is designated with a dashed green line indicating limited service.
The local stations between Queens Plaza and Continental Av are shown with a dark black oval "dot" instead of a circular dot indicating the station stop.
The new MetroCard transfer from the Lex-63 station on the F to Lex-59 on the 4/5/6/N/R is indicated with a black ladder-like symbol.
The E to 179 is not listed.
The G to Church Av on Saturdays is not listed.
There is a very small box on the bottom left hand side of the map indicating the Queens Blvd. service changes. Otherwise, the map looks like one that's been updated. And we're all quite familiar with that.
Did you notice the same "ladder" symbolizing a transfer between the G at Court Sq and the 7 train?
Didn't notice it, only glanced real quick. It's probably there.
I can tell you that cars are having the new map installed at a rapid rate. And the V stickers are already up on QB (as I'm sure you've already noticed Luch).
Are you working the V line at all? Is anyone sure about what kind of equipment is going to the V? My friend picked it as a C/R, and hopes to find nothing but 46's, so he can enjoy the comfort, and privacy, of a full-width cab. As of yesterday, he still was not sure on what equipment was headed to the V.
It appears that 46's will be the main type of equipment used on the V with an occasional 32.
Yes.
The V and F lines are indicated by two separate orange lines. The V's ends at CTL.
Oh, and there's also a minor error in which the F has a part-time light font at Lexington Ave... I was observing it very closely, yes...
Resembles original 1979 map that showed the F making local stops midnights (only the colors were much brighter then).
The info on the MTA Web site about the V line and associated changes also does not mention anything about the G going to Church Ave.
If it does happen, I think it will be treated as an unannounced bonus.
Nothing "if" about it. It is 100% guaranteed.
Good. Saturdays only or Sundays too? I've heard rumors both ways.
Saturdays only.
No offense, but I was hoping to hear back from someone in the TA. Your sources are presumably no more reliable than mine, and I've heard rumors both ways.
Anyone find out the reason for relaying G trains at Church and only on Saturdays, yet? Some long term G.O.?
No G.O., but otherwise I have absolutely no idea. Maybe it's a test to see how it works.
I was on a V train today and at least one of the cars had the OLD map (without the V).
To the young man interested in Transit employment:
IF you read my post and are serious about the career, check out MTAs home page and search for internships. Bookmark the info, check with the guidance officer or whoever is linked with internship programs as this goes through the Board of Education. Understand that right now there is a hiring freeze for city employment and I do not know how such programs are affected BUT TA needs young men who want to work and the opportunities for you lay dormant. Car Inspector Peter
Hi Folks,
OK, I promise to shut up about my damn book and get back into lurk mode real soon now...this is just a quickie note to everyone who pre-ordered my book in the last week. I got the first batch from the printer this afternoon and I'm very impressed with the final product. I will be stuffing envelopes for the next few hours after dinner, and hopefully some of you in the NYC area will have them as soon as Saturday's mail! I get the rest of them tomorrow afternoon. My chiropractor will be waiting for that event with open walletarms < grin >.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Pardon my ignorance but it's been a while since I've been to NYC but can someone breakdown the divisions for the MTA for me. Also is it just me or do the new LED signs on teh 142's and the 143's remind anybody of the old diner signs that used to say open?
First Question:
The IRT is the numbered lines and the 42nd Street Shuttle.
The BMT is the following parts of these routes:
A-above ground to Lefferts
F-Ditmas to CI
J-all
L-all
M-all
N-all
Both Qs-all
R-Lexington Avenue to Bay Ridge
S-Franklin
W-all
Z-all
The IND is the following parts of these routes:
A-207 to the stop after Euclid, I am forgetting the name (Grant, I think)
B-all
C-all
D-all
E-all
F-Jamacia to Ditmas Avenue
R-Queens Boulevard
V-all
Grand Street on the S and the Rockaways don't have a real division. 63rd Street and Archer Avenue don't have a division since they are served by both IND and BMT.
Note: IRT is now A Division. BMT is now B Division Group I. IND is now B Division Group II.
The second question: no.
Thanks for the clarification!
I might have a few mistakes, don't mark my word! I also realized after posting I mentioned the V train (intentionally) but said the F was all IND, which it won't be when it runs via 63rd.
The F is also not IND from Ditmas Ave south to Stillwell.
I said that in the original posting.
The Culver is BMT in structure and radio Frequency only. Since it was connected to the IND, and the 4th Av. connection severed, t was considered IND on signs and old maps. It is linked to the BMT only at Stillwell (unlike the Brighton, which is connected to the BMT on both ends, and is now and often disconected from the IND).
The Fulton St. el was completely isolated from the BMT, and is now considered strictly IND, as is the Rockaway line. Just like the once IRT Astoria line is now strictly BMT.
The 63rd St. T tracks feed into 6th Av. and the G tracks feed into Broadway, so you can divide it that way, so the F will still be IND at that point. Second Avenue, though, will wind up a BMT extension!
Sorry. I missed it the first time.
The Astoria section of th (N) could be considered as IRT, historically. But since 1949 it has been purely BMT and is obviously now within the B divison.
:-) Andrew
The A line is IND in Queens. Also the Grand Street and Rockaway shuttles are technically IND.
Hey all,
I am planning my own fictional 2050 layout. I have not written out anything passed that so don't give me your email address because it may be up to a year before you get it and by then I'll have lost your address. I want to include the 2nd Ave subway, plus extended IND second system sections. I have Nassau and Suffolk as the sixth and seventh boroughs of the city, so the subway will go out past there. All trains will be ATO and the jobs lost because of that will go to operating the trains from the towers and being present in stations to assist customers in confusion. Speaking of confusion, since I've implemented the idea of unlimited cars, there have to be more than 26 regular routes, so no way can I stay inside A-Z, I need ideas as to whether I should decide the routes by color in the circle of the letter {what about the color blind} and my better idea: having each route be named by 2 letters, one for the North End and one for the South End, and each terminal will have its own letter of designation, with some exceptions, ie Coney Island would have 4-5 different letter codes because of the lines that converge there, and other terminals as well. Also, I ask if anybody has their own route layout, please send to me or post here. I want the second ave subway to feed into the WTC {which will be redone somehow} tracks {the current E} and through a new tunnel and into the Transit Museum stop in Bklyn and then into Hoyt and out to Fulton. I've decided track capacity to be 30 tph but 27 to be used b/c of switching, which I won't consider in the layout to create more liberties. Tracks can have three routes at a time, all routes will be 9tph with some exceptions to be decided upon, though 9tph may seem like not that often, since lines will have three exps and three locals for the regular four-track ROW, I don't think the 7 minute frequency hurts that much. Any ideas to feed me?
I thought I read a post about a week ago that the "Santa on the Trolley" weekends at Branford was scheduled for the next 3 weekends so I put in for the day off Saturday so I could bring my son there. However I just read in their newsletter "The Tripper" that the Santa weekend is scheduled for Dec 22 & 23 only on their calendar. Anyone out there know for sure?? Also is it only certain times of day or is it all day till closing?? Anyone???
Jeff, the Branford website is listing it as every Saturday and Sunday from Thanksgiving through 12/23, with the implication that the hours are the usual 10:30 - 16:30. You might want to drop a line to Jeff Hakner (webmaster@bera.org) to confirm.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Thanks alot. I read the newsletter wrong. I did get an email from Jeff H. confirming it. I'll try to make it up this Saturday.
Jeff, Well then you'll get a choice of Lou from Brooklyn, Doris or myself taking you & the boy for a ride !
Next week the it's the BMTman & RIPTA42HopeTunnel's turn at the controlls.
P.S. Santa's in a Peter Witt, there's a Tin Plate layout in our R-9, a O scale is in our Brooklyn Trolley Dodger car, plus Hot Coaco & cookies.
I'll be the one in the Santa hat, Mr rt__:^)
10:30a is the first trip then every 1/2 hour and the last trip is 4:30p that ends up with a nice ride in the dark on 775.
Meet Santa and get a gift, hot chocolate and cookies, see some different model train layouts as Thurston said even one at the station.
The R9 is at the high level platform with heat on and the crew door open as another layout on board, not that any subtalkers would want to just be on the R9 >G<.
I'll be there every Saturday until Xmas.
Yeah! Let's go for a spin on the R-9. I have the keys and the brake handle. With a 2 week vacation from the booth looming in the air, starting on 1/6, I'm bound to show up. Let the RT Games Begin!
-Stef
I wish I could join you....
Next week the it's the BMTman & RIPTA42HopeTunnel's turn at the controlls.
All the more reason to go this Saturday!! :)
And guess who saw Santa this week-end ? Was my pleasure to take Jeff & his son for a ride !
Mr rt__:^)
And we thoroughly enjoyed it. If I ever finish the roll and develop the pictures I will post 'em.
If someone has posted this previously, I apologize for repeating it.
As many of you know, part of the East Side Access project already exists: a LIRR tunnel from 63rd St/2 Av to 41 Av/Northern Blvd in Queens (the easternmost part was extended during construction of the subway's 63rd St Connector.
According to the MTA capital projects section on their website, contracts have been or are being let to built an access shaft to the Queens end of the LIRR tunnel bellmouth and to demolish structures, build fences and prepare Yard A for extension of the tunnel through the yard. The method of constructing the new tunnels will be open-cut, which is easy to accomplish in the yard.
So East Side Access construction is actively underway, the activities listed are prerequisites to connecting the tunnel to the main branches of the railroad.
The most difficult and expensive part of this whole project will be extending the tunnel to Grand Central Station.
The most difficult and expensive part of this whole project will be extending the tunnel to Grand Central Station.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will also be the most lenghty part. Can you see it being completed within the next 15 years?
If you didn't hear, the completion year of the East Side Access Project is to be 2012 so you're only off by 3 years. But it is lengthy.
There are new signs by the LIRR mainline track immediately south of the Sunnyside Yard saying something about the East Side Access project; the trains I've been riding have gone by the signs too quickly for me to make out exactly what they say.
I've only seen one, but I belive it says:
EAST SIDE ACCESS
TUNNEL ENTRANCE
B/C
That would be the access shaft MTA built to allow work to proceed on a bellmouth connection to a new set of tunnels under/through Sunnyside Yard.
Whooooo yeah! Progress! Thankx, Ron,
MATT-2AV
>>
The most difficult and expensive part of this whole project will be extending the tunnel to Grand Central Station. <<
At least, since the route largely goes under office buildings, there shouldn't be much NIMBYism.
There won't be any...
At least, since the route largely goes under office buildings, there shouldn't be much NIMBYism.
Ummmm ... not so fast! From 63rd to the mid-Fifties, there are at least a handful of residential buildings on Park Avenue. IIRC, one of the early designs for the LIRR tracks rising from a southward turn of the 63rd Street tunnel would have taken out a couple of those buildings' basements. Looks to me like the plans call for the new LIRR terminal in GCT to be on the west side of the lower level, taking out some current MN facilities (which is why there are yard improvements in the package, to replace those GCT facilities that will be lost).
I don't know the various elevations, but especially on the west side of Park Avenue, there are said to be some NIMBY residents.
Not much of a worry. The buildings' foundations will be reinforced, so structural collapse is not an issue. And the Preferred option on the environmental impact study directly addresses the NIMBY concerns and eliminates them for the most part.
There are going to be concerns, but nothing that can't be quickly bought off.
I must agree with Ron completely. Although there are residential buildings on Park between 63rd and the high fifties, the tubes will be deep-bore construction, and thus out of sight, out of mind. Psychologically, it's harder for people to get worked up over things that they can't see.
It's New York, so you can expect some NIMBY$ to complain, but they won't have much basis; the construction should go on without much detection on the surface. Although at a much deeper elevation, Tunnel 3 was bored under 20 miles of New York City while people, for the most part, slept soundly above.
As an interesting aside, the TBMs used to bore the tubes down to GCT may become permanent residents of GCT. IIRC, boring will start at 63rd and work its way south. TBMs are often abandoned in place after construction. Don't expect them to be taking up a track. Standard practice is to wall them up in concrete. Because it's GCT and little space is available, they may be dismantled, although this is more expensive.
MATT-2AV
(As an interesting aside, the TBMs used to bore the tubes down to GCT may become permanent residents of GCT. IIRC, boring will start at 63rd and work its way south. TBMs are often abandoned in place after construction. Don't expect them to be taking up a track. Standard practice is to wall them up in concrete. Because it's GCT and little space is available, they may be dismantled, although this is more expensive.)
They should just keep tunneling, either turning west to NJ, or east and down Second Avenue for the lower half of the subway with a GCT spur. I wonder if (if you assume the TBM is a sunk cost and doesn't count) the value of the rock in construction could pay for the tunneling? Nice building stone if the TBM doesn't crush it to dust.
Why can't they take it out and reuse it?
For the same reason you can't often can't take an oil tank out of a house' basement intact. It was put there while the house was being built; to take it out you have to cut it into pieces.
TBM's are sized for the particular tunnel they are digging, and might not be suitable for a different tunnel application. Could they be used? I suppose so - but no one has thus far thought it worthwhile to.
Boaring, Boaring, Boaring (chanting). The MTA should use a TBM.
I believe you are correct - they will.
The method of constructing the new tunnels will be open-cut, which is easy to accomplish in the yard.
This I'm astounded by. The route must cut across at LEAST a dozen tracks in Sunnyside Yard, if not twice that number. Severing a handful at a time must have a major impact on the Yard's operation, given how many trains are parked on those tracks whenever I pass them.
Does anyone know if perhaps that's outdated and the MTA plans to use a TBM, as urged by another SubTalker?
Tracks can be shored up on temporary support pilings. And there are places in Queens where a TBM isn't practical. Open-cut in the yard poses no NIMBY problem, which is what I was really getting at.
Remember that the tunnel in Queens has to rise fairly quickly, because the train will be going above ground on the Main Line while still in Long Island City. The shallowness of the tunnel argues against a TBM.
I was talking about in manhatten.
Is it running and on what line? Tomorrow's my day off. Railfanning day.
The L line
Does the R-143 train have a schedule, like the R-142's did when they were testing?
- Lyle Goldman
Dave Pirmann has posted the schedule on the R-143 page.
http://www.nycsubway.org/cars/r143.html/
What about Saturday?
I don't think so.
Yes to Saturday. R143 MU's run 7 days a week, and 14 or 15 hours a day, roughly from 6am to 8 or 9pm.
L
i think the R42s have met their match. in my opinion the trains with the loudest BIE dumps are
R42 is number one!
R46
and Redbird
but i think the R42s have met their match. the R143 conductors seem to be silly enuf to open the doors before the operator dumps the train! so when we arrived at 8av the doors open and BOOM! the Train dumps so loud i was like whoa!
R42s are still number one loudest dump i think.
what do u guys thin what trains dump loudest???
remember..............
Safety
Attentiveness
Train Control
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
uh, huh huh. hey beavis, he said 'dumps!'
sorry, i had to.
To see the biggest dumps, see if Chuck Berry has a website.
EGGS!
What's wrong with opening the doors before dumping? Might as well let the passengers be on their way ASAP, no?
TA rules state that the C/R is not allowed to open the doors at a terminal until the T/O places the train in emergency. I believe that the reason is that trains can come to a stop with the train partially out of the station due to the slow grade time signals that exist in the majority of terminals.
Do you mean to tell us that saluting the board isn't the cure to all evils?
Yes, if saulting the board worked there wouldn't be door enablers.
And when the door enablers don't cut it, watch for them to mount PUNCH BOXES on the poles ... can't reach it? Can't open up. Watch! :)
Have you ever read the door enabler memo word for word? The way I read it, the ruling is: at the terminal the t/o is supposed to push the button before he dumps the train. The t/o apparently did just that. I suppose the c/r is still supposed to wait till the air dumps tho. Apparently, the c/r in question did not.
Hmmm Makes a good WAV file for shutting down Windows.
Anybody want to put together a SMEE desktop with compressor, door motor, dumping, tripped, etc WAVs. Plus a R-something BMP and a few special ICONS?
Phil Hom
I have. Go to my website at www.orenstransitpage.com and go to the Download Station.
Sweet! I'm going to have to check this out tonight.
Nice site
Has anyone ever been near a pneumatic switch? Stand at the very West end of the Northbound platform at 149th Street, Grand Concourse on the lower level. You'll be twittling your thumbs, then all of a sudden "CLUNK!!!!!! CLUNK!!!!! SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!" And, you nearly fall on the tracks. Here's a wav of the switch.
149th
Even better, one which I miss, is the one in the station at Exchange Place on PATH. Here.
PATH
There's one at the SB end of the Bowling Green station, too.
Yep. Seperates the South Ferry route from the Brooklyn Route. I always wondered why there are two clangs. The switch only moves once. Maybe the second is it locking?
Thanks.
Downloaded at work (NT4.0). Now to ZIP Disk it home to Windows 2000.
Some of the redbirds can cause ear bleeding! :)
In the hole. In the hole. IN THE HOLE!!! (If your lucky enough to put your cans on or stick your dirty fingers in your ears.) CI Peter
I don't know...the loudest dump you can ever get is working undercar where the air discharge is...one ear gets flushed out...and then you restrain your temper...and YELL 'THANKYOU.' CI Peter
OUCH!
Namaste thankyouverymuch
If you ever have a sound file of the dump please send it to me at jeffalterman@yahoo.com
#3 West End Jeff
IF I could figure out a way to do it on the job, what language do you want the precursor to be in???
In the Hole
In de Hole
EEN de oll
eeen de orn
Best wishes always, InTheHoleOnTheJuiceThankyouverymuch CI Peter
Whatever language you think the dumps would sound the best.
#3 West End Jeff
I like Russian for the entertainment quality. 'EEEn de orn' can mean almost anything and one must quickly stick dirty fingers into ears...got an ear infection because of it. Hindi runs a close second: olll, olll, olll, ornnn, ornn. This stuff does wonders on hearing blitzed by 30-06 rifle discharges. No matter what the language used is, I always give a good n hearty WASPY 'thankyou' for BIEs. I'm never angry...I love these guys. CI Peter
I wonder how good it would be in English.
#3 West End Jeff
The few times I hear 'in the hole' in English, my hearing is preserved. 'On the juice' is another matter...haven't got fried yet and I look behind my back, always. What you hear platformwise is nothing like being blasted directly. CI Peter
Have you been "blasted" directly?
#3 West End Jeff
The M/K R42's dumps very loud, the CI rebuilds do not.
I remember the way the BMT standards dumped at 8th Ave. Not particularly loud, but sustained.
I updated my image gallery. Can you guys let me know what you think? Go to the link, and click on pictures.
My site
Tony, Nice photos, but the 16 X 5 map make re-loads too much of a annoyance. Might I suggest you put a few on several pages to speed the process of going thru them ?
Mr rt__:^)
Suggestion noted. Thanks. I'll work on that this weekend.
Tony
6791-95 are on the property tonight. I suspect 6796-6800 may not be too far behind.
Hey Juice, looks like you have another 5 cars that need TLC.........
-Stef
Yeah i saw the diesel locos pulling them past E tremont as i was on a northbound #5.
Yeah i saw the diesel locos pulling them past E tremont as i was on a northbound #5. The next delivery will be the last for the #2 and the one after that will start putting cars on the #5.
Hold on partner. There are cars that are still sidelined and haven't been delivered as of the present time. Cars from 6801 and up are said to go to the 5. HOWEVER, I believe some 6800 series cars will wind up on the 2 at least for the meantime, to permit the line to be completely R-142 while the 5 gets what's left of the Redbirds.
Note:
6361-6410, 6431-75, and 6481-6500 are sidelined, in yards other than Unionport, East 180th Street.
6566-75 and 6746-80 have not been delivered from Plattsburgh.
-Stef
some of those sets are sitting in Jerome/ Concourse
Also there are sets sitting up at Lenox as well.
The question would seem to be is when those sets are coming out of dead storage. Perhaps delivery should be halted and those cars needs get addressed so they can finally be put on the road.
A trip to the shop with Bombardier Techs is in order.............
-Stef
i thought that they were fixed. what other problems do they have? thye should've hired the experienced to build them, because this is abnormal coming from a company like this.
Yes, they should have just given in and let the cars be built in permanent facilities like the ones in Thunder Bay, Canada or Aachen, Germany (where Bombardier's European LRVs are built)
What about D u s s e l d o r f which I think was in Eastern Germany where quality products were made stamped with the quality symbol 'Fabriken DDR.' Just found the packing label from my TA issue cotton gloves which smell of mildew that says, 'Made in Vietnam.' It's a new world...mebbe Euros will soon replace tokens. CI Peter
I think there's a Siemens plant in Dusseldorf. Maybe the MTA should really start looking at other rail car builders for their next order, including Siemens.
if the MTA looks at Siemens, Manufacuring will come out of Washington State where Siemens America is located. also, there aren't many railcar builders in the industry anymore. the only ones this side is Kawasaki, Siemens, Bombardier,and if they decide, General Motors Electromotive. whoever produces the least amount of cars in a certain amount of time will not get the contract.
Bottom line: If Bombardier and Kawasaki continue to produce 'dead trainsets,' TA will not extend orders and I'll look foward to the 'hammer and sickle, Fabriken DDR,' the 'symbols of quality.' One thing that the West discovered when the East was opened: the Gauleiters produced spare parts, many spare parts, so many spare parts but not enough of one kind to make ONE of anything. CI Peter
Ohh you know that K and Bom are going to get it. The MTA execs don't even know that the R-142s (all) had any problems whatsoever or they oblivious to the fact. Off the truck and into the station and they load up with passengers. Also it could be a bribe made by K and Bom.
I doubt that execs are oblivious any more based on special inspections I have been asssigned to. Any trainset towed by diesel is not accepted, not ready for revenue service and unsafe for passengers. Any trainset towed to 239th is going to be worked upon by Bombardier and its vendors. Placement in service means that it was field checked by one of my partners...and it will stop when required (might not go when required or stop unexpectedly.) K and Bom. couldn't take the chance now on a gamble for extended contracts....SubTalkers keep my shop under surveillance. CI Peter
DDR means dead delivered railcar because Siemens is just as bad as Kawasaki
DDR means dead delivered railcar because Siemens is just as bad as Kawasaki and bombardier
Good Lord Save Me! As my experience and confidence builds so does the work...I don't even get the chance to look 'upstairs' to see whats in anymore...we're now changing gear oil on the running R142s. Thankyou my friend, CI Peter.
If trainsets were towed into 239th by a diesel, that must mean they have no brakes. Only 180th does acceptance...and 239th is becoming a Bombardier upgrade shop. Well, at least my worries may soon be over.
" You didn't touch anything, did you???" "No Mr. Tony, the Redbird propulsion sequenced properly before and after inspection and there wasn't anything fried." "Good work ." CI Peter
I have been recently working on a new fantasy map(not yet for the public)with my Second Avenue plan and I have ran out of Ideas.If anyone has Ideas then I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks in advance.I am also making other extension plans currently.
& especially of those good old R 1 - R 9 series !!! so very good to see new pics of when the subway was really real !!
I will say it again @!!
Today is certainly a somber day in history, and because of what our nation and great city have gone through, everyone now knows what its like when America is attacked.
The more obvious anniversary is of course today marks the 60th anniversary of Pearl Harbor. It was the worst attack on America until September 11th.
Today also marks the 8th anniversary of the L.I.R.R. Massacre. It was December 7, 1993 when gunman Colin Furgason wounded 17 on a PM rush hour train, and killed 6 other commuters as well.
My heart goes out to any subtalkers who know or are victims of either of these tragedies. -Nick
It was the worst until Febuary 23 when a truck bomb exploded under the North Tower.Which was the worst until Oklahoma city,until 9/11.
The 1993 bombing of the north tower took place before the L.I.R.R. Massacre. And yes, Oklahoma City was the next worst before 9/11. -Nick
I agree that at the time the attack on Pearl Harbor was a terrible event. The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11th was just as awful because of the surprise nature of it. Like the attack on Pearl Harbor on Sunday December 7th 1941, the attack on the World Trade Center on Tuesday September 11th 2001 stunned the nation. Though I wasn't around at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, I got the sense of what it was like to have our freedom violated on the day of the attack on the World Trade Center. I was very angry over the attack on the World Trade Center becuase my sense of freedon was violated.
#3 West End Jeff
I totally understand your feelings, Jeff! I too felt a deep sadness, and felt like America's freedom paid a price on 9/11. -Nick
It was especially tough for me that day since I was born with a concealed cleft palate and because of my anger over the attack I was in pain from it. Having pain in the roof of your mouth is no fun since it can be quite uncomfortable and from my experience I can attest to that. Now I have that situation under control since I wear a hood at night when I sleep that covers my cheeks and keeps my mouth warm and now I'm in much less pain from my concealed cleft palate. Otherwise I'm in excellent physical condition.
We'll always remember Pearl Harbor and we'll always remember the World Trade Center.
#3 West End Jeff
America has paid a great price for freedom since the concepts were developed in 1775 and placed in writing 1776 and the mission continues to this day. 'Where are your papers?' is a statement not engaged by law enforcement (yet.) WE remain the only country in the world to have travel rights, property possesion, free education and medical, unrestricted radio/television/publication access, voting and jury service, firearms possesion and FREE SPEECH. Rights to have been paid for and worth fighting and dying for.
Admiral Halsey was asked to give a statement about what to do after December 7th, 1941. His response was colorful and simple in a manner related to the thoughts of the Founding Fathers: "Kill Japs, Kill Japs, Kill all the Japs." Sixty years later, we have a more humane feeling towards Japan.........but they continue to bomb us economically withe the likes of the R142As and R143s. The economic war continues and we, united, will win.
I agree with you that we have paid a great price for our freedom and we'll continue to do so. At the same time we cannot allow terrorists to take away our freedom. Hopefully the events of September 11th will teach us that we cannot allow our freedom to be taken away because of a few people who hate us and will do anything to get their attention which includes the World Trade Center attack. Even when our freedom has been violated we should always stand up to our right for freedom. I will say this once. United We Stand.
#3 West End Jeff
About the lines that use the Manhattan Bridge, you think the Brighton Express (Q) will remain as a Broadway Line after the 6th Ave. branch reopens for the bridge?
The Q will almost certainly remain on Broadway. It was only moved to 6th Avenue at all because it couldn't get to Broadway for 13 years or so.
It remains to be seen if the Q will be the Brighton express or the Brighton local, however.
In any case no matter how many times the question is asked here it will be a number of years before we even get a hint to the answer.
Who knows what will happen in four years, maybe the option order on the R143 will be executed and for more then what is stated now and Div. B can have more cars and lines in four years instead of waiting for the R160 order.
Now it is anybody's guess.
Actually, for a brief period in 1990 or 1991, the Q Train was able to get to Broadway, but it still went along Sixth Avenue.
- Lyle Goldman
I knew somebody would bring that up.
The Q could have gone back to Broadway for three months in 1990. Although the south side was scheduled to be opened longer than that, it wasn't scheduled to be open much longer. Rerouting the Q would have resulted in two major service changes within a year, which the TA wisely avoided. (Then again, look at 2001 -- two planned major service changes, plus two unplanned major service changes and countless minor ones, all within six months.)
That would have left 57th St/6th Ave unserved, without another (5th) 6th Ave. route. Wasn't worth it.
You could always create another train, make the terminal 57/6th, and crowd the tunnels some more. The "X" train, anyone?
Just kidding. :0)
Projected initial daily ridership: 800
Daily average through Dec 2: 1470
Busiest day: 3929 (day before Thanksgiving)
Short story in Bergen Record.
Co-Worker who lives off the North East corridor (takes NJT or SlamTrak to work) loves it!! Won't go any other way to EWR now.
I'm not surprised. This rail-air connection is long overdue...
Hmmm. I'm a traveler. I'm in Manhattan. I have to fly out of town. Do I?:
1) Hop in a cab to LaGuardia, where I'll likely face delays, most of which will be my plane beep-and-creeping to the runway for a half hour or more? Nah. I heard there are trains to the airports now. Let's go to Penn Station and see.
2) Well, I heard the LIRR connects with an Airtrain at Jamaica to JFK. What? It's not running yet? Well, even if it were, that train starts pretty far from the airport, and even once I get there, I have to be sure I know which of the many terminals at which to disembark. I never liked JFK. It's too far away, and too complicated. What else is there?
3) Oh, the Newark Airtrain. That's two stops away from Penn Station, then a short hop on a monorail to one of only 3 very well-orgaized, modern terminals.
No contest. Newark it is.
You still have to know which terminal to get off at, rvrn if there are only three to choose from instead of six(?)..
Well, I heard the LIRR connects with an Airtrain at Jamaica to JFK. What? It's not running yet? Well, even if it were, that train starts pretty far from the airport, and even once I get there, I have to be sure I know which of the many terminals at which to disembark. I never liked JFK. It's too far away, and too complicated. What else is there?
I don't imagine that most travelers to JFK are going to even think about the distance that AirTrain covers between Jamaica station and the terminals. Similarly, EWR users probably don't think about the distance that the monorail covers. All that matters is that there is direct rail access as opposed to bus transfers.
As far as JFK's layout is concerned, it would seem certain that there will be announcements on AirTrain regarding terminals and airlines, just as there are on the shuttle buses. I don't see that as any too confusing.
One other factor that might help AirTrain is JetBlue's constant expansion at JFK. The airport is now becoming a very good alternative for budget travelers, in other words the people who will be likely to consider rail as opposed to taxis and car services.
I've used the EWR connection twice now that it has been open even though I live on Long Island. Both times on returns to NY, where I needed to switch a flight and I could save on time by flying into EWR.
I'm still using LGA and JFK as my main airports -- the LGA delay problem has been almost completely eliminated by the flight cancellations post 9/11. The biggest issue at LGA now is the tight corridors in the main terminal have made it impossible to increase the number of security checkpoints. As a result, you really do need to arrive 2 hours early.
Also, despite the JFK Airtrain being a bit further than EWR from the terminals one must also consider the frequency of LIRR Jamaica-Penn service (every 12 minutes on average) against NJT's EWR-NY Penn (every 20).
CG
I've taken this train. It's a neat ride (free for Amtrak passengers). Comfortable. The train did stop on its own once and sat for a couple of minutes for an unexplained reason.
I should explain: I took Amtrak from Philly to EWR. ZI saved $1,000.00 in airfare compared to PHL.
the operative question here is will the airlines change the service pattern ie SFO-JFK nonstop,v. OAK, three stops, EWR. (2-3 hours longer trip) When those changes happen the EWR link will be flooded.
800 a day? Seems like they didn't have such high hopes for it! That's great news; given its high cost, I was afraid ridership would be low. On a related note, today's Times has an article on the yesterday's belated opening ceremonies for the monorail extension.
The cost was something that surprised me also, is it true that the fare to EWR is more than points further down the line? If so, what would stop one from buying a ticket to say Rahway and just getting off at EWR? You aren't overriding, and its a train, not a prison, you can't be made to say on, you paid a fare to a further point.
Does this make sense of is my criminal mind in overdrive once again?
what would stop one from buying a ticket to say Rahway and just getting off at EWR?
I believe the extra $5 ticket puts you on the monorail, while with a cheaper next-station ticket you would have to pay $5 to get on the monorail. Is this correct?
You have to pass your NJT ticket through the monorail turnstile to get in or out. I don't know if you can buy a monorail-only ticket at the NEC station.
What really makes no sense is that it costs more to buy a NYC-Airport ticket than to buy separate NYC-Newark and Newark-Airport tickets.
Yes, you can buy a monorail-only ticket at the station for $5.
Hey, airline travelers are used to it. A few years ago, I found that it was about $100 cheaper to fly from CMI to SJC via ORD than to skip the first leg and fly just from ORD to SJC. (More convenient, too, since I was coming from CMI.) This is not uncommon. Nor is it uncommon for a round-trip ticket to be cheaper than a one-way ticket.
As one who is not a regular flyer, could you give the names that those initials represent. I would like to know what you were saying, I think you were pointing out how airline fares can be crazy. My post was based on an article I read a few years back were it was cheaper to buy a ticket from New York to Dallas, with a stop in Atlanta (Delta) than to buy a ticket from NY to Atlanta. The article suggested one not check any luggage and buy the Dallas ticket via Atlanta and just get off with the folks at Atlanta.
Bill
CMI - Champaign, IL
ORD - Chicago, IL (O'Hare)
SJC - San Jose, CA (I think -- if not, San Jose is where I was going)
Your trick will get you to Atlanta just fine, but the airline will cancel the rest of your itinerary when you miss the flight to Dallas and you won't be able to get back to New York.
It makes about as much sense as a store selling six-packs of Coke for less than single cans, but forbidding the practice of buying a six-pack and only drinking one can.
CMI - Champaign, IL
ORD - Chicago, IL (O'Hare)
SJC - San Jose, CA (I think -- if not, San Jose is where I was going)
SJC indeed is San Jose.
Fresno-Yosemite International* Airport must have the worst airport code in the country. It was formerly known as Fresno Air Terminal, and while the name's been changed, the code remains FAT.
* = yeah, sure.
that's the "free market" for you I have a friend who needed to make short trips between Eugene and SF. His travel agent would sell him two separate RT's including a Sat nit each out--he would use half of each throwing away the unused AND SAVE 50% over the fare he would have paid for down today back tmw nite. This is lame! (and the frequent flyer miles!!!)
the cost includes a $5 access fee at newark intl airport when you transfe rfrom njt to the monorail. if you were to just go to the newark intl ap station from newark or ny penn's the price would be the same as a trip to elizabeth. i guess when u buy a njt ticket, the access fee is added on. what i dont understand is how the access fee is $5 from newark penn but $7 from ny penn. a ticket from ny penn to newark penn is 2.50, another 1.65 to elizabeth or newark intl ap. this makes 4.15 total for a trip to newark intl from new york penn. under every other cicumstance, the fee is $5 which i believe you pay at the station if u dotn already have it on your ticket. why not just buy one ticket to newark penn and another to newark intl. the price would be 2.50 plus 6.15 = 9.15. i just dont get it!
by the way, njt has a bus called airlink from newark penn and newark broad. the bus only costs $4 and goes directly to the terminals. apparently, somewhere in the price negotiation process, njt and the port authority lost all reason whatsoever. a bunch of monkeys hopping around a room flinging their own feces at each other could rpobably have coem up with a better pricing system. it almost seems like PA wants an airtrain just to have it, but is purposely preventigng it from actually carrying any significant number of passengers.
by the way, njt has a bus called airlink from newark penn and newark broad. the bus only costs $4 and goes directly to the terminals.
I've never ridden the Airlink bus, but I've been told by friends who have used it several times that it's incredibly slow getting out of downtown Newark.
it almost seems like PA wants an airtrain just to have it, but is purposely preventigng it from actually carrying any significant number of passengers.
I thought the same thing, but obviously that isn't the case. And that's a good thing :).
I think by airtrain he ment the JKF train that will run up and down the Van Wyck. They could have designed it in any number of ways to be more user friendly, but the PA wanted it be done their way and as a result it will not be used by nearly as many people than it run via the old Rockaway line of the LIRR and maybe go into Penn Station.
I think by airtrain he ment the JKF train that will run up and down the Van Wyck. They could have designed it in any number of ways to be more user friendly, but the PA wanted it be done their way...
I totally agree with you on the PA's JFK AirTrain mistake, but he was using the Airlink bus from Newark Penn to EWR as a comparison.
Every so often I see talk about the Rockaway Line to JFK here, especially in the context of rather silly AirTrain bashing.
The Rockaway Line cannot be built in any reasonable amount of time, unlike AirTrain, which is ahead of schedule (despite the tragedy of 9/11) and set to open in 2003.
The Rockaway Line passes within 50 feet of private property at certain points, and has been invaded by private property owners at other points, unlike AirTrain. Further its construction would involve massive NIMBY problems, unlike AirTrain (where 24 people out of 600,000 whined in the newspapers for a while, made noise, and in the end were run over.) Construction on AirTrain is complete, and the Port Authority received praise from residents of Jamaica and Ozone Park when the construction project was managed competently and responsibly, with a minimum of disruption. Legitimate claims for a few pile-driving related cracks in houses were paid by the Port Authority.
The Rockaway Line is untenable as a straight run into Manhattan so long as East Side Access is unfinished (insufficient capacity in the East River tunnels). While AirTrain does not go to Manhattan either, it will transfer you at an ADA-compliant Jamaica Station, where you can take ANY departure to go ANYWHERE (Long Island, Brooklyn, Manhattan).
When East Side Access opens and the Second Av subway is well along in development, we can revisit the issue of LIRR expansion to the airport.
Finally a little common sense. If the old Rockaway Branch was so great the LIRR wouldn't have sold it to the Transit Authority.
The Rockaway Line is untenable as a straight run into Manhattan so long as East Side Access is unfinished (insufficient capacity in the East River tunnels).
Send the Myrtle Av line into it, northwards (via the Montauk branch), into Rego Park. Similarly, send a few trains an hour southward to Howard Beach.
That's reasonable, on paper. If there weren't so many other really hard, intractable issues, each of which kills the project dead, I think MTA would consider that.
Of course if Robert Moses hadn't been so mass-transit-phobic, and had agreed to a proposal for a rail link at the time that the Van Wyck Expressway was built (around 1945-46), this problem would have been solved long ago.
The proposal called for a link in the center mall of the Van Wyck, and would have required only an additional 50 feet of right of way. After all, the expressway was already bisecting neighborhoods along its route; another 18 yards would hardly matter. Links could have started from the Van Wyck Blvd station, with access from the LIRR at Jamaica, and for that matter, from the Fulton Avenue line further down.
You're dead right about that. Moses cost us all dearly...
He had some vision, but what he saw was not realistic, as the passage of time has shown us. He saw, I believe, the automobile as the wave of the future, and only those who could afford to have them should be accommodated. By extension, he also believed that only a certain class of people should have access to what the region had to offer.
Ultimately, his views and those of others who agreed with him wound up costing their descendants in the long run. If they acted to do things to benefit everyone, not just a select few, then this would not happen. The IND second system would have cost much less to build years ago than it would now. We must learn from the mistakes of history, or we will be sure to repeat them.
Amen to that.
Of course if Robert Moses hadn't been so mass-transit-phobic, and had agreed to a proposal for a rail link at the time that the Van Wyck Expressway was built (around 1945-46), this problem would have been solved long ago.
The proposal called for a link in the center mall of the Van Wyck, and would have required only an additional 50 feet of right of way. After all, the expressway was already bisecting neighborhoods along its route; another 18 yards would hardly matter. Links could have started from the Van Wyck Blvd station, with access from the LIRR at Jamaica, and for that matter, from the Fulton Avenue line further down.
Yeah, but it was a different era then. Railroads and public transportation was seen as old fashioned and in decline. If anything the Roackaway line should be used for a subway line to provide local service to that area aof Queens. There is no subway service in that area it runs through.
I agree that a route like that might be handy.
If LIRR needed another line there, I would have them rehab what they could near the connection to the main line, then continue it on a new route, at least partly underground (to eliminate NIMBY where it would have to pass too close to people's houses), and redevelop the old unuseable ROW into parkland, bike paths etc. and sell parts of it to businesses and homeowners where appropriate.
My plan is expensive, I admit, and perhaps not practical enough to happen. But it may not be even possible, legally, technically or politically, to reunify the pieces of the existing ROW and run trains on it again.
I've ridden the AirLink bus several times when I had plenty of spare time, and I've needed the spare time. Because of miserable traffic, its schedule is unreliable and the trip can take forever. You can almost take the bus to Port Authority in Manhattan by the time you get to downtown Newark. I'm definitely looking forward to using the train next time I need to fly.
I rode the NJT #62 bus from Newark Penn - $1. It was pretty good, but I prefer Newark AirTrain.
The PA I think wants NY travelers to use the NY airports, hence the larger fee to discourage them from coming to NJ's airport.
The PA I think wants NY travelers to use the NY airports, hence the larger fee to discourage them from coming to NJ's airport.
The Port Authority runs all three airports. I highly doubt they discourage New Yorkers from using EWR.
My impression was that the TA was charging the $5 surcharge because of some incomprehensible notion that people using a service (such as the monorail extension to the train) should help pay for it.
Yes, except it's a $7 surcharge from NYP.
The cost was something that surprised me also, is it true that the fare to EWR is more than points further down the line? If so, what would stop one from buying a ticket to say Rahway and just getting off at EWR? You aren't overriding, and its a train, not a prison, you can't be made to say on, you paid a fare to a further point.
With the exception of the rail between Newark Penn Sta. and NY, the fare to the EWR station AT ANY POINT is roughly the same as the one way fare FROM that destination TO NEWARK PENN STA.
My home station is Metuchen, and the fare is $9.10. If you subtract $5 you get $4.10 which is the OW fare from Metuchen to NEWARK.
REMINDER: Tickets bought from ticket machines INCLUDE the access fee.
You are considered to be "overriding" the train if you get off at a destination that is farther than the station printed on your ticket.
Also, if you ride too much, your trip may exceed the fare at which station you got off from when you got on the train, thus "not paying your fare".
1470 passengers per day really isn't much of a cause for celebration.
I believe the monorail operates every 3 minutes during the peak 12 hours of the day. That's 20 arrivals and 20 departures from the NJT station each hour, or 480 total for the 12 hour period. Assuming none of the 1470 are travelling during the off hours, that means that the average monorail train arrives or departs from the NJT stations with 3 passengers on board.
Or you can look at it this way. 1470 passengers times $5 per ride is $7,350 per day in revenue. That's about $2.7 million in revenue per year. I don't know the cost of the monorail extension off hand, but we're likely talking about a return period well into the thousands of years -- assuming no maintenance or operational costs. Not good.
CG
1470 passengers per day really isn't much of a cause for celebration.
True, but let's not forget that air travel is way down. If and when people start feeling comfortable enough about air travel so that passenger numbers get back to their pre-9/11 levels, the monorail might do better. I agree, though, that 1,470 pax/day is pretty low. It has a long way to go.
i believe i've read that air travel is back to about 70 percent of pre-9/11 levels. if so, a return to pre-9/11 levels would put us only slightly over 2000/day. besides, weve apparently been in a recession since march, and a bear market much longer. air travel traditionally follows very closely with the health of the economy. thats why airlines always hit red in a downtown and always make big bucks in good times. thats also why airlines didnt deserve a fraction of bush's bailout plan. the risk of losing money in a sour economy is already built into the value of these companies, so much of the $ transfer was just a present.
i believe i've read that air travel is back to about 70 percent of pre-9/11 levels. if so, a return to pre-9/11 levels would put us only slightly over 2000/day.
That could be. One thing to keep in mind, however, is that traffic to and from the NYC airports is well below the national average, with a higher percentage of flights have been cancelled than anywhere else (it almost sounds like the airlines are punishing New York for September 11, as if the city was to blame ... go figure). In any event, that may be depressing the figures for the EWR monorail somewhat, although I agree that it still has quite some way to go.
And with no marketing whatsoever.
Well, Continental has been giving it quite a bit of press on its website and in its frequent flyer program mailings.
Is this postcard really worth that much?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1043997781
Alan Glick
bob.s always has a high opening bid on his transit related cards, but he already has a bid, so I guess it is.
It depends on how much a party will pay to obtain a given item.
Demand + Supply = ebay final bid.
Yes, but one transaction doesn't skew the equation. There might be somebody somewhere willing to pay big bucks for my collection of personal toenail clippings, but that wouldn't nessesarily mean my toenails are worth big bucks. I think a more accurate gauge is to consider a number of transactions dealing with the item in question to arrive at a good idea of its value. Which makes it hard to determine the value of my toenails because, as of yet, I have not received any bids.
Alan Glick
Oh, I'm sure one or two bids'll show up....;-D
>>> There might be somebody somewhere willing to pay big bucks for my collection of personal toenail clippings, but that wouldn't nessesarily mean my toenails are worth big bucks. <<<
Yes it would. If you find that person, then your toenails are worth big bucks. Until you find him, they are not worth much. Fair Market Value (FMV) is defined as what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller to purchase an object.
Particularly in the field of "collectibles" it may be difficult to determine a rational reason for the value. For instance, if the Louvre were ever to sell the Mona Lisa, they would get many millions of dollars for it. If an unknown art student, painted an exact copy, which when placed next to the original could not be differentiated from the original by the naked eye, the price of the copy would be only a few hundred dollars.
Tom
For instance, if the Louvre were ever to sell the Mona Lisa, they would get many millions of dollars for it. If an unknown art student, painted an exact copy, which when placed next to the original could not be differentiated from the original by the naked eye, the price of the copy would be only a few hundred dollars.
Yeah. and the poor art student wouldn't even get to keep his few hundred dollars after daVinci sued him for copyright infringement.
Life stinks.
LOL!
Thanks, Paul.
BRT stuff has been going for a lot. Remember the saga of Joe Saitta's Coney Island area track blues. I'll admit that his later offerings were not as nice as some of the early ones (like the Brighton Beach Hotel one), but he went from bids around $300 to not getting a single $48 bid later. And these are rare (but I know for a fact not one-of-a-kind) items.
I wouldn't pay any of these prices as an investment, which is the typical reason for asking about values. My rule of thumb is, if I bid $100 for an item and lose it, how disapponted will I be. If I bid $100 and win it? how happy (or cheated) will I feel?
My previous comments notwithstanding, my late mother would have said: "$40.00 for a post card? Who delivers it. The Queen of England?"
Thanks for the tip...will make a good addition to my upcoming Kings Highway page on...
www.forgotten-ny.com
Last night at 7 PM A&E network replayed an old L&O episode about a shooting on the subway.
It was a clear rip-off of the Bernard Goetz incident. It started off with Cynthia Nixon (Miranda of Sex in the City) getting on an R-32. The train leaves the station and the back end is an R-40 (Slant). Whizzing through the tunnel to make you think its the same train is an R27/30, and another R-32. When the train empties because of the gun shots and the victims are found it is an R-62 because its narrower than the other cars.
Was able to pick out "Hoyt' as the R-40 left a station. Couldn't tell where the other parts of that piece where shot or if it was stock footage inter-cut with the filmed stuff.
I saw that episode, and made similar conclusions. TV shows and movies have a tendency to make kinky connections, rather like the dumb _Money Train_ did.
Law & Order tends to use what they can because they do so much shooting in the city. They use Track 1 at the PATH WTC station every once in a while when they need a "subway" station without a train.
Some of you may recall the Trib's anti-Amtrak editorial last week. As expected, this has produced a flurry of letters to the editor, both pro and con. Here's the link:
Chicago Tribune: Voice of the People
-- David
Chicago, IL
I wouldn't say that the article was anti-passenger rail, just anti-Amtrak in its present for.
Sure, Amtrak has been hobbled by insufficient subsidies and being forced to run unprofitable routes, and the unrealistic target date of profitability, but they have not done the best they could with what they have. The "Why should I care" attitude that too many people, in all levels, have.
>>> As expected, this has produced a flurry of letters to the editor, both pro and con. <<<
The letters were completely predictable.
Tom
Anyone have any idea of what this is worth?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1305353069
Alan Glick
Usually not as much as what they're asking (minimum bid).
The minimums on alot of those Stock Certificates are more than the cost if you were to find them at Paper Trade and/or Railroadania shows.
BMTman
Well look what BRT certificate went for:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1040175193
And a Brooklyn Elevated RR Stock Certificate went for:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1303230171
Here's what a H&M certificate went for:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1302806299
Those are somewhat common. I've never seen B,F,&CI stock offered. I have seen the Brooklyn & Brighton Beach RR stock from 1888 go for about $150 twice, so I'm guessing that the B,F,&CI is worth more than that. Isn't there a price guide that contains info on the B,F,&CI stock? I thought I remembered seeing it at Arnold Joseph's place.
Alan Glick
IMO, this is a pretty rare item, Alan. More so because it appears to have actually been issued and probably hand signed. OTOH, it doesn't contain a train vignette.
But also IMO, at nearly $300 and two days to go, it's really up in the stratosphere of "how much do you want it." If I had a lot of bux to spend I'd rather have gone $900 for that complete set of Seyfried's History of the LIRR.
I don't know. I couldn't find it in the stock market pages. Is it Dow or Nasdaq?
It would be on the NYSE in 1883.
Apparently $273.+
I guess that certificate is not a common one or else it would not be up as high.
It hasn't come up on eBay for years.
Alan Glick
The auction's over. Six people bid on it. It went for over $400. Oh well, at least I won this item:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1669225491
Alan Glick
Yes, I noticed that stock certificate, too. Especially the seller's description
"In 1878 the LIRR and the new Brooklyn, Flatbush and Coney Island RR made an agreement whereby a connection would be made at Atlantic Ave. and Franklin Ave. and trains, both freight and passenger, of each of the two railroads would be able to travel along the other’s ROW. In particular, the Brighton line would be able to use the LIRR’s Flatbush Ave. terminal and the LIRR would be able to use the Brighton line for travel between Long Island City and even points east on Long Island to Coney Island. In 1880, Austin Corbin, who also owned the Manhattan Beach line, a serious rival to the Brighton, bought the LIRR, and the LIRR stopped running its trains along the Brighton line since it was a direct competitor to Corbin's Manhattan Beach line."
Check out my description of the joint LIRR-Brighton service in my website HERE.
Looks very similar. Well, imitation is the highest form of flattery, isn't it :-)
Bob, don't worry, I already have Johnnie Cochran on retainer....;-D
No need for that. The seller agreed to let me use a copy of the Stock certificate on my website, along with another one he had of the NY, Greenwood and Contey Island RR (from which Andrew Culver later formed the Prospect Park and Coney Island RR)
For years, the Suburban O'Hare Commission, heavily financed by the suburbs that surround O'Hare, has rabidly opposed any expansion of O'Hare Airport. They've filed lawsuit after lawsuit, threatened and intimidated any politician or business that has voiced even the slightest support for O'Hare, packed public hearings to shout down their opponents, and issued one outrageous press release after another.
Now, the only thing they have to show for it is a strong resolve to expand O'Hare from all levels of the city, state and federal governments, and a vastly hardened resolve by the local business community to see an expanded airport.
The city of Des Plaines, Lisle, and the DuPage County government have now announced plans to withold further funding to the SOC and/or drop out of the organization altogether. Turns out some of these local governments have realized they have more to gain from an expanded O'Hare than by continuing to pander to NIMBY interests.
You can be certain that Mayor Daley will use his vast political leverage to further dismantle the SOC. More news as it develops...
-- David
Chicago, IL
While looking at the photo of the new R143 car at Livonia Avenue I noticed that the Livonia Avenue El is rusting and looks like it not have been painted in years. Any idea what holding that up? Also
is there a free Metrocard transfer between the Livonia Ave Line and the Canarsie Line. If not what are they waiting for? If I took a B42 Bus in to the station wouldnt that count as a bus to subway transfer if I try to enter the IRT station there after exiting the Livonia Ave station ?
There is no MetroCard transfer where the L and 1 cross.
A dip on the B42 counts as a bus dip, not a subway swipe. If you board a B42 and transfer within fare control to the L, you still have a free subway or bus transfer waiting on your card -- so, yes, in that case you would be able to transfer to the 1. Don't try that trick in reverse, though.
How do you know when there is a metrocard transfer at stations? I don't see any indications on the map. Why do they keep these connections a "secret"
There are always Metrocard Bus-to-Train and Train-to-Bus transfers available at all subway stations. It is noted on the Subway and Bus Maps. There is no secret to that.
There are currently no subway-to-subway MetroCard transfers.
Beginning 12/16, there will be two: 45th Road (7) - Court Square/23rd-Ely (E/G/V) and Lexington Avenue (F) - 59th Street (4/5/6/N/R/W). Both are indicated on the new map.
Subway-to-bus, bus-to-subway, and bus-to-bus MetroCard transfers have been available for years.
The B42 at Rockaway Parkway is unique, as it stops inside the subway station itself. Transfers between the B42 and the L do not make use of MetroCard. If you board the B42 and transfer to the L, there is still a transfer on your MetroCard, valid at any subway station and on any bus route other than the B42 itself.
I thought the post was talking about a metrocard connection between the New Lots line and the L (subway to subway). I must have read it wrong.
It was. Gary asked if there was such a transfer (no), but he also suggested the B42 trick (which would work). Sorry if I wasn't clear in my response.
The reason for the free subway-to-bus transfer at Rockaway Parkway was to accomodate Canarsie riders for the loss of the free trolley service that was provided (in the 1930's) after the original Canarsie Line was cut back from approx. Seaview Avenue (near the pier) to it's current terminal of Rockaway Parkway.
BMTman
>>While looking at the photo of the new R143 car at Livonia Avenue I noticed that the Livonia Avenue El is rusting and looks like it not have been painted in years. Any idea what holding that up? <<
The rust.
and some crazy glue...;-D
Nah Crazy Glue is not TA approved it has to be Duct Tape.
Peggy asked me to post this:
There will be a tour of the 1 line's Manhattan and Bronx Portions on 1/5/02-this is a Saturday. meeting time is 9am at the Uptown end of the uptown platform at Chambers Street.
We will see mosaics at Houston, Christopher among others plus the site of the old double decker elevators at 168,181 and 191 plus a view of 207 yard from the platform at 207. We will also see the Broadway bridge and continue to 242 where the tour will end. Cost- 1 fun pass if you wish to get off at 207 to view the yard from the street or just one fare if you wish to stay in the system.Tour runs rain or shine.
Also on the tour is the construction at Times square- We will view the new mosaic art panels in two locations and see the Ellipse affording a view of N and R trains.
Anticipated stops: Houston, Christopher, 42nd Complex, 66, 86. 96, 125,168,181,191, Dyckman, 207, 242.
Oh no! Saturday is the one day of the week that I can absolutely, positively guarantee that there is no possible way I could come under any circumstances. If Peggy does a rerun or this tour gets rescheduled for another day, I'm there.
For us it would have to be on a Sunday.
Sunday's fine with me. Are you volunteering to organize it?
OK. I spoke with Peggy and she agreed to change the trip to Sunday 1/6/02. 9am at the uptown end of the uptown platform at Chambers. Planned stops include Houston, Christopher, 34, 42 (Includes BMT mezzanine" 50, 66, 96, 125,(includes trip to see the structure from the street), 137, 157, 168, 181, 191, 207, 2452- end of trip.
Pleas e-mail her **off-site** at peggy@nycsubway.org if you are interested in attending this tour which would run rain or shine, snow or fair, hot or cold.
DAVE: Peggy asks this be posted as an upcoming event.
Cost- one fun pass or unlimited ride MetroCard. If unable to attend and want a CD of trip photos, please e-mail peggy, again off-site and a CD will be sent with a$5 donation and a self-addressed padded mailer. Peggy will pay postage (the $5 covers postage and the CD.)
Note that Peggy will be on vacatation from 1/7/02 till 1/15/02 and the CD will be mailed after she returns.
A lunch stop will be at 242- there is plenty of fast food at this station.
Sounds like a true gem.
Tho, if only it were to start at 242 and run south.
Hence, thy northerners amongst us (self included)
must now be on a southbound 1 leaving 242 by 8am
the latest to make it down to Chambers in time
to join the uptown turnaround troop..
But hey, (OT) it's either a tour of the 1 line
or going to church... ~the 1 sure can play with
the big boys! (end OT) plus it sure is nice to see
the homeline get some fan-ly attention.
Thanks buff & Peggy!
1SF9
Wow, my wish has come true! Thank you, subway-buff and Peggy!
I'd like to go! What time on 1/5 would it be?
Sorry, I didn't see 9am time when I first wrote. But I'd still like to go!
Uptown End of the Uptown Platform??
The HEAD end or the TAIL end?
Sounds like NORTH end of NORTH bound.
I might be able to go ....
BTW, the only "street" level view of 207th that you can get is if you cross the University Heights bridge and view it from across the Harlem River. The yard is surrounded by a high concrete wall on most of its sides.
--Mark
You may end up on my train since I am scheduled to leave New Lots at 8:34 putting me at Chambers around 9:10.
I may come along but I'm not sure yet.
Date changed to Sunday 1/6. Read the message Peggy asked me to post below.
Sounds good to me- I think I can make it. There hasn't been a major organized trip since August 23, the Farewell to Newark PCC trip- the one that started off taking PATH out of WTC (sigh!).
The L is running in two disconnected pieces this weekend with a shuttle bus in the middle. Which piece will the R-143 trainset be running on?
Rockaway Parkway to Myrtle Avenue -- and I don't have the timetable here at home, so I can't provide its schedule. However, I can say (having seen the timetable in the office) that the train will run for its usual 15 hours a day or so.
David
IF Kawasaki can make it go. Gotta few Redbirds to lend if you don't mind the missing parts (victims of unauthorised stripping.) CI Peter
I rode the R-143 on Friday (12/7) during the PM rush. It was "going" then and I expect it will be "going" in the morning.
David
I just seen it heading into Sutter Avenue northbound about a half hour ago, so its running on the Rockaway Pkwy to Myrtle Av section. I was driving so I dont know if the signs are/were programmed for Myrtle Ave. I doubt anyway, that they would run it on Lorimer to 8Ave portion just for the fact that it is under testing.
It will be on the Myrtle to Rock. Parkway segment, allowing access to ENY yard for layup when needed.
I rode the R-143 today from 8th Avenue to Canarsie! I have some pictures and a description.
R-143
Thanks for the pics and your comments! -Nick
I hope they don't put flags on all of them under the logo. As it is, the logo should be gone. One of the only things I don't like about that train (having not ridden it). At least the front looks better than the R142, even though I am not 100% in favor of the black front.
>>> I hope they don't put flags on all of them under the logo. <<<
I agree, it shows a real disrespect for the flag. It should be above the MTA Logo.
Tom
if the car was built in the USA ...!
Except that the flag was added after the car was delivered. It may be impractical, expense-wise to redesign the front.
A minor transgression in the scheme of things. I think we can forgive MTA that one.
How many thing have we forgiven, no 2nd ave sub, no sea beach express, no scedualed mantanence, ripping down of jamaica BMT area, 63 st connector, and so on.
Not to mention the premature slaughter of the Triplexes.
That's beautiful.
So wonderful to read of this on December 7th. Kawasaki trainsets are foreign garbage built with a hodgepodge of standard rail parts to make them 'kosher.' Few stopped today, even in TA, to remember. I'm a New Yorker and I like bagels: put sesame seeds from Afghanistan on em and what you get is donuts. What you get from Kawasaki is turds. CI Peter who loves to make trains go.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOKAY... I'd prefer if subway cars were built by the US also, but what are you gonna do?
U stol' my thunder !! .... a USA flag on a non USA built subway car ....(s).....
Noooooooo Salaamallah.........youuuuuu got it wrong. These trainsets are a hodgpodge of stuff...has all American braking per FRA....foreign crap parts assembled in USA. A USA built subway car with a US flag assembled by....USA peoples under 'foreign' supervision. No doubt big parts like motors or trucks are labeled 'Made in Japan.' I hope that epileptics don't have seizures under the 'flickering lights.' CI Peter
Flickering lights aside, do you seriously thing someone with epilepsy would be riding on the subway? Can you imagine what the sight of a moving train/riding on a moving rain and looking out a window would do?
-Robert King
I have not yet read one decent explanation of exactly what 'flickering lights' is. If all trainset lighting is 37.5 volts, the BIG capacitor banks are charged and the batteries charged too, maybe ONE or two fixtures?? Sure an occasional epileptic (get IT trying to spell that) will try...just look down and listen for the announcement of the station! One of many new notes today: TA wanted a 'linebreaker' in the new trainsets...I wonder if that is contributing to problems. CI Peter
Only a few epileptics are vulnerable to flickering lights.
There is nothing wrong with someone with epilepsy riding the subway. The subway is incredibly valuable to people with seizure disorders who cannot drive.
Most epileptics, who are under good control with medication, can do pretty much what anyone else can do, including ride the subway.
During a brave wave test you use deep breathing as well as flashing strobe lights at different frequencies to see if there is seizure activity in the brain.
No, you do not. Patients suspected of suffering from seizures undergo an EEG (Electro-encephalogram) to determine if there is abnormal neuronal firing in the brain, and where it might be. They may also undergo an MRI scan to rule out a structural problem in the brain tissue itself (such as a tumor). Most patients suffering from epilepsy do not have a definable cause for their condition, but it is treatable with drugs, electrical stimulation, and in some really severe cases, surgery.
Sometimes an EEG will be performed over aperiod of 24 hours or longer, with a video camera to record the patient's behavior over time.
The number of epileptic patients who react to flashing lights is very small.
For more information, please talk to your doctor, or consult the National Epilepsy Foundation.
Funny, then why does the patient I know get an EEG every so often with the deep breathing and lights to see if the meds are working. This only causes the "feeling" or precursor that an attack is going to happen never brought on an attack they always stop the test once they get a certain reading. (MRI was clean BTW and it was with contrast). Hmmm... must be checking for somthing else then, what do I know.
Maybe the patient you are referring to does have a problem with flashing lights. But it's very uncommon.
"There is nothing wrong with someone with epilepsy riding the subway."
Would you foresee a problem with an epaleptic working as a conductor? (Subway conductor - not an electrical conductor)
There might be. Activities and positions involving some risk to yourself or others are subject to legal restrictions (having a driver's license, for example). Policy may differ based on severity - ie if a person had a seizure disorder but has suffered no seizures at all in 5 years and had his/her medication tapered off, is he/she ok to be T/O or Conductor?
I can't comment about specific job titles. I don't know enough about MTA's policy. I would suggest you ask your occupational health doctor at MTA as to which positions are deemed restricted to people with seizure disorders.
I would say anyone with epilepsy is safe riding on the subways. If it is just petit mal epilepsy I don't think that such a person should have any problems at all riding the subways.
#3 West End Jeff
I did too, very briefly from 6th Ave to Union Square. I had come from 8th on a Slant R40 (which I like well enough), but then at 6th I saw the R143 pulling out in the other direction. I had to wait for it to return. Then I took it to Union Square. I would have stayed on longer, but my lunch break was ending.
(You might be a Subfan if you spend a buck fifty for a brief subway ride during your lunch break.)
Anyway, it's a nice car class. I didn't sample the seating, but it seems similar to the ones on the R142/R142A. Cheery interior. Interesting look all in all. Very modern feel. I actually prefer the red area on the A-end of the R142 car, but the R143 looks quite good even without it.
:-) Andrew
How was the railfan view? On a scale of a locomotive hauled train being the worst and a PATCO Hi-speed line being the best. In terms of the NYCS an R32 being the best and an R44/46 w/ the polarized stick on being the worst.
A little worse than the R-44/46 (fuzzy, more triple vision) but you see colors of the signal. Not the number on them though.
The R44/46's have a 2 inch diameter viewing window with the rest blacked out. Are you saying it is worse than that?
That's only ONE of the reasons I've NEVER liked that car....
I've never gotten used to it.
I like the R-68's much better, even though they're basically the same train.
At least the 68 doesn't have that UGLY fake wood, and I like the darker silver color, and the mirror-like inside is very cool. :)
Too bad they didn't make a shorter version of the 68 to run on the Eastern Division.
Some R-44's are as you describe. Other R-44's, and all R-46's (AFAIK), have polarized glass, similar to the R-68(A), R-142(A), and R-143.
Personally, I'll take a clear view through a small hole over a large fuzzy view any day. (Of course, a large unobstructed view is best of all.)
The glass isn't polarized, it's a stick-on thing that prevents you from looking over at the T/O.
I think its also so that the T/O can see out the window when he/she is going through a tunnel. (i.e. so that the t/o sees the tunnel not a reflection of the people in the car).
Why don't they install a window like on the R-62?
It is, but (as I've asked here at least twice) wouldn't a sliding curtain perpendicular to the door do the job just as well?
Crowbar, chisel, can some one tell me how easy it is to remove. I did see a R44/46 with the cab window kicked in (the glass (plastic) jumped out of the rubber gasket) I for got which car number but it was on sat 8 on F line.
Yes, because you don't have triple vision and it isn't polarized then. I would take fuzzy over triple vision anyday.
I looked at the pictures of both the exterior and the interior and I would have to say that the R-143 is a winner.
#3 West End Jeff
Great post. Thank you.
The ninth Acela Express round-trip between Boston and New York Penn begins Monday (1:15pm-4:42pm south; 3:03pm-6:35pm north). My understanding is that the 10th, and final round-trip will begin in March (I recall it being mentioned as a 5am departure from BOS, but I don't recall the return time).
According to the Acela Express Trainset Web site, trainset #20 was accepted on November 30 (test sets #1-4 are still to come).
I hope they accepted a working trainset this time. I got #19 7 days after acceptance and it broke down, as we all recall.
This one won't stop at New Haven. Now me and Phil can settle the dispute regarding the through speed of New Haven terminal. I say it's 20mph, he says it's like 40. Anyway, it'll be cool to see the middle through track in service. New Haven has been completely re-built over the last 3 years and it looks like that is going to pay off.
Now me and Phil can settle the dispute regarding the through speed of New Haven terminal. I say it's 20mph, he says it's like 40.
Mike -
You can walk along the adjacent platform to judge the speed; if it is faster than your normal walking pace, it's doing 40.
That's not the problem. There are not any through trains currently scheduled through New Haven so there has not been a chance to observe the MAS on the middle track.
Why no New Haven stop? Is it going to stop at Stanford, which seems more pointless to me than New Haven?
That is cool. Nowif they would only finish fixing the catenary and signals and let the train fly through at 80...
No wonder Amtrak is bankrupt from Accela. Metro-North refuse to allow Accelas to go at speeds higher than their M-6. Is this true or no?
Metro-North's refusal has nothing to do with their MUs. It has to do with the ongoing replacement of catenary and with an ancient signaling system. There are places in Conniecticut where, if an Acela were to enter a track block at 150 mph, it would either crash into the train in front of it (because signalling can't maintain appropriate distances), or its pantograph would rip catenary wire right off the poles, shutting down not just Acela but the entire New Haven Line.
When catenary replacement is complete, and a new signaling system is finally in place, you will see speed restrictions lifted not just for Acela but for the M-6's as well.
The signaling system is perfectly fine. It is the same one used on the NEC and should allow speeds up to 125mph (admittidly not in all areas). The New Haven line will probably never see speeds greater than 125. The route is simply too curvy, just like the rest of the CT Shore Line. You also have the problem that the New Haven line is just plain congested. You have 4 loations where diverging movements must cross all the other mainline tracks. You also have an intermediate terminal/yard that again requires crossover moves, 6 drawbridges and several "Frankford Jct" severity curves. The "second system" New Haven catenary is at least good for 90mph, probably 100 and the signaling system uses 1-2 mile blocks just like the NEC. "Upgrading" either will not wave a magic wand that makes everything faster.
Literature from the MTA and the railroad contradict your statement that the signalling system is up to snuff, however. The current signalling system is not fine and will not handle 125 mph operation; there is still work to be done on that.
I think getting trains up to 125mph is great. Acela will even take a curve at 110, so your comment about curves is not really valid for Acela, though it is valid for the MUs and conventional equipment. The trouble is, the current speed limits are much lower (90 and below). That is due to a combination of signal and catenary problems. That is also why one track is always out of service (due to work replacing catenary).
Fixing catenary is not a "magic wand." It is a necessary requirement to improve service.
Literature from the MTA and the railroad contradict your statement that the signalling system is up to snuff, however. The current signalling system is not fine and will not handle 125 mph operation; there is still work to be done on that.
Then the MTA is making excuses for its poor track maintainence. The Amtrak NEC uses CTC controled, 3 and 4 block Rule 261, with 4 speed cab signaling that is installed by US&S and blocks that vary between 1 and 2 miles in length. Metro-North uses the exact same system with the exception of their dispatching which is probably more advanced than on the Amtrak NEC. I am sure that in some areas it can't support high speeds just like some parts of the NEC can't, but the basic design of the system can support speeds between 100 and 125. I would love to see this literature. Do you remember just what exactly they said the problem was? It could be a needed upgrade to 4 block, but the NEC trains run up to 110 on 3 block AND Rule 251. I highly suspect that it is a smoke screen to cover their currently poor preformance.
Acela will even take a curve at 110, so your comment about curves is not really valid for Acela, though it is valid for the MUs and conventional equipment.
There is more than one type of curve. ACELA can take curves at higher speeds, but that higher speed could be 80 vs 60. I got the impression that ACELA was relitivly slow on the post-New Haven CT portion of its journey (all the 150 is in MA and RI) and my non-ACELA train's preformance on the Shore Line left much to be desired. You can expect ACELA service on the New Haven Line to be much the same only with more congestion.
It's always possible somebody at MTA is making excuses, or we're not getting the whole story.
The MTA and Amtrak have said explicitly that the old catenary cannot handle high speed operation. But when new catenary is in place, many speed restrictions will be lifted.
Your point about extra tight curves is a good one.
The MTA and Amtrak have said explicitly that the old catenary cannot handle high speed operation. But when new catenary is in place, many speed restrictions will be lifted.
The Stamford section catenary is clearly falling appart and although I think the design is fine, it's age is a completely different story. The New Haven section cat is technically limited to 75 although I have been on MNRR trains that repeatedly do 90 and Amtrak has the same catenary between SHELL and OAK and they run at 90 or 100. The later might be due to an age fatcor as well, but as a rule of thumb, the most significant impediment to speed is track quality and physical charactics of the line. FRA track standards gets increasingly more expensive to maintain the higher you go. I think class 5 is 80, class 6 is 90 and class 7 is 110. Many lines w/ cab signals, long blocks and straight lines could easily handle 100mph+ speeds (example the NYC Hudson line was rated for 120 back in the 40's), but railroads (NJT and Amtrak are good examples) limit the speeed to 80 to save on needing to maintain class 6 track.
This explains why you could get to Chicago by train faster in the 1920s than you can now.
No, I believe is you look at the schedules, they never regularly operated at that speed level. They did nowever run in the 70's AND have priority on the tracks. AND if you are talking the 20th or Cdr Vanderbilt very few stops.
The best chicago times were 16 hours by the PRR's Broadway and 16.5 by the NYC's comparable train. If you read the Al Stauffer book "NYC Memories" or something like that there is a little "cab ride" section that documents specific trips and information from when things like Naigras and Hudsons were still plying the rails. Much of the NYC main line at least b/t here and Albany was rated for 100, 110 or 120 (yes, they had ATS), and those big NYC steamers could easily do it.
The best chicago times were 16 hours by the PRR's Broadway and 16.5 by the NYC's comparable train.
Both trains were at one time scheduled at 14 hours 35 minutes. This required small, light trains however, and meant that they would regularly have had to run as many as six or seven sections to handle the passenger load. By lengthening the running time (and increasing train length from 5 or 6 cars to 19) they were able to run only two sections, or occasionally three, on a regular basis.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
from the April 1954 Official Guide
both the 20th Century and Commodore Vanderbilt are shown at 16 hrs in each direction.
Well my times were from a reliable PRR publication ;)
That was an excellent post. Thank you for reviewing track classes. Very good points.
Don't congratulate to fast :) I was off by one. Here it is straight from the horse's mouth.
Speeds in Freight/Passenger
Excepted track 10/NA
Class 1 track 10/15
Class 2 track 25/30
Class 3 track 40/60
Class 4 track 60/80
Class 5 track 80/90
Class 6 track NA/110
Class 7 track NA/125
Class 8 track NA/160**
Class 9 track NA/200
Each class has requirements in each of the following sub-section:
Drainage.
Vegetation.
Track gage.
Alinement.
Curves, elevation and speed limitations.
Track surface.
Automated vehicle inspection systems.
Ballast; general.
Crossties.
Defective rails.
Inspection of rail in service.
Initial inspection of new rail and welds.
Continuous welded rail (CWR).
Automotive or railroad crossings at grade.
Rail end mismatch.
Rail joints.
Torch cut rail.
Turnouts, crossovers and lift rail assemblies or other transition devices on moveable bridges.
Frog guard rails and guard faces; gage.
Derails.
Track stiffness.
Right of way.
Visual inspections.
Special inspections.
So you can see how expensive it can be.
The whole story is here:: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_99/49cfr213_99.html
**Operating speeds in excess of 150 m.p.h. are authorized by this part
only in conjunction with a rule of particular applicability addressing other safety issues presented by the system.
The New Haven section cat is technically limited to 75 although I have been on MNRR trains that repeatedly do 90
Do you mean the entire New Haven Line, or some specific portion? The catenary in NY on the New Haven Line is relatively new, and that has a short section with a speed of 90. I would be very impressed if there's any place between the NY/CT border and New Haven where trains ever go 90; usually when I'm on that section traffic on I-95 is easily passing the train. (I don't normally ride during rush hours, when presumably the highway is more congested.)
The NY section is officially 90. I was on the 5:17 super express to New Haven and there were about 5 locations past Stamford where the train hit 90 despite the fact that the linespeed is 75. They have an overspeed whistle in the cab and it trips at 90. It was going off about every 30 seconds in the NY section. The 5:17 super express is just about the best railfan ride around. It is schedualed for 93 minutes, but our train made it in under 90.
first I understand you about upgrading and replacing (the local nothbound track is out of service for conversion to cement ties). Also what ancient signalling system? The brand new (the speedmeter is very shiny) and instructions on the door for how to deal with the retrofitted ATC system. Has there ever been real block signal control on the system (there are some left scatered along the line)?
Has there ever been real block signal control on the system (there are some left scatered along the line)?
It has real block signaling now. It just relies solely on cab signals.
Sorry I phrased it worng. I ment is there a compleate trackside light signal like in the subway.
Yes, before the current system they had the US&S H-2 searchlights. You can still see some out on the eastern parts of the line. Some of the distants remail as well, unlit. Before that they had suspended GRS model 2(?) semaphores. You can still see the mounting brackets. The lase of those survived on the Amtrak Hell Gate line. One is still intact, although again not in service.
With all of this I can still see a place for a mid-evening departure from NYC... Shop, dinner, depart about 9:00, arrive Bos around 12:30A The arrival time mimics the old Merchants, but that was a 'very limited' 5 hour run!
After looking at Redbirds Rule's photos, 2 nicknames occurred to me for the R-143 (<--link takes you to Redbirds Rule's website).
"The Lone Ranger" - the bonnet looks a bit like a black mask, complete with "eyes" (the MTA logo and the cab window).
"The Darth Vader" - the bonnet is shaped like his black helmet. (Nickname won't work for the R-142/R-142As - their sides are verticle, without the slight bowing out towards the bottom like on the R-143.)
Someone mentioned The Pirate, which I like.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH, Matey! That's a good one too!
Is there any particular reason why the ends of R142 and R142A are black and red, and the R143 is all black on the ends, or is it just for style? -Nick
I don't know. You would think this would make them harder to see in the tunnels.
As long as the headlamps are working, I'd think that the color of the front would be more or less irrelevant.
In the old days ALL the trains were black or dark brown, with the exceptions of the BMT specials. Many didn't even have headlights.
I think it was done for one of two reasons:
(1) For asthetics so that the cars aren't totally boring stainless steel in color.
(2) The black trim makes it easier to see the route marking in red from a distance. Otherwise it might 'get lost' in the glare from having an all-stainless steel end -- particularly in Elevated/outside running situations.
BMTman
and it looks kool!!!!!!!
and it looks kool!!!!!!!you should see the M7 for the LIRR!!!!!!! BLACK IS BACK,BABY!!!!!
I must say that I agree with you that it does look stylish. -Nick
I hope it gives the LIRR some character. The new Diesels are the ugliest things I've ever seen. The MU's are bland. At least Metro-North's Mu's still have the stripes and the diesels have alittle character. Not that I like the Genesis units but it's better than the LIRR's. The black will add some character.
" The black will add some character. "
I think it will add some lawsuits. Just wait for that 1st grade-crossing wreck and who the savage, ambulance-chasing lawyer will have for lunch ?
And even better, the black ends make it easier for the geese to spot an oncoming train zipping towards the platform. (don't mind me, I'm in one of those moods again tonight after an excruciatingly long long day)
One more possible reason:
Black reduces reflection and glare. Did you notice how 747 jetliners have black paint just under the cockpit windshields? They are designed to reduce reflection of sunlight into the pilots' eyes.
Ditto for the front ends of commuter trains. Less glare and blinding for the train operator.
Point well taken...
BMTman
Maybe this black face on the new trains hide the dirt better. People will think they're getting on a cleaner trains.
Yet, the insided walls are as white as a hospital, and look beat up on some cars.
While we're on the topic of the Black face on the R-142's does anyone know what the red symbolizes, on the front and sides??
The red on the sides is supposed to be a mini-tribute to the redbirds which the 142's are replacing.
Oh come on Zman179 cuz u know the red recognizes stupid newbies like me who clean off the Redbird lenses with TuffGuy. CI Peter
Why didn't they just paint the R-142s totally red, then. The New Redbirds! With the entire TA silver, it get's kind of boring. BRING BACK THE WORLD FAIR COLORS! :D Or, the monstorous brown Tirplexes! What happened to all the wonderful colors? Is this just another way to strip our individuality?
No, it's another way to save money - sadly, isn't that what it always comes down to these days? We've been getting aluminum bodies on all of our subway cars here since 1962 after it was discovered how much money was saved by not painting the cars.
Aluminum and stainless steel can be made to look good through the use of form, colour really isn't necessary to produce style, although with no form or colour, subway cars will probably look like nothing more than simple metal boxes.
-Robert King
Like the De Lorean?
I was thinking in terms of subway cars rather than automobiles so I had the fluting below the waist line, the eyebrows and slightly angled windows on the ends of the TTC H1-4 cars in mind. Unfortunately, my website is offline and I couldn't find any high quality pictures of what I'm talking about on the internet that would be suitble for you to examine to understand what I mean...
Basically, what I'm trying to get at is how the subtle use of design elements can make an object interesting to look at, even if it is all the same colour.
-Robert King
The black face does not hide the dirt better; the indication that the cars haven't been thru the washer is the dirt on the sides of the car (which is the case on a LOT of the cars).
IMO, the red on the front and sides may be a testimony to the 'birds they're meant to replace.
"IMO, the red on the front and sides may be a testimony to the 'birds they're meant to replace"
I believe that the stripe on the side of the car denotes which cars are handicap accessible. But the red on the ends is prolly for the birds. -Nick
Redbirds. The original plan was blue, but someone had the idea of commemorating the Redbirds' 35 years of service.
It will make you remember of the redbirds.
The ones on the sides are to show where the handicap accesible areas are. It has nothing to do with redbirds. The red stripe is kind of cryptic, why didn't they just have a blue handicap symbol?
Actually, the CHOICE OF COLOR (red) is an homage to the Redbirds. The LOCATION OF THE STRIPE (on the end cars of a five-car unit) denotes which cars have the wheelchair positions.
David
it is the " I am full of crap stripe"..& a NEW JUNKER grafitti stripe - ....lol.!!
Or simply.... racoons.
"armidillo stripes".. gone bad....lol!!!
& not made in the usa overseas junkers with USA flags .....!!!.........................???..............!
the fronts now look like masks. These new cars should be the "armidillo thieves"
"armidillo thieves" ...Yep !! U got it ....lol!!
I think it would be painted brown if it was for what you are suggesting. Kind of like your own posts!:p -Nick
I have an Idea.
Have a program where teenagers come together and spray paint cars (windows are covered with tape). It adds variety and color.
All the Russians and Indians leave work wearing their TA vests...great orange target. The black is like camoflouge..it disrupts certain targeting systems. So sit up front and hope the T/O doesn't nail a solid target. CI Peter
Reminds me of the 70's.
Remember how the original R-40m's had the painted black border around the front windows? And remember the black paint of the R-44's and R-46's across the front windows and storm doors? Eventually, the MTA found it cheaper and easier to simply paint the fiberglass ends on these cars a single shade of metallic silver.
Makes me wonder how the fronts of R-142's and R-143's will look after several years....
Look at the ConnDOT Metro-North Trains, they look as if they survied Hiroshima and WTC. Also is the thing about spray paint where they spray paint the railfan window black (no polarized glass) with a little scratch out window and little holes (created by flaking paint) you can look through. Am I getting what you are saying?
Sounds interesting. Just make sure that they maintain the graffiti covered cars in clean condition and in good running order as well. I'd rather have the graffiti over the scratchitti in the windows. I would have rules though. They cannot graffiti the interiors. They also cannot graffiti the MTA logo. Lastly it must be done under supervision so they don't spray paint obscenities on the sides of the cars.
#3 West End Jeff
That's an interesting idea.
Don't know why but it looks good.
Just for style
it is also so you cant SEE them coming !! .....& that IDIOT digital display NOBODY can see !!! lol!!!
The Red ends of R142s with the headlights are crappy pieces of fiberglass painted red that don't fit well. Had to take one apart to fix a downed headlight...poor wiring . CI Peter
They are black-ended to give the appearance of handels, handles to pickup a hot Toaster!
They look like a big kitchen appliance. A friggin TOASTER! They do have a smoother ride though.
avid
I know what else looks like a toaster. An AEM7!
Might as well say it before any one else does
:)
Especially of the good old r1- thru r-9 series photos uploads ....& that 1950s Path too !!!
thank you again SalaamAllah
Ok ok I heard you! :-)
my apology...
I really enjoyed the r1-9 shots if nobody else did ..
I did as well.
I also enjoyed the R-46's with the funky colors on the rollsigns, especially the F.
Mr Greenberger-
Where may I see the new images so. cal. is talking about?
I'd really enjoy seeing them :)
look on the front page ....it is in the ""newest images"" section
I always check it very often !!
Thanks, cat!!
Oh, by the way, what's YOUR favorite car of all time?
I know you said you like the R-17 :)
I will vote in all of the pre world war 2 fleet
thats when it was a subway for REAL .... lol !!
C'mon---- :)
name the one you like the BEST
well th R-1-9 series .... i remember them a lot ...
did get some rides on bmt s & hi vs & low vs ...
Thank you very much!! it made me sad to see how many years i was sent away from my home & birthplace missing all of the good old pre -world war 2 rolling stock (s) the R1-9s which were my favorites & really looked like a GENUINE & was so very happy to see them again ( unfortunatly in still slides & pictures only ) .....sigh ...
... New York City Subway cars ... " the real dealhere "
Oh man...!!!! if i had had my sony camcorders & my digital still sony DSC - S30 back then .....woooooooo....
I have seen the R143's in service on the L line, and I have some questions:
1a) How many trainsets/car pairs run on the L currently?
1b) How long will it take to fill up the entire line's fleet?
2) What cars are being used on the L currently?
Answers and responses will be greatly appreciated.
1a) 1 train
1b) 16 trains
2) R40s, R40m & R42
All of these have been answered many time before on Subtalk.
Robert
Thanks. It's just that I don't have time to dig for answers within posts, and I thought it would be better to ask and get a straightforward response.
Honestly, Pete....look at the fleet roster before you post these questions! It's not like your a newbie here. -Nick
I just checked out those Red Line airport cars that went to Cleveland's Hopkin's Airport from 1969 on on this website. Boy do I remember them well. I rode on em' every year from '69' to '77'. I don't remember the earlier cars that I rode on the system before it reached the airport when I first flew into Cleveland at age 6 months in December '65'.
Eric D. Smith
It amazes me that at thirty six I already have more than thirty years of railfanning under my belt. Where has the time gone?
Eric D. Smith
Time flies when you're fogging up the 'fan window!
"Time flies when you're fogging up the 'fan window! "
which is being taken away ......
>Time flies when you're fogging up the 'fan window!
So many 'fan windows... so little time.
I feel your pain ...lol
Who cares? :)
I'm 37, and a subway fan for about 33 of those years...
Ain't nuthin' better than being a subway freak, is how I see it.
You're just a kid, Eric... only two years older than the oldest of my children. Wait until you've been railfanning as long as I have...
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I have 3 questions about the R143's
1.Do they make the same sound as the R42 slants(You know that eerie sound,especially for us Brighton Riders)?
2.Does it makes that iiritating sound the R142 makes when stopping?
3.How fast can they go?
1. No
2. The traction motors sound exactly the same as the R-142As on the 6 line. The R-142s on the 2 sound a little different.
3. I'm not sure.
the R-142's sound way different from the R-142A. the R-142 sounds like a ringing cell phone. the R-142A and 143 sound like i don't know
sound like something charging up
It's more like the way the propulsion generates AC power in its inverters to run the motors. One difference between the R142s and the R142As/143s is that Kawasaki trains have the ability to generate power and put it into the third rail when braking....Bombardiers 'regenerative braking' does not work properly and is turned off...that may attribute for some of the 'sound' differences. CI Peter
Is brobardiers working to correct the 'regenerative breaking' issue. I assume this problem will need to be corrected
1) R42 Slants? What are those?
2) Same exact sound as the Kawasaki R142A on the 6 Line.
3) Max Design Speed: 62 MPH
Max Speed On Normal Track: 55 MPH
Max Speed On Normal Track after it gets gutted: 40 MPH
What do you mean by gutted?
Kinda like how the whole system used to go 55 MPH with little or no problem pre 1995 and now it only goes up to 40 (rarely). The motors were modified and 55 is now history. Not sure about new equipment like the R143.
I got you perfectly. What is the maximum speed of the R-68 (with all electronic and MTA speed limitations aside) motors? What about the R-46?
I'd ASSUME 55...
There are numerous stretches of track where trains exceed 40 mph every day. There are a few where they exceed 50. You're just not looking in the right places, I guess.
The only place I've seen a train go 45 (R) is in the 60st tunnel (N,R,W). I have seen 62 before the W came along and Manhatten Bridge Switch. I also I belive the N goes faster in the 60 st tunnel than R.
yea i seen a R32 N hit 65 and Rs only do around 52 depending on timers. and also R46 Es hit 47 between jackson heights to forest hills northbound so thats good speed. R32s hit around 40-41 correct me if i am wrong E F Motormen.
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
Safety
Attentiveness
Train Control
I've seen 4 trains hit 70.And I'm not a T/O or a conductor.
If you read that speed off a speedometer, the speedometer was broken.
If you measured that speed in some other fashion, your measurements were incorrect.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
maybe it was the experimentaly train with a jet on the roof from NY central RR.
After all, the Daily News posted busted speedometers on R62/A's a while back....
Signed,
SephirothR142
Microsoft Train Sim Central
Where?
I wouldn't believe a thing outta that guy's mouth if my life depended on it.
See this thread.
The 3 usually reaches the high 40's between 72 and 42.
I've hit 51 in the 60th Street tube on an R-32.
(These numbers are according to the speedometers in the cabs. I realize that they're not entirely accurate -- if they were, I'd be on a 1 train sitting at 168th Street right now, since the speedometer never budged from 0. I got home in finite time, so apparently the speedometer was off somewhat.)
I don't know exactly how they rate, but the 4/5 through the Joralemon Street tube and the N/W on the 4th Avenue express seem to move quite fast.
The N gets a bit of a head start over the R southbound, which might account for the higher speeds you've experienced.
The worst speedometers are on the R-38. Doors are open and were at a cool 5 mph! Also those R-38s are the worst cars in the fleet, the acceleration is that of a car with the timing chain set back a couple of degres (your will accelerate to 60 in 4 minutes and burn gasoline like the devil, you've floored it for 10 seconds and its still at 20 mph). Also the R-38s are in a worse disrepair (there a bum sleeping in a cab, door doesn't even lock). Did this train ever have a GOH?
Was their last GOH back in 1973 (pre-grafetti)?
The R-38 series was overhauled in 1986-7 by Buffalo Transit Services, which was a subsidiary of General Electric (that I believe was set up expressly for this project). In October 2001 (the most recent month for which I have information), the R-38 fleet had a Mean Distance Between Failures of 129,314 miles, compared to a system average of 99,155 miles. The previous month, the R-38 fleet had a MDBF of 176,884, compared with a system average of 114,297 miles. The R-38's 12-month moving average MDBF (November 2000-October 2001) is 129,108 miles, compared with a system average of 112,672. (The worst-performing car over the 12-month period, excepting various Redbird fleets -- which are being retired -- is the R-44, at 73,633 miles between failures.)
I fail to see how the R-38 fleet can be classified as the "worst cars in the fleet" except by VERY subjective measures such as aesthetics (some people like the way they look, others don't -- there's no right or wrong there). As for acceleration, their initial acceleration rate is 2.5 mph/second, just like the rest of the pre-R-110 fleet. Removal of field shunting has affected this car class's top-end speed and its ability to maintain acceleration, especially on up-grades, just like the rest of the pre-R-110 fleet. If there is a marked difference in the cars' performance (and I'm not saying there is), perhaps it is a reflection of the way the Train Operators are running them (which in turn could be a by-product of the operating characteristics of the lines on which they run) rather than a reflection of their mechanical condition.
David
Yes. But I usually take trains during rush hour... and with so many trains together on the tracks and trains filled, it's hard to even get the Brighton dash fun...
I'm afraid, IME, the Brighton express is not among the above-40 runs. At least when R-32's were on the Q, when I followed a speedometer all the way up, we never topped 38 or 39.
I've seen the speedometer top 40 MPH regularly on Brighton express runs with R-40s.
David
As I said, IME (in my experience). The R-40 speedometers are generally not visible from outside the cab, so all I have to go by is the one R-32 ride. FWIW, that same Q later reached (IIRC) 51 in the 60th Street tube.
For the Brighton Line, you just need to ride during off hours when the trains are really light, that's when it'll fly. But I usually don't have the opportunity to do so. Hence, a fully loaded train in the morning is a very painful ride.
I rarely find myself on a rush hour Brighton train. (I don't live in Brooklyn.) The only time I rode an R-32 on the Brighton express was on a Sunday when a GO was sending circle-Q's up the express track. The train was pretty empty. I don't normally have the luxury of seeing the speedometer since it's blocked by the R-40 cab hinge.
Did anyone ever see the commercial where one guy is telling his friend that he got this wonderful apartment very cheap? His friend asks how, and suddenly an El train rockets buy and shakes the whole place? The guy's dishes fall and everything. I forget what product that was for, and unfortunately, I don't see it anymore.
*L*
I lived in an apartment like that, out by the Myrtle/Broadway J/M junction...
in 1983, for only $150 a month
of course, as a poor jazz musician/J train lover it was PERFECT
>>> of course, as a poor jazz musician/J train lover it was PERFECT <<<
Now we know the real reason why when you're jamming you stop and wait quietly for 40 seconds every three minutes. It isn't the Miles Davis thing at all, just practicing next to the El. :-)
Tom
Hey--
didn't Miles live near a el too??
Maybe you're on to something
:)
Burger King, I think.
Did anyone hear about the baby that was born Wendsday night at GCT? I'm willing to bet he grows up to be a railfan.
I'll bet he'll grow up to become a drunken wino who one day hits the lotto, gets rich, and books a flight to South America, which gets hijacked and crashes. He'll die, having never ridden any vehicle travelling on rails in his life, ever.
But then again, I believe that the universe can be full of irony if it tries hard enough.
LMFAO! What's the matter with you? :D
Between seeing "2 - 7th Avenue Local" on the new subway map, and riding the F train through the 63rd Street connector (it's a nice connector/tunnel, but it's annoying if you want to get to it from Lexington Avenue), I'm becoming one of those disgruntled railfans.
Probably specialise with Metro North!
you have a link to a newspaper article?
On monday the various communities served by the Downeaster will have a celebration to welcome the new train as it arrives.
The "Community celebrations" are planned as follows:
Boston 10:00-11:00 EST
Haverhill, MA 11:00-12:00 EST
Exeter, NH 12:00- 13:00 EST
Durham-UNH 12:15- 13:15 EST
Dover, NH 12:30- 13:30 EST
Wells, ME 13:00- 14:00 EST
Saco, ME 14:00- 15:00 EST
Old Orch'd B. 14:00- 15:00 EST
Portland 14:30- 15:30 EST
There will be a reception open the public in Portland from approximately 15:30 to 18:00 EST ($25 tickets sold by chambers of commerce in the above communities).
Regular revenue service starts Saturday, December 15, with four daily round-trips.
Still at issue is the maxium linespeed. Guilford Transportation is still insisting on a 59 mph limit and is demanding that the states fund the installation of heavier rail and balast.
>> Still at issue is the maximum linespeed. Guilford Transportation is still insisting on a 59 mph limit and is demanding that the states fund the installation of heavier rail and balast. <<
So I guess the timetable is also still at issue.
Well, it's Guilford's track, they can do what they want with it.
How can they have a celebration at a stop still under construction (Saco)?
America would be better off if Guilford went under
Continental Air is doing a lot to promote Airtrain. Besides having their Chairman appear at the recent Opening Ceremony, they just sent all their frequest flyer members a printed Airtrain schedule. They also have opened a ticket booth and waiting area in Penn Station, and ther Business Class and Presidents Club members can use the Acela Lounge in Penn.
Anyway, I noticed a few interesting things in the schedule. There are 18 Amtrak trains a day, in each direction, stopping at the Airport station. Also, the last NJT train each night leaves Airport station at 1:49 a.m. (except Sun-Mon, when it's 12:48). The first NJT in the morning is at 4:46 -- thus only a 3-hour break without service. Most of the day, NJT runs 3 trains an hour, with 2 an hour on Sat-Sun (except 3 an hour leaving Penn from 5-8 p.m.).
One more time. I cannot remember. The R-142 and R-142As are on which lines respectively? And, which company makes which? Also, who makes the R-143. If I remember, the R-142As are on the 6 line and the r-142s are on the 2.
The R142 runs on the 2 line and is made by Bombardier. Unfortunately, a lot of them are plagued with problems and are not in in service, but that is because somebody put a curse on the 2 line and that curse just won't go away.
The R142A runs on the 6 line and is made by Kawasaki. They seem to be doing better in service than their Bombardier counterparts, from what I've been hearing, but I've also been hearing that they too have a few teething troubles. Let's hope they are ironed out soon.
The R143 runs on the L line and is also made by Kawasaki. The first train (8101-8108) has been running for four days now and is in its 30-day acceptance trial. I hope it passes it. The B-division needs as many cars as it can get right now.
I didn't do it! I didn't do it...I didn't put the curse on the #2 line. I didn't do it! My first day on the job walking into the barn and I was faced sidecar by the R142 and I thought, "Lord, what did I get into. This is so big...so much bigger than a pinball machine." I think #5s will/may run R142s and the buzz is out that R142As have been in the yard...but don't quote me. CI Peter
I assume you're a car inspector, unless CI stands for something else. Sounds very interesting. How many inspections do you guys do a day? How thorough are the inspections? By that I mean do you cover every square inch? Sounds like a job I'd love. Maybe they can fix my ^*(%ing eyes with stem cells or something some day so I can get a TA job!
Maybe they can fix my ^*(%ing eyes with stem cells or something some day
so I can get a TA job!
If they could just set me up with a few cones, I'd be happy.
-Robert King
I hate the TA inspection process only because it is so wasteful of peoiple with skills. Nutshell: Redbird married pair: two guys upstairs (carbody,) two guys downstairs (undercar,) two guys for propulsion (motors, shoes, controls.) It's one guy assigned to one car one day. R142s have AC motors (no brushes) and computers (no electromechanical propulsion system controls) so one guy does propulsion on two cars. It's not every square inch but inspection means checking for loose cables and leaking hoses/fittings/valves. I'll withold comments. Blind/broken English?? If you can hold up a flashlight to one ear and the light comes out the other, you're hired. I'm a Car Inspector (CI) and PROUD. I'm new to TA, not assigned to any team or work, given EVERYTHING to do and i love it. I can troubleshoot, do all the inspections, change brakes and oil, Bug the cars out of the barn and even tweek lightbulbs. CI Peter
:) Okay. Unfortunately, I failed the flashlight test. Sorry. :(
Home Depot has a fine selection of electricians bits that would assure an 'end to end' clearout. 'Look Ma...no wax.' CI Peter
No that curse was there before the delivery of the R142s. I don't know where it came from and why it's there, but it is and just when I thought it was over - POW! - it strikes again!
Boy, it's a while since the B division has had "odd" number train types (R143) It's usually the IRT that gets the "odd" morders.
Boy, it's a while since the B division has had "odd" number train types (R143) It's usually the IRT that gets the "odd" numbers.
True...the last Subdivision B equipment with an odd contract number was model R-27, unless one counts the R-110B (whose construction was under contract R-131). However, it means nothing, as there is no protocol for numbering rolling stock contracts. The next available number is used whether even or odd, irrespective of subdivision.
David
And, in another secret GO (no mention on the Transit website), W service is suspended at least on Saturday 12/8 (and probably on Sunday as well, but I couldn't find the GO today). This implies that the N will run to Stillwell. Since I've been re-assigned to an N job with a reporting point of Kings Highway, what're the chances that no one will be there, having been sent to Stillwell for the duration?
I have a question
If the N is suppose to terminate at 86 street at all times,why is it always going to Stillwell and the W get's suspended? Is there some type of thing the MTA is doing?
And have the MTA done this with the B when the N terminated at 86 street in the 1990's?
Because the B split off from the N and had it's own route in Manhattan, it ran together with the N. But since the W only goes to Pacific, there is no reason to run it with the N.
"If the N is to terminate at 86th Street at all times, why is it always going to Stillwell and the W gets suspended?"
Well, well, maybe the TA is finally getting some brains and decided to do the right thing for a change. Ever considered that? What was that you said? The TA doesn't have any brains? Well then maybe they are taking my diatribes to heart, and if you believe that I know a bridge I can sell you real cheap.
The reason the N is cut back is that the N platform at Stillwell is closed for reconstruction. The tracks leading to the station are still there, and access is available to the other three platforms, but things would get a bit crowded if the N tried to share a platform with one of the other lines.
When W service is suspended, the N can have free reign on the W platform at Stillwell. In fact, if N trains kicked off all their passengers at 86th (assuming southbound trains ran via Sea Beach and northbound trains ran via West End), how would northbound Sea Beach passengers and southbound West End passengers reach their destinations? The Stillwell connection is pretty crucial in this case.
When the N terminated at 86th a few years ago, that was for track repair, not platform repair. I assume that means there was no access to Stillwell from the Sea Beach line -- or if there was, it was probably only a single track at a time. But I don't think it was common back then for N's and B's to swap places.
Why can't trains perform the following manoeuvre at Stillwell:
1) Pull in at platform (say, as an N)
2) Set down passengers
3) Pick up passengers
4) Continue straight on out of Stillwell on another route (for instance, a Q)
There's probably a good reason why this is not done, but it looks to me like it would increase capacity. Anyone care to tell me what the good reason is?
That's exactly what the late 60's NX train did.
Hey, I thought of the same idea, but there are a few problems: (1) The track arrangement at Stillwell doesn't allow for full flexibility in running through; (2) I don't think many crews would be happy running from Ditmars to 57th via Stillwell (your example) without a break; (3) Depending on the car class, anywhere from 2 to 42 signs would need to be cranked; (4) The cars need to be cleaned at one terminal, and only the F could possibly be cleaned at its north terminal (the N and W share a pair of tracks at Ditmars, and the Q shares a pair of tracks with the other Q).
(1) Not full fleibility - too right - the switches look a right mess! I thought N to Q and F to W looked do-able, but even that doesn't look practical! I somewhat get your point!
(2) That isn't much worse than the old CC (Bedford Park Boulevard - Rockaway Park, I think) was, is it?
(3) I never got why someone didn't invent the motor. :P
(4) That was the big problem which I didn't notice!
The old CC (or C) was universally hated by crews, I'm sure.
There were some grumblings here when the 1 was extended to New Lots, but the 1 doesn't pale in comparison to the CC/C.
I'll bet conductors hated the CC, especially when the R-10s were still around.
The N did this last weekend, too. Also, how come every weekend they either send everything over the bridge one way or everything through the tunnel one way?
Awww crap, no R68As anywhere except one here and there on the Q and W.
What you see in those things is beyond me.
And it shows you how they think downtown. Apparently, the W did run today - but only as far as 36 St. The supplement only cancelled my job on the AM, so I got reassigned. This was the first time I've operated north of the Broad St cut by myself, as well as the first time southbound on the Bridge.
What did you expect? The N and R are running southbound over the bridge and through the DeKalb bypass this weekend. True, the W could relay on the northbound express track (as it usually does on weekends) and slip onto the southbound track between trains from Manhattan, but given how the weekend W is treated, I'm not surprised it was cut short instead.
(I assume the N/R is also running express to 36th, even though that's not listed on the web site. Either that or it's not using the DeKalb bypass after all.)
I take it the W is turning in the station at 36th, on the southbound express track. Relaying north of the station would interfere with the southbound N/R. Do W shuttles normally relay?
Two weekends ago, when we were realaying at 36 st due to emergency switch repairs, it went like this:
Train arrives on NB platform, is cleaned out and switchman boards the south end. Road crew takes it north of 36 St to 10 car reverse marker, dumps. Switchman brings it in to the SB platform, dumps. Road crew changes ends, charges and goes south to Stillwell.
Iam assuming that this is the same procedure used today, since I spotted Ws on both express tracks at 36 St.
Oh, yes, I think you told me that. ("Emergency switch repairs"? I am impressed with your restraint.)
I'm surprised the W is relaying this weekend, since that forces it to briefly share the SB express track with the N and R. Two weekends ago, the N and R were running local, so both express tracks were clear for the relay.
The R finally outdoors??? Unbelieveable. My Sea Beach over the bridge? Quick, send for the paramedics. I think I'm having a stroke.
I'll dial 911 right-a-way.
#3 West End Jeff
1. The G line is shown as a dashed line
2. The V line is shown
3. the letters for the V and G are shown in not bold lettering
4. if you look in the staten island, that Stadium station is shown,
5. the 1/9 line south of chambers street is shown in light colors,
6. the M is shown terminating at 9 Avenue in bold lettering
everything is the same.
you forgot the metrocard transfers at 63rd/lex and Court Sq, and the N train terminating at 86th St.
The N thing was in the 10/28 map.
About 8:10 this evening I was riding a Dyre Avenue redbird, southbound, We slowed down on the curve going into Fulton Street, coming northbound, I heard a roaring sound,it was a yellow engine pulling a five car train of brand new R-142's.The first car was 6800, it was of course a five car set with another yellow engine at the end.I didnt catch the last number of the set, we were sort of blocked off by the pillars.
If the car you saw was 6800, then the set was 6796-6800. The lowest number in every R142 five-car set ends in either a 1 or a 6.
Lord Save Me
They're here and on the property.
-Stef
Rode the R143 today, overall a very nice train/ride. However, from 8th Ave to Union Square, the train's interior lights frequently flickered. I never noticed this on the R42's on this section of track. I'm wondering if this is going to be normal for the R143, or if it's some kind of problem?
I rode the R143 today also. There was a guy from Kawasaki on board that was taking down notes. We were chatting for a bit. He said Kawasaki tried lots of different things to fix the flickering problem on both R142A and the R143. He was saying that the real solution, whatever that was, was too cost prohibitive. There was also a TSS on board who overheard our conversation and he didn't know that the lights didn't flicker on other car types.
Shawn.
There might be a small problem that needs to be corrected. Remember the problems with the R-142s when they first entered service.
#3 West End Jeff
I would assume they have "batteries" like the rest of the fleet (except for most of the Redbirds). Speaking of which, I'm enjoying my early Christmas gift of a digital camera, but they do eat up batteries. Only got about 40 shots before the batteries died. Haven't done any train pics, it's been years since I've used a camera but it is fairly easy. Too bad I missed a shot of an LIRR train from Roslyn (where it is on that steep hill). From that distance the DE's look like model trains.
Not planning on taking any subway pics (most of you have done a great enough job) but would be willing to contribute any LI Bus or LIRR pics if anybody wants em. Anyway I imagine things are pretty restrictive in terms of subway photography, though from all the nice pics of the R143 from many of you i guess they are still allowing pictures.
Any suggestions for subway/rail photography would be welcome though.
Trains with battery circuit breakers can still have flickering or dim lighting due to an improperly operating converter. The converter converts DC power to AC power.
R142s/142As/143s dont flicker. They do not use an inverter in place of a motor generator like the 'old ones.' Lights blink or flicker on new tech...defective hardware or software. Suckers have new batteries too so there is no voltage drop problem. Trainset was defective so it should be returned to vendor for warranty assesment and repair. Gotta go to check out MBTA on History Channel. Hands On History will teach me how to operate choo-choo. So exciting...have brake and reverser handles in hand. CI Peter
MBTA on History Channel? Whens that on?
You missed it....Boston Transit
B"H
I've had a kodak dc40 for over 5 years now, and it takes 4xAA batteries. I've tried lots of different batteries, but the *only* ones that last more than one or two 'rolls' of 'film' are the *Red* Lithium batteries from Energizer. The only place i've seen these is at radio shack, although you may be able to find them elsewhere. With a new set of these, I usually get about six months of picture taking (probably like 20 times through the 'film') One other thing, the Red batteries are like $6 for two, but well worth it.
Hope this helps.
-yitz
Have you tried NiMH rechargebales from RS?
Arti
Those are the best (for rechargable use). Get 8 batteries and the charger and you're set!
B"H
I have enough trouble with the rechargeable battery in my cellphone.... :)
-yitz
Thanks, I'll check that out.
Our Kodak DC210 at work likes Rayovac Renewal rechargable alkalines
I own 2 sony DSC S30 coms with a NP-FM50 built in ( but rmovable battery ) Does anyone out there own a sony
DSP-S30 which is powered by two AA batteries @ i dunno why ......
can you recharge your battery with those AA power supplies ....
I would consider answering you, if you would, please once, post a civil message.
Arti
what ??............
I do believe that this forum uses English, so please don't make a mockery out of it.
Arti
excuse me sir .....i did not attack you in any way ......
& i do have a lot of experence in rail transit photography with digital cameras & equipment !!
( thank you ) ....!!
This is still not English, and you attack few of us in a blatant way all the time. I know it's Internet, but some respect to the language would be nice. AFAIK it botheres me.
PS I have nothing against you personally (I don't know you) but this butchering of the language just really irks me.
Arti
ok .....whatever ...............!
If to think of it I would respect you, if you would give the respect to the languge you speak. No need to be cool and use crap @#$%^ «»«
to prove youreself, also why would we need to see the same picture over-and-over again, just because you learned how to post pictures.
Arti
??? ......U can post pics if you want......what is your issue ??
betcha U aint seen dis' one...!!!..........................lol1..!!
R U in a high state of envy ??? ..........too bad.............lol!!
I use Nickel Metal Hydride batteries (NiMH). I get them at Radio Shack and they last and can be recharged like NiCADs but without a memory (ie if you recharge a NiCad when it is half drained it soon will require a charge at half drained.) Just be sure to buy a charger that can handle NiMHS.
I'm thinking of getting a digital cam for Christmas but don't have the money for a real expensive one. Would a simple digital camera work?
Generally around $210 if you look for the sales for a digital camera (with 2 or more Megapixels, less will look grainy). Considering a decent point and shoot can cost $90, you're better off with the digital in the long run, the film and photo development cost with "point and shoot" could add up pretty quickly. With digital you just load into the computer and if you want a print, print it (with your printer).
Thanks for the help. I saw a couple of digital cams for around 160.
It depends on intended use. Let's say you want to print out wallet size or publish on the web- you dont need high Megapixel . Peggy uses a 1.3 megapixel fuji. If you want to print out 8 x 10 or larger than you need around 3-4 megapixels. (A megapixel is 1000 pixels.) A Pixel is geek-speak for a dot or "Picture Element".
I am trying to keep it simple and even I could elaborate. I'm sure Terry kennedy could elaborate to a great length but is this is place for such a discourse.
Check out smart computing magazine- they have features on digital cmaeras and check out the various digital photo magazines.
It depends on what you're looking for. Too many of the inexpensive units are the digital equivalent of disposable film cameras with zoom. For useful results, you should look into one with adjustable "film" speed (faster speeds, needing less light, are handy for times when you can't use a flash in the subway, but tend to be grainier than using a lower speed with a flash). Also, a camera that lets you select aperture priority is nice, since you can control the depth-of-field that way. I don't know if you'll be able to get all of those features for a price you're willing to pay, though.
Other things for railfans to consider are battery usage, cold weather operation, and how fast it can shoot multiple images - two of the places manufacturers cut corners are the JPEG compression speed and the speed of writes to flash memory.
I'd suggest dropping by B&H Photo (southeast corner of 9th Ave & 34th Street, Manhattan) on a weekday and getting advice in their digital photo department. Set aside an hour or two to browse in case you've never been there before.
For people who are really serious about digital photography, take a look at this. And it is only $5500.00 (without lenses).
Why when a redbird goes over a switch the lights flicker?
NO battery power for lights over 3rd rail gaps, only for the small low wattage bulb (around the circular vents I think).
All Redbirds have fluorescent lighting fixtures that operate on 37.5 volts DC. Each light fixtures ballast contains a transistorised inverter to provide the AC voltage required. The married pair has a 600 volt DC to 37.5 volt DC inverter to provide control systems power, lighting power and battery charging. These electronics are old and don't respond so well...when the Redbirds roll over a rail gap, main lighting should stay on for about twenty seconds until the other third rail is reached. If no power is picked up, only several fl. fixtures (emergency lighting) will light. No lighting should at any time flicker...unless contact shoes are bouncing and the circuit assumes another rail gap...back to emergency lighting. CI Peter
That should only happen on the "world's fair" R33S and R36 cars.
Those are the only passenger cars left that still have the old-style
DC fluorescent lighting.
You're probably correct. Whe I've ridden the R-33S and the R-36 cars through the Steinway tunnel the lights inside the cars wink out then come back on at one point.
#3 West End Jeff
This is Subway Tech 101. The system runs on 600 volts DC. Fluorescent lights work only on AC. Used to be that trains had a motor-generator (alternator) to run the lights and when it ran a rail-gap (a space with no third rail) the lights went off and little brown bulbs kept you out of the dark. Then came 'solid state,' an electronic power supply to replace the generator and ballasts with their own power supplies to run the lights off batteries when required. Now we have new tech trains....if the lights flicker it is probably because the computer/control system is screwed up. Cost prohibitive??? Just tell the TA about it and it will be fixed eventually because you rode on a defective trainset that Kawasaki doesn't know how to fix and your tax dollars payed big bux for. Or, don't say nuttin and let me continue to wash the 'blood of the Redbirds' out of my clothing (takes two washings plus a washout of the washing machine.) The TA needs knowlegable feedback from responsible citizens to figure out what to do and tell guys like me how to MAKE TRAINS GO. Or, sit in the dark/flickering cars and use your NY Times to wrap up fish. CI Peter
Is there a limitation in the Warrenty?
Fire or death. Not sure if its two or five years...I may be assigned to bug out electronic problems but it gets thrown to Bom.
Flickering lights...probably some electrical teething problems
in the main lighting inverters. Now, if the flickering main
lights are accompanied by the illumination of small incandescent
bulbs, someone screwed up at the Kawasaki plant and slipped one
of the junked redbird ELR's into the assembly line.
No, the old trainsets had 37 volt bulbs for emergency lighting. All trains use fluorescent lighting today...mebbe Kawasaki should add some cheap bulbs....what i can tell you from my R142 experience is that all lighting is computer controlled. If the trainset sits idle long enough, the lighting will shut down per computer command (I think it's one hour.) IF the lights are flickering in more than one car, there is a trainline problem related to design/hardware/software. CI Peter
I rode the R143's yesterday, round trip from 8th Avenue. Canarsie-bound between Myrtle and Halsey, the lights went out. It stayed like that for about 10 seconds, then the lights came on...and went out again for about 10 seconds! The only light came from the strip maps. After that, they were on for the rest of the round trip to 8th Avenue. Didn't notice any flickering.
Read into this: lights don't go out on New Tech trainsets, ever, when in service. CI Peter
Some one palying with the circet breakers?
One thing about new tech: zillions of CBs. The R142 trainsets are five cars...only the Bs (three middle ones) have batteries. All the cars have big banks of capacitors to store power and help with any third rail shoe glitches so lighting should not flicker...new Alstom posters show a meter in every inspection...fail to check for stored voltage when you service and you get a blast. I'll ask about the lighting problem...would like to know if its the whole train or just specific cars. CI Peter
All I could see were the lights from the strip maps. No lights were on in cars 8101-8104, the set I was on. Don't know bout the other set (8105-8).
Um, it was a joke OTJ. There are still some cars in passenger
service with incandescent emergency lights.
Mebbe Kaw SHOULD have some incandescent emergency lighting!!!
How would Kawasaki get there hands on one I would Like to know.
Ain't gonna happen. Lighting controls come off master computer and power is a tap off of a transformer from one of the three phases that operates the 37.5 VDC (like battery circuits.)
I've seen that problem on R-142's, R-62A's, and (mainline) Redbirds as well. It's about time the B Division got its share.
" the r-143s they R A breakin' down already" .......
That's what you said about the R142(A)'s also.
Just because a new train enters service doesn't mean its results have to be perfect all the time, and right away.
I've ridden the R142(A)'s a few times and the only flaws I could find were those mentioned by the SubTalkers here.
I put up a little page with pics from my R143 experience today. I shot them with a Sony DCR-TRV530 camcorder that I'm borrowing from a friend. I didn't have my other camera with me. They look pretty bad, but I think they're cool.
Click Here
Shawn.
Very nice! I like that you shot the sign. Noone ever shoots the destination signs. I wish there were more pictures of them.
:-) Andrew
Same here I would like to see more signs.
What I did forget to shoot was the animated ad on the inside. Unfortunately I barely got that last pic when the battery crapped out. The guy from Kawasaki says the R143 has such little problems that he stares at the wall most of the day. He said that he wish they'd just put in some new ads so he has something to read. I thought that was pretty funny.
Shawn.
Batteries, yeah I only got about 40 shots out of 4 AA's on my digital cameras. I guess that's the downside of this great technology (the only one I can think of). Otherwise it's great. They say that a 6V adapter helps when you're transferring photos from the camera to the PC as far as conserving batteries.
I think shutting off the flash saves batteries even more. I hear those MP3 and CD players gobble batteries too. That's why I stick with the ol AM/FM tape "walkman", batteries last 25 hours of tape play.
I should post some of my pics somewhere....if I happen to be with my camera and see an odd rollsign posted, I take a snapshot of it.
Thanks!
:-) Andrew
Here's a side sign pic for you.
I've taken lots of 'em (not just the 143's.)
Not bad at all. I like the side destination sign, very clear (better than the 142's).
I just got a gift of a digital camera from a family relative and this is such a neat thing I am enjoying. I hope to get some RR pics (especially LIRR). Once I get some LIRR pics I'll be happy to add them to this website.
Are you going to take LI Bus Photos too? I would like it to add it to my website if you take any.
Very nice, Shawn....thanks so much for the pics!! -Nick
As others have said, I agree that the camera was terrible, but I applaud you for being the first to show me the R143's destination signs, can someone tell me what the sequence was: L: Canarsie Local and then what L: 8th Ave or L:8 Ave or L: 8 Avenue and also going the other way? And is there any mention of L: 14th St Local
Thanks in advance
Here's what I saw:
L 14 ST LOCAL
L TO 8 AV MANHTTN
L CANARSIE LOCAL
L TO CANARSIE
Hello,
I am offering New Officially Licensed MTA / NYCTA / LIRR Products
Hat / Lapel Pins
RTS Bus Key Chains & Hanging Ornaments
Subway Car Key Chains & Hanging Ornaments
Subway Destination & Line Letter Pins
NYCTA RTS Bus Soft Stuffed Squeeze Toy
NYCTA Subway Car Soft Stuffed Squeeze toy
New Products Coming In Daily
You can buy direct from me or visit my E-Bay Auctions to place a bid.
www.ebay.com
Search /
Search By Seller /
E BAY USER ID
THE-GOOD-ADS-GUY
I accept Pay Pal on line credit card payments
For a Photographic Download of my products please send me an e mail at M23BUS@CS.COM & use the subject heading " MTA MERCHANDISE "
Thank you
Anthony Irace
CRAP! I get MTA glasses and an APTA 2001 award I had to sign for. Shouldn't I get the MTA merchandise for free?? I don't even have a CED patch for my hat....bootlegged all my MTA stuff from my computer.
Even my car is MTA live...emblems and emergency service plates...trucker needed my car moved and they knew where to go...heard the third page through the noise...mebbe you could work out a deal with TWU. CI Peter
Anybody seen this set lately, last I saw of it was on the #5 line. Those cars had a pretty good set of motors on them, and they were in pretty good condition.
Pretty good set of motors?? How do you define that?
Probably because the sucker runs without bucking. CI Peter
Thank You Juice!
8885 is currently on the rail adhesion train. 8884 was killed in a crash.
Crash is good
...for me to p0*p on!
11/30/01 did carbody on car # 8875. Great shape...#5 lines maintained well by the 180th Street crew...they have earned my respect. Just needed a few small parts obtained by 'unauthorised stripping.' These trainsets run smooth on the old El lines without air springs...we make them go. CI Peter
I would imagine if this is a REAL 30-day test they would run it on the weekends. I've gotta leave in about a half hour or so for a dumb standardized test, but after that, I've got some free time, and I'll be able to make the 12:56 out of 14/8 I think. 1) Is this time correct on the weekends and 2) Is the train running on the weekends, thanks!
0 for 1 catching the R143,
Clayton
(Yes, I know the poster already left the house.)
I answered this same question hours before this particular post was posted...read the messages!
There is a construction project on the Canarsie Line this weekend. Service is split into two sections. The R-143 pilot train is scheduled to operate on the Rockaway Parkway/Myrtle Avenue segment for approximately 15 hours a day (6A-9P).
David
Let us all have a pleasent and blessed day as we embark upon our travels,and remember to give thanks[for those that believe]for the day ahead......thank you....
Thanks for putting things in perspective,
MATT-2AV
Thankyou and I do everday. Everyday. Making trains go, CI Peter.
Before 9/11, the 3 train did not run at night. I've heard that it runs all times now and always to 14th St is that true?
The 3 train always operates between 148th and 14th Streets, but it doesn't run during late night hours.
No the No.3 does not run all night. During weekdays the Last No.3 train Leave 14 Street at Midnight. That would make the last train from Lenox at about 11:30PM. On Weekend there no No.3 service past 11:30PM.
What year did Amtrak move to Penn Station from Grand Central Terminal?
Around 1994 or 1995 I believe.
No, April 7 1991
Fair enough.
April 7, 1991? Are you sure it wasn't earlier than that?
I certrainly don't have extensive Amtrak-riding experience, but I did travel back and forth to Washington and Baltimore on Amtrak 3 or 4 times in the summer of 1988, and I went from Penn Station each time.
Ferdinand Cesarano
Wasn't Amtrak using both stations in 1988?
They did. All Amtrak NE Corridor and long-distance trains ran out of Penn Station. All Amtrak service that came into Manhattan from the north, including Empire and Canadian trains used Grand Central until 1991, when those trains were rerouted into Penn Station.
When they rehabbed the west side line.
But they never electrified the line, did they?
- Lyle Goldman
But they never electrified the [West Side] line, did they?
Nope, diesel only.
How can trains from GCT go south, got any (efficiant) ideas?
Dig a super deep tunnel, or connect to Penn as the ARC people want.
How can the trains from GCT go there they would go through the mezzine and the big room with the ticket windows and etc. unlese they use the lower leval and then it would require the closer of certin passenger areas.
Actually, there would not be any affect on the passenger areas of GCT if trains were routed through the lower level, as there are concealed tracks now that would be used to connect to a route to Penn Station. That's not to say that they would not decide to do things differently, however.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Amtrak has always used Penn Station. GCT was used for trains going north along the Hudson River (the ex-New York Central lines). With the rehab of part of the old West Side Freight Line and the construction of a new connection between that line and Penn Station, Amtrak was able to consolidate operations at Penn Station and leave GCT to Metro North.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
However, Amtrak maintained a ticket window at GCT till at least 1996-97, just prior to the rennovation. It was located at the extreme left 2 ticket windows (as you face the ticket windows) across from the Chemical Bank ATMs, which were replaced with that new staircase.
.....Broadway Junction. The overhead white on black signs have Brodway Jct pasted over the Bway-ENY(except for the last one at the north end of the northbound platform). The tile and pillar signs still shows Bway-ENY.
Everything old is new again...
Maybe they will now change the New Lots Ave. #2 terminus to East NY- New Lots Ave. It's about the only terminus that has not been given a neighborhood name -- probably to avoid confusion with Bway Junction.
New Lots Av is the former terminus of the 3 train and the new terminus of the 1 line. IDK why the TA dont include the ENY part of it, but I doubt it has anything to do with Bway Jct. The same could be said for Euclid Avenue on the C.
Thanks, Mike. I was over there today, but didn't notice the signage changes(maybe that's because I was busy chatting with the Kawaski crew on the R-143 I was riding on...;-D
BMTman
When is the NYC subway accident page going to be updated?And is it going to include the terrorist attacks?
Because of the trade made yesterday between the Yankees and the Mets, it was considered a "Subway Swap", and on the back page of today's Newsday, there is an interesting "photo illustration" of the front of a Redbird and the front of an R-62 next to each other. This was similar to what newspapers did during the Subway Series in 2000. If you cannot pick up the actual paper, here is the link:
http://www.newsday.com/includes/pages/bcl.pdf
If you look closely at the WF R36, you see someone at the window. I wonder if that might be one of us.
Personally, I don't think its the best picture, but oh well.
see todays NYT
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/09/travel/TROLLEY.html<<
I live in SF. The historic Market Street streetcars (we dont call them trolleys here) are quite popular.
Is the 'Red Baron' running again? This is a trolley from Hamburg that SF was running for a while, but then took out of service, but that was a while ago. A sister car lives here.
No, the Hamburg car is out of service--needs repairs. Muni internally is dragging its feet on fixing things--not a new problem.
Hi train dude,i have some brass R-29's and i like to know what
is the color i need to paint the models. Your help will be
most appreciated.
Thanks R-29.
From the TA "Passenger Car Data Book,1947 - 1976", the R-29 was the only car delivered in TARTAR red. Note, as previously discussed, tartar (not tartan) red is the color of red-wine sediment. R-33 & R-36 mainline cars were also delivered in this color. I'd guess that Dave has enough photos under the R-33/R-36 section to give you an idea.
Obviously I meant to say that the R-29 was not the only car delivered in this color.....
I'am sorry,Train Dude i mean the actual Redbird paint scheme.
The exterior was tartar red.
Interior doors were dark blue.
Interior walls were light blue.
Ceiling was white.
Those are the colors of the car as delivered in 1962. That's the best i can do for you. Hope it helps.
Thanks for your time and help.
Permanently stained with the blood of the Redbirds, dark oxygen evacuated syrup. Mebbe I should revise my Sunday duties: "The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for you, straight from the bodies of the Redbirds, preserve thy body and soul with the castor oil that makes the trains go unto everlasting life." I'm not being blasphemous...it's just the relation that TA gave me a gift that i have to share and return... I serve when called. CI Peter
Hi,
While cleaning today, I found the big (huge) 1988 train map found in the stations... is this worth anything? Anyone want it? Not sure how I would ship it, but I am sure we can figure something out...
I wish I could put it up but no room... email me at mightyman@Onebox.com if interested.\
Thanks,
Allen
does this map show Archer Avenue Ext.
Mine does and it shows that the K train doesn't excist anymore and that the Archer ave is open in the whats new section. Also it shows JFK train.
I think I also have that exact map. I have it pinned to my bedroom wall back home. I bought it from some vendor at the Hoboken Festival about 8 years ago. It doesn't have the "K" train I don't think, but it has "the train to the plane" and the new archer ave extension and a notice about Manhattan Bridge repairs. I now am also the proud owner of 2 copies of the July 2001 station size map, which I went to the brooklyn MTA HQ to buy in person. I have one of them taped to my dorm room wall and the other is still rolled up. I love them!
The transit museum used to sell them in the early 90's when I got mine.
If you could custom design your paint schema for the postwar steel cars, what would it have been ? Mine would be a World's Fair style scheme with red substituting for the turquoise.
DeLorean Stainless of course
Greenbirds instead of redbirds. Like the dark green paint that was used on some cars in the 80's.
Probably bad etiquette, but an all-over Stars & Stripes design would be nice!
A black R-46 would be nice.
Good for Funerals or going to the Opera!
I would peronally like the Orange/Cream with gold trim.
avid
when they close a line and it is the last train to go over it.
I think WMATA cars with a more American exterior would look nice. Maybe blue, red, and white as the system colors instead of brown. The brown isn't bad but it is America's Subway.
Mabye it's time to bring back the Bicentennial red, white and blue color band that some of the R-46 cars debuted with:
what ever did hapen to the color strips on the r-44/46s?
what ever did hapen to the color strips on the r-44/46s?
There were only two cars done in that Bicentennial striping.
Slap me and call me silly, but the MTA silver/blue stripe was beautiful...
But I think the flat colors were more fitting for a subway (with the dirt and steel dust and all)
I'd paint the cars (if we're talking about R-10 thru R-27/30) the following-
Dark Grey for the Eastern Division BMT
because it's so deliciously drab.
Maroon for the IRT 7 Ave. lines, and Dark Green for the Lex. lines.
Olive Drab for the Southern Division BMT.
Light Grey for BMT Broadway (incl. Sea Beach and West End)
Tan for the Flushing IRT. (would go good with the concrete El)
Blue-Gray for the IND Crosstown (G)
Dark Blue for the IND 8th. Ave.
Sepia (or a nice Burnt Orange) for the 6th Ave. & Queens Blvd. IND
Last but not least, Black for any shuttle lines (think that would look REALLY cool)
obviously, I put a little too much thought into this :)
I actually would like some feedback on this, if any of you don't mind.
p.s. The silver of the R-32, 38, and especially the dark silver of the R-68 is class, in my humble opinion :)
Basically, you're suggesting using the main trunk lines for the subway cars that run on them, with the exception of the J/M (dark gray), N/Q/R/W (light gray) and the 7 (tan). This is similar to what they do in Boston now. But it works in Boston because all four lines are physically separate from each other. Cars from one line can not be switched from line to line in Boston. But in New York lines are connected to each other. For example, you have a blue (E), two oranges (F, V) a light green (G) and a yellow (R). Your color scheme suggests orange/sephia for 6th Avenue and Queens Blvd. Works great for the F and V trains, but what about the E, G and R trains? You suggest light gray for the Broadway lines and olive drab for the Southern Division, but the Broadway lines are the same lines as the Southern Divsion lines. There's an overlap there.
Well, I thought of that, actually...
It'd be OK if different colored trains ran on the same line, where they overlap...
The R would be the Olive Drab color, The G I said would be Blue Gray, and the E would be Dark Blue.
And, thank you for the comment, I really wanted to see what others thought :)
In the MTA posting of the (L) overnight closures between Lorimer and Myrtle. What's the purpose of this?
Closure times:
Weekend (0001-0500) for Dec. 8 to 10; Weekdays (2330-0530) until Mar. 8, 2002.
Probably another GO. But ths one is for further along up the line.
Yes, I rode the new R-143 test train set and a GO was in effect where the L runs in two sections. I rode the southern section which was between Rockaway Pkwy and Mrytle Avenue. I think you get on a bus at Mrytle that takes you to DeKalb where you'd get the L for the trip into Manhattan.
BMTman
There are two sections: Canarsie to Myrtle and Lorimer to 8Av. I guess because they're working on the trackbed around Jefferson St. This is coming from just riding the L to/from Manhattan.
Yes, They are doing a concrete pour at Jefferson and also some third rail work at all the stations.
> Weekend (0001-0500) for Dec. 8 to 10; Weekdays (2330-0530) until Mar. 8, 2002.
They use military time in their notices now?
- Lyle Goldman
Channel 4 NY News 6pm Sat. Had a story on the fare increase.
(I Live In Phoenix Az, the message was e-mailed to me)
What Is the fare Increase?
There isn't going to be a fare increase - yet! State Comptroller Carl McCall said that the TA may need to raise fares on the subways and buses to meet a $1 Billion budget shortfall, while Governor Pataki is insisting there won't be a fare increase. If the fare goes up, the report said that it would go up to $2.00.
And when the Metrocard was set to allow for free busto subway transfers,the management at the MTA found themselves with a surplus of cash, and increased ridership! So what did the bums do with all that money? Enron had cash coming out of their ears, yet they just filed for bankruptcy. Seems like when something becomes profitble and good for the public, those in the higherups spend the money like drunk sailors on liberty. Then they have the nerve to cry broke. Never fails.
Or, they cook the books, like Baseball did this week, with Selig trying to sell Congress his "The owners are going broke" bill of goods.
Fortunately we have free press.
Arti
Jesse "The Gov" Ventura would disagree with you on that. Read his book.
BTW, This has not been meant as a free plug for him!
Second attempt:
I don't take any suggestions to read someones (the next big thing) book anymore, you know they cost money. I was urged to read Korten's book as the next best thing after sliced bread, luckily enough I just took a look on (God blessed) web to see what's it all about. I guess few trees got saved due to that:-). We all have seen the ill effects of ideology trying to solve the world's problems, and I'm not one of them who believes that More or Lenin can do the job. (Fortunately More just wrote the book.)
I love the current system of free markets and IMO things are getting better for everyone involved. And I believe we in USA have free speech!
Arti
>>> I don't take any suggestions to read someones (the next big thing) book anymore, you know they cost money. <<<
Check out the public library. Poverty is no excuse for ignorance. OTOH if you say you don't have the time to read every new book that comes out, that is understandable.
Tom
Check out the public library. Poverty is no excuse for ignorance.
The first manifestation of the post 9/11 budget cuts has been to reduce the hours that the Queensborough Library system is open.
Like the video and kids section they have a thousend notices in the central lib.
Rudy has been hitting the libraries with budget cuts as long as he has been emperor. The events of 9/11 is just another justification in his eyes.
I agree with you, Tom. I assume however, the public library has a copy.
Baseball is going broke? Right, and Osama Bin Laden is going to sponsor a Christmas party in Washigton, DC. P.T.Barnum said that a sucker was born every minute, so what do you expect?
And even if baseball were going broke, what would that have to do with Congress? What are they supposed to do? Divert good taxpayers' money from important projects to people who do nothing for us but play a game?
- Lyle Goldman
Baseball is a game?
These days it is more like a business.
The club is out to make profits.
Free agents are out to make more money a year.
Cities stand to make revenue from taxes.
"What does baseball have to do with congress?"
Congress has granted Baseball an exemption to the Anti-Trust laws for over 75 years. Some members of Congress want the exemption to end.
This is why Bud Selig was in Washington last week, pleading "poverty" on behalf of the owners, and using that as a reason for Congress not to revoke the exemption. This has allowed baseball teams to collude and hide their books in ways that wouldn't be permitted if it were any other business. Hope that answers your question.
By the way, Brooklyn Cyclones season tickets go on sale today.
> Hope that answers your question.
Thanks. It does.
> By the way, Brooklyn Cyclones season tickets go on sale today.
How did you know I'm from Brooklyn?
- Lyle Goldman
A $2.00 fare would be a 33 percent increase over $1.50, assuming all other fares rise in proportion. That's crazy! But I absolutely believe it.
It is criminal that the MTA is running up debts by NOT raising its fares until after the 2002 election, thus forcing a horrific fare increase soon after. Some of that higher fare will go to pay higher interest, something that benefits no one.
Back when the passed the law that the state budget had to passed on time (ha!), and the constitutional provision that the budget had to be balanced (ha!), they should have passed something that forbid a fare increase during the 12 months AFTER (rather than the two years before) the re-election of an incumbant Governor (ha, ha, ha).
Pataki should leave office before his rotten eggs come home to roost.
Re: Fare Increase On TA Buses & Subways (291411)
Re: Fare Increase On TA Buses & Subways (291411)
Home ·
Search ·
About ·
Feedback ·
Volunteer!
www.nycsubway.org > SubTalk
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[ First in Thread | Next in Thread ]
Re: Fare Increase On TA Buses & Subways
Posted by JailhouseDoc on Sat Dec 8 19:12:57 2001, in response to Re: Fare Increase On TA Buses & Subways, posted by R142 #2 on Sat Dec 8 18:37:46 2001.
And when the Metrocard was set to allow for free busto subway transfers,the management at the MTA found themselves with a surplus of cash, and increased ridership! So what did the bums do with all that money? Enron had cash coming out of their ears, yet they just filed for bankruptcy. Seems like when something becomes profitble and good for the public, those in the higherups spend the money like drunk sailors on liberty. Then they have the nerve to cry broke. Never fails.
As quoting the above (hopefully this will come out), when the MTA got a surplus instead of saving it for an important time they have wasted it like drunk sailors on liberty.
Republicans actually *want* fare increases, so I don't see why Pataki would want to put it off till after the 2002 election. It's not as if he's going to lose any votes on the issue.
Republicans also wish to completely subsidize motorist with free East River bridges. My guess is that they will throw around the $2.00 now so that we will be relieved with $1.75, similar to what the PA did to PATH.
I won't vote for him whether he increases fares or not! It's time for someone better.
- Lyle Goldman
News had a piece too.
Arti
here's the link couretsy of "cut and paste"
http://www.nydailynews.com/2001-12-08/News_and_Views/City_Beat/a-134553.asp
Hehe, I actually read the paper version :-)\
Arti
To pay for my good work. CI Peter
Do you like my 404 page?
( I really would like criticism if it could be improved for functionality or whatever. )
very cute!
I like it.
That's the best one I've seen. It puts those dreaded, dry, boring "404 - File Not Found, you file could not be blah blah blah" things to shame.
-Robert King
Which one is you?
The ... uh ... incapacitated gentleman on the platform.
Nice & Cute !
As they'd say in Haight-Ashbury, groovy!
Almost looks like a scene from the Malbone disaster. Though the person off to the side doesn't look like Luciano...
BMTman
Almost looks like a scene from the Malbone disaster. Though the person off to the side doesn't look like Luciano...
On a serious note ... has anyone ever seen a picture of Luciano?
I've never seen a picture of Luciano. Cudahy doesn't have one nor does he have a description, as far as I can tell.
However, I do have a description in my notes, and they follow: "Antonio Luciana [sic]: Luciana is an intelligent man, with a well-shaped head and forehead, a rather triangular face, a sharp nose and a by no means unintelligent expression. He does not create the impression of having any great intellectual powers, and seems to be a man of rather small affairs. The height of his ears on his head [are] set a little too far forward toward his eyes[...]"
Maybe kind of like:
It should be noted for the modern reader that at the time, people put a lot of stock in "experts" who purported to tell you what a person was like, or whether or not he could commit a crime, by such analysis of their appearance. This did not die quickly. As late as the 1950's I recall the Daily Mirror publishing a picture of an accused murderer with that kind of analysis.
In his description of Luciano, the writer also seems to contradict himself: "an intelligent man [...] a by no means unintelligent expression [...] does not create the impression of having any great intellectual powers [...]"
But, hey, that kind of crap sold newspapers.
I was being facieous...;-D
The national Electric Railroaders Association finally got a web site.
www.electricrailroaders.org. I found out about it in their national election ballot for the board of directors.
Oh yea, one more thing, the national ERA 2002 Convention is in Portland Oregon over the 4th of July weekend.
Just out of curiosity, how much to t/o's with the MTA get paid???
Info here
It ain't bad.
How about a page lke that for Station Agents?
Beats me. That page was written by Alex L, who posts here sometimes, and was a T/O. The only station agent I can think of is "subway-buff@mindspring.com", but I don't know if he's written a similar page.
Subway-Buff is a female. She'll probably tell that to you later. Just warning you now! :-)
A page like that would be good for me to send to someone who doesn't understand what an agent (like me) goes thru everyday. I have 22 years in service and some members of my family STILL don't know all that I go thru.
This page has some info about the day-to-day of an agent, but nothing about pay.
Oh, and subway-buff, sorry about that mistake. I never saw your gender mentioned, so I assumed that you - like most railfans and TA workers - were male.
I guess subway-buff DID say something about what an agent does. For that and certain other things, I stand corrected! Once in a while I do make a mistake. When pointed out to me I admit that I make a mistake and take my lumps for it. With my luck I'll be working somewhere before Christmas and Buff will relieve me and give me a soup-to-nuts relief!
If I see you you will get a proper relief in an expedited manner.
Salaries: Like any other transit job we get minimum wage for the first 40 hours. If you later get promoted you do not have the first week at minimum since you already had that.
There is a three year progression from entry rate to top pay. Here is the top pay
98--17.79, 12/15/99--18.68, 12/00--19.24 and 12/01--20.01.
So write it. I only did that because we were getting swamped with the same questions when Transit first started hiring TOs from the open-competitive list.
And by the way guys, I am STILL a T/O.
Maybe I will. However, I wouldn't be able to write the way you did. The mixture of how it appears and how it really is. The reality of what T/O's actually encounter. I was only wondering if there was a page like that for agents?
What is so wrong with being called Motormen?
because not all of them are men.
Because women do the job now.
I have no problem with that Just leave the English language alone.
well how can they be called motormen if they are women.
That's why Train Operator.
To me, the title train operator is degrading. While Motorman is more dignified, and traditional.
I agree, but the same is said of bus driver, now bus operator.
I see nothing wrong with bus driver.
Me neither.
To me, the title train operator is degrading. While Motorman is more dignified, and traditional.
A dignified, traditional Chicago motorman is in this SubTalk Chicago trip photo. Can you pick him out?
Thank you!
You're welcome.
You made a great trip even better. Even more so when I learned that you were the motorman playing the creative announcements on the Red Line train that I rode before I met you.
Bob
Hi Bob! (and others) What creative announcments?
I guess he means anyone who says more than:
"The Next stop Is <> ".
Damn I hate that!
Why?
I went to say something and it was lost in a field of <>'s
I went to say something and it was lost in a field of <>'s! Put a < in between that and another > the whole line disappears.
I guess he means anyone who says more than:
"The Next stop Is Station Name ".
I serouisly doubt I said anything on the PA, considering cta spent $5.4 million of Uncle's money for automated announcements, even though the cta claims that they do not have the money to pay premium pay to the Motormen for working OPTO. Unless I made my yearly announcement,"Addison, Wrigley Field, home of the 2002 World Series!".
Maybe it wasn't what you said. It was the way they heard you say it :-)
I don't remember the specific announcements, but it was stuff on the order of "We're waiting for an open drawbridge" when there was none. These were pre-recorded announcements that were punched in.
Maybe a comedy was being filmed on the CTA?
?
I'd love to see the reaction of the customers on the train.:-)
Harry Carey would be saying "Holy cow!"
>>> train operator is degrading. While Motorman is more dignified, and traditional. <<<
And yet, besides being unisex, "train operator" is more descriptive than "motorman" which could also apply to someone who repaired motors.
Tom
How about motorhuman?
That presumes all are human, of course :-)
That is very intereseting. Here in Chicago, we just settled our contract (worsed in 15 years btw). Our rate is $21.30 an hour. Our system is completely opto. (thanks to weak union leadership). How much more do the opto motormen make than motormen with a conductor?
I think the T/O's in Boston make about $23 but im not exactly sure. But I know they dont have conductors.
I thought only the Blue line has no conductors.
I havent seen any on any of the lines.
How long ago was this?
The last time I was on it was about three months ago.
They don't have conductors in Boston, they have gahds. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
:S
Perhaps they have semi-conductors.
funny
OPTO T/O's in NYC make $2 an hour more in addition to any other pay/differential payments. Definitely not worth it.
That's terrible.
Everyone says this was pitiful by the Union. If there was an 8 dollar difference the MTA could put a wedge between the C/R and T/O's.
Well guess how much more Chicago received for OPTO. Close your eyes. ZERO! NOTHING! In other words we did not receive one penny more for more duties. We are making the same whether we had a conductor or not. I contribute this to the weakest union leadership in A.T.U. 308's 98 year history, Mr. Jerry Williams and company, as well as the international and International President Jim LaSala not coming to our aid, and being more concerned with being re-elected and his longevetity in office. I would much rather be part of the T.W.U.
I think you have to vote those guys out.
PATH has issued a new map and guide dated December 2,2001.
The colors used on the map are not the same as the ones posted in the cars:
MAP CAR MAP
33-NWK (M-F) RED RED
33-JSQ (S-S) YELLOW RED
33-HOB (7dys) BLUE BLUE
33-HOB-NWK (7dys) BLUE-RED PURPLE
HOB-JSQ (M-F) GREEN GREEN
HOB-NWK (S-S) RED GREEN
I did see a 33-JSQ LCL with R-R markers instead of Y-Y
Larry,RedbirdR33
Ed, I finally bought your book, "They Moved The Millions" and have to tell you I thoroughly enjoyed it. I recommend it to any subway fan.
Sarge, Bigedirtmanl hasn't been on the internet for several months.
Hello,
I am offering New Officially Licensed MTA / NYCTA / LIRR Products
Hat / Lapel Pins
RTS Bus Key Chains & Hanging Ornaments
Subway Car Key Chains & Hanging Ornaments
Subway Destination & Line Letter Pins
NYCTA RTS Bus Soft Stuffed Squeeze Toy
NYCTA Subway Car Soft Stuffed Squeeze toy
New Products Coming In Daily
You can buy direct from me or visit my E-Bay Auctions to place a bid.
www.ebay.com
Search /
Search By Seller /
E BAY USER ID
THE-GOOD-ADS-GUY
I accept Pay Pal on line credit card payments
For a Photographic Download of my products please send me an e mail at M23BUS@CS.COM & use the subject heading " MTA MERCHANDISE "
Thank you
Anthony Irace
I went over to Rockaway Pkwy this morning to do a 'test drive' of the R-143 test train.
I caught it at Atlantic Avenue. I wasn't sure where I'd meet up with it, but wanted to go to Atlantic anyhow just to see how the demolition of the B'way-Junction El was progressing.
In any event, I didn't have to wait more than 10 minutes (one other canarsie-bound train passed me before the R-143s arrived).
I boarded on the first car and was met by a gang of safety-vest wearing TA RT supervisors, WABCO brake specialist and Kawaski Inspectors. Everyone seemed to have a clip-board and be listening in on their two-way radios for different info from other parts of the train (the C/R position or the reverse-end T/O cab).
I enjoyed the smoothness of the ride. That was the most obvious improvement over the earlier R types. One of the things that is evident about the Canarsie Line (and most Eastern Division lines in general) is the amount of 'S' and/or tight curves. On the older equipment you'd have a jarring ride when the train went over those tracks. Now, it is alot less unpleasant a ride.
The interior was almost a mirror image of the R-142's, with the exception of ceiling-mounted handholds (for the very tall) in the middle of the cars. Nice to see that the double-door treatment for the R-142's was not repeated on the storm doors for the R-143s.
Since the GO was in affect, the crew did a computer override on the LED station/date/time indicators as well as announcements. All annoucements were made by the C/R.
I did a complete round-trip in 1/2 an hour (Rock Pkwy to Mrytle and back again).
I'll have to do it again soon. But with my camera next time...
BMTman
BMTman,
I was on the R-143s yesterday around 3-4PM.
I agree with you that the R-143 is like a big R-142. Since I'm used to the long strip maps, it's funny to see a small route for the (L) line. Strange hearing iiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeee on the Eastern Division !
Bill "Newkirk"
I was on the R-143 around 2:pm.The lighting isnt too harsh the interior is or appears to be darker, I like the signs that give you information the R-142's dont have that.It rides smooth, has that same whine as the R-142's, also has a short jerky stop like the R-142's.its a nice train.
I have a few serious questions:
Are the R-68s 75 footers?
Can the LIRR trains go onto the IND division (aside all legal problems)?
If the LIRR trains can't go onto the IND can they go onto the 75 footers complient track?
What and where are the connections between the NYCT transit sysytem and any external railroads or rail systems?
What are the different third rail systems in the US?
Where can I find a map (track map if possiable) of the New york, westchester & boston railroad?
As far as The NYW&B, I believe this website has a whole page or two devoted to the NYW&B. I don't think there's a trackmap, but I'm almost positive it lists pretty much all the stations the were on the line, plus a whole page on the construction from a railroading magazine from the time.
Except for the Dyre Av. line and a few abandoned station buildings, I believe the original right-of-way has disappeared or has been built over.
Anyway, it's a great question, I've always wanted to see a map of that line.
Heck, even a reprint of an original schedule would be cool :)
"Except for the Dyre Av. line and a few abandoned station buildings, I believe the original right-of-way has disappeared or has been built over"
There are some bits and pieces here and there of the ROW, ya gotta know where to look.
Bill "Newkirk"
I figured there were-
Next time I get a chance, I'm going to go look :)
Here's something I've been wondering. Why was it called the New York, Westchester, and Boston railroad? It doesn't go anywhere near Boston!
- Lyle Goldman
Perhaps when the railroad was formed, this was their intended goal. You can dream a little, can't you?
-Stef
Stef, you are correct. The NYW&B, like many railroads, lured investors with grandiose plans, including far-away destinations as part of their name even though they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting there. A lot of these included "Pacific" in the name, as they were chartered during the westward rush of the 1850s, but the one that most intrigues me was the Danville, Atlanta, and New Orleans. Chartered in the 1870s, it finally constructed just over one mile of track in the 1880s on the outskirts of Danville, Virginia. Its sole customer was a charcoal kiln operated by the brother of the line's founder, but it remained an independent railroad for nearly forty years, until its acquisition by the Southern Railway (its only connection to the outside world) around 1920.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I know there are connections between the LIRR and the subway system on 2 parts of the Bay Ridge Branch, one near where the Canarsie Line and the Livonia El crosses and another connection to the West End line just W/O the 9th Av Station.
By the way, there was once a connection between the Jamaica El and the LIRR Bklyn Branch at Chestnut Street between the 1890's and the 1910's. Trains used to go from Essex Street to the Rockaways that way. The LIRR had MP41's which was a cross between a railroad car and a Low-V.
As far as your question about whether the LIRR trains can go on IND tracks methinks you might be bringing up the old Rockaway Branch to JFK thread again!! :)
"Trains used to go from Essex Street to the Rockaways that way."
I understood that they only ran them to Fulton Ferry. I thought they stopped running on the Broadway El before the 1908 Williamsburg Bridge el tracks to Essex St. were completed.
Quoting from page 16 of "Change at Ozone Park" by Herbert George:
"The LIRR service between Delancey Street and the Rockaways started May 30, 1908. It was extended further downtown to Chambers Street on August 4, 1913. Both LIRR and BRT electric-powered trains ran from these terminals to Rockaway Park. This was the only time in the history of the LIRR that it had a second rail terminus in Manhattan that could be reached without changing to a ferry or a subway (the principal one, of course, was and is, Pennsylvania Station)."
Wow!!!
I had no idea...
I stand delightfully corrected.
There was another route for LIRR trains to cross the Brooklyn Bridge going to The Rockaways. After leaving Sands St it would accept the route for the BRT 5th Ave El. As the train past Flatbush Terminal there was a one track turnoff where the LIRR would go down a ramp thru the yard and go out to Woodhaven Junction and then the Rockaways. That lasted only until 1917. As a kid I used to see an old elevated tressle coming out of the yard there and I couldn't figure out what was it there for. It was only when I started tracking the Brooklyn Els that it all fell into place. And that old tressle itself was finally toen down about 20-25 years ago.
The LIRR had MP41's which was a cross between a railroad car and a Low-V.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Were those cars specifically constructed for that purpose, or were they already in the LIRR's fleet?
What else did they use those cars for?
I can only assume they were constructed for that purpose. From what I heard they lasted for many years until the 50's and ended its career on the 2 stop shuttle between Country Life Press and Clinton Rd on the old Central Branch. The fire house thats at Clinton Rd and the little used tracks there is actually the old station bldg and ticket office.
Is the ROW for the old LIRR Central branch still intact passed the freight section still in use? Aside from NIMBY complaints and cutting through the park, is it possible, if they wanted to build the line through there again? I've followed the ROW on the map, and by the map, you can pretty much see where it ran, but I've never physically followed it. It seems that now it would give rail access to parts of Levittown, and other towns right around there.
Is the ROW for the old LIRR Central branch still intact passed the freight section still in use? Aside from NIMBY complaints and
cutting through the park, is it possible, if they wanted to build the line through there again? I've followed the ROW on the map, and by the map, you can pretty much see where it ran, but I've never physically followed it. It seems that now it would give rail access to parts of Levittown, and other towns right around there.
Much of the route is now occupied by LIPA power lines. There may be some encroachments by buildings, but not many. Needless to say, building a rail line through the middle of Eisenhower Park would be a non-starter unless it went through a tunnel dug by a TBM.
The Central Branch between Bethpage and Babylon is currently in use by the LIRR for both freight and passenger service...
Yeah, sometimes I've been on trains that use that.
Was there a diamond at Bethpage, or how did the branch cross the mainline, when the real central branch was in service?
Gov. Pataki promised the NIMBYs of Garden City in a speach there this year that the secondary to Mitchel Field wouldn't be used for freight PERIOD. The LIRR promtly removed most of the tracks in the old yard & severed the line across Meadowbrook parkway. The only non-LIRR internal use will be the once a year cirsus train.
Pataki's promise includes any consideration of re-creating the line East to Bethpage.
It would appear that state & local transportation folks are starting to think about BRT (bus rapid transit) vs. LRV or any LIRR extensions.
Mr rt__:^)
>> Pataki's promise includes any consideration of re-creating the line East to Bethpage <<
Fortunately, governors leave office. Long Island needs more passenger rail lines, more freight rail lines, and subways, and fewer governors making promises that aren't worth keeping.
Again the NIMBY's win out over the greater good. It should be kept for freight even if frequent passenger service wouldn't be allowed.
Again the NIMBY's win out over the greater good. It should be kept for freight even if frequent passenger service wouldn't be allowed.
Agreed, but if it's any consolation, freight service on the line has been all but defunct for years.
Are the R-68s 75 footers?
Yes.
Can the LIRR trains go onto the IND division (aside all legal problems)?
I don't think so. The M-series trains are like 82 feet long, and I think they're also too wide and even too high.
If the LIRR trains can't go onto the IND can they go onto the 75 footers complient track?
Isn't that what the IND is?
:-) Andrew
I did see a pic of a R-44/46 on the LIRR in passenger service on this site. So the width is the same but length and hight I have no clue.
It was an R-44, and it wasn't in passenger service. When the R-44s first came in, a set was operated in high-speed tests on the LIRR.
David
I belive the motors can reach speeds of 80 mph on the R-44/46 but have been electronically decreased. Is the correct?
As built, the cars were geared for 70+ MPH operation. During GOH circa 1990, the cars were re-geared for the standard NYCT(A) balancing speed of approximately 50 MPH. Of course, since that time, the cars have had their field shunting capability removed, thus somewhat reducing the top speed and increasing the amount of time it takes to reach top speed.
What is
field shunting capability
?
The posting by "Jeff H." referenced below will answer questions about field shunting (scroll to the bottom of the posting if not interested in AC propulsion):
http://subtalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/starchives.cgi?read=104000:104920
David
So why did they eliminate field shunting? Will it be brought back when CBTC is used?
- Lyle Goldman
By the time CBTC is completed, field shunting will be inapplicable.
All the cars will have AC traction.
1) Yes.
2) Yes, if the tunnels are retrofitted to handle 85 foot MU's.
3) See #2.
4) Linden Yard, 38th Street SBK Scrap Yard, 207 Float Bridge (if still in service).
5) Overrunning and underrunning third rail.
6) On this site for the Bronx portion. Map will reflect present day trackage.
1.Yes
2.I think
3.Maybe
4.There was a connection between the LIRR and the 2 and 3
5.I have no Idea's
6.You can get a track map of those here I think.
Can the LIRR trains go onto the IND division (aside all legal problems)?
No, The LIRR M-1s are 85 ft long and stand taller than NYCT subway cars. Also the LIRR and subway platform heights are different. Third rail voltage is different (600V NYCT/750V LIRR). Also third rails on the LIRR and NYCT are of different height and distance from nearest running rail. With adjusting shoe beams you can run a NYCT subway train on the LIRR but don't do the same with an M1/M3 on the subway!
If the LIRR trains can't go onto the IND can they go onto the 75 footers complient track?
WHAT !
Bill"Newkirk"
Where can I find a map (track map if possiable) of the New york, westchester & boston railroad?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Build:
E-mail me at RedbirdR33@hotmail.com
Larry,RedbirdR33
Are you saying that I should build one myself?
I think Larry is addressing you, by using the first five letters of your "handle", and asking you to email him for info on the NYW&B map.
"Where can I find a map (track map if possiable) of the New york, westchester & boston railroad?"
You can try a book called "Westchester's Forgotten Railway" by Roger Arcara Published 1962. Has a map of the complete system to Port Chester. 136 pages of text and photos. I know of at least one copy which will be available on E-bay this week or next.
what is the ISBN of the book?
I have a 3rd edition of the book from 1985, and it shows no ISBN #.
The original book was written in 1961.
The third edition was published by...
I & T Publishing Div.
C S A Hobbies
P O Box 89
New Rochelle NY 10804
My copy was published in 1972 by Quadrant press. There was no ISBN # either.
I have a question-
Has anyone here been to the abandoned 9th Ave. El stations in the South Bronx, i.e. Anderson Ave. and Sedgwick Ave.?
When I go home (The Bronx :) ) this spring, I want to go check them out-
are they easily accessible and safe?
I'm not talking about the neighborhood :)
Also, is it trespassing to do so?
I will have to eventually go there (I have time), maybe another subtalk fieldtrip or something? Its about time there be another Subtalk Field Trip.
A fieldtrip would be good - especially if it hit my Summer Vacation so I could fly over!
I have a question-
Has anyone here been to the abandoned 9th Ave. El stations in the South Bronx, i.e. Anderson Ave. and Sedgwick Ave.?
When I go home (The Bronx :) ) this spring, I want to go check them out-
are they easily accessible and safe?
I'm not talking about the neighborhood :)
Also, is it trespassing to do so?
I explored the old tunnel as part of a SubTalk field trip in January 2000. There was quite a bit of debris in the tunnel, and of course it's completely unlit, so if you go there wear sturdy shoes, a hard hat if you have access to one, a couple strong flashlights, and by all means be careful. I would definitely discourage going there alone, indeed the larger the group the better.
In addition, I have heard that the west tunnel entrance, by the remains of the Sedgwick Avenue station, has been sealed off. I do not know if this is in fact the case, and in any event you might be able to access the tunnel from the east, by scrambling up a short but fairly steep rock face.
Finally, as far as the legalities are concerned, you'd probably be okay as no one wants to claim ownership of the tunnel. The MTA says the city owns it, and the city says the landowners above the tunnel own it. Dunno what the landowners say, but it's a safe bet they don't want to touch it with a ten-foot pole.
Bring a gun (more legally a taser, peper spray, mace (don't know if thats legal but the sell it at a convinance store I go to)), any abondoned place which is listed on the net is gonna be a druggie spot. Also I think the owners wouldn't care since they set bronx at lit in the 70's. I found that out on a multi-part series on PBS on robert moses.
*L*
In my original post, I said my safety questions were limited to the safety of the tunnel and right of way, not the neighborhood, as I grew up and lived in that general section of the Bronx :)
WWW.FORGOTTEN-NY.COM has a pretty nice page about the tunnel.
nice job Kevin Walsh!
http://www.forgotten-ny.com/SUBWAYS/9thavel/9Ave.html
Thanks for the plug. However the nycsubway.org page, linked from my page, is rather better since it has images from INSIDE the tunnel...
Has anyone here been to the abandoned 9th Ave. El stations in the South Bronx, i.e. Anderson Ave. and Sedgwick Ave.?
Twice. Videotaped it, too. I assume you've seen the 9th Ave El / Polo Grounds shuttle writeup on this site already?
When I go home (The Bronx :) ) this spring, I want to go check them out- are they easily accessible and safe?
I received an e-mail from a member of the mayor's office a year ago and was informed that the tunnel was to be sealed up:
Good evening.
Let me first say that I truly enjoyed the story behind and pictures of the Polo Ground Shuttle. This morning I, along with other members of the Mayor's Office, led City agencies into both ends of the de facto 9th Avenue subway (Anderson-Jerome & Sedgwick Avenues) in an attempt to strategize a clean up.
The situation at this site was brought to my attention by an FDNY Battalion Chief during the September District Service Cabinet meeting of Bronx Comunity Board 4.
I was informed by FDNY that they have responded to numerous fires set by homeless and vandals in the past couple of years, most recently this summer. Yes, we did find hundreds of tires and car shells amidst other debris mostly at the Anderson-Jerome end. If you want to know how we all got up to the Anderson-Jerome station, we had FDNY lift us with their Ladder truck above the white awning-business building where there is a gate that opens up.
It is in our interest to clean up both ends of the tunnel, remove the car shells and all, and seal completely the tunnel to prevent vagrants and pyromaniacs from entering and wreaking havoc.
Thank you for the story behind this station/tunnel.
Lee Anthony Nieves
Director, Bronx Unit-CAU
Mayor's Office
212-788-7458
There may very well be nothing for you to see inside the tunnel, though you could stil see the remains of the Sedgwick Ave station using the pedestrian bridge over the Major Deegan at about 163rd St as a guidepost - the station is immediately north and beneath you at that point.
Also, is it trespassing to do so?
Good question. No one claims to own it (current thinkng is that it "belongs" to the landlords whose apts and houses sit above it). I'd hate to be one of those people if a collapse were to occur ....
--Mark
Aye, In memoriam of those "trips"... :)
Although this has probably been covered, will the MTA kill the W when the Manny B reopens?
Maybe they shoud extend the Q as Astoria Express.
The official answer would undoubtedly be "yes," since the B would be expecte to return and they're not going to run two midtown West End services.
However, I'm not so sure. If people end up liking the Broadway routing (after having it for 2-3 years) maybe they'll keep more Broadway service than originally planned.
It's definitely a yes, since the B will return to Stillwell Ave. after the Manhattan Bridge reopens for the 6th Ave. branch. However, I would think that the Brighton Express might remain on the Broadway service.
"It's definitely a yes, since the B will return to Stillwell Ave. after the Manhattan Bridge reopens for the 6th Ave. branch."
That'll be news to NYCT's planners, who haven't decided what will run where yet.
David
Send The W From Lower Manhattan Via The 2nd Avenue Line And The 63rd Street Tube With A Connecting Ramp At 21st Avenue At 31st Street To The Astoria BRT/IRT Dual Contracts El Then From Ditmars Blvd Into La Guardia Via The La Guardia Extension.
I thought of connecting 63st tunnel to astria BMT 5 years ago but won't it be to expensive to build the ramp with property problems and stuff.
I had an even wackier idea of attaching the 63rd. St. tube to the Flushine line, configuring the line for B division equipment east of Queens Plaza and running a 6th Ave and Broadway route all the way to Main St. Then a connector from the G line north of Newton Creek could allow this line to access Manhattan via the old #7. This would require the G line to be completely configured to IRT standards, as the Steinway tubes cannot use B division equipment at all.
That's a nice idea.
The W wouldn't go to Brooklyn, but if the N is rerouted to the bridge and as an express, there would be a need for an Astoria to Whitehall local.
If they do that wouldn't it make more sence to cut the N to Whitehall and run the W over the sea beach.
The Sea Beach line has alwasy been the letter N, as long as letters existed on the BMT. The W was never intended be used for the current route it's used for today. It was always meant to be an Astoria/Bway local to Whitehall St. when N service was rerouted back on the bridge where it belongs.
If they ever again run a 2nd Nassau Street service from the Brighton line, W could run to Chambers Street.
Hardly necessary, given the one service running today is lightly used, to say the least. Nobody uses the midday M train from 9th Ave, and I have a feeling it's days are numbered.
Unfortunately the M as it is now is here to stay, eventhough the ridership is paltry. It is all a political pacifier to the Chinatown community courtesy of George from Albany. I make an early afternoon trip from Met to Ninth Ave. If I have 3 people in the first car leaving Broad St, it is a lot. But just in case there is a blockage on the MannyB, the customers have an alternative route from Canal St. Much later around 8 PM coming back from Bay Pkwy., the same thing, I have the car to myself thru the Montague tube. Same for the conductor. I was told from an M line management team member to expect the same service level for the spring/summer pick 2002.
But the Chinatown community isn't using it. As I predicted, southern Brooklyn's chinese population is adjusting to the new routes and takes the Q/W to Canal St. We all know that the current budget crisis is going to affect service. I can't see the midday M service surviving.
I know the Chinatown community isn't using it, I said it in my posting!...and it WILL survive because the MTA chairman is Pataki's messenger. Pataki & Kalikow knows the community doesn't ride it, but when he asks the Chinatown community to re-elect him as governor next year, George will cite all the things he has done for them in regards to the Grand St. loss of service to Brooklyn. The TA/MTA says that they can't run empty trains and buses, but political considerations and favors supercede that policy. After all, Pataki has given the MTA the additional funds to pay for the extra service.
Why is the Southern Divsion - Nassau Street service so unpopular off-peak ? Why do people prefer riding train to downtown via Trinity Place considering much office real estate on the west side has been blown away ?
Not too many people ride to downtown off peak on any line. The Broadway service is more popular because it continues to midtown, or destinations between mid- and downtown (like Union Sq.).
So if they are going midtown, why ride the N & R at all when they could change to the Q & W ?
The bridge doesn't save much time, and some prefer to keep their seats even at the expense of a few minutes -- especially for those ultimately bound for local stops, who would have to change right back to the local in the end. Besides, there is much to be said for the tactic of remaining on the local rather than waiting for an express that may be miles away.
The letter may disappear, but there still might be a good rationale for keeping a rush-hour express service on the Astoria Line. Perhaps a circle N and diamond N?
whats the difference between the circle and the diamond?
One is lighted, the other is dark.
thats it?
The dark letter is the Q exp.
He's pulling your leg.
When the New York City Subway operates an express and a local with the same letter or number, the diamond means express service. For example, peak direction service on the 7, 6, and Q means the train skips certain stops. This usually applies during rush hours.
The diamond was initially used to designate rush hour service exclusively, whether it was express or local. The CC, RR, QB, B, & N all had local-only diamond service. Unfortunatly, the diamond means nothing anymore, like the way the original double letter system of the IND became by the 1970's.
>> Unfortunatly[sic], the diamond means nothing anymore... <<
How do you figure? On my line(Q), the diamond means express stops between Prospect Park and Brighton Beach; the circle means all stops from DeKalb to Stillwell.
=Rednoise
(NewQirQ)
I meant it's original purpose has been lost.
It's original purpose was actually an all weekday only service-- not in 1979, but on the Worlds Fair #7 strip map (on the WF car in the museum). RR a, and I think T and QT appear as diamonds, where they cross the #7 line. The RR (same as today) and the QT ran all day weekdays.
I never knew diamonds were used before the current color scheme was introduced in 1979.
Originally Circles were full time service and diamond PT Rush Hr Service, but since then things changed
The diamond does have a consistent meaning now, with two exceptions.
The diamond-X meets the following conditions:
Its hours of operation are a subset of the circle-X's hours of operation.
It shares trackage along a portion of its route with the circle-X, but it doesn't make every stop made by the circle-X (in at least one direction) during the diamond-X's hours. This covers both express runs and alternate branches.
It is not simply a short-turning variant on the circle-X.(I think that covers it.)
The first exception is the map, including strip maps in cars, which use diamonds for generic rush hour services in addition to the above.
The second exception is the 5. By these criteria, only the rush hour 238th Street branch should carry the diamond.
These criteria account for the A, E (starting next week), Q, 6, and 7. (The diamond-A doesn't appear on train signs but it does appear on timetables and station signs. We'll see about the E next week. The diamond-Q, diamond-6, and diamond-7 are signed as such.)
Astoria express service is DOA, and good riddance, for those who used the local stops anyway.
Well, it's obvious how you feel about it. But it doesn't sound as if you know for sure how most commuters on that line feel about it.
Sure I can. I have friends who use the Broadway station. They hated seeing half empty W's run right through their station. And my few W rides noted the same thing.
I use the Ditmars station and I LOVED it - sorry ;-)
As far as I know, Astoria express W service is still running, and is relected in the new map.
I noticed that too today. But last week, it wasn't. I think people will scream if it's re-instated. I hope it isn't.
Initially, after full servie was restored, a notice in the Astoria dispatcher's office said it would be local "to accomodate the riders". But by the time I worked on the line, a couple of weeks ago, it was express again. So there mut have been some demand for it.
I can personally vouch for the W running express on December 3 and December 10.
Talk about stubbornly sticking to a silly service plan. I wonder how long they will persist with the new F/V configuration come Monday.
I agree that running the W express is probably silly (I haven't seen passenger counts so I couldn't say for sure), but the F/V arrangement is the only way the connection could possibly do any good (as well as the only way to give G users bound for local stops access with only one transfer). My only concern is weekend 6th Avenue access, but that's easy enough to fix.
I'm more worried about the congestion at Queens Plaza and confusion about the new F configuration. Running the V thru 63rd St. makes so much more sense to Queens/Manhattan riders. F ridership would almost demand that it accesses the more desirable 53rd. St. line.
IMHO, running V thru 63rd St. would do little good to force people to use locals.
Arti
It provides a direct way for Queens Blvd. local riders to access 6th Ave without going near the F. Even a chance at a seat! Don't underestimate the desire Queens riders have for a seat, something not possible on any E/F train after they leave Jamaica.
R is quite close to 6th Ave, yet underutilized.
Arti
Because it goes all the way out to 7th before swinging back to midtown. The Sixth Ave line goes directly to the same midtown spots.
I'd rather think that the stigma of it being express has more to do with it.
Arti
In other words, you'd have good trains and bad trains. Good trains would run express in Queens and stop at busy transfer points; bad trains would run local in Queens and bypass busy transfer points. The V, being the ultimate bad train, would be empty.
By sending the F through 63rd, the V and R will pick up some passengers who might prefer an express but need to transfer to the 4/5/6.
Also, if the E and F ran through 53rd, G riders who currently have direct service to local stops would have to transfer not once but twice.
IMO, the TA should strongly consider building a passageway under the 4/5 between 63rd and 60th.
Your points make some sense, but are negated somewhat by the logjam the planned configuration will cause at Queens Plaza. Besides, a lot of people will notice those "empty" V trains as they stand on packed F trains, and once they realize that those V trains stop at the same stations the F does in midtown, many will switch.
As for G riders not being burdened by a 3 train x-fer to get to Queens Blvd. local stops, I say these passangers are too few in number to warrant doing what the TA is doing.
That would overserve Sea Beach portion of it.
Arti
Does anyone know when Mr. Adler is going to post his version of the new map?
I really enjoy his versions.
Also, does anyone have any idea when it'll go up on the MTA website?
I don't know about Mr Adler's version,but the MTA version should be out by the following Monday.
Probably the new maps:
Will be delivered to token booths by Friday. Distributed from Saturday on.
Are being plastered on trains and wall units all this week.
Will be on the MTA web site at 12:01 am next Sunday.
Does anyone know which R62 Cars are running on the 2?
And which line is R68 car 5200 is currently running on(no offense to the person)?
I don't think taht the R62s run on the 2, you're talking about the Redbirds that operate on the 2. R62 operates on all the IRT lines (Except 2 and 7).
R 62'a's are on the 2 But they are converted 3's only during rush hour
5200 is an R68A. It is normally found on the W, but it can easily wind up on either Q, or the N.
R-62: #4
R-62A: #1/#3, #6, 42nd Street Shuttle (plus an occasional #5 train)
Car 5200 is an R-68A and is running.
David
How does it work? Since it's a metrocard transfer, not a paper transfer, they can't tell where you left the system, only where you're getting on. I don't understand how they can prevent people from getting a free round-trip ride for only one fare.
Can you get on the subway at any station, and be able to get back on at one of the transfer points in 2 hours?
key:
- (direct transfer)
== (metrocard transfer)
(example 1: you get on at Times Square, take the shuttle to Grand Central, take the 6 to 59th, get out and walk to 63rd, and transfer to the F)
S - 6 == F
(example 2: you get on at Roosevelt (7), go to Court Square, transfer to the G station, and walk through to the F, and ride back to Roosevelt, and get back on the 7.)
7 == G - F - 7
(example 3: you get on at 179th Street (F), go to 63rd street, leave fare control, swipe your metrocard. What happens? Does it realize that you just got off an F?)
F == F
(example 4: you get on at Bway-Lafayette (F,6,others), ride up to midtown manhattan on any train, and try to get back in at 59th (6) or Lexington (F). )
F == F, or 6 == 6
It seems like if they let 2, 3 and 4 happen, it would be easy to cheat them out of a fare, and the TA doesn't seem like the type of people who let themselves get cheated if they can help it. But if they restrict it by the subway stop you got on at, then you couldn't do #1, and the passengers lose out.
I think paper transfers would've been much easier.
I want to know the answer!
All of these transfers will be free, just as a transfer (say) from the 1 to the M104 is free, even though the two together could be used for an easy round trip.
(Incidentally, there won't be a transfer from the G to the F at Court Square.)
Paper transfers would cause traffic jams (imagine 100 passengers coming off an F looking for the 6) and would be subject to even more abuse. When the Franklin Avenue shuttle used paper transfers at the C connection, they were routinely sold on the street. It's quite a bit harder to sell a MetroCard transfer, as they're only valid for a few hours and most of us want our MetroCards back.
In the past, I've suggested that the TA place a large bank of MetroCard encoders inside fare control at either end of a MetroCard transfer. In order for the free transfer to be valid, two conditions would be required: (1) the MetroCard was used to enter the subway within the past two hours, and (2) the MetroCard was encoded at the other end of the transfer within the past 20 minutes. That would essentially eliminate all abuse, although it would allow for quick errands to be run at the transfer point itself. Either the TA hadn't thought of this or the new MetroCard encoders would cost more than the TA expects to lose.
Your suggestion is a good one.
what id I swip 20 cards go outside and sell em and people get in.
And you used all 20 cards within the past 2 hours? Re-read David's post...
Since when did they allow turnstile to turnstile transfers?
They're starting turnstile/turnstile transfers for the new changes are coming into effect:
F train going through 63rd St.
G train terminating at Court Sq.
They're displayed on the new map, but without any detailed information.
*smacks head* can anybody smell a fare increase?
And there isn't enough details on the map to get out of the subway and make your way without getting lost. Also if the MTA intends to make more of these and eliminate the originals (8th ave IND to times square) this will subject the passengers to attacks by unfriendly entities.
But soon enough, once people realize such transfers are available, they'll figure them out. Some would obviously be more popular than others: Lawrence St/Jay St. and uptown Bleecker/B'way-Lafayette immediately come to mind; Hoyt-Schermerhorn to Hoyt and Christopher to W4th are another couple possibilities. And certainly, making just about everything between of Chambers & the Battery eligible for such a walking transfer makes wonderful sense.
You post maps at the appropriate subway exits. You might even paint a special stripe on the sidewalk.
The turnstiles have been accepting transfers since 1995 or 6. Ever since the buses have been accepting Metrocard.
I said turnstile to turnstile.
So you did.
The only time TA had the turnstile-to-turnstile transfers was at Lexington-53 and 51 Lexington. At the time TA was replacing the escalators. People could transfer by exiting at the 3rd Ave exit and then walk over to 51 for the 6.
Hmmm, I'm surprised they allowed the free transfers, I thought they would've left the passengers without a transfer at all.
That's rarely done.
When the 2/3 section of the Fulton Street complex was temporarily isolated from the rest of the station, paper transfers were distributed to allow passengers to transfer via the street. The TA did encourage the use of alternate transfer points, but there are no other transfer points with the J/M/Z, and for passengers not traveling to or from Brooklyn, there aren't many other choices for the 4/5 either.
With the number of people who transfer at Lexington and 53/51 it was the least TA could do.
There was also the short-lived Bway/Lafayette to Bleecker uptown transfer
every time you swipe or dip your card the card is read. Each bus line or station has a unique code number which I will not post. When you swipe your card at a subway station, the turnstile knows where you last used your card. There is a list (in the turnstile's software called a "table". This table determines transfers. To allow a transdfer from subway to subway would involve a software change so the turnstile would recognize this exception to the rule and give free entry.
Right, but I think what the original poster was saying was that unless the walking transfer required an exit swipe, the transfer back into the system at the other end of the transfer would allow anyone back in, since where they originally entered the system isn't relevant to granting/denying the transfer.
By the way, from observation I'd say that the table is in the station controller, not each turnstile. [Side note - sometimes they're hidden in utility rooms, but I saw one once that looked like the Star Trek (TOS) episode "Spock's Brain", sitting in the middle of an otherwise empty mezzanine. I think I saw one once that was just a fatter-than-normal side on one of the turnstiles.]
Oh, and was Cubic clever enough to assign different code numbers for the cards than the code numbers that are on the ID plates on the controllers (and unit numbers on the turnstiles)?
exit swipe is not needed. After the customer left the system and walked to the second station and swiped their card, the previous use would be recognized and since the customer reentered at station 2, the table would allow entry if the time is within 2 hours.
You are right about the location. I was trying to keep it simple and not reveal too much (which they dont even tell us!)
How does one gain access to the TAT for Rapid?
If I understand your question, When one swipes to get on the subway, they have a transfer that is good for 2 hours. During that time they can use it to transfer to a bus. During that time they could also use the transfer at Lexington 63/60 and at Court Square/Courthouse Square. If I didn't, oh well!
My wife will like that. She can take a round trip to Blomingdales (subway both ways) for the price of one-way.
Even better, buy her a Fun Pass so she can spend ALL DAY going to Bloomers, Macys & TJ Max.
Mr rt__:^)
Long as she waits 18 minutes before she uses it again.
It could be as little as 13 min. or as much as 18. Remember; this works on a 6 min. cycle.
A few times I've played with an unlimited card that I found. It is 18 minutes.
The list of (TAT)Transfer Acceptance Tables shows which transfer possibilities are either accepted or rejected. Perhaps the Station Agents have information about this.
Sorry. They do not give us the info since it is "decided" at the tursntile- ie if the wheel beeps once as displays
GO 1 TRSFR OK
the transfer was allowed. If the transfer was not allowed it will simple display GO and show the balance on the second line.
Sometimes the folks at the TA who control the Table are willing to modify it, but I still don't understand the need for it with all the Unlimited MCs in use.
Mr rt__:^)
I went to Branford today to show my son the Christmas layouts and Santa Claus and I must say they put on a first class production. Compliments to everyone there.
Anyway going home to LI (I live in Nassau) it was pouring out with bad driving conditions. The electronic signs on I-95 said traffic ahead and I figured there would be problems on the Merit/Hutch combo too so I got off in Bridgeport to see if there was room on the ferry without reservations. I figured the W/B LIE on Saturday night would be much better than I-95 and if it wasn't I could always take the Northern State. Well to my surprise no reservations were needed and I got on the 6:00 boat. As someone used to the Staten Island Ferry the $38 fare threw me for a loop. (At least I saved $3 on my EZ Pass for the Throgs Neck!!!) Because of the rain we couldn't go outside on the upper deck and we couldn't see out of any window at all. The ride was very choppy but I guess that was due to the weather. The only way to the ticket window on board was past the concession stand which was very tempting to my 5 yr old son which added to the $38 fare!
After debarking there is a long drive south on rt 112 to the LIE, with a number of red lights. The ride was about an hour and a half plus about a half hour waiting time, just to save about a half hour driving!!! All in all I think I wasted $38 and I don't think I'll use it again, except by motorcycle which is cheaper.
Of course it will really cheer me up if I find out that both I-95 and the Merrit/Hutch were both bumper to bumper from Bridgeport to the Throgs Neck!!
Having checked out the websites for all those ferries on Long Island, I'd say they are running a bunch of JUNK for boats. They all look like converted something-elses.....
That fare did sound outrageously high, too.
The Washington State Ferries are continually raising their fares but nowhere near that Bridgeport-Port Jeff route. Seattle to Bremerton (about an hour's "voyage") is $10.00 for car and driver. (Same fare for all the Seattle-side to the other-side services.) The boats are all very nice....some as old as 1927-vintage (ex-Southern Pacific RR, San Francisco!) with major rebuilds so they are like brand new....and some ARE just about brand new (1997-1998).
British Columbia also runs one beautiful operation. Their fares are up there with the B-PJ route, though. From Vancouver Island to the mainland, it's around CDN $40.00 for car, driver and 1 passenger (works out to US $27.50, that's what my credit card was charged). But the boats...OH!!...they are BEAUTIFUL!!!! Two of them are less than seven years old (the "Spirit of..." boats), and have on board cafeterias, buffet restaurants, cocktail bars, kiddie rooms, television rooms, computer hookups, etc. (The all-you-can-eat buffet was CDN $10.00 per person and the food was excellent!)
Actually the boat didn't seem that bad, and I'm sure I would have had a better opinion of the service if I had lived out east. My odometer showed I only saved about 25 miles. I thought it would have been more as I'm about 20 miles from the Throgs Neck. I figured I'd save about 20 miles on each side, I guess the ride south on rt 112 adds miles.
I would suspect the high price is justified by supply and demand with all the rich people going to the Hamptons although I think most of them would prefer the Orient Pt ferry and the 2 Shelter Island Ferries.
I guess the ride south on rt 112 adds miles.
A more direct route would be NY 347 to the Northern State Parkway.
:-) Andrew
The Washington State Ferries are continually raising their fares but nowhere near that Bridgeport-Port Jeff route. Seattle to Bremerton (about an hour's "voyage") is $10.00 for car and driver. (Same fare for all the Seattle-side to the other-side services.) The boats are all very nice....some as old as 1927-vintage (ex-Southern Pacific RR, San Francisco!) with major rebuilds so they are like brand new....and some ARE just about brand new (1997-1998).
Fares on the Washington ferries are low because they're part of state government. They're an essential part of the Puget Sound transportation network. Some of the routes go to Vashon Island, which has no road connections to the mainland, while other routes are alternatives to far longer road trips (for instance, Seattle to Bremerton must be at least 75 to 100 miles via I-5 and Galloping Gertie the Second).
Unless I'm quite mistaken, the Bridgeport-Pt. Jefferson ferry is a fully private, unsubsidized operation. But you're right, the fares are pretty high, no matter what.
Too bad they never built that Cross-Sound bridge!
Bob, could you imagine how bad the LIE would be if all the I-95 and Cross Bronx Expway traffic was on it. No, I'm glad it was never built.
I think that if the bridge between Oyster Bay and Rye was built, the traffic patterns would change so that there would be less traffic on I-95 between the Bronx and Rye, and DIFFERENT traffic on the LIE and Northern/Southern State Parkways between the Cross Island Pkway and Route 135. Sure, more people from Brooklyn, Queens and Western Nassau would be going further east to reach the Sound Bridge on those roads, but LESS people from Bronx/Upstate/New England would be there if their destination is east of Oyster Bay. In addition, the LIE/Route 135 interchange is designed a lot better than the LIE/Cross Island Pkway interchange, I don't think you would have the same backups that you have now at exit 30 if even more people got off at exit 44.
There are many ways to look at this. If the Rye-Bayville Bridge had been built, and if this eliminated the need for those in Queens and Nassau to take the Whitestone or the Throgs Neck, then no doubt there would be additional traffic on 95 by those who live north of the Sound and who now avoid the 95 traffic by using Rt. 287, the Cross-Westchester Expressway.
History shows us the facts. Supposedly, the opening of the Whitestone was going to relieve traffic on the Triboro. In fact, all that happened was that traffic increased altogether on both bridges. The Throgs Neck was supposed to serve the same purpose, but once again, it only increased traffic. As Casey Stengel would say, "you can look it up."
Surely, the Rye-Bayville bridge would have followed the same pattern. And Robert Moses would have "solved" this problem by building a Port Jefferson-Bridgeport Bridge and an Orient Point to New London Bridge. Once this proved unworkable his next move would doubtless be a Montauk to Providence Bridge, and when all of this turned out to be a traffic disaster, I wouldn't have been surprised if he had proposed paving over Long Island Sound altogether.
Sarcasm will get you everywhere! Anyway, I stand corrected regarding my statement about LESS traffic on 95 between the Bronx and Rye. It slipped my mind that those traveling from points west and north of the Bronx who were no longer crossing the Whitestone or Throgs Neck Bridges had to go somewhere! However, those who used to travel from points north and east of Rye can avoid 95 between Rye and the Bronx if they are heading to Long Island. So, it may be a wash.
I know, no matter what happens, the traffic will increase everywhere.
The answer to the congestion problem is of course more mass transit, but I am sure that on this board I am preaching to the converted. Believe me, Fishbowl, if you had ever been a dispatcher for a car service or a courier service, you wouldn't have had to think twice about that!
The Oyster Bay - Rye Log Island Sound Crossing
(I-287 Cross Westchester Expressway At I-95 New England Turnpike To Ny 135 Seaford Oyster Bay Expressway At NY 25 Jerico Turnpike)
From Steve Anderson's NYC Roads & Crossings
http://www.nycroads.com/crossings/oysterbay-rye/
THE OYSTER BAY-RYE TUNNEL?
Beginning in 2000, environmental activist Alexander Saunders and engineer Dr. Martin Herrenknecht devised plans for a twin-tube tunnel between Oyster Bay and Rye, along the approximate alignment of the proposed bridge. To construct the tunnel, one or more boring machines (each costing up to $50 million) would tunnel beneath the Long Island Sound. Each machine would have a "production rate" of up to 130 feet per day. The steel-and-concrete lined tubes would be burrowed through the gravel-sand soil under the Sound.
Borrowing from tunneling breakthroughs achieved during the late 1990's in Europe, Saunders expects that the Oyster Bay-Rye Tunnel would cost $1.5 billion (not including the cost of approach highways), and be constructed within five years. He proposed that the Oyster Bay-Rye Tunnel be part of a long-range master plan to place the entire I-287 corridor - from Suffern, Rockland County to Syosset, Nassau County - in a combined road-and-rail tunnel.
The Oyster Bay-Rye Tunnel would consist of two 60-foot-diameter tubes, with three traffic lanes (and continuous emergency shoulders) constructed on the upper level of each of the two tubes, and two rail lines on the lower level of each of the tubes. Combined, the four rail lines would serve both commuter and freight traffic. An additional service tunnel may be constructed for maintenance and emergency usage.
According to the Regional Plan Association (RPA), an engineering analysis would be necessary to determine appropriate highway and rail grades. The RPA had long been opposed to a Long Island Sound Bridge, but may consider the Saunders-Herrenknecht tunnel proposal upon engineering and environmental analyses.
Recomendation from Steve Anderson
TUNNEL:
Using the Saunders-Herrenknecht proposal as a beginning, the tunnel would begin just north of NY 25A in Oyster Bay, requiring a 3.25-mile-long northern extension of NY 135. The 12.75-mile-long, twin-tube tunnel would carry six traffic lanes (three in each direction) and emergency shoulders in the upper deck of the 60-foot-diameter tubes. Passenger and freight rail service could be added to the lower deck of the tubes, tying into the LIRR Oyster Bay line (and possibly other lines). At the northern portal, the tunnel would end just south of I-95 in Rye, requiring a 0.5-mile-long extension of I-287. Rail connections would be made with the MTA-Metro North New Haven line, and possibly a future rail line along I-287. Once below ground, the roadways would avoid ecological sensitive wetlands. The tunnel portals would replicate the stone-arch design of the Moses parkways. Ventilation towers would take the historic architecture of the region into consideration.
The LIRR In Westchester & Rockland Counties (Via Tapanzee Bridge Or Tunnel)& Connectuit (Via New Haven MN Line)From Penn Station & Atlantic Avenue Thru Nassau County?
Metro North In Penn Station & Thru Nassau County To Westchester & Rockland Counties (Via Tapanzee Bridge Or Tunnel)& Connectuit (Via New Haven MN Line)?
Building any bridge / tunnel in western Long Island makes no sense. If there is a crossing, it should be from eastern Long Island to eastern Connecticut, to provide an alternate route.
As others on this thread have pointed out, any auto route only increases, and never decreases, congestion. A rail route, on the other hand, does not have that effect.
Of course, you will never get funding for an exclusive rail use project.
Of course, you will never get funding for an exclusive rail use project.
Exactly. So you encourage a highway project, but become the most obstructionist of tree-hugging NIMBYs unless they include the rail project too.
Ideally, I would have two Sound crossings, each with both rail and road.
The western one is important because it would enable Nassau residents to cross into Westchester, Upstate, and New England without going though the already overcrowded Queens and the Bronx or going far out of the way into Suffolk. That could be a bored tunnel via NY 135/I-287.
The eastern one would best use the William Floyd Pkwy and I-91, since that's the closest anything comes to reaching the parallel shores. This would be important since it would save central and eastern Suffolk residents upwards of 100 miles and at least 2 hours of driving to go to New England.
:-) Andrew
Was the point of William Floyd Parkway to lead to a sound crossing?
Was the point of William Floyd Parkway to lead to a sound crossing?
That's a good question. Suffolk County built it back in (I think) the 1950's. Despite the name, it allows commercial vehicles. It wouldn't be too hard to cnvert it to a southern extension of I-91 if the crossing were built.
:-) Andrew
Was the point of William Floyd Parkway to lead to a sound crossing?
That's a good question. Suffolk County built it back in (I think) the 1950's. Despite the name, it allows commercial vehicles. It wouldn't be too hard to cnvert it to a southern extension of I-91 if the crossing were built.
I'd check nycroads.com to be sure, but the site seems to be down. In any event, I would very much doubt if the William Floyd Parkway had been built as part of a proposed Sound crossing. The much shorter, much cheaper to build Rye-Oyster Bay crossing was still an active proposal at the time Suffolk County built the WFP. Central and Eastern Suffolk county was still largely undeveloped at the time, so it's doubtful that there would have been much demand for a crossing in the area at the time.
But no traffic counts can change the fact that Long Island is essentially isolated. It is just not good for Long Island that the only viable way off the island is through the largest and most densely populated city in the United States, a very indirect route if you're going north or east of the city.
:-) Andrew
This is the most compelling reason for a Long Island Sound crossing. LI needs a back door to New England, if only for the sake of a possible emergency -- not for evacuation per se, but as a means of getting in emergency vehicles and services. The other big reason is it would relieve traffic that now has to detour thru the Bronx to get to CT and New England.
Where it is put is open to debate. My own twist to this debate is I would *insist* it include a rail element, allowing trains to bypass Manhattan or Queens to get into the LIRR system.
I think it would resemble the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel, or even closer, the Oresund Crossing (bridge-tunnel, with rail) between Copenhagen, Denmark and Lund, Sweden.
This would be very expensive. If you put it far enough east, however, the the cost in time and gas of doubling back thru the Bronx would reasonably balance out what is likely to be a very high toll ($10, $15, even more, in either direction).
If you look at old Hagstrom maps from the 60's you will see a black stripe running N/S east of Deer Park Avenue labeled "Babylon-Northport Expressway proposed Route". This road was to be built as an overflow road for people traveling within Long Island. A section labeled Rte 231 was built between the Southern State Parkway and Montauk Highway. (A great drag-strip).
Since the bridge was not built and 135 not extended north past Jericho Turnpike, there was no need for this road and it has been delisted. Also certain real estate parcels acquired by NYS have been sold off and houses built upon them. Therefore Babylon-Northport Expy will never happen.
Heh. be prepared to live on the bottom deck if you go by bike :) It sucks in rainy / cold weather. BTW, if you've got a good looking bike (say, a Harley with a flame job and custom seat and a nice exhaust), you sometimes get bumped to the front of the line :)
If $38.00 seems a bit high, try it on a motorcycle. $20 for the bike and $10 for the passenger (or something close to that). They squeeze the bikes into spaces where cars won't fit at a profane cost. The only good thing is that most times bikers need not have a reservation. The New London-Orient Pt. ferry is not much better except for the view of the Sub repair facility leaving the ct. side.
I've gone by motorcycle once on that ferry with the Blue Knights. They usually take the other one at New London to Orient Point. I've gone with them on that one a few times. The trip on 25A to the LIE seems forever though!!! However you can stop at some of the wineries for refreshments. (Not that I would ever ride after a glass of wine)
Sunday morning wine tastings are one of my club's favorites
>>> Sunday morning wine tastings are one of my club's favorites <<<
Sonny Barger would be proud of you guys! :-)
Tom
Yup. The Bridgeport-Port Jefferson Ferry is criminally overpriced, and so impossibly slow that it's utterly and completely useless!!!!!!!!!!1 Oh sure, but we don't need a cross-sound bridge! Yeah right!
It saves no time and costs waaaay more money---unless you're going from somewhere very close to Bridgeport to somewhere very close to Port Jefferson.
It is sort of a pleasant ride on a nice day. I recomend if it's going to be a one-way ride to use it towards Port Jeff. It's a much nicer place to end up.
:-) Andrew
Anyone know about this new book "Unifying the Subways" listed as available at the Walthers catalog website? It shows one of my beloved ABs on the cover.
We've got: Hot Lunch!
It has gone for sale on eBay a couple of times in the recent past.
Alan Glick
I have it. Good book, nice vintage photos--some of which I haven't ever seen. It was just published a few months ago.
Great book! It's available for $17.00 from Ron's Books; bought one there not too long ago. Web site is "www.ronsbooks.com".
I have the book and the B/W pictures are really great. There are a number of errors in some of the picture captions however!
I find it historically disturbing when a person dismisses another persons opinion about racism-
Person A: That's racism.
Person B: That's NOT racism, you're just saying that.
Racism has many forms-
Why do people only believe the violent forms?
I don't think, however, that certain people are going out of their way to bar others from being railfans.
It didn't become a debate about racism until it became an economic issue.
That's when it became a discussion about racism.
"It didn't become a debate about racism until it became an economic issue.
That's when it became a discussion about racism."
It became a debate about racism when person A responded "Racism" to person B's statement that Blacks have not achieved the economic success of Whites.
Alan Glick
In the late 80's, were the 27-30's rebuilt, or just repainted in the redbird scheme?-
I remember for a little while, all of a sudden the 27/30's running on the M (and I think J) showed up in the dark red body/silver roof scheme-
They were just around for a bit, running I believe with R-32 J's, then all of a sudden, the rebuilt slant 40's and 40M/42's appeared.
Same thing with the dark green R-10's on the CC.
Rebuilds or just repaints?
All 162 R30 GE cars got a GOH by Coney Island, though they didn't do such a great job judging by their reultant MDBF's. Some of their compenents survive today as donor organs to Flushing Redbirds. Other R30's got repainted as well simply to improve appearance. Some went to the scarpyard in New Jersy within a month of getting painted.
The 110 WH R10's were overhauled and could have run longer. Keipper wasnted them scrapped because of the antiquated door controls, they were surplus, newer GOH R30's existed, and they "looked" old. It seems to me an 8 car train of 6 10's spliced by 2 WH R30's could have solved the door problem.
I don't see what Alan Kiepper had to do with the decision to retire the R-10s, since they went in 1989 while David Gunn was still President of NYC Transit (Authority) and hadn't yet announced that he would be leaving.
David
The 162 R30's were in sorry shape before their overhaul. Maybe the GOH wasn't so great in your eyes, but it was a definite improvement.
Those remaining R-10s were still mechanically sound, as I understand. Some of them had a bad case of flat wheels, though.
I used to love the way the R16's sounded going to Rock Park on the C near the end. They sounded great as they sped down the Rock line.
TYPO NOT R16. I meant R10
Yeah, speed and the R16 just never got together very well!
Makes you wonder if the R-16s even had that magic final field shunt step. Those of us who remember the R-10s on the A know for a fact the Thunderbirds did.
when the R30/27 went for G.O,THE 32's replaced them teporarly.As the cars returned,the 32's went back to the south.The GO 27/30'S saw service on the J,M,L,Z,C and H lines.When the R40S/40/42 cars returned from G.O,they were placed on the Eastern Div. and gradually replaced the 27/30,inwhich were then placed in service on the C line. These cars then replace the R10'S.these cars were replaced by the R68/68A.
The R-10 was replaced by the R-68(A).
The R-27/30 was replaced by the R-143. Er, will be replaced. Oops.
Where exactly was PATH's Henderson Yard and yard lead track in relation to some landmarks visible from the PATH train?
It was just east of Grove St. Station in the westbound (JSQ & NWK) tunnel. The opening is covered by a plywood partition, which can be seen from a passing train or from the end of the station platform.
As Fitz mentioned, the connection was just east of the Grove Street platforms on the Journal Square bound track.
The trains would have to make a reverse move to get to the yard -- if they were coming from JSQ they'd use a crossover west fo Grove Street.
Once on the lead track, it angled under the yard then made a sharp right turn, and trains actually exited the tunnel into the yard facing southwest. The yard was extremely compact -- amazing how they got as much as they did into the place, and the way the lead track down tothe mainline was engineered.
You might find these links interesting:
one and two
thanks everyone
This is what I think the TA should do about keeping the fare at $1.50:
I feel the problem is not that the fare is too small but rather that they get to ahead of themselves with their fare initiatives:
1) Get rid of the 10% free part of the Pay-per-ride card, someone buys for 15.00, give them 15.00 worth of rides, not 16.50
2) Raise the unlimited cards up a couple of bucks.
3) Start charging fare on the SIRT. I don't get this at all. From what I understand, you only have to pay if you board or exit at St. George, that's ridiculous, as everyone gets off at the stop before and walks, loss of money there. No offense to Staten Islanders, but they should be charged something for use of this train. Look: people use this train to avoid the Verrazano which is $7 toll, meanwhile if you live in Tottenville, you can ride to Tompkinsville {I think that's the stop before St. George} and walk the {I think it's 5} blocks to St. George, then get a free ferry ride, then if you have to take a subway, you only have to pay a maximum of $1.50 for your whole trip? And if you work in Lower Manhattan, you go from Tottenville to work there for free while somebody who lives on York Avenue still has to pay!!!
With these plans implemented I feel the TA could go at least a little while longer without increasing the fare again.
1) True, cmon MTA, enough people have gotten the hang of the MetroCard.
2) Not necessairly, but I see where you're coming from.
3) AMEN!!! So true!
1) Eliminating the 10% discount sort of kills the point of Metrocard, but I expect the MTA will offer a smaller discount in the future.
2) Still a good deal.
3) I agree with you and I live on S.I. The "free" SIR fare started in 1997 as part of the "one city - one fare" program. The NYCDOT did not want to go through the expense of installing Metrocard turnstiles in the Whitehall and St. George Ferry Terminals. So the $0.50 ferry fare was effectively eliminated. The MTA didn't want to go through the even higher expense of installing weatherproof Metrocard turnstiles in the 21 SIR stations. The MTA claims that something like 90% of SIR passengers are either going to or coming from the St. George SIR station, where there are Metrocard turnstiles. They didn't figure on cheap people (not everyone as you state) getting off at Tompkinville to beat the $1.50 fare at St. George. That all said I still don't see either the NYCDOT or MTA installing Metrocard turnstiles at the ferry terminals or SIR stations at this time. (By the way the round-trip Verrazano toll for S.I. residents with EZpass is $3.20, a 54% discount off of the full $7.00 toll. Tolls are only collected westbound.)
1) Eliminating the 10% discount sort of kills the point of Metrocard, but I expect the MTA will offer a smaller discount in the future.
Free bus/subway transfers still make Metrocards a good idea for riders.
Saw this on Bravo last night. Since it was the broadcast edition and not the theatrical release version I didn't see as much of Angie Dickinson and Deborah Allen LOL.
The film was shot in NYC in 1980. One scene Deborah Allen runs down into the subway jumps the turnstile and gets on an R-17. Only saw xx94 as the number board. Eventually she runs through several cars and while between an R17 and an R21/22 she is attacked but her boyfriend comes to her rescue by shooting a white aeorsol substance in the attackers face.
Will rent the film in the near future. Will tell the wife its so I can get the car number and station it was filmed in, not to see Angie Dickinson and Deborah Allen in two different showers LOL.
Also have a post on Bus-Talk about the flick.
Big article in today's main section of Newsday regarding NY&A and their attempt to take truck traffic off the road.
Nationally 15% of freight goes by rail while here on LI its less than 1 %.
Here's the article.
Thanks for posting that.
Are there any 1 shuttles between 242 and 96? I was on a SB 1 approaching 96 today, having just run express from 137 (i.e., presumably carrying a number of passengers who needed to transfer to an uptown train to reach bypassed stations, so we should have had priority). We were held at a red signal, and about 30 seconds later a 3 train came up the ramp, stopped for a few seconds, and crossed onto the local track in front of us. As we finally began moving again, a light 1 train proceeded north from the southbound express track, switching to the northbound express (Lenox) track. Is there any scheduled 1 service terminating on the southbound express track at 96 or had something gone wrong?
Incidentally, all southbound trains were running local from 72 to 42. I'm guessing this is because of work at 42 (I only rode from 86 to 59 and the switch to the express tracks at 72 was blocked off but there was no work going at 72 itself). I don't know about northbound service.
There is no sevice that I know of that terminates at 96st S/B. I suspect that what you saw was a transfer of equipment to Lenox, 180st, or 239. #1 and #3 line equipment are all over the place. Last night the # 2 line was running 62 type equipment all night, at least one train. I was working the GO at Jackson Av, single tracking overnight. I did'nt note what line the cars belonged.
It sounds like a car transfer move between 240th and Lenox.
Work was being done at 72 yesterday, none today, finishing touches on some edge tiles at 42 today, more work yesterday as well.
The 7/22 map was riddled with errors. What errors have we found on the 12/16 map?
I've only found one: the former joint 1/9 stations north of 137 are marked as express stops. Since the 9 isn't running, all stops north of 96 should be marked as local stops. South of 14, all stops (including Chambers, Park Place, Fulton, and Wall) are correctly marked as local stops.
I do not consider it an error that the E to 179 is not shown (although it is listed in the service information table), and I'm treating the weekend G to Church an unannounced bonus.
Keep 'em rolling in! I mean, it'd be nice if there were no errors on the maps, but because there just always are, why not have fun with it!
Weekend "G" to Church? I thought it was Saturdays only.
What is the reason for the extension? A long term G.O. on the IND?
Will an extra train be placed in service for the extra 5 stations?
What is this about the E going to 179. Details please?
A few trips will come out of 179th Street in the morning, and a few trips will go to 179th Street in the afternoon.
David
I keep hearing this rumor, but it's not on the new map- but then, you never see the '2' or '5' running in and our of New Lots when in fact quite a few run in service along the Livonia el when going to or from the yard. Way back in January '79 I rode a '5' in this manner around 3:00 PM.
Anyway, it would be great to have a railfan window along Hillside again, unless these rush-hour specials are R46s- like the rush-hour Rockaway Park 'A' specials that are invariably R44s. Would I be pressing my luck in hoping this special 'E' to 179th might actually use the neglected EXPRESS tracks along Hillside?
That would really be paradise: revision of express service AND a railfan window on a stretch that's had neither since 1992!
Given the tight space now at Jamaica, those express tracks may never be available for use in revenue service!
I have to check further, but I think that a few E trains will come from 179th but not go back there in service. How? After PM service, some E trains laid up at D4 Kew can d/h there upon being put back into service for the next AM rush hour or have a few trains laid up on the lower level at 179 St. I did notice some (I think 3) early PM E crews report to 179th St. They will probably get their trains as after AM rush hour Kew Gardens dropouts laid up to the lower level at 179th St. for PM service. We'll all find out next week, perhaps sooner if the timetables come out to the field beforehand and I can take a look. I personally would not like to see any E trains teminate at 179th St. No matter how many announcements are made, no matter if the signs are correct or not, you'll have a trainload of passengers winding up at 179th St, in error. You also have the problem of wrong lineups due to confused/rookie tower operators and train operators. The E has been going to Parsons/Archer since 12/88, yet you'd be suprised for me to tell you that when I worked out there (5/99 to 7/01), I encountered several passengers weekly who thought the E still went to 179th St.!
It will be utter mayhem. It's a dumb idea.
We need the increased TPH for the E with it being the only Express - 53st line. It currently runs at 12TPH, the max for Parsons-Archer. They want to bring it up to 15TPH and have an even mix between E and F.
Archer can't handle 15TPH terminating. That's why the 3 extra E's go to 179th.
Archer can't handle 15TPH terminating. That's why the 3 extra E's go to 179th.
I assume this is because of the way the line was terminated during the money crunch back when it was built. If they spent the money to extend the line further, this problem would disappear, wouldn't it?
No gurentee but you would need more tracks not longer tracks. Like at 179 st with maybe a lower leval. Also there shoud be a rail connection between the J and Z and the upper leval E so maybe E trains can run from some other yard?
Stepping back (that is, where train crews take out the train after the one they arrived on to save time) might solve the problem of too many trains for the platforms. This is done quite successfully in London - at Aldgate where the 8tph terminating on the Metropolitan share two tracks with 8tph THROUGH on the Circle; an identical situation at Baker St where on two platforms 8tph on the Metropolitan are through, the other 8tph terminating (to relieve Aldgate) ; and at Brixton where at times 27tph (Victoria Line) are operated from two tracks (they actually step back two trains here). If they can do that in London, it should be no more difficult in New York.
Stepping back (I believe "dropping back" is the local term) is a common practice here as well.
600 ft trains would entail adding over switches or lots of ovr hanging moves in a hand throw yard, YIKES!
Remember ENY is set up for 480ft trains and CNR is kind of far for PA.
In a moment of cruelty we sent someone who asked to the back of the relay tracks for the J 'elevator' to the E train.
It's not that they can't it's that this new way is presumed easier for putins and such like considering the increased number of trains in the area.
I was at PA one day at 7am when F's AND E's terminated there due to police activity at 179. It was intense.
The obvious dumb question is, why can't Archer handle 15 TPH? It's a standard terminating configuration with two tracks. Doesn't the #7 at Times Square handle 20 TPH under the same circumstances?
I don't know whay Archer can't. The tracks do extend about 3 more train lengths to the southeast. But I have been on E trains bumper-to-bumper from Van Wyck out.
Remember that E trains have to merge onto the F's local tracks at Van Wyck Blvd before they can resume express service. I assume the switching and crossing-over and signalling reduces the line's capacity a bit, in contrast to a situation where trains are merely following one another.
I take it the 179 St-bound E will not be using the express tracks (ie skipping 169 St)? Trains on the express tracks at Van Wyck Blvd. pass more quickly and thus thee should be less of a delay to a train merging from the Archer Avenue ramp.
I thought the Archer Avenue Extension had direct access to both the local and express tracks on the mainline.
The E rush hour specials will run express on Hillside.
That is correct, it does. Some folk want to get to 8th Ave. from Hillside without changing trains, and I agree with them.
ur right Mr Greenberger. According to Mr Dougherty's trackbook, which i got in my hand, track D4 where the E Express takes the bottom yellow into archer avenue, that homeball X762 u can take a bottom green to 179. after all thats how they layup R46 nights and weekends. F trains can take a bottom green onto the express tracks. Fs from Jamaica yard also use this track to get to 179 faster. Anyways u can stop at union turnpike and then make parsons and hillside ur next stop. the Express tracks can lead u to 179. However i hope Motormen look at their schedules. I know i would be confused if i was a T/O. which lineup do i take again? its easy to remember. bottom green for 179th, bottom yellow for archer.
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
Safety
Attentiveness
Train Control
I read a sign saying that 3 minutes after departing 179 they will reach parsons blvd. Now weather this means express or local I don't know but maybe a scedual head can tell.
It is on the map. Look at the route information table on the bottom.
E trains will run express on Hillside. I don't know what equipment they will use.
r-46 I bet cause they want to be mean to the railfans!
Also remember that there are more E as R-46 than ever before.
Damn, I couldn't find one this morning as I rode the A from Chambers to 42nd.
Will there be express service for the F there like before the E webt to jamaica Center? What is the point of sending some E's to 179? It just seems like it will confuse people and bring less Trains to JC. What's the point?
Check my previous posting.
An error in judgement by the TA: "(2) - 7th Avenue Local"
How so?
The 2 is a local in Manhattan and will be that way for a while.
I know it's accurate, it just hurts to have to see it.
I think I found one... The "F" under the Lexington Avenue station was not bold, meaning it's part time. (Or was it my bad eyesight?)
Do the maps have symbology to show free Metrocard transfers between the 63rd/Lex and 59/Lex, and in LIC?
Obviously the map I can consult on-line still shows the 63rd St shuttle.
Yes they do. A black/white dotted transfer line. It's in the key at the top of the map as well (glad they remembered to update it).
Very cool...
The E to 179 (4 AM, 4 PM, 3 reverse-PM) makes more trips than the A to Rockaway Park (5 AM, 5 PM). It should be shown, though I suspect the confusion factor is the reason it isn't.
And if it wasn't for this board I would have assumed the G to Church was a myth. It's not mentioned anywhere in the literature they give out.
Union Square has been undergoing near-constant reconstruction since 1985, it seems. It's more nightmarish to navigate than ever, as my experience with a flea market and a rainstorm proved last night. Just try to find a way out!
Anyway, some of this reconstruction has to do with transit, no? If not, what's it all about?
www.forgotten-ny.com
I don't know what's going on there. Last week I found myself walking through that crowded flea market when I was trying to get to Staples. Some signs, at the very least, would be most helpful.
Maybe NYCT hired the geniuses who worked over Penn in he sixties. You would enter take a train to Philly coming back less than a day later and that entrabce had dissappeared. Signs? what are those?
The Union Square Staples is the best one EVER! It's open 24 hours! I'll leave it to you all to figure out why that's awesome...
Yeah, but they couldn't give me the rebate form I was looking for. I finally gave up and returned the item that I should have gotten for free.
Anyway, some of this reconstruction has to do with transit, no? If not, what's it all about?
The renovation of the Union Square complex (4-5-6/N-R/L) ended a year or more ago. The surface construction now is to expand the park area west by removing the loop where Transit Police officers used to park (near the Gandhi statue) and simultaneously do some underground work (sewers, water mains, whatever). Bit of a local controversy, since it will reconfigure the Green Market somewhat.
It'll all be over soon. When I walked past last night, it looks like they're grading the area. Not sure if they're going to use asphalt, cobblestones, or something else.
Hi I am new to this forum. I am 15 and I am from Boston. I am interested in becoming a TO for the MBTA. I was just wondering what qualifications are needed and what I should major in, in college (if it would help). Also if you could tell me if there are any schools that would teach me about the job. I would really appreciate your help. Thanks
Ryan
I am not an expert in train operator qualifications, but I would like to throw in my two cents' worth.
