I wouldn't count on it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/71731p-66550c.html
But I didn't expect the service to be ready to start as early as February. This is good news.
The D - replacing the W in Brooklyn - will run express from Coney Island through much of Brooklyn along the Fourth Ave. line, go over the bridge and travel along the Sixth Ave. line in Manhattan to 145th St. It then will continue to the Bronx.
Express through much of Brooklyn? Both these logical routings are already running like this in Brooklyn along 4th Ave. And, I would hardly classify a three mile express run as 'much of Brooklyn.'
The N gets shifted from tunnel to bridge. The is replaced by the B, The W is replaced by the D. So now there are fewer trains through the tunnel to downtown. On top of that, there is still no direct service downtown from the Brighton. Or will the M shift over? Or will they run additional routes not yet mentioned???
I know right now the tunnel trains run fairly empty to Brooklyn in the PM, at least that's my observation, and the Brighton trains are always crowded.
There is, and it doesn't. It does send more trains over the bridge and fewer through the tunnel, since far more people want to use the bridge (they're heading to midtown) than the tunnel.
1-Middays there is a 50% reduction on service through the tunnel between Downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan. Since the 1920's there was at least two Broadway locals(4th Ave and Brighton) and one Nassau Street service (West End) which operated through the tunnel until Chrystie Street opened in 1967.
Between 1967 and 1986 there was the RR(Broadway Local) and the QJ(1967 to 1973) and M (1973 to 1986)via Nassau Street. Between 1986 and 1995 it was the N and R (via Broadway) and M(via Nassau Street).
Between 1995 and 2001 it was just the N and R and since 2001 the current M,N and R
2-Weekends it will be a 50% reduction on Brooklyn/6th Avenue service via Grand Street if this plan is implemented. Between 1968 and 1986 and from 1988 to 2001 it was always the B and D that operated except for owl periods via the 6th Ave Bridge tracks. Yet it will be a 33% increase on service via Broadway between the N,Q and R services from Brooklyn to Manhattan.
3-What happens to Brighton Line Passengers who want to go to 6th Avenue weekends. Since 1988 most West End trains do not stop at DeKalb Avenue
4-This plan still does not address the problem of Queens Blvd Local to Manhattan during the midnight hours from the East Side with a one seat ride which existed from 1987 to 1990 when the R operated 24 hours a day.
5-Does Brighton Line passenghers perfer Broadway to 6th Avenue. I do not believe they do.
6-There is no Central Park West to 6th Ave local service weekends which was growing in 2001 prior to the Bridge changes. This is an opportunity to pick up additional riders for the TA. They are blowing it big time.
Several years ago the TA tried to switch the 2 and 5 local and express services on White PLains Road in the Bronx. Public pressure killed it. We can do it again
Thank You
The D train WILL stop at Dekalb Ave, at least on nights and weekends.
"6-There is no Central Park West to 6th Ave local service weekends which was growing in 2001 prior to the Bridge changes. This is an opportunity to pick up additional riders for the TA. They are blowing it big time."
B weekend service to 145th st was due to the major completion of the 63rd st line, which only had either the rarely runs shuttle or any of the E, F or R lines diverted through the connector. We can argue all we want about the need for 2 CPW local services, how about arguing for more frequent serivce on the 4 line on Saturday? Why is there 10 minute service on the 4 line on Saturday until 12:30 PM, while the #7 line has 5 minute service from 6 AM on?
Headways are every 10 minutes apart, and there are more riders using the #4 line, than the #5 line. So is every 7-8 minutes from 9 AM till 1 PM too much to ask for on the #4 line? After 1 PM, service on the #4 line run as frequent at 6 minutes. Or is it more letters received by NYCT are from #7 line customers than #4 line customers about levels of service?
Is combined 4/5 service sufficient on weekends? If not, one or both should get more service.
Is the Jerome line itself underserved on weekends? Not that I've seen. The Flushing line is much, much busier than the Jerome line, so one would expect more service on the Flushing line than on the Jerome line.
"6-There is no Central Park West to 6th Ave local service weekends which was growing in 2001 prior to the Bridge changes. This is an opportunity to pick up additional riders for the TA. They are blowing it big time."
If there were enough demand, these two itmes could be coupled to have the draft B run weekends, but my feeling is the demand is not perceived to be high enough.
Especially this rabid Yankee fan who loved the NY MUTTS succumb yesterday to a 15-2 drubbing by the Cubbies at Shea. Now they want to take MY baseball specials away and run express on the Witches End Line from 36th st to Bay Parkway with a stop at 62nd st. Even Crazy Eddie Antar would think it's insane!!!
In recent years there have been 2 services in the tunnel midday only because of bridge related issues. The percent of S Brooklyn customers going to lower Manhattan has decreased since 1986.
(4-This plan still does not address the problem of Queens Blvd Local to Manhattan during the midnight hours from the East Side with a one seat ride which existed from 1987 to 1990 when the R operated 24 hours a day. )
Unrelated. If they wanted, they could use exactly the same plan, except extend the Q to Continental late nights, or make the R instead of the N the late night service. I guess they just don't want to, but that choice doesn't have any effect on the rest of the plan.
(5-Does Brighton Line passenghers perfer Broadway to 6th Avenue. I do not believe they do. )
Weekdays they probably prefer 6th Ave, and that can be reflected in the train frequencies. Weekends I doubt you can prove a strong preference either way.
(6-There is no Central Park West to 6th Ave local service weekends which was growing in 2001 prior to the Bridge changes. )
Looks like they're being stingy. As many have pointed out, CPW doesn't have the traffic for 2 local and 2 express services on the weekend; it really needs 2 locals and 1 express.
I walk to different stations and take different trains, and I can tell you the Brighton is much more crowded than the 4th Avenue Line, especially AM. At 7th Avenue you can barely get on.
That's why I had recommended 9, 9, 9, 9 on the bridge, and extending the Z via Brighton Express. That way the Brigton gets six extra trains, though they would be short ones. They'd be the equivalent of about five 600 foot trains.
I'm assuming that they will be standardizing on equal service levels (in terms of tph) for all the Southern Division services. If they do otherwise, then they will get non-uniform headways which will result in delays.
This means that they should adjust the schedules so that an N/R/B travels through DeKalb at the same time, followed by a D/M/Q combination. This will permit a Midtown<->Downtown transfer at both Pacific (4th Ave riders) and DeKalb (Brighton riders). 4th Ave riders wishing to transfer between midtown Bway and 6th Ave service will do a double switch, first at Pacific and then at DeKalb.
This presents some problems, if we assume this rate will be 10 tph. First, the capacity of the MB is 60 tph; so they will be operating at only 67% of capacity at rush hour.
Second, the M operates at only 7.5 tph not 10. The J/Z combination does operate at 10 tph - so it might have been a better choice. OTOH, they might decide to expand M service.
Third, there is a big problem with the 60th St tunnel. They will be running 3 services, each at 10 tph. Consider the downtown merge. The Astoria services will be operating at 20 tph or every 3 minutes; the Queens Blvd R will be operating every at 10 tph or every 6 minutes. The combined 30 tph service must operate at 2 minute intervals. This means that one of the trains must be held for 1 minute to maintain uniform headways. (The likely candidate should be the W because it will not merge with any other trains). Next the N will diverge to the express at either 57th or Times Sq. This will leave the locals running at with non-uniform headways (0,2,6,8,12...). One of the trains will have to be held one minute to restore uniform headways. It's the W again.
Finally, the 10 tph locks in the V at 10 tph due to the R/V merge. This means keeping the same unbalanced merges between the E/V and the F/V. This means additional delays for 6th Ave local service and the 53rd St tunnel.
Suppose the TA needs to scale up rush hour service due to overcrowding - on say the Brighton Line. They are running at capacity in the 60th St tunnel so they are blocked from doing this, even though the Brooklyn East River crossings are operating at 67% of capacity.
One would think that more flexible solutions have to exist. Of course the TA has one year to close their eyes and dig in their heels.
That kind of perfect synchronization sounds unlikely to work. Passengers are more likely to get off one bridge train at Pacific and wait 3-4 minutes for the other. Otherwise, if your local is delayed by 30 seconds, it will pull into Deklab just as the express you want is closing its doors. I also doubt they'll run as many Ms as bridge expresses.
(Third, there is a big problem with the 60th St tunnel. They will be running 3 services, each at 10 tph. Consider the downtown merge.)
Another possibility: N, West End, and W each run at 8 tph while the 2 Brighton lines each run at 12 tph. Reduces problems at 60th St to their current levels.
A third possibility: significant asymmetry in N service. It could be 10 tph northbound while it and the W are 7 tph southbound. There may also be asymmetry on the B and D: you want at least as many Brighton-6th Ave trains as West End-6th Ave trains, but you need fewer Concourse locals than Cocourse expresses.
If one schedules merging conflicts, they are likely to occur. The way to avoid them is to start at the merge point and work one's way backward. The synchronization was designed to avoid merging conflicts not to provide cross-platform transfers. The latter is simply a happy result of the former.
Another possibility: N, West End, and W each run at 8 tph while the 2 Brighton lines each run at 12 tph. Reduces problems at 60th St to their current levels.
The unbalanced service levels will create merging conflicts at DeKalb.
"A third possibility: significant asymmetry in N service. It could be 10 tph northbound while it and the W are 7 tph southbound. There may also be asymmetry on the B and D: you want at least as many Brighton-6th Ave trains as West End-6th Ave trains, but you need fewer Concourse locals than Cocourse expresses."
All excellent points, and BTW an obvious logical conclusion: IF you need more Brighton trains than West End trains AND more Concourse expresses than Concourse locals, THEN the D should remain on the Brighton and the B on the West End. I say: make the B 24/7 West End with service to Bedford Park (rush), 145th (middays and evenings) and 205th (nights and weekends). Overall, less confusion and better balance all around.
Brighton Express & Local - via Bridge north, 6 Ave, CPW & Concourse.
4 Ave Local(s) - via Tunnel to B'way Local and Nassau St.
4 Ave Expresses - via Bypass, Bridge South, B'way express.
Now if you want B'way -- 6 Ave transfers, you're either doomed to a B'way local for a cross-platform transfer at DeKalb or you have to walk through the Pacific/Atlantic complex.
The lack of flexibility that I referred to is that service levels are maxed out with the Bridge and Montague St Tunnel operating at 67% of capacity. There is no upward flexibility for Brooklyn service.
First of all, the 60 tph you suggest is considerably more than the current 48 tph. I'm not convinced the MTA is really going to send 60 tph through Dekalb. My guess, based on no evidence whatsoever, but based on standard MTA stinginess, is 2x12 on the Brighton, and 4x8 on 4th Ave.
Secondly, there is much more capacity if truly needed. The West End-6th Ave and Brighton-6th Ave could each be close to 15 tph if traffic demanded: there is no impediment further north, though 59th St would slow down. The 4th-Ave-Broadway via bridge and Brighton-Broadway via bridge could each be 15 tph, with 25 of the 30 turning at 57th St. and the other 5 going to Astoria. The Montague tunnel could be 10 tph to Astoria, 10 to Continental, and 10 to Nassau St.
Weekdays they probably prefer 6th Ave, and that can be reflected in the train frequencies. Weekends I doubt you can prove a strong preference either way."
Brighton line passengers on weekends prefer Broadway service. 14th street union square is a major hub for night life and also allows for easy transfers for the 4/5/6 Lex lines plus the L to williamsburg.
Personally I prefer broadway service during rushhour also. I work near herald square and it is a quicker ride on via broadway express then 6th Ave.
Although 6th ave express is probably prefered by those working a rock center.
I'm curious, how do you know, given that there hasn't been a fair option of choosing one vs. the other for 17 years now?
The only decenter was my cousing who works in rock center who lost direct building access to his train.
One concern that I have heard since the daily news story yesterday is that the wait for a brighon train at manahttan stations is going to increase due to the line being split over two separate lines in manahattan increasing one's commuting time home and to work.
That is warranted. Broadway is more popular on weekends than 6th from what I've seen. In fact, I saw it even before the 6th Avenue Bridge tracks closed for the second time. The B and D trains I rode on weekends before they were cut to 34th, were nearly empty, while over on the Broadway Line, the N and R trains were standing room only and even packed on weekends. R and W trains today are still crowded, but not like the N and R were when they were the only Broadway trains. And having the Q there on weekends, I think, helps. And it will still be needed on weekends.
What that additional route it will be. I hope it will be a T.
And by the way what about the M R and Circle Q in all of this. if N run 24/7 over the bridge, then will R run via Manhattan 24/7 as well. There has to be one broadway local service when W is not running at least.
As for Q, TA should let us that whether or not Q will be full-time brighton line service.
In the draft plan, it's the Sea Beach late nights.
The Concourse local (B train) runs every 9-11 minutes during rush hours. Since Brighton Express trains must maintain 6 minute headways or better, we may see huge improvement in reverse-peak service above 59th st/CC and some slight improvement (maybe 8 minutes or better?) in the peak direction on the B train. Because of the nature of Brighton Express service starting early in the morning, the first B train from BPB may leave around 5:30 to 5:45 AM (pre B and C switch in 1998, the first C train to Brooklyn left BPB early, at 5:07 AM). We may also see some Brighton express service still running past 10 PM, but I doubt it.
The biggest winners are Bay Ridge riders, who suffer from inferior rush hour service (8 minutes at best). In Feb. 2004, the R train will only have to compete with M service (10 minutes) and probably less W train service in rush hours (also most likely 8 minutes), Bay Ridge and Sunset park local riders will be see 5 minute headways on the R line.
The D train loses it's identity for the past 36 years as a Brighton line resident (sob!), but will gain 24/7 access to the West End line. Only the R line will be the only shuttle running at night, the N will go through the rat-hole on nights and weekends (I do see a better and easier service plan to have the N on weekends run via. bridge, BUT local from Prince Street, all the way up to Astoria.) Except for Cortlandt and Whitehall st, the numbers really don't justify two services through the Montague rathole on weekends. But 2 local services are needed above Canal Street. To have (like the W line now.) the N using 2 dirrerent platforms at Canal Street is confusing enough for customers using that station. I've seen a LOT of people waiting for the R or W train (on non-G.O. weekends affecting R and W service) on the Bridge platform.
Let the public vote on this plan, guess I will have to live with this plan next year and will miss my D train.
"(I do see a better and easier service plan to have the N on weekends run via. bridge, BUT local from Prince Street, all the way up to Astoria.)"
I thought that is what the draft plan calls for on weekends, "via Bridge and Broadway Local." Perhaps I misunderstand; Do you believe that following the hearings the N will be assigned to go via the current draft late night plan (Broadway Local via Tunnel) on weekends as well?
"To have (like the W line now.) the N using 2 dirrerent platforms at Canal Street is confusing enough for customers using that station."
Would it be more convenient then if the N ran via the Montague Street Tunnel on weekends as well, with no Broadway Local using the Manhattan Bridge, and thus the lower level platforms?
Currently the first s/b B leaves Bedford Park at 0526. The first Brighton Express leaves BBC at 0600 and returns at 0730. Combining the two will either result in a) an earlier s/b Brighton Express, or b) a later start to s/b Concourse local/express service.
---Brian
Darn, I have to miss a Kaplan SAT class for that one (free). Is a score of 1240 a good starting point for a sophomore? Or should I skip the rodeo and attend the class?
The original poster said that he might be able to attend as part of a school field trip. I would imagine that the school was able to get an exception to the employees-only policy. If so, it sounds like a very good opportunity.
A school group, I dought it.
P.S. If you are an employee it's an event you should do with the family at least once !
---Brian
Last year a certain SubTalker had his MTH subway cars set up & gave tours (just walk bys with yada yada) of the museum/RPC fleet (the ones NOT at Court Street.
As I said before, it's a great event if you're able to tag along with an employee.
I also had that same option last year, but conflicting events, same
as this year. >GG<
8-) ~ Sparky
Also, not being blessed with children, I'm not that familiar with the
SAT scoring etc. But for those who are replying to DTrain22's post,
he is a student at "Transit Tech", so add this into the equation
of your responses. And we are not anti student or anti female at
Branford. Ask R-30, our student participant or Notchette, Samanta
or Leslie. >GG<
8-) ~ Sparky
These days you won't hear many a 4 letter words or smell cigar smoke. It's just a different World.
At Rockhill Trolley Museum, the operating staff consists of a number
of female operators. IIRC there's a Mother/Daughter team in ops.
Mr. RT, I am the traveling Trolleynaut and good will ambassador.
Any significant teams or finer gender at CTM? >GG<
8-) ~ Sparky
It's still very unusual to see a blond wisp of a girl bring a 9 1/2 ton single truck hand brake car to a full stop in two car lengths.
15 minute wheel gauging, 45 minute exam, magic box test, so much more.
Nice jacket/tee shirt/hat. Free breakfast and lunch. Free stuff from TA. Gotta go to Home Depot and write down the names of plumbing and electrical fittings. I could be a 'killer' changing out a Redbird shoe beam....takes a crew of three when I can do it by myself. Brake shoes, pneumatic hoses, oil changeouts, computer downloads....no problem. Gonna do it!!!!! CI peter
And Good luck!
The description says that the tram only takes tokens. What’s going to happen when the MTA discontinues tokens?
John
The last time I rode the tramway, they were using their own tokens.
Bill "Newkirk"
If that's the case, they used to have their own tokens. They can go back to those if they have enough stockpiled.
---Brian
---Brian
www.railfanwindow.com
Actually, it was free, because you were already inside fare control.
Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoyed your redbird ride.
---Brian
A friend from Boston was at the game with me. He's a bit of a railfan. I showed him the C/R pointing at the board and he nearly fell over laughing.
After I dropped him off at Penn Station, I had to get back to my car at Shea. I took the LIRR to Flushing. When I went downstairs to the 7, there were three sets of redbirds lined up. It seemed like the clock had turned back!
See Here
1101-05 were delivered to East 180th St last night, and a fellow SubTalker reports another set has gone into service on the 4. 7131-35 and 7156-60 were at Nevins St when he saw them yesterday.
7131-35 were assigned to the 5 several days ago, but this has apparently changed. My take is that the 5 will receive 6811-15 in place of 7131-35 now assinged to the 4. Initally, 6811-15 and 7156-60 were burn testing together.
1100 Series Car Pileup! There's a whole bunch to be found at East 180th St and Unionport. One of these sets should be burn testing now...
-Stef
Right you are, 6811-6815 were in service on the 5 with 7106-7110 March 31. Newest deliveries are 1101-1105 and 1136-1140, which (apparently) came down on Sunday's CP train. 6876-6880 were delivered to East 180 on March 28.
7141-7145, 7161-7165 are waiting for some last minute mods at East 180 to be accepted. That oughta soon be Trainset #3.
It looks like the 6800s and 6900s will be placed in service on the 5, and traded for 7100s to the 4. The 1100s will also go to Jerome.
FYI, details on the last #5 Redbird on March 25, 2003 were: Gap 239 to 138. In service 0803 @ 125 to Flatbush (0856). 0903 Flatbush to Dyre (1023). Laid up @ East 180.
Consist was (N) 8820/8821-8862/8863-8878/8879-8892/8893-8914/8915 (S).
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
BLAH
Why don't they just put the D back where it was on Brighton, and the B back on West end? They're both ultimately going to the same place (along Sixth Avenue and up to either 145 or Bedford Park).
Here's a wacky idea: run the B to 145th St on weekends. Leave the B & D where they belong. Run the B as a shuttle at night. It worked for 30 years.
I don't understand. You're saying there was B service on weekends to 145th for 30 years? I thought it was for a year during the 63rd St GOs.
If NYCT were willing to run 4 services on CPW on weekends there would be lots of plans that would work.
The long-standing notion that the Sea Beach must have 24/7 service to/from Manhattan is even more ridiculous. The West End is more heavily used (because its catchment area is more heavily populated) than the Sea Beach. Why must the Sea Beach be treated like God?
Uh, oh. Them sound like fightin' words directed toward a gentleman in California!
I agree the West End line needs a full weekend route. The Sea Beach doesn't. Now do I have to re-iterate my B/N swap yet again?
The MTA says they will present the plan to local community boards in June. There's your chance to make your opinions known. Sign up on the speaker's list early (before the actual meeting) and you can speak early while people are still paying attention.
I hope, though, that there's no overlap where Sea Beach riders are served by the same community board as Brighton riders. That could make for an interesting riot.
It also doesn't shortchange Broadway itself on weekends.
It also keeps that Sea Beach access via Broadway, where the Sea Beach riders want to go. They're not interested in 6th.
Your alternative proposal pushes aside all three of these plusses because you don't like a letter. How silly!
It also doesn't shortchange Broadway itself on weekends.
It also keeps that Sea Beach access via Broadway, where the Sea Beach riders want to go. They're not interested in 6th.
Your alternative proposal pushes aside all three of these plusses because you don't like a letter. How silly!
Hogwash:
- The Sea Beach line needs a bridge route. Whether it's the B or N is irrelevant. Right now, the B is a vast improvement.
- The Sea Beach ridership is noticably lower than the other 2 routes to Coney Island. It does NOT need a 24/7 route to Manhattan.
- 4th Ave doesn't need 3 Manhattan bound routes on the weekends.
- In my plan, 3 Broadway weekend lines would be reduced to 2. The one eliminated would be the Q. the N/R would run local. This would NOT affect Manhattan-only BMT riders that much.
Yes, my plan provides less service than the proposed one. I think the proposed plan is excessive.
Sorry, I guess my other post is irrelevant. I thought you were proposing a 2nd Brighton line on the weekend.
I use the Manhattan Broadway BMT frequently on the weekend. I can't claim an inalienable right to 3 services there. But I can attest that before July 2001, when there were 2 services, the quality of service was pretty poor.
For various reasons the N and R tended to come one right after the other, with no service at all for 10 minutes after the 2 of them came. And when they were properly spaced, they would be far more crowded than any other B division line in Manhattan except for the L.
Also consider service from Dekalb if there is no bridge train to Broadway. The MTA has done ridership surveys. They certainly asked questions like: if you only have an express to either Broadway or 6th Ave on the weekends, which do you prefer. I suspect that the answer was Broadway, not overwhelmingly but enough to make a difference.
In my proposal, which matches the current proposal by the MTA, the N would run over the bridge on weekends. It would run local north of Canal St, however.
NYCT has taken ridership surveys. Have you?
Based on the little I've heard, I would venture to say that Sea Beach riders would consider 6th Avenue bridge service only a small improvement, if at all, over Broadway tunnel service. Broadway bridge service is what they want.
The Sea Beach ridership is noticably lower than the other 2 routes to Coney Island. It does NOT need a 24/7 route to Manhattan.
Weekend ridership on the West End, IME, seems no greater than weekend ridership on the Sea Beach, but I haven't seen any actual ridership numbers. Certainly, when the W was a weekend shuttle, trains ran almost entirely empty. Even now, I rarely see more than a dozen passengers in my car and I often have the car to myself.
The Dyre Avenue branch has service to Manhattan on weekends. Ridership on the branch itself is very low, but there needs to be some service on the branch, and the 4 and 6 alone aren't sufficient in Manhattan -- so Dyre branch passengers get the bonus of direct through service to Manhattan.
Similarly with the Sea Beach.
4th Ave doesn't need 3 Manhattan bound routes on the weekends.
I never said it did. Why do you keep bringing this up?
In my plan, 3 Broadway weekend lines would be reduced to 2. The one eliminated would be the Q. the N/R would run local. This would NOT affect Manhattan-only BMT riders that much.
Only 33%. That's a lot. Trains are already crowded with three services.
With more tracks available, your plan provides less weekend service than has been in place during either of the half-closed plans. Why do you think that's appropriate?
what about the 2? it doesn't run that fast and needs the 5 as help, without the 5, everyone would have to wait 10-12 minutes(sometimes up to 20) for a slow 2.
It's great that some people get the bonus of two services where their ridership levels would only support one. It's still just a bonus. Service would be adequate on weekends with just the 2; passengers for the East Side could transfer at 149-GC.
But, since some sort of service is needed on the Dyre line, and the East Side would starve with only the 4 on the express tracks, through 5 service might as well run, even if the intervening section would get more service than its ridership demands.
-----
Service would be adequate on weekends with just the 2; passengers for the East Side could transfer at 149-GC
-----
What about Yankee Games, if the 5 didn't run how would people take the east side, cram on the packed 4? Please the Bronx doesn't need to be screwed out of more service. Of course unless you are suggesting that they all take the long ride on the (6) which is not always an option if someone is in a rush.
Making the 5 a shuttle was brought up as an analogy to certain people's proposals for the Sea Beach.
The argument went like this: if you want to make the Sea Beach a shuttle (and add service to the Brighton line) because it doesn't have enough patrons, then it's equally valid to make the 5 a shuttle (and move all the trains to the Jerome line) because the Dyre line has even fewer patrons.
It's equally silly to make either the Dyre or the Sea Beach a shuttle on weekends.
Ridership surveys.
IMHO you're over-emphasizing weekend service. 3 trains thru Dekalb, running at 6-8 tph, would serve southern Brooklyn adequatley.
But it would underserve the Broadway line in Manhattan, as I keep saying.
With only half the bridge available, the current service pattern has 3 Broadway services (QRW) and 1.5 6th Avenue services (DF) on weekends, for a total of 4.5 services between the two lines.
With only half the bridge available, the previous service pattern had 2 Broadway services (NR) and 3 6th Avenue services (BDF) on weekends, for a total of 5 services between the two lines.
I take that to indicate that there's a demand for at least 4.5 services between the two lines -- and possibly more, but because of the bridge closures, some of that demand couldn't be realized.
Yet your suggestion reduces the combined Manhattan service to 4 services, 2 on Broadway (NR) and 2 on 6th Avenue (DF). NYCT's plan maintains 3 on Broadway (NQR) and restores 2 to 6th (DF).
You're suggesting something very counterintuitive: that, with more trackage available, less service should run. We're still waiting for some sort of justification.
You still haven't addressed why it's OK to make the Sea Beach a shuttle on weekends so that the Brighton can have 2 services, while it's not OK to make the Dyre Line a shuttle on weekends and move all its Lex trains to the Jerome Line.
Replacing the Sea Beach with a 2nd Brighton line would require more crews, since the Sea Beach would still have to run from CI to Pacific. Replacing the Dyre Line with more Jerome trains would actually SAVE money, but NYCT isn't doing it. And yet the Dyre line has fewer passengers than the Sea Beach!
Thank You
Better get used to it. The TA is selling this plan like they did the V train 2 years ago. That means they're adament about it's implimentation despite whatever protests it will arouse.
Not quite. The plan described in the article is obviously a DRAFT which was still in some stage of development.
Whenever Transit officially releases a proposal, at least one spokesperson is identified and quoted. Yet NO official (or unofficial) Transit source is named in the News' article! V-e-r-y interesting...
Methinks they've lifted it off Subtalk (or some Subtalker has "leaked" it)!
The plan makes sense, for the most part, unlike many others that I've seen here. That's why NYCT is pushing it. My criticisms of it are minor.
I completely disagree with that premise.
The MTA says they did extensive ridership preference surveys before coming out with the plan. Do you think that they did the surveys, found that riders prefer 6th Ave to Broadway, and then decided to come out with the current plan anyway?
Of course lots of people want to go to 6th Ave even on weekends. But probably the surveys found that more people want to go to Broadway.
That's a load. I want to see these surveys before saying otherwise.
1. They took surveys and went with the preferences they heard.
2. They are totally stupid and incompetent, and probably deliberately like to make life worse for their customers.
I don't think the MTA is a perfect organization by any means, but I still vote for #1. Others may have different opinions, of course.
I also think the MTA wants to show off the Broadway BMT, given the millions spent to rehab it's stations.
#3 West End Jeff
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
Most customers who use the Nostrand Ave LIRR station to board, go towards Jamaica, why would you spend $4 one way ($150 monthly, as a hypothetical example) to go towards Flatbush Ave, when the A express train is 2 blocks away?
There is no need for any ticket booths at either side of Nostrand Ave station.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
And indeed it does list Nostrand and ENY as being without ticket issue facilities. But it'll cost you $4.75 off-peak one way to go from Nostrand to Jamaica. Makes the new subway fare of $2 look like a bargain by comparison.....
Well, there is the matter of comfort. If you either depart from or arrive at either station, or in the vicinity of either, it can make a difference in your state of mind to take the faster, more comfortable train, if you can afford it. If it's a daily commute, I can easily see people wanting to take it. In one sense, the Downtown Brooklyn to Jamaica corridor could be considered a true "super express" route. The local/express subway (with a transfer needed for Jamaica) as the base service. LIRR one or two stop "fast line" for people who value the faster service as the "premium option". The LIRR is still cheaper than a cab or car service anyway. For people in that category it's a welcome option to consider.
You can usually get away with not paying the sur-charge at most suburban stations, however they usually get you downtown since those ticket windows are open for almost all departures. I see people all the time that try to ride for free and end up paying the extra $2.00 when departing downtown terminals. The conductors are pretty good when departing downtown, these people are pretty stupid.
What is really stupid is that TVM's on the electric line don't count at all stations that don't have agents. Only Randolph and Van Buren Downtown and 59th St. do have agents. You can jump the turnstile, and pay your fare on the train without no surcharge. It is stupid that the electric line has turnstiles at select stations and not at others in the first place. They shouldn't descriminate against electric line riders like that. But the no penalty for jumping and paying on the train is good. It saved me a few weeks ago when I just made a train at University Park by about 1 minute because of unexpected construction on the way to the station. If there was a penalty for jumping or not having a ticket, I would have had to wait another hour for the next train.
Nostrand still has a large volume of reverse-commuter riders heading to jobs on Long Island. I would doubt if very many do domestic work, of course.
Reverse commuting to Long Island isn't an easy task, given the LIRR's scanty number of reverse-peak trains. Yet people still manage.
The office at East New York is also open from 6:45 - 2:10, but the lunch break is from 10:50 - 11:20.
CG
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
How does that prove that the schedule is a lie?
# 2 Line :Brooklyn bound trains Will operate Via Lex Line from 149 GC to Nevins St.
# 3 Line: Will operate from 148 Lenox to Times Square
# 4 Line: Will run local from Atlantic Ave to New Lots Ave
# 5 Line : Bowling Green bound trains will operate Via 7 Ave from 149 GC to Chambers. Then operate in service from Chambers around the South Ferry loop to Bowling Green where customers can transfer to a Brooklyn bound Nos. 2 or 4 trains.
OTOH, I'm just about ready to shoot (and I don't mean with a camera) whoever decided to wait until just after the 5 lost its last Redbird before running this GO.
-Stef
R-16 6382 was in the middle of a group of IRT cars on Sept 5 that went up the ramp from the IND Concourse Yard and along Jerome Ave to the Mosholu Yard. Motorman of regular IRT train reported station platform damaged and signal knocked over after the event.
That must have been some sight!
Man Oh Man... brickwall stops & more!
vlad
Vlad
Is there enough clearance when passing other trains amd when on a curve?
You'd probably end up making IRT cars narrower than they already are.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
--Mark
R-10 3226 was on the operating end of a train of IRT cars that climbed the Bedford Park ramp from the Concourse Yard and ran onto the IRT Jerome Ave Line at 5:41 AM Saturday, March 6. The train then wrongrailed to the IRT Yard, scraping the platform of the Bedford Park Station on the way. It remained in the IRT Yard until 11:15 AM. The car was back in regular service within two weeks.
This is almost exactly six months after a similar incident with an R-16.
Of course, you could always say that R-16 found out about its R-17 cousins and wanted to go meet them.:)
Bill "Newkirk"
I am looking to possibly find some subway cars in N scale, Hopefully operational.
Andy
Images Replicas made three-car sets of R62's.....
http://www.imagesreplicas.com
And there are PLENTY of Japanese prototype subway cars in N scale. There's one particular variety that has sides that look somewhat close to R38's....the ends are totally different but someone with above average modeling skills might be able to fashion more correct-looking ends onto them.
http://www.collect-corner.net/new_york_city_models.htm
Quote" I make a lot of "desktop" models from scratch, using cheap plastic toy train cars (and/or old model railroad cars)....made a couple of O scale LO-Vs, and smaller scaled R15 and Slant R40. "
You got Any pics of the R15 and R40 models ???? A few mounts ibought An Ho R15 form The "Famous" Red Caboose For $70 unpowerd and With alot of flash ! AND SPEAKING OF THE r40 I BUILT a r40 out of brass in Ho pboth powerd units for a frend a A Year Go ! Not an Easy Task !
Vlad
Save The Slants !!!!!!!!
And when I feel like going for a ride and can't make it to Branford, I go for BVE. I have to remind myself to put my N gauge toys under power every now and then just to polish the rails.
But NOTHING beats 1:1 scale. Ask anyone here who's gotten some handle time. Heh.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Might wanna try to get up there for one of the events.
The big model train set is just outside of New Haven: Directions
However I have twice driven a 6 pack of Rohr cars on WMATA in to the tail track at Dupont Circle A03 when Dupont Circle was the end of the line. Kind of fun controlling 3000 Hp through the crossover.
This sounds like a good story... :)
Thanks.
"This sounds like a good story... :)
Its not the only story I have. I also got the chance to operate the MP54 that Washington Terminal use to use to shuttle employees between Ivy City and Union Station.
By The way does anybody know if any Museum any where have any of either PRR or LIRR MP54 in there collections?
Enjoy,
John
I know that the cars at Warehouse Pt and Seashore are ex-LIRR.
I suspect the rest are PRR, but I don't know.
But you can still see Dashing Dan on the side as you cruise by in a Rio de Janeiro open car :)
Down in the basement I have a nice O gauge traction layout, and the cars to run on it. (One of my O gauge cars is a scratchbuilt (NOT by me :( ) model of WB&A 92, a Laclede built combine that was unique in that the car has no baggage doors. The Cab doors at one end are wider than normal.
I run it (and the others) every once in a while. (Very once in a while. Just polish the rails.) My BSM uniform has a 30 year service pin on the sleeve. 1:1 is more fun, but the workload is a LOT more. But worth it.
I haven't done any O scale additions since 7/2/70.
--Mark
BTW, the proprietor of 'Collector's Corner' used to be a member of BERA and we got him up there several times via car-pooling.
And you know me and bingbong. We'd bless a CHECKER cab. Heh.
Other than that, Jack LaFarge of Images Replicas is the only one around doing N scale subway cars that I know of - they're very, very nice but not in my price range!
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
i might make you a married pair for under $30 in n scale good ones too !
Woking on a redbird R33 set for a custumer an Slant 40s set an a R27 and a R16 for my self !
I bet they would sell a ton of them.
I know I'm an exception, but there are people all over the US that love the NY Subways, love Athearn models, and would buy their subway cars.
I'm sure a NY Subway model would sell a lot more than the Athearn Hal Carsten's 70th Anniversary passenger car that recently came out.
Don't you think that if Athearn sold a model of let's say the BMT Standard, there would be a big demand for it?
bigedirtmanl in Montana, just recently finished building a six car set in S gauge from scratch, and I think he built some from each different roof style. I do think that Ed really prefers the roof style of the 2500-2899 cars, particularly the 2500 series.
which cras exacly R ?
if only youre willing to buy models for me are yo willilling to wahit for a test/pilot model ?
and if you want i can give you price ?
interesting !
