The preceeding was a test of the SubTalk clock based on that big droping ball on TV. If this post is not recieved just after midnight on Jan 1, 2002 then either Dave's server is off or we have been scammed by either the networks, the NYC Tourism Board or both.
Wow, good timing. 2 seconds. Earthcam was dead from the overload.
Earthcam?
Live stream of times square ball droping.
http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/timessquare/
Take it easy. You're just on the money.
Have a happy, healthy, and above all, safe, New Year!
Happy new year to all!!!!!
May this year be a more normal year than last.
Same to you R30 from Amin.
I was in Boston over the weekend, my goal being to ride the entire T (which I did, except for the stations between Reservoir and Riverside).
--What are the old trolley cars laid up in the Boylston station? They are colored orange. Is Boston planning a transit museum?
--Why is the D branch of the Green Line priced more than other lines? The B, C and D inbound can all be accessed from Chestnut Hill Avenue and while it's $1 inbound on the B and C, it's $1.25 on the D (and $2.50 if I wanted to ride from Riverside). After all it seemed a much shorter ride on the D inbound, yet it costs extra.
Once you get away from downtown the Red and Blue lines seem rather more like commuter lines than subway lines, with large headways between stations.
I was hoping the E had been extended to Forest Hills so I cold transfer from the Orange but no luck there.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Re: Boylston Station cars. The PCC belongs to the T and is equiped with a pantograph. It has been used for fan trips, but not recently. The Type 5 belongs to Seashore and is on long term loan to the T. It also has been used for fan trips, but lacks a pantograph. It's less and less likely to be used again.
The D line fares are predicated on the high speed nature of this branch. And you only pay extra when you board, not when leaving. If you left the station on the Red Line in the Quincy and Braintree areas, you would have paid more than $1 there as well.
4 years to go on the E to Arborway..... it requires extensive rebuilding as well as ADA compliant stops. It's been out of service for 16 years and cannot be "grandfathered"
Unfoutnately the Type 5 5734 needs to go back to Seashore it has vestibule problems that need attention before they get worse. As far as the PCC 3295 no one knows whats the disposition of the car with the T's new management. Now that General Manager Bob Prince who was a friend to Seashore and railfans has retired.
In Boston, I was struck by the complete absence of scratchiti. I'm sure Boston has no lack of feral youth wishing to leave their mark on the world, so how does the MBTA deal with it?
www.forgotten-ny.com
I've been on enough R142's on the 2 and the 6 to give something of an informed opinion. I've concluded I don't like them that much.
--The cars seem much more small and tight than the redbirds and the R62's (?) found elsewhere in the IRT. The harsh fluorescent lighting and the monochrome blue paint job are not a help in that regard. If I have time, when a crowded R142 #2 arrives, I'll just wait for a #1. I'll admit to having acquired a touch of claustrophobia as I get older.
--I rode a 142 on Thursday and while the automated sound system was just fine, when the conductor chimed in with a message, the PA shrieked and fed back just like a decades-old subway car!
Is it impossible to wire a sound system so it is audible and understandable or is that technology still limited? This was in a months-old subway car!
(Boston's, otoh, seemed a bit low in volume, though there's no loudness or feedback problems)
www.forgotten-ny.com
I can't take a nap on them as easily as in the old redbirds and R62s. Really sucks for the morning commute.
My Mom and Sis feel the same way (space and room inside the R142). According to Mom, she likes the "3 train" better than the "new 2 train". This was of course when the 3 was still running in BK. But right now her monrning and afternoon commutes consists of her "fast" local, the C train along Fulton.
Welcome to the Club, Kev.
They ride & sound just like these junkers we have here in los angeles on the red line subway to nowhere !!
by the way do the heaters work ?? At all ???
& I bet the AC Sucks in the summer !!!
LOL !!
"harsh fluorescent lighting" ...!!
Noticed this back in 2000 winter !!
& at #5 gun hill road at night how long do you have to STUMBLE in the DARK & wait while your eyes ADJ adjust to the dark again ??
""POOF"" like a photographers BRIGHT FLASH !!!
Yea !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, it's what I got to work with. The 'floor heaters' do work...if the car gets too warm, upstairs AC kicks in too. Just like the Redbirds. I'm out a car for a few days...have to travel on MY trainsets and the guys know I'm crazy about what is to be fixed in the car I'm riding in. It's a slow long ride up to my yard and the car desk has been generous in enabling me to make up any lateness...I have an excellent attendance record. When summer arrives again, we will 'feel the heat' with defective AC units...motor/compressor problems are out of reach without special hoisting equipment. CI Peter
From you description, it sounds like there was a problem somewhere in the microphone circuit.
What I don't understand is the overall style of the 142 cars - from the pictures I've seen, the interiors don't look pleasant at all and the exterior appearance of the car ends is bizzare.
-Robert King
they dont look good like ...
lol !
You missed your chance to be a Budd salesman...:0)
You mean St. Louis Car--that was an R-38.
Dan
american made ....
How much smaller is the R-142 passenger compartment than that in the other IRT cars?
The walls, I think, are slightly thicker. Four of the cars lose space due to the transverse cab (which is more than twice the width of a standard corner cab) but the other six gain space since they have no cab at all.
I do agree with your overall assessment. Unfortunately for us, they're here to stay.
For this year I have 6 wishes for all of us.
1.Love and prosperity for all
2.No terrorist attacks
3.For all of us to be better people
4.For the R143 to be a sucess
5.For Cortland Street to be fixed as fast as it can
6.Too go without a year of derailments
Happy Newyears too all.
add this to the list:
-No major incidents that kill hundreds of firemen.
Hello all- let me start out by wishing all a happy and healthy New Year!! Also by askign what I'm doing awake at 9AM on Jan. 1......
Anyhow, in the thread about rumored railfan window restrictions, another topic very and dear to my heart came up, something I thought deserved its own post.
There was some talk of the moral significance of fare evasion, and a few derisive comparisons of fare evasion with spitting on the sidewalk.
In fact, it's been my belief for many years that Rule Number One for use of public transit is that the legal fare must be paid in full, by each rider, virtually without exeception.
Why? well for several reasons:
1) First and foremost it, demonstrates RESPECT for the system.
2) As a corrolary to the above, when you pay your fare, you become in a sense, a shareholder in the system. You're far less likely to litter and/or vandalize something you've invested your hard-earned money into.
3) A person or persons entering the system with murder or other serious mayhem in mind probably has total contempt for people he sees as weaker than himself. He's not likely to stop and buy a token or MetroCard first. As the Chief of the former Transit Police Department, Bill Bratton understood this. When SERIOUS fare enforcement was undertaken in the early 90s, violent crime in the system dropped simultaneously. Who knows how many innocents escaped murder or lesser violence as a result?
(aside: does anyone think that the kids who murdered the toursit from Utah in 1990 paid their fare first? You know, the ass***** who claimed that the victim "fell on my knife")
4) This is not to say that some of the very young folks whov've posted here about misusing school passes are violent criminals. I would never make such an accusation against my fellow sub-talker. However, rules must be applied to all, whether you've got a rap sheet a mile long or are a Stuyvessant student selling rides from an unlimited pass at Chambers/West Broadway, or a stockbroker on Wall Street.
I do think that an afternoon in lockup would discourage you from ever manipulating your student Metro Card again. Execs in suits could be similarly deterred.
Finally, I also think there are too many passes given out. Some such as for students (to be used school days ONLY), for the very elderly (75+), and the obviously infirm are OK. But I see far too many people who look very strong with reduced fare passes. For all the reasons above, that's not appropriate either.
OK, there, I got that rant off my chest......
I believe though student cards should only be used on school days, they work for anyday Monday to Friday 5:30AM-8:30PM, even Thanksgiving and Christmas.
I think half fare discounts for the elderly should only be good during off peak hours. Children get no discounts at all, unless they have school passes. And my child's school pass does not allow her to take the subway -- half fare passes are bus only.
Do you put money on the half-fare pass or do you dip that in first, then another card or put in exact change of half a fare?
I don't know wheather you put money but if you swipe it at a bus and it is empty it will tell you deposit 75 cents.
A student pass cannot have money put in. Therefore, buildmorelines description applies.
I know! Note: I never gave a swipe of my card to anyone else but me.
As a student, I personally think the whole system is screwed up. If they don't want you using a metrocard on a certain day, they should make it well known. They have the ability to make metrocard readers reject a card on certain times or days, so they should use it. The only valid reason I can think of for not doing so is so that cops can rack up their ticket count and fill their quotas.
Furthermore, the rules aren't specified anywhere. When I was caught for using it last week to go to the library, I didn't know that it could only be used on days when school was in session. I thought using it for any school-related activity (going to the library to work on a term paper) was valid. If the turnstile had simply rejected it, the matter would've been closed, and I would've used the normal metrocard I keep in my wallet.
I have no problem following rules and paying my fare, but when they set the system up to catch people, that's just entrapment.
Furthermore, the rules aren't specified anywhere.
Obviously, things have changed since I last used a TA school pass in 1959. My pass at that time had the rules and regulations printed on the back of the card.
I have never got in trouble for using it but bus drivers do give me a hard time, that supposedly school is closed, Racists.
What the MTA ought to do is not just that, but cut out this half-fare/reduced fare nonsense already. I went to High School at Fordham Prep and because I lived in Norwood I supposedly "lived too close" to qualify for a reduced fare pass. When you barely have enough in your pocket for lunch on a given day, that's still a bit of change for a 14 year-old. Afer that first year, I think I used that pass once, maybe twice. It wasn't worth my while. I just did the 25-30 minute walk from Southern Blvd to Perry Ave.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the school day/week doesn't end at 3:00 or even at 5:30 anymore. I have sisters who work in "extended day" or afterschool programs where kids are pretty much in school until almost 7 or 8 at night. The lines are blurring between the end of the school day or even the week.
The computers that figure out whether you qualify for a pass use a radius from the school. They don't take into account the street layout, bodies of water, and topography.
That's why I suggest a "flat pass" for all Students within the 5 boroughs, Long Island and Westchester.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the school day/week doesn't end at 3:00 or even at 5:30 anymore.
I know exactly what you mean. My school forces us to do extra-cirricular activities. Some are held in school, while others, you need to travel for.
<<<"I thought using it for any school-related activity (going to the library to work on a term paper) was valid. If the turnstile had simply rejected it, the matter would've been closed, and I would've used the normal metrocard I keep in my wallet.
I have no problem following rules and paying my fare, but when they set the system up to catch people, that's just entrapment.">>>
This makes a lot of sense. I wasn't complaining about students using their passes to go to the library. Morally, I find that quite legitimate.
I was referring to people selling rides, shorting bus fares, and/or simply jumping turnstiles
It's been almost three years since I went to school in Brooklyn (E.R. Murrow HS), but IIRC Private schools also got Student MetroCards. Some private schools do not close for the same holidays that public schools do, and so they would need to have their student cards be active on those days. I'm not sure how much time and energy the TA wishes to expend on figuring out which cards are at which schools that observe which holidays and shut them off selectively, or just to leave the system as-is. Of course, I could be wrong about the private-school thing, but I'm fairly certain I remember a few of my friends who went to private school taking the train (D/Q Brighton Line) to the city with me on holidays (both official and non-official :) ).
On another note.. I remember the "three-swipe" limitation being quite a hassle for us on those "non-official" holidays we used to take. We would have to figure out how we would get everywhere we wanted to go, using no more than three swipes, with associated transfers.
--
Ian P.
>>>Hello all- let me start out by wishing all a happy and healthy New Year!! Also by askign what I'm doing awake at 9AM on Jan. 1......
<<<
UMM... you haven't been to sleep yet? 8-)
I'm still trying to figure out what I'm doing up at 1100
Peace,
ANDEE
Bravo! A very sensible post. May others follow your example.
Thank You.
Finally, I also think there are too many passes given out. Some such as for students (to be used school days ONLY), for the very elderly (75+), and the obviously infirm are OK. But I see far too many people who look very strong with reduced fare passes.
I believe federal law requires that off-peak discounts be made available to anyone over age 65(?). Not everyone who looks very strong is very strong.
I wish there were some way for the TA to offer half-fare passes for temporary or recurring disabilities. I've paid many an extra fare due to the occasional acute pain in my left knee, which is normally not present but, when it is, is very painful and lasts for the rest of the day (at least). I don't see how this could be done without leaving the system open to abuse.
(I believe federal law requires that off-peak discounts be made available to anyone over age 65(?).)
But the TA makes the discounts available on peak as well. The elderly get so many privileges these days, regardless of need, that it amounts to child abuse.
>>> I wish there were some way for the TA to offer half-fare passes for temporary or recurring disabilities. I've paid many an extra fare due to the occasional acute pain in my left knee, which is normally not present but, when it is, is very painful and lasts for the rest of the day (at least). <<<
I think I have mentioned to you before that you are probably eligible for a disability fare. Recurring disabilities are not temporary. Someone with arthritis or a heart condition may not have pain all the time, but has a continuing disability. A temporary disability such as a broken leg from an accident could be accommodated in the same way temporary handicapped placards are given to motorists. In California, one of the ways to qualify for a reduced fare pass is to have a handicapped placard. In New York, even if you do not own a car, you can probably obtain a placard which can be used in any car you are riding in.
Tom
Someone with arthritis or a heart condition may not have pain all the time, but has a continuing disability.
Quite true. I had an argument with a police officer a year or so ago who was quite convinced that my handicapped placard must have been fraudulently obtained, since I walked back to my car with no difficulty. At the time I had parked it there, however (some three hours earlier), I was barely able to walk from the car to the theater, even with Jr.'s assistance. Logic (or charity - it was Christmas day) prevailed, and I didn't have to deal with a ticket, but the lack of knowledge by the officer was surprising.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
>>> Logic (or charity - it was Christmas day) prevailed, and I didn't have to deal with a ticket, but the lack of knowledge by the officer was surprising <<<
In California (where there has been much fraudulent use of handicapped placards) when one is issued a placard, he also gets a registration form to carry in his wallet which has his name and address and the serial number assigned to the placard. Any officer seeing someone entering or leaving a vehicle with a placard in use can ask to see the registration form. Anyone not having the form in his own name gets a BIG ticket and the placard is confiscated. If the form was just left at home, the person gets the placard back and does not have to pay the fine when he goes to court.
Tom
That is eminently fair.
North Carolina has the same, and I had the registration card in the glove box. That wasn't the issue - he felt that I must have forged the medical paperwork to obtain it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Once upon a time, I drove into a handicapped slot, hung the card up, and bounced out of the car with no difficulty whatsoever. Someone looked at me like I had three heads, and made some sort of comment, so I explaied to her that I was a Registered Nurse. She looked at me like I had four heads, but that was her problem.
A few minutes later, I came out of the doctor's office escorting my patient, who was severely crippled, and could not move but with obvious pain and difficulty, and had to be carefully assisted into the vehicle.
I looked back at this lady again, just to see if she had taken a count on how many heads she had.
: ) Elias
She had one head but the skull was unoccupied.
There is nothing wrong with a cop being suspicious. How does he know if you received it by fraudulant means or not without starting a conversation. Years ago, when my mother was still alive, she had a handicap permit after she had several strokes and a heart condition. Her boyfriend was the picture of health who played racketball every day. Yet he used my mothers car and parked in the handicap spots with the permit all the time!!!
Jeff, I'm annoyed about it because he wasn't satisfied with the registration card for the permit, even though it matched my driver's license and the registration for the vehicle - he presumed that, since I didn't appear handicapped, I must have filed a fraudulent application with the DMV to have obtained the permit. And, to top it off, this incident occurred in New Jersey, while I have North Carolina plates, permit, and driver's license.
Basically, he was just being an arrogant SOB. I'm sure you have run into a few, probably even within your own precinct, over the years. I have two brothers-in-law who are retired police officers and two nephews who are currently on the force in Michigan (one a county mountie, one a state trooper); three of them are good folks but one is the epitome of bad attitude, both as an officer and as a person. I'm hopeful that his latest wife will prevail and convince him to change professions, not just because she wants him to find a safer profession, but because the citizens of their area of Michigan will benefit as well.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Thanks. If you did mention this to me, I missed your message.
In any case, the point is moot. From the application form: "From whatever cause, the person is unable to move about without a walker, wheelchair, wheelchair stroller, a crutch, crutches, or a cane at all times. The word 'unable' is used in its literal sense. The fact that one of these mechanical aids facilitates movements is not sufficient." Even when the pain sets in, I don't use a walker, wheelchair, wheelchair stroller, a crutch, crutches, or a cane. I wouldn't qualify even the pain were persistent.
Interesting that they are that restrictive. I'm like you... at one time I used crutches whenever the pain got bad, but now I've got other problems that preclude the use of crutches, so when the pain gets bad I usually just don't go.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
In my case, when the pain gets bad, I've usually already gone and I have to limp my way back home. I once deliberately bypassed my station and backtracked by bus to shorten my walk by two blocks.
>>> From the application form <<<
I read the application form you posted and it is quite a bit tougher than what is in effect here in California. Here if you qualify for an automobile handicapped placard, you automatically qualify for reduced rates on public transportation. In addition to the things stated in the MTA application, anything that reduces one's ability to walk, such as severe arthritis, heart disease, or serious respiratory disease (certified by a doctor) qualifies a person for a handicapped placard.
One could argue from a philosophical point of view that there is really no reason to provide the disabled with a reduced fare on public transit, since unlike the vehicle placard which may reduce the need for walking, a reduced fare does not in itself assist the handicapped person to get on or off a public transit vehicle, and the public transit vehicle does not make any special stops to reduce walking. The reduced fare for the handicapped is really left from the days that stereotyped all disabled persons as being unfit to work and therefore poor due to no fault of their own and thus worthy of charity.
Tom
<<<"One could argue from a philosophical point of view that there is really no reason to provide the disabled with a reduced fare on public transit, since unlike the vehicle placard which may reduce the need for walking, a reduced fare does not in itself assist the handicapped person to get on or off a public transit vehicle, and the public transit vehicle does not make any special stops to reduce walking. The reduced fare for the handicapped is really left from the days that stereotyped all disabled persons as being unfit to work and therefore poor due to no fault of their own and thus worthy of charity.">>>
Thanks, Tom. I was trying to make this (as well as other points)argument in my original post.
Handicapped fares on public transit strike mas yet another entitlement. Many, many handicapped/disabled people hold regular jobs. Let 'em pay the full fare.
I mean, if some intermitent discomfort qualifes for a reduced fare, what about diabetes? Asthma? HIV? Hypertension? (I got that one), Thyroid trouble? Chronic Fatigue? Ringworm? Jock itch?
Where does it stop?
MTA is right to be strict about this.
Unless you REALLY can't work (due to illnes or extreme age), PAY THE FARE.
>>> Many, many handicapped/disabled people hold regular jobs. Let 'em pay the full fare. <<<
Although it is true that many handicapped people hold regular jobs, it is probably also true that if you compared the population eligible for disabled fares to the general population, you would find a lower average income. The same with the elderly who are eligible for discounts. There are some well to do elderly people also. I do not think that the TA wants to get into means testing for the discounted fares though. After all, someone like Stevie Wonder is not likely to be using the subway at full or discounted price, so the number of disabled persons who would want to use the public transportation system but earn a median wage or higher may be too small to make it worthwhile to use any means test.
And the disabled may have to use more public transit than the able bodied. If every step is painful, a person will not walk two blocks, but take a bus for one or two stops. A few weeks ago I posted to Bus Talk about a single day when I rode sixteen buses in order to transact business in Los Angeles. More than half of them were short trips (less than five blocks) that I would have walked when I was in better health.
>>> I mean, if some intermitent discomfort qualifes for a reduced fare, what about diabetes? Asthma? HIV? Hypertension? (I got that one), Thyroid trouble? Chronic Fatigue? Ringworm? Jock itch? <<<
What disabilities deserve a reduced fare is a different question than whether there should be any reduced fares at all. The criteria for New York's reduced fare seems quite strict (intermittent discomfort doesn't make it). It all depends on the integrity of the doctors certifying the disability though. There was quite a scandal here when it was found that many of the UCLA varsity football players obtained and were using handicapped placards to get preferred parking on campus.
Tom
Work has nothing to do with it. Perhaps you use the subway only for long rides to and from work, but some of us travel shorter distances on occasion. I've paid many a fare for what would be an easy walk if not for the condition of my knee.
Here's another way of looking at it: The average ride of the disabled is shorter than the average ride of the population as a whole (because the population as a whole walks for short trips while the disabled doesn't). The disabled use less of the system per ride, so they should pay less per ride.
(Notice that if the subway charged fares by distance, the point would be moot.)
General discomfort should not qualify. Difficulty in walking should be the only criterion.
I wouldn't object if the discount were only available off-peak (which is all federal law requires).
Guessing that you commute regularily, why not get a monthly unlimited pass?
Arti
Good guess, but it doesn't hold. On average, a $15 MetroCard lasts me 3-4 weeks, with maybe one or two Fun Passes thrown in.
The instant I find an excuse to commute by train (or bus) five days a week, my credit card will see a $63 charge.
Star-Ledger article by Joe Malinconico, staff transit reporter, echoes what Subwaybuff told us at the outset, that discontinuance of discount fares results in an 89 percent fare increase for some riders, while the increase is described by NJT as being 10 percent.
Fare increases for NJT riders are LONG overdue. But, going this route is not a good thing.
Peace,
ANDEE
OK, so fares haven't increased in 10 years, but that does not mean they are LONG overdue. NJ Transit has the second or third highest fare structure in the country already.
I buy a monthly from Jersey Avenue to NY Penn which costs $217. So if it increases to $239, big deal. I would love to see less crowded trains, a better on-time performance, and professional crews, but we know that is not going to happen. 10% is not going to get me in my car or on a Suburban Bus to Port Authority.
It's not the riders who buy the monthly pass that will be burdened, but the people who purchased the Round-Trip Excursion tickets during off-peak times. That is resulting in an 89% increase for some. Also, the fare from Newark Penn to NY Penn is going from $2.50 to $3.30 to match the fare from Newark Broad St. to NY Penn.
Gee, what does the fare to Newark Airport increase to? As if it isn't high enough as it is.
It is all political. Jeffrey Warsh is in his position because of politics, and they are getting DeFrancesco to sign off on the deal before he leaves office. And does McGreevey say anything? Nope. He is on the sidelines just like the politician he is.
It gets worse in the fine print. Annual fare hikes will be set by an inflation rate - "A Zone of Freedom Rate" set by DOT - which is collusion. Also, subsequent fare hikes other than those to oneway fares will not require hearings. They will be basically an unregulated public utility with monopolistic pricing. This is also the state with the 4th lowest gas tax in the country at 10.5 cents. Rail fares are slightly behind ConnDOT's now (with a measly 43% farebox recovery) will catapult to be far ahead of them. I smell corruption.
New Jersey Politics = Corruption.
I thought they left the Newark Airport fare alone, as it was already pegged as a premium fare. Don't quote me on it, though.
Is this the only way NJT has to raise more money for capital projects, and pay off its revenue?
I really despise the elimination of discount fares.
How much are monthly and weekly tickets affected by?
I believe that in the ultimate agreement, the round trip excursion discounts were retained. Monthly/weekly discounts were never on the table.
I doubt NJT ever really thought they'd eliminate the RTX's or reduce the discount for the handicapped. But when you're negotiating a fare increase, throwing things like that out there to keep the focus off of the real prize seem to work everytime.
CG
Fares do not pay for capital projects.
Am I correct in assuming that since a Sunday schedule is in effect today, the R-143s will be adhering to the Sunday departure times from Rockaway Parkway?
You are correct.
Peace,
ANDEE
6736-40 and 6786-90 are in service as of yesterday 12/31/01.
A side note - The Artwork has changed. Cars 6536-40 have received images of a whale. Someone read Moby Dick?
It would also appear that additional cars are receiveing the frames for holding those pieces of artwork.
-Stef
Stef: Isn't Moby Dick buried in Woodlawn Cemetary?.
Larry,RedbirdR33
I have no clue. Anyone here know?
-Stef
This posting is just a collection of some general thoughts regarding equiptment acquisitions by Transit Museums.(NOTE I did not say trolley museums) Trolley museums sprang up after World War II although at least one, Seashore, started before that. The war provided a watershed of sorts for streetcars but once it was over bustitutions resumed in earnest. Concerned railfans wanting to preserve parts of our heritage began trolley museums in order to preserve some of these cars. Unfortunately these early volunterrs were confronted by "Hobson's Choice." Acquire the car even though you have no place to store it,let alone run it or let it be scrapped and gone forever. Some of the more forsighted museums like Branford also began acquiring rapid transit cars even though in those early days "subway fans" were looked upon with dismay by many of the "trolley fans."
It was also necessary if not essential to provide some kind of operating service for the general public to attract non-railfans and generate revenue. Since virtually all labor was volunteer, construction and restoration work proceeded slowly and many of the cars deteriorated past the point of no return. Branford has made tremendous efforts to build car barns and get as much of the equiptment as possible under cover. If you have ever been there for the "Autumn in New York" or "Trolley Parade" events you would be amazed at the amount of operating equiptment,both trolley and rapid transit.
I have been to a number of museums which are so clogged with deteriorating cars that its almost impossible to view the collection. Some of them have acquired raipd transit cars even though they are totally out of place with the museum's goal and the museum has no practical way to operate these cars.
The Batimore Trolley Museum is an excellent example of a focused collections. All of there streetcars ran at one time or another on the streets of Baltimore.
The collection at Branford is much more extensive and comprehensive covering horsecars to modern subway cars. However the use of rapid transit cars imposes some restirctions on there operation. They arrive and depart from a high level platform in the yard area. I believe that due to weight resrictions they cannot operate over the bridge to Sprague Station but even if they could there are no facilties for high level loadings there. Also although many trolley cars could mu they usually ran as solitary beasts. Subway and El cars are far more gregarious preferring the company of their fellows. So its desirable to run them in mu when pratical. Two years ago during the "Autumn in New York" event Branford ran a three car train of an IRT Deckroof Hi-VM,an IND R-9, and an IRT Lo-VM. The first time that a three car train had run in the museum's history.
All three of thses cars could run by themselves though which make the married pair cars such as the M-1s less than practical since you must have both cars to run. Also the railroad mu's might be just a little too big. A pair of M-1's measures about 170 feet and both cars are twins of the other. As a fellow once observed at a topless bar."When you've seen one, you've seen them both."
I really don't know where you could preserve railroad size electric mu's. Possibly at one of the big "railroad museums."
Larry,RedbirdR33
Larry,
Do you suppose that you could store one in your backyard and I would store the other one? My lot is 100' wide!
I guess that it would be up to us to maintain them though, wouldn't it?
How can I store one?
Karl: Maybe we could start a "Save the M-1s Foundation" and print pictures on the side of milk cartons asking for donations.
Larry,RedbirdR33
We'd need a better advertising means down here. Milk cartons are all but extinct in this area. Everything seems to have been converted to plastic bottles.
How about a blurb on income tax forms specifying a $1.00 of the refund to be earmarked for the "G & B Save the M-1s Foundation".
I'll volunteer to act as Treasurer!
Karl: That sounds like a good idea. The only problem I foresee is trying to operate the pair. We would have to get a 300 mile long extension cord to connect the two cars. Maybe we could arrange some kind of house-to-house connection using the homes of all the sub-talkers along the route.
Larry,RedbirdR33
PS Glad to hear that you received Volume 3. The first volume deals with the IRT and is in a larger format. I believe that they used an offset printing process but I'm not sure.
I guess that long extension cord is not too practical.
Would you consider just having a static display?
PS Are you saying that Part I is 8 1/2 X 11? I've never even seen it so it could be "big little book" size, and I wouldn't know!
Karl: Part 1 of the Cunningham History measures about 8 1/2 x 11 inches. There are 104 pages.
Larry,RedbirdR33
So it is larger and apparently has more info in it than the other two, since there are more pages. Does it also have that troublesome "perfect" binding?
You have really whet my appetite to get that last book now. I will really have to be watching for it in 2002!
Karl: The binding isn't so good but then my copy is 26 years old and has seen some use. If you can get a used copy in otherwise good condition I would say $20-$30 would be fair. If it is in mint condition then about $45-50 would not be unreasonable.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Larry, Thanks for the advice! I'll certainly be hunting for it.
Karl/Larry,
Your idea has just a little bit of merit, i.e. Branford was started in the 40s by a small group of guys who bought a 1 1/2 of track and one car. If you can find a group of like minded friends that would be a start.
Mr rt__:^)
Larry, nice post.
All I can say is that a BIG museum facility like ILM (Illionis Railway Museum) or perhaps Danbury, could handle something the size of an M-1 set. Branford couldn't really even handle a married set of B-Division equipment w/o it sitting unprotected in the elements.
The MP-54 at Seashore that I mentioned in a previous post also sits outside, a similar victim to space limitations.
It is very difficult to find room for one or two 75 foot (or more) cars, when a museum already has dozens of smaller -- yet rarer -- equipment in its collection. It's a tough choice in some cases, but realistically most museums would want to preserve the older (and smaller) cars since they have more history attached to them than the newer and larger stainless steel equipment.
BMTman
<< All I can say is that a BIG museum facility like ILM (Illionis Railway Museum)>>
IRM, not ILM. I'd love to see an M-1 set there but it's highly unlikely, since the vast majority of equipment types at the IRM ran in the Chicago area and the M-1s certainly did not. There is some equipment there that did not run in Chicago (they have a SEPTA Brill rapid-transit car, a PC (nee NYC) S Motor, and a PRR GG1) but this equipment is in the minority.
---Dave S.
A pair of M-1's would burn down the substations. I'd rather see Shoreline aquire the forlorn MP54 at Seashore or the sole surviving arch-roof one that became a restaurant in Watermill.
What do you mean by "burn down the substations".
The M-1s are likely to consume more power than a trolley museum's substation can provide.
David
We already have to be careful when we operate the subway cars at Branford for this reason.
Mr rt__:^)
IRM seems like the only place with enough space
But IRM has factions opposed to non-midwest equipment. I'm still waiting to see if they are really going to acquire the R26 pair.
I am a volunteer in the Electric Car Department at IRM, and I find this to be a very interesting discussion.
First of all, IRM is planning to acquire a pair of Redbirds. While it is true that there are factions opposed to doing this, and to acquiring more non-Midwest traction equipment, I would not overstate this. As a combination traction/steam-road museum, there are factions "opposed" to any sort of traction at IRM! The important thing is that IRM will acquire the Redbirds, and will continue to acquire, restore and operate electric equipment.
One thing that has been totally ignored in this discussion is that cars like the M-1's are almost completely useless to modern museum operations. While it is highly desirable to save an example of each generation of car, if not every type of car, the usefulness of the equipment must become a factor in acquisition of more than one of something. Modern subway equipment is, in some way, useless for revenue-producing operation at museums because of one factor: its inability to be operated via overhead wire. All operating traction museums use overhead wire, and the prohibitive costs of operating - and insuring - third rail make installation of such an impossible proposition.
Most museums that own subway equipment have bypassed this problem by mounting unprototypical trolley poles on cars that never had them (Branford, Seashore, and IRM are all examples of this). Some of the more modern subway equipment, though, is constructed in a way that makes this impossible. I'm not sure exactly how M-1's are built, but if the roofs are stainless steel it's a safe bet that mounting trolley poles on them would be a project that would be irreversibly damaging to the historical fabric of the car. Most traction museums worth their salt will pause, if not balk, at the prospect of doing such damage to their equipment.
The reason that IRM has half a dozen North Shore interurban cars, and that Seashore has half a dozen Boston semiconvertibles, is because these cars make good "workhorses" that can be used to carry people year after year. Subway cars generally cannot do this, and as such traction museums often acquire the minimum number of them required to give an overview of the evolution of the equipment.
Is there a point to this rant? Yes. Well, I hope so! I would be surprised if any of the traditional traction museums were to save a pair of M-1's when they are retired. I think that we will be lucky if even one is saved in a museum, and I doubt that once they leave NYCTA rails they will ever move under their own power again. The only solution I can even hypothetically think of is for an organization like the New York Transit Museum to somehow expand its role, put more cars on display, and perhaps even begin to operate cars for museum-goers. This may be impossible for even the most intrepid and imaginative supporters of NYTM to accomplish, but we can hope that it will happen.
Thank you for a very illuminating post.
I wonder if a static display would work somewhere in the NY area, or perhaps in Philadelphia, where Budd was headquartered...
If a pair of LIRR M-1s are to be preserved at a museum, then the one that comes to mind is the Railroad Museum of LI. Why ? first it's in Long Island. Second, the RRMLI may have some pull with the MTA or LIRR to donate a pair when time comes for candidates from the fleet to be retired. The first M-1s from 1968 #9001-9002 would be ideal, considering they aren't involved in a wreck by then.
The idea of a pair of M-1s being preserved at Branford is laughable at best. Attend their next board meeting and suggest that become embarassed. When the R-9 when up there in the 70s, I heard there was some balking and I assume the same for the R-17 too.
To those on this board who refuse to accept reality who feel it's some other museum's responsibility to purchase and transport retired equipment, let them dig deep in their pockets and come with the big bucks needed for acquizition and transport of these railcars. This does run into the thousands mind you.
A pair of M-1s at Branford ? I Don't think so. I'd rather see the Brooklyn "Peter Witt" streetcar restored then see another Redbird at Branford. One Redbird representing SMEE equipment is good enough. Focus on long idle equipment needing to be restored rather than dream about preserving this car or that car.
To Frank Hicks of IRM,
In your quest to acquire a pair of R-26 Redbirds, I certainly wish you luck. There is some ongoing thing here that retired equipment with asbestos has to be abated. Removal of asbestos would probably destroy the car. The Redbirds being sunk off Delaware? Yes they have asbestos in them, But being wet, the asbestos is not a threat. Only when it's dry and airborn. I was told that of all the Redbirds, the R-26s are LOADED with asbestos. Once again, good luck sir!
Bill "Newkirk"
[A pair of M-1s at Branford ? I Don't think so. I'd rather see the Brooklyn "Peter Witt" streetcar restored ...]
Bill you make a good point. That Brooklyn Peter Witt would fit right in with regular ops at Branford, as would PCC #27 that was just acquired. This subway railfan thinks there's also a place for a few elevated/subway cars, but an M-1/M-2 or RDC now I'll have to agree with you.
Mr rt__:^)
Thurston: Another point against the M-1's is that always were maintenance-intensive. I remember working as the am tower director at HM on the Hudson Line and having five trains in timetable order unable to move because of one problem or another. Metro-North has done a great job keeping them going but are really need to be pampered.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Larry, that's another thing that brings to mind a yellow-colored fruit when discussing the M-1's.
They were loaded with problems from day one, but the LIRR had a VERY old fleet of MP-54s, and were itching to replace them. And don't forget the 'burb commuters were eager for the new, shiny cars so they could feel like they were really getting more bang for their buck.
Anyhow, aside from some minor historical significance, I doubt many people will 'shed a tear' for the retirement of the M-1s.
BMTman
I'd PAY to go to a museum that had some M-1's as long as they had Bill Ronan tied to the nose. :)
Doug: Your quite right. They do not have comfortable seating. Those subway type doors admit cold air right into the cars and the lavatories stink no matter how much we clean them.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Well, my grandson thought the triple was a good place to recline while doing his homework on the way in to see the Miracle at 34th Street (at Macy's) last month ... plus they do have a railfan window & go 60 to 70 MPH ... can't do that in a subway anymore :-(
They have grown on me a little due to going back and forth for 11 1/2 years in them. Same thing has happened to me & trolleys ... did about 90 hours operating them last year.
Mr rt
Mr. T.: Welcome back from your holiday vacation!
I'd have to agree that probably the BEST feature of the M-1's was their railfan windows. I must admit I got some GREAT shots of LIRR trackage/equipment from the front on more than a few occassions.
(So I did find one positive note to say about the cars after all.) ;-D
BMTman
You DO realize though that you've just put Unca Salaam onto a BRAND NEW mission ... and in TD's neck of the woods too. :)
What's interesting in this M-1 discussion is that one other "trolley musuem" (Pennsylvania Trolley Musuem, aka Arden) has added a Budd "Almond Joy" car (one of the single units) to their collection.
It now sits on a display track, power to the motors is disconnected, but the car is lighted and the aux stuff works. It will never be operational, even though it could run on their Pittsburgh tracks.
Why?
1. PTM will not put trolley poles on it.
2. The car draws more power than their substation can produce.
3. They got it because it ran in Pensylvania.
Wnat if they tried to run the "Almond Joy" with only 2 of the 4 tractions motors. Would they have the amperage then ?
AFAIK they have 300 volt series paired motors just like SMEE
cars. Disconnecting one motor group would actually _increase_
the current. It would be possible to adjust the acceleration
rates to reduce current consumption, but the car would be an
absolute dog.
"1. PTM will not put trolley poles on it."
This does create a problem with the unusual "humps" on the "almond joy" roof.
Bill "Newkirk"
The only solution I can even hypothetically think of is for an organization like the New York Transit Museum to somehow expand its role, put more cars on display, and perhaps even begin to operate cars for museum-goers
Just curious, the biggest subway cars are, I think 75 feet. How long are the M1's, and would they fit in any of the subway tunnels. They must be wider also, I assume.
M-1s are 85 feet long. I'm not sure about the width, though I think they're a bit wider than the 10 feet of BMT-IND subway cars. It would be a tight fit, at best, in subway tunnels.
David
If they are to survive anywhere after their LIRR careers, it will have to be SIR.
Well, it seems from all the posts that stainless steel cars could be practically preserved only as static displays.
That's OK with me.
However, I was wondering- is it a fact that the M-1s are on the way out as a car class? Or have jsut a few dud units been retired?
The M-1s should be with us for some time to come. The next class of emu to be retired will be the ex-New York Central 1100 Series or ACMU's. They will go out probably sometime this or next year when the M-7s arrive.
Larry,RedbirdR33
1100 series? In service with LIRR? What do they look like?
Nope, none at LIRR. They look a bit more boxy in the front then the Ms.
Mr rt__:^)
Ron: Maybe I should clarify that post. The LIRR has M-1's and M-3's.
MNRR has M-1a's and M-3a's as well as M-2's,M-4's and M-6's. MNRR also has the 1100 series mu built for the NYC which they call ACMU's.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Thanks. I don't think I've ever seen one. I'll check the pictures of rolling stock on this site...
Well, I looked. I didn't realize those weren't pulled coaches.
Thanks to the help of SubTalker Phil Hom we were able to purchase a copy of the C & D Part III The Independent System and City Ownership.
My wife gave it to me for Christmas, and I just finished my second reading of it. It really is a great book for history, facts and figures about the IND.
Several years ago, another SubTalker, Larry RedbirdR33, located a Part II for me Rapid Transit in Brooklyn. I must say that this one was even better, but perhaps it was because my first interest was always the BMT.
I am only missing Part I now The Manhattan Els and the IRT.
I sure would appreciate it if any SubTalker knows of a copy for sale at a fair price, that they would contact me.
Thanks A Lot!
How do I get to Harriman Station on the Port Jervis line? I understand that I have to get to Hoboken Terminal via PATH, but what do I do from Hoboken? I'm confused because that line seems to be split up. The southern half is greyed out (NJ Transit), while the upper half is considered to be Metro-North. Are there 2 seperate systems that run that track? Would they use NJ Transit equipment or MTA Metro-North equipment?
ah the Balkanization of service! The tracks are NJT to the State Line so the equipment is a mix of NY owned and regular NJT cars/engines all built to NJT specs.
At Hoboken, just look or ask for the train to Port Jervis.
Be careful! Train # 53, the 1:20 pm from Hoboken on weekdays, only goes as far as Middletown, N.Y. This train makes Harriman, but does not go as far as Port Jervis. You wouldn't want "Go N Train" to wait an extra few hours at Hoboken because he passed up a train he could have taken!
Thanks for the lookout Fishbowl :-)
It's a thru NJT train. The MTA portion is transparent to the passenger except a seperate ticket coupon is dispnsed from Suffern-North. Either authority's equipment and engines is fair game and may be mixed.
So what you're saying is you would need to get off at Suffern to buy a new ticket to continue the trip? This is almost as confusing as how to get to Lynbrook on the LIRR. From Jamaica, there's the Far Rockaway branch which turns off at Valley Stream. Then the Long Beach and Babylon branch seems to come out of nowhere at Lynbrook. =O
No, at one time when you would buy a ticket from the NJT vending machines for Newark-Port Jervis (for example) you would get one that read Newark-Suffern and another that read Suffern-Port Jervis. I don't believe that's the case any longer though.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
NJT operates the service, then then bill MNRR for the portion of service that occurs in New York State. The cars are all common pooled, so you will find MNRR equipment on any of the north side NJT service, although NJT tries to keep them on the Port Jervis Line. This does not always happen.
NJT operates the service, then then bill MNRR for the portion of service that occurs in New York State.
Where does MNRR get profits to pay NJT. If people buy tickets in Hoboken, wouldn't they be paying NJT? Then NJT collects money from MNRR?
This is MNRR "West of the Hudson" service operated by NJT. Do you think the line turns a profit?? hehe.... ANY LINE Turns a profit?
MNRR (in truth the MTA) pays NJT to run the service and loans some of equipment as well.
I don't know how they do the accounting with the tickets. The Metro-North cars are on a 90 day major cleaning cycle, while NJT's is 120-day, so there is some attempt to segregate the cars with the incompatible intervals.
The track Suffern and north is NS, the crews are NJT, the signs are MTA. Four east-of-Hudson blue sripe cars are now in the pool.
The equipment pool is used on any Hoboken based train not using Waterfront Connection. Have been many times on board MTA car while traveling from Newark to Summit.
Now on eBay:
Item 1057189372 - Huge 46 by 58 inch 1969 Subway Map
Item 1057184660 - PATH Hudson Tubes Letter re World Trade Center construction
Item 1057182122 - BMT Surface Division Money Bag
Caught the Port Auth film about the building of the WTC on CNN the other day, was very nice.
Mr rt__:^)
There was some police activity today at Continental. It happened aboard a northbound F train(R-32). The F sat on the express track while an E train just behind crawled into the station so that it's front doors would be on the platform. T/O opened the crew door and passengers walked through the train (also R-32) to the front car and onto the platform at Contintental. They were able to connect with n/b E and F trains which were rerouted to the local track until the police investigation was taken care of.
Did they lead the passengers out of the E train or had them walk into the F train and exit?
They lead them right onto the station platform.
Continental is a long station. There is room for a 10 car R-32, and still space for another train to pull into the station right behind it and get at least 1/2 a car in. And that's just what happened. Once the second train got his front car into the station, he opened the crew door, and people walked through the train, and right onto the station platform.
Thank you.
#93 BOS-PHL 01/10/02 THU 9.45am (arr. 3.27pm) fare $71.00
#43 PHL-CLE 01/11/02 FRI 6.35am (arr. 6.02pm) fare $11.70
#30 CLE-WAS 01/12/02 SAT 2.12am (arr. 1.23pm) fare $45.20
Pick up and drop off anywhere along the route is OK. No alternative times available (because I have to be in Washington for Jan. 12.) Suitable for students on winter vacation, or anyone who happens to have the time off.
Lexcie
Two footnotes:
(1) Have to book by Jan 3, 2001.
(2) #93 could be #95 the inland route train, if anyone wants to board on the inland route.
Lexcie
Both #93 and #95 operate via the shore line, not the inland route.
#145 operates via the inland route.
Michael
2001 was good for me for railfanning. Here's what I rode this year:
Rode for the first time:
Miami Metromover
Seattle Monorail and Heritage Tolley
Sao Paulo Metro
Chicago L
London Underground and Docklands light rail
Rode again:
Sao Paulo Metro (later in the year)
NYC subway
Atlanta MARTA (duh)
Today was Muslims Rajatwunablaan, which is some kind of festival where people have to buy lots of stuff. I was at Star Market today and lots of Muslim people lined up to buy Oranges -- forming an Orange Line -- apparently you needed lots of oranges to please the Rajatwunablaan Gods, or something. I wasn't entire sure, the guy I spoke to didn't speak English very well. He just kept saying "Rajatwunablaan, rajatwunablaan," and pointing at the sky. I've never seen so many people forming a line for oranges in my life. Both Star Markets I went to was out of Oranges by 3pm.
I'm wishing everyone on Sub Talk a happy and healthy 2002. Let us all say good-bye and good riddance to 2001 since it is now history. I'm not sorry to see 2001 go. I'm glad to see that 2002 is here. Once again I wash you all on Sub Talk a happy and healthy New Year.
#3 West End Jeff
Where was Hudson Terminal in relationship to the current WTC PATH station? What streets was it under?
Check out the Path / Hudson & Manhattan Railroad section of this website.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Looks like it was immediately west of Church St., underneath what was (prior to 9/11) a private "street" cordoned off for security reasons.
The shell of what was Hudson Terminal became a loading dock area under the plaza between 4 and 5 WTC, west of Church St. This was once under the old Hudson Terminal buildings. Its depth in PATH days was 35 feet. Don't know if this was changed in its latter-day re-incarnation.
To connect from the inbound tube to the rebuilt (actually new) station, it sounds like there will be a new reverse curve directly under the former site of 4 WTC. The old shell as was would be too small for contemporary operations.
With any luck, service will be restored in three phases: 2003 to Exchange Place; 2004 to (1971) WTC which will get temporary access; 2005 to Church Street. An extensive system of walkalators will connect from Church St. to neighboring subway lines and the WFC.
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
A question for SubTalk...
What is the normal operating speed of a train that is pulling into a station? Frank from San Francisco mentioned BART trains move at up to 36 miles per hour within stations, using less speed under adverse weather or equipment conditions. What's the norm with other systems?
Also, does anyone know the speeds for heavy-rail passenger lines? How fast do commuter and Amtrak trains approach station platforms?
Thanks in advance,
Brandon
I'm TA...my new tech work has R142s limited now to about 40 mph max with acceleration cut to prevent jostling of passengers. So a T/O could crank it if speed controls didn't put up barriers to enter...but the train must stop. Old trainsets can go faster but at what cost? CI Peter
Brandon it depends on track condition, speed restrictions and the area they run in. normally in the corridor between New Haven and New York I've seen AEM 7's with Amcans go through Fairfield, CT approximately 110mph.In Boston T Commuter rail run no faster than 75mph because of the speed governers they have on the engines.
How come on holidays MBTA cars are not allowed south of New Haven even though MARC cars from DC can go to Boston ?
What on earth are you talking about? Unless there's some very strange moves I'm not aware of, MBTA cars don't go south of Providence, and MARC cars don't go north of Baltimore. MBTA and MARC territories are a hell of a long ways apart.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Actually, I HAVE seen MARC trains on the Hell Gate Bridge in Queens. I dont know if they were in revenue service, but I do recall it was a strange sight!!! Tony
MARC, SEPTA and NJT all lease equipment to Amtrak during the Thanksgiving/Christmas/New Year holidays. It is slightly wierd to see MARC in Penn or 30th Street, complete with MARC motor on the point.
I've seen SEPTA motors with MARC cars and NJT motors on Metroliners, ATK motors on everybody's cars and MARC motors with Amtrak "kiddie kars". Holidays are fun times for railfans in the NE corridor.
Wow, I had no idea. I wonder who's job it is to sort it all out after the holidays and give the rolling stock back to their respective owners. Or do they just give it back to whichever commuter railroad's territory they happen to be in at the end of the day, and leave it up to each of them to give the cars a new paint scheme and call it even? :-)
Are the MARC and MBTA bi-levels involved in this operation, or will they not fit into NYC Penn Station?
-- David
Chicago, IL
Also the new HHP-8's for MARC are testing on the Norheast Corr. so you can see them pulling Slamtrak or MARC stuff.
The MARC ones might, as they are "low level" bi-levels due to trolley clearances in the Baltimore Tunnels.
The MARC bi-levels are similiar in height configuration to the new bi-level LIRR diesel-electric cars.
"This is a...95th Street bound "R" train...the next stop is...86th Street..." "Stand clear of the closing doors, please." *ding-dong**click*
Stuart, RLine86Man
And ths is an extension of Silverliner "advance" Philly NY sections eun by PRR/PC in the 60's. One of my few cab rides occured on Xmas 67 coming back to NY on a string of Silverliners with a well known engineer who sported dress clothing and a bowler hat rather than bibs.
Interestingly, the MU's were better at the curves and beat the schedulecoming into Penn ten + minutes early.
maybe he came from sunnyside. There have been MARC trains in sunnyside before.
"Stange moves" is Thanksgiving weekend and some other periods when Amtrak leases MARC, MBTA, NJT, and SEPTA cars. MARC cars go to Boston, SEPTA cars see NY, MBTA cars see New Haven, and MBTA cars see New Haven.
...even though MARC cars from DC can go to Boston?
Amtrak leases cars from MARC to cover the holiday rush. I don't believe they lease any from the MBTA.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
They can also go a few mph faster in at least one place, Stevie. On the Providence line, MBTA commuter rail trains are allowed MAS of 80 mph (the inbound railfan window allows a good view of the speedometer :-). The 7:10am inbound express from Providence to South Station is especially good for that, as it is express all the way from Mansfield to Back Bay... and runs at 80 mph for most of the run (slowing to 60 mph passing Canton Junction).
Acela Express trains in this area pass local MBTA stations such as Mansfield and Attleboro at 150 mph. Quite a sight when you're on the platform just a few feet away!
Acela Express trains in this area pass local MBTA stations such as Mansfield and Attleboro at 150 mph.
YIKES!! Just out of curiousity, I wonder what sort of a blast of wind that must produce. Either way, it must be quite a spectacle... One more reason I need to get back to Boston for a visit someday.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Cool!
Todd that is on the south side but, my apoligies i was refering to the north side. stevie
Wow... I bet that must be quite a rush to stand on the platform when a train flies by at 150 mph! Do they make a warning announcement before the train goes through?
Also, do you know if trains have a maximum speed permitted through a station if they are making a stop? Or is it at the engineer's discretion to go as slow or fast as safety permits (keeping within track speed limits, of course)?
In other words, if an engineer could safely do it, is it legal to approach a station at, say, 50 miles per hour and come to a screeching halt for the station stop? What's the normal speed a stopping train will approach a station at?
Thanks for the interesting answers so far everyone!
The station to which I referred, Mansfield on the MBTA Providence commuter rail line (shares track with Amtrak), has a platform that in places is only three feet wide. When Acela Express approaches, you'd better move away and turn so your back is to the tracks!
Theoretically, the audible/visible warning system must be operating (LED crawl signs say "Train Approaching! Stand Back Behind Yellow Line," and a recording drones, "Train Apporaching! Please stand behind the yellow line!). Prior to this system, Mansfield had a crossing gong that rang continuously, and it was much louder and more effective, in my opinion. At any rate, I was led to believe that in order for Acela Express trains to pass through stations at MAS 150, this system had to be working. This morning waiting for the 7:40 inbound express at Mansfield, the system was NOT working, and the AE blew through at 150. Oh, well, when the first 12-9 occurs....
I'm suprised that the engineer of the AE train doesn't blow the horn before passing through a station that fast. I thought they were required to do that anyway?
Sorry, forgot to mention that. There's a horn signal of two short blasts a few seconds before entering the station. But it's not very loud, especially if the wind is blowing the wrong way, and you have a hood up on a cold day!
Thats what I love about the NEC. High speed trains skip through crowed stations at full speed. I like to spot at Princeton Junction on NJT. Amtrak would sometimes come through the station on the local tracks doing 110+. On the express,its fun to but the extra 12-15 feet takes some of the excitment away.
127 mph right past the platform at Newark, Delaware. Hold on tight to the railing!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Seems pretty fast. I was at Irvington photographing trains on 12/31 and an Empire Service just sped through and I didn't even hear the horn. It was going so fast, my camera wouldn't even take a picture.
Does anyone know?
Thanks,
Subway grrl
He took the his (L)imo most likely.
It looked like he was getting out of the Brooklyn Bridge Lex IRT station in the clip shown on the news.
A Republican riding the subway. A good start. In fact, Mayor Bloomberg should go out of his way to portray the New York Subway as a major feature of New York City. After all, it is the one thing that brings us all together no matter where we live now. No doubt I am prejudiced, but of the twelve subway systems I have had the pleasure to traverse New York's is far and away the most exciting and the best. But that is just my opinion. I'd welcome yours.
But did he really ride the subway or did he walk in on entrance to the station and out the other in front of the cameras. Unless there is footage of him actually riding the train, this was probably just a phony stunt. I expect more of them over the next 4 years. I don't like Bloomberg, I only voted for him becuase I liked Green even less.
Definitely, I hope Bloomberg makes a big thing about the subway. Hopefully then, at some point we'll get a second ave subway, or better yet, some sort of rail link from SI to Manhattan (my cause celebre of late)! I don't think we can expect it anytime soon with the fiscal troubles we now have, though.
Bloomberg is a sack of shit in a cheap suit who isnt worthy of being mayor of Mianus, Connecticut, let alone the best city in the world. He isnt even good enough to ride the subway. Brace yourselves for 4 long years of horrible city management. It will be like Dinkins all over again.
Isn't Mianus an unincorporated village (which in NY would be a "hamlet"), ie no mayor?
Eh. Whatver.
:-) Andrew
Isn't Mianus an unincorporated village (which in NY would be a "hamlet"), ie no mayor?
Not even that much. It's basically just a neighborhood with no legal status whatsoever.
Isn't Mianus the place where, oh, 15 years ago or so a bridge carrying I-95 collapsed, and screwed up traffic royally?
sn't Mianus the place where, oh, 15 years ago or so a bridge carrying I-95 collapsed, and screwed up traffic royally?
It was in Riverside or Cos Cob, Town of Greenwich, over the Mianus River, on I-95 (Connecticut Tpke, but noone calls it that anymore.) Some people were also killed.
---Andrew
Dinkins didn't do anything right or wrong. Bloomberg will do everything thats is wrong and nothing that is right.
There are two types of mayor out there......caretaker and leader. Dinkins was a caretaker. Koch and Giuliani were leaders. Bloomberg will be the first of a different kind.....destroyer.
No - he is worse. He is a businessman.
Dinkins did a lot wrong.
We'll see how Bloomberg does. Like it or not, he's mayor.
"Bloomberg is a sack of shit in a cheap suit who isnt worthy of being mayor of Mianus, Connecticut, let alone the best city in the world. He isnt even good enough to ride the subway. Brace yourselves for 4 long years of horrible city management. It will be like Dinkins all over again."
Well..........I wonder how those New Yorkers who voted for term limits feel now.
Bill "Newkirk"
Amen! Although I no longer live in NYC, 4 more years of Guiliani would have been very appropriate right now. I can't help but think back to the early '90's (when NYC was known as 'Dinkytown') with people getting mugged on my trains, delays due to police actions, etc. Did most of my time on the M line back then. Fun and games.
You still have 'police action' holding up trains -- what's the difference there???
Maybe not as many muggings, I'd agree there.
Pretty damn good, actually. I don't expect much from old man bloomberg, but I think it's safe to say there's a good portion of the NYC population that's happy to see ghooliani go. yes, he did a nice job, but he was an arrogent SOB that did a lot of dumb things. Him and that rubber-faced girlfriend of his can go moved to nebraska for all i care.
Well..........I wonder how those New Yorkers who voted for term limits feel now.
Bill "Newkirk"
We feel very sad to see Guiliani go, but remain committed to the concept. Term limits will do more to clean the trash out of city government then in preventing good politicians from seeking more terms.
Alot of the New Yorkers who voted for term limits were Rudy backers. You reap what you sow...
Term limits are/were a dumb-ass idea. It dilutes the whole meaning behind 'voting power'.
BMTman
The 108th Mayor of NYC Mike Bloomberg rode on the IRT line to the City Hall Station which the #4, 5, 6 and the J, M, and Z also stop. On Page 4 is a picture from the NY Daily News shows him coming out of the IRT City Hall Station.
The NY Daily News on page 5 for Wednesday January 2, 2002 says he rode the #6 train to City Hall.
Charlie "Chud" Muller of Bedford Park Blvd.
Bloomberg took the 6 train from the 77st station on the Lexington line ride to his inauguration. The 6 is a local; there were 13 stops made on the way to Brooklyn Bridge/City Hall.
While campaigning for the Senate Republican Rick Lazio showed his lack of subway savvy: It's midday and he's is finishing up an event at Grand Central Terminal (42st). His next campaign stop is Harlem (125st). What does this Long Island boy do? He takes a car with a driver. Hello? 3 stops on the 4 or 5 IRT express trains....
I don't understand your complaint. Bloomberg boarded at a local station. Did you expect him to walk to an express station? Transferring from local to express at 59 is pointless (it takes longer to walk downstairs than to stop at 51). Sure, he could have transferred at 42, but even if there was an express waiting, he would have saved, what, three minutes or so? And if there was no express waiting, there's a good chance he'd end up ahead on the 6. Lots of real New Yorkers -- except in Queens -- realize that the local is a perfectly good way of getting around.
Woah. The IRT City Hall station? You mean he stayed on through the loop and the C/R let him out at the old City Hall station? Very cool!
It'd be pretty tough for Mike to get out at City Hall, since both of the entrances are sealed tight.
More likely he exited at "Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall."
Wishful thinking.
If Bloomberg had wanted to ride through the loop (maybe he's a closet railfan!), would the T/O have kicked him off?
Before answering that question, recall who operated the first train from City Hall.
Well at least he will be better than Guilliani. Good riddance Rudy.
Rudy did a lot to clean up the city. You can't ask for anything more from a Republican.
Calm down! The guys not even in office one day and you're already bashing the guy in the head.
Keep in mind that the economy is heading in the toilet -- nationwide, and even if 9-11 hadn't happenned -- so if NYC has financial problems you can't lump it all on him. Be realistic...
BMTman
Put it this way: he needs to cut 4 billion dollars from a budget where the only part he has any discretionary power over adds up to a little over 5 billion. And he cannot raise taxes.
Ouch.
While I don't want to get into a political debate, I'm surprised at your negativism and outward hostility. I thought Bloomberg's inaugural speech was quite uplifting. Most of the leaders Bloomberg appointed are city government veterans and have many years of experience. If he manages the city anything like his own company that he built from the bottom up, the City will be run well in the next four years.
You can't help but understand the bitterness of our colleagues on board Subtalk. A great chance was lost to put the great Mark Green in the Mayor's office. As some of those politically astute people could have told you, Green would be the greatest thing to happen to New York since Fiorello La Guardia.
Fred,
You’re supposed to put the <sarcasm>, brackets around such opinions, so that people who didn’t follow the debates could understand!
John
I give up. Dave’s HTML sanitizer is too much! There should be {sarcasm}, {/sarcasm} with braces replaced by < and > symbols, but I couldn’t make it work!
BTW: It worked in preview!
John
Glad you have given the guy a chance. Why not wait awhile before you make a judgment. He rode the subway didn't he? What better way to ingratiate yourself with your fellow New Yorkers than to do that on your first day in command. Oh yes, I get it. You were a supporter of that shitkicking no account Mark Green. That speaks volumes.
Come on, guys!
I need to know if anyone heard or saw this info on the news. I saw
him coming out of a subway station and heard that he had ridden the
subway there, but no one mentioned which line he took. Whether you
like him or not, he's the new mayor and we need for him to be
successful. I'd like to give him one of my subway shirts so he'll
keep mass transit and the "little guys" in mind.
Subway grr.
STORY HERE
Peace,
ANDEE
Dear Andee,
THANK YOU!
Subway grrl
Who say's Bloomberg's not intellgent? He took the Lex on New Years Day to say he did it -- not during the hell of a regular rush hour. I expect that if he takes the subway at all from this point forward, it will be limo to 33rd, and the Lex from there, once enough people get off to let in the air.
According to the newspapers he took the #6.
It makles sense since he lives on 79th St on the East Side.
Thats scary.......Upper East Side republican trash with billions of dollars shared a subway car with residents of the South Bronx. Something tells me that he will elect not to do that again.
Upper East Side republican trash with billions of dollars shared a subway car with residents of the South Bronx. Something tells me that he will elect not to do that again.
Notice how many times RUDY rode the rails while Mayor, of course ....
How many times did Rudy ride the rails?
You certainly know how to be insulting, don't you?
Not everyone who rides the 6 is from the South Bronx. I happen to live in the NE Bronx and I ride the 6 daily as do lots of others from the NE Bronx as well as folks from 96th St, 86th St etc.
He does not have much choice since the 6 is the line closest to where he lives (79th St on the east side). He can walk to 86th and get the 4 or 5 if he wants to but then he is also going to see those who you deem to be unworthy.
If you decide to voice your political opinion in response to a transit question (as in the Bloomberg question), could you please at least change the title of the thread so that those of us who want to read about transit know we can just ignore the posting?
It's really frustrating trying to weed out a few grains of transit information from a large number of political postings.
Thanks!
...or if you've been here long enough,
you eventually come to recognize
which posters more often than nay
tend to stick to the topic...
Bill Newkirk... Mark S. Feinman...
Stef... EngineBrake.. to name
a select few posters of worthy reads.
Pirmann, above all :)
Train Dude and OnTheJuice aren't select enough???? Sorry, your ride in my car is two bucks a trip. CI Peter
Thus far, as far as I know, SEPTA has not settled on a paint scheme for the PCC's to be rebuilt for the Girard Ave line. One would guess that it will be the standard SEPTA livery. At the risk of 'copycatting' Muni, is it worthwhile to suggest to SEPTA that the cars be painted in the different PRT/PTC/SEPTA schemes? Here are some variations:
Blue/silver (first PRT PCC's, as seen on repainted 2054)
Green/cream with maroon belt/letterboard molding (similar to 2732)
Green/cream with maroon belt, no molding
Green/white/orange (the bus scheme - applied to 2070)
Green/cream (the 'lazy' scheme of the mid-70's)
Gold/maroon (first SEPTA scheme)
The various SEPTA trial schemes (turquoise, the 'banana' car, red/blue, etc)
Blue/orange/white ('Gulf Oil')
Original SEPTA red/blue (full panel below belt - first K car scheme)
Modified SEPTA red/blue (stripe below belt)
'2730' variation (black window area)
Current scheme
That's at least 14 schemes for a fleet that will be minimum 18 cars. Other variants could include another Red Arrow car or two and a couple of PS/Newark City Subway tributes.
Anyone on the bandwagon yet? The trick is to convince SEPTA that it's a SEPTA idea, otherwise it won't go anywhere (I'm only half kidding here!).
What about St. Louis, Kansas and Toronto, where Philadelphia's used PCCs came from?
-Robert King
Sounds good to me. Given the awful experience had with the ex-St Louis cars, however, some railfans here might not want to give St Lou any tribute. Besides, the red scheme is somewhat similar to TTC's.
While we're on the subject, we should include two of my personal favorites - the all-white 'safety' and 'Zoo' cars that ran around the system just prior to SEPTA's takeover. Those would really bring back memories.
What was that awful experience? I only knew that the St. Lous cars weren't kept around long (replaced by cars from Kansas?). Didn't San Francisco keep their former St. Louis PCCs running for quite a while?
-Robert King
The basic problem with the ex-St. Louis car was that PTC bought them "as is" from SLPS. St. Louis had the really oddball PCC control with the power pedal on the left, brake pedal on the right with the deadman in the heel of each pedal. This also has the master controller backwards from the standard position and the push rods were reversed as well.
PTC went the cheap route and equipped the cars with standard pedals, but used bell cranks so the standard pedals (power & brake, the deadman does not use a push rod) could be used. That's why the cars had a very short life in Philadelpia.
San Francisco and Shaker Heights also bought cars from St. Louis.
SF MUNI did nothing and ran the cars with the St. Louis control, along with their standard PCC's. (This resulted in the joke "in an emergency, what do you do? Simply lift feet from all pedals.") :-)
Shaker paid SLPS to equip the cars with standard controls and MU equipment and no problems with the cars.
Was there ever any documented reason to have such a bizzare control arrangement?
-Robert King
Don't know, but St. Louis Public Service had no air-electrics, and pioneered the all-electric. The claim was that having the pedals set up that way allowed faster braking. (Remember, in PCC control Brake always overrides Power) They also had a peculiar electric switch arrangement that was shown as "St. Louis Type". No one I know in the industry or in musuems seems to know exactly what it was. Like Toronto's Necessity Action electric switch system (The superior electric switch control system in MHO.) the St. Louis type was used nowhere else.
Knowing those lazy bastards, they'll paint them in the same color scheme as the buses, white with a red-to-blue stripe on top of the window line, just like some of the overhauled Kawasaki cars.
That's probably exactly what those laz... er, those fine fellows at SEPTA have in mind - which is why I think some imagination couldn't hurt.
You don't have to pay for the maintenance!
I'm 100% certain they'll be painted in one standardized scheme. BUT, if SEPTA management wants to romanticize the cars and/or Route 15, maybe they'd do them up in PTC colors, kind of the way the MBTA is repainting its Mattapan-Ashmont fleet in the Boston Elevated Railway/MTA scheme.
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
In a sense you're correct (as a local taxpaying resident and SEPTA rider, I'm contributing to it, but we won't go there...). However, I think if SEPTA wants to bring some attention to the line and gain some needed friends, the 'throwback' paint schemes would be a good way to do this. Corporate support could also be sought for this, at least to help with the capital costs, and perhaps the support could be extended to maintenance costs also.
I've got a bunch of new R143 photos taken on New Year's on my website, www.nyrail.org along with some R142 delivery photos by Bernard Ente at Fresh Pond. Go to the main page and click on the link in the "updates" column.
Happy New Year!
-Dan
www.nyrail.org
How are the 143's doing on the 30 day trial? has the clock been set back at all?
I was told by a Kawasaki Emp. That the clock was reset one time and thatit should be done on 1-10-02.
Robert
Yep ... and in talking to crews on the 143's on the L, everybody seems pretty happy with it ... aside from having to shake your right hand every stop to get the blood circulating again once it's in full service. :)
The shaking of the right hand issue should not be taken lightly. I wonder about long term effects? If someone "drops the button" during the trip, it will be recorded on the evnt recorder. I fear the employee would be sent to the TA doctor and deemed unable to perform his/her duties.
Oh, how about the timers in the tunnel that have no lunar whites and you approach at 40-45 not knowing whether they will clear. When I rode for the first time on the 2nd day of service, I watched, and they had to go a bit slower, because you cannot take the chance as much now. (Approaching reds that fast is scary enough to me regardless)
That's the reason I raised the issue. I see it as a potential problem that could be addressed NOW before the rest of the fleet comes in with that configuration. I sure wouldn't want to operate it for 8 hours like that. And that's really the only thing about the 143's that I thought was less than optimum ... and yeah, got a chance to look underneath as well ... nice layout down below as well ...