First, study hard and finish high school with good grades - no matter what you decide to do. Second, if you want to go to college, go to college. Go because, if you are interested and prepared to do the work, college can offer you a good education no matter what career you ultimately pick. And a college degree can make you more attractive to other employers and to the MBTA, should you ultimately decide that operating atrain is not for you (or if you want to be promoted to management later).
I'll stop here and let the transit pros take over. Zman, Train Dude?
Like Ron said, first finish school. Some transit agencies require a completion of high school or even college credits in order to be hired, so this should be your first course of action.
After (or during) your schooling, you most likely would apply by sending in your resume to the MBTA. The MBTA also holds Job Fairs every few years in the Boston area.
The thing that you want to do most is just get your foot in the door. The MBTA may or may not hire Train Operators from outside sources, so if you should happen to find out that they are hiring for Bus Operators, Token Booth Clerks (Station Agent), or Station/Car Cleaners, then you may have to accept one of these titles for at least a year before you would be eligible for promotion to Train Operator.
The following MBTA web address posts available jobs within the agency:
http://www.mbta.com/newsinfo/employment/jobview.cfm
Currently there is only one open slot for Superintendent (Planning), but train service jobs also get posted within the above forum. Check it every month.
Also, ask around. Next time you see a Train Operator, Token Booth Clerk, or a Station Cleaner, ask him/her how she was able to obtain the job and what qualifications were required. Don't be shy. If someone isn't willing to answer your questions, then ask someone else. Even in the subway, you're going to meet workers that simply do not want to be there. But when you meet someone that is receptive to your questions, then the things that these individuals tell you can really go a long long way in helping you become what you want to be.
I am a Train Operator for the New York City Subway, so I have a bit of knowledge in regards to things like this. Remain focused on what you want to be, and you will become it. Good luck to you.
I want to thank everyone that replied for their help. Especially zman. A friend of my uncle is a T/O on the red line I will have to ask him. Also I dont think they advertise the T/O jobs (at least to everyone) since they are union jobs. Also on a side note I wasnt planning on dropping out of high school (that seemed to be the general feeling). Just to let you know. But anyway thanks for your help. I really appreciate it.
"Also on a side note I wasnt planning on dropping out of high school (that seemed to be the general feeling). Just to let you know."
I did not mean to imply that you were planning to drop out. But it's great to hear that from you anyway.
Good luck to you. I visit Boston from time to time and lived in Cambridge for two years, riding the Red Line all the time. Maybe I'll ride your train one day!
>>>>>>>>Also I dont think they advertise the T/O jobs (at least to everyone) since they are union jobs
Sure they do, but not often. I first found out about the Conductor's test (my first title with the NYCTA) when an ad was placed in the sports section of the New York Daily News.
I saw a roll from a NY subway car rollsign on Ebay. It has the routes from the N, R, G, F, E lines & the ill-fated Train to the Plane JFK Express. It has a buy it now for $95 and I was wondering if it was a good deal or not.
Too much!!!!
$35 - $50 at the high end but $95 - the seller is dreaming (I wonder if it is Subway Al).
I saw the same item, and yes, the seller is Subway Al.
These questions are continually posed here. What is this sign worth to you? Enter that amount as your maximum bid. Sit back and wait for the end of the auction. You may or may not "win" the item.
What is one share of Enron "worth"? $85.00 or 26 cents, two selling prices within the past 52 weeks. Maybe more than $85.00, maybe zero. "Worth" means what?
Incidentally, I have done business with Subway Al on e-Bay, and met him at the trolley meet in King of Prussia, Pa. last year.
I have done buisness with Alan Zelazo (Subway Al) on a number of occasions. Either he is getting desperate for $$ or he is getting carried away with his prices.
The only reason why I asked was because usually if someone bids rather than buying it the price goes over the buy it now price.
You have to take a chance.
I have successfully bid on items and the price came in way less than the "Buy It Now" price.
Personally I feel $95 is a bit steep, but I don't like anyone telling me how to spend my money so I'm not going to tell you how to spend yours. Actually that's not an original R46 sign, it's the replacement that existed in the cars until they were overhauled in 1990-1991. Also, someone just spent $77.76 on a 1967 subway map, so I guess if you feel it's worth it, go for it. Good luck.
URL?
Probably easy to find if you type in the relevant search terms.
Alan Glick
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1045608873
BTW - Subway Al sent me an e-mail. He got pissed at me for my earlier comments.
Alright - so he isn't desparate for money. As he states that is the going price.
I am not going to stop anyone from bidding what they want for an item on any auction. But once you ask I will give my opinion.
As promised, part III of my trip to NYC last weekend, delayed because of exams this week...
Sunday was major railfanning morning. My parents left for Ottawa early since they were driving, and since my flight wasn't until 3:30 in the afternoon, I had all morning to railfan.
I spent it going to Stillwell and back, since I had never really seen Brooklyn before. I got an R32 (N) at 34th Street, which as we all know was going over the Manhattan Bridge that weekend, so I got another amazing view from the bridge, this time during the day (on Friday, I rode the (Q) across at 5:00 pm and hence it was dark). What had slipped my mind though was that the (N) was going via the West End, whereas I was expecting the Sea Beach. But that was okay, any line would do. Some nice views of the different Brooklyn neighbourhoods from the West End line!! And of course, the view of all the Slant R40's parked at CI yards was beautiful!!!
I got off at Stillwell and transferred to an (F) of R46's for a ride along the Culver. Again, some great views of the Brooklyn neighbourhoods, and some gorgeous views of the city on the El over the Gowanus Canal!!!
What are the areas around the West End and Culver lines like at night? Are they safe to walk around (not that I'd do that at night, just curious)?
So I rode the (F) all the way back into Manhattan to 42nd Street, then transferred to a (7) and rode a Worlds Fair car one stop to Grand Central, with the purpose of finding an R142(R142A), the only car type on my list of trains to ride that I didn't yet. Sure enough, I found one on the (6) and rode it to 14th Street. The announcements weren't working properly, the conductor was announcing the stations and the cowboy voice (that male R142 voice really does sound like a cowboy!!!) was coming on for the door closing announcements. But all in all I liked the train, especially the AC engines!!!! Music to my ears!!! The R142A and the T1 in Toronto are tied for the best sounding AC engines in my book!!!
I then got a R68A (Q) at 14th Street for one last ride on an express, and then got the very same R32 (N) at 57/7th (I recognized the C/R's voice) and an M60 bus back to LaGuardia. I arrived at LaGuardia a good 2 hours before my flight, only to find out I didn't really have to and could have easily fit in a trip up Queens Boulevard!!! Oh well, better safe than sorry, and I have to leave something for next time!!!
So all in all it was a great trip. I got to see every car class running except the R40M and R42 (and now, the R143 since it only started running two days after I left). I'll definitely be back, maybe even next year after I finally finish my university studies and have a job that pays enough that I can afford trips to NYC.
At that time I'll be trying out the Sea Beach and Brighton in Brooklyn as well as the Canarsie (for those R143's!!!) and the J/M/Z, and the Queens Blvd and Flushing lines. As well, I hope to ride some of the Bronx lines, the only borough I haven't been to yet (aside from Staten Island). Well, let's just say I'd like to ride the whole system, but those are the priorities!!
In everything I've read about the Malbone St. disaster, they mention the Consumer's Park station-
I kow a little about this, just from what I've read, but what I'm wondering is-
A. Does anything exist of it?
B. It's always referred to as a very small station-were there platforms on both sides of the right-of-way?
C. What "consumer park" were they referring to in the name of the station?
D. Do any pictures, etc. exist of the station?
A. No. It was located 850 feet north of Malbone Street (now Empire Boulevard), near the intersection of Washington Avenue and Montgomery Street.
B. Yes, there were. It was a flag stop station, not a regular stop.
C. It may have been a reference to the "beer garden" located there, although I don't know.
D. None that I am aware of.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Chris. Good answers all around.
The Consumer's Park station also MAY have served as a distribution point for supplies to the Brewery (via SBK), although I have not encountered any evidence of my own. Paul Matus might have some info in this area.
I Have An 1898 Rand McNally Map Of The City Of Brooklyn (& The City Of New York South Of 38th Street)
The Franklin Avenue Shuttle and The Brighton Line (South Of Malborne St/Empire Blvd) Were Once The Brooklyn & Brighton Beach Railroad (My Map Shows The Line Ending In A WYE At Atlantic Avenue & The LIRR Surface ROW. (The B & BB Goes Off The Map at Ocean Ave/Clarkson Avenue)
I Have An 1898 Rand McNally Map Of The City Of Brooklyn (& The City Of New York South Of 38th Street) The Franklin Avenue Shuttle and The Brighton Line (South Of Malborne St/Empire Blvd) Were Once The Brooklyn & Brighton Beach Railroad (My Map Shows The Line Ending In A WYE At Atlantic Avenue & The LIRR Surface ROW.
The Brighton Line was connected with the LIRR Altantic Ave. Line and Brighton trains used it from 1878-1884. According to Mark Feinman's Early Rapid Transit in Brooklyn, 1878 to 1913 , after that, the connection was severed and it was connected with the Fulton El in 1896, so that 1898 map was not up to date. Coincidentally, I also have an 1898 map on my website which also incorrectly shows the connection only at Atlantic Ave.
A.Yes now as Prospect Park
B.IIRC:It was a flag station
C.Don't know
D.Don't know
"A.Yes now as Prospect Park "
It definately wasn't Prospect Park
Some say (incorrectly) that it became Botanic Garden...
but I know that to be false.
Sorry I ment Botanical Garden.My mistake.
It's quite alright...
Look at Paul Matus's response to my query...
He links to a picture!!
In everything I've read about the Malbone St. disaster, they mention the Consumer's Park station-
A. Does anything exist of it?
Of the platforms and access, no. But you can still clearly see where the siding for the Consumer's Park Brewery was, on the east side of the right-of-way.
B. It's always referred to as a very small station-were there platforms on both sides of the right-of-way?
Yes.
C. What "consumer park" were they referring to in the name of the station?
It was a small brewery.
D. Do any pictures, etc. exist of the station?
I haven't seen any. But a picture of the location today is here:
Hey-
Thanks so much!!!
I've always wondered about it.
Much appreciated!!
A great source of information on the Consumer Park Station, and on the whole Franklin Park shuttle is in Phillip Copp's "Silver Connections" Vol. 2
Alan Glick
Along with Paul's response, I must add a bit of info I recently cultivated from a 1929 map of the Borough of Brooklyn.
The Consumer's Park station was indicated not so much as a 'regular stop' but more like a siding. The map showed that Consumer's Park was accessed via a spur from the Franklin Line -- and it branched out from the north. This would mean that a train would have to 'wrong rail' on the northbound track to dislodge/receive passengers from Consumer's.
Paul, I will get a copy of this to you as soon as I can.
BMTman
maybe THAT'S why riders had to tell the train crew they wanted to get off, and people at the station/siding had to set a signal for the motorman to see...
verrrry interesting
still would like to see a picture, it would hopefully clarify everything..
Thanks BMTman :)
Hi, Doug,
By 1929 Consumers Park was closed. I also have non-definitive evidence that Consumers Park MAY have been renamed Botanic Garden before being closed and replaced by the current Bontanic Garden station.
The track you are looking at is undoubtedly the Consumers Park freight siding which indeed serviced the Consumers Park Brewery,
Even the BMT's service commitment would not have entailed backing a passenger train into a siding to discharge passengers at a one-cow way station. ;-)
A picture from Joe Testagrose's wonderful collections shows a pre war R1 MU (dated April 20, 1969) with covered AxiFlow fans, a la R32 models.
When did the pre war R units have the exposed overhead fans replaced with those of the type shown here?
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r1/r1-103e.jpg
"Can the LIRR trains go onto the IND division (aside all legal problems)?
If the LIRR trains can't go onto the IND can they go onto the 75 footers complient track? "
Don't know when that experiment was done. R-1 #103 was the only one I know of and still exists as a mothballed "museum" car. It was maybe be stored at Coney Island Yard.
Bill "Newkirk"
LIRR cars are 85 feet. I doubt they would fit on the B division.
"{A picture from Joe Testagrose's wonderful collections shows a pre war R1 MU (dated April 20, 1969) with covered AxiFlow fans, a la R32 models."
Don't know when that experiment was done. R-1 #103 was the only one I know of and still exists as a mothballed "museum" car. It was maybe be stored at Coney Island Yard.
Bill "Newkirk"
I'd quite like to see a map of where the Second System was meant to go, as I'm struggling a bit with the geography of the Bronx... can anyone help me, please?
There are some resources at this site. There a couple of picks on this page that should give you more information that you can digest in a single sitting. You will want to read the bit on the IND 2nd system, as well as the one on the 2nd Av subway.
http://www.nycsubway.org/ind/
The current plans call for not going to the Bronx, but it's agreed they will leave provision to do so. Various proposals are floating around. The current one seems to follow the New Haven tracks (parallel to the Bruckner Expressway, i.e., the expressway leading into the Bronx portion of the Triboro Bridge), up to Co-op City, which is in the NE Bronx, and probably, also taking over the (Dyre Av) IRT 5-line.
As for maps, if you are really gonna play with this group you have to get the Hagstrom Five-Borough New York City Atlas. It is carried by Amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com. I imagine it is similarly available from the European equivalent (but probably at a premium). This atlas is quite complete and also shows ALL the subways lines and stations (with a few fudges here and there).
Joe Korman created a BAHN map of the Phase II system. He also has a blueprint map of the Phase II system for sale.
http://www.nycsubway.org/software/bahn/indnot.zip
Phil Hom
The site did not have a map on it. (Maybe that's why he has the map for sale!). But half of the fun of figuring out the Second System is taking a 5-boro atlas and drawing the routes based on the writen desciptions.
I downloaded the map to run with BAHN. Yes, it is not really helpful if you don't know things like Kings or Richmond county that only a native would know about.
Where can I get the blueprint and more details on it?
http://www.quuxuum.org/~joekor/indsecondsystem/index.htm
Phil Hom
The news reported that Acela had run over teenagers in Bucks County PA who may have been trespassing on the ROW.
No details yet.
Point browsers to:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-railroad-deaths1209dec09.story?coll=sns%2Dap%2Dnation%2Dheadlines
I'll bet that aerodynamic shape really helped scoop them out of the way. People get really mashed into an AEM-7. I'll bet the ACELA comes clean with a shammy. This reminds me of my mom's friend who was driving on the NY Thruway in an old VW Beatle and hit two deer w/in the space of 20 minutes. The shape of the Bug scooped them up an over w/ no damage to the vehicle.
This reminds me of my mom's friend who was driving on the NY Thruway in an old VW Beatle and hit two deer w/in the space of 20 minutes. The shape of the Bug scooped them up an over w/ no damage to the vehicle.
Mike, I hope you're majoring in creative writing, because that statement is 100% pure bull**** and you know it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Um, no its not. I heard the story from the person whom it happened to and she it not a lair. Selkirk can confirm the proliferation of deer on the Thruway.
" I heard the story from the person whom it happened to and she it not a lair."
Where is her lair, and did you visit it?
:0)
Everyone knows there are plenty of deer along the NY Thruway, but I seriously doubt the woman is being truthful about hittiog TWO deer within 20 miles in a VW beetle. Methinks she is the type that overexaggerates everything.
Maybe she SAW two deer....
I used to drive a VW beetle years ago, and hit a f***ing DOG (the four-legged variety, not the 40-foot bus....) and it wiped the front end out. There was NOT much substance to protect one from anything in those beetles. Amazing more people weren't killed by exploding gasoline tanks which were in the front.
Or she might be a really bad driver
:)
Maybe it was within 2 hours, but she did hit two deer on the same trip on the Thruway in one night. This was back in the 60's or 70's. It was one of my mom's college friends.
College friends? What were they smoking????
Drink enough of the good stuff and you could swear to seeing two of anything you want...
That's the first thing you thought of, eh?
I truly hope you never get into an accident yourself. People who have read your posts and see you in a fiery wreck might be tempted to say things like "Gee, he really looks well done on that side. I'll bet he tastes pretty good with a little bar-b-que or hoisin sauce."
"Yeah, but look at the other side. Too rare. I'd want to pop him in the microwave."
My only consolation is that Iknow you can't help yourself.
I don't believe that anything people could say would bother me in the least. You know, me being dead and all.
People who get hit inside the RoW get little sympathy from me. It is tragic...tragic for the poor engineer, the parents and the passengers who were delayed all because their kids couldn't look out for their own safety.
Still, the ACELA's nosecone could be easier to clean and generally promotes the intactness of the bodies as compared to the AEM.
"I don't believe that anything people could say would bother me in the least. You know, me being dead and all. "
So maybe the govt could create an exception in the laws prohibiting "abuse of corpse" and decriminalize "abuse of Jersey Mike?"
:0)
"People who get hit inside the RoW get little sympathy from me. It is tragic...tragic for the poor engineer, the parents and the
passengers who were delayed all because their kids couldn't look out for their own safety."
Their families would get a lot of sympathy from me. What they would NOT get from me, if I could help it, is $$$ for rewarding the stupidity of the person run over.
I'd have sympathy for the engineer. I think he has to get hauled in for a Whiz Quiz after one of these incidents, fill out reports, deal with police and investigators. There will probably be some lost pay.
This is an engineer's worst nightmare. No engineer deserves this.
Obvously kids, especially teens, should know better than to play on the tracks...especially now that we have the Acela trains which go up to 150 MPH. I would really hope the engineer does not get blamed for this, or lose wages...those trains take at least a few miles before they can come to a complete stop, even w/ the emergency brake. -Nick
I wonder if a train going BIE from 150 mph would automatically be scheduled for the truing machine.
Is there such a thing as an "antilock brake" on a train wheel? I exclude dynamic or regenerative braking for now.
The MAS for ACELA on the NEC is 135 at on all locations equiped w/ the supplimentary siailite cab signals.
I also know the area in question and it is one of the fastest segments for SEPTA MU's (they can hit 90+), but there are some curves and the proximity to MORRIS and GRUNDY might limit the ACELA's speed.
Thanks for the information - but you didn't answer my question.
From my experiance I would have to say no. Train airbrakes are designed to be failsafe. For antilock you would need something that could rapidly apply and release the brakes. First, you would need an independant system as if you tried this w/ traditional brakes you would piss away all of your braking air and the train would become a runaway. Second, this would increase braking distances in an emergency. In BIE yes the wheels do get flatter, but this means more of a stopping surface. Locked wheels are traditionally combined with sand from the engine to achieve the greatest possible deceleration.
So in BIE the train can dump sand from storage bins as the brakes deploy. Nifty.
Sorry wrong. The Maximum Authorized Speed (MAS) goes up to 150 at MP 162 for eight miles to MP 170 on the Boston Division. It slows to 130 MPH for two curves in that area.
I believe that the article said that the speed of the train was unknown at the time of the incident. In any event, I'm quite sure that that there is an anti-lock feature since disc brakes are used.
You are correct about the article.
There are various types of "anti-lock" features on RR brakes- two brand names that come to mind are "rolokron" and "decelostat." However, these features are disabled when an emergency brake application is initiated.
Yeah, a while back I read an article in the free Fairfield County paper (forget what it was called) on the trauma that engineers experience when hitting a person. The one guy they spoke of in particular was the engineer of the New Haven Line train that hit the mother and her 4 kids crossing the tracks near Bridgeport, i believe in '98. She was Central American, and in her homeland people cross the tracks all the time, but geez, why you would risk your children (and she had to have known better, the didn't just step off the boat) is beyond me. Meanwhile, the poor bastard running the train, he's got this to deal with.
Suicides, too, seem particularly selfish, because the engineer ends up having that on their conscience to deal with.
on that matter i agree completely, (why do people cross the tracks?)
Oh, a splat.
I thought you meant something real, like a derailment and it's attendant mess all over.
The Acela claimed it's first victim the other month in Mass. Some 90 year old guy 'walking' his 'dog' on the tracks. Or maybe he was 'shopping' I dunno.
Feel sorry for the engineer, though. That's gotta suck hitting a bunch of teenagers at a time.
They really have to secure a lot more of the ROW.
A Philadelphia Inquirer story reported that the Acela was travelling southbound at 100 mph, and that the ROW in the area is not well secured.
Maybe SEPTA could be persuaded to put new fences up. Point your browsers to:
http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/12/09/local_news/09TRAIN.htm
Then how will railfans be able to access it? Think about the ramifacations of your sugestion.
Simple. Those railfans who are SEPTA or Amtrak employees will access it legally and safely, snapping pictures and acting like a "pool" for the rest of us.
Besides, there are plenty of station platforms available for non-RR employees...
Simple. Those railfans who are SEPTA or Amtrak employees will access it legally and safely, snapping pictures and acting like a "pool" for the rest of us.
That's not very fun.
Then how will railfans be able to access it? Think about the ramifacations of your sugestion.
I do think about it. I have enough sense not to trespass on the ROW. I've managed to take many good pictures, without the need to violate the law (and common sense - in which you seem to be severely lacking) in order to do so.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
PA's Highway Dept is quite delinquent in maintaining non-motorized access, when they add limited access highways. The accident scene is such an example.
PA decided to turn the section of US 1 between Morrisville and Fallsington into a limited access highway around 1987. The implementation severed many connections to the old US 1. Among these connections was Newbold Rd. Newbold Rd connected to US 1 at its junction with the Lincoln Hwy (PA 32). It went south and under the PRR ROW to a junction with Lower Morrisville Rd. Lower Morrisville Rd provided direct access to Fallsington. Newbold Rd and Lower Morrisville Rd were old 2 lane highways that had little fairly low traffic volumes.
The two preferred roads that PA provided that crossed US 1 and provided access into Fallsington and over the PRR ROW, US 13 and New Tyburn Rd display "Motor Vehicles Only" signs and have neither shoulders nor sidewalks.
I last checked out this area was in 1990. The PRR ROW underpass was no longer a public highway. It had been turned into an access road to the parking lot of a restaurant. This restaurant had fronted on US 1. This became their sole access.
There used to be a few roads that covered the 4.5 miles between Morrisville and Fallsington (the victims'residences) PA has systematically closed all of them to non-motorized traffic over the last 50 years. The only remaining route that does not involve a 3-4 mile detour is across those tracks. PA's shortsightedness has not hurt anybody until now.
The problem isn't crossing the tracks, it's not paying enough attention when you do. You stop, look, listen and run. The NEC is not a place for lollygagers.
The problem isn't crossing the tracks, it's not paying enough attention when you do. You stop, look, listen and run. The NEC is not a place for lollygagers.
The section section where the accident took place is close to a rail yard. There are 6-8 tracks to cross.
There are no 6-8 track sections except inside MORRIS linterlocking. They are 5 if you count the 0 track.
Would a pedestrian overpass or two be in order?
the people were walking down the tracks not across them.
the people were walking down the tracks not across them.
The PRR ROW is on an embankment at that point. There may not be access to ground level on both sides of the ROW. This may require people crossing the tracks to walk down them for some distance.
An excellent point.
Still, attempting to do so on an active high-speed ROW (in fact, part of the highest-speed ROW in North America) is sheer lunacy. A better way to respond is to accept the inconvenience to avoid loss of life, and then see what can be accomplished politically. Maybe not much can be accomplished so long as the PA Highway Dept. is run by a bunch of clods responding to car-happy idiots, but even less can be accomplished by dying.
Would a pedestrian overpass or two be in order?
There is also bicycle access to consider. I had seen plans to extend one of the local streets in Morrisville over US 1 and the PRR ROW to provide access. It was never built.
The problem between Morrisville and Fallsington is by no means the only problem in PA. Their limited access highways were imposed on top of existing roads. These roads were turned into cul-de-sacs with possibly an entrance ramp. No thought was given to preserve non-motorized traffic.
I read the story about the accident involing the Acela train of Amtrak and it is a good demonstration that railroad tracks are dangerous.
#3 West End Jeff
>>I read the story about the accident involing the Acela train of Amtrak and it is a good demonstration that railroad tracks are dangerous. <<
My mother and father taught me when I was little that railroad tracks are dangerous, and I have taken that lesson to heart. If I didn't, I'd have a hard time taking pity on myself.
For some reason I hear Charles Darwin in the background, muttering something about natural selection and the gene pool...
There are people who are simply too ignorant to realize how dangerous railroad tracks can be. If one must cross railroad track they must do so with the utmost caution. I've crossed railroad tracks on rare occasion and when I did I looked BOTH ways before crossing and LISTENED to make sure that no trains were near. One time I was too near the tracks for the comfort of the engineer so he blew his whistle (horn) and I moved away from the tracks without hesitation. If I recall, he even gave me a quick toot of the horn or even perhaps waved to me as he passed me since I'm showed respect for the dangers of railroad tracks.
#3 West End Jeff
Acelas and Metroliners are remarkably quiet. When they are operating at speed you sometimes cannot hear them until they are almost on top of you. So the engineer has to really be alert, even during the day.
At night, the engineer can only see as far as his headlight will illuminate. If you choose to jog on the NEC's express track after dark, you're bound to be roadkill (or railkill, as is the case here).
You're probably right and, if I had the choice of crossing under the tracks through a pedestrian tunnel/underpass or over a bridge rather than crossing them at grade, I would choose to cross under or over them rather than at grade. If one must cross railroad tracks for any reason listen very carefully and cross at a portion of track where it is straight for maximum visibility. If a train is too near don't cross.
#3 West End Jeff
You're right about that - you're dealing with high-speed trains (so they're on top of you faster than a normal train), and often they're pretty quiet.
But even still, I think you'd have enough time to get off the tracks if you were paying attention. And when you're standing on the railroad tracks, that is surely something you should do :-)
Now, if someone is old or disabled and can't get out of the way in time, or is hearing impaired or blind and doesn't know the train is coming, well, they should take their condition into account when they decide whether or not to cross the railroad tracks.
And I'd think if you just approached the tracks, looked carefully both ways and listened, then quickly crossed, your chances of getting hit are nil.
It's the people that jog (while wearing headphones, no less) or walk their dogs along the tracks (presumably the dogs like to pee there, 'cuz you know little Sparky only pees on the rails), or use the tracks as a thoroughfare to get from point A to point B without, God forbid, having to actually go around and walk a little further, that become roadkill.
The amount of carelessness displayed by some people is just astounding. While driving down Broad Street in Newark about two years ago, we saw a woman with a baby carriage walk across against the light, mid-block. For those not familiar with Broad Stret, it is aptly named - 4 to 6 lanes of traffic with a double yellow median line, and enough traffic to keep it full most of the day, and jammed at peak. A HUGE Haz-Mat truck with sirens and lights blaring had to JAM on the brake, and barely missed a collision with this person. And she just kept on walking, like nothing happened, completely oblivious, probably angry that some truck *dared* to get on the same road with her. And all the traffic had to sit in both directions with a green light, waiting for this evolutionary-challenged woman to get her and her baby across the street.
I should probably nominate her for a Darwin Award, but she didn't die (though she sure tried to remove both herself and her genetic successor from the gene pool).
Then there's the drunk who just wandered out into the street on Staten Island one day. New Dorp Lane - one lane of traffic in each direction, plus parking on each side. I'm pulling up to park, and this drunk, after waving me on to park in the spot, runs out into the street. I barely miss hitting him. He continues out, and nearly gets hit not once, but twice, by a car in each direction. Once he actually lost his balance and touched one of the cars. So again, everyone had to wait, sitting there, waiting for this anti-Einstein to get across the road and well away from the curb, so he couldn't run out again. Yet another Darwin candidate...
Anyone who tries to cross railroad tracks without being very careful is a candidate for the Darwin Award if they manage to remove themselves from the gene pool.
#3 West End Jeff
Acelas and Metroliners are remarkably quiet. When they are operating at speed you sometimes cannot hear them until they are almost on top of you. So the engineer has to really be alert, even during the day.
Usually, before a train comes the rails will start to "sing". It is a sound that completely defies description other than it is metallic, high pitched and not of uniform intensity.
When I visit Window Jct. on the NJT AC line I tend to spend more than a little time walking the tracks. However, the trains are slow and noisy, there's a grade crossing to the east, the rails sing and finally there's an approach lit interlocking that gives between 1 and 4 minutes of warning. As long as you are constantly looking and listening in each direction you'll be fine. Basic safety takes so little effort, but means so much in the end.
I have heard the singing too. But not with Metroliners. I've waited at a SEPTA stop when the Metroliner came by at 125 - I swear to you I heard nothing at all until the locomotive was passing in front of me.
By the way, while you are, in practical terms, correct about your chances on the rails when alert, you can still trip and fall unexpectedly, at the wrong time; and a transit or Amtrak police officer seeing you there can still cite you for trespassing.
All in all not worth it to me.
This past February I rode the R7 from Trenton to Center City and was quite appalled to find that long stretches of the ROW around Bristol or Croydon- I forget exactly where- run on ground level right smack next to busy U.S. 13 with absolutely no fencing or protective barrier whatsoever- not even shrubbery. This with frequent SEPTA and Amtrak service going by. As it is, Metroliners passing next to stopped-in-local-station SEPTA trains feel like they're blowing the doors in.
This isn't in the middle of nowhere; it's a heavily developed suburb. Before the LIRR's Ronkonkoma branch was electrified, the ROW running alongside Long Island Avenue from Pinelawn through Deer Park was similarly unprotected. With the electriciation came high fences on both sides of the ROW so people long accustomed to slow diesels every two hours would get the message.
The LIRR is particularly dangerous for trespassers because of the 750 volt DC third rail.
Additional articles in the Philadelphia Inquirer reiterated some well-known facts:
1) Whenever Amtrak puts up No Trespassing Signs and fences, people ignore them, rip them down and do what they want.
2) The mother of one of the dead boys is already taking the first traditional steps of disclaiming any responsibility for her son's behavior. "He didn't know it was an Amtrak line."
As a pediatrician, I understand her grief and sorrow and anger. But I know that the next step, a thoroughly offensive and unjustified lawsuit, is coming, when she will not only refuse to accept any personal responsibility, but put all the blame on Amtrak.
I rode the R-143 trainset this morning from Broadway Junction to Myrtle Avenue (last stop).
I had been looking forward to seeing how it would handle the short-turn. Would it leave subsequent stops unlit on the strip map? Would it ask passengers to leave at the last stop? I was extremely disappointed in the end: the automated announcements weren't working, the door chimes(!) weren't ringing, the strip maps weren't lit, and, worst of all, the route signs were blank. Come on! Even the R-46 electronic signs, which aren't terribly flexible, are able to display a route letter with no destination or any arbitrary destination with no route letter, if not both together. The technologically inferior rollsign has no trouble displaying any route letter with any north terminal on the roll and any south terminal on the roll (and if the desired terminal isn't on the roll, at least the rest of the information is up). Am I wrong to be disappointed? I thought the "2 syndrome" (i.e., the inability for the system to recognize that a train that's programmed to make every stop on the line is not an express) was bad, but this really takes the cake.
The storm doors are a definite improvement over the R-142(A)'s. They're somewhat heavier than on the older equipment, but they don't pose a safety hazard. The "bounce-back" feature (to keep the storm doors from slamming) functions somewhat differently from on the other equipment.
The strip maps show the post-12/16 connections, with an extra red(!) S tacked underneath PATH at 6th Avenue (in addition to the V). (I don't remember if the 9 is listed -- that is, if the strip map takes 9/11 into account.)
"I was extremely disappointed in the end: the automated announcements weren't working, the door chimes(!) weren't ringing, the strip maps weren't lit, and, worst of all, the route signs were blank."
The automated announcements were bypassed because the (L) was running shuttle to Myrtle Ave. There is red button on the conductor panel for "door warning". perhaps the conductor wasn't pressing it to ring the chimes. The interior end signs weren't functioning because of manual door announcements, the same for interior strip maps.
Bill "Newkirk"
Why is it so difficult for the TA to obtain software that will allow the trains to be properly signed for any sequence of stops along a single line?
Once again, fancy new technology (or at least the TA's version of such) fails where the technology of decades ago passes, at least to some degree.
It's the manufactures fault for low balling on sign bids and information technologies bids.
Much to our believes, the R-143 NOR the R-142 class cars don't not have the capabilities to show all lines. This is because the TA didn't necessary get down to the nitty gritty on sign specs and the manufactures kidna threw in a general digi sign with low disk space capacity.
The R-142s can ONLY do announcements and side sign readings for the 2,3,4,5,6. The R-143s capabilities are unknown at this time, but my guess is that the R-143s announcements and side sign readings are limited too. So this is why you don't get your midpoint end of the line information like the Canarsie-Myrtle shuttle deal.
Now the front sign has the capability of showing all Numbers and Letters on both series cars. So technically the can operate anywhere, but the lines that do not have a automation program has to be announced manually. If the front signs were out on the R-143 today, that is because some dummy of a C/R or T/O didn't program it right.
Eventually these guys will get the gist of the cars and will be able to working it like the A Division guys.
Again, Give the car and the personnel a fighting chance before giving a bad review! I won't give a review until the 30-days are up personally!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
.....Lol !! the r-142 has NO ability to display the # 1 # 9 & # 7 sign...express / local .....lol!!
( but give thr r-142 a chance ) ..................lol!!!........he he he he he he he ...!!
...& oh yes i am still ready for your westcoast transit photo contest with >>>>> ....yo' man !!!
MOST R142 trains are programmed for the 2 and 5 lines only. I cannot comment on the R142a. There are some R142 trains that do have 3,4, and 6 trains programmed into them as well.......
6336-6340 must be among them, because they operated briefly on the 6 coupled to 7211-7215 in the summer of 2001. I rode them on the 6 and they used the canned announcements on them.
Thanks for the comments.
The responsibility falls ultimately on the TA's shoulders. The TA could and should have demanded higher standards from its suppliers.
Disk space isn't much of an excuse. It takes a few bytes to encode the name of a station, and besides, the station names are all already encoded (for the "next stop" announcements and signs).
I'm glad that the front sign should have been working. But what about the side signs? They're far more important than the front sign. On the L, it doesn't really matter, but what will happen when the R-143's make their way over to the M, which shares platforms with every other BMT line?
Now is the time to raise questions, not after the 30-day test ends.
Unlike some posters here, I do believe that modern technology can be of great value. However, the TA's recent forays into technology have given us nothing but inadequate and inaccurate signage, backbreaking seating, earsplitting braking, and fuzzy views. This technology I can do without.
With the onset of the 30 test, that is the first time RTO gets the cars to evaluate them. RTO keeps logs on what needs to be improved from the RTO perspective. That is why only one train is here right now. After all the evaluations are in, modifications can be made to the existing train and the cars yet to be delivered.
im waiting.....
HAVE PATIENCE!!!!!!! Everyone already knows that some R142s were towed into 239th and it looks like some R142As were in this morning. There's no disk in the computer for signage, the stuff was put in by Bombardier/vendors and already out of date but there is plenty of room for additions. The software in all these trainsets needs/is being updated, the brakes are being upgraded on R142s (hopefully the regenerative braking problems will be solved,) failing AC units have been changed out, door problems plaguing R142s are being worked on and so much more. TA is on the move by getting the vendors engineers in and making trains go. The Redbirds are on their merry way to the ocean again...we're still using 'bailing wire' on the survivors and I am looking foward to some real clean electronic work. CI Peter
The assigned TSS told me that unfortunately, the train is not programed for shuttle service from Rockaway Pkwy. to Myrtle/Wycoff. It is programed for service from Rockaway Pkwy. to Atlantic, or to B'way Jct., and to Bedford. The program will be modified in the future.
The issue of the end signs not being turned on was an oversight. They were turned on by the vendor while I was riding the train around 3 PM.
This is a "TEST TRAIN". Sign and destinations are less important right now. How the train works and responds to different scenarios is much more important right now. Let it pass the 30 day test first and then work on the minor modifications later.
Dead wrong. As you say, this is a test train. If it cannot do something so simple as to display basic route markings, it has failed the test. Now is the time to catch these problems so they can be fixed. Look at the 2 -- nobody bothered fixing its night program to properly reflect its status as a local, and now the 2 runs local at all times, proudly declaring itself an express.
It must be an ego thing, it has low self esteem, so it needs to call itself and express!
My 2 this morning ran quasi-express: 86-79-72-59-42. The train started to announce 66 but the C/R interrupted it; to my surprise, when it stopped at 59, it correctly identified 42 as the next stop. Score one-half for the R-142.
Not that it helped. Something was clearly messed up on the BMT this morning. All I wanted was a northbound N or W. Instead I got an R, four Q's, and at least six southbound trains of varying designations (including one with blank side signs that I think was an F). After about 15 minutes, an N finally showed its face. Even though we hit 57 mph under the river, that wasn't good enough. After forcing my way through the crowd at Ditmars (come on, guys, there's no need to push and shove onto a train that's just arrived at its terminal and won't be going anywhere for a few minutes), I ran the three blocks to my car, where a cop was writing out his first ticket of the day (by his own admission), timestamped 8:32. I should have stayed in bed.
Have anyone rode the SEPTA N5s on the Norristown High Speed Line?
How fast do those things accelerate?
I ask because I remember reading a story a few weeks ago complaning about how the R142 acelerate too quickly. They would get a stroke if they rode the N5s on Norristown High Speed Line, especially if the motorman applies full power out of 60th street.
Correction: I mean out of 69st.
Yes, the N-5s do accelerate very quickly especially the closer you get to Norristown where the stops are more spread apart those bad boys have the capability of doing 70mph on tangent rail. The ride is quiet and very smooth especially on continuous welded rail. Oh yeah, they stop very well after doing 70mph or less. They have very good spin/slide control at least to me.
Ms.SEPTA
These cars are terrific, but so were their predecessors which had many more years under their belts. Additionally, what about the PATCO cars, many of which date back to the line's opening, about 1969. These cats can haul, and their acceleration is far beyond the comprehension of the NYCTA!
joe c
the only thing i hate about PATCO is that you touch a rail or a handle in the system and your hand is sticky and smelly the rest of the day.
That's cause PATCO trains run mostly in suburban territory with widely-spaced stops. You really can't compare PATCO to the NYC Subway or even Philadelphia's own Broad Street Subway or Market-Frankford El. PATCO is really more in league with the Washington Metro or BART, possibly even the Baltimore Metro. NYC subway stops, especially on the IRT, are set so close together that high acceleration rates are not always desirable on NYC subway cars.
The N5's were specifically designed with rapid accel rates, which basically matched their predecessors (mainly the Bullets, but the Stratfords had some get up and go also). The characteristics of the line dictated the performance of the cars, since there are closely-spaced stops on the inner portion of the line (mainly below Villanova). The operation of the line adds to this since all trains don't have to make all stops (only those at which passengers call). The downside is that, at busy stops, the pay-leave collection system can cause a car to spend a good deal of time unloading. Gulph Mills is a good example of this, even in off-peak times.
If you rode the line during the period when the El cars (both Market-Frankford and CTA) were running, you may recall how much slower the service was, even with the 'jackrabbit' Budds.
PATCO cars are also quick to accelerate but you must ride beyond Broadway to get the true feel for this. On the old Bridge Line portion of the line, speeds are restricted to 35 mph.
The N5 cars do accelerate very fast. I like them a lot, except for the exterior styling. It's too angular. I like the interiors, though. They are very nice, especially the seats. The big windows are nice too.
But there's one thing I want to know about the Norristown Line. Were there ever proposals or plans to extend this line into Center City Philadelphia, either under SEPTA operation or during pre-SEPTA days? I would think so, considering the line had 3rd rail instead of overhead wires.
The Norristown Line is standard gauge, while the Market-Frankford Line is broad gauge. So unless dual-gauge track was installed, through operation couldn't work. (The Market Street Budds were retrucked when they ran on the Norristown Line).
But was there ever a proposal to run the extension into Center City parallel to the Market Street El? Like maybe on Walnut St or somewhere else?
When the Phila & Western first built the line to Stratford (now abandoned) in the 1900's it was not permitted to use the 69th St Terminal being built by Phila Rapid Transit (I'm not certain of the reasons). The terminal was built without any P & W station. P & W threatened to build its own el line a half-block south of PRT's Market St El to gain access to Center City. That would have certainly been foolish, but it was apparently enough to get PRT's attention, and a rickety 'temporary' station was added onto the north side of 69th St in 1907 for P & W. P & W added the line to Norristown in 1912 (it branched off the Stratford line north of Villanova), which was used by Lehigh Valley Transit cars to Bethlehem and Allentown until 1950. Thus, P & W became very successful and afforded downtown delivery via transfer to/from the Market St El.
The 'temporary' P & W terminal was replaced by the current one in 1962. The Stratford branch was abandoned in 1956. Interestingly enough, the right of way of the Stratford branch is slated to become a bike trail.
Thanks for the info. I thought I recalled seeing something about an extension into Center City during the P&W's early days on some web site. That must have been it. When I first rode the P&W, I thought it was unusual that SEPTA had a third-rail, grade-separated rapid transit line that ran entirely outside of Philadelphia, with the closest point to Philly being the 69th Street Terminal in Upper Darby.
I love the Route 100 to Norristown. The N5 is the Cadillac of light rail vehicles.
Here's an idea: In some fantasy world where money grows on trees and nimbys do not exist, I think it would be nifty to expand the route into an outer loop line surrounding the whole Philly metro area. I'm not sure where I would take it, but I've got some ideas...perhaps intergrating it into the Cross-County Metro proposals.
Mark
Wasn't SEPTA considering building a spur off the Norristown Line to let it operate directly to the King of Prussia Mall?
'Considering' may be the key word. NIMBY's in King of Prussia have fought it but SEPTA is still exploring the service. How close it will be able to get to the Mall/Court complex is another question. If it can't get within reasonable walking distance, its value may not be very high.
I love the 100 line. the trains go so fast and so smooth. but, some of the motormen have a tendency to overshoot some of the platforms. last time i went to take the 100, i pulled into gulph mills, and i woulda missed the train except that the motorman overshot the platform and had to back up. i am very grateful, because i woulda hadta wait 20 mins for the next one if he didn't
I would imagine fast acceleration is bad on the R-142s where there are many standees, but good on PATCO or the N5s where there are usually few standees.
I would imagine fast acceleration is bad on the R-142s where there are many standees, but good on PATCO or the N5s where there are usually few standees.
Rush hour PATCO trains have many standees, but South Jerseyans know how to deal with acceleration when standing.
I have heard that patronage on the 100 is growing and many peak-hour runs operate with standing loads. Of course, the odd part of this is that the reverse commute is where these crowds are.
About the new updated 12/16 map. I assumed they will be available in the booth by next week. But I not sure whether they will be in full-size or single sheet. Does anyone here know anything about that?
Thanks
I assume it will be a regular full size/folded up map. But no one will know for sure until Thursday or Friday when they will start being delivered to the token booths.
Since it's already on the trains (Yesterday on an R-46 'F' along 6th Avenue, somebody was perusing our present location on the map and was utterly confused to see the presence of the 'V'), I wonder if it's currently available at the Transit Info Center on Jay Street.
The Center is very unpredictable as to the timeliness of its bus maps; last time I was there the Queens map they had was from September 2000! The September '01 map is readily available on buses and in libraries.
I was there last Thursday and they didn't have them.
I wouldn't count on getting maps from that place. I been to that place few time and no map and train was ever updated.
The small maps were only issued as stopgap measures in response to 9/11. (They were simply printouts of the PDF on the TA's web site.) This was a planned service change; I see no reason the TA couldn't get full-size maps printed in time.
Look at how much someone paid for that PDF print out!
(And a black & white one no less)
People are nuts.
Q .....does anyone have the www...etc... to ..
MARK W (s) subway page ??
i seemed to loos it im y old bookmarks when my netscape bookmarks whent down !!!
thankz .... SalaamAllah
Can you ever take your finger off the period key on your keyboard?
actually my i mac keyboard is almost shot especially the E key
i ordered another macally replacement keyboard from J&R in NYC it should be in the mail now
Plus internet explorer 1996 1998 edition for macintosh is a very small font to read & work with text ...
I am going to have to re-install our netscape hopfully a 5.0 this time if i have enough memory space
( oh well ) ....
Actually the version is 6.1 and it takes A LOT more memory. My problem with the Macally keyboard is, that it sometimes repeats the same letter.
Arti
Cut the crap out already. You already asked the same question in post 291989. Mark W responded in 292600 that he would send it to you. You acknowledged this in 292604. You seem to be loosing more than your bookmarks. By the way, have a railfan window on me.............
excus me sir but we talked off the board ........i only asked him ONCE .......
did you take that photo of your current R -142s ?? ............
Hey EngineBrake.....we need some door latches across town. Mebbe some seats with the latches intact, a few counter reset boards that still work and some tail light housings that aren't rusted from the inside out with the latch replaced by silicone 'putty.' You can keep the AC compressors...the one I worked on today had a view window more like an old washing machine when it ran (suds.) There was also a rust-gash about a foot long at door level that made the door kinda squeaky when it closed. SOAC. CI Peter
Have they ever figured out what causes those deep slashes in the side panels when they open and close? Or do they even care anymore? One of my favorites came in last night, the 7880. What you couldn't fix, the main shop will "take care of".
Could be dirt or grit on the door pockets.
Q .....does anyone have the www...etc... to ..
MARK W (s) subway page ??
i seemed to lost it im y old bookmarks when my netscape bookmarks whent down !!!
thankz .... SalaamAllah
As soon as I am finished upgrading it, I will post the link. Thanks for your interest.
-Mark
Please send me a link ( the url to my E MAIL )
& thank you for the cony island tour .... ( smile )
Please send me a link ( the url to my E MAIL )
& thank you for the coney island tour .... ( smile )
I would like to shoot a video this summer since 9 11 has there been a CrackDown on video camera operators ??
I was not stopped at all last time i was there
( world series 2000 ) ....thankz
i've been doing many still photos and never have been harassed. if i was, i'd file suit. so long as you don't got a tripod, you should be fine.
The rules have not changed. Photography without suplimental light is permitted in all common areas. Permit needed to use lights. Permission needed to get into restricted areas including transverse cabs.
On my last trip, I decided to find out exactly what the policy was, because I was also concerned about using my videocamera during this era of hightened awareness. I would also go in person since I planned to do railfanning that day anyway.
So I went to 130 Livingston St and asked the person at the "front desk" what the policy was regarding using a videocamera as a tourist (i.e. no professional equipment) knowing the obvious things - no ancillary equipment, don't get into people's way or interfere with operations and don't go where you're not supposed to go. I made it clear I was interested in trains as a serious hobby. I was told to go to 370 Jay St. So off I went.
I stopped by the Transit Info Bureau in the lobby of 370 Jay St and asked the same question. One person in the bureau said that you didn't need one but to ask a police offer who might be posted in the station if it was OK. I gave a puzzled look as if to say "how do I do that, exactly", so he asked the other person in the bureau. The second person was adamant about me going to 590 Madison Ave and talking to someone in the MTA. "You need a permit", he said. "You gotta talk to MTA HQ". After insisting that this was wrong, because I was staying in the juristiction of NYC Transit, I relented and took the train to 590 Madison (MTA HQ). (I had to go to B&H Photo for some videotapes anyway, so this wasn't out of my way). I did this already knowing I was getting the runaround. I don't think this was intentional; I just think most of these people didn't know. I am sure not too many people come to NYC Transit with a desire to videotape subway trains.
After showing id to a member of the National Guard (posted inside the MTA building!) I spoke to someone at the receptionist desk. When I saw that he was going to tell me to talk to NYC Transit at 370 Jay, I told him that I had been to both 130 Livingston AND 370 Jay, and they sent me to 590 Madison; he smiled and gave me a number to dial on the "house phone" (don't have it handy but maybe I can find it) and I spoke to a nice woman (probably at 370 Jay St) who informed me that, although her boss was out on vacation that day and couldn't be 100% sure, no permit was needed for what I wanted to do. Again, I made it clear that I enjoyed trains as a serious hobby. She basically told me to enjoy myself and have a good time.
So I went on my merry way using my videocamera and wasn't bothered by anyone.
That said, I decided that day not to shoot any cab views through the railfan window. At that time, I felt that doing that would call attention to myself (more so that shooting runbys on the platform) that I didn't want. On my next trip, I'll probably shoot some more video from the railfan window.
I've heard from others that you tend to come "with a portable movie studio" (a tripod, sometimes more than one camera, a sheet to block out glare); I don't think I would do that anymore if I were you. One camera with digital image stabilization (optical if you can afford a more expensive camera) and a very steady hand, and that's it.
Then go out and have a good time.
--Mark
One way to solve this dilemma is to get someone to write you a letter about it. Armed with the letter, you can observe policy.
I usually carry a copy of the TA usage rules and regulations that specifically says that video is OK w/o the ancilary lighting, etc. You can view it here ....
See section 1050.9 near the end ....
9 1050.9 Restricted areas and activities.
(a) No person, except as specifically authorized by the authority, shall enter or attempt to enter into any area not open to the public....
(c) Photography. filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used. Members of the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment. All photographic activity must be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this Part.
Thee is a section above this one that says video is not permitted but that is in reference to doing some other permitted non-commercial activity, like videoing yourself giving out leaflets or some such thing.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and do not play one on TV.
--Mark
Self, with permit.
whats a railfan window?
You are joking, right? I guess not.
In subway cars the window in the front storm door in the first car (or last car) is the railfan window.
However in R44, R46, R62/62A, R68/68A, R110A & B, R142/142A cars the operating cabs are transverse (full width of the car). This results in the window in the storm door being made unavailable to the railfan to look out of. Sure they put a "film" over the cab door window so that you could see out but the imgae is distorted in dyalight and evcen worse when you are underground.
Some R-62A's on the 1 and 3 still have full railfan windows.
The other R-62(A)'s have small rectangular windows in the cab doors. The view is undistorted. Similarly, some R-44's have tiny transparent (undistorted) circles in the cab windows.
The R-143 (which you do not list) has the same distorted view as the R-142(A).
Call me a purist but I don't recognize a new car until I actually see it and ride it. Then I know it is real.
Click here to see a railfan window.
Now thats a railfan window. The best seat in the Car. But I fear if it gets too crowded, standees may block the view. We must get that car type for the 63rd ST connector "F" !
Make some photos before the f runs full time because the S is a R-32 with a railfan window.
it is a shame the ORANGE LINE dos not have them !! .....like they used to !!
it is a shame the ORANGE LINE does not have them !! .....like they used to !!
Click here to see a railfan window.
*****************************************************************
And so, what is a railfan window?
And here's a shot of a railfan window taken from a railfan window.
The pull-down window above the photo can be used to enlarge it.
You are supposed to have a permit. No flashes or tripods allowed. PERIOD. Besides flashes being illegal, I can't tell you how many times I have called Command Center after arriving at a station to greet my riders with dilated pupils. I don't have the phone number handy, maybe South Ferry can help you but I am sure you needed to go to Livingston Street, customer affairs.
"You are supposed to have a permit."
That's outdated information. A permit is no longer required, at least for the general public. Someone doing, say, a movie shoot would have to have a permit.
David
I would like to thank all who posted on this thread ...I really needed this information after ..... setember 11 2001 ..
last time i was there yes i used a stable tripod but got away with being cool out of the way & only opening it up
directly after the motorman & i were cool with each other . Since tripods are supposed to be a no-no sometimes a ( excuse the mispell ) disgruuntled occasional hostile mortorman I imediately smiled said yes sir i will get off...
Then QUICKLY de-train walk the other way hide my stuff wait for the next train with a new mortorman (smile)
I did have a few problms with this on the A train at 207 th street & far rockway ....lefters blvd ( no problem ever ) ...
Figure dat' out ....lol!! # 7 train no problem in any part of the line .. EVERYBODY WAS GREAT THERE !
So although i stratechd the rules a bit putting my sony tr416 camera wide angele lens & a medium black towell around
the lens & i was never haseled about using my tripod .. When the end of the line is reached i slowly drew the legs together until the train stopped then pickd it up & continued to shoot the front of the train AWAY from the operator
& passengers & people .. then fade out the video & shut it off ( great special effect ) ....lol!!
Actually a lot of good frendly conversations interesting exchanges meeting other subtalkers I met a motorman who i will not name here as i promished him i will call him mr XYZ mortorman operator ...we shot the #6 with a transverse cab r 62 we are still in touch & i plan to shoot with him we are both excited about this ...
I had no problem at all with the LIRR .....man cant wait to do the babylon line !!!!...........lol
Keep in mind that a number of Redbirds are still running on the 6, so you still have access to a full-fledged railfan window (but it may be a wait).
In fact, at this time, every A Division line has at least a few trainsets with railfan windows (except possibly the shuttle -- I haven't ridden the shuttle in ages).
I hope at least the A train & the N train ( maybe a reshot of the Q ) ...
A division is covered by what lines if I may ask ?? ....thankz ...
The A has a majority of R-44's but it still has a good number of R-32's and R-38's. The rush hour specials to Rockaway Park run only R-44's though.
The N has a mix of R-32, R-40, R-68, and R-68A. You may have to wait for a few trains to go by but you'll eventually get one with a window.
The diamond-Q generally runs exclusively R-40's. The circle-Q generally runs exclusively R-68's (perhaps with an occasional R-68A).
A Division is IRT: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 42nd Street shuttle.
The following sections of track are generally traversed (in revenue service) only by trains with transverse cabs:
entire Brighton local, including all service south of Brighton Beach
West End line south of Bay Parkway
DeKalb Avenue bypass
Rockaway Park branch
Astoria express
Concourse line (local and express)
connection from CPW to 6th Avenue via 53rd Street
6th Avenue express (not in service south of 34th)
I've omitted all lines served by Jamaica Yard (E, F, G, R, and Grand Street shuttle), which will receive new car assignments next week. (Currently, the F and shuttle only run R-46's, and R-32's appear on the G once in a blue moon.) Rumors have been circulating that the F will be getting R-32's. We'll see what happens next week.
Yea ! becaue I will be there this summer in the HEAT to see what it is like to ride a subway car with no AC ....lol
glad to hear th Q is till a runnin R-40 !!
I hate those R 44s on the far rockway branch !! geeeeeeeezzzzz !! terrible man !!
as long as i can get the last of the birds i guess i will have to settle !! but th N & A will not be missed !!
& all of the LIRR lines that run MU cars ...thank you SalaamAllah
It is precisely the use of the tripod and towel that might get you the attention that you don't want in this era of heightened awareness. Just because you did it before doesn't mean that you can get away with it again this time.
--Mark
No argument about the use of flashes here!
--Mark
What is the wording against Tripods? Would a mono-pod serve the same function? As I sit and write this post, I have before me a coat hook. This coat hook is about eight inches long by about 3 inched wide. It is covered with that that rubberized magnetic stuff you find in refrigerator magnets.
If one were carefull, could one smack this on the ceiling and support a camera with bungi cord?
I looking for work-arounds that may be compatible with TA Policy.
avid
U R not supposed to use em' however i came up wit' a routine dat' works & keeps me outa' da' way !!!
@ not everyone can do this........now remember dont try this at home .........lol!!!
I am not an attorney but that could fall under the "ancillary equipment" umbrella .....
The exact wording about tripods (monopods fall into this category) is ...
(c) Photography. filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used.
--Mark
Where might one obtain a permit to use a flash (not in the presence of an approaching train, of course)?
Please try TA Customer Relations at 370 Jay. They would know the appropriate department for such a permit.
Actually, it's the NYPD, which gives permits only to members of the media.
"Members of the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment. All photographic activity must be conducted in accordance with the provision of these Rules."
-- from Section 1050.9(C) of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations
David
How would you get permission?
i did notice very cool heads & a laid back atmosphere when shooting videos at .. night ....
New York Subway Resources is a YAHOO PICK OF THE WEEK!!!!!!! Congratulations Dave!!!!!!!
WOW. And the first one on the list for the week of 10 Dec 2001
Congrats!!!
Ahh jeez. That's all I need. More traffic.
-dave
Awwwwww come on Dave - Admit it. You love the attention.
Well I guess it's not a big deal anyway since I can't seen to find yahoo's picks of the week page anyway. There doesn't seem to be a link to it from the main page or a category for it in MyYahoo.
Oh, THERE it is, under "Personal/MORE" on the front page, and then Picks of the Week on the sidebar. Jumped right out at me.
congradulations !!
Hay Dave you're talking like one of the management type on the 13th floor of Jay Street ... more traffic means more overtime, more maintenance, etc.
Mr rt__:^)
Well, it actually means: slower performance for everyone. The "Big Guys" can typically throw hardware at a web site that is over capacity without much trouble. Especially if you're using a web host like Akamai (Like Yahoo uses). For a little guy, attention from a popular web site is often the kiss of death. In the business they call this "slashdotting" after the popular web site slashdot.com which has been known to link to "little guys" with the resulting additional traffic overflowing their server's capacity, their regulated bandwith limitations, or cost them a fortune if they have no regulated limit but still pay by the byte.
This web site may become a victim of its' own success.
It better not be!
Dave,
My sincere congratulations to you!! Your hard work on this site really pays off :-) -Nick
Nice!
wayne
Thanks for the new pics, Dave. I never really new the R6 ran in numbers on the eastern division. If you haven't checked them out, I reccomend it!
er, make the "knew"....lol
Chances are the R-6s that did run on the Eastern Division were sent over towards the very end of their careers.
There is an article on the front page of today's Times about a new ferry service between the new development along the Hudson River (collectively known as "Trump Place") on the Upper West Side, next to "Riverfront Park South" (still being constructed), and downtown. The ferry will utilize a remodeled, now defunct, car-float bridge at 69th Street as the uptown landing. It is hoped that the service will releive crowding at the IRT 72nd Street station. I post this here because the print edition contains a well-drawn graphic depicting the the old NY Central 60th Street freight yard tracks and roundhouse as the "Past" and an accompanying graphic of the "Present and Future." Unfortunately, the maps are not part of the online article (as usual, registration is necessary to view the Times online):
Ferry at Riverfront Seen as Gateway to Wall St.
Kinda reminds you of when the system hit rock bottom:
Am I missing anything? This looks like any other late '70's/early '80's subway scene. The R44 or R46 (which is it?) is pre-GOH, and has some grafiti, but I don't think this picture shows otherwise anything worse than the system is today.
:-) Andrew
Notice the route sign ....
Ahh, these were the days when the R-46s mileage was being watched very carefully because of the Rockwell Truck problems.
100 R-16s were taken out of mothballs to help with the car shortage. ironic, since the R-46s were supposed to replace most, if not all, of the R-16s!
--Mark
I thought the R46 was supposed to replace all the prewar IND cars left running in 1976?
Yes. The R-46s replaced the remaining R-4/6/7/9 trains running in the mid-1970s. The R-16s were replaced by the R-68s, but because their reliability was so low by the mid-1980s, they were only used under extreme duress from about 1981 on (and on the Eastern Division, of course, where the MTA felt they could do the least harm to the schedules if they broke down).
R44
No but you are close. Considering that the pix file is called R46_1002.jpg, I think we can safely assume that the picture is of car #1002, an R-46 - Pre-GOH. Nice try though.
Whoopsie.
Nope. It's a 46. the 44 came with black number on natural finshed metal (silver). The tower guys can't read the numbers very well.
Phil Hom
There aren't five inches of paint on the pillars to cover grafitti as there is now, for one anyway!
R46's on the (CC) line. You won't find that today. There's no more (CC) line!
What would be todays version of the CC. What were the terminals?
Back in it's CC days, that route was the only 4 boro line in the system, running from Bedford Park Blvd. to Rockaway Park in Queens. And it only ran during the rush hours.
The (C) continued to run through all four boroughs through the 1980's and maybe even into the early 1990's.
:-) Andrew
Yup, it was October 1992 when the C was completely cut back to Euclid Ave.
And March 1998 when it stopped serving The Bronx.
Don't anyone forget the CC only started running to the Rockaways after about 1976. Up to that time it ran only to Hudson Terminal, from Bedford, rush hours only. The B was the BB, and the AA ran 3 car trains during the day. Fun trying to catch a train in those days!
joe c
I can vaguely remember 3-car AA trains of R-1/9s in May of 1967, when we were in the city on two Sundays, the 7th and 21st.
I do remember 4 car AA/K trains in the early/mid 1980's.
When the R-32s came over to the AA in December of 1967, 4-car trains were used on Saturdays. A few weeks before Christmas, 8-car AA trains appeared. E trains grew from 6 to 10 cars, and A trains from 8 to 10 cars.
The original terminals for the CC were Bedford Park Boulevard, Bronx and Rockway Park, Queens. It ran only during the rush hours.
Todays version of the C:
Bronx portion: B(rush hours only) From Bedford Park Blvd to 145th St (on its way to 34th/6th). Manhattan portion: C at 145th St (started at 168th St) to Euclid Avenue (off hours: A local). Brooklyn portion C local (to Euclid Av) Service to Rockaway Park via A then shuttle at Broad Channel. Off hours: A local to Broad Channel then Shuttle.
To be honest, the "original" CC terminated at Hudson Terminal, not Rockaway Pk.
OK if you want to back that far.
To take this one step further, the CC ran to Hudson Terminal due to the AA being replaced with B service during the rush hours. Remember the B ran from 168th St-Coney Island so service to Hudson Terminal was needed. The CC. Ah yes, I remember it well...
Speaking about the AA, look what someone is selling.
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1046804498
Neat! Friends of Bill will love it.
And NotchIt has a VERY nice map up for bid but the price has gotten way out of reach.
wayne
Yes, and can you believe the prices maps are going for now?
And if the seller had included the word 'subway' in the item title, it would have come up in my searches. (Not that it matters to me, since right now I'm just going after maps.)
Sometimes people don't use the right key words and you see little activity on that auction, or even a misspelling sometimes.
But, it seems like this is the season for people buying maps.
So the C never goes to Bedford park anymore?
No, the B and C swapped north terminals a few years ago (1998?). The C goes to 168th Street; the B goes to 145th Street (middays) or Bedford Park Boulevard (rush hours).
March 1, 1998 was when the B and C switched.
Today:The A from Far Rockaway to 205 street all stops.
As Maxwell Smart would put it:
"Missed it by THAT much!"
You should have said 207 St.
That must be post '79 and pre '86 AND pre R46-GOH; the "CC" sign is blue (looks like a diamond too) and #1002 is now #5680.
wayne
The R-46s went over to the CC at the same time the R-10s filled in on the E and F lines, around 1980. I saw examples of both (an R-46 CC and an R-10 E train) at Chambers St./WTC on September 5, 1980. A week later, I was on my way out west.
That's the story behind that rocket F ride you had in 1981, led by 3080.
Yeah, I remember being home on college furlough in August 1980, taking the Q76 to 179th Street and seeing an R10 marked 'E' waiting to depart instead of the expected R46. Even though it was a hot day, and I always used the M-F midday outer Hillside express 'F', I opted for the novelty of riding a 10 in such alien territory. The fact that most people boarded nochalantly all the way into Manhattan indicated this was not an isolated incident.
Even more bizarre, later that day waiting at 42nd/PA uptown, an R46 'CC' with green signs arrived, followed by another R10 'E'. Everything was backwards! What happened in the past three months?! The 'A' seemed to be running its normal mix of Slants and 44s. Next time I was home, at Thanksgiving, I saw a 10 on the 'F', and unsuccessfully attempted to ride one down the Culver el.
Actually, the R46 undercarriage problem started the summer before. I was working in New York the whole summer of '79 and commuting from Flushing to downtown Brooklyn daily, so noticed some equipment oddities. The 'N', which had been predominately 46s through 1977 and '78 started running 32s again. The 'E' and 'F' was still mostly R46, and completely so on weekends, but during the week, they too were running a fair amount of 32s. Those R32s must have been taken from the 'B' and 'D', which had heavily used them since 1967. The 'B' became mostly R38, and the 'D' Mod-40/42, with both lines using R27/30s during the week.
The last related equipment oddity I observed was in January 1981 in the form of an R38 'E' on Sunday at WTC. It was the first time I'd seen that model on a QB express since about 1975.
Interestingly, the train in the picture that started this thread has a dark blue 'CC' end sign, so it had to be later in the eighties. In 1980, all equipment still had signs in 1967 colors. The new trunk-line color dedicated system, initiated in 1979, only appeared on maps and station guide signs until about 1982 when I finally saw an R-32 on the 'G' with a light green marker- and the proper single letter.
It wasn't until early 1986 that the official MTA map dropped the double-letter designations, by which time most signs and train markers were the post-1979 colors- even on unrenovated R27/30s and 32s. Only some unrenovated R10s still had the plain white-on-black letters on their bulkhead and side signs.
The R16 kept it's 1969ish signs until the end, and several R44/46's had those 1970ish color signs into 1987. I remember them well, old color bullets on the outside, strip maps on the inside.
The R46's in that pic must've just had their signs changed. It's dated in the summer of 1980.
I have a book showing a train of R10's on the E at Jamaica-Van Wyck.
Has to be a farewell to the R10 fan trip. No R10's ran on the E when the Archer Ave. connector opens.
That's right. I don't know how long the R-10s stayed on the E and F lines; however, they were pretty much back on the CC by 1983 or thereabouts.
Mr R10 himself stated his October '89 fantrip took him thru the Archer Ave connection as well as the 63rd. St. line. He evn stated the R10 ran on the J line right past my house. Would have loved to seen that rarity.
There were thirty R-10's in regular service on the Jamaica line in 1954-55.
Too bad my mother was only 11 in 1954 and I wasn't even thought of yet.
The pic was dated 8/18/80
I fondly remember the CC-
When I rode it in the early early 80's they were running R-10's.
It ran local in The Bronx during rush hours, when the D went express up or down the Concourse..
I like riding the R-10's so much, I would actually wait for a CC and pass up on the D, even though my destination was 205th St. in The Bronx :)
And I loved them on the A.:-)
IIRC, the R44 end signs had a green circular CC. I don't recall them in blue. The BOOM MIKE is still attached too! Train Dude, did you ever use the hostler pockets on the ends and was the yellow light fixture over the motorman's window lit during wayside regulated automatic, if you know that too?
That CC sign in the photo looks as if it's pasted on. As for the green CC sign on the R-44s, that was the color for the CC when the spaghetti maps came out.
Do anybody know how many R-46's ran the < CC > Line?
All available ones in 1980, IIRC. Their trucks were cracking and were being replaced and the CC line allowed them to be used only a few hours a day. The R10 beasts took over the E & F line at the time.
I don't know how many R-46's were on the CC, but I do remember that those that were used came from the D line.
Wayne
Some must've came from the E and F, because people say that those 2 lines became dominated by the R10 in 1980.
R-10's on the F? No way. They had R-46's in the 1980's and R36's in the 1970's after the R9's were retired.
YES THERE WERE R10's ON THE E & F briefly in the early '80's. That was when the trucks of all of the R-46's had to be replaced. There were also R-32's on the E and an occasional R-38 on the F. Hard to believe HUH???? Tony
There were R-32's on the D train, too, in about 1983. For a short while, anyway.
The R-32s provided base service on the D right after the Chrystie St. connection opened. Their original roller curtains had a rounded-off "D" compared to the squared-off "D" on the R-1/9 end route signs. They streaked effortlessly along CPW while the R-10s thundered and the R-1/9s "howled" ass.
The R-32s were also running on the D in October of 1984 when I visited the city for the first time in four years. I rode on one such train and a puzzled look from the T/O when he saw me writing down the marker light combination (green-white). I explained what I was doing, to which he replied, "It should be correct".
As for the R-10s on the F, just ask Wayne (Mr. slant R-40). He rode on one such train in 1981, and it flat out rocketed past Sutphin Blvd. In his words, it was Katy bar the doors. It was probably the fastest R-10 ride he'd ever been on.
Yes, there were R-10s running on the F in 1980.
and
Pretty cool.............
Wow... I guess you are right.
Hmmm, here's an F train at Lexington Ave. on 7/14/80:
Here's an F train at Ditmas on 8/11/80:
There are plenty more pics of R10's on the E/F in 1980-81 on this site. I'll let others explain why.
Are they ever going to do anything about the condition of that station at Lexington?
You'd think it'd be up there on the rehab list. The did a nice job on Lexington/59th 5 years ago.
Hasn't work on 53 St/Lex started already?
Touche, Touche
Peace,
ANDEE
You can thank Rockwell and their cracking R-46 trucks.
I wouldn't say the E & F were dominated by R-10's. At that time R-46 were still on the E & F lines and R-10's still showed up on the A as well. I think many folks here will remember that before this all took place some R-46 were put on the D and A lines. Also some of the R-44's had also went back to the E & F lines. I'm certain that since R-46 arrived Jamaica Yards have always had most or all of them.
Wayne
That's a good point. Wayne aka Mr. slant R-40s says that rocketing R-10 F train he took in 1981 was the only time he ever rode on those cars on that line.
For the CC riders who didn't know the reason why the R-46s were there, they probably considered this period a high-point in their commuting experience, since the Eighth Ave./Concourse local had never exactly been a hotbed of new rolling stock before then.
Of course, had one of the Rockwall R-46s ended up skidding along the concrete trackbed after the truck broke, their opinion of the switch might have been altered a little bit...
I remember it well! I also remember when they were so short on equipment, so they ran a couple of CC trains with only 7 cars (R-10's). Tose were the good old days, as you never knew what kind of equipment you were gonna see next!!
There's no variety anymore!!
IIRC the low point came in January of 1981, when 30% of the fleet was OOS. It even made the Chicago Tribune; my aunt sent me an article on how desperately bad things had become in New York. Now if I could just find it...
I remember, that was in early 1981. It was the catalyst for change, as the GOH and clean car program began shortly thereafter.
I missed that entire dark period; it wasn't until October of 1984 that I would visit the city again. Redbirds were beginning to appear on the 7 then.
1981 was probably the low point. The cars on the IRT were coming apart at alarming rates, the R46 was still having truck problems, and the entire Broadway Bklyn elevated was in a state of near collapse. I remember the 10 or so "red" flag positions between Queens Blvd and Marcy Ave. where trains had to slow for safe passage over woeful track. Considering the R16 made up most of the J at this time, slow speeds were the norm no matter what!
Oh yeah - I think I said something like Oh sh*t when I first saw one. I was waiting at Tremont Ave during the AM rush for a D train and I heard the R-46 arriving on the local track, but I said to myself that can't be unless it's a D going local. I looked over my shoulder, saw the "CC" in the blue diamond and nearly died. Then a train of R-44's showed up on the D and minute later. It was an interesting morning as I was equally shocjed when we reached 7 Ave/53rd to see R-10's on the E. I'll always remember this as the time the TA played a major game of musical trains overnight. I'm pretty sure this was during the summer of 1980.
Wayne
Based on the 40+ E-Mail messages this weekend, I thought I better put out this list.
1) No, I do not have the updated list of R-44/R-46 side sign messages.
2) No, I don't know if or when the R-62As will be moved to the #7 line.
3) No, I cannot send parts off of any redbirds.
4) No, I have not seen any pictures of Heypaul with a rubber chicken - but it might be interesting.
5) No. I didn't get the new fleet assignments yet...
I can tell that you're lying about the rubber chicken.
is the MTA selling the parts of the old redbirds?
Check the MTA website: http://www.mta.info/mta/surplus.htm.
David
its not listed there. im gonna try e-mailing them.
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/materiel/index.html
Hey Dude,
What a great idea....a new subway faq. When you do can you please have these topic in the faq:
1) List the updated R-44/R-46 side sign messages.
2) Find out when the R-62A's will move to the #7 line.
3) How much you charge for parts of redbirds?
4) Tell us when was the first Heypaul - rubber chicken sighting.
5) Tell us the new fleet assignments.
I think this could be done rather quickly.
Thanks soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much for your help.
=)
Remind me to bring a screwdriver the next time I ride a Redbird. I wonder how much I could get on eBay for a strap.
Or trunk, my pickup is started.
one just sold for about $50
I'd settle for a photo of Heypaul with his infamous gas grill.:-)
Photoshop might be able to come up with something....
;-D
Originally, didn't the sign on the left front of this picture say GO HOME JOE? But now it's Japenese characters. Tell me I'm not going crazy.
Peace,
ANDEE
It did. Until Kawasaki sent me a real one.
LOL
Peace,
ANDEE
Shazzbot!! And here I was hoping that Andee was going crazy .
To tell you the Gods honest truth, I've been crazy for years.
Peace,
ANDEE
It once said Jack go home.
whatever
I know that they must sell more than they advertise on their website. i.e. I have heard that they sell repro signs, redbird models etc... anyone know if this is true? If so can you tell me what else they sell?(just curious).
Thanks
They sell many things...posters...maps...etc.,
Unfortunately, the Museum in Brooklyn is closed for renovation until sometime in 2003. However their sattelite shops at GCT and the Times Square Visitors center remain open so, you may have some luck at those locations.
Peace,
ANDEE
What kind of renovations are being done to the Brooklyn venue of the transit museum that require closure for two years?
THIS
May help you.
If not visit here and tell me what you think.
Peace,
ANDEE
I don't know why both links bring you back to the subtalk page here are the URLs;
http://www.mta.info/museum/general.htm
HTTP://www.nycrail.com
Peace,
ANDEE
Andee, thanks for the links and the information. It sounds like an involved and worthwhile project, and I'll be looking forward to visiting the renovated museum.
OT: Here in Los Angeles, the board of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art has approved the destruction of three of its main buildings and their replacement by a "tent" structure designed by a Dutch architect, Koolhaas, at an estimated cost of 200 million. During four years of disruption, the collection will be unavailable to the public.
When I heard that the Transit Museum would be closed, I was somewhat skeptical, but you made me a believer.
Thanks
The Transit Museum does not sell anything on their website.
Everything is done at the 2 stores (Grand Central Terminal and Times Square Visitors Center). The 3rd store in the Museum itself (Brooklyn) is closed while the Museum undergoes renovation.
Wherever did you get the idea that they sell Redbird models? They do have a few model train sets but they are railroad not subway. They did have the MTH R-40M sets for a while though.
What do they see there?
- Subwayline T-shirts
- Subway bullet (symbol) buttons
- Coffee mugs
- Shot glasses
- Coasters (gotta put the shot glasses and mugs somewhere)
- Trays with some of the bullets on them
- Station sign "reproductions" )I put that in quotes because no station sign ever looked like these. These signs were created for the Musuem).
- Token Watch
- Metrocard Watch
- Token Jewelry
- Old NYC Subway Tokens
- Subway car number plates (taken from scrapped cars)
- Videos
- Posters (like the ones you see in the stations)
- Poster size Subway maps (usually the previous one used in stations) - these are new and rolled up and put in plastic.
MetroCard holders (they still have a number of the sets of "Subways Around The World" on hand).
- MetroCards
- "Messenger bags"
- A plastic shower curtain with the subway map on it.
- Train/Subway related books
- Model Bus Banks
- Key Chains
- Postcards
Whew!!! That is all I can think of at the moment but they do have more items. BTW - this is what the store in Grand Central has. The Times Square store is much smaller and only has T-shirts and a few other items.
Hey - you asked.
Thanks. I thought someone told me that they had models (not working ones, ones that you build and put on display) of the subway cars but maybe they were wrong. Anyway thanks for your help.
The Red Caboose in Manhattan sells a very extensive subway/commuter model car collection ... at a good price too.
Mr rt__:^)
P.S. by GOOD I ment HIGH.
Mr rt__:^)
The Transit Museum store does have small keepsake boxes that look like subway cars (though perfectly rectangular); I've seen R-11, R-15, and R-33WF versions. I think they also have smaller versions for use as tree ornaments.
If you're looking for a decent, relatively inexpensive subway car model, try Images Replicas.
Why don't they sell old signs like they did at the auctions. I know a lot of people would but them. I have only a few and visitors, I've had from Europe always wanted them when they came to visit. What do they do with old signs, now that they don't have the auction anymore. I know they would have no trouble selling them at the store.
A contractor for the MTA is selling them on Ebay. There is one ending today. Search "Subway sign" and you will find them.
when is it that the 7 will get r62a's or r142's?
Stop asking every few days. Nobody knew the last time you asked. Nobody knows now, either.
Most likely (IMO), nothing will happen on the 7 until all the R-142(A)'s are in. That won't be for a while. I'd be surprised if it's in under six months.
I'm sure the moment someone hear learns new facts (as opposed to rumors), you will read them right here. You don't need to keep asking -- unless you want to become a popular killfile entry.
it will probaby take them a while to put their equipment in too. i.e. rollsigns,decals etc...
The R62/R62As have roll signs for the numbers up to 14 and I am sure the MTA can live with a R62 still displaying a yellow yard sticker even though it is at Corona.
I'm sure the moment someone hear learns new facts (as opposed to rumors), you will read them right here.
The moment someone hears new rumors, you'll also read it here :).
To the best of my understanding, the (7) will get R62A's when the redbirds are completely off the (2) and (6), and when the (3) gets the R62A's from the (6) and gets some R142s or R142A's of its own and can give its R62A's to the (7). Or something like that. I think the (7) will also get R62A's from the (1) somehow.
Exactly when all this would happen is unclear. At this point, I would imagine it's a matter of months, since they've already started to scrap redbirds and new R142s and R142A's are arriving. I say it can't happen soon enough.
Now when will the (7) get R142s or R142A's? No time soon. Years, at least. I think the Corona barn has to be upgraded to handle them. Possibly never.
:-) Andrew
Here's how it goes for like the 6th time. Before WTC it was going to be Pelham R62As to the 1 line, the 1 line R62As go to the 7. The 3 line R62As will go somewhere, and will eventually be phased out with option order? or regular order R142s.
Why bother with the red-yellow (1-6) swap? I don't like the yellow-striped cars -- why can't we keep our reds and blues?
maybe the yellow is a primer.
You are. 1670 is going around with a red sticker and has been since I saw it in August. The cars are moving, not the colors.
The stickers aren't replaced the instant the cars move. At any given time, a number of yellow-stickered 1's (or 3's) are prowling about the system. (I rarely ride the 6 but I assume red stickers show up there similarly.)
At any given time, a number of yellow-stickered 1's (or 3's) are prowling about the system.
There's one set, 1876-1880 I think, that was a yellow-stickered 3 for quite some time. Now it's a blue-stickered 1.
Before the WTC destruction, I was told that the #7 line would get the cars from the #1 line because it was felt that these are in the best shape mechanically and interior car body wise. The #1 line would get the #6 cars, while the #3 cars would be dispersed wherever needed to provide the full quota of cars on lines 1/4/7 & GCS. Acording to an RCI I know, whenever the #7 line gets R62A's (we have no idea when "whenever" is), all glass will be replaced.
"Acording to an RCI I know, whenever the #7 line gets R62A's (we have no idea when "whenever" is), all glass will be replaced."
Is the new glass going to have the anti-scratch system like the R142s? -Nick
You've just hit on the reason I want the 1 to keep its cars. We West Siders have taken good care of them, at least in comparison to the East Siders on the 6. The Pelham cars are in noticeably worse shape.
The matter is under study by NYCT as we speak. No decision has been made as to what will replace the R-33S/R-36 fleet on the Flushing Line, or when.
David
Better ask Train Dude. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
The MBTA is supposed to get new cars for the blue line which I believe will be the same as the new ones on the red line. Sorry but im not exactly sure which type they are. Here is an article that I found on a website:
On September 6 2001, the MBTA Board of Directors voted on a $172 million contract with Siemens Transportation to supply 94 new Blue Line cars to replace the present fleet.The first pair is expected to arrive in late 2003 with regular deliveries in 2004/2005. The new cars will have stainless-steel carbodies, A.C propulsion, and will be the same carbody size as the present fleet. Siemens has subcontracted with Transportation and Transit Associates (TTA, a subsidiary of Talgo America) to assemble the new cars at Hornell NY. TTA will also dismantle and reassemble two existing Blue Line cars to determine if it is feasible to rebuild 24 for Orange Line service. Cars 0622/0623 were sent to Hornell NY for the work in early November 2001 and will return in about 6 months to Blue Line service after they are reassembled. If it is feasible, 24 cars will be retained and rebuilt for Orange Line service after the new Blue Line fleet arrives. If it is determined that the cars are too corroded to be feasibly rebuilt, 18 new cars will be ordered from Siemens for the Orange Line.
I hope the new cars are a success. After all the crap the MBTA has been through with the Breda Green Line cars, hopefully they will have much better luck with Siemens/Talgo.
yeah i dont know if you heard about it or not but recently a breda train derailed and the wheel fell off. I dont know why they keep using them.
I did read that one of the Type 8s derailed (yet again!), but I didn't hear that a wheel fell off. Oh man, that's not good! I've been hearing that the MBTA and Breda are blaming each other for the problems with the trams.
It derailed, the wheel fell off and as far as I know it destroyed a rot iron fence.
The most recent derailments were on July 17 and August 20. The Type-8 Green Line cars have been out-of-service since August 20, and there is no information available on when they will return to service. The MBTA and Breda are still in discussions on a resolution to both the technical and business issues.
The new Blue Line cars are being built by Siemens, and will be delivered in about two years.
A rumor was posted on subtalk not too long ago that the MBTA is building a test track out by Riverside exclusively to test the type 8s. January marks four years that the first prototypes were delivered...hmm, didn't it take four years for the first Boeing lrv's to make revenue service too? -Nick
"The MBTA is supposed to get new cars for the blue line which I believe will be the same as the new ones on the red line"
Nope, they won't be the same at all. They might be similar, with stainless steel bodies and the cool sounding AC motors, but the new blue line cars will be the same length as the current blue line fleet, and as the article mentions, built by Siemens, not Bombardier..which the new red line cars were built by. -Nick
For those of you who have Yahoo! e-mail accounts, if you got your Yahoo! Weekly Picks e-mail today, the first web site they featured was none other than this one, New York City Subway Resources. They gave it a very nice review and included links to the subway cars, yards and maps. I was pleasantly surprised to see nycsubway.org there.
Google still gives me 7x the hits :-)
-Dave
Does anybody remembers if the R-10's had the CC after the GOH in
the greenbird paint?.
I remember taking this overexposed picture.
Cool thanks Engine Brake,now i can paint my brass WP Car Co
R-10's in the greenbird paint.
I like the double letters better,in my opinion.
Definatley 1985 or 86. By 87, the new black/white signs were installed.
Some cars had the color bullet signs, "A", "C", "H" and grey "S".
wayne
Definately--
I rode they very-short lived green CC trains....
actually, it was a "C" inside of a blue diamond in the front sign.
Boy, those green R-10's didn't last long, did they?
Yeah i know i loved those R-10's they hauled butt in that Rockaway
stretch of track,and in 8th ave too. Although i'am an IRT guy,i really like the R-10's.
Amazing contrast with the R16. Same builder and technologically the same car, but the R16 was cursed from the start, allergic to snow and to salt air.
The R16 was allergic to going down the road.
You can say that again.:-)
Not only am I the only R10 hater on this board, I seem to be the only R16 lover. I always was a different sort.
Don't get me wrong, the R16 was a unique car to the B division, it looked very IRT'ish. And as a B division conductor at the time, it was kind of fun to operate doors with handles rather than push buttons. However, when I became a motorman, I had nothing but bad luck with those cars. Dead motors galore wondering if I would make it up the hill out of Essex and on up the WillyB. Thankfully, I always did. I can't tell you how many times I had to take the trains out of service. Door problems galore. We would hear the doors unlock, but fail to open. We would flick the handles back and forth and they would still refuse to open. For some reason, it was the last car more often than not.
Hey, I can never remember ever riding an R16 with all doors operating.
Why wasn't some maintenance done on them in the 1980's? Even the redbirds are being maintained although their scheduled for scrapping very soon.
I was talking about doors in an entire car failing to open, not individual doors within a given car....In those days even the beloved R32's were in bad shape, defered maintance started to catch up to the TA. They weren't doing much maintance on anything!
Yeah the whole system looked like hell. I think the R16's were the SYMBOL of the entire system gone to hell in the 70's!
There was no SYMBOL of the entire system gone to hell in the '70's other than the system itself. And even that is a generalization. The entire decade commencing with the late 1960's was an utter digrace. But that is subject for another board. The transit system was just a reflection of that time. It took the timing, foresight and guts of transit officials like Simson and Gunn to begin pointing fingers and taking names and not afraid to give a few people a good kick in the ass to get things back into shape. And of course, what NY does the rest follow.
The R16 was just a victim of the times. But in those days no car escaped. Long after the R16's disappeared the new scapegoat would be the R27-30's. About the time I moved to the Grand Concourse, the R27's were holding court on the CC. They were rolling doodle boards; the wheels couldn't have been any flatter. A sad end to another good car.
joe c.
Do you guys remember WHY NY got so bad??
It was because in the late 60's the senators/ governors from other states, I think even Nixon, said no more big $$ to NY.
I remember seeing a headline from the time basically saying it.
That was a good part of it. NY almost got to be the national joke. But the time itself was a big downfall. Many people blame Koch with shutting the sro's being the contributing factor to homelessness. True. But what happened in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and many other places? Koch wasn't to blame for those, right? Anyway, we digress from the topic of this board. Sorry folks.
joe c
Lindsay and Beame were to blame!
Lindsay got off on the wrong foot. Now, Beame. Here was the comptroller. He new the dollars and cents of the city. Was no surprise when the city went belly up under his regime. I still say he doubled as the "principal" on WELCOME BACK KOTTER.
Up Mr. Woodman's nose with a rubber hose!
You're right, I'm sorry...
It's just that I don't think it was all the MTA's fault....I mean, garbage collection, street lights, everything went downhill then.
New York certainly had it's share of enemies outside of the city, but don't go off and take an "everbody else is responsible" attitude. Lindsey was rolled by Mike Quill and the other unions on their contracts in ther late 1960s which led to spiraling municipal costs. The city also bought into LBJ's Great Society program and increased local social service spending well above surrounding areas, then imposed a city income tax to pay for it.
That drove a lot of middle class people who could afford to pay the taxes out of New York, and a lot of Fortune 500 compnies as well, since the elitist attitude towards corporations held by local officals was that "We can tax them, they won't move out of the city. We're New York, where else in the world can you get (name your item)." They screwed up big time on that one, and didn't see the light until it was too late.
Losing the residential and corporate tax base while the cost of municipal service rose meant when the next recession hit after the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, tax revenues plunged and the city had run out of bookkeeping slight-of-hand methods to balance the ledgers. That's when the infamous "Ford to New York: Drop Dead" headline appeared about the government's refusal to bail New York out of bankruptcy.
All that social service spending and those higher municipal contract deals may have seemed compassionate and "the right thing to do" at the time, but remember, in the long run, stuff like that it what helped kill the Second Ave. subway in the 1970s, because when crunch time came, it went first while the social service and contract givebacks came later.
"Ford to New York: Drop Dead"
That's it...that's the headline I referred to :)
I see what you mean, I didn't neccessarily mean to blame everyone else, but for the man on the street in NY in the 70's, it wasn't a good place to be.
A lot is made about that infamous headline, but people tend to forget that shortly after, the federal government about-faced and agreed to a major financial bailout of NYC.
New York City also started a sales tax about 19965 or 1966. Before that there was no sales tax in New York state or city.
Deferred maintenance of the 1950's & 60's collided head on with the fiscal crisis of the 1970's. The postwar years saw badly needed transit funding siphoned off to fund Robert Moses pet highway/bridge projects. In these days, nothing was fixed unless it broke down to a point that made the equipment impossible to run. By 1975, this attitude had driven the state of the infrastructure so low that it interfered with normal service. But at this time NO money was available to address the mounting problems, which only worsened through the late 1970's, bottoming out in 1981. Only then was a major capital improvement program undertaked to fix everything up and to eradicate grafitti. It took nearly 10 years to do, but the system is better than it ever was before.
IIRC the system was gutted in an effort to save the 15-cent fare. It finally went up to 20 cents in July of 1966.
October 30 1975:
NY Daily News runs headline "Ford to City: Drop Dead"
NY Times article here.
There is a saying, "Being at the right place at the right time." there is another, "The cream will rise to the top." Well, at that time we, the U.S. of A. had a run of wrong place and time and swill rising to the Top from the FED down to local Government. We, the tax payers and worker/consumers were hustled with our eyes wide open.
We had the good fortune to have some folks with good sight in all strata that hepled lead us out of those times.
The best part is, there were and still are a lot of places on spaceship Earth that have never even risen to that point in their own socio/economic identity. This is still the best place to be!
avid
At Branford our R-17 has a couple of sticky doors, but they don't need to open THAT much anymore. I like to board thru the storm door anyway :-)
Mr rt
1689 had one sticking door leaf back in 1980. It was at one of the car ends. Eddie S. knew about it; it was just a matter of getting aroung to fix it.
That door still sticks :-(
It's on the list for the 3/4 Ton Crews next assignment.
Mr rt__:^)
Glad to hear it's being attended to. 1689 had gotten a lot of TLC, it seems. So has 6688, no doubt.
Well, there is a small group there who works on subway cars now to complement the trolley, & signal guys/gails.
This week-end I'm Santa's helper again with the BMTman, Lou from Brooklyn, RIPTA42HopeTunnel, Sparky, Mr SMEE & my grandson.
Mr rt__:^)
Give 1689 a nice pat on the side from me. Hope to see her again someday.
It's the BMTman's turn to move her 75' (we've been moving her from a storage track to the High Platform every Sat/Sun because we have a Tin Plate model layout inside). Lets the old girl earn some of her keep.
I tell the customers to make sure & tell Al, who's working the layout, that they don't want to go to Coney Island. For many it's the first time they have ever been in a subway car, particularly the ones small enough to sit on Santa's lap.
Mr rt__:^)
6321 wasn't without door problems, either. Not to mention a variety of other things, according to the December 1986 NY Times article about its demise. I've heard that part of the problem was with the elctric portions on the couplers.
The last straw for 6321 was when all four of its motors were declared dead due to deteriorated wiring. It was retired the very next day.
Although I am one of the fold, that is an R10 lover, I always liked the R16's. As a Bronx boy, I was used to the standard equipment of the IRT, running past my home station of 149th and 3rd Ave. The nearest of
anything remotely different was at River Ave and 161st.You know what was there, of course. The IND was the fastest of the fast, but with only two types of cars, it was rather stagnant. Little by little I discovered the lines of the BMT along with the IRT #7. All unique and different! In my early high school years, about 1962, I stumbled upon the upper level at Delancey/ Essex. What was there, of course, but the R16's. How could this be? A car like the ones on the "A" ( I had no idea at the time of the R10 designation) but externally like the cars on the IRT #1 and #6 lines ( where I first encountered the R17's).
Over the years of my railfanning, I have never had a bad experience on the R16. The Jamaica and Myrtle expresses were a ball to ride, expecially after a tired old Standard crapped out. (I'd take that tired old standard today!)
I disliked what became of the 16's; plastic seats inserted in place of red cushions, the "slanted" walls for new door motors. But you can't blame the car for that.
They didn't run as fast as an R17, but the ride was far and away more comfortable.
Hooray for the R16!
joe c
My friend...you're just like me:)
I, too, am a Bronx boy who LOVES the R-16
(although, I think I'm a little behind you, I was born in 1964)
Why do us Bronx Boys seem to go for the R-16??
My father, another Bronx Boy, liked them, too....I made him take a joyride with me on them in 1982, when I was living in Bushwick.
He had never seen them before, and thought they were boss.
Long live the Fabulous Fat Sled, The R-16
(well, in our memories, anyway)
You know, J-Train, many of the folks that like putting those cars down always state the time the doors froze during a severe winter storm. The AB's were called out and replaced them. That was very early on in their careers and did not happen again. To use this incident against them would be like using the time a freak snow storm hit the north east and even rendered the venerable GG-1's inoperable. Again, a one time incident.
One other thing. We liken the R16 to the R17 that was all too familiar to us. Here's another instance: I was on a class trip to Brooklyn while in the 6th grade. We took the Lex (Lo-V's) to 86th street and then the #6 local to 59th. That was not an express station in 1960. The R26's were brand new. Clean and shiny olive drab. Just when I got over that shock I nearly dropped dead when an equally new and clean R27 barreled into the station. A fat big brother to the IRT car I had just seen! This Bronx boy was getting more hooked by the minute.
joe C
Ha!!!
You are bringing me some good memories, my friend..
I never really rode the IND-BMT in my early years...those were spent on the 2 and 5....and the 3rd. Ave. El, which was my favorite when I was a little boy.
Occasionally, me and my father would ride out to Coney Island on the D, but it wasn't till i was in my early teens did I realize that the IND-BMT had bigger cars, and when I did....I was hooked.
By the time I started riding them in high school on the EE, the R-16 had started to show its unreliability. I remember several times hearing the horn sound as an out-of-service set of R-16s would lumber through the station at Broadway and 23rd St. while everyone waited for the next set of R-27/30s on the RR to arrive (though the R-16s did have their own certain loopy charm in the way the cars would rhythmically rock side-to-side, each car out-of-phase with the one in front of it, as the train would enter the station. It was almost like watching the rail equivalent of a kindergarten class walking single file and hand in hand behind their teacher; the line was straight, but each car seemed to want to do it's own thing as it rolled down the tracks).
You are exactly right, J Lee. I like your use of "loopy charm". Cool. I hope it sticks. The 16's did waddle at slow speed. Again I do point out that they were being neglected and suffered the usual TA's "we don't care about them" attitude, which pops up generally when something new is about to enter service.
Saw one of the breed sitting in CI yard near Ave X, painted sort of silver.
About 1970 there was a story going around about how an R16 was up at Concourse yards for servicing. It was mistakenly coupled into a train of IRT cars & sent up the ramp to the Jerome el. There were some clearance problems, I understand. Again, just a story that made the rounds then.
jrc
Sounds like the story I heard about an R-10 that got mixed into a train of R-12/14s and sent along an IRT route. Whoooooops! Cr-rrunnn-nnch!!!!
I have to plead neutrality as far as the R-16s are concerned, since I rode on them only twice and for short runs each time.
And isn't there a similar story of a car "disappearing" from the 207th St. yard, only to be found years later?
I think it had to do the 174th St. yard underground. Something about an AA train, IIRC.
My memories of the R16 start on the Jamaica (#15) el and end at the last days of the "EE". By then they were starting to go. While among the slowest cars I've ever ridden on, they had some unique features - the porthole windows, the curved grab-poles, the slanted door motor pockets and the infamous peeling white ceiling paint. Even at Museum, #6387's ceiling paint still peels away gloriously. I liked the R16 despite its several flaws. The window seats were a big plus, kind of like a natural progression from the R10.
wayne
The one thing I disliked most about the R-16 was the uncomfortable seating position due to the wall panels tilting out.
Being over 6 feet tall made those seats less comfortable than standing. That's why I never used the bench seats. I'm a slave for window seats anyway.
>>>The one thing I disliked most about the R-16 was the uncomfortable seating position due to the wall panels tilting out. <<
The first time I ever saw an R-16 was at The Transit Museum (they didn't see the Bronx too often, if at all). The protruding door panels looked most uncomfortable to sit by.
Peace,
ANDEE
That was a retrofit in the early 1970's to accomodate new R44-type door motors. Most other conventional cars got new door motors, but built a smaller boxier potrusion instead of sloping the entire panel out.
Doesn't anyone remember the R-16's before they got those stupid slanted door panels?
Well, they didn't get those slanted door panels till the early 70's, I believe.
Also, "stupid" is a matter of opinion, I liked the look, to be honest.
I can't believe that you would have liked the slanted panels if you had ever ridden them before the retrofit.
My memories of them are from 1955-1958, and back then they were still new and had red vinyl covered cushioned seats too.
Incidentally, the R-16's did not have headlights when they were built. They were added when they were seven or eight years old.
No headlights? I take it then that the R16s were confined mostly to the mostly-elevated Eastern Division during their first seven or eight years in service. But even then, how did they manage to keep them running safely in the tunnels without any headlights?
Before the late 1950's none of the subway trains had headlights! They just ran in the dark.
Before the late 1950's none of the subway trains had headlights! They just ran in the dark.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part of the reason for the installation of headlights was so that work crews could see the train coming. Believe it or not they are places in the subway tunnel were the acoustics are such that you do not hear a train coming,even an R-10.
Larry,RedbirdR33
I still remember getting an R-1/9 train with no headlights. None of the R-1s ever got them, and only part of the R-4 fleet got them (all R-6s thru R-9s got headlights). You haven't lived until you saw I-beams turned into silhouettes with the only illumination coming from tunnel lights.
899 and down had no headlights. There were a few exceptions however.
What was the point of the slanted door panels?
The R-44 style door motors were too big to fit into the R-16s pockets, so the panels were slanted outward from their base to leave enough room at the top for the motors, while (theoretically, anyway) still allowing passengers to sit in the sideways-facing seats below the panels without bumping their heads.
That was true of all 60' R-units. They all got new door motors, but a neater job at enlarging the compartment.
They didn't work very weell. I remember most of the time only one door opening in each doorway.
It was more about abuse than the quality of the motors. They worked fine in the R44 prior to their GOH. Perhaps they were checked once or twice a year, as opposed to never on the R16.
Yes, on the "EE" and "GG" prior to 1971. A number of them were Fox Red back then, with the #6387 interior paint scheme.
Sadly, I remember one R16 in particular, that one is #6304, who met her fate on May 20, 1970. She was pushed from the consist and into the curtain wall by the blind nose of R40M #4501.
wayne
I'm figuring that the TA realized it was a huge mistake to have those slanted door pockets, cuz I never saw another single car type with them, even those which had their motors replaced at around the same time. Certainly noy on the R16's IRT cousin, the R17.
I vaguely remember the original straight pockets on that #15 train I took on September 23, 1967. That 15 really threw me for a loop, let me tell you.
The #15 threw me too, and I lived there at the time! We poor folks on the Jamaica line knew nothing of front signs, and just looked for two green marker lights.
I have a great 8 x 10 B & W photo of the interior of 6400 as delivered, but no scanner or camera to post it.
Believe it or not, I never paid any attention to marker lights when I became immersed in the subway, much to my regret. When I returned in 1984, I wrote down as many combinations as I saw; unfortunately, I wasn't able to record any for the A. Even though the pre-GOH R-38s were running there, I didn't see them.
And to think I rode on all those A trains and would look right at the front bulkhead signs on the R-10s, and never noticed the marker lights. Ditto for the R-32s on the N back then.
Green/Green was Lefferts Bound
Yellow/Red was CC to Rockaway Park, White Red was to Euclid
I'm almost sure the shuttle HH was red/red.
Green/green was RR Ditmars, I recall also Woodlawn bound 4
I'm looking for my B division route guide, which did have 1982 marker setups. By bulletin, all markers must be properly displayed as red/red, and of exception to the 7 line, for some stupid reason as per previous posting are disconnected and cannot light.
Marker lights existed into the 1980's? What kinds of cars used them? This is news to me.
All cars older than R40 had markers and end signs. The R26/36 cars have them today. Colored marker signals were used to identify route and destination to wayside tower operators.
And back in the days when most rolling stock didn't have end bulkhead signs, the riding public also became familiar with marker light settings.
By necessity but now there is no reason to pay attention to the color of the lights.
That's because they're now set to red-red.
OK, here's a picture of an R27 circa 1972. Are those small lamps on either side of the bulkhead rollsigns these marker lights you describe?
Those indeed are the R-27 version of marker lights!
If the R-27 was like the older equipment it could display white, amber red or green in those lights through the use of the appropriate lens.
All R units thru the R-38s had those marker lights in roughly the same area, on either side of the bulkhead roll signs. The Redbirds still have them, but nowadays they're set to red-red.
By bulletin, all markers must be
properly displayed as red/red
got some green/red and green/green
combos running amok on the 4-5-6
tho it's understandable for them,
being the 'green circle' lines..
I saw a 2 train a year ago with a white-red (or red-white) setting. Sentimental T/O, perhaps?
I saw a red-green (or green-red?) 2 a few days ago at Times Square.
Yesterday a 2 flashed its marker lights once or twice approaching 96. It was going over a switch then; the marker lights may be wired similarly to the 7's interior lights.
This is our interior at Kingston. Which blue is closer to original?
It looks like the wall color's right, the doors and fan I think are a little darker blue, more like a blue-grey.
She's coming along nicely! Have you decided what to do with the seats?
wayne
The seats are done. Since we couldn't remanufacture foam cushons, we took the next best route and the fiberglass seats are red. TMNY's web site might have a picture.
What is that red car coupled to the R16 ?
That should be an R30, taken at CIY.
Where are you rebuilding this R16?
She's at Kingston, NY. The museum has many trolley/subway cars from NYC.
Mr rt__:^)
#6387 is a beauty, isn't she? She's got the original interior paint but it looks funny cause of the slanted door-motor pocket covers. I associate the Pistachio Green interior paint with those.
I also liked the multi-colored sign rolls too, the ones that were installed in 1970. On my way home from my last drop (Lefrak Building on Queens Blvd near 63 Dr station) if I got an empty one I'd play with the rolls and set up a "TT" or "MM" or "HH" or "JJ" package.
wayne
The only way I'd recognize it as an R16 is with tan walls, orange doors, ripped flooring and wall-to-wall grafitti.
And exploding.:-)
To be honest, explosions were a once-a-week thing. OK, maybe twice a week. Hardly an every day thing. LOL.
That photo is NOT the way I remember the R16's. They didn't look that good in service, especially at their end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just curious, I know everyone would want to forget, and it may not be far enough back in history to even consider it....but grafitti, as bad as it was, WAS a PART of the history of the NYC subway. I wounder if a grafittied train will ever find it's way to the Transit Museum. I believe it is a part of history, and it may be too soon, we have only been cleaned up for 10 years or so. History is not always good things, but no one can deny that for a period of almost 20 years, THE SUBWAY DID LOOK THAT WAY! Thank goodness that it's over, but it's still a part of the history of the subway.
You are so right about graffiti being part of the history of the New York Subway System. But the museum is a Public Relations arm of NYCT. Graffiti and the cars being in horrible mechanical shape were two milestones which NYCT would not like to document in the museum.
Then it is not doing its job as a museum. There are a lot of
unpleasant moments in history. To just gloss them over and present
only those warm fuzzy memories is nostalgia schmaltz, not history.
Any presentation of the history of the subway system has to include
things like grafiti, wrecks, labor unrest and public opinion,
negative or positive. However, preserving a tagged car or train
isn't the only legit way to interpret that period to the public.
I'd be happy with a photo exhibit, or a small car interior mockup.
As much as I dislike grafiti, I can't see re-writing history to
erase it.
I agree completely. No one can deny that the subway looked like that for almost 20 years. If anything they should be proud that they wiped that nightmare away. It was a great accomplishment, and a hard one at that. A graffitied car is just as much a part of the history of the subway as is the great collection of vintage cars. If anything, as mentioned, a photo exhibit would surfice, although a full car would show history more vividly.
The Transit Authority in its infanite wisdom, painted over the aluminum light fixtures and ceiling grilles, just about everything. That has been taken care of and you'll be pleasantly surprised the next time you are up there.
When I was a little kid I didn't like the round window in front because that was the only window (along with similar IRT) that I could not see out of because it was too high.
So I had an early age bias against them.
Me too! until I was 10, I hated those damned round-windowed trains. But after i reached adequate height, I loved them.
Nah, me and flx870 like them, too :)
Had you been old enough to remember them on the A as I do, you might feel differently about them. But as I've said before, it's OK if you didn't care for them. I didn't care for the BMT standards myself.
I can't blame their awful condition towards the end for why I hate the R10, because the R16 was even worse at the end and I love them.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It's OK if you didn't care for the R-10s. I don't hold it against you.
The first time that I ever encountered an unlocked front door was on an R-10 on the A line in Brooklyn bound for Lefferts Blvd. I cracked the door open wide enough to look through the opening. After a while I did shut the door.
I must have been about 9 or 10 then.
Actually, the R16 was more technologically advanced, with electric doors and a PA system. Plus it had better fans. I still don't quite understand why the R16 was so bad, but it's contemporaries weren't (R10, R12, R14, R15, R17 & R21/22).
You state that the R16 did not run well in the snow. I was on it during a heavy snowstorm on the j line and it was a very smooth ride late at night.
Well, you didn't have to call WEather6-1212 to see if it was going to snow. The Standards would show up on the Jamaica line as the R16 went to the 14th Street line, which was how we could tell, at least on a weekday. My R16 experience during snow was 10PM on a Saturday night from Sutphin (around 1966 - still safe then) to Woodhaven Blvd. The train was 8 cars, took about a half-hour, and 2 door leaves in the first car are all that would open. Similar in other cars in the train. It took forever to get a door light at every station.
I rode a r16 in a snowstorm early 1970. No problems with the doors or the ride. All the doors opened and closed ok. It was about 3 am.
That was unusual. When significant snow was predicted in the 1950's/60's, the R16's would always show up on the Canarsie Line, swapped for the more reliable standards.
BTW, did anyone who rode the J line in 1967 bitch when the R16 was taken from the J and replaced with much older R7/R9 equipment from the IND lines?
The R-7/9s didn't appear right away. R-27/30s went over to the JJ right after the R-16s were yanked. BMT standards were also used. That JJ train I rode on in March of 1968 was an R-27/30 consist, still sporting its original olive drab.
Is that you looking out the railfan window?
LOL.
No, I'm Caucasian.:-) But that photo was taken right about the time I went to that recital at FKL. OTOH I rode from Elderts Lane to 168th St. and back. I think there's a photo taken at Elderts Lane on that same day.
This one's dated March 1968.
I don't remember the exact date we were at FKL, but it was probably either March 10, the 24th, or the 31st. Unfortunately, we don't have a program and I no longer have my ticket stub.
Believe me, if any of those photos featured me at the railfan window, I would have said something.
Am I the only R10 hater on this board?
By the time I was riding the subway (mid-late 1980's), the R10 was poorly ventilated garbage. I was never happy to ride one. I have no experience with its heyday.
:-) Andrew
Same here. I once endured a ride from ENY to Bedford Park on a non-green grafitti-splattered rusting noise machine of an R10 train. It was the filthiest train I ever rode, both trash and grime wise. If today's younger people ever saw it running today, they'd be shocked to see what we endured in the early/mid 1980's.
I remember that those "old green trains" used to inspire dread, especially if you were taking it for any distance.
:-) Andrew
Everyone hated them. The only people who used them were those who needed stations served only by the C line. During early 1989, when C service ran all day long, nobody along CPW ever used them. They'd simply wait for a B train of slants.
All the negative attributes you heap on the R10 was not a fault of the car and was epidemic thoughout the system. There were not that many airconditioned cars then, grafitti was all over the place, end doors were opened and noise came in, along with hustlers dancing their way though the train. The 10's were equal to all other pieces of equipment in the "negative". It was the "positives" that took the R10's to the hights of railfannig. If you have never experienced these things because you were too young or close minded, I offer my condolences.
joe c
Their biggest positive was their sheer brute speed on express runs. The Thundering Herd were tailor-made for the A. Once they got rolling along CPW, you had the feeling they were unstoppable.
Plus they had the fastest doors in all of New York. Whenever I open a Windows program, you hear a sound bit of R-10 doors opening.
In addition to the speed, they had "bounceability" like no other. For the speed, recall if you will the R10's hurtling s/b into 42nd street from the express from 59th! Sheer blurr! The bouncing was something to behold, especially northbound express, from 125 to 145, hitting the switches just north of 135th. Brother, if you were standing at the front window, you had to hang onto the door handle! It was a joy to ride. And NEVER, EVER a derailment or such.
joe c
hello. Joe! Carlton here...
Nice to hear from you again!
The northbound express on Lex. Av (4)(5) is so thrilling, but I can't stand it...for once, I'd like to travel that distance from 86th to 125th with just all speed and no bounce...and no derailment there...
I can't imagine anything older than an R26 going up that track at that speen and with that bounciness.
That's why I like the 60th St (N)(R)(W) tunnel, the thrill of travelling at speeds of about 50-55mph and have a smooth ride all the way, especially on an R68A (W) train. The Fulton St unnel (A)(C) is also fun, but too bouncy...especially at the midpoint of the tunnel going eastbound, Brooklyn-bound...
That's just me...
Carlton
a.k.a. Cleanairbus
Hey Carlton,
Yes, there are several hot spots on the system today where the trains can, eventually, get up a good gallop. Problem now is too many time signals and also most trains crap out by time they reach the "summit". The #4/#5 n/b express from 86 to 125 in the early '60's was a disappointment 'cause there were switches 'tween n/b and s/b express track between 103rd & 110th. The northbound actually came to a stop before proceeding. The southbound came thru at a nice pace, hitting those switches with a pleasant bounce. The R21/22's did that the best.
About late 1966 or early '67 that switch was removed and the signals reset. Let me tell you, that express rivaled anything the IND had to offer, and I am an IND fan. Standing at the front window as my n/b express hurtled thru at full power all the way into 125! The best thrill the IRT could offer. People reading their newpapers and books actually had to put them down until the train stopped. Where is that done nowadays?
Ah yes, that downhill dash into 42nd St. That was nothing short of terrifying. And those Thunderbirds always stopped on a dime afterwards. As for the Homeball Alley stretch, I never found myself hanging on for dear life.
There used to be an expansion joint on the southbound express track at 42nd St. near the southern end, and you could identify an approaching A train from the mezzanine by the clacking sound as its wheels passed over that joint. That happened to me a few times when I was buying tokens, and by the time I got to the platform, the conductor was closing down. I came this close to yelling, "LET ME ON THIS TRAIN!!!" I dod not want to wind up on an E.
I like the sound of the doors on the R-27. That was a distinct sound.
I know that sound! The R26 had it also, but not the R28.
joe c.
I was on one of the last runs of the R10"s in 1989 and the ride was very good. Ran fast accross Jamaica bay. Should have kept the for many more years. I remember the first time they came to Far Rockaway in 1967.
I remember the first time I rode out to the Rockaways in July of 1969. Once we had cleared the bridge, all bets were off. Our train took off as though it had a Saturn V booster attached to it (Apollo 11 had just blasted off to the moon). Had we been in a tunnel, it would have felt as though we were doing 70 mph.
I wonder if Mister R-10 himself, William Padron, has been reading any of these posts.
Of course, I have been reading these posts...if it is directly connected to the R-10's, my all-time favorite and great classic cars that was responsible for me being a lifelong transit buff, I will be seeing them with interest. Ahh, in my case...the glory days when they were all on my all-time favorite route on the IND "A" *Wash.Hts.-8th Av.Exp.* operating between "Wash.Hts.-207th St.* and *Fulton-Lefferts Blvd* or *Mott Av.-Far Rockaway* (as seen from the destination side signs).
It is simply of matter of personal choice, and there will be those individuals who will either praise or condemn the R-10's (it is always their free choice to say so). Me...I will always be an ardent follower and vocal champion of the R-10's throughout the rest of my lifetime, despite the fact they were all retired thirteen years ago and only two units exist today (#3184 and #3189).
Besides, everyone who knows me personally on this message board or at the railfan meetings and functions all know about my one real personal preference (perhaps obsession?) in New York City subway rolling stock. You don't need to know any further that they have acknowledged me as the R-10 expert of this hobby for that reason alone.
-William A. Padron
So sad to know that only two cars were saved, i think the TA should
have saved an 8 car train of the R-10's.
Where would they be stored? The TA cannot keep too many of the retired rolling stock, because then where will the current working stock go? I share the sentiment, but the practical side does start to activate from time to time.
Coney Island, Fresh Pond, Rockaway Park, Rock. PArk (IND), Pitkin, 39th St. All could take a few cars if you wanted to mothball some r10's for an emergency.
By the way, the non-GOH (and graffitied) cars were gone by November 1988, while the Green GOH R-10's were able to go the distance up to September 1989 in regular service. The E.R.A. Farewell fantrip was held on Sunday, October 29, 1989.
-William A. Padron
That's why you're Mister R-10.:-) Maybe someday we'll hook up and talk about R-10s ad infinitum.
I remember seeing an R-10 on the C line in 1989. I think it was at Jay Street. I forget if the C went to Jay Street in 1989. I think that it did.
I didn't like them when I first saw them, coming from the Bronx, where they ran a lot of R-12's and 14's, but I grew to like them.
I don't hate the R10 - they just didn't give me an erection. I did fall for the R16 and was heart-broken when they were removed from my Jamaica line in 1967. I thought they only misbehaved at the time when it snowed. The R27 was actually better suited for the service: lighter weight for the els and WBB.
The R-10s were great as an express, but not much fun to ride as a local, especially one on lines that made a lot of turns, since the loundness remained, but their redemming quality of speed along runs like CPW were absent.
You can bet that conductors didn't care too much for them on local runs, especially when the CC/C went all the way out to Rockaway Park. They should have been kept on express routes until the end specifically for that reason.
I rode a few R10 expresses (re-routes on Fulton and 8th Ave), and they still sucked. LOL
Did the reroutes get up to any decent speed or did the chug along because they were re-routes and there were a bunch of other trains in front of it?
Driving Jeff Gordon's NASCAR racer would be fun on an open highway, but not on the BQE on a Friday PM rush hour during a snow emergency. Riding the R-10s isn't really riding the R-10s unless you experience them the way God and the American Car Foundary meant them to be experienced, flat out full blast on the CPW or Fulton runs with nothing but green lights ahead of you.
The one I took in 1988 on CPW was probably slow due to congestion as everything (A/B/C & D) had to go express (someone got shot on a B train IIRC). But the Fulton runs were never congested. Don't get me wrong, we moved pretty fast, but not any faster than an R38 or R44 at the time, and quite a bit louder.
Amen to that. I rode on many trains of Thunderbirds along CPW in that exact manner. Damn the GTs, full speed ahead!!
The R10s rocked on the run out to Rockaway. Nothing better than all the doors and windows open and the green R10s clunking out to Rockaway in the late 80's. It could also be because I was also in a good mood because I was going to the beach! But they were great - even if you would get a dirty graffittied one.
Say, after reading all these R10 posts, I'm cross-eyed! One prpblem the 10's used to have: water in the flourescent light fixtures. Remember that?
joe c
Say, after reading all these R10 posts, I'm cross-eyed! One problem the 10's used to have: water in the flourescent light fixtures. Remember that?
joe c
The R10 was guilty of a lot of rumble and roar, but on curves, they were among the least noisy subway cars I've ridden on. They made noise similar to that made by the R16 (hiss and that "thhh" sound) but did not screech (like, say the R27/R30 and most IRT cars) much.
wayne
The roar, especailly in the summer along CPW when all windows were open, is what I remember most about the R-10s, not so much the screetch, since with a few exceptions the A train's route is only really curvy in the stretch between Chambers and Hoyt-Schermerhorn and the East New York switch from Fulton St. to Pitkin Ave.
Why would cars with the same trucks and of the same length squeel different ? The R16's squeeled very loud Cypress-Crescent.
Body weight could have something to do with that -- IIRC the R-16s were heavier than the R-10s.
They aren't many curves as sharp as those at Cypress Hills and Crescent St.
All the 1950's IRT R types I rode on the #5 between 138th St. and 149th/Grand Concourse screeched louder than anything I ever heard. Painful. The curve at E. Tremont is equally screeching, but because it's not in a tunnel, the din isn't reflected back at you.
The A has one really sharp S curve, just north of Liberty Ave. When the R44's run express at nearly top speed (Manhattan bound), you really have to hold on.
Even the new R142's screech around that jughandle at East Tremont Ave.
I think everyone knows how I feel about my beloved Thunderbirds. (NAWWWWWW!!!!) Yes, they strutted their stuff on the CPW express dash, and absolutely rocketed along the Howard Beach-Broad Channel stretch. Although I never rode on them along the Fulton St. express or Queens express runs, I've heard they were no different there. Local stations would go by in a blur.
P. S. Their teal-and-white racing stripe scheme was the best. It's a shame it wasn't retained for a longer period of time.
"Their teal-and-white racing stripe scheme was the best. It's a shame it wasn't retained for a longer period of time. "
I disliked that babyshit blue/green. I preferred deep dark blue doors.
Well, I loved the dark blue doors on the R-32s when they were new. Even the interior dark blue on the doors of the R-27/30s looked nice.
They seemed to be really slow in their last days on the CC. I remember when they were on the A - you always in for a nice fast ride. Very noisy but fast as heck.
Wayne
Oh, I wouldn't say that. Those lucky 110 R-10s put in 40-41 years of faithful service by the time they were retired. Of course, they didn't wear the dark green paint job very long. OTOH it was longer than that snappy racing stripe scheme of the 60s.
I always preferred the dark green to the much heavier used brick red scheme. A few R33's got this scheme in 1986/7, but they were re-painted.
Here's a pic of them for those who never knew about them. The sign must be wrong, as the #5 never went to South Ferry in the 1980's:
Hey that is great. Too bad not many wound up that way. Why then did David Gunn decide on red for these cars and the R30's but stayed with green for the R10?
IIRC the R-10s were painted dark green because they didn't get a GOH as such. They were fixed up some and cleaned up, but did not get major overhauls. Cars which went through the real McCoy GOH were painted Fox Red.
Not necessarily. I believe many R27's and R30's got the minimal overhaul the R10's got, yet were painted red. Some not at all, just a quick paintjob. I think they chose against green for asthetic reasons, or for anti-grafitti reasons.
The R-27s that were painted were ONLY painted. 162 R-30s (all of which were General Electric cars) were GOHd and painted. The remaining R-30s that were painted (all of which were Westinghouse cars) were ONLY painted.
The R-10s that were painted green received an overhaul that was somewhat smaller in scope than a GOH, but more than just a major repair.
David
I remember riding those repainted R-27/30's, at first I thought they were rebuilt, but after one ride, I realized it was just a paint job.
They stuck them on the J and M for a very short while, then they suddenly disappeared.
Remember, just before their 1992-3 retirement, they ran on the "C" train mainly. If I can recall, they were off the "J" and M" shortly after Parsons Archer opened. Tony
How did you tell the difference between the R27 or R30. Was it just different manufacturers? I did notice that back then. I never knew the difference between the two, if there was a real difference.
Except for the car numbers, there wasn't much difference between them. Both were built by St. Louis Car Co., IIRC. Since they had couplers on the blind ends as well, they could be, and were, routinely swapped with one another.
They're practically identical. The only reason they have different designations is because they were purchased under 2 seperate contracts. I'm somewhat perplexed why the R30's weren't simply called R27A's.
Actually, there were R-30s and R-30As, IIRC.
They were always paired odd and even numbers, so there was something.
avid
>>>Why then did David Gunn decide on red for these cars and the R30's but stayed with green for the R10?<<<
Excess green paint, perhaps? 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
Actually, that was an Electric Railroaders' Association fantrip in May 1987, and the train was shot on the Dyre Avenue line at Gun Hill Road. As a request from one of the trip coordinators, I personally signed up the train with the "#5 - South Ferry" designation myself. Note that the side signs are for the "#2 - 7 Av Express" route.
-William A. Padron
Thanks for the info. I never did see those green IRT cars anywhere but the #2 line. Overhauled cars were a rarity on the 5 for most of that year.
The Green train was actually a mixed consist that included at least one R22.
I remember seeing few greens R33 trains ran on 5 lines back in 1986 or 1987. But i think green is much better than red.
Peace
David J.
I notice that the R-33mainlines that were painted in green were all 8800 series. Why did the TA decided on 8800 series why couldn't they use 8900, 9000, 9100 & 9200 series all together? I heard on this board back long that this train also saw service on the #4 line other than the 2/5 lines?
I remember that--
I think it was only one ten-car train, but I'm not sure...certainly no more than 20, I'd bet.
10 R33's, 1 R17 and 1 R22 were painted green.
Yes I do, and they were great cruising out to Rockaway. I was young then and had now idea what "type" of cars they were, but had a great time hearing them clunk from ENY to Rockaway Park.
I always thought those green cars were original IND cars, as the idea of an incandescent lit train was absolutley foreign to me, until I went to the TA museum around 1988 to see the R1's.
Before I had an idea of what cars were called, I used to refer to them as either old or new cars, as most lines had only 2 types. If I was on Queens Blvd, R46's were new, R32's were old. Same on the A (R44 new, R38 old). The R16 I always called "boats" because of the porthole window, and the R2730 (never even knew there were 2 types of these) were "regular" trains, as the J/M/L and RR were dominated by them.
To me, the R-1/9s were IND oldtimers; the BMT standards were cruel and unusual punishment, and the R-10s WERE the A train, hands down. The R-27/30s and R-32s were BMT cars as far as I was concerned because that was where I saw and rode on them for the first time. It felt strange seeing R-32s on the AA and D lines right after Chrystie St. When the slant R-40s debuted in 1968, I thought, "What's this world coming to?" Not that I didn't like them, they were too far out then. My sister liked them, and she's not even a transit buff.
The R-16s were the "What's a 15?" cars.
I remember as a kid how I'd react to a rare R42 on the J line. They were so different, with silver bodies, BIG bullets on the front and low blue seats perfect for a little boy to kneel in to stare out the window. Plus their darth vader brakes. I flipped every time I got one, which I, of course, called a "new" train.
Get this: when the R-7/9s began showing up on the Canarsie, I actually referred to them as new cars! Unfortunately, we never had time to wait for them, so if we got a train of BMT standards, we took it. When the R-42s began appearing in late 1969, they were "brand new cars". On a few occasions, I would sit directly across from the conductor's cab on the left side of the train and watch him do his thing at stations with an island platform. Eventually I began to stand at the railfan window on Brooklyn-bound trains. During the winter months, the Brooklyn-bound track would be used for train storage on Saturdays, and when the R-42s arrived, the conductor would announce, "Brooklyn train, Brooklyn train. This is an LL train to Brooklyn" while wrong-railing between 8th Ave. and 3rd Ave.
Does anyone know what was used on the Canarsie line before the standard cars were used? I have wondered about this.
Horse and buggie.
See this site for standards being lowered down a ramp for initial service.
avid
Yes, since the Canarsie line was totally isolated when the first segment opened, 20 2700-series BMT standards were towed down a temporary street track, then eased down an inclined ramp into the subway.
I have pictures of this process in my "Cars of the BMT" book. They ripped the street and neighborhood up to do so, something which would bring out the NIMBYism in any of us.
People where that anxious to get subway service back then. That would not happen today! It would take a long time to get a new subway line running today.
You could say NIMBYism has been around since the beginning of subway construction in New York. They wanted to run the original subway all the way up Broadway from City Hall, but business owners managed to kill that notion in court. I'll bet they were singing a different tune when the BMT built its Broadway line.
The Canarsie line is about the newest of the old BMT lines. The first segment opened in 1924, and as a result the Standards were the first equipment used on the line.
Nothing. Except for some multisection cars from 1933 to 1956 and some R16's after 1955, the Canarsie line was dominated by BX standard units until the standards were retired in 1969.
Did they really use BX Standards on the L?
I thought they were always B's and a sprinkling of A's.
My understanding was that the entire eastern division was BX standard equipped, at least the Cars of the BMT book states. I'm not absolutley sure.
In 1980-81, I remember a LOT of R10's on the "LL". There were also some R-16's, but the majority of those were idle in the Fresh Pond yard!! TOny
Yeah, that was a weird place for R10's to show up. Perhaps they got lost as they made their way back from the F line to the CC line:
11/14/80
Actually, that was one of those sets temporarily based from ENY Yard 1980-81, with an R-10 train sometimes popping up on the "LL" line. I should know, because I made one complete westbound trip from Canarsie to 8th Avenue on February 17, 1981, with the lead motor #3161 on the eight-car consist. Naturally, it did only have IND division roll signs then.
-William A. Padron
Kind of like deja vu all over again (to quote Yogi Berra), since the BMT standards didn't have front signs.
It's possible that was the case until the motorless trailers were scrapped. I would imagine that only B units were used in the late 60s. Were any single A units rebuilt in 1959-60? Also, was the conductor in the second car from the Brooklyn-bound end on Canarsie trains? If so, that may explain why I never saw him at the button consoles - I don't think I ever rode in the second car while heading out to Brooklyn. On the R-7/9s, yes, but not on the BMT standards.
I talked to the friend who used to be the transit reporter for the Ridgewood Times. He rode the Canarsie line to get to work during the 1940's, 50's and early 60's.
According to him the basic model for service on the line was the Multi until they were moved to the Myrt in 1956. During the Multi reign Standards were frequently used to fill in and frequently appeared at rush hour as well.
The Standards used were the same combos as used on the Myrtle-Chambers and the Jamaica line, in other words a six car train would be comprised of a BX and a B set. It was against NYCTS policy to attempt to operate a six car set made up of two BX units.
He recalled an incident in the 1940's of a six car rush hour put-in at Metropolitan that was two BX units. The motorman apparently had trouble just climbng to Fresh Pond, and the train was taken out of service at Myrtle Ave and returned to Fresh Pond yard.
He also noted that the BX units were never ever used for a three car train. A three car train had to be a B set or three A's.
What's the difference from BX units and other types? Why couldn't a 6 car train of 2 BX sets not make it up that hill?
BX units were made up of two 2400s and a 4000. The 4000s were trailers, so were 'dead weight,' one might say.
The numbering system was simple--divide the last two digits of the even-numbered 2400 by 2 and you'd get the last two digits of the 4000. For example, 2400/4000/2401 or 2424/4012/2425. There were only 50 Standard trailers.
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam, New York
The 4000's did have door controls though, so if a 4000 was the fifth car in a six car train, there would be the conductor controling the train's doors.
BX were trailer. They had no motors and were dead weight.
Yup. That's were they always ran, except for a week in September 1987 when a couple of sets ran on the B/K route from 168th St.
Despite some initial Green R-10's placed in service on February 22, 1985 that had newer route and destination signs for the "C", "G" and "H" routes, many more Green R-10's later simply kept the original IND division roll signs (from "A" to "HH") for some time. It wasn't until December 1988 that all 110 Green R-10's had brand new signs again, but this time with only for that connected with the "A", "C", "H", "D" and even the generic "Shuttle."
The Green R-10's were proposed to add five more years to its service life, but it certainly wasn't the case as the R-68's and R-68A's started to arrived beginning in February 1986. Even the last two R-10 cars released from 207th Street Shop (#3037 and #3169) at that same time only lasted in regular service for only three more years at best.
-William A. Padron
That explains the hand-drawn "K" or "B" signs placed on the front of those sets that saw service on those 2 lines in September 1987.
William,
I recall a newspaper article about a certain employee @ 207th st yard being heralded as saving the TA a lot of money on rehabbing the R10s.
Can you shed any light on this?
Peace,
ANDEE
His name was (and is) Vladimir Beryozkin, and he designed the scope of work for far less than a consultant would have charged.
David
Thank You,
Peace,
ANDEE
Well, the name of the Russian-born NYCTA technical engineer was mentioned in David's post, but I do indeed remember that the NY Daily News article. It had a photo of himself with two grunified R-10's each on the lifts in the background, which were about to start the overhaul process (it began in December 1984). One of those cars shown in that picture was #2956 signed up (I believe) "CC - Rockaway Park".
It was said the project engineer saw red in his eyes as to the cost of the consultant's estimate of at least $1 million in just designing the project to take about a year. All of the in-house Transit Authority specifications were all completed in just three weeks as a far less cost.
-William A. Padron
Immediatly, R/38,40,40M amd 42 slam into my mind. If only for a rust abatement program and stainless roofs. Maybe four and five car linked sets.
avid
The cost of rehab for R-10 cars was $900,000 per car. And some only lasted three years? I could have done much better things with $900K.
Are you sure about that number. Seems awful high for a rehab in the mid-80s considering the fact that brand new R142s are 1.2 million at todays prices. Sure that 900K wasn't for the whole fleet? I just can't see the TA being that wasteful, but...you never know.
Peace,
ANDEE
The price tag of each Green R-10 car was actually $65,000 a piece, which would come into a range total within $7,000,000 for 110 cars. Had the R-10's been redone by an outside contractor, and not at all within NYCTA's 207th Street Shops, the price may have been a bit higher.
It was said that an outside firm would have done at least the engineering specs at about $1,000,000 for the design of the program created in a year. The in-house program only took about a mere three weeks to have the entire overhaul plan in place.
-William A. Padron
That figure makes much more sense. Thanks.
Peace,
ANDEE
Whatever became of the plan to do this with the R10's:
Now-
That
is
UGLY
:)
I kinda like it.
I agree.
Peace,
ANDEE
It's a desecration.
It was a scheme by NYCTA to try to give the R-10's a very radical look in perhaps entirely rebuilding the cars. In 1975, car #3192 became the chosen one as the pilot car, and this unit was outfitted with an R-42 type mock end and planning to have R-44 style interiors.
However, the project was halted with about 1/4 of the inside body work done due to cost projection problems, and #3192 just languished inside Coney Island Shops for about five years. One time, the front route sign was changed from a large "A" to a circled "N" (a la R-44).
So, in the fall of 1980, #3192 was simply sent to the scrap line at C.I. Yard, but this time without the R-42 end. I was able to get one of its removed number plates four years later.
Apparently later, two R-16 cars #6392 and #6429 were selected and went for another proposed car rebuilding program also, but this time to be done at 207th Street Yard. This was prior to the mere idea of the R-10's to be given the real GOH treatment in 1984-86. Just as before, those two R-16's were never finished, and did not see passenger service again at all just like #3192.
-William A. Padron
Would have loved to see rebuilt R16's running. Perhaps they'd have been able to restore their reputation somewhat. Thanks for the info.
I read that at the time in the Daily News. The number was from their interview.
It was more like 60,000 per car not 900,000.
The Daily News report $900,000 per car. Could they have meant an eight car train, and screwed up in the reporting?
The Daily News reported $900,000, per car. Could they have meant for an eight car train and screwed up in the reporting?
When was the "Van Sicklen" removed from the Culver line and replaced with "Neptune".
joe c
No idea as to when. But I'd guess it was when someone at Jay St had to look at a subway map and discovered Van Siclen on the J, A and 3 lines.
It was pretty recent...the last year or two, if memory serves. And the various Van Siclen Avenue stations had nothing to do with it. "Van Sicklen" was removed from the station name because there's no Van Sicklen Street/Avenue/anything near the station (there may have been at one time, but there isn't now and hasn't been for years if ever).
David
Very true, yet under that way of thinking, the TA should be consistent and rightfully remove the street names from the #7 line as well. I never drove past Rawson St., or Lowery St., or Bliss St., and so forth.
So why then is the Culver line not the MacDonald Ave line? There is no Culver anything around, as far as I know.
joe c
Named for the Culver Hotel in the 1800's that the line as a railroad went to in Coney Island. It only recently became the Culver again as only the shuttle was called the Culver when it was still in existance.
Not after the Culver Hotel. I don't believe there was such a Hotel. You may be thinking of the Culver Terminal. Both the terminal and the RR line were named after the line's founder Andrew Culver. This was a surface running steam locomotive line that opened in 1875. It was rebuilt during the Dual Contracts as today's elevated line.
Alan Glick
If you drive through Sunnyside along Skillman Avenue you will notice that the city has added the old street names along with the street numbers to the signs.
I like seeing the real names. It's a shame they ever changed all the streets in Queens to numbered streets. At least Brooklyn has kept it's history and all it's street names.
The old street names on the Flushing line have, for the most part, been removed from maps and station signage. The map also omits the old street names along the A through Ozone Park and Rockaway, but I'm fairly certain the signage hasn't changed. 23 St-Ely Ave lives on.
Well that's a mosaic, so I guess that will remain luckily. It'd be a shame to cover that.
It would also be confusing, because the E and V would then stop at two stations with the same name. True, the R already stops at two 36th Streets, but they're quite a distance apart. (Then there's the W, with 50th Street and Bay 50th Street. When it was the B, it also stopped at 47th-50th Streets. The pre-summer D also stopped at two 7th Avenues, but those two stations are hard to confuse.)
Of course, in Toronto they do things logically. There were already stations called St. Clair, Eglinton, and Lawrence on the Yonge Street line. So when the Spadina section was built, the stations on that side were called St. Clair WEST, Eglinton WEST, and Lawrence WEST (Not to forget Lawrence EAST on the Scarborough RT, and Dundas WEST on the Bloor-Danforth line). In New York City, they probably would have them all named the same just to confuse people on purpose!
eyyyyy--
up ya nose wit a rubbah hose
:)
joking....*L*
I guess you mean to put down EVERY transit agency in these United States. There are a few "Cicero" stations in Chicago. Meant to confuse people, no doubt.
I stand corrected sir, I meant to say that transit agencies in Canada do things more logically than those in the States. My mistake!
That area of Brooklyn, way back when, was owned by the Van Siclen family; hence, the name on the station sign (which probably dated back to the Culver Line when it ran on the surface).
--Mark
Was it only two years ago? It seems more like five years ago.
Actually, for a long time the station was called "Neptune Avenue/Van Sicklen." I remember that name being used through most of the 1980's and 90's. They got rid of the "Van Sicklen" part only a few years ago.
By the way, has anyone else noticed that the exit signs on the platform say to Neptune Avenue and McDonald Avenue, even though there is no McDonald Avenue south of Avenue X?
- Lyle Goldman
Perhaps they are refering to the MacDonald's sitting just yards away form the southbound platform. Chuckle!
jrc
IIRC about 2 years ago.
Alan Glick
Here we go at Times Square I was waiting for a W and I saw an N with brown backround and I was like ooooookay, someone is color blind. The W wasn;t coming so I took the S which half of the train had the Number 11 on it and I was like woah! COOL! All in all an interesting day
Why when the 3 runs as a shuttle we always se the 11 on the rollsign?
(11) and (S) are next to each other on the rollsign. It's under what I call "Upside-down Letter Syndrome." Since S looks the same upside-down as it does right side up, the person changing the sign simply sees (S) and stops, not knowing that it's the upside-down S that's showing.
That's how we knew about the W on the R-40's for years. The same thing happens with the N, which is next to W.
I saw a train yesterday that had upside-down W's on all cars. I assume it was an N.
In the campaign for cleaner air, the TA will retire all RTS's with 6V92 transmissions. 8000's thru 8500's will be repowered with the series 50 detroit diesal egine. The seats are high in the rear, my feet still touch the floor. Why didn't they slop the floor a little like the Orions. Isn't it weird that some repowered series 50's sound like Orion 6.1 egines and some sound like RTS 8600's.
Welcome to SubTalk, but we have BusTalk for that kind of news....the repowering is old news, we all are well aware of it....6V92 is the engine not the tranny.
My mistake, I thought this was bustalk.
I edited a game file for Swat 3 which makes a mission which takes place in a subway station. I made the subway look like a MBTA station. There is a few pictures here:
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/subway1.jpg
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/1.jpg
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/2.jpg
tell me what you think
just thought I would post the pics again in case anyone didnt see them. Still waiting for opinions.
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/subway1.jpg
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/1.jpg
http://members.aol.com/ryan81986/2.jpg
Very nicely done. Some image details are a bit fuzzy up close. But very nicely drawn!
thanks. I was going to do one for new york and have the car be a redbird.
here are the picures so that you dont have to cut and paste the links:
The good:
* the "Downtown Crossing" poster with station area, Orange Line, and MBTA system maps.
* "T" symbols on the sides of the train cars.
The bad, at least if it's supposed to be Boston's MBTA:
* "Travel Smart ... Take Metro" on the sides of the train cars.
* a station named "7th St./Metro Center"
Both of those are straight from the Los Angeles Metro Red Line.
yeah i know i havent figured out how to take them out yet. (the original trains were la metro trains)
Now I know that the MTA may have plans for extending the "R" to Staten Island, according to www.nycsubway.org. I also noticed that the extension will go under the Narrows bridge to link from Brooklyn to Staten Island. Right now, I know that I either have to take the Staten Island Ferry near Whitehall Station or a bus connection from Brooklyn in order to reach Staten Island, but wouldn't be much faster if they had a subway link to Staten Island?
Im not from new york so if im wrong please forgive me but, isnt staten island a little small for a subway station?
No, it's not - in fact, it has its own rapid transit line using subway-based equipment.
Ryan, as you have mentioned, you're not from NY. It's also becoming very obvious that you haven't taken the time to look through the many resources that are available on this site, since almost every one of your questions could be answered by simply looking at the appropriate section. Please do everyone, yourself included, a favor by reading the material on this site that pertains to your area(s) of interest before asking questions. You'll learn a lot more that way, and your questions will then be ones that open new ground for discussion in this forum.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I just discovered this site last week so I will look through the site before I post more. At least on the stuff I dont know to much about.
Have fun, it's a great site, and you will enjoy it. Look forward to hearing from you!
Im trying to learn all I can in case I decide to pursue a career with the MBTA in Boston.
Don't forget to mention he's misinterpeted the ones he HAS read.
-Hank
Hey Staten Island is 10000 times bigger than Roosevelt Island and they have a subway station. In all seriosness, Staten Island is not that small. Staten Island Rapid Transit (a part of the MTA) runs a whole line of stations and covers only a small fraction of the Staten Island. It's not that small!
I know the SIRT (Staten Island Rapid Transit) runs on its propriatary line, but it still lacks an underground link to either Brooklyn and/or Manhattan. If it did have either or both, it would be much faster to people who have to go to Manhattan (compare it to the almost 30 minute ferry ride to Manhattan, near Whitehall). For Brooklyn, it would be appropriate, where the "R" should be extended beyond 95th. Street into Staten Island, because of the long bus rides into Brooklyn through the Narrows Bridge.
Speaking of Staten Island, wasn't the Hudson Beregn Light Rail proposing an extension of their line to Staten Island via the Bayonne Bridge?
IIRC, When the Hudson Bergen Light Rail opened, in the Staten Island Advance they mentioned an extention to Staten Island via the Bayonne or an extention to the NJ side of the Bayonne Bridge with Bus Connection.
From Steve Anderson's NYC Roads And Crossings:
The Bayonne Bridge Has Existing Capisity For 2 Rail Tracks to be added to the 4 Traffic Lanes. An Ext Of The Hudson Bergen Light rail line to Staten Island Is Currently Under Study For Line Construction After 2005.
I wonder how deep it would go into the island. The Bayonne Bridge goes straight onto the MLK Expressway. On the East side of toll plaza is a empty field "Elm Park" and my school. On the opposite side is housing. The MLK isn't travelled alot so maybe its possible to extend to Victory Blvd.
I was thinking possible connection to North Shore Railway from the Bayonne but the grade will be way too steep and it looks pretty impossible. I'll take pictures of that one day since my school is a block away.
BTW...i took pictures of a portion of the ROW one day. If anyone wants to see.
Vekter
I think the best way would be to tunnel under the North Shore (with except maybe one stop in Elm Park at the foot of the Bayonne Bridge). The North Shore already has substantial bus service to the Ferry, one or more express bus routes to midtown via the Linc, and you could add bus service from the Mariners' Harbor/Port Richmond area to the new Elm Park station (short ride).
It comes out of the tunnel somewhere around or below Victory, then you have Park-n-Ride facilities serving Richmond Ave. and the West Shore Exp around the Mall and the world-famous Dump.
Then, possibly, a continuation farther south with more traditional pedestrian stations.
How bout a connection to the existing SIR. Just go down Richmond and have a nice terminal around the Eltingville Station.
But to me it seems to crammed over there. They are building too many houses here. Space to work with is somewhat scarce.
I think the space issue is going to get you.
The SI Mall or its environs might be a good place for a park-and-ride terminal. I don't know exactly what would be best, given the concern for land in the Greenbelt.
Don't bother connecting to the SIRR, but try to hit as many bus routes as possible. Port Richmond bus terminal seems like a good terminus.
I was thinking about that. I was thinking about way back, when i was trying to make a fantasy staten island route. The Renewed North Shore Rail Road was part of the plan and it would have a major hub in the Port Richmond area since so many buses go through and originate there.
<<<"I was thinking possible connection to North Shore Railway from the Bayonne but the grade will be way too steep and it looks pretty impossible. I'll take pictures of that one day since my school is a block away.">>>
From your post, i gather you attend Port Richmond HS. I attended there in the 1980s. In those days, there was an abandoned, but intact station at the Morningstar Road bridge. The stationhouse was removed circa 1985, when the bridge was rebuilt by the NYCDOT. I think the platform might still be visible deep in the embankment
Yes, I do attend PRHS. I have been down where the old station used to be. It was like last spring, now a days there a building houses on the corner near the Morningstar Road Bridge, so they block the way that I used to get down to the embankment. I took pictures on the opposite side of the Bayonne Bridge overpass, and I also just recently took pics of the embankment, but I haven't looked through them yet. When I do, I will post them on my site.
It does, along with several others. We had a walking tour through it some years back, there are photos and such available here.
-Hank
What would make the most sense is to route it via CSI and the still-mapped parkways to the area of the Staten Island Mall, and allow the cars to travel around 70. Across the Bayonne, down the median of the Willowbrook Expressway, a pair of stops on the campus of the College of Staten Island, and then a straight shot to the mall, which is the second-best transit hub we have, after the ferry.
-Hank
People from NJ going to NY to shop at a mall? It boggles the mind.
PATH cars have had advertisements for people to shop at Manhattan Mall. Presumably intended to be viewed by NJ residents.
>>The Bayonne Bridge Has Existing Capisity For 2 Rail Tracks to be added to the 4 Traffic Lanes. An Ext Of The Hudson Bergen Light rail line to Staten Island Is Currently Under Study For Line Construction After 2005. <<
How? Add another deck?
The Bayonne is four traffic lanes, with a double yellow line down the median (no concrete barrier) and a pedestrian walkway.
The only way I see is, run the rails down the middle, and you get only one lane each way for vehicular traffic. If you try to maintain all four vehicular lanes, I suspect you'd a) lose the peds walkway and b) narrow the lanes even more.
The Bayonne Bridge isn't heavily traveled anyway, so narrowing it to one lane each way might not be bad, if supplemental rail service was added.
But it'd probably still be better to tunnel under the Kill Van Kull. That way, you lose no vehicular capacity, and don't have to deal with the same grade problems that you would going over the Bridge (which at midspan is 150 feet above the water).
also, if you tunnel, trains could go straight to st. george rather than the north shore. this would mean a one transfer rail ride from tottenville to jersey city or hoboken!! of course, the ferry would still be faster to manhattan than hblr to the path.
>>also, if you tunnel, trains could go straight to st. george rather than the north shore. this would mean a one transfer rail ride from tottenville to jersey city or hoboken!! of course, the ferry would still be faster to manhattan than hblr to the path. <<
Yes - I think the ultimate goal of having the HBLR will be to allow commutes from SI to NJ, particularly Newark, Hoboken and Jersey City.
Currently the only ways to get there are to drive (clogging the roads which are already over capacity), or to take a circuitous route, going up to Penn in Manhattan, then getting NJT or Path from there, about a 2-hour trip. I did it a few times, back when WTC was still around, and it was an hour and a half or more.
<<<"Currently the only ways to get there are to drive (clogging the roads which are already over capacity), or to take a circuitous route, going up to Penn in Manhattan, then getting NJT or Path from there, about a 2-hour trip. I did it a few times, back when WTC was still around, and it was an hour and a half or more">>>
I don't know the exact routing, but there is some bus service running along Richmond Avenue to Jersey City or thereabouts........ususally beat-up looking "Flexibles"...
My mother used to take that bus when she worked in Harborside. The buses are beat up looking too. They are marked with the Route 144. It confuses people because it runs on the same line as the S44 for awhile. I can always tell the difference. I believe this bus route would go to Jersey City via the Bayonne.
Aren't you still forgetting something here, with the link between Staten Island and Brooklyn as the Verrazano Narrows Bridge it's already congested and with the congestion, people will lose productivity time. When productivity is lost, so will the revenues. By offering a Subway link between Staten Island (near the Verrazano Narrows) to Brooklyn and/or St. George to Downtown Manhattan it would offer a faster link for the residents of Staten Island and its vicinity.
I'm still really not sure about the feasability of extending the R to SI.
Besides the obvious technical challenge of tunnelling under the Narrows, and building rails and stations in very densely populated communities, you'd have to wonder if it'd really be a viable commuting alternative.
Right now it takes, oh, half an hour from the terminus of the 4th Ave line to Whitehall St. in Manhattan. Extending through the Narrows would add another couple minutes (and that assumes you get on the train right near the bridge, so you can add more if you get on further west).
You'd probably do just as well taking the Ferry, which is about half an hour from St. George to Whitehall. And if a rail tunnel were built from St. George to Whitehall, effectively connecting the SIR to the 7th Ave IRT (whether the trains are physically on the same tracks, or you just transfer to a new vehicle across the platform), you could cut that time in half.
And from near the Verrazano, you could always get an express bus. With bus-only HOV lanes in place, it's generally a half hour or less to downtown.
Really, the only plus side of connecting the R to SI would be a connection to Brooklyn itself. I don't know if there's enough of a demand for that to justify the expenses (especially if any of the NY Harbor tunnelling alternatives are enacted, which would provide pretty fast access to Brooklyn anyway).
Perhaps, if the 4th Ave line were widened to allow for more express service, and express service all the way to 95th street, it might be a viable alternative. But sitting on the R, making local stops all the way from Fort Wadsworth to at least 59th street (if not Whitehall) - not my cup of tea. Actually, running local to 59th, then running express from there might not be too bad. But then you'd need a new line (and more tph on the tracks), or lose much (half?) of the local service to downtown Brooklyn by making the R express above 59th.
Any ideas?
The Bay Ridge portion of the 4th Ave was originally built to be easily upgraded to four track (read the station descriptions elsewhere at this site). I would not be suprised to learn if it essentially already boxed in as a 4-track subway.
I've written before that SI would probably be better served with a high-quality light rail system. SIRT runs with very short trains. While the VN Bridge cannot carry heavy rail subway trains, it certainly can carry light rail, or at least, so I understand this to be the case. Running light rail over the bridge and then via a new tunnel to terminal in the Sea Beach cut between 8th and 4th Av makes much more sense. And if it's also connected to the Jersey light rail system via the Bayonne Bridge, so much the better.
It really is a long ride to Manhattan, even from 59th, even if the N runs express. They would have to do *something* to increase speed/capacity.
How is it a long ride to Manhattan? From 59th to Canal is three stops.
In years and years of taking the N, rush and non-rush, my experience is that it is *very slow*. The sedate rumble over the ManBridge is also on the slow side. This was caused by cruddy rolling stock, crappy signalling, jam-ups at DeKalb, perpetual track work, speed limits on the bridge and just plain indifference. I started taking it in the mid 80s, when things started sliding downhill, particularly with the ManBridge closings.
Three stops to Canal? Not as I recall. It was the West End that skipped DeKalb.
Prior to the first Manhattan Bridge closing the N did bypass DeKalb. Once it was forced into the Montague Tube, it had to make the stop at DeKalb.
In general, a 4th Avenue express that runs over the bridge will bypass DeKalb. Trains can shift to the local track and stop at DeKalb, but that's as unnatural as shifting any other express to the local track to make one extra stop.
The only movements that CAN'T occur through the interlockings south of Dekalb Ave are trains between the Brighton line and the bypass track; and tunnel to bypass. Before the Dekalb area was reconfigured, tunnel trains could bypass Dekalb.
-Hank
No, 4th Avenue locals can't access the bypass track either.
Although this isn't historically accurate, I think of the 4th Avenue - Broadway line as a single line, with local and express tracks and with a variety of turnoffs from each. The mainline local tracks run up 4th Avenue, stop at Pacific and DeKalb, and continue through the tunnel. The mainline express tracks run up 4th Avenue, stop at Pacific, bypass DeKalb, and continue over the bridge. The Brighton line merges with both sets of tracks, the local tracks south of DeKalb and the express tracks north of DeKalb. Brighton line trains merging into the express tracks first stop at DeKalb on a separate pair of Brighton-bridge tracks. The express tracks have a branch (currently closed) to the 6th Avenue line. The local tracks have a branch to the Nassau Street line. There are a few local-express switches in the area: from express to local, north of Pacific; from local to express, south of DeKalb onto the special Brighton-bridge tracks, which then merge into the express; and either way, south of Prince.
So, while 4th Avenue express bound for the bridge can stop at DeKalb, the move is equivalent to switching to the local track, making one stop, and switching back to the express track. It can be done, and it is done where warranted, but it's usually avoided if possible.
The N, not the B, was the train that skipped DeKalb in the late 60s and early 70s after the Chrysite St. connection was built, so the N's only stops after crossing the bridge were Pacific, 36th and 59th before leaving Fourth Avenue.
A route splitting off from the Fourth Ave. express tracks and going to Staten Island from there would have the same potential routing. It wouldn't be as fast as a direct SI-Battery tunnel, but for passengers going from SI to Canal St. and north it would still be faster than the ferry, IMHO, since it would follow approximately the same route through Brooklyn as the Staten Island express buses (and the Fourth Ave. tracks are less crowded than the Gowanus during rush hour).
Even below Canal service would be available, albeit local service requiring a transfer. From Pacific St you could transfer across the platform to the R (and whoever else is routed via Montague - stop at DeKalb, Lawrence, and Court, and you're at Whitehall/South Ferry). You could take a little walk to Atlantic, and get the 1/2 (stops at Nevins, Hoyt, Boro Hall and Clark, then Wall, Fulton, Park Place, Chambers). You could get the 4/5 at Atlantic, then it's Nevins, Boro Hall, then Bowling Green and up.
I figure you'd make about the same time as the ferry to downtown via this routing, assuming a St. George->59th Street routing. Maybe you'd do a little better. And since the trains will run more frequently than the ferry, the service will in fact be better since you may not have to wait as long (the ferry runs 1 bph late nights and most of the weekend, 2 bph midday and mid-evening weekdays and noon-7 weekends, and 3-4 bph at rush; the SIRT is currently timesd one train to each boat, except sometimes extra "expresses" at rush hour, meaning 1-2 tph off-peak, never more than 8 tph so peak) - even a subway line running rather infrequent service would be at least 3-5 tph off-peak, 10 tph peak.
Midtown service would be substantially improved, since after St. George it's just 59, 36, Pacific, Canal, 14, 34, 42, 49(maybe), 57 and whatever else you decide to do from there.
At 15mph. There's no such thing as an express on 4th Ave anymore.
-Hank
I beg to differ. Trains move quite fast from 59 to 36 and from 36 to Pacific. From Pacific to Canal -- that's a different story.
Why are the trains so slow over the bridge? Is it only because of the work being done, or has that been a problem all along?
(I'm 22, so I can't think of a time (except a few weeks about 10 years ago) when the bridge WASN'T being worked on...)
Slow going uphill climbing the bridge, slow going downhill trying not to pick up so much speed as to have a problem with the next curve, especially on the north side.
-Hank
Ahh, the old slope problem.
I've been looking at some MTA timetables, and I think the Brooklyn routing wouldn't work anyway. The W from 62nd to Canal is reported at about 25 minutes, so you wouldn't do too well going that way.
OTOH, going straight from SI to Brooklyn would take perhaps 15 minutes, maybe a little less (tunnel maybe 5 to 6 miles).
Now, if you extended the J from its current weekday terminus at Broad St and sent it down to Tottenville via St. George, you'd have a 40 minute SIR/J ride to St. George, 15 mins under the harbor to downtown Broad St or Fulton St = 55 minutes total travel. If you stay on the J and switch to the Q/W at Canal or the 4/5/6 at Chambers, you get to the respective 42nd St stations in about 10-15 minutes above that ~ 75 minutes total travel time. I don't know anybody who makes it to midtown in that kind of time (remember, I'm talking Tottenville - Main St, Tottenville, just up to about the fence at the end of Hylan Blvd.
If you started your trip at Eltingville, then it's only 30 mins to St. George - subtract 10 minutes from the above figures - 45 downtown, 65 midtown.
Starting from New Dorp, it's 20 mins to St. George -> 35 mins downtown, 55 midtown.
Starting from Grasmere, it's 10 mins to St. George -> 25 mins downtown, 45 midtown.
If you currently take the bus to St. George, keep doing that, and get the train instead of the ferry - lop at least 20 mins off whatever your old commute time was. And the trains undoubtedly would run more frequently than the ferry did - maybe something like 3 tph overnight, 4-6 tph daytime and evenings, 6-10 tph at rush hour; use short trains off-peak (4 car?) and longer at rush hours if necessary.
You could also send some trains from Broad just to St. George to load up there and head back up, since that's likely to be the busiest station (picking up passengers from the buses).
The only mode of public transit that even competes timewise is the express bus, which will get you downtown in a comparable time if you're not too far (in terms of number of stops) from the Verrazano, and you don't hit significant traffic; midtown you generally do better with the cross harbor train (since either you sit in traffic in Manhattan, or get off the bus and transfer to the subway), except perhaps if you get an FDR-routed bus and your stop isn't far from where it gets off the FDR (and again, no traffic jams).
And to appease the South Shore express customers, you can run some local buses on the old express routes, dropping them off at the nearest SIR/J station; their complaints about losing their one seat ride will largely evaporate once they discover that it takes them 15 minutes less each way, and they never have to worry about traffic jams. Maybe keep the west side expresses that go through the Lincoln Tunnel - those might work better for some customers than the SIR/J would.
And of course keep in mind that these express bus-speed connections are in effect 24 hours a day (though train headways may increase to 20 or 30 minutes in the wee hours), not just rush hour like nearly all the current express buses.
Next thing to do, reactivate the North Shore line (rebuild by hook or crook from Snug Harbor to St. George, and get the rest back in working order) and send even more trains (the ones you were stopping at St. George and sending back would suffice) from Manhattan to St. George, then to Port Richmond. This would turn the Port Richmond terminal into a satellite for St. George - take a bus to Port Richmond (which for some customers is far shorter than a bus to St. George), then the train to Manhattan via St. George (I estimate 25-30 mins from Port Richmond to Broad St. People who wait for the train at St. George could now take the first available train, doubling the frequency of service there. Trouble is, you have to somehow break up the J line into different names so that people know where the train's headed after St. George (K will be copacetic).
<<<"Running light rail over the bridge and then via a new tunnel to terminal in the Sea Beach cut between 8th and 4th Av makes much more sense. And if it's also connected to the Jersey light rail system via the Bayonne Bridge, so much the better.
It really is a long ride to Manhattan, even from 59th, even if the N runs express. They would have to do *something* to increase speed/capacity.">>>
No, sorry, I respectfully disagree. Light rail jsut doesn't have the capacity to carry real crowds long distances. So I'd say forget that. However, we're in agreement that a BMT ride from somewhere in Staten Island to Manhattan via Brooklyn would take VERY LONG. Not many downtown people would use it- the regular old SIRT or even a bus to the ferry would be quicker and eaiser. So let's not go THAT way either.
Instead, let's try my oft-mentioned idea of running the line along the North Shore, thru NJ and into Penn Station. We Staten Islanders really need more help with Midtown anyway. It could be powered like the New Haven Line- thrid rail in SI, catenary in NJ into Penn.
I live near the Mall- using the X17 bus, I can be downtown in 50 minutes. Getting home from 34th Street, on the other hand, takes an eternity, any way I try.
Howabout going up NJ coast, maybe a stop at Newerk Airport then in Bayoone and up to jersy city and the under to hudson to manhatten.
AFAIK the VN Bridge is on two bi-drectional levels. If this is so, why not take one of them out and run the subway above ground level? This would be cheaper than building a tube. Have I missed an obvious problem or something?
Yes - there are two decks, each with three lanes in each direction.
If you took one deck out, traffic would be absolutely atrocious. I mean, infinitely more atrocious than it is now. It's a major trucking route, and heavily used by people headed out onto the Belt, and people traveling to sites on Long Island (all three groups of people would not benefit from a subway link). Absolutely wouldn't work.
But then where do you go once you get off the bridge? The expressway is 3 (sometimes 4) lanes in either direction, and majorly jammed for significant fractions by people traveling to and from NJ as well as the above two groups, plus those commuting into the city. Removing lanes from service, even one lane in each direction, would be an absolute nightmare. And forget about the disruption caused by the construction of the tracks, when there is not yet a rail alternative to remove traffic from the highway!
I'm not sure you'd have room to run it down the median - the width of the ROW would certainly limit the places where stations could be (presumably with pedestrian overpasses or tunnels under the highway with access from both the north and south sides). And you'd most likely leave a road even further from compliance with interstate standards, so there would need to be some sort of variance to continue receiving federal funding.
For these very reasons, I think, and have posted in this thread, that the best way to connect SI to Manhattan via rail is to connect the North Shore line to NJ Transit to Penn Station. Would avoid disruption of any existing facilities.
Of course, NJ Transit runs on catenary, so the North shore line would either need catenary installed, or, if it used third rail, we'd need trains like those used on the New Haven Division of Metro North. (BTW, I'm sorry, I don't recall whether those are M2s, M4s, etc..)
Yeah - the power issue will be a question that needs to be settled.
But engineering problems are something we can all deal with. They might be difficult, but they can be handled.
The politics, on the other hand, is beyond anyone's control...
But it's still a time-loser. The only way to decongest the roads is to make the mass-transit commute quicker. Making a circle from Great Kills to Penn Station via New Jersey would be as long or longer than the current trip.
-Hank
But it would allow for commuters to Newark, rather than having to either drive or take a circuitous route through Manhattan and then PATH or NJ Transit (which is really a time-loser, leaving driving as pretty much the only alternative).
Now, the question is, can the train beat 30 minutes driving to Newark (in absence of traffic, of course)? Most likely not. But it most certainly beats anything transit has to offer now.
If HBLR is extended to SI, that would be an excellent alternative, providing service to Bayonne, JC and Hoboken. In fact, it might wind up being better, expecially if it's also hooked to Newark. Then you'd have connection to most of the major urban centers in NE NJ, and a quick PATH ride from downtown (Exchange Place, once WTC reopens) or midtown (from Hoboken).
LIRR third rail or subway, maybe there shoud be a switch in the cab for switching from LIRR to NYCTA third rail.
BTW, I'm sorry, I don't recall whether those are M2s, M4s, etc.
Those cars are M2s, M4s AND M6s.
Whats the difference?How do you tell them apart?
If you took one deck out, traffic would be absolutely atrocious. I mean, infinitely more atrocious than it is now.
Good. Might help a few people to decide to leave their cars at home.
It's a major trucking route
That just shows how bad railfreight is in the Western World.
and heavily used by people headed out onto the Belt
Yeah, well the traffic would in future be reduced for them, if they really have to drive.
and people traveling to sites on Long Island
Change at Atlantic/Pacific to the LIRR.
But then where do you go once you get off the bridge? The expressway is 3 (sometimes 4) lanes in either direction, and majorly jammed for significant fractions by people traveling to and from NJ as well as the above two groups, plus those commuting into the city.
It wouldn't be such a bottleneck if bridge capacity were halved
Removing lanes from service, even one lane in each direction, would be an absolute nightmare. And forget about the disruption caused by the construction of the tracks, when there is not yet a rail alternative to remove traffic from the highway!
Exactly. Perhaps the construction of an elevated structure at the same time as normal road maintenance may be the answer. However, it is not the only road once on Staten Island and traffic is only kept on it by the limited exit capacity caused by its being an expressway. I could make a case for tearing expressways down and putting avenues in their place.
I'm not sure you'd have room to run it down the median
Nor am I - it might have to go on an El.
the width of the ROW would certainly limit the places where stations could be
Another argument to remove the expressway. :P
(presumably with pedestrian overpasses or tunnels under the highway with access from both the north and south sides).
I like the access from both sides bit. Overpasses and tunnels are not popular with pedestrians, especially those in wheelchairs. A few traffic lights might help. A ramped bridge at each stop would also be a good idea.
And you'd most likely leave a road even further from compliance with interstate standards, so there would need to be some sort of variance to continue receiving federal funding.
I don't want it to be an interstate anymore - they encourage congestion.
Basically, I think it might be quite a good idea to stop Staten Island being the Manhattan Southern By-Pass for lazy motorists. Let them have a stationary drive across Staten as an alternative to a stationary drive across Manhattan. It would certainly put NYC's public transport in the enviable position of having excess demand. Then funding for improvements would happen.
Why do so many mass transit 'advocates' favor reducing all-around traffic capacity when it comes to automobiles? This is why they're rarely taken seriously. If you reduce the capacity of the bridge, you don't affect just the rush hour traffic. You affect weekend travelers, people visiting relatives, and emergency access (ESPECIALLY when it comes to Staten Island).
Your ideas are a bunch of crap that cannot be supported by reality.
-Hank
because some of us really despise auto generated pollution, disease, , wasted real estate(parking lots both official and temporary--highways), auto based culture--you know low density suburbs , franchise blight, etc. Some of us actually have a social agenda, gut auto usage encourrage mass transit usage AND improvement. I want us to quit importing oil from the mideast, outlaw SUV's, AND economically punish corporations who abandon urban headquarters for 'edge city' developments far out of downtown. You may of course, disagree with some or all of this, you may think I am nuts, but I do support funding of inceased rail based transit (subways, LRV's etc) which you apparently enjoy.
I see the balance. There is no way at this point to stop the sprawl that has increased the net worth of the average citizen (what assets have you got in an apartment building?) and grown the economy since WWII. Manifest Destiny?
-Hank
Hey Hank, Dave has a point----and you can look to Los Angeles for proof. They tore up the Red Car Lines in the early 50's and depended on the automobile, a real conspiracy of the oil and rubber and steel companies. The result is a massive traffic jam daily and a dependence on the auto that has crippled transportation out here. A good public transportation system that depends on rail for cleaner air and a more free flowing traffic. I wish we had such a system out here.
No, you don't. You see the typical view of the automobile lobby indoctrinated with a pseudo-scientific view of "history". You fail to take into account the general success of public transport in Germany, particularly the East - just look at the lack of congestion in, say, Leipzig. You take a view that anything which was done by the Communists is necessarily wrong. That just assumes too much stupidity upon the part of intelligent men like Marx and Engels. They had an ideal. I don't particularly like certain aspects of their ideal and I can tell that you probably don't. Most of all it was an ideal and not a reality. That was the misunderstanding of the Communists. However, they planned in accordance with their views. Remarkably, the vast majority of apartment blocks in the former DDR are well-maintained and are quite an asset. You use a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument in stating that the sprawl has been the cause of the economy's growth. This is distinctly dubious. Nor, for someone who claims to see the balance, do you see any diseconomies therein envolved. In my opinion, I believe the diseconomies are greater than the economies in many cases. "Manifest destiny" is an interpretation of history pretending to be science (which was what Marx was trying to do anyway). As that it is not a very good historical analysis and needs to be used as a phrase with some caution.
Remarkably, the vast majority of apartment blocks in the former DDR are well-maintained and are quite an asset.
Can't speak to East Germany as a whole, but the apartment blocks in the former East Berlin are quite an asset only because after the Wall fell, the unified German government pumped as much as $80 billion into a programme of rehabilitation.
In those East Berlin tower blocks (mostly 12 stories), they rewired, replumbed, put in new windows and covered the facades with metal panels in order to bring them up from failing Fifties spec to the standard that any new tower block in West Berlin had to meet.
End of off-topic clarification.
I was really talking about small towns in Thuringia and Sachsen-Anhalt, but this is really really off topic.
"There is no way at this point to stop the sprawl that has increased the net worth of the average citizen (what assets have you got in an apartment building?) and grown the economy since WWII."
Really? NO way to stop sprawl? Many cities have managed to:
1) attract and/or keep businesses downtown. New office buildings have been built in Chicago throughout the (admittedly low-grade) economic slump that long preceded September 11th. Even after that fateful day, occupancy rates in downtown Chicago office buildings are higher than for suburban office space. The Sears Tower -- the building most likely to be affected by post-9/11 fear -- still has 96% occupancy.
2) revitalize their neighborhoods. Areas near downtown Chicago that have been empty (old rail yards), or warehouses, or run-down offices have in the last decade or so become the hottest neighborhoods for people to buy condos and townhouses in. And I've seen similar residences in old warehouse districts of "lesser" cities like Seattle, the Twin Cities, and Denver.
3) built moderately successful rail transit, which the sprawl-meisters have insisted -- indeed still insist -- that no red-blooded middle class American will ride. The success of park-and-ride lots and of expansion efforts for EVERY Western light-rail system* has disproven such an assertion. Just because they don't have the sheer six-digit ridership of the Lexington Avenue subway or the CTA Red Line at rush hour doesn't make them any less successful in their market as an alternative to having to drive everywhere.
And you do know there's such a thing as a condominum, where a person CAN have an asset in an "apartment," right?! Just because they aren't necessarily affordable in New York City doesn't mean they aren't viable housing alternatives for the middle class in cities such as Chicago.
*Yes, every one. Saint Louis, Dallas, Denver, Salt Lake City, Portland, Sacramento, San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego are all either now building, in the final stages of planning, or have just opened significant extensions. In most of those cases (LA is the big exception), neighborhoods that opposed the initial light rail system turned around and requested or demanded expansion to serve them once the system was viable reality. NIMBYs becoming YIMBYs?! Maybe the Bible really has something with that jazz about lambs lying down with lions and all that? :^)
Well I see more 18-25 people on the local 6 R-142s than on the express even though they go from 14st to grand central on the local when they could take a redbird or R-62. You need the modern look to atract prople to the subways. Not make it look like a WW2 blownup office complex. People would rather ride and go on modern stile station like on the 8th ave line and not like queens plaza or roosevelt or any station which has pee on the ground at the end of the platform. People want to feel secure in the subways, light and that blue-white color help. The daylight (not coolwhite) colored florescent tubes and the newer fixtures like on 8th ave subway are more relaxing. The tile also help cause its a light color. The more wires, pipes, whatever have you hidden will also help. You need to get the people whoes first time it is on the subway. The WMTA (washington D.C.) stations are much more inviting than the NYCTA not remodeled. Also to coax people from the streets and bus users you need to have people and platform conductors or just men-in-vests in the station or better yet in the street. Also the florescent tube lighting in the tunnels on the 63st tunnel look to the eye to be safer than those incandesent ones or the compact florescent ones (60st tunnel). Also don't paint the tunnels, it makes them scarier.
I opose doing what I have suggested cause it distroys the Historical integraty of the stations.
<<<"You need to get the people whoes first time it is on the subway">>>
Absolutely true. First impressions last a lifetime. Simply using the high-pressure wash overnight on the stairwells (to get rid of the urine odor) will make a huge difference.
<<<"You need to get the people whoes first time it is on the subway">>>
Absolutely true. First impressions last a lifetime. Simply using the high-pressure wash overnight on the stairwells (to get rid of the urine odor) will make a huge difference.
Absolutely. My thoughts about station cleaning is to make it the responsibility of the Community Boards. They'd get some cash to pay the help (more or less as a patronage job), but there would be signs on the platforms and mezzanine areas clearly indicating who's to be praised or damned: names, addresses, phone numbers. I have similar views about booth attendants too.
Stations -- their staffing, their cleaning, whether entrances are to be closed or not, etc, are all fundamentally local issues. Making this the responsiblity of local officials is the way to go.
Is it a felony to urinate in a station?
>>> Is it a felony to urinate in a station? <<<
Generally no, unless the charge is weenie wagging with a minor present.
Tom
It's a MISDEMEANOR in New York - forget the chapter number but the offense is "public urination" ... of course, do it on the third rail and the death penalty is invoked, but that's another thread in another place ... this is of course different from the offense of whizzing in the gene pool ... that's another thread too. :)
Not a felony, but defintely a minor violation. However, the cops can't be everywhere all the time, so urine odor can build up quick if cleanign crews fall behind.....
When I was a kid, int he 70s, most stations reeked pretty bad of piss.
Nowadays, particularly if you ride at night, you'd see TA crews with high pressure water cleaners scrubbing on plaforms, stairways, and in corners.
2 things
- Black and Decker Scum Buster
- hose with bleach in the water
How about some paint scrapers, fresh paint, and a garbage crew to fix up the outdoor stations of my Sea Beach line. It is a long time in coming but something tells me it will take a lot more time coming before anyone even contemplates doing such a job.
Speaking as an 18-25, I find the worst things about every public transport system I've ever used are: the way certain stops stink of urine (we don't need a P-train for that), the way that heating and air-con seem deficient, and aggressive beggars.
I'am starting to know the Bums in the subs. That black women with the tape around her feet, long hair in a cloth bag, really badly stinks (the oder is still there after 50 seconds. Anyways why doesn't the NYC Park department have public showers so the bums can take a bath and not stink.
The tried that in the Soviet Union, didn't work out so well.
David Vartanoff for President!
Let us not get carried away now...8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
You know the SUVs have the same MPH as a CTTransit bus I think?
The Feds will happily cough up billions to rebuild the Gowanus, but will give little for a 2nd Av Subway.
Look at the total effect on the transportation network each would have. As long as rail freight is not an option (and within the city it never will be) at least 50% of the freight in the city needs to move by truck. While I don't believe the Gowanus should be expanded, it should be moderized to include actual shoulders, a pair of dedicated reversable bus lanes, and a major reworking fo the 1.5 miles between and including the Prospect and BBT interchanges. Eliminate the Gowanus, and you'd likely see as big an impact on the local economy as the WTC attack has had. The Second Ave subway would mostly relieve overcrowding on the existing transit network, not attract new transit riders.
-Hank
Have big, inyoface entrances and they will change their mind.
Lower Manhatten Expressway anybody? I-78? Robert Moses?
Howabout hanging another leval of the lower leval, 2 tracks very light construction?
The VN was not built with heavy rail in mind. It is doubtful that the trains could make it up the grade to center span, not to mention what the stresses would do to the bridge itself (look at the problems we've been having with the Manhattan Bridge)
Besides, how on earth could an R-32 possibly fit between the toll booths? Would the E-ZPass be mounted on the railfan window?
No, the motorman would be waving it as he approached the booth, and then curse out the TBTA Agent who will sieze the pass and issue a $25 citation for improper usage.
-Hank
And since when does and R-32 have a license plate so it can GO ON THE ROAD; and a 600 ft trailer; and on rubber tires, you know the wheels will cut the asphalt and not grip.
Have I missed an obvious problem or something?
And aside from the bridge capacity & loading problems mentioned by Alex, I think the grades to the top of the bridge (which has to have room underneath for Very Tall Floating Objects) are far too steep. Car grades in this country on interstates are up to 10%, whereas IIRC even 4% is considered very, very steep for a train.
I'm still trying to imagine how the hell they'd
a) Get the tracks up to ground level
b) Get them up onto a viaduct
c) Turn the viaduct toward the bridge,
d) Going above, below or otherwise around the maze of approach ramps leading to and from the bridge, and
e) Miraculously landing the tracks along the longitudinal axis of the bridge, most likely the lower deck, all the while
f) Through crowded residential and commercial streets, with
g) Traffic on the bridge 24 hours a day
And that doesn't even begin to address the slope situation, or what happens once you get to the other side (do the trains use EZ Pass to go through the toll barriers? :-)
A tunnel is the way to go, no question.
a) Get the tracks up to ground level
b) Get them up onto a viaduct
I thought that people wanted an express and as there are no express tracks South of 59 St yet, there is a hell of a distance to gain height in.
c) Turn the viaduct toward the bridge,
On the map it doesn't look as if it would be as bad as around Crescent St on the J.
d) Going above, below or otherwise around the maze of approach ramps leading to and from the bridge,
Yes, that's a big problem, I concede that - but I'm sure some mad architect would revel in the task!
e) Miraculously landing the tracks along the longitudinal axis of the bridge, most likely the lower deck, all the while
Fine, we might have to dynamite some approach roads. One exit each end and a traffic circle?
f) Through crowded residential and commercial streets,
Weren't most of the streets they constructed els on? (Yes I have seen the photo of the el in the middle of a field!) Isn't that exactly the reason you'd build one?
g) Traffic on the bridge 24 hours a day
Sod them! More ferries in the meantime, and some to Brooklyn too. One of NYC's greatest blunders was making the VN solely a road bridge and it ought to be sorted.
And that doesn't even begin to address the slope situation,
Anyone got a topographical survey?
or what happens once you get to the other side (do the trains use EZ Pass to go through the toll barriers? :-)
Tehee! No seriously, el followed by ramps onto the SIRR in both directions!
A tunnel is the way to go, no question.
Almost definitely, but the silly burger who built the VN bridge should be hanged!
A subway link to Brooklyn is useless. You'll take an already 40-minute train ride through SI to Brooklyn, and then deal with working your way through Brooklyn to Manhattan. It's either a direct connection to Manhattan, or nothing. But most Staten Islanders prefer nothing. Unless the tunnel could be built in a week for a quarter, it's not going to happen until the population out here hits 1 million. But the zoneing rules keep the density so low it's quite possible that there will never be more than about 750,000 residents out here, considering the parklands and zoning restrictions.
-Hank
If the 4th Ave line is widened to 4 tracks the whole length, the Brooklyn leg wouldn't be so bad - stops at 95 (maybe, maybe not), 86, 59, 36, Pacific, then over Manny to Canal lower level, then up Broadway express - 14, 34, 42. From the Narrows tunnel, 9 stops to Times Square (including 95th, if it stops there).
If you used a St. George to South Ferry routing, you'd still have SIR stops at Clifton, Stapleton, Tompkinsville, St. George, and at least a few local stops before you reached the level of Canal.
I'd imagine the best routing for the Narrows tunnel would be to run under the southern (eastbound) service road, so you don't have to rip up the highway. Have one stop either near Fingerboard or Hylan (whichever one arouses the fewest NIMBYs), and a second with transfer to the existing SIR at Grasmere.
This wouldn't supplant the ferry, though, as you'd have effectively no service below Canal (unless you got off and back on in the other direction on the Broadway local); I guess it would function most effectively as midtown direct. You could also route through Montague, but then you have to make local stops from Whitehall to Canal, which gives downtown service but adds some time to the trip to Midtown.
<<<"It confuses people because it runs on the same line as the S44 for awhile. I can always tell the difference">>>
I believe you that it confuses people, but it really shouldn't. The busses are a different model (Flexibles versus NYCT Orions or RTSs), and aren't marked MTA.
But remember that we're railfans; most people pay no attention to the type of vehicle they get in, only that it's going where they want to go.
Originally, the route was run by Boulevard Trasit, and when it started, the route number was 44. It was changed to 144 shortly thereafter to avoid confusion with the s44 (the former s102). There are at least three NJT-contractor routes on SI, the 144 (Hyland-Richmond to Exchange Place); the 122 (Victory-Forest to Exchange Place) and the 55S (or 99S or 99; it's been a while) which runs to Richmond and Forest from Bayonne.
-Hank
Thanks.
I had no idea there were so many bus routes from SI into NJ.
If you ever walk across the bridge, you'll notice there's more than enough space to the outside of the roadway, inside the superstructure, for the rail lines. The additional space is also available on the aproaches. The bridge design was changed during its design phase from a single road deck with capacity for a second to a single deck with trolley capacity. Using the outside of the southbound roadway would neccesitate moving the walkway to the outside of the superstructure.
-Hank
there's more than enough space to the outside of the roadway, inside the superstructure, for the rail lines. The additional space is also available on the aproaches. The bridge design was changed during its design phase from a single road deck with capacity for a second to a single deck with trolley capacity.
But are we absolutely sure that this bad design (heavy and sporadic trains on the outside, lighter and steady-flow road vehicles on the inside) was properly accounted for in the structural engineering of the bridge, esp. if the design was changed midway through?
We would all hate to add trains of any kind only to replicate the Manhattan Bridge design flaws and subsequent maintenance disaster ....
Different kind of bridge, different problems. However, witness the Syney Harbor Bridge and several others. The main problem with the Manhattan Bridge is TWO tracks on each side, combined with the center roadway. Remove the center roadway and its supporting trusses and you have two independant bridges that won't twist as greatly.
-Hank
I like that approach.
In fact, you could add two more tracks to the bridge (for a total of six) and still have room to disconnect the two halves along the middle.
But that's just a pipe dream.
Besides, aren't the LRV a lot less demanding on the structure than a whole subway train?
Unless you have a none stop continuous flow of trollys.
I'll have to look at the roadway the next time I go across the Bayonne Bridge - I forgot that it was unique among the SI bridges in having a walkway (well, the Goethals has one, sort of...)
But if the plan was to run the rails down the median of the MLK Expressway, wouldn't it make more sense to run the rails down the longitudinal axis of the bridge, and move the roadway lanes outward? It would also alleviate Manny B anxieties...
the reason the Manhatten bridge is so broke is cause the trains run on the OUTSIDE. Because the trains crossing aren't a constant strain like cars they will damage the bridge.
I've posted more than once on here that what "they" should really do is re-open the long-dormant (48 years) but intact North Shore Line and run it over the Arthur Kill lift bridge and eventually into Penn Station. The spur to Travis should be included. Use real transit equipment- forget "light rail".
Or, we never got the connection to midtown, at least connect it to the St. George ferry- might still take a lot of cars off the Staten Island Depressway.
Park and ride lots could be built on the site of the old Arlington yards and at the west end of Victory Boulevard for the Travis spur. These porjects would use already existing, and largely unencroached rights-of-way, as well as save the huge expense of tunneling under the Narrows.
Of course, being a passimist, I'll expect to ride this service the same day the Second Avenue line finally opens......
Good points. North Shore has become intensely populated in the last 10 years. The NS Line would be a boon. The ROW is there, just needs some fixing up and that's it.
The Jersey connection thru the lift bridge is a little more off, but the St. George to Port Ivory conneciton is very workable.
The NS Line would be a boon. The ROW is there, just needs some fixing up and that's it.
The ROW isn't all there any more, though... it's severed beyond the ballpark, significantly encroached upon for quite some distance. If that problem can be resolved there might be some merit to rebuilding the line, but it will take a lot more than "some fixing up".
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
As many businesses as there are now on the old ROW, there would be a tangle of lawsuits to reactivate much of the line. However, if the Cross Harbor Tunnel is ever built with the Staten Island routing, using the CSX lift bridge, then it would be possible to build both a tunnel from that bridge to around Tompkinsville or Clifton for the freight tracks under Richmond Terrace. A second pair of tracks could then be built at the same time for the SIRT North Shore line.
Why does it have to go to litigation? Is the American planning system that bad? Surely there could be a law passed to stop it or something.
The United States turns out more lawyers per capita than any other nation. They've got to have something to do to keep busy, and the fact that no rail line through a predominantly residential area of the city has been built in 45 years shows the results...
But you're not talking about "a predominantly residential area of the city."
Any Cross Harbor tunnel route from the B&O lift bridge to somewhere between the St. George-Clifton area for the tunnel to Brooklyn would have to travel either alongside or under Richmond Terrace and part of Bay Street, along with any SIRT North Shore extension or subway tunnel. While both of those streets have substantial commercial development on them, they can in no way be called primarily business thoroughfares like other city streets in Manhattan can. since there's very little in SI that can be considered as high-rise office buildings.
Then there must be legislation to stop these irresponsible lawyers! One should not rest until the lawyers are looking for a job and we can employ them cheap to build our subway! :P:P:P
Lawyers tax? Tax for having a license?
Tax them 98% of any income they get from practising law ;)
"We need to ensure that the public has alternatives to using road vhicales and buses." "By the creation of this throughfare, the polution and harm caused by the other way will be reduced to acceptable levals." Use one of these sentances or like and all your problems will melt away.
<<<"Why does it have to go to litigation? Is the American planning system that bad? Surely there could be a law passed to stop it or something.">>>
Sorry, James, EVERYTHING in the USA winds up in court. Sad, but true.
True, but "summary" proceedings for the eviction of squatters usually take less than a year.
Gee, wouldn't anyone with half a brain think of amending the Constitution to limit the scope of lawsuits, shift a few burdens of proof around and generally make it a pain in the posterior for NIMBYs?!?
<<<"Gee, wouldn't anyone with half a brain think of amending the Constitution to limit the scope of lawsuits, shift a few burdens of proof around and generally make it a pain in the posterior for NIMBYs?!?">>>
James- it's nice that you take such an interest in our city and it's transit. Ever been here? We could sure use your tourism dollars, lol....And almost all visitors are very impressed with what they find here, so please do visit us.
But I also must tell you, I guess there are certain things about American culture you don't know. And that's entirely understandable. The country is totally lawyered up. Even legislation to limit lawsuits would be written and interpretted by LAWYERS!! Secondly, while NIMBYism can be very frustrating when they get in the way of a project WE want, it's an example of real people power. You've mentioned that we've got too many highways here. Guess the only reason we haven't got more?? You guessed it- NIMBYs and threats of endless environmental and other suits.
On the other hand, when there's real public will for a project, it eventually CAN get done. Witness Times Square. From pretty much the end of World War 2 to about 1995ish, it was a cesspool of filth and smut, and unsafe to walk around. Redevelopment was proposed in the early 1980s. There were the usual suits, etc....but the need to do soemthing was just so great that the project got going. Now, Times Square is a great place, major firms are there, and it's full of tourists, including lots of Brits...
My first real conclusion about how NYC works came a couple of years after I moved there. The city is an example of the philosophy I call 'inutilitarianism' (the opposite of utilitarianism), where the catchphrase is 'the greatest inconvenience to the greatest number of people for the greatest period of time'.
It takes 10 years to do anything minor, 20 years for something major, and 50 years for really big things -- and nothing gets replaced unless it falls down (as with the Manhattan and Williamsburgh bridges). And once a capital project gets underway, all work on it ceases at exactly the point where the greatest number of people are going to be inconvenienced, while the contractors and the city spend the next two years suing each other.
What about the west side highway? That fell down and never got rebuilt? I'am I right?
Well, I don't have many dollars, but I'm certainly glad of your invitation! I'm hoping to sling together enough money to get over there in the summer - any excuse to ride the best subway on earth! ;)
You're right there are things about America I don't understand. There are other things that I can understand, sympathise with, even find very sweet, but there are also things which can only be seen as counterproductive. I hasten to add that I can give as long a list of things that are wrong with England, Scotland or Italy as I can with America.
We have NIMBYs in England too. They held up Heathrow Terminal 5 up for 12 years on planning objections. We are finally legislating to be able to circumvent this process which diminishes the competitiveness of Britain in the world. According to this morning's Daily Telegraph, a planning application on a major project will now only need to be voted through Parliament under a three-line whip at 42 days notice. (Believe me, you can do that in a day, though it usually takes 2 weeks).
Furthermore, although NIMBYism can be, as you say, an example of real people power (for instance, if someone proposed opening a nightclub in your neighbourhood), it can also be an impediment to real people power (for instance, the impact on a wider scale of a major transport project). It is right that people should be compensated for any actual loss caused by a major project, but their ability to sue well over the odds and hold things up are distinctly dangerous.
Think how much more quickly Times Square would have been sorted if your elected representatives had decided upon planning and who needs to be paid what beforehand. That would be good theoretical working for a Republic.
You have probably noticed I love great cities with great public transport. NYC ranks as one of the greatest cities on earth - and I don't just mean on land area or population. Yet, as with so many great cities, it could be better. I actively want it to be better. Hopefully, one day when I'm rich, I can return the favour Yerkes did when he came from NY to sort out the London Underground.
Just so you know my sentiments on the legal profession have some historical basis, I shall finish this post off with a quote from Shakespeare:
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Henry VI, Part II, Act IV, Scene II.
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Henry VI, Part II, Act IV, Scene II.
Or offer them cheap rent in an old Redbird...
Under water with no airtanks. Ha HA HA HA (evil laugh)
Thanks, James.
Very well put, and very true.
Some lawyers would try a ham sandwich just for the thrill of it. Not eat it, but put it on trial. Go figure. The laws are written by - guess who? Interpreted by - guess who? Changed by - guess who?
See what I mean?
The line has only been shut down to St. George since the mid 80s. PASSENGER service ended in the 50s, but freight service continued well into the 80s. I believe the last load the Advance recieved by rail was in 1987.
The encroachment is not litigatable; the line was never formally abandoned; it's owned completely by the NYCEDC. The tracks have been removed between the new Ballpark station and Jersey St; the old US Gypsum plant would need to be torn down; and there are significant washouts between Snug Harbor and the beginning of the viaduct. All would have to be repaired. The biggest challege would be moving the ROW above or below the shipyards on Richmond Terrace. In this day and age, I doubt they'll be willing to allow passenger trains through the property, ROW or no ROW.
-Hank
The encroachment is not litigatable; the line was never formally abandoned; it's owned completely by the NYCEDC. The tracks have been removed between the new Ballpark station and Jersey St; the old US Gypsum plant would need to be torn down; and there are significant washouts between Snug Harbor and the beginning of the viaduct. All would have to be repaired. The biggest challege would be moving the ROW above or below the shipyards on Richmond Terrace. In this day and age, I doubt they'll be willing to allow passenger trains through the property, ROW or no ROW.
I don't see how the shipyards would have any say in the matter. If NYCT gets ownership of the line and restores passenger service, there's nothing the shipyards could do to block that. They'd have to put up with the trains running through their properties, like it or not.
The North Shore line is largely intact (to the extent of having continuous rails) from about Snug Harbor outward. Though it passes through property of shipyards, it is for the most part between two fences or through parking areas. They are even fairly good about not parking their cars on the tracks, although I am not sure how much they would like a third rail to be installed through their property. As for the washouts, they are not a significant as some say, rather like 10 foot gaps where there were bridges, with the rails still continuous. The largest difficulty would be removing the trees and rebuilding station stairways.
It's certainly doable.
No, but there would be the safety issue... much more so today than in the 1950s or even the 1980s when the line last saw freight.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
If it's third rail electrified, shouldn't there be BIG fences either side anyway. The other side of the fence is another world.
Overhead
WHAT THE **** AM I SAYING!?
If there is overhead wire it won't allow for regular cars to passby and thats worse cause you have an incompatable system which requires special cars.
please post the question one-time. We dont need all the duplicate posts!
The thing that ownes the North shore has a track right to run and maintain there line there. The line was there before any shipyards were in the way. The thing that ownes the North Shore still has a piece of paper that says we have to somehow run a Line through here. Now if you don't want to cooperate we will take you to court and it will only be harder on yourself.
It needs to be 4 tracks cause I thinks thats what it was. Correct me if am wrong. Or atleast all the tracks that excisted at some point should be restored.
Trade the whole of the SIRT to the PATH, including the R110As, we keep the R/44s, the Path deals with the NIMBYs and lawsuits,we get back the Jets,Giants,Nets, and an option on the Devils!
avid
Sounds pretty good to me...
Why does SIRT have IRT in its name? Because it belongs to The MTA which ownes its cousine IRT.
SIRT has been called SIRT since long before MTA took over -- it even precedes the IRT Company, if memory serves.
David
It does not precede the IRT. It was known as the Staten Island Rail Road (SIRR) for many years; I'm not sure when the SIRT name was adopted.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
From "Staten Island Rapid Transit 1860-1965" published by Silver Leaf Rapid Transit in 1965:
1836: railroad proposed, running from the east shore to Tottenville; Staten Island Railroad incorporated, but work never started
1851: work begins on line between Clifton (then Vanderbilt's Landing; Commodore Vanderbilt was involved by this time) and Tottenville
April 23, 1860: 7.5 miles of railroad opened from Clifton to Eltingville
May 16, 1860: extended to Annadale
June 2, 1860: extended to Tottenville
September 7, 1872: company bought by George Law out of receivership and renamed The Staten Island Railway
Now, for the kicker, from page 11:
"In 1883, William Pendleton, owner of the North Shore ferries, approached Wiman with the reactivation of the St. George scheme. Wiman loved the idea; he enlarged its scope and embarked on execution of it with his wealth of energy. He approached Robert Garrett, president of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, to gain his backing; Garrett, recognizing the promise of a B&O branch in Staten Island and a railhead in New York City, gave his support.
"The new company, planning to build a railroad from Vanderbilt's Landing north to St. George and, from that point, west along the norht shore, with a branch from the Landing paralleling the existing railway's track, to South Beach, was named the STATEN ISLAND RAPID TRANSIT RAILROAD COMPANY (emphasis mine). In so naming his company, Wiman was the first to apply the words 'rapid transit' to a railroad -- though, in fact, it did not truly live up to the full meaning of the designation until electrification four decades later. And so the country's oldest railroad to become a rapid transit operation joined with the country's oldest railroad.
"The SIRT got off to a flying start, taking a 99 year lease on the Staten Island Ry., including the ferries, then owned by Jacob Vanderbilt..."
Therefore, my statement that the SIRT name precedes (or, to use the correct term < g >, predates) the IRT name, and therefore predates any MTA influence, stands. The current "popular" name of the line is "MTA Staten Island Railway," anyway!
David
David
I stand corrected... thanks!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I remember it used to be called like SIRTOA....Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Autority or something like that. I may be wrong about what it stands for but there used to be SIRTOA
I remember it used to be called like SIRTOA....Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Autority or something like that. I may be wrong about what it stands for but there used to be SIRTOA
That's right.
These days it's usually called MTA Staten Island Railway, though it's official name is still SIRTOA.
:-) Andrew
The route up NJ is much faster than up Brooklyns coast. I looked at a map with a rular.
also the ROW excists so thats not a problem.
I think that was the idea of ending the R train where it does - to have a connection to Staten Island from there, but it never materialized.
No. The connection was being built through what is now Owl Head (or Owl's Head) Park in Brooklyn. The line would have cutoff the existing R after the 59th St station. Read the station-by-station on the 4th Ave Subway for the details of that plan.
-Hank
Manhattan is an island too and there are lots of subway stations.!
Are you thinking of Liberty Island, by any chance? Staten Island is larger than Manhattan Island.
I think you may have Staten Island and Governors Island mixed-up.
avid
It'd have to be a pretty big Subway Station - Staten Island's approx 15 miles long and approx 8 miles wide.
Depending on where you measure. It's easier to say that Staten Island is more than 60 sq mi, and Manhattan is less than 25 sq mi. (For the record, Queens is 112, Brooklyn 82, and the Bronx 44)
-Hank
Too true - I just glanced at a map and estimated the longest length and width I could see. Very interesting that Staten's bigger than the Bronx too.
> isnt staten island a little small for a subway station?
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
- Lyle Goldman
You found that out on THIS web site? Where?
It's found in the following link:
http://www.nycsubway.org/bmt/4thave/
I did take a look at the 4th Avenue page. I found the section about Staten Island expansion. If expansion to Staten Island is once again considered as part of the Cross Harbor Tunnel project, it would be from the LIRR Bay Ridge line, so the connection would have to be south of 65th Street, which would reqire a line other than the R (or N) to go to Staten Island. I think it would be great.
I don't know about extending the R to SI. Around the V-N bridge the area is highly built up, and you'd need to do some significant Moses-ing to get rails and stations through.
What would be FAR more useful, IMHO, would be a tunnel from the St. George Ferry Terminal to somewhere in lower Manhattan. Now's the time to do it - connection could be made with a new, expanded South Ferry station or a new WTC station, or both. Or even (pray) extend the 1-9 down into SI and convert the SIR into an extension of the 1-9 (though I suspect this is impossible). One seat access from the South Shore to Midtown - dare I dream?
As an alternate, one could construct a tunnel from St. George to coastal Brooklyn, then run along the shoreline up to about where the BBT starts, then run into Manhattan in a parallel tunnel. It would minimize the amount of underwater tunnelling, though the total distance would be greater, and running in Brooklyn might require some work. The SI-Bk leg could also be constructed in concert with a cross-harbor rail tunnel connecting to the former North Shore Railroad on SI and to NJ.
I think this would be *far* more useful and *far* simpler, as you can use the existing rail lines and bus routes (which run to the ferry), and allowing perhaps a 10-15 minute ride into lower Manhattan from St. George. It certainly would minimize NIMBY considerations, particularly given the current situation in lower Manny, and by using the direct tunnel (or with the indirect by sharing the NIMBY with the Cross Harbor Project).
As a second route, extending the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail into SI would be nice, though you'd have more NIMBY to deal with. There's lots of underveloped land and landfill on the West Shore, which could make for some nice Park 'n' Rides. If NIMBY considerations get to be too much, I suppose you could just tunnel under the developed communities on the North Shore, run express to Bayonne, and just have the rail system for more distant customers (the North Shore already has more than adequate bus service to St. George).
Next, would be an extension of the SIR beyond Tottenville, perhaps to link with NJT's Jersey shore line. Then open the North Shore Railroad again (the parts that have been taken apart, just tunnel under and head directly to St. George - these areas have quick bus service to St. George anyway), to run from St. George, then west, over a wider Arthur Kill Railroad Bridge into NJ, then into either Elizabeth (right there) or Newark (a little further, but more rail service available from there - I'd prefer this option).
Then, once the substantial benefits of rail service are proven to customers, you can tackle the NIMBY considerations of extending the R into SI (though virtually any route from there is going to disrupt substantial commercial and residential activities). I'd think the only acceptable way to do it would be to leave the R as is on 4th Ave, and start a new express service on 4th ave, which becomes local in SI, or else it takes too long to get anywhere. It'd probably be best to send that new express over the fully operational Manny B, since I don't think Montague can handle the extra traffic.
Geeze, d'ya think any of this will ever happen, or am I just loopy from bus fumes?
The best link would be to Manhattan, even though harder and more expensive to build. The route to Brooklyn and then Manhattan would be to long and round-about to get to Manhattan, and I think that is where most travelers from SI would be going, not Brooklyn.
I believe that the link between Staten Island and Manhattan is vital, but there are many choices for that. Is it possible that it will link with the Nassau Street Subway line?
Let's not forget that the Gowanus Expressway may soon be moving to a tunnel. If a pair of tracks were added to the mix, the V train could become an express to Staten Island.
Let's not forget that the Gowanus Expressway may soon be moving to a tunnel. If a pair of tracks were added to the mix ...
No mention of that in the RPA study, sadly. Probably complicated enough to get it funded as is. I'm beginining to conclude (cf. Big Dig) that underground road/rail projects are impossible ... any contrasting examples, anyone?
On the contrary, I think one of the best ways to get your pet project built is to couple it with somebody else's pet project. I can't think of any underground examples, but look at the Chicago expressways, built with tracks when tracks were very much out of vogue. An expressway isn't the ideal place for a train station but it's better than nothing -- and the point is moot in this case, where there wouldn't be any stations along the expressway.
All this talk of tunneling the Gowannus, etc., is a huge waste. Ugly as the old green hulk along 3rd Avenue., it's needed now, and there are many other vital projects in the metro area.
My suggestion for the Gowannus may be unpopular, but I think it's very practical:
Maintain the structure we have now!
Ugly as the old green hulk along 3rd Avenue., it's needed now, and there are many other vital projects in the metro area.
The residents of the adjacent areas, blighted for 50 years by the structure, clearly disagree and have gotten the ear of their borough government. How much weight that carries remains to be seen.
If a subway tunnel could be built with the Cross Harbor tunnel from around Clifton to Bay Ridge and hooked into the Fourth Ave. express line, the route from Times Square to Staten Island wouldn't have that many stops if it went via the Manny B and bypassed DeKalb -- 34th, 14th, Canal, Pacific, 36th and 59th Sts (You can even throw in a new stop at 86th St. if the tunnel followed the Verrazano route across the Narrows).
A route that hooked up, say, with the BMT local tracks at Whitehall would have a faster trip under the habor (5 1/2 miles without a stop), but would then stop at Whitehall, Rector, Cortlandt, City Hall and Canal, Prince, 8th, 14th, 23rd, 28th and 34th before reaching Times Square. Not much of a time savings for the extra cost of a tunnel that would be four miles longer than an SI-Brooklyn connection.
Of course, many SIers work in the far downtown region currently best served by the ferry. If one replaced the ferry with Manny B rail service (which is probably what would end up happening, since I doubt the guv'mint would keep both services running for long), then those who work far downtown lose their current connection.
The best thing would probably be to connect St. George to South Ferry, maybe with an extra stop at the WTC or in the Wall St. region, then head back. You can get any number of subway lines downtown to take you up (1,2,3,9,4,5,N,R,J,M,Z), plus PATH and perhaps Metro-North (if a terminal is added at the new WTC).
Alternately, a cross-harbor rail tunnel to the 4th Ave express, up to Manny B could be done as you suggest. But then you'd need to make a transfer to downtown locals to get to areas once served by the ferry.
Or they can do both - one can dream, no?
An alternate midtown plan, which may in fact be more useful in the long run, would be to connect via the AK rail bridge to NJ Transit's tracks in Elizabeth, and connect to midtown via Newark Penn. Not a snowball's chance in hell of seeing that any time soon, though, and compatible tracks and equipment are only part of it...
Actually, given that the population of Staten Island has tripled since the Verrazano was built 37 years ago, there's no reason why the borough couldn't support a subway line via Brooklyn and at the same time conitune to keep the Ferry running from St. George. People going downtown would continue to take either the SIRT or the buses to the terminal, while others wanting to go to midtown could take the subway via Fourth Ave. express and the Manny B in Brooklyn.
Late night service is another matter -- with a subway link from around Clifton to Bay Ridge, the city might opt to discontinue midnight-6 a.m. runs from St. George in favor of the rail link, provided there was a transfer somewhere or a direct connection from the subway line to the SIRT and connecting bus lines. It's still cheaper than an additional four-miles of underwater tunnel, and the 1 1/2 mile tunnel is only possible if they could pair it with the Cross Harbor freight tunnel plan.
I would think that the best way to connect Staten Island with Manhattan is to extend either the Nassau Street Line (J,M,Z), south of Broad Street, such that there are tail tracks south of the station for the terminating J,Z trains to turn back to Parsons/Archer. I would think that this service would be ideal if it were for the future of the (M) line.
Another suggestion is to extend the 8th Ave. Local line (E) from its exsisting Chambers Street Station (WTC branch, once it's reopen for revenue service) and connect it to South Ferry with Whitehall Station and then enter St. George to the Staten Island.
a SI route via NJ would work....if done right. In the past,every subway route proposal to SI or SI via NJ was shoot down like a duck in the water... any reasons why?
a SI route via NJ would work....if done right. In the past,every subway route proposal to SI or SI via NJ was shoot down like a duck in the water... any reasons why?
Sure. Two states have to fund it or at least be involved. Why would NYSDOT fund something not within NY state? Or the MTA?
Take the example of trains from Penn to Binghamton. The sensible route is via Scranton, then turn north. There's already movement to reactivate passenger service from Penn to Scranton. But NYSDOT is stamping its feet and wants a Penn route to go via another route, essentially up the Delaware along Route 17, that takes much longer, passes far fewer people, has no other work being done on it ... all because it's within the boundaries of NY state.
It's a similar idea as Metro North Trains running into Hoboken on the Port Jervis line.
It's a similar idea as Metro North Trains running into Hoboken on the Port Jervis line.
And as Port Jervis riders will tell you, they believe Metro North views them as second-class citizens and a major distraction since I believe the service is operated by NJT for MN.
Sounds like the state boundaries are inconveniencing America's most important metropolitan area. Is there any way in American law to re-organise state boundaries?
Is there any way in American law to re-organise state boundaries?
Short of interstate wars, nope. And we try VERY hard to avoid those.
For a good book on this topic, see "The Nine Nations of North America" by Joel Garreau. Excellent discussion of the regional economies of this continent, and where the logical boundaries lie these days. (As compared to arbitrary lines drawn in an agrarian society 200-odd years ago.)
Then NYC should declare independence from NYS and invade NJ!!! lol
That's pretty much the platform that Norman ("The Twin Towers were yucky, they blocked my view from Brookyln Heights of Weehawken") Mailer used when he ran for mayor in 1969, though IIRC, he didn't openly state his plans to take up arms against the Gadren State :-)
Was that an invitation for me to emigrate and run for mayor? :P
OK, but you gotta have Jimmy Breslin as your running mate like Mailer did :-)
Is that bad?
Depends on your view. Breslin's been a columnist in New York for about 40 years and in recent years he's been ticked off at Giuliani both for what he sees as his violation of civil rights and for taking the fun out of Times Suqare ("Bring back the hookers!" I believe was his succinct comment on the situation).
Were I the Mayor, I'd be pushing the legislature to legalize hooking. Just consider all that untaxed revenue!
Not really, NY should just take over NJ. NJ is a little backwater (I lived there for 35 years, I know). If NY took it over, it could move from 3rd world status to something useful.
I quite agree - it's a bit of a pain having such a major suburb the wrong side of quite a major boundary - it just ends up with everyone being shortchanged. Except probably the lawyers.
From the GWB to Binghamton, route 17 is a whopping five miles longer than the Scranton route. I don't know exactly where the train would run, but the two routes are in the same ballpark. I do agree that the Scranton route passes through more populated areas.
From the GWB to Binghamton, route 17 is a whopping five miles longer than the Scranton route. I don't know exactly where the train would run, but the two routes are in the same ballpark. I do agree that the Scranton route passes through more populated areas.
Don't know how rail compares to roads (I assume this is what you measured?), but the terrain along 17 is FAR hillier and more challenging than shooting out through NJ to Scranton and then turning north.
Perhaps a NY/PA rail historian can enlighten us as to the differences in the two routes?
Both are hilly. One passes through the Catskills, the other through the Poconos. The highways avoid most of the substantial grades; I assume the rail lines would do likewise.
The Scranton route is a little more straightforward than the Catskills route, except for the twists and turns around the Deleware Water Gap and on either side of the Scranton valley. The line along N.Y. 17 (or I-86 for you futurists out there) is forced to follow the curves of the mountain passes to a great extent which would probably make the trip a little longer (though that lovely winter fog that plagues Highway 17 drivers from Binghamton to NYC probably wouldn't cut as much speed off the trains).
As I said before, the highway distances differ by only five miles.
I know -- I've made the Syracuse-New York trip more times than I can remember.
Were it not for the twists and turns 17 has to take through the Deleware River watershed, it would be a much faster route, since the Scranton route has to go at far less of a diagonal than 17 does northwest of the I-87 connection. But the I-80/380/81 route has more straighaways than Highway 17 does, which is what evens out the distance (and in winter conditions with fog or snow on 17, the Scranton route is far more reliable, even if you do have to pay that freakin' toll at the Water Gap...)
The Scranton route is largely more reliable in snow because of the greater traffic volumes, which help to keep the highway clear. OTOH, a major snow-related accident near Scranton is liable to cause a big traffic jam, while a similar accident in Delaware County is likely to go unnoticed.
My first long drive (i.e., longer than a mile) in the snow was the day before Thanksgiving 1994, from Ithaca to NYC. It had been snowing in Ithaca all morning, but I was informed by the AAA that it was clear just a few miles south. Well, I guess the snow was also traveling south for Thanksgiving, since it didn't let up until around the Delaware Water Gap. The entire drive took about eight hours, including about 45 minutes stopped on I-380 and a brief episode with a truck on fire driving down the other lane (rather than slow down to investigate, I stepped on the gas to get far away quickly, and I never did find out what happened). I spoke to a friend who left around the same time but went through the Catskills, and it took him just about as long, in his case due to frozen bridge surfaces. What an awful drive!
I had a scary snow drive through the Catskills in January 1997. The snow was just heavy enough to form a thin coat on the road without making itself too obvious. It didn't help that my wipers weren't working quite right. An SUV coming the other way flipped into the ditch near Deposit. (This was before the proliferation of cell phones, and it took me a good ten minutes just to find a payphone.) I stuck to 40 mph the rest of the way up.
December 1998 I hit a major snowstorm way at the other end of 17, in western New York. Traffic was very light and I felt safe around 25 mph. Forget about lanes; I drove down the middle of what appeared to be road and moved over a bit when others needed to pass. Other than being nearly blown off the road by a truck that was going way too fast, this drive was actually quite relaxing.
January 2000 was a bit scarier. No snow this time -- just black ice. I hit a patch, did a 360, and landed in the median. This was on I-72 just west of Champaign, and fortunately no other traffic was present. No injuries, although the car needed a wash.
I was with some friends going down from Syracuse to NYC at the tail end of a snowstorm in February 1979 when we tried to take one of those 270 degree clover leaf loop exits in Sranton to stop for lunch and made about 45 degrees around the turn, went off the road and took out the curve sign on the exit.
Since there were a number of empty 7 ounce Miller bottles in the car at the time (college students, waddaygonnadoaboutem?) we made the quick decision to get back onto I-81 and continue on south to the city. This was far quicker than the Pennsylvania Highway Department, which waited until sometime in 1986 before finally putting the curve sign back up at the exit ramp.
Outside of that one speed merchant you saw, drivers up north tend to be much more snow and ice aware than their fellow drivers down south. I got caught in a snowstorm in the mountains east of Phoenix two years ago, and to some people (pickups and SUVs, mainly), they seem to think if they can see the stripe on the road, there must not be any black ice there. The results ususally turn up (either turned over or turned around) a few miles down the highway.
Outside of that one speed merchant you saw, drivers up north tend to be much more snow and ice aware than their fellow drivers down south.
Oh yeah. In Rochester, NY, I took my driving test in 0-degree weather with 10 inches of snow on the ground. Never got out of 2nd gear! And I got a pass on the parallel parking after I rammed the back of the VW Squareback into a snowpile to get the car into the space.
Us Upstaters knew about 4WD in the Sixties, way before the rest of America had decided SUVs were cool. Jeep Wagoneers and Land Rovers, back then.
One of the funniest video clips I've ever seen was a major snowstorm in Atlanta. Some enterprising TV station parked a camera at the bottom of a cloverleaf and just let it run to film the carnage. Oh my, oh my, oh my!
I used to go to SUNY Buffalo, and I lived in Levittown. I've done the cross-state thing many, many times. As a matter of principle, I preferred to stay in New York State. Just silly roadgeekish loyalty. So it was always NY 17 for me. I think it's more scenic anyway. It also seems faster or shorter, but I've never accurately measured it.
Now the Thruway the whole way--no good reason for that unless you're giving directions to someone georgraphically challanged and you want to give them the simplest route possible. Of course it's no way to go to Binghamton, though. I have done it a couple of times and on top of being tolled and needlessly indirect, it's mostly REALLY BORING. Most of the route west of Utica or so is flat and featureless most of the time. (and while there are certainly hills in NY, PA, OH, and beyond, there are no mountains at all on I-90 from central NY all the way to western South Dakota!) It does move, though.
The journey was roadgeek jeaven for me. I took the oportunity to really explore my state. I've probably done as many different routes as I did trips. For instance going home I've done US 219 to NY 17, another time NY 78 to NY 18 to Lake Ontario State Parkway to I-390 to NY 17, going up I once took the Thruway to NY 28 to Oneonta then NY 23 to NY 41 to I-81 to I-90--surface roads all the way from I-87 to I-81!. That one is GORGEOUS--but don't do it if it will be getting dark. Very winding, deserted roads! From Albaby to Buffalo I once took NY 5 the whole way--very slow but FASCINATING how the landscape and the cities gradually change from "Upstate NY" to essentially the Midwest, and I also got a lesson on how traffic lights differ in different NYSDOT regions. Also from Albany I took US 4 to NY 40 to NY 29 all the way to Dolgeville, then NY 28 north to NY 12 south to Utica then the Thruway (shockingly indirect, but when was I gonna have another chance to see that part of the state?)