There have been stories that the physical Bridge work is already complete, and what's left to do is mostly just touch up, along with administrative work, planning, train crew signups, etc. I don't know if that's true, but you can contact NYC DOT and someone there will tell you.
Newark is currently building a extention to its subway. It would be great to have more cars. Classic, nostalgic, cars like the R-36 could supplement the 1999 Kinki-Sharyo LRV cars on the subway and new extention.
One thing good about this: because NJT would buy the cars from the TA, the TA would ACTUALLY make money. Every time a Redbird is sunk into a coral reef, the TA LOSES money, because the car is donated, not sold. So, this the TA could make money in times of fiscal crisis. So, this is a better idea.
- Replace low platforms with high
- Replace 3rd rail 600V system with overhead 750V system
- Replace all the innards of those cars anyway (consider their age)
- Replace center-facing seats with forward/backward ones (NCS pax not gonna put up with NYCTA seats after all this time)
- Thanks to platform disparity, new LRVs and Redbirds cannot operate side-by-side (also LRT versus heavy-rail concerns)
- Is this an April Fool's joke?
Well, that outta the way, you got a few things wrong:
- TA most likely gets a huge tax writeoff every time a car is "donated"
- NJT only got one deal from the TA, that being the old Grumman Flxibles
- NJT logo is not a chevron (which is a V shape); it's unofficial name for years has been "disco stripes" and has recently been altered somewhat
- NCS extension has been operating since last year, exactly when the PCCs went OOS (although the "extension" you are thinking of is the one to the old DL&W Broad Street Station, not part of the original NCS but part of the Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link officially)
Story here.
The Second Avenue Subway's first service plan will have trains using the existing bellmouth to run in the 63rd Street line, then onto the Broadway line.
The way the tracks are arranged, trains from the BMT most naturally flow into the 2nd Avenue leads. If 2nd Avenue ever opens, expect a Q train north of 63rd. Trains from the IND most naturally flow into Queens.
One possible modification to the 2004 route proposal is to terminate the F at 57/6 and to extend the Q to Queens in its place. I don't know if NYCT has conducted a formal evaluation of this option; offhand I see some small advantages and disadvantages but no strong arguments either way. The F and Q would probably swap yards and car assignments in such an event. (R-46's and R-32's on the Brighton local? R-68's on the Culver? That would be an interesting change.)
I know that there are many fans of the Q coming into Queens, but I've never understood it myself. Perhaps it would be more of a 'lose nothing' swap if the Q were a 6th Avenue service, but then again, if that were the case, why switch at all? I mean, R-46 Q trains look unusual, but I don't really crave them. Given the 2nd Avenue change that looms ahead (well that makes it sound like it's just ahead, doesn't it. I like it that way-but you get the point), why not keep the routes as is so that in a few years (I hope, I dearly hope) there would not have to be yet another switch after the Q/F flip described here?
6th Av IND service goes through three outer boroughs, whereas Broadway service only takes care of two. If you're going to add service, you add it to 6th Av, not Broadway, though Broadway is still a close second.
The Second Av Subway will introduce Broadway trunk service to another Corridor, and connect people, via transfer, to the Bronx.
The only picture I took of the area leading to the turnstiles came out overexposed, but basically the fare control looks completely new and different. Now instead of coming down the stairs from the W platform and making a left to get to the turnstiles as it used to be, they put in new stairs and the exit is directly below the W platform now.
The pictures
The camera I have isn't too great, and a few of the pictures were through a subway car window, but it'll give you a basic idea of what it looks like.
Nice job! If you can find reading material on the project itself, why not describe it and use the pictures to support your story. I'm sure Dave Pirmann, our webmaster, would be happy to create a section on subway.org which would tell the story. It would make a great addition to this website.
Don't you think so, Dave?
I'm forgetting the layout of the station already.
To try to combat a projected $55 million deficit in 2004, SEPTA proposes cutting the following:
TRANSIT:
-Operate Sunday level service on Saturdays
-Operate buses on trackless trolley routes
-Reduce midday MFL and Subway service
DISCONTINUE:
-bus routes 19,35,47M,77,121, and BROAD RIDGE SPUR
and here's the killer...
REGIONAL RAIL:
-Discontinue the R6 Cynwyd, R1 Airport, R2 Warminster, and R8 Chestnut Hill West.
-Close 9 stations: Lamokin, Angora, Eddystone, Rydal, Delaware Valley College, Link Belt, Eddington, Wister, and Wissinoming.
-No weekend R5 service past Lansdale
-No weekend R8 Fox Chase service
FARES:
-Raise fares 5.5%
--Tokens by 10 cents
--Transfers by 10 cents
This sounds very painful for Philadelphians, and excruciating for railfans.
With all the cuts you mentioned SEPTA will barely be running anything at all.
If they are going to eliminate one of the Chestnut Hill services, take the R7. It gets lower ridership. They could even slash the service on the R8 to hourly, and it would still be respectable. I don't care about Cynwyd, and it only got about 300 riders a day anyway.
There are plenty of other changes listed on the webpage that I gave the URL to, I only mentioned the biggies.
Maybe this is an ultimatum, like what Dave Gunn did at Amtrak. The Pennsylvania legislature might be persuaded to come through if things get bad enough.
If this is true, who do we write to to prevent it? Rendell? Street? Some nameless state representive from Upper Dinksburry? How about newspapers and TV stations, perhaps Fox's 'What's bugging you' thing?
Write John Perzel (R-Philadelphia), the GOP leader in the PA House. He is the biggest opponent of any tax increases and the one most favoring Rendell's first budget, which calls for eliminating a $2.5 B deficit with no increases, and it was a budget never intended to pass. Let's face the music, conservative Pennsylvania. You need to think outside the box and realize that tax increases are often necessary. Taxes are pretty low in that state, they can afford a few extra million. One of the biggest causes of this shortfall is the fact that SEPTA will lose 6% of their state funding in this next budget unless things change.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
And the emphasis of SEPTA operations needs to be placed in the city over the suburbs. There are a lot more people in the city who are dependent on transit, and its very difficult to serve the sprawling suburbs in an efficient manner with transit. We need to end urban sprawl and focus the redevelopment back in the city center, where the transportation infrastructure is already in place.
I heard about the cuts too and losing the R1 doesn't seem like such a hot idea.
And now the Republicans are trying to take the Convention Center over, and have a suburb-oriented board of directors, although the center lies in Philadelphia and employs mostly Philadelphians. It's a power grabbing strategy to try to build Repub support in heavily Democratic Philly. Last I heard, Mayor Street filed a lawsuit to stop the takeover.
They've got that great airport rail link, and now they want to get rid of it? It boggles the mind. The R6 to Bala-Cynwyd, I can understand. It had so little ridership that it should have been converted to light rail long ago. Perhaps both Chestnut Hill services aren't needed on weekends. Were they built today, only one would have been built. But the Airport Line? I don't know...
No, it isn't. And there really isn't much controversy about it any more. New Yorkers need to turn it on and start running it. And they will by the end of the year.
You don't know much about that Monorail. I suggest that the next time you fly out of Neww York, use EWR (good prices from there) and check out Newark AirTrain. It should be very educational for you.
" And who knows what's gonna happen with LaGuardia, probably nothing but more buses, taxis and cars."
Write MTA. Who knows...
Yes, it is. It will only go to Howard Beach to connect with the A train and to Jamaica to connect with E, J, Z and LIRR. Newark's monorail only goes to the NEC to connect with Amtrak and NJT trains. Both of them won't go directly to Midtown or Lower Manhattan. Philly's R1 service at least goes directly to Center City.
I'm not putting down the monorail. It's better that it's there than if it wasn't. Same thing for the JFK Airtrain. I'm simply saying that SEPTA's R1 service goes directly downtown and that the monorail doesn't and the JFK Airtrain won't (and they're spending all that money on it). The SEPTA service is better in that regard.
Yes, it is. It will only go to Howard Beach to connect with the A train and to Jamaica to connect with E, J, Z and LIRR. Newark's monorail only goes to the NEC to connect with Amtrak and NJT trains. Both of them won't go directly to Midtown or Lower Manhattan. Philly's R1 service at least goes directly to Center City.
I'm not putting down the monorail. It's better that it's there than if it wasn't. Same thing for the JFK Airtrain. I'm simply saying that SEPTA's R1 service goes directly downtown and that the monorail doesn't and the JFK Airtrain won't. The SEPTA service is better in that regard. What the JFK Airtrain will have as an advantage is that most LIRR riders from the east will be able to change in Jamaica for the Airtrain without having to going into Manhattan first.
It would be nice if the TA could speed the trip up from manhattan to either Howard Beach or Jamaica.
Plus you are also assuming most riders are coming directly from midtown manhattan.
most are not. Most business travelers come in from LGA or newark
And that's all you need it to do. It isn't necessary for it to do anythging else. It brings the airport, in essence, to those stations.
" Newark's monorail only goes to the NEC to connect with Amtrak and NJT trains. Both of them won't go directly to Midtown or Lower Manhattan. "
Not relevant. You have a convenient ADa transfer.
"Philly's R1 service at least goes directly to Center City."
And that's the only place it goes, and it only goes every 30 minutes. And if you want to transfer, you have up to an hour wait for a train, depending on where you're going. It's a nice service, but AirTrain will take you places where you can get service every 10 minutes to Manhattan and every 30 minutes to Brooklyn (from Jamaica Station) and the A train. It blows the R1 away for convenience without any doubt. Not even close.
Losing it in Philly, though, is a bummer because they don't have any other service.
Now that I think about it, it's a shame that SEPTA didn't build its Airport line as a high-frequency subway or light rail line. That would have been a much better and probably more popular service.
This is a very good point. In essense the airport begins at howard beach or jamaica. A 600 foot subway train winding through the airport would be a waste of time and money not to mention a serious terrorism issue. Remember JFK is not one building like say grand central. It is a group of terminals.
Someone could put a bomb in a conductors booth in the seat somewhere in manhattan and dedonate it at the terminal without a trace. It is much harder to police.
In paris you had to take a bus to the rail station. Luckly I met a sexy French gal on the plane who steered me in the right direction.
In addtion Ait train makes Jamaica a more viable location for hotels and other Airport related activities
Was it the direction she was taking? :0)
Now it does -- at least at Howard Beach. There's free shuttle bus service between the two sections of the airport.
When AirTrain opens a fare will be charged, probably around $5. Do you know of any other airport that doesn't provide free access between its sections?
I learned my leason in Denver when I depended on a bus to get me from the off property Rental Car place to the airport. Never again
By the time I lugges by luggage onto the bus, walked from the inconvient place the bus left us off. I was so tired and sweaty, I forgot to change into my flight cloth's and thus missed my one opurtunity to be bumped into first class*. My girlfriend made fun of me the whole flight.
Trains are perceived as more frequent, easy to find and have stations to wait in.
$5 does not see that much when you are traveling on business or vacation. It's a business expense for business travelers. Maybe they can offer a discount for riders with unlimited ride metrocards. It would help the MTA to sell more of these cards to tourists and business travelers.
* A freind of my ex-girlfreind worked for the airline. For $200 roundtrip you got priority to be bumped into first class.
And it's not just perception. Especially at JFK, the traffic is a killer. The buses get bunched up and delayed like crazy.
So make them reliable. Provide a better bus service. Run express service between the terminals and the subway, bypassing the parking garages. Restrict one lane on the terminal roadway to buses only so they don't get stuck in traffic.
Of course, it's not the Port Authority's interest to do that. It's in the Port Authority's interest to ensure that the bus service is as poor as it can be so that people will come out in favor of an expensive new rail line that doesn't actually accomplish anything the cheaper buses could.
But you still didn't answer my question. Do you know of any airports that charge a fee for access from one section of the airport to another?
Then the terminal circulator train at Atlanta Hartsfield Airport, where it meets MARTA's terminal, isn't at the airport either, because it doesn't actually continue onto MARTA's tracks and provide a one seat ride into downtown Atlanta. Why don't you go to Atlanta and hang up a sign asking people not to use it because it is a fraud? :0)
Very few people actually "agree" that Airtrain is "poorly integrated." There is you, and 24 people in South Ozone Park, and a a few other people who showed up at public hearings pissed off because the Port Authority didn't use their "best plan."
For all the noise and speechmaking they did, the local politicians (except for good old Julia, who wishes the subway would disappear never mind AirTrain) didn't really give a damn, either.
The whole issue is more about mental masturbation and semantics than anything else.
My thoughts on that have always been, the re-use of the old LIRR ROW would have been the best option to choose. If the realities of the situation would have allowed it to happen. What's done is done, true. But....maybe it would have allowed better direct service from New York and Long Island. Hell, even Brooklyn. Maybe it could have been good for the old corridors' neighborhoods. Maybe it would have allowed for direct interstate train connections via Penn Station or right over the Hell Gate Bridge.
ISTM that all the AirTrain will offer is a "trainstitution" of the bus or a cab from Jamaica to JFK. And that much more schlepping.
Could be worse. Another part of this thread has gone into politics and insults, and may result in the entire thread being deleted.
ISTM that all the AirTrain will offer is a "trainstitution" of the bus or a cab from Jamaica to JFK."
That's what the whole NYC subway system does, basically.
" And that much more schlepping."
That's silly.
Let's compare this to the 63rd Street connection. It was quite pricey, as you're aware. It could have been built for much less if it weren't an actual track connection. Consider this alternative: Deep tunnel a track between the 21st Street and 36th Street stations. Install elevators connecting the platforms. Charge $5 for the new shuttle line. Based on your reasoning -- that ADA-compliant elevator transfers and $5 fares are not deterrents to ridership -- such an arrangement would have been perfectly adequate. So why was a much more expensive track connection built instead?
So what? Do you know of an airport that offers extensive free parking to its users?
If you show me one, then you have a right to complain about AirTrain's fee.
My point is that your claim fails the quack test. Every airport has free access between its sections. If Jamaica were really part of the airport itself, then it would cost exactly as much to get from Jamaica to the American terminal as it costs to get from the United terminal to the American terminal. (Pardon my examples if there are no terminals by name -- I've only flown into, not out of, JFK in recent memory, so I wasn't paying close attention to the name of the building I walked through to get from the plane to the bus.)
Or do you have counterexamples?
I'm not complaining about the fee. It won't affect me; now that I've discovered the B15 bus, and it's easier for me to reach New Lots than Howard Beach or Jamaica, that will be my preferred route to JFK (for those occasions when LGA isn't an option). I'm pointing out that, if the PA really considered Howard Beach and Jamaica to be part of JFK, no fee would be charged to get from Howard Beach or from Jamaica to the rest of the airport.
There is no quack test here, and so your comparison is not relevant.
"If Jamaica were really part of the airport itself, then it would cost exactly as much to get from Jamaica to the American terminal as it costs to get from the United terminal to the American terminal."
Nope, not necessarily. That isn't one of the ten commandments handed down by God, after all. Maybe the PA will ultimately see it in its best interest to make it free, but that's a separate question.
"It won't affect me; now that I've discovered the B15 bus, and it's easier for me to reach New Lots than Howard Beach or Jamaica, that will be my preferred route to JFK (for those occasions when LGA isn't an option)."
For you, certainly. For everyone else who uses it, a non-issue.
"I'm pointing out that, if the PA really considered Howard Beach and Jamaica to be part of JFK, no fee would be charged to get from Howard Beach or from Jamaica to the rest of the airport."
And I have tried to point out to you that, as long as you strictly limit your complaints to Subtalk,you deserve whatever you get. :0)
Hotel that may spring up at airtrain stops may offer free airtrain passes etc.
Special tourist deals that will include attractions, metrocard and airtrain fare's included.
$5 will be the base fare just like $2 is the base subway fare.
Anything is possible. They are not likely to do that, but they could if they wanted to.
Trade shows bring in $29-50 million per show. NY is desparately needing more convention space. Such an arrangement would also allow NYC to tap into the market for one day coorporate meetings. NY currently is passed over becuse it lacks easy hotel access to it's airports. with international flights arriving at JFK and most domestic flights at LGA there is no place to build hotels to compete with orlando and chicargo
Besides the 8 million people who live in the city. Millions more work or visit each week
Mark
The MTA does not fully tap into other revenue streams. These streams could subsidies its rail and bus operations.
Some options to reduce the fat.
1)Eliminate token booths. Metrocard sales through third part vendors, MVM's and subscriptions
Savings - nearly 1/2 billion dolars a year.
The security issue is bogus. SA don't deter crime
Add $10 million for the operation of extra security equiptment, cctc central monitoring, call boxes, bioterrorism sensors extra patrols.
2)ATO with ZPTO where possible lines. Preferable with platform doors. monitoring for draggers could be done via cctv from central location. Automatic door operations. OPTO utilizing CBTC and inteligent OPTO.
The MTA own statistics show draggings down signifcantly at stations with CCTV to assist T/O
Savings nearly 500 million
Add $10 million on extra security patrols
Add $50 million one time capitol expense to equipt all cars with in car CCTV.
Add $60 million one time capitol expense for 3G wireless network to transmit images and emergency phone calls to central monitoring.
Reduce by licence fee charged to cellular opertors for use of network
3)Right size service. Shorter trains after 10 PM. Shorter more frequent trains on weekends. This allows for addtional maintance and longer life due to less overall milage on cars. Plus will attract more riders increasing revenue.
Save $10 million a year on operting and mainance costs
Save nearly a few hudred millio over 20 years for exteneded live of rail cars and the need for less cars in reserve
4)Elimination of the layers and layers of obsolete mangement, line management, supervisors etc.
5)Elimination most bus trackers. Use GPS based bus tracking, monitoring including on bus weight sensors to get accurate real time statisics of bus utilization to enhance schedules and to keep buses ontime
Savings for bus trackers less then $1
savings on fuel due to less dwell time and better schedule?
6)Purchace low floor articulated buses reducing overall bus runs
7)Better utilize MTA real estate including leasing out portions of subway stations for news stands, drug stores, starbucks etc..
Add revenue $10 million a year
7) Better utilize the system as an advertising vehicle including in station audio and video advertisments, promotions and other marketing tools.
Add $20-30 million a year
Make appropite modifications to subway lines and modify feeder bus route's to reduce the number of express bus runs. The West end line is a prime example. Build new express station and/or improve the feeder bus routes to attract express bus riders to the subway. Make the El's more appealing. remove the boxed in look, add more glass.
The MTA does not fully tap into other revenue streams. These streams could subsidies its rail and bus operations.
Some options to reduce the fat.
1)Eliminate token booths. Metrocard sales through third part vendors, MVM's and subscriptions
Savings - nearly 1/2 billion dolars a year.
The security issue is bogus. SA don't deter crime
Add $10 million for the operation of extra security equiptment, cctc central monitoring, call boxes, bioterrorism sensors extra patrols.
2)ATO with ZPTO where possible lines. Preferable with platform doors. monitoring for draggers could be done via cctv from central location. Automatic door operations. OPTO utilizing CBTC and inteligent OPTO.
The MTA own statistics show draggings down signifcantly at stations with CCTV to assist T/O
Savings nearly 500 million
Add $10 million on extra security patrols
Add $50 million one time capitol expense to equipt all cars with in car CCTV.
Add $60 million one time capitol expense for 3G wireless network to transmit images and emergency phone calls to central monitoring.
Reduce by licence fee charged to cellular opertors for use of network
3)Right size service. Shorter trains after 10 PM. Shorter more frequent trains on weekends. This allows for addtional maintance and longer life due to less overall milage on cars. Plus will attract more riders increasing revenue.
Save $10 million a year on operting and mainance costs
Save nearly a few hudred millio over 20 years for exteneded live of rail cars and the need for less cars in reserve
4)Elimination of the layers and layers of obsolete mangement, line management, supervisors etc.
5)Elimination most bus trackers. Use GPS based bus tracking, monitoring including on bus weight sensors to get accurate real time statisics of bus utilization to enhance schedules and to keep buses ontime
Savings for bus trackers less then $1
savings on fuel due to less dwell time and better schedule?
6)Purchace low floor articulated buses reducing overall bus runs
7)Better utilize MTA real estate including leasing out portions of subway stations for news stands, drug stores, starbucks etc..
Add revenue $10 million a year
7) Better utilize the system as an advertising vehicle including in station audio and video advertisments, promotions and other marketing tools.
Add $20-30 million a year
Make appropite modifications to subway lines and modify feeder bus route's to reduce the number of express bus runs. The West end line is a prime example. Build new express station and/or improve the feeder bus routes to attract express bus riders to the subway. Make the El's more appealing. remove the boxed in look, add more glass.
8)Revamp the way the MTA buys, tracks construction projects, handles payrole, manges parts inventory etc.
For instance, A schedules purchace and replacement program at the bus division to buy x number of buses with similar mechanical underpinings over a say 10 years would allow the MTA to negotiate better prices on buses due to allwoing the manufacturer to maximize factory utilization . Adding a secound shift or adding overtime drives up the cost of builing buses and rail cards.
The difference between public transit and police and fire is that there is no practical way to charge for police and fire. Public transit already has a charge.
For that matter, so does water and sewer and in many places, garbage too.
According the Census Bureau's journey to work file, about 240,000 worked in Center City in 1990. This is a file that comes out late, and 2000 data will not be available for some time.
Don't be so sure. Existing buildings can be less intensively used. Here in NYC, the average SF per office worker has risen from 125 square feet in 1960 to say 300 today, as legions of clerical workers have been replaced by machines and a smaller number of managers and professionals.
The Convention Center has been built since 1990 IIRC, and expanded dramatically. 5,000 Hotel rooms were added to the city since 1992 alone. And retail is booming. I don't think a 270,000 working population is very far fetched.
And while we're on the subject - If it's a free country and YOU are allowed to say what you want when you want. why do you take it upon yourself to try to limit my freedom of speech - especially since my comments were not addressed to you. Does freedom of speech only apply to people who think the way you do?
Would you like me to start citing parts of the Bill of Rights? Ok, here we go...
FIRST AMENDMENT:
-Freedom of Religion
--Since 9-11, Muslim Americans have faced incredible scrutiny which is senseless. The average Muslim is just as dangerous as the average Christian.
--School Vouchers, Faith-based Intitiatives. Violates the Separation of Church and State, with tax money going to fund parochial schools and to religious organizations.
FOURTH AMENDMENT:
-Right to Privacy
--The privacy of literally millions of Americans has been violated without just legal cause. Emails read, people questioned and detained, racial profiling, etc with no legal warrants whatsoever to back it up.
There are many other examples, but I don't want to waste space on Subtalk with a big off-topic message. If you are really interested, there are many places you can check this stuff out. Try researching some of the USA Patriot Act.
How many chistians were members of the first or secound terrorist attacks on the WTC - ZERO
Many of the muslim that were questioned and detained were either here on visa's for which they are at the mercy of the govenment to come in for questioning.
Many had paperwork that was either expired or obtained under false pretenses.
In addition it is little know that the first bush administration spent $70 million dollars resettling Iraqi's after the first gulf war. Many were former solders that were surrendered or were captured. The Bush and then clinton adminstration droped the ball and failed to do thorough background checks.
"School Vouchers, Faith-based Intitiatives. Violates the Separation of Church and State, with tax money going to fund parochial schools and to religious organizations."
I agree that federal money to faith based initiatives is wrong. Bush's child left behind law which guarentee's a transfer of any child from a failing school to a top performing school whether the school has space or not is ment to pave the way for more vouchers.
Faith based initiatives is going to result in money being given to some "religious organizations" that are shames set up to collect on the governments pot of gold
"FOURTH AMENDMENT:
-Right to Privacy
--The privacy of literally millions of Americans has been violated without just legal cause. Emails read, people questioned and detained, racial profiling, etc with no legal warrants whatsoever to back it up."
Unfortunitly we live in a world that is very different then the one when the bill or rights was written.
Many of the above do have legal presedent when there is a suspicion of involvement in an issue.
What the NJ troopers did was wrong. Profiling is a valable and needed tool in solving crimes. If used within the framwork or the law it does not illegally descriminate against any one group.
This is another case where the word has taken on a life of there own. Words like descriminate and profiling with many in the public who don't know the real meaning and use it as a crutch.
A descriminate shopper is a good shopper who shops around for products that are both high quaility and priced right
After 9-11, THREE THOUSAND Middle Eastern Muslims in America were detained in Brooklyn without legal cause and without suspicion other than their nation of origin. Some of these people were detained for up to three months with no lawyers, and no charges brought against them.
Does this make it right for the airports to stop me three times because of my appearance? It has happened to me and to a few of my Italian cousins based on our looks.
Theres no easy solution to this. I prefer that we step down our "bite me" foreign policy, and stop pissing off the rest of the world. Not only will this eliminate a lot of the hatred, but it will allow us to step down our security enough to preserve the freedoms that our nation was built upon. The Bill of Rights wasn't created to be changed 200 years down the road.
See, the thing is, and I hope you understand this, such changes as you mention in "our foreign policy" are not just isolated pure changes, no matter if they're based on "righteous thinking". Analyze realistically your current lifestyle. Look at it from a blank slate so to speak. Not that I know anything about you but I'd bet you lack none of the comforts of home. Roof over your head, running hot and cold water, electricity, sanitary environment, clean garments, foods both plentiful and varied, assumption of benign external conditions which will allow you to continually seek greater comfort and pleasures.
In comparison to a very large percent of the world's population, YOU'RE LIVING LIKE A KING! And none of all that....none of it....came without the torturous price being paid for your bounty. In blood, sweat and tears.
I'll join you in this desire. So if we want the world to get a fairer shake, we too gotta be willing to pay the price. Ready to wear those shoes a "little longer"? Mind sharing your toilet? And hell, I don't care about medical care....got good strong genes.
Hahahahahaahahah....... Too rich for words........ Why don't you give us all an example about Canada's 'higher' standard of living. Perhaps your knowledge of canada is more extensive than your understanding of the Bill of Rights.
From the United Nations Human Development Index:
Canada is ranked as the 3rd highest nation.
Life Expectancy: 78.7 years
Adult Literacy Rate: 100%
Combined Primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrollemtn ratio: 97
GDP per capita: $26,251
Life Expectancy Index: .89
Education Index: .98
GDP Index: .93
HDI value: .936
GDP per capita rank minus HDI rank: 3
Also remember that Canada has a much higher level of social services, a virtually nonexistant crime rate, lower inflation, and universal healthcare.
United States is ranked as 6th
Life Expectancy: 76.8 years
Adult Literacy Rate: 99%
Combined Primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrollment ratio: 95
GDP per capita: $31,872
Life Expectancy Index: .86
Education Index: .98
GDP Index: .96
HDI value: .934
GDP per capita rank minus HDI rank: -4
The US has a much lower level of social services, a larger gap in incomes, tens of millions without adequate healthcare, crime rates much much higher than Canada, and higher inflation.
Let's look at that. First, your own data actually shows (without the arbitrary formula) that the US is number one in some respects, and Canada is number one in others.
"Also remember that Canada has a much higher level of social services,"
and more overt rationing of things like health care, which your neighbors do not want and would not vote for.
"a virtually nonexistant crime rate, "
That's easy with a more homogeneous, and smaller population. But look at how the Canadian government treats its indigent Indians and Eskimos - far worse than we treat ours (not that we're so wonderful, though).
"lower inflation,"
Wrong. If there were a difference it would not matter much - with one exception:
"and universal healthcare."
With significant overt rationing. Canada uses a single-payor system. Some Canadians like it, and others think it sucks, so they come across the border to see US doctors.
The public here has fought tooth and nail not to go to such a system. Our health-care system is prone to inflation, but it provides customer-friendly conveniences that Canadians are not used to having. It's not wrong for Canada, but it's not better than what we have.
The US has "tens of millions without adequate healthcare,"
Canada does not have to, and never had to, deal with the kind of economic stratification that we do, so your statement is trite and meaningless. Canada also never had the kind of heterogeneous society we do. Put New York in Canada and its federal government wouldn't know what to do with it. Toronto, while a beautiful city, is a joke compared sociologically to New York.
Canada uses diplomacy more than we do, because Canada doesn't shoulder as much responsibility over world security as we do, and is less capable than we are. The US pays a higher % of the UN budget than anyone else. If there's UN action to be taken, most of it is US forces, with others helping. Look at Korea in the 1950's and Bosnia in the 1990's.
Switzerland is very diplomatic, and neutral. Why? Because nobody has anything to gain from conquering it, and because the Swiss were willing to get naked and into bed with anybody if it was to Swiss advantage (like WW II, when they refused to intervene to prevent the slaughter of millions of Jews on the one hand (and stole concentration camp inmates' money), shot down Axis aircraft in Swiss airspace on the other hand, and were happy to launder money and entertain spies for all comers).
So let's not put Canada on such a pedestal. They don't belong there.
Brother, this is gettin' way O.T. But here's a basic fact. The strong win. No disrespect to the people or government of Canada. But in one sense, Canada is the sucker fish to the American shark. Who'd you rather border....Mexico? Germany? Upper Volta?
As far as what that has to do with foreign policy...uh, how do you think this country has survived and thrived? By being "pleasant" or "respectful" of other countries? Naw man, we had plenty hungry folk here, looking for gelt. And we lucked out to have somehow created the political and financial infrastructure that made our fortunes rise accross the board. The two put together got us here.
There'll always be dumb, unlucky or jealous people looking on. It's the way it is. Either they can utilize the data gained from our "great experiment" and adopt it towards their own respective situations, or they can bitch and moan and try to steal it or destroy it. So we gotta defend ourselves....and yes, our way of life.
Burkina Faso
"Burkina Faso? Disputed Zone? Who called all these weird places?"
First of all, I don't need you or anyone else to teach me anything about courtesy. My comments were directed at a pucilanimous weasel who doesn't work, doesn't pay taxes, lives at my expense and called my President a Bum. I'd say that made him fair game. You chose to inject yourself into the dispute. feel free bo back out any time you wish.
Second, how has this president done anything to abridge anyone's first amendment rights? If anything, he's gone well out of his way to point out that the acts of some fanatical fundimentalist muslims does not reflect the mainstream of islamic thought.
Finally, there is no right of privacy guaranteed by the 4th amendment. Let me repeat that. There is no right of privacy guaranteed by the 4th amendment. That's a perversion of the origional intent of the amendment. The amendment was written to protect against unauthorized searches and seizures. There was never an absolute guarantee of privacy - just the expectation of such without a court-order to the contrary. Do you have evidence that this has been violated by this president? If so, since sucha violation would fall within the realm of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors", I'm sure that ted (backstroke) kennedy and his band of merry dems would love to know about it.
You seem to be quite the expert on his life. Perhaps is NAFTA didn't ship millions of jobs south of the border, he would be working right now.
First Amendment Rights have been violated in terms of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which concerns government support over religions. I outlined that pretty damn clear in a previous post.
And I am well aware that the 4th Amendment in its original wording doesn't protect privacy, but this can fall under unlawful search and seizure, depending on the interpreter. That is the entire purpose of the Constitution--to be a living document that can be amended and interpreted as the times change, although the fundamental principles remain the same. But some people are so narrow-minded that they refuse to escape the 18th century, and follow it word-for-word, which was not the intent. A Protection of privacy is a legal precedent set over the centuries in our court system, which is based on the Fourth Amendment. I could give you a list of cases in which this was upheld if I had convenient access to a law library. Check out the ACLU if you'd like some information on the Bill of Rights, and some of the freedoms that make America so great.
And I described in a previous post how this was violated, with the illegal detainment of Muslims in this country. The Village Voice was just one of the newspapers that published articles concerning this. I'm sure you could research and read about it if you were really that interested in the facts, and were willing to get away from the propaganda spoon-fed to you on mainstream news.
And as far as I'm concerned, this issue is over. I think we should bring this off-topic discussion to an end, since this is not a political message board. Thanks :-)
Thank you very much. It would be sad to see this thread deleted, since originally it really did involve transit, and David doesn't usually surgically delete just the political parts of a thread.
FACT:People were detained because of their suspected Anti-American (terrorist) activities - NOT because they were muslims. They happened to be muslim as were the murderers who hijacked 4 US airplanes on Sept. 11, 2001 and used them to kill nearly 4,000 innocent Americans. There is a significant difference.
As for the illegality of their detention, the courts disagree with your point of view. So unless you hold yourself above the law, you are incorrect once again.
Most not all of those detained had problems with there visa's or were participating in some illegal activity.
Get the facts straight. it is people like you who cause fear in the muslim communities..
Are you aware that the US government has spent $70 million dollars since the last gulf war resettling muslims who were oersecuted by Saddam Hussein . That does not sound like a government that hates muslims.
Don't confuse the govenments attempt to track down an question those who violated thier student or travel visa's with illegally detaining people. They have every right to.
I wished the govenment would crack down harder on illegal immigration.
Especially in NYC it leads to many good paying jobs going to illegal immigrants and contributes to the housing shortage.
Contractors charge customers at rates based on current wages and hire illegal immigrants and pocket the difference. Illegal immigrants from mexico are willing to work at jobs in pizza places and deli's for far less then an american and work ungodly hours. The owners pocket the profits. Many send the money back to mexico where it buys more. I don't blame the people, I blame the politicians on the take who fight to ignor it.
Bad Building owners rather rent to an illegal immigrant because he/she is not going to complain when the heat is not working or the deiling is falling. Plus some landlords charge mexican workers per person making twice the rent as it would be to a normal renter.
It is not smart to cheer the WTC disaster when you don't have your proper paperwork!!!!
Read that article. That's just one of the thousands you will find on the internet relating to the similar subject.
And, I would consider changing your handle.
It fails to mention why many muslim immigrants were detained when they showed up to register. There were either on expired visa's or there visa's were obtained using false or inaccurate information.
Comparing the situation to the 1940's issue with japanease americans is rediculous. For one many of the japanease americans put in camps during the 1940's were ameicans many for more then one generation.
Most of these muslim immigrants detained are not american citizens and are here illegally or provided false information on there visa applications, or were known to be associated with people believed to be involved in terroristic activities
You have to understand that many of these civil liberties groups need to come up with cases to make money to feed there pockets. There interests is purely selfish.
Your allowing them to decide the outcome of the fact pattern for you. read many sources on this issue and put the fact patter together yourself and you will see the truth
If you did nothing wrong and you followed the rules you will not be detained. The fact of the matter is that the INS screwed up over the last 20 years issueing torrist and student visa's without a system of tracking down and rounding up violaters. The INS also did not do adequate background checks on asylum seekers. The INS even resettles some of saddoms inteligence officer seeking asylum after the last gulf war complete with food stamps, medicaid, educational training and housing assistance.
First of all, I don't need you or anyone else to teach me anything about courtesy. My comments were directed at a pucilanimous weasel who doesn't work, doesn't pay taxes, lives at my expense and called my President a Bum. I'd say that made him fair game. You chose to inject yourself into the dispute. feel free bo back out any time you wish.
Second, how has this president done anything to abridge anyone's first amendment rights? If anything, he's gone well out of his way to point out that the acts of some fanatical fundimentalist muslims does not reflect the mainstream of islamic thought. The fact that some islamic institutions have been targetted has been well justified by the discovery that their activities have been linked to the funding of terrist activities to the tune of 10s of millions of dollars in this country alone.
