At a few underground stations, the only ways to get to a platform entail walking up a flight. (Think of the island platform at Essex, where access is only via the IND mezzanine below. Cortlandt on the N/R may become another example shortly.) Similarly, at a few elevated stations, the only ways to get to a platform entail walking down a flight. (Think of the J/Z platform at Broadway Junction/Eastern Parkway, where the only extant mezzanine is above the platforms, or of the SB L platform at the same station, where access is via an overpass.)
What are some other examples? Or former examples?
Here are the ones I can think of:
NB(?) 1/9 at 66th Street (rectified in the rehab; until then, one platform had only part-time entry)
3 at 34th Street (access via underpass)
SB 4/5 at Wall Street (part-time entrance only; other times use underpass)
SB 4 at Bowling Green (part-time entrance only)
SB 1/2/4 at Nevins Street (part-time entrance only)
4/5 and SB 1/2 at Atlantic Avenue (access via underpass from NB 1/2 or BMT mezzanines)
M at Wyckoff Avenue (access via L mezzanine, I think)
J/Z and NB L at Broadway Junction (see above)
NB J/M/Z at Essex Street (see above)
NB J/M/Z at Canal Street (the wraparound was closed recently, so access is via underpass)
NB A at Dyckman Street (entry via underpass from SB platform)
A at 34th Street (access via underpass)
NB G at Fulton Street (not sure what the status of the NB fare control is, but it's definitely not full-time entry)
That's all I can think of, but I'm sure there are more. Anybody?
N/B 1/9 at 168 Street, only access is via an overpass. Perhaps 181 and 191 are similar?
I don't remember. Are there a few steps up from the elevator to the overpass? I think there are. If so this is a winner.
I think there are. It's been a couple of years since I've been there (wow, I used to be there a couple times a weeks -- times change).
CG
I think there are. It's been a couple of years since I've been there (wow, I used to be there a couple times a weeks -- times change).
Also, Dyckman on the 1 might qualify with an asterisk. At the southern end of the platform, you're well below street level. But the only way out is a stairway going down at the northern end of the platforms.
CG
yes they are.
East 105th on the L ... you have to go up stairs to get to the mezzanine, but the tracks are down below that on street level.
But the tracks are at street level, not below. Doesn't count.
Ah, but the platform is above street level, and you have to go down to get there!
It's a pretty cheap technicality, I admit....
It isn't exactly what I was looking for, since you don't ultimately want to go either up or down. But we could add it in a footnote. In the same category add Broad Channel and, temporarily, Howard Beach SB with its temporary island platform.
Kingsbridge on the D. At the South end you go down to exit via part-time booth and then either out to the Grand Concourse underpass or up to the Grand Concourse.
Many Concourse Line station have grade level (or just a few steps) to the Concourse udnerpass and thern up to the Concourse.
M at Wyckoff Avenue (access via L mezzanine, I think
That is true sometimes. Actually both of the original "end mezzanine entrances on Wyckoff are abandoned and removed (the current stairways throught the "station building" were probably added when the Canarsie line was built. When the station building is open it's not unusual. You walk in and either go down for the el, or up for the M. However, I believe off hours and weekends they close the station building (or at least they used to - not sure if they still do). When they do/did that, the only entrance was to walk downstairs to the L mezzanine and then back upstaris (a lot of flights - one less than if you were transfering from the L) to the M level at Wyckoff.
Chris
I used to have a lunch on the M. The only current entrance to the M is via the street level mezzanine (part-time) or from the L mezzanine.
This station will get ADA elevators in the current capital program 5 year plan. The NYCT is using eminent doma.in to aquire property to expand the station bulding
The only current entrance to the M is via the street level mezzanine (part-time) or from the L mezzanine.
That's what I thought. The "easy" exit is the part time one, while the full time exit is the one where you half to walk down to the L mezzanine before walking back up again to the M train.
where you half to walk down
What am I dumb? I mean HAVE to walk.....Too much on my mind.......
I didn't even know there was a street-level mezzanine. I'll have to check it out some day.
How about Lorimer on the L? The only full-time entrance is to the IND mezzanine, but there's an underpass to the NB platform.
West 96 on the 1/2/3/9. Down to fare control, down to the paid mezzanine, up to the platforms.
LIRR East New York. You can enter the surface platforms directly, but I believe there's a ticket office underground.
LIRR East New York. You can enter the surface platforms directly, but I believe there's a ticket office underground.
And if the ticket office is open, you HAVE to buy a ticket there, just like any other station. I didn't even know that they used that ticket office anymore, until once on the train, the conductor said I had to pay the extra fare because I didn't buy my ticket at the ENY office. I was surprised, because I used the station quite a bit before that, and used the crossunder, but I guess it depends on the time of day you use the station. It's open in the mornings for sure.
Not 96th. The south mezzanine, which is fully staffed at all times, is between platform level and street level. In form if not in function, the main mezzanine is at the south end.
Not 96th. The south mezzanine, which is fully staffed at all times, is between platform level and street level. In form if not in function, the main mezzanine is at the south end.
I stand partially corrected. Yes, you can slide right down via the south mezzanine. However, the south mezzanine is at 93 Street. The north entrance, which requires down-down-up to reach the platforms, is at 96 Street. In name, if not in form nor function :-) , the 96 St entrance is the "main" entrance; the 93 St entrance is secondary.
I know. But my initial question was about underground platforms that can't be reached without climbing up, at least at some times. Both 96th Street platforms can always be reached by only climbing down. (Besides, I frequently use the south entrance and I almost never use the north entrance. I wonder which end is more popular -- I'd guess the north, but not by much.)
SubTalk has been abuzz with the awarding of the R-160 contract. So that brings up this question:
What number series will the R-160 occupy ? I am assuming the numbers being vacated by the Redbirds. Any thoughts ?
Bill "Newkirk"
I agree. It makes sense to reuse numbers rather than create new ones. I'm sure that saves millions of dollars some how, I'm just not sure exactly how...
Wouldn't the R142's take over the redbird numbers, while the R160's take over the numbers of the B-division cars they are replacing?
no, the R142/as have taken over the R16-R26(6300-7700)the 160s will probably(IMO) start at 8350
I don't know about the R160's, but did the R143's take over the R16 numbers? I think they also were in the "6's"
The R-143s are 8101-8312. Those were R-27 and R-30 numbers.
David
Assuming they eventually have gotten rid of all the R26,R28,R29,R33,R36 cars by the time the first R160s arrive, the order would totally or almost fit in 8313-9999 depending on the options. Here's where the rest of the free numbers are unless I miscounted.
1000-1299 free (300)
2450-2499 free (50)
2925-3000 free (76)
3001-3009 R110B (reusable)
3010-3347 free (338)
4950-5000 free (51)
6259-6300 free (42)
7851-8000 free (150)
8001-8010 R110A (reusable)
8313-9999 free (1687)
I don't know whether the number between 1-999 will be used. The numbers between 100 and 999 used to be occupied by R44s and R46s.
Chaohwa
It depends on how much each manufacturer will be getting. I think if possible, they might want to break up the numbers in different groups bewteen different manufacturers so it may be easier to tell the difference like the R68 and R68A. But if they don't, I think they'll use the numbers after the R143. But not 8313-9999. Maybe the numbers from 8321-9990 just so its easier to count.
There's only one manufacturer: Alstom. Kawasaki is involved only to ensure compatibility with the R-143.
No they will both assemble cars.
http://www.mta.info/mta/communications/releases02/020731.htm
"Alstom will assemble the new R160 cars at its manufacturing plant in Hornell, New York. Kawasaki will assemble the R160 cars at its plant in Yonkers, New York."
That's interesting. The staff summary that went to the Board indicated that Alstom would be building the cars with design and technical assistance from Kawasaki.
David
Also 8011-8100, as the 143's start with 8101.
I went to the 97 St portal of MNRR's Park Av tunnel today and eventhough the fence and lack of sunlight was making me very angry, it turns out that a few of my photos turned out half-decent. Here are three of them for your viewing pleasure:
Cool, you managed to capture some ACMU-1100's. They are rarer than Unicorns. I really need to ride one, but I don't know where or when they run.
Thanks. They run up the Hudson line. I see them whenever I go up to the Broadway Bridge to take photos (and video now). Here is an example from July 11, 2002 at 6:13pm. (I want to ride these also as I have never ridden them.)
They also run on the Harlem line south of North White Plains. They generally run rush hours only, but sometimes one manages to escape NWP and go in service during a midday.
Yeah I've seen them also, when I was waiting for a train at White Plains I saw one go by empty. I thought it was a diesel, since I thought all cars were "M" series, but was shocked to see no engine.
These are the only electric cars that aren't M series in the MTA commuter RR system. I want to ride one also, how many does MNRR have and what times do they run?
You know something truly demented? I went to school 2 blocks away from there for 6 years, and I didn't go up to the fence to watch the trains going by even once.
That is totally messed up.
You know something truly demented? I went to school 2 blocks away from there for 6 years, and I didn't go up to the fence to watch the trains going by even once.
Hey, you just hadn't gotten bitten by a mosquito infected with railfanitis yet :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
In the 60's I was working near City Hall & going to college at Brooklyn Poly Tech.
Took a different way home to Queens one night, it was a dirty & dark old train ... a "Q" !
That's a great place to stand, especially in rush hours. You can see an inbound train from the time it makes the curve off the bridge onto Park Avenue. Some of them blow their horns going into the tunnel. It's even better hearing the rumble of an outbound train for about one second (two seconds it it's a Bombardier) before it bursts out of the tunnel.
That's a great place to stand, especially in rush hours. You can see an inbound train from the time it makes the curve off the bridge onto Park Avenue. Some of them blow their horns going into the tunnel. It's even better hearing the rumble of an outbound train for about one second (two seconds if it's a Bombardier) before it bursts out of the tunnel.
Just curious as to what Line(s)these "R 143 look a likes" will go to? Any ideas?
They will replace all the Letter Lines that have Trains that need replacing, I believe the R-38-R46 will be retired, and possibly a option order, the R-32 might go. The R-160 will most likely be appearing on the A Line first, or the C Line, the C has nothing but old Cars, they only operate R-32's & few R-38's.
I think the R40's and R42's will probably go before the R46's. The R40 slants are not in that great of shape. And the last time I looked up on the el at the roof of the R40M's and R42's, they seemed to be rusting away. The R40 slants will be missed.
Yes, the slants will be sorely missed. When the time comes I will personally organize many "Farewell to the Slants" trips. I hope that it is a long time away though.
The slants are my favorite .
I really enjoy riding the Q express.
On many of the slants the advertsing frame on the TO cab is missing revealing a little whole to view the speedometer and T\O view
Really? I'm not quite sure what you mean, because the normal redbird trick of looking through the crack in the door hinge doesn't work on the slants.
I shall join you, if not try and organize maybe one of my own.
wayne
Figure 2007/8. The 38's will go first. Not that long off, dude.
NOOO FOR THE LAST TIME, the r44/r46 will not be going away, the only retired fleets will be the r32GE, r38, r40slant, r40m, and the r42, i will miss em all
That's what I said, all the 60 foot cars would go before the 75 foot cars. I didn't say anything about the R44-46 going anytime soon.
"NOOO FOR THE LAST TIME, the r44/r46 will not be going away, the only retired fleets will be the r32GE, r38, r40slant, r40m, and the r42, i will miss em all"
Well said, lets hope we can minimize the postings about what cars will and will not be retired now. -Nick
>>"NOOO FOR THE LAST TIME, the r44/r46 will not be going away, the only retired fleets will be the r32GE, r38, r40slant, r40m, and the r42, i will miss em all"<<
The R-32GE may not be retired along with the R-38, 40S, 40M and 42. The TA wanted to retire them because the parts were unavailable to repair the A/C units. But now the A/C on those cars have been replaced and are supposedly back in service. So their retirement may be delayed.
Bill "Newkirk"
The July 2002 staff summary said the GE R-32s would be among the first cars to go. Like Bill Newkirk, I thought the cars would get a reprieve with the replacement of the air conditioners, but apparently that is not the case.
David
The cars are probably still on the first-to-scrap list because the other interior components of the R-32GEs besides the AC are closer to R-38s than their original 'Budd brothers.' The MTA's reasoning seems to be there's no point in keeping an extra set of spare parts around for only 10 cars once the R-38s are sent to the scrapper or the briny deep.
The cars are probably still on the first-to-scrap list because the other interior components of the R-32GEs besides the AC are closer to R-38s than their original 'Budd brothers.' The MTA's reasoning seems to be there's no point in keeping an extra set of spare parts around for only 10 cars once the R-38s are sent to the scrapper or the briny deep.
(Interesting -- the Password Manager on Netscape 7.0 also apparently decided to remember the thread title from my previous post and use that again the first time I tried to post this reply. Another fine AOL innovation, I guess...)
200 of 200 R38
300 of 400 R40
100 of 400 R42
They can always move cars from place to place. Case in point: The 7 had an all Redbird fleet, the R142s and R142As replaced the Redbirds, the 7 will not have a single R142 or R142A when all the Redbirds are retired. Just because the C has the oldest cars in the system doesn't mean it will get the newest, it will just get cars newer than those retired.
It wouldn't surprise me if the remaining old cars end up on the G, the MTA could care less about this line. Though I'd prefer the R-32s in express service. -Nick
It wouldn't surprise me if the remaining old cars end up on the G, the MTA could care less about this line.
It may be that the MTA does not care about that line, though they would contest that accusation. Still the (G) will have R-44s or better, and never less. Afterall, they want it to be an OPTO line, and so that is what is required there.
Elias
Thanks for the info, Elias...I guess the R-46 or higher equipment are here to stay for the G! -Nick
Which line will be the next line to have CBTC installed
One other question. Is the signalling system on the concourse line in such bad shape that it can not wait untill the TA can figure out if CBTC will work in NYC.
Rumor has it the 7.
More than rumor -- CBTC on the Flushing Line has been planned for a while now.
David
"More than rumor -- CBTC on the Flushing Line has been planned for a while now."
HMM..this is interesting! Is this CBTC planned for the 2020s after the R62A is retired, or will the silverbirds be moved to another line, making room for brand new cars on the #7? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the R62A can work with CBTC. -Nick
Good question. Last I checked, the matter hadn't been settled yet. Corona Shop is to be replaced on-site in the near future with a new facility that will be able to handle R-142/142A-type equipment, however.
David
but I don't think the R62A can work with CBTC. -Nick
An why not. I'd bet you a bag of donuts that it can be retrofitted into that equipment without too much difficulty. Maybe a GOH but probably not even that. I'm sure that CI Peter could do it!
Elias
It has been stated before that the R-62/62A/68/68A and even, IIRC,
R-44s and 46s can all be retrofitted with CBTC equipment, without too much trouble. There is even a set of R-68s with it already installed, assigned to CI, I believe.
Peace,
ANDEE
Ok, Thanks Andee..I'm sure this was stated before, but I must have missed that thread. -Nick
Only the first 8 or 16 R68s had room and hooks and bing bongs to install that equipment.
Only the first 8 or 16 R68s had room and hooks and bing bongs to install that equipment.
Certainly not in the cab though. :)
Those cars would have to be retrofitted with the new technology and computers as their young brothers. A little expensive though.
True, but since this is possible (as I learned a few days ago), its still cheaper than getting more new cars. Also, the MTA will save money by only having a conductor on the train, and no T/O. -Nick
That rumor is said to be true. As we type these messages to each other the transit authority and a private contractor are constructing numoreus relay rooms along the line and are replacing all signals. Hopfully this new technology will work.
"I believe the R-38-R46 will be retired, and possibly a
option order, the R-32 might go"
You are right that the R-32 would go in an option order (not looking forward to that!), but at this time (to subtalkers surprise), the R44 and R46 will not be replaced. -Nick
Every SubTalker knows that the R-44/46 will be retired when the R-160 comes in.
"Every SubTalker knows that the R-44/46 will be retired when the R-160 comes in."
According to a post on Wednesday, this is not true. The R-32 through R-42s will be replaced, even with both option orders. -Nick
That post is wrong, the R-44/46 will be retired, the plan is to replace most of the Trains on the lettered lines, R-38, R-44, and if a option order(1,700 Cars) they will replace R-32 & R-46 also.
The R40's will also go pretty near the begining, probably before the R44.
But I read in an earlier post that they would be keeping the R-32's around for awhile yet since the entire car is constructed of stainless steel. To be honest, I don't see a need to replace the R-40 slants at this point either. They too have been overhauled and from what I've seen of them do not appear to be in bad shape at all....
You are right about the R32's. They may outlive all the later cars except maybe the R46. As for the slants, I love the slants, and will hate to see them go. But I have read from people on this board that they are not in that great of shape. I don't know, I'm just going by what I heard here.
i still think the slants are in better shape than the R42
That may be true. The last time I saw the R42's they looked pretty rusty.
Look at the slant R40's where the fiberglass noses join the car bodies. They're in worse shape than most R42's.
the roofs on the 42s are rivals to the 38s!!!
Yeah the R42's are pretty rusty on the roofs. In the last year of so they are really starting to show their age.
"But I read in an earlier post that they would be keeping the R-32's around for awhile yet since the entire car is constructed of
stainless steel"
They won't be replaced in the initial 660 car order, but they may be replaced if the first or second option order is implemented. I think they will still be on the road until the tail end of the decade; they won't fade away in 2006-07. -Nick
R44 you mean... the R46 will be staying for much longer
Not when the Option Order comes in, the 1,700 new Cars will cover mostly all the old cars, including the R-46.
no...
it will replace
Primary order-
200 of 200 R38
300 of 400 R40
100 of 400 R42
Option order-
100 of 400 R40
300 of 400 R42
And 2 of the following 3
1-300 of 300 R32(ph 1)
2-300 of 300 R32(ph 2)
3-340 of 340 R44(in 60 ft equivilants)
if 1 and 2 are retired, the option order will have 1000 cars
if 1 and 3 or 2 and 3 are retired, the option order will have 1040 cars.
no... the 1700 will not do anything to the R46... there are 1940 cars(60 foot equivilant)to go before the R46s are retired
1here are 1100 R46 in 60 foot equivilants
Hey TrainDude, Do you have any information regarding the R-160 order? And What this Train will be replacing? Thanks!
I'm not "Train Dude," but I do work for NYC Transit and saw the Staff Summary that was presented to the MTA Board.
If this were a movie, the credits at the end would read, "No R-44s or R-46s were harmed in the making of the R-160s." In other words, the replacement plan does NOT include the R-44s or R-46s. The R-32, R-38, R-40, and R-42 series are to be replaced, assuming the full 1,660/1,700 cars are purchased. This is not a matter of opinion, or wishful thinking, or anything else. These are the words of NYC Transit senior staff, on paper, given to the MTA Board, which approved them.
David
From ALSTOM's own website...this is where I first learned of this...
Damn...the URL didn't post like I wanted it to...
Here it is without the HTML tags:
http://www.transport.alstom.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/View&inifile=futuretense.ini;futuretense_xcel.ini&c=at_article&cid=1027873683549
I read it when it first came out. Funny thing is, the Reuters (not Lawrence G. Reuter -- the press agency) article and the MTA's press release both indicate that Kawasaki will actually be CONSTRUCTING some of the cars. This doesn't jibe with Alstom's press release or with the Staff Summary that was submitted to the MTA Board. I'm trying to find out (by asking around the office) what is the actual case.
David
Ever SubTalker knows not to believe a word you type. I hope. Where did you find this? Replacing the R44 and R46 in addition to the 60 footers is not possible even with all options. 1700 v. 2598.
"Every SubTalker knows not to believe a word you type. I hope."
amen r68a. i hear that.
Amen over here too...
--Brian
Check the Alstom web site for the press release which is dated 31 Jul 2002.
Here is the long URL.
http://www.transport.alstom.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/View&inifile=futuretense.ini;futuretense_xcel.ini&c=at_article&cid=1027873683549
It looks like that R160s are very similar to R143s.
Chaohwa
It looks like that R160s are very similar to R143s.
And I'm sorry to hear that. I like the R143 well enough, but not where I want the next order to be just like it.
This is strictly a subfan perspective of course, but it's hard to get excited about the R160. It will mean less variation in rolling stock, not more. It seems to harken back to the days when every car was the same, when everthing up to the R30 (or even up to R38, BMT/IND) and R36 (IRT) was a variation on the R16 and R17, respectively, even going as far back as the R10. Functinal maybe, but boooooooooooo-RING!
:-) Andrew
It looks like that R160s are very similar to R143s.
And I'm sorry to hear that. I like the R143 well enough, but not where I want the next order to be just like it.
This is strictly a subfan perspective of course, but it's hard to get excited about the R160. It will mean less variation in rolling stock, not more. It seems to harken back to the days when every car was the same, when everthing up to the R30 (or even up to R38, BMT/IND) and R36 (IRT) was a variation on the R16 and R17, respectively, even going as far back as the R10. Functional maybe, but boooooooooooo-RING!
:-) Andrew
These are only hypothesis. I am not sure which line these will go to
A, C, E, J, L, M, N, Q, Z. I also heard the F.
JMZ are first i think
Yes, and the M will have a lot of the R143's also. I think it's next after the L, and probably will start getting some even before the L is all R143.
yup, do you think we will see any R143s on the J ever?
I know that they wont be assigned there, but R32s arent assigned to the R either, and they still show up.
I'm sure they eventually will show up on the J, at least occasionally. The lines I believe switch cars now sometimes, so I'm sure it won't be different then.
The crews on the J are not qualified to operate the R143.
well let's get them qualified asap! :) While they're at it, I'd like to be qualified also.
I saw an article in NY1 news that said the R 143's were experimental in talking about the order for the R 160's. I thought the R 110A' and B's were the prototype cars for future orders? Any thought why the TA made that statement?
The News was wrong, the R-110A/B was a experimental prototype for the Future Cars.
I saw an article in NY1 news that said the R 143's were experimental in talking about the order for the R 160's. I thought the R 110A' and B's were the prototype cars for future orders?
There are lots of experiments to be done.
The R110s were experiments for the 142s and 143s.
Now they are experimenting with a *line*, a line running 143s, and actually going to run a computer controled line.
The (L) line was the perfect candidate for this work, since it is a captive line and doesnt interface with any other equipment.
If they can make it work here, all bugs out and all, then they will (it appears) do the same on the (7) which is also a captive line, but much too busy to do experiments on.
Maybe later they will turn their attention to the (J) and (M) or maybe somehing on Broadway.
HMMMMmmmmm...... I wonder.......
HMMMMmmmmm...... I wonder.......
What If.... Routes were reareanged to allow computer control on the Broadway (BMT Please!) Express Line?
The Broadway Express would be exclusively R-160s running in a computerized mode. They could not leave computerized Tracks, and no other trains could run in Pax service on these lines. How might the routes look!!???
The (Q) could not run express on Broadway since it shares the Brighton with the (D) so it becomes the second local via Montegue, Though it could still run express on the Brighton... Lets think some more about that. It will have to terminate in Astoria since it needs to share the 60th Street Tunnel with the (R).
The queens tunnels have to many different route on them to be computerized this early in the game, and The South Side of the Manny B is the only computerized crossing (other than the (L) and the (7) ov course). sooooo.....
The (N) and the (W) Become the Broadway Express 57th Street to Coney Island (Sea Beach and West End) via Bridge.
This makes Fourth Avenue Express Tracks (and all of the West End and Sea Beach Lines) computerized, while the Local (R), (M) local to 95th Street are non-computerized.
The 6th Avenue (D) runs Brighton but the (B) is what?
The (F) and the (V) head on out to Culver via rutgers...
Anybody want to play with this idea?
elias
CBTc is needed in one place above others: Lexington Ave. Anything that increases capacity and eases delays here should take top priority.
CBTc is needed in one place above others: Lexington Ave. Anything that increases capacity and eases delays here should take top priority
Yup.... I agree with you 100%....
But...
Do you really want them to set it up *there* before it has all of the bugs worked out of it on a less critical service.
So CBTC is a given on the (L), get it up, running, and largely bug free.
Maybe extend it to the (J) and the (M) (They would have to terminate at Broad Street) see that it can run multiple lines and schedules.
Then try it on the (7) validate it for both high capacity and multiple routings (exp / lcl).
Then where to install it next.
And my suggestion was the Broadway Express. because it is a fairly simple upgrade with few variables.
The (6) ia another good choice, for though it runs on Lexington with the (4) and (5), the (6) does not actually share any track with them.
Likewise the (1) could be made into CBTC since it too really does run on its own dedicated trackage.
You could not IMHO do (4) (5) without also doing (3) (4) at the same time since they share trackage both in the Bronx and in Brooklyn.
But I'll Grant you, getting the (1) and (6) moving at beter intervals will surely help all of the IRT.
Elias
I agree, once the bugs have been worked out, the Lexington Ave line should get top priority.
The next line after the 7 is supposed to be the F, at least the Brooklyn section. This will be in conjunction with the new Bergen Master tower (I hope they're not waiting for this to fix the interlocking to allow express service). The new trains have a button "Begin ATO", so I imagine you can operate normal for part of a line and then go into ATO for only a scection.
I've also been told that next year, V2 testing will begin on the L line south of Atlantic. The current V1 test uses the J line exp. track between Myrtle and Eastern Pkway, which has the new transponders (which scan something on the train as it passes over) set up for speed measurement, with regular T/O operation, and the next phase these will be installed on that section of the L, and midnight non-passenger testing will begin with ATO.
The new wayside signals are being set up on the Canarsie line now )needed for when regular trains use the line to access the yard or wash), and the older signals have removal dates written on the boxes. (The new yard tower is really taking shape).
Also, noticed that the P chain is being eliminated, and Q is being extended all the way down to Canarsie; the new survey markers are stenciled on the new signal boxes and the last signal before the block on 1 track having survey # 540. (this of course is also in conjunction with the relocation of the zero point to 8th Av.)
I think a set of R143s was used for certain tests for the R160 doors
"I think a set of R143s was used for certain tests for the R160 doors"
I'm not sure what you mean by this, because the R-160 has not been built yet. Are you referring to the design of the R-160? -Nick
Certain components that are candidates for installation on R-160 cars are being tested on R-143 cars. "Train Dude" elaborated on this about a week ago.
David
Ya TrainDude usually has the scoop on what happens in the Subway System.
well when they come in,the R40's and 42's will be going,going gone.
The A will be the first line to recieve the first order of R160's. other possibilites include the N,Q,C and who knows what else,but the A will be first,no doubt about it.the R32's WILL NOT be retired anytime soon,not sure bout the 38's.the 46's wont go,the 44's? not sure bout those either.
Okay and where did you get that information from??? The R-160 is expected to be here in the year 2006, you don't know if they will put the R-160 on the A Line first.
actually I DO know that for a fact and how i found out...is a secret ^.^
It was posted in a newspaper article several months ago. However, we have nearly three years until the pilot train arrives and nearly four years until the cars start coming in for real. That's plenty of time for NYCT to change its collective mind.
David
From what I heard the A, C, E, F and possibly the N are likely candidates.
JMZ are the almost definite candidates
I woke up at 3:45 in the morning Tuesday so I could be home in time to go to Philly with the fam, who wanted to leave at 6:30, of course when I get to Lancaster, they are all still knocked out sleeping, so we don't leave until 8:30 or so, but it's cool. My mission that day of course, was to visit family and friends, but mainly to pay a visit to 1234 and put in an application to work at SEPTA. The adventure begins at 40th and Spruce where my aunt had a dentist appointment at Penn's dental school, while she's being treated, I'm walking up 40th Street up to Market finding a place that sold the SEPTA Day Pass, but then after all the walking up to Market and back, I finally realize that the closest place to get one is 30th Street Station ticket booth. So I walk back up to Market, and catch the MFL there and catch 1109, the lead car, hoping to snag a railfan seat for the short ride, but no. I get to 30th Street, visit the post office to cash a money order, and come out to see my favorite New Flyer (only because it's the only one I've rode on), 5437 on the 44 trying to turn onto Market street, but somehow the operator couldn't make the turn initially so he backs up and then he's able to make the turn after blowing the horn to get a car to move a little. I go back to the MFL, again hoping to snag the railfan seat to no avail, I must say, as much as I miss my almond joys, I thanked God for the M4's excellent air conditioner. This consist was interesting, -I was on 1212, and I forget all the cars that were in the consist, but at least four of them contained the numbers 1, and 2, (I know for sure 1111-1112, and 1211-1212). I get to 13th street, walked to the exit, and didn't even realize I was at 1234 until I saw PCC 2733 lookin all good. I go to the sixth floor, where I had been told by others to pick the application, but the sent me to the security desk. I go back down there only for the guy to tell me, "We're out til Monday" oh damn!! A whole day wasted-not I visited the Transit Museum Store, spent most of my time there looking at the Road To Upper Darby book, (get it if you're an almond joy fan-the most tech data I've seen on them since the old SEPTA fact sheets or Delaware Valley Rails) I'm a little disappointed about the application, but what the hell I have a day pass, you know what that means...I walk up the street trying to make up my mind where to start, carefully observing everything over 30 feet in length. I saw a couple of NJT Metro-B's, Metro-D 3711, 79XX, and 8080, and a few more of the new D4000's, D40LF 5600 on the 17 heading to Penns Landing, 5436 with it's Spree wrap and special on the destination sign with a paper Spree sign in the windshield. I finally decide I'm gonna get me a 460, and I just miss one, but I wait not even 5 minutes before 7121 pulls up on the 33 going to Penn's Landing, figuring if I'm lucky I could catch 5600 there. Keeping in mind that even when I lived in Philly, I always took MFL to Penns Landing, so I was a little thrown off on where to get off, I got off on the viaduct and walked over on Front Street. In the distance I see a D40LF and a Transliner AN440 laying over, I get closer, I see numbers and the D40LF is none other than 5600! I'm gonna get this sucka-not, pulls off when I'm about 10 steps away, I should have ran for it. The Neoplan that was there was 3111, which was on the 5, I figure what the hell and took that. Saw some of the construction for the 15 trolley restoration, Eldorado 4561 with a paper sign for the 89. For an old soldier, 3111's AC was pretty good although there was some condenser leakage on the seat across from me. Took the 5 all the way to Frankford Terminal and the bus doesn't even get a half load the entire trip (around 1:00-1:30).
I go up to the MFL platform, checking out some of the construction, but there's a train about to leave so I hop on it, hoping to get my railfan seat, the dude that was there got off at Church I think, the dude he was with then took that seat and I'm thinking he's not going to be on much longer we can wait this out, but I changed my mind, and got off at Erie-Torresdale, crossed over to catch the train going back to FT. the train stops as I come off the crossover and I get on 1025, last in this consist. We're back at FT and I'm on the platform waiting for the next westbound train, and observing some of the construction, including the new El alignment (complete with concrete bents, gonna look really nice when it's finally done) when I hear the announcement behind me, "69th Street Train making all stops", and the destination sign confirms it, so back on 1025 I go-straight to the empty railfan seat, yes!!! Of course this was going to be a ride that I haven't taken since I was 10 standing at the Almond Joy's end door with the wind hitting me in the face-an end to end ride, and like the others in the fleet, 1025 was ice cold. Once at 69th, I try to make up my mind, I could take the 108 and meet up with the fam back in Southwest, or I could take the 65 and get on a 460, but I settle on NABI 5035, on the 21, which must have been in an accident, the front pillar had a bolt holding it on and the sign cavitiy area on the passenger side looked pretty banged up as well. 5035 is nice and cold, and it fills up pretty quickly, but I still manage to get a seat. Nothing special about this ride, but once I'm back in Center City, I decide to get off at 13th to walk back to 1234 and see if the guy before was BS'ing me, I ask the lady for an application, but word for word, "we're out til Monday" dammit!! oh well, it was worth a shot.
So back to 13th Street station, I go to the Subway-Surface lines, and wait for the 36, I never realized how much usage the tunnel gets, one right after the other, 11, 10, 34, 13, then my 36...9059, one of the first LRV's with the solid windows, and coincidentally the trolley I rode on my last trip to Philly back in May. I saw at least 2 other LRV's with the solid windows, 9022 on the 11, and 905X on the 13. Got off to catch the 36 shuttle bus at 49th & Woodland, the first one I didn't even bother to try to get on, a bunch of people from the trolley before us and everyone on our trolley tried to crowd on, I just waited, and 3178 pulls up, I ride to 57th and walk over. The one thing SEPTA didn't do right on my travels that day, was give clear info on the route of the 36 shuttle, I'm sure I read it somewhere before online, but at that point I had completely forgotten whatever it was. I hung out with the fam for a while, then it was time to leave to go back to Lancaster. 9101 on the 11 takes me to 30th street, where I take a pretty boring ride on Amtrak's keystone train in the usual G-ride (Genesis P42)and 3 amfleet consist that has become standard on that line. A fun day all in all, I didn't stop to eat until I got back to my Aunt's house. I'll be back Monday to visit 1234 bright and early to fill out that application, then I have a date with the B-IV's, and maybe I'll take another stab at getting 5600, and I'll probably visit NJT and PATCO as well. Thanks for reading and I hope this wasn't too long!
Darnell
Cool story, thanks for sharing :)
Hey cool, I must say I've never quite Busfanned Philly quite that much, but last week I became fixed that I would catch a 31 bus from my Drexel Orientation to center city, and then a NJT 406 bus to just a few blocks from my house. Oddly, for all the time and distance I have covered on rail (Just made it to Conn and the end Of the LIRR Port Jeff Branch 2 days ago), this was my first bus ride by myself.
I walk out of my orienation/brainwashing early at 12:45, walk north a block to Market and 33rd, realize I have no tokens or even singles, so I go down to the 34th and market MFL station, missing the first 31 bus I see (a New Flyer Low-Floor) to grab some. Strangely, I become disoriented in the station and head out the north side of the station, passing under Market, I come up just east of 34th on market, and begin walking east along the north side of market, only to see a 31 bus heading east, but it's on the other side of a market with traffic flowing rather fast, so I say "screw it, I'm not gonna die today, I'll wait for the next, it wont be too long," and head over to stand under the shelter of the Drexel Library at 33 and market (Since it is now raining). From my shelter with several other people, I can hear MFLs and LRVs squeeling below me, atleast 6 K-cars and 3 MFL trains pass. Finally, I've had enough, and I head over to the 33rd st stop for the LRVs, but hear a bus, turn, AND THERE IT IS! A New Flyer Low Floor 31 waiting for me. I get on, and endure possibly the slowest mode of trasportation ever, I coulda beat the damn thing walking! By now it's like 1:30 or so, and my patience is worn, so I get off at 16th and Market when I see that the City Hall area is nothing but traffic. Walk through City Hall, right past Mayor Street giving a speach about Liberia, and over to the other side of city hall. Like you I head over to 1234 market, both to see the PCC in the basement, and to see if they have any NJT bus schedules. I get in and head for the PCC, which to me looks oddly like a Raymond Loweyized K-car, I might say that the K-cars are chips off the old block, but that'd get me in trouble with the PCC police.
I also check out the transit museum and grab a book of railroad maps of the Pacific Northwest (You know those SPV things, kinda cheap, no where as detailed as those for the Subway), and finally decide to wrap up my business there. I walk up to the impressive selection of SEPTA schedules, but no NJT there, so I go up to the two possible security people manning the counter. I ask, "Do you know where I can get NJT bus schedules?" A perfectly obvious, and, to somebody who works for a Transit company, straightforward question. However, the lady to whom I addressed my question merely blinked and sputtered, "NJT, whats that? New Jersey..." and she trailed off muttering. Now I just about lost it, I can't belive that somebody who works for septa cannot know what NJT stands for! So i fairly yelled at her, "YEAH, New Jersey Transit, like those busses out there across the street," and pointed to some MCIs and Flexibles that were waiting for passengers. Fortunately her partner thought it was funny, but was of little more help, he just laughed and directed me to Market East Station. After a quick stop in Reading Terminal for lunch, I head to Market east, get a schedule for the 406 from a harried counter person, and head for 10th and market, and grab the slow boat to china home. The 406 crawls out of camden, I will never ever catch a 406 home unless it reads "limited" and skips camden. Both busses were incredibly nice and so on, but were so slow that i proably coulda started walking from Drexel at 12:45 and gotten home at about the same time, which was about 3:00pm.
I will never ride a bus though center city if the Sub-Surface or MFL is an option.
Did anybody watch Channel 11's 10:00 News Last Night? I didn't get a chance to watch it, Can somebody Tell what they were talking about? Thanks!
Did anybody watch Channel 11's 10:00 News Last Night? I didn't get a chance to watch it, Can somebody Tell what they were talking about with the new R-143/160 Cars? Thanks!
Actually, I saw the story on the channel 5 news, where they talked about it being the largest order for subway cars in history, and mentioned that the French firm which won the bid (whose name somehow escapes me right now, and is sure to pop back into my brain the moment I post this message) will be working with Kawasaki to see that the R-160 will be compatible with the R-143.
They also talked about some of the features of the R-143, like the strip maps, the fold-up seats in the corners, the internal LED info signs, and the intercom system, and interviewed a few riders who praised the R-143 for being a huge improvement over the older cars.
All in all it was a very positive presentation, and rightly so.
and mentioned that the French firm which won the bid (whose name somehow escapes me right now
ALSTOM.
Mark
Uhhhhh....yup! :-)
More on the Boston heart attack incident, from The Boston Globe
But Susan Bergeron, an assistant conductor on the train credited by passengers with performing CPR on Allen most of the way into Boston, said yesterday that CSX dispatchers denied a request to make a direct run to Back Bay.
MBTA crews do not need permission of CSX dispatchers to bypass station stops, especially in cab signal territory. It is common courtsey to tell the dispatcher if you are going to go off schedule (well, in fact it is required), but if you are simply going to bypass a station stop, there's no need to get permission, especially if that will only get you there 1-2 minutes early.
It is possible that had the train not stopped at the stations, they would have been held at a signal. But only in this case do the dispatchers need to become involved.
AEM7
Do we know if the train would have run into a Red signal in front of Back Bay station? Was there another train in the way and was "wrong-railing" a train to help not a practical option?
Each of the above steps would have taken a bit of time, of course. I am NOT taking a position or stating an opinion on them.
The train crew's conduct raises a host of potential liability issues, including civil litigation against the two rail agencies as well as CSX, legal experts said.
I look forward to the day when I have to sign a liability wavier when I buy my T-pass.
AEM7
I found it ironic that the within-article advertisement which popped-up when I read this online was for RailEurope!
Dose anyone know what will happen whe a Work Train need to run on the L line after the CTBC system is in. 1) I mean there will be no signals for the crew to read excpt at switches, and will CTBC she the work train on the tracks and keep the road off it's back.
2) Will the TA buy special work train to only run with CTBC.
Just wanted to see if anyone can come up with some short of idears.
Robert
Maybe the work trains will have cab signals?
While the system can't control the work train or know where it is from the train, the track circuts could still be used for cab signal?
Just a guess, knowing the TA they would issue a GO and make all trains move at 10mph whenver a work train enters the L line.
They can shut off the CBTC when there is one and the signals with operate like we all know them to.
But there wont be any signal exsecect for switches.
Robert
Yes there will be. You will see the same signals required to run a "traditional" train. There will be 2 states. The operating state we see now and the CBTC state where the top green light will flash to indicate CBTC is in use. When in use, the second monitor in the R143 will display the signal information.
Actually I think it's more likely they will retrofit cab signal equipment into whatever they're using for work motors at the time. If they can put cab signal equipment into steam engines (like C&O 614 has for operation in New Jersey Transit territory) they can put it into some older subway cars.
Yes. They are experimenting that with R68 2500-2503. But they'll probably need something bigger than a redbird cab.
> bigger than a redbird cab
It's a work train-- you got the whole car!
The specs I saw called for an Auxiliary Wayside System (AWS) consisting of a similar signal system to that currently in place throughout NYC's subway system, but not capable of supporting full rush hour service levels.
Work trains assigned to the "Eastern Division" are to be equipped with partial CBTC, controlling the brakes, according to the specs I saw.
David
There will always be signals at interlockings in case of cab signal failure. Manual block protection will be established for any rai vehicles w/o the appropiate cab signals.
As I understand it, CBTC is present in all the cars of a trainset to comm the system of all car status ('stuck brakes, hot car, door failure' and the like.) A work train unit would only need a simplified cab unit and transponder with perhaps a portable transponder on the end car...so the system will acknowledge the legnth and presense of the trainset. CI Peter
According to an article in today's Newsday, nationl section,a commuter passenger on the Framingham-Boston run had a heart attack. The crew continued on for three stops to Back Bay Station (a 20 minute trip)to a waiting medical crew.
Evidently MBTA contracts with Amtrak for the crews. One can only wish that the victim was a relative of the crew.
Get your facts straight, son.
Even the Boston Globe report isn't 100% accurate, but better than what you had.
AEM7
There clearly was a lapse of judgment somewhere. This was a true life-threatening emergency which demanded that the train proceed as quickly as possible to the nearest stop where paramedics could board and assume responsibility for care. This means patching into the 911 system immediately and holding the train at the nearest stop until the passenger could be transferred to the ambulance. There really was no leeway here; the passenger's medical condition was very critical and unstable.
The failure here appears to include a communication problem. The situation was handled incorrectly, but as to culpability, I would be interested in the results of the MBTA investigation.
I have personally been involved in first-aid situations on both trains and and airliner. Had this occurred on an airliner, the proper procedure would have been to ask air traffic control for emergency landing clearance at the nearest airport (dump fuel as needed to meet safe landing parameters), request paramedic assistance and then resume travewl after the stricken passenger is off-loaded.
In the air emergency I was involved in, the victim was stable and not in immediate danger, so the flight plan (to Tampa) was not altered; nonetheless air traffic control in Tampa ordered other aircraft clear of the runway and we were given immediate clearance for landing and taxi. The Tampa Fire Dept and a police officer met us at the gate.
I have personally been involved in first-aid situations on both trains and and airliner. Had this occurred on an airliner, the proper procedure would have been to ask air traffic control for emergency landing clearance at the nearest airport (dump fuel as needed to meet safe landing parameters), request paramedic assistance and then resume travewl after the stricken passenger is off-loaded.
There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a couple of months ago concerning airline medical diversions. Many of the larger U.S. airlines use the services of a company in Arizona in deciding whether to make medical diversions. The company, whose name I don't recall, has physicians on duty 24/7 to handle radio calls from flight crews. The physicians discuss the situations with the crews and recommend whether or not to divert. So far, the system seems to have worked very well, reducing the number of unnecessary diversions (which are costly in terms of both time and money) while getting quick medical attention to the people who really need it.
I would imagine that medical diversions become a real issue on trans-Pacific flights. Airliners traveling from the United States to Asian airports have a number of diversionary airfields along the route, mainly to satisfy ETOPS requirements, but some of them are in remote spots in the Aleutians or Siberia that have sufficient runway length but few or no medical facilities.
Yes, I read that article. The system does work pretty well.
If there is a physician available on the flight, that physician will relay history and physical examination findings to the "on call" doctor on the ground, and can be very helpful in arriving at the most appropriate solution. I was put in touch with such a doctor during my flight.
Ultimately, by law, the ultimate decision to divert is not the doctor's however - it is the aircraft commander's (the pilot) decision to make.
You are right about trans-Pacific routes. There are no easy answers there. Since economical cruising speeds are below maximum speeds, one of the things a pilot can do is increase the aircraft's speed by up to 100 mph to get to an airport faster, but otherwise, the only other interventions available on board are oxygen and perhaps an automatic defibrillator.
<< Since economical cruising speeds are below maximum speeds, one of the things a pilot can do is increase the aircraft's speed by up to 100 mph to get to an airport faster >>
Usually not possible unless there is an airport suitable for landing within range at the higher speed. Why so? Because fuel burn rate goes up dramatically at speeds faster than long-range cruise. Fuel is weight and weight costs money (lower payload, for example) so aircraft typically are fueled for the flight along with the appropriate IFR alternative airport and loitering time fuel reserve requirements.
Correct. However in the United States, there are enough airports meeting that requirement that the increase in speed can often be accomplished and be helpful (the US has more airports with scheduled service than any other country).
Of course, I concede the amount of help that would be is limited - you can't enter a landing pattern at 600 mph.
How can you say they did NOT let the guy die? They are very much responsible because, and speaking as a conductor, your responsibility is the safety and care of the crew and people aboard your train. If someone gets seriously ill aboard your train, you get them assistance IMMEDIATELY!! You don't continue on in service. Once again the safety and well being of your customers is your primary responsibility. The conductor could have held the train at the station, called the dispatcher, and awaited medical help, especially given that the hospital was not far away. He acted in very poor judgement. I mean I know you want to keep on time and to schedule, but come on, humanity gives way to schedule, and the well being of your passengers comes first. I been in this position before one morning on the Q at Canal Street, and I didn't care one bit if I backed the railroad all the way up into Brooklyn, I acted by judgement in the best interest of the customer, and the train went NOWHERE until the EMS and police had arrived to assist the individual off the train. I even had a brief spat with the control center regarding this. They were only concerned with the train moving, not living up to TA's slogan of "We're serious about safety.....YOUR safety!!". I told them, in no uncertain terms, "No, Control, the customer CAN NOT BE SAFELY REMOVED FROM THE TRAIN!!! Awaiting EMS and Police assistance!!" Customer safety comes first. The conductor deserves whatever punishment he gets. This man is dead now because of the conductor's lack in judgement.
Thank you Mr. Paul for backing me up. Letting a train go for 20 minutes with a seriously ill passenger is a lapse in judgement. I am not an attorney so I don't know where the line between a lapse in judgement and depraved indifference to human life (a criminal charge).
The article said that it took the train 20 minutes to get to Back Bay station...Hopefully the engineer could stop the train at the spot where the medics set up otherwise precious seconds would be lost getting to the victim. After all, in the case of a heart attack, SECONDS COUNT !!!!!
It is hard to fathom that if the train had pulled into the first stop, the voluteers in that town would have taken twenty minutes to get to the deceased. Many years ago when my daughter needed the Rescue Squad for emergency transport to Huntington Hospital, it took less than ten minutes for the "vollies" to get to the firehouse, get the rig and get to us. We live about a mile from the firehouse. In most communities on Long Island the firehouses are in the "downtown" areas near the LIRR station. I presume that it wouldn't haven't taken a response time of 20 minutes to get to the train.
At a minimum, a public apology to the deceased family is in order.
The article said that it took the train 20 minutes to get to Back Bay station...
How long do you think it will take for an ambulance to get to Newtonville in rush-hour Boston traffic? Remember, the Mass Pike does not have an exit at Newtonville.
After all, in the case of a heart attack, SECONDS COUNT !!!!!
How do you know that he has had a heart attack, without reading the press report after the event?
AEM7
The amb. would have taken the patient to the nearest hospital to the station. which would have been Newton-Wellsley and stabilized and then if further care was needed then that person would have been taken to a Boston hospital. City of Boston EMT 718 Steve H
Yes. That would conform to appropriate procedure.
The protocols for CPR changed several years ago. Now IMMEDIATE ACCESS to the EMS system is the first priority in rendering care.
You can do CPR to the cows come home, but only the defibrilator and the drug box will make a difference.
A basic squad could have started with the automatic defibrilator while awaiting the ALS squad. More than likely an ALS Squad was only a few minutes away anyway.
And a hospital is NOT NEEDED! A hospital CANNOT HELP YOU!
Either the Paramedic saves you right there in the isle of the train,
or you call a priest.
Those are the statistics... If they can not recover you in the street, there is almost no chance that the hospital can do it.
Br. Elias, EMT RN
Brian,
You started out OK:
"The protocols for CPR changed several years ago. Now IMMEDIATE ACCESS to the EMS system is the first priority in rendering care.
You can do CPR to the cows come home, but only the defibrilator and the drug box will make a difference.
A basic squad could have started with the automatic defibrilator while awaiting the ALS squad. More than likely an ALS Squad was only a few minutes away anyway."
Absolutely correct.
"And a hospital is NOT NEEDED! A hospital CANNOT HELP YOU!
Either the Paramedic saves you right there in the isle of the train,
or you call a priest. "
Well, yes and no. Statistically, for "simple" cardiac arrest, that's basically true. But remember that an on-scene squad canot definitively diagnose all comers. Should certain procedures be needed, some are best performed in the hospital (some ONLY in the hospital), not in the back of the rig. This will not apply to the majority of victims, because the basics (ABC) can be done on scene.
But your basic point, that help must come quickly and without delay to the victim, is correct.
The last time I checked, an unwitnessed cardiac arrest had a less than 1% chance of survival; a witnessed cardiac arrest attended to with CPR and with quick (less than 4 minute response time) intervention by an ALS squad has no better than a 10% chance of survival.
Pretty dismal as a whole (unless you're on a TV drama series).
If anybody knows numbers to be different than mine, please post.
> The last time I checked, an unwitnessed cardiac arrest had a less
> than 1% chance of survival; a witnessed cardiac arrest attended to
> with CPR and with quick (less than 4 minute response time)
> intervention by an ALS squad has no better than a 10% chance of
> survival.
>
> Pretty dismal as a whole (unless you're on a TV drama series).
Actually, it depends on the cause of the cardiac arrest.
Traumatic Cardiac Arrest - except for a witnessed arrest with tension pneumothorax as the cause - has a save rate of far less than 1%.
Medical Cardiac Arrest has a better rate of save. Time causes a diminshment of success - about 10% per minute. The optimal American Heart Association model has immediate CPR (bystander CPR), defib within 2 minutes and ACLS within 6 minutes. That translates, in their model, to a 50% save rate from Vfib arrest. Now, I work in a suburban/rural area where I am the ACLS and it takes me up to 15 minutes to get to calls. Who do I save?
Back to Newton - I believe that they have contract ACLS ambulance with one of the commercial ambulance providers (or are they fire-based?).
How can I relate this back to subways and trains? Hmmm...defibrillation uses electricity - so do subways!
Chip
How can I relate this back to subways and trains? Hmmm...defibrillation uses electricity - so do subways!
Heheheh....
do you want to trust your jouls to the third rail?
ALL CLEAR!
Should certain procedures be needed, some are best performed in the hospital (some ONLY in the hospital), not in the back of the rig.
Absolutely! Hospitalization is needed ASAP....
but if EMS does not bring them in alive, there is little that can be done in a hospital.
Elias
I ain't no attorney either, (:-)) but I think this situation is a little of both. It is a lapse in judgement that showed depraved indifference to human life, and now a man is dead as a result. The conductor, who is in charge of the train and had opportunity to make a wise decision, didn't in any make one, and now this guy lost his life. If you can't handle that kind of responsibility, don't do the job!! The position belongs to someone who can show they're in charge, and make the right decisions in regards to the well being of human lives entrusted to their care, and handle the responsibility.
Even the Boston Globe report isn't 100% accurate
What do you know that isn't in the Globe?
What do you know that isn't in the Globe?
Local knowledge of the Framingham Line beyond what they outlined in the article, access situaiton in Newton, knowledge of some CSX operating rules, and general knowledge of what crew can and cannot do.
AEM7
That sounds like you're saying he couldn't have been properly taken off the train in Newton? But should the train have made station stops or gone straight to Boston?
Hey, even Kramer kept making all the stops even though a gun wielding maniac tried to take over the bus. Just like the Post Office, transit workers have a duty to make all the stops.
> That sounds like you're saying he couldn't have been properly taken off the train in Newton?
Having pulled patients from some of the strangest places, while I have not visited the stations in question, I am sure that the patient could have been removed from the train safely and efficiently at either Newton station.
Chip
Having pulled patients from some of the strangest places, while I have not visited the stations in question, I am sure that the patient could have been removed from the train safely and efficiently at either Newton station.
More to the point, you would have had no trouble getting a defibrilator and a drug box onto the train.
You can let the cops, firefighters and or train crew figure out how to get the backboard on.
Elias
More to the point, you would have had no trouble getting a defibrilator and a drug box onto the train.
Newtonville has real issues. It's not easily reached by automobile, EMS or else. Especially in rush hour traffic.
Some other people have posted here that EMS would probably take less than 20 mins to reach Newtonville, and that is probably correct given the location of the hospitals. However, this relies on the crew realizing that the guy has had an emergency medical condition which warrants holding the train.
As I stated earlier, the conductor is not required to have medical training and may not have realized the man is having a cardiac arrest. It would be stupid to hold a train just because someone has fainted. Even if he did, he would not have known that in those cases EMS response times are vital. For that matter, I did not know it was *that* critical (the 10% per minute statistic).
If this is a real problem, the T ought to educate its employees (or ensure that its contractors educate their employees) with information on common emergency medical conditions and how best to respond. Of course, this could backfire because the T then can be sued for "errornous" medical judgment.
In certain medical emergencies, the decision to push the train to Back Bay where major hospitals are close by may be the best decision. In the rush hour, the commuter train is the fastest way to get from Auburndale into downtown.
AEM7
Newtonville has real issues. It's not easily reached by automobile, EMS or else. Especially in rush hour traffic.
If people cannot get to the station, then I actually see little point in putting a station there!
Elias
Yes, Newtonville is a pointless station. That station should have been eliminated long ago. I do not know why Auburndale, West Newton and Newtonville are open. Either they should sort out the stations, make them nice, and make them accessible, or they should just close them. I am sure the stations are well-used by people who live in the immediate vicinity, but that's about all the traffic they get. They don't have the crowd-pulling powers of the other commuter rail stations. It's a waste stopping a train there.
After all, the Mass Pike is there for a reason.
AEM7
I've seen the time line on this.
The crew radioed for help at 8:53. It made the next stop, West Newton, at 8:56, Newtonville at 8:59 and made South Station, where the emergency team was waiting, at 9:10.
Assuming skipping the two station stops could have saved a minute each, that would have made the arrival at South Station 9:08. So, at best there would have been a 12-14 minute difference between trying for South Station or treatment at West Newton. Unfortunately, 12 minutes can easily make the difference between life and death.
Remember also that there was just 3 minutes from the time assistance was asked for to the time the train stopped at West Newton. So a tem might not have been able to get there in that short period and start treating the man as quickly as the team waiting at South Station.
So this bears some investigation. But I do think the station stops, though they ate "only" 2 minutes, were a good idea.
The Amtrak conductor has some 'splainin to do
The Amtrak conductor has some 'splainin to do
This is really a heartless statement. The MBTA doesn't dispatch the trains nor hire the crews. They pay for service. The crews work for Amtrak and operate on CSX tracks. CSX made the decision what to do becuase they dispatch the trains.
You can be sure there will be an investigation -- as well as lawsuits.
Somebody really screwed up badly. It's just not clear at the moment. Was the train dispatcher notified of the seriousness of the medical condition? Did the conductor play doctor and decide to make regular station stops? Stay tuned. This story isn't going away.
Michael
Washington, DC
Well true CSX made the decisions, but, and speaking as a conductor, you got to make a judgement call. If they are trying to tell you to move despite the situation, you emphasize the seriousness of the situation, and you hold the train. You have to make your own decision and act in the best interest of your customer's safety. I would have held the train without hesitation till the EMS came, and I'd be prepared to defend my decision to the end if anyone decided they wanna bring insubordination charges against me for acting in the well being and care of a customer aboard my train. You follow your judgement and humanity, not the judgement of some idiot who works in a nice, air conditioned, comfy dispatching center, whose only concern is the movement of the train and not the life of a human being.
Someone is responsiable for his death and of course it will be fought long and drawn out in a court room. Question I put to you who will be charged with neglagent homiside.
I think it will be the conductor, because the conductor has the power and the responsibility right there to hold the train and await medical help, and do as much as possible to comfort and aid the sick customer in any possible way, or in TA terms, render whatever assistance possible. He is in charge of the safety and well being of anyone aboard his train while it is in customer service, and it's his duty to act in their well being should an emergency come up. It's bad judgement calls like this that make people have a low confidence in mass transit, and want to use automobiles to get around.
If the conductor decided that the best course of action is to allow the train to run express to Back Bay, where medical help may be more quickly summoned, there may be nothing wrong with what he/she decided.
If the conductor was not aware of the fact that medical help was available in Newton, then that's an institutional issue that MBTA/Amtrak has to address.
If you have ever been to Newton commuter rail stop, you would not think medical help is available there.
If the engineer was not aware of the nature of the emergency, he/she may well have decided to make all station stops. If you're sitting in the locomotive up front, it won't be very clear to you what the nature of the emergency is unless the coach crew states very clearly that you should run express. Evidently, the conductor did not state this. The reason could be because (1) the conductor is not medically qualified and therefore did not know the seriousness of the situation; nor was he/she required to know (2) the conductor was concerned about belting pass Newtonville and West Newton at a full 79mph where the platforms are only 3 ft wide and likely to be packed with commuters.
THINK people. THINK. Do any of you have commuter rail operating experience? Been up there in the head end?
You people need to become rational. Clearly, the death of a passenger is an emotional issue. But in dealing with emotional issues, we must remain rational.
AEM7
Your post is a reasonable one, on the whole. Culpability is appropriately determined by MBTA's investigation, of course, not by Subtalkers posting (myself included).
However, a couple of issues:
"If you have ever been to Newton commuter rail stop, you would not think medical help is available there."
Not directly relevant to the discussion. If the train had been cleared to Back Bay to meet an ambulance at MAS of 79 mph, that's one thing. However, that was not the case.
I have been involved in patient evacuations from subway stations and remote railroad stations (on long-distance train travel, I tell the crew chief I'm a physician and available to them if needed and as a result, I have been asked to help on an emergency basis).
If choosing Back Bay as the evacuation point involved a medically unacceptable delay for whatever reason, a 911 call to EMS could have brought help to the Newton station. The physical configuration of Newton station might make things more difficult, but even at awkward stations the combination of a gurney and chair-lift, extrication equipment carried on engine companies, and lots of trained bodies helping (paramedics are frequently accompanied by a fire engine) will get anybody out of a station area. Then, an ambulance or helicopter, as appropriate, can get the victim to a hospital.
The point is, the crew (as a whole) ended up doing the worst thing they could have done (however, starting CPR immediately was a very good move, a point which I hope MBTA will recognize in its investigation).
What also has been mentioned did anyone on the crew attempt CPR on the victim? Did the crew ask the passengers if there were any EMT's or MD's on board to help while on the way?????
About two years ago my son was on a flight from Islip-MacArthur to Ft. Lauderdale when a passenger became ill. While the plane was being cleared for emergency landing at Raleigh-Durham a request was made over the loudspeakers for any doctors or nurses to come to the front of the plne.
As I posted before I have been on two Amtrak trains where there has been a medical emergency. One was at Wooster MA, the other at Providence RI. Both times a C/R was alerted, the C/R promptly called the head end and the E/R called the dispatch to called an Ambulence to meet the train at the next station. The first guy (Wooster) just felt sick. The second guy was sweating and delerious and has taken out on a stretcher. In both cases the crew paid special attention to the guy and seemed prepared to offer care if needed. There were many radio messages to update the E/R and Dispatcher of the situation. I felt it was a class act all the way. This latest case bafles me.
If you take all the MBTA's crews and grade them on safety/medical emergency procedure (or anything else), you will find some being truly outstanding, some above average, some average, some below average, and some truly lacking in important skills (hopefully the last category is removed from duty). It's possible this particular crew, with the exception of the one who performed CPR, was not in the average or above categories.
It's up to MBTA to determine culpability.
That would be Worcester. Wooster makes models.
Or Worcesteshisteshisteshire, which a famous wabbit once visited.
Woooooster is a Roooooster that haunts Western Massachusetts
Cute.
For one... I DO HAVE THE EXPERIENCE AND CURRENTLY WORK AS A CONDUCTOR ON A MAJOR TRANSIT SYSTEM THAT CARRIES AN AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE....MORE IN A DAY THAN MBTA PROBABLY DOES IN A WEEK, AND I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN MEDICAL EMERGENCIES ABOARD MY TRAIN, AND HAVE ACTED ALWAYS WITH THE WELL BEING AND BEST INTERESTS OF THE CUSTOMER'S SAFETY IN MIND!!
Second... GIVEN THAT THE CONDUCTOR IS IN CHARGE OF THE TRAIN, HE/SHE CAN INFORM THE ENGINEER VIA THE TRAIN'S INTERCOM SYSTEM OR VIA RADIO TO STOP AND STAY, INFORM THE ENGINEER, AND THE DISPATCHER AS TO THE NATURE OF THE EMERGENCY AND AWAIT MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TO ARRIVE!!
Third... USE COMMON EYE SIGHT AND COMMON SENSE TO SEE THE CUSTOMER IS NOT WELL, SINCE A CUSTOMER HAVING A HEART ATTACK WILL SHOW DEFINITE SIGNS THAT HE/SHE IS NOT WELL, AND KNOW, USING THAT SAME COMMON SENSE, THAT SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT, AND AS PER RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CUSTOMERS' SAFETY ABOARD YOUR TRAIN, MAKE THE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO AID THE CUSTOMER. YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE LOTS OF MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT SOMEONE AND TELL THEY ARE NOT WELL!!
Rational thinking, true, is what helps deal with emotional issues, but if the conductor had been thinking rationally, or even been thinking properly, the man would be alive at this time. But this didn't happen I guess, huh?
Since you ask, do you have any commuter rail and/or mass transit experience? Have you ever been in this situation? I have been in medical situations on my trains, and acting in the manner I did, and making the decisions I made, the customers who were sick were tended to in a timely manner by proper medical assistance, and LIVED!!! Until you are in the situation as many times as I been, do not lecture me about how to think in a situation like this, because I been there, done that, and I came through, and the person/persons made it through!!
>>> if the conductor had been thinking rationally, or even been thinking properly, the man would be alive at this time. <<<
There was no need to shout in your previous post.
I doubt that you or anyone else can tell from the published news reports whether that person would have survived if EMS had been summoned at Newton. The fact that he died without the earlier medical care says nothing about the outcome if care had been provided.
In early June, a friend of mine suffered a heart attack while in a hospital for tests. Because of the immediate response by trained and equipped medical personnel who saw the start of the episode, her life was saved, but she spent six weeks in intensive care, and her heart now operates at 15% efficiency, so she can barely get out of bed. The doctors said that if this had happened anywhere else, such as in the lobby of the hospital, she would not have survived.
At this point it is only speculation that the passenger would have survived if the conductor had done something different than he did, although it is clear that what was done was not the optimum response to the emergency.
Tom
It wasn't directed at you, Tom....it was directed at AEM7!! The whole post was.
It wasn't directed at you, Tom....it was directed at AEM7!! The whole post was.
Doesn't give you a right to yell. Anyway you'er posting to the board, not to me.
FYI, I was a planning manager for 2 years at a major commuter authority overseas. I also happen to think I know a few FRA safety rules. I see that you either have not had experience actually *operating* a train or a subway car, or are totally oblivious to the danger of by-passing scheduled stops in a railroad environment.
AEM7
"USE COMMON EYE SIGHT AND COMMON SENSE TO SEE THE CUSTOMER IS NOT WELL, SINCE A CUSTOMER HAVING A HEART ATTACK WILL SHOW DEFINITE SIGNS THAT HE/SHE IS NOT WELL, AND KNOW, USING THAT SAME COMMON SENSE, THAT SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT"
You are very correct. Even in EMS courses, they emphisize how the patient looks. People who are dangerously sick LOOK SICK.
I had one patien who was complaining of some mouth pain, said he was having a diabetic emergency: He looked ok, his vital signs looked ok, his blood sugar was ok. I told him that Medicare might not pay for an ambulance run, but he said that he felt awful, and needed to go to the hospital anyway.
As soon as I put a cardiac monitor on him, I saw a 'bad heart rythem', and told my partner to move it. Frankly the pt did not look as bad as the rythem suggested, eventhough the monitor kept saying 'check patient' (It says that if the patient is dead too, so that is not so helpful).
The patient said he had a pacemaker, but I could not see it on the monitor, so what I was looking at was not V-Tach, but rather an AV-Block. Apparently his pacemaker had stopped working. Not quite as urgent as I first suspected, but still urgent enough.
There are many things that can bring a patient down. Even as an EMS provider and an RN, I don't know them all. A train conductor knows less, but as Paul said, you don't need that to know that someone looks sick.
Elias
have a low confidence in mass transit, and want to use automobiles to get around.
Oh Great! What a rotten idea.
Go ahead and have your heart attack while driving a car.
It will be a TREE that will stop you (if everyone else is lucky.)
Yes, a transit provider needs to have protocols for situations like this, but I am here to tell you that life and death is not in the hands of a train conductor (Conductor Darwin notwithstanding), or even of the best physician or paramedic in the field.
Elias
Yeah, sometimes it's just not up to us...
Maybe so, but the decisions you make can make a difference whether or not the customer lives or dies. Maybe if the right decision was made and better judgement exercised, the guy would still be alive today. Unfortunately reality is that poor judgement was exercised, a man is now dead, lawsuits are more than likely pending, and a conductor might not only be a former conductor soon, but could end up wearing a uniform of a different type....the kind that has black and white stripes, with a "State Prison" logo on it!!
Maybe if the right decision was made and better judgement exercised...
If you really think like that, it's you who should be out on the streets. What kind of scum worker do not back up the actions of a brother? Alright, he's not in the same union as you, and not even in the same city. But we're all railroaders.
Wait, no you're a transit-worker scumbag, aren't ya? Ah, that's why. Well pull your nose out of railroaders' business, just cuz you can run a tiny little EMU doesn't mean you know how to run a train...
AEM7
>>> Question I put to you who will be charged with neglagent homiside. <<<
Wait a minute, put away the rope and stop whipping up the lynch mob. It is not clear than anyone will or should be charged with negligent homicide. To convict for negligent homicide it is necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that but for the defendant's negligent actions or failure to act, the deceased would not have died. In this case it certainly not clear from the news reports that the person would have survived the heart attack if medical personnel arrived on the scene at the train's first stop. There will no doubt be civil lawsuits.
Tom
Wow, a lawyer who talks sense :-)
If anyone is near a radio they might want to tune into the 'Ron & Fez Show' currently airing on 102.7. They are comparing celebriites to trains (examples: 'The Andrew Dice Clay Train -- fun to ride years ago, but it's no longer any fun'. 'The Archie Bunker Train -- has one chair and no one is allowed to sit in it!' 'The Shortest Train -- JFK to JFK, Jr.').
Check it out -- very funny stuff!
Ron and Fez SUCK.
-Hank
It is my understanding that most tracks in the US are lined with a wire; when the wire is broken (ie when the rail breaks and moves, breaking the wire), an alarm indicator is triggered at the railroad's control center.
Why didn't this happen in Maryland on the CSX tracks? Is it because the rail and wire remained intact (that is, still joined) even though the rail was now out of alignment?
The rail has current going thru it, it is the wire, just a big one.
when wire moves but is still electricaly intact it won't drop the signal however.
this also happened in the Bayou Cannot incident with the bridge hit by the barges.
with a sunkink the rail is still intact physicaly but out of allignment.
I was riding on the LIRR one night, and track continuity was lost between Freeport and Merrick. The conductor and the brakeman were out with flashlights walking ahead of the train (it looked as if they wer trying to pull the train with a rope) inspecting the tracks.
The never did find the cause of the problem and when the train entered the next track section, they climbed aboard, and the train took off again.
Elias
The Maryland accident is no different from what happened earlier this summer with the derailment in Florida. According to some sources, CSX has very poor maintenance and inspections standards. Isn't it odd that a majority of Amtrak trains happen to derail on CSX owned tracks but a CSX freight can make it through without a problem? It's time that CSX Corp. take into consideration that while Amtrak is a tenant on its lines, they operate high-speed trains and they should be more considerate of their maintenance standards. IT AIN'T JUST SLOW RUNNING FREIGHT TRAINS!
And the Capitol Limitied seems to have more than its fair share of problems.....A couple of years ago, an Amtrak (Cap Lmtd) train rear-ended an auto carrier at the CSX yard in Cumberland, MD
I don't think this is widespread practice. Broken rail detection
is effected through closed-circuit track circuits, not with
extra wires. Track circuits won't detect kinks.
Yes, thank you.
It would be nice to have an alarm which could also detect a change in geometry on the tracks. An infrared, radar, laser or sonar device could do this; but the technology has not reached a point where the tracks could be protected for nominal cost.
Sounds like a Slide Detector you're describing.
It's a Hi-V on some IRT line, but I'm at a loss as to where it is. I don't know of any IRT elevated which crosses such an extensive collection of trackage on the surface:
That's Concourse Yard in the background. Taken from the Northbound platform of Bedford Park Boulevard (#4).
Damn, that was quick. Thanks.
OK then, who's that at the RFW? A parent or grandparent of a SubTalker???!!!
It's Sea Beach Fred, in his younger days!
Nah, he wouldn't have gone to the Bronx (if they would have let him in.).
Right, all he would have got is a Bronx cheer !
How can you tell it's a Hi-V and not a Lo-V? The electric running lights indicate a relatively recent picture and I can't read the number.
It's labeled as a Hi-V. I assumed it was labeled correctly. My knowledge of pre-unification IRT rolling stock is almost non-existant.
Hey Chris,
No disagreement on location with Dave. Put the picture may be mislabeled.
The electric running lights tend without seeing the car number toward Low V.
I agree on Paul about this. Unless it was converted to non~revenue service,
but then they painted them Yellow or on another recent post Silver. Didn't they?
I'm not a R/T expert, but the Hi Vs ceased service in the mid
fifties, when the R-17 arrived and enough Low Vs were available to shift to the
West Side Lines. Even the running lights were added later
to the R-17s, that's why Branford can not return 6688 to an as
delivered restoration. Mods done after delivery by the TA.
;-) Sparky
>>> How can you tell it's a Hi-V and not a Lo-V? <<<
The number in the caption, 3471 is a Hi-V number (ACF 1910-11), and when the picture is magnified, that does appear to be the number on the car. The clearest way to tell a Hi-V are the horizontal panels below the windows on the doors. Again with magnification, there appears to be a slight shadow of one of the panels on the middle door. Also this is a Joe Testagrose photo, which gives me confidence in correctness of the caption.
Tom
Tom,
The first run of regular Hi-Vs (the first was 3350, IIRC) did not look like that, unless I'm very mistaken. 3471 may even have been a deck roof, and you couldn't possibly mistake that.
The first two numbers look like "74" not "34" with or without Photoshop. Since were no original IRT cars above the 5600s, it is most probable that the bar on the first number make the car "54xx," a Lo-V.
Also see Joe Frank's extensive post.