:-) Andrew
Given the choice under good weather conditions, I also like taking N.Y. 17 over the 80/380/81 route because of the scenery -- and that annoying toll booth at the Pa. state line. If time isn't of the essence I also like taking the Bronx River, Sprain Brook, Taconic and Bear Mountain Parkways to the Bear Mountain Bridge crossing and down U.S. 6 to Highway 17. That's the most scenic route of all from NYC to upstate, but the two-lane stretch of U.S. 6 up and down from the bridge can be slow going if you get behind grandma and grandpa in their Winnebego doing 20 mph up the hill.
As for the Thurway, while it has a couple of nice spots, it's almost as straight as some of the highways through the Plains states and the flatlands of the south. I guess that makes it a farily safe road under bad weather conditions -- no sharp turns to skid off of when it's snowing -- but it's also one where you need to stock up on the caffine to stay awake. U.S. 20 is an interesting alternative from Albany to Buffalo -- it bypasses Syracuse and Rochester, hitting the small towns like Geneva and Senica Falls instead. But like taking U.S. 6 and the Bear Mtn. Bridge instead of the Palasades Pkwy. and the GWB into Manhattan, it's a trip that requires a lot of spare time.
As for the Thurway, while it has a couple of nice spots, it's almost as straight as some of the highways through the Plains states and the flatlands of the south.
Which Thruway you talking about? It's a beautiful ride, with separation of the two roadways (pretty far apart in many cases). While the curves are Interstate-spec, it's got hills, slopes, dips and enough to keep you awake.
It's not a bad road by national standards.
By state standards it falls very short in the scenery department. Compare it to NY 17 (I-86), I-81, I-88, or any of the parkways.
From say Rockland County through Albany there are many beautiful sections of the Thruway, the Hudson Highlands, the eastern edge of the Catskills, and yes the extra wide median helps. Even beyond Albany the Mohawk Valley has some nice parts. But Utica or so the scenery gets less and less hilly and even less and less wooded. By the time you're heading near Rochester mind-numbing flatness rules the day.
:-) Andrew
I did Amtrak Buffalo-NYP this summer, and it is much better than driving basically the same route on the Thruway.
I usually need NoDoze just to visit my daughter in Rochester, and that's only about 40 miles from Exit 50 to Exit 47.
Why would anyone drive from NYC to Buffalo on the Thruway?
Why would anyone drive from NYC to Buffalo on the Thruway?
What's the question? Is it, Why would anyone DRIVE from NYC to Buffalo (as opposed to taking the train)? Or is it, Why would anyone take the THRUWAY when driving from NYC to Buffalo?
The answer to # 1 is, because they need a car on the other end, and train ticket + rental costs more than the gas to drive there and back. Or they have stops to make along the way.
The answer to # 2 is, what's the (high-speed, limited-access, interstate design) alternative? Two-lane roads will take you days. And in bad weather, the Thruway is pretty well plowed.
Look at a map. We've been discussing two (high-speed, limited-access, interstate design) alternatives in this thread. They will easily save you a few hours over the Thruway.
Well, it's certainly the easiest way. No turns. Lots of easy-on, easy-off rest stops. Great for someone directionally challenged. I only did it as a novelty.
:-) Andrew
For an eastern state roadway, the Thruway is extremely straight once it gets out of the Catskills region, and to me at least, it can get monatanus compaired with other roads.
I-90 in Upstate New York may not be as bad as I-80 though the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah as far as straightness goes, but to me it's the dullest major Interstate highway in the northeast, though to me the section west of Syracuse may be one of the reasons for my bias -- northwestern New York is very flat and there aren't any fast options other than that if you're headed west. Going to NYC, you can always take I-81 and either the N.Y. 17 or the Scranton/Water Gap routes we talked about before.
If I may make one modification: Don't bother with the Bear Mountain Parkway. Use the Briarcliff-Peekskill Parkway (NY 9A) instead.
I've found that adds about 30-45 minutes over the PIP option (from the GWB to US 6 -- joining the Thruway at exit 9W doesn't save any time but is less scenic and costs a 50-cent toll). Southbound, it saves $2-3 in tolls (assuming E-ZPass) but it also bypasses New Jersey's cheap gas.
The Verrazano service pattern is a great idea. I was thinking of the same Broadway/4 Ave express service pattern for Staten Island. An express train stopping only 4 times in Brooklyn (86, 59, 36 and Pacific) and at major express stops in Manhattan (Times Square, Herald Square, Union Square and Canal) would be a very quick and useful route for SI riders. I was thinking of the N being that train, while a new 4 Ave Local train becoming the Sea Beach train. The only difference is that I'd terminate the 4 Ave. Express train underneath Grasmere Station, keeping the Staten Island railway free.
The big question though is whether Staten Islanders really want the NYC subway on their island. It seems that on several occassions in the past, a connection with the NYC subway was proposed, but that notion was always shot down. I'm not 100% sure but I'm pretty sure that Staten Island, not too long ago, voted to SECEDE from the rest of NYC. Their vote was ignored (correct me if I'm wrong). Don't get me wrong, I love Staten Island, but I don't know if SI wants the NYC Subway on their island.
But how would you run an express from 86 to 59? You'd need to add express tracks to the 4th Ave line, which I'd think would be prohibitive.
About secession - the movement pretty much died out after Giuliani came into office. It's really a product of the neglect of SI in the Koch and especially Dinkins years.
If you built the subway line in tandem with the Cross Harbor tunnel, then the tracks would follow the route of the freight tracks to where they reach the NY&A line.
If the tunnel came out around 69th St. in Bay Ridge, the subway tracks would head towards Fourth Ave. where the NY&A crosses it around 62nd St. From there, they can merge with the Sea Beach express tracks before entering the 59th St. station -- no need for a new 86th St. station that way.
If they decided to use the shortest underwater route, via the Narrows at Fort Wadsworth-Fort Hamliton, then the freight tunnel would have to run for about two miles in Brooklyn (either beneath I-278 or Fort Hamliton Parkway) to reach the NY&A tracks. The subway tunnel could follow the same route, just like the bi-level 63rd St. tunnel, with a stop at 86th St. at I-278/Fort Hamilton Parkway before merging with the Sea Beach line between the Fort Hamliton Pkwy. and Eighth Ave. stations.
That would add two extra stop in Brooklyn compared with the 69th St. crossing route, but there would still be only five stops between Staten Island and Canal Street, while a Battery-St. George hook-up with the BMT would have four stops (albeit all in lower Manhattan) between Canal and SI.
Sorry it took a while to get back to you. What I was thinking of was to run the subway under the Narrows near the Verrazano Bridge then have the train run under 4 Ave the minute it hits Brooklyn. 4 Ave ends very close to the Verrazano. I would run it under 95th Street(keeping it a local station) and have it stop at 86 St. You'd have to re-align the R tracks between 95th and 86. From 86th northward, there are already spaces there that allow for a 4 track configuration. Meanwhile, I'd keep the freight tracks underneath the 4 Ave Subway until it meets the freight line at around 62 street, where it would connect and turn east. A new pair of tracks would have to be built that would connect the Sea Beach Line directly with the 4 Ave local tracks.
Way back when, 'Red' Mike Hylan had proposed doing a tunnel from the 4th Ave subway to Staten Island. I read that there was even a small portion of tunnel excavated somewhere near Ft Wadsworth. Staten Islanders were so greatful that they named a boulevard after him.
I wonder if it's true?
. <<<"I read that there was even a small portion of tunnel excavated somewhere near Ft Wadsworth">>>
I've heard this, too. I think they filled in the excavation sometime around 1950.
Whenever I talk to people and bring up the subways. They always complain that we [Staten Islanders] need one. I usually get into lenghty conversations about it. While I was on the bus today, I thought. Wouldn't a Staten Island Subway conflict with all of the Xpress Buses we have here. Express Bus and Subway to Manhattan would still be a one seat ride, but one will be 2 times more than the other.
And this was precisely my beef with extending the R.
I proposed as an alternative, if tunnelling under NY Harbor would be too expensive, that a shorter tunnel from St. George to somewhere on the Brooklyn coast be built (possibly in concert with a freight tunnel that connects to the North Shore line), then runs express up the west end of Brooklyn, up to about where the BBT starts. Then a second tunnel, roughly parallel to BBT, would bring the subway line into Manhattan. It would significantly reduce the amount of underwater tunnelling that would need to be done, and only add a little to the length, though I'm not sure about the impact of the new tracks on that part of Brooklyn.
As a second alternative, someone else posted that the Gowanus restoration may involve changing it to a tunnel, and that tracks could be added there. I suppose this would be an alternative to the coastal plan.
But sending a train up the local 4th Ave tracks - not a chance. That would be something to consider later on, when rail connection from SI to Brooklyn is desired. Right now, SI to Manhattan is the priority, and extending the R to SI doesn't do a good job at all of that. In addition, where would one run these tracks from the vicinity of the V-N bridge?
"MTA may have plans for extending the "R" to Staten Island"
The R is only a service. They have to built the tunnel, lay the tracks, set up the signals, finish the stations, etc before the R can run to SI. ;)
The Chambers street station would serve well as another annex to the existing Transit Museum. It will also rescume Railway Presevation cars from weathering at Coney Island shops.
But wasnt the chambers street station destroyed in the attacks?
There are several Chambers Street stations. He's referring to a different one.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'm refering to the BMT Chambers street station, J, M and Z lines.
Precisely. That one's intact, as you know.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
For the time being. Neglect might accomplish the same destruction here as terrorism accomplished at Cortland St.
Seriously, does the condition of the station pose any structural risks to the Municipal Building above it?
I doubt it would be allowed to deteriorate so far. I'm sure that structurally, Chambers St. is still sound. But it's an asthetic disgrace.
No, it's a total disaster! As discussed last week, it's probably the worst in the system! But like you said, I think mostly it is just cosmetic.
Um, would you care to inform us which Chambers Street station was destroyed? I know of three stations by that name, one on the J/M/Z, one on the 1/2, and one on the A/C. Last I checked, trains are stopping at all three.
Sorry David, I had Cortlandt on my mind... I was thinking in particular about Cortlandt on the N/R which, as I recall, is closed due to major platform damage, although trains are passing through.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Cortlandt on the N/R is closed because the northbound exit is in the restricted zone and the southbound exit was into the WTC itself. Whatever platform damage remains could be fixed up quickly.
Cortlandt on the 1/9, a block away, is gone.
Yeah, basically I think they could use Cortlandt on the N,R, but what would you be walking out to. There's nothing there anymore (besides the fact that the public is not allowed in that area.
Exactly.
Aside from the name, I don't know why the E terminus is still closed. The north end of the platform leads to Chambers Street and connections to the A/C and 1/2.
I'd guess, Safety, Physical and Mental Health.
avid
No he means Chambers on the M/J/Z, far enough from the events of 9/11.
What ever happened to the museum opening at the old City Hall Loop station. There was alot of talk about that a few years back.
No City Hall for the museum. However the City Hall lower level would suffice.
If they every clean it up.
That area is needed to lay up trains and is totally unsuited for a museum.
Guilliani said no (and welded all the manhole covers in the area too).
No, well Roosevelt terminal station is always another chose.
how about canal st?
The J line?
its being abandoned isnt it?
Roosevelt terminal has yet to see the light of day.
Plus there's no way to get trains into it. The trackways leading to the active IND Queens line are not connected to the trackways leading to the terminal.
Well then there is your answer. The trackways are needed, the diamond crossover, the ramp and the bellmouth and what ever can be put in the tunnel for storage.
If the riding public hears about this there would be hell to pay, especially with that "G" train element that wanted a one seat ride. Even worse the possible YIMBY's along Winfield to the M Terminal.
Greedy gimmie, gimmie every place you look.
avid
I never understood why they didn't make some connection for the G train to go to Manhattan. Maybe around Court Square, or better from Hoyt-S. At H-S, all it appears they would have to do is install a switch there somewhere to allow the trains to go into the tunnel or have the G share the platform with the F at with a new switch. The reason the ridership is so low is because there is no direct connection. And now the line is even more useless. Why didn't they do this even at the time it was built?
You ask why not. At one time I lived in Brooklyn along the Culver (F) line and I always wondered why the express tracks were never used for revenue service. The four track original IND section from Church Ave through Bergen Street and then converging with the Fulton Street Subway at Jay Street/Borough Hall.
The G could go through to Church Avenue as a local thus shortening the time to ride to the Culver (old BMT section of the line) for passengers destined to Brooklyn past Church Avenue.
But that would deny passengers at local stops direct access to Manhattan. That's why it's been proposed here (and elsewhere) to extend the V to Church (or Kings Highway) and run the F express.
Is it really a big deal to take the G one more stop to Hoyt-S and change to the A or C which would go on to Jay Street then Manhattan?
In fact, I remember Bergen Street to be a bi-level express stop with the express tracks downstairs. There would only need to be a change of trains at Bergen and a walk downstairs for Manhattan G passengers.
Why don't you ask them how they'd feel about it? You'd save about two minutes. How much time would they lose having to wait for a second train? Recall that of those local stations is itself a transfer point.
The service pattern was tried for a brief time.
When did they try it. Was it in revenue service? Or just a test.
Revenue service, I believe for a few years in the 70's.
1968 to 1976, to be exact. Customers along local stops complained about having to change trains to get to Manhattan, and so F trains resumed running local between Church Ave. and Jay St. at all times.
I would assume that extending the V to Church and restoring Culver express service is being considered seriosuly when enough cars exist to do so.
Is it feasible to have a new route ie. create two route from Culver?
Express to Manhattan originates at Coney Island and local starting at Kings Highway that runs local all the way through? That would solve the transfer problem.
Both lines would be identicle past Jay Street though the Express could run express on the center tracks under Sixth Avenue.
I know that there will be added congestion with so many Culver trains in Manhattan and Queens.
What about one of them going under Eighth Avenue?
Is this too wild?
YES IT IS A BIG DEAL!
G service is a 20 minute wait if you 'just miss' one for half the hours in the day. Going from West 4th on the A to Clinton/Washington on the G is an incredible pain in the rear after 7pm. The G train is simply wasted capacity as it currently exists. They need to close Van Alst and Broadway, extend to 4th ave, and at least make it a quick alternative to going all through Manhattan for Brooklynites.
Compunding this is the fact that F SERVICE IS A CRUEL HOAX. Standing room only on a 12:30 AM downtown F this morning. It is like this all the time. Whoever decided that the V should not go to Brooklyn is an idiot. The trains don't empty out at 2nd avenue. I don't know what contrived user measurement system the MTA uses, but any regular rider of the F to Brooklyn can tell you they are full of shit.
Yes, i am ranting. I apologize, but being dependent on the F & G service to get around is a big dent in the quality of one's life.
I believe some politician stepped in from the Lower East Side and petitioned that the V end there and don't go a step further. I agree with you whole-heartedly.
Is it really a big deal to take the G one more stop to Hoyt-S and change to the A or C which would go on to Jay Street then Manhattan?
In fact, I remember Bergen Street to be a bi-level express stop with the express tracks downstairs. There would only need to be a change of trains at Bergen and a walk downstairs for Manhattan G passengers.
my grand skeme was always to bring the G up 21st. in LIC, connect it to either 60th st. tube or 63rd, and continue anotehr line north up to con ed, then east into laguardia. with a connection of 63rd to GCT, a super fast route to LaG from midtown would open...
my plan,would be to reconfigure the whole Queensboro plazastation area.I connect the Steinway st tunnel to the Astoria line via the Sunnyside yards[with a new station,of course] and send the the 60th street trains to Flushing.
Whoa,
I advocated that a long time ago. I'd use Nine 60ft,s to replace 11 50fters.
BUT...... trip arms, platfroms to be cut back, and need for cars to replace all those redbirds.
Over all in the loooong term it would reduce car diversity by moving towards more Div B cars.
The Nimbys in ASStoria would complain of service diminuation with a smaller car and giving up of a one seat ride to anywhere except Times Square.
What a run that would be , Flushing to Stillwell Ave.
You are skating on the edge of the Ice in August, but it is a lucrative idea.
avid
it should have been done a long time ago..
That sounds a really cool idea! It could even lose the problem of the line only going to midtown if a 2nd Av subway were built to IRT standards, rather than the IND proposed (to save time, yes I know they will never do anything of the sort). That would have the advantage of being cheaper to build, as less material would need to be moved, and any connection to a line or lines in the Bronx would avoid reconstruction of all the stations on any of those lines and maintain possible service from whichever line it would be to more than one Manhattan avenue.
When a G train has to go to Manhattan, (usually delay on F line) it starts the diversion route from Bergen St. It will go up the F line to 47/50 Sts then go to 5/53 and then to Queens and pick up its regular route at Queens Plaza. Probably after 12/16 it will go to D5 track north of Queens Plaza, change ends and go back to Brooklyn. Probably over the G line.
When the G was first built there was supposed to be a transfer at Broadway and a line that would have continued down Lafayette after Bedford-Nostrand. If NYC had built their second system. Likely the G would be busier. But try telling the people who ride the G now their line isn't busy. You'll learn swear words on Polish!
So the G was always meant as a crosstown route never going to Manhattan (but connecting to the Second System at Broadway, but still not to Manhattan)
G was always meant to be Crosstown. And don't forget there was supposed to be a line continuing from Bedford-Nostrand continuing Lafayette Ave.
to the MYRTLE CENTRAL LINE[that replaces the Myrtle ave el]
And thence to Winfield, and onward to Roosevelt Terminal.
avid
The original IND tended to have locals not cross the East River.
The 8th Avenue local tracks end at WTC. The Fulton Street local tracks end at the museum. The Smith Street and Queens Boulevard local tracks feed into either end of the Crosstown line. The only outer borough local tracks to cross into Manhattan are on the Concourse line, but that's only because there's only one express track.
I'm not sure why this was the design. AFAIK, from day one, locals merged with expresses to continue into Manhattan.
I don't think Court St was used too ling as it's intented use. It was abandoned pretty early on, and like you said the the locals did continue right into the other boroughs. Although WTC was used as a terminal for most of it's life, unlike Court Street.
It was the original terminal for Fulton St. locals when it opened in 1935. That configuration lasted less than a year, as access was limited to a shuttle to Hoyt St, and the diversion of locals thru Cranberry St. The station was permanently closed in 1945.
That terminal ,at Chambers was a Transfer point for the H&M Trans Hudson Tubes.
Maybe the route from Court St toward the city was going to be a IND Second System Route. Maybe a Third System.
The only realistic routing for a tube from Manhattan to the Transit Museum station is what we can call a "Pierrepoint St. tunnel". This would feed into Broad St.
Something similar could be done if the 2nd Av ever gets built, and if it gets built with the Water St. alignment.
the local track of the Fulton street subway were planned to run into the Second ave line,as well as a branch into South 4th street.
So the Court St transit museum was not meant to be a stub station permanently?
no
What is that thread, 9 months old?
yep.went looking through my files....and found it[lol]
The IND second system had both the Chambers St and Court St. spurs connected to tunnels to/from Manhattan, so I doubt that terminating locals short of Manhattan was by design.
I'm less convinced than you are. Were the two IND system planned at the same time? If not, perhaps the IND's original idea was to terminate locals outside Manhattan, but that idea was abandoned when the Second System was planned.
Still, what about the Smith Street and Queens Boulevard lines, which fed only into the Crosstown line? I don't recall seeing any IND plans to change that.
We're talking about a train service that doesn't even enter Manhattan here. Since the Crosstown line is the only service that travels between Brooklyn and Queens without entering Manhattan, we're not going to bother touching it.
My point is that the Queens Boulevard and Smith Street locals don't enter Manhattan either, according to IND plans.
Queens Blvd locals not originally designd to enter Manhattan?
Why then did the IND use a separate alignment between Roosevelt Ave & Queens Plaza for expresses (more direct) than locals? Locals were to terminate at Queens Plaza? I don't follow ....
--Mark
Locals were to run into the Crosstown line, as the G does today (and Sunday, but not tomorrow or Monday).
It's clear that both the Smith St. and Queens Blvd. local stops were meant to be mainly served by the Crosstown line. It's not the same as Court St. or Chambers St. as the tracks continue on as a seperate line. They don't dead end.
In as far as Queens was concerned, this was poor planning. They HAD to realize that the local stops would demand Manhattan-bound trains, given the experience of Fulton St. Did they plan on the eventual connection with the BMT thru to 60th St?
The Chambers St. stub was always intended to be connected to a Worth St. tunnel to Brooklyn and bellmouths were constructed to accomodate this. As for Court St, I'm not sure what was planned, but I don't believe the original IND plans actually meant for this line to end here permanently.
Both Smith St and Queens Blvd feed into the G local directly, but access to Manhattan via switches is very easy here.
The Worth Street turnouts are well north of the station.
Yes, of course it's possible to switch trains from the local tracks to the express tracks, but the design makes it obvious that the intended service plan was for only expresses to enter Manhattan. (Compare to the design south of 59th, where locals and expresses alike have direct access to 6th Avenue.) One of the major advantages -- perhaps the major advantage -- of a four-track line is that it has twice the capacity of a two-track line. If locals are forced to merge with expresses to pass into Manhattan, that advantage disappears entirely.
Very true - but of course the benefit you want must be balanced against the costs. Tunneling under the rivers is very costly, so any rail operator would look very closely at proposals which involve more than two tracks at a time in the tunnels.
The most recent tunnel with four tracks is the 63rd St tunnel; the total cumulative cost is $1.5 billion, with money contiuing to be spent as the Sunnyside Yard work proceeds.
Amtrak and NJ Transit want a new tunnel under the Hudson so there are four tracks going from NJ to Penn Station instead of two. I am strongly in favor of it, also, but the projected price tag is around $5 billion. I still think it should be built, but I can understand someone blocking proposals to put four or six new tracks in because that would be too expensive.
Correction: The lower level tunnel at 63rd St doesn't actually have tracks yet.
???? What is with this lower level tunnel: What's the purpose and where would it feed from???? Also, is it really meant to be, or is it another idea out of one person's mind that isn't going to be entertained?
The lower level is built already, without tracks yet however, it will/was supposed to be used for LIRR service to the East Side. It is not a fantasy of subtalkers, it already exists.
Correct. I've walked in it back in 1996, when construction was beginning on the last segment of the 63rd Street connector (Transit Museum tour).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Any videos or photos?
I may have taken a few Kodachromes... don't remember, I'll take a look over the weekend if I get the chance. Not really anything spectacular, though - just another unfinished tunnel, looks exactly like any other unfinished tunnel in the system.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I honstly didn't know there was anything at the lower level of Queens Plaza. Wow, that is interesting!
What I meant was that perhaps the G could be extended by a new pair of ramps from Court St to a new lower level terminal (I did not realize there was one already there) at Queens Plaza. I broached the idea here on Subtalk; I have bno idea what MTA's attitude would be.
No, not Queens Plaza lower level, a lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel is fully built.
Thank you.
Yes, but my question is what are its roots? Does it just start at a wall and end at a wall, or does it have a drawn out connection to something else?
Right now it starts and ends at a wall. Eventually it will connect the LIRR to GCT - it's not for subway use.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Can it be retro fitted for subway use?
Why would you do that, there's already six tracks feeding to 6 tunnels.
Arti
No reason to. With the latest extension it ends at the edge of Sunnyside Yard. The subway capacity in that area is limited by the existing lines, not the tunnel.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
It makes sence.
The subway tunnel was there for years before the line opened up in 1989 so, why not the Railroad tunnel?
On the Subway level. Northbound track after 21 St and before it starts turning to come under the existing line, there is a bellmouth that starts there. What is that supposed to lead to?
I believe it is meant to feed into the proposed Super Exp idea with one subway track on the main LIRR ROW from 21 st non-stop to Forest Hills. For more info read about the IND Second System, or check out the 1968 plan found at www.quuxuum.org/~joekor by scrolling down, or if you have BAHN get the file INDNOT.NT3 and take a look.
Very true - but of course the benefit you want must be balanced against the costs. Tunneling under the rivers is very costly, so any rail operator would look very closely at proposals which involve more than two tracks at a time in the tunnels.
Of course. The city may have had good reason to only run expresses across the East River. The fact remains that three sets of local tracks in Brooklyn and Queens remain in Brooklyn and Queens (two, now, thanks to two later connections built in Queens). I don't know why some here find this hard to believe.
It's debatable if that was intentinal. Remember, today's IND is merely a small piece of what was planned in the end.
So what grand plans were there for the Queens Boulevard amd Smith Street local tracks?
A crosstown subway was one of the things planned and built for the original IND. (First system?) With second system plans including a Lafayette Ave line (starting at Bedford-Nostrand) and a major transfer point at B'way/S4 St.
Maybe the crosstown was meant to be more than just a lightly traveled route. For example in 1929 when NYC annouced the IND Second System, they vaguely mentioned plans for further future expansion. (Third System?) Maybe the crosstown would have hooked up or transfer to other lines.
where can I get a full size map at high resolution of this Pic http://www.nycsubway.org/ind/2ndave/132a-1.gif
any help would be greatly apriciated.
Very true - but of course the benefit you want must be balanced against the costs. Tunneling under the rivers is very costly, so any rail operator would look very closely at proposals which involve more than two tracks at a time in the tunnels.
How about if a TBM were used that would bore a tunnel wide enough for two trains - wouldn't that also make it tall enough for two trains - hence, by 2x2=4 it might be possible to insert an extra level inside a bored tunnel - an elevated construction or something.
That's a nice idea.
well if you look at the tunnel between 33st (Lex ave) and the ramp the the original grandcentral station and the very sharp turn right (uptown). There is a single tube which carrys the express and local so you could do that and it would be cheaper!
How about building
-2 3lane traffic tubes
-2 FRA tubes to penn
-2 subway tubes to NJ city
The traffic tunnel would be a huge money maker for the MTA!
Now try to get some of the suits in Albany, Trenton, MTA headquarters, and other places to go along, and then you will get somewhere. Otherwise, no way.
The Grand Concourse line WAS the Second ave lines Bronx extention...but as the importance of the 6th ave subway grew,the 2 ave was placed on the back burner,and G.C.line was connected to the 8th ave subway......to at least have it operating until a connector route could be built.... [remember, the IND was to have a simular H type system in Manhattan like the IRT]
Probably because of cost of building a four track tunnel
N Bwy
Probably because of cost of building a four track water tunnel
N Bwy
Yes,as a matter of fact,the Crosstown line was the first line drawn up by the IND[IT WAS A BLOCKING MEASURE ,IT STOP THE IRT FROM DOING IT],as it was the first legg of the so called loop system the IND was suppose to be...it was drawn as an loop system with tagnent[arms]to washington hgts, jamaica, and coney island and the bronx. But opperational wise this was impractical,so four tracks became two,no direct midtown service...... and so on. The COURT ST station was to be the first Brooklyn stop for the Second ave line, but of course that never happened.
Yup.
What and where is roosavelt terminal?
Roosevelt Terminal section of this website.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Good Museum Fleet Underground Storage
Pitkin Avenue Tunnel From Pitkin Avenue Yard Leads East to 78th Street (Tracks A1 - A4 & A7 - A8)On The IND Second System.
(Need To Remove Wall From Tunnel, Lay Track And Singal)
Lower Level 42nd Street Station On 8th Avenue Line (Track D3)(A)(C)(E)
Lower Level 9th Avenue On West End Line (Tracks C1 - C3) (M)(W)
North Side Tracks Lexington Avenue Station
On 63 Street Tunnel (Tracks G3 - G4) (F)
Lower Level 42nd Street Station On 8th Avenue Line (Track D3)(A)(C)(E)
Can trains still access this station? I know they used to use it for Movies like GHOST, they had trains going through there as recently as then.
Lower Level 42nd Street Station On 8th Avenue Line (Track D3)(A)(C)(E)
Can trains still access this station?
Dunno about that, but this level may have to go away if the 7 train is extended west. As I understand it, the west end of the 7 tunnel butts up against the wall of this lower level.
I heard the tracks are no longer continuous through the station.
Lower Level 42nd Street Station On 8th Avenue Line (Track D3)(A)(C)(E)
Can trains still access this station?
D3 track is permanently out of service. Switches are clamped and routes cannot be lined. It might be possible to reverse this but not practical. As a museum it's wholly unsuited. It's a single run-through track only accessible in one direction (southbound). All upper-level platform accesses have been removed and you'd need to be in fare-paid territory to get in. It would be nice to see it again, but certainly not in the capacity of a museum annex.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
This must have been fairly recently. So is lower 42 totally abandoned? Can they still bring trains in to do movies and the like, or it is now basically over and be totally sealed?
Lower 42/8 is like the lower level at Bergen St-F. Closed to the public. But out of service and worktrains still go thru.
Bergen lower isn't entirely closed to the public. The platforms are (AFAIK), but for two weeks in June, F trains were running express through the station. (If the E is ever sent through 42 lower on a GO, you'll find me standing at the front.)
Pretty cool.............
But someone said the track has been taken out of service and trains can't go through anymore.
The last time I noticed this discussion here, I went and looked at it (about 6 months ago). The signals were lit, there was some water but it wasn't anywhere close to flooded (below the web of the rail), and the 3rd rail had power (as evidenced by the work lamps powered from it). Given the dollar numbers I've heard for annual switch inspection/maintenance, if they wanted it permanently out of service the switch machines would have been taken up and the track replaced with straight rail.
Lower Level 9th Avenue On West End Line (Tracks C1 - C3) (M)(W)
Oh, I'd just *love* to go there in the winter! That would just be perfect for a museum--open to the elements at both ends, albeit a bit more sheilded than upstairs! Remember, too, that C2 track is in regular use by work equipment.
It would make some sense to use C1 and C3 tracks as terminals for some future service where trains could dwell and not hold up W's (or by then B's again) down the line.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
North Side Tracks Lexington Avenue Station
On 63 Street Tunnel (Tracks G3 - G4) (F)
Needed for layups on occasion. Also impractical.
Maybe in a post-Giuliani era the City Hall station could work, but not likely for the forseeable future. Frankly, where it is right now is about the best place for it. It's easy to get to for patrons, it's out of the way in terms of not blocking access to any other lines and once the renovations are complete in '03, it will be perfectly climate-controlled and ADA-accessible.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
There is no access for rail equipment to Roosevelt Terminal station. The trackways don't connect to any others.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Many people ridiculed this security measure when he instituted it. Whose laughing now?
The 3 Chamber Street Stations (A,C, 1, 2, 3, and J, M, Z) are still intact. The JMZ Chambers is no where near the WTC so thats still in all of its "glory". The 8th Avenue and 7th avenue ones may be bypassed but they weren't destroyed. I am pretty sure at least the 7th Avenue station opened up.
The only station currently being bypassed is Cortlandt Street on the N/R. The E's WTC terminus is closed to passengers (but trains are turning in the station) and the 1/9 line south of Chambers Street (through Cortlandt Street, Rector Street, and South Ferry) is closed for a long time.
Yeah thats what I thought the last time I rode on the 1 was awhile ago, but I might have to go up to 50th Street tomorrow and thats the way up there. My friend asked: Is the 1/9 running Yet?
after a nice slap across the back of his head....
"NO, THEY WERE DESTROYED...3years maybe!"
Ignorance, you gotta love it
I've been thru the N/R a lot in the past 2 weeks and I am getting sick of it, the railfan views never change. Except for that GO sending the N thru the Manhattan Bridge. That was nice.
I still like the lower level at 42nd. You can fit fewer cars, but the foot traffic levels are so high in that area, you have to figure some of those people would, such as tourists, would go downstairs, and spend their money. And that's what it's all about. Money.
That's the unfortunate part of the current museum. A great station and lots of space, but really far from tourist foot traffic like lower 42nd. City Hall would be great. Not only a dramatic historical gem, but near foot traffic. Too bad it is needed to turn the 6 Train, and post 9/11 near City Hall!
I like, very much, the idea of Roosevelt terminal. A peninsula platform, two tracks for car displays, access by several trains and buses. Tunnel use for additional storage.
We have had on-board adventureers who penatrated the inner sanctum there. Perhaps they could lend some additional information.
Do both the northbound bellmouth and the south bound ramp connect to the upper level? Is the south bound ram the only completed side? If there are two tunnels from the upper terminal, how far do they extend, for storage purposes?
Who is occupying that space now? What else is needed besides a track bed,diamond, Signals and keeping that PRO "G" train element from hearing about its possible use?
I never realized the Roosevelt station was a tad over 2 miles from the terminal of the "M" at Metropolitan AVE. Was that supposed to be part of Phase II IND System?
avid
Yes, the Roosevelt Ave. terminal was to be part of the Winfield Spur. This line would have connected to the Myrtle Ave./Central Ave. line which in turn would have gone all the way out to the Rockaways.
In order to get trains up there, you'd have to extend the existing trackways to the point where they were supposed to merge. Or install a superheavy duty freight elevator beneath the terminal.
By this, you mean lay track in the existing ,but vacant tunnels.
avid
No. The trackways do not extend far enough to connect. There would be significant additional construction required for the trackways to meet, let alone the additional distance required to switch a train.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Lets see if I'm getting this correct.
1) there is a platform flanked by track beds(no Track) on either side.
2) there is a south bound ram to the active local south bound track. (ramp trackbed has No track.)
3) At the tunnel end of the platform , in the tunnel there is an area for a diamond crossover(NO track)
4) There is a length of tunnel after the diamond, an area where the south bound ramp would join with the tracks coming from the Vacant terminal.(no tracks)
5) no connection with tunnel from north bound bellmouth off of north bound active local tracks.
A) Any idea how long the trackless tunnels are?
B) Is there a bellmouth on the upper level where the connection would have been to connect to the lower bellmouth?
XX) The southbound ramp would be the only way, envolving a lot of reverses, to get cars o the upper level IF track and expensive switches were ever laid.
Which assumptions are correct or incorrect?
Thanks
avid
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
4. Yes.
5. Yes.
A. 750 feet, IIRC.
B. No.
XX. As has been mentioned, the ramps and tunnels would have to be extended before they could connect. Right now it would be impossible to get a train to the terminal itself.
.... Roosevelt Terminal ...
Can someone give me a one-paragraph description of what the Roosevelt Terminal actually IS?
From what I've read, sounds like a terminus that was never put into service? Or was it part of a now-demolished El or streetcar system? Is it used for anything at all now, or just sitting there? Who owns it (MTA, I presume)?
Thanks for any basics you can provide.
A built, but never used, station shell at the Roosevelt Av IND station that was supposed to be for a line to the Rockaways. There is a complete description of it on the main site.
Here's the link, pictures included.
--Mark
Here's the link, pictures included.
Mark: Thanks, this was great! I take it that this is another level of the existing IND station that was to serve as the northern terminal of the Second System line to the Rockaways?
I'm having trouble picturing the trackways and so forth, though. Are they in Peter's trackbook? Any maps or schematics available?
I'm having trouble picturing the trackways and so forth, though. Are they in Peter's trackbook? Any maps or schematics available?
There is a map on Page 49 of the Third edition and also in version 2.5 on the Queens E map. In answer to Avid Reader's question, there is no connection from the Queensbound local to the Wwinfield Spur--just a short tunnel bellmouth east of the station. The only physical connection in place is a ramp from what would have been the Winfield Spur to the Manhattan-bound local track just before the local track curves outward prior to entering Roosevelt Ave.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
The only physical connection in place is a ramp from what would have been the Winfield Spur to the Manhattan-bound local track just before the local track curves outward prior to entering Roosevelt Ave.
Presume that's a flyover to get to the westbound local track from the south?
The only physical connection in place is a ramp from what would have been the Winfield Spur to the Manhattan-bound local track just before the local track curves outward prior to entering Roosevelt Ave.
Presume that's a flyover to get to the westbound local track from the south?
Yes, that's correct. See my drawing elsewhere in this thread.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Thats what I feared!
Every time I passed that bellmouth I'd peer into the darkness, but it just didn't seem to have any depth.
So that connection, from the northbound local of QB to the southbound of Winfield is yet to be constructed. The rest of the trackbeds are in place. 2 in the station, 2 in the tunnel towards Winfield and the southbound/manhattanbound ramp. Awhole lot of moves and reverses.
I think I have it now.
Thanks all
avid
Headed Manhattan-Bound on the Queens Blvd local track, there's even what appears provision for a home signal controlling the merge from the Winfield Spur to the mainline.
I was out there in June, and managed to find an R32 running on the R, and was railfanning towards Manhattan. Just before the ramp from the Winfield Spur approached, there was a 2-headed signal, but sheet metal covered the entire lower half.
I wonder if any tower along the line actually has a lever designated for it?
Mark,
As being the only person known to have been there. Is there any connection from the northbound local tracks thru the bellmouth to the Winfield line, or is the ramp on the southbound side the only connection? I've tried to peer into the darkness, but my tired old eyes can't see in the dark to well.
avid
There are no physical connections. The trackways would have to be extended further before they could meet.
I have it now. Thanks. I was under the misconception the connection was in in its entirety. Now it all comes together.
Where ever the IND Phase I made allowances for possible Phase II expansion, it was usually done within the confines of the Phase I ROW, either above or below on the different levels, as needed to avoid future disruption of service, when ever construction resumed.
This brings to mind the shells at Utica Ave.("A") and Bedford and Nostrand aves. ("G"). The tail express tracks at Second Ave and Houston
Does this imply that there is a flyover or under between 63rd Drive and 67th st for the Rockaway Branch connection to the southbound local Queens Blvd., again within the QB ROW?
That brings to mind the bellmouths east of Broadway East NY, about 800-1000 ft., on both local tracks. To where were would they to go and connect?
avid
As I recall, they're just bellmouths at grade between 63rd & 67th and they appear to be at the edge of the construction. I never saw anything indicating ramps or flyways.
Thanks ,
avid
You are correct in that provisions were made in the Phase 1 system for future Phase 2 expansion, and that these were confined to the tunnel ROW. The middle track at Bedford-Nostrand was intended for an extension along Lafayette Ave. which would have linked up with the Myrtle-Central Ave. line.
I've never seen the bellmouths past Broadway-ENY, but it has been reported that they may have been put in for a possible link to the Jamaica line.
BTW, the connection to the Archer Ave. line from the Queens line was put in when that line was built. It was called the Van Wyck Stub and was originally planned for a line down Van Wyck Blvd. to, I believe, 120th Ave.
Yes , and that made that extension/expansion easier.
avid
As far as I can remember, there is no northbound connection - only one coming down from the terminal station into the local tracks at Roosevelt Ave of today's Queens Blvd line. The trackway for the ramp meets the trackways coming out of the terminal station at the same level, but there is no crossover provision - that would have occurred beyond the current construction.
--Mark
.... Roosevelt Terminal ...
Can someone give me a one-paragraph description of what the Roosevelt Terminal actually IS?
From what I've read, sounds like a terminus that was never put into service? Or was it part of a now-demolished El or streetcar system? Is it used for anything at all now, or just sitting there? Who owns it (MTA, I presume)?
Thanks for any basics you can provide.
Here is a rough drawing of what is there at present. Black dashed lines are trackways only (no track). The turnout from the Queens-bound local is a bellmouth only, nothing more.
Grey lines are the in-service tracks below. The solid black line is the approximate location of the never-used terminal platform. This drawing and descriptive text is found on Page 49 of my trackbook on map page Queens E.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Now it all makes sense. There is NO turnout from the north bound track from Winfield to the ramp. That portion of tunnel has yet to be constructed as well as the turnout connect ing the bellmouth to the southbound track towards Winfield.
I've got it. So this terminal is useless car wise until at least another 1000 ft or so of four track tunnel is built. That would put it 1/3 of the way to Metropolitan Ave. Almost to the NY&A/LIRR ROW.
This is almost as tantalizing as the Broadway ENY to Euclid leg of the "A" prior to its opening in 1948. That had four stations and four tracks. That must have driven the then Railfans to a frenzied moonlite dance naked around a bonfire.
avid
That must have driven the then Railfans to a frenzied moonlite dance naked around a bonfire.
You're scaring me.
That's NOT a picture I want painted two hours before dinner, thank you.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Now it all makes sense. There is NO turnout from the north bound track from Winfield to the ramp. That portion of tunnel has yet to be constructed as well as the turnout connect ing the bellmouth to the southbound track towards Winfield.
I've got it. So this terminal is useless car wise until at least another 1000 ft or so of four track tunnel is built.
OK, pardon me for being dense, but after going through the video photos and the descriptions ... here's what I *think* is there. Tell me if I'm right or wrong.
NORTHBOUND Winfield to WESTBOUND Queens Blvd: Trackway in ramp complete with flyover that extends beyond the four QB tracks and deadends.
NORTHBOUND Winfield to ROOSEVELT TERMINAL: Trackway alongside island platform. How far south does it extend? Is there a flyover that crosses over all 4 QB tracks before dead-ending?
SOUTHBOUND Winfield from ROOSEVELT TERMINAL: Trackway alongside island platform. How far south does it extend? Is there a flyover that crosses the 2 eastbound QB tracks before dead-ending?
SOUTHBOUND Winfield from EASTBOUND Queens Blvd: Bellmouth only.
Peter? Mark? Avid?
From what I see in Peters Drawing, three (3) track beds fly over the QB four (4) track ROW.
There is a Bellmouth from the Northbound QB local ending at a wall.
The three fly over trackbeds of the upper level end at about the wall adjacent to the local QB nothbound track.
The fly over trackbeds do not have sufficient length at this point to 1) allow a connection between the Northbound Winfield and Westbound Ramp to the QB southbound local track.
Hope that clears it up for you.
avid
When I first saw this subject I knew I saw it before.
It was posted in the Riders Diaries section of the Straphangers Group. In fact it was started here by the same person who started it there. He may call himself Interborough on Sub-Talk but he is known there as Khalis.
Tell me Interborough - the responses on Straphangers - weren't they good enough for you? (they were basically the same as posted here).
You are not dealing with ordinary subway riders in here. The regular partcipants in this board encompass more NYC (and other cities) Subway/Transit knowledge than could ever be written into books.
I have no problem, whatsoever, with your participating in here but I ask you, please, be more direct and detailed with your questions.
Allan
IRT1904
Allan is a long time poster here, as I am, but not since 1904.
Hay Al do you think he knows what an IRT is or the significance of 1904 ?
Mr rt__:^)
I'll wager a Nathan's Hot Dog that he does know what those mean.
I mean he does use Interborough so he must have a clue.
Seems everyone wants to put their two cents in on this. I had suggested turning most of Chambers St into transit museum a few weeks ago on some thread about how to make Nassau st run express. I have also suggested rebuilding the 1 through to Red Hook Brooklyn, and hooking it up to the G. Yes, all the G station platforms would have to be modified for IRT cars.
I heard that the R-32 will recieve a second general overhaul. This one will make them appear with LED route sign like the R-142's and air bag suspension with AC traction control. How true is this?
My understanding is that some upgrade of the R-32 cars is being considered (no, I don't have details). However, it is likely to take place under the current SMS (Scheduled Maintenance System) program and not as a GOH (general overhaul), which NYC Transit doesn't do anymore.
David
Will the cars receive the items I mantioned?
Read my post again. I DON'T HAVE DETAILS.
David
That doesn't seem to stop many of us.
I noticed that a significantly lower percentage of the R32 fleet is used in actual service than the Division B fleet average. Will the proposed changes address this problem or continue it?
R-32 have been cheating on themselves. I've seen cars married with different number plates. What's that all about?
Ugh, ever think of some damaged cars? Yeah ok, for one damaged car the MTA will get rid of its mate. So when two cars get damaged, the opposing two get coupled, the MTA figured it out, why can't you?
Yeah, there are 3 gate cars at 36th street yard.
I hope you're being sarcastic as I was for part of my message, but if you aren't. Gate cars are ancient, they are probably being stored for preservation...Please tell me you are kidding though, please please!
The changes are being thought about at best, not proposed, and I don't know what the changes are.
In any case, as of the July 22 assignment, 76 of the 596 R-32s were listed as "unavailable" (modification, SMS, inspections, long-term hold, or pending scrap). The R-32 fleet is currently undergoing floor replacement under SMS. I haven't seen the December 16 assignment yet, but it is safe to say that the "spare" ratio will go down.
David
In any case, as of the July 22 assignment, 76 of the 596 R-32s were listed as "unavailable" (modification, SMS, inspections, long-term hold, or pending scrap). The R-32 fleet is currently undergoing floor replacement under SMS.
I based my assessment on the data on Joe Koerner's Website, which goes back to March 1998. During that time the percentage of R32's actually used in service has been lower than the Division B fleet average. To wit:
Summer 2001: R32 - 77%; Div B Fleet - 84%
October 1999: R32 - 82%; Div B Fleet - 84%
May 1999: R32 - 86%; Div B Fleet - 81%
December 1998: R32 - 81%; Div B Fleet - 83%
June 1998: R32 - 83%; Div B Fleet - 84%
March 1998: R32 - 79%; Div B Fleet - 84%
I don't have the benefit of systematic monitoring nor the totals of the number of "unavailable" cars for all these snapshot readings. Clearly, there may be some unforeseen bias in the snapshot selection. However, with one exception (May 1999) the percentage of R32's actually used in service has been below the fleet average. At that time the fleet average was substantially below its historical baseline. So, I'd assume there was something else that prevented those cars from operating at that time. Also, the R32's represent almost 16% of the total, so if the comarison were made to the non-R32 fleet the differences would be more striking.
Now THAT would be nice! Will it happen, well, who knows?
The cars are considerablely old. The first signs if any are the new floors.
They're still younger than I am.:-)
Who was the specific person you heard this from, and where did he get this inside information from? Till I get a satisfactory answer, it can be only considered a rumor, and this rumor has been going on for the last several years.
I got the info from a TA employee. However many don't know they're a s s from a hole in the ground.
Ah! A TA employee! That's my point! Was it a guys who pushes a broom, a train service employee or someone from the 13th floor at 370 Jay?
Someone at one of these sites.
I might be wrong, but this sounds awfully strange. These cars don't long to go, they are scheduled to retire soon. Would the MTA put a lotta money into something for another 2 years?
No, but Railway Preservation or any railway museum can.
MTA=Metropolitan Transportation Authority, built to serve the public
Railway Preservation or a railway museum=built to restore cars
See the difference?
The R32's are in better shape that anything up to the R46's. For what has been possed hear before, IF AND WHEN the R160's are built, the TA will replace the R38's though the R44's will be replaced.
Robert
The R32's will be around for many, many years to come. They may be the oldest B division cars, but they will outlive the rest of the 20th centrury 60' cars. I would wager that they'll outlast the R44's as well.
Certainly.
Soitanly.
They'll be around longer than the Gibbs Hi-Vs.
If the R-32's are retired within two years, I'll eat my hat. Without taking it off first.
I don't think anything but the Redbirds will be retired within two years.
Regenerative braking! It's the patriotic thing to do.
Is it true that the R-143 rides on Bombardier trucks?
No, it is not true.
Robert
Then what trucks are the cars on?
They ride on the same trucks as the R142a's. Why would they ride on the other company trucks.
Robert
Speed regulation on the L line.
Huh? Several manufacturers are capable of manufacturing trucks that meet NYC Transit's specifications.
David
The TA is solely interested in heavy weight trucks.
Once more, read my post again: SEVERAL MANUFACTURERS ARE CAPABLE OF MANUFACTURING TRUCK THAT MEET NYC TRANSIT'S SPECIFICATIONS. The world does not revolve around Bombardier (at least not yet < g >).
You probably make a good parent.
Yes it is true, The R-143s are riding on Adtranz Trucks. This is confirmed by a Kawasaki Technician I was discussing the specs of the train with last week.
The R-143s are doing well with minor problems. On To Day 8.........
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Cool.
They look like the same trucks that the R142a's are riding on. So are you saying that they are made by Bombardier trucks. Then I stand corrected. I might work for the TA, but I don't know everything. That why I read this board. Thanks Trevor.
Robert
The truck resembles the one you find on a GP38 locomotive (assuming the HO models of these I've seen are accurate...)
Today while working on the C, I saw two GE R32's bring up the rear of 6 R38's. The two cars numbers are 3892-93. Had anyone else seen any of the others 8?
Robert
They others generally are in trains of R-38 and R-32A on the 8 aveune line.
I know that they run with R38 on the 8th Ave line. I have oparted from one over the summer, before they put the new AC units in.
Robert
AC units in subway cars? unheard of in Boston.
Excuse me?
If by "AC" you refer to air conditioning, all Boston rapid transit cars and streetcars are air conditioned.
If by "AC" you refer to alternating current propulsion, the Red Line's 1800-series cars are so powered.
So either way, there's plenty of "AC" in Boston.
It's the AC-DC ones you have to watch out for :-)
Mr rt
Rim shot!
What about the two cannibalized cars? Any word on whether they'll be back in service?
3934-35 are on the road. If I recall correctly, these were cannabalized for parts and sat dead at 207th Street for a long time. I hope Wayne-Mr.SlantR40 sees this note.
-Stef
I should have looked before I posted. You just answered my question. Thanks!
How come they don't go out as a single consist , all G.E.R/32s ? If only for a little bit.
Any spotters see the R/110Bs and how are their cannibalized retofits coming?
avid
I didn't realize they were ever out of service. It has been years since I've seen a train of R-32 GE consist. I just expect to see them in trains of R-38 units like you saw them.
Wayne
I operated that pair on my last C trip on Sunday. It was on the south end, and therw was another pair on the north end of another C train, and I saw two more pairs, I think, on the ends of A trains. 3 trips on the C and you see alot. I was trying to see if I could positively confirm all 5 different pairs.
Is there any special reason the TA doesn't run them all in one consist?
avid
[Is there any special reason the TA doesn't run them all in one consist?]
My guess would be that since they're mechanically identical (I think) the TA does not see any reason to attempt to keep them together. I'm sure as rail fans we'd all like to see them in one train again. I know I would.
Wayne
I think that it would be better to run the GE GOH R-32s as one trainsetsince the A/C units in those cars are different from the rest of the GOH R-32s.
#3 West End Jeff
The fact that the air conditioning units in one car are different from the air conditioning units in an adjacent car means nothing as far as the operation of the train is concerned.
David
Yes, separate from the the Non-GE r/32s but they are usually broken and are paired out to R/38s of the "A" or the R/32s of the "C".
avid
Trains are routinely drilled in the yards (switched around from consist to consist), for whatever reason, so to try to keep one consist together would be very restrictive. Now, why they didn't send them out in the same consist, who knows.
What I wished they would do is convert them to the the rest of the R-32's. This is what they should do instead of scrapping them with the R-38's. If they have to gut them and install everything from scratch (there must be spare parts laying around), they should save those car bodies.
The new trains have strip maps. I think they are useless, sense trains on the BMT Eastern Divsion can operate on any B-Divison line.
Can the R-142 be changed to other colors?
Yes and so can the R143.
When will this happen?
When the cars are transfered to a different line. When the R142 was on the 6, it had 6 stip maps.
If the L R-143 was to operate on the J line it would not make J line annoucements, would it?
I imagine it would.
Only if those announcements have been programmed into the train. The last time I worked on an R142 - R142A, it was only capable of making announcements for the 2, 5 and 6 lines in both express and local flavors. The remaining lines had not been programmed - the poor thing couldn't even display the routes on the front and side signs.
How are the strip maps changed ? Does someone go up there an manually to change them ? What about the little lights lining up with the varying amount of stations ?
I say VMS digitaly strip maps will allow the cars to operate system wide, except for A-Division properties.
Probably as you describe. The lights are probably programmed by route (light 1 does such an action at such a time, light 2 does something else at that time) and if the holes are lined up right, you see the light.
There's probably a line of lights for the length of the space allocated to the strip map. The light actions are programmed into the trainline software to act accordingly.
>>How are the strip maps changed ?<<
Based on the responses so far, it appears nobody knows!
Alright, I'll respond! They simply unscrew the screws, take out the plastic, put in a new piece with the right amount of holes. The trainline software controls the lights. There you have it, a strip map change!
That seems very arcane. All the computerization to get rid of roll signs, but then somebody has to come through and do that ?
I dont know why they would get rid of the rollsigns (even though I benefit from it since I can buy them now) but why spend more for an led sign? Jeez pretty soon they wont even need the T/O's. lol (hopefully that wont happen since I want to be one after I go to college).
How many lights does the strip map have avilable?
when they cough up the dough
I don't think the R143 will be used on any other lines since they are testing a new type of signal system.
I just saw a picture on the front page of some Redbird R33s next to a bunch of N R40 slants. I was wondering where this could have been taken as those two classes shouldn't mingle.
Queensborough Plaza, or Coney Island on a fan trip. Did you click "about the banner image" next to the banner image for more information?
(The only such image in the banner list is in fact at Coney Island on the Observation Car/Worlds Fair Redbird fan trip 8/27/2000.)
Yes I did, but it had no caption. Thank you for providing it.
Sure it does:
Maybe you need to scroll down to the bottom of the picture
And I'd say that the redbird was going to/from the #7 line.
Read back in the thread. It was a fan trip. Actually yes, the train did go back to the #7 line via the "N" but it was carrying paying customers all the way...
Tomorrow is the one year anniversary of the start of Amtrak's Acela Express service for revenue passengers. Happy birthday to the Acela Express and many more!
December 11 is also day number
35474 since the opening of the IRT from City Hall to 145th Street.
31584 since the initial BRT (now BMT) run from Coney Island to Chambers Street.
25294 since the opening of the Eighth Avenue IND.
17711 since the unification of the IRT, BMT, and IND systems.
17015 since the demolition of the Third Avenue El in Manhattan.
9390 since the opening of the first five DC MetroRail Stations.
5 days until the start of full revenue service in the 63rd Street Connector
4 dats until the start of the Downeaster service to Maine
Wow! You have a talent for calendaring...
2001 is also the 32nd anniversary of the Metroliner...
2001 is also the 32nd anniversary of the Metroliner...
By far one of the coolest names for a train in the US. Not to mention the origional MUs looked kinda cool too. It's a shame they never worked right.
The crazy thing was, when it started service, it was actually one of the fastest trains in the world, and it's 150mph revenue speed was ambitious by everyoe else's standards (The TGV had not yet been born, the Bullet Train was doing around 125mph in service)
Hey Phil, go down to strassburg and scope out the PRR Metroliner they got stashed there. It is so hot looking inside. I mean the interrior, for 1969, is just completely modern by todays standards. It's like the inside of a jet, only w/ more room.
So it's an exhibit at the RR museum? Very cool!
It's parked out in the yard. You sort of have to ignore all sorts of signs to get a look inside. Not that I did, I just stood guard while a friend went in for photos.
That's a shame. It should be open for visitors.
Will you post some of those pictures on subway.org?
If I can find them.
When I visited the Pennsylvania Railroad Museum in Strasburg in September, the yard was closed to visitors because of old tracks being torn up and new tracks installed, not necessarily in the same location.
You're right. I loved those MUs.
I do think critics were a little harsh with Penn Central on that one, though Philip. After all, the trains did achieve 110 mph, which was faster than anything we had before, and the trains' 3 hour schedule Washington-NY was very respectable given what was going on in the rest of the world. I respect their trying to go for a good goal, and their accomplishing something important, even if it was imperfect.
I wrote to Amtrak as we neared the 30th anniversary of the Metroliner, and the start of Acela service. I suggested a "then and now" photo opportunity where the Budd Metroliner MUs would be photographed next to an Acela. Perhaps the Budd Co's program managers could be located and honored at a ceremony.
Amtrak blew it off, I'm sad to say. Their reply clearly indicated they were not going to do it.
Too bad-no sense of history OR PR.
And I, too, thought they were cool--digital speedometers yay!.
It was of course the track that was the limiting factor--they tested a set near Trenton on a quiet weekend at 160. And on the first revenue run they hit 125.
IIRC, they were in fact cleared for 150mph operation for a brief period, but that was reduced. We're talking maybe a few months at most.
If the tracks had been decent, we would have had a faster train than the Japanese!
Only until the high weight and generally poor dynamics of the cars caught up with us. Budd needed better trucks and to lop about 50,000 lbs off each car, and it woulda worked. I don't think it was all their choice, IIRC, the PRR insisted on the overweight trucks they use, and a few other things that effectively doomed the cars. Actually, I recall the PRR was quite opposed to the whole concept, and had to be dragged in typical PRR fashion, kicking and screaming, into modern times.
The funny thing was, despite everything they did to kill it, it was a big success with the passengers, even if it was a technical flop.
What I find even sadder is that even after RRs were shown that faster trains would attract passengers and even profits, they ignored it and continued with the low speeds and poor service that was killing passenger rail in the US, and still is...
You're right about the Pennsy's attitude, and wrong about the "flop." It wasn't a complete success, but it clearly wasn't a flop either. Calling it that is really unfair to its designers. As you yourself pointed out, a few modifications and it could have achieved a lot more.
Suggestion: Look at Anonymous' posts - he has a bit more mature perspective on it.
What's wrong with calling the MUs a flop? Technically, they were disasters. The GE units weren't reliable, the Westinghouse ones popped substations - and Westinghouse's sugessted fix was to modify the substations on the NEC. The units were way too heavy (I'm not sure how much of this was Budd's fault), and had trouble dealing with dead pairs. QC was in the gutter, and even the couplers were flakey to the point where one train actually broke in 2 at speed. Even after the rebuild, they were still unreliable units - witness their withdrawl from the NEC in '83, and their withdrawl from self propelled service around '87. The Silverliners they were based off of, and the M-1s built around the same time, are still running strong.
The Metroliner units are widely regarded as failures, though the service ultimately became sucessful as a conventional hauled train with AEM-7s. But the Metroliner MUs themselfs were disasters.
My guess is Budd wasn't totally in control of the design - the Silverliners of the same vintage are decent cars, Budd showed that lightweight MUs could be built with the M-1 and M-2 cars, and the Metroliner's acient truck technology was never dupicated in a recent MU from them. Splitting the propulsion order between two companies, and two different technologies (Thyristor Vs Ignitron), likely made the cars maintenance nightmares. The high weight and overly optimistic gearing simply was too much for the propulsion systems.
IMHO, the Metroliners would have been a huge technical sucess is Budd had used a lightweight design like the M-1s had, and stayed with a conventional Ignitron control system (i.e. GE, why Westinghouse ever got any of the order is beyond me as they were a non issue in RR traction long before the Metroliners were built).
The metroliner was proof that the "throw more power and weight at it" approach to high speed rail simply doesn't work - a lesson that Amtrak and the FRA have yet to learn.
The metroliner was proof that the "throw more power and weight at it" approach to high speed rail simply doesn't work - a lesson that Amtrak and the FRA have yet to learn.
I think that the MetroLiners were just a generally marginal design with technologies that just weren't quite yet ready. The hi-comfort/safety with high power is the best way to go with hi-speed rail. Else you get something like what the have got in Europe, basically cramped death boxes on rails.
"My guess is Budd wasn't totally in control of the design - the Silverliners of the same vintage are decent cars, Budd showed
that lightweight MUs could be built with the M-1 and M-2 cars, and the Metroliner's acient truck technology was never
dupicated in a recent MU from them."
You mention lightweight trucks. If I recall correctly, Rockwell was designing lightweight trucks at the time, which were ultimately used in the R-46 subway car, and failed due to premature cracking. Are these cases very different?
Is it possible that a lightweight truck (as designed in the 1960's) would have not have been sufficiently rugged to last in service? It has been posted here that tracks were a major problem. If so, the tracks would have wreaked havoc on trucks not designed to accept a beating.
"Splitting the propulsion order between two companies, and two different technologies (Thyristor Vs Ignitron), likely made the cars maintenance nightmares. The high weight and overly optimistic gearing simply was too much for the propulsion systems."
I would agree that was not a real intelligent move.
Westinghouse' reasoning about the substations may not have been completely off-base. I notice you didn't address the issue of a truly ancient power supply...
You mention lightweight trucks. If I recall correctly, Rockwell was designing lightweight trucks at the time, which were ultimately used in the R-46 subway car, and failed due to premature cracking. Are these cases very different?
The LIRR, among others (even Amtrak), has used lightweight pioneer III trucks. granted they're not the best riding truck around, but the LIRRR's have logged an easy million or two and are only now starting to deteriorate. IIRC, the Rockwell design was a flawed design used on a few other cars out west, too.
Is it possible that a lightweight truck (as designed in the 1960's) would have not have been sufficiently rugged to last in service? It has been posted here that tracks were a major problem. If so, the tracks would have wreaked havoc on trucks not designed to accept a beating.
I don't know. The Pioneer III, for all it's flaws, is a one tough truck. They're survived years of abuse on the LIRR without much trouble.
Westinghouse' reasoning about the substations may not have been completely off-base. I notice you didn't address the issue of a truly ancient power
Westinghouse was basically saying it was the PRR's fault that their thyristor technology popped substations, while GE's ignitron stufff didn't. My guess is Westinghouse really never wanted to be involved at all, did so reluctantly, and was looking for an excuse. In '69, thyristor technology was in it's infancy, I don't think even Asea was playing much with it yet. GE was developing the SCR, but obviously didn't feel it was ready for RR traction. Westinghouse was a non player in the semiconductor field.
Anyway, IIRC, big W's solution was a to add a resistor of some sort at every substation. Not very good when your customer's product works better.
Thanks for the explanations. They help a lot.
When does Acela Commuter service get called by that name (not Clocker)?
Probably never, now that NJT is to take them over (and discontinue them south of Trenton) by 2005 or 6.
Areyou saying there will be no Amtrak trains which stop in places like Cornwells Heights between NY and Philly?
If the eventual cessation of Clocker/Acela Commuter service is true (and this is the first I've heard of it), the slack may be taken up by Keystone Service trains, which already stop at Cornwells Heights 4 times daily. You could look at Keystone trains as Clockers extended to Harrisburg anyway. Amtrak does.
I didn't hear anything about discontinuing them south of Trenton. There is no point for NJT to take over the service if it dosen't go to Philly. They already run from Trenton to NYC.
Probably never, now that NJT is to take them over (and discontinue them south of Trenton) by 2005 or 6.
I've seen this question asked numerous times on various message boards, but this is the first time I've seen an answer. Where did you learn that the Philly-Trenton service will cease?
I have heard it personally from NJT management (Warsh, Redeker). Only 15% of the ridership continues south of Trenton and will have to take other Amtrak trains.
They're implying that most passengers using SEPTA who arrive in Trenton do not continue on NJT to New York. I've been on that train. There's a pretty good size crowd arriving in Trenton a lot of times.
Actaully, they are implying that Clockers are glorified NJT trains with liitle reason to exist south of Trenton.
OK.
Why dosen't NJT just operate a NYP to TRE express train? There's nothing stopping them.
Maybe NJT should get control of the R7 as well. Make a super commuter rail line from Chestunut Hill East to New York (on certain runs, of course).
That's actually a fabulous idea.
1) Upgrade all stations on the R-7 to high platforms.
2) Standardize the rolling stock to NJT's Arrows with the center double-leaf doors.
3) By eliminating the 10-15 minute transfer times, you can improve the operating schedule.
4) Reassign SEPTA rolling stock to other SEPTA routes.
Really all that would happen is that there would be no connection between services. Since NY to Trenton service is in more of a demand than Philly to Trenton, there would be short turns that end at Trenton. Now that I think of it, maybe Chestnut Hill East can share with the Cynwyd line and all Trenton trains would begin/end at 30th Street (Amtrak tracks).
Two people in the past month or so have reported riding them, the most recent being Friday night at about 11:30. I think it is safe to say one can go out and expect to find one (provided they wait long enough).
NOTE: I have yet to personally see one so don't take my word but if two people give me this report, I have reason to believe it.
Why did the R-142's fail on the 7 line test?
It wasn't making proper contact with the third rail. Eventually a Diesel had to come save it.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
That line should be converted back to B-Division ops.
That would be a stretch. B division cars would get destroyed in the Steinway tubes, among many other issues.
What about on the el?
That wouldn't work either. B divison cars are wider, the car body juts out from the trucks farther than A division cars. You would have to chop the edge of every platform. The result: narrower platforms.
Not necessarily, just shift the track a bit.
Shift the tracks? Then they'll fall off the structure! Major problems at Woodside, Junction Blvd., and Willets Point. They'll have to break thru the walls at Main St. There is a financial cost to this!
But the line was B-Division as of the 20th century.
The Flushing line was never B Division. When the BMT and IRT shared operations, the BMT trains terminated at Queensborough Plaza and passengers had to change to either the wooden el shuttle cars or to the IRT trains to reach Astoria. That line couldn't handle the BMT width cars until the platforms were shaved back in 1949.
Converting the No. 7 train to B Division might seemlingly offer more passenger capacity, but because of the tight clearences in the Steinway tube, you would end up with an IRT shuttle between Times Squareand QP or huge rebuilding costs, while the BMT 60th St. tunnel would have to serve both Astoria and Flushing, along with handling trains coming in from the IND Queens Blvd. line. The result would be to cut service to Flushing and Astoria, not increase it, because the number of TPH going to Manhattan via only one tunnel would be far less than whatever gains there would be from running wider (and 40 foot longer) trains.
what about 63rd street?
A Whitehall-Flushing BMT local could be done if the R was routed to Flushing and the N or a Whitehall W BMT local was created for Astoria, while the Q was sent through the 63rd St. tunnel to serve as the R's replacement to 71st Continental (creating a new line would leave the N with relay problems at 57th-7th if it went back to express when the Manny B is finally fixed. That problem would be solved when the Second Ave. subway line became a reality, which may or may not happen before the Manny B repair job is done).
Running both the N and R through Queensboro Plaza would eliminate the 11th Street cut from Queens Plaza to 60th-Lex as a revenue service route, which would probably irk some people who use it to transfer from the E, F or G today. But the biggest libaility would still be the under-utalization of the Steinway Tubes by converting them into a Queensboro Plaza-Times Square shuttle operation.
As a stand-alone line, the 7 isn't affected by other lines' mechanical, signal or other problems on the Flushing route, only its own. Do it the other way, and the Flushing bound R train could be slowed down by any other lines' troubles between QP and 59th St. in Brooklyn. Plus, the limit on the number of R trains (or N or W or whatever line you want to sent to Main Street) per hour through the 60th St. tube would mean something else -- no more peak direction express service between Main Street and QP, because there wouldn't be enough other trains to handle the local service.
For the people at queens plaza can't you build a transfer with electric walkway like at 21st ely and court sq? Would that be a problem?
You could build a transfer between Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza (in fact, there's a thread from a couple of weeks ago about that idea), but that still doesn't solve the problem of the cut in the number of trains per hour east of Queensboro Plaza on the Flushing Line if you switch it to the B Division.
The No. 7 right now can handle up to 30 TPH, all of them going at least as far as 111th St. and usually to Main St. If you switch it to B Divsion, the 60th St. tunnel has to share space between both Flushing and Astoria trains, then has to merge with the 63rd St. line (or 11th St. cut) trains coming from 71st-Continetal. At best, you could get 24 trains per hour through the 60th st. tunnel with all those merges, which means only 12-15 trains per hour could go to Flushing, which means the end of peak direction express service along that route, since the maximum service you could have would be one train every 4-5 minutes (unless you go back and rebuild the massive Queensboro Plaza complex that was closed down in 1949, which would allow you to run Flushing locals or expresses between Main St. and QP).
The No. 7 right now can handle up to 30 TPH, all of them going at least as far as 111th St. and usually to Main St.
The TA used to run 36 tph, with 24 tph originating at Main St and 6 each at Willets Pt and 111th St. The Times Sq. terminal can theoretically handle 40 tph. Of course, if the Javits Center extension results in a terminal without tail tracks and no expansion to the existing Times Sq. station, then the capacity would be reduced to the 24-30 tph range.
How about connecting the 7 or astoria to the 63st tunnel. Would that decrease the amount of TPH or increase it?
It relocates the problem from Queensboro Plaza to either 57th-7th or 47th-50th and Sixth, but it doesn't eliminate it, snice those lines would have to share trackage with another line once they got into Manhattan. Only a brand new East River tunnel or a rebuilt and widened Steinway tunnel would give you the same capacity with the B Division you get now with the A Division trains having their own stand-alone route.
In spite of your handle I have have a feeling you are a newbie to NYC Subway railfanning.
The #7 was B1 for operational purposes only because it is not physically connected to the rest of A division (IRT). Operationally menaing: Radio frequency and other "paperwork" reasons. Otherwise it was, is and always will be IRT.
As you will see in other posts the Flushing line started out as IRT. In fact the Astoria line was originally IRT.
The Flushing line was, is, and hopefully always will be IRT (well, now it's "A division"), including the entire 20th Century from 1915 on. And in fact the Astoria Line was IRT in the earlier part of the 20th Century.
:-) Andrew
Ask yourself whether 7 is a letter or a number.
;-) Andrew
Queens Astoria uses the IRT system for booth numbers(Rnnn -- n is a number). The 7 Lines uses the IND channel for radio communicatiosna dn contacts the IND Desk rather than the IRT.
what the *? why is the 7 IND it never was at anypoint IND?
I guess they use the IND radio channel since it wouild be the only IRT in Queens.
Only on its radio frequency. In all other aspects the 7 is IRT, even though its only connection to the rest of the system is to the BMT N line at Queensboro Plaza.
Build the 2nd ave subway is better and it will serve more people not rebuilding the 7. Though I must admit it is a major line.
The change in width would not be noticeable. If the Flushing line were converted for B division service it would be exactly like the Astoria line--that was built during the Dual Contracts and operated jointly by the IRT and BMT for several decades during which time all cars on both the Flushing and Astoria lines were IRT dimensions, as were the platforms along 31st Street. When the Astoria line became B-division, the platforms were shaved back to allow for the B-division cars to run. They had designed both lines to allow 10 foot wide cars operating on them, so the Flushing el would have no problem if we shaved back the platforms. The problem lies in getting the trains to Manhattan. The Steinway tunnels are far too small for any B-division rolling stock and enlarging them would be prohibitively expensive and not terribly useful.
Perhaps if we rebuilt the north half of Queensboro Plaza and had tracks run west along Queens Plaza North to Queensbridge and then drop down to join the 63rd St. tunnel, it might be possible then. That change would force abandonment of the Steinway tunnels and stations beyond in Manhattan unless some way to run both A and B division rolling stock on the same line could be found, possibly along the lines of the second set of tracks in each station that are closer to the platform, allowing A-division stock to contact the platforms.
Dan
Perhaps if we rebuilt the north half of Queensboro Plaza and had tracks run west along Queens Plaza North to Queensbridge and then drop down to join the 63rd St. tunnel, it might be possible then. That change would force abandonment of the Steinway tunnels and stations beyond in Manhattan ....
Which means we could then use the Steinway tunnels for AirTrain to JFK [grin], which would end them up at both Grand Central and (close to) the Port Authority Bus Terminal.
I remember a Port Authority guy saying their dream route for AirTrain was to use the Steinway tunnels. This was back when they were still thinking about running them across the QB bridge and terminating them under the old Alexander's site.
Anyone know if AirTrain rolling stock would fit through the Steinway tunnels? If not, then perhaps he was talking through his hat -- though at that point they hadn't done an RFP for the rolling stock, so they could have built it to fit.
This would REALLY be good! The Port Authority could use the nearly-abandoned inner Montauk LIRR branch and connect it to the Steinway Tunnel in Long Island City (because the Flushing line would be converted to B-division service and be running in the 60th Street Tunnel). Not only would it give people who arrive at JFK direct access to Manhattan, it would put them right in the heart of the city. Best of all, the Montauk branch crosses over the Van Wyck Expressway. The PA would be getting a link to Manhattan for the Airtrain on an already existing right-of way. How great is that?
Well, let's not get carried away here. I don't think diverting one of the the busiest single subway line into the 60th Street tunnel would accomplish much more than reducing subway capacity across the East River. You want a straphangers' riot on your hands?
If AirTrain is to be extended across the East River, it will happen after LIRR's 63rd St tunnel is activated (that won't be for another 10 years).
Would it really? When I suggested rerouting the Flushing Line into the 60th Street tunnel, I also suggested rerouting the Queens Blvd/Broadway service into the 63rd Street. So it would be like this:
N - Astoria through 60th Street tunnel
Q - Forest Hills Local through 63rd Street tunnel. Replaces R on
Queens Blvd.
R - Flushing Local and Express through 60th Street tunnel. Replaces 7
on Rossevelt Avenue.
7 - Replaced by R in Queens, replaced by Airtrain in Manhattan and
LIC. 45th Road and Hunters Point Stations in LIC would be
abandoned.
Headways would probably be somewhat shorter on the new Flushing R service than on the present Flushing 7 service, due to the presence of Astoria N trains in the 60th Street tunnel. But I would think that the larger B-division cars would more than make up for that. Is there anything else about the Flushing Line that I should take into account?
The combined N and W run at about 15 tph (rush hours). Assuming, for the sake of argument, that an arbitrary section of track has a 30 tph capacity, that leaves 15 tph for the Flushing line (local and express combined), or eight-minute headways at local stations. That's half the current service. I'm afraid B Division trains would have to be twice as large as A Division trains for this to work -- and even then, this would still be a service cut, since waits out in the cold would double.
Your plan crowds the six Astoria tracks and six Flushing tracks into two tracks under the river while giving AirTrain its own dedicated pair of tracks. Do you really think that makes any sense at all?
If you could somehow swap the Astoria and Flushing lines in the current configuration, with the 7 to Astoria and the N/W to Flushing, that might fly (although the R would have to run via 63rd and express on Broadway to leave room for a full 30 tph on the local from Flushing). But how would you (efficiently) cross paths at Queensboro Plaza?
Which train goes to 95 St/Fort Hamilton? Does the R continue to do that under this scheme?
Sure, why not?
Just wondering...
The Astoria and Flushing lines are three tracks each, not six. It would have been six into two, not twelve into two.
But it doesn't make sense and I see exactly why from all the responses I got to my posts. I now agree that the Flushing line should remain A-division.
Sorry, yes, this is what I meant to type: "Your plan crowds the six Astoria and Flushing tracks into two tracks under the river while giving AirTrain its own dedicated pair of tracks."
It's an interesting idea, but I don't see how it would be workable.
I have to agree with you 100% on this one, Dave.
The world must be coming to an end.
It is. The sun is going supernova in about a billion years.
Will the monthly Metrocard still be $63 by then?
:0)
Will the 2nd Avenue subway be built by then?
It'll be running Mag-lev cars with individual beam-transporters for short trips.
Germay's system sucks if the emergency battery fails the train will crash, but japans has wheels on the bottom so if for some reason there is no power whatsoever, it will fall on it's wheels.
Did I say Japan's reached a Higher maximum speed that Germanys.
Replaced by remote fiber optic replication. They send a atomic scan of you to another place and you wake up over there.
I' not saying Queens doesn't need additional subway capacity. It does, of course. The new 63rd St line opening Sunday helps by adding capacity into Manhattan and redistributing passenger loads - but, truth be told, it isn't enough. The "7" is crowded and we do need more.
One way to add capacity would be to create a new lower level tunnel underneath the Steinway tunnel. The subway using this tunnel, which would serve Times Square and Grand Central, would diverge away from the "7" train in Long Island City, and go its own way into Northern Queens.
Another, less expensive way, would be to add service via a new diversion from the 63rd St tunnel. This train, sharing tunnel space with the "F," would then proceed in a new tunnel to East Elmhurst, providing badly needed subway service there.
Some of you have suggested that this diversion could terminate at La Guardia Airport, and I agree that would be useful.
A 63rd St. connection to the Lower Montauk LIRR branch's ROW would still be workable, if you extended the Q train past 57th-7th and ran it on the new route, which could then be hooked back into either the E tracks or the J tracks along Archer Ave. in Jamaica (I'm making this proposal assuming a NIMBY-free fantasy world along the LIRR line in Maspeth, or course, where no one would ever think of filing a lawsuit to stop the line like they did 30 years ago...)
A 63rd St. connection to the Lower Montauk LIRR branch's ROW would still be workable
And, from reading the DEIS 10 years ago, the LIC end of the 63rd Street tunnel was built with a bellmouth leading to the boundary of Sunnyside Yard for that or other possibilities.
(Peter Dougherty: Don't forget this one for your nascent section on bellmouths!)
Also the people of Glendale always "Lay in front of trains" everytime the LIRR used the lower Montauk for construction diversions. You would think they would wany direct subway access. The lower Montauk converted to a subway line would give so many areas direct subway access, that don't have it now. It couldn't cost that much because the ROW is already there. There is plenty in most spotsto keep the freight track along this route also.
Yeah well, there are always troublemakers everywhere...
But we know it's frequently the 10% which ruin it for the other 90%. Every time I hear about it I have to wonder whether this is another example of a few ignorant loudmouths imposing their dictatorial will on their neighbors.
Of course, if that's really the case and the neighbors don't like the NIMBY among them, it's up to them stop being wusses and stand up for what they want.
Of course, if that's really the case and the neighbors don't like the NIMBY among them, it's up to them stop being wusses and stand up for what they want.
Of course it's the neigbours' democratic right to bear arms ;) Pity the lawyers would have it otherwise! Oops, I'm sounding like a Republican!
Do this the line is abandoned literaly, Build more station and establish a Express/Local system and call it a subway. It has connectins to the 7, G, M, JZ, EJZ. perfect and it will bring the "people within one mile of a subway" up that no other current proposed project could do (even if they left the planning/impact study stage). Also you could extend the M line to Roosevelt Station and put that abondoned upper leval to good use.
Do this the line is abandoned literaly, Build more station and establish a Express/Local system and call it a subway
It is used quite a bit for freight, however. I don't think it would be feasible to abandon all railroad traffic to the subway, especially now that they are trying to increase freight. It would be great though if they could build the subway line along the Row, if there is enough room.
Build one more track for fright!
Whom do you plan to scare?
Arti
There's actually a report right here on NYCsubway.org that deals with overcrowding on the E, F, N, R and 7 lines and offers several ideas to alleviate it, including "3 & 1 service" (3 tracks to & 1 track from Manhattan during AM rush) on the Queens Blvd line, running longer trains (including 14-car trains on the 7). It also some sort of premium-fare subway from Port Washington, LI into the 63rd Street Tunnel.
The URL is www.bts.gov/smart/cat/queen.html. You can also access it through the New York City transit-related web sites link. The report was done several years ago, so I don't know how well their suggestions will play into the current subway patterns, especially considering that the Broadway express tracks are now back in service.
I had heard about the 3+1 plan. It is already in use on other rail systems, and it's not a bad idea.
Te devil is in the details, of course. But it can be done.
It would (rightfully) get the reverse commuters quite angry. That's a long ride with no express service at all.
You're right in that this plan would not please everyone.
If the TA were to do it, the agency would have to carefully gauge reaction. In New York, that means taking the time to figure out whether something is truly a problem for a lot of people, or at least a significant minority presenting a legitimate gripe (like the complints about insufficient service at stops between 179 and Union Turnpike right after Archer Av opened???), versus a few people with verbal diarrhea who will ultimately go away on thir own, with or without being offered pacifiers to suck on (AirTrain being a classic example).
I am not implying that I believe the latter to be the case here. I'm just saying that is what the TA has to discern.
Build a supper express with maglev tech and standard gauge support.
A express from midtown Manhatten to a airport, alla "Train to The Plane". It will take a really big bite out of the taxi market.
A express from midtown Manhatten to a airport, alla "Train to The Plane". It will take a really big bite out of the taxi market.
I disagree. It'll get overseas tourists from the PA buses, plus a bunch of JFK employees, but the folks who take taxis or car services to JFK will continue to do so.
What really would have gotten the taxi people up in arms would have been an announcement that the LIRR Rockaway would be redeveloped and put to use for expresses out of Penn Station to JFK. Just think, Midtown to the airport in 25 minutes tops? And for $3.75 since you're still in the City Zone? That would have the potential to really bite into the taxi market. But it will never happen, though. First there's convincing frequent flyers to take the real "Train to the Plane," a hard bargain in it of itself. Then there's convincing the communities along the right of way that there will be minimal noise pollution during reconstruction and service along the line, as well as the beneifts (which will probably be minimal at best) from the exsistence of the line. Finally, there has got to be agreement between the MTA and PA on such a line, which there will not be since the PA has no interest (much less than good feelings) in having the rival MTA enter their turf.
Then why is the MTA allowing the PA to build the AirTrain?
Why is the MTA allowing me to make this post?
Simple: The MTA has no say in either matter.
If you want to raise your own funds and build your own rail line, the MTA won't object.
On MTA property! The JFK station has the Air train tracks directly over it!
There is no point to activating a Rockaway ROW without sufficient tunnel capacity into Manhattan (which East Side Access will fix, but not for ten years or so). The Rockaway ROW is much closer to people's homes than AirTrain is and would have to deal with ROW encroachment. The MTA has other priorities and insufficient funding for them as it is. Rockaway line NIMBYs, I hate to admit, would have legitimate gripes. If the ROW were permanently abandoned and given over to bike trails, jogging paths, parkland and some new housing, we wouldn't have lost anything.
AirTrain had appropriate ROW, an agency with a mission and a budget, and two very good places to hook up to in Queens. It also didn't have a big NIMBY problem (24 people out of 600,000 voiced opposition to it and were run over). It was also built with very minimal disruption, so minimal than even people along the ROW called into hotlines to say the PA had done a great job.
You're making too much of the PA-MTA "hostilities." There's a lot of that on Subtalk, and it's not much more than rumor.
Cutting the income of my Hindu Brethren...hence, more new Car inspectors who have to be 'clean shaven' and wear blue plastic helmets. IloveanGodBlessemallthankyouverrymuch. CI Peter
As I said before,shift all service to the Sunnyside yards[a massive new station for 60th and 63rd st services] with the 7 going to Astoria and the other two going to Flushing,and Jamaica.
Insulated and heated little waiting areas.
IMHO it would only work (and have any merit), if Flushing would be served via 60th St. tube EXCLUSEVLY, ie. no QB service. At the same time Astoria would be IRT territory. Perhaps that would leave some capacity in Steinway Tubes for Airtrain.
Arti
What is the story with the 63rd St LIRR Tunnels? If I recall, they were built under the NYCTA tunnels, correct? I remember watching something about that project on the Discovery channel last year.
Do the tunnels connect with anything in Manhattan or Queens yet? What is the ETA on project completion - assuming there is a project...
Any track maps online?
JR
The LIRR 63rd St tunnel extends from 2nd Av/63rd St to the Sunnyside Yard in Queens. The MTA is currently demolishing old structres in the Yard and preparing to to do an open-cut style project to extend the tunnels to connect to the main line + the Port Wash. branch. That's an active project, underway now.
The Manhattan side is the more difficult part. To my knowledge, nothing's been done there yet. Major Capital funds must be committed first. The Capital Plan includes funds, so the construction contracts for Manhattan may come soon.
Do you know if they are planning on linking up to GCT or Penn Station?
I think hey should build an LIRR station/terminus between 63rd St/Lex and 59th St/Lex with a connection to the F,N/R/W,4/5/6 and take that opportunity to build a connection between 63rd and 59th NYCTA stations.
This would only require a slight turn South from the present tunnel, and a few tail tracks or a lay-up west of the station.
This would put the LIRR line in service faster (and cheaper) than tunneling to Park Ave/Metro-North Approach or Penn Station.
Short term cheap doesn't do it. GCT has excess capacity, space that makes the rush hour conga line much more efficient. And it *is* GCT, with transfers to other suburban and inter-urban trains.
Connecting GC and Penn also makes some sense, but certainly not until they get an extra pair of tunnels under the Hudson.
Short term cheap doesn't do it. GCT has excess capacity, space that makes the rush hour conga line much more efficient. And it *is* GCT, with transfers to other suburban and inter-urban trains.
Yes, GCT is the obvious and easiest choice, but I was trying to find an interesting alternative that might be beneficial to NYCT and LIRR. The question is, where would those LIRR riders be commuting to? I know Hunter College is up there - CUNY Colleges get a lot of Long Island students. It's also close to Central Park - whatever draw that may be...
Who knows?
Connecting GC and Penn also makes some sense, but certainly not until they get an extra pair of tunnels under the Hudson.
It does make some sense, but I wonder if it is worth the expenses involved. I'm also a little scared about how crowded the 4/5/6 lines would become if 50%(?) of the LIRR Penn riders got off there.
Even if the two are not connected, they need another set under the Hudson. The current situation is a disaster waiting to happen. It's too vulnerable to break-downs that can back up the entire system.
I believe most of the people that currently use LIRR's Hunterspoint Terminal will use the new LIRR service to Grand Central. There are a lot of riders that use Hunterspoint Ave, so the connection will save them time. I would assume Hunterspoint Ave will be abandoned, because I believe a new Sunnyside station will open to accomadate the fraction of riders that used Hunterspoint Ave as a Queens destination, as opposed to go to the Easst side of Manhattan.
The 63rd St tunnel is intended for GCT.
The DEIS/FEIS and engineering plans filed include a deep-bore tunnel turning south under existing Park Av Metro-North tracks, terminating in a new LIRR station underneath the Metro-North platforms. This is designed not to interfere with Metro-North operations, so you don't get delayed Metro-North trains on the four main Park Av tracks while LIRR trains have to cross over switches and merge.
Now I see why it will take so long to complete.
This sounds like a good plan that will add service to the existing system, and won't take away or hinder any other services.
terminating in a new LIRR station underneath the Metro-North platforms.]
I thought that they were to use the lower level og GC, have the plans changed?
Arti
This is a net decrease in Queens subway service. Even if you convert the Flushing line to IND standards, the modest increase in capacity does not make up for what is lost.
I remember a Port Authority guy saying their dream route for AirTrain was to use the Steinway tunnels. This was back when they were still thinking about running them across the QB bridge and terminating them under the old Alexander's site.
The QB bridge could not handle the weight of the AirTrain. Anybody with any kind of fleeting knowledge of this bridge's structural history knew that. This made the PA's original proposal a pipe dream.
Based on the patronage levels for O'Hare and Midway, the AirTrain will attract around 8000 daily patrons or around 3 million a year. This use would place it on a par with the 28th St local station on the 7th Ave line.
However, JFK will not be a little used station on a line. It will be the only station. How practical is it to build a dedicated facility for 8000 daily passengers? The Williamsburg Bridge carries 25,000 passengers into the City during the morning rush hours alone. Its long term viability as a transit link has been questioned. If anybody proposed building a new facility for an order of magnitude fewer passengers they would be laughed at. The only reason nobody laughed at AirTrain is that they brought $1 billion to the table.
"Based on the patronage levels for O'Hare and Midway, the AirTrain will attract around 8000 daily patrons or around 3 million
a year. This use would place it on a par with the 28th St local station on the 7th Ave line."
"However, JFK will not be a little used station on a line. It will be the only station. How practical is it to build a dedicated facility
for 8000 daily passengers? The Williamsburg Bridge carries 25,000 passengers into the City during the morning rush hours
alone. Its long term viability as a transit link has been questioned. If anybody proposed building a new facility for an order of
magnitude fewer passengers they would be laughed at. The only reason nobody laughed at AirTrain is that they brought $1
billion to the table. "
A classic Baumism - perform a narrow analysis, excluding anything which might derail a predetermined conclusion, then criticize without the facts in hand.
... perform a narrow analysis, excluding anything which might derail a predetermined conclusion
What facts were omitted?
Will there be intermediate stops between JFK and either Howard Beach or Jamaica?
Will the line connect beyond Howard Beach or Jamaica?
Is the use of the O'Hare or Midway Stations greater than 8000/day?
Do the Williamsburg Bridge lines carry more than 25,000 passengers between 7 and 10 AM weekday mornings?
...then criticize without the facts in hand.
Which facts did I miss?
The ideological bias that the needs of a relatively few airport users should come before all others, even if this means cutting capacity elsewhere the subway system.
"What facts were omitted?"
Anything which might indicate that O'Hare is not necessarily a good point of comparison for AirTrain. Such as: New York has more than twice the population of Chicago and much heavier rail ridership overall; such as O'Hare playing a much heavier role as a hub airport (eg many more people traveling from one flight to another and not leaving the airport) than JFK does; and others.
It's OK. I'm used to your bursts of intellectual dishonesty. You speak first, think later...
Anything which might indicate that O'Hare is not necessarily a good point of comparison for AirTrain. Such as: New York has more than twice the population of Chicago and much heavier rail ridership overall; such as O'Hare playing a much heavier role as a hub airport (eg many more people traveling from one flight to another and not leaving the airport) than JFK does; and others.
Which airport has more passengers?
JFK has more passengers for whom the airport is a destination, rather than a transfer stop, than O'Hare does. I'm not sure of the exact figures, but I seem to recall reading recently that 90% of the passenger count at O'Hare is passengers who are transferring from one flight to another, vs. 20% at JFK. Anyone have the exact figures?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
JFK has more passengers for whom the airport is a destination, rather than a transfer stop, than O'Hare does. I'm not sure of the exact figures, but I seem to recall reading recently that 90% of the passenger count at O'Hare is passengers who are transferring from one flight to another, vs. 20% at JFK. Anyone have the exact figures?
I have not seen such figures and I'd be very much interested to see such data.
Such data would appear to fail a sanity check. You are saying that only 10% of the passengers ever leave the O'Hare terminal. That means that the surrounding community has to spend a dollar to get back each dime's worth of tourist trade. I don't care how much they charge for shirts at the airport stores. That's a worse return than NYC residents get on their state and federal taxes.
I'll keep an open mind but there are other contrary indicators, e.g. a comparison of the number of hotel rooms and other tourist facilities.
Good for you, Stephen.
AirTrain usage will display a pattern (or more than one pattern) in the coming months and years. There will be plenty of good data for you to analyze and post about here (and I'll be interested to read what you post).
AirTrain usage will display a pattern (or more than one pattern) in the coming months and years. There will be plenty of good data for you to analyze and post about here (and I'll be interested to read what you post).
At $1 billion AirTrain is a very expensive mechanism for gathering usage data.
"At $1 billion AirTrain is a very expensive mechanism for gathering usage data."
First, it's $1.5 billion. Second, don't kick a gift horse in the mouth. Just enjoy it.
Not really. Divide that $1,000,000,000 by the population of New York, then see if you have a figure to grumble about. It's not even worth the NIMBYs' lawyers fees!
>>>Perhaps if we rebuilt the north half of Queensboro Plaza and had tracks run west along Queens Plaza North to Queensbridge and then drop down to join the 63rd St. tunnel, it might be possible then.<<<
Or the Flushing Line could be connected to the 60th Street Tunnel and the R could replace the 7 to Flushing. The Q could run through the 63rd Street Tunnel and take the R's place to Forest Hills. The larger B-division trains would definitely handle the crowds along the Flushing much better than the smaller A-divsion cars. Don't forget, a BMT/IND train of eight 75-foot cars or ten 60-foot cars is 90 feet longer than an IRT train of eleven 51-foot cars. And Flushing line riders would have direct access to more of Manhattan. I really think the Flushing Line should be converted to B-division service. And it wouldn't be too hard to do it.
>>>90 feet longer than an IRT train of eleven 51-foot cars.<<<
Sorry, that should read "39 feet longer than a train of eleven 51-foot cars" except during July and August when 7 trains run with ten cars.
The merge with other lines in the 60th or 63rd St. tunnels or at 57th-7th is what kills the idea of running the B Division to Flushing.
Say you build a ramp down to the 63rd St. tunnel and run the Q to Flushing via Broadway. When it gets into the 63rd St. tunnel it has to merge with the F, which has to run at least 15 trains per hour for the jammed Queens Blvd service. That leaves the Q with only 15 trains per hour to run to Flushing, which is a 50 percent drop in service from the current 30 TPH maximum of the No. 7 train. And no matter how much wider and how much longer the B Division trains are (and an ll-car IRT train on the No. 7 is only 39 feet shorter than a 10-car train on B Division 60-footers, not 90 feet) there's no way you can make up for a 50 percent loss of service into Manhattan.
Even if you split the run and sent 15 trains per hour through 60th St. and 15 trains through 63rd to Flushing, you would either have to cut N service to Astoria or R service to Continental to make up the difference. And expanding the Queensboro Plaza station back to its pre-1949 size to turn Flushing trains there is a non-starter; unless they want to change at QP, riders between 33rd-Rawson and Main Street aren't going to want to be forced to change trains from the (presumed) diamond Q to the circle Q or to a IRT Steinway tunnel shuttle between the Plaza station and Times Square. Just try standing on the platform at Willets Point or 82nd St. on a cold January day and telling the boarding passengers "But you'll like it, these are wider and longer cars that will more than make up for you having to get off and change trains and extra time on an elevated platform at Queensboro Plaza." The crowd will stuff you head first inside ome of the MVMs.
Even if you built a flying junction east of Queensboro Plaza and ran the 7 to Astoria and the N and W to Flushing, you would still be dealing with a service reduction, because the B Division trains still have to share the 60th St. tunnel with the R. The BEST you could hope for would be to boost N and W rush hour service up to 10-12 TPH each through 60th St., cut the R service to about 8-10 TPH and run half of the service through 60th St. and half through 63rd tunnel with the F train. That would be only a 20 percent service reduction on the Flushing line in TPH, which might be made up by the larger capacity B Division trains, but you would still have to figure out what to do with the merge between the N W, R and the Q train at 57th-7th, unless you put the Q back on Sixth Ave., which then cuts B and D service.
Unless you either build a brand new tunnel to Manhattan or expand the Steinway tunnel to B Division specs, there's no way to run the Flushing Line on the IND/BMT lines without cutting service. You're more likely to see an N extension to Willets Point via Astoria and LaGuardia Airport than you are to seeing the Flushing line go B Division any time in the future.
Well I did suggest running the Q through 63rd and as the Queens Blvd Local in place of the R, but then it would have to share it with the F, which could create delays given how many trains use the Queens Blvd Line during rush hours. And if the R were rerouted to Flushing, replacing the 7, it would still have to share the 60th Street tunnel with the N/W. I know the 7 runs frequently during rush hours, but wow, a max of 30 TPH, that's a lot. I also know that the N/R/W run between Times Square and Lex/59th can be slow at times. Trains do get delayed there because you have three lines running there. I can see how if those R trains went to Flushing, it would cause much bigger headaches for Flushing line riders. All right, definitely leave Flushing the way it is, except to replace the Redbirds with new (or newer) A-division cars.
Just out of curiosity, how many trains per hour run on the N, R and W lines now? And couldn't a second line (other than Flushing) share the 63rd Street tunnel with the F's 15 TPH? The F currently has the Rutgers Street tunnel all to itself, and that tunnel is considered "underutilized."
IIRC, the 60th St. tunnel handles 24 TPH during rush hour, which I guess for now has to be split between three lines, the N/R/W. As for 63rd St., there's certainly capacity for another line, but there's no place for it to go once it gets to either 47th-50th in Manhattan or 36th St. in Queens, since the V is going to share tracks with the F on Sixth Ave. and the R in Queens, while the F and E are on the express tracks there.
But the lack of shared line in the Rutgers tunnel does make a case for eventually extending the V to Church Ave. to restore Culver F express service in Brooklyn, if and when they finally get enough B Division cars in service.
Let me go on record saying I'm very against converting the (7) to B-division. IRT is just part of its identity--and after all it's the only one Queens has! It would be a shame to take away such a large part of its uniqueness. Yeah, it's irrational, and since I'm a Queens man and an IRT fan, but hey we all have our prejudices.
Anyway, step back from this a second. It would be impossible to do this reasonably without major construction. And it would do very, very little to increase capacity---in the end you'd LOSE capacity under the East River (unless you converted the Steinway to B-div--but that's A LOT of money and A LOT of work for not that much capacity.) The money would be much, much better spend BUILDING NEW LINES.
Heck---the other Queens trains connect directly with all the major north-south B-division lines in Manhattan anyway. If you were going to connect the (7) to a north-south line, a track connection to its fellow IRTs is really more needed for Queens riders.
And it would do very, very little to increase capacity---in the end you'd LOSE capacity under the East River (unless you converted the Steinway to B-div--but that's A LOT of money and A LOT of work for not that much capacity.) The money would be much, much better spend BUILDING NEW LINES.
Converting to B Division cars and 600' long trains would result in an 19% increase in capacity. They are currently running a max of 30 tph on the Flushing Line. They previously ran 36 tph on the same line with the same signal system. If they were to return to previous service levels, it would represent a 20% service level increase.
Building new lines is not the only alternative. Operating existing lines at higher service levels is another.
The money would be better spent extending the 7 to New Jersey.
And Newerk Airport with High Speed acess to midtown manhatten.
Hey when do you learn that it's ManhattAn.
Arti
First I'am the worst speller in NYC, next this keyboard was made for a 4 year olds hands!
Rest of your spelling aside (takes a funny twist sometimes), but it would be nice to know the correct name of borough of NYC.
Arti
Some ideas:
Upgrade only the express tracks of the 7 to B division spec.
Upgrade queensbrogh plaza station to handle the crosssing over
of the express tracks while allowing the local tracks to remain
and bringing a link to the queenbridge station(I think that is the name)
Enclose and insulate the upgraded express stations. (they are freezing now and it looks like no work what so ever has been done to use passive climate control (ex: put in a bit of fiberglass in a wall out side the northern track and double pane glass on the southern walls with doors into the subway station)
Reduce the R's to 6 TPS and have the new 7's dead end north of canal.
This should upgrade available space out to flushing and increase the number of trains through 60th street.
Problem is that Flushing line has only one express track.
Arti
yes, I forgot.. (take the 7 mostly from Times Square to HP)
but what about cross overs and backs before the express stations.
This would require people running the line to be on their toes a bit
but still could be done safely.
ex: send the outbound to local track while inbound passes by.
rebuild that crumbling el to heavy concreate with solid beam/gerder construction, not the rivited together 1 foot segments that they call beams. Also if you build a double deck (express on top, Local on botom) el there will be more light reaching the street.
That wouldn't work either. B divison cars are wider, the car body juts out from the trucks farther than A division cars. You would have to chop the edge of every platform.
The El portion from Queensboro Plaza to Main St was designed to Div B standards. The original concrete platforms were designed for easy conversion. The platform replacements since the 1960's removed this option. The only surviving platforms with 6" extenders are 111th and Willets Pt.
Remember there is one station where the clearance is less than 1 foot. Guess what will happen then. You would need to rebuild the station and then you might as well put it underground or make it a 4 track line (it should have been one from the start).
You're sure right that the B division cars would get destryoed in the Steinway tunnel(s). They were originally designed to handle trolley cars which are certainly narrower than "B" division subway cars.
#3 West End Jeff
>>> That line should be converted back to B-Division ops. <<<
Back??? The 7 line has never been in the B Division, and was always with IRT specifications prior to unification.
Tom
The Flushing/Astoria lines were jointly operated by the BMT and IRT at one time. In those days the subway cars had end vestibules. Th
Those BMT cars were able to operate over IRT stations.
I think that the Astoria line was renovated to BMT specifications when there was no longer joint operations.
.......LOL.......!!
THE r -142s they R A Breakin down already .....break on down ........lol!!
!@# Shit...they didn't break down, how about you read responses!!! They are incompatible with the 7 line structure. Wait I can smell it, no railfan window? Yes! I'm right!
Dont have a cow man !! ...sorry your new JUNK failed ...lol!!!
should have used a r 62 ...eh ?? ......!
When you say it 10,000 times people get tired of hearing crap spew out of your damn mouth. PHOOEY. Hehehe. Lol!
-Stef
allright ......gee..!!! chill out man ...@ at least it is ( on topic ) ....lol!!
Can you voice your opion in a non-violent way?
wait til SOUTH FERRY posts !! then U will really git'... mad ....lol!!
You are getting worse than Railfan Pete.
...lol !
man U cant run that R -142 Junk on my # 7 line ....lol !! ...dis' is whassuuuupp !!!.....lol
now thats a real .....lol!!!
That picture is awful. What on earth did you do to the colours?
-Robert King
AHHHHHH.......Sunnyside isn't complete without a rusting Redbird clanking on the El. Isn't it beautiful?
can you imagine the good old R 15s & R12s ?? & or the low vs - high vs ?? Now thats when the subway was a subway ...lol!!
Truer words seldom spoken.
1SF9
Dis'- is De'- only " thang " should run on the # 7 line ( my soul brother in NYC ) !!!
NOW THATS A REAL ....>>>LOL ...!!
Rmadillos... So bad.... even the third rail
on the Flushing line dont wanna touch 'em...
YEA ! the R -142 " Jumping Armidillos " they R dead on arrival !!!
Cant even keep contact on the third rail !!!!
LOL !!!! HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!
he he he he he he he he he he !!!
.........!
YEA ! the R -142 " Jumping Armidillos " they R dead on arrival !!!
Cant even keep contact on the third rail !!!!
LOL !!!! HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!
he he he he he he he he he he !!!
.........!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shoe beams are far more tolerant than current collectors (Redbirds versus R142s.) However, dropping a worn brake shoe from a Redbird and catching it with a finger as it hits the rail is far more painful than a sliver of metal from a R142. R142As may not fair well either as the third rail paddle is very small. CI Peter
by the way I am just joking & jiving about those r-142s !! ( the junkers they R & so dammed ugly! ) ....lol!!
But it is an puzzle to me why a new piec of equipment boasting of such high tech is such a flop etc... lol!!
may i make another comment on your post ??
{ OUCH } i dont want to put my hands there ...lol!!
LOL!!
Always love your pics. Important lesson reminded: check the pit an let um fall...dey be broken anyway. CI Peter
You know I must keep that in mind...got to be more careful .. lol !!
GREEN LINE IN LOS ANGELES AIRPORT STATION ...lol!!
oh yes ... by the way tell trevor I am the #1 WESTCOAST Transit Photographer out here !!
I still stand ready to whip his man BIG TIME hands down !!! ....lol !!!
LOL !!! .....................LOL!!!
same station airport I 105 los angeles green line
with a digital camera ...
LOL ....!!!
by the way I am just joking & jiving about those r-142s !! ( the junkers they R & so dammed ugly! ) ....lol!!
But it is a puzzle to me why a new piece of equipment boasting of such high tech is such a flop etc... lol!!
may i make another comment on your post ??
{ OUCH } i dont want to put my hands there ...lol!!
LOL!!
But Metro norths (blue ones) are thinner and on one train I say 3 broken shoes.
This is JPEG at quality leval 20. Please post the TIFF.
Digital camera. Over saturated.
I thought they decided to use R-62s on the 7.
Anybody who thought anything about future car assigments on the Flushing Line "thought wrong." NO DECISION HAS BEEN MADE!!!!!
David
two tours are scheduled next week on the 19th and 20th. One is of the 6th avenue IND, I don't know the other.
What is the cost of one R-143 car, I heard something like $1.1billion.
1.1 billion? I doubt it, the city would go bankrupt.
It's about $1.2 million dollars per car.
just curious.
You need to upload it to a webserver somewhere, then add a link here like this:
< img src= " http://www.yourwebserver.com/yourimage.jpg " >
What about putting in a link to another site or an article when posting messages? Also do you know how to do colored text in messages?
thats a good question !!
I can post the pics but not the links ....as of yet ...
You would put in a link like this:
(but without the spaces after < and before >)
< a href="http//www.yahoo.com/" >YAHOO< /a >
would be:
YAHOO
< font color="red" >Red text here,< /font >< font color="green" > green text here.< /font >
would be:
Red text here, green text here.
On the road tonight, R-142As 7556-65 are doing road simulations as I speak.
-Stef
6800 R-142 cars were seen on the freight rail this weekend.
You made me think for a second that 6,800 R-142 cars were seen on the freight rail. :-) YAY! 5 Line will see them soon!
6796-6800 are the lastest to be delivered.
-Stef
Let's throw in R-142s to the mix - Cars 6736-40 and Cars 6786-90 are now testing on the 2.
-Stef
i thought i saw it this mourning
Nope! Not carrying passengers yet. BUT, Cars 6726-30 are in service for the week of 12/9 and are coupled to 6561-65.
-Stef
i saw that this mouring for real
2[seventh Ave express]
R142MAN
And more....according to my 'todays' foreman, 100 R142s are on the property which are not ready, TA hasn't accepted any new deliveries, the R142 project is at least six years old, looks like Kawasaki will have extended orders and everyone will have plenty of good work in the future. Pelhams crew is starting to get R142 training...they may have a mix of R142s/142As and Redbirds. The Redbirds, tired as we all are of them, continue to be 'reliable.' CI Peter
Please advise what happened to the R -62 A's assigned to the # 6 line.
Have they been transferred yet to the # 7
Thank You
I just fiximup...other posters know better than me! Only R62 series I remember being in...tows garbage flats. CI Peter
The #7 is purely Redbirds and will be until...it isn't.
David
Did they ever come up with a solution to the 11-car #7 train with R-62s?
There was discussion of "divorcing" some married pairs or just going with 10-car trains.
Thanks,
Chip
AFAIK a single R-62A can be coupled to two 5-car sets. Or they could rework some 5-car sets into 6-car sets.
Hey Juice,
Did you get any malfunctioning R-142s in the barn yesterday? 6521-25 and 6661-65 appeared to have broken down, and ran uptown light, with the Train Operator running other than head end. Know anything?
-Stef
Stef:
That train had braking problems at 18St. Control ordered the train to be discharged and run light. I was in Times Square signing out when it came over the radio. The dispatcher was not in a happy mood to say the least. There were two trains stuck behind it.
That would explain everything. Well, these things happen.......
-Stef
I'm doing Redbirds for 180th Street...try to ck ur posts...but am I busy now!!!! CI Peter
Is there a way I can view the pictures of the other contestants (If Any) that have submitted any work to the Photo Contest??
No.
(For a while it was possible but that was unintentional on my part. You don't get to see the competition.)
Do you plan on posting the entries after the contest ends?
Will you be incorporating some of them into existing sections of the site?
I was at Jay Street IND today, and noticed that R10 ball had extremely bright yellow and green lamps, which snapped on fast like an LED array, as opposed to incandescents which light more gradually as the filament heats up.
Also looking at the lens, there was a noticable "Y" shadow pattern to the light source, like it needed some kind of front support bracket, or was actually three sources clustered together.
It looked unusual. Has anyone else seen this, or could someone who knows shed some (ahem) *light* on the subject?
Dave
It's a new array of LED's. At first, they were greener, but then they started looking almost blue. I'll bet it's white LED's they have in there now, insted of green. Behind the green glass (which looks blue in daylight) it looks almost blue. An older type of LED's have been in use on the other platform for years (the first to go up), and LED greens are popping up in variuos places in the system (Lawrence St., 38 Ball at 36th St, etc.
Now at Jay St. what I'm really interested in is the blue bulb right across from the homeball. It is too deep a color to be a flourescent and especially not an incandescent. This one is shaped just like a regular bulb, without a large ballast base, and another one further up the same track at the north end of 42nd St. is shaped somewhat like a compact flourescent, but with a smaller base. I suspect these might be blue LED bulbs. I'm trying to get in contact with the signal department to find out for sure. White LED bulbs that would take the place of regular bulbs cost hundreds of dollars.
but do they last 100's of times longer?
LED's usually last alot longer.
And consume less energy, and don't have problems from turning on and off constantly like fluorescents have.
Fluorescent lighting with electronic ballasts will fail with repeated cycling. Such energy efficient lighting is reserved for car and tunnel illumination. CI Peter
LED signals will last much longer than incandescents, as long
as the line stays clean. They are more fragile in terms of
overvoltage and surge.
Are there any track connections between the any lines on the Boston T? The track map doesn't show any, but could there be any non-T tracks involved?
Every line is independent to one another. That is the main characteristic of the T subway system.
Chaohwa
Every line is independent to one another. That is the main characteristic of the T subway system.
At least one MBTA chaiman lamented that fact. They could have linked the Orange, Green and Blue lines together at the time they built Government Center. They blew that opportunity.
There were some track connections for maintenance in previous years.
Orange --> Green. This was a revenue service. Main Line Elevated trains operated via the Tremont St Subway before the Washington St Subway was completed. (until 1908)
Green-->Red. Via the Watertown line, over the Watertown Bridge and via the Mt Auburn St line to Harvard Sq. Track connection was in the yards. (1954-1958 to service Mattapan Line)
Green-->Orange. Via North Sta out onto Causway St, over Charlestown Bridge and via Main St and Broadway to Everett Yards.(through mid 1960's at least)
Blue-->Red. Via incline onto Charles St, over Longfellow Bridge to meet with Red Line tracks at surface at Commercial St, (until 1952).
Because the equipment is of different size for each line, that is out of the question.
Not necessarily, since all their equipment runs on the same guage. For non-revenue connections built to the specifications of the "lowest common denominator" (the Red Line, in this case), I don't see any technical reasons why trains couldn't share certain non-revenue track connections.
However, I think the question would then be: Why would they want to?
-- David
Chicago, IL
Why would they want to?
Wasn't there talk of buying new cars for the blue line, and moving the old cars to the orange? How would they move the cars over there?
A contract has been awarded to Siemens for the new Blue Line cars. 24 old Blue Line cars will be likely rehabbed and put on the Orange Line as three eight-car trains (Blue Line cars are shorter, so 8 * Blue = 6 * Orange).
More details from the NETransit Web site.
Weekend "G" to Church? I thought it was Saturdays only.
What is the reason for the extension? A long term G.O. on the IND?
Will an extra train be placed in service for the extra 5 stations?
How about this: I recently read on this board about a proposal in Boston to wire the subway tunnels so that cell phone users could make calls while riding underground. If the MTA did this in NYC, then there would be a source of revenue for capital improvements and the like. Yes, I know, all those phone callers making a racket on the trains, but if something happened to delaythe train in the tunnel, being able to call home to advise your family would be something most folk would want. How about it? Who could I contact at the MTA to get them to think about doing it?
DON'T YOU DARE!!
The last thing we need is a car full of people yakking away on their cell phones (I won't go into those annoying rings the phones have). It is bad enough when the trains on outside on the El structure.
The train crews have radios that is enough.
Have to make a call - go out into the street.
The MTA was looking into this a while back but they have higher priorities right now. It would be an expensive propostion for cellular carriers to install microcells and related antenna equipment in the subway system.
Yes, but money spent now will reap profits later. The proliferation of the things could mean a windfall for the MTA. Not to mention the added safety for the riders. It is just an idea for now.
I'd support it. It will be a pain to some, to be sure...
They will consider it a pain until they have to make that important call, and then they will wonder how they could have lived without the service. Never fails.
Whatever gives you the idea that all or even most New Yorkers have cell phones?
All hoes got cell phones in case their clients call. Any ways I would never get them cause by trianglulation (calculate the latency between towers and you get the the phone is (thats how they knock you off in oil countrys))
Are you suggesting that you're involved in some criminal acitvity?
Arti
I just know a little too much?
Do you believe that "X-Files" is a documentary?
Arti
Howabout ethenet port and you pay per megabyte?
Or have a celluer thing in the car and transmit it via third rail or the regualr rails to a central source.
So while all the phone users were busy talking, they wouldn't be paying attention* to their location, missing their stops and blaming the crews? We get enough of that as it is, when they can only be distracted by the other people in the car.
* Recently read an article wherein the author claimed to answer the one-sided conversation of a hands-free phone user. the person on the phone NEVER noticed someone standing near them responding to what they were saying.
* Recently read an article wherein the author claimed to answer the one-sided conversation of a hands-free phone user. the person on the phone NEVER noticed someone standing near them responding to what they were saying.
Heh... I recently ran into my ex-girlfriend on the street; she smiled and said, "Hey! How are you doing?" I answered, asked her the same, and she kept right on walking. Then I noticed the wire going to her ear... :)
But back to the original topic... my personal feelings against cell phones aside, the biggest problem with the plan proposed to the TA was that a single service provider was going to pay to wire the tunnels. Fantastic if you use that service. Sucks if you use their competitor and have to pay exorbitant fees to use your phone in the subway. Should a state agency so overtly play corporate favoritism?
In the world of telecommunications, tarriffs are the rule. If the State decided to go with the provision of wireless access, there could be no monopoly. What would happen is that major carriers would have to set up something like a co-op so that users would not face a roaming charge or surcharge for access. It's not unusual...that's how it works now above ground in areas that your carrier has no equipment. You never know who's picking up your call in rural areas in which you have service...just that it (hopefully) works. CI Peter
If the State decided to go with the provision of wireless access, there could be no monopoly.
Not true. All that would be required would be for the government to put it out for bid as a franchise. Those users who are subscribers of the franchise holder would be in home territory and the others would be in roam. All would have service (assuming their phone is compatible with the network - there are three different digital technologies out there today in the US, plus analog, and not all phones can handle all three types) but those in roam might have to pay roaming fees, depending on their service plan.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The trains are already so overcrowded they have reached crisis levels on many lines. The last thing we need on a cattle car, is for someone to start maneuvering for their cell phone, when there's no room to maneuver to begin with.
Hey Metro-North have Railphone. Its a cool 2.00 a minute groovy.
With all the recent "old is better" talk, I tried to think of some new transit vehicles that were the same or better than the vehicles they replaced for both the riders and railfans. Here are some that I came up with. Please nominate some of your own.
1: The SEPTA M-4 cars. I never got to ride the Almond Joys much, but I feel the M-4's are definitly an improvement. The seats are chusy, the route signs and automated anouncements are fine, you can pass through all the cars, the design looks fine and, perhaps the most important part, they have both a railfan window and a railfan seat. The only bad parts is that they are not made by Budd, and there is no conductor to blow that little whistle thing b4 the train leaves the station.
2: The Breda cars on the Boston Red Line. Although carbon steel trains are always a treat, the 1500's, 1600's and 1700's really didn't do anything for me. The Breda cars had a fine railfan view, and even though it was through two panes of glass, it was much better than the letterbox sized, offset from center view you get on the older cars. Furthermore the preformance was better and the interrior was nicer.
2: The Breda cars on the Boston Red Line. Although carbon steel trains are always a treat, the 1500's, 1600's and 1700's really didn't do anything for me. The Breda cars had a fine railfan view, and even though it was through two panes of glass, it was much better than the letterbox sized, offset from center view you get on the older cars. Furthermore the preformance was better and the interrior was nicer.
I assume you mean the Bombardier 01800's? Those are among my favorite modern subway cars as well.
-- David
Chicago, IL
That's right. Breda made those awful Type VII LRV's.
Kinki made the type 7s, which are fairly good cars. Boeing
made the troublesome LRVs (no type #) and Breda is currently
making the Type 8s, which seem destined to make the Boeing
cars look good.
Breada is still building the type 8s? I was under the impression that the MBTA had them stop constructing them a long time ago until the problems with the existing ones were fixed so that the solutions could be incorporated into the production line.
-Robert King
There have been so many problems I've lost track. I think
production has once again resumed.
I don't know if it really makes a difference if they've resumed production or not, the type 8s still aren't running in service anyways.
-Robert King
I believe that the seats on the M-4 are much worse than the seats on he old M-3s. Although it is soft on the sides, it is hard in the middle, getting rid of possible seating space. If they made no seperations between the two seats, they would be more comfortable. But the railfan windows are excellent, as are the PATCO railfan windows. And the B-IVs have a good railfan window even with the transverse cab.
[Although carbon steel trains are always a treat, the 1500's, 1600's and 1700's really didn't do anything for me.]
They arn't caron steel they are aluminum.
Speaking of what is sold at the Transit Museum...
They have my Subway Knitted Hats as well as Baseball Caps.
I just put these up on my web site, too!
The ones I have so far are the
#A, #F, #R, #1, #4
All are embriodered on Black hats, but on my site I also have some in other colors
as well. They say "Brooklyn to Queens" etc like the shirts do, on
the back.
http://nycsubwayline.safeshopper.com
Hi there,
I like your T-shirts and have a few of them. One thing about the hats... Did you have to make them those "low-profile" type hats? I don't really care for them. I know that quite a few other people I've spoken to also don't care for them. Plus, I'm sorry to say, the other brand of caps are much better. They are styled like a real 'professional' baseball cap. I would buy more of your caps if they were that type instead of the "low-profile" type.
Thanks,
Marc
I have to agree on that.
By low-profile do you mean the soft hats Vs. the still ones with the extra lining in front like the Gale Sobel outfitters to the TA stuff?
Yikes I hate those caps. Out bought some surplus Old Navy hats and put the MTA logo right over the Old Navy logo.
The real stuff wears like iron but I like some soft cotton on my noggin.
Question about your tee-shirts ... I noticed the Transit Museum stores have versions that have 2 lines on them (2/3, A/C, N/R, 4/5) with the boroughs beneath them and then a few "rules of conduct" beneath that. The tee-shirts you have on your web site have single routes only and that's it. Do you make a different line of tee-shirts for exclusive sale at the NYTM stores?
--Mark
Someone already beat you to the knit hats...I got one at YRB with the L train. Whatever, still, good work!
I m still waiting for a Q T Shirt XXL
i clicked the link and it brought me to the homepage of the server.
I'm not so good at this yet.
But I am good at making the products!
I'm at nycsubwayline.com
In Boston, operators requalify every 2 years with a class, a written test and a road test. Most trolley museums requalify their operators every year.
How often do they do this in NY? Other cities? How about museums?
Thanks for the info.
in NYCT i was told that once a year, they bring u back to 370 jay street or whereever Motorman skool is. Anyways i hear they just see if u have it together. its pretty easy. Any Motorman should be able to requalify. its like what does Bottom green mean? And if u cannot answer that and u been a Motorman for a while, then u don't deserve to requalify. Just about all Motormen requalify.
I think the hardest requalification on rules is Locomotive Engineers, especially with LIRR. everyone tells me LIRR is the hardest to get a Engineer license, but to requalify is hard too. u gotta know ur NORAC rules, PTEP (passenger Train emergency preparation), Ticketing, and a number of other things. Its like a 19A for Engineers and Motorman.
out of all 3 bus operators, Subway Motormen and Engineers
Engineers got it the worst, but its because
they gotta be certified by FRA and they have a different job than motorman because FRA requires more from Railroads, and Engineers operate trains at higher speeds that Motorman do not see. i seen a R32 on the N do 65 but thats because it was a downhill. Timers were off.
LIRR does 80
MNRR does 95-100
Amtrak does at least 125 Acela does more than 150
all freights are fast too so u know what i am sayin
Requalifying, or as the TA terms it "refresher courses" take place about once every 3 years and take about 3 days to finish. There's nothing to pass or fail really.
Of course, "every 3 years" is based on some very weird calendar. I had a refresher course after 13 months as well as a weeks training on the R142/142A and 5 more weeks when I switched divisions. One guy in my original motors class was scheduled for a refresher after 4 months (with no violations, either).
Nice article in the Sunday New York Times Travel section about the
"F" line. A couple of good PCC photos, too.
it was. A whole bunch of 2's and 5's were stuck up in the Bronx due to two things: a sick passenger at Simpson (the train that unfortunate person was on had to discharge all passengers, and my train was three trains behind that one and got the worst of it), and signal problems on the Brook Av/149th St ramp. No Thru Express either since the interlock south of Jackson was also involved. That most likely translated into gaps in service on the 7 Av. LOCAL, and the Lex.
During the peak 12-9 season, think about this:
Since 1996, there has not been a 12-9 on 12/9 in the NYC Subways.
About how many 12-9's are there in an average year?
How many 10-4s are there on 10/4?
Too many. No joke.
Communication received today from PATH states the following:
1) The PATH WTC tube has been cleared (water pumped out), and engineers are examining it and drawing up repair plans.
2) PATH confirms it will be placing that line back in service. Estimated time: 2-3 years.
Communication received today from PATH states the following:
1) The PATH WTC tube has been cleared (water pumped out), and engineers are examining it and drawing up repair plans.
2) PATH confirms it will be placing that line back in service. Estimated time: 2-3 years.
Does this mean that the former Hudson Terminal won't be put back into service?
The plan announced earlier was two step:
First, restore limited service, using the WTC station and temporary access.
Second, reopen the Hudson Terminal station, after expanding the platforms.
Whether this is still "operative" is the question. The idea behind this two step plan was that it would give more flexibility to rebuilding and open service earlier than otherwise if the Hudson Terminal station were used. (There is no plan to keep the WTC station beyond the temporary usage.)
please excuse my ignorance of the path system. Please clarify exactly what the hudson terminal is? Was this the terminal before the WTC was built? Where exactly is it and what condition is it in.
Thanks
Hudson Terminal is an older station, at higher level and to the east of the current (well, until 9/11) WTC station.
As you may know, there are two "tubes" under the Hudson leading to the WTC complex. Originally, these tubes led to a loop track at Hudson Terminal. But those tracks were later removed, and the loop realigned to the location of the present WTC station when the WTC complex was built (ca. 1971). Hudson Terminal is more toward the eastern edge of the bathtub (i.e. toward Church St.), not directly beneath is, as the newer WTC station is.
Here are some photos of the station layout and the construction of WTC: http://www.nycsubway.org/us/path/wtcbuild/
Here's a page on the Hudson Terminal, on Brennan's Abandoned Subway Stations page: http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/hudterm.html
And here are Exchange Place and WTC, new entries as Abandoned Stations: http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/exchwtc.html
Exchange Place will be coming back as well!
Exhange Place could be back sooner. They have to restore the switch between Tunnel L stub and the westbound tuve west of the station. Trains from NJ would "double" relay to change ends. I don't see why they think that will cost $71 million.
Your guess about the money is as good as mine.
Even if they had to re-do the signals to accomplish the double-relay I can't see how that adds up to $71 million. $7.1 million, maybe.
wayne
They might have to extend the tunnel (Doesn't it fit less than 6 cars?).
They wouldn't need more than 6 cars for an EXP-JSQ or HOB-EXP shuttle.
The PATH WTC tube has been cleared (water pumped out), and engineers are examining it and drawing up repair plans.
Thank god for that. I was afraid it was going to corrode away into nothing. Now maybe they can re-open exchange place.
But how would you turn the trains there?
Else you'll have traffic both ways on one track, which would limit headways on the entire line.
here is a picture I found of the entrance to the subway :
I believe the picture you posted is of Cortlandt Street on the N/R. As bas as the surface area looks, the station itself survived with little or no damage. Trains are running through it, albeit without stopping.
Freaky... I used to wait at that exact bus stop for the QM11, and debate wether or not to run down to the N/R (on those stairs) depending on the crowd level on the bus. *Shudder*.
That's the BMT Cortlandt stop. I don't think it looks like that now, as I'd expect much of that debris has been removed.
But the station underneath is intact (with extra 12"x12" wooden studs helping support the ceiling on the west side) - I've used it many times. The trains don't stop, but the tracks are intact and the trains run through.
The air conditioning (and LCD destination signs) is shut off as the trains go through the tunnel at slow speed. Even so, you can still smell The Smell.
Not anymore -- took the N/R tonight and one night last week. No A/C shutoff...
I think the T/O (or C/R?) turns it off at his or her discretion. I went through twice the day service through the station resumed and the a/c stayed on.
(Incidentally, does anyone else find it strange that we're halfway through December and a/c is still warranted?)
It's warm in Philly too. Strange-a little scary. Global warming?? A ten-year trend about to reverse? What?
Well. Air conditioning is not warranted *now* where I currently live (Northeast Iowa, in climate zone 4 [Jesse Ventura weather]), but considering we were glaciated at this time last year, and that certain plants in the garden are sprouting with a 'false spring' (we've had a bumper crop of parsley) and obviously won't flower (or even survive) till Spring once real winter comes, we do wonder. It's December; we had the AC briefly on the week before Thanksgiving. It might be like the winter of 1999, where we were speculating about a Thanksgiving barbeque on the patio; this year, we are speculating about a Christmas barbeque on the patio. I'm an hour south of La Crosse WI: we get frozen here. It's not like the Magnolia grandifloras and azeleas you get in Brooklyn.
And to think, December 2000 was the coldest month I ever experienced. (I've experienced colder temperatures, but they didn't last most of a month. I've gone shopping at -21 -- I opted to remain indoors the next night, when it dropped to -24.)
I want snow already. This neverending summer is depressing.
I went to Harrows, for holiday supplies. Get your snow there!
If you are an "O" gauage fan, they had some "Lomax figurines about the right size. I beleive they were to go with those "Dickens Village" type houses. They are epoxyresin, painted and reasonably priced.
avid
I want snow already. This neverending summer is depressing.
At the risk of betraying my Confederate blood... any day below 55° Farenheit is winter, as far as I'm concerned. And snow is just a different color than another substance often described by a four-letter word also beginning with "s".
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
You'll be happy to know that El Paso, Tx., and neighboring Juarez, Mex., picked up about two inches of snow this morning, their second snowfall of the season. I doubt they're worried about global warming right now. (Any chance the Earth is turning sideways on its axis?)
>>>(Any chance the Earth is turning sideways on its axis?) <<<
It already is--a 23 degree tilt--and because of that we have seasons.
Until this year.
If it was any other year, the media would be in double secret full panic global warming mode...after all a Republican is in the White House...
www.forgotten-ny.com
There's having a pretty hot winter in Afghanistan right now too, or so I've heard...
Then there's Uranus, which is tilted a whopping 82 degrees. How would you like to have daylight (or twilight, in this case) for 42 years straight, then live in darkness for 42 years?
Your loss.
"And snow is
just a different color than another substance often described by a four-letter word also beginning with "s"."
I guess it depends on who's making the substance.
You are familiar, no doubt, with a rather interesting, and very irreverent, definition of rain?
You are familiar, no doubt, with a rather interesting, and very irreverent, definition of rain?
If I am it escapes me at the moment...
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'll tell you if you promise not to be offended:
Rain = The Creator's urination.
Interesting. No, I hadn't heard that one before. It does follow along the same lines though.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Yeah this warm tropical weather is disgusting. If you take a look at the MRF 10 Day model at weather.unisys.com next week some cold air should come down and we should be near "normal".
Hopefully with some real cold air and snow the "Smell" will be history.
That picture makes me very sad, guys.
I worked at Maiden Lane and Broadway till I moved to North Carolina 11 years ago...I used to use that BMT station all the time.
Very sad.
That picture makes me very sad, guys.
Tony: Keep remembering it doesn't look like that any more, though. Roughly half of the 100 million+ tons of debris have already been removed from the former WTC and most of the neighborhood has been cleaned up. That station is within the Restricted Zone, but I bet the street around it is clean.
If Hudson Terminal i indeed to be used again, I imagine it will get a nice renovation.
Has anyone at the PA recently considered, even briefly, extending PATH eastward across lower Manhattan, say to a new terminal connecting to the Broadway-Nassau-Fulton subway station?
Very good question. The main issue is what lies east of Hudson Terminal and at what levels.
It should be relatively easy to do pedestrian access. Trains are a different issue. (Remember the distance between the two tubes is fairly large, so you need two access ways.
Very good question. The main issue is what lies east of Hudson Terminal and at what levels.
The old Hudson Terminal station site is east of the IRT, rather than west as the deeper 1971 WTC station was. It lies between the IRT 1 tracks and the BMT N/R tracks, roughly between Dey and Liberty streets. To handle 10-car trains (someday) it would have to be extended northward to between Fulton & Vesey, still allowing room for the necessary curves to fit within the WTC "bathtub".
The PA's goal in moving the station would be exactly what Ron proposed: Connecting to the Fulton-Broadway/Nassau-Fulton-Fulton subway complex. Routing would be presumably from the north end of the lengthened Hudson Terminal station via a new underground walkway roughly along Chambers Street.
It's a tough site, though, since you have to connect to the end of the former WTC "E" terminal, AND the now-closed Cortlandt Street N/R station, and yet avoid their trackways.
If the IRT were moved west (as some propose), that would give some more room at the east end of the bathtub.
What about this -- realign the WTC "E" track so that there can be an intersection between them and the BMT tracks -- then build a new Cortland Street station for both lines (four track) and the possibility of having the "E" continue on the BMT to Brooklyn?
Or, how about rerouting the rebuilt IRT west along Battery Park City (to terminate there instead of South Ferry), and extend the "E" tracks to connect with the old IRT to South Ferry (I believe that it is built to B Division standards as a 1917 era line), and a new terminal at South Ferry?
What about this -- realign the WTC "E" track so that there can be an intersection between them and the BMT tracks -- then build a new Cortland Street station for both lines (four track) and the possibility of having the "E" continue on the BMT to Brooklyn?
An earlier thread with contributions by J Lee discussed exactly this. To avoid massive crossovers, you have to do flyovers/flyunders and that's tough to do north of existing BMT Cortlandt station. His proposal would be to separate out the A-to-N/R connection and do it south of Cortlandt, requiring that a second lower level be added to Cortlandt that connected to A tracks.
I'd love to have cross-platform transfers among PATH and N/R trains added into that mix, but even disregarding cost, I gotta think that getting the TA and PATH to build an entirely new combined station would just be a little tough. And it's easier to put passageways for people to walk through above/below a 3-D maze of trackways than to add in new trackways crossing, flying over and under, etc.
Or, how about rerouting the rebuilt IRT west along Battery Park City (to terminate there instead of South Ferry), and extend the "E" tracks to connect with the old IRT to South Ferry (I believe that it is built to B Division standards as a 1917 era line), and a new terminal at South Ferry?
Not sure I see the utility in connecting the E to IRT tracks. Plus obviously you'd have two incompatible car widths. Or are you proposing that a rebuilt Chambers-to-South Ferry route be E train *instead of* 1/9 train? I'd argue against that since it would deprive Upper West Side Manhattanites of a one-seat or cross-platform ride to the WTC. (Though I'd love to see statistics on source of WTC-bound passengers -- maybe the E carries more than the 1/9?)
Sending the south IRT spur further west to BPC and WFC is a great idea. Problem is, NY state wants to sink West Street below ground just west of the bathtub. And that entire area is landfill anyway. So figuring out what alignment the new 1 takes would be a challenge, not to mention getting it far enough east to (1) avoid the bathtub; (2) fly it over/under a sunken West Street & Battery Tunnel approach network; and (3) keep it within the river bulkhead!
So figuring out what alignment the new 1 takes would be a challenge, not to mention getting it far enough east to (1) ...
Whoops. That was "... far enough WEST ... "
Dey and Liberty streets. To handle 10-car trains (someday) it would have to be extended northward to between Fulton & Vesey, still allowing room for the necessary curves to fit within the WTC "bathtub".
Hudson Terminal is not located within the bathtub.
Hudson Terminal is not located within the bathtub.
Ah, right, my mistake ... sorry. It's the "dry" part of the WTC site east of the IRT (which IIRC is just inside the eastern bathtub wall).
That means an additional difficulty with the relocation is piercing the bathtub twice (inbound to Hudson Terminal from the south, outbound at the north) since the low-level incoming tubes make "landfall" within the bathtub. Hmmmmm. Not trivial, that.
So the PA is actually going to do this?
So the PA is actually going to do this?
Got me. IIRC, in November they announced that they were studying a two-phase plan.
First phase was to repair the existing station, make entrances at north and south ends and get the thing running -- about 2 years from now.
Second phase was to lengthen old Hudson Terminal site and make it the permanent PATH station. Would take longer.
I think in November they said they were "studying" and would announce a final decision on how to proceed by end of December. I'd expect it in early January.
Sounds reasonable to me.
I don't see the advantage in connecting PATH specifically to the Fulton complex, especially if the connection is via Chambers. Why not connect instead to the three Chambers Street stations (IND, IRT, and BMT), Brooklyn Bridge, and City Hall? The walk would probably be shorter (except to the 4/5) and the connection would reach the 6, E, and weekend J in addition to the lines that stop at Fulton.
Why not connect instead to the three Chambers Street stations (IND, IRT, and BMT), Brooklyn Bridge, and City Hall?
'Cause the Fulton-Fulton-Bway/Nassau-Fulton complex is directly east of the WTC site. South end of the 2/3 Chambers station is 4 blocks north of the north end of the WTC bathtub. (A more logical IRT connection if you want to go that way is the Park Place station, which interchanges with the IND Chambers station which can be reached from the former WTC E station.) No Chambers stop on BMT, do you mean City Hall (waaaaaaaaay far north)? And I can't even imagine the network of underground passageways to get you to the IRT 4/5 Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall station! Yeah, you miss connecting to the 6, but to connect to F-F-B/N-F complex is just a block or two of under-sidewalk connector. You're talking about blocks and blocks and blocks!
I don't know exactly where Hudson Terminal was, but you suggested that the passageways be on Chambers Street.
City Hall on the N/R is south of Chambers.
There is a Chambers Street BMT station -- the other BMT line. Under the Municipal Building.
The advantage to Chambers IRT is that the local and express share the platforms. Park Place is only on the express and Cortlandt is only on the local.
Really, all it would take to tie together all of these stations (substituting PP for Chambers IRT) is a passageway under City Hall Park from PP, passing beneath City Hall BMT en route.
I don't know exactly where Hudson Terminal was, but you suggested that the passageways be on Chambers Street.
Geez, I'm making all kinds of mistakes today. Sorry, once more. I meant under Fulton Street ... not Chambers, FULTON.
There is a Chambers Street BMT station -- the other BMT line. Under the Municipal Building.
Oh, THAT! [grin]
The advantage to Chambers IRT is that the local and express share the platforms. Park Place is only on the express and Cortlandt is only on the local ... Really, all it would take to tie together all of these stations (substituting PP for Chambers IRT) is a passageway under City Hall Park from PP, passing beneath City Hall BMT en route.
That's all true. But the original posting was about connecting to PATH ... and the Chambers axis is FIVE BLOCKS north of Vesey Street, the northern border of the WTC. (And the old Hudson Terminal site was toward the southern end of the WTC site, outside the bathtub, though it'd probably be extended most of the way north to Vesey to get those hypotethical 10-car-length platforms into the N-S direction and still have room for the turns back toward the tubes.)
I suspect I may have caused this whole misunderstanding by typing Chambers where I meant Fulton. My apologies. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!
No problem. I agree that Fulton would make more sense, especially if a few moving walkways could be installed.
I don't know what sewer and water lines are in the way, but otherwise it strikes me that a walkway under Fulton St. should be pretty easy (at least, relative to all the other ideas discussed here, and relative to the cost of rebuilding the PATH and 1/9 lines in general).
I would think the walkway should be 2 levels below Church St, which ought to be below the N/R Cortlandt St station and above the PATH tracks (though it would be right on the level of the 1/9 unless they move it west or lower it).
Then it could pretty much go horizontally the block east to Broadway, where it could connect to the existing underpass below the 4/5 at Fulton and Broadway that you use when you go from the downtown 4/5 to the A/C, J/M/Z, and 2/3 lines.
And a spur walkway north to the terminal of the E should be really easy, since that already exists (even if it needs to be demolished because of structural damage there isn't anything in the way).
One catch I can think of: is there enough space under Fulton St to make it wide enough? In bad weather there might be pretty high demand for this walkway once everything is rebuilt and the Wall St economy recovers.
I would think the walkway should be 2 levels below Church St, which ought to be below the N/R Cortlandt St station and above the PATH tracks (though it would be right on the level of the 1/9 unless they move it west or lower it).
Good analysis, with one caveat: Remember that the old Hudson Terminal PATH station is at a higher elevation than the 1971 WTC one on the lowest level. An expanded 10-car terminal will undoubtedly stretch from Liberty on the south all the way to Vesey on the north, which is to say passing the Fulton connector.
That site is just within the WTC footprint, but in the "dry" part outside the bathtub, east of IRT but west of BMT. So you gotta factor that into your 3-D mental map.
The elevation of the old Hudson Terminal station is still lower than the elevation of the BMT N/R line. The BMT N/R is at the same elevation as the IND E station, and I remember walking down from the IND to get to the H&M.
Getting throught the utility lines is probably the hardest part, but there will probably be major relocations in the next two years. Remember, all the electric lines will be rerouted.
There was a reason to keep the old Hudson Terminal station outside the bathtub -- otherwise, it could not have been kept open while construction was proceeding on the WTC.
The important thing is to get these plans moving now -- before we start with reconstruction which will make it much more difficult.
The important thing is to get these plans moving now -- before we start with reconstruction which will make it much more difficult.
I agree, though I'm skeptical that much reconstruction will start any time soon despite posturing by Silverstein and so forth. He's got a major court battle with his insurance company on his hands, for one thing, and until he knows whether he's getting $3.5 billion or $7 billion, can't do a lot of planning for replacement offices.
The Port Authority seems to be on the job, despite losing a chunk of offices and dozens of staff. They came out with their initial ideas less than 10 weeks after 9/11. That's pretty good, I'd say.
Less clear what the TA's doing. Haven't heard much other than "possible IRT relocation" ... unless I've missed something.
And, as noted in other postings, what I *really* want is the PA and TA working *together* to make the best *combined* transit hub(s) in lower Manhattan. That is the critical difference between replacing damaged existing stuff and rethinking the entire downtown transit space.
Amen.
I can't imagine that reconstruction of the WTC site could proceed without the owner (PA) giving the green light - which they won't do until they're clear about what they're doing with PATH. Silverstein's architect will have to huddle with PATH before the engineer-constructor starts working on the new plaza and buildings.
But how would you turn the trains there?
They would use the "Penn Pocket", ie "Tunnel L". Someone posted an H&M track blueprint earlier and it is on the nycsubway.org PATH track Map.
The proceedure would be as follows:
Train pulls in on E/B track, train discharges, Engineer waiting on west end of platform enters train, that engineer takes control and moves train into the Penn Pocket and then powers down his cab. The first engineer then takes the train into the W/B track at exchange place, he gets out and walks to the west end of the E/B track to take a break and wait for the next train. The engineer who got in then takes the train west. It would probably take about 5 minutes and could be used for select Rush Hour trains to exchange place, possibly running from HOB and JSQ.
track map - http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/us/path/pathmap1.gif
Ok - that makes sense. You couldn't send all trains that way, as the headway is at least five minutes.
I was thinking that you'd have to back out all the way to Grove, which would limit headways even more.
I don't know what kind of shape the reversing track is in (or if there are even tracks there), if it needs to be lengthened, or anything like that. From the map it looks rather short, and I'm not sure that it connects to the WB track.
It isn't currently connected to either track. The switch on the eastbound track was removed some time ago as a performance improvement (it was responsible for part of the speed restriction there). The westbound track has a power and signal shed in the mouth leading to the tunnel, which would need to be replaced. There was a fire in the pocket some years ago which I'm told involved PCB's. There might be some sort of cleanup needed before it could see regular service.
I posted a while ago on how it would be better to extend the pocket to connect with the westbound track at the pocket's current dead-end. Then all service could operate from the eastbound platform - a train would pull in, discharge/load while the crew changed ends (like at Hoboken) and then enter the pocket to cross over to the westbound track without further reversing.
Your proposal sounds a lot more practical, as it would reduce dwell time, as compared to the double reversal.
Now the only question is, what kind of shape the pocket's in - what kind of cleanup is needed, and how to link it at either end to the existing tracks.
The only problem is it will be difficult/impossible to use my route for service towards Pavonia/Newport as those tracks are outside the tracks towards Grove and at a rather different elevation. Take a look here for a drawing of the pocket. Elevations aren't readable on this scan - sorry.
Yes - the double reverse would be needed to access the Hoboken line.
It wouldn't corrode. The tunnels are in the muck at the bottom of the river, not in rock. A dredging operation opened the top of the westbound downtown tunnel many years ago (that's why the tunnel is lined with concrete near the ejector pump).
By the way, the uptown westbound tunnel isn't even iron lined - it is just 6 layers of brick between the inside and the muck on the bottom of the river (the 1/4" iron outer protective layer mostly rusted away, as it was only for support while building the brick walls).
Here is a picture of some rings of similar age (1915) in the same water, with nothing on the outside except the river (in other words, this is sitting at the bottom of the river. It is substantially deeper (300 feet) and thus under a lot more pressure. It is also a somewhat different construction method, having rope ("Oakum") and lead in between the rings. But it was engineered by Charles Jacobs, the same person who did the downtown tunnels.
I wanted to add something to my prior post before I submitted it, but for some reason "back" took me back to the topic, not to the post. So, please excuse the additional post to add this...
What I mean by "it won't corrode" is that there's water acting on the outside, and if salt water on the outside hasn't corroded it in 90 years, a few months of fresh water won't corrode it from the inside. Of course, there would be damage to the signals, lighting, emergency phones, and so forth, and the trackbed will need to be inspected for any warping of ties and loosening of plates.
thanks for the info ron -
How are they making out with the abandoned train down there?
wayne
I don't know.
Latest pictures showed a few intact cars and a few destroyed cars. Even if they do decide to salvage what they can, they can't do anything until the tunnels are declared safe and the plugs removed. I'm glad the tieback operation worked on the bathtub.
"1) The PATH WTC tube has been cleared (water pumped out), and engineers are examining it and drawing up repair plans"
I wonder if Path is rushing this ?
The situation involving the "bathtub" hasn't been resolved. Sooner or later the debris within the bathtub will be removed. If it gives way and there are no concrete plugs in the river tubes..............big trouble !
Bill "Newkirk"
If it gives way and there are no concrete plugs in the river tubes..............big trouble !
The bathtub failing is not going to be like a dam bursting. There is a little thing called the world financial centre and battery park city in between it and the water. You might see a slow seep that allows plenty of time to errect a temporary barricade.
I agree. There's little danger to the PATH tube now.
About half the debris has been removed from the WTC site. Rebuilding plans there are moving forward.
How much rubble was cleaned up?
I recently heard that about half of the 1.2 million tons has been removed.
That's the "easy" half, as they get further underground it will get harder.
When was the Dyre Ave. shuttle known as the 9?
Interesting. Now, if someone has an old roll sign, when the line name appeared below the number, we could see if other numbers were ever assigned.
(My guess for the timing would be late 50's to early 60's.)
I grew up in the Bronx, and was a mischevious little imp. My favorite thing to do was crank the headsigns -- had to stand on the seat on the left side of the storm door to do so.
The R-12/14/15 cars all had the usual #1 through #7, but they also had "8-Astoria" and "9-Dyre Avenue", in addition to "No Passengers", "Special", "Shuttle", "Thru Express". I don't ever remember seeing the R-17 through R-29 cars with the #8 or #9 -- but there are more photos than just this one here that prove that there were at least three different R-29's that DID have the reading. I wonder if they didn't switch some sign rolls out of the older R-12/14/15 cars.
I think a lot of kids did that. I changed the routes on the M when I was a kid, as well as a lot of other kids. I used to think it was fun just to see what other routes were in the rollsign.
Sounds almost as good as the time that certain English bus companies increased the letters on their rollsigns. Unfortunately the rollsigns were four letters long......
I cranked a route sign once on a BMT standard. Can't remember what it said, but it wasn't "14th St. L'c'l". So I started cranking away while my mother was going crazy hoping I wouldn't be spotted by the conductor, and stopped when "Local" showed up. Close enough.
It says in the FAQ "never seen on trains?". Well done on finding a photo!
You probably know that only IRT cars built after 1948 can show numbers. This probably means that the Dyre shuttle would have been unlikely to see many such cars before 1965.
However, it looks to me that it was the 9, at least theoretically, from 1948 onwards. This numbering may have been discontinued in either 1959, when the 2 was moved from Broadway to Dyre, or alternatively in 1965 when the 2 and 5 swapped White Plains Rd and Dyre.
Therefore my informed guess on the photo is late 1950's.
There is another photo in Grellers NYC Subway car book, of a R-289 car in 180th Street yard witht he #9-Dyre route sign showing.
However, the R-29's weren't built until 1962...so the photo is no earlier than that.
The photo was taken in 1970; it's a weekend 5 shuttle.
The pic is an R33 dated in March 1970. Perhaps it's an oddity.
The R-33's look newer today than they did in 1970. Cleaner, at least.
That's very interesting....
I remember that the Bronx 3rd Ave. was supposedly the 8 train, but it was NEVER signed that way, it was always just "SHUTTLE" in the big sign window...
So, none of the maps have 9 as the Dyre Av. shuttle?
None that I've seen. Pre 1967 it's only shown as an IRT route, and afterwards as only the #5 line. Perhaps it was called the #9 back in the day when it wasn'y yet attached to the IRT mainline and operated 24-7 as a shuttle to E180th, using the old NYW&B terminal.
Yours truly has a vague recollection of R type equipment running in Dyre Service with a 9 sign right after the line was connected to the White Plains Road line for full passenger service. The number lasted for a little while. Does anyone else share this recollection?
Chris: Presumably the Dyre Avenue Shuttle could have carried the #9 any time after R-types were assigned. I used the Dyre Avenue Shuttle during the early 60's and they most certainly used the #9 sign although since they ran mainly at night not too many may have noticed them. From 1965 onward the TA referred to the shuttle as a #5 route on the subway maps although if this picture is from 1970 its obvious that the #9 continued to be displayed.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Regarding the use of the #9 on IRT R-types. R-17,21,22,26,28,29,33 Mainline and 36 Mainline originally carried the following readings on the front route sign.
#1
Broadway
#2
7 Av-Bronx
#3
Lenox Av
#4
Lex-Jerome
#5
Lex-WPRd
#6
Lex-Pelham
#9
Dyre Ave
Shuttle
No
Pass
Larry,RedbirdR33
My recollection of the 1960's and 1970's was that as "new" cars were showing up on the BMT and IRT they began using letters and numbers respectively, but that the maps didn't officially recognize the new schemes until a few years later. By the time the IRT numbers were on the map, the Dyre shuttle was just a late night 5 train.
Saw them today on the New Track before Broad channel? WhY?
IRT Madness
Track testing the cars for acceleration and emergency braking. All car classes are tested.
Let's start a new rumor! The (1) is being extended from New Lots to Howard Beach to merge with the (A) and go to the Rockaways!
It's true I tell you!
;>D Andrew
Not true! The real thing is the New Lots branch is being upgraded to Division "B" . The platforms will be extended and cut back to allow the larger rolling stock access. The looooooong awaited DeKalb connector to the Rutgers tube will be done. The soon to start "V" will be assigned to this route.
If your gonna do a rumor, do it big!
avid
man i would have taken a shot of dat'...!!!
:O
Well, folks. I've just moved to Park Slope, Brooklyn. Though I can't possibly yet call myself a true Brooklynite, I plan to be here for the long haul and gradually earn my stripes. Now, I will not only feel compelled to exclaim, "Let's Go Mets," but also shout the companion "Let's Go Cyclones!" So, farewell RonInBayside, Astoria Al, QTrainDash7, and the rest of my fellow northern Queensians. I'll be sure to visit the old neighborhood periodically to see how the Queens IND and the Astoria elevated are doing. :O)
Transit Comparison After One Week
I have made the following transit observances in the week that I have lived in "The Broken Land.":
After living in Astoria and commuting on the Queens IND, the F train from Brooklyn to Midtown, though longer in distance and time, is a much more pleasant experience. I have gotten a seat during the Manhattan portion of the commute almost every day. That would never have happened on that same train coming from Queens.
On the other hand, getting home in the evening has been an excrutiatingly s-l-o-w and sometimes uncomfortable ordeal. I figured, since I live in an area ringed by subways, transit possibilities for the evening rush were greatly expanded, allowing alternate travel plans utilizing subway and bus lines, should one line be somehow incapacitated. With that in mind, I have tried several routes home to The Slope from Midtown since last week:
IRT
First, I tried to use the Lex IRT to Brooklyn. I found that the 6 train waits quite a while for the turnaround at City Hall loop, and that I should have transfered to the 4 or 5 at 42nd or 14th. I watched 3 or 4 expresses go by as we waited outside the final stop for our spot at the local platform at BB. Finally, we pulled in and I waited a few minutes for a < 5 > to Nevins, then a 2 to Grand Army.
IRT to IND, Transfer @ Bleecker
On another evening, I transfered to the F from the downtown 6 at Bleecker. (This option is only available on the way home, since there is no transfer to the uptown 6 at Broadway Lafayette. I have, on occasion, used my unlimited ride card to fanagle the uptown transfer in the morning, however.) On that night, I rode the F to Delancy where a smoke condition in the tunnel caused the Fire Dept. to hold up the train. I decided to transfer to the J to the Q at Canal and continued home over the Manhattan Bridge. At Atlantic, I transfered to the 2 to Grand Army.
BMT Bridge Route
Night number 3. I decided to use the Manny-B on purpose. I transferred from the 6 to the < Q > at 14th, and I expected a quick trip to Brooklyn, since the only other stop in Manhattan is Canal. The trip down Broadway was fairly quick, but what I can only imagine was a severe congestion of Q and W trains made the bridge trip painfully s--l--o-----w. The closest word I can apply is "crawl." I honestly could have gotten out of the train and walked across the bridge faster. You would think having these trains on the bridge for that length of time must be much harder on the structure than allowing them to cross at a steady, faster pace. Instead, the signals appeared as though they were placed every 3 feet and that they were all red. If these aren't timers, they sure felt like it. Man! I continued, still at a snail's pace, to 7th Aveneue.
A Word On Brooklyn Buses
When not taking the F train, which is within walking distance to my home, I have spent many minutes waiting for Brooklyn buses after getting off the various lines above. Some of these buses arrive only 4 or 5 times an hour, even during the evening rush. Unless you're on Flatbush Avenue, or some other large, four-land thoroughfare, buses like the B69 or B67 seem only a token enterprise.
Routes Not Yet Tried
The E/F Queensbound to the G to the F.
The 6 to the L to the G to the F. I'll definitely give this a shot to see if I can catch the R-143.
The 6 to the W to the F.
The 6 to the M to the F.
Conclusion
It's like things have turned 180 degrees. When I lived in Queens, the morning rush was a sardine-like ordeal, and the evening was relatively comfortable. Living in Brooklyn, the morning commute it much more civilized, and I grow whiskers on the evening commute, it's so laborious.
Looking forward to seeing Brooklyn Subtalkers riding the rails. I'll be the one at the front window of the Slant R-40 < Q > crossing the Manny-B, but don't be surprised if, for a few months, I mistake it for an N to Ditmars! :O)
"Brooklyn Pete"
Let me extend my sincere condolences. Regarding your move TO Brooklyn, that is. By the way, try commuting to Manhattan from the FLATLANDS section of Brooklyn for nearly 20 years. What used to be a "2 Fare Zone" is now a "2 Vehicle Zone", the trip still takes 70 minutes on a GOOD DAY, about 90 minutes on average. I know that it was my own choice to live in that area, however, that is where I grew up and where my parents still live today.
The reason I offer "condolences" is because after living in Brooklyn for the first 40 years of my life, I am sick to death of the place. In April of 2000 I finally moved out, making the trek out to Old Bridge, N.J. Granted, the main thing that prompted my move was my job, but I could have stayed in New York if I wanted and worked out of Penn Station. But several factors helped my decision:
1) Much lower income tax
2) Lower Rent
3) Better Quality Of Life
4) Quicker Commute
5) Ability To Receive Philadelphia Radio Stations
In places like Brooklyn, you can cut the tension with a knife. It's crowded, disorganized, the stores are tiny, and the streets are dirty. It's true that I do require a car with my new life here in central Jersey, but after 20 years of riding subways and buses through the 5 boroughs, I've had enough. While I still always like subways, commuter trains, and buses, they were never much fun while COMMUTING to or from work. My favorite transit rides were usually on my days off. Even presently, on my days off I will occaisonally park my car at Aberdeen-Matawan station and travel (for free of course) to New York and ride subways and buses. On the rare times that I will DRIVE to Brooklyn to visit my family, my blood pressure goes up the minute I cross into Staten Island (Brooklyn West). True, there are bad drivers everywhere you go, but in the urban areas it's "every man for himself".
Congrats on your move! Don't be discouraged by the post of 5301 Fishbowl.
You picked a great neighborhood in Brooklyn -- specifically if you LOVE to dine out! Many varied flavors there in Park Slope. I know the rent was probably MUCH higher than you were paying in Queens, but the small-town/Greenwich Village-like atmosphere of the Slopes makes it one of the 'prize' areas of 'Crooklyn'.
BMTman
It also has a good view of lower Manhattan, minus the WTC. :-(
By the way, an example of the "tension" and chaos I discussed in my previous post, check out:
http://bustalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/bustalk.cgi?read=41004
My head was spinning just reading it!
"The trip down Broadway was fairly quick, but what I can only imagine was a severe congestion of Q and W trains made the bridge trip painfully s--l--o-----w. The closest word I can apply is "crawl." I honestly could have gotten out of the train and walked across the bridge faster. "
BOY do I know! Everytime I've taken the Manhattan bridge it's just been a crawl. The south side does seem slower than the north side, but it might have to do with the track workers which always seem to be in the area slowing things up. What is the speed restriction when track workers are around? It feels like 5mph. Personally I think it should be 15mph, anything less is an over-reaction.
Speed restrictions in the presence of flags or lanterns is 10mph. the timers on the Manny-B are posted at 25 or 20 mph (I've only done it on one day; not my regular line).
What were the north side timers posted? (Obviously my question isn't addressed at you, Alex, unless you took your 1 on a very wrong turn one day.)
Should be 15mph, 10mph is an overkill on safety (something the TA is becoming quite fond of lately). LIRR trains don't go as slow in work areas.
The bridge is probably moaning, "Oh, my aching deck!"
"Keystone Pete" ? With I handle like that, I always assumed you were from Pennsylvania and/or were a Pennsy fan. What's with the "Keystone", then?
"Keystone Pete" ? With I handle like that, I always assumed you were from Pennsylvania and/or were a Pennsy fan. What's with the "Keystone", then?
Keystone Pete is from Camp Hill, PA, or from the Harrisburg area, as he tells out-of-Pennsylvanians, who never heard of Camp Hill.
Thanks, Bob. Actually, when I left Camp Hill for college in North Carolina at age 18, many of my professors had heard of Camp Hill, because that's the address for Book-of-the-Month Club. Actually, that enterprise is not actually within the borough (in Pennsylvania, small municipalities are called "boroughs," but these are not parts of larger city entities like the Borough of Brooklyn, but rather independent local towns). As is common is Pennsylvania, the large Camp Hill Post Office covers a wide area and more than one zip-code. Your mailing address could be "Camp Hill," but you could actually live in Hampden Township.
Sorry for the OT post here, but it relates to the whole Brooklyn/my handle thing.
There was a commercial for Tide X-K detergent once which featured a housewife in Camp Hill, PA. It even went so far as to encourage viewers to get in touch with her.
When I lived in Park Slope on 3rd. St between 6th and 7th Aves., I would walk down to Union St. and 4th Ave. sometimes, to take the N or R train...
Why don't you try that one??
I will. Taking the M/N/R to Union, instead of continuing to transfer to the F at 4th Ave-9th St. is also an option. The walk from 4 Av up the hill to 8 Av is kind of a nuisance, but saving the winding transfer at 4 Av.-9 St. might be worth it. Also good exercise. :O)
To the Chicago Metra railfanners,
I noticed on the Metra UP-North line to Kenosha a club car just behind the locomotive in the evening rush hour. Is this car open to all riders, or does it require membership? Also, is dinner/drinks served?
Thank you.
Maybe I'll rethink my position on hating Metra, unless the club car is for VIPs only.
Have you heard the automated announcements yet? At first, I thought it was a psychopathic TO, until I found out they're prerecorded drivel. Since when is a conductor called a "trainman"--and in what age does this imply we are living? There are several female conductors on the Metra Electric.
The club car - at one point there were two, but there may only be one now - is privately owned and is not open to the public. It is run only on the UP (ex-CNW) North Line, which runs along the posh north shore. As far as I know, about two dozen well-to-do folks own it and use it as their private car.
As for the term "trainman," while it may be less than politically correct, it is a technical term that refers to members of a train crew. A passenger train can only have one conductor, who traditionally is in charge of orders for the train. However, on a multi-car train, you need more than one attendant to take tickets and help with passengers (often one attendant for every 2-3 cars). While the conductor can handle a couple of cars, for the additional cars you need additional personnel. These are known as trainmen, a title that distinguishes them from the conductor. Trainmen are NOT in charge of the train in any capacity. I suppose you could call them "trainpeople" if you wanted.
I thought that Metra called the extra trainmen "Collectors" as their primary function is to collect fares.
-- Ed Sachs
I call them superfluous expense. Or maybe I'm just super p***ed because the fares increase even as Metra refuses to further integrate fares with CTA and Pace (and fare integration is the primary reason that I transfer from a CTA train to Metra, rather than to a CTA bus; reliability of the Metra is traded off by the lousy and uneven timetable for a reverse commute on the Electric District). I mean, get with the times--automate! Not that I want anyone to lose a job, but seriously why should I have to have my ticket audited at each zone in addition to putting it through the turnstile at each end of the trip? Did they waste money in half-a**ed automation or something?
Even if they are [were] properly called "trainmen," the term absolutely must be considered out of date, as is "policeman" or "stewardess." It is not excessively politically correct to have respect for the women in these positions by acknowledging their presence.
Here's a news item I picked up.
Freight rail carrier Conrail Inc. will pay $3.5 million to settle federal claims it underreported and underpaid for its use of tracks owned by Amtrak, the agreement showed on Monday. The Justice Department claimed that the Consolidated Rail Corp. knowingly submitted false reports to the passenger rail service on its track use along the Northeast Corridor, alleging breach of contract.
Under a 1986 agreement, Conrail has to calculate its track usage and pay Amtrak a fee. The alleged underreporting occurred largely between 1989-99. Conrail did not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement.
Bastards.
Heh. Guess they lost that bet. Amtrak must really be strapped for cash if they're finally starting to notice when everyone scams them....
Figures. Conrail.
What kind of an idiotic arrangement lets the purchaser of a service or product bill himself? What if I was allowed to account for my own television watching this month and pay Time Warner Cable an amount I decide for what I said I watched? Last time I checked, the business world was not to big on the Honor system. It's Amtrak's fault for agreeing to this moronic billing practice in the first place. How hard is it to keep "track" of when trains that aren't yours are on your tracks?
Do yourself a favor andopen the business pages of the newspaper sometime.
Walmart orders merchandise from suppliers, then tells them at the end of the month, "We determined that 30% of the merchandise you sent us is unacceptable. So we're dumping it and deducting it from our next payment to you. If you don't like it you can send your merchandise somewhere else next time."
In business, the 800 lb gorilla can do whatever he wants - as long as the other guys don't eventually get together and sic a 1500 lb gorilla on him.
This weeks Destination Freedom newslatter has a little journal type description of a guy who got a head end ride from Boston and NYP to Boston. There are plenty of photos and a lot of information about how the line works. You can access it here at:
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df12102001.shtml
Did you noticed the caption below one of the pix of Hellgate Bridge which states that the NH built it? IIRC, the bridge was part of the "New York Connecting Railroad", which was an entity chartered by the city and quasi-independent of the Pennsy and NH.
The latest issue of the NYD Bulletin mentions a retrofit braking
package on the R142 order called "A-Plus" braking and gives
a vague technical description, stating that these cars are not
train compatible with the older "A" braking package.
Does anyone have more details?
I wish I could get these bulletins. R142s use pneumatic brake assemblies called 'tread brake units.' Auto disc brakes squeeze pads against rotors, TBUs press a composition brake shoe against the steel wheel. R142s have eight wheels...eight TBUs. In the myriad of problems affecting this trainset, TA had the brakes modified in the design because the trains stop at slower speeds. The system called for 'regenerative braking'...a system where power generated in slowing down the train would be put back into the third rail. It doesn't work correctly, the trains didn't stop satisfactorily and the TBUs were modified to TBU 'A'...a higher pressure placed on the shoe. You can couple the different trainsets for moving in a yard but the difference of about ten pounds or so would cause problems on revenue rails because of unequal trainset brakage. So the suckers still eat shoes, the parking brakes eat shoes faster, there up to TBU A + but the trains do stop and passengers are safe...and CI Peter gets to do special trainset inspections between SMs. CI Peter
I'm guessing the reason regenerative isn't working right is cause the third rail and it's substations can't absorb the extra power.
Can't the trains do dynamic, too?
They can do a limited amount of dynamic braking. The limited dynamic braking whas was intended to be used during a third rail gap but it was never intended to be used as a service brake all the time. Consequently, it's inadequate for the task so friction braking plays a larger than intended role, hence the rapid consumption of brake shoes.
-Robert King
I will defer to David on this one, who I'm sure has the
contract specs. My recollection was that the dynamic brake
grids were to be of sufficient capacity to provide the
same braking effort as the regen system, in case the regen
system was cut out or in an unreceptive area.
Correct...they must be and more IF regen braking isn't used. CI Peter
I just received the parts breakdown from Wabco on Tread Brake Units and this thing is so simple that R142s should get many months of brake shoe wear. I emailed them back with my observations...should be interesting to see what the results are. CI Peter
I thought WABCO didn't exist anymore...
Sure they do. They had become WABTEC when they picked up the
Ohio Brass line. Now WABCO/WABTEC was swallowed by another company,
forgot the name, and OB was sold off to Impulse Electric. However,
WABCO continues to exist within this new company as an independent
business unit.
Dynamic braking in R142s is probably normal BUT the brake shoes are smaller and lighter hence the short life. Parking brakes are another matter...if the parking brake TBU engages in motion, the shoes are history and the units are sticking and mal-adjusting to the point where you cannot open them up to put in new shoes. CI Peter
My first lesson in TA was that trains stop with dynamic braking. When the T/O slows down, the electropneumatic system turns the motors into generators that dump the power into the banks of resistors undercar (the same resistors used to control current in the motors when operating.) You can turn a generator/alternator shaft by hand but once it is excited and has a load, you will feel the resistance. The last steps of stopping are when the trainsset has decellerated to about 10 MPH...then the pneumatic brakes kick in.
Attempts to have substations or loads at stations are not new and all were pretty much unsucessful. The R142 system of 'rail gap detection' was to have found another load...another trainset...on the same third rail and would dump power into the resistor banks IF it didn't find one. Simply, it doesn't work and has been turned off until further notice...the trainset operates like everything else. It's hard to type when you've dropped a Redbird shoe on your finger...at least burned out shoes on R142s are just a strip of metal. CI Peter
Is the R142 shoe made of the same Cobra shoe material as the
older cars, or is it a lining with a metal backer, like an
automotive drum brake?
Does that mean that regenerative braking can't get the train down to the 10 mph or so that the TA says is when it likes to use the air brake?
I used 10 mph as a reference....in dynamic braking of DC motor trainsets, pneumatic brakes cut in at about that speed as the motors are generating less than 100 Amperes of DC current. Regenerative braking WOULD bring the trainset down to that speed or less...if the rail gap detector sensed another train to accept the generated power. No train sensed: dynamic braking (power dumped into resistor grid undercar.) The pneumatic brakes don't cut in until the control system is satisfied that generated current doesn't have enough counter energy to slow the train down any more. At that point, the T/O can continue to 'air brake' and slow down gradually or slam you out of your seat. IF the trainset were on 'air brakes' all the time, the brake shoes wouldn't last a month (exception: R62 series EPO cars which haul garbage flatcars...they want max braking power available all the time.) By the way, just read post of R143 coming O/S because of braking problems...teething or Kaw Bomddd. CI Peter
Just remembered....my error. Pressure change went from TBU A to the TBU A plus.....poster here had the notice up...A plus cars had a blue stripe inder the numbers to tell the T/O that it was A plus...then all the cars seemed to get the blue stripe. Inspectors on line had a different paper than posted and pressure readings were all wrong. TA reversed orders...blue stripe indicated TBU A only...was pulled off after modification (cross mark found under car) and left a nice rctangular mark on the side. CI Peter
Peter, your explanation was somewhat confusing. Are there two
brake packages running around out there, or was this just a
passing thing while a fleet retrofit was being done?
Also, why should the parking brake eat shoes? If a brake shoe
is hung up, isn't there a fault that gets raised?
I posted the hole bullentin back before Dave went on Vaction. The Subject was title "Blue strips on R142's" or something like that. If you lookback at the older post it will explane it all.
Robert
So it does. THanks.
I took these today.
Ryan,
Nice job with the blue line photos! -Nick
thanks nick, I was approached by one of the MBTA Inspectors. He wanted to make sure I wasnt a terrorist. Also I have this picture that I took and tell me if you see anything wrong here. P.S. the train was moving when I took this picture.
Besides the storm door being open and one taillight being out?
well isnt it against regulations to have the end door open when the train is moving?
Absolutely!
I thought you were asking about something more subtle...
the taillights are out all the time on the blue line.
I saw that happen when I took the Blue line on 9-4. The operator left his cab at Wonderland after relaying via the storm door (why?) and it opened en route.
well wonderland is the last stop so he may have needed to get out for something and he probably didnt shut the door properly.
But why can't he just use the door we lowly passengers use?
Unfortunately, I had tix for the Red Sox game that nite and things during the day took longer than expected so I wasn't able to get out en route. Maybe next time I am in Boston...
who knows what his reasons might have been....
"Unfortunately, I had tix for the Red Sox game that nite"
Ahh, I do pity you...GO YANKEES!! LOL :-) -Nick
It was a good game. Boston won (this was the game they won after losing about 9 in early September). The reason I said unfortunately was because it cut down on my railfanning but the game was my main reason for going to Boston.
your photo did not look like a terrorist to me ....maybe a tourist !!!.......lol
1993 no internet no subtalk & no digital camras yet but 35 mm 3m 400 speed film ......lol!!
no subtalk? jeez it must have been pretty boring back then. lol (I was 7 so I didnt know much about trains).
true ..
LOL !!
The Internet was around in 1993.
yea .... shows U what i do not know !!! ........yep ............lol!!
thankz ...
It certainly does show how much he knows about the internet. The internet has been around since the 1970s, just not in the form you're used to seeing it in.
To be clear: The internet did not debut with Windows 95.
-Robert King
It didn't? Aww, man ... and after all this time .... :)
--Mark
i have hard of some government & military stuff that whent on ...remember the first faxes ??
that dammed E key on my keyboard ....damn !!
i have rcalled of some government & military stuff that whent on ...remember the first faxes ??
Is that a fact ?? ...well thanks for the info I thought it was a bit later ....hmmmmmm
couldnt do this in 1993 ??...!!.......lol!!
The Internet has been around for decades. I first obtained an email address in 1992.
The World Wide Web is more recent. I first heard of it in early 1994. There wasn't much on it at the time.
I do own a mac 1991 200 with a black & white small screen still works great for text usage & has a floppy disc slot !!
You could do that in 1993, but not as easily, certainly not as fast and it'd definately cost a lot more money for the required equipment.
-Robert King
"I was approached by one of the MBTA Inspectors. He wanted to make sure I wasnt a terrorist"
Unfortunately, technically ur not supposed to shoot the subway w/o obtaining a license first. Unlike the MTA where u can shoot pics all u want.
Feel free to e-mail me privately, and we'll go railfanning sometime. -Nick
Damn, I had forgotten how butt-ugly those Hawker-Siddley cars are. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
U know they do look like PATH cars with a "overhead pick-up" dont they ??
Was this shot with a DIGITAL cam ??
my contest entry ....lol!!!
I have a 60 minute cassette of a trip on an IRT Low V. The tape was made by Ed Davis who wrote, "They Moved the Millions." The book is a black and white pictoral history of all NYC subway models since the inception of the IRT in 1903.
I would like the audio to be on this website. What can be done to get this tape on the website?
What can be done to get this tape on the website?
Are you talking about technically what should be done to put this tape on a web site, or as far as copyright what need to be done legally to put this tape on a web site?
I can mail a copy of this tape to someone who knows how to put the sound on the wedsite.
If you can I want a copy of the tape myself. Please contact me at jeffalterman@yahoo.com
#3 West End Jeff
Ed sent me an audio tape of R-1/9s on the D. It could have been the same tape; after all, all prewar rolling stock had spur-cut bull and pinion gears and sounded the same when accelerating.
I bought my copy of his book from him. Got it autographed, too.
The book is still available from the author, whose address is shown in the bibliography portion of this site.
I had the pleasure of visiting Ed Davis in 1987 while driving through Montana on I-90. He showed me his slides and model subway that he built.
Ed is an IRT fan from The Bronx. I grew up on the Brighton line in Sheepshead Bay. I remember back to the D-Triplex cars.
I grew up in Cypress Hills in Brooklyn, and my favorites were the gate cars on the Lexington Ave el.
Ed lived in Cypress Hills for a while, but it was about 10 years after I had left.
How is Ed? I haven't had any contact with him since 1993.
He is doing well and has retired from Montana Rail Link. He used to post here using the handle of "bigedirtmanl". His son took the computer to college so he is not on the internet presently. He has gotten into politics, and was recently elected to city council or whatever they call it in Montana. He is doing some renovations to his home and also building still another model railroad.
He has some strong political opinions. He had a lot of criticism about how the city handled its affairs.
You ought to restablish contact with him.
I'm sure that he would be glad to hear from you!
I recently found a picture from around 1943 of my father (12 years old) and my grandfather on the platform of Elderts Lane with what looks like a gate car on the opposite platform (going towards Jamaica). My dad said he used to take a special train from that station to the Brooklyn Navy Yard, a train very mysterious to me until I found this website and learned of the Lexington el's existance.
If I get a scanner, I'll scan & post it.
I'd really like to see that picture. I hope that you can scan it.
Gate cars made all stops out to 111th St until Oct 13th 1950.
Can you make out the gate car# in the picture?
No, it's mostly a pic of my dad & grandad, and the gate cars are far in the distance. It's almost impossible to make out what number is on it.
Too bad, you know what I think of those gate cars!
I think it's high time we officially dub you as Mr. Gate Car.:-)
Ting! Ting!
That wouldn't make me mad.
If only I had a time machine that I could go back to the 1940's.
All of you would have loved to ride on one of those open platforms between cars.
how much is a copy of it ??
It did not occur to me to charge for the tape. I do however, trade radio airchecks (tapes of live broadcasts). I always like to hear airchecks of WCBS-FM from New York. If you are in Southern California I probably would like KRTH.
Gotta ask Dave. It's his toy.
BTW, if he decides to add a sounds page, I have pre GOH R42 airbrake (darth vader) and a 1971 R9 on the LL line .wav files I'd be happy to donate.
Yes, it would be nice to hear the sound of an R9. Go for it.
Heypaul's R-9 tape fits the bill.
The .wav files I made from his R9 tape, so they would sound familiar.
How many of them did you make? There are some great sounds of a CC train accelerating on that tape. Not to mention door and compressor sounds. I'd love to get a sound bit of that famous "tch-ssssss" magnet valve sound.
I'll e-mail it to you ...
In case you want to hear a fast wav of a low-v play over and over again its the background sound of my Trainbuff site. Its not the greatest site, I haven't updated it in a while but you can hear the Low-V. By the way, I know the background image of the site is an R-1, not a Low-V, but I didn't know how to get HeyPaul's R-9 tape onto the 'puter.
I had a dark signal on the road a few days ago. The only clue I had was that the road ahead was clear and that there was a yellow signal where one should not have been and I did not see the red so I took a brake.
That yellow is usually yellow only when there is a train in the station ahead and since there was not one is this a sort of safety feature?
Since the preceeding signal was yellow and there was no red and the stop arm was down, it was the signal that was out not just a bulb on it (unless RED and Green were b/o).
Is there a bit o a safety feature that made the other light go to yellow or was I just lucky.
Where was the signal?
Usually a dark signal with the arm down is just a blown bulb,
but that won't tumble down the previous signal to yellow.
The distant signal control circuit, which determines whether
an automatic displays green or yellow, checks that the next
signal is trying to display better than a red. However,
there is no lamp-out detection, unless this is one of the
brand-new signal installations and they are including that in
typical circuits now. What you describe sounds likes a relay
failure, which is why I wanted to know the signal # and location.
Now, in terms of RTO rules: When you see the yellow, you must
bring your train under control so that you can stop before
you reach the next signal. When you reached that next signal
and it was dark, you should have stopped your train short of
the signal and called control center for permission to proceed.
Is it ever appropriate for a T/O to simply look at the tripper and proceed if it's down?
Not on the main line without permission.
We are talking about dark signals, right?
Where was this signal?
Main line as opposed to yards?
(Yes, dark signals.)
Is blanket permission ever given to key-by? There's a funky signal -- red over yellow on a single head, or something like that -- southbound, approaching the dead-end track at Canal. I don't know what the signal means, but both times I rode past it at the window, the T/O stopped the train, waited for the tripper to drop, and proceeded.
That's a BMT thing. Does it have an "AK" plate attached?
Which track and what is the exact location?
I'm not sure about the AK plate.
As I'm sure you're aware, the J/M/Z has four tracks through the Bowery. Normally, only the outer pair is used. The inner pair dead ends at Canal, where only the east side track is currently in place.
This signal is on the southbound inner track just before it ends. See the extreme top of this map.
Is this sort of signal found anywhere else?
Oh, THAT Canal St! Now it makes sense. It's basically a pocket
timer, forces the train to go real slow approaching the block.
It displays a Red over Yellow on a single head? There's a
similar "AK" signal wrong-railing through the 14 st tubes that
displays a R/R on a single head which then clears to a yellow.
But this is well before the bumper block. The usual timers are in effect (complete with an ancient GT plate) in the station. This is at the switch onto J3 track.
I may be wrong on the colors. It's two colors on the same signal head -- that much I'm sure of. The signal doesn't change.
Let me revise my question: Are there any similar signals elsewhere that the general public has some chance of seeing?
The Canal track in question was used in regular weekend service between 1992 and 1994, when J trains terminated at Canal. I wonder if the arrangement then was as it is now. Unfortunately, I first discovered the railfan window after 1994.
Sounds like a 1-shot GT: Red/White.
It should clear to yellow, though, if the stop goes down.
No, the two aspects in this case are on the same head (and I think they're red and yellow). This is not a GT. The train came to a full stop at the signal, the stop went down, and the train proceeded. I've been through it twice.
Is this signal gone now? You said something about 1994.
The signal was in place on December 2, 2001, when a GO had J trains terminating at Canal.
The 1994 reference was to when regularly scheduled passenger service last used that track. I hadn't yet discovered the railfan window so I don't know if that signal was in place then -- although I can't imagine it's a recent installation.
I'll try to find out from some folks who work that neck
of the woods. It sounds like the same sort of signal as
on Q track reverse in the tubes.
On the few occasions where Control has known of a improperly working signal, they will continue to give each train permission to pass it until either an RTO supervisor or someone from Signals is on the scene; then it is that person's responsibility to flag trains through the area.
The only dark signal I have encountered was one of the timers approaching Simpson St SB on the 2. The space between timers appeared to be much larger than normal, so I approached slower than normal (normal is 10, I was doing about 4 waiting for something to leap out of the dark (it was about 0130)), Sure enough, as I passed the second timer, the third cleared from dark to yellow. Now that it was lit, I could pass it, but I spent the rest of the night explaining how and why I passed a dark signal.
If the dark signal cleared ahead of you, then you were cool, right?
Yeah, but some of the wits downtown just couldn't understand the concept of a dark signal clearing.
They should require mandatory handle time (even with a pilot) for those admins that don't have it. It would put them in your shoes.
There will be no more stupid grade timers on the queens blvd line if they all have to todo handle time. All problems will be fixed if that happens.
Is the T/O held responsible if he passes a dark signal he didn't know existed? (Say it was dark and this wasn't his regular line.)
Most T/O's will pass a dark signal for the simple fact that if you are going 35mph in a tunnel by the time you "see" the signal is dark there is no way you can stop before it but they will grab a big brake to make sure the next signal is not RED.
Dark signal is equal to a RED stop and stay and control has to approve you to pass it even if it is just a blown bulb no matter the condition of the trip arm.
I remember the few years I lived in Philadelphia and rode the two subway lines there. The personnel were lax compared to NYCTA. The doors would often open before the train was at a complete stop and I saw the train pass an extended tripper a few times.
There probably were no rule against passenger "guests" riding in the cab with the engineer. I was invited to ride with motormen several times on the Broad Street Subway in the large cabs of the B-1 model subway car. Those cars were similar to the BMT standard though they were built in 1929.
Whenever you see a dark signal you must treat it as if it were displaying the most restrictive aspect, unless you have some sort of operative cab signal.
>When you see the yellow, you must
>bring your train under control so that you can stop before
>you reach the next signal. When you reached that next signal
>and it was dark, you should have stopped your train short of
>the signal and called control center for permission to proceed
Thank you for assuming I did not do or know what I was supposed to do.
If you want the signal check the CC logs it's my voice on the radio calling it in.
Hey, you didn't say what you did. You didn't supply enough
information to answer your question, which was, effectively,
was the yellow signal a warning that the next signal was
burned out, or was it luck? If you say you could see the road
ahead clear, I don't know, without the exact signal location, why
you got a yellow with the dark signal having its arm down. The
only simple explanation is suggested by Engine Brake, that it was
in a station time overlap area, but since you say the track
far ahead was clear, that isn't it.
I thought I was clear that I caught it. That was the whole point the yellow saved me.
BUT THERE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A YELLOW! That is why I thought fail safe or efficiency test.
The signals on the sb express north of 74th are normally not yellow unless there is something in station and there was not.
Apparently you were not the only person I gave the wrong idea to.
OK, those signals have not been "upgraded" yet. There is no lamp-out
detection and you're right, normally there wouldn't have been
the yellow in advance to warn you. There's one very remote
signal failure mode but I'd tend to agree that this was most
likely a set-up, i.e. RTO had signal maintainers pull the lighting
to the green aspect and opened the D line circuit to the signal in
advance to give you the yellow.
Had the yellow not been set up, they would have a harder time
writing up any t/o who overran the dark signal and making it stick.
Did your c/r make the required announcement: Attention customers,
we are being delayed by a deliberate signal failure. ?
I should consider putting out a flyer on deliberately darkening signals, perhaps I'll talk to one of the V-Chairs. I have yet to find anyone who has been either through the DAN or arbitration for this type of violation, but I have heard it has happened. I remember when Bergen Street caught fire a few years back. I worked a transfer on the F line and was operating past "bagged" signals. I operated in accordance with rules and bulletins pertaining to reduced speed on yellow and found the TSS at Bergen Street was bothered by my ways of approaching signals that had not yet been taken O/S by G.O. Thats why I feel the green signal is the best defence against the incompetance of the rulebook, and its associated writers. I am curious as to how many hourlys and managerials would keep their jobs if we had the same level of scrutiny that our brothers and sisters in the BLE incur when taking the rules exam.
Hey I have a rules/discipline sort of question: How much PC
are motormen required to know? On the big RRs, engineers have
to know the location of all signals, interlocking or automatic,
as well as speed restrictions. That's not really feasible on
a transit system....imagine trying to memorize every automatic
on your regular run, nevermind the entire division! Same thing
with speed restrictions.
So, let's say you are approaching a curve with a 26 Miles sign
ahead of it, but that sign has been removed or isn't visible.
Is it "your fault" if you speed through the curve? Is it
"your fault" if you pass a dark automatic and the previous
signal was green? What if you are coming around a curve at the
posted speed, encounter a yellow signal, but the signal spacing is
such that you can't stop in time?
Perhaps Bill from Maspeth can elaborate on the training he incurred when he took the handles when he promoted, but I imagine training was the same as it is today. In the railroads, a Road Foreman of Engines will thoroughly grill new employees, as well as current ones taking their annual requalification exams. They are also checked for Form Ds and PC. We, however aren't checked at all in Subways when we come out. We get one day of training per line and are then written up if we take a wrong lineup or speed through unfamiliar territory. We get one "look" at a homeball and are expected to remember it forever. At least the railroads will give you a damned chance to get it right with up to 6 weeks per line before the final exam for breakin. As for the speed sign, that is a separate provision for violation, reckless operation etc. Even if you didn't hit the red behind that yellow, you are guilty anyway if it is written up for a DAN. BY the way, a DAN, or Disciplinary Action Notice, is a notice of conviction. Yes, you are guilty until proven innocent. It notes a statement of "facts", not charges or allegations. Best bet since Labor Relations is a money making business because of 70%/30%, don't speed.
To answer the next question. If you are penalized with 5 days suspension you can york for those five days at 70% pay.
It is supposed to be a nice thing as most people can't afford a month without pay. I have been encouraged threats of termination/demotion and then you are glad to be offered this and TA saves money.
There is also a crew room rumor that the union gets a piece of the savings, too.
The Union does NOT have any incentive in having its members suspended, money or otherwise. The chairs, vice chairs and VPs are tied up in discipline hearings when they could beout in the field to answer questions. 70/30 is the monetary incentive for management to write you up, and to issue enormous penalties for small infractions, knowing that most will work the suspension at a discount, rather than to take the days in the street. The pros of working suspension time are that you don't have to make up the lost time before retirement, ie "bad time". You do get to get a partial check, instead of none at all. Fine in lieu of suspension is not in place of termination, however. Once you have either settled at the step hearings or decision upheld, you are given the choice to work or take time.
ER
The ones that insisted that was true were from CCY. It did not make sense to me. In fact it was the T/O that was with me when I met you up there!! Those guys are paranoid.
The union also has no incentive to make its newest members 'safe and secure.' Wannabe1 and OnTheJuice are covered by CYA D. CI Peter
Again, by contract, employees, while on probation, are not covered by the disciplinary grievance provisions of the contract. An employee, while on probation. cannot be suspended by management. He must be sent for counseling. My only options are to request counseling, extension of probation or dismissal. You are not even given the right to union representation. Don't blame management - blame your contract.
Well, Eddie "the first thing I'd like to say is none of you should be here" C. (he still gives that speech) did throw us a bone and said while it would not have official status they would make a rep availble for consultation and management would likely not raise a fuss.
Now one of the guys from the OC does have a former prosition as a provisional and subsequently passed the test in the old title and he was offered two days suspension for his incident. When he was at Jay they told him the union did not want to help him but he held out for representation and got it.
Employees demoted into a lower title do not serve a probationary period even if they've never held that position before. FOr example, a train operator, hire off the street and demoted for cause to a cleaner would not have a probationary period UNLESS it was part of an arbitration award.......
Funny you should mention that example.
I was wondering if they were going to do that, they did mention they might but since this thing is so new who knows. I guess once people pass Civil Service probation Vs. MTA probation it is a given but that inbetween period is the question
"70/30 is the monetary incentive for management to write you up."
I'm sure you won't be suprised if I disagree with you. Managers do not have a monetary incentive to use the disciplinary system. I do not get a raise based upon the number of people I write up nor do I get a raise baised on the total number of days suspension my subordinates serve. The purpose of discipline is to correct unwanted behavior. I would perfer that my employees do not violate rules and not force me to use discipline as a remedy.
The system of disciplinary grievances is spelled out in the contract between the TA and the TWU. I am compelled to use it. I cannot arbitrarilly decide to use alternative means to remedy situations. If I disregard the contract as it applies to discipline, what other provisions of the contract should I disregard? Should I disregard seniority? Should I disregard Pick rights? How about vacation allowances? It is just not that easy.
Most supervisors and managers usually try re-instruction and sometimes more than one before they resort to discipline. On the other hand, the TWU does not officially recognize counseling and some employees do not respond to it. There is little room for anything other than discipline.
Of course, we have a progressive discipline system with multiple tracks. We have a job performance track, a time and attendance track and a safety track (in some job classes). Penalties in each track are progressive but penalties do not cross tracks. Time and attendence track penalties are not served until they are 20 days or greater. If an employee abuses his sick leave or is constantly late, he can acrew penalties of a warning, reprimand, 1, 2, 5, 10 and 15 days without ever doing a day in the street. What incentive is there for the employee to correct his behavior? On the other hand, if an employee does not perform his job properly, every penalty will be served. The purpose of the 70/30 penalty is so the employee's family does not suffer undue hardship because of an employee who can't or refuses to modify his behavior.
Of course, you'd have people believe that it's all gravy for management. However, hearings are held on the employees time which means that the manager holding the hearing (inmy dept.) must usually do it on his own time or change his schedule. When the case goes to tri-partite arbitration, it is, again, held on the employees own time, sometimes in the evening. When the manager is called to testify, he is usually doing so on his own time (since we do not get overtime).
Discipline is rarely successful. As Harry would have to admit, the same 5% of the employees repeatedly traverse the disciplinary system while 70% or more are never touched by it. So why discipline? Very simple. When a line superintendent exceeds his goal for switch run-throughs or signal over-runs and his boss askes what are you doing about it, he can say training, re-training and discipline. Telling a senior manager that you hug each employee who splits a switch or fails to make a safety stop (in an effort to correct the behavior), does not make it.
By management, I wasn't referring to the ones who actually write us up. I should have been clear on that. I didn't say supervision deliberately because they have contractual pay raises. It wasn't the TWU who said, "hey we can save the TA 30% in payroll for suspended employees by encouraging the write ups of more people, lets endorse it". Thats a manager in some department, or departments, who gets the bonuses for instituting cost cutting measures. We have MANY more writeups now then we did years ago. 18,000 writeups last year. I don't think it is because of the % of the workers who I admit I try to keep in check before trouble starts. Nor is it just because of the % of the TSSs who think it is important to go over the heads of their line supers and submit G2s over perceived problems that happen to violate a rule. When I came out, I didn't have 3,500 bulletins signed by Paul Oversier or Harold McGlouphlan stating "line management will monitor for compliance, violators will be severely disciplined". What wasn't serious then is serious now. It is for a reason. Labor Relations is a money making business. Someone made that decision. I'm going to make a demand for the next contract to remove the 70/30. I hear there are others who side on this issue. There are those who are being offered days in the street for violations that didn't exist years ago. We have more writeups today. If I was a chronic screw up, it would be an incentive for me to clean up my act if I were forced to take days. If I wasn't a chronic screwup, then I wouldn't get shoved for 10 days for forgetting to call back into my house while on sick. There are of course brighter sides to the current setup though. The F.R.A. demands 30 days for occupying track without authorization violations.
Thankyou EngineBrake and TrainDude for sharing your knowledge and experience. You two guys may banter back and forth throwing brickbats at eachother BUT I read into all of this. I understand so much more now about the 'politics' and don't feel so bad now about being pulled off the line for someone with seniority whom I feel was lacking qualifications, background and experience. I am happy about going back to 'inspection troubles' because of the variety of work assignments, especially as my confidence grows. I realise now the benefits of the car desk sup pushing me into more work and having a foreman from 180ths crew who makes an effort to look after the new guys. My 'big mouth' is out of words. CI Peter
Are they like Lincoln and Douglass or Lucy and Ethel?
It has to be something about the Bronx.
Just because we have a difference of opinon doesn't make it the end of the world. We happen to have alot of common interests, like our model trains (MTS Imports 4 car R10s, 3 car WF R36s) we like motorcycling and collectors items, we have families and cars to fix, just like half the people in this site. The differences are TD is a representative of Management, and I'm a TWU rep. We are bound to clash eventually, but as long as you can walk away without an attitude, all arguments are healthy.
Well said, Harry. It's a shame that some don't realize that overwhelming power on either side is counter-productive. It is the balance of power between labor and management that keeps things in check. The disagreement on the disciplinary process does not mean that we disagree on the need for discipline or that it may be unfairly applied in some cases. To the TA newbies, here on Subtalk, when you find out that managers, supervisors, hourly, TWU officials and SSSA reps may socialize off the job, don't become suicidal. We all, after all, did start in the same place and those roots grow deep.
Of course, the 70/30 provision replaced another questionable practice. It used to be that a disciplinee could 'work off' his suspension by working his RDO for free. This, of course, presented many legal problems including violations of the Fair labor Standards Act. Hence, it was scrapped. I'm not sure if the provision about cashing in vacation days in lieu of suspension is still in place.
I'd be careful about forcing the elimination of the 70/30 provision of the contract. Some families would be severely hury by a 20 day suspension - that's a month without a check. Unless it could be arranged that a suspension would be served at a rate of 2 days per week, it could be a very sharp sword held to the TWU neck.
There wouldn't be a 20 day suspension if the TA knew the employee couldn't come to work. There would be so many abandoned intervals, dirty stations etc, the TA would have to go back to the repremands for the discipline, and days in the street for those who truly earned real discipline. My family would be hurt if I got suspended, and I would pay for that. Since I wouldn't have a cushion to fall back on, it would be the last time I create that violation again.
"What if you are coming around a curve at the
posted speed, encounter a yellow signal, but the signal spacing is
such that you can't stop in time? "
Then the yellow is not far enough in advance of the red, right?
Well, yeah, but there are plenty of places within the system
where that's the case, i.e. you have to take a full service
brake as soon as you see the yellow in order to stop in time.
I guess with no dining cars and no soup to spill, that's okay. And it keeps the brake shop in business.
I never assume that anyone doesn't do their job either. If I did, I'd be working in Labor relation, not in RTO, not as a representative. I went on the info you gave me. I was also thinking along the lines of efficiency testing, which would also conclude you were approaching a station adjacent to a platform. Bottom line, you had to have a green or yellow on the dark signal.
Hypothetical situation: You pass a dark signal approaching a station, DO NOT go into emergency, and are grilled by a TSS at the station. What do you say? What do you write?
It's repugnant that supervision would deliberately create a
delay to service just to nail some people. Was it you or
another m/m who was describing an "efficiency test" where
command refused to answer the radio to see if the m/m would
try to get out and use the phone?
One night I saw a "speed trap" set up at 15th/Prospect Park on the IND, a station with a very broad curve. The TSS (or whoever) was standing at the extreme end of the platform, and just became visible right when it was (potentially) too late.
I didn't think that was too cool.
It happened to me years back on Central Park West south of 72 Street. I charged an obviously RTO charge of almost 20 minutes on the shmucks who truly deserved it: RTO supervision.
1) Blue Light phones DEAD
2) Radio communications DEAD
3) Flagging conductor with no issued radio, not HIS fault, blame that on RTO too while we are at it.
4) 12 handbrakes on an 8 car train to comply with efficiency testing.
You know the rest, the no lunch, late clear, etc.
My G2 was even simpler: Supervision was ON THE SCENE from the start. If they thought it was as funny as I did watching those Local trains ABD up the express, they'd be back working as my conductor. The Transit Authority has the right to check up on our operations, to protect the passengers, just as the FRA does their radar and restricted speed barrier tests. But they don't delay service to ensure safety. We do at NYCTA. They frequently take down conductors indication boards to see if we continue to open side doors. When we started pulling cords and walking the length of the trains to ensure proper positioning, they started hitting the yards instead and checking safety glasses and uniform stuff. The Line Superintendants never want to eat late trains so they look for ways to charge it to general orders, work gangs and Car Equipment. Yet, when the Jay Street TSSs catch you trying to make up lost time in an illegal fashion, where is the line Supt? Is he in a position where he will allege safety is important, but will then harass you and have you watched if you can't make the time. I know of one who took care of a DAN before it was issued, and the TSS went over his head anyway. RTO is very political in nature and divided between on time performance and safety. You can't have both but some don't get it.
Some questions:
> I charged an obviously RTO charge of almost 20 minutes
How exactly do "RTO charges" work?
> My G2 was even simpler
What's a "G2"?
> I know of one who took care of a DAN before it was issued
Who's DAN?
"Who's Dan?"
The opposite of NAD?
Delays have to be charged against something - Track Dept; Car Equipment; Signals or RTO, so that the suits know who to blame the drop in on-time performance on.
G2 is an in-house written report concerning almost anything, but usually in refernce to some incident that caused grief for someone.
DAN is a Disciplinary Action Notice - ie someone is getting written up for breaking a rule.
on time performance and safety. You can't have both but some don't get it.
Sure you can, as long as you don't get too anal about either one!
How do you set 12 handbrakes on an 8 car train? Do you bring
along extra handbrake stands, or do you set them all half again
as hard as usual?
Thats our friendly litle way of saying our train is properly secured.
Am I missing something??? CI Peter
8 car train has eight handbrakes; Brake claimed to have set 12 of them, ie he over-secured the train to prevent another stupid rule infraction.
Now that is a good question.
Train under control, nothing ahead, all signals clear, no contratictory signals
but how to pass off missing the dark signal? Mistook the trip for debris?
Even some TSS men would tell you "what signal?" In your report, the preceeding signal indicated was GREEN. Since you are not required to stop at the next signal, one that you can't see, it would be prime for arbitration to try it out. If they wrote you up on 98G, that would fall, that requires you to have control of your train approaching any signal displaying stop. If they hang you out to dry for not being prepared to stop at a signal you weren't supposed to, they would be doing so at the risk of a slowdown.
During my road final I had an efficiency test (part of the reason I don't like AMs). It was a 'fake' red where there should not have been and they wanted to see if we would key it.
As it turned out the supt was on the train and was pissed that I was reporting people hiding in the tracks without flagging instead of calling it in. The two TSSes and the supt did not see anyone there and were about to get nasty with me. Then the clip board army came out of the woodwork.
My friend, you and I are discovering the way things are done. What counts IS that we do things the right way and that the people who need to know find out. WE are the TA, WE make trains GO. CI Peter
The signal that was burned out was intending to display either red or yellow aspects. Older IRT and BMT signalling doesn't provide a series of yellows when approaching an occupied station under station time. Under newer signals with exception to the light bulbs, the system was working as designed. Perhaps, the signal which was yellow should be checked for tower control markers, denoted by "X" on it. Signals Division also modifies automactic blocks when approaching "dead rail sections" so that a particular section of track will always display yellow. One example is during upgrades. When I left the West End, the signals south of 9th Avenue were the original BMT heads, wiring and cabling, while the new signals placed into service at Fort Hamilton were new. Since the two systems are incompatible, a train entering Fort Hamilton would not allow the signals at 9th Avenue to clear in conjunction with it. Therefore, by displaying an approach, or yellow aspect, you can safely make the transition from the older to the newer signals without rulebook conflicts and degradation of safety. You weren't lucky. You were doing your job.
That remind me of a question I have in regard to signals:
I am standing at Market East Station, a SEPTA rail station with four tracks (2 in each direction).
The signal on track 1 shows green over red. The SEPTA commuter train on track 1 leaves, and the signal changes to red over yellow.
Does that mean "Stop, and when you go do it slowly and prepare to stop again?" or does it have to do with a switch setting to track 2?
R/Y would be "restricting" in that case, I guess, meaning the block ahead is occupied, but a move is cleared.
Boy am I glad you posted that. i've spent months trying to figure out why there is an eternal yellow leaving 55 St SB on the West End, when the next signal is always green (unless there is a train already there). It never occured to me that it was because of a change in the signal system from old to new.
The reason I say I was lucky was that it was yellow and there is no reason it should have been. If it was green even though the dark signal would have been yellow at worst I still would never have been able to stop in front of it I would have focused on the green behind it. The face plate was not lit and it was recessed so it was har to pick out until I was on top of it, the yellow let me slow down enough to pick it out but there should have been no yellow unless there is some fail safe. As stated I have been in that area before those signals are always green unless there is a train ahead and there was not.
The reason I asked is also that I have the feeling it was an efficiency test.
This was IND Queens so I don't know how that figures in and no there were no homeballs involved
Some random notes:
The single head "red + yellow" aspect could have been a "red + really dingy linar white" aspect...when I was a Train Dspr w/ Amcrash, before I could work a given section, I had to sit down w/ a Rules Examiner and go over the physical characteristics of the territory involved - sort of an oral exam; at the TA, I've never even heard the phrase physical characteristics - we simply operated over each line with an experienced T/O (one day each line, two for the A and F)...
the situation that started this thread may have resulted when the block occupancy which cascaded down to the yellow signal cleared by the time the T/O reached the station...I'm not Larry King...
EGGS!
It had no lunar but that is a good guess that would make sense.
I had never really heard of efficieny tests on Saturday.
"the block occupancy which cascaded down to the yellow signal cleared by the time the T/O reached the station"
please elaborate....
I think what Eggman is saying is that approaching the station
there are a series of automatics spaced less than a full block
apart with overlaping control lines. The home control extends
the usual two blocks with station time release. When there is
a train in the station, this series of automatics will all be
red. As the train starts to leave, there is a point where that
will cause two yellows in a row to be displayed. If memory serves,
as the train clears the crossover south of the station, the hooligan
signals are still red, but the automatic right before the station
portal and the automatic about 200' north of that will be yellow,
then the next automatic north will be green.
So, the theory was that a train had just departed Roosevelt as
Wannabe1 approached this setup and he saw the northerly yellow
signal, the dark signal "wanting" to display yellow as well.
However, I think Wannabe1 already implied that wasn't the case,
and the signals in advance of the dark signal were clear too.
Well yellow is clear, too.
And no he was implying the yellow protected a lunar red that was doing its own thing on time and not part of a larger scheme of things. But it wasn't a lunr and the leaving signal on the station was green in fact everything was green except for the dark signal.
G-Y-D-G-G-G-G
I have never seen that Y expcept when the much later signals were Y or R
Well yellow is clear, too.
Sorry, that's a TA sig vs RR sig nomenclature thing. I think
of green as CLEAR, yellow is APPROACH.
G-Y-D-G-G-G-G
I have never seen that Y expcept when the much later signals were Y or R
Right, so, either there was a relay hung up in the middle position
or (more likely) they were playing games.
"Right, so, either there was a relay hung up in the middle position
or (more likely) they were playing games. "
Right. The chances of HV hanging up between front and back seem almost impossible. Occham's razor points to something else, like the relay being removed. (Just a theory)
Another conspiracy theory? Perhaps it was the FALN looking to steal thunder from the Middle-Easter crazies. Or maybe the relay finger fractured and dropped off.
For this failure mode to occur, two contacts would have to fail
at once. One is in the lighting circuit for the signal that went
dark, the other is in the line circuit that runs back to the
D(istant) relay at the signal that was at yellow. Very unlikely.
Also unlikely but not quite as much is a high-resistance contact
in the stop arm controller. I'm pretty sure that territory uses
AC line relays which can get hung up in the middle if the voltage
on the coils is in a certain range
Now I was told that afterward for hours train were rerouted express on the local to avoid the area. Would they do that for just a burnyt bulb? Could they have done a test then messed it up?
Well, that bit of info certainly changes things. My guess is neither a burnt bulb or any "hijinks" would result in _hours_ of diversions.
But that might also have been they day someone went into the GO area leaving Roosevelt.
Well, it wouldn't be unheard of to disconnect something for a test
and then be unable to get it working again :) But, it sounds more
like a legit signal failure. What did your leader and follower
encounter?
My leader was not going to admit they passed a dark signal (would you)and at stilwell I only look to take a comfort and stuff my face with tamales as ZMan can verify.
WMATA 1100 and 1101, sighted on April 21 on the field trip at Franconia-Springfield and I saw them today at Grosvenor just after 7:30 AM this morning leading on an inbound train. These cars do not have the usual AC markers under their number plates. Does anyone here know if these cars do not have the AC motors and if so, what do they have?
Are those two cars in passenger service? I remember seeing a set of Rohrs late one night on a collection run. The cars still had roll signs.
Phil Hom
Yes, they are in passenger service. You are taking about 1114 and 1115 and are often sitting at the Alexandria Yard.
I guess after all the cars were updated, the AC sign became meaningless. It is like still carrying the words "Fuel Injected" on the back of a 2001 car when almost all news cars have fuel injection.
Or indicating which TV programs are in color nowadays. I still remember when "We are live and in color" was a common phrase on TV.
There are still motels with signs that say "Color TV."
My guess is that they have AC motors, as there were control changes (like a total re-equipping) that don't allow MU between AC motored and DC (Cam controllered) motored cars. That's why you don't see 1000's and any other class together in the same train. 2000's and 3000's stay together as a class as well.
I've seen 1000s running with 3000s before. I've even seen one on the Green Line which almost never sees Rohrs like this:
R-R-B-B-R-R
They run together and I must see at least one train like that every two weeks on the Red Line.
BTW: IIRC, you were the one who noticed the lack of the AC mark back in April.
Does anyonr know if this was a two sided map? The map itself is in the same format that was used from 1948 to 1956 {Hagstrom}. The prior ones had a title pane and service info on the reverse. I am wondering if the 1956 one [Rockaway extension shown for the first time] had reverse info as well.
Thanks
I was riding the 7 Queens bound and noticed something near the western end of the Vernon-Jackson station on the Main street bound platform. It looks like a glass triangle of some sort, perhaps it is a small room used for survailance. I never noticed this before, it looked like it was new.
Also heard an announcement around 3:30pm this afternoon about F trains running via 63rd street and E's running on the C up CPW. Sounds like there was trouble in the 63rd street tunnel. I also heard alot of activity on the T/O's radio while riding to Flushing on the 7 train. Said something about a problem near Times Square and that all trains were running local. Since we were just leaving TSQ it must have been the BMT (7 trains use the BMT channel). Sounded like a real mess but I have no other info.
Wow, well I'm pretty sure that the Glass Triangle you saw and I saw on December 9th was a dispatchers booth or something of the sort. If you look at 14th and 7th on the northbound end of the southbound platform you'll see a dispatchers office for the 3. Similar architect, similar use? I don't know.
Those are security booths being built on both the Manhattan and Queens bound platforms. The NYPD needs a bit of protection from the cold and windy conditions for the upcoming winter.
Paul
It is a booth for police. Marcy Ave. has one too. Security concerns dictate that police are stationed at the entrance to all underriver tubes to make sure the bad guys don't walk into the tunnels with ulterior motives.
I had a feeling.
I was riding the 7 Queens bound and noticed something near the western end of the Vernon-Jackson station on the Main street bound platform. It looks like a glass triangle of some sort, perhaps it is a small room used for survailance. I never noticed this before, it looked like it was new.
Also heard an announcement around 3:30pm this afternoon about F trains running via 63rd street and E's running on the C up CPW. Sounds like there was trouble in the 53rd street tunnel. I also heard alot of activity on the T/O's radio while riding to Flushing on the 7 train. Said something about a problem near Times Square and that all trains were running local. Since we were just leaving TSQ it must have been the BMT (7 trains use the BMT channel). Sounded like a real mess but I have no other info.
I recently bought this rollsign on ebay. I was just wondering what lines it might have been used on. Here is a list of the destinations on it.
Wash. Hts-207th St; Wash. Hts-168th St; Concourse-Bedford Pk; Concourse-205th St; Jamaica-179th St; Queens-Forest Hills; Court St-Boro Hall.
Here is a picture of it.
It doesn't look like anything from a NYCTA subway car -- perhaps from a bus or old trolley car with a partial roll of destinations from an IND R-1/9 or R-10.
Looks like an old IND north destination sign from the 1940's or 50's.
I spot the A, AA, BB, CC, D, E, & GG. destinations.
It seems to be from an IND train from the 1930's. R1-R9 model.
It's an R10 roll sign and was used (obviously) on any of the routes the R10s were on. Over the years, that mostly meant the A train, but it later years they showed up elsewhere, ending up on the C.
They also did a short stint on the BMT in the '50s.
R10s, the R11, R12, R14, R15 (I think) and the BMT Bluebird used small individual sign boxes along the top of the window line, instead of the integrated boxes common on most equipment.
My guess is R1/9 and they also had separate roller boxes a set of three of which grace my dining room. The odd thing is his roll seems short--no Forest Hills, Bedford Park etc.
Actually I think you may be right, because the crank is on the side. IIRC, the R10 cranks were on the bottom.
I remember those R-10 signs were so small that you could not read them from ten feet away (with normal vision)
It couldn't be an R-10, too big.
I bid on a set of three rollsigns that had the routes for the 1-7 lines but I got outbid in the last 10 seconds
It's an R-9 upper (Northern). The roll signs were very easy to remove. Move the spring load tabs to the side, open the case upward, lift the module, and pull out. All you have to do now is explain it to the Transit Cop on the platform.
I have that very same sign, complete with mechanism and sign box. Made by the Hunter Illuminated Car Sign Company in Flushing.
Right now, my sign box is signed up as a CC with today's C terminals (Wash. Hts - 168th St. and Fulton-Euclid Ave.).
Look closely and you'll see "1 - Upper Destination" stamped on the upper edge of the mechanism.
We have the same sign box. Want to have something different on the sign box? Use D 6 Ave Express; 205 Street Concouse; Fulton-Euclid Ave.
This train really did run with White and Green marker lights , when the D train ran to Coney Island & B'klyn Church ave on the current F-line. This route came down from the Bronx as a express and took the crossover at Jay street and ran as a Fulton express.There were at least 3 of these trains in the AM that I can remember that ran this route. Why the TA did this I would love to know, since they had the A & E lines. BTW my sign box at present has F 6 Ave Express; Jamaica 179th Street; Coney Island.
Have fun
Ron J
I just got another rollsign. It is just the roll but it is still a good buy.It is the routes for the
and lines and the plane to the jfk express.
For a time, I had my sign box set for "C-8th Ave. Express", Concourse-Bedford Park to Sixth Av.-34th St. This was used during a 1962 water main break at 23rd St. and 6th Ave. At the same time, there was also a DD service, the only time that marking was ever used officially.
Most of the time, I have it set for either the A or D. Over the years, I've displayed just about all of the IND routes; however, I will not sign it up as an E. The betrayal I felt on September 23, 1967 has been seared into my memory, and I've never forgotten it. 8th Ave. express, my foot - that just about sums it up.
Steve,I remember those routings while still living in Queens.Had a chance to ride at the railfan window on a F (R 1/9's) from 34th Street that was on track B-1 and crossed all the way over to B-2 to 42nd Street. That is one switch move I will never forget.
Ron J.
About IRT's R 110A, what lines will we see these trains?
Phil,
There are only two 5-car sets of R110A's, and they are both prototypes. Nobody knows if they will ever run again, but they used to run on the #2. If ur talking about the R142 and R142A, which is the model that was produced based on the R110A prototype, u can find them on the #2 and #6. -Nick
I understand there is the possibility that the R-110A trainsets might be scrapped. Do you have any knowledge about the eventual fate of the R-110A trainsets?
#3 West End Jeff
Rumor has it that their seating is being replaced with R142 type benches and will re-appear on the #2 at a later date.
Which annoys me because I LOVED the forward facing window seats, an oddity on any IRT car.
Comply, resistance is futile!
avid r/8 of r/143
Compliance is highly illogical, captain. And do my ears look funny?
LOL
avid
Laughing is a typical human reaction and serves no logical purpose. We should have crushed your planet during first contact, but that would've killed a great TV series.