Finally, there is no right of privacy guaranteed by the 4th amendment. Let me repeat that. There is no right of privacy guaranteed by the 4th amendment. That's a perversion of the origional intent of the amendment. The amendment was written to protect against unauthorized searches and seizures. There was never an absolute guarantee of privacy - just the expectation of such without a court-order to the contrary. Do you have evidence that this has been violated by this president? If so, since sucha violation would fall within the realm of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors", I'm sure that ted (backstroke) kennedy and his band of merry dems would love to know about it.
An expectation of privacy which is enforceable. The Patriot Act does get into a grey area there, and people have good reason to be concerned.
This is not to say that the whole act is flawed per se, but that concerns about civil liberties deserve respect.
This is an open forum. There is no such thing as a private conversation on Subtalk, and anyone can butt in anytime. You want to insult Qtraindash in private, use email. Otherwise, expect criticism from others when they think it appropriate.
While he underfunds
Homeland secutity
Medicaid
Education
Economic development(except farm subsidies which to large coorporate farmers)
The end result is that cities like NYC have to raise taxes by twicew as much as the average taxpayer will see in federal tax cuts
Homeland secutity
Medicaid
Education
Economic development(except farm subsidies which to large coorporate farmers)
You missed the worst one... the railroads!
Certain cuts (like the C bus) will bring out the usual "dog and pony" show of elderly and handicapped people, with their (unfortunately all too accurate) sob stories about their lifeline to getting food, prescriptions, medical care and whatever, plus the in-ability to use the Broad St Subway because of fear of crime, and the fact that most of the stations are not ADA compliant. The R8 CHW cut is an attack on Rendell's core constituency- the Mt.Airy-Chestnut Hill middle class pseudo liberals. The R1 will hurt tourism and Airport workers, the R2 will hurt commuters in the northern suburbs, and the R5 cut will piss off the commuters who live "way out there" in Chester and Bucks counties, who don`t want to drive their massive gas-guzzling SUV's into the city where they'll be vulnerable to break-ins. The bus cuts in the Northeast will piss off even more seinor citizens and send a message to the GOP legislators that represent those districts in that part of the city.
In closing, there will be huge, bloody, and nasty battles over whose ox gets gored, and who will get screwed over. Adding to this mess, is the fact that this is an election year for Mayor, and these cuts will be a HUGE issue in an increasingly nasty race between John Street (incumbent) and Sam Katz (challenger).
Stay tuned, this might be more interesting than Bush's dirty little war [at least in Philly].
Very good. You presented a very astute gestalt of the situation. Great post.
Interested parties can try to use www.hallwatch.org to set up a fax bank and fax their elected officials.
vey
vlad
Be careful...there's quite a few Philadelphians here on this board.
Mark
I lived in a few places around the country. All had good and bad.
Mark
Of course, things could be worse. I could live in Baltimore.
: )
Mark
If, however, you are speaking of our no-count transit system, I totally agree.
Mark
If I was to follow your example, I would say that whatever town you are from is filled with people just as ignorant and inconsiderate as yourself and the subway and food SUCK!
So we should not judge another's city's system by looks alone, or by the opinions of the users since they have to ride it everyday. We have to experience it on a daily basis to make an accurate judgement.
With the amount of money that exists in the MTA/TA there is just bound to be smoeone who's going to try & steal some of it.
Some do it in a legal way, i.e. another study of the 2nd Ave STUBway, etc.
However the City goes to the other extreem, i.e. lowest bidder has to get the job ... the City pays & pays for their rigidness on that one.
Washington (HDN) - In a reversal of Republican policy of the last 30 years, the Department of Transportation announced today that in recognition of changes in national transportation priorities since 9-11-01 it has formulated a plan for a vastly-expanded and improved national passenger rail system. “An expanded and more soundly funded rail transportation network complimenting and augmenting the nation’s airlines and interstate highways is necessary for our national security as we enter the more dangerous world of the 21st century, not to mention the effects of a more rational rail-based system on energy efficiency and especially highway congestion,” said Transportation Secretary Norman Minneta at a press conference held in Washington’s recently-renovated Union Station.
“Our proposal to Congress includes $20 billion in capital funding over the next five years to completely rehabilitate the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, the keystone of Amtrak’s national system, which is still operating almost entirely on an infrastructure dating from early in the last century,” said Minneta.
The proposal also includes $5 billion per year for the next 10 years to renew the nation’s national rail passenger network. “These monies are intended to rebuild existing modern Amtrak equipment and acquire new cars and locomotives for a number of new routes, as well as for more realistic compensation to the private freight railroad companies that host these trains,” Minneta continued. “In order to demand on-time performance and new routes we intend to compensate the freight railroads to a level equivalent to current expedited manifest trains, as well as to provide funding for additional facilities actually required for new services.” When questioned as to why operational compensation levels should not be even higher, to the level of the railroads’ most premium freight services, Minneta reminded reporters that Amtrak not only pays its own labor and fuel costs but also continues to relieve the companies of the costs of services required of them for well over 100 years prior to the formation of the nationalized and publicly-subsidized system in 1971.
When quizzed about new services, Minneta said that while marketing studies would have to be conducted to determine where new services are most needed, at least a few conceptual routes were almost certain, most of them neglected north-south and among them Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland south to Atlanta and Florida; Duluth-Minneapolis/St. Paul-Kansas City-Dallas/Ft. Worth-Houston; and Glacier Park-Billings-Denver-Dallas/Ft Worth and Albuquerque-El Paso. An east-west route from St. Louis through Kansas City to Denver is critical, as is restoration of service from Denver to Portland and Seattle as well as Las Vegas and Los Angles, according to Minneta. “We are also looking into making the current three-days-a-week transcontinental Jacksonville – Los Angeles route daily, but with alternate routings between El Paso and New Orleans via San Antonio-Houston and Dallas-Shreveport,” he said.
“These are not the only routes under consideration,” Minneta cautioned, noting that “Railroads have been an indispensable part of our great country’s transportation system, in fact the foundation of this republic, for 175 years. We would not be the United States of America were it not for our railroad network, in fact the veins and arteries of our nation. We have neglected this critical element of our national security for far too long, and now that the need for transportation alternatives has been so cruelly imposed upon us by outside forces it is time to correct this wrong.”
The larger freight railroads that host most of Amtrak’s current passenger trains were not enthusiastic about adding new trains. “We can’t handle the trains we have now,” one official was overheard to say at Minneta’s news conference. When it was later pointed out that his particular railroad once hosted a fleet of premier passenger trains that were operated with pride and efficiency, to the point that employees were disciplined for losing minutes in operating them, in a time when there were many more trains, no computers, not even radio communications, he said, “That was then, this is now. We learned a long time ago that we can’t outperform airplanes and cars, we can’t even outperform trucks, so we don’t sell performance anymore, at least with few exceptions we don’t guarantee it. We sell transportation, pure and simple.” When reminded that Amtrak intended to increase payments for “transportation” substantially in return for performance guarantees, he said, “We’ll look at their proposals,” and refused to answer any more questions.
In related news, House Republican leaders today announced a proposal for an additional $3.5 billion bailout for the nation’s ailing airlines. This would bring total cash bailouts, loan guarantees, and other taxpayer support since 9-11 outside of the aviation trust fund to approximately $30,000,000,000, more than Amtrak has cost the taxpayers in its entire 32-year history.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
If you had not written that, I would not have fallen for it.
Good job!
Hey is that Gate Flight 98, 2000 or 2002?
Anywhere I can get that plane? I uh want to learn to take off from Dallas, and navigate to Crawford. Umm, landing not required.
aPril Fools :)
Bill "Newkirk"
In related news, House Republican leaders today announced a proposal for an additional $3.5 billion bailout for the nation’s ailing airlines. This would bring total cash bailouts, loan guarantees, and other taxpayer support since 9-11 outside of the aviation trust fund to approximately $30,000,000,000, more than Amtrak has cost the taxpayers in its entire 32-year history.
I think that the plan cam about because they just couldn't support the hypocracy any more.
“Our proposal to Congress includes $20 billion in capital funding over the next five years to completely rehabilitate the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, the keystone of Amtrak’s national system, which is still operating almost entirely on an infrastructure dating from early in the last century,” said Minneta.
Keep in mind that Amtrak's starvation diet has preserved such Railfan interests as NORTH PHILADELPHIA tower, amber PRR signals, Pneumatic switch machines, the E60's and the Heritage Fleet. This could wind up biting us in the butt.
Are you "lowwater" on Trainorders, or did you plagiarize it?
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
If you had not written that, I would not have fallen for it.
Good job!
Hey is that Gate Flight 98, 2000 or 2002?
Anywhere I can get that plane? I uh want to learn to take off from Dallas, and navigate to Crawford. Umm, landing not required.
aPril Fools :)
Bill "Newkirk"
Besides that, it had been a while since anyone actually used it. :)
We, who enjoy all that the site provides, should not expect the Webmaster to cover the whole load.
In related news, House Republican leaders today announced a proposal for an additional $3.5 billion bailout for the nation’s ailing airlines. This would bring total cash bailouts, loan guarantees, and other taxpayer support since 9-11 outside of the aviation trust fund to approximately $30,000,000,000, more than Amtrak has cost the taxpayers in its entire 32-year history.
I think that the plan cam about because they just couldn't support the hypocracy any more.
“Our proposal to Congress includes $20 billion in capital funding over the next five years to completely rehabilitate the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, the keystone of Amtrak’s national system, which is still operating almost entirely on an infrastructure dating from early in the last century,” said Minneta.
Keep in mind that Amtrak's starvation diet has preserved such Railfan interests as NORTH PHILADELPHIA tower, amber PRR signals, Pneumatic switch machines, the E60's and the Heritage Fleet. This could wind up biting us in the butt.
---Brian
Of course, now that the north side of the bridge is closed, it would be useful to be able to send B and/or D trains to Brooklyn via Nassau. (For a brief period in the early 80's, D trains actually did go to Brooklyn via Nassau. They used the connection from Broadway-Laf to Essex, relayed on the bridge, and ran down Nassau from there.)
Understood. But NYC isn't static. Downtown has almost as many lines coming into it as midtown, but only 1/4 the workers (as opposed to the 1900s and 1910s, when the IRT and BMT lines were built). So the demand is much lower, especially on Nassau St., which is hit by a double whammy because (a) it doesn't go to midtown at all, unlike the other lines and (b) the areas it serves in north and east Brooklyn are not the most well off.
Vlad
Save the Slants
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
Vlad
Save the Slants
---Brian
too bad !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
---Brian
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
-Stef
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
i rode em on wensday last week
no 7790/7791 7800/7801
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
i rode em on wensday last week
no 7790/7791 7800/7801
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
-Stef
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
-Stef
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
-Stef
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
---Brian
Break me ?????????? R.O .F.L You got a long way before you can Break me lol !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
---Brian
---Brian
---Brian
R-26s had green stickers when they were sunk.
-Stef
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
-Stef
Could this be what I think it is?
thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Either you are mistaken about both the car numbers and the sticker numbers or this is an April Fools joke.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
BTW, an 8 Car Train of R-26/28s last used on the 5 in October were still at Concourse Yard when I saw them a few weeks ago. I wonder what the status is of those cars?
-Stef
Stef that might be what i saw !
Dont you think ????????
---Brian
-Stef
---Brian
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
LOL
..and send the BUSH daughters instead!!
Are you "lowwater" on Trainorders, or did you plagiarize it?
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
http://www.geocities.com/robaking_hotmail/ns.htm
-Robert King
-Robert King
-Robert King
Woulda made a HELL of a subway car museum/ride since when I looked into it with a few potential "sponsors" we were told by all municipalities along the way that they'd ALLOW third rail operation as long as the property was fenced in. :(
It ain't Conrail anymore. CPRail/D&H was denied trackage, end of story until we get our OWN regime change here in Amerikkka. But it's the end of the line for the D&H Voorheesville branch. It'll be weeds and trees. :(
Uh, that's it. Who are you, the upstate Jimmy Breslin??!
Lissen' closely now.
"PLONK"
....`n not a moment too soon.
Oh yes, how can I forget. The expression of opinion is a thought crime. I've already notified the authorities. Kiss me, Taliban Man. We've got a shopping Mall here in Albany you might like. To THINK that our children are over there DYING for people like you so IRAQ gets freedom and you republicans take ours away. Blome.
lol
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
I've really had my fill of the aftermath of the Laissez Fairy turning into roller derby and then into demolition derby at the hands of pinheads who can't even pronouce "NU-CLE-AR" ... agggggh. :(
Im just currious Why are R40 "Slants" getting scrapped early this year ????????
i been told that by frend who is a T/O
ive seen a ttrain of R40 slants with brocken windows with two diesels on each end durring 9:30am today towed away from the coney island yard !
thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
i only saw six cars 4434/4435 4319/4320 and 4267/4268
Hope this Helps !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Doug i think you are mistacken i might be young bu i aint Blind !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
When the R-160 order comes in in a few years, the R-40's will be scrapped, along with the R-38's, the R-40M's, the R-42's, and either the R-32's or the R-44's (depending on who you ask).
Fortunately, some continued in service for a few more years over on the Third Avenue El. Even MOVED over to Webster Avenue just so's I could ride them a few more years before the R12's pushed them off there too.
Still, with all of that said, the R-40 is a very unique looking car. It has that distinctive railfan window. Lotsa eccentricities.
And still the R-32's roll on. They're my fave. I think I'll actually get watery eyes when they start their retirement. The slants have a special place in my heart too, because when I was a youngster, still too short to see out of any railfan window, there were the slants with their window out the front for the vertically challenged.
---Brian
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
from what i ve heard i will be going in this order
R40s
R38
R40M
R42
Doesn that suck !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
So, Hipps, Rinos, 142s & 143s yuck.
The C is very unlikely. I see no reason for them to leave the N. As for the other line, who knows? If they stay on the Brighton express, that's the B -- but Concourse Yard only likes R-68's and R-68A's, so they may have to leave the Brighton express. All that's left is the Brighton local, the Q. Or maybe the G? There was talk a while back of the G moving to CI.
My website "NYCTBA may be down in a few sections of the site because I am redesigning it, apparently my Computer was wiped out and all my files were gone, including the NYCTBA files, so instead Im gonna start off fresh, and redesign the website even better, so check back for frequent updates.
In other News, I have been told that we will be rebuilding the L Line and MAYBE in both directions, this is not a promise, we will be adding new textures and walls, So Look out for that. The S Curve Will be taken out and the new connection will be built in BVE.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
Suggestion - KEEP the old L line with the old curve - no problem with providing multiple RW files in a route package - that'd be the sweetest way of doing it - new and old, choose. Just a thought ...
I will suggest that, Thanks for the idea
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
My sympathies, bro. Rebuilding is a pain in the butt. And now here we are with Billyware taking over the MTA. (and folks wondered why I believed in tokens - they don't crash or lose their little minds) - :)
ps linix servers can get hacked esaly than windows i happend to me once ! That is why my "toweRs" OS is 90%unix and 10% the "GOOD" ol win Xp pro !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
thanks Selkirk
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Billy won't TELL us what's in the box. Strangely though, he handed it ALL over to the Chinese government but not *OURS* ... I *never* run code I don't know about and can't fix. :)
But this is way WAY off topic for here. I make my living though hacking windows (or letting it BE hacked) and then I go back in and find ways to stop it. But until Billy's willing to let those of us in the security business see (and possibly FIX) the holes we DON'T known about (and cannot see) then ain't no way I'm going to stake my business on a Billybox, or our customers.
Amazing though - he lets CHINA see what's in the box, but not America. Meanwhile we're lambasting the FRENCH when we have an enemy WITHIN. :(
Wit all spyware adware and F*****G pop ups nbilt on winbloose tech will evntialy dissued !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Wit all spyware adware and F*****G pop ups bilt on winbloose tech will evntialy dissued !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
---Brian
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
---Brian
--AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
Want reality, or "policy?" :)
I then went to Broadway Junction and wanted to get some J action over Broadway, and ride the J to it's temporary terminal at Myrtle for today's GO. I took a photo stop at Gates Ave on the way. I decided not to deal with the 24 minute headways the M was on today, and headed back east after Myrtle, with another photo stop at Chauncey Ave. I got a photo of a "Z" train (it was about 1:30), that was signed on the front and back as a "Z", but the side signs did say "J - JC-Myrtle Ave". The J wasn't running that great, so decided to get out and walk back to Broadway Junction from Chauncey, after I took a few photos (thus missing a few JC bound J trains). It always seemed fairly close. Well, that was a mistake, as it was a long walk (at least longer than I figured it would be). Although I got a cool photo of the abandoned western-most mezzanine stairways, which look like they are open from the street, give hours of operation, but look like they are going to completely fall off the El structure. It says "Eastern Parkway Station" on those old stairways.
After that I finally got what I wanted. I got an R42 L train at BJ and rode the railfan window back to Halsey. I finally got what I wanted, however did get a bit sad at the railfan window, as not only did I have to say good-bye to a big part of my childhood (Atlantic Station), I basically also sort of officially said good-bye to the L's railfan window view in this probably-last-R42-railfan-window ride I will ever have also on the L - another big piece of my childhood vanishing.
I really enjoyed this quick tour of Atlantic and a small section of Broadway. I officially said my good-bye to both Atlantic Ave, and the L's R42's - not many trainsets left there at all......sigh.........
the 42s the 32s 40ms and the beloved slant 40s all becoming a part of history ! "Damn" time is fast !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Slants a a good pice of history !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
The change was supposed to take place this past weekend, but was squashed due to high winds. This weekend (4/5 & 4/6) the big change is supposed to happen.
GOODBYE SNEIDKER "EL".
Bill "Newkirk"
Well, I managed to catch one of two(?) R-42 sets on the L right away at Union Square, and the midday GO wasn't running, so I went straight to Canarsie and back to Broadway Junction, then the J to Myrtle and the last wrong-railing M of the day to Chambers, where I got off to check out the mainline Redbird scene. (Shall I continue?)
You were luckier than me yesterday! I saw both sets yesterday, but missed them both when I first got to Broadway Junction, and they were headed to Manhattan (two in a row). Luckily I did get one at the end of my trip described above.
I was on the L line for a while yesterday, and I think I had seen much of the fleet. I only saw two sets of R42 and one set of R40M....so you may be right...possibly only two sets left.
This afternoon, I was planning to take the L from Manhattan to Myrtle, ride the M single-track over the bridge to Essex and back
I wanted to do that yesterday also, but due to time constraints (I had to be somewhere later), I couldn't deal with the M's 24 minute headways. The part I did on the J took longer than I expected, especially after staying at Gates Ave for a few train photos, because the J seemed to have long headways also yesterday. I was originally also planning to get off at Kosciuscko too, but I decided to wait until the J was running normal.
and the midday GO wasn't running, so I went straight to Canarsie and back to Broadway Junction, then the J to Myrtle and the last wrong-railing M of the day to Chambers
What GO was supposed to happen on the L today? It was running normal yesterday also.
where I got off to check out the mainline Redbird scene. (Shall I continue?)
Always love to hear that.....
I had a copy of the schedule with me so I knew I wouldn't have to wait long. I had actually wanted to stay on the L to Myrtle and get the M there, but I didn't know if I'd have enough time for that, so I transferred to the J. Naturally, I just missed one, and headways did seem to be greater than usual. But I caught the M in time, though someone had already claimed the window.
What GO was supposed to happen on the L today? It was running normal yesterday also.
Single-track shuttle between BJ and Canarsie, scheduled for weekday middays until April 11. It was probably cancelled the entire week because of the weekend's setback.
Always love to hear that.....
Sure.
I got to Brooklyn Bridge around 3. At 3:29 (according to my watch), a Redbird set pulled in on the SB track. I grabbed the reverse railfan window and rode to Utica, and then claimed the railfan window for the ride all the way up to Woodlwn (as the front rollsign calls it -- really!). I had hoped to ride back down on the same train, at least to 149-GC and possibly all the way to Fulton or into Brooklyn, but it was removed from service, so I returned to 149-GC on the R-142 (Bombardier) set across the platform. This happened at about 5:13.
Redbird: N9232-9233-9240-9241-9160-9161-9303-9302-9109-9108S
Only 9232-9233 had bona fide orange stickers. 9240-9241 and 9303-9302 had orange-over-black, 9160-9161 had plain black (9160 had its bulkhead signs set as a 5 to Dyre), and 9109-9108 had no stickers.
R-142: N7136-7137-7138-7139-7140-7180-7179-7178-7177-7176S
Lots of Redbirds in Concourse Yard. These are the reserve cars, I presume.
---Brian
My aim this Sunday is to both ride and photograph -- specifically on the Livonia el. At weekend headways, there's no guarantee that any will be running, but I'm hoping at least one will be out there due to the increased run time. You in?
I would assume you are correct because whatever was the reason for the canceled Go was probably finishing touches on the new alignment AFTER it was in effect. Since it didn't happen - no need for the GO.
DO you know how that single tracking was supposed to run? It seems like a long stretch for only one train to run back and forth. When they would do track work on the M for example, between Metro and Myrtle, they would single track it, but in two sections meeting at Wyckoff or Seneca, depending on where they were doing the work. It's easier there because of island platforms, and easy to switch between connecting trains fast, and without stairs. The L doesn't have that luxury in the middle stations. Sutter, Livonia and New Lots, the stations in the middle, are all side platforms. And it wouldn't make much sense for it to meet at 105th St. So it sounds like this single tracking train could actually be the ONLY train running back and forth? Looooooooong headways!
I rode it a few weekends ago -- after transferring from the 3, which was also single-tracking in the same area, between Utica and Livonia.
I understand it may rain this weekend.
There are (were) three platforms and 6 tracks at Atlantic Ave. I'm going to look towards Canarsie, and call the current Manhattan-bound platform - platform 1, middle platform - platform 2, Canarsie-bound-platform - platform 3.
What ran where and in what direction?
-The left of platform 1 has been abandoned for years.
-The right of platform 2 is the current Manhattan bound Canarsie/14th Street line. Was it always?
-The left and right of platform 2 has been abandoned for years. What service ran there, and in what directions.
-The left of platform 3 has been abandoned for years, and will be the new Manhattan bound Canarsie/14th ST Service.
-the right of platform is the current Canarsie bound Canarsie/14th St service.
I know one service missing is the Canarsie/Fulton El service. Which tracks did that use.
What was the third service? Canarise/Broadway El? Did that use the middle platform? I thought it used the same tracks that the current Canarsie/14th St service uses (pre snediker el abandonment).
Platform 1:
Left - Downtown Fulton Service Lefferts-Sands St (Park Row) or (Futon Ferry). Also, possible Fulton (Lefferts)-Bway-Lex?
Right - Canarsie-14st or Canarsie-Bway El
Platform 3:
Left - Fulton service from Sands St or (Park Row) or (Futon Ferry)to Lefferts or Bway El to Canarsie or Lex-Bway-Fulton (Lefferts
Right - 14 st - Canarsie
Platform 2:
May have been used for trains terminating at Atlantic of 14th St -Lefferts service? What about Fulton Expresses west of Atlantic since between Atlantic and Franklin the El was 3 track dual-contract elevated.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
I think all four of them were for the Fulton El, merging into three tracks to the east and three merged into two to the west, the fourth went into the yard, or something like that...
That was a big mistake. While these mezzanines need not be converted back to fare controls, they at least could have been modified with HEET's as an alternate exit/entrance. If crime and vandalism is a big threat, then they could have abandoned just the mezzanine part and left the stairways for the HEET's. The fare controls at the other end could have been used as a cross under.
Unfortunately, the purge of unused "el" mezzanines was before Metrocard. But at least, they could have left them, but who knew ? I've seen some formerly abandoned fare controls reopened as Metrocard entrances. One might be the southbound Atlantic Ave IRT, which is undergoing rehab. If you go all the way to the south end of the #2 & #3 platform, that long unused exit had new fluorescent lighting installed. Possibly future Metrocard entrance ?
Bill "Newkirk"
True, you are right, I didn't think of it that way. Actually, I was going to post a question about this in a future post, but you may have already partially answered it, but I guess it seems fitting to ask now.
My question is this. On the Broadway El, they seemed to rebuild the platform stairways to all the abandoned mezzanines, even though they are currently still closed. At those stations, the canopies originally did not fully cover the stairways (at either the in use or abandoned stairways). During the renovations on Broadway, they went through great lengths to not only extend the canopies completely over the in use stairways, but also did that over the abandoned stairways at the opposite ends which are still abandoned. Even the stairs were replaced.
I was going to ask why they even bothered to do this, but you may have answered my question. Maybe they were thinking that as ridership rises at some of the Broadway El stations due to a lot of the contruction in the neighborhood going on there, they may actually open some of these abandoned exits to MetroCard only mexxanines?
In this way, all the neglect to the subway stations along the Broadway El may actually be a plus for those stations. Most of the extra mezzanines at elevated stations that had more use all along, thus better kept stations, did loose these extra mezzanines, while Broadway's stations that were much neglected in the past due to lower ridership got to keep them in the general neglect of the stations.
Without the Atlantic Ocean, there won't be an East River.
And all of the new east coast volcanos that will form will probably have destroyed NYC long before.
Well then I probably won't be here to make one of these trips.
Maybe they should leave the Snediker el. That's gotta be long enough for four or five trainsets right there.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
---Brian
and
the Inquirer article
Thanks
rob@rodcogroup.com
Obviously a railroader's lantern, but I could not make out all the lettering on it.
Tom
Thanks
ROB
Sean
Temple University
I think it's important to remmeber that the spur as originally planned was part of a much larger line that was never built. Which brings me to a question: what would you like to see become of this service? I remember a neat idea one subtalker had for extending it northwest, still under Ridge Avenue past where it meets Broad Street. I don't remember where he said it should ultimately go, but I would continue in the same northwest direction to provide subway service to Germantown.
Other ideas?
Mark
Sean
Temple University
What killed the planned route was NIMBYs in the Rittenhouse Sq area(they were a problem back in the eary part of last century, particularly this type of people, they were Philly`s wealthiest and most powerful residents back then), and the general inability to get things done in this city (a problem that exists to this day). The city gave up on this route, eventually settling on the alternatives that exist today (the Subway-Surface tunnel to 40th st, and the eventual use of the Locust St Subway, which gave way to its use by PATCO today).
The spur's glory days are past, particularly since the demise of 2 out of the three department stores that once crowded 8th and Market, Gimbels and Lit Brothers. I remember the traffic on the spur filled a four car train, not the tiny two car train SEPTA now runs. Now the spur is a shortcut to the Gallery, as well as commuting students from NJ going to Temple U. If the subway was being built today, the spur would not have been built.
Sean
Temple University
Sean
Temple University
There is also a shitty concourse leading from North Broad Street and Arch to the 15th Street/Suburban Station complex, but I doubt it's what you were talking about.
a one time poster "bobw" IIRC had a map.
Of course given the evolution of the 'homeless' much has been closed off.
Sean
Temple University
Mark
Sean
Temple University
Sean
Temple University
Sean
Temple University
The No Broad Concorse ran from the north end exit of BS City Hall Sta. uphill to Race St. - as it crossed Arch St. the quite deep stairways gave evidence of the distribution system where it would have curved under office building now closed (SE cor Broad St. at Arch St)
Also the No Broad concorse connected Reading RR station (Now motel) with No Phila Subway Sta at Lehigh Ave and two blocks north with PRR No Phl Sta.
I rode the "spur" once in a while in the early eighties when the B1 cars were still used. I was amused at the sight of the conductor working with his door open and reading a newspaper and only looking up and out the window to see if anyone was being scraped or dragged by the departing train.
-Stef
P.S. Will try and hit the sheets early, gotta 7AM meeting with Sparky. Time to work on the Lady In Red....
---Brian
FOR EVERY R143 THAT ARRIVES, WE ARE GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER TO PUTTING THE R40 SLANTS INTO A COFFIN!!!
If the redbirds being sunk doesn't strike a nerve for some of those here - maybe THAT will!
---Brian
http://talk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/subtalk.cgi?read=469114
---Brian
Would I really want to ride in a Redbird? No question.
IIRC, you ride the 7. It's widely acknowledged that the 7's Redbirds are in much worse condition than the R-33's that used to run on the 2 and 5. Most of them were never "rusted out."
No, YOU DON'T LOVE THEM, because if you did, you'd KNOW THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO.
Hmmm, because of that the:
R40
R40M
R42
R32
R38
R62
R62A
R44
R46
and especially the
R68 and R68A should all go also.
Which Redbirds? The ones on the 7 are very different from the ones just removed from the 5, you know.
Scractchiti is common.
On all subway cars.
I find that the seating was actually spread out, leaving spaces in them, allowing trash to build up.
There are gaps between seats on all subway cars. If you don't think the car cleaners are doing their job properly, that's hardly the fault of the cars themselves.
Some of the end doors open and close randomly,
The storm doors? At least it's possible to walk between cars safely. On the R-142's, only three-armed mutants can walk between cars safely.
If a door latch is broken, it can be repaired or replaced.
the announcement quality aren't as good, etc...
Not as loud, you mean (but they don't have a loud HVAC system to compete against, so they don't need to be as loud). C/R's on Redbirds tend not to announce the B and D trains at Atlantic Avenue, they don't announce late night local trains as expresses, and they don't announce PATH at Park Place. They modify their announcements for the GO's that they know about. They often give useful information about the available transfers instead of a flat list of numbers and letters. They pace their announcements appropriately so they don't have to cut themselves off mid-sentence to close the doors at a quiet station. And each one speaks slightly differently. I used to enjoy riding the 2/5 in the Bronx. Now I dread hearing that voice make the exact same announcements I heard last time in the exact same way.
I love the Redbirds, but I know when they have to go.
The ones on the 5 that just went through SMS were in perfectly good shape and would have easily lasted a few more years. Instead, they were pulled, and now we're left with the cars that really are in poor shape.
I'm talking about the 7's Redbirds, solely. From my experiences, the ML's Redbirds were better to go.
On all subway cars.
Yeah, I already figured that out from reading GP38's post.
There are gaps between seats on all subway cars. If you don't think the car cleaners are doing their job properly, that's hardly the fault of the cars themselves.
The gaps on the 7 that I find are much wider than other rolling stocks. So much you can stick your hand there, but point taken. I did exaggerate.
The storm doors? At least it's possible to walk between cars safely. On the R-142's, only three-armed mutants can walk between cars safely.
That's a matter of opinion. I see people on the 6 using the end doors all the time. I have no problem with it as well.
Not as loud, you mean (but they don't have a loud HVAC system to compete against, so they don't need to be as loud). C/R's on Redbirds tend not to announce the B and D trains at Atlantic Avenue, they don't announce late night local trains as expresses, and they don't announce PATH at Park Place. They modify their announcements for the GO's that they know about. They often give useful information about the available transfers instead of a flat list of numbers and letters. They pace their announcements appropriately so they don't have to cut themselves off mid-sentence to close the doors at a quiet station. And each one speaks slightly differently. I used to enjoy riding the 2/5 in the Bronx. Now I dread hearing that voice make the exact same announcements I heard last time in the exact same way.
No, the announcements I hear on the 7 have plenty of static which I know is a problem the TA can't handle, unfortunately. Other than that, a good read.
The ones on the 5 that just went through SMS were in perfectly good shape and would have easily lasted a few more years. Instead, they were pulled, and now we're left with the cars that really are in poor shape.
Which proves my point. I think the MTA should have gotten rid of the WF's cars, move the ML cars to Corona and then start bringing the new rolling stock to the ML. I guess the MTA could have done that.
Finally, I'd like to say I was talking about the 7's Redbirds if you weren't aware of that before. I sohlud have also mentioned the fact that these cars are made of carbon steel have doomed us to this situation we have right now of reefing them. There, that was a doozy. :)
-Stef
I really really hope that at least one of them will be out on Sunday for the GO. (I'd prefer to see one on the 5, but that seems quite unlikely.)
As for R142s bumping out de boids, it's all over!!! Last roster had 12 on #5 and highly unlikely a ten-pack will appear. It'll be scratchittied 'X-Men' R142s from now on. CI peter
wayne
I understand from past discussions, that PATH Trains could physically run on the Lex tracks, but the curves would be too sharp in the New Jersey Tunnels to allow the NYCT Division A Trains to run on the PATH.
Besides the obvious political problems, what are some of the other issues and how realistic is this goal.
---Brian
Sounds like all it needs is $1 billion, give or take (which probably makes it very unrealistic). With a moderate amount of construction, the 6 and the PATH could each be extended underneath Vesey St., allowing trains to run between the Lex local and either Hoboken or Newark.
The other question is, how valuable is this? It sounds like it would still be quicker to get from Newark to GCT the old fashioned way, via Penn Station. And Hoboken will be getting less important once the Secaucus transfer is completed.
NJ almost certainly has far higher priorities to fund, while NY has no real reason to fund this.
Hoboken is a vibrant city filled with people who work and play in manhattan. Such a connector would dramatically increase housing development on the other side of the river.
It would also add addtioal office development along the path tracks as it make it easier for NYC residents to work in hoboken, jersey city and along other path stations.
I agree with that. Look at all the transportation options available there. Train, streetcar, subway, bus, ferry. A place with all that cannot help but remain prominent in the local scheme of things. With the LRT getting extended northwards, even submerging into a lengthy subway stretch, the entire "Gold Coast" is taking on a true urban character.
There's already development happening along the tracks.
Arti
I seriously doubt that. Unless a person has some hatered toward PATH, one has no reason to use Secaucus transfer. Timewise it's almost a wash (look at NJT timetables and not taking into account of NJT to Penn being less reliable than to Hoboken) but in Hoboken you get an empty train, more destinations and air conditioned place to wait the departure.
Making Secaucus a terminal instead of Hoboken, extending PATH and terminating NJT Turnpike buses there could make this investment perhaps useful, IMHO.
Arti
PATH from HOB to 33RD takes the same time as NJT from Secaucus to Penn.
Arti
I agree, 1/2 billion later, nothing really has changed.
Arti
Could PATH still build their 9th Street Crosstown line to the east side, and then up to Grand Central? Or have developments like the 6th Avenue NYCS tracks cut off this option?
Yes, it does, but it can't handle it.
---Brian
The local can handle more traffic below 42nd St., especially uptown in the morning and downtown in the evening.
Additionally, PATH trips are B Division style, so either PATH would need to change sides or all cars used for this service would need dual trips.
Could PATH still build their 9th Street Crosstown line to the east side, and then up to Grand Central?
There's a piece of the tunnel there, actually. But you don't want to use it as it would involve an at-grade crossover, blocking both directions of the existing PATH service when merging. The H&M was built entirely with flying junctions (in fact, they abandoned the original south uptown tunnel because of this) except for the 9th St. spur.
PATH cars use lower profile wheels than NYCT. IRT cars would run the risk of scraping the tunnel ceilings.
Bill "Newkirk"
It wouldn't need more track capacity if you just extend the 6 from Brooklyn Bridge to the PATH tracks. That doesn't make it a good idea, however.