>>> it is most probable that the bar on the first number make the car "54xx," a Lo-V <<<
After reviewing the photo and others on this site, I tend to agree with you that it is a 54xx Lo-V that is pictured. The most convincing comparison was with Lo-V 5470, a picture credited to Steve Hoskins. A second comparison to Hi-V 3398, which would have been in the same series as 3471, reveals significant differences, although not a deck roof, which seems to be limited to the cars in the series 3650-3699.
Tom
Ok, it's moved to the proper section. By the way, there was already a picture of 5471 on the site!
there was already a picture of 5471 on the site!
Small world! :)
>>> Ok, it's moved to the proper section. By the way, there was already a picture of 5471 on the site! <<<
Now that we determined that this is a Lo-V, what happened to the front pantograph? We don't want it mistaken for an R-44. :-)
Tom
>>> Now that we determined that this is a Lo-V, what happened to the front pantograph? <<<
I am surprised no one caught my error here. Although we all think of pantographs being part of the veteran fleet, they were not. From looking at the pictures on this site, it appears that the BMT Standards were the first to use spring loaded pantographs (the D types did not), and the feature was incorporated in the R-1 contract for the IND, but the IRT never used pantographs in any pre-unification equipment. The first IRT equipment with pantographs was the post-war R-12. Prior to that the IRT favored accordion gates attached to the right side of each car by the cab, which would be stretched and attached to the next car when the cars were connected, more like the flexible cords used on the R-44 and later models than spring loaded pantographs.
Tom
Hello (OLD) Tom
It doesnt surprise me ---I have posted a number of times here re: "Whereisit??" topic and not one person commented to me about any/all my substantative data presented for the (heh "Hi-V") Low-V Car and Stillwell Terminal Photos except the for the one poster-individual when I wrote "misguided fools" in my text on the Low-V photo topic---as they continued to post on and on after my Low-V data proof --about it being a Hi-V with a Hi-V #
So Far, No one but me commented about (or possibly caught!!??) the "POLO Grounds" shuttle error-suggestion for the BMT Standards at Stillwell shot.
I guess people are being extra cautious here at Daves after the brouha last week...or just dont know much or much care or desire to be bothered about history and "details of the ancient era and order of things..." from "our" youth. I CAUGHT the segue of your "IRT pantograph post" but didnt respond because
I infact "knew what you were pulling" (heh) and why (re: posted lack of visual knowledge shown for identity of an IRT Hi-V or Low-V !!
Regards!! -- Joe
No, I think people were accepting your expertise at face value.
As to the Polo Grounds error you pointed out, I don't think it really needed extra comment. You were simply right.
Also people don't always (or some people ever) read all the existing posts before posting themselves.
Sometimes when someone asks a specific question, I'll read all the first replies (to the original question) and not the follow-ups. If noone accuratelt answered the question in the first round of replies, I may without going down the whole thread.
Dave is right -his location stated is absolutely correct !! ---but MORE details left out, as follows:
This photo was taken somewhere between the very late 1930's and early 1950's. The train IS NOT a HIGH-V, its a Low-V set --it has no HI-V 600 VDC jumper Cable MU "Pockets" under the anticlimber and it has LOW-V Doors (all Hi-V "Headley Standard Body" Motors (which this car is NOT ) --which shared a common Low-V type body --had 3 panels in the side doors and 2 in the front storm door.
NOTE THE Elevated 3rd rail - high and close to the track, along with covered (old pre-1960 style cover style) "subway type" third rail. Note the "modified third rail" by the subway car ---a "transition section for subway car shoes (lower and further out [than el-car-type shoes] when on "their" Rail) to guide the outer contact end of the subway car "paddle shoe" UP onto the "higher, closer el type third rail without the subway shoe "snagging" the end of the higher, closer elevated position 3rd rail. <> NOTE <> the above right where the forward truck third rail subway "paddle" shoe is just about at the "transition" bend of the compromise rail.
The "elevated" style third rail was used to get IRT 9th Avenue El "Gate", MUDC and Composite-Car Elevated trains up to the Woodlawn IRT yards and shops.
Wooden El Trains used the 9th (and 6th) Avenue el(s) with service from South Ferry to Woodlawn-Jerome on this section. After the 9th ave El was abandoned in June 1940 (6th was closed in 1938) --the line still run as a shuttle between Polo Grounds 155th St. Station and Burnside Avenue Station on the Jerome Line section--still using EL and later "Composite" cars (all with elevated type drop-sled shoes) until 1950. Then steel High-V, and later by 1954, Low-V Steel replacement cars provided the service. They had their "subway" paddle-type shoes cut back as they could not clear the tunnel walls of the Sedwick-Anderson shuttle tunnel..El type position 3rd rail was what the tunnel walls clearance was designed for when built in 1916. THATS why subway "AND EL" type 3rd rail was STILL used on the Jerome line above 161st Station from 1940 thru 1950 AND continued with steel car operation up until the shuttle quit in 1958.
Lastly, note the semaphore signal(s) ---these were prevalent on the Jerome Line until the early 60's when they were replaced--tho this scene is obviously mid to early 50' or earlier---due to the 3rd rail specifics.
Hope the legthy details above didnt bore anyone --but the photo reveals a lot more (to me) as you see.
Below is a "model photo" taken on MY NYC O-Scale El System of my scratchbuilt IRT Hi-V "Gibbs" motor car in a Hi-V train...the preceeding car is my scratchbuilt "Headley-Standard-Body" High-V with the 3-paneled side doors.
Regards - Joe
Joseph Frank
NYC Model Transit System
NYC Transit Modelers Group
So anyone want to take a crack at reading the number off that car?
Tried my best...strained my eyes trying....
At first I thought the first two numbers were 74, but as I kept looking in may be a 2 as the first number....okay I have a headache now. Someone else will have to give it a try......
Chris
Well the proper range would be 3350-4024 for a Hi-V (the slide was labeled 3471, incorrectly I guess) or 4025-5652 for a Low-V. It could further be eliminated by not accounting for the ranges of numbers assigned to trailer cars and also probably the Steinway motors.
Well I'm pretty sure the first number is not a 4 or 5, so it must be a 3, and a Hi-V.
At first I thought the first two numbers were 74
I read the entire number as 7471, but that can't be correct.
7428? Just a guess.
Low V Motor and Trail cars were numbered 4025 thru
5652.
Of that Low V Class --the lower geared "standard body" Steinway Motors (there were NO Steinway trailers) were in the above group - numbered themselves as:
4025-4036 /
4215-4222 & 4555-4576 (1915 low-V trailers converted to Steinway Motors in 1929) /
4700-4770 /
5628-5652
I left out the 1939 IRT Worlds Fair Low-V Steinway-Class cars (oh heck, they are noted NOW anyway ) - #5653-5702) as body style is different than the car in the Jerome photo.
Car 7428 would be an NYCTA post war R type --way off base ! Try using (heh) a microscope to read the Low V car #
Regards - Joe
It's 3471 but I didn't have to cross my eyes or make Photoshop do perverse things. ;-)
TO: - Paul Matus
Hey, Paul, -- ummm, aaah, "HELLO, PAUL" --(that fits better !)
Now dont some of these uninformed fools here who continue to state the number is in 34 hundred series ---KNOW the difference between an IRT Hi-V Gibbs car
(or remumbered Composite trailer cars made into motors in 3300 series as one guy thought the second # was definitely a 3 --was that Mr.GP-38 ??)
Jeeze, I rode all those cars (Composites (as a small kid) and Deck, Gibbs, Headley (standard) Hi-V's, Flivers, low-V and Steinway cars, plus the IRT EL MUDC, IRT & BMT Q-types and some gate cars-- and studied their details for many more years and modeled them accurately.
You and I and Bigedirtrmanl and other guys who were there back in those days -- KNOW its a Low-V Motor ---forget the number - just by looks. IF it were a Steinway Motor, you and I KNOW it would have a RED line (heh, not in B & W tho) UNDER he numbner, and if a FLIVER (Hi-Lo-V hybrid series which could ONLY run within their own class as ALL MOTORS) - would have a WHITE line under the number
So, COME ON fellows, start focusing on the LOW-V number series and stop (heh heh "fartin" around and spinning wheels in the lower number Hi-V Class. Big ED will back me up here too.
Class dismissed guys--do your homework under the LOW-V Series !!
Regards all, Joe
Joseph Frank
Webmaster - NYC Transit Modelers Group (Forum)
Co-Founder - NYC Model Transit Assn.
Builder - NYC Model Transit System Layout
Hows this for IRT WF Steinway models - scratchbuilt by me w/full authentic details & layout for interiors (including ad signs & route signs),
exterior, underbody & trucks - in O scale (have 2 cars) -as seen on my "NY City El", using "elevated style" 3rd rail for use by both subway car "paddle" and elevated car "drop sled" pickup shoes. Here are some "detail" photos---
How about some Redbird and Fishbowl action, BELOW:
Now dont some of these uninformed fools here who continue to state the number is in 34 hundred series ---KNOW the difference between an IRT Hi-V Gibbs car (or remumbered Composite trailer cars made into motors in 3300 series as one guy thought the second # was definitely a 3 --was that Mr.GP-38 ??)
Before you start spouting off about people being "uninformed fools", it says right here on nycsubway.org that the car in question is a Hi-V. If we're "uninformed" then the supposedly authoritative material here is wrong. If the material is inaccurate, you should point that out to Dave so it can be further researched and corrected, not make disparaging remarks about people who can only cite it. I wasn't born until 1953 and didn't live in NYC until 1974, so I lack the first-hand experience to "know" the differences. Granted, there are bound to be errors here and there (I've caught a few myself), but I doubt the entire Hi-V section could be completely wrong for this long without someone having questioned it.
Relax guys... It was a new photo added last week from Joe Testagrose's collection. It wasn't sitting there for years incorrectly labeled. Even if it was, so what? Mistakes happen. I trust that the captions on photos that I receive are correct -- especiall since Joe's meticulous about it. But since it's an older photo in his collection -- not one of his own or his photo buddies from the 60s and 70s Steve Zabel, Doug Grotjahn, etc-- he probably never looked too closely. Relax!
That's what's amazing about railfans. It's like a science almost. If someone makes a mistake, it WILL be noticed and the person corrected, whether it's here, or at a slide show, or wherever. It's amazing how a lot of fans will have memorized the exact numbers and type of trains so readily and efficiently. It's a lot to remember!
TO: (Mr.) DUPONT CIRCLE
RELAX fellow fan !! ---I was just "chiding & ribbing" the guys ---and I DID point out that it was NOT a HI-V and WHY --on the board, and a lot more peripheral info per the photo...yet my posted info appeared to just be IGNORED it seemed, and the HI-V car number "rattling on" just continued onward....so what more do you want from me??? (Ignorance is bliss??)
Its not anyone's fault, least of all Dave P's, that he used photo caption info provided to him incorrectly from years ago. Dave - like we all do, relies on the veracity of the contributor of photos...and seeing how many photos he gets submitted from this boards members -- it's probably astounding --he would be hard pressed to have to "proof-check" each one himself.
As a Webmaster of my own Message Forum Board, "NYC Transit Modelers Group", I am sure you know we aren't paid for all the time we have to invest in our respective "boards" for the enjoyment and info-benefit of our members.
I myself DID NOT know that the posted photo was from the "sub talk pre-war photo archives" as it now appears stated as such --...and listed incorrectly in the HI-V section....or I would have emailed Dave the correct caption info had I seen it. I assumed it was the poster's personal photo acquired somewhere.
So, your reply to me about my "fools" remark I can readily understand, but just as equally, it would help you to realize that I go way back time-wise with old friends of mine like Don Harold, Herman Rinke, Art Lonto's, Roger Arcara, Ed Watson, E J Quimby and too many, many others to list ---(ie: our Paul Matus here, I have ALL his original Silver Leaf & related publications and a BRASS HO BMT Standard then produced by him --all acquired by me in the early to mid 60's FROM HIM and not recently, heh, thru EBAY !!!) ---all friends I knew well and long ago (and some, many, now departed like Herman, Roger, Ed, "E J" , and more) --these legends whom most of you here likely never knew personally, and only remotely heard or read about, if that !! I have been in his (our) hobby field photographing & riding since 1954 (and just riding albeit since 1948 as a kid)--and have had published articles and contributed to a number of publications, ran a RR magazine, --so maybe next time when you see me post any info on OLD era topic items , which I dont do often here at Dave's fine "club car"---perhaps you will give me some credit due for having "been there and lived thru" times you can only read about...long before your R-40's thru R-143's of today. I have been scratchbuilding museum caliber, scale, accurate NYC Transit models (HO & O) for the past 40 years..and THAT requires MUCH blueprint, data, detail and equipment research on the prototype to "get it accurate" !!!
My old (and again, departed) friend and publisher, who I wrote much for in his magazine, "Traction & Models" in the early 80's, Vane Jones, long ago coined a phrase which I adopted and still use -- "Knowledge is useless unless shared" ---it has long become my motto. It was on the cover masthead of every T&M Magazine issue (6 a year) Vane published from the early 60's! It ran for about 25 years till Vane's death around 1987.
Any knowledge I (or anyone very knowedgable) have is also useless unless shared - and even more useless if shared but ignored by (heh heh "fools") those who chose to do so -- its their loss, not mine !
I hope I have provided a little more insight & understanding for you, fellow fan.
Sincerest regards -
Joseph Frank
@ NYCMTS-NYCTMG-NYCMTA
Well, the first two numbers almost have to be "54". The first number could only be 3, 4 or 5. IRT "3" had a rounded top. Only "5" had a straight top.
It's 54xx, maybe 5471. Gotta be.
This one is easy. This is on the Woodlawn-Jerome Line just south of Bedford Park Blvd station. The bridge in the background is Bedford Park Blvd and from the looks of it, the yard in the background looks like the IND Concourse Yard.
That was a bit too easy, wasn't it. Even I guessed it, and I'm not usually good with pictures like that.
It's just NORTH of the BPB Station. The bridge in the background is W205th St.
Peace,
ANDEE
On the news today I saw video of an R62A with no A/C yesterday afternoon. On the NY1 website video clips they showed a chaotic 74th/Roosevelt station, some people claiming they had to wait 20 minutes for a train.
Others spoke of the hot packed 7 train, with no A/C. And another, said we don't need this, in addition to the stupid bus strike that is continuing for Queens.
Shutting off a/c on the 7 was not a smart move by the TA, sounds like more of a dangerous one to me. Now we know running less trains saves energy, but I doubt shutting off a/c was that effective.
Also two more fires today, one at the 14th street plant, the same one that blacked out lower Manhattan, and another at the Keyspan Far Rockaway plant. Fortunately, no outages to report.
I tell ya NYC Transit is really suffering this summer, and it's making LI Bus look better and better. :-)
an R62A with no A/C ?? ......where were the REDBIRD HATERS CLUB ??
......on man the TRANSVERSE CAB CAR CLUB WOULD HAVE HAD TO EAT CROW!
an R62A with no A/C ?? ......where were the REDBIRD HATERS CLUB ??
......on man the TRANSVERSE CAB CAR CLUB WOULD HAVE HAD TO EAT CROW!
a good old ( no railfan window ) an R62A with no A/C ????....LOL!!
Yeah, looks like I blew it in another thread on the subject, saying that the AC had not been turned off. Guess I should listen to the news on a news station, not on a music station :-)
(Let's not allow this to become a radio discussion, though...that's what the New York Radio Message Board is for, as some of you know.)
Anyway, NYCT spokesperson Charlie Seaton was quoted in one of the papers, talking specifically about the AC having been turned off on #7 trains. Other papers had quotes from other spokespeople, but they didn't specifically address the air conditioning issue, only saying (pretty much) "we did what we had to do," without saying what that WAS.
David
an R62A with no A/C ?? ......where were the REDBIRD HATERS CLUB ??
......on man the TRANSVERSE CAB CAR CLUB WOULD HAVE HAD TO EAT CROW!
a good old ( no railfan window ) an R62A with no A/C ????....LOL!!
Inspired by the Boston incident, I want to relate a real incident on the LIRR, and wonder what the consensus of SubTalkers would do.
About 10 years ago, my rush hour Babylon trsin was pulling into Jamaica. Next stop was Rockville Centre, about 20 minutes away.
A man norified the conductor that he was having chest pains, and requested that the crew radio ahead to Rockville Centre to notify his cardiologist, who would arrange to have an ambulance meet the train there.
The conductor told him, "No way, Jose" and immediately radioed NYPD and EMS to meet the train at Jamaica where the man would be taken to the coronary unit at Jamaica Hospital. EMS and NYPD responded promptly.
The man insisted he be taken to Rockville Centre for his own doctor and hospital. He said he knew his condition and this is what he wanted. Lots of witnesses heard him take responsibility for the danger. The crew insisted that he had to go to the nearest and quickest facility, and Jamaica was it. There was a four-way discussion (NYPD, EMS, crew, passenger) which used up about 15 or 20 minutes.
Finally, the passenger was allowed to go to Rockville Centre where the ambulance was waiting. Happy ending.
_Aside_ from the obvious liability issues, what would _you_ have done if you were the person on the scene who had to make the final decision? Jamaica or Rockville Centre?
I don't believe the railroad could be forced to transport a passenger who might die before the next stop. On the other hand, I believe that a conscious person generally has the right to determine or even refuse medical care, even if it endangers their lives. Please forget about passengers' inconvenience. The man didn't mean to hold up the train, he was concerned about life and death.
It's too obvious to say that there would have been hell to pay if he went into cardiac arrest before RVC. But then there might have been hell to pay if he went to Jamaica hospital and died because the emergency medics there didn't understand his condition.
What would you have done?
This is not an uncommon occurence. EMS crews face it all the time.
First, understand that Jamaica Hospital has an excellent, truly first class emergency department with a cardiac care unit, and the best decision from a purely medical point of view would have been to take the man to Jamaica Hospital and put the ER physician there in touch with the man's cardiologist.
If I recall correctly, New York is "zoned" and therefore EMS must take patients to the designated zone hospital. A private ambulance is under no such restriction.
If the man were unconscious, this is what would have happened.
If I recall correctly, New York is "zoned" and therefore EMS must take patients to the designated zone hospital. A private ambulance is under no such restriction.
However, this man, being conscious, was a sentient adult legally able to make decisions for himself. Thus, if he says, "Don't touch me. I only want my own doctor to treat me," then legally, that request must be honored, even as the EMS crew advises him as to the risks of not being treated immediately.
I think ultimately LIRR did the right thing. However, I hope they made him sign a release. Never know what a shyster lawyer could make out of this.
If you were objectively considering the "patient's best interest" even if it defied his stated desires, do you Jamaica or RVC would have been the right choice?
Oh, clearly, Jamaica. No question. The patient could always be transferred to Rockville Center after being stabilized.
Sorry, I think you already answered that. Jamaica.
Not to make this even more complicated, but could the stress and anxiety of being taken to an unknown hospital and doctor against his wishes worsen his condition from anxiety and stress?
>>> could the stress and anxiety of being taken to an unknown hospital and doctor against his wishes <<<
But that could not happen. As Ron pointed out, a conscious adult has the absolute right to decline medical treatment. He cannot be taken against his will to any unknown hospital. The attempt to take him there would be kidnaping, false imprisonment, and when medical personnel touched him assault and battery.
Tom
Very true, Tom. Very accurate.
However, were paramedics to return to the same patient 10 minutes later and find him comatose, the principle of implied consent would apply, whereupon the paramedics would assume the patient wants to be saved, and would then treat and transport as per protocol.
I won't get into Do Not Resuscitate situations here - they are observed most often in a hospital setting. While legally they would apply out in the street too, in actual practice things get really sticky sometimes.
As Ron pointed out, a conscious adult has the absolute right to decline medical treatment. He cannot be taken against his will to any unknown hospital. The attempt to take him there would be kidnaping, false imprisonment, and when medical personnel touched him assault and battery.
True. On the other hand, the LIRR conductor could have refused to let the man ride to Rockville Centre.
He'd have no grounds to do it and would be easily sued for discrimination. There's no right to discriminate against injured/disabled people. And, as far as anyone knows, he doesn't have any transmittable illness - heart problems are not contagious. He's not endangering anyone nor breaking any rules. If he has a ticket, let the man ride.
A railroad ticket (or a Metrocard swipe, for that matter) is usually considered a revocable license to ride. That license could be revoked under certain circumstances, but the man was not creating a disturbance, and was exercising a right to refuse treatment on the basis of his reasoned assessment of his own medical condition. If he hadn't asked for the ambulance, there is no reason anyone would have known anything was wrong, at least at that juncture.
I doubt any court would find that his having chest pains breached his license.
You're assuming that if the conductor refuses him passage, he will be forced to be treated at Jamaica Hospital. But that would be wrong. He might try other means to get to RVC. Maybe he'll wait for the next train. Maybe he'll call a cab, or call his doctor and see if an ambulance could be sent to Jamaica. He might die waiting. Courts would not look kindly on that.
In retrospect, even though it turned out OK, I wonder if the man wishes he had talked to the crew after they left Jamaica, not as they were entering it.
A railroad ticket (or a Metrocard swipe, for that matter) is usually considered a revocable license to ride. That license could be revoked under certain circumstances, but the man was not creating a disturbance, and was exercising a right to refuse treatment on the basis of his reasoned assessment of his own medical condition. If he hadn't asked for the ambulance, there is no reason anyone would have known anything was wrong, at least at that juncture.
I doubt any court would find that his having chest pains breached his license.
One could argue that the man had a strong chance of creating a "disturbance," namely dropping dead.
In addition, the train was an unsuitable way of transporting him to Rockville Centre and the waiting ambulance. While it may have been scheduled as a 20-minute run, there was always the chance that it could have become delayed along the way - possibly between stations, which would have been a real problem if the man collapsed at that point, making a rescue difficult.
One could argue that the man had a strong chance of creating a "disturbance," namely dropping dead.
Not the kind of disturbance envisioned by the Rules of Conduct (or whatever the RR equivalent is).
In addition, the train was an unsuitable way of transporting him to Rockville Centre and the waiting ambulance. While it may have been scheduled as a 20-minute run, there was always the chance that it could have become delayed along the way - possibly between stations, which would have been a real problem if the man collapsed at that point, making a rescue difficult.
That is really a stretch. The chances of the train not making it save in the face of some extreme (and already known) tie-up is remote. The chances of making it even in 20 minutes by ambulance (which can pass traffic lights) on empty roads is remote, if you know anything about the street structure between Jamaica and RVC. And this was rush hour.
What you're really trying to do (as I'm sure you'd admit) is make up a plausable sounding rationale to dump the guy. There are people who would have no trouble seeing through this. I'm think they're aclled juries.
It's been a long time, but reaching back to my business law courses umpty years ago, IIRC, when you are legitimately present on someone's commercial property (which includes the railroad, state ownership or not), even, say, a departemnt strore, the owner of that property has a responsibility to you if you are injured or ill. They can't just get a bunch of gloorwalkers to wrap you in a blanket and dump you on the street because you're taking up space.
What you're really trying to do (as I'm sure you'd admit) is make up a plausable sounding rationale to dump the guy. There are people who would have no trouble seeing through this. I'm think they're aclled juries.
No one's talking about dumping the man off without care. Immediate assistance was available at Jamaica. The railroad should not have had to bear the responsibility of transporting someone in very fragile health, just because he wanted to be treated in RVC.
when you are legitimately present on someone's commercial property... the owner of that property has a responsibility to you if you are injured or ill.
Right. But presence on that commercial property is also subject to management discretion. There are usually published procedures on what to do in case of an injury or medical emergency. If someone else is taking responsibility for your well-being, then you must follow their published procedures. If the published procedure is to stick you in an EMS truck and head for the nearest medical facility (in this case Jamaica), then you must do that. If you choose to make your own decisions, then you alone are responsibile for the consequences of that decision, which may involve being left on the platform at Jamaica because the LIRR management has refused carriage.
AEM7
This was a complex situation. The man was not in visible distress. Knowing his own condition, he believed he needed treatment by his regular cardiologist and asked the railroad to save him time and danger by notifying his doctor in advance.
The conductor, so notified, properly deemed that this might be a medical emergency, and called EMS and NYPD.
If he refused to go to Jamaica hospital, and was fully ambulatory, fully rational, and not in visible distress (all true), the railroad would have needed a hell of a good rationale to toss him out on the platform.
I would bet that, if the railroad put him off, and he suffered physically as a result, it would sort out in court something like this:
1. John Doe requested that his doctor be notified to meet him at Rockville Centre.
2. The conductor properly notified EMS and NYPD.
3. EMS wanted the man to go to Jamaica Hospital and he refused.
4. EMS could not find that the man was in a condition that justified involuntary admission. EMS released him.
5. John Doe has in no way violated the Rules of Conduct. He was not incapacitated or abusive and he then exercised his contractual right to continued passage.
6. The railroad refused and physically put him out on the platform.
7. John Doe suffered a heart attack attempting to get alternate transportation to his hospital.
8. The railroad is neglegent.
"In retrospect, even though it turned out OK, I wonder if the man wishes he had talked to the crew after they left Jamaica, not as they were entering it."
More importantly, I hope the man remembered to thank the crew for their concerned, competent and compassionate attention to his situation.
I would NOT attempt to banter these threads...a good citizen and responsible rail employee must ignore refusal of a concious adult to receive medical attention and turn the matter over to medical response...while we may have some medical knowledge about injury, best to turn the matter over to the 'certified'. CI Peter
First the man asked for assistance, but he asked for specific assistance, ie. transport to RVC with an ambulance waiting there.
LIRR acted correctly in getting local EMS on the scene.
Now it is NOT true that *any* conscious adult can 'refuse' medical care. Only one who is *competent* may do that. The drunk are not competent, neither are the senile, retarded or insane, though you would have to have more information to make a judgement in these cases, and in all such cases police intervention would be required to force a conscious but otherwise incometent adult into a care situation that thwy want to refuse. The Police were on the scene.
The man clearly passed such rudementary cometency tests as could be administered in the field. The man knew his own medical condition, and knew what sort of treatment he needed and the consequences of putting it off another 20 minutes.
He would have been smart to have waited until the train was half way to RVC, but that is another story. If I were with a private ambulance service, I would have voulntered to ride with the man to RVC on the train, having some oxygen and meds with me just in case, but it is not likely that city EMS personel would have been allowed to do this.
As a nurse, I have traveled with elderly (somewhat incompetent) patients on public transportation (aircraft), (from a nursing home in Califorina to one in North Dakota). It *is* done all of the time.
Just like in the Boston case where the man clearly needed medical help 'right now', in this instance, the man appeared to be competent to make his own decisions.
Elias
He would have been smart to have waited until the train was half way to RVC
All that would be needed would be the train clearing the platform at Jamaica. The logistics of backing the train or trying to get help past the station platform would probably have been much worse (time and everything else-wise) than beating it out to Rockville Centre.
But I thuoght of this, and another thought occurred to me. If he felt there was any chance at all of becoming unconcious before clearing Jamaica, no one would have had a clue to his condition, or maybe even that he wasn't asleep.
If I were with a private ambulance service, I would have voulntered to ride with the man to RVC on the train, having some oxygen and meds with me just in case, but it is not likely that city EMS personel would have been allowed to do this.
That's a wonderful idea. But I think the man, in addition to being insistent, managed to convince EMS that his course was reasonable.
If the exigent circumstances warranted it, I'm guessing one or two EMS members could have done with him, protocol notwithstanding, but I may be wrong.
He would have been smart to have waited until the train was half way to RVC
All that would be needed would be the train clearing the platform at Jamaica. The logistics of backing the train or trying to get help past the station platform would probably have been much worse (time and everything else-wise) than beating it out to Rockville Centre.
Why wouldn't the train have stopped at a station before RVC, say St. Albans?
At St. Albans you're only 10-11 minutes from Rockville Centre. Then you have to get an EMS crew upstrairs and, if the man needs to be carried on a strecther, downstairs. RVC is ADA compliant with an elevator, St. Albans isn't. Plus now you have to go a significant distance back to Jamaica Hospital.
The next platform in that route is at Lynbrook. By that time, you're less than two minutes (I've timed it) to Rockville Centre.
Emergency situation...an ill pasenger...the passenger is concious and can coherently relate the medical condition. What you must do is coherently relate the situation to operations and get a coherent response. A human life is at risk...RTo skeds threaten a G2...and you have to make a rapid decision that you may have never made in your entire lifetime. Our training can never encompass every situation...better to have to deal with a G2 than live with 'a failure of choice' upon your conscience. You can be a real 'TA Ranger' or just a number on the seniority list. CI Peter
Train conductors can refuse to transport a passenger whose continuied presence may present a possible risk to the other passengers or to the crew. While that's obviously intended for use with respect to disorderly or intoxicated passengers, it probably could be stretched to include the situation under discussion. As noted, removing the passenger at Jamaica would have caused him some inconvenience but no physical risk, given the availabilty of medical help in the vicinity.
Good point, Peter.
Put him off a Jamaica.
I'd say the right thing to do is to minimize the time until medical care is available. Ideally, there would be radio contact with emergency services, and the train would to the place of quickest access -- with a battery run, if necessary.
Now if it was going to take 20 mintues for emergency help to reach the passenger at Jamaica, then go to Rockville Center. But if EMS can meet you in Jamaica, with a hospital right nearby, then that's the place to go.
I don't think the subway communication system is set up to allow that kind of rapid decisionmaking. Maybe after the Rail Control Center, ATS etc. is running in 2010 -- if it isn't lost to the budget crisis, but not now. True.
I see what you're saying, Peter. But since the man wasn't frothing at the mouth or writhing on the floor or something, it's kind of a nasty way to go about it.
It's kind of like saying "You have the right to make your medical decisions, so if you want to go to Rockville Centre, you can walk."
>>> removing the passenger at Jamaica would have caused him some inconvenience but no physical risk <<<
Aren't you forgetting, now he has to find alternate transportation to get to his doctor. Suppose that takes 30 minutes longer than riding on the train, and ten minutes before arriving at the hospital where his doctor is, he has a heart attack. There would clearly be no liability for the railroad if they transported him and something happened because he assumed the risk by refusing treatment in Jamaica. But if he cannot get to his doctor in time because the railroad refused to transport him??? That might be lawsuit time.
Tom
Last summer, I fell and broke my wrist. My wife panicked and thought I was going to pass out, so she called 911. While on the phone, I told her I was not going to pass out, so tell them not to come. When she relayed this message, they told her that once you call 911 you effectively cannot "uncall" them.
I once worked part-time for an income tax preparation company. We were told that if a client says something like: "I fix cars on the side and I get paid in cash. Do I have to report that income?" that the answer is "Yes". If you know about it, you can't look the other way.
I think in this case if the passenger is sick enough to tell the conductor about it, then the conductor has an obligation to get emergency help ASAP. After the EMT's come, and, assuming the patient is relatively stable, if he wants to continue to Rockville Center, fine.
Frankly, if the passenger told the conductor to call ahead, and they left it at that, that would have been the longest 20 minutes of his life, assuming he survived.
As far as not getting to his doctor on time, he could get to the Jamaica hospital sooner and they can phone his doctor from there for advice. After he was stable, he could be transferred to another hospital.
If this person already knew of a pre-existing heart condition, and had already decided that only his own cardiologist would do for treatment, he should have been carrying a method of reaching that person, ie a cell phone. He could then have called his own doctor to arrange for an ambulance pick-up at Rockville Center. Then he would not have needed to alert the LIRR crew and avoided the whole problem.
I agree. The LIRR did what it was supposed to do. Once the passenger had refused treatment, and signed a release, there was no reason why the train shouldn't proceed along its route as per routine.
Now, I would argue that the the LIRR was under no obligation to inconvenience other passengers by running express to a stop of the man's choice. If that is what he wanted, a private ambulance or even a taxi (remember, he's refused treatment, and even wants to stay on the train) could take him from Jamaica to Rockville Center. And there is no shortage of taxis at Jamaica Station.
In the end, all worked as it should.
Now, I would argue that the the LIRR was under no obligation to inconvenience other passengers by running express to a stop of the man's choice. If that is what he wanted, a private ambulance or even a taxi (remember, he's refused treatment, and even wants to stay on the train) could take him from Jamaica to Rockville Center. And there is no shortage of taxis at Jamaica Station.
Just a couple of technical points, Ron.
Rockville Centre was the next stop on that train. There was no question of changing operations. In fact, had the railroad been able to grant his requesr (I understand it could not because of protocol) everyone would have been less inconvenienced because the train was delayed 15-20 minutes at Jamaica to wait for, and then have a discussion with, EMS.
If you're familiar with the locations of Jamaica and Rockville Centre, a taxi, or even an ambulance, is a terrible alternative to the train, unless, of course, the man needed the life support systems of an ambulance, but in that case, I suppose the issue would be moot.
"Rockville Centre was the next stop on that train. There was no question of changing operations. In fact, had the railroad been able to grant his requesr (I understand it could not because of protocol) everyone would have been less inconvenienced because the train was delayed 15-20 minutes at Jamaica to wait for, and then have a discussion with, EMS. "
The delay was unavoidablle in any case. EMS was called to evaluate the man and determine whether or not he was stable, and whether or not he could give informed consent (and so could legally refuse treatment). EMS was obligated to inform the man of the risks involved, and also to inform him of his right to refuse treatment ( they did so). That process had to happen.
I agree that a taxi would not do as well as the train.
There was an additional alternative that could have been offered. I am not offering my opinion of its worth. It was actually done on the MBTA Red Line:
1)Take the man off the train, and let the train proceed immediately out of the station.
2) Perform the medical evaluation/informed consent etc.
3) Offer to have a police officer drive the man to his cardiologist's office in Rockville Center.
The MBTA did actually do a variation of this for a medical case. NYPD has done so, even driving a man home to Nassau County.
That sounds like it could be a good backup policy. However, in the specific instance, a policy car would have much the same problem, time wise, as an ambulance.
But your suggestion of having the train proceed immediately while the man was evaluated, might have have worked, if he could then have been placed on the next train, which at rush hours, would have been in another 20 or 25 minutes.
Of course, getting him a seat might have been another matter entirely...
But your suggestion of having the train proceed immediately while the man was evaluated, might have have worked, if he could then have been placed on the next train, which at rush hours, would have been in another 20 or 25 minutes.
Of course, getting him a seat might have been another matter entirely...
There are a couple of seats in most cars that technically are reserved for the handicapped. If the conductor of the next train was notified in advance, he could have made one of the seats available.
I'd say the system worked. It wasn't up to the conductor to determine if somebody with chest pains was medically sound enough to ride for 20 more minutes. So the C/O called the PD & EMS, and the situation was sized up by medical professionals.
Of course, if they let the guy ride, even after the conference, and at his request, and he had gone into arrest, his family would have sued the tie-plates off the MTA anyway.
About 6 months ago I noticed a passenger slumped over on a Metra Electric morning train into Chicago. The position of the passenger was ambiguous, as it seemed that she was just reaching down for something, and no one was doing anything about her. After a half a minute of observing her, I decided that there was a problem. I went immediately to find the Conductor, who then approached her and determined that she needed medical help. The train was held at the next station while a medical crew took her off the train. This delayed the train for a while. All in all, I guess this is a story of the system working the correct way, rather than what occurred in Boston.
I would add a congratulatory note to you. You could have just blown it off and gotten off at your stop - but you didn't. Thanks for caring.
Legally, the LIRR must request medical assistance at the next station stop where EMS can respond. A conductor/trainman is not legally empowered to make a medical decision. If they did and the patient died, believe me, his desire to see his regular doctor at his home station would carry no weight with the family (or jury) suing the RR on a wrongful death suit.
EMS, OTOH, is empowered to make medical decisions. If they decide the patient can travel on the train to his home station, and the patient subsequently dies en-route, the RR is off the hook froma libaility standpoint. (I'm assuming the patient doesn't subsequently make an additional request for immediate help)
Rockville Center, no questions asked, none needed either.
The sooner the better, no matter what. If Rockville Center is the next stop and it's that close, it's almost like a one-in-ten-gazillion chance. So I would take the bleeping opportunity, ne questions asked.
It's too obvious to say that there would have been hell to pay if he went into cardiac arrest before RVC. But then there might have been hell to pay if he went to Jamaica hospital and died because the emergency medics there didn't understand his condition.
What would you have done?
It depends. If the person is having minor chest pains then I would continue to Rockville. If the person was nearly unconscious then I wouldn't take the chance. If there was hell to pay with both decisions I would stick with Jamaica
SciGuyTransfer terminal
If the person is in distress, minor or major pains, I would call it in to the dispatcher, and have them tended to by the EMS at the very next stop as soon as possible!! Minor pains can become major ones, and taking a risk like that....going all the way to Rockville just because the pains are minor, leaves the door open to something like what happened to the guy in Massachusetts. Think of what would happen if right after you leave Jamaica, say about in the area of Rosedale, this guy gets dramatically worse, as can be the case in cardiac arrests and heart attacks, and now you are some distance away from the nearest hospital (if near Rosedale the only hospitals near enough are Peninsula in Far Rockaway or all the back to Jamaica Hospital), and now you are in the same position as the conductor on the MBTA train. If the guy dies en route between Jamaica and RVC, and it's found out you were in a position to get him help right then and there in Jamaica before the man's condition got worse, and you didn't and just kept the train going onward per schedule, you're responsible and now you are in the same pickle the MBTA guy is in, looking at pending employment termination, possible criminal charges for negligence, and lawsuits. If you have a chance to have the guy taken care of right there at Jamaica YOU DO IT!! Don't take a risk that can cost someone his/her life, and get you into a mess. If the guy gets aid at Jamaica, gets taken to Jamaica Hospital, and say his condition worsens there at Jamaica Hospital, and unfortunately he dies, his death, if a blame was to fall on someone, is out of your hands and not within your responsibility, and the responsibility for the death would fall on Jamaica Hospital, not you!! You did what you had to do in order to best look out for the interest of the safety of your customer in a time of distress, and at the same time keep the train running onward to its destination. The death would be out of your hands, and in the hands of whomever tended to him at the hospital.
If the guy dies en route between Jamaica and RVC, and it's found out you were in a position to get him help right then and there in Jamaica before the man's condition got worse, and you didn't and just kept the train going onward per schedule, you're responsible and now you are in the same pickle the MBTA guy is in, looking at pending employment termination, possible criminal charges for negligence, and lawsuits.
Before the EMS crew in Jamaica will release the patient to continue his journey, he has to sign a 'refusal of treatment' form stating that he has ben told of his condition, and understands the risks. The EMS crew in Jamaica will also have taken vital signs, made an assessment, and have documented thier findings. There is no way that the patinet can come back to the railroad or to the conductor claiming neglince on their part.
Elias
planning a 3-leg AE trip (4-days). Part of it is 2153 BOS-WAS. Would it be worth it to upgrade to first class for the run? Also, when does the clubAcela lounge open?
Sure, why not? If you've never done it first class, try it.
I enjoy it very much. Thje pampering is pretty good and the hot meals, included, are great.
Of course, having experienced it once, you don't have to buy first class again if you're travelling on a budget. But try it once and see.
IIRC, it would be breakfast/lunch, rght?
I assume your train is travelling in the morning. Yes that would be either breakfast or lunch.
I have not gone in First Class as a passenger but I have gone in the galley before the train left (I was a business class passenger) and I would say it isn't worth it. You get a hot meal prepared before the train leaves its origin which to me is just like airline food. I would only go first if you have one of those free upgrade coupons (which I do and I plan to use it soon).
Oh, the food on Acela is NOT Airline food by any stretch of the imagination. It is much better than airline food. I won't do first class often because I don't want to spend the money, but Amtrak deserves some credit here.
However, I did experience once a meal on the Metroliner First Class that was a cut above the Acela experience. Not sure why...
However, I did experience once a meal on the Metroliner First Class that was a cut above the Acela experience. Not sure why...
Because AEM-7's and Metroliners are the way of the future, maybe? I don't know why they change it as soon as the operation settles down to something good... Acela is the el-cheapo answer to Metroliners. The thing is, given the amount of ridership the Acela is already pulling in, what do you think would have happened if they had gone for a proper, Metroliner-like replacement?
AEM7
Having now taken about two dozen AE Business rides between Boston and NYC, and one AE First, I am of the opinion that an upgrade to FC is worth it only if the train is very crowded. On a crowded train, it can be very noisy, the wait for cafe service long, and same for the rest room.
Then again, on a full FC car, it can be noisy (FC passengers are just as bad with cell phones as BC passengers!), and you can wait for your food to be delivered and the rest room too.
Does the conductor always announce when the train hits 150mph in Rhode Island? Also, is there a speedometer somewhere on the train that you can view as a passenger?
They used to announce it regularly, but now it's "old hat" and I haven't heard it in a while. You can tell when it's at max speed... the seats rattle a bit more :-)
There is a speedometer in the "conductor's closet" in the cafe car, which is usually open. Each trainset has a Bombarider rep on it, who's usually sitting there and happy to show off the toys to those who are interested. If it's closed, ask a crew member -- they'll usually oblige.
This "Bombardier Rep" is paid to just ride the train? That's such an awesome job!
Talk to an EMD rep that sat on the Fs when they first came out. Then tell me it's an easy job..
oren, how did you wind up getting a cupon? Is it one of those "customer service" things?
It's all a question of what you value in life -- well also depends on who's paying for it.
I happen to value my $$ in life. I wouldn't take Acela Express to start with -- I would go Northeast Direct. But that's a personal choice I make.
If I were making a business trip, of course I would be insisting on Acela Express First Class.
I also happen to value comfort, style and class in life. That is why, someday, my girlfriend and I will charter a dining train out of her hometown to go where we're going to live -- probably when we get married :-) I doubt the train would be Amtrak equipment, although I think that Superliners would be good enough, complete with PRR Metroliner-style seats, deluxe bedrooms, etc. However, this probably won't happen until the Superliners are retired out of Amtrak service... in fact, I might have to purchase a Superliner and have it refitted to do it. But then, what's $100,000?
In short: I believe that the Acela Express First Class is not anything which I would even term classy.
AEM7
Here is what I would do: First, ask the ticket agent or reservations how full the train is. If Business is at or less than half full, stay in Business... you will get a "double" seat to yourself, and have the run of the train to wander around.
The one time I tried First, it was comfy all right (and the meal was OK), but I felt like I was in an airplane -- just get up when nature calls then return to your seat. Since FC is usually busy, it's more likely you'll have a seat neighbor if you can't get one of the singles.
Does anyone know what year the 5th track (between the 2 express tracks) at the Spring St station on the Lex was removed?
I believe it was removed a long long time ago, before Spring St was extended southbound (late 40's?).
A long long time ago?
Ha ha Chris. :) :) :P
I could have figured that out for myself. I was trying to find a more exact date.
Is the 4:10 Redbird from Brooklyn Bridge still going? Also, how many round trips does it make? I've looked at the older threads and can't decide if it goes to Parkchester once, turns back and goes to Bowling Green or if it goes to Parkchester, back to City Hall, back to the Bronx again and then returns to the 5 after the second southbound run?
Thanks, in advance.
It's called the 323 job on the 6 line. It's leaves Parkchester at 7:27 pm and arrives at the Bridge at 8:14. Then it leaves Bowling Green at 8:37 pm and arrives at Dyre at 9:30.
Figure if it's the last relay train at Parkchester, it probably leaves Brooklyn Bridge sometime around 6pm or so. I don't know how many other trips this train makes. And I also can't tell you if it's a redbird anymore. My guess is that it's a 62 again.
I would like to know too!! so i can catch it after august 25 on .....
( shoot it on video ) .....
That's it. Just copy those intervals that I posted, and you'll catch that train. Keep your fingers crossed that it's a redbird when you get here.
I think it's still running. I saw an R-33 train with all its doors open on the layup track south of BB yesterday shortly after 3, and someone was up front changing the bulkhead rollsign. I'll bet that was it.
It makes two round trips from BB as a Parkchester local. Then it switches to the express track at BB and runs light to Bowling Green, where it becomes a 5.
Thanks again to those who answered, if anyone knows more, feel free to post or e-mail me.
They should be running the Redbird from the No.5 Line until Sept.6th. However E 180 can send out a R 142 Barbardier instead of the redbird for No.6 Line service.
Today, I had an unexpected day off, so I decided to make use of that and return something to a friend in Glendale. Not working in Manhattan anymore, and now living in Suffolk, I don't get to ride the subway as often as I used to (or want to!) I was just about to get back on the JR Parkway at Myrtle to go home and said "Why am I going home? I should take a subway ride to the city!" I instead continued on Forest Parkway towards the Jamaica El, parked my car, caught a J to Manhattan.
I do take the subway often enough and go to Manhattan often, but it's been a few years since I've ridden the J east of Myrtle Ave. I was amazed at how the neighborhood between Eastern Pkwy Broadway Junction and Myrtle has improved from how I remembered it! They are even doing something with an old theater that I always used to look at, at Madison St and Broadway. The stations also look great!
Anyway, I rode to Canal and then to the Broadway line to check on the mosaic restoration at those stations....coming along nicely. I got off at 42nd St and walked to Grand Central to check out the Elevated exhibit at the museum shop there (everyone should check that out - it's a great exhibit).
I then was planning to take the Lexington Express down to Brooklyn Bridge to get the J back to my car at Forest Parkway when a Redbird 4 Train came in. I was on the R142's plenty of times, so I wasn't really thinking about the trains too much. When the Redbird 4 came in, I was suprised that the railfan window was empty (wasn't even thinking about it as Grand Central was it's usual busy self). I hadn't "rode the window" for a while so was happy. As I speeding down Lexington Ave I actually got a little sad, as I realized that this may be one of the last times, if not the last, that I may ride one of them in regular service, or at least while they are even somewhat common. They are getting fewer and fewer.
By the time I got to Brooklyn Bridge, I didn't want it to end, so I stayed on until Wall Street. I noticed they are doing some work there. (Are they planning to remove the ugly blue tile there, and restore the walls?) When I got off that train I said my "good-byes" to Redbirds, and crossed over to the other platform where I took R142 #7000 (remembered because it's a cool number) back to Fulton.
At Fulton I admired the J/M platforms new mosaics. I've been through there a few times on the train, but haven't actually used the station in a while. Of course, as usual, I lost all sense of direction at that station, and waited on the wrong end of the platform for the J's railfan window. Luckily a M came first to show I was on the wrong end. I boarded the right end of the J back to my car at Forest Parkway....
It's been a while since I have ridden the subway "just for fun". Most of the time, due to time contstraints, it's just for transportation. It was especially fun because I didn't plan for it. I hope I will get a few more rides on the "reds", but I am content that I officially said my "good-byes".....
That's a beautiful story. I'm gonna go riding for fun this evening, and I'm hoping to catch a Redbird 4 up in the Bronx.
i wll be there to shoot as may of em as possible late august into september !! for sure to see to it they are on DVD !!
""I was suprised that the railfan window was empty"" ....you said...
WELL THERE ANINT NO RAILFAN WINDOW ON A R-142 !!! ........!!
That is true. I used to use the 6 every day on Lexington when I was in College. I used to ride the window quite often, as I would usually wait at the end of the platform at Union Square anyway because it was the least busy at rush hour....can't believe that that front view on the 6 is mostly gone.
& all because of the TRANSVERSE CUT OFF VIEW CAB CAR CLUB !!
I HATE TRANSVERSE CABS!!!!!!!
MY MAIN MAN !!! ............good shooting !!
yea !!!
Too bad you didn't ride through the Jorelemon tube. Redbirds always fly through there and it's a ton of fun. :-)
Fly? My 4 train yesterday topped out at 41. That's not flying.
You know, I wanted to add one more thing. I really hadn’t gone through “loosing” a part of my childhood on the subway before, at least not as a railfan. I always liked the subway, and remember the R10’s, R16’s and R27-30’s. But at the time I wasn’t really up on current “subway” events, or even what they were called when I rode them. For all four of those classes of subway cars, I knew them right to the end, but one day I was riding them, and slowly one day they were just gone. I never knew they were going, and by the time I really cared, they were all gone, and thought, “Oh yeah, I haven’t seen them in a while.”
The redbird fleet (and of course the LIRR diesel trains---no more GP38-2’s) are the first class of subway cars that I know as they are on their way out, and it is a big part of my childhood going to the fish.
The Redbirds are cool and all, and I feel bad, but dang, the older guys here must have been near suicidal when the Myrtle Ave El and it's rolling stock went!
I agree. I felt the same way when R10, R12, R14, R15, R17, R22, R27, R30 were retired. I never had the honor of riding an R16 or R21.
I don't think this has been posted yet. If it has then I'm sorry. This was taken from here. Note the cars listed as being replaced...
ALSTOM awarded NYC subway contract
NEW YORK CITY -- The Metropolitan Transportation Authority-New York City Transit (MTA-NYCT) Board of Directors voted yesterday (July 31) to award ALSTOM, in partnership with Kawasaki, a $961-million contract for the design and manufacture of 660 new heavy rail subway cars, ALSTOM said.
The contract includes supply of the cars, spare parts, special tools and training.
The award also includes two options totaling an additional 1000-1040 cars for a total contract value of $2.358 billion if exercised by the MTA-NYCT. The new cars will replace R32, R38, R40 and R42 cars, and give the NYCT additional new cars for expansion purposes.
The 660 cars of the base order will be delivered in a 2006-2007 timeframe. The body shells will be manufactured in ALSTOM's facilities in Lapa, Brazil, and the cars will be built up and tested in Hornell, N.Y., the company said.
This contract announcement follows the $129-million order received on June 20th from the Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA) for 62 new cars.
MTA New York City Transit is the largest subway fleet operator and one of the most extensive and complex public transportation systems in the world. Each day, more than seven million people use New York City Transit -- over two billion customers annually.
ALSTOM serves the energy market through its activities in the fields of power generation and power transmission and distribution, and the transport market through its activities in rail and marine, the company said. In fiscal year 2001/02, ALSTOM had annual sales in excess of $21 billion and employed 118,000 people in over 70 countries. In the U.S., ALSTOM has sales in excess of $4 billion and more than 7000 employees. ALSTOM's Transport Sector, with annual sales in excess of $4 billion, is an internationally leading supplier of rolling stock, information systems, services and complete turnkey systems to the rail industry.
August 1, 2002
See a photo of the proposed R-160 HERE!
:)
Is is me or did they just take off the black facing on the R143 and slap a MTA sticker on it? It looks lacking W\O the black face.
Wow! It looks like they're moving the subway to the sky!
:-) Andrew
It looks like the R160's will have half width cabs. I know what that means - railfan windows.
Simon
Swindon UK
The L goes to the Empire State Building?
Unlike the MTA's press release, Alstom's release jibes with what was in the staff summary (Alstom builds the cars, Kawasaki provides technical assistance).
David
Didn't Alstom make the propulsion software on the Bombsuckier R142's?
YES...and the hardware it controls too. Alstom 'Agate.' CI Peter
Sweet mother of god... We're screwed.
Please change those 3 periods into !!!
And Kawasaki will be making the brakes as well?
I have purchased one of the old three digit numberboards from an R-46.
I have gotten most of the silicone adhesive off the back by careful use of a single edge razorblade, but there is still a film that will not come off.
Any Suggestions?
nah. wow how did u get a hold of that??????
i dunno about cleaning it but i remember how to program it
i remember programming the following
F 6AV/CULVER LCL
F to CONEY ISLAND (b4 F used 63rd)
N to DITMARS BLVD
N BROADWAY EXP
H to ROCKAWAY PARK
G TO QUEENS PLAZA
-- to 14ST/8AV
F 6AV LOCAL
F QUEENS BLVD LOCAL
F to 179/QUEENS (b4 63rd)
E 8AV LOCAL
E WEST END EXPRESS
E to CONEY ISLAND
I think you got the wrong impression.
I have one of the car's external numberboards.
It only shows the car's three digit number.
p.s.- the numbers are 4 digits.
p.s. The R46's had 3 digit numbers at one time....which is why this person now owns one of these old plates.
What is this numberboard? Pictures?
The sign that gives the car's number.
You could try some Ronsonol lighter fluid. That should soften up and desolve the adhesive.
Karl, did you get one of the enamel-steel signs or the fiberglass ones. The RSteel signs were put on during the SMS and had silicon. I don't recall silicone on the older, fiberglass signs. BTW: I have number-boards from cars 1054-941, the two wrecked at 179th St.
Steve, I got one of the enamel steel signs. It looks almost like a porcelin finish. It had a couple of bends, but I have carefully improved them so that they are hardly noticeable.
I got 902, which, as you may remember, was the number of my favorite gate car. I may never find a picture of that gate car, but I now have the numberboard from the R-46 that carried the same number for awhile.
Where did you buy it?
I bought it from an eBay seller after seeing a similar item in an auction.
Karl,
Try some WD40. It is very effective on removing adhesive and is better to use than lighter fluid (as was suggested by someone else).
Allan, I will give it a try, although I have already tried alcohol, and also paint thinner with no success.
An old friend here tells me that I should try carbon tetrachloride, but you can't buy that anymore.
I really wonder why I am worrying about it since it is on the back of the numberboard, but the front cleaned up so nicely that I am just trying to complete the job.
Anyone know if the parcel room at Grand Central has re-opened ?
Simon
Swindon UK
I called up GCT info a couple months ago wondering the same thing, and the answer was no. -Nick
There's a parcel check at Penn Station (which I used a couple of weeks ago), if that's helpful at all.
hanks David,will they take a holdall ?
Thanks to Nick also.
Simon
Swindon UK
Your welcome, Simon...I hope Penn Station works out! -Nick
I'm not familiar with what a "holdall" is (is that a British term, or is it just that I don't know much about luggage?). I checked a not-very-large backpack myself; the guy behind the counter just tagged it and put it on a shelf in the back room. The shelves seemed spacious enough, anything that could be considered within normal luggage size should be ok. I think it's $4 a day for each piece, and the counter is open something like 5am-midnight. The parcel check is the same counter as for checking baggage onto a train -- so don't confuse them ;-) -- on the main Amtrak level, towards the low-numbered track end.
Sounds ideal. The reason I ask is that when I come over in November I am thinking of staying at the Plaza Motor in in Secaucus. I have stayed there before. The hotel is very comfortable and reasonable (British term for cheap) which means that I can stay for a week. It does mean catching the 190 bus to the Port Authority but that really is no problem as it runs express and takes about ten minutes even at peak times. The only problem is the last day when I check out at around 8am but I have to leave my bag somewhere in New York as my return flight is overnight, hence the parcel room. Penn Station would be ideal if I fly home from Newark. BTW The James Bond style monorail to the airport is great fun, even worth a field trip:)
Simon
Swindon UK
I'm not familiar with what a "holdall" is
Well, there seem to be plenty of places online selling them. The following one loaded quickly despite my lethargic internet connection and it has a picture...
http://www.mulberry-england.co.uk/store/products/luggage/holdall.htm
This time we look at the life of a railroad wife.
The beautiful bride has a birthday coming up July 31st. For quite awhile I’ve been planning to write a piece about how difficult life in general can be when you’re married to a railroader. This special occasion makes it the perfect time.
While I was young, single and on the extra board, playing the dating game was difficult. Other times it was an adventure. And still other times it was almost impossible. Many a relationship failed because of the job. Some of the girls I dated were not real crazy about me having to break dates or end them early because the railroad called. That made relationships tough enough. Never being exposed to this lifestyle at all could be culture shock. Some girls just couldn’t cut the mustard I guess. Somehow through all of this, I managed to find one that could. It did take years of "conditioning" through years of marriage. And even then, there are still some interesting moments.
I was working at the South Shore in 1985 after getting laid off from the MoPac and was on the Brakeman’s extra board. Much of the time I worked freight but many times I caught passenger. This morning in particular, I was working a passenger run. It was pouring down rain and had rained for a couple of days already. While checking and collecting tickets, I encountered some women riding in the vestibule of one of the cars. This was not unusual as we were overflowing with patronage. As I went through the rounds of checking their tickets, I began some small talk with them. Being that I was single, this was a great way to meet girls. Aside from the fact they were disgusted with having to stand for some seventeen or so miles, they all seemed pretty fed up with the rain.
I thought that perhaps they might appreciate a little positive spin on the weather, so I suggested they try to think of this as being like Portland. Even though it is raining now, when it stops, the view will be spectacular. They all thought I was nuts, but one of them seemed to take a bit of a shine to me. In the next few days that passed, we engaged in conversation aside from the weather. Eventually, I asked her out. Our first date was October 19th. We had a good time on our date, so I asked her out again and again. On New Year’s Eve 1985, I proposed. We had made quite the evening of it along with three other couples, so there was quite the time had. The evening’s celebration included, among other things, the consumption of significant amounts of alcoholic beverages. Hey, three of the other people were railroaders as well, so it was almost required by law.
After I popped the question the beautiful girlfriend asked "Are you drunk?" Of course I was drunk, she didn’t think I would do something like this if I was sober, did she? But I lied and told her no and the rest as they say, is history.
Before we got married, I attempted to explain to her about how railroading really works. I explained the extra board, working nights, weekends and holidays, being on call and having plans changed or cancelled at the last minute. She claimed she understood all this and could deal with it all. If she really understood, she probably would have run away screaming and kicking and had a restraining order issued to keep me away. Instead, she stayed; little did she know what was in store for her.
As a reward for staying, the bride gets to do a lot of things without me. There have been weddings, funerals, parties and the like in which she was my "representative." I always tell her it is akin to the President and Vice President. Whenever the President cannot attend some sort of event or function he sends the Vice President in his stead. Thus far she hasn’t bought into this theory, but one just never knows, perhaps one day….
Being the wife of a railroader can be difficult more often than not. Being the wife of this railroader can be difficult most of the time. I admit to being a pain in the ass, so just couple that up with the uncertainties of the railroad lifestyle. It is one helluva a combination, certainly not for the faint of heart. The bride is of hearty Polish stock though, so she is one tough woman.
After not figuring on working until later (according to the Caller), I have been surprised with an unexpected earlier call on far too many occasions. Of course this immediately changed everything. The bride has responded quite admirably by throwing together a quick dinner while I was getting ready for work. Her ability to adapt to the sudden change allowed me to have many a good, home cooked meal instead of having to stop for fast food on the way to work. This scenario has played out more times than I can remember over the years.
Railroaders are in the top ten for divorce rates. Gee, what a surprise. The uncertainties of never knowing when we’ll go to work, when we’ll be back home and being gone so often has a major effect on marriages. So does missing family functions, events with the kids such as school plays, band competitions, sporting events and the like. Of course, there is that always popular, more. Some railroaders have been known to have a wife at one end and a girlfriend at the other. I have heard stories of some having complete families at both ends of the line. Now that takes some balancing. More than one railroader I have known over the years has been caught when the wife showed up at the away from home terminal to find the old boy with the away from home flame. I have a tough time balancing one relationship and life, how in the world could I have two or more?
One girl I dated some years ago told me she was warned by her mother about railroaders. She said her mother told her that all railroaders have women in every town. I wonder where she heard that one. Perhaps in her younger days maybe mom dated a railroader. This girl laughed it off and stayed with me for a couple of years. Women in every town, eh? I wonder how it was that I missed out on this phenomenon. We wound up going down in flames and yes, the railroad was a factor. But no, it wasn’t extracurricular activities.
But I digress.
I was very unhappy at the South Shore. Wait, let me rephrase that, I was miserable at the South Shore. They had promised I would be running an engine within six weeks after they hired me. Almost a year later and I was still on the ground. When I realized running an engine again wouldn’t come anytime soon, the job search began again. I was searching for a job all over the country. I wound up at a couple of places in New England shortly after the beautiful girlfriend had graduated to beautiful fiancé status. This put a strain on things.
A few weeks before were married, I became another one of the unemployed in the rail industry. This is a really good way to start a new life. We postponed the honeymoon owing to this situation. Several weeks after we were married, I got a call from the Chicago Central & Pacific. They wanted me to come out to Waterloo, IA for an interview. I was off to Iowa two days later. I figured I would be home in a few days. Instead, they put me to work right away, out there. This too was really good for a brand new marriage.
I was stuck out in Waterloo and not able to mark up in Chicago right away. The bride was not at all pleased. Of course I wasn’t real thrilled with the situation either. One day she called the hotel where I was staying in Cedar Falls, IA. I was out working and she talked with the woman who ran the place, a former railroader herself. From what I was later told, quite a bit of venting occurred. The woman at the hotel knew the Trainmaster very well and called him strongly urging they find a way to get me back to Chicago or I would likely be in divorce court.
After a month in Waterloo (with a few days off to get home for a bit), I returned to the Chicago area marking up at Hawthorne Yard. Even though I was back home again in Indiana, I was always gone. They were short of help and I worked constantly. The brand new beautiful bride was now getting a full dose and crash course in becoming the railroad wife. Several times after we went out for dinner and perhaps a movie (after being told I would not work until much later) I got the page to come to work. In a few cases, we were just heading out the door when the phone rang. I began to comment how the railroad gods were listening in, heard us making plans and did not approve. I started to suggest that maybe we not mention anything out loud so the gods could not hear. We should just pass notes instead. Gee, sort of like being back in school again.
Our first Christmas together was a bust. I worked very early Christmas Eve morning, like about 0300. They were planning on significantly curtailing operations for Christmas day so I figured this would allow me to be home for both Christmas Eve night and Christmas day. Instead, I got sick. As the workday on Christmas Eve morning progressed, I felt tired and had a sore throat coming on. We got done at around noon or so. Later that evening we met at some relatives of the bride’s for dinner. That was when it hit me big time. A serious case of the flu knocked me on my hind side. This made for my early exit from dinner and had me sick in bed for Christmas day and the day after. Being that marriage is all about sharing, I shared this flu with the beautiful bride. She got my flu just in time for New Year’s Eve. This probably really had her wondering (if not certain) that she had made a horrible mistake in marrying me.
After about a year of marriage, things at the CCP started going to hell. Layoffs were beginning to occur and the job search began yet again. Before the axe fell for me (or perhaps, on me), I landed a job at the Wisconsin Central, which was on the verge of beginning operations. This had me gone for several weeks to Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, which would become our new home. Several weeks later we sold the house in Indiana and moved to "America’s Dairyland."
Wisconsin was culture shock to her as the beautiful bride was a big city girl having been born in Chicago and raised in the Suburban Chicago area. She adapted well though making friends and becoming active. Even though I was gone a great deal, she was able to keep busy and do things without needing me along. A bowling league and church activities, including choir were some of the activities she took up.
Within a few months I was able to work a regular assignment. This helped make the transition a little easier for her. At first I was on an assignment that had me working ten days in a row and then off four days, every other Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. With this schedule, we were able to do lots of stuff together. However, this job did not last and I wound up on an assignment that worked five days per week with two days off. Eventually I wound up on an assignment that worked six days and was off three. Even with this kind of schedule, I was still gone sometimes when events were taking place.
An opportunity presented itself for us to relocate back to Chicago in 1991 as Metra called me for an interview. I wound up getting hired there and returned to the Chicago area. However, it was just I going back for the first couple of months. The bride was stuck in Wisconsin alone for that time period. We sold the house and moved back to the Chicago area staying with father and mother of the bride until we found a home to purchase. A second move some three months later into our own place back in Indiana occurred and we have managed to stay put in the same house since then.
I have moved around to a couple of other railroads since we returned, but have managed to stay in the Chicago area. However, I still have been gone a great deal of the time though.
As you can see from our example, it is certainly not easy to survive as a railroad wife unless you are tough. And the example of my career is tame compared to some. I knew one Engineer who moved something like thirteen times in twenty years, with all but two of the moves being with the same company. I worked with a Conductor who moved nine times in ten years, again with the same company. In this guy’s case though, he had no choice; it was either follow the work or starve. He would get cut-off at one location and go wherever he could hold at least a slot on an extra board. Big seniority districts have a way of doing that to employees.
It has become worse today on the railroads that have merged into the mega-systems. Employees may now have to cover seniority districts that encompass a six or seven hundred-mile radius. I know of several who have had to jump all over these districts just to keep working. Can you imagine what this can do to a marriage?
This type of activity has been going on probably as long as there have been railroads. And it was worse in one way before 1969 when the hours of service law changed. We used to have a sixteen hour work day. This meant a minimum of four more hours per trip gone from home. If you worked the road, that meant an additional eight hours per round trip in some instances. The guys that were the old heads when I started railroading talked of always working sixteen hour days almost constantly in the 1950’s and 60’s until the law was changed.
Some railroaders I know have left the industry owing to marital problems caused by the job. Many of these guys were those that entered the industry after being married for awhile. Some women simply cannot adjust to the lifestyle and it causes tremendous difficulties. Others remained in the industry but changed crafts to give them more of a semblance of a regular life. Not all crafts in the industry work like us in transportation.
I know many railroaders who have had multiple marriages, oftentimes because of the job. There are some women who simply cannot handle such a lifestyle and wind up either leaving or throwing the old boy out. I have been fortunate though as my beautiful bride has stayed with me despite all this and despite me being me. Is it love or insanity? I’m hoping for the former but betting on the latter. She always tells me she is on a mission. I guess dealing with all of this will guarantee her a spot in heaven. She has already lived through hell.
And so it goes.
Hot Times on the High Iron, ©2002 by JD Santucci
Visit www.Railroad.net and http://diesel.freewebsitehosting.com, both now hosting the latest Hot Times on the High Iron columns.
Again, Mike, thanks for posting Tuch's Hot Times on the High Iron. It's certainly not the story you find in the choo-choo books. This is real life on the rails.
Today, at Brooklyn Bridge on the Lex, I noticed that right past the station I saw a 5 train parked on a track. At first I though it was a 5 on the City Hall loop lead, but then realized it was parallel to the regular tracks. When I got home, I looked at Peter's track book, and it showed that there were two stub tracks there. Were they meant just for lay-up tracks, or were they originally planned to go somewhere?
Not sure, but I think they were always lay-up tracks for BO trains. They used to connect with the southbound express tracks just north of the Fulton Street station.
They were primarily used for lay-overs and at one time did connect to the south-bound express tracks before Fulton St. Evidence of this can be seen by the large space between the track and the tunnel wall. This was also(maybe) used when some local trains operated late nights to South Ferry by using this connection instead of the switches by the old Worth Street station.
Interesting, if that connection was still there, local trains against the wall at BB would have been able to continue towards Fulton, like you said. With that switch gone the "wall" train has no choice but to go into the loop.
As a small note, a switch can be rebuilt there but since TA had built a storage shed just behind the bumber posts, this will no longer be possible.
They are storage and layup tracks. In Peter Dougherty`s track book it states that," the switch to the southbound express tracks was removed due to a superelevation problem" Note the degree of curvature of trackage coming into Fulton St. and you can understand why.
The reported $961 million for 660 cars works out to $1.45 million per car. That's less than the R143s, which were close to $1.9 million. It's cheaper than the R68s, which cost about $1.5 million when converted into 60 foot equivalents and inflated to current dollars. I guess the savings of mated sets, plus a little competition, offsets all those extra features on the new cars.
If you assume a 40 year life (about the number of years for the cars being retired), and project a 6,700 car fleet (with an extra 433 "cars" added to account for the 75 footers), the TA needs to buy about 168 cars per year. At $1.45 million, that puts the annual replacement cost at $242 million. With the subway system up to 1.4 billion rides per year, that puts the cost per ride of replacement car purchases at about 18 cents. Increase the lifespan of the cars to 50 years, and you're down to 14 cents per ride.
The subway doesn't cover the cost of the right of way, but neither do autos. If the fare is jacked up to $2.00, as predicted, and costs are kept reasonable, it looks like the subway will be covering not only its operating expenses but also its car purchase expenses.
This should be reported to all those anti-subway folks.
Great post Larry. MTA did a pretty good job with this order...
Nice to know the sky isn't falling after all...:0)
(Nice to know the sky isn't falling after all...:0)
As you know, I can be a little bit cynical, having suffered through public employment for almost 20 years. The proof won't be in for a decade, but so far this is a pleasant surprise. The high bidder with the low MDBF was rejected.
Of course the winner was in with Al D'Amato, but I wouldn't put it past Al to "get paid" by someone who would have one anyway.
BTW, someone doesn't want me to read your posts. Almost any time I click on one, Netscape generates an error and throws me out of Subtalk. Except this time. Pehaps because we agree.
Very interesting. It's nice to know that the MTA did something right and efficient....I don't want to mention the LIRR debacle....
Chris
...subway doesn't cover the cost of the right of way, but neither do autos...
Don't gasoline taxes, sales taxes on auto sales and the income taxes of motorists more than cover street and highway maintainance costs?
(Don't gasoline taxes, sales taxes on auto sales and the income taxes of motorists more than cover street and highway maintainance costs?)
Leaving aside the income taxes, which everyone pays, the situtation is this. At the state level, motor vehicle related taxes and fees cover the cost of road maintenance, with profit, if debt service is excluded. At the local level, even with parking revenues thrown in, it doesn't.
But that's just maintenance. The biggest cost of motor vehicles is all the space they take up, space which is more valuable in urban areas and most valuable at rush hour. The fact that the land is so expensive explains why we aren't just building more highways to meet peak demand.
The biggest cost of motor vehicles is all the space they take up, space which is more valuable in urban areas and most valuable at rush hour. The fact that the land is so expensive explains why we aren't just building more highways to meet peak demand.
Yet that urban real estate is so valuable in part because of road access. Determining whether motor vehicles get a "free ride," so to speak, is ultimately a question that cannot be answered.
The subway doesn't cover the cost of the right of way, but neither do autos. If the fare is jacked up to $2.00, as predicted, and costs are kept reasonable, it looks like the subway will be covering not only its operating expenses but also its car purchase expenses.
Of course, that's a big if. Subway operating and capital costs are likely to rise more than expected if the overall inflation rate increases significantly beyond its present low rate. Okay, it looks as if the United States may be in for an extended period of low inflation, but there are various wild cards (case in point: the fall of Saudi Arabia) that could lead to higher inflation and, in turn, to higher subway costs.
The contract to build the open-cut tunnel for ESA in Sunnyside Yard has been approved by the Federal Transit Administration. Evidently the preparatory demolition is complete and bids will be taken this month. The FTA approval to begin boring the Manhattan-side tunnel is still pending.
(The contract to build the open-cut tunnel for ESA in Sunnyside Yard has been approved by the Federal Transit Administration. Evidently the preparatory demolition is complete and bids will be taken this month. The FTA approval to begin boring the Manhattan-side tunnel is still pending.)