Isn't hindsight wonderful.
Again LOL.
avid
Those seats were more comfortable than the R-142's. I saw them when they were first introduced to the public in November 1992 with the R-110 B at the Transit Museum. Also I caught them 5 years ago on a Brooklyn Bound (2) at Chambers Street. If they are scrapped or modified, I will hate that.
I don't want them to be modified, but one of the many complaints that riders had about the R110A was uncomfortable seats. -Nick
I once rode the R110A in 1994 on the 2 line from Flatbush to 241st St and back just to enjoy that window seat. I was hoping there would be more. But unfortunatley, that arrangement reduced the number of seats over the current R142 config.
At least the R-110A trainset will still be used. Too bad about the seats though. I wonder if they'll use that trainset to test other new technologies in the future?
#3 West End Jeff
"Which annoys me because I LOVED the forward facing window seats, an oddity on any IRT car"
I'm afraid bucket seating is a thing of the past. The IRT cars are way to narrow for them, but even on the IND/BMT lines you won't see that anymore because the MTA needs more room for standees. -Nick
With 60' cars dominating the future car purchases, I'm afraid you're right.
> I LOVED the forward facing window seats
We all did, Chris. We all did.
If it has a carbody and motorised trucks, it's gonna roll. CI Peter
I'd like to know where can I get subway font (specifically if I type A, it'll show circle A) I'd like to try that on our NYC Subway Map on this site to see if it shows clearly or not.
Thanks,
Michael Adler
Transfer Point, idk the URL off hand but its on my links page (orenstransitpage.com, go to Grand Central, links page).
Thanks, heading over there now...
Michael Adler
Man-
That site was a drag...popups galore...never did find the subway font
That link to Robert's page ends up at TopCities.com
Hey,
That web site is miserable... not only the popups and the sound, BUT THE DAMN FACT THAT YOU INSTALLED THE DAMN COMET CURSOR WHICH TAKES OVER YOUR BROWSER... THANKS!
Whats funny is that your ideas are cute and I like them... too bad that the site turns me off because of the above.
Allen
The comet cursor only gets installed if (a) you allow it to be installed, or (b) your browser is insecure.
If you didn't ask for it to be installed, you need to turn up the security level on your browser pronto.
I'd recommending uninstalling it, as it tracks all websites you visit and reports back to the home base, where they create a profile on you.
I am getting that feedback from other people too and will eliminate it in my next big rehab.
R36, the webmaster, once e-mailed out the font file. It's called "SLRM Filled".
But one must have it in their computer to view it. I just thought of an idea that would allow anyone to be able to view it. An HTML book shows how to imbed fonts on a page. You must make a web page of the font file, in the .eot format. Then, in the post, you write a simple style sheet:
‹STYLE›
@font face {font family: "SLRM Filled"; src: url(slrmfilled.eot)}
FONT {font-family: "SLRM Filled"}
‹/STYLE›
Then whenever you used the ‹FONT› tag, it would automatically be set to the imbedded font, and all you would have to do is set the color. They said that Microsoft (WEFT) and Bitstream (www.truedoc.com) have
programs that can convert fonts into .eot files for imbedding. If R36 or anyone else who has the font wants to take the time to make the font into the .eot file page, it would be great so we woudn't have to use the gif's or cheap ASCII imitations (parenthesis or brackets).
I'm on it!
As David says at the ERA meetings [high pitched voice]
Awwright!
forgive me for this i just wanted to see if this will work.
**************
just seeing if i can add a symbol with a post. sorry for being a pain in the a s s
Yes it did work fine.
#3 West End Jeff
OK So what is the test pic a pic of?
its the "A" line symbol.
There has been an on-going discussion here about the extent of the construction of the Pitkin Avenue Line east of Euclid Avenue. This adds a little bit to the story. As most of you know the four main tracks of the IND 8 Avenue Line extend east of Euclid Avenue to a point about at Elderts Lane where they end at a bulkhead. In the 1960's trains were laid up here. Sometime during the summer of 1965
the motorman of a layup train misjudged the distance and crashed his train into one of the bumping blocks. It took rescue workers several hours to free him and he later died. IND R-4 623 was cut up as a result of the accident.
Larry,RedbirdR33
I've been in the tower at Euclid to take a look at the board. Usually I had asked to use the toilet and lingered before leaving. At the bottom right hand corner of the board. Fist you see the 2 yard leads going to Pitkin Yard. The there are the 2 track that head for Grant Ave. And 4 tracks keep on going to the bumper blocks and the bulkhead that you said. I think maybe the line went further. At the end of the board there was a piece of black tape. Most of it was long since removed. Under the tape there is a station at 76 St. The next tower would have been at Cross Bay Blvd. Likely it was supposed to have been under Pitkin Ave. Although it might have gone under Conduit.
Maybe that can add something to your something about the line.
When was the last time the (G) ran on Weekends to 71 Ave?
Good question...but at least that service resumes on Sunday. Lets jsut hope all these lines don't cause a lot of congestion. -Nick
I think MTA will find out about congestion on Monday morning 5 minutes after the V and R start running their new normal schedules.
A possibility for sure! -Nick
Does the name "Roosevelt Ave." sound ominous or forboding?
avid
The IRT in general is completely oversaturated in the evening rush hours, and not much better in the morning rush hour....they really should have switched to the wider, more-people-carrying IND-BMT width trains, back in the Dual-Contracts days.
The whole system would have been better for it.
I know when they were doing the Dual Contracts, unification was years away, but still.....
Another line on the east side would help the overcrowding. Was not the Second Avenue subway going to replace the Third Avenue El back in the mid l950's?
Yes, that's very true, I agree.
Still, not every one would be traveling only ONE East Side line...
If the would have sent the 2nd. Ave. to the Bronx, it would have had to split into 2 Bronx lines, one to the east, one to the west to make a difference, just one trunk to the Bronx wouldn't really help.
The Bronx has a LOT of people, almost all of them subway riders.
That would have been too late. The original IRT line is simply too narrow for BMT-width cars. The Dual Contracts IRT lines are wide enough, but of course the platforms (and other random stuff in the tunnels) get in the way.
Isn't there a curve just south of 42nd street on the east side line
which is too sharp for a 67 foot or larger BMT/IND subway car?
I know that there are a few curves which are too sharp for a 67 foot car.
I don't know, but (a) the East Side south of 42nd Street is part of the original IRT line, so the point is moot, (b) the B Division has 60-foot cars, and (c) the B Division could conceivably acquire 51-foot cars, if necessary. The crucial question is width.
But that can not be done in the Bronx, or in Queens from Flushing to Corona, or on the Upper East Side where all you have is the IRT. The Concourse line is the only IND line in the Bronx and while it runs parallel to the Jerome Ave IRT in the Bronx, it goes down the West Side of Manhattan, while the Jerome Avenue line goes down the East Side. So each line attracts a different crowd of commuters.
To convert the original IRT tunnels (which are the #1 line from Dyckman to Times Square, the 42nd Street Shuttle and the Lexington line from Grand Central to Boro Hall) or the Steinway ttunnels to the wider Dual Contracts would have made the system better for sure, but the cost off "correcting" the width of the original IRT or the Steinway tunnels would have been prohibitive even in Dual Contracts days. So unfortunately, we up in the Bronx as well as the Upper East Side and Flushing, are stuck with narrow subway cars, probably forever. We are the ones who are worse off for it for sure.
The smaller cars of the IRT do seem to take tight curves better than the B div stuff though. The 7 has some tight curves yet you don't see slow timers on most of them like on the BMT/IND. I think only the curve between QB plaza and Court Square on the 7 has slow timers.
True, I agree...how about the 7 Ave. Express run...pure rocket, that one is.
Problem is, it's unfortunately not about speed, it's about moving lots of people efficiently, and unfortunately the IRT just isn't big enough.
Try it sometime, get on around 14th St. at 7th Ave. around 5:15 p.m. heading towards the Bronx, then switch at 149th. and Grand Concourse to the 4 and you'll see what I mean.
Or, try getting on or off an express train at 86th on the Lex during the morning rush......I think it may qualify as an Olympic event in the near future.
Or, try getting on or off an express train at 86th on the Lex during the morning rush......I think it may qualify as an Olympic event in the near future.
The loading on the express peaks between 86th and 59th at 116% of service load capacity. This loading is by no means the system worst. That distinction belongs to the F trains leaving between Ely and Lex.
Jeez-
You've got a point there...
I had a girlfriend that lived in Queens, and sometimes I would take the F to Queens from Manhattan after work...it was a crowded nightmare. It was a fast ride, but it was so crowded, sometimes I thought it bordered on unsafe (someone being accidently pushed on the tracks, for one).
I'd rather see it outlawed as cruel and unusual punishment...
How about boarding the uptown 6 at 59th St? An exercise in futility and one of the main reasons I rarely take the transfer to the N/W at Queensboro Plaza. It's easier just to go to Grand Central.
Dan
"...unfortunately the IRT just isn't big enough."
Tell me about it. I (try to) board the Lex every day at 86th Street.
Increasing the size of the IRT was deemed impractical by the MTA in the original 2nd Avenue planning study. It was just not cost effective compared to building a new line. Could you imagine the GOs? Not to mention the cost.
You're right, the IRT isn't big enough... by itself. That's why we need a 2nd Avenue Subway.
MATT-2AV
Hey, your IRT line isn't the only one that's severely overcrowded. A 2nd Avenue line (which I fully support) would make barely a dent in the crowds on my line.
That's entirely true!
I was heading up to Riverdale again the other day, and boarded an uptown 1 at Times Square at about a quarter after six. The platform was a sea of humanity. I couldn't make the first train, or the second. As I got towards the edge, for the first time in my life, I felt in danger of getting pushed onto the tracks from the shear crowd welling behind me. A girl next to me looked awfully fearful herself
However, at Columbus Circle, I noticed a series of relatively “empty” uptown C trains. I suspect that many people would rather crowd than deal with the inconvenience of walking over to Eight Avenue. This is just my observation, and I really don't know the ridership distribution. I also suspect that the reduction in service after 9/11 is fanning the flames. The bottom line is, both sides are crowded.
It's going to have to take an accident (like a whole bunch of people falling in front of an oncoming train) for people to wake up to the issue of subway and platform crowding.
Speaking of your line, I noticed a series of unusual markers heading uptown by 72nd Street. They appeared to be a series of green or yellow circles on a black background, oriented vertically, and roughly the same diameter as an aspect. I could not tell the exact color, nor could I tell if they were reflective or not. Sometimes there were five circles, other times there were three. Do you know what these are?
MATT-2AV
The IND isn't terribly popular in my neighborhood for a few reasons. First and (probably) foremost is that it runs along a residential street fronting on a large park, so it is largely attractive only to nearby residents on its west, while the IRT draws its crowds from residents on either side as well as from patrons of the Broadway commercial district. Local service isn't as frequent as on Broadway (especially nights and weekends, when the B doesn't run), and express service bypasses the entire neighborhood. Furthermore, the IND has poor connections with the rest of the subway system. I do use the CPW line on occasion (even though it's probably faster to transfer at 59th and cram onto a 1 than to walk from CPW to Broadway), and at the height of rush hour, it is moderately crowded -- but it's nothing like the 1.
I don't think 9/11 had much of a lasting effect. The 3 is largely empty. The 1 and 2 are about as crowded as they were before, and now they're providing somewhat better service to the underserved local stations. (As I've mentioned before, my local station was the 55th busiest in the system in 1999, busier than the entire Dyre Avenue branch, busier than South Ferry, busier than Stillwell Avenue, nearly as busy as 179th Street.) The rest of the traffic, I suppose, has shifted to other lines.
I think the TA made a big mistake in deciding to rehab 72nd Street without widening the platforms. Those platforms are narrow and they get very crowded, especially when locals run express (as they are wont to do). I realize that widening the station and shifting the tracks is a very expensive proposition, but the platforms are simply not safe.
I haven't seen the markers you speak of. Where exactly did you see them? If they're on the northbound track near the north end of the station, that track was recently realigned (the platform was extended a bit to reach the new stationhouse). In any case, I'll take a look the next time I'm in the area. (I'm rarely at the railfan window on the ride home since the only exit from my station is at the south end of the platform, but I'll gladly make an exception.)
If the people would spread out on the platform at 72nd there would be plenty of room. Everytime I pull into the station everyone is packed like sardines near the stairs and the rest of the platform is basically empty.
People are packed by the exits at 79 and 86. I'm invariably 1.5 car lengths from the south end (nowhere near the stairs), along with the rest of the 86-bound passengers.
If the TA would give some thought to building new station exits, passengers would spread out more. At the 55th busiest station, all exiting passengers have to push through a single bank of five(?) turnstiles near the south end of the platform. If you're not one of the first, it takes a while. Put a bank of turnstiles (or a pair of HEETs) at the north end of the platform and I, for one, will change my waiting position at 72.
If the TA would give some thought to building new station exits, passengers would spread out more.
Adding turnstyles has never been a TA strength, it seems, though the unmanned MetroCard entrance/exits have helped some.
My particular fear or beef is the dangers of single-stairway exits. At the 22nd Street exit of the southbound 23rd Street East Side IRT, one staircase has been closed since a bank was converted 10 years ago to a supermarket.
Even worse is the north end of the northbound 50th Street N/R station. The backups sometimes spill back onto the platform. It can take up to 5 minutes from train door to street level during morning rush. This has GOT to be unsafe for station evacuation!
(Though with the construction of the new office tower, formerly JP Morgan and now I think Lehman Bros, perhaps that will change? Anyone know?)
At least the two stations you mention have (IINM) two exits. The northbound 1/2 platform at 86 has only one exit (although it has two staircases to the street), near the far south end. The southbound platform has two, but the one in the middle is only open rush hours. I'll gladly sign a petition to close that token booth as long as the HEET that replaces the turnstiles is kept open at all times.
Although I'm quick to criticize the IND, one thing they did right was to build lots of exits. The 86 CPW station has a booth at the south end (86), a HET in the middle (87), and a HEET at the north end (88), with a staircase to the lower level at each. My only complaint is that the HEET is (pointlessly) locked up at night.
this is an issue on a lot of elevated lines as well. anyone who gets off at b'way or 30th av' on the astoria line knows what i mean. I wonder what places like marcy av. on the J/M/Z is like at rush hour? the exits there are tiny... though i suppose tehre are less riders at the moment?
"this is an issue on a lot of elevated lines as well. anyone who gets off at b'way or 30th av' on the astoria line knows what i mean."
Somehow I know what you are talking about because I have been an Astoria resident for nearly 9 years now... With that said, judging by what I read on this thread, IRT stations tend to have exits in the middle, while BMT and IND stations tend to have them at the end and middle. This explains why the Astoria line has exits in the middle, because it was formerly served by the IRT.
N Broadway Line
Not so. Remember that most IRT stations were originally much shorter than they are now. Many of these stations were lengthened in only one direction, and with few exceptions, no new entrances were added. At my home station, 86 on the 1/2, the only entrance (aside from a rush-hour-only southbound-only entrance near the middle) is about 1.5 car lengths from the south end.
Marcy is Crazy morning rush hours, I used to go there to cut school, and the trains are murder those R42s sink in the weight of the crowds
You're so right. "If" people would spread out, things would be better. But the average subway passenger does not have the presence of mind to think like you do. And it does not take being a T/O or C/R to figure this out. I know that at some stations, they are making PA announcements which suggest moving to the end of the platform to avoid overcrowding in the middle cars. I've heard this one for myself at 51st on the 6.
Yes, but at a station like 149th-Grand Concourse in the Bronx at 5:15 pm, it doesn't make much of a difference...in fact, at that station and time, the crowd HAS to spread out, or they'll end up on the tracks.
I've seen the platform so crowded, people were waiting on the stairs down from the upper level (4 train stop)
I was not aware. I assume that crowd is coming from the n/b 4 and switching to the n/b 2 or 5. If I'm not mistaken, there is only one pair of stairs to each direction on the 2/5 lines there.
There IS only one stairway stairway each side, but two sets of stairs, one to the north, one to the south, you know what I mean?
In other words, when you're on the mezzanine above the 2/5 platforms, you walk to the top of the stairs, let's say on the uptown side, then you can either go left down, or right down...
In any case, sometimes at rush hour, even the stairs are full of people, when the 2/5 uptown platform is full.
It's a real nightmare.
Is the 2/5 platform full? Or, are people to damn lazy to walk to the front to make room for others, and possibly enter a car that is less crowded? Plus, those 2 trains carry people coming from the westside of Manhattan who are on their way upstairs to catch a n/b 4. Everyone is bumping heads I'd bet.
Man, it's not laziness, that platform is full at rush hours. Like I said, in the crush of people on that uptown platform at around 5:15-5:30, you HAVE to spread out on the platform, there's so many people. Besides, it's still a pretty long ride up White Plains Road from 149 to 241, and people get off the 2 and 5 at every station along the way, so people naturally go towards the front or back of the platforms, hoping they'll get a seat.
There are two sets of stairways. The one at the end (WP/Dyre bound) leads directly to the 4 transfer point upstairs. The stairways further up is connected by a passageway which is right over the platforms and also leads you to the 4 train. It is just matter of people congregating by the rear staircase because it is dirctly under the 4 train.
There are two sets of stairways. The one at the end (WP/Dyre bound) leads directly to the 4 transfer point upstairs. The stairways further up is connected by a passageway which is right over the platforms and also leads you to the 4 train. It is just matter of people congregating by the rear staircase because it is directly under the 4 train.
"Yes, but at a station like 149th-Grand Concourse in the Bronx at 5:15 pm, it doesn't make much of a difference...in fact, at that station and time, the crowd HAS to spread out, or they'll end up on the tracks.
I've seen the platform so crowded, people were waiting on the stairs down from the upper level (4 train stop)"
I'm aware of this situation and have brought this to the attention of transit authority personnel. The real problem is, the #5 doesn't run as often as the #4 or #2 lines... So most people take to the #4 and get off at the Grand Concourse stop.. HA! And since the #2 doesn't run that often either, there's where you get the overcrowding problems.
Again.... One must concentrate there efforts at improving the #5 express..
N Broadway Local
There are four ways that the (5) will be improved:
1) It gets it share of the R-142s (whenever they improve and get down here from Plattsburgh).
2) It's all focused on one branch in the Bronx (to Dyre), rather than split between Dyre and 238th, causing confusison at every station south of 180th during the PM rush.
3) The switches at Unionport Yard and Nostrand Av. are reconfigured so that it does not have to cross in front of the (2) and vice-versa, causing massive delays.
4) Second Av. subway from the Bronx to Brooklyn. Enough said.
Needless to say, the last three are long shots at best. But without them, the (5) will be as messed up as usual. And forget about the situation at 149th/GC.
It's good to hear the local service is better now. Unfortunately (and of course through no fault of the TA) the express service is pretty useless. I used to be able to rely on rapid transportation anywhere between 96th and Chambers as long as I was going between express stops. That's over now: the 3 doesn't come as often, it doesn't go below 14th, and if you're at 14th going uptown there's no way to wait for both the 3 and the 1/2 (whichever comes first) unless you're a good sprinter.
Maybe it's due to the work going on at 72d street, but I've found even the local is slower than it used to be. I've taken some local trips from 14th to 66th or 72nd that have been quite painfully slow for no apparent reason.
What's the reason the 3 doesn't run to at least Chambers, that part isn't damaged.
What's the reason the 3 doesn't run to at least Chambers, that part isn't damaged.
I think because the southernmost point it can be switched between downtown and uptown tracks is just below 14th. There was some discussion of the TA putting in a crossover on the 1 tracks south of Chambers, don't know if that was SubTalk fantasy or actual TA study.
I asked whether anyone had heard of such a thing, since it seemed like the obvious thing to do. So I think that puts it firmly into the realm of fantasy.
You can't turn the 3 at Chambers without blocking access to the tracks to Brooklyn for the 1 and 2 trains. Turning the 3 at 14th allows the 1 and 2 to cross over to the express tracks at Chambers to begin the trip to Park Place and the Clark St. tube without having to wait for another train to reverse direction.
Southbound, of course, the express is easy to use, although you do need to change at 14. FYI, the local takes about eight minutes longer than the express (96 to Chambers), so staying on the local isn't the end of the world unless you're in a tremendous rush.
Many 2's are sent (either deliberately or by accident) onto the express track. This afternoon I saw something even stranger: a 3 stopped at 86 as a 2 went by on the express track. I guess the tower got the two trains mixed up. At 72 the 3 was switched to the express track; I'm not sure what happened to the 2 but we didn't pass it between 72 and 42. I wish more trains would do that; my most frequent subway ride is 86 to 42.
I've lived along this line most of my life and this is the first time I've ever seen a 3 on the local track (except when the express track is closed for whatever reason).
"As I've mentioned before, my local station was the 55th busiest in the system in 1999, busier than the entire Dyre Avenue branch, busier than South Ferry, busier than Stillwell Avenue, nearly as busy as 179th Street"
David -- Where did you get ridership stats? I've been trying for quite a long time to get my hands on some.
CG
My source is a series of posts, in disparate threads, mostly from David-with-no-last-name.
Here's one such thread.
I may find myself in downtown Brooklyn on Wednesday, in which case you can guess where I'm going to ask.
Posted by David on Sun Oct 14 15:44:42 2001, in response to Re: Does the 3-train serve any purpose?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Oct 14 15:19:20 2001.
"True, 145th Street and 148th Street aren't that heavy (566,358 and 583,900 riders, respectively, in 1999),"
The reason why the 145th St #3 train station isn't crowded is because everyone is heading towards the IND station which offers much more services.
Either there or in the opposite direction right across the bridge to the 149-GC stop to pick up the 4 or 5 trains.
They appeared to be a series of green or yellow circles on a black background, oriented vertically, and roughly the same diameter as an aspect.
These are temporary signals used to regulate train speed during track work. They're either yellow or green and I believe there's a speed marker on them too. Track workers put them out when the rails are unstable to make sure no trains run through too quickly. When they were redoing the roadbed of the 53rd St. tunnel and the switch just west of Queens Plaza, Manhattan-bound, there were several days in which the ties were not embedded in concrete but just sitting on the empty roadbed, so they had trains crawling through at 10 mph. Nightmare delays.
Dan
If there is a accident they will install a 1 billion dollar system where there are plexi-glass doors that open insync with the subway car doors. No help there.
On the upper west side, the vast majority of residences and businesses are considerably closer to the IRT than to the IND.
Only the people at Columbus and east are closer to the IND. Furthermore, the people who live on CPW are more likely to use taxis than subways.
With the lesser demand on CPW, not surprisingly the service levels are lower too. So even if you're equidistant to both subways, you might as well take the IRT because it comes more often.
...and that is why the IRT is more crowded, even though the UWS as a whole has a surplus of capacity.
The UES is the opposite situation, where the vast majority of businesses and residents likely to use mass transit are off to one side of the only line, and an IRT line for that fact.
To ease crowding on the UWS, creative solutions must be implemented to shift ridership over to the CPW lines, but people's habits are hard to change.
MATT-2AV
«To ease crowding on the UWS, creative solutions must be implemented to shift ridership over to the CPW lines, but people's habits are hard to change. »
Out of curiousity, do you have some. Would be interesting to know.
Arti
...and that is why the IRT is more crowded, even though the UWS as a whole has a surplus of capacity.
The UWS has a surplus of capacity on the IRT itself. Before trying to convince people to walk an extra ten minutes to reach a line with poor service, poor connections, and depressing stations, wouldn't it make sense to improve IRT service itself?
I can't tell you how much spare capacity exists now, since the TA still hasn't posted post-9/11 timetables. Before 9/11, though, we had a maximum of 15 tph on the local and (IIRC) 22 tph on the express. Let's start by pulling both up to 30 tph before telling people to hike to the IND.
Lets see now 30 tph. 2 min. headway divided by 85 min. running time (V.C. to New lots) = 43 trains for NB service and another 43 for SB service 86 trains just for the #1 line!!!
Where are all these trains coming from and where are they going to be layed-up???
Half of those will only be going as far as 137.
The 6 and 7 run about 30 tph. The Queens Boulevard express tracks carry 30 tph. Why can't the 1 get at least 25 tph? Anyone who's ridden or operated the 1 knows that 12 tph is inhumane (and impossible to keep on time).
The cars are easy to find. For those who have been asleep for the past year, there are lots of new cars coming in. Keep some of the old ones. They still work. Put them on the 1, if you like.
This should be done preferably before someone falls off the narrow platform at 72.
They will think about that AFTER someone falls off the platform and gets killed. Until then, the "that cannot possibily happen" mentality will prevail.
Until then, the "that cannot possibily happen" mentality will prevail.
The same mentality pertains to the sinking of the Titanic or the WTC. "Oh it could never happen!" People never seem to learn that "Anything can and will happen"
I have no problem with keeping my train on schedule until I get close to the terminal (either end) that's where I lose my time and end up coming in late.
I know first hand you have no problems at all with keeping the train on time.
So New Lots and 242 St. are still messed up. I'm glad I'm on the East.
Then you must be in the fortunate position of never having to bypass local stops on the local. (I assume that's done when the train falls behind schedule, not just on a whim.)
You still haven't answered where the trains will be layed-up. As I said before if people would learn to use the whole platform the crowding you talk about would not be a problem!!!
Sorry, I'm not familiar enough with the yards to answer that question. If necessary, the unused middle tracks up north on the 1, 2, 4, and 6 could be pressed into use, although that would limit options for rerouting. (Better yet, don't store the trains -- keep them in service!)
This afternoon, before rush hour, a 2 was sent express just as a 3 pulled in across the platform at 72. I walked on the platform from the 7th car to the C/R's position and back to the 9th car. It was crowded the whole way. (So was the following 1. I nearly missed my stop because a large pack of high school students had decided to park themselves by the doors while I had naively moved into the car so that others could board.)
the original IRT tunnels (which are the #1 line from Dyckman to Times Square, the 42nd Street Shuttle and the Lexington line from Grand Central to Boro Hall) or the Steinway tunnels
Boro Hall? I think you mean City Hall, the original terminus of the first IRT, in lower Manhattan. Boro Hall is way out there in Brooklyn ....
The IRT from Brroklyn Bridge to Borough Hall is known as the Contract 2 Subway, and is built to the same standards as the 1904 Contract 1 line (i.e., the narrow tunnel clearances).
The IRT from Brroklyn Bridge to Borough Hall is known as the Contract 2 Subway, and is built to the same standards as the 1904 Contract 1 line (i.e., the narrow tunnel clearances).
Aha, my mistake! Thanks for the info.
Does'T PATH in New Jersey use IRT standards on its lines? Those cars have only two doors on each side.
Does'T PATH in New Jersey use IRT standards on its lines?
No. They're similar, but not the same... just different enough to be incompatible.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Does'T PATH in New Jersey use IRT standards on its lines?
No. They're similar, but not the same... just different enough to be incompatible.
Details on the differences?
Hopefully someone with more knowledge than I have can provide a more detailed answer. The PATH cars are shorter, I think, in order to handle the sharper curves of the H&M tubes. There are differences in trip arm placement and in the overall shape of the cars, the latter due to the different profile of the tunnels. I would suspect that there is some additional informatin on this site about it, but I couldn't find it at a quick glance so it may be in prior discussions on SubTalk (of which there have been many).
In the event that the information doesn't exist on this site (as opposed to my simply not finding it), are there any knowledgeable volunteers who want to write it up (as a FAQ, perhaps) for Dave to publish?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The PATH cars are marginally shorter, and bow out in the middle like the B Division cars to go with the design of the tubes, though that was more of a design decision on the PA-1s, since IIRC, the K cars had flat sides like your basic IRT car.
If push came to shove -- or more to the point, if logic pervailed and the MTA and PA decided to intergrate their two systems, a hybrid subway car (the hypothetical R-161) could be built to run on both the IRT and PATH lines. Existing PATH cars could also probably run on the IRT (with dual tripcocks) while the PATH tracks would be for the R-62s and R-142s (and any surviving Redbirds) what the Eastern Division is today for the R-44s, R-46s and R-68s, a no-go zone.
the PATH cars (9ft) are widier than IRT (8ft) but narrower than IND/BMT (10ft)
the PATH cars (9ft) are widier than IRT (8ft) but narrower than IND/BMT (10ft)
Has it ever occurred to you to shut up when you don't know what you are talking about?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Not the stainless steel PA4 cars. They have three doors on each side. Also PATH signals have their tripcocks on the left side of the tracks just like the BMT and IND and unlike the IRT.
1912 was a long time ago. You have to forgive City Fathers at the time for not knowing the future the same was we know the past.
I know, they were doing the best they could, with what they knew. They did a damn fine job, don't get me wrong.
At the time, the Bronx was sparsely populated, too. How could they have known it would ever be so crowded?
One of the purposes of the subway was to get people out of the Downtown/Lower East Side area. With a fast efficent subway people would want to move to te Bronx to get out of the City.
When the Westchester was being built in 1912 the southern terminal was purposely put in the South Bronx. The builders figured that shortly after it was built midtown would have gone up to 125 St. When Vanderbilt built Grand Central 30 years earlier, people thought he was crazy for building a terminal in "uptown" Manhattan at 42 St.
When Carnegie Hall opened, 57th St. was considered "far uptown".
And the Dakota Building at CPW and W72 St was considered as far away from from NYC as the Dakotas.
back in the day when sheep outnumbered people in queens
I've also seen pictures from the building of the White Plains Road El, from 1904, and it looked like an el being built in Wyoming...just an el in the middle of a field. :)
Same for the Flushing line in Sunnyside--there's the el and there's Queens Boulevard and there are the farms...It's really weird.
Dan
Dan,
Reading your post I know you must be referring to that picture of the 33 Rawson Station in Stan Fischler's book "The Subway" so I scanned it and uploaded it to my angelfire account to post it. Click here to see it.
>>> that picture of the 33 Rawson Station <<<
An interesting picture. Maybe it is an optical illusion, but it looks like the tracks go to ground level in the upper right of the picture. Was that the case, or was it the end of the track at that time? Also, what street are the buildings on which are on the left of the picture. I could not tell, are they single story houses, or some other type of buildings? How about the buildings on the hill in the background on the left?
Tom
I think it is an illusion as I never heard of the "7" line at grade. As far as I know it was always an el. I don't know much about the picture, I just scanned it from the book. I do know it is facing eastbound otherwise you would see the Manhattan skyline in the background. (even in 1917 there is some skyline) It is probably pretty much on the western end of the structure because you don't really see the turn onto Roosevelt Av and the more conventional type el.
I had a weird dream once in which #7 trains ran at ground level by Shea Stadium. Instead of Redbirds, interurban coaches with pantographs were used. Nice sounding horns, too. Just as the horn sounded, I woke up.
It's hard to believe that Queens looked like that 84 years ago! I guess it is another case of build it and they will come.
The IRT in general is completely oversaturated in the evening rush hours, and not much better in the morning rush hour....they really should have switched to the wider, more-people-carrying IND-BMT width trains, back in the Dual-Contracts days.
The whole system would have been better for it.
Converting from 9 foot by 510 foot long trains to 10 foot by 600 foot trains would increase capacity by 33%. The same increase could be obtained by increasing the rush hour schedule from the present 27 tph to 36 tph. The signal system was designed for 40 tph operation. So, it's really an operational and not a structural question.
The signal system may be designed for 40 tph, but that's only for the re-signalled portions of the IRT. And those, or course, are not the major sections of the lines but in the outer boroughs. Stretches like the Lexington Av bet. 96th Street, Manhattan, and Atlantic Av., Brooklyn, still have to make do with signals that were made to regulate the old Low-Vs and not R-142s.
In my view, Mr. Belmont's Gilded age-type of thinking in narrowing the tunnels to keep out competitors was terrible, and it will cause the IRT to suffer for decades (maybe centuries). But hey, that is a testimony to the type of influence the robber-barons had in those days, along with the weakness of government.
The signal system may be designed for 40 tph, but that's only for the re-signalled portions of the IRT. And those, or course, are not the major sections of the lines but in the outer boroughs. Stretches like the Lexington Av bet. 96th Street, Manhattan, and Atlantic Av., Brooklyn, still have to make do with signals that were made to regulate the old Low-Vs and not R-142s.
The TA was operating 32 tph on the Lex Ave Express between 125th and Atlantic and 30 tph on the Lex Ave Local in 1954, according to their annual report. The West Side had 31 tph on the express and 28 tph on the local. They also ran 36 tph on the Flushing Line.
The trains were indeed LV's, however the signal system has no knowledge of the type of train that is occupying a block. It makes no difference if they are LV's, Redbirds, R62's or R142's. The newer models should permit greater service levels because of their increased acceleration and deceleration.
In my view, Mr. Belmont's Gilded age-type of thinking in narrowing the tunnels to keep out competitors was terrible, and it will cause the IRT to suffer for decades (maybe centuries). But hey, that is a testimony to the type of influence the robber-barons had in those days, along with the weakness of government.
It's fairly easy to blame people who are not here to defend themselves. If you want to improve performance, I'd suggest that you direct your attentions to people in charge of present operations and not accept their excuses for low service levels.
The TA was operating 32 tph on the Lex Ave Express between 125th and Atlantic and 30 tph on the Lex Ave Local in 1954, according to their annual report. The West Side had 31 tph on the express and 28 tph on the local. They also ran 36 tph on the Flushing Line.
So why, then, are current levels (15 tph?) so much lower? Is it lack of rolling stock? More stringent safety standards? Fewer riders?
What would the TA if asked?
So why, then, are current levels (15 tph?) so much lower?
Current levels are around 23-27 tph.
Is it lack of rolling stock?
That's part of it.
More stringent safety standards?
Not really. The key to maximizing service levels is operating trains in a consistent manner.
Fewer riders?
There were more riders in the 1947-1954 period. The percentage reduction in service levels is greater than the percentage drop in passengers.
[In my view, Mr. Belmont's Gilded age-type of thinking in narrowing the tunnels to keep out competitors was terrible, and it will cause the IRT to suffer for decades (maybe centuries). But hey, that is a testimony to the type of influence the robber-barons had in those days, along with the weakness of government.]
C'mon now, the IRT was a business, not a donation to the city. Why shouldn't a businessman discourage competition. That's business!!!
..they really should have switched to the wider, more-people-carrying IND-BMT width trains
When the system was built, the people back then were not as wide as they are now.
Did the privately run IRT even want to have a compatible system with its competitor, the BRT? I think not. They would have resisted and fought standardization as a threat to their lines and their independence to other city lines (BRT/BMT), at the time.
There is one advantage to the 50 foot IRT cars. They can take curves and switches faster than the cumbersome IND/BMT cars.
Ever hear the expression Barely Moving Trains (BMT)?
But you're right about oversaturation on the IRT. Lexington local is a zoo, and express trains sometimes run slower than a local.
What do you think needs to be done to relieve the Lexington line?
Hmm...
Good question, Luch.
I suppose more trains-per-hour is the obvious quick solution, but then you slow the whole process down because of all the trains jamming the system. More people would be moved, only slower.
Longer trains is out, obviously.
I think the only feasible solution is another trunk line up Manhattan, that would branch off into two lines in the Bronx.
Which brings me to another question-
I was referring to the Manhattan to Bronx IRT in my original post.
How is the Manhattan to Brooklyn sevice during rush hours?
I'm assuming it's better, only because there are many more trains (IND, BMT as well as IRT) going to Brooklyn. For that matter, Manhattan to Queens IRT, although handling lots of people, too, is helped by virtue of the fact that the 7 has 11-car trains, it seems to me.
I can tell you this. A ton of people from Brooklyn Heights have complained to me that by the time the 2 or 3 gets to Clark St, they have to let one or two trains go by before one comes that isn't overcrowded. I can also tell you that when I lived in lower Manhattan, and used the Lexington line everyday, I would sometimes have to let an uptown 4 pass me by because it was too crowded. I quickly learned that the 5 was lighter, and ended up just waiting for it many times.
What's the problem with the Bronx-Manhattan trip? You have the 2 and 5 lines coming straight through the Bronx, and the 4 on short headways. I know the 6 is a piece of sh*t, and have never really been on the 1.
Are IRT trains running between the Bronx and Manhattan very overcrowded?
Completely, my friend....
put it this way-
I'm from Burke Ave., which is one stop before Gun Hill, just to give you a picture of where I was riding to from Manhattan. That's about an hour (this is in the 80's, I'm not sure how long it takes now) from Times Square on the 2, and about 45 minutes from Grand Central on the 5.
So, a ride that long, you would want a seat, especially after working all day.
I would sometimes ride the bus DOWNTOWN to catch the 2 at Park Place, just to get a seat.
See what I mean?
For that matter, Manhattan to Queens IRT, although handling lots of people, too, is helped by virtue of the fact that the 7 has 11-car trains, it seems to me.
11 car trains is one part of it, the other part being the most frequent headways in the system (on a single line) of 30tph. If I'm taking the 7, I don't worry about missing trains because my waiting time for another local (peak direction, with express service running) will be two minutes at most. The extra capacity of 11 cars and the fact that the average intelligence of the 7 commuter is higher then that on other lines (judging by their tendency to spread out along the platform evenly and move to the center of the car) means that dwell times are very low, too.
Dan
Dont blame the IRT, blame August Belmont. IRT width/length/design was a deliberate decision by Belmont so there was no chance of freight trains on "his railroad".
Frank Sprauge would not have agreed, He thought wider dimensions were very unwise.
Wayne: In an earlier post I said that the MM had it run would have used a light blue color. This was a typo. The MM would have been the color green.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Okay, the new signage is up.
Local track from 36st to 67ave, Queensbound:
(R)(G)(V) to 71/Continental / Any Train. Late nights (E) local to Jamaica stops here.
From 71/Continental to 36st, Manhattan Bound:
(R) via 60st and Broadway Local to Manhattan and Brooklyn.
(V) via 53st and 6av Local to 2nd Ave / Lower East Side
(G) via Crosstown to Smith-9sts Eves, Wknds, & Late Nights only.
Late nights (E) local to Manhattan stops here.
Both Queensbound tracks at 71/Continental indicate the F using the express track all times and the E using the local late nights.
Express Track at 71/Continental, Manhattan Bound:
(E) via 53st and 8av Local to Canal St. Late nights on opposite track.
(F) via 63st and 6av Local to Coney Island. All times.
Express Track at Union Turnpike, Jamaica Bound:
(E) To Jamaica Center via Express, Weekdays. Limited Rush hour service to 179st.
Posters on damn near every column on both sides of every station on Queens Blvd:
Starting Monday, December 17th, some E trains depart 179st at:
7:12 AM
7:31
7:51
8:11
and arrive at Parsons Blvd three minutes later.
Way cool.
Is the afternoon schedule posted anywhere?
Look in the SubTalk archives. I've posted the schedules twice already.
Do you remember the name of the thread, or when you posted it?
I wonder why they don't show the E to 179th Street in a dashed line (limited service), the way they do with the off-peak G service on the new map. They really should.
Because it's so limited, it's not worth displaying, so no one can become dependant on it.
It's still less limited than A to Rock Park...
Sure, but the A to Rock Park is a big deal. Other than the A specials, there is no through service beyond Broad Channel. From 179th, there's always through service to Manhattan, with plenty of transfers to the E, R, and V. Direct E service is a convenience for a few.
I thought they ran more than 4 A's from Rock Park in the AM rush ...
You are correct. According to the timetable, morning departures from RP are at 6:38, 6:59, 7:19, 7:39, and 7:59, and afternoon arrivals at RP are at 5:25, 5:47, 6:08, 6:27, and 6:46.
Thanks. Wasn't sure, as I haven't been on that end of the Rockaway line since 1994.
It's all posted online. I've only been on a Rock Park A once, and I only went from 59 to Jay.
go further, Utica ave, there was some black girl scream "I'll fucken take all ya money" and a fight or something began. The doors were held open and the train emptied fast. I think the cops came and took her away. but it was scarry cause this R-38 was jam packed (A to far rockaway).
Um, I've been to or through every NYC subway station except two. (Any guesses which two?) I've ridden the A to Far Rockaway a number of times. I'm referring here only to the rush hour A specials to Rockaway Park.
The two stations you have not been on are Botanic Garden and Park Place on the Franklin Shuttle.
Actually, never mind. 145th and 148th/Lenox on the 3.
Bingo. Somewhat surprising, since they're right on my line, but I've yet to make it up there. Some day I'll take an M7 on Amsterdam to the last stop and get the 3 there.
I agree. It is similar to the fact that a few W trains stop at DeKalb Avenue in the late evening, but they don't list that on the map. I wouldn't be surprised if a few Brighton Expresses still ran from Coney Island once in awhile. Not to mention the pre-1967 M trains, never listed on any map that ran Brighton Express from Coney Island to Chambers St. via Nassau Loop (tunnel).
Let me guess, after midnight the on saturday they'll put up F and V circles in the appropriate places, and put a black circle over where the F used to run? -Nick
I'd imagine they've done that already!
If you go to the Lexington Avenue/53 St Station and walk in the transfer from the #6 train towards the E and F, you will notice that as you approach the escalators that go down, there are lit E and F signs on the other side of the control zone. I saw today that one of those lit F circles was just pasted over with a V, making the bullet pretty hard to read...
You know, if you go to the 48th Street entrance to the 6th Ave. line on the Southwest corner, the subway entrance there still has the KK bullet, along with the D, B, and F.
What color? I thought the only remaining K's were on the 8th Avenue line (at entrances to the 14th Street and 96th Street stations, and perhaps some others), referring to the short-lived replacement for the AA.
The bullet is dark blue- and it's definately KK, referring to the 57th St. to Eastern Parkway Chrystie St. KK, not the AA replacement.
The other bullets are in the spaghetti map colors.
Excellent. I will be sure to check it out, camera in hand. I just hope the TA doesn't beat me to it, so anyone else who happens to be in the area, please take a picture.
It's the 48th Street entrance to the 47-50th Street-Rockefeller Center Station..the bullets are set into the stone. As you walk down the stairs, they're right at eye level, I believe. They were there in July of 2000, which is the last time I was back home (I live in North Carolina now). They've been there as long as I can remember.
I hope they're still there, too, if you go and they've been changed I'm going to feel like a jackass :)
I think the 8th Ave K was just a single letter, not KK.
It sure was. It was introduced specifically because double letters had been eliminated and the AA needed a new name.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Express Track at Union Turnpike, Jamaica Bound:
(E) To Jamaica Center via Express, Weekdays. Limited Rush hour service to 179st.
No Henry, you are wrong. The last sentence says LIMETED to 179 St. Limeted, meet lemonalice.
But since today is only Wednesday, and the new services don't start until Sunday, what is MTA doing in the stations for visitors and other passengers who are unaware of what is going on and wait for a V train today which isn't coming?
Is there any signage in the stations showing today's service?
No current signage at all. All the signs are listed post 12/16.
Oh well. I look into my crystal ball and foresee some passengers taking an unexpected detour...
Or people waiting at 2nd Ave for a V train, as the signage is up there as of this morning. I hope they can with 5 days....LOL
Maybe we should ask for an overhead announcement: "Your attention please. The next "V" train will be arriving on the platform Monday. All passengers please be advised that McDonald's is open for breakfast and sleeping on the platform overnight is not allowed."
:0)
LMAO.
I assume everyone in here who can will be sampling the new services Monday morning? If you see some skinny white guy wearing glasses and a grey jacket, just come up to me and say "Hi".
LMAO?
Speaking of that where do the tail tracks at second ave lead? Where were they supposed to go?
Those tracks were part of the IND Second system, which was planned for but was not built. Check into other parts of subways.org for information about it. It would have been fantastic, but Robert Moses and other automobile happy individuals of times in the past killed it off. All that they could see was highways and cars all over the place, and they forgot about what would happen if a car was involved in an accident or breakdown on a crowded roadway, not to mention about parking and air pollution.
I was at 53rd and Fifth Ave. yesterday and the signage over the Stairway leading down to the platforms on mentioned E and V. The Coffee Shop/Convenience Store is still E F!
well this sunday WB11 news had an article on the V train. The crew was very pissed that the train didn't run. They were there around 1:55 to 2:15pm. I got on TV, also they interview a black man and it didn't show on TV. But I was on TV, HeHeHe. The clip air on the 10 o'clock news on the same day. How can I get a copy cause I didn't requard it?
V signs are up at most if not all Queens Boulevard stations, replacing the F signs at applicable stations. At 53rd/Lex, however, the V stickers are extremely poorly done--as I passed one, I wondered why it was lumpy-looking. It turns out that it was only half stuck to the sign!
Dan
What about fancy li glass signs such as the signs to the 53rd/Lex stations at street level that read "EF6" and the lit glass signs on the passageway between the 6 train at 51rst and the former E and F, now E and V, station?
No change on those, they're still reading "E F 6." I don't know how they're going to fix those without covering them over.
Dan
Why couldn't they replace the glass?
Perhaps they won't. The elevators at 168th Street still label the floors (A)(B) and (1)(9) rather than (A)(C) and (1).
They fixed them except the V train one; they took an orange plate and covered the back with black tape. You can barely make out V in the sign. The other sign for E and 6 have the letter cut out from their bullets color.
The V train is in a 30 day trial so maybe (pray like you never have) they will get rid of it after 30 days and everything will be okay! I got a route map of the 63st shuttle 6th ave, ripped it off the wall at W4.
What on earth gave you the idea that the V was a 30-day trial?!
It wasn't well-publicized, but back when Archer opened, there were a few token AM peak 'E's leaving 179th and running express on Hillside. This would compensate for the loss of direct Hillside-8th Avenue service.
It didn't generate much interest and died soon. This may have been because the 'F' was still running express on Hillside weekdays till October 1990 and rush hours till October '92 (with the 'R' extended from Forest Hills to pick up the slack at local stops). Besides, all that was required to achieve a Hillside-8th connection was to switch at Kew Gardens or 5th Avenue, which while inconvenient, is preferable to what will be required to achieve a Hillside-53rd connection starting Monday. It will still be possible to switch between express services at KG, but most people are inclined to wait till the last possible opportunity: Roosevelt!
A more comfortable Hillside-53rd connection will be available at Forest Hills, but the prospect of switching to the 'V', a local, will probably be rejected wholesale. Personally, I PREFER the local to the express during AM rush hours, especially when we zoom past two stopped expresses between Grand and Roosevelt.
Of course, with the new inbound switching pattern at the Plaza, the clean separation of the local and express operations will be completely lost.
Yup, signs at 179th St actually said this, but very subtly, in parentheses (AM Rush Some E trains to WTC on this track). It was only designed to ease the transition, as it took a while to get used to no E service to 179th.
Why were E's sent to PA and F's to 179 to begin with?
That's a great question.
Pure Speculation: Were suburban commuters arriving at Jamaica Station headed for World Trade Center more likely to need E service???
Of course, the J was realigned to Jamaica Station under Archer Av and the Z skip-stop added to offer a quicker ride to lower Manhattan, so maybe I've just shot down my own first argument, above.
???
One would think that, logically, Kew Gardens is the best transfer station westbound because you still have a decent chance, at rush-hour, of getting a seat, maybe.
The madness starts Monday. Read my lips and may Dave frame this post: it will be hell for passengers and crews alike; after a couple of weeks passengers will cry for the old service patterns to return; the newspapers, due to numerous letters to the editor, will rake the TA over the coals for a service plan which does not work because of all the congestion at Queens Plaza due to all the switching moves. I posted my service plan idea a number of months ago, along with most everyone else on this board. In a nutshell, and sorry G line riders you lose Queens Blvd. local service, the F via 63rd St. 24/7 and Queens Blvd. local terminating at CTL during the hours the V will run, extend the F to 179 when the V does not run. Whenever the V runs, it goes to 179. This gives all Queens Blvd. riders acess to the new line and eliminates the time consuming switching moves at the plaza.
And just who (or whom, if you prefer) do you expect to ride the F in your plan?
The F and V would swap Queens terminals in order to avoid the siwtching moves at Queens Plaza.
I see, but who will ride it? Your E and V are identical to today's (for another few hours) E and F. Look at how popular the local is now. The only way to draw passengers onto the local is to make the local more attractive than the express in some way -- say, transfers in Manhattan.
The reason for my idea is to avoid the time consuming crossing over business at Queens Plaza which will be the downfall of the whole service plan.
I'm not thrilled with all the switching at Queens Plaza either, but I don't see how else passengers could possibly be drawn off of the two overcrowded expresses (or at least one of them). If backups end up as bad as you predict, the connection will turn out to have been a waste.
What is the point of bashing a new service plan when:
1) You don't have a well-worked out plan to offer; and
2) We're all about the find out whether or not it works.
Hold your fire, keep an open mind, and watch what happens over the next month.
Then if you're still in the mood to bash, at least you'll have some real information in hand to do it with.
I agree that we should give this plan some time and that this plan is basically the best possible given the circumstances, but to be fair, Bill has posted (a number of times) his alternative plan.
All right, fair enough!
people care about time not anything else.
To all my fellow conductors and train operators who picked V jobs, or like me picked to Queens Division extra list.....MAY GOD BLESS US ALL AND ALL THE LUCK TO US!! We're gonna need it, because Sunday maybe when it all starts from the service standpoint, the madness and mess standpoint starts on Monday. Good luck to us all!! Even fellow E, F, G, and R job pickers, expect craziness from 100,001 V train questions!! Aye!! Much luck to all of us in the Queens Division :-) (we're gonna really need it!!) And this little service plan with some E's to come from 179, aye yi yi this is crazy indeed!!
Come on, man! You're up to it! NYC transit folks are the best! They can handle anything! After what NYC Transit accomplished Sept. 11, anything else is child's play.
whats this? i thought u guys knew about the E express to 179. Surprise i caught one a few weeks ago and guess what? they are running local north of continental avenue. things could have changed since i rode that E to 179. but this is not new news. This is how come there is more traffic on Queens bound Es, also why i see some Es with the sign saying E QUEENS BL EXP, E via 53RD ST, E JAMAICA/179ST. People believe it or not still thought the train goes to jamaica center. but if it were going there, the R46 sign says E QUEENS BL EXP, E via 53RD ST, E JAMAICA CTR, E PARSONS-ARCHER. SIMPLE!!! DID THE Es TO 179 BECOME EXP??? THEY NEED TO BE!!!
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
IF SO TAKE BOTTOM GREEN TO IM ME ON AOL INSTANT MESSENGER IS
F TRAIN 5656
ALL OTHER TIMES USE A 8AV/FULTON EXP
LATE NIGHTS USE etrain6@hotmail.com email
SUBTALK ALL OTHER TIMES USE
VIA LOCAL etrain6@hotmail.com
ALL SERVICE ABOVE ON OPPOSITE TRACKS
This has been kicked around on previous posts.
Someone suggested to make the E train to and from 179 the K.
That would be a semi-good idea if there were more runs to 179.
How many runs to and from 179 a day?
Leave 179th Street (weekdays only):
7:12-1/2 AM
7:31 AM
7:51 AM
8:11 AM
3:57-1/2 PM
4:16-1/2 PM
6:36-1/2 PM
Arrive 179th Street (weekdays only):
6:01 PM
6:21 PM
7:25 PM
8:05 PM
David
Thanks.
I'm not sure that it warrants a new designation to "K".
The MTA site says -- about the G transfer to the V at 23-Ely -- "a new moving walkway will speed your transfer." Is the moving walkway really finished?
The website also say there is increased rush-hour service on the G. What are the details?
They need to restore the G all the way to Church and restart express F service.
Doesn't answer my questions!
The walkway is finished and they even installed mosaic art on the walls! in re service- no info.
You bet they do.
Don't know the answer, but if you think the G should be 71st Street Continental to Church local give me a "HELL YEAH!"
!!!
Yes, the moving walkway is finished. But there are only two walkways that go the same direction; manhattan-bound in the mornings, queensbound in the evenings. -Nick
There is a moving walkway built and operating. What they need there is another one for people who have to travel the other way.
By increased service they'll have more trains running.
This past weekend I took the L to Lorimer, G to Greenpoint avenue for some high quality B&W Photos. Then I took the G to Court Square, got on the moving walkway (looks and probably is an escalator that doesn't climb up, but still its really fast!). I took pics in LIC near the Citicorp building then got on the 7 home. That moving walkway is a MUST for any railfan, it's quite cool!!!
I wish a moving sidewalk could be put on the ramps in the bowels of Broadway Nassau and Fulton St. station. Coming up from the "A" train platform to the #4 and #5 level. Just the up direction would be fine.
avid
How long will it be until the moving walkway stops moving? Will the city demand a fare increase before they allow it to start up?
Sorry for being so cynical.
Still trying to find about the "G" turning at Church Avenue. Some say it's all the time on weekends, others say just Saturday.
Maybe a long term G.O. on the IND.
Any info, anyone?
The Decemeber 2001 Editon of "The Map" is now available in the lobby of the MTA Building at 347 Madison Avenue between 44 and 45 Streets.
It shows the new V,the F via the 63 Street Connector, the G as a dotted green line north of Court Square and the N terminating at 86 Street.
A nice touch is the inclusion of the IRT Line between Chambers Street and South Ferry and the IND between Canal Street and the World Trade Center with the notation that these lines have been temporarily closed since Sep 11,2001. They will be rebuilt.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Thanks for the info.
In Peter Dougherty's trackmap book, (the new version is unbelievable,) he says that PATH may consider reopening Hudson Terminal. Is a track connection still there, and has anyone else heard this? I'd love to see Hudson Terminal. I heard the H&M kept it beautiful back in the day.
This has been the plan for a while now. No, there is no "track connection" but apparently the tunnels are still there, in some shape or form.
Are any subtalkers intending to ride the first "V" on Monday morn? (Run 201).
I'll be there, the 0538 out of Continental!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Thanks, Trevor, for that bit of info. When does the last one for the day leave 71 Av.?
I' am. I'm so exciting to ride on the new route. I 've been waiting for this special moment for very long time.
Well, actually you're not riding on a new route. You will be making local stops under Queens Blvd and Broadway reaching Queens Plaza, and then you'll switch over to the 53rd St tunnel (OK, that destinatio is new); then you'll see the 53rd St tunnel.
But, hey, it is a new train, so have a good time.
Who is planning to be on the first "F" train in regular service (as opposed to a GO)through the 63rd St Connector on Sunday?
Will the S (shuttle) be serving 63rd Street on Saturday? Although it's scheduled 24-7, service has almost always been suspended nights and weekends.
Dunno.
The F will begin it's regular 24 / 7 operation on Sunday 12/16. The V starts Monday 12/17.
As for Saturday - it depends on whether a GO is in effect. If it is then the F will probably be running via 63rd.
You know this thread was getting hard to see through all that foam.
No GO is currently posted, hence my question. (This might be one of those unannounced GO's, like the frequent weekend W suspensions.)
I'm going to be actively avoiding the V train and Queens Boulevard in general for a week after 12/17. While in time it'll probably help out with congestion, the first few days are going to be a tangle of delays and overcrowded E trains. Better to stick with the 7 where I get the added bonus of being guaranteed a seat.
Dan
Last night on my way home, I thought I'd walk to 6th Ave., with the advent of the new era looming closer.
I usually grab an uptown bus from 45st to 53rd and take the "E" or "F" to Union Turn Pike.
My stop, Van Wyck is served by the "F".
Next week I'll have to go to 47-50 for the "F" or "V". That will be my best chance for a seat.
So, yeterday, last evening, I get there and an "F" is sitting with its doors closed. The PA explains that the train will be going by the 63rd connector. Troulbe at Lex.
The train pulls out. I piss and moan.
An "E" with empty seats pulls in. I am experiencing nocturnal emissions.
All around me are faces filled with confusion and bewilderment.
I get on. We stop and go through the connector until we finally get to the dash between 36th and 65th sts.
The "F" that left me at 47-50th must have been sent local at 36th st. When I arrived at Union Turnpike there were people waiting for an "F". So it could not have been in front of us.
I think the MASTER TOWER is still cutting its teeth an may experience growing pains.
Considering the ad campaign the TA has put on, and the reaction of most of the riders, Railfaning should be made compulsary in high school and for recent emmigr'es.
As they woke up to the fact the train was not stopping at 5th Ave or Lex, they got off at Roosevelt Island or 21st ST., grumbling in english and other tongues!
You'll rejoyce in hearing I was only 5-6 minutes later than usual.
Recently, there was some debate over just why train speeds were restricted in Connecticutt.
I pointed out that the ancient catenary is one reason, and that speed restrictions would be lifted once catenary and signal improvements were instituted. Jersey Mike contradicted this, even in the face of information from MTA and Amtrak.
I received information today from Amtrak confirming that catenary is a problem. Specifically: A maximum operating speed of 70 mph is in effect at certain locations in Connecticut because the catenary is unsafe at higher speeds.
I do not know what the maximum operating speed is at agiven location with new catenary. It may be that the maximum operating speed will increase by 20 mph in some places, and 50 mph in other places, etc.
Additionally, Amtrak anticipates that completion of a new signal system, now in progress will also contribute to lifting speed limits.
The catenary between the Connecticut/New York state line and Stamford is in very poor shape, because of design, age, and lack of repair over the various bankruptcies of the New Haven and the fiscal crises of Metro North.
The design is very classy -- two supporting cables, with a third below in an inverted triangle, and the contact line running below. But, it is too rigid, requiring speed restrictions to 60 mph whenever the temperature is below 32F or above 90F. At certain points, the permanent restriction is 70mph; otherwise it is 80mph (used to be 90mph).
From Stamford to New Haven, it is almost exclusively a two wire system, but age here is the factor.
The State of Connecticut is replacing the entire system with the weight-tensioned system used in New York, but this is not expected to be finished until either 2004 or 2005.
Thanks for that very helpful post.
Tell all your friends to write MTA and Amtrak, and tell 'em to hustle on that!
I pointed out that the ancient catenary is one reason, and that speed restrictions would be lifted once catenary and signal improvements were instituted. Jersey Mike contradicted this, even in the face of information from MTA and Amtrak.
I guess I was unclear. Yes the speed will improve. No it will not be up to 150 or even 135. I would look for the typical linespeed to be 90 to 100 with some exceptions of 110 for ACELA's.
I received information today from Amtrak confirming that catenary is a problem. Specifically: A maximum operating speed of 70 mph is in effect at certain locations in Connecticut because the catenary is unsafe at higher speeds.
Between SHELL and CT border linespeed is 90. Between CT border and SHELL it is 65 because the 90-year old catenary is falling to bits (although I will miss that triangle cat). Between STAMFORD and New Haven I have been told the linespeed is 75, but I have been on trains that have hit 90 in a few select locations.
SHELL?
SHELL interlocking at New Rochelle, NY. Where the Amtrak Hell Gate Line joins the MNRR New Haven Line.
Thank you.
SHELL = New Rochelle Tower.
The towers on the New Haven Line, from the junction with the Harlem Line, are SHELL (New Rochelle), PIKE (near the New England Thruway in Harrison), GREEN (Greenwich), and STAMFORD. I don't know those north of Stamford.
There used to be VERN in Mount Vernon, on the New Haven side of the junction; WL (Woodlawn) was the Harlem Line tower there.
Of course, with the towers gone, the names simply refer to the interlockings.
Most MNRR lines officially use a 'CP' Milepost designation system, but all of the old names are still use familliar use. Some heritage names are still official tho like WOODLAWN, MO and CP-FH. There is also RYE interlocking between SHELL and STAMFORD. Either GREEN or RYE is the movable bridge over the Cos Cob creek.
MNRR got rid of the tower names when CTC operation from 347 Madison Avenue took over. Interlockings are now CP (Control Point) followed by a code. I think 1 is Hudson Division, 2 is New Haven (positive about this), and 3 is Harlem Division.
The next two numbers are the closest mile post.
Shell is now CP 216. 2 stands for New Haven Division and 16 is the mile post (from Grand Central), actually it's 16.3 but they round to the nearest mile.
Michael
Hudson Division CPs have no prefix.
Ex. CP12 is old DV (Spuyten Duyvil) Int near MP12
EGGS!
My observation is that the Acelas go slower then the M-N/Ct commuters from NYC to NH. North of NH it's all brand new wire.
Remember that they ALSO still have curves & old bridges that restrict to speed South of NH.
Mr rt__:^)
I think that the reason the Acelas go slower, is that Amtrak has restrictions on how fast they can brake or accelerate (for passenger comfort). Metro North has no such concerns.
I like how you put that. Someone at MTA would no doubt raise an eyebrow...
:0)
Articles in today's Sun-Times:
Trump unveils his Tower
Plans for a world's-tallest building on the Chicago River are scaled back to about 78 floors in the wake of 9/11. Amazingly enough, it doesn't even look like a casino.
Harrod's owner may be shopping on State Street
Daley & Company are courting Harrod's owner to open Chicago store, possibly on long-vacant Block 37. Meetings scheduled this week.
Metra cutting corners to remain on schedule
Metra plans to decrease length of trains and close some toilets during winter weather emergencies.
-- David
Chicago, IL
You may be aware that Trump planned to build the world's tallest building on the site of the historic Ambassador Hotel here in Los Angeles. He gave up on that idea, and now the site will pass to the school district, which has embarked on a building binge to reduce overcrowding.
I'm heartened to think that Harrod's may come to State Street. That will add some much needed luster. When I was a child, State Street boasted seven department stores: Marshall Field's, Mandel Brothers, The Boston Store, Carson Pirie & Scott, The Fair Store, Goldblatt's, and Sears. Keeping this on topic, at Christmas, Marshall Field's had an excellent model train display, and both The Boston Store and Sears offered train rides for children.
Christmas wasn't Christmas without a trip to State Street on the Chicago Aurora & Elgin, lunch at Field's Walnut Room, and rides on the "L" and streetcars.
Maybe they didn't announce it last year, but from late Dec through mid Jan Metra ran many rush hour trains with short consists. The train I normally ride to Chicago in the morning was running 8 cars instead of 9, and my homebound train was 7 cars instead of 8 (UP West Line train #24 and #51).
-- Ed Sachs
I completed the R40 subway car and working on the passenger view(will add this to the download later). The car is avail for download.There is 2 zip files for this download and there is a runme bat file in r40q2.zip to copy the cabview & sounds folders from the series 2000 folder.Also, a read me file in r40q1.zip
The next subway car I'm working on is the R36 (7) 60 % complete).
If anyone need a subway car let me know.
You can download it from my site below
http://jcamacho.topcities.com/main.html
There is some pics of the r40 Q train at MSTS Transit authority
http://communities.msn.com/MSTSTransitAuthority/_whatsnew.msnw
I'm just kind of curious...I know a few of the other posters to this board are SEPTA riders like myself, and I was just wondering exactly how many of us there are here, and what your lines are. I'm a Market-Frankford line commuter, but I also ride the R8 sometimes, and I use the green line trolleys in WEst Philly.
Mark
I moved to Philly in January. I ride the R6, the #61 bus and the Market-Frankford, Broad Street and PATCO lines on a regular basis. Ialso visit NY frequently, using either Amtrak or commuter rail to do so.
Hey RonNotInBayside, would you be interested in a SEPTA trip sometimes between Christmas and New Years on a weekday? I was thinking of taking the R8 out to Chesnut Hill and then comming back on the R7. Maybe a side trip to Doylestown.
I have to check my schedule. I'm overloaded with work at the moment. I'm lucky I have time to breathe for a few minutes.
I'll get back to you.
The catch is that you have to go with Jersey Mike. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
And with you too, after you start attending Drexel...
:0)
How do you find the transfer from the R7 to NJT at Trenton? Personnaly I've been using it several times a year since 1979, but it seems I may abandon the train for Greyhound.
I got stranded this past Sunday because Septa left from a track other than track 5 and didn't bother to wait until 2:02 departure time.
Now that Newark Intl Airport station is open, this connection is very very tight.
How can we get SEPTA to realize that they have to push back their departures? If they aren't running their railroad for passengers then what do they think their business is. It ain't pleasant waiting in Trenton for an hour.
Usualy, the SEPTA trains leaves from the same track as the arriving NJT Train. Also, at least in the case of SEPTA being late, they held the NJT train to that we could make our connection. Even waved the onboard ticket buying surcharge. The C/R basically told us all to run and get on quick.
The NJT train usually waits. I've never had a problem (but other people, on occasion, had).
NJ Transit sells a combination ticket through a TVM in the lobby of the SEPTA portion of 30th Street station, near the ticket office. Buying that ticket eliminates any possible hassle at Trenton (beyond running between trains, that is), and helps the conductors, too. I recommend it. (Besides, I think it's priced at a discount compared to a regular SEPTA fare plus a regular NJT fare, but don't quote me on that).
But if you're going to NYC from Philly on the weekend, a SEPTA transpass is good for all regional rail lines, so if you have one you only need to buy a ticket from Trenton to NY Penn Station.
Mark
I was talking aboout going from NYP to TTN to CCP.
Here's my usual routime, which I do about every 5 weeks:
From NYP. I go to the mezzanine to a TVM near track 3/4 and punch in NJT Rail, Philly, RTX and dip my credit card, then get 4 tickets. I never have to buy a ticket at Trenton and I haven't done that in years (and I've been riding NJT NEC to Trenton + R7 since the late 1970's when you had to get the tickets from the window, and when the SEPTA line didn't yet have "R7" as its designation).
I sit in the first car and when we arrive at Trenton, I run to SEPTA which is normally on track 5.
On last Sunday, 12/9/01 because the wire train was on track 5, every arriving train was juggled around.
However, NJT got in a bit late, but still before 2pm, yet SEPTA didn't wait until their 2:02 departure time.
SEPTA has gotta get 'Serious About Change' They left 65 passengers behind and the next train at 3:02 was very crowded. Funny how SEPTA doesn't leave CCP on time and arrives at Trenton late, yet NJT will hold their train; SEPTA should learn some manners.
I live in Exton, 30 miles west of Philly, but I come for joy rides
like the 108 bus from 69th st, then the 13 trolley to center city and then a round trip ride on the El (To Frankford and back to 69th St.),
where I park my car. While I was living in Philly I rode many bus lines. and the Broad st. subway (the old black cars).
Chuck Greene
I used to live and work in Philly, and i remember commuting to work on the R6 from manayunk....before it became trendy. I also took the MFL El back in the day when they were still running the old "almond joy" cars. Have they gotten around to painting the El structure in W. Philly yet? Last time i saw it, it was lookin pretty decrepit.
They are going to renovate the whole thing, changing it from double column supports to a single T-bent configuration. Nearly all stations will receive ADA-compliace work, with elevators and other amenities.
SEPTA, I believe, is currently being sued because certain plaintiffs believe it hasn't arranged to award enough work out to minority and women-owned businesses. I don't know what effect this will actually have on the project schedule.
Until all that mess gets sorted out we'll have to content ourselves to look at the mural that's at 47th and Market or so showing what the new el will look like. I have a photo of it. I'll try to scan it in and post it.
Mark
I wouldn't call the El work 'renovation' since it's basically a total replacement. Yes, the arguments over who gets certain work is holding up progress - two state legislators actually threatened to withhold funding from SEPTA until more 'neighborhood' businesses were hired. Just the thing to help your transit-dependent constituents, isn't it?
The El got its current maroon-brown paint job in the mid-80's. Before that it was the more familiar PTC green. The brown does too good of a job hiding rust.
By the way, to answer the original question, I can raise my hand as a daily SEPTA rider (at least on workdays). I use the 27 every day, and occasionally the 9 and 61 Express. I also infrequently find myself on the El and subway-surface riding to and from meetings at the good ol' U of P, and sometimes if I'm coming home from there I'll catch the R6, switching to 27 at Wissahickon. Once in a while I venture onto the Broad St Subway also.
Things haven't changed in Philly since the days of radical Mel Street have they? Sound like when I was there.
THAT'S what they're suing SEPTA for? Couldn't they sue SEPTA for something worthwhile, like restoration of trolley service where it has been suspended for ten years after a SEPTA promise to restore it in five?
They don't have time for that. "They" also periodically sue SEPTA for injuries ocurring after bus accidents (until a SEPTA lawyer shows them a video of themselves climbing on the bus after the accident and suggesting that one way to avoid jail time is to withdraw the lawsuit).
What about the trolly to Norristown? I had a girlfriend in E. Norriton and took the trolly from 69th street terminal past Bryn Mawr to Norristown.
The seats would be reversed at the end of each ride.
Have you ever been on the old trolly cars (used 1982)?
What about the trolly to Norristown?...
Earlier, on a different strand of this thread, I posted a link to slides that I uploaded. They include:
a Strafford car in the old paint scheme
Bullet car #203
Bullet car #200
Strafford car in orange paint scheme
Liberty Liner outside the car barn
CTA train as well as
other neat stuff.
I worked in Radnor from 1972 to 1987, commuting on PATCO, Market Street subway/el, and P&W interurban.
I recently took digital photos of some of my old slides, getting poor results. Many railfans would overlook the quality and enjoy the subjects, many of them being SEPTA.
My '70's and '80's slides (thumbnails; use pull-down menu above photo to make image larger))
Nice pictures. Long live the GG-1!
Have you ever stood on the south end of the Walnut Street station on the Broad Street subway and felt the PATCO train speeding by under your feet?
No, but I've stood in the Braod Street subway City Hall Station and flet the MFL rumbling by overhead.
Mark
I experience that too, but the PATCO under the Walnut Street station is more subtle.
All through City Hall itself, you can feel the Subway rumbling below. I was up on the 5th floor once and i could still feel it. Its weird, since you often feel it much stronger in the structure than you do in the courtyard right above the subway.
I lived in Philly from 1996 to 1998 while going to Drexel University. While in Philly, I rode nearly everything that ran on rails, the Market-Frankford El, the Broad Street Subway, the Norristown Line, PATCO and the Subway Surface and Regional Rail Lines. I even rode the entire Route 23 trolley line in May 1997. I visited the Transit Store on a regular basis too. Philly really does have a nice rail transit system. It just needs to expand in the city. Even when I transferred to UConn in 1998, I still kept up with proposals and projects such as the Schuylkill Valley Metro, the Girard Avenue Light Rail, and now, the Northeast Philly proposal. I hope to go back soon.
If you rode the 23 in '97 you had to have done it on a bus, as the trolley quit in '92.
I know. This was a fan trip. I forget exactly who sponsored it, but I found out about on the East Penn Traction web site. But they really ought to bring back at least the Center City portion of 23 and run it similar to San Francisco's F Line. I think both tourists and residents would enjoy it.
It was sponsored by the Buckingham Valley Trolley Association (BVTA), whose collection now forms the core of the Lackawanna Trolley Museum. I'm not a member (I am a member of EPTC) and was on that trip as well (I was the ugly guy with the full beard).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The one way back in May 1997? Wow, how 'bout that, had a fellow Subtalker on that trip and I didn't even know it. Hmmm, I do recall seeing a guy with a full beard on that trip. I guess that was you. There was one guy selling pictures off PCC cars in other cities. I asked him if head any for Brooklyn. He didn't. Another guy told me that he blamed Alfred P.Sloan of General Motors for the fall of the trolley. Another guy I spoke to said that only commuter service would work in NE Philly. And there was another guy who I held a seat for while he went out to take pictures every time the trolley made a stop. I stood for the whole trip, but it was still worth it. I really got to see a whole smattering of Philadelphia neighborhoods. It was great.
That's the one... I rode several trips in '96 and '97, before we concluded that my "temporary" assignment was going to last long enough to justify buying a house in New Jersey and my wife and younger son joined me here.
Photo by Anon_e_mouse Jr.
I was travelling light on that trip... just a point 'n' shoot, not any of my good equipment, but I did take a couple of shots.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Didn't Drexel build its present library on the site of the old SEPTA trolly barn at Market and 34th Street?
Steven (Class of 1983)
Haggerty Library was built on an old trolley barn? How about that? You learn something new every day on Subtalk. But that must have been a really long time ago because the trolley subway was extended into University City in the 50s.
The trolly barn was out of service when I came to town in 1977. i also remember that after solid precipitation would fall and melt a little, huge icicles would hang off the Market Street side and be a threat to pedestrians passing underneath. SEPTA workers would have to come by to cut off the huge icicles. The sidewald would be closed before the iciles were cut.
I've only ridden SEPTA a couple times so far, but there's a pretty good chance I'll be moving to Philly within the year to (hopefully) go to Drexel and finish my degree. Thus, I try to stay on top of what's happening on the system. My ideal scenario is to live and work within walking distance of either the commuter rail, subway-surface, or MFL so that I can have a quick, one-seat ride to school and work, so that I wouldn't be totally dependent on my car. My '86 Trans Am would then become the weekend toy it's ideally suited to be.
Of course, now that I own a Trans Am, I guess that sort of obligates me to grow a mullet and live in South Jersey. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
Drexel is a great school. Lots of luck to you!
Of course, now that I own a Trans Am, I guess that sort of obligates me to grow a mullet and live in South Jersey. :-)
Hey, don't knock South Jersey. The gas is cheap (down below $1), the beer is cheap, there's still winderness and you're only an NJT or PATCO ride away from Centre City.
And South Jersey has the third largest aquarium tank in the US!
Mike, there ain't much wilderness left in South Jersey!
Mike, there ain't much wilderness left in South Jersey!
This isn't exactly wilderness, but the Salem local is pretty rural.
What about the Pine Barrens?
Mark
There is considerable undeveloped land in South Jersey - I was being a little tongue in cheek. The Pine Barrens are certainly 'the wilderness'. However, if you go back about 30 years (when I was an impressionable teenager), you would see that a large part of South Jersey was farmland. Now it takes a lot longer to get to the farm. I recall that the area now occupied by the Deptford Mall and its surrounding shopping strips was a large pig farm where farmers would collect garbage from Phila households in their own trucks to feed the pigs. This all changed in roughly '75 when the mall was built.
Drexel is a nice school but it certainly can't compare to its Ivy League neighbor across 33rd St. (It's a Phila thing, and when you get here you'll understand!)
I would disagree with that statement if it concerns education. Drexel is a focused engineering school with an excellent reputation. The University of Pennsylvania is much better endowed, but will not give you a better education than Drexel in the engineering sciences.
Yes, engineering was definitely Drexel's forte. When I went there during my freshman and sophomore years, the engineering school was the big thing there. But when I changed majors from engineering to business, I felt the school was being neglected.
Some of you Drexel people might enjoy a web site I put up a while ago...
THESHAFT.ORG
Great site, Rich! I knew I wasn't the only one who got treated like crap while at Drexel. Maybe I can post my bad experiences (and there were many) on your site. It got so bad that I finally transferred to UConn in 1998.
Anyway, getting back on topic, while I was at Drexel, SEPTA only ran Almond Joys on the El, but I got to see a mock-up of the new M4 cars at none other than the Philadelphia Auto Show. Also I saw the first two M4s (1001-1002) being tested on the El. When I came back to Philly in 1999, I rode the M4s for the first time. I liked the seats (you'll never get seats like that in a NYC subway car), the quiet ride, the nicer interior, and the rounded sides of the cars. They were nice.
Was there a PA system. I never heard a PA announcement on the old cars when went to Drexel.
class of 1983
No, no PA system on old cars. That was why conductors blew those whistles before closing the doors on the Almond Joy cars.
I remember on the old Broad Street Cars (BI-BIV) that if the indicator light for the T/O was out for one of the halves of the train, then the conductor would double buzz the T/O.
The B-IV's are the current Kawasaki cars. You are thinking of the old cars, which were never called B-I/II/III, rather the North Broad (1-150), South Broad (151-200), and Bridge Line (1000 group) cars.
Actually the first M-4 test cars were 1002 & 1003. I had the chance to ride it in non-revenue service back in early '98 during the period when the line is shut down (12:30am-5am) for nightly routine line maintenance & etc.
Ms.SEPTA
Are there any plans for SEPTA expansion?
The highest profile proposal is the Scuylkill Valley Metro, a line from Reading to Center City. The plan pushed was for some kind of cross between light rail and commuter that they called "metrorail."
It would supplant the current R6 and use a lot of Norfolk Southern right-of-way.
Also working its way through the channels is yet another Roosevelt Boulevard subway plan, which would branch from the Broad Street subway at Erie, then travel undreneath the Boulevard to Southampton Road, just near the Bucks County line. This plan would also include extending the Market-Frankford line to meet the new line at Roosevelt and Bustleton.
It's anybody's guess what, if anything will really happen.
Mark
Well like here in NY, when the second ave line is actually running, i will believe it when i can put a token in the turnstile and ride
I guess you could say I gave up...Instead of waiting for SEPTA to build a subway to my neighborhood I just decided to move to where the lines already are.
It's nice to dream, though.
By the way I found my old SEPTA fantasy map. It doesn't have all the lines that people here have suggested, but it's still fun. How does one post an image?
Mark
I know that's right Michalovic, SEPTA good for making plans and not following through; unless it has something to do with a stinkin' bus. They always follow thru with a "planned" bus extension never a rail extension SEPTA has a very bad habit in pushin' the planned date back when it's light rail related(hence Rt.23 & 56), do you feel me? I'm still looking forward to seeing these remanufactured PCCs SEPTA has planned to put back on the Rt.15 in 2003. It was said in the SEPTA report that, "these PCCs will assume thier new role as LRVs". I lie to you not Michalovic. Let me know how you feel about this.
Ms.SEPTA
well i would like to see PCC's roll on track in revenue sevice - somewhere...
Me too, I this project very interesting. The cars are to be wheel chair equipped thru the ctr doors. It basically supposed to have all the anmenities of an LRV we'll see soon. I'm shootin' for late 2002 or early 2003 to a prototype model. That will definitley be a photo op, don't you think?
Ms.SEPTA
yes - i do beleive that an ex SEPTA car is actually here in brooklyn, read someowhere it is in a yard someowhere on 4th ave and president street - anyone know the number of the car and how it got there?
Someone posted a link to the photo about a month or so ago. Could that nice person be so kind as to please post it once again?
Mark
It's #2739, and it's supposed to be a seating in a 1950s-themed club being built in the old bathhouse at 4 Ave & Union St. I don't think I initially posted the photo, but here's mine.
What was the pre-SEPTA livery of Phillys PCCs? I seem to recall green/yellow but I could be wrong.
Peace,
ANDEE
Those were the PTC colors, as seen in these horrendous photos of #2733
I ahve a postcard at home that shows that livery, and another in an orange and cream coloring, with like maroon/ or brown lettering that says Southern Eastern Pennsylvania transportation authority on the rear -
Yea, those are the beasts I recall from my 8th grade field trip in 1969. First time I ever saw a PCC. Didn't know they were called that 'til years later. 8-)
Thanks.
Peace,
ANDEE
Heck, my father still calls them "those trolleys that look like buses," but they never ran in Providence :).
What does run in Providence....I spent a year there one weekend. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
What does run in Providence....I spent a year there one weekend. 8-)
What runs in Providence? Buddy Cianci and nobody else!
Generation gaps are funny sometimes. My dad always talks about how timeless PCCs look, and I love them because they look so datedly arti-deco! :)
Mark
you know they are timeless. Like the DC-3, there are some still in operation service - maybe it goes to show that things were built well back then, or just that it was a good idea at the right time
PTC's (SEPTA's predecessor) painted the PCC's green below the belt, cream above, with a maroon belt. The belt didn't extend across the doors. The bottom 'lip' of the belt was cream. The scheme on 2733 (the turquoise one) was an experimental one that SEPTA applied shortly after it took over. Apparently this one was so garish that it was removed very quickly. There were some others - I recall variations of red/blue, and the SEPTA 'gold' (which I personally never liked at all). The orange/blue 'Gulf Oil' scheme was one of these, and it was eventually adopted, but not before several cars got the gold scheme. The yellow/purple (yes, yellow/purple) 'banana' car (I think it was 2168), which I've seen on a postcard, was one of the experimental schemes.
If you make it to West Philly this weekend you'll be able to see for yourself what the PTC colors were, as the old PCCs are doing a holiday special out there. Catch them at 40th street. If you can't make it, SEPTA has a PCC in old PTC colors in there main headquarters at 1234 Market Street. You can see it from the Market Frankford line, at 13th street station from the eastbound platform.
Mark
If you make it to West Philly this weekend you'll be able to see for yourself what the PTC colors were
That's what I did today. I decided to ride the subway-surface to Woodland Ave to catch the PCC's running the West Philly holiday loop service, but when our trolley emerged from the 40th St portal,PCC # 2168 in green PTC paint was sitting there waiting for me. It went into service as a route 36 (Island Ave). The motorman went to lunch at the loop, so I returned on Kawasaki #9056, whose motorman is a railfan. I got off at 42nd St and walked a block up to Chester Ave, where I caught PCC #2799 in Red Arrow livery. The motorwoman parked the trolley at 40th and Filbert and went to lunch, so I did other railfan stuff elsewhere.
Additional photos of the PCC's, as well as the rest of my railfan travels can be found here.
Thanks for the great shots, Chuchubob. I hadn't seen the Red Arrow cars out and about this year.
Mark
This will be nice but SEPTA is missing the boat by only rehabbing 18 cars. This number will limit future service on 15 and will offer no relief for the overtaxed subway-surface lines. With the many PCC's sitting around the system, SEPTA would do well to double the number going through rehab and have spares for possible 23/56 resurrection. After its trials and tribulations with 15's comeback (which SEPTA is reluctantly doing), don't be too surprised if it throws in the proverbial towel on 23 and 56.
Actually, they put an option to rehab eight more cars in the contract, which would bring the rehab order up to 26 cars. It remains to be seen how well the restoration of streetcars on Route 15 goes. Either way, it wouldn't offer relief to the Subway-Surface Lines. Only larger, articulated LRVs or a parallel line could do that.
The option's there, and hopefully SEPTA will exercise it, but the base bid was for 18 cars. The option came about at the insistence of the City's Transportation Office over the objections of SEPTA staff.
A bus, or the nonsensical Schuylkill Valley Metro. I get a lot of feeling that there is a lot more focus on the suburbs than the city, hence a big push for an SVM plan that the City hates (with good reason) and the much-needed Roosevelt Boulevard subway gets pushed to the back burner. SEPTA frustrates in many ways, no doubt.
I know it will be late incoming, but I can't wait for route 15 trolley service to be restored, but I think that instead of trying to install lifts on the old PCCs, they should just build platforms...I think that's what they did on San Francisco's Market Street. I'd love to see routes 23 and 56 restored, and I like the idea someone once mentioned of turning 66 into a trolley line down Frankford Avenue, though that would be more complicated, because I don't know if there are tracks there or not.
But the good news is that I'll soon be living a block from one of West Philly's trolley lines!
Mark
66 and 52 are two good candidates for light rail. Of course, 66 had a planned expansion along Knights Rd to Franklin Mills but this will apparently never happen. (This was one reason that the AMG trackless order was so big - the replacement order will most likely be about 60, roughly the number needed to supply the current 5 lines.) Tracklesses could easily be used on 6, 53, 60 (and 50 if it were still around), which would have preserved some electric service on these former rail routes. There had even been talk at one time of tieing 75 to the outer portion of 53, leaving 53 south of Wayne Junction to be served by splitting the H/XH bus routes and routing one of them off Wissahickon Ave to Clarissa/Pulaski.
That is a very good idea Bobw, I agree w/you to the fullest.
Ms. SEPTA
The fact that you and I agree means that SEPTA has two reasons not to do this. I say this tongue in cheek but from experience I've learned that if something isn't SEPTA's idea SEPTA has little interest in it.
Are Girard Avenue and Richmond Street wide enough for high platforms? I know Girard is fairly wide around Broad Street and near the zoo. Personally, I would have liked to see Skoda Astra LRVs (like the ones in use in Portland, Oregon) on Girard, because those are low-floor LRVs and they would eliminate the need for high platforms.
But I really like that idea of turning Route 66 into a streetcar line. Where did you read about it?
Only two sections of Girard can accommodate platforms of any type - roughly Belmont Ave to east of the Schuylkill River and Broad St to I-95. Richmond St isn't wide enough.
I think someone postedd the idea here a while ago. I think it would be neat because Frankford gets pretty wide at some places, wide enough for 66 to have local and express service already, at least, and its a very charming street in some places, too, and a trolley would just add to the ambience of it.
Mark
Frankfort should be extended further northeast.
Definitely rapid transit is needed inthe Northeast. A third of the city lives there, and right now people have to cram on to buses to ferry them down to Frankford terminal. A one-seat ride would be a lot more convenient, and probably attract more riders to transit.
Mark
I am curious, why SEPTA doesn't consider using deisel trains running from Reading to 30th St?
It would at least get service running sooner, and you don't have to worry about fumes from the engines since the train station is
outdoors.
I live in Collegeville and work in Philly and can't wait to get on a train closer to home other than driving to Norristown or Pennbrook...
John
Interesting. But what happened to 1001 and 1004? If I'm not mistaken, the cars are paired 1001-1002, 1003-1004, 1005-1006, etc. Were they undergoing any tests at that time?
I don't know either, but that's how they were initially delivered and as long that they had an A & B unit it really didn't matter. The A unit has 2 choppers and no air compressor and the B unit has only 1 chopper and an air compressor and all that other sophisticated stuff.
Basically what I'm tryin' to say is odd # cars are A units and even # cars are B units. Oh yeah, it's strange but 1001 & 1004 were delivered later as you probably know it was a big mess w/that order those cars were 2yrs behind schedule.
Ms.SEPTA
From what I had heard before, 1001 was shipped to the 69th St shops to begin training of maintenance crews. Several months after 1002/1003 began their tests, they were rematched with their appropriate mates.
Is Drexel really that bad? Any large university, public or private, has its share of beurocratic ineptitude. Like it or not, it's part of the game.
Besides, I'm certain Drexel can't possibly be any worse than my former school, the University of Illinois at Chicago.
-- David
Chicago, IL
The bureaucracy at Drexel had a nickname. The Drexel Shaft. And a statue...a piece of steel jutting out of the fountain in the quad.
You should help Harvard students and faculty put up their own website like that!
Drexel University adopted its present name in 1970. The former name was Drexel Institute of Technology aka DIT.
Unfortunately you are correct (and this is coming from a U of P engineering graduate!). Penn is slowly but surely gutting its engineering school and has pretty much admitted that it can't compete in the world of engineering. However, I keep hearing that Drexel is also on the proverbial slippery slope as it branches into the medical field (MCP/Hahnemann/Tenet) and is trying to expand the business and fashion design schools.
I'd recommend University City. You'd be close to your school, and the wonderful West Philly trolleys. Lots of interesting people live in that neighborhood, too. It's one of the easiest places in the city for a newcomer to fit in quickly and easily.
Mark
Yes, I must agree with you on that one! Univ. City is good nieghborhood for newcomers to get settled. It's very peaceful, clean, and alot of interesting cultures and all that good stuff.
In fact, I'm moving there myself, because my girlfriend, my church, and most of my friends are there. I'm really looking forward to it.
Plus, the old PCCs have been running a loop in West Philly for the holidays. Its free and a lot of fun.
Mark
Yes, indeed it is. I know all the operators. Have you seen the Christmas trolley (LRV) yet? It's wildcatting on all 5 Sub-Sur rts. from now til Christmas.
I saw it at 13th street. I wanted to ride it, but it was an 11, think, and I needed a 34.
Bummer.
Sometimes they do one up for Halloween, too.
Mark
Valentine's Day a.k.a. The LOVE Trolley, Easter and for the annual Flower Show too.
>>Valentine's Day a.k.a. The LOVE Trolley
Wouldn't you know it, I'm planning on moving to a house near my girlfriend's place and the trolleys in February. I guess I have good timing!
Mark
Yes, indeed that's very good timing but anytime is GOOD time when live on or near an avenue that has trolleys cruising by. I'm planning as well to wove in that area. Just watching the LRVs roll by is theraputic for me. My friends call crazy but I don't give a damn. I LOVE trolleys and subway cars I can sit @ major stops and watch them roll by for hours. I think you feel the same way too. My favorite place to "trolley watch" is 40th Street portal during the "pm loadline". so many cars going in and out of the "HOLE" you can't possibly keep up. My son loves to see all the action, he gets so excited likes wave at the operators so they ring the gong or toot the horn. I can see now I'm raising a future railfan in the making. Matter of fact he's already there.
Some very good friends of mine used to live in an apartment overlooking the 40th street portal and have great views of the trolleys going in and out of the tunnel. Too bad that apartment isn't on the market right now! But I've found one only a block from one of the routes, so I'm happy.
You're lucky you can raise your son near trolley lines. My dad had no such luck, so he had to wait until I moved to Philly to watch me become a railfan like himself.
Mark
so what finally happened with the Saturn???
Right now, the Saturn is rotting away a couple blocks from here. Pretty soon it will belong to the finance company, since I can't afford to make payments on the Saturn and keep the TA running at the same time. What they do with it once they have it, I really couldn't care less. I'm in the process of filing Chapter 7, so at least they won't be able to come after me for the rest of the loan amount.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Sorry, TA = Trans Am. Guess I should make that clarification around here.:-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
I was a student at Drexel from 1977 to 1983. I got to see the changeover on the Broad Street subway.
The last time I was in town, Market/Frankfort El cars were the same mid 1960's era cars as they were using when I was in school. Have they changed any of their rolling stock???
I am in Texas now and I don't get to visit Philadelphia at all anymore.
By 1999, the El was running entirely with air-conditioned M4 "Mounds" cars and all of the 1960s-era M3 "Almond Joy" cars were out of service. For quite some time then, there was a lot of M4-bashing on this board, much like the R142-bashing that rears its ugly head on this board from time to time (and that existed way before the first R142 was even delivered). Those M3 cars had no A/C or PA system and inside they looked they came straight out of the early 60s. The El was a real rolling museum in 1996 to 1998 when I rode the El on a regular basis while at Drexel. I wonder why SEPTA never rebuilt the Almond Joys, maybe in the 80s they could have done so?
Lack of spare parts and places to get them? Sometimes it doesn't pay to overhaul a subway car.
I'm a Drexel student also - geez, there's a lot of us here!
Allegedly the Budds were so dependable that the rebuilding was never undertaken. While I find this difficult to believe, they were in fairly good mechanical shape even up to the day they were removed from service, so maybe there's something to be said for that. The only major flaw they had was the exposure of traction motors, which caused many to go out of service during and after large snowstorms. In '78 the line was down to 5-car trains due to this for a long period of time in the late winter and spring.
Don't forget about the fatal accident that occurred from a similar situation. The traction motor on the 4th car I beleive detached from the axle and caused a very ugly derailment on 03/07/91 around 8:45am @ the double crossover just west of 30th St. the last 3cars were MANGLED and chewed up. I'll never forget it 'cause i was @ the station when that horrible accident occurred 10 yrs. ago.
Ms.SEPTA
I won't forget it either. My wife was on the train following the derailed one and my cousin was the priest who left his chapel at Drexel and attended to many of the injured.
The last time I was in town, Market/Frankfort El cars were the same mid 1960's era cars as they were using when I was in school. Have they changed any of their rolling stock???
This is a shot of a new MFSE train taken from the railfan window of another.
Well of course, you know that I'm a frequent SEPTA rider (hence my handle). But yes, I frequently ride the Broad Street Subway, Market-Franford El & the Subway-Surface trolley lines. But, I personally LOVE the Very fast express runs on the BSS NB btwn Girard & Erie sta. and from Erie to Olney ave. Also SB from Olney to Erie is very fast I've noted them speeding @ 60mph and sometimes 65mph, which I personally think is very fast for a subway train. I can go from my sta. Erie where I begin my commute to work every morning and get to City Hall in 10mins. which in my eyes is "beautiful". But anyway that's my speil.
See Ya
Mz.SEPTA
Wow, I didn't realize that so many of the regular responders were denizens of SEPTA's rail lines. I could be bumping elbows with subtalkers every morning without realizing it. If you see a tall blond guy with glasses who looks lost all the time, that's me! :)
In addition to my regular lines, I really love the Broad Street subway (though I mostly ride it on weekends and can't always get an express) and the Route 100 to Norristown. I love the cars and the scenery. I have yet to ride the 101 and 102 suburban trolleys, though. PATCO is also a pleasure for me, and I wish SEPTA could make its stations look as nice!
MArk
Both 101 & 102 are very scenic. I like the 102 more than the 101 the ride is very smooth and quiet sometimes I would fall asleep becuase of this. Oh yeah, before I forget the 102 have about 1/2mile of street trackage (double track that is) which I find very interesting, since the majority of the route is PRW.
I didn't know that 101 and 102 ran on mostly PRW. I'll have to make a special trip to check them out, now. Thanks for the tip!
Mark
Both of them give you a great, scenic ride thru parts of country.
Enjoy!
Chuck Greene
I grew up in West Philly riding the PTC/SEPTA 34 and 10 trolley lines. I became familiar with many other lines as well some of which no longer exist i.e the 15.
I now live in San Francisco. My Philly experiences made the SF Muni "streetcar" and even the TB lines seem pretty normal.
The F-Market line here has been a dream come true. It's so cool to be a regular rider on or under SF's Market Street!
I ride the 34 a lot myself, and love it. Take heart, because the 15 is slated to return...supposedly in 2002, but I'm going to take that projected date with a grain of salt, of course.
San Francisco's Market Street is wonderful. Bart and Muni below, while nearly the whole history of traction whizzes by overhead. I might be going that way come spring, and I hope to do some ridin'.
Mark
You never know what'll come down the tracks here, a PCC, a Milano, New Orleans, and yesterday evening Muni's first streecar, car #1 was in service.
And you know, regular Muni passengers are so used to this that they board 'em with hardly a notice!
I'm glad to hear that #15 is on it's way back. How about the #23?
I really doubt if the 23 trolley will ever come back. Too much rebiulding who have to be done.
Chuck Greene
Correction: Too much rebuilding would have to be done.
Sorry for the errors.
Chuck Greene
I thought all the tracks and wires were still in place. Guess I haven't been over the entire route.
I also recall three lines crossing at Broad & Erie.
Church & Market streets in SF is like that with the F-Market crossing the J-Church and the 22-Fillmore TB there right over the Church Street Muni Metro station.
A block away at Fillmore & Duboce the J joins the N-Judah (and are crossed by the 22 there also) going into the Duboce portal and under the Mint streetcar yard to the Market Street subway.
Probably the best location for streetcar sightseeing outside of the 40th street portal in Philly.
Actually much of 23's trackage has been replaced over the past 20 years. Everything north of Vine on 11th St, Germantown Ave (except for Broad to Hunting Park, a short stretch south of Chelten, and another short stretch north of Gowen), 11th south of Passyunk, and several other short sections is in great shape.
SEPTA should at least resurrect the Welcome Line, maybe extending it a bit further to the north and south. It could be Philly's version of San Francisco's F-Line.
Take two grains of salt. The trackwork, etc on Girard Ave will probably be done next summer but the PCC rehab has not yet begun. The cars probably won't be ready until '03. Until then, unless SEPTA decides it can free up some K-cars next summer (and it can't do it during the school year, given the already tight car requirements for the subway-surface), service won't start until the rehabbed PCC's are ready.
I am a MFL commuter. 34th to 2nd and back every weekday.
A while back I posted about the removal of the crossover at 5th. For anyone wondering, it turns out it was in fact a replacement. The new crossover is fully installed now. Just FYI...
Does the new one still have penumatic switches? If so are they A-5's or A-10's?
I don't know. How would I tell?
An A-5 is a long flat box with a little cylinder at each end. An A-10 is a circular housing with two cylinders comming out of the same end. They have A-10's on the Frankford el. They use A-5's from 5th St. to 69th St.
I will check.
The new ones at 5th St look like a long box with one large cylinder at one end. I think they also replaced the crossover at 15th St a few months earlier, and the switches there look the same.
Re: "Complete New Look on the Broad Street Line"
A SEPTA pamphlet dated 7/28/82 was given out alongside a model of the current (new) Broad Street car. A regular car on a trailer open to the public for about a week. I think north of city hall on JFK.
The black and white pamphlet has a picture of the new subway car and two pages of information including the manufacturer specifications on the new cars and the old prewar cars.
I have about 30 copies, that I took. I will offer them to anyone for a trade of some sort, let me know what. Since I have 30 I can be very liberal for someone who wants the pamphlet, and I am never "liberal".
My name is Steven Green
peppertree5706@hotmail.com
The car was on display on Market St just west of 15th (across from the clothespin, near the old courtyard entrance now being rebuilt), as I recall. I think it was car 515.
I live in wilmington, ride mostly the R2 in to enter ity on occasion and sometimes connect with R7 to Trenton when I'm going up to NY.
When I was a student at Villanova we were spoiled by having an R5 station right on campus, and across Lancaster AVe we had 2 stations for the Route 100 High speed line ( or as we affectionately called it "the flying coffin"
...across Lancaster Ave we had 2 stations for the Route 100 High speed line ( or as we affectionately called it "the flying coffin"
We called it the "Pig and Whistle".
I uploaded a shot of Brill bullet car #203 that I took in Villanova in 1981, although there are no features in the photo identifying the location as Villanova.
I worked in Radnor, and most of my P&W photos were taken there.
I ride the Broad Street Subway every day, usually the express or ridge train. If there are any philly railfan trips, (or for that matter any NYC railfan trips) between next Saturday and new years please let me know.
It seems the proposed 840 ft tower won't be getting built anytime soon. As long as a year age the FAA had serious concerns over the proposed height due to flight path infringements (anyone who has seen planes take of from Logan knows who close they come to the skyscrapers already). Amtrak also had concerns over the effects of crowding at south station and the effects it would have on accela. While the developers thought they could get around both issues since 9/11 it is far harder to get abound either. Add the to the slowing economy and the project looks dead.
Airliners already cannot use the full length of one of the main runways due to skyscraper crowding. They can only use its full length for take-off in the direction away from the city. It has been repainted to reflect the new glide slopes. That means less of a safety margin for airliners using that runway.
I think that long range the city of Boston needs a second airport outside of the city. There is an air force station north of the city that could serve this purpose however it is located in some of the most expensive suburbs and in addition to the NIMBYs the nation park service would be against since the site is very close to part of the battle field from Lexington and concord. The national park service has been trying to restore this battlefield for a long time and thinks that low flying jet would not mix well with it. There is a closed naval air station south of the city but so far there have been no proposals on using it, as an airport although every idea seems to be shot down be NIMBYs.
I think that long range the city of Boston needs a second airport outside of the city. There is an air force station north of the city that could serve this purpose however it is located in some of the most expensive suburbs and in addition to the NIMBYs the nation park service would be against since the site is very close to part of the battle field from Lexington and concord. The national park service has been trying to restore this battlefield for a long time and thinks that low flying jet would not mix well with it. There is a closed naval air station south of the city but so far there have been no proposals on using it, as an airport although every idea seems to be shot down be NIMBYs.
Manchester (MHT) is becoming an alternative airport for the Boston area. Southwest already advertises its proximity to Boston, and other airlines have increased service there as well (or at least they did before September 11th). Come to think of it, Southwest also touts Providence's closeness to Boston. The two airports actually complement each other in terms of being alternatives, with MHT serving the northern suburbs and PVD the southern ones.
I wouldn't be surprised to see more mainline service into Worcester, either.
No doubt Manchester and Providence are good for Boston's outer northern and southern suburbs, but still, they are kind of distant from Boston and its inner suburbs. There aren't a lot ground transportation options to go the 60 miles or so from Manchester or Providence to Boston. You have bus and rental car servcies. But no rail. Given that there's so much highway construction going on in Boston related to the Big Dig, there really should be rail service from Boston to both Manchester and T.F. Green Airports.
No doubt Manchester and Providence are good for Boston's outer northern and southern suburbs, but still, they are kind of distant from Boston and its inner suburbs. There aren't a lot ground transportation options to go the 60 miles or so from Manchester or Providence to Boston. You have bus and rental car servcies. But no rail. Given that there's so much highway construction going on in Boston related to the Big Dig, there really should be rail service from Boston to both Manchester and T.F. Green Airports.
It's been many years since I was in Providence - how close is the airport to the Northeast Corridor line?
It's been many years since I was in Providence - how close is the airport to the Northeast Corridor line?
About half a mile. Construction has started on the Warwick train station (demolition and environmental remediation to be completed next month); it will have a people-mover to the airport. Most likely, MBTA will be extended to Warwick, maybe Amtrak will stop there, and the idea of RIPTA commuter rail to Westerly has even been tossed around a bit.
As far as I can infer from this site, there was a brief period of time where the number 8 refered to the Astoria IRT, since the number code came in in 1948 and the Astoria line became pure BMT in 1949. (Right?) The "Number, Letter and Color Code" section in FAQ's confirms that this designation did exist.
So, which if any car IRT classes displayed it, and are there any pictures on this site? The only IRT # 8 trains I could find were later shots of the Bronx remenant of the Third Avenue El.
Aparently the Astoria line had also been the BMT # 8, but that's a different story. (Interesting, though that both the IRT and BMT called it by the same number even as the Flushing line was called the 7 by the IRT and the 9 by the BMT.)
:-) Andrew
No cars existed which could display the numbers running on the IRT at this time, until the R12 showed up in 1948. I don't think any R type IRT car was assigned to the combined Astoria/Corona service before it was discontinued a year later. Most of the cars were World's Fair and Steinway Low-V's.
The few pics of the pre 1949 Astoria line show Q cars only. Here's one dated in the 1940's:
I'd just like to note that if you took this same shot today, the only noticable differences would be:
1) The rolling stock (and train-length)
2) The platform (no more wooded planks)
3) The "Broadway" sign font and color scheme (there still aren't aluminum corrugated screens in place in this view)
The surrounding neighborhood is exactly the same!
But the wooden Q cars look so much better than the antisceptic hippos of the N line.
Plus this photo was taken before their roofs were chopped down.
Rumor has it that R12s (signed as #8) did run on the Astoria line while it was still IRT, but I've never seen a photo to prove it.
-- Ed Sachs
Is it me, or does that old "BROADWAY" sign resemble the nameplates on the orginal IRT stations?
:-) Andrew
Broadway on the current N and W line used to be an IRT line.
Well, right. I know that. That's the point of this thread. But I never knew that IRT elevated stations once had nameplates similar to those on the underground stations--the Contract One stations no less (the underground Flushing IRT statons have the same IRT Dual Contracts one found on the lower 7th Ave and upper Lex Ave lines.)
:-) Andrew
Hey! Lookie here:
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r14/r14-5914.jpg
(Sorry I don't know how to put up a link here)
It's an R14 signed as a # 8, though it's actually in the Bronx.
:-) Andrew
I was wondering if like T/O's from one line would not like T/O's from another for things like longer breaks, more hours, better pay, or a shorter route and less relays. If its true, can someone site an example for me.
The only instance where there may be a little friction between T/O's is between the A and B divisions. B T/O's bad mouth the A and vice versa. But it's not a dislike, it's more of a rivalry.
I know you're B division. But what makes one division more desirable to work for T/O's, other than proximity to one's home?
How they are treated by other crews and supervision and where they can find 'penalty' jobs (jobs that pay in excess of 9 hours) at a convenient time.
B Division is much more interesting, especially the BMT. I'm not a T/O. Just my opinion. I would assume T/O prefer express runs to locals.
Not me. True you make less stops than a local, but for example on the Queens IND, if a train ahead of me has a problem, I may be stuck in between stations. If I'm on a local, I have a chance to stop and and wait for the delay to subside inside a station. I have to put in a whole days work anyway so I won't finish an hour earlier on an express line!
I usually prefer locals: fewer timers, and, if the railroad falls apart, they re-route me by giving me fewer stops; the guys on the expresses get to make more.
Heh. Do I detect someone getting a bit too much "wrist action?" :)
Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that B Division lines tend to run through better neighborhoods than A Division lines (when outside of Manhattan of course). There are exceptions, but overall the A goes through 'rattier' neighborhoods than the B.
BMTman
What are you talking about? Ever gotten off the G at Myrtle-Whiloughby? Even gotten off the M at Flushing? The A at Kingston-Throop? I live at President on the 2, and there's nothing around as "ratty" as what I just mentioned.
Just like the Police Dept, where the real cops of Brooklyn North tease the spoiled brats of the Queens Marines!!!
Not all T/O's are on the same line from day to day.
I wonder, do any T/O's deliberately sign up for a different line each day, to get a bit of variety?
Sure. Some do and everyone has the option to choose a different line for each working day, but most prefer to stay on one or no more than two lines for stability.
Most readers probably don't understand how nice it is to be in one TA place. CI Peter
This pick I picked 3 diffrent lines to work on.
You haven't heard of the East Side / West End gang warfare between T/Os? So far this month, 15 6 line operators and 3 whole W crews have been lost due to this senseless violence. If you're on Broadway, I'd avoid wearing green polka-dotted pants altogether unless you want your ass kicked.
Glad you told me. Now where can I go to change?
Actually its divisions! A division has beef with B Division. i once remember seeing a B division Motorman getting on a manahttan bound 5 at Dyre avenue. and a T.S.S was like u can't get on hea. ur B Division. I started to ask him about it, and He calls B Division trains alot of things. like BMT= Barely moving Trains. IND=Idiots near Destruction, or Its nearly Deteriorating. I asked him what about IRT? =Its a REAL TRAIN. lol A VS B division goes alot of ways. i won't say what B Division said about A Division
Irresponsibly Run Transit
O....... My!!
IRritating Transit is another.
You might as well. You've bashed the B division pretty good there. At least evenly spread the destruction.
There was kind of something like that when they put the No.1,3 train Crews together on the No.1 Line for the added New Lots trips. The No.1 crews didn't really welcome the 3 crews because they where getting away with 1 tripper when the No.1 crews had to do 2 trips and the No.3 crews just did not like the idea of coming to 242 Street. Thats also likewise about No.1 crews at New Lots. Things are more spead out now and the No.1/3 crew are adjusting for now.
Next pick will be interesting the No.1 will really be a Rookie Line.
Next pick will be interesting the No.1 will really be a Rookie Line.
Thrilling. Until now, the scheduling on that line has been a nightmare but at least (most of) the crews know what they're doing.
I hear that, I had to wait over 20 mintues for trains twice in the past few days, I think the #1 trains get lost in Brooklyn or something. And now all inexperienced crews? Great
Not every "new" person operates like they're inexperienced. Some newbies really know what they're doing. Likewise some senior guys after all these years still have been unable to find a clue.
Agreed, and I apologize for overgeneralizing.
There's nothing to apologize about. I think the same thing when I look at the payroll sheets and notice that my C/R has the dreaded word under his name "PROBATIONARY". Needless to say I cringe, but more often than not, their operation puts me back in my place...............................and once in a while they confirm or even double my worst fears.
Just be happy Im in the A division for now and 3 weeks away from ending probation. Im sure me and you will have a good, slow time. :):):)
JK
That's ok SubBus. I haven't forgotten how to put the controller in full service :P
Just kidding on the :P
Not kidding on the full service :)
My kind of Motorman!
Hmmm, I think Im gonna have to talk to the Road Dogg about you.....
>>>...3 weeks away from ending probation.<<
GAWD, It's been a year already! Congratulations Mike!
Peace,
ANDEE
>>>...3 weeks away from ending probation.<<
GAWD, It's been a year already! Congratulations Mike!
Peace,
ANDEE
I made my Probation Nov 27.
Congrats to No.6 Pel Exp and future kudos to SubBus for making it this far without creaming someone with the doors. Whenever you decide to venture into the B division, I'll be waiting for ya'll (sinister laughing commences).
Thank You! I'll make it to B Div. one of these days.
Dont worry, Ill make it over there eventually. Just dont give me the "oh great, its an A division transfer" look.
and you should be any different? I still get them and I've been here for 6 months already.
Oh boy!!! Looks like Im in for a good time.........
And believe me, SubBus and No. 6 Pelham, you haven't lived until you've worked with Z.
Trust me, I know from experience. :)
Thanks Andee. It sure does go by fast.
Hey Sub-Bus Big Friggin Deal Probation was the easy part. Now Try to become a vested Civil service Employee.That only takes another 2 years.So what are your Plans to celebrate Jack Daniels while working the 1 Line,Or maybe A woman or 2 in a cab to help you celebrate ,Homeless Sally and a no tooth Special or Quiet laid back evening At the Broadway East New York Complex.So see you at the Pelham Party Later BRO .
Shhhhh. Dont let the cat out of the bag.......
BTW, Congrats to you too Union Square. Now you can have the chicks along the 7 line in the C/R position. Have fun....
Hey, Mike -- congrats will be coming to ya in 3 weeks, buddy. In the meantime watch out for wiseguys on your run -- heypaul types and whatnot.
So, how about we celebrate by getting your butt up to Branford and getting you some operating time (not the doors) on a certain non-GOH Redbird?
BMTman
AMEN Zman179. Got assigned today...WWWOOOWWW!!! CI Peter
I got a picked job on the 1 on thurs/fri. So Im one of the rookies over there.
Next week I will be giving my regards to Broadway and Hello Lexington Ave. Its going to feel good going Express for once. I'll wave to you guys at Utica.
Dont worry, I can get to the East side too. Just pray the westside dont blow up, which is impossible.......:):) BTW, dont expect me to wait for your passengers at Utica while you change operating positions.:):):)
Thats ok I won't wait for your passengers coming North.
Don't worry about getting rerouted on the East you will get a warm welcome as long as you don't plug my No.4 train. Beside you are bound to go up the Lex because one of Dave's friends was holding the doors at Chambers Street for someone coming down the stairs and the Door Motor burned out so the C/R has to go back for the Gard Light and Fault light and now see if they remember C/R School car 101 How to cut out a door on a Redbird.
LOL. Dont worry if I go up the east side, Im sure there will be a train ahead of me from BG all the way up to 180St. Ill tell everyone to wait for the train behind me making "express stops".
You wouldn't dare! I'll talk to Utica Tower so they hold you at the Junction!
Oh great, of course they will hold me for a "deuce" that is all the way at Winthrop Street to cross in front of me. You already know Nevins is "holding happy"......
On T/F they will even hold you for my No.5 to cross the Switch. Nevins always holds me. There favorite line is "Where holding you to time".
Is that still followwed by Utica asking "Where'd you lose your time?"?
Yes and the same goes for Times Square. I just tell them ask Nevins.
Yesterday, Nevins held us both going uptown and downtown. Uptown, they held us for 5 minutes. They claimed that we were "hot". Of course we got slammed in Manhattan. Going downtown, we arrived at Nevins, I made my full annoucement, reopened to for someone running downstairs and close down. When I close down and gave indication, they decided to put holding lights for the connection to the 4 which btw, is also going to New Lots at that time. Since they screwed up, guess what? They put it on at Atlantic. Held for another 5 minutes. One time they even put holding lights on me at Wall Street.
Don't tell me, you arrived late at the terminal and you were asked "Where you lose your time?"
Better look out, rookie...the riding public is going to test your 'skills'.
Anybody ready to hold a door or two on the '1'?
Heh, heh, heh!
;-D
Yes, a few dozen on each train.
Hey Dave!!!! Thats not nice. Me and the other rookies on the 1 will not be pleased.
We don't reserve the treatment just for the rookies.
Persuade the scheduling folks to run more 1's (and to actually run them local) and you'll have less door holding.
The reason why the No.1 or No.2 turns into a Express is because of all the Door Holding. I noticed the door holding on the No.1 is getting worst. Thank god this is my last week on the No.1 Line.
It's a vicious cycle. Trains are delayed because of door holding, so locals are sent express. Locals are sent express, so passengers get confused and hold doors. The cycle needs to be broken.
There are two ways to break the cycle. The better way is to increase local service so the local stations aren't grossly underserved given their passenger counts. If that's not possible, then all scheduled locals should at least stop at the local stations that fall among the 75 busiest systemwide stations -- that includes all stations between 34 and 96 and excludes all other local stations north of Chambers.
According to 1999 counts, 23,367,967 fares were collected at local stations (except 59) between 34 and 96 while 17,419,142 fares were collected at stations (except 168) between 137 and 242. In other words, bypassing four local stations (in an attempt to make up for lost time, perhaps saving a minute or two, perhaps not) delays more people than simply terminating at 137 (which would save over 30 minutes).
If I had a chance, I'd do it myself...
yep
lol !!
what is it a picture of and what does it have to do with T/Os hating other T/O's?
From today's Chicago Tribune:
Art Institute on a roll with train show by Blair Kamin, Tribune architecture critic
A new exhibit at the Art Institute highlights the architecture of modern rail travel.
-- David
Chicago, IL
At the expense of seeming to descend into the depths of shallowness, who is Martha Thorne? Is she related to Montgomery Ward Thorne? Mrs. James Ward Thorne (of Thorne Rooms fame)?
By the way, the Art Institute's "Train Show" sounds like a "don't miss".
R-143 was down today due to a brake problem earlier in the morning. When it returns tomorrow or Friday, 30-day clock is set back to one!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
DAMNIT!
I knew it was too good to be true. I rode her yesterday from Union Square to Lorimer, and it seemed to be smooth sailing.
But 8 days without a failure is better than when the R-142s first started, it was Day 2 and the clock had restarted. But I think that the MTA and Kawasaki learned they're lessons from the R-142s and is working hard on making the R-143 a sucess! The R-142As seem to be running right along smoothly with little or no problems. Lets hope thier bigger sibblings can do the same!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
AOL/AIM/CompuServe Screen Name: Metro D 3700
lets hope so
How does it do in the grade approaching BEDFORD Ave?, BEDFORD ave
was my stop, when i lived in Brooklyn, i live now in Orlando, FL.
Well it does better than the R-40, 40M and 42s but remember how they MTA LOVES to cut back things so its a little better but I know it can do more!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Instant Message: Metro D 3700
Let's hope so as well. I'm counting on the leftover R143's from the 212 car order to filter on down to the Mary, so this new rolling stock will make it's way onto the BMT Southern Division as well as the Eastern Division.
Yea, I know a friend who loves the M (hates W) and can't wait until a 143 goes on West End.
wishful thinking. it may do better than the R-142 but their is a ton of problems waiting to creap up behind it. you'll see. however i do stress that a breaking down train doesn't prove reliability. this is complex machinery so the term reliability doesn't exist. adaption is what makes these fine cars become better than when they started off.
[this is complex machinery so the term reliability doesn't exist]
That's an interesting statement. So reliability applies to nails, hammers...?
Arti
basically
I was waiting for that train for its 15:17 trip out of Rockaway. I will have to plan another day to ride that train.
OH SHOOT!!
Only nine days of service and the R-143 trainset has broken down already. Hopefully it will make it through the 30 day test this time around.
#3 West End Jeff
Is the 30 day test when a train has to work 30 days straight w/o any problems?
I believe that is correct what you are saying that the train must operate for 30 days without any problems.
#3 West End Jeff
They should increase the requirement to 40 days, and add 10 extra days each time it fails. What's the point of repeatedly putting it on the road until it has a lucky 30 days?
Because a mechanically sound train should make it through 30 days without a problem. If it did have problems, I doubt it would make 30 days with the best of luck.
Keep in mind that early production models of any auto or train have issues
These issues can be solved to some extent if rail cars can be ordered like airplanes.
A basic design with customizations for particular transit authorities.
A path and irt car can be designed to run on both systems. The more cars produced the better engineered the cars.
It would not hurt if the cars were produced at full time rail production facilities with workers with decades of rail car engineering experience.
It did not make any sense for the MTA to split the R-142 order between the two manufactures.
If you look at it you have two sets of cars which require two sets of trained mechanics to fix up. two sets of spare parts. Two sets of new car kinks to work through
In the end you have substanially increased maintance cost with no increase in delivery scheduale
The insistance of building the cars in NY should be backed up with a commitment from the manufactured to set up a permanint operation in NY .
Even early production 2002 Toyota camry's have had some issues
That was their idea with the R143's I think. They pretty much the same as the R142's, except for like the look of the end. But technology wise, they're almost identical. They're just a little longer and fatter and with CBTC stuff. The Kawasaki guy that I was chatting with during my ride mentioned that in some fashion.
Shawn.
It was my understanding that the "CBTC STUFF" has not yet been installed. Is this true?
Peace,
ANDEE
There's some kinda weird valve or switch under glass a little below eye level (I'm 6'1") on the left side of the storm door in the cab that has some wording mentioning CBTC override or manual control or something. I don't know if the R142(A)'s have this or not. So, whatever hardware is needed is there, I don't know if the CBTC stuff is in the software yet.
Shawn.
"Two sets of trained mechanics to fix up. two sets of spare parts."
OOOOoooooHHHHHhhhh, that hurts more than an antler from a reindeer up Bin Lodens.....
I learned the basics on cars I haven't seen since. Trainsets are trainsets...wiring labels, door controls, trainline wiring, propulsion control and braking are all basically the same mechanically. The 'new tech' just has a big bunch of computers and AC motor control systems to make them go that TA techs aren't into yet....it's still 'warranty repair.' As for spare parts, well, that is a warranty problem that is not under TAs control yet. CI Peter
The R142 did better.
Selkirk TMO posted a response to me when we were all talking about mixed-consist trains in the 70's.
He claimed he saw (not sure if it was more than once) IRT cars mixed in with BMT or IND trains.
Not that I disbelieve him at all, I believe anything about that crazy era, I'm just wondering if anyone else ever saw or heard of that.
Just total curiosity, folks :)
Before the IRT Flyover on the Broadway Line was built at 207 Street, IRT cars were regularly transferred for main shop work on the B division. Concourse yard was the only interdivisional transfer point for car equipment repaired at 207. We would tack on an R10 on each end, sandwiching the IRT cars to allow for the move down to 135th Street, and back up the A line. The B division car was necessary because the IRT cars lack a trip cock that will immediately engage in BMT territory. R33S cars don't have this problem, as they are equipped with trippers on both sides of the end, and a valve that will cut in or out a particular trip cock, used when changing territory. They are usually changed over after switching from the 7 to the Astoria Line, or vice versa.
Yes. I remember seeing it at least one time in the mid-'70s; I was inbound from Howard Beach (riding a regular train, not the JFK express) back to Times Square for the shuttle to Grand Central and, when I got off at TS, noticed that the third and fourth cars were shorter than the others and had a pronounced gap between the sides of the cars and the platform. I wasn't particularly knowledgeable about the subway at the time so I didn't realize they were from the IRT, just that they were somehow different.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I already know the NY&A dosen't have any SD40-2s so don't beat me up. I found it to be impossible to repaint the stock GP38-2 in the NY&A livery. Everyone on the message board on www.train-sim.com complains about the GP38-2 model. Also, no one seems to have a MP15A model... so... I repainted a CP SD40-2 in NY&A livery with unit number 301. I think it looks pretty good. I took damn near the whole day. If anyone's interested in it, let me know. It's my first repaint.
Shawn.
Shawn, Do you know how EMD came to call it a "MP" vs. NW, SW, BL ?
BTW, Was in the Fresh Pond yard recently (we got permission) & got some shots of the real thing from the Fremont bridge.
Mr rt__:^)
EMD figures the MP15AC is multi pupose as opposed to a switcher.
MP is for Multi Purpose. GP for General Purpsoe. SD for Special Duty.
The others are also defined but the horsepower dosen't match their names exactly:
SC - 600 horsepower, Cast frame
SW - 600 horsepower, Welded frame
NC - 900 horsepower, Case frame
NW - 900 horsepower, Welded frame
So a SW1001 is 1000 HP version of the base SW.
DD are double ended. The UP and SP is supposed to have these somewhere.
I'd love to tag along next time, if I can when you guys get permission to take pictures. canarsieshawn@yahoo.com.
DD is for the truck powered axles, not "double diesel" as some diesel fans claim. UP and SP are off their roster except for one the UP kept. The only other EMD DD trucks in every day use are in Brazil (DDM45).
Shawn, Thanks for the input. Knew the MP stood for something simple.
The SC & NC are also ones I didn't know, as a matter of fact I never seen the number in use, was it popular ?
Another small point: I've seen SW(hp) for many years, but the only NWs I've seen had single digit numbers, e.g. NW2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Are they just OLD, i.e. the early SW (30s, 40s, 50s) were also single digit, e.g. SW1, 8, 9.
BTW, I'm not going to ask about the "TRs".
Mr rt__:^)
TR = Transfer (Cow & Calf set)
Phil Hom
Hmmm ... a married pair, but then I guess that wouldn't be a politically correct term for a Cow & Calf ?
For those that don't have a clue what we're talking about, the Cow did the driving & the calf followed ... crewless. They looked like the SW series vs. "covered wagons" or GP/SD.
BTW, my 'Loco One" book didn't explain what TR ment, so thanks for that.
Mr rt__:^)
DD are double ended.
UP's DDA40X is double ended in that it has two ends; however, only one end has a cab.
So has anybody planned any Subtalk trips for next week when the V train starts running and the F goes through the 63rd street connector?
Well, Monday and Tuesday, I will be on the V line for the majority of the afternoon...
Carlton a.k.a. Cleanairbus
While some of you are enjoying the first day of regular 63rd St service, think about writing a revised section on that line to replace the guide still on this website. The 63rd St line's introduction and station by station guide needs revision, to reflect the "F;" the Q needs to be rewritten and other assortedchanges are needed. Since you'll experience soon first hand, perhaps the opportunity for fame on nycsubway.org will interest you as well.
I am going to tell you something David Pirrman told me:
"Are you volunteering to be it's keeper? I can't keep everything up to date on my own".
I think that's Ron's point.
It has to be. I'm not going to be on the 63rd St line anytime soon. So I can't directly do anything about it.
However: If anyone would like me to help proofread their first drafts, and help rewrite these passages I would be happy to.
Hey now, don't take that the wrong way. The short fact of the matter is I get a lot of such requests. They sit in the queue and I work on them in my own prioritized order. But if someone actually offers to work on a section and sends me actual updates, I'll get it done.
It was a joke.
Hi all,
After receiving a lot of responses via this board and mostly private email, I've decided to go ahead and include the following to the updated December 16, 2001 Edition of our NYC Subway Map:
G to 71-Continental
E to 179 St.
Q (eliminate double line on the Brighton)
Possibility of G to Church Avenue (heard no official mention about this, anyone want to verify for me)?
Any suggestion(s) for wording on each box info (e.g., G runs to Church Avenue on Weekends Only) to be placed on map.
I need another feedback on which feature I should use on the map for part time, I have a sample map with 3 features (same as before, light color or border) EMAIL privately (SUBJECT TITLED: MAP SAMPLE REQUEST is required) and I'll file attach small sample map to you before I go to sleep tonight and tomorrow I'll review comments and decide.
Thanks,
Michael Adler
adler1969@aol.com
Michael:
For the G to Church, maybe a dotted line would be in order.
As for my online map (pdf version), I was able to embed the SLRM font and display the 12/16 service changes.
Transfer Point Info.
I found out why they closed the express tracks between Roosevelt Ave. and Queens Blvd. on weekends - it looks like pandrol clips are being installed on the express tracks, and they still have a way to go. The old plates have to be taken up, and the newer ones for the clips have to be secured before the clips go in. Tedious, but better in the long run.
What are pandrol clips?
Dan
I believe it is a new fastener like on LIRR used to secure rails to ties. Used with a nylon buffer, it is kind of like a z shaped thick metal spring that catches the edge of the rail where the spike did. CI Peter
Actually, Pandrol is the company that makes them. The common type on the LIRR and elsewhere (even internationally), is the s shaped "pretzel" clip. unlike spikes, these provide hold down capeability. The nylon and u shaped clip setup seen on the LIRR's concerete ties is there to facilitate easy machine handling. The advantages of these are reduced rail creep, easy handling by machines, and hold down capeability. And lower maintenance.
There is something else - I read in TRAINS magazine a few years ago about how a nely repaired ROW on a line out west prevented a major accident from happening. The old line was on a curve, and the repairs involved replacing the wooden ties with concrete ones - the rails being held in place with Pandrol clips. After the repairs were done, a few months later a runaway train went through the curve at high speed and did not derail - and the NTSB found that the combination of Pandrol clips and concrete ties was most helpful in the prevention of a disaster. Safety has a new weapon in the arsenal.
When these replacements are done, aren't the third rail insulators replaced as well? This, because the height of the running rail has changed and it effects the distance between the pickup shoe and third rail.
Is welded rail being installed, or is it welded already?
There still are some segments between Roosevelt and Queens Plaza with joints every 39ft.
avid
Thanks. I always was always curious as to why they have been closing that one section of track for well over a year now.
Did you remember where you saw the new pandrol clips? N/B, S/B, 3 track, 4 track, or both? Between Northern and Steinway, or for most of the stretch between Roosevelt and Queens Plaza.
It'll be a relief to get some kind of express service back for the customers of the Queens Corridor. Especially those who have to schlep it all the way from Jamaica.
What's going on with the Stillwell Avenue project? Has work started yet? I'm wondering just how extensive a job is going to be done. I would hope besides fixing up the tracks they do something radical about downstairs where the potential for shops and boutiques could a lot to alleviate the squalor that I have been seeing the last three times I was in New York. The place is in bad need of a paint job, and goodness gracious, please do something about the restrooms down there. Is there are any chance of them also refurbishing the signs outside the station, those green and red BMT Lines signs? I know it is going to take a few years to get it done but I hope it doesn't drag on long enough that I'm not able to enjoy it because I'm in an old age home or worse. A few of you out there fill me in and give me your thoughts on it.
Fred,
Work has started, that's why your Sea Beach has been cut back to 86th Street, work already begun on the Sea Beach terminal part of Stillwell.
Don't fret, some G.O.'s will bring the Sea Beach into the West End's slot while the three or so year project is underway.
Hey Piasan, I always fret where my Sea Beach is concerned. I'm always waiting for the other shoe to drop and see the TA commit another atrocity against my train. Call me gun shy if you will, but if what you say is true, then there is some consolation to all this. Thanks for the info.
Yes, and even the old BMT signs have been saved, AFAIK.
Look at it this way, the Sea Beach has it's own unique terminal for now, and in the future will have a much better Stillwell.
Gotcha ya!!!!! That is a good way to look at it--accentuate the positive until the TA strikes again.
The BMT Lines terra cotta plaques are to be repaired and restored to like-new condition; they are landmark status; I think the same guys that did 66th Street-Lincoln Center have got the job, they are VERY good with terra cotta and they're descendents of the original artisans - Grueby Faience formerly of Boston MA.
wayne
Fred,
Now that the terminal is 86th Street you're going to have to go to Spumoni Gardens instead of Nathan's!!!
is the pizza at the spumoni garden as good as it was 25 years ago?
is the pizza at the spumoni garden as good as it was 25 years ago?
It has to be; it couldn't be any better than it is now. :)
Tell you what I'm going to do Sarge. I will take the my Sea Beach to 86th Street when I hit town again, eat some of that good ice cream they're supposed to have, then will jog on down to Coney Island and burn off the ice cream. I should get enough of an appetite to chow down some more on Nathan's good stuff. How's that sound?
There's nothing left where the shops were, just a vacant lot with a blue plywood fence around it. Your namesake's platform is surrounded with white netting; as of 12/1, the "Stillwell Ave" signs were laying on the platform, and almost all of the canopy had been removed. I'm sure work has progressed considerably since then.
Just as with the reconstruction of the Manny B, I wonder if they will go over schedule and be three or four years late, or worse. Well, I will just have to take good care of myself and hope the Lord will give ample time to sample the new Stillwell for myself, although knowing the TA I will have to get off at 86th Street and walk there, or heaven perish the thought, take another line to Coney Island.
I hope for your sake they retain the old "BMT lines" signs on the facade of the Stillwell Avenue terminal. Hopefully they'll have decent bathrooms there at last once the project is finished.
#3 West End Jeff
Yes Jeff I understand that they have saved that signage & will be bringing it back.
Mr rt__:^)
I'm cure that will me #4 Sea Beach Fred very happy.
#3 West End Jeff
Yes it will Jeff. Thurston, are you sure about those signs. That is one thing I do not want to disappear. You know, unification and all that. We BMT fans still differentiate the BMT from the inferior IRT and the nowhere IND.
As far as I know they are supposed to preserve the old "BMT Lines" signs.
#3 West End Jeff
And actually spruce them up a bit,AFAIHH......
That will be great if the old "BMT Lines" signs are spruced up.
#3 West End Jeff
I resemble that remark.:-)
I had you in mind when I said that. I got a rise out of you, didn't I? All in good fun, my friend. How cold is it getting in your neck of the woods?
Especially the bathrooms. My God, did that place stink. And water, or was it something else, flooding the floor. No paper either. Just God awful. I hope they really make it a showplace. Coney still has the greatest ride in the world, a championship minor league baseball team, and Nathan's. A refurbished Stillwell might be the ticket to help revive more of the area.
Don't forget the Cyclone.
Forget? I said the greatest ride in the world. What did you think I meant? The Wonder Wheel? No, Steve. the Cyclone.
The Cyclone ... rated #3 all time best rollercoaster by Fun World magazine.
--Mark
They rated it third Mark but I rate it first. I don't care how new and improved rides have been improved because I have never gotten the rush on any other ride like I have gotten on the wooden, creaky and immortal Cyclone. It is in a class by itself. It must become a national monument.
Take it easy. Now that O'Leary has resigned in disgrace from N. D. after only five days on the job, who's going to be the new coach?
Is anyone here on Subtalk planning on going down to Coney Island and at regular time intervals and take photos of the progress? I think it would be cool to see some sort of time lapse of the rebuilding.
If I still lived in NY it would be impossible to stop me from doing just that.
Alan Glick
Hey, I am almost three thousand miles away, so I have to do this vicariously. I do hope to visit the place next summer or fall, or, happily for me, both seasons.
I stop by there when I have a chance. Here are some from earlier this year; I have more from October, December 1, and yesterday that will be added eventually.
I'll be there in a few weeks to see this project, and I can't wait to see what happens there.
The Sea Beach platform is out of service. The track farthest east in the station's out of service. The next track to the right is now a bypass track through the station for Q Express Trains through the station from the yard.
Are they remodeling the Q and F platforms?
Are there any word on the R62A coming to the no. 7 line replacing the
World's Fair Redbirds?
Thanks
R143 Canarsie
Well not so fast there speedy. I got word that the TA is trying to work a plan to get the R142s to work on the Corona. It's a good chance that R-142s may be heading the Corona's way (Once they sort through the 3rd rail issues).
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Instant Message: Metro D 3700
I don't understand, what issues are going on with the R142's on the Flushing IRT?
What are the problems with the pick up shoes just on that line?
I Don't Know the FULL extent of the problem, but to sum it up, the R-142 shoes were not making positive contact with the 3rd rail.
Regards,
Trevor
The other problem was the maintenance issue on the air conditioning units. The R-142s are serviced from the roof and Corona Shop is not able to handle that. However, I suppose with the arrival of the R-143s, t may be worth the MTA's while to fit the Coney Island shops with the equipment to handle the AC units for both fleets of cars, which would make sending the option order to R-142s to Corona more feasable.
Right now, the only shop with the special equipment to remove defective AC units from R142s is 180th Street. If a compressor is leaking oil, there is no room in the ceiling to disassemble it. Time and logistics...just time and logistics and parts. CI Peter
Corona Shop is to be replaced on-site shortly.
David
I hah heard originally that the Corona shop replacement would come in a few years, but not until after the R-142 option order arrived, which is why the line would get the R-62s. However, given all the fun the MTA is having with the Bombardiers on the No. 2 line right now, they might be able to get a new shop built for the Flushing line before the option order is accepted.
That would be great if the '7' got 142s instead of 62As. The 142s have bench seats, which is what Flushing line riders are used to after 37 years. I could just imagine the arguments that would break out when people wearing heavy winter coats take up two 62A-style bucket seats. When the IRT mainlines first got the new equipment back in the eighties, that type of seating did cause a lot of conflict, but that seems to have died down as people got used to it.
Now and then there are STILL territorial disputes on trains with traditional bench seating (there used to be a women every morning on the '7' who would lecture us on how these benches were made for nine people and that we male scum better get up and let her sit), so it probably doesn't matter much.
Of course, if the '7' ever did get the 142s, there would probably be abundant complaints from riders of the '1', '3' and '4' that those lucky people in Queens ALWAYS get the new trains- while conveniently forgetting that for the past 15 years those lines have had the newer equipment while '7' riders have lived on Redbirds.
>>while conveniently forgetting that for the past 15 years those lines have had the newer equipment while '7' riders have lived on Redbirds. <<
I said it before and I'll say it again.
The #7 was always getting the new equipment while the rest of the IRT was getting the hand-me-downs.
When the #7 got new cars for the 1939 World's Fair - guess where the old Lo-V's went
When the #7 got the R12/14, R15 cars - guess where the Lo-V World's Fair cars went.
When the #7 got new cars for the 1964 World's Fair guess where the
R12/14, R15s went.
The Flushing line had always gotten new cars at the expense of the main line. So don't kvetch about the R62s going over to the Flushing before it gets R142s.
Didn't they refurbish the "Q" cars for the '39 Fair which were 35 years old by then?
Yes, but technically those for the BMT Lines even though they ran jointly with the IRT on the Flushing line (remember at that time the IRT and BMT were still separate companies).
it would be nice for the 7 to get r142's. now that the new mets stadium is undertalk of getting built, shea would stay for the jets (i think) and then you got the u.s open across. this would be geat to get new trains again. like this tourists would get in nice trains rather then old bust up tains
The R-62A's are not old by any reasonable definition of the word.
And I would be happy to fixemup...the group box is electronically controlled with just a handful of replaceable contacts. CI Peter
As Quick Draw McGraw used to say, "Ho-ooo-ld on thar!"
The reason the R-12s, R-14s, and R-15s went to the Flushing line initially was because the gap fillers at Union Square, Brooklyn Bridge (before it was shifted northward), and South Ferry would not align with their doors. It wasn't until the R-17s were ordered that the gap fillers were reworked.
Some of the R-17s were also used on the Flushing line for a time.
#3 West End Jeff
As I recall, they couldn't move the gap fillers until each line that required them had a sufficient supply of new cars to completely replace the pre-war IRT cars. That's why the Lexington locals (with their single #6 train) received new cars first, while the expresses (with the #4 and #5 trains) received new cars later.
For a while, the 1938 World's Fair LO-V's were sent to the #6 (in an apparent swap for R-17's) so that ALL of the old rolling stock could be taken off the Flushing Line. The World's Fair cars had doors positioned similarly to the newer cars, so they could be used with the relocated gap fillers.
Does this really mean that for the IRT Flushing Line (7) will start using the R-62A fleet by next year, because of the Redbirds.
I'm not sure what you mean, but I would imagine that the MTA would prefer that the Flushing fleet be made up of a single type of rolling stock due to its isolation. They're probably waiting for a sufficient number of R-142's to be delivered and running so the whole swap can be done quickly.
R142 current collectors utilise a rubber-loaded torsion bar to provide tension and set to about 15 pounds of pressure after height adjustments are made. If the third rail is uneven for some reason, the shoes will bounce causing a myriad of problems in propulsion never had with the old DC motor trainsets. CI Peter
Wow, where did you hear this? It sounds interesting and I hope the TA does put R142s on the 7, if they can. I guess that means the 6 line would remain part R142As and part R62As, right?
And how will they run 11 cars trains, or will they form 6 cars sets, leaving 4 cars sets to make up 9 car trains for the 3 train again ?
I D K the exact running plan, but the R-142s have the capability of running in 3, 4, 5, & 6 car married sets. So doing 11-cars won't be hard.
Regards,
Trevor
A-B-A isn't cool....one battery and one compressor isn't safe or reliable in one trainset. IF 11 car sets are necessary, it'll be a 5 and a 6 car trainset combo. Problem is that the cars within a trainset are semi-permanent...uncoupling is impossible and the 6 car unit won't be usable anywhere else except by itself. I don't know the lines well, just the machines. CI Peter
Uncoupling is not impossible, it's made possible so that say if a car got destroyed the can uncouple it and recouple another car or even just couple up the four cars and use them somewhere else.
Don't get it twisted! Like it was stated in the specs, R-142s can do 3,4,5 and 6 car married pairs. It's a matter of if the TA does decide to go ahead with the necessary adjustments and place R-142s on the Corona will they run a ABBA-ABBA-ABA or a ABBBA-ABBBBA. As of right now everything is speculation on the consist type.
Car Equipment is pushing a lot, 10 Car Trains permenantly on the (7) which WON'T work, R-142s on the (7), and few not so logical things. Operations Planning is fighting heavily to keep the (7) line 11 Cars. It's all a matter of who will win. If the (7) does go to 10 car permenantly, then the likelihood of R-142s on the (7) becomes greater also.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitlak.com
Instant Messenger: Metro D 3700
How can they even contemplate changing the 7 to 10 cars? 510 foot IRT consists are simply not enough to handle Flushing Line service during rush hour, at least not if they're going to keep running 30tph.
Dan
They're not enough to handle the other IRT lines, either. Has the TA looked into lengthening IRT platforms (yet again)?
Our new mayor made a promise in his campaign for longer trainsets and longer subway platforms. Aint anyone here into politics??? Just try doing a FULL UNDERCAR TRAINSET BRAKE INSPECTION walking squat for over two city blocks!!! I remember seing two and maybe three short trains in one station when I was a child. Perhaps a fourty car trainset is in order with ten cars opening the doors at a shot. CI Peter
My simplistic take on the car assignments a while back is that since the R-62's were built as single units, they would provide a more flexible arrangement for the #7 line. Some of the R-62's are still single units and could be easily tacked on to a 10-car train to make up an 11-car consist. I would imagine that even a 5-car linked set of R-62's could be broken up and re-equiped to function as single units if necessary. (This would, of course, cost a bit of money.)
Then again: it might be too late for this (and beyond bugetary considerations) to consider ordering special R-142 single units (as was done with the R-33/R-36 order) as part of the final option order.
this means r142s all around.allright i guess.hopefully this does not intefere with the #2 line and its r142s
?...rob the 3 line r-62s..??......!!
In the "BMT Multisections and Oddities" section of the car roster page on this site, there are pictures of some IRT Lo-Vs modified with skirts for BMT service. Does anyone know why this was done, where and when?
Dan
When the BMT was short cars before the R-27/30s arrived, a handful of IRT Low Vs were modified with platform extenders for use on the Culver Shuttle in the late 1950s (I was one of several people who suggested the MTA do the same thing with the departing Redbirds until the B Divsion's full R-143 order arrives, in order to increase Queens Blvd. service, but apparently liability concerns about the gap between the platform and the train and the possiblity of some of the local yutes riding outside the cars on the platform extenders at the doors made that idea a non-starter).
yutes???
J Lee - you from Brooklyn??
Mom was, but I grew up in Manhattan.
Not only the Culver Shuttle, but also the Franklin Shuttle. From about 1958 until early 1961 it operated 3 four-car ex-IRT Low-V consists.
-- Ed Sachs
What about the trip mechanism? It's on the wrong side for IRT equipment.
Desperate car shortage on the BMT in the 1950's led them to modify some Low V cars to use on the Culver & Franklin shuttles by adding extensions at the doorways to allow the IRT car to safely operate on the narrower BMT platforms. Some old SIRT (which look a lot like BMT standards) were also purchased for the Culver line:
re:picture
Did they ever have a problem w/people jumping on to the ledges and hanging on for a ride?
Peace,
ANDEE
I was wondering if New York has had problems with people jumping onto the rear end of the last subway car in a train and riding on the ledge outside the connecting door, or by holding onto the gates. I know that London Underground had a problem with this, and that they ended up removing most of the handles and grab bars on the outward facing ends of their cars.
-Robert King
It's pretty close to impossible to get there without falling on the tracks from the platform, there's nowhere to hold on and nowhere to step for quite a distance from the platform.
Dan
That has got to be one real ridiculous title for a post. One of the things that endeared me to the BMT ages ago was the difference between their cars and those of the IRT. Those Low V's were ugly tothe extreme and they seemed dilapidated when you rode on one. The BMT Triplex, on the other hand, was a majestic car as it roared down Broadway and 4th Avenue on its way to Coney Island. Do I dare say a #4 Sea Beach Triplex? Yes I do and I just said it. The BMT low V's? An oxymoron.
The IRT Low-Vs were never meant to be used on the BMT and, when they did use them they had to install gap fillers on the sides of the cars so that they would mate with the platforms. The BMT riders got shafted in my own opinion when they used the IRT Low-Vs on the BMT Lines.
#3 West End Jeff
Jeff: Until I read the posts I was never aware that the BMT Lines ever used those ugly low V's on their tracks. What a perversion that had to be. We had our Triplexes, Standards and Multi Sectionals and they were more than good enough. It still amazes me why the BMT would even want those montrosities on their lines.
They had 20 of the Low-V cars on the BMT from the period of c.1959 - 1961. Once they had enough new cars (R-27s and R-30s) on the BMT division they returned the borrowed Low-Vs to the IRT division.
#3 West End Jeff
Desperation. The BMT had a major car shortage in the 1950's. IIRC, many Culver and West End trains had to end at Kings Highway or Bay Parkway during the rush hours because not enough steel equipment existed to fully run the lines. Shuttles using old gate cars ran to/from Coney Island.
Today's yutes like to ride the outside of the doors, standing on the ledge as a train leaves a station. It's a sign of manhood if you can stay on longer than your friends before jumping off.
Sounds like a variation on the game of chicken.
I prefer to call that game "Who Wants To Be Dead Before 20?"
Better yet: "Why I Want to Win a Darwin Award".
The subway cars have pentagraph gates at the ends of each car (to keep blind people from walking into the gap and falling onto the tracks.) the gate jut out about five feet which would prevent anyone from grabbing on to anything at the end of the train.
Not all cars have the pantograph gates. It's been years since "the subway cars have pantogrph gates at the end of each car". Many have "baloney springs". Where have you been?
Peace,
ANDEE
In Texas for ten years and married the last six. I used to visit the city twice a year. Now I am able to get there about every three years.
My wife is a native of subwayless Minnesota.
I have seen clowns riding on the anticlimber of the last car, riding in between cars, and other foolish stunts. There should be a sign over the entrance to every cemetary that says " Space Available ".
For service on the Culver Shuttle. I saw pictures of them in some book.
Today as I was waiting for the 7 train at Queensboro Plaza I saw a R-68 consist which was not in service, heading to the 60 Street tunnel. Both rollsigns in the first car had the north terminal roll saying "NOT IN SERVICE"; the head of the train also indicated this.
But throughout the rest of the train all the rollsigns were turned halfway between destinations and route indicators! Even the end sign on the rear was halfway!
That wasn't all, upon reaching Grand Central I switched to the 5 train. Not sure what the front end sign was reading but the side signs said Dyre Avenue to Flatbush Avenue! I got out at Bowling Green where the train terminated (I knew that) and as the 5 pulled out its end sign at the rear read "5 - E 180 Street"
The 4 train that followed behind that had four out of ten cars indicating that the train was going to New Lots. (It was going to Utica)
I can see why the R68 rollsigns were rolled halfway but is there any explanation for the other incorrect rollsigns? (Dyre Avenue, Flatbush Avenue, E 180 St end sign on the 5; New Lots signs on the 4?)
If the train's north and south terminal are changing then why don't the TOs or the CDRs fix this?
The TA generally (sometimes? always?) doesn't give its crews enough time to change the signs in all cars. The 5 was never corrected from its rush hour service pattern; the 4 was never corrected from its night service pattern.
On Sunday, one of the L shuttles was signed mostly as a J.
Besides, there are no screwy rollsigns, just screwy people noticing things like that .
I hope you're joking.
Am I?
Of course I am. I am as big of screwball noticing those things like the rest of everyone else in here.
HEY...speak for yourself...and me and many others in this vicinity.
8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
The car numbers were 4604-4605.
Today I saw an E train with the south terminal roll on one car reading "Broadway-Lafayette St." That one must have worked on the 6th Avenue Shuttle for a while.
Surprising. I thought shuttle trains came out of Coney Island. That implies that the cars changed yards without anyone touching the signs.
Also, B'way-Laf is next to Canal St on the signs.
1. For the R68's...from my schoolcar days, earlier this year, the side signs were turned halfway between destinations because there is no "Not In Service" listing on those signs. You probably saw a "schoolcar" train for a group of either new T/Os or C/Rs.
2. For the IRT trains, Allan's answer is the most likely explanation..
Welcome back, Tony.
I think Not in Service was on there, but our instructors didn't want to make us bother changing them all the way. IIRC, when we rotated among instructors later one, either Carrington or the other CI based instructors has us change all of them (including the old side route sign which had "Not in service" also.
Today I was on the board at Met and they had me changing Bay Pkwy to 9th Av. (almost the entire length of the sign). IT was long and tiring. A couple of times I wound up at Myrtle when I finished. Way too much for the crews to do. I was saying maybe they should put the 143's on the M until the CBTC actually goes up on the L. OR put in individual key activated motorized rollers. I imagine the B is another line with this headache, daily.
It was Carrington.
The Q was another one when it ran to Continental and 57th I had to do 50 cars worth.
A few E's have the signs you turn that don't take sign changer, going form 95th to Canal on the GO hurt.
The only plus side was that I met ZMan that day and I got to eat tamales.
Saw this sign (or something close to it)at the 22nd street exit from the downtown 6 train.
"The half fare program is in effect from 6 PM Saturday to 1 AM Monday. Purchase your token at the booth and ask the agent for a coupon for your half fare"
With the reference to tokens it seems like an old sign. Does anyone know to what it refers?
CG
I'm pretty sure that refers to the Half Fare on Sunday program they ran till the early 80's....basically, your return trip was free.
Thanks, Tony.
CG
It didn't always work that way. Alot of times people would come off the train, Walk to the nooth, Ask for a ticket then go upstairs. When they finished doing whatever they'd be doing upstairs, they'd come back to the booth, Give the clerk the ticket back then walk thru the gate.
They made the half-fare a no-fare and made it un-fare!
It was the ex-Macy's CEO idea of marketing transit on weekends. The slam gates really got a workout from the other side.
Can somebody get a shot of this sign for...
www.forgotten-ny.com
Thanks!
The Half-Fare Program began in 1975, when the fare went to 50 cents. The way it worked was. On the subway when you purchased your token the railroad clerk whould give you a Half Fare ticket simlar to a bus transfer. You would use your token to enter the system, but on your return trip you would give the railroad clerk your Half Fare ticket and proceed through the exit gates, slam gates.(Most of the stations at that time only had exit gates only.) The Tickets had cereal numbers so that the railroad clerk would know if the tickets where issued somewhere else or at that station. The tickets where also stamped with the name of the station where they where issued. The railroad clerks where not supposed to except the tickets issued at their own station. On the busses it was more simple, you juist deposited 25 cents in the farebox. Ifyou needed an Add-A-Ride it was 10 cents more. (Add-A-Ride was transfer that normally cost 25 cents. It was used when the free transfer issued on a pariticular line did not offer free transfer to an intersecting line or not in the direction that you need to go.) The Half-Fare Program was in effect from 6:00 P.M. Saturday to 1:00 A.M. Monday. During weekends where a Monday Holiday involved it was exstented to 1:00 A.M. on Tuesday. Back then Veterans Day and Columbus Days where holidays where like Memorial Day and Labor Day. They where celebrated on Monday which made for holiday travel to department stores. The Half-Fare Program ended when the fare was rasied to 50 cents.
Peter Dougherty (it is docker-tea or dough-were-tea?) gives us this wonderful drawing:
http://www.nyctrackbook.com/Images/Temp/winfield.jpg
I've seen the description of the Roosevelt station, and the line it was supposed to serve, tho' it makes not too much sense to me. This station is located at the (walled-off) eastern end of the Roosevelt Av-Jackson Hts Station, where the concrete on the mezzanine floor remarkably starts slanting upwards. It's a fully tiled station, which seems to mean They really meant to build the line.
Now. Elsewhere at this site, you get a description of how this line was to run. Along the mezzanine on Broadway to 78th St., thru a bit of now-demapped 78th St now-private-property to Garfield Av. From there, I don't understand at all.
From comments on this forum, it seems people are assuming it was to run along the r.o.w. I know as the 'Connecting Railroad', the one that runs to the Metro Av terminus of the M line (last time I explored this part of Queens, all sorts of rail tracks leading nowhere were still visible in the streets). But from a time back, when I personally inspected this r.o.w. (across from Metropolitan Ave as you exit the station and over to the cemetery), I discerned this r.o.w. was a single well-landscaped track with tombstones hard by it: anything but a potential subway alignment.
My real question is about what 'Winfield' signifies. Is the Connecting Railroad the 'Winfield line'? Or is it the name of a street that got numbered into anonymity?
Running the M up the Connecting RR to Roosevelt really does service unserviced portions of Queens. And if capacity allowed it, letting it run into the Queens IND to-Manhattan tracks to give thru-service to Manhattan -- Oh my: We dance naked around a bonfire, offering sacrifice to the great bitch goddess Mass Transit.
Winfield is the name of the neighborhood, although I don't think it is used too often any more. Check out the map below. It's right above the "E" in NEWTOWN.
Does anybody ever refer to "New Utrecht" or "Gravesend" any more? Also, today "New Lots" is an avenue in "Brooklyn" and "Newtown" is a road in "Queens."
I love these old maps. I hope that guy publishes a historical maps volume 3...
:O)
"Gravesend" is still used. However, "New Utrecht" refers to either the avenue or the high school, not the neighborhood.
Also some of us remember that the LIRR had a tower called "Win Tower" just east of the Woodside Station to control the switches between the Main Line and Port Washington Branch.
It was a shortening of the name 'Winfield' which the surronding area was called before Woodside or Maspeth.
The tower was burned down by vandals and the switches were operated from, IIRC, Hall Tower in Jamaica, until the switches were removed.
What's funny is just to the right of it it says Winfield Jr. as in "Winfield Junior."
I think it's Winfield Jc. (for Junction)
Ah, you're right, I looked at it closer :)
So much has changed in Queens from that time. There was once a Charlotteville and Columbusville. Brooklyn was still sufficiently rural that a LIRR flagstop was called Fords Corners. Dig all the stops on the Atlantic Branch. It ran at grade till 1940 and stopped at every other corner, it seems. I wish I had a time machine.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Great map. Where'd you get if from? What year, approximately? Interesting features. Look at the Lexington Av El---it crosses (rather than merges with) the Myrtle Av El. Where did it go? When did it stop going there? I love this site.
Once upon a time the Lexington El would run north on Grand St. Have a grade crossing with the Myrtle El. Continue running north to Park Ave (now the BQE) then make a left turn and head for Sands St (or was it Fulton Ferry?). The idea didn't last too long. It's said on the first day of service 2 trains crashed into each other at the site. Shortly afterwards the BRT moved to abondon the Lexington line north of Myrtle Ave.This was about 1900. The line was also never electrified.
It's supposed to be an 1898 map. I got it on Ebay. It's a copy, not an original, but you can tell it's been done professionally. The seller usually puts one up for auction every week or so. I've been using this map as the backround for a series of LIRR maps for my website.
According to Greller & Watson's "The Brooklyn Elevated", the Park Ave. (Brooklyn) portion of the Lexington Ave. El, which I believe was the original ROW, lasted until 1904.
About the IRT Flushing Line (7) or <7>, will there be a possible extension of the line?
By the way, as soon as the Flushing Line retires the redbird fleet, what trains will the Flushing Line use?
1) There has been talk about extending the Flushing Line west from Times Square to the Javits Center and a possible new stadium on 11th Ave. south of 34th St., but after 9/11 that's on the back burner unless the city gets the 2012 Olympics.
2) The Flushing line is supposed to get the R-62s from the No. 3 line for its 11-car sets, but you can check Wednesday's thread on the topic to get more info (not necessarily the right info, but info nonetheless).
THIS could be a future poster here.
Peace,
ANDEE
This story is very similar to a true story about me when I was six years old.
In July 1957, my family moved to a new home on Ocean and Newkirk Ave in Brooklyn. In the confusion of the moving of furniture and boxes, I slipped out unnoticed.
When my parents found out there was one sibiling missing, the Police were called and a search of the neighborhood began. I was found soon after, unharmed, unafraid and in my ultimate glory. If you know the neighborhood, I was found some 4 blocks away at Ditmas Ave. and East 16th St, peering through the cast iron fence at the BMT Brighton Line !
I obviously didn't know the neighborhood, but I was found where the BMT Standards and D-Types were running ! How's that ? Maybe I heard the singing of the traction motors of the Standards climbing the grade to the Ave H. station ? Guess I was born a railfan !!
What if I was born in 1995, same story and circumstances. I would wander to the same location to find a tall barrier preventing me from peering down on R-40 slants and R-68s !! I have no recollection of this incident as told to me by my father some years ago. TRUE STORY !
Bill "Newkirk"
HAHA! Like my cousin and I, 6 and 7 repsectively. Always getting on a number 4 train, every Saturday, at 167th St, Bx. and going North looking for Pelham Bay. We hadn't figured out the going down to 125th St. part of the equation and could never figure out why we always ended up at Woodlawn Cemetery.
If our parents had known the would have killed us.
Peace,
ANDEE
I used to live in Brighton Beach, and once I got myself a bus pass to go to school, it wasn't long before I used the train instead. I started doing this in 4th grade, and even got caught by my mother's friend (she claimed to "follow" me unnoticed) ... but even after being punished, I returned to "the scene of the crime".
I have the same subway gene you do.
--Mark
>>>I have the same subway gene you do. <<
Hey look, when your birthday is October 27th and both sides of your family go back 2 generations in NYC mass transit, it's sort of out of your control, IYKWIM.
Yeah, It's a curse, isn't it? A delightful curse. But, a curse nonetheless.
Peace,
ANDEE
Well, he almost got to ride the City Hall loop. :-)
Hopefully, the end of the story is right and the parents just had a communication problem. I hate to think the kid has several years of time in the child protective services maze ahead of him because of this.
I agree, they sound like really good parents. I really hope they don't get a big ration of shit for this.
Peace,
ANDEE
I agree, they sound like really good parents. I really hope they don't get a big ration of shit for this.
Peace,
ANDEE
I hope he wasn't hanging on the straps!!
I remember being a little tyke and going into NYC with my parents to see the Christmas windows (and FAO Schwartz of course). For some reason we were taking the subway. I looked up at the grab bars and said "Monkey bars, ooh, mommy, boost me up?"
My little three-foot self thought it would be forever before I'd be tall enough to grab onto them
I've heard that above one of the windows of the R143 there is a "ticker." What does it say?
It's actually a color LCD screen that displays public service announcements and is capable of displaying advertisements.
David
It's an advertisement by NYCT about Metrocards and other MTA stuff.
That's what I saw, unless the advertisement was changed.
Bill "Newkirk"
they want to raise fares in 2002 by 19%. Reading the fine print of news articles Newark no NY wwill be $3.30 which is mroe than 10% raise. They also plan on doing away with round trip tickets meaning instead of $3.50 from newark to New York off-peak it will be $6.60 at all times. this is much more than 10%.
On top of it they are cramming people in like third world countries. I tihnk such a huge increase will lead to a downward spiral.
Sure if it is just 10% fine butnot mroe than that.
On top of it they want automatic inflation increases for the following 5 years. HBLR escapes the first year only.
NJ Transit has not raised fares in 10 years. I hope that service improvements will accompany the fare increase.
Some increase is inevitable.
10 (TEN) YES TEN years without an increase, this reminds me when the pay phone went from a dime to a quarter. (Remember what a PAY PHONE is now that you all have cell phones).
I can accept increases across the board since there hasn't been one in 10 years but to get rid of off peak round trips and senior fares is a crime. Up the fares across the board 10%, what would that give you dollar wise??
If they need an increase in funds they should just collect the fares. There are two many rushhour trains when the conductors don't come through the cars. I don't care if it's crowded. The money we pay for our tickets is not spent until that ticket is punched. When I last had a vacation month I used a ten trip. My ticket was always punched in the morning on 3812 out of Metropark. Going home it was two out of five nights and both after Newark. The following week I used my extra three punches and five one ways so I picked up two free rides that week. Not bad. $ 6.10 times 5 adds up. I spent $91.50. Two weekly tickets would have cost $104.00. Multiply this times the people who make a game out of it to beat the railroad. I don't blame them when we ride cattle cars.
>>>Multiply this times the people who make a game out of it to beat the railroad<<<
Believe it or not, ther are some people on this very website who think this is the right thing to do.
Peace,
ANDEE
It's also unethical, though the actual, practical consequences to the individual are trivial.
the actual, practical consequences to the individual are trivial.
cf. "The Tragedy of the Commons"
You want the conductors to come through to collect your fare? You don't care if it's crowded, you still want them to come through? In early 1999, I used to work train # 3869, affectionately known as the "Titanic". The 6:11pm from New York to Trenton. When I worked it, it was 10 cars packed, and I was supposed to work from the 6th car forward, to "meet" somebody who was working the 4th car back. Out of New York we actually attempted to go through, I usually got through almost 1 car by the time we got to Newark. After the doors opened at Newark, the hilarities began. Maybe 10 people got off and hundreds attempted to get on. My location was near the ramp from PATH, with all kinds of people running down that ramp to squeeze onto the train. Most days, I could barely get back on the train myself, the vestibules looked like sardine cans, and if I couldn't get back on, I told people that the train wasn't going to go anywhere if I couldn't get back on! Of course, that meant that when I eventually got back on, my body was squeezed against the door, my face was plastered against the door window. Mr. "Night Train Show', how do you expect a trainman to collect fares under those conditions? And, I hear that now it's that bad out of NEW YORK since 9/11, since PATH is not running normal and there are restrictions for motorists going into the tunnels. Luckily, I don't work those lines anymore, I have enough seniority to stay away from New York. By the way, I know you probably won't believe this, but NJ Transit's priority is SAFETY, revenue is secondary.
I'm sorry if you fell I'm blaming you, I blame the railroad. I ride the Titanic and I've probably been pressed against you in that vestibule. If safety is first why didn't they do what they just did on the last schedule. They finally brought back a diesel express to take a share of the load of that train from Newark. There used to three of these years ago, then one and now back to two. These Newark/diesels don't need NY slots. I use a monthly ticket so I'm always prepared to pay my fare. When I bought my ten-trip and my daily's I was prepared to pay my fare. If it wasn't collected it's not my fault. I'm back to using monthly's but I know people who play the game. I don't like it because I'm subsidizing them but if there's a game to be played people are going to play it. There's even the people who have a ten trip from Newark when they ride from NY-Penn because sometimes the conductor comes through after Newark. I'm not trying to tell you something you already know, you probably told me. There are even the forgeries that you have been asked to look for.
I've heard that the railroad would like to get the Clocker service not for the business but for the slots out of Penn. My best story from riding the Titanic was the gentleman who is the counter. After a tough night of pushing his way through the train and he has/had a limp which makes it harder I asked him how many? His answer, "This train is 13 1/2 cars long" everyone in that vestibule cracked up. Yes it's worse since 9/11 and the sorry part is that new diesel express that was finally added can't be used to it's full advantage because more people have to ride from Penn-NY. This is going to go on for months. I don't blame the railroad for what happened on 9/11 or the riding problems since then. But this was going on for years before. I rode a train on a Sunday and I didn't see a conductor once all the way to Metropark. When I stood in the vestibule and when I got on the platform I saw only one conductor in the back. Usually all conductor's get off because of the gap. The railroad didn't assign conductors it's not your fault but how many fares did they miss that day?
There's a better story. I can understand the Staten Island Ferry being free but the train on the island has only fare control at the ferry terminal. If you ride the intermediary stations you ride free.
As you probably know, fare beaters have always been around and they will always be around. If NJT LOWERED the fares, there would still be fare beaters!
As far as no conductors hitting the platform at Metropark Station, there is no excuse, unless it was one of those weekend expresses where the first stop after Newark is Metropark. I don't know if things changed since I last worked out of New York in April of 2000, but those expresses hardly ever had ticket collectors, only the conductor and brakeman. Which is funny, because if safety is their "#1 priority", where are the trainmen to make sure everything went down "safely"?
On a related note, during the summer on weekends they were doing track work just west of Track 5 in Newark, so we had to turn around in Hudson Yard. Because of this, the crew was unable to get change or ticket stock, so after a while we ran out of tickets to sell. As a result, everybody rode for free on those days. And wouldn't you know it? Some people actually cursed us out because they went out of their way to buy tickets, and now we weren't collecting them (we had to be fair to everyone, even if they had tickets, we weren't going to take theirs and then not charge the cash customers)!
On a related note, during the summer on weekends they were doing track work just west of Track 5 in Newark, so we had to turn around in Hudson Yard. Because of this, the crew was unable to get change or ticket stock, so after a while we ran out of tickets to sell. As a result, everybody rode for free on those days. And wouldn't you know it? Some people actually cursed us out because they went out of their way to buy tickets, and now we weren't collecting them (we had to be fair to everyone, even if they had tickets, we weren't going to take theirs and then not charge the cash customers)!
Why didn't you just improvise and make your own tickets from scrap paper or something?
Well, first of all, the revenue procedure is very complicated. The ticket books have series numbers and each ticket has a number, so everything can be traced properly. Even if we ran out of tickets in the middle of a REGULAR train ride, even if another trainman has a fresh unused book of stock, we have to fill out forms and practically sign our life away just to transfer a book from one trainman to another.
Secondly, even if we were able to "improvise", we ran out of CHANGE, so we wouldn't be able to sell tickets unless everybody had the exact fare, which might happen once out of every 75 fares that I cut.
The only time we can "improvise" is when, in the middle of a trip, the punch breaks, or falls out of the train (a rare occurence). If that happens, you can't cut cash fares, but you can accept machine or agent generated tickets, and then rip them instead of punching them.
Secondly, even if we were able to "improvise", we ran out of CHANGE, so we wouldn't be able to sell tickets unless everybody had the exact fare, which might happen once out of every 75 fares that I cut.
This happened to me last Saturday when the cashier didn't show up to the theatre. Since I had no cash box I just anounced to the growing throng of people for those w/ exact change to come up first. When they were done I had enough to make change for all those w/ 20's.
Way to go. Problem solved.
But like I said, only about 1 out of every 75 fares I cut do people have the exact fare. You might say, why don't I ask people, they might have the exact fare. The doors don't open by themselves, folks! I cannot even ask for the 10 cents if the fare is $4.10 without people taking forever searching their pockets looking for the change while the train sits in a station with the doors closed. That's why I never ask for that type of change, it's faster for me to click the 90 cents change out of my changer than to waste time waiting for that dime.
I notice your experience.
But the thing is, I don't think there is a way to solve the crowding problem during AM or PM rush, unless if there were trains every few minutes for a period of time or something.
Does anybody know how many daily commuters to/from work take the train esp. to/from NY? (I know many many thousands according to how crowded each train is, but does anyone have a more accurate estimate?)
Since 9/11, the company has had the head conductor of each train call in to the dispatcher with passenger counts. Which, in reality, is not really necessary because a conductor is supposed to fill out a form for each train noting different details, including PASSENGER COUNTS.
In my opinion, a train like #3869, the 6:11pm from New York to Trenton, would carry approx 2,000 people at its fullest (between Newark and Rahway).
I thought NJT didn't have dispatchers.
NJT has been conducting more or less monthly organized counts of all NYPS bound trains during the am peak period. Pre 9/11 NJT + clocker service trains averaged 34,000 riders/day. In December, it was up to 48,000 per day (am peak period). The system is under great stress.
Thank you for the info.
NJT doesn't have dispatchers so conductors can trust the clock to close the doors to depart, so as to not leave any passengers as possible on the platform.
This may not be a big deal for weekdays when train service is plentiful (approx. every 20 min.) but on weekends, where hourly service is present for the majority of the time.
Counting passengers on #3869? LOL!!!!!!!!!
Cram as many people as you can into an Arrow III and multiple by the number of cars on the train. I don't think the conductors can collect fares it's so crowded. If I didn't buy a monthly I'd ride for free.
I avoid this train like the plague. The 6:33 Trenton Express #3871 is usually running up its ass by the time it hits Metuchen/Edison.
Right! I agree some increase is needed and I'd accept the 10% but to do away with the roundtrip discount is a trvaesty/I sduggested to them to add a pm peak of 4pm to 7pm and to increase those prices 15% rather than 10% and keep the RTX (Round Trip Excursion).
The latest on Secuacus is a hold due to crowding due to the WTC disaster.
I also agree some service increase should go along with the increase such as one or two more late night trains plus half-hourly weekend service on the Corridor.
New Jersey Transit is the only area commuter railroad that still has any Round Trip Excursion Discount fare. LIRR and Metro North used to have it, but they did away with it years ago. The reason? I don't know, but I can tell you it might have something to do with the passengers abusing the discount. Because it is a discount, they have to be used in the proper directions indicated. For example, one ticket reads FROM New York to Trenton, the other reads FROM Trenton to New York. If a passenger gave the "wrong direction" ticket, we were supposed to charge a "step-up" fare, the difference between the round trip excursion and two one-way fares. Of course, most passengers whine and cry at this point, "Oh, the other conductor took the wrong part" or " Oh, I thought they were the same, I got a ride back the last time", etc,etc. By eliminating the RTX, you eliminate all of this nonsense. Too bad for the intelligent riders. However, according to the proposals, those RTX's will still be valid on weekends and major holidays, which will now cause havoc when they try to do their return trip on a regular weekday!
I inderstand the reasoning, but a stepped plan for eleimination would be fairer. Right now from Newark to NY Penn is $3.50 off preak. Under the ne proposal it would become $6.60-- almost double the fare. Perhaps raising these by 15% in year 1 and by inflation plus 5% in the remaining years until they are eliminated would reduce the burden. I also support adding a PM peak fo 4pm tp 7pm from the same stations and same "...or you transfer at one of these stations" stipulation."
I do agree more revenue is needed but we also need better on-time performance. Weekend service is especially notorious for being late and we also need more weekend service which since 9/11 has resembled rush hour shoulders in passenger loading.(And I am not talking about "Shirley-Time"-they are still late arriving at the end of the liune.
I did send an e-mail comment for the public hearings.
I understand you are limited in adding weekday service but on weekends many lines are not opearting ie Boonton, Montclair, High Bridge Service, etc. BY deploying Comet cars with ALP44 or diesel (other than to NY Penn) Arrow II cars would be freed for the Corridor and theewby allowing more trains.
Thanks Fishbowl for an educated post!
I have a feeling that the hefty raise in the NYP to NWK fare has a lot to do with NJT wanting to discourage riding between these points. "Use PATH" is what they are telling riders........ From reading this thread, it seems that NJT can't handle the ridership on the main line. Yes, they are justified in raising fares, but they should not have waited 10 years since the last one and want a big increase now because that makes them look really bad. In the short term, they couldn't care less if they lose ridership, it will make matters more managable. Aren't they supposed to get bi-levels in a couple of years? That will help. And getting the clocker slots from AMTRAK (NJT to 30th St.? and how does this affect SEPTA R7 service to/from Trenton?) should help as well.
I really don't think that NJT "couldn't care less if they lose ridership". Even before 9/11, ridership in and out of New York during the rush hours was at uncomfortable levels and even weekend "off peak" Trenton trains are 10 cars packed in both directions. What I am getting at is that if a passenger writes to them about any minor problem or inconvenience, the company automatically sides with the passenger, and does everything short of "kissing their b%$&s". They issue "courtesy ride" tickets, and they apologize profusely. They then speak to the conductor in question and even if the passenger was completely in the wrong, the conductor is told not to "do it again", or to be more "diplomatic". You would think that if they wanted to lose ridership, they would just throw those complaints in the garbage and not care.
getting the clocker slots from AMTRAK (NJT to 30th St.? and how does this affect SEPTA R7 service to/from Trenton?) should help as well.
Is the "Clocker" an NYP to Philadelphia-30th Street run? What do you mean when you say NJT is getting it?
Is the "Clocker" an NYP to Philadelphia-30th Street run?
Yes. Its name was to be changed to "Acela Commuter".
What do you mean when you say NJT is getting it?
Amtrak will not run the Acela Commuter. NJT will run a NYP to Trenton train instead.
Yeah, and all of the people who live in Philly and commute to NYC get f*%ked over by this changeover. Either we take the SEPTA-NJT local, or we drive to Trenton to get a decent express train to NYC. Or get aboard an overcrowded regular Amtrak Train to reach NYC. Nice move Amtrak. Just give Philly ther shaft.
They already do. So this is going to be a NYP-Trenton non-stop express?
Trivial information is given about this at Hoboken Terminal's webpage.
Look under the heading of "NJ TRANSIT NEWS" which lists the many topics of NJT news.
Also here, you'll learn about a lot more about NJT service, including historically.
Clockers are pretty much run by AMTRAK under contract to NJT. They are the only AMT trains that honor NJT monthly passes and are the only AMT trains that the NJT spies up in '40' office pay attention to.
Now more than ever. EGGS!
>>>...spies up in '40' office pay attention to...<<<
What's '40" office? Inquiring minds want to know.
Peace,
ANDEE
Kinda like TA Control Center, with PSCC in the same (big) room.
PSCC=Penn Station Central Control
EGGS!
As suggested in other posts, if they eliminate RTX's, they should keep the CURRENT one way fares as "off peak" fares, and make higher "peak" fares. I would assume they would also have to eliminate their plan for keeping weekend and holiday RTX's.
As far as late trains, it is my experience that 99% of the lateness of trains destined for New York or coming from New York is caused by or related to AMTRAK. On the Raritan Valley Line, which of course does not go into New York, we roll along beautifully without a worry in the world until we hit that damn corridor. Then we have to sit there and wait until an Acela train from NEW BRUNSWICK comes through and clears the interlocking. Or, we are delayed leaving Newark because we have to wait for delayed connections from New York because some idiot at NY Penn decided to bring a train IN to the SAME PLATFORM that was used to BOARD a westbound train, thus causing chaos and confusion and the delay in departing!
By the way, I did hear rumors of starting all day weekend half hour service between New York and Trenton sometime next year, I don't know if it's true or not.
Do you know how tracks are assigned at NY Penn. I know NJT usually uses 1-12 and can use 13-16 but beyond that who decides what track a given NJT train arrives on. Who decides that an Amtrak or NJT is departing dfrom the other track on the same island platform-- is it Amtrak or LIRR dispatcher. From Rail magazines I know that LIRR and Amtrak alternate control every six months as head person.
I do not know the answer to your questions. However, I have seen it where we are loading a 10 car Trenton train at the same time a crowded inbound train pulls in right across from us on the island platform. I have also seen a Trenton train board across from a DOVER train! Talk about mass mayhem! Even after all of the announcements and questions being answered prior to departure, I would come across someone with a South Orange ticket on my Trenton train! Oh, well!
Tick, tick, tick. All this mahem you mention, of course, racks up the o/t for the crew members. Did I hear someone shout "bring on those delays?"
Honestly, a scale back in pay for some of these crew members would certainly negate the need for outlandish fare hikes. More crew productivity could help, as it was called, when the NYCTA was looking for more bucks some years ago. It is unthinkable that a train operator step out side his/ her cab or loco to "greet" waiting passengers like Casey Jones, Superstar. Please!
Perhaps NJ's new governor should look into the situation, which used to be called railroad featherbedding.
Yes, I have invoked the wrath of some, but so what; it was fun!
Get to work and earn a decent wage the honest way!
I think that you should spend time learning how to spell "mayhem" correctly, instead of being envious of a career you chose not to pursue! And BTW, FYI, the only time we make overtime due to delays is when it's our last trip of the day, and most of us are tired and want to go home just like everybody else. And as far as that Casey Jones reference, you better close that window to your Bronx apartment. You must be getting a contact high!!!
Bingo!! Was wondering how long it would takr you to respond. After working well over 35 years in the "real" world, I "choose" not to pursue anything right now; one of the pleasures of early retirement. Hope you can chalk up that much time in your chosen career. Back to the unwarranted fare hike. Perhaps those lucrative "dead head" times I've been told of is what is bringing NJT's costs up.
Oh, I rather like my window open, thank you.
I didn't respond earlier because I was out WORKING for a living, as Huey Lewis and the News once sang. A grueling 6 hour shift in anticipation of my never ending 11 hour shifts tomorrow and Sunday.
Speaking of unwarranted fare hikes, how was it working for a firm in a business that charged fees on top of fees on top of fees, and that was for their employees!!
"Speaking of unwarranted fare hikes, how was it working for a firm in a business that charged fees on top of fees on top of
fees, and that was for their employees!!"...
I don't know. How was it??
If you refer to a well-known bank, as one of those employees of which you speak, all I can say is you'd best close YOUR window!
Going to an 11 hour job is NOT the same as WORKING the job. Try it!
New Jersey Transit is the only area commuter railroad that still has any Round Trip Excursion Discount fare. LIRR and Metro North used to have it, but they did away with it years ago.
The NJT RTX is their off peak fare. MNRR and LIAR both offer off peak fares, only you can get them for one way. NJT requires you to buy the RTX if you want off-peak rates. This enables NJT to have just one peak period, in the morning. By eliminating off-peak RTX tickets NJT will charge peak fares all the time.
A fare hike after 10 years certainly isn't unreasonable -- especially since service now seems much better than 10 years ago (at least until Sept. 10th it did).
On the other hand, many commuters already incurred a significant increase in monthly expenditures in that they can no longer commute to Newark or Hoboken and connect to a downtown PATH -- so they're forced to pay more and commute to NY Penn.
Consider a Metropark to downtown rider. They used to pay $101 to Newark, then PATH fare. Now they pay $171 to NYPenn plus subway. That alone is almost a 70% increase. Tack on 19% more and the $171 becomes $203. So what cost that passenger $101 in August will more than double in less than a year.
NJT heavy rail fares are now the 2nd highest in the country, very close behind the ConnDOT portion of Metro-North. These increases will lead to a ridership decline/death spiral.
I don't know that it will lead to a death spiral unless their service levels stagnate. They've got a 2-3 year window where they've got the NYC commuter with limited options -- a weak job market to change jobs, no downtown PATH to name a couple. Over the next few years NJT will have to improve their service from the post 9/11 levels (crowding in particular) or otherwise face the music when downtown PATH and a vibrant job market are restored.
CG
The Secaucus transfer stop is about to start service. That should help a fair number of people.
If McGoofball is smart he'll raise the subsudy back to pre-Whittman levels and hopefully eliminate the need for some of the fare hikes.
What is the primary factor for this increase?
Inflation?
What is the primary factor for this increase?
Costs far greater than revenues from farebox + government subsidies, requiring use of capital funds for operating expenses.
After 10 years ... it's about time. Remember 10 years ago the subway fare was $1. Even PATH had to raise its fare recently.
I know NYCT and PATH has had a fare hike and I am not very concerned or make it a big deal.
I remember in the early days when I first rode the subway and the fare was $1.25. It hasn't changed now in a while.
PATH's QuickCards make it possible for more effective trips for the amount you pay for.
(i.e. 20 trips for $24.)
I wish NYCT provided that system.
(Besides unlimited ride MC)
That means my $9.75 fare from Metuchen to NY will approx. change to $11.70 RTX. So that reduces the chances of my entire family having a trip to NY.
Well, I guess there are times for change but I think fare hikes should not go so far.
Despite it being 10 years, they are still the highest fares in the nation, and so it isn't about time. They have done nothing to cut costs like improve equipment utilization, streamline onboard cash fare collection. Most fares will increase 20% since the Newark Penn -NYP portion will increase 32%. The elimination of RTX on weekdays is a 50% increase for those who use it.
I am thinking of undertaking a continous tour of the entire subway system. I have an idea of how I'd do it, but I'd like the collective wisdom of this board on two questions at least:
1. How long would this take, assuming I wanted to STOP at each station (e.g., I could only ride an express if I later backtracked over the same line on a local)?
Using the schedules and headways posted on the TA's website, it looks like it could be done in <30 hours if I started early on a Friday morning. My father, who apparently attempted this back in the fifties, thinks this is way too little time.
2. Are there any general strategic hints you could give me?
I would be starting somewhere in lower Manhattan, so I could get the south end of the Nassau Street line on a weekday morning. Other than that, the route I came up with generally means doing the whole IRT, then the whole BMT, then the whole IND. (It seems to me that the old divisions between the three systems have become clearer with this year's Manhattan Bridge service changes)Is that the best way?
Apologies if this question may have been addressed before - I couldn't find an archived thread or FAQ item about a full-system tour. If an old thread exists, and anyone remembers the topic, please let me know and I'll dig it out.
-- WU
If I recall somewhere in nysubway.org there is a plan of how to do what you want to do. Let me caution you that some will say you're not really doing the whole system since the WTC station and 1/9 below ground zero are closed. Sounds like great fun though.
Every time the subway changes, there is talk about someone who'll try for the modern record. I think it's time again.
Douce Man wrote:
Every time the subway changes, there is talk about someone who'll try for the modern record. I think it's time again.
---
So, what is the modern record then?
My thirty-hour estimate was based on reading the on-line timetables. I assumed that end-to-end running times were reasonably correct, and that any transfer would take half the headway of the train I'm transferring to, plus a five-minute walking penalty for any transfer that wasn't cross-platform.
I would agree that 30 hours to ride 722 miles, or whatever it is, doesn't pass the "smell test" - it just seems too short.
- WU
>>>So, what is the modern record then? <<
Don't know the modern record. But, it is listed in the Guiness Book.
Peace,
ANDEE
(I would provide a link but their website is impossible)
>>> I would agree that 30 hours to ride 722 miles, or whatever it is, doesn't pass the "smell test" - it just seems too short. <<<
It would be truly amazing if in 30 straight hours of riding the subway, every train you rode stayed on schedule. There is bound to be slippage somewhere, so I would think you would have to increase the theoretical minimum time by 10-20% to get a realistic estimated actual time.
Since the records are traditionally for riding the whole system on one fare, when you did the calculations, did you consider all the backtracking necessary to get to transfer points? Also, since you want to stop at each station, is a Northbound side platform local station with no mezzanine connection to a Southbound local station across the tracks from it really the same station, or are they two separate stations? That question is immaterial if you are just passing through every station (i.e. riding an express through local stations), but comes into play in defining what stopping at every station means.
Tom
I believe that the record is about 24 hours to ride the whole system. However, I can't imagine that they forced themselves to ride locals.
BTW, it's "722 miles" of revenue TRACK (not a current number). It's "only" about 266 route miles or some number like that (about 2.6 times the size of Washington's Metro and 4 times the size of Chicago's lines).
Assuming you want to actually stop at each station, 30 hours is probably a significant underestimate. Other threads in the past have discussed this (search the archives...) and as I recall the record is around 24 hours for the complete system, which included express rides on certain parts of the system (that record required you to ride past each station, but it could be on the express tracks - this meant the express tracks on what was the E/F/G route were not permissible, for instance, since they are on a different alignment than the local stations, but the IRT express tracks generally were permissible).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I like it at a more leisurely pace, e.g. do parts of the system every time a bunch of us have a day off ... with a stop at Coney Island for lunch & ride on the Franklin Shuttle if the BMTman is with us.
The last time was my first visit to Rockaway Park.
Mr rt__:^)
I want to ride on every bus line in Brooklyn. Not to make any record but just to see all the bus routes. I have been working on this project for about two weeks.
Hello, everyone. I am posting this to let people know that they are in place already. I tested both locations yesterday (w/PPR, of course). There were no problems. I suppose the only rejection would occur if someone tried, say 63-Lex, exited and went to 59-Lex. Simllarly, if one swiped at Court Sq. then at Court House Sq, or vice versa, it would be rejected. This was the case in 1999, with a train-to-train at Union Ave.(G)-Lorimer St. (J&M).
What exactly is a Turnstile-Turnstile transfer?
Also known as a metrocard transfer, if you board one line, travel to the "metrocard transfer" point, exit the system, and reenter at the other end of the transfer with the same metrocard within a time limit, you will not be charged a second fare.
A headake for the agents at Lex/63 and Lex/59 and Court Square and Court House Square will be dealing with people who got on a bus, transfered to a train then can't understand why they can't transfer at one of those stops I mentioned?
This caveat was not announced clearly to the public. (The only mention I've seen is as an aside in the G brochure. The main E/F/G/R/V brochure ignores it.) The TA is (rightfully) going to get bad press over it.
That's why I don't want to be anywhere near thise stations,
Did anyone else notice that the R-142's illuminated route indicators (above the windows) do not list 'S' at Franklin Avenue? I was riding this morning and noticed this for the first time.
Looks like the cars will need to be updated.
The only saving grace was the fact that the station announcement made mention of the transfer to the Franklin Shuttle.
BMTman
Well, if anything that will be corrected with the new maps go up showing the (V), (Q), , and (W) train transfers.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
What IRT line has a transfer to the Franklin Ave shuttle?
1-2-4-5 at Franklin Avenue
Ever since the rebuild...right?
Peace,
ANDEE
I never noticed.
The R-143's list the transfers to both the orange V and red(!) S at 6th Avenue. The S looks like a temporary add-on; we'll see if anyone remembers to remove it.
A red S?
Peace,
ANDEE
It looks a lot more like the 1/2/3 bullets than the F/V bullets.
AHH...no cares about that lousy shuttle anyway 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
Hi, again . Yesterday, I did not find the R-143 on the "L"
on its scheduled slot. (5:59 Rock Pkway). Does anyone know if it was shifted to a new slot, or if it's down for maintenance?
Down for maintenance on the brakes!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
...and back up again!
Rode it today on the L around 2:30-3:00pm...Running well, as usual.
Kawasaki rail equipment on Bombardier trucks...lmao...it's almost as if they were asking for it...lmao
Cleanairbus
"Kawasaki rail equipment on Bombardier trucks...lmao...it's almost as if they were asking for it...lmao"
I believe this was discussed just the other day, and it had been clearly mentioned that this info was false. -Nick
And it's day 1 for the second time!
I hope it is in service on Saturday. I will be one of the 2 Conductors that will have it that day on the PM. I can't wait!
-Mark W.
Conductors' best friend: a transverse cab!
Amen!! I could not agree anymore.
Is it running on the same schedule weekends as weekdays?
It may or may not still be there, but a recent post about "glass triangles" at before crossing stations spurred my memory......
I remember on the J line, at I believe Elderts Lane (But it could have been Cypress Hills, it's been a while), there was a sort of net thing that protruded from the windbreak on the Manhattan bound platform. I noticed that at several stations, but I hadn't been on the platforms to really look at it, I just would see it from passing trains. WHAT IS/WAS IT AND WHY IS IT THERE?
It's art; wire mesh faces looking out from the el.
And why we're on this subject, does anyone know why Eldert's Lane is longer than every other Jamaica Avenue J station platform?
I'd like to hear the answer to that too!
Maybe for overhang from that nasty turn, perhaps they wanted to extend the station to avoid a last or lead car on a sharp turn. This is a guess.
The sharp turns are between Cypress Hills and Crescent Street.
In case a 10-car train strays into the Eastern Division, it can make one stop.
Unlikely, as this stop was built larger from the beginning, and at this time all BMT dual-contract elevated train stations were of fairly uniform length.
I do have a working theory. In 1917, there was a horse racing and minor league ballpark occuping the land that Franklin K. Lane's current field occupies, as well as the adjacent houses (anyone who lives along Dexter Court notices all the houses here were built in the 1950's and stand out noticably from other older houses in Woodhaven). Perhaps the BRT expected higher patronage here and wanted more platform room.
Unlikely, as this stop was built larger from the beginning, and at this time all BMT dual-contract elevated train stations were of fairly uniform length.
Your sarcasm detector appears to be powered off.
Damn, I gotta do a battery check on it....LOL
Chris, Dexter Park was still standing in early 1954. While it was no longer used as a minor league baseball park, it still had some type of stockcar racing. Dexter Park was a beautiful, but small baseball park, and was set back from Jamaica Ave just the way FKL is. The park was on the east or Queens side of Dexter Court. The area between the park and Jamaica Ave was a very large, but unpaved (cindered) parking lot. This contrasted greatly with the fenced-in sports fields in front of FK Lane
In those days FK Lane was considered a Brooklyn school. Today, while it still has a Brooklyn address, it is apparently a Queens school. The Kings-Queens county line apparently runs right through the school, placing 2/3 of the school geographically in Brooklyn, and 1/3 in Queens.
My parents often told me that the Elderts Lane station was a very busy place on baseball game days. I know when the west entrance to the station still existed, it was a pretty busy station before and after school as well.
it is called "Five Points of Observation" it is also at several other stations. Sere the J Line station-by-station page for more info.
I thought that was on the south side of Woodhaven Blvd. right above the middle of thr road below.
Does that mean there are two such examples of Art?
avid
More than one, actually. IIRC, each station between Woodhaven and Cypress Hills has one or two of them.
Just WHAT ARE those large red things that are above the N/B local tracks at the IND 34th/6th station. Do they serve some kind of ventilation purpose or are they just decoration?
Peace,
ANDEE
Art forms. Been there since 34/6 was redone some time ago.
They should relight them and CLEAN them. They're FILTHY, you could grow potatoes on the dirt thats on them.
Peace,
ANDEE
Andee,
They are called "mobils" Very large versions of what parants put over a newborns crib.
When a n/b train approaches watch how the air currents cause it to move.
Is there an "ART" section devoted to where and how best to do an ART tour of our playground?
avid
Yup, since the station was rehabbed in 1989, one of the few done at private expense. Those things would spin when trains caused enough airflow to move the blades.
I noticed today that the east wall, at the south end of the station, appears to continue along Broadway, rather than turning (like the track) to the west and Church Street. Was there ever a plan to go straight here?
Originally the upper level was intended to be a terminal station while the lower level station was to be the through (to Brooklyn) station. However, as things worked out the upper wound up being the regular station (with trains continuing to Brooklyn) while the lower level never got put in passenger service.
The lower level (a 2 island platform, 3 track station) is used for turning N/R trains that end at Canal St or for train storage during the day.
Yes, the "City Hall Yard" as it is termed holds trains or layups, but turnarounds do not happen there. They take place on the "yard" lead-ins just south of Canal Street. I'm being technical because the yard actually begins at the low home or "jack" signals, and turnarounds stop just shy of this point.
I saw 6520 on a SB 5 at GCT. Is this the start of the end for the redbirds on that line? Or is this just a test run?
Read into this: I do not have to do anymore Redbird work for 180th Street anymore (except emergencies). I was just assigned to a crew at 239th today and I'm counting the days till I never have to get into/under one and get nasty dirty/greasy/black from head to toe. I cannot express my elation into words BUT EngineBrake and I will laugh as the 'Redbirds go to the fishies.' CI Peter
A BIG FAT LOL
9321? Is Deleware sure the fish and other marine life with go in that car? It doesn't have air conditioning. :-)
Today I had the repair of a Redbird leaky (everything has holes) air conditioning condenser adjacent to my R142 inspection. Is the repair worth it? Is the public spoiled? CI Peter
Poke more holes into the condenser, make the redbirds go through their last year in misery :-) hehehe
I'm talking about the rest of the holes...not the condenser! The drain holes under the seats are so big now. There are long open gashes in the carbody where the doors recede into. Air Conditioning?? Not needed...the wind whistles throughout the car and fills the blower filters up with black soot. BUT, everything works each and everyday and these trainsets get you to work and bring you home safely. $ 1.50 a ride is a bargain. CI Peter
Our friends in the shop will correct that hot car condition. They shall remove all doors and windows to improve ventilation.
Har Har.... Grr!
RIGHT !! polluting the ocean !!
Hey Hey Be Fair to the crew at 207th. The trucks are gone, all contents potentially hazardous to ocean life have been removed AND consider the Big bonus: lots of small parts to keep the rest of the RUNNING FLEET in motion A N D work to keep the car inspectors busy until SOMEONE comes up with an operable if ugly replacement. CI Peter
recycle the metal & build a new railfan window equipped body !!! ............eh ??
how bout' dat "...???
just a suggestion for a conversation ...
It's not possible to recycle carbon steel carbodies into stainless steel carbodies. Atleast I don't think it is.
Shawn.
Salaam,
How about this...take a trip to delaware and go underwater and ride your redbirds. Please stare through the railfan window for at least four minutes. -Nick
We're talking skin diving here, right? No SCUBA gear?
Now THAT would really be polluting the ocean.
Peace,
ANDEE
You got it! :-) -Nick
That would REALLY pollute the ocean
Peace,
ANDEE
Nick: The Redbirds run 24/7 reliably despite their age and wear. So do I. CI Peter
When R62 EPs bring in Fuji flatbeds (garbage trains,) I grab a Dep Supt and say, "Look, R142 SOACs. No computers, no brake problems, no seating complaints, just fresh air." Get a weird look, a 'pregnant pause,' they know me know, a smile and maybe a laugh. The Fuji flatcars made for container hauling have 360' railfan windows. CI Peter
Ahh, what a beautiful sight :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Gleeful to see all the redbirds go, or just the R33 singles?
All of 'em. Yes, I'll miss the railfan window, but I won't miss the rust and the feeling that I had on many of them that the car was one shake away from shearing a kingpin.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'll actually miss the redbirds. Everything will look alike afterwards. I'm sick of seeing bare stainless steel.
Bring back the blue stripe!!!
Hey, I love those Redbirds too man, but realize that nothing is immortal, including subway trains. They usually last for up to 40 years and the Redbirds are really showing their age already.
Thankyou EngineBrake once again. My 'permanent assignment' came to an end today...'they' wanted someone with seniority to fill the position. I thought I didn't do well enough...I thought I had failed...management told me it was 'politics' and I was well recommended for the position. A little disheartened, am back on troubles, was undercar for 180th on REDBIRDS. Trainsets behind us are to be reefed...was instructor today...our married pair will probably become home for the fishies too. I like 'troubles duty' but hate filling in to repair wrecks with a zillion miles. As much as we know the Redbirds keep on going like the 'Energizer Rabbit,' we know there is a limit. OnTheJuice, CI Peter
could it be.i now im glad to see that.
Around noon on thrusday I say some thing going by 179st. It was making a diesal noise and its headlight weren't in the same pattern as a R-46. I think it was a single car but I'am not sure. It had something that lokked like red christmas lights in the rear cab. It came in on the queens bound express track and went back and went into the southest upperleval track? Does anyone know what this is?
Sounds like the Track Geometry car to me.
If it was yellow/orange in color then it would have been the Sperry railcar (aka The Mack Bailbus).
BMTman
It was yellow but I say it for a split second before it went into the tunnel.
It must have been the Sperry car.
Look at this picture.
For those who can't do <tt>iframe</tt>, click <a href="http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/getimg.html?01/13.jpg">here</a>. The real image is located at http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/01/13.jpg, but click on the link before going there directly. Look at the bottom center of the picture. That's Sperry.
Here's a link to what it sounds like.
Do you have any pictures of the front of this train, also what does it do?
Sorry it wasn't the Sperry car because its end overhung alot (more than in this pic) like below:
\
\
-\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
------\\
-------/
/
|----/
| Ë
_| /|\
_ |_____________________ overhang
\
| /________ Wheels
_/ \
I saw the Track Algebra car once ...
How about the track trigonometry and track calculus cars?:-)
Think so, but they were too complicated for me to recognize.
My father would spot them immediately. He could do any math you'd put in front of him.
Santa Claus
Was this it?
click here
-Dave
I have a Rough idea what is is ...
Special thanks to SOUTH FERRY for the information that let to the 2000 CONY ISLAND tour !! ( my soul brother lookin' out for me )
& there I was shooting digital stills with a broken lcd screen & had to use a casio handheld TV to monitor my pictures so i was a shooting off everywhere at the complex !!!
glad to see all of the good old cars wooooo!!
I fixed my lcd screen cost $ 300 ...OMG ...!!!
Dave, don't you know that's my new trailer home?
;-D
You mean heypaul hasn't gotten to it yet?
heypaul hates anything sporting the blue stripe.
It's too modern for heypaul's tastes...
BMTman
Hey, at least it probably has a motorman's cab in it.
Aww man - it was YOU who outbid me for it on eBay ... &*(#^(#^*$()^
--Mark
Guilty...
Thats not it. It had a cab that sticked out over the end of the train
Coulda been the Suck Truck..I mean the vacuum train.
Now more than ever...EGGS!
Yesterday canal st station a brooklyn bound q diamond (R-40 slant) go stuck around 5:55 pm. I was on the platform lokking at it from the station. Anyways what are they doing at altaltic ave (pacific st)on 2,5 lines? The roadbed is temporary and the air is fulled with smoke. What are they doing any why is the station a true war zone? And what are the bellmonths when you take a q diamond across the bridge to manhatten on the right. As if the track joins a line but there is no track there or bed what is this?
Where's Manhatten Bridge?
Arti
The Manhattan Bridge is near Canal Street (Chinatown) in Manhattan.
I don't think so :-)
Arti
The Manhattan Bridge passes directly over Chinatown. My wife and I went shopping in a market there and could look straight up at a passing D train.
Only in MANHATTEN :-)
Arti
Sorry. I only realized after I posted that I had missed the joke.
If you'll help me, I can wipe the egg off my forehead.
:0)
Thanks, I think we need few laughts these days. :-)
Arti
Amen to that!
Peace,
ANDEE
If you looked straight up and saw a passing D train it was either along time ago or you were in the twilight zone. The D train no longer uses the bridge.
It wasn't that long ago. Before the Manny B flip-flop.
Where's Manhatten Bridge?
*************************************************
It surely isn't by Canal St. or anywhere else in Manhattan. All we
have there is the Manhattan Bridge
>>>Where's Manhatten Bridge? <<<
Just south of
Manhateleven Bridge and
just north of Manhatnine Bridge.
Sorry...couldn't resist. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
LOL
The tan hat man from manhattan:
http://www.subplay.com/59.html
Most interesting link, THANKS.
Peace,
ANDEE
[Yesterday Canal St station, a Brooklyn-bound Q diamond (R-40 slant) got stuck around 5:55 pm. I was on the platform looking at it from the station. Anyways, what are they doing at Altaltic Ave (Pacific St)on 2,5 lines? The roadbed is temporary and the air is filled with smoke. What are they doing and why is the station a true war zone? And what are the bellmouths when you take a Q diamond across the bridge to Manhattan on the right. As if the track joins a line but there is no track there or bed what is this?]
Well, I'm not sure about Atlantic Avenue. They're doing some kind of rehab there. As for when you take the the Q train across the bridge, once the train goes underground, there is a shift to the right. That's where the tracks move into the alignment for Canal Street. The right of way came from the (now closed) north side tracks of the bridge. Before the Chrystie Street connection opened in 1967, the tracks on the north side of the bridge led to Canal Street (where the Q and W trains stop), and the tracks on the south side led to the Chambers Street station (J, M, and Z trains).
Don't mind the others, they're just joking around.
The work at Atlantic looks almost like the entire line is being rebuilt. New steel roof supports, a new underground passageway. It's truly gigantic. And comic, as workers can actually go under the train tracks and look "up" at the people in an underground tunnel.
Thanks Now I have to go again and list all the belmouths on the brooklyn side.
Don't mind the others, they're just joking around.
***********************************************************
That's true, and I also have to observe that I was struck by
the good-naturedness of the reactions.
I just spotted a NY&A consist that had five passenger cars. They look like old LIRR passenger cars. They looked like they were scrapped or in prety bad shape. Anyone know what these are? I tried to get a picture but it didn't come out.
Shawn.
Where did you see it ?
When they were doing some switching just outside of the yard on the bay ridge line.
Shawn.
By "the yard" I mean Fresh Pond Yard.
Shawn.
how many? 4 or 5? graffitied up a bit? they might have come from yard A in LIC, being shipped out for scrap. I'll take a look and see if they're still down there (in yard a) tomorrow... if not, it's a safe bet where they came from and are going... maybe they'll be on the csx run out of 'the pond' over hell gate tomorrow?
5 with a litte graffiti yeah. That might be them.
Shawn.
i'll take a look in the AM...
OK, so it wasn't the four being moved from Mitchel Field to Oyster Bay AND it wasn't NY& Atl own "green" one being moved around.
If you go in that yard make sure you seek out someone FIRST, they don't like folks just walking around.
Mr rt__:^)
Don't know if what I saw tonight is related, but I saw a couple of the old LIRR passenger coaches sitting in Morris Park at around 7:00 pm. Since it was dark out, I wasn't able to get numbers or a better view, but I recall one of them had some graffiti on the lower side.
Shawn, it might've been a part of the same train of scraps that you saw earlier at Fresh Pond. Funny thing is: that would mean they're coming BACK onto LIRR property and not the other way around...
If that's the case, it could mean that those cars WERE meant for the scrapper but were saved for some reason -- or sold to a private party.
BMTman
If these are indeed the cars from yard a as i suspect, they might have pulled them back to morris park since the GCT tunnel access is suppose to start sometime soon, thus requiring whatevers in yard A to be moved out...
i'm guessing that this is what they're up to as a few weeks ago they removed n old alcohol car that was in the yard - and instead of it being sent to scrap as every other old lirr coach to land in yard A, it was dragged over to a maintance area near where the eastbound tunnel portals reach the surface (along skillman av). it's an otherwise senseless shuffle unless they're clearing the yard for construction...
There are/were only 4 coaches in yard A heavily graffitied. I think thought they are the NY&As no? Well in any case as of yesterday 12/12, They were there all by themselves in yard A.
go figure...
i wonder how many old diesel cars are left on LI... ..and why they moved that junky old alcohol car.... (and if the old guy living in it went along for the ride!)
[I wonder how many old diesel cars are left on LI]
Besides those already mentioned:
- NY & Atl has one in green at Fresh Pond, plus a couple of cabooses
- Engine 35 has two, plus cabooses at Mitchel Field
- Engine 39 has one or two with many other vintage coaches
- doesn't the MTA have one earmarked for the Transit Museum ?
- seems to me someone else on LI got one (the MTA was giving them away because hardly anyone would BUY them), e.g. Cap Cod got some but couldn't get the A/C to work ... surprise surprise.
Mr rt__:^)
The 39 Group has 2 in Riverhead plis a privately owned one. The latter was bought from Ken Bitten Ken Bitten bought when they were still in service the entire fleet (except the 4 for 35/39) and resold many to other tourist railroads . LIRR was paying per diem. I don't why these extra 5 clunkers were hanging around.
this is what i've been wondering - why they're still around, in limbo. I did NOT see the coaches that were in lic yard a still stored int he yard today (you could see the tops of them from the N/W trains at the end of that dead-end street) - so either this is the batch, or they were pushed back in the yard behind some factories. I didn't get to take in the better view from the 7 train though...
i wonder how many 'other' old cars are still on the LIRR. i know there's one numbered w17 (or w19) painted maintaince yellow in the LIC coach yard tucked in by the bakery. i'm pretty sure it was one of the ex-B&M cars. it's currently used as a yard office or storage room and i'm pretty sure the track it's on is diconnected from the rest.
i wonder how many 'other' old cars are still on the LIRR. i know there's one numbered w17 (or w19) painted maintaince yellow in the LIC coach yard tucked in by the bakery. i'm pretty sure it was one of the ex-B&M cars. it's currently used as a yard office or storage room and i'm pretty sure the track it's on is diconnected from the rest.
There's a very old coach at the eastern end of the Ronkonkoma yard, visible from a nearby roadway and from passing trains on the Greenport line. It also looks like it was converted to some sort of office use.
Time for a J-Train Tony amusing anecdote-
When I was a kid, me and my father and younger brother reffered to work trains as "Trains from Hell"- they usually appeared out of nowhere late at night, they were always old old OLD cars painted that flat taxicab yellow, and were all beat up and evil smelling from the diesels that were pulling them.
Anyway, late one night in about 1981-might have been close to 3 a.m.-me and my girlfriend were going to my place out in Bushwick, and we were waiting at Chambers St for the J. You know how ancient and decrepit and cavernous and downright uncool that station can be, especially at late hours- we were the only ones at the station it seemed, and it was deathly quiet...all you could hear in was the echoing drip-drip-drip of water somewhere- you get the picture.
The J was always a drag to catch late at night, I don't know how it is now, but in the late 70's-early 80's it seemed like I waited close to an hour sometimes for a train. Anyway, after about a half-hour wait, suddenly I heard the rails click-you know how they do when a train is coming. At the back of the Brooklyn-bound platform the tracks curve away to the right, so you could see the rails start to glow when a train was coming. I saw the light on the rails, and we could hear this grinding, growling subway train noise. Before I could say "what the hell..." a train from hell took the curve and entered the station. It must have been an R-1, with all the windows covered. I didn't even look at the train operator- all I could see was that old, dirty yellow rivet-covered train from hell. The station was filled suddenly with evil-smelling gray smoke, as the work train (the R-1 pulling a flatcar and some sort of crane looking thing) slowly grinded its way through the station.
I remember me and Mimi looked at each other, and said "Holy cow."
I ride the system at 0300 regularly and let me tell you I see PLENTY of stuff like that. It never ceases to amaze me.
Peace,
ANDEE
Thought you were going to continue the story ... Bob, a friend of mine, was waiting for the better part of an hour on a downtown 6 station at 4 am (this was in the early '80s). Finally, a train came ... one of the "trains from hell" ... stopped, paused long enough for him and a friend to jump on the back ... and then took off. Problem was, it switched to express and accelerated. As they headed toward 86th Street station, he realized his options were bad and worse: Jump, or end up god-knows-where-in-a-marginal-neighborhood-he'd-never-been-to.
Oh, did I mention he was wearing a suit?
He and the friend jumped, being careful to jump away from the third rail side. Bob managed to stay on his feet (he figured train was going 25 mph, not barreling full-tilt). Friend tripped, rolled, ended up fracturing his wrist.
They made it back onto the platform, VERY CAREFULLY. Got buddy to hospital. Got home after break of dawn. They were proud of their adaptiveness and spirit, despite the broken wrist.
Bob's 42 now, has three kids, and I've lost touch with him. But I kinda suspect that if his son did the same thing, he'd kill him. [grin] Maybe that's what age will do to ya.
Going by the direction the train was heading, it would have been interesting to have been standing on the 103rd St. platform on the 6 at 4:15 a.m. and to have seen a work train shoot by on the express track with a guy in a suit hanging onto the back of it.
Only in New York, kids. Only in New York...
Going by the direction the train was heading, it would have been interesting to have been standing on the 103rd St. platform on the 6 at 4:15 a.m. and to have seen a work train shoot by on the express track with a guy in a suit hanging onto the back of it.
[laughing] Oh yeah! But I'd also have liked to be in 86th to see two guys, dirty and battered, one of them in a suit, climbing up onto the platform at 4 am ....
Train from hell: Reminds me of when I lived in Astoria and got on at Ditmars BlVd to the N at around 5AM everyday.
The vagrants and street people took over about four cars of a train and used one of the middle cars as a toilet. That ranks high among some of my gross experiences as a straphanger.
Getting on at Ditmars did have the advantage of being able to find things left behind (of value) by passengers from the last trip.
I remember having the same experience at Times Square on the uptown N/R platform. There must have been some GO making the E run there because otherwise we wouldn't be waiting their late at night.
Anyhow, we see the rails light up and everyone in my group is looking down the track, waiting to see if it's an 'E' or an 'N'. Well, it was an inspection car of some sort. For those that have never seen this thing, it has about 300 flood lights on the front of it. It suddenly rounds the corner and everyone is briefly blinded - I can only imagine the feeling if you were at the southern end of the platform. So now if the rails seem to be lit up a bit too brightly I don't watch.
No time to post until now so here goes:
The day started on WMATA Rohr 1084. This train had no door chimes. I recall having one other train without the door chimes although I don't recall the number (may have been 1088 or 1089). Very nice not having them although considering the fact I had to run for this train, to hear a door chime would be reassuring.
At Grosvenor, Orion V/CNG number 5804 was waiting. I noted the "birthyear" being 99 on the front under the windshield but as I paid my fare and looked up, I saw it read 00. What year was this thing made??? The rear says 99.
Later in the day, I caught the 47 and went to Rockville. The bus was number 5353A, yet another proof the January 2001 37 AMs are from Gaithersburg as they still are (if CNGs aren't enough for you, maybe I will see if they can get 5410 out there and then what can you say?). This was my second 47 ride, I don't remember being it as fast as it was, especially north of Montrose Road. Also, why do the 47 and 56 use Maryland Avenue while the T2 uses Great Falls Road?
While in Rockville, the place I was at overlooked a street with buses on the 46, 47, 54, 56, 63, and 65 going by, and maybe some others. No interesting observations although I did see one or maybe both of the 35 foot CNGs.
After my business there was complete, I walked in through the misty rainfall to the Rockville Station. A T2 pulled in although I opted to take the Metro, for it was faster. It was now after sundown, so I got to do some nighttime photography, which I normally don't do. I got some trains at Rockville. Luckily it was the end of rush hour so about 4 trains went towards Shady Grove between the one that left for Silver Spring as I was at the T2 stop and the one I actually got on. I also tried getting a photo of a MARC train entering their Rockville Station which probably won't come out anyway due to the light or lack thereof but a CSX train had to come along just then.
The train I took towards DC was Rohr 1154. We went manual from Rockville to Bethesda (no idea why but it seemed every other train was, too) and reached speeds of up to about 65 miles per hour. Night railfanning, which I normally don't do, is fun, but the lighting from the interior of the car can be annoying. The T/O covered up the speedometer after Grosvenor :-(.
Please try to answer the questions enclosed, thanks in advance.
Does anyone know the numbers of the cars that are still down there?I saw on NBC channel 4 this evening one of the cars with damage was car #160.And now that the tunnel has been pumped out will they remove the undamaged cars?
Does anyone know the numbers of the cars that are still down there?I saw on NBC channel 4 this evening one of the cars with damage was car #160.And now that the tunnel has been pumped out will they remove the undamaged cars?
I don't know the numbers of the other cars.
But as for moving them out - that may take quite a while since the PA sealed off both tubes with concrete to guard against a possible rupture of the "Bathtub" flooding the tunnels in NJ all the way into midtown Manhattan.
Don't expect anything to happen until after the site is completely cleared of debris. The PA estimates they can have the WTC station cack and running in a couple of years.
One of the crushed cars is a Kawaski PA4.
How do you tell the difference between a PA-3 and a PA-4?
PA-4's have 3 sets of doors.
How do PA-3's look like?
Very nearly like the PA4's. If I recall correctly they have a simple lit sign over the door leafs that says NWK or HOB (or WTC when that comes back in 2003). Do the PA4's use that same kind of sign?
PA1, PA2, PA3 all look alike and are painted aluminum. PA4's are unpainted stainless.