Counseling about shaky hands??? Employee Assistance Program..then doom. CI Peter
Heh. That would probably be the routing ... I always had a thing about "two fisted operation" myself and thought the "slide pot" control on the 46's was unnatural - the 143 controller is nice and all and has a nice feel but I still can't get used to the idea of having a "does everything" controller all the way over on the side like that. Different strokes I s'pose ... I'd be worried about dumping myself though.
The only time I dump is when Gupta leaves the other end charged and his cousins berate me for not checking. CI Peter
Every morning I take a good d ... oh, nevermind. :)
Great photos! Thanks!
While watching the WB-11 Newscast this morning I saw an aerial shot of the Goethals Bridge and what appeared to be one of the two former Coast Guard ferryboats moored near it. It was only a quick glimpse so I may not be correct. Would any of our Staten Island sub-talkers know if this is so and which boat might it be;Lt Samuel S Coursen or Pvt Nicholas Minue.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Just been trying to take Amtrak to Philadelphia without gouing through the NEC. #449 takes me from Boston to Albany, where it MISSES THE LAST EMPIRE SERVICE BY 1/2 HOUR!!! GRRRR!!!!!
Amtrak really needs to sort out their local services if they want to compete with Greyhound. They should try to get some $ from Rhode Island DOT and ConnDOT or else refuse to carry passengers between local stations in Conn and RI.
Why would you want to go from Boston to Philadelphia via Albany? What do you have against the Northeast Corridor?
I agree with this question
I agree with your answer
Amtrak's forbidden by their running rights contract with MN to provide commuter type service on MN territory. Anyway, CDOT already throws Amtrak way too much in terms of the ShoreLine East ($10 per pax vs $2 with MN). Given how Amtrak seems to be happily letting the Springfield line fall to pieces, I don't see CT (in a state of financial chaos now anyway), tossing them any more money. I dunno, something about the capitol city's Amtrak station being an eyesore and a dangerous one at that....
There's talk the SLE might end up in MN's hands some day. We could only be so lucky....
RIDot could care less - Amtrak serves exactly one stop in RI, and it's served by the (T) commuter lines anyway. And yeah, the MBTA contracted out to Amtrak, but I hear they're less than happy with the service. Their stuff's nice, but it's S-L-O-W. No wait, slow isn't it. More like, painfully slow. Last one I was on took like 2 minutes to get up to 80mph. That's pathetic.
Try leaving Mansfield, MA northbound (inbound to Boston) on train 806, which is express to Back Bay. The single diesel is pushing five bilevels and two singles, packed full (including standees) -- about 1400 people, or over 200,000 lbs of commuter. It takes seven minutes to get up the hill towards Sharon, and just reaches 80mph as it passes the station (which is already on the downhill side).
BTW, there are other AMTRAK stops in Rhode Island: Kingston and Waverly.
BTW, there are other AMTRAK stops in Rhode Island: Kingston and Waverly.
I think that would be Westerly. What's going on with the station at TF Green Airport, has that been started?
Right, my oops. Waverly is a commuter rail stop :-) It's Westerly, RI. The TF Green Airport station is still in the "planning phase," which means it's waiting for money. But I recall reading a piece in the paper a few months ago that sounded optimistic.
AFAIK, the Warwick Intermodal Station site is currently in the environmental remediation phase. In a press release on 9/26/01, Gov. Almond said the project is "on track" and will proceed on schedule.
And speaking of RIDOT and the NEC, here's what's happening. I'm really going to miss the little stone underpass at Lincoln Avenue :(.
We're going to be in Cleveland on the night of 10/01/02 THU, riding Metro and railfanning. If anyone in the local vicinity want to join us, please e-mail me.
Lexcie
We're going to be in Cleveland on the night of 10/01/02 THU
Lexcie,
Most Americans would write this date as 01/10/02. Anticipate some questions.
Yep. That date format is Europe based, and a few Defense Dept agencies too.
Cleveland does not have a "Metro" but a "Rapid".
Since I work in an international business, I have gotten into the habit of writing the date like this: 10-JAN-01, to avoid confusion. The European paperwork I receive will sometimes throw me, because the writers often write the date a la Lexcie: 10-01-01. October first? No, January 10th.
Not if it’s Cleveland, England (which was a region in England, now elevated to administrative county status)!
Oh, and there’s rail-fanning too! The main Cleveland railway is the Saltburn to Darlington local railway, parts of which run over the first railway ever, with trains pulled by George Stephenson’s Rocket!
John
Okay, this probably falls into the "yesterday's news" category, but I found it amusing and heartwarming.
From Newsday.com: New York station brings Yule Log back to TV after 12 years
Apparently The Log beat out Martha Stewart, Sally Jesse, Montel, and all the rest of the daytime talk shows. Beautiful!
(On-topic note: The Yule Log was apparently sponsored in part by the MTA. Cool!)
-- David
Chicago, IL
>>> [From Newsday.com:] they had a bit of an issue because she couldn't find the tape, which had been hidden away in an archive for 12 years. After some digital remastering, "Yule Log" was ready to roll. <<<
I guess this was the long awaited "Yule Log, the Director's Cut" :-)
Tom
Will there be a re-run for the Eastern Orthodox Christmas? I'd love to tape it and burn a CD!
avid
ok.. i had msts and it was great.. BUT HOLY SH** THIS BVE IS AWESOME... i just drove the G train... SO COOL :)
I MAY NOT GO TO BED TONIGHT :)
ok can some of you post where i can get more then the g? q would be great... also, can you see other views besides driving the train?
tahnks!
OMG i am about to lose it... this flushing line has announcements!!!
Heh. Ernie Alstom did good on that one. Wait until you play with the Q line, D train and some others. BVE has a LOT of support out there and new routes popping up every week or so for something worth rolling. And yes, MSTS blows. :)
You want my route? I have a Red Line WMATA route with announcements and the authentic doors opening and closing sounds of the Rohr subway cars but the console is still generic and the scenery is lacking since I need help making objects. A few people have but I have yet to really publicize it. E-mail me if you are interested.
Yeah, and the guy sounds like a real New Yorker.
Alan Glick
.. SPEAKING for the un-initiated...
what the PUCK is a BVE?
If sharing is caring, do tell where
we late-bloomers can join in the hysteria!
Go here:
http://members.aol.com/bvehelper/
Tells you how to get started, where to get the stuff, and how to set it up if you don't speak Japanese ... then follow the links in the "OMG BVE" thread and welcome to the rails under your nose. Next best thing to paying dues to TWU. :)
Heh. Welcome aboard ... the ONE thing that BVE doesn't do is "let's see what the tunnel looks like from the route ... but if you want to OPERATE without having to whiz in the bottle, BVE is the ride.
Here's some other places to find things:
http://r68a_5200.tripod.com/ The Franklin shuttle route is STUNNING.
http://www.crotrainz.com/ Many routes and links to routes here.
There's also another site on msn somewhere, but I use Netscape and they insist on getting a Microsoft PASSPORT (no way) that has the E train from WTC and a few others ... I tend to look on crotrainz and should have a new BVE route available of my own creation in a couple of weeks. Been a bit too "real world" busy to work with it the last week and change but will get back on it. In the springtime, plan on releasing a 2ND AVENUE subway based on the existing drawings, but that's going to take a while ...
Welcome to the club ... BVE does subways wonderfully - if you visit Crotrainz, you will LOVE the Glasgow and London tubes lines. Definitely grab you some of that ...
How do you get BVE? How large are the files and how can you deal with all that Japanese stuff?
Answered in detail in the "BVE???" thread surrounding this one.
Yes I got to the helper site and downloaded the files, now I'm going to look at the install page.
OK I am having a problem with the install. In the step that has me click on the computer icon with the window and C:\Program Files\BVE. I click on Computer Icon and a window comes up and I hit where OK would be, but nothing happens. I'll keep trying some more, because I really want this thing to work.
OK I fixed the problem and it installed and I can get it to run. Now how do I get the train to move?
HAHAAHAH qtrain... took me a minute too
its either
z - go faster, a - reduce speed,
/ - apply brake
> - release
OR like in r143
z = reduce brake and go vroom
a = apply brake and slow the mother down
Better yet, since you're running a 143, take a JOYSTICK, plug it in and run BVE in "real mode" ... pull too hard and you go BIE just like the real deal. :)
You can select "joystick" in the CONTROL options ... the keyboard control is a bit lame and the "TrainController" hardware is nearly $200 ...
I never use the the brake on MY R-143. I drive it at 83 MPH on the Franklin Ave. Shuttle.
OK, that's it. I'm downloading it this weekend.
Here read this post at Straphangers that was started by me.
http://www.straphangers.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=23&t=001051
The guys at Oaks Model RR captured the video clip and put it online. You can find it at http://www.trainweb.org/oaksmodelrr/Video/Other/2001.mpg
If you thought travel time time on the MARC Penn Line was fast now (it IS the fastest commuter run in the nation) it's about to get faster. I just saw a video (13 meg) of a MARC painted HHP-8 electric electric locomotive in an NS freight consist pulling into Abrahms Yard in Valley Forge PA on Decembre 29th. Way to go MARC. All they need to do now is electrify some more routes. The video is here: http://www.trainweb.org/oaksmodelrr/Acela_movies.html
Railpace has a photo of it in Philly 12-15.
As does this month's issue of TRAINS magazine.
And the Baltimore NRHS Chapter's Newsletter beat Everybody to the punch!!!
In the December 2001 issue of the Interchange, published in middle November, a picure of MARC 4911 appears on page 12.
Why do they buy that crap a la Francaise?
'Cause nobody in the USofA wants to build electrics. EMD did do the AEM-7's, but even they aren't interested in electrics without diesel prime movers any more.
Last year there were a BIG & LARGE string of posts of what it was like riding the rails to & from the times square Dick Clark Special new years celebration(s) ..times square !!
?????????............................!!
It's called NO ONE WENT. I suspect half that footage they showed was a tape from last year. Hehe!
had to be a tape ....lol !!
i was in a chat room earlier, and a friend of mine was in it. Well her brother anyway. Anywaysi found out he is a railfan and interested in trains. i reccomended him to this site because when i was recommended hea by Peter dougherty's NYC trackbook. Anyways his handle will be 3 7 AVENUE EXPRESS. i believe thats it. anyways hopefully he can learn alot here as i have and still am.
ARE U ACCEPTING THE PROPER LINEUP?
TAKE BOTTOM GREEN AND IM ME AT AOL INSTANT MESSENGER F TRAIN 5656
OTHER TIMES USE A 8AV FULTON EXP
NIGHTS USE etrain6@hotmail.com email
SUBTALK
VIA LOCAL
Tell him he is welcome and he will be treated as would anyone else here.
NO WAIT. Forget the 2nd part!! He'll just have to take his chances like the rest of us. :)
Hardly any legroom on this loveseat, ya know?
You didn't buy the fold out sofa?
I'm going through this article on the way to school this morning (yep, I just can't seem to stay away from that damn place!), and I find that Pataki is asking Congress for a temporary waiver on Clean Air Act air quality controls for new projects on two grounds:
1) The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, which draws up such plans, has been on hiatus since 9-11, when its offices were destroyed and some members killed when 1 WTC came crashing down, and
2) Commuting patterns have changed in such a way that some of the air quality regulations on new projects are now irrelevant.
This is certainly understandable, given that the PATH line to lower Manhattan is shut down, forcing people to either take their cars, NJ Transit, ferries, or the PATH line to Midtown. But the problem arises in Pataki's asking the Feds for the waiver to be in effect until 2005, which could have a substantial effect on new construction projects and transit purchases, particularly locomotives, bueses, and generating plants.
This possibility has raised the eyebrows of Congressmen (particularly Democratic ones) and environmentalists alike. Fears are that such a waiver, if granted, will give Pataki and the State of NY leeway on projects that could be potentially hazardous to the communities they affect.
Sorry, but I don't have the web address for this (I'm not registered), but the article appears on the front page (bottom right hand corner) of today's Times Metro Section.
The article is on the TOP right hand corner of the NYT Metro Section.
You may click here to view it.
It certainly raises my concern.
"In the meantime, [Pataki] officials say, changed commuting patterns, especially for former PATH riders, can mean more driving and more air pollution." RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA, NY Times, JAnuary 2, 2002.
While at first glance, I was inclined to believe that a relaxation in environmental regulations might help fast track mass transit construction projects, after reading the article, I now realize that such a move could simply be an excuse for the Whacky Pataki administration to stop the clock on environmental progress in the region.
""Without the waiver, we're frozen into transportation projects that don't make sense any more." ibid.
Well duh. But before they're completed, they'll make sense again. What? Nobody's ever going to work in downtown again?
What is it with their love affair with the automobile? It is so like them to mortgage the future in order to be lazy in the present.
MATT-2AV
apres moi le deluge Louis XIV about debt, most Republivcans about environmental issues. "my car is my freedom machine" (a slogan from late seventies radio ads
I felt it was about time I post some of the most interesting bits about the Dec 27th SEPTA field trip.
The total cost per person was 3+2.50+3+3+1.30 or $12.80.
No matter where we went we were just in time to miss a train.
Eating lunch at Wayne Junction turned out to be not an option as the sketchyness of the area was exceedingly high. We camped out on the platform.
The wooden canopy over the lo-level, inbound platform at Wayne Jct. has devoloped a definite slant and looks about ready to pancake.
--
\__\
The R8 got up to 70 on the NEC, on the PRR Cheshnut Hill line the linespeed was 50. The speed on the Reading line was 40 or 45 and on the run to Lansdale the speed frequently reached 60. Speed on the doylestown branch was 40 or 45.
The most exciting part was running expres on the R5 from Wayne Jct to Jenkintown. There were several abandonned stations south of Fern Rock, the line was 3 track to Fern Rock and the large Junction at Newtown Jct. was a thrill to speed through.
The best wildlife encounter was a Red Tailed Hawk feasting on a newly trainkilled deer lying w/in the 5 foot of the n/b track.
Lunch was had during the 1/2 hour layover at Lansdale. We walked 3 blocks to a McDonnalds that I heard was popular for patrons of NRHS fan trips.
The old freight station at Doylestown is going to become a bar, but right now it has more rust than Redbirds.
The animated subway ad has been only installed on the outbound PATCO track at Franklyn Square.
According to the T/O, the abandonned Spring Garden station on the Ridge Line has been visited by world renound graffitti artists. Also, current devolopment patterns might get the station re-opened. The T/O also blamed the ridge line's current ridership levels on poor marketing on behalf of SEPTA.
That is about all I have. Happy New year.
The Ridge Spur remains one of SEPTA's best kept secrets. One would hardly know how, when or where to find it, especially after the little 'dance' that was done a few years ago when the trains were extended to Fern Rock via express. I'd venture to say that many everyday Broad St riders avoid the Spur due to the little general knowledge of it. Every time I've used it, it's darn empty.
Just north of Wayne Junction on Germantown Ave (past Berkley St), there are a handful of small mom & pop type stores where a good lunch could be had (to go, if you prefer). Admittedly the area is a tad bit 'sketchy' but not so unfriendly during the day.
The abandoned station at Logan (atop the Broad St Subway stop of the same name) will become a further victim of the next phase of the mainline rebuild (Wayne Jct-Glenside). The platforms will be removed, which will further seal its fate. Whether the old Fern Rock (just north of the new Fern Rock) will get this same treatment, I don't know.
The bar at Doylestown has been a long time coming. The restaurant at Jenkintown (Stasi Milano) is closing and may have already shut down at this point. Although I always thought it was very successful, it wasn't. The parking situation at the station is apparently partly to blame. It makes one wonder if the bar at Doylestown can survive this difficulty, given the even tighter parking situation there.
I had heard that the Spur station at Spring Garden might come back, but I don't know about any development in the immediate area that would push this. There is the renovated building at 10th & Spring Garden that houses several city offices that could attract some ridership, but that's it as far as I know. One thing that does hurt the Spur is the free interchange at City Hall, which makes riding on the more frequent Broad St main line and transferring to/from the El a little more attractive (especially given the Spur's awful off-peak headways).
...and more.
Click here and then click on the 31 that appears in the left frame.
Nice pics, but your webhost is a pain in the ass, had to disable Java because of all the pop up ads.
I was looking at the pictures of the r-143s and the other on this website http://rmmarrero.topcities.com/museum/transit_pictures/ They were good pictures.
#3 West End Jeff
Someone had told me that there was an abandoned station on the LIRR Atlantic branch, underground at Woodhaven (not the one on the Rockaway Branch) where it connected with the abandoned station on the Rockaway Branch at Atlantic Avenue. Is this true and does anyone know where there are any photos posted, either past or present?
Check the archives on this board...The subject was extensive discussed within the last 6 months. The platforms are clearly visible from the railfan windows on both the E/B and W/B sides.
Someone had told me that there was an abandoned station on the LIRR Atlantic branch, underground at Woodhaven (not the one on the Rockaway Branch) where it connected with the abandoned station on the Rockaway Branch at Atlantic Avenue. Is this true and does anyone know where there are any photos posted, either past or present?
It's true. You can get a quick glimpse from LIRR trains going to and from Flatbush Avenue, but don't expect to see much - last I saw, only one small part of each platform is lit, and the trains go past at a very high speed.
Don't know of any pictures.
If you get off at East New York, you can still the sign for the Rockaways.
Mr rt__:^)
Actually, I used ENY from the Atlantic L station on Tuesday and as you said, there still is a sign that says "Jamaica and the Rockaways" at the LIRR ENY station! What is that, close to 50 years later, after service ended!
Actually, I used ENY from the Atlantic L station on Tuesday and as you said, there still is a sign that says "Jamaica and the Rockaways" at the LIRR ENY station! What is that, close to 50 years later, after service ended!
Of course, if one wants to get really technical about things, the sign is still accurate.
Of course, if one wants to get really technical about things, the sign is still accurate.
I don't think that's what they had in mind with that sign, but technically, I guess you are right if you get on a train at ENY to Far Rockaway.....
"Of course, if one wants to get really technical about things, the sign is still accurate.
I don't think that's what they had in mind with that sign, but technically, I guess you are right if you get on a train at ENY to Far Rockaway..... "
... or East Rockaway -- but then you're really not in "the Rockaways"
CG
Perhaps the sign should be reoriented to point toward the A train.
Actually the sign, if I remeber correctly is painted on the tiles in the crossunder of the LIRR ENY.
It is. But now the A train uses the route that the sign originally referred to.
December 26:
My trip started off in a rather interesting way. I made a unique acquisition to my collection when I was able to pick up a piece of upholstery off the floor of Breda 3219 on my way to Union Station. It was more like a strip. I could see where it had come from and it was about 6 inches in length. I saw the holiday display at Union Station and then went to board my Acela Express to New York. The train we had was trainset number 14 (2015-2005). I got the conductor who gave me the carbide in September and I found some other things out from the train crew. All the Acela trainsets are to be in service in June. Eighteen will run daily and two will be in "reserve". The bathroom doors, as I mentioned in the post earlier this week, are still problematic and some people at Amtrak are bracing for a big PR issue if anything happens. This was a conductor who said he was bracing for the trouble, I wonder if the dark suits even thought of this. As I said, they needed a crowbar to get one of those doors open. Also, the curve at the Metropark station is the reason why the Acela has to spend such a long time at that station. The doors can't get enough air to close due to the tilt and they must be closed manually. They had to do this with three of them on that trip. Maybe the Acela should only open selected doors at Metropark. While we were there, a NJT train with Comet cars pulled in while we were platformed and left before we did. Also, it didn't appear too many people on the platform were happy to see us pull in and sit forever. What surprised me was the number of thru passengers from points south to Boston. We arrived one minute late. While taking the switches at Penn, someone commented that the Acela was less stable than the Metroliner. I told them it wasn't and the switches we were riding on were the problem but he refused to believe me.
I went to the subway where I added money to my MetroCard, then entered and waited for an E train. An R38 C train came, followed by an R32 E to 179th that was suffering a really bad case of lost train syndrome. The first four cars were signed as follows:
179th Street
Queens
Canal Street
Manhattan
E 8th Avenue
Local
The next four cars were signed this way:
179th Street
Queens
Canal Street
Manhattan
F 6th Avenue/
Culver Local
Finally, the last two cars were signed:
Jamaica Center/
Parsons-Archer
Canal Street
Manhattan
E 8th Avenue
Local
I got a photo of the F sign, which I might get developed later today. I got on in the last car, 3885, then moved through to its mate and wound up in the last of the F signed cars, 3468. The conductor announced several times "This is an E train operating over the F route to 179th" which confused a few people but it seemed most people knew where to go. I got off at Lex where two V trains came in following the E I was on, both were rather empty. This was at about 7 PM.
I went upstairs and caught R62A 1805 on the 6. The T/O on this train accelerated so quickly it was amazing. The instant the doors closed, we were off.
December 27:
My travels today by transit were limited. I took Artic 1048 on the M79 from Madison to Columbus and RTS 4828 from there to Lincoln Center on the M11.
December 28:
Many travels today. I started at 77th Street where I bought a Fun Pass and caught R142A 7261 to Grand Central, where I switched for the express and got R62 1391 to Union Square. 1391 seemed to sway quite a bit between 42nd and 14th. The plan was to arrive about 5 minutes before the 8th Avenue bound R143 at 9:35, take it to 8th, then go to Canarsie on its 9:46 interval, and then continue elsewhere. I asked a C/R on a train of R42s heading to 8th if the 143 was in service, he said yes, but he didn't know how far back it was because there was switching trouble in ENY that morning. It eventually came, about 45 minutes late. The problem with my choosing Union Square to wait is that it is hard to identify the Manhattan bound train car types as they enter since there is a curve and a grade before they enter the station. I noticed while I was waiting many trains were signed J on the head ends (the ends were signed correctly) and that these signs were illuminated, even though they served no real purpose at that point.
Once on the R143, I went to 8th Avenue. It was about to go out for the Canarsie trip immediately but they decided to push it back an interval so the crew could get a break. When they announced the next train would be on the opposite track, everyone left except me, which made the train crew realize I was in fact a railfan. The speed in the river was good, although some of those curves are really slow. I wish they had let the male recording do the transfers or they should have gotten rid of him altogether, his limited existence is really stupid in my opinion. Also, there is an S bullet under 6th Avenue on the trip map, any reason why? I do like the R143 much more than the R142A. I think it looks better from the outside and maybe because it isn't replacing the redbirds. I can't say the R42s are my favorite cars in the system, but the R40 slants are up there. I think as we left the station before Halsey, I was invited into the cab for a brief ride. The controller is in a really uncomfortable position. I had to leave just before we entered ENY due to the possible high numbers of supervision in the area. I rode out to Canarsie, where I ran back to the lead for the Manhattan bound trip, and doubled back to ENY. They did a partial shutdown at Canarsie which they told me often does not work. I hope to be able to ride the R143 again in the future, it seems like quite a nice train.
At ENY, I changed for the J. That platform needs a windscreen badly! I got R42 4808 which I took out to Jamaica Center. Can the lower levels of the Archer Avenue Stations hold 10 cars? Also, why are there no real stop markers, just numbers sprayed on the wall? We passed over a set of railroad tracks in the vicinity of 121st Street. Who uses those tracks? I am not talking about the LIRR tracks the train passes right before the Archer Avenue portal, but the ones before those if you are on the outbound train. Lastly, for anyone who complains that the curves on the J are really bad, they aren't much worse than some others on the NYC subway system. While I have yet to complete it, the N/R/W at 57th, the 1 and 2 near Chambers, and the L in various places come to mind immediately.
Went upstairs and caught an R32 E train. It was about to leave so I got on towards the back and walked up. The lead car was 3589. I got off at Union Turnpike and noted that car number 3862 was paired with car 3839. I then took R46 6038 to 179th Street. I went "up and over" to wait for an R32, which lasted about as long as I had food to eat. I eventually took 5958 from 179th to 47-50. It was a nice run but I can't say the Queens Boulevard Express is really that fast. We couldn't even pass an R train between Elmhurst and Roosevelt. The train also has to slow down quite a bit at 36th to get to the 63rd Street Connector. Lexington appeared to be used quite heavily and it seemed everyone knew where they were going. The C/R announced before Roosevelt the service change but didn't announce the transfer to the 6 at Lex. I went "up and over" at 47-50 where I caught a R46 5652 on the V to Queens. The V was quite full, all seats were taken, and many people exited at 23rd Avenue. I went to Queens Plaza, only because the C/R didn't announce the 7 transfer at 23rd which I had forgot. Our V pulled in at the same time as an R across the platform but I changed for an Manhattan bound E and didn't look to see which left first. I rode in the 9th car, 3420, which was paired with 3465. I then used the MetroCard transfer (although I had a Fun Pass) to get to the 7. I took the express to Main Street with R36 WF 9697, then came back stopping at Willets Point to walk the bridge towards Corona and Casey Stengal where I saw Viking 996 and also stopping at 111th, 82nd, and 46th, for photo ops, before going to Grand Central. I rode the following WF and ML R36s on the inbound legs: 9650, 9377, 9527, 6475, and 9404. I bought this year's calendar, and then shuttled over to Times Square on R62A 1931 to see the Jacob Lawrence mosaic. I then took R62A 1880, which I believe had a blue sticker on it, to 148th Street. I saw 1731-1735 on the 3 with Pelham stickers and 1771-1775 had red stickers. I exited at 148th, hoping to find the M102 stop at 147th. When I got there, I found the stop but it seemed to be the last stop. The driver of an M1 took me around to 146th and Lenox, the official stop, on board Orion V 6042, and then I got TMC RTS 5187 on the M102 back to the Upper East Side. That terminal stand should be moved to 147th and Clayton in my opinion so it is closer to the subway, the M2, and also because that is what the map depicts.
December 29:
A far less eventful day. I should have bought a fun pass because it would have saved money but I didn't. I was going from the Upper East Side to Rockefeller Center and without the F on weekends, it was quite a trip. I first took R62A 1811 to 59th Street. I then walked up to 63rd to get the F there. The conductor announced the W at 59th and not the F. Someone has got to get these 6 C/Rs to get it straight. They always announce the W when it doesn't run and no one on any line is announcing the MetroCard transfers. There was one person on the platform at Lex who didn't realize it was a MetroCard only transfer so someone was trying to give them directions. I got R46 5952 which I took to 47-50. After seeing the tree, my next destination was the Met. I was going to go by bus, so I eventually wound up at the stop at Madison and 58th, a limited stop. Two limiteds had just left, and on Saturdays, I have found the limited beats out the local despite the 10 minute wait. The only problem was that the wait ended up being about 20 minutes for any bus. First came an M1 which I passed up, and nothing came on the M3 or 4 either. It was the worst Saturday M2 Limited I have been on since it was fairly crowded. The bus was TMC RTS 8791. Later in the day, I took R62A 1721 to Grand Central where I took the 5:20 Hudson Line train to Tarrytown. The first two cars were closed off to passengers which made no sense to me since some passengers were standing. The car was 8086, what type is that? Also, what are the three lights (green, amber, and blue) above the cab for?
December 31:
Spent a few minutes at Irvington photographing. Unfortunately, since my camera battery is lithium and it was about 30 degrees, it wasn't working too well. I missed a shot of a passing Empire Service train as well as the rear of a northbound local. I got a few pics which I hope do come out.
To anyone who finds the questions in this post and answers them, thanks in advance. Also, the pics will be on my site ASAP.
We passed over a set of railroad tracks in the vicinity of 121st Street. Who uses those tracks?
The tracks near 121st St. are the LIRR Montauk Branch to Long Island City
We passed over a set of railroad tracks in the vicinity of 121st Street. Who uses those tracks?
The tracks near 121st St. are the LIRR Montauk Branch to Long Island City
Unfortunately, since my camera battery is lithium and it was about 30 degrees, it wasn't working too well. I missed a shot of a passing Empire Service train as well as the rear of a northbound local.
That happened to me yesterday in South Station. I keep having to take the battery out and breathe on the contacts to make it work. It stopped working entirely once I had taken my critital shots of AEM-7 #925, then it somehow found the energy to unwind the entire roll of film. Batteries are weird.
Oren:
Sounds like a really neat trip!
I will finally get to "experience" the Queens IND on January 18, myself. Something to look forward to (?).
The car observations are quite useful. R-62A 1880 & company on the 3 are nowadays a fairly unusual occurence. It's hard to find "Lenox" 62As on Lenox; sometimes harder to find Redbirds on the 6!
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
TThe Airtrain is going to connect Jamaica with the terminals at JFK (I believe it is just one route connecting JFK Terminals to Jamaica Station). So far the project seems to be a sucess, and moving along nicely. Are there any planned extensions as of yet, such as to La Guardia. I know there was some talk of connecting the two airports. I don't know what kind of ROW that would use however. It just seems that a similar system would work well for La Guardia (someone had mentioned that in an earlier post on LaGuardia)if connecting to the current AirTrain, and slowly inching toward Manhattan.
1. There is a branch being built to the A train at Howard Beach. In fact this part will be completed before the Jamaica portion.
2. Once, the PA did plan to run Airtrain past Jamaica to LAG -- along the Van Wyck. This idea has been abandoned.
Airtrain LGA If Constructed Would Only Go To Woodside - 61st Avenue Station Connecting with (7) Subway & All Branches of The LIRR Except Long Island City & Atlantic Avenue Branches.
"All Branches of The LIRR Except Long Island City & Atlantic Avenue Branches."
That doesn't leave many branches.
"Once, the PA did plan to run Airtrain past Jamaica to LAG -- along the Van Wyck. This idea has been abandoned."
Are you sure? What was the reasoning? When was this statement made? I have lately heard rumors to the contrary.
MATT-2AV
I remember at some point before the current AirTrain was fully planned that the proposal was for a JFK-LGA-Manhattan line that would connect both airports and run over the Queensboro Bridge. I think it was to be a monorail. After going back to the drawing board a couple of times and figuring out how much money was available, they ended up with just the JFK-Jamaica portion. In theory they were to design the line so that it would be possible to extend it to LGA (and Manhattan, I guess) in the future, but I'm not sure what that really means. There are no current proposals I've heard of to get the line to LGA, but will be happy to hear anything to the contrary.
There was talk during the early construction phases of AirTrain that someone would look into the feasibility of through-running trains from Penn Station to JFK via LIRR and AirTrain tracks, but I haven't heard anything recently about that either, and in any case that wouldn't have been ready in time for initial AirTrain operation.
You would need new rolling stock which is FRA-certified. And, there's no chance of this happening until the LIRR 63rd St tunnel enters service. The Queens end at Sunnyside Yard is under construction now.
You would need new rolling stock which is FRA-certified. And, there's no chance of this happening until the LIRR 63rd St tunnel enters service. The Queens end at Sunnyside Yard is under construction now.
CLICK! The light just turned on. Right ... to get JFK users where they want to go -- mostly midtown, but not under Alexander's (the old proposal) -- you run GCT to LIRR 63rd Street Connector to Jamaica to AirTrain (hopefully connecting to AirTrain before that massive interlocking).
Though I can't imagine it would take less than 45 minutes to go from GCT to JFK ... anyone know?
This *does* add some usefulness to the LIRR East Side Access program. And by then they'll have 12 years of AirTrain and it'll be more firmly embedded into transit planning.
Can the LIRR physically (not politically) use the AirTrain ROW? And where would the connection between LIRR and AirTrain be made?
Can the LIRR physically (not politically) use the AirTrain ROW? And where would the connection between LIRR and AirTrain be made?
At Jamaica, where AirTrain track comes in parallel to existing southern tracks.
Hopefully the switches will come as early as possible before the interlocking (heading east/south), since every LIRR train I've ever been on has to creeeeeeeeeeeeeeep slowly through the entire mess.
At Jamaica, I noticed they are working on the station and a building for the AirTrain. Is the building for offices for the AirTrain, or what is the building for? I also noticed that one of the tracks of the LIRR go right throught the building! Is that track going to be some kind of Passenger transfer?
Jamaica Station is undergoing a nearly $400 million redevelopment. A new glass and steel terminal is rising up around the olde building; the old building will then be torn down. Part of the new building is the AirTrain terminal. AirTrain will, however be open to service long before this whole complex is finished.
Jamaica Station is undergoing a nearly $400 million redevelopment. A new glass and steel terminal is rising up around the olde building; the old building will then be torn down. Part of the new building is the AirTrain terminal.
WOW. Missed this entirely. Any online info? Can't find anything on MTA site.
Will it include more platform staircases? I got caught in a Friday night platform change and it was pretty frightening ... exactly 2 staircases on each platform, and about 50,000 people afraid they would miss their connection. Hoo boy.
The Port Authority had a lot of stuff about this on its pre-9/11 website. I hope it will come back at some point.
The Port Authority had a lot of stuff about this on its pre-9/11 website. I hope it will come back at some point.
It's still there. I don't remember anything more detailed.
Cool!
50,000? Really?
Seriously, there are two stairs to overpasses leading from each platform, plus another two, IIRC, leading to an underpass near the east end of the platforms. Unless, of course, something's been torn down in the last few weeks.
50,000? Really?
Well ... no. But it sure as heck seemed like it.
Seriously, there are two stairs to overpasses leading from each platform, plus another two, IIRC, leading to an underpass near the east end of the platforms. Unless, of course, something's been torn down in the last few weeks.
For some reason, none of the passengers who suddenly had to switch platforms used the underpasses. And I didn't know they were there. Everyone crowded into the stairways, which of course had a few people trying to come down them. And it was a beach train so there was a LOT of weekender luggage, unlike weekday commuter traffic (briefcases at most).
All in all, it was a miserable experience and one of the reasons that I take the train from Hunterspoint Avenue if I possibly can.
Life is far too short to change at Jamaica.
AFAIK, the old LIRR building will remain, and only the AirTrain terminal, "vertical circulation" building, and platform canopies are glass and steel (contextual development, anyone?). At least I think that's the old building on the right side of this slide.
You could be right; on the other hand I distinctly remember MTA stating it would replace Jamaica Station entirely with a new building, and the price tag quoted will pay for more than glass canopies and a vertical circulator. A construction supervisor at the site told me the old building was coming down.
I hope I'm right; that building is landmarked! :) The entire platform structure is being replaced, not just the canopies, which contributes to the $400M cost. I'd guess that a new building would cost more.
The entire platform structure is being replaced, not just the canopies, which contributes to the $400M cost.
Wonder if there are any thoughts toward double-decking it so you can have two layers of platforms AND some bypass tracks so not every SINGLE train has to stop there?
Any idea?
Wonder if there are any thoughts toward double-decking it so you can have two layers of platforms AND some bypass tracks so not every SINGLE train has to stop there?
None whatsoever
There already are some bypass tracks, but they're on the same level as the other tracks: http://www.kennedyairport.com/airtrain/Drawings11-00_Gallery/images/s-vcb-trac-101200.jpg
There already are some [Jamaica] bypass tracks, but they're on the same level as the other tracks: http://www.kennedyairport.com/airtrain/Drawings11-00_Gallery/images/s-vcb-trac-101200.jpg
Has any LIRR passenger train in history ever used them?
I have to think that there'd be a market for one or two "Super Expresses" (like Metro North has) that don't stop til the few stations at the end of their run.
This would only work if the bypass tracks were relatively quick, and trains didn't have to slow for 10 minutes grinding through the entire interlocking to get to/from the bypass tracks.
I think a small handfull of rushhour trains from Penn do actually skip Jamaica.
I think a small handfull of rushhour trains from Penn do actually skip Jamaica.
Ah, that's good to know. I've clearly never ridden one.
Does any SubTalker know if this helps speed things up or if they still take the 10 minutes of crawling thru the interlocking?
For 11 1/2 years I took trains to/from Penn Sta that skipped Jamaica.
The speed thru the station varied based on traffic, but we NEVER sped thru.
Mr rt__:^)
Quite a few trains bypass Jamaica, especially during the PM rush. Some of my favorites are
4:24 to Ronkonkoma - first stop Bethpage
4:51 to Ronkonkoma - first stop Hicksville
5:22 to Ronkonkoma - first stop Wyandanch
5:41 to Ronkonkoma - First Stop Hicksville
5:53 to Ronkonkoma - first stop Bethpage
5:36 to babylon - First stop Massapequa
In the AM there are also 5 trains from Ronkonkoma that do not stop at Jamaica. I don't know how many Babylon trains bypass jamaca but the best Babylon train is the 6:07AM? After Babylon, the first stop is the last stop, Penn Station.
Quite a few trains bypass Jamaica, especially during the PM rush.
Thanks, Dude. So ... how much time does this actually save? Comments on crawling through the interlocking?
According to the published schedules, trains stopping at Jamaica dwell from 1 to 2 minutes. Since the crawl through the interlock is constant it's likely that the actual time savings are more than the 1-2 minutes. FOr me, it's not the time though. It's the bother of people getting up and changing trains at jamaica. It's the disruption of my rest and the need to show my 'ticket' to the conductor again. Even when I'm on a train that does stop at Jamaica, if it's more than 10 cars long, I ride in the rear of the train since those last 2 cars do not platform in Jamaica. Personally, though, I agree that the extremely slow pace through the Jamaica station interlockings can be irksome. I don't see the reason for it, but then again, I'm sure they have their reasons.
Several years ago there was a train (IIRC the 5:23 Penn-Huntington) that only stopped at Syosset, CSH & Huntington. However I remember it pulling through one of the platforms without stopping, so that the time savings is really negligible. All it accomplished was that there was no picking up of Flatbush or HP transferees.
There are 12 AM westbound's and 14 PM eastbound's on the Babylon branch that skip Jamaica to/from Penn Station.
Huntington has 4 in each direction to/from Penn. There's also one Flatbush-to-Huntington PM train and a Port Jeff-Hunterspoint AM train which skip Jamaica.
As mentioned by TD, Ronkonkoma has 5 in each direction.
Long Beach has 2 eastbound and 3 westbound.
Far Rock has 2 eastbound, but none westbound.
Hempstead has 2 westbound, but none eastbound. (go figure)
West Hempstead and Oyster Bay have none.
Time saved varies, but (based on perception only) the most time is saved on trains which switch from the Babylon tracks to the Atlantic tracks at Valley Stream. The Atlantic tracks join the main line just east of Jamaica, and as a result skip many of the switches and congestion east of Jamaica.
CG
What is the track going to be used for that runs under and through the new buildings in the right of the picture. You can also see it at track 8 of the platform in Jamaica.
And if the trains didn't have to wait all day for clearance into the East River tubes.
So you mean that the waiting room that they just fixed so nicely on the old building is being torn dowwn with thew old building. Why did they redo the whole waiting/ticket area?
Wait I just saw on another part of the thread that the old building will remain with the new complex.
You are correct. The LIRR Building from 1913 will remain.
It does have a lot of character, doesn't it?
I read somewhere that it was built strong enough so that an additional 7-10 floors could be added if necessary.
A new glass and steel terminal is rising up around the olde building; the old building will then be torn down. Part of the new building is the AirTrain terminal.
From the PA website: "The AirTrain Terminal design at Jamaica Station has several components that will be integrated into the existing historical complex ... "
Key words "integrated INTO" and "existing HISTORICAL". The old one stays.
I guess the construction supervisor I talked to at the site was wrong...OK.
I have nothing against the current building. It does need a little interior updating, though.
They did a really nice job updating the ticket area.
There is a branch being built to the A train at Howard Beach. In fact this part will be completed before the Jamaica portion.
That's right, I forgot about that branch. So there will actually be two subway connections.
I haven't seen anything formal, but I'd be surprised if the Port Authority hadn't considered that connecting the JFK Airtrain from Jamaica to LGA would effectively create one very large airport from two. After all, it can take 20-30 minutes to get around DFW on their internal air train.
LGA and JFK currently serve very different clienteles. The thing they're missing out on are the international connections. JFK has the best schedule for international flights to Europe, but passengers travelling from mid-America are hard-pressed to take advantage of those options without taking a taxi from LGA to JFK. Not likely.
Extending the Air Train would increase traffic at both airports, giving a boost to the landing and departure taxes the PA receives on each passenger.
CG
It's a very interesting thought. If one looks at the arrangement of the trackway, Jamaica could serve as a stub terminal where trains could change ends and head for the alternate airport. The northern route could follow the Van Wyck median (as it does on the southern route) directly to LGA or with an intermediate stop for a connection with the #7 line at Willets Pt. Blvd. Whether the PA looks at it as an intra-airport system as you suggest or as a connector between the two airports, the LGA segment might actually get more ridership than the southern leg.
Are there any other stations for the Air Train between Jamaica Station and the airport (aside from the branch to Howard Beach)
There are no other stations between Jamaica and the Airport stations.
There are no other stations between Jamaica and the Airport stations.
Nor can there be. AirTrain is being funded by a charge levied on airline tickets. Federal laws imposing this "passenger facility charge" prevent the proceeds from being used for transit projects that will benefit persons other than airport users. Having no stations other than Jamaica/Howard Beach and those at JFK itself means that AirTrain will be of relatively little use to anyone but airline passengers and airport employees. That, in turn, keeps Congress happy.
You could theoretically have an intermediate stop on the Van Wyck, but it would have to work like this: Riders may only board Airport-bound trains; riders may only alight from Jamaica-bound trains. Doesn't that resemble what Long Island Bus does at its Queens stations?
"You could theoretically have an intermediate stop on the Van Wyck, but it would have to work like this: Riders may only board Airport-bound trains; riders may only alight from Jamaica-bound trains. Doesn't that resemble what Long Island Bus does at its Queens stations? "
Yes it does. Interesting idea. Also resembles what Amtrak does (or used to do) at some NEC stations (Metropark and New Carrollton come to mind) -- some trains stop only to receive or discharge passengers.
CG
Thye only thing is that it would slow the train up a bit. It would have to be estimated how many people would use an intermediate station to go to JFK.
Very true.
So long as one end of the trip has to be on the airport grounds, I would estimate that the number of trips per month with the other end at a hypothetical mid-point station would be approximately none.
"So long as one end of the trip has to be on the airport grounds, I would estimate that the number of trips per month with the other end at a hypothetical mid-point station would be approximately none. "
Not necessarily. A station on the JFK train just north of the Belt could serve all of the hotels in that area and would have the effect of reducing on-airport traffic further. Also, many of the airport's employees live just north of the airport along the Van Wyck.
CG
Thanks for sharing that info. I was unaware of that technicality.
So if I understand you correctly, should the MTA wish to extend the Astoria line to LaGuardia, or use a branch off of the Flushing line, it may not receive funding from airline ticket surcharges.
It would instead have to be funded by us, the taxpayers and straphangers.
In my opinion, this is one more reason why I like the JFK AirTrain situation; it is paid for by those who use it, and it is designed for those who use it.
MATT-2AV
So if I understand you correctly, should the MTA wish to extend the Astoria line to LaGuardia, or use a branch off of the Flushing line, it may not receive funding from airline ticket surcharges.
Not necessarily. If the extension/branch goes solely to the airport, without intermediate stops after leaving the existing line, one could argue that it would be useful only to airport users and therefore should qualify for ticket-surcharge funding. In other words, although the extension/branch would be part of the subway system, persons other than airport users would not have reason to go beyond the "original" part of the Astoria or Flushing line.
I'm not so sure it would fly. They may have no reason to go beyond that point, but that doesn't mean that they can't (without extra measures, like an exit fare). However, I really must not try and speculate on what a court would rule.
MATT-2AV
Would it be possible to fund a subway branch / extension by surcharge funding then at a later date add an intermediate station by other means?
I think that after the JFK Airtrain is completed, a branch to LaGuardia seems like the next logical expansion for the reasons you stated. It may even be a better connection than the N train to LaGuardia. Once LaGuardia is connected to JFK, thew next step (and getting closer, once at LaGuardia) would be some sort of connection to Manhattan. Although I don't know how or where would be the easiest and most Efficiect route to Manhattan, from LaGuardia for the Airtrain
As many of you know, the TA generally has no idea where its trains are between the time the leave one terminal and the time they arrive at the next -- unless a T/O pulls up to a phone to report a problem, or a tower calls one in. Therefore, only BIG problems get reported, and Newsradio88 almost always reports mass transit is "on or close to schedule."
If the TA pulls off ATS, however, all that will change. If any given train is eight seconds behind schedule, it will be immediately and clearly visible at the new Rail Control Center.
I wonder what the inter-face with the traffic agencies will be? Would the ten minute delay in-bound on the #4 at 6:50 a.m. this morning become newsworthy?
How is transit news reported in Washington, where ATO is standard?
It isn't. WMATA doesn't give WTOP any information outside rush hour or during rush for that matter. Whatever they provide is often bare bones so it isn't much help. Not even Lisa Baden's daily dose of humor helps the anger when they can't simply report if the trains are on time.
Would the ten minute delay in-bound on the #4 at 6:50 a.m. this morning become newsworthy?
If they listed every "minor" delay... the traffic guy would never get a break.Also, why would the T/o turn off the ATS?
I chuckle when I hear that too. I prefer to hear, "On or close to the track."
Here in Boston where the MBTA knows where all of its commuter trains are, the right word doesn't get out to the media. Case in point -- in the aftermath of last Thursday evening's Amtrak derailment at Canton Junction, one of tracks was still out-of-service all day Friday, causing delays of 60-90 minutes on the Providence line. On Friday morning, I listened to WBZ Newsradio-1030 and its traffic reports "on the 3s" for 45 minutes... and there was NO MENTION OF ANY DELAYS.
Unfortunately traffic reports and news stations play favorites with the cars, they rarely mention transit delays unless there is a suspension of service, and even when that has happened it's gone unmentioned on 880 or 1010.
Personally I think there should be a news station broadcast just in the subways, with only subway and MTA info without having to sit through all the damn traffic reports. I don't drive so they are worth nothing to me.
Added to the lack of info given to the news media is the fact that the news media doesn't know what to do when they receive the info.
I would estimate that 25% of their more unusual reports, whether related to the roads or transit, are garbled in some way. If it isn't about the Hudson River crossings or the Kosciuscko Bridge (and equally well-known trouble spots), they don't have a clue.
I don't remember any particularly outrageous examples at the moment, but one of my favorites is when they don't tell you in which direction on a highway or transit line the blockage has occurred.
>>unless a T/O pulls up to a phone to report a problem<<
Larry,
The T/O's have had 2 way radios for about 30 years. They don't use the phones much anymore (if at all). The Towers have radios as well and they can use either (radio or phone).
Where have you been living? In a cave?
As far as not knowing where the trains are. That may be true for the B division from a Control Center standpoint but the A division board at 370 Jay St does work. Let me assure you that in all divisions the towers keep a close eye on things and call trains when they stay in a station too long.
I thought that everytime a train came into the station, it had to get written into a pad of paper someplace. I don't remember who called in the times, and who wrote them down, but I vaguely remember something like that from the article in the times that basically said that all NYCT had to year 2000 check was their fax machine ;)
Only major stations such as 125th St, Grand Central, Brooklyn Bridge, Bwoling Green.
The only part that works is the Lex from 125 south to B'klyn Bridge; otherwise, they're as much in the dark as B1 and B2.
Perhaps, but the model boards in the towers do work so there is some light at the end of that tunnel.
I can't believe I just said that.
Model boards at the towers have always worked; that's why during a problem, a T/O is more likely to call the tower first. If you're 'blind', better to call someone who can see than another 'blind' person.
My sweatshirt - The light at the end of the tunnel may be an oncoming train.
My T-shirt - Due to budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off.
From a sign on an office door where I work:
It has come to our attention that the light at the end of the tunnel does not conform to standards.
Effective immediately, please disregard the light. It will be extinguished as soon as possible.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I wonder what the inter-face with the traffic agencies will be?
Why not provide a website interface for the general public that shows the real time status of all trains, something like what the MUNI already does.
Bemoaning the lack of transit info on the traffic reports seems to come up occasionally here.
Of course, this all begs the question "What would you do with the info if you had it?", especially as respects the annoying but minor delays like sick passengers and BIE that will tie up a line for 15 minutes and then have residual delays of about 15 minutes as well.
By the time the info could be conveyed from the TA to the radio stations very few people would be substantially impacted.
Suppose I'm in my office at 6:15 and I hear that there's a BIE on the E train at 7th Avenue which has just been cleared. By the time I get to the 5th Avenue station to catch my train to Penn, chances are the entire incident will be transparent to me.
Obviously things like "Derailment causes no evening service on the X line" are meaningful and newsworthy.
Same thing goes for the commuter lines. It's really of no consequence to anyone to waste air time announcing "20 minute delays on the Podunk Branch". How would that change anyone's commute? Certainly, if there were some alternate service that could get you home sooner than the Podunk branch plus 20 minutes, it's an announcement worth having. But in the overwhelming number of cases, LIRR/MNRR/NJT plus 20 (or even 45) minutes is far better than any other public transit alternative.
CG
For some people it is worth it. Some people only take mass transit certain days and drive others. If they hear "delays on the Brunswick Line", they will probably choose to battle traffic on 270 rather than take a MARC train.
No, as long as the TA keeps to defining a "late" train in it's own way.
I saw something yesterday that made me laugh out loud:
A little girl, maybe 4 or 5 years old, and her father were transferring from one of the 8th Ave. IND lines to the F at W4. I was standing on the stairs between the mezzanine and the F platform. When they reached the top of the steps, the little girl began to whine, "No, Daddy, I don't wanna go on another train!" and proceeded to throw a major hissy-fit as they descended. The tears, the screams, going limp and being dragged -- the whole bit.
Dad: "Tell you what. I'll make a deal with ya. We get on one more train, and when we get out, we'll take a bus."
Nice try.
Kid: "No, I don't wanna go on another train! No! Waaaah!"
When I was that age, I would have had a tantrum about not being allowed to take another train. There really are different molds, I guess. :O)
ok so far i have #7, R, G, Franklin shuttle
any others out there?
thanks back to my passengers now!!
http://communities.msn.com/NYCTABVERoutes
http://www.ste-liz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://www.crotrainz.com/index.html
Check out these three sites. The first one has several NYC lines, but you need an MS passport. The second and third don't have many NYC routes, but they do have Glasgow, Vienna, Toronto, and several from London.
David
I got a WMATA Red Line route, e-mail me for details.
I have installed BVE and got it running. But how do I get the train out of the station? There seems to be a lack of instructions on how to accelerate and brake. I don't have a joystick so how do I get the keyboard to get the train moving?
HAHAAHAH qtrain... took me a minute too
its either
z - go faster, a - reduce speed,
/ - apply brake
> - release
OR like in r143
z = reduce brake and go vroom
a = apply brake and slow the mother down
up arrow puts the train into forward gear
good luck!
You have to press "F" first every time to put the train in foward!
That is only if you have your controls set in operation 2.
And "Q" sets the emergency brake if necessary
ok so i got the Q route... runs on the express track but wants me to stop at the locals... bet that will piss off the passengers when they have to hop to the platform :)
I changed the file to change that but the distances are still inaccurate. E-mail me if you want it.
Heh. Go into the RW route file with a text editor and change the 1's at the station stops to 0's and then you won't have to stop there or watch the "geese-o-meter" go offscale. Each route seems to have minor miscalculations - the D train run for example wants you to run up the dash and somehow let the geese off at all the local stops too. Getting familiar with the CSV and RW files and how they work will allow you to piece together your OWN routes when you get bored with operating. :)
My E line route (the one I'm still working on [and need help with]) doesn't have that problem. It'll just show you a sign marker for each station you pass. They're not even listed on the schedule.
As it should be ... I just started doing my FIRST route for BVE and ended up getting my own happy meat caught in a Freeobj(...) beyond my own limits ... once I get past my own insanity level here at work, plan to finish it and then might actually have some time to engage in some collaberation ... my email address above is valid, but way over the top busy at the moment ... if you can give me a week or so, drop me a line, tell me what you need, be happy to kick in where and if I can be of any use. I'm a HORRIBLE artist, and live way upstate. My last visit to da chitty was Kissmoose with some pals. Prior was nearly 10 years ago - last time I *lived* in town was 1975 ...
Question I have is where do you stop the train at the station, where is the marker? I keep getting indications that I pass the station and three buzzes. I guess I'm not opening the doors, how do you do that?
q train: youshould see a marker, most of the nyc rotes are 8/10 or the g has 10 opto and the shuttle too has 2 opto...
otherwise stop close to the end about 1" off the end :)
hope that helps...
I don't have any NYC subway routes yet but I'd like some. I have no idea on how to operate the Japanese trains, the two routes that came with BVE when I downloaded it. I have gotten the trains to move but keep getting an "angry face" and chimes and bells, not to mention getting a commuter train into EMG and having no way to get it out.
The "grumpies" would be your "geeseometer" and yes, geese are SUPPOSED to be unhappy if you operate properly. :)
For the Nip routes, you'll see a little orange and white DIAMOND on a pole, usually on the wayside opposite the platform at the stop point. That's the DEFAULT stop point in BVE, the way it's done on the home islands in Nihon. For NYC subway routes, most people place the car markers on the wall just like the real thing. The "stop markers" can be made invisible in BVE (those diamonds on poles) so you can use something ELSE as the stop marker ... does this help?
OK I figured the diamond was the stop marker. I don't know what the three buzzes are though. It's abit different because you don't get door opening/closing sounds like on Mechanik.
Three buzzes is the conductors way of saying, "I pointed, did not see board, I ain't opening this witch until you put me on the board" ... means you overshot the platform. Go into the kitchen, get a plastic cup, fill it to the brim with grim and get ready for counseling. :)
Or just back up (press the down arrow 2 times then apply power) until you get it right.
Hit F3 and they'll leave you alone. That meter depends on the load set at each station. If you have none, it's ALWAYS green. If it's at full load, it's gonna get angry real easy.
Heh. Guess it's a throwback to my days in the 1970's on the railroad. Don't want no sleeping geese and the more you can make them steam, the more it felt like a day at work. Heh. In fact, I noticed that if I apply and brake a couple of times, I can pitch the old geese-o-meter right off the scale on the Franklin shuttle route. :)
The geese don't like fast, hard braking either.
Just like the real thing. Just remember - there's a reason why the shoe wood goes diagonally inside the cab to keep the geese from kicking it in after you splatter them on the storm door. :)
hey Northman (or anyone) can you tell me how to install that damn Q route and B route and all those other routes from the communities site? or where you got the Q route
Been a while. If I remember correctly, those were just a ZIP file containing all the files without "folder structure" so what I did was create a "NYCTA-Q" folder under \bve\railway\object folder and unzipped them to there, then moved the RW file to the ROUTE folder so it would appear on the list. All of those were done in a way that departs from what many other authors did, a nice self-extractor that put everything in place. For those routes, you DO have to sing for your supper to get everything moved.
We're not allowed to have games on our "work machines" or any other unauthorized stuff (security reasons) so I can't drop down and have a look since they're on my "home machine" ... but that's what I remember and just went and looked at a CDROM where those are stored.
Thanks a lot I'll go try that. Boy , hopefully Ill also get unlazy and create my own route.
I've still got one I was working on - got a bit busy and hope to get back to it this weekend ... plenty of folks working on MORE BVE routes too. We were all wondering how many of us BVE'ers were going to go over the fence and do MSTS routes - most who have tried are now back on the BVE train ...
one more question. I have 2 routes installed on BVE 2. SOmetimes the game stops and says invalid something Mainloop, i have to press contuinue to go and it keeps popping up, especially by the markers to stop, how do i fix that?
Any such errors indicate that files are missing or invalid. The authors of those routes used LONG filenames and if the Zips were unzipped in DOS mode, the filenames might have been unwittingly changed or don't match the filenames that the RW files are looking for.
Generally bad filenames will get an error prior to the route coming up while it's in "rendering" mode ... if it comes up and you get that, something's wrong with the route file as far as what's being called. I *did* get the routes working but it DID take some editing of the route files. That's why I find it amusing that the MSN site is going whole hog MSTS ... BVE is a LOT easier to write for and that has me wondering how routes for MSTS are going to turn out given the reality.
I'm near the end of th night on this end, but drop me an email if you continue having troubles - will see about zipping up my RW files for you so you can unpack them. I have those working on my home box but they didn't work straight out of the download ... they still have some problems but none of them require tooting for a car inspector. :)
Remember what Microsoft did with their Windows Media Player and Winamp? All of a sudden Winamp skins can be used in Windows Media Player. I wouldn't be suprised if tomorrow BVE routes will load and run in MSTS.
That would be amusing to hear ... but since this ain't Microsoft's train sim - they subcontracted it to the JUKU kids (who will find their stock options and their company soon swallowed WHOLE) it's possible it won't happen. I *have* tried MSTS (never got it to work on my machine) at friends' places and what's amusing is once they tried BVE, they got gigabytes of disk space back upon removing MSTS. :)
Can't wait to see what Mackoy has up his sleeve - rumors on the islands is that BVE 3 should be done by March and will come with some VERY pleasant surprises - even more major than the "2" version compared to "1" ... but no ammeter ...
That whole "batch" of files where you got that line, suck. No offense but, it's not really much work put into that and very buggy and not the least accurate.
Up arrow down arrow is your reverser in mode 1 ...
OK thanks!
The world of Subway Surfing suffered a major setback early on New Years Day. A rising star in the sport, Ariel Briones, was riding on the roof of a northbound train at Clinton Washington Station when he fell off and into the path of a southbound A train. He did not survive the cut.
...and here we see this week's darwin award being placed next to his tombstone. Ah yes, the darwin award, a prize cherished by subway surfers around the globe. And not to be left out, the city will be rewarded with a lawsuit from the deceases' parents for untold millions.
If this dumbass was riding on the top of a speeding train then why is the MTA being sued? And why does the city have to pay for someones idiotic acts. That's why kids are running wild because stupid parents mean stupid kids. And if that was my child(which I know it won't be because she'll be too lazy to do so with my DNA)I wouldn't sue because I'll know it would be her fault.
if that was my child...I wouldn't sue because I'll know it would be her fault.
How 'bout when the fifteenth lawyer tells you that you'll get 1.3 mil (and he'll get 2/3 mil)? 20 years ago the parent of a kid who climbed onto the roof of a freight car and fried himself on Conrail's catenary in Philly got 1 mil because there wasn't a fence around the railroad. Two years later, when there WAS a fence, a kid jumped onto the roof of a freight car from a street bridge over the tracks and fried himself when he grabbed the catenary. His parent got a mil. It doesn't have to make sense, it just happens.
Like the woman who got $10 mil after taking Phen-Fen (or Fen-Phen, whatever) after her own physician testified that she wasn't injured. She got a jury of HER peers, not ours.
Sorry to contribute to a thread rapidly going off-topic, but...
What we need is something like the British system: The loser in a civil lawsuit has to pay the court costs and attorney's fees of the winner. Corporations and public agencies are therefore much less inclined to settle, and the trial lawyers tend to stick to cases that actually are legitimate.
But you'll never see that here, because the only regulation lawyers face in this country comes from (drumroll, please...) more lawyers, whether they be in the Bar Association, or politicians in the local, state or national government. It's the only profession that essentially has no external oversight whatsoever.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Yo David....why can't I sue for pain and suffering if my buddies told me the car i had to inspect and repair was a victim of retarded dead dummy pathological remains splat? CI Peter
Why can't they ever get railfans on juries?
Cause there's no storm doors in court rooms. (sorry, couldn't resist).
I'm a railfan, empanel me, I FIND FOR THE DEFENDANT!
I'm a railfan, empanel me, I FIND FOR THE DEFENDANT!
The first jury on which I served found for the defendant.
Well, of course they should sue.
I mean, did the MTA install a 36 foot high electric barbed wire fence all around the entire ROW ov every single line in the system?
Were there signs (written in English, Spanish, 6 dialects of Chinese, Croatian, Ukrainian, Farsi, Tagalog, Sanskrit, Urdu, Latin, Haitian Creole, Morse code, semaphore, Braille, Esperanto, Vulcan, Klingon, hieroglyphics and Neanderthal grunt language) warning people that they might fall off the train and die?
Was there another sign (written in English, Spanish, 6 dialects of Chinese, Croatian, Ukrainian, Farsi, Tagalog, Sanskrit, Urdu, Latin, Haitian Creole, Morse code, semaphore, Braille, Esperanto, Vulcan, Klingon, hieroglyphics and Neanderthal grunt language) warning about the dangers of trying to scale an electric barbed wire fence?
If not, then it isn't the kid's fault. It's entirely the MTA's fault. Suppose he was a Neanderthal just thawed from a 50,000 year old block of ice? How would he know about the dangers of trains, unless there was a warning sign printed in Neanderthal? Suppose it was Dr. Spock? Sure, he's smart as hell, but how can you expect him to know any arbirtary earthling language? Same for Worf - isn't it unreasonable to expect extraterrestrial visitors to both understand the danger of NYCT trains AND speak English? What about escaped ocelots and peacocks? Ocelots are people too, and deserve a sign in their own language. And dolphins? If the subway system were flooded someday, how would the dolphins know to keep clear of the ROW? You know, with all this talk about equal rights for all, has anyone mentioned the rights of Neanderthals, dolphins or Klingons?
Maybe this kid was told to do this as an extra credit assignment by his teacher. Sue the teacher too - guilty until proven innocent. Send her to a military tribunal.
Man, what came over me??
It's a well known fact that Spock had trouble navigating San Francisco's transit system (Star Trek IV). He got on and off a bus, and asked Kirk, "What does he mean by, exact change?"
You mean MR. Spock. DR. Spock is a real person who would understand the english signs.
-Hank
Ah yes, you're right. Mr. not Dr.
Which brings me to another point - You know you're a true railfan (or a Trekkie parent, perhaps), when you can distinguish at a moment's notice between Dr. and Mr. Spock.
Well, here we go again. A subway thread that's going askew. Oh well, what the hell.
There's a belief in this country that if you suffer a loss, someone else must be to blame. There must be someone to sue. There must be someone to make me whole.
One only has to look to the events of 9/11 to see this being taken to its absurd conclusion. For all intents and purposes, 9/11 was an act of Mass-Murder, a crime. Hundreds of millions of dollars were raised through charities for the families of the victims. Yet the government has taken the unpresendented step to try to make the families whole. Taken to its logical conclusion, will the government now go back and pay the families of Oklahoma City? Will the government now embark on a policy that all crime victims are paid by the governemnt?
Getting back to your question, the lawyers only have to do one of two things:
Convince a jury that the TA did not do all it could to stop a reasonable person from riding on the roof of a subway train. (remember, this is part of the culture in some South American countries)
Or simply play on the sympathy of a jury and convince them that the family suffered a great loss and a settlement would mean much to the family and the TA would never feel it. In short, it has very little to do witht he idiocy of the original act.
Taken to its logical conclusion, will the government now go back and pay the families of Oklahoma City?
the families of Oklahoma City are pissed because they didn't get the government bonanza.
I just want to add that I was and still am in favor of payments for police, fire and other emergency personnel who risked and lost their lives. However, as tragic as the other lost lives were, why do they suddenly become elligable for a government windfall when the family mugging victtim, just as dead, gets nothing?
TD: what about us??????? If you trolley a trainset out of the barn and the big bug hangs you up......you may fry (I have learned to check for movement.) WE risk life and limb everyday as part of our work and not listed as 'emergency personnel.' I have ideas for turnstile jumpers. CI Peter
Part of Tier IV pension is life insurance. 2X your annual salary whether it was job related or not. Of course your family can always sue the TA and the maker of the trolley system - they may even be able to sue Con Ed. and the NY Power Authority.
However, as tragic as the other lost lives were, why do they suddenly become eligible for a government windfall when the family mugging victim, just as dead, gets nothing?
Beats the heck out of me.
I, for one, would like to see a limitation to state/municipal liability specifically for trespass onto property not designated for passenger use. Specifically, you lose your right to sue.
Of couse, I don't always get what I would like to see.
Injuries sustained during the committing of a crime -like trespass - should not be compensated. If you are fleeing from the police and your getaway car crashes into a wall, too bad for you. Yet, only in the good old USA, the crook will SUE! I do not get it, but then, who makes the laws? Yep, the lawyers.
Many crime victims are given money by state and federal governments, it's called the crime victims board. It's uaully not in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but it's a little bit.
-Hank
Yes some of the families of victims (not the rescuers families) are upset with $Million+ settlements. It's not a matter of being made whole any more - it's become a winning lottery ticket.
Why sue for idiocy?
Because you can get $ for it
What has ever happened to common sense. Don't these idiots realize that it is dangerous to ride on the roof of a subway car? There are many places throughout the system where there is no room for someone to stand on top of a subway car. This is not the first time I've neard of someone getting killed because of subway "surfing", and I'm sure it won't be the last time I hear of someone getting killed because of subway "surfing".
#3 West End Jeff
What has ever happened to common sense. Don't these idiots realize that it is dangerous to ride on the roof of a subway car? There are many places throughout the system where there is no room for someone to stand on top of a subway car. This is not the first time I've heard of someone getting killed because of subway "surfing", and I'm sure it won't be the last time I hear of someone getting killed because of subway "surfing".
#3 West End Jeff
As a railfan who also is an attorney, I positively dread entering threads that have to do with people killed because they crossed, tresspassing, or otherwise did something stupid around train lines. Someone will speculate that the parents or other heirs will sue, others will talk about the case as if the railroad is already being sued, and then the whole thing typically descends into a bashing of lawyers and the legal system.
1) As railfans, afficionados of a very technical and intricate industry, we are unusually sensitive to how the media and Hollywood can intentionally or unintentionally misdiscribe or even twist the perception of railways, transit, etcetera. We can all cite examples where either a local news outlet or a movie "got it wrong." And even with all that knowledge about the media not being a wholly reliable source, many of us still accept blindly as typical or ordinary the lawsuit horror stories that the media latches onto because they make good copy.
2) Contrary to the comment someone made, to the effect that if the MTA hired lawyers to sue trespassers and their heirs there would be fewer attorneys to sue the MTA, there are relatively few attorneys who practice in the litigation area. MANY people who get a law degree never bother to get their law license at all (lots more than study medicine or architecture or such but don't get the license) and instead use their legal training to do business transactions for themselves or a company they own or manage. Many who do get law licenses end up doing very little court work, criminal or civil, and mainly do wills, contracts, land transactions, etcetera. Of those who do practice in litigation, many serve as defense counsel (paid by the insurance companies). In the field I work in, I haven't been within a mile of a lawsuit, or any other court case, in over four years.