Now that New York taxpayers have helped to finance the infrastructure of the rest of the U.S, it will be intersting to see what happens when New York comes in for money for East Side Access and Second Avenue. The two would drain all "new starts" money for the next decade. My guess is the suburbs get their improvements, and the city does not.
East Side Access might not be a diaster for city residents --- if at least the Stubway portion of the Second Avenue is built and MetroNorth to Penn implemented on a far grander scale than now considered.
Alternatively, if the boring in Manhattan is not approved, I suggest an LIRR terminal at 21st Avenue, and the building of the new subway yard in Sunnyside connected to the 63rd Street tunnel. Some trains could start in the yard and proceed through the tunnel, and LIRR riders could board them.
What can I say? Even after the federal govt. OK's the beginning of construction and the money comes through, you still think the sky is falling...
OK.
h ye of undeserved faith in the crooks running this country.
Fact: in recent weeks the VTA (San Jose Transit district) twice tried to sabotage previously agreed steps toward electrifying CalTrain. The public excuse budget copnstraints even though the monied had already bee committed. That's right they wanted to rescind capital funding to patych operating deficits which is precisely what happened to the 2nd Ave monies in the late 40's. So when you have SEEN the sky falling why are you supposed to believe it isn't happening?
(What can I say? Even after the federal govt. OK's the beginning of construction and the money comes through, you still think the sky is falling...)
As I said in an earlier post, I attended a Transporation Research Board conference in January.
There I found out that the LIRR to GCT and the Second Avenue Subway would absorb 100 percent of all projected "new starts" funding for a decade. How do you transit fans in the rest of the country feel about New York getting 100 percent of all the improvements, even after the federal govenment "generously" rebuilts after the WTC.
And that (the Republican) Congress has now taken over authority for allocating 50 percent of this money, voiding whatever formulas and approvals the FTA has. There was a lot of talk about the importance of transit in rural states in the conference.
And that the Administration wants to cut transportation spending overall, now that deficits are soaring. Is that highways being cut?
And that for the first time, the FTA had been told to go ahead and allow planning and preliminary constructrion without a full funding agreement. That is with no guarantees.
Yes we will get something, but I wouldn't be so confident that subway riders will be included in the "we" part.
As I said in an earlier post, I attended a Transporation Research Board conference in January.
There I found out that the LIRR to GCT and the Second Avenue Subway would absorb 100 percent of all projected "new starts" funding for a decade. How do you transit fans in the rest of the country feel about New York getting 100 percent of all the improvements, even after the federal govenment "generously" rebuilts after the WTC.
It sounds to me as if New York's cost structure for transit projects is way out of line. Yes, under the best of circumstances it'll cost more per mile to deep-bore a Second Avenue Subway than it would to build light rail along an existing ROW in a low-density Sunbelt city. But I somehow suspect that the cost of tunnelled heavy-rail construction in New York is a lot more than similar construction elsewhere, including the much-derided LA Red Line.
With better cost controls, New York might not need to take such a huge share of federal transit funding.
(With better cost controls, New York might not need to take such a huge share of federal transit funding.)
I think there are two factors here. The need to keep everything running and no one bothered, and the need to pay everyone off in the construction industry -- including those not working at the site.
If NY had leaders willing to ram the Second Avenue past NIMBYs, and break the back of the parasites, construction would be as fast, as cheap, and as safe as the WTC recovery.
Who do we have? Pataki, Bruno, and Silver.
And a Republican Administration in the White House which is not inherently transit-friendly.
If NY had leaders willing to ram the Second Avenue past NIMBYs, and break the back of the parasites, construction would be as fast, as cheap, and as safe as the WTC recovery.
I'd hestiate before using the WTC recovery as an example. Sure, debris removal went very quickly, and of course the restoration of the 1/9 line is moving at a remarkable pace (Although does anyone want to bet that there won't be some last-minute snag that delays resumption of service? I don't!), but the reconstruction of the site itself already has that unmistakeable stink of New York incompetence.
"As I said in an earlier post, I attended a Transporation Research Board conference in January.
There I found out that the LIRR to GCT and the Second Avenue Subway would absorb 100 percent of all projected "new starts" funding for a decade. How do you transit fans in the rest of the country feel about New York getting 100 percent of all the improvements, even after the federal govenment "generously" rebuilts after the WTC. "
Projected by whom? Mitch Daniels, the White House budget director? You're not evaluating what you hear. The Bush Administration makes decisions, then fits projections and research to its ideology, not the other way around. If Bush turns out to be a one-term President, those projections get tossed out the window. They're meaningless.
"And that (the Republican) Congress has now taken over authority for allocating 50 percent of this money, voiding whatever formulas and approvals the FTA has."
Congress isn't Republican. The Senate has a one-vote Democratic majority, and there is a very real possibility that mid-term elections this November will produce Democratic majorities in both houses, or at least cut the Republican Majority in the House to the point where they are much weaker.
"There was a lot of talk about the importance of transit in rural states in the conference. "
And what of it? New York's projects aren't screwing anybody, Larry. That's right-wing Republican (and Larry Littlefield) issue.
If Denver wants to expand light rail services and Kansas City wants to start it, the New York subway will not be the obstacle. That's bullshit.
At one time, people were looking at Boston's Big Dig and saying "well, that's it, we'll never be able to fill another pothole again."
Are ou sure you wouldn't rather be in a private sector job, Larry. Your grousing implies that your government job may be more stress for you than it's worth...
New York's projects aren't screwing anybody, Larry. That's right-wing Republican (and Larry Littlefield) issue.
If Denver wants to expand light rail services and Kansas City wants to start it, the New York subway will not be the obstacle. That's bullshit.
If there's only X number of federal dollars available for transit projects nationwide, and New York sucks up almost all of the money, then yes, it would be an obstacle for Denver or Kansas City.
"If there's only X number of federal dollars available for transit projects nationwide, and New York sucks up almost all of the money, then yes, it would be an obstacle for Denver or Kansas City."
That's a statement which never conforms to Congressional reality. That, of course, is a two-edged sword.
Only if Congress and the White House do not increase the dollars X+Y, which could very well happen in the near future.
MTA is doing exactly what it should be doing. If other cities want to start a new project, fine. Make deals with the highway lobbies, spread a little pork around. It has been known to happen.
Increase the transit pot, or replace elected officials with new ones who will increase the pot. Come November, we may be doing that.
(There I found out that the LIRR to GCT and the Second Avenue Subway would absorb 100 percent of all projected "new starts" funding for a decade. Projected by whom? Mitch Daniels, the White House budget director?)
No, projected by the FTA based on its budget request, which Mitch Daniels will probably want to cut, and which the FTA is planning to defend by spreading funds around the country rather than concentrating them where the transit ridership and need is greatest.
(If Bush turns out to be a one-term President, those projections get tossed out the window. They're meaningless. Congress isn't Republican. The Senate has a one-vote Democratic majority, and there is a very real possibility that mid-term elections this November will produce Democratic majorities.)
I agree. The one hope to get federal money for both Second Avenue and East Side Access is for the Democrats to take Congress in 2002, and for Bush to think he can take New York in 2004. I hope the MTA keeps up the timetable to start Second Avenue construction in 2004. Unfortunately, our Democrats would gladly trade these improvments away for a few more units of subsidized housing, and our Republicans won't want the Second Avenue as long as the suburban improvments get funded.
(New York's projects aren't screwing anybody, Larry. That's right-wing Republican (and Larry Littlefield) issue. If Denver wants to expand light rail services and Kansas City wants to start it, the New York subway will not be the obstacle.)
You miss the point. I'm concerned that pork distribution will screw New York's projects. But we'll see. Hopefully the a-holes won't have the board closed down by 2004, and we'll see if $15 billion in federal money comes through. Except for 9/11, when I guess they had to do something, and the critical supporters of local politicians, I see the federal flow going in one direction -- out of NYC.
And by the way, the main point is about Pataki and the State of New York. They mortgaged the MTA to the hilt in good times, leaving no ability to borrow more to finance these vital improvments with state borrowing. Now I'm afraid they'll blame the federal government for not funding them and say "oh well." It wouldn't be the first time. We've seen this movie before, and can only hope that the ending will be different.
"No, projected by the FTA based on its budget request, which Mitch Daniels will probably want to cut, and which the FTA is planning to defend by spreading funds around the country rather than concentrating them where the transit ridership and need is greatest. "
Bush Administration-era agencies, including FTA, don't project anything without Whiyte House approval. Granted, Bush may want to cut further (to zero!), but what you saw at the conference already had somebody's OK at the White House - or you would not have seen it.
People at the State Dept, DHHS and Treasury (except for Greenspan) have already been publicly rebuked for showing any independence. The CDC's new designated director gave a speech which stated, "I will do whatever the President tells me to do." Nothing more is to be expected from this woman. That is her sole mandate.
FTA is well aware of this.
Bush Administration-era agencies, including FTA, don't project anything without White House approval. Granted, Bush may want to cut further (to zero!), but what you saw at the conference already had somebody's OK at the White House - or you would not have seen it.
You can be sure that the proposed Department of Fatherland Security will be under Bush's thumb, and ... oh wait, I meant Department of Homeland Security, dunno what I was thinking of.
I sympathize with your sentiment. I think we may be on the same page on that one...
That's harsh. They liked airships and autobahns too more than anything else and funded them that way. Now we KNOW AMTRAK is in real trouble.
The Senate has a one-vote Democratic majority, and there is a very real possibility that mid-term elections this November will produce Democratic majorities in both houses
I doubt that there will be a net Democrat gain in the Senate. There are only six seats that could be termed as really marginal and the Democrats are defending five of those. With a Republican President with the greatest popular support since Eisenhower (despite the recent decline in opinion polls), I somewhat suspect that the result may be one or two seats towards the Republicans.
Bush wont have that favorable oppinion for long
What makes you so sure? Okay, we sure can hope that, but public opinion can go up as well as down or even just be completely boring and stay the same.
Economy
It seems to already be bouncing back from the latest mini-slump.
(Economy -- It seems to already be bouncing back from the latest mini-slump.)
Reality is somewhat worse. Thus far, aside from job losses related to the WTC-airline-tourism disaster, which has no political implications, this has been profits recession. Businesses, stock prices, and the rich have been squeezed, but working people have not. Given that the long term labor market situation is shortage, businesses have been reluctant to let workers go even as demand falls. The result is low prices and low interest rates, leading to high buying power. State and local governments have exhausted reserve funds and borrowed to cover up their fiscal problems, rather than raising taxes, laying off workers, and slashing services.
However, I'm afraid the standard of living could start to fall. U.S. consumers can't go on spending more than they earn, and U.S. businesses cannot continue employing more staff than they need as their cash situation deteriorates. Hope it doesn't happen, but if it does Bush is toast.
"With a Republican President with the greatest popular support since Eisenhower (despite the recent decline in opinion polls), I somewhat suspect that the result may be one or two seats towards the Republicans."
George Bush, Senior, had similar results during and after the Gulf War, and was unceremoniously dumped at the next election. George Bush Jr. may have been the right guy at the right spot for Sept 11's tragedy, but that popularity does not automatically protect Republican Senate and House candidates - especially with the economy in a slide and corporate misdeeds condoned until very late by the White House.
I think there's an excellent chance the GOP will lose ground, significantly, in the November elections.
But projections in the end, are all rubbish. The voters will do whatever they want to do.
It OKed building one side of a tunnel. Do you want to ride through a one-ended tunnel?
That reminds me of the grand announcement someone made here early last summer that the Manhattan Bridge walkway had been opened. Then why couldn't I find an open entrance at the Brooklyn end? Because it was only open halfway across from Manhattan! I'm glad I didn't start at that end. (The Brooklyn end opened a few weeks later.)
Contract bidding has been announced on the Manhattan side as well. FTA approval is expected shortly.
"Do you want to ride through a one-ended tunnel? "
No. I think I'll wait until they finish it.
:0)
They should first make sure the tunnel wasn't already built in the '20s:
http://enquirer.com/editions/2002/07/29/loc_abandoned_subway.html
Very nice set of tunnels there. I hope Cincinatti gets to use them.
A co-worker of mine saw this month's subway pictute in Bill's calendar. He grew up riding the Queens IND and wan't too sure about the Flushing Line.
I had to explain to him the older BMT route number was 7 was the Franklin Ave El. Therefore stainless steel equipment on the 7 was a BMT service. It was possible in the 50's to have a BMT number and an IRT number routes.
Did any of your co-worker asked about the R-11 with the "7"?
I decided to follow David Greenberger's sage advice about local and express trains. While he was referring to NYCTA trains, I have achieved a result on this trip, on the Broad Street Subway in Philly, which is consistent with his advice.
I began my trip at Erie Station, where a local train was first to arrive at the island platform on the southbound side. I got on.
As my local train pulled into Susquehanna-Dauphin, an express train rocketed past, doing MAS.
We stopped at Cecil B. Moore, then Girard. At Girard, an express stop, there was the crowded express train at the platform! People hurried off my train to squeeze on, despite the fact that only one more local stop was left to be skipped.
The express left first; then my train pulled out. We stopped at Fairmount. Next is Spring Garden, also an express stop - there was the express again, sitting at the platform!
(Isn't this a little like the turtle and the hare?)
Bottom line - the people on the express, many of whom had to stand, got to City Hall maybe 45 seconds ahead of me - and I had a seat the whole way.
Maybe if this race had started in Olney, the express would have gained some sustainable advantage - don't know.
If this happens again, I'll take note to see if again, David Greenberger's theory holds up. I suspect it would. Of course, if the express comes first, I'll get on that one (if I see an empty seat).
Thank you, David.
Oh, don't give me credit -- it's how I learned to ride the subway. Except on the IND, that's how most subway riders seem to deal with the issue.
Yesterday around noon, I got on an SRO 1 train at 86th to go to 18th. At 72nd, I decided to get off and wait for an express -- not to save time but simply because I felt like riding an express. A few others got off and peered up the express track, but they all got back on. Only one other person stayed on the platform to await an express.
(How did the timing work out? About five minutes later, another 1 local pulled in. A minute later, a 3 express came. I got on. It passed the second 1 at 59th and was held at 42nd for a connection with that same 1. I transferred to the 1 since 18th is a local stop. So, by getting off at 72nd and waiting for an express, I stood on a hot platform for six minutes and reached my destination five minutes later than I would have had I stayed on the first 1.)
Thats the way it works on the Westside. I have my connections on my run timed out. My first trip out of 242 St IF I'm on time I make the connection at 72 Street. Uptown First trip No Connections. Second trip connection at 96 Street. The trip up on the second I connect at Times SQ and 72 Street.
The trip up on the second I connect at Times SQ and 72 Street.
With the same express or with different expresses? The local-express differential between those stations is only about two minutes, and I don't think the 3 has any scheduled two-minute headways.
It has long been my contention that it takes a greater intelligence to navigate bus and subway systems than to drive an automobile. One must use a number of algorithms to calculate the most efficient means of getting from point A to point B, as these local vs. express discussions prove. Of course, the fact that I don't drive does not color my objectivity.
What about the east side?
Expresses outnumber the local and are more useful the 4 and 5 combined less shorter headways than the 6. So things are different there.
With my recent experiences going NB, it's not much better. I need to go to 68th Street. When the express at Brooklyn Bridge gets to Grand Central, we either pass one 6 and so I'm one 6 ahead of the 6 that was there at Brooklyn Bridge or I end up waiting for the same 6 that was at Brooklyn Bridge. Going SB, I pass the 6 I was originally on and possibly another one or two. What happened to Lex? Now, most of the time, I just take the 6 one stop to 59th and transfer to a W to get back to South Brooklyn.
Yes the same train because Times Square holds the No.3 in the station for a few minutes.
You would have liked "silly Express service on the B'way" this morning. Queens bound R arrives at 14 St with a Q(local) across the platform. Normally, if this connection happens it is with a W. Lots of people bailed for the express (saves about 1 minute to 34 St). The Q stopped opposite 23 St AND 28 St. First into 34 St --- the local.
The A train seems to be just as bad with two General Orders on CPW, skeletonized tracks at 86 and 59 St. During my first run, I connect with a C Express at 125 , pass his A leader at 86 St, then leave 59 before it arrives to make a connection. Next week, the madness should end.
I take it you're on the B or D. Yes, CPW locals are often faster than expresses even without skeletonized tracks.
But -- bad news -- the C/D local/express switcheroo was extended another month.
But -- bad news -- the C/D local/express switcheroo was extended another month.
Isn't that "What's good for the C is good for the D?"
I assume that's a joke, but I'm afraid I don't get it.
What's good for the passengers, if four distinct services are running, is to have one local service to each of 6th and 8th and one express service to each of 6th and 8th -- that is, unless you have reason to believe that the overwhelming majority of CPW express passengers want 6th and the overwhelming majority of CPW local passengers want 8th (in which case the late night and weekend service patterns make little sense).
Does anyone know on how PATCO would have reached Camden after it connected Route 42 from Route 55 when PATCO proposed a line along Route 55 in the mid 1970's.
Any information on subtalk is greatly appreciate on this topic.
The original Gloucester County PATCO extension proposal was along the PRSL ROW through Woodbury. One of the factors involved in the decision not to build it was that local politicians bought up land where it was assumed stations would be built in anticipation of making a killing re-selling the land to PATCO.
You can find additional detail in the book "Trains, Trolleys & Transit" by Gerry Williams 1998.
You'll also find loads of photos from all the SEPTA divisions.
There were two proposed routes to Gloucester County in the 1975 Mass Transit Study: the Route 55 alignment and the PRSL alignment. Both routes would have split off the main line at Division Street in Camden, following the existing freight line up to Morgan boulevard (where a station was proposed). The two alignments split from here. The route 55 alignment would have followed I-76 on the west side, had a series of flyovers at Route 130, I-295, and the southbound lanes of Route 55 where it would have continued between north and southbound lanes until it met up with the PRSL line near Glassboro. Stations were planned at Kings Highway, Bellmawr, Deptford Mall, and Delsea Drive. In addition, a shop and carhouse was planned at the interchange between Routes 42 and 55. The PRSL route had stations planned for Gloucester City, Gateway Boulevard, Woodbury, and Mantua Boulevard. Both alignments had common stations planned at Morgan Boulevard (Camden), Pitman/Sewell, College, and Glassboro.
Today I observed a barge with about 60 Redbirds leaving 207. I caught it again as is passed under the GWB and again as I was taking the ferry to Staten Island. These are not coincidences of course, I was chasing the barge! But what is a railfan to do? I probably snapped that photos of these 'birds as they got closer to their watery grave. I will post pictures on my website, www.nyrail.org sometime this evening. Oh yes, this morning I spotted R142 set 7015-7020 at Fresh Pond. How Ironic. And another thing, today was the first time in my life that I spped foot on all five boroughs in a single day.
I'll let you all know when photos are posted.
-Dan
www.nyrail.org
Shudda been more about fifty but the Weeks barge had a really nasty draft...backhoe has a tough time knocking carbodies off to Neptunes Fleet. Joisey divers are bitchin cuz Redbirds are not reefing off the coast. CI Peter, fixin the 'Last of the Redbirds.'
Actually, I amend my estimate to an exact 50 as I counted the cars in my photos. arrangement is as follows: 21 fore, 21 aft, 8 starboard. If you don't already know or didn't figure it out, they're stacking the cars 2-high in the 21-car sections.
-Dan
Been there, done that, check out 207th YAHD every morning. Remember the Kursk, K19-Omega-the end. It's all over...Redbirds were good teaching platforms...239th will soon be all Silverbirds. 'Twenty one fore, twenty one aft, eight starboard.' Dis aint' the navy...it's dah Bronx...it's TA. Thankyou Redbirds, thankyou for your kindness and patience, thankyou for restoring my confidence in my skills. May you all rest in peace at the bottom of a big blue ocean nice and neat and clean and degreased. CI Peter
Pardon me, did I insult your intelligence? You're right, it ain't the Navy, but it sure ain't the Bronx either. 207 is where they load it and a barge is a boat and that is how directions are called. And another thing, it ain't the TA either, it's Weeks marine, and they run the boats.
No my friend...you did not insult my intelligence...this is not the Navy...and I'm no sailor. Port, starboard, left, right, 1 3 5 7 2 4 6 8 L1 2 3 4 R 1 2 3 4. No sun or stars...where is the moon? So I do my inspection reports counting upon my fingers: eight wheels on a car, sixteen brake shoes on a Redbird, eight tread brake shoes on an R142, #2 is cab on a Redbird, R#1 is cab on a R142. It's funny that when I make acurate wheel gauge measurements, Redbirds usually have lower numbers and R142s higher numbers.Dis is dah Bronx and we get our pizza from 241st Street. CI Peter
Fianlly got 'em all up. http://www.nyrail.org/nyct/subdivisionA/redbirds/barge/.
-Dan
You did good work!
I missed them by a day... I can't believe it. Wed, I came across the Univeristy Heights Bridge and noticed the barge was loaded and ready. My friend and I ( he took the Tribute In Lights Photos), made our way to 215th Street to see them. We only got half of the cake. A Barge Of Trucks disappeared into the horizon shortly after 3PM....
-Stef
WELL I HOPE YOU TRANSVERSE CAB - R-142 NEW JUNKERS -CAR CO
ARE AS HAPPY AS A PIG IN MUD !!!
ALSO I BET THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE GETING SOME KIND OF A SEXUAL
THRILL AND PLEASURE OUT OF THIS AS WELL !!!!
shit .......!!!
You think we are out here jerking off to trains?
Take a look at the proff.
GET OFF ME
WIFE
But if you wish, I will not lose an ounce of sleep knowing redbirds are 66 feet under.
i meant those folks who BOAST OF PERFECT AC on those r-142s ...!!
thats for starters !!!
now if folks want me put on my boxing gloves ..........>>>>lol !!
anyway besides of showing your COMPETER LINK skills??.....
....what else do you have to show ??...........hmmmmmmm!!!.....???
how bout some good old low Vs pictures you took or something ????
( not some barge shot ) ..........!!! how bout a good train shot &
that for example ??............eh ??............lol !!
My man! My thoughts exactly. FUCK the MTA!!! They can all go to HELL!
The MTA is doing the best that they can. GOODBYE REDBIRDS, WOOHOO!
goodbye rail fan window !!....................ugh !
my apology for the bad language ( 4 letter word ) ...U ...know...
i should have not let myself become so angry that i would not see any
redbirds this august / setember 2002 !
it just keed me off seeing those classics being dumped !!
maybe if hey were cut up i would not feel so bad ( recycle )
again my apology fof "" flying off the handle ""
@ ( man do i love dat rail-fan window ) .....!!
I didn't think they would be reefing them as quick as they are. This is the second barge this summer. It looks as though I'll never see another R-33 single-line car on the "7" (sob).
Don't worry, The R-62A's will be off the 7 when Corona shop is made R142(A) compatible.
man will i ever be glad to see the survivors
might kiss every one of em !!
Wow. Nice shots. Looks like you chased them in both a boat and a helicopter ;-)
I took some of the "arial" shots from the George Washington Bridge. Whew, what a hike! And I took some shots from the Staten Island Ferry, so it was a multimodal chase.
-Dan
You are REALLY dedicated. And it paid off. Those photos taken from the boat (A BOAT!) in the Harlem River are amazing. Thanks Skipper.
You have made some wonderful photos. I like the ones loading the barge with the trees in the foreground, and also the one with the fish in the picture. Guess he wants to get a good seat, you think?
Elias
Anybody know where they were headed? NJ, Delaware, or one of the Carolinas? I know it sure as hell ain't Bowling Green...
South Carolina.
-Stef
Today while listening to Hot97, the midday DJ made the following remark: "I would like to give a shoutout to the riders of the L train. I was on the new L train today and it was nice and spacious. Also the 4,5,6 lines are getting the new trains as well. We are riding in style".
Also radio commercial for Polytechnic U in Downtown Bklyn:
C/R: This is Borough Hall, transfer to the 1,2, and 5 trains. Transfer here for a good education. This is a Bklyn bound 4 train.......(plug for Polytechnic U starts.)
Interesting stuff.
The Cingular commecial mentioned a few days ago (fellow gets long set of directions with multiple changes on IRT then decides to hail a cab instead) is now running on local Boston stations.
Here are some pics from my Boonton Line Trip.
The Soon to be closed DB Draw
The New Montclair Connection
New Great Notch Yard
A soon to be felled classic Erie RR Signal on the old Boonton Line
NJT Comet III cab at Hackettstown
FL-9 side at New Haven
Just about the oddest Amtrak Consist you'll ever see. Its the Morning "Fast Mail" train to Springfield. Metroliner cab-Amfleet-P42-Mail-Mail-Mail.
NJT Comet 1 Cab at Hoboken
Lo-light shot of PRR PL's at Newark
I have many more aside from these. If anyone has any requests just ask and I'll put them up.
What is the future of the booton line? Will it be abandoned when the new Montclair connection opens? In the new MC ROW a old freight ROW?
A BNSF conductor (freind of mine) was visiting here today, and so I asked him about that sign I posted the other day. (About Remote controled locomotives)
He said that the Engineers refused to do that.
So BNSF gave the task to the Conductors.
So that locomotive working the yard is being run by a conductor, not by an engineer. I guess the engineers did not like the idea of working on the ground, getting their hands all mucked up with the couplers and the brake pipes and all. Besides, it gets *COLD* out there in the winter time.
Apparently, the FRA signed off on it, saying that they were not running a locomotive, but rathere were working an 'electronic device'.
Elias
About Remote controled locomotives
About time! About time the U.S. railroads achieved the Canadian operating ratios. Then we can really beat the hell out of their crappy industry.
So that locomotive working the yard is being run by a conductor, not by an engineer.
Okay, I see accidents coming. Am I right in thinking that most conductors have been engineers at one time? If a guy has inadequate train-handling experience, I see fun coming. Shoving that train around ain't easy even with a model set... to be able to do it on the ground is even harder (you can't feel the train). Even engineers have to go through training. Now, conductors... well I have nothing against them, but to have them run trains without training them as mainline engineers first!????
Well, we are not talking mainline here.
This is making up trains in a yard, so 5 to 10 mph max. Hell you can see if the engine is moving. (Unlike being up in a darkend cab at night with the wheels slipping.)
The idea of remote control is that they need only one man to make up a train. Clearly that one man (person, Please) has to be on the ground. Throwing switches, rapping knuckles, pulling hoses. He can climb up on the tail of the car that is moving. All yard switching is done from the tail end of the train anyway, the engine has got nothing in front of it except some trespasser trying to take pickkkk....... splat
The conductors (some of them at least) on BNSF are cross trained and can run the locomotive, like when the hog has to go to the biffy.
Elias
It's my impression (I realize I'm inviting flamage here) that the BLE refused to go along with remote control and the UTU agreed to do it (seeing the handwriting on the wall), so perhaps BLE railroads have conductors operating the remotes and UTU railroads have engineers doing it.
that the BLE refused to go along with remote control and the UTU agreed to do it
I think that is generally true. I have heard that BLE has a problem with it.
I think that is generally true. I have heard that BLE has a problem with it.
That is what my conductor friend said.
He also said they may be changing their minds on the subject.
Oops, too late, we got the job now.
Elias
Has anyone went to where they are dumping the redbirds and have pictures of them underwater?
you probably would not be able 2 see them because they are polluting the ocean !!
That too
the polluted water rust dimmed out water ....
if you do scuba it could be dangerous big time right ??
just to go see where some redbirds should have been cut up and the
metal re-cycled or used for storage barns museums diners etc ??
???????....................!
When the goverment dumps in the ocean....it's "good" for the enviroment.
The fish seemed to be doing fine without our "help", so I don't see how doing this with the redbirds this is better than recycling.
In 2053, a nuclear submarine is scuttled over what just so happens to be where the deadbirds were dumped, along with the R-38s, 40s, 42s and 44s. The ship breaks up and the radioative fuel settles in with the remains of the subway cars. At the same moment, Earth just happens to be passing through an unusually dense concentration of cosmic rays.
The interaction between the cosmic rays and the nuclear fuel cause the remains of the ditched cars to reassemble into hideous mutants -- R22s with slant fronts, 75 footers with railfan windows, 44s with bench seating and axiflow vents. Along comes a hapless school of giant squid that were just looking to mate, and they get trapped in some of the operator cabs. Before you know it, the mutant cars are assembling into the most hideous consists ever seen -- worse than the smorgasbord mixes of the 1970s.
Now semi-sentient, determined to mate and hell-bent on exacting revenge against the decendants of the geniuses who did away with railfan windows and chose the cheesy red color, dozens of these mutant consists from hell make their way back to NYC. Once in Jamaica Bay, they find their way into a sewer line that takes them to an abandoned subway station at Pitkin Av & 76th Street, where they smash through a concrete wall and head into Manhattan via the Fulton Street line. Along the way, some of them create bizarre connections between Fulton and the Franklin Shuttle, then racing up the Brighton to create a connector between DeKalb and Rutgers. They start creating a new East River tunnel, and run into the ruins of the Manhattan Bridge (that collapsed in 2019 and had been laying at the bottom of the river because NYDOT was still working on the south side). Sensing a kindred spirit in the long abused and maligned bridge, the trains and the bridge unite and destroy Hylan-Moses Plaza (erected in 2025 at the former site of 370 Jay Street.)
The trains terrorize all the trunk lines. Many railfans, who flocked to the subways to take pictures, end up being assimilated by the foam the trains produce. The army tries to appease the trains with Amazon sex kittens with route bullets on their breasts and the subway map tattooed on their backsides to no avail. They eventually discover the great-grandson of the creator of "Redbird Red" is in charge of receiving the new R-246 car order, and go completely berserk. They spray foam on all the new cars that destroy the transverse cabs and cover them in the 1970s blue and silver color scheme.
They are about to convert the 63rd Street LIRR tunnel for subway use when they are finally stopped by an old man who was a foamer as a teen railfan and happens to have an ancient R-1/9 brake handle. He raises the handle over his head while tossing garlic cloves and old posters of Miss Subways at them. They give up their rampage and head back to Brooklyn, where they congeal into a mass that solidifies and completely fills in the Sea Beach cut.
The final scene is of beautiful flowers blooming and small woodland animals frolicking about along the LRV ROW that is put in over the Sea Beach, with a streetcar passing and clanging its bell.
this is sick yet cool. interesting story.
Heehee. I thought we could use a little levity, so I just went to town twisting some of the discussions that keep coming up over and over. Be afraid of computer nerd railfans waiting for huge database imports to complete on hot, steamy DC August Fridays. Be very afraid.
Jimmy
just to go see where some redbirds should have been cut up and the
metal re-cycled or used for storage barns museums diners etc ??
And would have cost gadzillions of dollars for aspestos abatement!
: ( Elias
yassir
I have seen no pictures from the dumping of the redbirds off of the Delaware or Carolinas' Shore. But there are pictures of the PATH K cars on the Sea Girt Reef off Northern New Jersey.
NJscuba.net has a site on the Sea Girt Artificial Reef, and actually acknowleges that they are PATH cars and not NYCT trains.
On the other hand, Mr. Herb Segar seems convinced that they are from Philly's SEPTA system, too much Nitrox I guess. Still they're great pictures and show just how well preserved they are.
I'm still waiting for NJ to get it's act together, get it's thumb out of it's arsche and allow some R33s to be dumped on one of the reefs up here, which would make them more accessible to possible former commuters who may want to visit their old steeds in their pastures (errr... abysal plains).
And I'm still up for a Subtalk trip to visit a newly dumped bunch of cars. So long as I have about a month to complete training (I have no Idea how long advanced scuba courses take), we could even charter a boat to visit a newly dumped bunch of Deadbirds, undoubtedly a couple of divers around here could also be interested from a Non-Railfan POV. Right now my plans for completing training by the end of the month have fallen apart, my dive partner decided she didn't have the money, but this would get me started right up again. Anybody out there intersted?
And finally, Nitrox is a diving gas mixture, not Nitrous Oxide, but instead a higher concentration of O2 molecules to N2 molecules, it allow shallower, longer endurance dives with less fear of The Bends.
This summer, I've noticed that many BMT-IND subway cars have only one of two HVAC units working. Both blowers are on, but one blows hot air. My home line is the < Q >, so I'm noticing it mostly on slant R-40s.
Has anyone else noticed it? Do any of the operating or maintenance personnel on SubTalk have any insights (I've got my own ideas as to the reason, but I'd like to hear from others first)?
David
I thougnt when the ocean was polluted with redbirds you transverse cut of car club members would be happy as a lark !!!
( whine bitch and moan about your AC & weak AC ) !!!!!!!!!
....@... SO IT WAS NOT JUST THE REDBIRD HATERS AFTER ALL ???.......!
eh ??.........!
I'm talking about slant R-40s and other BMT-IND equipment. The Redbirds have nothing/zip/nada to do with this conversation. Although some BMT-IND cars have transverse cabs, transverse cabs have nothing/zip/nada to do with this conversation.
Let me ask the question another way: Does anybody who actually rides the New York City subway system on a regular basis, besides me, notice a rash of "half-hots?"
David
I don't know if it's geographically catching, David, but I've noticed that an increasing number of MBTA Green Line Type-7s are exhibiting this phenomenon this summer too.
And the LIRR as well. Could be some kind of energy conservation program.
Well of course the LIRR always has plenty of "full-hots."
Not R-40's, but I'm primarily an A Division guy (though I do get around). I think I've gotten a few R-142's -- I haven't put my hand up to the vent, but one end of the car is hot while the other is cool. Sorry if that doesn't help.
I have been noticing blower failures altogether on R38 on one end of the cars. The R68s have been OK in regards to AC, I encountered one car in two weeks where the blowers failed, and one car for the whole pick with an AC Compressor related failure. On a related question of Air Conditioning, I hear an A/C type whine when starting the equipment on the R68s and wondered if they still have DC blowers anymore. The Pitkin R32s have this too as of lately.
NYCT has been replacing DC-powered blower motors with AC-powered ones (with inverters) -- less maintenance-intensive. I believe the R-32s and R-68s have been done by now. Perhaps "Train Dude" or someone else familiar with the maintenance end of things will elaborate.
David
I hate to ask, but does it always seem to be the #1 end of the slants that re 'hot'? If so, I could hazard a guess as to why.
I think we're thinking on the same wavelength here. Frankly, I haven't been paying attention as to which compressor's not functioning (both blowers are working), but it wouldn't surprise me a bit to find it's the #1 end.
David
In which case, it will be the #1 end of married-pair type equipment and the exterior-capable end of transverse-cab type equipment. (And if it's any help, I ALWAYS make sure they're on)
What would that guess be?
If one had guess, I'd have to think that it's because the train operators and conductors are always playing witht he controls for the #1 end.
That's the reason I was thinking of -- heck, I even think about it in the middle of winter when I board the first car and don't hear the blower running above my head.
How big a concern is it from a Division of Car Equipment perspective, and does it truly have the effect I think it has (and Alex L. seems to think it has)? I know RTO rules prohibit cutting out all or part of the HVAC system at any time while the train is in passenger service, but I also know the rule is roundly ignored by the crews in cool or cold weather and I never see it enforced by supervision (not to say that it isn't -- I just don't see it).
David
Unfortunately some now just stick stuff in the crew cab air vent.
Yeah, but those are usually the ones that have had the vent closures ripped out, so that there is no possible way to limit airflow.
I do not understand the post. Redbird tech has easy flip down circuit breakers to interrupt HVAC heating coils...R142 requires concerted effort to access panels and drop breakers which come up on maintainance screens. One new mod to R142 transverse cabs is to cut the overhead HVAC discharge over the T/O position. Sometimes, you can find me standing on the other side of the transverse cab, arms held up 'In Grace,' sucking up every molecule of cold air my body can absorb. Ahhh to be absorbed by the Borg...physical ailments gone and thoughts 'collective.' My hearts out for every T/O and Conductor sans HVAC or a fan....cuz I know what hot is for eight hours. Just don't bitch to me...undercar service in the barn is one 'step from Hell.' Gimme Siberia in short sleeves. CI Peter
I'm talking about BMT-IND equipment, the R-40 to be specific. The cars have two HVAC units, either of which can be cut out without cutting out the other, and that's what some Train Operators tend to do in cool or cold weather, even though it's against the rules.
David
And to think ... back in the days of "exposed neck-cutter fans" and the only "air conditioning" you got was your trusty door clamp, a cab window that wasn't unopenable and GOD's graces, we were grateful for any moving air we got. Coat/jacket for winter, blanket for summer if we got a 42. :)
I hate to ask, but does it always seem to be the #1 end of the slants (or any others for that matter) that are 'hot'? If so, I could hazard a guess as to why.
David,
I was on a Slant on the N two days ago, and i experienced this half hot phenomenon. So no, it's not only you.
Rich
There are two blower/evap units but they share a common freon
loop. If you're certain that the blower on the "hot end" (heh
heh heh) is actually running and moving air, but it is hot, while
the other end is cold, then the only explanation I can think
of is a bad expansion valve or liquid line lockout magnet valve.
On the R-40 (my primary bone of contention here), there are two compressors. On a "half-hot," only one of the compressors would be working.
David
Oh, for some reason I had my mind stuck in the A division!
In that case, it's probably just been cut out by the crew.
THAT was my point, my friend. Cut 'em out in the winter, they don't work right in the summer.
David
Actually i had to cut out 3 today. The condensation was POURING all over the floor and deemed a slip hazard.
Believe me David, you WERE NOT the only one!! lol While deciding to work some overtime on the "E" Wednesday, numerous R-32 trainsets had massively hot cars. I had to work on 2, and one train of R-32s that night got taken out of service at Parsons because half, and yes I do really mean half (5 of the 10 cars) of the consist suffered from hot cars. Lately I been noticing this kind of thing on the "E" and the "A" (R-38). Sometimes if you reset the breakers (sometimes you'll have to be prepared to reset multiple times) you'll get the A/C back, and sometimes it comes back better than ever. Sometimes, unfortunately, resetting does absolutely nothing, and you're left to work on, and the people are left to ride on, very very VERY hot cars. Guess was all better start packing cold drinks for the trip, huh? lol :-)
Air conditioning reliability on the Jamaica R32's is awful. I spent the whole summer on the E in '99 and '00, & part of the summer in '01. Part of the problem is that the cars just can't handle the load. The heavy ridership, the hot air rushing in at stations as the doors open on this all underground line, especially at the terminals at Parsons & WTC, don't allow the cars to cool down. On more than one occasion in '00 & '01, upon arrival at Parsons I would take my train to Jamaica Yard. As I walked thru the train at the terminal, most cars were not up to task in terms of cooling. Guess what? By the time I got to the yard and walked thru the train once again to get off, most cars were fine since they were no longer under stress to cool. Now the yard car inspectors get on and find no defect and the cycle resumes the next day...........This year, especially since we've had so many 90 degree days, a/c problems are even more prevalent. Unfortunately when the RCI's do their a/c survey, if half the car is cool and half the car is warm or hot, they are told by TA management to consider the car acceptable. They are not shopping cars which are half hot, they wait till both a/c units are blowing hot air. Now the TA will deny this, but that is the reality.
6996-7005 have entered service on the 5.
7016-7020 have arrived at the East.
Breaking Cars Assignments Down It Should Look Like This -
The Deuce
6301-60 (60 Cars)
6411-30 (20 Cars)
6431-35 (5 Cars)
6466-70 (5 Cars)
6476-80 (5 Cars)
6501-65 (65 Cars)
6576-6760 (185 Cars)
6766-70 (5 Cars)
6781-6800 (20 Cars)
6826-55 (30 Cars)
Total Cars In Service As Of Now - 400
The Five
6361-6410 (50 Cars)
6436-6465 (30 Cars)
6471-75 (5 Cars)
6481-6500 (20 cars)
6566-70 (5 Cars)
6761-65 (5 Cars)
6771-80 (10 Cars)
6816-25 (10 Cars)
6856-75 (20 Cars)
6951-60 (10 Cars)
6971-80 (10 Cars)
6991-7005 (15 Cars)
Total Cars In Service As Of Now - 190
Redbirds will continue on both lines until they are phased out.
Coming Soon - 7006-15 (?).
-Stef
So what does this mean for the 2.2 or 3 more sets of r142s.Wasnst 6816-6820 on the 2 for a while
IIRC, 6816-20 only got as far as testing mode on the 2.
Keep in mind that the cars are specifically assigned to each line, but it is not impossible for the trainsets to operate elsewhere. Once in a while I might see a #5 R-142 that becomes a 2. The opposite is also true. Some 2s become 5s (R-142s that is), but I don't see that as often.
-Stef
On the 5's that become 2's, have you noticed if the announcements are up-to-date? I once rode a 2 that became a 5 and, to my surprise, the announcements were up-to-date (even though that same train running on its home turf has never heard of the W).
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
The announcements on the 2 sound the same way as they've always been, regardless of whether or not it's an R-142 #5 plying the rails on the West Side.
-Stef
Yep that is true, you saw what trainset I had this evening, (hot off the presses). But the trainset was still making the same old 2 anooucements..............
Gosh! What luck. I couldn't believe you got Cars 6996-7005 on the way down to Flatbush....
-Stef
Stef...
That is impressive. I have the exact same numbers, WITHOUT looking at your figures...I guess since I am near those lines, I live by them, whatever comes my way, I record it...lol.
Thank you
Carlton
Cleanairbus
White Plains IRT
"This is a Wakefield-bound 2 train...Stand clear of the closing doors, please!"
I agree! I live by the el, and record history (in my head) as those cars are making their way up to the barn for the first time. I'd swear without bragging, that I have a photographic memory of everything coming up and down the line. 25 Years of living by the el will do it to you.... LMAO!
-Stef
The No.2 Line also has cars 6831-6850
That's right.
SubBus got 6996-7005 today, the newest R-142 operating set to join the ranks. What luck! It is also one of those sets that an identity crisis - it didn't want to be a 5 today, so it assumed the role of the deuce.
-Stef
I've seen a R142 car being delivered on the trailer passing by Van Cortlandt Park around 10 PM on July 26. I assume this car is in service? (It was too dark and moderately distant to look at the car #)
July 26th? I don't think it's in service yet. It's probably in the testing phase. Could you see a Car Number?
-Stef
At least one cars a night, sometimes 2 or 3 pass by there around that time, usually 10:30. The plant is getting 8236-9 ready. It will be nice to note 8200s will not burn grids anymore.
Shades of the past.... GSB, have you operated the new and improved Signal Dolly as of late?
-Stef
I broke it in, she seems to be borrowed for garbage trains now. Good riddance to those decrepit singles.
Me Stupido.......what is a 'signal dolly?' CI Peter
"Dolly" delivers supplies to the Towers. Grounded Shoe Beam would know first hand about The Signal Dolly as he has operated it on numerous occassions. It is a specialized work car which must be hauled by former passenger cars (converted work motors) as it has no motors of its own. You can find it at 207th St Yard with Redbird Work Motors.
I was trying to find a picture of it, but I have been unsuccessful.
-Stef
Someone shot my rear end on the way to Corona in the last year prior to getting the cars not good enough for the fish.
And they're going to scrap the old fashioned way? Go figure....
-Stef
Seems a shame to scrap them. I hope they keep one or two for the museum fleet. BTW, thank you so much for sharing that sound byte of an R-9. It doesn't get any better than this :o)
It doesn't get any better than this :o)
It could.
R9 #1
R9 #2
R9 #3
R9 #4
R9 #5
R9 replacement
R9 replacement 2
Wow, that is really cool. How do you do that? Was this recorded on a fantrip? Thanks!
Grooooooooooovvvvvvvy Oh Man what a sound those were the days to bad I dont remember them :0( and Im at the age of 30 sigh.
Well guys Right next to the R 40m From Bridge crash ,(They Replaced the front with a Slant R40 Nose).There is a one car R 32 Guess whats special about it? It has Conductor Controls on BOTH SIDES Its a prototype for a transverse R 32!!!!!!!!!!!!!! All of you who work In Coney Island Go check for yourself!
In which shop is the R-32 transverse prototype in? I gotta see it for myself!! What's the car number of the R-32 if you know?
How in the world did they manage to do that?!?
-Stef
They had an AWFUL LOT of time on their hands and needed something to do!! lol :-) So in came a little creativity, some elbow grease.....and VIOLA!!
I think you meant "VOILA!" Or did you mean that former Twins great (and NY Met) Frank Viola helped with the job?
Bring a camera to work!! I gotta see this!!
For those of us who don't work in transit, please explain why this is significant. Thanks.
You don't have to work in transit for it to be significant.
The point is that the R32 is configured with a cab in the opposite (diagonal) corners. One cab has T/O and C/R controls, the other C/R controls only. To have C/R contols on both sides at the same end of the car for older equipment is something to talk about.
It has to be an experiment of some kind.
You mean the car in the Coney Island had two C/R booths, one on each side of the car interior? Wow.
That is how I read the posting.
I don't know if they put in another cab. I think they just installed a door control panel.
I can hear the complaints from railfan window fans now: Et tu, R32? Then fall railfan!
:-) Andrew
I think of two things when I read this.
1)Can you say OPTO? We could have more cars available for it.
OR If It Doesn't Get Off The Ground
2) We'll have another car 6429. 6429 was the R-16 that was modernized, and nothing became of it. It got scrapped before it got on the road.
-Stef
I am hoping for number 2. Rather lose one subway car than all the railfan windows.
I am sure the interior of this thing is going to be really ugly if it ever makes it onto the road.
Stef, are you saying thet you support OPTO?
Peace,
ANDEE
Absolutely not. I just feel there has to be a reason for having a second set of controls installed in the car. It makes you kind of wonder.
-Stef
What was done to R16 #6429?
The car was given a futuristic rebuild,which never got off the ground. It had the look of an R-42/44, new doors, new side windows, a single end route sign, etc. 6429's end was totally modified, no sprung gates, new headlight arrangment, a storm door that opens inward rather than sliding. Perhaps, they could have done all the R-16s like that and the fleet would have been that much better.
-Stef
I wonder if there are any pictures of 6429 with the mods? You wouldn't perhaps be confusing it with R-10 3192, would you?
No, he's not. That R-16 did indeed get rebuilt. It was a prototype for a project that never happened, when the CORE (Car Overhaul, Rehabilitation & Enhancement) program started circa 1980. CORE was the precursor to the famed GOH program later in that decade, after the capital program was significantly expanded. Under that capital program, enough cars were purchased to replace the R-16s as well as the R-10s (and later the R-27 and R-30 fleets).
David
thats not true. The TA replaced 5 differrent contracts[R10 thru 30a]with the R68/68a contract.That seriously reduced the size of the B division fleet to a point where as now there is a car shortage.fleet shrank from over 6000 cars to somewhere in the vicintiy of 5,500[give or take].not only that,but cars from the R32 thur 46 were lost due to various reasons and not replaced...
How is what I wrote not true? I said the same thing! The only thing I DIDN'T mention is that there were more cars retired (even accounting for the difference in size between the old and new cars) than purchased ("love9400" is correct in that regard). At the time, riding was on the decline, the GOH program was coming to an end (and thus the massive "floats" of additional cars to support the program were no longer needed), and it was determined that the amount of service then required could be provided without the R-30/R-30A GOH cars (which it had been expected would be around for a while). And, in fact, NYCT was able to provide that amount of service without the R-30/R-30A GOH cars, but was not able to increase peak service in any meaningful way without them. It's been said that the R-143s are belated replacements for the R-30/R-30A, and in a manner of speaking that's correct.
David
The R68/68A contracts replaced all R10, R16, R27 and all but 110 R30 cars. These later R30/R30A's were retired without being replaced by anything. Their retirement was never planned when the R68/68A contracts were issued.
thats what I've been saying.. the T.A purchaced 625 cars to replace almost[if not all]double that amount[550 R27/30/30A 400 R10 200 R16],not to mention what was lost to wrecks/incidents/scrappings due to bodyrot and so on from the other R units.....
does it have a side window?
If the former is nicknamed Frankenslant, what should we name the latter? Ambidexliner? Transversliner?
Wow! I was there not too long ago. I know there are a bunch of 32's there (most signed as "E", getting new floors. I I looked into one and it was completely stripped; even the seat removed, and only the metal supports for the floor. It's like a total rebuild.
But I didn't see antything like what you're saying. They cut out a new window on the opposite side?
Does anyone know if there are any R-32's still in existance with the original ceilings and front roller signs? Surely, one or two must have escaped the rebuild.
none exist
when i shoot video of the LIRR how far do the electrics go??
what zones should i pay for etc??
how far will i go to with the MU cars that is ....etc??
and how many lines operate the MU electric lines ??
how long would it take to see all of the electric only lines ???
just want to know so i can plan where to shoot railfan video ....
thnakz if anyone can e mail me or post this information here !!!
Most of the lines are completely electrified:
Post Washington
Hempstead
West Hempstead
Far Rockaway
Long Beach (no, not the Queen Mary)
Babyon
Brooklyn line (Jamaica to Flatbush)
Some others are only half:
Port Jefferson branch only to Huntington
Ronkonkoma Branch only to Ronkonkoma
Diesel only areas:
Huntington to Port Jeff
Babylon to Montauk
Ronkonkoma to Greenport
Jamaica to Long Island City
Mineola to Oyster Bay (one electric a day goes to East Willison where third rail ends)
Between Hunterspoint Ave and Jamaica, you will get a mix of both as a lot of the diesels terminate there rush hours, and of course non stop electrice to Penn Station.
THANKZ !
that is what i wanted to avoid, the diesel only areas :
like you said .........
Huntington to Port Jeff
Babylon to Montauk
Ronkonkoma to Greenport
Jamaica to Long Island City
Mineola to Oyster Bay (one electric a day goes to East Willison where third rail ends)
downloaded the post will use it like a map
much appreciation for the info. !
Westbound deisel trips often have the foamerview
?........??.........foamerview ....???.....
if i may ask what is that please the word foamerview ..
.....thankz
Cab cars, but without the railfan window which is covered up by the notorious metal sliding window plate which is mounted on the door leading to the engineers cab compartment.
ANOTHER EVIL STRIKE BY THE TRANSVERSE CAB CAR CLUB CO !!!
( why do they always win ) ................thankz for the horrible info anyway...!!!
terrible !!!
but you can see out the back of the train because then the cab is open
Actually I've enjoyed the "rear" railfan window on the M's quite a few times. Not bad, especially when the train is speeding along.
Hi, Salaam,
what zones should i pay for etc??
The LIRR is better photographed via auto, because planning the connections can be be a bear. During off peak, most branches, except Babylon and Port Wash, are hourly, the last two half-hourly, though not necessaily clock half-hour.
Of course, lines where multiple branches merge are busy, even in off-hours: Jamaica-Long Beach via Atlantic (more westerly) Branch is much business than usual until early September because the Montauk Branch in that area is fully or partially closed at all times for complete track replacement. You should see that track! Concrete ties and rails so huge (152 lb. or heavier) that it looks like the old Atlas Code 100 HO track sections!
Likewise, New York-Jamaica-Hicksville is busy all times. Flatbush Avenue is only half-hourly currently.
But, to answer your question, to avoid bankrupting yourself with individual tickets, and especially if you're shooting over more than one day, you might consider buying a weekly zone 10 ($62). Purchase the ticket for Penn-Ronkonkoma.
In theory you are only supposed to use that ticket for one ride each way each day, but who's to know? You will almost certainly be challenged eastbound if you are on another branch than the ticket says, but the main reason for this is to make sure you know you're on the "wrong" train. You say you are going to Babylon/Huntington/wherever "for convenience"--i.e., you're meeting someone, going to a friend's house on your day off--that kind of idea.
A really cranky conductor could, again in theory, lift the ticket (for multiple riding, not wrong branch), but such &%$^%$!! usually only do that to hassle kids using their parent's ticket to go in the City on weekends. (Ticket needs to be signed in your own name--that's how they get the kids).
Actually, it would probably be a real good idea to contact LIRR public relations first to tell them your plans. The are often receptive to people who might give them good publicity. Especially because a lot of engineers are really cranky about people at the railfan window and will chase you away, even though I think they're not supposed to.
Also, end cars are often closed off-peak, especially at the west end.
Yeah, permission/permit would be good if you can get it. The TV crew I went photographing with used their permit to bull their way in to photograph out the front on the Brighton and Franklin Lines. Who says hippos don't have railfan windows? :)
But, to answer your question, to avoid bankrupting yourself with individual tickets, and especially if you're shooting over more than one day, you might consider buying a weekly zone 10 ($62). Purchase the ticket for Penn-Ronkonkoma.
In theory you are only supposed to use that ticket for one ride each way each day, but who's to know? You will almost certainly be challenged eastbound if you are on another branch than the ticket says, but the main reason for this is to make sure you know you're on the "wrong" train.
A really cranky conductor could, again in theory, lift the ticket (for multiple riding, not wrong branch), but such &%$^%$!! usually only do that to hassle kids using their parent's ticket to go in the City on weekends. (Ticket needs to be signed in your own name--that's how they get the kids).
Are you sure about the prohibition on multiple riding? The LIRR says that weeklies (and monthlies) are good for "unlimited" travel during the indicated time period. I suppose that's a matter of interpretation, but I see that as meaning you can travel as many trips per day as you want, just like with an unlimited MetroCard.
I occasionally use my Medford monthly to travel from Patchogue or, less commonly, Stony Brook. Not once has a conductor on an eastbound train noted that I'm on the "wrong" line. It's possible that things are different with weeklies, as conductors might figure that holders of those tickets are less familiar with the system (whereas people with monthlies can be presumed to know what they're doing).
Are you sure about the prohibition on multiple riding? The LIRR says that weeklies (and monthlies) are good for "unlimited" travel during the indicated time period.
You're right, Peter! From the web site:
Good for unlimited travel for a seven-day period from Saturday through the following Friday. Ticket is non-transferable and may be used only by the person who first presents it for travel.
They've gone back and forth on this. At one point they were telling you that anyone in your family could use your ticket anytime. Now it has to be the person who signed it. For a long time, they enforced the "one round trip a daily" by punching every ride.
I'm glad they've gone back to unlimited.
you can travel as many trips per day as you want, just like with an unlimited MetroCard.
Well, not quite like an Unlimited MetroCard. Governor Pataki said you can pass your card around to anyone, just so you're not all riding at the same time.
For a long time, they enforced the "one round trip a daily" by punching every ride.
Nowadays they seldom punch the tickets at all. I was very surprised Thursday morning when the conductor came around punching the August monthlies; before that, it had been at least six months since the last punching, on the Ronkonkoma/Greenport line at least.
>>>Nowadays they seldom punch the tickets at all. I was very surprised Thursday morning
when the conductor came around punching the August monthlies; before that, it had
been at least six months since the last punching, on the Ronkonkoma/Greenport line
at least. <<<
On the PW branch they're diligent abt punching. My last 3 monthlies have gotten punched.
www.forgotten-ny.com
after reading all of the threads ....i guess as long as my zone is covered by the unlimited zone weekly ticket i should be allright to
shoot video & i even remember some motormen inviting me to shoot with them when the first car was supposed to be locked off etc....
i got some questions to ask about metro north if anyone knows some info in this ....
much appreciated for all of your help .....i love new york !!
home sweet home & my birthplace 11 3 51
Each month they're supposed to have two or three designated punch days. The purpose is to have the conductors occasionally handle the tickets, to help deter fraud.
During off peak, most branches, except Babylon and Port Wash, are hourly, the last two half-hourly, though not necessaily clock half-hour.
Actually, the Port Washington line is a great line to railfan, especially if you don't have too much time. That one is one of the first you should do. It's all electric (seeing you are into that). It has nice station buildings, fairly frequent trains, and the Manhassett viaduct is a must see/photograph!
The Port branch can be glimpsed here...
http://www.forgotten-ny.com/SUBWAYS/pwbranch/pwbranch.html
i did not have any problem with shooting on the lirr....
as long as the conductor took my PAID ticket &walked away fom me .....
...no problem at all ..another conductor dug the idea real good !!
again thankz for da' info i will load this page down put it on my laptop
for sure 2 use it when i stay in a hotel in hempstead ..
Did anyone board the first car of a sb "1" train at 125 St this morning at around 8:00am?
Uh oh. Did someone chase you away from the railfan window?
LOL
No. I threw someone off the train when they tried to.
Well that was mean. :-(
I went into the Coney Island Terminal men's room this summer and noticed that the old urinal/trough was no longer there. It was replaced by the usual human type urinals. When did the old trough become de-installed? I always loved that nightmarish thing. Spooky and disgusting. It was always an integral part of the Stillwell experience, like the scenes of bloody murder in the wax museum. Another piece of history bites the dust.
Ya' think maybe heypaul has it installed in his bathroom?
Alan Glick
The trough has been gone for a few years now.
Peace,
ANDEE
You mean there was an actual trough there? In this day and age? Wow.
It reflected the mass usage nature of the terminal.
Similarly, at it's height, Stillwell had multiple banks of turnstiles. IIRC, two long and one short bank facing Surf Avenue, a short bank facing Stillwell, and a short bank facing the Mermaid Avenue buses.
After Stillwell, I wonder what was the second biggest single station in terms of facilties?
I recall reading somewhere that there was a lower level with turnstiles as well. Is my recollection correct?
If you mean Stillwell Avenue side (which is Lower than the turnstiles for Surf), then yes.
There was also a big bank of turnstiles for the lower level on the Surf side, west of the upper level turnstiles.
Where were the staircases? I noticed a few weeks ago, coming down from the F, that the passageway narrows. Only the left half is open; the right half leads to a garbage room. But the door to the garbage room was open and I saw a staircase leading down. Was that it? The Q is similar.
Yes, that was the location. I don't remember it being used used 1960 or so.
Are there any other visible remnants that you know of?
If it hasn't been obscured by demolition at Stillwell, the depressed passageway connecting the platforms with an entrance on Stillwell is still there. It is directly underneath where the elevated passage connecting the West End platform turns toward the current Surf Avenue entranceway.
But many many features have been obscured so that you would never know there was a lower level, including that the ramps from the Sea Beach, Brighton and Culver platforms all had diversions to access the lower level. Now these former accessways are no more than jogs in the ramps.
Ir is possible that, in the course of demolition, that evidence may show up for the sharp eyed.
Very few people seem to remember this lower level. Several subway historians have disputed with me that it ever existed. But I used them many times--some details of things may slip or get distorted in my memory--but not that. I ain't that senile yet. (Watch it, guys--I heard that snicker).
The last year I can be sure that the lower level was open was 1957. I think there was some use up to about 1960.
I *wish* I had a photo.
I'll probably be at Stillwell tomorrow, and thanks to the shuttle bus on the W, I'll be able to scurry around outside without paying an extra fare. If I see anything, I'll get a picture.
If you are going to take a picture of the Stillwell Avenue bathroom all I can say is that you are a glutton for cheap thrills. I hope the pictures you take are anything but the toilet. The best thing we could for that is blow the damn thing up.
>>> The best thing we could for that is blow the damn thing up. <<<
Due to the heightened alertness of our homeland security forces, do not be surprised if there is a knock on your door in the middle of the night. If we see no posts from you for 100 days, we will assume you are being held without charges being filed as an enemy combatant. :-)
Tom
No, I'm looking for evidence of the lower level.
But since you asked:
Oh the humanity!
No, I'm looking for evidence of the lower level
I wish you all good luck with this, since the reconstruction might alter the area for keeps. All that was clearly left of it the last time I could take a peek was an area apparently used for some kind of storage or maintenance.
I've looked (not exhaustively) for survivals of the level myself, but had no access to areas that I hope may become visible during reconstruction.
I looked where you suggested, on Stillwell underneath the W staircase. There are two garage doors there. That makes sense, since the lower level seems to have been converted to a garbage room.
(According to sidewalk markings in the area, there will be a new fare control area on what is now the sidewalk right in front of those garage doors.)
I'll briefly describe the way it was, to help you look.
On the Surf Avenue side, there were two wide banks of turnstiles, side by side. The wider of the banks (on the right--east) led up the ramped floor to the four platform entrances, as now.
On the left (west) the turnstiles led either levelly or perhaps on a slight decline to the passageway which opened to entrances for Sea Beach, Brighton, Franklin and Culver only (not West End, which had a street staircase before my time.)
The current "stationhouse" area on the far right side was always there, and its turnstiles were available 24/7/365.
I already mentioned the entrance from Stillwell.
From the three platforms with LL access, each one had a jog in the middle. The ramps continued down to what was then the upper (full-time) level. On the right at this little landing area were staircases, usually chained off, that led down to the lower level.
If you know how the staircases are at Jamaica Station LIRR, where one staircase at each platform splits half-way down for access to the station house or the street, this was very similar.
In my memory, the lower level was often used at busy times to speed exit from the platforms. This channeled crowds more toward the Stillwell Avenue side of the station. I only have one clear memory of the lower level turnstiles being opened for entrance.
Happy hunting!
Thanks. All that's obviously visible now is where the staircases went down from the platform ramps from the Brighton and Culver, especially the Culver -- the jogs are still there.
DO NOT BLOW UP THE TOILET, We need an NYC area detention facility for Al-Qaida SCUM.
Times Square on the IND?
The IND doesn't go to Times Square -- it's a long block off in either direction.
Unless you mean the west end of the 7 platform.
LOL. I forgot about that! Obviously, that station must have been extended around the same time 8th Ave/14th, and Fulton and Broad on the Nassau line were built
Hey Paul, let me set you all straight. At the risk of being overly verbose let me state that nothing and I mean NOTHING about the Stillwell Avenue head is worth a damn saving. The few times I had to use it I nearly threw up with the stench of the toilets, the urine on the floor and the stifling air that made it hard to breathe. Any change is a vast improvement. That is one piece of nostalgia I can well do without.
Don'tcha like horror flicks? Don'tcha like getting disgustipated? Don'tcha like history? Well, the Stillwell trough/urinal combined all three.
I wonder what the ladies room was like. Maybe it had a trough/bidet?
For a great horror rail story read message 365604. It features the Sea Beach Line!!
Alan Glick
Alan Glick
Aren't you supposed to be gone? Well I'm glad you're back -- several people have said you are very knowledgeable and does source research. So I guess we're glad to have you back. I seem to remember that you trashed several of my arguments earlier on in the year, but I guess I have probably done the same to you, so it's all fair...
AEM7
Gone? Me? No, I did say I'd be dropping in less frequently. But since I've heard about the recent clean up I decided to pop my head in sooner than planned.
Yeah, trashing arguments is fair. I do it with my closest friends on a regular basis. We even get loud and angry. But we draw the line at trashing each other. That's what I think SubTalk looks like now: a bunch of buddies who enjoy having fun and maybe poking fun at each other.
Nice to be hearing from you.
Alan Glick
I'll check it out Alan and where the hell have you been? I haven't seen a post from you in a dog's age. Good to see you're posting again. It must really be muggy down where you are. Good to know you've come up for air. Keep posting.
I wonder what the ladies room was like. Maybe it had a trough/bidet?
You should go in and look, it isn't illegal to go into the wrong bathroom.
I've been to a women's bathroom once, but it was one of those one person at a time units, making the men/women distinction utterly useless.
I couldn't agree with you more Fred, on the toilet at the Stillwell Ave. station. It is incomprehensibly disgusting. If they decide to save it, they should keep it spic and span.
#3 West End Jeff
Yeah, the bathroom is quite a dump!! (no puns intended) The bathroom though is only as clean as the crews will allow them to be, although, too, the cleaners can visit it a little more and do what they are paid to do....but then again the mess in there is probably why the don't go in and clean!! :-)
I didn't even like going into that restroom for a few minutes to do the obvious, FORGET about having to clean that horror. If that was my job, I don't care how much they paid me, I would be looking for a new one.
A garbage dump is cleaner than the Men's Room at the Stillwell Ave. Terminal. If they gave it a through cleaning, it would be a pleasure to use.
#3 West End Jeff
I remember that awful thing...I haven't been there in years, so couldn't believe it lasted even until now! It's funny, when I was in New Orleans, those trough-type urinals in rest rooms are the majority rather than the minority.
Just a point of info
urinal/trough was no longer there
are the hottest thing in all the trendy clubs
Go figure
Sure, trendy people want to show off thier trendy things.
And if that is true I can tell you that one trendy thing we all have would actually wilt and waste away in that old dingy and disgusting toilet at Stillwell. I liken that bathroom to the Montague Tunnel. Enough said.
Hay in Europe they still piss on the walls.
A CT country fair used to have two boards nailed togather that just went outside on the grass ... it was only used for a couple of days a year. Then the State made some laws & told the fair assoc. it must go along with the well that served tasty frog water. Now that well is used for the indoor toilet. They replaced the out houses with portables ... same thing, just made out of plastic now.
Opps I'm off topic, wish the boys would come back to work !
Isn't there a ToiletTalk board?
Somehow, the somber view of the noble Redbirds being sent to their final repose is made that much more sad by the NYC skyline bereft of the World Trade Center towers.
I'm impressed with the combined archive/subtalk system. Dave, how did you write a database engine so efficient that it can search out (an often quite big) tree-path in a matter of milliseconds? I am supposing that each post has a variable-length set of pointers that points to each subsequent post? And is there a general index that points to the byte location of each post in the db file? I suppose, since the posts are never amended, an index can be quite efficient since the byte location never changes.
AEM7
!! No, I didn't write the database engine. It's MySQL (www.mysql.com)
There's no master file with all the text. The text of each message is stored in a small file in a subdirectory for each 1000 messages. Only the header info is in the database (subject, author, time posted, parent message, child messages, etc.). I'd be interested to see if it could handle the message text in the database on the same machine as well but it's working just fine as it is.
Since MySQL advertises itself as being designed for heavy load, mission-critical apps, it shouldn't have any trouble serving up the entire contents out of the db on a single box. I've been doing contents-heavy databases (thousands of majorly huge documents and images stored directly in the db) in SQL Server on NT for years and it doesn't have any major issues. Since you only have plain text inserts but no updates or deletes, one box should be be adequate. If you were allowing updates/deletes or storing large amounts of binary data, then segmenting the db across multiple storage devices or servers would make sense.
According to NY1 Wednesdays rush hour hoopla was not needed.
eace,
ANDEE
This sounds so insane, it's almost comical -- defeats the whole purpose of having air conditioned trains, but back before the days of a/c at least the trains had multiple fans and roof vents and storm doors and windows that could be opened to provide adequate breezes, albeit warm throughout the train.
Nowadays, most trains don't even have those little latch things to prop the storm doors open, except the single R33's and R62s (or 62A, I keep forgetting!)
And the windows just have little vents on the top part that open slightly inward.
Good job, whoevers idea this was.
--->>>Nowadays, most trains don't even have those little latch things to prop the storm doors open....<<<
I never understood why they took the latches off of the R-62/62As, can any one shed any light on this?
Peace,
ANDEE
Well, one thing I can tell you used to happen years ago. In the days of the Low-V, sometimes some hoodlum would reach into the car when the doors were already closed (and the train was just about to move) and grab a lady's purse, or a man's hat off his head.
Probably to discourage people from latching the storm doors open when the a/c does work.
Conductor's account at odds with CSX record.
AEM7
I think the most important part of the article was the timeline. The call was made litterally as the train was pulling into the first stop at West Newton so you can't fault the crew for stopping there.
The next stop took place at 9:02. This is NOT enough time for a dispatcher to clear the track ahead, OK an express move, get the details of the medical emergency AND call EMS. Because the engineer up front did not have an OK, he had to stop at Newtonville. By the time they would have gotten express clearance they would have been past the last stop!
Second, the whole incident took only 12 minutes from the first call till the train met EMS at Back Bay. Its not like this guy was trapped on the train for 20-30 min. Calling EMS to either of the first two stations would have taken at least 5 min from the time of first ccontact w/ the dispatcher ans as Lexcie said traffic around there sucks at Rush hour. Thye crew felt that their best bet was to have EMS waiting at Back Bay then gambling thay EMS could reach Newtonville or West Newton in time.
Not this weekend, but the following two weekends, there's an interesting GO on the F. Trains will run in two segments. One segment will operate normal in both directions but only between 179th and 2nd Avenue. The other will operate normal southbound all the way from 179th to Stillwell, but will run via the G northbound. During the day, the northbound C (but not the A) will run via Rutgers to connect the two segments. The G will also be cut back to Court Square to make room at Queens Plaza. (Anyone with more information than what's posted here, please correct me if I got the details wrong.)
If any R-32's are running on the second segment, this is a rare opportunity to see the Crosstown line through the railfan window.
I guess someone decided it would be more entertaining to use the C to connect the two Fs instead of running the Fs to/from Hoyt-Schermerhorn. Seriously, though: are there crew quarters at H-S and/or is it an issue of having to reverse the trains on both the Fulton and Crosstown?
No, that was a late-night-only GO on weeknights. This is an all-weekend GO. The other one is still happening. I assume it's operating differently specifically to avoid the C problem you raise in your other post.
As for the C problem (how to get to York, E. Broadway, Delancey, 2nd Avenue, and Broadway-Laf when the C isn't running at night), take the A to W4 and transfer to a SB F (running normal) downstairs. Yes, it's a pain. Perhaps it would be a better idea to send the late night A NB via Rutgers as well -- more people would be inconvenienced, but fewer would have to make two extra transfers.
Duh. I'm doing too many things on too many computers here today. I completely missed the "Manhattan-bound" bit in the G.O.
Last night was a MESS with the G.O on the F. The Tower Opt. at Bedford-Norstran did not know the move into the Relay train north of the station. They had to get another Tower Opt. to come in and work the switched. I was the 0018 G from 4th Ave. I sat at Fulton St for 40min and then moved slowly down untill I passed Bedford. I got to 71st Ave 1hours Late.
Robert
They once did run the Fs in two sections with a transfer at H-S over a weekend, and managed to have the A, C, and G running through without too many snags.
I forgot to put in the other post, what about the York St, E.Bway and Delancey stations late night when the C doesn't run? The G.O. doesn't say anything about service to/from them. It says to take the A to W4 during those times. Granted, there probably are extremely few passengers using those stops at those hours, but there should at least be some mention of it in the G.O.
Can they catch the F downtown??? I think thats how it would work
I keep seeing "IIRC" in posts. Forgive me for being a little naive, but could someone please clarify what this stands for? Thanks.
IIRC = If I Remember Correctly
-- David
Chicago, IL
Thank you, David :o)
FYI, there are websites that spell out all of the abbreviations used on the internet. You should seek them out.
Here are a few:
IYKWIM=If you know what I mean
IMHO=In my humble opinion
WTF=What the f*ck
There are many more, I'm sorry i don't recall the URLs at the moment.