Thank you. Yes, that's right.
HERE"S a PA-3
and HERE'S a PA-4
Peace,
ANDEE
I personally think they are very handsome cars. Not as well marked in terms of destination or route signs - but I like their aesthetics very much.
I like the aesthectics myself, always have. But, many people consder the "tooo 70s"
IYKWIM
Peace,
ANDEE
Nice railfan windows too! I rode "shotgun" from Newark to WTC on many an occasion...
I thought all PATH cars had railfan windows. No?
So far. 2 railfan windows at each end, one as part of the door, one with a seat. Some conductors will clean off the window if you ask nicely. Some engineers get nervous if someone is standing next to the door, though.
And there's some good scenery to see...
PATH did have plans to overhaul their fleet and get new rolling stock. Any idea what they wanted to buy?
"PATH did have plans to overhaul their fleet and get new rolling stock. Any idea what they wanted to buy?"
It was reported that the new PA-5s would be very similar in looks to the PA-4s, except they would sport the latest thing in transit these days, AC propulsion.
The PA-5s would replace all of the PA-1, 2 and 3s. The PA 3s, the Hawker-Siddely ones would go first. Reports are they are very troublesome. I guess the St.Louie cars were better all around.
Bill "Newkirk"
Oh I forgot, the PA-4s will have AC propulsion after an overhaul. So the entire PATH fleet, all PA-4s and 5s will be totally AC propulsion.
Bill "Newkirk"
With an all-stainless steel look.
I wonder if the boston Orange and Blue lines will get new cars soon as well.
Boston cars have nothing to do with PATH. But to answer your question, the blue line is supposed to get new cars because the ones they have now, which are not that old, have extreme body rot. A few cars may get transfered (and painted) to the orange line.
I hope they have nice railfan windows too!
Forget that. They will have full width cabs, probably collapsible like CTA's.
How do you know?
I have heard it from friends who have met with PATH officials about 6 months ago.
I personally think they are very handsome cars. Not as well marked in terms of destination or route signs - but I like their aesthetics very much
Same here. I particularly like their big windows.
One car is #143 (Freehold Township), another is #160 (River Edge).
wayne
Here are some images of them: (you can see 160 on one)
A PA-3 or earlier...
160 (PA-2) and 143 (PA-1) are the 2 cars I know are under GZ.
As for the other 5, we'll have to wait until the debris is cleared.
Thanks for the photos.
Wow...
Pic #4 is the scariest, in my opinion. The car is just crushed.
And now that the tunnel has been pumped out will they remove the undamaged cars?
Are the concrete plugs in the tunnels removed yet?
Service to Frederick will begin on Monday. Trains will run on the Brunswick Line to Point of Rocks, then stop at Monococy and Frederick. Frederick will have no parking, Monococy will have 800 free spaces. Three trains will run in each direction daily, travel time will be 1:25.
How is "Monococy" pronounced ???
Its actually Monocacy. Not much better, but at least it wont lead to too many crude mispronouncings!
Its actually Monocacy.
"mon-OCK-a-see" ???
I think that's right. I've never heard of that town before and I've lived in the MD-No. VA area all my 30 years.
Well, its also a river. The B&O Met division crosses the river before reaching Point of Rocks--the Junction with the "Old Main Line" go look there the old station is a real gem.
I'm going to have to make my way up there. The only time I head up there is if I'm going to Hershey Park or something that has me taking US 15. I'll have to actually get off of there one of these days and take a look around. Its a pretty nice view coming up I-270 towards Frederick. I hope this line does well. Anything to get traffic off of 270 would be greatly appreciated.
They should have concentrated more rail north of Shady Grove. There are always proposals to extend the Red Line North to the Metropolitan Grove area, but they need to get up to the Urbana area, or at least close to it.
I'm not familiar with the geography. Is this an extension of the line?
I looked up MARC and answered my own question.
I note with interest that MARC appears to have been extended into West Virginia. Also, there are three distinct lines now (plus the Frederick service).
It's a pretty good rise from the B&O tracks at Point of Rocks up from the Potomac to Fredrick and not an easy drive to get there on U.S. 15, so the new stations are probably welcome.
Too bad they never built a more direct rail route along MD 355 or near I-270, which is where the bulk of the new housing and business construction is going nowadays. The B&O line veers away from those main development areas after it leaves Gaitherburg and heads over towards the river for the crossing at Harper's Ferry.
Didn't the long-gone Hagerstown and Frederick run through those areas? Of course, it was an electric interurban, so it could handle the steeper grades that the B&O couldn't.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Mr. Greenberger-
Did you happen to find the KK bullet I was talking about yesterday?
No, but I haven't looked yet. I'll check it out the next time I have to be in the area anyway or the next time I'm using a Fun Pass (in which case I'll go out of my way). I'm afraid I'm not going to pay an extra fare just to search it out.
There is a sign advertising the KK train someplace? Let me know where!
The ghost K runs under 8th and 15th Street--a sign there says so.
www.forgotten-ny.com
The K also runs here:
I guess it's an express between 14th and 96th.
When they finally get around to removing the K from that subway entrance, let's hope they don't take our blue M off the post and replace it with that new ugly MTA logo...
Some things don't have to change, do they (sniff)...
Those two-tone-blue-M cubes are at station entrances all over the place. There are a very few white-M-in-a-blue-circle cubes (I think there's one at 86th and Lex). There are none with the current logo. At some point early in the white-M-in-a-blue-circle era, the TA decided to go back to the old-fashioned globes.
What was it the MTA paid for that new logo design -- $500,000 or something like that to some design firm? Now there was a waste of bucks, and the lopsided-looking thing is nowhere near as good as either of the TA's logos from the 1950s or the 1960s.
I like the current MTA logo. I think it's kind of sleek. But then, I also liked the various "M" logos too. Not that crazy about the "TA" logo, but then I'm not really a child of that era.
:-) Andrew
OK-
Go to the corner of 48th Street and 6th Ave. (Ave. of the Americas)
On the southwest corner, there is an entrance to the 47-50th St.-Rockefeller Center Station.
As you walk down the stairs, you'll see it if you look straight ahead.
IIRC, a 1975 subway map is in plain sight at 57th/6th Ave. I saw it last year!
And for those who haven't seen it yet:
(It's on a portable pedestal. I had to push it a bit away from the glass wall to get this picture. I didn't want to push it too far since I think the S/A was eyeing me.)
I will admit upfront that I'm a CTA management employee but I thought this press release would be of interest.
Daniel
Weekday service improvements will begin Monday, December 17, on the CTA’s Purple, Red, Blue, Yellow and Brown Lines. The improvements are designed to provide more efficient service to CTA customers.
Purple Line Express: Under a six-month experimental plan, service to the Loop will begin an hour earlier during morning rush periods and operate an hour later in afternoon rush periods to improve service for customers traveling to jobs in downtown Chicago, and for reverse commuting to the northern suburbs.
The first Purple Line Express will leave Linden at 5:24 a.m., will arrive at the Merchandise Mart southbound at 6:05 a.m., and return to Linden at 6:55 a.m. instead of at 8:01 a.m. During afternoon rush periods, the last train will leave Linden at 6:28 p.m., arrive at the Merchandise Mart southbound at 7:09 p.m., and return to Linden at 8:00 p.m. instead of at 7:06 p.m.
Red Line: More trains will operate in morning and afternoon rush periods. Also, during off-peak periods from about 9:45 a.m. until 1:45 p.m., and again from about 8 p.m. until midnight, trains will operate every 7˝ minutes instead of 10 minutes apart in both directions.
Blue Line: Midday trains will operate more frequently, leaving the terminals at Forest Park and 54th/Cermak every 15 minutes instead of every 20 minutes from about 10 a.m. until 2 p.m., and leaving O’Hare every 7˝ minutes instead of 10 minutes apart. This will effectively provide weekday intervals of 7˝ minutes or less between trains leaving O’Hare from 5:30 a.m. until midnight.
Yellow Line: Midday and evening service will be improved, with trains running every 12 minutes instead of 15 minutes apart between 9:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. From 8 p.m. until service ends around 10 p.m., trains will run every 15 minutes instead of 20 minutes apart.
Brown Line: More frequent midday service will operate weekdays, leaving Kimball every 10 minutes instead of 12 minutes apart between about 10:30 a.m. and 1:00 p.m., providing levels of service to the Loop comparable to the Green Line during that period.
Excellent. Has the Evanston Express ever run middays or weekends?
We have better historians here than I, but it did run every 30 minutes from Linden between 09:30 and 11:30 until around 1990. There was a more extensive midday service (and Saturdays I believe) in the 1950s.
Daniel
Without looking up the minutiae, Evanston service was always run through to the Loop until July 1, 1950. Before 1949 it was sometimes an extension of the North-South (Red Line).
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
From November 3, 1913 to July 30, 1949, Jackson Park was through-routed with Evanston; beginning in 1919, however, some trains were turned back at Howard. Confusingly, the head signs on the through trains referred to both Howard or Evanston and Niles Center (Skokie), though the latter point could be reached only with an across-the-platform transfer at Howard.
For a discussion of Evanston services, see http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/evanston.html .
Englewood trains in that era either turned back at the Loop, or were through-routed to Wilson (1913-1931) or Ravenswood (1931-1949); the Englewood-Howard through routing didn't come along until the major restructuring of 1949.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Is there any serious consideration at the CTA of weekend Yellow Line service? Not just occasionally for major events like the Third of July but on a permanent, 52 weekends a year, basis?
The station, cars, and parking lot used extensively for five days a week sit unused for two days (almost) every week. The service would not have to be extensive or particularly frequent -- one or two basic two-car trains could shuttle back and forth between Dempster and Howard for 16 hours a day, say 7am to 11pm. On that basis, weekend operation would require only:
1) one or two train operators and a Dempster station agent per shift for four shifts (two 8-hour shifts, two days), and
2) 32 hours worth of electrical usage for the line.
I don't know, but it is in their next 5 year capital plan to rip out the CNS&M trolley wire and install 3rd rail. Maybe then.
Glad to hear of this. I moved to Chicago back in the dark days when it seemed like the CTA was cutting service and raising fares almost on a monthly basis. The CTA still has plenty of room for improvement, mind you, but hopefully this is another sign that the pendelum has begun to swing back the other way. Keep it up!
-- David
Chicago, IL
I am very glad to hear this. The purple Line express is one of my favorites. It is very good that the CTA is listening to people's comments, the extension of the purple line service is due to complaint's from reverse commuters.
I personally think that the CTA will find that ridership will rise extensively on the purple line during the 2 extra hours a day, weekdays, that express service is added. One of the biggest complaints they don't listen to is that it simply takes to long when purple line express service is not running to go between Evanston and the Loop or especially Linden and the Loop. With the Transfer at Howard, and having to wait at Linden (or another Station) for a train to arrive/depart, it can sometimes take 1hr & 15 minutes between Linden and the Loop. That is simply to high of a travel time. People will either take Metra (30 min-ride) or drive if they have a car.
On the Other hand, the Purple Line express service is one of the fastest and best runs the CTA has to offer. With a transfer at Belmont, you can be to downtown from Linden in 35-min. That is with a convient transfer at Belmont (No waiting at Belmont for a Red Line Train). This beats Metra because you are in the heart of downtown, no cab or bus ride from Ogilvie to the Loop.
Anyway, my point is that over time I hope the Purple Line Express Service expansion show success. I hope it shows so much success that the CTA continues to expand express hours, eventually years down the road offering express service all day on weekdays. That is wishful thinking, but always hope for the best.
I only ride the the Evanston Express once or twice a year, but in my experience it doesn't really like express, that is fast, until north of Wilson. I hope that if they start investing more into it's operation they'll find the time and money to fix up the tracks (or whatever) south of Wilson.
Anyway, thanks for the news Daniel, great to hear.
HUDSON & MANHATTAN RAILROAD POWERHOUSE
LISTED ON NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
(Jersey City, NJ, December 10th, 2001) -- The Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy is proud to announce that the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Powerhouse has been listed on the prestigious National Register of Historic Places, making it the first official Jersey City landmark of the new millennium.
The Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy, a non-profit organization formed to preserve, protect and promote Jersey City's historic sites, buildings, objects and districts, submitted the Powerhouse nomination to the State Historic Preservation Office exactly two years ago, never once faltering or abandoning our preservation campaign for this magnificent architectural wonder.
Despite being declined listing on the New Jersey State Register of Historic Places (a decision cast by the Commissioner's Office of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection) the Powerhouse has been certified a national landmark by the National Register in Washington, D.C.
We hope that the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey and the City of Jersey City, both of whom share ownership of the property, respect Washington's designation and move ahead with a substantial restoration and adaptive reuse plan for the Powerhouse, whose architectural and engineering features remain astoundingly intact (it was, after all, built to last a thousand years).
The Powerhouse, standing majestically among rising skyscrapers along the Jersey City waterfront as the sole reminder of a remarkable era, should not be denied its rightful place in the annals of New Jersey history, particularly when it is recognized as possessing national historical significance.
HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE POWERHOUSE
The coal-powered, steam-generating Powerhouse once energized the entire Hudson & Manhattan Railroad subway system (now used by PATH), providing constant power to underwater and above-ground tunnel lines, stations, trolleys and terminals on both sides of the Hudson River, including the majestic Hudson Terminal, at that time the world's largest office and train terminal complex.
The history of the "Tubes," as they were popularly known, reaches back to 1874 when American engineer Dewitt Clinton Haskins, borrowing technology from England's famed Thames River tunnels, sank a deep shaft at the foot of 15th Street in Jersey City. Over thirty years later, after many engineering mishaps and financial failings, William G. McAdoo unveiled a state-of-the-art mass transit system that promised to bring both convenience to daily commuters and economic prosperity to the metropolitan region. On February 25th, 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt, sitting in the White House, sent a telegram to the Powerhouse instructing engineers to activate it, thereby illuminating a subway system that continues to this day.
ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SIGNIFICANCE OF THE POWERHOUSE
Designed by John Oakman, who had previously worked for the acclaimed architectural firm of Carrere & Hastings (which designed the New York Public Library), the Powerhouse is a monumental yet elegant Romanesque Revival industrial structure, hailed by the New York Times as a "cathedral...a masterpiece of brickwork." Erected between 1906 and 1908, the Powerhouse was considered to be one of the country's most technologically advanced power stations, with massive boilers, turbines, transformers and switchboards that collectively created an alternating current of 11,000 volts. The esteemed engineering firm of L.B. Stillwell, a former Westinghouse engineer who had been responsible for the Niagara Falls power plant, designed both the Powerhouse's structural steelwork and electrical machinery. Thomas Edison himself inquired about the Powerhouse's latest electrical fixtures and impressive output.
-John Gomez, President, Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Contacts:
Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
c/o Mr. John Gomez, President
P.O. Box 68
Jersey City, NJ 07303-0068
Tel: (201) 420-1885
Email: jclandmarks@earthlink.net
Web: www.jclandmarks.org
Historic Preservation Office
State of New Jersey
PO Box 404
Trenton, NJ 08625-0404
Tel: (609) 292-2023
Fax: (609) 984-0578
Email: NJHPO@DEP.STATE.NJ.US
National Register of Historic Places
c/o Mr. Edson Beall
Tel: (202) 343-1572
Fax: (202) 343-1836
E-mail: Edson_Beall@nps.gov
Very cool. If you support this goal, you can write to PATH's director and ask what PATH's plans actually are.
Is anyone interested in trading duplicates of official NYC subway maps? I have duplicates of many maps, particularly from the 70's and 80's. If you are interested, pleae contact me at soks@earthlink.net .
Charlie Sokol
I couldn't find anything on official MTA website that states G ends at Church Avenue during (weekends)? Despite rumors?
Need firm information before I finish the December 16, 2001 Edition of our NYC Subway Map.
Thanks,
Michael Adler
Firm information:
The TA in the train crew work programs has listed that the G will be operating to Church Av on Saturdays only from apx. 7 am to 8 pm (if you need exact times, let me know). This will also take place on any holidays that will operate on a Saturday schedule. Saturday station switching jobs have been created at Church Av solely for relaying G trains. Before 7 am, after 8 pm and all day Sunday, the G will discharge passengers at Smith-9th Sts and will terminate on the 4th Avenue relay track. G trains will run OPTO for the entire weekend.
Any firmer than this and it would be concrete.
What's brought this about?
This seems bizzare. Extended to Church on Saturday, but not Sunday? Why?
Had it been the other day around, I would have suggested that the Orthodox asked for it to get from Kensington (where they are spilling over from Boro Park) to Williamsburg and back. But they ride the train on Sunday, not Saturday. I'd like to see it run to Church during all off peak hours; more service for me.
I recently asked why the location of the interlocking between Smith/9th and 4th wasn't moved to the area between 4th and 7th as part of the Bergen Street job. I was told there was no money for track work, but something like that could be done when Culver CBTC rolls around.
Such an interlocking would allow G service at 4th Avenue, where many more people are switching these days. It would also allow trains to terminate at 7th Avenue on the center tracks, out of the way of the F as the trains are emptied (since they wouldn't be relayed in a spot without a platform). A bathroom could be installed for G train TOs. If I'm still around in 2006 I'll suggest it.
But running the G to Church would be better.
Had it been the other day around, I would have suggested that the Orthodox asked for it to get from Kensington (where they are spilling over from Boro Park) to Williamsburg and back. But they ride the train on Sunday, not Saturday.
The Hasidic groups in Boro Park/Kensington and Williamsburg belong to different sects, if I'm not mistaken, so they may not have much occasion to travel back and forth between the 'hoods.
Boro Park is mixed, including many non-Hasidim.
The Williamsburg community is mostly Satmar Hasidim. This wasn't always the case; my father (not Hasidic) grew up there. There are still some non-Hasidim there today, at least one of whom posts here, so I'll stop here and allow him to comment if he sees fit.
Food idea for 7th Avenue relay, but the trackwork is already in place at Church. It should be extended there at least during off peak.
I also question why the G will turn at Church only on Saturday...why not the entire weekend??
Of course, I meant GOOD. Please excuse the typo.
It seems strange that a service would run on one day of the weekend but not the other. This is pretty common with buses; many routes run on Saturdays, but not Sundays. But that pattern hasn't existed on the subway in years.
Granted, some nighttime shuttles and locals do run deeper into Sunday morning than they do Saturday morning: the '4' local through Brooklyn to New Lots (due to the late start of the through '3', now '1'); the Dyre, West End, Lenox bus and defunct Pelham shuttles.
The last time I can remember one day-only service was sometime back in the late sixties, when I believe the '4' ran express to Utica all day SUNDAYS only. Nights and peak, it went to Flatbush (local at night; express at peak). Middays and Saturdays it was cut back to Atlantic. The logic is this escapes me. Similarly, the immediate pre-Christie 'TT' operated as a West End shuttle from Coney to 36th on Sundays, as far as 57th/7th on Saturdays and all the way to Astoria on weekdays- at least I think it did. Feel free to correct me.
And this really belongs on Bustalk, but I believe Monsey Trails or Command does run a weekday and Sunday service between Williamsburg and Boro Park. Monsey service may originate in Rockland and stop at Paramus, Williamsburg and Boro Park before ending at Sea Gate.
To add to the saturday-only service, the T ran on Broadway on Saturday, but as a TT shuttle on Sunday, and the #10 ran to Chambers on Saturday, but not on Sundays.
And this new G configuration makes no sense unless some work being done in the area prevents the 4th Ave. relay track from being used. In that case, why only change service for one weekend day, and not the other?
Saturday used to be a work day, especially during WWII and right after. Most of the lines used to have full weekday type service on Sat. but you watch it be gradually scaled back in the late 50's. (The Brighton was another good example. See Line by Line History
Didn't there used to be Saturday 7 express service?
The 3 has been running on Sunday mornings for a few years. As of 7/22, through service begins northbound at 6:05 and southbound at 8:01. That's under an hour after Saturday morning service starts up.
Once the Chambers WTC station is reopen for revenue service, I believe feasible to extend the line to link with St. George, Staten Island, with a station beneath BMT Whitehall station.
Hmm, feasible yes. After the rebuild/clean up, even with Federal money and grants, I do believe that the MTA would be in money trouble. Building a link to SI will be VERY expensive, it was pretty darn expensive to build a little section of tunnel for the 63rd street connector, a whole underwater tube? Fuhgettabout it!
I know that MTA maybe on debt by then if they were to link the 8th Av. Line beyond Chambers Street (WTC branch) to St. George, SI and construct another station (possibly underneath IRT and BMT Rector St. station), still it takes much of the time off the ferry travel from Whitehall to St. George.
Just pray for continued funding for 2nd Avenue and a Cross Harbor Tunnel.
What about resurrecting the C1916 plan to extend the 4th Ave Brooklyn (R) to Staten Island Rapid Transit tracks...Or lay tracks somewhere, if there is anywhere, on the bridge.
Two words: won't happen.
Regrettably, it's not as feasible as you may think.
The channel between Manhattan and Staten Island is very deep. Coupled with existing structures underground in lower Manhattan, the line would need to make a very deep dive to get under the river. I haven't calculated the grade myself, but it would be a very difficult endeavor. If money were no issue, one could construct a loop deep underground to help raise the elevation in a short area.
From a construction point of view, a more attractive option is to connect Staten Island with Brooklyn, as the channel depth is less. At least that's what I hear.
The limiting factor is money. We'll be lucky if we see a 2nd Avenue subway. If you want to see for yourself, get a map, and measure the distance in miles. Not the minimum distance, but the distance the line would need to take. Then multiply the number of miles by one billion (a good rule of thumb for subway construction is $1 billion per mile). That'll be the cost of your line -- at least.
MATT-2AV
According to stories in the Times and Newsday, some outside consultants who have been examining the World Trade Center disaster have suggested that the collapse of the towers was not inevitable. They've claimed that the fireproofing on much of the towers' structural steel had worn thin or otherwise deteriorated over the years. Several photos accompanying the Times article, taken in the course of litigation a few years ago, clearly showed steel that was almost bare when it should have been covered by a thick layer of fireproofing. It looks like the Port Authority has already gone into damage-control mode, with an engineer quoted as saying that nothing could have saved the towers and hinting that the consultants may have had ulterior motives behind their conclusions.
It's at least possible that the Port Authority is going to come under increasing criticism for the towers' inadequacies. Should this come to pass - and I'm not in any way presuming that it will - owners of properties damaged in the collapses may find themselves at legal loggerheads with the Port Authority. And that would not be a good thing as far as transit is concerned. NYCT, needless to say, suffered probably hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to the IRT tunnel and the Cortland Street station. If NYCT ends up getting into litigation with the Port Authority, that would make any sort of integrated transit solutions involving the subway and PATH that much harder to accomplish.
Food for thought.
The Port Authority doesn't exactly have a spotless track record when it comes to fire safety at the WTC. Remember back to the 1993 bombing when there was mass chaos while evacuating the towers. Turns out the PA, being a bi-state government agency, had built the towers without following all the city-mandated fire codes and industry-accepted safegaurds that privately-built skyscrapers are expected to follow.
-- David
Chicago, IL
the PA, being a bi-state government agency, had built the towers without following all the city-mandated fire codes and industry-accepted safegaurds that privately-built skyscrapers are expected to follow.
One of the truly appalling things about government entities that do real estate is that they are NOT required to follow local codes. Some do voluntarily; I had thought that the PA did, but perhaps not.
It was clearly announced during early discussion of rebuilding the WTC site that one "advantage" to a State agency doing the planning and rebuilding is that they wouldn't be hampered by all those annoying things like community review, etc. Obviously NYC building codes fall into that category as well.
Grrrrrrrrrrrr .....
Two new slightly unsafe towers are better than no towers at all.
Two new slightly unsafe towers are better than no towers at all.
I'm actually stunned that you'd post that thought.
For the record, I disagree. Strongly.
The issue of whether collapse was inevitableor not will remain controversial. Despite the lapses, there is still no convincing evidence that the towers would have stood up to the fires. If they did, it is possible (but not known for certain) the death toll might have been lower than the current 3,000 or so. However, the towers would have then had to undergo demolition, because they would not have been repairable (more precisely, the cost of repairs would have been higher than the cost of dynamiting and starting over).
Might they have been able to demolish the tops and then rebuild from there?
Might they have been able to demolish the tops and then rebuild from there?
A test case for that is a 40- or 50-story building in downtown Philadelphia that had a fire about 2/3 the way up that weakened some of the beams. The building sat empty and wrecked for a long time -- 10 years? -- and I never learned its ultimate fate.
Can SubTalkers from Philly enlighten us?
There was an article about it post-9/11 (NY Times???) as a sad case of how long is can take to clean up the legal mess after a disaster. I believe they said it had finally been demolished.
That was the Meridian Bank tower. They had to demolish it completely and start over.
I would have loved to see this happen, and i'm sure everyone else here would have too. If it did go on, it would have easily ranked as one of the biggest engineering accomplishments of recent history. I'm not even sure how you'd even go about something like that. First, you'd have to clear out the wreckage, then you'd have to remove untold amounts of office equipment out (to reduce weight on it), then you'd have to strengthen the outsides, identify any weakened beams, and replace them.
Without causing a collapse.
Oh yeah, and then get everything else fixed.
There was an article about this in the New Yorker magazine about 6 weeks ago. The author said that only one of the dozens of engineers he talked to immediately expected the buildings to collapse on hearing the news. This particular guy was a building demolition expert. He tried desperately to call the energency response center in NYC to tell them to get rescue workers out of there, but he couldn't get through because all their phones were busy or out of order.
Fireporoofing only delays the transfer of heat; it can't prevent it forever. Maybe it would have taken 15 or 30 more minutes for the steel to melt. Maybe by then the Fire Department would have ordered evacuation of its men, and more injured and disabled people would have gotten out too. But it sounds very unlikely it would have helped those trapped above the impact or prevented the eventual collapse.
The issue of whether collapse was inevitableor not will remain controversial. Despite the lapses, there is still no convincing
evidence that the towers would have stood up to the fires. If they did, it is possible (but not known for certain) the death toll might
have been lower than the current 3,000 or so. However, the towers would have then had to undergo demolition, because they would not have been repairable (more precisely, the cost of repairs would have been higher than the cost of dynamiting and starting over).
Yet it's this doubt that may lead to a lawsuit between the Transit Authority and the Port Authority. Litigation would be a lot less likely, or at least would be settled quickly, if something could be proven definitively one way or another. And a long drawn-out court battle between the two authorities may kill off any chances for intergrated subway-PATH development in lower Manhattan. That would be a wasted opportunity.
Well, the recent video suggests that the Evel Mastermind didn't believe it either. Let's not forget his background as a civil engineer. The last centence sounded kind of contoversial, of course.
Arti
So before any of our troops off Osama, they need to get his deposition in any potential lawsuit against the Port Authority for substandard fireproofing safeguards (Well, Court TV needs a ratings boost since their OJ trial haydays...).
I think what Osama neglected to account for was the fact that when the tower tops give way, the weight of them comes down on top of the uppermost surviving level. You've got maybe 20 to 40 stories of building material falling an average of several hundred feet, and stopping in a few feet - massive g's pushing downward, and the whole thing comes down one level at a time - bum-bud-dah-bum-bud-dah-bum-bud-dah-bum...
Or maybe he thought the tops would fall off to the side from the impulse of the collision, but that's plain impossible (just from momentum considerations). I don't think he really thought that, considering his background.
But the planes did come in at a good amount of roll, so maybe they thought they'd slice it diagonally and send the top segment sliding off, but the 767's didn't do enough structural damage to shear the whole tower in one fell swoop.
As for the fireproofing issue, I'll weigh in with my (unprofessional) opinion that it wouldn't matter. The towers would have lasted longer, but the heat of the burning jet fuel would have gotten through eventually anyway. Given the extra time, casualties may have been lower (since people had more time to get out), or they may have been higher. A pool of burning jet fuel can last for many, many hours, especially considering that the planes had just taken off about 250 miles away, more rescue workers, engineers, etc go in to assess the situation), and it would have been days (at least) before heavy equipment could be hauled up to put the fire out.
PA just issued a press release saying that within 2 years it's going to replace all its turnstiles with ones that take EZPass-style smart cards that will eventually work in all area transit systems, as well as NYCT metrocards.
I hope they will still accept cash. That is one of the things that makes PATH truely convienent.
Yeah - having to go to the NJT vending machine and enter the starting and departure stations, or getting hit up for an extra 3 bucks on the train is a pain in the ass.
PATH is great - either buy a quick card (to be merged with the metro card), or shove a buck (now a buck fifty) into the machine and you're on your way.
Oh, everybody loves a scandal.
The notion of a building withstanding such temperatures clearly defies science.
The people on the impact floors were doomed, and so were the people above them. There is no practical way a drop of water could have been put on that fire. Insulation is inhibitory, not preventative. As such, the clock was ticking from the moment of impact for the people below the impact point.
The question is: did the buildings stand as long as they could have? Yes, an investigation is necessary to answer that. If it turns out there was a flaw in insulation, remember, the question is when not whether -- unless the fire could have been extinguished, failure was inevitable*.
The New York Times did a wonderful piece (as only they could) on the engineering behind the collapse (see page 10 of section A, Sunday, November 11). It is good reading for everybody interested in debating the matter.
It's no reason not to look into the matter, but let us not forget the genius of design that allowed the buildings to stand as long as they did, thus saving 30,000 lives. Chances are, you're high-rise would have shattered on impact.
MATT-2AV
* This assumes that the jet fire would have burned longer than the insulation rating. This is a highly defendable assumption.
Oh, everybody loves a scandal.
The notion of a building withstanding such temperatures clearly defies science.
The people on the impact floors were doomed, and so were the people above them. There is no practical way a drop of water could have been put on that fire. Insulation is inhibitory, not preventative. As such, the clock was ticking from the moment of impact for the people below the impact point.
The question is: did the buildings stand as long as they could have? Yes, an investigation is necessary to answer that. If it turns out there was a flaw in insulation, remember, the question is when not whether -- unless the fire could have been extinguished, failure was inevitable
You could be right. I don't pretend to have any special expertise in civil engineering or related fields, I'm only just repeating what I read. But my original point still stands: if the consultants analyzing the collapses say that inadequate construction may have come into play, that could lead to litigation between the Transit Authority and the Port Authority. Any such litigation won't be good for possible cooperation between the authorities on integrated transit developments.
The PA was not in charge of the maitenance of the Twin Towers because someone else owns the "bathtub" therefor the PA isn't getting 100% of the insurance claim and neither is the plot owner.BTW:That is a 1 billion dollar cleanup for the tunnel so the MTA would be seeking 2 times the amount(Let's not forget the N and R ).
The PA was not in charge of the maitenance of the Twin Towers because someone else owns the "bathtub" therefor the PA isn't getting 100% of the insurance claim and neither is the plot owner.
Don't believe that's true. The PA owns the site, and the complex, but had leased it all to Silverstein on a 99-year lease just a few months before 9/11. A lot of the transition to private maintenance was just taking place -- if you read the obits, some of the people killed were described in terms like, "...worked for the PA for 23 years and had just moved over the company run by WTC leaseholder Silverstein" or whatever.
Don't know the complexities of the insurance, but presume Silverstein was responsible for insuring the place as part of his lease. He'll get a settlement from his insurance companies, then use that to rebuild and/or meet his lease obligations.
Lease terms are still in effect; Silverstein still owes the PA a major chunk of change each month *whether or not* there's a WTC there to generate rent!
While a friend of mines did me a favor of running through the R62A roll sign. If the R62A should make its way the (7) Line. There WILL NOT be a <7> because the <7> is NOT on the roll.
The Rolls Sign Consist of:
Red: 1, 9, 2, 3, 13
Green, 4, 4 Diamond, 5, 5 Diamond, 6, 6 Diamond, 6 Diamond Express
Purple: 7, 11, 11 Diamond Express
Grey: S
So unless they do a sticker deal, the 11 will be the replacement for the 7 Daimond!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Green: 8, 10, 12 Too! All Circles
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Simple.....they will keep the birds as Expresses?
Realistically the 11 or 11 Diamond is useless on that line.
Why you ask?
How many times have you seen a <7> signed up on ALL cars but runs local and (7) signed up for ALL cars run express? Not all the time, but it does happen so much that most people at QBP just wait for the conductor to shout local or express cause they don't go by the signs on the train because it is not correct all the time. Just today I rode back a <7> on all the cars that went local all the way. It probably has to deal with what train enters TS. I am guessing trains leave TS alternating between local and express most of the time (don't quote me on it).
Now throw the (11) or <11> and it would cause more confusion than good IMO.
=)
The 11 can run the same way the W runs in Astoria - express in the peak direction and local in the anti-peak direction - and be shown that way on platform signs. For example, the downtown W is listed at Ditmars/Astoria and Astoria as running "Mornings express, Afternoons local" in Queens, while the uptown W is listed as "Mornings local, Afternoons express" at QBP. The downtown 11 would be listed this same way at Main Street, Willets Point, Junction Blvd, Woodside and QBP. Also the 11 would be listed at Flushing Local stops with the times that it would be stopping there, just as the W is done at Astoria Local stops. The 11 is not useless on the Flushing line and would only be confusing at first, just as the W was when it first started running to Astoria in July.
I'd rather see the 11 become the Flushing express, since it will be a lot easier to distinguish compared to 7 diamond.
"I'd rather see the 11 become the Flushing express, since it will be a lot easier to distinguish compared to 7 diamond"
I would like to see this too. But since the diamond 7 only runs in the peak direction, that means when the train comes back as a local, all the signs need to be changed...unless LCD signs are installed and then it will be easy. I don't think the TA will want to run the #11 one way, leave it in the yard all afternoon, and then ahve it come back at night. There prolly aren't enough cars nor enough money in the budged for T/O's and conductors to do that. -Nick
Just run the 11 the same way they run the W - express to Manhattan AM, from Manhattan PM, and local in the reverse-peak direction.
This is not a issue, the remedy is called Platform Conductors.
At Dyre avenue there is a set of Platform Conductors, Usually 2-3 cars per person that when the 5 circles come up that need to be changed to diamonds or needs to be changed to New Lots or Flatbush, the Platform Conductors change the signs and do it well within the time need to turn around the train, I watched that operation for a whole rush hour one day and it works well, The same can be applied to the Corona line.
Simple, already used Solution to a simple problem!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
The same IS applied to the Corona Line. There are 2-3 platform C/R's at Main Street. The problem is the roll signs on the 7 are so banged up and used that you have to leave the sign the way it is.
This won't be an issue once the WF redbirds are replaced by either R62A's or the option order of the R142s (if they can work the 3rd rail issue out). -Nick
I'm sure that they'll get the third rail issue straightened out on the R-142s eventually.
#3 West End Jeff
See my other post on this topic. There's no reason for Dyre Avenue trains to ever wear diamonds. The diamond-5, as currently implemented, is the exception to a simple and elegant system. Diamonds should only appear on 238th Street trains.
Send those platform conductors over to the 7!
The 11 will run local in the anti-rush direction, just like the W does in Astoria. I see plenty of 7 diamonds that do this when returning from Manhattan in the AM. Most of the time they don't change the signs.
Why should they change the sign? The only time I would be confused is at 12:30 when the operation switches. If I am at Flushing at 4:30 PM and I see a train signed < 7 > waiting to depart, I'm just going to get on.
You could do this, but the whole point of the #11 exisiting is that it is the express train, while the #7 remains a local. I realize signs are not changed that often, another reason why if the R62A's replace the WF redbirds, LCD signs should be installed to make this task easy. -Nick
You better have meant LED, not LCD. LCD is what is on the R44 and R46. LED is on the R142/A and R143.
Oops...my sincere apologies for making that mistake..I definitely meant LED!!! -Nick
Since consistent proper updating of roll signs is not possible, it would be good to have a separate identifying number for the Flushing express. Other peak-hour expresses or skip-stops that duplicate each other have distinctions that local riders become accustomed to. Then you wouldn't have people jamming the doorways at Queensboro Plaza outbound (the point of departure for the two services, and on the same track) every afternoon straining to hear the announcements or asking what train this is.
The Jamaica and suspended upper Broadway skip-stops have separate route designations. Unfortunately, the roll signs aren't always reliable from one car to another. From what I hear, neither are announcements.
The Brighton uses two different models of rolling stock and outer terminals for its local and express services. Of course, there is the odd R-68 express to Brighton Beach, but that seemed to occur between September 11 and October 28 when all bets were off. The final outbound point of departure for the two services is on the same track at Prospect Park, and generally, you know whether its local or express depending on the rolling stock.
The Pelham uses the same number for local and express but has separate outer terminals for its local and express services. At least, at the outbound point of departure for the two services, at 3rd Avenue/138th, the express is on the middle track and the local against the wall, so you know if you're on the right train or not. This was especially crucial from 1986-99 when Redbirds and R-62As provided either service. (I once overheard two employees saying that all Parkchester locals should be Redbirds and all Pelham expresses 62As.) Of course, the 142As have built-in announcements. Question is, how accurate are they in announcing the different outbound PM services and terminals?
The biggest headache isn't even distinguising local versus express, but rather the two (three during PM peak) branches of the 'A'. The roll signs on the R38s can vary from Far Rock to Lefferts one car to another, and the LED signs on the R44s often read '207 STREET MANHATTAN' even on Queens-bound trains. Conductors often merely announce "downtown 'A'", "'A' to Brooklyn" or "'A' to Queens" all the way down 8th Avenue and out Fulton Street, not bothering to reveal the train's final destination until Rockaway Boulevard, where the two branches actually part.
If you worry about getting the right service, it's best to stand near where the conductor's car stops and ask him or her. It usually works.
I don't see how a new number would make a difference. If the signs aren't (or can't be) properly updated now, how would that change if the diamond-7 became a circle-11?
I think part of the problem is that, not infrequently, the crew doesn't even know if their train is a local or an express until Queensboro Plaza.
The R-44/46 electronic signs are not terribly reliable (especially if they're not set properly). Yesterday I was taken for a ride, so to speak, on an R-46. When I got to the BMT platform at Times Square, there was a train of R-46's on the local track with blank signs. There appeared to be a bit of confusion, so I concluded that this was a rerouted F. Interested in seeing what route it would take to Stillwell, I got on. At each stop, the C/R announced it as a Brooklyn-bound train -- I figured he didn't want to confuse people by calling it an F. Then I moved into the next car, where the sign made it abundantly clear that this train was nothing but an R to Bay Ridge. (Incidentally, the a/c was turned off through Cortlandt.) Of course, the best solution to the Lefferts problem is to extend the local to Lefferts and send all expresses to the Rockaways.
That's exactly my point.
Unless some guys at TS or Main Street go inside the cars and change the signs from local to express or vice versa at the terminals when this kind of opportunity arises, the signs will be wrong. And I'd like to see that, but let's be realistic, with how fast the 7 trains have to turn at TS, especially during rush, it's not possible. I don't care if you put a <7>, <11>, or , it's not signed up correctly if the express signs are shown but it runs local.
The one sign I do look at is the front rollsign. From my experience, the TO running that train will check if the sign is (7) or <7> and will change it if is incorrect.
=)
What's the problem? If there's an 11 peak-direction express, there won't be any need to change those signs all day. They can always say 11. People will learn that the 11 runs express one-way in the AM, the other way in the PM. Thus, in the offpeak direction, both 7s and 11s will run local. This is the way the W works in Astoria, the 9 worked, etc.
The 9 as in the 1/9? No, that was skip-stop in both directions when it ran. Besides, skip-stop was irrelevant to the majority of 1/9 passengers, who didn't venture above 137th Street. Most 7 passengers do venture east of Queensboro Plaza.
What I think would make such an arrangement a bit more confusing than the N/W is that the N and W diverge outside Astoria while the two 7's are identical in the reverse-peak direction. I don't think this is a very big deal.
Still, the confusion today comes about because the signs aren't updated as necessary, not because the express and local have the same number.
Yes, but using the 11 means the signs WON'T HAVE TO BE UPDATED. Solves one problem.
No change. The current Redbird signs don't need to be updated either -- except when a train switches designations on a moment's notice. Take a ride on the 7 and look at the signs and you'll see what I mean.
How about distinguishing express from local on the 4th Avenue line? Last night I boarded at Pacific Street for the ride to 9th Street. I was talking with a friend and not paying attention as I boarded on the local track.
We continued talking until I realized the ride to Union Street seemed to be taking a long time. The we wizzed by 9th Street on a battery run to 36th Street, and I noticed we were on an "N" train that had not switched over.
There was no announcement.
First you said you weren't paying attention, then you said there was no announement. If you weren't paying attention, maybe you missed the announcement!
Being a former Queens resident, and riding the #7 everyday,
I do not see the big deal in the Express & Local.
Just listen, and look, its not that difficult, besides, the service
was so good, you never had to wait very long.
I used to ride the express home most nights to Junction, and
ride the local back one stop to 90th.
John
"Since consistent proper updating of roll signs is not possible..."
Huh, why isn't it possible? Anyway as far as the 7 is concerned, there isn't anything to update.
"crew doesn't know whether they're running express or local until Q.B. plaza..." Let's hope that's not true! These trains run on a schedule, guys. Everyone involved knows which trains out of Main Street will return from T.S. express and which ones will return local (PM in this example). Locals are signed (7) plain and simple. Express is signed with <--(7) <7>--> indicating direction for each. Therefore, unless someone decides to throw the schedule out and play it by ear, there isn't anything to change.
Changing <7> to 11 may or may not be a good idea, but has no bearing on the inconsistency issue.
Afraid this is just another example of sloppiness on the part of those involved.
Not if you manage the signs right. It wouldn't take that much effort, perhaps a platform conductor, to switch from (7) to (11) or back; I think they're adjacent on the R62A sign roll. Redbirds don't have 11.
wayne
oh...Yea.!!... the good old days with ...CLEAR ..i.d electric signs EXP. or express in RED or LOC or local in a green sign to the right !!!
BUT !!! this was with RAILFAN WINDOW EQUIPPED ROLLING STOCK ..............lol!!!
my apology for stealing the image ...
my question is note how U can see on the TOP of this fine RAILFAN WINDOW EQUIPPED classic car EXP (express ) or LOC ..(local)
See how in the GOOD OLD DAYS they got it right !!!!
LOL !!!!
LOL !!!
another example of a clear simple to understand destination sign !!
THIS IS HOW ITS DONE FOLKS....... !~!!
woops ...
try again
I think for most of use who actually "LIVE" in the New York Metro area knows about the Express and Local signs.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
?Where all of my family LIVED & where I was born & proud of it man !!! & hell F yes we know all bout' it !( even if U dont ) !
& by the way' R ' U ' ready with your
{ main man westcoast transit photographer U say can whip me } ???? lol !!!
you can run but you cant hide !!! .....lol !!!!
I love your pics...that trainset was built and looks like a tank...and conductors had 'brass balls' to stand between cars to control the doors. You got a real ride for your fifteen cents. CI Peter
thank you ! & my response is ..
lol !!!
I think that designating the IRT Corona-Flushing express the "11" is better than using the "<7>".
#3 West End Jeff
DITTO for using the #8 as a replacement for the Diamond 6. Now, can the R142A signs display the "8" and its route?
wayne
Good idea Wayne
#3 West End Jeff
Some R62a's have the 7 diamond. I have seen them myself. Just go to wait and see what happens.
The number R40s on the Q Express is getting new roll signs. They're semi-transparent so the Q actually lights up now. I've only seen it on a number or cars. The cars also have new roll signs on the sides too. More brightly yellow.
Does anyone know the e-mail/address of author Brian J. Cudahy?
Thanks.
Eric D. Smith
Does anyone know the e-mail/address of author Brian J. Cudahy?
I believe he teaches at Fordham University, so you should be able to reach him through there. The university's web site might have a faculty e-mail directory.
I saw a few diamond-Q's today with the bulkhead signs properly illuminated. Are the rollsigns being replaced or was I hallucinating?
(How appropriate for Chanukah.)
Maybe the bulkheads were being fitted with a Menorah?
:)
Maybe someone cleaned the front of the train.
It's no hallucination. I saw it a few days ago on R-40 4338.
David
A great miracle happened there :)
--Mark
I will be in Boston Dec 28-31. What can I expect....is the big dig approaching completion, and what abt the new Charlestown Bridge?
I rode the Mattapan Red Line trolley when I was there 2 years ago. Esthetically what are other good lines to ride? I will be staying in Brookline, as always, so I am familiar with the Green Line.
www.forgotten-boston, er, www.forgotten-ny.com
You should to try to do all the colors :-)
- Blue line stop at Aquarium is a good place to see Big Dig progress
- Green line at North Station then walk to Orange is another Big Dig viewing site.
- Red across Charles River is pleasent, also you may be able to catch a Tranckless Trolley in Cambridge.
- Red to Braintree is a fast run.
- Green at Reservoir allows you to catch D, C & walk up the hill to B.
Mr rt__:^)
Blue line stop at Aquarium is a good place to see Big Dig progress
Isn't Aquarium still closed because of the Big Dig?
--Mark
Nope. It opened about six weeks ago, exactly one year after it was closed -- as promised. The MBTA did a great renovation job!
We probally had a better view of things last year in July when we re-entered the system after lunch at Faneuil Hall during our quest to do all the colors in one day. 10 AM to 11:30 PM, we just made it back to our B & B before they rolled the streets up.
Mr rt__:^)
The Big Dig is about 75% complete. That means that there is 75% more mess than 10 years ago.
The Zakim Bunker Hill Charlestown Bridge is structurally complete, but not connected to any active roads yet. You can look at it best from North Station platform 1. The Leverett Connector (aside the ZBHCB) has been open for over a year, and is accessed from I-93 south from Charlestown and or Storrow Drive east.
As Mr. t suggested, ride the Mattapan trolley!!
The Leverett Connector (aside the ZBHCB) has been open for over a year...
That's what I like about going to Boston... all these places named after me... Leverett Connector, Leverett Street, Leverett Circle...
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
what?
He was a Governor of Massachsetts as I recall, Anon-e... are you
related?
Direct descendent.
A couple of files from our web pages:
John Leverett, 1616-1679 (Governor of Massachusetts, 1673-1679)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
That's really neat! I didn't know we had "mishpachah" in the
Governor's seat in Massachsetts!
We didn't... he was as Puritan as they come. But along the line one of his descendents, also named John, married Maud Arvilla Maccabee of Newport, Rhode Island. They were my great-grandparents. John, a physician, was the oldest of seven children, one of only two to marry, and the only one to have any children. Both surviving brothers became ministers (one Presbyterian, one Congregational), one of his sisters married a Presbyterian minister, and the other sister worked for the Presbyterian Home Mission Board. My grandfather, also John, was an only child; my father was the younger of two brothers. Like their father, they were raised Presbyterian, and did not know that their grandmother was Jewish until she sat shiva for her husband when he died. Although I was fundamentally raised a "nothing" - my parents could best be described as secularists, disenchanted with any form of organized religion - I was exposed to both faiths as a child and, when I finally came to believe that religion should be a part of my life, chose to follow my great-grandmother's path.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I suppose I should have clarified my statement... yes, we have mispacha, just not Jewish mispacha.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I was just in Boston for the first time 2 weeks ago. You cant really see the charlestown Bridge too good because of all the construction.
big dig approaching completion? lol. yeah right, i wouldnt be surprised if they are still working on it 6 years from now.
Where you only visit every few years, make sure you ride the Green Line out to Lechmere. The Construction crews are just moving into the North Station area that will bore a tunnel under the Fleet Center (North Station, old Boston Garden) and if you come back in a couple of years, the Green will be closed in that area. It may be your last chance to see the Fleet from the third floor!
The Blue is my favorite. Subway cars with pantographs! The new Aquarium stop (half finished) features an exit right by the back end of Quincy Market.
I've only taken the Green D, and Blue in their entirety (except I haven't been to Lechmere) and Green E as far out as Museum of Fine Arts and Red between Park and South Station. Blue line is awesome and I highly reccomend it.
Former Reagan and Bush speechwriter Peggy Noonan manages to tie all three together in her Friday column. No real minutia about the Myrtle itself, just a few parargraphs down in the story about growing up and watching it go by from an apartment window.
Nice article.
BTW - Berine Schwartz (Tony Curtis) lived in the Bronx. The elevated train mentioned is the White Plains Road line. He lived near the Simpson Street station. I know this because he and my late father were friends when they were kids in 1930's.
To the "B" division T/O with file # 3225 you would have been able to pick P.M. RDO relief either on Broadway or the East, not sure of what your RDO's would be.
I was suprised what I could have picked. I could have gotten the last AM Bway W/T and PM East almost done with the Last T/W or W/T and PM Bway wide open with T/W W/T or T/F. I could of also been No.51 VR out of 60.
With me, it was either Bway RDO or Vacation Relief, I chose the former. I got the "scraps".
Is the A division pick over?
What was the last file number to get a job.
On B XXL I got thrown off the midnights, I have to deal with people now.
On my preference sheet I gave the crew office all 21 shifts in my order of preference. Of course I got number 21.
I am File Number 3225. I guess that I might have to think about coming over to the A Division on day. But for right now I am happy were I am. I hope by next pick to back to the road every day. I am not to far off from getting a road job. I missed VR by two people this time. As for now this might be the best for me, I meen starting at 8:00pm or so, since I will be movin to NJ early next year.
Robert
21 shifts? I thought there were only three? Boy you're a weird one!
Shift/RDOs
21 shifts means that your not day...submitted the 'wish list.' I'm #1318 out of 1390 Car Inspectors and I'm happy at 'the last place anyone wants to go.' My pick is at 01/17/02 1058 hrs. Wonder what #1390 gets...East New York? CI Peter
I think either someone got pissed I gave every shift/RDO combination in order.
They thought PMs were better than midnights (only with a piece of the weekend they are).
They hate me, they really ate me.
OR They want more people from the earlier classes off the midnights becasuue of all the new guys clogging the AMs and PMs
I am not going to skate on thin ice with hot shoes by opening up my big mouth because I like my new work/new job/new friends/new opportunities. Canuproveyourselfworthythankyouverrymuch? CI Peter
The other theory is that alot of senior guys have vacation this week and they need more board guys to cover. As I am on the sheets as working Xmas on midnight PM's t/W seems weird.
I put in to get X-Mas and New Years eve off and got them. The Work Train desk gives alot of poeple off for these days, since there are no train going out. I sent in my request to them on Tuesday while at Stillwell. So now I have two back to back three days weekends, My RDO's are Tues & Wends.
Robert
Peter, I have god news for you. You may be #1315 by the time of the pick. I know of one resignation and 2 retiring before the pick starts. At that rate you may be under 1,000 before you have 5 years on the job. Just think - I'd still not be on the first page of the RCI pick if I stayed (I would be on page 1 of the supervisor pick though).
The Pick ended Tuesday Morning for T/O's and Thursday afternoon for C/R's.
What was the list number of the last person to get a job in the A?
An approximate number
For Conductors I believe it was file # 3054 or 3055.
The T/O went into the 3100's. I will check the board Sunday. Stay tuned.
OH thank you!!! A straight answer.
two press releases of interest
1- PATH will install a new fare system which will take smart cards and NYC MetroCards.
2- Within 18 months Exchange Place will be open and function as a temporary terminal- trackwork needed. Within 24 months the WTC station will reopen as a temporary terminal pending final deicsion on what is to be done in Lower Manhattan.
www.panynj.gov and click press releases
Yes. That was a press release dated Dec 13. The PA also reported to newspapers that $30 million in rehab work would be started on the 9th and Christopher Street stations. I hope this will include elevators; I wrote the PA on thissubject in the past and am doing it again.
All in all, great news!
1- PATH will install a new fare system which will take smart cards and NYC MetroCards.
Very good news!
Your generous and unilateral oath that there will be no fare hikes in 2002 in the wake of the 9-11 attacks is incredibly patriotic and considerate. I'm sure no one in his right mind would draw a connection between this promise and your impending re-election next year.
It is a tradition, a bi-lateral tradition in this city to announce a "NO FARE INCREASE" with an election year looming on the horizon.
It is another tradition after the election......(....Fill in the blank)...
avid
And blame the increase on the transit workers getting a raise!
heh..the only time he even acknowledges the existence of the subway is when he's running for reelection. Notice how his name starts appearing on all the TAs ads.
Peace,
ANDEE
heh..the only time he even acknowledges the existence of the subway is when he's running for reelection. Notice how his name starts appearing on all the TAs ads. Transparent SOB that he is
Peace,
ANDEE
Hey Jersey Mike, notice how this baboon keeps repeating himself? He has to post his mumblings twice so we can all get a double dose of boredom from his inane postings. Don't pay him any mind. I am on his drop dead list and he is on my shit list. I have never felt so good about anything in my life.
I too have noticed how that nincompoop posts his messages twice. I've done that on occasion and that is only when I've made a tpyographical error which I've caught and then I type a corrected message. Maybe that nincompoop's computer will screw up and he'll have to reformat it and hopefully if we're lucky he'll lose all of his important files that he failed to back up. I might be a nice guy as a rule but, when people are so idiotic I can think a little nasty sometimes.
#3 West End Jeff
Thanks Jeff for the support but believe me that guy is a hopeless cause, the only guy on Subtalk that I hold in utter contempt.
Don't worry, Fred, Pataki's ratings are high and will stay high enough to beat Mc Call or Cuomo GRRRRR!! RATS!!!
John, you might take solace from the fact that your Republican friend from California plans to vote for Gray Davis next year for governor. He has done great by teachers, our retirement and tax incentives are fantastic and it would be ungracious to hang him out to dry in a show of ingratitude.
Since this particular person on Sub Talk is such a nincompoop if I should ever see him in person I should show him my ugly looking concealed cleft palate which has a deep lineal depression in the midline and, if he is squeamish enough I can watch his face turn as white as a sheet. Then for bad measure I hope he gets on to a subway train that breaks down between stations and it takes him at least two hours to get were he is supposed to go. If he should need to ride on a Metro-North train I hope that there is a skunk waiting to spray him once he steps off the train.
#3 West End Jeff
C'mon you two... behave. This is SubTalk, not kindergarten.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The person whom I'm talking about might be more childish than we are. If you've noticed, there is a nincompoop who almost always posts his messages twice. Besides which we are just having a little fun.In the meantime I'll just get back to talking about Triplexes, BMT "Standards", IRT Low-Vs and other subway related topics.
#3 West End Jeff
Well, I'll grant that he hasn't figured out the "preview" button, but I've known him long enough to know that he's a lot sharper than you two want to give him credit for. He DOES get annoyed about thread drift, particularly when it gets into politics (regardless of what side), and I can't say I blame him there either - I do too, although I've been guilty of it on occasion as well.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I'll admit that I have drifted off topic any number of times over the last two years that I have been on "Sub Talk". On the other hand the politics can get quite interesting at times.
#3 West End Jeff
Sounds like you got some serious issues...
I've had my problems with my concealed cleft palate which has caused me pain but, I have that issue under control finally. BTW I was in the city last month and I FINALLY rode the R-142As on the #6 Line. Now I'm aiming to ride the R-143 trainset that is operating on the 14th Street Canarsie Line.
#3 West End Jeff
[I've done that on occasion and that is only when I've made a tpyographical error which I've caught and then I type a corrected message.]
Uh, speaking of nincompoops, you misspelled 'typographical'...
BMTman
Boy, you're an animal. I must remember to proofread my work so I don't get it next.
I'll be you're proofreader since I have a dictionary at hand.
#3 West End Jeff
Oops! I transposed two of the letters in typographical by mistake.
#3 West End Jeff
You're right - but let's not kick a gift horse in the mouth.
Ron, tell your anti-Pataki buddies that they can always go back to the high tax, crime ridden, excuse making days of Cuomo. His lightweight kid is a candidate I hear. Well you New Yorkers elected one lightweight in carpetbagger Clinton, now you can elect another one in Cuomo. I have to hand it to you New Yorkers, you show a lot of courage and class and are resilient as all outdoors, but you sure do some stupid things when it comes to electing people.
Can we maybe keep non-transit political discussions OFF this board? PLEEEEEEZE?
AMEN.
I never bring it up unless someone else wants to Mr. Junior Varsity. But I'll tell you what. You tell others to cool it and I will do likewise.
I also noticed how people will complain about off-topic posts while directing their complaints only to those with whom they disagree.
Alan Glick
I also noticed how people will complain about off-topic posts while directing their complaints only to those with whom they disagree.
Alan: It's not so much the political views as the crudeness of the terms and the general nastiness. One of the things I enjoy about railfans is that we're often a cheerful and friendly group of folks, by and large. When we get lengthy off-topic threads having to do with ANY political view making nasty comments about anyone ... it's not SubTalk.
My own personal weak spot: I think lots of urban planning topics are relevant to transit planning, so I get into lengthy discussions of urban design on SubTalk. I'll stop (well, I'll cut back) if someone complains ....
Well cut back because I will complain and I will cut back because you are complaining. Deal?????
I notice that you notice Alan, and we are on the same page with that. But why should it be surprising to you that this is so? For all the courage and class New Yorkers have shown in these past three months we all know they have a blind spot when it comes to electing their leaders. They seem to lack pride in that area and are defensive when someone points out to them that where we live we don't elect carpetbaggers or lightweight sons of former ineffective and tax gouging popliticians. Pataki came out with a very favorable idea for NY transit and the Cuomo and Clinton lovers jumped all over him for it. We both suffer fools poorly and unfortunately we have a moron or two on board in this area.
Um, fare increases are absolutley on topic, or at least I think it is.
Um, fare increases are absolutley on topic, or at least I think it is.
Agreed. I was responding to Sea Beach Fred's comments about "high tax, crime ridden, excuse making days of Cuomo", his "lightweight kid" and "carpetbagger Clinton" ... which as far as I can tell have nothing to do with transit.
All true, but definatley off-topic.
All true, but definatley off-topic.
[grin] Matter of opinion ... but definitely off-topic.
End of thread?
please change the heading people.........
[I was responding to Sea Beach Fred's comments about "high tax, crime ridden, excuse making days of Cuomo", his
"lightweight kid" and "carpetbagger Clinton"]
and he was right on al three
Thanks Danderoo, I appreciate the support. I wrote a flippant response to make my post relevant to transit. I hope you and they enjoy it.
[I was responding to Sea Beach Fred's comments about "high tax, crime ridden, excuse making days of Cuomo", his
"lightweight kid" and "carpetbagger Clinton"]
and he was right on all three
Sure it does---and it only takes one's imagination to make it a transit issue. Cuomo, Clinton, etc, should be run out of town on a RAIL. Now that is transit, eh?
Not really, Fred, If those politicians were to be run out of town on a rail, that rail would be a wooden fence rail, like the ones split by that gentleman I share birthdays with, your Idol, A. Lincoln. Actually that would be a good fate for a disgraced Democrat, being ridden out of town on a genuine Lincoln rail, Abe would love it 8~)
John, I love you. Wow, the same birthday as my hero. You are certainly a man of class. But I will be honest, I would also run Tom DeLay out of town on a rail, too, and a few other Republicans like Jerry Farwell and Pat Robertson. Yuk!!!! What disgrtaceful people those "christians" are, not a kind bone in their bodies. So if the truth be known, I do have shread of fairness, I hope.
Many posts on this thread have nothing to do with transit. Convince me that you didn't choose Fred because of his beliefs.
Alan Glick
Many posts on this thread have nothing to do with transit. Convince me that you didn't choose Fred because of his beliefs.
See previous post to your previous.
Ok JV, just tell me you are not a fan of lighweight Cuomo and I will fall out of the tree. Have a great weekend, and no offense intended by my posts to you. I only have one ememy on this site and I want to keep it that way.
Ok JV, just tell me you are not a fan of lighweight Cuomo
Cuomo the Younger? Don't have any thoughts about him yet. I haven't taken the time to research his positions and formulate an opinion.
Have a great weekend, and no offense intended by my posts to you.
Thank you very much, and the same to you. [smile]
I only have one ememy on this site and I want to keep it that way.
I hope I don't have any.
Ron, I'm not sure this is such a gift. Without the funds raised by a modest fare hike, there will less money for maintenance, etc. This may lead to the bad old days of the 50s-60s, when a politically mandated fare freeze led to years of deferred maintenance, as you know.
Deferred maintainence is a good thing. All that all shit that railfans love (like penumatic switch machines, trains w/ railfan windows and non-CBTC operation) stays around because the MTA dosen't have the money to replace it.
And broken-down trains that don't move...
He has a point, Mike. But it's only for one year. They'll make up for it in 2003.
Bad news for 2003: A fair hike is certain.
Good news: JFK AirTrain begins operation; PATH to WTC comes back with Metrocard turnstiles; the South Ferry line may be close to returning to service (if not, then 2004); the Manhattan Bridge will be a year away from full four-track service.
Looks like things will be looking good when the system celebrates it's centennial. With enough R143 cars in service, maybe a noticable increase in service.
Amen to that!
>>Bad news for 2003: A fair hike is certain. <<
Whew! I was worried it would be unfair... :-)
Yet another PEARL OF WISDOM from Jerky Mike.
Peace,
ANDEE
Pataki hasn't been that bad for NYC commuters. Is my recollection incorrect, or wasn't he pretty much the driving force behind the unlimited metrocards and elimination of the two-fare zone.
CG
If we had a state legislature that represented us, instead of itself and its friends, perhaps it would pass a law banning fare hikes in the year AFTER the re-election of an incumbent Governor.
That bastard.
I don't know if this response has been posted because I don't have time to go through all the "elementary school" responses first. As for my two cents worth, whatever the reason, fare hikes not occuring for another year, the 7th year in a row, is a darn good thing! -Nick
Today's Newsday reported that the PA's plans for the new PATH terminal (which could be either Hudson Terminal or a rebuilt WTC station) include airline style "people movers" (moving sidewalks??) along a 3,000 foot concourse to take passengers from PATH to multiple NYC subway stations.
In other news, heart disease is the leading killer amoung Americans. More than terrorism, Anthrax and Gary Condit combined.
And Jersey Mike too?
3000 feet sounds pretty elaborate. Looking at my detailed Hagstrom's map of lower Manhattan, it's about 600' from the current PATH station to Church St (far less from the old H&MT station), 600' from Church and Fulton to Broadway and Fulton (which is the west end of the A platform), and 400' from the north end of the N/R Cortlandt St platforms to the south end of the WTC E platform. That adds up to 1600' and covers all the train stations in the area.
What about the rest of the existing complex? It's a long walk from Broadway to John.
It will also extend to the Winter Garden (WFC).
Here is the Daily News version of the article.
Great news.
From the Daily News article:
Travelers would be able to transfer between the PATH and a slew of lines — the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, A, C, E, N and R.
Left entirely unanswered is whether the PA will resurrect the existing 1971 WTC station permanently or relocate PATH to the old Hudson Terminal station site. A 3,000-foot underground passageway can "connect" lines, but I think it's pretty unlikely that many people will make a half-mile walk among lines: 1971 PATH station to 4/5 at Fulton, say.
Here's hoping that they RELOCATE the PATH station ... and (less likely) move the IRT west to better serve World Financial ... and then (much less likely) connect the E spur to the BMT ... and (least likely of all) at least look into cross-platform TA/PATH transfers.
The 3,000 foot concourse -- about 12 city blocks long -- may cover the entire area from the World Financial Center through the WTC site and over to Broadway. Unless they're talking about a series of tunnels that, put together, would be 3,000 feet long, I don't see how else they could get to that length of passageway. And I would guess than if the passageway runs from west of West Street to east of Church, it makes no determination as of yet where the PATH station will go within the complex.
The Daily News online article that someone mentioned says the 3000' is from the Winter Garden to Broadway. Lokking at the Hagstroms, that distance actually looks more like 2200' to me. But it is what it is and can't be changed, since those two landmarks, unlike tracks, aren't going to move. From either PATH station to Broadway is far less, I'd guess 700' from the pre-1971 and 1100' from the post-1971.
From either PATH station to Broadway is far less, I'd guess 700' from the pre-1971 and 1100' from the post-1971.
Yeah, but Broadway is above the *westernmost* part of the Fulton-Fulton-Broadway/Nassau-Fulton complex (4/5-J/M/Z-A/C-1/2). And the idea is to connect not only PATH, but the World Financial Center, to all of these. A rough glance at the MTA's map of downtown shows that the east-west length of that complex (longer than a standard IND platform, which is what, 600'?) could be 1,000 feet. (Not sure if the MTA map is to scale though.)
Measure from the Winter Garden of the WFC to the Fulton Street 1/2 platform. Betcha that gets most of the way to 3,000 feet ....
Yes. Winter Garden to William St. looks like just about 3000'. But you can't actualy have a true passageway that goes the whole length. You can't cross the JMZ tracks except 3 levels down on the A/C platform.
I guess we'll find out eventually what they really plan to do. They probably don't have the details yet anyway.
Is the Winter Garden totally destroyed, or is it repairable?
Is the Winter Garden totally destroyed, or is it repairable?
Repairable.
Is the Winter Garden totally destroyed, or is it repairable?
Repairable.
But may have to be rethought, since it was designed to be entered 20' above grade from the WTC plaza level. Plaza is gone with WTC, and the state is talking about sinking West Sreet into a tunnel to provide a grade-level esplanade that would connect the WFC to whatever's built on the WTC site.
So the Winter Garden entrance would be 20' above ground level and no longer have to cross six lanes of West Street from a "ground level" 20' above grade.
Will be interesting to see what they do with it.
My prediction is that they won't sink West Street because there are easier ways of getting good connctions to the WFC. The real problem pre-9/11 with getting to the WFC from the rest of lower Manhattan was that the bridges over West St. weren't properly integrated into the WTC.
I enjoyed visiting the Winter Garden on a weekend but getting there from the N/R, which should have only meant going up a single level, was a maze of passageways and turns, all of them poorly signed in addition to being less than a direct route.
The South Bridge was equally annoying bcause you had to go downhill from Chruch St to the base of the bridge, then up an escalator. If that bridge had properly connected to the Plaza level of the WTC it would have been far more convenient.
All of this is not a big deal once or twice, but for commuters from the rest of NYC to the WFC, I bet you could cut 5 minutes off the commute just by making the walkways direct, straight, and wide.
Excellent point - and here's their opportunity to do it.
Being three-levels down (at least in portions) is probably what one wants. It allows for some very useful escalator alignments. Ideally, you build it to (1) enhance paid-area transfers and (2) create and equally decent non-paid pedestrian way clear to John St.
I don't think it's too much to ask that it be fully climate controlled.
Ithink you're being entirely reasonable.
So when is construction going to start? I am excited that the new platform for PATH has been thought of, but I still have many memories of the WTC station.
Will there be a loop in the new terminal too?
And also, what will be the anticipated positioning of the PATH platforms in relation to the new WTC? (I might be in college by then)
(I still DESPISE the use of 50-story buildings. If workers care so much why don't they shut down the Sears Tower and the Empire State Building too?)
Someone here mentioned about towers being "deathtraps" in the latter stories. This is not true but will contradict the fact if a stupid or a craven man decides to do something horrendous to the towers.
I'm sure airport security is taken care of at this point.
What about sprinklers or buckets of water? Have new security guards to guard anyone suspicious from entering the towers? Anything?
So when is construction going to start? I am excited that the new platform for PATH has been thought of, but I still have many memories of the WTC station. Will there be a loop in the new terminal too?
Construction will start after they've figured out what it'll take to return the existing WTC PATH station to service. They expect service to resume in 2 years, so I'd figure construction will start next spring or early summer -- by which time most of the debris should have been removed from the site. About half the tonnage is gone already, though removing the stuff below ground level is tougher and more dangerous in some ways.
Yes, the old Hudson Terminal station was a loop too and this is unlikely to change though it will have to be extended northward to handle longer trains.
And also, what will be the anticipated positioning of the PATH platforms in relation to the new WTC?
There's no such thing as a "new WTC" yet. What will be built in the area is still entirely open. In addition to allowing better connections to many subway lines, one reason for moving the PATH station to the old Hudson Terminal site might be to allow more flexibility in what gets built in the "bathtub" -- though as someone else pointed out, the PA owns the site so they can do what they want.
Someone here mentioned about towers being "deathtraps" in the latter stories. This is not true but will contradict the fact if a stupid or a craven man decides to do something horrendous to the towers.
It is absolutely true, and FDs around the country will tell you (quietly) that there is no effective way to rescue a large number of people trapped in a high-rise fire. Remember "Towering Inferno"? That's the basic point. Helicopters don't rescue enough people quick enough (though FDNY is dead set against 'em anyway) and you can't get water high enough to matter.
Fireproofing (whether tile or sprayon) just lengthens survival time -- but anyone on the floors ABOVE a serious high-rise fire is effectively dead. Think about that the next time you get a cool job offer on a high floor.
In addition to allowing better connections to many subway lines, one reason for moving the PATH station to the old Hudson Terminal site might be to allow more flexibility in what gets built in the "bathtub" -- though as someone else pointed out, the PA owns the site so they can do what they want.
And, I forgot to add, I think it would be cool if they maintained the old, low-level loop in the basement of the bathtub AND opened a new station interconnected with subway lines on the old Hudson Terminal site.
Any comments on this thought?
That was a long ride up on the escalator at WTC.
Remember the ads for the Meadowlands on the way up?
What are the chances of having a fire in an office building? Is somebody going to smoke? Will there be gas connections? (If for the water heaters, use an electric one)
Surge protectors?
Did people not anticipate generations ago that the effects of a high-rise tower are those that you've mentioned? ("Towering Inferno")
How did the fire start in that movie? (or whatever the title to it is)
"The Towering Inferno" is the correct title. If memory serves, the fire started because of faulty electrical wiring (there was some subplot about substandard materials being used in the wiring, I think).
-- Tim
MAD Magazine did a great spoof on that movie...
Also it was the first movie where the locations of the actor names (on posters and credits order) were in their contract.
Wasn't the building in "tower inferno" supposedly 1 mile high?
I don't know. I've never seen it nor know how tall it was, nor how the fire started.
If someone would tell me, though, that would be greatly appreciated.
"Fireproofing (whether tile or sprayon) just lengthens survival time -- but anyone on the floors ABOVE a serious high-rise fire is
effectively dead. Think about that the next time you get a cool job offer on a high floor. "
Sprinklers with strategically located pumps work very well in situations like that - if they are maintained properly. And evacuation is the number 1 goal, of course.
"...Think about that the next time you get a cool job offer on a high floor. "
Foolish advice. Your fear is misplaced. There's nothing to think about. The odds you will die in a high-rise fire while trapped on the top floor are so low that, in the midst of worrying about it, you're much more likely to drop dead of a heart attack or get run over by the truck you didn't see coming because you were thinkingabout the high rise.
Forget it. Lose the fear, take the job and the raise, and live long and prosper.
I hope they re-use the original Hudson Terminal station, keep the name, keep the loop too. The curves should be no more than 4 chains radius, less if possible.
wayne
No more than four chains radius? C'mon, Wayne, I'm already half deaf... no need to finish the job!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
How about mounting anti-aircraft batteries on the roof? Of course when you shoot the plane down it'll come down on populated areas anyway (unless you're lucky enough to get it over the Hudson or East River or NY Harbor)
I've heard rumors (unconfirmed) that there were Secret Service officers on the roof of the White House with shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons, ready to take down anything headed its way.
I've heard rumors (unconfirmed) that there were Secret Service officers on the roof of the White House with shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons, ready to take down anything headed its way.
The correct term is "there are" Secret Service officers on the roof of the White House with shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons. They have been in place since that light aircraft crashed into the White House about 5 or 6 years ago.
You mean the aircraft that crashed onto the lawn, right?
I got worried there when you said a plane crashed into the WH.
Thanks for the clarification, though.
Parts of it hit the WH and the body came to rest against the wall. That counts as crashing into.
The correct preposition would be 'against the White House'. 'Onto' would suggest the roof; 'into' suggests it fully penetrated the walls.
speaking of moving sidewalks, the mta has installed on in the corridor between 23rd st./ Ely Ave. and Court Sq. in queens. under the Citibank building just to let you know.
Fabulous!
Is it working OK?
it has been working like it has been there for years. you should check it out!
I will - next chance I get.
It is one way. One way doesn't cut it. If your going to build a walkway have it in 2 directions at all times not like a thrid express track or something.
If it runs only in one direcion it must be setup for peak direction service. Can anyone confirm that?
Does any one know what this train is?
I see the word "ISLAND" on the side, maybe Long Island (RR) or Staten Island?
It would be one of those 2. Definitely NOT a NYC subway station.
Peace,
ANDEE
I'd say LIRR at Penn Station.
At first I thought it can't be the LIRR because it didn't look like any LIRR MU. However I checked the picture of the MP41 which was a special rapid transit type car the LIRR used over the Chestnut Street Flyover and the cars looked pretty much the same. I'd say it is an MP41. If that's the case then the station is one of the "J" Line Stations in lower Manhattan.
It might be a P54 or T54 or maybe one of the earliest MP54s - they did have the same kind of lettering on the side - and I don't think it's one of the "J" stations - looks too long and none use those curved beams. Probably it's Penn Station.
wayne
Wayne,
Do you have "Change at Ozone Park"? Check out the MP41 on page 66. It looks just like the picture in the post. None of the other MU's look like it.
Jeff,
No I don't have that one - (Does NYCT museum sell it?) but would love to get it. I think someone posted a picture of an MP41 at Country Life Press - it was Ron Ziel's photo - but it was a front end view. Couldn't tell too much from the picture on eBay.
wayne
That's where I bought it Wayne. At the museum at Schermerhorn Street. It has alot of great pictures of all the LIRR's MU's from the earliest to the M1-3's. Many pictures of the LIRR on the Rockaway Line including a steam engine freight train on the same El in Rockaway that the subway uses now.
It is definitely NOT an early MP54 or T54...look at the window spacing.
It IS definitely one of the 1001-1125 series "Gibbs" cars....MP41's.
I ahve been sent a picture which confirms this - that it is an MP-41.
Thanks
wayne
Yes, *I* sent that picture to you!!
I agree it's an MP-41. But it doesn't look like Penn Station. Perhaps Essex St.????
How about Flatbush Av?
That's a good possibility, too.
I happen to have several versions of this photo in my collection.
This is a LIRR train at Penn Station. Some pictures erroneously (or just stretching a definition) caption this as a subway station in Manhattan.
I could nto tell you exactly what equipment is being shown.
It doesn't look like Penn Station to me. The verticle posts are too narrow. Do you have any verifiable proof?
Could that be Flatbush Avenue, Bob?
Yes, I think so.
The printed card that I got with one of the photos (a glass slide for "Magic Lantern" shows - same view as in the stereoview in the ebay auction)) as issued by the Keystone View Company
states in the last line:
"The train in this view starts from the lower level of the Pennsylvania Station on Manhattan Island, and goes under the East River and far out on Long Island before it comes to the surface".
Since there is no other LIRR underground station east of Penn Station I reached the conclusion that the train in the photo is in Penn Station.
As far as the vertical posts being narrow, consider the possible age of the photo. We are talking the original Penn Station not the rebuilt one.
We are talking the original Penn Station not the rebuilt one.
Huh? It's VERY hard to imagine that when they knocked down the old Penn Station in 1963 to build the current monstrosity that they changed the column spacing. They kept trains running throughout, remember, and the new construction was cheap in a lot of ways, among them that they kept big hunks of the old stuff in places -- staircases, tiling, etc. -- some of which has been restored in the LIRR redo.
Or am I missing something?
Is there a way of retriving the blocks that made up Penn (old one) from where ever they were dumped and rebuild the Penn Station?
If this is impossable I thought It would be a good idea to move Michigan Central Station and put it directly over Penn Station (it has a 11 story office build as part of the complex (good to cover the cost))?
Note we can kick out MSG and give it property in the bronx over a burned down block!
Heres a URL of the best page for it:
http://members.tripod.com/~Rappollo/mcs.html
Looks like Pennsylvania Railroad class P-70 coach at 30th St. Station in Philly, or Suburban, I can hardly tell. But that is definitely a Pennsylvania Railroad Coach.
No, it is NOT a Pennsylvania coach. It says LONG ISLAND on it.
It is NOT a P70 either -- look at the window spacing.
It MOST DEFINITELY IS a LIRR MP41 1001-1125 series m.u. car.
Go and look at the picture now. The word "island" has been optically censored. Let the buyer beware...
Peace,
ANDEE
Andee, as of right now it's plainly visible... perhaps the seller saw your post?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Amazing!
Does anyone have WTC Path station photos. I would like ot see how much of it was damaged
Try www.nycrail.com
I'm just back from North Station ... and the inaugural departure of the AMTRAK Downeaster train to Portland. The train was on Track 7 of North Station, led by engines 814 and 806, a coach, cafe car, club car, and seven more coaches, then "cabbage" (control cab and baggage) car 90234. The consist was so long, that the lead engine's front end was just past the dwarf signal that regulates movement out of North Station. I think that's vaguely illegal :-) or at least special permission must be granted to proceed. This trip will make whistle stops along the way, with celebrations in each town served. Today's trip will pass the Seashore Trolley Museum on Log Cabin Road in Kennebunkport around 2:15pm if it's on time.
Former Governor Mike Dukakis gave the welcoming speech (true to form he took the Orange Line to North Station), with brief remarks by Maine Governor King and MBTA Acting General Manager Mulhern. The ceremonial "All Aboard!" was given by the same Amtrak conductor who was in charge of the very last train from Maine to Boston nearly 40 years ago.
There will be four round-trips per day beginning tomorrow, and the fare Boston to Portland is $21 each way; $35 for a same-day round trip. More info is available on The Downeaster Web site.
I'll send pictures to our Webmaster early next week.
Great site. Thanks for posting this.
Perhaps you'll have a visitor to Seashore in the coming year. Amtrak service to Maine beats driving all the way from NYC.........
-Stef
Stef, if you can make it, I'll try to pick you up at the train in one of our historic buses!
Perhaps you'll have a visitor to Seashore in the coming year. Amtrak service to Maine beats driving all the way from NYC.
Not THROUGH service, though, remember. Downeaster leaves from North Station. Trains from NYC go into South Station. And provisions for a connector were NOT built into the Big Dig, as they'd talked about doing. So you gotta take a cab, or the T.
I'd like to think that it'd be less than 40 years til Boston will have through service. But I don't ....
Shouldn't AMTK run shuttle buses from South to North Stations, like they used to between NY Penn and GCT?
There's a "one seat connection" from Back Bay Station (Amtrak) to North Station, on the MBTA Orange Line. Through passengers should get a token for this...
You can't beat those prices.
Which stop is closest to Seashore?
None are close to Kennebunkport, just as none are near Strasburg.
Wells, about a 15-20 minute drive.
Maybe you all should launch some sort of shuttle...
Unfortunately we are not a "common carrier" and that would be difficult. Furthermore, we don't have enough volunteer licensed bus drivers (I am one of about a half-dozen), and most of us are busy
with our "primary" volunteer duties when we can be at the Museum. Keeping a regular schedule that people could depend on would be impossible.
We do make occasional runs as part of demonstrating our historic bus fleet, as SubTalkers such as Mr. t and BMTman will attest to!
True enough. I guess you could pick people up on request in some form perhaps? I also imagine the number of people who use the train is so low, it probably isn't worth it.
I have an even better idea. How about a trolley line? (fake rubber tire, gas powerd, trolley)
(fake rubber tire, gas powerd, trolley)
Ugh. YUCK! PTOOOEY ! ! ! !
On second thought maybe a bus line?
I already said that and it isn't very worthwhile, read Todd's response to an earlier post of mine.
I guess your right.
Oren, I think a good compromise might be if we know there are "friends" coming on the Downeaster, perhaps we can get a special pick up at either Wells or Saco. Possibly we can make that part of a special SubTalk Field Trip next summer!!
Are you paying for it? Who else is going to use it? It is 20 miles from Wells (downtown area) to the museum, according to Mapquest.
I have an even better idea than the last one. A thruway bus!
For the last time, it isn't going to work. The Downeaster website says there will be a seasonal trolley to the beaches, but that probably does not include the museum 10+ miles away.
The Wells train station. it's not that far from the Seashore Trolley Museum.
At last! Train service to coastal Maine and New Hampshire. I hope it's a success! I'm sure when summer comes, it's going to make a great alternative to I-95 and Route 1. I hope to ride the Downeaster one of these days. At $35 round-trip, it sounds like a great deal.
What is going on in Brooklyn this week at night?
Two posted GO's give part of the story: a GO on the Q and a GO on the W.
They still leave some questions open. Where exactly is the Q running? (Southbound, on the W. But northbound, where is it going?) How and where are shuttles turning? (Single-tracking from Prospect Park to Atlantic? Turning between Lawrence and Court, or at Whitehall? Or maybe -- this seems simplest of all -- the shuttles will be extended J's?) Why is this all necessary?
The Q will be running on the W line from Atlantic/Pacific to Stillwell in both directions. For the Q stations there will be a shuttle train from Atlantic. REASON: Station work at ATlantic, SOURCE: ERA BULLETIN
Sounds like the Q shuttle will be single tracked from Prospect Park to Atlantic Avenue.
I can seem to remember a time a few years ago where the Ds replaced B service on the West End for an entire weekend. Service is being split yet again.
-Stef
I found out from reading a bulletin poster on the wall at 7 Avenue.
They are fixing the switch leave DeKalb Ave one the South bound platform. I work train put some pipes on the platform yesterday between my first and second trips on the M.
Robert
So why are Manhattan-bound W passengers instructed to go to 62nd or Stillwell and transfer to an N? They could just take the Q instead.
If the work is on the southbound track (as Robert says), why not send southbound Q's express on the West End and northbound Q's on their regular route? That would do away with the need for a shuttle. Run the W as usual.
This makes more sense. If you are going to Parkside Avenue, how do you get there from Atlantic under your scenario? It is better to replace the W with the Q and have the shuttle (or single tracking would be more logical).
Backtrack, just like West End and Sea Beach riders are forced to do whenever the W is suspended.
The logical thing would be to single track from Prospect Park to Atlantic. With 20 minute headways at night, this is no big deal.
Q trains coming from Manhattan, after crossing the bridge will go down 4th Avenue line then run on the W line from 36/4 to Stillwell Ave. A Q shuttle will operate from Stillwell Ave to Prospect Park then run single track from Prospect Park to 7 Ave and terminate at Atlantic Ave.
At Atlantic Ave people can transfer from Q service going to/from Manhattan to Q service running from/to the Brighton line.
And W service will be suspended and replaced by Q service.
First, some background: MARTA is facing a $12 million operating deficit for next year, of which $10 million is going to a lawsuit of two workers who were killed by an unsheduled train. By law, MARTA can't operate on a deficit, so the only choices they have are either raise the fare or cut services. Well, they raised the fare last year, so there's only one option
You thought NIMBYs were the only ones to be out spoken? Try cutting bus service to an area. Roswell is a suburb north of the North Springs MARTA station. Also, they are considering raisng the train headways from 4 minutes to 5 minutes on the mainlines, which comes out to 10 minutes for each seperate line.
Roswell blasts bus cuts
"...is facing a $12 million operating deficit for next year, of which $10 million is going to a lawsuit of two workers who were killed by an unsheduled train..."
Perhaps MARTA should consider using some of their operating budget to buy some liability insurance?
CG
Is the settlement for the guys killed at Lenox at 2 something in the AM? Something was fishy about that story if I recall.
Sounds like an agency which tries to self-insure. This is where it doesn't work well.
Just letting people know that I've decided to take Amtrak down to NC to visit my parents over Christmas this year. (I usually fly, but all the seats on direct flights are already booked by now, and nothing available really fits my schedule. Besides, I really hate flying and I've been sort of itching for a good long-distance train trip for a while now. I'm travelling coach, but I'm hoping I can upgrade on board for a sleeper for a decent price.)
I'll have to change trains in Washington DC, and assuming the trains are on schedule, I'll have about 3 hours to kill on the way down and about 5 hours to spend in DC on the return trip. This will be my first time in DC, and although I won't have time to do much sightseeing, I would obviously like to check out some highlights of the Metro system while I can (and at least check out the Mall briefly).
Here's my intinerary:
Monday, 12/24/2001:
Arrive in DC: 1:23 PM
Depart for NC: 4:35 PM
Saturday, 12/29/2001:
Arrive in DC: 11:09 AM
Depart for Chicago: 4:05 PM
If anybody wants to meet up with me or at least tell me what Metro highlights I should see within those time periods, let me know.
Also: Do the coach sections on the Superliner cars have power outlets for laptop computers? Inquiring minds want to know...
Thanks in advance!
-- David
Chicago, IL
You really don't have all that much time. My reccomendation would be to stay "close to home" and stick to the Red Line in either direction. Second option would be to do the yellow line to Huntington. Third would be Red to Gallery, Green to Greenbelt, double back to Fort Totten, and then Red back to Union. Feel free to e-mail me if you have more questions.
I was talking to station clerks today about the 9/16 maps and they all said that by tomorrow afternoon that the 9/16 maps will be available. So for those who wanna get their hands on a piece of history, the first new line in years! Get the map tomorrow while they are hot off the presses.
I think you have to check what date you put on. It's the 12/16 Maps. NOT 9/16!!
So why didn't you change the Subject line to correct this?
The clerks actually have them now, but were told not to distribute them till Sat. (so I was told at 242d Street Station today.)
The W wasn't a new line?
I think u got this mixed up. Correct me if I'm wrong- I think ur referring to 12/16 map with the new route (V train, Grand St Shuttle to West 4, and dotted G in QB). This 12/16 map sure really will became MTA history piece. If u do refer to 12/16 map--They are now available at MTA information center in Jay Street. I got mines yesterday. If u r refer to 9/16- obvisously its strange that they have it. I doubt there won't be any because the only past maps that was published since 9/11 were (9/19 full size and 10/1, 10/5, 10/28 in single sheets).
The first new line in months.
There's aready 2 R-46's with the (V) Rollsign on the front aready set and it's sitting in KG Yard today.
What KG Yard. I never heard of it.
Robert
I am guessing he meant Jamacia and KG stood for Kew Gardens. Why he put that, I got no idea.
The MTA Web site has been updated to allow for the V on the Service Advisory Page. It's comforting to know there are none planned this week :-) The schedule page has not yet been updated.
There probably won't be any, either, since it doesn't run late nights or on weekends, when most GOs are scheduled.
I think it would be the ultimate in comic relief if the TA allowed a GO diversion on a route the moment it comes into existance.
"V" is for diVersion...
:0)
As far as the F and G are concerned, it sure is.
>>>I think it would be the ultimate in comic relief if the TA allowed a GO diversion on a route the moment it comes into existance. <<<
Comic relief, yes. Surprising, NO.
Peace,
ANDEE
The first weekend that Q trains ran up Broadway to 57/7, A GO was running that forced them to terminate at Times Sq; the same GO suspended the 6th Ave Shuttle on its first day.
Then perhaps the 2nd Ave. line opened in 1972, but GO's prevented us from ever knowing it....lol.
I'm not getting the V from their page although the link you provided works...
What is the best and worst subway car models? What is your criteria for picking the best and worst? Is it looks, or the quality of the ride? Post your car model and your reasons.
My favorite car model is the WMATA metrorail cars. Coming in a close second is the SEPTA M4 cars on the Mkt-Fkd line, then the Broad St Kawasakis. then here`s the list of the other car models I like:
PATH cars (PA 1 and 3)-Front Window is nice
R44/46-Wide and roomy.
R40-Sucker for "Futuristic" looking cars
R32/38-Stainless Steel gave modern appearance
HBLR/NCS cars-really smooth for low floor cars
SEPTA N5 cars-Like Bullet type styling, annd smooth to boot.
Now the worst car models
R30 and below to R14-Bleak and too utilitarian
Budd "Almond Joy" cars on SEPTA-Rode rough and no AC
Path K cars-Totally ugly cars
Baltimore Metro Cars-Too square-too noisy
So let`s debate the looks and ride of these cars!
R-62/A and R-68/A with the stainless steel giving them a glittering and longer appearance than they are. Also the clean interior should make them a good choice. Any others?
R-32
-railfan window
-stainless steel
-no duct tape on the roof (R-40 slant)
-bench
-best acceleration
-highest possable speed as compared to other cars
-not much side-to-side motion
-can walk between cars
-2nd best railfan of any Div B car (R-40 slant is the best)
-paper roll signs
-really old fashioned (wavy metal on the side)
-powerfull HVAC
Best- Between the Redbirds (R-26, 28, 29, 33, 33S, 36) and the R-32. Both are very fast, have best acceleration, braking is good, all are railfan friendly, and R-32s from a conductor's standpoint (well in my conductor/train buff opinion) have good doors and good P.A. Being the best as the R-32s are, that's why they are gonna outlast the R-38, 40/40M, 42, even some 44s when the R-160 comes out. In the B Division the R-32 is the most reliable (36 years and running live and well...will be 40 years in 2004!!), as for the Reds in the A, I mean 43 years of service (R-26/28), AND STILL RUNNING, says enough about their reliability.
Worst- 1). R-46....WORST DOORS IN THE FLEET!! Very slow doors (so slow the little old lady trying her hardest to run from the top of the stairs down can make it to the doors to hold them open!! lol), some P.A.s are either TOO LOUD or non-existent, and a good deal of the speedometers are not working properly
2).R-40(slant)....THE DESIGN....YIKES!!! Aside from that the shoddy patch-up work done on their roofs (I mean come on duct tape!!). Also pretty crappy doors.
3). R-40M (door enabler), R-42 (door enabler).....the door enabler, 'nuff said!! They need to get rid of that stupid thing. All it is nothing more than is a delay causer!! Some T/Os forget it's there (rightfully so they have enough to worry about ahead of them, without the extra hassle of enabling a side of doors), and (once again from a conductor standpoint) makes for the doors not being ready when the indication board is acknowledged, and we are ready to open up. (NOTE......the enabler R-44 is very good, fast doors, and a good PA)
4). R-44........CRUNCHY CAB (well from a train operator's view)!! And the annoyingly loud brake release squeal. Other than those, for the most part the R-44 is a solid performer (conductor/train buff standpoint) due to good PA system and doors almost as good as the R-68/68A doors.
1. Whats a door enabler?
2. I think the worst doors are R-38 then r-46 (the 46 doors have the same speed as a Metro-North New Haven Line except the is 5 second delay on the Metro-North before the doors start moving; also if the conductor has to reopens the doors all the way, you guessed it you have to have the 5 second wait period with the bell before the doors start moving (no wonder the trains are late 5out of 10 times by atleast 5 minutes))
3.Whats that extra 3 third seat in the R-44 (206th/Coney Island rebuilds) priority seats?
Where did it come from?
How did get the space for the extra seat?
Whats with narrow door cab doors?
Whats taking the space of the original doors?
In very simple terms, the 'door enabler' is the proper closure of switches to assure that the trainset is at a full stop with the throttle off before doors can open. A new feature being added is 'door enabler' buttons that require the T/O to activate when stopped at a station before the C/R can open the doors. Trainsets can not move with a door open unless overridden by the T/O. The door enabler button feature is supposed to assure that the crew is aware of conditions: two brains are better than one. CI Peter
1. A "door enabler" is a device that requires the Conductor to push a button indicating which side of the train's doors he/she wishes to open. It then requires the Train Operator to press a button indicating agreement. If the entire train is not equipped with "enablers," the crew is not to use them.
2. All NYC Transit doors are supposed to close within a specified amount of time that does not vary from car class to car class. The door mechanisms do have some room for adjustment, however.
3. The R-44 seats have been in their current positions since the cars were delivered in the early 1970s. The cab doors have been at their current width since the cars were delivered, as well.
David
I hate any of the cars with these "mirror" like interior walls. Sick of seeing the back of my bald head in the wall opposite me!
For pure sturdiness and longevity, nothing beats the old D types that used to run on the SeaBeach, Brighton & West End Lines half a century ago, they were the tanks of the subways..and the R1-9 series a close second.
Then how come they were scrapped before the Standards though they were built at least ten years after the last Standard?
I don't know, but that's a good question, but it should have never happened based on the record.
Hey Trainbuff,
The reason that the D-types were scrapped ahead of the ABs was that during the early and mid 60s the Transit Authority sought to rid itself of of all oddball (ex. SIRT, Multis) and unconventional equipment.
Thus, the D-types went to their early demise, despite the documented fact that even though they hadn't received any more than minimal care for their final 10 years, they were in great running and physical shape. Some might argue that they were the best designed and running rapid transit stock even. (Hey Fred: Think you might agree?)
As for me, it certainly is a tie between D-types and ABs. How can one argue with the fact that some of the ABs ran in service 50 years with just a minor rewinding of their motors and some new interior paint.
Win: ABs and D-types
Place: R9s
Show: Q-types, Lo-Vs, R32s
We've got: Hot Lunch
And bringing up the rear, R-26 (second to last for hideous taped-up sprayed-over and beat-up look and age-related maintenance issues) and R-36 (dead last, particularly and especially the mainline ones; flickering lights to drive you mad, rough start-up and stopping due to uncharacteristic light weight, and climate control cosisting of hit or miss a/c and heat)
I thought the reason the articulated ones left early was due to their unweidiness (sp) due mostly to the weight on their axles. I feel that you're correct about the ABs, they were something. [ this coming from an IRT boy ;^) ]
As I've said before, the Triplexes would have laughed in the face of deferred maintenance ("We don't need no stinkin' maintenance"). They would have kept right on going while the rest of the fleet was keeling over. Well-designed and well-built, the Triplexes could very well have surpassed the Gibbs Hi-Vs in terms of longevity had they been kept.
It was a grave mistake (no pun intended) on the TA's part to send them to slaughter so prematurely.
Par for the course for the TA. I defy anyone out there to make a stupid assertion that the New York Subway ever had a greater car on its tracks than the D type Triplexes. They were majestic, strong, powerful, and could they really haul ass over the Manny B and down 4th Avenue. I also loved even more the way they wooshed through those mini tunnels from New Utrecht onto 86th Street. One of my great childhood memories is riding on a #4 Sea Beach Triplex. You cannot imagine the rush I got. No car could compare with it then, and none can compare with it now.
You're really lucky-
The Triplex is the car I really wished I could have rode....when I go to Court St. Museum, I always sit down, close my eyes, and imagine.
Tell me if you know-
Was the Triplex ever used on the Eastern Division, or was that all Standards and R1-9's?
The Triplexes did not run on the Eastern Division except during fantrips. The 1893 el segment along Fulton St. from Broadway Junction to Crescent St. could not support their weight. OTOH they could have run on the #10 route, today's M (they even had #10 signs, IIRC), without too much difficulty, but did not do so.
I wish I could have ridden on the Triplexes as well. If only we had been waiting for a Broadway express during rush hour back on July 21 and 22, 1965....
You mean when I was one and a half years old?
Hell, who knows, maybe I did, just don't remember it :)
I was 8 1/2 in the summer of 1965. It was my first visit to NYC, and I took a liking to the subway right away. The R-32s were brand spanking new then, and I can still see the green backlit "57th St." side signs on that very first train I rode on, an N from 36th St. in Brooklyn to 34th St. in Manhattan.
Yep, July 21, 1965 is a red-letter date in my life.
Steve: I remember seeing the R-32's on my way to the World's Fair. They had that sparkling stainless steel and the blue doors gave them a nice touch. I was on a #7 train with the equally sparkling and clean Bluebirds.
Larry,RedbirdR33
And you showed some real class. You picked a Sea Beach train to ride as your first experience on the New York subway. It made a winner out of you, right?
The fact that the Triplexes just kept going and going and going with hardly any maintenance makes it that much harder to understand why they were sent to slaughter when they were. With all due respect, getting rid of nonstandard equipment sounds like nothing more than a weak excuse.
Right on #4 Sea Beach Fred. The Triplexs were probably the best subway cars that were ever used in the history of the New York City subway system.
#3 West End Jeff
Triplexes: Here is the best place for me to say. I remember riding on the triplexes on the Brighton Express. They were withdrawn when I was six. I remember that for six months or so, during 1965 the express tracks on the Brighton line were being repaired and the express passed by the local station on the local track up to Kings Highway. The express tracks were used from Kings Highway to Brighton Beach.
I did get to look out the front window and I remember the outside overhang above the door in the front. I was tall enough to look out the triplex but I was not tall enough for the R32 for a while yet.
The round window trains on the IRT were the last windows for me to grow up to. I did not see an R16 trains then.
The R-16s were generally used on the Eastern division which consits of the "J", "L", "M", & "Z" trains. They were seldom used outside of the Eastern division as a rule.
#3 West End Jeff
If you do remember the Triplexes, then you have to understand justwhat magnificent specimens they were. They were the King Kong of trains, powerful, majestic, and the rest ride in the system.
I agree with you that the Triplexs were a magnificent piece of equipment.
#3 West End Jeff
Also, I remember that the Express only ran during the rush hour on the Brighton line back then. 1965-1967. You could go to Broadway via Bridge or Tunnel. And the Brighton went Express and Local under broadway at all times.
The local trains were always R27 and I can not remember any with soft seats. The only thing I remember is beige? light orange? seats. And the distinctive sound of the doors opening and closing at the stations.
The R-27s were built with hard seats, colored "coral." So were the R-30s.
David
Just prior to Chrystie St., Q trains ran express in Manhattan whenever they operated (Mon-Fri 6 AM to 7 PM); and local in Brooklyn 9 AM to 3 PM.
The R-27s never had upholstered seats. They always had the hard plastic seats.
#3 West End Jeff
All right guys and girls, for those of you who want to know if the D-types were even used in service on the Eastern Division, the answer is as follows:
Southern Division D-types running to Chambers Street in the AM would in many cases be run lite over the Willy B out over Bway to the East New York yard to lay up for the evening rush, at which time they would do the reverse lite run to Chambers Street.
Now, as told by a very noted NYC transit historian, ocasionally the Canarsie line would be short equipment during the day while its ABs and Multis were being shopped and inspected. In order to cover the schedule, ocassionally a D-type would be pressed into servie on the Canarsie line in between the AM and Pm rush hours. From what I understand there are pictures of these D-types in service, but they are usually laughed off as fan trip photos.
We've got: Hot Lunch!
Did the Triplexes have #16 signs? Or did they imitate the BMT standards and run with blank curtains?
The line that was featured exclusively by the D Triplex was none other than my Sea Beach. A beautiful and majestic sight it was.
BY the early 60s, the Triplexes were nowhere to be found on the Sea Beach. The BMT standards took over, going full circle, until the R-32s arrived. Weekend service was provided by R-27/30s once they had arrived in sufficient numbers.
I know it was the early 60's but which year is what I want to know. I also know the R-32's carried the N sign, but did the 27 and 30's too? Or did they carry the #4. I'm trying to get that down pat so there is very little I won;t know about my favorite line.
Fred: The first cars to carry the BMT letters on the roll signs were the R-27's. They read "N-Broadway-Sea Beach Exp". The R-32's simply read "N-Broadway Express."
Larry,RedbirdR33
Thank you Larry Redbird. Now all I need is the date and year when the Triplexes were taken off the Sea Beach and I'm home free. Thanks again.
Fred: I was waiting for you to ask that question. D-Types began running on the Sea Beach (BMT Rt #4) on May 16,1932 and for the next 27 years no other type operated here. Beginning May 27,1959 sub-Standards were assigned to about half the trains and starting in April 1961 the odd R-27 in the off hours. On Februay 13,1963 D-Types were taken off the Sea Beach but returned in June of 1963 although the sub-Standards predominated. As late as April 1965 there were still two trains of D-Types on the #4 with nine trains on the West End.
I'll bet you two hot dogs at Nathan's that you can't tell me what was the last day the D's ran in regular passenger serice and on what line.
Best Wishes,Larry,RedbirdR33
"Remember "I R T " we put the RAPID in Interborough Transit.
Would you bet me 300 miles of extension cord for the same question?
No: I think that you know the answer but I would gladly treat you to a couple if you come up to New York.
Best Wishes,LarryRedbirdR33
That's fair.
I think I know the answer, but we will wait and see if Fred can come up with it.
Maybe I could if I knew the question. My daughter hogged the computer until now and I haven't been able to get online, so I missed the question posed by Larry Redbird. Ask me now and I'll see if I can come up with it.
Larry, that's interesting that the D-type triplexes operated on the Sea Beach from 1932. Where were they before that, all of them on the Brighton? Also, there seems to be some dispute among historically minded on this site about this: did the D-types serve on the Brighton Express or Brighton Local? I realize that most of the Brighton-Franklin Expresses (Sunday service) was nearly all standards. Do you know if the Triplex ever operated on this service, or perhaps also the Little Zephyr or other unique equipment?
I can hear Arnold Horshack now:
Oh, oh, oh-oh-oh-OH-OH-OH-OH!!!!!!!!
The Triplexes ran for the last time on the very same day we left for home while on vacation. Our last stop was in the city.
Or are you including the Culver Shuttle run some years later?:-)
I stand corrected on my earlier post. Hey, Larry, what's with the "sub-standard" moniker? Did you dislike the BMT standards as much as I did?:-)
I'll bet you two hot dogs at Nathan's that you can't tell me what was the last day the D's ran in regular passenger serice and on what line.
March 23 1974 - 3 round trips on the Culver Shuttle between Ditmas and 9th Ave.
Which cars?
Well, it had to be one of the three surviving units - 6019, 6095, or 6112.
it had to be one of the three surviving units - 6019, 6095, or 6112.
Your statement is not correct.
The R-27s and R-30s retained the original Southern Division titles and added the "Broadway" designation where appropriate. It was sort of a transition, as the R-32s carried no references to the old titles except for the TT.
I think there is one such photo from 1965 of a D-type on the Canarsie line. I was wondering if that was a fan trip or regular service.
"Path K cars-Totally ugly cars"
HEY!.......There's something wild and sexy about an air conditioned subway car with incandescent bullseye lighting and cushion seats !
Bill "Newkirk"
How about a ACed car with incandesent!
With no floresent lights.
BMT Standards... Lots of room, Classy with Rattan-Wicker seats overhead fans, box vents a solid stream of air blew in the summer through the whole train.
And the sound of their engines. Real subway sounds. Indescribable!
Though I never rode the BMT "Standards" they were the best of the non-articulated subway cars. I like the BMT "D" type "Triplexs" because of their spaciousness and the roll signs that were placed above the storm doors. I never rode on those cars either.
#3 West End Jeff
I rode on the BMT standards during their final two years of service but didn't care for them in those days. Hindsight being 20/20, I appreciate them now for what they were - solid, durable, and indestructible. No other car, except perhaps a Triplex, could take out I-beams after splitting a switch and come away with a few scrapes and bruises, not to mention a broken light bulb.
I rode on the BMT standards during their final two years of service but didn't care for them in those days. Hindsight being 20/20, I appreciate them now for what they were - solid, durable, and indestructible. No other car, except perhaps a Triplex, could take out I-beams after splitting a switch and come away with a few scrapes and bruises, not to mention a broken light bulb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve: One important safety factor built into the Standards was there low speed. This meant that they could only be involved in low-impact collisions.
Larry
Frankly, I didn't think they were that sluggish. Their acceleration was about the same as that of the R-1/9s, and they could move through the 14th St. tunnel before reaching the lowest point. Then it was a case of ever-decreasing gear pitch as they labored uphill.
I only rode on the rebuilt units, so I'm not familiar with their performance characteristics prior to rebuilding.
The Triplexs from the accounts that I've read were practically indestructible.
#3 West End Jeff
Well, they didn't get into fights with other cars the way the BMT standards seemed to; however, 6045 and 6078 got into a tussle near Stillwell Ave. in 1955. Talk about a heavyweight prize fight! 6045C, 6078A and 6078B were heavily damaged and were scrapped. 6078C was grated onto 6045B and renumbered 6045C.
The Triplexes were gentle behemoths, but woe to anyone or anything that got in their way!
I've read accounts of that little scrap between those two Triplexes.
#3 West End Jeff
The sad part of it was the fact that these were cars of the Sea Beach. I was in my first summer in California and came across a small article in the now defunct Los Angeles Examiner about a subway accident in Coney Island. Still very strongly attached to New York, I read it with great interest and jumped out of my pants when they said it occurred on the #4 subway line. I knew that it was my favorite train that was the victim. I have pictures of that wreck. I got it off NYCSUBWAY.ORG
Its no contest for the absolute BEST car EVER designed for comfort and aesthetics - the BMT Bluebird.
No cars that followed even came close to the aesthetics of these articulated compartment cars that included such features as mohair upholstered seats, and mirrors.
My second favorite is a tie between the BMT Standard and the D-Types.
Hey Bway West End,
Admire your judgement for second place. Also, it is a tie between the West End and Brighton for best line, with the Sea Beach a close second. (sorry Fred, we can't agree on everything)
We've got: Hot Lunch!
Cooked with BigBug on hotshoe!! OnTheJuice CI Peter
My favorite subway car ever is the BMT Zephyr, built by Budd.
Sleek, quiet, fast, comfortable, and ahead of its time.
Wish I could have seen that running on my favorite el, the Broadway Brooklyn el.
2nd place goes to the R-16, no matter WHAT the other posters on this board think :)
3rd place, definately the R-38 (sort of a little sister to the Zephyr)
R-38,
You need some help!
I rode one today on the A line to Far Rockaway (the track grinder was out today and some other thing, also there was a IRT R-142something out there).
Best(In model order)
R44/46:Roomy,smells sort of nice and isn't to bumpy.
R62/R62A:Nice stainless steel and very fast.
R68/R68A:Pretty much the R62 of The IND exept more roomy.
R142A:Nice air conditioned cars and nice digital componets.
R143:Same as R142 exept more room.
Worst
R40Slants:This would fall into middrift.It's ugly yet fast.
All Redbird units still running:It looks like the MTA didn't care about rather the underchasey and body is rotting.They need to be put out to pasture.No offense to Redbird fans.
R110B:It suprise me to see these things running.It looks to me in the next 5 years these will be put out to pasture with the former mighty redbirds and the shamefull R110A.
underchasey I think the word you're looking for is chassis. Pronounced chassey.
As for the R-110s, you can't expect anything from them because they weren't designed as production cars. They were designed to test new technology for use in the R-142/3 orders.
Dan
The best: Toronto's H-5 cars
The worst: Any Montreal car
I agree fully!!!! Though the Toronto T1's are a close second!!!
The H1s were pretty fun on YUS because of the way the swayed from side to side at high speed on the North Yonge extension. The also had nice interiors. That said, my favourites will always be the Gloucsters.
-Robert King
Speaking of high speeds on the North Yonge extension, one time my friends and I got on the Yonge Night Bus (after the subway closed for the night) somewhere between Steeles and Finch. We were heading downtown, it was a GM Fishbowl, and we FLEW all the way to Bloor in what seemed like seconds. THE best bus ride of my life! But I guess I should have posted this on Bus Talk instead, right?
The one time I used the Yonge replacement night bus, it was remarkably fast, faster than I expected. And, it stops right at the bottom of my street which was quite convenient by contrast to the subway whose nearest station is quite a good walk from here.
The night Queen car I used to get to the night Yonge bus was fast which I expected given how the traffic on Queen St. at 6:30 on a Sunday morning compares to almost any other time.
-Robert King
oh ! I thought you meant the small models....( like HO scale ) ....
Ever see the documentaries on Indian railways?? I work with these guys everyday, they make me laugh even when I have to ask them to repeat something three times...and they are my 'brothers of the steel rail.' Forget models, MUs, LIRR, LoVs, R10s, TrackGeometry, etcetera.
Gimme 'AllIndiaRailwaysthankyouverymuch.' CI Peter
I did a long time ago wth a shot of a motorman there at the controls & the trains completely overloaded & packed like a can of sardines ..
Is this the TV pbs doc. U saw if i might ask ??
is there a website incuding photos ?? etc...
i do have several photos websites ...
Which passenger ever rode the Track geometry car? When was the last time the track geometry car was in passenger service?
You're no fun. I was referring to the many posts of 'algebra' and 'calculus.' LOL CI Peter
Best: DC's Bredas (hey, with Congress in town, that system had better set the standard for what a subway should be like. I'm willing to give the T's Red Line Bombardiers a shot, though, because they look pretty good as well).
Best in NY: R-32s (interchangable within the B divison, and the way Budd built those things, they just keep going and going and going...)
Second: R-46 (by a very narrow margin. They're speedy (I think), fairly comfortable and well-built (Pullman-Standard and MK did a good job with them), and do not deserve the bad luck that came with them.)
Wild-Card: R-62(A) with bench seats and scratch-resistant walls. Then it'll give the rest of the fleet a run for its money. I also got to give props to both the AB and D units, which would probably still be service-ready had the TA way back when not run both fleets into the ground.
Worst: #3 - R-40s. Those slant noses, IMO, hurt as much as they are good to look out of. The design of the body overall is a saftey hazard.
#2 - R-44s. St. Louis Car came out way too fast with them. On top of that they were built with aluminum (no subway car should be built that cheaply!), are rougher to ride on than their Pullman-built cousins, and had so many problems with them that they had to be relived by a fleet older than they were. Still to today they are on some shaky turf.
#1 - You guessed it, R-26s. The useage of tape and spray paint to hold the fleet together is simply not going to get it done. Their reliability is infamous, particularly among #5 riders. The PA in those cars is nonexistant. And climate control??!! What climate contol?! In my view, the old windows should have been kept, because they let air in better than the new ones most of the 'birds got when they went to MK and 207th.
Who could join these fleets:
LA's Metro cars: If you ask me, they could have had a more attractive design to fit the still growing system.
Bombardier's R-142s: They could have done a WAY better job in the time they had to build those cars. And where are the high 6300s and 6400s?
Kawasaki's R-142As: If a consist of these units ever got into a crash with an IRT Low-V, I can bet you 3-1 the Low-Vs come out with only a few scratches while the R-142As would need piece-by-piece pick-up. I still believe this much they are that badly built.
"Who could join these fleets:
LA's Metro cars: If you ask me, they could have had a more attractive design to fit the still growing system."
well !! they did it all wrong here !!!
The IRT-loV won't get scratches cause the frame will permenently bend but most of the pieces will still be there. But the R-142s were designed for them to fly apart and turn into dust when there was a accident.
What about the r11? I never rode one, but it looks nice and modern (for its time).
It was modern for it's day, though a couple of design options like the hand-crank windows and the human being-sterelizing lamps didn't make it into any future models (can't understand what the Board of Transportation thought was wrong with that last one). But the turtle-back roof line, axleflow fans and rounded storm door windows would go into the R-15s (along with the porthole side doors) while the stainless steel exterior and the longer side window design would eventually make their way into the TA's plans with some modifications 15 years later.
I only rode on it once on the Franklin Shuttle. I deliberately got off the IND at Franklin, got a paper transfer for the shuttle upstairs expecting a BMT Standard which the shuttle was using then. Instead there was a three car train of stainless steel R-10's with 4 round windows on each set of doors. I didn't think much of them but that was because of a bias: I was so disappointed there were no standards there!!!
Best:
R32, for obvious reasons.
Worst:
R38, for equally obvious reasons.
I accounted for passanger comfort as well as mechanical and structurial issues.
Best is R-46 for its quiteness and speed.
Worst is the R-44 for its jerky breaking and bad smells.
Best - R-32. Mark my words, they'll make it to 50 years barring some bonehead maneuver by the powers-that-be. Budd really outdid themselves with that order. Too bad the city didn't buy more cars from them.
Worst - R-16. Lemons with a capital L. IMHO it was a combination of factors, not the least of which was deferred maintenance, that caused all the grief and misery.
Steve: My choice for best and worse:
Best: The R-33 Redbirds and Bluebirds, followed by the R-36 and R-29
Worst: Any 75 foot car with the R-46's being the best of a bad lot.
Larry,RedbirdR33
I'm with you on the 75-footers. The R-46s are OK. Let's leave it at that.
I love the 75' cars, because they have those foward facing seats.
And also- the backwards facing seats, my personal fave.
That's why I like the R-16 so much, and the R-10.
Love that backwards ride.
I can count on one hand the number of times I ever sat in an R-10. On CPW express dashes, I was ALWAYS at the railfan window.
I'm lazy. To me, the window seats are right next to the railfan window. The view is just as exciting out the sides as up front.
You must think that all signals are permanently red.
Worst: Any 75 foot car with the R-46's being the best of a bad lot.
Why? Granted, the R44 are lemons, but the R68's are now the most reliable cars in the fleet.
Chris: The R-46's have some get up and go. The R-68's would lose a race to a train of Q-Types. Recently I rode a rerouted B train south on the express track from 59 Street to Coney Island. We were outrun by a local train of R-40's.
Larry,RedbirdR33
One word comes to mind about the R-68s: booooooooooooooooorrrrr-iiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnng.
Yeah, the R68's are sluggish, but they have many other atributes. Don't expect the new class of 60' cars to be speed demons anyway.
Nah, we won't see the likes of the R-10s anymore in terms of speed, that's for sure.
44's and 46's could have kicked their ass had they not been neutered. :)
Quite true. Those suckers would have absolutely blown the doors off even the multisectionals had they ever operated at the speed they were designed for. I can just imagine doing 70 mph along 2nd Ave. on a train of those cars. In a tunnel, it would have felt like 100 mph.
Those R-68s from what I'm gathering are not particularly swift.
#3 West End Jeff
I like your taste.
My top vote goes to the R-33ML, with honorable mention to the R-42 (please don't confuse it with the R-40M) and R-38.
Like you, I don't get much out of the 75-footers. I'm not sure whether I'd place the R-44 or the R-68 at the bottom of the list. I find them all unpleasant. The R-68 grunts (do real hippos grunt like that?) and the R-44 and R-46 are a bit too pretentious for my tastes. Of the 75-footers, I suppose the R-68A isn't too bad.
I don't necessarily dislike the newer trains. The R-62(A) is pretty nice (especially the whirr as it brakes). The R-110A/B looks snazzy in the pictures here but I haven't seen either one in person. (Actually, I take that back. I saw one of them -- the B, I think -- from the University Heights Bridge on Sunday. I got a better view here, I'm afraid.)
any rail fan window equipped transit car gets my vote over any transverse cab equipped junker !!
...............lol...................
Well, I personally love SEPTA's Broad Street Subway cars(B-IVs), because of how fast they can accelerate, good suspension, and good braking(most of the time)and those loud pneuphonic horns. I love those cars mainly because of their basic design along w/the colorful marker lights, and the well-lit interior coupled w/the beige & orange seats w/good leg room(a plus for those that are 5'9" and over) and the pretty orange & metallic grey exterior. The B-IVs always was and forever be will MY favorite subway cars. The worst subway cars in my eyes from experience are those ugly, corny ass Baltimore Metro cars. I rode them once and I'll never ride again.
Ms.SEPTA
The best ever: R32 Brightliners, obviously. Gleaming stainless steel, ribbed from top to bottom to reflect lights. More beautiful before GOH. And when they were new, with original blue interiors. Wow! I remember them on the Q Brighton Express flying down northbound toward Newkirk. That was a rush!
Man, I'm a total R-16 freak, but the R-32 is third on my list....if you want to know, the R-38 is my second. I think the R-38's shortcomings operation-wise are because it was such a small fleet, and small fleets suffer on a system where 500 cars is a normal sized fleet.
But it (R-38) sure is pretty, with the bottom half flat/top half coruggated :)
But it (R-38) sure is pretty, with the bottom half flat/top half coruggated :)
Uh...Strike that! Reverse it! Much better.
:-) Andrew
Ooops :)
uh, thanks, I tripped all over myself slobbering over THAT beauty of a car :)
I grew up on the Brighton (Sheepshead Bay) and I was seven when the R32's arrived. I even remember their new car smell back in 1966.
I love the R32, but they have not gleamed in 30 years. Those trains are a part of my life as I grew up on them. I remember the BMT standards and D triplex with nostalgia.
But those R32 were such a part of my life, as a member of my family would be. They are the train of my life.
The BMT was my first love, too. Had it not been for all those A rides in the late 60s, I would have most definitely become a BMT fanatic. As it stands, the IND ranks first, with the BMT a very, very close second.
Oh boy, and I had such great hopes for you. How in hell can you pick the IND over the BMT is a mystery to me. Well, we all have our oddities and I now know yours. The IND!!!! What a crock.
My own favorite is the R62 series, especially the R62A. That's somewhat subjective. I like the look of them, outside and even in. That shape works best for a narrow car. I even like the stainless steel interiors which so many here curse. I think they're cheery. Plus there's great rollsigns with unmistakeable route bullets. They've also proven themselves reliable.
For a favorite B-division car, I don't know. Best looking would be The R38 I guess. Most reliable is either R32 or R68. The R68 and R68A are very underrated on these boards.
Least favorite...when I first started posting here I'd have gone with the R44 and R46, but now I just gotta say the redbirds. Yeah they're unique looking and all, but I just can't take 'em anymore. These cars are way past their prime, and I get a sense of dread when I have to ride them.
For B-division my least favorite is the R46, but then as a Queens Blvd rider, you gotta take boredom into account on that one. I think they look like faceless big grey monsters, with very tacky interiors (the fake wood is retro, but not in a good way!) And those digital signs are UGLY in addition to being generally inferior. Both the R44 and R46 generally did look MUCH better pre-GOH, with the blue stripe and the rollsigns. Whatever the case, the R46 is a reliable car, so I shouldn't dump too much on them. For least reliable, from my understanding it's either the R40s, R40m, R42, or maybe even the R44.
:-) Andrew
Baltimore Metro Cars-Too square-too noisy
It's not the cars, it's the TRACK.
The rail in the Baltimore Metro (our one and only subway) get very, very corrigated. (Back in the 1930's the London County Council Tramways did experiments in the Kingsway Tram Subway dealing with rail corrigation. They discovered that it's caused by truck wheelbase, wheel profile, accleration and braking, wheel slip, rail condition, and so on. The short answer is "it happens".)
Three guesses what the Baltimore MTA does not own.
Three guesses what the Baltimore MTA does not own.
A coffee grinder! I mean, a rail grinder!
Guess what the TTC owns - but simply won't use - for the streetcar network.
-Robert King
Regarding IND/BMT AKA "B" division:
Best for purposes of nostalgia and endurance without any significant mechanical rebuilding: R1-9s
Best for Longevity in the past: Wouldn't this be a tie between Standards and Q types?
Best in current fleet for endurance: R32
Best in current fleet for sheer style and appearence: R40
Regarding IRT "A" division:
Best for endurance in current fleet: R62s (already almost 20 years old and looking good)
Best for sheer style and appearence: Sorry - better bring back the Low Vs
Worst for noise, lack of heat, generally uncomfortable and unreliable:
R12s - I'm glad they're long gone.
Anyone else order one? Mine finally came last night and I like it alot. I'll put pics on my site soon. BTW, CometCursor is coming off my site soon, I'll post when I do it.
Yeah, I got mine a few days ago. It's pretty neat. Hope it appreciates.
Peace,
ANDEE
Specifically, the orange things attached to the steel beams in this early 70's dated picture. I'm completely stumped:
they are penny ($0.01)gum machines
Mini Hershey's, Mr. Goodbar and Krakle-mmmmmmmmmmmmm!
Oh Cool CANDY MACHINES, my father told me about them in the subways, 25 cents and a hershey bar on the go, those were small vending machines, before subway mini-marts popped in.
I don't think the candy bar were a quarter. Even a slice of Pizza was just a quarter then.
>>> Oh Cool CANDY MACHINES, <<<
There were candy machines mounted on pillars, but the ones in the picture are too small to be candy machines. They are penny gum machines.
Tom
>>> the ones in the picture are too small to be candy machines. They are penny gum machines. <<<
A second closer look at the picture reveals that the machine on the left appears to have advertizing for Dentyne, Beach Nut and Adams Black Jack chewing gum. It might be a nickel machine dispensing a full pack of gum rather than just one portion for a penny which was common with Chicklets gum machines. The word "HERSHEY'S" on the machine on the right indicates it dispenses chocolates rather than gum. Based on the size of the slot at the bottom of the machine, these were not full sized candy bars, but miniatures like you can find sold in bags at supermarkets.
The machines that sold full sized candy bars tended to have the candy bars loaded horizontally on platforms on a conveyor belt behind a window, with various popular brands mixed in the machine. A wheel on the side of the machine allowed you to rotate the belt till the candy bar you wanted was positioned next to a door at the lower end of the belt. You inserted a nickel (later a dime) and pushed a lever which opened the door and pushed the candy bar off its shelf to a place where you could reach in and remove it. The machine made no change, and if you lined up an empty shelf next to the door, you lost your nickel.
Tom
That's a great picture! Young railfans, and check out the look on the T/O's face!
From this picture, you'd think those things were attached to every steel pillar in the system.
Why not? Turn all the pillars into "candy canes."
>>>From this picture, you'd think those things were attached to every steel pillar in the system. <<<
They WERE, or so it seemed like it. I remember opening one up when I was an active volunteer at the Transit Museum. We actually found little packets of gum inside. But it had all turned black...EEEEWWW
Peace,
ANDEE
Not surprising. The chocolate bars in the summer were like syrup!!
That particular picture is deceiving, there were many columns without vending machines. Some stations did not have any machines at all.
They just about were throughout the Manhattan stations.
Not exactly:
>>> Not exactly: <<<
Not exactly what?
Tom
The person stated that those machines were only in Manhattatn The picture shows otherwise.
>>> The person stated that those machines were only in Manhattatn The picture shows otherwise. <<<
He stated: "They just about were throughout the Manhattan stations." I understood him to mean that the pillar mounted machines were on almost every pillar in Manhattan, inferring that they were less ubiquitous but certainly not absent from the other boroughs. The machine you pictured though is not relevant because it is a stand alone candy bar vending machine placed next to a pillar, not a machine mounted on the pillar. These came along later as the vendors tried to capture a nickel with each purchase rather than a penny.
Since these machines made money one penny at a time, but made no money when empty, and required someone to make the rounds to service them, it makes sense that the busier the station, the more machines would be located there, to prevent empty machines. Although I never personally checked, it is safe to say that virtually every station in the system, including els, had at least one of the machines on each platform.
Tom
>>> check out the look on the T/O's face! <<<
...... who has just been blinded by the photographer's lighting.
Tom
He looks a little like Redd Foxx!
I remember those :)
Candy machines were in every station, I bet.
Thanks, Chris, I haven't seen those since I was a little boy. :)
I missed out on those. Lets bring them back, I would be interesting now a days. Everyone is on the go, so why not bring those back. It's quicker than going upstairs to the mezzanine and buying something from a crowded Hudson News. I would like to see those and the Automat come back. I'd love to see those around once again.
Those candy and gum machines were nice, but now they cannot have them in the subways, what with some nut looking for a way to spread some kind of sickness around to the general public. Remember the case of the tampered Tylenol capsules? How about the Anthrax cases mentioned in the news recently? It is not the same place that you grew up in,
so for the sake of public safety, you will have to forget them.
I remember all those vending machines. The one the left was a penny Dentyne and Chicklet machine. You can see inside and tell whether or not it was sold out, this way you don't lose your penny!
The one on the right was a Hershey five cent maxchine. That machine on occasion was like a one armed bandit. Put your nickel in and nothing came out. Losing a nickel was really a bitch considering the fare was 15 cents !!
Bill "Newkirk"
Funny you should mention a one armed bandit. I remember when I was a teen about 1968 or 69 I was coming home from Shea Stadium and I changed from the "7" to the "E" or "F" at 74th & Roosevelt to get to 179 to get the Bee Line Bus to Hempstead. There was a big red candy bar machine on the IND platform (not one of those small ones hanging on the girder. I put a quarter in, pulled the knob and a quarter came out. I then kept pulling the handle and for each pull another quarter came out. I think I made about $5.00 that day at that machine.
Jeff,
I remember those free standing red machines. Put your money in, pray and pull the plunger. Your experience was the reverse of what I was used to.
I think those machines had a mirror on them and was sort of 1940s in style. I remember one time at DeKalb Ave (and Flatbush Ave) I was watching a man stock one of those soda machines that dispensed paper cups, crushed ice and on occasion, soda. When he was done, he tested it and down came a cup, followed by ice and soda. He handed it to me and said "here ya go kid". It always pays to be observant.
Bill "Newkirk"
'Cup' soda vendors always made the most money but fresh water isn't always available. What was worse...put your change in, make a selection, hear the wizz and a click followed by the soda...but no cup. CI Peter
"What was worse...put your change in, make a selection, hear the wizz and a click followed by the soda...but no cup. CI Peter"
That has happened on occasion. But for the machine to have a source of water for the ice, there would have to be cold water feed from somewhere in the station. I never noticed any piping leading to the machine, just an occasional passenger inserting a dime, making a selection and hear cursing when the cup didn't drop !
Bill "Newkirk"
>>> hear the wizz and a click followed by the soda...but no cup <<<
What was worse was when the cup dropped crooked, so the ice hit the outside, and you got soda all over your hand trying to straighten it up. IIRC when Siskel and Ebert started their movie review show on PBS their opening showed a soda machine dropping a crooked cup and soda pouring over the outside.
Tom
That was one of the ubiquitous vending machines in Manhattan. There were machines for a single stick of gum, candy bars, mints and in the middle of the platform a soda machine.
In the mid 1970's they were all removed by order of Mayor Lindsay because of mostly nonfunctioning machines and rampant vandalism. I remember a newspaper article where it was reported that a mental patient from Central Islip (LI) hospital on weekend leave was caught breaking into one with a torch.
The only machines left were the pay phones. The vending machines were also common on the station mezzanines but only in Manhattan and downtown Brooklyn.
In the picture on the left is a gum machine. On the metal ridge is a corresponding slot hole (1 cent) for each slot of gum in the machine. The metal item above the slot is a thing that you would turn to get your gum (if it worked and was not jammed with pennies). On top of the glass which displays the slots of gum is a mirror (unbroken yet). The white on the window is the display for the gums in the machine. I think that this was for Beechnut on this particular machine. Chicklets may have be sold in other machines.
On the right is a ten cent (or five cent?) candy bar machine.
If you have any other questions email me at peppertree5706@hotmail.com
I see another machine on the other side of the platform to the right of the R32.
That has to be a Steve Zabel photo. He was one of the early underground photographer when we had to use a flash bulb.
Phil Hom
Darn your dated....I always bought junk from these machines...especially the encapsulated Chiclets. Chiclets are finally gone too...the plant was at the end of Queens Boulevard...the underpaid workers had an accident with the ingredient 'magnesium stearate' and the place was 'nuked.' CI Peter
I can still by Chiclets in Texas. They are also available in Mexico.
You are correct that the picture must be from the early 1970's, not later in the decade. What's the giveaway?
The old front route sign on the N with Broadway below.
No giveaway, the pic is dated by Dave himself.
Never mind about the orange candy machines. That train was the N B'way/Sea-Beach express... Ahh! Good memories.
wow a r 38 with an ORIGINAL rool sign & express - local light s on top ...
answer ... gum machines ??
Showing your age geezer. CI Peter
omg...!! turned 50 on 11 03 01 ......( sigh ) ...lol!!
pico station 1999 ??
Answer ..... yep !!!
yep !!
The one on the left looks like a phone book.The one on the rightn looks like some type of meter.
Every day the Transit Authority posts press clippings on its internal computer system. I think their article selection is a pretty good guide to what is on-topic here. The articles include:
o Anything about Mass Transit in the NY Region, PLUS many articles about transit in other regions, AMTRAK AND the even airlines. Articles about rail freight. All these seem to be considered fellow travelers for the MTA.
o Many articles about auto safety and auto pollution, and many environmental articles in general. This includes all types of articles on new technologies -- fuel cells, solar cells, the works -- and full coverage of the whole SUV tire failure issue. I guess you could call this sizing up (and running down) the competition.
o Articles about the NY City and State budgets as they affect transit, and the City and State budgets in general. That is, all the budget articles that aren't specifically about some other service (ie. education or police).
o Articles about public employee labor relations and contract for NY City and State, about transit and in general, but not those specifically about non-transit issues. Lots of stuff about all those DC 37 people going to jail.
o Articles about major development proposals in NYC, if a transit component is mentioned (ie. the recent West Midtown zoning proposal, coupled with the #7 extension).
In short, many things affect affect transit, and vice versa. All are considered "on topic" by the TA as long as there is a link.
Is there any way to view this collection without being a privileged TA worker with access to their internal system? It sounds very interesting.
Not that I know of. It's on the internal network.
And 'privileged' is the operative word. Us guys in the field have no access to the Transit intranet
(And 'privileged' is the operative word. Us guys in the field have no access to the Transit intranet)
Things are definately behind in that sense. We have a system to update progress on capital projects. Each month I need to printout last month's record and fax it to the field offices. They have to write up new information and fax it back for me to hand enter in the system. It's a waste, but something tells me money to expand access to the system is about to get real scarce.
My shop has intranet terminals all over the place...but not one is turned on to be utilised by us. So, my personal project directly emails with the vendors because of a lack of documentation. RTO can bitch about the R142s O/S...it's their own fault for not keeping up. CI Peter
We have intranet terminals throughout our shop and none are turned on for us to use. I get more SubwayTech from here than I do from work. ...Experienced car inspectors ask me for my books/publications/texts/printouts/TA course materiels and nothing is available to us at all. Who cares about all the posted materiel on intranet...TA employees need access to learning materiels. The Car Equipment Department MAKES TRAINS GO. Bin Loden has more access to stuff than we do...is Redbird tech so secret?? CI Peter
Well if anybody is interested I will be riding the V train from Continental to 2nd ave on Monday, Dec.17th. This can be a subtalk get-together if anyone is interested. The trip will start at 2:30pm at the head end of the Manhattan bound platform at the 71st-Continental station. I will be taking the V train to 2nd ave, then I'll be taking the F from 2nd ave back to Forest hills. Too bad the E don't run express to 179th in the afternoon. If anybody plans on coming email me.
Have a good time. Congratulations on being one of the first (that is, riding it on the first day).
I thought 12/16 Sun. was the first day. My mom and brother will have a first chance to see them on the very first day.
Also, when and how many E trains start service to 179th?
E to 179 starts monday also. there are 23 Es. 4 are supposed to go to 179
12/16 Sunday is when the F goes through the 63rd tunnel on it's normal route. The V is a weekdays only service and will start on Monday 12/17.
Sunday is the first day of the new service pattern. The new service pattern has the V running weekdays only. So the V itself won't run until Monday morning.
Thanks guys for your responses.
I'll be on a V train leaving Forest Hills sometime between 6:30 AM and 7:30. I wanna watch all the "duh" expressions on the people who are waiting at the local stops.
Today while watching a VCR tape from last night, I was watching the Amazing Race. It was the last show of the Race. Two teams made it to Neqw York City (Pre 9-11-01). They first had to goto a park at 51Ave in Queens tfrom Nework AirPort, At the Park they were told to take the train to Willets Point/Shea Stadium. They had to go to Flushing Medow park near the World glob. The two team got on two different Number 7 trains. The first team was not from NYC, but somehow they made it to NYC from NJ before the other team witch was from Queens. Both teams got on at 52street, (they said name of the park at part of queens.) Well the first team they show the they were on was 9754 I only could get the first two number from the other team witch were 93??. The first team ask the Token Clerk for two tickets while the other team ask for a $15 MetroCards. Well the team not from NYC won the race. 35000miles in 30day, to win $1,000,000. What a way to end a race a ride on the NCY Subway.
One more thing, in the backround of one the the shots was one of the 2000 World Series cars.
Robert
I do not know what I was thinking when typing this in. But I hit the post instead of the Preview botton.
I ment to say (The first team was on car number 9754, and the other team I only got the first two number they were 93??.)
Sorry for the mistakes.
Robert
Those "so called" NYC residents ought to be ashamed of themselves, IMO.
Peace,
ANDEE
The got to NJ at 6:00am, I think it was on a Sunday. The team from NY told the Taxi driver to take the GWB to the TriBrough Brige, that it would beat midtown driving. While the other team went right though the Hollen tonnel right though midtown to the Midtown Tonnel. As you said they shoud be ashamed of them self.
Robert
6am on a Sunday there's hardly any traffic in Manhattan. Was this filmed after 9/11? I guess maybe the 2nd place team thought that there'd be police detours in Manhattan.
Recently Kevin and Drew were interviewed on Z100. They said that by the time they were about to go into China they heard about the US spy plane coming down. I'll check my tape for a better date. I think it was some time in May when they came back to NY judging from the LED boards in the stations.
It's good to see my neighborhood, my subway line, and my Redbirds on TV.
I taped the final episode of 'The Amazing Race.' If you use a slow-scan feature on a VCR, you can see the LED board at Willets Point-Shea Stadium staion reads 'SUNDAY APRIL 08'.
Jim D.
grovvy, Look how much time it takes in post-production, anyways it is amazing what kind of things you pick up when you look at tape carefully.
It was sure nice to see the NYC subway on TV. Now how about having an Amazing Race show but this time get around with just NYC transit subways (and some buses). For the brazen they can choose LI Bus!
How about a race from Main street Flushing to B 116 in Rockaway Park?
To make it fun, you'd add LIRR, LI Bus, NJ Transit, SIR, Westchester buses, Metro-North, PATH, HBLR, and a few others I forgot, and have commutes over the entire NYC Metro Area!
Who can get the quickest from Purchase, NY to Princeton (not Princeton Junction, mind you)?
Ditmars Blvd to Yaphank?
Eltingville to Morris Plains?
Exchange Place to Gun Hill Rd?
Use any and all modes of public transit other than Access-A-Ride (or similar door-to-door services). No cabs. No asking for directions - just use your own maps and the station kiosks. Ok, maybe asking for directions is allowed. No hitchhiking. Walking is permitted, though obviously inefficient.
And if both teams get there at the same time, whoever did it cheaper wins.
Whaddya say we start up a little NYCSubway.org contest - all SubTalkers invited, losers buy winners drinks?
how about south jamaica to 128 st in manhatten?
Getto runs, whoever gets through without being robbed wins, at 1 am. buses only!
It would have been very very interesting if a G.O. was in place and all 7 trains terminated at 111 Street. LOL, imagine them navigating down that street towards the Hall of Science....
It was Vincent Daniels, Jr Park
51st Street & Roosevelt.
It was appropriate that the race ended in front of the Unisphere. They went around the world.
Wouldn't it have been interesting if the race had ended on the 110th floor of the WTC? If this was filmed before Sept.11, would they have aired it or would they have changed the ending?
It is a game. I don't think they would have change the ending.
Robert
I remember the BMT standards on the Canarsie Line in the late 1960's. What model subway was used on the Canarsie Line before the Standards?
When were they used till.
The Standards were the first model used on the Canarsie line, but they were pretty much replaced by the Multi's until 1956.
The Standards were the first model used on the Canarsie line, but they were pretty much replaced by the Multi's until 1956.
There were never enough Multi's to operate the complete schedule on the 14th St line. Service was shared between the Multi's and the Standards. It was the difference in their operating characteristics that permitted express service.
I remember riding the R-9s on the L line in the early 70s.
They were used after the Standards were retired and not ever before the November, 1967 BMT/IND unification.
The "Standards" were the first subway cars to be used on the 14th St.-Canarsie line. The portion of the Canarsie line from Broadway Junction to Canarsie was upgraded from an earlier surface then later elevated line. Wooden gate cars one used this portion of the line.
#3 west End Jeff
I believe prior to the Standards that gate cars were the norm over there.
BMTman
If you are referring to the Canarsie line prior to it's connection to the 14th St line at B'way Junction, then I'd guess gate cars ran on the line in it's early "modern" days. The current line opened in 1906, but service to Manhattan and conversion of the Broadway elevated for steel subway car use didn't happen until a few years later. From the time this happened to 1928 the #14 was the only line running to Canarise, from Canal St/Centre to Rockaway Park. I'm assuming standards also made up this route.
When did they stop sunning all the way to Canarsie on the abandoned ROW?
Subway service ended in 1942, trolly service 10 years later, according to the Canarsie Line page on this website.
VERY interesting! They made the genre Documentary look like it can be cool!
This particular show is on the Discovery "Science" channel at least 10 times a month. In fact, the Discovery science channel consists of 12 shows repeated over and over again. Not 12 series, 12 shows. Ditto for the Discovery Wings channel.
Sub-Bus already reported it, but now it's official. Beginning December 16th, the Broadway-East New York station becomes Broadway Junction on the A, C, J, and L lines.
When I reported to work this morning at 207 Station, the dispatcher handed me a slip of paper that said to announce this station as "Broadway Junction, formerly the East New York Station." All signs, including those on the J line platforms, will be changed to read "Broadway Junction."
I wonder if they'll still leave the tiling on the walls saying "East NY."
They might be able to put "BWAY JCT" stickers over the existing "BWAY" and "EAST NY" captions.
wayne
Thats what they did. It looks like the original "B" was left and all that was "sticked on" was the ...roadway Junction. The wall tiles was untouched last time I checked. (Mon night/Tues Morn.) The new 12/16 map call the entire complex Bway Jct with "East New York" in parentheses for the A/C lines and Eastern Pkwy in parentheses for the J,L,Z lines.
It'll still be Eastern Parkway to this J rider. Heck, I still use "102nd Street".
I haven't been there in a while, What do the little tiles on the wall say in the A station? "Broadway"?
They alternate -- BROADWAY and EAST NY (or EAST NEW YORK?). Neat coincidence: JUNCTION has the same number of letters as BROADWAY. Add it!
BROADWAY wouldn't have been sufficient, since the IND has three other BROADWAYs: Broadway-Lafayette, Broadway-Nassau, and Brodaway.
I say Leave it as E NY , so when people get mugged they can say I got mugged in East NY rather than saying I got mugged at Broadway Junction.
How about simply adding JUNCTION tiles under the BROADWAY tiles in the IND station? Problem solved.
What year did the LO V's last run?.
According to the book "Interborough Fleet" by Joe Cunningham, Lo-Vs ran on the Bowling Green-South Ferry shuttle until mid-summer 1964. A few standard Steinway types hung around with the World's Fair Steinways on the Bronx portion of the Third Avenue el until November 1969.
Well, to be honest, they ran last in 1994, on the TS shuttle.
Hey, they carried paying passangers, so shouldn't that count?
LOL
HAHAHA They had R-62s. From off the top of my head the R-62 came in early 1980s so by 1994 you must be kidding but 1984 (hard to belive but possiable) or 1974 or 1964 (most appropriate) or 1954 I will belive you.
The Low-V museum set DID run in service in 1994, on the 42nd Street Shuttle, in celebration of the 90th anniversary of the IRT. Before that, it ran in service in 1979 (maybe into 1980) in celebration of the IRT's 75th anniversary.
Other than that, they were gone by the mid-1960s.
David
Looks like buildmorelines didn't get it.
I know that they were running on the Bronx part of the Third Ave. El until it was torn down in 1972.
Not exactly... The Steinways and World's Fair cars were taken off the Third Avenue EL (Bronx) in 1969. R-12's served the line from that time until abandonment in 1973.
-Mark
"The Steinways and World's Fair cars were taken off the Third Avenue EL (Bronx) in 1969."
The very same year the "Q"s met their fate when old Myrt closed down too.
Bill "Newkirk"
1969 was the year they finally got rid of every piece of rolling stock that existed when the two other systems were privatley operated. Nothing but bland R crap afterwards.
HI HONEY! I'M HOME!
(sorry folks, been so busy with software replacements for our customers lately that I haven't had doowahdiddy for time lately ...)
Atsa right ... and the R12's SUCKED on the 3rd avenue el. That line was BUILT for the Steinways and LoV's - the R12's were CONSTANTLY going BIE as they overshot the shorter stations ... annoyed the crap out of me when I lived at 204th ... the northbounds got slowed by the hill up from Fordham, but the yahoos coming out of 210th to 204th would often go BIE to avoid blowing past 204th. :)
Those R-12s had the dynamic braking function disabled, didn't they? Which meant their braking behaved like that on the oldtimers.
Honestly have no idea ... no offense to Stef or my other buddies, but I never much cared about IRT equipment. Too bland. But I can tell you that overshoots and BIE's were commonplace southbound at 204th St, and every now and then you'd see them back up to platform in serious violation of the rules. The third avenue el had many strangenesses to it, so that wouldn't have been a surprise.
Forgive my technical ignorance, but if the R12's were overshooting their stations, why not simply apply the brakes earlier to assure stopping inside the platform?
Right ... it's just a matter of getting comfortable with the car.
Mr rt__:^)
You've got me since the line assignments were all "regulars" who knew the line. Only guess I can make is that some of the equipment didn't work the same way at each stop. I can tell you from my own "mishap" that the general rule of thumb back then was "now you have it, now you don't" ... other R12's would coast into the station, run slow to the end of the platform and STILL have to take a dump.
A lot of folks don't realize how BAD the subways had gotten by 1970. It may be slower now, but it DOES run ...
You have a way with words.:-)
I guess it's part of having done this stuff, so all the mystery and "fun" is gone. I look back at my own career more like Scotty in Star Trek ... "cantankerous beasties" and "she's gonna blow, cap'n" ... heh.
I was referring specifically to "take a dump".:-)
Ummm ... what would YOU call it? Blowing? Heh. You pull the handle out, the train takes a dump. Next crew call ... and not ONCE did I mention an angle cock. Whoops.
Then there's the butt plug. Nah, I won't go any further.
Well, now that I'm back home - for those who showed up for our little group outing (most of the folks from Harry's place, the regulars, came and we had a blast) got a little gift from Santa Selkirk for all the good little birls and goys - a nice collection of old time recordings and a few new ones on a custom audio CD and of course, there was a butt plug in the artwork on the labels. I had to. There was another eye-cookie there involving HeyPaul's cab but I'll let it remain a mystery. Needless to say, the level of ballbusting as a result was fun for all. I had a blast and it appears that everyone else did as well.
And YES Virginia, I wrapped my fingers around some charged-up NYCTA throttle. I *hate* joysticks, especially when they're on the cab windowsill. :)
Years ago, the tools needed to adjust the brakes on Redbirds were made by hand out of steel bar and flat stock in the maintainance shops. The people with the skills to make them are gone...the old tools are rewelded when they break...there are no new ones. What I need is the 'socket sizes' for the 'self adjusting brake' and the 'shoe depth.' I can measure next week and do for myself or get the dimensions off of here and try without a model in my shop. CI Peter
"'self adjusting brake'"
Of course you are referring to the automatic slack adjusters! Do they ever call anything by their proper name in the A division?
No, most of the time people just ask for the tools and do the work...I don't remember every name of every thing yet. 239th is pretty slack...they can do the work but don't know how it works. 180th crew is sharp as a tack...they know how must of the stuff they fix works...you should hear their chants in propulsion tests! What they don't have are tools in good condition...and you know that there aren't two identical slack adjusters in the world. I'll try 'shrinking' an oil filter strap wrench...it's small. Thankyou. CI Peter
What do you mean, the manual adjusting nut on the back of the
slack adjuster that you turn out to loosen the brakes up to
change a shoe?? Those shouldn't be that hard to turn. If
you can't move them by hand, what's wrong with a simple adjustable
wrench?
What do you mean by "shoe depth" ?
Either its the thickness at the ends of or the circular notch height that is cut into every composition brake shoe used on clasp and tread brake units on cars R10-68A. A few tears ago, the R38s were having prblems with the brake beams, causing excessive shoe wear at one end. What is the problem with parking brakes eating away shoes?
R142 TBUs equipped with parking brake units are getting stuck or locked up. Their adjustment mechs internally slip and some times you can't run the arm out far enough to put a new shoe in. The shoes on R1/L2 are getting ground down to the metal. My last TBU in parking brake test would place the shoe against the wheel and then release it when it should have been engaged. Marked defective on my inspection sheet...referred to Bombardier. CI Peter
I still haven't had a chance to ride one, although I drove beneath one on the Westchester El, and the brake squeal is comparible to an dead motored R62. You get a chance to work on the R127s?
"What do you mean by "shoe depth" ?
Again, those northern division guys never refer to anything by the currently accepted terminology. What I think Peter is referring to is the shoe thickness. Currently, the SIP calls for replacement of the shoe when the thinnest part of the shoe is 3/4" or less.
Two tools to do brake adjustment on Redbirds can use hex sockets: the slack adjuster is easy to turn even by hand but faster to do with a long crank and socket (sheet metal can fabricate the socket.) The other adjustment I refer to as 'brake depth' is cam locked and set by a long hex shaft which controls the fixed distance of the shoe from the wheel and may take a little more force to rotate. Brakes OFF, set the slack adjuster, crank the shoe down to the wheel and back off four clicks. Easy work IF you have the tools...a big adjustable wrench can work but it's too slow and may not clear the rail. A foreman from another crew was after me Friday: 'Good Car Inspectors improvise.' I do. CI Peter
I'm trying to picture this brake rigging. The "long hex shaft"
that you say sets the distance of the shoe to the wheel, is this
a turnbuckle in the rigging or do you mean the thing on the back
of the slack adjuster?
Are you even allowed to use your own tools in the shop?
There is a hex shaft projecting from the brake rigging below the axle to be set four clicks out from the wheel. Improperly set, the brake shoe wears unevenly 'top to bottom' so one end is rejected and the other end is OK. The slack adjuster sets the average brake distance like the star wheel in auto drum brakes...the other adjustment evens the way the shoe sets on the wheel. I don't have the experience to speak in rail terms...just the mechanical skills to look at something to fixemup. You are not allowed to use your own tools in the shop for 'insurance reasons' but I'm given some slack because of my experience and the industrial quality of tools I pick up at flea markets and garage sales...'Car Inspectors improvise.' It is a sad situation but my 'hobby skills' are proving out to be so very valuable...my skills as an electronic communications professional remain unused. The tool room gets a shopping list for what I cannot fabricate. i love this job...I know nothing about cars and lines...but I can MAKE TRAINS GO. CI Peter
I do see CIs buying tools from Snap On trucks at certain maintainance facilities, so I would figure you can buy your own tools of the trade.
The contract and TA rules state that mechanics are responsible to provide their own 'common' hand tools. However, I have never known a situation where an employee was compelled to purchase his/her own tools. I would have no problem with an employee buying his own tools as long as the quality is adequate tomaintain a safe work environment.
Steve is far more knowledgable in this than I but in the beginning, some foremen gave me a little grief about 'tools from home.' Part of it is 'injury related' and part 'damage to equipment control.' The toolbox I finally got had a small assortment of Craftsman mechanics tools (ball peen, 3/8 socket set, combo wrenches, Adj. wrench, screwdrivers, linesman pliers, etc.) For most work it is adaquate...tools are marked 'NYCTA'...some things like files are available from the toolroom...but anything else is like 'pulling teeth.' I wouldn't go the Snap-on or MAC route...too expensive...Sears may occasionally change vendors but the overall quality is very good. I think TA probably pays too much for what I received as the blow-molded kits have far more at a much lower price. I had always used Xcelite tools in my 25 years of work ...far too little today for the buck. Maybe TA needs to get someone who QC'd government work to look at the condition of the tools being used...my biggest hangup is seeing old water pipe routinely extending wrenches and ratchets. CI Peter
Part of the DCE safety initiative is for the supervisor to do a tool inspection every day. Defective tools should be replaced as soon as they are discovered. If an employee needs a tool or suggests a tool that'll make the job easier, safer or higher in quality, if it can be proven, I'll buy it. Frankly, I'd rather blow the budget on tools and equipment that'll get the job done right. Any shop where this is not the practice is not doing it correctly.
BTW: Do not ever let me catch an employee using a piece of pipe to extend a torque-wrench handle.
Oh, now I know what you mean! Maybe Train Dude knows the official
TA term for that adjustment. Anyway, it will be expensive, but
perhaps a ratcheting box wrench?
Sears just came out with a Craftsman ratcheting combination box wrench set. I picked up one (English) and have already put a couple of those wrenches to use.
Sears just came out with a Craftsman ratcheting combination box wrench set.
Steve, I know Denver is a long way from civilization, but really... I've had my Craftsman ratcheting box wrenches for at least 15 years. Never have made much use of them, however - they take up too much space compared to a regular box wrench and usually if I've got that kind of space I've got enough room to use a socket.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Cut down an open end wrench of the proper size
Why waste a good tool??? I'll make one better!!
When I was got off the E Car 3423 at Roosevelt last night, I was going up to the 7. I saw on the Jamaica Bound Platform an R32 E Express- car 3386 with flags on them-near the number board. Flags appear to be a bit smaller than those on the R46. It's about time the R32 has some red white and blue.
#3386 E Queens Blvd Express
The True Red White and Blue!
I'm glad that they finally found a space to put the flag stickers on the R-32s. I guess that very soon all of the New York City subway with the possible exception of the "Redbirds" will have American flag stickers on them.
#3 West End Jeff
Redbirds have them.
At least some of the "Redbirds" will be retired with "old glory" on them.
#3 West End Jeff
At least some of the "Redbirds" will be retired with "old glory" on them.
Wonder if they have to remove the vinyl stickers before they sink them? And, is it disrespectful to the flag to sink it into the ocean?
(Though something I read recently pointed out that the recent profusion of flags is displayed in all sorts of ways, many of them "improper" according to whatever the rules for flag display are. I'm not bothered by it, frankly.)
>>> something I read recently pointed out that the recent profusion of flags is displayed in all sorts of ways, many of them "improper" according to whatever the rules for flag display are. I'm not bothered by it, frankly <<<
It is clear that the Flag Code is dead. It was promulgated in 1923 as a codification of accepted practices for displaying the flag. At the time, the flag was treated with reverence. There were still many civil war veterans alive, and in that war and the Spanish-American war being a color bearer was considered a great honor. When infantry troops charged, the color bearer was at the middle of the line right at the front. Naturally defenders would concentrate fire on him because if the flag fell, it might signal to those following that the charge had failed and they would pull back. If a color bearer fell wounded, he would plant the butt of the flagpole in the ground, and try to keep the flag aloft until the next soldier could drop his weapon, take the flag and continue forward. Needless to say, the mortality rate among flag bearers was high, but the position was sought by soldiers. It is that mentality that went into drafting the Flag Code.
Those who had seen men literally die to keep a flag aloft felt very strongly that the flag should always be looked up to, never be allowed to touch the ground, or be contaminated by coming in contact with everyday dirt and grime. The Flag Code gives instructions on where, when and how to appropriately display the flag, and instructions for "dignified" disposal of used and worn flags. Flying a flag was not something to be done casually. The code prohibits wearing flags as part of clothing, using them in advertizing, or using them as a decoration. Whenever it is displayed with other flags or insignia it should be displayed in the place of honor above and to the right of the other flags.
Until the 1960's the Flag Code was generally respected. Even politicians at political conventions would not have flags all over the place, but only one behind the speaker's platform. All other red white and blue decorations would be in the form of bunting which was clearly not a flag. The Vietnam war brought protests which included flying the flag upside down as a distress signal and flag burning as a sign of contempt. Supporters of the war started flying flags to show their support of the government (as opposed to the country) and police officers started wearing flag patches on their uniforms. Construction workers put flag decals on their hard hats.
There were attempts at prosecuting flag burners for disrespect of the flag based on state laws, but they failed as being an unconstitutional restraint of free speech. In one case in California, a young man walking in the hallway of a court house wearing an American flag patch on a back pocket of his Levi's was seen by a bailiff who was incensed that the man would sit on the flag and told a judge about it. The judge had the bailiff bring the man into court and held him in contempt of court and had him jailed. He was quickly released by another judge on constitutional grounds.
In contemporary America knowledge of the Flag code is so lacking that many people display and handle the flag contrary to the code's provisions, not through disrespect, but through ignorance. I have seen all of the following which are contrary to the Flag code:
> Flags hung backward and decals applied backward
> Flag decals on rear automobile bumpers (where it gets dirty and you look down at it).
> A flag decal as a hood ornament on an automobile.
> Flags flying from cars left unattended (the flag should be removed when the car is left overnight).
> An American flag on the left side of an automobile with a larger Lakers flag on the right side of the car (the right side is the place of honor)
> Flags with writing on them (usually "God Bless America").
> Ragged and faded flags flying all over.
> On a picture of an R-143, a flag decal placed below the MTA logo (yielding the place of honor to the MTA).
> A small flag on a stick worn as part of a woman's hairdo.
> Flags flying day and night without illumination.
> A flag draped from a porch rail with flower pots on it holding it in place.
> Flag decals or patches on various things such as school books, back packs, briefcases, women's purses and other items that may be placed on the floor at one time or another.
> Flags printed on T shirts and sweatshirts (which tend to get dirty)
> Flag patches on the coveralls of auto mechanics, plumbers and other blue collar technicians (where they will most certainly get dirty).
> A bicyclist with a flag hanging down from the back of the bicycle saddle.
> A woman wearing an American flag bikini.
> Worn flags discarded in trash bins.
All of the examples I have listed are considered by the flag code to be disrespectful of the flag, but in every case I doubt that the persons involved intended disrespect. It bothers me to see the ignorance of the traditional respect which is due the flag more than what is being done. I certainly do not think there should be any penalties for these transgressions, nor would I support any penalties even against those who intentionally dishonor the flag as a political statement. The freedoms for which the flag stands are more important than the flag itself.
Tom
THANKYOU. Most people do not know flag etiquete or which candle goes out first on the Church altar. CI Peter
Most people do not know flag etiquete or which candle goes out first on the Church altar.
No reason for me to know that unless I was a member of said church, eh? Whereas most of us here are American citizens.
I'm still not bothered by displays of the flag that contravene a set of now somewhat-archaic rules, but I accept that others are.
It's not archaic rules but tradition forgotten. All Churches have the tradition irregardless of denomination to put out the candle on YOUR left at the end of service...the 'Gospel' candle. Same with flags: as a kid I was told flags that touched the ground were to be burned..seen any flags burned recently? I had a small part in seeing that flag decals were installed on #2 R142s properly and they're in my face every day. My car sports red/white/blue emergency service license plates, the U.S. flags are on the right side, MTA CED identification is in the middle and banners/statements are on the left. Simple things, things of respect, things of traditon not forgotten. CI Peter
Hey Peter ...
All Churches have the tradition irregardless of denomination to put out the candle on YOUR left at the end of service...the 'Gospel' candle.
Uhhhhh ... not MY church, which admittedly is esteric.
And, frankly, I take a peculiar pride in knowing that I am a proud citizen of a country that can withstand its flag being burned as a symbol of what it stands for. BUT, I promised SeaBeachFred I'd not digress into political discussions on SubTalk.
So let me close, simply, with a word of compliments to you and everyone who got the Stars & Stripes onto the subway cars. It's a wonderful thing, and makes me reflect every time I see it (i.e. 3 to 10 times when my train pulls into the station). I'm delighted that you and all the other car-shop folks did this. Thanks. It means a lot.
Or flag underwear - seen at Sears this past week, marked down 50% (right next to similar garments featuring the Grinch and the WWF).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
The flag remains on the carbody as a recognition of service just as a flag drapes burial at sea. The Redbirds were called to service and have done us well. WE SHOULD ONLY WISH 'OUR CALL TO SERVICE' COMES CLOSE. CI Peter
... just as a flag drapes burial at sea.
Hmmmm, interesting point. Although to me it'd be a stretch to say that the Redbirds served our country in wartime. (I could make all sorts of comparisons of rush-hour IRT service to wartime, but it isn't appropriate these days.)
Hey...didn't Redbirds serve you and everyone else getting everyone to work?? Consider the economic war and the 'Energizer Rabbit.' CI Peter
How many of you have actually witnessed a military burial at sea? I have... the flag is draped over the weighted canvas bag containing the remains but is attached to the "slide" used to drop the remains overboard... it doesn't actually accompany the remains into the ocean. (No, I wasn't ever in the military, but when a close friend died after a shipboard accident his family requested the ocean burial and I accompanied them to the ship for the service.)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
... the flag is draped over the weighted canvas bag containing the remains but is attached to the "slide" used to drop the remains overboard... it doesn't actually accompany the remains into the ocean.
A useful detail to know, thanks. So that only reinforces my question: Do they remove the flag decal (and, for that matter, the rest of the decals) on Redbirds before they get dumped into the ocean?
While not a stickler on flag etiquette by any means (see other threads), it does strike me that maybe it's not appropriate to send a Stars & Stripes to the bottom of Chesapeake Bay (or whereever).
I wouldn't lose sleep over it, but seems like the MTA should pay a BIT of attention to this stuff. Just curious ....
Costs money to have Car inspectors scrape off the flag decal. Flags used in 'burial at sea' are returned to the family in peacetime. Should we save some red-painted chunks of Bondo?? CI Peter
Flags used in 'burial at sea' are returned to the family in peacetime. Should we save some red-painted chunks of Bondo??
Again, I'd be really tempted to say "we" (SubTalkers) are the closest family.
But it's all just a little too close to the bone these days.
>>> The flag remains on the carbody as a recognition of service just as a flag drapes burial at sea. The Redbirds were called to service and have done us well. <<<
Come on Peter, now it is getting a little deep. The Redbirds are not doing their patriotic duty, they are inanimate objects. To suggest they deserve a flag for their service cheapens the symbolism of the flag. The credit for keeping them running as long as they have is due to those who have maintained them, not the car bodies themselves. Even those who maintain the cars, like yourself, are not doing a good job for patriotism as much as a sense of pride in job well done.
Tom
I think that you are correct that it isn't proper to put the American flag underwater.
#3 West End Jeff
Flags appear to be a bit smaller than those on the R46.
This is obvious, according to the design of the carbody of the R32's.
Where do R32's and the Queens Blvd. division line trains get their flags?
Can anyone group any other lines onto a yard that affixes each flag?
Generally, the flags went on in the barn where the cars get inspected. Each car goes in on average every 2 months. Some are put on in the terminals by car equipment personel.
Cars 6791-6800, the latest deliveries, have joined it's companions in road simulations.
I observed it stopping at Canal Street tonight. Folks must scratch their heads every time a train opens its doors on the wrong side. What is that guy smoking? Heh.
-Stef
I seen the train at Fulton Street going north. Where you working Canal North?
Canal South.
-Stef
Yep, I saw you there last night. My horn was not working so I couldnt get your attention.
I have a VR job there so I'll be there one more week before I go on the road.
At least I got Sunday/Monday off!
-Stef
Which was the day the 9 and Z entered subway service and why was they added?
Also,Is there any other use for the 9 besides 7 avenue service?
Both lines were started up to provide for skip stop service on major segments of their operating territory. The J line runs through Brooklyn and Queens on a two track line, and to prevent overcrowding on some trains, the skip stop service was put in placefor the commuters. The same thing for the number 1 line in Northern Manhattan. The ROW of the J cannot be rebuilt to allow for an express track, so the skip stop is the next best thing short of building a new line altogether. The middle track of the number 1 line is not suitable for express service unless some modifications are made, so the next best thing is the skip stop service. It has been said before - if the IND second system was build when it should have been, the system would not be the hodge-podge that it is at present.
>>ROW of the J cannot be rebuilt to allow for an express track, <<
Based on earlier posts, I believe this is not true. The el portion in Queens was built with space for a center track, which could still be added today.
Yes the Jamaica el in Queens has space for the middle track and a bond issue voted on in the 1950's which was approved by voters for building the 2nd Av subway also included adding the middle track to the Jamaica el.
You know what happened to the money then. I don't think that the Jamaica el is in good enough shape to add a middle track and the whole el probably would have to reconstructed.
Anyway, the Jamaica el has had "A" stops and "B" stops for many years, for their skip-stop service in the rush hours. Somebody just redesignated as the new "Z" those Jamaica trains which made the "B" stops. (Remember the MTA posters which boasted about 'so many transit improvements' which introduced the [Z] and also included renumbering the Q-44A, Q-44VP, Q-5A, Q-5B, B-59 buses)
Big deal.
But not at collosal cost, and certainly not along Fulton St.
The Z was born on 12/12/88. The 9 was re-born in August 1989, IIRC.
9 was originally Dyre.
This is schedule is in effect when there is no weekend G.O. on the (L).
Saturday
Canarsie: 615, 747, 917, 1047, 1217, 1347, 1517, 1647, 1817
14th Street: 704, 834, 1004, 1134, 1304, 1434, 1604, 1734, 1904
Sunday/
Canarsie: 603, 740, 911, 1044, 1213, 1349, 1526, 1701, 1837, 2012
14th Street: 655, 825, 955, 1137, 1300, 1436, 1612, 1748, 1924, 2056
Again this schedule is tentative if there is no weekend G.O. on the (L) line. Now I've sometimes know the (L) to get screwed up and every once in a blue the R-143 will drop back one interval, so if you don't see it on the intervals posted above, that means there is a line delay, but other than that above is your R-143 Weekend Schedule.
Enjoy!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I hope to ride a train of R-143s myself one of these days.
#3 West End Jeff
Well all I can say is a BIG thank you! It was completely accurate, as it pulled into 14/8 at 11:30, very very cool.
I rode it today. The only thing I dislike is the "forced commercials" on the interior side destination signs for MetroCard, Access-a-Ride, request A stop, Airport access, step aside, etc, The signs used green, red and yellow/orange.
The train looks likk a wide and stretched version of the 142/142A. The unique feature is a ceiling mounted grab bar between door pairs 2 and 3 in an oval shape.
According to the crew assignment sheets, the 143 was listed as a "gap" train for Sunday meaning that the 143 would only be placed into service in the event of a service delay.
All I'm saying is that for this Sunday at least, don't rely on the posted schedule as the 143 may or may not run. Stay tuned.
Oh, so that's what that means, and that's why I didn't see it passing by all day on the J!
I thought the trainset was supposed to be in service for 30 consecutive days. If it skips a day for whatever reason, does the clock restart?
No, the clock will not restart in the event that the train is not used for service reasons.
With the start of the new pick, there will be new faces at Canarsie, especially on the weekend. Not too many people are qualified right now since there is only one train. I wonder if that actually means that the assigned crews to the gap train are already R143 qualified in case the guys who picked jobs are not qualified yet.
That would appear to be the case Bill. I was north extra up until yesterday, and I was not qualified on the 143.
They may being doing what they done with the R142. They had R142 Gap crews in case a crew is not R142 Quilified. The same case may happen with the R143's.
When the R142's came out they had a R142 Gap Crew at E 241 St and Flatbush. It sometimes read as "R142 GAP" "R142 GAP AND WAA"
Does anyone have the weekday schedule of the R 143? I know that it was posted here a couple of weeks ago, but I can't find it. Hope to ride it on Monday.How has it been doing?
Does my heart good to hear the New Lots station announced on the link last week- Brings back many memories.
Zman:
Did the CAS sheets say, R143 Qual Gap & Waa. If it did, then that means there is a crew at the terminal to take the train on its next interval just in case the original crew is not qualified. They have the same thing for the R142 for now, which will be gone shortly. T/O and C/R's in the A division must be R142 qualified by early next year.
The R-143 trainset was in service today. I rode it from Broadway Junction to 8th Avenue via Canarsie.
At Rockaway Parkway, it did not announce the in-station transfer to the B42. At Union Square, it erroneously included the W in the transfer list. At 6th Avenue, it correctly omitted the V. It also omitted the 9; I'd be curious to learn if it omits the 9 rush hours as well. (The 9 is listed on the strip map, as is the red S I had mentioned earlier.) The screech is loud when the train comes to a full stop. Otherwise, nothing new.
I had a conversation with another passenger in the second car from the Manhattan end about window treatments, gray walls, and the R-160 (among other topics). If you happen to read this, speak up.
Ain't me....junk trainsets make fishie homes. CI Peter
"At Union Square, it erroneously included the W in the transfer list." I don't know if the computer based announcements can distingush what day it is! For that matter, does the train know what time it is M-F so it can or won't include Z in the transfer list at Broadway Junction?
On the R142, they make the coorect transfers according to the time of day and the weekend.
Mostly. The announcements on the 2 at 59 always list the A, C, and D (IINM). Never the B (even weekdays), always the C (even nights).
But the point is that the system is capable of announcing the correct transfers at the time; it's just programmed incorrectly.
As I said, the train announced the W but not the V. Both of those transfers are weekday-only. Either the V wasn't programmed at all or the train "knew" that the V doesn't run on weekends.
On Saturday afternoon, we were waiting for our Slant to leave 8th Avenue when the 143 came in on the opposite track. We excitedly got ready to board it, but the only people on board were a few employees (orange vests) who waved us off. The doors never opened, and after about a minute it reversed direction and headed empty back to Brooklyn, making the same high-pitched whine heard on the 142As.
This was around 3:00, or 1500, so obviously they were testing it at the time. We'll have to try to get it during the upcoming four-day holiday, assuming there are no GOs.
I would have loved to have seen the reactions to this train from the large waiting outbound crowd our Slant inherited at Union Square.
A would-be robber poured flammable liquid through the money slot, told the token clerk to get out, and ignited it. The automatic extinguishing system worked, the robber fled, the token clerk was physically uninjured and subway service was not affected.
New York Times story
I hope this does not start a series of copy cat jobs.
The Flushing G station is scary. It's in the middle of nowhere, with little traffic, and, quite frankly, a frightening neighborhood upstairs.
If MTA closed down the extension beyond Parsons/Archer, the Queens terminus for (E),(J) and (Z) trains, will they plan for an extension though, despite the LIRR.
MTA didn't close down anything. The upper level of the Archer Av tunnel offers tail tracks that lead to LIRR ROW, which cannot be used for subway operations due to Federal Railroad Administration rules. To use that ROW LIRR has to stop operating on it (and presumably the voltage would have to be changed from 750 V DC to 600 V DC along with other work) and I don't think LIRR wants to do that.
The lower level leads to tail tracks along Archer Av. I personally think a new station at Merrick Blvd. would be cool, and I think the merchants would benefit from that too. It's a matter of money.
So, you're saying that the (J) and/or (Z) trains have a potential extension beyond Parsons/Archer terminus?
Yes, if MTA wants to build one and has the money to do it.
The "E" can be extended, too - same issues apply, and they'll have to stay underground to do it.
The J tracks only extend about a trainlength beyond Parsons/Archer. Extensive tunneling would need to be done to reach a station at Merrick Blvd.
Why has the extension of the F past 179th St ever been considered, especially since tracks extend all the way to 185/Hillside?
Firstly, because the Manhattan portion of (F) runs in the midtown Manhattan (Area of Times Square and Empire State Building), whereas for the Manhattan portion fo (J) runs in downtown Manhattan (NYSE, Chinatown, City Hall and Brooklyn Bridge).
"The J tracks only extend about a trainlength beyond Parsons/Archer. Extensive tunneling would need to be done to reach a
station at Merrick Blvd."
Yes, that's right. It's a budget thing.
Originally, the plan called for the lower level tracks to meet the upper level tracks south of the station with a diamond X-over. This would have enabled J trains and E trains alternate routes into the city. The plan was seen as having limited utility & not cost-effective and was scrapped before the final plan for the Archer Ave extension was implimented. Given the subsequent troubles with the Williamsburg Bridge, that decision might have been wrong.
That aspect of the plan certainly represented some forward thinking!
Never say never, though. Have money, will build - so long as it isn't too outlandish or disruptive,you could still do something there without too much NIMBY to worry about.
The plan was seen as having limited utility & not cost-effective and was scrapped before the final plan for the Archer Ave extension was implimented. Given the subsequent troubles with the Williamsburg Bridge, that decision might have been wrong.
Almost any cost savings scheme that sacrifices flexibility should be suspect.
You'll get no argument from me on that point.
Originally, the plan called for the lower level tracks to meet the upper level tracks south of the station with a diamond X-over. This would have enabled J trains and E trains alternate routes into the city.
What point would that have served, aside from equipment moves? You can call an J train an E train, but it's still a "J" with an "E" on the front running the same route-from Jamaica Center to Broad Street. Who cares if you call it an E Train?
About ten years or more ago, a prpane tank car derailed in sunnyside yard.
All rail,subway and street traffic was halted in that area.
If that connection and the Christie connection from the 6th ave to the Willie B were used, All of the LIRR, #7, E,F,G,N, and R trains and all the busses would have had at the very least, some sort of transportation. Thousands were delayer for hours before any movement was made.
This alternate is still needed.
avid
Now I see the point!
When the Williamsburg Bridge was closed, East NY cars were moved via diesel between south brooklyn and East NY. Even if this option was not available for service, it would have made shifting cars for inspection and maintenance more convenient. Also, in the case of a major service disruption due to accident, derailment, etc. Some service could be re-routed according to available track capacity.
I had suspected that something like that would've been the case before the final plans were made. It would've so much sense to have the E and J trains to merge together on one level and continue an extension into into eastern Queens since the LIRR ROW extension was abandoned.
Can't you boar? Wait is the Archer Eve Extension under The LIRR ROW?
Sure you can, if soil conditions are right. It still costs money to do that.
A 188th street station would be cool or how I heard once it, will be extended to Little Neck Parkway (fatchance). If it is extended you could terminate the MBTA (LI) much earlier in there route and reduce congestion at 165st term and on Hillside ave.
Forgive my ignorance, but how far east past 179th street does the tunnel under Hillside ave. currently reach?
To 184th Place.
Both levels?
I don't know.
The upper level ends at 184th Place, the lower level a block or two before that. The upper level has more training storing capacity than thge lower level.
Thank you for posting that. Good info.
Actually, I believe the distance difference is a bit over 600'. IIRC you can get 2 trains on the upper level tracks.
Why not just put a station there. Only five blocks, but a lot of people lining up to use it.
Stations are the most expensive part of a subway line. In addition, there are certain fixed start-up costs for construction which are the same if you build a a hundred feet of track or a mile of track. So extending the line several blocks and building a new station will not be all that much more expensive than building a station at 184th Place, and it will help serve more of the neighborhood.
Any time they want to extend the (F) past 179th, as far as they want up to the end of the city, it's allright with me!
:-) Andrew
How about a direct subway line to Belmont Park???
From 179 Street, these new stops:
- 188 St/Hillside, local stop
- Francis Lewis Blvd/Hillside, local stop
- 212 St/Hillside, local stop
- Springfield Blvd/Hillside, local/express stop
- Creedmoor Hospital/Hillside, local
- Jamaica Avenue/Commonwealth Blvd, local/express stop TERMINUS
Then from Jamaica/Commonwealth, operate a single track shuttle (4-car R46) to the Belmont Park backstretch on racing days only. Platform would be standard length, so a few F trains can continue to Belmont in "peak direction".
Just an idea..
Sounds good to me!!!!!!!11
:-) Andrew
I'd be happy with a 2 track line making those stops. Extend the R & V to 179th and make that stop the new eastern terminus for Queens Blvd. local trains 24/7.
How about a two track line with a propvision for adding express tracks when more money is available.
Sure, but asking for that may be too much these days. It's not 1934 anymore.
It doesn't say much for the economy if it's not possible to build things now which could've been built in 1934, just as the world was pulling out of the depression.
Imagine this:
It took 33 years to build the new line from Rockerfeller Ctr., through 57th St. and on to Queens Blvd (1968 to 2001). Total distance: 1.8 miles. The first IND line was 4.3 miles from 207th St. to Hudson Terminal, and was constructed in 7 years. Do the math and figure out how long it would take to build that first section of the 8th Ave, IND today and allow reality to set in. 2nd Ave line? Perhaps when my son becomes a grandfather ...
You have a good point, Chris.
The total distance of the completed 63rd St subway, however, is 3.4 miles, not 1.8. and total route miles built was about 6.5 miles (LIRR tunnel underneath).
Never rely on the NY Post for accurate transit statistics!
I thought 1.8 might be a little short.
It took 33 years to build the new line from Rockerfeller Ctr., through 57th St. and on to Queens Blvd (1968 to 2001). Total distance: 1.8 miles. The first IND line was 4.3 miles from 207th St. to Hudson Terminal, and was constructed in 7 years. Do the math and figure out how long it would take to build that first section of the 8th Ave, IND today and allow reality to set in. 2nd Ave line? Perhaps when my son becomes a grandfather ...
It wasn't 33 years of steady construction work, of course. From what I understand, most of the line was built in maybe four or five years, work then halted for many years, and then the line to 21st-Queensbridge was completed. It was the last 1,500 feet that took many years.
True, but my point was that it still took that much time to finish. How far up 2nd Ave. will the construction get until the funding dries up?
If you're lucky it might reach 14th St. :P
I'd be thrilled if they'd just build the 125th to 63rd. St. "stubway". But politics won't allow that, so nothing will be built.
I don't understand the objection to the "stubway" on 2nd Ave. Yes a full length would be best, but let's get SOMETHING built first and then extend it downwards after. Is NOTHING better half. You got to start somewhere. Otherwise no one has ANYTHING.
I don't understand the objection to the "stubway" on 2nd Ave. Yes a full length would be best, but let's get SOMETHING built first and then extend it downwards after. Is NOTHING better half. You got to start somewhere. Otherwise no one has ANYTHING.
Very simple. It does nothing to relieve the worst congestion on the East Side, which is from UES (96th down) to GCT. It would swing west onto Sixth Avenue, which is not where many of those folks want to go, and would cost a lot of money to benefit only a small number of folks (residents of 125th to 60th Streets on the east side).
The Stubway portion is still likely to be BUILT first, but the objection was to doing design only of that part. By requiring design of a unified Second Avenue line, the focus of the public, elected representatives, engineers, funders, etc., is on the entire line. If only the Stubway were designed and then built, do you REALLY think there would be much impetus for THEN doing the rest which will benefit a much wider range of people?
Yes, there would, but I think getting MTA to finalize engineering on the whole line, and getting politicos to sign off on the whole line, was a smart move.
Ron,
HERE is an interesting article about the 2nd ave history that I have not seen referenced here before. You may find it interesting.
Peace,
ANDEE
I had read that, in fact. But thank you for posting it.
Ray Sanchez whines a lot. He'll tell you how stupidly the whole subway was put together, how corrupt rich folks are and how they screwed the subway, and on, and on. The history he recounts has a lot of truth to it, but his spin is, we all got screwed. Read Ray Sanchez enough, and you'll wonder why you didn't go into the WTC during the attack so you wouldn't have to endure any more of the incredibly sucky lifestyle we have thanks to MTA (OK, so I exaggerate a little).
No, we didn't all get screwed. Yes, it would have been nice if the train were better lined up for an interchange with the Lex. Yes, the MTA sacrificed some convenience to save $5 million. But remember what $5 million was in the mid 1960's- so maybe that was a good decision.
Yes, Rockefeller U. complained. They had a legitimate complaint. The MTA responded appropriately, and in doing so, actually saved a lot of wear and tear on Central Park. As it is, a lot of money was spent replacing trees grass and boulders. If the train cut a wider swath through it, how much more disruption would that have caused?
Of course, he neglected to mention that the tunnel through the river was on budget, and on-time. He can't do that and wine at the same time.
The Daily News has papers to sell, and Sanchez has white space to fill. So he fills it. It's entertaining, sometimes. Other times it's claptrap. Other times it's just silly whining. Like this time.
Points are well taken But, I don't agree with your take on Sanchez. I believe him to be very poignant at times
Peace,
ANDEE
Fair enough.
This wasn't one of them.
The Daily News has papers to sell, and Sanchez has white space to fill. So he fills it.
Can't let all those trees die in vain.
Well, the Daily News doesn't kill any trees for Sanchez' column since he writes for Newsday, but Ray does have a habit of doing some stories where he tends to parrot the complaints of any group or the group's leader who shout loud enough about their demands (i.e. the Grand Street shuttle bus controversy from this past summer) and doesn't do enough to investigate alternatives to their claims. His better columns are the ones where he focuses on subway riders who may have problems, but have no political axe to grind.
His job is to sell papers, not report news of solve problems. The best way to sell papers is to make the case that you've been screwed by a higher power. It's very irresponsible, but it works.
Oh I understand that, but he would be a better reporter (albeit possibly a lower paid one) if he would actually think outside the box sometimes and actually tell some of the activists that they might be wrong about their complaints or there might be another answer than what they are suggesting.
Of course, he neglected to mention that the tunnel through the river was on budget, and on-time.
Water leaks and all? What about the necessity of having to replace the entire track bed?
What's amazing about that article is that he decried the TA for not listening the community today, yet blasts them for responding to it in the 1960's. What a hypocrite.
And to give the city at the time a break, they assumed that a 2nd Ave. line would have been built as well as 63rd. St, so their plans were made in accordance with this.
1. Te belief that Queens riders had an express replaced with a local. Only those who use the 2 stops in on 53rd. St. did. This isn't even a majority of Queens IND riders. Collective, 6th Ave. bound riders account for much more, but no one says that these people saw their service almost doubled.
2. The continued coddling of 53rd. St. riders as the only Queens IND riders who count. They keep harping on the "more crowded E". Well guess what? The V also runs there. So it isn't express. Too bad. You can't have everything. Why isn't someone saying this???
3. The continued quoting of irrelevant people. Ridership advocates saying things like "local is a 4 letter word" exposes their uselessness. Joseph Rappaport? Another irrelevant aide to the soon to be irrelevant Mark Green.
I'm writing a letter to Newsday, pretty much stating the first 2 points I made here. It had better be printed. Those who like the new service must be heard.
This article is infuriating in several ways:
1. The belief that Queens riders had an express replaced with a local. Only those who use the 2 stops in on 53rd. St. did. This isn't even a majority of Queens IND riders. Collective, 6th Ave. bound riders account for much more, but no one says that these people saw their service almost doubled.
2. The continued coddling of 53rd. St. riders as the only Queens IND riders who count. They keep harping on the "more crowded E". Well guess what? The V also runs there. So it isn't express. Too bad. You can't have everything. Why isn't someone saying this???
3. The continued quoting of irrelevant people. Ridership advocates saying things like "local is a 4 letter word" exposes their uselessness. Joseph Rappaport? Another irrelevant aide to the soon to be irrelevant Mark Green.
I'm writing a letter to Newsday, pretty much stating the first 2 points I made here. It had better be printed. Those who like the new service must be heard.
The "stubway" would definatley ease congestion, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Congestion into Grand Central would be eased because a significant percentage x-fer here to the S or 7 to get to the West Side, somewhere the new line would directly take them. Collect those people with those who already transfer to the N/R at 59th (a substantial number), those who live east of 2nd Ave who would rather take the train closer to their residence and those who just don't want to deal with the overcrowded #6 line, and you'd have mostly solved the worst of the overcrowding on the IRT.
And the "stubway" would be an extension of the Broadway line, not 6th Ave. And to say Sixth Ave is "not where many of these folks want to go" is ignoring a simple truth in mass transit: people will go where the trains go. Besides, a lot of people already transfer at 51st for the E/V.
The "stubway" would definatley ease congestion, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.
Gee, thanks, Chris. And a very happy holiday season to you too.
But I disagree. Here's why.
Congestion into Grand Central would be eased because a significant percentage x-fer here to the S or 7 to get to the West Side, somewhere the new line would directly take them. Collect those people with those who already transfer to the N/R at 59th (a substantial number)...
Neither of us has cited figures. But, having ridden the 4/5/6 daily for 10 years, I maintain that the number who transfer FROM the Lex line to N/R (59th), the inbound Queens Blvd lines (51st) and the 7 or S (42nd) is FAR lower than the number who are ADDED to the Lex line at each of those stops (inbound).
From my experience, more people transfer FROM the inbound Queens Blvd lines to downtown Lex than vice versa. And riders pour in from Metro North at 42nd, at least replacing all the folks who get off at Grand Central. And there are the original UES riders who want to stay on the east side.
None of these three enormous sets of riders are helped by a Stubway that takes them way west. With a full 2nd Ave line, the UES riders who want to stay on the East Side will have a second choice to the Lex line from a full 2nd Ave line. The Queens Blvd riders could take a line that turns south onto the 2nd Avenue line (under one plan). And the GCT riders (under a plan with a GCT spur) could go to the 2nd Avenue line, and even without it, the 4/5/6 would have more space if you take out these first two groups.
those who live east of 2nd Ave who would rather take the train closer to their residence ... you'd have mostly solved the worst of the overcrowding on the IRT.
As long as (1) they live east of 2nd AND north of 63rd, and (2) they happen to be going to somewhere west of Sixth Avenue. I maintain that's a small part of the total.
the "stubway" would be an extension of the Broadway line, not 6th Ave.
You're right, my mistake. Broadway west of 7th Ave (above 42nd) is even further from the east side, where I'm saying a majority of these riders want to end up.
And to say Sixth Ave is "not where many of these folks want to go" is ignoring a simple truth in mass transit: people will go where the trains go.
That defies logic. I'm won't change jobs to get somewhere a train goes. And corporations won't relocate a few blocks in midtown based on new subway connex. Their take is, We don't start paying 'em til they walk in the door, so as long as they can get near the office, an extra 5-15 minutes of commute time has no bearing on where we locate.
SUMMARY: I believe that the number of UES riders who go to west midtown is VASTLY outnumbered by the sum of: UES riders staying on the east side going downtown + Queens riders going to the east side + riders from GCT.
Neither of us has cited figures. But, having ridden the 4/5/6 daily for 10 years, I maintain that the number who transfer FROM the Lex line to N/R (59th), the inbound Queens Blvd lines (51st) and the 7 or S (42nd) is FAR lower than the number who are ADDED to the Lex line at each of those stops (inbound).
True. But my contention is that the Lexington Ave trains will be less congested as they pull into 59th, 51st, and 42nd to absorb these masses. The stubway allows this by diverting a significant percentage of East side IRT riders AWAY from these congestion points.
long as (1) they live east of 2nd AND north of 63rd, and (2) they happen to be going to somewhere west of Sixth Avenue. I maintain that's a small part of the total.
Not really. More people live along 2nd Ave and east of 2nd Ave then do from 3rd Ave west. Given that the new trains will be running almost empty from 125th St, the stubway option would be ideal for a significant percentage of East side IRT riders, currently with no choices at all.
You're right, my mistake. Broadway west of 7th Ave (above 42nd) is even further from the east side, where I'm saying a majority of these riders want to end up.
Yes, a majority of these people will definatley need the east side. But that's not the point. A significant minority want the west side, if you account for all the people who transfer to the N, R, E, V, 7, and S trains from 59th to 42nd St. These people will invariably opt for the less congested stubway line.
That defies logic. I'm won't change jobs to get somewhere a train goes. And corporations won't relocate a few blocks in midtown based on new subway connex. Their take is, We don't start paying 'em til they walk in the door, so as long as they can get near the office, an extra 5-15 minutes of commute time has no bearing on where we locate
Given time, this will balance out once the stubway is built and direct west side service is available. Everyone in Brooklyn worked in lower Manhattan until the Broadway BMT was built into midtown. Once the service exists, people will use it.
SUMMARY: I believe that the number of UES riders who go to west midtown is VASTLY outnumbered by the sum of: UES riders staying on the east side going downtown + Queens riders going to the east side + riders from GCT
Queens transfers to the Lex are unavoidable. Many would still x-fer even if a full 2nd Ave line is built, because the line would be local only, and in many places is much farther from their destination than the Lex is below 42nd. My assertion is that the stubway would attract enough riders away from the IRT to bring the east side IRT down from 130% capacity to a managable 100%. As a regular east side rider, you understand the congestion that people must suffer with. Any other alternative, especially if you live east of Lexington Ave, would be welcome. If I had to get from 77th St to Union Sq, I'd take the Q via 2nd Ave. It might take a couple of extra minutes, but that's a small price to pay for the good chance at a seat and the better chance of not having to let 2 or 3 packed Lexington Ave. locals go before I can squeeze my body on a train.
And my argument is also based on the fact that a stubway is cheaper to build, therefore it's much more likely to be constructed. The full length line would be ideal, but it's additional cost would make it tougher to get built. Basically, my arguments are of a "stubway-or-nothing" variety, while yours are a "stubway-or-full length" variety. Which is more plausable?
my contention is that the Lexington Ave trains will be less congested as they pull into 59th, 51st, and 42nd to absorb these masses. The stubway allows this by diverting a significant percentage of East side IRT riders AWAY from these congestion points.
Our dispute becomes, how MUCH of a "significant percentage" are those UES-to-west-side riders? You maintain "high enough to make a difference," I believe it would only make a marginal difference.
More people live along 2nd Ave and east of 2nd Ave then do from 3rd Ave west. True, and certainly true of subway riders. Given that the new trains will be running almost empty from 125th St, True as well, at least until later Bronx connection the stubway option would be ideal for a significant percentage of East side IRT riders, currently with no choices at all.
Not "no choices" ... I lived at York/80th for 9 years. I spent a lot of time walking to the Lex line and waiting for crowded locals, or walking to 86th to get a one-stop jump on the crowding and an express. But for UESers heading to Wall Street, there is heavy express bus service AND cab-sharing from places like 79th & York. A 2nd Ave subway takes some (but not all) of that away.
Given time, this will balance out once the stubway is built and direct west side service is available. Everyone in Brooklyn worked in lower Manhattan until the Broadway BMT was built into midtown. Once the service exists, people will use it.
Over decades, there may be incremental adjustments. But this is a convenience adjustment to make commuting faster and more pleasant, not a neighborhood development tool. We're not talking about undeveloped 5-story neighborhoods blossoming into Rockfeller Centers. The Broadway line in midtown is lined with large office towers already.
Queens transfers to the Lex are unavoidable. Many would still x-fer even if a full 2nd Ave line is built, because the line would be local only ...
Lex line at 51st is local too! Granted it's an easy cross-platform transfer to the express at GCT, but that makes it a 3-seat ride and adds to congestion. All depends how far you're going; 23rd Street or Wall Street?
My assertion is that the stubway would attract enough riders away from the IRT to bring the east side IRT down from 130% capacity to a managable 100%.
I respect your assertion, but disagree with it. We've reached the end of stating our respective positions. Anyone got hard ridership data on origins & destinations in the service area ???
Historical Note: Remember, opposition to the Stubway only heated up when LIRR East Side Access got approved without a Second Avenue commitment at the same time. The LIRR will bring in 40K more riders, some of whom will head for the subways. Even if the Stubway opened at the same time, your scenario of reduced loading from 130% to 100% would have another 30% (or some number) added back by new LIRR riders at GCT.
The entire east side needs relief, not just the UES! (There's probably a class issue too, the UES being perceived as wealthier than the east side below 42nd -- though I'm not sure that's accurate when applied to subway riders.)
a stubway is cheaper to build, therefore it's much more likely to be constructed. The full length line would be ideal, but it's additional cost would make it tougher to get built. Basically, my arguments are of a "stubway-or-nothing" variety, while yours are a "stubway-or-full length" variety. Which is more plausable?
Personally, I now live in Gramercy Park. Stubway does squat for me. But as a transit geek, I'd say that planning and engineering the full line and some political commitments to phased funding might just get the Stubway built in time for LIRR-to-GCT. IIRC, the recent $$$ appropriated were for design work on the entire line. A good thing, although I'm still skeptical that even a Stubway will open the same day as LIRR-to-GCT.
Our dispute becomes, how MUCH of a "significant percentage" are those UES-to-west-side riders? You maintain "high enough to make a difference," I believe it would only make a marginal difference
I think otherwise. Nice empty R68's are much more attractive than the overcrowded IRT. It'll be a significant minority.
Not "no choices" ... I lived at York/80th for 9 years. I spent a lot of time walking to the Lex line and waiting for crowded locals, or walking to 86th to get a one-stop jump on the crowding and an express. But for UESers heading to Wall Street, there is heavy express bus service AND cab-sharing from places like 79th & York. A 2nd Ave subway takes some (but not all) of that away.
These alternatives are born out of desperation with the state of the East side IRT. Once the stubway is built, these people will actually have a choice of subways into midtown.
Over decades, there may be incremental adjustments. But this is a convenience adjustment to make commuting faster and more pleasant, not a neighborhood development tool. We're not talking about undeveloped 5-story neighborhoods blossoming into Rockfeller Centers. The Broadway line in midtown is lined with large office towers already.
Which house workers who live on the UES, which the stubway will provide a one seat ride for. Not everyone on the UES works on the east side of Manhattan.
Lex line at 51st is local too! Granted it's an easy cross-platform transfer to the express at GCT, but that makes it a 3-seat ride and adds to congestion. All depends how far you're going; 23rd Street or Wall Street?
It's a sad fact that the 9/11 disaster has forever altered the configuration of businesses in downtown Manhattan. Most of the companies displaced will never return. Morgan Stanley isn't, and it had 25 floors of 2 WTC. Most will stay in their new "temporary" homes all over Manhattan and in New Jersey. So new transit lines should be planned with this shifting demographic in mind.
I respect your assertion, but disagree with it. We've reached the end of stating our respective positions. Anyone got hard ridership data on origins & destinations in the service area ???
Mine are based on extensive observations of the lines in question, but aren't scientific. I can say quite a few x-fer from the east side to west side bound lines at 59th, 51st, and 42nd. It's these riders I seek to remove from the East side IRT altogether. The stubway acheives this.
Historical Note: Remember, opposition to the Stubway only heated up when LIRR East Side Access got approved without a Second Avenue commitment at the same time. The LIRR will bring in 40K more riders, some of whom will head for the subways. Even if the Stubway opened at the same time, your scenario of reduced loading from 130% to 100% would have another 30% (or some number) added back by new LIRR riders at GCT.
True, but this will be below 42nd St, and the IRT trains will not be as packed as they are today because of the people using the new 2nd Ave. line
The entire east side needs relief, not just the UES! (There's probably a class issue too, the UES being perceived as wealthier than the east side below 42nd -- though I'm not sure that's accurate when applied to subway riders.)
Below 63rd. St, there are options, like crosstown lines at 63rd, 60th, 53rd, and 42nd, plus the BMT broadway line, which runs paralell with the Lexington Ave line from 23rd. St. south. Above, there are none. It's either the Lexington IRT or a long walk through Central Park to the IND.
Personally, I now live in Gramercy Park. Stubway does squat for me. But as a transit geek, I'd say that planning and engineering the full line and some political commitments to phased funding might just get the Stubway built in time for LIRR-to-GCT. IIRC, the recent $$$ appropriated were for design work on the entire line. A good thing, although I'm still skeptical that even a Stubway will open the same day as LIRR-to-GCT.
This explains your objections. The stubway does nothing for you. But you have options (The N/R). Upper east side riders don't. And you really can't please everyone and be realistic at the same time.
the 9/11 disaster has forever altered the configuration of businesses in downtown Manhattan. Most of the companies displaced will never return. Most will stay in their new "temporary" homes all over Manhattan and in New Jersey. So new transit lines should be planned with this shifting demographic in mind.
Incremental change, perhaps. But Midtown surpassed downtown 20 years ago as Manhattan's primary business center. Downtown will probably come to house more diverse uses: residences, shops and cultural institutions. The land will hardly lie fallow. Transit will still be needed, though demand may be smoother -- less rush-hour in/out, more dispersed service patterns.
Below 63rd. St, there are options, like crosstown lines at 63rd, 60th, 53rd, and 42nd, plus the BMT broadway line, which runs paralell with the Lexington Ave line from 23rd. St. south. Above, there are none.
Yeah, but the IRT with short headways and LONG express runs - GCT, 14th, Brooklyn Bridge - always gets the most traffic. For 6 years until last summer the Broadway line was local-only, making long trips take longer. And headways on IND locals are FAR worse ... just try waiting for an F train at noon!
This explains your objections.
I disagree. I already copped to it not helping me personally. But I'd like to think I can be a transit advocate for the greatest number of people without it benefitting me personally. My observations are based on daily ridership for those 9 years, plus regular trips in the 59th-Wall Street section of the 4/5/6.
you have options (The N/R). Upper east side riders don't.
I know. I lived there. Remember? And as noted, N/R isn't an option without express service.
And you really can't please everyone and be realistic at the same time.
I'm not trying to please everyone. We're disagreeing on a fundamental point: Will a Stubway make a noticeable dent in the overcrowding on the east side IRT? You say yes. I say no.
Who's got some DATA?
Incremental change, perhaps. But Midtown surpassed downtown 20 years ago as Manhattan's primary business center. Downtown will probably come to house more diverse uses: residences, shops and cultural institutions. The land will hardly lie fallow. Transit will still be needed, though demand may be smoother -- less rush-hour in/out, more dispersed service patterns
I think it will a sudden and permanent change. The area around the WTC will be empty for decades, and who knows what will be built there. All the displaced workers from this area have been scattered uptown and in New Jersey.
Yeah, but the IRT with short headways and LONG express runs - GCT, 14th, Brooklyn Bridge - always gets the most traffic. For 6 years until last summer the Broadway line was local-only, making long trips take longer. And headways on IND locals are FAR worse ... just try waiting for an F train at noon!
You're missing my point. You do have choices. UES riders have absolutley none. If another local existed above 63rd. St, it would be a safe bet that it would get used considerably.
I disagree. I already copped to it not helping me personally. But I'd like to think I can be a transit advocate for the greatest number of people without it benefitting me personally. My observations are based on daily ridership for those 9 years, plus regular trips in the 59th-Wall Street section of the 4/5/6.
You can't argue that the stubway will not be used by a significant percentage of Lexington IRT riders, then say that you've ridden the line for 9 years every day. If that was true, the benefits of the stubway for the UES becomes painfully apparent. You're probably biased because you don't realize how many people get off at 59th and 53rd. to get to east/west crosstown lines. I do. It's a lot more than you are letting on.
I know. I lived there. Remember? And as noted, N/R isn't an option without express service
Yes it is. It is because it's there. If you choose not to use it, then that's your problem. UES riders don't have ANY options whatsoever as far as alternative subway service.
I'm not trying to please everyone. We're disagreeing on a fundamental point: Will a Stubway make a noticeable dent in the overcrowding on the east side IRT? You say yes. I say no.
It will. I have explained how and why. I don't see any other way of putting it.
The area around the WTC will be empty for decades, and who knows what will be built there. All the displaced workers from this area have been scattered uptown and in New Jersey.
Only temporarily. AmEx is already returning to WFC. Dow Jones will return too. Perhaps not all at once, perhaps not as many people (it is a recession, you know), but companies will reoccupy their offices. And others will move into the vacated space sooner or later. I know many people who aren't returning, and there are valid reasons for them to go elsewhere.
But this is NYC, the land of real estate. There are BILLIONS of dollars of real estate down there. Landlords gotta pay the bills. They'll reduce the rents til they get bodies into buildings. Prices will fall (they already are) and eventually they'll reach a point where they'll be attractive enough to outweigh the disadvantages of working next to an emotionally-laden construction site. That's how it's worked for 300 years. 9/11 won't change that.
The "area around the WTC" lost only two buildings, remember: A small church on the south side, and 7 WTC on the north. All the rest is intact, salvageable and already being rebuilt. 100 days after 9/11, I'm amazed how quickly the repairs have started and how much progress has been made (half the debris removed) at Ground Zero.
I will bet you dinner at any restaurant in NYC that (1) the WTC site is full redeveloped within 10 years; (2) that development will have fewer offices, more residences and far better transit interchanges; and (3) the "area around the WTC" will be a vastly more pleasant place (subjective, I admit) than it was pre-9/11, and hence attract more people to spend more time there. Though I'm not convinced either of us would enjoy the dinner much, regardless of who paid. [grin]
I'm not trying to please everyone. We're disagreeing on a fundamental point: Will a Stubway make a noticeable dent in the overcrowding on the east side IRT? You say yes. I say no.
It will. I have explained how and why. I don't see any other way of putting it.
In my view, reasonable minds can differ on these issues in the absence of data. You appear to feel quite differently.
Only temporarily. AmEx is already returning to WFC. Dow Jones will return too. Perhaps not all at once, perhaps not as many people (it is a recession, you know), but companies will reoccupy their offices. And others will move into the vacated space sooner or later. I know many people who aren't returning, and there are valid reasons for them to go elsewhere.
Lehman Brothers isn't. Morgan Stanley isn't. If Cantor Fitzgerald survives, it won't return. Dow Jones has also relocated most of it's business to New Jersey, and they aren't coming back. Only a small portion is returning downtown. AmEx is increasing it's space in Jersey City. They aren't coming back in the numbers that were there in pre 9/11 days. This city is in for a rude awakening when enough office space has been constructed on the WTC site to replace that which was lost. Few if any will return. Assuming that even happens.
In my view, reasonable minds can differ on these issues in the absence of data. You appear to feel quite differently
Experience and observation provides me with all the "data" I need.
This city is in for a rude awakening when enough office space has been constructed on the WTC site to replace that which was lost. Few if any will return. Assuming that even happens.
This doesn't respond to my point about the fundamental market economy of real estate in NYC. It has operated through a revolution, a civil war, 2 world wars and now 9/11. Those rules don't change.
Maybe it will take a full 10 years, but in the next economic upturn, Class A office space built on or around the WTC will be occupied. Perhaps the average rents will be a few $/sq ft lower than midtown, but that's been the case for 20+ years now.
My dinner offer stands.
Experience and observation provides me with all the "data" I need.
Well then obviously there's no possible response. You're not discussing. You're lecturing. Or hectoring.
This doesn't respond to my point about the fundamental market economy of real estate in NYC. It has operated through a revolution, a civil war, 2 world wars and now 9/11. Those rules don't change.
Maybe it will take a full 10 years, but in the next economic upturn, Class A office space built on or around the WTC will be occupied. Perhaps the average rents will be a few $/sq ft lower than midtown, but that's been the case for 20+ years now
This is too optomistic for me to believe. As an employee of Morgan Stanly before & after the attack, I was privy to their corporate real estate activities. The company does not want to "centralize" it's offices and branches in one part of Manhattan. This has led them to rent space in Queens and expand their space in downtown Brooklyn (1 Pierpont Plaza). My department was relocated to a facility in SoHo and it will remain there permanently. Nobody who worked in 2 WTC will bother moving back after being forced elsewhere. It's not worth it. Morgan Stanley doesn't act in a vaacum. It's actions can be logically extended to other WTC tenants.
Well then obviously there's no possible response. You're not discussing. You're lecturing. Or hectoring
True, I am lecturing. But when you're right, you're right...LOL
This is too optomistic for me to believe. As an employee of Morgan Stanly before & after the attack, I was privy to their corporate real estate activities. The company does not want to "centralize" it's offices and branches in one part of Manhattan. This has led them to rent space in Queens and expand their space in downtown Brooklyn (1 Pierpont Plaza). My department was relocated to a facility in SoHo and it will remain there permanently. Nobody who worked in 2 WTC will bother moving back after being forced elsewhere. It's not worth it. Morgan Stanley doesn't act in a vaacum. It's actions can be logically extended to other WTC tenants.
Morgan Stanley does not the world make. Most NYC employment is not the megacompanies, but the support system for them -- the smaller service firms. Look at a WTC roster. There were as many floors occupied by small law firms, accountancies, etc., as there were by Cantor Fitzes, Morgan Stanleys, etc. They're not large enough to spread operations over many locations.
Landlords prefer the big firms (large single leases for many floors). You may be right that larger firms won't move back downtown, and that they'll diversify. But new Grade A office space will eventually be occupied. The small firms may be the ones who do it. New Grade A space at a discount to prevailing rates will prove attractive.
Honestly, I'd be worried about so many companies centralizing their operations in MIDTOWN about now ... even on separate power grids and phone trunks. Moving downtown could be a defensive move for some.
Since you worked at Morgan Stanley, I'm more surprised you don't see the long picture of real estate. It's all about cycles. They're measured in years, or decades, not the 5-minute profit opportunities that many traders focus on. But if I had any significant extra cash, I'd look to buy residential property downtown about now, to flip in 3-7 years. Ditto for office space, for a lot more $$$.
But when you're right, you're right...LOL
Yeah. Right. Whatever.
Morgan Stanley does not the world make. Most NYC employment is not the megacompanies, but the support system for them -- the smaller service firms. Look at a WTC roster. There were as many floors occupied by small law firms, accountancies, etc., as there were by Cantor Fitzes, Morgan Stanleys, etc. They're not large enough to spread operations over many locations.
But they already have. Cantor is uptown and in Jersey. Most of the other major tennants have as well.
Landlords prefer the big firms (large single leases for many floors). You may be right that larger firms won't move back downtown, and that they'll diversify. But new Grade A office space will eventually be occupied. The small firms may be the ones who do it. New Grade A space at a discount to prevailing rates will prove attractive.
Perhaps, but only if fiscal reasons exist to do so. My point is that the tennants who were in the WTC are not coming back. So why bother building enough space on the site to allow it? Lower Manhattan right now has a stigma on it. Enviornmental, transit, and just plain fear based factors will always hinder it's reconstruction. It'll be changed forever.
Honestly, I'd be worried about so many companies centralizing their operations in MIDTOWN about now ... even on separate power grids and phone trunks. Moving downtown could be a defensive move for some.
Most have scattered their offices among midtown, Brooklyn & New Jersey. All 3 plazas in the Harborside Financial Plaza in Jersey City are full. That wasn't so a few months ago. All of the relocated companies/offices will stay there. Mark my words.
Since you worked at Morgan Stanley, I'm more surprised you don't see the long picture of real estate. It's all about cycles. They're measured in years, or decades, not the 5-minute profit opportunities that many traders focus on. But if I had any significant extra cash, I'd look to buy residential property downtown about now, to flip in 3-7 years. Ditto for office space, for a lot more $$$.
I was talking more about administrative real estate practices. Companies go where the rent is cheapest and sufficient infrastructure exists to support their operations. Morgan Stanley was trying to get out of it's lease before 9/11, as were several other tennants (Guy Carpenter is one I know for sure, and rumors about Fuji and the former Carr Futures have swirled around for months prior).
My point is this: The WTC site will be rebuilt. Enough office space will exist to allow most, if not all the former tenants to return. But why should they? They'll be comfortable in their new space, it costs money to relocate offices, and the stigma of America's biggest terrorist act on home soil will last forever, given that a major memorial on the site will be a MUST.
Lower Manhattan was changed drastically by the 9/11 attack, a change which will become permanent. It will no longer be the "Financial District".
My point is this: The WTC site will be rebuilt. Enough office space will exist to allow most, if not all the former tenants to return. But why should they? They'll be comfortable in their new space, it costs money to relocate offices, and the stigma of America's biggest terrorist act on home soil will last forever, given that a major memorial on the site will be a MUST.
Aaaaaarrrrrrgggghhhhhh! It's NOT ABOUT the "former tenants". It's about the new tenants! It is utterly, totally irrelevant whether Morgan Stanley or Cantor Fitz or any other pre-9/11 firm moves in, absent a little bit of symbolism for newspaper writers to cover.
If you thought I was arguing that the former tenants will return ... I wasn't. I accept that they won't.
But OTHER TENANTS will occupy the new space. They may not be financial firms. That's fine. They will employ people. They will need space. They will bring dollars. Their employees will require transit (to bring the thread back to something transit-linked!). Not that much will change. A similar trauma to 9/11, on a much smaller scale, was an anarchist's bomb that exploded on Wall Street and killed 30-odd people (IIRC), leaving scars in the old J.P. Morgan building that are still there today. Didn't make much of a dent in the long-term prospects of Wall Street, did it?
Lower Manhattan was changed drastically by the 9/11 attack, a change which will become permanent. It will no longer be the "Financial District".
Could well be. Doesn't alter my argument. The "photo district" is now "the Flatiron District". SoHo is no longer a manufacturing center. Neither is Tribeca. They still have people in them. They still need transit.
OTOH, as long as the NYSE is there, it will be the financial district. The one caveat to my argument is if the NYSE moves to Harborside or something like that. Highly, highly unlikely ... but less so now than pre-9/11. But I think instead they'll probably keep their hot backup site in place, polished up and ready to go.
Aaaaaarrrrrrgggghhhhhh! It's NOT ABOUT the "former tenants". It's about the new tenants! It is utterly, totally irrelevant whether Morgan Stanley or Cantor Fitz or any other pre-9/11 firm moves in, absent a little bit of symbolism for newspaper writers to cover.
If you thought I was arguing that the former tenants will return ... I wasn't. I accept that they won't.
But OTHER TENANTS will occupy the new space. They may not be financial firms. That's fine. They will employ people. They will need space. They will bring dollars. Their employees will require transit (to bring the thread back to something transit-linked!). Not that much will change. A similar trauma to 9/11, on a much smaller scale, was an anarchist's bomb that exploded on Wall Street and killed 30-odd people (IIRC), leaving scars in the old J.P. Morgan building that are still there today. Didn't make much of a dent in the long-term prospects of Wall Street, did it?
I know they won't. Which goes to my point about lower Manhattan being changed forever. If you think enough "new" companies will replace the older ones now elsewhere, you're dreaming. Only CHEAP real estate will make it worthwhile. And that doesn't even address the stigma the area now is burdened with.
But you might be right. The Navy came back to Pearl Harbor. But one wonders if they would've had another equally useful port existed elsewhere on the island ...
Which goes to my point about lower Manhattan being changed forever. If you think enough "new" companies will replace the older ones now elsewhere, you're dreaming. Only CHEAP real estate will make it worthwhile. And that doesn't even address the stigma the area now is burdened with.
I'm not dreaming. It's how NYC has operated for 300 years.
I think you're overreacting. Let's pick up the discussion again in 2 years.
Lets try 10, because it'll take that long to get everything back to normal down there. We don't even know what's going to be built there. One plan wants the site returned to the Manhattan street grid and broken up into blocks. Office space isn't even a given.
People forget the details of horrendous events relatively quickly. There's an MGM Grand Hotel in Las Vegas. It had a different name for 20 years after a horrible fire around 1970 (as big a tragedy for Las Vegas as the WTC was for NYC), but they changed the name back again eventually.
On a much lesser scale, there was a time in 1985 when the name Kalikow was the symbol of the most avaricious real estate developer you could imagine (somehow a contractor demolished some SRO hotels on the last day they legally could, and did it in such a hurry they didn't bother to turn the gas service off first). Six years later there was a Kalikow Hotel on the location and no one seemed to think it was strange.
New York is full of newcomers. If the developers name the new buildings something other than World Trade Center, by 2010 half the people who work downtown will think that the term WTC only refers to whatever memorial site gets establihed. They won't even realize that those buildings around the memorial site are replacing buildings that were destroyed back in 2001.
For anyone who has the money and doesn't mind indirectly profiting from tragedy, I strongly recommend buying a condo in Battery Park City. The views are great and the memories are irrelevant to future New Yorkers who are living in Cleveland right now.
For anyone who has the money and doesn't mind indirectly profiting from tragedy, I strongly recommend buying a condo in Battery Park City. The views are great and the memories are irrelevant to future New Yorkers who are living in Cleveland right now.