3) When I was working for a firm that did litigation, it was only a small part of our case load BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PARTICULARLY LUCRATIVE. Think about it: if suing someone were the guaranteed "ka-ching!" victory that popular culture makes it out to be, we would have done that all the time instead of working mostly on simple bankruptcies, wills and trusts for people whose biggest asset was their house, and criminal defense in minor drug possession cases. Of the lawsuits we took on, we probably lost more cases than we won, and that was after the firm owner had debated, researched, and generally agonized over whether to accept the case in the first place.
4) While it's true that filing a lawsuit is easy, whether or not one has a lawyer -- the really bizarre "aliens and George Bush ate my brain!" suits tend to be pro se -- winning is not the guaranteed win that it's popularly made out to me, not by a damned long shot.
(a) "In 49% of [civil] jury trial cases, the jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded in the 12 month period an estimated $2.4 billion in compensatory and punitive damages. The median total award for a plaintiff winner was $35,000. Juries awarded punitive damage awards in 212 cases with a plaintiff winner that totaled over $545 million. The median punitive damage award to plaintiff winners was $50,000." http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/civil.htm
(b)"Plaintiffs won in 48% of tort trial cases. Plaintiffs were more likely to win in tort trials decided by a judge (57%) than a jury (48%). Plaintiffs won in 58% of automobile accident trials, 57% of intentional tort trials, and 23% of medical malpractice trials.
The median final award to plaintiff winners in tort trials during 1996 was about $31,000. Seventeen percent of final awards exceeded $250,000 and 6% were $1 million or more." http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ttvlc96.htm
(c) "Despite all of the hoopla about sympathetic juries, plaintiffs chances of winning a recovery in a products liability lawsuit hover at around 50% or less." http://www.productslaw.com/masstort.html
I appreciate your input, from the POV of a practising lawyer. I admit, I'm usually one of the first to jump on the lawyer/politician/whatever bashing bandwagon.
But what troubles me is that even though victory is far from assured (though a 45-50% chance of a median decision of $30-50,000 is far from penauts), agencies like the MTA have to go out and spend money to defend themselves against lawsuits of all sorts.
To give a related example, my cousin struck and killed a girl crossing a street(and seriously injured another). He has been sued by the families of the victims, for a sum in the millions of dollars. Since it's an ongoing case, I don't know if I should divulge too many details, but it was a wide street (something like Queens Blvd, near an intersection).
What was he doing? He was following traffic regulations, according to eyewitness reports. He was not speeding (eyewitness reports and measurements of skid marks confirm this). He did not cross a double line, and was not weaving between lanes. He did not go through a red light (it was green). He was not talking on a phone or arguing with someone in the back seat. He was not under the influence of alcohol (was tested for such; if he had refused it would be a default DWI and automatic arrest and slammer time). Onlookers and the police report stated that the victims ran across the street, against a red light, and that my cousin was not at fault, and that there was probably no way a collision could have been avoided; he could have been any of us, just in the wrong place at the wrong time. The car was later tested by the police for mechanical deficiencies and none were found. There are various other suspicious facts about the victims (they were underage, but carrying fake ID's in an area with many nightclubs and bars; I leave speculation to the reader).
But now my cousin and his family have to go through this grief, and have to shell out money for lawyers to defend him against this lawsuit. The suit is an amount in the millions, though even if they win it would most likely be a fraction of that (but even still, $100,000 or $200,000 is a pretty hefty chunk to have to pay out).
And they have a chance of winning, if the survivor or the family of the deceased turns on enough histrionics on the witness stand. Or they might lose, in which case my cousin still loses the time and money spent on the trial, and has to relive this horrible event over and over again in court.
>>> But now my cousin and his family have to go through this grief, and have to shell out money for lawyers to defend him against this lawsuit <<<
When a person kills someone, even if it was not his fault, he can expect some disruption of his life. Why isn't his insurance company paying for the defense?
>>> And they have a chance of winning, if the survivor or the family of the deceased turns on enough histrionics on the witness stand. <<<
Is that the kind of thing that would influence you as a juror? If not, why do you think it will sway the majority of a jury hearing that case?
Tom
>>Why isn't his insurance company paying for the defense? <<
I assume they will, though their obligation is limited.
>>Is that the kind of thing that would influence you as a juror? If not, why do you think it will sway the majority of a jury hearing that case? <<
Me? Probably not (I'd certainly hope not). But other people, yeah!
">>Why isn't his insurance company paying for the defense? <<
I assume they will, though their obligation is limited. "
Actually, in almost all cases in New York, the duty to defend is unlimited for an insurer -- regardless of the limit on the policy. If your cousin is being told anything else by the insurance company, you should get an outside opinion.
CG
Just to expand on the point a bit further, insurance companies who write automobile liability coverage have two separate obligations, the obligation to provide the insured with legal representation and the obligation to pay damages for which the insured is found liable. All of the deductibles and limits of coverage that you see on the first page of a policy relate to paying damages, not to paying for the lawyer. As for limits on the obligation to defend, the lawsuit has to be about you (or other named drivers) driving a car or someone driving your car with your permission and, I believe, you have to have given the insurance company prompt notice of the incident.
Thanks for the info - perhaps something got mixed up in my communications.
In any event, he still has to sit through court hearings and so on for something that has already been determined not to be his fault (and likely couldn't have avoided in any way), and stands some chance (how much, I don't know) of having to make a payout.
And even if the insurance will cover the payout he has to make, do you have any guess as to whose money goes out to pay that? Me and you, and millions of other schmucks who weren't even there, and didn't even know what is going on, through the auto insurance we pay every year. The whole thing just makes me sick...
>>> he still has to sit through court hearings and so on for something that has already been determined not to be his fault <<<
When you say it has already been determined that the accident was not his fault, who made that determination? The investigating officers? Are they infallible? Suppose the investigating officers had decided that your cousin was at fault and therefore the death was manslaughter. Do you think your cousin would waive having to sit through the court hearings for the state to prove it was manslaughter and just report to jail to begin serving a sentence?
If you can understand why your cousin would want to go to court even though the investigating officers found he was at fault, then you should be able to understand why the relatives of the dead and injured children want their day in court even though the investigating officer found that your cousin was not at fault.
It is a fact of life that if you kill someone, whether you are an individual or the TA, and whether you are at fault or not, you will be involved in litigation.
Tom
Is that the kind of thing that would influence you as a juror? If not, why do you think it will sway the majority of a jury hearing that case?
Tom, juries are stupid. There are well-documented psychological research (e.g. look under the works of Stanley Milgram who worked at Yale in the '50s) which suggests that in fact people who are put into a social situation (defined as a situation under which they have to interact with other human beings), then people can make irrational decisions subconsciously in order to make themselves look socially acceptable. A simple example is let's say we were doing a shout-out quiz in class and you were not 100% sure of your answer, but the brightest kid in the class yells out an answer which is different to yours. Then the second brighest kid does the same. Now, how sure are you about your answer? Which answer would you pick?
The American legal system (in comparison to the British) had made great strides in a process called "jury selection" in which jurors who could potentially be biased (due either to previous knowledge of the case or certain affliations) are not permitted to serve. For example, in a police shooting case, no one who are a police officer or a relative of one are allowed to serve. In Britain, they would still be allowed to serve as under the British justice system juries are still selected "randomly". Unfortunately, such selection processes does not include general categories such as say in a Transit Authority v.s. relatives case, they do not exclude anyone who is likely to sympathize with the families of the deceased. That's probably because it would be near-impossible to do this and to guarentee the relatives a "fair" trial.
Conclusion: juries are stupid. It's best not to get involved in a criminal trial. As for transit authorities, they should be given immunity to prosecution.
Lexcie (B.A. Psychol, Cantab, 2000)
Conclusion: juries are stupid. It's best not to get involved in a criminal trial.
BZZZT! Wrong conclusion. Some juries are stupid, that's true, but I don't think it's anything approaching a valid assessment overall. I have served on juries several times in my life, and I can only think of one case where there were a couple of people on the jury who were influenced by anything other than the facts of the case. That particular trial, in which I was the jury foreman, came dangerously close to a hung jury, deadlocked 10-2. After an additional day of deliberation, during which I kept the discussion focused on the issues raised by one of the dissenting jurors, that juror concluded that their original opinion was incorrect, and the jury was then 11-1. Another 30 minutes of discussion and we had a unanimous verdict.
I've also been the defendant in a case a few years back, involving a mentally ill neighbor who made some ludicrous accusations and convinced a couple of her friends to be her witnesses. One of the witnesses described the alleged incident in great detail, including minor details about the vehicle I was supposedly driving at the time that I supposedly tried to run her over. Imagine her surprise when my lawyer advised the judge and jury that the vehicle described was the one I had sold a month before the alleged incident. Needless to say, the jury was out of the courtroom for less than ten minutes - just long enough to vote, sign the paper attesting to their verdict, and return. So from that perspective too I have a great deal of faith in the American system of justice.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
close to a hung jury, deadlocked 10-2. After an additional day of deliberation, during which I kept the discussion focused on the issues raised by one of the dissenting jurors, that juror concluded that their original opinion was incorrect, and the jury was then 11-1.
That's the precise issue. Did you count the number of people who were for and against on the initial vote? The fact is, usually after delibration, the minority party sccumb to the majority party. This does not necessarily mean justice is served, especially where the facts of the case are not clear. Statistics show that the initial vote (as jurors enter the room) is at least a 95% confident predictor of the final unianimous verdict.
I have more confidence in the US system of justice than many other, but you only need to look at some of the anti-trust cases to realize not only are there no absolute right and wrong, anyone who gets mixed up with the DoJ loses. "Justice" is really a pointless concept invented by self-rightous humans...
Did you count the number of people who were for and against on the initial vote?
Yes, I did... the vote was 7-5 in the opposite direction of the final verdict. This was after about an hour of discussion, identifying the salient points of the case. (Deliberations lasted three plus days.)
Reginald Rose's play Twelve Angry Men deals with this issue. It's been made into a movie twice - 1957, starring Henry Fonda, and 1997, starring George C. Scott. I have recently seen a high school production of the play (politically corrected as "Twelve Angry Persons") and Jr. received the 1997 version on VHS as a Chanukah gift, although we haven't watched it yet. And yes, it's on topic too - an elevated train figures prominently in the jurors' deliberations.
Your point about anti-trust cases (and other non-criminal cases in general) is well taken. My experience as a juror is limited to criminal cases.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
"'Justice' is really a pointless concept invented by self-rightous humans..."
Your incite is truly remarkable.
Did you mean Incite or Insight--Hmmm.
As much as I would like to claim that it was a deliberate play on words, I suppose it was more of a Freudian slip.
>>> juries are stupid <<<
Juries are no more stupid than the general population they are drawn from.
>>> A simple example is let's say we were doing a shout-out quiz in class and you were not 100% sure of your answer, but the brightest kid in the class yells out an answer which is different to yours. Then the second brighest kid does the same. Now, how sure are you about your answer? Which answer would you pick? <<<
Due to the deliberative process that juries go through it is not quite like a shout-out quiz. Since a jury is trying to find some "objective truth" based on the information presented to all of them, it is not surprising that a minority may be swayed into changing their opinion of what that truth is after discussing that information among themselves.
>>> in a police shooting case, no one who are a police officer or a relative of one are allowed to serve. ... such selection processes does not include general categories such as say in a Transit Authority v.s. relatives case, they do not exclude anyone who is likely to sympathize with the families of the deceased. <<<
There is no rule in the American system excluding police officers or their relatives. Attorneys may challenge the objectivity of persons in those categories, and therefore reject them from service. In a case involving the TA, the same process would be used to challenge anyone who worked for the TA, or was related to someone who worked for the TA. Challenges to those who had ever filed a claim against the TA or their relatives or even anyone who had ever been close to anyone injured on the subway would also be considered in the same way.
>>> As for transit authorities, they should be given immunity to prosecution. <<<
Prosecution implies criminal charges. Most people would not want transit authorities or anyone else placed above the law and granted immunity for any criminal acts they may do. In the civil area, if the TA were immune from damages for negligence it would certainly be easier to operate the subways. The C/R would no longer have to check to see that no one was caught in closing doors, and the T/O would no longer have to make sure he stopped with all doors on the platform. No one would have to replace burnt out lights in stations or remove banana peels from the stairways.
If you believe the extensive safety rules for operating the subways came from someone's altruistic belief of what is the right thing to do rather than the wish to avoid liability, I would like to show you this wonderful bridge connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn which happens to be for sale. :-)
Tom
"Prosecution implies criminal charges. Most people would not want transit authorities or anyone else placed above the law and
granted immunity for any criminal acts they may do."
Well stated.
" In the civil area, if the TA were immune from damages for negligence it
would certainly be easier to operate the subways. The C/R would no longer have to check to see that no one was caught in
closing doors, and the T/O would no longer have to make sure he stopped with all doors on the platform. No one would have
to replace burnt out lights in stations or remove banana peels from the stairways. "
There is another way to handle it. Offer the TA immunity from lawsuits, but set up a claim fund. If you're injured through a screw-up of a TA employee, you can't sue the TA, but you can file a claim through the fund. Of course, the "devil is in the details" on accomplishing this.
>>> Offer the TA immunity from lawsuits, but set up a claim fund. If you're injured through a screw-up of a TA employee, you can't sue the TA, but you can file a claim through the fund. <<<
Why should the TA get that sort of exemption from lawsuits and not other transportation entities such as the airlines or Greyhound, or even school bus operators? And who is the one who will evaluate the value of the claim? What if you are not happy with that decision? What you are suggesting sounds similar to the Workers Compensation system, but WC covers all injuries on the job whether caused by the employer or not, and still has substantial litigation. I do not think you could transfer that type of compensation system to customers of a transportation system.
Tom
Your dealings with the federal govt (to an extent) work that way. For example, I served as a disaster response officer on a medical team. If I committed malpractice in that specific role, you could not sue me, and you could not sue the govt., but you could file a claim for losses and expenses.
Your skepticism about total immunity from lawsuits is well-founded, however.
"Why should the TA get that sort of exemption from lawsuits and not other transportation entities such as the airlines or
Greyhound, or even school bus operators?"
Because these other operators are profit-making businesses. If one of your goals is to make a profit, the threat of litigation is important to keep your eye on safety. The TA, in my view, is more like a critical govt. -un utility (esp. in New York!).
Of course, Queens Surface Corp. and Command Bus etc. are profit-making businesses too - so I concede there are a lot of (important) details I am obviously not dealing with here in this post.
" And who is the one who will evaluate the value of the claim? What if you are not happy with that decision?"
What if you are not happy with a jury's decision? I don't see a professional claims examiner or claims board being irherently inferior to a courtroom, per se.
It should be pointed out that the TA already has some procedural advantages over the potential private defendant. In most cases, the plaintiffs have only 90 days to file a notice of claim. The TA then gets to call them in and interogate them, even if no suit has yet been started. The statute of limitations for a negligence suit against the TA is 15 months, IIRC.
>>> What if you are not happy with a jury's decision? I don't see a professional claims examiner or claims board being irherently inferior to a courtroom, per se. <<<
If you are not happy with a jury's decision because the facts are against you, you live with it. If there was a problem with the way the trial was conducted you appeal. The courts are the institution in our society for dispute resolution. They have evolved to protect the rights of litigants by providing neutral persons to determine disputes regarding facts and the law and specific rules of evidence and procedure to protect due process. If a claims examiner is employed by the TA to review claims, how long do you think he would last if the TA did not like his decisions?
In California, and I believe most states, a person cannot sue a governmental agency, including the MTA, the police, the fire department, the sanitation department, schools, and where municipally owned, the electric company without first filing a claim with the agency. There is a limited time to file the claim, and the agency has a limited time to respond. If the agency fails to respond, the claim is deemed denied. If the claim is denied, the person can then file suit. As a practical matter, claims for an inflated amount are filed before a thorough investigation has been undertaken (no one wants to guess too low), virtually all of the claims are promptly denied, and a lawsuit is filed.
Tom
Just so you know the "juice" in NYS, any "Claim" must be first filed with a separate court, the NYS "Court of Claims" which is given the responsibility of GRANTING PERMISSION to sue the state. If you can't convince the court of claims that you have an adjudicatable claim, it gets quashed right there. For employees of the state, making a claim against the state for misconduct, "Article 78, exceeding authority" or any other such similar actions, if the COC blows you off, you're done. Same for many other litigants.
New York may have the finest crafted laws, but it also has the most "juice" ... and the Electric companies are protected by the "Public Service Commission" (where I used to work prior to what I do now with the software company) which ensures that NOBODY gets over. They once ruled the subways ... but NYC formed a Board of Transportation to cut those turkeys loose. PSC, just for the historical, was the geniuses behind how the "second system" unfolded as well as the IRT and restrictions on the BRT ... they also take care of your phone service to this day. 'nuff said. :)
Thus defeating the purpose of a claims examiner.
It is my opinion that even if a lawsuit is filed, the right to sue after a claim has been denied should be limited in the amount of $$ recoverable. I say this in a very simplified way; obviously its execution could not be simple.
"It is my opinion that even if a lawsuit is filed, the right to sue after a claim has been denied should be limited in the amount of $$
recoverable."
By your proposal, all the MTA (or whoever else would be protected by such a law) would have to do to limit their liability is refuse a claim. If that were the case, what would they have to lose by refusing a claim? Or, to put it the other way, why would they ever admit a claim larger than the limit amount?!? (And what would you propose the limit amount to be?)
The fact that a person or organization WHO IS POTENTIALLY LIABLE TO PAY A CLAIM rejects it doesn't disprove the claim -- not everyone is willing to admit they were wrong even if they know internally that they were wrong, especially if that comes with a price tag.
I agree with you; what I am saying (and it might not have been clear) is that the MTA culd be liable for a larger award they reject the claim first and then lose, but this award should still be subject to a cap.
For example, MTA might unjustifiably reject a $100,000 claim. If it goes to trial, the cap might be, say, $500,000, instead of allowing a jury to award a lot more.
In this way, MTA is not motivated to reject every claim.
"I agree with you; what I am saying (and it might not have been clear) is that the MTA culd be liable for a larger award they reject the claim first and then lose, but this award should still be subject to a cap."
That makes a LOT more sense than what I thought you were saying at first.
Even after my misspellings and screwed up punctuation...
Juries are no more stupid than the general population they are drawn from.
Your point? :^)
If you believe the extensive safety rules for operating the subways came from someone's altruistic belief of what is the right thing to do rather than the wish to avoid liability, I would like to show you this wonderful bridge connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn which happens to be for sale. :-)
I don't mean to speak for Lexcie, but you couldn't pay me to take the Manhattan Bridge!!
He said a wonderful bridge. He must have some other bridge in mind.
Juries are no more stupid than the general population they are drawn from.
Well they can't be. Nobody can be more stupid than the general population.
As my father is fond of pointing out, "The average is very low."
For example, in a police shooting case, no one who are a police officer or a relative of one are allowed to serve. In Britain, they would still be allowed to serve as under the British justice system juries are still selected "randomly".
WRONG. In Britain, questions are asked of jurors about such conflicts of interest before they sit. Anyone who fails to declare any such matter would be liable to prosecution for "Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice". Yes, the initial calling to the pool of jurors (they are called for a period of time, not for a specific case) is random, but it is checked afterwards. This way you don't get people discriminated against in serving for juries.
The only exceptions I know of for jury service are:
- the mentally or physically infirm
- legal professionals and any employee of the Lord Chancellor's Department (including support staff &c)
- the spouse of legal professionals or any employee of the Lord Chancellor's Department
- sitting MPs
Gidday Mate...ears a bite for you: New York State justice system requires all cases brought into State Supreme Court to be examined by a 'Grand Jury' conveined by law. What takes place is a presentment by the prosecutor, a demonstration of the evidence along with statements by participating law enforcement officials and corroborating witnesses AND the possible participation of defendents. Since the court does NOT determine the outcome of the case, exceptions of participating jurors are few. We have come a long way since 1776. Car Inspector Peter, NYC MTA CED
Has the TA actually SUCCESSFULLY sued the relatives of someone who was killed trespassing? I realize that the person may be wrong, and that the TA is not liable, but I think suing people who just lost a loved one in such a tragic way is why the euphemism "COLD" was invented.
And what would be the point in most cases? The suit wouldn't reach the property of the relatives, only the property of the decedent. I don't know it for a fact; but I would bet money that most subway surfers die judgment proof, i.e. without the proverbial pot to piss in.
Subway surfers die as a contribution to their sport just like unsupervised free fall parachuting. Isn't it enough that they get a memorial spray painted on some slumlords wall??? TD will tell you how his crew has to clean up the pathological biohazards ('Right To Know' training) but have a little pity on us guys finding an eyeball on a tread brake unit. CI Peter
That would tend to ruin your appetite for a few days, unless you were a forensic pathologist and saw this kind of thing on a daily basis.
Still, going to places where you have no business going and doing things that could get you killed is not the sort of activity that makes me feel any sorrow, especially when you are old enough to know better.
That would tend to ruin your appetite for a few days, unless you were a forensic pathologist and saw this kind of thing on a daily basis.
Or unless you're a devotee of rotten.com
Come to think of it, the people behind that site might be railfans (of a sort); lately they've been running a number of man vs. train pictures.
Those pics are fakes like the one with the head stuck between carbody and platform. My crew was breakin chops because I had undercar on the lead R142 after a jumper. How do you inspect airlines and valves: spray, wait for bubbles and wipe. 'Here's lookin at yah.' CI Peter
Works for gas grilles too. Hope you already came to the job knowing that trick and didn't require Special High Intensity Training. Bustini, bustini ...
When I was working for a firm that did litigation, it was only a small part of our case load BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PARTICULARLY LUCRATIVE. Think about it: if suing someone were the guaranteed "ka-ching!" victory that popular culture makes it out to be, we would have done that all the time instead of working mostly on simple bankruptcies, wills and trusts for people whose biggest asset was their house, and criminal defense in minor drug possession cases. Of the lawsuits we took on, we probably lost more cases than we won, and that was after the firm owner had debated, researched, and generally agonized over whether to accept the case in the first place.
The fact that personal injury litigation may not always be lucrative does not mean that there aren't tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of lawyers scuffling for a piece of the pie. Law school has become a natural extension of liberal arts college and a major draw for nontechnical types who lack the skills to get jobs in the real world. As a result, there is a gross oversupply of lawyers, many of whom have to struggle mightily to make even a lower-middle-class living. They'll eagerly take on dubious personal injury cases simply because there isn't enough other legal work to keep them busy. And, therefore, the survivors of subway surfers have no trouble finding legal eagles to handle their cases.
We non-technical types find our world just as real as you do yours.
Subway Surfer? You mean Jackass, don't you? R.I.P.
Eric D. Smith
Subway surfer - Jackass- same difference.
Makes you wonder when and who will file the first lawsuit against the TA?
This may sound nasty and cruel, but if the rising star didn't have a chance to impregnate, the genes will not be passed on for another generation.
I guess he just didn’t listen when mother and dad warned him of the dangers of doing such things - and the consequences.
The sad part is a young life was lost, and before long, nobody will even remember who he was.
Jim Kramer
"Makes you wonder when and who will file the first lawsuit against the TA?"
The TA didn't have warning signs on the end bonnets and a counselor posted nearby to talk the boy into riding in the car as opposed to on top of it.
Sorry, I don't feel sorry for him.
Bill "Newkirk"
Gee, maybe this is why we stopped putting ladders on the end of train cars when they go underground!
Well, he found a way to "stand clear of the closing doors," too bad he couldn't "lay clear of the speeding I-Beam!"
Some people are just too stupid to live. Apparently...
How do we submit this to the Darwin Awards?
JR
Bill and others:
My remark about the lawsuit was 'tongue in cheek'. No way do I feel anyone should even entertain a lawsuit. That should be apparent by the second line of my reply.
Secondly, feeling sorry about the loss of such a young person, while trying such an irresponsible act, is not a crime.
Compassion, sir, is one of the traits what makes us human beings.
Jim Kramer
Chicago
"Compassion, sir, is one of the traits what makes us human beings."
Along with opposing thumbs (which this guy likely had) and common sense (which this guy obviously lacked).
In all seriousness, these incidents are extremely costly to the TA and the City in general. Think about the costs for:
1) The train crew, testing and days off due to stress.
2) The other TA employees who hae to investigate the incident, inspect the equipment or maintain service around it.
3) The cleaning of the train.
4) The cost of police and EMS.
5) The cost of the medical examiner.
Perhaps the City and the TA should sue the estate of this young man for the expenses related tot he above. Perhaps the train operator can sue privately for damages.
Perhaps the NYCT should employ a few lawyers on staff who would do nothing but file suits against the families of the idiots for incidents like this.
This would (1) employ a few lawyers who could not sue the TA.
and (2) possibly defer future suits against the City and the TA with the proper use of publicity.
They could countersue for cleanup costs and for lost revenues while the service was down due to the incident.
Then commuters could file a class-action lawsuit against the family for lost time, pain and suffering, etc.
"My remark about the lawsuit was "tongue in cheek"
MY response to you was also "tongue in cheek".
We live in a strange world where someone files an outrageous lawsuit, it goes to trial and they are awarded a huge windfall. We talk about it in sheer amazement. It seems everone is suing someone these days.
Also, I have compassion for someone who changes cars and somehow falls between the cars and gets killed. It was their intention to change cars and an accident happened. Now to climb between the cars in a subway tunnel and get killed. My compassion would be for his family who learned of his death and must deal with it.
Common sense would have prevented his death, but todays society just does what they please and dom't account fore their actions.
Bill "Newkirk"
Rockin to the max!!! Second only to a big bug cut. CI Peter
>>>>>>>He did not survive the cut.
You mean "he did not survive the splat". At least you can say that he didn't have his brains splattered since he didn't have any to begin with.
My crocodile cries for him. What an idiot.
HEY TRAIN DUDE !!
I think he deserves two "Darwin" awards.
Usually these subway surfers do this in the outdoors before they slam into an overpass. This guy did it in the subway. How the hell can you stand on the roof in the subway ?
Bill "Newkirk"
watch for that (UMMMMPH!!!!!).....i beam.
Maybe those limbo skills came in handy?
Usually these subway surfers do this in the outdoors before they slam into an overpass. This guy did it in the subway. How the hell can you stand on the roof in the subway ?
I guess you can't...
-JR
Easy - in the movies only the bad guy gets whalloped by the beam coming by!
Seriously, though, I'd assume he was lying down, or hanging from the side with only his head over the top of the train, or something like that.
Give the man a break. At least he learned to fly. I don't know of ANYONE who can fly from a northbound local over two express tracks to catch an express on the fly. Surfing USA!
Too bad 'Elevator Action' from Taito hasn't gotten the next generation of 'Darwin Award' winners. Remember the stupid kids in City Housing jumping elevator cabs??? The cousin of 'Taco Bell bin Smokey Joe' pulled something on the adjacent track after a D4 compressor repair...lots of air flying around. Safe in my pit today doing undercar...I don't laugh at these things because I know the hazards. CI Peter
I am offended by your sarcastic attitude. This is a time for impersonal insensitivity and I am ashamed as a railfan that you cannot see that. To lump this fairly typical incident in with something along the lines of an Amtrak stranding or a LIAR screw up demeans us all.
:)
JM -- You are ashamed as a railfan. TD is a railroader. TD has to supervise the hosing down and cleaning of rolling stock after 12-9 incidents. TD has seen things that would make you hurl your stomach. I'm sure that TD is really impressed with your OUTSIDE opinion.
I've attended a few hosings down myself here in Voorheesville. One of the very worst parts of railroading, second only to trying to reassure a buddy that there was nothing in the world he could have done different to stop the greasing ...
Please note the smiley. I am just joshing with him. I wanted to see if anyone noticed that I was making light of his sarcasm with a completely sarcastic reply.
As someone who has attended this type of thing first hand, in all seriousness folks, let's offer a collective dose of moral support, via Train Dude, to the conductor and T/O.
Amen. The crew gets 'written up' for not checking....bottom of the food chain. CI Peter
You know, TD, Mike may be right and we shouldn't be so sarcastic about this tragic incident. An A line T/O is having a really bad day right now and we must not forget the pain he/she is going through right now because of this dumb shmuck that didn't realize that the steel poles inside the train were the ones he should have grabbed onto.
An A line T/O is having a really bad day right now a...
That's been my (serious) take on this subject, too.
My not-serious take is that Ariel Briones died a more exciting death than any of us have. (serious again) It's unfortunate that he had to mess up other peoples' lives at the same time.
In case you didn't realize it my post was completely sarcastic itself. Did nobody notice the smilie face? I was saying that we shoudln't be sarcastic when just plain insensitivity is called for. Sort of like they shouldn't be mocked, they should be laughed at.
As you stated in 305287:
Please note the smiley. I am just joshing with him. I wanted to see if anyone noticed that I was making light of his sarcasm with a completely sarcastic reply.
I noticed the smiley. I can't laugh at someone's demise, even someone that stupid. I'd still like to know how the fella flew across two full tracks after falling off the C.
People are surprisingly elastic.
Can we say Briones' death makes New York is a better place?
Did it happen like this?
My eulogy for idiots like this is short, sweet, and by now, quite well-known.
"You can't live forever."
I dont get it. Simple as that
According to the Post, an Acela regional train stalled east of New Rochelle and it took 5 hours to move it. I assume that this was one of the Acela trains that uses standard equipment since the real Acelas are double ended. Anyway, they hooked a diesel up to it and pulled it to Penn Station.
y'know this is the crap that riles those of us who love trains and despise the ATK "management". FIVE hours to dispatch a motor from Penn or Sunnyside to drag in the dead train? FIVE hours--right four hours to figure out what to do and one hour to do it --sorta like the how many (favorite despised social group) does it take to replace a light bulb? one to do it, six to watch, guffaw, cheer etc...
"FIVE hours to dispatch a motor from Penn or Sunnyside to drag in the dead train? FIVE hours--right four hours to figure out what to do and one hour to do it --"
That was my first thought when I posted the message. Thinking like a railfan, that was the natural conclusion. Then consider it from another point of view, I don't know the BLE schedule of work conditions. It was New years Day. If they didn't have a crew handy, how long did it take to get a crew called in? How much time does the BLE get for a reporting allowance? How long does it take to prepare a loco for road service? Then what is the MAS for a single unit on AMTRAK? On the LIRR, a single unit MAS is 40 MPH.
Likely problems yes, BUT within five hours, they would have had at least one crew northbound w/ a regular train--add an engine ct it off where needed. And in this elapsed time, no other southbound approached? God knows I am not a pro in this business but five hours is a long time.
5 hours to pull a dead AEM-7 (or was it an HHP-8?) to Penn from New Rochelle? I know diesels ain't fast, but man... :)
Actually, knowing Amtrak, 5 hours sounds about right.
1 hour to decide if the train's really broken
1 hour to find a crew and loco
1 hour to get from Sunnyside to New Rochelle
1 hour to hook it up
1 hour to get back to Penn
Oh, yes, and if anyone thinks that's slow 'complain to your congressman, it's not our fault'....
I hope the passengers called Amtrak and asked for a customer service certificate. I always call to get one when I get terrible service -- and Amtrak always gives me one.
One agent tried to talk me out of it but I said "You advertise satisfaction guaranteed. Well, I'm not satisfied. Are you going to honor the advertising." I received the certificate within a week.
Michael
East of New Rochelle? I'm beginning to think that AMTK has no incentive to get that train moving, because it's sitting on MNRR property? Now look at it this way -- Why the hell aren't they dispatching any MN equipment lying spare in NH just to get the train out the way? an FL-9 will do it. AMTK can then pay MNRR handsomely for rescuing its train. Spot-hire is not that difficult if the crew & equipment are handy. I'm willing to bet money on MNRR control saying "it's your problem" while they happily penalize AMTK for "unauthorized occupation of track space".
Also, David, you will never jerpordize a northbound service (or indeed any other service train) to rescue a stranded train.
The failed equipment is likely to be an HHP-8. Shortly before Christmas, an HHP-8 sat down at Hyde Park tying up the mainline for 2 hours. HHP-8 don't have a particularly reliable reputation. They dispatched AMT 525 (GP-40) from BOS to get it. The winter is setting in and the French can't take it so they are sitting down everywhere.
Lexcie
Still think they should have gotten AEM-7s. NJ Transit did and they weren't disappointed. Good luck, MARC.
Well you're quite the johny on the spot with the camera. Good job.
Mudey
That is NOT an ACELA. It's an HHP-8. The ACELA equipment is numbered in the 2000 series, as the HHP-8 is in the higher 600 series (low 600 series used by the remaining E-60 locomotives).
That is NOT an ACELA. It's an HHP-8. The ACELA equipment is numbered in the 2000 series, as the HHP-8 is in the higher 600 series (low 600 series used by the remaining E-60 locomotives).
This exemplifies my opinion that Amtrak was silly for deciding to name all NEC trains Acela. The HHP-8 clearly has the name "Acela" painted on its side, but as UTC Bus Roster points out, when we hear the name "Acela", we think "Acela Express", which is the 2000 series with a single-ended motor on each end of the trainset. The HHP-8 (banana) hauls the "Acela Regional", hence the name "Acela" on its side. The Clockers were to be called "Acela Commuter", which (IMHO) greatly diminishes the connotation of the name "Acela". I think somebody at Amtrak goofed seriously by buying the bill of goods from some consulting firm that told them to name everything "Acela".
Three classes of service known as "Acela Express", "Northeast Direct", and "Clocker" would have been more meaningful and less confusing.
I was about to say, it says ACELA on the side clearly.
The preferred motive power for Acela Regionals coming out of BOS had steadily been AEM-7's. I've not yet ridden behind an HHP-8, and everytime I've photographed HHP-8's on BOS service they had been either in pairs or failed.
I still call it NEDirect, as do the Amtrak Reservations people (if you ask for NEDirect, they will talk back like old timers).
I have several Amtrak timetables that say "NEDirect" for some trains, and "Acela Regional" for others, and "Metroliner" yet others. I'm totally at a loss as to why they are called different names, but with each timetable reprint they seem to have reduced the number of NEDirect trains and increased the number of "Acela Regional" trains. I get the impression that "Acela Regional" was slower than the old NEDirect in order to make Acela Express look faster. A few "crack" NEDirects I used to ride out of BOS had disappeared from the timetables, replaced by "Acela Regional" with more stops and longer timing. This is all except the Night Owel which is now called the Twlight Shoreliner and has a faster schedule now than in the E60 days. The schedule change is probably because of the decommissioning of the E-60's.
Lexcie
Just before electrification, all trains NY-Boston were called NortheastDirect. A 5-hour unreserved local train was called the same thing as a 4.5-hour all-reserved express train. Most trains were locals, but there were a few expresses scattered throughout the day.
When electrification was first completed, trains that used electric engines all the way to Boston (no change at New Haven) were designated Acela Regional. The first Acela Regional schedules made express stops only (presumably to show off the electrification, since there were no Acela Express trainsets ready to do this), making the run in about 4 hours. For this brief period the few Acela Regional trains were the premium trains north of NY, and NortheastDirect became the slow local service. As more electrics were delivered, more trains were converted to be Acela Regional on the timetable.
Now that NortheastDirect is eliminated and Acela Express is also running, Acela Regional is the lower of two service levels. They are intended to make local stops, and do this in about 4.5 hours (the same time as it took to make express stops before). Acela Express trains make the express stops, in about 3.5 hours. South of NY, Metroliners temporarily co-exist with Acela Express as the premium express service.
So the reason Acela Regional seems to make more stops than some of the old NortheastDirect trains is that you're comparing the current local service with the old express service. But note that the current all-electric local service actually takes the same amount of time (usually a little less, I think) as the old express service that ran diesel north of New Haven. It's not a matter of making Acela Express looking faster, it's the juggling around of all the service classes. It was a great way to sneak in lots of small fare increases on the NEC, but that's a different question.
Holy moly...those old GP40TC's are still around?????
I remember when they loaned a couple of them to Caltrain out here in California, the engineers all hated them.
Plenty in numbers. I've seen AMT 184 at Harrisburg, AMT 522 (now renumbered AMT 525) at BOS, and also there are a few others lying aronud in MOW work. Also of interest, BOS has AMT 280 and AMT 294 for pilot work -- both are F-40's. Other interesting engine here is a GP-9, MBTA #1921. Lots of old clunkers out there, AMT 603 and 610 is up in Philly (both E-60's)... I don't know if they still have any FL-9's though. I bet you they are all in Terra Haute just in case they have a big ass wreck and run out of Genesises.
I know about all that other stuff you mentioned...but look close in that original photo of the broken Acela HHP-8 engine -- that is one of the Amtrak 192-199 series GP40TC's originally built for GO Transit up in Ontario doing the towing.
You know, a friend told me they were originally built for GO Transit. I didn't believe him, but I guess he was right. They are numbered in the #52x series now. I did look at that engine up close, I didn't see any green paint (I was trying to establish whether the thing about GO Transit was true).
I'd be amazed if a FL9 was sitting in New Haven. There's no need for a FL9 at New Haven. There's more likely for a FL9 to be sitting at Sunnyside for Empire Service.
Michael
There's no need for a FL9 at New Haven
So what are the F-9 lookalike units that periodically sit at NH, and was painted NH colors? You know, the ones with the odd B-C trucks?
Lexcie
The reason I'm amazed is that I wasn't aware MNRR needed FL9s. Come to think of it, they could be used on the Waterbury and Danbury lines during the week on run throughs to Grand Central instead of passengers changing at Bridgeport and South Norwalk, respectively.
Michael
FL9's painted in NH colors in New Haven, Conn. could be involved with the thru GCT-Danbury or Waterbury weekday trains. They could have been deadheaded there for servicing, especially on weekends, or be spares for those services, and also Shore Line East.
Waterbury and Danbury shuttle trains (RDC's and SPV-2000's) used to be based at New Haven, and would deadhead down the Shore Line to Bridgeport or Norwalk before making their connections.
I just finished watching the Robert De Niro movie " A Bronx Tale." I really enjoyed it and now have it on tape. I am not as familar with the Bronx as many of you are. Where is the Fordham section? He was a bus driver and so I saw no subways in the movie. Is their a line that goes through there or is out of the way. And is the section still Italian? I am really curious after watching the movie to find out if the neighborhood bears any resemblance to the Fordham section of 1960 and 1968, the two periods portrayed in the movie.
if i recall right, some, if not much of, that movie was filmed in Queens - astoria, on 30th av east of steinway. they redid all the storefronts, etc. just for the movie.
Some of the scenes involving the railroad trestle were filmed in Brooklyn. I believe it was near Neck Road on the Brighton Line.
It definitely was the Brighton Line's Neck Rd Station, which still retains portions of the Manhattan Beach line's station adjacent to it.
Alan Glick
If you look carefully their are some circa 1980's condo building on the corner of 15th street and neck road in one of the scenes
Joe: No wonder I thought the place looked familiar. Hell, I went to PS 10 my last year in New York and lived in the Woodside Housing Apartments from July, '53 to September '54 when we moved. I used to walk from my house to Steinway Street to the LOEW's Triborough to see the first or second run movies. Thanks for the info.
no problemo. it was the joke of the neighborhood for awhile, though it was damn nice to see the street spiffed up like that, with period cars and buses around...
The Fordham section is around 190th and 3rd Ave. The Movie is supposed to take place a few blocks south of Fordham Rd, where the father's bus (BX12) runs. Joe is right, most of the movie was filmed in Queens; however, many of the neighborhood shots (such as the beginning where you see the church and post office) are actually filmed on 187th, between Arthur and Belmont, where the movie is supposed to take place. The D train, if you get off at Fordham Rd, is the best way to get to the area by subway. After you get up on the street, you have to walk one block north up the Concourse to Fordham Rd, then walk east towards Webster Ave. (I'm using north, south, etc relative to manhattan and the layout of streets) Its about a 15 minute walk to get to Arthur Ave, walking on Fordham Rd the entire time. During the day I wouldn't worry about the walk, at night you may want to have better awareness. If you don't want to walk, you can take the Metro North Harlem line, and get off at Fordham Rd/Bronx Zoo. That'll put you out at Fordham Rd and 3rd Ave, all you have to do is walk east, past Fordham University. Although Italians still live in the area, it is now predominantly Hispanic. You'd be surprised to see that the Fordham section looks very similar as it did in the 60s, but right on Fordham Rd it looks fairly different. Hope this helps.
It helps a lot MRUFFALO. Thanks for taking the time to answer my post. I knew there was still Italian sections in the Bronx, I just didn't know where.
Around Williamsbridge (across Bronx Park from the Fordham section) there's still a lot of Italians..
Off the No. 2 train---Pelham Parkway, Allerton Ave., Burke Ave., Gun Hill Rd.--If you go east from any of those stations, you're generally in an Italian neighborhood..Well, not exactly Italian, but the neighborhoods there used to be almost completely Italian and Jewish...now there's Hispanics and Orientals and Eastern Europeans, but a lot of Italians still live there.
Thanks Tony, I will keep that in my memory bank. Good to know there are still Italian neighborhoods in New York. They seem to be fast disappearing out to Long Island and Staten Island.
Throgs Neck is another strong enclave of yours truly.
Strange as it seems I have never been there and want to visit it on my next trip in. Some told me it is somewhat suburban with a lot of individual houses and not so many apartments. Is that true. And how is the best way to get there. From the looks of things I will be spending a good deal of my next trip up in the Bronx.
Is thew White Castle still there near Roosevelt HS????
Oh, and for those out here in California, there is a GREAT, TRULY AUTHENTIC Bronx Pizza place out here. Trouble is, it's in San Diego. The owner is a former boxer who lived on Arthur Avenue & 187th. Can't remember his name, but I do know the first name was "Matt". It's the ONE AND ONLY pizza place out here that actually serves "New York style" pizza, not just says it does!!
Sir:
No one can serve "New York Pizza" outside of New York. It's akin to serving a bagel or bialy in L.A.
NY Pizza retains it's taste because of the WATER used here. They may get close fairly close to the original, but unless he trucks in NY water, which I doubt, fugetabouit. I lived in the Valley and Santa Monica for over a year, and I spent many a day searching for something that came close. I ended up having my friends and parents sending FedEx'ed Gino's square pies, at way more than $12.00 a pie.
So true about the water....I agree with you wholeheartedly. The guy in San Diego claims he somehow gets NY water shipped out to him. Having tasted the pizza he puts out, I'm inclined to think he's doing "something" as no other place has ever come near his quality.
Yep, the White Castle is there right across the street. One of my favorite fast food places!
You mean you LIKE those sliders?:-)
I love those things. Any time my "system" needs a good cleaning out, I grab about a dozen of them. They work better than Ex-Lax.
Belly Bombs, Murderburgers....
Love those things...
My favorite White Castle was the one at 92nd Street near 4th Ave. in Bay Ridge...it closed about 6 months after I moved to Bay Ridge in 1987.
My second favorite one is the one at Allerton Ave. and Boston Post Road in the Bronx.
A funny aside about White Castle-
I decided to stop eating them in the mid-eighties, I got tired of the "eat-too-many-of-'em-cause-they're-cheap" stomache ache :)
about 6 months later I was up in Queens in that mall near "Slattery Plaza" or whatever it's called, and said "Hey!!! White Castle!!! Allright!!!" and went in and ate 5 double cheeseburgers..
Of course, riding the train back to Brooklyn, I had a crappy feeling in my stomach, and remembered why I hadn't had those things in so long, and decided not to eat 'em anymore..
So of course, 6 months later--"Hey!! White Castle!!!" etc.
:)
Only way you can get those upstate is frozen ... and not quite the same without the grillwork. Same tummy torture though. :)
You know, I can get them frozen at the grocery store near me...and I live in North Carolina...
My kid (5 years old) used to like cheeseburgers (now, the way he eats, I think he's a vegetarian), so I bought him some once...they tasted just like the ones you would get in a real Whits Castle..
anyway, he ate two of them, and said, "Hey dad, these things aren't very good"
Oh, well
:)
Heh. Must be the sack ... they also tasted a WHOLE lot better after four or five stops on the 3rd Avenue el from the store on Fordham. :)
Yup.
Legend has it that it's the sweat of the cook on the grill that gives them their flavor....ya just can't get that nuking them in the microwave!!!
Microwave?? Me??
:)
I heated 'em up in the oven, microwaves are BAD--to me it's like cooking with a little H-bomb, in my humble opinion.
Off topic
I'm sorry :(
Don't narc us out to the pigs ...
Too late
LOL
From the el at between Knickerbocker and Wyckoff, I noticed they just tore some old buildings down to build a new White Castle. You can see it on the North side from the M train.
Mmmmmm, beef cookies....hey hon, we're eating out tonight!!
White Castle burgers... aren't those the leftovers from the cow chip throwing contests???? ;-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Ahhh...a gambler...you played cow flop bingo!
White Castle.....45th and Queens blvd.......closest station-46th street on the 7 (one block). Lucky me...i live within walking distance!!
I have to drive up to NJ over on 295 exit 36(?) to feed my crave. That is the furthest south on 95 to get those little suckers.
Phil Hom
Wash DC
Your supermarkets don't have frozen belly bombs?
I like them freshly steam grilled. The onions have a different texture when frozen and the bread gets too steamed up.
OK..back on track
Where in San Diego? My brother-in-law lives there and he mises New York Pizza. What's the name of this place? Thanks.
Why, it's BRONX PIZZA, of course!!!!
It's on Washington Street, half a block east of First Avenue. Sort of in the Huillcrest district. Parking in the neighborhood is always a pain in the ass, especially around lunchtime.
Steve, post the address in San Diego where I can get some of that real New York pizza. I will be in Carlsbad in two weeks and it is just a stone's throw from Dago. Let me know will you?
I found good NY pizza in San Diego many years ago. The place was on University and a street named after some state. Florida Street?
Having grown up right in the neighborhood depicted in the movie, I'd say they did a fair job of recreating the neighborhood, even though in the credits at the end, they state it was actually filmed in Astoria.
I do give them credit on the two buses used in the movie, they were done pretty well though not perfectly, to resemble the buses used on the Bx12 to City Island in those days.
The neighborhood WAS Italian -- but aroudn the time I finished high school (Cardinal Hayes, 1968) there was a mix of people moving in.
Yes, there was a subway line -- the Third Avenue elevated...until 1973/1974 I guess (I was gone in 9/68). The next subway line westward would have been the D lien under the Grand Concourse about half a mile up from the neighborhood depicted in the movie.
To be technical they used at least 3 buses in the filming. The GMC old look and 2 new looks.
Steve if you tape the movie and slow it down, you will see that the exterior shots of the New Look were done with a non-A/C bus. Watch the interior shot when the "C" first looks at the black girl on the New Look. Stop the VCR at that point and look at the back of the bus. You'll see a line running across the back indicating an A/C unit on the bus.
I'm sure you'll see my point because as Alice Kramden once said to Ralph after he passes the physical after a night of bowling "and driving a bus is your livelyhood".
Also -- the High School used in the movie is Bryant HS---clearly in Astoria.
That is the high school I was ready to attend if we had not moved to California in 1954. I spend many a summer afternoon there in '53 and '54 playing stickball against the hand ball courts. I was a killer in that sport back then and I would play ten games a day. I even loved stickball better than baseball. The baseball field wasn't a real baseball field, but a track with enough room for a field that didn't measure out to be a real regulation field. I played a few games there as well. I'm surprised I didn't recognize it when they showed it on screen. I thought they would pick out a high school in the Bronx. When I watch the film next time I will be more attentive to detail.
I'll have to pop the movie into the VCR and check it out....thanks for the hint.
Italian areas in the Bronx - think in terms of Williamsbridge Road in the vicinity of Allerton Avenue as a few blocks east of the White Plains #2 line. Arthur Avenue still has Italian bakeries and restaraunts. Morris Park Avenue sitll hosts Italian restaraunts, bakeries and stores. This is particularly true around Morris Park Avenue in the vicinity of Mace Avenue.
I think that movie depicts a lot of the social changes and native mentality of the era. I grew up in Brooklyn in the 1960's and can strongly relate to many of the themes in the movie.
And I grew up in Brooklyn in the 1980's and LIVED the themes in the movie.
How does the NYC-Subway cope with snow and freezing temperatures? Is there some kind of heating-devices built in to the switches and/or in the third rail? In Stockholm, most subway services halted over the Christmas holliday, due to failure of such systems. Badly maintained as they been over the last years due to hysterical cost-chasing. Many trains come to a complete halt as they got isolated from the third rail due to the ice. The passengers then had to walk through the snow on the trackway to the nearest station, after they had been evacuated from the trains.
/B
YER gonna like this New York answer: tower operators are supposed to move switches at least once an hour in the yards to MAKE TRAINS GO....but they forget. My signal maintainer partner told me they had to go out in the yard with newpaper and alcohol to start fires to heat up the rails. Sweden? It's cold out there...go next door and borrow a Lapps reindeer to tow your trainsets. Car Inspector Peter
They where all very busy with something at the northpole, during the christmas holliday :-)
/B
On Amtrak and the LIRR, you can see switch heaters - they burn natural gas and make for a very surrealistic picture when viewed at night.
NYCT has a very elaborate "Cold Weather Plan". It involves various actions that are taken depending on temp. range and snow fall. The steps include:
Alternate lay-up positions for trains,
Mechanical drills where train operators rock trains in the yard.
Trains used to polish the rails or even trains with special contact shoes that scrape the 3rd rail.
Jet Snow Blowers & De-Icer trains
In the yards and in outdoor locations, the switches are heated electrically.
And many other steps includingthe opening of storm command centers.
Hope this gives you a quick overview.
Do they have any diesel locos to run on the tracks if the third rails are really iced over? Seems like that would be a pretty good thing to have around. You could probably throw some sort of heater on the undercarriage to warm the trackway, too.
In fact, one of the cold weather adjustments involves operating "Storm Emergency Trains" on certain lines, like in the Rockaways. The trains consist of four passenger cars flanked by diesel locomotives. The cars aren't powered, but at least they operate.
David
A S.E.T. Crew contains 3 T/O, 1 C/R and 1 TSS. There are four train set up in the system. 2 @ Piken Yard witch has 4 R68's that get sent there from CIY, 1 @ CIY also with 4 R68's & 1 up @ Westceter Yerd when ether 1 five car set of R62's or 4 cars single of R62's witch ever is avable at the time.
All this info is from a TA Buttlen that I have read before. It is 8 or 9 pages long and goes into the whole way the train is supppse to run.
Robert
They only would run 1 train out of Pitkin, 1 out of Coney, and 1 for the whole elevated IRT in the Bronx? That seems like very marginal service. Why can't they put a few more trains out of each yard?
Flooding is more of an IRT problem is I remember correctly.
Even in the real big storm of the 76?77?78? it was the tunnel not the structure that was the problem. That is likely your answer too. It can fall down from the structure and less prone to drifts.
>>Flooding is more of an IRT problem is I remember correctly. <<
Then does the MTA have ferries to run through the tunnels? :-)
3 T/O? That seems like a lot. I could see one at each end (to rock the train back and forth to clear some ice), but I don't know where you'd put a third.
One T/O in each diesel, while the 3rd is stationed in the cab of the passenger cars. IIRC, he has to monitor the gauges on those cars.
-Stef
Ahhh - that makes sense. But if the train is only 4 cars, couldn't it be run "OPTO" with the T/O in the passenger train also serving as C/R?
Not that it really matters, since the service is so limited...
The Snow Emergency Train calls for a C/R. The train isn't OPTO to the best of my knowledge, but you pose an interesting point.
-Stef
SET Consist is Diesel-4 R68 or 5 R62 - Diesel. 1 T/O in each diesel, 1 T/O in head out revenue car to monitor brakes in passenger cars, 1 CR to open/close doors.SET train should be thought of as a rescue train for passengers stranded at stations due to a suspension in service from snow.
Wow ... NOW you've got me wanting to head to the city for "da big one" just to be able to ride and kibbitz on one of those. I never thought you'd be doing pickups on those puppies, just knocking the crap off the tracks. Hooooo doggie! I'll be watching the weather reports on channel 5 now. :)
I have pictures of the SET Train on my website.
SET Train Pictures
-Harry
Thanks for the pics.
You know, I'm going to have to ride this puppy someday...
That thing is just so damn cool - it's even got a little plow on the front!
Yep ... saw them when they went up last winter ... didn't know geese could actually RIDE the puppy. Looks like another occasion for a fantrip annoying the hell out of TSS' along the way. :)
"Hey ... what does this 'Dyn Brake' handle do?" Heh. Many many years ago, got to ride in old "88" in Coney ... definitely less spacious than an SD80.
That still leaves my question.
A 4-car train can be run OPTO, and that's with the one person also driving the train! If it's being pulled (and pushed) along by diesels, that removes much of the T/O's job.
As I said, it isn't a big point, since there are only 3 of these in the city.
Actually, you'd want someone in the regular cars that knows what the red needle and the black needle are for, just in case a brake hose ain't connected the way it left the yard anymore. I'm pretty sure you'd want brakes applying if there was a need, and someone who can tell for certain that the pipes have air. I can definitely see the point if it's running revenue.
Are those passenger cars under power? Are they MUed with the diesels?
Or is it just the breaks that are are working with the diesels like the breaks on a freight train are to a locomotive?
avid
So my Roosian brother says to me in propulsion, 'Alcohol Peter, alcohol, spray Peter spray, psst, psst, alcohol Peter.' Light a match under one of those boids and the switches within 100 yards (and everyone else) will be thawed. Come on Steve, laugh, you're old enough and in long enough to understand my cold sick humor. CI Peter
This is a true story (sort of).
So I get hired by the TA and I report for my physical. There we are, standing in our underware on the 6th floor at jay Street, my friend George Hunter, a russian guy and me. The conversation between the Dr and the russian went like this:
DoctorSo how are you
Russian (in thick Russian accent) I am good.
DoctorDo you speak english?
Russian I speak perrrrfect english.
Doctor How tall are you?
Russian (in thick Russian accent)One hundred sixty two pounds.
That's a good one. Ive got another one for you (100% true story).
About 4 weeks ago, I was working the A line going uptown to 207th Street when close to the terminal, I notice that the door enabler is not lighting up, and the C/R is able to open the doors without the use of the enabler. I call for an RCI at 207th Street and the conversation goes like this:
Zman: The enabler is not working (I explain the above)
RCI (in very thick Russian accent): Da. Vat iz vong again?
Zman: The enabler. It's not lighting up, and the C/R is able to open the doors without the enabler being activated.
RCI: Da. (points to #15 door panel) I cut out door.
Zman: NO NO NO (pointing to the enabler, and now speaking in broken english to get him to understand), ENABLER. NO WORK. (Now pointing to C/R) HIM OPEN DOOR, ME NO PUSH BUTTON. (Pointing to enabler) THAT NO WORK.
RCI: Um, da. (points to #15 door panel) I cut out dis door.
Zman: LETS GO TO THE DISPATCHER'S OFFICE.
These language barriers are rapidly increasing down here. It's tough to do your job when a language barrier pops up at you.
# 1 Job requirement for RCI/CI is to speak, understand and to be understood in english. They ain't slippin' through the cracks. They is overflowing the dams.
It would seem that the guy is at least TRYING ... perhaps some flash cards are in order for such unusual failures ... "I cut out" does cover about 45% of all underground events.
You guys can print up the below - ain't perfect, but it'll do:
Äâåðü äàâàòü âîçìîæíîñòü èëè ïðàâî ëîìàòü
(use Cyrillic code page 1250 to print)
Whoops ... that's "code page 1251" for the Cyrillic to proint properly.
Third shift used to f up my Kleinschmidts. CI Peter
The requirement for the job is to ........... on the books!!!!!!! I like working with everyone...even the new foremen....and when I said 'God Bless and thankyou for your help and understanding' the Indian gentleman drew a sixty second blank. He knows the work well mechanically BUT why should there be a language barrier??? What i do is to keep my big mouth shut in these situations....a foreman wanted me to write up a G2 on another foreman whose English is about 40% understandable. I didn't...I have their respect despite being a newbie probie. I've learned to complete inspection before lending a hand...I'm learning about the smucks who call you 'partner' and leave you emptyhanded thankyouverrymuch. Mebbe TA needs to implement physical abilities testing...can't count the times I'm asked to pull off an inspection cap or shoe beam nut. Wonder what it's like to have a 'Roosian foreman?' The MS test dropped a lot of em for lack of basic stuff and memorising the Blue Book. New tech and the use of DVMs and storage scopes will seperate the men from the BOIS. CI Peter
Are you from Russia?
DA!
Are you drunk yet?
da
Oh Steve...why do you have to post something like this...I'm rolling on the floor. In propulsion 'training' with Simon: "Peter, alcohol, spray, psst, psst, spray alcohol, Peter spray.' A spark would light someones Redbird day...but i love them all. CI Peter
The lay up areas when the cold weather plan is in effect are mostly, if not all underground areas?
That would make the most sense.
Can they store all the MU's within the confines of the existing underground space without affecting service?
WMATA could take some lessons from your crews. Maybe that way Washington Metrorail won't lose over one third of its subway cars to electrical and other failures at the next snowstorm.
With any serious snow, anyone who commutes via the Brighton line usually goes home early, as this is the first line to get snowed-in. I have no idea of what kind of equipment they use to clear the tracks in such situation; with the Brighton line, the snow has to be actually removed, and not just pushed aside.
In my experience, the els and subways are not too affected by snow, tho' subway stations tend to get drifted-in at their entrances.
When was it, the big blizzard, '93? '94? Quite nearly everything shut down. I remember vividly watching Susan Molinari standing in the well of the House of Representatives, next to the Big Bad Newt, happily shutting down the government, essentially thumbing her nose at her SI and Bay Ridge constituents who were unable to get out of their homes.
Why is the Brighton worse off than the Sea Beach? I suppose the snow there could be pushed to the unused express tracks -- but the Brighton snow could also be pushed onto the express tracks. Local-only service is a drag (especially on that line) but it's better than nothing.
Yeah buddy.
I personally experienced a lot of these problems. For instance, at about 9.30 on Saturday morning, 29 December, I took over a train of new C20 stock at Alvik southbound from a driver who needed a relief (he'd been on that train for close to five hours with no break because of the disruption caused by the snow). I initially forgot to insert my key, so I couldn't get my indicator light. When I identified and corrected this problem, I left Alvik.
And couldn't make it up the first hill. The train simply sputtered to a halt after about 100-150 meters or so. The third-rail shoes apparently didn't have enough contact with the third rail to get me the power I needed to make the hill.
I called Control. "Change over to Battery mode," they said. Yeah, that's gonna work great on an upgrade! But I did as they asked -- and slid backwards, going into emergency after about two meters. Good job! So the poor driver I'd relieved climbed into the rear cab (the rear of the train was still at the platform at Alvik) and took the train back into the station. Then Control wanted me to make one more attempt to conquer the hill. So I did -- and got about five meters farther than the first time. THEN the poor driver had to take the train back from me, on orders from Control, and continue back northbound, apparently just to get the damned train out of the way.
After this, I decided to make myself useful by walking around the platform and trying to answer questions. After a few minutes, an announcement came over the PA that the next southbound train was about to leave Abrahamsberg, only two stations away. So I tried to spread this information to people who might have missed it.
The train entered the station and -- WHOOSH -- proceeded through without stopping. Thanks, Control! GREAT information to the passengers, not to mention me!
Anyway, I took over a train of older stock at about 10.30 southbound from Alvik to Hagsätra. The driver I took it over from told me it didn't want to go as fast as it should. No sh*t -- it helped some to use the button to cut some of the cars back in when it got really slow, but it never got really peppy.
Ultimately, I left Enskede gård southbound. There's a gentle rise out of the station, then a few more dips and rises until the last gentle rise into Sockenplan station. In that last "valley," my train ground to a halt. After I contacted Control, they finally ended up asking me to discharge and re-charge in that cab, so I did. I ended up with only 5 kg of air pressure (7 is the minimum to operate). They asked me to change ends and see if things worked better at the other end.
You can't pass all the way through these trains on the inside. On the right-hand side (from the driving position) at the cab end of these cars, there is a little pair of steps that is somewhat semi-serviceable for climbing into and out of the train. But I also had the third rail on that side, so I decided not to chance that. I stuffed my tools into my jacket pockets, and jumped out on the left side through the spotting door.
I fell backwards into the snow; my tools flew out of my jacket pockets and disappeared without a trace in the snow, which was at about nut level or so ;-). (For me, that is -- I'm about 5'8".) So I used my mobile telephone to call Control and report what had happened. The dispatcher sympathized with me, and told me he had a car with a supervisor on its way, and just to hang on.
So I got to spend a happy half-hour waiting in the snow for this car to arrive. When it did, carrying TWO supervisors, it took them an hour and a half just to move the train to Sockenplan. (There was ice on both the third rail itself and on the third-rail shoes. They concluded that my train was completely isolated from the third rail.)
When we got to Sockenplan, we evacuated the train preparatory to taking it to the yard at Högdalen. Naturally, in car 7 we had a drunk who refused to get off. Both a supervisor and I tried talking with him, but it was no use. So we drove the train to Högdalen, taking the center track and waiting for the long arm of the law. After 15-20 minutes, two police showed up and pulled the drunk off the train.
The supervisor who was with me (the other one had gone back to get their car) asked if I wanted to drive the train into the yard. "No, thanks," I said, since I'd only been on the road for about a week at this point and was by now very wary of this train. So he took the controls, and we proceeded toward the yard; moved switches as necessary to go in on track 9; came up to the shed door, opened it, and proceeded into the shed; continued over the walkway in the center to the other side. He hit the brakes and got nothing. He hit the snow brakes and got nothing. He put the train in emergency and got some brake, but not enough. We charged right into the shed door. Ouch.
We looked at each other. We could hardly believe that this day had ended with this crap.
Oh man.
-- Tim
On "The Map", they say the Northbound N or R, they don't make it clear which, skips 45th and 53rd Streets on the 4th Avenue line in Brooklyn. Also, they call 45th Street 46th Street. Why does one of these trains need to skip those stations after midnight?
It is the R. Northbound R trains discharge at 59th, run light to north of 36th, and relay with 36th being the first southbound stop. This is so that the R doesn't hold up the W which in turn holds up the N.
Northbound R trains do NOT discharge at 59th. They discharge at 36th Street.
Under normal conditions, the R will run local to 36/4, where it relays onto the n/b express track. It then reverses ends and crosses over to the s/b express and s/b local track where it enters service again. This is timed not to interfere with N and W trains, but at 20 minute intervals during overnight hours, it's not hard to space trains.
We had this discussion when the map came out and made the skiped stations proclomation. That was the answer given. Think about it. Why keep the R in service on that stretch anyway? How many people go from 95th to 45th anyway?
From the one time I rode this part of the line late at night (a few times in 1998), it operated as such:
R trains operated from 95th to 36th St, entering 36th on the northbound local track. After discharging, the train switched to the northbound express track north of the station, where it reversed direction and waited for it's next scheduled leaving time at 36th St, switching from the northbound express-to southbound express-to southbound local track. The West End shuttle did the same thing. The express platform, at least in my experience, was always closed. Twice, it was occupied by trash trains.
The R should be in service because the map says the R is in service! That's enough of a reason, IMO. Besides, if it's going to 36 anyway, why kick off the passengers?
Sorry if this is a repeat, but I didn't see it posted previously.
"Ariel Briones, 20, of 3940 Bronx Blvd., was hit by a southbound A train at Clinton and Washington avenues at 1:37 a.m.
Police said Briones, who was riding alone, fell from the back of a northbound C train when the accident happened.
A witness told police Briones had been riding on top of the train - a dangerous and prohibited practice known as "subway surfing.""
New York Post article
I just found the thread started earlier by Train Dude.
I hereby nominate this individual for a Darwin award. Anyone to second?
Here, here.
MATT-2AV
Unfortunately it is not creative enough for a Darwin. Hasn't this happened several times already this year? It's like there are tye types of movies, funny/cult bad and bad bad. This was just plain dumb and is not deserving of any special award.
>>>Hasn't this happened several times already this year?<<<
No.
From the article:
>>>The last time a subway-surfing incident ended in death was May 16, 2000, when a man riding atop a Manhattan-bound No. 7 train fell to his death.
Peace,
ANDEE
Remember the kid riding on the outside of a D train that Mr. Dude told us about? It's basically the exact same thing.
It happens every once in a while. Some kid will try it because it's cool to do it. They know of the risks. But after watching differnent movies about people running and fighting on top of moving trains and bad guys getting wacked by overpasses they didn't notice coming at them, They figure: IT AIN"T GONNA HAPPEN TO ME!!!
Is it cool to hang to the back of an Amtrak train by grab-irons? (or grab-stainless-steels these days, and grab-carbon-fiber-that-isn't-strong-enough in the case of any French product, like the Airbus (or probably the Acela too)).
Lexcie
That happened in Boston one time. Some moron that didnt want to wait for the next train held onto the vents on the side of the top of the train and tried to hold it for the entire ride to the next station. Well the train went into a tunnel and he hit the wall and bounced back and forth between the wall and the train. They say he was probably still alive during the first 7 bounces.
A couple of minor differences. The guy was riding on the side of the train and not the roof. He jumped off instead of falling. He survived although he has a big "42nd St." stamped in his face from when he hit the column at 30 MPH. Otherwise it's the same.
I would say jumping off a moving train in a tunnel is stupider than riding on the roof.
>>> Hasn't this happened several times already this year? <<<
Gee, Mike, give us a break. The year is less than 72 hours old. :-)
Tom
You got my vote.
nothing like early stupidity in 2002
But you know the panrents, there going to say that there son was a good kid, and that he would never do anything like that. Then slap the city with a lawsuit for lets say for $100,000,000.00, Becouse someone shoud have seen him doing it and stop him.
Robert
You have nicely illuminated an important metamorphosis: Every kid who dies becomes an honor student, an exceptional human being without flaws (so of course it's the TA's fault).
I do feel bad for the parents. I don't wish this tragedy on anyone.
Notice that the surfer was 20 years old - legally an adult. If the parents do sue the TA, maybe the TA can get the case thrown out on the grounds that this ADULT surfer was responsibe for his own behavior.
>>> If the parents do sue the TA, maybe the TA can get the case thrown out on the grounds that this ADULT surfer was responsibe for his own behavior. <<<
That is how they would win the case, not get it thrown out of court.
Tom
Better still!