STOOPIT IDEA!
Not if it attaches to the local tracks at BB.
"2) where in GCT or any place else do they propose to turn the foolish things."
Run them all the way to Pelham Bay.
"STOOPIT IDEA!"
I can't see that this is the best use for $1 billion or so, and I don't see either NY or NJ funding it, but it's not totally moronic either.
I believe that the sides of PATH are more steeply sloped inward above the belt line.
The PATH PA series cars are 48' long while NYCT IRT cars are 51' long.
Bill "Newkirk"
51' x 10 = 510'
48' x 11 = 528'
So just run 11 car trains.
So just run 11 car trains.
That certainly doesn't work at GCT, unless you make the end doors inoperative. It would be pretty expensive to extend the local platforms by 18'. There are almost certainly pillars supporting buildings above in the way. And you'd end up with a seriously curved platform.
You're assuming the existing space between the ends of the cars and the doors hasn't already been used in making the GCT platforms serve 10-car IRT trains.
I think you mean that PATH tunnels can accommodate IRT trains but IRT tunnels might not accommodate PATH trains.
But in this post Joe V says "IRT cars are 2 inches higher", and he suggests that IRT cars might not fit into PATH tunnels. Which way round is it, and do you agree with Joe V's conclusions?
The tunnel would have to split off from the current City Hall loop somewhere around the front of the abandoned platform (hope thet front part isn't landmarked), pass over the 2/3 tunnen coming across City Hall Park from Park Place to Beekman St. and then start diving down, so it can get under not only the N/R Broadway tracks at Vescey St. but also the A/C tracks coming down Church and turning onto Fulton St. from there, it would continue to descend, before connecting up with the current PATH tracks after they leave the rebuilt WTC station.
As for the uptown terminal, the trains couldn't be turned at Grand Central, but they can be turned on the center track between 59th and 68th Sts. on the local, and 59th St. is as logical a terminal for it as Grand Central (the Low Vs were turned their back in 1979 during their special runs on the Lex as part of the 75th anniversary IRT celebration).
On the other hand, hooking the PATH tracks up to the Lex via either a grade crossing at Ninth St. and Sixth Ave. or by splitting a line off between the Christopher and Ninth St. stations and running it across West Fourth Street would be far cheaper, since it would avoid having to dig under as many lines. Ninth St. would be the cheapest option of all, since the start of the tunnel is already there and the trains could hook into the Lex local tracks south of Union Square, but a West Fourth tunnel would allow for no grade crossing and two additional area stations. The PATH trains could stop at Astor Place on the Lex, and then have another stop at West Fourth St. and Sixth Ave. -- using part of the mezzanine between the Eighth Ave. IND trains upstairs and the Sixth Ave. trains downstairs as the platform.
Neither is likely to happen unless the PA, MTA, New York and New Jersey all suddenly find better peace, love and understanding, but it is interesting to speculate about.
Routing the Downtown 6 to WTC isn't THAT hard - there are 2 tracks already alongside the Lex Express to Fulton which could be used without touching the City Hall Loop. They still go OVER the 7th Avenue Express and the line would need to go under the Broadway Local if not under the 8th Avenue Line.
Coming back uptown is harder. It might be easiest to dig under everything, build a new platform below the existing Lex Local Uptown Platform at Brooklyn Bridge before rising to take the local tracks.
Not quite the Coney Island Cyclone, but not practical for a New York City subway car (to be fair, you could reopen the original H&M tunnel into/out of the old Hudson Terminal station and slope the trains down gradually to meet the PATH tubes somewhere under the World Financial Center, but you'd still have to figure a way to get the tunnel past both the N/R tracks on Vescey and the A/C tracks turning off Church and onto Fulton).
It would not be 59th Street, it would be Pelham Bay Park. The NWK-WTC and the 6 become one in the same, still with the ability to loop trains back as they do now.
The uptown PATH is to slow and means an at grade junction at 9th Street.
The downtown Manhattan tubes will be under-utilized with ridership expected to be down 25%. Reverse peak 6 trains are also very under-utilized. PATH is also setting up EXPL and WTC to accomodate 10 car trains. The other stations to Newark can be easily converted, including Grove Street.
And going from the City Hall loop to PATH would be the smaller of the two concerns. Getting the trains up from the PATH station to Brooklyn Bridge would be the biggest obsticle to overcome.
If the trains stopped at the outer (furthest east) platform at the new PATH station, it would then have to make a sharp right turn onto Vescey St. from a full stop and begin going uphill. Remember, because of the slope of the streets in lower Manhattan, the City Hall loop, which is two levels below the ground there, is the equiavlent of street level at Vescey and Greenwhich. The 1/9 tunnel at Cortlandt St. is one level below that, and the PATH station is three levels beneath the IRT tracks.
That means in a stretch of five blocks, with a 45-degree curve at Vescey and B'way/Park Row, the tracks would have to rise four levels, or roughly 60 feet, to connect the PATH tracks with the IRT Lex tracks. And the tracks would have to make that 60 foot climb by the time the tunnel got to Park Row and Beekman St., because the tracks have to go above the 2/3 tracks coming across the park.
There are other climbs of similar steepness -- the Culver express tracks coming from one level below the local at the start of Carroll St. to the Smith-9th viaduct is the most obvious example. But trains there get a running start at the climb. These trains would have only slightly more ability to pick up speed than the N/R does around the Vescey curve, which would mean either a very s-l-o-w climb to B'klyn Bridge or would require special cars with more powerful motors, a la the old Low V Steinways for the Flushing line.
It could be done, but it would be both more costly to dig and mre problematic to run than a connection either across West Fourth or Ninth streets. And the grade crossing at Ninth St. would be a problem (which is why I think a West Fourth hookup with a flying junction beneath Christopher St. at Sheridan Square would be better), but if the decision was ever made to hook up PATH and the IRT, they would just have to do a cost/benefit anaylsis and see if the savings in construction was worth the future delays in time.
"PATH is FRA compliant; the Lex is not. Legally, you couldn't do it at all."
This is a non-answer. Getting the law amended is child's play compared to the other problems that would need to be solved.
You're seriously underestimating this. Do you understand the quagmire you just stepped into?
It would be as difficult a single issue as any other, not more and not less.
Serious. It make the economics of installing such a system a more compelling argument.
Concider yourself lucky that the MTA is so inept and does not already have ATO running system wide.
Enjoy the handle while you can. Subway train operators will got the way of the Elevator operator withing the next 50 years
Don't be surprised if freight lines go to automated operation over the next 20 years. As it is, it is almost impossible to stop a long freight train based on visual observations.
I don't hate train operators or engineers. I am just being realistic
Seems that this proposal, which was discussed in this forum, may be picking up steam.
Also see http://www.nj-arp.org/path_lex.html
for the original proposal dated 18JUL2002.
If the two systems (IRT and PATH) are compatible, and it seems that they probably are, this seems to be a very good plan.
The line would provide a one-seat ride from Newark to Pelham Bay Park via the WTC and Grand Central. The work should be eligible for FEMA funding, as it improves transit in Lower Manhattan, unlike the Fulton Center which has no transit benefit.
There are only 3 differences between IRT and PATH cars that I see: IRT cars are 2 inches higher, PATH truck centers are 3 feet closer, and PATH cars have a longer draft gear with possibly more swing. It does not automatically render thru-rounting of some #6's to NWK an impossibility.
All that would have to be done is make whatever clearances needed on PATH for an R142A and get them double tripcocks.
Or as MTA puts it: "Fulton Street Transit Center: The $750 million project will improve access to and connections between 12 subway lines for hundreds of thousands of daily commuters and Lower Manhattan residents and visitors, and will link NYC Transit facilities with PATH service and the World Trade Center site."
So $750 million of FEMA money is to be squandered on pedestrian links with fancy architecture.
Unlike the Fulton Center, the PATH — Lexington link would be a transit link.
The illustration on The New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers site shows the PATH terminal grayed out, suggesting that it would not be needed. Instead, through trains would stop at a new regular subway station. The money saved by not building the Fulton Street Transit Center and by not building the permanent PATH terminal should go a long way towards paying for the PATH — Lexington link, the subway station, and the modifications that you mention.
The new line would have to pass under the 1/9 and under the N/R, but would it pass under or over the A/C and the 2/3?
The NJ-ARP plan seems to show the new line passing over both the A/C and the 2/3, but it's not very clear. J Lee had the line passing under the A/C but over the 2/3. And you envision a line passing under both the A/C and the 2/3. I don't know which of these ways of threading the needle are feasible. But I think your solution would work, because there are sidings (the yard) south of City Hall that pass under the 2/3, as shown on the track maps on this site.
I am not sure what difficulties if any would arise from the northbound merge with the City Hall loop.
Of course if all trains were through trains there would be no more need for the City Hall loop or for the PATH loop terminal.
How many people are clamoring for a one-seat ride between Newark and Pelham Bay Park?
The work should be eligible for FEMA funding, as it improves transit in Lower Manhattan, unlike the Fulton Center which has no transit benefit.
The Fulton Transit Center does indeed have numerous transit benefits. It creates new connections between a number of lines that never had them, improves connections that previously existed (thereby reducing commute times), and reduces dwell times at Fulton Street by improving passenger circulation along the platforms. It also makes the station ADA compliant.
Go ahead and argue—if you want—that these benefits aren't worth the cost, but at least you should have your facts straight.
None, but there is a demand to get from Jersey to Grand Central, and from the Lex local line to the financial district.
The Fulton Transit Center does indeed have numerous transit benefits.
Admittedly the new pedestrian connections will save time and add convenience, and I was wrong to ignore those benefits.
Seems that this proposal, which was discussed in this forum, may be picking up steam.
Also see http://www.nj-arp.org/path_lex.html
for the original proposal dated 18JUL2002.
1) PATH would have to be resignaled. Trippers would have to be moved.
2) What about PATH employees, their unions ? They're not civil service.
3) My earlier post stated that PATH wheels are low profile while NYCT cars sit higher.
4) You can't run ten car trains on PATH.
This idea ranks with extending the #7 line to New Jersy as talked about a few years ago and the recent ranting about taking over the Cranberry tubes (A Line) for LIRR WTC - Jamaica service. Save the billion or so dollars for the SAS.
Bill "Newkirk"
I see that the map was produced by the Lower Manhattan Development Corp, which suggests that this project was considered eligible for FEMA funding. It's too late now, but there would have been no need for a permanent PATH terminal. A regular subway station would have been built at WTC instead. The advantages would have been to connect the Lexington local line to the financial district and Jersey, and to connect Jersey to the Lexington local line including Grand Central.
Also, there is a difference in the signalling system of PATH from NYCT. PATH uses the NORAC system (same as LIRR) which is a North American mainline standard signalling system. In short, it is a system of various lights and their positions relative to one another. Whereas the IRT system -- like the rest of NYCT subways -- is based on color aspects and their meanings when used in various combinations.
http://www.nycsubway.org/nyc/path/path-signals.html
Totally unrealistic when the Lex Ave IRT tracks are at 110% capacity during both rush periods. Express is max out at 24 tph, locals a bit more at around 25-26 tph. And they want to add PATH trains to Grand Central with at least 10 TPH more? Oh, I forgot, where will PATH trains relay?
DUH!
"The Central Line is to be restored to the centre of London from first thing on Thursday morning, 3 April.
Tube Managing Director Paul Godier announced the return of a limited service to the busiest part of the Central Line to MPs at a House of Commons Select Committee hearing today.
The restoration of limited services means that two shuttles introduced in recent weeks on the west and east sections of the Central Line will effectively be 'joined up', with services finally running through the capital's West End."
Peace,
ANDEE
The MTA IG's office is a separate entities then any of the operations the operate bus, rail and bridges units. They do not report to any of the Presidents of say NYC Transit or LIRR.
Concidering the IG's office released made public there findings on the 2 broadway case yesterday leads me to believe that they may be looking into other matters concerning corruption in construction contracts.
This involves going through hundreds of boxes of paper records, talking to confidentional informants on the ground. These cases take months to put together inorder to successfully procecute the case.
I have personally headed up involving fraud in construction contracts similar to the 2 broadway case. It is not as cut and dry as it may seem. Most likely in the two broadway case, the investigators suspect that $50 million is actually stolen but $5 million is they can prove with a reasonable doubt in court.
Most of these cases are assisted by CI turncoast who rat out people higher up the chain.
If the MTA had robust real time database of all construction activities that tracks quality of past work, who is subcontracting on the project, all transaction including all material purchaces, where and when the material were used, all supliers on the jobs, who is working onthe job, what hours, credentials etc the MTA would save billion of dollars a year. YES BILLIONS.
The database would be able to flag any improper behavior by contracts immediatly prior to the MTA loosing money. If the contractors know this they will be less likely to flargrantly participate in these fradulant activities.
I currently work for a consulting company that deploys the above technology.
The security chief appears to want to work on cases that are the juridiction of the IG's office. The problem we had over at DOI and most likely is the same at the MTA IG's office and the office of is that the security director goal may be differnt then that of the IG's office. The IG wants to procecute construction fraud cases and the secutity director is looking to close securties varnabilites that these contractors may have access to.
Making public certain allagation prior to the IG having all the information it needs to procecute the case would jeperdise the IG's Case. It is the classic case of a power struggle when crimainal security cases overlap with operational finacial cases. I have seen this a number of time's where two teams are investigating the same person or company for two different matters. The matter is ussually settled by an outside third party with one side loosing there case.
Lets not start throwing the coverup word around prior to knowing all the facts for which the public will not be shared with
The security director can help reduce vulnerabilities to fraud. The IG can help by providing trends in what he has had to prosecute.
2) The IG can then prosecute whatever fraud doesn't get blocked by the security director's actions.
Lets not kid ourselves to think Pataki does not have influence over the IG's office to stop a particular investigation
Well, more like "there's room for interpretation."
Part of the problem is that Anemone is like an attack dog. That's both good and bad. But he will agggressively move against something he thinks is within his domain, and try to put the fear of God in people who get in his way. It also tends to allow him to take shortcuts which land him in trouble.
To some extent, his style was useful when he was Chief of Department and running Compstat sessions. (But you can still take that too far).
But in his new job, where an Xacto Knife (spelling?) is more appropriate than a sledgehammer, he kept swinging the sledgehammer.
And there's just no excuse for lying.
"Lets not kid ourselves to think Pataki does not have influence over the IG's office to stop a particular investigation"
True, true, though even Pataki has to weigh the risks.
Don't get your issues confused. Anemone was deposed and he betrayed everyone's trust. He both legally and morally met the standard for dismissal, period. There's no controversy there at all.
His question of criminal guilt or innocence will be decided in court.
The issue of corruption in the agency is a separate one, serious and deserving of investigation.
I shouldn't have said what I said. But are you sure that there is no controversy regarding what he did?
There is plenty of controversy over the specific details - but that's for Richard Brown, the District Attorney, to work out in court.
Peace,
ANDEE
It is called the "LiveCrashCam" and is set up tp point at a spot where Metro-North goes on a bridge over a street in Port Chester, NY. A lot of trucks hit the bridge so this guy set up a ca mto watch it. It updates about every 5 seconds. This sohuld make for some good train watching :) Read here for talk about the bridge and the truck crashes. Also includes photos.
---Brian
http://bwass.net
It is called the "LiveCrashCam" and is set up to point at a spot where Metro-North goes on a bridge over a street in Port Chester, NY. A lot of trucks hit the bridge so this guy set up a cam to watch it. It updates about every 5 seconds. This should make for some good train watching :) Read here for talk about the bridge and the truck crashes. Also includes photos.
---Brian
---Brian
---Brian
There is also a link (lost it) to a webcam on the flushing line I think near 33rd Street. When it first came on I was all excited seeing the first R62 train or two there, now it could be useful for the remaining redbirds.
Does anyone still have that link? I used to enjoy sitting here in England and watching Redbirds live in Queens....
What isn't funny about those trucks is that we had an overpass like that in Cincinnati, that met the road at an angle and turned the trucks over when they hit. A truck turned over onto a car and, well, let's just say it's the truck driver who survived. No, truck drivers don't read signs, they meet schedules. Sad.
---Brian
Chuck Greene
---Brian
What route is this and is it a heavy truck route?
How are these bridges measured? I'm sketchy about an actual measurement since a truck a hair over the clearance of a bridge can actually overtake it by smudging through. Yet, there is another concrete flatbridge under the NEC under Grove Av., that is signed as 13'-10", (the road dips down) although truckers doubt their trucks can get through.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/72128p-66867c.html
I'm surprised. The temptation to use money just because it's there can be overwhelming. There's not much wrong with South Ferry; I'm glad to see they're rethinking spending $500 million to fix the little that is wrong just because FEMA will pay.
There's a lot that's wrong with South Ferry. You may not be familiar with the demands placed on a station like that, and the impact of not having access for the disabled and others who need a more accessible station.
"I'm glad to see they're rethinking spending $500 million to fix the little that is wrong just because FEMA will pay."
You're not making sense, unless you only intend to serve die-hard railbuffs. They're rethinking the design because of its impact on the park, and that's fine. I don't think they should sautomsatically spend $500 million on it, but as someone very familiar with the environs and ADA, I do think (and so do a lot of people ) that the station can be improved and modernized to accept 10 train cars. And as an important terminal for the ferry, and an important feeder into what will be the new WTC, that's very important.
I agree. Just I don't see why they can't just extend the platform westward along the track and put in an elevator. More like $100 million than $500 million.
OK. I agree with you that this should be done inexpensively if possible - but considering that South Ferry is a terminal, hooks up to the Ferry, and is the West End's major rail artery, spending some money to redo it properly isn't a bad idea.
The MTA's idea of redoing it properly reduces the the West End's major rail artery's capacity from 40 tph to 20 tph.
If you have a better idea, write to MTA with it and post their reply here.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/72128p-66867c.html
Meanwhile, rebuilding officials exploring a one-seat ride from lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport are looking at a plan to create a "hybrid" subway car that could use existing rail lines and the light-rail AirTrain tracks connecting the airport to Jamaica Station, sources said.
---Brian
wayne
---Brian
Peace,
ANDEE
I agree. The only design that could possibly be worse, and impossible to do is what some Subfans proposed. :0)
i like the sound of the idea !
even better some R40 "slants"
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
But you don't know how to do that. It's easy to call someone else's project a toy; much harder to prove you actually have a better idea that can work.
"Better yet, we'd be seeing trains passing newly-rebuilt stations like Ozone Park-101 Avenue, Woodhaven, Brooklyn Manor-Jamaica Ave, Parkside, Rego Park etc."
But you don't know how to do that either. Talk is cheap. You can say whatever you want about AirTrain or the Port Authority, but they have a lot more to show for their efforts than a few Subtalk posts.
A one-unit train of Triplexes on a nice steel El would work. Whether it's a better idea or not is another matter.
There are dozens of threads on this subject. It keeps getting rehashed in part because nobody reads them.
The key is to dig underground. This cannot be an at-grade line or elevated line. Do cut and cover if that's the cheapest way, or use a TBM.
---Brian
How would it increase tph? Usually loops are better than terminals at handling a lot of trains. Is there anything about South Ferry that prevents 30 tph?
---Brian
If the loop were east of the platform, either the platform would have to be moved much further west (far less convenient to the ferry terminal), or else the loop would have to be moved further east. The latter would mean a new loop that has to avoid one or both BMT subway lines.
Better still, the interlocking could be moved West of the station, and an island platform created between the two straightened and elongated loops - this would mean that all trains on the left-hand platform would run on the Lex Express and all on the right would run on the 7th Ave Local. A coincidental benefit of this is that South Ferry would gain off-peak 5 train service.
Now would be a good time for one of you to actually author a letter to MTA and say so. Who knows - maybe they'll find a way to do it.
Your statement has no basis in reality. What James is suggesting, if it is feasible, would not cost anything close to what ytou are saying, and it would accomplish both of the goals you have stated.
Of course, if you're posting just to see yourself posted, that's a different issue. :0)
The MTA has at one point proposed something about half as complicated, and put a ballpark estimate of $500 million on it. Therefore I don't think I am way off.
Maybe they could do James' plan for $700 million. But it's massively more money than would be needed for just extending the current platforms westward and adding an elevator, which solves the main existing problems.
You're $500 million off. If that isn't way off I don't know what is.
"Maybe they could do James' plan for $700 million."
Back to your own (unsupported) budgeting. You have nothing to support that with.
"just extending the current platforms westward and adding an elevator, which solves the main existing problems."
If you think that will solve the problem, write to MTA and say so.
I have an MTA figure on the cost of a stub terminal. James' proposal involves much more excavation and construction. Of course I don't have precise budgetary figures, but neither do you. I am expressing my opinion that James' plan is extremely expensive, and I have some jsutification for my opinion. You have given no justification at all (not that you need to) for your opinion that James' plan is farless expensive.
False statement. We both have very good data available to us. You choose not to use it appropriately.
There are a number of different ways South Ferry could be redone, as a stub terminal, enlarging the loop, etc. There are diffferent ways the construction could be attempted.
One of the ways to drive up costs is to do the work as unobstrusively as possible, do it only on weekends and at night (overtime, anyone?) and take every pain to keep things as normal as possible. This was necessary with the 63rd Street Connector, in order to keep trains running through the Queens Boulevard corridor without disruption. It resulted in a 7 year schedule and contributed to a $645 million price tag, though it was not the only reason for that expense.
Personally, here's what I would do: I would select a plan (and I am not going to rank them here), I would set up shuttle bus service, and I would build the new terminal (whatever the design) in open cut fashion (not even cut and cover unless that subsection of area cannot be isolated). There would be 18 months to two years of inconvenience and dirt flying, and the budget could be reduced. I'd reward the contractor the same way the contractor was rewarded for rebuilding the line after the 9-11 tragedy.
The Greenwich Street subway was rebuilt for slightly less than $100 million. Recreate the exclusivity of the work zone at South Ferry as much as possible, and MTA can achieve something similar (though not as impressive a savings, perhaps) at the new South Ferry terminal.
Bottom Line: If you have a bright, well-thought-out idea of what to do at South Ferry (don't just throw rocks at their plans- that's worthless), write to MTA and post the reply here. Your idea may indeed be better than theirs; You may be pleasantly surprised by what they send you, and I guarantee you'll learn something.
And if they adopt any of your suggestions, I will personally toast your success here on Subtalk.
And if the reconstruction is poorly designed, that service reduction on the 1 will become permanent.
I agree with you that S Ferry renovations should be low key. But supposedly part of the 1/9 reconstruction was placing crossovers south of Rector so that Rector could be a terminal.
I'm glad you posted that. If true, it means that South Ferry could be closed and renovated without worrying about trains entering.
Not acceptable to David Greenberger; acceptable to everyone else.
Someone finally solved the problem, and you want to undo it to solve a different problem that doesn't exist.
Extending the existing South Ferry platform 255 feet back and installing an elevator would be cheaper than a rebuild, easier to use than a rebuild, and less disruptive to service on the rest of the line than a rebuild. Why is the rebuild option even on the table?
To the contrary, I'm very familiar with it. It's part of the reason South Ferry needs attention.
"Extending the existing South Ferry platform 255 feet back and installing an elevator would be cheaper than a rebuild, easier to use than a rebuild, and less disruptive to service on the rest of the line than a rebuild."
What you've just described qualifies in my book as a rebuild. bAnd it sounds very satisfactory to me. If that can be done, great. If it can't, then other options need to be chosen.
Now get off your lazy butt and write to MTA. Would you like me to send you a 37 cent stamp, or can you handle that? :0)
Extending the existing platform and leaving the rest of the station alone is not a rebuild -- it's a small modification.
The inner loop can't be used as a station unless the rolling stock on the 5 is modified so that only the middle doors can be opened. Seeing as the rolling stock on the 5 is brand new, I don't see that happening.
Even if that were done, the 5 could only stop there off-peak. Most rush hour 5's go to Brooklyn. That would be an unusual service pattern.
It won't happen
That means that door can be adressed independently
therefore one door can be programed to open and close on command. That option is most likely not available to T/O at the current time. It should be just a matter of changing the business rules of door operations.
"-- they can't even be programmed to do what they're supposed to do"
Thats propabaly because MTA employees have not been completly trained on how to operate more advanced features in the software
When an end user use windows 2000 at work he or she only see's the features the system administrator wants them to see. There are features within windows that only the most skilled system admins know how to use.
You may be right. But then again, one would have thought that changing the announcements on a train would be performable by a trained customer (i.e., NYCT) representative, and wouldn't require a vendor modification.
Software isn't always as flexible as it ought to be. I wouldn't be sure of it.
Operationally, this might be possible, although one must bear in mind that throughput is reduced when switches need to clear depending on whether a 1/9 or a 5 train is coming through.
The larger problem, I think, is customer confusion. Once the maps were updated to show SF as a 5 train stop, people would enter SF station hoping to catch a 5 train, and at rush hours it wouldn't be there.
Now, there are places in the system where certain routes don't operate at all hours. But normally, any curtailment is during off-peak times. This would be the only place where a station would lose service during rush hour -- presumably the time when it would be most useful.
For these reasons, this idea is not practical.
Wrong. In fact the station does have a problem, and your reliance on raw numbers proves you don't understand it.
I do not object to keeping it a loop - I don't use the word "terminal" top mean only a stub terminal. But South Ferry needs ADA access and needs room for more train cars.
Your idea may work. Instead of lazily posting nonsense, write MTA a letter, and post the reply here.
The station has no elevator. Tourists, espcecially those with poor command of English, occasionally don't realize that they can't get out from the rear cars and end up at Rector St. I agree these are both less than ideal situations.
Are there any other problems? I'd be genuinely interested to know.
All I'm saying is that a solution to the South Ferry problem that (re)creates a reliability and crowding problem on the rest of the line is no solution.
Now write the letter. Do you need a postage stamp? How about paper for your printer?
:0)
Don't get me wrong though, I am not really for a total rebuild of SF. I think it can possibly decrease local service on the line. Although SF is not a full station, it does do it's job well at turning trains fast, faster than a poorly designed stub would do. I say extend the platform into the tunnel, leave the loop alone, and use all the money saved on some other project downtown.
So get off your rear end and write into MTA to ask them to change it.
The terminal needs work. If you have a better idea, tell 'em. Get your friends to sign a petition. Send it to elected officials.
There is a huge FERRY TERMINIAL on top of the station.
Yes, there may be more or less of a ferry terminial there right now - it is being reconstructed. But, I don't see DOT holding their project - which dates back to the Dinkins Administration - for a TA project now that it has built up a head of steam.
Oh, well. They'll have to do it another way.
If that did have to close for construction, I don't see any reason (although my knowledge of boats isn't great) that ferries couldn't use another Lower Manhattan ferry terminal (eg Pier 11, Pier A, North Cove).
If it didn't have to close, then Whitehall St is a perfectly good station!
Your knowledge of NYC transportation is superb for someone living 4000 miles away. However, SI Ferry boats are far bigger than all the other ferries. They probably can't use the other piers, and certainly can't unload the large numbers of people in a reaosnable time span.
Maybe they could rent rubber dinghies and SCUBA suits to passengers.
:0)
Not a conflict, just the major expense of building a new train loop on top of existing tracks and station. Nothing $1 billion couldn't cure.
What it would affect is any new underground connection between the fare control area of the Whitehall St. station and the new S.I. Ferry terminal, along with the interlockings, as I mentioned before. Better to just extend the platform another five car lengths at the rear of the current station.
Agreed. You'd still be stuck with maintaining the platform extenders and frequent replacement of the rails, but you'd solve 2/3 of the problem for 1/4 of the money.
speaking of 149th street...I always hated the screeching on the 5 going to and from manh. Recently it seems it has gotten a little better. I hardly notice the noise anymore. Is it just my hearing going or were some improvements made?
Remember that recurring weekend GO about a month ago that had no 2/5 service between 149-GC and E180 and sent the 3 to 137/Bway? One of the many work sites was the jughandle. I don't know if the work somehow quieted the screech, but it's possible.
Yeah. Stupid HVAC units.
But even aside from the HVAC units, the trains themselves make a racket. It sounds like they're much heavier than their predecessors. Are they?
Right. Thus my wanting to call them hummingbirds. I like the sound of the R-142A better, myself. The R-68 is another pretty noisy car (on the outside) too, a "screechy yeller" sorta sound.
I suppose they could have very inexpensively installed a water sprinkler, which would seriously help screeches.
The Vultures (R142/142A) screech differently than the R62 and the Redbirds, probably due to the fact that the wheels are different. It's not as much a high-pitched sound as the older cars, but it's loud nevertheless. I heard quite a din from 7056-7-8-9-0/7065-4-3-2-1 recently as it ground its way into Mott Avenue.
wayne
Just extend the existing platform 255 feet back and add an elevator.
"I have been working recently on an ambitious subway expansion plan I have been toying with for about 3 years, but I just began to seriously work out and write out the details a few months ago. I had actually drawn potential routes in NYC and other metoropolitan areas atlases. Suffice to say, all five boroughs are covered with routes as well as areas of Long Island, New Jersey and Westchester County, and I have used all the letters, as well as additional ones and more numbers were added. If anyone's curious about what I have devised in terms of new routings, names of lines and route markers, leave your repsonses/questions here and I'll answer them as thoroughly as I can."
I have since updated that subway expansion plan and now have changed the context. Instead of just suggesting proposals of new lines and extending this line or that line, I have created an entire NYC Metropolitan Area subway systems that basically answered the question, what if these lines existed in another reality? So I tailored the project within a fictional context, where all past proposals of extensions and new service made the MTA, TA and when the IRT, BMT and IND were separate systems, have been realized. It made more sense to portray all the "New Routings" this way. The majority of the project is placed in a historical context, giving the impression that the lines actually exist.
Anyway, a handful of Subtalkers have responded to my earlier version of this project. The content of the documents they received before are basically the same, except with some new additions and edits. I still have their email addresses, so they will automatically receive the updated posts.
As for the reason for this post, I'm looking for more subtalkers who are interested in reading a "book" of transit fiction. I had found, while composing this project, to be a fascinating and unusual read. I have a total of 8 chapters; I have completed Chapters 1, 2, 3 and am currently finishing up on Chapter 5 and currently working on Chapter 4. I will begin emailing requests from interested subtalkers at the end of April or the beginnig of May when I anticipate Chapter 4 will be completed. Like the original post, I can answer questions here on the board for those of you who have not seen the original thread that first advertised this project back in November 2001. I also will have some questions to ask the board that would be useful to include in my project, as I know some of you are very knowledgeable about transit operations--especially the subtalkers who are transit employees. They will likely be technical questions, ones that are currently not found on the nyc.subway.org website. The questions will be posted as they occur to me, and when I reach a point in the project that I need an answer to that I can't answer.
Most of you have emails that are easily accessed by clicking on your handle. But I won't send anything unsolicited, unless you aske me to, or request a project. So again, all interested parties who are intersted in viewing this latest edition of my transit project, please respond, or click on my handle and email me.
By the way, The X train is a new showpiece routing. Just thought I tempt you a bit! LOL
Dwayne
Xtrainexp.
With construction on the Manhattan Bridge nearly complete, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will soon announce its most substantial change in the subway map in nearly two decades, officials confirmed yesterday.
I'd like to point out this sentence from the article that will make Sea Beach Fred extremely happy.
The N line, which travels Broadway, will become the sea beach express, so-called because it will become an express as it runs through Brooklyn to Coney Island. It will replace the Q diamond in Manhattan.
Now, granted, we all know that this is the strawman that Mark W posted a week or so ago, but it looks like this is what is going to be discussed with the community boards in the coming months. I don't live in the 5 boroughs anymore, but if I get wind of where some of these meetings will be, I may try to attend some.
--Mark
About six months after it opens.
If I were a gambling man, I'd take you on with that bet, for lots of money. If the bridge were only going to last 6 months, the south side would be showing cracks already.
I can conceive that it won't last 50 years. I can't believe it would only last less than 6 months.
--Mark
Wait! Did I say six months? Sorry, I must be having a relapse of my Alzheimer's. I meant to say six weeks.
Wait! Did I say six months? Sorry, I must be having a relapse of my Alzheimer's. I meant to say six weeks.
Are you sure you didn't mean hours? ;-)
Are you sure you didn't mean hours?
Nanoseconds.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Peace,
ANDEE
This is a big difference. Now it's not just a leak to the press by an MTA person who wants his own personal favorite plan to get publicity.
If the Times says this, it means this is the plan the MTA currently endorses. It may still change if the screaming is loud enough and a reasonable alternate gets proposed, but it is the official proposal of the moment.
Note also the Times confirms the plan will be in effect in February.
Peace,
ANDEE
I hope this is a blooper on the part of the Times.
They might be able to squeeze all three routes onto the local tracks, and it might make the Eighth Ave. line more attractive to people on the Upper West Side if the frequency was increased to more than that of the 1/9. But it would be a tough fit to get all three onto the local track during AM and PM rush, and Concourse riders will defintely stage a protest about losing express service to Midtown Manhattan (which could, depending on where some riders live and where they're going, actually push a few people to opt for the Jerome Ave. el instead. Putting more riders on the Lex is not exactly a smart gameplan on the MTA's part).
Bustini-bustini ... but YOU of all people believing the Times. Life is good. Heh.
If the changes go through as planned then the "D" will be the first line to operate (in regular scheduled service) over 3 different routes to get to Coney Island (Culver, Brighton, West End) during its history of service to Coney Island.
Now if we can just kick the N off of the Sea Beach later on, the D could then claim all 4 Brooklyn routes to Coney Island.
[Fred - put down that shoe-slipper]
wayne
If so, then the M is close. It had Sea Beach in 2001, it had Brighton before 1986, and it runs most of the way down the West End now. If only we could pull it down three more stops, we'd be there.
But since it still hasn't hit Coney Island (in service) via the West End it can't be counted because the criteria is service to Coney Island. We can give it half a point for the fact that it does cover almost all the West End line.
This plan is a very smart plan, so N trains have to cross over to the express track, its a 1 minute delay. A small price to pay for a faster overall ride!
1-Sea Beach Line-(N Route)
It will no longer stop at DeKalb Avenue when operating express especially during rush hours. The N Line has always skipped DeKalb Avenue when it operated express in the past peak hours. I would not be surprised if N Express services skips DeKalb period
The plan also called for the N to operate local late nights but did not specify the time. What about weekends?
The proposed W Line will most likely operate weekdays from approx 6AM to either 9 or 10PM. Does the N operate local all other times?
2-West End Line(D Route)
You are wrong that the proposed D Route will operate express along its whole route. It will still make all local stops between Stillwell Ave and 36th Street and thats at least 25 minuates. The revised D will still take about the same time to complete its trip. In addition will the new D skip DeKalb Ave. In the past the TA had West End Express service skip DeKalb.
3-Brighton Line(B and Q routes)
With the proposed B routing Brighton/6th Ave Express returns weekdays only similar to what operated between 1968 and 1986
What about evenings,nights and weekends when the B will not operate.
Does Brighton passengers make a two seat ride to go to 6th Avenue and if the proposed West End D does not stop at De Kalb then Brighton passengers have to change at Atlantic Ave/Pacific Street or 34th Street both are not easy transfers
Also do Brighton Line passengers perfer Broadway or 6th Avenue service.