Peace,
ANDEE
Speaking of abbreviations, young people in Taiwan create their own "English" abbreviations because of the internet, such as,
LKK (Lao Ko Ko in Chinese) means very very old.
SPP (Song Pia Pia in Taiwanese) means very cheesy.
UKLM (U Ki La Mei in Chinese) means very young and sexy girls.
The internet creates this kind of subcultures.
Chaohwa
SPP (Song Pia Pia in Taiwanese) means very cheesy.
Doesn't "Song" describe the feeling when you've just had sex and are feeling on top of the world and swish? So I am guessing Song Pia Pia means that something makes you feel good, proud, better than everybody else and generally "Cool"?
Or have I failed my Taiwan Idioms 101?
AEM7
I know what you mean. You are right about that. The problem is there are four different ways to pronounce Song. My "Song" is the second one; whereas your "Song" is the fourth one.
Chaohwa
UKLM (U Ki La Mei in Chinese) means very young and sexy girls.
An abbreviation which Qtraindash7 surely will find useful.
Great minds think alike !
Eye no it's b/c ur smoking something again :-)
http://www.magicpub.com/netprimer/acronyms.html
Scroll Safely!!
""AOTC""....
ESB
Hey SubTalk, I was just letting everyone know that I finally rode the R-143, I was in car #8185, I rode from Rockaway Pkwy. Station to Broadway ENY, When we left Rockaway Pkwy., and switched on to the Manhattan Bound Track, I didn't feel us switcing, that's how smooth it is. And I remember people saying that the R-143 doesn't have a railfan window, It does have one, I can see right into the Conductor's Office and throughout the second window, I can see perfectly, Even though I couldn't see the Front of the Train, because I was in the 5th Car of the Trainset. Since the R-160 will look identical to the R-143, I think they need to put those trains on the A Line First, Because I take that line to school. After I got off the R-143 (sadly), I had to take the A Line to Nostrand Ave., and the R-44(#5263) feels nothing like the R-143.
Will you still be going to that school in 2006 when the first R-160s are delivered?
I think you were looking into the conductor's cab. When you take your Acela Express ride, find your way to the cafe car. In the middle is a real conductor's office. It's shared by the Bombardier technician. You can easily see the speedometer. If the door is closed, ask a crew member to open it or you. I've never heard them refuse such a request... they like showing off their toy, even to reail fans!
Oh Damn! I get out of school in 2005, but that aint gonna stop me from riding the R-160. I already where everything is on the Acela Expres, I have 2 Tapes on the Train, I have one 2 hour tape where a guy rides the Acela Express and shows all the different features on the trainset, And he also went Rhode Island and taped the Acela Express going at 150 mph, he taped the Trainset from Trackside.
where did youget the cab rides? BTW. I tink the 2hr tape might have beena waste. you can bring a hadheld camera and document from there
If you hae seen the tape, you wouldn't say that, But then again u dont like the Acela.
I never said I rode in the Cab.
H/o I never said i ddnt like the acela. I said that it was a stupid move (infastructure, etc.)
testing,,,,,,,1,2
Since the R-160 will look identical to the R-143, I think they need to put those trains on the A Line First, Because I take that line to school.
Well THAT alone is a good reason for the MTA to do that.
Kidding aside, it's hard to say what they are going to do, they could go just about anywhere. It's probably safe to say theat the C won't be getting any. That line seems to always have the oldest equipment in the system. Although, the Eastern division is usually also the last to get new trains, but this time it's the first.
It is kind of crazy to speculate as to where the R160 will go, yet the sense I get is the TA would like to do weekend OPTO on the J when these cars come in. Supposedly, the entire ENY fleet ultimately will be R143/R160. The R160 will come in 4 and 5 car linked sets.
Wouldn't THAT be ironic? The Eastern Division used to get the hand-me-downs, now it'll be the newest fleet in the entire system!
--Mark
That is true! For once the Eastern Division got the newest. When I first heard the L was going to get the R143 first I thought it must be some kind of joke. Then when I heard the M would also be getting them I nearly fell down! A far cry from the R16 disasters in the mid 80's! (not that I don't miss them.)
goto mta.info under the what's new section. It Appears that Kawasaki and Alstrom have won!
You just now finding this information??? Every SubTalker already knows who won the contract, we been talking about it for a couple of days.
Be nice now. Some of us working stiffs do go on vacation to get away.
True.
my bad!!!
Some of us didn't read the other threads, mainly because the delivery is so far away.
As part of MTV's REAL WORLD Marathon, the NEW YORK
episodes (filmed 2001) will be shown SAT 3 AUGUST
between 1130 and 900pm....
The 1130 episode, for one, involves the
NYC Subway System in it's synopsis...
I've seen a few of those episodes. There are also some nice views of the WTC in it's "city-shot" scenes, along with some subway riding throughout.
Ayup, the exterior of r32 cars entering 23rd Street..
Interiors of the 1/9 train... A/C/E/L at 14st too!
It's intriguing to see WHERE and HOW the subways
were filmed in the series...
Post 9/11 these NEW YORK episodes have been somewhat
'rare' if not 'retired' by MTV so I'd catch them in the
Marathon bundle..
:)
Just got this from Bloomberg:
Hello and thank you for your inquiry. The following Bloomberg Radio talent appears on the NYC transit: Jessica Ettinger is the voice behind the 4,5,6 lines; Diane Thompson announces on the 1,2,3,9 metro lines; Any Bergan for the S and 7; and Catherine Cowdery can be heard on the J,L,M,Z subways. Hope this information is of help. With kind regards, Sofia Totti
Note the reference to S and 7-- maybe they are planning on using these cars (an option order) on these lines? If true then all redbirds will go to the great subway in the drink.
I think they only have the S and 7 just so they can have all of the lines "ready". I guess they'll need these people again after 2004.
I rode a R142 #5 train today and seems like the station annoucements are shared by the lady who does the #2 train and another lady.
The No.5 Line has 4 voices. The No.2,5,6 Female voices and the Male does the closing door announcement.
Are these the "people" who do the computer recordings on the 142s and 143s? I'm confused here.
Yes, there's some more info in the "who is that" thread also.
If you have checked the short thread titled:
"Announcements on R142's and R142A's"
David Greenberger gives a very helpful explanation. The male voice is Charlie (?) on both the 2 and the 6 and the female voice is identical on both lines.
He also explained why SubTalkers thought the voices on the #2 line seemed "cheerful" (they do not they are identical).
I know that some of you will disagree, but the East River is one of the most important things that affects the New York Subway. I will admit that a railfan from another part of the country will not care about the East River, but all of the subway lines that don't cross the East River are either really lame, or are the 6.
The 1 is lame??
Or B & D?
Chaohwa
The B and D are supposed to cross the East River under "normal" service when the Manhattan Bridge is fully open.
I'm sorry to say, but as it stands now, the B is lame. The D, however, is debatable.
The 1 crosses the East River.
Should it be Harlem River?
Chaohwa
Yes, indeed. #1 crosses both Harlem and East Rivers.
Chaohwa
The 1 crosses the East River.
I'm talking about its normal service pattern.
It's normal service pattern is with the 9, The 1/9 is lame.
If the 9 was eliminated, then my comment would be vrong.
Yes. The 1 is lame. Only good thing about it is the pizza at VC, and the fact that it has the best A/C. The 62's on the 4 line suck.
The 6 line is great. I wish the crew office would send me their more often.
Your post shows why railfanning is so interesting. One can always look at a subject a bit differently and come up with more interesting material. For example: crossing the East River.. One could list the crossings in chronological order, or discuss the engineering problems in each bridge or tunnel, or see how each helped the development of our metropolis. Or one could get personal and (perhaps) identify the people responsible for planning each.
The (F)(M)(N)(R) and (W) each cross the East River twice. Does that make them extra cool?
:-) Andrew
The N doesn;t have to cross the East River twice to be cool. It is cool because it is the Sea Beach and it is Sea Beach Fred's train. What else is needed. Cocky, aren't I?
I've been a T/O since October. They shoved me in the IRT, so I can't operate the Sea Beach Line. This does not sit well with me. I've always wanted to work the IND and BMT trains. They've told me I won't be able to transfer until next summer. You have no idea what an inconvenience it is to travel from Queens to the Bronx everyday. Or even worse, travel to Flatbush on the 5 line, and finish the day at Dyre! I'd do anything to get over to the B div.
Hey Triple A, good post and straight from the horse's mouth. Your post should be saved and put away for posterity. There you have it folks, a T/O operator who tells it like it is, namely, the IRT is for the birds and the BMT rules. I hope you get your transfer one of these days, sooner than later. Maybe you'll even get a Sea Beach run. Wouldn't that be a hoot. In fact, despite what some of my friends on this site think, the Brighton and West End would be great, too. They're very good lines as well. Of course, if you get the 4th Avenue Local you might wish you stayed on the IRT.
My main gripe with the IRT is that it's far from home. Try getting to those terminals in the Bronx from Queens on a daily basis.
Truthfully, I find the A division lines to be boring, except for the stretch between E.180-Dyre, and the 7 line. But I still like the 6 line because you don't have to get out of your cab at Brooklyn Bridge. This gives me a chance to relax in the same seat from Pelham to BB, and back. I've always wanted to work the historic B division lines in Queens and Brooklyn, as opposed to the A division lines that bring me to areas of the Bronx I'd never even seen in my life. I always imagined myself coming into Coney Island Terminal during sunset, or cruising over Jamaica Bay on a sunny day like today.
But in defense of the IRT, I must say that management is great. I work with a great group of people. But it's always better to work closer to home. Especially when you do shift work such as we do.
I just found out that approximately 40 T/O's are going to transfer to the IRT this pick. This will open more jobs for me. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I'll be in the IND/BMT by next summer.
Of course, if you get the 4th Avenue Local you might wish you stayed on the IRT.
It's even worse when you live near it, and can't just pick a new line to live on every 6 months.
We warned you. Queens to the Bronx is no biggie - I spent the better part of 4 years going to the Bronx from Staten Island. Much happier now that I work out of Midtown and Coney Island.
Once upon a time I did a run almost as bad. Lived in the Bronx at 204th and Webster at the end of the D train, had to report to Stillwell at oh dark hundred. Not a chance of reporting to MY end of the line. Made me nuts. My sympathies, LuchAAA, but ALex definitely had more of a haul. I trust that involved the Ferry as well as the long ride "on property."
Depended on what time I had to start. Any AM start before about 0700, I usually drove to. When I worked midnights, I always drove. If the timing was right, I could take a ferry; then the commute looked like this:
Leave home 0530
Ferry departs 0600
Manhattan arrival 0628
VC - add 55 minutes
Lenox - add 40 minutes
Main St - add 55 minutes
Everywhere else - 3 minute run to Bowling Green, then add appropriate travel time from there.
Yep, that's a haul. Since I lived in the Bronx back in my days, the cardinal rule was "don't have a car. Someone will take it away from you, most likely the CITY." So I had to do the "people's duties" reporting to the other end of the D train, usually leaving home around 4AM when there were plenty of trains. The only good part was I could usually open up a cab and cop a nap on my way to and from. :)
Or else instead of leaving the IRT, couldn't you go to the (7), or at least to the Livonia Yard on the (1)? (Or do the trips not start there?
:-) Andrew
I doubt they start at Livonia. Pre-9/11, all the 1 runs would start at VC, and all the 3 runs probably started at 148th, since they have a nice crew room there.
and all the 3 runs probably started at 148th, since they have a nice crew room there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
There are definitely jobs on the 3 line out of Livonia. I'll get back to you on that for sure.
The crew room at 148 is not very popular. Especially after you've been to VC and 241 a few times.
There are jobs out of Livonia Yard on the Nos. 2,3,4,5 Lines. Thes best are from the No.5 Line but you need some years to start out of Brooklyn on a Weekday with the Reg. runs.
This year with the 9/11 service changes added jobs from the No.1 Line started out of New Lots Term.
I just hope things get better for me. Right now, I'm extra extra. It sucks. I'm praying that I get work on the west side in September, because those are mostly 8 hr jobs. The crew office has been killing me lately. 10hr yard jobs. 5 hours on the board before picking up a job. 2 or 3 days on the 4 line every week, which is nothing but penalty jobs.
I'm crossing my fingers that I'll be on the west side next pick, with nothing but 8 hr jobs.
It takes about 1 Year before you can get a job or you can Bid on an open job on the first week of the pick. I do wish you luck because I also couldn't wait to get off the Extra List. I put a Bid in for a Late PM job just to get off the RX List.
The Bway section is ALWAYS last to go so you will not have to worry about that.
Look at the bright side: everyday OUR seniority moves up a notch so even if you can't do the work, you still can PICK it. Couldn't find my punchcard last week...turns out I moved up two notches. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that if you don't crash a trainset in RTO or blow up a car during inspection, 'body count' means much...on time, not sick, not absent. We all have EXCELLENT WORK. CI Peter
The crewroom at 148 ST and Lenox is very small. Not my favorite I would pick 242 St-VC
I used to live a block from the East River and once tried to climb the Queensboro Bridge ( foolish child). That was home and to me the East River, though filthy and dingy, was always known as our neighborhood river. I also knew at a very young age that those trains went under the river on their way to Manhattan, the Brighton and 4th Avenue Local. The East River, I am told, is much cleaner today. I wonder!
I notice that you say "Subway lines that don't cross the East River," thats an important distinction that needs to be made. Certainly the MN and Amtrak are worthy of railfan attention, the M2s,4s, and 6s are not found anywhere else in the world, and the beautiful Hudson Line feeds across the Harlem into both NYP and GCT.
I have always liked riding a train across a bridge, it's better than a car ride across a bridge, you're more exposed, and there's rarely a guardrail to keep you on the bridge or anything. From the standpoint of riding a train across a bridge, the Harlem is a much better river than the East. The East river has a total of 13 crossings rail (I'm assuming that the E and V and the M,N and R use the same tunnels, and I'm including the East River LIRR tunnels), of which only two are located on bridges. However, on the Harlem river, there are six crossings, of which three are elevated (The 1, MN and Amtrak's). The reason for this is quite simple, the east river is a much wider river, and most of Manhatten that abuts it is or was more developed at the time of subway construction, therefore a subway tube makes more sense than adding a subway track to a bridge. Look at the 63rd st tunnel and the Chrystie St. Connection, I actually don't know when the 63rd st tunnel was started, but I do know that Chrystie has been going on for some 40 or so years. It seems to me that a Subway tube is just easier over such a distance.
Tunneling under the East River creates some of the deepest stations in the city. To me that qualifies it as an important railfan thing.
CG
"… but the East River is one of the most important things that affects the New York Subway…"
I use to live by the Botanic Gardens when the Franklin Avenue Shuttle was a wreck (had a clear view of the S as it switched tracks before Prospect Park). Even back then, it has always been a vital connection; there are not many ways to connect to the A/C in Brooklyn. Since its been redone, with finally a connection to the 1,2,4,5, its even better
so as for:
"…East River, but all of the subway lines that don't cross the East River are either really lame, or are the 6."
Its the Franklin Acenue Shuttle isnot lame to a lot of riders what need to access the A, C, D, 1, 2, 4, 5 (east river crossers)
Not lame and not necessary are two different things. There are lots of lame things that are necessary, like a fare hike :(
YES!
The Franklin Avenue Shuttle might be important, but it's short and thus, quite lame.
Huh? Short=lame? The shuttle is/was part of BMT Fulton El service and Brighton's origional link to an East river crossing. I'm pretty sure the "non-lameness" of the Brighton existed pre-shuttle, and pre-Fulton IND. (Pretty lame with a four track main EXCEPT where it crosses the river.) And find me another spot that can boast a wreck as collosal and as stupid as Malbone. Was that a lame wreck? I say the Franklin Ave. Shuttle is Hottie McHot.
"…There are lots of lame things that are necessary, like a fare hike :( "
Agreed overall
As for the Franklin Avenue Shuttle, think the only lame thing about it is that its just 4 stops, but it is necessary
Questionm: At one point, weren't the Franklin Ave tracks connected to a line that ran over the Brooklyn Bridge? Does anyone have a pict of that route and knows why service over the Brooklyn Bridge was stopped?
Was it due to the Melborne Street accident (now Empire Blvd; incident where a train went throught the old S curve before Prospect Park at 40miles; one of the worst accidents in the subways history)
Questionm: At one point, weren't the Franklin Ave tracks connected to a line that ran over the Brooklyn Bridge? Does anyone have a pict of that route and knows why service over the Brooklyn Bridge was stopped?
Yes. The route was: Brooklyn Bridge, a private ROW, Fulton St, then as the Franklin/Brighton Lines. Stations were at: Park Row, Sands St, Court & Myrtle, Boerum Pl, Elm & Duffield, Flatbush Av, Lafayette Av, Cumberland St, Vanderbilt Av, Grand Av, Franklin Av, Dean St, Park Pl etc.
Through Fulton - Franklin - Brighton service was mainly replaced on August 1st 1920 with the Shuttle due to the opening of the Subway from De Kalb Avenue to Prospect Park. On Summer Sundays and holidays a Franklin - Brighton service ran until 1963 (with the Fulton Street El closing on May 31st 1940 - it had become surplus to requirements with the IND Fulton St Subway). Service on the Brooklyn Bridge itself (although by that time only the Myrtle Av Line used it) ceased in 1942 due to a fire at Sands St station.
Everything you say is correct except for one thing:
Brooklyn Bridge service ceased in 1944.
Thanks alot, much appreciated
Here is a 1924 map that shows the Fulton El. Through Fulton-Franklin service was already over, but the Fulton line is still there: http://www.nycsubway.org/maps/historical/bmt1924.gif
Here is a track map overlaid onto the Downtown Brooklyn Street Grid, some streets are now gone, and Cadman Plaza West and Old Fulton Street were still part of and continuous with Fulton Street. Cadman Plaza East was Washington Street: http://www.quuxuum.org/~joekor/dtbklyn1.gif
The tracks on Adams eventually turn onto Myrtle.
Thanks alot, 2 maps are great, much appreciated too.
If any future East River crossings are made, I hope one is the Utica line from Houston Street. Could do like what British James suggested before, make that an express from Bway-Lafayatte. Would like to see the provision at Utica Avenue Station used
The Manhattan bridge, whether 6th Ave or Broadway, in my opinion has a lot to do with its large usage. The abiltity to get into manhattan without passing throgh lower manhattan if u dont need to from Brooklyn. Any new one, if done where people need or want to go, would do a lot
"...a railfan from another part of the country will not care about the East River..." That's not true. I'm from another part of the country, and not a day passes that the East River doesn't enter my thoughts. I still can't imagine where its headwaters are. One question, where the Nassau Street line and the Broadway line merge into the Montague tunnel, is that point under water or not? Many maps suggest that it is, and that seems like a difficult piece of tunnel engineering.
IIRC it is. I think i remember seeing the switch where the tunnel curves to meet the broadway line in the tunnel because my friend pointed it out to me. i believe it is underwater.
"One question, where the Nassau Street line and the Broadway line merge into the Montague tunnel, is that point under water"
Absolutely yes. It's very clear on the Hagstrom map of lower Manhattan. The R is under Whitehall, while the M is under Broad. These streets are parallel as they reach the shore, so there is absolutely no way the tunnels could merge anywhere other than under the water.
With all this talk of the Stillwell Avenue Construction, I wonder if a similar design could be used for some of the stations on the MBTA's Ashmont Line, especially "Fields Corner" and "Ashmont." Does solar-power sound like a good idea for those stations? Also, has the MBTA ever released designs for the re-done stations, since construction will start there at some point in the near future? -Nick
Nick From wjat Im hearing Fields Corner is going to razied and rebuilt, as well as Savin Hill. as for Shamut they are goin to add 2 new elevators for ADA compliance and Adhmont Im not sure. The T has not relesed drawings of the re-building of the line as of yet. Stevie
Please post with additions or corrections
Shawmut doesn't look like it needs too much of a modernization, not to mention that it is underground. I'd imagine the MBTA would raize Ashmont, since it is also a dump like Fields Corner, and Savin Hill isn't much better. -Nick
<<< I'd imagine the MBTA would raize Ashmont, since it is also a dump like Fields Corner>>>
Ashmont was rebuilt in 1981. Fields Corner was not.
Jim D.
"Ashmont was rebuilt in 1981. Fields Corner was not."
Wow, thats surprising..both stations are in bad shape. -Nick
Do you think that one will ever be built?
You're hitting the wackypuffy early today. It will run to the 76th St. station, right?
Don't you mean Pork Ave.?
The MNRR already runs underneath Pork Avenue. :-)
The train terminates at Hamway, which is a fully accessible station to all bacon lovers.
York Avenue in New York? No.
It would be unwise to build a line with population solely on only one side. Of course, there is the eight avenue line under CPW, but the express line runs up cpw without a stop, the park is a ridership source, and cpw is only for a limitted portion of the route.
MATT-2AV
That would be a real stubway - 53rd St to 92nd St.
On the 30th, I took a R8 up to Chestnut hill around 1:19, and went up to do some drawing for a few hours. I get the train back, and make it back to the hotel (the Inn at Penn). I turn on the news, and find out there is a 2-alarm warehouse fire at 17th and Indiana, and all Regional rail service has been delayed in the area. What a bad place for a fire....right between the SEPTA Main Line, the R6, the R8, and a block from the NE Corridor. Luckily, I made the train back about an hour or two before the fire broke out.
The next day, I was walking back to the hotel from the El around 5 pm, and saw a trolley breakdown right in front of the 36th St Portal. Two 10's were linked together, and the front one broke down right at the portal station. This left the second one blocking all traffic in the street. Everyone moved to the back car, and the back car had to push the front one. Lots of screeching wheels spinning in place, and pretty soon the trolleys were moving. That screwed traffic up quite a bit.
While I was in town, I also caught a ride on the two South Philly trackless lines, and those things are great! So quiet, and I love the zapping noise they make as the poles slide along the overhead.
I just took the time to count up all the stairs to climb in a day, and it's unbelievable.
Going in to work, I take the F, change at 4th Avenue and 9th Street, and exit at Whitehall. There is an escalator there, but it is often out of service, and I have gotten used to the stairs. These days I take the stairs even when the escalator is working, reasoning that since I'm in worse shape than it is, that's probably a good idea. It's 91 stairs to the street.
On the way home, I have to climb from the BMT at 9th Street to the 4th Avenue stop on the F. That's 83 stairs. Then I have to exit the station at Prospect Park 15th Street. That's 56 stairs. Finally there are the 11 stairs up my stoop, and the 15 stairs from my ground floor up to my second floor bedroom, where I change out of my work clothes. That's a total of 165 stairs on the way home, and 256 for the round trip commute. That's like going up 17 stories!
Add on trips between the basement, ground floor, and second floor in my home in the morning and evening, and it looks like I'm going up 20 to 25 floors every weekday. Sure is different than taking an SUV to a one-story ranch house up three steps from garage.
So why am I in such bad shape anyway?
I don't know if this would entail less climbing, but if you use an unlimited MetroCard, have you tried transferring from the N/R to the F at Lawrence/Jay? The two stations have entrances a short block apart and, although Lawrence is deep, IIRC it has an escalator.
Larry is an employee of NYC Transit, and as such has a free MetroCard.
As for the escalator at Lawrence Street, it's out of service now, and that's its usual condition, unfortunately.
David
(Transfer at Lawrence Street rather than 4th Ave.)
I tried that for a while when I first moved from City Planning to NYCT, but going all the way up to the street and then back down proved to be a time loser. As a customer, it really doesn't feel good, even with the transfer now free. So I do the stairs.
Note that there are two new within station transfers planned, from Lawrence to Jay Street and from Broadway-Nassau to the northbound Lex Local. These will make a big difference to Brooklyn, but progress is slow. I hope they don't drop from the capital program once the election passes and the state and its agencies are allowed to admit their budget problems.
Broadway-Nassau to the northbound lexington Ave local? Methinks you really mean Broadway-Lafayette to the NB local, no?
(Broadway-Nassau to the northbound lexington Ave local? Methinks you really mean Broadway-Lafayette to the NB local, no?)
Right -- I always get those confused.
Stairs going down don't count?
Stairs going down are fun. One day I'm gonna break my ass running down the stairs at 51st/Lex, but until then I'm going to keep doing it.
Going up the stairs there, is completely different.
Stairs going down don't hurt. One reason I counted all 256 stairs now is that my wife bought an "elliptical" exercise machine for us to get back in shape. It's a good machine, but it uses the same step-up motion as climbing stairs. So those muscles are really hurting these days, and I'm really noticing each and every step on the subway. Hope they toughen up.
Ever tried running up a down escalator?
I wouldn't recommend this if the escalator is full of people.
No, but I run down the up escalator all the time. 59th and Lex, downtown 6 train to the N/R/W platform. Saves a lot of time.
Going in to work, I take the F, change at 4th Avenue and 9th Street, and exit at Whitehall. There is an escalator there, but it is often out of service
How do you define Hell? A place where the MTA maintains the escalators!
I just got back from a family vacation to the Rochester area, and during the trip I was treated to a grand tour of the New York Museum of Transportation. Since this does have to do with New York transit and even has a little to do with a New York subway (but not "the" New York subway), I figured I'd post something about NYMT on this forum.
NYMT is a small trolley museum in Rush, NY, about 20 minutes south of Rochester. They got started pretty late, in the early to mid-1970's. The museum's main barn was once an agricultural barn, but it's big enough to house most of their modest collection. The collection consists of the following:
New York State Railways #157 - this 1915 steel interurban car was built by Niles, and is one only 4 Niles steel cars in existence. It was used as a cabin after retirement in 1932, but NYMT was able to strip parts off a Philly center-entrance car and acquire a pair of curved-equalizer trucks from Japan for the future restoration of #157. NYMT has already cosmetically restored half of #157's exterior, and it looks fantastic.
Elmira Corning & Waverly #107 - this 1911 wood Jewett interurban is odd in that, after retirement in 1930, it was made into a cottage - but kept its trucks and underbody equipment! It's stored in NYMT's barn next to #157, stripped of paint and awaiting restorative work.
Philadelphia Transit Co #C130 - this is NYMT's snow sweeper, built in 1923 by Brill. It has been regauged to standard, and is stored in the barn, but its tram wheels mean it isn't likely to operate anytime soon. It's complete, though, and probably operational.
Northern Texas Traction #411 - out of place among a Northeastern collection, this 1919 St. Louis product is actually a wooden interurban parlor car. After retirement the body was bought by the Rochester Old Spaghetti Factory restaurant, where it remained until about 1997, when NYMT got the body. It's kind of rough - the exterior was sand-blasted, which ravaged the wood, and the interior is somewhat modified. The car is nicely painted, though, and is stored in the barn.
Philadelphia & Western #161 & #168 - these two "Strafford" rapid transit cars were built by Brill in 1927. After serving with P&W, Red Arrow and SEPTA, they were bought by Trans-Mississippi Trolley in 1990 (?) and rebuilt with ground-level loading doors. They were used during the 1993 floods to ferry workers across the river. In 1996 both cars were sold to NYMT, and last year #168 became the first electric car ever to operate at NYMT under its own power.
Batavia Traction #33 - this single-truck semiconvertible, built by Kuhlman in 1911, is only a shell. It's in the barn awaiting restorative attention.
Rochester Street Railway #437 - a typical streetcar from the Rochester street railway system, this body was built by Kuhlman in 1904 and acquired by NYMT in 1997. It's stored outside under a tarp, but work is already being done towards making the car complete.
Rochester Transit #0243 - this ancient single-truck streetcar (Stephenson, 1891) was rebuilt into a sand car in 1918. It went to the Magee Trolley Museum, which was wiped out by Hurricane Agnes in 1973. After NYMT got the car it was completely disassembled, right down to the frame, and then the project was abandoned. It looks pretty forlorn, but NYMT has all the parts in stock for future reassembly.
Hornell Traction #10 - this pitiful snow sweeper body was built by Brill in 1905. It is pretty historic, as this type of sweeper was common among street railways but rarely preserved, but it's in very bad shape. It's under a tarp outside.
There's a lot of other stuff of interest at NYMT. They have a small gas-mechanical engine from the Rochester Subway, which is in very poor shape and is largely disassembled. They also have a very interesting speeder from the Subway, which was gorgeously restored a couple years ago. NYMT has more displays, ranging in subject from the Rochester Subway to track construction to the history of American train design, than any other private museum I've seen - the only place that comes close is Branford. They have a large HO-scale layout on display, plus a fire truck, an old pickup, and three buses. There is also a large room full of spare parts for their electric cars. Outside, a loop circles the barn; part of the loop has wire over it, and they're working on extending the overhead. They operated last year for the first time using a crude generator, but they've discarded that system in favor of a substation and commercial AC. This system is in development. Their line runs about 1.5 miles from the site, and at the other end is the local NRHS chapter. The NRHS chapter owns a Lack MU car, a number of diesels, freight cars and passenger cars, and - most interestingly, I think - the last surviving electric car from the Rochester Subway. It's a far cry from anything the IND or IRT would run - it's basically an MU-capable streetcar. It's also in really horrible shape, with all the side panels rusted through. It's been partly disassembled by the NRHS chapter in hopes of restoring it, but it will take a lot of work and a lot of money.
Overall, NYMT is making a lot of progress, especially considering their small size. Just thought you'd like to know. :-)
BTW, their website is www.nymtmuseum.org
Frank Hicks
Frank: Sounds like a great place to vist. Thanks for the report.
Larry,RedbirdR33
Thanks for your informative posting. I visited this alleged "museum" just about the time it was first established and opened. A speeder was running for the public. Long talks were conducted with several key members at that time and it was evident that they did not have a clue about what they had to do - and didn't seem anxious to learn! The sad results you report are not surprising. If the railway pieces are in bad condition(they were in better shape during my visit in the mid-80s), no amount of money will be able to save such an organization nor the equipment they possess. What a shame that such unique equipment has been condemned to a slow death! The lack of financial planning seems painfully evident. Alas!
Unlike a certain other SubTalker, I see no USEFUL purpose in knocking a museum that's trying. Saturday at a bus thing sponcered by the Motor Bus Society I got an update about another new museum that's trying to make a go of it in Putman, CT (they're a diesel place).
Thanks for the input.
Accroding to the Dallas Morning news DART is about to raise fares for the first time since 1995 from 1.00 to 1.25. What DART is planning is operating fewer lrv's nights and weekends and eliminating some of the lower performing bus routes.
Welcome New SubTalker!! I know nothing about Dallas Transit.
Sounds like its operating cost (labor) has gone up a bit since 1995. Still for $1.25 you can ride a RDC on the TRE.
How much will it be to ride all the way to the T&P station in Fort Worth?
Right Now It's 2.00 one way and 4.00 for a day pass to go out o Fort Worth. Since moving to Charlotte I haven't had the chance to ride TRE all the way out to Fort Worth but I did ride the RDC's out to South Irving before the extension to Fort Worth and what I smooth ride. However they were a little sluggish in the acceleration department but that's expected.
I did ride the RDC's out to South Irving before the extension to Fort Worth and what [a] smooth ride
RDC's? Smooth ride? The two doesn't belong in the same sentence. How can you not feel the vibrations of the underfloor 400 hp prime mover?
AEM7
I rode, of all things, LONG ISLAND's RDC's for many years. And we allknow that LIRR track is NOT the greatest. Never remember any rough ride, in fact, I used to LOVE it when the RDC's showed up on a Jamaica-Patchogue run instead of a trainload of P54 ping-pongs. Usually this happened on a Sunday evening run, and then the RDC pair would be used on the Babylon-Patchogue shuttle all week.
And though there was some engine NOISE -- it was not obtrusive, and I don't recall much vibration.
Well the only "real" RDC I ever rode was on the Cape May Seashore lines. Maybe they were past their prime.
AEM7
The RDC's were very smooth but you could here the "bass" sound of the mover when they were getting up to speed.
DART has had problems with its buses for a long time. There is a Harvard Case Study about it a while ago, it's not public so I'm not allowed to give away too much details, but basically in Plano and many suburbs, they tried various different ways of providing transit -- for instance, they tried dial-a-ride at one point and it didn't really work. The real problem is that Dallas simply doesn't have the kind of density needed for an effective transit system. Their farebox recovery has been consistently poor and there really isn't much anyone can do about it. The 40' bus is just far too big for many parts of Dallas, and even if you swapped them for smaller buses it is still very hard to provide effective fixed-route transit.
See Carolyn Konheim et al, "Effective Transit Requires Walkable Communities", Transportation Research Record 1722, Paper 00-1064.
AEM7
Well your right about the 40 foot buses. For instance, the route I rode back and forth from school (56> 156> now 516) would suffer constantly with ridership. So to fix it DART replaced some 40 foot RTS II's with Neoplan AN 660's. Then they took the 60 footers back and took away Saturday service. Next they added Saturday service but only one bus would run all day. Then when the rail line opened up they reduced service from 15 minuets during rush hour to 22 minuets. Finally they said screw it and now the route just runs to the rail station at Tyler Vernon. The only reason that route is still around is because the people along Rugged Dr. (the routes main road) caused a stink about it. But from what I've been reading the 40 footers on most routes in suburban Dallas are on their way out. The already have theses 30 or 35 foot Ibuses running on some routes. Dallas has done very well with the light rail and commuter rail expansions but they have severely neglected their bus routes.
Here's one for you all:
I had to scan it and look at it large to see where it was. Take a look.
Stillwell Avenue.
That's what I thought too, at first. But nope!
Dave - Definitely Stillwell Ave. looking north from Surf Ave. The train above is at the West End line platform (on what is now track 8, but the picture probably dates from the days when they were still using letters for the tracks, so it would be track H). The stairway down from the platform and the stringers are what I remember from that platform back in the days before it was lengthened to accommodate 600' long trains. You can see the Stillwell Ave. bridge over Coney Island creek in the background, and the back end of a bus going into the bus turnaround opposite Mermaid Ave. under the elevated structure (Norton's Point bus route, which ran down Mermaid Ave and replaced the trolleys which ran on a private right of way and up a ramp to a terminal at subway track level unitl 1948).
Judging from the cars, I'd say around 1958 or 59.
-- Ed Sachs
Judging from the BMT standards visible, it has to be at the very least an elevated subway station. Looks a lot like Stillwell Ave. to me, too.
It does look like Stilwell Avenue/Coney Island. In the background you can see the Belt Parkway viaduct over the Stillwell Avenue bridge. And you can see a small piece of the Neptune Avenue gas tanks in the top of the photo.
Gas tanks.. Eesh! I called them 'water boilers'.
Thanks folks! :)
The correct term is gas holders. Years ago. gas was produced for heating and lighting by heating coal in a vacuum and storing the gas in special tanks that had the unique feature of variable capacity. the entire tank was enclosed in a steel framework and the top of the tank could be raised and lowered within that framework, thus changing the capacity of the tank.
The late Elmhurst tanks were explained as not gas storage, per se, as much as pressure regulators. The gas comes in via pipeline, but the temporary storage in the tanks means that, at times of high use, pressure can be maintained by running down the tanks, rather depending on the pipeline pressure alone.
Did I make sense there? Water tanks are often used for the same purpose.
I miss the Elmhurst tanks. They were quite a feature on the landscape.
I miss the Elmhurst tanks. They were quite a feature on the landscape.
Blight, I believe, would be a better adjective to use. I'm glad they tore those things down and removed the Greenpoint tanks as well. The Elmhurst tanks were pretty close to the border of Maspeth, and I recall hearing them referred to as the Maspeth tanks as well.
For aircraft approaching LaGuardia, there's a very famous approach called the "Expressway Visual" to runway 31, which essentially has aircraft fly north-ish over the BQE, east at the Greenpoint tanks, over the LIE, and make a big circle to the left over Corona Park and land on rwy 31. Well, for years (and even after the tanks came down), the approach plates for that procedure incorrectly called them the Maspeth tanks. I even wrote to the FAA to mention this oversight once, but never heard back from them. There's now a fairly complex notam in place explaing not-all-that-clearly what to do and where to turn :)
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3.2 NOW AVAILABLE!
Don't hold your breath over the notam....Paris was correct in discontinuing overflights since the end of the Western European/Axis Power/Soviet Confligration of the Second World War. Oops...I forgot to mention that the United States was sucked into the confligration to bail out all participants. So I'm driving to work, notice the Weeks barge picking up Redbirds for 'reefing,' look up into the sky and there I see the Hydrogen suspended Diragible HINDENBERGH. Gas is good, flatulence MAKES TRAINS GO. CI Peter
Dave, this seems like the ultimate trick question. I can even see the Stillwell Avenue highway bridge in the background.
Where do you think it is?
I was thinking it was Queensborough Plaza before they ripped down the north side. Maybe I was wrong.
Ah.
No, it couldn't be QP anyway, because all four tracks were two levels.
Yeah, as soon as I posted my theory I realized that very fact. Oh well. I never saw a photo of Stillwell Ave. with that trackway in place before that one.
If you mean the abandoned trackway, I think it is still there but obscured by platform extension and walkways.
Where was that trackway supposed to go again? Thanks.
Connected to the Lower Level Culver/Brighton tracks heading toward West 8th.
Ok, thanks. That what I had thought all the while but I was confused when someone else mentioned that they went down to the street or something (trolley?) Any idea when the were ripped out? Was 7 track a thru track also or did that always end in a block? Thanks.
I know very little for certain about the track pattern as to when it was connected, if ever. My understanding was that G track (7) was connected but H not. Or maybe H but not G. If its was ever connected it went very early.
If people wete talking about trolley tracks, that was the Norton's Point Line, whose structure continued right over Stillwell Avenue on the same level as the Culver tracks. It's purpose was to enable Culver trains to continue running to Norton's Point after the connection, but they decided not to do this and the elevated trains were replaced with trolleys.
I rewrote my last post a little to make it a little clearer.
I know very little for certain about the track pattern as to when it was connected, if ever. My understanding was that G track (7) was connected but H not. Or maybe H but not G. If its was ever connected it went very early.
My impression was that there was a connection, but it's only my impression.
If people were talking about trolley tracks, that was the Norton's Point Line, whose structure continued right over Stillwell Avenue on the same level as the Culver tracks. It's purpose was to enable Culver trains to continue running to Norton's Point after the completion of the elevation of the former surface lines and completion of Stillwell terminal (or "New West End Terminal," as it was also called). While the terminal was under construction they decided not to do this and the elevated trains between Stillwell adn Sea Gate (Norton's Point) were replaced with trolleys, which were succeeded by the current Mermaid Avenue bus.
I read your post and I was very intrigued by what you wrote so I decided to do some research. From my finds and by what you wrote I am going to assume that.....
the Culver line was proposed to go through here underneath the tower. Having decided to use trolleys from this point, the beginning of the Norton's Point trolley terminal was here as viewed from the street.....
Norton's Point connection
above Stillwell Ave. with two tracks and room and canopies on the sides. Iron work looks like that of a typical BRT/BMT elevated station.
Stillwell Terminal
Very strange that in the street connection picture it appears that the pedestrian walkway coming from 8/H track Stillwell terminal is built over railroad ties suggesting that there was a phsyical connection there at one time between the West End and the Culver. It is said on this site that there was a connection from 7/G track to the Culver and not from 8/H track. I think I will still wonder about the block end of 8/H track and the way the steel work was built suggesting a connection to the Culver as seen from the picure in the original post of this thread. Here is another picture of Stillwell terminal after it was completed with what appears to be another walkway toward the trolleys. Left side of the postcard. Very different looking.
This Site
Continuing with the trolley, I gather that when it left the terminal it now descended a ramp to ground level .....
Down the Ramp
and proceeded on a private right of way between Mermaid and Surf to 37 St.
Any corrections welcome. Thanks for the info, Paul.
What you wrote essentially summarizes my understanding of the situation. I'll make a few small clarifications.
First, I will correct myself. Track G (7) was connected to the Culver/Brighton lower level. The connection probably lasted very late, 1950 or so, but almost certainly no later than 1954, when the Culver went IND. The only thing in dispute is whether Track H was ever connected. But it is certain the structure to connect it was there if they wanted it.
Also, the elevated trains went into Sea Gate, to end at Norton's Point. I'm not sure when service was cut back to W37th Street.
Note again in this picture, that the rooms underneath the tower are an obvious later addition, and that the connections for the girders to carry two tracks over Stillwell Avenue are still clearly visible.
When was Sea Gate enclosed?
Before the elevated service ended. That is, earlier than October 1919.
The name "Norton's Point" long survived the conversion to private community Sea Gate, and long long after the end of (I believe his name was) "Thunderbolt" Mike Norton.
Signs in Stillwell still pointed you to "Norton's Point Buses" at least into the '60s.
Thanks, Paul
Anything to advance interest in transit history, and help a fellow Subtalker. :)
That pic show the former tower occupied. It has been abandoned in the past few weeks. It will remain during and after the Stillwell reconstruction, but the downstairs "addition" will be removed, returning the original "look" of the tower. I was told the Signal Dept occupied that building last.
Bill "Newkirk"
The 'water-boiler' looking object to the right of the
overpass was the giveaway.... that same 'boiler'
can be seen in any other Stillwell Ave photo on
this site... primarily with the r27/r30 class.
So.... what's the prize, Dave?
It has to be the West End at Stillwell. If you look at the pix of the B on the Stillwell page, you can see the sharp turn into the track and the low buildings that are consistent with the pic. AFAIK, that's the only place in the system where such a turn into an island platform with a bumper on an el capable of running Standards could exist/have ever existed. The tank is another clue. Another is if you look to the right of the tank, you can also make out the point of what must be the Culver canopy. And, if you brighten the picture, give a good look underneath the structure at street level.
Polo Grounds
Lookit the VW micro-bus.... so ok, the '60s and a BMT Standard, so Probably Brooklyn, thous it might be Astoria..... Nah... the curve aint right for there.
Might be Coney Island,
Or it might be out at Broadway Junction.
Coult also be out at the end of the old Jamaica.
Now lets look at the other answers....
Elias
I havent read all the message responses yet so I dont know if anyone noted the correct location
IT IS the Stillwell Terminal of the west End line ---looking NORTH from the Boardwalk end of the terminal --the Westerly track is shown. LOOK AT GRELLERS BOOK - SUBWAY CARS OF THE BMT ---page 30, lower right ---an overhead track level view of the SAME location showing remains of the original thru-track on the structure skeleton in YOUR photo ---and an extended wooden passageway built over on on that dis-used track structure to the BMT Head House terminal is seen in THAT picture ---with a BMT standard on the track in the same locale. The track level shot --showing a BRT trolley on street level (deck Roof BRT car at lower left) looks like a 1930 to 1940's era view in the Greller Book photo by old friend Ed B. Watson. Both your and this photo are the SAME location.
Regards - Joe
TO DAVE ---and Paul Matus
Well, Dave P or Paul (Mr. BMT) M, any questions of authenticityy on my placement of the Stillwell Photo ? I Noted no more posting-query about it.
Do I recall seing a posted answer of " Polo Grounds "?? - with BMT Standards ??--ummm, aaaahhhh
The ONLY steel cars on the Polo Grounds "IRT" line were Hi-V and Low-V units in shuttle service from respectively 1950-54 and 1954 thru mid 1958. Standards couldnt fit thru the narrow Sedwich tunnel and would have greatly modified the wood-planking platform edges on the line, including Jerome Ave Line El stations...
Hey----- Paul, (I MUST remember to keep both THOSE 2 words fairly separated on here) --remember (heh) when you related to me the time you and I were on the Brighton line in (you said it was 1907, I said 1903) long ago, and you stepped off the BU gate car steps at night on our way home --and fell, rolled down the new embankment because (heh heh) you forgot (heh heh) --
that we weren't riding the train on the "street level" like we last did in the end of the Brighton Steam era !!
BTW, did you ever salvage that nice Straw Hat and Ascot in the roll down the embankment. I couldnt help you 'cause the electric BU El train started pulling out fairly fast.
Fond Memories (heh heh) over coffee at Harrys Place!!
Regards Dave and Paul ---Joe
HeyJoe (am I inventing a new subtalker?)--
Yeah, the fact it was at Stillwell has long since been established, but the thread kept rolling as people often don't read all the posts.
BMT Standards on the Polo Grounds shuttle is rather a novel idea. Now that was a line! We all miss abandoned lines, but some are more missable (?) than others. A lot of interest in a few stations!
I miss the Myrt, but the surviving part north of Broadway is much more interesting than B-J to Broadway. The really interesting part--before my time! ;( began south of B-J.
Similarly, the abandoned part of Jamaica was not a thrill-a-minute, though others may disagree.
The Franklin Shuttle would have been a huge loss, though I miss old Franklin Avenue station.
P.S. I didn't get my bowler or ascot back. Some dang kids ran off flying them at the ends of the sticks they were using for hoop rolling.
I miss the Myrt, but the surviving part north of Broadway is much more interesting than B-J to Broadway. The really interesting part--before my time! ;( began south of B-J.
Similarly, the abandoned part of Jamaica was not a thrill-a-minute, though others may disagree.
Perhaps, because you've ridden these now gone sections. I've never ridden the 3rd Ave el, Lower Myrtle and I only have vague childhood recollections of riding J trains east of Queens Blvd.
I hear you. I'm just saying that some abandoned lines would not be especially interesting if they were still around, but others were super.
The one I really wish I got a chance to ride would be the lower Myrtle line. It just seemed like such a cool line. Although if it did survive, it would probably look a lot different today than it did when they abandoned. Gone would be all the woodened platforms, and old stations. The closest comaparision to what the lower Myrtle would look like today would be like stations like Van Sicklen, Norwood, etc on the J.
It would NOT look like it did in 1969, although would still be a cool el. Either they would have had to totally rebuild/strengthen the old el, or lighter cars would be running there, but either way, the stations and the whole feel of the line would have been a more modern appearance than the memories people have, or the photos that survive show.
Chris
The Myrtle L did not look like itself to the end. By the early '60s they had "renovated" the station houses in the ugliest possible way. The coal stoves were gone for electric heaters. The stained glass windows were pulled and the stations "resided" in painted plywood or something like. Ugly, ugly, ugly. Of course, the BUs were gone in favor of the mess they made of the Qs.
Most interesting things in the last section of the old Myrt, from a railfan point of view, were Broadway station, the fact that you could still see the connections for the Lex, 5th Avenue, and even Park Avenue (!) and the bridge over Flatbush Avenue extension. The view of Fort Greene Park was nice too, even though, in that era, noone was in the park. Noone who wanted to be sure of living anyway.
What amazes me is that the Broadway station looked intact right into the mid to late 1980's. I was just about old enough in the mid 80's to explore the subway on my own, and remember looking uo at the Broadway station about 1985 from the Myrtle Platform, and the signs were still there. They said BROADWAY with (MYRTLE AVE) in a little smaller letters and (). It still looked like a station, and a few stairways leading up to it.
There was also a great "overpass" between the two in use Myrtle platforms and an addition closed off connection to the station with woodened floor decking from the overpass as well. It was fun to stand up there and watch the J and M come in from the air. That lasted until the early 90's I believe.
It's amazing that that remnant of the Myrtle El at Broadway station lasted almost 20 years after abandoning the line. I was sort of sad when they closed in the platform up above in the late 80's or early 90's.
Yup, there were even tracks all the way to Lewis Ave. until recently. When I first discovered that station (1985ish), it looked, from the lower level, like it had been in use only the day before.
That's what amazed me about it. (I also discovered that station about 1985 when I was in high school) I knew nothing of the story of the Myrtle Ave El back then and didn't realize it was abandoned that long, as it did look like the trains could still roll through. The tracks went all the way down to where the M line started it's turn onto Broadway, although the switches were out already I believe.
Here's some photos of the old station. I have seen some better ones with a view of the old signs still up, but couldn't find them after a quick search.
The R42 with it's old stripe there, almost looks like the R46's! And even a bit like the LIRR M1's
Incidentally, I couldn't believe that the building to the right was already abandoned in the 60's (I've seen photos of the Myrtle el cars riding by, and all the windows are blown out. I remember standing there looking at it with doors closing boarding the windows up for as long as I can remember. They actually started to fix it up recently and for the first time in maybe about 50 years it has windows!
I meant the "building on the left" in the text at the bottom of my previous post.
>>> Here's some photos of the old station. <<<
This one is my favorite, although it shows more of the lower station and the connecting stairways than the upper station.
Tom
Ah yes, that is a nice one. Just above the middle track and slightly below the Myrtle El tracks, you can see that old woodened walkway overpass connecting the two in use platforms and the Myrtle El station I was talking about earlier in the thread. It lasted into the early 90's and you could get a good view of the abandoned station from that overpass.
Were those lamp posts actually painted orange, or is that a "primer" on them?
Lol, yeah, that's a pretty bad color combination. It seems silly that they would do the primer like that - each lamp is at the same point in it's "paintjob" - but anything's possible. Maybe it was a poor variation of this lampost scheme at Seneca Ave on the M? At least the one at Seneca doesn't look like primer!
Those lamp posts are attractive, that is a more pleasing two tone paint scheme!
You know what's also funny about some of the paint-jobs they used to do at stations? In the photo of Seneca Ave in the above post, notice how there are at least four different colors in that station visable (there may have been more in the parts of the station not showing) Some of the colors don't even seem to match! The lamp posts are blue and white, the top of the canopy is green and the supports seem to be silver! Who knows what color the doors, windows, and walls of the station were to add to that list!
In the photo of Seneca Ave in the above post, notice how there are at least four different colors in that station visable (there may have been more in the parts of the station not showing) Some of the colors don't even seem to match! The lamp posts are blue and white, the top of the canopy is green and the supports seem to be silver!
It created a nice effect, though. A single-color or even two-color scheme would've been less interesting.
For the longest time I have wanted to get hold of an old BMT map from the 40's or 50's in which all 16 routes are mapped out and their numbers given along the route. If any maps exist I would like to know and would be willing to buy one if possible. For a BMT fan like I am, aside from about five of the lines I am completely ignorant of the others. Anyone able to help me out?
For a BMT fan like I am, aside from about five of the lines I am completely ignorant of the others.
Do you mean you don't know the routings? If so, this might help...
1 - Astoria - Broadway (usu Loc) - Brighton (usu Loc)
2 - QBP or Astoria (until 1961), Queens Loc (1961-1964) - Broadway Loc - 4th Av Loc
3 - 57th St - Broadway Exp - West End
3 - Nassau St Loop - West End
4 - 57th St - Broadway Exp - Sea Beach (the best line in the system!)
5 - Park Row - 5th Av - Culver
5 - Nassau St Loop - Culver
6 - Park Row - 5th Av - 3rd Av
7 - Fulton/Franklin - Prospect Park and any longer workings including that section
8 - QBP - Astoria
9 - QBP - Flushing
10 - Metropolitan - Nassau St (the 2nd best line in the system!)
11 - Metropolitan - Park Row
12 - Lexington Av (Brooklyn)
13 - Fulton St and Fulton St Peak Dir Exp
13 - 14th St - Fulton St - Lefferts
14 - Broadway (Brooklyn) Loc (some to Jamaica, some to Canarsie)
15 - Broadway (Brooklyn) Loc - Jamaica (Express, or skip-stop with 14)
16 - 14th St - Canarsie
17 - not used in practice
Of course, numbers 1-9 were eliminated or replaced by letters quite some time before 10-16, so there was a time when the BMT number system actually followed on from the IRT numbers.
You need the 30's. None of the maps keyed numbers along the routes, but they had detailed service descriptions. The ERA reprinted the 1939 map, but it's also out of print (I think) and you might end up paying an "original" price for a reproduction. They (original and copy) show up on eBay from time to time.
Also see, from bmt-lines.com:
1939 service guide
and from right here:
1939 map
Are there any differences between the two maps, BMT 39 original and copy?
I've never been able to compare the two, so I don't know.
I don't think that orange. I doubt it's primer either. I think it's a kind of faded rust red, maybe also modified by the photo developing.
>>> maybe also modified by the photo developing. <<<
Not so much the developing as the aging of the photograph. All the colors seem to be "washed out," which is typical of most 40-50 year old color photos or slides.
Tom
I don't think those are primer, a number of stations on the Jamaica el had sheds and lamps painted that shade of (light) red.
The platform lamps were removed in the 80s and then new ones were installed about 5 years ago. The new ones are the same as the old ones except they're a little taller and have sodium lamps. You'd think they'd put them in at Broadway Jct (J) - but NO, the damned goosenecks...
wayne
That "Metropolitan Avenue" sign on that R-27/30 looks as though it was borrowed from an R-16. Look at this pic:
That does look like the same rollsign.
For all we know, those curtains might have ended up in R1/9's as well. I've heard many argue that "Brighton Bch" wasn't on many of them, but I know what I rolled to and saw it "backwards" from inside the dropped hatch on many a train I ran. Hell, some of them actually spelled out "BEACH" here and there. One big happy Starfleet. :)
They probably borrowed the Brighton Beach signs from R-32 destination roller curtains when those cars received the multicolored route signs. I wonder if any of those particular R-1/9 curtains were saved. Mine have the usual IND terminals with nothing unusual.
I have NO idea of how or where. Frankly, didn't care. The rule was "look for it, if it's there, show it - if it's not, roll the beast to the end and charge up." Heh. It just wasn't one of those things you thought about. A *lot* of roll signs had thread in them where they clearly stitched stuff in, others that had BB on them DIDN'T appear to be stitched ... you just cranked them, hoped the gears worked (turning the rolls by hand SUCKED) and there you were. Often they'd already be set - towards the end, put-ins of R1/9's made their appearance day after day after day on the same line, defect sheets and bad order tags completely ignored. :)
This pig burned you yesterday, and today ... charge it up, no problem found. IT'S BAAAAAAAAAACK! By the time you got it to 34 Street, it would be dragging a car again and wouldn't take power anymore. Same old, same old. But often the signs didn't NEED to be changed since that puppy would get laid up as what it was and like FrankenValve, it'd be back doing it again the next day. CC's would sleep at Concourse, D's would go back to Coney ... like sands through the hourglass, so were the days of R9's. Heh.
But a good number of the D's DID have Brighton up front on the south motor. Many of them were tagged as EE, GG, HH or CC in the middle though. We didn't care about the stupid signs (no offense) ... not laying down on the railroad was what we REALLY worried about. Calling for the ball pein squad and getting "did you check this? Did you cut this out? Did you smack this valve?" before they gave it last rites and towed it out ... only to show up again the next morning. :)
Your account of different signs in the middle of a train reminds me of the very last A train of R-10s I rode on back in 1979 or 1980. The north and south motors had obligatory A signs; however the other eight cars had CC signs. They must have taken an 8-car CC train and slapped an additional car onto each end. Needless to say I was tickled to death when this train pulled into 59th St. while waiting to take a CPW express joyride. It didn't disappoint me.
FWIW, both of my IND bulkhead destination curtains have numerous splices.
Back in the mid '50s, before new car purchases began to really mess up the pre-war systems, you had a short list of lines you could be on if you saw the car type, or vice versa. Seeing or riding anything other than the following was a treat and a photography moment:
R10 - IND A Line
R1/9 Everywhere else IND
BMT Triplexes - Brighton Express, Sea Beach Express (part)
BMT SIRT Cars - Culver Line
BMT BU Convertibles - Myrtle L
BMT Multis - Myrtle-Chambers (almost all)
BMT R16s - Jamaica Line, Broadway Short Line (few), Myrtle-Chambers (rare), Canarsie (one or two, sometimes)
BMT Standards - eveywhere else
IRT R12, R14, R15 - Flushing Line
IRT R17, R21, R22 - 1 and 6
IRT Lo-V, Steinway, Flivver - 2,3,4,5, 3rd Ave. el stub
I'm not sure if there was another time in the post WW-II era where what you rode was where you were, if you know what I mean.
I look with nostalgia at the wooden station platform and protective backs you could actually look out over to see the street, not corrugated metal sheets that block the view. [Sigh]
The outer part of the platforms at Marcy Ave are still low enought to look over. And it looks like they're putting in new sections that let you look through (N/E S/B Marcy Ave).
Speaking of which, anyone know why those new sections have handrails on them? (Again, N/E of the S/B plat). They're black gate like sections with silver handrails like on the staircases.
the lower Myrtle line. It just seemed like such a cool line. Although if it did survive, it would probably look a lot different today than it did when they abandoned.
Yes, I rode on that one. I remember the cars and the platforms. I was sure that I found the OLDEST cars still running on the system.
The new cars for that line (The R-39s) were on the drawingboard when the plug was pulled on that line. They would have served on the 3rd Ave. el too, making them the only cars that would have been ordered for both A and B divisions.
FIVE WHACKS WITH A LEATHER THONG ON THE ONE WHO ORDERED THEIR DESTRUCTION!
Elias
The really sad thing is that the TA was figuring they had to go keep those lines running, but the political culture of the time was so directed to other things (it was the '60s, war, poverty, riots) and there was so little constituency with a real transit focus, that it dawned on the TA that they could dump the lines entirely.
"Way cool," the TA said (or would have said, if that expression existed at the time) "we can get rid of two branch lines that are a pain to maintain, AND we don't have to worry about maintaining another class of equipment. It doesn't get better than this!"
An interesting side note is that, if the R39s had been built, it would have been the only time a common piece of passenger equipment was ever purchased to run on both "A" and "B" divisions or their predcessors.
How would the R39's have handled the northern part of the M line, where it had to share the line with the regular BMT sized equipment? I know the old el cars had little extenders to deal with that problem as they were also IRT/Old BMT el dimensions.
Also were the clearences also narrower on the Myrtle el, or could they have simpley "shaved" off the platforms (like on the Astoria line) if the had the lightweight R39's built to "normal" BMT standards?
I guess the same question goes fot the 3rd Ave el, if it wasn't intermingling of the other IRT lines.
>>> I guess the same question goes fot the 3rd Ave el, if it wasn't intermingling of the other IRT lines. <<<
The 3rd Avenue El did mingle with the IRT White Plains line above Gun Hill Road, and had to go over IRT tracks to get to any yard. Cutting back its own station platforms would not have by itself allowed wider cars.
Tom
>>> I guess the same question goes fot the 3rd Ave el, if it wasn't intermingling of the other IRT lines. <<<
The 3rd Avenue El did mingle with the IRT White Plains line above Gun Hill Road, and had to go over IRT tracks to get to any yard. Cutting back its own station platforms would not have by itself allowed wider cars.
Tom
That's what I wanted to know, so obviously they had to keep the cars to IRT/Old BMT sized cars. The Myrtle line may have been easier to do this with (again I don't know about clearances other than the stations) as it didn't have the problem of IRT clearences outside of it's own line. However, the cars had to be lighter to operate on the old el, so they still have to be lighter. It obviously would have been cheaper to buy only one set of lightweight cars for both the Myrtle and the 3 Ave els instead of a standard IND/BMT sized car and a IRT/Old BMT el sixed car, so I assume the Myrtle would have retained it's narrower sized cars.
R39s would have been IRT sized cars. apparently it was not possible to use wider cars on the Myrtle without major structural work, unlike on Fulton (different structure built by a different company) where the issue was mainly shaving platforms and moving wayside furniture.
I don't know how they planned to handle upper Myrtle. They probably would've used extenders again. It was OK on the Qs, so it should have been OK on the R38s. I don't more if that would pass legal muster in these litigious times, if anyone got hurt.
Put a different way, I never heard they had an exotic way of dealing with the issue, like mechanical gap fillers.
Aside from gap fillers or mechanical gap fillers at the stations north of Broadway, it may have had to be sort of a shuttle between between Myrtle-Broadway and Jay Streets. Like you said, in these litigious times, it might not have been possible to run in revenue service north of Broadway at those stations the same way they did at the end of Myrtle service. (of course deadheading to Fresh Pond yard when they needed to would not have been a problem.) Not an ideal situation, but better than what we have now. It wouldn't have been the end of the world for the "north of Broadway" M riders to have to transfer and go upstairs, with Broadway-Myrtle being the terminal. J line riders would have had to do that anyway, so who cares if the "north of Broadway" M riders would have had to also. Just a thought...not ideal...but a lot better than no service to Bridge-Jay.
Knowing the thinking of the time, I doubt they would have opeated an elevated shuttle. You have to remember that the Myrtle from Metropolitan to Jay Street was the core service. What is now the M was rush-hour only. They would preferred not to operate the M full time (or even worse, two shuttles, yikes!), which they would considered redundant with the J Line, and increasing overall operating mileage. Especially not in 1969.
So I think that if they actually got the R39s they would have figured out a way to operate them end to end.
Hi Paul,
You say that the new light weight (R39) cars were on the drawing board when the line was slated for abandonment. I remember reading the article and seeing an artist's rendition of the new cars in the Brooklyn Eagle when I was a teenager. I only wish I had that copy today. Just one question: To your knowledge did the TA ever contemplate using R12/R14 IRT cars prior to deciding to have new cars (R39) built. I also heard that tests were made with a set of R12/R14 cars with the dynamic brake circuit disabled due to the fragile condition of Myrtle Ave. lower. Any information appreciated.
Best wishes,
Bob
You say that the new light weight (R39) cars were on the drawing board when the line was slated for abandonment.
Someone else used the term "on the drawing board." It was included in the Capital Plan and information released to the press. So I suppose there were renderings. I have no idea if it actually got to the contract drawing stage.
I remember reading the article and seeing an artist's rendition of the new cars in the Brooklyn Eagle when I was a teenager.
Most have been one of several papers (there's one now) that appropriated the Brooklyn Eagle name but had no connection to the original paper, which closed in 1955.
Just one question: To your knowledge did the TA ever contemplate using R12/R14 IRT cars prior to deciding to have new cars (R39) built. I also heard that tests were made with a set of R12/R14 cars with the dynamic brake circuit disabled due to the fragile condition of Myrtle Ave. lower. Any information appreciated.
I never heard that. Maybe someone else knows more.
The new cars for that line (The R-39s) were on the drawingboard when the plug was pulled on that line. They would have served on the 3rd Ave. el too, making them the only cars that would have been ordered for both A and B divisions.
I never knew that. How depressing! It's a shame they didn't go through with it. If the el would have lasted only a few more years, it may have survived to today.
>>> If the el would have lasted only a few more years, it may have survived to today. <<<
Not the 3rd Avenue El in Manhattan. It would have tumbled into a pile of rust by now. Even in the early ‘50s, when a train stopped in a station you could feel the station move a bit. It was a fun ride, but somewhat disconcerting.
Tom
Remember watching Dean Street Station on the Franklin Avenue Shuttle do a little dance, that one was scary
Anything like the Jamaica EL between ENY and Cypress Hills?
[Was the rickety state of the 3rd Avenue el in the bronx] Anything like the Jamaica EL between ENY and Cypress Hills?
I'd say not as bad when the Old Main Line was at its worst. They could have held the 3rd together indefinitely the same way, if they wanted to, with steel and chewing gum.
>>> Anything like the Jamaica EL between ENY and Cypress Hills? <<<
I really do not know. Although I regularly boarded trains on the 3rd Avenue El, so was standing in the station when the train stopped, I was generally a rail fan traveling on the other els and did not get off the train at any station (except Stillwell). It was hard to judge how much structure moved while on the train.
Tom
Actually even the dual contract els shake quite a bit when a train is coming. I used to use the Forest Ave station on the M line, and if a train stopped at Seneca Ave, the whole structure would move. You always would know if a train was coming soon.
Not the 3rd Avenue El in Manhattan. It would have tumbled into a pile of rust by now. Even in the early ‘50s, when a train stopped in a station you could feel the station move a bit. It was a fun ride, but somewhat disconcerting.
Tom: That reminds me of the old 125 Street Pier used by the Day Line boats. The pier was in a ramshackle condition by the late 1950's. It was an even money bet that if the crew forgot to cast off one of the lines the boat would probably drag the pier up to Bear Mountain.
Larry,RedbirdR33
When did they move to Pier 81? The TV spots for the Dayliner in the late 60s mentioned it was at the foot of W. 41st St.
Go to Elder Ave (Pelham Line), Pelham Bay Park-bound platform, at the 10 car marker.
Easily a 5.5 on the Richter Scale.
--Mark
Kind of like that Triplex collision in 1955.
HEY---"Hello" Paul
New sub talker ---moi? --I use to be here a while ago you know --- and moved on (you know to where & what)...
Yeah---the Park Row to Sands Street Complex --to Bridge Street Myrtle station section was before our time - just barely for me ---but have plenty of 5x7 photos of that complex in operation and abandoned.
Now THAT was one busy, "h-EL-l" of an involved complex...can you imagine Flourescent lit aluminum R-type toasters whining and squealing around those twin upper-level Myrtle turn around loops at Sands Street today --- or running across the Bklyn Bridge.
What short sighted people our "parents's tax dollars at work" paid politicians were back then...and what is Cadman Plaza today ---on my last look 8 years ago, a plaza park with benches, trees, littered with trash, and tons more of auto-emission polution coming off the BB into it...and no rapid transit to the bridge or the riverfront areas. Oh, yeah, we all use cars today, I forgot...." GO THE AUTO COACH WAY " - variation of an old "5th Ave Coach Company" busses roof-side --(MOTOR Coach) slogan ---remember?
I have an IRT Contract-plan-drawing S-12272 dated 9-18-1928 - showing a plan for the IRT to replace Manhattan Railway Co. wood el cars with a lightweight steel el car designed somewhat loosely on what later was to be the IRT 1939 Worlds Fair Car body but with a clerestory standard sloping-ends (railroad style) roof. These cars showed maximum traction trucks identical in dimensions to the then ex-subway wood-steel composite cars used on the Manhattan els. This 1928 planned class of cars was - of course, never built...which saved the IRT wood el cars' existence til the mid 1950's
Glad to see you came out OK after all these years from the Brighton tumble in (you said) 1907
-the hell with the straw hat and ascot--at this point - out of style now anyway !
Regards ------Joe
Yup, Joe, (or HeyJoe, or ... oh, never mind!),
There's some great stuff that'll never be seen again. And, as you pointed out, the IRT and BMT had plans that never got much past the drawing stage, just like the lamented IND Second System.
As to the Ascot and hat, I guess I should just let it go, but think what I could get for them now on eBay. They were originals!
Looks like Stillwell and Mermaid to me
www.forgotten-ny.com
I have seen the flyer for this excursion, and notice that Steeplecab 6 will be pulling the D types on this trip.
I assume that the D's can still run under their own power, and was wondering if their being towed all around the system could be detrimental to their traction motors or wheels.
Will they still be able to draw power for lights and fans?
The D's can still run under their own power. I think the plan would be for the Loco 6 to run one way, and the Ds to run the other way.
As for questions about lighting and fan power, all of that will be running as long as the cars aren't off the 3rd Rail.
This type of excursion is not new, but it hasn't been done in decades. There's a picture in the book called Gotham Turnstiles which shows Steeple Cab #6 and the D Types on the ENY Flyover.
-Stef
Stef,
If I understand this correctly, you're thinking that the steeple cab will be pulling the D's in one direction, and the D's will pull the steeple cab in the other.
Thanks for the help!
Right!
-Stef
Karl: Stef is right. This kind of a fantrip has been run a few times previuosly and the Steeplecab gets something of a rest while the D-Types do the work.
Best Wishes,Larry,RedbirdR33
This question - whether towing an operational car is potentially damaging - is more interesting than it sounds. I would encourage someone who actually knows what they're talking about to chime in, but here's my impression.
On four-motor cars (or locomotives) where the motors have been cut out, towing the car needs to be done in the direction that the motors are set. If you have the reverser set in one direction and are towing the car in the opposite direction, you create a feedback circuit in the car. Essentially, as I understand it, the motion of the car turns the motors and creates an electrical current. The manifestation of this is that one or more axles on the car will begin to turn backwards, a phenomenon which is obviously undesirable. I've witnessed this happen, I'm just not sure about the electrical principles.
I'm sure that this could potentially be a problem for #6, but I don't know how the motors on the Triplexes are set up so I'm not sure whether that would be an issue. On two-motor cars, feedback circuits like this do not occur (again, I'm hazy on the electrical principles behind this). If the motor trucks on Triplexes are divided into separate two-motor circuits, it wouldn't be a problem.
The way to prevent this is to cut out the motors and make sure the reverser is thrown in the direction the car is going. For "dead" cars, the way to do this is to manually throw the reverser - a very bad idea for a car that is on third-rail and is receiving current! At IRM, though, I've worked on cars in which the reverser only throws when you take the first point of power - hard to do when you've got the motors cut out.
Note that I got the scantily factual observations cited above at a museum, and not on equipment from the NY subway. Someone who knows what they're talking about (and, if possible, what I'm talking about!), please clarify - I'm interested in any insight into this.
Frank Hicks
Take the brushes out of the motors.
"Take the brushes out of the motors."
That works too, but isn't very handy if each car will be alternately motoring and being pulled as a trailer during the course of a trip.
Frank Hicks
It's not an issue with D-types since they are 2-motor equipment.
To be precise, each 3-section unit contains two motor and
two trailer trucks, each motor truck having 2 motors on it.
There are two GE PC-10 switch groups, one for each motor truck.
So, the dynamic loop does not exist and the cars can be merrily
towed around.
#6 is GE type M with, I'm pretty sure, 4 motors.
Of course, when towing a streetcar with a K controller, the
solution is simply to center the reverser, which causes
the motor pairs to be disconnected. On a PCC, pull the motor
cutout switches.
After a brutal hot day, severe thunderstorms roared through here, starting at 7pm and going till about 9:30pm. Lots of lightning bolts and wind. No power outahe here in Sea Cliff, but DSL service is down so I have to restrict my time online (modem, the ol'standby).
Lots of downed wires causing fires on the 25a corridor. Again, I'm pretty lucky to still have power.
On Newsradio 88, they said there is no LIRR service between Huntington and PJ, due to downed wires. What a wild night!
Lucky Thing I have Dial-Up Today, I gonna switch to AOL High Speed Broadband Cable Service. DSL is always affected during storms.
Always? Tsk tsk. Mine wasn't. And that was some wicked storm. I saw the Empire State Building take a few hits from my window.
I lost power for about 20 minutes. There were downed wires all over this island. It was a flip of the last transformer strike; across the road they had power, we didn't.
-Hank
On a transit related note, I heard on the B2 of AC power failures in the Rockaways, and Clinton Washington causing of suspensions of Fulton St Express service
While on the J (and taking a significant drenching trying to observe the platform), I saw many buildings in Brooklyn take hits, especially the clock tower on Atlantic Avenue, and I saw the Empire State take a few. It was impressive, and man was the rain comin' down!! (Note** this is the 4th time I took a drenching while working the J on Friday!!)