And the TA could sue for lost revenue while the trains had to be shut down to clear up the mess, and for the cleanup fees incurred by having to clean up the brains that weren't bright enough to keep themselves in the skull they were designed to remain in.
Yo Homie T/O: be glad that it wasn't your hand moving the trainset with dumbo upside yo head. Write you up for that. CI Peter
According to what I read,:
"Ariel Briones, 20, of 3940 Bronx Blvd., was hit by a southbound A train at Clinton and Washington avenues at 1:37 a.m.
Police said Briones, who was riding alone, fell from the back of a northbound C train when the accident happened."
This was no KID. THIS WAS A 20 YEAR OLD MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, I didn't know tha the "C" runs at 1:37 am in Brooklyn. You learn something new every day!
They Don't, someone has there facts wrong.
Robert
They were running on a supplement, providing late light express service. This has been done for the last few New Years.
The C was probably runnning that late as part of a New Years Eve supplement around the system.
Normally, the C stops running at about 11pm. This, however, was New Years Eve. The TA extended C service by way of a special G.O. to accomodate the crowds at Times Square. The C ran around the clock for that night.
Forgive me if this has been asked before, but...how can someone fall off a NORTHBOUND A train at Clinton/Washington, and then be hit by a SOUTHBOUND C? At one thirty in the morning?
Aren't all trains local in B'kln at night? That dumbass would have had to fall across four tracks, and three ranks of support columns, and at least two third rails, to be hit by that S/B train!
how can someone fall off a NORTHBOUND A train at Clinton/Washington, and then be hit by a SOUTHBOUND C? At one thirty in the morning
A lucky bounce?
Skill: human pinball
That's true but the "letters" were correct. The C ran all nite New Years Eve thru New Years Day. Extra list personel were utilised.
We've been discussing the R-16's lately and while digging out an answer for Sea Beach Fred I came accross some interesting R-16 facts.
June 6,1963: A three car train of R-16's is assigned to the #7 Franklin Avenue Shuttle. The cars are 6497,6423 and 6443.I believed that they stayed for about a month or so.
September 12,1966: 32 R-16's from both the 6300 and 6400 series are assinged to the GG. "GG B'KLYN-QUEENS" is added to the side routhe sign and "CONTINENTAL AV" and "SMITH-9th ST" are added to the destination signs.
January 11,1955: First R-16's enter service on the #15 Jamaica.
June 20,155: First R-16 train on the #10 Myrtle-Chambers Line
Larry,RedbirdR33
Larry:
Nice to see to positive news about my beloved for a change.
Do you know when they were assigned EE service?
R-16: I can't give you an exact date but I can say that by January 15,1970 all R-16s were transfered to the IND Queens Line for EE and GG serivce. Tme March 9,1970 car assignments call for the EE to have 106 R 1/9s and 104 R-16s. The GG was to have 30 R-1/9s,95 R-16s and 54 R-40's. Note that all the remaining 199 R-16s were still in serivce. Note that car 6494 which hit the bumper at south of Broad Street on September 26,1957 was scrapped in February 1958.
Larry,RedbirdR33
I recall most "EE" trains consisting of R-16's about 1974. I was really young, but I can distinctly recall riding one from Macy's at 34th Street to Bloomingdales at Lex/60. My aunt said "What the f--k is this "EE", and where does it go??" It must've been wintertime because I vaguely recall burning my hand on the hot metal heat grille under the seat!!!!! Well, I was only 4 at the time!!! Tony
The "EE" had been running for 7 years, yet your aunt had no idea where it went? LOL.
You think that's bad, my mother still insists that the Lexington Avenue express does not stop at 59th Street.
Peace,
ANDEE
My aunt thought the Dodgers were still in Brooklyn in 1978 until I pointed out they moved to Los Angeles in 1958.
But she can transfer from the BMT to the third Ave el here, right?
In 1968, when I was 11 y.o., I won a 25cent bet/reward from my mother. She refused to believe that the F ran down Houtson Street to Delancey - it would be a D. I said, no, it will be an F. She said I'll give you a quarter if you're right. By the time the train showed up, she promptly forked over that quarter.
It's funny with older people and the subway. My father still calls the L train the LL to this day, no matter how many times he's been on it since.
I always remember seeing the R-16 EE's while waiting for the N at Times Square or 34th Street, and wanting to ride it down to Whitehall, but my mother always said no.
Maybe that's why I love them so much.... Need to see a therapist to help me work through these feelings going back to childhood.
Amazing that in 1970 they had all 199 running, and within 7 to 8 years they were ready for storage and scrap.
R-16: The R-16s suffered the same fate as the R-17,21 and 22s of the IRT. They were just a little to old to be included in the great rebuilding of the late 1980s. They soldiered on while there younger siblings received a new lease on life. There were a few exceptions; the 110 Green R-10s and the 42 Street R-17s plus a few others.
Larry,RedbirdR33
The 42nd Street Shuttle R-17s didn't get an overhaul. They were kept clean before the rest of the fleet was and got painted red shortly before they were retired.
David
If I remember the 42 shuttle, WAY back when had some pretty intersting paint job on a few sets. I vaguely remember something like aqua doors (interior) It may have been around 1980 or so (or earlier). I was young, but I do remember it. It stood out because most every other train had graffiti all over them.
That's right. The cars were painted around 1980. The colors were two shades of blue -- aqua or something similar for the walls, and a darker shade for the doors.
David
See, my memory isn't totally shot in the last 20 years!
They were painting door interiors orange in 1980. I do remember the R-17s on the shuttle being nice and clean while the rest of the fleet was utterly desecrated.
The 42nd Street Shuttle R-17s were an exception to the standard NYCT(A) paint scheme of the 1970s/early 1980s.
David
Yeah that orange was something. I guess a remnant of the 70's. I never saw a non-graffiti train with orange doors. But in most cases you could tell they were supposed to be orange, under all the graffiti. That's why the shuttle with the blue and qguq was pretty noticable. I think some of the R16's had gray doors, or they may have been the ones that never made it to orange. If I remember correctly some of the R27-30's also had some gray doored cars.
The orange-and-tan interior color scheme debuted on the R-33/R-36 ML trains when they went in for their air-conditioning retrofits starting in 1978. Supposedly that paint was more resistant to the cleaning fluids that were used to remove the graffiti than the pistachio green and gray paint the MTA began slapping on its cars in 1971.
The R-16 shuttle train's unique colors were actually closer to those the R-29/33/36s came with than what the R-16s originally had. Either way, they looked a lot better than either the 1978 colors or the 1971 combo (ANYTHING looked better than the 1971 combo...)
I remember R16's with the orange and grey door colors. While I won't swear to it, I'll bet the 6400 series cars were the ones with the grey doors, as they were mothballed when the orange scheme was debuted. I remember these grey doored R16's on the J line in 1984.
Am I right or am I just thinking of the R16's grey doors. Were there a few R27-30's with gray doors in the mid 80's. I think I remember a few, but again I may be thinking of the R16's.
Maybe the outside looked like this:
It's funny, I don't remember the outside at all, I was only about 10, but I remember the interior was very dark paint, and very aqua looking.
That's about right for 1982-83.
Right, R-17 6688, currently at Branford, did a tour of duty there in white, but got painted red before she left town in 1987.
Mr rt__:^)
This is true but the 42 Street R-17's always were in pretty good shape living in a protected environment and for several years were the only clean and graffiti-free cars on the IRT.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Then I raise the question:
Were they really "lemons," or were they just run into the ground?
A little of both. They were mechanically troublesome, but their lack of maintainence magnified these problems exponentially later in their lives.
Well, as May 20, 1970 they had 198 R-16s left; because that is when #6304 met the curtain wall head on west of Roosevelt Avenue, bumped out of the consist by the wayward nose of R40M #4501, whose blind eyes failed to see the "GG" train switching tracks in front of it.
wayne
I remember that one ... NOT pretty ...
Yes, #6304 got a faceful of concrete all right - left side of the car sheared off all the way back to the third door. Point of impact was just to the left (opposite of cab side) of the storm door. #4501, whose fiberglas bonnet and sign window were ruined (the seat opposite the cab was mangled), got herself fixed up and is still puttering around Eastern Division to this very day.
wayne
That wreck was a BIG piece of school car as the steam had barely stopped rising from that mess when I got the motor instructor beatings about "positive communications" in other than head end operation. That one event caused an entire cascade of TWU adventure with everybody pointing fingers everywhere and Ronan of course refusing to face reality. It ended up with a major overhaul of a quirky braking system in the original cars, everybody FINALLY getting a useless radio and no moves without command's approval. But the entire system was at war with itself over that and us TWU brothers had to decide between the "regulars" and the dissident "rank and file" group of the TWU which had a field day with this "we told you so" watershed event.
Bad things happen when you have to operate a train blind from the third car using only a flashlight and a prayer to make a move. I remember it well though. That one event probably did more for system safety than any other crash, and that includes Union Square. That wreck is WHY there's timers and blind trips in Queens ...
4501 probably wouldn't have been so lucky had it hit a BMT standard...
Werent't the R40M's renumbered after their GOH? IIRC, the R40 modifieds were numbered 4250 to 4349.
Yes, they were renumbered.
Peace,
ANDEE
I wonder if any of those 95 R-16s on the GG in 1970 were the same ones that were loaned to the IND in 1966 during the Jamaica Yard Crisis.
Steve: They probably were. The R-16's fleet at that time consisted of about 195 cars split between the EE and GG. I don't think that very strenuous efforts were made to keep the cars separate.
Larry,RedbirdR33
This car was supposedly "torn apart" by an explosion at the 125th St station in November 1960, and a woman passenger sitting above the bomb was killed. #3221 was supposed to have been repaired and retirned to service.
Does anyone have any further details of this tragic event?
Well the car was repaired and returned to service. Here it is in 1979. Note the WTC in the distance. This is at Smith-9th Streets.
As I've mentioned here before a few times, I'm leaning strongly toward moving to the Philadelphia area this spring or summer (or maybe even sooner if the opportunity presents itself). I've been looking at a few apartment complexes in the area on Apartments.com, and I found a place called Media Station that seems to have the features I want at a more-or-less reasonable rent. For those who are curious, here's the listing:
Media Station Apartments
(Hey, it's got a railroad-themed logo... Bonus points!)
According to the ad, it's within walking distance of the SEPTA R3 Regional Rail Line, another bonus.
Can anybody tell me anything more about this area? I was leaning toward living in the city, but just for kicks, I put the address into MapQuest and got an arial photo of the property (center) and surrounding area, and it actually looks like a fairly quiet, wooded setting. Given all I've been through over the past couple years, I'm thinking that might be a welcome change of scenery for a while. I assume that's the R3 line curving around across the photo? Is that a station there, where the road crosses the tracks? How nearby is the 101 Media route? According to the SEPTA website, Media is about 30 minutes from 30th Street Station on the R3. How long would it take to drive, in average traffic? What's Media like, and what sort of interesting stuff is in the area? I'm hoping somebody here who's more familiar with the area can fill me in a bit.
(And by the way, does anybody else find it very cool yet slightly unsettling that I can type an address and instantly get an arial photo of said address so easily?)
As always, thanks in advance...
-- David
Chicago, IL
Media is a suburban town outside of Philly. Being that I live in downtown philly, im not an exact expert on the area, but i am a news assignment editor in the area, and rarely does any crime headlines come from media.
I think Media is OK, but if you dont have a car, you want to have a place in the city. SEPTA has great service throughout in the city and in the closer burbs 24 hours, but it gets spotty late....so be careful about that.
....PS Media is not all burbs, it is a small town, and places 2 shop are available.
Roads from that area into the city are notoriously bad. The R3 is a good line and it hosts many old Silverliners. The media station building also houses an active interlocking tower. I would recomend the R3 over the Rt. 101 as the R3 is a one seat ride downtown, but the Rt 101 can get you to the big shopping complex around 69th St. terminal. The West Chester RR also runs some fan stuff out past Elwin. That area is very nice and just about the only downside are the abysmal traffic conditions (ie The Blue Rt, Rt 1 and PA 3 are all hell roads).
What Jersey Mike, you don't want to ride the Market Street El about 10 PM on a Friday or Saturday night?
I do some riding on the 'L' here in Chicago on the Southside, but it is always in the daylight, and in the first car.
I was held up between 63rd & 60th in 1969 by a gang of thugs, riding eastbound at about 6 PM. They were 15 or 16, there were five of them, and it happened very fast.
I never made the mistake of riding in the last car by myself again.
Jim Kramer
Assuming I'm working in/near Center City and going to school at Drexel, I'd most likely use the R3 for day-to-day commuting. My car would strictly be for shopping and pleasure driving, mostly on weekends. (If I end up working outside Center City, then all bets are off.)
-- David
Chicago, IL
David:
In all the years that I lived in Pennsylvania, Media was one town that I always wanted to live, but never quite made it. I had a few friends that lived there, but it never worked out because of my place of employment - i.e. a 35 mile one way commute. And that was before the Blue Route - I476 was finished. I say finished, because parts of it were started in the late 1950's and stopped by Mainline NIMBY's (still a lot of clout then). I think the bypass was finally finished in the late 80's.
Anyway, I actually knew someone who lived in the development you mention. It is you typical multi-family structure built in the 1970's IIRC. I know nothing of the property management there, and I've not been in Media except for an ERA convention trip in 1998.
Media is important in that it is the county seat for Delaware County.
Getting back to Media, it is served by the SEPTA Rt. 100 trolley (I spent many an hour after school riding this one). The line starts at 69th St., which means a ride out of the city on El would be involved. The trolley enters Media at Bowling Green, or Providence Road using State Street, which is more-or-less the main business drag. The paralleling Baltimore Pike (US Rt. 30) is the other main street. The trolley serves the downtown area.
The town is one of those you dream of, with side streets full of quaint houses, some containing apartments.
The ex-PRR line however enters Media south of the town center. Where the trolley ends at State & Orange Street, the walk to the now R3 Media station is downhill about .25 of a mile. Mapquest shows the distance between the apartment complex and State Street as .45 miles.
As SEPTA offers its very good bargain Trailpass (weekly or monthly) by zone, the fare via both modes of transportation is the same. The thing about the Trailpass, which is different to how fares work in RTA land, is the Trailpass is your one ticket for ALL SEPTA travel, Regional Rail, El, subway, streetcar, bus, Media, Norristown, & Sharon Hill trolleys. I think Media is in a zone #3, you can check out the prices of the Trailpass on the SEPTA Website.
Anyway, living in Media will require an automobile. In Pennsylvania that means annual state inspection of the vehicle. That is where you bring you car to a dealer/mechanic, and he knows you'll pay whatever to get that new sticker in the windshield, and get your car back. I remember when it was twice a year, so making it annual was helpful, but it is still holding your car hostage, and how much are you willing to pay to get it back. Only a brand new car makes it though state inspection without ANYTHING needing to be fixed. Auto insurance is expensive, but not so much as in the City of Philadelphia. If you're planning to work in the City, you must be aware of the 4.5% wage tax charged to all city workers/residents. Remember that when wages are an issue. That would also be a deciding factor whether to live in the city or not.
If I ever moved back to PA, I'd probably end up living in the City of Philadelphia. I can't even consider owning a car again (see above). The company I now work for in Chicago is headquartered north of Philadelphia - and of course, with inconvenient public transportation, so a transfer really isn't an option.
One other thing piece of information you should know about is that Philadelphia, and Southeast Pennsylvania in general, seems to be very cold when it comes to people. Many, many Germans, my ancestors included, choose this area to live. Germans, by nature, are typically less friendly. I remember once a remark that a friend of mind made, he'd transferred into the area from New Jersey After living in the area about 10-years "Jim, when do they start to accept you around here"? I knew exactly what he meant.
However, living in the Philadelphia area means you have the Amtrak NE corridor available to you. So, Washington, Baltimore, New York and Boston are only hours away.
Hope this helps you, and the best of luck on your decision.
Jim Kramer
former Pennsylvanian
I think the wage tax is deductable from state and fedral income taxes.
Mike:
That is only if you itemize your federal income taxes. It is not deductable from the 2.8%, or whatever the rate is today, that PA State taxes you for the priviledge of living there.
What you may be referring to is that most school districts in the counties surrounding Philadelphia have a 1% wage tax. If you pay the 4.5% to Philadelphia, the city then pays 1% to your local district. I think this still works this way.
Bottom line, it is something to keep in mind when negotiating wages.
Jim Kramer
In Pennsylvania that means annual state inspection of the vehicle.
Can you not evade this by having your car registered at a friend's house out-of-state? I know this is not the idea of the inspection, but I mean, don't lots of people do it?
...Philadelphia, and Southeast Pennsylvania in general, seems to be very cold when it comes to people.
It really depends on what you compare it to, and who you meet. I've met very friendly people in Southwestern PA, and also in Jersey -- within a PATCO ride of Philly. However the sort of surface acceptance you get instantaniously in some places (rural Indiana included) does mean that at a deeper level people hang on to their definition of themselves very dearly, and if you happen to violate that, then best of luck to you. I don't know if this is what the original poster was talking about, but that's my experience with Americans (and people in general) from all over the place. Really the trick is to understand what people's sensitivities are and just be careful.
I think that being from England, I find that everyone is more accepting to the crowd I grew up with, so I had no problem with Southeastern PA.
...the Amtrak NE corridor available to you. So, Washington, Baltimore, New York and Boston are only hours away.
Yup, hours away, and also $104 away. I just bought my BOS-WAS ticket and that was how much it came out. On the contrary, my PHL-CLE ticket was $11.70 (that was on sale though).
Lexcie
"Can you not evade this by having your car registered at a friend's house out-of-state? I know this is not the idea of the
inspection, but I mean, don't lots of people do it? "
Not only would the state take a dim view of that, but so would the insurer.
You can evade lots of things (taxes, auto registration, fares on commuter trains, paying for things at the cash register) but that doesn't make it a good idea.
Can you not evade this by having your car registered at a friend's house out-of-state? I know this is not the idea of the inspection, but I mean, don't lots of people do it?
Not only would the state take a dim view of that, but so would the insurer.
You can evade lots of things (taxes, auto registration, fares on commuter trains, paying for things at the cash register) but that
doesn't make it a good idea.
Registering cars out of state has long been a common practice in Connecticut, where cars are subject to a substantial personal property tax. Most people use vacation houses or relatives' addresses to register their vehicles. Because the tax rates vary by municipality, sometimes considerably, some people take the slightly less drastic step of registering their cars in Connecticut, as opposed to other states, but in different towns.
I have not heard of any insurance complications with this sort of scheme, although people can get hit with substantial bills for back taxes if caught.
In the event your insurance company discovers that you are regularly garaging your vehicle somewhere other than where you've stated on your policy, they have the option of cancelling your policy or billing you for the difference in premium, retroactive to the effective date of the policy.
If the discovery of the false address comes as the result of investigation of a claim that has been filed, the options an insurer has are a bit more limited...
In the event of a comprehensive or collision claim, the insurer can deny the claim or subtract the premium which would have been owed from the claim payment.
On a liability claim, most states require the insurer to pay the injured third party and then pursue recovery from their policyholder.
CG
> In Pennsylvania that means annual state inspection of the vehicle.
> Can you not evade this by having your car registered at a friend's
> house out-of-state? I know this is not the idea of the
> inspection, but I mean, don't lots of people do it?
Sure, you could do that. But I hope you're never in an accident with someone who does this and they are at fault. When their insurance company finds out they've been lying about their primary garaging of their car and where they use it, their policy will be cancelled and you'll be S.O.L. trying to reclaim money from them. On the other hand these kind of people love to settle in cash up front.
Also, since the nearest state to that part of PA -- NJ -- has bi-yearly inspection and higher insurance rates anyway, why would you even bother.
Also, since the nearest state to that part of PA -- NJ -- has bi-yearly inspection and higher insurance rates anyway, why would you even bother.
In spite of New Jersey being notorious for having the highest car insurance rates in the country, many Philly residents surrepticiously register their cars in South Jersey for the lower rates.
Inspection is now every other year, so some cars will fall apart between inspections.
Having just moved from Queens to Brooklyn, and having had my auto insurance jump a whopping 30%, New Jerseyans can just cry me a river about their insurance rates. Sure, on average, New Jersey has the highest insurance rates, but that's only because it is a small, populous state sandwiched between to large cities. When you average places like Plattsburg with New York City, of course New York has better rates, but where you live in New York makes a BIG difference! I doubt any one car-owner in Jersey is paying more than I am to insure a brand new, black, American-made compact car.
From a practical standpoint, I fail to see how moving from areas with the same relative population density and within the same city causes this 30% increase, but the formulas the insurance companies use are their own. I think it goes by zip-code, and I have the bad luck of living in a zip-code with historically costly drivers.
As far as inspections go, I was surprised while spending Christmas in Ohio to find that that state has no auto inspection whatsoever. Judging from other messages in this thread, that seems to be the case in the midwest. Having grown up in PA, lived in Virginia, DC, and NJ, I just assuemd all states had annual inspections. Be glad there's no personal property tax on cars in PA/NJ/NY. Virginia's political campaigns of late have been shaped by the issue of repealing the car tax there.
Having just moved from Queens to Brooklyn, and having had my auto insurance jump a whopping 30%, New Jerseyans can just cry me a river about their insurance rates.
I recall reading a very interesting statistic some time ago. On a nationwide basis, X percent* of multi-vehicle motor vehicle crashes result in personal injury lawsuits. In Brooklyn, however, about 2X percent of multi-vehicle motor vehicle crashes result in personal injury lawsuits. Put another way, Brooklynites are about twice as suit-happy as typical Americans, who of course are hardly suit-adverse themselves. Sky-high insurance rates naturally follow. What is particularly ludicrous about the whole matter is that multi-vehicle crashes in Brooklyn are almost certainly less likely to result in significant injuries than in most other parts of the country, given lower urban speeds.
* = Needless to say, I don't remember what X was, but it's really not relevant for the point I'm trying to make.
"Put another way, Brooklynites are about twice as suit-happy as typical Americans".
Actually, it's worse than that. Consider that New York has a "no-fault" law, which is supposed to eliminate the ability to sue except in the most serious cases. Most other states do not. The biggest issue in Brooklyn (and to a lesser extent, the Bronx and Queens) auto insurance rates are the number of chiropractor visits, MRI's and other soft tissue related injury treatments which are paid for by no-fault coverage, and then used as documentation that a "serious" injury has occurred thereby allowing the lawsuit.
Without the no-fault law, 2X would likely by 3X or more -- but overall costs might be lower.
CG
"From a practical standpoint, I fail to see how moving from areas with the same relative population density and within the same city causes this 30% increase, but the formulas the insurance companies use are their own. I think it goes by zip-code, and I have the bad luck of living in a zip-code with historically costly drivers"
Actually, in New York it's the state that limits the way insurers can rate auto insurance by location. Queens has two territories (effectively western and eastern Queens). Brooklyn has always been one territory, and political influences have conspired to keep it that way.
The size of the differential between Brooklyn and Queens has developed over the last 10-15 years -- a not so surprising correlation with the rise in influence of Russian organized crime in that borough.
CG
As far as inspections go, I was surprised while spending Christmas in Ohio to find that that state has no auto inspection whatsoever. Judging from other messages in this thread, that seems to be the case in the midwest. Having grown up in PA, lived in Virginia, DC, and NJ, I just assuemd all states had annual inspections. Be glad there's no personal property tax on cars in PA/NJ/NY. Virginia's political campaigns of late have been shaped by the issue of repealing the car tax there.
Connecticut has an annual emissions test (a total scam), but safety inspections are required only when registering vehicles over ten years old. As I mentioned elsewhere, Connecticut also has a very burdensome personal property tax on cars, yet for some reason it hasn't become much of a political issue, at least not yet.
Regarding New York safety inspections, the conventional wisdom is to pick carefully the place where you bring your car for inspection. There is a definite advantage to being a steady customer of a garage that's authorized to perform inspections. And never bring your car to a dealer for inspection, as invariably they'll discover a problem that will be costly to fix.
And never bring your car to a dealer for inspection, as invariably they'll discover a problem that will be costly to fix.
Interestingly enough, that's not the case in North Carolina. Down there, if you don't have an established relationship with an independent mechanic, a franchised dealership is the safest place to go. A lot of quick-change oil franchises also do inspections, and they're pretty reliable, although they also sell a lot of wiper blades :-) I usually replace my blades, if they're at all questionable, right before inspection, and then go to the quick-change place, since my regular mechanic doesn't do inspections; when my wife is taking one of our cars in, though, I have her go to the Ford dealer.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
From a practical standpoint, I fail to see how moving from areas with the same relative population density and within the same city causes this 30% increase...
Of course, you are free to choose not to move to that area, or take out insurance with a different firm who may or may not charge you less, or you may drive uninsured and risk the consequences. Or indeed you can choose to part with your automobile. I think that's the strength of the American system -- you almost always have a choice.
In Europe, they screw you twice over: first of all, they tax you like hell just so they can provide a transit system; then they provide an ineffective transit system so you have to buy a car; then they make legislation that require you to have motor insurance; then they make insurance rates the same wherever you go so that you don't have the option of moving to a lower-crime-rate area... etc. etc. It's even worse with healthcare -- they take $ off your paycheck to pay for the care for chain-smokers and other people who don't take care of themselves...
In california you have to pass a smog test every 2 years ( unless you car is a diesel or 1973 & older ).......... i got a diesel .....lol
!!
I remember the auto insurance NIGHTMARE in atlanta georgia whew !! & having to have a p.o. box OUTSIDE atlanta in order
to afford the state min. ....( marta was still under construction then & i guess now ) The buses really SUCKED big time back then
1983 1988 & auto ins. was way 2 HIGH !! .....yuck !!
& the auto insurance ( checkpoints )"crackdowns in the black sides of town only" like east point college park etc..
Cali-, anit no picnic either however being RETIRED you can get a break ....
The PE system is gone & the laRy as well...
That was the plan all the time destroy all RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS NATIONWIDE !!
In california you have to pass a smog test every 2 years ( unless you car is a diesel or 1973 & older ).......... i got a diesel .....lol
You have a diesel GM? Sorry, man... <g>
...i got a diesel...
When did you trade? Last week you had a 307 Olds engine in your Chevy.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I guess you believe people with tuberculosis should be left to cough into your face in a crowded elevator, or in crowded schoolhouse hallways.
An article I read some time ago said that tobacco taxes fully cover the extra social costs tobacco use entails -- including health care. Ditto for alcohol taxes.
then they make legislation that require you to have motor insurance
Which is the case in nearly all states of the US. That doesn't mean that there aren't drivers driving unregistered/uninsured cars.
"I think the bypass was finished in the late 80's"
Close, The enitire thing was finally finished and opened in December of '92. They've already started re-numbering the exits and they make absolutely noe sense. Go figure.
I believe, though not certain, that PA exit re-numbering is statewide. Drivers from other states have always thought PA's sequential exit numbering was confusing, since many surrounding states number their exits using milage from the border. PA has finally decided to follow suit. For example, on my drive back to NYC from vacation, I noticed I-78 has renumbered their exits using milage, but most signs have a smaller sign mounted below indicating the "old" exit number. This actually makes much more sense. When you build a new exit, you just number it according to the mile marker, instead of having to make it EXIT 8-A to differentiate it from EXIT 8. The exception is the PA Turnpike, which is run not by PennDOT, but by the Turnpike Commission. In fact, I think the other Interstates in PA used the turnpike as a model in their original, sequential exit-numbering scheme. New Jersey acted accordingly. The "8-A" example above is from the NJ Turnpike's Cranberry exit, which I assume was added sometime after exit 8, Hightstown.
On my post 9/11 drive across the country, I noticed that I-80 exits have been renumbered based on mileage as well.
CG
On my post 9/11 drive across the country, I noticed that I-80 exits have been renumbered based on mileage as well.
Ditto for I-70 from Denver to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, on my September drive home... although I think there may have been one state where that wasn't true... not sure though.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
In california you have to pass a smog test every 2 years ( unless you car is a diesel or 1973 & older ).......... i got a diesel .....lol !!
I remember the auto insurance NIGHTMARE in atlanta georgia whew !! & having to have a p.o. box OUTSIDE atlanta in order to afford the state min. ....( marta was still under construction then & i guess now ) The buses really SUCKED big time back then 1983 1988 & auto ins. was way 2 HIGH !! .....yuck !!
& the auto insurance ( checkpoints )"crackdowns in the black sides of town only" like east point college park etc..
Cali-, anit no picnic either however being RETIRED you can get a break ....
The PE system is gone & the laRy as well...
That was the plan all the time destroy all RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS NATIONWIDE !!
I think the other posters have done a good job of describing Media.
I will remind you that you will feel a little more constricted in your travels. Chicago has much better subway coverage than Philadelphia, and while SEPTA commuter rail does a decent job of covering other Philly neighborhoods, it offers only hourly rail service most of the time.
Bus service is pretty decent in the city, but I don't know much about the suburban division.
I don't know much about your budget. For comparison sake, have you considered neighborhoods along the Schuylkill, like Bala Cynwyd, or Manayunk and Roxborough? Also, older sections of Germantown have big beautiful houses on generous lots for not a lot of money - and heavy bus services, along with the R-8 line, are nearby. Another attraction is that you can walk into Fairmount Park from there. Fairmount Park is an urban green wilderness that runs for 7 miles (and you forget you're in the city). I am in the midst of moving there - my neighbors will include a member of the Philadelphia orchestra, lawyers, doctors, clothing designers, teachers and realtors...
Ron, are you Bayside as in SFO or Bayside as in Masschusetts Bay? If you're from here, we're sad to lose you from Boston! heh!
I lived in Bayside, Queens until Jan of 2001. Then my wife got a new job and we moved to Philly. I'm living in Manayunk, but we're trying to buy a house...
About 20 years ago, i lived in Manayunk back in the day when it was still a real working-class community. I remember the commute was horrible. Take the R6 to the El, take it to 5th, and walk down to the station on South Street. Took me the better part of an hour. Of course, this was back in the day when the Cynwyd train still ran across that big concrete bridge over the Schuylkill to Manayunk. Its a wonder the cynwyd line still runs....they only get about 300 riders a day
... does anybody else find it very cool yet slightly unsettling that I can type an address and instantly get an arial photo of said address so easily?
No. What are you going to do with an aerial photo?
If you're going to bomb the s**t out of the place, what good would an aerial photo do? Wouldn't driving directions be more useful?
Lexcie
I was thinking more along the lines of privacy issues.
Example:
1) Lady gives you her phone number, or you otherwise find it out.
2) Go to some website like Verizon.com and do a reverse look-up of the number, which gives you the street address.
3) Go to MapQuest and get an arial photo of her house and neighborhood.
What could you actually do with this photo once you have it? Well, probably not much, but it all just seems a little too easy, and slightly creepy.
-- David
Chicago, IL
(And by the way, does anybody else find it very cool yet slightly unsettling that I can type an address and instantly get an arial photo of said address so easily?)
Nope, if someone wanted to kill you, they'd have the address anyway, so they'd go to your house. I guess spying could be a problem for the paranoid. The really detailed ones aren't availible to the public (for free, anyway).
Aerial photos like that made primarly for surveying purposes. A low flying plane takes the pictures. The process is called Aerial Photogrammetry. Most state gov'ts (plus the USGS) have an agency that does this. They sell the photos, which are way more detailed than what you can find at Mapquest and other places, to engineering firms so that they won't need to go through the expense of paying a surveying crew to traverse the area.
I'm visiting Salt Lake, and drove out around the light rail line, which apparently shares trackage with a frieght railroad. There were at least 10 active industrial spurs I spotted along the line, all signalled.
My question is:
Does UTA-Trax have to be an FRA "railroad" to haul freight like that?
It was kinda interesting. I got visions of steeple cabs pulling the cuts of cars around....
Dave
I believe they have to use time of day separation between
the freight and passenger traffic. That freight operation
is presumably not just local but has interchange with the
national network, so you bet the FRA is involved.
They most likely got a waiver from the FRA, as the Baltimore MTA did.
I'm not sure how, but even after the BWI bang-bangs the waiver continued and was even renewed.
I think one other Light Rail line has an FRA waiver for freight operations as well, but the info escapes me at the moment.
That other system is San Diego Trolley. The freights may operate only between certrain hours, and if they are out in, for instance, El Cajon, when their time is up, that's where they have to park the loco so the Trolley can start operation.
Interesting. I have personally witnessed the NS (Ex-CRR/CSX) stone train running southbound out of Timonium with an LRV following right behind (1 signal block) it. This was at 7:15 AM on a weekday rush hour. The LRV service starts at 5:45 AM. The train has also gone north while the cars are still running at 1:15 AM (on ballgame nights).
Shakes up the passengers waitng on the (low-level) platforms on the lime.
And for decades, ending in 1973, the Chicago Transit Authority and predecessors hauled carload freight from a Milwaukee Road interchange at Buena Yard to several customers along the North Side "L." I believe freight operations took place mostly if not entirely at night, on the westernmost of the four tracks.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Don't forget the Newark City Subway, which now shares a stretch of track with the Orange Branch. Once revenue service to the last two stations begins -- supposedly w/i a few weeks -- that will also be a time share arrangement.
There is also a diesel LRT system being built from Camden to Trenton that will use this arrangement.
When the IND Sixth Avenue line opened in 1940, it provided local service only. The express service I believe began in 1968 or 1969.
Three questions:
1. Is the express section of this line in a seperate tunnel from the local tracks?
2. If so, was it constructed in the 1960's or was it built earlier or at the time of the original construction(1930's)?
2a. If the tunnel pre-dates the 60's, did it contain the tracks already laid?
3. Why a long gap in establishing an express service on the 6th Ave Line?
Thanks,
Tunnel Rat
>>> Is the express section of this line in a seperate tunnel from the local tracks? <<<
Yes
THIS should answer most of your other questions.
Peace,
ANDEE
Thanks.
Thanks Andee. I didn't know the lower level was constructed with an option to convert to an express stop! Now I'll have hives until the express resume running, and I can get an eyeball full of the tunnel construction.
That would kill the dash, but a 14th St express makes a little bit of sense.
avid
It's pretty interesting that both 14 & 23 have provisions to be converted to express stations if need arises. I can understand 14, because of it's connection to the L, but why 23?. Actually the 6th Ave express is not really an express anyway, it basically stops at every station. (even when running properly with the MB) Most of the stations are "express stations" 14 and 23 are the only local stations anyway.
23rd has the connection with PATH
Yeah, but so do 14th and 34th!
- Lyle Goldman
1) The express tracks are seperate from the local tracks between 34 and W4 sts. They're lower than the local tracks.
2)& 3) When the line was being built, express tracks were planned. NYC was going to take over the H&M (now PATH) tracks and use them. But those tunnels were built for cars that were shorter than the IND cars. For the sake of money (there was a deppression going on) work was put off for another time.
Thanks.
One question not answered yet.
Was the physical tunnel for the express tracks built in the 30's or did the TA actually build/excavate this tunnel in the 60's? My father had a business along 6th Ave and, during the sixties, I would as a child visit him there. I was too young to remember actual scenes of construction--if built then and not the 30's, it must have been quite an engineering feat what with the increased auto and bus traffic on the street above and despite not having the El of 30 years earlier. I do understand that the tracks were laid out in the 60's, but perhaps the tunnel was built then as well.
Tunnel Rat
It was dug in the 60s. There was a shaft on w12th St for the removal of debrie and entrance of building material. It was just west of 6th Ave IIRC.
avid
As I understand it, a tunnel was planned in the 1930's. However with the H&M tubes there and the fact the tunnels were built to specs for H&M trains, which were shorter than the IND, the plans were scraped. In the 1960's when the express tunnel was built, It was built below where the tracks along 6th Ave are now. Probably in the 1930's, all that was built were tunnel leads at the s/e of 34/6 and the n/e of W4.
As I understand it, a tunnel was planned in the 1930's. However with the H&M tubes there and the fact the tunnels were built to specs for H&M trains, which were shorter than the IND, the plans were scraped. In the 1960's when the express tunnel was built, It was built below where the tracks along 6th Ave are now. Probably in the 1930's, all that was built were tunnel leads at the s/e of 34/6 and the n/e of W4.
Huh. That would have been a NON-trivial thing to construct, putting express tracks under the IND Sixth Ave local/PATH combo ... woof. Esp since they couldn't just deep-tunnel 'em since 23rd and 14th both can be converted to express and hence have to be directly below the locals.
I've seen a lot about the Chrystie Connector happening in the Sixties, but hadn't known at all about this. Were there other little "fixes" or tweaks that got done at the same time?
Incidentally, it's been widely said that building the IND through Herald Square was the single most challenging piece of subway construction ever done in NYC (since BMT and PATH already existed there).
Incidentally, it's been widely said that building the IND through Herald Square was the single most challenging piece of subway construction ever done in NYC (since BMT and PATH already existed there).
And they had to support the old 6th Ave el in the 30's also, and I believe trolly lines! Very complex construction.
And they had to support the old 6th Ave el in the 30's also, and I believe trolly lines! Very complex construction.
Don't forget 4 LIRR/PRR tracks, too!
That's right! A real nightmare. It's a good thing that they built it back then, think of the cost of that line now, even without the el and trolly tracks there. It probably would not have been built in the present, even though it is a very important line!
Which is why I think the original IND builders erred in basing the first system on an 8th Ave/6th Ave trunk. I think an 8th Ave/2nd Ave system would've been better. The Broadway line basically paralells the current 6th Ave. line, and the city probably knew they were eventually going to take it over.
Which is why I think the original IND builders erred in basing the first system on an 8th Ave/6th Ave trunk. I think an 8th Ave/2nd Ave system would've been better. The Broadway line basically paralells the current 6th Ave. line, and the city probably knew they were eventually going to take it over.
Hmmmm. OTOH, more pressure to build on Sixth due to Rockefeller Center opening and the realization that a subway would allow them to tear down the Sixth Avenue El and make all that midtown land VERRRRRRY valuable to real estate developers ... and hence improve tax values, leading to more revenue for the city. (More proportionately than on 2nd Ave which is mostly too far east to be part of CBD.)
'Course, then they tore down the Second Avenue El anyway.
I'm *still* fascinated by the notion of the Sixth Avenue line without express service until the mid-Sixties between 34th and 4th. Wow.
It's hard to imagine the sixth Avenue without express, or never built. It seems like such an important line! But I guess if 2 Ave was built in the 30's, we couldn't imagine not having that either. It's another important project, that is very long overdue.
The 6th Avenue express is one of the least important express runs in the system. It only skips two stops. Notice that it's not in use now. Four tracks are necessary for the Chrystie Street connection to work, but otherwise it's pretty unimportant.
No I mean the whole 6 Ave line not there. I meant it is two seperate what ifs. 1. Not having the whole line, or 2. not having the expansion to 4 tracks in the 60's. Yes, the "express" is a joke , but it increasaes the capacity of the line by two tracks. Imagine if 6 Ave was only two tracks permanently. It would forever be like it is now with the MB closed. That capacity is a neccesity, even if the express only skips 23 and 14.
But the connection to the Manhattan Bridge didn't open until 1967. So why is it so odd that there was no express until 1967? The two local tracks sufficed.
I guess the 4 Broadway tracks can handle the traffic, but do you really think that the current service is better than when the MB is fully open and 6 Ave service uses all 4 tracks and Broadway uses all 4 tracks? The way things are now with the MB closed are a shadow of the real service before the construction. (It was just as bad when Broadway lost it's MB tracks)
And to think that when they opened the Christie St connection (before which service from deKalb was very much similar to what it is now) so many people complained about the reuction in service!
>>> I think the original IND builders erred in basing the first system on an 8th Ave/6th Ave trunk. <<<
It is only an error when you apply 20/20 hindsight. The purpose of those lines was to put the Ninth and Sixth Avenue Els out of business. They succeeded in that. The Second System would have provided the new line to the East side of Manhattan. The original builders believed along with most of the isolationist country in the ‘30s that we would not be drawn into any of the problems in Europe or Asia, and therefore the Second System would be built in the ‘40s.
Tom
Actually, I was proposing that a 2nd Ave/8th Ave "H" system not unlike the IRT would be the only 2 Manhattan IND trunk lines. The 6th Ave line was extremely difficult and paralleled by the Broadway BMT.
Which is why I think the original IND builders erred in basing the first system on an 8th Ave/6th Ave trunk. I think an 8th Ave/2nd Ave system would've been better. The Broadway line basically paralells the current 6th Ave. line, and the city probably knew they were eventually going to take it over.
There is also a high pressure water main coming from upstate under there. Water Tunnel #1 I think.
There is also a high pressure water main coming from upstate under there. Water Tunnel #1 I think.
And they broke it during the construction of the express tracks.
Someone (not me!) should assemble all the information presented here and update the FAQ on the Herald Sq station, and all the complexities involved in their building.
Does anyone actually know how they addressed the complexities, especially when building the express tracks in the 1960s? Some questions I'd like to hear the answers to are:
- How did they build the express tunnels directly below the local or PATH tunnels all the way from 31st down to 8th St. without stopping local or PATH service?
- At 31st Street, how did they get the express tunnels under the PATH (which terminates at about 31st St) but above the LIRR without disruption?
- What is the track arrangement at 14th St.? Do the express tracks tunnel below the L tracks?
- How do you get out of the PATH at 14th Street on the uptown side? The PATH tracks are inside the local IND tracks, but somehow you wind up on the street on the east side of 6th Ave., not on a mezzanine. There must be some kind of enclosed catwalk over the uptown local IND track.
The IND station at 34 St - Herald Square was originally built as a 4 track station. It extends from about 33 St to 35 St. If you look along the platform from the north end (35th St) you can see where it dives under the Broadway BMT at 34 St, and then rises up at 33 St to clear the LIRR & Amtrak Tunnels which cross under at 33 and 32 Sts. Fortunately, the LIRR and Amtrak tunnels are deep enough so that the IND subway was able to cross over the LIRR and Amtrak tunnels and, at the same time, pass under the PATH tracks which end at 33 St. The IND local tracks then rise to just below street level at 23 St, flanking both sides of the PATH tracks, which run down the middle of 6th Ave. The IND express tunnel from 33 St to 8th St was built as a "deep rock" tunnel, far enough below both the IND local and PATH tracks so as not to interfere with service on those lines, except for the 2 week disruption in 1962 caused by a water main break which Stephen Bauman pointed out above.
At 14 St the IND express tracks pass under the L tracks, which, in turn, pass under the IND local and PATH tracks. The IND platform extends north from 14 St, while the PATH platform extends south, so there's no need for PATH passengers to cross over or under the IND platform.
Heading south from 14 St the IND local tracks dive down to the express level, at the same time the PATH tracks drop down one level. In this way, the 8th Ave IND tracks coming in from Greenwich Ave are able to pass over the PATH tracks, which in turn, pass over the IND 6th Ave tracks as the PATH turns down Christopher St.
As you can see, the 6th Ave subway is a remarkable example of civil engineering and construction.
PATH 14th Street customers exit ro rhe street heading towards 33rd and share a common exit with the subway heading towards New Jersey. To enter PATH to NJ, you go upstairs to the Sixth Ave subway mezzanine, exit the turnstile and then go down the stairs to PATH.
Victor M,
Fascinating, fascinating, fascinating! Thank you and the others for giving a detailed account of the 6th Ave physical layout that seems to be missing or incomplete in every written work about this. I wonder why Brennan, Fischler, or Cudahy never put in a graphic illustrating the actual physical layout of what route goes under/over/alongside what in regard to 6th Ave. Now we have it, and thanks to ST'ers. I hope this gets placed in FAQs and gets digitally illustrated in Peter Donoghue's Track Maps.
Thanks again,
Tunnel Rat
Indeed. The 6thAv spaghetti, and how it came to be, does need some explanation, and this is the site to do it.
The A&E Documentary "Subway" had a great graphic of the "spaghetti", as you called it.
Also, a short description of the line, and a detailed timeline of construction of the IND is available in my history of the IND right on this site!
--Mark
Thanks for a very detailed response.
I was in the neighborhood of 14th and 6th just now so I thought I'd take a look at the levels there. There are tracks on 4 different levels!
The mezzanine with fare control is down about 20 feet. The F tracks are down another level, maybe another 15 feet. The PATH is behind the wall of the mezzanine, 20 feet down, one level above the F. To exit from the northbound PATH you go eastward and up 2 steps, crossing over the northbound F tracks (without seeing them, of course).
Then of course the L is down a level below the F, and the express tracks are yet another level (or more) below that.
In cross-section looking from the east you have:
6th Ave-->--------14th----6th Ave->
--PATH platform ----F Mezzanine----
--------------------F platform-----
-------------------L---------------
----------express tracks-----------
I like your graphic! I wonder why they didn't connect the northbound PATH platform with the northbound F mezzanine they way they did in the southbound direction. If they did, PATH pasengers from New Jersey could connect with the F or L without having to go above ground in inclement weather. By the way, did you notice that long corridor under 14th St to 7th Ave that enables a free transfer between the 1,2 and 3, and the L and F? You access it from the L platform just west of 6th Avenue.
"I wonder why they didn't connect the northbound PATH platform with the northbound F mezzanine they way they did in the southbound direction."
I'm guessing that the stairs that lead from the southeast corner of 6th and 14th directly down to the L (without going via the F east mezzanine, which only starts on the north side of 14th) get in the way.
As you know, it's a very complicated station and would take some thorough exploring to really understand. I only looked at it from outside fare control this evening.
I think you already understand it very well. One time I helped some tourists go from the L platform to the New Jersey-bound PATH platform. They found it hard to believe when I told them "It's about four flights up, then down a corridor", but I showed them the way.
"I wonder why they didn't connect the northbound PATH platform with the northbound F mezzanine they way they did in the southbound direction."
I'm guessing that the stairs that lead from the southeast corner of 6th and 14th directly down to the L (without going via the F east mezzanine, which only starts on the north side of 14th) get in the way.
I suspect it has to do with pre-existing building on the site. There's an old department store there (just converted to very pricey condos) which contains the PATH entrance but could well pre-date PATH and clearly pre-dates the BMT and IND. It's old enough where it might even have sidewalk vaults. I bet that the construction to do what you're talking about would use chunks of their basement.
That's pretty complex there also. So the 6 Ave exprss tracks are below the F tracks?
This can't be referring to Water Tunnel #1. That is extremely deep (hundreds of feet deep). Also, there was no redundancy at the time. If the main tunnel had been breached hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers would have been without water.
It must be some other sizeable water main but not the primary tunnel.
Water Tunnel #1 is under 6th Avenue. The main valve room is located somewhere in the vicinity of 39th or 40th street, I believe.
However, the water main that was damaged was not Water Tunnel #1. Had it been, the city would have had to close the gate valves in the main valve room. Because of lack of maintenance (simply because they could not shut off the water), it is likely that they could not have reopened the valves any time soon!
Once Water Tunnel #3 is operational, the city will redo #1's valves.
How far along are they on tunnel #3? It seems like they have been working on it for a long time. When is the estimated time of completion?
http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dep/html/watersup.html
You have to remind yourself that this is one of the *great* civil engineering feats of all times, ranking with the pyramids.
And look at what's on the tunnel floor in this photo. Until water starts flowing through it, it's the city's deepest subway line! :)
Looks like the London Tube on steroids. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
Looks like a nightmare I have sometimes.
Yes. Looking at the ultra-deep boring for this water tunnel, you wonder why there has not been discussion of building a subway line way down deep; super-long escalator runs could let a station serve a 15 or 20 or more block radius.
I wonder if anyone on here can compare the costs of deep drilling a tube through solid rock as opposed to the more traditional cut & cover subway construction method.
Another factor is the cost of escalators and elevators plus the cost of ventilation and emergecny evcauation of deep stations. Now if the elevators at 168 are out they close they station and police lead customers up the emergency stairs which are dimly lit and full of switchbacks. I dont have figures but I think a deep bored tunnel would be deeper than that. I think 168 is 6-8 stories down, can you imagine walking up 20 or more floors to exit in emergencies. I wouldnt want to work there when it happened.
BTW- all NYCT elevator deep stations have emergency stairways. They are behind marked doors and are sypposed to be locked but many times homeless move into the stairways. Where are the stairways-- look near the elevator shafts and you'll see the doorways.
Looking at the ultra-deep boring for this water tunnel, you wonder why there has not been discussion of building a subway line way down deep; super-long escalator runs could let a station serve a 15 or 20 or more block radius.
For very long-distance trains, maybe, but what's the use of taking a 12-minute journey on a subway if it takes 8 minutes each way to get to/from the platform? That's my main gripe about the London Underground: The deep-tunneled stations are deep enough that it takes more time to get up and down than the ride takes.
And how would it change matters when the water does start flowing? When was the last time you looked down at your friendly subway tracks?
One would imagine that when WT #3 is filled with water, no one would be able to ride a train down there (unless you've been genetically enhanced with lungs?)
You mean the R-142's aren't water-tight?
(I certainly wouldn't want to ride an R-40 down there.)
It's scheduled for completion in 2020, but I heard it's slightly ahead of schedule.
Now why ain't I surprised?
Whoops!
14 St was meant to have been an express stop. 23 St wasn't. But it was done because H&M was right behind the wall. And still is! NYC didn't force them out because it would have cost money to rebuild the tunnels. It was the depression at the time. At the time LaGuardia had to get money from Washington DC to finish what projects were already underway. The IND Second System was never built because the city did not have the money for it. It finished what it built because it was already committed to doing it. But they had to scale back plans for the lines it was building. The A line only went to Rockaway Ave. The E and F went to Roosevelt. Extentions for the the subway that we know now wasn't built after that until after WW2.
23 St wasn't. But it was done because H&M was right behind the wall. And still is!
Which side? North or southbound platform? I wonder why they never made a connection to Path's station.
When you enter the station at 23 St, it is the wall in front of you looking from the turnstiles. And this is from both platforms. Also at 23 St there is an entrance to the PATH train from inside the IND station.
The A line only went to Rockaway Ave. The E and F went to Roosevelt. Extentions for the the subway that we know now wasn't built after that until after WW2
The Queens IND was operating as far as 169th St and the Fulton St IND to Broadway/East NY as late as 1945.
It's quite remarkable how much subway construction there really was in the 1960s. While it's true that most of the sytem was built pre-1940, popular mythology is that practically nothing was built after WW2.
In fact, we got:
1) Connection of the McDonald Ave El to the IND (although, eventually, the connection to the 4th Ave BMT was destroyed)
2) Connection of the Queens Blvd Line to the BMT.
3) Rockaway line and completion of the Fulton Street IND
4) 179th/Hillside Avenue Station
5) The Chrystie Street Project, including 2 new stations (57th/6th, Grand Street), 6th Avenue "dash".
6) IRT Station at 148th/Lenox
7) Archer Avenue extension, inlcuding 3 new stations
8) Finally, the 63rd Street line, including service to Roosevelt Island, with pretty decent provsions for connections to a Second Avenue Subway
In total, not too bad, really.......
7) Archer Avenue extension, inlcuding 3 new stations
8) Finally, the 63rd Street line, including service to Roosevelt Island, with pretty decent provsions for connections to a Second Avenue Subway.
Unless you mean all construction since the 60's, these two lines were done in the late 80's. I guess the 70's is what really messed up any expansion.
The Archer Avenue project started in 1972, though planning had been underway for several years beforehand. The 63rd Street project started in 1969, though, again, it had been planned for several years. The segments OPENED in the late 1980s but had actually been under construction for a good long time.
David
The time frame cited should give SubTalkers a conception that even if construction of the Second Ave. subway began today, it would be a good long time till it opens for service. At my age, almost 49, I am certain that I will not see any more new subway routes opened up in this town. Perhaps I will see the LIRR extension to GCT tho.
I'm 29 and I'm not that optomistic either. Perhaps I'll ride the "stubway" to my grandchild's college graduation.
16 %$#@$ years to build 3 stops from Jamaica Van/Wyck to Parson/Archer, plus a ramp up to the J line. Considering that the entire 8th Ave line in Manhattan was constructed in half that time, I wonder how long it might take to construct a full length 2nd Ave line...
We'll all be dead.
It is a nice list, but you're talking 35 years here. Fulton St. extension of the A was 1956 and therefore work started earlier. Culver extension of the F was the 50s too. Archer Ave. finished in 1988, I believe.
Also, not to be ignored, making 59th and Lex an express station, in the early 60s. Quite a project too.
Culver extension of (what is now) the F actually was nearly complete in 1941, but it didn't open until 1954.
David
Also, not to be ignored, making 59th and Lex an express station, in the early 60s. Quite a project too.
I didn't know this. Bloomie's basement was originally a local stop?
Yup. To ease overcrowding caused by the new 11th St cut allowing access to 59th/Lex by Queens IND riders, the lower platform was built around 1960. Before the rehab, this platform's age was obvious, with the ugly green tiles used in similiar stations of the period (Grant Ave. comes to mind). Prior to this time, 59th St on the IRT was a local only stop.
Which made for one helluva run on a Lexington Ave. express. I hear the Lo-Vs used to smoke that run.
IIRC, the Culver/IND connection was pretty much built before we entered WWII, having construction interrupted when it was almost complete. All the platforms had been extended for 600' trains by then.
The steelwork for the IND ramp was in place, but wasn't tied into the Culver line itself.
Items 2,3, and 4 were completed and operational in the '50s. I remember the subway maps prior to opening had dotted lines to show under construction. The lines after opening had multi-coloured lines to show dual service on Queens Blvd. IND?BMT service. Standards did run on QB.
avid
When the line was being built, express tracks were planned. NYC was going to take over the H&M (now PATH) tracks and use them.
So were the express leads from the IND Herald Square station aligned so they COULD feed into PATH tracks. Now there's an amazing thought: IND to Jersey!
But those tunnels were built for cars that were shorter than the IND cars. For the sake of money (there was a deppression going on) work was put off for another time.
But ... I assumed PATH tunnels (essentially IRT spec) can't handle B division cars 'cause of girth, not station length? Wouldn't they have had to re-engineer all the tunnels? Or were they ONLY going to use the Sixth Avenue portions of the line, perhaps turning Christopher into a terminus?
Probably H&M would have terminated at Christopher St. Then again Hylan probably had ideas about doing away with H&N as well as BRT/BMT and IRT. Hylan wanted to build a modern subway. Cutting edge and state-of-the-art. When that went into service, people would prefer that to the other existing companies and force them out of buusiness.
No. The Sixth Ave express tracks were meant to feed the Houston St. tunnel to Brooklyn and S4th St.
The best they can do now is a huge Layup for inclement weather.
avid
Peggy asked me to post the reminder of Sunday's field trip on the 1 line's Manhattan and Bronx Portions.
IMPORTANT: Due to a G.O. supposedly due to end at 8am (which could run late) we will meet at Park Place Station Instead . Meet at 9am by the oculus mosaic in the mezzanine near the IND Booth.
While we can not enter closed areas, we can peek through black plastic and see the plywood at the bottom of the the ramp to the E platform level. We can also see the dust and grime still worn by Oculus.
Trip will run hot or cold, rain or snow. Planned stops include:
Houston, Christopher, 34,42 Complex (also to be seen is the N? Mezzanine and new mosaics), 50, 66,86,96,125(we will get off and walk under the structure which is not an el!), 168,181,191,Dyckman,207 (we can see 207 yard from the platform),215 (we can see Broadway Bridge from the street. The subway bridge is over the street bridge. ) and 242 where the trip will end.
Cost: One fun pass or unlimited card (you will need at least 3 fares- Entry to system, 125, 215.)
Peggy looks forward to seeing many subtalkers at the trip.
To those unable to attend, e-mail peggy off-site (peggy@nycsubway.org) and details will be sent for a low-cost CD of the trip photos.
On Monday Peggy will be heading down to Atlanta via Amtrak's Crescent. A full report will follow on her return.
Excellent.
What is this GO? I don't see any GO ending at 8am.
Oh, I see. The first Brooklyn 1 reaches Chambers at 8:36, and the 2 is running up Lex. Reaching Chambers from the south before 8:36 will be a real pain. Or are you referring to something else?
The WTC platform is plainly visible from the north end of the A/C platform.
The G.O. involves single tracking using the Brooklyn Bound track. I work nights and as such see many G.O.s and often times they run late and the first train can be delayed. I spoke with Peggy and seh agreed to Park Place sinmce it has an Island Platform which would not matter. I then suggested she include the visit to see Oculus which is in hiding at this time but can be seen through a hole in black plastic.
While the G.O. might be over, moving the start to Park Place will prevent a surprise.
The meeting place is in the Park Place Mezzanine at 9am inside the Fare Control by the transfer to the IND.
Single-tracking on the Brooklyn-bound track? Until 8:36, there is no northbound service at all south of Chambers!
Park Place is fine with me, in any case.
How does the management of the trainservices in NYC Subway work?
Is it the dispatchers in those called “Master Towers” that are in control of the trainsmovements and services during the working day, or do they just take orders from somewhere/someone else, the word “Control Center” is mentioned here and there on this site? And is there some management “on the road/line”?
Would be interesting to know how it’s works in NYC, in compare to my own organization in Stockholm-Sweden.
I’ll read the FAQ on this site, explaining some of the abbreviations of titles being used, but it still leaves many questions unanswered.
/B
I'll let the experts chime in, Dispatchers and Asst. Dispatchers are at terminals and start trains and give them their job name. The Control Center is in overall "control" (hehe) but they can't see where the trains are and talk to the towers mostly and trains. If you can't raise a tower, crews call Control too (Happened once when Dekalb tower screwed up, somehow they didn't hear the train calling but Control did, then Control called the tower and their radio started working hmmm). It's fun listening to the radio when control steps on everyone and then ends up telling a tower to use a phone to call them.
Anyway you also have the roving TSS to contend with too and towers and control calling them. I'll let the experts figure it out for ya
Thank you , much of what you just describe sounds very familiar to my ears J
However in Stockholm we do not have any so called Dispatchers. The trains runs accordingly to a predefined timetable. Any alterations of that timetable and routes, due to various reasons, such as halted trains and so on, are solely the decision of personal at Control Center.
The traincrews ( since the middle 70’s only the T/O due to the transition to OPTO ) can only use the radio to communicate direct with Control Center, even though the towers can listen in on the calls made. Towers and Control Center used to communicate with each other over the phone.
Since the beginning of the 90’s, with the political decisions towards entrepreneurship in public transportation, the former “blind” and “main” Control Center was divided in to three separated Control Centers, one for each branch/line, and then physically placed at the corresponding tower facility. That decision where not very popular among the TW/O’s, who from that point have to live with the fact of having “Control staff” (two persons) sitting right behind them, looking over their shoulders as they performed their duty’s.
Placed among them was also the person who is responsible for announcing delays and similar to the customers through PA-systems, LED-signs on the corresponding branch/line.
On top of that we have five TB (TSS in NYC) on every shift (on night-time only 3) patrolling in cars equipped with the same type of flashing lights and sirens as Police/Ambulance, so they can manage themselves trough heavy traffic, in case of emergency’s or halted services during rushhours.
/B
Master Towers are basically a new "invention". Previously switches in various sections were controlled by wayside towers located at different sections long a route. With new technology developed over the years a lot of these towers are now consolidated into one "Master Tower" which can handle control of switches and signals over long distances.
Example:
The towers at Pelham Bay Park, Parkchester and Hunts Point Avenue were consolidated into the Westchester Master Tower which is located in the Westchester Yard (north of Westchester Avenue station). At 3rd Av/138th St the switches on both ends of the station used to be under the control of the Mott Avenue (149th St/Grand Concourse) but was changed over to control by the Westchester Master Tower.
Mott Avenue Tower still controls the switches at 149th St/Grand Concourse (upper and lower levels) and the switch south of Jackson Avenue.
There are others but this is the only I can give any detail on at the moment.
Anyone else, please chime (and watch the closing doors) in.
They usually keep a body at places where two lines merge or diverge from a single track or there is a GO that takes you from your normal route (if there isn't one already).
Daytimes there are usually extra people around at part time towers like Church on the F.
Some TD are very proactive and give you skips when the rails are messed up or are good at suggesting alternative service (official or not) and others won't scratch their rear without permission from CC.
Moderately interesting puff piece on the year in transit HERE.
Peace,
ANDEE
Mr. Chi'en forgot something that's was crucial to transit in this city pre-9/11. Like the trouble with the R-142/R-142A fleet that temporarily caused a car shortage on a subway line.
Mr Chi'en neglects many things, as I have stated before, I feel that he is in the wrong line of work. Which is why I called it a puff piece.
Peace,
ANDEE
A car shortage? The A Division currently has an excess of cars (for the scheduled service, at least).
Definitely puffy.
"Then tunnels on the 1 and 9 lines were crushed, and all subway service ground to a halt for the first time in history."
Not quite true...
If I recall, the entire system was halted at 11:50 pm on New Year's Eve 1999 (changing to 2000) so that no trains would be running when the calendar changed, in case any Y2K glitches crashed the signal system.
Of course, there were no Y2K glitches in the US...
Anyone else remember this, or was it a rumor?
JR
Not sure about Y2K, but what about April Fools Day, 1980?
Not sure about Y2K, but what about April Fools Day, 1980?
What happened?
JR
TWU 100 went on strike and shut the system down for eleven days.
Ah yes, now I remember. Thanks. Glad they did research before publishing that NY1 article. (insert sarcasm here...)
JR
Yes, the system did shut down - sort of. Trains were stopped in stations, but the system was not evacuated.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
what does it look like at the street & station entrance level ??
since i was told this is the least used station ??
.....just curious & interested ... thankz ...!
lol!
Plenty of stores selling commerical cookware on the north side.
Plenty of stores selling lighting fixtures on the south side.
Always busy in daylight hours.
It's nohwere near as bad a neighborhood as it used to be. Some reasons it might still be little used:
- The businesses there are not major employers.
- The residential buildings nearby are all low rise (5 stories).
- The people who do live in the neighborhood will generally not want to use the J/M/Z but are more likely to want the F, the B/D (well, the Grand Street shuttle for now), the 6, or the N/R, all of which are really only a fairly short walk away. The J/M/Z don't go anywhere except to the financial district and very selected parts of Brooklyn and Queens.
- It's the only J/M/Z station in Manhattan that doesn't connect to much else, now subways and only the Bowery bus, which runs on a pitifully poor schedule itself. And the J/M/Z themselves aren't the most heavily traveled subway line themselves, with the vast majority of the traffic being people going to work in the financial district.
I was on the J train over the weekend and the ride spurred a question that I had for quite some time. It has always puzzled me, and I figured the guys at subtalk could help answer it.
Why is Marcy Avenue different from all the other stations on the line. It looks newer, and doesn't have the look that almost every local station on the J (and the side platforms stations on the M) have. Did they have to tear the original station down when they connected the line to the WillyB? I know the line original terminated at the Broadway waterfront, and was thinking that maybe the original station may have had to be demolished to make way for the bridge approaches. Does anyone know why Marcy is different with construction, no fare control under the station, and wasn't built to the same specs as all the other stations.
The station WAS built like the others, but it was rebuilt approximately 20 years ago.
David
So they tore up the fare control area under the station? It still puzzles me because I believe I saw a photo of Marcy from the 60's with rotting wooden platforms, that may have dated back to the 30's or so.
Not sure about the history of the fare controls, but the wood platforms were replaced by concrete ones in the early 1980s -- the station was closed for several months while this happened.
David
The platforms from Hewes to Eastern Pkwy were concrete for 60 years prior.
Concrete platforms in the 1930s and 1940s when no other BMT station had them? I am unsure about that.
All the stations I think were concrete on the M from Fresh Pond to Myrtle and on the J from Hewes to Eastern Pkwy, and from Cypress Hills to 168th Street from the time of the el rebuilding around 1915 or so, with Marcy being the exception, as I just found out today, and of course the old section from Alabama to Cypress Hills.
Marcy Ave, Alabama Ave, Van Siclen Ave, Cleveland St, Norwood Ave, Crescent St and 168th St had wood platforms until the 1980's.
Marcy Ave was the only side platform station with a wood platform at that time.
I'm not sure about this but I think that 168th St still had a wood platform when it was torn down.
All of the other stations that existed at the time of the dual contracts were rebuilt with concrete platforms.
Dual Contracts eliminated a station between Myrtle and Flushing. It was a center platform station known as Park Ave.
You haven't lived until you had the opportunity to stand on the end of Marcy Ave station in the 1940's. The wood platform was only about three feet wide, and you hoped that the railing didn't fall to the street before the train came.
You haven't lived until you had the opportunity to stand on the end of Marcy Ave station in the 1940's. The wood platform was only about three feet wide, and you hoped that the railing didn't fall to the street before the train came.
LOL........................That must have been something!
My mother always insisted that we stand where the front of the train would stop. I was always thankful when we got on the Standards, and off that damn platform.
I think it is the reason I have had a fear of heights all my life.
Yes, the station was quite scary looking. Does anyone know which platform had to be rebuilt after being damaged by fire in the 1950's?
I once had a nightmare about Marcy Ave.--
There were big holes in the rotting wooden platform, and I was holding onto those siderails tight so I wouldn't fall through.....
What's funny is that it was concrete platforms by the time I lived near it...
Go figure :)
Actually, 168th St was always wooden until it was demolished in the late 70's.
I highly doubt even with Dual Contracts rebuilding of the lines in the time period 1913-1918 they installed concrete platforms. Dual contracts construction did NOT employ concrete platforms on the West End, Culver, or Brighton elevated until past the 1940's. Why would it be done on the Eastern Division?
I am going to go thru the stacks of papers and books I have to verify this, but I would bet money that concrete platforms were NOT part of BRT Eastern Division rebuilding.
That's very interesting. I didn't realize that. What about the fare control areas? It just seems all the concrete is about the same age.
I used many of those side platform stations starting in the 1940's, and with the exception of Marcy, they were all concrete, and it sure did not look new.
The stations just seem to be built so sturdy. It's hard to believe that that concrete is not original from circa 1915 on the J and M lines, excluding Marcy, 168th, Alabama to Cres, and Metro. It seems that the wood platforms just wouldn't have went with the sturdy steal. And the fare control areas, it's hard to believe that they weren't always concrete, and if they made the fare control areas concrete, why not the platforms?
Those concrete side platform stations all used to have fare control at both ends of the station too. The TA has completely eliminated fare control at one end of many of the stations.
That was a shame!
I also noticed that with the rebuilding of Hewes, Lorimer, and Flushing they rebuilt and extended the canopies over the stairways of both the in use fare control area and the not in use fare area at those stations. So maybe they intend to one day use them again. However the extra fare control areas on the M at Forest, Central, Knickerbocker, and two abandoned fare areas at Wyckoff have all been completely removed and the stairways removed and cemented over on the platforms.