4-4th Avenue Local(R Line)
This proposed service revision fails to address 24 hour local service between Queens and Manhattan
5-50% Reduction of service between Lower Manhattan and Downtown Brooklyn
Thank You
2 - Stillwell to 36 run time 26 minutes. West End will bypass DeKalb rush hours and middays
3 - Brighton passengers prefer B'way. But then again, so do passengers on all the other south Brooklyn BMT lines.
4 - E runs local at night between Queens and Manhattan. Might not be convenient transfers to B'way, but that's life. this has nothing to do with Bridge service.
5 - R service is to be increased under the plan. M is barely used during middays and B'way needs a second Express over the Bridge.
DAILY it will operate Express on B'way until the R shuts down. Weekends, it will operate Local on B'way, with the R, and continue to do so after the R shuts down.
Where did you get this idea?
Not a big issue. at all. The only issue is coming home from yankee games if the service ends at 9 Pm as the current Q diamond does
"Also do Brighton Line passengers perfer Broadway or 6th Avenue service."
Brighton riders prefer broadway. I whish they would run the broadway Q express in brooklyn during rush hour.
Except for those who work at rock center, broadway service offered better transfers and destinations and is quicker
More than Rock Center. Midtown Development is heaviest between 7th and Lex avs. The 6th av trains are the lines that best serve this area. I dont know if broadway will be more popular when the bridge opens. 6th av is a very important midtown line. However, Broadway's importance is somewhat raised with the develpoment of Times Sq. We'll see how it works out. I still think that 6th av is more in the thick of the buisiness district, while Broadway is a line that provides more service to tourist destinations.
I'd say on 40% of days it's more comfortable walking underground than above ground because of rain, snow, cold, or heat. On those days, a block can make a huge comfort difference. And even in nice weather, waiting to cross an avenue forces you to inhale a lot of exhaust fumes.
Also, using one line may allow you to make use of passageways. I can get to Port Authority Bus Terminal from the Broadway Ave line without going outdoors. From 6th Ave, it's 2 long blocks outdoors, or else I have to go back downstairs (and pay again unless I have an unlimited card). Similarly, I can get to the NY Public Library from 6th Ave with only a tiny outdoor walk, whereas it's a long outdoor walk from Broadway.
Moving all Brighton service off Broadway was a widely criticized error of the original plan. The TA has been trying to patch it ever since--this was the reason for the jerry-rigged addition of the original rush-hour only QB (successful) and the NX (unsuccessful).
Brighton reliability will also be improved by the shorter Q service.
This leaves the D-Concourse/West End as the only core 6th Avenue service. Much betetr.
Trivia note--this will also make the Sea Beach the only Coney Island routing that the D train has never covered as the regular service line. Opinion, Fred?
I already mentioned your trivia note:
http://talk.nycsubway.org/cgi-bin/subtalk.cgi?read=469170
Will Broadway as the core Brighton service be better? Considering the amount of people I see every morning having to switch at 34th St from the B & D to the Q I have my doubts. When the MB closed in 2001 it was even remarked in the newspapers about the sudden large influx of passengers using the trasnfer point. The TA even closed the front end stairwell for a while because of the overcrowding.
The B via Brighton will help but by how much?
We can specualte all we want but until 2004 comes along we won't know.
The nuisance for people who might want to go further uptown from the Brighton could be eased by having West End Ds stop at deKalb when the B isn't running.
I guess it's sort of a knock at the Brighton line (although it doesn't really matter) that they are not getting the D train back but rather the part time B.
Of course it affects people going to Yankee games living along the Brighton line as they no longer will have off peak hours the ability to take one train (the D train) to Yankee Stadium but apparently will have to change at Atlantic for the 4 or at 34th St for the D if the D is not stopping at DeKalb. Kind of not good news for what was once the pride of the BMT the Brighton line.
But then again I am not Sea Beach Fred and don't take it personally.
I guess it's sort of a knock at the Brighton line (although it doesn't really matter) that they are not getting the D train back but rather the part time B.
Of course it affects people going to Yankee games living along the Brighton line as they no longer will have off peak hours the ability to take one train (the D train) to Yankee Stadium but apparently will have to change at Atlantic for the 4 or at 34th St for the D if the D is not stopping at DeKalb. Kind of not good news for what was once the pride of the BMT the Brighton line.
But then again I am not Sea Beach Fred and don't take it personally.
At the time, they legitamately may not have thought that there was a need for four midtown services across the Manny B, but sending the QJ to Coney Island during regular hours Monday-Friday while leaving the QB as a peak-direction rush hour service was just nonsensical. It seemed as those just because they had created a connection from DeKalb (and Essex) to the IND they felt they had to make sure as many trains as possible ran via the IND, so the entire project could be justified. Throwing in all those other part time routes (NX, JJ, RJ) along with the QB and later the KK just served to confuse things more, even if it did produce the wonderful "LSD map" of 1967.
The new MTA plan is far more logical, and balances out the primary (Q, D) routes to Manhattan on the Brighton and Fourth Ave. lines, with the secondary routes (B, N) so that one of those also runs Brighton and the other runs Fourth Ave.
As for destinations, I'd say the Broadway line is better for off peak travel (Time Square) but the 6th Avenue line is better for offices. It puts you right at Rock Center, and teh V gets you to the most densely developed part of Midtown 42nd to 56th from 5th Avenue to 3rd.
One other advantage of the Q ending at 57th St. is that if the E or V or F is disrupted the Q can continue to Queens via 63d Street as an alternate service.
Just one other suggestion. Why not have four or five rush hour R/4th Ave. expresses that operate express north of 59th St. Brooklyn and go to 57th/7th Ave. via 4th Ave. express, Manny B, and Broadway Exp to 57th? Would help those Bay Ridge folks who now have to take a local all the way or change to a crowded express at 36th or Pacific.
One other advantage of the Q ending at 57th St. is that if the E or V or F is disrupted the Q can continue to Queens via 63d Street as an alternate service.
Just one other suggestion. Why not have four or five rush hour R/4th Ave. expresses that operate express north of 59th St. Brooklyn and go to 57th/7th Ave. via 4th Ave. express, Manny B, and Broadway Exp to 57th? Would help those Bay Ridge folks who now have to take a local all the way or change to a crowded express at 36th or Pacific.
Wouldn't people from Bay Ridge change at 59th for the N-Broadway?
Good question. It depends on how good the timing is, and how good the information is. Outbound, you might as well hop on an express and change later. Inbound, if an N just left you are better off staying on the R until at least 36th Street, rather than waiting 5-8 minutes. If you know an N is within three minutes, it's better to wait for it.
Hopefully they can rig something up in cases like these, even if by radio, because ATS for the B division is a long way off.
#3 West End Jeff
My idea is to meet at Times Square about 4:30 to 5 & take an Express out to Main Street. Personally I can be a Main Street at 3:30. That will ensure me of a local Railfan Window in to Times Square. We could ride back & forth until dark or agree on something else.
So, how about Friday April 12th ? or the 18th with a ERA meeting as our destination after the railfanning ?
For my fellow Long Islanders a M-7 ride to cap off the night might be included in the plans ?
I'm afraid the redbirds might be gone by 2013 :). Friday the 11th works for me. 18th, maybe.
Times Square about 4:15 to 4:30 ... we'll have to come up with a specific time & meeting palce at Times Square.
Imagine getting a train from Corona Yard to South Ferry: Flushing Line, 60th St Tunnel, 57/7, REVERSE, 63rd St Line, REVERSE and wrong rail, Rockefeller Center, REVERSE, CPW Line, Concourse Line, Concourse Yard, Jerome Line, Lex Line, South Ferry. Some deadheading!
Not fast, but it does save a couple of track switches...
I don't know if ridership was that much of a problem as mainting the equipment. In 1975 the modified R12s started to brake down a lot and we wound up walking to Bowling Green.
Any equipment running on the shuttle would have to be modified so that only the center doors open on the South Ferry inner loop station. Only at Bowling Green can all the doors open.
After 27 years of not running the service I can't see any rational to resurrect it. It is only a about a 5 minute walk from SF to BG.
Also if they did resurrect it they would have to run the #5 Bowling Green trains on the outer loop in order to send the back uptown. Now they can use the inner loop w/o a problem.
IINM, the BG-SF shuttle only ran when the 5 or 6 trains did not run to South Ferry. It wasn't the shuttle getting in the way which made the 5 and 6 use the outer loop - it was the only way they could platform!
You mean the platform is that short?! It can't even hold a 102-foot train? What was the IRT smoking when they built this station?
Trains were able to open only their middle doors at South Ferry inner loop because of the extreme curvature of the platform.
-- Ed Sachs
-- Ed Sachs
Service cut backs. It had nothing to do with the equipment. At the same time they were rebuilding Bowling Green which included a rebuilt Shuttle platform that was never used. When the Shuttle was discontinued the TA also eliminated #5 and #6 service between Bowling Green and South Ferry
At the same time the TA merged the EE Line with the N Line and discontinued the K Line between Eastern Parkway and 57th St/6th Ave.
Other cutbacks at the same time
AA Line-Midnight hour service replaced by A Local
B Line-Shuttle between Stillwell Ave and 36th St and between 47th/50th Streets and 57th St/6th Ave midnight hours
GG Line-Service between Queens Plaza and Continental Ave replaced by F Line late nights(10:30PM to 6AM)
N Lime-Shuttle between Stillwell Ave and 36th Street midnight hours
Also the CC and E Line switched Rush hour terminals
Thank You
Oh, and they don't want a new stadium there, because that would take the Jets away from the Meadowlands (which gives me this image of McGreevey lobbying before the IOC next year to please put the Olympics anyplace but New York City so Chad Pennington can play his entire career west of the Hudson).
How this will affect the downtown transit plans if it really gets into the dogfight stage is unknown. But I think it does show that Bloomberg's other pet project -- the JFK rail link to lower Manhattan -- better not be counting on a chunk of Port Authority cash and/or assistance to become a reality, unless the city and state can figure out something of equal value to give New Jersey to make their polticialy leaders happy.
Considering what's been happening to air travel, trends which may not reverse themselves anytime soon, the JFK rail link plan sounds an awful lot like an answer to a question no one has asked.
The rail link did not make economic sense even before air travel tanked. The most optomistic projections would be a couple of thousand daily users between downtown and JFK.
Wait a minute... The politicians in Queens are opposed to the swap because it would "give 25% of Queens County to New Jersey" (exaggerated, to be sure, but still a valid point). However, if New Jersey opposes it, then it must really be a GOOD deal for the city, right?
Then again, instead of the airports, how about letting New Jersey take Staten Island? :-)
In this site, http://wt.mit.edu/Subway/Archives/Worth/Worth.html, the closing date is reported as 1964.
Anyone know?
Larry, RedbirdR33
Larry, RedbirdR33
Me being a suspicious railfan, I played about with various ways of using multiple tickets to achieve a cheaper fare. What I eventually worked out was that it was cheapest to buy three return tickets - B'ham-Derby (£7.35), Derby-Sheffield (£8.45), Sheffield-Leeds (£5.90). These add up to £21.70 - a saving of £2.55. (NB - I am riding exactly the same trains and still have a one seat ride!)
Put another way, Virgin Cross Country is reaping £2.55 (an extra 11¾%) from every rail user on that line who isn't both as suspicious and as knowledgeable as to where trains stop as me. Oh well, I suppose all these ignoramuses are subsidising my ride - something nice to think about on a two and a bit hour train journey each way!
People have tried doing that with air itineraries. For example, NYC-to-Chicago-via-Pittsburgh might be cheaper than NYC-to-Pittsburgh, so you'd buy the through ticket and not use the second leg. The airlines fought back by getting a law passed against that. (Yes, you can be arrested for NOT using a partial ticket.)
Not quite. There's no law against this so-called "hidden city" ticketing. What will happen, however, is that the airline will cancel the passenger's return trip once it catches on to the plan, and airline computers are quite adept at uncovering these plans.
Of course, more and more people are flying discount carriers, where it's not necessary to resort to anything like this in order to get a low fare.
There are plenty of rip-offs everywhere in the UK. Wivenhoe to Liverpool Street starting during the morning peak is something like 30 pounds return, but get a return ticket to Shenfield and another from Shenfield to London and the saving is over five pounds. The downside is that technically the train has to stop at Shenfield, so you lose the one seat ride for this saving.
Voters got the crazy notion that just because her husband was killed and her son was shot, Carolyn McCarthy would make an adequate legislator AND
legislation was passed giving police officers free transit on the LIRR.
(Forgetting Carolyn McCarthy for now) Fast forward nearly 10 years. Police are still riding for free but rarely, if ever, get inviolved in on-the-train altercations. I am not anti-police by any stretch of the imagination, however, yesterday, I witnessed a display of pure kutzpah on one LIRR train. Cop and a friend seated in a 5-seater in the 2nd car of a crowded train. Cop shows his ID card and conductor nods (even though the officer should have been standing). The conductor then gestures to the friend. The friend is caught off guard - not expecting the conductor to ask him for a ticket. The cop says something like, "He's with me." The conductor acknowledges the officer and then asks the other passenger for a ticket. The cop says, "I said he's with me!". One thing leads to another The C/R says he will not 'ride' the friend. The cop continues to protest. The conductor persisted and finally, they relented and paid the fare sans the $2.00 on-board surcharge.
I guess that had the governor not put State Troopers on the trains and had I not seen them 'get involved' on two occasions, already, this event might not have seemed so significant. Of course, I think the conductor was 100% correct. Any other thoughts?
[FDNY incident at another time]
I am retired now since Sept and only used the LIRR twice and both times the conductor's let me go free with my retired ID. I smile and say thank you and carry an extra ticket in my pocket just in case they charge me. I will not become argumentative.
When I was still on the job, 90% of the time let my wife and son go free. (my son would be free anyway because of his age) I always thanked them with a smile. If he charged my wife I wouldn't argue, and I'd pay and not be argumentative. I figure I'm ahead in the long run. As far as friends are concerned it never even dawned on me to try to have them go free.
By the way, although I always use my shield to get on the subway, I always bought my wife a metrocard or token. But lately I found out other cops have their families go through the gate with them.
Despite my general dislike of the LIRR, I've got to admit that the conductor was completely in the right. And needless to say, the cop should not have continued to complain after the conductor said that the friend couldn't ride for free. Come to think of it, if the cop was aware of the LIRR policy from the start, he shouldn't have said "He's with me" in the first place.
1) The conductor was right and this particular cop was an asshole, abusing the policy.
2) The conductor should have made a note of the cop's shield number and reported the incident to LIRR supervisors.
3) The cop deserved either a written reprimand, or letter of instruction (or other action) designed to inform him that the next time this happens, he could end up being his department's newest meter maid.
The policy is well-intentioned, Train Dude, but inevitably a few people will abuse it.
Nah, he collected the fare, so no need to turn it nasty. Sometimes it's better to be laid back!
#3 West End Jeff
Sorry, but you don't have to love a particular class of cars more than any other in order to be a die-hard buff. What you are describing is just someone who is old (which isn't a bad thing, I don't mean to put down people who have more of those orbital miles) or with a moderate-to-severe case of eruthornithophilia.
-- Ed Sachs
My two cents' worth would be drawing R-32 sign boxes on the covers of your schoolbooks and filling in the route and destination spaces with your name and subject. Not to mention drawing front bulkheads on test papers and filling in the grade you got in the route sign slot.
-- Ed Sachs
And I can remember being over 6 years old and ducking under the turnstiles when not riding with my parents. :-)
Tom
Of course it depends upon the person's size, but 6-10 it was better to go under, particularly with the large wooden turnstiles. It was much less likely to catch the eye of the person in the change booth if you approached with your hand out and appeared to put a coin in the slot and quickly ducked under. 10-14 was the awkward age when it was harder to duck under, but you needed vaulting practice to go over smoothly. 14+ it was a macho thing, you had to go over.
Tom
There was the yellow or pink "warning" tape that held open the service door entering into the Subway which blocked the two turnstiles which were next to it on the left. There was a worker in a construction vest outside talking with the booth clerk. A dark and eerie night as it was, we asked him dealing with the fare. The worker in the orange vest said "just walk right in". We resentfully went in (because I was obligated to pay the fare) but the impact of 9/11 was still at large. The reason why this happened is still unknown. BTW, the entrance at the other end of this station still had turnstiles operating and people paying the usual fare to enter the Subway system.
I tried not to enjoy the free ride, but 9/11 was a big enough thing to worry about.
I lived in L. A. from 1976 to 1998, and on a few occasions, the SCRTD fare was actually a little higher than the TA's fare, which I found amusing considering how much bigger the NY system was than LA's. Usually this was the case for a few months, then NY would "catch up".
(I don't even know what I just said!)
:-) Amdrew
As young as I am, one is die-hard when they will WAIT for an R-32 and let an R-46 train pass by on the Queens Line, or you will not ride a 75-foot car if you can avoid it. One is also a die-hard railfan if they want to railfan the MTA Railroads (so far, I have railfanned Babylon, Far Rockaway, Port Jefferson, and Long Beach branches (electrified portion of Pt. Jeff only), and the LIRR Main Line to Ronkonkoma, Metro-North Hudson to Croton-Harmon, and New Haven Line to Stamford. I haven't railfanned any NJT lines yet, but hope to do so soon.)
Yes, it implies that one slays vampires for a living.
Done a lot of that. Even managed to board at two now abandoned stations: North Newark and West 8th Street, in Bayonne. Hey, that means I got to detrain at the CRRNJ Elizabeth Station! Forgot about that. And used Rossville Avenue station too. That was a nice curved platform station.
New Jersey is good for cross line railfanning. Like taking a train out to, say, Bound Brook and walking north to take a Gladstone Branch train back in. I did it when those Erie-Lackawanna trains had open windows. Ahhhhh, on summer nights, there was nothing like it.
It's better than "foamer."
And just think, one day when the younger post-R62 delivery railfans of the board today are posting on subtalk off in the future, and they will be crying over the scrapping of the R142s.....hating the R865's on their arrival to replace them......there hopefully will be new young railfans there too wondering why they are getting so upset about the R142's being sunk, just like all of us are upset about the passing of the Redbirds.
CG
Here she comes!!!
There she goes!!!
Take Pride,
Brian
You'd LOVE "Lester Lines" ... it's a bus company that runs between Newburgh and New Paltz (though I think they finally went four paws to the moon, owwwoooO!) and the "fleet" consisted of ONE yellow school bus ($4.50 each way) with kindergarten seats that took about an hour to travel 6 miles ... "Hi. I'm LESTER ... RIDE my bus." (talk about your catchy slogans) ...
Capitol is the building in DC....or any other capital city.
That SRS 403 is one very historic piece of equipment. It is a Mack FCD Railbus, originally built for the New Haven Railroad.....
What the hell is an SRS 403, and what does it do?
Thanks :)
http://www.trainweb.org/elso/SPERRY.HTM
---Brian
Thanks for the link.
Other features: it takes power like a conventional gas-powered vehicle via a gas pedal, but brakes via straight-air brake valve, like a trolley car (and w/o a dead-man feature).
---Brian
Mind ya, I like subway cars and all (if nobody noticed) but the old Budd RDC's were pretty neat too and so absolutely vegetarian-unfriendly. No volts? NO PROBLEM. We go anyway. But given the specialty of electric traction and the REALITY that 99% of America's rails are unpowered, only made sense to me that would be the design.
And hey! Wait! YOU willing to give up your "Lucky Luciano handle?" Geez ... I'm impressed that you'd hand me down your PERSONAL heirloom. Or is it TRUE that hell just froze over? Moo.
The electric option is USUALLY more efficient than direct traction. And of course, the RDC's were the grandfather of the 32's as far as style went. When it comes to NON-subway cars, I always had a thing for RDC's ever since the first time I got to run one between Poughkeepsie and Croton North. Thanks to a buddy that I roomed with in New Paltz, I got more handle time on RDC's than on Arnines, though I hope to catch up THIS year. :)
Particularly amusing about RDC's was the "stick shift" controller. A zig-zag arrangement much like many muscle cars without having to push for the clutch (clutch was automatic based on controller gauntlet position) ... and the braking was VERY MUCH ME-23 (Arnine/LoV like) ... they were NICE toys, though a bit smelly.
Mind you, those were 6-71 engines, same as what was in all the GM diesel-powered city buses built until 1959!!!
The SPV-2000, newer version of the RDC, went to the 6V92 Detroit Diesel engine, as did city buses of its time.
Correct. And if you do see third rail shoes, it's usually in the winter, when scraper shoes are installed for cold weather duty; these scraper shoes do not power the locomotives.
--Mark
There's one at the Danbury Railway Museum... might be the one from Remington Arms, I'm not sure.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Indeed it is... see detailed informationhalfway down this page. From the information provided it would appear that two of the ten Mack railbuses have been scrapped, at least three survive, and five are "fate unknown".
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?img_12995.jpg
---Brian
---Brian
Robert
---Brian
Peace,
ANDEE
Peace,
ANDEE
Here is the company's website: http://www.sperryrail.com
---Brian
Anyway, I never knew the R16's were red at one time.
It's hard to believe that all the trains used to look like this....I remember it all too well.....
1 Broadway Local 9292
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
Well this is a great shot from the Broadway platform on the Myrtle El. That neighborhood was about to fall big time. I remember passing that bank in the backround in the 80's and it looked like it was going to cave in. It looks so nice in the photo. They did fix it up in the early 90's and one of my professors in college was involved in making it some kind of cultural arts building or something.
Anyway, Broadway had some dark days ahead at the time of this photo. It only now is beginning to turn around, and is really remarkable how nice it is getting (well anything looks good next to what it was in the 80s!)
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?img_24385.jpg
---Brian
Yes, but perhaps the caption was done by someone who remembers when the tracks of the Franklin Shuttle were part of the Brighton Line.
Tom
If for no other reason than that there's never been a 48th St station anywhere in NYC. ;-) (Go on, someone, prove me wrong.)
If for no other reason than that there's never been a 48th St station anywhere in NYC. ;-) (Go on, someone, prove me wrong.)
See ya Saturday,
Mark
The alignment is pretty well known by now. The line would start at the 125th St. Metro North station. After running briefly east, it would turn south along 2nd Avenue and go to the Financial District, with Lower Manhattan stops at Houston St, Grand St, Chatham Square, Seaport, and Hanover Sq.
About half of the trains would peel off at 63rd St and run down the Broadway line, and over the Manhattan Bridge. In the accompanying diagrams, the route continuing along Broadway is labeled Q. The route continuing along 2nd Ave is labeled T.
Connections to other lines at 57th St, 42nd St, 14th St and Houston St are portrayed as "under evaluation."
The cross-platform transfer at Grand St (which was the original plan, years ago), has been abandoned. The two options being considered are to build a 2-level station at Grand St, with a vertical transfer to the B and D. Or, to construct the SAS along Forsyth St, with a 200 ft passageway connecting to the B and D.
Public hearings have been announced for May 13 and 14. The cost of the project is on the order of $12.8 billion.
---Brian
I interpret it differently. I think that when the "early work" was done, there was less concern about the temporary and permanent effects on the neighborhood. Look at the SDEIS and all of the environmental concerns that are addressed; do you think Robert Moses did any of that when he built the Cross-Bronx Expressway?
We simply live in an age when pros and cons of various construction options are weighed differently. Depending on your point of view, that's either an advantage (because it forces public works projects to be more environmentally sensitive) or a disadvantage (because it makes these projects take more time, and limits what can be done).
Also, this is in Community Board 3 territory. Dealing with that board is like dealing with a very determined pit bull. They will sink their teeth into you and not let go, ever.
One of many examples: from about 1960 until 1985 developers tried to get a zoning variance for a lot at the corner of 3rd Ave and 12th street. The community board fought and pressured until eventually NYU bought the land and built a dormitory that did not require a variance.
Interestingly enough, they have been trying to get a middle income housing project built for 40 years now in a parking lot on the corner of 2nd Ave and Chrystie St, over the B/D tracks. I think they are finally succeeding, because the lot just closed. I wonder if the SAS plan contemplates using that lot for staging materials.
1. Far more people exit at GCT than enter in the AM rush. Good news for any added burden that ESA might add.
2. Dwell times at GCT in the AM rush average 45-60 seconds. As a result, true capacity is only 25 tph.
3. Currently, there are 28 express trains in the peak hour at 125th St but only 25 at GCT and further south. Where do the rest go? They queue up.
Hopefully, the projections for increased congestion on the 4/5/6 will make an impact on Bloomberg and get him to realize how improtant this is for the economy of NYC.
You know I WILL be writing. If I am visiting the East Coast during the hearings (there is a chance) I WILL attend.
You should write and speak regardless of your opinion.
Already did write -- as a TA employee I shouldn't do more than that.
There should be a fiscal analysis, showing the enormous federal, state and local taxes paid by post-1950 buildings, their residents and businesses pay net of the cost of the services they receive. And the net federal, state and local taxes that would be paid by future buildings and their occupants, because no matter what anyone says, the East Side does have development capacity, just not transportation capacity.
It is these cash cows who are being jammed onto the Lexington Avenue line, and who will be disadvantaged further if East Side Access and not the Second Avenue goes ahead. I would refuse to believe that was an accident. After all, which went first and received the federal money?
I can imagine that much of the dwell time is that the platform is too crowded to allow people to exit the train quickly. Maybe installing escalators to move people off the platform quicker would reduce the dwell time a bit
That has nothing to do with it. The trains are packed, so if those exiting at Grand Central are not by the doors, they have to shove their way out. Meanwhile, you have as great a volume shoving its way on, both from MetroNorth and from the local train. If the station had been built to allow trains to be entered from one side and exited from the other, that would have helped, but it wasn't.
The Dept. of Subways has done things to reduce dwell time -- platform conductors, the new trains have offset doors, etc. It is coming up with modifications to try to get up the 30 train max, but even it it worked that would not even absorb the projected added riders from ESA.
In one of the earlier MTA studies, it was suggested that a fifth track would be added to the station, which would have allowed three downtown trains to be in the station at once, rather than two. Obviously this wouldn't have been a trivial project, but it received serious consideration before being rejected (rightfully so, IMO).
There is an appendix in the SDEIS that lists the alternatives that were considered. It makes fascinating reading. Another suggestion, although I don't think it received serious consideration, was upgrading the Lex to B Division standards.
One thought that I posted recently (and I'm sure others have had it as well) was to lengthen IRT platforms to 12 cars. That would get 90% of the benefit with a lot less money. Still a gigantic expense, of course.
No, about 70%-75% of the benefit (I'm not saying it wouldn't have an impact); you've consistently discounted the political impact of the Upper East Side. Your being tone-deaf to that is OK, on Subtalk, of course.
But your suggestion is worth looking at. Lengthening the platforms isn't enough. If a renovated Lex took the place of the SAS, you'd need:
a) Longer platforms, more entrances, larger mezzanines or redesigned fare control areas. Getting passengers on and off faster is critical.
b) Full ADA compliance at most stations (to compensate riders because SAS would be fully ADA-compliant).
c) Extensive tunnel renovation and improved signaling (CBTC?) to increase speeds, increase tph and reduce travel time.
d)I'd even seriously consider renovating additional stations in the Bronx to allow a true peak direction 4 express service (Lexington Av Express - Jerome Express, rush hours) as well as local service. The 4 is the only Lex branch line without a Bronx express option.
Now, add all that up in $$$ and tell me what you think that might cost.
What on earth am I being tone deaf to? Did I say this would be a full substitute for a SAS? I also doubt it can be done for a reasonable amount of money. GCT especially would be a killer expense. But this is Subtalk, not the MTA's planning organization.
And of course I meant it would provide 90% of the capacity of a B division line, not make up 90% of the difference between A division and B division capacity.
Clearly, any scheme that restricts passenger flow to only one direction will decrease loading/unloading time. It's the difference between laminar and turbulent flow.
An alternate method would be to reserve certain doors in the car for entry and others for exit. This was done in the LV's. Entry was via the vestibule doors at the end. Exit was via the center door. Moreover the vestibule doors lined up with railings and gates on the platform. A single platform conductor could control two doors simultaneously. Moreover, entering passengers would line up behind the gates because they offered protection from the platform edge.
The result was that when LV's ruled the Lex express, they carried more passengers with reduced dwell times and ran more tph. Then again, what did they know. :-)
Build subway cars that have doors along 50% of the cars length. Or more if you want to get creative. That would help people got on and off A LOT faster.
---Brian
Not many seats on such cars. Long ride standing from the Bronx.
On a car with 110 people in it, most of them are standing anyway.
Can you please repeat that so that the meaning is clear?
Huh? You'd have to be pretty damn creative. The doors have to *go* somewhere when they have slid open!
---Brian
Arti
If the doors were thinner or the car's walls thicker, the doors could clamshell (that may not be the right word, but I mean to slide on top of one another, like the roof of the Milwaukee Brewers' new stadium, Miller Park).
---Brian
This is contradicted by the data shown in Table 5B-2. It shows that the leave load levels for both the express and local are greater than those for arriving trains. This is a reversal of the pattern shown in Table 9D-9 of the DEIS.
If this pattern is indeed correct, then the assumption that the ESA should be built first becomes questionable.
2. Dwell times at GCT in the AM rush average 45-60 seconds. As a result, true capacity is only 25 tph.
Actually, it clearly shows that 30 tph operation is viable. The chokepoint for subway operation is at stations. The time a train occupies a station can be divided into 3 distinct segments: the time it takes the train to stop (braking); the time the trains remains motionless within the station (dwell) and the time it takes the train to leave the station (acceleration).
The average braking time for downtown expresses entering Grand Central is 31 seconds. The average acceleration time for downtown expresses leaving Grand Central is 38 seconds. This leaves an average of 51 seconds for dwell time within the station, with trains coming every 120 seconds.
Dwell time is proportional to headway. The Grand Central measurements were taken at 25 tph or 144 second headways. One would reasonably expect that a 60 second dwell time at this service level would translate to 60 x 120/144 = 50 seconds, if they ever ran 30 tph. This falls within the required dwell time, based on acceleration and braking times for the station.
There is great variablilty among train operators vis-a-vis braking and acceleration times. If operators were trained to be one standard deviation quicker on average, then an additional margin of 8 seconds would be gained.
3. Currently, there are 28 express trains in the peak hour at 125th St but only 25 at GCT and further south. Where do the rest go? They queue up.
The trains are already "queued" up when the reach 125th St. There is no attempt made to keep uniform headways to prevent them from becoming queued up. The tailway variability (leaving times) is greater than the headway variability (arriving times) at every station, all the way up into the Bronx. No effort is made to prevent trains from becoming queued up. One would find the same headway decrease in the Bronx. Only the Upper East Side has warranted study by the TA.
You assume the train behind can come right up behind the one in the station, or close to it. Actually, the train behind is kept some distance away, because the fixed-block signaling system assumes it is coming in at max speed, and signals are at danger far enough back for such a train to stop. T/Os coming up on a signal and danger slow to be sure to avoid tripping it. So trains are backing up a full block behind the train in the station. And a full block behind that. They want to try some modifications to get back up from 26 to 30, but that's pretty much as far as it goes.
And "average" dwell time doesn't matter. What matters is the LONGEST dwell time, which backs up the train behind that and the train behind that, making those trains slower, which increases dwell time, until the whole rush hour collapses.
I did not define what I meant by braking and acceleration time, although I've done this in previous posts.
Braking time is the interval from when a train hits the enters the rear of the station at FULL speed until the doors open. Acceleration time is the interval from when the train starts to move until the signal with only a red/yellow aspect (the one that controls access to the station) turns from red to yellow. This means that signals behind this one will turn green with the propogation speed of the signal system. Finally dwell time between when the doors open until the train starts to move.
With these definitions, all following trains will see only green aspects. The TA might not realize this because they have not tried to send trains down the track at 120 second intervals. :-)
And "average" dwell time doesn't matter. What matters is the LONGEST dwell time, which backs up the train behind that and the train behind that, making those trains slower, which increases dwell time, until the whole rush hour collapses.
Actually one usually uses average + 2 standard deviations to project a reliable schedule. At least that's what's recommended by the Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council in their report entitled "Rail Transit Capacity".
Interesting. So reliable is officially defined as 95% reliable then (presuming that trains, like Carbon-14 dates (how can you tell I'm an Archaeology student?), follow the normal distribution). That would still have one train in 20 outside the range of +/- 2 SDs, but it would be just as likely to be below that range as above, so it would be only one in 40 which would be statistically likely to be unreliably late.
When pigs fly, Hell freezes over, the Sun rises in the west and two plus two equals five.
It will; just look at the designs posted on the MTA website. The 63rd St line was built with bellmouths for future connection to the SAS, and the design shows that the connection will in fact be built (i.e., assuming the line itself is built).
However, there is currently no plan to use the connection in revenue service. When the 63rd St tunnel was built, there were also plans to build a "super express" service along Queens Blvd. Those plans were never realized. Queens Blvd is currently saturated, so new service onto 2nd Ave couldn't be added without reducing service along one of the other routes that currently use QB.
What to do?
East Side Access will help Queens, but in addition I think you need to reconfigure the LIE to include a two lane express busway, and provide it with direct connections to Queens' extensive boulevard system. Provide bus lanes with signal jumpers on some of those. The LIE busway would end with a direct entrance to a bus terminal in Long Island City, the way buses can go directly from the Lincoln Tunnel to the Port Authority Bus Terminal.
Then you branch off from the 63rd Street line directly into a single station right in that same bus terminal. Therefore, you can walk to a bus somewhere in Queens (or Nassau, for that matter), ride down an boulevard stopping at bus stops but not lights, and zip to this bus terminal. There, you would have a quick walk to a waiting empty train, which would travel through the 63rd Street tunnel (change for the 6th Avenue line at Roosevelt Island) and down Second Avenue.
Twelve fully loaded B division trains can move 17,280 people per hour in OK comfort -- remember the train ride would not be that long. That's perhaps 40,000 people in the AM rush period. An expressway lane used exclusively by buses could probably move than many, and then some. That would be a significant increase in capacity just by reallocating road space that's already there, extending a branch off a line for perhaps a mile, and building one train/bus station.
I see that they have left provisions for potential expansion south from Hanover Sq. to Brooklyn and north on 2nd Ave to the Bronx. Did they bother to consider the utility of extending the line west along 125th (or relatively nearby) to the west side with potential connections (heading westward) to the 3, 2, A/B/C/D, and 1/9 where appropriate? While I am sure that there will be many people who suggest that the bus is an easy way to commute cross island and do it daily, I am equally sure that there are people who freely take the subway, but hesitate to transfer to a bus. Given the lack of cross-island subway service as a whole, especially north of the park, wouldn;t this be the perfect time to supplement the line so to speak to do just that. While Bronx-originated 2 passengers could have just transfered to the 5, and then the Q/T at 125th, I think all Manhattan-originated 2 passengers, and 3/A/B/C/D/1/9 passengers would benefit.