Hey Train Man Paul: I heard from a C/R on the Canarsie Line that Broadway Junction (the Elevated station complex) took a hit from a lightening bolt on Friday night's storm....did you hear anything about this?
I was on the expressway towards Manhattan a few times and have seen the Empire State (as well as the WTC) take lightning hits. The most recent one was a few weeks ago, when I saw the Empire State get hit. It would have made a great photo, as it was pretty spectacular.
Speaking of bad storms,last night we had one hear in Exton, Pa.
Our power flashed several times during the storm , but never went off.
Oddly enough, after the storm we lost it, for about 13 hours. I hate to open the windows and let all that humid air in, but we had no choice. Now, of course, it's back on and I can see what I missed
on Sub-Talk.
I think all around Philly was hit hard.
Chuck Greene
Verizon DSL has no problems. AOL BYOA is okay. That lightning lit up the whole block multiple times. Extremely bright. Knocked my Antenna out but DSL is okay. All is good. I can't imagine going back to dial-up.
I have Earthlink DSL - no problems at all during the storm. In fact it has been very reliable - the only time I had problems was for about 10 days or so immediately following 9/11. Earthlink DSL was down on the entire Northeast - but no problems at all since then.
Get Road Runner -- AOL SUX.
No, Im gonna get AOL, I like AOL services, they are more reliable to me. I have AOL Dial-Up Service Now, and my good brother has AOL High Speed Broadband Cable, and it is very good, I tried it already.
AOL and reliable are opposites
No, AOL has been very reliable for me, And I'm sticking with AOL all the way.
ok, but i have had some friends who have had serious problems with it
And I'm sticking with AOL all the way.
Oh Well.... AOL is not available out here.
The only connections available (broad band or otherwise are from the telephone cooperative) Heck, there is no place but Dickinson that we can call without incurring toll charges.
Heck, even Qwest has pulled out of this market.
BTW: My DSL connection costs about $100 a month. But since we have 14 computers using it the cost per node is around $7.00 a month, so that is not bad at all.
But then the phone company had only about 20 connections to the service in ourtwon, so you can see why the equipment costs must be spread over such a narrow customer base.
Elias
Where is this? Sounds like the place I just visited, Mooseonee and Moose Factory, Ontario, Only RR access, except By "winter road" when marsh freezes over, The train ride there is Awesome on their "polar bear express" the engines look like Fl-9s, They have an "internet" center, its open 1 hour a day with like 4 stations, talk about remote.
AOL DSL broadband has been very reliable for me as well. No problems in 6 months. Well, there was a problem once but that's because SW Bell was working on the lines so I can't blame AOL for that.
Cable Modems are faster than DSL, so I'm gonna stick wit the Broadband Cable, I also like the Instant Sign On.
Does it force you to run the AOL program to access the internet?
The thing I hated the worst about AOL is the forcible running of their program, which is a pretty bad interface.
The AOL program is bad because it's not compatible with some programs. A website that I use for work doesn't run well with aol. I don't have AOL, but some of the people I work with do, and they have a lot of problems when they do work from home online. I think they have to minimize the AOL interface, and open internet explorer, but since their connection is AOL they still have problems with it and accessing links, etc. That is one of the main reasons I didn't want to get AOL.
i cant access this site though aol this am. i am able to get though on the cable service
I use Internet Explorer sometimes, if a web page is not working with AOL. But AOL is reliable for me, I like the Buddy List to keep track of all my peeps and I like the E-mail.
It's interesting, but the Buddy List in the FREE AOL Instant Messenger has always been better than the AOL version. You can still talk with AOL people.
The buddy list isn't an MDI child, it's a taskbar level program, and so are all of the IM windows. You can press enter (no CTRL+ENTER) to send an IM, and getting an IM doesn't demaximize your web browser, it pops up on top.
AIM also lets you send files through IM and embed pictures and sound into IMs (assuming the other person agrees to this arrangement first).
I can't understand why AOL would give the better features to its non-paying customers and screw its paying customers.
I have to agree with you on that, I don't understand why AOL gives the non-paying customers better features on the buddy list, and then we have the krappy buddy list and we pay for it, I think I'm gonna e-mail them and ask them why are they doing this? Man, We are going wayyy of topic.
You can use AIM with AOL, just make sure you're signed on to AOL using a different screen name. Make sure you use your preferred screenname for AIM and the rest doesn't matter.
I can sign onto AOL with my Screen name and sign in with the same name with AIM.
But you will get all of your IMs in AOL, not via AIM.
Man, We are going wayyy of topic.
You can't get to far of track around here, because tracks are on topic!
: ) Elias
I can't understand why AOL would give the better features to its non-paying customers and screw its paying customers.
I cannot say for sure, because I simply do not know. But the problem with AOL is that they were the first (to open the internet to the public) in an age before browsers existed. The had to craft thier own protocols (keywords is one of these) to present content similar to today's webpages.
HTML and modern browsers grew up later (kinda like VHS overtaking Beta) and use standard TCP/IP protocols such as the AOL browsers do not. It if for this reason that many things, especially with java or Microsoft FrontPage extensions do not work well there.
If the AOL Messenger thing (And I won't use a product like that no matter what-- What a waste!) works better in a non AOL context then on their own because they are not working with a standard window or internet set of protocols or codes.
Interestinly, Europe and Asia have better TV sets than we do for the same reason, we built ours first, and then they built theirs after the technology was improved.
AOL is stuck makining things backward compatible with their olders stuff. Sooner or later they will have to ditch it. But maybe they will go bankrupt instead.
Elias
I cannot say for sure, because I simply do not know. But the problem with AOL is that they were the first (to open the internet to the public) in an age before browsers existed. The had to craft thier own protocols (keywords is one of these) to present content similar to today's webpages.
This is inaccurate. AOL did not offer internet access except via e-mail until 1994 or 1995. By that time, there were a number of direct ISPs offerring PPP access.
HTML and modern browsers grew up later (kinda like VHS overtaking Beta) and use standard TCP/IP protocols such as the AOL browsers do not. It if for this reason that many things, especially with java or Microsoft FrontPage extensions do not work well there.
The AOL browsers DO use standard TCP/IP protocol, otherwise they wouldn't be able to be on the internet at all. In fact, the built in AOL browser was an OCX control of Internet Explorer. I guess now they're switching over to Netscape, but AOL hasn't had its own browser in quite a while.
If the AOL Messenger thing (And I won't use a product like that no matter what-- What a waste!) works better in a non AOL context then on their own because they are not working with a standard window or internet set of protocols or codes.
This makes no sense. AIM connects to the same system that the internal IM/Buddy list system uses. They obviously had to provide a server to connect it to the internet. If there are features in the internet version, there is no reason why they can't make it available internally. There is also no reason why they can't write the external AIM so that it can be loaded as an MDI child of the AOL software. It works that way with IE, and now Netscape.
Actually they are making additional features (ie exchanging sounds, hitting enter to send a message, additional im sounds, making it easier to block im's, etc....) available in AOL 8.0. I have Earthlink DSL but also use AOL - BYOA, although I use AOL only for chats and certain other features - never the internet. I am currently beta testing version 8.0 - its pretty cool.
Actually they are making additional features (ie exchanging sounds, hitting enter to send a message, additional im sounds, making it easier to block im's, etc....) available in AOL 8.0. I have Earthlink DSL but also use AOL - BYOA, although I use AOL only for chats and certain other features - never the internet. I am currently beta testing version 8.0 - its pretty cool.
>>> But the problem with AOL is that they were the first (to open the internet to the public) in an age before browsers existed. The had to craft thier own protocols (keywords is one of these) to present content similar to today's webpages. <<<
Elias;
That is revisionist history. AOL was far from the first to open the internet to the public, if anything it was a johnny come lately.
AOL, like CompuServe and Prodigy, was a proprietary content provider, with phone lines leading to its own computers. CompuServe dated back to the days of CP/M, and 300 baud modems. AOL did not come on the scene until windows provided a graphical interface. It did a great job of marketing and brought many new computer users to the "on line" experience, and quickly passed the older more technical CompuServe.
When the internet started to become popular, AOL users were not connected to it, but several I knew thought dialing up to AOL was connecting with the internet. AOL finally became an IP when they saw a potential loss of their customer base to the internet. When they did interface with the internet, their implementation was woefully inadequate because they did not realize how many of their clients would want to surf the web rather than stay in AOL land. AOL ended up spending millions on new hardware to adequately connect their customer base to the internet. Their software was originally developed for their proprietary operation. The internet access software was an add on and not as efficient as software (browsers) specifically intended to connect directly from the user's computer to the internet.
Tom
The first AOL editions were for DOS, not windows.
-Harry
Over 1900 NYC Subway Photos
>>> The first AOL editions were for DOS, not windows. <<<
I stand corrected. I never used AOL, but I thought it was always a graphical interface, and the original Windows, 1.xx through 3.xx ran as an environment in DOS, coexisting with non-windows programs long before Windows 95 muscled in to take over the whole show.
Tom
AOL, like CompuServe and Prodigy, was a proprietary content provider, with phone lines leading to its own computers. CompuServe dated back to the days of CP/M, and 300 baud modems. AOL did not come on the scene until windows provided a graphical interface. It did a great job of marketing and brought many new computer users to the "on line" experience, and quickly passed the older more technical CompuServe.
Correct.... But were they not one of the first to offer web-page-like content with photos and all. Compuserve and Prodigy could not do that because jpg and gif had not been invented yet. In fact .gifs *are* compuserve graphics, but they were already on line with dial up content long before they invented these. And we will not try to explain what a .bmp file would have done on a 300 baud modem!
In those very old days, there were no web pages to look at anyway! The simplest hypertext markup language was all that could be done.
Sufice it to say that AOL tried to do its own thing its own way and was overtaken by events: other people doing things a better way.
Elias
Roadrunner and AOL are nearly the same thing, with RR you just don't get AOL's software. They're both owned by the same company.
-Hank
True, but straight IE runs and surfs a lot better than AOHell crap
I dont care AOL is the best internet in the world currently.
Your opinion.
Untrue of course, and unbiased tests on many levels have shown that.
DSL is always affected during storms.
Storms do not seem to affect our DSL.
And we get more storms than you do.
But then all of our telco sercice is underground; it is less than a mile to the switch, and then it is burried optic fiber.
Elias
So you go reset the whole system and its back in a few minutes or deal with dial up for a bit. You will still have your modem.
You may find this off-topic post funny:
Was at a LI Ducks game Friday, Quacker Jack, the mascot, ran inside as soon as the rain started & we never saw him again. The game was a wash out, as not one pitch ever occured, but my grandson annoyed everyone for a couple of hours with the quacker I bought him.
I happened to be railfanning the upper #1 line this past Friday evening with my camcorder, and after ducking into the Riverdale Diner for dinner just before the storm started, I ran back to the 238th St platform and videotaped a few #1 trains along with mother nature making sparks! Mother Nature won BIG TIME!
--Mark
Got that right! The lightning was springing everywhere!
Will you post those videos online or.... you can't? ;)
I'd love to see it. I had an early job the next day so I was sleeping and heard I missed one hell of a show.
See subject
And please don't say "it's an old fashioned traction motor that takes DC or low frequency AC that was installed on the GG-1". I want to know why the low frequency part is crucial, and how is it wound. Is it with the permanent magnets on the stator, or on the rotor, or both. And are the stator and rotor connected in series, and is this why it's called a series-wound motor? And if the two are connected in series, why is the "low frequency" part vital and what kind of commutator does it have?
AEM7
From what I've read the series connected motor has the greatest starting torque, greatest energy efficiency by weight and cost, and greatest durability out of all the types of electric motors. Thats why they still have to use them in autos and trucks for starter motors.
I can see what he's driving at though re: the "low frequency" question.
If you take the energy curve of an electric power system, the electrical system with the greatest mathematical "geometric area under the curve" is a pure DC system. If you form an equation in which the "Y" axis is the product of Voltage X Amperes (Voltage and Amperes being held constant), and the "X" axis is "Time"- a DC system "curve" will be a perfect Rectangle.
An AC system on the other hand, will produce a Sine curve. Its very clear that the area under a Sine Curve has to be much less than the area contained in a rectangle. To get around this "energy gap" inherent in all AC power systems, early engineers came up with the idea of using low frequency AC- because the area under a low frequency Sine curve is greater than the area under a high frequency Sine curve. Later on, Nicola Tesla realized that by using 3 AC alternators running 60 degrees out of phase with one another, the energy curve of a DC system could be approximated. The final advance in this arena was the minor modification of a 3-phase system into a 6-phase system by use of transformers. With the 6-phases operating 30 degrees apart, it came very, very close to a pure DC energy curve. All the rotary power converters used 6-phase AC input power.
The use of 60 cycle equipment lead to a great savings in capital costs- since the higher the operating frequency of the machine, the lower the purchase cost of the machine. A sixty cycle machine weighs less than a 25 cycle machine. Also by using 60 cycle power, the electric railroads could purchase their power needs commercially rather than maintain and operate steam turbine generator plants.
Although after the subway "brownout" the other day, they may have been better off keeping an independent power system after all.
bob d.
damn dude. you are a genius. i just learned something i've always wanted to know about electricity. thanks!
I'm glad you enjoyed it. This stuff is really very straight forward when you understand that in nature one "axis" will contain more than one "dimension"- and that the "dimensions" all interact.
The problem I always had, is most school teachers are not very strong in Geometry, and also have difficutly in explaining what a "dimension" or "plane" really is.
Bob d.
Bob, I feel I should point out a mathematical error in your
post. The amount of energy carried by a sine waveform does
not depend on frequency. There is a formula called Root
Mean Square (RMS) which gives the energy of the AC signal
referenced to a DC signal. Frequency is not in the formula.
Waveform shape is. What you're getting at is basically
ripple, but, that's not the real reason why low frequencies
such as 25 cy were chosen.
The frequency output of an AC generator is proportional to shaft
speed. Before the steam turbine was perfected, the generators
were driven by slow-moving stationary steam engines. Also, the
energy loss is greater with higher frequencies.
Which brings us back to AEM7's questions:
A series-wound DC motor is one in which the field and armature
windings are connected in series. This is in contrast to, e.g.
a shunt-wound motor where they are in parallel. In a series motor,
armature and field currents are the same (except of course when
field shunts are used), so the field winding consists of fewer turns
of heavier wire. In a traction motor, the field and armature
connections are made externally, through the reverser.
Series motors have maximum torque at starting, which is why they
are suitable for railway service, as Bob mentions.
The field winding creates the magnetic flux (there are no permanent
magnets). The armature windings also form an electromagnet and
the north and south poles of the armature attract and repel the poles
of the field to create torque. The commutator keeps the armature
polarity the same as it rotates. The motor works on AC as well
as DC, as the instantaneous polarity of field and armature currents
reverses in unison (since they are in series).
Both the field and armature windings have considerable iron (well,
actually, steel) in their magnetic path. This means high magnetic
flux for a given ampere-turns of excitation. Wonderful at DC.
However, this also means inductance, which creates an impedance to
current flow which increases linearly with frequency. In addition,
there is a property of iron called hysteresis. It is the magnetic
equivalent of friction. In a frictionless system, one could move
an object a certain distance to the left and then back to the starting
point with 0 net expenditure of energy. The fact that iron
has hysteresis means that with every AC cycle, some energy is lost
to this magnetic friction. THe energy loss increases as the
square of the frequency. For this reason, universal series motors
only work on fairly low-frequency AC>
I understand a DC series motor has to have a load when operating; otherwise it can fly apart.
Another reason why series motors are suitable for railway
service. The load is always connected.
Which is why, when testing a motor off the car, a low DC voltage is always used. No load, boom!! at 600V. Use 120 or so and rotation and possible binding can be found without rotational damage to the motor.
"In a frictionless system, one could move
an object a certain distance to the left and then back to the starting point with 0 net expenditure of energy."
But, of course, there is always entropy...
I don't see that many posts, and I'd been gone for four hours. Tomorrow, I have to go to the computer shop to exchange a PII motherboard, and I have to head to the store. Might even get some railfanning in if it isn't too hot. What are you guys all doing?
AEM7
I've been on SubTalk most of the Day because I've been trying to work on the website.
Alright, this post is gonna earn me some butt kickings from Mr. Nasodowski and proably a few others, but what the hey, here it goes anyway.
I have been thinking alot about dual mode operation, both in respect to the LIRR and MN, and also in respect to other systems that do not currently have DM service but might benefit from it.
But right now I have run up against some problems:
1. How much horsepower is needed for each Married pair of an M1? an M3? and M7? I thought about this because a Regenerating Gas Turbine (Yes, similar to the GT-Es, but today the GT-EIIs wouldn't need traps, the LIRR is all High Platform, also I think they used simple cycle gas turbines), would be ideal in this position, lightweight, high horsepower, and mechanically simple, at least compared to a Reciprocating Diesel DEMU. This brings me to another question, does anyone have any information on the GT-Es? What Turbines did they use? Was the transmission through a pnumatic exhaust gas over PTO turbine direct drive to the wheels (as in the Rhor Turbos)? or was it exhaust gasses over PTO turbine to drive a generator to drive the Traction Motors?
2 Why not just stick a Third rail shoe on a Shoreliner or C-3 cab car? Here you could justify a 4 car direct to NYP or GCT train without DM30ACs on both ends, and without fear of stalling on the third rail gaps. The C-3 would have the standard complement of third rail shoes, just like an M1 or 3, but would have no Traction motors, and instead would send it's power back to the DM30 at the other end of the consist. The intermediate cars would also need to be modified to carry the power, and the DM30 wouyld need a jumper to hook into whatever "stuff" there is to convert the 750 VDC into traction motor happy electricity.
3. Why not run MUs and then just stick a F40PH or something on the end of the train at the end of electrification? I realize that most MUs use their own type of Couplers, but still, couldn't the F40 be modified to use the same automatic coupler? The train would pull into the station at the end of the electrification, and while it used to be a transfer station, now a F40 just pulls up, couples on, performs an air test, the MU goes to Neutral (or perhaps waits to do that until they are truely clear of the electrification), and, with out the passengers ever going anywhere, the train continues out to the end of the line.
4. Does anyone think that the Wankel, or Quasitubine, have any chance of being a powerplant for an DEMU (I Guess that'd be a WEMU and QEMU).
Alright, a lot of your post flies right over my head, but I can give the standard responses (Phil will give the better ones later).
1. How much horsepower is needed for each Married pair of an M1? an M3? and M7?
For commuter service in a North American setting, about 700-800 hp per car would be ideal. The Metroliner had some 1,200hp per car but that is intended for some real kick-ass service. For DMU's, 800hp per car is pretty much the practical limit, unless some breakthru in diesel technology has taken place and I've not heard about it.
Yes, similar to the GT-Es
You're going to have to explain these GT-E and regenerating gas turbine things. My knowledge of turbine engines are not nearly as good as mine about things electrical. Now, the standard answer to not using apparently lightweight turbine engines are as follows:
(1) Turbines are high maintenance, because of high revs.
(2) Turbines are not suited to stop-start routines, especially like those on a commuter train. The turbine blades run hot, and too much thermal stress will kill it. The engines also go through an "unstable phase" between spinning up and spinning down -- again no good for your acceleration-intensive commuter service.
(3) Turbines consume a lot of fuel. Where are you going to put the fuel tank on that DTMU?
Reciprocating Diesel DEMU
What is a "Reciprocating Diesel" power plant?
2 Why not just stick a Third rail shoe on a Shoreliner... no traction motors, and instead would send it's power back to the DM30 at the other end of the consist. The intermediate cars would also need to be modified to carry the power
There lies your problem. You are first of all assuming fixed consist, which doesn't always happen. Now, you have seen the thickness of the third rail. To pass all that power through one linkage ain't that simple, and this is five linkages between the cab car and the locomotive. Do you really think it is safe to pass that much current under a metal passenger car?
3. Why not run MUs and then just stick a F40PH or something on the end of the train at the end of electrification?
Under the FRA regime, maintenance costs for push-pull consists work out much cheaper than MU's. I'm not saying the FRA regime is good or bad, I'm just saying that is the case today, and that is the reason why they hadn't done it (and probably part of the reason why SEPTA, NJTransit and MARC had been tending towards push-pull rather than all-MU operation).
now a F40 just pulls up, couples on, performs an air test, the MU goes to Neutral
Not only is that an involved procedure on an FRA railroad, it also causes havoc on a commuter railroad because of the intensity of the headways and the probability of something going wrong. Plus, that's more couplers to maintain. That is a reasonable proposition for the once-daily Amtrak train, but not for the half-hourly shuttle! You'd be carrying a lot of iron.
4. Does anyone think that the Wankel, or Quasitubine...
No idea who the hell they are.
AEM7
2 Why not just stick a Third rail shoe on a Shoreliner or C-3 cab car?
DC transmission cables need to be thick and heavy. You would run into both weight and connection issues as well as safety. A better plan would to just get Amtrak to allow trains w/ a single DM into Penn. If it ever gaps out they can just rev up the diesel and off it goes again. I mean DUH!
Does anyone think that the Wankel, or Quasitubine, have any chance of being a powerplant for an DEMU (I Guess that'd be a WEMU and QEMU).
The Wankel engine, aside from being unrelyable and generally sucking, is not scalable to larger HP's like a normal diesel is. A 150hp Wankle is one thing, but for 1000hp you can't just make one 10x the size, it would be WAY to heavy and way to cumbersome.
I will be online infrequently this weekend, because of connectivity problems. The bad storms and lots of lightning hit locally, and my DSL is out. Finally got through to AOL tech support and did some diagnostics and they said that it will take 72 hours for the phone company (Verizon) to look at the line. So as a result I will be online less frequently. Those storms were nasty, and LIRR must've had lots of problems tonight.
I refuse to give the phone company any more $$ for the extra dial up calls, and I'm still waiting for my RFM. I'm getting ripped off!!!
my DSL is out
I'm still waiting for my RFM
Does anyone else notice something not quite right here?
I'm just having some bad luck, that's all. Now if you think anything else is going on, than you're wrong.
Dial up costs more in the long run than DSL, especially if you spend alot of time online hanging out at Subtalk.
Well I won't be here this weekend, so have a good weekend y'all.
it is the "connected" age.
Why go DSL when there's Unlimited Regional Calling
which covers all those naggy-raggy dial-up calls
in one LOW steady rate....not to mention it also
covers calls to other area codes ALL TIMES.
Tho, Peter raised our 'brows!
Dial-up is slow and the dialing process is slow. I like being always connected.
Even if you have an unlimited calling plan, most broadband ISPs that also offer dial-up (mine doesn't, but I never needed it), charge you for that priviledge.
I personally would not want to sign up with a broadband provider that gives you free dial-up time each month. Why would a reliable broadband provider need to do such a thing?
What is an RFM?
He means Reduced Fare MetroCard.
-Stef
I didn't really notice this until I came home and transferred today's pics and examined them....
Yeah, those are cones on the roadbed.
Do the cones serve any practical purpose except to let onlookers know when the T/O didn't stop in time?
Is that a 9? You took those pics today?
Oh...it's an S. You know, with the glare and everything well...oh, I'll shut up. ~_~
It's an S at Grand Central Station. My camera and general photographing ability are pretty bad.
Nah, that picture is halfway decent considering the low light, etc. You didn't take a bad shot at all!!!
The cones, more than anythinge else might give passengers a hint as to where the train is going to stop. Presuming, of course that it is stopping in a place other than where it normally stops.
Elias
On this track especially, everyone wants to board the westernmost car. (Think about the platform arrangement at Times Square.) Nobody who's waiting for the train before it comes will wait by the cones. Besides, at the Grand Central end, as long as at least two trains are running, one train typically doesn't close its doors until the next one arrives.
Probably it's an off hour train and the cones are there for the train to stop at the center of the platform?????
The cones are there to tell the operator where to stop. This is the track that connects to the Lexington Ave line. Past the cones is a portable trip, and then a gate. No signal until past the gate, IIRC.
-Hank
no, i think that that is track 4, which connects to the 7th ave line at 42nd st, and dead ends at gct
That is 4 track. If I remember, the fixed stop is just beyond the cones, not by the block behind the cameraman (you.) That area where you were standing was boarded up for a while around the trackway while they were doing renevations to the stations. The bumper light is not close to the bumper at all but by the fixed stop (cones) and it is tucked under the platform. It is an old, small one and it doesn't grab your attention right away. So yes, the cones are there to remind the T/O where to stop because of the long and deceiving distance between the block and the fixed stop/tripper.
What is this car and where is it?
-Stef
#4280 at Shoreline.
Steve Loitsch
That's right! Actually, it was a giveaway, since it has an available caption. The trolley pole on the top of the car caught my attention. I was always under the impression 4280 didn't operate at BERA, but perhaps it did when it first arrived? It was in a better spot in the yard area than it is now.
-Stef
4280 was parked back in 1980 when I first saw it. I don't believe it has run under its own power since it arrived at Shoreline.
For the past few day I've been growing an interest in signal control and tower operating. Due to my limited knowledge on the subject I came up with a few questions
1. Can anyone provide somewhat of a signal simulator for the computer? I already have the ATS by a group affiliated with the MTA. I was wondering if there's any more (No BVE's please).
2. How can a person have a train switch tracks during rush hour? I just find it difficult to stop the trains without creating more of a delay on the line.
3. What's the annual salary for a tower man? Just in case I decide to pursue a carrear
4. What's the qualifications for a tower man? Again. For a career purpose
5. What's the busiest area for tower workers?
Thanks in advance
I'll take on number ONE - those who have more experience in current operations can take on the others. There's a signalling/tower simulation called NXSYS which just happens to be linked to from nycsubway org HERE ...
2. How can a person have a train switch tracks during rush hour? I just find it difficult to stop the trains without creating more of a delay on the line.
If they are on the ball they align a new route as soon as the last train clears the interlocking and then clear the signal. Depending on headways the next train would probably not see a stop or see the signal clear in front of them.
What happens if the do?
"What happens if the[y] do (see a stop or see the signal clear in front of them)"
They'd be slowing down or stopped at the red signal...and the railroad would be slowed down a bit.
If a TW/O was to drop a ball in front of an oncoming train in anything but an emergency, there'd be some 'splaining to do, and possibly some samples given.
TW/O is promotional from conductor, and I think, Station Agent. There are not open competitive tests for that position.
"How can a person have a train switch tracks during rush hour? I just find it difficult to stop the trains without creating more of a delay on the line."
Buncha IND stations have the junctions placed AFTER the platforms, so that if a conflicting train should have to wait, it'll be at a station platform.
Is that good design? I'm not sure. The downside is that passengers have no way to know if the train they're on is about to switch to the other track (unless they're at the front of the train and know how to read the homeball). Some stations, like 72nd IRT, have their local-express crossovers before the station in either direction; while that can increase waiting time in tunnels, there's also no question that any train that stops on the express track is running express or that any train that stops on the local track is continuing along the local track (alas, locals often bypass local stops even on the local track).
It's a good design in terms of railroad efficiency, by combining the stop times. Before the NTSB and WD's, trains could come into the pocket on Station Time while the road was crossing in front of them.
In terms of customer service, you just can't win. Everyone is gonna think an A is going to run express even if it shows up against the wall, and everyone is going to think a C is running local, even if its in the middle. Compouding the issue is the TA practice where express trains diverted to the local track still only make express stops.
As our C/O posters will repute, no amount of extra PA announcements will sink in to people who don't listen in the first place. And when "their train" doesn't stop "where it always stops" people get real indignant
It's a good design in terms of railroad efficiency, by combining the stop times.
Agreed so far -- unless the two tracks are at different platforms and the train that's on the unexpected platform is going to have to wait for everyone to run over.
In terms of customer service, you just can't win. Everyone is gonna think an A is going to run express even if it shows up against the wall, and everyone is going to think a C is running local, even if its in the middle.
Here I disagree. At least on the IRT, most regulars seem to know that if a train shows up on the express track, it's probably going to run express, and if a train shows up on the local track, there's a good chance it's going to make local stops.
Some people do seem to live in a fog. A few months ago, during the evening rush, I got on an uptown 5 train on the express track at Times Square. That's a common enough reroute that I think most rush hour passengers have a vague idea of what's going on when they see it. Yet you should have heard the angry comments in my car when we passed 86th! If it wasn't obvious that the stations looked different from the usual 5 stations, wasn't it a big clue that the train stopped at 72nd instead of 59th?
Compouding the issue is the TA practice where express trains diverted to the local track still only make express stops.
That depends. Normally, if it's an express that simply got the wrong lineup for no good reason, that is the usual practice. But if a GO has the express track closed, or the express track is being kept clear for some other reason, trains normally make local stops.
It's nice to know that if my train, whatever number it happens to be carrying, pulls into 72nd on the express track, it must be going express. If only I could be assured that a 1 train on the local track was necessarily going to make local stops!
Some people do seem to live in a fog
They're the ones who hold doors when they get confused. Regulars I'm not worried about!
Buncha IND stations have the junctions placed AFTER the platforms, so that if a conflicting train should have to wait, it'll be at a station platform.
You should come up to 145 St during the morning rush, and see this silly concept in action. With the current GO of express C and local D, trains are held outside the station while the crossover move is made - my B sits north of 145 until the D has cleared all the switches south of 145.
Bummer. Canal SB is now the same way, too.
All that stuff used to *WORK* with ST's ... granted, owing to scheduling in rush hour, when I came up from the concourse into homeball alley (125 to 145) I'd often have to creep south to 125 after "merging" with the A's. Sounds like the "excessive NTSB spacing" has taken its toll yet again. Believe it or not, the IND *used to* haul asp. Same for the IRT with 90 second headways before MY time. :)
I tell ya, if things get any worse than I'm hearing about, it's only a matter of time before the MTA issues SCOOTERS for the geese to get around the city ... :)
>>>3. What's the annual salary for a tower man? Just in case I decide to pursue a carrear <<<<
About 46K.
Peace,
ANDEE
""the Last ever "Low V" museum run ...........was done on
setember 9 1998 ,....am i right folks ???
what stopped them from running ever since ??
since the D triplexes do museum runs .....etc......
Why not the ""low Vs"" ..........????
...............................................!
Yes I believe you are right. I was on that trip. Wish they would run them again. They gave us a trip around two train yards, and quite a bit of territory in the Bronx.
I'm sorry I was unable to attend the event. But some SubTalker who was there said there was a problem on that trip. There were so many dead motors the lights started to dim inside the cars, and the train struggled to keep moving. I wish they would use the Low-V's again. The D-types are getting kinda old....
Problems with the propulsion system shouldn't affect the lighting. Additionally, I rode the D-Types on a Memorial Day Weekend fantrip this year, and they performed like champs.
David
How about a fantrip of R-1/9 cars? I would love to see 484 and new-restored 491 on a museum run.
Mechanical Problems kept the Lo-Vs from coming out for additional trips.
As for the R-1/9s, a number of these cars are in need of cosmetic and/or mechanical restoration. Unfortunately, those cars haven't been out of Coney Island Yard in many moons...
-Stef
Are there enough to assemble a trainset? How many R1/9 cars exist in the Ave X "graveyard" besides #491?
I can think of 5 cars right off the top of my head - #100, 103, 484, 491, and 1802. They could even use #1575 (the prototype R-10) since that car ran with those series cars.
At Ave X are Cars 103,381,923,925,1000,1300,and 1802.
Throw in 100, 484, and 491, and we have a complete 600 foot train.
Wishful thinking for a 10 Car Train.
-Stef
So you see, in theory it is possible. I would say there are more R-1/9's still in existance than another other type of vintage car. BTW, when were the last of the work car Low-V's retired? I've seen photos of them at Coney Island as recent as 1980.
I'd be inclined to agree with you about the R-1/9s, too bad there aren't more that are operational. As for Lo-Vs in work service, the last rider (diesel hauled) cars were withdrawn about 1984. R-14s, R-15s were retired from active duty that year. R-17s, R-21s, R-22s followed in 1985.
-Stef
no.., the R21/22s last saw service in 12/87, and the 17s in 2/88
I know, but R-17s/21s/22s were being withdrawn from service as early as 1985. Whatever was left over, got pulled from service 12/87 and 2/88.
-Stef
Stef, in the meantime we can dream on.
R9
Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh. The sweet sounds of an R-9! Excellent!
-Stef
What? No bull and pinion gear sounds? Awwwww, man!!!:)
I'd be thrilled if they could get a 4 car train operational. I was not aware so many R1/9 cars were there.
Never mind 4 cars. With a little effort, they could get a full 10-car train!
>>Never mind 4 cars. With a little effort, they could get a full 10-car train!<<
With quite a bit of money and a dedicated shop force, the R1-9's would roll again. They haven't run on their own power for years, so they have been out of the loop as far as being road worthy. They're not basket cases, but they do need the proper restoration so they don't lay down on a fan trip.
Bill "Newkirk"
At least we have three of them out-of-town that are still in operational condition.
If only the money existed to hook them all up with a few more and do a REAL train. As someone who literally *LIVED* in "Arnines" for a living (as well as a "geese") I just can't get comfy with the thought of just ONE all by its lonesome running like some sort of BUS ... no offense to anyone, but when those cars ganged up, they became almost human in their cantankerous personalities in a gaggle as they conspired against the poor bastard in the cab. :)
The moans, the groans, the grunts, the snarls, the hisses, the throbbing compressors, the spur-cut bull and pinion gears...
It's ali-iiii-iive!!
Hey, I'd sign up to play conductor in a heartbeat!
If we can get someone to build it, and drill out ten cars, I'd be HAPPY to have you along as conductor. Only thing I'd ask is that you wear GLOVES because after you'd pointed out the "two little triggers" and then I revisited the "real thing" at Heypaul's ... I never REMEMBERED they were separate. A PROPER gloved hand interfaced with them PERFECTLY, you reached, you pulled, they opened. You slapped the caps, they closed.
Had it NOT been for what YOU noticed, I would have never remembered that since I just pulled, blissfully unaware of "lock and load." When I was on the rails, they just DID it. :)
I picked up a pair of brown Well's Lamont (sp) gloves a few years back and wore them while posing for pictures on the step plates of 100 and 484 at the Transit Museum. They're cloth with no leather. Did you wear leather gloves when you worked the trigger boxes?
Sorta ... they were suede and twill stitched. I have a pair that I collected off the structure at Atlantic on the Canarsie last year where the trackway was that are pretty much identical to the issue I had turned in 30 years prior. "N.Y.C.T.A." on them ... the style doesn't seem to have changed much (Brown and grey now, more bluish earlier on) ...
There are enough around to assemble ten cars, but most of them would have to be donated for the occasion from several museums. But man, that'd be sweet filling a platform to the 10 car marker with them even if they're borrowed ... it'd also be one very expensive outing since most of them need some serious work.
True, but you see, this can and is possible. This way, once the restoration is complete, they can be used on a regular basis, and can thus alternate between the D-Types and R-1/9's. Like I say, if you incorporate car #103 (with it's experimental fans), #484 (with the experimental "bullseye" lighting and PA system), and #1575 (the prototype R-10), you'd have yourself a pretty interesting train indeed.
Couldn't agree more. Wish it were possible, that's for sure. I'd love to get some handle time on a set once again, been 30+ years for me. But no layup. :)
arent tghe 1/9s compatible with the B/Dtypes?
Not at all ... though they could do an iron to iron hookup if necessary, they didn't do that either. Two completely separate beasts with only a few things in common but none that were useful for making a "smorgastrain." :)
both AMUE with H2as, i thjought they might work... oh well
Nope ... iron to iron was possible, but they were quite different as far as operating together ...
It was thought the BMT standards could m. u. with SIRT cars, but as it turned out, they would not do so after the TA acquired those surplus cars. The R-1/9s did have the same braking system as the Triplexes; both car classes gave off that famous "tch-ssss" magnet valve sound. The standards went "tchhhhhhhhh" just as they came to a full stop.
Yep, but if you tried to mate them electrically, there was much poppencorken und blowenfusen mit schpitzensparken. Never set foot in a standard in all my days with the TA - they were up east and never set foot at Stillwell that I ever noticed. My memories of them were on the "M" to the loop and on the Canarsie. Don't remember seeing them anywhere else but my own time scope was limited to late 60's, early 70's and most of them were GONE by the time I got sworn in.
But other than iron to iron, the IND cars and the BMT cars were NOT on speaking terms. :)
The last BMT standards left the scene 33 years ago - August 4, 1969 to be exact - so they were in fact all gone by the time you went to work for the TA. I rode on them on the Canarsie for two years on Saturdays and did not care for them at all. Old, ugly, no signs up front, three sets of doors per side when IND/BMT R units had four, etc., etc. I've come to appreciate them for what they were - solid, durable, and damn near indestructible. What can you cay about a car which could take out a tunnel pillar or two and walk away with scrapes and bruises?
Someone once posted a lengthy explanation of how to do an iron-to-iron lashup of an R-9 to an R-10.
R9 to R10 ... "kinkyshariu sex" ... not into it. In honor of Senator Bruno, I draw the line at "whips and chains" and stand clear of it entirely. :)
Yeah, like I said, never saw a standard when I *worked* the railroad, but sure do remember riding them on the Canarsie and the "upper Myrtle to Manhattan" ... always loved that part of Brooklyn's trains. To those of us in the Bronx, there was no such THING as (ahem) "Manhattan." To *US*, it was simply "downtown." Whoops. Heh.
Do you remember seeing the conductor at one of the button consoles on the BMT standards? On a six-car train, he would be in the second or fifth car, since near the end only 3-car B units remained. I can honestly say I never saw the conductor in the two years I rode on those cars. By some quirk, I must have never been in the second or fifth cars of any train. OTOH when the R-7/9s came over, I vivdly remember being in the same car as the conductor, watching him climb up onto the step plates and assume the position. I even watched him do his thing on the R-42s when they first appeared on the Canarsie.
The few times I rode standards (Upper Myrt and Canarsie) I wasn't the least bit interested in the conductor's position. Guess where my face was planted? Think Salaam ... I know you can name this tune in one note. :)
About the same place I was usually at.:)
Interestingly enough, while I started riding in the first car on Manhattan-bound trains from Lorimer St. after a week or two of starting Saturday School, I didn't start riding at the railfan window on Brooklyn-bound Canarsie trains until late 1969 or even early 1970. In other words, I never rode in the first car of a Brooklyn-bound train of BMT standards. Part of the reason may have been because we always exited at Union, by the transfer to the GG. We would backtrack down Metropolitan Ave. to Havemeyer St., where Annunciation Parish was located. That's where my Saturday school was until it moved to Richmond Hill in the fall of 1970. After school, we'd enter the subway on the south side of Metropolitan Ave., which put us at the western end of the Manhattan-bound platform.
Feh. You weren't ENOUGH of a foamer. Walking to the far end of a platform from the foamer glass was NEVER a problem. Wasn't until I got a job at the TA that I finally got cured. :)
Did you ever see a 2x6 jammed against the storm door handle on a BMT standard? I did a couple of times. Apparently the door wouldn't lock or stay shut, so they probably figured if the car still ran, it could go in service and they'd "make it stay shut".
Yes indeed I have ... even more amusing, I ended up in the TAIL car of a standard coming back to 14th Street and just for sheets and giggles, tried opening the door. Opened *RIGHT* up, so I left it open and enjoyed the breeze and the clear view all the way back. I take it most of the latches no longer existed in many of them, but the door handle wasn't locked either. Back in those days, it wasn't unusual for storm doors on the ends to either not be locked, or not stay latched so I didn't think much about it. That's why they had the chains across the ends. :)
I always wondered about the storm doors on the BMT standards. They were powered - even had their own separate controls - but could they be opened manually? Perhaps the power feature was disabled on the rebuilt units.
Ya got me there ... I was from the Bronx ... only rode them on rare occasion. While they were OK, they had a whistle that sounded like a HORRIBLE shriek and we pokey. They had some similarities though to the Arnines, which at the time made them largely boring. Now I got a stiffie on the Q's on the myrtle as well as some of the weirder cars on the shuttles, but the standards didn't really do it for me. I DID note though that the end doors tended to NOT be locked, that was the one thing I *do* remember about them as a spotting habit. I also remember having motormen toss the door open and YELL at me for opening them, so I'd take up the rear where there wasn't anyone to tell me to close the damned door. And seeing where you'd BEEN was acceptable. :)
I remember going to Coney Island via the West End when I was about 5 years old (around 1961). Back then the Sea Beach and West End shared a 2 track bridge over Coney Island Creek going into Stillwell.
I was in the front car of a Standard waiting for a D-type Sea Beach to clear. As I was looking, but not leaning, out the front storm door window, the storm door opened up! I remember the motorman opening up the cab to see what happened and my aunt jumping up from her seat to grab me.
BTW, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. To me those ABs were beautiful looking cars. End signs? They don't need no stinking end signs! Between the ABs and D-types, with the R9s on the Culver, you couldn't ask for a better railfan than the Southern Division.
We've got: Hot Lunch!
By the time I saw the BMT standards for the first time, I had gotten used to seeing route and destination signs up front and liked the idea. OTOH by 1967 they were operating mostly on the Canarsie line, so signs weren't really needed up front. Still, it was a turnoff to me. I like to be able to identify a train as it pulls into a station. Now you're going to say they had marker lights. Unfortunately, I never paid any attention to them. Another funny thing, I never heard their whistle. I did hear a Triplex whistle on Heypaul's tape of one of the fantrips two years ago.
With all these stories of BMT standard storm doors opening inadvertently, maybe they should jammed 2x6s against every single one.
Heh. Yeah, I found out about the storm doors not working the hard way on the Canarsie ... ya got used to holding on to the door handles that when locked, were as good as a "strap" when suddenly, whoops! I had a motorman dump the train and then give me a HEALTHY chewing out about staying away from the door, got out his woodie, jammed it in there, gave me another dirty look and charged up again.
That's why I'd do the standards from the tail car. :)
Had the storm door open up once on me on an Arnine while riding the Culver. I waited until we got to Stillwell to report it, enjoying a full trip on the elevated with the door partially open.
--Mark
I'm already starting to miss the World's Fair R-33 single-line cars. They have a latch on either door so you can leave the doors locked open.
Broken latch. I turned in several in my time as well. They'd drill them into the middle somewhere as a cure. Didn't happen often though. Musta been fun. :)
I had a storm door open on me once on the IRT. Might have been an R-21/22. I gave the handle the usual tug-tug as I like to do when - whooops! - the door opened! The motorman didn't see it, but my sister did. Talk about a dirty look!
>>arent tghe 1/9s compatible with the B/Dtypes?<<
Nope, while those cars could make a "iron hitch", none of them are electrically compatible with the other. The D-Types cannot MU with the Standards, although there was an interesting accurance that happened years ago.
Back around the time of the "Diamond Jubilee" (75th Anniversary of the IRT), there was a display in the BMT Chambers St station. On the inner tracks, displayed were the Museum Low-V's, Museum BMT Standards and one unit of D-Types. The cars were open to the public for all to see. Since this was underneath the Municipal Building, you can see why they chose Chambers St for the display.
A friend of mine, who still is an RCI, told me he was there when things were being shut down and the equipment moved out. He saw (as he described) the Museum Standards "pulling" the D-Types back to Coney Island yard. This was done as an "iron hitch" with the couplers electric portions NOT making contact. He told me no diesels were used. Of course if that were today, diesels would definetely be used.
Bill "Newkirk"
None of the prewar fleets were compatible with each other. Even the IRT had incompatible fleets (Flivvers, Steinways) which had to run by themselves.
If they ever do manage to get a consist of R1/9's rollable again, I'd be willing to volunteer to take them out for a ride if Big Ed or one of the other guys doesn't wrassle to the floor first. :)
CAB FIGHT! Heh.
One of you could assume the position.:)
Not without lubricant. :)
LOL
thankz for the responses ...........does anyone know if the low V s
will ever do a museum run again ?? ....& if not why not ???
if so willo they run by the year 2004 ??...........???
i do notice the low vs on the lot at coney . saw pics of them up to
1998 what a shame they are just sitting there !!! ...........
.........no- lol ,,,
Story in the 8/3/02 Washington Post about the unpleasant odors in some Metro cars.
What's with these namby-pamby people in DC? As a long-time, hardcore subway rider who rode SEPTA and the NYCTA subways, the odors detected in the Metro are mild compared to some of the olfactorial offenses I endured in both of these cities. So my advice to all of the prissies in DC is GET USED TO IT, AND GET A LIFE! There are more important things to worry about that an occasional smelly subway car.
P.S. If you want to lose the odorts, GET RID OF THE CARPETS.
I consider your opinion that the people here are "namby-pamby prissies who need to get a life" to be ignorant and offensive. While a subway isn't a botanical garden, there is no reason why its users should have to put up with unpleasant, preventable odors. It's a quality of life matter, which needs to be addressed to keep the public wanting to use it. If simple things are left unchecked, ridership declines and then that snowballs into declining revenue, meaning other maintenance matters or improvements get cut, and eventually the system ends up in a shambles like the NYC system in the 1970s and 1980s.
Metro is regarded as a model and a message to other cities that rapid transit can be both useful and appealing to the public. In NYC and Philly, the average Joe Schmoe rider seems to only care about there being service. When I lived in NYC, I was appalled at the conditions I had to put up with in stations and on trains day in and day out. It disgusted me no end to enter a station on a sweltering summer day and have to smell urine or vomit, then be crushed in a filthy car with no or malfunctioning air conditioning that reeked of rotting food or bodily wastes. NO ONE should have to endure or tolerate such offenses. If you don't care about such things, fine, but don't dare to impose your indifference on others.
Removing the carpeting altogether might help, since Metro doesn't have to focus as heavily on luring suburbanites to ride the trains as it did when it first opened. However, whatever kind of flooring replaces it has to be chosen carefully to be aesthetically pleasing, comfortable to stand on for longer rides, and highly durable. The strictly utilitarian flooring of the NY system would not be well-received here by either residents or tourists.
I was once on an R-38 A train at around midnight, headed southbound fromthe GWB Bus Terminal. It had obviously just been washed. The windows were clean, the floor and seats spotless, no newspapers or soda bottles anywhere. The fresh lemon scent greeted you as the doors opened.
Riding that train was its own reward.
You've made some very insightful comments. First, I agree that there is no reason to start name calling people for thier not being happy with subway cars that stink. Yes, here is NYC, we more or less have become indifferent to minor (or not so minor) unpleasentries; if the trains run (more or less on time) we are satisfied. But apparently, the DC system has set a higher standard and it apparently has lived up to it for quite some time now. I congragulate them for that and think it is postive that the press in the area thinks such a transit issue is worthy of coverage.
I have never had the chance to ride the Metro in DC, so I cannot comment on its operation. I must admit, the concept of carpet seems to be a little far fetched for a mass transit system, even if every rider was the most civic mined, clean and considerate person alive, I tend to believe the carpet would take a beating in very short order. Again, I have never seen it, so maybe I am off base.
A question for those of you who have riden the DC Metro, what is your opinion of the use of carpet on the trains? Has it held up well in the past? Is this problem really something new, or just something that has always been around and just now got picked up in the newspaper?
The carpet, for the most part, does hold up very well. Many Metro riders could qualify as being the most civic mined, clean and considerate person alive. Recently, since the trash cans were removed (and bomb resistant trash cans are now being put in), the minute amount of trash on the system became a little greater, but it is hard to notice. I think once the trash cans are back, the issue will fade away.
From what I've seen in my 10 years here, the carpeting does hold up remarkably well, showing mostly just sings of wear typical for the traffic. Metro has managed to do an excellent job of keeping the interiors in good order and the ban on eating on board definitely helps. Unfortunately, as the article said, the trains have been getting dirtier during their operating hours because of thoughtless laziness and selfishness of some passengers. The lack of convenient newspaper recycling and waste receptacles has resulted in more litter being left on the trains. The more insidious problem is the increase in the number of people eating in the system, and that a large number of them are downright slobs. Food residues on the carpeting makes it deteriorate considerably faster than just foot traffic and weather slop.
Short of removing all the carpeting, they could try what MNRR did and not have carpet in the door areas. You'd still have some water getting on it in the seating areas from shoes and umbrellas, but it would probably be much less than what gets in when the doors open.
I've ridden Metrorail a fair amount. The carpets, I've noticed, are vacuumed and shampood regularly. They do seem to hold up well.
Metrorail is a showpiece of Washington - another way to impress visitors. Congress makes sure it gets taken care of.
Similarly, Moscow Metro was the Soviet Union's way of providing a showpiece of Communist triumph. As a transportation system, it works very, very well, and as an example of transit design and architecture, it is magnificent.
...and of course, since he's the mayor as well as being a passenger, he can actually do something about it, according to today's New York Daily News Whether or not he took the action on Thursday because of the A/C problems with Con Ed in Queens on Wednesday is up to you to decide.
They have a photo on the News' website of Bloomberg riding a train that looks like an R-142, but since the story says he was on the No. 4, odds are the News just yanked a stock picture of him out of their files to go with the copy and the problem train was an R-62 (it could have been a `bird, but nowadays when something goes wrong with them, it's usually pointed out in the story that "some of the cars are over 40 years old...").
I remember on a new bit, the first day Bloomberg went to work, he took a 6 Train. Perhaps that picture was from the 6 Line. I forgot what stop he was on. Maybe he needed to be early and got a 5 Train operated by R142s. Or it was actually taken that lucky day where there was R142/R142A on the 4.
the Times got the car # 1623
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/03/nyregion/03SUBW.html<<
>>mayor called in a complaint to Katherine Lapp, ...Regular riders should not call Ms. Lapp but the hot-car hot line, [718] 330-3322, with the car number, found on the outside of the car, and the time of day of the problem.)<<
And regular riders can expect equally rapid response. ???
WE (the crews) can't get them pulled off the road and repaired.
"Write it on the Defect Sheet when you get to the terminal."
Actually, I was on the L Saturday and heard over the radio a W conductor complaining about hot car #5150. When I had the W the next day, I see sitting on the stand was a train with #5150, but when I got on it was ice cold.
Maybe just depends on the line and yard how successful you are at getting them to fix it.
We'll find out (regular riders getting rapid response).
I called the "hot"line to report R-62A 2456 with no A/C running on the #1 line Friday.
--Mark
Well on Monday, my #1 train had two hot cars in the rear, including the last car which would have been the T/O car going back to New Lots. I called it into Control as people was running from car to car. Upon arrival at VC it was taken out of service. This was during the PM rush hour.
Here's the link from the New York Times. It was car #1623.
There's is only 1 R-142 on the 4 line. Except of course, when I'm on the 4. When they see my name on the sheets, they make sure to have 8-10 or more redbirds just for me.
I can't begin to tell you how much I hate that line. 9+ hour jobs, and more redbirds every time I go back. Last week they must've had at least 10-12 redbirds over there. And when they give me one of those 3 trip jobs where the last trip is local to New Lots, I want to scream.
But Redbird AC is repairable and maintainable....R142 AC failure goes back to the vendors. We've got Bombardier cars with leaking compressors and evaporators that do not drain the condensate. Lucky for us that Mayor Bloomberg got a 'hot car.' Hopefully, he asked WHY.............Bombardier lost the R160 contract. CI Peter
When I've ridden on the R-62s on that are on the #4 line, the A/C is frequently weak. What on earth is wrong with the A/C on these cars?
#3 West End Jeff
We are all of the 'last and lost generation.' Spoiled rotten, cheap gas and cheaper cigarettes...contaminating the 'pristeen environment' of the Third World. Most refrigeration systems utilised 'ChloroFlouroCarbon' liquids when released into the atmosphere....one part of the Chlorine molecule will destroy 100,000 molecules of ozone. Typical of R11 and R12...R12 was used in automobile air conditioner systems. R22, used in home air conditoners and refrigerators, is 'HydrogenChlorineFlouroCarbon' and is the refrigerant of Redbirds. On the 'toxic scale,' Halon fire extinguishers rate a 12, R11/R12 rates a 1, R22 rates a 0.1 and the newest refrigerant, R134, which is used in newer automobiles and subway cars, rates a zero. As you go through the R11/R12/R22/R134a scale, you will notice that the boiling point of the liquid refrigerant ascends...R134a is somwheres about 50 degrees. New refrigeration systems use R134a...R22 will be outlawed. Two HVAC units in the R142...probably the same in R62s...with R134a will never give you the frigid environment of a Redbird. So, newer trainsets cannot give you the 'whiff' of an open ice cream truck. Do what i do on the job...carry frozen gel packs to place upon your head but don't compromise your safety with a frozen block inside of your helmet. CI Peter
I'm probably younger than many of you at age 39 and I don't smoke. My parents have a central A/C unit from 1964 for their house that uses R-22 and it still works quite well. I have yet to experience how the A/C is in the R-142s and the R-143s. I have come across some excessively cold cars in the system, but those cars have refrigeration systems that use R-22. Sometimes you'll come across a very cold car on Metro-North. Once I came across a GMC "Fishbowl" bus with cold A/C, but that was back in 1982 and that was in Westchester County. I never came across an overly cold GMC RTS II bus in Westchester County even after they retrofitted them with new A/C units in late 1983 and early 1984.
#3 West End Jeff
Those RTSs probably had HCFC 22 systems even after retrofitting. The subway cars NYCT purchased in the 1980s use HCFC 22. NYCT didn't start using equipment with refrigerant 134a until well into the 1990s.
David
"with R134a will never give you the frigid environment of a Redbird."
Why is that? Just because the boiling point is higher doesn't mean they couldn't make a compressor that cools as well. I recently bought a "new" used car whose AC had been retrofitted to the new standards, and it cools as well as my previous car, is even slightly larger, and gets better gas mileage too. In that case, new technology has surmounted the obstacles. Why not with subway AC?
HVAC class 101A...what air conditioning does: R134a refrigerant systems built as new are probably very efficient and very electricity conserving BUT their ability to transfer heat is not as good as a system that uses R22. A home air conditioner built in the sixties that has no leaks of significance may contain less than three pounds of refrigerant and chill you 'to the bone' but cost more to operate. R22 will still be used for some time and has one major advantage: its molecules do not pass through copper/aluminum/steel piping as readily as R134a. New industrial cooling plants retrofitted to existing HVAC require complete installation of condensors/piping and maybe evaporators to check the loss of R134a...systems do loose refrigerant despite the lack of leakage. As for MVAC retrofit, complete upgrade requires compressor removal and draining of oil, thorough 'pumping down' (evacuation) and replacement of lubrication (synthetic oil) AND replacement of refrigerant by a manufacturer specified weight. The old cars had sight glass windows that allowed the backyard mechanic to 'tinker' and fill by flow. New R134a systems have no window...'kits' to recharge depend exclusively on high side pressure. My new/used 1995 Oldsmobile Achieva was probably rebuilt by GM and it takes almost forever to chill down the cab...the check is to insert a refrigeration thermometor into the air duct to monitor the chilled air temp R142 trainsets have two computer controlled HVAC units...running full blast what they cannot do is easily overcome the heat load of a high humidity environment...which is what the primary task of AC does...dehumidify to reduce the transferrance of heat (in winter you need to increase ambient humidity.) CI Peter
I have a 1998 Honda Civic DX hatchback and the A/C chills down the cabin fairly qickly. I can't say anything about the R-142/R-142A and R-143 subway cars since I haven't experienced them in hot weather yet.
#3 West End Jeff
I picked 2 days on the No.4 Line two picks ago. One job was great 2 trips and the other was a mistake. The job was 3 trips in and out and paid 9HRS and 25 Min. I had 1 1/2 trips of the PM Rush Hour. Then for Lunch you have to settle for bad pizza at Woodlawn.
However I can't say I woundn't do it again.
LOL. It's funny that you should mention the bad pizza at Woodlawn.
I've given up on that place. It's almost as bad as the place at Dyre.
Management on the 4 line is taking Bloomberg's complaint seriously. They now have platform conductors going from car to car making sure there are no hot cars.
More people have gotten sick from eating at that place at Woodlawn than at any other terminal eating spot i know of. Bring lunch/dinner with you.
Pepinos Pizza at 241st is safe because #2 RTO crews digest this stuff without TTs...I checked out the place for when I WASN'T BROWN BAGGING. Some lines have faster runs...food consumed leads to faster runs. CI Peter
It only safe if you have a plain slice.
I take plain slice and sterilize it with red pepper...remains hot without microwave or solar power.
If you have the time, get a sandwich from the deli across the street (and down the block) from the 241 St entrance to the yard. Big sandwichs, little prices.
Gotta remind the crew about that place...price is right and a happy tummy makes for a happy CI. CI Peter
Woodlawn without question has the Worst Pizza place in A Div or maybe like Alex said the worst in the system. Dyre comes in 2nd with bad places to eat. The only good place at Dyre is the Dinner but they are only open from 5AM to 4PM. Its also too bad the fish place moved out.
There are only 2 reasons I would pick the No.4 Line again. 1. Its Express and 2. I see a big increase in my Paycheck.
When I worked the 4, I would buy something at Utica(my childhood station) and either eat it there or bring it up to Woodlawn. Or if I had a long break in between trips, then I would ride one stop to Mosholu and pick up something there.
TA may soon be implementing laser sighted hand held thermometors for tracking hot cars and their systems in RTO.
Well, he is cutting/not raising the funding for the NYCTA. . .
Good. I hope Billionaire Bloomy gives 'em hell! :)
Looking at the subway map the fact that there is no subway line running underneath Fifth Avenue has always questioned me. Since i don't believe that it "just isn't there", the following questions:
1. Was the construction of such a subway line as mentioned above, ever considered?
2. If yes, why was it never built? and
3. What are the chances this subway line will ever be constructed in the (near) future?
Fifth Avenue has long been the city's main upscale shopping area. As a result, business interesting did not want a subway built, and surely would not want one now.
With subways flanking it on 6th Av and Lexington (Park Av south of 42nd Street), and rail terminals at 33/7th and 42nd/Lex, why would we need a subway on Fifth.
"Fifth Avenue has long been the city's main upscale shopping area. As a result, business interesting did not want a subway built,"
Not true. I can't say what their attitude about elevateds were, but subway service has happily coexisted with retail business of all socioeconomic levels, with subway entrances built into some, in Manhattan
" and surely would not want one now. "
For the reasons I outlined above, not because of any hostility to subways.
Fifth Ave was once lined with mansions of the gilded age rich. They probably torpedoed any attempt to put the original subway along it's length. Once Park Ave south and Lexington Ave had subways underneath themselves, a 5th Ave subway became redundant.
The Fifth Avenue Association (I'm not sure all its predecessors had the same name) has been a powerful force in New York politics literally for centuries.
They've gotten special considerations not given to less well-connected avenues.
Important to this disccussion is the fact that they were able to make sure that no rail line ever marred the surface of 5th Avenue--not horse cars or steam cars or conduit cars. 5th Avenue had coaches from day one, and then buses later.
So I'm sure that, even if they could be convinced that a subway underneath wouldn't downscale their avenue, that they would never permit the disruption of constrcution.
And so far, at any rate, they've always had the power to make their transportation policies stock.
Back in the old days, Fifth Avenue had its own bus company, the Fifth Avenue Coach company. Its buses charged twice as much (10¢ vs. 5¢) as New York City Omnibus and did not offer any kind of transfer even though the two were subsidiaries of the same company.
FAC had double decker coaches too. NYCO did not.
Both NYCO and FACO lasted until the '60s when the City took them over in the face of some hardball tactics to try to win a 20 cent fare. Fifth Avenue's attorney was the charming and urbane Roy Cohn.
Weren't they both called FACL (Fifth Avenue Coach Lines) by then?
All I ever saw on their maps was FACO and NYCO. I don't know if that changed at the end.
IIRC, NYCO was the renamed Third Avenue Railway System. Though taken over by FACO, they had a different corporate culture to the end it seems, at least on their lines.
TARS was a completely separate company, it merged in 1956 with NYCO/FACO, which was when FACL was formed. But by that time it was called Third Avenue Transit and its bus subsidiary was Surface Transit.
NYCO/FACO were owned until 1954 by the Omnibus Corporation, which offloaded its bus holdings that year and changed its name to this.
"So I'm sure that, even if they could be convinced that a subway underneath wouldn't downscale their avenue, that they would never permit the disruption of constrcution."
I'll concede that they wouldn't have been happy with cut and cover, which was the order of the day in the first half of the twentieth century.
Of course, if they had as much impact as you say, well,that's OK, because everywhere subways were built, property values skyrocketed. Fifth Av was close enough to benefit as well. Had they been much further, they would have screwed themselves.
In the end, it did not matter which street the subway was actually serving - so long as it was within easy walking distance.
Ron,
I think Paul hit the nail on the head in a couple of areas:
1) The hostility is not to a subway per se, but to the disruption caused during the years and years of construction. And that is not limited to the actual building of the subway itself, the utilities on the street usually need to be moved, before subway work begins. I mention this as it could be pointed out that the subway construction could be largely done by deep bore tunneling which would minimize the street level disruption.
And
2) If you will agree #1 has merit, then the business and residents on that block surely do have enormous political pull, so what they want, is very often what they get (or what they don't want is often what doesn't happen).
I concede that I underestimated that effect - because a Fifth Av line would have been constructed in the day when cut and cover was the rule. No, the Fifth Av and Park Av types would have been upset.
Today, it's not needed at all. A Fifth Av subway project would rightfully be rejected as a complete waste of money.
And would likely have been in the time of els, as well. On Park Ave, the NYC ran on the surface and later in a cut, and had stations. Second and Third Avenues had elevated service above 59th St, and below 59th St, there was elevated service on Second, Third, and Sixth. Once the subway opened, service below 42nd St was on Fourth Ave, so you had rapid transit on Second, Third, Fourth, and Sixth. The area was already well served, so there was no need.
-Hank
Agreed.
If someone proposed a Fifth Avenue subway today, assuming for the moment that there weren't lines on Sixth and Lexington, the upscale merchants would probably raise their eyebrows and say "Our clientele does not ride the (ick!) subway."
I don't know if a 5th Ave subway was ever proposed, but 5th is near the 6th Ave subway (and 6th Ave el before that) and the Lexington subway line. As for there ever being a 5th Ave subway? I don't see it an the near future. They have been trying to build the much more necessary 2nd Ave subway since about the 1930's, and it's still not built, although much closer than it ever was in the rescent past. There will not be a 5th Ave subway before a 2nd Ave subway is built, and even when and if the 2 Ave subway is built, it is still questionable because it is near 6th Ave and Lexington.
Further subway development (besides the Second Av subway) is best pursued as station enhancements - that is, improving stations' capacity to handle large numbers of people with comfort and safety, upgrading them to ADA compliance (which also makes them stroller, child, luggage and elderly-friendly) and perhaps expanding the air conditioning experiment being tried at Grand Central's IRT platforms.
"even when and if the 2 Ave subway is built, it is still questionable because it is near 6th Ave and Lexington."
No, I can't agree. Please pull your Manhattan maps out. The Lexington line is overcrowded and several blocks from many East Side customers; the Sixth Av lines do not serve the East Side Market at all.
"even when and if the 2 Ave subway is built, it is still questionable because it is near 6th Ave and Lexington."
No, I can't agree. Please pull your Manhattan maps out. The Lexington line is overcrowded and several blocks from many East Side customers; the Sixth Av lines do not serve the East Side Market at all.
No, I think you misunderstood what I said, but then I see how it could have been unclear. I meant, "Even when and if the 2 Ave subway is built, it is still questionable (that they would build a 5 Ave subway) because (5th Ave) is near 6th Ave and Lexington.
I wasn't questioning the 2 Ave subway, but the possibility of a 5th Ave subway.
Sorry. Yes I did misunderstand. Thank you for correcting me on that point.
My guess is a line down 5th Av would have been opposed by the well-to-do folks having addresses in the 60s and 70s. Where would it go to the north or south without major, major new construction? Sending it to join up with one of the existing lines wouldn't provide much (if any) benefit. I don't know much about the Bronx, but other than service to Co-Op City or the Orchard Beach area, it would seem there are enough lines already there. At the other end, 5th comes to an end at Washington Square, and below that the grid pretty much ends. Join it into the Houston or 6 Av/Church St lines? Majorly complicated and constrained by current capacity issues.
As for such a line ever being built, don't expect to be telling your great-grandchildren about the time before there was a subway there. The 2 Av line has been in the works for over 60 years now and there's still squabbling over funding and building it. Between the NIMBYs who would swoop down in droves, the disruption construction would cause, and the massive expenses involved, it just won't be.
"…As for such a line ever being built, don't expect to be telling your great-grandchildren about the time before there was a subway there. The 2 Av line has been in the works for over 60 years now and there's still squabbling over funding and building it. Between the NIMBYs who would swoop down in droves, the disruption construction would cause, and the massive expenses involved, it just won't be."
Manhattan isnt getting any less developed and the longer this is streched out, the harder its going to be, plus more "ammuntion" for NIMBY.
As much as I love subways, especially in certain areas of Manhattan, a monorail could be built faster, with less disruption and serve the same purpose as els without the negativity behind them. And not every monorail looks like the ones at Disney, ALWEG, and not as clunky
The one in Japan is an example
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Chiba.html
Wow, that is one nice looking Monorail.
Clearly, there's no need for a Fifth Av subway.
"The 2 Av line has been in the works for over 60 years now and there's still squabbling over funding and building it. Between the NIMBYs who would swoop down in droves, the disruption construction would cause, and the massive expenses involved, it just won't be."
The only obstacle (being solved now) is money. There is no NIMBY opposition to a Second Av subway at all - just the opposite. Community groups, businesses and individuals are begging the MTA to build it. No one is opposing it.
There would also be very little disruption. The tunnel is being deep-bored or blasted, meaning nobody on street level would notice anything except where stations are constructed. There's no issue at all. I wish all rapid transit construction could be that way.
There is no NIMBY opposition to a Second Av subway at all - just the opposite. Community groups, businesses and individuals are begging the MTA to build it. No one is opposing it.
No one is opposing the Second Avenue Subway because there's nothing to oppose. After 75 years, it's still the transportational equivalent of vaporware. If somehow the start of actual construction approached,* you can be sure that NIMBY's would come swarming like cockroaches. The fact that many groups, businesses and residents support the line means nothing, as in today's legal climate just a few determined opponents can delay any project long enough to kill it off.
* = Ralphy the cat is sitting next to me as I write this. It would be more likely for Ralphy to start singing arias from Wagner's Ring than it would be for construction to start on Second Avenue.
"No one is opposing the Second Avenue Subway because there's nothing to oppose. After 75 years, it's still the transportational equivalent of vaporware. If somehow the start of actual construction approached,* you can be sure that NIMBY's would come swarming like cockroaches."
I've been directly involved in this effort, so I am quite familiar with the political situation in Manhattan vis-vis the Second Av line. Your objections are non-issues.
A few, would, inevitably, try to stop it (this is democracy). They would not get far. A few NIMBYS tried to stop AirTrain. Result: Construction went ahead as scheduled, and a judge threw out the appeal. The issues were not identical, nor was the exact legal argument, but it's close enough.
"The fact that many groups, businesses and residents support the line means nothing, as in today's legal climate just a few determined opponents can delay any project long enough to kill it off."
Wrong. A few determined individuals must convince enough other individuals to stop the project, and then must convince a judge to do so in court. They must also have the support of state legislators in the affected district.
No one who is a potential NIMBY has, or will have, that kind of support in Manhattan. If a NIMBY appears, he/she will get to voice their opinion, and then will be swept aside. As a resident of the burbs (I surmise that from previous posts) you may not be in the city enough to gauge the depth of this. The Hamptons this aint.
Don't forget that lawsuits with even the most tenuous basis on reality can delay projects for a prolonged time. Determined opponents certainly are going to be able to shop around for sympathetic judges. And there's no shortage of legal arguments - for instance, that the tunnelling will weaken building foundations along the avenue. Sure, that can be disproved, but it'll take time. There's also the error-in-the-EIS claim, something that's not difficult to raise given the extreme complexity of those documents.
I am not trying to say that the opponents can stop construction permanently. But they can delay it for months or even years, and a delay of that nature could very well prove fatal.
AirTrain isn't a very good analogy because the people living along its route are vastly less well-off than the people on Second Avenue and vicinity.
"Don't forget that lawsuits with even the most tenuous basis on reality can delay projects for a prolonged time. Determined opponents certainly are going to be able to shop around for sympathetic judges."
They'd be wasting their time. You overestimate the value of that.
"I am not trying to say that the opponents can stop construction permanently. But they can delay it for months or even years, and a delay of that nature could very well prove fatal. "
They can only do that if a judge halts construction while the issues are fought over. That's very unlikely in this case. The NIMBYS can argue, but the tunnel boring will proceed.
"AirTrain isn't a very good analogy because the people living along its route are vastly less well-off than the people on Second Avenue and vicinity."
The NIMBYS were initially supported by hordes of cash supplied by the Airline Transport Association. It didn't help.
Even very well-off people are not likely to wanbt to spend $$$ on a losing cause. No judge is likely to halt construction during a lawsuit like this and if he/she did, an appeals court would very quickly reverse.
Consider something else: The EIS has already been circulated. The boring and blasting will begin in less than two years. If lawsuits were to be a major problem they would already have started to appear. No one has uttered so much as a peep.
There are of course many reasons why it was never seriously considered. And there certainly is no reason to put one there now, except for one!
The Only Reason to build another trunk line in Manhattan is because more lines are needed in the outlying areas of Queens and Brooklyn (and possibly also Staten Island). [And better service in the Bronx wouldn't hurt either.]
But where can such new service go? It cannot go on the existing trunk lines as they are already saturated.
They cannot use the existing tunnels or bridges, for they are already maxed out.
If new service is needed into Manhattan, then ipso facto, more service is needed in Manhattan. Where to put this new service. Well, it needs to go where people need to go to, and so WTC is a big draw, as is midtown. It has to be on an Avenue that does not already have a subway: If you think that disturbing a few water pipes and electric wires is disruptive......
The Myrtle - Fifth Avenue Subway seems to be one of the most reasonible approaches, if I do say so myself. Naturally the underground portions will need to be deep dug with minimal to no surface disruption. Fortunatly along the snobiest NIMBYst parts of Fifth Avenue the enterances can be shaded into Central Park a little so there might possible be no disruption whatsover of the surface street.
Naturally this is a computerised, high speed subway line, and incidently makes almost no junction with existing NYCT properites. (Well except for Jamaica Center-- which is a good place for such a convergence anyway.)
Elias
That's a good point. Excellent observation.