They are available for emergency exit use only. They can be unlocked by pushing a special button in the booth at the other end. The mezzanine space is now used for electrical rooms, communicatiosn rooms etc.
Marcy is being renovated again at this time. New lights are going in including new end of platform lights--presumably like the other J stations have along with the ADA edge strip and elevators will be added.
Is the ADA edge strip those big yellow tiles with the bumps. I can't remember if the other renovated stations got that or not. That stuff is dangerous I say. I busted my ass right in front of a door of a 4 train at Grand Central. That stuff was wet because they were cleaning the station. I was nice and didn't try to sue the MTA for millions because I was the one running for the train. I'm just glad the C/R didn't close the door on my arm which was partially inside the train.
Shawn.
You win the prize ! Yes, the usually yellow strip with the bumps. As far as stations with them- all current renovations projects are getting these along with some previously done. Some stations such as 57/7th have a slightly different form but this too is a tactile edge as required by the ADA.
I say usually yellow since PATCO uses Orange at the ends of their platforms and I think MARTA has at least one station with white.
Can anyone remember the first station these yellow bumped edges were installed at? I do.
Which one was it?
- Lyle Goldman
Pacific St.
I very much dislike the yellow tactile strip.
I very much like the bumpy black edge with two orange stripes, as at 57/7. It's less slippery and it looks quite classy.
If both meet ADA requirements, why is the yellow version in use now?
I agree the yellow bumpy strip always looks dirty.
I have a picture of a BMT standard train at 121 St on the Jamaica line dated in 1947. The station has concrete platforms, as well as an open windscreen design.
Marcy Ave never had fare control under the station. It wasn't even an express stop until the 1960's. The switches back then were west of the station, now they are east!
I wonder why the rebuild of 1915/16 placed 2 stations (Hewes & Marcy) so close together. Other pre-dual contracts stations were completely removed (Evergreen Ave is the only one I know by name). If I were in charge back then, I'd have rebuilt Marcy Ave, moving it west about a block, and completely eliminated Hewes.
Even THEN there were NIMBYs ... you either work WITH the hood or the hood works against YOU ... politicians once FEARED the voter. No problem today. :)
Marcy Ave. is different because it wasn't rebuilt when the center express track was added around 1915-1920. The Broadway Brooklyn Line and Myrtle Ave Line (between Broadway and Wycoff) originally looked much like the section of the J/Z line between Alabama Ave and Crescent St does today - two tracks with space between them and island platforms at the stations - except at Marcy Ave., where there was a layup track in the center and side platforms (with fare controls at platform level).
When the line was rebuilt c. 1915-20, the stations with center platforms were rebuilt as side platform stations with mezzanines (including the ones along Myrtle Ave, even though a center express track was never built, but only space left for it).
-- Ed Sachs
Thanks, that explains it.
Wow!!!! Thanks for the explanation. I've ALWAYS wondered why there looked like a possible center track existed at one time, but didn't *lol*
I suppose that's the same thing as the rest of the "J" line east of the Alabama-Cresent Street corridor (past the dreaded "S" curve)--at least up to the former end of the line at 111th Street, before the extension to Jamaica Center (I think), or am I wrong on that matter?
I'm not so sure there was never a center track between Central and Wyckoff, If you look closely on the el structure, you can see where ties used to be. I know it was never used in service, but it does look like there was a track there once, even if for a short period of time. On the J line there is no evidence of a trackway ever being there, but the trackway does seem to exist on the M.
On the (J) line east of Eastern Pkwy station and the turnoffs to the (L), you can see girders rising in the middle and going nowhere. There had been a plan to build a raised center track (as in the old Manhattan el's) around 1951, and it was started but never completed.
Bob Sklar
The girders going nowhere west of Alabama Ave have been there a lot longer than 1951,
I think they were constructed during the dual contracts in 1916-17.
This was the provision for the never built Fulton St flyover express tracks and does indeed date to 1916/1917. The riveted structure easily dates the steelwork to this era.
I always wondered what that was at Alabama Avenue. So it never was much more than it is right now. I wonder why they stopped building it.
I thought that raised roadbed was a turning track.
GP-38: The center track was installed on the Myrtle Avenue El between Central Avenue and Wycloff Avenue. It may have been used for layups but never regular serice. It may have been removed somewhere between 1945 and 1955 +/-.
Larry,RedbirdR33
There's a picture on page 36 of Greller and Watson's book, The Brooklyn Elevated, showing the third track "in service" at Knickerbocker Ave. Unfortunately, no date is given.
What kind of track layout was there from B'way-Myrtle to Bridge-Jay?
Two track elevated, island platforms. Here's a link to a picture of the newspaper on closing day ...
newspaper picture
For a several years the sections of Jamaica Ave. and Myrtle Ave had these shorty light poles long after the "Els" were removed. There gone too!
avid
Let's take some of that Broadway Junction steel and rebuild the Navy Street station! Teach THEM to mess with a perfectly good el. :)
Myrtle Ave was hardly "perfectly good". It was in bad shape and too lightly built to operate modern cars.
Did the trick though, just like the 3rd avenue el that was razed for the SAME excuses ... now GRANTED, on the Myrtle, one pier got kocked loose by a traffic accident towards the end ... it COULD have been fixed. Yum ... busses for everybody ... woohoo! Bx55 was the same sad joke. BOTH els though, when it came to the torch, farted in the general direction of the contractors ...
Both elevated lines would have needed massive rehabilitation and structural work if they were to retained much longer than they were. The R12's were to damn heavy for the lower 3rd. Ave line, and nothing in the B division fleet outside the proposed R39 would have been able to replace the Q cars.
In my opinion, the most intersting part of the old Myrtle Ave. El was the arch truss bridge across Flatbush Ave. Extension, obviously added when the road was built as an approach to the Manhattan Bridge so that traffic wouldn't have to snake around the El's support columns.
-- Ed Sachs
2 tracks, almost identical to Fulton St prior to it's rebuilding. This is Grand Ave, probably in the 1950's. Can I assume from the steelwork in this picture that this is the place where the Lexington Ave and Myrtle Ave els joined?
I think the picture is from the 1940's or earlier, Chris, and it is the old Grand Ave - Myrtle Ave interlocking. The picture was taken from the old walkover between the two Grand Ave platforms on the Myrt.
I spent some time on the walkover as a kid in the 1940's, watching trains, but couldn't afford a camera.
The three platforms and the tower were razed after the Last Lex on Oct 13th 1950.
Thanks for the picture, it brought back a lot of memories!
I don't think so. The picture that I've seen of the Myrtle-Grand crossing has the Myrtle El platform at Grand Ave to be east of the turn-off to the Lexington El. Trains doing to the Lexingion El never made a stop at that stop. There was no platform to stop at! Before Aqueduct Race Track, Myrtle Ave on the Lexington El was the only station with service just on one side.
I'd say that in the picture, based on the shadows, the view is looking west.
I'd say that in the picture, based on the shadows, the view is looking west.
The "Metropolitan Ave" destination sign on the lead car clinches that hypothesis.
The Myrtle Avenue el ran geographically northeast to southwest. Lex trains turned off just southwest of this station.
The picture was taken looking southwest toward Bridge-Jay St.
You can see one of the diverging tracks for the Lex under the second car of the train. The other track is concealed by the train itself
The Lex had its own side platform, called Myrtle Ave, for Bridge-Jay St bound trains. This platform (not shown) was connected to the Grand Ave platform shown on the left side of the picture. The two platforms formed a letter L, with the stationhouse at the point.
111th St bound Lex trains were the trains that had no platform to stop at here.
There is a picture on the inside of the front cover of Greller's Brooklyn Elevated , taken from the other direction, that shows this same junction.
Boy, this has me really confused. The steelwork in this picture has a track turning off and going right through the platform, something impossible unless the station was rebuilt after the Lex track's were removed.
That's probably because you're looking at the turnoff to the Old Main Line. That turnoff goes right into a building.
-Stef
Thanks for the clarification.
The 4 story yellow brick building on the NE corner of Myrt and Grand wasn't built until after the Old Main was torn down. But the wood building next door until about 10 years ago still had the 45 degree cut in the second story to clear the el structure - gone then about 90 years. Those two lines were only about 6 feet apart originally!
I can also see the building where I met my other half - midway between Hall and Ryerson. You Pratt guys would remember Dottie's Romanian Gardens.
Chris, the Lex is very definately still in operation in your picture. All three station platforms and the tower were removed when the Lex ceased operation. There was no longer a Myrt station at Grand Ave.
Incidentally the two side platforms on Myrt were not exactly opposite each other. The steelwork you see in the lower right hand corner of your picture is exactly as Stef says. That is probably why the two side platforms aren't exactly across from each other.
There was. If you look on page 59 of James Greller's "Cars of the BMT" book, in the lower left hand corner, it shows a picture of Knickerbocker Ave in the 1940's, a BMT standard on one track, and a gate car set on the other. The remains of an express track are quite visable, though it's had it's rails removed (much like the lower express track along 3rd Ave. in the Bronx during the 1960's and early 70's). So one did exist for a time.
Pretty cool photo. That proves it was there for a while.
The center tracks between Crescent and Cypress Hills, and at 111th St have existed since the line was built. They were never an express track, but were always a layup track.
Van Siclen Ave used to be a side platform station, and there was a side platform station there. It also had a center track for layup purposes.
The bumper for this long gone track at Van Siclen still exists.
It was rebuilt from an older wooden platformed station in 1979. Marcy Ave, as it was before 1979, looked as if it was an original Broadway elevated station, merely extended to accomodate longer train during the rebuild of 1916.
Test failed
Error 513: Transmission feiled for the following message: "Test failed".
"Transmission feiled"?
Where's the proff?
Works just like an R142!
Here we go:
Tanx
Howard,
Where did you find the "Bluegrab" Gif? I'm still laughing!!
JR
From here: www.mysmiles.com
1.A
2.C
3.D
4.B
5.E
6.C
7.C
8.A
9.B
10. D
So, how'd I do?
grand-central%test
FALSE
grand-central%
Hmm, I wonder who wrote that little proggy that somehow found its way onto our /usr/bin
excellent ! keep up the good work !!
lol !!
Is that the new, improved Florida election ballot ?
Bill "Newkirk"
...was the announcement being made on the northbound 1 I boarded today at 8:15 a.m. at Atlantic Avenue.
Such honest announcements are refreshing.
If John Belushi were still alive, he could do a "Samurai" sketch as Samurai conductor. With a whoosh of his sword, he could neatly cut all subway riders into 3 (IRT) or 4 (BMT/IND) pieces, and then announce "Please use all doors when leaving the train"!
(LOL)
Bob Sklar
You could also have a Schwartzeneggeroid type waiting around to chuck some passenger battering-ram-style through a door that won't open.
"You vill use the vuns that don't vork, either. And you vill like it!"
They could also toss passengers off the express between the studs onto the platform at local stops as it goes by. It would be called an "express stop" or a "nonstop stop."
In fact, all trains should be converted to expresses, regardless of the tracks they use. Would make the system much more efficient, though you'd need an Ah-nold on every car.
I can see the TA ads: "Stop nonstop and speed your ride!"
The only problem with that is you can only allow pax to disembark and cannot pick up anyone at the local stops.
It was done in "Soylent Green" ... simply add a big scoop up front and dump 'em into the second car. :)
Trains used to pick up and drop off the US mail nonstop; with enough padding/webbing/netting it should be possible to do with pax as well. Have them sit in a chair that accelerates and then catapaults them into the train.
To which I sometimes want to reply: "I'd be happy to walk down to an emptier car if I didn't think you were going to slam the doors shut while I was doing it."
I would say this is an objectionable habit of about 10% of C/Rs. The rest are very decent but the occasional outlier makes getting into a crowded train something of a crap shoot.
Just one thing to bear in mind - conductors are obligated by management to play "beat the clock" while out on the road. If the train's late, these boys and girls get a whipping. Their motivation is NOT to abuse customers, their motivation is not getting yelled at at the other end for holding up the railroad so folks can sashay onto a car. Perhaps "step lively" should be put back into the announcements.
Make more built in time at the end so we have time to run down to the other ends of the train. I'm fast so I can often do it and dodge the crowds but not everyone can make it easily.
The shuffle earns a fat belly that gets stuck. CI Peter
If RTO is willing, I'm sure the folks in the middle would be happy to. But in many cases, the train behind isn't all that far away - more than enough time to pre-position one's self at the designated car marker. All the crews we met along the way found us waiting for them at their spot. :)
But for those who have to ride a train from end to end and then back, "tick tock" is a vivid reality ... hold one train, and you suddenyl find that you're holding many others as well ... and usually in the dark.
I am not so picky at rush hours but evenings and weekends, to me it makes sense to wait and just let people pile on than close up. The time is easier to make up plus the next train can be 10 minutes away sometimes and there are fewer alternate ways of going.
On those headways, generally the odds of landing on the platform as the train is there are relatively slim. But the schedule is just as tight off peak and you still get yelled at if you're late. In the greater scheme of things, 10 minutes isn't quite forever either.
There ARE lingerers out there though - if you let the doors sit open for five minutes at a platform, there are folks who would STILL be taking their sweet time. Don't mind me though - for every customer who has horror stories to tell about having the doors close in their face, there's easily two conductors who got yelled at for being late. Gotta look at both sides of the equation and there's a lot of folks who don't. If it was entirely up to our discretion, we'd open up once or twice. In reality you can't or the train would never make it to the other end.
Crews get it form the T/D more if you run late off peak hours. A TSS in school car gave my class the best advise for the road.
Take some
Leave some
Drag none
Heh. I like that one. I know THAT won't go over big with folks who don't understand what it's like to be in the refrigerator carton all day but I have YET to meet a conductor who doesn't wish that they DID have the time to let someone on when it's time to go ... especially that cute one at the bottom of the stairs. Grrrrrow-wow! :)
I know! When I was posting which is on the job training you go on a line and ride with a Conductor and they show you the job.
Well I was on the No.6 Line with a Redbird for my first half trip ever on the No.6 Line. It was around 9AM at 77 Street this hot young lady comes down the steps after I close down. I couldn't help it I reopened for her. Now my trainer was asking me why I did it but before I could answer she came to my cab to thank me with a kiss. A good kiss at that. Before I could get her Number she just said you know where I get on see you tomorrow and she sat down in another car.
My trainer was lost for words after seeing that. If you are wondering since we are Talking about AM's and the No.6 Line where PBD SR works did he the Trainer tell him?
Yes it was the topic of the Lunch break because Me, Trainer and dad with others had lunch together.
Heh. Cabs were MEANT to be "blessed" ... AH, for the days before Herpes and AIDS ... but I can't talk about it lest I corrupt your wittle mind. Once upon a time, in a less groovy world, JUST THE MONKEYSUIT was enough to get yer yayas if you could persuade them to meet you at the end of your run. :)
hey, Nancy and I met ya ... it could STILL happen. Heh.
Well that only happened to me once. Maybe it could happen again but with Redbirds going out I don't think so.
Strange TA logic at play there - big cab, lock yourself inside, little cab, open it up for the world. STILL can't fathom that one. :)
They can make time. Anyone who cares to make that train off peak will get on where they see a door.
Sometimes it is the truth that you should use all working doors when entering or exiting the train. I have on occasion been in a car with a non-working door. It not only has happened to me on the subway, it has also happened to me on Metro-North.
#3 West End Jeff
I used to work with a conductor who always had a knack for announcements.
1) "This train is equipped with 32 pairs of doors. Not just the one at the front."
2) To passengers holding doors asking questions: "Ladies and gentlemen, if you aren't sure if this is your train or not, it probably isn't. Please let the doors go."
3) Sitting in the cold at Broad Channel: "service is closed because the bridge is opened."
4) "You can get her phone number on the platform, or on the train, but NOT BOTH!"
Honesty will get us nowhere.
Do T/Os have any say in what the C/R says or does the T/O have to keep his mouth shut?
I've heard a conductor on an R46 E s/b at Lex Av. - 53rd St. and during PM rush, (the station's like a rampage) the conductor noted "Please use all available doors", as I was standing at the platform and saw a myriad of people stuck to get in one set of doors while the other three sets were less crowded.
I've heard it on other trains too. I think conductors do care about effective service.
why do your ears blow out when... you enter a undergound under the water tube ?? etc..
U know what i mean !!
lol !!
PRESSURE, PURE PRESSURE
No, it's cuz of PEER pressure...
When it's underwater, it's because of the pier pressure.
Rim shot!
It usually happens when the train passes an emergency exit in a river tunnel. I used to keep my mouth open when riding through the 14th St. tunnel when our train approached one of those exits. It helped.
You mean like in an aeroplane?
"The gum is for your ears."
The TA should distribute gum on N/W trains at Lex and QbP.
Pressure, too much pressure causes this:
lol !
That's when Felix would try to clear out his ears:
HMAAHH!! FMAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
Then he'd sprain his throat.
Salaam of the Redbirds,
The short answer is that it is due to a change in pressure within the car.
I'm not a doctor, but from what I gather, air cavities (like your sinuses) need to adjust to this change. The passageways aren't very large, meaning that they often need to be cleared. Otherwise you will feel force being exerted one way or the other by the pressure differential. You can experience this sensation in an airplane or driving up/down a mountain.
Now for the long answer.
Many out there will probably say that this pressure differential within a subway car is caused by the depth of the tunnel. This is not entirely correct. Both the elevation and velocity of the car play a role in the increase in pressure.
The role of elevation is simple. The deeper down you go, the greater the pressure, as you literally have that much more air resting on top of you. But 100 or so feet isn't enough to cause that much of a pressure change alone.
The answer is velocity. Yes, velocity. As the subway travels through the tube, air is forced from in front of the car to around the sides. The clearance is not that great compared to the effective diameter of the tunnel. The air must speed up (relative to the train) and/or be compressed to pass. It will do both. The subways are not airtight, so this pressure increase on the exterior of the car is transmitted inside. You will note this by hearing an unusual whistling noise through the windows and doors.
So why does this happen only in the river tunnels? Well, there aren't any air vents to equilibrate the pressure changes that set up. So deep in the tunnel, you get a significant relative velocity and pressure change around the exterior of the car.
I hope this answers your question,
MATT-2AV
yes it does ! thankz !!
Notice if you swallow you can blow your ears back ... lol !!
thankz again ....( smile )
For the same reason LIRR used to want conductors to lock the toilets on trains when heading toward NY City. When the train hit the tunnel, it was like a piston in a cylinder....and would compress the air. A not so tight "gasket" would allow the air to go wherever there was not a seal.
A former neighbor who was a LIRR engineer was running an MP54 MU into Penn Station, and hitting about 55-60 mph going down the ramp into the tunnels when he heard a loud scream. He thought he hit someone. Plugged the train, they got out and inspected underneath. Nothing. Then the toilet door behind his cab opened, and a woman covered from head to toe with poop came out crying.....
Seems the tunnel air forced her donation to the tracks back up where it came from...sort of. All because the conductor didn't lock the door.
OMG !! ..........woah man ......terrible !!
Can we have a function whereby the poster can combine and split threads? See for the Subway surfer thread, we can combine the Train Dude and churchbob threads. For the other threads that drift off topic, we can have a split thread function at the time of posting a reply and then we can have simply a link in the first message of the new thread that takes you back to the old thread, but when the user choose first message in thread it won't trace back to the first message of the thread of the original topic
I can tell you right now, it would either A) never be used or B) used so much almost everything is the start of a thread. Do you think I trust Subtalk posters to use it responsibly? Got better things to do with my time, sorry.
Waoh, sorry. Just a joke, didn't mean to relegate you to more programming. Are people that irresponsible? Are you pissed off with the board?
Lexcie
Now, why would he be pissed off?
If I'm not mistaken - I don't know precisely how Subtalk works on the server, but I have written similar programs in the past - slice and splice functions for remote users would be rather difficult to program, and their use would definately tax the server's performance.
-Robert King
One thing that I'd really like is an elimination of the 15-minute refresh thing, or an option for it. Sometimes it takes longer than 15 minutes to look for new material by searching for "NEW" in the threaded view.
Mark
>>> One thing that I'd really like is an elimination of the 15-minute refresh thing, <<<
I'll second that. It cvan be annoying at times.
Tom
If you want to see new material, turn on the "chronological" option.
Nice, 60 minutes now. If we can't make it through in that time, then something's seriously wrong.
Thanks, Dave.
Mark
we can combine the Train Dude and churchbob threads.
Letchie: That's chuchubob, as in choo choo bob. I wouldn't want anybody to get a negative impression of church by reading my posts. I understand how easily it can be misread, though.
"That's chuchubob, as in choo choo bob. I wouldn't want anybody to get a negative impression of church by reading my posts. I understand how easily it can be misread, though"
Good one
Oops!!! Sorry, I keep maquing that mistaque. Well my spellingque is terriblue.
Lexice
Yeah, yeah, I know ... it's in/around/near Selkirk, NY.
The Q is actually: When I drive up the Thruway toward Albany, then turn right onto the extension that leads to the Mass Pike, I cross over a light-blue 4-lane bridge. Next to it is a very rusty rail bridge.
Is that the Selkirk Bridge, aka southernmost point where a train can cross the Hudson?
The Selkirk bridge locates at MP 125 (90% certain) on the New York side of the Hudson River and is used to connect with the tracks on the New Jersey side of the river.
I don't remember the name of the divisions. I think the Jersey side is called the River division and the New York side is the Hudson division.
I'm sure I'll be corrected before the night is over.
Michael
River Line and Hudson Line. The Boston Line crosses the bridge b4 turning into the Selkirk Branch.
What you describe is definitely the south-most rail bridge over the Hudson.
What you describe is definitely the south-most rail bridge over the Hudson.
Well, southernmost ACTIVE rail bridge. The one in Poughkeepsie is still there and just as impressive, though I believe the approach ROWs on the west side (Highland, NY) have been torn up and/or built over.
So IS the one I described the "Selkirk Bridge"?
Well, southernmost ACTIVE rail bridge. The one in Poughkeepsie is still there and just as impressive, though I believe the approach ROWs on the west side (Highland, NY) have been torn up and/or built over.
The approaches on both sides have been significantly encroached and/or destroyed at this point, unfortunately.
A book chronicling the history of the Poughkeepsie bridge, by Pulitzer Prize winning author Carleton Mabee, has just been published by Purple Mountain Press. Unfortunately, their website isn't up to date enough to even list it. It runs $39.00 for an autographed hardcover (if they still have any left - the hardbound was a limited edition of 500, of which my copy is #440) and $24.00 for a non-autographed paperback. Someone is listing the book on eBay but the bidding starts at full list and the shipping charge is higher than ordering directly from Purple Mountain. Their toll-free order number is (800) 325-2665 or, for those who would rather pay by check, you can mail it in... call them first for the total including shipping and their address (in Fleischmanns, NY).
The book, by the way, is quite interesting. It is NOT an engineering history but rather a history of the people who planned, built, worked on, maintained, and ultimately those who are trying to save the bridge and open it as a walkway. Lots of photos.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Somehow I feel obligated ... yes indeedy ... that's the one and since the Poughkeepsie bridge is no more for traction, the one here is indeed the "southern cross" ... plenty of others though as you work your way up the Hudson creek from there.
Should we tell folks from the city just how NARROW the Hudson is up here? Nah. But the good news is you can walk across it all winter long and not get winded. :)
Still looks like a real river to me on the map. 1000' of actual water and a mile long bridge to cross what looks like undeveloped marsh land. Maybe not quite a match for the East River but considerably more than the Harlem River.
Yep ... but standing at 72nd street for comparison, the Hudson's a puddle up here. And when you get up towards Watervliet and the locks of the Erie, it REALLY gets narrow. When I have folks up from the city and they spot it for the first time, they are amazed. :)
Never mind 72nd St. Try Tappan Zee...
Feh. You can LEAP it here. :)
Sounds like the north end of the Jordan River -- except no rail bridge..
The reason for the length of the Selkirk rail bridge is because on the east side of the Hudson, it's at a pretty decent altitude coming off the Berkshires. But only a small portion of it is actually over the Hudson itself - it's about 400 feet south of the Thruway bridge to the Berkshire spur at about the same height. Years ago in the Conrail days when I was permitted cab rides with buddies, it was a scary railroad bridge. Rickety and shaky ... it's a LONG way down to the river below ...
What was wrong with the redbird I say at Grand Central yesterday going south at 4:30pm?
What would lead one to assume that it was "broken?"
A #5 train is supposed to deadhead southbound, leaving E. 180th Street light at 4:18 PM and arriving at Bowling Green at 5:02 PM, and leave Bowling Green going northbound at 5:17 PM. Perhaps that was the train "buildmorelines" saw heading southward, though 4:30 is a bit early to be seeing this deadhead move assuming the train left E. 180th Street on time and wasn't "pushed out" early.
David
i just came from railfanning. the most interesting thing is i went to bedford park blvd on the 4, to take pics of trains in the yard. the most interesting thing is, i caught the same trains everytime!
for example i took 3558 as a E to lex/53rd. took 7511 R142A 6 uptown one stop to 59 where i catch 1610 as a 4 to woodlawn. I get off 1610 at bedford park blvd to shoot pics and all of the yard. then i catch 1610 again back down to 125! then at 125 7520 pulls in and i get on the tailcar and the tailcar is.... u guessed it 7511! then i decided to ride the E downtown to my bros job! guess what E pulled in as the headcar? 3558! whoa! what a day! then i take the E back uptown and catch a F up hillside to take pics of the special E signs saying E to 179. they betta make those Es express soon
LOL. Railfanning IS great! I did some today after work. MUST TAKE PICS OF ATLANTIC AVENUE AND ENY ON THE L BEFORE IT'S TOTALLY CHANGED!
I thought the Hillside Es were express all the way.
I was on a 1 train a week ago, last Thursday evening, that ran through a yard in passenger service.
It was a southbound train. Just south of 145, the mainline track didn't exist -- I assume it had been removed temporarily for track work. The signal displayed red-over-red-over-yellow -- i.e., call-on (this, incidentally, is the same signal I saw on the SB J approaching the Canal dead-end -- I had misremembered). The 1 train switched to the first track to the right (west), keyed by a few AK (red) signals, and rejoined the mainline just north of 137. Northbound trains were operating normally.
If I am not mistaken, only the two mainline tracks, and perhaps the one between them, are considered revenue trackage. A few months ago, I was informed, in no uncertain terms, that the general public is simply not allowed to be on a train in a yard. When Manhattan-bound E and F trains operated through Jamaica Yard, passengers had to use a slow shuttle bus from Van Wyck to 71-Continental. Why weren't we subjected to the same routine last week at 145, with shuttle bus service to 137? Or is 137th Street Yard considered revenue trackage?
A few months ago, I was informed, in no uncertain terms, that the general public is simply not allowed to be on a train in a yard.
on SEPTA, pax regularly ride thru the yards. Maybe this is an NYCTA rule. on MBTA, disabled pax ride thru the yards, because they don't have facility to board pax at Park St Green Line for westbound pax, so they take the disabled person, put them on a train, turn the train round in the underground yard/loop thing and then make the train face west.
lexcie
The T is much more lax about this, especially on the Green Line. If you're a rail fan and want to ride around one of the end-of-line loops such as Government Center, Park Street, or Lechmere, all you have to do is ask. Your wish will generally be granted.
SEPTA- At the 69th Street terminal on the Market Street Line I was aloud to ride the train on the loop through part of the yard.
Sorry, I think it's reasonable to assume on this board that, unless stated otherwise, the conversation is about the New York City subway system. Notice the domain name. Of course I'm discussing an NYCT rule. What do you expect?
Frankly, I wouldn't mind if posts that have no connection to NYC-area transit or other urban transit systems were directed to another board. This is SubTalk, not some generic TrainTalk.
I beg to differ Sir, please read the message at the top of http://subtalk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/subtalk.cgi which clearly states "This board can be used for discussions of rail transit systems worldwide. It is not limited solely to New York City topics, but please stick to rapid/rail transit issues only"
It is great to compare NYC system to other subway systems IMHO.
Yes, rail transit. Amtrak is not generally considered transit, and many of us here don't care to hear random obscure complaints about Amtrak (and, no, it wasn't thread drift).
Of course, I'm not in charge here; I'm just giving my opinion.
But getting back to my earlier post -- is it not reasonable to assume, unless there is some indication to the contrary, that a post on this board is about the NYC subway and not some other system?
Maybe he thought that you thought that you had been told that there was a federal law or regulation on the subject, rather than a particular system's operating rule.
That is NOT a yard it's a siding with an inflated resume.
AHA! That says alot. It's quite a short stretch to travel, so it may be an exception to the rules of mainline trackage. It makes me wonder if the TSQ spur has been used for odd ball movements when there is a blockage on either of the two express tracks.
I know that the yard lead at the East is used for passenger movement, as I have been through it one time or another.
-Stef
"A Lead" is listed as being the only yard trackage certified for revenue service.
Normally, if the B'way IRT express tracks are blocked, trains get re-routed via the local track.
Alright, but there are some interesting moves at times. Case and point: The Collector (Revenue), is held on the northbound local track between 34th-42nd Sts. The train behind it, an R-142 #2, gets a lineup for the express track from 34th Sts. Immediately before 42nd St, the train takes a lineup back to the local track. It's such a short move, I didn't think that the Collector could be held in such a way that other trains could get around it.
72nd St? Well that's a different story.... Collectors usually sit and wait.
-Stef
Two car long collector sitting behind a homeball that can hold ten cars, while the road runs around it - no problem. Infinitely preferable to holding the road while the Collector does its thing.
What/where is "A Lead"?
Is the crossover from the South Ferry outer loop to Bowling Green revenue trackage? What about the crossover from Bowling Green to the outer loop?
Go to the track maps; find the section of the Bronx that includes E.180 St. Just south of Bronx Park East, you will see A Lead (aka 'the scenic route' and 'the back door') split off 2 Track and then rejoin it right before E. 180 station. The move through here is usually made for one of three reasons:
1.- when a southbound 2 and southbound 5 are trying to arrive at the same time
2.- on the midnights when a shuttle is arriving
3.- during GOs where the 5 is single-tracking on the southbound track.
Both loop crossovers are (were?) mainline, hence, revenue trackage. Otherwise they could never pull off the '2 loops the Ferry to the Lex, then goes to Brooklyn' move without emptying the train at Chambers St.
Very interesting. How often is A Lead used in the typical morning rush hour? (Is it ever used middays, even though the 5 will have to switch back to the local once past E180? The afternoon rush is obviously out.)
As for South Ferry, what you say makes sense, but then I wonder why, when the equivalent to this weekend's GO ran (4 split, 5 SB via 2 to Chambers and through the loop), most crews ejected their passengers at Chambers rather than allowing them to remain on to Bowling Green (and beyond -- the quickest route from Dyre to, say, Brooklyn Bridge would have been a 5 through the loop rather than a double transfer).
What about the inner loop proper?
Both loop crossovers are (were?) mainline, hence, revenue trackage.
So what you're saying is that previous revenue tracks allow passengers on? If that's so then why do 6 trains force everyone to get off the train at Brooklyn Bridge?
Because the Mayor insisted on it to prevent a bomb from being carried on the train as it went through the loop. (I hope that someone checks the train for unattended packages before it leaves BB.)
As of 2 years ago (if I recall correctly) passengers were allowed to ride the City Hall loop. A bulletin was issued regarding this matter.
This has been discussed here extensively. From what I've read of previous threads on the subject, one cannot rely on anything more than a few months old on this subject.
That's how the TA works, once you get used to something change it.
There is a new Mayor in NYC. Is he paranoid about attended bombs in the City Hall IRT station?
Didn't say that at all - used 'were' because at this time they are out of service. For opinions on BB Loop, go look in the Archives.
Alex wasn't referring to the inner loop itself -- he was referring to the crossovers to and from the outer loop. (The outer loop is/was the South Ferry station. It was in revenue service until 9/11.)
The City Hall loop has gone back and forth a few times in the past few years. My experience is that crews don't have time to check the entire train for lingering passengers. If you're in the last car, chances are nothing will happen, although you probably risk a ticket.
If you ask the conductor nicely he'l llet you ride it. I rode it many a time and they never declined.
I think that depends on the latest bulletin issued on the matter. Back when the loop was unquestionably revenue trackage, the first two T/O's asked me to leave the train and only the third allowed me to remain. (Now I just don't ask -- although if someone asks me to leave, of course I do.)
Does TA policy make a distinction? Are trains often rerouted through the yard (siding) in question?
You mentioned it had AK's. That uts the level of signalling way beyond a yard.
And how would I know that? With this one exception, I've never been in a yard -- remember?
Yards typically have no signals at all, I take it, except at switches?
And bumper blocks plus a few stop signs at various places.
There are a few exceptions like the entrance and on loops tracks. Almost everything is a homeball. AK and yard don't mix.
And you should know you are a train buff and you won't let this topic go.
No you can't go to Jamaica yard go to bed, no supper.
There are many sidings that are certified for passenger service. One of the most connonly used spurs in the one on CPW at 72nd St. Often in the AM a north-bound D wil be brought in on the local if an A is approaching on the express. The D will go up the local and X over to the express north of 72nd St. through that spur. Customers ride it without problem.
I would have expected a distinction between sidings that function as parts of crossovers (the one north of 72 on the SB 1/2/3 is pressed into use often) and sidings that only connect from one track back to itself. Guess not.
But you've answered another question of mind -- whether B's and D's will sometimes use the wrong track at 59 (to avoid a stopped A or C) and make corrective action afterwards.
"But you've answered another question of mind -- whether B's and D's will sometimes use the wrong track at 59 (to avoid a stopped A or C) and make corrective action afterwards. "
I've seen that move made many times but it's favored by only a few managers. Most favor running the D express up the local track to 135th St.
There are other times when those tracks are used in revenue service. The one between Ct. Square and 21st. onthe G is used often during G.O.s Most of the IND 'sidings' (the one at 72nd St. is called "The Spur") have a Wye at either end so you can X between north and southbound tracks or go north to north (or south to south) if the need arises.
What about southbound? If an A is sitting on the express track, might a following D switch to the local track? Or how about a B in either direction? In all those cases, using the siding is necessary (to avoid holding the train before the station, that is).
Is there a distinction between a spur and a siding? The one at 72 IRT is only useful now to switch between local and express tracks (and, I suppose, to bypass some sort of temporary defect on either through track, or to allow track work there to take place); IRT trains have grown considerably since that spur was installed (although they're still as thin as ever!).
The move can be made southbound as well but with less of a purpose. The only time it becomes useful is if there is a delay at 59th st. and the switches north of 59th are blocked.
Occasionally, during G.O.s, the spur tracks between 125th St and 145th St are also used for revenue service. 5 track and 6 track @ 135th St. are roughly 3-4 trainlengths long. As with other IND spurs, you can go from express to local, local to express, local to local or express to express, in either the northbound or southbound direction.
My mistake. I had (mis)placed (in my mind) the sidings in question between 59 and 72, and had figured, based on this thread, that they served as local-express crossovers. I just looked at the track map and I see that there are dedicated crossovers just north of 59 in addition to the sidings between 72 and 81.
So let me see if I have this right: If a NB D arrives at 59 at the same time as a NB A, the D is (sometimes) sent to the local track. It proceeds to stop at 81 (to let the A get by) and then switches through the siding to the express track. Am I close?
Very close. Except that the D would switch from the local track north of 72nd St. into the spur and emerge on the express track south of 81st St. Which train would go first would depend on which was running late(r).
Sorry, typo on my part. The D would stop at 72, not 81 (unless it was decided to send the D first).
BTW, I do owe you a word of congratulations on your fleet. Although, as you know, I don't find the R-68 the most pleasant of the TA's cars, they are by all measures reliable, and that's what really counts.
Except for the IC's.
Was it the incident with the moron on the Q that got you yelled at for BO IC's.
I don't believe I said I was yelled at. If I did, it was not meant literally. In reality, the D line Supt. raised the issue of inoperative ICs.
You might have said something like 'called on the carpet' (where does that come from, royalty?)
Not Royalty! I would suggest that it came from the fact that the 'boss's office might have been carpeted.
Wuh-oh ... carpeteria duty ... I know that myself. Well, if'n you need a pup-tent and can shovel snoo, we'll put ya up. :)
It would largely depend on whether the track was certified for passenger use or not. Some siding tracks are certified for revenue service. The middle track at Court Square is one of them. In the previous thread that you referred to, we were specifically speaking of track 69/26 in Jamaica yard only.
What would lead some tracks to be certified and others not? I believe you mentioned signal protection. This particular yard track had a few AK's but no conventional three-aspect signals. Does that qualify as signal protection? How much (roughly) would it cost to implement a series of AK's on track 69/26 in Jamaica Yard?
The whole security in the yard is based on permission to move, AK's defeat this.
I don't think speculation about cost of signalling the Jamaica yard Loop track is relavent here. The utility it would provide would not make for a wise investment (Although I know at least two here who would disagree). If you look at the Jamaica yard track layout, going north every train would have to cross the entire plant twice, once in and once out. This would severely limit the number of trains that could loop the yard. (And no, you can't run cars backwards around the loop because of the car wash machinery.)
So you got a chance to go over the derailer.
Please elaborate!
Ok the storage tracks at 137 Street have derailers before the Switch on the 137 Street side. Thats in case a lay up hits the home signal for whatever reason OR is layed up with lack of handbrakes and rolls it will derail before hitting the main line.
The only derailers I have seen on active tracks are mechanically connected to the associated track switch so that trains can pass the derailer whenever the switch is set for movement to/from that track and not otherwise.
Plain and simple TA makes the rules so they can change the rules when it needs too.
Since this G.O. is supposed to go to March would you like shuttle bus service for 3 months 24/7?
Do you think the TA's answer to that question was influenced by the neighborhood?
No. More like money and convenience.
Cool! Is it in effect at all times? I haven't been back there since that night; I wouldn't mind going for another ride through the yard.
About 1990 or so, the A line ran a General Order in which Southbound A trains ran with passengers into 12 track, Pitkin Yard, reversed on 7 lead to K1 track, re-entering the main south of Grant Avenue. There was also a D line G.O. in which D trains avoiding the Manhattan Bridge trudged through Chrystie Street to relay on the Willy B, and traveled south to Dekalb through the Montegue Street Tubes, just to keep the Brighton Line moving. Nowadays, the TA seems obsessed with buses, probably charges them to Capital and doesn't make these strange relays anymore.
A shame, no?
Did the D use 60-foot cars for that GO? IINM, at least today, 75-foot cars are not allowed north of Broad, although I don't think the problematic curves and clearances start until the bridge itself if not beyond.
I'd say the most similar GO to these in use nowadays is the 2 from Brooklyn via Joralemon, then backing down the East Side, going through the South Ferry loop, and continuing up the West Side. We'll have to wait a few months before that one can be done again; hopefully we'll still have railfan windows at the time.
I'm sure R68s were issued to the Concourse line at that time. R68s can relay on the bridge. Many N trains have taken wrong lineups in the Montegue Tubes, although I'm not sure if they can take the sharp switches North of Chambers Street. Bringing an R46 through Chrystie Street has been done already, I recall there was a fantrip so it isn't impossible. I wouldn't run one North and Southbound on the bridge at the same time though.
Today, after work, my train buff friend and I went to check out the progress on the Canarsie line at Atlantic Avenue. Interesting. After leaving Atlantic Manhattan bound, a train takes a violent switch to the right, goes up the ramp of the former K2 Fulton El track, and then swings into ENY. Also, they built a diamond crossover outside ENY to relay trains. The ramp to the J line going Manhattan bound has been temporarily severed, and K2 now goes THROUGH it. Yes, THROUGH it. Is the ramp they are using part of the original K2 ramp that lead to the Fulton El? Was the ramp in good enough shape that they were just able to lay track on it? Also, did the transistion to this new configuration take place over one weekend? It had to in order to keep service. The switch outside Atlantic on the Manhattan bound is wonderfully harsh! :) I hear they are going to rebuild the connection to the J line, but now that they can relay trains outside ENY on the upper level, they may wimp out.
Funny you should mention the Canarsie Line. I was shooting video on the line on Friday (in preparation for a BVE route). I had mentioned on the recording that the alignment of the tracks would follow what it said in P.D.'s Tracks book (the most recent version I have is 2.4). I shot mostly along the ramp where the line ran, then panned over to where P2 crosses J2A (the ramp to the Jamaica Line), showing J2A.
I also shot the R143's making the S turn north of Sutter.
I was with my aunt when I shot the videos (it was her camera). It was the first time she rode the R143 cars, and the only thing she didn't like about them were the "butt sink" seats.
There's an article in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/03/nyregion/03TRAN.html
The restrictions on single-occupant vehicles and the shutdown of WTC PATH have maxed out the remaining options. Not one more train can be sent into Penn Station, not one more bus can be sent thru the Lincoln Tunnel.
I think the Manhattan real estate lobby has taken notice. They will see some of their tenants moving to Jersey, while having to cut rents to compete in a renters-market characterized by high vacancy rates.
So. They will push for more transit links to Jersey. Two more tracks under the Hudson to Penn at least. Perhaps a PATH extension.
And they will kick the Congressional Republican likes of Tom DeLay in the nuts: being anti-transit and anti-New York is one thing, but not when it hits fatcat real estate moguls in the pocket.
NYC needs to play hardball. Why should Jersey commuters have an easier time of it when the Lex is just as maxed out? If there is to be more to New Jersey, there has to be more in Manhattan: the 2nd Av subway.
I think the problem with Penn is that there just aren't any places to park the trains. So even new tunnels to Penn would do no good, since the trackage isn't there to support the new trains.
OTOH, a new WTC station that could also take NJ transit, and possibly at least some LIRR would give new options to commuters, and open up slots at Penn for additional service there.
I don't know of the feasability of moving some LIRR service to GCT; that would open up slots for NJT as well.
(Of course, anything you move to GCT will increase traffic on the Lex, so you're trying to serve two masters with mutually exclusive demands.)
Another option perhaps would be some sort of Grand Central Terminal North - perhaps 125 between Park and Lex. MNRR goes there, so you'd add a crosstown line that would carry NJT from northern NJ (Bergen County, for example) to GCT-N, and a NYCT crosstown line on 125 from Broadway, (transfers along the line to the 1, A/B/C/D, 2/3 and MNRR/NJT/4/5/6) over to Randall's Island, then running toward LaGuardia, possibly merging with the 7 at some point. Possibly some LIRR service could be routed there as well (possibly using some extension tracks off the Hell Gate line from Randall's Island?). Of course, that would increase traffic on the Lex even more, and this is something that would be years off in the future in any event. I haven't really thought about it much, just throwing out an idea...
How is this? If they ever get the capacity, connect the Main and Bergen Lines to Manhattan. I think now that you mention it, the PATH should be rebuilt so that NJT and Amtrak can make a downtown Manhattan terminal.
Sounds good.
The advantages of a downtown connection should be obvious, though I don't know the fractions of NJ or LI commuters going to midtown or downtown.
And of course, the situation around WTC is much more plastic at this time than almost any other location in Manhattan due to the attacks.
But anybody whose destination is not in lower Manhattan or Midtown should be kept out of it if at all possible, which is where a Grand Central North would come in. It would also assist in the revitalization of Harlem, which in itself is a good cause.
They don't have to park or reverse the NJT trains at Penn Station. The trains could continue under the East River (there are 4 tracks under the East River vs. only 2 under the Hudson) to the huge Sunnyside Yard in Queens where they could be stored between rush hours. They already do this on a limited basis. The LIRR doesn't need much eastbound track capacity in the morning or westbound in the evening, since it uses the West Side Yard to store trains between rush hours. All that would be needed would be an additional single track tunnel under the Hudson, probably just south of the 2 existing tracks. The current eastbound track would become a reversible center track for peak operations.
Yes, this would work wonders. Really, ending a train at a major station isn't a great idea, due to the longer dwell times. End them in the 'burbs, so they can run right through the CBD without stopping to reverse. Or use loops (but that's not an option with the limited track space at Penn, or almost anywhere else in Manhattan for that matter).
Two words ... Sunnyside yards ... other end of Penn.
This sounds somewhat like the proposal I made a few months ago: Build the 2nd Avenue line as a four-track local-express line. The express would continue to the Bronx. The local would turn west and cross 125th Street, with transfers to all north-south lines. Perhaps at a later date, the crosstown line could be extended to LGA.
A very nice plan. I like it. Too bad we don't have the $$$ to accomplish it.
We don't have the $$$ to do much of anything right now.
"I think the problem with Penn is that there just aren't any places to park the trains. So even new tunnels to Penn would do no
good, since the trackage isn't there to support the new trains. "
Wrong, wrong wrong. The lack of Hudson tunnel space is THE problem. It is the HUGE problem. Trains waiting their turn to squeeze onto one track in each direction across the Hudson - solve that, and then we can talk about parking trains at Penn.
Penn Station capacity per se is a non-issue. Train throughput will improve when there are four tracks across the Hudson.
They could try longer trains into NYP. The PRR was running 22 car trains as late as the 1960's so Penn can definitly handle them.
That would require more cars in the fleet and, IINM, more locomotives per train. How many cars can an NJT loco supply with HEP?
Locomotives and cars are cheaper and faster to be completed than a new tunnel. NJT could just start running 20 car trains after buying the appropiate equipment and wait on a new tunnel for a few years.
NJT could go out tomorrow and lay prefab trackage extending service throughout the state and do what government is supposed to do: serve the people. I know because I've walked the empty cuts. Making more rail service instead of the private buslines would provide more commerce. Ain't gonna happen. CI Peter
Putting off a new Hudson tunnel is penny-wise and pound-foolish. Simply running longer trains doesn't address all the issues. You need more frequent service, and Amtrak needs its own tracks into Penn so Acelas and Metroliners don't have to wait for NJT trains to clear the track.
Of course more buses can be sent through the Lincoln Tunnel. Remind me, how are the lanes configured -- one bus-only and three for general traffic? Convert one general traffic lane to a bus lane and there you go.
I agree 100% with your last paragraph. Unfortunately, New Yorkers don't seem to count.
Of course more buses can be sent through the Lincoln Tunnel. Remind me, how are the lanes configured -- one bus-only and three for general traffic? Convert one general traffic lane to a bus lane and there you go.
True ... but I think the PA Bus Terminal is now at gate capacity just like Penn Station has no more slots. Buses are easier -- you can drop passengers on the sidewalk at the curb -- but in that area curbside loading & unloading could paralyze traffic.
(Plus when the NYT starts buildings its tall office tower between 40th and 41st on 8th Ave, the traffic around there will get EVEN WORSE.)
Couldn't part of 42nd Street be closed to private vehicles (except, perhaps, HOV's) during rush hours?
Actually ALL OF MANHATTAN south of 57th Street can be closed to private automobiles (save for those actually licensed to people who really LIVE in that area).
The streets are crowed enough providing essential access to trucking and other commercial needs.
: ) Elias
No it can't, nor should it. Private vehicles have valid reasons to be there, and at certain times of day they don't get in the way. I would not object, however, to steep tolls to keep unnecessary traffic to a minimum.
I do applaud you for remembering that Manhattan extends north of 57th Street. Most who make similar proposals seem to forget about us 1.5 million Manhattan residents.
Some of whom also live south of 57th Street.
Of course! But acknowledging only those of us north of 57th is still to be commended when many acknowledge none of us at all.
Penn station has plenty of slots. What Penn station doesn't have is a way to clear slots quickly; to do that we need another two tracks across the Hudson. You're looking the wrong way - turn around!
What is more important, 2 new hudson tubes or two new east river tubes extending from the NJT tracks to Sunnyside. The latter could be built much more cheaply.
What is more important, 2 new hudson tubes or two new east river tubes extending from the NJT tracks to Sunnyside. The latter could be built much more cheaply.
Hudson tubes, no question. There are already four tubes across the east river. That imbalance is the bottleneck. East River tubes might be cheaper but they wouldn't do a damn thing to solve the throughput problem.
The east river side sees double if not triple the volume of the Hudson side. Both rivers are bottlenecks, but the current setup has non-revenue NJT and Amtrak trains requiring conflicting moves onto the mainline.
True.
East Side Access, now under construction, will bring East River tube tracks to six from four (albeit two go to GCT).
It's high time something was done under the Hudson. Isn't a $5 billion tunnel already in an appropriation bill somewhere, introduced by a New Jersey congressman?
Eastside access is a waste of money. They should have built a cheaper NJT tunnel under the east River.
Incidentally, according to the article you cited, "The tiny Christopher Street station once handled an average of 3,700 passengers a day; now it handles 8,000." Funny -- my similarly tiny home subway station handled an average of 14,000 passengers a day in 1999 and probably handles more now that there's more local service(granted, crowds there are not nearly as peaked as on PATH), yet it gets no attention whatsoever.
The difference is that Christopher St has only a single, long stairway to handle both uptown and downtown traffic. You just can't move that many people into and out of the station.
The difference is that Christopher St has only a single, long stairway to handle both uptown and downtown traffic. You just can't move that many people into and out of the station.
As part of the PA announcement that they'd get PATH to WTC up and running within 2 years, they noted that improvements would be made to Christopher Street and 9th Street as well. I presume this would be a second staircase and/or elevator. Any notions on where and how, anyone?
All the midtown PATH stations' exits were originally into stores. The idea was that commuters would buy stuff on their way to/from work. It worked as predicted.
So, there must be extra tunnels down there somewhere!
All the midtown PATH stations' exits were originally into stores. ... So, there must be extra tunnels down there somewhere!
Doubt this is the case with Christopher. When it was built, it exited half a block from the waterfront ... that was not exactly a salubrious place for people to go shopping.
Ninth Street, possibly. I don't know what was on the site of the early Sixties white-brick building that now houses the single entrance, and don't know if the station runs uptown or southwest from there. If uptown, most of the original buildings there are still standing -- mostly small residential -- and if downtown, I rather wonder if there was a second entrance on the west side of Sixth Avenue near the former Women's House of Detention (torn down in the Fifties and site now occupied by a park). No major stores around there either, at least now.
14th and up, your comment applies.
Chritopher and 9th each have entrances at one end. The prevailing belief in other postings has been that each has a sealed entrance at the opposite end.
Does it matter that the single staircase is shared by uptown and downtown traffic? In the morning, almost everyone is coming up from the northbound platform. In the afternoon, almost everyone is going down to the southbound platform. PATH ridership is heavily peaked.
At my station, the northbound platform has a single exit (five turnstiles or so) with two staircases to the street. The southbound platform has a similar arrangement, and there is an additional rush-hour-only entrance with one staircase and three turnstiles.
I rode it today KDL-ALW:
- Cab-end truck giving weird "poof" noise upon acceleration, two to three times per stop, only occured when train accelerating hard just after a station stop
- "Poof" was very loud, about the same noise level as banging a sledgehammer on paving block. Could be heard in adjacent coach (01754)
- No loss of light during the "poof" sounds
- PA fully functional
- Train continued to operate despite this
- Jerking action during the "poof"
I told the T/O at Central, and he seemed to be driving at less-than-full-notch for the next few accelerations, and then the traction motors stopped popping after Porter. I asked him at ALW what was wrong with the train, he said "circuit breaker popping, it echoes in the tunnel" and then went on to explain that he isolated the No.7 motor and each traction motor could be individually isolated.
Was he correct? (I suspect the sounds I heard are more like that of a shorted circuit motor not tripping the breakers, thus going "poof".)
Some other T/O said that they only take the train out of service if it's a brake by-pass, and not a traction motor isolation.
Lexcie
Yeah, he was correct. After the "pop", the blue light on the side of the train was lit. He gives the train a reset and the breaker resets and the light goes out.
He probably said he was cutting the seven point. It's T-ese for motor cutout switch.
As for the cut motor versus the cutout brake, it's also true. If the cutout motor doesn't noticably affect speed, the train will finish the rush and then head for the shop. If a brake is cutout, it's diminished braking capability and requires the dispatcher to "manually block" or babysit the train the whole way. The train in front of the diminished capability has to call out when they clear a station and the dispatcher clears the diminished just to that station. It's a pain! They get rid of those as soon as possible.
The 1700's Jeff are DC motors and SCM controller underneath and cineston control. Jeff also 7 point cut out is another name for motor cut out, These cars were built in 1988 by UTDC Canada. Just to clear something up on 7 point cut out, when a 7 point is cut it cuts out he entire car both motors not just one. :)
I have to admit despite some lecturing from my friends at
Seashore, I don't have the MBTA roster memorized. Are the
01700's AC traction units, chopper or straight DC?
The popping sound could have been the line switch (aka circuit
breaker) dropping out from overload. If it were a shorted
traction motor, it would only make that noise once :)
I don't believe it is possible to cut out just one traction
motor and even if it were, there is no #7 motor. Perhaps
"Boston T Party" had the answer. Earlier equipment had a
cam switch on the main switchboard panel to cut out the motors
on a car (all of them, the whole propulsion system). This
was called an "X-point cutout switch", where X depends on the
vintage of the equipment. E.g. on IRT Hi-V and pre-1924 Lo-V
cars, X==10. X refers to the number of trainline wires which
are isolated when the switch is turned.
Here's the scenario. Lexie hears the breaker, it's a hard (or loud) breaker, when the train is drawing leaving a station. At the next stop, the guard spots the blue light and informs the motorman. The train starts out of the station and the motorman puts it in coast and hits a reset on the front panel. He then continues to accelerate which cause the breaker to pop again. At the next stop, the guard sees the blue..... etc.
They do this three times and then the motorman sends the guard to cut the 7 point in the affected car. And as pointed out, it does cut all the traction power in the affected car.
Most times, the breaker is a soft or quiet breaker and usually doesn't happen the three times. I had one today that blew twice over two trips and never was a problem the rest of the day.
I was looking at an old 1948 map of the subway system and I noticed
that the 14th street canarsie line had express stops. The train went from Lorimer St to Myrtle Ave non-stop. It also skipped Sutter ave. When was this discontinued?
The 14th St line used to be served by 2 lines, one to Canarsie, and one to Lefferts Blvd. via the old Pitkin Ave el. the Lefferts Blvd route ran during rush hours, from Lefferts, via today's A train, then along the now gone Pitkin Ave el to Atlantic Ave, where it then merged with the Canarsie line to go into Manhattan. This route skipped all stops from Myrtle to Lorimer St. It was discontinued in 1956 when the old el was closed.
Wow i never knew that. How many lines then actually served Atlantic at one time. It's amazing how far Atlantic on the L has fallen! A few weeks ago it was mentioned it is the least used station in Brooklyn besides the Shuttle!
Atlantic Ave was originally served by four routes: Canarsie/14th St (16), Canarsie/Nassau (14), Fulton/14th St(another 16) & Fulton St (13). But this station only operated at full capacity for 28 years (1928 to 1956).
There was a 5th line for 10 of those years.
What was the 5th line?
Was their a Lexington/Fulton route as well?
Chris: Although it was never offically assigned a BMT route number since it began after the NYCBOT took over the BMTthere was a Fulton-Lexington Line between Lefferts Avenue and Park Row,later cut back to Bridge-Jay Streets. Service began on/about June 1,1940 and ran until October 13,1950 when the Lexington Avenue El was discontinued.
Larry,RedbirdR33
From that starting date, I'm assuming this route was initiated to get those riders who used the Pitkin Ave. portion of the Fulton el to downtown Brooklyn after the Fulton el was closed west of Rockaway Ave.
Chris: I think the reason for the #13 Fulton-Lexington Route was to continue to give Fulton Street El riders a one seat ride to Downtown Brooklyn and Park Row(until 1944). At certain times of the day this train provided all service on the Lexington Avenue El and there were no #12's running.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Don't forget the Broadway Brooklyn Short Line, which ran from Broad or Chambers to Eastern Parkway, and sometimes Atlantic Ave.
It and Broadway Junction are truly majestic stations, and I would have loved to see them when they were at full service.
Broadway Junction, while not what it used to be, is still an amazing structure....even though the neighborhood isn't so great, it's worthwhile to go there duting the day and walk around it, and look at the structure from street level. When I was a little younger I did this a few times.
In fact, in general, I like to walk under big el complexes, you can really see things from a different interesting perspective.
I included that, as the #14 route.
The Queensboro Plaza complex and what it used to be was awsome. The Flushing line west of Grand Cental Parkway to Willets Point is a worthy study as well.
avid
The way I understood it from other posters on this board, since they didn't have an express track they timed it so the express left just before the local with enough headway so it didn't catch up with the train ahead of it. This way the people in Canarsie and Brownsville had a shorter ride without hurting the people using it to Greenpoint, Williamsburg, and Bushwick. I guess they got rid of it because it was only a two track line and the ridership didn't support it.
Jeff, When I moved to Canarsie in 1960 they still had an express service and i recall my grandfather use to take it. Canarsie was first starting to grow then and i believe that subway service was not as much as any other line. I believe that the express was discontinued because of additional service that was needed between Canarsie and Myrtle Avenue. Canarsie had huge growth in the early 1960's when the area was fully developed between Rockaway Parkway and Ralph Avenue. The area between Rockaway Parkway and E.108th Street was built in 1958 and 1959 but some construction was still going on in the early 1960's.
After the express service was stopped the TA started rush hour short trips between 8th Ave and Myrtle Ave but they were discontiinued in the early 1970's
Thank You
I believe that the express was discontinued because of additional service that was needed between Canarsie and Myrtle Avenue. Canarsie had huge growth in the early 1960's when the area was fully developed between Rockaway Parkway and Ralph Avenue.
Current service levels are 15 tph for the entire 14th St - Canarsie Line.
The 1954 service levels were as follows: 8th Ave - Lorimer 24 tph; Lorimer - Myrtle 12 tph; Myrtle - Atlantic 12 tph; Atlantic - Lefferts 6 tph; Atlantic - Canarsie 12 tph (with 6 tph each coming from the Broadway Short Line and the 14th St Line).
Eliminating expresses did nothing to increase service levels on the Atlantic-Canarsie leg nor could it. The only area to be "helped" by eliminating express service would have been the local stations. They did not need help.
Analysis would indicate that the 14th St tunnel trains average the highest load levels of all the Brooklyn to Manhattan services during the AM peak period.
Here's a question that has bugged me for some time.
On four-track lines with the inner lanes as express, why are there different configurations for local and express stations? (I know the obvious reason...)
Why not simply construct all stations in the "express" configuration with two island platforms, with the local trains stopping at all stops, and the expresses stopping only at selected stations?
To me it's the obvious choice. It provides
1. Less confusion - the station layouts are more standardized.
2. Less confusion - the door always opens on the same side with little fluctuation between one stop to the next.
3. More flexibility in designating express stations as demand shifts. For example, if there were an event drawing many people to a "local" stop, the expresses could be temporarily instructed to stop there. Same if a new subway line were built with transfer to the existing line at a "local" stop - it could be redesignated an "express" stop. If an express came up to a crowded platform at a local station, it could make a special stop there to relieve the crowding. In addition, temporal variations in local and express stops (for example, stops which are express only at rush hour or on weekdays) could be more easily implemented.
4. If it were determined that the demand for express service is small in comparision to that for local service, then both sets of tracks could be used for local service (i.e. load the local trains from both sides of the platform). Or the inner tracks could be used for express service during rush, then local otherwise (this falls under the point raised in #3).
Is there some pressing reason why the side platform layout is preferable to island platforms? If it became a problem that people were frightened by the trains going by at high speed, a fence or temporary wall could be erected on the inner sides of the island platforms; converting the station to "express" would then only require removing the fence or wall (or possibly just sections thereof, like the South Ferry inner platform and many stations in other transit systems).
The stations at 34/7th Ave (1,2,3), 34/8th Ave (A, C, E), and Atlantic Avenue (2, 3, 4, 5) have a three platform layout with a common express platform for both directions. That's because:
-There's no room above for a mezzanine between the street and platforms, which is needed at a typical two platform express station.
These three stations are immediately below street level.
-The next stops northward (Times Square and Nevins) have typical two platform layouts where customers can transfer between express and local.
-These stations serve major commuter rail hubs where the additional platform is useful for handling large crowds and discouraging express to local transfers.
>>The stations at 34/7th Ave (1,2,3), 34/8th Ave (A, C, E), and Atlantic Avenue (2, 3, 4, 5) have a three platform layout with a common express platform for both directions. That's because: <<
Yes - these are a few oddballs. But what about in general?
>>-There's no room above for a mezzanine between the street and platforms, which is needed at a typical two platform express station. <<
What about a station with side platforms? Those in general have some sort of crossover, too. If you can't build a crossover of some sort between two island platforms, then you likely couldn't do it for side platforms either. You have two entrances on opposite sides of the street (like 110th St. on the Broadway line).
One possible issue would be for the stations so close to street level that you couldn't do it. In that case, go with the side platforms out of necessity. Even then, it might be possible to go with island platforms if:
The entrance could be made on the curb lane (where you wouldn't/shouldn't have cars moving, only parked/stopped), or
The trains in the local lanes could be run a little further out, to go somewhat under the sidewalk (the stairs to the island platform can even infringe a little on the train's path, so long as it safely clears the roof, though this might present later restrictions on rolling stock replacement).
Or, just make the station a few feet deeper so you can do one of the above (you don't need a full mezzanine, just a few extra feet so some sort of stairs from the curb heading toward the street and thus down to the island platform can clear the train).
A more circuitous design would be to have curb access to a crossunder, from which you can go up to the platforms.
These alternatives would presumably leave only a few as odd cases in which suboptimal design is mandated by external conditions.
>>-The next stops northward (Times Square and Nevins) have typical two platform layouts where customers can transfer between express and local. <<
>>-These stations serve major commuter rail hubs where the additional platform is useful for handling large crowds and discouraging express to local transfers. <<
These are significant issues - discouraging local/express transfer at additional stops, and additional capacity at major stations. I'd imagine there are ways to do this (such as using the 3-platform side-center-side setup for a few stations in which you think in advance that this would be an issue). If the 3-platform station is converted back to local, then simply stop using the center platform.
Alternately, you could use two somewhat wider island platforms, with a wall or fence down the middle. The station wouldn't be significantly wider (since you're getting rid of the third platform in the center), and you can't transfer from local to express. If in the future such transfer were desired, one could simply remove the barrier.
But then why not in the capacity cases a 3-platform setup with island platforms between the local and express, and a third down the center? If you want to discourage cross-platform transfer, or keep the express customers off the outside platforms, then open the train on the inside, to the center platform. Otherwise open the expresses on the outside to make the station operate as a "regular" express, or even open them on both sides for serious "crowd control!"
It's a good question but really has no relevance to systems already built. No existing subway is going to rebuild its four track segments in all island platform configuration. As far as new systems are concerned, virtually all (e.g., Washington METRO, SF Bay Area BART) are two track trunk routes.
The other problem is the theoretical issue of which stops would actually be express stops if all stations had four tracks and two island platforms. Becomes a political hot potato, Case in point - the 61/Woodside stop on the #7 was a local stop for a brief period after 1987 (?) when the line was rebuilt and express service restored after a multi-year period of local only service. After a public outcry express service was restored at Woodside.
I know that it would be completely impractical to rebuild existing stations. My question was, why wasn't it done this way in the beginning?
That is, construct all stations along the four-track route with two island platforms. The few exceptions discussed above (high capacity issues, and discouraging local-express transfer), do with three platforms - two "express" islands and one in the center, or with two wider island platforms with fences down the middle to prevent people from going from one side to the other. The fewer cases where the station must be constructed so close to the street level it's impossible to have a mezzanine, then you use two side platforms, but only out of necessity.
>>The other problem is the theoretical issue of which stops would actually be express stops if all stations had four tracks and two island platforms. Becomes a political hot potato, Case in point - the 61/Woodside stop on the #7 was a local stop for a brief period after 1987 (?) when the line was rebuilt and express service restored after a multi-year period of local only service. After a public outcry express service was restored at Woodside. <<
Yes - this is an interesting issue. If my local home station had the capability of handling express trains, I could be a YIMBY (yes, in my backyard) could scream to the MTA, "Why can't you make the express stop at my-y-y-y-y-y home station? What about moi?" At least the way it currently is, they can stuff their hands into their pockets and say it's impossible (or that ALL service would have to be terminated on the route for 24 months in order to do it, which to the YIMBY is equal to "impossible").
I suppose the MTA would just have to take a hardline stance on it, perhaps by constructing temporary walls on the inner sides of the island platforms (most people wouldn't even know the express train ran there, and those that did would understand enough about the workings of a subway system to know why the train didn't stop there). If they did decide to run express service, then they'd just have to knock down the temporary wall (which could probably be done over a night, or a few nights at most without massive service disruption). Or they could just give a technical mumbo-jumbo explanation: "Well, in order to stop there the tracks need hyperventilated pneumatic brake discombobulator valve shafts, which would require 3 years of service disruption and $17 million to install."
In any event, the example you describe is of a station that was an express station for a long time, then left as local after a long period of service restrictions. I think it's entirely normal to want a return to the original service.
But if usage of the station drops dramatically or something else changes, then the MTA should be entirely justified in converting a station from express to local (which it can do now in most cases). The reverse should be similarly true, in an ideal world.
I think that the best system is used on the Queens Blvd. IND where the express takes a more direct route and the locals between Queens Plaza and 74th Street take a more circuitous route away from the path of the express tracks. For example, the local has a stop at Steinway Street which is a busy shopping area deserving a station, but the express is quite a bit away from Steinway in its more direct route.
The only other instance I know of this is on the IND built part of the F line in Brooklyn where the (unused) express tracks takes a more direct route than the local between 4 th Avenue and Church Avenue.
If you treat the combined Broadway - 4th Avenue lines as the BMT mainline, then the express leaps over the Manhattan Bridge for the express run from Canal to Pacific.
Yes - this is nice, but it requires 2 ROWs and makes it even more difficult to convert local stations to express and vice versa. I suppose it is nice in the outer boroughs, where the local can snake between one densely populated area and another (since there's no necessity for them to lie on a straight line), while the express takes a shortcut. This might be good for outer boros, when an area is already built up (so you have a pretty good idea where the demand is) - narrow 2-track line through the densely populated areas, and a separate 2-track line away from the population center, weaving in and out to meet at express stations.
It's actually going in the other direction from my proposed system (making all stations potentially functional as either local or express), which would probably be better in Manhattan (and downtown Brooklyn and similar places), since it only needs one ROW, and provides maximum flexibility in future evolution of the line.