I am not suggesting holding up construction of the whole project just for this. I would just hate to see an otherwise potentially feasible and worthwhile project forever pre-empted from fruition because certain steps, be they financial, construction, etc., were not taken today to preserve the opportunity later. For example, if the line were to cost $12B today, yet just $13B with the 125th extension, but $12B today and another say $3-4B to add on the 125th extension later. Or if certain construction were used to allow no possibility of extending past the 125th tail tracks. I know the numbers above are not true, but I hope you all get my point.
Thoughts?
I've often thought that a 125th St line would make an awful lot of sense, given the relative paucity of crosstown service. As the gentrification of Manhattan moves steadily northward, I wouldn't be surprised if this idea enters the frame at some point. On the other hand, I wouldn't count on it anytime in the next 20 years, as there are simply too many other big projects competing for the same $$$.
The terminal could be Riverbank State Park.
I'm not saying the MTA planners read SubTalk, even less that they follow its suggestions, but, who knows, maybe someone there figured a future 125th St. line at least should not be precluded.
The plan changed when the consultants were brought in. It could be a "great minds think alike" criteria. I could be cost -- the double curve would have been vastly more expensive, and I never say the point of it. Maybe they got the idea here, or maybe it was obvious.
I agree that it's probably a "great minds think alike" deal.
You have already noticed, though, that the plan includes an east-west station as one branch of a T tunnel arrangement - so the line can, in future, be extended both north and west.
Tail tracks can become a new line if further extension is desired.
So, where is this?
My prediction is business as usual: shuttles, by train and by bus.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Now, what's the deal with maintenance work being done on the Broadway tracks north of Union Square in the middle of the PM rush hour??? Who's bright idea was that? Everything was backed up all the way to the Manny B!
Doesn't sound like regularly scheduled work to me. If nothing else, a fully opened Manny B should allow less disasterous consequences if a re-route is required.
Why was the Sea Beach built without any express stops between Coney and 59th Street, anyway? Did they anticipate a building boom down there?
www.forgotten-ny.com
I'm sure the TA does not intend to revive the NX. They simply mean the Sea Beach will be express for its entire route. The "Sea Beach Express" always made all stops from 59 to Coney.
NX - Sea Beach Super Express: Stillwell, 59, 36, Pacific
N - Sea Beach Express: Stillwell, 86, Av U, King's H'way, Bay Pkwy, 20 Av, 18 Av, New Utrecht Av, Ft Hamilton Pkwy, 8 Av, 59, 36, Pacific
NN - Sea Beach Local (theoretical): Stillwell, 86, Av U, King's H'way, Bay Pkwy, 20 Av, 18 Av, New Utrecht Av, Ft Hamilton Pkwy, 8 Av, 59, 53, 45, 36, 25, Prospect Av, 9, Union, Pacific, De Kalb Av
The Daily News was therefore correct in stating that the N train would be express from Coney Island to Manhattan as it would not stop at 53, 45, 25, Prospect Av, 9, Union, or De Kalb Av - ie it is not a Local - but it would stop at 86, Av U, King's H'way, Bay Pkwy, 20 Av, 18 Av, New Utrecht Av, Ft Hamilton Pkwy, and 8 Av - ie it is only an Express, not a Super Express. It's why the trains were called N and NX, not NN and N.
A Sea Beach express is an express on the Sea Beach line itself.
Your terminology can't describe a hypothetical line that runs express on the Sea Beach line but local on 4th Avenue (a common routing for W's during GO's, though I can't imagine it would be very useful as a regular service). Mine can.
R8 Crane car
R13 Allocated to a track cleaning unit purchase
R18 Allocated to a pump and hose car purchase, never purchased
R19 Diesel loco for pump car, never purchased
R20 38 misc. service and MOW cars
R23 30 hopper cars for MOW
R24 Wheel truing machines (2)
R25 Wheel truing machine (1)
R31 Vacuum cleaning unit
R35 15 misc service and MOW cars
R37 4 diesel-electric locomotives
R41 6 diesel-electric locomotives
R43 3 diesel-electric locomotives
R45 2 crane cars
R47 8 diesel-electric locomotives
R48 1 Rail Derrick Car
R49 20 Flat Cars
R50 2 Supply Car (not purchased; included in R-74 Contract)
R51 18 Flat Cars
R52 12 Diesel-Electric Locomotives
R53 5 Crane Cars
R54 1-2 Supply Cars (not purchased)
R55 Passenger Cars (not purchased)
R56 1 Two-Car Rail Welding Unit
R57 1 Self-Propelled Crane
R58 27 Refuse Flat Cars
R59 1 Track Geometry Car
R60 1 Track Gang Car (Canceled)
R61 2 Diesel Crane Cars
R63 Not Rolling Stock contract (Car Sign Modernization)
R64 Door Operator Mechanism
R65 3 Pump Cars
R66 3 Tank Cars
R67 Fabricated trucks (four designs for R-84 to R-87 inclusive)
R69 Prototype of Air Conditioning for 8 "B" Division Cars (not purchased) (presumably the GE GOH R-32's)
R70 20 Ballast Cars (not purchased)
R71 20 Rider Cars, 3 Hose Cars, 6 Reach Cars, (conversion of cars from R-81 contract)
R72 24 Flat Cars (4 from R-82 Contract)
R73 3 Crane Cars
R74 2 Signal Supply Cars (from R-50 Contract)
R75 5 Diesel Locomotives (not purchased)
R76 Door modernization 900 cars (R-27, R-28, R-29, R-30, R-32)
R77 20 Diesel Locomotives
R77E 10 Electric Locomotives (5 from R-83Contract)
R78 1 Rail Grinding Car
R79 1 Self-Propelled Rail Changer
R80 18 Hopper Cars
R81 conversion of 10 Passenger Cars to Rider Cars (incorporated into R-71 contract)
R82 4 Flat Cars (incorporated into R-72 Contract)
R83 5 Electric Locomotives (incorporated into R-77E Contract)
R84 2 Prototype Trucks, 8 Production Trucks (production trucks canceled)
R85 2 Prototype Trucks, 8 Production Trucks (production trucks canceled)
R86 2 Prototype Trucks, 8 Production Trucks (production trucks canceled)
R87 2 Prototype Trucks, 8 Production Trucks (production trucks canceled)
R88 14 Rail Car Movers (1 purchased)
R89 1 Rail Grinding Car
R90 Pilot Overhauls, 4 cars
R91 Pilot Overhauls, 4 cars
R92 Pilot Overhauls, 4 cars
R93 Pilot Overhauls, 4 cars
R94 Used Flat Cars (Canceled)
R95 10 Revenue Collection Cars, 10 Locker Cars
R96 Overhaul 43 Flat Cars
R97 1 Vacuum Train Canceled
R98 Retrofit Traction Motors
R99 Overhaul 236 R-29 Passenger Cars
R100 2 Crane Cars (Not Purchased)
R101 30 Reconditioned Flat Cars
R102 9 Ten-ton Crane Cars (3 from R-119 Contract)
R103 3 Side Dump Cars
R104 Upgrade and Overhaul 13 Locomotives, Upgrade 22 Locomotives
R105 1 Ballast Distributor
R106 New Car Design: Future Cars (incorporated into R-110 Contract)
R107 New Car Design: Lightweight Trucks
R108 New Car Design: Propulsion Controls
R109 New Car Design: Auxiliary Systems
R110A New Tech. Test Train A Division - Design
R110B New Tech. Test Train B Division - Design
R111 Purchase 2 Cranes
R112 1 Dynamometer for Track Testing (Not Purchased)
R113 12 Three-Ton Crane Cars
R114 20 Flat Cars (Canceled)
R115 Develop and Test Prototype Air Conditioning Unit (Canceled)
R116 10 Hopper Cars (3 from R-118 Contract)
R117 10 Diesel-Electric Locomotives (Canceled) Design Stage for R120
R118 3 Hopper Cars (Incorporated into R-116 Contract)
R119 2 Ten-Ton Crane Cars (Incorporated into R-102 Contract)
R120 7 Diesel-Electric Locomotives
R121 Overhaul 22 Flat Cars and 2 Crane cars
R122 Overhaul 18 R51 Flat Cars
R123 Convert 16 passenger cars to 2 continuous welded rail train
R124 3 Tampers (Track and Structures purchases)
R125 1 Ballast Regulator (Track and Structures Purchases)
R126 Overhaul 20 Diesel Electric Locomotives (8 R47 & 12 R52)
R127 EP001-EP010 (Refuse train propulsion units) Bombardier
R128 Overhaul 2 continuous welded rail trains
R129 Overhead Cranes (for shop)
R132 Planning MW104111- replace Coney Island Yard Cranes
R133 Overhaul 27 R58 Refuse Flat Cars
R134 EP011-EP018 (Refuse train propulsion units) Bombardier
R135 Overhaul Four Diesel Locomotives
R136 Upgrade/Repair 2 Track Geometry Cars
R137 Vacuum Cleaning Train (for track maintenance)
R138 Overhaul 18 Hopper cars
R139 Overhaul 4 refuse flat cars
R140 Overhaul 1 rail grinding train
R141 Recondition 24 NYCT flat cars and 6 SIR flat cars
Whoops. So that's why there was no announcement when we were rerouted over the bridge.
Chuck Greene
R162 Furnish and Deliver Twelve 3-ton Crane Cars
R167 Upgrade and Modernize Existing NYC Transit Diesel Electric Locomotive
--Mark
Nice list, but IIRC wasn't there a R-39 for replacement cars for the
BUs, but never built?
8-) ~ Sparky
I meant for the Qs on the MJ.
8-) ~ Sparky
Then there was an R-39 "proposal", if nothing more for light weight
cars for the remaining "ELs". BTW, how's weather up your direction?
I scratched half my weekend to Maine, due to the projection of SNOW
and winter weather advisory. Enough already.
8-) ~ Sparky
www.forgotten-ny.com
Well, that record didn't last very long, did it?
"2nd thoughts
on S. Ferry
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is rethinking the planned redesign of the South Ferry subway station amid concerns that the construction will tear up part of Battery Park, sources said yesterday.
The plans to revamp the station, which serves the 1 and 9 trains, would tap into the $4.5 billion in federal funds earmarked after the terror attacks to improve transit downtown.
The original plan for South Ferry would have involved tearing up a swath of Battery Park and dozens of trees on its eastern side.
The MTA is now considering several options — including one that would "minimalize" the effect on the park, sources said. Planners want to extend the subway platform so that all 10 cars can pull into the station instead of just the first five.
An MTA spokesman could not be reached for comment.
Meanwhile, rebuilding officials exploring a one-seat ride from lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport are looking at a plan to create a "hybrid" subway car that could use existing rail lines and the light-rail AirTrain tracks connecting the airport to Jamaica Station, sources said.
Pete Donohue and Maggie Haberman"
While this may appear to be a tribute to the Stars and Stripes, we will actually look at flagging rules in today’s lesson. I have touched briefly upon flagging rules in the past. In this particular little workshop we will probe deeper into the subject.
In many railroad rulebooks for many years, flagging rules have been known as rule 99. On a few others it has been given a different number 130, as it is designated in the NORAC book. Some of the methods may vary slightly as well and we’ll look at those, but in any event the overall requirements of this rule are the same. The use of torpedoes, fusees and in the case of flagging in daylight, a red flag are all essential components of the flagging equation.
Once upon a time, it was essential in railroading to be extremely well versed on all aspects of Rule 99. Flagging was very important, especially with the operation of trains in non-signaled territory through the use of timetable schedules and train orders. Your train required an absolute form of protection when moving slowly or stopped. No other duties were to be allowed to interfere with providing flag protection to your train. Flagging was also routinely used in other aspects of train movements to protect against other trains.
In today’s world virtually all railroads have eliminated cabooses from trains. This has resulted in some modifications to the requirements of flagging rules, which has resulted in somewhat of a change in their significance. Flagging rules been eliminated by at least one road. CNIC has dropped all flagging rules from their US operations rulebook. The use of track warrants and automatic block signals take the place of the requirements for flagging, so CN management has determined flagging requirements under the traditional scope are no longer necessary. Some railroads have opted to keep them but suspend such rules by use of a track warrant when necessary. Other roads use absolute blocks or direct traffic control rules to protect trains thus relieving crews from having to provide flag protection. We will delve into this in a bit. On many roads though, flagging rules are still in effect and used as required. We will examine these rules past and present.
One of the reason flagging rules may be suspended in today’s railroad scene is the fact there are only two crew members on most trains. It would be difficult for a crew to provide flag protection when there are hardly any of them on the train to protect it and perform the other duties. Also, in this era of cabooseless trains, in addition to walking back the prescribed distance, the employee providing the flag protection would also have to walk the entire length of the train as well. After walking seven or eight thousand feet of train (or more) then having to walk the prescribed distance in compliance with the rules would take forever to accomplish. And by then, a following train could have already plowed into the back of your now stopped train before the Flagman could even get back to the tail end yet alone the required flagging distance.
Under the rules, in non-signaled territory, if a train cannot sustain at least half the normal maximum speed, or may be operating under circumstances where it could be overtaken by a following train, flag protection must be afforded. For example, if normal timetable speed is 40 MPH and the train cannot sustain at least 20 MPH, flag protection must be afforded. To protect a moving train, lighted fusees (pronounced Few-ZEES) are dropped from the caboose of such a moving train. They are dropped off along the right of way at intervals that do not exceed the burning time of the fusee. Most railroads use ten minute fusees, so this means a lighted fusee must be dropped of at least once every ten minutes until the train reaches more than one half of track speed.
Good judgement and common sense are required for dropping off or placing lighted fusees. You certainly don’t want to drop them on a road crossing or a bridge for obvious reasons. You also want to take grade and curvature into consideration as well.
In the case of an unattended fusee, with this being the one tossed off by the Flagman of the slowly moving train, a following train that encounters the unattended fusee must bring their train to a stop consistent with good train handling techniques. This means don’t put the train into emergency to get stopped but stop it quickly and safely using service braking. Now if the following train were already operating at restricted speed, they would have to stop before passing the unattended fusee as this is a stop signal they should be on the lookout for.
Rules have varied over the years and from railroad to railroad. In the case of an unattended fusee encountered, there have been several different philosophies invoked. Once stopped, the crew is required to both wait until that fusee burns out and then proceed at restricted speed, or simply come to a stop and then proceed at restricted speed for one mile or two miles. CSX requires that you do not have to stop but immediately reduce to restricted speed for fifteen minutes. In any event, you are looking out for all that bad stuff including another unattended fusee or perhaps even the Flagman of that train ahead that might be flagging you to a stop.
If encountering nothing requiring that you must stop while proceeding that prescribed distance or time, you may then proceed at normal speed.
If you were in a situation where you had stopped and needed to afford flag protection there was (and continues to be) a specific procedure for doing that as well. In the days before radios, the Engineer would sound a whistle signal to instruct the Flagman to get off the train and provide flag protection under the rules. The sounding of one long and three short blasts of the whistle was used to protect the rear of the train and three shorts and one long to protect the front of the train. The Conductor and Flagman on the caboose had to be attentive for the sound of this whistle signal. Even in the absence of the whistle signals, the crew had to be attentive and mindful of the situation and take the necessary measures to protect their train.
Flag protection for stopped trains worked as follows. Upon hearing the whistle signal, receiving instructions on the radio or under any other circumstance that requiring flag protection, the Flagman would gather up his flagging kit and embark upon his journey.
The flagging kit is comprised of a metal container with a strap to carry over your shoulder. This container carries a supply of fusees, a compartment to hold a supply of torpedoes and a red flag.
As I mentioned in the restricted speed piece, torpedoes are metal packets containing gunpowder. There are two soft metal straps that resemble large twist ties coming off this packet and used for strapping the torpedo onto the rail. When the torpedoes are run over by a train or railcar, they explode making a boom sound about the same volume as a silver salute type of firecracker.
The Flagman will walk back the distance as prescribed in the timetable and place two more torpedoes and light a fusee. Flagging distances are determined by such factors as track speed, terrain and grade. Most railroads used a chart based upon speed as their basic guide but could modify this on a particular portion of track in the special instructions of the timetable. On some railroads the scale worked like this;
0 to 10 MPH, one-quarter mile.
11 to 20 MPH, one-half mile.
21 to 30 MPH, three quarters of a mile.
31 to 40 MPH, one mile.
41 to 50 MPH, one and one-quarter miles.
51 to 60 MPH, one and one-half miles.
61 to 70 MPH, one and three-quarter miles.
71 to 80 MPH, two miles.
81 to 90 MPH, two and one-quarter miles.
In the NORAC book the table is slightly different.
20 MPH or less, on-quarter mile.
Between 21 and 30 MPH, one-half mile.
Between 31 and 40 MPH, one mile.
Between 41 and 90 MPH, one and one-half miles.
91 MPH or greater, two miles.
The old Grand Trunk Western rule 99 used measurements in yards based upon range of vision and, curvature and grade. In daytime with no down or descending grade toward the train within one mile of its rear and a clear view for 2000 yards from an approaching train, a flagging distance of at least 1000 yards was required. In other places and times at least 1500 yards was required.
If there was a downward grade towards their trains within one mile of its rear, 2000 yards was required.
And of course, the always popular extra precautions had to be taken as conditions warranted.
In my initial MoPac days flagging distances were prescribed by speeds above and below 35 MPH; one mile where maximum speed was under 35 and below, two miles for speeds in excess of 35 MPH. And once again, the timetable might modify these distances. On the station page of the timetable would be a notation of flagging distance, usually in feet or mileage. It might say "Flagging distance 2500 feet" or perhaps "Flagging distance two miles." Normal timetable speed, terrain and other factors are taken into consideration when prescribing the actual distance required for flagging distances.
Today CSX uses the same scale as the MoPac used to use; 35 MPH and above requires two miles and below 35 MPH one mile.
In all of the above examples these scales were minimum flagging distances. Again, common sense and the timetable might prescribe a greater distance. So with all of this required information burned into his memory, off goes the Flagman walking the prescribed distance. Upon his arrival at the required distance, the Flagman places two torpedoes one hundred to one hundred fifty feet apart on the rail, lights a fusee placing it along side the rail and then proceeds back half the distance to the end of the train and waits. The Flagman is required to wait at this spot until recalled to the train, they flag a following train to a stop or until relieved. To be recalled, either a whistle signal or a call on the radio instructing him to return will be given.
Should it be flagging a following train to a stop, upon doing so, the Flagman will then board this train and inform the crew of what is happening. The Engineer of this train may, upon permission of this Flagman, proceed at restricted speed to close up behind the stopped train. The Flagman may then return to his caboose and the flagman on board following train would then have to drop off to begin to protect his own train now.
In the event of being relieved, the Flagman would be replaced. This might be the result of the crew expiring on the hours of service. The Flagman, even though expired on the hours of service still may not leave his post until somebody relieves him. Even though dead on the hours of service, protection of his train still takes priority. His relief could be in the form of train order issued by the Train Dispatcher. The Dispatcher then assumes the responsibility and may hold all following trains at a specified location short of the stopped train until it starts moving again when recrewed. The order issued might inform all trains to "Wait at (location)." Once the stopped train begins to move again, the Dispatcher would then issue orders to all the trains being held behind the stopped train permission to pass such point from where they were being held. Or the relief could be in another Flagman coming out to take over the responsibilities.
In Canada before the era of cabooseless operation, there were a few additional steps in flagging rules. The Flagman was required to place torpedoes right behind the caboose first, and on both rails as opposed to just one. They were also required to walk back the prescribed distance and follow the rules like their counterparts in the United States but also placing torpedoes on both rails at the required flagging distance instead of just one rail.
When the explosion of one or two torpedoes is heard, the Engineer on the train exploding them would acknowledge this fact with two blasts of the whistle and then immediately reduce his train to restricted speed. Even if only one torpedo explosion occurs and is heard, the train must still be reduced to restricted speed with the crew keeping a vigilant lookout for a stop signal be it red flag, burning fusee or flagman giving a stop sign.
The radio was never to be used to circumvent flagging rules. One could never assume who was behind them. In the days before the ninety-seven channel radios, foreign line trains (usually trackage rights trains of another railroad operating over the line of the host railroad) were not likely to have the host railroad radio channel. This meant such trackage right trains would not hear any call from a stopped train ahead of them over the radio. So you needed to provide the proper flag protection as required.
Whenever a Flagman was recalled to their train, they were to light a fusee and leave it at the location where they had positioned themselves waiting to flag a following train to a stop. As they proceeded back to the caboose, they had to be mindful of the potential for following trains just the same. They also had to light and drop fusees not to exceed the burning time of the fusees as they headed back to their train. Even though they were heading back to the caboose, they still had to provide protection. And the torpedoes they placed on the rails were left in place.
Once you boarded the train and it began to move again, the Flagman was required to light and place a fusee on the ground immediately behind the caboose. And until the train reached at least one half of normal speed, they were to light and drop fusees along the way not to exceed the burning time of the fusees.
Now in the event a Flagman was in the process of heading back to protect his train and determined there was a following movement approaching before he could set the torpedoes and get into position, they were required to immediately place the torpedoes on the rail, then light a fusee and continue towards the approaching train giving them stop signals. Of course good judgment had to be used and you were not to head towards the approaching train while standing within the gauge of the rail (in between the rails).
Flag protection was also required in the event of a train overrunning a location where they were supposed to stop. If a train order only gave a train rights to Able and they went beyond Able, even if only by a short distance before stopping, flag protection had to immediately be provided ahead of their train against a possible opposing movement approaching them from the opposite direction. This requirement was for all territory, not just non-signaled. Also, flag protection would be required under other circumstances as necessary, especially against first class trains operating on timetable schedules.
In the days of dispatching and operating trains by timetable schedules and train orders, particularly in non-signaled territory, flagging rules as prescribed by Rule 99 were not only the requirement, they could also be a lifesaver. They were the last line of defense in accident prevention. There are other types of non-signaled track aside from those with none at all. This would include the opposite direction of track signaled for a current of traffic. Should you have double track railroad with one track designated as the eastbound and the other as the westbound, this meant each track was assigned operation for one direction only and were normally equipped with a block signal system for that particular direction.
Now even though it was assigned one direction, trains could and often were operated against the current of traffic. Sort of like running the wrong way on a one way street, only there were rules in effect to permit such operation. If a train was authorized to operate against the current of traffic, this meant operation without the protection of block signals to the rear of their train. Should this train either stop or be unable to maintain at least one half of normal speed, flag protection would be required.
Trains could be and sometimes are relieved by a train order or track warrant of the requirements of flagging. A train order would be issued that might read "Not required to protect against following trains." Or perhaps they might be relieved from having to protect against only some trains. They might have an order that read "Not required to protect against extra trains." In some situations trains would be relieved from flagging for specific time periods. Their relief order might read "Not required to protect against all trains from 600 am until 1001am." There were other methods of modifying flagging rules as well in through the use of train orders as well, but we won’t go through all of them here.
In today’s world with track warrant control replacing train orders on numerous railroads, there is a line on the track warrant for to provide for relief from flagging. This line when instructed to be checked by the issuing Dispatcher would read "Protection as required by Rule 99 is not required." Like the train order, this meant the crew on the train would not have to provide flag protection as prescribed by the rules. In such circumstances, the Dispatcher would be required to hold any following movements until the train ahead reported clear of a specific point first.
There is also another method to provide flag protection relief on a track warrant. This method would allow two or more trains to occupy overlapping limits in non-signaled territory without requiring flag protection. A line on the track warrant will be issued to all trains or movements authorized within such limits that reads "Between (location) and (location) make all movements at restricted speed. Limits occupied by train." Under this authorization, all trains involved had to be prepared to stop short of another train that could be working within these limits. Once again, that restricted speed issue surfaces. Everybody governed by these instructions has to be on the lookout for other movements at all times within the limits designated on the track warrant.
Automatic block signal systems normally overrode the requirements of rule 99. If you have two block signals, a block and an interlocking signal or a block and distant signal to the rear, you are not required to afford flag protection. In direct traffic control (DTC) territory that is non-signaled, you are issued an absolute block in which you are the only train authorized to be in any part of the limits of that block.
As you can see, flagging rules are absolute and essential. Employees had to be well versed in their meaning and application. Failure to do so could result in disaster.
Back in 1986 I met a retired Conductor from the New York Central Railroad. He told me of a story that took place during the Second World War when the Central, like most railroads of that era, was operating numerous troop trains which were transporting military troops en route to ports of demarcation destined for service in the various war theatres abroad.
He told of traveling at less than half of the normal track speed. He had positioned himself at the tail end of the last car of the train with a case of fusees. About every ten minutes he lighted and dropped off a fusee. After this went on for some time, a well-dressed man came up to him identifying himself as a member of the accounting department of the Central. He observed the Flagman lighting and dropping off the fusees. After several more had been lighted and dropped, the suit questioned why this Flagman was "Wasting company assets by throwing these things off the train."
The Flagman pointed behind their train and asked him to observe the glow of the light on the horizon behind them. When the suit acknowledged this glow in the night sky the Flagman explained to him that was another train following theirs. He went on to explain to this suit the reason he was "wasting the company’s valuable assets" was to keep that train from catching up to and plowing into them likely resulting in a horrible wreck with tragic and fatal results. He suggested to the suit that should something like this happen, he would be spending all of his time calculating how much money a disaster like this would wind up costing the company.
He said the suit commended him for making sure everything was being kept safe and walked back into the train, not to be seen by that Flagman again. Proof that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Support our troops.
And so it goes.
Tuch
Hot Times on the High Iron, ©2003 by JD Santucci
Is it around 120th St NB and around 130th St. SB? Thanks.
Also, is there anyting interesting about the structure or station worth seeing?? I am planning on visiting this station when I visit NYC in August.
Last year I stayed in Queens and rode the 7 daily. I really enjoyed the unique concerte structure in the middle of Queens boulevard around 40th St. where I started most of my trips. It was very interesting in contrast to the Steel structure at Willets Point-She Stadium like I'm used to here in Chicago. The Doubl-Decker structure at Queens Boro Plaza is really awesome. The only complaint I had was that the conductors needed to do a better job of identifying trains as local or express before departing Queens-Boro Plaza outbound (Towards Main St.) Some did good, but most were too quiet or didn't say anything. But then one time many people on the platform and train started yelling "local or Express" until the conductor identified the train as a local. I found out quickly that the signs on the side of the train don't do much help identifying the 7 as a local or express. Half of the train says 7 express and half 7 local. OVerall it was alot of fun though and one of those things that you can say "only in New York". One of the many reason I love NYC.
No. The same line emerges from underground at Dyckman (200th) Street and continues for about a mile north in Manhattan as an el, and then for about another mile in the Bronx elevated to 242nd St.-Van Cortlandt Park.
Also, if you had been around 65 years ago, the Queensboro Plaza station would have been even more awsome, since it was twice the size of the current complex (width, not height) and had trains running to Manhattan across the Queensboro Bridge and down the Second Ave. el, as well as through the Steinway and 60th Street tunnels.
Anyway, back to the present, I believe once the R62A's become the dominant rolling stock on the 7, it'll be easier to identify trains with their larger rollsigns....given, of course the T/O's/C/R's change the rollsigns when necessary.
Why is that? If the signs are set wrong, the signs are set wrong.
The signs are often set wrong because a train on the 7 can change its identity on the spur of a moment. What was supposed to be a local becomes an express. What was supposed to be an express becomes a local.
I though I knew the (&) line! Where *is* the spur of the moment. Is it in Queens, or is it in Manhattan.
Bored Troublemakers want to know~!
I guess the problem can be blamed on the laziness on the staff. That's all I can deduct, or the fact that it doesn't matter. I've ridden the 7 and I have a knack for knowing if a train is local or express.
Me too, at least by the time we get to Woodside (in either direction). :-)
Tom
I understand that the train can change from local to express or vice versa at the last minute, but you would like to think that either the whole train would show the same designation, right or wrong.
Why freak? Both local and express stop there, with a whopping six minute time difference between the two. If you pass up a local to wait for the next express, you'll typically save a whole three minutes, but have far less breathing room.
Out of towners freaking over getting to MoMA Qns is understandable.
I understand that the train can change from local to express or vice versa at the last minute, but you would like to think that either the whole train would show the same designation, right or wrong.
Provided the crew has time to change all the signs. Typically, only the signs in the lead car and conductor's car(s) are updated.
I very nice line, htat I have not ridden on since I lived on 102nd Street
Elias
Elias
Yup... That *is* what I was looking for. What is Smith-9th... 60+ feet above sea level?
What is Washington Heights?
I have seen railroad maps that mark elevations (kinda important out here... to determine where extra locomotives are needed and such), is there such a critter for the subway system.
Thanks
Elias
http://americasroof.com/nyc-manhattan.shtml
According to www.topozone.com, the GWB Bus terminal is about 200' above sea level. IIRC the A train is not particularly deep there.
Further north, the terrain gets even higher, but the A is very deep relative to surface level of the hilltop. By Dyckman St, the terrain is low and the A is still underground.
So my guess is that the A at 175th is at least 160' above sea level. Somebody who travels that way could count steps from the bus station down to the platform.
To answer another poster: this particular struture is unique among all NYC elevated routes. If you ride the #1, get off at 125th Street and stand on the platform for a while. You will be about five stories high - much higher than the normal three story height of NYC els. That's because this route, which is part of the original 1904 IRT Contract One line, was elevated for one station because of the hilly topography in the area. Go down to street level and you will understand better. At 122nd Street Broadway is at the top of a hill called Morningside Heights, near Columbia University. North of 122nd Street the ground slopes steeply downward into a valley, the bottom of which is 125th Street. North of 125th, the ground slopes up steeply to 135th Street and a neighborhood called Hamilton Heights. The subway could not be tunnelled because the grades would have been way too steep. Instead, it continued on a level route which necessitated building an el with one station. Look at the station itself from the street. A large arch bridge actually supports the station as its straddles 125th Street, a unique engineering achievement that is largely forgotten today, 99 years after it was built.
You will also note that West 125th Street does not follow the normal street grid, but instead goes at an angle SE to NW. That's because the valley was created by an old earthquake fault centuries ago, and 125th Street follows the bottom of the valley. When the 1904 subway was built this west part of 125th was called Manhattan Street - name was changed later. One more fact - the old name for this valley is Manhattanville.
Erythos = Red (Ancient Greek: the “y” is a better transliteration of the greek upsilon (u)–cf Erythromycin, a red antibiotic)
Ornithos = Bird
Philia = Friendship
Need I say more!?
Ferrum and equus are Latin words. Logia is a Greek word. Your word "Ferroequinology" is therefore a bastard.
Before you ask, the Greek for ferrum is sideros and the Greek for equus is hippos. You might have meant "Siderohippology".
Incidentally the most frequently used bastard word is "television" from the Greek "tele" far and the Latin "visio" seeing. Better alternatives would be the wholly Greek "telehorasis" or "telehorama" or the totally Latin "proculvision".
I think I'll go and watch the PV - or is that the TH?
The study of R-68s!
Back when I ran that chat room, I called it the premier chat room for siderodromopholiacs.
LMAO!
I called it the premier chat room for siderodromopholiacs.
I hope you meant siderodromophiliacs! Pholeo means something very different from phileo!
Ferro = Iron
equin (short for equine) = horse
ology = the study of
Therefore it means the study of the Iron Horse.
I kvetch - therefroe I am!!
Eclinator
Necrocrat
Panophobe*
and now Erythrornithophilia
*I'm sure somebody else invented this first, but I never saw it before.
Well, first, I think it will be a major shock and confusion for most brighton and west end straphangers. It will changes the whole Brighton and West End line histories since decade. On other hand, I was amazed by the change through TA's consideration. I wasn't trill about the flip-flop ideas at the beginning, but I guess I shall give an chance and see what this flip-flop change will bring.
At least one conductor DOES expect everything to go back exactly as it was - she still announces transfers to "the Q train running on the D line and the W train running on the B line."
The 'real' information has not yet reached all of the (operational) managers in the field. It's being passed by word of mouth so far. Any info I have has come via public media or from my counterparts in RTO.
From an operational standpoint, though, the swap is not a bad thing. First, the West End line will (as I understand it) become a full-time line. The shuttle to 36th St. will be a thing of the past. Late night West End riders will be better served.
On the otherhand, the 'D' line will have some new challanges, not all related to the swap. Prior to the bridge closing, the D line was supported by 284 - 300 R-68 cars. The West End line, being a 'slower' line will likely require more trains to maintain the same level of service on the Concourse 'D'. Add to that the supplimental schedule proposed for the 'D' line due to the signal replacement to begin later this year and you'll find that the D line may require 320 - 324 cars. This may result in R-32s back at Coney Island or even the possibility of running them on the Eastern Lines.
CI will need more cars anyway. The B/D will require more R68's than these 2 lines needed in 2001 given the increased headways the full bridge will allow and the TA is commited to exploiting. That means a number of CI r68's headed to your neighborhood. The N & Q will also need more cars for the same reason the B/D does. Then to replace the extra cars the B/D will need. If all R143's are in revenue service by the time the new service pattern is implimented, will enough ENY R40/42's be available for x-fer to CI to compensate?
You are partially mistaken. At any instant when there is a train on one side of the bridge but not at the corresponding place on the other side, there are major twisting stresses.
It doesn't help to have the same amount of service on both sides on average (even over the course of an hour), unless you can match the trains instant for instant. And of course, that's impossible given the random things that happen with trains.
I suppose that's conceivable, especially with the bridge before reconstruction, though I'd find it surprising. Do you have a source for that information?
The MTA wants to send 3 trains over the bridge on weekends, 2 to Broadway and 1 to 6th Ave. But on weekdays they want to send 2 to Broadway and 2 to 6th Ave. They don't want to send a 4th service up CPW on the weekends, and Queensbridge is no longer available as a destination.
So, something has to change from any previous plan that has ever been in effect. One possibility would be to keep the D on the Brighton, and have the West End be an orange B on weekdays and a yellow B on weekends. Another possibility is the B/D flip-flop. A third is to totally screw the Sea Beach riders by having 2 Brighton bridge services on the weekend, one West End, and no Sea Beach.
The MTA in its wisdom, or lack thereof (depending on yuor opinion), has chosen the first option.
My B/N swap would not have 2 Brighton services. The Sea Beach B wouldn't run past Pacific St on weekends, but the N would (over the bridge, but local in Manhattan). The Q (express via Brighton) would keep it's familiar weekday only pattern.
Yes, I missed that one. However, that doesn't help the Yankee fans on the Brighton line and may therefore be considered radical by some who post here.
Well, this is a flip-flop too--it's just doing it in another way.
Like it or not, the bias is that, wherever possible, the traditional routes in Manhattan are maintained, and any changes are in the outer boroughs. With Manhattan being the core of the system, this seems appropriate.
A frend from the ta told me yesterday that there are 4 slant 40s trains in Ci that are getting striped for parts/scrap can anyone confirm that ????
thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
A frend from the ta told me yesterday that there are 4 slant 40s trains in Ci that are getting striped for parts/scrap can anyone confirm that ????
thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
You are assuming things that are simply not so. While the D will, indeed, need more R-68s than it did prior to the AB tracks closure, the B will not. The B will be 100% R-40 Slants.
Maybe there will be some minor confusion the first week but after that no way.
Remember people said the same thing when the north side closed and the Brighton got 2 Q trains.