In fact, I've heard that there actually has been a pickup in sales and new rentals in Battery Park City. What seems to be happening is that families are leaving, or trying to leave, and being replaced by singles (who presumably are enjoying unusually large apartments ...) What this demographic change means for the long-term economic health of the area I'm not sure, but at least BPC isn't being deserted.
Maybe it will take a full 10 years, but in the next economic upturn, Class A office space built on or around the WTC will be occupied. Perhaps the average rents will be a few $/sq ft lower than midtown, but that's been the case for 20+ years now.
My dinner offer stands.
As I said in my earlier reply to Chris R27-R30, it's unwise to assume that the WTC area will be permanently "tainted" because of the events of September 11th. Sure, right now, things may be that way, but people have surprisingly short memories. It's sort of like all the people who said right after September 11th that they'd never fly again. No doubt most of them will be back on planes within a year or so, if they haven't done so already. Given more time, many companies will start to consider lower Manhattan for their space needs, albeit probably not some of the displaced companies. Time heals all wounds, psychic as well as physical.
Perhaps I'm biased because I was in the World Trade Center and was nearly killed on 9/11, but I remain pessamistic about downtown. It will rebound, but it'll never be what it was, which was the financial district of Manhattan. It'll be indistinguishable from midtown.
It will rebound, but it'll never be what it was, which was the financial district of Manhattan. It'll be indistinguishable from midtown.
This may not be such a bad thing. Overdependence on a single industry is dangerous for a district. Remember the early '90s, when 2 Broadway was empty and widely considered to be a "teardown"? That was 'cause the only people renting down there were connected to the financial industry, which has always been cyclical.
I think NYC will remain the Finance Capital of the World. But you're right, downtown may not be the financial district. Though I still think the NYSE and the commodity exchanges provide a center of gravity. But so many of the investment banks had moved to midtown before 9/11 that the title was fading.
In the long run, a mix of uses -- office, commercial, residential, cultural -- is healthier for a city. The same will probably apply to downtown.
Nothing ever comes back, but if the federal and state government don't finally finish the city off, something else will show up.
Downtown has already changed several times. From the 1920s to the 1980s, it was loaded with clerical "pink collar" workers -- who were automated out of existence in the early 1990s. Downtown diversified into small offices for companies that wanted a footprint in NY, non-profits, housing, etc. Something else will show up.
A baseball stadium shared by the Yankees and Mets isn't such a bad idea for the site -- if they pay for it. Better transit access than the current stadiums, and decent access to NJ.
It's hard to be objective when you went through something like that. No one deserves to be subjected to that sort of thing (except maybe Bin Laden).
I'm afraid you are right. We will never have prominent buildings there again, (and the jobs lost will never come back in the same way). Future generations have really lost something. It's a different loss than Penn Station (which was done "for the 60's version of progress"), not only because of the death toll, but because the skyline is changed forever. I still can't get used to it.
Only temporarily. AmEx is already returning to WFC. Dow Jones will return too. Perhaps not all at once, perhaps not as many people (it is a recession, you know), but companies will reoccupy their offices. And others will move into the vacated space sooner or later. I know many people who aren't returning, and there are valid reasons for them to go elsewhere.
Lehman Brothers isn't. Morgan Stanley isn't. If Cantor Fitzgerald survives, it won't return. Dow Jones has also relocated most of it's business to New Jersey, and they aren't coming back. Only a small portion is returning downtown. AmEx is increasing it's space in Jersey City. They aren't coming back in the numbers that were there in pre 9/11 days. This city is in for a rude awakening when enough office space has been constructed on the WTC site to replace that which was lost. Few if any will return. Assuming that even happens.
It's important not to have too short-term a focus. If somehow all the lost office space at the World Trade Center could be replaced this instant, well then of course it would prove difficult to rent. It's only been about 100 days, and memories of September 11 are still vivid. But we're talking several years at least before the site is fully reconstructed, whatever form the new buildings take. Most of the aversion toward the area will have faded by then. Given this time lag, as well as the fact that whatever replaces the WTC is unlikely to have anywhere near as much office space, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the new development turn out to be successful.
It's important not to have too short-term a focus. If somehow all the lost office space at the World Trade Center could be replaced this instant, well then of course it would prove difficult to rent. It's only been about 100 days, and memories of September 11 are still vivid. But we're talking several years at least before the site is fully reconstructed, whatever form the new buildings take. Most of the aversion toward the area will have faded by then. Given this time lag, as well as the fact that whatever replaces the WTC is unlikely to have anywhere near as much office space, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the new development turn out to be successful.
I'm using Morgan Stanley as an example, as I can vouch for their activities personally. The company is permanently relocating it's former 2 WTC employees elsewhere because to do so "temporarily" wouldn't be cost effective. They have been scattered all over Manhattan, Brooklyn & New Jersey. Other companies will be doing the same. Once new office towers are built on the site, all the former tennats will have become accustomed to their post 9/11 home and only fiscal concerns will bring them back.
Once new office towers are built on the site, all the former tennats will have become accustomed to their post 9/11 home and only fiscal concerns will bring them back.
Other tenants will come, at the right combination of facilities and price.
i couldn;'t find a better place to interject here, just thought i migth mention a few things:
1.) stubway would connect to b'way express. therefore, stops starting at 72 south would be 72/2nd, 63/lex, 57/7, 42/7, 34/6, 14/b'way, canal/east of b'way.
once the b'way leaves 34th st, all of of its stops are on the east side very close to the lex. if were talking about lex riders going anywhere south of 34, 2nd to the local R would be no different from lex express to the 6.
3.) bronx riders would benefit from the stubway because the stubway is intended to veer west and meet the lex at 125. any bronx riders going to west midtown or the east side south of midtown could transfer from a packed irt at 125 and get a seat on the first stop of the 2nd. if they had to transfer anyway, this would be a bette roption than a sardien liek midtown x-fer.
2.) almost all of manhattan office construction of the last few years has occured in the times square area. with companies like conde nast over on 7th, aol-time at col. circle, reuters at times square, and the times across from the port authority we may start seeing more UES - west midtown commutes.
Your points are all correct, but my lengthy discussion w/Chris focused on one point of contention:
we may start seeing more UES - west midtown commutes.
I maintain that the number of riders from UES to west midtown is dwarfed by the sum of (1) riders from UES to east midtown & downtown + (2) riders transferring to the Lex from the N/R at 59th + (3) riders transferring to Lex from Queens Blvd lines at 51st + (4) Metro North (and LIRR in 12 years) riders at GCT. Hence without a full-length Second Avenue subway, the improvement will be marginal at best. And my bet is that the improvement will be completely offset by additional LIRR riders at GCT when East Side Access opens.
I'll repeat the call for anyone who has actual ridership data on source/destination that would help us discuss this ....
I have some personal observations that are somewhat relevant. From 1998-early 2001 I occasionally got off the uptown 4/5/6 at GCT in morning rush hour and walked through the passage to the shuttle. Any UES-west midtown riders using the shuttle would be walking with me. We were definitely seriously outnumbered by the people coming the other way.
That's because the shuttle is the only reasonable connection from the Upper West Side (IRT) to the 4/5/6, while Upper East Siders also have the F, N/R/W, and E/V at their disposal.
The northern portion is the more important one anyway. If it were the southern portion, that would indeed be a "stubway", connecting to nothing (well, maybe Queens Blvd somehow, but how I don't know.) The northern portion will feed into Broadway. I think it would make a big difference. It would at least get many of the upper east side riders off the Lex, and that is probably the biggest contingent. It will still leave the Bronx and Queens (via the 7 and N/R/W) riders with only the Lex, but at least they'll have less company.
:-) Andrew
With the "stubway" built, 86th St should become a local stop, so that UES riders understand what the system was designed to do, which is to use expresses to get outer boro residents into Manhattan, and to use locals to get Manhattan residents to their destinations.
With the "stubway" built, 86th St should become a local stop ..
The Second Avenue Subway is not planned to have "locals" and "expresses" AFAIK. It is planned as a two-track system, I believe.
so that UES riders understand what the system was designed to do, which is to use expresses to get outer boro residents into Manhattan, and to use locals to get Manhattan residents to their destinations.
Really? News to me. My understanding was that locals were for "local" trips (within, say 20 to 30 blocks, or 1 to 1.5 miles) and "expresses" were for longer trips. It has nothing to do with boroughs. It's how far you're traveling.
The Second Avenue Subway is not planned to have "locals" and "expresses" AFAIK. It is planned as a two-track system, I believe
I was referring to the 86th St. express stop on the Lexington Ave. line.
I was referring to the 86th St. express stop on the Lexington Ave. line.
Why would you want to make this a local stop? That would make the 4/5 express between 59th and 125th. A lot of the Lex line riders go from midtown (east and west) to the UES, not to Harlem and the Bronx. You're forcing them off the Lex and dooming them to TWO locals -- the 6 and the Second Avenue line. Why?
To confirm, even in non-rush hours there is major demand at the 86th street express platform.
To confirm, even in non-rush hours there is major demand at the 86th street express platform.
I know. But the 4 & 5 are already filled to absolute capacity after leaving 125th St. It isn't fair to Bronx riders to have their trains delayed by stopping at 86th St, stop few of them want. Once again, I must stress that Manhattan riders outside of the extreme north shuld stick to riding locals while the expresses do their job of moving people from the outer boros into the city.
This is impractical without the 2nd Ave. line buil, of course.
To confirm, even in non-rush hours there is major demand at the 86th street express platform.
I know. But the 4 & 5 are already filled to absolute capacity after leaving 125th St. It isn't fair to Bronx riders to have their trains delayed by stopping at 86th St, a stop few of them want. Once again, I must stress that Manhattan riders outside of the extreme north should stick to riding locals while the expresses do their job of moving people from the outer boros into the city.
This is impractical without the 2nd Ave. line built, of course.
Why would you want to make this a local stop? That would make the 4/5 express between 59th and 125th. A lot of the Lex line riders go from midtown (east and west) to the UES, not to Harlem and the Bronx. You're forcing them off the Lex and dooming them to TWO locals -- the 6 and the Second Avenue line. Why?
To ease congestion on the expresses. Being in Manhattan, their ride to their place of work is shorter in length & time than those on the expresses coming from the Bronx & Harlem. Locals will serve them fine.
It would be somewhat ironic to have a subway to Belmont Park. Belmont Park was built by August Belmont, father of the IRT, New York's first subway.
Built over the city line because, I think that shortly before Aquaduct was built (in 1960) paramutual racing was banned in the City.
Even a bigger irony would be the IRT going to Belmont Park.
Getting the subway to Belmont is not that crazy an idea. The place exists -- as a horsetrack -- only because of paramutual betting. Were the city/state to legalize betting on sports (sensible, I think) then these big horsey places can be recycled into something more useful. The Mets and Yankees both are grousing about their stadiums. Moving the Mets to Belmont makes a great deal of sense, but only with a subway connection. You'd do it as a mixed sports/convention/exhibition venue, with a big hotel. You could even do luxury high rise apartment buildings behind the bleachers. Aquaduct would do just as well, but the proximity to JFK adds some problems.
If NYC goes for a summer Olympiad, this might be an impetus.
How would the residents of Elmont, LI take to this?
A subway line for baseball must have an express with few stops past 179th street.
The first IND line was 4.3 miles from 207th St. to Hudson Terminal
Ummm, 207th to Houston ("0th Street") is a shade over 10 miles (20 blocks to a mile). Did you mean 14.3 miles?
The folks in Bellerose Village would have you tarred and feathered just for THINKING about it. The only way to do this is to run the shuttle down the middle of or undeneath the Cross Island Parkway.
I would use the LIRR ROW east of Jamaica up to Belmont and have the LIRR Hempstead Branch start at Bellerose.
wayne
Got money to build it??????
(How about a direct subway line to Belmont Park???)
It's about number 100 on the list of things to do, but such an extension would provide Belmont with both LIRR and subway access from a variety of destinations. It would make it a good site for a replacement for Nassau Colesium, especially if a basketball team could be secured to share the space.
So where to put the arena, on the south side of Hempstead Turnpike?
I can't see them tearing down Belmont Park, since the rebuilt version is only about 30 years old. It isn't that much of a money-loser, is it?
wayne
>> Just an idea.. <<
But an excellent idea. Belmont Park even on racing days has so much excess parking capacity that it would make a splendid park and ride lot if it had a subway terminal. Plus, it's right off the Cross Island Parkway. I'd use it often.
>> How about a direct subway line to Belmont Park??? <<
Just brainstormed some more. Here's an even better idea. Extend the subway from Jamaica all the way to Hempstead underneath Hempstead Ave and Hempstead Turnpike (stopping at Belmont Park along the way). The N6 bus is chronically overcrowded and is ripe for replacement by a subway. The route is also not well-served by the LIRR.
(I know-- not a ghost of a chance. But we can dream.)
Nice idea, but we have to remember the subway is not a commuter railroad, but I'm up for any expansion of the system.
I don't see any problem with the Subway getting that far out. If you look at London, certain lines get miles out into the countryside. NY should try to beat London!
London has an advantage: it's considerably cheaper to build their deep bored tunnels through the soft clay the greater London area sits on. Subway construction in NYC is much messier.
'Cheaper' is relative. The Jubilee Line came in vastly overbudget.
And one question I've had about the Jubilee is why they did not build it for bigger longer trains (agreed, it would have it's own dedicated fleet and yards, but anything would be better than the usual London subway car).
The Jubilee is fun to ride. The new stations have outer doors and Plexiglas barriers, which prevent people from getting shoved onto the tracks, or committing suicide by train.
All British construction projects come in overbudget. It's because construction companies know that:
1) Everyone will charge them 150% what they should, because Britain is like that.
2) If they tell the truth about how much something will cost to build, they know they won't get to build it.
The Jubilee Extension was wonderful in that, in its final form, it was only months, not years, late. Unfortunately, it's not much use except for getting from Parliament to the now empty Millennium Dome. I think they realised that no-one was going to need it, so they made the stations small.
Incidentally, the Stratford at the end of the Jubilee line, contrary to popular belief, has nothing to do with Shakespeare.
Does private investment follow public investment as it does here? Do you expect the Jubilee Line to do for its new territory what Washington Metrorail did for Bethesda, Maryland, or MARTA did for downtown Atlanta, or NYC's 63rd St line did for Roosevelt Island?
That was the intention. That's why they built all those seriously ridiculous glass stations. Allegedly this would also mean people would not vandalise them as they would esteem them. To be fair, Southwark is now on the up and all the plutocrats and businessmen are streaming in.
Very good.
If you rode the Underground, you'd realise that most of it runs at grade once you get out of the centre. There was no boring north of Finchley on the Metropolitan (although that is cut and cover anyway in the centre), Queen's Park on the Bakerloo, and, if my hazy knowledge of East London serves me right, Loughton on the Central. Some former operations included to Verney Junction and Brill, both about 70 miles from the City of London, although both of these failed way before the Second World War. Yet you could still get a one seat ride from Aldgate to Aylesbury (a town in Buckinghamshire) until comparatively recently.
Also North London is built on clay, yes, but the South is sandstone, the worst tunneling material ever, because it crumbles.
>> NY should try to beat London! <<
Besides, it is the "Metropolitan" Transportation Authority. The 1/4% MTA sales tax is collected in Nassau, so why can't we have subways too? The ads claim "one transportation system," so why not make it more unified? (Of course, I agree that other projects are more important right now.)
The F line was supposed to go as far east as Springfield Blvd, right? Hillside Ave. and Springfield Blvd. has a large plaza like area which would make an ideal storage/layup yard for subway trains, but I guess the locals would not even hear of this.
That far up you'd get some NIMBY, it's true.
But you could extend the train as far as the low 200 block with no complaints. They'd love it (underground only, mind you. No elevated.)
I would not mind that at all. The traffic on Hillside Ave, what with buses and trucks, is crazy. A subway extension would reduce the crowds on the buses, and getting to work would not feel like a military operation. Now to getthe project under way, well that would in itself be a military operation.
your're right, all those empty MBTA buses riding around make life hell and think of all the fumes you have. A bus every 2 minutes at the best. At the worst 5 buses per minute. You should terminate all the LI buses near city limits and have a drive in terminal so people walk across the platform and take a subway.
Washington Metrorail stations were designed with a "kiss and ride" (drop off a passenger then drive away) driveway for commuters, along with parking lots and bus bays.
Jamaica Center was well-designed for organizing buses (and the number of bus bays has been increased, I'm told). As is typical in NY, though, kiss and ride is not a big feature here. I do wish more of the LIRR stations were better designed for that.
The F line was supposed to go as far east as Springfield Blvd, right? Hillside Ave. and Springfield Blvd. has a large plaza like area which would make an ideal storage/layup yard for subway trains, but I guess the locals would not even hear of this
I'd hear of it, and I live in Oakland Gardens. Bring it on!
:-) Andrew
Whoo-yah!
Count me in!
Have a looksee
Very nice. I would ride for sure.
Nice.
But, at 212th St., I'd route it onto the GC Pkwy as an el. The stations after 212 would be Springfield-GCP, then at Union Tpk-Creedmoor. You might go as far as Little Neck Pkwy.
A connection to Belmont Park could be done with a branch via 212th into Hempstead Av or the such, to Belmont -- just inside the city line, not far from the LIRR station. You'd have a station at Jamaica Av. as well.
>>A connection to Belmont Park could be done with a branch via 212th <<
The NIMBYs on 212th wouldn't even let signs for Route 24 be posted, for what that's worth. Anyone who tries to follow Route 24 through there now gets lost. A subway would probably cause them to riot.
You gotta have the media. If no one can hear them no one can do anything. If I buy WNBC (NIMBYs' home, politicians' home) there will never be anymore NIMBY concerns. Also when was the last time your congressman read what you sent them with there own eyes?
I love it!!!!
:-) Andrew
OK Jose, can we throw in a station under Commonwealth, at, say 86th Avenue?
The tiles - yes, the tiles- must be classic IND, and must follow the pattern - that would mean getting rid of the NY Mets colors at 179th Street and returning it to purple (which is what it was originally and should be), that makes the three local stops up the line all purple, but lighter shades (maybe as light as 65th Street or lighter), then for Springfield it goes purple to BLUE - and stays that way beyond.
Did you ever consider using Braddock Avenue as your route to Commonwealth & Jamaica? Yes, that would create a lovely curve coming into Springfield. AND there's new housing going up on Creedmoor's grounds, right at the station site.
wayne
- Belmont park shoud have at least a 2 track subway going there. a single track subway always hurts the passengers.
-whats with a 3 track going to jamaica ave, remeber the els, it sucks cause people need to move anywhere anytime.
It's quite a coincidence you should mention an extension to Belmont Park. Right now, i'm working on a subway expansion plan, and I have the F train extended past 179th Street with a branch serving Belmont Park (as a through station) and Nassau County.
Here are the stations:
1--188th Street/Hillside Ave. Local
2--196th Street/Hillside Ave. Local
3--Francis Lewis Blvd/Hillside Ave. Express
4--Hollis Ct. Blvd./Hillside Ave. Local
5--215th Pl & Vanderveer St./Hillside Ave. Local
6--Springfield Blvd./Hillside Ave. Express
the 4 tracks continue along Hillside with 4 additional stations and a terminal at 267th Street/Glen Oaks, but I have a 2 track branch continuing along Braddock Ave.
7--Winchester Blvd./Braddock Ave.
8--Gettysburg Street/Braddock Ave.
9--Jamaica Ave. (at intersection of Braddock and Jamaica)
Finally the next stop is Hempstead Tnpk/Belmont Park.
I guess we were on the same wavelength here. If you want to know more about these extensions I'm working on, drop me a message on the board.
Send me a private e-mail with the details. Click on my handle above for my e-mail.
More info, I'am also building a expansion plan.
Allrigt. You can either leave me your email address and I send the information I have so far. Some subtalkers here on the board already have that info, by the way. Or you can ask me some questions here and I'll answer them. That way, we can have an open discussion right here on the board
Mail to patcat88@snet.net okay :-)
Could you send me your extension ideas too? aristophanes2000@hotmail.com
Many thanx!
Wait is the E train extension actual able to goto the LIRR. it the portal there and it just needs tracks or what?
It would have enabled subway trains to get onto LIRR ROW, with the intended terminal being Rosedale.
Subway trains can run on LIRR tracks, and have even been tested there prior to service. I think they step down the voltage to 600 when they do that, but I could be wrong (somebody please correct me on this; other subway services use 750 volts and I don't know if NYCT equipment can run on it).
NYCTA=600 DC, overrail
LIRR=750 DC, overrail
Note that the subway cars would have to automatically change their Shoe's position to reach the LIRRs. Something like when the MEtro-Norths change from Third Rail to Cantanary.
The shoe positions are identical. Nothing was done when the subway was extended to the Rockaways. When the LIRR was 650v, PA1 and R44 cars burned out their traction motors. So do the R32 running Mott Haven - GCT.
first HOW HELL DID A R-32 GET TO GCT? It would need to retrofited for under rail operation and higher voltage.
It was indeed given modified third rail shoes to run on what was then the New York Central. My understanding is that the fans whirled VERY quickly due to the higher voltage.
David
750 as to 600 same as if it went on LIRR. Also would it be possiable to have a transformer to covert 750 to its native 600?
[Also would it be possiable to have a transformer to covert 750 to its native 600? ]
You can't use xformers with DC.
Arti
A converter, then, perhaps?
«A converter, then, perhaps? »
Would work. I'd rather design something capable of handling that range of voltages.
Arti
? what the? I ment without using resitors to lower the voltage.
How old are you? If you know someone in higher grades ask them to explain you the basics of electricity.
Arti
I don't know enough about the LIRR's track capacity, but . . .doesn't it have an alternate parallel route through SE Queens that it could use for all its trains, thus allowing the subway to take over the ROW extending from Parsons/Archer? That was the original plan, wasn't it?
I don't know enough about the LIRR's track capacity, but . . .doesn't it have an alternate parallel route through SE Queens that it could use for all its trains, thus allowing the subway to take over the ROW extending from Parsons/Archer? That was the original plan, wasn't it?
Yes it does, the line through St. Albans could be used if the line through Locust Manor and Laurelton was given over to Subway service. The problem is, I think, that the LIRR would have to put in at least one additional track, and maybe two, otherwise the there wouldn't be enough track capacity to serve the Babylon/Montauk, Far Rockaway, Long Beach and West Hempstead branches.
You are correct. In addition, the FRA began cracking down on mixing subway trains and railroad trains (subway trains do not have to meet FRA crash standards), and, fro what I understand in reading other posters here, the LIRR giving track to NYCT to accomplish the full "E" extension as originally intended would not exempt it from FRA regs. Hence, that part of the project was cancelled.
So no commuter rail line could be converted to subway use today without that line meeting FRA guidlines for a commuter railroad?
How self-defeating is that?
If the line was severed from the LIRR, then there should be no problem. It's only when the lines are connected that the FRA kicks in.
If the line was severed from the LIRR, then there should be no problem. It's only when the lines are connected that the FRA kicks in.
So if the ROW was wide enough for 2 sets of tracks that weren't interconnected, that would be OK?
Is the ROW wide enough? Usually any main ROW was 4 tracks, but I don't the geography out there.
I gather that there are similar FRA issues with running a one-seat ride from Penn Station on the AirTrain tracks ... since the AirTrain cars are NOT FRA-compliant.
I am not familiar enough with the LIRR ROW issues to give you a good answer on those questions.
"I gather that there are similar FRA issues with running a one-seat ride from Penn Station on the AirTrain tracks ... since the
AirTrain cars are NOT FRA-compliant."
You are correct. If the PA were to contemplate such a project, new FRA-compliant rolling stock would have to be used.
If the PA were to contemplate such a project, new FRA-compliant rolling stock would have to be used.
Actually, when the press tried to make a scandal of the non-FRA-compliance of the AirTrain rolling stock a few months ago, there was rumbling that a private contractor (???) might do the one-seat ride from Penn.
Hard to imagine how they'd find slots for it, since you'd need a LOT of slots ... and that Amtrak/LIRR would sign off on that ... but, who knows?
I'd imagine this has been covered on SubTalk before, but I missed many months' worth. Anyone got info?
I reeeeally don't see air train cars going to penn anytime soon, if ever. ...though what do it know...?
is the air train even standard gauge track?
Standard gauge track but AC propulsion. AMTRAK/LIRR is DC so never the twains shall meet.
The PA web site says 750 Volts DC Linear Induction Motors.
The PA web site says 750 Volts DC Linear Induction Motors.
So, rail gauge works, and current works ... the question remains, is the elevated trackbed capable of supporting heavy FRA-compliant "real trains"?
And can FRA compliant trains that actually exist handle the curves or will new ones have to be designed? Also, are the 3rd rail arrangements compatible?
I don't think the Airtrain tracks will ever support the weight of and thing that is FRA complient.
I have not looked into that. The suggestion about FRA-compliant vehicles on AirTrain tracks is just speculation right now.
"I gather that there are similar FRA issues with running a one-seat ride from Penn Station on the AirTrain tracks ... since the AirTrain cars are NOT FRA-compliant."
The issue was not really one of FRA compliance, especially in light of changing FRA regulations. What it all boiled down to was a pissing contest between the MTA and the PA. The PA owns the airport and wouldn't give the MTA ROW within its airports. On the other hand, the MTA would not allow the PA use of their ROW between Manhattan and Jamaica. Ditto, any unused ROW from Jamaica south to the airport.
I guess the MTA/PA pissing match, aside from the NIMBYs of Ozone Park, Woodhaven and Rego Park, is why the Rockaway Beach line of the LIRR never got used for an airport rail service.
Can't they use it cause the ROW exists (a chainsaw and every thing will be okay).
"Can't they use it cause the ROW exists (a chainsaw and every thing will be okay)."
No it doesn't. It's in pieces, it's been encroached upon, it's in a disastrous state of disrepair, and in places it's too close to people's homes to be used.
Better to permanently abandon it and use it for parkland and bike trails.
And another thing,the City of New York OWNS the Airports within its boundres,and the MTA DOES HAVE A ROW INTO THE AIRPORT, it was their choice not to build,not a blocking measure by the P.A......
The MTA has a one-track ROW into JFK from Howard Beach, which it judged impractical to develop. The connection of AirTrain to Howard Beach station ends the need for this ROW.
Where is that ROW? I don't recall ever seeing it or hearing about it. Was it ever used? if so whan and for what?
The ROW, if used, would translate into one track branching off of the "A" line at Howard Beach, and leading into the Airport, roughly parallel to the AirTrain Howard Beach alignment.
The ROW, if used, would translate into one track branching off of the "A" line at Howard Beach, and leading into the Airport, roughly parallel to the AirTrain Howard Beach alignment.
Forgive me because I haven't been there in a while, but how close does the new Air train come to Howard Beach station?
Very close. When finished, the new station will be well-integrated, with AirTrain forming the upper level of the station, and the subway, the lower level, connected by elevators.
Pretty cool, I'll have to get over there to see the progress.
Assuming you will ride the "A" train there, you might want to proceed on to Broad Channel station - the ride is gorgeous. It is also, according to MTA Facts and Figures, the longest distance between subway stops in New York.
That it is. I used to do it alot when I was a teenager.
you might want to see the new tracks the have restored there. From 2 tracks to 4 and sometimes 4.
Very nice!
Give them an incentive, and they will build. Give them excuses, and nothing gets done.
And sometimes 3 soory finger sliped, also I belive they test R-142s there. Does anyone have info on them and how they get them to the rockaway branch?
Like over it.
I think that you are incorrect. It was just last year that the Mayor tried to gain control of JFK & LaGuardia from the Port Authority. The city, I believe owns the land for which the PA pays a miniscule rent.
Am I good ,or what?.....
Meaning what?
I too have no idea what he means. At any rate, as I understand it, the City receives a substantial rent from the PA, if less than the market would support today. The City owns the airport. The PA is its tenant. The lease expires sometime relatively soon, IIRC.
When the lease expires, the City will own the land and all of the improvements (buildings, etc.) on it and will be free to do with the airport as it sees fit unless it has bound itself otherwise in the lease or in some other agreement. Now, that wil be the mother of all pissing contests.
I was there on wensday and looked at it. for the elevated embankment its okay except for chiped concreate. once it reaches the park some excavation will be required, but all the bridges are still there. also I only found 2 station along the route to forest park I think more will have to be added. also how many tracks can it support?
How much of the length of the ROW did you follow?
I believe that line supported 2 tracks, but someone more familiar with its history should probably correct me on that if necessary.
First I don't know about the tracks south of Forest Park. I did some railfanning on Monday and have more info on it.
(pull out a map of Queens)(I use the 1999 Yellow Book Map for Queens)
- from Rego Park branch off going south it is a REALLY BIG open cut until further notice.
- I don't remember where but somewhere in the cresents there is a unauthorized baseball park. I can tell because there is a hole cut in the fence to get down there.
- At Yellow Stone blvd there is a embankment you can climb (east side of the tracks) with no fence but it is very steep (hold onto the roots). It is 2 tracks but can be upgraded to 4 easilly tracks. It is the first time I touched a third rail and didn't wined up in the hospital.
- I don't have enough details but I did a good 6 hours of driving looking at the ROW, I even found a horse stables and a riding school at walnut st and 70th something? and a DOT yard in the vicinity.
-one problem is that there is a abandoned factory on Union Turnpike and its parking lot is on the ROW
-also the projects acroos the street have a parking lot on the ROW
-On the same block there is the LIRR to LIC branch bridge and on the north side of the LIRR Montuk Brach you can walk up the hill and onto the bridge and tracks, was 3 feet from a new diesal with new cars.
I will maybe do a line guide or something in the future but for now this is the best guide: http://www.oldnyc.com/rockaway/contents/rockaway.html
And thanks to all the subtalkers who helped in the creation of this guide.
Sounds like you did a lot of exploring. Nice to know there are still riding stables in Queens.
What it all boiled down to was a pissing contest between the MTA and the PA.
Waaaaaayull, if the PA and MTA prove that they can work together in making the site of the former WTC a better and more interconnected transit complex, perhaps that'll be a good test case for future cooperation on other projects ... like maybe the one-seat ride?
I'm hearing little things that make me think they really do want to work together, at least on the WTC stuff. May not be easy, but if MTA and Amtrak can figure out what part of Penn the LIRR controls (apparently those negotiations took 5 years before the LIRR could do its Penn Station rehab), there may be hope yet.
The issue was not really one of FRA compliance, especially in light of changing FRA regulations. What it all boiled down to was a pissing contest between the MTA and the PA. The PA owns the airport and wouldn't give the MTA ROW within its airports. On the other hand, the MTA would not allow the PA use of their ROW between Manhattan and Jamaica. Ditto, any unused ROW from Jamaica south to the airport.
Remember also the restricted funding being used for the AirTrain. It comes from surcharges on airline tickets and can only be used for certain sorts of off-airport developments.
If they can defeat that restriction by "selling" the airrights over the Van Wyke to the PA, all things are possible.
Because the PA chose to finance AirTrain by borrowing against
future PFC funds, those funds can only be used to construct a
system that is strictly for airline passengers and employees
going to, from or within the airport. That is why there are no
stops along the VWE ROW and why the VW and Howard Beach branches
are separated. However, as the financing was explained to me,
the PFCs are being used for the next 30 years or so. I'm not sure
how that works. I guess you keep on borrowing against future PFCs
until you are mortaged 500 or so years into the future.
The Port Authority has announced it is contributing some money to East Side Access. I do not know which pot that would come from.
whats a PFC?
Passenger Facility Charge - It's a $3 fee tacked on to your air fare when you buy a plane ticket and paid to the Port Authority. It is used for infrastructure improvements to the airport, including construction which enhances or pays for parts of terminals, gates, roadways, parking, AirTrain, runways and taxiways (although I believe other federal funding is available for the latter as well).
The day-to-day airport operations are funded by fees paid by the airlines to the PA for gate assignments and landing rights.
The only thing thats the same with airtrain and the FRA standard rails is the rail guage.
It all wouldn't happen because of the hassle and money that would have to be spent to upgrade R-32 (Queens Div. R-32s) and R-46 equipment to FRA standards in order to operate on the LIRR (i.e. additional grabirons on the sides of the car bodies, the "triangle" or FRA's mandated headlight/ditchlight combo now seen on all railroads, ASC (Automatic Speed Control) equipping of the R-32 & R-46 assigned to the Queens Div.), not to mention the money spent for training of TA train operators to learn the LIRR signal system (not for nothing I am a TA conductor and I know the LIRR signal system like the back of my hand) and to operate with the ASC. Then to add to that the money spent to construct a connection with the LIRR and the NYCT tracks, not to mention delays to be caused to LIRR traffic and NYCT traffic. The idea is good, but as far as the FRA, the city and the state go, it's all money not worth spending.
If the connections to the LIRR in Jamaica and east of Laurelton station are severed, the line is no longer linked to the nation's freight rail network, which means it can no longer be in the FRA's jurisdiction. As long as those connections to the LIRR are completely severed, the MTA should not have any problems extending the E train from Parsons-Archer to Laurelton. From what I read here, the tunnel extend from Parsons-Archer to South Road (the south side of York College). Only a ramp would have to be constructed to connect the subway to the Laurelton line.
I heard that the reason this proposal died came from NIMBYs.
Can't a law that a ROW can built as long as the homeowners phisical property is not disturbed? E. G. boaring tube?
You greatly oversimplified the FRA problem and I am not sure that regulators would agree with your legal interpretations. There's much more to it than that (not including the politics).
"I heard that the reason this proposal died came from NIMBYs."
You heard (mostly) wrong.
Well then, what am I missing? What other FRA-related issues were/are there? What are the legal interpretations that I may be overlooking? Let me know.
Since I mostly heard wrong about the NIMBY issue, I'm assuming NIMBYism had something, maybe not a lot, to do with this extension not being done.
NIMBYism had very liitle to do with why the Archer Av. extension didn't extend like it was supposed to. It did, however, have something to do with the very exsistence of the line (it was either the Archer Av. extension, or a third "flyover" track on the J line El between Broadway Junction and the old 168th Street terminus). Besides, why would the residents of SE Queens, who have no rapid transit service to speak of with the exception of "dollar" vans, band together to kill a line that could make their commutes to Manhattan exponentially easier rather than having to pay $4-$5 to ride the LIRR?
The FRA compatibility issue would, in my book at least, have delayed the construction of the line due to design problems and a near-definite injunction effort on the part of LIRR commuters on the south branch who would have been the most adversely affected. What sank the extension ultimatly was the City's budget problems.
What sank the extension ultimatly was the City's budget problems.
Which is usually the case over the last 30-40 years or so ....
Well I know that the city had a financial crisis of its own back in the late 60's and I can tell it by the way how there were labor problems in the New York Subway. Such that is supported by the grafitti on subway property.
first can some one please give me some information on dollar vans?
next have a LIRR train that goes faster than 55 mph for once, then all thy dollar vans are dead.
Didn't a R-44 do high speed tests on the LIRR?
Yes. It reached 88 mph under full power, 77 mph with 2 motors in each car disabledc (to simulate crush loads). The R-44's run set a world's speed record for subway cars which still stands.
The motors suffered from "birdcaging" during the run, so some modifications would have been needed before you could run a subway train at that speed. The R-44 was designed for safe operation at 70 mph.
Yes. It reached 88 mph under full power, 77 mph with 2 motors in each car disabledc (to simulate crush loads). The R-44's run set a world's speed record for subway cars which still stands.
Wow, COOL! When was this test done?
(And how did they handle the differing voltages?)
I don't know the answer to your second question.
As to the first: The test runs were performed on the LIRR between Woodside and Jamaica, January 31, 1972 (source: Gene Sansome's book EVOLUTION OF NEW YORK CITY'S SUBWAYS Copyright 1997 NYC Transit.
The LIRR was 650v then. The MP72's were still running.
Thank you.
Clearly, this had to be the cas. The converter on the R-44 had an over-voltage module that would have shut the low voltage circuits down when track voltage exceeded 700 volts.
More details please?
Is there a pic of a MP72?
Also when did they convete to 750 volts?
Also increasing the voltage will save money for the MTA because there is less power loss in the third rail and less substations are needed?
Are there any problems with my proposals?
(And how did they handle the differing voltages?)
Poorly - the motors "birdcaged", which is to say that the windings were severely overloaded to the point of destruction. Not a very smart idea, if you ask me.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
So the damage was not done by the high-speed operation? It was simply a matter of too high a voltage?
Previous posters implied it was the power required to push the train to nearly 90 mph that did it. If this is not true, then the test was an indication the R-44 and R-46 could theoreticaly handle 80+ mph in service (if they had somewhere to do it).
So the damage was not done by the high-speed operation? It was simply a matter of too high a voltage?
I'm no electrical whiz, Ron, but here's how it was explained to me: the higher voltage allowed the cars to go faster than they could have on the lower voltage. The added heat (generated by the higher current flow), in combination with the centrifugal force (generated by the higher speed), created the birdcaging effect.
If that's wrong, hopefully one of our electrical gurus out here will correct me.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I've never gotten the straight (HHH) answer on what happened during
that infamous R44 test. The motors have a maximum speed rating.
Say the balancing speed for a SMEE is (was, actually) 50 MPH. Then
the maximum speed will be something like 60 or 65. Above that speed,
the motor is rotating too quickly and may be damaged. Since the
R44s balanced at 70, I don't think 84 MPH would have damaged the
motors. In fact, one theory I heard was that the 750VDC blew up
some of the auxiliaries and that's what crippled the train.
Also, while It wouldn't be unheard of for an old cruddy motor
to flash over (suffer insulation failure) being operated at 125% voltage, those brand spanking new windings should have been able
to take it.
An interesting and plausible explanation. One other poster here says that the LIRR was using 650 volts at the time.
It was probably a combination of 50 volts too many + sustained 83MPH.
Thank you.
For the record: I salute the St' Louis carbuilders for their achievement with the R-44. The test runs to nearly 90 mph were a credit to the designers, and a reminder that NYCTA, despite our tendency to bash the agency here, is truly world class.
Well back then the MTA chirman was not a paper siging, limoed guy. Also the MTA had more sense back then and had a urge to make service faster and better. Now they just install grade timers to the point where dollar van will beat a amtrak accla going through the tunnels!
What voltage is the LIRR using now?
750 volts, direct current.
Dan
Not to nitpick, but I think the term is "bird nesting", as that's what the windings look like.
EGGS!
OK.
Too bad Doc Brown couldn't have installed a flux capacitor and time circuits in that train.:-)
lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!
whats bird caging?
Lest I get it wrong (because I'm not an electrician), I would refer you to Train Dude's posts and to others with electrical expertise. If I recall their posts correctly, it is when the windings on electric motors (such as traction motors) become undone due in part to centrifugal force. It also occurs secondary to exposure to higher than design voltages (such as well a subway car motor rated at 600V is run on a 650V third rail).
If I didn't explain this entirely properly, somebody feel free to revise this explanation.
Good enough!
Oh, ok. That makes more sense.
That's not quite true. Under recent legislation, LRVs and freight or heavy passenger rail could use common trackage. The determinant is seperation by time. This would not be possible in the case of the NYCT and LIRR because both are 24 hour operations. Then again, this would not be necessary to deal with since the original idea was to share a common ROW and not common trackage. There is no legislation that prohibits this.
yes and if ANY of the current LRV's perform half as well at age 50 plus I'll be amazed. Visit the SF MUNI website for MDBF PCC's beat both classes of LRV's.
One could conclude, I suppose, that the subway extension to Rosedale could be accomplished under the following scenario:
1) Subway and LIRR tracks are distinct (perhaps fences off from each other?)
2) LIRR signs off on the idea (not likely)
3) Sufficient budget exists and MTA is willing.
The project's cost would be less than usual subway tunnelling costs due to use of above-ground LIRR ROW and structures, but this would still be a major capital project and so difficult to achieve given current capital priorities.
Based on previous posts, it seems that was indeed the original plan back in 1968. If you can indeed add 2 new subway tracks on the ROW, as others have suggested, than the LIRR shouldn't care, since it would retain its full track capacity. So, again, it all comes down to money.
I'll buy that...
The LIRR is owned by the MTA. The NYC subway is owned by the MTA. they are the same thing on paper.
That is true. However, the MTA board is unlikely to pursue a course of action if LIRR management strongly opposes it.
The Long Island Rail Road is owned by the State of New York. The New York City subway system is owned by the City of New York. They have both been turned over to the MTA for operation.
David
When did it begin to crack down?
I don't know the exact sequence of events...
Also can't the LIRR abondon (legally/on paper) thoses tracks and have them reinstated as used by NYCTA?
The LIRR could not give that ROW to the NYCT because it would not have enough track access for the Montauk, Babylon, Long beach & Far Rockaway branches on the other leg to Jamaica. In addition, valley Stream would become a nightmare bottleneck. However, this was never the intent of the plan. The LIRR ROW is wide enough to carry two additional tracks for the NYCT route although retaining walls would need to be built on both sides.
...although retaining walls would need to be built on both sides.
Is this part of the FRA regulation? Or are the retaining walls required to maintain a four-track width on the ROW?
If you have ever traveled along that section of ROW you'd see that 4-tracks would be possible but because of the width, retaining walls would be necessary. In addition, while the LIRR does not protect the integrity of its ROW, the NYCT does and would require some barrier between track and community.
Sounds like it would be a similar set-up as the WMATA Red Line in the Rockville-Shady Grove area. It's a narrow space, but the WMATA tracks are isolated by fencing both from the B&O tracks on the east side and from Rockville Pike on the west side.
An even better example would be the WMATA Orange Line to either Vienna or New Carrolton, lined on both sides by CSX and Amtrak's NE Corridor respectivly. The south end is fenced off from the CSX line, but in that case I noticed (when traveling into the Deep South via Amtrak's Silver Services) that the WMATA line has a pair of tracks and wall plaforms with the DC-bound platform (track) facing away from the CSX line. The north end is still two tracks, but in that case they are on a semi-independent ROW with respect to the NE Corridor line in that they travel on a concrete elevated and end up in island platforms (still fenced off from the Amtrak line, of course).
In addition, while the LIRR does not protect the integrity of its ROW, the NYCT does and would require some barrier between track and community.
Another example of MTA's flagrant and willful violation of their legal obligations.
NY State RR Law reads:
§ 52-a. Fences along road operated by electric third rail. Notwithstanding the provisions of section fifty-two or of any other law, general or special, within a city containing a population of over one million inhabitants according to the last preceding federal census or state enumeration, every railroad corporation operating a railroad deriving its motive power in whole or in part from an electrified third rail shall erect and thereafter maintain a fence or fences along the boundary line of its right of way contiguous and adjacent to a public highway running generally parallel to or terminating at such boundary line whenever the commissioner of transportation after a hearing on notice to such railroad corporation shall determine it to be necessary for the public welfare and shall by order so direct. The order of the commissioner of transportation may prescribe the height, length,
materials and design of such fence or fences.
Which portions of the ROW are accessible to passersby?
Here they are:
1). Atlantic Branch from just east of Jamaica by South Road to Laurelton. Numerous portions along this line are easily accessible. Especially in the area of Locust Manor station, Laurelton station and towards Rosedale. Either very poor fencing, or in big parts none at all,.
2). Virtually all of the Montauk from St. Albans to Rosedale. Fencing along the Montauk branch right of way is virtually non-existent (especially along Montauk Street which parallels the ROW by St Albans, and the access way next to the ROW by St Albans station is completely unfenced). Complaints of trespassing here is high. The MOW yard north of St. Albans is inadequately fenced, where there too kids access the ROW, and frequently vandalize the MOW equipment, MOW trains, signal equipment and all.
3). Main Line at Kew Gardens. Fencing very inadequate, with large holes in the fencing, some fencing not even installed (at one point east of the Kew Gardens station eastbound platform some of the locals took it upon themselves to build large gardens just off the ROW, ALL of which end maybe 2 - 3 feet from the eastbound local track (Main Line 4)
4). Main Line at Kew Gardens at the MOW storage lot north of the station by Main Line 3 track. No fencing of any kind. The MOW trucks frequently get hit by vandals, and often large groups of kids walk the tracks, even seen grown adults, who you'd think know better, walking the ROW. Here too I have seen several near misses with trains and the kids on the ROW. Occassionally MTA police patrol the area, but not often enough.
In respect most of the LIRR ROW in Queens is easily accessible from the streets around the tracks, some even accessible from city parks which some ROWs run by (especially Forest Park, where I have personally seen numerous close calls with trespassers and trains), which unfortunately allows kids in the parks to access the ROW, AND A LOT OF THE TIMES THEY DO!!
5). Main Line at Queens Blvd. and the BQE near Woodside (just north of Winfield Curve and Signal Bridge 36 at Queens Blvd), where there is NO fencing, and there is even a path which practically invites people to come up to the tracks and stroll along them (this path is on the southside of Main Line 4 eastbound local track, fencing not existent all along this location). Train engineers often report trespassers in this area by the Winfield Curve and bridge 36.
6). Literally all of the Montauk line in Queens from LIC to Forest Park west of the old Richmond Hill station platform.
In respect to NYCT they have places where the fencing is inadequte, especially the Brighton Line. Locals can easily climb up the embankment and be right out on the tracks, since most of the backyards there do not have good fencing, some by the ROW don't have any at all. Some points have fencing that can easily be scaled by kids with no trouble at all (this is all from working knowledge having observed Brighton ROW while working the Q, and often one hears of kids trespassing on Brighton ROW, throwing stones at trains, etc. And I know they don't pay a fare just to trespass!!)
That is bad news. These areas would call for at least the same kind of protectio they give subway storage yards.
I would put up chain-link fences with concertina wire on top,and in places wheretrespassing hasbeen really bad, motion detectors linked to transit police districts.
MTA being the bureaucracy that it is, it may take a fatal accident and a lawsuit or two tomake it happen. Please note that this doesn't mean I side with the idiots who trespasson the tracks.
Oh, and the gardens need to be shaved back.
The blame should not be layed at the doorstep of the MTA. After all, the MTA also oversees the NYCT & SIRR. They both do an excellent job of maintaining required barriers. Clearly, the LIRR and its MOW division should be accountable for these lapses.
But it'sthe MTA's job to ensure that the LIRR, as its subsidiary, does just that.
One way or the other, the buck stops at 347 Madison Avenue.
[re unfenced sections of LIRR ROW in Queens]
I don't quite see the big deal. Much of the LIRR ROW throughout Nassau and Suffolk counties is unfenced. Some sections run right through downtown areas.
Isn't most of the trackage in Suffolk purely disesl territory (eg no third rail)?
As I type this, I seem to recall observing the "A" line near Broad Channel station as it travels through the wetlands. I don't recall seeing a fence, though you'd have to wade pretty deep in the muck to reach the tracks...
That line does have a fence, but the locals trespass it regularly.
The LIRR even goes through Pinelawn Cemetary with no fence - and that stretch of track is electrified. Take a look at the grade crossing just east of Garden City Station - the third rail is right out in the open, and anyone can walk right up and grab it. I am amazed that there has not been more electrocutions because of these situations.
Could that be because all the really stupid people are already dead?
Guess not...that would be too easy.
Hey, I'm getting buried in that cemetary some day!
Just don't make it anytime soon, OK?
Hopefully not, I'm still paying $25 bucks a month for the real estate!
there are better ways and less ireversable ways to comit suicide.
The last time I checked, suicide was not reversible (at least not by any methods I know about).
However, if you are referring to people who go through the motions of a suicide attempt to ask for attention, then yes, there are other preferred ways. If you call 911 right before you swallow a bottle of pills, you are no doubt aware that the ambulance crew has a good chance of reaching you in time to save you.
When you grab the third rail the current will have you fly back and away from the third rail. So you might be left unconsious but not dead.
Isn't most of the trackage in Suffolk purely disesl territory (eg no third rail)?
Not at all. The main line is electrified all the way to Ronkonkoma, several stops into Suffolk, and runs through some heavily populated areas. Port Jefferson is electrified to Huntington, not as long in terms of distance, but it once again it goes through a busy urban area. The Babylon line is electrified for about five miles in Suffolk, but is less accessable than the others.
I knew about Huntington, but I thought that was basically just a little across the county line. Your points are well-taken.
New nominations for the Darwin award, anyone?
6). Literally all of the Montauk line in Queens from LIC to Forest Park west of the old Richmond Hill station platform.
That section has not third rail though.
Think so? I doubt it.
Exhibit A: HBLR, which is not even heavy rail. It shares a ROW with an active freight railroad. All the FRA wanted was a fence between the HBLR tracks -- formerly used by the Central RR of New Jersey -- and the freight track.
Exhibit B: The Newark City Subway. It shares tracks -- not just a ROW -- with an active (albeit barely) freight RR. All the FRA required was that the freight and the subway not use the tracks at the same time of day.
If these arrangements are OK, I can't see the FRA trying to regulate something just because there used to be a railroad there.
Maybe that was easy to arrange in New Jersey. I recall a much bigger fuss occurring in Jamaica about the LIRR ROW.
If there is enough demand for it, and if MTA wants to try again, perhaps the situation can be dealt with more easily this time around. Trouble is, I don't think MTA has this on its radar.
The upper level (E) line tracks continue roughly 1/2 mile south east of the Parsons/Archer station. I saw the original plan once upon a time. The line was to continue along Merrick Blvd and francis lewis Blvd. to Rosedale. Much of the line would have been tunnel but would have included a segment that paralleled the LIRR ROW. A small yard was also included north of Rosedale. This plan was killed off about the same time that the Queens Blvd Super express through Sunnyside yard died.
I will make a law saying that NIMBYs can go to **** and the project benefits more than it harms. Isn't that what war is? Many more people would benefit if Bin Laden were captured but that wouldn't benefit him.
NIMBY did not kill that project - crimped budgets, a bankrupt city, and to some degree, the FRA, did.
>> I will make a law saying that NIMBYs can go... <<
I'd make a law saying that anyone who opposed a subway project would have his MetroCard confiscated. Anyone who opposed airport improvements would be barred from airplanes. Anyone who opposed a new highway would have his driver's license revoked. That would probably quiet the NIMBY's fast.
Wasn't there a special NIMBY subway entrance design for new or rehabbed stations - you know, where the escalator led to the middle of the street?
:0)
wish there were. remember dead people can't sue:)
I say give the housing near airports to deaf people.....
That's a good one!
:0)
>>> I say give the housing near airports to deaf people..... <<<
You may be joking, but Carty Finkbeiner, the mayor of Toledo, Ohio (and a high school classmate) seriously made such a proposal with regards to the Toledo airport a few years ago.
Tom
Legislate to seriously diminish their ability to get litigious and seriously increase the penalties if they lose. Bribery's good too.
>>> Legislate to seriously diminish their ability to get litigious and seriously increase the penalties if they lose. <<<
I would support that legislation whole heartedly (provided there was an exception for the area within one mile of my home). :-)
Tom
The penalty for a second offense should be writing 100 times on the blackboard "I love subway trains," and memorizing the serial numbers of LIRR MU's which don't stop at New Hyde Park.
:0)
A third offense would mean spending a day in Heypaul's R-9 cab.:-)
A forth offense would mean licking bum's pee off the platform at roosevelt ave.
Easy does it. Let's not get carried away here...
Smart. Then you'll be crying a river when the next Robert Moses levels your entire neighborhood for a new highway/airport enlargement/subway/etc and sends you to live in a housing project... ...and no, a check for the moving van and your time will not be in the mail.
Don't forget to delete the subway - late in the project, so we don't know it's being deleted until too late...
I doubt people would mind if they adopted the French system - pay 120% of market value for any compulsorarily purchased real estate. Not too fair on tenants, but the landowners would be happy.
`>>> I doubt people would mind if they adopted the French system - pay 120% of market value for any compulsorarily purchased real estate. <<<
The American system requires payment of the fair market value of any property taken by eminent domain. But even if 120% were paid the devil is in the details. Determining the fair market value of a specific piece of property can lead to a long court battle. An even thornier problem is when something like an airport or rail line or sewage plant is built near one's property, without actually taking the property itself. Paying 120% by itself would not prevent NIMBYs.
Tom
I said that you can't sue if it doesn't distroy your property. Like shave a few feet of your backyard. Build a deep boar tunnel under your house. build a tunnel under your house with no surface damage. Not super-block your neiborhood.
This is such a mixed bag....rent controls, projects and the like. Many years ago, companies like Metropolitan Life built entire communities. Mitchel-Lama housing projects did well for the city. Problem is tenants that gained apartments years ago under income limitations now have same apartments with far greater incomes. New York City needs affordable housing built where people work at reasonable rents...not cardboard boxes at the end of the subway lines. Don't be fooled by 'rent control' nonsense...my apartment is not inexpensive and the rent goes up 7% a year when my income hadn't. The IBEW built housing for its members...I wonder what the TWU could come up with (don't suggest Redbird carcasses.) CI Peter
"The IBEW built housing for it's members"-- THAT'S IT!!!-- Join unions and have them start similar programs. As for those who don't see the value of unions -- they can well afford to buy their own --, surely I don't care about them. In other words EAT CAKE!!!!
When the G is only going as far as Court Sq...what will be
with the balance of cars not needed??..used on the new "V"..??
Wasn't the G actually short on rolling stock to begin with? I imagine the G will now have adequate rolling stock (and will need a full complement for weekend service to Forest Hills). As to the remainder - your guess is as good as mine. The "G" uses 75-foot cars, so the "V" could use them too, I suppose. Or the "E" or "F."
I heard the R32's will run on the F most of the days. Maybe two or three sets. Anyone else heard this.
Robert
The official F assignment is 40 trains of R-46s and 5 trains of R-32s. What ACTUALLY runs will probably vary somewhat from day to day.
David
I thought the F required at least 45 to 50 weekday trains?
Ummm...40 R-46 + 5 R-32 does indeed add up to 45 trainsets.
David
Will the F require fewer trainsets now that it has been rerouted ?
The information that I gave (45 trainsets on the F) is as of Monday, December 17, 2001. The previous assignment sheet I have is from July 22, 2001. That sheet lists 49 trainsets of R-46 cars on the F. Therefore, the answer is "yes:" fewer trainsets are required on the F than previously.
David
Ahhh, I knew I saw something in the area of 50 sets.
If the F's routeage is slightly increased, why is the TA cutting back 4 trains?
Prior to December 17, weekday F frequency was 18 trains an hour in the rush. Starting December 17, weekday F frequency is 15 trains an hour in the rush. (E frequency is increased from 12 trains an hour to 15 in the rush.) The result is three fewer trainsets needed in the peak hour, and four fewer needed overall during the rush.
David
Ummmm...I said at LEAST 45 during weekday off peak. Past car assignments had 50 F trains.
That could be because of going from 18 TPH to 15. I guess none is attributable to reduced end-point running times.
Are you saying that F service is now (post 63rd St) 18TPH and starting today, it goes DOWN to 15TPH?
yes
Let's hope I get on one of those R-32s on the F!
What is the V assignment?
I hope the T/O's who've been on there for years and are staying fr this pick find their brake handles (if they even remember what they are!)
That reminds me of a story when the TA put the R68's on the F for a short time when they were brand new. At Stillwell, the crew who bought it from 179 was a finishing crew and went home. The motorman to take it back told the dispatcher that his brake handle & reverser were in his locker at 179, so he had to take the R46 across the platform. Same with the next guy and the next guy and the next guy. All regular F guys from 179, all old timers. And this R68 was sitting there. Finally, a rookie t/o comes in with an R46, and the dispatcher begged this guy to jump ahead so he could get that R68 outta there. Needless to say, all those F t/o's had to write G2's to explain why their brake handle & reverser was not on their person. Of course, nothing came of it, but in todays enviornment suspensions would be the penalty.
I take it the R-46 reverser was different before the GOH. (They use the same reverser now).
Yes indeed. When the R44/46 had P wire, we used a very small key called a "console key" which unlocked the stationary master controller and reverser handles. This key was a smaller version of the "skate key" which was originally used to set up the c/r position on the R40/42. Additionally, it was used to open and close doors on the R44/46, and the first few R68's before the new 3 position key switch came into being.
Which brings up an interesting point. Why do the train operators have to carry their own brake handles on most trains? They should be standard parts on all trains. Imagine if we had to buy our own brake pedals for our own cars?
- Lyle Goldman
Isn't the brake handle intended to be the equivalent of your car key? You have to take that with you.
Is it? That's a strange thing to use as a key. What do they use for keys on the R-44 and R-46 cars? Why can't they use the same thing on all the other cars?
- Lyle Goldman
No, from as much as I understand (I'am not a TO or MTA/NYCTA employie). The key for all the cars is the reverser so you can shift into forward, so in effect you carry your transmision stick with you to get your car out of park/neutal.
Wow R32's on the F, I don't think I've ever seen that. The railfan window will be welcome on the Hillside line.
Some examples:
Yes railfan windows on the F! I've never seen the F line through a railfan window, only those blurry images through the R46 cabs. If I catch one of those R32 F's I'm gonna ride to C.I. and along Hillside.
When I lived in NYC, I got to ride the R1/9 and R-40s and R-42s on the F. The 1970s and early 1980s were a subfan's paradise, in spite of the dreadful graffitti and non-existant maintenance.
just wait from 6 to 8 pm and you will find a R-32 or 1 out of 10 trains I think.
If the official F line car assignment of 5 R32 consists is actually followed, the average rider will be totally confused. Don't get me wrong, an R32 on the F is a great thing if one is the most casual railfan, certainly it is great news to all SubTalkers. Partly because of my disgust with the M line, I wish all 45 trains on the F were R32's because I would consider working the line! Now for the bad news: it is well acknowleged that those digital end signs leave something to be desired. Looking at the end sign at close range, it is tough to distingush between an E and an F. And many end signs on the Jamaica R32's do not light up. The average passenger on the Queens IND express knows when the "old" train arrives, it's always an E. Now that is no longer the case. Most passengers do not look at the side signs in general. In addition, many times you will have improper side signs (Stillwell/Kings Hwy.) Many times the dispatcher at 179 will have to make a last minute equipment swap. You need personel and time to change 20 side signs.
[If the official F line car assignment of 5 R32 consists is actually followed, the average rider will be totally confused.... The average passenger on the Queens IND express knows when the "old" train arrives, it's always an E. Now that is no longer the case. Most passengers do not look at the side signs in general.]
Should each subway route now be considered a separate operating authority, with its own dedicated equipment which must never be used anywhere else, AND can ever be replaced except with identical equipment?
AND to what extent must public agencies accommodate people's real or feigned stupidity? Service information is provided not only on train side signs but also on platform edge signs and in conductor announcements. Transit cannot be faulted when riders consciously choose to ignore the information presented.
I would feel differently if those dumb digital signs were not in the front making it difficult for people to tell the difference between E and F.
Hopefully when the cars go in for the next SMS they will put in either a combination LED/flipdot sign or a 100% LED sign.
You try figuring out if the R32 entering Penn Station at high speed is a C or an E and you will see what Bill is talking about. To make matters worse, since they both share the blue bullet, you have to wait for the train to slow down to see the bullet clearly, or the top destination sign.
> Service information is provided not only on train side signs but also . . . in conductor announcements.
Conductors don't always make good announcements, and even when they do, the loudspeakers don't always work.
- Lyle Goldman
have one speaker per cars so there isn't echos and have a dynmic volume increser, or just run the conductors voice through DFX (winamp plugin) with fidelity at high and dynamic boas high.
Well, the dot matrix digital sign on the front and rear of the R32 is a bust. No doubt about that. But the R32 has rollsigns on the sides, and I think that's a lot more important. If anything, R32s are better signed than R46s. The color coding on the bullets for the (E) and (F) are key. The R46 side signs have no color at all (and poor contrast to boot.)
:-) Andrew
And when the back light fails?
When the backlight fails on the R46:
If you touch your nose to the glass, you can read those dark signs, but it's hard to do when the train is moving. Ouch! That smarts! :-)
Those signs aren't too reliable. My favorite is when the conductor forgets to update the signs, and it says "LAST STOP" all through Queens.
You make some good points there, Bill. Do you know how many people get on my C train thinking it's an E only to find out when it gets to Columbus Circle that it's not? Nobody looks at the side signs. They see an R32 and they automatically think it's an E train. If they do that on the 8th Avenue Line, imagine the chaos that'll happen on the Queens Boulevard Line if they change the R46s on the F line to R32s.
When I saw the roster from Joe Kormans site, I was suprised that the F had 5 trains of R32's and the R had none. Rosters are not set in stone, the superintents can tell the yardmasters to make changes since the cars belong to the same maintance facility.
The problem is, we're asking people to use their intelligence and common sense, alien concepts indeed. All through the eighties, R46s predominated in both QB expresses, but that was before side LED signs, so you just had to check to see if the circle was blue or pink (later orange). Before Archer, both outbound services went to 179th, although one service was local beyond Forest Hills, the other express.
Problem is, most lines during the nineties have become dedicated to one or two models of rolling stock. If there's more than one line running together, people automatically associate a certain model with a certain line. That's been the case on the QB expresses since 1991 along with other lines.
Broadway/60th Street riders assume an R-32 is always an 'N' and that an 'R' HAS to be a 46. Well, in recent years there HAS been increasing use of 32s on the 'R', especially on weekends. That doesn't stop people from making the above assumption and panicking when the Queens-bound R-32 they're on starts jughandling into Queens Plaza instead of heading up out of the ground to QueensBORO Plaza.
Actually, from about 1979 through 1990, R32s ran pretty much equally on BOTH Queens-bound 60th Street services interspersed with 27/30s or 42s to Astoria and 46s to Forest Hills. If a 32 pulled in, extreme care had to be taken to make sure which train was which. Prior to the R-32 GO, both services had the same yellow circle on the bulkhead. Afterward, one had to read the LED sign carefully. (Never mind that if you weren't sure, you could check the side roll signs!)
A Redbird on a Bronx OR Brooklyn-bound '4' can cause similar problems surfacing at Yankee Stadium or skipping Nostrand en route to Utica, respectively: "But it's RED! It's a '5'- isn't it?". Likewise, a 62A on the '5' at 3rd/149th or President. On the rare occasions when a Queens-bound 'A' train is partly or fully R-32, there are probably those who panic when it skips Lafayette.
Ah, for the 1967-88 period when a B-division route could be virtually anything and an A-division mainline train could carry anything from an R-12 through 36 car inclusive. Then you actually to read signs!
The lack of literacy of some of the riding public makes me want to SCREAM sometimes. Some guy held the doors on an 8th Ave. bound L train because he wanted to know if it went to Queens - and there were signs nearby. He was not blind, but he was dumb.
Close the door and drive away. He'll learn!
I agree. In my travels today I noticed some confusion between the F and V line because both lines were R46. I think the entire V line should be R32's, so it's very easy to tell what's what without having to look at those unreliable digital signs.
Also the V train signs on the front of the R-46 look to be red or brown and not orange? Has anyone else noticed this?
The V signs looked like light red, or a mix orange-red. As for the brown I don't know about that!! Haven't seen one that looked brown to me. As for your issue about the signage on the R-32 the LED sign and lighted side signs is a good idea, but the TA won't invest that kind of money and technology into cars that are 36 years old, and in due time will be retired. The lighted side signed were cut out due to money saved on doing repairs and replacing electricals and bulbs in the signs when they blew out, and you know cost cutting is a big thing in the MTA. Same said for the PA system you mentioned as far as the cost of putting them into R-32s and the maintenance of the new PA system. The key to working with the PA system on R-32s is not to talk with your mouth 1/4 of an inch off the mike (or the mouth practically touching the mike) and your voice so loud like the PA isn't even working. And the extra feedback, or echo effect, can be cut down dramatically by the conductor closing the door behind them before doing their announcements (this works for me BIG TIME!!). The R-32 has a good PA system for the most part. The only way, though not to me, they might not be a good idea on the F is that a conductor is not too much anxious to stand up all the way to Coney Island (I don't mind at all having worked with the R-32 doing 2-trippers to 95th Street on the R from Parsons-Archer), instead of a nice seat and tranverse cab the R-46 provides. Believe me the good word from the conductors on the F line is that they are pretty pissed about the R-32 on the F. Me, as a conductor and a train buff, I don't mind them there one bit at all!!
This is probably since they were never used. Constant exposure has faded the F's.
Simple fix - put rollsigns back on the front/rear ends of the R-32s a la redbird, replacing the dot matrix, and lessening confusion.
Good thought but, it is not that simple. The reason that they went with those dot matrix nightmares during GOH is that when they retro fitted the cars with A/C it did away with the access door where the crank to change the sign was. This is also the reason that route markers, on later cars, got really big and moved to where they are today.
Peace,
ANDEE
Can't you switch them all with a single button to advance all the rolls at once or do you have to go through the train and turn every one by hand?
R-32 side signs are manually operated. Each has to be turned individually by hand, using a special tool.
David
Yes, a special tool. Like my mailbox key.
(Okay, fine, that was on an R-68, and cranking even from one letter to the next would be very tiring with my mailbox key.)
Some R-32's can apparently be cranked by hand, although I don't think I've seen any such R-32's.
Thank God there are not many left that won't take the wrench.
Also thoses flip dot are pure c**p. Go to hell luminator. Look at the buses all there flip-dots are broken. Ether install the old roolsigns with backlight, or install something with color LEDs (orange for F, blue for E, yellow for N and R, green for G, etc) like on the r-142s except please use color coordinated signs! okay?
That's the bottom line of my objection, those signs are unreadable. Now if you had an orange F and blue E, then I would have no problem with R32's on the F.
Also does Luminator have pics of the MTA board doing same gender love, that the MTA is obsesed with luminator products?
"Also does Luminator have pics of the MTA board doing same gender love, that the MTA is obsesed with luminator products?"
Oh, come on.
Point of order: The R-143 uses signs provided by Telecite, which as far as I know has NO relationship to Luminator.
David
The G will use short trains at all times. I am guessing that means 4 cars. I'll find out tonight- I work part of the G which will now be OPTO when it goes to 71.
As my father used to tell me about eggplant, "If you don't take any, there's more left for everyopne else."
Eggplant, subway cars, you know, same thing...
If the IND 8th Ave. Line (C) is a supplement to the (A) between 168 St., Manhattan and Euclid Ave., Brooklyn; in which right now the MTA lacks a fast connection between Manhattan and Staten Island. Would the (C) train be ideal for the Staten Island X-harbor extension to St. George, having an extra station just south of Rector Street and north of South Ferry, when the (C) train is south of Chambers Street.
No. I would just make an bellmouth off the 1 when they redo that line.
But if you were to think about (1) to extend to Staten Island, wouldn't it take work to rebuild and reconfigure South Ferry Station?
The only time they have a good chance of getting the funding in the near future is now since Albany and Washington are quite sympathetic at the moment. I do hope both Albany and Washington do consider putting money into improving Lower Manhattan for the future, not only fixing it up.
Yeah, definitely the access to Manhattan from Staten Island should improve with Albany's and Washington DC's help, since the Staten Island ferry takes about 30 min. from St. George to Whitehall Station.
In addition, it's more likely that the MTA will use the (E) for entering Staten Island.
I thought of that after posting.
In my opinion, it is very important that the MTA and the City of New York use their current situation to gain funds while they are most likely available. If NYC and the MTA act wisely now, they will secure alot of funding for the future.
Excellent here, but I do think that because of the debts that MTA probably have right now, along with the City of New York, I know it isn't possible right now, unless Washington pitches in.
President Bush isn't the kindest when it comes to public transit so I am not so sure how that would play out. At least the Senate is democrat controlled so a transportation funding measure would probably get through there more easily.
I know that this has nothing to do with the President here. But the important thing about this topic is to improve the access to Manhattan by the people of SI and near the New Jersey and Staten Island state border.
Bush's public transportation is his horse and wagon.
We can say "To help that ravaged area regain a footing in todays socitiy"
We can say "To help that ravaged area regain a footing in todays socitiy"
Forget South Ferry. If (if!) the 1 is extended to Staten Island, South Ferry will become a much less important station than it was before. The other nearby stations will easily handle the traffic.
What if they used the (E) train service to extend to Staten Island with a station near Rector Street, would it retain the usefulness of the IRT South Ferry Station?
My point is that many if not most South Ferry passengers transfer there to the Staten Island ferry. If the subway itself runs through to Staten Island, they no longer need to transfer to the ferry, and Battery Park is no longer a major transit hub.
In case the Manhattan-Staten Island tunnel is in a major repair, they still need the ferry in-order to back the line up.
The ferrys are going to live with the redbirds if a cross harbor tunnel is built. But remeber that we are RAIL fans (rails include subways) not SHIP fans.
The SIRR is Div B (officially its FRA but that can be switched cause there is no traffic from the rest of the FRA network and it is disconnected) South Ferry is Div A. Do you sense a problem?
Staten Island Railway is Staten Island Railway. It is not a Subdivision of NYC Transit's subway system (A/IRT, B/BMT-IND, or C/work trains). It is no longer under FRA jurisdiction.
However, I think I understand the point. Should a direct connection be made between the SIR and the subway at South Ferry (like THAT'll ever happen...), why not convert the SIR to IRT-type operations?
David
IRT is smaller and carrys less people and in the end is less profitable than the bigger Div B cars. SIRR is built to Div B platform specs not Div A (IRT) why rebuild the SIRR to Div A? Why go back in progress, the Div B cars are bigger than Div A? Also if The MTA did decied to make one subway division, they would eliminate Div A not Div B!
Because wider dimensions were always unwise, and that is the reason that today, you do not have total intertransfers of rolling stock.
The IRT dimensions should have been kept with the Triborough plan, and the BRT, and the IND (which followed the BRT).
Frank Sprauge was right.
If they retained the smaller IRT dimensions, the E and F trains would be a lot worse off than they are now. August Belmont's attempt to keep the railroads out of his subway by going with narrow tunnels was a big mistake.
Try to stick just the subway here, there are 2 possibilities for connecting Manhattan to SI with the subway here. One is by using the 8th Ave. (E), going past the Chambers/WTC off the stub line and the other is by using the (J) or (M) the Nassau St. line connecting at Broad St. Station. Converting SIRT to IRT will not help, because the SIRT fleet is the exact same as the BMT/IND fleet not IRT fleet especially with the R-142A.
Two questions:
1. If the C goes to Staten Island, then what serves local stations along Fulton Street in Brooklyn?
2. Would Staten Islanders want subway service, or would they give a "NIMBY" reaction?
Connect it to the SIR. I know the SIR would be B-Division but perhaps they can modify it in some way.
SIR is B division - runs R44s
On paper it is FRA but it has nocnection to any other FRA tracks so the SIRR should abandon it and the NYCTA should pick it up. This will result only in saving costs for the MTA and their are almost no cons and the one their are are insignifigent.
If you think (C) to Staten Island is rather a bad idea, then how about using (E) to Staten Island, extending beyond Chambers WTC with a station near Rector Street and South Ferry then connect it to St. George?
I thought of that after posting. An even better idea!
E train to Fulton.
There is neither the money nor the impetus to connect SI to the subway system. And certainly, were it to be connected, going via The Narrows into the 4th Avenue system would be considerably cheaper (the Bay Ridge portion of the 4th Av was built to be easily upgraded to a 4-track line).
On the other hand, I've thought that substantial Federal money might be had if Liberty Island were made part of such a Battery-St. George connection.
On the other hand, I've thought that substantial Federal money might be had if Liberty Island were made part of such a Battery-St. George connection.
I wish I believed that, 'cause it would make sense. But the Feds want to off the island to the highest bidder, and as I understand it, NYC and NYS haven't been able to get their act together to submit a plan for its acquisition by one or the other.
Among other things, apparently the upkeep of the many historic landmark buildings on the island and general maintenance is on the order of $20 million/year IIRC.
Columbia proposed to put a satellite campus there, I think. And it's been widely discussed as a conference center for world peace stuff.
I must admit, I never thought about putting a subway stop under it -- that would clearly solve the access problem. As wonderful as ferries often are, I think they're a big perceptual impediment. People think they're harder to use and/or will take longer than they actually are/do.
Can you imagine the security needed on that line post 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!
Well try to use the (J) or (M) to extend to SI.
If you are referring to connecting the SIR tracks (physically) to a C extension to Staten Island wouldn't be because, and do remember, the Staten Island Railway is considered a railroad!! Operated under FRA guidelines from the signal system, to headlight dimmers, to additional exterior grabirons on the R-44s for the SIR. C line (North Division) R-32 and R-38 which run the C line would need to be FRA compliant in order to run on the line. Though it is a good idea because finally the SIR can come into Manhattan and connect to the rest of the MTA system. Why not just bring the R train down 4th Avenue more, take it under the bay and across to Staten Island? I think this could work too, but again the SIR operating as a railroad issue comes to mind again. If you are talking about bring the C to SI but not physically connecting it to the SIR, then I think that would be a damn good idea and should be considered sometime (if the "brains" at MTA start thinking for a change!! lol )
But most of the people in Staten Island are going to Manhattan, not Brooklyn.
Logisically, connecting the C or E to Staten Island doesn't make much sense from a construction standpoint.
While the stub-end terminal for the E is at the WTC, the line is on the same level as the N/R trains, which take over Churck Street south of Trinity. As was discussed on another thread, the only way to extend the IND Eighth Ave. tracks south from Chambers-WTC is to either build a grade crossing, eliminate the BMT Broadway local tracks south of City Hall or drop the E tracks down a level (if there is enough clearance) and build a tunnel beneath the N/R tracks, but above the A tracks turning onto Fulton and going to Broaway-Nassau. That would then rise up to connect with the N/R tracks between Cortlandt and Rector Streets.
The other option, I suppose, would be building a new IRT 1/9 terminal at Battery Park City and giving the E or the C the IRT tunnel between Liberty St. and South Ferry. But connecting the stub-end WTC platform of the E up to the IRT tracks would require the tunnel to run right through the former mall level of the WTC (so much for shopping), while a C connection to the express tracks would meana couple of very sharp curves to get the uptown tracks over from Liberty St. and Greenwich to hook up with the Eighth Ave. express track before Chambers, and the depth of the flying junction (it would have to go either two or four levels below ground to get above or under the A train's tunnel coming from Fulton) could interfere with plans to relocate the PATH station at its former Hudson Terminal site.
But why go though that hassle at all? The cost of a 5 1/2 mile underwater subway tunnel would be horrendously expensive to begin with, and adding this engineering job onto it wouldn't help matters any. If they were to build it, and assuming the B train and N train return to operating over the Manny B after 2004, it would make far more sense to split the tunnel off the BMT Montague Tunnel south of Whitehall and extend the proposed Whitehall-Astoria BMT (W) Broadway local to Staten Island.
While Staten Island commuters are going to Manhattan and not Brooklyn for the most part, the only realistic way to get a subway line built there would be to piggy-back an extra set of tunnels onto the Cross Harbor Tunnel project (which actually does have some real-life funding), run the line from around Clifton to Brooklyn and then connect it up to the Fourth Ave. express tracks. It may not be the direct non-stop route between the two boroughs the other routes have, but for the majority of people in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx, they have to endure multiple-stop rides before they get to their desitnation in Manhattan, so I'm sure Staten Islanders can endure stopping at 59th, 36th and Pacific Streets in Brookyln if they reall do want a subway line in their borough.
What about using the (J), (M) or (Z) to connect to Staten Island?
Anything off the Montague Tunnel would be easier to connect than the Eighth Ave. line, though I'm sure if they only had the J, M or Z to work with Staten Islanders would gripe that their trains don't go any further north than Delancey.
I was actually thinking of using the tailtracks that are present south of Broad St. Station, which is being used by the Weekday terminating (J) and (Z) trains.
Would the extension to Staten Island be more feasible if the link was to connect from St. George to Broad Street on the (J), (M) and (Z) lines with the (M) on service during weekdays (05:30 to 21:00) and (J) for the rest of the week (Full time except for Mondays-Fridays during 05:30 to 21:00 )?
What consists would they use? R40M and R42 or the Modified SIR R-44s. Can't use the R-44s because they are too big for the Eastern Division platforms.
What trains does the Nassau St. Subway primarily use?
Rebuilt R-42's, I believe. At 60 feet in length, the R-143 (and the R-160) would fit right in also.
Are they qualified to enter SI?
I guess so. Voltage is the same. Third rail's the same.
Remember, though, that certain modifications were made to SI-based R-44's. Train Dude or Zman179 are better qualified to speak on this, but I believe the SI trains are run more by FRA rules.
if the sir line is cut off from any real railroads does need to be under the fra rules any more.
However, what is the 2nd Avenue subway connected to Nassau Street, as one plan states. SI would have a whole new subway line!
The C line would have to use R44's, that shouldn't be too hard to Change. All C line stations can handle R44's.
The SIRR is too subway to be a rail road.
Can someone please tell me all the modifications that will be necsasary to convert a R-32 to FRA or R-46/44 to FRA?
They updated the main service advisory page to reflect the addition of the V train. They also now have buttons for the blue S and the black S is now gray (same color as L). They also have no more 9 button, so is this a sign the 9 is history?
I have also seen permanent signs for E to Canal on 8th Av Local stations. At Chamber some conductors are announcing "Chambers Street, Borough of Manhattan Community College." The station also has a big new overhead sign for the college. I work the 1 line one night a week. At the stations, the 9 bullets have been covered up and new signs only mention the "1 at all times"
That doesn't mean it is really permanent. When the South Ferry line is restored, you may see "9" service restored as well.
Actually, the 9 page is still online, just not linked to anything. I really think the 9 was a waste and we can send it off now.
I really think the 9 was a waste and we can send it off now.
Let's have a vote on how many SubTalkers want the 9 and who doesn't want it.
I personally am not a frequent CPW rider on the 7th Av. line, but I've seen a 9 train ONLY ONCE while riding a downtown exp. 2 train in that area.
I don't see a purpose to it, besides the benefits of the skip-stop rush hour service, which some SubTalkers have commented that it wasn't working well.
Why should we all get to vote? Let the passengers on the line from north of 137 vote. It makes no difference to the rest of us.
Since most of those passengers were hurt more than they were helped by skip-stop service, I doubt they would vote to revive it.
the black S is now gray (same color as L.)
The "gray S" denotes advisories for the Grand Central shuttle.
It's operating to West 4 St. but I forgot the time of the advisory.
Who currently have the car assignment roster for the 2,5,F,Q,W and V?
Also,how many trains currently run on the Q and 4 per day?
I see no one.ok.
An earlier post said that the official F train assignment was 45 trains. 5 of type R-32, the others of type R-46.
This information might have been posted at some time in the past. Have you tried searching the archives?
Shawn.
I can answer some of it.
If by "how many trains" the poster means trainsets (as opposed to trips), the answers I can provide (weekday mornings, as of December 17) are:
F: 5 R-32, 40 R-46; total 45
Q: 14 R-40, 17 R-68; total 31
W: 21 R-68A
V: 15 R-46
David
I think this entire board would be very grateful if you or someone else with the information would be so kind as to post the entire car assignment matrix.
Also, do you happen to know if the 5 R-32's on the F will run on weekends, or will the R-32's only be used as a "last resort" when there aren't enough R-46's to cover? (In other words, do I wait around for an R-32 trainset on the F tomorrow?)
I don't have time to provide the whole assignment. It'll come out in dribs and drabs over the next few weeks, I'll guess (please don't anyone attempt to trick me into doing it by asking me questions about it a line at a time), or maybe someone else with the assignment and more time will post it.
In answer to the other question, the assignment only covers weekday requirements, and Car Equipment is free to adhere to it as strictly or loosely as it wants based on a particular day's conditions.
David
That's fair. Thanks. I look forward to the dribs and the drabs.
To answer my own question: I didn't see any R-32's on the F today, nor did I see any R-46's on the E. (The R was the mixed bag we've all gotten used to.) We'll see what happens tomorrow and next weekend.
Have a look at the Joe Korner site - its there already!
Click on new and part way down the next page is a link to the new assignments.
Excellent. Thank you for the pointer.
Here is the link, for anyone interested.
I see that the new assignments are already being violated. There were lots of R-32's on the R today, even though the R is supposed to have only R-46's.
Yesterday evening I was returning home from downtown Los Angeles, and was waiting for a train on the L.A. Green Line. I couldn't help but think of some of the beautiful photography of the L.A. transit system Salaam has posted. A picture is worth a thousand words, and I wish I had a camera with me, because it is difficult to describe the scene, but I will try.
It was 5:10 P.M. and I was standing on the platform at the Harbor Freeway station waiting for a train. The station is located in the median of the 105 freeway at the interchange of the Harbor (110) freeway. Two levels below the station the Harbor freeway passes perpendicular to the line, with an express bus stop in the median connected to the station by an elevator and escalators. (I had arrived by bus on a 40 ft Neoplan with four other passengers on board.) One level below at the side of the freeway is a local bus transit center reached by a walkway over the freeway. Right beside the tracks are the parallel lanes of the 105 Freeway. Above and below the station there are transition roads between the two freeways. It was already after sunset and the station platform was bathed in yellow halogen lighting giving it a surreal look. As I looked out at the Harbor freeway I could see a mass of red lights on one side, and white lights on the other side. Next to the station was a sea of cars slowly crawling along, and above us at areas where the transition roads were banked I could also see traffic moving along on them also. Because of the slow speeds of the traffic along side the station, it was quieter than usual. I looked over the rush hour crowd on the platform waiting for our train. The other ten passengers were widely dispersed over the platform. This then was the quintessential portrait of rapid transit in Los Angeles for me. The height of the Friday rush hour and only eleven passengers on a center platform station waiting for a train in the midst of all the freeway traffic.
The LAMTA did let us know it was rush hour though. When a train arrived after waiting ten minutes (the schedule shows 6 ˝ minute head way), the one car transit vehicle (I can't call one car a train) was standing room only. I guess that is a bit different than waiting for a train to the Bronx on the Lexington Avenue line in New York, but it is rush hour in the second largest city in the United States.
Tom
Tom, very nicely described. Two quibbles--1 the yellow lights are either low or high pressure sodium not halogen, 2 Los Angeles is certainly the second largest metro area but not a "city" by my standards, although the petroleum industry ideal.
As to the passenger counts AND single car service at rush hour, think of the LA Times headline from last year's strike "...and nobody notices...". It is my impression that LA transit usage is more class identified than most other large transit operations.
>>> 1 the yellow lights are either low or high pressure sodium not halogen, 2 Los Angeles is certainly the second largest metro area but not a "city" by my standards <<<
I stand corrected on the lights, but I believe the city of Los Angeles (as opposed to the metropolitan area) has passed the city of Chicago in population, and is now the second largest city in the United States.
>>> It is my impression that LA transit usage is more class identified than most other large transit operations. <<<
I certainly cannot deny that. On Friday I caught my first bus at 7:00 A.M., to Pasadena (2hrs, 4 buses) then rode from Pasadena to Los Angeles at 11:30 A.M. (3 buses), and from downtown to home at 4:15 P.M. (4 buses, 1 train). During the entire day I did not see any other transit rider wearing a tie and suit or sports jacket, but did observe a few well dressed women who could be in lower management or white collar jobs.
Tom
Yellow lights are low-pressure sodium. They were installed because they consume much less energy, and are more reliable, than the mercury vapor lamps they replaced.
While channel-surfing this morning, I stumbled across a commercial featuring a 6-foot-tall Pikachu exiting car #1911 and leading a bunch of kids to the new "Pokemon Center" store at Rockefeller Center. (Yes, there was a flag decal under the car number.)
While encouraging the use of public transportation is always nice, it's odd that Transit would allow the filming of an oversized rodent riding as a passenger!
1.LOL
2.Since I don't watch cartoons with the name Pokemon, what's a Pikachu?
3.Which fleet of trains is car 1911 in?
4.Are there any other of these oversized things walking the street?
[2. Since I don't watch cartoons with the name Pokemon, what's a Pikachu?
The whole Pokemon ("pocket monster") craze was imported from Japan as both a card game and a cartoon series. It's about a bunch of creatures that use assorted powers to battle one another. Some of these Pokemon (the word is both singular and plural) look like dogs, cats, snakes, dinosaurs, fish, turtles, plants, rocks, beachballs, and even humans.
In the cartoon series, three kids wander from town to town, engage in Pokemon battles, fight off the comic-relief bad guys, make new friends, and learn life lessons. The primary Pokemon is Pikachu, a yellow-and-black rabbit-sized rodent that attacks its opponents with electric shocks.
- - - - -
[3. Which fleet of trains is car 1911 in?]
IIRC, car 1911 is an R-62A. (There, now I'm back on-topic.)
- - - - -
[4. Are there any other of these oversized things walking the street?]
Probably, outside that Pokemon store.
I wish I had been there when that thing was walking their. I would pull out my silicon power gun and cover that rodent so he isn't conductive. Then pull out my Smith & Wession, insert a clip loaded with silver bullets. Aim (it shouldn't be that hard, the thing is the size of a SUV), fire, they have no more main character to have a show about. If I did this in quesi-real-life all the parents wouldn't allow their kids to watch the funeral of Pikachew. In real-life I would be happy that NY state has no death penilty. Cause even though the kids really belive Pikachew excists and is a breathing, bleeding, boned, quesi-mammal thing, there is actor in a costume or cartoon which is drawn by hand (Adobe Photoshop, hand drawn cells) and the are no real pukemon. Also any parents out there know that each card your son has that was bought (in a pack, no knowledge of which cards in specific) is a $1.50 or more. Now multiply that by the number of card you bought the kid and you will want to sell them all. Also overal pukemon are a dead fad (MYBIH [May You Be In Hell] mid 1999-early 2001), and it is a waste of money to revive them. Pukemon can now be put up there with the Pet Rocks and The Jackson 5 Lunchbox.
But the Jackson 5 Lunch box is worth $$$MONEY$$$ on eBay!!!
In real-life I would be happy that NY state has no death penilty.
It's too bad that in real-life, New York State has the death penalty.
2. Pokémon is a Japanese TV show now airing on the WB network. Pikachu is one of the 251 known species of pokémon. It is the first pokémon that the main character, Ash Ketchum, receives. Pikachu is one of the more popular pokémon. Wobbuffet is one of my favorites.
3. Car #1911 is an R62A. When Pikachu was filmed, it was probably at the Grand Central (S) station. Notice it has to walk sideways to get through the doors.
4. There was a Pikachu balloon in the Thanksgiving Day Parade, and a Volkswagen beetle that looks like a Pikachu.
How old are you?
And what is your relation to pukemon?
No intent of child molestation.
15
none
I date girls my age
:-)
it's odd that Transit would allow the filming of an oversized rodent riding as a passenger!
Hey, as long as you swipe at the turnstile they don't care who you are. I've seen weirder things then Pikachu on the subway, like summer camp groups or parents who insist on taking their children on the subway at rush hour in strollers. That's weird.
Dan
But you need to fit through the turnstile.
Can the Token Clerk see that you swipped a card and turned it without going through?
What is the way a Token Clerk would most like the door routine done?
The Pikachu probably entered through the gate like a wheelchair-bound passenger.
The Pikachu's size is probably a disability and it could thus be eligible for an autogate Metrocard for mobility-impaired persons.
I guess the MTA wanted to show people that even the rat population is into rapid transit. And rodents come in all sizes. I even know a few on two legs...but that's another story...
BMTman
For those of you anxiously awaiting the MTH R-32 model trains, the delivery date has been pushed back to mid-January, 2002. The date they give is the same as the R-17 model delivery date.
For those of us who collect O-gauge trains, this should not be a major surprise.
I thought how to make more cars available to div B by eliminating the E train.
R or G or V get routed to the Archer ave extension.
B or/and D get routed to WTC or whatever it will be called.
The is by no means obselete and will be more important than ever in just a few hours. The MTA hopes with 63rd Street, people will do the following:
1. If they are going to Midtown and insist on an express ride and are not transfering to the 6, take the F
2. If they are going to change for the 6, take the E or V
3. If they are too lazy to walk from 6th Avenue to west of 7th Avenue, take the E
4. It is usually the first subway line I take upon my arrival in the city (not like the MTA cares about that but it does give the line some purpose).
The "E" train at times is rather well used.
#3 West End Jeff
The E is much more important than the V, because the E is the only Queens Boulevard line that goes to 8th Avenue. The correct thing to do would be to eliminate the V (even before it starts!), and increase R train frequency, since it would be the only remaining local.
BUT, they won't get rid of the V soon, and the E is still quite useful, case closed.
The V is essential. The goal is to lessen crowds at Lexington Avenue and increase capacity. If the F is faster than the E/V, I bet some people will walk 1.5 blocks from 6th Avenue instead of .5 from 8th because the trip will be faster. The goal is to make 53rd Street used for the transfer at Lex and for trips to west of 8th Avenue. 63rd is for trips east of about "7th and a half Avenue" not involving the transfer at Lex.
Would it make sence to cut the E train to Penn station.
That would seriously reduce capacity of the 8th Ave line.
Arti
Where do you plan on relaying?
There is a center track just south of Penn.
"There is a center track just south of Penn."
Yes, but the E runs on the local track, so it would have to cross over the two express tracks, causing delays for the A.
The center track south of Penn (between the express tracks) is a siding which would be used for a B/O (bad order) train or a gap train if needed. The north end of the track dead ends at a bumper just south of the A express platform at 34th.
How about this
B:Eliminate
E:Same
F:Shorten train lengths
G:Extend train lengths
R:Same
V:Eliminate if it's unused.
[F:Shorten train lengths
G:Extend train lengths ]
What are you smoking?
Arti
Yeah those G trains can really get packed. I remember getting on one once and it had almost 20 people in one car!
Chatham Square will be open tonight and every other Saturday night unless otherwise noted. Please go to www.subtalklive.com to get there. The chat will open at 7:30 PM ET. Please feel free to come by at any time. See you there!
What's Chatham Square?
- Lyle Goldman
It's a sub talk chat site.
or
Where all the Altantic City buses depart from Chinatown.
or
It is where the 2nd Ave El, 3rd Ave El meets with the branches to City Hall and South Ferry.
or
It is one block south where the el lines goes under the subway.
or
It's where the M9 Avenue B and East Broadway buses terminate.
Anyone remember what date the MTA assumed nomimal control of the NYCTA? Originally the MTA (as the MCTA) was formed just to take over the LIRR.
I'm thinking 1971 was the year the NYCTA came under the MTA umbrella, but I can't put my hands on a source for that. Anyone recall for sure?
This from the NYC Transit History page on the MTA Website:
March 1, 1968 The New York State Legislature creates the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to oversee transportation operations in 12 counties. The MTA becomes New York City Transit's parent agency.
Thanks!
during the week there was a thread on the old polo ground shuttle tunnel (that remnant of the 9th av. elevated) - with a few folks wondering it has indeed been sealed up...
so i went up there today with some folks and yes indeed, the tunnel is sealed with concrete at both ends. you can still climb up the hill and check out the old platform by yankee stadium, (if you don't mind a bit of climbing...) and down into the park and see much of the old platform on the end overlooking metronorth (I forget the station names...)
anywho - from there we walked north through the old highbridge yard - near where the 44th pct. is a bunch of folks yelled over at us wondering how we got in there - it seemed to be some type of tour group... i was just wondering if anyone from around here happened to be in that group. seemed to be about 20 people walking south along the river...
"so i went up there today with some folks and yes indeed, the tunnel is sealed with concrete at both ends"
For those of us who attended the SubTalk walking tours, we have our memories as well as our photos. A piece of Forgotten NY is now sealed, possibly forever. Unless the locals have jackhammers and dynamite !
Bill "Newkirk"
it looked pretty well sealed, though i wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually cracks it open.
the platforms on either end are still intact though.
Or perhaps Mark W has a few packets of C-4 laying around... ;-D
BMTman
Let me look into my stash....lol Seriously, I am so glad we did those tours. It appears we will not get another chance for a while.
-Mark
Amen & Thanks Mark!
how bout dat " south ferry my soul bro. in NYC ??
Man I am going to have to stay on my J.O.B. to keep defending my title !!! .....lol !!!
so much for trevors westcoast photographer "winp" who he said could beat me in westcoast
transit photography !!! .........or that other word i seem to mispell ""midget""
how bout dat " south ferry my soul bro. in NYC ??
Man I am going to have to stay on my J.O.B. to keep defending my title !!! .....lol !!!
so much for trevors westcoast photographer "wimp" who he said could beat me in westcoast
transit photography !!! .........or that other word i seem to mispell ""midget""
Two of the tours through the Polo Grounds shuttle tunnel were captured on video.
--Mark
(This was posted on my website a while back, but I thought I'd share it here.)
You might be from Chicago if...
You don't pronounce the "s" at the end of Illinois. You become irate at people who do.
You've had to switch from "heat" to "A/C" in the same day.
You measure distance in minutes (especially "from the city"). And you swear everything is pretty much 15 minutes away.
You understand what "lake-effect" means.
You know what goes on a proper Chicago-style hot dog and what doesn't.
You respond to the question "Where are you from?" with a "side" example: "West Side", "South Side" or "North Side."
Asked to be more specific, you respond with a street intersection even if you actually live several blocks away: "Irving Park and Western", "Foster and Sheridan", or "35th and Halsted."
You refer to Lake Michigan as "The Lake".
"The Super Bowl" refers to one specific game in a series of 35 played in January of 1986.
You refer to Chicago as "The City".
You have no problem spelling or pronouncing "Des Plaines".
Your school classes were canceled because of cold.
Your school classes were canceled because of heat.
You have, at some time in your life, used your furniture to guard your parking spot in winter. (This is a Chicago classic!)
You think 35 degrees is great weather to wash your car
The "living room" is called the "front room" (pronounced fronchroom)
Stores don't have sacks, they have bags.
You buy the "Trib".
You know who Tom Skilling is.
You have an opinion about every major skyscraper in the Loop.
You consider Wrigley Field at least as sacred as St. Peter's.
You end your sentences with an unnecessary preposition. Example: "Where's my coat at?" or "I'm going to the Jewel. You wanna come with?"
Your idea of a great tenderloin is when the meat is twice as big as the bun, "everything" is on it and a slice of dill pickle is on the side.
You consider fish and chicken to be vegetarian dishes.
You carry jumper cables in your car.
You drink "pop."
You understand that I-290, I-90, I-94, I-294, the North-South Tollway, the East-West Tollway, and the Northwest Tollway are all different roads.
You wouldn't be caught dead at a Pizza Hut.
You know the names of the interstates: Stevenson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Dan Ryan, and the Edens.
But you call the interstates "expressways" or "highways." Freeways are only in California.
You know where Hubbard's Cave, The Strangler, The Circle, the Steel Bridge, and The Junction all are. And how many minutes it typically takes to get from one to the other.
You know what an oasis is.
You refer to Naperville as if it's in Utah.
You refer to anything South of I-80 as "Southern Illinois".
No matter where you are in the world, when you hear the term "Downtown" you immediately assume they're talking about the Loop.
Your location in relation to the Loop is always expressed as a pair of numerical coordinates. (How far north do you live? "About 5200.")
You have two favorite football teams: The Bears, and anyone who beats the Packers
You know why they really call Chicago "The Windy City".
You think "Maredaley" is a single word.
You know that suburbanites take "the train" to work; city-dwellers take the "L".
You know where the Ravenswood, Congress, and Jackson Park branches of the "L" go, even though they're not shown on any map.
You can distinguish between the following area codes: 847, 630, 773, 708, 312, & 815
You know the phone number of Empire Carpet!
Any others??
-- David
Chicago, IL
"You know that suburbanites take 'the train' to work; city-dwellers take the 'L'."
Word! Where I live, I can take either Metra (UP-NW) or the Blue Line to go downtown. The inevitable question on a Saturday or Sunday morning when I head downtown is "Are you taking the train or the subway?" (It's the Blue Line, we can call it a subway and still be Chicagoans!)
You have, at some time in your life, used your furniture to guard your parking spot in winter. (This is a Chicago classic!)
No it ain't. We do it in Baltimore all the time when we get our occaisional monster snowstorms.
A good friend used to live in a neighborhood that had few garages, and almost everybody parked on the street. His birthday is in January and his 40th was accompniaed by two 23" storms in the same week. We ended up parking everybody in a nearby school parking lot and running 4WD shuttles from there to his house.
Another friend, noting the lawn furniture protecting the cleared curb parking spaces remarked "Furniture! Everywhere you look, furniture!!.
Later, my friend moved to a suburban neighborhood that has copious driveways, carports and garages. Nice house, nice area, but - no furniture when it snows.
You have, at some time in your life, used your furniture to guard your parking spot in winter. (This is a Chicago classic!)
I'm glad that when I lived in Chicago (Greenview & Howard) I had a garage with my apartment :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
you know what the connector is...
...you remember "The Bobs".
I'm willing to bet no one ever called the Skyway the Steel Bridge, even thought the cantilever span over the Calumet River is built of steel.
Do people include the section or neighborhood they live in; i. e., Brighton Park, Marquette Park, Bridgeport, etc.?
I'm willing to bet no one ever called the Skyway the Steel Bridge, even thought the cantilever span over the Calumet River is built of steel.
The "steel bridge" is a short truss bridge on the Bishop Ford (formerly Calumet) expressway. I forget exactly what body of water it goes over -- possibly the Cal-Sag Channel -- but it's used as a landmark for the traffic reports. The Skyway is rarely mentioned on any traffic reports unless there's a specific problem, probably because the Skyway hardly gets any traffic.
Do people include the section or neighborhood they live in; i. e., Brighton Park, Marquette Park, Bridgeport, etc.?
I think it probably depends on the neighborhood. People will mention some of the better-known neighborhoods that have a strong identity, such as Lincoln Park, Ravenswood, or Rogers Park. However, many people aren't likely to know where neighborhoods such as Hermosa, Burnside, Hegewisch, or Dunning are, unless you actually live in there, so a major street intersection is given.
-- David
Chicago, IL
The following intervals will be the first trains ever to operate on the V line.
First downtown train lv. 71-Continental Avs. is at 5:38 am
First uptown train lv. 2nd Av-Houston St. is at 5:54 am
And just to answer an earlier question: 201 crew does not operate either one of the first intervals.
Oh well the New has worn off I am a full fledge Conductor,I picked a horrible job ,starting to think blue really is my color,thinking women really like me for me,Tss's will pronounce my name right and stop calling me Dude,Or maybe some dispathchers will give me that drop
now thatthe Horrible P is gone from my name.What do you guys Think.
I think you're doing iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Sure women are attracted to blue, but they love stripes more (hint hint).
That great. I know the feeling about being off probation. I have been off probation for three mounth now. I told one TSS that I know very well, that I miss have one to talk to every now and again. Well good luck with the next 25 years at least. Hope you tend to move up some day.
Robert
I think it wonderful...got 9 months to go...my provisional status remains because I passed the tests and there is no list...so I keep my nose clean, steer away from the bigmouths in the lunchroom and work my heart out to make that year. You didn't pick a horrible job, you have the opportunity to change and upgrade, you can look TSSs in their face and say 'my name is,' and TA work is good work. I had regrets about the mispronunciation of my name and kept my big mouth shut. The error has been in my favor with my little experience...the Dept. Sups. remember CI 'Hurricane.' CI Peter
I love the blue man. Blue is my favorite color. And you still wont get the drop. Haha......
Today i took the # 4 train at Bedford Park Blvd to work and saw at the back end of the d train concourse yard at jerome ave about 6 sets of the redbirds. Are these good ole redbirds being stored there for now until the TA gets rid of them?
Charlie "Chud" Muller of Bedford Park Blvd.
At last count, there were 80 redbirds being stored inConcourse yard. These cars will not be stripped until the very end. They will be kept available for emergency duty in case r-142s need to be pulled from service for modification. Eventually, the figure I hear is 140 cars will be kept in storage.
Train Dude takes much on your answer to the great redbirds of the ny subway.
Charlie "Chud" Muller of Bedford Park Blvd.
TrainDude states plainly the facts of my subway and Redbird tech will be present for at least another decade. CI Peter
What did they do to 142 takeoff ? When you leave a station It takes almost 13 seconds (I counted ) to get the train out of the station.It has this terribly slow takeoff It wasnt this bad before.Now the train slow to begin with is even slower. After I turn the key It takes almost 5-7 seconds just for that roll to begin My head hits the 10 car marker and we're not doing 15 Mph yet WHAT HAPPENED?Why did they do this? Just to make the senior crews on the 2 go crazy ,Or are the 142's Just crap and cant handle the Miles they are getting?And Juice is there a way to get these things going past 40 mph's again It seems after 36 they stop acclerating.
There is nothing wrong mechanically or electronically with Bombardiers R142s (except of course with a dragging brake shoe or two which will be burned off.) Originally, the R142 was designed for operation with a max not exceeding 90 mph as it could be used on lines like LIRR. TA had mods made to make them work in a slower world...trainsets don't usually go faster than 50 mph...and software and braking was adjusted to handle the short distances between stations. The software changes along with the cutoff of regenerative braking are screwing up operations. You didn't mention if you had any warnings on your TOD...I doubt if a problem would come up on the maintainance screen. WRITE THIS CONDITION UP!!!!!! The software running your trainset is F'd up and we in CED cannot do anything about this condition. I'm back in 'troubles duty' and I wish I was sent out to DL new software to MAKE TRAINS GO. Again with emphasis: WRITE THIS CONDITION UP. What you do not have to worry about is stopping: WE MAKE TRAINS STOP TOO. The parts being replaced ongoing have to do with wear on the trucks caused by the rough ride of the roadbed. If your sked is off because of the problems, let your RTO supervisor know and WRITE THIS CONDITION UP. The trainsets can handle the miles but how long they will last without updated software/braking/suspension is anyones guess. CI Peter
Due to lack of interest I will not keep a set time that I will be riding the V train on Monday, since I haven't had any email replies to my trip announcement. Hopefully a better time will come up for everybody to see the V train. I'll probably ride sometime Monday, that's all I can say for now.
Personally the V is nothing special. All it will bring is more craziness and delays to an already plagued Queens Division. As Queens Extra list conductor, I will experience it all firsthand!! But do come on for a ride, see what you think of it.
My main concern is a potential bottleneck Manhattan bound at Queens Plaza. Queensboro master tower operators better be wide awake or the E's and V's going to Manhattan are going to get backed up!
Trust me man that happens already with the E and the F. So much that over the past several months selected F trains on the AM rush hours were routed over the 63rd Street line. Do expect it with the V and E. Don't be surprised that if things get hairy, as they commonly do in the Queens Division (which is why I am now scorning my decision to pick to the Queens Div. conductor extra list lol ) V trains might get routed over 63rd Street, along with the F's. I am just so interested to see what it is gonna be like Monday morning and afternoon. Sheer madness. Tomorrow is gonna be nothing, Monday morning is the true test of how this all is gonna play out with the V train. In 36 hours we will indeed know!!
Bring your lunch, you'll have to eat in the cab.
Not only that, but if there happens to be trouble along 63rd Street that selected 'F's will be sent along their old 53rd Street routing.
Let's talk about THAT when it happens!
The backups will be all the back to Roosevelt Ave. Manhattan bound and Fifth Ave. northbound. Hopefully it won't spread to the 60th St. tube getting the N/W involved into the mess.
I'll be out there in V-land mid-afternoon on Thursday.
Let us know what you think of the V!!
I'll be doing Transit & Weather Together live from NYC on XMAS eve and XMAS morning. You know I will get a mention in somewhere :-)
Hey, what about the day after?
I'll be doing Transit & Weather Together live from NYC on XMAS eve and XMAS morning.
I can just see the arguements we'll be having at my house on Christmas Eve. I'll want to listen to Transit and Weather Together and everyone else will want to see the Yule Log! :-)
No reason you can't have both going at the same time!
My specific shifts are 4-8pm on Mon eve and 5-11am Tue morning. By Tuesday afternoon, I'll be back in BeanTown.
Oh well. Maybe next time.
If you get in early Monday, I'll still be working the same Monday job on the B as the last time. This time, though, please bring more pleasant news. (The last time Todd found me on the road was the morning that the plane went down in the Rockaways - nothing like having news delivered personally by a real news person)
Maybe this time a "real meteorologist" will bring some real weather :-)
Alas my business appointments in Manhattan on Thursday are fluid so I can't make a commitment as to what time I'll be doing the V... but I'll be out there at some point. Also looking for an R32 F for that rare Culver railfan view!
Alas my business appointments in Manhattan on Thursday are fluid
It's going to rain on Thursday, you say?
Gosh I hope not. I have a lot to do... including the WCBS holiday luncheon, and another business stop in Manhattan. I'm just hoping there's time for a V trip, and that I don't get caught in QP-LIMBO!
Can we assume that, if you do catch a ride on the V or F, you'll be at the railfan window (or what passes for such on the R-46)?
Oh Yeah. With digicam in hand.
Todd,
I will be in NYC on thurs., and definitely want to ride the V. E-mail me privately if you want to go railfanning. -Nick
Thursday is better than Monday for me as well (sorry, Q). Todd, add me to the list or just post your itinerary for all to see.
Yeah I think I'll be doing it later in the week too. The confusion is not something I feel like putting up with, especially since I'm still getting over a cold.
Can I take photos of the V train (with the flash off?) I've heard photography in NYC is frowned on since 9/11 due to security concerns.
It is still legal...
Absolutely. I've gone through a few rolls of film since 9/11.
It seems tourists and shoppers seem to be not venturing far from midtown these days. I rode in on a fairly crowded 8:11am train from Oyster Bay and another fairly busy MU into Penn.
Penn was fairly busy, but the Manhattan mall is half dead. Macy's was bustling, and from Herald Square I took a Q train to Canal. We had to wait ahead of Prince st. switches as they put a local in front of us (all N,R trains to Brooklyn are running via Manhattan bridge).
Perhaps they should rename Chinatown to Ghostown, a more appropriate name. Not many people around at all on Mott, Bowery or East Broadway. It was 11am and still not many stores were open.
From there I took an M103 down to City Hall. A little busier than Chinatown but still a ghostown. Walked along Fulton, and was only one of three people eating at Wendy's at 11:45am. Then I had a little difficulty getting into the Fulton st complex as alot of the entrances were closed. Yeah the "smell" is still there, though not that strong.
I took a packed 4 train to GCT and spent the rest of the day around Grand Central and Rockefeller Center where it actually felt like it was a Saturday.
The City better start advertizing Chinatown more as well as some parts of lower Manhattan because it is a ghostown down there, and businesses must be losing alot of money. Also was at South Street seaport which also was a ghostown. It's pretty far from the subway entrance, which doesn't help.
And V train signs were all over the place on the 6th ave IND, after all it does start Monday. I still didn't get a new map, I guess I forgot.
Last saturday I took an R from my home in Bay Ridge to midtown (49th/Broadway). A large mass of people got on at Cortlandt, a little less at City Hall, and even quite a few at Canal. It turned a nearly-empty car into a nearly-packed one, and this was at like 2 PM. It was obvious that most of them were tourists, probably visiting the wreck site, but there's no denying that they were there.
HOWEVER, I have to admit I didn't take this trip much on weekends, so I don't know how the crowds compared to normal.
Courtlandt is closed...
My apologies, I meant Rector. I get those 2 mixed up.
Penn was fairly busy, but the Manhattan mall is half dead
What's left there? It's a pretty feeble excuse for a mall. I'd say shut the whole thing down and convert it into offices or something else.
The City better start advertizing Chinatown more as well as some parts of lower Manhattan because it is a ghostown down there, and businesses must be losing alot of money. Also was at South Street seaport which also was a ghostown. It's pretty far from the subway entrance, which doesn't help.
I have seen ads in some subway cars urging people to patronize businesses below 14th Street. How much good that ad campaign will do for hard-hit areas like Chinatown, it's too early to tell.
I have seen ads in some subway cars urging people to patronize businesses below 14th Street. How much good that ad campaign will do for hard-hit areas like Chinatown, it's too early to tell.
And remember, Chinatown got the double whammy: Not only 9/11, but a couple of months earlier, the severing of its connection to the huge Chinese communities on the other side of the river. IIRC, more people of Chinese descent live in those neighborhoods, but Manhattan's Chinatown served as their central shopping district ... until the Manhattan Bridge rebuild chopped off the direct subway connection.
No it didn't. It just moved the direct connection a few blocks away. It's less convenient for some and more convenient for others.
You took the words right out of my mouth! He must have connections with the community board down there who demanded expanded M service, nobody rides it because the ridership level is an abomination, yet the TA has to run empty trains because of Pataki's deal with the Chinatown community. The M line, one of the most desirable lines to work, has become a misery to work.
You took the words right out of my mouth! He must have connections with the community board down there who demanded expanded M service, nobody rides it because the ridership level is an abomination, yet the TA has to run empty trains because of Pataki's deal with the Chinatown community. The M line, one of the most desirable lines to work, has become a misery to work.
I don't quite see how working the M is a misery just because it has low ridership. If anything, the opposite would be true. Or is it the longer runs the M is making?
It is the work programs. You are always 5 to 10 minutes late due to the lack of respect for the M line: no priority and they put J, N, R, and W trains ahead of most all the time. You leave the terminal late (esp. Bay Pkwy due to poor scheduling) and you lost all your slots. You get to the terminal, walk to the other end of the station, then the dispatchers office, then the toilet and before know if you lost a good amount of your recovery/lunch time due to the lateness. The next train in is always yours except at lunch time. I need my head examined for picking the job I have, despite the pay. But someone has to put up with the conditions. 2 back to back trips to Bay Pkwy spanning almost 6 hours treats the crews like machines, not people. You come back from Bay Pkwy late, if one interval behind, + the lateness, you go right back out on the same train. SubTalkers on this board who are now train operators know what I'm talking about.
Canal Street seemed to be very crowded today.
Canal street is usually busy anyway. Travel town Mott and East Broadway where all the resteruants and tourist shops are. It's dead down there.
Canal street is usually busy anyway. Travel down Mott and East Broadway where all the resteruants and tourist shops are. It's dead down there.
Actually the Grand st area is perhaps the busiest part of Chinatown right now.
There's only one place left at the Manhattan Mall food court and floors 4-6 are closed for "renovation". Even places that were open like TCBY on the lower level were serving nothing (I was chased out of TCBY when I asked for a chocolate yogurt).
They keep saying the "new" Manhattan mall is coming soon. I think they are lying, they want to close the whole thing down and just convert it to office space. What a shame. It's no wonder I don't frequent Herald Square as much as I used to.
Downtown is a lousy place to be these days, so I don't expect those who work there to be returning on the weekend. Battery Park City is more or less cut off, Century 21 is closed, the whole place smells, etc.
As for the Seaport, you wonder what will happen to it. It's heyday is now 15 years in the past -- it was booming in the mid-1980s. It never recovered from the opening of the second building; the demand just wasn't there, especially after the recession hit. High rents and tourist prices has made it just about useless.
They ought to covert one of the buildings to discos and meeting/conference space -- if people can be convinced to go Downtown.
Based on the Dim Sum Index -- a measure based on how long it takes to get a seat at a table in my favorite Chinatown restaurant on Mott Street south of Canal at 2 pm on a Sunday -- I would say that Downtown is well on its way to recovery.
IIRC in the 1950's the IND platform was East New York, the Jamaica line train platform was Eastern Parkway, and the 14th St line train platform was Broadway Junction.
Had these original names survived until this recent change?
Yes they had.
Unlike the Boston System where a single name represents multiple lines, for example "Downtown Crossing", New York City has always allowed for names which represent the cross street, with the through street secondary. Thus the L stops at 8th Av., while the ACE stops at 14th St. - same fare area but different names. The East New York complex also includes a dose of the IND-BMT rivalry, since the IND line was a direct competitor of the Fulton El. A single name for this complex transfer point, encountered by passengers coming from or going to JFK, might reduce confusion. The use of the old BRT name, however, may itself confuse out-of-towners since most have a conception of the name "Broadway" which this identity is not compatible with. On the other hand, "East New York" creates no such confusion.
>>The use of the old BRT name, however, may itself confuse out-of-towners since most have a conception of the name "Broadway" which this identity is not compatible with. On the other hand, "East New York" creates no such confusion. <<
Oh yeah? I bet a lot of out-of-towners think East New York is the East Side of Manhattan!
At one point Broadway Junction was known as Manhattan Junction. That must have confused people at one point.
And how close is Monmouth Junction to Monmouth, NJ?
It's in Monmouth County...
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Yes. Another piece of railroad history eliminated for no apparent reason.
The new name emphasizes that the station is a major transfer point. "Eastern Parkway" does not.
Didn't it become a major transfer point 55 years ago when the IND station opened?
That doesn't help tourists (or recently arrived residents) much, does it?
How many tourists go to East New York?!
That's why I included recently transplanted residents.
But tourists heading to the airport by subway pass through East New York, and some of them may transfer from the L or J/M/Z to the A.
I suppose much of my beef is with the incorrect labeling on recent maps (until this month's). Both elevated stations were labeled "Broadway-Eastern Parkway" -- but that name never appeared on signs on either platform. The first time I rode the J to Eastern Parkway I nearly missed my stop because I was looking for "Broadway" on the signs.
But, where practical, I see nothing wrong with giving a single name to all platforms at a major transfer point -- especially if that name includes with word "Junction." I don't see how the new names, as listed on the map, could possibly be confusing. The BMT platforms are now "Broadway Junction (Eastern Parkway)" and the IND platforms are now "Broadway Junction (East New York)."
Totally different Broadway, but speaking of name changes,
When did they change the Bridge Line's Canal street station to Canal from it's original name of Broadway. It may have been when they put up the 70's ref. tile. I know the mosaics way under there say Broadway, because when they were redoing the station I spotted a few "B"'s along the top of the wall, where they ripped down some of the ref. tile to do work. The old Broadway Tablets are under two layers of tiles now!
Anyone seen any photos of the original Bridge Broadway-Canal Station mosaics on this site or elsewhere, from way back when? I have seen a photo somewhere of the 49th Street tablets on the N/R line. (That is one station I would not want to see restored to old mosaics, just because it's so unique and was one of the only stations in the 70's that looked good.)
There aren't any pictures on this site that date that far back... Sorry!
Thanks Anyway!
Here's one, although it doesn't show much:
I'd say taken at 49 St-R line. s/e of s/b platform. Where is the EE going? Whitehall St?
Yeah, but I was hoping for the Bridge Canal Street station showing the original name of "Broadway" in the mosaics. I have seen photos of the 49th St station name tablet in one of the books I have or somewhere.
That's a great photo though showing the old walls at 49th Street though!!!
I thought the name of the station was always Canal? I know at the N/E of the station inside the tunnel there is (was?) a wall tile that says BROADWAY. As I understand the history the Bridge line was supposed to have gone west along Canal St toward the Hudson. Maybe with the construction of the Holland Tunnel and/or the BMT Broadway Line changes at City Hall plans were changed for the Bridge Line. Trains were rerouted uptown. And it was too late to correct all the tile work at the station. But ever since I was a little kid going with family to Brighton Beach (1960's) That station was known as Canal.
I did however see two "B"'s on the top of the wall, (about 1 1/2 to 2 years ago?) when they were redoing the station, and some old maps call it Broadway. It may not have been called that for a long time though since it does make more sense to call it Canal.
The Bridge platforms at Canal are called Broadway on every map I can find from 1924 to 1966. This changes on the 1967-1978 style map in which every station is named by intersection - the whole complex is Canal St/Broadway, though I doubt this had much impact on what signs they put up on the stations.
In a certain way it was more logical to call it Broadway. The tracks were planned to continue under Canal Street to the Hudson River. Had this been built, "Canal Street" would hardly have been a helpful name for a station! (Incidentally this is why the current N & R platforms have four tracks in between them - the local in Manhattan was intended to terminate at City Hall and the EXPRESS continue on through the Montague St Tunnel.)
However, it would be still more helpful for the official name of this Canal Street station to be changed to what the Chinese symbols there read - Chinatown. This might help the moronic tourists and the like realise that the Canal St on the J-M-Z, 4-5-6, N-R, Q-W are all connected, but are totally different from the Canal St on the A-C-E, and different again from the Canal St on the 1-2-3.
Likewise, the enforced closure of part of the 1 would enable a very brave renaming strategy in Downtown Manhattan - how about Chambers on the A-C-E, Park Place on the 2-3 (now the 1-2), and Cortlandt on the 1 all becoming "Hudson Terminal - Park Place" or something like that? And IF a free connection is built between South Ferry and Whitehall, it would be helpful to merge the two names.
One final station with an anachronistic dichotomy of names: Brooklyn Bridge 4-5-6 and Chambers St J-M-Z.
Actually, Broadway is a bit strange, as the station is well east of Broadway. Lafayette Street might have been more fitting.
I don't think Chinatown is a good name for the station. At least three other stations are squarely within Chinatown's borders.
I have seen a photo somewhere of the 49th Street tablets on the N/R line. (That is one station I would not want to see restored to old mosaics, just because it's so unique and was one of the only stations in the 70's that looked good.)
As a regular user of that station, I kinda disagree. The bright orange glazed bricks aren't wonderful.
However, I'd rather not see it rebuilt for a different reason: It was a test station for a really comprehensive noise reduction scheme, and it was REALLY successful. It's the only station I know of where you can be unaware that a train is coming in until after it has arrived. No whoosh of air (dunno how they did THAT) but NO noise.
It has absorbing panels above the tracks, and I think also something below the edge of the platform. Whatever they did, it's GREAT.
I actually talked to a TA designer around 10 years ago about whether they'd incorporate any of those modifications into the stations being rehabbed under the Capital Plans. He said no.
It's always pissed me off that the TA has made much nicer, cleaner, brighter stations with better facilities ... and has done absolutely ZERO about the noise, which is entirley preventable. How much could it possibly have cost?
Anyone got any history?
I remember as a kid going through that station with my father, in the low point of the 70's, and asked my father why it looked so good (as compared to other stations at the time). He said it was some sort of test to prevent noise, and it was expensive.
I have a sort of an affection to that station, because I would always look forward to getting off there as a kid. (It probably looked better in the 70's) But you have to understand that I grew up on the M (and L)line, which was running filthy R16's and R27-30's, along with dirty stations. I used to love when we would take the Broadway to 49th and I would get to ride the "ding dong" trains. I used to also admire the "little houses" at Union Square when we transfered from the L to the Broadway line. It's the little things like this that started me as a fan of the subway, at a young age (especially because my father almost hated the subway - but everyone hated everything about the city in the 70's!)
. I used to also admire the "little houses" at Union Square when we transfered from the L to the Broadway line.
Not sure what you mean, unless it was the building on the ceramic tile station identifiers at Union Square N/R line?
The mosaics at Union Square on the Broadway line.
>>> When did they change the Bridge Line's Canal street station to Canal from it's original name of Broadway <<<
The 1959 Map still shows the station as Broadway.
Tom
As does the 1966.
I would think that the big problem now will be for all New Yorkers to remember that when they give directions at Penn Station, to tell the visitor to get off at Broadway Junction, and not East New York.
I know that it will always be East New York to me, and it will probably be the same for you.
Incidentally, years ago all of the old elaborate Eastern Parkway porcelain signs had an additional board just below that read Broadway Junction.
The old name for the IND station was Broadway-East New York, not just East New York. The new name -- Broadway Junction (East New York) -- isn't too far off.
It's not rocket science.
And to be more accurate, Eastern Parkway became a major transfer point earlier, in 1928, when the 14 St. line opened upstairs.
Eastern Parkway sufficed for 73 years. What's the need to change it now? I know the Eastern Parkway exit is now completely closed, but so what?
While we're on the subject, I just noticed today on the map that the Elderts Lane station was changed to 75th Street. Why? Was Elderts Lane de-mapped? Was the station moved? What gives?
The 75th St. reference, like the 85th St reference at Forest Parkway, exists only on the map. Everyone still uses the old name. Only 104th St, changed from 102nd St, has really been changed. This was done about 10 years ago as these stations were rehabbed and had their unmanned part time mezzanines removed. These stations were renamed to accuratley represent the streets that have the remaining mezzanine.
I think Cypress Hills should be renamed Hemlock St. anyway.
Then talk about confusing. You sit on a J train waiting for the 75th Street stop to come and never see it and wonder where this Elderts Lane stop came from. It's not on the map! However I'm sure the TA will remedy that situation. One day they'll change the signs on the station. Why can't they just leave well enough alone. It was working for 75 years.
Typical. I wonder how many people get to Jamaica Center and say "When did I miss 75th St?" hehe
I can see the change from 102 to 104, the 102 exit has been closed for years.
When the IND East New York subway station first opened I recall that there were nothing but stairs up to the BMT el.
Does anyone have any idea when the escalators were installed?
When was the free transfer first put into effect?
>>> When was the free transfer first put into effect? <<<
The Broadway Junction free transfers went into effect with the fare increase on July 1, 1948. Prior to that date, I believe the only interdivisional free transfers were at Franklin Avenue between the Fulton IND and the Franklin Avenue branch of the BMT Brighton Beach Line, and the IRT and BMT at Queensboro Plaza and the stations on the shared IRT and BMT lines to Astoria and Flushing.
Tom
Very interesting -- one of the first interdivisional transfers is, as of now, the most recent transfer to be enclosed.
Did many people go well out of their ways to Franklin/Fulton to transfer between IND and BMT for free?
What other transfers went into effect on July 1, 1948?
>>> What other transfers went into effect on July 1, 1948? <<<
Interdivisional free transfers at the closing of the 9th Ave. El in 1940:
IRT Jerome Ave - IND Bronx Concourse @ 161st St.
IRT Polo Grounds Shuttle - IND Bronx Concourse @ 155th St.
Other new Interdivisional Free Transfers as of July 1, 1948:
IRT 7th Ave. - IND Washington Heights @ 168th St.
IRT 7th Ave. - IND 8th Ave. @ 59th St.
IRT Lexington - BMT Queens Lines @ 59th St.
IRT 7th Ave. / Flushing Line - BMT Broadway @ Times Square
BMT Broadway - IND 6th Ave. @ Penn Station
BMT Canarsie - IND 8th Ave. @ 14th St. and 8th Ave.
BMT Canarsie / Broadway - IRT Lexington Ave. @ Union Square and 14th St.
IRT Lexington - BMT Nassau @ Brooklyn Bridge and Chambers St.
IRT Lexington / 7th Ave - BMT Nassau - IND 8th Ave. @ Fulton and Broadway/Nassau
BMT Broadway - IND 6th Ave @ Essex and Delancy
IRT Lexington / 7th Ave. - BMT Broadway @ Borough Hall and Court
IRT & BMT Flushing - IND Queens @ 74th St. and Roosevelt Ave.
BMT Canarsie - IND Crosstown @ Lorimer and Metropolitan Ave.
There's been lots of talk expended abount extending the 7 west to the Meadowlands or south to the Javits or even south of that. Precious little action, which will probably be the case for the near future. But:
What prevents an Air Train style 11th Avenue el that would take IRT units? What NIMBYs would object? The auto body guys and the gas stations? The 7 could surface on 11th between 42nd and the Javits, and run as an el a few blocks south of that, when it could connect with...
....The High Line, which runs as far south as the Village. You could get commuters from Times Square to Chelsea, the Javits and the Village.
Right now, the High Line is an impressive, rusting hunk of metal. Community activists would like to turn it into a bike/run track or a public park. Let 'em keep dreaming. That won't happen. The High Line will eventually come down, unless it reclaims its past as a railroad structure.
This makes too much sense to ever be done. Creating an el structure is easier than digging a tunnel, which takes 20-30 years. Opinions?
www.forgotten-ny.com
Sure. (1) The city plans to change the zoning for the Far West Side to make it an extension of Midtown and bring large office buildings, expensive condos, etc. All of those people will object! If this flies, and eventually it probably will, the auto body shops are gone.
(2) The Friends of the High Line are far more interested in preserving it for a linear park than for future transit use. My gut says if it were a choice of reactivating it for rail use or tearing it down, they'd go for the latter ... despite their rails-to-trails argument. Hope I'm wrong, but ....
(3) If you DO use the High Line, it only gets you a (non-direct) mile, from 34th to 14th. And it goes all the way over to West Street to get around the end of the 34th Street yards, so it's not very direct. What do you do once you're at 14th Street?
(My favorite answer was somehow connect it to the L ... but that's the wrong division, and in that neighborhood, there's no way in HELL you'd get the land for a subway-to-elevated portal, much less deal with the NIMBY issues.)
To pick up on a bit of my east side suggestion, take the 7 west to 11 th Av., then down 11th to West, and down west to the WTC site where a portal into the South Ferry Branch could be built. Of course that means Rector and Cortland would have to be lengthened for 11 car trains, AND the problem at 8th Av. would have to be solved, but most of the rest would be relatively cheap!
Where would the 1 go?
Newark.
I suggessted right after 9/11 that as part of the WTC area rebuild, to increase mass transit access to the area the 7 train could be extended west to Javits Center, and then south, either using the High Line to 14th St. and then down the center median of West Street to around Liberty Street, or turn it west around 30th St. and send it down 12th Ave. and West Street to the WTC. Given the usual NIMBY stuff, I would think option 2 would be better because there are no residents on the west side of West Street to file suit, and the Chelsea Piers would probably love to have a subway stop right outside their doors.
A No. 7 elevated line to Lower Manhattan would give the World Financial Center/Battery Park City area their own direct connection to Midtown without having to zig-zag a new 1/9 tunnel over to West Street and back to South Ferry, and if the city ever gets their proposed Hudson River Park built, it would make it much easier for people outside the immediate area to use.
(In fact, with the Flushing line running 30 trains per hour during AM/PM rush, it would be conceivable that you could run both a line downtown to the WTC and another line over to the Meadowlands in New Jersey and have adequate train capacity for both -- 15 TPH west of Times Square for the two routes and 30 trains from TS to Main Street.)
(In fact, with the Flushing line running 30 trains per hour during AM/PM rush, it would be conceivable that you could run both a line downtown to the WTC and another line over to the Meadowlands in New Jersey and have adequate train capacity for both -- 15 TPH west of Times Square for the two routes and 30 trains from TS to Main Street.)
Add a branch for one of those 15tph to go to La Guardia Airport in the other direction and that'd be dead cool.
A split line off the 7 around Shea Stadium to LGA would create the fewest NIMBY complaints, at least compared to the N extension from Astoria, since the line would basically run between the Grand Central Parkway on one side and Flushing Bay on the other. Fish traditionally aren't know for their litigious nature, though I'm sure some commuter on the GCP would probably sue because the new el would block their view of scenic Rikers Island.
Whether or not you could do an even 15 TPH split between the two lines given the rush hour crush of people at Main Street, I don't know, but so long as they kept the peak direction expresses terminating in Flushing and not LGA, you might be able to keep those people happy.
What about an 18/12 split, where 18 TPH go to Flushing and 12 TPH go to LGA? Also, since the express track is higher up than the local tracks where Roosevelt Avenue crosses the GCP, a connection to LGA would most likely have to be made into the local tracks just east of 111th Street. An el along the GCP would be a lot better than an el through Astoria, but service to Flushing does have to be taken into account.
18-12 or even a 20-10 split might work, because LGA would still be served during rush hours at a 5-6 minute interval, which should be enough given the location and the likely passenger load.
The connections would be easier using the local tracks instead of trying to hook into the center express track and there may be anough clearance below the el tracks at GCP and Roosevelt to run a flying junction for the LGA-bound trains beneath the existing trackway and still have adequate street clearance (which would also allow for a new station on the west side of the Shea parking lot for the LGA spur, which would help both for the stadium access and for park-ride).
Also, aside from being more NIMBY resistant, a connection via the No. 7 would also be more Queens-friendly, since access to other parts of the borough, like Forest Hills, Kew Gardens and Jamaica, would be available via the transfer to the E/F/G/R/V at 74th St. An LGA connection with the N train faces Astoria oppotion, and any Queens residents outside the area could only get to the airport by subway only by taking the 7 all the way to Queensboro Plaza and changing to the N.
Flushing-Main Street is the busiest single station in the system.
Part of the reason is that so many buses, including Nassau express buses, feed passengers into the subway at rush hour. (This is one of a few main stations accepting Nassau riders in the morning, and delivering them in the evening; the others being 179 St, 169 St, Jamaica Center - and I would include Sutphin/Archer due to interaction with LIRR, and AirTrain next year).
Sorry - AirTrain in 03...
So long as all other stops along the line were still served by the same number of trains (including Shea Stadium, though that would likely require a new station on the LaGuardia spur), a new line off the 7 to LGA just west of Shea using 10 TPH during rush hours would still leave Main Street with 20 TPH during, which would be 3-minute headways.
If all the peak direction express runs continued to originate from Main St., it could still work, though riders who board there and planned to transfer to the IND at 74th-Broadway would be inconvienced.
Flushing-Main Street is the busiest single station in the system.
I find this extremely hard to believe. Could you please give your source?
I thought the busiest station was the Times Square complex.
I remember the MTA acknowledging that a year or so ago. A clarification is needed: It is a single-line station. Times Square in toto sees more passengers, from all lines combined.
I'm afraid that's not a source. With all due respect, I simply don't believe your claim.
I don't have the numbers to prove it, but I suspect that any single line at Times Square (except the shuttle and maybe the 7) has more passenger boardings than the 7 at Flushing.
If you don't like that, how about the 1/2/3 at Penn Station? That's a single line and it surely beats Flushing.
You also mentioned a few F stops in your earlier post -- IIRC, 179, 169, and Parsons. I'm afraid that my dinky little local home station, rank 55, has 80% of 179's traffic and a good deal more traffic than 169 and Parsons combined.
I should go look and see if I can find AM station counts. They're reliable enough.
Of course, if you claim differently, what's your source?
AM station counts aren't entirely fair, since the 7 at Flushing gets many more entering passengers in the morning than at other times, while the Times Square crowd is distributed more evenly over the rest of the day and week. Still, if you find such numbers, I'd be interested to see them, regardless of who they support.
As I said, I don't have exact (or even approximate) numbers for Times Square or for Flushing. I can tell you that 34 on the 1/2/3/9 was the 4th busiest station in 1999 (see this post), with an annual ridership of 23,866,604 (see this post). That's an average of 45 passengers per minute, weekdays and weekends, days and nights. I'd be shocked if Main Street comes close.
I'll take your word for it.
I guess what I was really getting at is that, of all stations in the morning rush hour, Main Street gets hammered really, really hard (and in reverse for the PM rush), and so if you're going to be doing anything with the 7 line that sends trains elsewhere, you need to consider what happens at that terminal.
I've ridden the 7 a lot at all hours. It's always got a big crowd aboard, and there are times when you can't get a seat even if you board on Main St (during rush hour).
No argument there. But the busiest stations are unlikely to be the ones that primarily busy rush hours. There are many stations that are busy around the clock.
I still would like to see your numbers if you find them.
If the two lines were to split off with both having stations (albeit seperate) at Shea Stadium, some of the bus routes could be extended there from Main Street. It wouldn't be a perfect situation, even if you could connect the Willets Pt. stop with a new station on the LaGuardia line paralelling the GCP on the west side of Shea, but it would give those riders the option of having the same number of TPH as they do today to choose from.
OK, I could see that.
You may have to wait for Julia Harrison to retire though (has she ... I lost track), grand poubah of all NIMBYs...
Being grand poobah of the NIMBYs probably makes her immortal :-)
I'd suggest trying to create an embezzlement trial or something against her and hopefully get her locked up conveniently. Oops, how unAmerican :P
I'd suggest the following, including a replacement for the arcane station at Willets Point Shea Stadium, if space permits:
(I don't know how to paste a picture in here, so I'll have to link...)
www.geocities.com/transitrapid/lgabranch.bmp
It's not there! All I got was one of those "Sorry this page can not be found" messages from Yahoo/Geocities.
Was not the 7 said to have been extended to New Jersey some time ago?
The 7 should get a connection to La Guardia Airport long before getting any extension to New Jersey. La Guardia really needs a rail link.
Oops, I forgot Geocities was case-sensitive.
Try here
That link took me right back to the index.
Oops, I forgot Geocities was case-sensitive, then I missed off the http.
Try http://www.geocities.com/transitrapid/LGABranch.bmp
"This Page is Not Available."
James, you need to have a page created... Geocities doesn't allow access directly to files. If they did, they'd become a parking space for graphics and no one would get to see all the nice ads :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Buses are less of a problem. If they currently terminate at Flushing Main St, it would not be too difficult to extend them to the Shea Stadium, unless there's a major traffic problem in that area - as you probably noticed I'm not from Flushing, so I'm pretty much amazed I picked the best route for an El to LGA just by looking at a map. However, I appreciate I might not be the best person to decide how many trains should hypothetically go to which terminal.
I'm sure a NIMBY commuter fish wouldn't be hard to bribe.
Point your browsers to www.subtalklive.com for the weekly chat, now in session!
See you there!
Is anyone going on the Dec 19 (7PM) outing with Joe Cunningham featuring the Herald Square area? Oddly it meets at the IRT station at 28 St.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Kevin, I'll be there. I made my reservation today and was surprised they had space available. I hope whatever Police Investigation was going on in H. Sq. this morning at 8:30am when I was trying to get to the DMV has cleared up. Hope to see you. -KP
Selected dates from the 1968 NYD Bulletin.
May 09 1968 – R9’s 1527-1802 started service on the BMT Eastern Division.
May 13 1968 – Lenox Terminal Open.
Jun 22 1968 – SIRT Southbound started to use new right of way
Jun 29 1968 – SIRT Northbound started to use new right of way
July 01 1968 – JJ designation eliminated.
July 01 1968 – 57th and 6th Ave terminal opened.
July 05 1968 – Car shortage reduced the KK (R9) from 8 cars to 6 cars, excess cars (R9) were assigned to M.
July 12 1968 – R9’s from M returned to Queens IND due to car shortage. BMT standards recall back into service replacing R9’s on the M.
Aug 15 1968 – Rockaway Parkway terminal burned down
Fall 1968 - TA increased contract R42 from 200 cars to 400 cars. R44 design work started, focusing on 70 foot cars
Oct 6 1968 – First air conditioned R40 arrived, the first with factory installed pantograph gates and high railing.
Oct 17 1968 – First M-1 arrived on LIRR. LIRR’s Union refused to move them because door control are in the cab.
Oct 30 1968 – First of the Jersey Arrows started service.
Nov 1968 – R27 started to appear in red. Roofs were unpainted. R16 painting are almost all finished.
Nov 06 1968 – Air Conditioned R40 entered service.
Dec 30 1968 – M-1’s started operating on LIRR.
More to come for 1969
Phil Hom
Thanks, very informative indeed.
Ah, so the old reliable BMT standards came to the rescue once again. Were they also yanked off the scrapline as they were in August of 1966?
Yes. The "S" were painted over.
Phil Hom
Boy wasn't it nice to have some cars you could recall back into service when the need presented itself. Someone want to remind me the theory behind the scrapping of the R30's in 1993 again?
UMM.. wasn't 6th avenue "dash" service started in '68 too? Sometime in July, IIRC.
Peace,
ANDEE
If you mean full time service on the 6th Ave. express track, it started July 1, the same day that 57 St./6 Ave. station opened.
But rush hour service on the 6th Ave. "dash" had been running since Nov. 27, 1967 - the day after the Chrystie St. connection (the line through Grand St. station) opened.
Thanks for the clarification.
Peace,
ANDEE
It was used from the first day of Chrystie by B and D trains during rush hours only. Other times, the D switched to the local tracks north of 34th St (as it had done for decades prior). The B used the express tracks at W4th to terminate service during these times, and blocked access by the D. The 57th St/6th Ave terminal was not ready at this time and B's had to end someplace.
Southbound D trains, yes. Northbound D trains entered 34th St. on the local track, then crossed over right after leaving the station. That very first D train of R-32s I ever took right about this time 34 years ago did just that. We did some Christmas shopping at Macy's on the 16th or 23rd, and I remember lugging a Skittle Bowl game with me onto the subway. When we got to 59th St., the conductor announced, "Next stop on this train will be 125th St". Naturally, I wanted to stay on board an experience a CPW express dash R-32 style, but that would have to wait. We had a bus to catch. I watched the train depart, and by the time the last car went by, that sucker was moving. Those R-32s gathered speed quickly in those days.
Didn't all "D" trains back then switch from express to local north of 34th St? At this time, the "express" tracks here dead ended shortly after leaving the station going south.
Prior to Chrystie, southbound D trains switched from the "express" (inside) track at 42 St to the "local" (outside) track at 34 St; F trains to Broadway/Lafayette were already on the local track and continued as such. When they terminated at 34 St, such as in the evenings and on weekends, they switched to the inside tracks. The BB, which ran rush hours only, came in on the inside tracks at 42 St and stayed there to terminate at 34 St.
1968 is one year that most Americans would like to forget. It was a year of turmoil, war, assassinations and the general downer all the way. I know of a lot better ways to cheer one up rather than mention that particular year. Historians call is the worse year in the 20th Century from an American standpoint. Ah well, we all have our pecadillos.
And we elected Nixon and Agnew
And we didn't elect Hubert Pancake Face Humphrey and Edmund Marbles in Your Mouth Muskie. If memory serves me right Humphrey called arch racist Lester Maddox a "good Democrat". You know the guy---the one who gave his customers in his chicken restaurant ax handles to chase out black people who would be dumb enough to want to eat at his shithole eatery. Remember?
I still remember Nixon making a cameo on Laugh-in and saying, "Sock it to ME?". Humphrey was also offered a spot, but turned it down.
And they said Nixon had no sense of humor. Humphrey was a stick in the mud if there ever was one, but I will say this for him. The guy did show real guts in 1948 when he demanded and got a civil rights plank in the Democratic Party's platform with the full support of President Truman. Unfortunately, he became little more than a bootlicker when JFK and LBJ got us into that quagmire in Vietnam. He could have showed more courage by resigning his Vice Presidency when he knew as Johnson ( his tapes said so) that we could not win that war as we were fighting it. His silence helped cause a large portion of 58,000 deaths to our boys over there.
Did you ever see a blooper he did with Bob Hope? Hope asked for Nixon's autograph on a set of golf balls, and Nixon said, "Oh, incidentally, the Vice President has one on his balls for you".
Drum roll.....BLAAAAAAAAAAP!!!! (((*****bash!!!******)))
ROTFLMAO
wayne
Southbound, yes. Northbound was the opposite. They'd switch from local to express north of 34th St. Then there's that interlocking signal on the northbound platform maybe 20-30 yards from the tunnel entrance. It makes a good 10-car marker; the first car of any train seems to line right up with it.
My dad got mugged in our apartment building on Harrison Ave in the Bronx. This prompted he and my mom to begin talking about moving. He didn't want my brother (age 6) or me (age 3) to face any danger. 18 months later, we moved to Queens. The apartment building we lived in was torched a few years later.
The grade crossings from the Wantagh LIRR station to the Bellmore station were eliminated, and before opening day was over there were "Allard Lowenstein for Congress" posters on the wall of the new waiting room on the Wantagh platform.
Whats this about a R-40 having "pantograph gates"?
Look at the photographs of the R-40 cars on the site. You'll see them at the nose-ends of the cars.
The slant R-40s as delivered did not have pantograph gates. They were added later along with all that other hardware up front.
I'm quite aware of that. I was directing buildmorelines to where to find out what they are. It's also apparent from the pictures they were added after they were already in service. Ditto for the gates on the R40M/42.
I think the slants looked better like that:
When I moved to NYC in 1973, there were still "unspoiled" slants. It's a damn shame so many ignorant morons were tolerated to the point of ruining the cars with those gates. But, don't mind me...I think the 44/46 in their original garb of the stripe and raccoon mask and their original controllers were the best-looking cars ever fielded.
Someone once said that the gate attachments to the R40 slants was akin to slapping braces on Pamela Anderson....LOL.
Have a look:
http://www.mta.info/nyct/service/index.html
It looks much better than before. Comments??
HAH! They call 225/Marble Hill Manhattan, goes to show what the MTA knows:-)
225 was on the Manhattan division of the strip maps on the 1 line cars for as long time. I pointed it out to my friend once when we were riding. It goes to show that who ever makes up those maps and stuff don't get out much.
Shawn.
Up to about 228th Street is considered Manhattan. So the people who put "Manhattan" on the signs, were actually smart to remember that.
Up to about 228th Street is considered Manhattan. So the people who put "Manhattan" on the signs, were actually smart to remember that.
This has to do with pre-1900 history. Until about then, the waterway that connected the Hudson with the East River meandered north of what is now Marble Hill. It was lengthy, probably shallow, and in due course, the Harlem River Shipping Canal (or something like that) was created.
This pushed straight across from Spuyten Duyvil to the East River, in the process severing Marble Hill from its former home: Manhattan.
Rumor has it that Marble Hill is still legally part of Manhattan in NYC maps. Rumor also has it that its area code is 212, that it gets its power, water and sewer services from the Manhattan side, and so forth.
If you're riding Metro North, just after the Broadway Bridge (IRT + cars) you'll see JFK High School off to the right. That was built on the land that was created when the former riverbed was filled in once the Canal opened. You can (sort of) follow the route around to where it connected again.
THAT'S why Marble Hill is, actually, part of Manhattan.
"Rumor has it that Marble Hill is still legally part of Manhattan in NYC maps. Rumor also has it that its area code is 212, that it
gets its power, water and sewer services from the Manhattan side, and so forth. "
It's not just a rumor. It's correct.
My understanding is that people who live there refer to themselves as living in the Bronx, but I'm not 100% sure of that.
It certainly is part of New York County (as is Roosevelt Island), so jury duty service is down on Centre St.
But I believe that "Manhattan" means the island, not the county, and doesn't include Marble Hill or Roosevelt Island.
I went to Marble Hill Nursery School (a LONG time ago :-) ... and yes, it is in the Borough of Manhattan.
I had a very close friend who I met in camp for the first time back about 40 years ago who lived in the Marble Hill projects at 225 and Broadway. When I first met him, he told me he lived in the Bronx. When I visited him at home and met his parents, they told me they lived in the Bronx.
Their zip code was 10463.....isn't that a Bronx zip code?
(Yes, I know that politically the place is considered Manhattan but the vast majority of residents consider themselves Bronxites....but since the great area code split I guess they retained the 212....
They have a Bronx zip cdoe -- 10463 -- and 718 phone service. But it's politically in Manhattan.
Marble Hill WAS part of Manhattan Island until the canal was created, thus diverting the course of the Harlem River as it made its way towards the Hudson. But it remains a part of New York County, as is Roosevelt, Governor's, Wards and Randalls Islands (and possibly Rikers too). All voters of New York County vote for Manhattan Boro President, Manhattan judges, etc. From what I hear, people who live there consider it the Bronx. If I lived there I would think of it as Manhattan.
All correct, except Rikers is part Bronx County, at least crimes occuring in the jails are prosecuted in Bronx County Court. The road signs on the island are of the Blue on White that was used in Queens at one time.
I'm glad that I qualified Riker's by saying "possibly". I pride myself on my knowledge of the NYC metropolitan area, but I am content to have never made it to Rikers Island, in any capacity!
Actually Riker's is on-topic as the only way onto the island is by bus, either Corrections Dept or the 101 (or 101A) bus from the parking lot on the queens end of the bridge.
My only visits to Rikers have been just that, visits. Interesting place thought!
One summary 30 years ago I was driving a taxi. A woman hailed me in front of the Queens courthouse and asked to go to Hazen Street. I had my Hagstroms and found the street.
Once we got to Hazen street, I asked how far, and she said just keep going. It was only when we started to drive onto a bridge that it dawned on me where we were going.
The folks on the island were quite used to taxis, and told me to just not pick anyone up on the way out.
the only way onto the island is by bus
You could swim :-)
Blue and White signs were seen in the Bronx only.. While in Queens, it was Gray and Black.
N Broadway Line
Actually, most of Manhattan above 155th Street does resemble the Bronx a lot more than Manhattan- lots of pre-war apartment buildings, hills and parkland. The presence of an elevated subway above Dyckman Street helps too.
Whenever I take someone up to Inwood Park, while walking from the 207th Street subway terminal to the park, I tell them we're still in Manhattan. They don't believe me.
W. 225th St. between Broadway and the Major Deegan Expwy. actually consists of a bridge over what used to be part of the Harlem River. If memory serves, the bridge was buried sometime since my boyhood (ca. 1960).
Bob Sklar
I never heard that (I live near the area). Is there any physical evidence of the bridge visible?
There were two bridges over the original path of the river. One was a toll bridge built by the British that was called the King's Bridge which eventually gave its name to the street;the other was near the location of the Deegan and was built by the local farmers and became known as the Farmer's Bridge or the Free Bridge. Since the path of the river has changed and the location of the bridges has became landfill there probably is no evidence of their existence.
Thanks!
New York County and Manhattan are coterminous. Marble Hill and Roosevelt Island are in both. (I had long thought that MH was in New York County but the Borough of the Bronx. I had been incorrect.)
You're right that NY County and Manhattan boro are coterminous -- but Manhattan boro is not coterminous with Manhattan Island!
...as anyone reading this thread has recently learned. Manhattan contains a bunch of islands as well as a little bit of the mainland.
You are correct that a small portion of Manhattan is on the mainland. I found this out by accident while looking at a map back in 1974 when I was 11 years old. I thought it was quite interesting to find out that a tiny portion of Manhattan was on the mainland at the time. I'm sure that few people who ride the Metro-North Hudson Line train realize that they actually pass through this little piece of Manhattan before they are actually on Manhattan Island after they cross the Harlem River just north of 132nd Street on the Manhattan side.
#3 West End Jeff
In an amusing anamoly, it's actually possible to take an MN diesel from Grand Central to another stop in Manhattan. Off-peak Hudson line disels to and from Poughkeepsie actually run direct to GC making selected 'express stops', and Marble Hill is one of them. Usually, one associates MN diesels with remote destinations above Croton-Harmon and Brewster North or on the Danbury and Waterbury branches.
Other false assumptions even lifelong New Yorkers make are (a) the New York end of the GWB is in the Bronx, not Manhattan; and (b) if a street number is in the 200s, it's gotta be in the Bronx. Even some guidebooks desribe the 'A' as running to 207th Street in 'the Bronx'.
GWB in the Bronx? I've never heard that one. Some people think the Cloisters is in the Bronx, though.
Oh yeah, many people think that the NY anchor of the GWB is in the Bronx.
Peace,
ANDEE
WINS did one better. It announced that the 3 wasn't running to Manhattan, but was operating in the Bronx only from 148th to 135th!!
Several baseball announcers, over the years, have stated the Manny Ramirez of the Indians played hign school ball at George Washington HS in the Bronx. He grew up and went to HS in Washington Heights.
> it's actually possible to take an MN diesel from Grand Central to another stop in Manhattan.
What about 125th Street?
- Lyle Goldman
Does MN diesel locomotive use 3rd rail power south of Croton-Harmon, or does it use electric power only in the Park Avenue Tunnel to GCT?
Does MN diesel locomotive use 3rd rail power south of Croton-Harmon, or does it use electric power only in the Park Avenue Tunnel to GCT?
Only in the tunnel.
it's actually possible to take an MN diesel from Grand Central to another stop in Manhattan.
What about 125th Street?
I don't believe MN will sell you a ticket to 125th, although I may be wrong.
I don't believe MN will sell you a ticket to 125th, although I may be wrong.
CLARIFICATION: I don't believe MN will sell you a ticket *from Grand Central* to 125th, although I may be wrong.
When I was in New York last weekend, the Hudson Line schedule notes that 125th street is used only to discharge passengers for GCT inbound trains, and to recieve passengers only for outbound trains.
If I tried to get off at 125th, would anyone stop me? (Maybe I had just realized that I had gotten on the wrong train at GCT.)
I notice lots of people crowded at 125th station waiting for outbound trains. I guess it would be easy to exit the doors when passengers enter, and I do not see conductors staning next to the doors.
Why do all MN trains stop at 125th street? Are new office spaces being built in the area as a part of Harlem gentification (ex: Bill Clinton having an office space in the area)?
Also, would it make sense to build new office spaces near the LIRR Jamaica station to avoid the high rents of Midtown/Downtown?
Why do all MN trains stop at 125th street? Are new office spaces being built in the area as a part of Harlem gentification (ex: Bill Clinton having an office space in the area)?
Not ALL of them stop there. But most do.
Unlike midtown, the 125th service area is mostly residential. I'd say that 125th serves Manhattan from roughly 100th to 175th or so, including lots of Westsiders who take the 125th Street crosstown to get to Metro North. North of 175th or so, it's easier to take the subway to Marble Hill and board there.
Also, would it make sense to build new office spaces near the LIRR Jamaica station to avoid the high rents of Midtown/Downtown?
Absolutely and I think some are there and at least one is being renovated, or was late last summer.
Why do all MN trains stop at 125th street? Are new office spaces being built in the area as a part of Harlem gentification (ex: Bill Clinton having an office space in the area)?
Not ALL of them stop there. But most do.
Unlike midtown, the 125th service area is mostly residential. I'd say that 125th serves Manhattan from roughly 100th to 175th or so, including lots of Westsiders who take the 125th Street crosstown to get to Metro North. North of 175th or so, it's easier to take the subway to Marble Hill and board there.
125th Street has always been fairly busy. In particular, it does a good deal of reverse-commuter business, similar to (though on a larger scale than) Nostrand Avenue on the LIRR. Your description of its service area sounds about right.
The Marble Hill option only works for Metro North train on the Hudson line.
Also, would it make sense to build new office spaces near the LIRR Jamaica station to avoid the high rents of Midtown/Downtown?
Absolutely and I think some are there and at least one is being renovated, or was late last summer.
Jamaica's potential has yet to become reality; while there's a good deal of construction in the area, so far it's all public-sector stuff.
The Marble Hill option only works for Metro North train on the Hudson line.
Whoops! Oh yeah, those other 2 lines ... I only ride the Hudson Line regularly. [embarassed grin]
Yes you can buy a ticket from GCT to 125th 0n the Hudson and Harlem Lines Cost $3.25 off peak $4.25 On Peak. never noticed the conductors ask for Tickets in Northbound south of 125. Northboundf they usually pick up the hat checks.
You can ABSOLUTELY buy a MN ticket from GCT to 125th and vice versa. Many Hudson and Harlem trains stop there without restrictions for discharging or receiving passengers. There are posters at 125th listing all the trains that stop there and continue to GCT. The one-way peak fare is $4.25, amd monthly pass is $94.
You can ABSOLUTELY buy a MN ticket from GCT to 125th and vice versa. Many Hudson and Harlem trains stop there without restrictions for discharging or receiving passengers.
Interesting. I wonder if they actually sell any of them?
I've also the heard "boarding passengers only" northbound at 125th and "departing passengers only" southbound on Metro North.
Sounds like Metro North has some internal inconsistencies. Unless the GCT to 125 ride is for the trains that run local to places like Croton-Harmon (and whatever its equivalent midpoints on Harlem & New Haven lines might be), not the expresses?
You can buy the GCT-125th ticket, but you're only allowed to use it on certain trains. Not on any New Haven Line trains, and not on the longer distance Hudson and Harlem line trains. You can definitely use it on the Mt Vernon West locals that stop at every stop on the Harlem line in the Bronx.
You can buy the GCT-125th ticket, but you're only allowed to use it on certain trains.
Ah, now THAT makes sense! I wonder how the buyer knows WHICH trains, though? Does the ticket agent tell them? Or when they request that routing are they assigned to the "next train" that they're allowed to make that stop?
If you ask at the Information Booth they'll steer you to a train that you're allowed to take.
Otherwise, you have to know at least something about the system. The board at GCT might say something like "White Plains, 1st stop Mt. Vernon West." But if you don't know where 125th St is relative to Mt Vernon West, that might not help.
Also, the actual signs at the track entrances list all the stops you can get off at.
If you're a regular (not sure there are any) you'll learn soon enough.
I've almost never taken a Mt Vernon West local, so I have no idea if anyone actually gets off at 125th on the way outbound.
Why would anyone take MN from GCT to 125 St ($3?) when they can take the subway there for $1.50?
Why would anyone take MN from GCT to 125 St ($3?) when they can take the subway there for $1.50?
Quicker ride, nicer equipment, more pleasant station (GCT concourse v. crowded underground IRT station)?
Speed??
It is much faster
Peace,
ANDEE
It's 10 minutes either way. MN trains take a long time to get through all the switches between 46th and 59th. I guess it you start out right above GCT it's quicker to get to MN than the subway.
Somebody must buy tickets, or they wouldn't still be selling them 40 years later. But it's always been more expensive on the railroad.
I once rode a peak Harlem train out of GC that was destined for Mount Vernon West, first stop 125th. It was one of those 1950s electric consists that looks much more like a diesel than an M-2. A regular I was talking to said this particular train is ALWAYS an oldie.
Anyway, from what I remember, NO ONE got off at Melrose or Tremont. There were a couple at Fordham and Botanical Gardens and a few more at Williams Bridge. The vast majority got off at Woodlawn and most of the rest at Wakefield. I was virtually the only one who stayed on through MVW.
I can only theorize that very few people who live near Melrose through Williams Bridge would be willing to pay MN monthly fares. Only Williams Bridge is reasonably close to the subway. True, the entire MN Park Avenue Bronx corridor has the free transfer from the BX55 to the subway at 3rd/149th.
As for Woodlawn, it's walking distance to the very slow '2' or a bus to the somewhat faster '4' or 'D'. Woodlawn is considered one of the few 'middle-class' areas left in the Bronx, hence its populace may be willing to shell out the extra bucks for a quick ride to GC. I don't know if the elimination of two-fare zones have encouraged locals off MN and onto the bus-to-subway version.
(Riverdale on MN's Hudson Line is another area of the Bronx that's highly 'professional', but the location of that station is so remote- hard on the river- from any subway alternative that people living near it have a long walk to the feeder bus service to 207th or 231st that's far less convenient than the BX34 to Woodlawn or 205th. That probably gives both Riverdale and Spuyten Duyvil very high ridership. The implementation of MN-run shuttle bus service to keep people from overcrowding their parking lots would seem to bear this out.)
Wakefield station, while located in the Bronx, is actually closer to extreme southeast Yonkers than its namesake. It seems reasonable to assume that most people using Wakefield are actually Yonkers residents who are able to live outside the city but benefit from a cheaper fare zone- the price always jumps at the city limits. Similarly, lots of people from Nassau's Five Towns drive into Queens to use the LIRR Rosedale station.
By and large, many more people use the LIRR for outer Queens stations than MN for outer Bronx stations.
Outer Bronx stations are very popular pick-up points for domestic workers going into Westchester in the morning to clean houses and diaper babies belonging to rich people...
This is true -- I've seen dozens, if not more, people who appear to be domestic workers at Fordham station boarding in the morning going to Westchester and Connecticut.
N20/21 buses from Flushing to Nassau County are packed in the AM rush.
Same thing here in Nassau except that most of the workers take the bus, however you see quite a few domestic workers getting on/off SUV's at Great Neck to/from the LIRR and LI Bus.
The "not on any New Haven Line trains" goes back to the old days when the New Haven was separate from the New York Central. The Central did not allow any competition -- it was willing to allow the New Haven trains over its track, but that was all.
But even now that Metro-North has added a Fordham stop to a lot of New Haven line trains (which never existed back in NY Central times), they still don't allow GCT to Fordham travel on any NH Line train, whereas that trip is permitted on White Plains locals on the Harlem line.
But even now that Metro-North has added a Fordham stop to a lot of New Haven line trains (which never existed back in NY Central times), they still don't allow GCT to Fordham travel on any NH Line train, whereas that trip is permitted on White Plains locals on the Harlem line.
Betcha it now has something to do with the ConnDOT funding for the New Haven Line part of Metro North. Probably don't want CT tax dollars being spent to transport riders solely within NY state.
Why was Fordham added to the New Haven line stops:
There are a large number of reverse commuters from the Bronx who work in Westchester and Fairfield County. An interesting sociological study is to look at the different economic/racial mix of those arriving at or leaving Stamford on different trains each rush hour.
Also a fair number of Westchester/CT people who work in the Bronx. Most New Haven line trains traveling with the rush don't stop at Fordham, but on the few that do a lot of people don't travel all the way to GCT but get off at Fordham.
Also a lot of travel on weekends. Mt Vernon, New Rochelle, and Port Chester have major working class areas like the Bronx, and many people are visiting friends and family, in both directions.
I've taken early morning outbound trains out of Fordham on the New Haven and Harlem lines- they are CROWDED. You get a good idea of demographics watching the discharges at each stop.
There are domestic workers piling into SUVs at Scarsdale, Mamaroneck, Larchmont and Greenwich. There are techies piling into transports at Harrison, Rye Stamford and South Norwalk. There are college students headed for New Rochelle, Bronxville and White Plains. White Plains has some huge office complexes and government offices.
Metro-North's lowering of off-peak fares between the city and suburbs have contributed immeasurably to this phenomenon. If only the LIRR would reduce THEIR off-peak fares between Penn and the Island- or at least Jamaica and the Island.
But what about the people who use the New Haven Line between GCT and Mount Vernon to Port Chester? Those trips are solely within NY state as well?
Only during Rush Hours, trains pass 125th St they are usually the express trains that originally board North of Croton and White Plains and Stamford 14 AM South bound trains New Haven By pass 125th 16 Morthbound Rush Hr Trains Hudson SB 6 all expresses NB 6. Harlem SB 9 NB 11
There are many false assumptions in life. You should never take anything for granted. I wonder how many people think that streets number in the 100s are only in Manhattan?
#3 West End Jeff
This Marble Hill theme was discussed a while back, there is a great section on the FORGOTTEN-NEW YORK website describing the Marble Hill Bronx/Manhattan situation.
I live a few blocks from Marble Hill (on Kingsbridge Ave) and when you walk throught the area, you can tell it is different from the surronding "real" Bronx Area. It is more hilly (I guess that has something to do with the name) and has a seperate feel. I read somewhere that people from there use the confusion to avoid jury duty, they tell New York County they live in the Bronx and visa versa.
No, Marble Hill gets almost all its servcies from the Bronx, though it is politically part of Manhattan. That is, it elects the Manhattan Boro pres., has a Manhattan City Council seat, etc., But its postal service is from the Bronx and it has a 718 area code.
Marble Hill, despite being north of the Harlem River, is in Manhattan.
The borough (county) line is around 230th Street.
I suspect the line follows the earkier river channel which is now 'inland'.
Yes, you are correct.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Your suspicions are correct. See this Google Groups search for a lot of information (most but not all of it pretty accurate) on the topic.
R-143 went O/S today @ 8th Avenue around 2:45pm
Stay Tuned....
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Cool!!!
It got to 8th Ave around 1:15. I was waiting in Canarsie for it since I was supposed to have it for the 1:47 interval. Over the radio came a report of stuck brakes. They put it in the layup track between 6th and 8th Ave and tried to fix it. Around 3:00 it was decided to take it to ENY yard. It came to Canarsie to change ends to go back to ENY when the computers crashed. Let's see how long it will be out this time.
-Mark W.
Ah, 143's working as designed I see.
Yeah and the brakes squeal like they need new brake shoes, even some T/O's reporting that the brakes are bad, employees and customers find the automated announcements annoying, and in order to do announcements yourself (Z-Man you know how I work lol :-) ) you have to deactivate ALL the digital signs, do all this computer play with the operating system to get to do the announcements yourself. The train looks nice, rides smooth (though the loud brake squeals I heard are a surprise giving the age of the train and amount of time on the road), but everything else, ESPECIALLY THE AUTOMATED ANNOUNCEMENT SYSTEM, sucks. If you like it thats fine, I think it's all looks!! (P.S. Anyone who thinks the automated announcements absolutely need to go gimme a HELL YEAH! I think they REALLY need to do away with that because it's torture for 37 minutes to have to hear those all the time.)
>>>>>>>>I think they REALLY need to do away with that because it's torture for 37 minutes to have to hear those all the time
How do you think I feel having to listen to you for 6 hours on the F.
Gotcha.
I'm surprised to hear about the brakes squealing so badly. I rode the 143 from 8th Avenue to Rockaway Pkwy and then back to Lorimer and I never noticed any brake squealing. The impression that I got was of an excellent, well-built car.
Dan
The proceeding was paid for by Kawaski Heavy Industries, Inc.
;-D
BMTman
I think you mean "preceding."
Kudos Yugos.
I think that thats how the brakes sound. It is the same as the R142A on the 6 line which is the A division counterpart to the R143(both made by Kawasaki). As for the annoucements, come ride with me on the 2 line for 1 hr 35 minutes on the R142. I betcha that send your ass back over to the L line. Just to torture you some more, Ill play the special annoucements between stations....:):)
lol!
I thought that the reason the brakes squealed is because the T/O didn't know how to brake properly. It takes a bit to get used to, I understand.
P.S. Anyone who thinks the automated announcements absolutely need to go gimme a HELL YEAH!
HELL YEAH!
IMHO, talking transit equipment should be banned outright.
I guess you don't want to ride the newest SEPTA buses then. "Welcome to SEPTA," they cheerily say. Then they announce all the stops - very accurately.
And, frankly, guys, give me an impersonal but understandable and clearly articulated voice announcing every stop predictably any time.
If the TA required elocution lessons and standard pronunciation of all of its on-train personnel -- and tested them on it -- I might change my mind. "Colorful" Noo Yawk accents are fine for the movies, but on a train, I want to be able to HEAR and UNDERSTAND the announcement. Every one of them. At a predictable time. BEFORE the station.
Sorry, Express. I'm sympathetic to the miseries of having to listen to it over and over and over and over and over ... but not nearly enough to sacrifice the incredible benefits for all the riders.
C/R's are now required to wait until the train is stopped in the station before identifying the station. Part of your beef is with TA rules, apparently.
Personally, I value accuracy in announcements. The automated announcements have been routinely incorrect, even on the R-143.
> C/R's are now required to wait until the train is stopped in the station before identifying the station.
That is a stupid rule that the MTA never, ever should have ever messed with.
- Lyle Goldman
Trevor, did the Kawasaki's on the IRT get taken out twice in the first two weeks of service like this 143?
I was riding and shooting it on the eastern end of the (L) today. Everything seemed fine. I last saw them at Sutter Ave heading toward Atlantic Ave, a couple of cars had FLAT WHEELS. I didn't hear those flat wheels earlier in the day.
Bill "Newkirk"
Anyone know what the status of this website is? The server name appears to still be around but even trying to bring up the initial page gets a 404 error.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Anyone know what the status of this website is? The server name appears to still be around but even trying to bring up the initial page gets a 404 error
Some sort of problem caused by excess bandwith requirements. Steve Anderson said on misc.transport.road that he's trying to split up some of the content into different sites, and hopes to have it all back up soon.
Thanks Peter...
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
>>>misc.transport.road<<<
Web address please?
www.forgotten-ny.com
It's not a web site it's a newsgroup.
But if you don't have Usenet access you can get it at http://groups.google.com/
-Dave
Yeah that's basically it.
I've been contemplating setting up a third web server for sites like these, and selling essentially unmetered web space to non-commercial transit/roadgeek sites for a trifle. I gotta talk to my current web host and see what he'd charge me additional to what I pay now.
-Dave
My web site is currently nonexistent, and I do have arrangements already elsewhere, but if you go through with something like this, I may sign up. Please keep us updated.
Well if you are interested or know people who might be, before I can pitch the idea I have to have some idea of bandwidth consumption and what people would need for server software, etc.
So if you're interested or know people who are, have them fill this little thing out and mail it to me (please don't post it here)
site name:
purpose:
approximate amount of disk space consumed:
approximate amount of disk space desired for future:
approximate bandwidth used, in megabytes/week:
current host platform: i.e. Solaris/Apache, NT/IIS, etc.
web/server technologies used: i.e. Apache, mod_perl, PHP, MySQL, Frontpage, access to scripting languages/compilers required, etc. Include version numbers if known.
how much of site content is static vs. dynamically generated if any
require DNS hosting? mailing lists/aliases? streaming video/audio? any other requirements, desires?
(optional) how much do you pay for your web host package now?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks. I'll respond by email, but why don't you post this on the relevant newsgroups (nyc.transit, misc.transport.road, etc.), mailing lists, and message boards?
For now, I'd prefer "word of mouth" distribution. :)
Doesn't trainweb.com do that now? But I don't know if they allow roadfan sites.
It's terrible that they just completely shut him down because of some silly "bandwidth requirements" which they didn't even bother telling him about beforehand. I don't know who these clowns are, but they shouldn't be able to do that.
- Lyle Goldman
Most hosts have some kind of bandwidth limit on your account. (Actually it limits transfer, but they call it bandwisth) This is not unreasonable, because bandwidth costs money. I wouldn't host with anyone who offers "unlimited bandwidth" because they play games with you to make sure you don't use to much of it.
The problem is that Steve apparently hosted with someone whose software just shuts you down when you go over the limit. Some hosts charge you mega$$$ when you go over the limit. Best are the hosts that have software that send you an email when you reach some specific level of usage, so you can decide what to do about it.
I'm just saying bandwidth limits are not unreasonable, per se.
> I'm just saying bandwidth limits are not unreasonable, per se.
Neither am I. I'm just saying they should let him know first.
- Lyle Goldman
DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG! DONG!
12:01 AM and the new service plan is officially in effect.
Anyone want to make a crystal ball prediction for Monday Morning?
ok so the message was sent at 12:02, big deal.
Lots and lots and lots of people who can't read a service notice will be kvetching 'till the cows come home.
I'm on vacation!
:-) Andrew
I'll be on 'troubles' Monday morning doing work for 180th Street keeping the #5 Redbirds alive. CI Peter
Let me guess. It won't be like when Chrystie St. opened, but with the relatily low profile the new services got within the last three months, along with the lack of attentivness to the service notices already up on the part of passengers, the Queens line will not be a very pleasent place to be working on come tomorrow (Monday) morning.
To T/Os and C/Rs: Just be glad that some colleges are closing for winter break and some members of the NY workforce chose to take early vacation this coming week.
2 letters.
NX
Did you notice how, of the three NY papers, only the NY Daily News covered this (on-line version; I haven't seen NYC print editions this morning yet - I have to go to downtown Philly for that).
Daily News had an article about it.....3 weeks ago!
I look into my crystal ball....the future lays before me....it's getting clearer.....I see joyus celebrations! F riders extatic that the F won't go to 53rd. St. Everyone loves the V and knows where it runs! E riders welcome the extra F riders it will absorb with open arms! It's a party atmosphere!
{sarcasm mode: OFF}
People will swear they never saw or heard any announcements about service changes.
People will be going back and forth on the F line between Roosevelt Ave and 47-50 Sts looking for Lexington/53 for the 6 train.
People will avoid taking the V train because although it will go down 6 Ave they'll think it won't go down 6 Ave. Funny but that's how some will think.
People will be losing money at the subway-to-subway transfer sites because they don't understand how the transfer works.
People will be complaining that the R and V trains are backing up along Queens Blvd. And more when the G resumes running along Queens Blvd after 8:30 PM.
"People will be going back and forth on the F line between Roosevelt Ave and 47-50 Sts looking for Lexington/53 for the 6 train".
I like that one!
Good to have a sence of humor now. I don't think there will be one on Monday.
No there won't be an exchange of pleasantries. But like evey other service change, they'll simply have to adjust. On the way to work, they can curse the friendly neighborhood Station Agent, Conductor, T/O, about crummy service.
-Stef
That's already been happening during the many weekends the 'F''s been running on its new permanent routing. Many times on Queens-bound trains, people will look confused when it pulls into 57th/6th instead of 5th/53rd. Many get off to switch to a downtown 'F' to "go back to Rockefeller Center and get the REGULAR 'F' train the way it's SUPPOSED to run."
It's just like what happens when a local train switched to the express track and announcements are made that it will be running express and skipping a series of local stops due to a weekend GO. People will get off in disgust and stand waiting for a train to arrive on the local track- even when it's taped off. This is a very common occurrence at Times Square and 72nd Street.
This confusion is often due to ambiguous announcements: "This train is running through the 63rd Street connector" or "This train is running express to 42nd Street." Very good -- so I'll get off and wait for the next train! That's why I've been nudging C/R's here to be more specific: "All F trians are running through the 63rd Street connector this weekend" or "Due to track work, all downtown 1, 2, and 3 trains this weekend are running express from 72nd Street to 42nd Street."
Yeah it might be a mess alright. I was hoping they'd give out pamphlets about the changes while riding the subway yesterday but I didn't see any stuff to take. Only signs on the walls stating the changes. When the bridge flip happened it was better advertized. I'll be riding the V and new F route sometime this week, perhaps not Monday as I planned though.
There are pamphlets at token booths, and on buses. Actually on the buses I've ridden recently they're much more plentiful than bus schedules and bus maps. Many people pick up the pamphlet, flip through it, find it has nothing to do with buses, and put them back. There have also been ads in the subways saying where the F won't stop any more and where the V will stop. But it doesn't matter what the MTA does to publicize a change, a portion of the riders will always ignore all notices and end up confused when the changes happen, cursing the MTA and their evil machinations. =)
And the pamplets in different languages too...
MTA ran an ad in the NY Times Metro Section yesterday, and Newsday (I initially missed that article) and the Daily News covered it.
The bridge flip was a much, much bigger deal than this.
Go to a token booth Monday Morning along Queens Blvd and tell us if it's a big deal or not. Some people will
go ballistic over it and influence others about it.
They bitch, they moan, they complain. Why weren't they given advance notice?
So what else is new?
-Stef
And they'll demand your badge number too and complain to the Station Supervisor about how you were no help.
Try and explain a GO notice to a Customer who refuses to listen....
-Stef
And how. You should see what its like when trains on the Lex go express due to a GO, and everybody gets off not knowing that all trains are express and delay the line trying to figure out a new route home or curse out the train crew (both of which are futile). This is probably going on with the track rehab on Pelham right now as I type.
As a V/R I'm staying away from the V line as much as possible!
What about the "R"?
To those who refuse to listen, I refuse to talk further.
Yes, but how many riders are affected by the changes?
This time, it's basically the Queens Boulevard corridor (solid E and R riders can ignore the changes, but it would be to their advantage to see what's going on around them and possibly adjust their routes). Travelers between 6th Avenue and points along 53rd Street will have to learn a new letter, and on weekends a new route (although regular weekend travelers are used to E/F suspensions due to GO's). For those of us who never regularly rode the F along 53rd, the G north of Court Square, or the S along 63rd, nothing has changed. With the exception of G riders, those who have to adjust to new routes today have, at worst, new cross-platform transfers.
Back in July, who did the changes affect? Anyone who rode the B south of 34th, or at all on weekends. Anyone who rode the D south of 34th. Anyone who rode the Q. Indirectly, N/R riders got additional (express) service, F riders got the overflow from the now-unused express tracks, weekend CPW riders lost half their local service, Astoria riders got express service, etc. Transfer points changed: 42 instead of 59 or W4, 14 instead of Bleecker, 34 instead of 47-50. One-seat rides now entail lots of stairs.
Yes, some people are confused today, but many fewer than were confused on July 23.
We'll find out definately tonight after the PM rush is over. And read some of the horror stories in the media tomorrow.
The weekend OPTO business on the G thru the Queens Blvd. corridor will be a problem. The other service is the R, a train which takes up the whole platform. The G, of course, takes up half the platform and does not necessarily stop in the center. Passengers who desire the E or F at Roosevelt or Queens Plaza, through no fault of their own, will force the G to have longer station dwell time at all those Manhattan bound local stations. Hopefully, if the G is scheduled to leave CTL 2 minutes behind the R, this problem won't happen. Even if so, a change in headway or service disruption on the R will create problems on the short/OPTO G. Queens bound, a delay in R service from 95 will create over crowding problem with the OPTO G as well.
And the R142s wiil turn back into pumpkins and I'll be doing Redbirds forever. CI Peter
MY prediction is...
Ill be late for school
Where do you live and where do you go to school?
53/lex-96cpw
If in the near future once the R-142A fleet is large enough, will MTA launch the R-142A to replace the Redbird fleet gradually on the Flushing Line (7)?
Boy scroll back about two days, you'll see what's going with this subject!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
The MTA will eventually replace Redbirds on the #7 line with anything that runs 'numberworld.' R142s have been allocated, new deliveries have been halted by MTA and how Kawasaki 142As will perform is anyones guess. CI Peter
I thought that the IRT is really the numberworld?
It is...I remember what I was taught in recognising systems. Short 12 door cars with brake trips on the T/Os side. CI Peter
they will break down quick fast & in a hurry !!!
lol !!
Of course and I will remain employed to MAKE OLD TRAINS GO and teach the next generation of Car Inspectors howtofixemup thankyouverrymuch. CI Peter.
lol !!!
Uh, people,
Asking the same question every day or two, even in a very slightly different way, isn't going to change the answer.
If and when there is an answer to this question, it will no doubt be provided to SubTalkers in a very timely manner.
David
Thursday I saw 3 older cars on one of the upper level track of GCT and they were numbered 1, 2, 3. Two of the cars were flat on the side while one of the cars have the ridged side like the Fishbowls and Classics (Buses). I peered into these cars and saw that there were some regular seats but there were also booths with tables like in a diner.
What are these 3 cars?
Where are they used?
Why were they there?
What RR name was painted on them?
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
If i remember, one had the Metro North Commuter Railroad on them, but no other names, etc.
IIRC, those are MN's bussiness cars. Or inspection cars. They float around the system.
One of those cars might bee the ex- Lackawanna onservation car from the Phoebe Snow. Metro North of course acquired it from the LIRR. I attended a fan trip using that car on the LIRR Bay Ridge Branch. Paid some extra bucks to ride in one of those parlor compartments, real cool !
Bill "Newkirk"
MN 1 and 2 are the former Obsevation cars of the Erie-Lackawanna's famous "Phoebe Snow" train which ran between Hoboken and Chicago.
MN 3 is a former New York Central car.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Had to ride the S from GCT to Times Square. Was on the northernmost track of the S (What would connect to the #1 Local line if the bridge was up).
As I exited, I noticed on the platform there is a staircase that is enclosed in a fence that leads down from the platform. It wasn't lit and the tiles looked old.
What is this staircase and where does it go and why is it sticking out there like a sore thumb?
It is the remains of a crossunder, from when the Times Square shuttle station was a local stop on the original line. The other staircase has been covered over, I believe.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
It is the remains of a crossunder, from when the Times Square shuttle station was a local stop on the original line. The other staircase has been covered over, I believe.
No kidding! I've never noticed this, but it stands to reason. Where is it located, exactly, EnIgMa?
If you ride the 2nd car of the 3 car shuttle on the northernmost shuttle track (I forget which track #) and stand by the middle door, you should see it plainly when you exit - Let the other people off first so that they don't push you.
You will see it in the floor about 12 feet from track one marked by small circular glass block tiles with the actual staircase entrance covered by concrete.
And if you go to the northern end of the Times Square BMT station and look into the tunnel, you'll see where the express tracks spread apart to make room for that underpass. The Broadway line passes directly beneath the shuttle at that point.
I know that there are plans to link GCT to Penn. I was wondering if any of this had previously been done?
Reason asking: My MNRR train disembarked on track 116. I noticed that there are more tracks on the lower level of GCT west of Track 117 with trains on them. What are these tracks used for?
"I know that there are plans to link GCT to Penn. I was wondering if any of this had previously been done?"
Really? Who, besides SubTalkers, came up with these plans?
David
There have been talks about connecting the two in slightly more official places than Dave's website, but AFAIK, no one associated with any planning agency or governmental authority has ever officially drawn up a plan on how to do it.
It is an option being considered in the Access to the Region's Core study (http://www.accesstotheregionscore.com/).
I stand corrected; someone has put it down officially on paper (or hard disk, in this case).
It's interesting that the Alternative G map on the site proposes that tracks 1-5 at Penn Station, from the 31st St. side of the station, be connected to Grand Central Terminal, instead of what would seem like the easier connection for tracks 17-21. However, since 1-5 are the NJT tracks, with some Amtrak departures thrown in, it does make more sense to hook those up to GCT since the LIRR will have its own access there via the 63rd St. tunnel.
However, the connection going into GCT is a little more generic on the map. It makes no statement about which avenue the tracks would be routed down, though from the drawing, it seems to assume Park Avenue. Given the crowding on the Lex already, adding a series of construction-related disruptions to build an 11-block lone tunnel under the IRT express tracks doesn't strike me as the most well thought out option, if that really is the Alternative G plan.
However, the connection going into GCT is a little more generic on the map. It makes no statement about which avenue the tracks would be routed down, though from the drawing, it seems to assume Park Avenue.
When I talked to someone overseeing a team of ARC customer focus groups several years ago, the assumption was already that the connector would run under Madison Avenue. The GCT track fan extends west of Madison, so the alignment works.
The challenge, of course, is turning the corner from Madison to E 31st or thereabouts -- VERY pricy real estate there!
If the connector were to run into the western part of GCT, I wonder if provisions for it are being factored into the LIRR-at-GCT design work now being done to create new LIRR tracks in lower-level space in GCT now used for MN shops & yards ???
Yes, the LIRR track area is to be separate from the MN area, and they are going to relocate the MN yard to the Bronx.
Yes, the LIRR track area is to be separate from the MN area, and they are going to relocate the MN yard to the Bronx.
I remember that from reading something on the MTA's website. The question was more, Does the planning for that new LIRR area include whatever may be needed to include a Penn-GCT connector that would likely land trains into the middle of it?
The northbound trains coming from Penn Station could use the loop track to get over to the east side of Grand Central, if the tracks there were hooked up to the Madison Ave. tunnel. That would solve some of the problem of shared trackage with the LIRR, and I suppose they could reverse loop trains through there going from the east side of GCT to Penn Station, if the traffic volume on the lower level of the terminal was light enough to permit it.
The northbound trains coming from Penn Station could use the loop track to get over to the east side of Grand Central, if the tracks there were hooked up to the Madison Ave. tunnel.
Hmmmmmm. I don't know exactly where the loop track lies under 42nd (or north of there) but I'd question whether the radius of the turn from NB tunnel under Madison would require clipping the corner of the very large building on the SE corner of 42nd and Madison?
MTA may have missed a bet in that the SW corner of 42nd and Madison is now being redeveloped (entire blockfront to 41st) with a large office tower. They could have put some provisions in the basement for such a turnout on the SB tracks if they could have planned far enough ahead.
uhmm... so far as the rumor mill has it, contracts went out a few weeks ago for surveying & soon beginning the work connecting LIRR @ harold interlocking to the lower level of 63rd. st. tunnel. it's all suppose to be said and done in the next 10 years. (hey, they finally connected 63rd to queens blvd... it might just happen before we're all dead & gone!)
That's connecting the LIRR to GCT, but connecting Penn Station to GCT via a tunnel under Midtown is a different project, and still just a plan on paper (or on the web). It's being considered as part of the project to build another rail tunnel under the Hudson.
But, the 63rd Street Tunnel would link the LIRR to GCT. What would link GCT to Penn?
But, the 63rd Street Tunnel would link the LIRR to GCT. What would link GCT to Penn?
A new section of tunnel running under Madison from GCT and feeding into the approaches to the East River tubes at 31st Street.
The idea is to allow through-running of Metro North, NJ Transit, LIRR and Amtrak trains. There are significant power differences, but if the tracks are there it's at least possible to offer one-seat rides from Westchester to NJ, NJ to LI, LI to Westchester, etc.
There are already through tracks from LI to NJ and have been for a very long time. Notice how many through trains there have been.
The current plan to bring LIRR into GCT doesn't allow for through trains to Westchester from LI. There is no track connection in the plans. If the connection from GCT to Penn Station shares the tracks set up for the LIRR at GCT, you won't have a track connection from NJ to Westchester, either.
There are already through tracks from LI to NJ and have been for a very long time. Notice how many through trains there have been.
True, although the gradually increasing regional focus on transit may one day bring it about in our lifetimes. I'm not holding my breath, mind you.
The current plan to bring LIRR into GCT doesn't allow for through trains to Westchester from LI. There is no track connection in the plans.
That makes sense. Either (1) you run a Westchester train into GCT, then backtrack up to the 63rd Street tunnel and out to LI (lengthy); or (2) if they DID put a wye at the 63rd-Park connection, you'd have a Westchester-to-LI run with no Manhattan stop.
If the connection from GCT to Penn Station shares the tracks set up for the LIRR at GCT, you won't have a track connection from NJ to Westchester, either.
Not clear what the track layout for GCT-to-Penn would be. The RPA paper on it (see their website doesn't give details at that level.
What I presume to be your main point, that the POWER sources differ, is still entirely valid. But dual-power trains can be specified and built once trackage exists. Triple-power? (LIRR third rail, Metro North third rail, NJT catenary) Hmmmmmmmmmmmm ... ugh.
Again,
Actually, my point has nothing to do with power, although that is also an obstacle. My point is that what is proposed for the LIRR to GCT project will result in essentially two terminals, side by side, sharing one building but not having any track interconnections at all. In other words, it will be impossible for a train to come down the Park Avenue tunnel from the Bronx, reverse direction, and back out under 63rd Street to Long Island. The tracks that go to the Bronx will be entirely isolated from the tracks that go to Long Island.
It follows from the above that, if the Penn Station to GCT connection runs into the LIRR tracks at GCT, the only through route created will be from NJ to LI.
what is proposed for the LIRR to GCT project will result in essentially two terminals, side by side, sharing one building but not having any track interconnections at all. In other words, it will be impossible for a train to come down the Park Avenue tunnel from the Bronx, reverse direction, and back out under 63rd Street to Long Island.
I guess I'm a little surprised that there would be NO crossovers, though since the two RRs have two different electric power systems, only diesels could use both sets. I'd hope they'd at least build in openings for future crossovers.
But I don't see the use of your proposed route. It would be at least a 20-minute backtrack at best, and I can't imagine customer demand for such a route. Were you talking just about using that route for train storage?
It follows from the above that, if the Penn Station to GCT connection runs into the LIRR tracks at GCT, the only through route created will be from NJ to LI.
I have to imagine that in fact this limitation would require that the Penn-to-GCT connector would be run into the Metro North tracks intstead.
The official online map has been updated.
The error I had pointed out in the printed map -- meaningless "express" stations on the northern reaches of the 1 line -- has been corrected. I could mention that 14th Street/6th Avenue is now depicted incorrectly as an express station, but it doesn't really matter since there's no express service on 6th Avenue for another few years anyway.
You're technically incorrect - since 23rd Street is a local stop, express trains along 6th Av do skip one stop, allowing them to retain "express" status. In practical terms, though, you're right.
There are two local-only stops on 6th Avenue, 23 and 14.
But there has been no express service since 7/22, barring an occasional GO. The B and D terminate at 34. I don't know why a black dot wasn't used (since no expresses stop at 14/6), but at least a white dot won't lead anyone to ride a train that will bypass the station (since there's currently no express service on either line past that point).
I stand (or rather, sit) corrected. Forgot that little detail, focusing too much on themap itself.
So the only real express services on the 6th Av line are in the Bronx peak direction, and in Queens.
No, those are express services on the Concourse and Queens Boulevard lines, not the 6th Avenue line (although they're connected to one another by the D and F, respectively).
I was referring to the "route ownership," not to immediate geographic location, as you have surmised.
According to the map "express" E doesn't stop at 5th Avenue.
Arti
The E is only express in Queens. If the E only stopped at white-dotted stations in Manhattan, it would bypass Spring, 23, and 50 as well.
You want an error? Check out the area above East New York. A lot of Brooklynites are going to be surprised they live in Queens...
BTW, aren't they supposed to renaming all the ENY stations Broadway Junction? It doesn't show onthis map.
Good catch.
The Broadway Junction change is on the printed maps.
I think the MTA could learn a few things from Michael Adler. Two things I noted about the MTA map: 1) An interchange isn't always clear. At 161 St/Yankee Stadium one might surmise that the IND passes under the IRT but not necessarily with a station on the IND that connects. 2) Aqueduct Racetrack is once again omitted.
One think I like about the Adler map (among others) is the diamond within a box to denote the terminal of a diamond service.
The printed map lists Aqueduct Racetrack.
I'll be honest and say I haven't really been reading any of the new V and G service threads, but I thought the G was supposed to terminate at Court Sq. What's up with that?
Note that the G is a dotted line past Queens Plaza. It's going to cover the V route nights and weekends.
I think the G is actually going to go to 71st-Contintental more HOURS than it does now. It had been terminating at Court Square approximately the same off-hours that it will now be thru-routed.
There are errors on this map.
In addition, the schedule for the "G" links back to the "G" timetable from July.
"M" timetables also have not been updated.
As of last night (I haven't checked since), none of the schedules had been updated. The new strip maps are very nice, though.
Yes, they are. I just wish the TA would get on the ball and updated schedules that have been in effect for the past 5 months (M Line).
To be fair, the MTA has had a lot on its plate the last few months.
True, but from July to September which was nearly two months, the timetables could have been updated.
And I anxiously await the new 1/2/3 timetables. We West Siders have been in the dark about the details of our service since September.
Yes it is... & i did not even keep track of the date !!
damn it ....& i was going to enter this today on the last day !!!....lol !!!
LOL !!!
In my book...you are the West Coast winner. CI Peter
thankz ....
you know my dumb ass did not even keep track of the experation date of the contest !!!
lol !!
So what? Do you really think I'd put my employment at risk by submitting a pic of pigeons flying into a R142?? You make my trains look good! CI Peter
woah ! man !! how many droppings did they doo-doo...on the R-142s ...???....
lol !!!!
does anyone know when the winning pictures will be posted?
thats a good question ..
however I am looking foward to seeing all of the contest submissions !!
I do.
But they haven't been chosen yet. Give me a break ok?
-Dave
i was just curious.
Can we have access to all the contest entries? I would love to see all the wonderful pics submitted by SubTalkers.
I got over 700 submissions, I'm not putting them all up on the site. A lot of them, to be honest, had strange ideas of contest quality (I got a lot of blurry photos!) But I am choosing a winner and 6 runners-up in each category and those will be posted as soon as I get done selecting.
I got over 700 submissions, I'm not putting them all up on the site.
Dosen't Nycsubway.org have over 800,000 images?
Anyway, as I said, you can feel free to post my entries in any regular Nycsubway.org photo page that you see fit now or at any point in the future.
when can we see the submissions ?? thankz salaamallah...
I've been away for a number of days and have no hope in hell of catching up with so many thread I've missed ... I'll also be tied up for a few more days (for the first time in our software company's history we've had to replace ALL of our products, thank you, XPee) and have been busier than a one-legged standing kickboxer on the CPW dash trying to keep my "sea-legs" with the business the last few days ... just so's y'all know I haven't yanked the DC0 here. :)
Anyhoo ... as a breathing space during heavy workloads (which continue at the moment) I've been messing around with the BVE2 train simulator and have often made comments here about the N gauge layout on my desk that runs up to the bookcase on the other end of my office. I've been designing a BVE2-based layout of what's on my desk, running from "SONY Plaza" (TV set on the extreme right hand of my desk) to "Cliff City" which is the bookcase behind me including all track, yards, and three stops in between with my Japanese subway cars.
I'm resolving the model layout into something those who have Peecees here can actually RUN my layout, a two track line from "SONY Plaza" to "Cliff City" in the cab in BOTH DIRECTIONS plus a layup to the yards. The trains are based on the R68A with shunting, but for my fellow subtalkers, I've also added redbirds, a consist of R9's (of COURSE), some 32's although the mainline trains are all R68 in appearance. I've borrowed a lot of scenery from other BVE NYC subway layouts as well.
The FAVOR I need is I'd LIKE to add a consist of R10's to the yard layup and went looking for photos of the front end as well as the sides of the cars (SQUARE PERPENDICULAR front and sides) and all of the railfan photos I've found have been "perspective shots" and nothing at cab height dead-on front of an R10 from center of track nor have I found any pictures of R10's with a square side view, all in the aqua and turquoise paint scheme.
Does ANYBODY have an R10 nose-on and a square side view? Be happy to give you credit for the pictures in my freebie route release once it's done ... I have R36 redbirds, R32's, R68's and R1's (#100 was the glamour gurl) but would LIKE to be able to add an R10 to pass by in the Mouseville yards layup for the final build of the "Selkirk Subway"
I intend to offer soon for those using the BVE subway simulator that puts YOU in the cab ... hope to be done in a couple of weeks, bonus points for me if it's a Crispness gift. :)
Anybody got R10 pix that ain't on nycsubway.org with flat-on shots?
Wish? Did somebody say wish?
Your wish is granted (half of it, anyway). Long live Jombi.
BLESS YA! That was JUST what I was looking for! I'll borrow the palette from a color side shot and WOOWOO!
I wanted to add some R10 objects for the yards that will be passed in the BVE2 route I'm doing in both directions (I always wondered why NO route done for BVE has "out and back," just one way. But the R10's are for Steve and Mr. Padron should they want to play BVE and for several other folks here who are IND homeballs like myself. Each of the consists on the "Cliff City" line are four cars and so far, there's 32's, 36's, R1's and 68's laid up - this rounds out the collection a bit. And just for fun, I *am* planning on at least one smorgasbord consist for the routes.
THANKS, buddy! That's *JUST* what I was looking for. :)
We aim to please ;-)
BULLSEYE! Thanks again! When I have some time next week, plan to finish up this BVE treat and make it available since it'll be pretty much an "other side of subtalk" special ... on the "layup" run, there's even an opportunity for people to emulate my Coney Island Yard layup and crunch metal ala Heypaul's submission for this project. :)
Anyone who has BVE will get a kick out of this realization of my own desktop layout and since there's shit for models of NYC subway cars in N gauge, the BVE sim is better than the real thing surrounding me here in my office. What should have been a nice simple four station layout has turned into an obsession ... heh.
I've finished the rendering of what you sent along with what I had and it came out QUITE nice ... THANKS AGAIN!
If you'd like to see what I did with that shot you posted, a cab view of the R10's laid up at "Mouseville" station can be seen here:
R10's and R32's in yard from upcoming BVE layout in progress
KEWL!
Also, that's kind of amazing. I don't know anything about this BVE stuff. Where do I learn about it?
Good place to start is http://mackoy.cool.ne.jp/ which is the source for the program itself as well as starter routes. The page is entirely in Japanese and Mackoy doesn't speak any English. However, it can be translated with Altavista's site and there's links for "English speaker's page" ... BVE is BETTER than Microsoft's "Train simulator" as it incorporates textures, has actual MOTION of the car and proper dynamics. MSTS on the other hand is a more "plastic" experience, acceptable to those who have never been in a cab perhaps. BVE on the other hand has all the motion aspects (rocking, rolling, yaw, etc) that those of us who have been on moving trains expect.
It's VERY nice. There's also a site www.crotrainz.com which tracks new stuff happening in the BVE world - that's where I expect to make my own route available when it's done ... but yeah, that's YOUR R10 nose on the front ... colorized to match the sides ... took only about a half hour ... the "R10 object" will be available in my own package free for others to use in their routes along with R1 #100 and a few other diddles I did ... the IND will be adequately represented in the BVE world - but NOT in MSTS ... I deleted the copy I had as I considered MSTS to be "lame" ... I'm sticking with BVE.
Love that R-10 paint scheme. Suddenly, it's 1967 all over again.
Ain't no "war between the states" paint in MY yards. :)
And besides, isn't that the "A train" everybody remembers? Any other warpaint would be blasphemy. Can't wait to release the BVE route for everyone who wants to sit in the cab and run the train both ways - "Mouseville" is one of the most boring stretches of the run ... My wife is going to record the station announcements and the required "doorbell" for giggles ... we're having a blast building this thing.
And thanks again to Paul Matus for that WONDERFUL nose shot ... made the R10's look cool. We have a Branford shot of 1689 for the nose of the R1/9's which outnumber R10's 2 to 1 on the route ...
BRing in the Graff man, bring in the graff
Heh. Send me an email address and I'll send you some BMP files of the car sides ... why the F not have a car or two in the yard all tagged up for nostalgia's sake? Only problem is the artwork is 128 pixels in height and 1024 pixels from side to side. Doesn't allow for a lot of detail, but if you're game, why not? :)
crazy10seven@msn.com Il ldo it, some throwies should make em ugli enough to NOSTALGIZEEEEE
Deal ... will see about sending them later or in the morning - gots me a facefull of customeros at the moment ... but will send them along. No joke. Would like to see what you can do with them. The "panels" make up one car each, and the sim trains are four cars each so if you wanna do a whole consist, pick something and make four duplicates ... I'll take this to email and if there's some pretty stuff you can toss up, be happy to include it in one of the routes for the final package ... it's a BVE thing ... snagged the email address, will be back at ya ...
Well, those of us who are old enough to remember the racing stripe scheme can say that.:-) That paint job was so cool. That's what the R-10s wore when I became an A fan for life. Of course, the R-1/9s were still moaning and groaning when I became a D fan...
I was amazed at how nicely it came out - the nose shot was a nice high resolution MONOCHROME pic, and the side whot was a poor quality JPG that required a LOT of editing and had miserable color. Ended up cheating and reducing the side shot to monochrome and then colorized both to match. THAT worked ... I rode the A train for years when I lived over on 230th near Broadway so to me, that was ALWAYS the right color. That gray and blue was an anathma - fortunately I didn't see much of that on the R1/9'ers ... I pity the folks on the BMT eastern division who probably thought they were SHIPPED in that paint. :)
Not too many R-7/9s got the silver-and-blue treatment. I never saw one like that in revenue servise.
I don't remember ANY on the D or CC until years later. And it looked DAMN WEIRD ...
But Paul, I don't see heypaul in the cab. What gives?
BMTman
It's an R10 Cab.
I realize that. Just thought he might've done a trade-in for a newer model...
BMTman
Not to worry ... we've CLONED Heypaul and every R1 has Heypaul in the cab. And, if I don't run out of yard space, I *am* hoping to also throw together a couple of gate cars laid up as well, perhaps one of them with a crunched front end. Guess who's going to be waving from THAT cab? (and it AIN'T gonna be "tower guy") ... heh.
Oooooh, Noooooo!
And unca Dougie will have that big "howdy" smile as seen out of the cab window of 1227. No sheep is safe tonight. :)
Man, is that a sight for sore eyes! I'd do anything to see a train of those speedsters pulling into 59th St. northbound again, getting ready for a thundering express dash up CPW....
Isn't that a GREAT picture though? Didya see what i did with it in the reply message with the screenshot of the BVE route I'm building? And heh ... SeVeN offered to tag some up - I just might do it for the historical value - there's still some layup room in the yards. :)
No, please. No graffiti. There was no epidemic in the days of the racing stripe scheme.
What I'm building is a route based on the layout here in my office, a four stop, two track route between the SONY TV set on the left side of my desk up to "Cliff City" which is up on a bookshelf in the back of the office. It'll have a run out to the bookshelf AND a run back from the bookshelf to the SONY plus a "layup to the yards" route. No big thang adding a fourth route which includes tagged cars if someone wants to do the artwork (I'm awful at artwork) ... if tagged cars bothers ya, and if someone does the artwork for the fourth route, one can choose to not play it. The route files are small compared to everything else.
There was a route for the old Mechanik train sim that included a number of cars tagged with grafitti in one of the underground stops and frankly, it did make me a bit nostalgic. But no, no obligation on my part to provide it for the main routes of course, though it might be a kick for a few ... maybe not. Choice. :)
NO GRAFFITI? MORE GAFFITI
You know ill be there, hey you want me to make a real life counterpart?
No now, bro ... we don't wanna have to come downtown to bail out yer skeevy butt. Heh. But if you'd like to do some Windows BMP art, be happy to send you the original graphics and have you "spray it" ... been working on the route some more tonight and I'm serious if you wanna tag up some R32, R32, R68, R1 and R10 ... drop me an email addy and I'd be happy to send you the flat art that the 3D cars are made from. It'll be a challenge though with such low resolution, but a true artiste can "work it" ... the scenery's outdoor like and if you're game, these'd be sitting in a yard scenery ...
"Anybody got R10 pix that ain't on nycsubway.org with flat-on shots?"
Paging William (Mr.R-10) Padron !!
Bill "Newkirk"
Is the V train running today or tomorrow?
No V on weekends.
So no V today, yes V tomorrow.
According to MTA, the (1) train only operates to Chambers Street after 23:00. According to the track map, how can it terminate at Chambers, since the (2) have to use the inner track to proceed into Brooklyn? Besides, if they used the Southbound (South Ferry Branch) track as the terminus of (1) after 23:00, it can't go back to the local tracks until it passes 14th Street Station.
The lighter schedules after 23:00 allows for enough time to use the middle tracks to switch the 1 without causing any major delays for the 2. During other times, service frequency is too often to allow that to happen.
Meaning the terminating (1) trains at Chambers will switch to the Northbound inner tracks before entering Chambers Station?
Look I said this before and I'll say it again. The No.1 comes in on the Downtown Express track at Chambers. Then the T/O changes ends or drops back and the train goes back Local switching from TK 2 (Downtown Exp TK) to TK 4 (Uptown Local Track). Sometimes it comes into Chambers on the Downtown Local like tonight do to the No.2 Train single tracking from Wall Street to Chambers. In that case the No.1 goes back uptown but Express to 14 Street and then back to running local.
I got a ride on SEPTA PCC 2732 on Saturday and after 10 years of riding LRV's exclusively, I noticed the rather hard ride of the PCC's on street trackage. It was bumpy and had a grating sound. Has anyone noticed the difference between PCC's and LRV's.
>>> Has anyone noticed the difference between PCC's and LRV's. <<<
SHH! Don't let out the dirty little secret that all of us who want to turn back the clock and gush about the PCCs and the R-10s and Standards know in our inner hearts. The newer equipment is wore comfortable, and efficient. I had a chance to ride a PCC in San Francisco recently, and although I enjoyed the ride, it was uncomfortable. For a daily commute, I would choose their modern LRVs.
Tom
excuse me posted response in wrong place--belongs here
If any of the current LRV's run half as well at age 5o plus I'll be amazed. see the SF Muni website for DBF for each group.
I strongly suspect that the riding qualities of the older equipment were a large factor behind the well upholstered seats in them.
Anyways, I never had a problem with PCCs being uncomfortable compared to the LRVs, however I'm comparing TTC PCCs against CLRVs and ALRVs. The TTC PCCs had rather generously padded seats, and the CLRV type seats installed in the A15 rebuilds had reasonably good cushions as well and I never found the PCCs uncomfortable. At the time, I even found them more comfortable than the CLRVs which frequently had capacitors in various electronic systems that made an earsplitting extremely high pitched whistling sound, a problem that simply didn't occur on PCCs because of their different equipment.
If we were to compare Boston PCCs in their later days on the green line to the newer LRVs of various types, the LRVs probably are more comfortable because their suspension is better than the PCCs, and the PCCs didn't have cushioned seats to make up for it either. If I remember correctly, all of the green line PCCs I rode on (1984ish) had horrible plastic seats and you'd feel every bump in the tracks but the LRVs with the better suspension did much better.
-Robert King
>>> I never had a problem with PCCs being uncomfortable <<<
My main problem with the PCCs in San Francisco (I think I was on a former Boston car) was with the leg room between seats. I found myself sitting sideways on the single seats on the left side of the car to have a place for my legs. Added to that was the small windows with no air conditioning. The smoothness of the ride was not a big factor.
Tom
Do they have any Boston PCCs there? I'm honestly not familiar with the who's who of their PCC fleet at all, I thought they only had a handful of original Muni PCCs, mostly used Philadelphia PCCs and a St. Louis PCC.
The TTC PCCs that were around when I was growing up had adequate ventillation via the windows which opened up around 2/3 of the way on the cars with the crank windows, and all the way on the 4500s (those which were rebuilt were subsequently renumbered in the low 4600s). You won't find many air conditioned PCCs...
Legroom wasn't a problem then! These days I need to sit at a slight angle to fit in, which is the same on the LRVs.
-Robert King
They don't have any Boston cars. He probably meant car 1059,
an ex-Philly car painted up in Boston colors.
>>> He probably meant car 1059, an ex-Philly car painted up in Boston colors. <<<
You are correct. I must have misunderstood the plaque inside the car which identified the Boston livery.
Tom
Standard PCC seat pitch (spacing between a set point on the seats) on the forward facing seats is 28-1/2". There is not alot you can do about that - the seats are spaced to the window posts on the postwar cars. There are aisle facing seats on many arrangements.
Economy class seats on narrow body aircraft are typically spaced 30"-32". In europe configurations, I have seen 28", but only on shuttle aircraft.
The original seat design has the seat back with the padding very thin at the bottom, so there was some consideration for legroom.
I don't think many people in the late 40's had air conditioning in anything, even Caddys and Lincolns did not have workable a/c into the early 50's.
Luxury-liners PCC's were not. For the day they were the best we had, and for several decades after too.
From my experience, PCC's were hard-riding, especially on special work. They did have the rubber, bellows, dampers, etc to make the ride smoother but when I first rode and noticed this the newest ones in Phila were over 25 years old. Motormen would tell stories about how hard-riding they were despite all the rubber, dampers, etc. I have also been told that the rigging on the trucks (mag brake, etc) moved around a bit and contributed to this. I don't know all the details.
I don't think cushioned seats were designed to compensate for the ride. Most of the older cars in Phila had either rattan or wooden slat seats. The Witts and double-end '23 cars that were rehabbed got leather upholstery because that was the trend of the times. The old streetcar companies cared little about comfort (who had any alternatives back then?) and more about moving masses of people, and rattan/wood was easy to care for. When riders began to have options, things had to be done to make the transit option more attractive. (This is about the same time that car interior lighting changed from a string of bare bulbs to focused fixtures.)
And electric heating was added too...
-Robert King
The PRT/PTC older cars always had electric heat, but there were restrictions all over the system as to how much could be used. Numbers were painted on line poles indicating whether levels 1, 2 or 3 could be used (3 being the highest). As I've been told, in Center City and other busy areas, anything higher than 1 would draw too much current and basically bring things to a crawl.
PCC's, on the other hand, were well-heated, but this was due to the venting of motor heat through the car. It didn't work very well in the summer - PCC's could be real sweatboxes.
I strongly suspect that the riding qualities of the older equipment were a large factor behind the well upholstered seats in them.
Not really. If you ever have the chance to come to Philly when they have a fantrip involving 8534 (the Peter Witt) and a PCC car, ride both while standing, and then tell me which one rides more smoothly, especially over switches and other rough track. (Hint: it ain't the Witt.)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I've been on Witt cars in Toronto a few times so I can compare them.
They really crash over streetcar intersections hence well upholstered seating to even it out for sitting passengers. That's the point I was trying to make. PCCs are smoother and CLRVs are the smoothest and the thickness of the seat cushions decreases accordingly.
-Robert King
Well, the upholstered seats really aren't indicative of ride quality. Philly 8534 has wooden seats :-) The PCCs had nicer seats because the riding public of the 1930s and 1940s wanted something nicer than what they had previously had, and for most transit systems adding upholstered seats was a step up... and, of course, in the '30s and '40s we didn't have the vandalism problem that often plagues transit today.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
True, but if the public complains enough they can be the result of ride quality: the leather sofas (the cushions are huge leather covered ones) in the Toronto Witt cars came about in a modernisation program in the late 1930s shortly before/when the PCCs arrived. The TTC Peter Witt cars originally had wooden seats, too. Having he huge cushions does help...
-Robert King
I have recently downloaded the 12/16 map and I have found a few mistakes(Little if any)
1.57 street 7 Avenue isn't seen as an express station
2.The M is a diamond after Broad Street.
Thats pretty much it.
Is the 12/16 map on the MTA website? I don't see it.
Go to the "maps" section, it's there, it takes a while to find and download (it's a big file, and you need Acrobat Reader.
I don't see anything but.
The online map isn't identical to the printed map, though.
The QB Routes are not in Alphabetical order from 36 st to Forest Hill 71 Ave. Its shows E F R V G instead of E F G R V.
That's deliberate, since the G doesn't run there weekdays. Perhaps it should have been put in parentheses.
This morning i spotted either a 4 or 6 car S shuttle at w4th, heading for grand st. I was a bit surprised by this as i hear it might be extended, but didn't know they were actually going to do it.
anywho - it is up and running, consisting of a short train of R46's, with the orange 'S' on the roll signs instead of just 'shuttle' as the 'old' grand st. shuttle had... it was around 7am, so i suppose it started at midnight.
Four R46's, with two T/O on C/R.
Robert
No C/R
Robert
Are you saying they use 2 trains of R46 cars, 4 cars to a train? OPTO with a t/o on each end?
That is correct. There are now two Grand Street shuttle trains.
Both trains now use the southbound track at Grand and B-L. Northbound trains then cross to the northbound track at W4 and relay north of the station. The two shuttles meet in the station at W4.
Wow so there are two shuttle trains. I may once again use the IND to get down to Chinatown, with an F or V to W4th and get the shuttle to Grand. And since Chinatown south of Canal is starting to fall apart, it's good to know service to the still relatively busy northern part will improve.
I don't know how headways compare. We'll see when the timetables are posted. (I saved copies of the old timetables.)
A good number of passengers took advantage of the route extension today. If nothing else, it makes for a cross-platform connection to/from the F/V in either direction.
One downside is that, if you arrive at B-L and a shuttle is already in the station, you have no way of knowing which way it's going. If you're going to Grand and it's going to W4, you'll have to run up and over pretty fast to catch the first train out of W4.
Not everyone has figured it out yet. I saw one passenger on the train as it pulled out for its relay. (No, the T/O's didn't bother to check the train before relaying.)
Incidentally, this means that the dash (which has been used on an occasional D GO) is, for all intents and purposes, out of commission until 2004.
And just to show what happens when people make blanket generalities here:
This morning (Monday), I came through the dash southbound, and after playing "loop the train", went through it again northbound (and probably scared the life out of some poor TO on the D).
I give up. What's the dash? I've looked at the track map and still can't figure out what this is all about.
A nickname for the 6th Avenue express tracks.
The southbound express track from 34th to W. 4th, specifically.
What route were you operating? Why were you sent through the dash? Were any B's, D's, or shuttles in your way?
I didn't mean that the dash would absolutely never be used -- only that it was unlikely that it would be used for scheduled GO's and such.
As indicated in the New 12/16 Map The Grand St Shuttle extended to West 4.
just got the latest hotline from NJ-ARP (NJ association of Rail Passengers.)