I think the biggest reason why you can't do that is the safety of passengers waiting at the platforms.
Express trains run at very high speeds, and could injure passengers standing right next to them as they run by. When trains have to bypass a station on the station track they have to slow way down.
You can hardly call *that* an express anymore.
Elias
Well, expresses USED to run at very high speeds, anyway.
It's a CONSPIRACY, man! :)
Yeah, a conspiracy to make RAPID trainsit LEISURELY transit.
The IND 59 St station has a track/platform/track/platform/track/platform/track layout. When I lived in NY (pre-1973), the center platform was used, at least in rush hour, for A and D riders. Doors on both sides would open. From the track maps on this site it appears that the center platform is no longer used.
I would guess that the express trains (i.e., thru trains to/from 8th Av) at Hoyt/Schermerhorn opened on both sides while the Court St station was in service.
Yes - according to the track map (available on this site), there is indeed a center platform at 59th, which is plotted as unused. The A, B, C, and D all stop there, and IIRC they all use the outer island platforms.
At Hoyt-Schermerhorn there are six tracks and four platforms: T-P-T-P-T-T-P-T-P-T. The outermost of the two platforms are plotted as unused (though the description on this site says they and the outermost tracks are used solely to access the NYC Transit Museum, though they used to carry local service to Court St.). The middle and inner tracks are used for the G and A/C, respectively, using the inner two platforms.
I still remember when the center platform at 59th St. was used; in fact, I've gotten off a northbound A train onto it and boarded a southbound D train (of R-32s, no less; may have been an R-32/42 mix) from it.
The center platform at 59 is chained off and unused. (It's not hard to climb over the chain to reach the platform, but you'd be in direct view of the other two platforms and you'd probably be instantly arrested.)
About ten or twelve years ago, the IRT crossunder was closed, and passengers were directed to the IND platforms instead. IMO, the middle of the center platform should be reopened as an IRT crossunder.
What do you mean IND crossunder? The center platform allowed for a crossunder for the IRT. How come it's not possible on the in use platforms?
I meant IRT not IND crossunder.
There is a dedicated IRT crossunder. It's closed now.
Currently, the middle IND platform is closed. Passengers are directed onto the two in-use IND platforms.
I'm suggesting that the middle platform be reopened, to function as a crossunder. Crossunderers wouldn't have to mix with the crowds waiting for the IND, but safety wouldn't be an issue since the middle platform is in direct view of the other two.
I understand what you are saying. it would be good to have a dedicated transfer. A similar problem exists at Canal Street. The Canal bridge platform is way to narrow to handle passengers waiting for trains and people transfering between the M/J/Z,6, and N/R, especially when a Q or W is platformed and just dumped more people on the platform. It wasn't so bad when the platform was abandoned, because people just moved through the station. Not that I see any other way of having the transfer, but with all the people standing waiting for the Q or W on the platform, transfering requires you to walk right along the edge of the platform sometimes! The platforms are very narrow. One day I see someone falling in front of a train at that station.
Yes, Canal is pretty bad. I doubt this is feasible, but I'd like to see a passageway parallel to the platforms but behind the wall (on either side) for transfer purposes only.
Yes, a good idea. For safety sake I'd include a chainlink fence to keep transferees with in the bounds of the columns from stairway to stairway. This would insure safety and keep the place clean and the T/Os from worry about a twosided platform. It would easy congestion in time , after those that crossunder learn thet don't have to bob-n-weave through those passengers waiting for ind service.
avid
With the discussion of multiple platforms, I'm curious if anyone knows how the HH Shuttle from Hoyt-Schermerhorn to Court reversed at Hoyt? How many cars were used on each train?
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam NY
It probably ran on one track, but I'm not sure which platform at Hoyt it originated. I'd be interested to know if the Fulton St. trains headed for Manhattan opened both sides of their trains to allow cross-platform transfers to the shuttle.
It's pretty obvious if you look at the track map ("Brooklyn Heights") on this site.
- You can only use 1 track because there are no crossovers.
- There are side platforms not currently in use that could serve the A/C and the shuttle but not the G (which runs down the 2 center tracks).
Did normal two track service ever use Court street, or was it a shuttle right from the beginning? It couldn't have been long, because I believe the shuttle only ran 10 years or so.
To my knowledge, there was never "Regular" service to Court St. It was only a shuttle, and not for very long.
1936 to 1945 to be exact.
I believe the original intent was for the Fulton St. local to terminate there, hence the meager two tracks continuing from Fulton to Eighth Ave. If this original plan was ever put into practice, it wasn't for long.
:-) Andrew
Hagstrom's 1948 IND map still shows the Court St. stub and lists the HH as running between Court St. and Broadway-ENY. By then, of course, Court St. had been closed.
Hagstrom's maps had the Myrtle & Culver lines still operating into the 1980's.
Surprise, surprise.
The suffolk one still has some abandoned LIRR stations on it, and even the Nassau one did until fairly recently, like Meadowbrook.
South Farmingdale, a station that must have been abandonned a hundred years ago, has appeared in the Nassau atlas as recently as the late 1990's, if not even the current edition.
:-) Andrew
HEY! *I* am NOT that old and I remember very well riding LIRR trains that stopped at South Farmingdale ont he Central Branch!!!
If you wanna see REALLY outdated information, try DeLorme Street Atlas USA CD-ROM's. Until version 6.0 (about three years ago) the railroad that exited the tunnels at Hunterspoint Avenue and had a big yard past Roosevelt Avenue was labelled as....PENNSYLVANIA RR!!
In a hagstorm nyc atlas that I have, the K train and the JFK train to the plane are still on the map and its from 1996!
PATH station maps STILL have the Train to the Plane!!
The all-new digitzed Hagstrom 5-Borough street atlas has the passenger station symbol on the LIRR Bay Ridge branch at McDonald Avenue- site of the old Parkville station. It stands separate and apart from the passenger station symbol depicting the Avenue I subway station around the corner.
I've only glanced at the atlas in bookstores and haven't actually bought it yet. There's probably a treasure trove of other such errors.
Well into the eighties, Hagstrom had the Dyre Avenue branch as their presentation of a West Side line- thick, dark line- and the White Plains Branch as East Side- two thin lines running parallel to each other. This was the service pattern until what, about 1962?
Ed: The "HH Fulton Street Local" shuttle service between Court Street Station and Hoyt-Schmerhorn Streets Station began operating on April 9,1936. Trains ran Monday through Saturday from 7am to 7 pm. The May 11,1940 schedule has HH trains leaving Hoyt Street from 701am to 654pm and leaving Court Street from 705 1/2am to 658 1/2pm. Based on this short turnaround time I would venture to say that only a single track was used and I believe it was the westbound but I cannot say for sure. The alternative would have been to relay on the middle track between Lafayette Avenue and Clinton-Washington Avenues. Trains ran on a 10 minute base headway with a rush hour headway of 8-10 minutes. I do not know how many cars were used.
Larry,RedbirdR33
One of the reasons that Penn station on the 7th and 8th have a 3 platform design is because they did not want people transfering b/t local and express there. The figured the crowds would be great enough with out having people jumping off of locals to the express.
Not a bad idea. It's one I've had before.
But the traditional local station is cheaper, and it's preferable to have the station as close to the surface as possible.
But this leads us to a new subthread: If all of the local stations were constructed as express stations, giving the TA the option of converting stations from local to express or express to local, what would be different today? That is, which would be the express stations if the TA could pick any?
Most transfer stations deserve to be express stops. 14th on the F, Bleecker on the 6 (especially if they do a passageway to the uptown 6).
By the way, even though we are generally in the realm of fantasy to consider converting any stop to express service, note on the 1959 system map available on this site that 59th on the Lex is local, whereas by 1964 it has become an express stop. That must have been quite a project!
Also, as amazing as it sounds, Times Square was at one time a LOCAL station. By the same token though, I'm sure there are stations that were designed to be express stations, but don't warrant being express stations now. This is probably especially true in the outer boroughs like Brooklyn.
Also, as amazing as it sounds, Times Square was at one time a LOCAL station.
True, although only for a VERY short time .... from 1906 til the southern portion of the west-side IRT opened (is this "Second Contract"?). And from what I've heard, with the NYT building and all the theatres there, it was obvious almost from the start that it was a disastrous mistake.
There are still a few remnants of the old local station: One section of curved brick and tile wall (southwest end of shuttle) and the semi-famous "Knickerbocker" hotel doorway (southeast end of shuttle).
The shuttle station at Times Square is the original Times Square local station -- with necessary modifications, of course (including a platform over the original southbound express track and a moveable bridge over the two original northbound tracks).
They brought a piece of the old wall with a name tablet up to one of the fare areas where the Times Square Brewery building was. Now the whole building was dismantled, except for the fare contraol area.
They brought a piece of the old wall with a name tablet up to one of the fare areas where the Times Square Brewery building was. Now the whole building was dismantled, except for the fare contraol area.
And that fare control area closed this morning and has been boarded up til "Summer 2002" according to the signs.
Am I the only one who thinks that Times Square station is going to be frighteningly crowded and hard to get into/out of?
They've just closed the largest entrance (as above) on the S side of 42nd between Bway & 7th Ave. That leaves the new one on the NW corner of 42nd & 7th (Reuters Bldg), the changing one on the SW corner (Ernst & Young Bldg), the narrow stairway on the SE corner of 42nd & Bway (bldg covered in construction cloth w/Gap on the ground floor) ... and maybe the old local entrance from the N side of the Shuttle. I think that's IT. (Plus some stuff on 41st Street that few people seem to use)
Plus half the mezzanine over the 1/2/3 is boarded up to provide a work area for storage. The work that's been done so far will definitely make the station better, but that is THE most crowded station in the system and it is now MUCH harder to get in and out of.
I think your fears are unwarranted. That station has many, many exits. One, in the 41st Street IRT mezzanine, recently opened (late summer, IIRC). That makes three exits in that mezzanine alone, plus one near the south end of each BMT platform, plus one near the south end of each IRT platform (currently closed, but scheduled to reopen this month), plus everything you mention, plus all the exits at the other end of the passageway to 8th Avenue. Despite what you seem to think, the 41st Street exits are well-used, primarily by IRT riders.
The IRT mezzanine (I assume you're referring to the one at 41st) used to be a bunch of narrow passageways. It's been opened up and now it's huge. The blocked-off area in the middle is for elevators, I think. In any case, there's still a lot more room to maneuver. I transfer between IRT and BMT frequently, and I almost always go that way now.
You're referring to the Dual Contracts portion which extends south along 7th Ave. from Times Square. The Contract Two portion extended the original line to South Ferry and Atlantic Ave.
Yes, the planners of the original Contract One route really dropped the ball (no pun intended) when the Times Square station was made a local stop. It became the most popular local stop along the original line, so much so that theater owners went so far as to unsuccessfully petition the IRT to install crossover switches near the station so that express trains could also stop there.
Get this: the error was almost repeated when the Dual Contracts were signed. Luckily, someone realized this would be a huge mistake before construction began and plans were revised to make Times Square an express stop on both the IRT and BMT lines.
74th Street on the 7? Express.
The express platforms at 59th St. on the Lex were carved out of the rock the line goes through. Not as difficult as, say, threading the 6th Ave. line through the maze at 34th St.
Columbus Circle/59 st on the 1
An obvious choice -- but what do you do with the rest of the line? 96 has to be an express station, since it's where the 2/3 split from the 1. 42 has to be an express station; I needn't explain why. Are there no express stations between 59 and 96? If so, locals would be overburdened even more than they are now. If not, then there isn't much of an express run. But perhaps the good express runs are best reserved for sections of the line that aren't quite so busy.
Wanted to get an early start because today I was going to SI and take some photgraphs.
I took a 7 express from Flushing at 8am, and got to GCT aroun 8:25am. Went to the downtown lex platform. A Redbird 4 pulls in packed to the gills. I had to get on this one since I wanted to make sure I got 9am ferry. This was the most crowded train I have ever been on, there wasn't any breathing room. It was packed like sardines until Wall st when the whole train emptied out. I got off at Bowling Green and walked to S.Ferry. The area is very busy, it seems lower Manhattan is back to life (with the sad exception of Chinatown).
It doesn't help they don't mention Chinatown in those I love NY ads.
Anyway I had the John F. Kennedy, but fortunately no cars got on (cars should be banned permanently from the ferry).
Got the SIR train at St.George and took it to Tottenville where I took some pics. Then I took a bus along Hylan blvd and made some stops along the way (Mt.Loretto, New Dorp, Eltingville) in that order, even though there was some backtracking. Now I got some pictures of SI, NYC's forgotten borough.
Went to the mall for a little while then took the SIR from Eltingville to St.George where I got some more pictures. I was hoping to get a shot of the small B&O signals they use, but most of them are only in between stations so that would be hard, but they are still there. Ride on SIR was pretty fast, those R44's ride more like LIRR cars than subway cars (we knew this already of course).
Going back on the ferry I had the Lehman. I have a sensitive nose and noticed the "smell" as we neared S.Ferry terminal.
Once we got there I went down to Whitehall st and took an R. This was around 5:30pm and this R train was packed after Rector. Jam packed, usually it is not this bad. I heard some vaugue announcement of a police investigation somewhere.
At TSQ I pried my way out of the jam packed R46 R and went down to the 7. The express arrived on the other track, the one that leaves on a diverging route, whereas the local arrived on the south track.
There was congestion going east a bit more than usual, and once on the express we passed 3 locals and caught up to a 4th at Shea. Looks like the line was backed up or something. Saw track workers near Woodside interlocking on the Main st bound local track, maybe there was a problem.
The area is very busy, it seems lower Manhattan is back to life (with the sad exception of Chinatown).
It doesn't help they don't mention Chinatown in those I love NY ads.
It's bad enough that the Times runs these whining articles about how bad things are in Chinatown (and Little Italy too), this week the Village Voice has one as well. What is conveniently forgotten is the fact that both neighborhoods were deeply troubled well before September 11th. Mystical girls aside, Chinatown has been looking increasingly run-down, untidy, and non-prosperous for years. September 11th merely exacerbated the decline. As for Little Italy, it has long since ceased to be a neighborhood in the usual sense, having been reduced to just a couple blocks of third-rate restaurants.
I will agree the trouble in Chinatown started before Sept.11th, but the rate of decay accelerated quite rapidly since Sept.11th.
I wonder if the MTA has kept statistics on the Canal st complex (N,R,Q,W,6,J,M). I'd like to compre ridership stats from August till December.
Interestingly Chinatown was alot busier two weeks after Sept.11 than 2 months after.
It seems like the SIRT R-44s are pretty fast cars compared to the R-44s used on the regular subways. Even though the fires are out at Ground Zero I guess at least to you the "smell" still lingers. I'd probably be able to smell it as well despite the fact that I have a concealed cleft palate. Though it affected my speech slightly, it hasn't affected my ability to smell. Under good conditions my nose works quite well.
#3 West End Jeff
IIRC the SIRT R-44s still have the final field shunt step enabled.
Did they remove the time delay doorchimes on them?
The time delay on the door chimes on the SIR R-44s was removed when the cars were overhauled. The later (R-46 through R-68A) style door chimes were installed, without a time delay.
David
The door chimes also sound different on SIR 44's, and I like it, just like the added field shunt step.
Hopefully they won't disable the final field shunt step just to slow the cars down. Slow cars aren't needed on the SIRT. They aren't needed on the subway system in general either.
#3 West End Jeff
Damn straight!
It's very easy to notice. The 44's have much faster acceleration. too bad the field shunt was removed on NYC subway cars. Another over-reaction in the name of safety.
When the accident occured on the Williamsburg Bridge the train was going uphill at perhaps 30 mph. Even with the field shunt removed such an accident could still happen.
#3 West End Jeff
Since the removal of full field shunting, "standard" NYC subway cars (pre-R-110) have difficulty maintaining, let alone increasing, speed on up-grades, particularly on long ones.
David
With all due respect, we dont need to know about every trip you take.
With all due respect, no one is forcing you to read posts that you're not interested in.
Fred: Last night I answered your question about when the D-Types ran on the Sea Beach. I also offered to by you two hot dogs at Nathan's the next time that you come east if you could tell me the date of the last regular revenue run of the D's and the line that they ran on.
Whatsamatta? Don't you want the hot dogs.
Best Wishes,Larry, RedbirdR33
"I R T" Where we still have the "RAPID" in Interborough Transit.
I think we put him off his lunch a few days ago, but that's a prohibited thought. :)
If he don't want em, I'll take em!
BTW, I went by there a couple weeks ago (Christmas eve to be exact), and they have a buy one get one free on dogs at Nathans. You can print out the coupon from their website, or they give you one when you buy something there.
For a second time, I was able to go to the Training Facility at Livingston Street. I did the E line from Jamaica Center to WTC. This time, I've got pics! They are dark though cuz the cab light didn't work :-\
The files with custom in the name are resized for dialup:
Enjoy!
How does a non-TA employee access the sim?
You don't. Security has gotten tighter at 130 Livingston Plaza since Sept. 11th. I've been in the building many times on official business, but the training areas are basically off-limits to non-TA folks.
Mr rt__:^)
I glad you had fun. Know only if they let me in to play with there Simulator.
I was down there twice they said Conductors are not allowed to use it Train Operators Only.
I glad you had fun. Know only if they let me in to play with there Simulator.
I was down there twice they said Conductors are not allowed to use it Train Operators Only.
Clayton, think about this: isn't it stupid not to let people who want to learn ??? I can operate any trainset...it is part of my job...to test in static conditions. What I will do is to DL the BVE simulator with updates....probably far better than PS248 or whereever. CI Peter
Actually, if the new sim everyone's talking about is based on BVE's rendering engine, it'll make for a VERY good sim. Given Ed Yee's FINE work on the 143's and the Franklin shuttle route, if I were a TA wiglet, I would have had motor instructors using BVE for school car and a mockup panel. In fact the QUALITY of Ed Yee's work was the reason why I *had* to do the "real thing" when I came to the city (both some cab time in a REAL 143 as well as the Frankie) and Ed did a WONDERFUL job on it all ...
Download that puppy, Peter ... anyone who's done the real thing can really appreciate why the BVE sim is far and above what MSTS is ...
Thanks for the high praise. Wait till you see the R68A. Interactive controllers!!!
I check in every couple of days. Two fisted ops is the only way to go. I'm also waiting to see what you do with the Q ... but knowing what I can expect when you're done, I'm willing to wait. :)
But you SURE do crank out good stuff ...
It sucks
On my way to work tonight, I saw another notice that the subway surface lines are going to divert nightly once again after 900p, for some more construction.......i have two points on this
1)What is SEPTA installing, I hope it's not that new signal system which had the system closed for most of last year at night...whats the holdup?
2)Is anyone else annoyned at all these system closures. It's hell for those who live near these lines. You close all subway surface traffic after 900p, you have to wait on dark, cold and dangerous 40th street, where a SEPTA Police offficer or supervisor is not even there to protect passengers, and then on the weekends you have the El shutdowns. I'm all for system inprovements, but why stress your existing riders. Why not use the overnight hours to get this work done, the subway is already closed at that time anyway
The subway-surface is out for two reasons. One is the signal system installation (STILL!). The other is various rail projects, one of which is on the EB east of 19th St where there has been a long-standing slow order.
Why the El shuttles can't start at 40th for the west side outages is is beyond me. SEPTA insists on doing this at 15th, which creates traffic problems with all the congestion already there on the surface and rider confusion with the 'courtyard' stairs and escalator (NW corner 15th & Market) out due to construction. Ending train service at 40th also allows better connection if/when the subway-surface is on diversion. Go figure. The current feeling seems to be that weekend riders aren't worth the worry.
On January 2,2002 a approximately 3:30pm. Service on the MBTA's Orange Line was halted for approximately 3 hours and substitute bus service put in place when a 23 year old man from Sommerville,MA decided to jump under the train heading for Forest Hills at Sullivan Square in Charlestown, MA getting himself caught between the third rail abd the running rail. I was there today and you can see where he was hit by the sand spread around and the trail of mush they were not abe to clean up. Photo was in the Boston Globe today.
Hey gang,
The 14th St./Canarsie L Line as we know is a local service on its entire run. I am wondering if there ever existed an express service on this line as I have an old Hagstrom subway map from around WW2 that indicates express stations in addition to the local stations. As I have never noticed any express "cages" in the stations, was this service, if it did exist, skip-stop? This would have been one of the few types of express runs that by-passed local stations with out a cage of girders, whooshing by the open platforms. Perhaps the Hag map is in error and it is now a collectable rarity. ;)
Tunnel Rat
Several old Brooklynites explained this some years back, but in case they aren't looking, I'll give you their answer.
There is a turnaround track beyond Myrtle, were a "local" waited to leave. As the "express" left Myrtle, if followed immediately behind. The "express" skipped nearly all the stations on the way to Manhattan, with the "local" falling further and further behind. The "local" would arrive at 8th Avenue just ahead of the "express" behind it.
Repeating this pattern would be difficult today -- it takes the TA longer to turn trains around at terminals. These days, the TA is more likely to go with skip stop. But you need 20+ trains per hour to limit the wait at any individual station, and the ridership has to justify that amount of service.
>>As the "express" left Myrtle, if followed immediately behind. The "express" skipped nearly all the stations on the way to Manhattan, with the "local" falling further and further behind. The "local" would arrive at 8th Avenue just ahead of the "express" behind it. <<
Wouldn't the express eventually catch up with the local just ahead of him ?
Bill "Newkirk"
Nah, Zman was piloting the local. :)
The idea was that with a 6-minute headway on each, the express would gain about 4 minutes--i.e., the express left a minute BEFORE the local and arrived 8th Avenue a minute AFTER the local in front.
Same thing they do with the "zoned" expresses on MN and LIRR.
It works out well on the LIRR Babylon branch, running express and local on the same track. It's all timing. Of course the subway runs many more trains, so it's much harder to get it to work.
Wouldn't the express eventually catch up with the local just ahead of him?
The reason this service worked is because the BMT exploited the differences in operating characteristics between the Multi's and the Standards. The Multi's ran as locals and the Standards as expresses. This reduced the differential between a local and express.
They ran 24 tph on the 14th St line or 150 second headways. The time in seconds out of Myrtle would be: 0(E); 90(L); 300(E); 390(L); etc. By the time they reached Lorimer the relative times would be: 0(E); 210(L); 300(E); 510(L); etc. Both trains made all stops between Lorimer and 8th Ave. The Multi's would gain on the Standards because of their higher acceleration and braking rates. By the time they reached 8th Ave the relative times would be equalized: 0(E); 150(L); 300(E); 450(L).
Was the connection at Lorimer for the G there yet? If it was, it would be bad to skip Lorimer. Did the expresses stop at Lorimer? How long did this service last (and when)?
Before 1940 it didn't matter - the BMT could care less if you could connect to the IND or not ;-)
My 1931 BMT guide shows the express service - it was weekday rush hour only -westbound in the am and eastbound in the pm. The guide only states that the service was express between Lorimer and Myrtle so I assume it stopped at these stations. My 1937 BMT guide shows an additional rush hour express service using the 14th Street Line - this operated from Lefferts Ave (Fulton St Line) to 8th Ave (14th St).
If the Lefferts trains ran as expresses, it means that the Multis were running express, as the Standards were too big and heavy for the old section of the Fulton St. El over Pitkin Ave. Seeing as only 25 Multis were built, that meant that in rush hour, they were essentially all assigned to the 14th St-Fulton St service.
-- Ed Sachs
Yes, this is so. In the "Cars of the BMT" book, it is stated that the multis ran on the 14th St/Fulton route during rush hours. Other times the multis ran on the Canarsie/14th St route, until 1956.
After 1956, the Multis ran on the Myrtle-Chambers route, rush hours only. By that time they they were suffering from defferred maintenance and they probably needed to patch them up during the day for one or two more round trips in the PM rush hours. The head end route signs on some of them were stuck on '13' (the number of the Fulton St line, used on the 14th St/Fulton expresses), leading me to incorrectly conclude in 1960 that 13 was the number of the Myrtle-Chambers line (should be 10). They were finally retired in 1961, replaced by Standards from the southern division freed up by the arrival of the R27s. All were scrapped - none remain.
-- Ed Sachs
All were scrapped - none remain.
And what a shame that was ...
"the Standards were too big and heavy for the old section of the Fulton St. El over Pitkin Ave. "
That was one of the reasons the Multis were built.
Also, the later "R-39" contract (never built) was a similar idea, lightweight stainless steel cars for the BMT (presumably the Myrtle). I can't think of any other BMT els they might have needed lightweight cars for, because the Fulton El was already taken over by the A by that point, correct?
They must have had alot less trains running on that line, in order for express and local to run on the same track.
There was a plan at one time that involved skip stop on the L line. What ever came of it? I never heard anything again. There is a gray letter on some trains, Y I think, that is reserved for this service. Someone on subtalk a few weeks ago see the gray "Y" (or whatever letter it is.
The existing skip-stop line and the one that ran through the morning of 9/11 don't have 20+ tph.
Just heard on 1010 WINS that TA plans to rebuild the tunnel and have the 1/9 line open by next fall. They will not reopen the Cortlandt St. station at that time, though, just Greenwich and South Ferry.
Here's hoping that Cortlandt stays closed til it can be integrated into a rethought and redesigned Hudson Terminal PATH station ....
(If this was covered earlier on the site, my apologies.)
Here's a link to the story on the WCBS 880 Web site. (Yeah, the stations are co-owned, but we compete. Just like GM's Chevrolet and Buick Divisons.)
I guess that means all the thinking about relocating the line and reconstructing the South Ferry terminal was just hot air.
-Hank
Just another free-standing, Subtalk misbelief powered by railfan fantasies (= railfantasies?).
If we start a thread about it, that is what will come to be, right???
MATT-2AV
It was pretty quick before this one evaporated due to lack of funding. Most subfantasies are sustained way longer.
Ya dont think having the 'wealthiest mayor
in NY history' had anything to do with this
promptness, do ya??... naaaah... ;)
If so, I like Mike
The relocation of the line was just one of three options. The decision was made to rebuild in kind for the first part of the restoration job in order to expedite the restoration of service down to the Ferry. Per my understanding of the current thinking of this restoration, the reconstruction of South Ferry (i.e. platform lengthening to accomodate 10 cars etc.) is envisaged to be done on a future contract. Also in a future job,the Rector Streets stations on the IRT and BMT would be connected and the Cortlandt street station made a part of a transit hub with neighboring lines and railroads as a reader wrote.
the reconstruction of South Ferry
(i.e. platform lengthening to accomodate 10 cars etc.)
We're already havin' enough trouble trying to
rebuild portions of a tunnel... to reconstruct
the SF station itself would require an extending
of the loop (yes, Virginia it IS a loop station)
and breaking down additional tunnel portions
(inwhich consist cars 6-10 await) which could
possibly run right into Rector on the head end.
Keep it a loop... aint many like it.
The loop would be kept as far as I understand. The loop is needed in the event of a General Order in the 2/3 tunnel so they can route trains down the 1/9 line around the loop up to Bowling Green and up to Wall street and then change ends and go on to Brooklyn.
The loop needn't be changed. In fact, the idea I hear is that the loop would be kept and the platform used as a walkway to the Ferry which would be in a new terminal bldg. The So Ferry terminal would have straight platform three layup tracks. Possibly under Battery Park. This is not a 123 project.
I'm still having trouble envisioning where this new SF station would lie. East of the existing station, you have to worry about the Broadway line and connection to the Montague tunnel. Underneath the loop are the 4/5 tracks to the Joralemon tunnel, and the 4/5 tracks are intertwined with the 7th Ave tracks at the north end of the loop. That leaves west of the station, which might put it kind of far from the Ferry terminal (it will be moving somewhat to the northeast once the new (old) terminal is repaired), you need to worry about infringing on the BBT and BP Underpass, and would likely require a great deal of excavation in Battery Park.
Also, if a new SF station were going to be built, any chance of having a connection to the Joralemon tunnel, for possible alternate access (if only for emergencies - remember the J on 4th Ave?)
I can't come to picture SF having
3 layup tracks!?....
I know - it's just unthinkable, not to have the curved platform, the chains along the platform boundary, the gap fillers bzzzzing out to meet the opening doors...
I tell ya, one time I did have fun there - I think the T/O overshot the mark, or the gap fillers weren't working. The train sat there for a few minutes, and finally the C/R came around keying the doors open, and we had to step over the gap to get off the train. Ahh, the good times in that old station...
One gets the impression from this story that Cortland St. will demolished permanently. Is that so?
My impression is that it'll be rebuit whenever the whole WTC complex is rebuilt, hopefully with integrated walkways that connect all train lines plus the WFC. Maybe 2006-2008.
One gets the impression from this story that Cortland St. will demolished permanently. Is that so?
From the Times article:
"The Cortlandt Street Station, which is directly beneath the trade center plaza and was heavily damaged, will be demolished, and the shape of any new station in that area will be part of much larger plans for redevelopment and a memorial at the trade center site, officials said."
It was already demolished, on September 11.
The whole platform wasn't demolished at Cortlandt, was it? In pictures, it looks like at least part is intact.
Its like a car. The insurance company gets to decide when it is totaled. Sure there may be some parts that aren't damaged, but it hardly matters at this point.
Not entirely. It was heavily damaged.
The term is 'structural failure'. It's not that parts of it are not still standing, but that the damage is so severe that its remains must be removed if trains are to safely go thru it. Besids the station, there are two tunnel segments with equally severe damage.
It is both faster and safer (and probably cheaper) to rip out nearly everything and essentially start from scratch.
Will Cortlandt be opened again when the new WTC is opened or will it be removed as a stop forever?
Will Cortlandt be opened again when the new WTC is opened or will it be removed as a stop forever?
It will likely be rethought and combined into a new transit hub that includes IRT "Cortlandt" station, PATH "new Hudson Terminal" and BMT "Cortlandt" station. This will be much later than the line will open, though. The existing station will probably be removed entirely with only the tracks remaining by the time the line opens.
Much SubTalk speculation on various designs, linkages, alignments, etc. in other parts of this thread.
It's such a waste/shame. They did such a nice job redoing the station too.
Certainly.
If it's any consolation, the mullahs at Kandahar probably put some effort into their headquarters. But it was too ugly to stay up, so our B-52s demolished it for them. Even took out some of the architects.
Free of charge. Such incredibly good customer service...
I kind of like the idea that a #1 train goes to Brooklyn once again, even if it is for only a short duration. It will probably drive my Brighton friends groggy, but I did like the Brighton's old #1 desigination of yesteryear, and the fact that the #1 now goes to New Lots Avenue is somewhat a bit of nostalgia to me. I hope to ride it when I come to New York. That's just my opinion on the matter.
You're thinking of the BMT station. The IRT station was redone when the WTC first opened, and like most other 70's rehabs, it was pretty ugly.
You are right it was the N/R station. Well at least that will open again.
Actually, it took about seven years or so after the WTC opened before the Cortlandt IRT station was rehabbed. Between the demolition in the late 60s and the WTC construction in the early 70s, the station's tile work was in pretty awful shape by around 1973, and stayed that way for the rest of the decade.
Once again, the MTA goes for the "quick and cheap" fix.
Once the line is open, forget about improvements.
I'll offer my comment as I offered it over elsewhere ...
Here is yet another sad convergence of POLITICS and NYCTA ... seems pretty apparent that the federal money to cover NYC taking a punch in the face for the REST of America is being met with the political "drop dead" again from the swine in DC. Of course ENRON gets their money back.
MTA Board apparently has read the tea leaves and realizes that things HAVE TO get back to normal one way or the other. I'm sure this decision is also a piece of Mayor Mike's pragmatism ... "let's get it going somehow for now and see what we can do later." I *hope* this isn't the end of the story but lower Manhattan needs those lines restored by whatever means is possible and as QUICKLY as possible.
But half a subway is better than none, especially when the House of Texans decides to stiff New York. Again. We can all argue over "politics" but the end result is always NYC getting shafted by those who build highways that only armadillos use while we're SOL ...
I won't argue with your view of Texans' opinions about New Yorkers. And I don't doubt we'll get shafted in the future too.
But this just wasn't the right place to spend the money. It's only 500' from Rector and West to Rector and Trinity. A $20 million bridge over West at Rector will do almost as much for lower Battery Park City as a $1 billion project to move the 1 over to West St.
And the workers at the WFC will benefit more from walkways truly integrated into the entire subway system than they would from a station at Vesey and West that most of them wouldn't use. Those walkways will really be worth the money, and we'd better spend our own money on them if the feds don't give us any.
Agreed ... but let's hope that some federal pork DOES manage to come to NYC. After all, we're all paying MORE that enough as it is for taking a stabbing from whiners down south who got a mere dusting of snow and are totally losing it. Somehow I think what WE got was a bit worse. :)
You should see what happens when it snows in Denver. DOT panics and starts dumping gravel, gravel everywhere even if the roads are merely wet. People in SUVs spin their wheels at intersections. It's ridiculous.
Heh. You ain't seem them deal with snow in South Carolina yet ... now THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT. :)
You ain't seem them deal with snow in South Carolina yet ... now THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT. :)
One of the funniest video clips I ever saw was from an Atlanta station that parked a camera near a cloverleaf during a snowstorm. The drivers came slowly down the ramp and either slid to the outside ditch, joining a row of cars already there, or to the inside ditch, ditto.
heh! I took my driving test (in Rochester, NY) when it was 4 degrees below zero and 14" on snow on the ground. Couldn't parallel park 'cause the spaces were full of plow-piles, and never got out of 2nd gear. Take THAT, sunbelt weenies!
Smallbany myself, February with 26 inches on the "parallel parking test" ... that my examiner wasn't killed was good enough. That I did the parallel park while the PLOW skidded was "instant car-ma" ... heh.
I got my license on September 11, 1973. Drove around the block once, with the examining officer bouncing all over the seat (he wasn't wearing his seat belt while I was). Wayne remembers that day for another reason.:-)
Heh. I did OK, the plow didn't ... I'll leave it there. I passed with flying colors, just like school car. Did about as well out on the REAL road which is why NANCY drives. :)
Last January in Hastings-on-Hudson where I live I saw somebody get stuck in an SUV in a minor snowstorm of all things. I just kept rolling along in my 1998 Honda Civic with four snow tires.
#3 West End Jeff
OK, I just got back from having to drive through the snow in Arizona, as in the south there are two types of problems:
1.) Drivers (pickups and SUVs especially) who don't understand the meaning of the term "black ice" and think if they can see the white stripes on the Inrterstate, that means it's OK to do the speed limit of 75 mph.
2.) State highway departments who don't want to have to worry about rust damage to their overpasses (hello, I-90 and I-81 upstate) and throw sand on the things in snow and ice conditions, which naturally gets knocked off the road after the first two or three truck-tractors have gone by.
Fortunately, I think Chevron or some other company has come up with a road de-icing chemical to replace salt that's supposed to last about 24 hours. Hopefully, a few of the southern state highway departments will actually buy some.
We've got 8 inches so far up here where I-87 crosses I-90. We're sitting and watching videos of Georgia residents fighting the mighty half-inch drifts in the company bar. CSX is remarkably silent too - back in the Gonerail days, a foot wouldn't have slowed the railroad down at all ...
I was stuck for eight hours on an LIRR train west of Patchogue during the great Blizzard of `69 (actually it was just a good blizzard; Lindsey's screw-up with the Sanitation Department turned it into a great one), and the lesson seemed to be if you let the trains stop running for a while the more snow there's going to be on the tracks later on.
As for snow driving, hopefully the next time Austin, Tex., gets an ice storm Time Warner's NewsChannel 8 down there will share some of its fun footage of I-35 drivers with its sister NY1 station -- talk about clueless motorists, especially on the downtown viaduct, which naturally ices over first.
Yep ... have got folks living down in the Carolinas and when it snows, they stay home, gather in the bay window and watch the hijinx. And yes, if you stop the railroad, you'll need a snowblower when you decide to open back up. Looks like about 10 inches here, CSX is doing their thing and all's well. Upstate, 10 inches is like an inch and a half in the city ... no big thang. :)
Oddly enough, my aunt, uncle, and cousins from Atlanta were HERE when the snow hit Atlanta. They laughed at the footage on CNN of the highways.
-Hank
We thought it a hoot also in all sincerity ... musta been rough piling through those half inch snowbanks. Now for anyone from the sooth who si about to get honked at me for these words, we did 14.8 inches overnight and it's now at 15.2 as it starts the BACKLASH of the Low, a new binary Low about to barrel through for the daytime hours. We'll probably get up to 20 inches by nightfall, not that there's anything wrong with that.
FORTUNATELY, I'm an indentured servant with the software company here, so I *live* on company property ... when it DOES get plowed, I'll be able to leave ... whenever that actually occurs. Heh. Such is the life upstate. If NYC got something like this though, it'd shut down entirely, the trains would be on panic schedule if any at all, and here, everything's running. The main roads were clear last night. Amtrak's ON SCHEDULE and so is CSX and CP ... one inch of snow down on the Island though and LIRR would be in BIE and NYCTA would be running the SETs ... gotta love the difference. :)
Hell yeah it was rough! I got the bottom of my shoes wet from the snow. :) Here, if one snowflake falls, schools are closed and everyone gets into a wreck. MARTA was running normally, however. Don't blame us though, we only get snow once a year, if that, and 5 inches is about tops.
Heh. Been down 85, know the drill. But for ANYONE who knows what to do when the road turns white, gotta admit, it's better than going to the mousetrap in Orland0 ... we just passed TWO FEET of snow since sunset last night here, and it's coming down harder than between 10 and midnight when we got 8 inches over those two hours ... Thank GOD those of us who call upstate home are used to this, even if it's been a year since the last glopping like this.
For those who complain about city life though, this one snowfall is going to cost MORE than $600.00 out of "upstate pockets" where the rents are MUCH cheaper (so are the wages) just to put it in perspective. FRONTLOADERS ... the municipal Zamboni is BURIED. :)
Lucky for us, heavy snow doesn't seem to disrupt light rail schedules. Then again, most of our light rail running is on private ROW.
1.) Drivers (pickups and SUVs especially) who don't understand the meaning of the term "black ice" and think if they can see the white stripes on the Inrterstate, that means it's OK to do the speed limit of 75 mph.
Truckers don't understand either - my son-in-law being a prime example. He jacknifed on a bridge near Prescott in mid-December; by the time the snapping and banging stopped, the nose of his truck was buried in the side of his 53' trailer. When our daughter called and told us I tried to be sympathetic, but I'm not sympathetic to the point of giving them the down payment on a new rig like she wanted me to.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Magnesium chloride? They use it here in Denver. It's welcome on the freeways; they're actually dumping less gravel now. The drawback is that if you don't wipe it off your windows within 24 hours or so, it becomes as hard as concrete. Even if you do wipe it off, it leaves a greasy film. Water or cleaning solution will do the trick.
There's some peddlers selling an ALCOHOL and Ethylene Glycol based product for $40 a gallon as a liquid that you put on roads (used in Alaska) and guarantees 14 days of clear road even if it snows again.
What we found works best on our own private highway up the hill is plain old corn squeezings and a good bit of sand. Amazing what the SUN can do if there's something darker than snow to catch its attention. But for serious snow protection, alcohol and some fat (ethylene glycol) works wonders at altering the 32 degree scientific constant (Zero C pour les Canadiens) ... same stuff they use to de-ice airliners with variations in mixtures ...
Verr-rr-rrrrry interesting.
Yep ... another theory shot to hell though THIS snow - we got just under 19 inches, put out our goop and now it's slick and LUBRICATED. Agggh. :)
Sounds like the same deal as we used to do up in Syracuse when the temperatures finally got above 32 degrees -- head to the self-service car wash and hose that sucker down completely, top and undercarriage, before the water and sodium chloride meltdown started working its way through your car's panels (the alternative was to follow Rod Serling's advice and Zeibart your whole auto, but that was kind of pricey for a youth of my limited means...)
But this just wasn't the right place to spend the money. It's only 500' from Rector and West to Rector and Trinity. A $20 million bridge over West at Rector will do almost as much for lower Battery Park City as a $1 billion project to move the 1 over to West St.
And the workers at the WFC will benefit more from walkways truly integrated into the entire subway system than they would from a station at Vesey and West that most of them wouldn't use.
On the whole, I agree.
PROS:
- line gets back up and running within a year
- 1/2/3 service gets back to normal
- elevators get added (hthe NYT piece) to S. Ferry & Greenwich
SORRY ... very touchy keyboard ... here's complete response!
But this just wasn't the right place to spend the money. It's only 500' from Rector and West to Rector and Trinity. A $20 million bridge over West at Rector will do almost as much for lower Battery Park City as a $1 billion project to move the 1 over to West St.
And the workers at the WFC will benefit more from walkways truly integrated into the entire subway system than they would from a station at Vesey and West that most of them wouldn't use.
On the whole, I agree.
PROS:
- line gets back up and running QUICKLY (within a year)
- 1/2/3 service gets back to normal
- elevators get added (hints the NYT piece) to S. Ferry & Greenwich
- Cortlandt gets integrated into new transit complex whenever it gets designed & built
- Feds pay for all/most of the cost
CONS:
- S. Ferry stays as is (5 cars long)
- Long-term (50 years) flaws with this line don't get addressed
On the whole, given AlM's arguments ... I think TA made the right choice.
The question is: Can the TA and PA cooperate to build something that truly leads to better interconnections among subway riders, PATH riders, ferry passengers and whatever gets built above? Or, can they actually benefit the folks who pay the fares?
(I'd *love* to see cross-platform transfers between PATH and IRT and/or BMT, but that may be asking for too much ... )
I fully concur with all your pros. If speed of reconstruction is the main criterion, then the MTA's limited plan is the best option.
However, if the reconstruction of the damaged portion is done in a manner that would preclude any later changes, then we are back to being locked in to a bad design.
Perhaps the MTA could design the rebuild with a bellmouth to allow them to take the 1/9 to the west at a later date, if appropriate, and also leave room for interconnections with the B Division (WTC and Rector Street) and PATH.
PS - the reason you won't see a cross-platform transfer to PATH is the vertical separation between the 1/9, E, and N/R services and the PATH line -- to keep the grades at a reasonable level, the PATH station would still be at least one level below the others.
Perhaps the MTA could design the rebuild with a bellmouth to allow them to take the 1/9 to the west at a later date, if appropriate, and also leave room for interconnections with the B Division (WTC and Rector Street) and PATH.
Hmmm. A western extension would have to turn under the WTC site (the part to be rebuilt) and penetrate the bathtub. Since it sounds like a large chunk of the eastern half (east of the bathtub) will already be transit, I have to wonder (a) how much bathtub space such a line would chew up; and (b) whether the resulting line would make much sense. Much better pleasant underground walkways to WFC/BPC, I'd say ... and much, MUCH cheaper. I'd bet no bellmouth gets built.
the reason you won't see a cross-platform transfer to PATH is the vertical separation between the 1/9, E, and N/R services and the PATH line -- to keep the grades at a reasonable level, the PATH station would still be at least one level below the others.
Probably true, although old Hudson Terminal was considerably higher up than the WTC 7th-level-basement station. But no doubt PATH stays a level below the IRT. How bout stacking northbound and southbound platforms, so Jersey folk coming in on PATH could walk up a flight of stairs onto the 1/9? There are fare-control issues, but by THAT time PATH will surely take MetroCard ....
AND, as part of the rebuild/rethink, what about connecting the E terminal at WTC/Hudson Terminal into the N/R? J Lee and others had a long discussion about this a few weeks ago. You probably have to get rid of, or radically rethink, the Cortlandt BMT station to do proper flyovers and flyunders to avoid switches across active lines. But think of the flexibility THAT would bring (IND through BMT tunnel, BMT up 8th Ave!). Note also that the TA has not yet said anything about the BMT Cortlandt station.
All of your points make good sense.
The Hudson Terminal platform elevation was (is) 15-20 feet below the N/R level.
Those are very well thought out pros and cons. What is best in the minds of railfans isn't always the best solution (for better or worse). The only thing I am a little dissapointed about is that South Ferry will not be upgraded to accomodate 10 cars. Am I not taking my own advice?
I'm not sure you will ever see cross-platform transfers to the PATH, as it is at a much lower evelation and the line comes in at a perperndicular to the IRT lines. Someone's got to make a 90 degree turn. However, better transfers between all (PATH, IRT, IND, and BMT) lines are a must.
MATT-2AV
I'm not sure you will ever see cross-platform transfers to the PATH, as it is at a much lower evelation and the line comes in at a perperndicular to the IRT lines. Someone's got to make a 90 degree turn. However, better transfers between all (PATH, IRT, IND, and BMT) lines are a must.
The elevation issue is valid, but while the tubes enter Manhattan east-west, the platforms at the old Hudson Terminal ran north-south between the IRT and BMT ... so you could do upstairs/downstairs if they move one or the other.
Probably better passageways are the realistic solution, but it would be great to make transferring REALLY easy and stack them ... plus, probably cheaper to build a single two-level PATH/IRT station than two separate ones (since both gotta be rebuilt from scratch).
I agree. It would be cheaper to build one station shell instead of two.
Because they are not going to open the Cortlandt Street Station after rebuilding the damaged tunnel segment, perhaps your plan can be put off for now??? I heard the report on 1010WINS this morning, but they weren't specific on how much of the Cortlandt Street station, if any, would be rebuilt. If it will be totally rebuilt in the future, your idea may not be ruled out.
MATT-2AV
Assuming that after the 1/9 rebuild you don't want to shut down any operating lines, then the two "givens" are the 1/9 and the N/R.
What you could do is move the E station to the west (it is at a higher elevation than the 1/9, as is the N/R), and relocate it to the south to allow a single station complex with the E, the N/R, and the 1/9. The PATH is below the whole complex, and could be joined with ramps.
You also could put a pedestrian walkway or use moving walkways to connect that complex with Fulton/Nassau -- allowing a transfer between all lines in Downtown.
I heard from a reliable source and not a kooky railfan, that the TA if toying with the idea of building a new three track South Ferry station along side of the curent one.
When the construction ends, they would tie it in with the curent loop station. The loop station would remain for miscelaneous moves and not demolished. This would address the problem of making South Ferry a 10 car station. There is no way of making the loop station capable of 10 cars. And please, let's put to bed this silly notion of returning the Bowling Green shutle to service. It's dead and buried and let's leave it that way.
Bill "Newkirk"
Would not having the loop slow down service on the line though? I know someone had mentioned that in an earlier post. Although, most terminals are not loop terminals, aside from the 6, so I don't know if that is a real factor.
>>Would not having the loop slow down service on the line though? <<
I don't know, I guess the #1 service would have to be adjusted to reflect a stub end terminal like the rest.
Bill "Newkirk"
Since the SI ferry does not operate at 30 ferries per hour, there is no real need for 30 1/9 trains per hour.
If the loop is preserved, not every train has to stop at SF. If three tracks are built at SF, they would be able to handle maximum thruput of trains. With a 3-track station plus the loop, there would be no problem whatsoever with capacity.
Since the SI ferry does not operate at 30 ferries per hour, there is no real need for 30 1/9 trains per hour.
Oh, come on, Mark! There are other people than simply ferry passengers who use that terminal. And, a SI Ferry carries a helluva lot of people. Could you fit an entire rush-hour ferry onto a single 10-car IRT train?
Not everyone on that ferry will use the 1/9. Some walk to their destination, some use the N/R, some walk to the 5/6 at Bowling Green.
However, it still took two trains to clear out South Ferry after the arrival of an AM rush boat.
According to the 1999 passenger counts, at least five local stations on the 1/9 had more passengers than South Ferry.
Yes, when averaged the SI Ferry throughput isn't awfully large (about 65,000 passengers per day, of which some fraction use the 1/9 (and only half of it at that due to the short platform), some other fraction use the 4/5, some other fraction use the N/R and some other fraction walk to their destination, with possibly a few who take buses or taxis, or stay on to return to SI).
However, ferry usage is highly peaked toward weekday rush (much smaller number of passengers off peak or weekends), and even at rush the boats operate on 15 or 20 minute headways, giving a noticeably "pulsed" distribution of commuters entering lower Manhattan.
And a single Barberi-class boat holds, IIRC, about 7,000 people - more than enough to completely stuff (sardine style) about 3 full 10-car IRT trains. The Kennedy-class holds about 4,500, still enough to fill up 2 10-car IRTs.
Now you've done it! David J. Greenberger is going to start another rant that the 1 needs a minimum of 30tph because he lives at (all together now) THE 55 BUSIEST STATION.
lol....................David, any comment?
Not a minimum of 30 tph. It needs more than the 12 tph it gets now, that's for sure. And it would be nice if the service that's there makes all scheduled stops on a regular basis. Go stand at 42 or 72 in the afternoon rush if you don't believe me.
If my station alone were busy, that would be no big deal. Since all five local stations between 42 and 96 are among the 70 busiest stations, it is a big deal.
Oh, I believe you it just amazes me. Before 9/11, did both the 1 & 9 stop at all those stations? Where did the skip stop end, and both lines start stopping?
Yes, both the 1 and 9 stopped at all those stations. Skip-stops were only made north of 137 St.
I stop at those stations every afternoon and I'm usually right on top of another train, since my leader leaves V.C. 4 min. ahead of me and 3 min. from New Lots.
Then either you're routinely the follower of one of the frequent fallen-way-behind-schedule-so-it's-sent-express trains or the posted schedule unabashedly lies.
You figure it out I just checked my records for the past year and I did the run you complain about exactly TWICE.
Ah, so you must pick up the angry crowds at the express stations after being betrayed by your leader. I'm sure I've been on your train. Look for me about 1.5 car lengths from the south end at 72.
"I heard from a reliable source and not a kooky railfan, that the TA if toying with the idea of building a new three track South Ferry station along side of the curent one."
I think the TA was moving very slowly with he 1/9 lines because it was waiting to see what sort of funding would be made available for the construction of a new line from Chambers St to south ferry and a transportation hub at the WTC when it's rebuilt. Given the age and design of the old line, a new tunnel with new stations would have been the most desirable option.
However, this situation no longer exists. The governor has publicly stated that it will be possible to restore 1/9 service to South Ferry by December 2002. This mandate clearly limits the TA options to one: Repair the damaged tunnels. Open the Rector St. and South Ferry Stations. Bypass the Cortland St. station (completely destroyed) until it can be rebuilt. The TA has its marching orders....
The governor has publicly stated that it will be possible to restore 1/9 service to South Ferry by December 2002. This mandate clearly limits the TA options to one: Repair the damaged tunnels. Open the Rector St. and South Ferry Stations. Bypass the Cortland St. station (completely destroyed) until it can be rebuilt. The TA has its marching orders....
But let us hope & pray that the TA and PA can work together to do something SMART with the Hudson Terminal site, 1/9 Cortlandt station, N/R Cortlandt station and E WTC/Hudson Terminal terminus.
The PA has in fact committed real money to study the situation and come p with a smart plan that includes walkways from the WFC to Broadway, integrated in with the subways and PATH.
That doesn't mean it'll happen, but at least the odds are better than in other cases.
Finally..someone with the intelligence to believe "the greatest good for the greatest number."
If there were ever a no-brainer this is it. The current havoc on the #1/2/3 is solved, the trains go back to their normal terminals, and two of three stations get service back (including South Ferry with its heavy tourist usage).
South Ferry isn't very busy (1999 numbers), and Rector is the least busy station on the line south of 207th Street. See this post.
The real advantage is that locals will have a place to turn in Manhattan, increasing capacity on the line as a whole.
Finally..someone with the intelligence to believe "the greatest good for the greatest number."
Yes, we all know about Bentham and Mill. What they failed to notice is that would justify great evil toward a minority for comparatively small good for the majority. Even Hitler was put there by a majority of sorts (coalition with the DNVP).
What they failed to notice is that would justify great evil toward a minority for comparatively small good for the majority.
Well, as the accused here (or the prior recipient of a completely unexpected compliment), I find it a stretch to declare NOT moving the 1/9 to be a "GREAT evil toward a minority" ....
Finally! A person with the intelligence to see "the greatest good for the greatest number."
Given all circumstances the plan announced today is the best approach and helps far more people than those who might be incovenienced.
Why is there seemingly Dire (not 5) need
to make SF a 10 car station??? The loop
is what makes the station unique.. (Union
Sq. a CLOSE second).... and besides,
135th (?) on the 3 is a 5-car platform...
and I don't recall anything unique about
THAT station... :s
For one thing, it doesn't attract many tourists. The people who use that station (145, not 135) are likely to be aware of its configuration.
And for that, we have our C/R who open the fullwidth
cab door to let tourists access the rear cars of
a 10-car consist... besides, what a jolly pastime
it is to watch tourists scurry towards the
aforementioned full-width cab each time they fail
to "move towards the front" at Rector...
They MUST have built SF this way for a reason...
and if it ain't broke... why fix it?
They built it this way because IRT cars weren't originally as long as they are now. Why do you think most of the other IRT stations have been lengthened?
(Speaking of which -- can I assume I'll see you at Park Place in eight hours for the tour?)
What tour?
Look here. The meeting place has been moved to Park Place by the oculus.
Five cars do not adequately take care of the passenger crush from a rush hour SI ferry.
There is also a plan to incorporate the station itself into the paid area of the SI Ferry terminal itself.
The ferry is free.
Good catch, David...
Thank you!!!
Spend the money where its needed!
There are whole regions of the City, typically outer boroughs, that do not have adequate rapid-transit at all. Why spend over a billion to move the line a block when an underground walkway can accomplish the same. I'm very partial to moving walkways like the type you see in the airports.
MATT-2AV
Once again, the MTA goes for the "quick and cheap" fix.
Once the line is open, forget about improvements.
But at least something will get done. It's better than spending massive amounts of money to relocate the 1/9 in a project that will take many years to complete.
Not to mention the thousands of 2 & 3 riders inconvenienced by the inability to use this line.
Some of us can actually use the 2 now. And it still isn't enough!
The 2's crawl down Manhattan from the Bronx is intolerable. Full express service must be restored. Whether or not the Broadway local has enough service is a seperate issue.
The 2 running local has got to be pure torture for the Bronx passengers. Just imagine you were a passenger getting on at the beginning in the Bronx, and your destination was Brooklyn! At least before, the run through Manhattan was express!
I rode it yesterday. It took 90 minutes to get from Flatbush Ave. to E180th St, and that's with the train skipping Franklin, Canal, Christopher, 18th & 23rd. St stations due to a delay.
The current timetable (which reflects post-September 11 operations) says it should take 65-1/2 minutes (in the AM rush) from Flatbush Avenue to E. 180th Street. Obviously something major happened on the line to cause that train to be approximately 25 minutes late even after being operated express for part of the way.
David
Even if the 2 ran express, it would never get from Flatbush to E180th in 65 minutes. It took exactly one hour to get from Flatbush to 149th St/3rd Ave. pre 9/11.
My mistake...need new eyes or new glasses or something.
A train leaving Flatbush Avenue at 8:30-1/2 AM is scheduled to leave E. 180th Street at 9:49-1/2 AM, which is 79 minutes. Sorry...
David
That's more realistic, but I was still 11 minutes late.
Agreed, but again, something major must have happened to cause even an 11-minute delay even after running express partway to make up some time.
By the way, did the total 90 minutes include the wait for the train at Flatbush Avenue (and, while I'm at it, was I correct in assuming that it was an AM rush trip?).
David
No. I timed it from our leaving time (11:46 AM). We arrived at E180th at exactly 1:15 PM. We moved very slowly from Atlantic Ave to 135th St.
It gets worse! I just realized that my copy of the timetables doesn't contain a weekday timetable for the #2 (I looked at the Saturday without realizing it), nor does it contain any #1 timetables...I'll have to look into that...
David
The December timetables are on the TA web site now. I have the previous set of timetables on my hard drive; if you need a timetable, just ask.
Currently, the 11:46 2 from Flatbush is scheduled to arrive at E180 at 1:05. However, if Chris had transferred to the 4 at Franklin (12:02) and back to the 2 at 149-GC (12:44), he would have ended up one interval -- eight minutes -- ahead (assuming everything was running on-schedule). That's exactly when he would have arrived on the pre-9/11 2.
Some of us don't have the option of transferring twice to save eight minutes. Some of us would be thrilled if our greatest complaint were an extra eight minutes seated on a train.
Actually, I was railfanning and wasn't interested in reaching 180th St. as quickly as possible. If I had, I'd have never used the west side IRT.
So why do you care that the 2 takes eight minutes longer than it did in August?
I think you better check your math. The running time from 241 to Flat (local) is 93 min. minus 12 min. (time from 241-180) 81 min.
I did. I was incorrect. It's 79 minutes for the interval leaving Flatbush Avenue at 8:30-1/2 AM...I also posted it in another part of the thread.
Time for new eyeballs, brain, whatever... :-)
David
12 minutes from 241st to 180th is a very generous assesment. In my travels, I've always allotted 15 minutes for this, and I've usually been right on time.
Some of us are a bit more aggressive.
It is! Better to take the 4 or 5 from the Bronx or Harlem to Brooklyn if you want to get there faster. I'm sure lots of people do that now, making the 4 and 5 even more crowded.
"The 2 running local has got to be pure torture for the Bronx passengers. Just imagine you were a passenger getting on at the beginning in the Bronx, and your destination was Brooklyn! At least before, the run through Manhattan was express!"
Take the 5 and 4!
N Bwy
Even when the 2 ran express, anyone in a rush took the 4/5.
Now the 2 is a local. Anyone in a rush still takes the 4/5.
I personally like the new service on broadway, I think local is much more important that express service
Not when you're from the Bronx. The whole point of the original 4 track design was to speed Bronx riders into midtown & lower Manhattan. Increasing 1/9 service after normal service is restored is a topic worthy of discussion, but service remaining as it is now is definatley not
Probably turnback facilities at 14th Street are the reason why the 2 and not the 3 is running local. I definitely hate the fact that the 2 is running local, but there's really no easy answer to fixing 7th Avenue service until the 1 line tunnel south of Chambers is repaired and ready for service again. When normal service is restored, I would like to see increased service on the 1. Some weekday runs can terminate at 137th Street like they used to in the 80s.
I don't see why they cannot run 24 TPH on the 1/9 during the rush hours and 15 TPH during the midday hours. That would be adequate.
As far as I am aware, there are no operational impediments (absent World Trade Center stuff) to running 24 trains an hour on the #1/#9. The only impediments are the number of cars available (not so much of a concern now with Redbirds in storage, but they won't be there forever) and the number of crews available (which looms as a bigger problem as NYCT heads into financial troubles that it's not being permitted to solve in 2002 via a fare increase).
David
Why isn't the TA seriously considering keeping some of the better Redbirds in service, at least until another car order can be placed?
Crews could, if necessary, be taken off of other lines. Nobody likes a service cut, but right now some lines see much more service per passenger than others.
If this isn't an option, some procedural improvements could be made. For instance, it's common practice (i.e., this happens multiple times nearly every day) for locals that are behind schedule to bypass 50, 66, 79, and 86, and continue as scheduled from there. According to the very numbers you posted, fewer passengers would be impacted[1] if, instead, late locals made all local stops to 137, and then simply turned around -- not to mention that a good deal more time would be saved. (I'm skeptical that bypassing a series of busy local stations saves any time at all, what with the extended dwell times as passengers try to figure out what's going on or how to recover.) In addition, it might make sense to switch an occasional express to the local track to fill in for gaps in local service; while I've seen this done on other lines, I don't think I've ever seen it done on the 1/2/3.
[1]I'm fudging slightly. For one thing, your numbers don't include 168, but I suspect that most of the passengers boarding the 1 there are going north, so they're already counted once in the 137-242 range. For another, I'm ignoring the passengers waiting to board southbound trains; a train that turns at 137 isn't serving passengers north of that point in either direction, while a train that skips a few stops northbound can still make them southbound when the time comes. However, when northbound delays are most common, there are many more northbound than southbound passengers. Even if the passenger counts don't quite work in favor of my argument, they're close, and the dramatic difference in time savings should push this over the edge.
I would argue that the primary point of a four-track line is that it has twice the capacity of a two-track line. The faster service for some is a bonus.
As for the line in question -- I agree that 2 and 3 service should return to their pre-9/11 status, but, really, the 2 local only takes eight minutes longer than the 2 express, and the 3 is still available part of the way. I know it seems like more, but locals aren't as slow as they seem.
It's easy to sit here and throw rocks at MTA over this. MTA's plan makes eminent sense when you consider:
1) There is no service at all now.
2) There is insurance and FEMA money available to get service back, so no additional MTA money need be spent right now. That's very cost-effective.
3) Immediate improvements to be installed now include elevators, so riders are getting something. If these stations are brought up to ADA standards, all riders will benefit - esp. at South Ferry.
4) Redevelopment of the WTC site will bring additional improvements.
Service stinks on the 7th Av line now, compared to before Sept. 11, because of the service outage. Getting some service up soon is a very smart move, and it shows responsiveness to ridership concerns.
I agree with what you say. However, based on the politics, once a partial solution is in place, we will never see a full solution.
Rerouting the 1/9 to the west is not necessary. Rebuilding South Ferry as a 10 car platform terminal is necessary.
I don't agree with your pessimism. If I'm reading this correctly, South Ferry will be part of the first-phase rebuild, and so will an ADA upgrade to the other remaining station. That's pretty good. When additional rebuilding money comes for WTC redevelopment, the South Ferry line may see a third station added.
Now let's see if we can get PATH back ahead of schedule.
If I'm reading this correctly, South Ferry will be part of the first-phase rebuild, and so will an ADA upgrade to the other remaining station.
Ummmm ... disagree ... my take on the Times and Daily News pieces is that the line goes back into service, minus Cortlandt which is entirely removed, plus elevators at S Ferry and Greenwich.
I *hope* you're right, however!
"Ummmm ... disagree ... my take on the Times and Daily News pieces is that the line goes back into service, minus Cortlandt
which is entirely removed, plus elevators at S Ferry and Greenwich."
There's nothing for you to disagree about. Installing elevators substantially complies with ADA. The rest of ADA involves stairs, tactile strips and lighting - well, since they're going to have to do some of that anyway, they're making the stations substantially compliant.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I read your message to mean that conversion of S Ferry from its current 5-car loop to a 10-car terminus was part of the first phase. THAT's the part I was disagreeing with. You're right on about elevators being the bulk of ADA compliance.
I am hoping the new platforms will be part of it, too. I guess it depends on the rate of cash burn.
Is there any reason, at least off peak, that the 1 train can't open all 10 cars, first the front, then the back? I know a new stop marker would have to be purchased and installed 275 feet up the tunnel, but how much would that cost?
I still don't see why it's absolutely impossible for the platform to be extended. (Before anyone suggests otherwise, the 10-car marker for the switch comes before the platform begins. That means there's room for at least a platform and a half.)
Well, at this point, it's been said that it is illegal to use any federal disaster relief funds to build anything other than an exact replica of what was destroyed. Makes no sense to me, but there it is. I was just thinking that while we wait for them to find the money to lengthen the platform, they might be able to swing the cost of a new 10-car marker.
As best as I understand it, 'exact replica' is a poor choice of words. Replacement structures are done according to modern engineering standards, using modern materials, meeting modern health and safety codes. And relocation/realignment is permitted. You don't rebuild a 50 year old disastered-out bridge according to 1952 standards; nor are you required to put the replacement on the same exact alignment. The same applies to 100 year old IRT tunnels and stations. But there is Federal oversight of what the money does eventually get spent on.
A Daily News article, available here:
http://www.nydailynews.com/2002-01-04/News_and_Views/City_Beat/a-137166.asp
...seems to indicate that some sort of replacement station for Cortlandt Street will depend upon what is built on the WTC site. It also cites MTA "sources" who say that a rebuild/reconfiguration of South Ferry to accommodate full-length trains is being planned...
=Rednoise
(NewQirQ)
http://www.nydailynews.com/2002-01-04/News_and_Views/City_Beat/a-137166.asp
I hope the final plan for a new Cortlandt St. station includes a third track, a la Whitehall St. Since it seems they really are going to redo South Ferry as a straight-on 10-car station (with direct access to the Joralemon tube), the ability to turn back trains earlier ensures the maximum tph.
I doubt it because that would mean that they have to widen the existing tunnel at Cortlandt St. I think they will take the path of less resistance and keep it at 2 tracks.
It will be interesting to see the extension of the SF station. Can they do it w/o too much excavation at street level.
I think they will take the path of less resistance and keep it at 2 tracks.
Agreed ... and my bet is they do it as simply as possible at minimum cost (for the former Cortlandt station area) since that line *could* be reconfigured later as part of a wider-ranging transit complex.
It will be interesting to see the extension of the SF station. Can they do it w/o too much excavation at street level.
The Daily News doesn't say they're doing S Ferry as part of the rebuild. It says they'd "like to" ... which means, as the Times points out, that it'll go into the queue of projects they'd like to do. And probably not much higher up the queue either.
"The Daily News doesn't say they're doing S Ferry as part of the rebuild. It says they'd "like to" ... which means, as the Times
points out, that it'll go into the queue of projects they'd like to do. And probably not much higher up the queue either."
There's more than enough money in the stated budget ($850 million) - which is insurance and FEMA money, not MTA money - to get a South Ferry station reconstruction done. It may or may not be fully done by the time service opens (passengers might alight onto a South Ferry platform with lots of boarded-up areas).
There's more than enough money in the stated budget ($850 million) - which is insurance and FEMA money, not MTA money - to get a South Ferry station reconstruction done. It may or may not be fully done by the time service opens (passengers might alight onto a South Ferry platform with lots of boarded-up areas).
Dunno ... there's hardly any space to spare on the platform.
If they're going to do this, now would be a good time, while the area is torn up for the Whitehall Ferry Terminal reconstruction.
Article by Randy Kennedy in the Times
Point your browsers at (NY Times article):
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/04/nyregion/04SUBW.html
Well, that's a relief to hear!! tony
Just heard on 1010 WINS that TA plans to rebuild the tunnel and have the 1/9 line open by next fall.
I just heard from CNN that it will resume service by Dec. 2002.
Delayed already????
Delayed? It's better than the 3-4 years of the original estimate.
Well, between 1010WINS and CNN I don't know which to choose from since both are very reliable news sources. I think depending on the time that the news was given might be an affect.
But hey, at first we thought they weren't going to finish until a few years from now, and Dec. 2002, is still a reasonable time to open.
I don't know about the "Cortlandt St. WORLD TRADE CENTER" signs, if the T/A is going to use them or throw them out or hold them to use later on for the new WTC.