Maybe there will be some minor confusion the first week but after that no way.
Remember people said the same thing when the north side closed and the Brighton got 2 Q trains.
:-) Andrew
I thought it over...I thought they need a FULL TIME train to run to Coney Island, plain and simple, as is the situation now, they need a 24/7 train...since the D was always 24/7 - let that be the designation...the B was always a P/T train...if this wasn't the case, they would have to make changes to the yello Q, making three changes...2 changes are beter than 3...that must be their reasoning...
My guess for car assignments:
B: R40
N: R68/R40
D: R68A
Q: R68/R40
Best
Jonathan
Not neccessary, when you still have the Q in 24/7. But you still have transfer between Q (Broadway line) and the D (6th Ave) at 34 you reaching for Dekalb Ave Station and between West End and Brighton line. With this service change its like say transfer between two Brighton line (the current line and former line).
The pic is 1906, probably January...
Anyone who has a relevant website and wants to use one of the Avenue H pictures to promote saving the station, feel free. You don't have to link back to rapidtransit.net or the Third Rail article, but you might want to least cite or link to the Times article.
Peace,
ANDEE
1) What was the nature of the service patterns between the J, JJ, M, MJ, QJ, & RJ trains in the late 60s? Was there express, or skip-stop service? Which ones were what? The maps here only tell the route.
2) Yesterday I saw something very interesting...an R30 (the one in my school, different sign every day) signed as:
Jamaica Center
Parsons/Archer
Chambers St
Manhattan
(Q) Broadway
Brooklyn
Now this raises an interesting question. Broadway-Brooklyn can be used as a designation for a train running on the Broadway El, or a train running from the IRT West Side to New Lots or Flatbush, or for a train that uses the BMT B'way subway to Brooklyn. Before the current system of letters was adopted, when they had only names to refer to routes, how would you distinguish between these three if you saw a train signed as "Broadway Brooklyn"? And second, when they adopted the letters, why didn't they change the (Q) sign to "Broadway Brighton"? Note that these are real signs on this R30, similar to those currently on R-32 and R-38 cars. And worse, what if such a train arrived at Atlantic/Pacific, where all three of the above combinations would stop? Was this a security measure in case the (Q) had to be shifted to another Brooklyn Line?
While the QJ ran (168th St to Coney Island via Brighton/Nassau) on weekdays, the letter "J" was never used. In 1973, when the QJ was cut back to Broad St, it was re-introduced. The M ran from Metropolitan Ave. to Broad St when the QJ ran. The M ran express from Myrtle to Marcy. The JJ ran for only a few months in 1967/68. It ran from Atlantic Ave to Canal St. On 7/1/68, it was replaced by the KK, whose routing should be familiar to you. The RJ ran just like the QJ did after reaching Broad St.
I have been reading a lot of the posts about what should and shouldn't be posted here, which foamer got which employee in trouble, etc. and what goes on in a train while in service.
May I make a few simple suggestions?
1) MTA employees have no obligation to post anything on Subtalk that is confidential to their employer, or share information that is not intended for public consumption. "Leaks" happe all the time, and MTA may not even care, depending on the subject. But if you're not sure it belongs here, don't post it. Posting "weird" stuff and neat pictures may be nice for us, the audience, but employees do not owe Subtalk anything.
2) There's nothing wrong with using Subtalk as a way of getting feedback on sticky situations - but you have to change the details enough so people don't automatically know the real incident. In medicine, we present the case of a patient, sharing relevant clinical details while witholding, or changing other details to prevent listeners from knowing it was Mary Jones we were talking about, who lives at 555 Lexington Avenue. You could do the same - but pay attention and do it right.
3) If a person sees something illegal or dangerous on a train, and wants to do something about it, do the right thing: call 911, call the Inspector General's office, write a letter of complaint, documenting things carefully, to MTA. If you post it here in a casual manner, by the time we get to the end of a thread, who knows how the details could change by the time MTA reacts to it? Recall the "person tells person tells person" routine. The story starts out as a theft of a piece of candy and winds up as a shooting...
Take responsibility for what you post.
- Sensitive/confidential stuff ... use great care in what you post as the TA is a very anti-information organization, i.e. only those at the highest level are "authorized" to talk to the public.
- Feedback on a job situation ... I have made a number of friends who work in different parts of the system or otherwise will give me a heads up. All of this via PRIVATE e-mail. I got one this AM from a non-employee. It was something I didn't know about. I sent copies to our Pres. & several VPs. Within an hour I got a reply from one of the VPs.
- Illegal/dangerous situations ... if you are concerned about it, report it officially or keep quite. Posting it here is probably not a good idea UNTIL it become public knowledge, then you can comment on it.
- Public service ... I for one am happy to answer questions put here or at BusTalk, but I do it on my terms, i.e. if it's something I don't know I'll go to the trouble to find out, if it's something I do know & I don't feel it's confidential I'll provide it. Sometimes the person doen't get the answer they wanted or I'll tell them that they are wrong or off base, but speaking just for myself I can do that.
- Disclaimers: If a lot of the folks at the web site know you're employee or it can be easily figured out, then add a disclaimer that you are NOT speaking officially. You wouldn't want to end up on the front page of the Daily News "Train Dude, speaking for the Maintenance Department of the TA, said ...."
Mr t __:^)
BTW, a mutual friend sends out XXX rated JPGs to a group of his firends.
I delete them right away & empty the "trash" to make sure they aren't on my work machine.
That might not even be enough. I once sent a letter to the editor in to Planning Magazine. They decided to print it, called me back, and asked me where I worked. I said that I was expressing my own opinion. They said that was understood, so I told them I worked at NYC Planning. The letter to the editor was signed "Larry Littlefield, NYC Planning." THE DAY AFTER THE MAGAZINE CAME OUT I was called on the carpet for giving the appearance of representing the views of the Department.
Some are better. The NY Times, when citing the fiscal data I have prepared on my own, didn't mention my employer: I asked them not to.
Larry Littlefield: Formerly of City Planning, current employer irrelevant.
Personally everybody, all the way to the top, knows I'm a railfan here.
They also know I sometimes get involved with the public/busfans on issues outside my job responsibility. I make not secret about what I do, e.g. the fare document that Allen provided that is now in our Transportation department. They also know HOW I do this, i.e. my previous post. Even some of the folks in nycDOT & TA know of my activities.
That doesn't mean that some circumstances might not occur where I embarras my employeer, but they will probably give me the benifit of the doubt.
I think the point here is that we employees need to seriously think about these issues and decide on how best to conduct ourselves. If at all possible find a way for your boss to know what you are doing. If they are the nervious, insecure type, then maybe you better be more careful. But most, if they know in advance, will defend you to some extent should something come up. At the very least they'll tell their boss at the time, "oh yea Thurston he's a railfan nut, but he's harmless" then tell you to cool it for a while. I have both kinds of bosses here, i.e. one thinks I'm a nut, another thinks what I do provides some benifit to my employeer.
Keep in mind also that if you work for a government entity, and you do not disclose any confidential information, and you make clear that you speak for yourself and not the entity, you have a First Amendment right of free speech to say what you want, including criticizing the entity you work for.
Tom
That may be the other extreem, but as we're said in this thread you do need to be aware that what you say CAN get you in trouble, so think about it first, not after you've said (typed) it.
Did you go to an event on February 18, 6:00PM at the Urban Center Galleries (456 Madison Avenue), that was described as an APA sponsored event, a panel discussion on the transit improvements proposed by the regional transit agencies and how they fit into the greater policy objectives for the City and the Region?
---Brian
I am, and I know whereof you speak.
- - - - -
[MTA employees have no obligation to post anything on Subtalk that is confidential to their employer, or share information that is not intended for public consumption.]
That statement should be a little stronger: As an employee of NYC Transit, I'm specifically obligated to NOT post anything (on Subtalk or anywhere else) that is confidential to my employer, and to NOT share information that is not intended for public consumption. Therefore, I limit my NYCT-related postings to either public information - i.e. things that are in operation, or have been in operation, or are currently being picked - or my own (hopefully obvious) personal opinions.
Yep, that's the policy as I read it, and a pretty good one.
On Rudy's plantation, in contrast, you were hesitant to say anything to anyone about anything. At City Planning, people would call up and ask for publicly available economic data. Under Dinkins I'd give it to them. After early 1997, when things got really freaky, I'd tell them to contact someone else.
NEVER disclose sensitive information
NEVER release details about an accident
NEVER criticise TA or its policies
NEVER identify anyone under any circumstances
I am very careful of my postings because I see an opportunity to
teach and instruct. Any violation of those four rules can lead to
charges of insubordination and loss of employment. What I do after
careful review is provide 'SubSchool 101' IF warranted. I enjoy doing that because it bolsters my confidence in what I do every day
and reinforces my experience. I also enjoy sharing my knowledge with my friends. CI peter
Look here
or point to this URL: http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/queens/nyc-nybus033204299apr03,0,1561447.story?coll=nyc%2Dmanheadlines%2Dqueens
or Point and Click here
"We've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs, Gentlemen!!!"
Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddles
DOI though independent of agency they investigated still reported to and was influenced by the Mayors office.
You can not avoid this. It is better that it on an elected officials head otherwise who to hold accountable in case things go wrong
Pataki has done a masterfull job during his election of hiding from all the crap he has been doing
If reporting to the Attorney General and not the MTA Board, it would be independent, in the sense that there would be a different chain of command. MTA does not tell the Attorney General what to do.
Not sure if that would improve the quiality of oversight of the MTA operations. After the who fare increase issue fades away the public and politicians have little interest in the working of white collar investigative units. In the case of DOI, they don't want a strong DOI to crack down on the games they are playing
The AG budget is still set by the Govenor and the state senate. The govenor could easily still influence the IG's by limiting funding etc. Each new hire needs to be aproved in albany.
So you want the mta IG's be a unit of the AG's office. The current AG runs a rather tight operation. There manhattan office is real nice. A former Dot Com Space.
The MTA needs to be looked at from an operational point of view from top to bottom. Information technology needs to be put in place to adress area's that are prone to corruption and to improve the overall effeciency of the operation. Real time information shall set you free. Many of the low level scams can be easily identified and stoped befor they start costing the MTA large sums of money.
The technology exists and is being implimented by large corportations. There is a large upfront cost of implimenting such a system but at an organization the size of the MTA, it is penuts as to the cost savings
Otherwise you will have the same circular pattern of cases over and over. History proves that inconsistant procecution does not deter people from attempting to commit an act. With the current hog pog system of paper records it is very difficult to prove a case without someone feeling the heat and ratting someone out.
For point of reference it often take many weeks just to sort through boxes and boxes of junk to find anything useful. Thats if you get the opurtunity to take all business records from the offending company
Search warrents for records from contractors are often very specific to as what can be taken off property. A contractor who knows the system and wants to be a ball buster mixes his records is with other junk. The records needs to be gone through one by one on sight.
That is why better tracking makes it harder to hide money, no show jobs, purchase of lower grade materials etc.
In fact it would not be a bad idea if the mta is contracting out work to have contractors buy certain supplies such as concrete, lighting, elctrical cabling from MTA aproved suppliers at areed apon prices. The contractor would simple enter the order for the needed material into the MTA system with delivery directly to the work site for use.
One funny story. A co-worker of mine was working on a case involving the Department of Sanitation. DOS was keeping track of what trucks when out, came in, weight after pcikup etc in log books that looked like they belonged in alice in wonderland. Not to mention the entries were often written in pencil. These books weighed about 5-10 pound each.
Proceedure was to write it down in a peace of paper as the trucks when in and out then a secound person entered into this log book. Two people were employed to track these trucks in a log book that was virtually useless. It was very difficult for management to get a handle on what was going on.
The information could have been collected in a form useful to management by simply using a system that read an E-Zpass technology. Weight measurement could either been done by having a drive on scale or some on board sensor.
Cost - very cheap
Saving -tremedous
Abiltiy to track down potential issue and prevent stealing by employees.
The aligation was that NYC DOS trucks and crews were picking up garbage from local businesses and construction sites. Such an automated information system make the ability to pull off such a scheme virtually imposible.
Real time accurate information in an easy to query format would have spoted the fraud in secounds
A -- 8 AVE EXP
A -- FULTON ST EXP
A -- OZONE PARK
A -- LEFFERTS BL
Is it possible that they are finally updating R44 Destination signs just like they did on the R46's last year? I recall someone saying that they weren't gonna update R44 signs because they only operate on 2 lines (A, Rockaway Shuttle). Anyone in the know about this?
Brian
R68 2690
R44 5224
:-) Andrew
A -- FAR ROCKAWAY
A -- via JFK AIRPORT
A -- 8 AV EXP
A -- FULTON ST EXP
My long-standing comment on some bus destination signs applies here as well: By the time one reads the whole thing, the train is gone!!
And how does a train go to Far Rock "via JFK airport" its as annoying as "A via Delancy St" and "F via BWay-Nassau"
A--8 AVE EXP
A--INWOOD-207 ST
Saw cars 5390-5393 together with 5264-
OZONE PARK/LEFFERTS BL/8 AV EXP/FULTON ST EXP
Coming home northbound with south motor 5254
INWOOD/207 ST/8AV LCL
I wonder why does the TA insists on not including the northbound Fulton St status on all signs.
4. Which train will take you from the Native American caves of Inwood in Manhattan to the ocean beaches of the Rockaways?
a) IND E train
b) IND A train
c) BMT R train
d) IRT 9 train
See more sample questions here.
And you can find out more about the new exam from this New York Times article.
--Mark
These are the stations I can think of that are named after buildings. PS: I am talking about original station names, not names that have been tacked on since the station opened. (Example: West 8th Street on the BMT - had "New York Aquarium" tacked on. Since the Aquarium was not there when the station opened [it was in Battery Park until Robert Moses closed it as revenge for not getting the Brooklyn-Battery Bridge {according to Robert Caro}], that station doesn't count.)
City Hall - Lexington Avenue IRT
City Hall - Broadway BMT
Borough Hall - Brooklyn IRT (The Boro Prez is not a powerful position anymore, but it was in the early 20th century.)
45th Road/Courthouse Square - Flushing IRT
Grand Central - Lexington Avenue IRT
Bowling Green - Lexington Avenue IRT
Grand Army Plaza - Brooklyn IRT
68th Street/Hunter College - Lexington Avenue IRT
77th Street/Lenox Hill Hospital - Lexington Avenue IRT
Christopher Street/Sheridan Square - 7th Avenue IRT
Brooklyn Bridge - Lexington Avenue IRT
High Street/Brooklyn Bridge - 8th Avenue IND
Who can think of some others?
Is Broadway Junction a structure? More so than some of the other examples.
Until its name change to Neptune Avenue, Van Sicklen on the F, named for the hotel at that location and no other reason. Further in the past, don't forget Culver Depot.
Well Times Square fits both the "place" categories and the "building" categories, so it could be used in the original stations names named after buildings. I think Longacre Square became Times Square simaltanuously with the building of the subway and the Times Building in 1904.
If you want to have a category for stations that are named for places (as opposed to streets), we can add a lot.
To quibble slightly, Courthouse Square, Sheridan Square, Grand Army Plaza, Bowling Green, are places, not buildings or structures. And Brooklyn Bridge is a thoroughfare that people travel on, not just a structure.
(68th Street/Hunter College - Lexington Avenue IRT)
Also on the official map, BPB-Lehman College, 161st Yankee Stadium, 81st-Museum of Natural History, Woodhaven Blvd - Queens Mall(!), Willetts Point - Shea Stadium, WTC, 34th-Penn Station, South Ferry.
I think his original criteria was for stations named for buildings from the construction of the stations.
-I'm not sure if 161 Yankee Stadium counts in those criteria, but certainly counts in general. The mosaic says "161 St-River" I believe.
-Woodhaven Blvd counts, but not because of it's current name of "Queens Mall (Center)", but because it was called "Slattery Plaza", whatever that was.
Of course Shea, and WTC count in general, but not according to Mitch's "original station name" criteria.
South Ferry and 81st Street fit of course.
People assume that "South Ferry" refers to the fact that it is a ferry terminal at the southernmost tip of Manhattan. Not so. South Ferry refers to the ferry line that ran from that point to the tip of Hamilton Avenue in Brooklyn. The ferry terminal in Brooklyn was also known as South Ferry, just as both ends of Fulton Ferry were known by that name.
Properly, the name of the station should be "Municipal Ferry" or "Staten Island Ferry."
Of course a ferry is not a building. Is it a structure.
They can add something to the name, but I think the main name, and front part of the name should remain "Fulton Street". See Here.
Other than Broadway-Nassau, which can easily be changed to Fulton Street (as explained in the above link), all the other "Fulton stations have tile mosaics that say "Fulton Street". It would be a shame to cover the great new mosaics at the JMZ station, or the old ones at the 4/5 station. The base name has to remain "Fulton" for that reason alone. Call it Fulton Center, Fulton Station, Fulton STreet, or Fulton Whatever, but it has to remain "Fulton" because of all the tile walls. They should however take down the Broadway-Nassau metal signs, and replace them with Fulton Street (or Fulton Whatever). Other than that, no other name change will work, because there is no way to tastefully change the mosaics on all the walls in the other stations.
Perhaps "Fulton Street, New Amsterdam Transit Center" and "Broadway, New Amsterdam Transit Center" would do. They could add mosaics to cover the new concept. How about windmills?
To really stick with the retro theme, it could be "Niew Amsterdam."
Not that we're likely to see any renaming at all.
Hudson Terminal (original name for the last stop on the E)
181st Street-George Washington Bridge (if Brooklyn Bridge counts, then so does this)
Canal Street-Holland Tunnel (same here!)
110th Street-Cathedral Parkway (once removed)
A10 Medical Center
B01, F01 Gallery Place (National Portrait Gallery)
B03 Union Station
C07 Pentagon (A really big building)
C10 National Airport
D03, F03 L'Enfant Plaza (Hotel' shopping arcade)
D08 Stadium-Armory
E08 Prince George's Plaza (shopping center)
F02 Archives
K01 Court House Station
Other that are borderline;
D01 Federal Triangle
D02 Smithsonian
D05 Capitol South
F05 Navy Yard
Future planed stations
M03 Tyson Center (Tyson Central D) (shopping mall)
M04 Pike Seven Plaza (Tyson Central C) (shopping center)
M06 Wolf Trap (outdoor concert venue)
M11 Washington Dulles International Airport
What about White Flint (after the mall of the same name?
Mark
Opps !!
John
In San Francisco, there's BART's Coliseum station, and arguably El Cerrito Plaza and Bay Fair (both named for a nearby shopping center).
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
-Andrew Merelis
However, I do realize that this is a fantasy, and won't actually happen (nor should it). The station names are too well known to justify such massive changes. I would agree that this would make sense where formerly separate stations have been joined: Fulton/Bdwy/Nassau is perhaps the best example.
It would be gradually possible - in the style of "42nd Street" changing to "42nd Street - Bryant Park".
23rd St would actually be a very good place to start adding suffixes: 23rd St on the Broadway Line could become "23rd Street - Madison Square", but the others would require some work in coming up with a suffix.
23rd Street-Park, 23rd Street-6th, etc. Don't always have to do handsprings.
Good luck.
McBurney/St Vincent's.
Chelsea-Village.
Next?
---Brian
You know what I mean.
Good night.
Take Pride,
Brian
and, let's not forget:
23rd Street-Bellevue Medical Center (U,Y)
It get's silly when you have to have the name of the street the line is on after every station.
If the TA wanted to, they could eliminate street names entirely on the Broadway Line with little problem because of the number of Squares etc on the line!
What about Beach 98th St / Playland?
--Mark
On the Metro..
Lexington Market
Reisterstown Plaza
Mondawmin
On the Light Rail
BWI
Camden Yards
Convention Center
Lexington Market
Penn Station
Hunt Valley (in reference to the Mall)
Mark
The R17, the R16's IRT twin, never had the same problems. Was that due to proper maintenance (they spent the bulk of their early years on the high-profile east-side IRT), or were they mechanically different?
The boys at Kingston say the same about their R-16
-- Ed Sachs
In early 1961, the new R27s suffered from guilt-by-association. Followng a particularly bad snowstorm that winter (which had the Brighton and Sea Beach lines shut down for several hours with 3' snowdrifts in the open cuts) the brand-new R27s were pulled of the Brighton (QT) line and reassigned to the all-underground RR (now R) line.
That was the last time it happend. By the following winter, all of the R27s and R30s had been delivered, and the RR line as all new cars as well.
-- Ed Sachs
The G.E. R-16's were scrapped first, I believe in the early 80's. Those R-16's were mothballed at Rockaway Park, Concourse, Fresh pond Yards and elsewhere. I can't say when the last G.E. R-16's were in revenue service.
Bill "Newkirk"
A search through the archives says it was June 1987 on the M.
thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
i dare to ask why ????
46s are in better condition !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
You have can have "faith" that the R40s may stick around longer, but not know their true "fate" or destiny as to whether they will.
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
thats sucks !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
N-slant 40
-Myrtle Ave (L), Wyckoff Ave (M) to Myrtle-Wyckoff Avenues --- no mosaic tablets to change, just take down the Wyckoof signs upstairs, and the Myrtle signs downstairs, and put up "Myrtle-Wyckoff Ave" signs.
-Broadway-Nassau St (A,C) to Fulton Street. Call the whole complex Fulton Street. Easy to do because it only involves taking down the Broadway-Nassau signs and replacing them with Fulton Street. Again, no mosaics to deal with on Bway-Nassau St (the little IND "Bway"s and "Nassau"s could stay - no big deal - WTC said H&M for years). The other stations all say Fulton street in their mosaics, so no changes needed there.
-Bleecker St (6), Bway/Lafayette to Bleecker-Layayette. Again, very easy to do. Change the metal signs on the Bway-Lafayette platforms to Bleecker-Lafayette. The Lexington Bleecker station is to undergo a renovation, and in the contract one part of the station, they can just renovate the old tablets. On the extensions, which are ugly anyway, they can have a great opportunity to play with the name, and make new tilework showing the new station name - Bleecker-Lafayette Streets.
The ones above are the simplest to change, and would not involve much money, or construction, or covering or destroying mosaics. I am all for changing the names of all the transfer complexes into a uniformed name. Some of them are hard though because of mosaics, for example Lorimer St-Metropolitan Ave. It would be hard to tastefully incorporate a new name into either of those stations.
Then there are some others that could easily be changed without worrying about mosaic tablets, but have no idea what to call the complex:
-6th Ave - (L) and 14th Street - (1,2,3,9)
-Roosevelt Ave - 74th St
Both of these could have their entire names changed, and would not involve anything but metal sign changes.
Any suggestions?
That would be unhelpful for 7th Avenue Line riders as Cortlandt St is actually at the World Trade Center.
True, but only the 1/9 7th Ave riders would to Cortlandt, and only the 2/3 7th Ave riders would go to the new World Trade Center station (formerly Park Place), so it wouldn't really be confusing.
Yeah, but if you are destined for the World Trade Center and you are on the 1/9, you will get off at Cortlandt-World Trade Center, and if you are on the 2/3, you will get off at World Trade Center (former Park Pl). How is this confusing? For all the other passengers not bound for the WTC, it doesn't even matter, they are headed to other 2/3 stops or the remaining 1/9 stops
How is this more confusing than if you are at 145th/St Nicholas bound for 155th street? If you are at 145th, no matter which side of the fork you are destined for, the next stop is 155th, but they are different stops.
Just because there's an awkward situation there, you don't have to create one somewhere else too.
Yeah, but if you are destined for the World Trade Center and you are on the 1/9, you will get off at Cortlandt-World Trade Center, and if you are on the 2/3, you will get off at World Trade Center (former Park Pl).
I'd much rather extend the 8th Avenue Local tracks a bit further South, between the Broadway and 7th Avenue Local Lines to a terminus at Cortlandt St, with a transfer passage to both the 7th Av and Broadway Lines. Then call the station at Cortlandt St "World Trade Center" and the A/C/2/3 complex "Park Place".
Why is it awkward up there? I don't think it's really a problem up at 155th stree, and I still don't think it would be a problem at WTC either.
As for the WTC, if you work near the WTC area, you are going know which exit or station will be close to where you work, so if you are a 1 rider, you will either go straight through to Cortlandt-WTC, or you may even get off at Chambers and switch to a 2 to WTC (former Park Place, depending on works for you and what exit gets you closest your destination (or visa-versa for the 2 riders). And tourists or non-regular users destined for the WTC area will be in the area whether or not they get of of the 1/9 station or the 2/3 station.
It's not like it's two stations in a row on the same line with the same name. That would be awkward and confusing. This would be two stations with a similar name (remember the 1/9 Cortlandt-WTC would still have the a slightly different name), but they are not even on the same line technically 2/3 trains never go on the SF line, and the 1/9 never go to Brooklyn.
The 1/9 goes one way and the 2/3 goes another way, just like up north at 155th Street the C goes one way and the B goes the other.
I'd much rather extend the 8th Avenue Local tracks a bit further South, between the Broadway and 7th Avenue Local Lines to a terminus at Cortlandt St, with a transfer passage to both the 7th Av and Broadway Lines. Then call the station at Cortlandt St "World Trade Center" and the A/C/2/3 complex "Park Place".
But then there is construction involved. It's a good idea, but with my idea, the only cost involved is the removal of one set of signs, and replacement with another. As for calling the 8th Ave line's station Park Place, I don't think that would be an accurate name for the 8th Ave line station. I still think it would be fine to change Park Place to WTC, but the reverse is not feasible. If we can't agree on WTC as a complex name, I don't feel it could be Park Pl for a complex name either.
1) the LIRR station IIRC is called Flatbush Avenue Terminal.
2) Atlantic Terminal would be inaccurate as it would only be the terminal for one of the lines there.
How about holding our noses and saying that if some bigwig politician will fund a 4 track Second Avenue Subway, it can be renamed something ghastly like J** B**** Transportation Center?
Cypress Hills - whatever street the entrance is located at.
Jamaica-Van Wyck - Jamaica Ave
5 Ave - Bryant Park
Sheepshead Bay - just add Road to the name.
Prospect Park - Empire Blvd-Prospect Park.
Except at most stations in London.
OK.
This is Crescent Street. Queens-bound J, the next stop will be Crescent Street.
Eastern Parkway is a strange name, since the entire line from that point to Utica is under Eastern Parkway. I prefer to call it by its subtitle, Brooklyn Museum. (A street name would be even better but we don't have one.)
....see, this is how SubTalk legends like 76th Street start......
B Line-Between Brighton Beach/Brooklyn and 145th Street/Manhattan daily except for late nights. Rush hours extended from 145th St to Bedford Park Blvd/Bronx. Operates via Brighton Express,6th Ave Express,Central Park West Local,Concourse Local
D Line-Between Stillwell Ave/Brooklyn and 205th Street/Bronx at all times. Express in Bronx Peak direction Rush Hours. Makes local stops between 36th St and Pacific Street midnight hours, and 59th St to 145th Street late nights when B does not operate. Skips DeKalb Ave when M Line operates. Operates via West End Local,4th Ave Express,6th Ave Express,central Pk West Express,Concourse Line
M Line-Between Metropolitan Ave and 9th Ave Weekdays 6AM to 8PM. Extended from 9th Ave to Bay Pkway rush hours. Operates via Myrtle Ave Local,Broadway/Jamaica Local,Nassau Street Local,4th Ave Local,West End Line
N Line-Between Stillwell Ave and Ditmars Blvd/Astoria at all times via Sea Beach Local,4th Ave Express,Broadway Express to 34th Street then via Local,60th Street Line,Astoria Line. Late nights via Broadway Local. Skips De Kalb Ave weekdays 6AM to 9PM
Q Line-Between Stillwell Ave and 57th St/7th Ave via Brighton Local and Broadway Express at all times
R Line-Between 95th St/4th Ave and Continental Ave at all times via 4th Ave Local,Broadway Local,60th St Line,Queens Blvd Local
W Line-Between Ditmars Blvd/Astoria and Whitehall Street Weekdays 6AM to 8 PM via Broadway Local,60th St and Astoria Line.
G Line-Midnight hours cut back from Continental Ave to Queens Plaza 12AM to 5:30AM
J/Z Line-Skip Stop service span to operate inb both directions rush hours and weekend J service extended to Broad Street
This plan will do the following:
1-Maintain midday service level on 4th Ave Local same as current.
2-Introduce weekend Brighton Line Express Service
3-Maintain both 6th Ave and Broadway service for Brighton Line passengers.
4-Improve downtown service
5-Improve late night 4th Ave Local Service
6-Restore 24 hour service to West End,Sea Beach,4th Ave to/from Manhattan in over 25 years
Any comments
Thank You
Also the B should go to E 200th Street middays and rush hours to extend the Concourse Express, to make up for this, the B can be the late night and weekend West End SHUTTLE, and unlike last time, it will be a shuttle shortly after midnight in BOTH directions, just like the 5 line. Last train from 145 St at 10:35 pm
Brighton xpress service will likley be curtailed from 2004-2008 for other work in that area.
There will also be significant work in Manhattan the will affect weekend service, too.
Of course until the host puts in a policy about banging people in and posting about it you will have to wait until it filters down.
Brighton xpress service will likley be curtailed from 2004-2008 for other work in that area.)
I don't see anything on the MTA web site (other than SAS stuff) that projects beyond the 2000-2004 capital plan. If there are internal documents that haven't been released to the public, most of us here don't have a chance to read them.
If these documents are available to the public in some non-obvious way, could you please tell us what that is?
Thanks.
See I am not a buff I was interested in current information on train stuff but you guys have driven away most of the T/O's that are breakdown experts. As RX and being involved with the Union, I do get to see stuff of minor interest to me but greater interest to you. There is NO reason to share when you guys tolerate banging people in for small crap. I am not saying to cover if someone overruns a few stations or opens on the wrong side. But most of you want the crews to talk to you but now you will not tolerate them talking to anyone else.
OTOH from Neck Rd to Ave H there will be tracks out of service from 2004-2008 for Station Structure Remediation and some ADA work at the Hwy. Or does it matter that Lower manhattan riders want local stations and Astoria riders crave the express stops plus 49st. The Metrocard is a great analysis tool.
On the more general topic, you are of course entitled to be as open or as closed-mouthed as you wish. But perhaps you might consider that Subtalkers, like police officers (see Train Dude's post of today), NYCT employees, firemen, priests, subway riders, etc., come in all forms. Some are totally self-centered and selfish and most are very decent people. Some will be self-centered and obnoxious some of the time and very generous at other times.
Most posters on Subtalk have never made a big fuss about the conduct of any MTA employee. Relatively few (though more than I wish) have ever deliberately insulted another poster. But the people who do make Subtalk less pleasant can't be removed. Even if David wanted to be a policeman, there's always the issue that what annoys you may not be what annoys me, etc., etc.
I guess it was better when Subtalk was just a small bunch of people. It's got so many posters now that someone is always going to be annoying someone else.
- 4 CPW services on the weekend
- 2 Brighton services on the weekend and late nights
- Full length R late nights
- M service extended into south Brooklyn middays
- B/D will be completely R68. Can Concourse handle all 415ish available cars?
- The Q will use the R68A's. If there are any left, they will fill in on the B or D.
- The N & W will be all R40, both slant and modified.
Sorry Brighton express riders, but the current service proposal precludes their continued use on this line.
I still don't understand the rationale behind the B/C swap -- in particular, how important is it at this point that R-40's stay away from Concourse?
If it's not important, then the Brighton express will probably keep its R-40's, which will return home to the B. Since the B is a longer route than the current diamond-Q, the N will have mostly R-68's or R-68A's and few or perhaps even no R-40's. The Q will take the rest of the R-68's and R-68A's.
If it is important, then the B will get its R-68A's back. Either the N or the Q will run exclusively R-40's, with many on the other.
In either case, the D will stick with its R-68's, and the part-time W will probably run R-40's.
This is all speculation. We'll see what actually happens.
it cant be happening !! it cant be happening !! AW SH*T !
Well there goes my home route ! AW FU*K !
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants !
vlad
A R44, R32-38
B R40
C R30, R32-38
D R68
E R32-38, R44
F R46
G R46
H R30
J R40M-42
L R40-40M-42
M R40-40M-42
N R68
Q R40, R68
R R46
S R68
Z R40M-42
- B/D will be completely R68. Can Concourse handle all 415ish available cars?
- The Q will use the R68A's. If there are any left, they will fill in on the B or D.
- The N & W will be all R40, both slant and modified.
Sorry Brighton express riders, but the current service proposal precludes the slants from continued use on this line.
does anyone know the faith of the BHRA aka Brooklyn trolley museum ?
i heard only that its going to be shutdown !
Thanks
Vlad
N_Slant_40
Save the slants and the tolley's !
Not "faith" .... you mean to say "fate"
so what is it ??
OK, in English:
I think the BHRA is a secular organization.
Let's also try Canadian:
I think the BHRA is a secular organization.
and Australian:
I think the BHRA is a secular organization.
lol
(those who know some Ancient Greek will get that one)
if no you have anwered you own question !
Two shrimp on the barbie for ya, mate!
--Mark
Carless mitsakes always sink me.
You're slipping ... and I did get the Greek gymnasium reference. Naughty, naughty.
No, those days are behind me, now:
I'VE FALLEN AND I CAN'T GET UP!
Carless "mitsakes" always sink me !
"mitsakes" ?????? L.M.A.O.
and there goes the titanic !
If you don't believe me, well, I don't have fate in your spelling.
lol
I think the BHRA is a secular organization.
Except most Brits would write "organisation".
NJ will take 250 Redbirds, with a 8-year moratorum on train car reefs.
(After reading this, I am going to talk to a local short-line near me (Morristown & Erie Railway) about them buying and saving some Redbirds).
Unfortunately, MTA still has no process in place for "buying" a complete Redbird for any other use. MTA is responsible for mitigating the shells in advance of transfer so they will not leave the property until "packaged" for reefing. At least one trolley museum is working to preserve a pair intact, but this has not (to my knowledge) been resolved as yet. So, in short, M&E likely wouldn't have any better luck than others have to date.
Sorry...
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
(Q)-From Coney Island to 57th st/6th av. Brighton Local, 6th av express. All times.
< Q >-From Brighton Beach to 57th st/7th av. Brighton/Broadway express. Rush hours/middays.
(Q)-Brighton Beach to 71-Continental Av.* South from BB then Over West end express track beginning at Bay Pkwy, peak direction express. West End/4th av/Broadway exp. 63rd st tunnel. Queens Blvd local. Nights terminates at 57th st/7th av, and runs via 4th av local.
(B)-168th st manhattan to Bay Pkwy. CPW local, 6th av express, 4th av local. Weekdays until 9pm.
(D)-205th st to Coney Island, via CPW/6th av/4th av/Sea Beach express. Peak direction exp from 59th st to Kings hwy on Sea Beach, then via local to CI. All times. Nights via 4th av local.
(N)-Ditmars Av/Astoria to Kings hwy. Broadway/4th av exp, Sea Beach local. Nights/weekends no service.
(R)-Ditmars Av/Astoria to 95th st Bay Ridge. Broadway local, 4th av local. All times.