Extensions of existing lines do not require additional trunk capacity.
Additionally, lines such as the Broadway BMT have excess capacity now; so if an entirely new subway line were to be built in Queens, and there were concerns about Sixth Av or Eight Av trunk capacity, you could plug the new train into Broadway.
Of course, MTA did that. The original 63rd Street extension was plugged into both 6th Av and Broadway, and trains have been run that way.
The Second Av line will introduce additional trunk capacity, and service plans will probably see some Queens Blvd. service switched onto Second Av - thus making new capacity available on the other trunk lines.
On the R160 Award contract, it says that the R160 will go to the A, C, E, J/Z, L, M, N and Q lines, currently, I think, the A, N, and Q and once in a while E lines have the R44/46 and R68 cars, my qusetion being, where will these go BEING that will still have the R143 order going. To meet the Redbirds fate maybe????
The BMW.Williams F1 Team
The R68 Cars will not be retired, they are only 14 years old. The R44 and R46 may end up like the redbirds, we'll just have to wait and see...there have been conflicting reports on whether or not they will be retired. -Nick
I doubt the R68's are going anytime soon for the reason mentioned. They will be the last trains to go of any of the trains running now on the B division, and that will be many years from now by the time they get to them. It will not be with the R160's....maybe the R360's?
The R68 just went through a SMS, and the R68A's are due for one IIRC, so forget about retirement on that fleet.
The R46 MU's have been performing well, IMO, others here can give specific details on this fleet's MDBF.
The R44, which came in as a dog some 30 years ago, MAY be scrapped once a good portion of the R-160 contract has been excersized, but we are at least a few years away from that decision.
they will not be scrapped!!!!
sunk... maybe, but they also have asbestos i think
I think the MTA will rethink this strategy once remnants of asbestos turns up in our fish. This information will come to light long before the R-44/46 cars are sent seaworthy. How the EPA could approve something like this is beyond me....
how would they get to the fish... they are insdide the carbody
True, but when the carbody rusts through, the asbestos will seep out and contaminate the water around it. I believe it is as much of a threat underwater as it is airborne.
the carbody needs o2 to rust
You'd be incredibly wrong. Try reading scientific journals.
-Hank
Incredibly wrong about what? If they wanna do artificial reefs, that's fine. I'm just opposed to them using vintage subway equipment to do it. Why not use the scrap metal from the WTC structure?
Because Vintage subway equipment means nothing and WTC scrap metal does.
To whom? This was a tragic event, one many Americans (myself included) want to put behind us. Now that all the human remains have been sifted out, I can't think of a better way to dispose of the twisted remains.
Scrap metal
To companies willing to pay good money for the quality steel that can be recycled.
-Hank
Yeah, and I love how they keep praising the program (dumping) as a great thing for the enviroment. The fish were doing fine without our help long before we started "dumping" trains into the ocean.
Learn something about artifical reefs.
-Hank
So you endorse this?
Absolutely, as do a number of prominent scientists and scientific organizations. A number of ships have been purposely sunk in the Florida Keys to become artifical reefs. The sea life takes hold, providing food for the fish, who hang around. This results in a healthier ecosystem. When something 'intersting' is sunk, it brings tourist dollars from dive groups.
http://www.fla-keys.com/spiegelgrove/photogallery/index.htm
This is what a ship sunk in 1986 looks like one sea life takes over-
Tugboat Spartan NJSCUBA.COM
-Hank
When something 'intersting' is sunk, it brings tourist dollars from dive groups.
If have to admit, I don't know too much about artificial reefs, but I do understand your point now. I also have to agree that the subway cars will make interesting diving spots. BTW, how many feet down are the subway cars? Can they be seen without artificial light for divers? I have to admit you intrigued me now about the "tourist" aspect of it. I am actually looking forward to the photos they bring up years from now about how they will look in their new life....I love seeing photos of the Titanic and other shipwrecks, so on a smaller scale (or larger scale considering the coume of trains down there) it will be interesting to see them.
I really have to apologize for sounding like a broken record, since this is my fourth post on this exact subject, but here I go again:
There are some ex-PATH K cars located on the Sea Girt Artificial reef off the Northern New Jersey Coast Line. The cars are in around 60-80' feet of water, IIRC, thats between 2 and three Atmospheres. The cars are in plenty of light, and Dive Lights would only need to be used in the dark, or possibly wreck penetration. The cars are a haven for sea creatures of all kinds, and as such are popular amongst divers for pictures and also for lobstering.
Both of these sites have Info on or Pics of the Cars:
NJscuba.net
Herb Segars' Photography Calls them SEPTA cars, oh well.
There will be no asbestos in fish. Asbestos is only a threat if it is FRIABLE. It must be INHALED. That means ASBESTOS DUST. Proper removal of asbestos involves making and keeping it nice and wet, so that the particles stay together, like mud. In water, there is no way for the asbestos to become airborne, and thus it is completely non-threatening. Besides, I am sure it tastes terrible to the fish.
-Hank
Proper removal of asbestos involves making and keeping it nice and wet, so that the particles stay together, like mud. In water, there is no way for the asbestos to become airborne, and thus it is completely non-threatening. Besides, I am sure it tastes terrible to the fish.
Asbestos is not a man-made substance. It is naturally occuring in the earth, and is mined like many other substances. It poses no threat to the earth or the water. It does pose a threat if it becomes airbourne and you breathe the stuff.
Elias
wet asbestos is not a threat to the environment.
Asbestos exposure increases the risk of mesothelioma, due to the fibers being breathed into the lungs and sticking in the air sacs. Once there, they don't come out.
The risk of mesothelioma is increased in workers who have constant exposure to it without protection. The average person who happens to pass through an area with asbestos fibers in the air will not have a measurable increase in cancer risk from that one exposure - but where there is asbestos present, it should be mitigated.
I recently renovated a house, and had a state certified contractor remove loose, fraying asbestos blankets wrapped around pipes. The crew created a negative pressure system with houses and plastic sheeting, then watered down the asbestos, scraping it off the pipes. An encapsulant was then applied to the cleaned pipe to prevent any stray fibers from becoming airborne. Air sampling after the job was completed was required. After the all-clear, I was allowed to remove the plastic sheeting.
The asbestos went to an approved dump.
Sounds expensive...
-Hank
NOOOOOOO!!!! Not the R-44/46's !!!
NOOOOOOO!!!! Not the R-44/46's !!!
But did you object to the departure of the Redbirds, or the 16s or the 1-9s?
I remember when the 46s were new, and I thought they were the cat's meow. Well, I have had a new cat since then, Several in fact.
The dead ones don't meow anymore.
Elias
I never liked the Redbirds, or all of those old cars.
or all of those old cars.
Most people like the cars of their childhood. I know I do. When I rode them I hated the R16's and the R27-30's. At the end when the R27-30 where in their final days, I kind of made my peace with them, as they did have an attractive final scheme. The R 16's I hated to the end, but now actually kind of like them, and would do anything to ride them again! I always liked the R10's, both grafittied and in their very attractive last scheme - the "greenbirds" - because I had such good times on them riding out to Rockaway for days at the beach.
As for all the classes before the R10's, I have no experience with. I can enjoy them from photos, and definitely understand why everyone loves them. But it is hard to have an affection for trains you never rode or had experience with.
I remember the R1-9s. I used to ride (car) to Kew Gardens with my father, and then take the (F) in to work with him. Later in the day I'd ride all of the subways up and down the line.
Dad said the IND had the newest cars, but clearly he had not been on the other lines since the 50's, because the R-27s on the BMT were a real eye opener!
But I still have a fond spot for the 1-9s, *that* (according to me) was what a subeay car was *supposed* to be, with the conductor standing up there between the cars.
Elias
which car class is the first "old one"?
"NOOOOOOO!!!! Not the R-44/46's !!!"
I couldn't agree with you more, Acela...but you are a part of the conflicting reports I was talking about; the other day you insited that these cars would be retired with the R-160 contract, but that differs from another post on Wednesday. -Nick
The R44 and R46 were overhauled in the 1990's. They have another 20 years to go before they'll need retiring.
"The R44 and R46 were overhauled in the 1990's. They have another 20 years to go before they'll need retiring"
They did both have the overhaul, but I don't know if both those orders would last another 20 years or not. I give the R-46 a better chance of survival, since the MTA had fewer problems with them. -Nick
The routes the R160 will serve has very little bearing on which car classes will be retired. It is common for the TA to shift things arround from time to time. If the (Q) gets R160's, it could always send its R68s somewhere else, say the (F) for arguments' sake.
:-) Andrew
Well should it be?? Hmmmm.............
It needs to be both. It needs to operate as a well-run business, according to market princples as well as social ones, and it also needs to realize that it is providing an important service, not corn flakes.
But these same principles would apply if the MTA were a private business or government owned.
>>> It needs to operate as a well-run business <<<
I agree with your post. The term business as used in the original post is too ambiguous. If business is defined as a profit making entity, run to maximize profits, the MTA, and most government services cannot be run as businesses. OTOH, certain service goals have to be set and the entity must be run as efficiently as possible to meet those goals. Many of the tools of business are used to measure how well the organization is run, and the principles of running a business cannot be ignored.
Tom
Id does have to be run as a business, and it does have to make a profit.
However, the bottom line need not be one readily recognisible to accountants!
Obviously *all* of its opeating costs, capital costs, financial costs etc must be met somehow.
Clearly much of it must come from the farebox, especially the day-to-day operating costs. Others will need to come from city state and federal coffers. But all of this money needs to be used and accounted for wisely. (Arthur Anderson, you keep out of this, you hear!)
The subway, as city infrastructure does add value to the city, and to the properties around it. It adds value to businesses in mid-town as they are able to attract more well-qulified and edeicated employees. It benefits the residential areas, both as in increase in the property values, and in the desireability of whole neighborhoods that have access to clean afordable and swift transportation.
Yadda yadda yadda....
It does need to run as a business, effeciently, effectively, but not all of its assets, its value can be written in a ledger book.
Elias
If business is defined as a profit making entity, run to maximize profits, the MTA, and most government services cannot be run as businesses.
We're not disagreeing. However "run to maximize profits" is sometimes a code word for "rob your customers blind."
In a well-run business, maximize profits is not synonymous with "milk 'em dry." Some of the most profitable business are expert at identifying their markets, serving their customers efficiently, reducing actual waste, maintaining plant to avoid catastophic repair costs, having a good relationship with their employees which translates to employees that are happier amd serve clients more willingly, and actively looking for new products or policies to increase business.
Striking the right balance of all of the above (and we could probably add others) maximizes profits, or (in a subsidized business) reduces dependence on subsidies.
A badly run business tries to survive by increasing prices, demanding concessions from government, cutting service, and hiring excess management to squeeze labor, and running down its capital plant.
Which model sounds more like the subway system for much of the past six decades?
Some of the most profitable business are expert at identifying their markets, serving their customers efficiently, reducing actual waste, maintaining plant to avoid catastophic repair costs, having a good relationship with their employees which translates to employees that are happier amd serve clients more willingly, and actively looking for new products or policies to increase business.
Not that a successful business has to do all of the above. Good treatment of employees, in particular. Wally World has become the largest corporation in the world despite its well-known practice of treating its "Wal-Martians" in a (heh heh!) sub-optimal manner. Of course, that's probably because its workers are easily trained and easily replaced, nearly a fungible commodity.
Insofar as they can get away with it, its because the other employment opportunities for its employees are worse or nonexistent.
Who knows if they market model will last forever.
(Insofar as they can get away with it, its because the other employment opportunities for its employees are worse or nonexistent.
Who knows if they market model will last forever.)
Walmart benefitted from having young employees, with low health care costs and few retirees. These employees were given stock in lieu of some salary, which works as long as the stock keeps going up. Whne the company, and the workforce, ages, and the stock starts going up, we'll see how well they do. My guess is they'll do OK, but not as well as in the past.
The MTA should run as efficiently as possible, and try to cover as much of its expenses from fares as possible. The more it does so, teh more it will be able to improve service. Fool's gold -- higher wages and less working years before retirement for employees, saving the fare, lower subsidies -- nearly killed the system once. It can happen again.
Walmart benefitted from having young employees, with low health care costs and few retirees.
Wal-Mart actually hires many older people. Most likely, these older workers are looking to supplement their retirement incomes rather than trying to support themselves or their families, and hence aren't too concerned about the low wages.
Wal-Mart also hire a large number of handicapped people.
Elias
The MTA should run as efficiently as possible, and try to cover as much of its expenses from fares as possible.
Unfortunately, the MTA has assets that they are not exploiting. Assets that can provide revenue that at the very least will help to protect the fare. (Yes, the fare will have to go up no matter what.... but other income is also a good thing no?)
1) Rental or Retail space in subways.
2) Rental of Resturant Space in subways (especially since resturants must have restroom facilities)
3) Voulnteerism: Railfans (of sorts) to man information kiosks in important stations. Bet you you *could* find some, eh?
4) Communities 'adopting' a station, fixing it up and keeping the station clean, and special. (ie. the local Lions Club or Garden Club) Might do wonderful tings for many of the elevated stations.
And I'll bet you we could find other assets that would help the bottom line *if they tried!*
Elias
Rental of Resturant Space in subways
Walking through Times Square station yesterday (from the 2 to the Shuttle) I was reminded of the huge lunch counter restaurant that used to be on the south wall of the passageway, just to the right (west) of the BMT entrance.
The TA got rid of quite a bit of food vending and other revenue opportunities because they decided that having people getting food and maybe walking away and dropping litter (and therefore having to maintain that endangered species, the station cleaner) was more trouble than it was worth.
Such facilities existed for decades. I guess the TA could be so cavalier at such revenue producing concessions, since they're so much more skilled at whining to politicians for money.
decided that having people getting food and maybe walking away and dropping litter (and therefore having to maintain that endangered species, the station cleaner) was more trouble than it was worth.
It is a fairly simple proposition. You make maintenance of the are the responsibility of the tennant. McDs keeps their joints spiffy.
Instead of the old lunch counter in the open, I am thinking of enclose, air conditioned retail spaces, with a place to collect the litter on the way out.
Have plenty of trash recepitcals around. Heck they could even be self cleaning!
Elias
kindda like 42st 8th ave PA.
4) Communities 'adopting' a station, fixing it up and keeping the station clean, and special. (ie. the local Lions Club or Garden Club) Might do wonderful tings for many of the elevated stations.
I know the parsons blvd on hillside has a plaque on the east fare control that says that hillcreast (ghetto school) HS sponsors it. Though I doubt that they still do that.
"4) Communities 'adopting' a station, fixing it up and keeping the station clean, and special. (ie. the local Lions Club or Garden Club) Might do wonderful tings for many of the elevated stations."
Might not be such a bad idea if done properly. Always wonder tho, what happens to that $1.50 after u pass through the turnstile? How is it distributed?
Take a staion, or a group of stations together, ever 2 cents goes into a box specifically for that station or group of stations maintainance (retiling in the future or other future renovations)
"4) Communities 'adopting' a station, fixing it up and keeping the station clean, and special. (ie. the local Lions Club or Garden Club) Might do wonderful tings for many of the elevated stations."
Might not be such a bad idea if done properly. Always wonder tho, what happens to that $1.50 after u pass through the turnstile? How is it distributed?
Take a staion, or a group of stations together, ever 2 cents goes into a box specifically for that station or group of stations maintainance (retiling in the future or other future renovations)
Does anything like this happen already?
Read through most of the post, but one of the earliest, where Walmart was brought up as an example, raised some other thoughts.
If anything, Walmart has one thing to deal with that the MTA does not… competitors.
Whether the MTA is run as a business, public service, or using the most effective principles from both to achieve effiency, where is the competition? (which gives an incentive to be the best to keep their customers)
The MTA currently control the subways, commuter lines, and majority of the buses without direct competition. One could argue that there are competitors (some bus companies, taxis, your own car, or on a grander scale, government funds) that compete for customers/funds, but the MTA itself is a vast service in the Metroplitan area.
Its like having one grocery store in a 20 block radius of a neighborhood. It become a necessity; it knows it, so on certain levels, it can do what it feels. As annoying as the fare hike is, you cant just say "to hell with' em" and go for the competitor thats at a lower rate (Kmart, Costco, American Airlines, USAir, ect), because there is no other, in this case, subway company
The whole idea of another subway company may be ludicious, but remember, it got the system to where it is now (in terms of competing, to provide this service to the people of this city) Not meant to be childish rantings or knock at the MTA, but just something thrown out to think about… the idea of competition and how it pushes a business, or even a public service to be better. Any thoughts?
The whole idea of another subway company may be ludicious, but remember, it got the system to where it is now (in terms of competing, to provide this service to the people of this city) Not meant to be childish rantings or knock at the MTA, but just something thrown out to think about… the idea of competition and how it pushes a business, or even a public service to be better. Any thoughts?
Well if you go back in time you can look at the pre-1940 BMT Corporation. Ideas like the BMT Bluebirds were born out of a competitive atmosphere. We can only imagine how far advanced subway car design would be today if they had remained in business...
BMT-Lines.com
Whether the MTA is run as a business, public service, or using the most effective principles from both to achieve effiency, where is the competition? (which gives an incentive to be the best to keep their customers)
The MTA currently control the subways, commuter lines, and majority of the buses without direct competition. One could argue that there are competitors (some bus companies, taxis, your own car, or on a grander scale, government funds) that compete for customers/funds, but the MTA itself is a vast service in the Metroplitan area.
You could say that the MTA competes with other parts of the country. In other words, if service on the various MTA lines gets bad enough, businesses can and will begin relocating to other areas. As the state controls the MTA, and obviously has a strong vested interest in business rentention, it does (or should) be concerned about this form of competiton.
"…You could say that the MTA competes with other parts of the country. In other words, if service on the various MTA lines gets bad enough, businesses can and will begin relocating to other areas. "
Agreed.
For businesses, location and access has alot to do with its success; if it not easily accessible, whats the point in staying (then again, some communities may like that, but not going there now). Another factor that has to be thrown which cause many business departure… Rent. Its getting too expensive to keep business or live in Manhattan.
Business like 2 things, low rent and easy access. Brooklyn Marriot can be an example; cheaper to build there but great acess to major lines (inevitably, like Manhattan will get/has become too overpriced, but still, its about accessibility)
Before this gets too long, The point is this is a city, and business (and people) should not be either confined to areas due to transportation or lack there of. Sometime I feel the MTA has too much on its plate and some competition would create the much needed lines, even out the bills, and open the whole city up to more possiblities
And the congregation says AMEN.
Lol And I was going to put "not trying to get preachy"
Everyone in this group has there thing, love, obsession, whatever you want to call it, mine is subway routes and extensions :)
Staten Island Express Bus Service is a perfect example. The MTA ran long, weak, and slow routes. Private carriers charged the same fare and had nicer equipment. MTA got pimpsmacked every day until the union had enough.
MTA orders the same equipment as those private carriers, started running some X17 and X31 trips via New Jersey, boosted services throughout the island and reduces the fare to get rid of most of the competitors. Although Staten Island used to run buses from 1982 in regular service when Brooklyn started getting Nova Suburbans, they also replaced most of the newer Orions and Novas assigned to Staten Island.
Now, only the serious private carriers continue to do business regularly.
I WISH that the MTA could be this responsive citywide. When they get some competition in other places from buses, they just might.
With buses theres a chance, but as for subway/rail lines, the MTA doesnt have the competition, so can move at their own pace :-|
I wonder if Bloomberg, Trump, or some outside company just swept in, got through all the red tape and built a monorail down Second Avenue. Cheaper price, like $1, run effeciently, but kept the profits. How fast would the MTA start tunneling just to knock it out
I've been thinking about that, but monorail requires a 6' median. So what do we do with traffic? Do we:
1) Turn Second Avenue into a two way street.
2) Turn the two westernmost lanes into a transitway for buses and cabs, then have the median, then the general lanes.
3) Wipe out all parking on Second Avenue and pay for 3000 cars to have short-term parking.
I'm leaning towards 2, but 3 is appealing too.
Found this site a while back and couldnt get over this one monorail. Had the track above to cancel out the effects of weather. Posts are off to the side, could be on sidewalks; could work nice for 2nd Ave
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Chiba.html
here another similar on:
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Shonan.html
The sides of the track box could be refaced, so it doesnt look as clunky
Both would be tantamount to putting els on Second Avenue. I have a feasibility study on several monorail concepts from the same web site, and the thickness of both of those monorail concepts would be troublesome in terms of shadows.
Although you could put trucks on the bottom and have a dual mode subway train...and a heavy, complicated piece of machinery.
I prefer the monobeam concepts from Futrex and OTG Incorporated and these concepts can be found at www.futrex.com and www.otg-inc.com. I'm leaning towards the System 21 concept because of the grade separated switches and the fact that you could always stack an express beam above the local beam. However, the HighRoad concept has a turntable that would eliminate the need for loops.
nearly a fungible commodity.
Now there's a vocab word!
Corn Flake is vital to the fabric of American life. Do you have any idea how many people would starve until lunch time if cornflakes were not produced?
AEM7
OMG, I never thought of that! I think we should increase the MTA subsidy so they can make sure that every single rider is presented with a box of corn flakes each morning.
I think we should increase the MTA subsidy so they can make sure that every single rider is presented with a box of corn flakes each morning.
We recently bought a box of made-in-Egypt corn flakes at one of those 99-cent stores. They weren't bad, actually.
Can we get premium Corn Flake Special K Strawberry Edition if we buy a monthly Metrocard? Also, the Metrocard needs to mark "off" once it has been swiped for the first time on a given day, so that monthly Metrocard holders can't scam the system.
AEM7
Only enough cornflakes to eat in 18 minutes.
There is something called a snickers bar. High calorie, and sweet. gets you up in the morning. I wish they woould fortifie it with vitamins and minerals like they do with real ceral.
That is how NJT works. Its a private bussiness/corporation w/ a State Contract. The state pays them an annual fee to run the services and they can pocket any extra they make on said services. Bacially, NJT Copr Profit = State Subsudy + fares - operating costs. I am pretty sure that the state owns the rolling stock and also pays for capital improvements.
What does "they can pocket any extra" mean? Where does this "profit" go?
It goes to NJT and their owners as NJT is a private corporation. They are contracted to run whatever service the state DoT thinks is necessary. I believe that NJT is paid a subsudy that combined with the fares and other revenue streams funds the service and provides NJT Corp with a fair market rate of return. If NJT corp finds a way to cut costs and still provide their contractual obligations they can do so and pocket the differance as the budget is worked out at the beginning of the fiscal year.
It goes to NJT and their owners as NJT is a private corporation.
But who actually gets it? Shareholders? Officials? WHo gets to actually spend it?
If the money goes into the corporation, what is it spent on?
It goes to fat bankers in the Bahamas then it gets paid out as interest to state officials who have Bahamas bank accounts as a "special dividend".
It goes to fat bankers in the Bahamas then it gets paid out as interest to state officials who have Bahamas bank accounts as a "special dividend".
I'm sorry, but I am not allowed to discuss that customer's secret illegal bank account.
I don't know if its privately owned or publically traded. All I know that NJT is a private contractor, not a state owned bussiness like the MTA, LIRR or MNRR.
If only NJT were a private corporation. Read this...
http://www.njtransit.com/an_corporateinfo_history.shtm
...and then please stop spreading falsehoods.
David
NJ Transit is, in fact, a corporation run for the public benefit. It is owned by the citizens of the State of Neew Jersey,with the federal government having jurisdiction stemming from FRA regulation, and NJ Transit's use of federal capital funding and operating subsidies etc.
I just read that webpage. It left many questions unanswered. What I want to know is how this institutional arrangement is any different from that at LIRR. NJT is clearly the operator here, and LIRR is also an operator, and both provide service as dictated by NJDOT and NYSDOT respectively. How is it different?
AEM7
I think the confusion is that "corporation" is being equated as "private business." A corporation is simply an "artificial person," an entity that is legally treated in many ways as though it were a natural person.
The LIRR was rechartered as a public benefit corporaion. It is a separate legal entity, notwithstanding its having to follow the bidding of the MTA and NYSDOT and could legally be sold back more or less intact to the private sector. (Don't hold your breath for this to happen.)
I think this is loosely what happened with the Penn Central -> Conrail -> NS/CSX deal.
a detail or two. early in the PC bankruptcy, the consultants analysis presented what was ultimately allowed--jettison 80 % of the route mileage losing only 20% of carloadings. BUT when originally formed Conrail was designed to CONTINUE most routes thus its first years it soaked up money just as the predecessors had. It was the change in Federal policy which resulted in the massive abandonnments of the early 80's by ALL of the majors, which allowed Conrail to become 'profitable' (not counting the Fed money or the payoffs to the predecesor co's.
One mght remember that 1. CS (pre X) blinked in 1976 when offered E-L and RDG/CNJ for $1 and the continuing union contracts, then when the Feds sold Conrail back into the stock market NS tried to buy it all. CSX used every political card they had to block NS resulting in a two decade span for a successful operation.
I think the way it turned out was for the best all around.
I don't know the circumstaces of the offer of E-L/RDG/CNJ to NS, but as a shareholder I don't think I wouldn't have been thrilled to purchase these so long as Conrail remained in existence as a government-supported entity, if indeed that's what the offer would've entailed.
As a stockholder, I disagree. The Chessie System's lack of a decent route to NY (the largest market d'oh) was always a weakness. IIRC, Conrail was notorius for delaying the 'run-through' connections for them. Remember also, that B&O had oqned 42 & of RDG so that part of the deal was essentially giving them back their own WITHOUT the indebtedness. And at the time E-L was the ne functional RR in the mix. Immediately after the onral takeover E-L engines were everywhere--they were still running, and it had been E-L which did the thrugh runs w/BN of containers resulting in pix of BN F45's (a personal asthetic favorite) in NJ.
Of course the old Erie 'wide guage clearances' weren't a bad bargain either. 20-20 hindsight for dounle stacks. It was the Staggers Act which changed the playing field for everyone. As a final thought, contemplate the cash outlays for lobbyists, the stock prices etc. of the final Conrail split and the intermediate fight when the IPO happened--would the cost of having a competitive route to New York have been so high?
I see your point, but there may be a little 20-20 hindsight there.
Knowing the nature of government, and not knowing that CR would eventually be completely returned to the private sector, CSX could have ended up with a hostile competitor with access to government influence and the government purse strings.
I can see people on Capitol Hill blustering about "boosting Conrail against the unfair competition of the money-grabbing CSX Corporation, interested only in profit and not the public interest."
Tell me it couldn't have happened.
FWIW a recent Trains Magazine article gushed all over CS (X) political savvy and lobbying efforts preventing NS from getting Conrail in round 2 (the IPO in the 80's) . But you are correct that other scenario's could have happened. BTW it was the "USRA" (2) the Fed created advisory group which wanted to give E-L and RDG/CNJ to Chessie in 1975-6. I believed at the time it was a good deal. It was said in the railfan and business press that Chessie was unwilling to take on the labor contracts without major concessions. I am sad that the Erie west of PA/Buffalo is weeds now. They were never my favorite but they had class. I once got off the B&O in Akron to take an E-L train the rest of the way to Chicago costing several extra hours just to sample the route. It was a nice ride even without the B&O amenities (dome, nicer diner). I also later, rode the last westbound Phoebe Snow out of Hoboken to Scranton.
once got off the B&O in Akron to take an E-L train the rest of the way to Chicago costing several extra hours just to sample the route. It was a nice ride even without the B&O amenities (dome, nicer diner).
The Erie was like an unwanted stepchild in the whole Conrail deal. Erie joined Conrail relatively late in its planning, resulting in many Erie lines getting the axe just because Conrail had already got its routes planned out and didn't want to mess with it. However many parts of the ex-Erie still exists as shortlines. In fact there is one section that is still used today as a CSX mainline, albeit single tracked. That section is between Galion (Ohio) and Marion (Ohio). In that section the Big Four (CCCStL) shared a RoW with the Erie, and when Conrail chose its RoW through Mansfield (Ohio) they chose to keep the adjacent PRR mainline to Bucyrus (Ohio). The Erie RoW between Galion and Mansfield still exists, and is a pretty good bike ride. The old Erie depot on Washington St in Galion is very pretty also.
Oh my goodness. I miss Ohio.
Map. The Erie is shown as "Conrail Railroad" next to Rt. 309; the CCCStL went Northeast towards Crestline (Ohio) where it crosses the PRR. Today the Erie is abandoned and the CCCStL line is CSX.
I have photos from Galion depot and various other places along that line. Will post them if I get a few requests.
AEM7
That doesn't answer my question. Let me restate my question. How is the institutional arrangements under which LIRR is operated is different from that under NJTransit?
I did not mention the word "corporation" in my original question.
It is important to realize that NJTransit and LIRR routes do not "go out to bid". NYSDOT and NJDOT designs the services, and LIRR and NJTransit hire railroaders to operate them. NYSDOT cannot suddenly decide that another "corporation" can run those services instead of the LIRR. Likewise, NJDOT do not put their rail operations out to bid.
AEM7
What exactly does NYSDOT have to do with the operation of the Long Island Rail Road? LIRR is a component of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). LIRR is a corporation, with all of its stock owned by the State of New York.
David
With the day to day operation of the LIRR, nothing. Nor does the MTA, for that matter.
NYSDOT and the MTA, acting singly and together, have the power to specify broad requirements for the LIRR, from planning to service levels, and coordination with other entities of the MTA.
More particualrly, the LIRR ultimately relies on NYSDOT to approve its planning ideas, especially capital plans.
To my knowledge, NYSDOT has absolutely nothing to do with operation of the LIRR. The MTA's capital program (LIRR portion and otherwise) is overseen by the Capital Program Review Board, which is a state entity that is not NYSDOT. Service levels are determined by the LIRR and approved (or disapproved) by the MTA Board.
David
[More particualrly (sic), the LIRR ultimately relies on NYSDOT to approve its planning ideas, especially capital plans.]
Um, go back and re-read David's post. He clearly stated that LIRR was part of MTA, not NYSDOT. While both ultimately report to Governor George, they are NOT the same agency.
That, by the way, is the primary organizational difference between the MTA and NJT. NJT is explicitly part of NJDOT, with the Transportation Commissioner doubling as NJT's Chairman. The MTA, on the other hand, is completely separate and distinct from NYSDOT.
So you're saying NYSDOT is a highway agency and they don't have anything to do with mass transit or commuter rail? I find that very surprising. How are they supposed to coordinate investment? AEM7
On paper, this may be true. But we're dealing with political relationships here, not just corporate ones.
On paper, neither the Governor nor the Mayor can directly do a d*mn thing about the MTA and its subsidary and affiliated agencies, but when they announce certain things they happen. How do you think these things happen?
One of the conduits of power and politics is NYSDOT. When there's horse trading between diverse interests, NYSDOT is there. And that's about all I should really say about the matter.
On paper, the Governor appoints the Chairman of the MTA Board, and thus has full control. If the Governor wants to (illegally) divert MTA's sales-tax-for-transit funds to restore Joe Bruno's barn door (again!), the Chairman will cheer and applaud like a good puppet.
I *promise* I am NOT going to carry on with my political speeches prior to the "reset" here ... but just to put this in perspective from someone who WORKED for the Paturkey (and Padre Mario as well) and covered politics at the state level for nearly 20 years and a former PEF member who worked with the legislature and the "second floor" I do need to comment here.
The MTA board is appointed by several political interests, but the MAJORITY of appointments comes from the "second floor" (Governor's office with the "advise and consent" of the NYS Senate (Bruno). The preponderance of STATE interest trumps the CITY by an order of magnitude. NYSDOT is ALSO the "second floor" but MTA will trump DOT whenever it involves mass transit and the railroads and busses. NYSDOT may refuse to fix potholes and might not fix the bridge on time, but MTA calls the shots on its own turf and all it oversees, subject to "the pleasure of the governor." (this last phrase by the way is LAW - the Governor can fire anyone on the spot if he's not pleased, such is the reality of those in "Management Confidential (OMCE) and appointees." There's no union representation, so they do what they're told. ALWAYS.
Second floor tells any subordinates to dance, and the top hats and canes come out. Diversion of funds is also at the pleasure of the governor. And yes, if money is wanted for a certain train station, it gets diverted on demand or heads roll.
Bear in mind ... folks living in the city keep their eye on City Hall. Things like the MTA were created out of political expedience since folks in the city are largely unaware of even the EXISTENCE of the state government and even if noticed, ignored. This is how thing can get done owing to the parochial mindset of folks in the city blissfully unaware of what upstate is doing when nobody's looking.
But NYSDOT? Only important in their OWN mind in the greater scheme. Da Gov wants something, he GETS it. :)
Having explained that the MTA is actually a "state" entity, you guys are going to LOVE this as I pull two threads I replied to together into a "uh-oh" ...
Had a friend of mine over Saturday night who happens to work for a city Assemblycritter who was telling me one of those "you ain't gonna believe THIS sh*t" ... David Gunn, "Mr. Amtrak" basically shot down Joe Bruno's $53 million railroad monument over in Troy. As a result, the station will *NOT* be used by Amtrak. Among some of the plans to escape the "New York Museum of Boondoggles and Waste" status now applied to the station (I posted a link to the political cartoon in the Times Union a week or two ago here) our anointed are plotting a new scam ... "who do we stick with the bill before WE get blamed for this mess?"
Talk has gone around about the CDTA (Capital (sic) District Transit authority) converting the train station into a glorified bus terminal as a "Joe Bruno Regional Transit Center" or an even BOLDER move ... thumbing the legislative nose at Amtrak and demanding that the MTA *extend* Metro North to "Albany/Rensselaer" and take away the run from Amtrak entirely, making the Joe Bruno Boondoggle into the northern terminal of MNRR instead of Poughkeepsie. Sticking point is the good Senator wants to EXEMPT his county from having to pay the MTA taxes which are paid by people NOW served by the MTA in their "county."
Now THERE'S a scam ... what's being kicked around is diesel service from Poughkeepsie similar to the old days when you'd change trains at Croton if you were going north to avoid electrification costs for NOW while they continue to strongarm Amtrak to buy the pig in a poke. If Amtrak doesn't relent, then electrification to Rensselaer, once again at MTA expense, so as to open up the shrine one way or another.
Just thought folks would be interested. Legislature's closed right now, so if this IS for real, it'll be a while before they invoke this little plot. But it's a hummer. It'd put MTA out instantly for $53 million, plus trains. No cost to Bruno's district though and the reason WHY this is being floated is "cheaper fares to NYC by letting MTA do it instead of those awful, expensive Amtrak folks."
Moo.
WHOA! Since I go to school in the Capital District, I'm going to have my bucket of popcorn out to watch this drama unfold.
Hey, I'll use the station if you subsidize me :)
Glad for us insects to know the State of New York looks out for those it considers human beings.
Rail politics *is* a spectator sport. :)
DING DING DING DING! Round, I mean track one :D
Heh. Now if only it could be more like the XFL ... hell, I'd settle for our leaders wearing boas and latex tights. Ewwwww.
NO NO NO! Unless it was on Pay Per View :)
Has anyone bothered to speak to CSX about this? How would they feel about more passenger trains on those tracks? And aren't those Metro-North trains geared to 90MPH only? Boy, just imagine this scenario:
"Dude, I was chasing this Metro-North train on Track 1. All of a sudden, an AMTRAK train pulled up on Track 2 and I nearly wet my pants! Two Gennies going head-to-head, with the passengers cheering inside. AMAZING!"
This is going to be great!
Actually, Rensselaer and south is CPRail country - doesn't turn to CrashSmashX until it crosses the river and blows past Smallbany without stopping. CPRail has no objections to Amtrak and has already agreed to having rails moved if Amtrak wanted that. Unlike CSX, CP believes in cooperation so long as it doesn't harm their scheduled runs. They're pretty flexible.
But don't be placing any bets ... I'm sure this is nothing more than one of those lead-filled political trial balloons ... put the rumor out there so Amtrak will say, "ooooooooo, we're so scared, we'll do whatever you want." Just another shakedown yahoo upstate sidewalk act. :)
I can't see ripping off the MTA for free trains flying downstate. Assuming anyone would notice, of course.
I could...they could charge more on our phone bills to extend the MCTD north to Saratoga Springs and Schenectady. Then, MTA can run to Saratoga and the commuter rail too. They could put a 2 or 3% tax before someone starts crying.
It'd never happen in Joey's district. If his constituents had to pay a tax, he'd explode. That's why I get such a chuckle out of all this. He thinks that the MTA would come in and do it all for free PLUS take that useless rail station off his hands. Of course, all of this is to squeeze Amtrak since many believe that they're making fistfuls of cash on the Empire Corridor. Heh.
But Amtrak wouldn't be the first or the last "business" driven out by a political shakedown.
*COUGH*,*COUGH*,Enron,*COUGH*,*COUGH*
One minute, they are doing a feasibility study on an oil pipeline through Afghanistan, the next minute bombs are falling on weddings and they are out of business. Just goes to show how quickly things can change.
He could package an increased downstate tax with the arrival of new train cars to replace the ACMU 1100s (all of a sudden, Metro-North could always tag on to LIRR's order, even if they are not fond of the cars), hold steady commuter rail fares, increase shuttle buses from the new MCTD district territories to the existing rail stations to meet the MNR trains, and increase our taxes downstate (in the existing zone) on phone bills by burying it in those "improvements".
Good thing the state doesn't have cruise missiles then - Amtrak'd be a goner. In all sincerity, I see this as nothing more than a political game of chicken, but yeah should be interesting to see what happens. After all, no BILLS have been introduced ... this was a "leak." So far I note none of the press has picked up on it as yet and that makes it all the more suspicious.
The Metro North Bombardiers are limited to 100 mph the MNCW gennies are 110 just like Amtraks.
Thanks for the correction.
How would you feel about taking a Hudson Line train from GCT to Croton Harmon with two stops (125 Street and Yonkers), then all stops to Albany? You might be able to run bus times with that schedule.
"How would you feel about taking a Hudson Line train from GCT to Croton Harmon with two stops (125 Street and Yonkers), then all stops to Albany? You might be able to run bus times with that schedule. "
IF the MTA ran trains to Albany, they'd probably be semi-express above Croton (e.g., Peekskill, Beacon, PGH, Rhinecliff, Hudson), with a connection to a train making all stops to PGH. In other words, only 2 stops more (Peekskill and Beacon) than the current Albany trains.
Sounds unlikely though. Even if Bruno wants it, the NIMBYs in northern Dutchess County have already vetoed MN expansion to Rhinecliff, so it's not as though there wouldn't be political opposition.
Ain't that a kick in the head[and I mean KICK!!!].Wasn't that idea floated around years ago or something? I mean, it would be nice to have MTAMR up here[fare would be cheaper, thats for sure]but..WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT??? US???? THATS WHAT ITS LOOKING LIKE TO ME!!!!. Isn't it enough that I pay for schools,CDTA,and every darn thing else around here,whats next? get taxed for clippin' my freakin toenails? ComeON... There has to be a better way.... this sucks Big time!!!!
Well, the most telling thing is that the bill drafting people haven't heard doowahdiddy about this, so it sounds like nothing more than a blind threat that has no meat behind it. Certainly hasn't impressed GUNN from the looks of it. :)
But for now, the politicos are on hiatus, stuffing their wallets. Shhhhh. Be vewy vewy quiet. Heh.
A corporation is simply an "artificial person," an entity that is legally treated in many ways as though it were a natural person.
Are American corporations liable to an inheritance tax then? It's one of the great unfairnesses of British taxation that every 30 years or so a family gets hit with 40% (yes, it is that extortionate) inheritance tax, but companies don't get taxed when their members die or step down.
Corporations don't die in the sense that natural people do. If a corporation is dissolved, the assets are distributed according to the corporate bylaws and federal and state law. This may result in taxable events for the recipients of these assets. So in a sense, the people who "inherit" the corporate assets pay an "inheritance" tax.
If a shareholder dies, his or her shares become part of their estate, and are subject to inheritance tax. This might mean Ronald Rich, who owns 80% of $20,000,000,000 GreediCorp or it might mean Joe Blow, how owns 6 shares of Duff Beer Corporation, valued at $2.29 plus tax and deposit.
Is it different in Her Majesty's Realm?
Is it different in Her Majesty's Realm?
Sadly not. It's one of my pet peeves that we know how long a generation is on average from taking a census every ten years, but we still don't charge companies 40% of their value every generation. We are throwing away good tax money!
But as I pointed out, the corporate assets are essentially subject to inheritance tax as the shareholders die and pass on their assets.
What you are essentially proposing is a bit different. You are saying that (if a generation is 30 years, say) the government should expropriate 40% of the company (in addition to taxes paid by the shareholders) every 30 years.
Put it in a physical terms--a farm corporation owns a 1000 acre farm. In 30 years the government seizes 400 acres, in another 30 years, another 240 acres, and so on.
It's the same thing Castro did in seizing business property without compensation, just slower. At least Castro made no bones about what he was doing.
But as I pointed out, the corporate assets are essentially subject to inheritance tax as the shareholders die and pass on their assets.
I disagree. The individual is being taxed for his assets in the comapany's liabilities, but the company are not being taxed on their assets.
What you are essentially proposing is a bit different. You are saying that (if a generation is 30 years, say) the government should expropriate 40% of the company (in addition to taxes paid by the shareholders) every 30 years.
Once the value of the assets reaches the threshold of £258,000 (circa $385,000), yes. This is only one artificial person, remember.
Put it in a physical terms--a farm corporation owns a 1000 acre farm. In 30 years the government seizes 400 acres, in another 30 years, another 240 acres, and so on.
And once the farm is worth less than £258,000 there is no tax. Fair is fair. If I owned a £300,000 farm, I'd get taxed on it at 40% in, say 30 years, when I die. If I called myself James Dowden Ltd, in 30 years, even if I died, I wouldn't pay a penny of tax on it - worse still, James Dowden Ltd would get charged a lower rate of income tax (so called "Corporation Tax") than plain old James Dowden while I'm alive. British Tax law is so set out so that individuals are swindled by both government (overtly) and business (by their unfair tax advantages).
It's the same thing Castro did in seizing business property without compensation, just slower. At least Castro made no bones about what he was doing.
Yep, it is like Castro. But if the British Government want to behave like Castro to individuals, then it's only fair they behave like Castro to companies. I actually have less of a problem with government behaving like Castro to companies, but that is a point of politics not fairness.
But if the British Government want to behave like Castro to individuals, then it's only fair they behave like Castro to companies
What about just moving to a country that has provisions like "no uncompensated taking of property" in their constitution? :-)
AEM7
What about just moving to a country that has provisions like "no uncompensated taking of property" in their constitution? :-)
I don't agree with that 100% so I wouldn't, thank you.
If I called myself James Dowden Ltd, in 30 years, I wouldn't pay a penny of tax on it even if I died
But this is still what I'm not understanding, unless British law is somehow different from U.S. law.
In the U.S., you don't just "call yourself" James Dowden Lid., you form a corporation which may be "James Dowden Ltd." or it could be "Moo Cow Farm, Ltd." I point this out to correct the misconception some people have that you, personally, can become a corporation.
If you incorporate and you are the only shareholder, there are now two entities, Jams Dowden, a natural person, and James Dowden, Ltd., a corporaion.
If James Dowden the person dies, the shares in James Dowden, Ltd., become the property of James Dowden (the natural person)'s estate. This estate pays estate taxes on these assets.
James Dowden the farm doesn't even know James Dowden the human is dead.
You can form a company as an individual in Britain. It is used a lot as a device by IT consultants to subcontract themselves out and pay 10% rather than 40% income tax. They then pay themselves "expenses" tax free. This is one of the unfair advantages which I am objecting to.
The other unfair advantage is a conmpany being allowed to hold assets in itself, not the human beings involved. It is as if one has created some sort of deity, immortal and invulnerable.
"You can form a company as an individual in Britain. It is used a lot as a device by IT consultants to subcontract themselves out and pay 10% rather than 40% income tax. They then pay themselves "expenses" tax free."
You can do this in the US too. However, the "expenses" allowed tax free are only the ones that your employer would be allowed to take if you were a salaried employee. For example, you can't use this dodge to deduct your expenses for commuting to work. You can't deduct a home office unless you truly have no other place to work. To deduct inappropriate expenses would be tax evasion and a criminal offense. (Which is not to say that some consultants in the US don't criminally evade taxes).
Also, self-employed people have to pay their entire social security tax, instead of only half, so this usually more than offsets any tax benefits.
For example, you can't use this dodge to deduct your expenses for commuting to work.
What about employer sponsored T-pass schemes? Surely then the employer is paying an expense for your commute?
AEM7
This is indeed a special expemtion in the tax code. Take a look at schedule C instructions. They make it VERY clear you can't personally deduct commuting expenses.
You can form a company as an individual in Britain. It is used a lot as a device by IT consultants to subcontract themselves out and pay 10% rather than 40% income tax. They then pay themselves "expenses" tax free. This is one of the unfair advantages which I am objecting to.
OK, but is that strictly legal? Or are these IT guys simply using the corporation as a shield to mask funny business? IOW, if they're paying themselves a salary and calling it "expenses" this would never survive an audit. At least not in the U.S.
You can put anything on your tax forms you like. You can expense your ferrets' Weasel Chow, you can write your spouse off as a capital loss, you can put your goldfish on retainer. But you should just picture yourself explaining it to the IRS.
OK, but is that strictly legal?
Yes, 100% legal.
IOW, if they're paying themselves a salary and calling it "expenses" this would never survive an audit.
Except you can pay yourself in expenses for all sorts of things. Even when you do have to pay yourself a salary, you keep it low. Face it, by getting your salary down into even the 22% band you win.
The Inland Revenue can fume as much as they like, but there is nothing they can do on this one. It is variously termed a loophole and a bugger-up.
If British tax law is so easy to get around, how high-paid entertainers like Mike Jagger have elected to live elsewhere to avoid them.
And didn't he just get an MBE to boot?
The easiest way to avoid them is to live on the Isle of Man.
MBEs etc are often given out in a wholly populist fashion.
MBEs etc are often given out in a wholly populist fashion.
I was clued into that when the Queen gave them to the Beatles.
I just thought that giving MBE to someone who has so openly avoided Her Majesty's Tax Collector might be viewed as a mixed message. :)
I just thought that giving MBE to someone who has so openly avoided Her Majesty's Tax Collector might be viewed as a mixed message. :)
Oh utterly, but this is a corrupt country.
Then you realize that the inheritance is essentially wrong?
I meant: "Then you realize that the inheritance tax is essentially wrong?"
I wouldn't say anything was essentially wrong. I'd just say that inheritance tax as currently set up is not a fair tax.
Life is not fair. Why am I born to be 5'5" whereas that German guy next door was born to bang his head on the ceilings of subway cars?
Life is not fair.
That is not a reason to go around making it even less fair.
What do you think government are for? :)
What do you think government are for? :)
Taking all our money and spending it on useless stuff?
AEM7
In a democratic system confounding government with politics. In a single party system simply confounding government.
>>> And once the farm is worth less than £258,000 there is no tax. Fair is fair. If I owned a £300,000 farm, I'd get taxed on it at 40% in, say 30 years, when I die. <<<
That is a tough law. I would expect that you would be taxed 40% of £42,000 (£16,800), the difference between £300,000 and the value of the exemption. You should have an insurance policy that would pay that much to your heirs so they can pay the inheritance tax, since it is presumably not an unexpected expense.
Perhaps your gripe should be with the amount of the tax, or amount exempted. In the U.S. there is no inheritance tax for estates less than $600,000.00, and our wonderful Republicans have passed a law to phase it out completely. Without any inheritance tax there will be a continuing concentration of wealth with the rich getting richer. Since there is a finite amount of goods and services backing the money supply, if the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. Once the gap gets too great, the proletariat starts to call for the heads of the idle parasitic rich. If the exemption were raised to say $5 million, there would be enough for anyone to provide for a decedent's immediate family, and no need to break up family farms. But if someone is transferring great wealth upon death in the range of $10 billion, I see no problem with the government taking up to half of it. It is not likely that the heirs will be in the street with tin cups.
Tom
Without any inheritance tax there will be a continuing concentration of wealth with the rich getting richer.
That is simply not true. Family estates require careful management to stay in shape. Most families (especially ones with large estates) tend to have more than one children -- they get split up that way. It's very easy to spend all your inheritances and end up with no money. The fact that people maintain their inheritance generation after generation is result of their hard work in managing the funds and the estate. You should not take any of it away from them. If there were a high rate of inheritance tax after a certain amount, then there is less and less reason not to dismantle your estate during your lifetime, spending money on needless crap rather than managing it wisely.
AEM7
Oh utterly - even if one has no children, it is always better to leave your estate to a nephew rather than a brother so the taxman only gets you once.
Even better, the funeral expenses come out of the estate before tax. So a nice irresponsible way of cutting the taxman's pay is by having a really nice funeral!
So a nice irresponsible way of cutting the taxman's pay is by having a really nice funeral!
Why not just donate tha $ to a registered charity in the will? It's tax deductable.
AEM7
If a shareholder dies, his or her shares become part of their estate, and are subject to inheritance tax. This might mean Ronald Rich, who owns 80% of $20,000,000,000 GreediCorp or it might mean Joe Blow, how owns 6 shares of Duff Beer Corporation, valued at $2.29 plus tax and deposit.
Most decedents' estates are not subject to any inheritance tax, and the tax itself is being phased out (but may return 10 years from now).
Most decedents' estates are not subject to any inheritance tax
You are fortunate it is like that in the USA. In the UK the threshold has been rising at a rate lower than inflation, so now the middle classes are getting hit hard by inheritance tax.
Let's be direct. The government has gotten away with inheritance tax for middle class people because people tend to regard an inheritance as "found money" and have been acculturated to believe that any time they get money the government is going to get part of it. So if they're left $10,000 and the government gets $2,000 of it, they figure they're still ahead $8,000. Especially since the estate is taxed directly, so they don't ever really see the $2,000 go bye-bye.
If the government thought they could get away with it, they'd have my kids declare the value of their Big Macs and Small Fries with Thick Shakes (can really add up over a year) as income.
great unfairnesses of British taxation that every 30 years or so a family gets hit with 40%
There are ways round that. You have to transfer the money slowly, and before you die. Or you can do it through off-shore tax havens. Anyway, it isn't unfair. If you are going to die, then what's the point of having all that money? You can't take it with you. Inheritance tax should be 100%.
AEM7
Don't believe in the concept that you earn your money for yourself and your family, and when you die, your family is more entitled to it than the government, huh?
I guess you also propose that your family be thrown out of their house when you die. It's part of your assets, after all.
Inheritance tax should be 100%
Oh man - that would change our society and not necessarily for the better. I know if that were the case I would not be putting one dime into savings or investments of any kind. I'd spend it faster than I got it - and go deep into debt as well - I would manage my life so that I would die leaving nothing but mountains of debt and no assets to go to the gov!! ;-) But I would enjoy living every minute - Home theater with 100 inch wide screen HDTV (running a custom designed computer simulation of a BMT Standard on the Broadway - West End route), etc etc - you get the picture....
The bottom line would be why bother saving or investing in anything if it would all go to the government.
It'd be like Germany after WWI.
You can't take it with you.
Sure you can!
Deposit your money in CitiBank.... They got offices all over hell.
: )
There are ways round that. You have to transfer the money slowly, and before you die.
Restrictions not placed on companies - you see it's not a level playing field at all.
If you are going to die, then what's the point of having all that money?
What's the point of a company having any assets once its founder is dead? Creating artificial immortals is not really fair.
What's the point of a company having any assets once its founder is dead? Creating artificial immortals is not really fair.
Corporations are separate legal entities with (in theory) perpetual existence. They are not supposed to be mere alter egos of their main shareholders.
Corporations are separate legal entities with (in theory) perpetual existence.
I object to that in principle.
What really matters is that NJT (and the LIRR) gets public funding. That makes it, in essence, a governmental entity regardless of its specific corporate structure. Does anyone really expect otherwise?
What really matters is that NJT (and the LIRR) gets public funding. That makes it, in essence, a governmental entity regardless of its specific corporate structure. Does anyone really expect otherwise?
The Airlines just got tons of Govt Funding... but they are not govt entities.
All sorts of corporations have contracts with the govt, but they are not govt entities.
Meethinks you need to thinks this some more..
: ) Elias
What really matters is that NJT (and the LIRR) gets public funding. That makes it, in essence, a governmental entity regardless of its specific corporate structure. Does anyone really expect otherwise?
The Airlines just got tons of Govt Funding... but they are not govt entities.
All sorts of corporations have contracts with the govt, but they are not govt entities.
Meethinks you need to thinks this some more..
The airlines did not just get government funding. Some of them got federal loan guarantees, which if all goes according to plan (in other words, if the airlines recover financially) will not require the outlay of taxpayer money. It also was a one-time program enacted in response to the unprecedented events of September 11th. Corporations with government contracts get paid for selling products or services to the government, just as in any business transaction.
NJT, the LIRR, and other commuter lines get ongoing infusions of taxpayer money, indeed could not survive without that money. But as I said, so what? We all understand that transit is a vital public service and is deserving of taxpayer funds.
Well, if you're going to post that, why not share some of your thinking with us? Tell us why.
Has anyone noticed the following:
In the early days( Noted as of january 2002)of the R142A cars on the 6 line some announcements read as follows, All changes appear in caps:
This is One Hundred Twenty Fifth street. Transfer is availiable to the Four and Five EXPRESS TRAINS. Connections are availiable to Metro-North AND THE M60 BUS TO LAGUARDIA AIRPORT.
On the <6>: Transfer is availiable to the Six local TRAIN.
Today, there are some differences ( noted as of last weekend):
This is One Hundred Twenty Fifth street. Transfer is availiable to the Four and Five. Connections are availiable to Metro-North. Transfer is availiable to the M60 bus to Laguardia Airport.
On the <6>: Transfer is available to the six local.
Unfortunately the last part of my message was cut off, and reads as follows:
If Subtile Announcement Modifications can be done on technicalities such as Differenciating between a transfer and a connection, Why not on pertinent information like transfers and service changes?
I was wondering how in recent years they skip so many numbers between "R" car class types. In the 30's, we had the R1, etc, then not skipping too many numbers, not too far off to the R10's, the R16's, the various IRT R-twentysomethings, the R27-30's, the R32's, R38's R40's and so on. Then we get a big jump from the R46's to the R62's, and then an even bigger jump from the R68's to the R142's and just between the R143's and the R160's there is a big jump.
I know that the contract "R" numbers are for more than just trains, but how did we get from the 30's to the mid 80's (50 years) with just R1 to R68, and in the 15 years following it jumped all the way to R160? Where are all the numbers in between, and why are so many more skipped now than we did in the past?
Check this out, it will explain it to you.
http://www.nycsubway.org/cars/bytype.html
Sorry, I don't know how to do links.
The "R-" number is the capital contract number issued by the MTA. Some capital contracts are for subway cars, others are not.
No. 'R' is a Rolling stock contract. It is used ONLY for subway cars, work equipment, and items related to them. Note also on that list, that only some of the overhauls have R contracts.
-Hank
Thanks, I never noticed that list here. I guess the "gaps" are just because they've been buying a lot more things lately.
Hank is correct, the R-'s do not include all capital spending. My error! But you get the idea.................
Yeah, it makes a lot more sense now.
I know some people on SubTalk said it was hard to read the blue on my website, so some of the Blue, I changed to have Bold text and some of the text is grey, Let me know what you all think.
Here's the Correct Link:
Amtrak Modeling Layout
MBTA Capital Plan -- 2020 Vision
I guess these people at the T actually have some vision after all. I'm really quite impressed with all this. Do you think they will get all this done by 2020? It appears that Silver Line is not part of the 2020 Vision, though...
AEM7
Question,
Just yesterday I was looking over the MBTA website and its subway map. On the Redline, does one train end at Ashmont and you transfer to another train for the ride to the last stop at Mattapan? If so, why is it set up this way?
Thanks for any info.
The Red Line rapid transit service ends at Ashmont, and then you transfer to a PCC trolley for the ride to Mattapan. The line to Mattapan is very low-density suburban and quite scenic in addition to having quite a few grade crossings, and doesn't have the ridership to justify being converted to grade-seperated rapid transit.
IIRC, for operational reasons within the MBTA, the Mattapan Trolley actually falls under the Green Line's jurisdiction, but is shown as part of the Red Line on maps to avoid confusion.
-- David
Chicago, IL
Thanks that explains it!
Yes, At Ashmont you transfer to the Mattapan High Speed line with PCC. Note:Blue line doesnt show extention to Lynn so whatever you here the T has NO intentions to extend the Blue Line by 2020 Stevie
Can you tell us where on the MBTA's site this is located, so we can read the text associated with this plan, or are you just going to tell us that it's YOUR dream, and not really planned?
-Hank
It's located on AEM7's own website at MIT. Maybe it was planted there by an MBTA operative. A search of the MBTA website for a "2020 Capital Plan" revealed nothing.
-- David
Chicago, IL
I guess that the old proposal to extend the blue line to Lynn has not been pursued.
Wow, what a coincidence! I just found a CTA Capital Plan on my own website. What are the odds?
-- David
Chicago, IL
Why is the CTA Circle Line not in that capital plan? Has it been replaced by the "Yellow Line" to Skokie?
AEM7
Where is this "Downtown Map" to which the master plan refers?
I never got around to drawing it. Sorry.
-- David
Chicago, IL
That circular Purple Line would be a real pain in the ass - both to operate and for riders. It would suffer from many of the same problems as the Circle Line in London.
Nice touch restoring some service to Watertown.
You don't like the Circle Line?
Actually, Circle lines are not pains in the ass to operate. It's just London's incompetence. Plus, they have Circle Line sharing tracks with other lines. Of course there are problems. Chicago is pursuing a similar plan, but they don't have as much track-sharing on their Circle Line as they do in London.
The Purple line really isn't a Circle Line. It's really a crosstown Line (like the G train) which happens to turn back on itself. The Purple and Blue lines could in fact be swapped to make Harvard-Bowdoin and Wonderland-Harvard-Watertown.
The Purple Line is actually much needed. The buses that currently run on the route of the Purple Line are totally packed throughout the day.
AEM7
I agree with you that Boston could use more fixed-rail transit service.
The "purple line" idea sounds fine, but change the color so people don't confuse it with the commuter rail. -Nick
It is annoying getting held for large amounts of time at Aldgate, Edgware Road, or any other random station they decide to do that at just to confuse the half asleep into thinking that it is indeed Edgware Road. The Circle Line schedule of 8 minute headways is simply not true - it is normal to wait 10-20 minutes for a Circle Line train, by which time (depending on where you're going) you could've gone to Aldgate East or Earl's Court and doubled back. Plus, very often it is very indirect - eg try walking from St Paul's on the Central Line to Mansion House on the Circle Line; ride the Circle Line to Liverpool St and the Central Line back to St Paul's - you will find that walking is much quicker (okay, that is a particularly stupid one, but it is an illustration of a much more general point).
Operationally speaking, I understand the Circle is an absolute pain. There are no termini, so delays build up during the day. The only way to counter delays is to hold trains at a few stations for inordinate amounts of time and annoy the hell out of the passengers who just waited 20 minutes for the train anyway. Then there's all the problems caused by (clockwise from Aldgate) merging with the District Main Line, demerging with the District Main Line, merging with the District Edgware Road Branch, merging with the H&C Line, merging with the Met Main Line, demerging with the H&C Line. Then there are the complicated arrangements to get trains off Circle Line service...
All off this builds up to make the Circle Line the worst line on the London Underground, despite the District Line's best attempts:
from http://victorian.fortunecity.com/finsbury/254/
District Line, hometime, me and several hundred other passengers and indeed the station announcer at Earl's Court were thoroughly confused by the signal men. I hopped on the tube at Victoria thinking that I was on a Richmond bound train. At Earl's Court, the platforn indicator said Parsons Green. I ignored this as ...well, when did you last believe what the indicator at Earl's Court said? Anyway, there were several loud announcements and it turned out that the train was going to Parson's Green. Unfortunately the carriage was packed with Italian students who didn't get off. Now maybe they knew something I didn't, because they all carried on to Parsons Green, which is completely in the wrong direction to Richmond. Perhaps I should have been public spirited and said "Are you sure you all want to go to Parson's Green", but my Italian is non existent, so I didn't!
Anyway on the platform of Earl's Court, the female announcer was beginning to get a bit harrassed and apologises for the boards and enthusiastically tells us that the next Richmond train is just leaving South Kensington and will be with us in four minutes time. She then gave us minute by minute updates apologising for the confusion.
Four minutes later and the train appears with 'Richmond' on the platform indicator. We're all about to pile on the train, when lo and behold it changed to 'Parsons Green' again.
"I am sorry," the announcer says "I was told this train was going to Richmond and the signal men have changed their mind and this train is now going to Parsons Green".
The same thing happened with a train that was supposed to be going to Ealing Broadway and ended up going to Wimbledon instead.
Another four minutes and a Richmond train appeared. The announcer was now in full swing "The train at platform three is not going to Parsons Green but to Richmond. The train approaching platform two is also not going to Parsons Green but to Ealing Broadway. These trains are not going to Parsons Green despite what the signal men think."
It is annoying getting held for large amounts of time at Aldgate, Edgware Road, or any other random station they decide to do that at
It's called headway management (see previous thread), although it might be done badly on LUL.
The Circle Line schedule of 8 minute headways is simply not true
I've never waited for more than 5 mins, and I've often come charging into Circle Line station at KingsX bound for Paddington.
ride the Circle Line to Liverpool St and the Central Line back to St Paul's - you will find that walking is much quicker
Circle Line is primarily an East-West circulator and not a North-South circulator. If you're going N-S, take the Victoria, Northern, and the Bakerloo. For what it is designed for, it is very effective, and it sure beats a Paris layout that resembles springing spaghetti liberally over the city without a way to simply travel crosstown.
There are no termini, so delays build up during the day.
There wouldn't be problem with delays if there were no schedule. The fact that they are trying to adhere to a schedule suggests that it is badly managed. The real issue is the track-sharing with the Hammersmith & City. If there weren't any flat crossings and no track sharing with any other line, Circle Line would run as smooth as a camel's ass.
Then there are the complicated arrangements to get trains off Circle Line service...
It's called a pull-out. Standard procedure on CTA. It's just the LUL that's incompetent. And they built the wrong kind of half-assed infrastructure.
AEM7
I guess there is still no plan to connect North and South Stations together, eh? -Nick
I got lazy, didn't want to mess with commuter rail. AEM7
There is a number of different turnstile messages that show when you drop your token in each turnstile or swipe your MetroCard.
A list:
GO
TOO SLOW SWIPE AGAIN (Is there a message stating 'too fast'?)
$1.50 BAL $--.-- (I think I'm missing a line)
* PLEASE SWIPE AGAIN
AT THIS TURNSTILE
* PLEASE SWIPE AGAIN
INSUFFICIENT FARE (I've never swiped a card like this through the actual turnstile; anyone else know?)
Anything else?
What gets me the most are the two messages marked in an asterisk.
Under what conditions would the turnstile display "PLEASE SWIPE AGAIN AT THIS TURNSTILE?" I've never seen that before but only the other one.
Answers would be greatly appreciated.
Thank You.
This message appears when You've swiped the metrocard many times, and is preceeded by " Please Swipe Again".
There is also:
TOO FAST
SEE AGENT
JUST USED
Swipe again at this turnstile pops up when the machine *thinks* it has already deducted a fare but couldn't read the card correctly, so it asks you to swipe again to make sure. People who ignore the message and use a different turnstile often end up paying double.
BTW: I once accidentally almost used my regular Metrocard on a school day, and got that message when I aborted mid-swipe. The reader indicated the fare had been deducted, but I opted to instead use my student pass anyway. The next time I used my regular card, it was in that exact turnstile, and it DIDN'T deduct an additional $1.50! So it has a long-term memory!
There's also other messages:
ALREADY EXPIRED
NOT VALID NOW and EXCEEDED DAILY LIMIT for student pass riders.
Funny you should mention that. I have been unable to pass through the turnstiles with my employee MetroCard for the last two days. The turnstile would display Please Swipe Again. I would motion the Station Agent in the booth to allow me entry. When I ran my own card through the Booth Computer, it said I swiped it at such and such a time and at the location that I was unable to get through. Employee MetroCards behave like Unlimited MetroCards. Swipe It Once and you go in. Swipe it again at the same location, and it might say you've just used it. Then you wait 18 minutes before you can go in.
I decided that after two days it wasn't turnstiles, it was my card. There had to be some way of fixing it. I cleaned the magnetic stripe with a little bit of alcohol and VOILA! The card was as good as new. I'm glad I didn't have to go and exchange my card....
-Stef
suggestion- carry some head cleaners with you. They can be used to clean your pass too as well as the turnrstile.
When going from bus to subway, something like:
GO 1 X TRNSFR OKAY
For years, we've heard they are planning to re-direct trains at Atlantic Avenue on the L line to eliminate the two block separation of the 2 spurs. Why is it taking so long? Seems to me that little progress is being made...yet they've eliminated the flyover from L to J lines which would provide more varied service for Canarsie.
Anybody care to comment...
the J connection was in place as of yesterday
The J connection was in place as of yesterday
The flyover between the J and L will be put back when construction is done. (at least that's what I heard here at sub talk) I hate to see things downgraded, but I feel this is a good idea consolidating operations at Atlantic Ave at the current Canarsie bound platform. The glory days of that station are over - the Fulton el is never coming back, the abandoned center platform is an eyesore, and all that el infastructure is not necessary anymore. When the project is done, Atlantic Ave area will be much easier to maintain, and surprisingly, IIRC, Atlantic is the LEAST use station in Brooklyn (aside from the shuttle), and that's even with a LIRR connection! So all that infastructure is unnecessary.
As a matter of fact, Atlantic Avenue on the Canarsie Line is the least-used station in Brooklyn, period. In 2001, there were 237,260 riders. Next least-used in Brooklyn was Bushwick-Aberdeen, also on the Canarsie Line, with 261,750 riders.
Park Place is the only station on the Franklin Avenue Shuttle that is not part of a complex and thus has its own ridership count. In 2001, it had 617,390 riders. The other shuttle stations, which are part of complexes, are:
Franklin Avenue (Fulton Street): 1,436,566 riders in 2001
Botanic Garden (Eastern Parkway): 3,723,728
Prospect Park (Brighton): 2,397,512
All I can say is "WOW". And this is a station that connects to the LIRR!!!! I do use that connection quite often. (obviously, one of only a few.....)
How about something happier... what are the most used stations on the Canarsie Line?
They would have to be all the Manhattan ones, and I'm sure the "transfer" ones like Lorimer, Myrtle, and Broadway Junction. I don't know what order they would be in, but I'm sure that they would be on the top of the list, followed by all the others, with poor Atlantic at the bottom.
I can try-- The Manhattan side of First ave, Along with bedford are brutal. I have to give the AM S/A lunch and the lines can be very long. If a Monday is also the first fo the month they are really very long. Now throw in a Holiday on Monday and even worse.
Lorimer is fairly busy due to the G Line. Myrtle/Wyckoff is busy due to the M and is busy all-night. Rockaway parkway is busy due to the bus transfer inside the paid area.
The Canarsie side of Third av is slow during the AM Rush but many board at Canarsie side of First av.
As far as 8th av-- I imagine it is busy due to the IND, Sixth is not too bad- the main booths serve the F line and a part-time for the L (and two more part-time for the F at the North Ends).
I have been stuck at DeKalb on the L during the earliest end of the Rush and it was starting to get busy.
Where does the L train stack up in comparision to the other lines in the system? To me, it always seems like a fairly busy line, even in the middle of the night. I guess what I'm really asking is what are the busiest lines in the system, to the one with the least ridership? I would assume that the 4 would be one of the busiest (or one of the other Lexington routes), and the G would probably be near the bottom, if not the least ridden. Does anyone know how each line compares?
I work a night lunch on the L. many nightsm even at 3- 3:30am it is still standing room only and around 1130-12 midnight it is almost rush hour loads.
I have not seen the dolalr figures for 2001 or any other year . What they dont reveal is how the money is earned:
let's say station red does $600 and station blue does $600. They appear to be the same. Let's look further-- station red sells $15 cards so it would be 40 customers. Station blue sells $3 cards for 200 customers. With this example (made up stations) station blue is busier-- much busier than station red.
I have worked stations with low dollar amount and had lines all night thanks to "add 50 cents or one token" all night. I have worked other statiosn with higher dollar amounts and had no lines due to higher purchase level per customer.
Doesn't ridership go by the turnstile passes though? Using your example, Someone buys a $15.00 metrocard at station red, but uses it at both station blue and station red for round trips. Station blue was used as many times as station red, but only station red got the dollar amount, and station blue got $0.
Yes and no. I was referring to the s/a who is busier at station blue with the $3 cards and the add 50 cents all night. If I mislead you, I am sorry.
let's say station red does $600 and station blue does $600. They appear to be the same. Let's look further-- station red sells $15 cards so it would be 40 customers. Station blue sells $3 cards for 200 customers. With this example (made up stations) station blue is busier-- much busier than station red.
It's a reasonable assumption that station red is in a much more affluent area than is station blue.
Given enough time, it's probably possible to make a reasonably accurate income map of NYC subway-served neighborhoods based on MC purchase patterns.
Not necessarily. I worked one station in an affluent area and sold nothing but add 50 cents or three dollar cards all night with no stop.
>>>...and had lines all night thanks to...<<
I never wait on lines, I haven't dealt with a "booth monkey" in over 4 years....MVMs ALL THE WAY!
Peace,
ANDEE
You are in a minority. Most passengers prefer the human to machines and I am not talking about recent immigrants or senior citizens. I am talking about people in three piece busienss suits. I can not print the language I hear about the machines.
I respect your opinion, but can the MVM call for help if some disturbed person tries to hurt you or if you get sick. We are needed even if we dont sell to monitor station conditions.
A station agent CANNOT:
Accept payment with plastic.
Sell me a fun pass.
Peace,
ANDEE
The rules should be changed then in my own opinion. I don't like the idea of running my money through ANYTHING Microsoft pooted out. I too prefer to deal with a carbon based lifeform over a silicon one, even if they look at me like I'm from another planet. :)
But that FUNPASS *did* make a world of difference when I last visited, and that's what I'd want to do. But I demand my 20 seconds of attention from a carbon based lifeform even if I have to pay a little extra to get it. I'd love to see how the rules have changed for the "table" and how much like a coupier token clerks (sorry, but I still call us "motormen" too) has to be to dance safely under the limbo bar these days. I remember watching my bills and change sitting there by the slot (far enough away that *I* couldn't reach it of course once surrendered) and I remember the "L-shaped" sweep of the TA coinage and grab of the funds in almost a choreographed move that tells ya "no sidewalk acts on MY watch, kid." Heh. I miss that caution.