Any ideas on this?
I doubt they would reuse the old signs in a brand new station. They wouldn't throw them out either, they are probably worth money now. I don't understand why they don't sell any of the old signs. I'm sure people would buy them. And as for WTC, even nonrailfans would buy them.
I suspect some vultures have been there before us.
I hope they save some of those crumpled I-beams, and use them as a design element in the new station: lest we forget.
Please accept my apologies if this has been proposed already and I've missed it.
* Construct 2 crossovers just west of Hoyt-Schermerhorn to allow the G to come from Queens and cross over onto the A/C track. Then the G runs the current C route to 168th in Manhattan.
* Call half of all E trains "C" instead. The new C comes in from Parsons/Archer and doesn't terminate at Canal or Chambers. Instead, it continues through to Euclid Ave just like the current C does.
* Extend the V from 2nd Ave to Church Ave Brooklyn as a local. Run the F as an express on the Culver line.
Benefits:
* 15 or so more tph from Jay St/Boro Hall into Manhattan.
* Culver Line gets its express, plus a local that goes where people want it to, namely Manhattan.
* Direct G service into Manhattan.
* More trains at Essex and at Fulton St for J/M/Z riders who need to head to midtown.
Costs (a bit of construction, more rolling stock, a few more crews) are low relative to the benefits. I don't know how to reallocate rolling stock or crews, but here's essentially what added amounts are needed.
* G trains now have to be 450' or 480' long (not 300') for the whole distance from Queens to Chambers, a slightly longer route than to Smith/9th. The rest of the rolling stock can be recovered from the former C route in Manhattan. Also, no more OPTO.
* C trains have to be full length (I forget whether they're running 8 cars at the moment) from Chambers to Euclid.
* V trains need crews and rolling stock for the extension to Brooklyn.
* Need to construct crossovers west of Hoyt-Schermerhorn.
* Need to fix the Bergen St tower and make the lower level of Bergen St usable if not pretty.
Inconveniences:
* The Rutgers (and especially Fulton) tunnels operate at nearer to 100% capacity, meaning more careful control is required and higher risk of everything falling to pieces.
* People at the local stations on the Culver line have slightly fewer trains.
* People traveling between stations on the Culver Line and stations on the current G and Fulton lines have a more difficult trip. A larger percentage of this group (which is far less than the Manhattan-bound traffic) will have to cross over to change trains at Jay/Boro Hall.
You are cutting service on the Fulton St. B'lyn line.
How is that? There are 7 C trains per hour from Euclid in the morning rush. That can still be maintained. The A train service would be unchanged.
I was one of many passengers held up in Atlanta by the recent snowstorm. I took advantage of the delay to go joyriding on MARTA, and got in a few rare shots of MARTA in the snow. Also, I'm happy to say I've now ridden the entire system. The snowy scenery was great, if terribly incovenient to millions of people.
Also, I noticed a spur under construction on the north orange line between Arts Center and Lindbergh stations. What is this for? Is it some sort of service siding? I wasn't aware of any new lines being built. If anyone knows what this is, please fill me in.
Mark
The spur your talking about was for a proposed Northwest line to run north along the I-75 corridor linking up cobb county with MARTA. It was built with the original system but alas, Cobb County didn't want MARTA and the extension was never realized. I would bet though in about ten years that spur will be in use as Cobb County is planning two circulator systems around the northern communities of Cumberland and Town Center. They are planning to connect these two segments and tie them into a downtown link. This unused spur would make the most sense but Georgia politics can be notorious for succumbing to the powers that be when it comes to public transportation.
Georgia politics can be notorious for succumbing to the powers that be when it comes to public transportation.
Had heard, and I dunno if it's true, that Atlanta transit planners succumbed to a wish by white suburbs to stay utterly free of rail transit connecting to nonwhite areas despite some utterly bizarre routings that resulted. That would likely be 20+ years ago now.
Any Atlantans care to comment?
I've heard the same thing from an associate who used to work closely with SOU. They were doing some work extending MARTA northwards to some mall or something, and apparently the mall owners opposed because it will bring the "scum downtown" up to their posh shopping strip. I don't know whatever happened with that project but he wasn't working with the MARTA peolpe when the line was fnially built.
This spur looked pretty new, actually. It didn't look like it could be 20 years old.
Mark
there are a couple of issues here.
in order to have marta, a 1% sales tax had to be voted in. it was not approved in some of the northern counties such as cobb and gwinnett. was it not voted in for racial reasons or because the counties did not want the city of atlanta controlling things? i don't know, but given that both counties run their own services to atlanta [bus] suggests that, if it was racial back in the mid seventies, that may not be the case now.
some of the wierd routings are pure and simple politics. for example, there is no station at turner field. instead, the north-south line actually veers away from the stadium to serve a low income housing project and then it veers back to the original route [thus leaving the stadium with no close train service]. it was a political give up to get support for the sales tax referendum.
the east-west line has a spur just west of town that goes for one stop to serve another low income housing area. another political compromise. this shuttle got very little ridership in its early years, so what did marta do to save face? they terminated a number of bus lines there that formerly terminated in downtown. now, folks that want to travel downtown and who live on those bus lines, have to make a change to the train. if they get a shuttle [may not still exist], then they take it one stop and connect to another train. probably double their trip time.
atlanta is not as evolved politically as some other large cities, so it is going through the corruption and mismanagement that other cities have already evolved through. not that the later stages of evolution are any better - they are just not as obvious. having said that, it is still a pretty good place to live regardless of race or income compared to some other big cities.
I never will forget when i lived there ....
( thank god i moved away )
The city of East Point fought against a marta station ...........then ....
Rang it in with a BIG CLEBRATION..big time when it opened back in about 1986 or so when i lived in that humid ass piss bucket!! ( atlanta ) ....lol!!
please tell us how you really feel.
he he he he .................lol !!
in order to have marta, a 1% sales tax had to be voted in. it was not approved in some of the northern counties such as cobb and gwinnett. was it not voted in for racial reasons or because the counties did not want the city of atlanta controlling things? i don't know, but given that both counties run their own services to atlanta [bus] suggests that, if it was racial back in the mid seventies, that may not be the case now.
Until just a few years ago, Cobb County was the most populous county in the United States that had no public transportation whatsoever. That bus service is VERY new.
And yes, race is a big factor.
-- Tim
Actually Cobb has had bus service for over 10 years, you are thinking of Gwinnett, which started 6 express rush hour routes to downtown in October. Local service starts this year. From what I observed from the street, it's quite popular.
I don't think I'm thinking of Gwinnett, but I'll take your word for it.
I may be confusing Cobb and Gwinnett because of all the homophobic crap Cobb tried to pull during the 1990s.
However, I heard a few years ago, i.e. not this year, that one of the suburban counties north of Atlanta had just started its first bus service.
Or am I dreaming? That possibility should NEVER be discounted. ;-)
-- Tim
No bus service was started during the 90s, in 2001, three were started.
I think back in 96, Cobb said they didn't want gay people, which grew out of some gay play being performed. I think they later retracted it (at least I hope so).
that was one county commissioner shooting off his mouth. iirc, the others and the county quickly disassociated themselves from him.
kennesaw is also located in cobb county. that's the city that requires every house to have a working firearm [although it is not enforced].
i see a bunch of people waiting for the gwinett bus each day... I do not understand why there is so much room in the front with no seats... to me it looks like max 30 people could sit... not sure I would want to stand on a bus for 90 mins...
gwinnett & cobb county did not want marta rail....or buses either !!!
THE-BIGOTS !!
The spur underground nearest arts center is/was for the northside drive line. The spur nearer Lindburgh is probably for the Lindburgh yard.
I wish I knew you were in town, we could have railfanned. I had the day off Thursday and I rode out to Avondale for the hell of it. I REALLY wish I had my camera that day, because I was at King Memorial and looking Eastbound, the elevated tracks just disapeared into the snow and the Bankhead train was relaying over there, it looked very cool.
That spur you saw are the future yard leads to new new rail yard that is being built where all that dirt is. I plan on taking pictures of the construction in about a month.
Let me know if you are going to be in town anytime if you want to railfan.
Thanks, Rob. A new yard was my first guess, even though I was hoping for a new line to ride. I'll keep you posted on my Atlanta railfanning plans.
Mark
I was hoping for a new line to ride
Oh how I wish we had something new to ride. There is only so much you can do on 49 miles route miles. It can get boring. I usually just spend my time watching the crowds if I railfan. Probably in about 15 years, you'll see a seprate light rail system and commuter rail to ride.
Where is that light rail line supposed to run?
Mark
Northwest to Cobb county from Arts Center. I believe about 25 miles total length. People actually want this line to be built, so it has been fast tracked. The first leg should open in 2010. 70,000 people a day are projected for it. MARTA was originally going to do this, and the bellmouths are in place for it north of Arts Center, but it never happened.
Will it share the Arts Center station with the heavy lines?
Mark
I'm not sure of its exact alginment, but it will not share platforms or tracks with MARTA. It will be a seprate system. My guess is that it will run above ground perpindicular to the N/S line. Don't know who will operate it yet.
I figured it wouldn't share tracks. I was just wondering if transfering would be a simple matter, like transferring between lines at Five Points.
Mark
Transferring between lines at five points is simple unless you are trying to get from center platform to center platform. That can be tricky unless you know exactly where you are.
There isn't a center platform to center platform way. It's always from center to side. But the center platforms are a little confusing.
Does anyone know if there is a 3D track map of how the X line (N/S to E/W link) is set up within the five points building. Always wondered how they squeeze between the 2 levels in such a short distance.
I wish I knew where one was. I don't have a clue how it is done.
Where is this el?
I got this from a 1991 episode of Seinfeld (the one where George thinks he has a heart attack), it seems like really old stock footage (check out the cars) and the el might not exist anymore.
I could be wrong, but I think that looks like Upper Manhattan. Perhaps it's under the (1) somewhere?
:-) Andrew
The 1 line has a middle track. It looks like a really old el. Perhaps the Third Avenue El in the Bronx? Perhaps it isn't even in NY?
That's a '77-'79 Thunderbird in the first picture. I don't think anything has been demolished since then except the Jamaica El, which it isn't.
What about the Fulton Street section of the Broadway-Jamaica El, does it look like that?
Could it be in another city? I don't know about Chicago, but it couldn't be Philadelphia because there the El has a roadbed. Could it be the Washington St. El in Boston that was closed in 1987?
That's a '77-'79 Thunderbird in the first picture. I don't think anything has been demolished since then except the Jamaica El, which it isn't.
The blue car just to the left of the ambulance in the second picture seems to be early to middle 1970's vintage. It looks like a Buick or Pontiac. Whatever the model, the presence of two older vehicles probably means that the footage was filmed some years before the episode's 1991 air date. That would be consistent with the Boston el, demolished in 1987, that our porcine pal suggested elsewhere on the thread.
The ambulance itself looks to be built on a Ford F-series pickup body, of a style that's been around since the early 1980's.
One more thing - the row of apartment buildings in the first picture, running perpendicular to the street on which the el runs, somehow don't look very New York-ish to me.
The evidence pointing it back to New York is the ambulance looks like a NYC ambulance, before the fire dept took over EMS, when they were still orange. But then again, if it was NY someone on the board would've recognized the el.
Since its now settled as Boston. I guess I was wrong about the ambulance. But the cast better watch out. The last time they were in Massachussets they got locked up for not helping a robbery victim.
If I recall correctly, the city ambulance service in NY was originally the NYPD Emergency Medical Service Division. Then, in 1972 or so (somebody please correct the date) it became NYC EMS.
IIRC the NYPD Emergency Medical Division was for disasters and major emergencies rather than for transporting of ill citizens to hospitals. I seem to remember that each hospital had its own fleet of ambulances.
I could be wrong but perhaps the city took over the function in order to centralize the dispatching and to indirectly subsidize all the hospitals by purchasing & maintaining the ambulances.
I recall seeing photos of NYC ambulances with the NYPD logo and the words Emergency Medical Services Division on their sides.
Last I checked, an NYC ambulance could be driven to Boston.
It does look like upper manhattan, but the missing middle track means it can't be the 1.
My first thought was the IRT New Lots line in Brooklyn.
Could this be the Jamaica El? The show's producers wouldn't necessarily care that the neighborhood seen on camera isn't exactly what the dialogue says it is.
Definitely the Washington St el in Boston. The shot is of the square where the building they used as the hospital for St Elsewhere, another NBC show, was. I believe it was actually a former hotel.
I think we have a winner! Check out these photos of the Orange Line at Thompson Square.
Absolutley no way it's any section of the Jamaica El.
"Absolutley no way it's any section of the Jamaica El"
Not disputing you as I have no clue, but what is it that makes that so obvious? This discussion has gotten me a bit interested in the variety of el structures.
CG
1. No steelwork of this type is found anywhere on the J line. It's a lot more "box-like"
2. The Jamaica line does not run over any street this wide.
I wonder if its the elevated portion of the LIRR on Atlantic Avenue?
I don't think the LIRR El is, or was, open in the middle like that. Besides, the El in the picture looks too flimsy for a line that once handled steam engines and freight.
The structure looks like the part of the Culver Line that you can see from the Belt Parkway.
It isn't the Culver line. It isn't any NYC subway elevated.
I suspect it's not in New York. Note that in the first picture there's what appears to be some sort of park on the right side with globe-style light fixtures on poles. Those don't seem to be NYC Parks issue.
Those definitely aren't standard NYC park luminaires, but it could be a private courtyard. Unfortunately, I don't know my girder styles, but I was thinking Culver between Ave X and West 8 St. Then again, it appears the ambulance has a blue license plate in the rear...
It can't be the Culver El because the surrounding buildings look nothing like what one would find along Shell Road. In addition, the Culver El's cross-supporting beams aren't arched the way they are in the picture.
Now, did Massachussets or Illinois have blue license plates in the 1970s and 1980s?
Now, did Massachussets or Illinois have blue license plates in the 1970s and 1980s?
Massachusetts did/does not. I'm not as sure about Illinois, but I believe the answer's also no. Two things to keep in mind, however:
1) Ambulances may have special plates with different color schemes.
2) I'm not entirely sure that the plate in the second picture actually is blue; it might be a shadow.
Why does that remind me of the elevated LIRR structure along Atlantic Ave? It doesn't appear to look like Chicago-style els, and only Boston has similar elevated stretches.
It does have some similarities to the LIRR el on Atlantic, but it's not the same.
Then it's not in NYC, because I'm totally lost as to what else it could be.
Then it's not in NYC, because I'm totally lost as to what else it could be.
As noted elsewhere in the thread, it's the now-demolished Washington Street el in Boston.
It looks to me that it is either the IRT New Lots line somewhere on Livonia Ave. Or the LIRR elevated tracks on Atlantic Ave.
Considering Seinfeld and friends live on the Upper East Side, I don't think EMS would take them through such a different neighborhood. Wherever this picture was taken.
It looks to me that it is either the IRT New Lots line somewhere on Livonia Ave. Or the LIRR elevated tracks on Atlantic Ave.
Considering Seinfeld and friends live on the Upper East Side, I don't think EMS would take them through such a different neighborhood. Wherever this picture was taken.
I would highly doubt that the show's producers were concerned with any sort of geographical accuracy. They probably used whatever stock footage of an ambulance was most readily available. The fact that an el was visible was probably just happenstance.
Seinfeld lived on the upper west side....W 81st, to be exact
129 West 81st Street apartment 5A to be even more exact.
Wow, you know your sitcoms. I only can remember that Lucy lived on East 68th Street (623?) I know if it was a real address it would be in the East River. Of course Archie lived at 704 Hauser Street, but that's totally fictional.
I know my Seinfeld. But I do remember things when I see them. I j
I know my Seinfeld. But I do remember things when I see them. I only remember that and from a different show: 742 Evergreen Terrace.
What about 1164 Morning Glory Circle.....Bewitched. They lived in a suburb of New York, because Darrin took the train to work. I don't know what area or line though.
I don't think they ever said anything about where the Stephens' lived or worked.
Did not Darrin work on Madison Avenue? He definitely worked in advertising.
The cars in the show had New York plates.
For sure he was in advertising. But from what I remember there weren't that many references to a specific location. Maybe I heard wrong.
Yes he did work on Madison in new York. He took the train many times to work. I don't know which train line it would have been though.
At the time it probably would have been New York Central. Today probably Metro North.
I think it was once stated that they lived in Westport, Connecticut. Darrin definitely worked in NYC.
Darrin was a weenie. Samantha should have turned him into a toad by the second episode.
:-) Andrew
I think Lucy also moved to Westport, CT, because there was a episode that took place at the "Westport" train station (obviosly in Hollywood on a stage).
I think Lucy also moved to Westport, CT, because there was a episode that took place at the "Westport" train station (obviosly in Hollywood on a stage).
Dunno ... the "Connecticut" location seemed rather rural as opposed to suburban. But then again, parts of Westport probably were quite rural in the 1950's.
What exactly did the train station scene involve? It would be rather unlikely for a nightclub owner like Ricky to have commuted by train into Manhattan, given the strange hours a job of that sort would have entailed.
It is when they first moved to Westport. Both the Metzes and the Richardos were bored, so the decided to go see each other, so Lucy and Ricky got to the Westport station just as the Mertzes arrived, and they missed each other - basically passed in the station. So of course Fred was mad that he paid for train tickets for nothing, and the rest is classic Lucy. I don't remember the episode exactly, but it was something like that. It's a while since I'd seen it.
And here's another one I remember:
Bundy
9764 Jeopardy Drive
Bundy as in Married...With Children?
Based on the opening scenes on the show, they lived in the Chicago area.
Rob Petrie lived on Bonnie Meadow Road or Drive in New Rochelle, IIRC.
I wonder if Flanders lives at 740 or 744 Evergreen Terrace???
If this is New York footage, then the only possible location would be Livonia Ave. on the New Lots line.
http://terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com/image.asp?S=10&T=1&X=2959&Y=22508&Z=18&W=2
This is the only current or past el that runs past a park. The New Lots line portal off E Pkwy is considerably less likely. I confess that I've NEVER been in these neighborhoods.
But when you look at the Terraserver picture, it does not look right.
It would be nice if we had a clearer picture of the ambulance, at least so we could read the writing. The license plates would also be informative.
> It would be nice if we had a clearer picture of the ambulance, at
> least so we could read the writing. The license plates would also
> be informative.
What difference would this make? These are stills from a TV show. I could put California plates on a New York ambulance and drive it under an el structure. Doesn't mean it was filmed in California!
Newlots El was built to Dual Contract Standards, BOX girder. This is NOT Newlots!
avid
It's unlike any el I've ever seen in NYC, and I cannot think of any el line like it in NYC, given the obvious dating of the picture to a time no earlier to the late 1970's. If it's an NYC structure, my only guess is the LIRR over Atlantic Ave.
Atlantic Avenue is much wider, And its columns are over malls that separate a two-lane inner roadway (used for turning) from the main roads which are on the sides. In addition, there is no space between tracks on the Atlantic Avenue El. We've already settled it on Boston.
I would guess that this is an el section in Boston. Unsure which one and/or location. Not a NYC el. Pre dual contracts els did not have these types of stringers and girders. Post dual contracts rebuilds and new els would have had upgraded features.
Market Frankford El with the concrete roadbed? (Note lack of sunlight from between the ties.
Phil Hom
I can tell you right now that that is NOT the MFL.
Thanks Mike. I never been under the el.
It's the Main Line Elevated in Boston near the Northampton St Station.
This would have been the old Orange Line, right? The one passing nearby the building that represented St. Eligius Hospital on the TV series "St. Elsewhere" in the mid '80s.
It kinda looks like the jerome av el in the bronx, up near Kingsbridge. Or am i totally off?
But this el has no third track, the Jerome El does.
What I can tell you is that the el is NOT in NYC whatsoever. Stephen Bauman's Boston explanation seems to be the most feasible.
I'd have to see those pics again. I still think it's either the IRT somewhere on Livonia or the LIRR elevated on Atlantic.
It`s Definitely not LIRR on Atlantic Ave. The outer roadways have three lanes of traffic, and the columns haven`t had stripes in years.
I thought we already discussed that many times. Why don't people at least look at some responses before making their own?
Looked like trick photography. They can do that kind of stuff in the control room.
How's this for a match?
View of elevated Mainline structure - looking South - along Washington Street and across Blackstone Park.
From the Library of Congress Website
Mystery solved.
That structure sure looks fragile. I'd like to see the rolling stock which used it.
>>> That structure sure looks fragile <<<
Not really fragile but well engineered. The load bearing pillars are directly below the road beds, the girders under the roadbeds spread the load and provide longitudinal stability, while the cross members provide lateral stability. Strength with economy of materials.
Tom
The last generation of rolling stock to use that el is still in service on the MBTA Orange Line.
Check out www.nycsubway.org > American Transit Systems > Boston, Massachusetts > The Orange Line
-- David
Chicago, IL
A pannel appainted by the govornor is moving forward with plans for a new commuter rail line between Athens and Atlanta.
"It's going to happen. It's just a matter of when," said E.H. Culpepper, vice chairman of the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority, a group that works with the Program Management Team on transit issues. "One of the real challenges we have is that, we've been talking about it since '86. ... There is a certain amount of skepticism in people's minds about whether it's gonna happen."
Local residents have been demanding rail alternatives since the mid 1980's and the pannel is currently negioating w/ CSX to lease part of the Abbeville Subdivision, along Georgia Highway 8, which runs roughly parallel to Georgia Route 316.
In connection with an Athens-to-Atlanta line, Georgia Rail Consultants suggest a fee of $10.10 for a one-way trip from Athens to a midtown Atlanta station. The consultants said an Athens-Atlanta commuter rail system would cost $378 million to build and have an annual operating cost of around $16.8 million. From an economic standpoint, Culpepper feels a rail system would help spawn biotechnology business growth along Georgia Highway 316 due to the corridor's location between Athens and Atlanta and proximity to major research institutions like the University of Georgia, Emory University and Georgia Tech.
Why Athens, such a small town. Why not Macon or Columbus, much more metropolitan areas than Athens.
Because NEW YORK, which is in need of a bit of work, can BLOW Georgia as far as funds go ... nice stuff, eh? don't mind me, I'm really honked off about having to pay for rebuilding the former smoking crater of the IRT rather than SHRUB coughing up some cash for US taking a punch in the face for texas ... in order to do it properly. Hell, we don't even get Cortlandt street back, the bastards. meanwhile, let's throw some mad money to ENRON execs. Yeah, that's a recovery ...
My apologies to all who don't understand WHY I'm cranked. Paturkey is going to do "budget school" and presentation of the state budget in a few more days. I have friends in DOB (Division of the Budget) and media and the rest will see the screwjob we're about to get thanks to the morons in DC in a few more days. Bend over, here comes Dick Armey doing something that would have made Jim and Tammy blush ... New York gets to absorb the ENTIRE cost. Meanwhile, the Pentagon's almost finished with ITS repairs ...
Sure hope the terrorists pick another spot next time, they've WON here ...
I think your very right, the right wing nut jobs down south like nothing better than to screw NY. I fully believe you that we will see very little of the money "promised" by Bush. They were backtracking on that promise as soon as it was made. I guess they need to bail out some more bloated corporations. And don't forget the airline bail out (but AMTRACK is "inefficient")
Go figure
Hate to sound like a "liberal" to some misguideds, but I'm DAMN conservative with my cash. Get so little, you GOTTA conserve it! Hell, I live UPSTATE ... I don't mind paying for NYC as long as everybody else does - it's not like it's a damned "welfare check" ... had we had a government, NYC would still have it's 11's on the shore ... but instead the foggy bottom boys handed out a tax cut and cut INS, and all other agencies that could have stopped this since 1993 ... time to reclaim the taxcut.
The PENTAGON'S NEARLY REBUILT. I still don't see no WTC1 or 2 yet. Does anyone else? Hell, can't even catch a subway train but yet Texas is getting all sorts of shiny new fed toys as are 40 other states. Meanwhile we've gotten WHAT? Anybody?
TIHS KCAJ, from what I've heard. That's TERRIBLE that NYC is not getting the money they deserve. How can America's busiest city survive without the proper funding?
-F.
We need to identify certain corporations who (1) gives money to Texas Republicans and (2) does serious business in the NYC area. BOYCOTT!
A nice greasey one in the rear, is about all we've gotten.
The headlines should read "BUSH TO NYC: DROP DEAD".
what did he promise? 40 billion? how many does bloomberg say we're in the hole? a few billion at least?
that raises a whoe other isssue though: people actually be surprised that bloomberg has made light of the fact so quickly that the city is short on cash. it's no surprise to me that ghooliani pushed this under the rug.
I think you have it backwards. NYC pays for upstate NY. By far the most tax revenue in the state of NY is generated in NYC. On the national side NYC gets far less back then it pays in to the natioal government. That is whay I find it so pecular that the federal government is so cheap when funding projects in NYC.
When the federal govenment gives out transportation money it tries to divide the $$$ evenly between competing projects. That is grosly unfair becasue atlatlant pays far few $$ into the gederal gov than NYC
The 16th Amendment is the cause of this. Basically, the federal government gets to steal money made in the states, forcing them to beg for money made locally. I don't have a problem with income taxes, I have a problem with federal agencies collecting them.
New York State pays the lowest per capita in federal tax because state income tax is deductible and you know how high that is in New York, especially combined with the city income tax.
States with low local taxes pay the highest per capita fed tax.
Well, we got a new fire truck - oh wait, that was donated by a governor from another state!
NYC deserves all the money - and more - that it was promised. After all, NYC wasn't attacked because it was NYC, it was attacked for being America!
If this was Texas, we would have plenty of money. Of course, if this was Texas I wouldn't be living here. (No offense to any Texans on the board.) The Texas motto: "Don't mess with Texas!" Congress' motto for NYC: "Yeah, you can mess with New York a bit, it can survive on its own."
Since this is SubTalk, anyone know what the scheduled finish dates are for Airtrain? I know Howard Beach is supposed to be finished this year, and Jamaica the next, does anyone know if it is still on schedule after the attacks? I have check the PA website, and it is vague as to the exact finish dates.
JR
AirTrain lost one day of construction, total.
The Howard Beach leg should be ready by late '02- November or so. The Jamaica leg should be ready by Spring of '03, even if Jamaica Station's total rehab isn't done by then.
Thanks Ron.
That's great! I'm really looking forward to the Jamaica connection. I'm glad to hear that it we only be a matter of months between the two legs being completed.
I only hope that we hear, "Next stop, LaGuardia Airport" soon. It all seems so easy...
I live in Austin, Texas. One thing I can tell you is that Texas sends mostly conservative low tax, low spending Republicans to congress. If you would like to hear an example of that yourself, you can listen to the weekly message from Representative Ron Paul (R, Houston) at
888-322-1414. Ron Paul ran for President in 1988 in the Libertarian Party (of which I belong).
(One thing I can tell you is that Texas sends mostly conservative low tax, low spending Republicans to congress.)
"Low Spending" of a type. Check out the Northeast-Midwest institute to see which states get more out of the federal government than they put in -- they often have a colored map. Then look at the states that went for Bush in 2000. They are just about the SAME MAP! States that elect Republicans get most of the money. It's the same at the NY state level -- areas that vote Democratic pay more in, while those that vote Republican get more out.
What does this mean?
It shows the Republican dillemma. They gained power when "big goverment" was a code word for spending money on Blacks, Latinos, Immigrants, the Poor, and people living in cities. So in the early 1990s, they drastically cut spending on such people. But when some "true believers" kept talking about small government, the elderly, rural people, and the suburbs -- who get most of the money -- got nervous. Bye, bye Newt.
The Democrats have no such dillemma. They are the party of people who rely on government funding, so they are not about to call for less spending on Republicans. And they are not to worried about selling out those who vote for them no matter what, so they do in order to gain votes in places like Chappaqua.
Bring back Newt. Or McGovern. Anything but this.
Four words: The University of Georgia.
-- Tim
Because Sparta is boring and bland.
There's A LOT of traffic along the highway between Athens and Atlanta.
...a one-way trip from Athens to a midtown Atlanta station...
Is the Amtrak station in Atlanta a historical railroad station (one used by major RR's pre-Amtrak, or a Union Station)? If not, what happened to Atlanta's historical station(s) (Southern RR? Seaboard Line? I don't know...)?
I've used Atlanta's Amtrack station a couple of times. Why is it so far from the center of town?
Atlanta's Amtrak station was a purpose-built structure like the Cleveland Waterfront station.
The original Atlanta station was right downtown by Spring St. A platform is still there (or was in SOU days) for boarding of SOU's business specials. The actual Union Station itself was built over with some business development. With that move, Atlanta said good-bye to any comuter or nitercity rail. I have no sympathy for Atlanta on that one.
The actual Union Station itself was built over with some business development.
Typical for Atlanta. I once heard the horrifying statistic that there are only FOUR pre-1900 buildings within the Atlanta city limits. Even given that much of the city was torched in the Civil War ("War of Northern Aggression" to some, as THIS Yankee was astounded to find out!), that's a pathetically low number.
In my own personal hell, Atlanta native John Portman (architect of many hideous anti-urban megastructures including Times Square's own Marriott Marquis) will Suffer Bad Things for a Long Time!
Remember that railroad "gulch" you saw downtown? That's where the station will go. If ever.
Yea I worked under the amtrak station ( freeway construction ) jasper-construction-company, 1983-1987.... saw the base post for the marta sandy springs branch off when it was first built.
But my question was always why there was no DIRECT connection to the north avenue marta rail station you have to catch the 22 bus to transfer to the amtrak station there !!
( made no sense to me )
In case anyone noticed, Amtrak's Silver Palm hit the trailer part of a tractor trailer that had been left on the tracks in Bushnell, Florida. The truck was loaded with $60,000 worth of bread loaves and aside from an explosion of bread all over the scene nobody was really hurt and there was minimal damage. Apparently the driver just walking away from his rig on the tracks w/o telling anyone.
Maybe a few months on bread and water in a cell would be appropriate for this asshole.
Sounds like he was attempting to kill US employee and using his truck as a weapon to disrupt Interstate Commerce.
He probably figured, "I have at yeast a few minutes. I'll just loaf around and wheat here for a bit."
D'you have the unit numbers? I'm interested to see whether these Genesises that are damaged like this (they must go through at least ten a year) ever make their way back to service.
As Mike noted, there was minimal damage.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Is it true that the driver was related to the late subway surfer from the Bronx?
The 8:45 Am Downeaster train has been so sucessful that Amtrak is adding another car. The train, which can seat about 220 people has been pulling into South Station each day w/ over 60 people standing.
More than 4,300 people took the train during the first five days of operations, which began December 15. That works out to an average of 860 passengers a day. Amtrak estimates that 320,000 people will ride the Downeaster each year, or an average of 877 a day, but ridership is expected to be higher in the summer than the winter.
Some of this may be due to the novelty of the train and the holiday travel period, but then again they could see additional ridership spikes over the summer vacation period and during any winter snowfalls.
Did Amtrak suddenly discover a hidden tunnel through Boston? Maybe the Downeaster continued on the Orange Line, transferring to the Red Line at Downtown Crossing using a previously unknown interlocking to arrive at South Station. Passengers must have been delighted to be able to connect to other Amtrak service without having to get off the train! :O)
I'm joking with you, Mike.
Did Amtrak suddenly discover a hidden tunnel through Boston?
[grin] Good catch, Pete! I missed that one entirely.
I will avoid my usual rant on how stupid it was NOT to include the concrete walls for a North-South Connector in the Big Dig. Just imagine it for yourselves ....
There is a good reason why the N-S rail link isn't included in the big dog. The big dog is overbudget as it is, and it was hard enuff gettnig the $ to build it from the Feds. The silver line was included as part of the big dog Fed package, thanks to the public transit lobby. The N/S rail link would be useful, but is probably another project altogether.
There is a good reason why the N-S rail link isn't included in the big dog. The big dog is overbudget as it is, and it was hard enuff gettnig the $ to build it from the Feds. The silver line was included as part of the big dog Fed package, thanks to the public transit lobby. The N/S rail link would be useful, but is probably another project altogether.
Politically, you're correct. BUT ... any N-S Connector that is built will cost hugely more than if they'd sunk the walls into the ground beneath the lowest level of freeway, which was the plan for awhile. Scraping out the dirt and adding a concrete floor plus utilities would be far, far easier than tunneling from scratch, and god knows the alignments pretty much work.
As it is, it'll take a couple of generations before the trauma of Big Dig fades for Bostonians. I don't expect to see it in my lifetime (and I'm only 42) ....
The Philly commuter tunnel cost only 300 million dollars. Boston needs to get its act together.
The Philly commuter tunnel cost only 300 million dollars. Boston needs to get its act together.
Don't know details of the Philly project. But the Big Dig is a big, big, big project. It includes:
- a third tunnel (the Ted Williams) under the river to Logan
- sinking between 8 and 11 lanes of freeway below ground
- onramps and offramps in both directions for the above
- a brand-new bridge over the Charles w/about 12 lanes
- relocating all the utilities prior to all of the above ...
- ... while all the while keeping the existing elevated road in service
That is a NON-trivial project. Hard to imagine the Philly project being as complex.
I am *not*, however, weighing in at all on whether it should have cost as much as it has ended up doing!
I was just giving a figure for a downtown rail tunnel including one station that was built under buildings, over one subway line and under another as a benchmark for a post big dig project. It did take 6 years tho.
Only six years? When was the last time anything took only six years to build in NYC?
From what I read, the project taking 6 years was a big deal that attracted much public critisism.
Some people don't know when they're well off. Seems like, around here, it takes that long just to do a study.
Whoopsie there.
Seriously, why can't Amtrak include a free MBTA transfer w/ the cost of a through ticket? You just flash your ticket and get buzzed in.
Maybe because of the reason I cited above? About MBTA and Amtrak being competitors? Read the other branches of this thread...
Did Amtrak suddenly discover a hidden tunnel through Boston? Maybe the Downeaster continued on the Orange Line, transferring to the Red Line at Downtown Crossing using a previously unknown interlocking to arrive at South Station. Passengers must have been delighted to be able to connect to other Amtrak service without having to get off the train! :O)
Unfortunately, they made a huge mess when they tried to shove a couple Genesis locomotives through the Boston subway tunnels. :-)
-- David
Chicago, IL
Ooooohhh, so they have had all that construction work and new tunnels in Boston to fix that? :-)
That would be North Station. I understand that a LOT of people are getting on at Haverhill, which is also served by MBTA commuter rail. But The Downeaster is express (typical running time 53 minutes, vs. 62-66 minutes for the MBTA locals).
Fares? Hoo-boy. Look at this!
MBTA round-trip $9
AMTRAK round-trip $13
MBTA 12 ride $49.50
AMTRAK 10 ride $64
MBTA monthly pass $153
AMTRAK monthly pass $155
So for a round-trip or occasional commuter, a few more dollars gets you more comfort and a faster ride. But the monthly pass is only $2 more! Why not use AMTRAK, if the times are convenient? The downside: with only four trips per day, if you miss your Downeaster, you have to pay for the MBTA train. Also, MBTA passes are good for the subway and buses, AMTRAK passes are not.
But I can see that could there could well be enough commuters from Haverhill with a fixed schedule who work near North Station (and don't need to use the subway), for whom The Downeaster is a no-brainer.
Smart move by AMtrak. I never even thought that the fares would be that close. It's a good way to make the State of Massachusetts pay for trains going through Idaho -- which, I think, makes a lot of sense if the "self-sufficient" mandate of Amtrak's is still in effect after 9-11.
This might also explain why State of MA officials are noticably absent from Downeaster's inaugural run. As reported in the South Station Journal, MA officials were less than happy about the Downeaster.
Let the Massholes complain. As a native of Portsmouth NH, I love being able to take the train up to Portland or down to Bahston. (Getting on at Dover NH)
Hey, why is it called the Downeaster? It doesn't go anywhere near down east, which would be more like Florida and Georgia.
- Lyle Goldman
Its clever name is to make Dick Armey and pals think it'll eventually arrive in Houston. That got it FUNDED. :)
This is a 19th century (or earlier) phrase that is still in use. Maine is Down East from Boston because it is downwind.
It's a maritime phrase, no? Billy Joel wrote a song about the "Downeaster Alexa," which IIRC, was the same of a swordfishing boat. Mr. Joel is an advocate for fishermen near his Long Island home, where the profession is slowly dying-out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Yes, it's a maritime phrase. You sail downwind, which in the case of going from Boston to Maine happens to be eastward.
In todays NY Post on pages on pages 22 and 23 there is an atricle and photos about Mike B. on the #6 line yesterday. The photos are of him exiting the turnstiles at Brooklyn Bridge, on a R142A and waiting for a train at the 77th St station.
I checked the Post online at http://www.nypost.com/ but they only have a quick mention and cropped photo on the lead page.
Hey, if he keeps it up maybe we can invite him to become a SubTalker.
Where are the sills beneath the doors?
According to Building the Independent Subway, only cars 100-144 didn't have sills beneath the doors. I read that the number plates from 190 were slapped onto 100 at some point, and eventually that situation was straightened out.
And NOW you see why I was suspicious, but for OTHER reasons. Been VERY cautious about this, but I was in the battery box of 190 once upon a time. And DAMN if the plate didn't say 100 ... but yeah, now you have an idea of why I had my doubts. STILL ain't sure though. And I doubt there's real answers either.
I thought 100 was resting in the Transit Museum.
It is now but at the time this picture was taken (my guess the late 60's, early 70's) it was still n the road.
As a reference point: the Transit Museum opened in 1976
Right, those first MU's from ACF had some other type of underbody/door stiffener in the underbody. I am unsure either, but if Selkirk was in the Battery area on this MU and it said it was ACF R-1 #100, then it would be safe to assume a re-numbering took place. Replacement cars for those scrapped/damaged did NOT re-use old car numbers, and I believe the original pre-war R numbering ended around 1704.
The R-1/9 cars were notorious for renumberings. Of course the door sills and that lack thereof were the giveaways.
Bill "Newkirk"
Story I got out of some shop foremen back in the old days was that some cars were dogs that were frequently out of service for the same old problems, parts shortages and other problems. Best way in the system back then to up the MBDF was to swap car number plates so as to hide the same car coming back again and again for the same problem.
Hell ... can we REALLY be sure that 1689 is in fact 1689? Heh. Chalk marks on the trucks? :)
If you go to Joe Korman's website, he has a list of the car switches. I forget the reason, but YES, 100 and 190 were switched at one time.
A number of carplates got swapped - and often didn't match the numbers on decals in the cabs. Made for better numbers. That kind of hijinx doesn't happen these days, but that practice always caused me to disrespect "statistical numbers" in the system just in case anyone wondered WHERE my attitude about MBDF's came from ...
>>I forget the reason, but YES, 100 and 190 were switched at one time. <<
And here's the reason as told to me by a reliable source:
By the mid-60's, the R-1s were in terrible shape with a lot of blown out motors. It was decided to take a certain group of R-1's and remove the motors, making them trailers. For some reason, this group swapped numbers with another in the 100s. The good motors were placed in the trucks that had some burn outs, so they would have cars with full power. Depending on how long the train was, there were either one or two trailer cars.
An outside vendor rebuilt the burned out motors and eventually the R-1s regained their lost motors and the trailer program ended. That's when #190 was renumbered back to #100 and vice-versa. My source tells me that he spoke to someone in Jamaica barn (1966) and #190 was in the inspection barn. he told the guy to have an RCI remove the number plate of #190. He told him that the car number was really #100. After the plate was removed, underneath painted on the car body was #100. So #100 in the Transit Museum IS really #100 and not #190.
Note of interest: When the R-1s were new, I am told they were not delivered with number plates, they were added on later. That's why #100 was painted on the car body.
A side note to this:
R-16s on the (GG) !
Because of the shortage of R-1s due to the motor problem, this created an unusual car assignment change. BMT Standards of the 2300 and 2800 series, that were stored on the Sea Beach express tracks awaiting scrapping were removed and returned to service!!
The Standards, with yellow "S"s for scrap were placed on the Broadway Brooklyn Local. The R-16s on the #14 BBL were then shifted to the (GG) to substitute for the shortage of pre-war equipment.
And you think R-32s on the (F) are hot stuff, the above was the wild and woolly days of te TA !!
Bill "Newkirk"
What's next? Will we see Slant R-40s on the "F"?
#3 West End Jeff
And filth in the underpass at 42nd St ... everything old is new again. :)
>>What's next? Will we see Slant R-40s on the "F"?
#3 West End Jeff <<
No, I doubt that wil ever happen.
Bill "Newkirk"
Slant R40's ont he "F"????
hell, when they were brand new, I rode them on the "F".
Thanks for the background ... that's pretty much the same story I had heard as well ... keeping dead cars in the shop for weeks on end wasn't much liked by "upstairs" and I had heard that plate swapping was going on at a furious pace just to show the shops were moving out the work even when they weren't ...
Yet another example of the day I worked in and how good people have it THESE days with a WORKING subway system.
Note of interest: When the R-1s were new, I am told they were not delivered with number plates, they were added on later. That's why #100 was painted on the car body.
Cunningham & DeHart have some pictures of R1s being delivered and it looks like they already have the plates attached. And of course, there's this picture on the (now) N Line in the very first days of service.
NICE SHOT! Sure looked sharp when they was noo ...
Hello, Mr. TMO, and Moo!
Read this whole thing in New York's Lost Transit Legacy.
( Thanks for the segue ) ;-)
Yo HO, guy! I *love* stopping over your place ... from the els to the 2nd Avenue, to the Q cars to the museum to the Myrt ... whenever there's something new over yonder, it's a battery run over yonder. :)
Thanks for reminding me of that all ... and causing me to take it all in once again!
Did R1's actually run on the Sea Beach line when new, or were they merely tested there? If they were just tested, why does this car have BMT rollsigns?
>>Did R1's actually run on the Sea Beach line when new, or were they merely tested there? If they were just tested, why does this car have BMT rollsigns? <<
The new R-1s were indeed tested on the Sea Beach in revenue passennger service before the opening of the IND subway. Sort of a harbinger of what's yet to come.
Paul's shot of #381 was at Track #7 of Stillwell Terminals Sea Beach platform. Those were indeed BMT signs in #381 and her sisters which included BMT side route and destination signs.
Bill "Newkirk"
Why did the BMT allow this? They had to know the IND was being built to put them out of business.
The BMT had to live with the powers-that-be. For example, they needed the Transit Commission's OK to buy experimental equipment like the Zephyr and Green Hornet.
The BMT was supposed to be compensated for the R1 testing but, when it was done, the BMT and City mutually agreed that the BMT got enough use of the R1s in service that it was declared a wash.
I must have wound up with one of those original BMT upper destination curtains spliced to an Eastern Division curtain.
>>Cunningham & DeHart have some pictures of R1s being delivered and it looks like they already have the plates attached. <<
That is hard to see in that photo. Numbers painted on the car bodies could be of the same style font and fool us looking at the photo. But why would #100 have the number painted on the carbody underneath the number plate ? I was told only the R-1s were like that and the R-4s to R-9s had number plates when delivered.
Bill "Newkirk"
But why would #100 have the number painted on the carbody underneath the number plate ?
Well, I'd like to see what the painted number looked like. Anyone seen a pic? Did they look permanent, or something to ID the cars while under construction.? Maybe they originally wanted to have painted number, but decided on the plates instead. Maybe they had painted numbers as a backup since plates could be removed/stolen?
ex-BMT equipment got number plates gradually under city ownership, partly because they were easier to clean while the rest of the car was left dirty. Quite a bit of equipment had painted numbers to the end.
Look at the photo of car 107 onpage 4 of Greller's subway car book!!
Look CLOSE!!! (Get out the Pepsi bottle bottoms....)
There is NO plate for the number. It surely appears to be PAINTED onto the carbody!!!!
>>Look at the photo of car 107 onpage 4 of Greller's subway car book!!
There is NO plate for the number. It surely appears to be PAINTED onto the carbody!!!!
Steve's right !! I don't see anything that would hint to a porcelain enamel plate with mounting bolts.
Bill "Newkirk"
You are right. The nunbers have been applied directly onto the car's body itself. Go to page 29 of the book where it shows a picture of car #100 and it clearly shows that the numbers were applied directly onto the car's body.
#3 West End Jeff
Just checked the book for myself. This is TRUE!!
I've had the book for years....just so used to enamel plates on the R-type cars, never even thought about painted numbers!!
I wonder if they put the enameled number plates in place, because the numbers that were painted directly onto the cars began to wear off.
#3 West End Jeff
Just wondering if there was a BMT/IND track connection back in those days, or was it a carfloat deal from 36th Street Brooklyn to 207th Street Manhattan.
They were turned over to the BMT Freight Dept. at CI yard and delivered to 38th Street freight yard at 2 ave. for return to City on barges.
Ahh, it was a carfloat!
Yes, the R1s knew what the Redbirds have forgotten--subway cars need a barge to float! ;-)
Couldn't they have saved a lot of effort and simply put the standards on the GG line, or was Jamaica incapable of supporting them?
>>Couldn't they have saved a lot of effort and simply put the standards on the GG line, or was Jamaica incapable of supporting them? <<
You sort of answered you own question !!
The 2800 series BMT Standards had rollsigns for the (GG) Crosstown Line, I saw a slide of this. I don't know when those signs were put in there, was it for the mid-60s car shortage of when the 60th St. tube opened, not sure of that. There may be a possibility that Jamaica Barn wasn't able to maintain the Standards since this was on short notice. Also the Standards, not speed demons, were probably judged to operate on their familiar home turf as opposed to IND Queens Blvd Line.
Bill "Newkirk"
Bill, that's the same story about 100/190 I heard, and I do consider the source reliable.
I remember the R16's on the GG -- in fact, I photographed one at Smith/9th Street. I think it's in the R16 photos at NY Subway Resources web site.
In the book by James Clifford Greller "New York City Subway Cars" they show a picture of car #100 without the sills as it would have been originally. I think that car #190 in the picture that you're showing is likely to be car #100 if they switched the number plates back to the original cars.
#3 West End Jeff
This little "plate dance" HAS turned interesting though, no? That was the whole reason I brought it up, to have some fun and shake any lingering doubts. The TA was an absolute *mess* back around the turn of 1970. :)
I think that you're right that this little number plate dance has turned interesting.
#3 West End Jeff
WOW !! look at them enjoying the railfan window !! ....lol!!
Or more specifically, 904 subway cars.
I do.... only 1 please!
....as long as SubwayAl doesn't
get to the rollsigns, first!!
Any TA work is EXCELLENT work....even stripping out Redbirds. CI Peter
Personally, i like the idea of buying an old subway car real cheap, and mount it on a bus chassis. then i would have a big, unique bus with the subway spirit livin on.
Thousands of years from now, this world will come to an end. This planet will be visited by UFOs that will view the vast terrain what will be dried out oceans. They'll wonder what the hell is all those rectangular boxes scattered all over the place !!
No..............heypaul didn't tell me this !
Bill "Newkirk"
Highly unlikely that thousands of years from now that seperating rust out carbodies of Rotboids could be recognized by the remains...a few months in the ocean of salty water should finish off the openings seen when seats are lifted. I frankly don't understand the '207th reefing project' as scrap steel sans harmful materiels should go straight to the smelter. CI Peter
Here are the MDBF Numbers for December. The only numbers I will give are the 6 that follow. I will not give the 2nd highest, the 3rd or the lowest so please do not ask.
Highest IRT Car Class - R-62 242,069 Miles
Highest IRT Shop - Jerome 136,707 miles
Highest IRT Line - #4 136,687 miles
Highest B division car class - R-68 268,981 miles
Highest B division Shop - Concourse 175,937 Miles
Highest B division line - Q 513,474 miles
Congrats - The Concourse does it again !!!!
Nice job, dude, keep up the good work with those hippos.
Congratulations on a very fine job - especially since you turned the subway's "dumb blonde" (the R-68, which is very nice-looking subway car) into an outstanding performer.
Keep up the good work. 2002 will be even better.
Is that the Q circle or the Q diamond or both together? Whatever, the R68 (again) comes in first for reliability in the B division. And it isn't even all your doing (I'm assuming that the Qs are not shopped at Concourse). Oh well, my Brightliners did not even get honorable mention. But they are survivors!
For the Q it's both circle and diamond.
"And it isn't even all your doing (I'm assuming that the Qs are not shopped at Concourse)."
No! There are 209 R-68s at Coney Island & they share the credit for the R-68s excellent performance. In fact, their R-68s did somewhat better than the Concourse R-68s. They don't, however, share the credit for the shop withthe highest MDBF.
If past performance is any indication, I suppose the slants are also running well despite the fact they are falling apart structurally. Despite this, I would bet the house that the Brighton riders are still bitching and moaning to the TA in their cards & letters aout the "lousy" service they receive.
Only in NY. Do you suppose that US Air gets complaints when they switch plane models on a specific route?
(Only in NY. Do you suppose that US Air gets complaints when they switch plane models on a specific route?)
Maybe not, but I must admit I'm not pleased about getting an R32 rather than R46 on the old F train in Brooklyn. I think the R46 is a nicer car, and if you're stuck with an old car, it might as well be a nice old car.
It was a very nice car until GOH got hold of it.
Only in NY. Do you suppose that US Air gets complaints when they switch plane models on a specific route?
Ask that question on airliners.net and you'd be surprised at the answers ...
They might. I'm not a frequent flier, but if I was and the airline took off a nice plane with (comparatively) decent legroom and substituted an older aircraft with tighter seating I'd raise a fuss. Fortunately, the only time I can recall having equipment switched from the scheduled type on a flight I was on it was in favor of a significantly larger aircraft (L-1011 replacing a 727 on a flight from Atlanta to Raleigh).
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Actually, yes! When I was a consultant for the USAirways Shuttle (I was their meteorologist), and the airline changed from the vernerable 727 to the new Airbus A-320 with lots more comfort and amenities, many "oldtimers" complained about "their" 727 being phased out and replaced with the "new tech that won't work."
So it can happen anywhere!
Ahhh, A320, fly-by-wire and they did away with yolks and use joystick type to control.
That's exactly how I feel on the 2!
Enjoy your new 'smooth ride' and hope that there aren't any 'door indication failures' to hang it up. CI Peter
Only in NY. Do you suppose that US Air gets complaints when they switch plane models on a specific route?
Would you not agree that when there are different comfort differences between the models the passengers might have a legitimate complaint? For example, if 10-car R32's are substituted for 8-car R46's the number of seats per train drops from 600 to 480. That's almost like a 20% cut in service.
It may well be a 20% cut in SEATS (nominally, more in practice since people tend to slop over into adjacent seats on R-32s, which have 50-not 48-seats a car), but not in service. I have no doubt that people would complain (they DID complain on the Brighton express when R-40s replaced R-68s). However, the trains (10 cars x 60 feet vs. 8 cars x 75 feet) have roughly the same nominal capacity, and the train of 60-footers has a greater capacity in practice because of the seating layout, and it loads and unloads faster because it has more doors.
David
It may well be a 20% cut in SEATS (nominally, more in practice since people tend to slop over into adjacent seats on R-32s, which have 50-not 48-seats a car), but not in service.
I've had occasion to look up the seating capacity of both the R68A's and the R32's in the National Transportation Database (1999). The data is supplied by NYCT. The seating capacity for the R32's is given as 44; the seating capacity for the R68A's is given as 72. These numbers disagree with MTA published data that cites: "NYCT Division of Operations Planning/Facilities, Subway Vehicle Passenger Capacities", December 18, 1992 which gives: 50 for 60 foot cars and 70 or 74 for the 75 footers.
The difference in the R32's represents 1 less person on the long benches between the doors. Perhaps there was a revised girth factor between 1992 and 1999. :-)
I don't care what some database says. I count 50 seats on an R-32 and on an R-38, as follows:
cab-2 seats-door-7 seats-door-7 seats-door-7 seats-door-2 seats=25 seats (on each side of the car)
Now, the 7-seaters are usually taken up by 5-6 people, but it doesn't mean they're not 7-seaters.
David
Fat butts pay only one fare. Moulded seats rule. CI Peter
I think it's more an issue of familiarity than it is comfort. I don't think the average subway rider has any concept of which car has more seats or more standing room or whether trains of 60' cars have shorter dwell times. In general, people seem to resist change.
When the equipment on the Q was changed from R-68A to the R-40S you could hear the howls from the Brighton Beach contingent all the way to midtown manhattan. It didn't matter that the MDBF ob the Q and the B went up noticably. Their trains were changed.
I don't think the average subway rider has any concept of which car has more seats or more standing room or whether trains of 60' cars have shorter dwell times.
I think the average subway rider has a very clear concept of whether or not he has a seat and what are his chances of getting one. The passengers' misunderstanding was in equating the reduced chances of getting a seat with lower service levels. The notion that NYCT would purposely design cars with fewer seats and no overall increase in capacity escaped their limited reasoning. It still escapes mine.
When the equipment on the Q was changed from R-68A to the R-40S you could hear the howls from the Brighton Beach contingent all the way to midtown manhattan. It didn't matter that the MDBF ob the Q and the B went up noticably.
Are you stating that the R-40S' have a higher MDBF than the R-68A's? If not, then how would substituting some less reliable R-40S for the more reliable R-68A's result in an increased MDBF for the combined fleet?
Are you stating that the R-40S' have a higher MDBF than the R-68A's? If not, then how would substituting some less reliable R-40S for the more reliable R-68A's result in an increased MDBF for the combined fleet?
YES! When the R-40s were moved from a full-time line (B) to a part time line (Q) they were layed up at night and on weekends. They received additional maintenance and began to perform better. Incidently, the R-68As MDBF was approximately 40% higher than the R-40s. Both were above the fleet average.
YES! When the R-40s were moved from a full-time line (B) to a part time line (Q) they were layed up at night and on weekends. They received additional maintenance and began to perform better. Incidently, the R-68As MDBF was approximately 40% higher than the R-40s. Both were above the fleet average.
I'm sorry, I don't follow the math. You stated in your first post that the R-68's had the top MDBF figures. Suppose the Q's ran a distance D, then the number of expected failures, N, would be given by:
N = D/MDBF.
I'm assuming that after the substitution the combined fleet went the same distance as before. In calculating the number of failures for the combined fleet, assume that 0 < x < 1 is the fraction of R-68's used. Then the number of failures for the R-68's would be:
N68 = xD/MDBF
The number of failures for the R-40's would be:
N40 = (1-x)D/(MDBF/1.4) = 1.4(1-x)D/MDBF
Your statement was that: N > N68 + N40
This implies that:
D/MDBF > xD/MDBF + 1.4(1-x)D/MDBF
D/MDBF > [1.4 - .4x]D/MDBF
1 > 1.4 - .4x
x > 1
which contradicts the original assumption.
Are you stating that the R-40S' have a higher MDBF than the R-68A's? - SB
YES!...Incidently, the R-68As MDBF was approximately 40% higher than the R-40s. - TD
Without resorting to math, a contradiction appears to be evident, unless we are misunderstanding the statements.
Without resorting to the math, let me say that my statement was completely misunderstood. Likely my lack of clarity because I did not want to give the actual MDBF numbers for either fleet.
What I had intended to relate was what has happened since the R-40s were moved to the Q and the R-68As were moved to the B. In fact, the performance of the R-68A (which was double that of the Slants, is now about 40% higher despite the fact that the R-68As have remained fairly constant. The other fact is that the Slants now exceed the fleet MDBF.
MDBF gonna get better on A division. OnTheJuice, CI Peter
R U gonna use D cells on the 142s?
Keep up the good work, TD! And the Q will always come in first for me.
I noticed that only 88% of the R-68 fleet is actually used during peak times on any given day, despite the reliabliltiy figures. Even the lowly R42 sports a higher a utilization percentage.
These figures are worse for the Div A. Utilization for the R-62's is 77%, whereas utilization for the R-33's is 82%.
I saw a sign in a booth saying 'Compute problems, tokens only'. Does this mean that people would have to buy a token, and if they wanted to transfer to a bus they would have to pay again? I know its not proper, but is it legal?
What would happen if there was a computer failure effecting the turnstiles? Would people be 1 - Be forced to buy tokens, 2 - Told to go to a different station, 3 - Just be let in?, 4 - Something else?
If the booth computer is down for servicing or failure then all we can sell is tokens unless our station has no MVMs. If we have no MVMs then we will carry pre-encoded cards for $6, $215, $17 and $63.
As far as bus transfers- sorry!
If the turnstiles do not take cards then we could check the card. If it is a started unlimited we can allow entey. Otherwise tokens only and we will call for a maintainer via calling Station Command. Of course, it may take a whiel for the maintainer to show. If the tunrstiles fail completely then we use the Non Revenue Fare Box (NRFB) wehich is the tall black box near the turnstiles and hit the EBCS and face a booth audit. If the NRFB is jammed then again we hit the EBCS and then hand collect by asking the customer to give us the token and buzz them in. In either case, police will be sent by Stations to make sure people pay.
Of course, if they have no cash we can suggest they go to another station. (Note- if a station has more than one booth and turnstiles/computer are out at the main booth they may or may not be out at other booths in the station depending on whether the Station Controller (SC) is running. If the SC is down then the entire station is tokens only.) If the SC is running then the other booth(s0 if open will be in service and sell cards and tokens.
This LARCENY by the MTA is why the token should be eliminated, apparently it only exists to facilitate the MTA's ability to steal money from passengers.
It is not Larceny ! Let's say you go to the department store to buy some Pig videos and their phones lines are down so you cant charge your videos. The store will ask for cash or no sale. WHy is Transit different. If we use the NRFB or if we hand collect either way it is a mandatory booth audit. We do not have keys to the NRFB and neither does supervision. Only Revenue has keys to the NRFB.
Hand collect is an absolute last resort and must be specifically approved from Jay Street. If Police are present we give them a revenue bag if the NRFB is jammed and the cops hand collect and give us the tokens to count as fares. Hand collect is not fun but a nightmare.
The difference is that the video store doesn't give a 52% discount to those paying by credit card, not making it available to anyone when the credit card reader is down.
The current subway fare, for those willing to buy in bulk, is $1.37 for a ride followed by a transfer. I am not willing to pay $1.50 for the initial ride, let alone an additional $1.37 for the transfer to the bus. Call the cops if you like -- I'm paying the proper fare and entering the system.
I would think that most regular subway riders would use an unlimited Metrocard, rendering most of these calculations academic. The more rides taken, the cheaper each one becomes.
Right, and with the unlimited if it is already started we can check that it is valid and buzz you in.
A regular rider would be twice a day, every weekday for a month.
That comes out to $60.00. In order to make an unlimited card a value, one has to expect to ride at least three more times.
I'd be surprised if most people use unlimited cards. They're priced to be slightly more expensive than the typical usage, if paid-per-ride, for their effective periods.
If I commuted by subway or bus every weekday, I'd certainly use 30-day passes, since I also sometimes (okay, often) engage in recreational riding. But I typically only ride a few times a week, if that. It's pay-per-rides for me, with an occasional Fun Pass (I once used a 7-day pass). I do always compute in advance which option is the cheapest -- of course, once in a while my plans will change and (say) I'll pay for three individual rides in a day, wasting a dime.
>>> The current subway fare, for those willing to buy in bulk, is $1.37 for a ride followed by a transfer. I am not willing to pay $1.50 for the initial ride, let alone an additional $1.37 for the transfer to the bus. <<<
A slight correction. The current fare is $1.50. Those who buy in bulk get a discount, which amounts to one free ride for each ten paid rides. At certain times the discount is not available due to system malfunctions. At certain times, due to accidents or power failure, the whole system is unavailable at any price. The fact that you bought a Metrocard does not guarantee you travel at the discounted price at any time you want, just as it does not guarantee you any transportation at all while service is suspended.
Tom
The current fare is approximately $1.37 for those willing to buy/recharge MetroCards with at least $15 at a time. Since this fare arrangement went into effect, I paid $1.50 for a ride once, and that was just to see what the new bus transfers looked like.
If the subway system is down, obviously it's not going to take me anywhere, but neither is it going to charge me. If it's up, then I'll pay the proper fare ($1.37 by MetroCard, since my latest MetroCard purchase was in the amount of $15) and go wherever I'm going.
When I bought my MetroCard, the implied contract was that it was valid for fares (and free transfers, where and when available) at all times. With my MetroCard, I am entitled to ride and the TA is entitled to deduct the appropriate fare from the card. If the MetroCard system goes down, that's not my problem -- I'm still entitled to ride even if the TA is temporarily not equipped to deduct the fare from my card. If I'm asked nicely and I'm carrying cash (I normally don't use cash, so I sometimes forget to bring any), I'll pay $1.37 in cash, although I wouldn't be so accomodating if I had no plans to refill my MetroCard or buy another one later (say, if I were a tourist or a resident about to move out of the city permanently) -- that is, unless I'll be using the transfer, in which case I'll pay the $1.37 when I dip my card on the bus. I'm meeting my end of the deal.
>>> The current fare is approximately $1.37 for those willing to buy/recharge MetroCards with at least $15 at a time. <<<
Repeating it will not make it true. The fare is $1.50. When you buy ten fares, one free ride is given to you as a bonus. I assume this is done by putting $16.50 credit on the card when you pay $15.00. If you were allowed to pay $1.37 in cash when the computer was down, and therefore not deducting rides from the card, instead of getting 11 rides for $15.00, you would be receiving 12 rides for $16.37. Do you believe that if you put $16.37 on a Metrocard you would receive 12 rides? You would not. You would get 11 rides and $1.37 credit toward future rides. If you go to refill the card with the $1.37 credit on it by adding $13.63 to make a total of $15.00, you will get only 10 rides. Although purchasing $15.00 of rides at a time to get a bonus ride free reduces the effective cost of the rides to you, it does not reduce the price of a ride.
>>> When I bought my MetroCard, the implied contract was that it was valid for fares (and free transfers, where and when available) at all times. With my MetroCard, I am entitled to ride and the TA is entitled to deduct the appropriate fare from the card. If the MetroCard system goes down, that's not my problem -- I'm still entitled to ride even if the TA is temporarily not equipped to deduct the fare from my card <<<
You are willing to accept the fact that if the electricity fails, or a tunnel is flooded the TA is not required to immediately transport you to your destination even though your contract was to be able to ride there by swiping your MetroCard at a station and getting on a train. The TA is only required to take all reasonable means to keep the trains running. By the same reasoning, when a computer failure makes it impossible to read your MetroCard, there is no requirement that you be allowed into system because you have a MetroCard. The card is nothing but a debit card, indicating that you have a money balance which may be used instead of cash for paying the fare. If a bank's ATM computer system goes down, you cannot withdraw (what you think is) your own money from the ATM, even though you have a card that entitles you to do so 24 hours a day. The failure of the MetroCard computer system is no different.
Tom
> Do you believe that if you put $16.37 on a Metrocard you would receive 12 rides?
A 10% credit applies for any amount greater than or equal to $15.00 added to a MetroCard. $16.37 plus 10% is $18.007, a bit more than 12 fares.
>>> A 10% credit applies for any amount greater than or equal to $15.00 <<<
That is interesting, I thought the excess was provided in blocks of $15.00, but regardless, since they add the amount to the balance on the card, it supports the premise that the fare remains $1.50, and the TA is providing a bonus for purchasing in advance (giving them the use of your money sooner) rather than lowering the fare per ride.
Tom
No, it's just a matter of bookkeeping. The effect would be identical if a $15 MetroCard came with a balance of $15.00, with $1.37 (or so) deducted per ride. MetroCards with smaller initial balances would be subject to a (roughly) 9.5% service charge, deducted upon purchase. (I think the numbers work out. If not, you get my gist.)
>>> The effect would be identical if a $15 MetroCard came with a balance of $15.00, with $1.37 (or so) deducted per ride. <<<
This is what I posted earlier. With a MetroCard your effective cost of a ride is $1.37. You have used the biggest little word in the English language, "IF". IF the MetroCard had $15.00 added and $1.37 deducted for each ride the price per ride would be $1.37. When the Card has $16.50 added for $15.00 paid, the price per ride remains $1.50. There is a real difference between the concepts of "price" and "effective cost."
Tom
The only distinction between the two scenarios I presented is what is displayed on the MetroCard readout screens. In either case, I pay $15.00 and get a card valid for 11 rides or I pay $13.50 and get a card valid for 9 rides. Is this the "real difference between the concepts of 'price' and 'effective cost'" that you allude to?
>>> Is this the "real difference between the concepts of 'price' and 'effective cost'" <<<
To reiterate what was said earlier in the thread, you stated that if you purchased a MetroCard for $15.00, the price per ride was $1.37, and therefore if computers were down the TA should allow you to ride for a cash fare of $1.37. I stated that even with your $15.00 MetroCard, the price remains $1.50 per ride, only your effective cost when using the MetroCard has been reduced to $1.37, and there is a difference between "price" and "effective cost."
Price is the amount of money given or set as consideration for the sale of a specified thing. In this case the TA sets the price at $1.50 per ride. When they give you $16.50 credit for your $15.00 payment, they are giving you the extra value for the use of your money before they provide the service. Their cost to provide that extra ride is very low, since most of their costs are fixed, and they are getting money cheaper than they can borrow it. (They also get "breakage," i.e. some percent of the total rides are never used.)
Cost is the outlay or expenditure made to achieve an object. If you purchased a MetroCard for $15.00 and you and 15 of your immediate friends (whom you are treating) used it to go on a fan trip, right away, your effective cost would be $15.00 divided by 16 or approximately $1.37 for each ride. OTOH if you purchase your $15.00 MetroCard and go on a one year vacation to Spain, and upon your return you take your friends on that same fan trip using the MetroCard, the effective cost would be higher. The reason is that you would have lost the interest you would have earned on the $15.00 during the year. If it could have been invested at 10% per annum, the return would have been $1.50, so this time your effective cost of the 16 rides would be $1.50 each. If you purchase a $15.00 MetroCard, and drop it off the platform of an el station on your first trip, your effective cost of that ride is $15.00.
That is using extremes to illustrate the mean. When you buy a MetroCard you probably do not wait a whole year to use it, and you probably don't have 10% per annum investments waiting for each dollar, but each day the card has a balance on it adds to the effective cost of using it. It is not something to worry about since it is a de minimis amount, but it illustrates the difference between price (the TA's charge for a ride) and effective cost (what you pay).
Tom
Right! As I have informed customers-- When you pay your fare all you get is permission to use the system to get from point A to Point B.