1- Additional entrances within 12 months at Grove, Christopher, 9th.
2- They too mentioned PATH will be taking MetroCard but said also that the NYCT will be using smart cards also.
Has anybody got any info on NYCT using smartcards? As usual they gave us no info.
Yay, more government tracking devices.
Wait until they stop selling tokens and make you show a photo ID to buy a Metrocard.
Since photo ID isn't a requirement for subway riders (nor is it ubiquitous among New Yorkers, many of whom don't drive), I'm not terribly concerned.
It will be interesting to see where the new entrances go, especially at Ninth St., where they have to work any new pedestrian tunnels around the A/C/E Eighth Ave. tracks one level above PATH.
I'm pretty sure the westbound end of 9th is clear of the subway - waiting at that end, all of the rumble of passing trains is from the center of the station to the eastbound end. If I get bored later I'll pull out my drawings and see exactly where the west end of that station is located, street-wise.
It'll have to be at the south-west end of the station, if at all - the current entrance to 9th Street is at the north-east end, right at 6th Avenue. They'll probably put it mid-block.
wayne
Logicially that's where it should be put, but locating it mid-block on Christopher St. seems to be a potential NIMBY suit in the making.
If the MTA and PA could get together, the ideal new entrance/exit there would actually be directly into the IND West Fourth St. station, with a fare control barrier between the two. That would allow passengers from New Jersey to transfer to and from the A/C/E to go downtown without having to go outside and then down the street to the IND entrance, though due to the layout of the tracks turning onto Greenwich Ave., it would be easier to run the stairway from the PATH platform down to the Sixth Ave. tracks than upstairs to the Eighth Ave. ones.
Ypu have a point, though in this post-disaster period NIMBY may be a bit muted. But your plan makes sense.
Ypu have a point, though in this post-disaster period NIMBY may be a bit muted. But your plan makes sense.
Plan does make sense. NIMBYs are probably endemic in Greenwich Village, especially since (I believe) that's part of the Historic District.
BUT ... the sidewalks on that block of Christopher are exceptionally narrow AND crowded, with both basement access stairs AND large tree pits. Hard to imagine being able to put a staircase in there at all.
However, I think I read somewhere that the owner of the small "taxpayer" properties on the SW corner (between Sixth and Christopher) has filed plans to build an apartment building there.
It would be too much, I supppose, for the PA and the TA to negotiate with him to include the necessary entrances and construction in his plans ... ... or would it?
We bash them all the time here on Subtalk. But I think something will be worked out...
and maybe, just maybe we can gut the fare barrier between the two systems! The News article mentioned metrocard accepting fare gates for PATH.
At either Christopher or 9th, isn't there an abandoned entrance beyond the steel doors at the opposide end of the platform from the main entrance?
And will they need to make the stations ADA compatible?
I don't know about Christopher or 9th Street; but, IIRC, I have read that there is a blocked off entrance at Grove.
All of H&M's entrances in Manhattan output directly into stores. Rumor had it this was very good for business in these stores.
Since none of the PATH entrances in Midtown go into stores anymore, (well there's that one at 32nd-33rd) yes, there definitely are sealed off entrances.
The 14th St. uptown exit is in a building. Of course, the arrangements at the 6th Ave stations changed when the IND came through.
I doubt there's another exit at the west end of 9th St, since there is just the closet room and then there's an abandoned half-crossover just past the station - those would have to be some pretty steep steps! There is a closed-off passageway at 9th, though - it is easiest to see it on your right as you exit through the passageway. When the passageway jogs to the left, there is a blocked-up arch to the right which would have led to the Astor Place Extension platforms. BTW, I also believe the current 9th St. entrance isn't the original building.
I don't know about Christopher St.
Grove has another exit at the east end, converted to a storage area for the station cleaners to loaf/smoke in.
The 14th St. uptown exit is in a building. Of course, the arrangements at the 6th Ave stations changed when the IND came through.
The uptown exit is in a turn-of-the-century building that was a department store at the time. It now exits to the street, but not clear that it was originally designed that way. The building was converted to offices once the big department stores moved uptown, and has just completed another conversion to expensive condo apartments. The downtown exit is just an opening in the street.
I also believe the current 9th St. entrance isn't the original building.
That's correct. It's a single entrance from the street, housed within a 1960s apartment building on the NE corner of Sixth & 9th. Hard to imagine that site ever held a store, though. If it did it was bound to have been a small store (only a few stories).
I don't know about Christopher St.
Still in its original -- and fairly majestic -- building. Now with loooooooooong lines outside it.
To be fair, this was also a mistake on the previuos map.
The service guide says about the J line -- "Middays: All stops in Queens and Manhattan; express stops in Brooklyn from Jamaica Center, Queens, to Broad St., Manhattan." Well, the map shows the following as Express stops in Brooklyn -- Crescent, Bway Junction, Myrtle amd Marcy. (That is, the stops before Myrtle that both the J and Z stop at are shown as express.) But the J makes ALL STOPS between Jam. Center and Myrtle middays when the Z isn't running. It should really say --"all stops in Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn", then continue (as it does) to say it skips local stops from Myrtle to Marcy in peak direction.
Some R-46 A-A Sets are now together becoming a A-A-A-A Sets with a A-B-B-A Sets. Some of them where running the R and F Lines today. Here's the ones I saw running with a A-B-B-A Set.
F Line 6222-6620-6230-6232. And R Line 6246-6244-6210-6212. All of them where with a A-B-B-A Set. Are they putting some A-A Set with anouther A-A Set then put it with a A-B-B-A Set? Is this also part of the NEW Service Plan?
Purpose of this? Are there not enough "B" cars to go around? Are the "B" cars stored in theyard when trains are shorter?
AA sets were the late 1000 series(late 6000series now) and were not built with B cars, one of the A wcars was wrecked, and replaced by a b car
Actually the extra A cars were purchased for the JFK express which ran in A-B-A consists. The original R-46 purchase was 390 A cars and 364 B cars. Currently there are:
181 A-B-B-A units 72
1 A-B Unit
13 A-A Units
The one A-B unit in existence happened because 2 R-46s (cars 1054 and 941) were destroyed in a collision in 1986. Otherwise there would be 190 4-car units.
Many thanks.
"1 A-B Unit"
Do you know what those numbers are and what line this oddball set runs ?
"Bill Newkirk"
They are just part of the pool. In the old days when the G had 6 cars (2 days ago!!!) the consist would be AB (6206-07), then ABBA. (6207 is the only B car that does not have a link bar at both ends.) Therefore, there was only one conductor position, he would operate backwards toward Continental. Should these cars be found on the G or Grand St, shuttle today, it would be ABAA (two 2 car units). If part of an 8 car train, add them to AAAA or ABBA.
Did he have a rear-view mirror?
Collision in 1986? I can't recall an accident that severe, but my memory may be sketchy.
"Train Dude" is right. It happened in the layup area past the 179th Street station. A Train Operator had a fatal heart attack and collapsed in such a way as to defeat the "deadman" feature of the controller.
David
I was sure he was right, just that I couldn't remember such an incident.
I was there that Friday night and into Saturday AM. Apparently, while moving to the lower level behind 179th St. the motorman of the E train had a stroke or heart attack. He slumped foward, pushing the master controller handle up into 3rd point. The train hit the bumping block and wall. The Cab was pushed back to the first door opening. Extracating the motorman took several hours as the fire dept. has to cut the stainles with gasoline powered saws. The people at jay St. were reluctant to turn on the fans at 184th St. - either that or they didn't work.
There were 3 skells on the train who actually slept through it. Amazingle enough, we pulled 6 cars out with a diesel and once onthe 3rd rail, we were able to establishP-Wire and move the 6, under their own power, back to Jamaica yard. 941 and 1054 were brought back to Jamaica yard on Saturday night and Sunday respectively.
Those cars remained in Jamaica yard until they were sold to M&K in 1991. Car 941 was cut into a 25' car and was burn in a furnace in November 1991 in Buffalo, NY where we tested the flooring for heat resistance. 1054 was cut up for stainless steel patches used during the overhaul. I have the number boards from both cars.
This accident happened recently?
I saw an A and B car coupled to two A cars on the R line 2 days ago. I think these were the make ups from the 6 car G trains.
1986 - recently is relative.
Do you have any pics of 941 in the furnace?
How does an A-B unit live? Wouldn't the train not start?
Actually the extra A cars were purchased for the JFK express which ran in A-B-A consists. The original R-46 purchase was 390 A cars and 364 B cars. Currently there are:
181 A-B-B-A units 72
1 A-B Unit
13 A-A Units
The one A-B unit in existence happened because 2 R-46s (cars 1054 and 941) were destroyed in a collision in 1986. Otherwise there would be 182 4-car units and no A-B units.
How many were there?
of the JFK units
At the time the JFK ran, R-46s were single units so virtually any number was possible but there were 364 B cars and 390 A cars in the original order.
were the R44s also single units?
Originally the R-44s and R-46s were single units. In the mid 8os, the R-46 were linked into A-B units. They were hard-wired and hard-piped to cut down on P-Wire failures due to the side-slung electric portions. Both were made into 4-car units during the GOH between 1990 and 1992.
could R44s and R46s run together in service then?
No! The air brake systems were not compatible. To this day, they are still incompatible - even more so today. While the R-46s now use a feed valve and regulate brakepipe air at 110 PSI, the R-44 does not and Brakepipe air is between 135 and 150 PSI. However, because the Ohio Brass & Waugh type couplers are essentially the same, they can be moved iron-to-iron.
But f they arecoupled together it would be only for situations where a dead R-44 needed to be pulled to the yard by an R-46, or vice-versa, right?
We don't pull. We always push but otherwise, that's correct.
Thank you.
Why were the R-44 and the R-46 types made incompatible? did it not occur to the design guys that they just might have to work together in case of an emergency situation? They are in the same subway system, and the tracks do connect, so what gives?
That's a good question. They were both anticipated for use on the high-speed P-wired Second Av subway and 63rd St super express bypass line to Forest Hills.
The changes on the R-46 were in response to R-44 limitations. Pullman-Standard did a much better job of systems integration, and as a result, the R-46 did much better with maintenance and performance (with the notable exception of Rockwell's lightweight trucks). Once truck problems were resolved (1,548 new trucks were ordered by 1983), the R46 did quite nicely.
What does high speed P-wired mean in relation to the Second Avenue subway? Was (is) the second avenue line suppose to run at faster speeds? Since it is now suppose to be all local, that doesn't make too much sense.
High speed P-wired means that once again, Ron is talking about something he has not the foggiest notion about. There is, there never was and unless he invents it, there never will be anything called high speed P-wire.
P-wire is a method of controlling a train's braking electrically - analogous to the straight air system used on NYCT cars. Originally, it was used on R-44 and R-46 equipment only but was removed in 1990 -92 in favor os a straight air system.
In the current system, brake effort is proportional to the straight air as controlled by the operator. 80 PSI is = to a full service brake and 0 PSI = full release. In the P-Wire system an electrical loop was established from the operating cab to the rear of the train and back. A P-wire current was sent continuously through the loop. At 1 amp the brakes were fully released and at 0.1 amp you had a full service brake. Any disruption of the loop, anywhere in the T/Line circuit meant a stuck brake condition. LIRR still maintains the P-Wire control of braking.
I hope this helps to clarify any confusion generated by Ron's mis-informed post.
I agree that my sentence construction was a bit confusing. I understood very clearly what a P-wire was. I also understood that the purpose of the P-wire was automated train control, directed to the braking system.
This was intended to go hand in hand with a subway line that would have operated at a much higher speed than existing lines. The TA correctly anticipated the need for a P-wire in such an environment. Unfortunately, when the line wasn't built, the immediate perceived need for the P-wire disappeared too - though it would still be useful, I think, in places like Central Park West and even Queens Boulevard.
You explained the P-wire itself very well, Train Dude, but with all your energy focused on trying to insult me in the course of explaining it, you forgot to place the P-wire in its proper historical context.
Since P-wire is used on conventional rail equipment around the world, the historical context, as you put it, is not significant. P-wire would and does stand alone with out automatic train control as in the case of the LIRR.
As for the alleged energy expended insulting you, might I point out, an insult can only be taken - it can't be given. In fairness, I was only pointing out the glaring errors in your response. Besides, I don't look at it as energy expended. You make it so easy.
"Since P-wire is used on conventional rail equipment around the world, the historical context, as you put it, is not significant."
Not true. It is very significant in New York. The Second Av subway, the R-44/46, and the P-wire use HERE were closely tied together. When the subway project was cancelled, the P-wire was doomed as well. There are many who point to that as a (failed) test of NYCTA's commitment to improving technology in the subway.
It is certainly true that other railroads/transit systems use technology which NYCT does not use. Your example of LIRR points that out.
P-wire would and does stand alone with out automatic train control as in the case of the LIRR.
"As for the alleged energy expended insulting you, might I point out, an insult can only be taken - it can't be given."
I don't care what you post, really. But you missed an opportunity to flesh out a very good technical post - and your reply, illustrated above, indicates that you may not have the self-insight required to understand why.
As for the P-wire issue, it was only significant as one of the technologies that UMTA mandated as a condition for funding for the R-44 and R-46. This despite what the subway historians now say. The actual ATO equipment - key to the 2nd Avenue program was so unreliable and failure prone, that it was removed within 2-3 years of the delivery of the R-46s. The P-wire remained for a decade and a half with the cars permanently relegated to 'wayside manual' mode. The ATO program was such a dismal failure that the 'father' of the R-46 ATO was transferred from the Signal Dept. to car equipment just to keep the cars running through dozens of modifications. He left the NYCT once the cars went out to overhaul.
As to the relative quality of my reply to you, since you have no demonstrable expertise in either field, I'll assume that we should take what you have to say with a grain of salt.
"As for the P-wire issue, it was only significant as one of the technologies that UMTA mandated as a condition for funding for
the R-44 and R-46. This despite what the subway historians now say."
You're entitled to that opinion, and while I disagree with you, there are others who would not.
"The actual ATO equipment - key to the 2nd Avenue
program was so unreliable and failure prone, that it was removed within 2-3 years of the delivery of the R-46s. The P-wire
remained for a decade and a half with the cars permanently relegated to 'wayside manual' mode. The ATO program was such
a dismal failure that the 'father' of the R-46 ATO was transferred from the Signal Dept. to car equipment just to keep the cars
running through dozens of modifications. He left the NYCT once the cars went out to overhaul."
Isn't that a shame? It had something to offer. Too bad we couldn't take advantage of it. Water under the bridge now, but a useful lesson to learn...
"As to the relative quality of my reply to you, since you have no demonstrable expertise in either field, I'll assume that we should
take what you have to say with a grain of salt."
Gee, why didn't you tell me all this before the thread got started? That way, I wouldn't have put my 5 years experience as an attending physician to waste. Not to mention the 9 years of training working with, among other things, adolescents and adults in psychiatric, ED and prison settings.
So no, I don't recognize an adolescent response when I see one.
All that training, and you still seem to "lose your cool" just like the rest of us.
You're right; I'm human. I could have let the whole thread go. Maybe should have.
A mental note for next time.
"Gee, why didn't you tell me all this before the thread got started? That way, I wouldn't have put my 5 years experience as an attending physician to waste. Not to mention the 9 years of training working with, among other things, adolescents and adults in psychiatric, ED and prison settings."
Tell you what Dr. Ron. It's obvious that you outclass me in the education department so before you really dig in your heels and publicly embarrass me I'm going to gracefully bow out of this mindless prattle. It's just nice to know that when push came to shove, with all your education and training, it was you that engaged in the name calling. But since this thread might just have something to offer to others here, I want to stop the feud before Dave kills this thread, also. Therefore, I'm going to take the high ground and stop pointing out your errors. I'll hold my tongue until you post something that's correct and then point that out. If nothing else, it'll leave me much more time.
By the way, were you the Dr. Ron that lived in Glen Oaks?
"By the way, were you the Dr. Ron that lived in Glen Oaks?"
As a matter of fact, yes, during residency training. This was before I began posting on the Subtalk board.
Of course I cannot claim automatically to be the only one with that first name who lived in Glen Oaks.
Did, or do, you you live in Glen Oaks?
I'm referring to the early 70s
I see. I was there up to 1996 - then moved on to fellowship training.
The one I'm referring to was there from the early 70s and was a resident at LIJ.
"The one I'm referring to was there from the early 70s and was a resident at LIJ."
So was I. You do realize that one of the garden apartment complexes off of Union Turnpike behind the hospital belongs to LIJ. LIJ was my landlord for 3 years.
LIJ maintains it for resident housing.
Okay, I'm sorry that I may not being clear. I'm referring to a resident who lived on 77th Crescent in Glen Oaks proper in the early 70s.
No problem.
That would have been before they built Schneider Children's Hospital (with a chunk of Irving Schneider's money - the guy who was partnered with Helmsley-Spears) on 76th Avenue and 269th Street. I think LIJ Hospital had one or two floors set aside for pediatric services at the time.
Helmsley Spear had a minor partnership with IS. His office was at 60 E. 42nd, 53rd Floor.
Harry B. Helmsley, Helmsley-Spear, Helmsley-Noyes, Charles F. Noyes, Harley Hotels, Deco and Helmsley-Greenfield gave HUGS amounts of money to numerous hospitals..far too many to mention.
While H/S was in it's heyday, I acted as Building Manager to some class "A" towers.
Thanks for bringing up a lost, but not forgotten great person.
Did you ever help manage the Empire State Building?
Yes for a while under Steven Tole, General Manager, then I was needed in the Financial District.
The building 350 Fifth Avenue (E/S) is the only one still under Helmsley Enterprises' control.
I think P wire could have been made to work. The biggest
problem was those side-mounted electric portions. Of course,
the entire system was designed and built in the bad old days of
the 1970s when the industry was first learning about the use of
electronics in the railway environment and also when quality
control wasn't as good. The TA failed to adequately test the
new technology before ordering hundreds of cars and scrapping
hundreds of older cars.
With the "new tech" program (R110, R142) the TA set out to make
sure that the R44/46 mistake wouldn't be repeated. Umm, I better
quit while I'm ahead.
The R-142 isn't entirely new (it is new to the TA, of course). Bombardier sold similar equipment to MBTA's Red Line. I rode it, and liked it (though occasionally the canned station announcements were off by one stop).
P-Wire was definitely viable. of course the conventional wisdom blamed the side-slung E/Ps for the P-Wire problem. We added the redundent P-Wire loop and still had problems. The batteries were partly to blame. I remeber many a train limping back to jamaica Yard witht he ML and 22 breakers off (That's main lights and headlights). But we finally figured out that it was not the portion causing the problem. It turned out to be lack of maintenance - lubrication of the hook pin to be specific. The hook pin had a brass bushing that would wear due to lack of grease. This added just enough play to the hooks to cause the E/Ps to lose contact - especially on curves. Simply loosening the pin and rotating it 180 degrees would buy several trouble-free months on that car. Alas the side-slung portions are gone but the worn hook pins still exist. - Something MK neglected during the overhaul.
Yeah but the extra P-wire loop helped out a lot, didn't it?
Something you said about the coupler confused me. I thought
the couplers were replaced with an equivalent model during GOH?
Do you mean the same heads are still on the cars with the worn
bushings, or that the new heads developed the same problem?
Did those old e-p's have half of the pins stationary and half
that turn as you push them in like the older WABCO BL26
and (uh, what's the number for those 4-row portions?) have?
I'm still a big fan of H2C couplers. I understand the reasoning
behind abandoning it in favor of more modern designs, but there's
never been another coupler as rugged and suited to the harsh
conditions on the NYCTS.
The only couplers that were replaced were the ones that failed the face contour no-go gauge. If they failed the 305 Hook gauge, the hook or the hook pin bushing was replaced. What do you want for $495,000 per car. The couplers that passed both gauges were re-installed without any consideration to the remaining life of the hook-pin bushing. If you can visualize the vertical pin that passed through the coupler head - holding the hook in place, you can see why that pin bushing was and still is so critical. BTW. the coupler height adjuster springs were not addressed on overhaul either.
On the E/P, we had the quarter turn cranks, if you remember. I believe all pins retracted and advanced on both sides. Geez, this sounds like ancient history.
The real fiasco was when Timken changed the design of the high speed pinion bearing from 19 rollers to 20. Maintaining the same size bearing, the cage was naturally made smaller. We'll save the rest of the story for another thread.
I wasn't directly involved in the R46 GOH. I remember having
an argument with the engineer in charge about those new
cineston-style master controllers. Yeah, the hostler, wayside
regulated, stuck brake bypass, it all seems so distant now, like
AMUE brakes and air doors.
Ooops, I forgot to ask: Is the hook pin bushing a field-replaceable
unit?
Not. Because the pin is 1/2 covered by the anti-climber the coupler has to be removed - at least mechanically. That can be done in the shop but IIRC, the bushing needs to be pressed into place. Of course, the coupler head could be replaced in the shop. Just no real incentive to take on the additional work.
So is this hook pin condemning gauge test part of one of the
inspection cycles? If it fails, changeout the whole coupler
and send it to CI Shop? Or send the whole car down there?
305 No-Go gauge measures the relative position of the inside face of the hook vs. the coupler face. If the hook pin bushing is sufficiently worn the gauge will lay flat against the coupler face. (If both opposing couplers have this problem, trainline can become intermittant or air leaks can occur). The car is then shopped to coney island for whatever action the shop deems necessary.
Thanks. Is there a similar gauge for H2 heads?
There is a master coupler gauge - used every 2 years, I believe. Then thete is a general contour gauge. There is also one that checke the E/P pin position with respect to the coupler face. Ditto for the R-44/R-46. The R-44/R-46 have other gauges too. There is one to check the pocket contour and one to check the position of the inductive hook sensor.
Just like the big time RR with MCB couplers! Thanks for the info.
What do you want for $495,000 per car.
Perhaps I'm applying too much logic here, but isn't there agreement by all parties on what the scope of the work is before the contract is signed?
Before I started managing contractors in NYC, I used to rely on people being reasonable and using common sense. Then I started adding stuff like "all work to be done in a neat and workmanlike manner". In a recent job, I had a contractor actually tell me that he only followed the electrical code if I requested it, and I'd have to pay extra if I wanted that.
Given that this seems to be a way of life in NYC, I'd assume that the contract would be bulky, verbose, and contain detailed statements of what work was to be done and what was and was not acceptable, no?
Speaking of R44/46 couplers, the few times I've looked at one, I could swear there are international "Caution - static sensitive components" stickers (like you find on PC card bags) on the top of the couplers. Was somebody trying for "Danger - High Voltage" and got the wrong sticker, did I misread it, or will a random zap actually damage the car?
I did not prepare the workscope for the R-46 overhaul. However, standard language would included Inspect and replace as required. Alternately the contract might call for a 100% changeout or a fixed % changeout. The couplers were never meant to be a 100% changeout, especially after the decision to link the cars made so many surplus couplers available.
It's been over 2 years since I've dealt on a 1 - 1 basis with the R-46 fleet so I've never seen the decal you refer to. However, there is an inductive sensor mounted in the coupler and it uses a solid state device to fire the coupling sequence. Perhaps this is an additional precaution that's now being taken with the sensor.
You mean the R-46s were like a R-62 or R-68? and whats the difference between a B and an A?
How about doing a good hard browse around www.nycsubway.org before asking what the difference is between a B and an A...But what the heck, to avoid sounding like an ass, I'll tell ya here. An A unit (usually referred to with transverse cabs or full-length) has a cab, while the B unit has no cab at either end. For example, an R142A set would look like ABBBAABBBA.
Thanks! I suspected what you said was going to be right but I just asked to make sure I'am not confused!
What was the difference between the R46 cars with GE master controllers and the ones with Westinghouse master controllers if all the cars were equipped with SCMs?
You are, of course, referring to pre-GOH. There were 6 cars fitted with the GE advanced electronic propulsion package and NYAB WABCO master controller while 6 others had a fore-runner of the E-Cam and a Westcode master controller. The GE groups were removed and installed on work motors. I'm not sure if they even exist today. The Westcode master Controller ended up as standard equipment on the R-44s
Actually, I was referring to the pre-GOH car's console controller as they were in service. I know some had GE and others had Westinghouse. I was wondering if there were differences in the group propulsions in relation to the cars with the other master controllers, like the R32GE vs WH
BTW. I got on #6220
Who will be the first SubTalker to see an AAAA-AAAA set in service? It will happen!...... In all seriousness, I think 2 trains of AAAA cars should be run on the Grand St.-W.4th shuttle. This way if one compressor goes bad on a train, you have 3 others to pick up the slack, rather than just 1 having to supply the air to the whole train.
Aha! That answers my question of the day: With the G now running four-car trains at all times, what is happening to the two-car sets that had been used as two of the six G cars? Thank you for noticing.
You Welcome! :)
Many of those A-A R-46 sets used originally operated at A-A-A-A units. Remember that with the original R-46 fleet numbers (500-1278) units 1228-1278 were all A (even numbered) units. The JFK usually had most of the lower 12XX cars (approx 1201-1246). I can remember many of the higher 12XX cars operating as A-A-A-A units on the E & F lines. When the R-46's were on the CC line I think they were operating in A-B-A-B-B-A configuration.
Wayne
There's anouther A-A Set. it was on the R Line Today. It was:
6240-6242-6216-6214
Back in the era of the R-1/9s I know that the door controls were located in between cars. Does anyone have pictures of the door controls or conductors who have "assumed the position?"
Thanks,
Dan
Is that train were the conductor is standing between car controling the door triggers is a R-10? And when was that picture taken?
That train was an R10, 3050 on the left side, 3252 on the right, in April, 1988. Sorry for the blurryness, the Tamarack 2400 FS wasn't worth the hundred bucks.
Thanks for the information Engine Brake.
April 1988? I don't think I ever saw any unrehabbed R10's after Christmas 1987. She must've been the last of her kind.
The R1/9's were identical for the bottles - you'd slap the caps on top to close up, and reach UNDER the box and pull the triggers towards you to open up. As I've indicated for those here in the past who worried about us falling off though, there was always something to grab and hold mounting and dismounting, even when the foot plates fell off. Safe as the womb most of the time.
I'll bet it was fun working a train that had been sitting in an uncovered yard all night during a snow/ice storm....
I did have a neighbor, when I was really young, who was a BMT conductor. He worked those D-types on the Brighton Line, meaning he'd be between cars to work the doors. Poor old guy one day was stretching his step from the second floor of the front porch to clean a window in his brownstone, and fell to his death. Not enough handgrabs, etc., like on the subway cars!!
The deck plates would get slippery indeed in gnarly weather - I was always glad to get over the bridge and into tunnel on such days after starting at Coney or Brighton Beach ... you could usually kick the schmutz off though or spank it with a board until it fell. It was actually MORE of a challenge during RAINY days than snowy days. But it was a whole lot safer than it actually LOOKS ...
To be honest, that position would scare the hell out of me, and I wonder how new conductors would react to doing it. Particularly on the C/CC, which had a marathon run through 4 boros, making every damn stop.
Was the C line as unpopular with conductors as it was with certain riders (hint: me)?
Well, back in those days, being inside in a motorman's cab was kinda "wimpy." Heh. You really didn't think much about it, it's just what ya did. Back in those days, the CC was a rush hour only concourse local that went to Hudson Terminal (WTC) and back. I worked the D and maybe did a total of two CC runs as extra. Great workout for the legs and arms though. I was also 19 at the time which made it pretty easy. When I was 20, I got my bag of wrenches and gave up riding outside. :)
I remember seeing the conductors on the Rl-9 trains and feeling pity for them in the winter or in the rain. The trains were not made for outside service as they did not even have windshield wipers as original equipment.
Yeah, but when the eagle shitteth every two weeks, it made it a bit more worth it. At the time, the paychecks made up for the misery outside and stepping down all wet created much sympathy among the chickies. :)
I can only imagine how dangerous their ride was...just stepping on a fixed trains pantograph to reach around and check the crew switch is hazardous duty. CI Peter
Feh. You guys are wimps. Heh. We had to climb onto the front of those things with the foot treadle right over the third rail on wet mornings. Yes, you HAD to pay attention to what you were doing, but there was plenty of stuff to hang onto while you did. It REALLY wasn't all as bad as it seemed ... I was more worried swinging the chains to get out there and back than I was OUT there ... hooking the chain going out and coming back down was a lot scarier than mounting and dismounting ...
I'm no wimp!!! The other CIs skip the work, never checking the switch or cleaning the door indicator lense. CI Peter
I bust them just the same ... heh. Hope you took it as intended - back 30 years ago, "safety" was something you'd see on signs, but in practice, bright flashes and loud bangs were just another day on the railroad. If YOU wouldn't do it, they'd get somebody else who could. :)
When I was a conductor in 1983, the CC went to Rockaway Park during the rush hours. The fleet was made up of R10s. I had picked a day off relief job that had me working the D four days a week and the board job at Bedford Park on Mondays. The board conductor would pick up the job of a conductor who did not show up for work if that job was not covered in advance. I could always count on picking up a CC job on rainy days as some conductor would invariably call in sick to avoid standing in between cars playing with caps and triggers in the rain.
If only those old time conductors that had to endure pneumatic doors could see the conductor's cab on an R142 ...
I still have not seen the train. I'm gonna fight it kicking and screaming all the way.
Nah, the 32's were too futurama for my taste. :)
What would OSHA say now about the in-between car conductor position?
They'd probably require orange and black stripes on the toeholds ... and of course with them painted, you'd DEFINITELY slip right off. :)
But wouldn't your mother (or grandmother) worry about you catching pneumonia? Even in the summer?
Heh. Well, my moms died when I was 13 and my pops died the year that I went to work for the "ta" ... so wasn't anyone around to slap some sense into me - besides ... everyone else did it, musta been OK for me to do it too. :)
MMMmmmmmm ... bottles! :)
For the benefit of the junior SubTalkers, the conductors wore hard hats when the R1/9's were on the L line due to blunt objects hurled at the conductors.
Never worked the eastern ... and yeah, there'd be paper cups and stuff every now and then but nothing serious at least in my day. I musta been lucky.
Damn, was everyone wearing some type of uniform a target for venom in the 1960's? LOL.
Well ... back then the subway was pretty broken. And the geese weren't the ONLY unhappy campers down below. Of course, if WE threw stuff back, we'd have to cool our jets downtown. Then again, with the nice thick gloves we wore, the geese would have to guess at which finger we were giving them the high sign with. (Hint: it wasn't the same finger we used on the triggers) :)
Which brings me to ask: which fingers did you use for the triggers? When I assumed the position at the Transit Museum between 100 and 484, I figured you'd use your middle fingers on the first trigger (the one that released the door locks) and your index fingers on the second one.
Heh. With the official TA issued gloves, it was just a turn of the finger and you ended up pulling both at once. Bare-fingered, it was a bit trickier. And heaven help you if you were caught WITHOUT your gloves on. I used the same finger that I saluted geese with myself, but the trick was to get your finger all the way up under, pull the upper and then drag it across as the bottom side moved. Nice and easy with the gloves. All these years later, I had forgotten about that since it was a one finger operation if you knew how on each side.
So that's the secret. That explains why there was no delay between the doors unlocking and opening. Now that you mention it, I seem to recall that every conductor I ever saw on those step plates had gloves on. The triggers on those two museum relics are quite stiff, probably because they haven't seen much use in recent years. OTOH 1689's triggers worked well when I played with them in 1980.
Yeah, when they were USED, they were nice and loose. The trick was to get your finger ALL the way up in there, then rotate it ... but in service, most of them were nice and loose, same for the bottlecaps. You wore the gloves though 'cause you'd get grease and/or graphite on your fingers ... my guess is that being a lone widow, 1689's mechanics will eventually stiffen up from lack of use as well. There's a lot of sliding metal inside those boxes.
I used to watch conductors move something beneath the trigger boxes to open the doors (the triggers), and remember they did it quite deftly. Your description makes sense. Back then, I assumed it was a lever they were moving, although I suppose you could call the triggers levers. I could duplicate the trigger cap sound by clicking a ball point pen on a desktop. A Bic Clic pen gave an excellent facsimile sound.
Fpr some reason, the R-10 trigger boxes looked different from a distance, but that may have been because of the different paint scheme. IIRC the trigger boxes were physically identical on all cars which had them.
The sliders underneath were QUITE easy to move - you had an upper piece and a lower piece that were almost as wide as the slot itself. You had to reach up and snag the upper piece and start that moving first, and it was offset by a small amount (I forget how much after 30 years) and then the lower part would slide along once it was unlocked. A simple fingertip on top, then rotate your hand slightly towards you while pulling towards you and the whole assembly unlocked and moved into position to let the air go. It was remarkably easy once you got the "feel" for it - so much so, I actually had to make an effort to try to remember that there were two portions to it - for all these years my memory was just one chunk of metal to pull under there.
And yeah, the bottle caps were pretty much the same though I recall that the ones on the R12's were slightly smaller than those on the IND but that might be defective memory as well. Even more amazing, I can't recall EVER having "mechanical difficulties" with ANY of them though some were stiffer than others ...
Aren't the triggers side by side? At least that's how it felt when I worked them.
Shows you what vague memories I have of all that after 30 years ... could be though I vaguely remember having to go ALL the way up inside the hole and just plain yank but now that I think about it, you're probably right. Gotta get me some 1689 time this coming year. Last year I had to ask one of the guys up there to send me pictures of the breaker panel from both ends as I didn't remember which end had the compressor switch and which end had the charger. Turns out on looking at the pictures, I was WRONG there too. :)
The passengers could use hardhats on the L-Canarsie too.
Guns are restricted in New York state. Shucks.
Ummm ... plenty of gunplay to be had upstate ... I remember a joke one of the drivers for Pine Hills Trailways posted on the window at Port Authority one late night - "Passengers must check guns with driver before boarding bus" ... well, it emptied out the seats around that gate anyway. :)
That's no R-1/9 series......
Yes I knew that. But it was the best photo so far showing a conductor at work. Now all we need is one showing one on a BMT standard - inside with the passengers.
Re BMT Standard: Is that why they had the strong guys on the platform at Times Square during afternoon rush... The professonal pushers back in the 1950's pushing passengers in to clear the doorway?
Giving the coductor in the middle of the car some room to move his head to see that nobody was being scraped or dragged?
>>> Giving the coductor in the middle of the car some room to move his head to see that nobody was being scraped or dragged? <<<
On the standard anyone being dragged was out of luck. Once the C/R closed his doors before the train started to move, he could no longer look up or down the train.
Tom
On the BMT standards, the conductor would close down both sections of the train first, then he closed the set of center doors he was standing next to last.
>>> then he closed the set of center doors he was standing next to last. <<<
Are you suggesting that the conductor's door was not closed until after the train started to move? If it was closed before the train started to move, there was no way for a C/R to see someone being dragged.
Tom
I think what Steve is trying to say is that the conductor would close the doors to the rear of the train first, then close the doors to the front of the train. After a final look he would close the two doors at his operating point. On the Standards there was no way a conductor could observe the side of the train once his two doors were closed.
The Standards had a single button to open all of the doors on a side, but three buttons to close them, doors to the rear, doors to the front, and doors at the control point. On a three car train the conductor was normally in the middle car, on a six car train his control point was normally in the fifth car.
Most of the Standards were permanently coupled in three car sets, and known as B's or BX's. While all cars had door control panels, the 1st and 3rd car control panels were deactivated when the three car sets were permanently coupled many years before.
The single car Standards were identified as A's, and as far as I know they all had operating door panels. The door control panel was located between the the center doors of each car.
Yes, that's correct. The BMT standards were automatically "zoned" when the conductor turned his key in the button console.
Karl is correct about the single A units. They had motorman's cabs on both ends plus active door controls. An A car could be substituted for any car in a B unit if one of the three cars broke down. I don't know if any A units were rebuilt in 1959-60.
>>> On the Standards there was no way a conductor could observe the side of the train once his two doors were closed. <<<
You gave a good explanation of how the conductor operated the doors on the standard. This is something I knew already. My original post was in response to peppertree5706's post about giving the conductor room to move his head to see that no one was dragged. Since the car doors, even the C/R's door are closed before the train starts moving, and no one can be dragged before the train starts moving, a C/R would not be able to see someone being dragged.
Tom
The BMT standards also had separate "Close End Door" buttons for each of the storm doors. These controls could be considered redundant, as both button consoles had them. Not to mention separate buttons to open each storm door.
Also makes me wonder....how the hell did conductors keep their uniforms always looking so clean and spiffy working the older cars???
We had lots of WAA working the Concourse so keeping our shoes cleaned and shined wasn't a problem.
NICE monkey suit! Heh. Concourse was nice in that there wasn't all that much supervision ('cept Bedford) saying "straighten that TIE, boy." Heh. Time period looks to be right around 1980 there but I see the uniform didn't change in the ten years since I split the job.
I had forgotten just how bad the graffiti was back then. Ugh!
I grew up in the grafitti era and I thought it was "normal". Riding those clean white R36's operating on the 7 line on my way to see a Jet game at Shea was about as shocking to me as if that train pulled into 59th St today.
When we moved to Jersey in 1967, the trains were still clean and the fare was 20 cents. Even in late 1970 and into 1971, when the silver and blue paint scheme first started to appear, trains were clean. It wasn't until 1972 that the problem reached epidemic proportions.
Have you ever been on the TAA in Toronto? There isn't even garbage in the stations. I don't even remember seeing a garbage can.
Of course in Singapore, there would be dire consequence for littering.
And remember that American guy back in 1993 who got cained in Singapore for graffitti?
Before 1971, I did not ever hear of the word "graffitti". What a difference in culture, even in New York.
The cars were toilets on rails back then (1974-1982)
Why does this pic bring back some wonderful memories when the subway system was one vast unexplored frontier filled with danger and suprise. I hated those old cars, grafitti and the noise, but I'd love to take one last ride on that train.
And for the really young subtalkers, that grafitti was nothing compared to most of the R16's in 1986. In fact, it's downright clean.
Why does this pic bring back some wonderful memories when the subway system was one vast unexplored frontier filled with danger and suprise. I hated those old
cars, grafitti and the noise, but I'd love to take one last ride on that train.
Graffitti was a sign of my youth, my vigor, times when my parents were strong and healthy. Bernard Goetz, discos and good old Smith Sane all over my put ins. At 35, I am beginning to feel over the hill looking back. There are reasons I'd like to have that train one last time too. My daughter turned ten going into 18, my wife turned 36 going into 10, I'd be driving an old Chevy and by golly, I forgot what it was like to cut out 2 to 3 doors per trip. I don't remember the water in the lights though.
Sane Smith is an immortal grafitti god. He's still got his tags up inside the tunnels 15-18 years after he was killed.
The graffiti epidemic had gotten pretty bad by the late 70s. Heck, I can remember going out to Shea Stadium on the 7 in 1973, and the WF R-36s were starting to look really desecrated by then.
The #7 was the only line I never saw grafittied cars on. My earliest memories are of the blue/silver scheme, then all white, then red.
The Flushing cars had FACES painted on the front of the train! Maybe when you started to ride the Flushing, the white "I dare you" test paint was working as well has the double barb wire in the yard.
That white scheme never worked! It was like giving the grafitti artists a blank canvas.
The WF R-36s still had their original paint scheme when the graffti epidemic hit. They were passed over during the first round of repainting. I remember seeing some silver and blue R-36s in 1980. Not all of them got it, though.
I never saw the world's fair paint scheme. Only the blue striped or all white scheme prior to 1985. But I only rode the line maybe twice a year back then.
I heard of an attempted to mark a commercial plane parked at Kennedy.
The old Pan Am Hangar 19 at JFK was quite out in the open by the canal (facing the Rockaway line). We used to have tugs and other equipment lightly tagged up until the port really started to worry about security. Tagging a airplane I think was attempted. The MIA & JFK mechanics would also leave each other rude messages to each other in the langing gear wells of the fleet until the VP of Mx saw how bad it was getting.
I wonder if installing door controls inside the motormans cab on the
R-10's was too costly?,i mean after the cars were built.
If anything, it should have been done on the R-12/14s. At least they had electric door engines. Don't know if the pneumatic door engines on the R-10s had anything to do with it not being done.
The G Line was running 4 Car R-46's today. I saw them at 71 Ave. One Question. Was the plan for the G to run 6 Car R-46's when it runs to 71 Ave and when it runs to Court Square was to be 4 Car R-46's? This is Messed up!
4 cars full time is what will happen
Do this mean even when it runs on Queens Blvd too?
All the time,the extra 2 cars are being paired up and run on the F,V, and R
Another sacrifice made for the benefit of Manhattan-bound riders...
Guess this means it's also OPTO all the time.
The G will run OPTO only on weekends and major holidays. C/R's will work the G Mon-Fri only.
That means the CDR will be at the rear end of the train?
Yes they will be in the back of the trains. I remeber them doing this when they use to cut the F train at night down th four cars. The train alway looked funny to me when leaving W8 street station, which is were a lived as a kid.
Robert
Stations in an official bulletion says it will be OPTO overnight also.
I'll check on that. I do not recall seeing that, but I'll find out tomorrow morning.
The C/R picked jobs at night during the week, so C/R will be riding on them. This unless they put the C/R in the X-List, in witch case there will be some pissed off G line C/R out there. The jobs they picked are 100's jobs not 700's temp. jobs were they can put them to the X-List if the TA dose not want them to have C/R on the G.
Robert
Yellow OPTO Car Stop markers are up at all G stops on Queens Blvd.
I see . Ok then.
"4 cars full time is what will happen"
Let's not forget 4 R-46s are equal to 6 R-32s. Perhaps the TA has been studying riding patterns on the (G) and they figure a 4 car R-46 train may cut it!
Bill "Newkirk"
4 R46's are = to 5 R32's, not 6.
Robert
They ran 4 car OPTO trains on the G today. At Continental, G's coming out of the relay seemed to be holding up some R trains.
As expected, most trains were light today, as there were 4 trains running. This is a drastic improvement from the regular weekend service (R Jamaica Center-95st via 60th/F 179-Coney Island via 63rd).
I noticed that people at Roosevelt were letting F trains go by in order to take an E express directly to the 6 at 51st, or perhaps points beyond.
Just get ready for tomorrow. Roosevelt is going to be a disaster, unless some people are willing to take a local V to 51st to connect for the 6 train. If not, then EVERYONE will use the E since it's the only express service with a connection to the 6 train, which is extremely popular.
Am I allowing myself more time to get to work tomorrow? Hell no. I told my boss to expect me to be 10-20 minutes late as a result of all this. I'll just have to make it up on the backend of the day if I am indeed late.
Here are three solutions:
Have some E trains in the morning, going towards Manhattan, SKIP Roosevelt Avenue. That'll have people think twice about using the V.
PROBABLE RESULT: A HUGE MASSIVE MAYLAY.
Profusely, verbally convince people to do so.
PROBABLE RESULT: A HUGE MASSIVE MAYLAY.
Have Zman describe it (no offense!)
PROBABLE RESULT: ALL SMILES.
Don't take offense; it was a funny post, but:
"Melee" comes from the French.
Now you know how it's spelled.
Have a good day.
So does mayday (or is it "may day"), but we don't see it spelled m'aidez very often. Give it another generation or two, and his spelling could end up in the dictionary.
No way Jose! You've always had a crowd control problem at Roosevelt. Lots of people legitimately need the E for stations beyond Lex. If passengers destined for Lex/53rd let the V go by in favor of the E, and now you have an E or 2 bypass Roosevelt, what is being accomplished? Surely you jest! Why punish the passengers any more than they are already being punished?
People would be wondering why the E bypassed Roosevelt Ave and then wait for the next train. If the next train is the
F, that would be another problem altogeter. And the V trains probably will be empty.
The G is four cars at all times now. Signs at the stations direct passengers to the appropriate waiting points. Still, there will be delays and missed connections on Queens Boulevard as passengers attempt to transfer from expresses.
I don't see why the G needs more than four cars.
I learned something new today. The OPTO stop marker takes precedence over the "4" marker.
Signs at the stations direct passengers to the appropriate waiting points.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Where? I did not notice any signs directing passengers to the corresponding waiting area within the bounds of a 4 car G train. Where these signs south of Queens Plaza?
I saw the signs at Roosevelt, QP, and Court Square, and perhaps a few other stations. I wasn't really paying much attention except where I got on and off, so it's possible that other stations don't have them. (I assumed they were posted at all G stations. Apparently not.)
Of course, the most accurate sign is the OPTO stop marker. Walk back 300 feet to find the other end of the train.
Permanent (customer-oriented) signage would be nice. The signs I saw were on yellow paper, taped to the columns.
Actually, by rule a 4 car train of 75 foot cars (R46 for example) stops at the 6 car marker if a conductor is on board.
Duh! Of course. And I was chasing around the 4-car markers all day, wondering why trains were all stopping in the wrong places.
At continental they are using the four car markers...
Not the OPTO markers?
If they have C/R then they have to stop at the 6 car mark. This way they can put the C/R on the special board that are marked "4 Car G" on them.
Robert
The opto markers are under the 4 car marker at Continental, not the 7th car.
But if they have a C/R thay are supost to stop at the 6 car mark, no mater were the OPTO mark is.
Robert
According to the New B division matrix, the G will be 4 x 75' cars at all times.
Boy, G riders must've felt like the gods of mass transportation have forsaken them today.
I saw a 10 Car R-32's on the F Line Yesterday! Is this RARE NOW to see a R-32 on the F Line?
It depends on if you believe that a one-in-nine chance, on average, is rare.
It was VERY rare, but will become not so rare at all starting today.
Very interesting to see R-32s on the "F" Line. If I'm not mistaken they never had a consist of R-32s on a regular basis running on the "F" Line.
#3 West End Jeff
They did around 94, I believe...
I remember seeing a train or two of R-32s on the F back then. IIRC their side route signs say, "F-Queens Blvd./6th Ave./Culver".
There were many occasions when the R32s provided regular service on the "F". 1977 until 1978, 1980 until 1981 (during the great R44/R46 truck swap), 1990 (exactly the same time they started appearing on the "E" on an exclusive basis) until early 1992 and during the winter of 1994.
These were just the occasions that I personally know of. There could be more.
Can't wait till I see it!
:-) Andrew
I counted four trains today... People at 179 thought they wree Es!
I believe those R-32s fleets may have been a former 63rd street shuttles (orange S).
"I counted four trains today... People at 179 thought they wree Es!"
Ok, so who bet on four people mistaking an F for an E? Don't ya love those crystal clear bulkhead signs...NOT!! -Nick
Surprise, surprise.
I agree. That pixel sign they used on the R-32s just doesn't cut it.
I saw them too. If I didn't have access to subtalk, I'd be shocked. Almost as shocked as I was on 10/1/97 when the Q swapped every one of it's hippos with the B for that line's R40's.
I haven't seen them, but I can't wait to ride on one (if I'm lucky, tomorrow) from the Rockefeller Centre...
I saw 2 Trainsets on the F Line today. Saw #3088 on the Express Track at 67 Ave and got on #3801 to Union Turnpike.
I AM SO HAPPY TO SEE THE V LINE RUNNING! I TOO HAPPY!!!!!! :)!
BUT One Question. What cars are to run the V Line?
All R46s
Sometimes the simplest things in life are truly the best.
I am very pleased too.
If you would scrool down the board every once in a while, many of your questions would be answered without you having to ask in the first place. This question and your previous one are perfect examples. Thank you.
One of the Pitkin R-32's. Car #3649 was running with 9 other R-32's in a 10 Car Set on the R Today. Did Jamaica got some Pitkin R-32's or they started have R Line running out of Pitkin?
Jamaica received 40 cars on loan from Pitkin to accomodate the new QB service plan.
Close...
According to the official assignment sheet, it was 10 Phase I R-32s from Pitkin to Jamaica, 20 Phase I R-32s from 207th Street to Jamaica, and 60 from Coney Island to Jamaica (plus 8 slant R-40s from East New York to Coney Island).
David
mmmm. I always thought that 207th only inspected R38's, and Pitkin inspected all R44's and all Phase I R32's from the A and C lines.
As of the current assignment, that is the case (plus the 9 R-110Bs at 207th Street -- not that anybody ever sees them).
David
The conductor on the F line was saying the following about service, when I was on an R-46 consist heading back to Queens.
Departing 42nd Street:
"Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this F train will be operating on the 63rd Street Line. For train service to 5th Avenue, 53rd; LEX (yes LEX is how he said it), 53rd; 23rd, Ely; Queens Plaza; take the Bronx-bound D to 7th Avenue and take the E train.
"Passengers going to 57th, 6th Avenue; LEX, 63rd; Roosevelt Island; 21 St Queensbridge, you may remain on this train.
Departing Rockefeller Center:
"This F train will operate express from 21 Street Queensbridge to Roosevelt Avenue. AFTER Roosevelt Avenue, this F train will CONTINUE to run express to 71st Continental Avenue. AFTER 71st Continental Avenue, we will make all local stops to 179th Street Jamaica."
Departing 57th Street:
"If you have a Metrocard, you can transfer outside for the 4, 5, 6, N and R trains. If your metrocard was used no more than two hours, the transfer is free."
Heard when departing Lex/63rd,
"Ladies and gentlemen, get used to the idea."
Heard departing from Queensbridge,
"Ladies and gentlemen, we apologize for any inconvenience we may cause for this new change."
"If we are skipping your station, transfer at Roosevelt Avenue for a Manhattan Bound R train. You can also take service to 71st Continental Avenue on the local tracks, stopping at all local stations, including express stops."
looks like he doesn't want to get hammered tomorrow...
That is one great conductor!
Even though he said all that, stupid, ignortant people who supposedly didn't see the signs stating the changes will still complaina about the service...
They'll probably think all the posters and annoucements and brochures have NOTHING to do with them. Even if someone sits down with them and explains it all to them.
I can just image trying to explain it to someone and having them tell you that it dosen't matter that the F stops at 21 St-Queensbridge or Roosevelt Island because they get off at 53rd/Lex.
Shawn.
Not bad.
But weekend riders are used to the changes by now. He can make announcements today until he's blue in the face but it won't help the zillions of rush-hour-only commuters tomorrow who have never experienced a GO in their lives.
It will be bad but not for too long they have been running F Via 63 for awhile during rush and people were familiar enough to ask.
As for the weekend, when the 179 F crew were told run regualar on Saturday only the old timers knew what thet meant.
As for the confusion well today on the D, I could not convince someone to get on the train, he was waiting for the D that went past 34st since he did not want to change, hopefully he brought snack while he waits. On the F someone was asking about the ninth ave line as he had to go to 18th and 9th in Manhattan and would not believe there was no such beast.
My point being that even when things are normal there is confusion.
I guess you guys know, but the new subway map is available at token boothes. The 7th Avenue line from Chambers to South Ferry is there but greyed out.
They're gray so that people won't think the 1 still goes down there. Just wait until the tourists come to the booths with last year's maps asking:
"How do I go to South Ferry?".
My response to that question:
Take a time machine to any point between 7/1/1918 and 9/10/2001, THEN take the 1 train or its equivalent
I have been advised by a reasonably reliable source that the MTA will be closing the Transit Museum store in Times Square (47th & Bway).
The reason given is poor sales of items (other than Metrocards). Sales have been down and the events of 9/11 didn't help any. There are just not enough people buying T-shirts etc at that store. On the other hand Grand Central is very successful and will remain open.
There is a possibility that another store may open but where has yet to be confirmed.
The estimated date of closure is January 31, 2002.
I agree. I only went to the Times Square store once during a span of 7 months. Whereas I visited the GCT store about 20 times (usually to get copies of the latest "The Map").
It's not even a store though. I just like a booth in the visitors center. There was only one person working it when I was there last. How much could it cost to operate?
Shawn.
The rent they have to pay to the Visitors Center. I am sure it is enough of an amount to do a comparison on sales.
Did you folks know there is yet another subway chat site out there, on the Straphanger's Campaign website?
Point your browsers to:
http://www.straphangers.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?action=intro
Long live the subways...
Hello:
If you can stick with my current novice's standing as regards B-Division equipment, this is the best information I received for changes a/c the December 16, 2001 service changes:
30 Phase II R-32s from Pitkin to Jamaica
30 Phase I R-32s Coney Island to Jamaica
10 R-40s East New York to Coney Island
It would be nice to have corresponding numbers. I am still trying to re-learn the subgroups.
Regard,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
OK:
On this I can help out quite a bit.
As of December 8, 2001 on the 2 line there were 463 cars:
134 R-33s 9070-9113, 9115/9212, 9116-9123, 9126-9129, 9130/9225, 9132-9151, 9154-9181, 9184-9211, 9214/9215.
325 R-142s 6301-6360, 6411-6445, 6476-6480, 6501-6565, 6576-6730, 6741-6745.
On the 5 line there were 384 cars:
36 R-26s 7768-7775, 7780/7781, 7786/7787, 7790/7791, 7804-7809, 7818-7821, 7832/7833, 7842/7842, 7846-7849, 7852/7853, 7856/7857.
38 R-28s 7860-7869, 7880/7881, 7886-7889, 7896-7899, 7906/7907, 7914/7915, 7924-7927, 7930-7933, 7938/7939, 7948/7949, 7958/7959.
78 GE R-29s 8690-8695, 8698-8699, 8702/8703, 8708-8711, 8714-8719, 8722/8723, 8726-8735, 8738-8741, 8744-8747, 8750-8757, 8760/8761, 8764-8771, 8774/8775, 8780-8787, 8790-8793, 8798/8799, 8802-8805.
232 R-33s 8806-8835, 8856-8873, 8876-8883, 8886-8957, 8960-8967, 8970-8979, 8982-9017, 9020-9055, 9058-9069, 9182/9183.
Notes:
R-33s from the 2 often appear on the 5.
R-142s listed have been in passenger service. Some have subsequently been withdrawn.
Additional R-26/28/29s were out of service after 12/8/01. Not all of these cars had been released for storage/reefing.
As of 12/13/01 there were 26 R-26s, 26 R-28s and 58 GE R-29s left in operation on the 5.
2 R-62As from the 6 run on the 5 & OPTO.
2 R-62As from the 1 run on the 2 or 5 daily.
1 R-62A from the 3 runs on the 2 or 5 weekdays.
Additional R-62As for the 3 are laid up at East 180 Yard.
No progress in getting R-142s on the 5. Looks like it will be a while yet.
(I can hear the groans!!)
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
Keep up the good work.
We'll see a continuous shift of R-33s to the 5 replacing all R-26/28/29s. As for R-142s? Well, let's get those sidelined units on the road so we can start putting 142s on the 5. Until then, seeing 6800 series cars on the 2 will be no surprise to me, as the line needs to be completely equipped with new cars.
-Stef
There was a R142, with #6520 in it, on the 5 late last week. It may have been an extra or substitution, but it was there.
Right.
That happens when equipment gets swapped to cover trips at Flatbush Ave. terminal. The 2 cars require a 2 crew even if it makes a trip on the 5. Unless there's a lot of happenstance, regular 5 crews are not qualified on R-142s.
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
This is from Newsday.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trains Take New Twists and Turns
Plan introduces V line, reroutes existing paths
By Bobby Cuza
STAFF WRITER
December 16, 2001
Subway riders will be confronted with a slew of service changes beginning today, part of a plan aimed at alleviating overcrowding on the E and F express lines in Queens.
The plan's centerpiece is the new V line, a local train that will run from Forest Hills to the Lower East Side along essentially the same route as the F line.
The V, the city's first new line since the No. 9 was introduced 12 years ago, makes its debut tomorrow morning. Changes to two existing lines begin today:
The F train will be rerouted through the 63rd Street tunnel, meaning it will no longer make stops at Queens Plaza and 23rd Street-Ely Avenue in Queens or at Lexington Avenue-53rd Street and Fifth Avenue-53rd Street in Manhattan.
Instead, it will make stops at 21st Street-Queensbridge, Roosevelt Island, Lexington Avenue-63rd Street and 57th Street-Sixth Avenue. All other stops are unaffected.
The G train will be chopped virtually in half on weekdays, terminating at Court Square in Long Island City rather than 13 stops later in Forest Hills. But the G will continue its full run to 71st Avenue on nights, from 8:30 p.m. to 5 a.m., and weekends.
The changes are the result of a decade-long effort to link the 63rd Street tunnel - infamously dubbed the "tunnel to nowhere" because it dead-ended abruptly at 21st Street in Long Island City - to the Queens Boulevard corridor.
Transit officials point out that the number of Manhattan-bound trains along the corridor will increase from 41 to 50 every hour during morning peak times.
"What it provides for everybody are more travel options," New York City Transit spokesman Bob Slovak said. "They're going to find less crowding."
Among straphangers who make out as winners are Queens riders of the R, particularly those west of Jackson Heights. They now have an additional Manhattan-bound local from which to choose.
Skeptics fear that because the F now will bypass the critical Lexington-53rd Street station, which connects to the 6 line on Manhattan's East Side, Queens commuters will cram onto the E train rather than ride the slow-moving local V.
"I think the V will stand for 'very little-used,'" said Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign, a rider advocacy group. "The choice riders have is to either stay on a crowded E to get to where a lot of them are going - 53rd and Lex - or to switch to a V that's 13 stops and eight minutes longer."
The changes have drawn the greatest ire from residents in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, who rely on the G - the only major subway line that does not pass through Manhattan - to get to Queens. The line has been credited with helping to revive neighborhoods like Greenpoint, Williamsburg and Fort Greene.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority installed $3.5-million, airport-style people movers in the passageway connecting the G station at Court Square to the 23rd Street-Ely Avenue station, where they can switch to the E or the V.
Riders will get free MetroCard transfers from the G to the No. 7 station at Court House Square in Long Island City, and from the F stop at Lexington-63rd Street to the Nos. 4, 5 and 6 lines at Lexington-59th Street.
Copyright © 2001, Newsday, Inc.
The V, the city's first new line since the No. 9 was introduced 12 years ago...
Give me a W!
You have a point there...
The signs have been up, the messages have been out, the stories have been written. But look for a lot of confused G train riders Monday morning waiting between Contintnal and Queens Plaza, and a lot of angry F train riders after Roosevelt, when they can't get off at 53rd and Lex or Fifth.
If I were a TV news crew, I think the downtown platform at 47th-50th Streets would probably be the best place during the AM rush to find some of the angry riders who will be trying to double back to their stations after going through the 63rd St. tube.
The people who, in this case, stand to benefit greatly from the diversion of the F will be #6 subway riders, for now (hopefully) there shouldn't be as many people rushing onto the back of the overcrowded train at 51st street. This was probably the MTA's way of forcing F train riders to stay on the train thru Midtown and rely on the crosstown buses, rather than slow down even further an already notoriously slow line. If this doesn't work, however, then the whole question of the 2nd Av. subway will have to be revisited. Only then it will be with more urgency since the MTA will not want to admit it wasted billions of dollars and a new line, and will have to revert to old and steadily worsening service alignments.
The W is a new train in my opinion...
Watched the Fox 5 News few hours ago. And there was Mayor Guiliani appearance and was asked by the reporter his comment on the new V train. Guiliana response was ("V Train!..A V Train?"). Appearently Mr. Guiliana is lost.
Yeah, I saw it on the 10 o'clock news. That was REALLY strange. I guess he has other stuff on his mind, but this train is really going to stir things up monday morning, he oughta at least know about it.
Well, I wouldn't blame him for not knowing the V Train. The poor guy may have been thinking about his divorce with his ex, and ground zero cleanup. But, he did remember the W Train
With two weeks left as Mayor, I don't think he is that concerned. His last few months has been busy enough, don't you think? -Nick
Does anyone know if the Manhattan Transit Company and the Interborough consolidated Corp. are in the family tree of the NY transit system? Also, if someone could point me towards a source for this type of info I would appreciate it.
Thanks
>>> Does anyone know if the Manhattan Transit Company and the Interborough consolidated Corp. are in the family tree of the NY transit system <<<
Where did you come across these names? The Manhattan Transit Company appears to be a New Jersey Bus Operator with GM Suburban buses in the ‘60s and ‘70s. Maybe someone on Bus Talk knows more. Interborough Consolidated Corp is a mystery to me, but it sounds like a holding company or possibly a construction contractor.
Tom
hi tom - they were represented as predecessors by someone trying to sell old, cancelled stock certificates.
Probably will be offered and auctioned on eBay in time for Christmas.
This IRT (Interborough Repertory Theater) is NOT part of the subway system either.
Phil Hom
Is that the company that puts on the long-running play Tales of the Long Island Riff Raff?
:0)
Hello Everyone,
I am currently working on a book about the first fleet of stainless steel subway cars produced in this country that was not a test train (R-11, BMT Zephyr) Of course I am talking about the PTC/SEPTA "Almond Joy" Cars built by Budd in 1960 and retired by SEPTA on 7/5/99. I am looking for basically ANYTHING. Photos, Plans, Diagrams, etc........ Anything will help. All items will be returned within a week or you can meet me in Midtown and have item back IMMEDIATELY. Everything will be credited to those who contribute. Please e-mail me with any questions and I will be happy to get back to you ASAP.
Thanks all....
-Mark W.
I just got back my pictures from Genovese (no digital camera yet!!) of my trip to Branford with the Christmas festivities and I scanned them to post them so here they are. I hope you don't mind that most of them have my 5 yr old son Arthur in them but that's the reason I took the pictures. For you R1-9 fans you can see the model train layout actually inside R-9 1689. Another train set is in a BRT Trolley and Santa Clause is in another trolley. You can see the pictures by clicking:http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/sgtjeff/xmasbranford/xmasbranford.html
Well of course no picture of a trolley museum or model trains would be complete without an obviously fascinated young boy (or girl) to complement them.
I enjoyed the pictures very much. I realy have to visit this place sometime (and drive the subway car).
Happy holidays.
What?!? No Flyer trains anywhere? Aww, man!!!!!:-)
Liked the photos. Nice of them to sign 1689 as an FF.
The Times and Daily News each have an article on the initiation of the V train today.
"Transit Authority officials defended its advertising campaign for the latest alteration to the subway system."
"We've had brochures, newspaper ads and have had posters up in the stations and trains affected by the switch," said TA spokesman James Anyansi. "We've gotten the word out."
Just like Nov 67. Passengers don't pay attention to changes and find out at the last moment.
I knew about it, and I work in DC!
People read but it does not sink in until it is necessary. By that time it is too late.
>>>Officials also agreed to install a moving walkway for G riders to use to transfer from the G train's new last stop in Queens, Court Square, to the E or the F lines, which stop nearby at 23rd Street-Ely Avenue.<<
Par for the course for them I guess. Here they talk about the E & F at 23rd/Ely when in the next paragraph they talk about the F going via 63rd St Connector.
The station information box for Atlantic-Pacific in Brooklyn, which like its couterparts at other major stations lists bus and train connections, fails to mention the LIRR. This is quite an omission seeing as how the LIRR connects directly with the station, and the information boxes for some other stations list train connections that aren't particularly close by (for example, the LIRR for Broadway Junction and Far Rockaway, Metro North for 241st Street).
The R-143 announces the LIRR and shows it on the strip map. Oh well. Will we ever get a 100% correct map?
For now on, I think NYCT should post any and all new subway maps on SubTalk to be proofread before releasing them to the public. New maps to Bus Talk!
I saw your message on "Subtalk". Are you interested in trading duplicates of subway maps?
Cordially,
Charlie Sokol
Hi folks. The new "V" train has been introduced and from the little information that I have it runs from 71st-Continental Avenue in Queens to some point in Manhattan. If anyone knows the terminal for the "V" train in Manhattan please let me know.
#3 West End Jeff
2 Avenue/Houston Street.
Just ask anyone here =D
Listening to 1010 this morning:
"Despite numerous media reports and announcements, people still don't have a clue what to do."
-Hank
classic. i love this town. hehe!
It was nothing compared to 12/13/88, where changes affected every lettered line outside the L, M, G and N. And from some of the horror stories I heard about 11/27/67, it was even worse than that.
I'm aware of what 11/26/67 was like when the Chrystie Street connection opened. From the accounts that I read even the T/Os didn't know where the train would end up. It was a very interesting day in the New York City subway system.
#3 West End Jeff
Some people wouldn't know even if you took their map and outlined their route.
Logic says:
Get on a train and see where it goes. There's only a limited number of places it can possibly go.
Even if it's not exactly the right train, it will likely stop at your station. If not, probably within walking distance.
You can find out on board where the train goes by checking the map, asking questions, or just observing.
The worse-case scenario is you'll have to backtrack on another train.
omg the horror.
Pulled into Queens Plaza on the V at 10am this morning. Everyone waiting for the R did not move an inch. Even with 5 TA employees shouting through megaphones that the V train would make all stops to 71st.
Should have some annoucments in Spanish as well I think.
And Korean, Chinese, Japanese, German, Polish, and Russian. Yiddish, perhaps, as well.
-Hank
The Greenies would really find it easier to get around if they learned a bissle English.
The sad truth is that you could make announcements in every known language spoken in this city & most people, especially the ones that speak english, still wouldn't get it.
Peace,
ANDEE
It doesn't help when the conductor states you could x-fer to the G at Queens Plaza, when you can't.
At least one C/R on the F yesterday at Roosevelt announced that passengers for Queens Plaza should transfer to the E, V, or G. Close but not quite.
I had taken the F this morning from 34th St to Roosevelt Ave.
My observation was alot of people from Brooklyn had to get off at
Rockefeller Center and wait for the V, not too many happy
and many confused faces.
Once at Roosevelt, it was a little chaotic, seems all the E and R
trains city bound were packed and the F and V still with plenty of
room. I did hear alot of people ask the poor guy on the platform
about the G.
Should have had the V go into 63rd tunnel, it would be less
confusing...
John
If the V ran through the 63rd Street Tunnel NOBODY WOULD RIDE IT!
"If the V ran through the 63rd Street Tunnel NOBODY WOULD RIDE IT!"
Except us Subfans of course...:0)
Of course. Don't forget, you would have your choice of seats.
The service pattern is the way it is because the E is via 53rd St. 24/7 and the F is via 63rd St. 24/7. If you run the V via 63rd instead of the F it would be rather confusing to F riders who ride during extreme off hours: sometimes via 53rd, and sometimes via 63rd.
Well, from a passenger they interviewed on TV yesterday, they should have done just that. At 3pm, he waited at 47-50th 30 minutes for a V during which time 5 F's passed to Queens. One of those F's should have been detoured. Imagine the platform at 5th and Lex.
Bullcrap. Riders always overestimate their waits for their trains. 30 minutes? No way.
Maybe people would have had a "clue what to do" if the media had gotten it right...at least one reporter was saying that V trains were starting at 179th Street, and another was saying that it was starting at 71st STREET (instead of Avenue).
David
People were morons. When I rode the F out of Rock Center to 57/6th, some idiot held the doors open until he was adequatley informed why he wasn't at 5th Ave.
You can get lots of good info on the MTA official site, too... www.mta.nyc.ny.us if you didn't already know.
Actually, they are so far the only site I'm aware of that is using one of the new TLDs- www.mta.info
-Hank
If I had to, I'd guess that the D stands for domain. Right? But what do the T and L stand for?
TLD acronym: Top Level Domain.
Thanx.
Jeff,
Where have you been? In a cave or something?
This is been the talk of the board for the past several weeks.
Some people post here and later look back to get a personal answer to their posts without ever bothering to read other posts on the board. Same kind of mentality like many subway riders today who didn't have a clue about the service changes in Queens despite posters in the cars, on station platforms and brochures availiable in the stations.
Some people don't have a clue.
I am still kind of new here and it was hard to miss all the V train stuff, but if I miss of few days of this it is so hard and takes so long to catch up when I come back again! It is not possible to read everything you want to read unless you have a tremendous amount of time!
V train conversations on this board shouldn't be relyed upon. If someone did, he might think the V terminates at Second Ave, Church Ave, Kings Highway, Eastern Parkway, Atlantic Ave, Metropolitian Ave, Jamaica Center, Rockaway Parkway, etc ...
Oh, come now. There are only 468 possibilities (if you count to temporarily closed stops). The person's bound to get it right sooner or later.
:0)
took an R from steinway around 9 this morning - there were enough seats for just about everyone, and while there was some congestion from steinway to queens plaza (and a 5 minute wait there to connect to a jam-packed E), it went as smooth as one might expect.
I heard a few people talking about how 'the e is the only express train' now - which pretty much shows the mentality of a lot of folks out there: just because the F doesn't go to 53rd and lex anymore, they feel the only choice is to cram onto the E train.
I guess we'll hear a lot of that for a long time to come... until the 63rd is linked to a downtwon running 2nd av line... maybe 50 years from now...
If anyone oughta feel shafted though, it's the folks that must be cramming into them 4 car G trains that they got running now. I can understand cutting the line back during rush hour, and that the cars must be needed elsewhere, but damn! cut the line back AND car the length of the trains?
People have to get used to the new alignment.
There will be folks at the four new stops who are not used to be being able to go to Queens - but they'll figure it out soon enough.
I've ridden the G at all hours. Between Brooklyn and Queens, there's hardly room to set up my living room furniture. I have to make do with a La-Z-Boy and a 32" TV.
-Hank
have you doneso recently, around rush hour from the queens end into greenpoint? it's usually filled at least to where there's people standing. cut 2 cars off, and it'll be crowded.
I worked it today, and it was pretty packed.
Out of respect for certain posters I'll give the new alignment
a month to work out teething problems and customer education
issues before passing judgement.
It's the only way. When the R143's show up in numbers, perhaps a number of the R46 A-A sets can be returned to make 6 car G trains once more.
I heard a few people talking about how 'the e is the only express train' now - which pretty much shows the mentality of a lot of folks out there: just because the F doesn't go to 53rd and lex anymore, they feel the only choice is to cram onto the E train
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Strong words from a man who has to travel all the way from Steinway to the City.
For us out here in Forest Hills, the E is the only express train for the reason you point out. It's the only way to connect directly to the 6.
Now, for us commuters traveling from Forest Hills, or Jamaica, or even Jackson Heights, it's nice to run express right to the 6. So before you pass judgement on us "folks", consider how good you have it as someone who has to get to NY from Steinway st.
Anyone who rides down the broadway line through 49th street knows what I mean. Slowly but surely through this last month, more and more tourists have been getting on the downtown trains at this spot in the morning, which was an every day thing back during the summer. Today there had to be a crowd of at least 20 of them that squeezed into one end of the front car of the R train I was on - all standing huddled around 2 or 3 poles (with no sense of balance) while the rest of the train was practically empty. Gee'olly.
Question: How can you spot a tourist on the subway?
Answer: By the outdated map that tourist is reading!
Or by the puzzled looks when they are in front of a Metrocard machine (but then that could be a NYer as well).
also...
*By there traveling in packs of 5-30...
*Startled stumbling and occasionally hitting the floor like a bunch of drunks the instant the train starts moving - all the while making a scene by yelling out 'woooah!'
*talking in strange accents.
The real game in tourist spotting isn't spotting the tourists in the crowd - that's the easy part - the fun comes in when you start guessing where they are from. i've tried this a few times whemn traveling iwth friends on the trains, and before we get off, we'll ask them where they're from. I usually get within a state or 2 of the correct location... commuting fun!
*talking in strange accents.
It depends, here. People with American regional accents (midwestern, southern, etc.) are usually tourists, but many foreign accents indicate natives. From what I've found:
Middle-eastern and Asian accents tend to be natives
European accents tend to be tourists.
Dan
lol
this is quite true... though it seems tourists from other countries try to some degree, or are simply better at, blending into the crowd, whereas those from the midwest and south have likely never seen a subway before and have absolutely no clue what normal and abnormal subway behavior consists of.
though it seems tourists from other countries try to some degree, or are simply better at, blending into the crowd, whereas those from the midwest and south have likely never seen a subway before and have absolutely no clue what normal and abnormal subway behavior consists of.
Not surprising. A good percentage of the tourists from the Midwest, South etc. probably have never been on a subway or indeed any type of passenger rail before, except maybe the Disney World monorail. Foreigners, in contrast, probably are more used to transit.
They might be tourists if...
-They refer to subway lines by color
-They're asking, "what train goes to 42 Street?"
-A family of four gets on, two take a left and sit across from each other, the other two take a right and sit across from each other, then they all try to converse with one another
-They're conspicuously carrying Playbills
-Someone is whining, "Honey, why couldn't we just take a cab?!"
They look for the 405 train.
(Twice, while trying to direct tourists to lower Manhattan when the N/R was running over the bridge, my "4 or 5" was thusly misheard.)
That, and the Oneannine must be the A division equivalents of the Ennanare train in the B division.
For me, I know it's tourist season in NYC when pedestrians on street corners wait for the light to turn green before crossing.
You never cross on the green here! You'll get run over by the turning cars!
>>>-A family of four gets on, two take a left and sit across from each other, the other two take a right and sit across from each other, then they all try to converse with one another <<<
Hey now, wait just a minute. I no defender of tourist behavior but, plenty of New Yorkers are also guilty of this boorish behavior too.
Peace,
ANDEE
>>> -A family of four gets on, two take a left and sit across from each other, the other two take a right and sit across from each other, then they all try to converse with one another <<<
Or maybe it is a homage to days of the family going to Coney Island for the day on the Standards.
Tom
I never thought I be so glad to see hoards of tourists bourding the trains!
...I was, for all of 2 minutes. now i'm sick of them again =)
Sorry typo, Boarding trains, not "Bourding"
I sure hope they're going to Chinatown!
What is it with you and chinatown?
i hear he's got a thing for oriental women.
Today's edition of the Destination:Freedom newsletter has a nice lead article on The Downeaster. I've sent my images from last Friday's inaugural departure to our Webmaster Dave for posting.
What's running on the V?
R46's
Thanks!!!
I saw 6228 on a V train today.
saw a r32 on the V this morning
What time? What run?
saw it at Broadway Lafeyette going SB at about 9:05 am
THANK YOU,KINDLY.
Sure that wasn't an F train? 5 sets of R-32s are assigned to F service.
David
You positive? There were a noticable number of R32's on the F.
Officially, according to the B division matrix, 120 R-46s have been assigned to the V train. Of course, this is subject to car availability as determined by the yard dispatcher in Jamaica Yard.
Nothing but R46's, which is a mistake IMHO, because the F and V look too much alike on 6th Ave.
If the 1 line is rerouted and rebuilt, here's what I think it should look like.
As you can see my idea also involves a new single-line terminal for the 5 train.
Sorry for the Bowling Green platform screw-up =D
Query - a single track terminal for the 5 means that when the train leaves going north, it has to cross the s/b track. The ideal is to have no at grade crossing situations. Any ideas?
Nice one-line diagram.
I have the following questions:
1) Are there any existing conditions (building foundations, utilities, etc...) that might prevent the (1) from making the jog over to West Street South of Chambers?
2) Can the South Ferry platform be extended to accommodate 10 cars (say ~525 feet in length)?
3) How does a single-track terminal affect the number of (5) trains that can turn at Bowling Green station each hour?
4) I like the idea of a transfer between South Ferry and Bowling Green.
5) Since the (1) is out of service, this isn't an issue. However, how would you maintain operations on the Lexington while modifying Bowling Green Station? Some sequencing and phasing diagrams would be helpful showing interim routings.
MATT-2AV
Any rebuilding of the 7th Ave line south of chambers will include modernizing the South Ferry station to accept a full train, perhaps even eliminate the current loop arrangement. If the line is rebuilt on a more westerly alignment, it will likely make its turn at Vesey St, since there is already a large hole in the ground. I would run under the west side of West St or under the mall areas in front of the Battery Park City buildings, and there would be underground passages to whatever gets put up on the WTC site and the new PATH hub. It would then run under Battery Park (and this is where you may run into problems) to the vicinity of the existing South Ferry station. The new station could be a stub-terminal underthe park, or make use of the existing loop to turn back north. In either case, a new South Ferry platform will be built that will accomodate a full train.
-Hank
If the line is rebuilt on a more westerly alignment, it will likely make its turn at Vesey St, since there is already a large hole in the ground.
And the turn radius could be put under the former site of 7 WTC.
I would run under the west side of West St or under the mall areas in front of the Battery Park City buildings, and there would be underground passages to whatever gets put up on the WTC site and the new PATH hub.
Remember you may have to account for NY State's desire to sink West Street underground from roughly Chambers Street to the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. You then have grade issues unless you keep the 1 alignment inboard (east) of the road tunnel ... and you may have turn radius problems since Vesey is the northern edge of the WTC bathtub, which extends out to West Street. Don't want to have to clip the corner of the bathtub!
It would then run under Battery Park (and this is where you may run into problems) to the vicinity of the existing South Ferry station.
Other problem may be the subsurface conditions of Battery Park City and Battery Park. All of the former and most of the latter is on two centuries' worth of fill. BPC was fill from WTC excavation, and from West Street into halfway through the WTC was previous fill. Castle Clinton in Battery Park used to be an island, I'm told! Obviously the tunneling is tougher if it's through unpredictable fill. Probably not impossible, but more challenging.
"And the turn radius could be put under the former site of 7 WTC."
Two possible problems: The area under 7 was the home to a major ConEd transformer substation -- it would have to be relocated. There are a large number of telephone cables under Vesey street to relocate, going to the Verizon building.
The landfill of Battery Park City should not be too much of a problem -- it can be stabilized if needed. Going through Battery Park, however, could be very tricky (and remember that disturbing the surface in any will will bring out the tree huggers and the NIMBYs in droves).
: The area under 7 was the home to a major ConEd transformer substation -- it would have to be relocated. There are a large number of telephone cables under Vesey street to relocate, going to the Verizon building.
Good point, though I'd bet that the substation was destroyed and the cables replaced with others by Con Ed and Verizon, respectively. If new facilities elsewhere have replaced the destroyed/damaged ones, what better time to put a subway line in?
. Going through Battery Park, however, could be very tricky (and remember that disturbing the surface in any will will bring out the tree huggers and the NIMBYs in droves).
Hmmmmm. Not so sure about that ... the neighbors down there will clearly understand the benefits of a subway passing closer to their neighborhood, though they're all understandably a little shell-shocked and protective of their park space right now. Still, I think it'd be less likely to be a problem than in, say, Queens where subways may be viewed (in SOME areas) as a way to bring outsiders into the area. BPC has no such issues.
I note also that the chairwoman of CB1 is on the rebuilding commission -- amazingly, the only person who actually lives in the area to be rebuilt. Rest of the commission looks like the usual suspects from the large commercial real estate world.
Substation -- Con Ed needs to either rebuild it or get a new site -- right now downtown is running on a very temporary feeder system and they are not sure whether it would hold up in a major heat wave.
Battery Park -- even if the BPC folks want it, there are a large number of people who feel that parks must be left entirely intact, at least on the surface.
I worked for the PA when we did the BPC fill - that was very carefully put down and checked. It is also at least 30 years old, so it has had a good amount of time to settle.
As everyone who has written on the subject has noted this will be the only opportunity to really reroute lines without being confined by existing buildings and/or street patterns.
Substation -- Con Ed needs to either rebuild it or get a new site -- right now downtown is running on a very temporary feeder system and they are not sure whether it would hold up in a major heat wave.
Is the 7 WTC site cleared out yet? The bathtub has gotten more attention, but I assume there's a foundation there too that has to be cleared out. Gotta think that Con Ed won't even get a chance to start to rebuild at that site for a year or two.
Hope (and pray) that that will be sufficient enough time for PA/TA and the Rebuilding Authority (or whatever it's called) to formulate some COORDINATED plans on this stuff and bring in all the other parties (including Verizon & Con Ed).
Battery Park -- even if the BPC folks want it, there are a large number of people who feel that parks must be left entirely intact, at least on the surface.
Mmmmmm, maybe. I live near Union Square, chunks of which have been fenced off and dug up for the past 5 years for the Union Square rebuild. While the Parks Dept. (i.e. Henry Stern his ownself) made them save the three mature trees on the little triangle on the east side where 4th Avenue and splits with Broadway, the rest of the park offered various construction sites. Granted they didn't take down any major trees. It's usually the chainsaws that upset the neighbors the most. (And I live on Gramercy Park ... I *know*!)
I worked for the PA when we did the BPC fill - that was very carefully put down and checked. It is also at least 30 years old, so it has had a good amount of time to settle.
Sounds good, and it was probably more consistent in quality. From what I've read about urban archeology, the 18th and 19th century fill was more like Fresh Kills -- everything that could be dumped up to old ships. Any knowledge about that strip of landfill?
We hit a good deal of the "Fresh Kills" type landfill digging the bathtub. Literally garbage! Many rotting timbers, a lot of decaying organic matter.
We hit a good deal of the "Fresh Kills" type landfill digging the bathtub. Literally garbage! Many rotting timbers, a lot of decaying organic matter.
Betcha that's what's under Battery Park. Can you tunnel through it, or do you have to dig it out and build your walls then fill the outside with clean fill?
Building the bathtub did not involve tunneling -- check out how the H&M did when they went through it.
Building the bathtub did not involve tunneling -- check out how the H&M did when they went through it.
I understand that the bathtub and tunneling are 2 separate issues. Was wondering more whether tunneling would be a useful way to relocate the 1 under Battery Park without disrupting the surface, or whether cut-and-cover is the only practical way.
The tree huggers are the problem I was refering to.
-Hank
Personally, I just don't see spending an extra $1 billion just to move the 1/9 600' further west (that's how far West St. is west of Greenwich St.).
There are all sorts of projects that can make the city's transportation system incredibly more useful for tens of thousands of people, cutting their commute time by 15 minutes or more (2nd Ave, Queens super-express, LIRR to GCT, Metro North to Penn Sta, etc.).
Where is the financial justification for this project? It makes it 2 minutes quicker for a Battery Park City resident to get to the west side of Manhattan (but not the east side; they'll still need to walk to the 4/5 for that), and similarly makes it 2 minutes quicker for an upper west sider or Staten Islander to get to the World Financial Center. For anyone who works in any future buildings on the WTC site, it'll probably be a wash. For anyone who works in the eastern Wall Street area it's probably irrelevant: they can catch a subway there.
Also, I hear on this board that stub ends can't serve as many tph as loops. Finally there's good local service on the west side (at the expense of express service, I admit). That'll be gone forever with a stub end.
Personally, I just don't see spending an extra $1 billion just to move the 1/9 600' further west (that's how far West St. is west of Greenwich St.).
There are all sorts of projects that can make the city's transportation system incredibly more useful for tens of thousands of people, cutting their commute time by 15 minutes or more (2nd Ave, Queens super-express, LIRR to GCT, Metro North to Penn Sta, etc.).
It is completely true that moving the 1/9 farther west wouldn't be as useful as the projects you mention. On the other hand, it might very well be capable of being completed for $1 billion, while the more-useful projects definitely cannot. Given New York's difficulty in getting major transit projects accomplished (a person who was born the day the Second Avenue subway was first proposed probably is dead today), it might not be so bad to settle for a smaller-scale, less useful project that has a reasonable chance of being built in a realistic time frame. I know, this viewpoint might be termed defeatist, but given the city's record I prefer to term it realistic.
It is completely true that moving the 1/9 farther west wouldn't be as useful as the projects you mention. On the other hand, it might very well be capable of being completed for $1 billion, while the more-useful projects definitely cannot.
And it may be less than $1 billion, since they'd have to rebuild in place OR relocate and the rebuilding in place probably will cost a bundle anyway.
Not to beat a dead horse, but if you rebuild in place there's only 1500' to be rebuilt at most. South of Liberty and north of Barclay the right of way is undamaged.
... if you rebuild in place there's only 1500' to be rebuilt at most.
Hmmmmm. Good point.
Though it sounds like it might still be a good excuse to "fix" South Ferry.
And I have to think the funding for 1 rebuild/relocation is separate from all other TA funding. IIRC, a substantial chunk of the promised $20 billion goes to fix transit. So while clearly relocating the 1 absent 9/11 is about 498th on the Top 500 list, the availability of dedicated funding may alter that list. Kinda like AirTrain not being an optimal solution, but a fundable one.
The thing is, if you really wanted to serve BPC, it makes more sense to extend the #6 down Vesey Street than to move the #1 west.
As it is, everyone going Downtown on the Lex has to squeeze onto the express, even if they are going over to the WTC/BPC. On the west side, in contrast, pre-disaster you had the choice of the #1 on the west and the 2 and 3 on the east. Run the #6 to the WTC/BPC, and the load would be balanced.
They are only considering moving the #1 because it is out and because they can. But the idea I heard was to remove the debris, pour a little concrete, lay some track, and run the #1/#9 as an open cut to South Ferry. That could be done quickly -- the rest of the rebuild could come later.
Just try getting the 6 over to BPC!
Basically, because of deep building foundations, you simply can't build outside of street lines along Broadway. To the west, there are still some areas where you can go outside the narrow streets.
As far as running the 1/9 as an open cut -- remember that the tracks are about 30' above the bottom of the bathtub. You have to find some way to support them at that elevation, and still allow for rebuilding.
Running the 1/9 line west makes a good deal of sense for BPC. That will leave the old 1/9 tunnel (south of the bathtub) unused. Put a new stub terminal at South Ferry, and run the E down it -- I believe it was built to B division standards, rather than terminate the E at the WTC station.
That should give lots of downtown capacity and options.
The 1/9 is east of the bathtub. The bathtub extends all the way from Liberty to Vesey Street, but doesn't go all the way east to Church St. My guess is the bathtub didn't go further east because that would have meant rebuilding the tracks back in 1970.
I haven't specifically read what's below the 1/9, but I think it's the original rock and dirt. It was built early in this century under what was (until 1970 or so) Greenwich Street. It's really unlikely that anything man-made is underneath.
How about Hudson Terminal? The IRT passes right over it (or if not over the station proper, certainly over the tracks leading to and from it).
The 1971 PATH station is completely to the west of the IRT tunnel (and at deeper level); the E and N/R are completely to the east (and at shallower level).
The Hudson Terminal is east of the IRT and west of the N/R. It's not uner the IRT. You are right of course that the tracks from NJ to the Hudson Terminal pass perpendicularly under the IRT. But otherwise I still think there's only dirt and rock under the 1500' or so of damaged IRT right of way.
the idea I heard was to remove the debris, pour a little concrete, lay some track, and run the #1/#9 as an open cut to South Ferry.
As someone else pointed out, the area to be repaired is limited to 1,500' ... you wouldn't need to run the entire line as an open cut. Perhaps the WTC section only.
Ok I'm a T/O on the IRT so I see alot of what going on with these reroute. One sending the 1 to New Lots is a big waste. And ending the 3 at 14th Street is another screw up. Ok here is my idea first lets start with the 2 I would send it express in the City to 14th and end the 2 there. With the 1 run it to Flatbush local in the City. And send the 3 to New Lots
You're not the first to make this suggestion. I have yet to see a good explanation for the current service pattern over yours. Anybody?
It would seem that just in evening out the distance between the 1, 2 and 3 it would make sense to run the 2 between 241st and 14th and the three between 148th-Lennox and New Lots or Flatbush. The only reason I can think of that the MTA doesn't is that the 2 is a 24/7 route and the 3 is not, so they don't want to have one line service Brooklyn riders during the day and another doing it overnight (unless you run the 1 on a 24/7 basis to Flatbush and keep the 2 as a 24/7 run between 241st and 14th).
I have to agree. I haven't understood the point of this since I first heard it. Just fix the collapsed tunnel. There are much more important things they could do with $1 billion.
Finally there's good local service on the west side (at the expense of express service, I admit). That'll be gone forever with a stub end.
By what criteria? Before 9/11, the 1/9 ran at a maximum of about 15 tph, and that was only northbound in the morning. The afternoon rush ran at about 12 tph, and much of that bypassed some of the busiest local stops (50, 66, 79, 86). For a line that has its own private pair of tracks (until the 2 invaded recently), that's not much service at all. Until 9/11, the express ran much more frequently than the local.
Aren't you argueing with someone who agrees with you?
Arti
It would seem so. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
Not by my reading. AlM seems to suggest that 1 service before 9/11 was very good and that replacing the loop with a stub-end terminal would reduce service. (If I misread his post, I'm sure he'll correct me.) My point is that 1 service was not very good, and that a stub-end terminal would reduce capacity but needn't affect actual service. OTOH, it would forestall any possibility of a service boost that's badly needed.
What I read, was that current 1/2 local service is good, and it'll be gone when 2 starts exp run again and 1 wil have no chance to run decent service because of the reduced capacity terminal.
«««Disclaimer: This doesn't reflect my viewpoint.»»»
Arti
No, I was saying that local service NOW is relatively good (at least in theory; in practice I haven't had much good luck with it). I agree it was bad before 9/11. I'm saying that if you put in a stub end to the local, don't you doom it in perpetuity to half capacity? This doesn't preclude the fact that it was at or under half capacity before 9/11 to begin with.
See. I was able to "translate" it :-)
Arti
Thanks for the correction. (You win, Arti.)
Local service now is better on paper than it is in reality. According to the maps and signs, every single 1 and 2 stops at every single local stop. In reality, many 2's run on the express tracks and the 1 is still up to its old tricks. Still, local service is unquestionably better than it was before 9/11.
As one hoping for an eventual permanent service boost, I agree that reducing capacity would be a big mistake.
Local south of 96th may be a lot better (or not), but north of 96 on Broadway sucks royally.
>>Local south of 96th may be a lot better (or not), but north of 96 on Broadway sucks royally. <<
I can personally vouch for this. I think turning at least some trains at 137 would help greatly.
Or how about this - what if the 3 was sent up the Broadway tracks? True, you'd lose the service to 145 and 148, but you have that at night anyway when the 3 stops running. So stop sending the 3 up Lenox (or only send every other 3 up Lenox). Use the switches north of 96 to send them onto the local tracks.
You lose capcity at 96th street if you switch trains from upper Broadway (current 1/9) onto the Express tracks at 96th. Then all trains have to go through a single junction, and you get a max of about 30 tph, if that, through the whole station on both tracks combined.
Scheduled local service south of 96 is excellent. Actual local service between 42 and 96 is abysmal, although better than before 9/11.
Turning alternate trains at 137 makes sense. Demand is much lower north than south of that point, and by running adequate service down south (well, north of 42), the Bronx would be tremendously overserved. If alternate trains turn at 137, the Upper West Side can get the service it needs without sending empty train after empty train to Riverdale.
How about turning trains at 137 AND also running trains from north of 137 in the peak direction express to 96th? You have three tracks the whole way. That would cut running time from the northern end of the line.
I've toyed with that idea, but from the comments and numbers I've seen here, I currently don't think that would be a good idea. The stations south of 137 are really a lot busier than those north of it. Sufficient local service between 96 and 137 is more important than saving two minutes for those north of 137.
My goal is not to "cut running time from the northern end of the line." Sometimes a local is the best way to serve the masses.
No, I was saying that local service NOW is relatively good (at least in theory; in practice I haven't had much good luck with it). I agree it was bad before 9/11.
I take the 1 or 2 from Houston Street to 34 Street in the afternoon rush hour. Before September 11, I had to wait an average of maybe five to seven minutes for a train, but once one arrived I hardly ever had any trouble getting on. Today, the waits are a couple of minutes shorter on average, but it's not at all uncommon to be unable to squeeze aboard.
Do you think that was a demand or rolling stock issue?
My limited personal experience would say the limited #1/9 service (pre-9/11) wasn't because of low demand. I've been squeezed pretty tight on it in the evening rush hour, but I admit I didn't need to do that trip very often, so my sample is small.
Interesting observation, I usually commute during off-peak hours and I've found non-rush 1 service quite in par with 6 what I usually take.
Arti
The non-rush 1 is pretty good. It's a lot better than most other lines, although I think it gets somewhat less service than the 6. The demand is there; even on weekends, I rarely get a seat.
Rush hours, the 1 gets shafted. The scheduled service is inadequate, so trains get delayed. Then they're sent express to make up for lost time, further reducing local service. As I recently pointed out in another post, more people are inconvenienced by sending a 1 past 50, 66, 79, and 86 than by short-turning the train at 137.
Have you tried 6 during rush hour? I usualy opt for buses, and lately, it looks like others do the same (much more crowding.)
Arti
I didn't say the 6 is any less crowded! (At least the 6 has more scheduled service -- but it has to serve a wider swath.) G riders certainly don't get any sympathy from me, though. I hear they sometimes have to stand.
My only G experience was going to some Polish party at Saturday night, and both the L and G were packed around midnight.
Arti
It always amazes me to see how many people use the subway late at night.
The problem with the 1 is that it has a few very busy local stations in the middle of a line that otherwise doesn't have exceptionally high demand. Adequately serving those local stations would overserve the north and south ends of the line, and I guess the TA is a bit reluctant to do that.
Short-turning alternate trains at 137 would largely do the trick. That was the routine until the mid-80's; I don't know why the TA abandoned it.
I don't think the TA scheduling people realize quite how bad the situation is. They send out 12 tph signed as locals, but they may not know that only (say) 8 tph actually stop at local stations.
At this point, rolling stock should not be an issue. New cars are coming in and the old cars, while old, still function. I don't think the crowds waiting at 42 and 72 care if their local trains are R-62A's, Redbirds, or flatcars with handrails -- as long as it moves and it'll stop at the local stations, it's better than the current service. Besides, turning alternate trains at 137 would allow for additional service south of 137.
In theory, loops can handle as many tph as signalling capacity can permit. In reality, loops with a station make it harder to deal with service disruptions. For example, if you have a series of bunched up trains heading for a loop, it is far harder to even up departure intervals. You have to send trains out as you receive them.
"Any rebuilding of the 7th Ave line south of chambers will include modernizing the South Ferry station to accept a full train, perhaps even eliminate the current loop arrangement."
Is that definite? I haven't seen anything in writing (have I missed an MTA planning study???) Yeah, its a great opportunity for the TA to modernize South Ferry, but just because they should, doesn't mean they would.
As far as running under West Street, I can tell from your post that this is more fantasy than fact. Again, its a neat idea, but I imagine the TA would be reluctant to AIP all the usable tunnel sections.
MATT-2AV
Will South Ferry be a 10-car station?
It should be. That doesn't mean it will be. Upgrading South Ferry is one of the ideas being tossed around. I'm just trying to find out if the idea has extended beyond the imagination of this board. People believe that if they say it here, it will become reality. If only things were that simple.
MATT-2AV
Still I see one big obstacle:
How do you make South Ferry a 10-car station without reducing maximum possible trains per hour on the entire local line from 137th on down?
What is the capacity of two stub-end tracks (e.g., E at WTC)?
What is the capacity of two tracks with tails (e.g., 7 at Times Square)?
What is the capacity of three stub-end tracks (e.g., 7 at Main)?
What is the capacity of three tracks with tails?
The 7 manages to maintain about 30 tph. Is either of the terminals the bottleneck on the line? If not, two tracks with tails or three tracks without tails probably wouldn't reduce capacity of the line. If such a terminal would be a bottleneck, move up to three tracks with tails.
It's clear that two stub-end tracks won't do unless locals have an alternate place to terminate, as some have proposed.
That leads to something I don't understand. Why does the E at Parsons/Archer have so much less turn-around capacity than the 7 at Times Square, since both are stub-ends with tails?
Even stranger, why can the E's south terminal handle 15 tph but its north terminal, with tails, handle only 12 tph? (That's the reason I've seen for the E specials to 179.) I have no idea. Is something wrong with the signals at Jamaica Center?
nah its nothing wrong with them. I live near Jamaica Center so i can speak on this. E trains always get held up at the end because Jamaica center cannot have too many trains in one hour! Here is a prime example. Echo enters Sutphin blvd at 1530. he doesn't enter jamaica center until 1534 because we always gotta wait for another E train to leave Jamaica Center. Not to mention once the Motorman brings it in and dumps, he has about 30 seconds to secure his tools and get off! because once the train comes in, The bell rings and before u can say anything, the train is closing up and pulling off!
With the Es to 179, my E to jamaica center yesterday went thru sutphin without being held, and it got time to sit at Jamaica Center!
We arrived around 1800 and the train left at 1806 so u see how 19 trains to jamaica center and 4 to 179 works out?
only problem is people think TA should have changed the platform signs that say E to jamaica center all times.
but its a TRIAL PERIOD!
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
That doesn't answer my question. The E terminal at Jamaica Center is arranged roughly like the 7 terminal at Times Square. Jamaica Center can handle 12 tph. Times Square can handle 30 tph. Why can't Jamaica Center handle 30 tph, or even 15 tph?
Maybe 'cuz it takes MTA a weee bit longer to
sort and place the outgoing E/F/G/R etc. trains
onto their proper switches and tracks leaving
JamaicaCtr whereas the TS-7 only has that
one primary switch to set before ALL trains
proceed onto a single track (till Q'boro atleast)
Only the E runs to Jamaica Center.
Right... but after a few stops (IIRC) it meets
up with a jumble of lines and multiple tracks..
the 7 meets itself.. and then a middle track.
One problem with Jamaica Center as a terminal is that the switches between Sutphin Boulevard and Jamaica Center are much closer to Sutphin Boulevard, which means that any train using the switch to go in or out of the terminal will take longer to do it than one switching right by the end of a station would. The Queens Boulevard Line level is the one that was supposed to continue along the LIRR right-of-way (my understanding is that the Jaamica Line level was supposed to end where it does).
David
One problem with Jamaica Center as a terminal is that the switches between Sutphin Boulevard and Jamaica Center are much closer to Sutphin Boulevard, which means that any train using the switch to go in or out of the terminal will take longer to do it than one switching right by the end of a station would.
The devil is in the details or how to reduce the capacity of a terminal with tail tracks from 40 tph to 15 tph.
"The devil is in the details or how to reduce the capacity of a terminal with tail tracks from 40 tph to 15 tph."
Yup...how about that?
David
If supposedly MTA was going to connect Manhattan to Staten Island, which option would you prefer?
Note: All options will involve with a connection with the tailtracks south of Broad Street Station on the Nassau St. Line.
1. Have (M) operate from Metropolitan to Tottenville during (Mondays to Fridays from 05:30-21:00) and (J) operate from Parsons/Archer to Tottenville during the remainder of the week (Friday 21:00 to Monday 05:30 and Mondays to Thursdays 21:00 to 05:30 the following day)
2. Have a different route that would operate , like (H) that would operate between Tottenville and up to Essex Street.
Now that I've thought about it a bit, I think extending the J/M to Si would be the best option, considering the transfer options it gives:
1. Get off at Broad, and Wall St's right there.
2. Get off at Fulton, and you have easy transfer to 8th Ave IND A/C, (a little more indirect) transfer to IRTs 1/2 and 4/5, and BMT Broadway N/R one block west, with WTC and WFC beyond it. If the peoplemovers are installed under Fulton (as some have suggested) these connections would be made even simpler.
3. Get off at Chambers, and you're in the city hall district. Simple transfer to BB/CH IRT 4/5/6 station.
4. Get off at Canal, simple transfer to lower level to get Broadway expresss BMT. Can also get 6 at Canal, or Broadway BMT local at Canal.
5. Get off Bowery for Chinatown area.
6. Get off Delancey/Essex for F and S.
7. Stay on and cross Willy B.
The only people who would be served better by the existing Ferry are those right smack dab near the ferry terminal, and also some parts of BPC.
One issue I have is, what happens when you have to cross other tunnels? It would seem that you'd have to cross both Montague and Joralemon (or at least Joralemon depending on how you align the tracks heading into the tunnel), as well as the BBT and any proposed Cross Harbor tunnel (if the Bayonne routing is chosen). What would be the technical issues with crossing tunnels?
I've refered to the track map south of Broad Street, I believe that the best option here is to have a split of the Southbound track just south of Broad Station, before entering the Montague Tunnels and the Manhattan-SI connection Southbound would go under Whitehall and South Ferry and Joralemon Tunnels and then they go underwater.
For the Northbound however, I beleve that they may have to use the existing east tailtrack south of Broad Street to open up a link between SI and Broad Street without opening up a separate trackm open the eastern wall of Broad Street and try to connect the Newly bulit track to the existing Northbound track, before entering Fulton. If they were to use the existing east tailtrack south of Broad, they would have to corner tightly before entering Broad Station.
Any suggestions about to improve the Northbound situation for Broad Station?
Hi; Did anyone ride the last "S" train Sat. Nite? If so, what time did it leave 21 Q.B.? Also, when did the first "G" leave 71 Ave. and/or leave Court Sq. for 71st. Ave. on Sun. Morn? Thanks.
Connected with the Uptown 'V' Train from the 'F' at 2nd Avenue this morning ca. 8:45am. I waited a good ten minutes, maybe a little more, for the train to arrive at the uptown platform. (At least 3 other 'F' trains came through the station besides the one from which I detrained.) I figured I was sure to get a seat, which I did, but there were enough riders for all of the seats to be taken, and even some standees. The consist was of R-46's, led northbound by Car # 5748. As I sat in the head car waiting for the train to depart, I did not notice a T/O enter the cab, which leads me to believe that a T/O rides in the end car to 2nd Avenue and takes over to turn it around. (Or, perhaps I just didn't notice the T/O enter.) The end-sign is of typical 6th Avenue IND design, an orange circle with a white capital letter V. The interior LCD rollsign displayed the following information (wording here might not be exactly right, but close) in sequence:
V
6TH AVE LOCAL
QUEENS BLVD LCL
71-CONTINENTAL
FOREST HILLS
I suspect the train was behind schedule, since we made express stops to 34th Street. The train whistled through Broadway-Lafayette, 14th Street and 23rd Street on the local track without stopping, except at W4. This run served my commute well, so I hope it happens again! We were tailed closely by another 'F' train up 6th Avenue.
The big crowd you saw is a hopeful sign for the train, though we need to see what's happening in Queens to know whether this service plan is working out or not.
I'll be very curious about what happens over thenext month or so..
A month ago, I would have benefitted from the Queens Blvd. local-thru-53rd-St-tunnel service -- I wouldn't have had to transfer anymore. Alas, the delay in start-up of 'V' service precluded me from experiencing this improvement. I'm curious also about any improvement in Queens, my former home.
Well, FWIW, I was waiting on a D at 34th today @ around noon. While waiting for my uptown D to leave I saw one V correctly signed and 2 F's incorrectly signed as Queens Blvd. locals.
They seemed to be moving pretty slowly. The line seemed plugged up as we passed both F's that had passed us at 34th by the time we got to 47/50th.
Peace,
ANDEE
Sending a completely new local train express must've confused a lot of the commuters. They should've let it go local (at least for today), since it's the first day and the sheep - oops, I mean riders - need as little confusion as possible.
just my opinion.
The LCD on mine was
FOREST HILLS
71 AV
QUEENS BL LCL
VIA 53 ST
I think all the V's are like this.
I think you're right. (I knew I wouldn't remember it exactly. It was all I could do to remember the lead car #.) I do now remember "VIA 53 ST". I guess not including "6TH AV LCL" on the LCD "allows" the express diversion I experienced!
I had assumed the last 'F' train ever through 53rd Street would have run late Friday night and then it would assume its usual weekend 63rd Street detour through Saturday even though the change officially wouldn't start until Sunday.
Late Saturday afternoon we were changing from the 'G' at Court Square to continue towards Jackson Heights. When I saw a lot of people coming up from the outbound 23rd/Ely platform, I resigned myself to a long wait for the next 'E'. One came a minute later, making me think there had been a service disruption. At the same time, an 'F' pulled in Manhattan-bound much to my surprise. They must have been doing last-minute prep work on the new connector which led to the 'F' running its lame-duck route for one more day.
Even better, the 'E' actually ran express to Roosevelt. It actually fooled some people headed for Steinway; one said he thought there was only local service on weekends.
Given the last few years, can't say I blame him.
Why is that a surprise?
The new service plan went into effect yesterday, not Saturday. For the past few weekends, a weekend GO had suspended the E and sent the F via 63rd. That GO was not in effect this weekend, so F trains ran their regular routes on both Saturday (via 53rd) and Sunday (via 63rd).
If the new service plan had gone into effect Saturday, your G train would have run through to Forest Hills.
The only surprise was that there were no GO's on the line. The weekend S schedule was rarely in effect.
That's exactly my point. It seems like months on end that the 'F's gone via 63rd on weekends. Sometimes there's been full suspension of service through 53rd (with the 'R' going to Jamaica Center in place of the 'E'), other times there's just been the 'E' on its usual routing. I can't remember the last weekend BOTH ran through 53rd, but now it's academic.
The usual GO service patterns were E suspended, F via 63rd, R extended to Jamaica and E normal, F normal, R via 63rd. I'm sure you'll correct me, but I can't think of a weekend when the E ran via 53rd and the F didn't.
My surprise came when I read the scheduled GO's and none were listed on the F for Saturday. Unlike other lines, the F always had its diversions listed, so it was no surprise when Saturday rolled around and the F ran via 53rd.
No GO's for Queens Blvd lines to help ease the change over is my guess.
Calling Dave Pirmann,
The following caption appears below a photo of an "N" train and a "7" train posing together at the upper level of Queensboro Plaza:
"R33 9312 @ Coney Island/Stillwell Avenue (Fan Trip) Photo by David Pirmann, 8/27/2000."
It's a great picture.
Just thought I'd point that out.
We just talked about that image a few days ago.
The caption is correct.
The photo was taken on the 2000 summer fan trip of a bunch of redbirds and the 0f-116 Observation Car at Coney Island.
Besides if it were at Queensborough Plaza, the "N" would be on the left not the right.
So it was a trick photo! And I fell for it.
That would be a great photo for a subway Jeopardy question.
subway Jeopardy question
I'll take Famous Railfans for $500, Alex.
This Subfan built an R1/9 motorman's cab in his spare bedroom.
UMMM...who is Hey Paul?
BZZZ...wrong
Yes, BMT man your turn
UMMM...who is heypaul?
Yes BMTman you win final jeopardy.
Hey, I like this, gret idea,
Peace,
ANDEE
Besides if it were at Queensborough Plaza, the "N" would be on the left not the right.
The image could have been "flopped" to produce a mirrior image.
Then the rollsign on the R40 slant, and the car numbers, would be backward or on the wrong side...
Good point.
Since Dave took the photo himself I'd think he'd know if it was.
Funny, takes time to load on a slower connection
Funny
If the new service patterns hold true, it looks like it'll be possible to park on weekends at Kew Gardens or Forest Hills for the subway again without having to worry about a partial or full local trip all the way to Manhattan. It's been what, since 1995 when you could count on full 'E' and 'F' express service on weekends?
Those coming from Forest Hills east and headed for west Midtown (Rock Center, Times Square, Penn Station), central Chelsea and the Village will probably benefit most from the new pattern. All those areas will be served by both express services. If you're headed for East 53rd, or if you're coming from Forest Hills east and changing for the Lex, you're stuck with the 'E' or forced to change to the 'R'. If you're coming from a local QB stop, the regular 'R' service is retained.
If you're coming from a local QB stop between Roosevelt and Continental weekends, you've got two feeder services to use to connect to both expresses at Roosevelt- just like it had been on weekdays since 1955. If you're coming from a local stop between QP and Roosevelt, you'll only have one express service available at the Plaza. But the 'R' stops a block from every 6th Avenue 'F' stop from 57th to 23rd- except 34th of course.
If you're going to Queens Center from the east, your weekend service options have doubled (not counting the endless local-only service of recent years).
Going from Manhattan to Queens on weekends will require some big adjustments:
-Accepting the fact that there's only one service available on 53rd.
-Likewise, people switching from the locals at Queens Plaza will have to accept the same as above, and if they want the 'F' to either change twice or stay on the local to Roosevelt.
-If you're going from Flatiron or central Midtown for a local stop between Queens Plaza and Roosevelt, it's best to head for the nearest 'R' stop. No change required at the Plaza, the 'F' will bypass your stop, and you avoid the overburdened 'E'.
-If you're taking the 'G' from Brooklyn to east of Queens Plaza, everything's all backwards from what you've gotten used to.
-The walking Metrocard transfer to the '7' at Court Square is convenient if you don't have an unlimited Metrocard, don't have to save the transfer for a bus, and are hungry. There's a nice diner, a Chinese and a pizza/chicken joint conveniently located on street level between the two services.
Of course if there are more GOs knocking out the '7' between Queensboro and Manhattan, that's going to force more people into an unfamiliar situation.
According to this magazine 3 NYCTA trains were destroyed at the WTC. If this is correct what are the car numbers?
According to this magazine 3 NYCTA trains were destroyed at the WTC. If this is correct what are the car numbers?
Don't think so. Think it was 3 PATH cars (see threads on their car numbers elsewhere on SubTalk). Think the TA operators got all the trains out before the Twin Towers collapsed.
If they truly published this, someone (many people?) ought to send them a note to publish a correction. Sloppy reporting!
Hmm...didn't read that part...
-Hank
My apologies, it was not Railfan and Railroad but TRAINS which said this, on page 15 of the December 2001 issue to be precise.
I was under the impression no PATH equipment was lost on 9-11
Trains is not exactly known for their transit reporting.
At least 4 cars of the 8-car train were totaled. The other 4 may be salavageable.
Railfan & Railroad, while it does have a small amount of 9-11 coverage in the issue that arrived today (February 2001!), makes no mention of how many cars were damaged or destroyed.
Trains apparently does, and as usual has it wrong. Another reason I don't subscribe to that one.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Well I went to chinatown yesterday for christmas presents and I was curious to see how the manhattan bridge work on the north side was going, and so far it seems as if they are doing alot of work so far in the short amount of time that has taken place, even the 9/11 attacks haven't seemed to slow the constuction time down alot. I think the tracks have been stripped., those big vacume machines, and alot of covering, seems very very active, like the willamsburg bridge site. I think this thing is going to be on time (projected completion date is in January 2004) with that being done. Then NYC will be running at a subway capacity not seen in nearly 18 years.
Anyone still skeptical that it will not be completed on time?
Where does it say January 2004? NYCT was smart as to not saying a specific time for completion to keep the commuters from barking for 12 months if something goes wrong.
R68A: Since 2004 is the centennial of the New York City Subway system, it would behoove those in command to make certain that all work on the north side of the Manny B is completed on time, and not have the ridiculous snafu that engulfed the work on the south side for much longer than was anticipated. However, from what those living in New York tell me, the bridge is in rough shape and it might take longer. Why the hell did they put tracks on the flanks instead of the middle of the bridge where there would be less wear and tear is beyond me. I'm no expert but I know enough about physics to understand there is a lot less stress with power down the middle rather than at the flanks. Oh well, we can hope. God willing, I will be there for the Centennial which happens to fall on my birthday, October 27.
I will be in the city on that date, no matter what. October 27 falls on Wednesday in 2004.
You are watching the first step in the process (lead paint removal) then they will get to the actual metal work. It is a long way off.
Can anyone explain all the specific things that are being done as far as the metalwork is concerned? If the south side was closed for 11 years, why is the north side closed for only 6 (3 in the 80's, three in this decade)?
Detailed article in the Times about a week ago. Basically, the idea is to replace the damaged steel beams and to make the bridge so stiff that the beams don't again get damaged by excess sway.
My guess is that in the 80s they were trying to fix it on the cheap and didn't get anything useful done, while this time they are doing it right, and with the largest possible work force that can work effectively (you can probably do it cheaper with a smaller crew, but it takes longer).
Us Steel Corp. had a contract at one time to fix the bridge. Either they backed out, or were fired, or???
Does anybody know anything about that?
I'm sure money was involved, isn't it always. It is too bad work on the bridge wasn't done decades ago when it would have done much more good. Why is the Willy B able to accommodate rail traffic without much of a problem while on the Manny B it seems like an endless story.
Well, I have a positive mental attitude about it. The city did a good job on the South side of the bridge, and they appear to be reasonably on schedule with the north side, despite Sept 11.
If they give the bridge another 25 years, that will be enough time to continue finding new ways to maintain its function. Not the best of all worlds, but hey it's workable.
That's a good way to look at it Ron and I would take a more positive attitude if I could be sure my Sea Beach will one day be back on it. But then you would advise me not to hold my breath until it happens. Right?
Anything's possible, Fred.
One thing's for sure: Any cool service plan requires the bridge to be fully open. And that will happen. After that, well, write a letter. You never know.
The Williamsburg has it's tracks in the center, so the load is fairly equal on the structural supports when trains cross it. On the Manhattan bridge, the roadbed dips towards the side the train is running. With trains bending the bridge on either side, the roadway structure was being torn apart.
You know Chris that I have never ridden on a train across the Will B. I will have to next time in town. In fact, the only time I was ever on t hat bridge was September 18, 1954. That was the day our family crossed the bridge on our way out of New York for our big move to California.
It looks radically different now, especially on the Manhattab side. The two walkways have been removed on either sides of the tracks.
My understanding of the project was that the phase done in the 1980s was preliminary, designed to keep the bridge usable until the main rehabilitation contract (going on now) could get underway.
David
In years past they would have just blasted that lead paint off into the air. How things change! (what am I saying years past they would have done NOTHING - LET IT ROT!)
(In years past they would have just blasted that lead paint off into the air. How things change!)
The change is costing you $300,000 per signal project just for environmental engineers to oversee the work. We're not talking about actual large scale lead paint removal here, just old signal cases with asbestos and lead on old relay rooms. That money wasn't budgeted, and it is (one of the things) that's killing us. I can't imagine what the removal on the bridge is costing.
At least the TA only has to do it once. Unless they finds something wrong with the paint and insulation now used in lieu of lead and asbestos.
Anyone still skeptical that it will not be completed on time?
It probably will. The skepticism about how long the bridge will be able to carry 24 TPH on both sides without the same structural problems returning a few years later.
Yeah, suspension bridges do not lend themselves well to Rail traffic, especially on the outside edge like the MB. It's ironic that the one cantelever bridge, which works well with rail traffic, the Queensboro bridge, is abandoned to rail traffic!
The Queensboro Bridge is in pretty bad condition too. Perhaps its being a cantilever bridge is good, but just about everything else is bad with it. I am no engineer, but I'm told it's extremely badly built out of totally unsuitable materials. Oops. But Astoria to South Ferry across the Queensboro Bridge and 2nd Av El is at least one thing we can dream of and envy other people's grandfathers.
All the lower East River bridges except the Brooklyn Bridge were not built smartly. The design flaw in the Manhattan bridges "outside tracks" alignment has created 18 years of hell. The Williamsburg Bridge was built in 1903, and as a cost-saving measure, didn't use galvanized metal. The darn thing started to rust before it was finished! The Queensboro bridge had a similiar shoddy construction history.
I've said for a long time, long after all the other bridges have fallen into the water, the Brooklyn Bridge will still be standing strong. The Roeblings did a pretty damn good job there! And especially so considering it was built in the 1870's and early 1880's.
The Roeblings did a pretty damn good job there! And especially so considering it was built in the 1870's and early 1880's.
The removal of the center truss in the early 1950's significantly weakened the structural integrity of the Brooklyn Bridge.
>>> The removal of the center truss in the early 1950's significantly weakened the structural integrity of the Brooklyn Bridge. <<<
Why was it removed?
Peace,
ANDEE
I guess when they removed rail traffic?
True, but it was overbuilt to begin with and the removal of the el train tracks eased the strain.
True, but it was overbuilt to begin with and the removal of the el train tracks eased the strain.
By 1867 standards. However, there are weight restrictions on vehicles because of the bridge does not meet current standards. The 1950's rehab reduced the bridge's live load capability.
What a pile of garbage all these bridges are!
Then there's Hell Gate Bridge.
Chris: Did rail traffic ever cross the Queensborough Bridge? I lived very close by and never was under the impression that there was any such thing.
The Williamsburg Bridge was built in 1903, and as a cost-saving measure, didn't use galvanized metal.
You are referring to the use of galvanized wire in the suspension cables not the truss work which is not galvanized in either bridge. The Williamsburg encased the critical wires in an oil bath. There has been very little corrosion to these non-galvanized wires, despite numerous worries over the last 100 years.
Perhaps its being a cantilever bridge is good, but just about everything else is bad with it. I am no engineer, but I'm told it's extremely badly built out of totally unsuitable materials.
The Queensboro is an extremely poor design. It is not a standard cantilever bridge. Only one other bridge was similarly designed. That bridge collapsed one year before the Queensboro was finished. There were thorough engineering studies made before the Queensboro was opened as a result. Among the findings were that the designers neglected to consider the additional weight of snow and that the designers underestimated the effects of wind loading by several orders of magnitude. The recommendations that were followed were to considerably reduce the bridge's live and dead loads. Portions of the upper level were never built and two of the projected 4 railway tracks were never used. The Queensboro has been doing an architectural striptease ever since to remove dead and live loads. The recent rehabilitation, started in the early 1980's removed more upper level structure and two traffic lanes.
The only thing that has probably kept the bridge above the East River was its early use of "nickel steel", an early form of stainless, for certain critical structural members. Had these members rusted at the rate of other non-structural members the bridge would not be still standing.
The Queensboro is an extremely poor design. It is not a standard cantilever bridge. Only one other bridge was similarly designed. That bridge collapsed one year before the Queensboro was finished.
Not to mention one of the ugliest bridges I've ever seen. The Williamsburg is not too sharp either. It's ironic that after New York built the Brooklyn bridge (one of the prettiest in the country, along with the Golden Gate), New york built nothing but junky, ugly bridges. The Manhattan is not really bad to look at, but is junky, and built too close to the Brooklyn Bridge.
GP38: That seems to be true to this naked eye. I have always marveled at the majestic strength and greatness of the Brooklyn Bridge. When the other bridges are stacked up against it, they come up with a bad case of the shorts. The Roeblings fashioned a masterpiece when they presented the Brooklyn Bridge to the nation in 1883.
Yeah, it's sad that bridge building peaked in NY in 1885 when they built the Brooklyn Bridge. It was all downhill after that.
I think the Manhattan is a pretty good-looking bridge, as is the George Washington. Have you ever seen the GWB towers lit up?
The Bayonne, Henry Hudson and Hell Gate bridges are pleasing to the eye, and the Triboro (Queens span) has an aesthetic appeal to it. The Manhattan span of the Triboro has an interesting appearance, looking like an archway (miniature versions of the GWB towers).
I suppose the simple design of the Throgs Neck, Whitestone and Verrazano has a structurally pure aspect to it - a sense of massiveness but at the same time gracefully arching across. The Throgs Neck looks kind of short and stubby when compared to the Whitestone, though.
Even the Williamsburg that everyone loves to hate - the tapered shape of the towers gives the bridge a look of strength and massiveness, the same way it does for the Brooklyn Bridge. The Manhattan bridge, on the other hand, has a more "flimsy" look, though I suppose that adds to the sense of balance and grace.
I like the 59th street bridge, as well as the Tappan Zee, Goethals and Outerbridge. They have a symmetric appearance, and give the sense of just a large amount of steel something sturdy and strong. I get the same feeling looking at the Pulaski - just miles of steel suspended in the air by what, more steel.
The Gil Hodges is interesting - the lift towers are tapered inward, giving it a strange sort of "feel." The swing-style Harlem River Bridges are a dime a dozen, though they'd stand out more in a city with any fewer bridges than NYC. The Washington and Hamilton Bridges are interesting to look at, as is High Bridge - right there you have a century's worth of bridge building in one view! High Bridge, of course, was forever changed when some of the original spans were removed to put in a larger steel span to widen the navigable path - purists would cry about it, but I think it's an interesting juxtaposition of the building styles.
The only real butt-ugly bridges I can think of are a few of the rail bridges in NJ - black lift bridges are the ugliest design!
New York wouldn't be New York without the bridges!
Stephen,
I presume you're speaking of the first Quebec cantilever rail bridge - that one collapsed because at the last minute the designs were changed to lengthen the central suspended span. Needless to say, the damn thing plopped right off in the water. But they built another bridge like it afterwards, and it's still standing today (the longest cantilever bridge in the world, about 1800 feet cantilevered between the pillars - and probably will remain so since cable-stayed bridges are more economical for that length).
I presume you're speaking of the first Quebec cantilever rail bridge - that one collapsed because at the last minute the designs were changed to lengthen the central suspended span....
"The Blackwell's Island Bridge structure is of the cantilever type, but without the usual suspended span between the extremities of the cantilever arms...The omission of the ordinary suspended span between the cantilever arms necessitated the employment of so-called rocker arms or vertical members, having a length equal to the depth of truss and connection the extremities of the top chords of the island cantilever arms with the extremities of the bottom chords of the other cantilever arms in the same span, thus making the trusses continuous throughout the entire distance from the Manhattan anchorage to the Queens Borough anchorage...As the two rocker members connecting the ends of tghe lever arms cause the adjacent ends of the lever arms to move up and down together, the structure is continuous from end to end for live load stresses, and these stresses cannot be computed by the usual static method and must be found by means of the elastic properties of the materials", Prof. Wm. H. Burr, "The Safe Live Loads for the Blackwell's Island Bridge", The Engineering Record, No. 58, Vol 20, Novenber 14, 1908.
"Sixth-Computations for all the main truss members of the bridge show that the stresses prduced by the prescribed congested live load, combined with the dead load or with the dead load and wind loading, are higher than prescribed as permissible in the specifications, and higher than prudent to permit, although practically not in excess of the limits approved by the Commission of Expert Engineers in 1903.,"Prof. Wm. H. Burr, ibid.
New York City owes a great debt to the collapse of the Quebec bridge.
The sophistication of construction engineers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries never ceases to amaze me.
It's ironic that the one cantelever bridge, which works well with rail traffic, the Queensboro bridge, is abandoned to rail traffic!
This cantilever bridge never worked well with rail traffic. Severe limits were placed on the weight of the rail cars. Severe restrictions were placed on the spacing between El trains and even trolley cars because of the bridge's structural shortcomings.
El service started around 1915. The tracks were in the center of the bridge's upper level. The tracks were moved to the north side in 1928. There is a 4% deflection in the bridge as a result of the El car loading from between 1928 and 1942. This was at a time that such service was limited to light weight wooden cars.
I didn't realize it was such a piece of garbage!
I'd hate to think of what would have happened if Triplexes had ever run across it. Ay-ay-ay!!!
Can you imagine the hellish effect on rail service the bridge's shortcomings would've brought had the BRT been granted it's original wish to put the BMT tracks on that bridge, instead of the 60th St. tube?
One word comes to mind:
Timmm-berrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!
Yup, on the Triplex's innaugural trip to Queens.
Can you imagine the hellish effect on rail service the bridge's shortcomings would've brought had the BRT been granted it's original wish to put the BMT tracks on that bridge, instead of the 60th St. tube?
Your attention is called to Conclusion 6 in Prof. Burr's article that I quoted in another thread. Key structural elements of the bridge as originally planned would have been overloaded with no live load in a severe wind. The BRT trains would not have been necessary.
Has anyone taken any pictures of the new "V" train yet?
I know they're only R-46's, but I'd still love to see a pic of the train in service :)
It's just a roll sign.
I know, but I still want to see 'em.
call me a subway fanatic :)
I have taken a couple.
They will be up soon on my web site.
Transfer Point
Also there, pictures of the V train using R32's and R40 slants (9/8/01)
lol
Arti
I knew I shouldn't have taken that left turn at Queensboro!
:0)
Or was it Albuquoique?:-)
There's a picture of the V in Randy Kennedy's Tunnel Vision column.
I'm trying to figure out if some routes on the IND are physically possible and if they are if they are, if they were ever used in revenue service, and why they don't use them now.
1. Central Park West to 53rd St to Queens
2. 8th Avenue to Brooklyn via 6th Ave line at West 4th St (14th-8th to W4th to Bway-Lafayette)
3. A straight 6th Avenue train right down 6th Ave straight through West 4th St to Brooklyn via Bway-Nassau. (I know that can be done b/c JFK Express did, but ever any other service and if yes why not now?)
1. Central Park West to 53rd St to Queens
2. 8th Avenue to Brooklyn via 6th Ave line at West 4th St (14th-8th to W4th to Bway-Lafayette)
3. A straight 6th Avenue train right down 6th Ave straight through West 4th St to Brooklyn via Bway-Nassau. (I know that can be done b/c JFK Express did, but ever any other service and if yes why not now?)
1. According to Peter Dougherty's track maps, there is no connection.
2 or 3. It's 100% possible, and is often done for diversions due to track work. But other postings on this site have pointed out that doing 2 or 3 (especially doing both) would seriously cut down on trains per hour because of the merges required south of W 4th.
Are there speed restrictions on the switches or something? It looks like a local train on the A-C-E line could be swapped one-for-one with a local train on the B-D-F line on paper - I'm just wondering what, other than timetabling accurate enough that both trains arrive near enough at once, obstructs such a move.
No, no particularly onerous speed restrictions.
All 6th Avenue locals could be sent 14/6-W4-Spring and all 8th Avenue locals could be sent 14/8-W4-B/L. Sending some locals one way and other locals the other way would make for more flexible service arrangements but would induce delays whenever two merging trains approach the switch at the same time.
Presumably that would only delay one train though - given a about a 12 ft clearance between levels and a maximum slope of about 1 in 50 as pretty standard for any railroad anywhere, a ramp between levels must be about 600 ft long, which I understand to be one train length.
That sounds about right, but I don't think the signal system would allow a train to enter the station if another train is just past the platform waiting for its lineup.
That was done all the time from 1940 through 1949. On the 8th Ave the E went to Bway-Lafayette and the AA or CC went to Hudson Terminal. On 6th Ave the D went to Hudson Terminal and the F went to Bway-Lafayette. There were no delays. On time performance was 99.06% in 1945; 99.20% in 1946; 99.68% in 1947; 99.22% in 1948 and 99.24% in 1949. Running times were also faster and more passengers were carried than today.
That was done all the time from 1940 through 1949. On the 8th Ave the E went to Bway-Lafayette and the AA or CC went to Hudson Terminal. On 6th Ave the D went to Hudson Terminal and the F went to Bway-Lafayette. There were no delays.
It seems to make sense to send 6th avenue straight down the 6th Avenue line to World Trade Center Terminal. Why did they stop doing that, and give the 6th Avenue a bend at west 4th Street?
Possible delays due to merging with 8th Ave. local trains. The current service pattern prevents this. Of course, if they wanted to, they could run all 8th Ave. locals via Houston St. and all 6th Ave. locals straight down 6th Ave. without delays.
Hmmmm, E and C via Rutgers would allow the express to be restored between Church & Bergen without a large amount of cars needed. Terminating the F at WTC and running the V to Euclid would give Fulton St. riders increased options. Not a bad idea.
I don't think you have to swap all the lines at West Fourth. Keeping the F where it is and sending the V through on Sixth Ave. to Chambers/WTC/Hudson Terminal while the E goes to Fulton local in Brooklyn (or vice versa) would not only give both Sixth and Eighth Ave. riders direct access to lower Manhattan, but would give Queens Blvd. local passengers a one-seat ride there, instead of having to switch trains between Queens Plaza and 53rd and Fifth (either to the E, the R or to the No. 6 Lex local).
The C train could then either serve as the Culver local to Church Ave. while the F continues to run to Coney Island, but goes Culver express between Church and Jay, or the C could be routed across the Willie B to Brooklyn via the Chrystie St. connection, either to Metropolitan Ave., Parsons or (my personal choice when they expand CTBC to all lines) Rockaway Parkway, since the eight-car C trains could run on the Eastern Division, while the other 600-foot trains on Sixth and Eighth avenues can't.
I think the point was to avoid any switching at W4th. Swapping both locals south of W4 requires no switching, like today's service.
D trains used to terminate at Hudson Terminal and at the same time E trains terminated at Broadway-Lafayette.
D trains used to terminate at Hudson Terminal and at the same time E trains terminated at Broadway-Lafayette.
Wouldn't that make the D blue and the E orange?
No. Colors are based on Midtown routings.
Besides, the modern color scheme didn't exist until 1979.
Oh that's right, the switch would be made at W4th, below midtown.
If you want to take the color system to it's extreme, then the B/D should be blue because it runs on 8th Ave above 59th St. (called Central Pk West to 110th).
Midtown is defined (roughly speaking) as the area of Manhattan between 14th and 57th. The B and D do travel on 8th Avenue for four blocks within that area, but I think we can forgive them. All that leaves out are the J/M/Z, the G, and the shuttles.
Incidentally, if, as some here have proposed, the C merges with the J or M, the resulting route would be blue, even though Broadway (Brooklyn) is now thought of as brown.
Any line line using the Chrystie St connection to Williamsburg would change the Brown to blue (from 8th) or Orange from 6th. I guess a modern version of the KK would be Orange, not Brown, if ran today.
Incidentally,
Connection from Chrystie St. to 8th Av. is possible northbound only - there is no switch from local to express between W. 4th St. and Broadway-Lafayette.
Bob Sklar
Why not look at the track maps?
-Dave
[1. Central Park West to 53rd St to Queens]
Physically Impossible.
[2. 8th Avenue to Brooklyn via 6th Ave line at West 4th St (14th-8th to W4th to Bway-Lafayette)]
Physically Possible. Uptown B and D trains, before July, could use this.
[3. A straight 6th Avenue train right down 6th Ave straight through West 4th St to Brooklyn via Bway-Nassau. (I know that can be done b/c JFK Express did, but ever any other service and if yes why not now?)]
F trains can use this as a re-route. B and D trains used this as a reroute via the Culver line also before July 2001.
I know of no regular service routes that utilized this.
2. Before the 6 Av line was built, the E train ran down 8th Av to W 4 and then down Houston, through Rutgers and on to Church Av.
3. I've seen some older maps where the E (8 Av) terminates at 2nd Av while the F (6 Av) goes to Hudson Terminal.
This is not quite right. The 6th Avenue - 8th Avenue connections are only on the local tracks. The Chrystie Street connection from the Manhattan Bridge only leads to the express tracks, and the first switch to the local tracks is north of W4 (i.e., too late). So local trains on 8th Avenue (if they're on the express track at 59th, it's too late) can reach East Broadway but not Grand Street.
The 6th Avenue - 8th Avenue connections are only on the local tracks. The Chrystie Street connection from the Manhattan Bridge only leads to the express tracks, and the first switch to the local tracks is north of W4 (i.e., too late). So local trains on 8th Avenue (if they're on the express track at 59th, it's too late) can reach East Broadway but not Grand Street.
Interesting. And since Chrystie was built after W 4th St, any kind of retrofitting of the W 4th complex to fix this problem would have been a very expensive nightmare.
But are there NO local/express crossovers from 59th to 4th on the 8th Avenue line? Golly!
Actually, there are no L/X crossovers on the 8th Av Line between 59th and CANAL. West 4 is a Local/Local crossover between two lines.
Actually, there are no L/X crossovers on the 8th Av Line between 59th and CANAL.
Wow, that seems a LONG way. Maybe I'm just used to the IRT which seems to have 'em mile to 2 miles. 59th to Canal is more like 4 miles. So if an A train dies, the entire uptown express is DOA? Yeesh.
Yeah, it seems they put in everything including the kitchen sink when the IND was built, except for crossover switches along 8th Ave. in Mantattan. They're few and far between. Then OTOH you've got scissor switches galore along 6th Ave. between 34th and 42nd Streets.
Wow, the tracks are very complex there, and not even as complex as they could be!
There are no crossovers between 59 and Canal! Shocking but true.
On 9/12, when trains were still staying away from lower Manhattan, I found myself at 59 with a downtown A train on the express track. I got on to see where it would go -- it had only two options: go through lower Manhattan or use the D turnoff to 53rd Street. It did the former, bypassing the creepy stations south of W4 but, to my surprise, stopping at High, where a small crowd was waiting to board (so apparently select trains were running via Cranberry).
There are crossovers on the IND between 34th and 23rd. There is also a center relay/storage track between those two stations.
Southbound locals can switch to the express. Southbound expresses cannot switch to the local.
It's still a crossover. :)
Yes, but it's not relevant to this discussion. An A train that stops on the southbound express track at 59 cannot reach the Rutgers tube without pretending it's a D; an A train that pulls out of 59 on its regular route just as a problem at High is found has no way of reaching Jay without reversing twice.
True, the S/B express track cannot switch directly into the S/B local track between Canal and 59/8, BUT other switches exist, one for a relay track and another for the L/L at 42/8.
The lower level was accessible only by southbound trains coming off the Queens line; i. e., E trains. A southbound A or C train cannot switch to the lower level track.
Right. I was talking about the center express S/B track coming down from 59/8.
Both of which point the wrong way -- and neither of which is terribly helpful in getting the train to Brooklyn. I suppose you could bring the train the wrong way up the southbound E track to 5th Avenue and reverse again down the V onto 6th Avenue -- but wouldn't it be easier to reverse up the crossover from local to express to end up on the local track? Still, I can't imagine either of those happening while other trains are trying to get through (especially now that A, C, and E trains are all sharing the local track due to the disruption ahead).
A simple express-to-local crossover would have solved the problem. Most other lines have them every express station or two.
A simple express-to-local crossover would have solved the problem. Most other lines have them every express station or two.
Which makes me ask, Given that the IND has an impressive collection of flyovers and flyunders and crossovers ... how comes it DOESN'T have these (seemingly obvious) ones?
No clue! Maybe the builders had planned a crossover there but put it on 6th Avenue by accident? (Look between 34 and 42.)
Yeah, that's the only place I know where you've got back-to-back scissor switches between any two tracks.
Someone on here once said that one set of crossovers here was installed many years later, after realizing that 34th St. was going to be used as a terminal for a long time. I still don't understand why.
My guess would be to enable a train to switch from one local track clear across to the other. It can be done, IIRC.
What about homeball aleey on the IND between 125-135/145?
Yup, it was used regularly in September 1989 when an asbestos problem related to a water main break at 42nd/8th caused the A to terminate at 34th St 24/7.
3. A straight 6th Avenue train right down 6th Ave straight through West 4th St to Brooklyn via Bway-Nassau. (I know that can be done b/c JFK Express did, but ever any other service and if yes why not now?)
Prior to the extension of the IND 6 Avenue Line from Church Avenue to Coney Island via the BMT Culver Line Rt D 6 Avenue Express trains terminated at Hudson Terminal and Rt E 8 Avenue Express trains terminated at Broadway-Lafayette Street.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Wow, that's totally backwards!
GP 38
The IND while somewhat overbuilt was designed so that passengers could travel over different routes without having to change trains.
Note the A/AA Wash Hts-8 Av and the B/BB Wash Hts-6 Av; ditto the C/CC Concourse-8 Av and D/DD Concourse-6 Av. The lines were built with many elaborate junctions that avoided at-grade crossings.
So a hypothetical passenger on the 8 Avenue Line could take an E train to Broadway-Lafayette and make an accross the platfom transfer to an F train going to Church Avenue. Similarly a southbound 6 Avenue passenger could take a D train to Canal Street and make an accross the platform transfer to A trains.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Those switches south of W. 4th St. do allow flexibility in the event of an emergency.
But, as I've said elsewhere in this thread, not for southbound 8th Avenue expresses and not for northbound trains coming over the bridge.
Well, some flexibility, anyway. IMHO the IND could have sprung for a few more scissor switches along 8th Ave, say between 34th and 23rd Sts. There's an open space between the northbound express and local tracks just south of 23rd St. Could there have been a switch of some sort at that spot in the early years of the IND?
Thatwould be an Ideal location for a diamond switch location. Then the "A" downtown riders would no longer be "captives" of the future problems. Rutgers would be a choice after 59th St.
avid
Is there any point to these?
With all of the talk about how the public seems oblivious to signs and announcements regarding route changes and even under "normal" conditions, have there ever been studies done to see what makes these people act the way they do? The "clueless" people that have been discussed here come from all different backrounds, races, nationalities, income brackets, sexes, ages, and intellegence levels. What causes these people to become "morons" when it comes to riding transit? If there are any medical professionals out there who may know some answers, please enlighten us!
For one the anouncements are usually so unintelligeble, that probably most won't bother.
Arti
How about a close cousin of math anxiety? I know people who have serious map anxiety even though they are very intelligent. The idea of trying to understand a subway map, or filling out a Form 1040-EZ tax form, frightens them. They made it through High School math but don't ever want to see another geometry problem, or equation, or map for that matter, again.
(This is not based on any knowledge of pychology, just personal experience).
[I know people who have serious map anxiety even though they are very intelligent. ]
I had a frend and associate like that. When we were in Kansas City on work assignement, when driving around, my task was to read the map (I don't drive.)
Arti
I think we get a largely slanted impression from the media. They obviously set out to prove the negative and interview only people who support that proposition. I'm quite sure that not everyone was confused this morning but if you watch the news, that would hardly seem the case. Our Mayor - well he was just a bonus. I sometimes think that people act stupid just to be interviewed.
"I sometimes think that people act stupid just to be
interviewed."
I'd be inclined to agree.
Uh-oh, Agreement??????
Of course, depending on who was doing the interviewing, maybe I'd briefly consider being temporarily "stupid" too... :0)
Yeah, Whitney Casey would be my current favorite - but she needs to get rid of the contacts. Of course, Todd introduced me to Pat Carroll and she'd also do.
I'm not just talking about today's "V Train" situation. I'm talking about during every day situations. On a MOVING TRAIN somebody asked me which way the front was!! On Track 5 in Newark, during rush hours there are frequently 2 trains back to back at the platform. Somebody asked me "Which train is leaving first?" And the list is endless...
I was not referring to just this service change. I still remember July 22 when I stood on the uptown platform at 34th and 6th directing customers. I was interviewed by a newsday reporter as to how the first day of flip-service was going. My response was generally positive citing limited confusion and some tweeking would make it better. The TA employees who actually made print were the ones who put a more negative spin on the subject.
The same was true for the customers. Those that seemed to know what was happening or asked simple questions were not interviewed at all. The ones who were completely lost were exclusively sought out by the media, print, tv and radio.
Ok, let's forget the media and interviews. I'm referring to what I see and hear on a regular daily basis, where all kinds of seemingly intellegent, rational, level headed people LOSE ALL OF THEIR COMMON SENSE when they enter a train station. That's what I'm trying to say!
Okay, I misunderstood. I suppose when people descend stairways and passages that change directions frequently some folks lose their orientation. They dont have the landmarks they usually rely on to navigate safely. They also don't trust what they think they hear or the posters that may not be written as clearly as possible. They just do not trust their senses to navigate confidently.
Goose juice in the ventiliation system. They are still perfecting the formula, but once it's complete, all commputers will grow wings, a beak, and webbed feet.
Great, so now the R142, R142A and R143 would be non functional! :-) hehehe
If you just moved from Britain, or Italy, or Japan, or someplace else where trains left-run, you would be advised to ask someone knowledgeable about which way the train is going!
It would make for an INTERESTING study ... in my own experiences, I'd walk the train telling the geese to get off, train out of service because it was unsafe to ride, I'd clear the cars, start walking back up front and DAMN if one yoyo didn't decide to get BACK on, followed by dozens of others. Lemming effect is what I used to refer to it as.
I think other posters here have done a good job listing some of the reasons: A rider might not pay attention to new signs or maps; ignores the ads MTA put in the newspapers or the articles, and didn't watch TV news.
Others may have trouble with directions. I sometimes get lost figuring out north from south on the street, but navigate very easily in the subway. For others, it's vice-versa.
Other people are too busy reading, yakking on cellphones, eating a McDonald's hamburger or doing other things to notice that their train just went by, or that they missed their stop.
I remember one young woman who got very upset on boarding an E train right after Archer Av opened, and thought she had gone into some other dimension when the train didn't take her to 179 St station.
I happen to be a psychologist myself, and so I typed "signage" into the bibliographic database that we used. Only 25 articles came up, nothing about railway signage:
ONEILL MJ
EFFECTS OF SIGNAGE AND FLOOR-PLAN CONFIGURATION ON WAYFINDING ACCURACY
ENVIRON BEHAV 23 (5): 553-574 SEP 1991
Dogu U, Erkip F
Spatial factors affecting wayfinding and orientation - A case study in a shopping mall
ENVIRON BEHAV 32 (6): 731-755 NOV 2000
Of course, I may have used the wrong keyword, but even so I was surprised. It is possible that research has been done, but not published.
From my own observations of the London Underground:
Too many signs are in 'key locations' - well, where else would you put them, but all too often, gazing at a map to identify the correct passageway to take blocks the traffic. People may decide that they would rather be lost than have 1000s of angry commuter held up behind them.
Too much obscure terminology. LU uses "Eastbound", "Westbound" and so on. I have been using the system for years, and still find I have to stop to think about these. It must be even worse for tourists. More helpful for me would be "City", "West End", "City AND West End", "City OR West End" and "Eastern Suburbs" etc., but only because this is meaningful to me. I am sure that a tourist would still not be happy with these unfamiliar terms.
Here is another idea: Use computer technology to interact via radio with hand-held devices. Put your intended destination and preferred route into the device. As you walk through the station, detectors know where you are. They tell you where to go at each intersection, and even which train to catch on the platform.
Patterns of traffic flow and heat and mass transport.
We, in New York and every other city in the US grew up with traffic rules of etiquet etched into our behavior.
left-hand drive, keep right, right on red allowed, yield rightof way.
This is all good for us.
There are however, people from other lands, near and far that are raised in a right-hand drive, keep left society. Then there are those raised in rural third world societies were traffic was never heavey enough to need etiquet, or rules.They are following the laws of physics, They walk what appears to be hellter skellter.
We have folks from Honk Kong, Britian, Japan, Bermuda and Jamaica on the wrong side of the road(sidewalk or passageway and staircase).
Then we also have folks from some African and Latin American countries that are used to taking the shortest route between to points. This is a form of mathematics.
To those of us raised under the current traffic patterns and rules governing its flow, we think they are 1) Rude, stupid, lost, pushy.
They are still learning a second traffic language so to speak.
Now introduce massive changes into the system, some parttime, some onetime, some only in one direction and we get a little chaotic.
Now pour on a media that thrives on the sensational and New Yorkers are made to appear like knuckle dragging rude brutes.
So we wind up with not 15 minutes of fame, but a sound bite of standup comedy
avid
Onthe one hand, Newsday says, riders complained about the V. On the other hand, the TA claims the V trains were full, the F train slightly less so today.
Point your browsers to:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/ny-nyvee172512946dec17.story
According to the article:
The new service, which operates weekdays only, debuted Sunday at 6 a.m.
Run that by me again?
"It'll just be the V - which I won't take because it's local," and the E, which is "going to be more crowded," Burns said.
And that, my friends, is the problem with Queens Boulevard riders.
"It'll just be the V - which I won't take because it's local," and the E, which is "going to be more crowded," Burns said.
And that, my friends, is the problem with Queens Boulevard riders.
Prior to the change Mr. Burns could take either the E or the F at a combined service level of 30 tph. After the change Mr. Burns can take either the E or the V for a combined service level of 25 tph. That's a 16.7% reduction in service.
Did I imply otherwise?
I don't think the average commuter is commuting between a Queens Boulevard express station and 23rd-Ely. More are going to Manhattan.
"Prior to the change Mr. Burns could take either the E or the F at a combined service level of 30 tph. After the change Mr.
Burns can take either the E or the V for a combined service level of 25 tph. That's a 16.7% reduction in service. "
Only if you require a change at 53rd Street. The majority of riders are getting 50 tph in place of 41 tph. That is a nearly 25% increase in service.
And he didn't say why he didn't want to take the "F."
Don't you read the links you post?
Others were more miffed than confused by the service changes. Until today, Greg Burns of Forest Hills, who commutes to 23rd Street-Ely Avenue in Long Island City, had his pick of the E and F trains in getting to work. Now that the F skips his station, his options are far less attractive.
He can still take the E, running every 5 damn minutes during rush hours. For every Greg Burns's out there, there are 5 others which have better service today.
Just curious, how do you get 30 TPH before the switch? I always thought it was 26, 14 F's, 12 E's. After the switch, I also count 26, 12 E's from Jamaica Center, 12 V's and 2 E specials from 179th.
Excellent points, Chris!
I thought that, until this week, the E had 12 tph and the F had 18 tph. Now they each have 15 tph, but since Parsons/Archer can only handle 12, 3 are sent to 179.
That's what I've gathered from posts here, at least.
I got the 14/12 from here as well. Someone's wrong here.
We'll see when the timetables are posted.
Speaking of which -- what's taking so long? The 7/22 timetables were up a few days early.
You got me today, Stephen!
Congratulations. Rare, but it has been known to occur. :0)
The majority, though, still get a 25% increase in service.
Excelehhhhhnt.
(You knew it was going to come!) :-)
Doesn't Mr. Burns commute in his 1934 Duesenburg, driven by his personal lackey/closet lover Waylon Smithers?
If the 25 TPH's are evenly spaced, that accounts for a 30 second increase in waiting time to access 53rd. St. While 53rd. St. might have lost 16 percent of his service, 6th Ave. bound riders saw their service increase 80%
Mr. Burns can set his alarm clock back one minute and still get to work on time.
If the 25 TPH's are evenly spaced,...
Please explain how you will get a service that runs at 15 tph to merge with one runs at 10 tph and have uniform spacing?
There's always the "walking over the 59th St bridge" option. What do these people want? The empty train is too slow, the faster train is too full. Is mass transit some sort of entitlement now, something the average city dweller gets on demand, as he/she demands it?
Hey, why dont we just hold a vote on every train as it approaches every switch to see which way the majority wants to go.
Maybe it should be whatever the T/O wants. :0)
Aeroflot used to run according to whim. You boarded a plane in Moscow back in the "good old days" after spending a month's pay buying your ticket, then you rolled dice as to whether the flight was really going to go to Leningrad or Stalingrad - or maybe Riga if the pilot or a newly boarded apparatchik felt like it.
From the article:
O'Leary blamed a ruptured brake pipe and a brakes and emergency stoppage for the delays experienced by some riders on the E line.
Sounds like somebody misheard "brakes in emergency"
"Sounds like somebody misheard 'brakes in emergency'"
Correct interpretation by "jrr7." At 7:05 AM, a Manhattan-bound R train had multiple emergency brake applications at Grand Street. Until it was cleaned up (about half an hour), everything ran express. Ever hear the expression, "two pounds of bologna in a one-pound bag?"
David
yea man i was stuck behind that R on Victor 5864
Whew. That must've been the 6:58. I was on the V train right ahead of it.
Believe the TA here. F ridership was down, V ridership was slightly higher than you'd expect for a new line's first day. Rider's didn't complain about the V, they were upset because they couldn't or wouldn't understand the new system.
Except for some overcrowding on the s/b E, things looked to be ok.
To me, it seemed as though passengers on Manhattan-bound trains were unwilling to take the V train, because they "had" to be on the s/b express to be at work on time.
PM n/b rush seemed less hectic. People were willing to just get on the V even though it goes local.
I came home on the E train today around 3:30. By the time we got to Lexington, the train was, I'd say MOSTLY full, it wasn't STUFFED.
Nevertheless I saw many people pour out at Queens Plaza to take the R that had just arrived.
Apparently they're still unaware about the V.
I think the E should skip Queens Plaza until people understand the new arrangement.
I really believe that this is a signal that the complaints we're hearing may constitute a lot of whining. The "V" isn't empty, the "E" isn't jammed up - so the system is working, so far, as intended.
Now we need to see if this pattern holds up, and if there are weekend difficulties requiring some adjustments.
Hmm, do you mean something like the F Hillside Express and R Hillside Local idea in the 90's, that sunk after a short while?
If a persistent problem develops, the service plan will change. But if "V" trains remain full and keep drawing passengers off the F, there's no reason to change it. The whiners will find something else to whine about.
They always do. We haven't heard from G riders yet, and they have legitimate reasons to whine.
The G riders did lose something, it's true. That is why I argued so vociferously by mail and at hearings for MTA to rebuild the Court Street terminal and make it as physically comfortable as possible to achieve the transfer. MTA has begun implementing some of that. The moving sidewalk and Metrocard transfer there was Step One. They are not finished yet.
I would actually favor the G continuing to a lower-level terminal under Queens Plaza, then renovating Queens Plaza with elevators and escalators. Other posters here, however, pointed out some interesting engineering problems with this approach. Not to mention the expense.
One of the problems with "V" usage is that Queens-bound, the "E" and "V" cannot "meet"at Queens Plaza. Therefore, the crowd usually will take an "R" on the adjacent track. I do not think that they would hold a "V" to meet the following "E".
Correction. Such a meet is impossible. Sorry, I was diverted to the Manhattan-bound platform where the two routinely meet.
From what I hear from passenger interviews, not so great. the V seems to be as unreliable as the R (30 minute wait yesterday afternoon), the E is just as crowded, the F is less crowded.
I entered an F train (car # 5560) going s/b during AM rush, and got a seat. There were about five other available seats as well. This was unheard of until the recent changes.
I believe problems are yet to come with the crossover east of Queens Plaza, I forsee a MU going BIE on the diamond and there goes the Queens IND rush.
I believe problems are yet to come with the crossover east of Queens Plaza, I forsee a MU going BIE on the diamond and there goes the Queens IND rush.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MU? What is that?
Crossover east of Queens Plaza. Affecting trains going s/b or n/b?
BIE on the diamond? Is there a WD or just some tough timers to cause this?
MU is a Multiple Unit train.
Affecting BOTH directions of traffic.
Anything could cause it, including happy-pull-the-corders.
The F seems to be less crowded, V is not crowded at all, and E seems only a little more crowded than before. Other than the fact that Lexington/53 was full of people who didn't get into the V when it came, everything seems good so far.
Whoops
As I was saying:
I started my riding by taking a southbound "V" at Forest Hills at around 7 AM, sitting in a strategically located position right next to the conductor's cab so i could listen to what people would say. Many were perplexed about the V, but after a simple explanation, they began to understand. One lady at 63rd. Drive was thrilled she could take the V straight to 5th Ave/53rd. St. Even with a seat ALL the way. The most confusion was at Roosevelt Ave, as announcements abounded imploring F riders that this was the last place they could get the R for Lexington/60th and the E or V to Lex/53rd. This caused many a stop-start-stop movement in and out of the train as they tried to fully understand this. I'm sure many who remained on the F's leaving Roosevelt were not aware that they were screwed. One man swore he would transfer to the E or V at Queens Plaza to get to Lexington/60th. When I informed him that the F doesn't stop there, he said "nonsense, Queens Plaza is an express stop". Stupid is as stupid does I guess. No significant switching delays took place when the V merged with the E outside Queens Plaza. I continued all the way to 2nd Ave, crossing onto the uptown tail track. Many people were afraid to get on the new line, apparently not wanting to risk riding it over the familiar F. This was especially true at 42nd and 34th where crowds of B/D riders wishing to continue downtown x-fer to the F. I then got an F in the other direction at 2nd Ave. Things ran smoothly until we got to Rock Center. Both platform announcements and 5 conductor announcements stating that the F would run through 63rd. St and that people for the 4 old F stops HAD to x-fer to the V. People still didn't get it. Many riders, one very pissed off at the conductor were upset when we arrived at 57th St., not 5th Ave. He was cursing at no one in particular, punching the door before we fully stopped. I then turned to the woman sitting next to me and said that if they don't know the new routes, they only have themselves to blame due to the massive media attention this received over the weekend, as well as brochures and train signs which have been up for over a month now. All the problems I encountered as I made 2 passes through both 53rd on the V and 63rd on the F were due to ignorant passangers. Operations ran smoothly. Once people adjust, they will understand the obvious, that Queens has better service today than it had last week.
I do have one beef, and it's has to do with the G line. With the compromise night and weekend service extension to Forest Hills from LIC, all the stations had G service signed on the platforms. This was very misleading, as most of the media attention was centered on the new V line, so lots of G riders expected they'd be able to get a G train. Many had to be told there was no G train, even though signs said there was, properly marked as a weekend-night service only. Many didn't understand that. They saw "G" and expected to get one. The problems were compounded by the large number of signs at each Queens Blvd. local stop attached to the pillars pointing out the area that the new shorter G trains will stop. This furthered the belief that the G was up and running, when it was not. The weekend G service should have never been implemented. It's too easily confusing people and serves no useful purpose.
The weekend G service should have never been implemented. It's too easily confusing people and serves no useful purpose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True. But then again, Queens residents have suffered for years, as the TA cut service on weekends through the following GO:
R Jamaica Center-95st
F 179-Coney Island
The above did not provide sufficient service for Queens riders. Now, we suddenly have four trains, and I'll be the first to admit we don't need that much service.
I've always wanted to see the following on weekends:
R Forest Hills-95st Local in Queens
E Jamaica Center-Canal Local in Queens
F 179-Coney Island Express in Queens
On weekends, Queens does not need two express trains, but does need two locals. Stations like Steinway, 46th, Woodhaven, and Rego Park are too busy to be serviced by just one local.
It's just a matter of time before the TA realizes this, and reduces service.
In fact, when Zman told us that the F would go express full-time, I told him "no way". He responded by telling me to believe it because it's true. I have to remember to ask Zman why I saw a n/b F on the local track at Continental this morning.
These inconveniences were due only to the construction of the connection which increased their Manhattan-bound service 25%. Those should ease now.
Another reason weekends are always messed up on the Queens IND is because it's heavy ridership precludes any mid-day GO's (9:30 to 3:30) that are used elsewhere to perform routine maintenance. Everything has to be done on the weekends or at night.
That's the problem with passengers.You can make an announcement 30 times about a diversion will not hear until it's too late.I decided to take the V today and I will stick with my guns and say the V will fail NOT because of the reasons I stated,but because no one listens to announcements until it's too late.
I had said MANY times on this board that the G will be packed with 4 75' MU's, and that diamond crossover east of Queens Plaza is a nightmare waiting to happen. Frequent "E" service and then the "R" and "V" and one train BIE at the crossover at the height of the rush spells disaster for the IND.
It's not a question of WILL it, but WHEN will it happen.
NYC Subway trains are way too far and few in between outside of rush hours. While I don't sympathize with any G rider not willing to change to the E or V at rush hours, I will overnight and on weekends. It simply takes too long to have the passengers walk through the corridor, see the E leaving, and wait 10 minutes for the next one.
Terminating the G at Court Sq is a necessary evil which allows improvements in service to a much larger number of riders than are inconvenienced by the truncated G.
If people really are jammin the E, one solution (as discussed previously) would be to have the E and F skip Roosevelt Avenue during rush hours.
If people really are jammin the E, one solution (as discussed previously) would be to have the E and F skip Roosevelt Avenue during rush hours.
What's missing is the requisite number of rail cars to provide adequate service. There is no service improvement, if the same number of cars are divided among 2, 3, 4 or 10 different services. Any way you slice it, it's still baloney.
The previous service was E & F at a combined 30 tph plus the R at 12 tph and all at a nominal 10-car length trains for a grand total of 420 cars/hr. The new service cuts the R to 10 tph and adds 10 V's for a grand total of 500 cars/hr. This represents a 19% increase in service but not necessarily to where many the passengers are trying to go.
Were there alternatives? Suppose, they ran 11 car trains at 34 tph on the express as they did during the 1950's. That would be 374 cars/hr. This total would be raised to 524 cars/hr, if they increased the number of 60th St Tunnel trains on Queens Blvd to their 1970's level of 15 tph. That's an improvement of 25% from previous levels and an improvement of 5% over the new arrangement.
Of course, the TA would not have needed the 63rd St connector nor its $600+ million cost. A fraction of that cost (about $100 million) could have been used to resurrect 11 car 660' operation and buy the extra cars necessary. The savings on interest charges for the remaining $500 million could have been used for the extra manpower required for increased service levels.
What we really need, then, is a time machine to take you back to the 1950's, so you can revisit the glory of the subways. You're obviously too unhappy to deal with the present.
:0)
What we really need, then, is a time machine to take you back to the 1950's, so you can revisit the glory of the subways. You're obviously too unhappy to deal with the present.
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
I am very unhappy with the way present TA management deals with present operations. I cite previous service levels to refute TA claims that they are running the existing system at maximum theoretical capacity or even close to it.
The sad fact is that there is sufficient existing capacity on most lines to provide significantly better service levels. It is a scandal that the TA has been allowed to hide behind their capital resources starvation shibboleth.
In many cases, the improvements that are to be achieved by building new lines provide less service than was available in previous years using the old lines. The new 63rd St connector is one such example.
The sad fact is that there is sufficient existing capacity on most lines to provide significantly better service levels. It is a scandal that the TA has been allowed to hide behind their capital resources starvation shibboleth
But not enough cars. And if the extra capacity existed, why isn't it being used where necessary? You continue to state numbers about train capacity which are 30 years old at best. Perhaps those service levels are unobtainable in today's enviornment. Subway services don't always fit into the neat mathematical equations you love to cite.
Not to mention that in previous posts, Mr. Baumann has decried the removal of rail services. Well, service across the Queensboro bridge disappeared decades ago. A 63rd Street crossing has replaced it.
The V is OK. My only problems with the configuration is that now Queensplaza only has one express, and 53rd Street will only be served by one line on the weekends. How about sending the N and R to Astoria on the weekend, and sending the V and G to the Queens line. The line could handle the V, R and G. It does it between 8:30PM and 12:00AM.
But that would essentially mean you cannot get to Queens Plaza when you get on a BMT Broadway train on a weekend. A lot of people in Manhattan will need to transfer. Given the current Manny B situation, that will mandate transferring for Brooklyn riders, of course
i feel like many people overlook one possibility for future servie that would really make the 63 st connector valuable. if an extension of the N is ever made to LGA, demand on that lien would presumably increase significantly, especially if the connection is done in a way that makes it accessable to commuters as well as airport users. if so, the entire 60 st tunnel could be routed directly up the astoria el. with the 63 st connector, queens blvd service to broadway that would otherwise be lost to 31 st could instead be operated via 63. as for connections between 60 st. and queens blvd, queens plaza and queensboro plaza are only a couple blocks apart and probably should have been connected a long time ago. a walking transfer, in addition to the newly institued one between 59/lex and 63/lex could be a temporary fix until something more permanent could be built within fare control.
p.s. if broadway service were removed form queens plaza, perhaps with the addition of a switch or two, g trains would be able to continue north to queens plaza since only one set of tracks would be needed for 53 st service.
p.p.s. one problem under this configuration is that only broadway expresses can access queens blvd, but the train being replaced would be a local. having the F be queens blvd express and 6th local with perhaps the N or Q as b'way express, queens blvd local would be silly.
a better configuration would be:
N, Q, or W: Bway express, 63st, Queens blvd Express.
V: q blvd local, 63 st, 6th local, brooklyn local - church.
F: q blvd express, 53 st, 6th local, brooklyn express - coney.
E: q blvd local, 53 st, 8th local.
N, Q, or W: bway express, 60 st, astoria exp.
R: bway local, 60 st, astoria local
->only problem would be no express to lower manhattan. quick fix would be to have some of the queens blvd-b'way trains terminate at whitehall. i believe they used to do this in the 70's when the N ran on Q blvd.
But not enough cars.
Which is the first point I made in the previous post.
And if the extra capacity existed, why isn't it being used where necessary?
One basic tool for doing just that is no longer available. Train lengths were varied to maximize equipment deployment. Married pairs and link bars have killed that.
You continue to state numbers about train capacity which are 30 years old at best. Perhaps those service levels are unobtainable in today's enviornment.
The major change has been one in management. The signal system and the operating fleet are largely untouched.
Subway services don't always fit into the neat mathematical equations you love to cite.
The divergence of theory and practice usually calls for careful analysis to determine whether the theory or the operational practices are at fault. The theoretical service levels are obtained by other systems. The reason I cite past practice in NYC is because the TA management usually states that the performance of other systems cannot be replicated in NYC.
The major change has been one in management. The signal system and the operating fleet are largely untouched
I disagree here. New regulations reguarding safety issues have made certain practices illegal today, such as keying by red signals. These practices made possible the increased capacity years ago. The signal system may be the same, but the rules for interpreting them have changed dramatically.
You're right. Stephen looks at the physical plant, makes calculations, and arrives at conclusions while assuming that the equipment is used to its maximum physical potential. Of course, this is only possible when you ignore safety.
Take Airports, for example. Decades ago the rules for departing and arriving aircraft were different. Flying was much more dangerous, even counting the less reliable aircraft we had.
You could argue, for instance, that it isn't necessary to build an additional runway because airplanes can just take off every 30 seconds, and you've trebled or uadrupled runway capacity. But if you allow a Beech 1900 commuter to take off 30 seconds after a 747 (or even smaller) jetliner does, then you might as well call the funeral director, because he or she is going to have a lot of work to do. This is what Stephen ignores.
But he has fun doing it and watching us react. There are worse hobbies. :0)
ok, so if CBTC ever happens then hypothetically, we could return to past service levels. yes/no?
Hypothetically, Yes
Practically, No, IMO
Peace,
ANDEE
I see an accident on the L train after the CBCT is installed, and new safety regulations instituted which negates the increased capacity. Oh well.
Yeah, and train speeds of 10 mph.
Actually, CBCT would allow the MTA to exceed them. But that's 30-40 years in the future.
What's missing is the requisite number of rail cars to provide adequate service. There is no service improvement, if the same number of cars are divided among 2, 3, 4 or 10 different services. Any way you slice it, it's still baloney.
When all those trains go into Manhattan, it's a definate service improvement. If you're going to argue against the new services, at least be honest.
You'd have a crowd control problem on the platform if you'd do that.
Why not just replace a few more Hillside Ave. Fs with Es?
That is a nice idea. It's relatively easily workable (within the tph limits of the tunnels), and you can adjust until you find an equilibrium where most people are not too unhappy...
That would be in a UTOPIA.
Nah -- Acrooding to MapQuest, Utopia's up on Union Turnpike, at 181st St. (sorry, I couldn't resist...)
Drum roll!
Rim shot!
How about this:
Swap the E and F in Jamaica. Run the F at 12 TPH from Jamaica Center. Run the E at 15 TPH from 179th to Canal St. Add 2 F put-ins from 179th per hour.
This gives you 27 TPH thru 53rd and 14 through 63rd. And as for the capacity problem at the WTC stub, I remember during the midday hours in the 1980's that the terminal handled 16 TPH's (8 E, 6 AA/K). It can be done.
And a riot from transferring #7 riders.
took the V home last night, and it was pretty well crowded, but i got a seat at 34th. there were 3 E's backed up from QP to 36th street heading into the city.
taking the N in this morning though, it seemed as though they cut train frequency yet again on the line. last time (after montague st. tunnel reopened) it only lasted a week before the bean-counters realized it was a dumb move. who knows though, maybe there was just some delay...
I think that the V route, as it is right now is lousy. I understand that the MTA routed it way it did to not inconvenience G riders (saving them a transfer), but it's messing up more passengers. It's a local and on top of that it terminates at 2nd Ave (which doesn't help Brooklyn riders). People want to get home in a hurry, particularly those at the 53rd Street stations. In the end the E is overcrowded (which is what I suspected would happen). My immediate solution (again it's a little radical and not fundamental in some areas):
E: From Jamaica Center-Canal Street. Same route as now, except that it goes local all times from Jamaica Center-71 Ave. Late nights all stops in Queens.
F: From 179 Street-Coney Island via 53rd Street and Culver Express to Coney Island. Between Ditmas and Kings Hwy peak direction only, otherwise express in both directions. I think Mr. Greenberger was right about the F being the Culver Express (If you seen my previous posts I now admit the E shouldn't be the Culver Express).
G: Run local from Court Square-Church Ave at all times.
M: Runs all times from Metropolitan Ave-86 Street via Sea Beach Local.
N: Runs from Ditmars-Coney Island via Astoria Local, Broadway Local, Manhattan Bridge and Brighton Local.
Q: Runs 179-Brighton Beach as Queens Blvd, Broadway, and Brighton Express. Some of its extra trains could be given to the N. Q-Diamond is eliminated.
V: Runs from 71 Ave-Kings Highway via Queens Blvd, 63 Street, 6 Ave Local and Culver Local. Weekends it terminates at 2nd Ave. No late night service.
The one question I have, are there enough cars and equipment to run it this way???
M: Runs all times from Metropolitan Ave-86 Street via Sea Beach Local.
----------------------------------------------------------------
M should be a shuttle from Metro to Myrtle 24/7. Reassign the cars and crews currently being wasted on that line and send them to a line that needs more service.
There is no justification for shutting down the 63rd Street service at off hours.
You're right, I forgot to put that in my post. I would have the V run as a shuttle between 21 St and 2 Ave during late nights. Chris is right in saying Sea Beach riders would be messed up, but that already is the case with the N not going to Coney Island. Still I concede that the M is worse than the N. I also admit I was just throwing that whole post out there to see what people would think. I guess I'll have to be patient with the V running on the 53rd line, at least until the Manhattan Bridge fully reopens.
And what would you connect to at 21 St? Your shuttle would have to run to at least 36 St, using the local track switch provided. That way, a V rider could get off and transfer to an R or G train to complete the journey into Queens. Assuming a train can be turned there, of course.
. Assuming a train can be turned there, of course.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think a train can be turned there.
No, the closest switch is a diamond crossover between Northern Blvd. and 46th St.
Your plan screws Sea Beach riders and the Q running to Queens is an impossibility without massive cuts in E and F service.
This Afternoon while riding the V train today about 3 PM it had the following consist: from North to South 6226 6224 6242 6240 5668 5669 5667 5666. It looks weird seeing an orange circle with white Rabbit ears. :0) Ps the Double A cars even had their roll signs displaying V there was another consist yesterday on the F that train also had 4 Double A cars 2 out of the 4 cars still displayed G.
The V is very strange looking, as much as the Z was when it was new, and the W was last July.
Wonder what they'll be calling the V. We came up with a few choice nicknames for the W this past October, Worthless being one of them.
How can a train that gets people from some of the nicest neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn directly to Chinatown, Union Square, Herald Square, Times Square and Carnegie Hall be "worthless"?
People need to be taught a lesson. Shut the system down completely for 24 hours in the middle of a work week. Remind them how valuable the subway really is.
We were ready to call it the T.
Why not just put all the AA and one AB unit on the G line, and have the C/R in the middle and OPTO on the weekends. Is there enough AA & AB for at least the weekdays sevice and if they need more for the Weekends and they still have some ABBA from the V line.
Robert
This morning at 34/6, I was scheduled to make an 0858 B to 145. When the train arrived, the brake valve was broke - I couldn't get my handle in to charge the train. Since no one would let me operate top-side northbound, we had to discharge the train so I could take it south light. Up until recently, I would have gone to 2nd Ave to let the RCI work on it, but now that it is a terminal, that option doesn't exist. Leaving 34/6, I went south through the dash, crossed to the local, and ended up going light behind an F from W.4th St to Ave X, where I looped through Culver Yard and the back of CI Yard to come at Stillwell Station from the N/W end. A momentary pause at Stillwell while an F crossed in front, then back north along the Culver (behind the road again) to sit at 2nd Ave while a V crossed, then back north through the dash, and up to 145. Two TSSs took it from there back to Concourse (TrainDude, if you read this, I would love to know exactly what was wrong with it). The confused looks from people on the platforms were absolutely priceless, especially at the stations where I played "Shave and a haircut" coming in and "Two Bits" as I left (A series of short sounds of the horn when entering a station to be bypassed and two short sounds when leaving).
Acronymfinder tells me RCI stands for either "Road Car Inspector" or "Rectal Cranial Inversion"
The only glossary you'll ever need confirms that it's not a rectal problem. Whew!
Sniff! (wipes tear) ... reminds me of the "GOOD" old days ... they wouldn't let you transport top charged then either ... that's a fascinating round robin run there. Only difference is that back in the bad old days, you'd put a conductor up front and run from the second or third car with Beulah the buzzer to a pocket somewhere ... what car type was it out of curiosity? Betcha DCE finds a screw fell in or similar ...
That would be a R-68.
Peace,
ANDEE
I heard the top charge misalignment theory in an earlier message. I'd hate to think it's THAT easy a problem. I'd hate to see our unlucky motorman have to hear an earful if THAT was the cause. I know I sure felt mighty stupid one morning when I couldn't take power because there was a breaker down in the B cab that I should have noticed. Too many oh-dark-hundred mornings had caught up with my stupid bone that day.
Debris at the bottom of the handle seat?
I couldn't turn the handle far enough for it to drop down. The valve well seemed clear of debris; it appeared that the slot inside where the handle's tit (what does the PC crowd downtown want us to call that thing now?) goes was not lined up, preventing the handle from falling in.
I had that problem once on Hi-V 3352 :-)
But it turned out someone put the wrong brake handle in the usual hiding place; the right one was at the other end of the car.
Great story, Alex!
That sounds like somebody top-sided and pulled the handle out
in other than handle-off position.
That leaves the center of the valve in the wrong position and prevents the handle from going in at all. Mine would go in, but not be able to turn completely toward the fullservice/charge position and completely drop in. Once the ATD showed up and couldn't do it, I did top-side it and then try again, but with no luck.
So you were able to charge up top-side, but then after cycling
the brake valve you still couldn't get it in? That sounds like
debris at the very bottom of the cavity. The handle key (or
"tit", if you will) was able to enter the vertical slot in the
collet and turn from handle off to emergency, but because the
bottom face of the brake valve was blocked by debris at the
bottom of the cavity, it wouldn't drop down that extra 1/8"
to clear the recessed lip in the collet that allows it to
get over into service. There's not too much that can be
done in the field about that unless you have a pair of
tweezers and can get lucky and find and remove the debris.
Hey, it's been a couple of days now. Where's Train Dude
with the official report from Concourse?
You may have been a victim of 'speed brake' with worn brake controller. Someone keys with the back side of the handle, you struggle to get it right, you slip in your handle correctly and it won't go down or gets stuck. I've had it happen charging up a car and had it dump when I charged from the other end...many new languages are heard from undercar! Even the supervisors struggled and my handle is new. CI Peter
This morning on the F, two other subway buffs joined me in looking through the R-46 window. I recognized one of them - David - who I saw testify back in March against cutting back the G train (which I did, too)
Another guy, in his 40's or 50's I think, joined us.
Both of them got off at 42nd Street, but unfortunately they missed the good part. As we pulled into West 4th, over the radio:
"DELANCEY THEN JAY. DELANCEY THEN JAY."
Yes folks, the old skip-stop service was back in force for our particular train. Express to Delancey then Express to Jay. Except this time it required a "flying punch" at Broadway Lafayette. The C/R slowed to 2 MPH before quickly punching the F button at the 6-car stop at Broadway Lafayette, then continuing on his way.
Apparently the punchbox and the departing signal were wired together a la Lex/59 Street, where Queens bound trains must punch their route, then the red signal ahead will clear.
Question is, why couldn't West 4th tower route him accordingly? Is the interlocking automatically controlled, such as "What you punch is what you get" at Rockefeller Center?
Punch at B'way/Lafayette is controlled by Essex St Tower. they can't see the station live and in person.
Hmm, that doesn't make sense, why was Essex put in control of the area?
And if that's the case, then how do the V trains tell them that they are ready? Do they radio to the tower, or punch some kind of "ready to proceed" button?
Best guess is something to do with the Chrystie St cut. The SB punch box at B/L gives choices for B1 (F line), B5/B6 (2nd Ave terminal) and BJ1 (Chrystie St cut - Essex St). Coming northbound on B2, there is a 'Ready to proceed' punch, B5 and B6 have starting lights, which are probably tied into Essex Tower, letting them know when its time for a V to leave.
They have a schedule, and the operator at Essex can see on his indicator board which tracks at 2nd Ave. have V trains ready to go.
SLE started operating from Stamford today. The news said it was part of a 1 million dollar trial to see how or if people will use the service.
I wonder how badly that will intefere with Metro North. Will it be stopping at the same stations, or which ones?
Only Stamford and Bridgeport I believe.
The extended SLE trains shouldn't interfere with Metro-North. It's only a couple of trains in the morning and afternoon. One of the afternoon trains also stops in Stratford and Milford. I wonder how fast those diesel "express" trains will run between New Haven and Stamford.
And besides, close to half of Metro North New Haven branch trains never even make it into CT, so the 4 track line is nowhere near capacity.
I thought at least half of the M-N trains make it to Stamford. I know there are a few rush-hour put-ins that begin in Westchester, but I believe basic weekday service is locals to Stamford every half hour and expresses to Stamford, then local to New Haven every hour. Still the line east of Stamford is below capacity and the four weekday SLE trains won't hurt Metro-North service.
As you say, in non-rush hours (weekdays) there are 2 trains per hour local to Stamford, 1 express to New Haven (1st stop Stamford).
In rush hours, many trains terminate at New Rochelle, Harrison, or Port Chester, and still more terminate at Stamford, so the tracks east of Stamford are not so crowded.
They run with old FL-9's, right? Of course, they're not all that long.
Any chance Shore Line could be persuaded to switch to electric locomotives?
I thought they used F-40s.
You could be right. I stood next to one. It was a snub-nosed diesel which, strangely enough, sounded a lot like a panel truck when it revved up from idle and pushed two cars out of a Connecticut platform.
They just bought 25 New GE P-32DM's.
They have been using F-40s. The FL9s are used in M-N territiory to Waterbury from Bridgeport.
Mr rt__:^)
Ex Amtrak F-40's ?
I always used to see Shore Line East trains at New Haven whenever I went home from school and back. And I even rode SLE trains assigned to Hartford/Springfield service during Thanksgiving Weekend 2000. They always ran with GP38/40 diesels painted in NH livery. FL9s do appear on Waterbury and Danbury Metro-North shuttle trains.
Does anyone have a Track Chart or Track Map
Thank you
Steve
914 668 9218
Point your browsers here:
http://www.rideworks.com/sle/whatsnew.htm
From the Boston Globe
And it is about time.
You mean about time the MBTA wastes 120 million dollars so that lazy riders can save a few seconds?
The new system, he says, will offer riders ''smart cards'' with microchips that passengers will be able to simply wave in front of scanners to gain entry to stations and buses. The cards, which riders will hold onto and reload via vending machines, the Internet, and by telephone, instead of throwing out, will have the capability of piggy-backing other uses, too. The MBTA is already in discussions with area banks, large employers, and universities to create cards that would double as ATM cards, workplace access cards, or student identification. Thieves Local 467 was excited about the new changes as it stands to make identity theft much easier.
What's more, users will be able to register the cards, so if they get lost or stolen, the owners won't lose their money and so that the government will know when and where you travel.
Why don't we just get it over with and put up the "Big Brother is Watching You" signs.
The tokens work. Tokens will always work. Tokens require no programming and are immune to EM surges. Just stick with tokens.
While I think tokens are better than a Mag-strip system the smart card system is much better than tokens.
Smart cards are down right dangerous. The threat to privacy is too great.
Hey mike do you have a state issued ID or a supermarket savings card both of those are threats to privacy more than voluntary registration of an MBTA smart card.
My Supermarket card is under a fake name and address.
'Registration' of a smart card is not really necessary. All you need is to get a receipt for the thing. If it's lost or stolen, you present the receipt, get a replacement card, and the system is told to make it invalid (or, even better, to trigger video cameras to zero-in on anyone who enters the system with it, and alerts any nearby cops).
If the authorities are really interested in invading your privacy, they already have ample means for doing so.
If the authorities are really interested in invading your privacy, they already have ample means for doing so.
They have the means, but not the funding. By having people do all the hard work themselves, the government just needs a computer to keep track of it all.
What possible interest would the government have in you anyways? Or do I not want to know? In any case, the government has more important priorities at the moment, or so I'd like to think.
-Robert King
I want to keep my options open.
What good a token when the EM surge fries the solid state traction equipment on the LRVs and the subway cars? Not to mention knocking the electrical supply offline rendering any older technology vehicles unpowered anyways.
-Robert King
With the 143's coming on line, it is just about a 100% certainty that the M shuttle will be an OPTO line when more 143's become available. However, I have now found out through a highly reliable source that the TA is now shooting for OPTO on the J line on the weekends within the next 3 picks. They would run 4 car 143's.
What? You didn't think that the TA wasn't going to try to cut costs with these new cars didn't you? As far as the TA is concerned, OPTO is a highly successful, cost-saving program, and it'll spread out everywhere if the TA has it's way. The union's gonna have it's hands full with this.
The union isn't my primary concern. Speed is. Unless all platforms are on the right, OPTO increases dwell times a lot. I'm surprised the TA is even considering attempting OPTO on a line as long as the J.
The union isn't my primary concern. Speed is. Unless all platforms are on the right, OPTO increases dwell times a lot. I'm surprised the TA is even considering attempting OPTO on a line as long as the J.
That's what the wireless camera system is for. The SEPTA MFL has very short dwell time. The T/O's don't even have to get up.
I agree. Even without OPTO, the C/R wouldn't need to ever get up and walk to the other side. And we railfans could keep our windows. I don't know why the TA didn't include this in the R-142/142A/143.
I wonder when the MTA will install wireless cameras like SEPTA did. That way you can have OPTO with half cabs with the T/O never having to leave his seat.
Then they would have to rewire ALL the door control circuitry. Half cabs can only control the doors on the side of the train on which they are located.
By now it's probably too late, but such circuitry could have been included in the R-143 from the start. Maybe we'll see it in the R-160.
I wouldn't bother rewiring the R-42, but the R-42 won't be used for OPTO in any case.
One of the problems with OPTO which nobody seems to be looking at is the increased dwell times at every stop as the T/O switches from driving the train to opening/closing doors. On shuttle trains, this is no big deal, as only a few stops are made. But on longer routes, it adds up. OPTO on the J might add 5 minutes to every run.
BTW, anyone hear the story about the T/O in the Franklin Ave shuttle who, after being held at Botanic Garden by a red light, sent one long buzz to himself to keep the doors open?
When the MBTA Blue Line went OPTO, it was widely assumed that the extra dwell time would be an issue. (It adds about two minutes to the schedule -- Boston T Party if you're out there, is that correct?) At any rate, once it went into effect, no one complained.
They seriously need to install SEPTA or PATCO style door controls.
I am waiting for accidents to increase with OPTO. It has happened before, OPTO safety isn't as sure as the TA leads us to believe.
okay, here we go again. OPTO may be unpleasant to current TA workers. AND by me Safety Is Issue One. However, BART runs 10x72' trains OPTO and has a very good safety record. OPTO is going to happen, the only question is how will the workers deal with it.
The nights and weekends will become devoid of probies at this rate in a few years.
I've seen references to this date on this message board before--
Fill me in, someone, if you don't mind :)
Chrystie Street connection opened, finally connecting the BMT and IND.
That would be Broadway-Laf. to Grand over Man. Bridge to DeKalb (closed ofr Bridge repair) and (unused for revenue runs) Williamsburg Br to Essex to Broadway-Lafayette.
And a sad day for all BMT fans, having to get lettered into a marriage with old Mayor Hyland's revenge featured system. I don't know if any of you know this but one thing that always struck me was how clean the BMT cars were and how filthy the IND cars were in comparison. It just seemed to me the BMT took greater pains to take care of their cars And, no, it wasn't my imagination. The BMT cars were cleaner.
You're probably right about the cleaniness of the IND cars. I've seen pictures of them and they were covered with grime. On the other hand the BMT cars were generally kept reasonably clean according to the pictures that I've seen of them. It is a shame that the IND division never kept their equipment clean.
#3 West End Jeff
For one, the BMT was mostly outdoor, the IND underground. Steel dust accumulated on the latter. And the Sea Beach did not get shafted with the Chrystie opening, like the Brighton and West End, which got a lot of those ugly, filthy R1/9s. The Sea Beach got many R27/30s instead.
At the expense of having the nice, shiny R-32s bumped elsewhere, mostly to the AA, B, and D lines. Actually, the R-32s have turned up on the N for almost as long as they've been carrying passengers. I still associate the N with the R-32s.
I remember that the majority of Ns were R27/30s, but they did have a sizable minority of R32s. True, most Bs and Ds were R32s, but that minority of R1/9s was absolutely, filthy, ugly, and disgusting.
I can remember getting an occasional N of R-27/30s at Union Square on Saturday afternoons, but usually they'd be R-32s.
I never rode on any B trains of oldtimers; however, I saw one deadheading past 34th St. once. The few prewar D trains I rode on after Chrystie had one thing in common: no headlights. I loved it! The last time I got an R-1/9 D train, I stayed on it to 125th St. One more CPW express dash on a howling, rocketing old time train. Believe me, I did not want to get off that train. Had it not been for that bus we had to catch from Port Authority, I would have stayed on board all the way to 205th St. and back.
I have been accused of being very critical of "B" type trains, but they were very good cars. What I didn't like about them was that they were the featured cars of the 4th Avenue Local, a line that I held in high contempt. BTW, for you newtimers, that line was once the #2 Line. Today it is the R. From numbers to letters it is still a raunchy line that never sees the light of day. It once did have one outside stop, its last at Queens Plaza. We called the GG of the BMT.
After Fred Left, the Standards were pulled off the 2 and R 8 or 9s replaced them in the mid 50s, The BMT cars were clearner, because they were outside, and were washed in the rain, the only Outdoor line until 1954 on the IND was on the portion over Smith 9thSt on the F
There is only one difference between the "R" in the "G". The "R" goes into Manhattan unlike the "G" which doesn't go into Manhattan.
#3 West End Jeff
Don't forget: the BMT standards inaugurated service on the Sea Beach and 4th Ave. lines on June 22, 1915. So you can always say they were on your line first. It wasn't until August 1, 1920 - 50 years before your wedding date - that they began running on the Brighton.
You gotta be kidding. The R1-9's were the best looking and sounding cars. BY FAR. And a lot more functional than the standards. More doors on each side; conductors between cars, not in the center of the car in the midst of standees; a wider, straighter aisle, as the standards had the extra long seats, better hand straps, and better destination signs, destination signs in front and back which the standards had none, etc, etc, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved the standards too (I wish Branford would fix up the standard they have so we could ride it) as I love all pre-war cars but the R1-9's were the best subway cars ever made.
For sound, nothing beats the old Phila. Broad Street Subway B1 cars.
Especially after they were 40 years old, the drone from their traction engines was fantastic. A true subway sound, and every stop except the last stop on the north at Fern Street was in the subway, which even made them sound more intense.
I'll second that. Of course, to me it's a tossup between those moaning, groaning, grunting, snarling, and hissing old timers and the R-10s.
Chrystie St. opened, B/D trains started running over the north side to Brooklyn. On top of this, the QJ, RJ, NX & EE routes were created, the QT & T disappearing into oblivion. It was a disaster for anyone having to go through Dekalb Ave. or Stillwell Ave. One T/O of a D train pressed the wrong button at Dekalb and ended up on the Broadway line.
I still say 12/12/88 was worse. These changes were system wide, whereas the changes in 1967 affected only those using the southern division BMT for the most part.
BTW, someone said that the QJ terminated at Brighton Beach and that the QB didn't exist at all in the early days of the post-Chrystie St. system.
Chris, it was psychological, too. We BMT fans held the IND lines with very little esteem. As I mentioned earlier the cars of the IND were filthy and the system hardly saw the light of day. I don't think IRT fans would have been too happy to have been associated with the IND lines either. Come to think of it, why not put the IND and IRT lines together. That would have made a more perfect marriage.
Different tunnel clearances, for one thing. Remember, the original Contract One portions cannot accommodate 10-foot-wide cars in any shape or form.
Once again Steve, you set me straight. Keep up the good work.
But then if the IND had gone with the IRT dimensions, as once proposed, you would hav had that
The QJ did terminate at Brighton Beach until August 18, 1968. It and the QB swapped Brooklyn terminals with the D, with the D going to Coney Island during nights and weekends.
I'm pretty sure the newfangled QB was up and running with the opening of the Chrystie St. connection. I never saw or rode on such a train; the only QBs I ever saw were on Saturdays prior to the connection being opened.
QB's were resigned QJ's going to B'way instead of Jamaica. Only the end signs were changed and it seemed that the destination signs were hastily changed becuase I remember seeing many missigned QB's. Personally I didn't see many QB's in operation after Chrystie. I saw many of them before Chrystie running to Astoria.
They were out there and running, but they may have terminated at 57th street (7the Ave) at certain (or most) times.
In the '70's and early '80's, I vaguely remember seeing the occasional "QB" running to and from Astoria. "QB" trains were a rare find, I think that there were 5 Manhattan-bound AM, and maybe 4 southbound PM. I mainly saw R-42's on the lines. Some were layed-up on the Brighton express tracks among tons of "M"'s during the weekends. Tony
Were R42's in service as early as 1967. Was not R32 the newest rolling stock?
In November 1967, the R-38 was the system's newest rolling stock, having arrived in 1966-67. The R-42 arrived in 1969-70.
David
I remember the R38s being pulled through Bush Terminal (probably on their way to 9th Av.) July or August 1966. Quite definite then, that the R38s first were in service in 1966.
The R-38s were pressed into service on the E and F lines when they arrived - right smack in the middle of the Jamaica Yard Crisis.
I stand to be corrected on the QJ termination for the first few months.
By the way here is some trivia. These changes were voted on in an election referendum. I remember the TV ads featured a "2" IRT train and the announcer asked if you would like a change?
I was miffed that after the ads with the "2"that the IRT was unaffected by the change. I was 8 and this is what my mind dwelt on at that age.
The QB was up and operating out the outset of Chrystie, from Brighton Beach to 57th St., express in Manhattan, local in Brooklyn.
<<<"I'm pretty sure the newfangled QB was up and running with the opening of the Chrystie St. connection. I never saw or rode on such a train; the only QBs I ever saw were on Saturdays prior to the connection being opened">>>
The "newfangled" QB was running right away- the 1967 post-Chrystie map shows it in place.
It was the saddest day in the history of the Astoria Line - three great services (T, QT and QB) were replaced by the lousiest piece of &%$#$ in the system - the RR
At least you have the "W" train which does provide some express service in Manhattan while the Chrystie Street connection is out of use.
#3 West End Jeff
I grew up at Sheepshead Bay on the Brighton Line, and I remember the QJ terminating at Stillwell.
The Brighton trains after the change were D, QB and QJ.
Prior to the change: Q, QB, QT and M (rush hour only)
Hi, Right after Grand/ Chrystie opened, yes, the QJ and QB AND NX trains terminated at Brighton Beach. By mid 1968, D Brighton Expresses were cut to Brighton during the weekdays, and QJ and QB trains ran to Coney Island. TOny
Chris, I remember it exactly as Ebwaytony1 stated.
I still say 12/12/88 was worse. These changes were system wide, whereas the changes in 1967 affected only those using the southern division BMT for the most part.
OK, I don't mind displaying my ignorance. What happened on 12 December 1988?
-- Tim
December 12, 1988 was the first day of service on the Archer Avenue Line. The usual confusion was exacerbated that day by extremely cold weather, which caused massive delays due to a lack of trains with working doors. That was supposed to be the first day of Z service, but it pretty much didn't operate that day.
David
I should have said first WEEKday. The first DAY was Sunday, December 11 (technically shortly before midnight on the 10th -- I was there!).
David
Thanks.
This raises new questions in my mind. I don't understand how anyone could say that this change was more significant than the extensive reroutings when the Chrystie Street connection opened. Other than new Queens destinations for the E and the J, and the introduction of the Z, were other changes made? If not, this wouldn't seen to qualify as a really major changeover.
Or have I missed something?
-- Tim
Well, subway service on the Jamaica BMT was truncated to 121 St. while construction was going on. So the opening of the line meant subway service was restored to that area. The E got a new route with a new station at Jamaica Hospital.
Was it significant? Yes, in the sense that LIRR and bus service was better integrated into Jaaica Center. The net effect was to increase ridership on those lines.
OK. I understood the previous post to imply that 12/12/88 was a more significant day in terms of the disruption it caused. Based on the changes that occurred that day, it didn't seem to me that this would be the case.
But perhaps I misunderstood the original poster.... ;-)
Thanks for the further explanation.
-- Tim
You're welcome.
Perhaps it was I who misinterpreted the intent of this part of the thread??
Perhaps it was I who misinterpreted the intent of this part of the thread??
Could be; here's what I was responding to:
I still say 12/12/88 was worse. These changes were system wide, whereas the changes in 1967 affected only those using the southern division BMT for the most part.
I don't get how the 1988 changes were "systemwide" whereas, the implication is, the 1967 changes affected a smaller portion of the system.
-- Tim
Pleas read my previous post laying out all the changes of 12/12 & 12/13 1988:
OK. I understood the previous post to imply that 12/12/88 was a more significant day in terms of the disruption it caused. Based on the changes that occurred that day, it didn't seem to me that this would be the case.
Archer Ave. was only one component. I made a previous post laying out all of them. Unless you rode the IRT or the G, L, M or N line, your service was noticably changed.
I recall that December 12th 1988 was a very cold day and that probably helped to have caused the problem with the doors not working properly that day. From the accounts that I'm reading December 12th 1988 must have been a very confusing day for subway riders.
#3 West End Jeff
Yes, the Z pretty much did run it's full schedule that first workday, 12/13. I rode several of them in the AM & PM.
12/13/88 was a Tuesday, the second weekday of Archer Avenue operation. I was referring to Monday the 12th. I know the morning rush was a nightmare; perhaps things got better by the afternoon.
David
Right, i was referring to the 12th, not 11th. I rode Z's in both directions on that day, and I saw several others. I don't remember any problem.
But maybe I was just lucky.
During that snowy morning of 12-12-88, I recall seeing only 2 "Z" trains operating TO Manhattan. They were r27-30's. Then the "F" had to run via. Hillside Local due to MAJOR delays on the "R" trains that were newly extended to 179-Jamaica during the rush hours. AND a man died of a heartattack on a South Bound #5 Train. HELLISH rush hour morning!!!! Tony Leong
I rode an R42 Z that morning. I saw other R42 as well as R30 Z's.
Here's an exact rundown of the changes on each line affected:
A. express service along Fulton St. expanded from rush hours to all day long weekdays.
B. Resumption of 6th Ave/West End service, eliminating the yellow Broadway B that had run since 1986. Service to 168th St via CPW local expanded from rush hours to all weekday long.
C. Service expanded from rush hours to all day long, terminating at 145th St. during non rush hours and Chambers St on weekends.
D. Full 6th Ave/Brighton service restored, eliminating the yellow Broadway D that had run since 1986. Service as the full time Brighton local introduced (instead of the weekday express that existed pre 4/86).
E. Diverted from main Queens Blvd. line at Van Wyck Blvd. to the new Archer Ave extension, making 3 new stops at Jamaica/Van Wyck, Supthin/Archer & Parsons/Archer (this change was probably the most dramatic of them all).
H. Eliminated.
J. Extended from 121st St to Jamaica Center via the lower level Archer Ave. line, stopping at Supthin/Archer & Parsons/Archer. Myrtle/Marcy Ave service expanded to all day peak direction service. Started skipping the Bowery when M ran.
K. Eliminated
N. Ran via tunnel on weekends, not the bridge.
Q. Rerouted from Broadway to 6th Ave to 57th St/6th. Rerouted as full Brighton express, with the termination of yellow D/Q skip stop service that existed since 4/86.
R. Extended to 179th St 24/7
Maybe not as dramatic as 1967, but the changes were spread out around a much larger area, affecting more people.
Although I'm not sure, I believe the resumption of Flushing express service, which had not run since 1985, was also done on 12/13/88. That, and the addition of the new Z route, round off the list.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the rundown.
What was the H? This all happened before my first visit to New York in 1991, and that's one line I don't remember ever hearing about before.
-- Tim
The H was the Rockaway Shuttle, operating from Euclid Ave or Broad Channel to Rockaway Park, except when the C ran during rush hours.
IIRC, in 1967 the E and not the C ran out there in rush hours.
Atsa right ... Rockaway was served by the A, the E and the HH ...
During rush hour, either an A or an E was fair game to any of the 3 branches: Lefferts, Far Rock, Rock Pk, at least according to the maps.
Yep ... but they actually scheduled them to do that as well. HH was off peak only from Euclid ... both ways ...
Actually, the "E" to Lefferts was very infrequent. I think I read on the 1972 map that there were only 2 "E" departures from Lefferts during the Am rush--that was it!!! In 1967, I believe the "A" ran to Far Rockaway only during Non-rush hours, and never did it go to Rockaway Park. Tony
According to my 1972 map, half the A's went to Far Rock, half to Lefferts, half the E's went to Rock Park, half to Euclid. None to Lefferts. The HH ran from Euclid to Rock Park when the E didn't (non-rush hrs). The E also was the Fulton St express, which meant empty express trains going into service at Euclid Ave. What a novel idea.
True, but the H only existed when the C went to Rockaway, from 1985-1988.
The H lasted until 1992, when the C stopped running to Rockaway Park.
No, the #7 Express was restored in August 1989.
On this day 11/26/67 to be correct the Chrystie Street connection opened. Trains using the north side tracks of the Manhattan Bridge were routed onto the IND 6th Ave. Line in Manhattan. Trains using the south side tracks of the Manhattan Bridge were routed onto the BMT Broadway Line in Manhattan. The first day that the Chrystie Street connection was used there was much confusion that made things very interesting to say the least. Even some of the T/Os didn't know where their trains were going.
#3 West End Jeff
On that day I watched all the "strange" trains eg. R1 on the Brighton Line from the side walkway on the bridge over the Belt Parkway.
The bridge is just south of the Sheepshead Bay station. The backup of trains waiting to get into Brighton Beach from 4 to 7 PM was as bad as the backup underneath on the belt parkway. I imagine that every weeknight for the first week, express trains were backed up to Avenue U (on the express track) or even further.
The local track was not as congested.
I was eight and got to see R1's for the first time outside the confines of the Culver Line. Back then (at 8 years old) I rode mostly on the BMT. The R1 was a novelty for me.
It is surprising that there was such a backup of trains on a Sunday at the time. However I could have seen that happening as it was the Sunday after Thanksgiving that year, and there must have been a lot of people using the subways to get home that day.
#3 West End Jeff
Correction, the backups were on the weekday nights. I did not observe on weekends, because I remember the familiar R32's being used on the weekend and the R1-9 only on weekdays.
Now that you mention it, I vivdly remember seeing almost nothing but R-32s on the D after Chrystie St., but then I was in the city on Saturdays. The R-1/9s didn't turn up on the D very often on weekends after that. At least I didn't see them much.
The R-32s also took over on the AA line, and held down the fort on the B as well, with Bs pasted over the BB signs.
I would have to say from what I've been reading on the posts there must have been quite a redistribution of subway cars throughout the "B" division after the Chrystie Street connection opened.
#3 West End Jeff
Yup. R27, R30 and R32's were scattered among the eastern division BMT and IND afterwards, and couple that with the moving of R6/R7/R9's from the IND to the BMT and the new R40's and R42's, and I tell you any soldier who went to Vietnam in early 1967, only and returning 3 or 4 years later would NOT recognize the system.
I've seen pictures of the R-6s/7s and 9s in the East New York yard during the early to mid 1970s.
#3 West End Jeff
Yup, they dominated those lines thru 1976. The last ones were finally scrapped in early '77.
I believe that the last run of the R-6/7/9s took place on March 31st 1977.
#3 West End Jeff
You are correct. It was a put-in train on the J from 168th St. IIRC it discharged passengers at Broad St. and ran light to CIY.
I guess that the train started at Jamaica and terminated at Broad St. Afterwards no more pre-WWII subway cars carried passengers ever again for revenue service.
#3 West End Jeff
"Dead Train Walking!"
When I was little, there were STILL pre-war IND cars groaning on the F line until about 1975. Also on the line at the time were Slants, and newer R-44's. The line was more interesting back then!!! TOny
<<<"When I was little, there were STILL pre-war IND cars groaning on the F line until about 1975. Also on the line at the time were Slants, and newer R-44's. The line was more interesting back then!!! TOny">>>
I also remember this from 1975 or so (I was 7 at the time). I hated the R1-9s..they were dark and smelled weird....what did I know then abotu classics.....Wish I was old enough to have appreciated them at the time.
Actually, it was the Slant E & F on Queens Blvd that made me a railfan......it seemed fitting, somehow, that the very loud Slants (to this day, I can tell by the sound when one is entering a station) would run express, bypassing people on the local platforms.
I remember the F got the 44 or 46 (dont REMEMBER which exactly, but likely it was 46s) first, the the E, then the N, then the GG.
I don't recall ever seeing an EE with my own eyes.
At least the R-10s remained on the A, for the most part. A few went over to the B.
Correction, the backups were on the weekday nights. I did not observe on weekends, because I remember the familiar R32's being used on the weekend and the R1-9 only on weekdays.
I mean afternoon rush, not nights. I was home by 8PM.
It must have been an interesting experience for those commuters that got stuck in the backup of trains. I wonder how long it would take for some of those trains to reach Stillwell Ave. terminal.
#3 West End Jeff
The following are the new side sign listings as listed on the R46 equipment. R44 signs retain the old style.
- is used to separate signs
...... is used to separate signs when the - is used within the actual sign setting.
E line:
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-via 53 St-Queens Bl Exp
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-via 53 St-Queens Bl Lcl
Jamaica/179 St-via 53 St-Queens Bl Exp
Canal St-via 53 St-8 Av Lcl
World Trade Ctr-via 53 St-8 Av Lcl
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-via 63 St-Queens Bl Exp
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-via 63 St-Queens Bl Lcl
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-via 6 Av
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer
Chambers St-via 53 St-8 Av Lcl
Whitehall St-via Bway
Euclid Av-8 Av/Fulton Lcl
Lower E.Side-2 Av-via 6 Av
Lower E.Side-2 Av-via 8 Av Lcl
F line:
Jamaica/179 St-6 Av/63 St Lcl-Queens Bl Exp
Jamaica/179 St-6 Av/53 St Lcl-Queens Bl Exp
Jamaica/179 St-6 Av/53 St Lcl-Queens Bl Lcl
Jamaica/179 St-6 Av/63 St Lcl-Queens Bl Lcl
Coney Island-63 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
Kings Hwy-63 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
Coney Island-53 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
Kings Hwy-53 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
Jamaica/179 St-via 8 Av
Jamaica/179 St-via Crosstown
Coney Island-63 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Exp
Kings Hwy-63 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Exp
Coney Island-via 8 Av
Coney Island-via Crosstown
Church Av-6 Av Lcl
Avenue X-63 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
G line:
Smith-9 Sts...Crosstown Lcl
Long Is.City-Court Square-Crosstown Lcl
Forest Hills-71 Av-Crosstown Lcl
Jamaica/179 St-Crosstown Lcl
Kensngton/Bklyn-Church Av-Crosstown Lcl (Kensington missing I)
Hoyt-Schermrhn...Crosstown Lcl
R line:
Forest Hills-71 Av-Broadway Lcl-via 60 St
36 St/Bklyn-Shuttle
Bay Ridge-95 St-via 60 St-Broadway Lcl
Whitehall St-via 60 St-Broadway Lcl
Bay Ridge/95 St-Shuttle
Bay Ridge/95 St
Forest Hills-71 Av-Broadway Lcl-via 63 St
Jamaica/179 St-Broadway Lcl-via 60 St
Jamaica Ctr-Parsons/Archer-Broadway Lcl-via 60 St
57 St/7 Av-4 Av Lcl-Broadway Exp
Pacific St-Shuttle
59 St/Bklyn-Shuttle
Canal St-Broadway Lcl
V line:
Forest Hills-71 Av-via 53 St-Queens Bl Lcl
Lower E.Side-2 Av-via 53 St-6 Av Lcl
Forest Hills-71 Av-via 63 St-Queens Bl Lcl
Jamaica/179 St-via 53 St
Kensngton/Bklyn-Church Av-53 St/6 Av Lcl-Culver Lcl
Grand St S:
W.4 St-Shuttle
Bway-Lafayette.....Shuttle
Grand St-Shuttle
Signs concerning all other lines (A, B, C, etc.) and all miscellaneous sign settings (Last Stop, Not In Service, etc.) remain unchanged.
The two Grand Street shuttle trains apparently have not been updated as of yesterday. One displays its old "S / to GRAND ST"; the other is signed as a generic shuttle.
The T/O don't bother changing the signs. The trips are to short.
Robert
How hard is it to change an R-46 sign?
No not realy. But why do it any way, People don't read them to start with.
Robert
I do or the people who use the A train do!
Not hard to change the signs. Though having to do it 34 times in a day is a pain in the a**.
Today I saw a V train with two cars that had the following on their signs:
[V][via 6 AV]
[V][71/CONTINENTAL]
I guess that those cars weren't updated yet.
Also, I saw a V train on Wednesday, running express past Woodhaven Boulevard on D1 track. Some of the signs said [V][CHURCH AV].
I wonce saw a V which thought is was a F going to "Avenue X"
Congrats to the official who decided to put R32s on the F and even more to the people who concurred. Now, for what should have happened:
Why can't these R32s run on the E??? No one here has reported the R46s being moved off from there.
OR
The R runs R32s a fair amount of the time. You could take the R46s from the R and give them the extra R32s.
Even harder to imagine:
Decent head signs or people actually reading them when they work or attempting to when they don't.
Your point being...
Peace,
ANDEE
According to the matrix, the E is 100% R-32 and the G, R, and V are 100% R-46. Only the F has a mixed bag. I don't know why the E and R routinely run the "wrong" equipment, but it's nothing new.
The E always had a few R46s at least before this Sunday.
In real life, it did, just as the R had (and has) a good number of R-32's. But according to the official car assignments, each Jamaica-based route ran only one car type (R-32 for the E, R-46 for the others).
Out of curiosity, what difference does it make? I can understand running only one type of car from a certain yard for logistical reasons, and I can understand that certain of you want certain cars on your own line for railfan window and comfort reasons. But other than that is there any practical reason to prefer certain cars on certain lines? Are certain types of cars able to perform better on certain types of lines?
One reason put forth to favor R-32's on the E is that 600-foot R-32 consists have 40 doors per side while 600-foot R-46 consists have only 32 doors per side. Furthermore, due to the seating arrangement, an R-46 consist can fit fewer passengers than an R-32 consist (although the former has more seats).
That accounts for Jamaica Yard. What about, say, Coney Island, with two types of 75-foot car (R-68 and R-68A) and two types of 60-foot car (R-32 and R-40)? You'll never find R-32's on the diamond-Q, and the circle-Q and W stick as closely as possible to all-R-68 and all-R-68A, respectively. And then there's the mishmash on the N. The only reason I've heard for this is that if a train dies on the road, it might be helpful if the next train along is the same model.
the V is a nice line. A T/O told me the code is Victor. Anyways i figured it was either victor or Victoria. Anyways there were delays today. I took the 705 V from continental and we waited at woodhaven blvd slattery plaza from 707-718. Anyways its a nice line overal. it reminds me of both the E and C at the Same time. E because its a short line which ends in manhattan, and C because it follows another train and can be replaced by it. For example the C follows the A as the local but when the C don't run the A is local. Same with V and F
V 5864 was my first train i rode.
PS has anyone seen the R32s on the F yet?
ALSO IF U GUYS WANNA KNOW ONE TIMETABLE OF A E TO 179, it leaves Canal around 1655. I took one today got off at forest hills because i figured they would run it exp on hillside!
ARGGHHHH
The V couldn't be Victoria. Before you know it, the C would become Circle, the D District, the N Northern, and the E East London, which would really throw those E riders for a loop. (Loop? Oh no, here we go again!)
Yeah, I was on that same train. It seemed bad that my first V train would cause me to be 30 minutes late.
Where are there photo oppurtunites on the:
1/2/3 lines
A/C/E/Rockaway Park S lines
B/D/F/V lines
4/5/6 lines
7 line
G line
N/R/Q/W lines
L line
J/M/Z lines
42nd Street Shuttle
Franklin Avenue Shuttle
Grand Street Shuttle
Thank you.
I know two good spots,
1) Rear end of the southbound platform at Smith 9th Streets. You have a view of the manhattan skyline (minus WTC sadly) and a view of all four tracks at the city's highest elevated subway station.
2) If you have your zoom lens, perhaps in the summer when the amusement parks reopen you can take a ride on the Wonder Wheel (the white stationary carriage) and zoom through the iron bars for an overhead look at the Stillwell Avenue terminal. I tried it last summer but the pictures didn't come out right.
i have to go back to the #7 and re take this shot
FOR SURE !!!...........lol..!!
The shot is nicely framed and you balance the train and the skyline nicely. How did the color come out that way, though?
ok the negative was a costco kodak 400 pak
shot november 1999
WRONG LIGHTING shoot from this platform in the morning only !!!.... ( afternoon @ shot from this platform in the morning only )
scanned on an epson 2500 with twain ...
tweeeekeeed with color correct ....
i used my the adobe 1998 1999 program to correct the mistakes in the sky them MFG my own uning color corrrect then smear it like a cloud .. distort the color sharpen the pic crop off the signal etc... wallll llaaaa !!! ...lol !!
( oh well a piece of artistic $$%...) & a big ..lol!!
here is 33rd st rawson the same day
HOWS that ?? ....should have shot this one in the morning & i will this summer for sure !!!
thankz !!
7 line-33rd Rawson, Woodside Shea Stadium, 74th, QBP are places I've shot. Pretty much anywhere is good.
G line-Smith-9th
N/R/Q/W lines-Beverley on the Q is excellent
If you have a camera with a good telephoto lens and high shutter speeds, don't forget the A train in the direction of Broad Channel and back. You can get a pretty good look at Kennedy Airport and the bay.
I decided to stick to personal experience. I have done the whole A line (on various trips) but didn't photograph at Broad Channel.
Q- Day or night of southbound trains making the turn into Brighton Beach taken from the outside of the CI bound platform would be great. The inside tracks at night time would be great from either platform. David Pirrman has the all time best picture of Brighton Beach I've ever seen, hands-down, period. Check it out!
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r32/r32-3359.jpg
For the really brave, I'd love to see somebody get up to the 23rd floor of 3000 Ocean Parkway, climb up to the roof to get some day or night shots (with zoom) of the 6 elevated tracks between Brighton and Ocean Parkway and O.P to West 8th. You can even get good shots of multiple lines (F and Q) running in and out of West 8th from there, not to mention a cool sunset.
I was very impressed with the pictures Trevor Logan took on December 4 showing the new R-143's. They look like state of the art and should add some class to the New York Subway. My understanding is that more than the L lines will be awarded some of these new trains. Does anyone know of any other lines that are destined to be graced by the 143's? It would look very good on the Sea Beach.
I believe the M Line will get the overflow, since 212 cars have been ordered and the L will only need 160 of them.BTW, this was posted a few days ago.... -Nick
Nick: I don't get on line every day so I am not as up to date as some of the rest of you. Thanks for filling me in, though. I wish I could be on line more often, though.