Feed NTee the right digits and it'll spit like a damned slot machine. Heh.
What's the reason station clerks can't sell "fun passes", and you can only get them at newstands, etc?
"What's the reason station clerks can't sell "fun passes", and you can only get them at newstands, etc?"
Officially: because selling them at booths would cause too much congestion.
Cynically: because then too many people would buy them and the TA would lose money.
With the prevalence of MVMs that sell Funpasses, the cyncial explanation is losing its credibility.
"I never wait on lines, I haven't dealt with a "booth monkey" in over 4 years....MVMs ALL THE WAY!"
Sir.. What is your definition of a "booth monkey"? Is it a particular type of person, please describe. thanks!
N bwy
>>>Is it a particular type of person?<<
No, just anyone trapped in a token booth for 8 hours.
Peace,
ANDEE
Ok.. thanks for you explanation.
N Bwy
"I never wait on lines, I haven't dealt with a "booth monkey" in over 4 years....MVMs ALL THE WAY!"
Sir.. What is your definition of a "booth monkey"? Is it a particular type of person, please describe. thanks!
N bwy
I too am curious. Andee, care to comment?
-Stef
Just recycling a phrase created by another poster on this board. No harm intended, just found it humorous.
Peace,
ANDEE
"I never wait on lines, I haven't dealt with a "booth monkey" in over 4 years....MVMs ALL THE WAY!"
Sir.. What is your definition of a "booth monkey"? Is it a particular type of person, please describe. thanks!
N bwy
OOOHHHH!!! Not PC!!!!! Write up the G2!!!! In the twenty first century, carbon based life forms exchanging monetary units for subway access tokens will be eliminated by Borg Tech MVMs. Tukass seating wil be replaced by HyTest PPE shoes. Buttwarming in HVAC environmental chamber will be replaced by pacing the platform. Any TA employee who responds to 'definition of BM' can lose their employment. Serious stuff that Jay Street takes seriously and TWU 100 pulls their hair out about.
As of 2001, here are the stations with the highest annual ridership figures on the Canarsie Line (for complexes, the other lines served are in parentheses):
Union Square (Lexington Avenue/Broadway): 26,068,141
Sixth Avenue (Sixth Avenue/Broadway-Seventh Avenue): 13,215,582
Eighth Avenue (Eighth Avenue): 8,159,404
First Avenue: 4,574,737 (highest Canarsie Line station that's ONLY served by the Canarsie Line)
Bedford Avenue: 4,246,410
David
Wow, I didn't realize that Bedford was such a busy station, especially for a non-Manhattan, Canarsie only station!
Chris
Wow, I didn't realize that Bedford was such a busy station, especially for a non-Manhattan, Canarsie only station!
To be clearer, I mean a station that only serves Canarsie Line trains....I can hear the punches now, "What do you mean it only goes to Canarsie and not Manhattan" lol. I admit, when I reread it, that's what it sounded like to me, so I'm sure others would have read it like that also....
Bedford is busier than the numbers show. The station has a problem-- adults with children over 44" and not paying for the kid. There is also a large number of fare beaters . In some cases the kid is taller than the parent and I get the line "But they are only 3 years old" (off .the record-- yeah, and I am five years old).
Bedford is busier than the numbers show.
Any idea why Bedford's so busy?
Oh and what's so special about 44" as a height - I mean it's not a particularly round number in either imperial (3'8") or metric (1.118 metres)?
Its in Willamsburg, very populated area and one stop outside of Manhattan, easy access.
If memory serves, 44" was determined to be the average height for a 6-year-old. The child's free fare requirement used to be age-based, but that ended several years ago after a multitude of fights between Railroad Clerks (at the time) and customers over how old the customer's child was.
David
There are still disputes! They claim the kid is 3 years old (t is always 3 years old!) and the kid is taller than the parent by miles!
Bedford is in an area which is becoming gentrified as a new SoHo with many artists and musicians moving into the area.
Yes, but now it doesn't matter how old the kid is. It goes by height...there's nothing to argue about.
David
height prejudice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It all works out. Short people have the advantage of free entry for a longer part of their childhood -- but when they grow up to be short adults, they find that the horizontal bars on trains get higher and higher with each rolling stock order.
I know that, you know that. Many customers think it is still age and when I remind them it is height they say they'll pay for the kid tomorrow (which never comes--when the next dya arrives it is the same story.) Or theyll tell me *bleep* you and pusht he kid udner if the kid comes out.
I asked a police officer and got the personal response (face to face- no customer around) that it is up to each indivudal officer whether to press the issue. I have had officers handle it both ways-- make the kid pay and those that let the kid go.
Bedford is in an area which is becoming gentrified as a new SoHo with many artists and musicians moving into the area
That wouldn't sound like the sort of area where there would be many people with children, at least not compared to other parts of the city. If I recall correctly, however, you mentioned that you had been in a number of child-fare disputes at Bedford. I suppose the station must draw passengers from some locations outside the new-Soho neighborhood.
There are quite a few children entering the station -- both with adults and using shcool passes. I guess that there must be non-gentrified areas nera the station or they use the bus to get to the station. When a card is swiped we do not know if they used the bus to get there unless we check their card due to a problem.
[Bedford is in an area which is becoming gentrified as a new SoHo with many artists and musicians moving into the area.]
What's that got to do with the 44-inch height requirement? It applies system-wide.
Should a particular neighborhood be exempt from the fare just because gentrification (the new "urban renewal") is being shoved down its throat?
Of course not. NYCT should also put up posters on the height rule and in multi-langugae verisons.
Know where I can find those numbers? Pretty please!
Write to NYCT and ask for the 2001 subway and bus ridership report.
David
OK, thanks.
Too bad there isnt more of a purpose to it, like the set up.
If it could have continued and dropped down to the LIRR to Flatbush or even Coney Island
(The flyover between the J and L will be put back when construction is done. (at least that's what I heard here at sub talk))
There is one thing I don't understand about this project. According to Peter Doughertys' book, the connection from the Canarsie Line to the Broadway Line will be restored, as you say, but no connection from the eastern end of the Jamaica Avenue line to the 14th Street-Eastern Line will be built.
Why not? Perhaps I just have a thing about subway service over suspension bridges, being 20 years into a service disruption on the Manhattan Bridge. But all things considered, you'd think the MTA would be interesting in building alternatives -- like the DeKalb Rutgers Connection, or a way from Jamaica trains to head for 14th Street. It certainly would have been useful during the Williamsburg Bridge shutdown, no?
And what is the purpose of the Canarsie/Broadway connection? Perhaps if ridership continues to boom in Wiliamsburg, Greenpoint and Bushwick, they plan to divert the Canarsie trains to Broadway. But the Canarsie line will be CBTC, and the Broadway Line is not.
before the switches at Broadway Jct on the L were installed, they used the J station for the L shuttle to Rockaway Parkway in conujunction with shuttle bus service from Myrtle to Eastern arkway on the J /Broadway East NY on the A/C (Both are renamed to Broadway Junction).
its back now, i saw it there on friday
The NY Post has never met a transit fare increase it didn't like...and today's editorial is no exception. It compares a proposed $2 fare with other Northeast transit systems and pronounces it a bargain.
If you're an $8 an hour floor swabber, $2 per ride is a big piece of your salary. Heck, $1.50 is.
The Post? "Let 'em eat cake"
www.forgotten-ny.com
SEPTA's cash fare is $2, and it's outrageous. Tokens cost $1.30.
THE PROBLEM is that many stations don't have token vending machines, and token sales clerks only work on peak hours. If you need to take a train at 7 pm from most of the stations, and you are without a pass or token, you are forced to pay $2 to the booth attendant.
>>THE PROBLEM is that many stations don't have token vending machines, and token sales clerks only work on peak hours. If you need to take a train at 7 pm from most of the stations, and you are without a pass or token, you are forced to pay $2 to the booth attendant.<<
Maybe SEPTA should look into a farecard system like Metrocard with the free transfer feature like ours. This is long overdue.
Bill "Newkirk"
SEPTA'system is so far flung and so fractionalied that trying to set up a sinple, easy to understand fare system that would work in a system that has constant money problems, multiple fare zones on the surface systems, railroad style fare on the commuter rail lines is well nigh impossible.
Everybody looked at Baltimore as being nuts when we threw away a fare system that had existed for over a century and instituted a system that has a flat fare for a single ride, no transfers or zones, a day pass (sold on all buses and subway/light rail ticket machines) and weekly/monthly passes. The MTA even has MARC monthly tickets good as a pass on the city system. MTA and WMATA are talking on integrating the two system's fare systems.
It sounded crazy, but it worked! Ridership went up, even on the buses.
SEPTA's people came down, looked at it, and drooled.
Baltimore did a good thing. They also expanded service (light rail to Camden Yard etc.). A pretty decent system, and you've even got an airport rail station.
True. You have to consciously use a station (like 11th street or 30th Street on the Market-Frankford Line) or visit a sales office, to buy tokens. Some retail (convenience stores) stores do have them, but they are not nearly as ubiquitous as the Metrocard.
You know what? If it were up to me, ATMmachines would sell Metrocards. Your choice of withdrawals would be cash or a Metrocard. I'd sign upas many banks as possible to do that and link the necessary dispenser to the ATM's machinery (and integrate it whenever a new ATM was being installed).
There are ATMs at a bank near 71/continental which do sell Metrocards. But the last time I used it, the cards were BLUE.
What's wrong with Blue Metrocards? Are they like Blue M&M's?
>>What's wrong with Blue Metrocards? Are they like Blue M&M's?<<
Blue M&M's would taste better anyway.
My guess why the MTA dropped the blue Metrocard in favor of the gold one is that the new gold Metrocard had much better transfer priviledges the blue one didn't have.
This would tell people that the blue Metrocard didn't have the enhanced transfer feature and to distinguish it from the blue one. They probably didn't want to retain the old color and go with the new one as a marketing device.
Bill "Newkirk"
The color was changed for marketing reasons. There is no differnce in the cards from a technical standpoint. I used my blue card for many months after the free rides\transfers went into effect.
Metrocard GOLD was a complete new introduction to the riding public of the previously little used metrocard system
There are ATMs at a bank near 71/continental which do sell Metrocards. But the last time I used it, the cards were BLUE.
Are you METROCARDCOLORIST? What's wrong with BLUE Metrocards? Are they like BLUE M&M's? Are they PERSECUTED by other METROCARDS? Clearly not. Therefore, a Blue Metrocard should be judged on its MERITS, i.e. how much VALUE it has remaining and not by its COLOR. If you were YELLOW, does that mean you are any more of a METROCARD? I think not.
AEM7
HEHE. Blue MetroCards only offer the free transfer program for one person, while MetroCard GOLD offers transfers for up to four people. All of the school MetroCards are probably Blue MetroCards in white clothing for easier identification when school is NOT in session.
I remember when I use to take the B41 to school, and grown adults would get on and flash the paper bus passes. Also people would just keep the old passes, cut out the colors and numbers to create a new pass; flashed it so quick the driver never knew.
Metrocards do carry a relivance, avoiding things like this occurring. Also keeping tabs on where ur traveling during the day :-|
I wish they would bring back the blue metrocard -
the color was so intriguing...
I still have ablue Metrocard. It was my first Metrocard.
I also got a Yellow one.
Last time I was to the city I used tokens.
Gotta get one of them day passes the next trip..
Elias
A day pass looks exactly like a regular, gold MetroCard. There is nothing exciting about it except it lets you ride all day.
Several Republic Bank ATMs advertised that Metrocards were available. They were always out of stock when I tried to use them. Now HSBC owns them and there's the ATM surcharge so I don't use them.
$2 is a big chunk? For a 40 hour workweek, $8 an hour makes for $360 a week. Take-home is around $296 (assuming total deductions equals 18%). Round trip to and from work is $4. 5 days a week is $20 for transportation, or 6%. A total of $1 per day more than the existing cost. That's before the expected discounts. Completely affordable. Even on unemployment, because that's how I'm doing it.
-Hank
Still, $2 is a lot for a train ride, it's a psychological barrier, like $10 for a movie.
Hey, I think the minimum wage should be raised to $15 and the CEOs, top management, baseball players and TV human broomstick actresses should not be paid obscenely the way they are.
I'm just not supervisor material...
www.forgotten-ny.com
Just remeber what happened the last time politicians "listened" to the people and "saved the fare," while agreeing with the union and raising wages and cutting years worked before retirement, AND cutting tax-based subsidies to divert money to other things. Win, win, win right?
We've seen this movie before.
The real question is whether they will raise the NYC transit fare to $2.00 while keeping the commuter rail fare the same. The financial structure of the most recent MTA capital plan makes this possible. All the reissued debt was merged together, rather than kept separate, and backed by the transit fare. They could just designate transit fares, and not commuter rail fares, to cover debt service, and voila the "wasteful" NYC transit system has a deficit, and the "efficient" commuter railroads do not.
So no one has any more thoughts on the MBTA 2020 Vision? I would have thought that the Red Line Extension to Watertown would invite controversy.
AEM7
Was this your own "dream", or did the MBTA actually propse this? -Nick
I think it has been established by several requests, which have gone unanwsered, for the web address where this plan could be found, that this is his personal proposal. That in itself is fine, many of here at Subtalk have plans that we would like to see implemented, but his presenting it as an offical offering from the MBTA is misleading to say the least.
A few posters have said they have searched the MBTA website and have found no mention of this plan or proposal.
Ok, I guess some ideas from a subtalker can't do any harm! :-) -Nick
For those who haven't seen the new 2003 edition or heard talk about it, the calendar will be a WTC salute edition. Eleven of the twelve monthly images have a outdoor scene with the Twin Towers in the distrance from any one of the five boroughs. The twelfth image is of Cortlandt St. WTC on a Low-V fantrip five years before it was partially destroyed. The front and rear cover feature a four car R-46 at Smith-9th Sts. station. The front on October 1978 and the rear on the first Saturday after 9/11 with a wisp of smoke rising from "Ground Zero" with the towers absent.
Here are list of some vendors who are selling the calendar.
Steve Bogen (Quadrant Press).....Seen at some NYC area trainshows
Kevin Farrell (kevin@trainbooks.com) Boston area
Alan Zelazo.....NYC & NJ area (subwayal@aol.com)
Willis Hobbies.....300 Willis Ave, Mineola,LI
Shoreline (Branford) Trolley Museum gift shop, East Haven,CT
Red Caboose, 23 West 45th ST, NYC
Manhattan Trains 14 West 45th St, NYC
or see me personally at the ERA NY Divison meeeting. 3rd Friday night of the month. St.Johns University Auditorium 101 Murray St, NYC
The Transit Museum Gift Shop hasn't take them yet, but will in the near future.
Penn Books in the LIRR arcade of Penn Station usually sells them after Labor Day.
Coliseum Books which has sold the calendar for many years went out of business several months ago.
My apologies for the delay of mail order which was supposed to be kicked off this week. A death in the family set me back one week. Any future announcements will be updated.
Bill "Newkirk"
Newkirk Images
How do you get Transit Museum to carry things? Why don't they carry Peter Dougherty's Track Map?
AEM7
It's one of those 9/11 things.
>>How do you get Transit Museum to carry things? Why don't they carry Peter Dougherty's Track Map<<
I spoke to the buyer of the Museum and spell out the specifics. After showing the sample they decided to carry them. As for Peter Dougherty's book, I cannot explain why they don't.
Bill "Newkirk"
Thanks for the update, Bill...I'll definitely pick my copy up in the near future. Sorry to hear about your families' loss. -Nick
Hi. Wanted to know if any pictures from old calendars were available for sale. There was one great picture (of many) I think from the '98 or '99 calendar of the Broadway el near Gates Ave. station with the Bushwick theatre in it.
>>Hi. Wanted to know if any pictures from old calendars were available for sale.<<
Sorry to disappoint you, but original images from the subway calendar are not for sale.
Bill "Newkirk"
One NICE thing though about your calendars ... they'll *NEVER* make it to the landfill! If 2001 was any indication of what's to come, I'm *psyched* ... I only regret that I haven't seen any of the priors. Perhaps one of these days, you might "webify" some of the "classics" (trash the resolution if you must for artistic integrity) but man, I'd LOVE to see your EARLIER stuff ...
There's a 1978 photo of an R-42 D train on the Brighton in one of the calendars.
I love these calanders. I've got every one. Every year I buy two copies. One is for use, it goes on the frig and I write appointments and such in it. When the year's up, I'll cut out my favorite shots for hanging on the wall. The other copy goes in the files in its pristine condition.
Alan Glick
I was pointed to an article about Darius McCollum, the railfan who has been in jail because he refuses to stop impersonating transit personnel, with possibily dangerous conswquences.
I don't think this has been posted here before.
The boy who loved transit: how the system failed an obsession.
They play around with "Asperger's" throughout the article: "a neurological disorder called Asperger's Syndrome might explain Darius's behavior"; "There was a strong consensus in the Asperger's community that Darius suffered from the syndrome"; and so on.
For G-d's sake, Asperger's is a diagnosable disorder. Since there is a liberty and treatment issue at stake here, take the man to a doctor--better a team of doctor's knowledgeable in Developmental Disorders--perhaps a psychiatrist, a neurologist and Ben Casey (as a tie-breaker) and attempt to get a formal diagnosis.
Once diagnosed or not, it could change the entire complexion of Darius' situation. The answer might be that he might have to spend the rest of his life in a structured environment, but since I don't have an MD after my name (and even if I did, he's not my patient), it's not my call.
The only thing that's obvious to me is that he's a compulsive railfan. There are a lot of compulsive railfans (this surprises you, right?) but not all of them are autistic.
My impression is that Darius' advocates are hinting he's Asperger's to try to gain leniency from the judge. They might not want to attempt a formal diagnosis in case they can't get it.
The article also talked about how, at the prosecution's request, the jailors and judge blocked a test for Asperger's from happening.
Unless you read a different part of the article than I'm thinking of, the judge blocked a request that the "defense could have Darius examined and explore treatment options."
This is jumping the process. By going straight to "explore treatment options" they are are asking the court to accept something which has not been legally demonstrated--that he even has Asperger's. Asperger's, like Autistic Disorder, must be diagnosed by a competent MD, not an "expert" or advocate.
I didn't hear that the judge offered to order a psychiatric evaluation for the purpose of diagnosis, preferably by more than one physician. If the defense asked for that (did they? maybe it was elsewhere in the article and I missed it) I would be more sympathetic to the defense's case.
I will disagree with the judge that "there's no treatment for Asperger's" if he means therapy, though I don't know if any has been demonstrated effective once a sufferer reaches adulthood without it. If he means a treatment that would lead to a cure, he is right, but people get therapy for incurable conditions.
It's obvious Darius has some kind of compulsion. Sooner or later they'll have to figure out something to keep him from repeating the behavior, or else find an appropriate structured environment for him.
>>> If the defense asked for that (did they? maybe it was elsewhere in the article and I missed it) I would be more sympathetic to the defense's case. <<<
I think the article mentioned that the defense was frustrated in trying to get their doctor in to see Darius. They would naturally want their doctor to check to see if an insanity or diminished capacity defense would work before asking a judge to have him examined. If their own doctor said he was OK, there would be no request to the court. After they were unable to get their doctor in to examine him, they finally asked the judge to have him examined, and the judge turned them down for not asking sooner. Kind of a catch 22 situation.
Tom
I made a very short visit to Brisbane, capital city of the State of Queensland, Australia a few months ago, during the subtalk hiatus. It was a business visit and I didn’t get much chance to look in any detail at the city rail system, but I thought subtalkers might be interested in my very superficial impressions. I welcome corrections and additions from any “Brizzy” subtalkers, as there are lots of things I don’t know, including overall route mileage.
Brisbane itself has a population of about 900,000, but the total area served by Citytrain also includes nearby resort areas and satellite towns, and is probably closer to 1.5 million. Like other Australian systems, Citytrain is primarily a city/suburban/interurban commuter system rather than urban rapid transit, with lines radiating out from the CBD, including new lines to the Airport and the Gold Coast (an apalling combination of Las Vegas, Miami and Disney land about 60 ks from Brisbane). Like many former British colonies in once remote areas, the gauge is a narrow 3 foot 6 inches, or 1072 mm.
The system was only electrified in 1979 (before that, it used D/E locomotive haulage, mostly light EMD hood units), which means that the rolling stock is relatively modern. The basic unit comprises three permanently coupled air conditioned stainless steel cars, driving/non-driving/driving, rather like the old BMT C units. Total length of a three car unit is 72.4m. Car width I don’t know, but I felt that it was narrower than Sydney or Melbourne stock, because of the gauge. Power supply is overhead, and collected by a pantograph on the middle car. 8 of the 12 axles in each unit are powered, but I don’t know which ones. Numbers are allocated on the basis of 3 car units rather than individual cars, and trains are normally run in two units of six cars.
There are several different marks of rolling stock involving progressive technical improvements, but to the layperson (which includes me) the cars are all very similar in overall style and appearance, the major differences being style modifications to the fibre glass cab fronts. I took three photos that I’ll try and post separately (I'm not sure how to post from CD) but they show a train of 1996-97 “interurban” stock, built for the new Gold Coast line at the new Brisbane Airport Station (where patronage has been disappointing), but it is typical in general appearance of all Citytrain stock.
My overall impression was of a modern and innovative system. On the other hand, there were signs that Cityrail is not immune from Brizzy’s famous sub tropical culture, which can be described either as relaxed or feckless, depending on your point of view. There was no attempt at any form of barrier control at any of the stations I went through, and the cars were grubby, even by Australian standards. Scatchitti was bad, but that’s hardy just a Brizzy thing.
On the other hand, there were signs that Cityrail is not immune from Brizzy’s famous sub tropical culture, which can be described either as relaxed or feckless, depending on your point of view. There was no attempt at any form of barrier control at any of the stations I went through, and the cars were grubby, even by Australian standards. Scatchitti was bad, but that’s hardy just a Brizzy thing.
How is fare collection (supposed to be) done?
Anyway, thanks for the interesting report. It's surprising to think of narrow-gauge rail being used in a large city.
Thanks
basically, there was a ticket vending machine at each station where you bought a ticket (it took Australian 5 cent pieces, which is a bonus!!) but there was no subsequent barrier control to entry to the platform, nothing to prevent you from entering the train without a ticket and there was no exit control that I saw, although the fares are distance based. I saw no ticket inspectors on the trains.
It is said by some that Clapham Junction is the busiest station in the world. This site gives live train running information - judge for yourselves. There are in fact more train movements than shown on the board, as through trains are not shown.
http://rtti.nationalrail.co.uk/3008/15/15.htm
Simon
Swindon UK
I count 102 trains. Each of the 3 center city Septa stations handle at least 415 trains a day.
You counted wrong. Clapham Jct handles far more than 102, or indeed 415 trains per day. Clapham handles something more like 102 trains PER HOUR.
AEM7
So it is indeed busy. Penn Station is supposed o be somewhere around 700 trains a day. I could be wrong on that...
Big deal. The Times Square complex handles over 200 trains per hour at its peak, on five distinct lines. Even in the middle of the night, it has 39 tph.
And they're subway trains, which means they're actually on-topic here.
I wasn't judging how big a deal it was.
And by the way, our official host, David Pirmann, who is the ONLY one authorized to define what is, or isn't, on topic, has officially stated that any passenger train service constitutes valid fodder for posting.
So there (Bronx cheer).
I wasn't judging how big a deal it was.
Nor was I. I was putting forth the busiest station in the world that I know of, busier than anything anyone else has come up with in this thread. See the subject line.
And by the way, our official host, David Pirmann, who is the ONLY one authorized to define what is, or isn't, on topic, has officially stated that any passenger train service constitutes valid fodder for posting.
Has he? Where? On the index page he asks us to "stick to rapid/rail transit issues only," and 'transit' (as opposed to 'transportation') is typically used to refer to urban systems. More likely, I think, he's opted to turn a blind eye to certain offenses, and that makes sense.
So there (Bronx cheer).
Times Square is in Manhattan (but it's easy to get to the Bronx).
And by the way, our official host, David Pirmann, who is the ONLY one authorized to define what is, or isn't, on topic, has officially stated that any passenger train service constitutes valid fodder for posting.
Where did Dave say that? If he has said so officially, perhaps the Subtalk main page ought to be amended to read "It is not limited solely to New York City topics, but please stick to passenger rail issues only."
AEM7
Does this mean no more Amtrak, Septa, NJT, etc.
Sorry I posted in the first place. I just thought you all may find it interesting.
Simon
Swindon UK
I've been posting stuff about Amtrak anyway, regardless of what the "rule" on the site says. There doesn't seem to have been any clampdowns. If there are clamping down actions, I suppose I would just not post...
AEM7
I don't think it's technically on-topic, but unless Dave asks you (or us) to stop, I don't see why you should stop. (I just wish no one would complain when I inject a post that's unquestionably on-topic.) It is interesting.
So -- can any station or station complex top Times Square, either in terms of train movements or in terms of passengers?
Do we need a thread, "Why railroad stations are relevant to railfanning?" I didn't think there was ever a problem as long as it dealt with rail issues, which this does. There have been many threads on Amtrak, Long Island Railroad, freight, Foreign rail, none of which are actually "transit". Was that incorrect? I never heard here that that was a problem until now.
Who said there was a problem? I don't see anything wrong with an occasional intelligent off-topic discussion, as long as it stays civil. But this is SubTalk, not RailTalk. (The final determination is up to our host, of course.)
If it really were Subtalk meaning "Let us talk about Subways", I think I would leave, and many others would leave (e.g. AcelaExpress2005).
To be quite honest, I am not really interested in the inner operating details of NYC Subways (or any subway system), and I really hate those "Where was this photo taken" posts. But I haven't exactly complained. I just don't read them.
AEM7
If it really were Subtalk meaning "Let us talk about Subways", I think I would leave, and many others would leave (e.g. AcelaExpress2005).
Some would; some wouldn't. I'm sure there are others who aren't interested in other topics and are turned off by the large number of posts that have nothing to do with subways; more of them would post here. Personally, I'd prefer separate SubTalk (subway systems only) and RailTalk (other rail systems) fora -- I'd visit SubTalk very frequently and read most posts, but I'd only visit RailTalk a few times a week and skip most posts. (Such a division would probably please you as well.)
But I haven't seen any indication of any imminent change, so what are you worrying about?
To be quite honest, I am not really interested in the inner operating details of NYC Subways (or any subway system), and I really hate those "Where was this photo taken" posts. But I haven't exactly complained. I just don't read them.
As well you shouldn't. Those threads are the reason I come here.
True, You are right, this isn't "RailTalk". I just thought you meant that NO other "rail" things should be talked about. The truth is it is nycsubway.org, and should be majority "subway" type talk. But the few other "rail" topics that come up are a nice mix, with the majority being subway.
I guess, after thinking about it, I come here because it is a talk about the subway. I rarely visit any other of the "rail" boards because even though it does interest me to an extent, it's not really something I want to talk about for the most part, or at least not on a "messageboard". However I do like the few posts that get mixed in here occasionally.
Wait a minute. So would a post about AC traction packages come under "railtalk" or "subtalk"? I have posted a lot of those. The same traction package that is used in R-142's were used on Network SouthEast "Networker" trains -- 100% heavy rail railroad with freight trains running on the system.
(The R-142's have an updated version of the Oynx package)
AEM7
You mean Onyx. Oynx is what I do (actually, what I do when referred to alone in the third person).
heheheh!!!!
I hereby offer Hong Kong's Central and Hong Kong Stations Complex to challenge Times Square!
- Tseun Wan Line (TWL): 128 to 200 second headways = 20-30 tph
- Island Line (ISL): 128 to 200 second headways = 20-30 tph
- Tung Chung Line (TCL): 4 minutes/train = 15 tph
- Airport Express (AEL): 10 minutes/train = 6 tph
So, let's see here:
- Off-peak: 20 (TWL) + 20 (ISL) + 15 (TCL) + 6 (AEL) = 61 tph
- Peak: 30 (TWL) + 30 (ISL) + 15 (TCL) + 6 (AEL) = 81 tph
Therefore, Hong Kong's Central/Hong Kong complex seems to be MUCH busier than Times Square in terms of TPH. Passenger flows, I have no idea...
-J!
Therefore, Hong Kong's Central/Hong Kong complex seems to be MUCH busier than Times Square in terms of TPH.
It is? I already posted that peak service through Times Square is over 200 tph. I can't give an exact number since I don't have access to the exact figures, but I rounded down seriously from my estimate. Off-peak, service gradually ramps down to the late night service level of 39 tph.
Remember, the Times Square complex has the 7th Avenue IRT with local and express tracks, the Broadway BMT with local and express tracks, the Flushing IRT, the shuttle to Grand Central, and the 8th Avenue IND with local and express tracks.
Passenger flows, I have no idea...
Nor do I (although Times Square is definitely near the top of the list). How do we even count this? Number of passengers entering and exiting the station complex? Number of passengers entering and exiting trains, even if many of them are transferring? Number of passengers passing through, including those on trains?
And HOW many routes were there that stop at Times Square? About 10, I guess?
So still, on average:
Central/Hong Kong = 81 tph/4 routes = 20 tph per route
Times Square = 200 tph/10 routes = 20 tph per route
...so I guess it should be about par, if we look at it THAT way.
A, C, E, N, Q, R, W, shuttle, 1, 2, 3, 7. But some of those routes share tracks with others and diverge elsewhere, and three of the lines have side-by-side local and express tracks.
I don't see why you want to divide service by number of routes. Times Square is busy not because one route stops there but because so many routes stop there. Clapham Junction and Penn Station certainly don't get all their business on one route.
Actually, I think I cheated in my calculations without realizing it. Except on the two lines that terminate at Times Square, I counted trains in both directions -- but by doing that, it looks like I'm counting some trains twice. If I count trains going in only one direction, I come up with "only" about 140 tph peak and 21 tph in the middle of the night. (Does anybody know which is the usual way to count through trains -- one direction or both?)
(Does anybody know which is the usual way to count through trains -- one direction or both?)
The normal way is to count through trains in one direction.
The normal way is to count through trains in one direction.
If you're in operations planning, the normal way to count trains is to count the number of train paths. A through train in one direction counts as one train. A through train in the opposite direction also counts as one train. A terminating train may count as one, two, or three trains depending on the amount of time it spends fouling up the interlocking. A lot of it depends on for what purpose you are counting the trains.
AEM7
>>> Does anybody know which is the usual way to count through trains -- one direction or both <<<
If you are determining how busy a station is, you need to count how many stops are made at the station. Therefore both directions would count, but a train that terminates like the Shuttle or #7 would be counted only once each trip.
If you are counting the number of passengers using the station, you would not count passengers that remain on trains passing through the station, only those boarding or leaving trains, including those transferring to another train.
There is a question though whether Times Square should be considered one station, since it was not originally designed as one station, but several different stations which were later joined by passageways.
Tom
If you are determining how busy a station is, you need to count how many stops are made at the station. Therefore both directions would count, but a train that terminates like the Shuttle or #7 would be counted only once each trip.
That's how I counted originally, but it doesn't entirely make sense. It implies that, e.g., 5th Avenue gets twice as much 7 service as Times Square.
There is a question though whether Times Square should be considered one station, since it was not originally designed as one station, but several different stations which were later joined by passageways.
Why is the history relevant? It currently functions as a single station, as much as Penn Station if not moreso (there's a lot more transfer activity at Times Square).
"It implies that, e.g., 5th Avenue gets twice as much 7 service as Times Square."
That's actually true, though. You can get on a 7 train to go somewhere else twice as often at 5th Ave as you can do it at TSQ. You can get injured by an entering train, or stuck in a closing door, twice as often at 5th Ave.
If you start getting ultra-sophisticated and counting how valuable some of the trains are relative to others (i.e., how many different places they take you), you'll never be able to do the calculations. Every statistic (tph, number of passengers entering/exiting, etc.) is an approximation of actual "busy-ness".
Agreed on both, um, counts.
But what about a terminal station where the terminating train relays? It stops twice at the same station, once to drop off passengers and once to pick up passengers. Do we count that once or twice?
"But what about a terminal station where the terminating train relays? "
I'd count it once because you can't get onto it as it heads into the relay. Admittedly, you can get injured in both directions, so that example wasn't a good one.
The straightforward number is:
How many trains can I take in the busiest hour that take me from this station complex to some other place?
This does produce minor distortions (for example, at the Fulton St complex you have J and Z trains that you can only take one brief stop, so almost no one will take them), but it's a simple method and doesn't produce any major distortions.
There are just too many variables for a more accurate count: size of trains (A vs B division, 4 vs 8 vs 10 car trains), how popular the available destinations are, how crowded the trains are, etc. Nobody actually measures the real busy-ness number, which is:
How many people board a train at this station in the busiest hour to go somewhere else?
Sorry I posted in the first place. I just thought you all may find it interesting.
I don't think you should be sorry, I thought it was on-topic and interesting. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think more people found it interesting than those that didn't. It has to do with the rails.....
What it says on the top
-----
Welcome to the SubTalk bulletin board at www.nycsubway.org. 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. Off-topic and harassing posts will be removed at the discretion of the management. Please note! This site is not run by MTA New York City Transit!
-----
Any rail transit system is on topic, so Amtrak and others are on topic as well.
Amtrak is not a rail transit system. Neither is SEPTA, NJTransit, or British Rail. Those are all off-topic posts. I only contribute to off-topic threads. If people don't like it, walk.
AEM7
Amtrak is a railroad system that transports people to different places, how does it not qualify as rail transit?
Amtrak runs the MBTA commuter rail and people do post about the LIRR nobody sees to mind. Steve
Rail transit is the term used to describe things that run on rails that aren't real railroads. They are railroad wannabes. Therefore to call Amtrak a rail transit would be an insult. Amtrak is "intercity rail transportation" -- definitely not transit. Amtrak has class. Subways and commuter rails have no class, except Metro North which has bar cars, and Surfliners which are very classy.
AEM7
Subways and commuter rails have no class
I'd argue against that. If anything I prefer commuter rail trains on their longer journeys. You get your coffee served at your seat, not in a buffet car halfway down a very long train. I'd much rather ride a Class 168 "Clubman" than an Inter-City 225 any day.
I'd argue against that. If anything I prefer commuter rail trains on their longer journeys.
You've not experienced a real train... come here and ride Amfleets outside the Northeast Corridor before Amtrak shuts down :-)
As for the 170's, I hate 'em -- used to ride one to work every day!
AEM7
The truth is, everyone comes here for their own reasons. I think it's safe to say that most people get out of SubTalk what they come here for, otherwise they would stop coming if it "bored" them. SubTalk obviously has the right mix of Amtrak, subway, commuter rail, etc. There's enough "Amtrak" stuff here for the people who like Amtrak, otherwise they wouldn't come come here and stay on an "Amtrak" only board. Or there's enough LIRR stuff for the LIRR people, etc.
The majority of people come here for the subway talks, but that doesn't mean the other occasional topics don't interest them also. And no one says that everyone has to read everything. There are many threads that I don't read because they don't interest me, but then I just don't participate in them or read them. But if other people like those threads, then obviously they should read them and add to them. That's what they are there for!
The majority of people come here for the subway talks
I actually think that assumption is no longer true. Back in the old days, before the hiatus, topic keeping was much stricter and there were a lot more subway people posting. Ever since AcelaExpress2005 and his cohorts invaded this board (as well as people like Chao-Hwa Chen for instance), I think there is pretty much an even subway/railroad constituency. Would be interesting to do a poll so that we have some statistics.
AEM7
Plus, people like me who started out with an interest in subway and ended up becoming more interested in railroads!
As Groucho Marx said, "I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member."
Just to mess with this a bit. What about the SEPTA, MBTA and NJT operations that are clearly Transit? Septa may operate the Regional Rail, definitely not a transit operation. However it also has the Market Frankford and Broad Street subways, the Rt101 and 102, the Sub surface trolleys and the Rt100, all of which are transit operations. Are all of these considered on-topic, even though they are not in New York or a part of MTA? And if you were to say that no, becuase of their lack of proxmity to NYC they are off topic, where would you draw the line? Would NJT's HBLRT be off topic? How the heck would NJT's operations into Penn Station work? Would they be off topic once you clear the west portal of the hudson tunnel? Off to Railroad.net with you! What about PATH? It's a subway that runs into NYC, but has no affiliation with the MTA, would it be spared?
I propose a New Standard! If the operation is mentioned in depth somewhere on this site, such as station-by-station guides and photos and such, it's ok for a topic. Of course this would have severely detrimental effects for those who wanted to discuss the LIRR, since it is surprisingly under-represented here.
Heh, of course I am only kidding, I hope such a crackdown on offtopic posting never comes to pass, however, it does raise some questions for dave, exactly what it off topic, with all the transit systems in NYC, it's hard to get a cut and dried solution.
however, it does raise some questions for dave, exactly what it off topic, with all the transit systems in NYC, it's hard to get a cut and dried solution.
I think Dave already has the right solution. He is very minimal in deleting threads - I can only think of three which he deleted: racism, some of the sillier demolish the Astoria El stuff, and Opera in the Clouds (oh well, I suppose this isn't OperaTalk, but I am an Opera fan as well as a railfan) - presumably all the nonsense which led to the last hiatus is no longer there, but I can't be asked to go searching the archives for that. The one thing I have noticed is how even though the deleted threads are not there any more, the numbers are left there vacant, including the landmark post #300,000 - I can't help wondering what that was and why it was deleted.
I think some person posted "I got the 300,000th Subtalk Post"!!! I forget who it was, but he's a regular here.
Dave was a lot stricter about deleting threads in those days. I once posted something along the lines of "you know you are being neglected by your girlfriend when rubbing arms with the girl sitting next to you on the subway feels good", and Dave deleted it even though it is DIRECTLY subway related. I went on to talk about the Boston Red Line and how it offers good arm-rubbing opportunities because there are no dividers and seats are too small, in that post. I don't think he would delete this thread, but we shall see.
AEM7
HEHEHEHE...that's terrible. Now you are starting a strange thread: which trains have the best looking PEOPLE (you thought I would mess this one up, eh?). I cast a vote for the Northeast Corridor from Washington to New Yrok.
I cast a vote for the Northeast Corridor from Washington to New Yrok.
Nah, they all look like either Monica Lewinski or Chandra Levy. I prefer a Southern Belle anyday. Texas Chief and el Capitan for ever!
AEM7
OUCH! That's rough. Let the dead rest in peace, though. You need to ride the Regionals inside of the Express because you won't find as many politicians on the Regional.
Although I have a friend of mine from the South at school...I FEEL YOU :)
You need to ride the Regionals inside of the Express because you won't find as many politicians on the Regional.
I ride only NEDirects. I won't touch the Acela Express with a bargepole! Still, the two times I rode NEDirects out of Washington, everyone on the train was business-looking were all overdressed and all had excessively fashionable makeup. People in Washington is just too phoney. I've only been to Washington twice, liked it the first time but only because I was accompanied by an Irish Bostonian; the second time I was there for a conference, it was a rough town. People are very cold, except the working class from Virginia -- they are not bad, but they only ride the VRE.
Although I have a friend of mine from the South at school...I FEEL YOU
Where you at school?
AEM7
I am the guilty party with the gobbledegook 300,000th post. 'Tis what happens when you mix drinks.
David Pirmann did not change the stated rules on the website, but he did mention the acceptability of other railroad topics in his posts. Just as Supreme Court decisions interpret and sometimes extend the coverage of posted laws, David's posts are part of the official word, not just the rules at the top of the opening Subtalk screen.
If you talk about PASSENGER VOLUMES, there's a different story there...
A lot of Tokyo's stations are pretty crowded with people, and of course some of my favourite stations in Hong Kong too....
- Kowloon Tong: A popular transfer point between commuters from Sheung Shui, Tai Po and Sha Tin to transfer from East Rail to the Kwun Tong Line into the city
- Mong Kok and Prince Edward: Transfers between the Tsuen Wan Line and the Kwun Tong Line...it's so busy the MTR has installed platform screen doors at those two stations FIRST.
- Central-Hong Kong: The terminal of the Tung Chung Line (at Hong Kong), the Tsuen Wan Line (at Central), a stop on the Island Line (at Central), and the in-city base of the world-famous Airport Express train (at Hong Kong.)
- Admiralty: The popular transfer point for Tsuen Wan Line commuters to transfer to the Island Line towards the eastern end of the Island towards Chai Wan...legends have it that people have lost shoes in the mad rush across the curved gap.
- Yau Tong and Tiu Keng Leng: The two newest stations on the system. The new Tseung Kwan O Line coming from both Po Lam and North Point will intersect with the Kwun Tong Line towards Yau Ma Tei and Tiu Keng Leng. Soon to be my two favorite stations...and you got to love the words Tiu Keng Leng, which translated into English means "Adjust (Tiu) View (Keng) Point (Leng)!"
- Tsim Sha Tsui: Not a transfer station, but a popular station nevertheless for tourists and shoppers into the south Kowloon tourist trap...er...mecca. This is the area that's filled with hotels and chic malls and European designer shops. Tres chic, I say.
For Tiu Keng Leng (former English name is "Rennie's Mill"), its original Chinese name is actually means the Hanging Point because there is where Mr Rennie hanged himself up as he business is failed. The Chinese name is then derived to the name used in nowadays.
Central-Hong Kong interchange is somehow like the interchange between ACE and other lines in Times Sqaure in New York. It's techinaclly 2 station, but we treat them as one because the name Hong Kong is too vague for both residents and tourists. It takes 5 minutes to just walk in the tunnel fore transferring from Tung Chung Line Platform at Hong Kong to Island Line Platform in Central. There is moving walks in the tunnels, but Hong Kong people are rather reluctzant to use such interchange because we are used to direct transfer within the same island platform.
Its not the bussiest station because few trains stop there. It might perhaps be the busiest interlocking. Penn Station is of course technically 4 seperate interlockings (A, KN, JO and C) , but since the creation of the PSCC you could argue it is one. PSCC also controls F interlocking in Queens and if you rounded everything all together is might be on the world's bussiest list with all the non-revenue moves and whatnot.
Here, a live departure board:
Clapham Jct.
When I pulled it up, it was 21.14 GMT and there were 25 trains between 21.14 and 21.44 -- that's about 50 trains per hour. This is not even peak hour. It's past 9 o'clock at night.
AEM7
Again this is a Sunady service. Check it out around at 12.00pm EST (your time) tomorrow. Should be interesting.
Simom
Swindon UK
I was wondering why it was blank, until I realized it's 3AM there. Dumbass...
I did the same looking at Bicester North (but this was about 1300 GMT). It turns out that day there were no trains on the section Princes' Risborough - Banbury because of the track redoubling between Bicester North and Aynho (Yay!!! More trains on my line!!!).
track redoubling
If you are adding one track alongside another, why is it necessary to shut down the single track?
AEM7
To finish connecting the tracks to eachother at either end. (Plus the single track had the typical inconsistency as to on which side of the ROW it was).
The really weird thing is where you get further into London and the bridges are all built wide enough to span four tracks, but only two have ever been there.
I just pulled it up and counted 99 trains departing between 12.46 and 13.45 today.
And that isn't even peak-hour service.
Mvh Tim
The live information you are looking at is for a Sunday service. Check it out on a weekday.
Simon
Swindon UK
In terms of subways, however, I can offer this (This was posted where I have a belief that it will not be seen and will be drowned out by mindless and pointless nitpicking on details...)
CENTRAL/HONG KONG STATIONS COMPLEX, Hong Kong:
- Tseun Wan Line (TWL): 128 to 200 second headways = 20-30 tph
- Island Line (ISL): 128 to 200 second headways = 20-30 tph
- Tung Chung Line (TCL): 4 minutes/train = 15 tph
- Airport Express (AEL): 10 minutes/train = 6 tph
- Off-peak: 20 (TWL) + 20 (ISL) + 15 (TCL) + 6 (AEL) = 61 tph
- Peak: 30 (TWL) + 30 (ISL) + 15 (TCL) + 6 (AEL) = 81 tph
Might not be a Clapham Junction, but it's comparable, ne?
-J!
Okay, wrong numbers, but still...
CENTRAL/HONG KONG STATIONS COMPLEX:
- Tsuen Wan Line (TWL): 120-300s/train = 12-30 tph
- Island Line (ISL): 128-300s/train = 12-30 tph
- Tung Chung Line (TCL): 4-10 min/train = 6-15 tph
- Airport Express (AEL): 10 min/train = 6 tph
- OFFPEAK (Middays, Evenings): 12 + 12 + 6 + 6 = 36 tph
- PEAK (AM/PM Rushes): 30 + 30 + 15 + 6 = 81 tph
Thanks for the info. Must go to Hong Kong one year, sooner not later.
Simon
Swindon UK
I think that Hong Kong Subways in fact do have the lowest operating headway anywhere in the world. The signalling system is designed for 72 second headways, they are only using 90 seconds at the moment -- rush hour trains run less than every 2 mins), but there is a plan to go down to 80 seconds. With an 80 second headway and 72 second minimum, if you get a delay you're in trouble until the end of the rush hour...
Clapham Jct is the world's busiest railroad/railway station, but it's nowhere near the busiest subway station.
AEM7
However, Hong Kong MTR (subway) seldom delay. And if they do, they must be a chaos!
There were once the signaling system is failed, and they are forced to use fixed block signaling, somebody got sufficated on the train and emergency buttons were pressed so frequently that they slowed down the ride. With the shortest distance allowed by the system is 18 metres (20 yards) between 2 trains, we can make the MTR as frequent as wew want.
Unfortunately, with the new Korean trains, the Kwun Tong Line has been chaos. The K-Train are even worse than the R-142s.
And with Yau Tong-Tiu Keng Leng diverson it's been even MORE chaos. A single-seat ride becomes an extra 4-minute stand at Yau Tong (and that's if you can actually get on board a train!!)
-J!
I think that Hong Kong Subways in fact do have the lowest operating headway anywhere in the world. The signalling system is designed for 72 second headways, they are only using 90 seconds at the moment
I think I can beat that. Lille (France) is designed for 60 second headways (as are Toulouse, Rennes and the "OrlyVal" in Paris) and run on 75 second headways in the rush hour.
The Lille Metro is not a subway.
I quote from Metropla.net: "Lille is synonymous for a new generation of metro systems, a kind of small profile light railway operated automatically..."
If you are counting light rail, Boston's Green Line operates with a 45 second headway in the rush hour between Boylston and Copley on a basically two-track right of way. Of course, Boston's system is not nearly the busiest light rail system.
AEM7
The Lille Metro is not a subway.
Yes it is. It is a completely different system from the Tramway in the same city. There is ATO, no on street running and the weight of the rail, width of cars, gauge etc don't make a hell of a lot of difference. It is more of a subway than either the Boston Green Line (the oldest SUBWAY in America) or the Newark City SUBWAY.
light railway
A phrase which means at least three different things:
1) a railway built under powers from the Light Railway Act (e.g. the Cleobury Mortimer and Ditton Priors Light Railway)
2) a trolley line (such as the Boston Green Line or Lille Tramway)
3) a railway where the weight of the rail is low (such as the Lille Métro, and the Sea Beach Express tracks in NYC)
The reason for the actual rail weight being low in Lille is because the rubber tyres take most of the load and the rails are just there as a fall-back and for switching.
The reason for the actual rail weight being low in Lille is because the rubber tyres take most of the load and the rails are just there as a fall-back and for switching.
If something has a rubber wheel, it's not even a railcar. Looks like this Lille is some f__ked up system that doesn't even qualify as a rail transit. Lille can forget it. Comparing Lille headways with a true subway rail transit headway isn't correct since the rubber wheels will allow much higher rates of braking -- a large factor in determining the possible headway.
AEM7
"If something has a rubber wheel, it's not even a railcar. Looks like this Lille is some f__ked up system that doesn't even qualify as a rail transit."
So Paris and Montreal don't have rail transit systems? Other than the rubber, they look very much like NYC or Boston subways to me.
So Paris and Montreal don't have rail transit systems?
I've never liked anything French. Now even less so.
I've seen the system map of the Paris Metro, that's pretty impressive, I'd call that a transit system (but if it's rubber wheeled, it's not a "rail" transit system). Montreal doesn't even have a trasnit system.
AEM7
I've seen the system map of the Paris Metro, that's pretty impressive, I'd call that a transit system (but if it's rubber wheeled, it's not a "rail" transit system).
The rubber wheels are not used at switches, traditional rails are and the rubber wheels are guided much like traditional rail wheels. It is a railway of a higher form of technology.
It is a railway of a higher form of technology
Whenever a technology is "new", everyone calls it a "higher form of technology". Unfortunately that is often incorrect. In space, where there is no gravity, a pencil writes a lot better than the higher form of technology, a fnarking Frog invention called the BIC. Different technologies should be used for different environments. I personally don't see how rubber wheeled technology would be appropriate anywhere other than on the highway. The highway is a "newer" form of technology than the railroad, sure. But if you want to run a rubber tyred vehicle, there's something out there called a "road" (and a vehicle called a "bus") that you can use. Indeed, this is most appropriate for low-density areas where the costs of steel rails cannot be justified.
AEM7
"I personally don't see how rubber wheeled technology would be appropriate anywhere other than on the highway."
- Faster braking allows more tph.
- Quieter (greater passenger comfort).
Offset, of course, by greater maintenance costs. But not inherently a stupid idea.
- Faster braking allows more tph.
- Quieter (greater passenger comfort).
I'd dispute point no.2, but anyway, that's not the issue here. If you think this is great, why not convert all subways to busways?
AEM7
"If you think this is great, why not convert all subways to busways?"
- Busways have lower capacity than subways.
- Rubber tire subways have higher mtc costs, which to my mind outweigh the benefits.
Note that I did NOT say rubber wheels were great, I just said they weren't inherently stupid. I merely disputed your contention that they were inappropriate other than on a highway. The Paris system moves lots of people and doesn't seem to be a disaster in any way.
The rubber tyres in Paris give amazing acceleration and short stopping distances. This gives very short headways for the five car trains that operate. The ride is best descirbed as unusual. They are also very quiet - may be suitable for New York's steel ells.
Simon
Swindon UK
I assume you mean by a busway a subway with rubber tyred trains, not a subway in which you run AEC Routemasters.
There are of course obvious advantages for busy subways to adopt this technology:
- faster acceleration
- faster braking
which allow:
- shorter journey times
- shorter headways
which allow:
- shorter dwell times
So in short, trains running at way above 30tph which get you where you want to go quicker.
Sounds a good idea, doesn't it? Why not do this to all lines?
That was the question RATP (the Paris transit agency) asked themselves. Indeed they managed to convert the very busy lines 1 and 4. However, there were two main obstacles:
- cost of converting existing infrastructure was rather high
- maintaining existing service whilst conversion took place
- the whole line has to be converted before one rubber tyred train can run
So they resolved that all new builds would be rubber tyred, but to leave the rest of the lines as is (unless they got way too busy). An exception was made for line 6, which was converted to rubber tyred operations for quite different reasons. Anyone who knows Paris will know that line 6 for the most part is on an El. Noise concerns were the reason for this conversion.
If I could name one line which IMHO would benefit from this technology more than any other on earth, it would have to be the Flushing IRT. This is ridiculously busy (so a technological improvement would be useful in practical terms) and for the large part elevated (so in environmental terms as well).
I don't get the noise aspect of this.
The Montréal Métro is IME considerably louder than the Washington Metro.
If the Flushing IRT is too noisy, converting it to rubber-tired operation is not the solution. Upgrading it to modern steel-wheeled equipment and infrastructure would be at least as effective and much less costly.
Mvh Tim
If the Flushing IRT is too noisy, converting it to rubber-tired operation is not the solution. Upgrading it to modern steel-wheeled equipment and infrastructure would be at least as effective and much less costly.
Actually, rubber tyres are less noisy, that is true. The problem is that it is shite, and it isn't a train. Upgrading an el to reduce noise would require a total rebuild, changing the steel underdeck to a concrete one. (Basically, instead of the noise being transmitted downwards, it hits the sidewalls and gets bounced up so those in the car hears it instead of those living below and beside).
The solution to noisy el's is to tell the residents to shut up, and tell them that if they complain, we will take the el away. Just ask those people on 2nd Ave.
I assume you mean by a busway a subway with rubber tyred trains,
No, I mean a BUSWAY like they have in Pittsburgh.
There are of course obvious advantages for busy subways to adopt this technology:
- faster acceleration
- faster braking
- less comfortable ride
- more falling over
- feels like a bus
So in short, trains running at way above 30tph which get you where you want to go quicker.
If the choice is between running six car trains at 15tph or three car trains at 30tph, which would you choose? Of course you would choose three car trains at 30tph, right? That's because you have not been an operator or dispatcher. You think like the customer and you think that a train every 2 minutes is better than a train every 4 minutes. In fact if the ITS system telling you how long it is until the next train did not exist, very few people actually notice the difference between a 2-minute headway and a 4-minute headway. After waiting for a train for 3-minutes, if you ask someone "how long have you been here?", they usually tell you "a couple minutes". Talk to an operator, they will tell you how much less likely to have a f__k up with 15tph than with 30tph. Unless there are some infrastructure constraint (e.g. platform length), there's no real reason to have headways less than about every 4 mins.
AEM7
Unless there are some infrastructure constraint (e.g. platform length), there's no real reason to have headways less than about every 4 mins.
Boy, you really don't know what you're talking about at all. The Flushing line runs 11-car trains (except during the summer) at close to 30 tph, and they're crowded. Yes, I'm afraid platform length is an infrastructure constraint -- the platforms aren't 1122 feet long. I also question whether the C/R's can keep an eye on 33 doors over 11 cars in each direction as the train is pulling out.
Other lines have similar operating characteristics. The East Side IRT has close to 30 tph of 510-foot trains on each of four tracks. The Queens Boulevard IND has 30 tph of 600-foot trains on its express tracks.
The Flushing line runs 11-car trains (except during the summer) at close to 30 tph, and they're crowded...
Time to do one of two things:
(1) Build more lines
(2) Price up so that demand is suppressed.
AEM7
I like oprion 1 better.......
The Flushing line runs 11-car trains (except during the summer) at close to 30 tph
Exactly, so the way forward is rubber tyres and (maybe) ATO. The reduction in noise pollution is a nice side effect, but I'd say the main thing would be to run more trains of the same size.
The other way would be to build a second Subway Line to Flushing. I think rubber tyres sounds an easier alternative than that.
Raising fares to force people off the Subway is regressive and stupid - it makes the City's congestion problem worse and will only work in the short run. Raising fares to fund improvements may be a good idea - if either the unions or the bosses don't get their hands on the money instead.
Oh yes, and, AEM7, I appreciate that not many people would notice the difference in waiting time once you have more than 12tph, but they sure would notice the difference in crowding. 15tph would be suicide on the Flushing Line platforms, 27tph is still overcrowded; what's actually needed is about 40tph.
I appreciate not everyone likes the idea of running trains on rubber, but in certain cases, it is a very good idea.
Please explain how running trains on rubber tires/tyres as opposed to the present steel wheels can result in more trains being operated in the peak hour. This claim was made before, a few weeks ago, on this board, and I challenged it but never received a response.
David
Higher braking rates = operating trains at same maximum speeds closer together = higher vehicle flow rates
Assumption: the signalling system can handle continuous (and not discrete) block lengths (i.e. moving block signalling)
AEM7
Fine. Now tell me how rubber tires/tyres enter into the equation. What was described by "AEM7" is CBTC, which does not in any way require rubber tires/tyres to work.
David
That can be an effect of CBTC, but it is a more characteristic effect of rubber. Rubber has more grip than steel, hence better acceleration and retardation. If simple physics like that really bothers you, I sugest you read "Paris Metro Handbook" by B. Hardy published by Capital Transport Publishing of 38, Long Elmes, Harrow Weald, Middlesex, UK.
NYCT's present signal system (before recent modifications, at least) is designed to handle 40 trains per hour per track. Because of dwell time considerations, no more than 36 have ever been scheduled, and there are questions as to whether that throughput was ever sustained on a regular basis. Currently, NYCT schedules no more than 30 trains per hour on any given section of track. This is all with steel wheels on steel rails. There are some places where more service can be operated than is currently scheduled, but isn't because of a lack of cars (discounting, of course, places that have the capacity but not the need) or because dwell time has limited throughput and must be reduced before an attempt can be made to increase service (on the Lexington Avenue Express, service is being increased slowly as efforts to reduce dwell time take hold).
Is what's being proposed here that NYCT operate more than 40 TPH on any section of track? 30 or even slightly more can be operated, and indeed historically HAS been operated, with traditional steel-on-steel and electromechanical(/pneumatic?) signals. Additionally, increasing the braking rate is something that NYCT could do NOW if it so desired and does not require any change in the braking technologies currently in use or in wheel or track design.
David
I understand that the faster acceleration and braking (resulting in higher tph) were what prompted the RATP to begin converting lines to rubber-tired operation back in the 1950s (wasn't it?).
However, it should also not be forgotten that the acceleration and braking of steel-wheel-on-steel-rail systems is deliberately designed not to be higher than what human passengers, particularly those who are standing, can tolerate. Steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology is capable of better (=faster) acceleration and braking than what is currently the norm, but that is not feasible for passenger safety reasons. Consequently, using rubber tires to achieve better acceleration and braking is also not feasible.
Mvh Tim
Really? Try riding SEPTA. Especially the N5s.
Are you telling me that an R62A can brake at 2.5ms^-2 and acellerate at 1.4ms^-2? If so, I am impressed.
"Are you telling me that an R62A can brake at 2.5ms^-2 and acellerate at 1.4ms^-2? If so, I am impressed."
Not sure what post your're responding to, but obviously it meant 2.5 and 1.4 miles per hour per second, not miles per second per second.
2 miles per second per second is 300 times the force of gravity.
He's British. He's using evil metric units.
2 mph per second is pretty lame acceleration.
2 miles per second per second is ridiculous.
2.5 m/s/s (meters per second per second) is about 5.6 mph per second. (If I have done the conversion right)
Maximum Service Brake on British Rail is 9%g = 0.88 m/s/s = 1.98 mph/sec
2.5 m/s/s would be extremely uncomfortable.
Aeroplanes taking off is about 25%g = 2.45 m/s/s, which is why people must be strapped in. His rubber-wheeled trains would feel like a plane.
AEM7
I did not quote a braking rate in the post being answered. However, the service braking rate is 3.0 miles per hour per second, and the emergency braking rate is 3.2 miles per hour per second.
David
Interesting....never saw numbers before. When we service brake in the static condition, we are given numbers and limits in PSI for brake cylinder pressure. Redbird Tech: 0 or something for full release, 6 to 10 PSI for snow brake, 80 PSI for max. 15 PSI is the 'window' for dynamic braking. Not a clue to speed but the dynamic braking window is about 10 mph/100 amperes of generated current. CI peter
"Please explain how running trains on rubber tires/tyres as opposed to the present steel wheels can result in more trains being operated in the peak hour."
1. Trains with rubber tires can break and accelerate faster because the coefficient of friction of rubber on concrete is higher than steel on steel.
2. Objects that accelerate and break faster can safely be spaced more closely together than objects that accelerate and break more slowly. Consider at the extreme, automobiles can be spaced much more closely than trains. Even MBTA trolleys can be spaced much more closely than subways, pretty much tailgating each other at Park Street.
3. The closer spacing, at comparable speeds, allows for a lower time interval between trains.
1. Subway cars with steel wheels can have higher braking rates than NYCT's (3.2 mphps in full service) do.
2. As in my answer to "AEM7," this describes what NYCT's objectives are with CBTC (Communication-Based Train Control). Again, it doesn't require rubber tires/tyres. MBTA trolleys don't operate under CBTC, by the way...moreover, to my knowledge, they don't have ANY means of stopping the train other than the Train Operator/Motorman activating the brakes.
3. Agreed -- the closer together trains can safely be spaced, the higher the potential capacity of the line. But, once again, all of this can be accomplished with steel-on-steel, and IS accomplished at several transit systems.
David
1. Subway cars with steel wheels can have higher braking rates than NYCT's (3.2 mphps in full service) do.
But, no matter what the steel wheels do, the rubber wheeled cars will always have higher braking rates, hence lower potential headway (assuming CBTC).
However, I dispute that the rubber wheels are the solution. With the kind of braking rates that are currently in use on NYCTA, it's already tough to stand up without holding onto something. Making the acceleration any sharper would mean that the subway isn't all that much better than buses in terms of comfort.
AEM7
Then think of what rubber plus proper ATO can do (none of this lousy CBTC).
Fourty tonnes of dead weight supported by rubber rimmed wheels on steel tracks? These guys never went undercar to measure wheel diameter or flange thickness!!!! From the American Commander of forces defending the besieged town of Bastogne to the German Commander of assaulting forces: 'NUTS.'
If you don't believe it's possible, go to Paris and ride one of lines 1, 4, 6, 11 and 14 - or even better all of them.
ATO and CBTC are independent items that can, but do not have to, work together. My contention is that all of the supposed benefits of rubber as regards the amount of service that can be provided, can be attained without changing to "pneu" technology.
David
My contention is that steel on steel has an upper limit in the range of 36-40tph for heavy rail systems regardless of ATO, CBTC, TPWS or any other system like that.
So does rubber wheels on rubber wheels, if the thing is going to feel like a train at all.
The French run a higher levels of cant deficiency (or imbalance to North Americans) than anybody else on their rails. Their trains are also the most uncomfortable and car-like.
The French allows some 185mm of cant deficiency for their non-tilting trains. The Acela only runs at an FRA authorized maximum of 190mm (7.5 inches) cant deficiency. The British Rail "exceptional" standard is 165mm. Standard North American standard is 115mm.
The French are f__ing nuts.
AEM7
And what's the point here? The maximum amount of service NYCT currently operates isn't anywhere near the upper limit "British James" theorizes for steel-on-steel (not to say that he's wrong).
Let's run the system according to the limits of its capabilities, with or without the latest whiz-bang technological enhancements. If that isn't enough, THEN consider changing the roadbed and wheels.
David
David is correct on #2. MBTA Green Line trolleys run on a fixed block system, but do NOT have trip stops. It is the operator's responsiblity to stop the car/train.
While AEM7 is correct that the trolleys do "tailgate" at Park Street and other places within the subway, trolleys entering stations that have a preceding trolley platformed will encounter a yellow over yellow signal at the entrance to the station, which means:
RULE 58(C)(1): Double Yellow -- COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. Then preceed at restricted speed. (Proceed, prepared to stop short of a car, train, or other obstruction and watch for broken rail or switch not properly lined, not exceeding TEN (10) MILES PER HOUR) to appropriate berth.)
Not necessarily!
The Kinkisharyo Millennium Trains on the KCRC East Rail have undercar curtains that cover up the sides of the wheel mechanisms. These curtains have significantly reduced noise by about 25%, and when they pull up to a station you can tell it's a Kinkisharyo Millennium. They're THAT much more quiet than the Alstom EMUs.
Ah, for the love of the Sheung Shui-bound Kinkisharyo Millennium...*sigh*
-J!
Where does the noise go? If it simply goes up into the cars, then I'm not sure I consider that a good solution -- it certainly isn't likely to attract patrons to public transit, not that this tends to be a problem in Hong Kong, from what I gather. :-)
Mvh Tim
The rubber tyred lines also have steel rails as well and the rubber tyred trains also have steel wheels (in case of a blowout). The system works very well, is fast and very efficient. There are some lessons to be learned.
Simon
Swindon UK
To be fair, Paris is only partially run by rubber wheeled trains.
Lines 1, 4 and 6 were upgraded for rubber wheeled operation
Lines 11 and 14 were built for rubber wheeled operation
Lines 2, 3, 3bis, 5, 7, 7bis, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 have never been upgraded
Line 14 has the added benefit of ATO.
Just a little correction.
Line 11 was also converted from regular steel rail service.
In fact, it was the first regular service line to be.
Most lines have ATO, albeit with human operators.
Line 14 is completely automatic with no human crew on board.
You're completely right - it was the one line I didn't look up because I knew it was built later than all except parts of 13 and all of 14 - unfortunately it was still 21 years too early!
If something has a rubber wheel, it's not even a railcar. Looks like this Lille is some f__ked up system that doesn't even qualify as a rail transit. Lille can forget it. Comparing Lille headways with a true subway rail transit headway isn't correct since the rubber wheels will allow much higher rates of braking -- a large factor in determining the possible headway.
Yeh, well, I like this fucked up system with it's fast acceleration and braking. Seeing as it's pretty much standard on all new builds in France (including in Paris), I think it qualifies if not out-qualifies the traditional stuff we have in London and New York. It looks like progress to me.
It looks like progress to me.
Do you have the latest Windows XP operating system? Do you think that's progress over the old-school Mac OS?
AEM7
Do you have the latest Windows XP operating system?
Yes. So I installed Linux.
In terms of the interface, yes.
I hate the old MacOS, with that stupid menu to switch programs. Windows 95 and up is better.
Now compare Windows before 95 with the Mac OS and OS X with Windows and it's a different story.
Dude, if you say Lille is a metro, then I can say Vancouver's Skytrain is a metro too, when it's supposed to be an ALRV.
-J!
I've never been to Vancouver, but it looks from metropla.net like it's a metro not a tramway.
Looks liek Metropla.net's reporting is screwed. Is Docklands Light Rail a metro too?
AEM7
I believe the Beckton branch has some on street running.
Not to my knowledge. It has third rail.
Simon
Swindon UK
The Beckton line doesn't have on-street running. It runs in an open cut down the central reservation (median strip in American) of a highway, and the stations are below street level at the roundabouts (traffic circles in American), so if you just look at a map it may seem as if it runs in the street. The highway in question, by the way, runs almost exactly on the alignment of the long-dead Gallions branch line. (The equally long-dead Beckton branch actually followed a different alignment a bit further north.)
However, IIRC some early plans for the Docklands LR envisaged running it in the street to Mile End underground station (District and Central lines), for connection to the rest of London. In the end, it was decided to run it to Tower Gateway instead, using the viaducts of the old London and Blackwall railway. And later the tunnel section to Bank station was added, for better connection with the tube network. Presumably the Mile End idea pre-dated the decision to make the system third-rail. The Docklands LR is also driverless, of course, which would make on-street running interesting (8-) !
Fytton.
didnt the Flushing line have 90 sec headways years ago....?
Nope...100 second headways (36 TPH). I've got several timetables from the 1960s and 1970s that show it. However, there is a question as to whether the scheduled throughput was actually achieved.
David
Heck, I just counted 74 tph in the peak for T-Centralen in Stockholm:
Division 1 (green lines): 30 tph
Division 2 (red lines): 24 tph
Division 3 (blue lines): 20 tph
These are schedule numbers; IME, the new signalling system on Division 1 does not permit 30 tph in practice. (The old signalling system did.)
Mvh Tim
I thought Shinjuku station in Tokyo is the busiest in the world, but IIRC that claim is based on passenger counts rather than the number of train movements. Not sure what the train frequency is through there, and how it's broken down by subway vs. railroad.
Ive seen pictures on the TV with station staff pushing people onto trains. This must help with the passenger numbers:)
Simon
Swindon UK
I couldn't get tph numbers but many web sites quote Shinjuku as being the busiest train station in the World. One site said 3 million passengers per day but I'm not sure if it includes all the systems.
Japan Railway East runs 5 commuter lines and one long distance line and airport express. There are three subway lines and three private lines have their Tokyo terminal there.
People-pushers are becoming less common these days, but I'm sure Shinjuku still needs them on the Chuo line inbound platform during the morning rush.
OK I found some figures from fiscal year 1999. Figures are rounded to the thousand and show only people entering the station and exclude transfers within the same company.(Source: Tokyo Metropolitan Gov.)
Japan Railway East: 276,978,000
Odakyu: 93,272,000
Seibu: 38,049,000
Keio: 124,039,000
Eidan Subway Marunouchi line: 49,055,000
Municipal Subway Shinjuku line: 41,170,000
Municipal Subway Oedo line: 7,591,000
Couldn't find the number of trains.
In any case that's a LOT of people.
A lot of systems in Asia have superconductors. Tokyo and Hong Kong, especially. I know stations such as Admiralty, Wan Chai, Causeway Bay, Mong Kok and even Yau Tong on its first operating day had superconductors on duty to push people from Kwun Tong Line trains aboard Tseung Kwan O Line trains toward North Point.
Hmm.
Are we conunting trains in both directions? If you are at a subway station with 20 tph, then 40 tph pass through (twenty each way). Maybe JLeung should double his Hong Kong figures?? I think the Clapham Jct example is counting both ways (I just looked at the live departure board and 50 trains in total -- both directions -- are listed in half an hour). Secondly, I think the oft-quoted tag that it is the busiest RAILWAY station in the world is not including subways. Even in London itself, Kings Cross St Pancras tube station has three deep tube lines each about 20 tph each way -- that's 120 tph -- plus the sub-surface station with probably nearer 30 tph each way -- total getting on for 180 tph in the peak. Less in the off-peak, and no night service, but probably nearly 3000 trains per day.
I was never claiming that Clapham Junction was the busiest (I think I used the term "regarded by some" or something like that in my post). As many have pointed out it depends which criteria you use. I had hoped that my post would have encouraged folks to look at the live departure boards which also show how many and by how much the trains are running late. BTW this information is also available for most British stations on the same site. Incidentally Clapham Junction serves just a small part of the very extensive and complex London Suburban rail system (one of the busiest in the world, perhaps the busiest:) and one which is great fun and very easy to explore with an all zone travel card.
Simon
Swindon UK
Incidentally Clapham Junction serves just a small part of the very extensive and complex London Suburban rail system
Surely extensive and very complex... there are large parts of it - especially South of the Thames - which I simply don't understand at all.
Its a wilderness. People have been known to disappear for days:)
Simon
Swindon UK
Even looking at an old map to see which lines were South Eastern & Chatham, London Brighton & South Coast, and London & South Western doesn't make it any clearer - they seem to be pretty much random even in 1923. For instance - why did the SE&C have two stations in Catford? And why did they build a spur from Grove Park to Bromley North when Bromley South is SE&C too? And why did the LB&SC build two Croydon stations? I suppose the short answer to all of these questions is that the Southern Region has never made any sense.