There is no guarantee a train will arrive at a specified time , no guarantee you will get a seat or a specific type of train (ie Slant, R142, etc.) and no guarantee toy will make a certain connection. We do give block tickets if all service from our station is suspended or G.O. tickets if a shuttle bus is needed.
I then follow up with " I am sorry you are inconvenienced.I know you are frustrated. I too am late for my next stop. I know gow you feel."
American Pig states that the continued use of the token is LARCENY.
Subway Buff responds "It is not Larceny ! Let's say you go to the department store to buy some Pig videos"
Uh..oh ! Could this be the first SubTalk war of 2002 ?
Bill "Newkirk"
I for one got a chuckle out of it.
I'll bet Pigs was surprised at the reply, maybe too surprised to answer ?
Mr rt__:^)
Not shocked at all. David Greengerber mentioned everything that I would have had I posted, making my own post uneccessary.
I wonder who he is.
I'm glad to see that "American Pig" is at it again. The new year is just a week old and one thing has not changed. "American Pig" loves to
argue over just about anything. Maybe if were lucky his MetroCard won't work in the turnstile.
#3 West End Jeff
I prefer my way of doing things to your incessant tendency to agree.
Of course, if you have a strong opinion, like your crazy plan of reinstating divisions and using numbers for all lines, you'll argue just the same.
I guess that argument is only wrong when it isn't yours, is it?
>> Let's say you go to the department store to buy some Pig videos and their phones lines are down so you cant charge your videos. The store will ask for cash or no sale. <<
If it were my store in this day and age, I'd sooner close than embarass customers by not accepting a key form of payment. Cash and tokens just don't cut it any more. I was in a store once that had its charge card reader out, and it was frustrating to watch customers be refused sale. Better to close altogether than to do that to customers-- and all the more important to make sure the computers are fail-safe and have backups. For better or for worse, the plastic card is it today.
Your point is valid but we cannot decide on our own. Many times there are supervisors and managers in hiding and when we flub up they come out of the woodwork and correct us. If we are caught we face discipline, ANy such decision has to come from supervision and in some cases even supervision has to call Jay Street for a decision.
Transit is run like the military- the privates must follow the orders of their superiors or face court-martial!
So that's why sometimes when I'm at work I feel like I'm a prisioner!
Right on! Remember we are the privates. We diont get paid to think but to blindly follow orders unless the orders are dangerous. If a supervisor tells you to sweep the stairs you sweep and then grieve. If a supervisor tells you to polish the third rail ask for the direction in writing and then call Stations and ask for the Level II. If still instructed to go ahead tell them you refuse as a safety issue and invoke 1.9 and close the job site down until bigwigs at TWU an TA meet.
I would tell that supervisor that I didn't know how to do that. Would be be kind enough to show me how to polish the 3rd rail ?
Mr rt__:^)
>>>Transit is run like the military- the privates must follow the orders of their superiors or face court-martial!<<<
I always thought it was run more like a grade school, they treat their employees like children. The military respects it's people. But, to each his own.
Peace,
ANDEE
No it's run like a mushroom farm ... you keep them in the dark & feed them shit.
hahaha...Now that's rich
Peace,
ANDEE
If a credit card is not accepted it is not always the fault of the store. During peak shopping periods there have been times when the problems occur at the credit card companies (ie, slow phone lines, network problems etc). In those cases I would not expect a store to close because it. Believe it or not, CASH was still a valid form of currency. Most folks carry enough cash to cover their daily shopping needs.
The last time I was in a store that had credit card problems was Christmas of 2000 - I was in the NYC Bloomingdales and they had problems processing Visa cards. The customer had the option of using 1 - other forms of credit, 2 - Cash, or 3 - not making the purchase.
Having worked in several retail establishments over the past few years, I must say that I've never seen a customer refused sale because our card reader was down. Speaking from experience (this may not be true elsewhere, but is what I've seen), each retailer has access to a toll-free number to verify credit cards before taking an imprint of the card. I've never had the phone lines go down (at least not all of them) so I'm not sure what would be done then.
Remember those big sliding card-imprint roller machines (KaCHA!)? Most merchants still have one laying around, expressly for this purpose. I believe it may even be a requirement of the retailer's merchant agreement with the credit card company.
I know this may not apply to the MetroCard system, but as it applies to retail credit cards, that's how it works. Anyone who has their sale denied because "the card reader's down" is probably the victim of the retailer's laziness, not the failure of the system.
Banks are notorious these days for "too bad - the computer's down" ... what may have passed for service among merchants who live by every individual sale does not apply to political subdivisions or apparently banks either. I sure wouldn't blame the hourlies for the way things are done. But since "transit" *is* a political subdivision, there's always the option of leaving footprints on foreheads and getting a politico's office involved in a nice sausage-pressing ... policies can be changed, but it's a trickle-down kinda thing ... all it takes is getting a politico to whiz ...
Can we maybe lure Bill Gates into a dark alley and issue some backseat justice? :)
Remember those big sliding card-imprint roller machines (KaCHA!)? Most merchants still have one laying around, expressly for this purpose. I believe it may even be a requirement of the retailer's merchant agreement with the credit card company.
It used to be, but by 1999 was no longer, at least for Visa and MasterCard (the only ones we took at the late great Hobby Shop in Raleigh, North Carolina). Our imprinter broke that year and when we called to get a replacement we were told we didn't need one any more - all we needed to do was write our merchant number and the customer's card number on the appropriate paper form. I don't recall ever using it except for tracking credits, though, since we weren't set up to process them live - had to enter them batch mode at the end of the day.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
You learn something new every day, I suppose. Though it made for a fun day when I was working at RadioShack and our server went down.. back to the stone age of looking up prices in books and figuring out tax by battery-operated calculator. Even with all the mayhem, we still took charge cards. Didn't even bother phoning them in. This is off-topic enough, so I'll stop there.
--
Ian Penovich
...back to the stone age of looking up prices in books and figuring out tax by battery-operated calculator.
Well, our store was sufficiently modern that we either had the price marked on everything or we knew what it was, our cash register had a crank on the side, and our primary calculator was called a brain (its backup was paper and pencil)... the only thing electronic in the store was the credit card swiper and the power supplies. We never did get into DCC either. RIP The Hobby Shop, 1946-2001.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
>>> I've never seen a customer refused sale because our card reader was down. <<<
I've been a couple of super markets where they could not even make cash sales when their computers went down.
Tom
On 9/11, I had to pay cash at a hardware store. If unusual circumstances is ever an excuse, it was then. (ObSubway: The hardware store is directly above 96 on the 1/2/3 -- well, it was the 1/2/3/9 that morning, and at the time there was no subway service anywhere in the city.) That was nothing compared to my attempts to buy milk -- I wasn't trying to hoard, but apparently everyone else was.
OK-But what if none of the turnstiles work and you can't do anything with metrocards at the booth.
Then we hit the alarm button and start to use the non Revenue Fare Box (NRFB) which is the black box near the service gate. If that is jammed, we again hit the EBCS and we get permission to hand collect which is a customer gives us the token and we buzz them in.
We dont like either since it is a mandatory booth audit and duie to non-registered fares the money wont match and we have to explain why ( of course, the turnstiles are out).
All the MVM's at St.George weren';t accepting bills yesterday.
thas because they either ran out of change or the bill boxes were full. Step into the 21th century and use your credit card already. My credit card gives me reward points further reducing the cost of each trip
Can anyone provide a listing of each line's super?
Thanks.
If you go to www.straphangers.com there is a list there of the Supt's who take care of all the subway lines.
Charlie "Chud" Muller of Bedford Park Blvd.
Futher on Line Supt's. After going to www.straphangers.com click on any of the lines's like the B or #4 line there is the list of Supt lines.
Charlie "Chud" Muller of Bedford Park Blvd.
Those lists are very outdated...
-Harry
You caught some of the errors too, I guess.
There is at least one glaring error in the list of Line Superintendents. The person listed as the A line superintendent, is actually the General Supt. of District #5 E, F, G, R & V lines.
David Spivey now works at control as the Nigh Supt. as well.
-Harry
Night- not nigh
Either way - unless there was a big raise involved, I would have thought he was smarter than that. Who moved into his spot, Sutton?
I don't know offhand. I met him once but forgot his name...
-Harry
There IRT list only two are currect the No.1+4 Lines. Supt they have listed for the No.6 Line is Gen. Supt of District 2 (4,5,6 Lines.
Has anyone seen the January SEPTA transpass yet? It has a really good picture of four M-4 trains at the yard, with a whole fleet of old almond joys in the background. Wonderful picture.
Mark
You have one? Can you scan it?
Sure I can do that. I might not get to it until next week, though.
Mark
Ok. That would be nice!
Why hasn't the N/W line been extended with tail tracks to increase TPH into the terminal? As it is, trains have to crawl through the timers so they don't fly though the end stop, and this always slows down the arrival & departures.
If trains could arrive at a normal station speed, the turnaround time for each train would be decreased, and more TPH in the station.
How far would the tail tracks need to be to allow normal speeds? If the tracks were extended to the edge of Ditmars Blvd., would that be enough? This would reduce neighborhood complaints if that intersection was still open to the sky. As it is , the tracks end 100-200'(?) short of the intersection.
JR
How far would the tail tracks need to be to allow normal speeds?
You need enough distance to stop a train with the emergency brakes that is going at the maximum attainable speed. This works out to 612.5 feet beyond the station for a speed of 50 mph and a deceleration rate of 3 mph/sec.
OTOH, they managed to handle 19 tph quit nicely in the past. They are handling only 14 tph today.
The 1 terminus at 242 St. has 2 tracks and no tail tracks. How many TPH do they haNDLE?
Maximum scheduled service today is about 12 tph. Before 9/11, maximum scheduled service (northbound in the morning rush only) was about 15 tph.
(I base these numbers on the published timetables. Where I see headways of, e.g., "4-6 minutes," I assume average headways of 5 minutes, for 12 tph.)
This will all become academic once they start extending the N to LGA.
When will that happen?
- Lyle Goldman
Around the same time as the extension along Ditmars Blvd. to LaGuardia Airport.
Yesterday I rode the PATH train from 14th Street to Newark. On the frieght tracks next to the PATH ROW south of Journal Square, I saw a slew of gondolas - loaded with SNOW! What in the Sam Hill were they doing there? I hope that they were not from Buffalo - that would be crazy. There has not been any snow in the Tri State regionlately, so what gives? You never know what you might see from a train these days.
My dad told me once there was so much snow in Chicago that a train of boxcars was loaded up with snow and sent to the Florida. Most of it melted along the way, but enough made it to give the Floridians there first look at snow.
David
Someone on another message board reported seeing a similar sight in Philly's Greenwich Yard. Maybe it's being shipped to Jersey to ease the drought. :)
Why would they waste time loading it into rail cars to ship somewhere, when they could just as well dump it in the Delaware River?
I'd be willing to bet it isn't SNOW in the gondola inthe rail yard, but it was a gondola load of ballast, rocks, dirt, junk, etc. that just got a good covering with snow.
It's snow. They are snowed up in upstate. They ship the snow to somewhere hot to melt off. That train was probably gons full of snow going to Florida, and by the time it gets there the gons are empty and the train goes back for another load. I don't rememebr if Selkirk TMO has mentioned this before. They certain do it on the MoPac -- they ship it to Texas.
Yep ... when you get snow like we do upstate (and AMAZINGLY, there's not a FLAKE on the ground here) you try to pile it up next to the road, in the back of parking lots and any hole you can find. Rivers tend to be iced over, so that's not an answer. Eventually you run out of places to pile it and so you start front-loading it into trucks, trains or anything that's leaving town just to put it SOMEWHERE.
Joisey's a good place as far as Buffalo and the Tug Hill plateau are concerned. :)
What you say may be true, but I am in Texas and I have not seen any snow from anywhere, and MoPac goes through town. Austin,TX.
They get diverted to Waco for sno-cones. :)
Many years ago I handled a restaurant for a CPA firm. The restaurant was located at the end of South Ocean Avenue and the Great South Bay in Patchogue New York. When there was a lot of snow the Town of Brookhaven and the Village of Patchogue would load snow into dump trucks and they'd go onto the pier just past the Restaurant, dump the load into the Great South Bay and go reload.
Several years later after a large snow, the trucks didn't arrive and I asked the restauranteur why not and he said that the EPA banned the practice because it was harmful to the marine life.
That's probably why Buffalo can't just dump the snow in any body of water up there.
Several years later after a large snow, the trucks didn't arrive and I asked the restauranteur why not and he said that the EPA banned the practice because it was harmful to the marine life.
So, where do they keep the tarp to cover the bay during a snowstorm?
The snow that has been scraped off the streets is significantly contaminated by oil, salt, and other compounds. Dumping these, in concentration, into the bay can "shock" the water and kill marine life.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
One OTHER small angle (I'm sure the EPA angle had to do with salt mixed in being dumped into SALT water, go figure - in upstate New York, it's illegal to dump LEAVES in the Hudson) is that unlike the salt water that surrounds the city and Long Island and the Hudson up toe the "saltwater line" near Beacon is that upstate, the rivers which consist of UNsalted water are frozen solid this time of year.
Down south, snow can be dumped into the ocean perhaps in winter because the water is still in a liquid state. Not so upstate. It just piles and sits there and eventually you run out of place to pile it. When this happens, it has to be trucked or railroaded elsewhere where it can be offloaded. And if it heads south in deadhead cars and is gone by the time it gets to where the empty cars are needed, the whole world is a happier place. It's actually that simple ...
After the big snowstorm here in NYC a few years ago (1996?), the city dumped lots of snow in the Hudson. If I'm wrong, kindly account for those huge chunks of ice I saw from Riverside Park.
NYC's storm overflow drains go straight into the river as well. Actually an ingenious bit of design that permits the regular sewage to go to treatment plants and only the overflow to the river during gully washers in the city. But as to the snow, the BIG advantage NYC has is that the Hudson rarely freezes there thanks to the salt content and the size of the river down there.
Up in Buffalo and much of the rest of upstate, the rivers and lakes freeze over for winter and stay that way. No place to dump the snow once you've filled the usual locations, so off it goes to somewhere else when you're all full up. And it gets MIGHTY expensive for upstate communities to ship it out ... MIGHTY expensive.
Yep ... it's from out west ... New York City ships its garbage up here, we ship snow back. NAFTA is good. :)
Yellow snow???
Only where the huskies go ... generally up here, the snow may contain some road salt and dirt that's spread on, but largely it's mostly plain old snow. Up here isn't like down there where the snow looks real pretty all over everything for about 6 hours and then it turns brown. Nothing prettier though than when it snowed on the els and the trains got a whole lot quieter during the storms. A good snowstorm had a way of absorbing the noise and increasing the "sparkiness" up there. :)
And this is from a passenger.
I know it's for "safety" (more like "liability"), but why do there have to be so many g**amn timers. For example, I was so excited this morning to be able to catch a W train at Pacific Street because the next stop would be Canal in Manhattan!. That's a pretty hefty distance with no stops. I could have walked faster.
And someone on the board mentioned the timers at Ditmars in Astoria preventing quick turn-arounds there.
They just put a whole bunch of those wacky new flashing lunar Wheel Detector lights at Queens Plaza, forcing Queensbound locals to crawl into the station.
There's also the timers placed what seems like about a yard apart as the Queens-bound 7 approaches Grand Central.
And people often post about the slowness of the CPW express trains, which by all rights should zoom up and down the park.
And countless others.
Is it just that a few drunk or sleepy T/O's, who couldn't seem to keep their eyes on the road, screwed it up for everybody? Aren't the block signals which are already there enough to throw the train into BIE if it gets too close to one ahead? No, I'm not a T/O, but when I look out the front window, there are so many places where there's not a train in sight, and a decent view down the tracks, wherein the T/O could really open 'er up, but timers have us plodding along like a silver snail. Can't we depend on and trust our T/O friends to use their eyeballs for cryin' out loud?! Pretty soon, people are gonna wonder why they put the word "rapid" in "rapid transit."
"Is it just that a few drunk or sleepy T/O's, who couldn't seem to keep their eyes on the road, screwed it up for everybody?"
I believe so. Once someone has proved an accident can happen, the TA has to prevent it from ever happening again, or else risk an incredibly large negligence award.
Definitely that's what happened on the downtown Lex express at 14th. It was a great ride from GCT until the big accident. Now they slow down at 23rd.
Are you talking about the 1991 accident or something recently because I noticed in the last year that the expresses going down Lex have gotten slower between 14-Brooklyn Bridge.
I was referring to 1991. I don't know what would cause them to slow down below 14th, except maybe a general phobia about going around a curve too fast and possibly causing someone who isn't holding on to fall down. I agree there are some moderate curves below 14th that don't really seem to deserve the slow speeds they take them at.
The 1991 Union Square crash occurred on a straight stretch, at a switch, which was entered at a high speed by a motorman who was found to not be in control of his train.
wayne
We know. AIUI, one finding of the subsequent investigation was that the train passed red signals and went BIE, but because of the train's high speed, that wasn't enough to prevent the accident. That would explain why speeds have been reduced through there.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
-- Tim
Last time I was there, there was ONE timer north of Union Square.
Could be, but it has a powerful influence. Pre-1991, downtown expresses used to slow down at around 16th street as they entered the station. Now you can feel them slow down (because of the yellow light due to the timer) at 23rd Street.
On a lighter note, the R46 R train I rode yesterday hit 50 MPH in the 60th St. tube.
I looooooooove the 60th Street tube, especially in an R-32 on a late night or weekend. It's one of the only places the trains can still really move!
I don't think the bridge problem was due to timers. Sometimes, especially in the mornings, the trains start getting backed up and the bridge crossing goes slow. At other times, they cross at a decent speed.
The crossed much faster on the north side. Perhaps the merger of the W with the N/R at 34th St. slows the whole thing up.
SEPTA Broad street subway. hehe you got speed there.
They just put a whole bunch of those wacky new flashing lunar Wheel Detector lights at Queens Plaza, forcing Queensbound locals to crawl into the station.
What are Wheel Detector lights? Where are they installed? I've noticed that R's and E's and F's on the express track Queensbound have crawled into there, but I don't mind. The E's and F's travel at a decent speed until just before Queens Plaza i/b, but it's no big deal.
There's also the timers placed what seems like about a yard apart as the Queens-bound 7 approaches Grand Central.
Exactly how slow do q/b trains pull into the station?
And people often post about the slowness of the CPW express trains, which by all rights should zoom up and down the park.
As I have mentioned in my other post, if you ride a D train in either direction, you won't be complaining about the slow ride as some may have on the A. Is there a difference regarding this?
Answers and responses would be greatly appreciated.
1. Wheel detectors are a fancy form of timers. They measure the speed of a train as the ENTIRE train passes them, not just the speed of the front car, and can trip a train even after the front car has passed through. They are installed in strategic locations throughout the system.
2. Someone more familiar with the line can tell us what the posted speed is approaching Grand Central on the Queens-bound Flushing Line. However, often, throughout the system, Train Operators go through timers at less than the posted speed.
3. There should be no (or virtually no) difference between D trains and A trains on the Central Park West express tracks. If there is a difference (and it might be more a matter of perception than reality), it is most likely in the way the trains are being operated by their Train Operators rather than in the equipment.
David
In response to number 2:
That's because most of the timers aren't exactly precise. You have to go like 3-4mph slower than posted speed for the timer to clear right by you. There was a GT20 on the E line somewhere in the simulator, I put a 20 brake when I was going 25, went down to 17, cleared right as I passed it. Either that, or the speedometers aren't exact. Whatever.
The simulator will clear at any speed. It's a laserdisc recording.
I know. I've used it.
David
True- it is the major flaw in it.
The new ones with motion will not have similar problems.
-Harry
Exactly. And for those who don't know, the graphics on the new simulator will be completely different from the current ones' graphics. They'll ALL be computer-generated (as opposed to the cartoon-like stuff that's occasionally thrown in front of the video clips on the current ones).
David
I wanted them to but in a cracked glass graphic for derailing or the unintentional add at CIY like the old Battlezone game.
Or if you overspeed or hit a signal they could cut to a TSS and a burly T/O that take you OOS.
GAME OVER. :)
Hey transit might be full of perverts but to a kid the yard is fun you can see Dwarves, play with the Dolly and the chair and housetops, boys of course will like the bugmen.
I think her arm got tired or something like that otherwise I'd start to worry about my job.
Wannabe1 you bring me tears of joy. You forgot the lollypops. CI Peter
Transit workers play with dollies and eat bugs ... are we SURE this is the image we wanna project? Heh.
I know, me too. I didn't know that it would clear at any speed though, I thought it was somehow modified before being put on a laserdisc.
There is actually one signal you can hit. If you ever get there again, ask for the alternate scenario at 138 St/Grand Concourse on the 4.
I put a 20 brake when I was going 25, went down to 17, cleared right as I passed it. Either that, or the speedometers aren't exact. Whatever.
Are you a T/O on the NYCT? I thought you were a teenager.
I was at the simulator on take your kid to work day. A TSS said the best one there was a 9 yo.
If a 16 year old kid can make almost a round trip on the A train, anyone can do it.
True, but he couldn't overcome a BIE
Nor a TSS checkpoint... or did he?
On a simulator?
3. There should be no (or virtually no) difference between D trains and A trains on the Central Park West express tracks. If there is a difference (and it might be more a matter of perception than reality), it is most likely in the way the trains are being operated by their Train Operators rather than in the equipment.
Next time you ride a D on CPW, post your response here.
I've ridden both, on many occasions. I have perceived no distinction in speed. (Perception is all I have to go by.)
The next time I ride a D train on Central Park West, I will not be riding an A train in the same place, on the same track, at the same time, since that is impossible. Therefore, there is no valid basis for comparison.
Again: the cars are designed to do the same thing in the same way under the same operating conditions. If they don't, unless there's a defect, it's because the Train Operator is doing something different.
David
I was videotaping along CPW at 110th St, 96th ST and 81st last Friday, and all the trains seemed to be going at nearly the same speed to me, regardless of the R-series in the consist.
--Mark
Well, get used to it, Pete. The TA is definitely slowing down the system with all sorts of timers; be they grade time, station time, approach, lunar white, or wheel detectors. And it costs lots of money to change them in order to speed up service, so don't look for them to change anytime soon.
I've noticed that the timers are mostly on mainline express tracks, and not on the local. Which might explain why local trains are only two or three minutes behind their express counterparts. Yet another reason to grab a local when it comes.
These timers kinda defeat the whole idea of express trains and services. They're the main reason why there isn't that much of difference on some lines between the express and local. Expresses are supposed to be fast, especially where there are long stretches between express stops. On the Central Park West Line and certain areas of the Queens Blvd Line that is not the case. As a kid (which wasn't that long ago) I remember how trains used to blow through these stretches. I suspect that the MTA is purposely trying to get more people to ride the local trains. If there are no safety issues involved, then I think that creating these timers are a complete waste of money. What can anyone do about them though?
Expresses are not supposed to be fast; they are supposed to make less stops.
I don't know about that, I think passengers generally favor expresses over locals because they believe they could get to their destination quicker with expresses. An express doing 15 kinda defeats that whole idea (not to mention the original planners intent of these routes).
I don't know about that, I think passengers generally favor expresses over locals because they believe they could get to their destination quicker with expresses.
That's probably why the average passenger would wait for an express. However, I think that expresses just make less stops as Alex L has said. With the expresses, you only gain about 2 or 3 minutes. For instance, the when an express train goes from 36th street to Pacific, it will usually pass 1 local and catch up to another local waiting at Pacific. However, if the local at 36 leaves even a minute earlier, the express will pass the local at Prospect Av or 9th St. From there, the express and the local have the same amount of distance to Pacific. By the time the express is at Pacific, I'll bet the local's one stop away at Union St. If they leave 36 together, however, the local will be passed at 25th St when it needs to stop. I'm pretty sure the local will be at 9th St or heading to Union by the time the express is at Pacific.
Also with Lexington Av express. 2 summers ago, when I needed to go to 68th st, I took the express to GCT because it's the last express station with both local and express on the same platform. On the first morning, I saw a 6 at BB. I though it's a local and there's a long way up Lex, so I stayed on the express. I passed no other locals on the way up and that 6 ended up at GCT not much later than the express pulled out.
Same with 6th Ave express. From W4 to 34, on the express feels fast and seem fast considering it's only 2 minutes to go 30 blocks. Everytime there was a F at W4 and I was on the express, the express gets to 34th first, of course. However, it amazes me that when I get off the train, the same F from W4 is pulling in. It's the same because I remembered the car numbers. How did the F do that? It makes 3 extra stops, yet it right behind the express... amazing.
Last week I made a connection with the same 3 at 72, 42, & 14.
And, thanks to the new WD on the express track at 96, the 3 probably missed the connection there.
They put in wheel detectors at 96 St southbound?
The ones entering 96 northbound, active only when the train will be crossed to the Upper B'way local, have been there since the Lenox Invert project
No Alex. No new WD's on Broadway.
No, northbound.
Perhaps they've been there for a while, but they've generally been inactive until now. Now they seem to be active whenever any train pulls in on the express track -- perhaps because 2 trains now merge in from the local.
You're forgetting about the comfort factor. When you take an express (especially during rush hour), you can sort of settle into a spot a little longer. On the local, at the 2 or 3 stops where the express whizzes by, you have people alighting and detraining, causing you and your neighbors to have to shift around, or perhaps crushing you against your fellow passengers even more as they enter the car. And we've all played the get-out-of-the-way-of-one-passenger-only-to-hear-a-nasal-exCUSE-me-of-another-whose-way-you-just-got-in game at stops during rush hour. Of course, that's just part of the commute, and we all have to deal with it. However, on an express train, especially on most IND routes, having less stops to wait for the shift of passengers can make the trip a little more pleasant, if not faster.
Express trains are much more crowded than locals, the exception being the 1 & 6 lines perhaps.
Still, fewer stops means fewer hassles. When I lived on the U.E.S., I did find the 6 was always less crowded than the 4 or 5 in the morning rush. Keep in mind that the continuous lack of 2nd Ave subway makes the Lex line a unique animal. My destination was only 4 local stops away anyway, so I just took the 6. Had I had a longer trip, I would have opted for the 4 or 5 and dealt with the crunch, but not the monotonous stop-stop-stop...
And, until the express was cancelled on Monday, the N in Astoria.
I see you're assuming that you have a seat. When I ride the subway, I assume that I'll stand, and occasionally I get a pleasant surprise. On the local I'm more likely to get a seat eventually, especially if I stay on past a transfer point to the express, because (as you say) the local has greater turnaround. Rapid turnaround is a good thing.
Good point about expresses and locals, N Train. I guess I'm one of those people who are convinced that local trains are the devil. Sometimes there just isn't a big difference between the express and local; such as the 4th Ave (Brooklyn) 6 Ave or Broadway El lines. Other times they're big differences between expresses and locals such as the Brighton or Flushing lines. I guess it depends on the number of stations the express skips on a line and the amount of traffic on the express tracks.
It's funny you should mention the Brighton Express and Local. If I'm not mistaken, the Brighton Express has no timers on it between Prospect Park and Sheepshead Bay in both directions. Surprising. I wonder how long it will be before the TA slows that down.
SSssshhhhhhhhhhh! :)
I second that!!!
Yeah, really.
You do have the annual fall slowdown northbound around Av. H. Takes away the most exciting part of the run.
Station timers, yes...grade timers, no(t yet).
David
Is it Sheepshead s/b that people overrun?
Not in MY days ... there IS a curve though ... S/B ... Brighton next. Home balls ...
Maybe it was Kings Hway express
It's not a bad station it just is faster than it looks. My theory is that with all that back and forth on the curve the wheels aren't in full contact with the rail for the brake to take fully.
Nyah Nyah yourself we only have 3mph deceleration not 4 like you guys did. Did you use the Fred Flintsone method to get that extra stopping power?
Heh ... back in MY day buster, we had TA issued Fred Flintstone rockasauarus shoes that not only stopped the train, but left SPLINTERS in the platform. :)
I remember that stop ... as I've confessed MANY times, I was a pussy on the handle ... you learned to do that with R1/9's the way they were (ahem) "maintained" ... no two stops the same. I guess that's why I can handle writing software to work with "Billyware" ... heh.
But yes, your MTA dress shoes were worn to a nub after two trips. :)
And yeah, you're right ... that's why ops in my time were "full serve, regular or premium first" and you'd INCH up to the marker ... just in case you passed it. (grin)
Didn't they have a coal stoker when you operated? Or was it still mule pulled?
It was done with cables and sails. Heh. Those hamsters at Kips Bay gave their all. :)
Other times they're big differences between expresses and locals such as the Brighton or Flushing lines.
The Brighton express saves seven minutes. The Flushing express saves six minutes.
Expresses save time for those traveling between express stops; locals save time for those traveling between local stops. That seems pretty obvious.
Check out 4 track (uptown local) from Franklin Ave. to Chambers St. if you think that there are not alot of timers on local tracks.
You are right. That whole northbound part of the Brooklyn IRT has nothing but timers on it between Franklin Avenue and Atlantic Avenue on both the Lexington and Seventh Avenue Lines. I never understood why.
The 7th Avenue Line between Wall and Chambers Streets in Manhattan I can see putting timers; after all, some of those curves are very sharp.
Police= New York's Finest
Firemen= New York's Bravest
Sanitation= New York's Strongest
TA= New York's Safest
Safety is the TA's only concern. Fast efficient service was erased from their list of priorities years ago.
Thankyou LuchAAA...makes me proud. CI Peter
If safety and speed are mutually exclusive (and I'm far from convinced they are), wouldn't you rather have the former?
Ron in Bayside, Stephen Baumann, and Peter Rosa and JC Gridlock got it right. (have I missed anyone else? Sorry.)
The location is in Boston’s South End under the old Orange Line, between Dover St. and Northampton St. stations. I lived in Boston for many years, and took shots in this area while the el was still running as well as during and after it’s demolition. Thompson Square station listed in one of the links is not in the South End, it was on the northern part of the Orange line across the river in Charlestown, that ended service several years earlier (1975?) than the southern half which ran until 1987.
RonInBayside needed two tries, though. My first guess, posted in response to the question, was the Jamaica El.
The Jamaica el would have been my first guess as well, due to the missing middle track. It didn't look anything like the Jamaica el otherwise, so it wasn't a very good guess -- and, besides, the definitive answer was posted by the time I first saw the thread.
Thompson Square station listed in one of the links is not in the South End...
I didn't mean to imply that the ambulance scene was at Thompson square; rather, the style of the structure in the Thompson Square photos was almost identical.
OK......what's the latest news on the R-143 30 clock ?
Any problems ? I heard of no setbacks. If so, can we be heading to a straight 30 days with no problems ?
The suspense is killing me !!
Bill "Newkirk"
On our little trip, I was told there was ONE reset somewhere around the 10th ... none since that I'm aware of ... looks like those babies are going to make the finish line unlike some of our friends on the IRT ...
>>looks like those babies are going to make the finish line unlike some of our friends on the IRT <<
HAH !! THE BMT STILL RULES !
Bill "Newkirk"
PUT that thing back in yer pants ... wanna go blind?!?!?! But yeah, B division size does seem to work better than the A division size. 16 ounce cans for 12 ounce cans or something like that.
The 10th is the last day of the test for what I was told a few day ago by the Company emp on the train. I possed this a few day ago, in a one of the other threads.
Robert
Knew I heard it somewhere. Given the experiences over on the other division, it's nice to see some new cars made right. Aside from the placement of the handle. I ain't giving up that one bit of kvetching easily. :)
Didn't they cheat one day - a false indication which disrupted service anyhow, and they didn't reset the clock ?
>>Didn't they cheat one day - a false indication which disrupted service anyhow, and they didn't reset the clock ? <<
I heard that was a false indication and not a mechanical fault that would have sidelined the trainset. Even if it was a fault and the clock had to be reset, look how flawless they are so far. Got my fingers crossed.
Bill "Newkirk"
So how do we explain this sudden success?
Are all of the functioning parts the same as the R142 parts -- which have now been de-bugged -- just attached to a wider frame?
>>So how do we explain this sudden success?<<
Maybe the R-142A was the ultimate guinea pig ! Since all the bugs were worked out, they just applied that to the R-143s as production just maybe underway.
BTW - I photographed and rode the R-143s today. You can tell they have been running 25 days straight. They are getting grungy inside and out. A Kawasaki employee with a clipboard told me that this was day 25 on the 30 day clock.
Bill "Newkirk"
NO......R142 parts are not Kawasaki.....R142As share with R143. There are many commonly shared parts but Bomba and Kawa are different fruits. The MAJOR difference between R142s and R142As is undercar: Kawasakis trucks will last far longer on NYC trackage. CI Peter
There was also one day that the destination signs and automated announcements weren't functioning (due to shuttle bus service in the middle of the line).
Let us keep our fingers crossed that the R-143s make it to the 30 day mark without a hitch.
#3 West End Jeff
Let's not. The more problems are discovered now, the fewer have to be fixed later, at the TA's expense.
When you buy a dishwasher with a 60-day warranty, do you baby it for those 60 days so you won't have to use the warranty? Of course not -- you make it work as hard as you can so that if it's not up to snuff, you'll know before you have to worry about repairs.
It is in the TA's interests to allow the 30-day clock to run as long as possible. The manufacturer would have been thrilled if the TA had dispensed with the clock entirely.
Agreed entirely. Kawasaki is probably a far more better manufacturer of trainsets than Bombardier and the TA has only recently learned some hard learned lessons in replacing the Redbird fleet. We're busy discovering new maintainance problems holding up the R142 fleet for RTO duty. Balking about the announcements, seating and lighting is BS....what counts to NYC TA is getting people to work on time. CI Peter
Given how much the TA (i.e., the riding public) has paid for the fancy announcements, seating, and lighting (no, I don't have a number), balking about these systems is very much appropriate.
Are the Kawasaki built R-62s better than the Bombardier R-62As?
#3 West End Jeff
Mean Distance Between Failures, October 2001:
R-62: 272,365
R-62A: 149,176
David
That the R62 has such a high MDBF is truly remarkable. Those cars acclumulate a lot of mileage in a hurry and spend lots of time on the road. It is express to Utica during the day, yet on the midnite it is all local with a longer run the New Lots. This means that while other lines lay up most of their fleet at night, they can't due to the additional time it takes to make a round trip to/from Woodlawn.
That the R62 has such a high MDBF is truly remarkable. Those cars acclumulate a lot of mileage in a hurry and spend lots of time on the road. It is express to Utica during the day, yet on the midnite it is all local with a longer run the New Lots. This means that while other lines lay up most of their fleet at night, they can't due to the additional time it takes to make a round trip to/from Woodlawn.
Only 84% of the "Remarkable" R62's is available for servie. Only 77% are currently required for peak service. It would appear that the maintenance services have a very long time to keep them maintained.
By contrast the 88% of the R62A's are available for service and 80% are used during peak periods.
Of course, the availability king title goes to the R33S's with 89% of the fleet available and 82% being used during pead service.
If you keep bowing to the false god of MDBF you will find that 10 minute rush hour headways will become the norm. :-)
In the case of the 143 out on the Canarsie line, it does appear as though THIS trainset was built well. TA's gotten MIGHTY fussy lately and is looking for any little detail to hit the reset over, especially after the acceptance problems for the others. These might actually turn out to NOT be TA citrus ...
What's disappointing in my mind is how forgiving the TA has been of major design flaws in the automated signage/announcement system.
Heh. Well, if that's all that's still broken, I for one would just cut the wires and declare victory. :)
And let passengers guess where the train is going? That might be okay on the L -- but it will cause problems on the M, which shares trackage with the J/Z, N, R, and W and shares the platform at DeKalb with the Q.
Besides, the riding public paid a lot of money for a system that so far has been a lot less reliable than a set of rollsigns -- even the kind on the Redbirds with publicly accessible knobs.
The riding public has unknowingly paid a lot of money for trainsets that do not always let them know where they are or where they're going. They do not even know how lucky they might be in getting to their destinations on schedule. The manufacturer of the trainsets along with their vendors assume sole responsibility for delivering defective equipment.....TA placed a hold on acceptance of any new R142s for a reason. CI Peter
I don't disagree with you in any way shape or form. I guess I'm a product of my own TA environment. When you would literally KISS the platform when you got to where you had planned on, and in one piece. BONUS points if it was the same day you LEFT for that location. :)
Thus, I'm remarkably easy to please. Your mileage may vary. If the end sign tells me what train it is, I'll be responsible for the rest and knowing where my stop is long before I get there. Used to be like that.
But the first time I rode the R-143 (during the L GO), the end sign was turned off! So were the side signs, internal signs, automated announcements, and (surprising, but not critical by any means) door chimes. It simply could not handle the fact that it was only going as far as Myrtle. Even the R-46 does better than that (the side signs can be programmed to display any B Division station, although not necessarily with a route letter, and the end signs are, of course, independent of any automation).
Heh. Well, a contractor will build what they're told to AS they're told to, so it would appear there could have been some Bronx Handshake in the design. Still, I'd be willing to forgive something like that in an unusual circumstance. Did you MAKE it to Myrtle? That'd be my biggest concern. Up here where I live, if the lights are on, life is good. :)
Do you mean that the announcements and signs only work right when the train runs it's normal route? If a run anything other than it's normal route the announcements and signs don't work. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
There is no automated announcement and destination sign menu programed into an L train operating between Canarise and Myrtle/Wycoff. That is one of the criticisms to the new car engineering people that RTO has reported. It is up to the powers beyond the scope of RTO to make the situation proper.
I'm CERTAIN it can be easily programmed into the system, just wasn't done prior to the need. After all, we managed to upload over 1500 pictures from Harry's place into the computer before the train crashed. :)
Kidding!
Can't they at least overide the system and make live station announcements? Although I still can't see in this era of computers that they can't program alternate routes in addition to the normal route.
No offense, but these are NEW, PROGRAMMABLE cars ... what we seem to have here is the lack of foreskin to have "programmed in" the situation at hand. Lacking such a solution to "what if it terminates at a strange stop?" since the 143's are in TESTING on road duty, the option was likely not there to bring it back to the barn for "regrooving" ... since the 143's are under "test status" and since the change of operating mode was a GO of some sorts, sure as getout wouldn't be fair to the vendor under "reichstad gepruft" (testing) to make them change the annoucements without a "time out" ...
I understand that a lot of people may be unhappy with the subway for whatever slights there may be in a given day - I remember a time when the subways were a *JOKE* and having visited after nearly 30 years absence from the "system", I was not only impressed by how it all runs TODAY, but have stains in the pants that will NOT wash out over how WELL it's running now.
Geez, get OVER it ... the 143's are NOT in service ... they're getting stomped BRONX style in service, and those babies are taking a licking and keep on ticking ... bad signage? bad announces? Hell, let's see them do that on day 31 through day 400,067 ... unimportant in the greter scheme AT THE MOMENT! (emphasis)
"what we seem to have here is the lack of foreskin to have "programmed in" the situation at hand"
WHAT?!
oh my!
Oy GEVALT - as joe would say from time to time
Live station announements were being made by the conductor....I am sure that the missing program (Canarsie to Myrtle/Wycoff) will be programed in.
They can make manual announcements, but there are no rollsigns to be manually cranked.
well i saw the R143 go by today and it look as sharp as a thistle.
Let me guess. You took a picture from the front of an R-42 passing the other way at Sutter. Funny, so did I!
Isn't it just amazing.....SOAC and we can't update the displays or announcements. It isn't beyond the scope of RTO to make the situation proper...revenue means MONEY and if the trainset is defective....a REFUND is DUE. Bombardier and Kawasaki have failed to provide Car Equipment Department the tools to update systems...they're keeping the work to themselves...and so has the vendors. CI Peter
The signs and announcements only work on programmed routes. Any deviation, and not only are there no automated announcements, there are no route signs.
IMO, the R-143 should have no difficulty being programmed to make any subset of the L stops. The destination sign would give the last stop programmed, and announcements would still work. The R-142(A) should be programmable for all mainline IRT stations, allowing, say, a 2 to be rerouted up the East Side (either for a GO or on the spur of the moment). It should also figure out, based on the stops it's programmed to make, whether it's a local or an express.
Knob Rotation kicks ass. I love my 4 To woodlawn as south terminal and 111st Corona as my north terminal. Bou howdy go figure that one.
(Don't blame me -- I didn't do it.)
niceee
I have a hex so i've been known to play around with the R-32 side signs as well
A lost Redbird. Hmmmmm.
No. Special GO !!! Start at 138th..go around the Ferry and continue up to 96th !!!
They are not major design flaws.....the automated announcements and the destination displays do work flawlessly. Problem is that the system is still too new and that inspection crews do not have the laptops in each team to do the work.......in fact, TA does not have available to us the necessary equipment and software to update anything. These problems still remain in the hands of the vendors and TA is NOT forgiving of these problems. David, you know me by now and how much I'm interested in doing this work. You have read my postings AND KNOW MY ASSIGNMENTS. The work that is being done is to make the R142 trainsets reliable for everyday usage. The TA was 'forced' into a situation of 'international cooperation' that has yet to benefit the public. It is a sorry situation when the work that needs to be done will be done by US when the warranties expire. As always, the R142s remain safe transportation. 'Let MTA get you there...Car Inspectors assure your safety.' CI Peter
The warranty period is 5 years, correct? I think that's an awefully short time considering the life span of a subway car is supposed to be 50+ years. It's like having only a 9 day warranty on your VCR :)
There's a lot more things that can go wrong on a train than a VCR too.
Shawn.
I don't expect R142s to run for five years with the truck they are equipped with. TA isn't going to play games anymore with manufacturers and vendors...the public expects up to date transports and demands service. Nuff said
Sure hope you guys kept some of those redbird trucks in the back of the carbarn ... can we say "retro" boys and girls? :)
180th crew foreman has me pegged for sub work on Redbirds...really good feeling, really confidence building. I do know for a fact that there will be some 'Redbird reserve' held but I for one want to see an end to the nasty-dirty work...my job changes every day. I'm towards the last page for the 'pick' and like the day troubles crew. I found my work, a home and friends. CI Peter
That is true. I wonder if the T/A is trying to work the hell out of the R-143s to see if they're up to snuff?
#3 West End Jeff
I have no idea.
If the R-143's are really working as well as the test results would indicate, great. I'm just worried that the TA is engaging in grade inflation, which isn't good for any of us.
When we rode it last Christmas, it was chock full of people with stopwatches timing the doors, a full cab people with clipboards and test equipment out the wazoo ... I don't think they're playing around with any of the testing ... and knowing what trains SHOULD do, I can tell ya, I had my eye peeled too and every aspect I could detect was flawless ...
Okay, Selkirk, here we go again. The R143s are running over B division, but former BMT trackage. I still think of the R1/9s you loved as filth, steel dust loaded, smoky, bare-light-bulb cattle cars that huffed and puffed in their and long, depressing underground stretches. Fine for the C and E lines. They should never have been allowed on a BMT line. Ever.
Huff and puff?!? Come on. Moaned, groaned, grunted, snarled and hissed, yes. Those old timers could MOVE. Unless you had a train with a bunch of bad motors.
Guys: don't paralyze your fingers crossing.....grab a 40 oz. CI Peter
Heh. I managed to take some time at ground level next to a 143 and had a GOOD look around them. The battery box on the B cars HAS air holes. :)
They do look well built, felt good on the rails and moved. No funny noises. Seriously, I expect them to do well and you KNOW what a pain in the butt I can be when judging railcars. Heh. I'd go into more detail but let's see where this thread goes ...
i can't comment on R143 tech yet...I am sure they are better cars. CI Peter
Not having been in a situation of tearing any down in a shop, can't say I'd be qualified. But IMPRESSIONS from riding and taking looks at things I knew to look for left me mighty impressed so far ... and the Canarsie line has just about everything you'd want to test a trainset with ... they're still running. Just a few days left before they reach the finish line ...
You're qualified. Certified QSL CI Peter
If all goes well with the test, when should the new sets start coming, and will they also go on the other eastern div. lines, J & M
The prevailing wisdom that the R143 will make up all L line consists with the leftovers going to the M. The M is presumed to go OPTO for shuttle operations when that happens.
What does OPTO mean?
OPTO is short for One Person Train Operation.
#3 West End Jeff
Ebay has these rapid chargers for $25 the go for 80 to 100 bucks so go check it out
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1317163667
antique ht radio battery chargers? WB2SGT CI Peter
Is Metro-North going to stop at Penn Station? Is the LIRR going to stop at Grand Central? When? I caught the end of a Penny Crone report on FOX5 News (I love Penny Crone haha what a man) about it and I was wondering why; because both could actually benefit me and my co-workers. Thanks!
Is Metro-North going to stop at Penn Station?
The MTA has plan for it to do so once the LIRR East Side Connector lets LIRR run to GCT and frees up some Penn Station slots. See their Penn Station Access study documents on the MTA website.
Is the LIRR going to stop at Grand Central?
Yes. It should open in 12 years or so. Construction has already started in the Sunnyside Yards to connect the LIRR mainline to the lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel. See the MTA's East Side Access project website.
The only MN trains seriously under consideration for going to Penn are New Haven Line trains. Everything else is SubTalk fantasy.
The only MN trains seriously under consideration for going to Penn are New Haven Line trains. Everything else is SubTalk fantasy.
I'm not so sure. Read the MTA study I referenced. They're at least LOOKING at what it would take to run all three lines. My take on likelihood is:
NEW HAVEN: Most likely ... run 'em over Hell Gate, catenary already exists for Amtrak.
HUDSON LINE: Next likely, trackage already there following Amtrak's Empire Line. Need to EITHER add third rail from Spuyten Duyvil to Penn (for Croton-Harmon and below) OR run only diesels (entire Hudson Line).
HARLEM LINE: Least likely, probably fantasy. The routings are too tough. Either they add too much time (through The Hub and back up to Spuyten Duyvil and the Empire Line) or are tricky to build (to get Harlem Line onto reverse-direction New Haven to then turn again onto Hell Gate).
HUDSON LINE: Next likely, trackage already there following Amtrak's Empire Line. Need to EITHER add third rail from Spuyten Duyvil to Penn (for Croton-Harmon and below) OR run only diesels (entire Hudson Line).
I don't know if that will work. They can't run diesels into Penn Station.
I don't know if that will work. They can't run diesels into Penn Station.
Thought they couldn't run diesels through the Hudson tunnels. This doesn't use those.
AND, aren't the Hudson Line diesels actually bimode to use the Park Avenue Tunnel?
AND, Amtrak's Empire trains sure ain't electrics, and THEY use Penn Station ... and those Turbos are smoky and smelly ....
AND, aren't the Hudson Line diesels actually bimode to use the Park Avenue Tunnel?
The problem with that is those diesels use a different type of third rail. LIRR is over the rail. Metro North is under the rail.
The problem with that is those diesels use a different type of third rail. LIRR is over the rail. Metro North is under the rail.
Oh, right. DUH!
Still ... couldn't they run diesel on the West Side to the start of the Connector south of 42nd Street? I have to think there's some way to run MN third rail from there into one platform at Penn, since the Connector does NOT have third rail now.
And what about those Amtrak diesels from Empire service ... ???
And what about those Amtrak diesels from Empire service ... ???
Good question. Anyone know how Amtrak hanldles that problem?
They are dual-mode, running as electrics from third rail (as described earlier in the thread) into Penn.
Yeah I know, but the confusion arose over the different third rail for M-N and LIRR. I guess then, they use diesel until Penn and then use use LIRR version of third rail. So basically, Metro North would have to have dedicated LIRR equipped dual modes to operate the Hudson into Penn.
Not necessarily. MN could equip the entire west Side line with MN's own version of third rail, then use several dedicated tracks at Penn that also use the MN version. That would be easier all around -- for both Amtk and MN.
MN could equip the entire west Side line with MN's own version of third rail, then use several dedicated tracks at Penn that also use the MN version.
We need to know where Amtrak's dual-modes go electric ... is it around 42nd Street or at the north end of the West Side line? In either case, I think you would have at least a short segment of the Connector into Penn that would require BOTH kinds of third rail. Is THAT possible?
They are dual-mode, running as electrics from third rail (as described earlier in the thread) into Penn.
Including the Turbos ???
One more issue: not all the route from Spuyten Duyvel (sp?) to Penn Station is 2 tracks.
What do you mean? Are there stretches where there is only a single track?
- Lyle Goldman
Other posts on this site have mentioned the bridge over the Harlem River and the connector at the south end near Penn Station as being a single track.
Another issue that has been discussed and not resolved, as far as I know, is what kind of power would you use on Hudson Line to Penn trains? MN and LIRR use different third rails. This is not a problem on the New Haven Line because those cars already are outfitted with both MN 3rd rail and pantographs.
I suppose you could outfit the link with overhead wire and use New Haven Line style rolling stock, but this still makes the whole project much more complicated than New Haven Line trains going into Penn.
What's the problem? Put in MN 3rd rail. Hudson, Harklem and NH plus Amtrak can use it. Then dedicate several trcaks at Penn to this service, using MN 3rd rail instead of LIRR 3rd rail.
Dedicated tracks sounds like the snag to me. You certainly can't dedicate any tracks in either of the yards or the tunnel under the East River. Also, Amtrak doesn't use MN 3rd rail, but that's not an issue.
I think you'd have to put in overhead wire, which of course isn't impossible.
You can dedicate the tracks on the west side line and into Penn. That would use MN's 3rd rail. No need to dedicate tracks under the East River. MN's New Haven line can use the existing catenary wire all the way over the Hell Gate bridge and into Penn, like Amtrak does.
You can dedicate the tracks on the west side line and into Penn. That would use MN's 3rd rail.
Actually I suspect that Amtrak Empire service & MN Hudson Line trains might have to share tracks.
No one's answered an earlier question: Can you have tracks wired for both third rail (of one kind of another) AND catenary? 'Cause some part of the Connector has catenary to run the Amtrak trains into Penn. That means to run Hudson Line trains in, you have to add MN third rail to a catenary track. Any examples of this anywhere in the system?
Surely the 32nd/33rd Street tunnels under the East River must have both catenary (for Amtrak) and 3rd rail (for LIRR).
Surely the 32nd/33rd Street tunnels under the East River must have both catenary (for Amtrak) and 3rd rail (for LIRR).
Doh! Right. There you have it. (Unless for some obscure reason 2 of the 4 have catenary and the other 2 have third-rail ... any T/Os wanna comment?)
They have to all have thrid rail because the LIRR uses them all. At least 1 or 2 have to have catenary for Amtrak.
If I recallcorrectly, some of the tracks in the Sunnyside Yard and leading to the East River tubes have both third rail and catenary (except where Amtrak diverges to go north into the Bronx). The Hudson tube does not, because no third-rail service operates that way.
Do any of the Amtrak trains on the Empire and Adirondack lines run on electricity? If so, what kind do they use?
- Lyle Goldman
Do any of the Amtrak trains on the Empire and Adirondack lines run on electricity? If so, what kind do they use?
Sure... all of them do. It's the kind they generate on board :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
One more issue: not all the route from Spuyten Duyvel (sp?) to Penn Station is 2 tracks
You sure? I thought they double-tracked the whole thing several years ago.
You're right for the actual Connector itself (the late '80s part between the West Side Line and the Penn interlocking). It was expensive enough to thread a single track under the foundations of the tall buildings above it -- they actually had to transfer load from one foundation column and remove the column altogether to get the alignment in.
The Spuyten Duyvil Bridge is single-tracked -- though years ago it was double-tracked, so I assume they could do it again.
Does anyone know what the first equipment that was given the 30 day test was?
I think it may have been the R46, brought on by all the problems with the R44's, but I don't really know.
The earliest 30-day test I know of was the R-62, in 1983, which followed the R-44 (just about everything) AND R-46 (mostly undercarriage) problems.
David
Yes, the debacles with the R44 & R46 led to a major change in the way the TA procured new cars.
Would the R-44s and R-46s pass the 30 day test? Perhaps not. I'm sure they still have problems keeping them running at times to this day.
#3 West End Jeff
Who on this board rode those BMT Multisections??
I think those were really cute trains...too bad they scrapped them all.
Also...
What color were they exactly??
They look brown in some color photos from the era, maroon/dark red in others.
Are there any serviving units today?
No, all were scrapped when they were retired in 1961.
-- Ed Sachs
"No, all were scrapped when they were retired in 1961."
Which was before they thought of saving cars for historical purposes, probably..
Still...
Does anyone know what color the Multis really were??
They seemed to be the same color as the Standards, "weathered".
I hate to say this, but there are no surviving Multi-Section units today. They were all scrapped by 1962 to my best guess.
#3 West End Jeff
I rode the Multis in service in their last regular home, #10 Myrtle-Chambers. I didn't know their history, then, and didn't much care for them. They weren't terrible attractive or comfortable, but were they ever SPEEDY.
Think R-10 with a hotshot motorman but faster.
But what COLOR were they??
:)
Greller says they were Light Brown with Silver roofs, though his rendering on the cover of Cars of the BMT is rather reddish.
At the time they were retired, the TA didn't wash cars, so virtually all equipment, the Multis included, were a sort of neutral grayish brown (I guess you would call it), a combination of dirt, grease and steel dust.
I have that book, and it's fantastic...
Also, his other book, NYC Subway Cars, is great.
I saw the Multi pictures in there, but I wasn't sure of their exact color because in the color pictures of them, all the colors look a little off.
Thanks for your help, I appreciate it, as always.
:)
The word "grimey" seems an appropriate adjective to describe what all cars looked like by the early 1960's.
>>But what COLOR were they??<<
I have a slide taken at E.105th St on the Canarsie Line and the cars are painted brown. Whether that was a repaint or original, I'm not sure. But most of the older BMT cars like the Standards and D-Types were brown when they were new. I was told the same color brown as a UPS truck. BTW - the E105th St shot was real old. there was nothing on either side of the tracks. The sticks man !!
Bill "Newkirk"
>>> the same color brown as a UPS truck. <<<
But unwashed for twenty years and with absolutely no reflective shine. If you ran a finger along the outside surface when a car was in a station, it felt gritty, and your finger was extremely dirty.
Tom
I've heard that the articulation of the multi's allowed them to traverse the sharp curves of the eastern division at higher speeds than other cars. They also had horrible brakes and often overshot stations.
Wish the R143's were designed this way. If you're gonna permanently link them in 4 car sets, why not use articulation?
Grellar's book has a story of a multi-section running through the Myrtle Avenue station, through the switch over to the Myrtle Avenue El, up the ramp, and then finally stopping at Central (I think).
All with no apparent reason.
Yup, I read that story. Talk about lousy brakes! No wonder these trains ran non stop on the 14th St line in Brooklyn.
I've heard those stories too, but never experienced it myself. From what I've heard, it had more to do with a control issue than brakes, per se.
The account in Grellar's book made it sound like it was funny. "Boy, those cars did just like to run," is how I remembered it.
You could have had a major disaster at the crossover, or running into the rear end of one of the wooden el cars that were still running on the Myrtle.
These were the days before radio communications.
Dumb question: could the multi's run on the lower Myrtle Ave el safetly? What about the experimental Zepher & Bluebirds?
The Multi's could run on any of the elevateds since they were lightweight cars. So could the Zephyr and the Green Hornet.
#3 West End Jeff
The Multi's were 10 feet wide. Ditto for the other Zephyr, Green Hornet and Bluebirds. The lower Myrtle could take only 9 foot wide cars.
So a simple platform shaving was all that was needed? No problems with excessive weight?
May also have had problems with signals, station houses, etc.
I'm sure if the platforms were shaved on the lower portion of the Myrtle Ave. line the Multi's could have theoretically operated on that portion of the Myrtle Ave. El. On the other hand, other things could have gotten in the way.
#3 West End Jeff
It appeals to me that the antique construction of the lower myrtle might have caused clearance problems with the station houses.
It was not at all certain the lower myrt was going to be abandoned when the BUs were junked in favor of the Qs. If the platforms could have been trimmed without major work, it would have made much more sense to use the Multis than the Qs, at least after 1961, when the R27s started coming in.
Unfortunately the Multi's were retired after 1961 and subsequently scrapped.
#3 West End Jeff
Well, that's my point. The Qs substituted for the BUs in 1958. When the R27s made the Multis surplus in 1961 they could have been used on the lower Myrtle if it were possible to run 10' cars. At the time the Multis were only about 25 years old.
They were stupid when they scrapped the Multi's in 1961. If they were willing to shave the platforms on the lower Myrtle Ave. El at that time there would have been more "modern" cars running on it for at least a few more years.
#3 West End Jeff
However, by 1961, the Multis were suffering badly from deferred maintenance, and were in much worse shape than the Qs, which, by the way, were essentially rebuilt from the ground up in 1938, so in a sense, they were newer than the Multis by a couple of years.
-- Ed Sachs
If I'm not mistaken, they were having some problems with the brakes on the Multi's from accounts that I've read about them.
#3 West End Jeff
NO PROBLEM! We ran R1/9's also. No brakes, no problem. That's what DOOR CUTOUTS were for! :)
The door cutouts were the "Emergency Brakes" in a sense.
#3 West End Jeff
Heh. So was standing in the doorway if they opened up anyway. :)
Interesting "Emergency Brakes" to say the least.
#3 West End Jeff
Well ... they USUALLY stopped where you wanted them to ... :)
How about the times they didn't stop. That DID happen on occasion.
#3 West End Jeff
HEY! You busta my balls ... yeah, sometimes they didn't ... but when we DIDN'T raise command in a dead spot, I'd open the door after dropping a few switches, step into the car after the long buzz and say "sorry folks, this train's out of service - please exit this car to the NEXT car - EVERYBODY off ...
There would usually be 5-8 people left who would provide that MTA "free dumb look" we'd hear so much about ... to those geese once the car cleared, would come the NEXT level of "customer service" ... "I suppose you didn't hear this - We've had a MAJOR brake failure and this train is out of service - you're lucky you weren't KILLED ... DAMN lucky! This train is out of service and going to the yards. For those who STILL didn't get the message, it was - "there's a bomb." Didn't impress the geese either. Wonder for WHY my attitude? :)
Maybe we could put Osama Bin Laden on a train with NO brakes and no operator. Then let the train roll somewhere in the yard and bump into something. Then if were lucky he can be knocked unconscious at the very least.
#3 West End Jeff
They could have been overhauled, like some Standards were in 1959/60. I'd think metal cars would be preferable to what were essentially 50 yo wooden cars.
They had some SOUL and didn't require platform shavings to platforms that were already pretty narrow in the middle of the el to begin with. The lower MYRT was pretty much THIN island platforms to begin with. I remember them ... they were too narrow with the Q's on them ...
The Myrtle el platforms don't look any more narrower than the current J platforms over Fulton St:
TRUE ... but if the Q's weren't *IRT* width, those platforms would have really made ya think about giving up your lunch ... REMEMBER that the Q's were IRt width, not BMT width and thus you had a little over a foot of platform width than you would have ended up with if they were shaved for Multis ...
If the stations were converted to BMT width, the platforms would have to be shaved back a grand total of 6 inches on each side.
Yep ... since they're island platforms, they'd be one foot narrower across ... and those platforms weren't terribly wide in the first place since they occupied a trackwidth had the el been a three-tracker like the IRT el's we're used to today.
That platform hardly seems to be so narrow that a foot difference would be noticable. We're not talking a high-capacity line here. But as others said, shaving the platforms would mean that the station houses would have to be narrowed as well.
No, but having USED the Myrt myself, the platforms WERE narrower than many others elsewhere in the system. You'd NOTICE it ...
If the Multis were too wide for the lower Myrtle, Lexington and 5th Ave Els, how were the Green Hornet, Zephyr and #8000 Bluebird able to navigate the entire Fulton St. El? I also read that a Multi ran its entire length in non-revenue service just after delivery in 1936. Weren't portions of the FS El built to carry the BMT Standards from Nostrand to Atlantic Aves? That being said, the rest of the line dated back to the nineteenth century.
Carl M.
Carl: When the C-Types were placed in service the platforms on the Fulton Street El were cut back to accomadate 10 foot wide cars.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Yes, parts of the Fulton St. el were upgraded in anticipation of the Ashland Place connection being built. It never was. The portion used by A trains today was an extension of the original route and was built to subway standards right from the start.
I'm not sure the Myrt couldn't have been altered to accomodate the Multis, my question is whether the station houses, and not just the platforms, would have had to have been altered.
The Fulton Street Line was differently constructed than the Myrtle or Lex. It had mostly side platform stations and the station houses were not adjacent to the trackways. Also, the BMT had much greater incentive to go to the expense and trouble of making alterations to operate wider (therefore more commodious and modern) equipment on the Fulton Street Line since that was its second "bread-and-butter" line after the Brighton.
And it was intended to be converted to subway usage with the connection to Dekalb Ave anyway.
The entire Fulton St el was rebuilt to handle 10' cars, right?
Yes. Park Row to Lefferts.
As a matter of fact, they upgraded a portion of the Fulton St. El so that it could handle the BMT Standards. Unfortunately their efforts never came to fruit as the connection at Gold St. that would have connected the Fulton St. El to the DeKalb Ave. station was never built.
#3 West End Jeff
I'm trying to imagine the nightmare Dekalb Ave would be had the BMT got all it's lines approved:
1. Brighton express
2. Brighton local
3. Fulton St (i'm assuming 2 routes due to the traffic this line handled)
4. West End
5. Sea Beach
6. Culver
7. Staten Island
8. Fourth Ave local
How on earth would Dekalb Ave be able to handle all this traffic?
It is daunting, but once upon a time handling a number of lines through a complex interlocking seemed to be manageable.
True, but I don't see being able to operate 9 different routes through Dekalb Ave. even back then. I think the traffic would limit headways on all lines to levels that would seriously overcrowd everything.
I'm sure that DeKalb would have been able to handle the extra traffic from the Fulton St. El if the connection was built.
#3 West End Jeff
Christ R27-R30 lists the fullest BMT route proposals through DeKalb. In the 1950s, rush hour service was quite busy. Using BMT route numbers, these nine services operated:
1. Brighton Express, Local, Special
2. Fourth Avenue Local, Special
3. West End Express, Local
4. Sea Beach Express
5. Culver Express
In the morning Brighton Specials, Fourth Avenue Specials, West End Expresses, Sea Beach Expresses, and Culver Expresses all skipped DeKalb. In the evening, Brighton Specials couldn't skip DeKalb, but all the others skipped it.
Busy place. Even during the night, there were Brighton locals (via Bridge or Tunnel, depending on the hour), Fourth Avenue locals, West End expresses, Sea Beach expresses (Sea Beach skipped 24 hours a day), and Culver locals. Not much there now at night--two services instead of five? No wonder so few ride there anymore.
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam NY
Ed,
I don't rememberthe Brighton specials skipping DeKalb in the TA era. They would have had to pass the platforms at DeKalb without stopping, since there was no access to/from Brighton to the bypass tracks, either before or after the DeKalb reconfiguration.
Paul Matus writes,
>I don't remember the Brighton specials skipping DeKalb in the TA era. >They would have had to pass the platforms at DeKalb without stopping, >since there was no access to/from Brighton to the bypass tracks,
>either before or after the DeKalb reconfiguration.
Northbound, there was a bypass connection and the Brighton specials skipped DeKalb on that track. The bypass track was probably the first piece of track to be removed for the DeKalb rebuilding. The space needed to be rebuilt so the Brighton would have access to both tracks at the DeKalb platform. I wonder if the current track switch that provides that access might not be the same one that was in place in pre-rebuild days. If I hadn't ridden it a few times, I might have had doubts. (My regular train was the Fourth Avenue Special during the '50s, though I also used the other three expresses on Fourth Avenue. One of the most frustrating things would be to be looking out the railfan window after leaving Pacific and having to wait for the Brighton Special as it pulled in ahead of us.)
On the southbound side of DeKalb, I don't think the bypass tracks were ever connected to the Brighton track. There always seemed to be all sorts of stuff piled up there.
It's still interesting to me that except for longer platforms and losing Myrtle Avenue station, all that DeKalb did was to move the delays from the northern end of DeKalb to the south, but with both sides of the bridge operating, there were still delays coming off the bridge.
Ed Alfonsin
Potsdam NY
Late in 1959 the TA decided to "Rebuild" Standards in the 2400,2500,2600 and 2700 series. The 2400 series incorporated the 4000 series BX trailers. They were numbered
2400-4000-2401 thru 2498-4049-2499. Beginning in late 1960 the BX trailers were removed from these units. 2400 thru 2467 received an "A" motor in place of the former trailer. Cars were now numbered 2400-2615-2401 thru 2466-2649-2467 . 2615-2649 accounts for 35 cars but there were only 34 sets. This was because at least on 2600 had been scrapped by this time but I don't know which one. 2468-2499 were coupled into two car sets and called "BT's". Note that from about 1924 to 1927 2480-2499 had operated as two car BT sets.
The first BT to reappear in service was 2470-2471 and was in service by January 1961.
Larry,RedbirdR33
So that means there were some rebuilt single A units.
ALL the single A units in the 2600 and 2700 series were rebuilt. Some were incorporated with the 2400s to make new B units, and the rest remained A units.
>>ALL the single A units in the 2600 and 2700 series were rebuilt<<
And let's not forget #2899, the only 2800 series Standard to be rebuilt. #2899 was coupled with # 2774 and #2775. #2775 as we know is in retirement in the Nutmeg State !
Bill "Newkirk"
And appears to be the only surviving Pressed Steel square-deck-roof Standard left.
Unless there's one sitting in a field somewhere as a chicken condo.
>>Unless there's one sitting in a field somewhere as a chicken condo.<<
You know Paul, funny you should mention that. I was always thinking of a BMT Standard body being used as a chicken coop on a farm un New Jersey not far from New York.
I based this on a legend that when the Standards were being scrapped and their bodies were being cut up, only one Standard #2321 was shipped whole. The legend is that the truck with the car body was followed but only part of the way. Something about taking a different turn as opposed to the correct one that would have taken it to Sarnelli's. Someone else on this board mentioned that too a year ago, so, that's two sources I heard this from.
Bill "Newkirk"
Shipped whole "to" or "from" Sarnelli's? I remember most of the Standards sitting in Sarnelli's were initially one piece.
Either way, maybe we'll turn up a pic of a "lost" Standard some day. It's a shame that it seems just about every variant of an R1/9 was saved, but you can't make up a full-length train or either Standards ot Triplexes. Well, close on the Triplex, but no cigar.
There may be some pieces lying around of scrapped equipment, but I don't know of any listing. I once saw a pic of the center section of a Triplex sitting near the roadside somewhere.