Fred,
No problem..that is understood :-) -Nick
Trevor and the R-143s ... where are they playing? I wanna catch this new group ;)
--Mark
Trevor and the R-143s ... where are they playing? I wanna catch this new group ;)
They're at Logan Circle in Philly. :)
If Moses was in love with subways in the same way he was in love with highways and expressways, and used his power to build subways in the exact same heavy handed way he did for highways, would we rail geeks worship him like a god, or still hate him?
I'm not sure myself. I hate what Moses did, but if he did it to build new trains, I'd love him.
He would be worshipped. Individual religious traditions would dictate the level and manner.
I'm Catholic, so I'd probably want him declared a saint.
Maybe we all could form a new religion where instead of a church or a synagogue (spelling?) we could transform a redbird into praying grounds :-)
Our Lo-V, who art in heaven...
COULD YOU PLEASE STOP MAKEING FUN OF OTHER PEOPLES RELIGIONS I DON'T SEE ANYONE SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT YOURS GET A LIFE PLEASE.
sorry, I didn't realize that my comment was offensive, I meant it in humor.
I don't think any reasoable person would take offense at your post. I thought it was kind of funny.
>>> I didn't realize that my comment was offensive <<<
Those of us who worship Lo-Vs were greatly offended. :-)
Tom
Sorry, I did not mean it in a hurtful way.
Speaking of Robert Moses and religion, what was Robert Moses' religion?
- Lyle Goldman
Speaking of Robert Moses and religion, what was Robert Moses' religion?
Jewish, I would presume.
Moses was born of Jewish parents but was not religious--he was neither circumsized nor Bar Mitzvah. He began attending the Episcopal Church at some point and, I believe, continued to do so whenever he was churchgoing from then on.
When Moses learned that the Jewish Encyclopedia intended to list him as a prominent Jew, he threatened to sue them for libel.
>>>--he was neither circumsized <<<
Lucky Man, wish I could say the same.
Peace,
ANDEE
You mean he was actually offended to be called a Jew? That doesn't make any sense. What was his problem?
- Lyle Goldman
>>> You mean he was actually offended to be called a Jew? That doesn't make any sense. <<<
You have obviously led a sheltered life. To get some idea of the America of Robert Moses' day, rent the 1947 Academy Award winning movie, Gentleman's Agreement. It is dated now, but reveals a history that all too many today are unaware of.
Tom
God. A second IND system....Ashland Place connection...BRT to Staten Island...2nd Avenue Line...his face would have been on every token.
Or today, every Metrocard
Okay. At the risk of vilification by my fellow subfans, I'm gonna provide a counterpoint within this thread.
As much as I advocate mass-transit use, had Moses the Destroyer used his power solely for subway construction, he still would have been an offensive and contemptible presence. His flaw, a flaw widespread yet in government (and the public) today, was his one-sided approach transportation problems -- elevating the car above trains (literally, in many cases -- I am reminded of this as I look out and see the ugliness of the Gowanis Expressway, with its stand-still traffic, during the evening rush every day). Moses' was disgusting because of his contempt for people while professing to aid "the public." The Cross-Bronx expressway destroyed the Tremont section of the Bronx because Moses decided it would. Had anyone had the power to force him to look at alternative solutions to helping transporation "flow", including road AND rail, Tremont may have been saved. Had he chosen just rail, the lack of highway access between Connecticut and the GWB would be causing other problems for the Bronx. There is always more than one piece to a solution in urban planning. Ol' stubborn Bob only ever saw one.
As an example from today, as much as I agree that extension of the 'N' to LaGuardia is right for the city (incidentally, this would integrate our transportation infrastructure, air-rail, more efficiently), I'm not sure a Robert Moses-type figure telling Astoria residents who oppose the subway extension to go-to-hell, and having the unencumbered power to do so, is all that right and good.
As much as I advocate mass-transit use, had Moses the Destroyer used his power solely for subway construction, he still would have been an offensive and contemptible presence. His flaw, a flaw widespread yet in government (and the public) today, was his one-sided approach transportation problems -- elevating the car above trains (literally, in many cases -- I am reminded of this as I look out and see the ugliness of the Gowanis Expressway, with its stand-still traffic, during the evening rush every day). Moses' was disgusting because of his contempt for people while professing to aid "the public."
It's a lot easier to focus entirely on one topic than to integrate different ones into a whole. For all the talk about Moses as a genius, possibily he just couldn't figure out transportation solutions involving cars and transit, and for that reason dealt solely with the former.
I keep thinking about actions and reactions whenever there's a discussion of Moses. He certainly did run roughshod over many people and get his way no matter what. But today, at least in part as a reaction to those methods, we have a wimpy government that can't get anything accomplished. Any thoughts of a happy medium have gone nowhere.
It's a lot easier to focus entirely on one topic than to integrate different ones into a whole. For all the talk about Moses as a genius, possibily he just couldn't figure out transportation solutions involving cars and transit, and for that reason dealt solely with the former.
I believe it is well-known that Moses deliberately excluded any provisions for the incorporation of rail on all of the bridges he oversaw, most notably the Narrows bridge. Furthermore, legend has it that the bridges over his parkways were deliberately low in order to limit them for use only by private automobiles. And obviously his parkways were never to have been marred by mass-transit's co-use. It's not that he couldn't figure it out, it's that he figured, wrongly, that the car would usurp mass transit completely, at least for the middle class. When he saw the fact that as soon as one of his roads or bridges was opened, it was almost immediately clogged with traffic, his solution was simply to demolish more of the city and build another road. He built it, they came, and it never really worked. Simple-minded, arrogant, blindness.
I keep thinking about actions and reactions whenever there's a discussion of Moses. He certainly did run roughshod over many people and get his way no matter what. But today, at least in part as a reaction to those methods, we have a wimpy government that can't get anything accomplished. Any thoughts of a happy medium have gone nowhere.
Agreed. It seems as though you get one extreme or the other, and reason and action rarely coincide. You can probably gather from my postings on SubTalk so far that I would prefer a more active government where transportation issues are concerned.
He would be worshipped like Zeus
If Robert Moses had loved and supported the subways and other mass transit, he would have been a completely different person. He wanted nothing to do with the subways and the people, at least in his narrow-minded view, who used them.
This alternative Robert Moses would also probably understand the concerns of the residents of East Tremont, and therefore not destroy the community the way he did. Or the Norwegian community along the route of the Gowanus. Or the farms along the Southern State route (while making deals with the more powerful North Shore elite). Or the countless other people and communities that the actual Robert Moses ran roughshod over. He wouldn't have shown his contempt for large parts of the city that he neglected not only with his road construction, but in his capacity as Parks Commissioner and public housing coordinator. And this "Bizzaro", if you will, Robert Moses wouldn't have rejected, as the actual Moses did, offers from both Al Smith and Fiorello Laguardia to become an "education czar". He had no interest in doing that.
Frances Perkins, FDR's Secretary of Labor, knew Moses going back to their college days and probably put it best. Moses, she said, "loves the public, but hates people".
>>> "loves the public, but hates people". <<<
HAHAHA .... similar to one one my favorite lines: (I'm in retailing).
"I LOVE RETAIL...IT'S THE CUSTOMERS I CAN'T STAND" 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
I have heard anecdotally that SIRTOA (SIR) is no longer FRA. Anyone know is this is for sure and/or when it happened?
Paul, I have heard that they are no longer under FRA rules. Not sure WHEN it happenned, but would hazard a guess it occurred sometime after they severed the old freight spurs from the mainline (late 80's?).
BTW, I believe SIRTA still uses NOREC signaling systems in their operations.
BMTman
SIRT still has B&O Co-Po signals, but they are going to be replacedby the end of next year. SIR is embargoed; there is no way any other railroad can connect to them. They have been granted a temporary waiver from FRA rules, since 1988. If the line is ever reconnected all the way from St. George to AK, the waiver must be revoked.
-Hank
They're removing the signals! God damit. Why can't someone stop the MTA. They are running ripshod all over the system.
But just think of the juicy souvenirs that will be available!
You could mount one on your dorm room door as a do-not-disturb
sign. Nice green vertical, come on in. Red bar, stay away.
Approach, "I'm almost done". Restricting: "block occupied, but
3-ways welcome".
You know Big Ed, don't you?
Yeah, I do
Yeah, go figure they move to replace a completely outmoded and difficult to maintain system to improve the service to their passengers. What a tragedy. Somebody stop them!
Back to the horse and buggy days?
-Hank
B&O CPL's are not out moded. In fact they are better than most colourlight signals.
As display yes, BUT the guts are ancient, and I doubt you would be willing to be forced to retuen to relays and vacuum tubes for your PC.
As someone who loves the B&O dearly, I will miss them, but if the redo means more reliable operations, CTC, and bi-directional signa;;ing as is the case in the CSX projects trains will be able to run better.
As display yes, BUT the guts are ancient, and I doubt you would be willing to be forced to retuen to relays and vacuum tubes for your PC.
A CPL signal dosen't have any "guts". It is a light fixture like any other. Furthermore most railroad equipment today still uses heavy duty mechanical relays. Solid state stuff is for overall signal control and various logic operations that control the relays.
And will the new signaling system have the same speeds as the former?
(I'd like an answer)
Since you ask so nicely, and in a manner where you don't expect me to answer, figure out if it makes any sense.
-Hank
Are any of those B&O signals left? Better get out there soon and get some pics!
So they're still an FRA Class I RR, but they have a waiver?
I would imagine their desire to avoid FRA rules is more on the labor issues than the physical. Based on the equipment they have now and in the foreseeable future (unless they go light rail) FRA compliance is not that big a deal.
As Hank says the have a waiver, they applied during the rebuild of the R44's and got rid of the grab irons on them as well...
> they are going to be replacedby the end of next year.
What are they going to be replaced with?
- Lyle Goldman
Personally I would love to see us all show who runs this city, I am sick and tired of transit workers getting no respect.The TA has no respect for its T/O's C/R's Tower operators or Dispatchers.We can not let them get away with a line as long as the J going Opto,its bad enough the Union let them getaway with the G going opto.If the J goes Opto thats at least 25 C/R's moving to other lines for jobs with no night diff,G O Late clears.I wanna see this so called New directions Union will do .I dont want another Rally Where city permits were obtained and the people we were protesting against got the day off ,and were home laughing thinking what a bunch of IDIOTS protesting an empty building.WE SHOULD ALL STAND TOGETHER AND SHOW THEM WHAT RUSH HOUR WILL BE LIKE WITHOUT US.
The (G) IS NOT OPTO, I rode it today and though it was 4 cars there was our friendly conductor in the last car doing his thing!
Regards & Happy Holidays,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
I am not talking about rush hours I am talking about off hours ,after 8:30 pm the G goes to 71st OPTO
One of my T/O's picked over in B Div. doing an OPTO G Line job.
Actually, the G is only OPTO on Saturdays and Sundays.
Weekday midnight runs still have a C/R.
>>> We can not let them get away with a line as long as the J going Opto <<<
A strike at this time over this issue would be disastrous. We all should have learned in Unionism 101 that a strike is the ultimate weapon, used sparingly, and only when significant public support can be rallied to the Union cause. This is even more true when a strike is illegal.
With regards to the J going OPTO, the union would have to spin its position as a rider safety issue. The TA would claim featherbedding, and point out that OPTO is already being done safely on some portions of the system. Before striking, the union must convince the public that they are being forced to strike by the unreasonable intransigence of management in not meeting reasonable demands. Is operating the J OPTO allowed in the current contract? If so, a strike over it might not get support even from other unions. In addition, the Union would be painted as unpatriotic in impeding the recovery of the city. A strike at this time would probably fail, and seriously damage the union.
In the long run OPTO is coming to the subway. It is as inevitable as the replacement of the gate cars. Rather than trying to prevent it, the Union must concentrate on preventing the layoff of members as it occurs, and pay increases for the T/Os for the extra responsibility. These are issues for the next contract, and that and public relations is where the Union leadership should be concentrating their efforts.
Tom
well easoned
(In the long run OPTO is coming to the subway. It is as inevitable as the replacement of the gate cars. Rather than trying to prevent it, the Union must concentrate on preventing the layoff of members as it occurs, and pay increases for the T/Os for the extra responsibility.)
That's fine for the workers. But the union collects fewer dues. The interests of the workers and the union are frequently not the same. This is especially true since many public employee unions use New York as a high-dues cash cow for national operations (ie. DC37).
There is a perception that the transit unions are anti-technology,and that they are indeed "feather-bedding."
At minimum, I think unions should actively participate in rolling out new technology on the subways, and making sure their members learn how to operate it so their job skills keep pace with progress. This should be provided for in the contracts with MTA.
what, you want creative behavior in the 21st century? surely you jest.
What the TWU asks for and what they really want are two different 'fruits.' They ask for 'new tech' training but want to keep the 'old timers' on who aren't interested in advancing themselves and try to do as little work as possible. They want new members but don't protect the new members. They want advancement programs but claim the young men in a five year apprenticeship program threaten jobs. They want CTAs (cleaners) to be more involved in car maintainance but claim such programs in place threaten Car Inspectors. They want people like me to do the work efficiently and promptly but they want me to strech out the load over my shift. They say we're all united in one union but pit the different titles against each other. Car Inspectors (RCIs too) and Track Workers do hazardous safety-related work but CIs are now assigned to 'utility' and can be called to do anything that needs to be done in the shop including painting of anything. The public doesn't understand that TA isn't private industry...that there is a heirachy...and anyone new from the outside who has no relations in the system comes in to get and keep a new job, unintentionally placing a strain on a slow system that will eventually make up speed when retirement takes out some of the 'dead wood.' The union isn't helping matters...TA is a wonderful workplace of diverse cultures working together...and must one day realise that the schedule of fixing up the old trainsets just has nothing to do with the new ones. It is now time to shut my big mouth up. CI Peter
>>> The interests of the workers and the union are frequently not the same. <<<
Isn't that what New Directions is all about?
Tom
Neither are the cars driven by union officials and the workers.
i dunno... opto trains seem a lot slower, since the t/o has to get up, open, close the doors, & get back rolling - over and over through a course of stops, it slows the run down a lot. opto might be used more on some more runs, but i don't see it coming to rush hour anytime soon.
Would the J go OPTO with the current equipment? That'd be interesting on the half-cabs.
Go ahead strike.
By the time the Taylor Law finishes with you, you will need a 2nd job to pay your bills.
If they do strike, the off the street T.O. list will be used up real fast >G<....
Local 100 told us we would not be asked to honor the picket if we were still on probation and I wonder if this includes civil service probation (3yrs). By 12/15/02 there will be about 600 OTS T/O's running around there are around 400 now plus a few promotionals that have not seen 3 years total service. Add that there are more TSSes now than ever and you might be able to run on a doomsday schedule of maybe 14 hours a day with shorter lines for the 4 days it will take to break the union.
There are also many new C/Rs (you can pick in less than a year as a C/R).
Um, you can't strike. It's illegal.
Chris,
You know it, I know it and so does everyone else but you have to understand - the "New Directions" leadership of the TWU local 100 could care less (and they have said so in the past to the newspapers).
The next strike will be the end of the TWU in NYC.
Well, the doomsday battle ground has already been laid. Albany will probably be late with its budget again for FY '02, as the battle over who will get the credit for rebuilding downtown gets mixed up with the upcoming gubernatorial election (which looks already as if it will be a repeat of the disaster that befell the Democrats this year). Throw in the fact that the mayor of NYC has just left Bloomberg a balanced budget for this year but a shortfall for the next THREE years. Then, add in that the TWU's contract is up next year (along with everybody else's), and you have a recipe for anarchy as the city continues on its downward slide. Nevertheless, with Tousaaint [forgive my spelling] and New Directions calling the shots, I won't be surprised if they go for an all-or-nothing strike.
Even still, I do have insider info (don't ask me who I got it from) that there is a sense of hoplessness among the rank-and-file membership (particularly among African-Americans and Latinos). To be more specific, there is the feeling that there is nothing that they can do, especially after 9/11, to stop management from getting what it wants, be it a conversion to OPTO on the Eastern Divison upon the completion of the R-143 order, or the phasing out of Token Booth Clerks. If this is indeed true or not, it will be interesting to see how this plays into the situation next year.
>>Nevertheless, with Tousaaint [forgive my spelling] and New Directions calling the shots, I won't be surprised if they go for an all-or-nothing strike. <<
And after the dust settles - that is what they will have: Nothing.
And some of us might lose our new jobs. Not a 'new direction' to travel in. CI Peter
Not that he was accuarte with his other statements but when I went to Union Hall for orientation we were told if we were on probation we would be allowed to cross and be exempted from job actions to keep our jobs without recrimination from the union.
Brother, think about who represents you and what opportunities you have had to decide: ZIP. We're on probation and we love and need our new work...the union doesn't give a 'rats ass' if we live or die...we're displacing the 'loyal rank in file' as they die off. The old timers tell us just to follow orders from supervision and do our work as they bask in the sunlight. The best defense is the best offense: show up for work on time, don't get sick, always finish your assignment to the best of your ability and keep clear of the 'big mouths'. It's the management that will 'make or break' you...they will notice if you are a good employee and doing well every day may mean that the one day you screw up will be a day forgotten. I just found out what it's like to be pulled off an assignment because 'they' want someone with seniority and I now know that it won't be the first time. LOL CI Peter
Within this thread, Allan has said:
>>>>>>>And after the dust settles - that is what they will have: Nothing
>>>>>>>The next strike will be the end of the TWU in NYC.
>>>>>>>By the time the Taylor Law finishes with you, you will need a 2nd job to pay your bills
Funny how you've bashed the union since this thread started. Forget OPTO or pay increases. Maybe we should strike just to piss you off.
For the record, I do not favor a strike.
How about strict obeying work rules. Taking 45 for every putin not going back out without your 15 min break.
And if there is a strike, call it at 1pm not at midnight.
Quite frankly the transit system should be run in the best interest of the riding public.
The best interst of the riding public is to run a safe, fast clean and affordable mass transit system.
OPTO should be employed wherever feasble. I like the plan to utilize wireless video cameras to aid the train operator in opening and closing doors
The best way to impliment this practice is as follows
on R-142/143 class trains with smart doors.
- the cameras should display only doorways in which an obstruction is detected.
- Train operator open only those doors which have obstructions
The train operator will not have to leave his control position thus not causing aditional dwell times. A heads up display could be utilized so that the train oporator does not need to turn his head thus reducing repetitive stress injuries.
OPTO should be used full time overnights when passenger loads are light.
Another possible implimantation of OPTO on full length trians would be to have the train operator drive the train from the middle car . HE could drive the trian theough the use of a infered/video camera installed on the front of the trian. The Train opetator would open + close doors as he normally does
This would allow the TA to utilize thier current fleet of train stock for full time OPTO.
AT a time where budgets are tight, the TA should make full use of technology to contril cots and increase service.
We should also extend the N and Q to Rikers Island. At the new Rikers Island Yard we can eliminate ALL car cleaners and use the inmates. The extension built of course with all prison labor.
We can also commute prison terms to the part time booths and make them 24/7. Lunch relief will involve bringing more food to the inmates and taking away the waste bucket. For each day their books balance we can drop a day from their terms and each day not in balance add 2 days.
>I like the plan to utilize wireless video cameras to aid the train >operator in opening and closing doors.
You will get closed circuit TV and like it. There is a point where it is cheaper to keep people than go total high end.
I am not against OPTO but I bet you have never operated and seem to care about speed. The J is too long a line for OPTO and not the right type either. You really can't have OPTO on lines with the more 'feisty' customers, it's dangerous and counter productive.
The M is a better choice it is just logistically more difficult. Even the F from Church to Stillwell makes more sense.
While part of this has to do with the placement of equipment another part is that the J does do not go past many affluent areas. There really are much better choices thna the J for just passenger load reasons.
>>> We should also extend the N and Q to Rikers Island. At the new Rikers Island Yard we can eliminate ALL car cleaners and use the inmates. <<<
How did you get access to the TA's long range plans? They are supposed to be secret. :-)
Tom
The J is too long a line for OPTO and not the right type either.
How long is the J, in terms of number of stations and (more importantly) running time?
The Stockholm underground, where I've recently become a T/O, has been all-OPTO since the mid-1980s, and I'd be interested to compare the J to the longest line here -- line 19, with 35 stations and an end-to-end running time of about 55 minutes.
-- Tim
The J is 29 station with approx. a 50 minute running time. More info. available here
Peace,
ANDEE
Thanks. That makes it roughly comparable to line 19 in Stockholm, at least in terms of length and number of stations (I'm not touching the issue of demographics... ;-) ).
Regards,
Tim
I tried to leave it at 'feisty'. Now the L would be 'rowdy' and the D 'boisterous'.
I had to sort of laugh when I read the MTA"s J schedule-
When I lived near/rode the J (off and on between 81-85), it seemed the headways were just a LITTLE longer :)
I remember quite a few nights (well, anytime after 10 p.m.) waiting up to 45 minutes for a J. And a few times waiting an hour or a little more. Admittedly, it was probably about 3-4 a.m., but still, waiting at Chambers St. in the dead of winter at 3 a.m. for an hour is a near-death experience in my book.
On the MTA schedule, you'd never have to wait more than 15 minutes even at 3 a.m.
Uh, has it got THAT much better? :)
All the preceding said, still gotta love the B'way B'klyn El.
Even back then, I'd doubt that the scheduled overnight headway was any worse than 20 minutes. That was the policy headway on the subway for many years.
David
I guess you're probably right-
I'm just stating what I know about riding the J in the early 80's.
I never looked at a schedule- in fact, things were so goofy back then I wouldn't have believed one anyway, unfortunately.
I'm not putting the MTA down at all, I think they do an exceptional job at a very difficult task, in all honesty.
>>>>>>>On the MTA schedule, you'd never have to wait more than 15 minutes even at 3 a.m.
The headway at that time of night (morning) is actually 20 minutes. Even at 20, there hardly is anybody riding the J at that time.
J ridership dwindles after 1 AM, unless it's a Friday or Saturday night, when the dropoff happens later. But this can be said of all lines in the outer boros.
The J runs every 20 minutes at night. Unless some significant problem arises, service at night is very reliable. I should know, I had to ride the J train home every night in 1996-8 at 1 or 2 AM.
I have made a list of ways your plan is going to fail
-A strike right now seems unpatriotic.
-Right now the MTA isn't going to be hesitent to fine a union millions of dollars.
-There is no real reason for a strike.
-OPTO is proven safe on the G,J(already),M,S,and 5.
-A strike for a insufficient charge is disastorous for a union if it's going against a company facing a budget shortfall.
I'm sure there is more.If you was smart you would try to talk it over with the MTA.If they don't agree than go to another line where there can't be OPTO.Like the 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,A,B,C,D,E,F,Q,R,V or W.
>>>>>>>>OPTO is proven safe on the G,J(already),M,S,and 5
Um, the J and M aren't OPTO yet.
IIRC:A few years ago the J had fewer cars than usual(On a weekend)so they ran OPTO trains.If I'm mistaken sorry.
The M was my mistake.Sorry.
If the J goes opto and the trainset is too long/passenger numbers too high and it doesn't work out, you can be sure revenue, schedules and safety are prime numbers which will cancel out any savings. Simple math. I thought the only way to get a TA job was through nepotism: it was RADIO advertisements that caught my attention. Like my fellow 'newbie' brothers, we only wish we knew about this opportunity years ago...how our lives would have been so better!!!!! IF the union REALLY wanted the public to know how much WE do for the city, THEY could pay for the advertisements as a public service one better than 'Let the MTA get you there.' 'T/Os get you there on time safely, CTAs make your ride clean and comfortable, CIs/RCIs assure your safety' and so on. Play into the hands of the union and you just may destroy the best employment you may ever get after 911. I know someone who had been doing menial work...got a Fed CS job...took a test for Air Controller...had an udiscovered phenomenal talent...and lost everything in the PATCO strike. CI Peter
I'm booked to ride on an "Acela Regional" on Dec 28th. Are these the new cars or the old cars pulled by an acela engine, or the old cars with a new name? It's abt $200 cheaper round trip than an acela express...the difference has to come somewhere other than the extra travel time...
www.forgotten-ny.com
same old amfleet, engine a good question probably an AEM 7 maybe a rebuilt one (AC), lomg shot HHL-8 if any are in regular use.
An Acela Regional is all Electric from DC to Boston. You also have a good chance of getting re-habbed coaching stock and a AEM-7AC or an HHP-8 engine.
AEM-7AC or an HHP-8 engine.
*thwap*!!!!
MOTOR!!!!!!
There have been a large number of station signs auctioned on e-bay recently. They are new and about 2 feet wide and are for places like Coney Island and Yankee Stadium. They are considerably larger than the ones at the transit museum.
Any idea where they are available for purchase? thanks
john rofrano
I believe that these were left as junk when the contractors did the demolition work. Either the contractor of one of his employees is probably offering them (or someone who was watching the work and walked off with the signs).
Hello Boys & Girls (For The Few That Are Here!):
Here is the lastest and greatest info as per Kawasaki.....
1) The R-142A Option Order as we all know has been taken, but instead of the original 120 cars, it was beefed up to a odd number of 154.
2) In talking to Kawasaki about the R-143 order, there is talks of adding more cars to the order as a tack on option to cover the entire Eastern Division and according to the Kawasaki Technician, the TA is very interested in that idea.
3) Though the TA has backed off of the R-160 order for the meantime, according to the Kawasaki Technician, that Kawasaki will most like if not definately be the builder of the now 900 car order. Again, this will replace the R-38 through R-44 class cars.
The Kawasaki Technician was VERY VERY happy about the R-160 order because that would keep work for the current Kawasaki personnel for up to 12 years. Also confirm again that the R-143 is riding on Adtranz Trucks and Motors. with 4 motors PER car, YES PER CAR (B CARS INCLUDED)!!!!!!! Unlike there little brothers, R-142As which have Four Motors on the A Cars, Two Dummy B Cars and 1 B Car with two Motors. I can't speak for the Bombardier Layout but knowing how the TA like uniformity, its probably the same.
Regards & Happy Holidays,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Instant Messanger: Metro D 3700
Shouldn't those be Bombardier trucks? Bombardier purchased Adtranz last year. Hopefully the trucks aren't made in Plattsburgh.
Although I'm still looking through NY State Law, I'll bet you double-or-nothing that Albany backed itself into a corner requiring rapid transit vehicles that will run in NY to be built in NY. That means that Bombardier, in order to continue to get contracts from the MTA, will have to continue to use the Plattsburgh shed instead of its more permanent facilities in Barre, VT or Auburn, NY (which may be more out of the way of CP Rail than Plattsburgh.) And that means more defective products on the way.
My question is....are the products really defective or is it an incompatible collection of units from around the world like Volvo built autos? Some have complained that TAs specifiying certain railroad standard parts spoiled a trainset that would be almost perfect IF Bombardier built cars as they wished. CI Peter
Very good. Cannot wait for the leftover 143's to go onto the M to give southern division a new car class, first since 1988.
I just hope the TA will back off it's OPTO plan for the shuttles. One bad accident and you can bet your reverser that OPTO won't be pushed anymore.
Uniformity? In a ten car R142 trainset, there are 32 150 HP motors between two ABBBA trainsets. The 'A' cars have a control computer/TOD system/four motors/two propulsion control system while the 'B' cars have their computers/two motors/one propulsion control system/inverters/batteries/air compressor. Nothing can run by itself and a ABA three car, if assembled, would not be too reliable or safe. CI Peter
A 10 car set of R142's have 28 moter by your count.
(4+2+2+2+4)=14*2=28. So a three car set have 10 moter per set. 4+2+4=10.
Robert
So the TA didn't hire me for my arithmetical abilities but i still can calculate series capacitors and RC networks LOL. CI Peter
You do have me there, I have done Series Capactors back in college 6 years ago. I don't think I can still do that.
Robert
I damn near pee'd in my pants today while waiting at 71st and Continental when a 8 Car set of ALL A-Unit R-46s pulled in on the Manhattan Bound Side on the (E). WTF is going?!??!?!!!!
Regards & Happy Holidays,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
The G used to be six cars. Now it's four. You just found a cluster of those now-unnecessary A-A pairs.
I told y'all it was gonna happen!
Hey Bill, you remember the last Pre GOH train that ran on the F with all A cars? It took little more than 3 seconds to charge the B.P. through the charging magnet valves. I wonder if the feed valves and charging checks are choking the system and this isn't possible even with 8 air compressors.
Hey, for the technically challenged: Is all A cars a good thing, a bad thing, or just a fun coincidence?
the article on yesterdays new york times paints a bleak picture here maybe somebody out there read this article. Example: those who clean subway cars for food stamps etc...
It was horrible to read about those not hired to work for the nyc transit system & were ""left out"" & have reached thier 5 year terminations with nothing no job no benifits & cut off ...
Was a horrible article to read ..Maybe you read the article ....
>>> .Maybe you read the article .... <<<
Maybe you should have posted a link.
Tom
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/17/nyregion/17WELF.html
another sad depressing tale for the holiday season.
but what really gets me is that these folks benefits were running to the end of their 5 year marks, and they knew it. didn't anyone explain to them that maybe they needed to, after a year or two, take all those great glowing reviews from their bosses (and cram them up their candy asses? - just kidding!) and find jobs in the private sector? they had to have been told that they had 5 years... ...maybe they were strung along with the promise that they'd be hired full time, unionized, and get big pay, but it was just that - a promise - and we all know promises get broken.
so now what are we all suppose to do? cry a river? does personal responsibility over a sudden disappear now that the economy ain't so hot? how could one sit on a time bomb like this, know that they were going to be in trouble at the end, and not be propelled to do something about it? is the system suppose to just keep bailing these folks out over and over and over again?
all i'm saying here is 5 years is enough time for someone to find a way out of their situation. the financial aid to go to college and get a good job has always been there, and i bet plenty of thse folks coulda got educated and employed before the economy went downhill... if they were to get laid off later, well at least they'd be able to get benefits again and have some education and references...
on a seperate note, i recall seeing one of the folks in this article at coney island one day. i was in the front car of a W, and she wasn't cleaning the car at all - spending the time talking in spanish to someone in the car. the C/R announced the train was leaving, and specifically stated "all car cleaners leave the train - watch the closing doors" - very loud, very clear - did this lady budge? nope. I can only guess she didn't speak english. when the doors started closing she scrambled, got stuck in them... i wasn't sympathetic that day, and i'm not today.
Thank you for posting the URL.
Peace,
ANDEE
[It was horrible to read about those not hired to work for the nyc transit system & were ""left out"" & have reached thier 5 year
terminations with nothing no job no benifits & cut off]
For most of the last 5 years the economy has been booming if any person who is physically and mentally able to didn't get a job during that time than they are lazy and I don't care if they starve to death.
And a Merry Christmas to you too..............
Would you care to argue the issue rather than making stupid and pointless comments?
What issue, that you want people to starve? Not everyone is able bodied. Some people have emotional and mental problems that may prevent them from functioning in a productive employment role. And if someone is able bodied, but never recieved any training, what kind of job can they get to support themselves. The minumum wage is $5.15 per hour, for 40 hours a week that is $206 before tax, no more than $190 after FICA(assuming no FIT or SIT). Even a room the size of a closet rents for $100 per week. Now try to afford medical insurance and food and where are you? Now say you take this job and try to improve, if you are lucky enough to get a good union position with training, you may have shot, but union jobs are going (the right wing likes that, no more driving up labor costs)fast.
Now say you have a HS diploma with no special training. How do you support yourself??? And if you do somehow make ends meet, how can you afford any training to better yourself. Now suppose you are single mother with a child. How can you work that minimum wage job, get daycare and make a future for your child?????????? Maybe welfare is the anwser. You enroll in school at night and care for your child during the day. It may very well take more than 4 or 5 years to finish any kind of training in that window. Now suppose you or your child is ill or has somekind of problem, what do you do to support the child, support yourself and hopefully better your family?
And the booming economy you mention, has mostly produced low wage jobs with minimal or no benefits. Yes, jobs have been created, but not good ones................
Your post reinforces my feeling that unions should strive to be at the forefront of technological developments; make sure their workers have opportunities to continue education, cross-train on other jobs and even be able o land on their feet if they have to leave union employment.
The focus on "I'm a car cleaner; I don't fix the lights" will hurt people in the long run.
Absolutely, I agree 100% By working to encourage employee's techincal developement, the union is really looking out for its future and the furture of its employees. While I often feel employers need to be pressed as they will try to exploit workers, people of good will on both sides must come together for the mutual benefit of both sides.
If unions today take the position "I only clean cars" that is wrong. But if a car cleaner is asked to change headlights, you must be sure the car cleaner is trained and paid for the additional work. You also need to protect the job of the craft that currently changes headlights. You may need to make some kind of deal to compensate the old headlight changer, or have some higher paying, more changlenging work for him.
Agreed.
[What issue, that you want people to starve?]
I don't want people to starve I just don't care if lazy people do.
[Not everyone is able bodied. Some people have emotional and mental problems that may prevent them from functioning in a productive employment role.]
And if people have a real disability am not against public services for them.
[And if someone is able bodied, but never recieved any
training, what kind of job can they get to support themselves. The minumum wage is $5.15 per hour, for 40 hours a week that is
$206 before tax, no more than $190 after FICA(assuming no FIT or SIT).]
The issue here is not how much people working are making it is people who are not working for five years.
[Even a room the size of a closet rents for $100 per
week.]
If it weren't do-gooders like you housing prices would be lower.
How do do-gooders like me keep housing prices high. It is the right wing that want to eliminate rent control, what would happen then. And don't tell me that more housing would be built and everybody could afford it, rent in the NYC area is off the wall. We need rent stabilization and higher wages. Do you believe a minimum wage of $5.15 is fair??????????????
If we were to get rid of zoning rent control and other environmental regulations and host of other things more housing could be built. One hundred years ago slumlords made money and people living in slums have a roof over their heads. Now we have homeless people and taxpayer money going to wasteful public housing projects.
i agree with you 100%
you MUST have not read the new york times article ...it proves the last part of your post wrong....
Randy Kennedy’s Tunnel Vision column in the Times, an editorial in the Times, and an article in the Daily News all discuss the first day of the V train.
Double check your NY Times link. That editorial discusses the "train to the plane".
Sorry. You're right. I had 4 different articles for 3 different message boards. That's too much for my brain to handle at one time.
One my way to Lower Manhattan this morning, noticed atleast 2 consists of R32's on the F. I boarded on consist at 71/Continental Avenue with SB motor 3801-3802.
Also as I made it to the platform noticed a R46 V train signed:
V FOREST HILLS
V 71 AVE
V 6 AVE LCL
V via 63rd Street
Maybe they we will see R32s on the F more often now.
Are these CI or JAM R-32's?
All cars on the F are assigned to Jamaica.
GRACIAS, BILL.
Lastnight while my work train way sitting on the siding tracks @ 135st and 8ave, I saw a 10 car train of R142's running on the Downtown Express. I could not get the car #'s so I don't know if they are new or were just got upgraded brakes system @ 207yard. The cars were signed up of 2 7th Ave express to Flatbush. Any one else seen this train, it was about 11:30 or so.
Robert
P.S. Yester day was the first time I had to flag a Work train from Crain car. What a very different expence running down the 8th ave Express and seing the roof of the tunel over head and feeling the wind in my face.
Wait until you have to flag over the Rockaway Flats at 10 degrees without wind chills. Be careful when applying handbrakes on R23 flat cars (low 100s), if there are any left. The handbrake linkage connects to a singular car body mounted brake piston, as they don't have one piston per truck like newer stuff. You will hurt your back on some of them. MAKE SURE you have adequate standing room on the flats with the bins, track likes to use all the space they can, and you must NEVER stand in front of the railing while flagging. It is unsafe and you should refuse such a move and call Control Center.
Thanks for the tip. Now can you help me with tring to clime up on the crans. I had some trouble doing it. My feet are to big to bring them to the level of the floor.
robert
Supposedly, would it be better if MTA to use (J) or (M) to extend to Staten Island instead of using (E), by connecting St. George, Staten Island to Broad Street, Manhattan?
By using the (J) or (M), it's more accessible to New York City's major areas.
Once you're at Broad Street, you have instant access to the New York Stock Exchange and Wall Street.
At Fulton Street, you'll be able to enter Brooklyn through the IND 8th Ave and Fulton St. Line (A) and (C), which allows access to the WTC and WFC. Then there's the IRT 7th Ave. (1)/(2) to head to Times Square and the East Side/Lexington (4) and (5) to Grand Central.
At Chambers Street, in connection to Brooklyn Bridge, it allows access to all the IRT East Side/Lexington Av. Lines (4)/(5)/(6) and it allows direct access to the City Hall area.
At Canal Street, it connects with the Broadway Lines, including the Broadway Express Lines (Q)//(W) to access Brooklyn, particularly Stillwell Ave., in addition to the Broadway locals (N)/(R), it can still access Times Square, but it also allows access to the Empire State Building and Central Park. The IRT Lexington Local (6) is still available at this station though. This would also be the major stop for the Chinatown area though.
Once it's at Bowery, it's still one of the stations that serve Manhattan Chinatown.
At Essex Street, it allows an interchange with the (F), to enter Rutgers Street tunnel to the Culiver Line at Brooklyn and allows access to the Jamaica/179 St.
Then it crosses the Williamsburg Bridge and continues to Metropolitan Ave. or Parsons/Archer.
I would think the best option here is to operate the (M) during the Weekday schedule between (05:30 to 21:00) and then (J) operates to Staten Island, during the Weekday Schedule (21:00 to 05:30 the following day) and the Saturday and Sunday Schedule (Friday 21:00 to Monday 05:30)
But if that were to happen, I would have no issues with connecting the Southbound tracks to the Manhattan-SI underwater tunnels, which is south of Broad Station, such that it will pass under Whitehall, South Ferry and the Joralemon Tunnel.
For the Northbound however, would it be more appropriate to connect the east tail track south of Broad Street that is being used by Weekday terminating (J) and (Z) trains, instead of building a dedicated platform or even have its dedicated track opened behind the wall of Broad Street at the Northbound platform?
Perhaps, but it would be easier and cheaper to connect Brooklyn to Staten Island since they are closer.
Since many of the people of Staten Island that are looking for a connection between Manhattan and Staten Island, is the Brooklyn / Staten Island connection less feasible?
The original intention was for a line between Brooklyn & SI. In fact the Tunnel headings at both ends (59th St in Brooklyn) had been started way back in the 1920's or 1930's but abandonded for the usual financial and political reasons.
I would think the Manhattan/SI connection is less feasible and for that matter less practical because of the distance. However, if they were do attempt such a thing it would probably be the longest subway tunnel under water in the U.S.
I was doing some searching of the MTA timetables, and it doesn't seem that a Brooklyn-SI route would do that well timewise.
If you ran from somewhere near the Verrazano, tunneled under the Narrows, and joined the 4th Ave tracks at 95th, you'd need to widen the 4th Ave line to 4 tracks (which is doable, but a chore). But even then it's perhaps half an hour, if not more to Canal Street lower level. You can do about this well with express buses, particularly if the bus-only HOV lane is in effect.
If you ran from St. George to 59th, you'd still have a 30+ minute trip to Canal (the W currently takes about 25 minutes from 62nd to Canal, stopping only at 36 and Pacific) - the ferry does just as well.
If you chose a routing from Clifton to 59th, well, what connects there? The SIR is about it, and as we all know, the current service between SI and Manhattan comes from express buses (which can run from the Verrazano to the BBT in under 30 minutes if no traffic jam) and the ferry (typically you take the SIR or a bus to St. George), but you can do just as well timewise with what's there now.
On the other hand, a direct tunnel would be shorter and would turn a 30 minute ferry ride into a 15 minute (maybe less) train ride. You'd hook in to the existing infrastructure (SIR and buses to St. George), and perhaps merge with the J line in Manhattan. From the J you can access Wall St. district by getting off at Broad, WTC and WFC by getting off at Fulton (which will be made easier if peoplemovers are installed under Fulton St.), have simple transfers to the A/C and 2/3 at Fulton, the 4/5/6 at Chambers, and the Q//W (and also N/R) at Canal. This would give you direct access to express service to ALL the lines running to midtown (via the A to 14&8 34&8 and 42&8, 4/5 to 14&Park and 42&Lex, 2/3 to 14&7 34&7 and 42&7, and Q//W to 14&Broadway 34&6 and 42&7), plus nearly ALL the lines running in Manhattan (A/C from Fulton and E with one transfer after that, 2/3 from Fulton and 1/9 with one transfer after that, 4/5/6 from Chambers, N/R/Q//W from Canal, F by transferring at Essex, north track Manny B lines by transferring at Bowery (not sure if there's a free transfer there). It's simply perfect!
In essence, you would be putting he SI Ferry to rest.
Well the SI Ferry would still be needed in case of the tunnel repair or emergency within the tunnel.
Bart Runs From San Fransisco To The East Bay, They Also Have The East Bay Ferry's From The Ferry Terminal To Several East Bay City's (The Ferrys were put in to service in 1989 due to the partial collapse of the bay bridge, after the bridge was reopened they had to add ferries.)
I'm not really interested in San Francisco here, it's about the possible collapse of the Manhattan-SI tunnel that connects St. George, SI and Broad Street, Manhattan. How the SI ferry is still useful in a way, in case of emergencies for the (J) or (M) that may be used for the Staten Island Subway.
How about using both - say J North Shore, M South Shore?
I'm more interested in connecting the (J) during weekends (Friday 21:00 to Monday 05:30) and Weeknights (Monday to Thursday 21:00 - 05:30 the following day) or (M)during weekdays (Monday to Friday 05:30 to 21:00) to the Staten Island Rapid Transit here.
Although your idea of extending the (J) to the North Shore is not a bad one, but I'm not sure if that part of Staten Island is that populated. For extending the (M) through the existing Staten Island Rapid Transit, it's not bad though if it we're for the times I've just said before. But due to the low patronage of the Broadway Elevated/Nassau Street Line, I don't think that having both (J) and (M) operating between Myrtle Ave. and Broad St. on Weekends and Weeknights.
On my map a dense maze of streets is shown along the North Shore going quite some depth inland as far as Arlington, conveniently where the North Shore Line would terminate. At a glance it looks like there should be demand. One must also remember one of the effects of improved mass transit is to increase its own demand.
I was also thinking along the lines of being able to use the Port Richmond Bus terminal as a satellite for St. George - passengers on the west side of SI could take a bus to PR, and get the train to Manhattan there (I'd guess ~25 minutes). Otherwise you'd spend 15+ minutes (that's driving yourself, a bus takes even longer) weaving through the local streets to get to St. George.
In addition, if the HBLR is ever extended over the Bayonne Bridge (presumably to run down the median of the Willowbrook/MLK Expressway, down to CSI (a little west of where Victory Blvd meets the Staten Island Expressway) and then down to the SI Mall. That way, South Shore customers would have another option - get a bus to the SI Mall (there are already lots that go there) or drive to a convenient park and ride lot (the former Dump is there, so there's lots of room for that), and get the HBLR. You could take that up to near the Bayonne Bridge, then transfer to the Manhattan train (presumably at or around the PR station of the NS line). Or one could go from St. George to PR via the NS line, then get the HBLR into NJ. I know, there are transfers required, but at rush hours it shouldn't be bad. The NS line is what brings everything together.
North Shore is more populated and more diverse than the South Shore. Lots of townhouses around here. Buses are very crowded, schools per square mile is more. The north shore connection would be a relief to the area.
OK, I guess MTA could use (J) during weeknights (Monday to Thursday 21:00 - 05:30 the following day) and Weekends (Friday 21:00 to Monday 05:30) and (M) during weekdays (Monday to Friday 05:30 - 21:00) for the Staten Island extension. This allows the North Shore civilians to access Manhattan from Staten Island through the tunnel to Broad Street Station for the Nassau St. Subway Line, where the best option to connect Staten Island to Manhattan. Keep in mind though, in case of repair or emergency in the tunnel between Manhattan and Staten Island, it still needs the Staten Island Ferry to back up the service.
A good point to connect to Staten Island is St. George. That is a major hub for transit.
The Major Transportation Hubs in SI are:
St. George Terminal
Staten Island Mall
Port Richmond Terminal (Good Number of XBuses)
2 of those North Shore..1 Mid-Island
Overcrowded Streets here are:
Victory Blvd
Forest Avenue
Richmond Avenue
Hylan Blvd
Here is a question: What would suffice for cross island transportation. The bus service isn't sufficant from North Shore to South Shore one seat rides. The hills in the middle of Staten Island would make Subways hard I believe. I was thinking (And still am) of a 3 route Staten Island Subway (just for Fantasy Perpose)....one route is the current SIR, the second is the North Shore RR, and the 3rd would be from Port Richmond across the island under Richmond Avenue to Hylan Blvd. Major stops would be at Port Richmond, Walker Street, Forest Avenue, Victory Blvd, Staten Island Mall, Eltingville Station, and from there on I need to work on since I am from the North Shore and seldom travel to the South Shore.
I see your point, thereby I think the expansion of the underused Broadway Elevated/Nassau Street Line should really fit the bill to connect between Manhattan to Staten Island. Again the connection should be between Broad Street and St. George.
With the extension, it could expand the Nassau St. line to make it a more efficient line. I'm basing this on the way how the (J) trains terminate only at Chambers Street instead of Broad Street during weekends. Really the extension to Staten Island with the Nassau St. line, would unlock the potential of the underused subway.
Direct Access from North Shore to Canal Street...that would be so useful right now. I think taking the S44 up to the ferry. Taking the Ferry 25 minutes into Manhattan, then taking the N/R from Whitehall is tedious. Taking the Xpress bus (X10) is unbareable at times due to the fact of traffic on Victory and Richmond and the downtown diversions that seem to vary by driver. A connection would be great. The Nassau Street Line would be revived and used more. Staten Islanders would really like a connection into a city. Why didn't the MTA look into this (besides obvious money problems)?
Well, I think that MTA really thinks that the SI Ferry is the way to go, but really it isn't due to the nature that ferry ride takes 30 minutes from Whitehall Station to St. George. If you we're to compare your journey to Canal St., it would probably take under an hour. But if you we're to use the possible connection between St. George to Broad Street (Nassau St. Line), it would probably take about half the time or less.
Let me see how long it takes for me to get to Canal Street.
Walking to the bus stop which is 10 minutes, 20-25 minute bus ride...not including waits
25 minute ferry ride, 10 - 15 N/R ride to Canal Street...my whole trip takes a little more than an hour. Missing the ferry isn't the best thing in the world.
I'll admit the ferry is a nice ride and I can't wait til St. George Terminal and Whitehall are renovated completely, but when it is 30° outside and 12:00 at night. I'd rather take a train back home. I haven't been on the ferry recently during rush hours, but it is a bit uncomfortable and crowded.
So, you really think that the Nassau St. line extension to Staten Island be worth the investment by the MTA?
PS The MTA right now is on debt due to the New Fleet, the program to rebuild IRT Cortlandt Station and rehab the BMT Cortlandt Station. Quite possibly improve the access to South Ferry Station, by adding an elevator.
The Nassau Street Line extention is a good idea. I have never really considered it. My friends usually motion for a 1/9 Extention...I always looked at the 4th Avenue Line since it was closest, but the Nassau Street Line Ext. one works good since its an under used line and will get use, and it connects well with other lines.
When the money comes around hopefully the MTA would look into it. I hope I am not old and gray when that happens, I am still very much young tho, so lets see what happens .
^_^
You're correct about the idea that the Nassau St. Line is always underused, with extending the (1) or (9), it would require a rebuild of the South Ferry Station. In addition (1) and (9) trains are overused by many people in New York, particularly near the Times Square and the WTC.
Thats why I stay away from the 7th Avenue Line. The Lexington Avenue Line is crowded, but it is far more quicker in my opinion than the 7th Avenue Line.
People don't notice that the South Ferry 1/9 Station is a loop from the maps. It used to be a loop, but since the newer drawups of the map (IIRC 1979), it has been taken off. To be honest, i never knew it was a loop until after i moved to Staten Island. I used to live in Richmond so I grew up around the Lefferts Blvd (A).
Because of the overcrowded IRT lines that happen to go near the South Ferry, that is why that the IRT shouldn't really invest in extending their lines to Staten Island. This is also made worse by lower capacity trains for the IRT lines.
With the possibly overcrowded IND 8th Ave. lines (A)/(C)/(E), with (E) as the possible other option that could extend to Staten Island, it requires a much deeper tunnel when it's south of Chambers at the WTC branch without any stops beyond Chambers WTC.
Four words - Hudson Bergen Light Rail.
You would send it over the Bayonne Bridge, stop somewhere near the foot of the bridge, then go down the median of the MLK expressway to its terminus.
Now, would the distance be acceptable, walking from the station near the Bayonne Bridge to the PR bus terminal?
If not, then the HBLR could be tunneled east of the Bayonne Bridge, have a station underneath PR, then the route you mentioned. It may end up being cheaper going that route, since we don't have to reconfigure the lanes on the Bayonne Bridge or worry about getting the train uphill and back downhill.
The only difficult part might be tunneling under PR Ave, which is why an MLK routing might be more palatable. Sure, you'd lose the North SHore stations, but those areas are already adequately served by bus service to PR terminal.
As for a backup, later on passenger tunnels can be piggybacked onto any Cross Harbor freight tunnel that's built. Regular passenger service can be sent up that way, through Brooklyn.
If the main SI-Man tunnel is out, all service can be diverted to the Cross Harbor tunnel. It would change the connections available, and would add some 15 minutes to most people's commute, but it's there.
You could also bring back express buses for the duration. Now that brings up an interesting question - will express bus service be continued once the Tunnel is built? It would be another cost-cutting measure to try and justify the cost of the Tunnel.
In addition, if the HBLR was ever extended to SI, trains could be routed from the South Shore, to St. George, to Port Richmond direct - from there pick up the HBLR to Exchange Place or Hoboken, and get PATH from there. Still wouldn't be as fast a connection, but it'd work.
The ferry, I think, will close. To operate a ferry many fixed costs are incurred, regardless of the frequency of service. So to justify the cost of the tunnel project, the ferry would have to be shut down. Perhaps very infrequent service for tourists could be sustained, although the cost might be prohibitive (then you'd just increase the frequency to make up for a lost tunnel connection).
The operative seems to be having a backup available - either a Brooklyn tunnel piggybacked to the Cross Harbor tunnel (designed for people traveling to and from Brooklyn to SI), or an HBLR extension (designed for people commuting to and from NJ, but would also work going to and from Manhattan). Express buses could always be brought back, at least for the rush hours.
Are you saying that MTA should also propose a tunnel beneath the Narrows bridge between Brooklyn and Staten Island? If so, won't the line be underused, due to the nature that most people in SI will be going to Manhattan?
No, if a Cross Harbor Freight tunnel is ever built using the AK lift Bridge->SI->Brooklyn routing, simply throw some passenger tunnels atop it. That project has the advantage of actually existing on paper (as opposed to our sheer speculation) and having some money to study it.
I'd imagine the line wouldn't be used too much normally, since the direct tunnel provides faster access to the City.
But it would act as a backup to the direct tunnel - going up to the 4th Ave express, stops at 59, 36 and Pacific, then the Manhattan Bridge to Canal, then up the Broadway express. Switch at Pacific to the 4/5, N/R, M or 2/3 for downtown service, or stay on for midtown service via Broadway
It's ironic that a line that seeems so useful is a line in total direpair and I beleive low patronage. The Nassau line has connections to almost every other line (except 8th Ave) at every one of it's stations (except Bowery, but I always thought it should connect to Grand St.) It would become avery important line if connected to the new 2nd Ave subway (or Staten Island as previous post states) What is the likeliness of it being used for the 2nd Ave subway as one plan states?
every other line (except 8th Ave)
What am I saying, you get that at Fulton!. It does connect to every line in Manhattan directly or indirectly!
i caught a E to 179 yesterday leaving canal aroud 455-500. I wasn't too thrilled that MTA decided to run them as locals after 71av. Why does the TA decide to do that! Why have express tracks on hillside they NEVER use?
Do they use them for anything other than extra tracks as a memory of Es to hillside?
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
Safety
Attentiveness
Train Control
Something about rider complaints...
I'm surprised your E to179 ran loacl after 71st. Variuos posters here said they would run as express
For some reason, even though the stations have signs up that they are express, the E's to/from 179 are indeed running local.
Must've changed their minds at the last minute.
Isn't there a punch box at Continental Ave. for the switch before 75th Ave?
Likely it is wrong lineup insurance.
Does anyone know what the cause of the delays over the past several weeks has been between 138th and 125th on the Lex? I've heard a few C/R's mention something about ongoing work in the area. Any ideas?
Probably the skeletonized trackage in the tubes slowing speeds to 10 MPH.
Is this a good idea for the future? Extend the V to 179th Street-Jamaica and have the F run express in Queens. Whenever the V is not running, the F runs local 179th Street to Forest Hills. Also, extend the V to Church Avenue on weekdays, and have the F run express in Brooklyn. The F runs local when the V is not running. G trains should be extended to Church Avenue 24/7.
Several years ago, during rush hours only, the (F) ran express to 179th St. and the (R) local, all the way through Queens. This did not last long, and one can guess that hardly anybody boarded the (R) at 179th St, while the (F) trains remained jammed. The (V) would probably do no better.
Bob Sklar
Agreed.
Who would want to ride the V from 179 if you have the F running express.
People who couldn't in a crowded F train.
Not really... They usually rather take the next F than a local
People always assume an express is always faster. Even if they let locals go and continue to wait for the express.
If the 7 didn't x-fer at Roosevelt Ave, I'd really consider that having expresses skip this stop during rush hours would force more riders on the local trains. But it's too heavily used to rely on just those 2 lines.
The people using the local stations.
My recollection of the reasons for cutting the R back from 179th Street to 71st Avenue included complaints from passengers boarding at 71st Avenue that with the R starting at 179th Street, they could no longer easily get seats at 71st Avenue. I guess enough riders boarded the R between 179th Street and 75th Avenue to make that a problem.
The hell with people at 71 ave. They're all NIMBYs. So why should we listen to them?
You and Sid are both sadly misinformed, to the point of being beyond ignorant. This has been discussed here numerous times over the years and some vestiges of those discussions must exist in the archives.
The R was returned to terminating at 71Av because the real NIMBYs along Hillside Av had conniptions because they no longer had a one seat ride to 6th Av, and having to transfer to the F at an express stop was far beyond too inhumane for their genteel tootsies and tushies.
Do yourselves and the rest of us a humongous favor: DO NOT POST messages with a declaratory tenor unless you provide specific links or other citations substantiating your assertions. If these words do not register with you, then spend more time on your English classes than on the Internet. You will receive no further polite admonitions if you do not comply.
They deserve to have their subway extended another five miles - running OPTO-four cars and local only...
:0)
Even more sadistic: the line runs directly in front of their abodes with station stops located a whole half-block away with only a single consist of R46 like the JFK Express used to run...and with only one door opening. [ominous organ music]
My recollection of the reasons for cutting the R back from 179th Street to 71st Avenue included complaints from passengers boarding at 71st Avenue that with the R starting at 179th Street, they could no longer easily get seats at 71st Avenue. I guess enough riders boarded the R between 179th Street and 75th Avenue to make that a problem.
That makes ALOT of sense, cut back a train, because a lot of people use it making the people using a station further down the line loose seats. Why do they cater to the people at 71. Now all the people who used the train east of 71 have to suffer, instead of the NIMBYS at 71.
Good Idea. Except - Run F, E, V Express from 71/Continental. Restore G to Forset Hills Local. No E from 179 St. Run F Express from 179 St. to Forest Hills. And run V local from 179 St. to Forest Hills. (or vice versa).
Run F, E, V Express from 71/Continental.
Can't do that unless you want service cutbacks on the E and F--they're already running a combined 30tph, the maximum allowable for the Queens Boulevard express.
Dan
That will be brillant if they build another pair of tracks between Queens Plaza and Forest Hills. Let's hope that the MTA suddenly finds however many zillion dollars that'll cost.
In addition to the G to Church have the F run express to church, and reinstate peak express service on the rest of the line to Coney Island. When did they stop express between Kings Hwy and Bay Pkwy, anyway. Some 80's maps show peak direction express on that portion of the line.
Here, Here! I live in Colorado now, but I would make a trip home just to take that ride!
I think they would have to reinstall the northbound switch into Kings Highway if through service were to be a possibility during the morning rush.
Well, I like it.
:-) Andrew
When's the next meeting of the ERA? I'd assume that this Friday night is a slideshow & meeting.
Anyone have any additional info???
Jeff H???
BMTman
My Bulletin arrived last week, and announced the next meeting as Fri 12/21 at Cooper Union. Wish I could be there :-(
Where are the R110Bs?
R110B is still in 207th Street Yard.
Peace
David J.
mabstoa tco op@aol.com
Thanks Dave.
avid
...on a planet far, far, away...
Peace,
ANDEE
According to the 12/16/01 map, there appear to be times (sometime on weekday evenings) when there are actually three locals, (G)(V) and (R) running along Queens Blvd. to Continental Av. Is this correct, or are the various definitions of "evenings" in conflict with each other? My overall impression is that more than two local routes per line at normal intervals would exceed capacity.
Also, are all the (E) to 179th St. running local between 179th St. and Continental Av?
Thanks,
Bob Sklar
The G, R, V will be running local on QB during overlapping periods
on weekdays
G - from 8:30 PM to 6:30 AM (and all hours on weekends)
V - from 6:30 AM to Midnight (no weekend)
R - from 6:30 AM to Midnight (same hours on weekends)
The overlap for all 3 would be between 8:30 PM and midnight.
The above times are approximate based on the latest The Map.
Do they conflict? If people were staying on QB I guess they would at the later hours but if they are going into Manhattan of Brooklyn there would not be a conflict there.
As for the E - the selected trains during rush hours that will be operating to/from 179th St will be local between 179 and 71st (Continental Av is no longer indicated on The Map).
So between 8:30 PM and 12 midnight weeknights we can look forward to a Conga Line along QB?
That is one way of putting it.
Instead of a conga line, I should have said they'd be doing the loco-motion. lol!
Reduced headways will make it not so horrible.
Cleaning out a G will be a snap!
We'll see if reduced headways can get the crowd off the dance floor.
Damn will they EVER use those Hillside express tracks? And for those at local stations complaining about a few trains not stopping at their station-GET OVER IT!
It's only a small amount of trains, why can't they run them express?
I was on an R44 equipped A train to the Rockaways yesterday. Out of curiosity, I found that I could see the speedometer clearly from my side of the T/O's door. He actually managed to bring it up to 46 MPH prior to our stop at Broad Channel.
We all know that most trains running out on the "Flats" in the past especially and including R10s probably went 5-10MPH faster than this. What I'm wondering is whether 46 MPH is a pretty good speed these days for a train of R44s on the flats.
If I had been on the R38 train that followed my R44 - how fast do you think R38s do these days on that same stretch?
Is it possible that people under rate the R44 speed simply due to the fact that the sensation of speed is so much less in an R44 than one feels on shorter cars?
I doubt that the speed would be much different on an R-38, but Train Dude and Zman and others could speak to that better.
The line to Broad Channel is affected at times by washout and other hazards inherent in crossing ocean on a shallow viaduct. That would affect operations.
Any T/O's here who would like to coment on special operational conditions or rules on the Rockaway viaduct?
The one special condition that takes place every now and then is for dense fog. When fog greatly reduces visibility on the flats, a fog order is issued by the Control Center, and the maximum speed for the flats under a fog order is 15 mph.
To me the 44's are a bit faster. IMO you get a bit of more speed as you come closer to the station. I think you can hit 50 + on a fast train but I really don't want to try hit that curve at that speed and then to slow down to hit a marker.
Ride an R-38 next time. Peer into the crack in the cab door hinge and you'll see the speedometer, unless the T/O's head is blocking it. (The same trick works on the R-32 and on some Redbirds. It doesn't work on the R-40.)
Of course, both readings are subject to the accuracy of the speedometer in question, and one anecdotal experience on each isn't sufficient to draw broad conclusions.
I don't think of 46 mph as terribly fast. The West Side IRT express has no difficulty reaching 47, and the last time I rode an N from Lex to QbP, we got well into the 50's (57, IIRC).
I got to 62mph in the 60 Street Tube going to the City. I passed the l;ast timer at 55mph, I did not see it clear so I just let it ride. There was nothing I could do to stop from hitting the next Signal if it did not change. It did change but as I got to the up hill I had to talk a brake there was a R at Lex. By time I got to the station I was doing only 19mph. The R did not move out fast enough for me to come to any faster.
Except for scenery passing by, there really is no "sensation" of speed, particularly on a straight run. What one usually "feels" are the forces causing acceleration, which can either be a change in speed or a change in direction. I remember in 1970 - 73 having summer jobs in the city and returning to Wavecrest, first on R1/9's (E trains), then on R-10's (A trains). The sudden jolts sideways are what was felt. It was humorous to watch the expressionless faces of the passengers and their jowls moving in unison one way and then another. Now a sideways motion (for a given effective radius of curvature) will be felt in proportion to the square of the speed. Thus, the jolt at 50 mph will be about 56% greater than at 40 mph. Obviously, as newer trains and repaired track were introduced, the jolts to the side would be less violent, giving rise to a "slower" sensation.
IMO braking is worse when you knock around too
46 mph is slightly better than average by about 1 mph for the flats run. Rarely nowadays does a train regardless of car class go faster than that. however, a shorter train (i.e.4 car R44) would get to about 48.
R32's on the same stretch usually attain a slower speed of about 41 mph on the flats due to the heavy back & forth rocking that is common with R32 equipment.
Yesterday afternoon around 2:30 PM, I was on an R32 equipped F train. I haven't been on the F in quite a while. But it seems to me that for years, the F was strictly R46 equipment. Has the diversion of R46 equipment to the new V train brought a bunch of R32s over to the F line?
Yes. The V train is composed of all R46 type MU's.
Extra R46's from the "G" are now showing up on the "E", which is not an exclusive R32 line anymore, as the "F" is now listed as having 50 R32's from Jamaica, which is 5-10 car trains for the "F".
In addition, "F" service is now reduced from 49-50 trains (at least during peak hours) to 45 now.
I don't think the (E) was ever exclusively R32. It's always been fairly common to see both R32s and R46s on it. Now up until this week the (F) was indeed exclusively, no exceptions ever, R46.
:-) Andrew
"I don't think the (E) was ever exclusively R32. It's always been fairly common to see both R32s and R46s on it."
This is true. Since the early 1990s, the E has been mostly R-32s with a few R-46s. However, before that I believe the E was exclusively R-46s, while the R and G and the R-32s instead. -Nick
What about R38?
The R-38s made their debut on the E and F lines in 1966 out of necessity due to the Jamaica Yard Crisis, which has been discussed earlier. Once the slant R-40s arrived, most of the R-38s were displaced elsewhere. They may have made an occasional appearance on the E now and then, but have not been seen regularly on that line in some time.
I rode an R38 E a week after the Trade Center collapse, at a time where there was no C service and E's went to Euclid Ave. They also made their unwanted appearance on Queens Blvd. during the time the crossover north of WTC was being replaced. A few also appeared on the B line at this time. During a few weeks in September 1989 an asbestos condition at 42nd/8th caused the Q to replace the A from 207th St. to Columbus Circle. This was the only time I saw R38's on the Brighton line. Other than these exceptions, I haven't seen an R38 on any other line outside the A/C for the last 15 years.
It's is to bad the R32s don't look like the R-38s. I mean, I think the R-38 looks better than the R-32 but I realize the R-32 is the better train. To bad Budd couldn't have made them both.
Peace,
ANDEE
Not only is the R-38 better looking, the poles are laid out much better. I hope there's a major pole-transplant effort when the 38s are retired.
Was there ever a contract to construct A-Division R-32 or R-38?
The R-38 is the B-division version of the R-33/36WF. If you have Bill Newkirk's calendar, see the sketch inside the front cover of what it would have looked like in carbon-steel. (If you don't have the calendar, get it! :)). IIRC, there was some plan for the R-33/36 to be stainless, but it never happened; I forget the details, and this may just be my imagination.
The R-33/36 order, primarily because of the World's Fair cars, had to be in regular service by April of 1964 on the Flushing line to handle the Fair's crowds, so the TA went with a familiar design based on St. Louis Car's 1962 R-29 model, with the window placement (and the good-looking paint job) the only major modifications.
Where do I get the calender?
Here is a link to Paul Matus' review of the calendar, including ordering information. The calendar's creator, Bill Newkirk, posts here on a regular basis.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I bought the calendar. It's going up on my wall in just a few days, replacing my 2001 subway calendar.
Newkirk has done it again.
I bought the calendar. It's going up on my wall in just a few days, replacing my 2001 subway calendar.
Newkirk has done it again.
Ditto
I'll have to admit that I haven't bought one, simply because I have been informed by "she who must be obeyed" that I am allowed only one RR-themed calendar at home, and since I was given one showing railroad stations of the Catskills, that's my one. (I've got room for one at the office, of course, but that one is traditionally the East Penn Traction Club calendar.) Used to be that I'd have a subway calendar, an Audio-Visual Design PRR calendar, a Pacific Electric calendar, and (when I could find one) a CNS&M calendar, plus the EPTC one at work, but she's taken over the wall space for ones with lighthouses on them.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Look on the bright side: Lighthouses are cool.
Does any of her calendars feature a photo of a lightship? They are no longer in use, of course, which makes photos of them all the more nostalgic on a calendar.
Does any of her calendars feature a photo of a lightship? They are no longer in use, of course, which makes photos of them all the more nostalgic on a calendar.
Not sure if any of the ones for 2002 do... I haven't looked through them yet. One of the 2001 calendars had one, with snow and ice on it... I think it was the one stationed off Nantucket, but don't remember for sure and I'm too lazy and creaky to go upstairs right now and check.
Most of her 2002 calendars feature Canadian lighthouses... she's trying to convince me to go to Prince Edward Island this summer... I'm interested in the new bridge out there but don't think we'll have enough time to make that long a trip this year - maybe we'll get to New Brunswick though and take in a couple there.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Your wife has some great trip ideas...
Well, she grew up in north-central Michigan and has a lot of family on the other side of the border, so we have some affinity for going to Canada - we've been there the past two summers and numerous other times as well. We only have nine days, typically the Tuesday afternoon of one week through the Thursday morning of the next, which begin and end in Warwick, NY, when Jr. goes to camp (the Kesher program at UAHC Kutz Camp), so that limits our travels somewhat. Any other trips we go on are normally solo since we can't leave him at home alone overnight. So we like Canada - it's close, it's different yet familiar, and we can relax.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
If you buy only ONE calendar this year, you GOTTA buy Bill's ... I'll give you a little taste of what's in it because *I* got one from his own warm fingers in person. On the front cover is a 3 car consist of freshly painted standards coming into Broadway Junction on the flyover - below an Eastbound J R27 train leaving. ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL. Inside before the calendar itself is a shot of Fiorello LaGuardia wieling a cutting torch (himself) on the 8th avenue el, a lovely black and white shot of the Green Hornet in revenue service and very elaborate descriptions of what the pictures are.
As a taste of some of the other shots for the monthlies, January features a street shot of the 89th Street stationhouse of the third avenue el taken somewhere around 1955 based on the parked cars, February features the Brighton line with a 42 passing an R1 passing a red R30 ... gorgeous ...
March features a lovely FULL COLOR photo of the BLUEBIRD in revenue service on the Canarsie line, for April, it's redbirds passing the Silvercup sign on the Flushing. May is a consist of R17's in work detail yellow and bluw (at least four cars in view coming around the West Farms curve) ... BMT gate cars (car 787 centered in view, also in COLOR) on the Myrt for June ... July features R12's running on the third avenue el at Fordham, August brings us R30's marked up as QJ's at Alabama Avenue ... I could go on and on and on ... OK, November features a Q car signed for Bridge-Jay streets leaving Fresh Pond for Myrtle duty, passing a Staten Island car ... and finally, on the BACK is a complete, perfect reproduction of the July 1, 1948 fare hike to ten cents by the NYC Board of Transportation notices that were on platforms and token booths ...
ALL in color, all better than magazine quality and absolutely wonderful photographic composition ... now tell me you don't want one also. Usually my train calendars hang in the office - this one's on our "art wall" in the LIVING ROOM ... 'nuff said. Buy it, you WON'T regret it ...
Whoops ... meant "9th avenue el" (not 8th) ... happy fingers and drool stains from looking at the calendar blurred my vision again. :)
Oh, I've seen it... you don't need to sell me! But I also have to live with my wife, and there are certain things one must do (or not do) in the interest of domestic peace and tranquility :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Heh. Hide it with the porno rags. Certainly does it for me. :)
"Where do I get the calender?"
Try the Transit Museum gift shop at Grand Central.
Bill "Newkirk"
Yea, they are known as R-62/62As-. 8-)
Seriously as ripta states R-33/36s were the equivilant it's just that they were made before the stainless steel changeover.
Peace,
ANDEE
Contract R39 was supposed to be let for lightweight A and B-division cars to run on 3rd Avenue (A div.) and Myrtle Avenue (B div.) they were supposed to be stainless steel but it never got beyond the initial design stage.
wayne
<<<"Contract R39 was supposed to be let for lightweight A and B-division cars to run on 3rd Avenue (A div.) and Myrtle Avenue (B div.) they were supposed to be stainless steel but it never got beyond the initial design stage.">>>
Those would have been something!! Anyway, according to J.C. Greller, there was also talk of an R23, for the same purpose. Considering it's lower R-number, maybe it would have been a lightweight SMEE?
Any thoughts?
You are correct about the R-39s The proposed contract was for 120 cars. However, according to the TA "Passenger Car Data 1947 - 1976" book, the R-23 contract was for 30 hopper cars purchased for MOW.
I stand corrected.
>>>I hope there's a major pole-transplant effort when the 38s are retired.<<<
You mean a massive "polectomy" Hmmm....sound kinky...lets organized a field trip NOW. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
That does sound rather naughty don't it?
LOL
Peace,
ANDEE
Exterior-wise, the R38 is better looking. the interior, mechanically and structurally the R32 is superior. That damned R38 lighting scheme is horrible, and thankfully they'll never receive those black floors.
The R-38 poles are the only overheads short railfans like myself can comfortably reach, aside from the Redbird straps.
I agree, the R-38 is a more attractive car, especially the sign bonet.
Yes, those pixel signs are larger and easier to read.
Why and when did they install Flipdots?
When: during overhaul (GOH), circa 1988.
Why: It's been mentioned here many times, including over the past day or two. With the #1 end climate control evaporator/blower installed where it is, there is no good place to put a crank to change a roll sign. The solution was to install a flip-dot digital sign capable of displaying one character continuously. There's a wheel in the cab with letters A through Z, numbers 0 through 9, and some other characters.
David
Is ? one of those characters? :o>
wayne
It's all of them.
How about an exclamation point or an ampersand (&)?
Are R32s still running the F these days? I rode the F today but not long enuf to tell if R32s were on it. Anyways, are some R32s from Coney island or All from jamaica?
12/28 when I was on there, it was mostly R-46's with some A-A units within. Did not see R32's there.
don't get me wrong guys but i love R32s as opposed to the R38s. if i can choose to operate either one i would pick R32s. from all the motormen i know who operate R32s on a regular, they give u a great feel of operating a Train. Not to mention the R32s i grew up with them because i always rode the E as a child. Also the R32s will outlast the R38s. If I become a motorman i wanna operate a R32 on the E someday or whateva they might be running. and being that i turn 19 on friday and whenever the test comes out, it won't be long before i can operate a R32.
The R-32s have always been a sentimental favorite of mine - ever since I rode on them for the first time on July 21, 1965. Too bad they no longer have those trademark blue doors.
Agreed. The R38 is better looking. The R32 is obviously a better piece of work, though.
:-) Andrew
When manufactured, the R38 was similar inside to the R32 MkII batch (#3800-3949) - with the air diffusers as opposed to the axiflo fans, and the back-lit advertising panels. One difference in the R38 was the end-door ad light and the grab poles were positioned differently. Other than that they were pretty much the same inside. When they went out for GOH, they went to two different rebuilders - the 38s went to Buffalo Transit up in Blaisdell (near Buffalo) and the 32s went to Morrison-Knudsen. The R38s show a much fancier interior than that of the R32, which is rather spartan. I would guess the R38 interior was more expensive- GE only had 196 R38 and 10 R32 cars to GOH as opposed to MKCo's 582 R32s.
As one who is fond of aesthetically-pleasing things, the R38 interior wins hands down in my book. Love those curly bars and backlit ads!
wayne
The R-38s did last into the early 1970s at Jamaica yard, since I remember riding one of the 10 experimental air-conditioned trains on the Queens Blvd. line at that time. I think they also popped up on the EE line once in a blue moon around then.
>>>...since I remember riding one of the 10 experimental air-conditioned trains on the Queens Blvd. line at that time. <<<
Since this particular train had A/C and regular bulkhead signs. Do you recall how the endsigns used to be changed. IE; where were the cranks?
Peace,
ANDEE
On the 10 expermental R-38s, that had Air Conditioning, where were the cranks to change bulkhead curtains?
Peace,
ANDEE
AFAIK the R-38s had the same roller curtain mechanisms as the ones on all other R units, made by the Hunter Illuminated Car Sign Company. The access hatch may have been in a different location. Speaking of which, how about the R-11s? The one at the Transit Museum doesn't have the typical access hatches, either.
Yes, circa the early 1970s the R38 were occasionally seen on the "EE" and "GG", more frequently on the "GG" but not regularly on either line - which were mostly R16 with occasional R40Ms.
wayne
There were times when no R46's could be seen on the E. That changed about 2 years ago, to varying degrees.
The E was as, far as I could tell, exclusively R32 until 1998 or so.....
That spring, they started some kind of repair job on what was then the line to 21st/Queensbridge, and ran a shuttle from there to the 34th Street/BMT station, with a yellow S.
That's when I started seeing 46s on the E and 32s on the R.
I don't know if anyone recalls, but in the summer of 1999, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to trains, there were R40M and/or R42s on the N.
42's on the N and also the Q. Yes, along with the slants, there were R-42's (4900 series) on the Q with the orange circle then. It was the summer of 1999. That day I usually saw slants, then at W. 4th. St. while riding an R-68 D, I saw what looked like an R-42. When I got off at Brighton Beach that is where I saw a definite proof that the Q had R-42's. I miss them on the Brighton because my first subway ride from W. 8th St. to Kings Hwy. was on an R-42.
Man you have to see how PISSED the F crews are now that they have brought R-32s to the F line!! (not knowing who's joking or who's serious I heard some of the guys talking about vacating off the F jobs because of this!!) I personally think there is nothing wrong with them on the F, since having worked on them doing 2-trippers on the R from Jamaica Center (yeah that ridiculous "NO E TRAINS" G.O.) to 95th Street (now that there to most is a killer!!) I heard 12 trainsets of R-32s are on the F (10-car sets).
Oh it's up to 12 now is it? Bravo! I saw at least six of them Thursday in mid-day service; at least one of these six is a full Phase I trainset from Pitkin Yard (the one with #3720 in it), another is a Coney Island Phase II (ex-"N") trainset (the one with #3378 in it) and the others are ex-"E" trains from Jamaica Yard. Ya gotta love it from a railfan's point of view.
wayne
Hey I like the R-32 from both a conductor and a railfan's point, conductor's view because PA is good and the doors are good, not to mention they are fast. As for my railfan's view one can now see out the front while riding down the Culver line to Coney Island, which one couldn't do for a very long time. The R-32 Phase I found its way here after the 9/11 service changes when the E ran in place of the C train, and E's were at Pitkin Yard (guess the Phase I didn't wanna go back to Pitkin or the C line lol :-D.....can't blame it!! lol juss kidding ) The C.I. Phase II found its way here when they were used on the Q service from C.I. to Continental (guess it got tired of C.I.....saw Stillwell too much!! lol)
Yes, they are fast but they don't FEEL fast. #3720 had a full head of steam going through 65th Street, and he reached 46MPH. Very smooth riding train, despite its age. The R32 were built well and overhauled better. I would equate them to the 1938 London Tube Stock, some of which saw 50 to 52 years service AND a couple of trainsets of these classics are still running on the Isle of Wight. They sound like R-6-2s and have the same smooth feel of the GOH'd R32s; of course these vintage beauties have been much-overhauled themselves. And they fly! They run outdoors in 2-car sets and can reach 60MPH. Not bad for 63-year-old cars!
wayne
Now you see why I say old equipment is the best....RELIABLE and BUILT TO LAST!! As for the 32s yeah they fly like bats outta hell!! lol
We may have to include an R-32 F jaunt next year, at least through 63rd St, if they're still running over there then.
Yup! I was on an R32 (F) train today from 75th Ave to 179th St. I thought I'd never see such a thing! The rollsign:
EXTERIOR:
179th St
Jamaica
Stillwell Ave
Coney Island
(F) 6th Ave
----Culver
INTERIOR
179th St Jamaica
Coney Island
(F) 6th Ave/Culver
I assume there must also be an (F) rollsign reading "Queens Blvd/6th Ave/Culver".
:-) Andrew
Andrew - you're right about the below. Routing on the rollsign was
"Queens Blvd/6th Ave/Culver".
Well if this R32 on the F is a fairly common thing I may just wait for one at 179st and ride it all the way to Brooklyn!
I could do a BVE route for the F!
It is entirely possible that the new "V" train did bring at least some R-32s to the "F" train.
#3 West End Jeff
I saw an F train of R32's today. 9:58 northbound out of Union Turnpike. I tried to take a picture of it, but it left the station before the doors on the E train I was on (also R32's) opened.
Aside from the line being assigned to JAM, could there be a few "trippers" from CI in the Rush?
ALL equipment assigned to F service is maintained at Jamaica Shop. There are NO Coney Island Shop-maintained cars in F service.
HOWEVER...there most likely are some put-ins from Coney Island/City YARD on the schedule.
David
There are plenty of laid-up F's at Coney Island. Jamaica couldn't store them all.
I saw an F train of R32's today. 9:58 northbound out of Union Turnpike. I tried to take a picture of it, but it left the station before the doors on the E train I was on (also R32's) opened.
Does anybody have (or even know of) a time table of when the 32s are out on the F? I'd like to have some idea so I don't wait for a couple of hours only to discover they're only in rush hour service < grin >.
I obviously plan to ride both ways from one end to the other while it's still possible (and not too cold up front!).
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3 NOW AVAILABLE!
Hopefully, I will see them next week when I take my pictures at Stillwell Ave. If I do, you will all be posted on this.
Maybe the F will still have some R-32s next fall. I would include such a ride on my things-to-do list.
<<<"Does anybody have (or even know of) a time table of when the 32s are out on the F? I'd like to have some idea so I don't wait for a couple of hours only to discover they're only in rush hour service < grin >.
I obviously plan to ride both ways from one end to the other while it's still possible (and not too cold up front!).">>>
Agreed!! I can't wait to go railfanning on the 6th Avenue and Culver Lines. Too bad I'm working outside NYC for a few weeks.......
NOW let's get some R32 or Slants on the D, so I can check out the Concourse Line.
Seen both of those on the D in the early 80's, once or twice....saw a train of slants in about 81, saw a few trains of R-32's in about 84, but they were only there for a short while.
Ahh, too bad....
I know the TA ain't in the business of accomodating railfans...
But a Slant on the D!! Wow- I'd like to see that, especially on a full length, CI to 205 D!!
But aren't the slants scheduled to be gone by the time the D is restored? :(((
I rode a set home from work from Bergen at about 1:05am Friday Morning. I was surprised they were using the '32s overnight.
Rode another set back in the same morning @ about 8:55am.
Very nice to have a window on the Culver.
During the rush hours, most of the sets I've seen are signed for King's Highway
Damn---
Standing at the storm-door window of a R-32 on the Culver el.....
I'm imagining it now, a smile on my face......
If there are twelve trainsets of R32 in "F" service, that's a significant portion of the overall "F" fleet and you would therefore see them all around the clock, not just rush hours. I would bet that there are enough to have some in service over the weekends.
wayne
I don't think there are that many. IIRC on paper, the F has 45 trainsets, 40 are R46 and 5 are R32.
I think there are at least 6, maybe 7: (plus sign means next consecutive odd #)
1) 3516+, 3790+, 3526+, 3388+, 3838+
2) 3738+, 3358+, 3540+ (missed the last 2 pairs)
3) 3774+, 3814+, 3676+, 3888+ (missed the last pair)
4) 3670+, 3704+, 3456+ (missed the last 2 pairs)
5) 3378+, 3542+, 3830/3531, 3554+, 3558/3421
6) 3478+, 3350+ (missed the rest of the trainset)
7) 3720+, 3756+, 3632+, 3364+, 3534+
Let me know if there are any more
wayne
"Bill from Maspeth" is right. On paper, it's 40 R-46 sets and 5 R-32 sets on the F. As I said a week or so ago, though, in practice it's likely to vary from day to day (and so far, from the reports here, it has -- nice to be right). Additionally, WHICH trainsets are on the F is likely to vary from day to day -- it's unlikely that there's a dedicated group of R-32s assigned to F service.
David
The F used to have 49-50 sets during peak times. Where did the 5 or so F sets end up? For V service?
I apologize if I'm wrong, but didn't we just discuss this a few days ago?
ANYway...Prior to last week, the F had 50 trainsets assigned to it. Now it's got 45. The difference? Peak service is now 15 F trains per hour and 15 E trains per hour; previously it was 18 Fs and 12 Es.
No, we didn't talk about where the extra trains from the "F" ended up. Thanks for the information.
I'm suprised too. I'm sure that the dispatchers try to get the R32's off the road if possible during the non rush periods so as not to hear the crews bitch and moan but that it not always possible. There may be a block of back to back R46's having to go to the yard for inspection or other troubles so now you may have a few R32's running back to back. Perhaps a late railroad may not allow him to lay up an R32 as planned. If I worked the F, I suppose I would be one of the few guys who would be happy to operate an R32. I like to be bounced around, to use both God given hands to operate the train, keeps me alerter (new word).
I like to be bounced around, to use both God given hands to operate the train, keeps me alerter (new word).
Alerter? Isn't that the thingy you punch to stop the train from going BIE because you haven't moved a control in 25 seconds? Oops, wrong railroad :-) I use mine on Microsoft TrainSim.
And speaking of that, At Union Turnpike at about 3:10PM, I got on a Manhattan-Bound R32 F. It stirred up a little confusion (Especially when the digital sign looked like it said "E") But a welcoming change of pace nevertheless.
I can see where people might confuse it with the "E" since the R-32s have been the standard bearer on the "E" for quite some time aside from the occasional train of R-46s. Were the R-32s ever assigned to the "F" in earlier years?
#3 West End Jeff
This was just discussed a few days ago, and pictures were posted.
I believe this is the very first time R32 equipment has been seen on the "F". I myself have never seen an R32 on the "F", and that's going back to the days of the Slants and the R40Ms - and as for the signs, they are very confusing, very hard to tell from an "E", but the train I saw had a paper orange "F" bullet taped into the front window.
wayne
I can imagine that it is rather difficult to tell the difference between the letter "E" and the letter "F" with the Luminator signs used on the R-32s.
#3 West End Jeff
It is next to impossible, especially when the lamp is dim and the glass is dirty. I had to look very hard to determine whether the sign read "E" or "F".
wayne
The backlight is always burned out. Hey Jamaica Yard guys, stop slacking off and change thoses bulbs.
I would have to guess that when I'm at a station where both the "E" and the "F" trains stop I'll have to look very carefully to make sure that I get on the right train.
#3 West End Jeff
Was the paper orange F bullet in the railfan window? If yes, what a scandal, but the right thing to do.
Yes, Bill it was. I took the liberties of moving it to the top centre of the glass while we took the view from just below it. The flipdot sign in #3720's bulkhead was indistinguishable as to whether it was "E" or "F", the lamp was indeed very dim (or the dirt was very thick).
wayne
They should bring back the round circular metal sign attached to the guard chain the way they did on the NX.
If I'm at a station were both the "E" and the "F" make their stops I guess I'll have to be very careful to make sure that I get onto the right train. I guess if I'm in doubt whether the train that pulls into the station is a "E" or an "F" train I'll have to look at the signs on the side of the train.
#3 West End Jeff
I believe that the E & F swapped equipment a number of winters ago (R-32 to the F and R-46 to the E) during a prolonged cold snap, and that lasted a month or two. Train Dude... does that sound familiar?
Transit and Weather TogetherMon & Tue AM.
Are the end bulkheads on the left side on an R32/38 thick enough to handle an R42 style roll sign ?
Probably not, although they could probably build an enclosure there; the drawback to that is that it would encroach on the handicapped seat opposite the motorman's cab.
wayne
<<<"I myself have never seen an R32 on the "F", and that's going back to the days of the Slants and the R40Ms">>>
It was riding Slants on the E & F in the 70s that made me a sub-fan. I remember that the F got the 44/46s (I couldn't tell which, back then) first, then the E.
Thoses R-32s need to have a multi-color LED display for easyer identification.
I agree. Who's paying for it?
David
Good sighting. I prefer R46's over R32's, but something unusual as this might be interesting to experience.
December 18, 2001
By PENELOPE OVERTON, Courant Staff Writer
NEW HAVEN -- Gov. John G. Rowland announced plans for more than
$185 million in statewide rail improvements Monday, including
$150 million to rehabilitate a fleet of 25-year-old railroad cars
on the New Haven line.
The overhaul will replace failing propulsion components of 241
aging M-2 cars on the New Haven Line, the nation's largest rail
line, over the next six years. The upgrade is expected to keep
the cars running another 15 to 20 years.
"This will be a big plus for our commuters," said Harry Harris,
the state's chief of public transportation. "This will add seats
on our daily runs. This will make commuters more comfortable. ..
This signals a new era of commitment to rail travel."
This is all part of what Rowland said would be more than $1
billion spent on state railroads in the next 10 years. He said
rail travel was a key component of the state's plan to reduce
congestion on I-95 in the southeastern part of the state.
The state is spending $2.5 million to convert its old New Haven
Car Shop into the M-2 overhaul garage. It will spend $35 million
to purchase four new locomotives and 10 cars for the Danbury,
Waterbury and New Haven lines, adding 1,000 new seats.
The overhaul of the M-2 fleet is expected to begin next month.
Commuters, who visited New Haven's Union Station to see Rowland
launch a new Shore Line East service to Bridgeport and Stamford,
welcomed the state's support of rail travel, but worried that
state rail service would get worse before it gets better.
"These are all programs that should have been started years ago,"
said spokesman Jim Cameron of the Connecticut Rail Commuter
Council. "It will be years before we will see the payoff. We're
using a Band-Aid to cure a patient who is almost dead."
The old M-2 cars have been failing at an above-average rate, said
Ray Cox, a state rail operations assistant. Anywhere from 30 to 60
M-2 cars are out of service on a typical day, reducing the number
of seats available to commuters, he said.
The state will pay Metro-North Commuter Railroad crews to overhaul
an average of four cars a month at a cost of about $600,000 each.
The state will begin work on 30 idle cars, repairing those before
taking working cars out of service.
Replacing the old cars with new ones would cost about $964 million.
That is still going to happen, Harris said, but the overhaul buys
the state time to gradually phase in purchases. The state will
start replacing overhauled cars with new ones in 2012.
The overhaul also will provide the state with the chance to
improve comfort in an increasingly run-down fleet. Crews will
replace ragged seat cushions, clogged toilets and ripped-up
floors. Connecticut and Metro-North will share the cost of
rehabilitating the M-2 fleet, Harris said. Connecticut will pay
$100 million, using $20 million of its own cash and $80 million
in federal funds, and Metro-North will use $50 million in federal
funds.
Thanks for the report, Meriden Mike.
Peace,
ANDEE
I don't live in Meriden.
That's NOT what I've heard...
Peace,
ANDEE
ANDEE,
Jersey Mike only lives in Meriden when he is at school, just like I only live on the south shore of Boston for school as well. -Nick
I go to school in MIDDLETOWN, CT. I catch the train from Meriden.
Speaking of Merdien, WHAT BUFOON decided to rebuild that platform into another low level platform? As if the loading/unloading wasn't slow enough there? Grrr. Great waste of money. New platform, net gain zero.
Why re-build a hi-level platform when only 2-6 people use the station per train.
Beats me, seems to be more than that. On that thought, why rebuild the platform at all? Hartford's is virtually colapsing under it's weight and Amtrak so far has dont nothing more than rope off the weak portions.
Down where I come from we call that the old "Philly Phorget". If it ain't workin, rope it off.
A neat solution, isn't it?
Reminds me of the old Microsoft joke from a few years back:
Question: How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a dead lightbulb?
Answer: None. Bill Gates will redefine Darkness (Trademark) as the industry standard.
Hooray!
Istill want them to hurry up and fix the catenaries!
Which proves that $600,000 could have been spent on the LIRR M-1 and avoid the M-7 boondoggle.
I-95 through Connecticut downright sucks. They really do need to improve passenger (and freight) rail service in southern Connecticut, although I think the Hartford corridor (the Inland Route), should see more passenger trains as well. Right now, New Haven and points west have very good rail service provided by Metro-North. But ConnDot should also start running additional Shore Line East trains between New Haven and points east to help ease congestion on I-95 through southeastern Connecticut. They should run additional weekday trains and start running weekend service as well. The service to Bridgeport and Stamford is a good start. But the article states that southeastern Connecticut is where the state is looking to ease the congestion.
Maybe they could try this: Build high platforms at all seven SLE stops east of New Haven, add a stop in Old Lyme (with high platforms of course). There are 241 M2 cars. When they rebuild them, they should give them electric motors that can handle the voltage of the new catenary wires east of New Haven. Then they can add more service east of New Haven without having to buy additional diesels and push-pull cars.
MN can't run any trains on SLE. They don't have enough cars now. Serving the regular riders betwen New Haven and GCT is more important !!!!
I still think they should use all electric trains on Shore Line East and also start a new commuter railroad service between New Haven and Hartford.
- Lyle Goldman
Any ideas about a fan trip sometime soon?
You want to have one, organize one! It's really not all that difficult - I've done it. Just plan a reasonable itinerary, select a time and place to meet, estimate the ending time, and send the info to our illustrious webmaster so he can post it in the Events section. Mention it on SubTalk... ONCE... and solicit participation (asking potential participants to email you so you know who's coming and to fine-tune the itinerary). That's really all there is to it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Because of recent events are there (or were) there any permit reqiurements to access the locations that any potential SubTalk field trip might take place? If so how would one organizing such a trip go about obtaing the proper permits?
regards
George's Pool Hall
Well, the assumption I'm making is that any SubTalk field trip would encompass only public areas, in or outside of fare control. For that, no permit would be needed. Non-public areas, even prior to 9-11, were extremely difficult to access even by the Transit Museum staff for tours these past few years (the last real tours of non-public areas were in 1998, IIRC).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Too cold for that stuff. I hope you mean an indoor walking tour.
Well, I'm not the one proposing this one, so I'll leave that up to whoever decides to organize it. The last one that I did (along with Wayne-MrSlantR40) started at Oculus, encompassed a ride through the 63rd street connector, a brief peek at the sealed entrance to the Roosevelt Avenue Terminal, the grand ruin (Chambers Street), and a ride around City Hall Loop - all rather disjointed, but kind of fun. After a late lunch on the edge of City Hall Plaza, some of the folks then took PATH from WTC to Hoboken and rode the HBLR; Jr. and I had to head back for the SI ferry and New Jersey.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
We dress warm & spend most of the time inside nice warm subway cars.
Mr rt__:^)
Most SubTalk field trips are in public areas (Polo Ground Shuttle wasn't). Over the few years there haven't been any in the winter except for the Polo Ground tour (heck that was underground >G<). THe shorter daylight hours plays part and for me being out in the cold!!
You can organize one yourself if you want to, don't just sit on the right of way.
This sounds like a fan trip to me.
I missed that post ... thanks, Bob !
Mr rt__:^)
If by fantrip you're thinking of chartered trips on museum equipment, the next one I can think of, if past history serves as a guide, is a March of Dimes charity trip that is usually held near the end of August. My guess is that it would be held on or around Sunday August 25th, 2002 (only because I'm gonna go on vacation that week and I missed the last two :)
The Transit Museum usually brings its D-types out 3x a summer, so I'd count on that happening this summer, too.
--Mark
Hello All!
The photo contest winners have been selected. See PHOTO CONTEST WINNERS for the results!
Thanks to all who participated!
The winners are:
1. Best Subway Photo ---------- BMdoobieW
2. Best Bus Photo ------------- Kevin KayBee Barsky
3. Best Area Rail Photo ------- Trevor Logan
4. Best Non Area Rail Photo --- Chao-Hwa Chen
5. Best Non Area Bus Photo ---- BusProwler
6. Best Night Photo ----------- Salaam Allah
I will be contacting them by email to deal with the prizes shortly!
Again thanks to all who participated!
Can we see the photos now???
Wow, nice photos. Congratulations to the winners, and to the runners up, very nice photos!
I personally think that the Amtrak shot should've won for night, but I'm not an LA fan.
Thanks for the photos, your effort in getting some nice shots is appreciated by railfans like me who can't get out much to stare at trains.
Lexcie is a very accomplished night photographer. Here are two other examples of his work.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/amt86-toledo.jpg
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/amtk71011-toledo.jpg
He has a bunch of other stuff from 6/9/01 at Trenton, but it is not scanned yet.
Wow, nice photos. Glad to see a couple of Chicago photos made it into the runners-up.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Congratulations to the winners. From what I have seen of the entries the standard is really high. I enjoyed looking at them.
Many thanks to Dave Pirmann. I hope the same can be done for next year.
Simon Billis
Never thought one of those Chicago photos would come from me did ya, eh?
Great Pics. Congrats to all the winners!
Peace,
ANDEE
Very well done to all of the winners and runners up! Will the non-winning entries be posted at some point? I'm sure there are many interesting entries. After all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
No, I don't plan to upload the remaining 650+ entries, it's just too much. Sorry!
-Dave
Hey! What are you trying to say???? Just kidding! :)
Hey, thanks for featuring one of mine. If I have any overall complaints it would be that those Kinky cars on the HLBR and NCS were a bit over represented.
Anyway, while you might love that slanting sunlight, I absolutely despise the exhaust that makes its visiable. I actually took the phtograph to document how unbareable/unhealthy the track areas were with all the diesel fumes, sort of like a poster for electrifacation. It makes me glad to be in the northeast where railroads had the foresight to string up all those wires. Seriously, that station is a public health hazard. By the time I was done railfanning my eyes were stinging and I had a headache.
Are you considering making this an annual event? If so would there be eligibility requirements?
If it is annual, must we resubmit all our old entries? I would make a rule stating no honorable mention or winner can be resubmitted.
That's a $*#&*%ed up rule. That would mean knocking quite a few people out of the box. Then what in about 3-4 years all of your submitters are done with.
Makes absolutely no sense!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Not PEOPLE, Photos. You can't resubmit a previously winning entry. (Well you can, it just can't win).
I would go so far as to say, no resubmissions of anything, to perhaps encourage people to choose their submissions more carefully rather than send (in a couple cases) 100+ photos!
I think that upload time is a good enough deterrant for that.
Trial and error, if you don't want 100+ photos, start the rule next year. If you say unlimited entries, people are going to take a shot with whatever they think has a chance and I don't blame them.
Sure, hopefully we can do it again next year. It depends on if I have prizes to award :-)
If you want you can add my MBTA blue line photos to the site..... lol
It depends on if I have prizes to award :-)
First of all, I don't think that the prizes have to be anything special. Second of all, I'd submit my photos even if there weren't any prizes. It's just nice to have one's "art" be judged to be good.
I was also thinking that you might consider maybe creating a "Best Of SubTalk" image folder with the broad definition best photos submitted for the contest. Basically anything that is of good quality, nice composition and of interesting content.
> If I have any overall complaints it would be that those Kinky
> cars on the HLBR and NCS were a bit over represented.
Hmm I guess they did show up quite a bit in that category, but on the other hand there were not that many photos from other regional rail properties like MNRR, LIRR, NJT to compete in that category. Maybe next year!
Hmm how about holding a photo contest on a more frequent basis?
maybe every 3 months - just for pride?
UMMM....Dave does have a life that he would like to tend to..I think.
8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
How about some actual subway representation next time around? Everything in the subway category, and nearly everything in the other categories, was outdoors, even though most of the NYC subway system is underground.
Again, not everyone has the equipment to do underground photos, you really need a good camera, high speed film (I'd recommend 800, 1000 or even 1600), and a tripod. Or just a digital camera. I'm one of the lucky few to have a high end resolution digital camera that bangs out beautiful underground stuff.
Also to you have to look at composition, there isn't many platforms with good leads between the front car and the wall to get a well composed shot and most of the stations that I know of that have those leads really do have a great background to do a lovely composition.
Below, I listed a few of those stations that DO have the lead and the looks for a great subway photo:
Metropolitan & Lorimer Street (Manhattan Bound, Rear of the Platform (L) and anywhere on the platform of the (G))
Canal Street (Southbound, Rear of the Platform on the (A))
Flatbush Avenue (Exit End of the Platform, either track (2))
34th Street (Front end, Northbound (B) (D) (F) & (V))
Brookyln Bridge (Front end, Northbound (6) side ONLY)
Queens Plaza (Rear End, Jamaica Bound Express Track ONLY)
Broadway-ENY (Rear End, Manhattan Bound Local Track ONLY)
Those are just a few of the places where I have gotten off some great underground shot, there is a few more, but again its still not many in comparison to the many underground stations in the system. So that's why elevated, right-of-way and cut throughs (Like the Brighton) are the best places to shoot.
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Trevor,
I’m looking to upgrade my current digital camera. What model do you use?
Congratulations on some great photos!
John
not to step on your ego too much here, but skill matters more than equipment for underground shots. I have a pretty average camera (well, maybe a bit above average - it's good, but it's no top of the shelf, $2000 unit...) and I still get damn good shots down there (sometimes with a tripod, other times without). What matters most is that you've used teh camera a whole lot, know what it does, what it don't do, and what manual settings you can do to get what you want...
I stick rather strictly to 64 and 100 film speed, and yes, the shots come out damn good. i use the same in nightclubs and otehr dark places with good results. you just have to know your shuttelr speeds & f'stps... what you can do and what you can't do, heh heh!
you're on the money with composition though - all the poles can make for a challenge.
crowds though can be burdensome though. with lots of folks running in every direction for a train you got to find a nice little corners if you want to work during rush hour... which of course can be the most rewarding time to get photos.
No Ego Stepped On Here, I know I have a skill for this profession. So I take pride in everything I do!
See you are talking about Slide Film which is great, But a good portion of the youth which my post was really directed to, uses either Digital's or film not slides, I use slides and I know what to use (I always use Kodachrome 64 or 200).
You can get 800 or better speed 35mm film DIRT cheap at B&H at 34th & 9th Avenue. I'm talking about 2.99 to 4.00 for 800 to 1600 speed films.
Regards & Happy Holidays,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
B&H has the best prices in town, ab-so-lutely.
When i'm doing slides, it's usually 64, but most of the time these days I'm taking standard negative shots on boring fuji 100 print film, which does everything i need it to do. I used to use some 800, 3200, but for the extra money the quality is probably worse imho. besides, if i have to bracket shots on film i can get a for a buck, i reckon i get more practice than not doing so (or spending more to do so) with higher speed film. more practice =) hehe!
I realize underground photography is tough, but as you say, it can be done. I have a few successes along with my many failures, and I only use 400 (I have yet to find 800 at a decent price). No tripod. As for digital cameras, I've heard that they're actually difficult to use without good lighting, but if your experience says otherwise...
Composition is the hardest part of all, but I'm not convinced it's impossible to compose a shot in any station.
I'm just a bit surprised that, of all of the winning entries and runners-up in the entire contest, all but two are outdoors, and neither of those is in the subway category. I'm sure at least one or two submitted underground subway shots were worthy of note.
As for digital cameras, I've heard that they're actually difficult to use without good lighting, but if your experience says otherwise...
It all depends on the camera and how well you know the settings; even then, it's sometimes a crap shoot. The same night I took the HBLR photo, I took this fantastic shot of a Broadway bus, with only slightly less ambient light.
Right! A few sucesses. I had to learn the hard way when I first started out that 100-400 wasn't doing it for me in the subway. When I bucked up the 800, 1000 and 1600 speed 35mm Film, I saw that 95% if not all of my subway shots were coming out.
Below I posted a pic of a underground subway photo I took with my Digital and with a roll of 800 speed 35mm film.
1) Digital Shot
2) 800 Speed Film with Flash and Night Mode to fill in the Background
Now the pic using 800 speed was with a flash and in Night Scene mode and I got a very clean shot out of it. I did something similar using 400 speed with a flash and Night Scene Mode and it was a sorry ass photo. The Digital shot was with no flash at all just letting the camera accept the natural light. Also the shutter on the Digital doesn't stay open long at all. I've been using digital cameras now for about a year and a half and my underground shots have been next to perfect all of the time. I would advise anyone to get a digital camera, especially Olympus ones since thier digis carry that SLR feel and feature to it.
Regards & Happy Holiday,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Congratulations to all!
I am shocked !!!
Are you ever not?
yes......lol!!
PS: I also would have had a seperate infrastructure category. That Black and White GCT double-slip photo would have gotten my vote to win.
I only submitted one photo, which happened to be an "infrastructure" piece. Actually, it was a photo montage... Maybe a little more abstract than the typical railfan photo. Here it is:
Underside of the CTA "L" tracks near Armitage, where the Red Line subway comes above ground and joins with the Brown/Purple Line "L". Taken September 2000. What a beautiful heap of metal!
-- David
Chicago, IL
I like it ! very artistic U should have been nominated !!
Did you use a photo shop to do that ??
here is my " chicago shot " at the clinton station in chicago back in 1999 enjoy !!
LOL !!!
Come on SalaamAllah! My trains and stations really stink...tough to get something nice pic...and you are in a quality class by yourself. Look at the three schlubs in Clinton Station...NO SAFETY HELMETS! CI Peter
No Photoshop editing involved; I arranged the photos by hand and scanned them together. Glad you like it.
-- David
Chicago, IL
i see U put em on a flatbed scanner !!!
Wonderful pic. It's good to see that other people can appriciate rail transport even w/o the trains.
WOW!!!! Thanks Dave! All of the photos are so good! I am honored! Well those seven months of taking photos while I was in NYC really paid off! I haven't been back since August, but I'm coming in for two days in January. I plan on riding the V and finding some good mid-week G.O.'s. NOTE CHANGE OF EMAIL ADDRESS...previous one seems to not be working.
VERY nice shots, everyone... I never did submit any myself, despite my best intentions... maybe next year... congratulations to all!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I never did submit any myself, despite my best intentions
Me too - even though I did bring my camera to work several days during the contest, I never seemed to be able to find the time to take any rail pictures!
Ne neither, I had a big exam on December 17th whose associated studying kept me away from the scanner...
-Robert King
Wow! Great pictures... Can't wait to see what comes around next year...
I am Happy To See that #1 went to the Brighton Line, No Sea Beach at all, Fred, Fred, Where Are You Fred? Ha, Ha, ha
For the Northbound platform at the Nassau St. Line in Canal Street Station, when will MTA completely close the platform to be precise?
For the Northbound platform at the Nassau St. Line in Canal Street Station, when will MTA completely close the platform to be precise?
Bowery's platform will be abandoned then also. They have to make the track connection at the southern end of the station first. I don't know how big of a job that is. Anyone know?
When was the last time the F had other equipment other than R-46?
I have a NYC Subway calendar that has a picture of R-27 marked as an F.
It has been said that the (F) had R32s arround 1994, briefly. Probably also arround 1989 or 1990 when the R46s were undergoing GOH. Other than that, I have no idea.
:-) Andrew
A few R-68s ran on the F circa 1987. The cars were new and trouble-prone at the time, and as I understand it, NYCT was trying to determine whether shop practices at Coney Island had something to do with the poor performance by letting Jamaica have its way with a few of the cars.
David
Yes, I remember those R68's on the F. I also remember R46's on the N to Astoria about the same time. That was a weird time. I saw red R30's on the R from Forest Hills and R10's on the K/B.
The N had R-46s in the late 70s as well.
The N had everything in the book. Here's an R30 N and a R40M N in the late 1970's:
Are you sure that wasn't an R16 (was it the one outside on the Culver with a porthole screen door) ?
The picture I'm talking about is November 1993 in the NYC Subway Calendar. The picture was taken in 1988.
"The picture I'm talking about is November 1993 in the NYC Subway Calendar. The picture was taken in 1988"
That was done deliberatly for photographic purposes. The Redbird R-30s, at least that set wasn't assigned to the (F). It was a goof to show.....what if!
Bill "Newkirk"
Isn't that the photo of a diesel towing that F train along street trackage while the Williamsburg Bridge was closed?
Must've been staged. No R2730's ran on the F at that time. A few did on the R in 1987.
I believe there have been a few isolated instances during the past 10 years or so when an R-32 train ran on the F. I forget what may have run there when many of the R-46's were taken out of service with problems many years back. Before the R-46's entered service, the F utilized R-44's.
And before that the "F" used Slant R40, with occasional R40M and a handful (4900 series) of R42s thrown in. Oh, yes, mustn't forget the (not-so) occasional R-4 (higher numbers only), R-6-x, R-7 and R38.
We're going back to the early-to-mid-70s with the above.
wayne
Someone once said that just before Chrystie St., the F was almost exclusively R-38s. I rode on a prewar F train in August of 1967 from Rockefeller Center to Lexington Ave. We were trying to get on the Lex to get to the Bronx Zoo and, of course, there was no free transfer at that time. I think we exited and walked a block or so to 51st St. Either that or we backtracked to Grand Central. The only thing I remember vividly from all that was how that 5 train moved.
[Someone once said that just before Chrystie St., the F was almost exclusively R-38s]
When the R-38's first came in, they operated on the F. As more were delivered, some of them were eventually used on the E, but most did run on the F. As the F ran between 2nd Avenue and Jamaica right before Chrystie Street, it didn't take a heck of alot of R-38's to make it seem like they pretty much dominated the F.
When Chrystie Street was placed in service, about 40-50 of the R-38's (lowest numbers, if I remember correctly) were switched over to the new NX service. The remaining 150-160 R-38's stayed primarily on the F, which had been extended from 2nd Avenue to Coney Island. Occasionally, an R-38 ran on the E. When the NX service was discontinued, the 40-50 R-38's utilized for that service remained in N service.
I don't recall the F with R27s - but I do recall the E and the F with R10s around 1980 or so. This was during the crisis caused by cracks in the Rockwell trucks that the R46s rode on at that time. The R10s were quickly given a coat of paint - more inside than out as I recall and IIRC - they were painted a two tone brown color on the interior.
Now if you want to talk about R27s showing up in an unusual place - I recall that at about that same time, a few R27s and R30s were on the D train. Again - this was around 1980 or so.
Someone else suggested R16s might have been on the F a long time ago. Well - I don't remember seeing that. But R16s were definitely on the EE between Continental and Whitehall. They were also on the RR a few years before that.
1 All the I remember on the EE is R16 after the R9 were retired.
2.How about a ten car train of R27's on the A. I think that was about 1985 or 1986 for a short period of a few days.
2.How about a ten car train of R27's on the A. I think that was about 1985 or 1986 for a short period of a few days.
I remember those few days. I actually rode on one. I was about 10 at the time and kept thinking to myself, "this is an 'A' train?!!? It belongs on the 'C'!" At that time the 'C' line had those cars.
B61 Leonard
Must've been late 87 at the earliest. All the R27's and R30's before then were on the eastern division BMT and the C line was almost completely R10.
I did get ONE "F" of R16 back in 1974 IIRC. It was abysmally slow. Lead motor was 6418.
wayne
Think of it as the law of averages.:-)
I rode on a few D trains of R-27/30s in 1980. Some of them were sporting DD signs up front. Never saw those cars on the A, although I did see them on the AA around 1968-69.
I remember the R27/30s in the early 80's on the express track from 34 to W4. That's a very fast stretch and the vibration would sometimes spread to ceiling panels. FWIW - I don't recall R27/30s as being fast. But they were pretty noisy when they tried for speed.
Slow and deafening. I think the speed was more a result of the grade drop between W4th and 34th in both directions.
I even rode on one or two R-27/30 D trains up CPW. They didn't do too badly on that stretch. Of course, having taken many R-10 rides, I got spoiled.
Like this:
Taken in 1970
What's with the DD ? Motorman's idea of a joke?
Since the photo dates from around 1970, either that or someone wasn't paying attention. The "DD" only ran in revenue service for a few weeks one December in the mid-1960s because of a water main break on 6th Avenue...you can look up the details elsewhere on the site.
Yep, only the cars by then were wearing silver and blue, obliterated by graffiti. I couldn't help but think, don't these cars have D signs?
This will settle any doubts:
You've also got to remember that these pictures are taken because they might be unusual, and not the norm. If i was photographing the J line in say, 1985, I'd definatley snap pics of the rare R42's, but not the common R27's.
1979-81 were wierd years on the D. There's not too many types of R10 and later rolling stock that didn't run on it at one time or another.
Living my whole life riding the "F" from East Broadway, here's what I can remember as far as rolling stock serving that line:
pre 1975: R 1-9 vestiges, R-44, slants, the OCCASIONAL R-42
1975-7: some Slants, R-44, R-46, once or twice R-32's
1977-80: predominantly R-46's
1980-1: R-10's, R-32's, R-38's, and R-46's in and out of rehab!!
the 1980's: Predominantly R-46's
1987: 46's, and several r-68's
1990's to today: 46's still rule, but around 95, some R-32's
Sounds about right!!!! TOny
I've seen pictures of R-16's on the F...
remember seeing them?
Mainly R38 in the 1970's and R9 until about 1972. R38 lasted until about 1979?.
My first ride (1967) on the F prior to Chrystie was on a R38. I recall the trains being mostly R1-9's and R38s along Queens Blvd.
In 86/87 with R68's and before that, early to mid 70s with R44's Pre-War R units, and also during the mid to late 70's, some R32's.
R27? Wow, that's rare.
R32's ran in numbers on the F as late as 1994.
My personal observations, for what they're worth:
-R1-9s from inception through May 1976.
-R10s summer 1980 through early 1981.
-R32s mostly weekdays through 1978-79;
then December 1990 through spring 1992
(Unlike other posters, I don't ever recall seeing an R-32 on the 'F'
during 1994.)
-R38s from inception through Spring 1975.
-Slant 40s from inception through Fall 1977.
-Mod 40s/42s from inception through Spring 1977.
-R44s from inception through Spring 1978.
-R68s a couple of times in 1987 and '88.
The first time I actually saw an R-46 on that line was Spring 1976. As more were put into service, the R38s went to the 'GG' and lame-duck 'EE'; the Slants and 44s to the 'E'; and the Mod 40s to the 'D'.
I've NEVER seen an R16 or 27/30 on the 'F', although the latter became rather common on the 'N' for the last couple of years it ran local to Forest Hills.
There are at least 5 pix of R16s on the F from the summer of 1972 here on the site:
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r16/r16-6405.jpg
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r16/r16-6418b.jpg
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r16/r16-6418f.jpg
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r16/r16-6427.jpg
http://www.nycsubway.org/slides/r16/r16-6451.jpg
There are also a number of pix showing them on the E, EE & GG.
R16's were transferred from the Eastern division BMT to Jamaica in 1968/69, probably after getting the new doors/rollsigns. They remained there until 1977, going back to the BMT to replace the retired R7/R9's. At this time, the R16 ran on the E, F, GG, EE and after summer 1976, the N.
I did see R-32s in 1994.
And I distinctly recall riding them during the summertime 1994!! Tony
Come to think of it, I didn't ride the trains recreationally very much from my April 1992 wedding through my October 1995 entrance to parenting. My spouse and I did lots of other things on weekends, so I must have missed the 1994 appearances of R32s on the 'F' everyone's referring to.
It was probably the introduction of the unlimited Metrocard and the inevitable apprenticeship of my offspring to the subways that dramatically increased my weekend recreational usage of them since 1998. The discovery of this board helped, too.
Sorry about the long post. This is one of those "near and dear to my heart" topics. I can't give you exact dates, but I'm good for within a year or two. I'm afraid I don't know what the deal was with the R-27, I've seen that picture too. I'm pretty sure the F train was a combination of all original IND equipment and R38s until the original R-40s came out. You have to remember that the F was the D before the Chrystie Street connection in '67. R40s ran exclusively, I believe, on the F until the R-44s came in four years later. R-40s from Jay Street to Kings Highway via Culver Express must have been absolutely the greatest, but I was too young to rail-fan back then. If memory serves, the R-44 stint on the F with the R-40s was short-lived(2-3 years) as the R-46s came in a few years later to replace them. I don't have a clear memory of a lot of R-44s on the F. The R46s, including the ones with the Bicentennial colors started out pretty exclusively on the F but also ran on the N. And yes, all eight of those Bicentennial cars ran together for a period of time. There was an experiment with R-46s on the Brighton line, but some people who lived near the Avenue H ramp comlained about the vibrations(I never understood why the the R-44s didn't seem to bother them). I was a Brooklyn kid so I got to enjoy the R-46s when they ran quite a bit faster then they do now, and their speedometers worked! The 4th avenue run on the N was awesome! R-44s moved over to the A,D and E around '74. The E train ran a combination of R-46s, R-44s and R38s after it got cut back to Chambers. Man, some people think the R-68s feel like they have slow acceleration, the new R-44s felt worse. A great deal of R-38s ran on the F as well, even into the '80s until the Culver Express run finally met it's final demise. At this time the R38s ran mostly during rush hour when they were usually used as Brooklyn locals that would terminate at Kings Highway. The R-46s ran that fun yet abbreviated express from 18th Ave. to Kings Highway with through service to CI. It was a lot of switching for a couple of minutes of saved time (and speed) but I never complained! The whole run would backfire if an earlier local wasn't held at Ave P with the Express bearing down on Kings Highway, literally (18th-KI is pretty much all downhill). But if you lived near Kings Highway or further south, it was a blast!!!
MARTA redesigned their home page, but at the title bar, it says "MARTA- Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Association" At least they got it right underneath the MARTA logo.
LOL
hey rob,
if you ever want to get together to do a "fan trip" let me know... i live right near the lindbergh station :)
Allen
asociation ?? it used to be called authority ...??
It is called Authority.
The New York City Transit Authority dropped the 'Authority' many years ago, too.....
Gee, How much is membership?
$50 a year, make check payable to:
Rob from Atlanta
2348 Rip-Off Way
Atlanta, GA 30303
:)
Tie arrival this PM into the city at Queens Plaza, both an E on the express and a V local arrived almost the same time. So who goes first to 23rd St??
Whomever punches first??
I also noticed the Queens bound tower is GONE, they are cleaning out the room at the end of the platform but going to Manhattan the tower is still manned. Is this tower the saying who is going first or is Queensboro Master have any say in this??
The room at the south end of the soutbound platform isn't
a tower, it's the ATD's room. A LONG time ago, before the FIRST
punches were installed at QP s/b, the ATD would have to shout
over the intercom to the tower at the north end of the n/b plat
so the tower operator could give the line up to the G or the
broadway service (EE, N, R, but I think the punch was in already
by the time the R came along).
I don't recall if during the signal "upgrade" project that ATD
booth was given a new indication panel and a route request
override. There are punches at Roosevelt and 36 St s/b.
In theory, QBP MT should be able to track each train and know
who is coming before they get to QP.
Oddly enough, with all this technology, the ability of the train
dispatching system to adjust the spacing of trains and avoid
silly merging conflicts like this seems to be poorer than in the
days of isolated towers.
The effect of the new service pattern has been to shift the
merge on to D3 track from 75 Ave, fairly close to the terminals
where train spacing is usually closer to schedule, down to QP.
It has also introduced an additional crossover delay at QP n/b
which in combination with the new merge on to D4 track at 36 St
and the merge with the R service on GD2/D2 track makes it very
tricky to schedule properly.
Oddly enough, with all this technology, the ability of the train dispatching system to adjust the spacing of trains and avoid silly merging conflicts like this seems to be poorer than in the days of isolated towers.
The schedule makers were more intelligent. The TA is trying to merge one service the E with 4 minute headways and another service the V with 6 minute headways. Any train will block the merge for 1 minute. There is no offset that avoids merging conflicts without all trains being on time to the second. The TA attempts this zero tolerance merge twice: at Queens Plaza and at 50th St.
Assuming the E's and F's each run every 4 minutes, the V's would have to be be spaced alternately 4 and 8 minutes apart to merge smoothly with the E's and F's, but this unequal spacing means unequal loading.
I guess the V is just a typical aggressive New Yorker. It shoves
itself in front of the E, takes the shorter route to 50 St
and shoves itself in front of the F.
I don't follow what you are saying about the merge being impossible.
With uniform headways, there is a conflict at common multiples
of 4 and 6. So, don't use uniform headways.
Say the E leaves on :00 :04 :08 :12 :16 :20.
The V can leave at :02 :09 :14 :21 etc. The E going straight is
going to clear the switches faster than the V crossing over.
So, don't use uniform headways.
The average number of passengers waiting board a train at any station is proportional to the time interval from the last train. If the T1 is the time required to load N1 passengers and T2 is the time requird to load N2 passengers then
T2/T1 > N2/N1 for all N2 > N1
Suppose there is a time interval 0 - T that is serviced by N trains. How should the trains be scheduled so as to minimize loading time, given that the above conditions hold.
The answer is that the trains should have uniform headways.
Why is loading time on the V a big issue?
Why is loading time on the V a big issue?
Let me amplify the example you gave before with a correction.
E: 0, 4, 8, 12, etc.
F: 2, 6, 10, 14, etc.
V: 2, 10, 14, etc.
R: 0, 6, 12, etc.
I substituted the time of 10 for the second V, instead of the 9 that you had suggested.
What's the maximum deviation from scheduled arrivals for there to be no merging conflicts? It's ±30 seconds. (It would have been 0 seconds, had we used your suggestion of 9 minutes for the 2nd V).
What scheduling measures can be employed to help that such tolerances can be maintained? Consider the unequal headways on the local. First consider the strategy that the passenger waits for a 1 seat ride. The V headways alternate between 4 and 8 minutes. The loading times at the stations will vary by more than 2:1. What about the strategy of taking the first train and transferring at either Roosevelt or Queens Plaza? The waiting times will be 2 and 4 minutes for both the R's and the V's. Again the loading times will vary by more than a 2:1 ratio. The result will be that alternate trains will be crowded and will not be able to maintain their schedule. The locals make 10 stops between 71st and Queens Plaza. An average delay of 3 seconds per station due to the unequal loading is enough to exceed the 30 second schedule tolerance to guarantee no merging conflicts. Clearly, the alternative of uniform headways for both the R and the V will eliminate the loading time variability. If you can't be good, at least be consistent.
I suggested 5/7 headways for that reason, it introduces only a
slight imbalance.
Look, philosophically, you can't have every parameter optimized.
Just consider the basic conflict between on-time performance
and schedule time. Any schedule which is drawn up has to
take into account average loading delays. If the actual delays
are less on that particular run, the train is going to run ahead
of schedule and potentially be delayed by the train ahead or
a merge. So either the crew lays back at each station and spreads
out the delay or they run as fast as possible and takes the hit
all at once. The former is less disruptive to following trains
and the "customers" tend to notice the delay less than if they
sit behind a signal for 1 minute.
The only way to get good schedule speed AND good on-time performance
is to have a lot of excess capacity. Then the bean counters notice
that "hey, you're wasting public money".
I suggested 5/7 headways for that reason, it introduces only a
slight imbalance.
The problem with E's arriving at 0, 4, 8, 12, etc. and V's arriving at 2, 9, 14, etc. is that there is no tolerance for the E at 8 and the V at 9. If the E is even 1 second late or the V is 1 second early, there will be a merging delay. This is an unrealistic scenerio. OTOH, one does not need to go to non-uniform headways to devise a zero tolerance schedule. Run the E's at 0, 4, 8, 12, etc. and run the V's at 1, 7, 13, etc. Management should design schedules that are realistic and do not depend on unrealistic tolerances to avoid merging delays.
Any schedule which is drawn up has to take into account average loading delays. If the actual delays are less on that particular run, the train is going to run ahead of schedule and potentially be delayed by the train ahead or a merge. So either the crew lays back at each station and spreads out the delay or they run as fast as possible and takes the hit all at once. The former is less disruptive to following trains and the "customers" tend to notice the delay less than if they
sit behind a signal for 1 minute.
So, the schedule that minimizes loading time also optimizes performance, provided there are no merging delays. The maximum tolerable deviation from schedule for merges at 30 tph is 30 seconds. Permitting a 1 minute deviation reduces throughput to 20 tph.
The only way to get good schedule speed AND good on-time performance is to have a lot of excess capacity.
Let me cite a counter example. In the first half of 1949 the on time performance for the IRT was 87.47%; the BMT was 99.19% and the IND was 99.24%. A train had to reach its terminal within 3 minutes of its scheduled arrival to be considered on time.
The IRT East and West Side expresses operated at 30 tph; the Lex Local operated at 30 tph; the West Side Local operated at 26 tph; the 3rd Ave El operated at 42 tph; the Steinway Tunnel operated at 27 tph, the Polo Grounds Shuttle operated at 12 tph and the Dyre Ave Shuttle operated at 7 tph.
The BMT operated 24 tph on the Brighton Line; 14 tph on the 4th Ave Line; 18 tph on the West End Line; 11 tph on the Sea Beach; 8 tph on the Culver; the Eastern Division operated 27 tph over the Williamsburg and 24 tph on the 14th St Line; 18 tph through the 60th St tunnel and 12 tph on the Astoria Shuttle.
The IND operated 34 tph down the CPW express tracks and 30 tph down the CPW locals. They ran 30 tph through the 53rd St tunnel. They ran 15 tph to Church Ave; 18 tph on the Fulton St Local and 15 tph on the GG.
The running times were as good or better than at present. I do not have comprehensive 1949 schedules in front of me but I don't expect a challenge on this point. The running time for the Pelham Express service, when it was started in 1946 was 18˝ vs. today's 21 minutes.
This counter example shows that it is possible to have one's cake and eat it too: fast service; on time performance and high service levels. In fact, on time performance is necessary for high service levels. However, as the TA has demonstrated, low service levels do not guarantee on time performance.
There is a reason I suggest having the V depart on the heels of the
E and not vice-versa. The V crossing over from D1 to D3 will
delay the train on D3 longer than the E going straight will delay
the V waiting on D1. When the V is crossing over, this will put
the approach to D3 track on time clear AND activate the blind trip
near the south end of the D3 platform. That's to prevent the E
train from overshooting the homeball and colliding with the V
crossing over. The other way around, with the E going straight,
the V train can come right in to the station. By the time the
station stop has been made and the train closes down, the tower
will be able to throw the switch and line the ball.
In analyzing OTP vs schedule speed, I don't mathematically agree
with your analysis which basically relies on the crutch of
assuming everything is Poisson, and that loading time is a
predictable, increasing function of the time since the last train.
In fact, I think there is signifcant randomness (more precisely,
chaotic behavior) in that loading time function. One day say
it's been 5 minutes since the last train, you are at 75% crush
loading, and it takes you 25 seconds to make the station stop.
Next day, same equipment, same crew, same arrival time, same loading,
same time since last train, it could be 20 seconds, or it could be
50. I think you could make a large number of observations and
the randomness would probably be guassian.
But anyway, the point is in designing a schedule, you pick some
assumed point in that randomness curve for loading time. If
you are very generous then your probability for on-time performance
goes up. However, the hidden penalty is lowered schedule speed.
In order to avoid running "hot", the crew will have to lay back
and expend the extra slop time, or they will get holding lights.
Likewise, if you make up the schedule on the low end for loading
time, some runs are going to be quick, but a large percentage will
be late.
The running times were as good or better than at present. I do not have comprehensive 1949
schedules in front of me but I don't expect a challenge on this point. The running time for the
Pelham Express service, when it was started in 1946 was 18˝ vs. today's 21 minutes.
This counter example shows that it is possible to have one's cake and eat it too: fast service; on
time performance and high service levels. In fact, on time performance is necessary for high
service levels. However, as the TA has demonstrated, low service levels do not guarantee on time
performance.
Listen, a lot of things were different 50 freakin years ago!
You didn't factor in the third variable in the golden rule:
good, fast and cheap, pick 2 of 3. I maintain that the better
service in the past came at the expense of higher labor requirements.
Remember, back then rush-hour trains carried 2 conductors, there
were more platform men, and supervision was distributed.
This may not have translated into higher costs because the real price
of labor (including benefits packages and legal fees) has risen
more steeply than the CPI in the past 50 years.
Of course there are other dimensions of freedom in that 3-way balance.
One of them is intelligence. If you're smart, you can win.
I'd have to agree that collectively, the NYCT system today doesn't
have nearly as much "railroad smarts" as it did back then. Another
factor is politics. The TA today is completely hamstrung by political
considerations, I think more so than the BOT and certainly more
than in the private days. Yet another factor is societal. I think
compared to 50 years ago, New Yorkers are, as an aggregate, less
cordial and less able or willing to understand and follow directions.
So maybe we have to accept that 50 year old service levels
are not attainable today without added cost?
I would suggest that part of the reason for fewer tph than formerly achievable is the general idea that the system has to be 99.999% safe rather than just 99.9% safe (I don't mean those numbers to be exact, just a relative comparison).
Just one of probably hundreds of examples: before the T/O on the downtown Lexington express track hit the switch at Union Square at 40 mph in 1991, the express would regularly come barrelling down to Union Square at full speed and only slow down as needed to stop at the station. Now, to prevent that same accident from happening again, every express slows down starting at about 23rd St., no matter how empty the track ahead is.
I'm sure the TA's reasoning is that if exactly the same accident happened again, they could be charged with gross negligence ("Well, you knew this accident could happen, didn't you?"). So because of one irresponsible T/O, we all spend an extra 30 seconds on that train every time it isn't directly on the heels of another train.
In summary, to achieve over 30 tph, every employee has to do their job exactly right or else you can have big trouble. And the penalty for big trouble may be a $ billion lawsuit nowadays. So it's just personally safer (less risk of being fired) for managers to put in more controls that reduce capacity but also reduce risk.
I'm not advocating that the TA act more recklessly, but if the State were held to the same standards of raod safety as the TA is for train safety, the speed limit on every road would be 20 mph and the penalty for speeding would be life imprisonment without parole. That would definitely reduce car accidents dramatically!
The V crossing over from D1 to D3 will delay the train on D3 longer than the E going straight will delay the V waiting on D1...
I missed your point. Yes, there is around a 15-20 second difference in the time for the track to clear. This would translate into the need for holding within 7˝-10 second maximum deviation from scheduled arrival to guarantee no merging conflict. OTOH, if the TA could maintain every train's arrival to within 10 seconds, then they would have no problem in maintaining 40 tph operation.
I don't mathematically agree with your analysis which basically relies on the crutch of assuming everything is Poisson...
I did not specify a Poisson distribution nor did I make use of any particular probability distribution for the number of passengers waiting on a platform as a function of the train waiting time. I did say that the average number of people waiting was proportional to the time intervals between trains. There are two additional conditions necessary to derive a Poisson distribution from that statement.
...and that loading time is a predictable, increasing function of the time since the last train.
I did not state that. I did state that a function describing the average loading time had to obey certain properties with respect to the number of passengers.
In fact, I think there is signifcant randomness (more precisely, chaotic behavior) in that loading time function.
This function's properties are based on the observation that passenger flow during loading is non-laminar.
...I think you could make a large number of observations and
the randomness would probably be guassian.
Careful, the Central Limit Theorem requires identically distributed random variables. We are talking about a function of a random variable.
...the point is in designing a schedule, you pick some assumed point in that randomness curve for loading time.
I would have thought that avoiding situations where two trains occupy the same track a the same time might also be a criterion. The present E, F, R, V schedule cannot avoid this situation to within the tolerance of present operations.
I maintain that the better service in the past came at the expense of higher labor requirements. Remember, back then rush-hour trains carried 2 conductors, there were more platform men,...
The extra conductor reduced loading time. My own observations indicate that the present operations of platform men actually increases loading time. However, the reduced loading time would have be important in increasing service levels and decreasing run times but do not influence OTP. Of course, there are ways to achieve the reduced loading time of 2 or more conductors without extra manpower. TA management has chosen not examine such technology. The TA has gone out of its way to design equipment that significantly increases loading time.
...and supervision was distributed.
That's the first germane point you've made. Maintaining a 30 tph service level without merging conflicts requires a greater adherence to a properly designed schedule than is possible with the TA's present system of supervision/corrections. This does not mean that such supervision/correction requires more manpower. The TA does not want to employ such systems that are used elsewhere.
...the real price of labor (including benefits packages and legal fees) has risen more steeply than the CPI in the past 50 years.
The cost of transit rolling stock and new construction has risen even more sharply. In the short term it means that existing lines and rolling stock must be used more intensively and efficiently than in the past. This is a long term problem that must be addressed by the industry.
So maybe we have to accept that 50 year old service levels are not attainable today without added cost?
The cost of addimg more lines far exceeds the cost of duplicating the operating practices of 50 years ago or using technolology to provide the same service levels with reduced labor costs.
I missed your point. Yes, there is around a 15-20 second difference in the time for the track to
clear. This would translate into the need for holding within 7˝-10 second maximum deviation
from scheduled arrival to guarantee no merging conflict. OTOH, if the TA could maintain every
train's arrival to within 10 seconds, then they would have no problem in maintaining 40 tph
operation.
OK, no argument there. This whole portion of the thread is
getting threadbare because it is speculation about a schedule.
I don't, in fact, know how this merge is currently scheduled.
It seems to me that you have to define "merging delay". If
it takes 40 seconds between the time an E train closes down
and proceeds and the time that the V train can get the ball,
and the V train is schedule to depart 60 seconds after the
E, that's an allowable deviation of 20 seconds. However, that
means the V train will be "running on the yellow". Is that
a merging delay?
We are
talking about a function of a random variable.
Alright, as long as you agree that loading time is a function
of a random variable. I'm not interested in debating the
mathematics of modeling it. The point was that one can not
predict the exact loading time, even if one could control
exactly the arrival time of the train. Therefore, any schedule
will have some percentage of late performers. How much is a
tradeoff with the schedule speed, all other factors being equal.
That's the first germane point you've made. Maintaining a 30 tph service level without merging
conflicts requires a greater adherence to a properly designed schedule than is possible with the
TA's present system of supervision/corrections. This does not mean that such
supervision/correction requires more manpower. The TA does not want to employ such systems
that are used elsewhere.
I though that was at least the 2nd germane point. No partial
credit for pointing out the 2 conductors? Would you care to
give an example of this technology or system in use elsewhere,
where elsewhere is another rapid transit system of similar
capacity as the NYCTS, not a bank of elevators.
The cost of transit rolling stock and new construction has risen even more sharply. In the short
term it means that existing lines and rolling stock must be used more intensively and efficiently
than in the past. This is a long term problem that must be addressed by the industry.
Since the cost of labor affects both of these, that is partially
expected. But why would these costs rise even more sharply than
labor in general? Certainly construction of both routes and
rolling stock is more productive today with modern practices
and technologies than 50 years ago. Or is it the case that
OSHA and the law firm of Zollman and Schnerrer has driven
up the costs?
However, that means the V train will be "running on the yellow". Is that a merging delay?
It should be green by then. Assume 2 mph/sec and go from 0-20 mph and continue at 20 mph. The E will travel 0.5 x 2 x 1.47 x 10 x 10 = 147 ft in the first 10 seconds. At 20 mph it will travel 20 x 1.47 x 50 = 1470 ft in the next 50 seconds. The total distance will be 1617 ft. The rear of the train will be 1017 feet away.
The point was that one can not predict the exact loading time, even if one could control exactly the arrival time of the train. Therefore, any schedule will have some percentage of late performers. How much is a tradeoff with the schedule speed, all other factors being equal.
Loading time is a function of a random variable and hence is also a random variable. It has a mean and a standard deviation. If the scheduled dwell time is the mean plus the standard deviation then the probablity that a train will leave the station on time is 84%. A two standard deviation cushion provides an on time probability of 97.7%. If one were to assume that the loading times at each station were statistically independent from one another. then such gernerous cushions are not needed to achieve the same on time performance. With N stops, one would expect to be able to reduce each cushion by a factor of 1/sqrt(N).
Would you care to give an example of this technology or system in use elsewhere, where elsewhere is another rapid transit system of similar capacity as the NYCTS, not a bank of elevators.
The key is the the conductor and T/O know the scheduled departure time at each station down to the second. There are many ways to implement this fairly inexpensively using modern computer technology. However, in the pre-computer era a fairly low-tech solution was implemented in the Moscow Subway that provides the same functionality. There is an upcounting clock in each station. It is reset as each train leaves the station. All the crew has to know is what its headway should be at each station. Usually, would be the same for each station, e.g. 90 seconds for 40 tph; 120 seconds for 30 tph; 180 seconds for 20 tph; etc.
Suppose each service (E, F, R and V) operated at 15 tph. The E crew would know its departure count would be: 240 between Jamaica Center and Forest Hills; 120 between Forest Hills and 5th Ave; 240 from 7th Ave to 50th St, etc. The F crew would know departure counts would be: 240 between 179th and Forest Hills; 120 for Forest Hills and Roosevelt; 240 between 21st St and 57th St; 120 between 50th and Bway-Lafayette and 240 from 2nd Ave to Coney Island. The R and V crews would use the 120 count for from Forest Hills to Queens Plaza. The V would continue to use 120 until its terminal. This system has the advantage that it can accomodate different headways during non-rush hour periods. The crews would be given a different count, when they wre operating on 5, 8 or 10 tph.
Two things are needed for this system to work. The first is for one train to set the clocks the clocks by having a crew to read a schedule and a properly set watch at the beginning of the day's operation. The second is that the departures at the terminals have to be kept punctual to the second.
If one were to assume that the loading times at each
station were statistically independent from one another. then such gernerous cushions are not
needed to achieve the same on time performance. With N stops, one would expect to be able to
reduce each cushion by a factor of 1/sqrt(N).
I'm not so sure a statistical approach is best for predicting
the behavior of the system. Clearly, at any rate, there is
some dependence between dwell times because a train that encounters
higher than average loading time at one station will be behind
schedule and therefore have a high expected loading time at the
next station, and so on.
Two things are needed for this system to work. The first is for one train to set the clocks the clocks
by having a crew to read a schedule and a properly set watch at the beginning of the day's
operation. The second is that the departures at the terminals have to be kept punctual to the
second.
That's not a bad idea, but since we have enough trouble getting
conductors to open up on the correct side, what do you think are
the chances of getting them to adhere to something like this?
Punctuality at the terminal is one thing ... there have been
some "initiatives" over the years to improve that, but trying to
do it at every station is going to get hairy.
I'm not so sure a statistical approach is best for predicting the behavior of the system.
A process is either deterministic or probabilistic. You did state that some aspects that influence performance are not deterministic. Therefore it must be probabilistic. Statistical methodology is used for analyzing the behavior of probabilistic processes. Why should the NYC subway system not be amenable to the statistical approach, when this approach has been successfully used for analyzing many other processes?
Clearly, at any rate, there is some dependence between dwell times because a train that encounters higher than average loading time at one station will be behind schedule and therefore have a high expected loading time at the next station, and so on.
This is not what I said. I said that the random behavior at one station does not depend on the behavior at another. If there are two stations A and B, a time interval t. The number of people waiting at station B, NB is a random variable that is described by a probability distribution function PB(NB). This pdf will yield a mean for NB that is proportional to the time interval t. There will be a similar, though not necessarily identical, function PA(NA). What I said was that the conditional probability density function for NB given NA = NA is independent of NA i.e.
PB|A(NB|A) = PB(NB)
Yes, a delay at one station will cause more waiting time and consequently more loading time at a following station. However, there is a high probability that the extra number of people waiting at the following station can still be loaded into the train, given the loading cushion for the following stations' dwell time. This is not a simple sum because of the non-linear function that relates the number of people waiting to the loading time, so the quickest method to find the probability of a delay after N stations would be to use a Monte Carlo simulation. If it were a simple sum and the statistics at each station were identical then the 1/sqrt(N) factor would apply. Therefore, it would not be unreasonable to expect a similar reduction for this specific problem.
...since we have enough trouble getting conductors to open up on the correct side, what do you think are the chances of getting them to adhere to something like this?
Pretty easy. Use a computer based clock with a camera. If the train departs too early or late, send an email with the picture to upper management with cc's to the Inspector General, the MTA PCAC and the TWU. Bypass the normal supervisory channels which has been prone to administrative lapses in accurately recording arrival times.
Punctuality at the terminal is one thing ... there have been some "initiatives" over the years to improve that, but trying to do it at every station
Life's a bitch, so what. This is the minimum required to run a railroad on time.
Ooops, I missed your message.
The number of people
waiting at station B, NB is a random variable that is described by a probability distribution function
PB(NB).
OK, so you didn't understand what I meant after all. I'm not
talking about the PDF of waiting passengers. I'll be happy to
grant the simplification that passengers arrive uniformly and
the expected number of waiting passengers is directly proportional
to the time since last train.
What I am saying is that the relationship between waiting passengers
and loading time is not fixed, because people do not behave
uniformly. At one station you may have an aggressive individual
who holds the doors, or refuses to step into the car, or a confused
commuter who boards and then tries to back out, etc. So you can
say that for a given number of waiting passengers, the loading
time is a random variable.
Pretty easy. Use a computer based clock with a camera. If the train departs too early or late, send
an email with the picture to upper management with cc's to the Inspector General, the MTA
PCAC and the TWU. Bypass the normal supervisory channels which has been prone to
administrative lapses in accurately recording arrival times.
Some unfortunate accident would befall those cameras, I suspect.
So you can say that for a given number of waiting passengers, the loading time is a random variable.
I never implied it wasn't. I did say that the mean loading time was was a concave increasing function of the number of passengers waiting on the platform. I also said that this function does not include any terms that specify the number of passengers waiting on the platform of another station. N.B. the function for each station may be different from one another.
At one station you may have an aggressive individual who holds the doors, or refuses to step into the car, or a confused commuter who boards and then tries to back out, etc.
Why do you keep bashing the customer? Far more variability is introduced by differences between different T/O's.
Some unfortunate accident would befall those cameras, I suspect.
They're pretty inexpensive to replace and any malfunction would also result in the sending of an email with a picture. It would not be the same thing as stealing the film. The purpose for sending a copy to the TWU is to protect the operating crew.
There has to be some realization that the system is under-performing based not only on other systems' performance but on previous NYC performance. The cure is not necessarily high-tech toys. Much of the problem has been operational laxity that management has permitted to exist and has tried to hide.
I also said that this function [mean loading time] does not
include any terms that specify the number of passengers waiting on the platform of another station.
But there is a hidden dependency. The mean loading time at station
N+1 is a function of the number of waiting passengers, which is
in turn a function of the time since last train, which is a
function of the loading time at station N.
The whole point in plain English, to re-state what I wrote much
earlier in this thread, is that in drawing up a schedule, you
can't predict loading time down to the second. There is some
jitter. That jitter is due partly to the behavior of the conductor
and partly on the composition and mood of the passengers at that
moment. You might get a pack of aggressive door holders, or
conversely the conductor might be an aggressive door popper.
Now, to address what you said:
Why do you keep bashing the customer? Far more variability is introduced by differences between
different T/O's.
That's not passenger bashing. I didn't say it was the customers'
"fault" that service sucks. It is a fact, however, that passenger
and conductor behavior have a significant effect on loading time,
all other factors (e.g. waiting time since last train) being
equal. I'm not sure what the T/O could possibly do to affect
loading time.
If loading time could be precisely predicted given just the
number of waiting passengers (or likewise time since last train),
then a schedule could be designed that specified optimum
schedule speed and still be maintainable. Since it can't be
predicted absolutely, the schedule makers need to design some
slop time into the schedule.
Once a run starts to get behind schedule, either because it left
the terminal late, or encountered door holding or some other delay,
it will tend to accumulate lateness. Where do you make up the
time and try to get back on schedule? There isn't that much
room to play in the station. You can try to close down early
and be aggressive on the doors, but you won't gain much, if anything,
when you are already behind and facing crush loads. The best
place to make up a few seconds is between stations. In the
"good old days" that you pine for, motormen accomplished this
mainly by exceeding posted speed restrictions. Now the equipment
is too slow to really gain much, and the disciplinary process
favors being slightly late over taking a chance with rulebook
violations.
I would think with the constant back and forth switching, especially at 5/53, those switch machines and rails tied into those turnouts must wear much more faster than other switches and turnouts.
That is why diverging speed limit signs are hung at the home ball. I've seen D10 and D15's.
Dozens of other switches in the system see similar usage.
These just see equal wear for N vs. R :-)
From my one observation, both the E and V C/R's closed down. (I was saying excused me one of you will have to wait >G<)
The V opened open and said they would wait for the E to cross in front of them (haha).
Only time will tell..
[Tie arrival this PM into the city at Queens Plaza, both an E on the express and a V local arrived almost the same time. So who goes first to 23rd St?? Whoever punches first??]
There are other instances around the city of such conflicts, such as Columbus Circle S/B (for the B and D); 34th/Broadway N/B for the W and N/R; Canal St S/B for the A and C; Canal St N/B for the C and E. Whenever this issue arises, my instinctive response is to ask which Line Superintendent controls the tower. More often than not, the line whose superintendent controls the tower gets priority over all others in the area.
I don't know if this guy was a TSS (didn't see a tie >G<) but a gentleman in TA Vest with ear protectors, saftey glasses, dust mask and clip board was a the queens bound punch box for the N/R/W at Lex Ave. I mean this guy was on the cat walk at the punch box across from the platform not on the platform.
Was that a TSS going "above and beyond" the call of duty?
There wasn't any flagging into the station BTW.
Maybe you could start by explaining what the N/R/W was doing at Lex/53rd.
Maybe he meant to say Lex/59th. But still what was he doing at the box?
Okay Okay 59th, I was only 6 blocks off, give a guy a break will ya.
Gee not like I was posting about losing the railfan window.
Greenburg was getting on your back about 53 St. I was only asking what was the TSS doing at the box?
Lou didn't say ANYTHING about Lex/53rd he just said "N/R/W at Lex"
Peace,
ANDEE
Oh, I see it's in the title an easy fix
Lou didn't say ANYTHING about Lex/53rd he just said "N/R/W at Lex"
Peace,
ANDEE
In all likelihood, he was a TSS. At the beginning of a new RTO pick, you can usually find a TSS at ever major 'point-of-no-return' location - those places where if a TO punches for and accepts a wrong line-up, he can't get the train back to its scheduled destination. In theory, this is to catch the guys who have been, for example, punching R all last pick, but are now working on the N from going to the wrong place.
what do TSS, TO RTO, mean?
TSS=TRAIN SERVICE SUPERVISOR
TO =TRAIN OPERATOR, FORMERLY MM=MOTORMAN
RTO=RAPID TRANSIT OPERATIONS a division within the DOS=DEPARTMENT OF SUBWAYS
Peace,
ANDEE
Here are some others for you:
C/R =CONDUCTOR REVENUE
TW/O=TOWER OPERATOR
SA =STATION AGENT (token booth clerk)
and my favorite:
CTA=CLEANER TRANSIT AUTHORITY (nothing to do with chicago)
Peace,
ANDEE
Transit Secret Service
Times Square Shuttle. Or is that at Lex/42nd?
I saw several people at 59/Lex wearing safety vests, and holding clip boards. I saw three on the n/b express platform, and one on N/R/W platform.
They are Trafick Checker. All they were doing were counting the people on the train and marking donw the train enter and exited the station.
Robert
So to get back to the original question, What was the guy doing at the N/R/W box? Be it 53 or 59 St?
Even more important, was the TSS "stuffed," "mounted" or both? Proper hanging on the wall does require a licensed taxidermist in THIS state.
All I can say was the DUDE was on the catwalk next to the box with vest, hearing protection, glasses and a dust mask. Why he didn't just stand on the platform and bang on the R46's window, was he doing this for the sometimes R32 that came by??
Having already given a reasonable answer, I guess the obvious choice would be:
He was there just to give us something to talk about.
I was fortunate enough to ride the F line with an R-32 consist in BOTH directions, from Roosevelt to Jay around 9:30 AM, and Jay back to Roosevelt at around 1:45 PM.
That means the odds of taking both R-32 rides today was 1 in 25, right?
So what equipment is on the V now??
According to Joe Korman's website list, the V is all R-46.
Since 5 trains out of the 45 required on the F on weekdays are R-32s by assignment, nominally the chances of getting an R-32 on the F are 5 out of 45, or 1 out of 9. However, the number of R-32 F trains in service is likely to vary from day to day.
David
Didn't I see you there?
- Lyle
There are a lot of great pics among the winners of the contest. I cant wait for the next one!
I would like to know how many movies can be suggested, with at least one scene of a BMT souther division train flashing by the screen. Noises don't count, must be the sight. I would include any line from Dekalb Avenue south as the parameter.///Think about it.
My entries:
Next Stop Greenwich Village-BMT Standard... Brighton, also scene at Newkirk Ave. platform though the movie took place in 1955, that section of the platform, filmed in the early 1970's, may not have been built in 1955.
Flamingo Kid, 1983-R27 West End (Movie took place in 1963).
French Connection, 1971-R32 West End (or was that R40?)
Saturday Night Fever, 1978-R27? 4th Ave and R32 West End
Enemies; A Love Story, 1996?-BMT Type D (Probably the museum car), The
story took place in 1946. Actor was sitting in the car on the Brighton Line at Stillwell Ave. waiting for the train to leave the station. This was a great movie. Also had "Bronx" scenes which really took place under 32nd Street Queens, Astoria el.
The Warriors,1983- Brighton R32? and Stillwell Ave. Station scene.
Only movie I ever saw with an extended view out of the front window.
It looked like the express under Fulton Ave. Brooklyn (A).
Disappointment- Bright Beach Memoires and Lords of Flatbush.
"Glengarry Glenross" with Jack Lemmon had scenes of the Brighton line.
The Little Fugitive:
Scene at the (soon to be old) Stillwell Terminal with Standards.
Glengary Glennross (sp?)
The very first and very last shot show a R40 or later train. Throughout the movie whenever there is an outdoor shot we see the Sheepshead Bay station, always with a train pulling into or out of the station, and always with sparks shooting from the wheels. Hollywood has strange ideas about how often trains pull into stations and about how aften sparks are emitted.
Stan Fischler's book, "Uptown, Downtown" mentions a 1931 movie called "Subway Express" There are scenes along the Sea Beach route but Fischler doesn't mention any particular cars. It's probable that there were shots of cars. I'd love to see how a Standard or Triplex looked in action in 1931.
That's all I can think of for now.
Alan Glick
Check out a classic movie from 1948: "The Naked City." There is a scene where a train of BMT Standards is approaching Queensboro Plaza from the 60th St. tunnel with a backdrop of the 59th bridge span, abandoned steelwork from the Second Ave. El connection and a Queensboro Bridge Railway trolley heading toward Manhattan.
Carl M.
Although that certainly isn't a BMT Southern Division line that same movie shows one of the characters getting off a Low-V on the Flushing Line.
Jeff...I knew that scene was somewhere in LIC, I could not figure out where he was coming down from. It looks like a very long stairway from somewhere, but what station on the Flushing line could that be....Court House Sq? Could it have been filmed on the Astoria Line?
Carl M.
Are you talking about the guy at the end that gets killed on the chase scene, if that is the part, it was on the Willy b Bridge
Bob...No, this is about 1/2 hour before the chase scene on the WillyB.
Carl M.
That was the Broadway Berooklyn Line at the Willy B Bridge, since Naked City was shot on the Lowere east Side(The Movie) Also Welcome Back Kotter TV show in the 70s showed the West End at New Utricht and 86th St
The scene in "French Connection" was an R42, probably almost brand-new.
Tidbit:
FRENCH CONNECTION was MOSTLY filmed using the West End, the "N" using R4OM/R42 equipment was just taken off the Sea Beach prior to filming, they didn't have time nor knowledge to change the bulkheads to "B".
There is ONE scene which was taped in Ridgewood, Queens under the Myrtle El, during the car chase scene. If you look SHARP, you will spot the el in a ROW, unlike the West End Line, whose el tracks are above a street.
Two parts of the chase were taped in Ridgewood.
One part is when Popeye is driving s/b on Putnam alongside an M train.
The next was taped on Onderdonk and Woodbine.
When will the movie be on TV again?
The end sign issue was discussed before. I've heard that the director wanted the N over the B because of the color and visual appeal. BTW: The train was R-42s headed by car #4572.
It is true that the train just came off a run prior to filming?
R-42s 4572 and 4573 were chartered by the film crew and were placed on 24-hour guard at CIY. They were coupled to 6 sister units which had just come off a regular run when the chase scenes were filmed. Of course, they could film only during midday hours when the system wasn't busy.
I did notice one thing: the train is on the local track during overhead shots, then in all shots taken from the front end of the train, it's on the express track.
The reason the train is sporting an N marking is because 4572-4573 were normally assigned to the N line and did not have B signs. The producers wanted clean cars, those were the only clean cars available. Car washers were OOS due to the fact it was winter while the movie was filmed.
I don't think that R42s 4572 4573 didn't have "B" bulkheads. Many a R42 once delivered in '69 had the large "B" rollsign, I don't think only certain R42's would have "B" bulkheads signs. There are quite a few pictures of R42's with the "B" during the same time period.
It has been also stated that the producer wanted to have the cars show "N". As it was,supposedly, more aesthically pleasing, to him any way.
Peace,
ANDEE
Yes, I am much more inclined to believe that the "N" bulkhead was chosen over the "B".
These cars had all letter combinations right from the start.
No, the R-42s (and for that matter both R-40 kinds) had three bulkhead signs at the most. Remember, the original bulkhead signs on these cars were humungous. They were also rolled horizontally, not vertically. IIRC Wayne aka Mr. Slant R-40 has a breakdown of which cars had which route signs.
Incidentally, the R-40Ms (and possibly the R-42s) did not have HH signs originally. Cars assigned to that route carried S signs.
I have never seen a picture of any R40 or R42 assigned to the Rockaway Park shuttle (HH), so I guess this lack of signage was no big deal. Most of the cars assigned to this line had HH signs, but the old "Fulton" St. designation. Even the R10's had them, although they were put into service 3 years after the original HH shuttle was eliminated to Court St.
The 1948 Hagstrom's IND map still shows the Court St. stub and lists the HH as operating between Broadway-ENY and Court St. Go figure.
I have a 1947 Hagstrom; it shows the shuttle, but with an asterisk and the date of termination of service. Maybe they took the note out of the next edition, but forgot to remove the line? :)
Unless there was some sort of plan to actually implement a Court St.-ENY HH pattern. The Fulton St. line distinguishes express from local stops on the 1948 map as far as ENY. From there to Euclid Ave., all stops are shown as express stops, probably because only the A went that far.
When the R-42's were first delivered, they were assigned to various lines in groups and carried only the signs for those lines. IIRC, 4550-4583 were assigned to "N" service and thus did not have "B" signs.
Steve B is correct about the producer's preference for clean cars.R-42's assigned to the "B" went downhill fast and were known for being dark, hot and dirty, while the "N" cars were kept in good shape.
The train in the ROW was not a Culver shuttle?
"The train in the ROW was not a Culver shuttle?"
Nope, the West End and Myrtle Ave line above Broadway. No Culver line.
Bill "Newkirk"
Nope, the West End and Myrtle Ave line above Broadway. No Culver line
Unless you are thinking of a different scene, the M scene was done at Onderdonk Avenue on the M line, further down from Broadway. I don't think any scenes were done at Broadway.
Here is ANOTHER tidbit:
When you see the R42's crash into a lay-up train of R32's signed for "B" service on the center track of the West End El, the director actually filmed the scene in REVERSE, getting right on top of the R32, then slowly reversing back into 62nd Street station.
You have the DVD, too, I take it.:-)
>>> There is ONE scene which was taped in Ridgewood, Queens under the Myrtle El, <<<
Taped?? They used videotape rather than film in the final picture? I did not think videotape would provide the quality needed for the big screen (other than porno flicks) back then.
Tom
Interesting twist actually - all the years I spent with a "handy-looky" (Ikegami's original video camera) and a deck over my shoulder out in the field, our crews would constantly be asked, "what are you FILMING?" Heh.
No, they used film. It was shot in documentary style.
Yes that scene was done on Onderdonk Avenue and Palmetto Street, just when the M train el comes off of Palmetto Street and goes into its own ROW. If you look closely on French Connection you can see the church in the distance way down on Onderdonk. (I used to live near there so I recognize the scene well.)
you can see the church in the distance way down on Onderdonk.
I think that's St. Aloysius.
It is, but I didn't know how to spell that!
The Warriors: The opening credits scene I think was the IND 8 Ave line between Broadway-East New York/Broadway Junction and Euclid Ave. I couldn't make out the stations. But I did recognize the platforms. Later on Ithink dilming was done in one of the deserted passageways at Union Square station. Long before the police district took it over.
French Connection: The famous chase on the train was done on the current W line. Then known as the B. But I think the lead car used was an N.
That could be, but the final scene was the gang detraining a R27 or R30 at Stillwell. Side signs were mixed up IIRC.
I get the impression that they purposely varied the train markings in The Warriors because of the nature of the film.
<<<"I get the impression that they purposely varied the train markings in The Warriors because of the nature of the film.">>>
Actually, in my observation, they almost never use the right trains on the right lines when they make movies or TV shows. Examples:
On an HBO movie "Subway Stories" (1997), an R68 (2600) is signed for the M.
The same movie shows the 42nd Street Shuttle using an R62/62A, but with the number blacked out.
TV Show "Third Watch"- first episode- Train is signed for J ( I forget which train they used- but it was a 40M or a 42, maybe a slant), but it was running on the characters said they were on the Lexington Ave. Line. figure that
The Pokemon commercial shows R62A 1911, but with a black stripe, rather than dark blue, below the number.
I wrote down the sequence of stations a while ago. Some are visible more than once. All are on the Fulton St. line. IIRC some of them were Utica Ave., Nostrand upper level, Clinton-Washington or Franklin, and Liberty Ave. (I think; it was one of the local stops between Broadway-ENY and Euclid Ave.)
They used the entire Union Square complex for The Warriors. The "To 14th St. subway" sign was on a station pillar on the BMT Broadway line. I remember seeing those signs in the late 60s.
And, of course, Hoyt-Schermerhorn was used, disguised as 96th St. It may have also been used when the prom couples get on or off the train the Warriors are riding on. You can briefly see a slant R-40.
THE CLASS OF '44(1973) sequel to the Summer of '42. With it's scene of 6095a/b/c triplex. Just saw it recently too.
Peace,
ANDEE
Yup, along with at least one other Triplex unit. Did you notice the train was empty as it cruised by?
Yes, I did notice it was empty. I have seen the movie a number of times. What station was used.
Peace,
ANDEE
I am told the station you see the Triplex train pulling into is 62nd St. on the West End line. It makes sense if you believe Brian Cudahy's appendix in the original Under the Sidewalks of New York. He states that one station on the Sea Beach line was restored to the style and hue of the 1940s, and the Sea Beach is not that far from the West End at that point.
Yup, along with at least one other Triplex unit. Did you notice the train was empty as it cruised by?
Lots of 4th Ave. local shots on "Saturday Night Fever". "The Warriors" shows great views of trains coming into-out of Coney Island.
If you want to see some great Low V shots in the late 1950's, try James Stewert's "The FBI Story". Has great shots of an unrehabbed, incandescant lit Bowling Green Station!
Not mention 161st Street when the train comes out of the tunnel. Back them that line did not use the #4 designation and the trains were almost all low V's. What is wierd is that people are going to Yankee Stadium to see a football game instead of baseball. I know the football Giants played there from 1956 to around 1972, but it still seems strange. Yankee Stadium to me has always meant baseball, even though I am an old time Yankee hater.
Before the Football Giants in Yankee Stadium, they played in the Polo Grounds, and In the 40s there were the Football Yankees, and the Football Brooklyn Dodgers AAL
Were the Bronx El shots in "FBI Story" on Jerome or Third Avenue?
<<<"Were the Bronx El shots in "FBI Story" on Jerome or Third Avenue?">>
I'd like to add to my own post for a sec, ...
Soemomne else on here was nice enough to point out that this movie also has a scene of a train near the 161St Station on Jerome. I remember that.
I also just checked my 1972 map....there's no Kingsbridge Station on the #8. Guess I answered my oen question, LOL.
Sorry, this is the Bklyn Broadway subway extension out of the Essex St. station. After the credits, your see a southbound Standard rumbling towards the Marcy St. station. The story is about the tragedy of many Bklyn youths, going bad into the first youth gangs, after WWII, when long gone or unknown dads returned from the European & Asian theaters of war. Circa 1952, or thereabouts.
I found out this morning that the Cathedral of St. John the Divine sustained heavy fire damage to the gift shop area. Luckily, there were no injuries, and the main nave and the stained glass windows appear undamaged. Along with the WTC, the Cathedral was one of the landmarks I visited on my first-ever trip to NYC, and I've made a point to get back there at least once during each of my subsequent visits. Heartbreaking.
Articles, photos on Yahoo! News
When New Years rolls around in a couple weeks, I'm sure we'll all be happy to say good riddance to 2001.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Thankyou David...so busy with trains that the only news I get to see starts with 'Bin Loden.' News is sad...the Christmas Pagaent with the animals is world renowned. I'll pass it on to my Minister who is in the Episcopal Diocese of Newark. CI Peter
I found out this morning that the Cathedral of St. John the Divine sustained heavy fire damage to the gift shop area. Luckily, there were no injuries, and the main nave and the stained glass windows appear undamaged. Along with the WTC, the Cathedral was one of the landmarks I visited on my first-ever trip to NYC, and I've made a point to get back there at least once during each of my subsequent visits. Heartbreaking
I walked by it on Amsterdam Avenue a bit after noon today. If it weren't for yellow tape blocking the doors, and a couple of fire trucks on the north side of the main building, I wouldn't have known that anything had happened.
Yeah - I went by a little after noon, and there wasn't any apparent damage to the exterior.
Hey - maybe we passed each other!
A sign on a R-46 V Train going to 2 Ave .today it first showed a V to 71 Ave then it change and it show:
[F][CULVER LCL]
[F][6AVE/53ST LCL]
[F][AVENUE X]
Have the F Line ever went to Ave X as the last stop? When I saw it the sign was a bit messed up on the 1st 3 Letters.
During a future phase of the Stillwell Terminal rehabilitation, F service will be terminating at Avenue X.
David
What year would that Happin?
Some time between 2002 and 2004. I forget what the scheduled date is, but it should be remembered that these things tend to "slip" from the original timetable, anyway.
David
Wouldn't it make more sense for it to terminate at W 8th Street?
Where will the Q and W terminate when it's their turn?
The Q at Brighton.
The W will likely always stop at CI but the platform will change as the work progresses.
This doesn't make sense to terminate the Q at Brighton. Wouldn't Ocean Parkway or W 8 Street be better so you don't tie up the Q express layups?
One of the TD's is pushing for moving the diamond Q up farther north but that is something else.
No Brighton makes more sense you can bring your putins close and call whatever you need very easily. you need that ease as they may or may not want to turn regular Q's in station.
At W8 you MUST relay trains, changing which train departs first would be a major workout.
Must important Brighton is built already and has the space for the crews.
In 1987 during a GO for about a week all trains (yellow D/Q) terminated at Brighton Beach, and a one track shuttle went from Brighton Beach to W8th. Will a similiar plan be in effect? What about those people who use Neptune Ave?
Which track did the shuttle use? Was it reverse signalled?
It always used the Manhattan bound track. There was only one train on the track and it was considered an exclusive block.
The W will always run to Stillwell, however there is a chance that the platform location will shift as work progresses.
Wouldn't that have the effect of Ave U being served in one direction only?
If I'm not mistaken, a southbound train coming into Avenue X on Track B1 can relay via (Coney Island Yard lead) Track B6, reversing on the ramp or in the yard and coming back into the station on the northbound local track (B2).
David
It's shown on the track map on this site that the Northbound Local track is not directly accessible from the yard, only the Express Track. This would mean either a another reverse move from Express to Local, or not getting onto the Local track until King's Highway. Has an extra switch been added which isn't on the map?
I'll have to check to see how the terminal facility will be arranged. If I find out anything, I'll report back (and no, it won't be tonight < g >).
David
I've researched the matter further, and it appears my original explanation was correct. Trains terminating southbound at Avenue X will head onto Coney Island Yard lead track B6 (not B5, which will not allow for the move that follows). The train will reverse direction (I would imagine with a different Train Operator to minimize delay) and cross over the southbound local track and the express track, ending up on the northbound local track at Avenue X and able to stop at Avenue U.
If anyone has a better explanation, please post it.
David
P.S. It is possible that another terminal will be picked for F trains while they can't use Stillwell Terminal. Nothing's in stone at this point, though the last thing I got in writing listed Avenue X.
It's a logical terminal for trains bound for the yard. When I rode a rerouted Q in February, the C/R announced that we'd be making all stops to Avenue X, but at Kings Highway the train pulled in on the center track and was removed from service.
Actually it is not. You can't always get a yard lineup immediately and there are sometime sneaky railfans trying to scam a yard tour. You can't risk plugging the mainline. The center track at Kings Hwy is a better choice unless you want to hire more C/Rs.
Several GO's on the Culver line limited service to Ave. X, with a one track shuttle to Coney Island.
The South Jersey section of Tuesday's Philly Inquirer has a commentary by James Weinstein, the New Jersey transportation commissioner and chairman of the board of New Jersey Transit, explaining the need for the 6-year fare increase plan, with a 10 percent hike now and cost-of-living increases the next 5 years.
I don't see why they have to defend it. It's been more than 10 years, and if you account for inflation, fares have actually DECLINED 25%. That means the passengers are not paying anything close to the cost of their ride 10 years ago.
-Hank
The Bergen Record defended the across-the-board 10%, with annual inflation adjustments, but decried the places where fares are being raised more than 10%, such as the elimination of discount for off-peak riders.
Maybe NJT should establish time-based fares. Maybe charge by the hour.
This way more of the fare burden will fall on the people who love the trains the most and would be willing to pay the most - Railfans and Subfans like us.
Just kidding.
:0)
I am not opposed to the 10% hike but their plan is not 10%. For example- Now the one way fare from Newark Penn (NWK) to NY Penn (NYP) is $2.50 and the proposed fare is $3.30--more than 10% raise, this is around 35% hike. Now let's talk about a round trip going from $3.50 to $6.60, that is a huge 90% (approx.) hike.
10% yes- 35 to 90% hike, NO!
I have noticed that nowhere on the NJT site do they list the actual proposed increase in weekly or monthly passes but hide behind "Propotional increase based on one-way fare".
I intend to attend the hearing and protest (orderly, of course) their outlandish scheme to rob the middle class riders they serve. It is just as bad to raise fares during a public emergency than a hardware store raising plywood prices when a hurricane is coming. If a state or city can force a business to keep prices at a reasonable level, why cant NJ raise the gas tax or even a 1 cent sales tax dedicated to public Transit.
NJ has one of thr lowest gas taxes in the country. Imagine what NJT could do if we rasised gas taxes 5 cents and earmarked that money for NJT. MARTA has a dedicated sales tax as does NY's MTA. It is time for NJ to join the list!
It is bad PR to raise fares when they have record ridership due to travel restrictions to NYC
A good compromise would be to change RTX (Round Trip Excursion) fares to " Off-peak" fares and to add a PM peak period as is done on Metro-North and LIRR. To avoid ticket schemes the tickets should be sold as one-way fares (meaning you'd need to buy two for a round trip) rather than a pair of tickets with the need to present the ticket with the proper station at the top. (Currently for NWK to NYP you'd give the conductor the ticket with NWK at the top when you leave from Newark and the ticket with NYP at the top when leaving from New York.) Under my proposal the tickets would simply be off-peak(clearly marked) and good in either direction.
I am urging all NJT riders posting/lurking (just reading) on subtalk to attend the hearings and protest (orderly, of course) this outlandish scheme to line the pockets of the bigwigs in Maplewood (NJT's headquarter location).
10% yes but only 10% and no automatic hikes inj future years. If needed set a plan for future hikes- ie 10% this year, and 5% in each of the next two years and give us somethign in return. PATH is promising new cars, new signal systems and better stations. PATCO is promising better tracks and better stations. NJT at least should give us half-hour service on weekends on the Corridor from around 8am to 8 or 9pm.
To Fishbowl- I understood your reply but NJT should tell us their plan ie-" We propose half hourly weekend service on the NE Corridor on weekends from [time] to [time] and we also promise to complete renovations at [station names] to accomodate longer trains of up to[number of cars] -- Some stations only hold 6 cars such as Linden."
I am tired of being treated like cattle--I ride during late evening and mid-am , both reverse commute and many times I am crammed in as if this were a third world nation--if I could afford a car, I'd leave the third world conditions behind. My commute would be more pleasanrt and actually shorter since I could commute via Staten Island. ALl I'd have to do is go over one of the NJ bridges to get a free Bus ride on NYCT (Employees ride free on NYCT and MaBSTOA) from Tottenville area to Brooklyn.
>>>...but their plan is not 10%.<<<
It MAY be 10% accross the board. Some hikes more than 10% some hikes less. Do you think?
Peace,
ANDEE
SO far I have nor seen any specific farwes other than Newark (Penn or Broad St.) to New York and that is muich more than 10%
Do they also say they are the highest fares in the country getting higher and what's going on here, or why the gas tax need not be raised ? No.
As promiced I scaned those photos I had of the inside of an original PRR/PC Metroliner. These are curtisy Lexcie and were taken at the RR Museum of PA.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner1.jpg
The front end of MetroLiner #6.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner2.jpg
Inside shot of the food preparation area.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner3.jpg
Coach area in the non-cab 'B' end.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner4.jpg
Outside shot of the 'B' end.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner5.jpg
The old design, outside equalized trucks.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner6.jpg
Coach area in the 'A' end.
http://mbrotzman.web.wesleyan.edu/Metroliner7.jpg
The control cab in the 'A' end.
If you put them in the context of the late 1960's and the other rail equipment running at the time you can see how hot these babies were.
They really should restore these cars. Maybe dress up a manniquin as a train operator and allow the public to walk througgh while reading historical signs and notes. Similar to what they did with the old 707 Air Force One in Seattle's air museum.
By the way, great job with photos. Thanks for posting.
I believe there are more cars in the yards at the Wilmington shops.
A couple of them would be a nice addition to the museums at either
Seashore or Illinois.
I was watching Money Train the other day and I noticed this.
In the scene where Wesley Snipes is fighting the guy in the subway tunnel outside of 5th ave you see the redbird that comes at them on the tracks they are fighting on, if you look at the train, in the first frame the train is a "unknown destination" train. But in the next frame when they show the train, it is a Coney island train.
Just something I felt like sharing
The whole f*cking movie was an error.
Except for the scene where the token booth is set on fire, the movie was both comedy and fantasy.
Aw c'mon, guy ... you're just peeved that the rulebook won't let you tumble an E train down the mainline. :)
It had as much to do with a real subway as my nephew's Hasbro train has to do with the Acela.
It's what they call an inconsistancy. It shows that those two quick shots were taken at different times, hence the different route designations.
Those scenes were shot in California on Southern Pacific tracks. The film crew merely built a 'tunnel' around the trackage they needed, and -- 'Ta Da' -- instant subway tunnel.
BMTman
Scenes were good enough to fool all of America. EXCEPT for people who work for NYCT.
The I-beams were properly spaced; however, the tunnel roof was much taller than anything in New York, even the 4th Ave. line.
Where did they film the scean of the 5th ave station, green colums, really thick, not rivited beams on the platform. Also notice the turnstiles in the movie, they were the computerized ones before Metro-Card. Also where was that scean taken of where there is JLO looking through a hole at a booth which is about to be robbed?
There was a movie out in the 1950's or early 1960's about terror on the woodlawn? line. The terror and most of the movie was filmed on a low V. But on an outside scene, they showed, I think a newer R18.
"There was a movie out in the 1950's or early 1960's about terror on the woodlawn? line. The terror and most of the movie was filmed on a low V. But on an outside scene, they showed, I think a newer R18"
"The Incident"........starring Tony Musante and Ed McMahon !
I believe the year was 1968.
Bill "Newkirk"
The movie was called "The Incident". Most of the filming was on one of the 5653-5702 series 1938 World's Fair IRT equipment.
An R-18??? What's an R-18???
No. The movie crew used an excellent replica of a World's Fair car.
I believe there is a very nice website with the details involved. The film crew had St. Louis Car Co. send them the blueprints so that they could recreate a WF subway car out of plywood. This was done because some camera angles needed would not work on the confines of the actual car (camera equipment back in those days was BIG and bulky. The narrowness of IRT equipment curtailed certain 'theatrical elements' that were required in the script).
It was an interesting read. unfortunately, I never 'bookmarked' the site -- but I'd guess if you did a websearch for 'The Incident' it'd pop up.
BMTman
St. Louis Car Co. still exists? Or is it that they managed to get a hold of a few retirees who still had access to a file cbinet with drawings?
St' Louis car still existed in the 60s.
Peace.
ANDEE
Will new money train cars be purchased to replace the existing R-21/22 cars?
I wouldn't bet on it. The TA is moving towards street running armored cars in a big way.
Peace,
ANDEE
Theay are brand new and generally operate at night. Man they are scarry when you see one!
Oh, I know what I did. I posted a reply regarding Money Train when in fact what I was replying to concerned a different movie.
Sorry about that...
you're forgiven say 3 "hail railroads" and you will be absolved. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
Here is the website.
Really interesting post and speaking as one who has never seen the movie, thanks for the link.
Peace,
ANDEE
Actually, if you research the movie, the interior shots were done in a wooden mockup of a LoV on a sound stage. The quality of detail done by the union carpenters fooled ME into believing that it really was shot in a real subway car until I saw the production photos that clearly showed it was a wooden model on a sound stage. It's been on the Encore/Flix channel a few times lately and has also shown up on one of those Fox or Turner movies channels ...
When Barry Levinson filmed Avalon in 1989 in Baltimore, they built an exact mockup of a Pullman PCC car in plywood. Some filming was done with the real thing (Pullman PCC 7407 at the Baltimore Streetcar Museum), but 90% of the streetcar scenes were the mockup, bearing different fleet numbers in various scenes.
The mockup was good enough (the movie company had BSM advising them) to fool our second president, who called our current one during the filming at the Senator Theatre asking if if had been difficult to move 7407 there.
The mockup was given to us at the completion of the filming, but when Liberty Heights was filmed in 1998, the bulk of the streetcar scenes were filmed at the Musuem, but the now somewhat deteriorated mockup made one more appearence. At the conclusion of the filming, the mockup was scrapped and the actual streetcar parts used in its construction were returned to us.
When Barry Levinson filmed Avalon in 1989 in Baltimore, they built an exact mockup of a Pullman PCC car in plywood. Some filming was done with the real thing (Pullman PCC 7407 at the Baltimore Streetcar Museum), but 90% of the streetcar scenes were the mockup, bearing different fleet numbers in various scenes.
Is that the movie in which a streetcar is seen crashing (spectacularly) into a gas station?
Yup.
Movie magic at work, as the whole crash scene was actually done over four days, and two widely separated locations.
The scene starts as the car careens out of the street next to the Senator Theatre, sparks flying and screeching sounds echoing.
CUT!
The locale then shifts to Fells Point, where a gas station had been constructed by the movie company. The car crashes into an auto and then both go into the gas pumps, which promptly explode.
Amazingly, the PCC mockup suffered NO damage, despite being constructed basically of plywood.
Now - the major streetcar glitch in Avalon. Check the trolley wire in the scene. It's TC wire, complete with all the insulators used in TC overhead. We gave them a photo of York Road in the streetcar era, plus the production company had seen streetcar overhead at BSM. Since the overhead was computer generated in the film in post-production, somebody goofed big time.
Many of us from BSM were invited to the premere at the Senator. We all howled at the wire in the crash scene.
Oddly, Avalon did not do well at the box office, except in Baltimore, and went almost straight into video. Liberty Heights suffered the same fate. I suspect that few outside the movie industry realize the two films are a fictionalized version of Barry Levinson's family history. Guess when you are a very successful producer you get a few million to do a "personal" film or two.
Barry seems to be partial to streetcars, and if he does another Baltmore based film, expect to see BSM's cars in it.
I was surprised the first time I saw it, in the late 1970s, to find out the film was shot in B&W as late as 1968 (which added to the menancing tone of the film). With the Low V interior, I took it for something that had to have been done around 1960-61 at the latest, plus I couldn't believe Ed McMahon would get a part like that after already spending several years as Johnny's sidekick (but Ed fared way better in this one than in 1982's "Butterfly" with Orson Wells and Pia Zadora).
They numbered the mockup 5674.
All of the actual subway footage was shot without permission from the TA. The crew had to conceal their cameras in paper bags, and station cops got suspicious when they heard whirring sounds coming from those bags.
Heh. Some things NEVER change ... "recording" on audio tape was prohibited when I worked radio years ago in the system and I always got a kick out of telling interviewees "talk to the bag" ... now I would guess they have orders to shoot to maim if they hear funny sounds emanating from brown paper on the platform.
I think Heypaul concealed his tape recorder when he recorded those R-1/9 sounds. He told me he was sitting right above a compressor during the LL tape; you can hear it plainly throughout that particular recording.
They should try that after 9/11, "whirling sounds coming from bags in the subway."
does anyone have a picture of the real money train?
The money train (in TA terms Revenue Collector), is nothing more than a yellow with black striped R-21/22 with steel grated windows, with a few armed guards riding on it, and is primarily seen after 8PM. If you wanna get an idea of what it looks like just check out the section here in nycsubway.org on work equipment, and look up the section on rider cars. All the thing pretty much is is a R-21/22 rider car made up specially with the grated windows for the revenue collection service. (People have ACTUALLY asked me if the money train looks like the one in the movie!! They were met with a loud laugh and a big HELL NO!! lol)
The car in the movie looked to be a modified R-32? What car did they use in real life?
In 'The Money Train' an R-21 was totally customized from the ground up at Coney Island Overhaul Shops to look like the 'armoured' subway car that was shown hijacked by Woody Harrelson and Wesley Snipes.
One of the little-known details is that they took that A Division car and added several inches to the floor and stainless steel body paneling to a B Division dimensions (width only).
BMTman
HERE IS THE REAL MONEY TRAIN IN ALL ITS UGLINESS
Peace,
ANDEE
Was that rebuilt out of some other car, or was it built specially for the real money train?
I believe it was rebuilt from an R-22
Peace,
ANDEE
I won't mention names But, It looks better than someone elses picture of a train.
I'm sure if you were the father of a poor, defenseless R-22 that never did anything to hurt anyone you might not appreciate that comment.
:0)
The IMdB has a long list of bloopers for Money Train. Go here and click on "Goofs." (Trying to link directly to the goofs page doesn't seem to work.)
Looks like the whole movie was a goof. The people who made the movie knew NOTHING about TA. They had a rough idea of some of the stations and the routes. But they could have just jotted them down from looking at theTA website. Then using "creative" licence changed things around to make things look better. The fancy money car. The Police weapons. The thin glassed booth windows. The roadbeds and the stations. ECT!
Except for when the subways are NOT running right, (No comments!) the subway is rather boring. If Hollywood isn't showing the subways dirty and gang infested, they show it with state-of-the-art gadgets that no other railroad or subway system has.
Harry Kaufman died for THIS?
Don't forget the R-30's with door chimes and the transit cops whose number one concern is to get into bed with Jennifer Lopez...
Hey we ALL would like to get into bed with Jennifer Lopez! ;-)
I thought that this has something to do with Wesley Snipes and Woody Haroldson
"It wasn't Puffy's cutting key!" :)
With THAT big fat ass? No thanks.
But there are other places where people believe a little fat is nice (I can think of two of them).
:0)
With THAT big fat ass? No thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're not Italian, obviously
:)
Nothing wrong with the J Lo part of the equation...that doesn't signify an error in my book...
;-D
BMTman
I also viewed the goofs for Pelham 123 (both versions). Interesting. As far as the 1998 version is concerned, my aunt actually thought those were new NYC subway cars running there! I tried to convince her to no avail that that wasn't the case.
Guess who's right.
I wouldn't be surprised if your aunt thinks the NYC Subway is still the broken down system it was back in the 1970's. Hollywood isn't about to show how the subway is now. If they show how the system is now then it's probably a comedy/parody. Teens come to the big city expecting to see all the things they heard at home. They are surprised to see the changes and it'll all probably turn out to be some kind of dream sequence. I would expect somewhere one would say a line like..."I drempt I was on the subway last night. It was so clean. The people were so nice." Giving the audience the idea the subway is NEVER like that. Maybe after 9/11 people are thinking differently.
The 1998 version is one big goof, IMHO. It should never have been made.
Where can I get a copy of the 98 version. it doesn't seem to be available on tape?
Who wrote the Goofs for that page on the Money Train? For a site that is not a railfan site, the writer sure knows alot about the operation of the subway.
Obviously a terrorist to possess such detailed knowledge. Perhaps a letter from the MTA will wipe that smirk off their page. :)
Kev, seems like a foamer did those notations...
'nuff said. I say "string 'em up" ... but the character Robert Blake played reminded me of some of Stillwell's finest in MY day. There were LOTS of Mussolini-like superintendents back then. And the trains DIDN'T run on time and everybody knew it. :)
[And the trains DIDN'T run on time and everybody knew it.]
cause nobody cared...;-D
Wiseass. :)
What's funny though is every TMO on the railroad thought THEIR line was running OK, it was the other jamoke that screwed up the railroad.
Who wrote the Goofs for that page on the Money Train? For a site that is not a railfan site, the writer sure knows alot about the operation of the subway
Most of the IMdB's goofs are submitted by site visitors who fill out a feedback form. Or, I should say, the goofs were submitted in that manner. Goofs listings have dropped off considerably since Amazon bought the IMdB a year or so ago. Nitpickers.com is now the premier site for listing movie bloopers.
That explains it-Railfans writing in to set them straight.
I contributed a few goofs to the original Pelham listing.
Just a piece of information. When I took a tour of Coney Island Shops about a year and half ago, the car they used for the Money Train was there with some Museum cars. I forgot what they rebuilt it out of (anyone know?). The guy giving the tour was very unhappy that it was there however. I don't know if it is still there currently.
I think it was an R21/22.
It's a customized R-21 (seriously customized).
BTW, it technically belongs to Mike Hanna's crew at Coney Island. Since it is not an original car, it is looked at with scorn and ridicule. However, it should be preserved as a marvelous construction job that was done entirely 'in house' by the Coney Island Overhaul Shop, based on the specs given them by Columbia Pictures.
BMTman
Has anybody seen Don't Say A Word? It came out about two months ago and I never got to see it, but I did read a newspaper review that mentioned the all important little fact that Toronto streetcars don't run in Manhattan. Oops.
-Robert King
I haven't seen the movie, but some ads have a picture of a moving subway car, which I thought was an R-42. Looking at pictures on this site, it could very well be the Toronto subway.
Now that I know (another oops) what I'm getting for Christmas, I'll probably rent the movie and see for myself. The TV ads showed the upper left corner of the front of a subway train. It had the marker lights and eyebrows which pretty much settles it...
-Robert King
The IMdB lists one of the filming locations as "Disused lower platform, Bay subway station, Toronto, Ontario, Canada."
Why isn't there any fare control's at any Staten Island Railway station exept for St George?And how far is St George from the Stadium and Tomkinsville?
You pay all your fares at st. george
If you pay all your fares at St. George, doesn't that encourage fare evasion?
Effectively the SIRT is free unless you get on or off at St. George. There is no fare to evade.
Even so, it's still vulnerable to fare evasion.
I thought the conductors collected the fare on the train?
Not anymore. I don't remember the exact date it ended, but IIRC was around the start of the MetroCard Gold.
Maybe earlier when TA had the MetroCard Blue. I remember one day in 1994 I was able to use my employees card at Saint George. The people working there grudgingly allowed me to get on the train.
Hmm, I moved to Staten Island in September 1993. I remember being brought to New Dorp. I think it was for bird food because my sis has a conure and IIRC we got him/her in December of 1994. When we took train back...the conductor was collecting fares on the train. It was long ago so I could be wrong
It WAs exactly when Gold Metro Card was introduced- July 4, 1997.
>>> Even so, it's still vulnerable to fare evasion. <<<
You gotta watch them or the next thing you know they will be sneaking on the SI ferry. :-)
Tom
But they do! While there is no fare, you are still expected to go through the turnstiles for a body count. During the evening rush, it is amazing how many people insist on entering the boats by swimming upstream against the flow of commuters coming off, instead of going through the turnstiles
What can anyone say? Some people do not want to go thru a turnstile even if it's free.
It's the illusion that they have to pay. Also it makes them feel as if they are being cawraled like bulls.
That has less to do with going through the turnstiles (notice there are none on the Manhattan side, or the lower levels where people are allowed to board) than with people trying to beat the crowd inside the terminal to a seat.
-Hank
Even so, it's still vulnerable to fare evasion.
You mean someone could get off at Tompinsville and walk? I suppose.
I don't think SIRT much cares any more. Any deficit from operations not covered by existing subsidies is simply made up out of the MTA coffers. Maybe if the City still had to make it up the difference, they'd get more excited about it.
You mean someone could get off at Tompinsville and walk? I suppose.
That's why only one train between 7:00 and 8:00 AM stops at Tompkinsville :). It's really amusing to watch all those people running up the hill to make the ferry...
You mean someone could get off at Tompinsville and walk? I suppose.
When I rode SIRT for the first time two weeks ago, I found out why this isn't a major problem:
I could have walked to Tompkinsville to save $1.50 (actually not, since I was using a Fun Pass that day), but then I would have had to wait 30 minutes for the next train.
Well, Tompkinsville is fairlyu close to St. George, so I imagine that some people get out there to avoid/evade the fare. However, most peak-hour trains by-pass Tompkinsville, pretty much eliminating the problem.
Also, most peak hour riders are going to or from the ferry.
Prior to the present system, the conductor collected tickets and/or fare on the train. A NYC Comptrollor's study showed that at rush hours the conductors missed about 50% of the fares.
That would be impossible, because there is no way that 1/2 the ridership wasn't paying during the AM rush when 95% of them are headed for St. George. During the AM rush, fares were only collected at St. George, Grasmere, and Tompkinsville on westbound trains. St. George was done via turnstile, Grasmere and Tompkinsville were done with a conductor at the top of the only exit. Off-hours, all westbound fares were collected on-board, and you exited the St. George turnstiles free. Eastbound AM rush fares were paid at St. George as they are now, and collected on the train at all stops in between. Westbound PM rush fares were collected on-board. Eastbound PM Rush fares paid at St. George, and fares were only collected on local trains between Tompkinsville and Bay Terrace; and on Express trains east of Great Kills. With the advent of Metrocard, it was determined that the cost of providing a method for fare collection on-board would exceed the income generated, however, a recent rise in crime aboard the trains has led to many people asking that the fares be reinstated, because it means the presence of a conductor or trainman in the car every few minutes.
-Hank
-Hank
I am sure Hank can elaborate, but many/most SIR stations dont have an open station house where turnstiles and the needed hardware can be placed. If you wish the customer to buy a catd on the system then you'd need a MVM or a local merchant.
Well, in our other thread, we've talked abotu one day integrating SIRT fully into the Subway. If that ever happens (don't hold your breath), normal fare collection procedures would be needed.
1. Isn't there a problem that the R-44s are 75 footers and you can't walk between cars?
2. Why don't they have a fare collection slot in which you swipe your metro-card (on the train) and it shows you paid. Then randomly there are complete train searches where everyone must swipe their Metro-Card in a portable machine carried by the cops! If they don't haven't paid a fare they will get a very stiff fine $200. Now the fine makes up for everyone who beats the searches.
Because the cost exceeds the benefits.
-Hank
IT is ill-eagle to cross between cars on the SIR (though storm doors are more often then not unlocked). An SIR Cop will ticket you if they observe you doing it.
(Been there done that)
And railfans are NOT allowed to look out the front windows. Conductors have to be able to see who entered the train at the last stop.
Even while stopped at a station?
Stadium and Tomkinsville is all within walking distance. I have ran from Jersey and Forest to the Ferry couple of times. Its a good run. Stadium is like a 5 minute walk.
About Fare avoiders, they get off at Tomkinsville and then walk to the ferry if they are headed that way. I went all the way to St. George one day from New Dorp and my friend asked me why I didn't get off at Tomkinsville...reason: I didn't know and I had a fun pass so it didn't matter.
It is a walk UP a hill, not fun in the winter that close to the water.
Summer months go for it, good for the body!!
Much of the traffic is either destined for or starting at St. George, so you get them there.
The other stations are so underused that the MTA would never recover its investment in turnstiles for the stations. In addition, the stations would need to be made more secure to prevent people from simply getting on the platform some other way.
Transfer M-1 coaches from the LIRR to SIRT. Remove R/44(GE) to subway system.
Equipe M-1 coaches with HEEP fare control on board each coach.
Solved!
avid
Who is going to pay for all this?
The 44's are working fine, might not look bad but you still have full trains rush hour unlike the LIRR running short trains due to failures.
While going to Garden State PLaza today I took the 7 from Flushing in the AM to TSQ and passed up a packed uptown A train, sure enough there was another A right behind (both were R44's). Of course the train was empty, and the ride up CPW was pretty quick.
Going back from GWB I caught the A (another R44) down to TSQ. The ride was a bit slower this time, stopping several times around 86th and 81st, the B local passed us (we never caught up).
Took the 7 from TSQ and the first sign of trouble was stopping in the Steinway tube outside of Vernon-Jackson. We sit for a few minutes then pull into Vernon Jackson. It was announced there was a "sick passenger" at Queensboro Plaza causing delays (this was around 5:30PM). We sat there for about 5 minutes, then at Hunterspoint for another 5 minutes. We progress slowly the QBP. The platform is packed and a W empties out more pax onto our train (despite the C/R's efforts to get them closed before the W opened). I was in the rear car which wasn't too bad, boy am I glad I got a corner seat!
On the way to Flushing we pass a packed local around 40th street and that was the only train we passed. The platforms at Woodside and 74th street were packed with people waiting for the local.
Well fortunately the delay wasn't too bad, though it looked pretty hairy at 74th.
Wait - you were in GSP on Tuesday? Did you go into Borders between 9 AM and 6 PM? If you did, you must've seen me at the registers!! Except from 1-2, which was my break.
I was in there around 1pm.
The highway system in Philadelphia is dismal. New Yorkers can not believe that there are only two and half limited access highways in Phila. (Schul., Del. and Roos.)
If Phila. had a Moses type character, the highway system would be more fitting for a city of over 2 Mill. and an area of 4 Million.
As it stands, to get from Drexel to Abington, you have to go through sixty stop lights (all red) from the Roosevelt/Broad exit to Abington, up Broad Street and 611 to Abington. Or 40 lights from Drexel to Upper Darby. Many other examples abound.
Having grown up in Brooklyn and attended
Drexel, I am intimately familiar with all thing NYC and Phila. esp. in transportation.
New Yorkers would not believe how small the city highway system is in Philadelphia. The Delaware Valley needed someone fifty years ago with the foresight of Robert Moses.
I am happy to say that I am now living in Texas where we have a good highway system without potholes and busses that still cost 50 cents to ride. I do miss my beloved NY subways though.
New Yorkers would not believe how small the city highway system is in Philadelphia. The Delaware Valley needed someone fifty years ago with the foresight of Robert Moses.
Robert Moses was evil incarnate of something on the level of Alfred E. Pearlman. If it wasn't for him NYCers would still be zipping around on street running LRV's and on light weight, stainless steel, multisection, elevated light rail transport units.
Had we NooYawkahs KNOWN Philly was in need, we would have GLADLY traded him. :)
And offered Philly a truckload of Philadelphia cream cheese as a bonus for accepting the deal!
Moo.
:0)
Speaking as a native Pennsylvanian, Pennsylvania is not New York. Its population is much more evenly distributed throughout the state, and there are many smaller cities, and one large one (Pittsburgh) to offset the influence of Philadelphia. Its last governor was from Erie. The one before him, Scranton. There is something known as "The Philadelphia Curse" -- the fact that it has been decades since a governor was elected from Philadelphia, which Ed Rendel is trying to break this time around. Its legislature is not hamstrung by an all powerful triumverate of Speaker, Senate President, and Governor. The Commonwealth's constitution has always deliberatley made it difficult for large cities to annex its smaller neighbors. A "Greater Philadelphia" would never have happened. Pennsylvania could never have had a Robert Moses becuause wealth and power are not concentrated in one super-populous metropolis. In short, Pennsylvania's diverse social and political makeup prevents any one man or state region to weild an inordinate amount of influence. Living now in Texas, I'm sure you can see first hand how little government matters there. The legislature meets once every two years or something like that. Houston has been trying to get a decent light rail system off the ground but has been thwarted by NIMBYs at every turn. In Texas, small communities and individuals have the power to stop government. Robert Moses would have been tarred and feathered and run out of Houston on a rail had he employed his heavy-handed methods in that city. In much of Pennsylvania, attitudes are the same. This is why Philadelphia had no Robert Moses, IMHO. -KP
"Robert Moses would have been tarred and feathered and run out of Houston on a rail"
Run out of Houston on a rail would be pretty ironic, don't you think?
If Moses had been a Texan, between him and Lyndon Johnson, Robert Caro would have been writing a never-ending book for the past 30 years!
What in one person's eyes is 'dismal' is 'livable' in the eyes of another. Phila had many 'master plans' for freeways, ring roads, the whole gamut, but the car caught on too late, probably fortunately. Local residents fought and defeated highway proposals all over the region, but it was the strength of the transit system that made this stick. In the city itself, there are still 40% of households with no car, and in the 60's and 70's it was probably in the 60-70% range. The big plans for a highway network that would rival Detroit or LA couldn't be implemented since there was little support and low demand.
In many ways I'm glad this happened. Yes, we are underserved by highways, and yes, many of our surface streets have traffic volumes that approach that of other cities' freeways (I dare you to cross Roosevelt Blvd's 12 lanes without hestitation!), but Phila has resisted suburban sprawl and urban decimation for much longer than other similarly-sized cities, and despite SEPTA's problems, transit remains strong as a mobility 'player'.
It hasn't helped that Pennsylvania's view of Phila is similar to that of the poor stepchild, and since the state builds the freeways, the political realities have focused state highway funds elsewhere despite the needs here. Again, maybe this was/is for the best.
Robert Moses, in spite of how transit fans view him, was a powerful man and accomplished much. However, I'm glad we never had someone like him here!
Our subway system is just as lacking as our highways, I would point out...
As for Texas, at least Dallas is finally seeing the dawning of good rail transit.
Mark
What do these signs means?
These are the stop markers for One Person Train Operation trains, which are much shorter then full-length trains with a C/R.
Dan
As I recently learned here, the OPTO marker has priority over the appropriate car length marker when OPTO is in effect. That means that, even though G trains are now always four cars long, they stop at different points on weekdays and on weekends (unless the OPTO markers coincide with the 6-car markers).
Car stop markers insure the C/R can see the train length or are in front of TV monitors and the C/R Board.
OPTO does that same thing but for the Train Operator, since at different stations with different curves and such the stop points can be different because of where the headend of the car can be compared to where the conductor stands.
Somtimes they line up and you have an OPTO/4/6 at the same point but each station is different.
Look at the W and 18th Ave, the OPTO stop is almost at the C/R board because of the curve in the station no where near the other stop markers.
Hi there
So now that the 63rd St Shuttle is gone...what happened to my Coney Island R32's??? They haven't made their way back to my beloved N yet, nor did they pop up on the F or the E, at least from my observations...
My tribute to Sea Beach and the N train is coming up...
SeaBeach53
They're assigned to Jamaica now, AFAIK. So they are probably on the E or F.
Pitkin and Coney sent R32's to Jamaica, they are being used on the E/F/R keeping the V 100% R46.
Reported on Good Day New York minutes ago:
"Uptown C and E trains are running express from Canal Street to 42nd Street. This is because of a broken rail at 42nd and 6th."
Channel 5 always gets it right... NOT!
Actually they said "34th and 6th", not "42nd and 6th" sorry for that.
Like I said, they always get it right.
Sorry I didn't on the first post =D
ALL of the news organizations are reporting the same thing. Indicates to me the problem may be their source. But, at any rate they are now reporting the problem as over.
Peace,
ANDEE
FOX 5 recently changed their tone in the last few days.
But right now I wouldn't exactly call them the "Traffic Authority."
Listening to all the impossible things I hear on the radio in terms of traffic and transit delays, I get the feeling that a requirement for being a traffic announcer is that you don't live or work in NYC, or if you do, that you keep your eyes closed during the commute.
Must be the case. On TA police radio. Queens Channel. The dispatcher is always describing one station on the 7 line as "82 STREET-JACKSON AVE". Police on the road have corrected the dispatchers. But it's always Jackson Ave. Closest to it is Northern Blvd 3 blocks away. Northern is Jackson Ave after it crosses Queens Plaza.
With the proliference of these many "traffic agencies" I woudn't be surprised at all if some of the traffic reports we here are called in from places like, Podunk, Arkansas or worse yet,Atlanta. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
"C" and "E" doesn't run up 6th!!!
Duhhhhhhh!!!!!
We know that - that is why it was commented on.
Aside from the obvious error --
This implies that C trains are stopping at 50th Street. Would someone care to elucidate how that's happening?
This implies that C trains are stopping at 50th Street. Would someone care to elucidate how that's happening?
Sixth Ave or Eighth Ave? IIRC, Eight/50th is a double-level local station with lower level for E train and upper level for C train.
But if C trains are running express, they can't get back to the local track until past 59, as we've been discussing in another thread. (E trains can stop downstairs.) So, once again, how can C trains, rerouted to the express track, stop at 50th Street?
They can't.
Fox 5 reported that Cs were running express to 59 St, Es express to 42 St.
Excellent! Somebody got the details right.
Yep that's correct - that was the second announcement made about the broken rail, and which I forgot to add here =D
But I still can't understand why a broken rail @ 34th/6th would cause this. 8-)
Peace,
ANDEE
Sympathy?
I'll go along with that................
Peace,
ANDEE
As happened at least once during the recent "powdered donut on the floor" problems, if something closes down 34/6, the following service change took place:
C and E trains run express between Canal and 59St (or 42 St); B and D trains are re-routed LOCAL along 8 Ave from 59St to W 4 St, then sent downstairs to turn at 2nd Ave.
Granted this was before the inception of V service, so they might not do this any longer; however it has happened in the past, and with the accuracy with which most media outlets get subway service diversions, it would come as no surprise that they only reported half the story.
Just as a information update, the 30-day clock on the R-143s never started over again. The brakes were never stuck on the train, the operator's console was giving out a false indication about the brakes being stuck, but it never was.
The Kawasaki Technicians stated it was a minor glitch in the software, when they got back to ENY they just changed it out and badda bing, BACK INTO SERVICE!
This should be day 14 or 15 on the clock!
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Happy Holidays
www.transitalk.com
Then at this pace the R143's will be coming in some time next mouth.
Robert
According to the Kawasaki Techs, the next set of R-143s are already on the Property at Pitkin yard for Rockaway Testing (8109-8116).
Regards,
Trevor Logan
Dame If I would have know that I would have look for it when I was a Piken Yard Sunday Night. My work train was canceled so I had to deadhead to 38st yard to seat on report till 6:00AM.
Robert
Extending the 30-day clock as long as possible is in the TA's and the public's best interest. Why does nobody on this board recognize this fact?
But getting the R143's in service is even more necessary. The TA has plenty of experience with the R142's, so I doubt any new problems would arise with the R143. The G line needs 6 cars, and that aint gonna happen until more cars are added to the fleet.
Then the TA should have gone with a quickie purchase of technologically simple cars. Seeing as the we have already spent a lot of money on fancy technology, it would behoove the TA to ensure that it works properly. It's a disgrace that, even though the 2 has been running local at all times since mid-September and at night since before the first R-142 arrived, yet the software is too stupid to figure that out for itself and the programmers still haven't gotten around to correcting the announcements and exterior signs.
GIGO. Garbage in and garbage out. TA does not program the signage or the voice messages! When SubTalkers ask, I ask and #2 is my home. Take a DeadBoid married pair, strip em down to platforms but retain the concept of construction. Replace the DC motors with AC motors (two per car with inverters,) basic controls with a computer but retaining present braking systems, stainless steel carbody...and you have a fixable trainset for the next twenty years plus. CI Peter
It depends on how hard they work the new train during the 30 days. If they just baby the train and have it run only 8 hours a day, then they should extend the test period. However, if they are running it 24/7 for the test period, then 30 days should be enough for a prototype.
IMO, they should have restarted the clock.
Yes, 30 days is sufficient as long as any discovered defect restarts the clock. The clock wasn't restarted when the train ran around for two days with no exterior signage on the side of each car. Perhaps that wasn't a critical problem then, but what happens when the cars start running on the M? The M shares trackage with the J, N, R, W, and Z and shares the platform at DeKalb with the Q, and only railfans will know that the fancy new train isn't being used on those lines.
The 30 day period should have been restarted from the beginning A software problem like that is unacceptable because it causes a train to be removed from service unnecessarily due to ficticious information. Also, the converse could be true as well - the software could fail to indicate a problem when there actually is one.
-Robert King
I have to agree, a false reading still would take the train out of service and discharged pax would be delayed for no reason. Just because they fixed the problem within "seconds" the software is part of the train and it should be treated the same as a major mechanical failure IMHO.
The problem was NOT corrected in seconds. That train was out of service ALL DAY on Saturday. In addition, By it going OOS it screwed up the whole line and it took most of the day to get crews and trains back on their scheduled intervals. The clock SHOULD have been restarted. It goes to show how desperate they are for cars in the B division.
-Mark W.
It also goes to show that not much has been learned from the trouble with the R-142s and R-142As.
But I think the contract stipulates that the 30 day testing period can only be re-started with a mechanical failure, and a software problem isn't addressed. Perhaps the R160 contract should include this stipulation being extended to the software.
But if the software causes a mechanical failure it should restart the clock, IMO. Don't 'cha think?
Peace,
ANDEE
>>> But if the software causes a mechanical failure it should restart the clock, <<<
The reason for the 30 day test period is to discover hidden defects that could cause disruption in the whole fleet when it starts to arrive. A software glitch that can be reprogrammed can be done virtually instantly on all the other new cars before delivery, so there is no reason to restart the clock. On the other hand, some mechanical problem like brakes that lock up, or an electrical problem that constantly blows fuses, may need re-engineering and some change in production. The TA would not like to take delivery on a fleet that is going to need extensive changes right after delivery.
Tom
Like the R46's did. No need to replay that nightmare again.
A software glitch that can be reprogrammed can be done virtually instantly on all the other new cars before delivery, so there is no reason to restart the clock.
"This is Park Place. Transfer is available to the A, C, and E trains. Connection is available to PATH."
As far as I know, the R-142's are still saying that. They certainly were a week ago.
Virtually instantly, you say? I wish.
(And that's not even a software glitch.)
But the software didn't cause one, if the facts given here are correct. It incorrectly identified a problem which didn't exist.
It's still an unacceptable problem. I don't know this for a fact, but I strongly suspect that the software is designed to detect problems (like stuck brakes) and not allow anything to operate that will be affected by the detected problem. In this case, the stuck brake indication should prevent the train driver from taking power and driving the train with the brakes full on. This means that a nonexistant problem like the stuck brakes will cause a real problem by rendering the train needlessly useless.
Can you imagine if a similar problem with the software erroneously detected an uncoupling between units while the train's in motion or mistakenly indicated that all the doors down one side of the train were open all of a sudden? When the software detects a nonexistant problem, it could very well create a real problem as a result, and that is simply not acceptable. The train needs to be pulled and the fault detection systems and subroutines in the software need to be inspected very closely.
-Robert King
I agree in theory, but if the contract states a mechanical failure is the only way to reset the clock, you can't do anything about it.
Oh my god!, the R-143s can actually last two weeks for the first time out of the box without a major problem. If they reached the 30th day without breaking down then it will be time to cheer. A BRAND NEW TRAIN ENTERS SERVICE WITHOUT BREAKING DOWN DURING THE FIRST 30 DAYS IN SERVICE!
#3 West End Jeff
Right, now in correction to Mark W's Post, Saturday the train was NOT in ENY all day. That train made at least 1/3 of its scheduled runs before its false glitch! Remember, the glitch happened around 2ish and the train began its deadhead at 2:45pm from 8th Avenue back to ENY Yard, the train was back out Sunday morning, so you know the problem was minor and easy to correct.
I was there in PERSON, saturday between 6th and 8th Avenue watching this and clocking this (Yes I was bored, so I took notes).
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.com
Thankfully it was just a false glitch. If this trainset of R-143s makes it through the 30 day test the first time around, that will be something to celebrate.
#3 West End Jeff
Am I the only one who thinks it's not the greatest idea to put brand new cars on a line that has only 2 tracks for it's entire length? What if they do start breaking down after a number have been put into service? Chaos on the L line, I guess.
That is possible. Maybe we'll be lucky and they won't break down any more often than the R-62s which don't break down to often.
#3 West End Jeff
If kept to a strict SMS, they won't.
In my shop, a team does SMS 1,2 3 or four inspection based on a schedule and the time period is 29 days or so. Carbody does doors/windows/lighting/HVAC/indications. Undercar does brakes/suspension/gearboxes/coupler. Propulsion does motors/3rd rail shoes/motor control systems. A little simplified but 'the basics.' Trainsets like R142/142A/143 have many 'teething problems' being corrected by the vendors of installed systems. The SMS is strict even if a few details are overlooked...problems occuring with 'new tech' are the manufacturers responsibility. The push to replace old trainsets compounds the problem. CI Peter
Let us keep our fingers crossed.
#3 West End Jeff
Someone is asking for trouble...
Was what i heard this mornign at Union Square over the PA system. and that all Q were running to Dekalb via the N&R lines. Anybody what happened? This incident happened at Canal St.
There haven't been too many reasons to complain about the D and B lines since July 22nd. However there is one practice that really irks me. Most of the time, during middays, a B and D will arrive n/b at 125th Street at the same time. They both pull out at the same time and the B stops at 135th. The D is always held to let the B cross in front of it into 145th St. Why is this? Why are the larger number of passengers delayed? The B pulling out of 135th NEVER has more than 5/6 people on it. It seems the TA is more interested in moving trains not people. Can anyone shed any light on this annoying practice.
Peace,
ANDEE
A similar thing happens on the southbound E/F between Union Tpk and 71-Continental. The E is held north of 75th Av to let the F cross in front of it.
This is somewhat annoying for me, too. The tower operatoes should give the express the priority in both cases.
That situation is probably caused more by the fact that they try to alternate Es and Fs. Maybe the train ahead was another E?
It makes sense to me, especially if the B missed the D connection at 125. More passengers will need to trnasfer from the B to the D than from the D to the B. The B should pull in first to allow its passengers to connect to the D. Alternatively, the D could pull in first but be held for the connection with the B -- but then you'd complain about being held in the station.
Incidentally, your generalization isn't quite right. I've ridden midday B's to 145 and there have been more than five or six people in my car alone.
>>>It makes sense to me, especially if the B missed the D connection at 125.<<<
I those situations I would agree with you. But, I am referring to B/Ds that make the connection at 125.
>>>Incidentally, your generalization isn't quite right. I've ridden midday B's to 145 and there have been more than five or six people in my car alone.<<<
Granted, it is hard to get an accurate count of passengers on a moving train. But, most times I have paid attention I usually see 5/6 people in one of the center cars and most other cars are empty. I still believe that the express should recieve priority.
As I stated it is a minor annoyance and was just wondering why it is done that way.
Peace,
ANDEE
Peace,
ANDEE
The TA doesn't have a blanket policy that expresses should have priority. That's because it often makes sense for locals to have priority. This may be one of those cases.
I wonder if there even is a policy. This summer, pre-9/11, I was waiting on the uptown A/C/E platform at Canal Street. A C pulled in from Broadway/Nassau on the express track and as it stopped I saw an E coming in on the local track.
I asked the C conductor which train was going to pull out first. He said, "What do you mean, this is the only train." (I guess he didn't turn his head downtown to see the train pulling in). I said, how about that one, pointing to the E coming in. Then he said, "I'm going out first."
Half a minute later the E train pulled out first.
The only blanket policy is to follow the schedule. If the E is scheduled to leave before the C, then the E leaves before the C. (Usually.) Of course, that doesn't help you if you don't know the schedule.
Sometimes this results in annoying delays, as the train to first reach a merge point is held for one that isn't there yet. Before 7/22, this routinely happened between DeKalb and the bridge on the Q -- seemingly every time I rode the Q, we were held to wait for a B. (This never made any sense to me. Presumably, more passengers wanted to transfer from the Q to the B than from the B to the Q, so the Q should have gone first.) When the B ran express on the Sea Beach (due to GO's), it would often pass an N at Fort Hamilton Parkway only to stop at 8th Avenue (on the express track) and wait for the N to catch up, stop, and proceed into the tunnel. And last weekend, when the southbound 1 was running express from 137 to 96 (if anything should have priority, it should be such a train, since many of its passengers have to backtrack from 96), we stopped before 96 to allow a 3 to come up the ramp and cross in front of us because another train was blocking the express track.
Intresting, dispatching the Q's at 57th, locals are always dispatched first even if the Express is behind schedule. Needless to say the diamonds overtake the express (most of the time even with multiple W's crossing in between them).
The other way, ties at Church have the express going first 9 times out of 10 even when the local punches first.
THere has to be a policy somewhere.