Here is a question. What does Acton have that Croydon does not ?
No prizes :)
Simon
Swindon
A main line? :P
Nope. Give in ?
Simon
Swindon UK
Go on - I bet it's really obvious...
North, Town and Central?
Yes, than answer is North.
Simon
Swindon UK
The answer is North.
East Acton, West Acton, North Acton, South Acton.
There is no North Croydon.
You can have a tee shirt anyway :)
Simon
Swindon UK
Nice one. That is an oddity that hadn't struck me.
I still like my "Main Line" answer, but that probably reflects my opinion of the Southern Region more than anything else!
If you look at
http://www.nycsubway.org/faq/radiocode.html
you'll find a list of radio codes - 12-1 through 12-3 and 12-5 through 12-12. Why isn't there a 12-4?
Too similar to 10-4
12-4 is supposed to be the same as 10-4,i.e. "acknowledged".
Anyone have any false buzzers on a 68?
Id you are on a a1-b-b-a1 + a2-b-b-a2 consist and the IC worked between both a1's would it be a slam dunk that a2 could hear a1?
I quess the question is where are the most common problems on IC in couplers, trainline or mike/speaker.
I have been getting reports from my T/O's of false buzzers on the R62A Singles. They normally happen around 125 Street - Bway.
Are you serious or am I missing something?
No, I've never gotten a false buzzer on a 68/68A, and no, not a slam dunk for your IC question, either. The IC's never worked particularly well on these cars, and I've been working them since they were new.
thanks
"Id you are on a a1-b-b-a1 + a2-b-b-a2 consist and the IC worked between both a1's would it be a slam dunk that a2 could hear a1?"
I'd try to answer your question if you'd be so kind as to clarify what you are asking.
I think he's asking whether an intercom system that's been verified to work between the first and fourth cars of an 8-car R-68 consist (a1/a1 in his nomenclature) should reasonably be expected to work between the first and FIFTH cars (a1/a2).
David
You sir are correct- Ed McMann
Ed McMahon Karnac will put a hex on me for that.
If that's what he's asking then the answer would have to be a qualified maybe. If the communications units in the second link are functioning as intended and if the electric portion(s) of the coupler(s)are clean, then you'd have to assume that the intercome may work. As has been discussed here many times, there is a grounding problem in the in-car circuits that causes the problems. This grounding problem will sometimes kill the t/line functions including IC.
>>>This grounding problem will sometimes kill the t/line functions including IC. <<<
Yikes, you could lose partial train line like just the IC and the PA and other stuff would still be good? Would this ever be an intermittent problem cutting in and out over a trip?
Door control lines and indication have been known to be lost like that here and there as well - especially on a curve where the pins are a bit loose. So it would logically follow that your scenario could happen as well. I'm no car inspector, but I've seen that myself.
Well in this case it just seemed too easy that the IC was working at certain times and not others (and always when helpful to that persons story) but the train was fine otherwise.
But if that is possible it, it is what it is.
*DO* bear in mind that I'm not a qualified "expoit" here - but I *am* aware from my own experience that electrical portion pins can go intermittent on you if their travel is restricted or the contact ends are a bit crusty. I think Train Dude also acknowledged that things can go wrong from time to time. For some reason, an intermittent will get worse on a curve, possibly due to additional flexing. I've had indication problems on 32's thirty years ago on a curved platform that didn't happen anywhere else on the trip. I've heard crackling in the PA as well from time to time.
So certainly, there's a "reasonable doubt" at play here. But if I was in the "modern TA" and I had doubts that my partner heard me say something signficant I and I didn't receive an ACK, I sure would have gotten on the radio and asked "did you hear me?" whether or not I had doubts about the equipment. If it was important, I'd want to be SURE I was heard even if I had to walk the train (as it was back in my day, the radios weren't worth a warm pail of spit and most equipment didn't have PA or IC so a walk was a way of life) ...
All straight track, all in the span of 2 minutes.
There are two thoughts on G2's say everything or say as little as possible. Both have advantages if done right.
A friend of mine had a problem, a put in would not charge right. The B2 had tripped BUT it was in position just loose so if you looked at it it seemed fine, it took the RCI quite awhile to figure that out. The Supt was LIVID at an ABD so the T/O had to write a bullet proof G2 outlining all the steps he took in preparing the train. If he had not written about testing the c/r horn and EBV they likely would have nailed him as the RCI did not want to say it took him a half hour to figure it out. That RCI claimed it was in the tripped position and the T/O told him he had checked already so he (the RCI) never rechecked it until after the ABD.
Geez ... sad statement on how things go these days. Yeah, if you didn't drop and kick the breakers, you'd get yelled at by the RCI's, but they'd write up their time, write in a bogus failure and be on their way merrily earning their nut. In the old cars, wasn't unusual for breakers on the panel to "go funny" where they'd trip but the handle didn't drop. Some would be obvious, partially down but not all the way, others would sit there smelling funny from all the accumulated steel dust. But we didn't have "I'll write you up for this" unless you were stupid AND abusive to your coworker with the hammer.
Now that you've put a little bit of detail behind it that wasn't there before, I would have looked at it as a "wash" ... sometimes problems are funky. Not to side one way or the other, not my way, but a (ahem) "T/O" should not be an electrical genius. Their job is to try to fix the OBVIOUS and go through the handbook of rote procedures. If they do what the book says to look for and no go, then it's time to call in the ball pein squad. If the ball pein squad came in, with the required knowledge and didn't REcheck the breakers (despite the urgings of someone who is not in a position to "tear it down" in their own two hands like we did as best we could in my day) then if I *had* to choose sides here, I'd charge the car inspector since breakers are equivalent to "is the plug out of the wall and that's why your TV don't work?" ... but in the end, I find this whole thing silly myself.
I'd want to bottom line it as "did the train eventually MOVE?" Bravo, it doesn't have to be torched or towed. Sounds like car equipment is a little defensive if CI's and RCI's feel the need to cover their butt. Before I end this message though, I am FEELING my way through this devoid of a lot of info that none of us needs to know publicly, but it's a DAMNED shame that something like this even became an ISSUE in the first place.
Some of the RCI's are geniuses and a blessed few are so bad I could do better job. I am not sure if they don't care or passed the test on seniority points. The new thing is RCI's that carry no equipment not even an R9 key. I thought the ones that just carried tape were bad.
I know there is only so much you can do in the field my kit would be:
Three rolls of tape (electric, silver and white), keys, reverser, small mallet, speed handle, the tool you use to open certain panels and maybe a custom multitool.
You would have loved the guys in my time. Either they had a small doctor's bag, a small tool chest or they carried their warez on their belt. But they had all that, knife, had stashed away parts and pieces in towers, equipment closets, anyplace they tended to hang out. There was this one guy who lived at Columbus circle who could change out a breaker in five minutes and CARRIED them with him! All that was required was a pair of paddles and you got rebuilt. Rumor at the time was that there was one guy on the Sea Beach who carried a PIPE THREADER with him. I don't WANT to know why. :)
Sadly, been thirty years away for me - I don't know how easily repaired cars are these days. But they had every tool you'd need to cut out pretty much anything plus an extra pressure indicator, spare relays and breakers, ohmmeter and voltmeter (or lacking that, a 50 volt bulb with clipleads) to troubleshoot your stands. If the RCI couldn't get you going back in my days (Train Dude remembers the old school I'm sure, he was one of them) then it was time to roll a diesel. Heh. But seriously, RCI's were not to be toyed with. They'd make any pile of crap roll unless you lost a wheel.
I wonder if they have a certain tool set that qualifies for fitness for duty.
I was carrying mail on the way back from lunch and someone blew a gasket that I was not carrying my sign changer. The flip side is I had a putin that was fresh from the barn for periodic and RCI preinspected that I had to bang in two doors that kept trying to cycle themselves. The YD who has the SOH of a lemon was cracking up.
The small tool bag is the standard for most RCI's. I get to talk to the good RCI's but when I have a problem I get Bozo. One guy at a terminal runs out of the office when you pick up the defect sheet, he replaced the guy that used to sleep 5 hours a shift.
Sign changer? What's THAT? Here we go again with "grampa speaks" ... heh ... you had HAND CRANKS when you dropped the hatch, and hand cranks for the signage. OK, on the newer cars, you had to carry a bigass "Magnavox tool" to turn the inverse phillips handles on the 32's and such ... but "sign changer tool?" Quelle BIZARRE! :)
And yeah, I've seen the "modern signs" ... Makita and Black and Decker got a cure for THAT sheet. Cycling doors ... another novelty. Either they'd close or they'd jam TIGHT in my days. I got MOOSE-cular trying to push them back after opening that panels, find whatever fell into the track and close up. Then again, we'd have arms that would lose a cotter pin, valves that would jam (or worse VENT) and that was pretty much it. Close the valve, flip the tab, close de box and the indication fairy would smile. Especially if you did a FONZIE on the microswitch. :)
>Makita and Black and Decker got a cure for THAT
So does the TA , time in the street. They tear some plastic that is in there.
Heh. I've SEEN folks at Coney do that. Whoops. :)
By the way - on the "electric section quiz" ... what I was describing was some phenomenons I knew that were the result of "mystery meat" or intermittents ... sometimes oxidized pin ends on the electricals would occur on straightaways as well. Sometimes a pin can retract and if there's oxidization, the spring may not push it all the way back out AFTER a curve ... so what I'm saying is that "electrical intermittents" are a tekkie's WORST nightmare because they happen when they FEEL like it and often when you check, the pookah has vanished and all tests well with an "ohs-eater" (ohmmeter) when it gets back to the yard. Ultimately, what I'm saying is "anything's possible." Given the additional details though, THAT wouldn't be the T/O's fault in my book either. And having worked with electricals and electronics for the better part of my life, I know what a pain in the BUTT "intermittents" can be because you can only catch them WHILE they're misbehaving ... sometimes it's sanest to wait for a complete failure to catch the electrical "culprit."
For everyone else who bothered to read this, I recall in school car that one of the "new tech trains" that arrived in the early 70's (late 60's but I didn't get to run one outside of school car) was either the 44's or the 46's where they had this *INSANE* electrical portion that was on the SIDES of the coupler rather than under it. They were intermittent from day one and I *think* I heard that they were quickly "fixed" after all the door and PA problems they caused. Was it the 44's or the 46's that were known as the "now you have it, now you don't" cars?
Wasn't that the P-wire circuit?
The R-44s and R-46s had the same Ohio Brass couplers with side electric portions.
All I know is it failed miserably, even when them puppies was NEW. But I thought somehow it was one or the other. If it was both, doubly amusing. :)
David said it much better than I did.
As you are supervision it is only fair to say that this actually might be used as supporting evidence in a 'he said, she said' discipline case. So let me know if you are on or off record.
A phantom buzzer does not seem to be a problem of 68's
What is the e-mail address that you found this MBTA 2020 Vision Map.
I can't seem to find it on the mbta webpage.
That's because he made it up.
If so, can you put it up on subtalk & what would be the e-mail address for this.
If anyone has or knows the webpage on the 1975 Mass Transit Study for PATCO into Gloucester County, please post it.
Also, if anyone has a map with stations on the proposed 2 alignments, please post that as well.
I have the map and the full 1975 study. I can scan a portion of the map. Let me know how to post it.
Can you can the map the same way as AEM7 did with his MBTA 2020 Vision Map.
I could not find the image from AEM7. Please try the link, I hope it works. Let me know if you want anything more from the map.
http://community.webshots.com/album/46018446lHrtrt
The information you gave me couldn't find me the 1975 Mass Transit Study Map for PATCO.
Would it be possible to scan the map on subtalk.
OY VEY! Get the person's e-mail address, send them $20 through PayPal, and let them copy the whole thing and mail it to you. It would save you both time.
Wow! Great map! I have a couple of questions:
- Why are most of the stations just outside towns when the line passes through them?
- On the first map, what's the proposed line going off through Westfield Avenue, Crescent ... etc?
The PRSL route, I believe, had proposed stations in locations that would allow for ample parking. The Route 55 route was following a highway alignment that was constructed ten years later (the dotted line). The proposed line going off to Westfield Avenue and Crescent Boulevard was the proposed Mount Laurel route. I did not scan that portion since the route to Glassboro was the route that someone asked about.
Given the size of the route and two additional extensions, it would seem like an incredible bottleneck at the Philadelphia end of the line. They should have investigated a tunnel (as was proposed in the 1950’s).
The PRSL route, I believe, had proposed stations in locations that would allow for ample parking
Brilliant. Force people to drive to the stations. Not my idea of a railway, but hey...
The proposed line going off to Westfield Avenue and Crescent Boulevard was the proposed Mount Laurel route
What were the rest of the stations to be on that route?
They should have investigated a tunnel (as was proposed in the 1950’s).
A loop might be nice...
Several events are crowding the calender for September and October. There is the D-Type fantrip on Sep 22 and the "Autumn in New York" weekend at Branford on Sept 28-29. We also have the impending return on Sea Beach Fred and Steve 8 Avenue Exp.
Does anyone know when NJT plans to hold their "Try Transit" festival at Hoboken? Its usually in late Sept or early Oct. I have seacrded both the NJT and Hoboken websites but could not find any further info.
Thanks, Larry,RedbirdR33
I saw on another message board that it will be Sunday September 29. This was a naked statement laking any reference.
I saw on another message board that it will be Sunday September 29. This was a naked statement laking any reference.
I should add that I checked various websites without finding any info on this year's Try Transit (Hoboken) Festival. Sites checked include:
NJT
URHS
Michael Steinberg's "Hoboken Terminal"
It's definitely the 29th.
See railroad.net:
http://www.railroad.net/forums/messages.asp?TopicID=1539
http://www.railroad.net/forums/messages.asp?TopicID=213
Here is also some news as to when the CNJ festival is in OCTOBER, 2002:
http://www.cnjfestival.com/index.htm
thanks! That place is really cool.
I added a few things:
Re: The Blue Line extension to Lynn -- Does it REALLY have a chance of getting built? I thought that Blue Line ridership is really low anyway, and the Blue/Red connector at Charles, the Green Line extension to North Cambridge, and the "Urban Ring" were much more important priorities.
AEM7
D line to Riverside should be green.
Question to AEM7 the Blus/Red Line link how are you going to fit the 70ft redline cars in the East Boston tunnel and how are the blue line cars goint to reach the red line platforms? Steve
Blus/Red Line link how are you going to fit the 70ft redline cars in the East Boston tunnel and how are the blue line cars goint to reach the red line platforms?
With lots of money! You can either widen the tunnel which isn't *that* hard, or you could build a special blue/red line fleet which has automatic extenders.
AEM7
Thank you for clearing that up. The MBTA has lots of money to spend friviously. LOL
They just spent $1 billion on the Silver Line. Who says they have no money? They could have built the Blue Line Extension to Lynn 3 times over with that $.
AEM7
They've been in debt for quite sometime, so I dunno how they do it. They still have to fork over the 2nd half of the payments for Breda's cars, if they ever stop being lemons. -Nick
(The real reason is that the Feds paid for the transit tunnel with highway $ -- there was a lot of political bickering over that, and the Silver Line being someone's pet scheme, got the $. But at least they got the damn thing built.)
AEM7
Or how about building a second parallel tunnel so that the Purple and Red lines can stop at different platform faces (like QBP in NYC).
I don't think the purple line would get busy enough to require that kind of capacity, but if it does get busy, that would be a smart thing to do.
AEM7
So the E line will terminate at Park St., and the D will be running parallel to the green lines, only it will be the pink line? Also, is North Point or Homer Square the new name for Lechemere? -Nick
There are serious operating issues between Kenmore and Government Center. My proposed solution is to build heavy-rail tunnels alongside the existing underground trolley trackage and make D-line a heavy-rail line. The BC and E lines would terminate at Park, but the D will travel express between Kenmore and Park stopping only at Copley. At the North end (Lechmere Line), North Point is where there was a housing development and it's close to Lechmere, so we'll just move the stop. Homer Sq. is at the junction Washington/McGarth Hwy in Somerville. Somerville City Hall is in Gilman Sq. All those stops are approximately 0.75 mile apart (heavy-rail type station spacing).
AEM7
Sommeville's city hall is on Highland Ave in the same area as the High School. I didnt know that area was known as Gillman Sq.
Interesting idea to make the D line heavy-rail. I've wondered how to ease the congestion in the Central Green Line Subway (Kenmore Through Park Street), and I wondered if more tracks could be added in each direction by widening the stations and tunnels. I know Park Street didn't always have four tracks, so this has been done before. -Nick
Ive lived in the city of Revere all my life. Every time election time would come around Revere and Lynn the person running would use the Blue Line extention to gain votes. After the election was complete the extention issue would be forgoten about till the next election. Well it would take alot on the MBTA to reclaim the old Boston Revere Brach and Lynn R.O.W.. As home owners moved on to the land and the city authroized condo complexes to be built on the ROW withot permission of the MBTA at the time.
Disscussion:
Here's my own subway line survey
TOP 5 severely overcrowded (Greatest ridership) subway lines:
1. E
2. F
3. A
4. 4
5. 5
Top 5 somehow overcrowded Subway line:
1. W
2. J Z
3. R
4. 6
5. 2
Top 5 somewhat overcrowded Subway line:
1. N C
2. J Z
3. 1
4. S (42nd Shuttle)
5 (Q)
TOP 5 Less crowded subway lines:
1 M
2 G
3 3
4. S (Franklin Shuttle) & (Rockaway Shuttle)
5. V
TOP 5 Cleanest Car:
1 R38 (C)
2 R42 (M)(L)
3 R40S
4 R142 (6)
5 R32 (R)
B and D lines - N/A Haven't ride those line in a long time since 7/22/01
Any subwayriders are welcome share their different views.
Are you going to give us a clue as to your methodology? At the very least, when and where did you make these observations?
Where's the 7? it has some of the highest tph, the only line that NORMALLY runs 11-car trains, and is extremely crowded most of the time.
Well, I don't ride or go near 7. Thanks for additional info.
I'll be leaving my house as soon as I find my Mets hat which I misplaced and will be off line for a week while my family and I cavort at the seashore. Catch you all later.
See ya!
Using a Zone 3 monthly pass, I have pretty much used the LIRR as a local service for the past 9 years. By that I mean I use it to get other places other than from Flushing to Manhattan and back 10 times a week. To a part time job in Bayside; to a friend's house in Great Neck; to a girlfriend's house in Woodside. I figure I use my monthly pass for about 15 to 20 rides more than the average commuter using the same $117 monthly pass.
I see that the LIRR doesn't exactly encourage this kind of monthly pass usage...it's not mentioned prominently in their Mail & Ride ads. I wonder if they actually keep statistics or surveys about how their monthly passes get used, and if they'd take action, like fare hikes, if there were TOO MANY rides being used on the monthly pass.
I also note that the LIRR does not make any efforts to tailor its schedule for local service. The eastbound Port Washington branch often arrives at Woodside at :30 past the hour, and many westbounds from Jamaica often are scheduled to arrive at :27 after. So, most of the time, you'll make that connection. Sometimes, though, the westbound will be a touch late and the operator will NOT wait for a cross platform connection. A simple solution would be to schedule the westbound a bit earlier, but there is no thought given to it. I'm not the only one making that transfer--on a busy day, about 20 other passengers do it as well.
But LIRR schedules are drawn up to facilitate Manhattan-bound passengers only....
www.forgotten-ny.com
When I got to watch the Mets game I come from Hicksville in which it requires me to change at Woodside. However the connections are not that good to the Port Washington Branch. I find it easier to spend the extra car fare and take the number 7 train. The LIRR creates train Schdules for those going to Shea from Penn and they seem to not give a shit about those coming from Eastern Long Island. Are they trying to encourage people to use their cars to go to the games?
I wonder if they actually keep statistics or surveys about how their monthly passes get used, and if they'd take action, like fare hikes, if there were TOO MANY rides being used on the monthly pass.
No. Not at all. Maybe this will change if they do some kind of high-tech fare system, but they have no way of finding out how often any particular pass is used, or even aggregate figures. If they want to determine riding in a particular area, they put people on the trains at specific times and locations, you know; "One sheep ... two sheep ... three sheep .. darn, lost count ... one sheep."
They don't even keep track of individual tickets any more. By standard methods of railroad accounting, when you sell, for example, a single fare ticket for $5.00, you have have sales of $5.00 which is offset in your ledger by a liability of $5.00. In other words, you haven't earned $5.00 of gross income yet because you still owe the purchaser $5.00 worth of train ride. When the trainman lifts your ticket and it arrives back at the railroad accounting office, then they've earned the $5.00.
At some time in the past, they said "oh, screw it" (it probably helped that they were a public agency and wouldn't be harassed by tax officials) "we'll just account for these on a cash basis." So ... I don't know what method they now use, but they just count your ticket purchase as income at some point between the day of sale and three months later, when your ticket is technically worthless.
So what happens to your ticket after the trainman punches it and puts it in his pocket? If you're into cancelled ticket collecting, check out the trash cans at a station like Babylon, where trainmen turn in their money, and help your self to piles of cancelled tickets. WARNING--it is technically illegal to remove anything from the trash on the LIRR, mainly to keep people from tossing trash around to get a free newspaper. Better to rummage when noone who looks like they might give you a different kind of ticket is looking. And please don't scatter debris if you do.
WARNING--it is technically illegal to remove anything from the trash on the LIRR, mainly to keep people from tossing trash around to get a free newspaper.
What? Do you mean that LIRR riders actually use trash cans? Impossible!
Must have been a typo...
:0)
Boston's MBTA actually encourages monthly pass users to use their passses for other than commuting. They have a "two for one" on Sundays, where you can take a guest for free by flashing your pass to the bus driver, station agent, or commuter train conductor. (That's right -- MBTA commuter rail passes are good for all services, including subway and bus.)
And when I have to use my pass for a longer ride than it's good for, the add-on charge is pretty reasonable. It's $2.00 plus $.25 for each zone. So if I use my Zone 2 pass for a Zone 6 ride, it costs me $3.00 in cash (instead of paying a $4.75 retail fare).
Commuters in Boston don't know how good they have it: My 18-mile one-way Zone 2 ride retails for $97 per month, and that INCLUDES bus and subway. Even better, my employer pays 50% of that, pre-tax. There are other incentives too: Those who use pass-by-mail get one month a year free. And those who mail 11 passes to their insurance agent get a $75 per year rebate on their auto insurance.
>>>>Commuters in Boston don't know how good they have it: My 18-mile one-way Zone 2
ride retails for $97 per month, and that INCLUDES bus and subway. Even better, my
employer pays 50% of that, pre-tax. There are other incentives too: Those who use
pass-by-mail get one month a year free. And those who mail 11 passes to their
insurance agent get a $75 per year rebate on their auto insurance. <<<
I see that the MBTA is proposing a new line as well. Along with the at-long-last big dig completion and the new Charlestown Bridge Boston seems to be at last making its plans come to fruition. They already built a new Orange Line in the 80s and extended the Red Line.
Of course the big dig has had cost overruns, union problems and delays. But at least it's getting built. New York City has not added a new subway line since 1940. Every few years, the Second Avenue is proposed, blueprints are drawn. But in the end, either the nimbys or the accountants always win and the 2nd Avenue, or any other line like a #7 extension, is never built. When the next boom happens, they talk about it again. Then when the inevitable bust happens, the subways are told they have to wait.
Boston at least tries to get it done and in many cases, succeeds, as far as rapid transit and urban projects go, from the perspective of this Flushing-ite.
www.forgotten-ny.com
The schedules are really made for commuter going into and out of Penn Station. The MTA, the parent of all these local lines, does run TV ads encouraging people to use the MTA. But they dont really do a good job of really convincing people of the benefits of using mass transit, like depending less on foreign oil, less stress by leaving the "driving" to someone else, cleaning the environment for future generations by not using the car so much. These statements are never mentioned in the MTA's TV ad.
Anybody know why DE30s were running from Jamaica-City Line today? I saw 500 8 double deckers and 517 on 1 train and 502 and 511 on another. I assume it was b/c of the power.
#500 DE 30 LIRR
There are now 2 or 3 weekend dual modes running between Penn and Patchogue/Speonk. This started with the summer track work. I don't know if it will continue once the work is completed in September.
CG
I didn't know that. None of the weekend Montauk trains do, just Patchogue and Speonk?
You do see a fair amount of local travel on the Ronkonkoma line. Hicksville and Mineola, in particular, attract quite a few local riders.
On weekends and during rush hours it's impossible to go between the Port Washington and Forest Hills. Trains that stop at FH skip Woodside, trains that stop at Woodside skip FH. So the only way to actually do it is via Penn Station!
There's alot of local travel on the babylon branch between lynbrook and babylon also. Service is frequent enough (every 30 min) that you don't really need to look at a schedule at times.
It looks like Local 100 has won a mighty victory for the Local 100 Queens Bus Drivers. According to the news reports, if the drivers ratify the new agreement, they'll get 4% for the first 12 months, 4% for the 2nd 12 months and 1% for the last 3 months of the contract. So by simple math:
Strike, when ended will have lasted 7.6 weeks.
Average driver earns $20.35/Hr. (according to the news reports)
So the average driver lost $6,186.00 for the duration of the strike if he didn't work overtime.
4% rate increase = $0.814/Hr.
At that rate, the drivers will recoup what they lost during the strike in just 38 weeks.
Now, that's what I call a great victory!
Dude:
I am a bit perplexed by your math here. For a 40 hour week, your calculations on what each driver lost is correct. However, with a raise of 81.4¢/hr, each driver would make an additional $32.56/week. At that rate, the drivers would receive a raise of $1,693.00 for the first year. Too late at night for me to figure raises for second year and beyond. So, it appears that it will take quite a bit longer than 38 weeks for the drivers to recoup what they lost.
The increase and time period does not acknowledge TWU100 Welfare or contributions from members.
Lou, you're likely correct. See, heypaul had his uses here. I'm glad you're here to pick up the slack.
Your math is off.
If they get $0.814 more per hour, times 40 hours per week, each driver is now making $32.56 more per week. (we're going to ignore how much of this bonus is lost due to taxes and whatever)
They lost $6,186.00, and making it up at $32.56 per week, they'll get it all back in.....*drumroll please*
190.0 weeks!
So in a little over 3 and a half years, they'll be recovered from their losses in the past two months. Then they can start earning new money!
Oh, and by the way, this new contract only lasts 27 months (12+12+3), or a little over 2 years.
The Local 100 union leaders would've been well off taking some algebra in high school.
TWU Local 100 still get new Mercedes Benz sedans...thanks to my ten buck contribution to feed the families of striking workers...Bloomberg got em a 2 Million dollar bridge loan to support their medical benefits. The most important benefit at my age is the medical benefits...much more important than salary. "MY' union sucks big time...I cannot understand how others maintain full time work outside of TA when I put my heart, soul and skills into my assignments and drag my body home. Last week, union flunkies came about looking for money at 239th AFTER we got together and filled the plate of alms. Where was Roger Touissaint or his reps...maggots have NOT been to 239th in nearly two years. I hate unions and closed shops, I hate the phoney seniority system. I hope you guys in management passed every English speaking Car inspector prospect with low test scores....I'll work with every 'hungry guy' with a skill to nurse em along and teach em everything I know just to prove a point.
I know how lucky and God Graced I am to have this new work and September 17ths CI class knows it well...we saw WTC collapse and TA DID NOT suspend our starting date. Roger Touissaint and the rest of his lazy union slackers...need six months of Redbird undercar. We are CED...WE MAKE TRAINS GO everday...WE are the heart and soul of the system. CI peter
Wow CI Peter, I never knew how rough Car Inspectors had it. Good luck in all future Individual and Union endeavors.
Thankyou my friend 'Flyerlover.' Signal maintainance, track repair and car inspectors share hazards and filth that the public never hears about. We're 'hands on' in inspection and repair and but a small part of TWU 100. If we 'pulled the plug,' TWU 100 would be 'schmaltz.' Get that Roger Touisssaint while chugging down a 'Red Stripe' and the bottlecap or chickenhead gets stuck in your throat.
The Local 100 union leaders would've been well off taking some algebra in high school.
Or, put another way:
Major Victory for Local 100 Strike Breakers
It looks like the TWU has won a mighty victory for the Local 100 Queens Bus Drivers. According to the news reports, if the drivers ratify the new agreement, they'll get 4% for the first 12 months, 4% for the 2nd 12 months and 1% for the last 3 months of the contract. So by simple math:
Strike, when ended will have lasted 7.6 weeks.
Average driver earns $20.35/Hr. (according to the news reports)
So the average driver lost $6,186.00 for the duration of the strike if he didn't work overtime.
4% rate increase = $0.814/Hr.
At that rate, the drivers will recoup what they lost during the strike in just 38 weeks.
Now, that's what I call a great victory!
Did TWU offer strike pay? If so, how much did that amount to?
The TWU offering strike pay. That's a good one. I remember back in 1980 when the last big strike took place and I walked the picket line in the freezing cold, we didn't even get so much as hot coffee and donuts from the union. The only persons that received their regular salaries were the big union bosses and their strike pay was provided by the hourly employees that received absolutely nothing. That strike lasted eleven days and we lost twenty two days due to the Taylor Law(two days pay for every day on strike) Remember any loss is a loss that you never recover from.
Well, these local 100 guys get a little something every day they do picket duty. There was a BBQ from day one along with bottoles of water.
That doesn't change the fact that they lost the battle ... did they loose the war, it remains to be seen (I haven't seen a LONG strike yet that was a winner for either side). On this side of the picket line I'll be glad to see them come back.
It's called 'Family Day at Rye Playland'.
I think that should have been cancelled and the money used to get all these discounts distributed among strikers.
No offense, but IMO it seems 100 is more interested in shin-digs than important stuff.
Not true, Tony. They are throwing a lot of support to the "Free Mumia" movement.
It's called 'Family Day at Rye Playland'.
I think that should have been cancelled and the money used to get all these discounts distributed among strikers.
No offense, but IMO it seems 100 is more interested in shin-digs than some of the important stuff.
Lets also remember they get health benfits without cost (or additional cost) out of pocket to the member.
Will the company default on the loan?
So the average driver lost $6,186.00 for the duration of the strike if he didn't work overtime.
4% rate increase = $0.814/Hr.
At that rate, the drivers will recoup what they lost during the strike in just 38 weeks.
Could you elaborate a bit more on your calculation?
He's trying to be funny at their expense. I'm glad none of them work for him, because there is too much paperwork when there's blood on the floor.
He's trying to be funny at their expense
I thought I detected a whiff of sarcasm. It's hard to be sure because he has been underestimating his failure rate by roughly the same percentage. :-)
Actually I am surprised not to see any number crunching by you on this topic.
Only one person hit on the answer. It will be YEARS before they break even. There is a very good graduate paper on the subject.
First you have to compare the settlement to what was on the table. In most of these scenarios it really is not that much different than the last offer on the table.
Second after a strike the next 3 contracts tend to come in higher than average that is the long term consequence that gets lost. The last transit strike took 8 years to pay off. The biggest benficiaries of this strike are the people that will become employees after the next contract come up in April. Just as I am still getting the money from the previous two strikes.
Now for some other facts.
Most of these guys earn MASSIVE overtime as they work split shifts several days a week. With a base of $42K it is very easy for drivers to earn $65-70, the other guys make less. But this means being out may have lost them 9K in income. So the big earners about to retire take the biggest hit while others with years to go will benefit escpeccially with the OT.
This is a retroactive contract as they have been without one for quite a long time so back pay will make this up for some of them immediately.
There was no job protection bill that looks like it will pass with a veto proof majority before the strike except as vague talk.
They did get their medical which is a step in the real goal, lifetime medical.
Unlike MTA their pensions are based on years of service NOT a formula based on final pay or last few years pay. Your monthly pension is a fixed amount something like $88 times your years of service. This means that stiking does not hurt the pensions of people about to go out (well you might have to work and extra month). Someone just about to go out in the MTA would really get hurt as your final years pay would take a hit. It will be interesting if proposed buyouts will make the MTA more radical with the people on their way out, most hurt and I assume least likely to vote for a strike gone.
As a former Teamster, the best strike is one that doesn't happen. The next best is over in a day or so. If it goes beyond that the members never make up what they lost. Local 100 lost this battle. Can they re-group & win the war ... we'll have to wait and see.
It occurs to me that Roger T. wanted the "private" owners & union members to get a divorce ... well this was a very expensive one. Did the members realy want/need it, or was it just that Roger made them believe it ? If I were in MTA/TA management I would be more motivated to challenge Roger in the future ... he got wounded by this & TA management is good at smelling blood. I would guess that the anti-New Directions members will use this against him too.
Exactly, past 4 weeks the payoff is too far away.
This is also about other thing not strictly money and a few hundred dollars in health benefits per person. These guys are terrified of Regional Bus. Anyone can get fired all routes can be changed to get rid of most OT the ones that remain will get more work added, you can get picked out of your job and forced to work far from your house.
Look at the ad campaign the TWU ran a few months ago showing drivers with 32 and 40 years on the road. You just don't see that in the NYC system as often, because they have it very nice in the private lines and don't want it to change or if regional happens they want to make sure their generation does not lose out. Even with the IRT and BMT takeovers there are contract provisions that kept seniority for the workers within their own systems.
What they REALLY wanted was the legislation from the City Council.
You'd be surprised several people I talk to are now convinced we are going out in December and that Roger can claim victory in this round. Even the VP that walked out and threatened leaving the Union came back to the fold. With the exception of maybe one person here I go to more meetings than anyone, there is a ton of more stuff going on and frankly most of the people here have no clue about most of it or have a distorted picture. I am an anti-ND person, too.
If you strike in December, that will NOT last more than a day or two. The city or state will pony up. Two strikes in a year won't look good in the city.
Wrong, that's not the reason.
The City will go to court & bankrupt the union in no time. That will force them back with their tail between their legs.
I seriously hope Roger doesn't pull that blunder. The Union & management need to be fairly equal players ... too much on one side and the members loose big time, too much the other way and the taxpayers pay for it until the cows come home.
You can't say the strike was a win unless you know what was on the table at the beginning (you or others may know this, but I don't). The gain from the strike isn't the entire amount of the increase, but only the increase over what was being offered when the drivers walked.
Let's suppose that there was a 2.5% cost of living increase on the table as management's last offer before the strike. The real gain from the strike is then only 1.5%, or 30.525 cents per hour. 40 hours per week, 52 weeks a year makes it a gain of just $634 in the first year to the average driver. Of course, there's a second year where the compounding of 4% on 4% beats 2.5 on 2.5 by 63 cents an hour. So the gain in the second year is $1,311. Total gain is $1,945. Now that $6,186 cost of striking doesn't look so good.
CG
There's this game. It made me think of some of Jersey Mike's postings. One of the people on airliners.net, where the game was first mentioned, said it ranked up there in the humor scale with the burn ward at a children's hospital. Me, I found it pretty funny, though it got a bit boring after time.
Hey, who knew national defense was so easy!
Cute game...might be offensive to some...I just find it boring.
Yikes...both very disturbing, yet humerous at the same time! -Nick
Actually, my postings were inspired by that old "Missile Defence" game, which this is a version of. God that game was fun. I could make it to like level 7.
Cool... funny, yet offensive to some...
I got annoyed because my hand got tired. You'd be surprised how the dullest of games get you addicted.
Tasteless, but then it's in French...
-Hank
I found it incredibly SIMPLE, and boring much like an earlier commenter whose name I forgot and am too lazy to go back and look for at the moment.
But for anyone questioning the patriotism of the author, there's always sweet revenge no matter what your "blood and guts and things in my teeth" quotient:
Kill Osama and related things
Hit Osama with a pie
Slap Osama!
Señior Arafat
Turnabout is fair play. Moo.
"Click with your mouse to fight the feeling of powerlessness/impotence."
I'm visitng New York for my annual subway fix. I'd like to take some pics of subway yards. Any suggestions on good places, i.e., easy to get to by subway, good vantage points, etc.
Thanks,
Bill
Corona Yard is very accessible. Get off at the Shea Stadium stop on the 7, and walk right over the yard.
Other yards: Concourse Yard is quite visible. Coney Island Yard.
Anybody else want to pipe in?
Try Broadway Junction
The best view of Coney Island Yard, IMO, is on the Sea Beach trackage between 86th Street and Stillwell Avenue. Unfortunately, the N no longer runs there, since it lost its platform at Stillwell last year. However, on an occasional weekend or midday, the N does run through to Stillwell (usually in conjunction with a suspension of W service; the N runs round-robin), or the W runs in one direction on the Sea Beach tracks. Keep your eyes on the Weekly Subway Service Advisories.
That said, the W (on its regular route) also cuts through a corner of the yard, and the F runs along its east edge.
Jamaica Yard leads share a pedestrian overpass over the Grand Central. It might be blocked off now, since there is nothing on the other side of the overpass a pedestrian would want to go to...
If you have a decent telephoto lens, stand at the northern end of the Neptune Ave (F) platform for good shots into CI Yard.
Others have already mentioned East New York & Corona.
--Mark
Westchester yard.
Westchester yard. Home of the 6.
Subdued dye clothing, anti reflective coatings on objective lenses and a rapid means of escape. General Orders still stand...report all suspicious activities to proper authorities. No matter how much you love railfanning, your interest still 'presents a risk' to the system and unannounced observation is in question. CI Peter
Concourse yard, in the Bronx, is viewable from the North-end of the southbound platform of the 4 train stop at Bedford Park Blvd.
Peace,
ANDEE
For 239th Street - I'd try to get a shot from a N/B #2. At Concourse I'd try from both ends of the S/B platform at the Bedford Park Blvd IRT. You can also standon the bridges at Bedford Park or 205th Street.
Wayne
For that 239th Street yard....take the 2 to 241st Street, and then walk east on 241st Street for a couple of blocks. You'll be right alongside the north edge of the yard, and you'll get a good close up look at whatever trains are in that part of the yard.
Thanks for all the suggestions. I knew I could count on Sub-Talkers! I'll be spending my next few days riding the rails and taking pics of various structures as part of the research I'm doing for the HO model of the NY subway I plan to build.
Thanks again.
Bill J
Every weekend this month, the W is cut back to Bay Parkway ("Bay Parkway / Bensonhurst" on the R-68A rollsigns). Is the work taking place somewhere on the elevated structure or is the work taking place at Stillwell itself? If the former, why not send the N through to Stillwell on weekends for the time being? If the latter, why not run service to Bay 50th with shuttle buses taking over there? (FWIW, I didn't see any work going on at the Stillwell W platform this afternoon.)
Maybe they're enjoying the crew quarters at Bay Parkway. I'm not entirely sure of the switching capabilities of Bay 50th. Perhaps it has something to do with signaling. The same thing that kept M Trains at 9 Avenue or relaying behind Bay 50th for a few weeks.
Yeah Yesterday I went to my God-brother house and I had to take the W from Pacific st. - Bay Pkwy, so this was good for me, then when I came downstairs they had Shuttle Buses leaving out 86 st. & Bay Pkwy.
I work the W as a conductor. I don't work weekends, but from what's been going on the last 2 weeks Monday-Friday, with the midday GO of us going southbound over the Sea Beach, I would say they are preparing to cut-in the new signals and switches at Bay 50th Street (Tower D) interlocking. I cant answer about the N going through to Stillwell, that's another area altogether, but it does make sense.
Thanks. Speaking of the recurring weekday GO, is the Sea Beach express track out of service again? I was on a W train last week that ran local on the Sea Beach; usually it runs express.
I don't think the center track on the Sea Beach was OOS the last 2 weeks, my thinking is we ran local to provide easier access to the West End stations in Borough PArk via the transfer at 62nd/New Utrecht. Otherwise the move would be to change at 59th St. for the N, take it to NU and then change to the Manhattan bound W upstairs. This has been done many times the past couple of years, and I could never figure out why. It always made more sense to me to run local on the Sea Beach just for this reason. Besides, waiting for the timer on that home signal south of Bay PArkway on the center track always negated any time saving.
Oh, I agree absolutely that it doesn't make sense to run the W express on the Sea Beach, at least not southbound. (If you've seen the usual service advisories, they instruct passengers to transfer at New Utrecht, even though W's don't stop there if they're running express. At some point last year the recurring error was fixed, but then it came back again.)
When it comes to railfanning, though, the express track is a real thrill (even if it doesn't save any time over the local). I got so disillusioned last week when my train went local that I got off at 8th Avenue and took an N straight back to Pacific!
It would be even better if they would upgrade the roadbed on E3/4. The local tracks on the Sea Beach line have 115 lb. rail clamped to tieplates with those newer type fasteners, they also use CWR (continuous welded rail). However, E3/4 (the express track) still has 100 lb. rail spiked to tie plates and rail sections bolted together. My motorman absolutely refuses to go faster than 25 mph on the express track, quite frankly I can't blame him. God only knows how old some of those ties are, and when I work with someone else who goes faster, the train rocks and sways all over the place. Another tidbit the board may be interested in -- on E3 track (the other express track that was severed and is no longer used) some rails date from 1914 -- the year the Sea Beach line was built! E3/4 sure could use an upgrade, but unless this track is to be used for a regular service sometime in the future, it's probably not high on the priority list.
Think I was on the southbound platform of Bay Parkway or Kings Highway, theres a slight S curve (like between Beverly and Newkirk on the brighton Line) . Watched a W running on the express track; was sweet to see it hook around the corner, fly pass and around the next corner.
Its a shame the express tracks don't have more of a use in commuter service. Seems too far west to be extended east anywhere: only thought, along Avenue U to Kings Plaza; or Kings Highway to relieve the B82 a bit, all fantasies tho.
Wondering if we get the 2012 Olympics, will they use it to get people to Coney Island (Only Olympic event in Brooklyn: Indoor Volleyball @ Coney Is)
This past Friday morning, while waiting for a Manhattan-bound N at 20th Avenue, an R-68 N bound for Coney stopped the other way, followed immediately by a W with passengers going the other way- which also stopped. A few minutes later, while the Slanted N I was on was stopped at 18th Avenue, I saw another W, with passengers, fly through in the same direction on the express track. Then there was a Coney-bound R32 N stopped at Fort Ham, followed by a W stopped at 8th Avenue.
So it seems very inconsistent as to whether the Coney-bound W rerouted middays over the N is supposed to run express or local.
According to the GO they're supposed to run express, but for some reason Control doesn't get it. I heard a W the other day double checking the lineup and Control responded "You're supposed to run local I don't know where you got express from."
FWIW, on the W I rode that went local, the C/R announced 8th Avenue, not Stillwell, as the next stop at 59th. Either he knew he was going local or he guessed. (I wouldn't be too surprised if he guessed; the same C/R's only announcement at 36th regarding the service diversion was "W express!" Um, no, wrong diversion.)
I was wondering when you would ask. The weekend GO is for track panel replacement at Bay 50 St. So, for the rest of August, Ws run from Bay Parkway to Pacific St on the weekends, Labor Day weekend should see no weird GOs, then the next weekend, Stillwell closes, Ns go to Pacific and Ws go to Astoria.
Yes, you've learned my routine by now. I was going to ask you in person if I happened to run into you at Pacific, but I didn't know your schedule so I didn't.
So there's no particular reason that the N wasn't extended to Stillwell except to avoid the hassle of putting together a supplement schedule.
Incidentally, when a route is shortened for a GO, fewer crews than usual are needed. Where does the excess go?
Incidentally, when a route is shortened for a GO, fewer crews than usual are needed. Where does the excess go?
They fall to the board. Even if its a picked job.
Incidentally, when a route is shortened for a GO, fewer crews than usual are needed. Where does the excess go?
Oops, hit Post too quickly and didn't get to finish my thought (stupid tab key... 'I'm thirsty, think I'll order a Tab.').
It really depends (on what, I don't know).
Sometimes, the extra crews become extra board, or are made WAA (Work As Assigned) Jobs, which is really just extra board under a different name.
Other times, they'll drop trips from a crew's schedule. Take the A as an example. When its shortlined to Lefferts Blvd, some crews make 1 trip or a trip and a half instead of the usual 2.
And a third possibility: the supplement just creates more service to use all the crews.
What are the change for sept. will the 1/9 return and will the 2 run express again
This project is once ahead of schedule. Originally things were supposed to be back to Normal in November, but then it was pushed up to 9/30, and now the project is going even faster..so it should open on or around 9/15. Something tells me they might work harder to open it 4 days earlier. -Nick
Last week, one of TA worker told me that the IRT 1 2 3 9 line will will be restore sometime in september be4 or after the N/W flip flop that is scheduled be in effect at 9/8. Check out http://www.subwaywebnews.com/tour.htm, looks like those TA engineer workers are patching thing up quickly. I think they deserve a big fat bonus on their paycheck.
I was on the 7:38pm NJ Transit train out of New Brunswick today (it left at 7:48pm). It was a train of Arrow MU's and I didn't get a count of how many cars. Anyhow, he came into the station really fast and the the first 2 or 4 cars overshot the platform. Apparently this was done on purpose because of a problem with the doors not opening on those first cars. I heard a trainman mention that. It makes sense because if they just didn't want people to sit in the first few cars, they wouldn't overshoot the platform, right? Actually that doesn't make sense. Anyhow, I boarded a car, and found it to be without lighting or A/C. It also had a really bad burning smell like rubber burning or brakes "burning". I then moved up 2 cars to get in one with A/C and lights and without the bad smell. Long story short, the engineer started booking up the NE Corridor because we got to Penn Sta NY at 8:37pm, four minutes early (after we had left 10 minutes late).
Ok, I'm kinda confused now. I just looked at my printed timetable dated June 16, 2002, and it doesn't show the 7:38pm train out of New Brunswick. In fact, the whole schedule is different from what I saw posted at the station and what is posted on the "point to point schedule" section of NJ Transit's website. Am I reading this timetable wrong, or what? For Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays, it says 5:53pm, 6:53pm, and 7:53pm. The online schedule and the one posted at New Brunswick said 5:38pm, 6:51pm, 7:38pm, and 8:38pm. What is going on here?
False alarm, I answered my own question by downloading the PDF file of the NE Corridor schedule and I see that there was a new schedule as of August 3, 2002. If I had known that I would have picked one up in Penn Sta NY this evening. Oh well.
Apparently this was done on purpose because of a problem with the doors not opening on those first cars. I heard a trainman mention that. It makes sense because if they just didn't want people to sit in the first few cars, they wouldn't overshoot the platform, right?
Actually, they would. Commuters stand in specific locations on the platform and get pissed if the doors don't open and they have to walk. It also delays boarding. So they simply pull the train up to where the people expect it to be.
On MBTA Red Line I periodically see they overshoot the platform, but by the sound of what you said, the NJTransit overshoot was done delibrately. As for the smelly brake pads and no AC, I think you were maybe in an out-of-service car.
AEM7
Commuters stand in specific locations on the platform
Called "cows-at-the-slaughterhouse-chute half moons."
Very cute. That's a good one, Peter.
[Southern voice now] Huhhhhhhh???????
They are having to wrong rail through the hudson tubes on weekends which is screwing everything up.
See subject
I rode one them this morning!
I am told that 50 Cars remain on the 6 as part of a reserve. I'd suppose they remain for emergency purposes (to fill in for R-142A train when needed) at least for the time being. This seems to have put a temporary hold on the transfer of cars to Corona.
Car assignments are subject to change.
-Stef
Thanks for the heads up.
Yes, I saw one at Parkchester yesterday.
There's an unconfirmed report that 1746-50 and 1756-60 have left the 6. I haven't seen it so I don't know for sure.
If that is the case, Cars 1716-25, 1736-40, 1761-70, 1776-90 are all that remain on the 6.
-Stef
Working off the numbers you provide and what my memory recalls, I would guess that 1736-40 and one of the 5 car sets from 1761-70 were the trains running. I do not recall seeing 1776 or higher. I should have written it down but oh well.
1786-90 are part of the Livonia fleet as of Monday when I first noitced them.1746-50/56-60 was at Gh/WPR middle a couple of weeks ago. Saw a whole bunch T/Os. Probbaly school car refresher.
Just saw 1786-90 again on the Livonia El. It is hooked up with 1806-10 which got the blue Livonia Stripe.
I had that train earlier this week. 1790 was my operating car
I saw 1786-90, but where have 1746-50 and 1756-60 gone? Inquiring minds want to know....
-Stef
They have not hit the No.1/3 Lines yet. Maybe they are going to Flushing.
Yes, I saw one at Grand Central last week.
they have gone to a better place, the 7 line ;-)
Amen! I take the 7 often, so I've noticed the change!
i know this has been asked before... but the question is for TA employees[in the know..].Is there a specific reason why the R142/142a cant operate on the Flushing line? Does it have something to do with the Corona barn or the Steinway tunnels? thank you.
Who says they CAN'T run there? They DON'T...that doesn't mean they CAN'T.
However, one reason they don't is that they are configured in five-car sets, which would mean trains of no more than ten cars (yes, the cars are designed to be able to run in six-car sets, but doing so would create operational difficulties since NYCT ordered enough cars of each sub-type to make five-car sets). Outside of summertime, the #7 has eleven-car trains. An experiment was recently done using ten-car trains on rush-hour headways (on a weekend), and it failed (go into the archives for more on this -- it was in the spring of this year).
David
VERNON: Joe McHugh [Amtrak Director of Government Affairs] told me Monday night prior to the accident in Kensington (where the Capital Limited derailed) you had 92 cars out of service, sitting idle in those yards.
GUNN: Yes, at Beech Grove, but we lost eight more.
VERNON: So you have 100 cars.
GUNN: Well, it’s 105 cars, actually...
VERNON: Wow, 105 cars, that’s a lot of equipment.
GUNN: It’s a disaster.
VERNON: You have a bill in Congress while you’re waiting for repairs, but I understand you’re not waiting for that.
GUNN: First of all, we’ve got a loan from DOT for $100 million, then the Congress put in a supplemental appropriations $205 million which is not restricted, it’s just operating cash. It’s not for any specific purpose. This will keep us alive in the fall. We requested $1.2 billion next year in prior appropriation, which is the money that actually the previous management put in. I didn’t change it. It’s tight, but I think it’s doable.
What I had planned to do, to the extent I could, was to make significant reductions in non-essential stuff here at Amtrak and put the money into car rebuilding, track and so forth. That was going to happen. We were going to do that in the 2003 budget, which starts in October.
VERNON: So you do have money to start doing that?
GUNN: Well, whether we have the money or not, we’re going to start doing it.
VERNON: How can you do it without it the money?
GUNN: Well, what I’m doing is... I have enough money to begin cranking up, and I’ve ordered the operating department to begin mobilizing and rebuilding cars, and also restore some level of overhaul on these Amfleet cars. We don’t know what our appropriations will be next year, but it doesn’t matter, because if they’re not going to give us more money to run Amtrak we’ll just go out of business with our shops up and running. If they give us enough money we’ll have rebuilt cars. In other words, we’re at a point where it doesn’t matter. We have to do this; we have to do it if we’re going to run the railroad.
VERNON: So you’re saying...
GUNN: I’m betting on the come, is what I’m doing. [He expects to get the cash-Ed.]
I can fund a lot of it internally, assuming that Amtrak is funded. We have an operation and within that operation I can take resources and redirect them to overhaul, that’s what I intend to do. The big question is, ‘is the operation going to be funded?’
I don’t know. I think so; I think we have a fair amount support over there for the $1.2 billion.
VERNON: If I understand you correctly, you’re saying it’s $1.2 billion or nothing.
GUNN: No, I’m saying $1.2 billion is the amount we have asked for, they can give us $1.4 and we’ll...
VERNON: What if they give you just...
GUNN: $500 million?
VERNON: $900 million?
GUNN: It gets real chancy; we’ll have another cash crisis.
VERNON: Okay.
GUNN: Obviously you can play the ‘salami’ game, you say, “Well, what if they give you $1.1 billion, $999 million.... What’s one dollar? Can you live without one dollar? Then we can go down and play that game.
I’m not sure at this point. The number we’re focusing on is $1.2 billion. That is going to be very tight.
VERNON: “There’s also something that was slipped into the Homeland Security bill for $55 million to help you repair those cars. Now, don’t you need that too?”
GUNN: Well, look, ultimately we need more than $1.2 billion but – and if – we get an added block of funding that’s fine but money is money. What you have to do is, you have to look at Amtrak’s operation, what does it cost to run it on a day-to-day basis. What do you need in the way of capital and heavy maintenance for the existing operation? Forget all this expansionary stuff.
Basically what we’ve said is, the $1.2 billion is probably doable for the next year, what I just said; but it would be very tight because we have a lot of obligations and prior deals that they (previous Amtrak management) made, like New York State on the Turbotrain and Pennsylvania on the Harrisburg Line. Things that chip away at the $1.2 million. I think that within the $1.2, even after taking out some of these other deals and taking out the debt repayment, which has to come out of it, the $100 million has to be paid back. On top of that, we now have to pay some of the $100 million a year in servicing our debt. That comes out of that. So you know it keeps chipping away at that number. If it’s $1.2 million, I think we can survive, and there will be enough money to do the car overhauls, get them back up and running, and get the track, do the essential stuff on the infrastructure. Would another $50 million make it easier? You bet. Are there good ways to spend that? You bet. But I’m not...
VERNON: You’re not counting on it.
GUNN: Well, you must deal with the totals. This business of saying, you know, look it’s like a human being if you need a 1,000 calories a day or 2,000 calories a day to survive, all right? And somebody says we’re not going to give you that but we’re going to give you 500 calories a day so you can run a marathon. Well, I mean, it doesn’t make any sense.
You see, you have to view this thing in totality. Do we need the money for wrecked and damaged cars?
Yep! – But what we really need is to have an appropriation that is not tied down with a lot of specifics that allows us to fund the operating deficit which is going to be a half billion dollars, give or take, probably $550 (million) and fund the heavy repair program which should probably should be classified as capital, but also might be put in the operating budget. That’s an accounting decision. But we know we need to spend a couple hundred million dollars in cars, we know that, next year; but we think we can spend it.
VERNON: well, a diner and a lounge were totaled at Kensington, also a coach, but, I mean, there are plenty of coaches, I hear, but there aren’t too many of the diners and lounges.
GUNN: we’re short, very short
VERNON: now you’re going to have to cut back on service because of that. I’m riding the Capitol Limited and the California Zephyr in a couple of weeks and I’m beginning to wonder if my train is going to be fully equipped in either direction.
GUNN: It won’t be. The Zephyr should be all right, but the Capital... we’re in trouble. They’re just trying to put together a plan for the Capital now. We’ve run out of cars, and the only way they’re going to be able to do it is speed up some of the turns in Chicago, it’s the only way. At this point I’m not going to make any predictions.
VERNON: So we may get a bucket of chicken instead of a dining car?
GUNN: It’s a very serious situation.
VERNON: You had to terminate the “Cap” in Pittsburgh? (for one day)?
GUNN: Yes, but that wasn’t due to equipment. That was due to tracks. As we said after the last derailment, one more derailment and we would have trouble meeting our service – that’s where we are. I haven’t had a chance to go downstairs and find where they are, but as of last night they were still scrambling to try and figure out how to put together a Capital Limited. There are a number of things we could do in the long run. I mean, we’ve got this; we really hurt ourselves on our transcontinental train. This express business and all the switching consume enormous amounts of time.
VERNON: And does it make enough money to really make it worth it?
GUNN: No, I do not think so.
VERNON: In other words, you want to eliminate the express service.
GUNN: Well, we’re taking a hard look at it. There’s no question on some of these issues.
VERNON: This morning, Tom Ramstack in the Washington Times says “the track segment where the Amtrak train derailed would have withstood the heat without buckling if it had been properly maintained, railroad track engineers say. The temperature was 97 degrees, the temperature on the track reached 118 degrees, and an engineer with the FRA says that good track should be able to withstand those force levels with no problem.” Now, that raises issues between Amtrak and CSX doesn’t it?
GUNN: I’m not going to argue with the engineer (chuckle).
VERNON: So what are you going to do? What can you do?
GUNN: I don’t want to discuss our relationship with CSX. Those statements stand on their own. If CSX disagrees with them, CSX can say it on their own, but I’m certainly not going to argue.
VERNON: Anything you have to say would be with them behind closed doors, I guess in negotiating sessions?
GUNN: It’s their railroad. It was their track. That statement goes to their maintenance practices and how they manage their railroad, and they should respond to them.
VERNON: Well, the freight railroads and the AAR have contended for a long time that they are not reimbursed for the use of their trackage by AMTRAK at market levels.
GUNN: That’s a red herring. I mean, I’m sorry, but first of all, there’s no market level for passenger trains riding over their tracks; and secondly, I’ve never seen a railroad say, “For this, you get 90 mph track.” We are a very small part of the tonnage going over their railroad and, as you know, in most cases it’s one train a day out of maybe 30, 40 trains, so I really think that the problem is that the railroads cannot say their track problems are caused by Amtrak. They cannot say that. They can say they wish they had more money, that’s fair. If they want more money, that’s fine, they can say that; but they can’t say that Amtrak causes the track problems.
VERNON: No, no I wasn’t linking it to that.
GUNN: How much money – I mean, what do they mean by “market based?” All they’re trying to do is squeeze a little more money, which I understand. I’d like to squeeze a little less, but the question there is: what do they need to maintain a proper track structure? What do they need? One train a day is not going to be enough money coming from Amtrak. They don’t have enough money to maintain their track if that’s what they’re saying, but I guess I don’t know if that’s what they’re saying. But if they are...
VERNON: Senator Hollings has a bill out there, his committee approved it 20-3, very comprehensive, provides not only for upgrading the current Amtrak system, but also for serious first step towards building a high-speed rail network. If that bill dies, will that also doom Amtrak?
GUNN: My sense is there’s a lot of support, there is a lot of support for rail. I think the public is way ahead of the politicians, that most people know that our continued reliance on roads and airlines for short hops is a failed strategy. You can’t build more roads in urban areas. I was at Montgomery County, Maryland last night. The Highway Department wants to build a connector to relieve congestion and you know, everybody knows, that’s a crock. If they build a connector to relieve congestion within a year that connector will be congested. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. You build a road, they will come, and they will fill it up – and the public understands that. The public has figured it out: that the highway engineers and the construction people and the oil industry have led us down a garden path. We are now to the point that we’re choking on our air, we’re physically choking on the space that we require, that the highways take up. We’re not going to build a lot more interstates where we need them to try and resolve congestion by highway, so I think there’s a general feeling that rail has an answer. If the rail industry – and we’re in that, obviously; we’re the spokespersons for that, if we can actually act together and provide some realistic cost-effective solutions for some of these corridors. So I think the Hollings bill is a great bill. I’m not criticizing the bill, but I think there’s a lot more pressure to deal with the transportation problems in this country moving people, so you can’t say that the whole thing is contingent upon one thread. That’s not going to be the case.
I think the Hollings bill has a lot to be said for it, I’m not criticizing it; I’m just saying that you don’t bet the whole ranch on that one thing. He represents an attitude that is becoming much more prevalent.
VERNON: Well you said in the past “I don’t do politics,” yet you knew when you took this job you have to deal with 535 politicians plus some people downtown...
GUNN: I’m not sure I ever said I don’t do politics I probably said...
VERNON: I saw that quote somewhere.
GUNN: I know, but I think that what I’ve always said is I much prefer running the railroad as opposed to politicking. It doesn’t mean I don’t deal with the political side. I’ve obviously been at this business within the public sector for since 1974, so that’s almost 30 years, and obviously I’ve had to do my share of convincing politicians; but I am not a politician.
VERNON: Well, have you had a discussion with Mitch Daniels the White House Budget Director?
GUNN: Yes
VERNON: Okay. Tell me how some of that goes.
GUNN: I think that when you deal with the government... well, take the Administration [for example]. There is no consensus within the Administration on what to do with Amtrak. It’s very clear Mitch Daniels would like to see us go bankrupt and get rid of us. We are just a nuisance to him and a source of expenses. On the other hand, I think there are people at DOT, and I’m sure that there are people in the White House, who think that there may be a need for a little more proactive transportation policy.
VERNON: Well you have (Health and Human Services Secretary) Tommy Thompson in your corner. But the trouble is, he’s in the wrong job.
GUNN: Look what’s going on. I think you’re never going to convince everybody that what we’re saying or proposing is the right thing to do, or what rail proponents say is the right thing to do. What I’m saying here is that you pick up enough support so that you carry the day. I mean, this is not a case where everybody has to agree to one solution. I can be, in one sense, sympathetic to Mitch Daniels because he has an enormous budget problem, enormous problem; but I think that what they’re doing, the attempt to put us under, and it’s ludicrous. It means they don’t understand the economics of Amtrak. If Amtrak made the decision tomorrow to go out of the long-haul business, we’d save the first full year of being out of the long haul business. We might save $18 –20 million – might! What that means is that if they really want to get rid of Amtrak and do it legally, they’ve got to fund us at least for a couple of years.
VERNON: Severance pay?
GUNN: Yes. I mean, do they want to fund us and run trains or fund us and not run trains? It’s going to cost them the same either way.
VERNON: Yes.
GUNN: So, I think that what I would say is that if someone is serious about doing us in, they better at least study the situation and have a plan that is real, although I’m not going to help them do that. You have a total divergence of views on this subject. I’ve met with a lot of the Senate and the House and even there, you have tremendous divergence of views, although you have a lot of support. That’s why I’m saying I really think that if Amtrak can get its own house in order in terms of its finances, and be absolutely clear about what is going on here, and prove that we are an efficient custodian of public money, I think you got a lot of support over there. I think Amtrak will have a better time of it – and the other thing is, I think we’ve reached [the end of] this ‘glidepath’ notion. If that isn’t dead now, it never will be because we have been really, really straightforward with what the economic reality of Amtrak is.
VERNON: Well, you know that there are some questions about bookkeeping under the previous management. The Amtrak Reform Council (was) mystified by what they called the “smoke and mirrors” they got. Were you surprised when you took over and found the books in – I guess –you would describe it as “a mess?”
GUNN: Well, I knew that Amtrak was in big trouble. I understood that when I took the job, but what I didn’t understand was the fact that they literally were having difficulty closing their books. I did not understand that. There were hundreds of millions of dollars for adjustments that had to be made to 2001 and prior years income statements. It was like $200 million worth of adjustments. I didn’t understand that; but that’s being straightened out. We’ve got our books in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and the chief financial officer that we have now is a very straightforward financial type person.
I’m talking about Deno Bokas, The acting CFO. I’m going to tell the board I’m going to appoint him at the board meeting next month. He’s the new CFO, he’s a CPA, and he’s a very straight-forward, no-nonsense financial controller type person. The books will reflect reality.
VERNON: I know you don’t like the blame game, but somebody is responsible for the way the books were kept prior to you coming here. You have to say somebody is responsible The politicians on the Hill, especially the skeptical ones and even some of those who support Amtrak, want answers to that, want to know who’s responsible – accountability?
GUNN: What I’ll do is, I can commit to what we will have from this point forward. These people were all here during the last two to three years. This whole business of the glidepath, I have said, was a situation where the Congress created an absolutely impossible goal with the corporation, and the management pretended they could accomplish it. Now, who’s at fault – Congress, the management, or both of them? If you create crazy incentives through law and then people respond to the incentives and try to accomplish the law, who’s at fault? Is it the Congress? Is it the people? Look, if it had been me, I would have blown the whistle a long time ago and I would have just said, “It’s over.” I would have been much blunter about the nature of the problem. It’s like what I’m doing with the overhaul program. I’m not going to fool around. I have to rebuild cars. You asked, do I have the money, and I’m telling you no, not yet, but I think I’m going to get it, but if I wait until I get it, it’s too late. I won’t be able to spend it. I won’t know until December whether I get $1.2 billion. So what am I going to do? Sit on my thumbs until December? When I don’t have enough cars?
VERNON: (chuckle) In the middle of the night, 2 a.m. December 24th something happens.
GUNN: Yeah, if we waited until December, what would happen to us is we wouldn’t be rebuilding cars until next spring.
VERNON: Getting on another subject here, your relationship with the unions. You’ve had a reputation as being a tough cookie at the bargaining table. You’re talking about cutting back, or at least running a lean operation. United Transportation Union’s lobbyist, Jim “Broken Rail” Brunkenhoefer said a day or two before you took office, “don’t look to labor rolling over and playing dead to any ideas of reviving Amtrak on the backs of its labor force.” You see room for reductions in labor costs?
GUNN: Well, wait a minute; you’re mixing up two things. I agree with him that labor is not the problem per se with Amtrak; we have no disagreement on that. Our wage rates our competitive, in fact they’re better than the freight railroads, so I mean...
VERNON: You mean conductors on Amtrak get more than the freight?
GUNN: No, no, no – we get less. We’re more productive.
VERNON: I see. That’s one of their other complaints, by the way, the fact that their wages are less than the freight.
GUNN: No, no, no; their take-home is competitive. What I’m saying is, our workforce is fairly compensated, that’s really what I’m telling you. I’m not going to argue that they’re the problem. We have some productivity problems internally based upon work rules. That’s a little piece of the problem. We have a management structure which was bloated and out of control. These experiments they had around here with strategic business units and all of that stuff? All that did was confuse authority and responsibility, accountability, and add people you didn’t need to run the railroads. Having said that, we also have some organizational structures.
VERNON: These VPs that you cut back on, what is it, 60 –80, something like that?
GUNN: We had 84 people, I believe, with the title of vice president, assistant vice president, executive vice president, senior vice president, etc. When I’m done, we’ll be down to less than 20 people – 12 or 14 who actually have “vice-president” in their title, and there will be three or four other people of that rank like chief operating officer, chief financial officer, and general counsel.
VERNON: Okay, well, how many of those people actually got pink slips – in the past some of them were just shuffled around a little bit.
GUNN: It’s gone in terms of the number of people who are actually going to lose their jobs – some have left and we are in the process of notifying people whose jobs have been abolished and so forth. I don’t want to get too specific until that gets out, but there’s no question that on the issue of productivity we have got to be tough on all levels of this company. You can’t solve the problem just by canning a few VPs. We will be tough on the management and other levels, supervision and hourly. For example, we’re in the process of downsizing our telephone reservations system because the number of tickets sold by human with a telephone call is dropping as we shift to the internet.
VERNON: Automated machines?
GUNN: “Automated machines, so if the call volume drops, I need to reduce my coverage.
VERNON: Now you were saying a minute ago that labor was not part of the problem, obviously it isn’t because...
GUNN: No, what I said was labor is – you have to be careful of sweeping statements – I’m not solving my problem on the back of labor, that’s true, but there are areas we want to improve productivity, and that’s between our unions and us, but it’s not a sweeping thing. We have some issues of work rules and manning issues that we think we could make changes that would make sense and would save us some money.
VERNON: Let me say this. I use your long-distance service something like three, four times a year. I’ve seen dining cars filled to the brim with hungry people – and two dining car attendants to handle that whole crowd. Obviously you can only go so far. That raises the question maybe you’re going to cut back on the service, maybe not having dining cars on these trains?
GUNN: No, no, no. The last people you want to impact are the people who are actually serving the public and doing useful work, but we have areas where you can look at the way they were (structured). With this strategic business unit, you had a lot of duplication in terms of overhead function. That can be eliminated. I think we’ve had areas where we had too much supervision, we’ve had areas where we’ve had too little supervision, so it’s hard and I shouldn’t make a sweeping statement.
You had over a 100 people doing planning, and I’ve never seen such a mess in my life. I mean, everybody is running off in every direction. When you have a meeting, there were 10 people in the meeting, nobody ever made any decisions, nobody was in charge, and everybody had an opinion. We’re dropping that back to less than 40 actual planning people. It will be a tight function; there will be people who have a responsibility for specific areas – that’s it!
VERNON: Are any routes going to go?
GUNN: No, I’ve said no, unless we totally run out of equipment.
VERNON: Of course, that’s a possibility too.
GUNN: Nah, we’ll get some equipment. Once we get the shops going, we’ll be able to begin to get the stuff back.
VERNON: There are some people, including some politicians on the Hill, mainly those who are critical of Amtrak, and some who live in crowded corridors who want their service but say that the long distance trains are losing too much money, their too much of a drag.
GUNN: Now wait – the long distance trains are a red herring. If you look at Amtrak as a whole, commuter services are supposed to be self-sufficient. In other words, we get paid what we cost. Then you have the intercity, the long distance trains. Then you have the corridor, shorter haul type trains – they all lose money! Not the commuter, but the long distance and the short haul.
The Northeast corridor does not make money. It’s an absolute fantasy and in some sense it was perpetuated by this glidepath, where people were “Oh, we’re going to be making money and we’ll get the Acelas and we’ll make...” It’s not true. The Northeast Corridor barely breaks even on above the rail costs, and it requires enormous amounts of capital. I mean, hundreds of millions of dollars just to keep running. The idea that getting rid of the long-haul trains leaves you with a profitable core is not true. The long-distance trains probably lose about $300 million a year incrementally. Okay, you get rid of them, [but] you’ve still got an enormous deficit – plus you need hundreds of millions of dollars of capital. Use the $1.2 billion – these are all rough numbers – but if I say I need $1.2 billion and everyone says get rid of the long haul trains, okay, now I need $900 million.
VERNON: Okay. Well, let’s look at it.
GUNN: That’s the way the numbers work.
VERNON: Let’s look at it from the other end of the telescope. Sen. Patty Murray, who heads the Transportation Appropriation Subcommittee, thinks the Northeast Corridor gets too much at the expense of (others); her state has to pay out to have the kind of service... (for service the Northeast Corridor gets for nothing).
GUNN: She is absolutely correct, there is a great inequity in terms of the funding of services. New York State gets a free ride, relatively speaking. Her state pays the incremental deficit plus contributes to the capital – she’s right, but I’ll go back to my analogy of the human being needing 2,000 calories and is only getting 1,500 but you don’t solve the problem by moving the 1,500 calories around. You’ve got to get the funding up to the point where you have enough money to deal with all of your problems.
Now I don’t really care, I mean I care, but it’s not a priority whether it’s federal money or state money. What I need is enough money to run the services and maintain the plant and equipment. In the reauthorization process, I believe that a lot of people are coming to the conclusion that we need a transit-type solution. I don’t know if you’re familiar with how transit is funded, but it works. There is a set match for capital, 20 percent local, and 80 percent federal. That’s it. You want to build a bus garage in Keokuk, Iowa you come in with your 20 percent, and they’ll match it, and give you the money to build the bus garage.
VERNON: So you think that the future of Amtrak is there’s going to be more stat