(M)-Metropolitan Av to Broad St. Rush hours, extended to 9th av lower level.
< W >-Rush hours. From 57th/7th av to Whitehall st.
(F)-returned to 53rd st tunnel. When Bergen interlocking work is finished, via Crosstown exp.
(V)-suspended until work on bergen interlocking is completed. Then from 57th/6th av to Kings Hwy. Via 6th av/crosstown locals.
*-Work will be done north of 57th/7thv to tie in local trackways to the broadway/63rd connector. The aforementioned (Q) train will switch to the local tracks just south of 57th/7th av, along with the N. N will use 60th st tunnel, (Q) will use 63rd.
Benefits of this plan: Every line has a 6th av and Broadway train. 4th av service increases markedly, and also attempts to get some Brighton Riders off of the Brighton Line.
Can anyone point out why this plan would be bad? (aside from the extreme cost it would incure, or the fact that there may not be enough cars.)
(Q)-Brighton Beach to 71-Continental Av.* South from BB then Over West end express track beginning at Bay Pkwy, peak direction express. West End/4th av/Broadway exp. 63rd st tunnel. Queens Blvd local. Nights terminates at 57th st/7th av, and runs via 4th av local.
Too confusing to have a West End and a Brighton Q (three Q's total!)whether it's diamond or circle, orange or yellow. It works on Brighton now because it's the same line, it would be too confusing on two seperate lines. The service ide may work, but it needs too be called something else other than Q.
Also, I can't find a West End local? (I must've missed it). But either way, now there are two locals on West End, and obviously you have one, but if the M is cut to 9th Ave, and all this service on the West End local, I don't think the West End Local stations are being served enough, you may have to keep the W there for a local train on the West End.
(M)-Metropolitan Av to Broad St. Rush hours, extended to 9th av lower level.
Ahhh, someone has been listening! Not bad, 4th Ave still gets the M at rush hours, and M riders keep the Fulton St transfer during the day.
The **** should read "West End Express".
I think the service from Queens Blvd local stops to E 53rd St has disappeared. That service is necessary to reduce crowding on the E and F. Without it, crowding will return to pre-Dec 2001 levels.
All the south Brooklyn lines are way overserved. I can't wait to see the jams at Stillwell and Brighton Beach.
Direct access between Stillwell and local stops on the Sea Beach/West End lines is eliminated.
The N and W cross paths.
The R is the only midday Broadway local.
I could probably find more problems if I looked at it for another two minutes.
It's innovative but I'm afraid it's full of holes.
Too many Q trains.
Canceling the V would make Queens Blvd. an unbearable hell. (no mention was made of G service...)
W is pointless. Unless you're change the tph on the N, not running the W from astoria isn't smart.
This is just what I got from skimming...
Certainly, but only because you asked for it. Here are two points, spoken like a Queens rider.
1. Mind your P's and Q's. Since you don't have any P routes in there, I must be referring to the Q's. Too many. Convenience demands that another letter be used.
2. Queens Boulevard riders are hurt by this plan. The V is eliminated. The R is eliminated (from the Queens Boulevard Line). In return for this, riders receive a Broadway Local Q via the 63rd Street Tunnel and the F put back on the 53rd Street Tunnel. I don't think both Queens Boulevard express services should be put in the same tunnel, putting enormous stress on the junction.
If a route is not mentioned, it is unchanged from the previous post.
(Q)-Coney Island to 179th st via Brighton Local, 6th av express, 63rd st, queens blvd exp, Hillside exp.
(F)-Coney Isle to 179th st via Culver/6th av local, 53rd st, Queens Blvd exp, Hillside local.
(W)-Queensboro Plz to Whitehall st. Via Broadway local, rush hours/middays.
(V)-continental to 2nd av, via 53rd st, queens blvd/6th av lcls.
E/F/Q-10tph each. E/F/V can all fit in 53rd st tunnel, and both Q trains can fit in 63rd st. now there are 2 queens blvd locals.
Guys, i wasnt really being too serious with this one....... Just trying to take off with everyone's obsession with the Brighton line, and trying to make the craziest plan possible. Then again, it IS the best plan!
10 tph on the E isn't enough to carry the hordes going the reverse way from Penn Station to E 53rd St.
The W service is needed in Astoria, not Queensboro Plaza. Vast hordes of yuppies are moving there and taking the train to Manhattan during rush hours.
Both N and R go there.
10 tph on the E isn't enough to carry the hordes going the reverse way from Penn Station to E 53rd St
Ok then. 12 E trains, 9 (F) trains, 9 (Q) trains.
THE BEST PLAN!
Answers would be greatly appreciated.
Thank You.
Thank you very much,
Coco McPherson
I think you will find that most of us here are in the same situation.
CC Local might be able to help. He plans to use tokens until the very last day.
Big drawback with token: not accept for FREE surface to rail transfer.
So when is the protest to keep the tokens?
Join the parade!
Set on vibrate no doubt. Sheesh - talk about a booty call.
Hey - he started it!!!!!
--Mark
Yo pig that is not kosher ! lol
I can put you in touch with both organizations.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
As for the two R42's. That seems to be what everyone is confirming. I confirmed that Tuesday, David Greenberger confirmed that yesterday, and now you today. (I also saw one set of R40M).
It appears that when three more trainsets of R143 arrive, the L will be 100% R143.
-AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
As for next weeks and two from this weekend G.O. Shuttle busses replace train from Braodway Junction to Leffects Ave from 11:00pm to 5am weekdays and 11:00pm Friday to 5:00am Monday.
Robert
This also reminds me of a question that I posted a while ago that some tried to speculate on, but nobody gave a definite answer. If every train went out of service, could all the yards and sidings hold them? It's not like tracks are being added to yards, so where are they storing all these extra B-division trains? They haven't gotten rid of any yet and they will probably need them with extra service next year when the MB opens. They just keep ordering more and more and more...where are they putting them?
Flexible 9037 on the #29
---Brian
Good God, do you think the 1970s never happened? Some of us had the bad fortune to grow up in them, and now you want us to wear fedoras and break our ankles on high heels (no wife or daugher or mine)! From the title, I thought the thread was about littering, not fashion. As for the former, we are still stepping on the black chewing gum wads from the good old days.
(Common courtesy, pride in one's appearance, and simple good grooming can make a WORLD of difference!)
To those who have noting else to be proud of. In your particular level of hell, may you be condemned to wear tightly knotted neckties and three-piece suits 24/7!
I've always said that Ronkonkoma station is hell on Earth. Guess this proves the point.
Why end there at the time of ties, suits and fedoras? Why not go back to the powdered wigs of the 18th Century, or maybe the complicated gowns worn by Henry VIII and his high-class contemporaries?
If you look at a retrospective of fashion through history, you'll find that clothing has become less and less "decent" and "proper" and more and more comfortable. The clothing from the past was too cruel to even force a mannequin to wear!
Tell me what purpose a tie serves? Seriously. A nice shirt will have buttons, so what purpose does a tie have other than as a noose by which individuals are hanged by the forces of conformity?
The last time I went to a formal event, there was NO TIE on my neck.
Then why don't you wear a loincloth and go bashing bison with a wooden club for dinner? For after all, if you were truly in favor of conserving everything, how could you ever have advanced past that point?
Why is it fine to advance to 1953 and not to 2003?
On the other hand, I see no problem in wearing an armpit stained undershirt and ripped-at the-asscrack Umbro shorts when I go to the gym :-)
That's OK... those who know me understand perfectly well why my image doesn't reflect in a mirror... and no, contrary to the opinion of my employees, I am NOT one of the "undead"... it's just that even the mirror understands the concept of ugly :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Hey, if you're skinny, which is what you seem to be saying, that's actually good. Eat a lot, do some heavy weights, and before you know it you'll have terrific muscular definition and vascularity.
Here is a very good site for a quick-bulking program.
-Robert King
OH! A gym!
American Pig: 6'1" 224 pounds
Well actually, get enough exercise and you can keep eating the same, or even more, yet still lose weight.
6'1" and 224 #s doesn't sound bad, not pig-like at all.
with me is simmiar thing 6feet 5in 180lbs 8% body fat !
all of that becouse of badminton ,voleyball ,soccer and kickboxingand also karate !
and im only 18! lol
N_Slant_40
with me is simmiar thing 6feet 5in 180lbs 8% body fat !
all of that becouse of badminton ,voleyball ,soccer and kickboxingand also karate !
and im only 18! lol
N_Slant_40
From what I remember from health class, I've concluded it doesn't matter what you weigh, as long as you think you look good and a doctor says you're physically healthy. Fat weighs less than muscle, so charts that compare your height with weight are pointless if you don't know your body fat %.
That's nice. I'm sure you've also never known a woman in your life.
Again, I think subway riders dress pretty neat compared to Long Islanders in their jeans and sportwear.
The point of clothing is to cover your body and provide warmth. Those "jeans and sportwear" you decry achieve that purpose admirably and do so with a maximum of comfort.
Please stick to serious topics.
I dunno, but last time I wore one, I made up for it with a red crushed velvet waistcoat and bow-tie - it was quite fun standing out a bit from all the boring people who were too stingy to buy a waistcoat and wore black bow-ties - oh, and the ladies seemed to like it...
The previous time I wore a purple bow-tie...
:-o Andrew
And this was pre-air-con! They must've been mad!
Please elaborate on this.
---Brian
Has nothing to do with it.
(Hope you never get them nasty little buggers again!)
Having your two and four year old get them is worse. Combing out the nits hurts, and who likes to hurt their kid for an hour a day for weeks, sometimes after putting pesticides on them. Lice went around the pre-K classroom for months, as the kids passed it back and forth. It was seven years ago, and we still have nightmares about it. It was one of the three worst things to happen in our lives, and the other two involved deaths (one was 9/11).
Cool
:)
Then I guess we won't see you dress that way.
What about all those men that wore hats in the old days? Why is one type of head covering right, but another wrong? Doorags are less offensive than a fedora: They don't block anyone's view, and you can't hide stuff under it.
Teenagers have traveled in packs since the dawn of time, it is part of their nature. It is quite fashionable nowadays to deny them that and force them to be locked in their house when not at school. Thank god NYC doesn't have a curfew law (it wouldn't affect me, but I would oppose one as a matter of principle).
The girls are no different,they dress trashy,with mouths to match,pushing a baby stroller,with sometimes more than one illigitimate child.
This is a biased sample. You are using the behavior of a small subset of a group in order to attribute those behaviors to the group at large.
In 1999, there were 49.6 births for every 1000 girls aged 15-19, a third of these people are adults.
You think this rate was higher than in 1949? GUESS AGAIN! The rate in 1949 was 81.9. In 1974 it was 58.1. The 1999 rate was the lowest since 1919.1
Rap music blares from the walkmans and discmans(yes I HATE THAT GARBAGE!!!!!)
So what? I hate YOUR music too. Would you rather the music be blaring from a cranked up boombox as one had in the 1970s?
God for bid you look at someone the wrong way,they want to put a bullet in your head for "dissing"them.
Everyone is out to get you, aren't they?
Come to think of it,when I see the rats and giant roaches crawling around on the trackbed,at least I am looking at more civilized behaivor than my human counterparts!!!
I see that you take pride in your misanthropy
1Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Natality, Vital Statistics of the United States (1937- ); Birth Statistics (1905-36). Washington: US Department of Health and Human Services. Populations from US Bureau of the Census.
You're not alone. I too hate Rap music. Nor do I have respect for people who wear gangsta clothes. I too hear this horrible music, but from cars. I sometimes think these suburbanite kids are alot worse than city kids. Many kids out here in Massapequa are wannabes. They act tough and stuff but I think they are really wusses inside.
-Robert King
Another gripe, I jumped on an express train heading to Flushing. When the train got to Shea stadium, the conductor said there was conjestion at the Flushing station. We waited about 15mins with the doors wide open, while it was cold outside as well as feel the A/C on inside the cars. Another disregard for the customer. When the train finally left the station, it headed toward the station tunnel, but then stop short of going inside because of a RED signal. We waited outside the tunnel for what seem to be eternity. What burned me up was that the so-called EXPRESS train had to wait oustide while 3 local trains past us by. Why bother taking an EXPRESS train if the local train gets into the station before anyone else does. I have seen it happen all too often......
That's weird. And there are frequent delays during the rush when trains are headed into Main Street. The interlocking at the other end (Times Square) seems to be so good; maybe the best around. Is there some reason why it takes so much longer at Flushing. Perhaps it's the 3 tracks, but even when both the E and F ran to 179th Street I can't remember such delays (or maybe it's because of memory lapses-I was just a youngster then).
Are there any plans to upgrade the train-turning ability of the station? Is it even possible?
I was going to ask the same thing. It happens routinely; the express sits outside the portal because we're "waiting for a train to leave Main St terminal." A train comes out... and a local goes in. Then another train comes out... and another local goes in. Third train comes out... third local comes in. The first local that came in comes out, local #4 goes in. The express is finally given the yellow-over-green after local #2 comes out, twelve or so minutes later.
My only guess is that it's caused by local trains bunching because of door-holding at 74 St, but then, why not short-turn them at Willets Pt Blvd and kick the passengers onto the express? Usually, the express is SRO, while each local has maybe fifty passengers. What's more puzzling is that this holding doesn't cause a conga line of expresses; I've never been on a train that was held for congestion before Willets Pt Blvd.
Well, my observations are that two (maybe one) express train(s) can occupy the track between Willets Point Boulevard and the interlocking at Main Street. Another train can be held at Shea Stadium. Then beyond that, up the line, at the downgrade on the flyover track, there are timers. I've never seen congestion further back than that. Of course, maybe that's because by the time the timers allow an express train to the top of the track, the express in front has cleared through Shea Stadium.
No. Several trains, Queens-bound locals, at least during rush hours, terminate at Willets Point Boulevard. I'm not certain, but I'd guess about 5 tph or so. Sometimes, the destination sign on the front even denotes this (but this is the 7 line after all, with route and destination signage not given high priority by most T/O's to be changed with the route and service).
GOOD POINT on the last notation........ but cmon... please
tell us------- WAS IT ATLEAST A REDBIRD??
1SF9
Explore inside an idle redbird.
A fare increase causes P.A. systems to malfunction ? Gee, that's interesting, please explain how !
Bill "Newkirk"
Number of available areas to purchase fare media with fully staffed double-booth: 2
Number of available areas to puchase fare media with one agent and multiple machines: More than 2
I say the MTA should continue its current staffing policy: Punish the luddite fools without affecting me.
And when the machine malfunctions is the customer still a luddite fool? I ride BART whose TVMs did not accept the new Fed Reserve 20's for six months after introduction. Agents do not by policy handle ANY monet. please swipe again. How long has it been since you deposited a token and the gate failed to recognize it. Obviously I am willing to use modern technology (this computer board) but there are many things which do NOT need techno replacements.
This would be difficult to say since I haven't even used a token in years. But if you must know, this has happened. At least the MTA turnstiles have coin return slots and digital displays that say TOKEN RETURNED.
I haven't used a token in many years, but I remember the jammed slots. If you were lucky, you got your token back out. If you weren't, you lost the token and didn't get in either.
I agree Metrocards can be a pain, but I've lost less money and time using them than using tokens. If S/As were measured on the cleanliness of Metrocard slots, there wouldn't be any problem with them. As it is, some agents don't seem to care how well the Metrocard readers work, and make the experience unpredictable.
So with the increase in the fare, how can you say everything is going to be worst.
If it wasn't for progress, you'll still be on MS-DOS 2.0.
damn right !
Try to buy your Metrocards at a booth that is not that busy. Easy if you try.
"the added thrill of watching three downtown #2s pass by before a #3 finally shows up"
Depending on where you're going on the #2 or #3, Take a #2 traib as far as you have to go and catch a #3 train further down the line. Better than waiting on the platform and watching a crowd form.
"more discarded Metrocards discarded on the station floors."
Call 718-243-3222 once in a while and complain to a supervisor who can order a cleaner to clean the cards off the floor instead of complaining to the agent in the booth who can't come out and do it himself.
"more surly and obnoxious station personnel."
If people complained to and/or threatened you over things you have little (or any) control over, you'd be the same way. They don't want to be.
How does a fare increase cause employee surliness and obnoxiousness?
Thank you Alanis Morissette
Thank you Google
However, the "R" should be upgraded a bit to headways of at least 6-7 minutes. I know the Queens section has these headways.
The map shows the Manny B fully open, with the N Sea Beach and Q Brighton on one side, and the D Brighton and B West End on the other. So it appears the D/B switch in Brooklyn, rather than on the Concourse, was of recent vintage.
Since the Q would obviously be a 24/7 line to serve Second Avenue and Broadway, this implies that until recently the TA was considering a D/B switch on the Concourse rather than in Brooklyn. The D would be weekday, express, on the Concourse and Brighton from Brighthon Beach to Bedford Park. The B would be 24/7 on the West End and Concourse from 205th to Coney Island, and perhaps David G would have gotten his second local on Central Park West.
Obviously, their plan for everything other than the SAS doesn't fully hold water. But they really only need to name routes so that they can describe estimated impacts of the SAS on other lines.
Steve Loitsch
On April 1st, a clearance test train left Mosholu Yard at 6:00 pm and operated over various IRT lines. THe train was composed of three motors, car 8776, XC 375, 8777 and three more motor cars. THe motor cars were single unit R17, R21 or R22 cars.
So it's later than I thought...
But isn't it ironic. The TA was so in love with the economies of longer equipment that they were interested in a 64' IRT car. Now we're back to ordering 60' BMT cars.
I still have my doubts a 64' car could make a lot of the IRT curves.
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
I have some video in mini DV format that I have been planning to convert to mpeg and put online. Does anyone have a good free or cheap hosting company that allows unlimited bandwidth or cheap bandwidth.
I have fotage of numerous paris subway lines, stations and of course lovely parisians on the trains
-- Tim, who's on a new schedule and hopes most of his trains tomorrow will be C20
--Mark
-Stef
Based on my reading, the Board of Transportation in the 1920s did some research that suggested that a 55' long car (of about 10' width but with tapered ends) could serve most IRT lines with relatively minor wayside clearance obstruction removals (and of course altered platform width). They did this as they pondered the ultimate design paradigm for the IND subway system, with hopes of "recapturing" the Dual-Contracts built lines and integrating them with the IND. However they felt it probably wasn't worth the longterm bother, and settled on a 60' X 10' design for the R1/9's.
Hasn't anyone noticed the date on this report (8-) ??
David
Incidentally, this same Proposition One would have included funds for 280 rehabilitated BMT / IND cars. "Inside sources" in September and October of 1979 claimed that many of the cars to receive the overhaul would be the R-16, and as part of the overhaul, they would get air conditioning. The estimated cost of this project was $98 million. A prototype refurbished R-16 (6429) was put on display at the 207th Street shop during an open house in September 1979. It even had a full width cab.
More information on Proposition One can be found in the discussion of the NYCTA in the 1970s.
--Mark
I doubt it could have run on the 2/3 lines either (curve South of Chambers St) or the 7 line (curve West of QBP). So we'd be looking at a car which could only run on the 4 train. Brilliant.
No offence, but not using MetroCard (aka not getting the discounts) is dumb.
---Brian
1) You have to wait on line to buy them. With the Metrocard you can buy a one day Funpass, weekly and monthly Metrocards. Try that with a bag of tokens !
2) Everytime a fare increase happens, everyone hoards them. The TA limits sale to two. Longer lines at the booths. Sometimes a different size token has to be minted. This isn't cheap. Counterfeiters make slugs and sell them cheaper than the fare.
When the fare increase happens, the turnstile or farebox will just deduct $2 from the Metrocard after the stroke of midnight of the first day of the $2 fare.
3) Oh and how about the Metrocard transfer ? Subway to bus, bus to subway, bus to bus. No can do with a token ! And there are those Metrocard subway to subway transfers at a couple of locations. Can't do that with a token
4) Then, there are the HEET's (hign entry exit turnstile). A newer high tech version of the "iron maiden". I rarely used an iron maiden, wondering if I would get trapped. Once I lost a token in one. I walked a block to the full time fare control. In their last years, the T.A. had them all chained shut. Probably were problematic.
I haven't bought one token since Metrocard became system wide. I'll probably buy two before they bite the dust since I'm a token and farecard collector. I just want to see when I give the agent the token and 50 cents and see what kind of single ride Metrocard I'll get. As far as Metrocard goes, except for the occasional "swipe again at this turnstile", I've never had any problems with a Metrocard.
In closing, magnetic stripe farecards have been around for a while and are doing well in other cities. It's just time for New York City to join the party !
Bill "Newkirk"
Your reactionism is filled with scads of contradictions and blatant hypocrisy.
typewriter ??? man youre old !
not old enought to drink but old enough to drive
Hmm, tradition.
Let's look at a bunch of wonderful traditions we've had through the years:
Women wearing chadors, abayas, burkhas, [INSERT VEIL HERE]
corsets
Footbinding
Female "circumcision"
slavery
human sacrifice
Divine right of kings
leeches, bloodletting and other forms of "medicine"
The Inquisition
Geocentric theory
Well actually, male circumcision is not that "wonderful" of a tradition either, and not necessary.
This is the only country in the world that does that for non-religious reasons. If you are Jewish or Muslim, it's a religious ceremony, and to each their own.
But for everyone else, it's just as outdated a practice as footbinding and all the other body altering traditions.
Yes, we lost our tokens in Chicago four years ago. It is even hard to remember their use anymore.
I use the 30 Day CTA pass for $75 - that is $2.50 a day - what a bargain!
Jim K.
Chicago
As for the issue of tokens vs. MetroCards, there are ups and downs. MetroCards can break, tear, rip, be scratched, etc. and won't work. You'd be very hard-pressed to find a device to break a token, even a truck running one over won't hurt it. On the other hand, tokens are coins, which add to the incessant amount of change in my pocket, are hard to pick out from everything else especially pennies and gold dollars, and you need one for each ride. MetroCards require only one card that you can use for a long time, but transfers don't always work in a predictable fashion and there are so many different types all with the same look (really stupid) so you can't tell a funpass from a monthly express to a regular pay-per-ride. And there's the infamous "Please Swipe Again" and "Card Expired" with money left on it, gone to waste. Also MC's are easier to lose than tokens. I personally use MetroCard simply because I'm used to it, since I use my student pass everyday at least twice. And MetroCards can be better in case like, the trains are backed up and you can go get the bus or walk or with unlimiteds you can cross-transfer between subways at places you could not otherwise. Overall I think they're about even; if MC's brought about opening up of all the closed exits and mezzaines of stations with HEET's I would like them more but since they don't I don't. They both serve their purpose. You can't buy a card with $1.50 on it, and single-rides don't transfer at all. I am going to miss tokens, but I will miss the Redbirds and the Sneidker el structure much more.
hey what are you smokeing ?
Q express has mostly R40m
Wanna ride the slants ride my home line The N on the weekdays !
But transfers with tokens do work in a predictable fashion:
Bus-Subway transfer: NEVER ALLOWED
"Card Expired" with money left on it, gone to waste
No, you can trade the value to another card using an agent or vending machine.
Bus-Subway transfer: NEVER ALLOWED
But giving people the illusion that transfers exist when they don't or don't exist when they do or they do but don't work or may expire after time's up is even more annoying than not having transfer in the first place.
There are very few exceptions. But then, why would anyone transfer from the M27 to the M50 unless one wanted to get a free return trip?
Some transfers are a lot more complicated. I can take the 3rd Ave bus uptown and return downtown on the 2nd Ave bus for one fare. If I return on the Lex bus, it costs me a 2nd fare.
Admittedly, a round trip is supposed to be 2 fares, so I can't complain that I get a free bonus by returning on the 2nd Ave bus. But here's another one. I can't transfer for free from an M14 that goes Ave C to Chelsea to another M14 that goes Ave A to Abingdon Square. This is a legit transfer need, but not allowed because both are M14s.
Other tricky transfer rules involve the free 2nd subway trip you're allowed to take when you re-enter at Lex/60th or similar stations. Again, a free bonus, not an entitlement.
None of these transfer rules are a reason not to use Metrocards, of course.
You can't transfer between directions on the:
M1, M2, M3 and M4
M101, M102 and M103, probably also the M98 but I'm not sure
Bx1 and Bx2
You can't transfer at all between two buses on the same route or:
M27 and M50
M31 and M57
M30 and M72
M96 and M106
Bx40 and Bx42
Q25 and Q34
Triple transfers are:
Any trip where the first or last, and the middle bus is on the Long Island Bus system.
Any trip starting or ending on the Q79 or the Bx29 (there are probably others).
A trip from the subway or bus in lower Manhattan, to the SIR or Victory Blvd buses, to a bus that doesn't run to the ferry.
From the S60 to the S53 to a third bus or subway or back.
The Metrocard subway transfer eat up the one transfer on the card. They are allowed at Lexington Avenue/63rd Street (F) to 59th Street/Lexington Avenue (4,5,6,N,R,W), 23rd Street-Ely Avenue/Court Square (E,G,V) to 45rd Road-Courthouse Square (7) and from 51st Street (6) to the Third Avenue end of Lexington Avenue/53rd Street (E,V), but not back.
When the M10 was first split into the M10 and M20, a triple transfer was created. Is that still available?
I still think the entire transfer period should be replaced with a two-hour unlimited use period, especially now that the Fun Pass is too expensive to be of any use.
Either block tickets for everyone or free walk-ins at the iron maidens.
1SF9
Buying tokens today-- to keep.
: )
It sure is better than carrying around a sack of tokens. I have a token I purchased years ago with the $1.50 fare. I'm saving it as a "souvenir".
Besides, the B has been a weekday-only line since 2001. As has the V. And what about the new W?
2. It's DeKalb Tower, not Pacific.
3. People who don't have gap sheets in front of them are in no position to comment as to which train should go first.
David
DeKalb also controls the Brighton to Church Ave as well as the Franklin shuttle.
Pacific St is a satellite (if even that)
In fact, Pacific Street has a relay room on the mezzanine (I was not referring to the dispatcher's office N/E N/B). So its the "if even that" part of my previous statement.
I didn't include DeKalb to Church because the original post didn't involve the Q line.
While I have not been on a 2 with updated automated announcements, my guess is if the TA is smart, they will leave in the PATH announcement because the PATH will return some day rather soon. Also, it has not been nearly two years since 9/11. Finally, the R142 announcements should be made to be more easily changed, but 9/11 was totally unexpected. Can't hold the TA to too high a standard.
Such true gospel!! :)
For those who have never heard of it, it is between Fort Washington Avenue, Haven Avenue, West 173rd Street and West 176th Street.
Or, just use it on a bus (+50¢)
at my station this morning, only ONE clerk was on duty inside the two-clerk booth, at the HIEGHT of the rush, a LONG line
Of idiots no doubt. I find it highly unlikely that they all needed to buy a $3 Metrocard with a $20 bill.
"I can't break a Twenty."
Haven't you ever heard of people running out of change? Why is the clerk or the MTA faulted for your (and obviously those of others) failure to provide smaller bills? Or pay with a credit card.
A better question is why do you wait until your card is out of money to refill it. You would not leave your house without money. Why not have money on your card at all times?
Why should the riding public have to pay for more token booth clerks because you were not prepared with proper fare?
Try having to take a bus to the train every morning. You make sure you have enough fares to get you where you need to go.
"as a sidenote, at my station this morning, only ONE clerk was on duty inside the two-clerk booth, at the HIEGHT of the rush, a LONG line, and when I gave the clerk a $20 (which is all I had) he looked at me as though he were in a stupor and muttered, "I can't break a Twenty." Thanks MTA, you are really showing just how much you care for your customers(and they have the AUDACITY to raise the fare??)"
Who's the idot who waits to rush hour to refill his metrocard. I think it's you. It's like the old adage if you build more lanes on the highway you just attract more cars. If the MTA opened more token booth during rush hour you would just be encouring more people to wait to the last minute to buy there fare. The lines would still remain.
Part of the reason the fare is going up to $2 is the anti-change activist which prevented the MTA to close additional booths a few years back.
Among other things:
1. Second Avenue study. How much did it cost to hire an outside firm to do the study as opposed to doing as much as possible in house?
2. Various in house projects that had been logged as expenditures to outside firms.
These come from a Times article for which I no loner have the date.
Look at other TA projects where a contractor sucked funds and didn't do the work or has taken a good deal of time. Howard Beach -- the GO has been running now for at least 6 months that I can remember. And last time I checked that GO was for rebuilding the platforms" (If it has been added to or additional GOs issued please correct me here). It seems like the PA AirTrain station itself was built in less time and the GO is STILL not done.
The rebuilding of the barn at E180 St went through severL contractors.
Yeah they got fined and not paid for the work not done or however it works (exactly I don't know) but they did they something out of it. And some of it came out of your pockets.
If you make two trips a day using a token, you should have only 42 token to use up (Mon to Fri travel, 60 if you include weekends) before the token slots are sealed. So how many you have left today?
They will never be worth more than they are now.
And this is a pic of the notice.
http://www.railfanwindow.com/temp/PDRM3025.jpg
You (and others) have a month to find your old tokens hidden in your jackets, top drawers and cookie jars and either use them or cash in the value onto a metrocard. If you hold on to them past May 5th, you're still going to hold on to them. Booths will not accept them.
I know, you're not complaining for yourself. You're speaking up for those other people. I've been writing this all thru this thread for all those other people to read.
From your post, it would seem that you might have a bigger gripe with your local school system.
--AcelaExpress2005 - R143 #8265
Others can go into more specific detail.
-Stef
Back then also, don't forget the signage was terrible. It was rare to have a train signed correctly on all parts of the train. This could hvae been a "M" or "MM".
A few "KK" did go to Metropolitan I think at the end of the AM and beginning of PM rush. They would have been meet and right to sign these as "MM".
wayne
wayne
wayne
Also, what are those white circle things on the sides of the R46s?
wayne
til next time
Looks different to me, but what do I know?
If you have an unlimited metro card (or are willing to waste some $$) you can make it essentially covered by entering the 1/2/3 station and exiting at the north-eastern most stairway (which I believe is at the SE corner of 34/7. Dash across 34th and into Macy's and head east -- you can come out at 34/6 and duck into the subway there. Depending on where you enter, you may be able to make it over to PATH without swiping again, but I don't recall.
CG
21 NYCRR 1050.7 (j)
Read the whole thing at http://www.tmk.com/nycrr.
APRIL 13- TOKENS NO LONGER SOLD.
Let's REJOICE AND CELEBRATE (by way of purchasing and storing)
NYC SUBWAY TOKENS over these next (AND FINAL) TEN DAYS OF TOKENS!!
1SF9
Token = Subway.
Take Pride,
Brian
After May 4th there will undoubtly be people who will swear they never saw any announcements.
---Brian
I guess nobody really ever takes a single ride anyway, but...?
Elias
I assume riders wishing to purchase a single fare would be directed to a vending machine.
Out of towners certainly do. They visit someone and get driven in one direction but not another. Or they walk one way, but take the subway back because they're tired. Or they think they need to take 2 rides, but then a third item comes up, and they have to buy one more fare.
If the changeover is supposed to happen on May 3-4, when exactly
does it happen? At midnight, will all the turnstiles automatically
stop accepting tokens?
Tokens have been such an integral part of the transit scene for
so many years it would be a shame if nothing was done to
commemorate the passing.
Good idea, Jeff.. I'd tape something like that! :)
I think you need to take something for your extreme foaming. Or maybe you should come over to the Strappies board. They might go for something like that.
Tokens have been basically dead for years, it is just a lot of people refuse to accept it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
I don't plan to be at at subway station just to deposit a token at 11:59:59 PM.
Now I can see why people think we are crazy.
I read that they never even installed turnstiles in the City Hall station.
It would have to be Brooklyn Bridge.
I should have said Brooklyn Bridge. Thanks Allan.
Neither do I... it's way past my bedtime :-) But our presence isn't a prerequisite for someone else to do it. I've had my share of transit "firsts" and "lasts", including being a passenger on the last operating streetcar in Barcelona (1972 fan trip) and the first revenue passenger to pay their fare at a new Metro station (Joanic) in Barcelona in 1973, so I understand the enthusiasm.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
This week, since the TA started selling only two tokens at a time you would think you would see an immediate drop in volumn N-O-T.
Guess folks have a lot of them to use up, or they are going back to the Station at coffee breaks & lunch to stock up ... well maybe next week they start running out of them.
Having a last token ceremony is no more foaming than riding the
last train on the Myrtle El or the last streetcar in Brooklyn.
It represents the passing of a long and significant era in
public transportation and culture.
Peace,
ANDEE
---Brian
No matter how you word it, it's a nightmare for all involved.
Perhaps the MTA could change perceptions by giving the T/O a decal to be affixed below the cab window. (It works for the Air Force). :-)
Tom
Of course TA employees know the proper way of stopping the train in such incidents (and its NOT by RADIO!), I hope.
I took the x29 express bus home last night, and was wondering what was going on at Church Avenue. Seems like the F train was terminating at Church, and everyone was pouring out onto the street from the exits.
Look at how these two articles refer to the Avenue I station:
Daily News Train kills blind man after platform slip
"the Avenue I station in Ocean Parkway"
Is Ocean Parkway now considered a neighborhood?
WNBC Blind Man Run Over By Subway After Fall Onto Tracks
"the Avenue I station on Ocean Parkway"
Did they move the station?
--Mark
But why is it that when people who have all five senses are run over by trains, they are "Darwin Award Winners?" I guess it's because when a person isn't physically disabled, it's OK to make fun.
But think about this the next time you want to make fun of somebody who's a 12-9: A physically disabled person is less fit as far as natural selection is concerned than someone who is simply careless or stupid.
Do you accept the token and 50 cents and hand out a single ride Metrocard or are customers informed to go to Jay St. to redeem them ?
Bill "Newkirk"
The TA might give them pre-encoded MCs. Non of them want them because they'll have to be treated just like money, so you have the issue of who stole that one MC.
People failed to buy tokens in advance.
Lines were long with people waiting to buy tokens on day one.
Change booth became token booth.
People jumped turnstyles or entered slam gates.
People did not like the idea of extra coins in their pockets.
History is repeating itself, except Fare Cards have been around MUCH longer.
Bye-Bye tokens, you are now part of the era as part of the "good-old-days".
Lines were long with people waiting to buy Metrocards on day one.
Token booth became change booth.
People jumped turnstyles or entered service gates.
People did not like the idea of plastic cards in their pockets.
History is repeating itself again!
The token booth became the MetroCard booth
People had extra money being deducted from Pay-Per-Ride cards (actually, this has been a problem that is only now being looked into).
People tried to jump the turnstile. Instead, the NYPD Transit bureau had an artic at the ready, and it was full of farbeats.
"People did not like the idea of plastic cards in their pockets." People also accidentally bent their 30-Day MetroCards on Day Two, causing the card to become so damaged that they LOST the remaining 28 days.
This is history repeating itself, only on a grander scale. Can May 4 come any sooner (actually, May 5 will be the day of FUN, and January 1, when tokens are no longer accepted anywhere).
It has been called the station booth for quite some time.
And the tokens were so nearly dime-sized that some people had to fumble to pick out a token from their change. Some people (my dad, for example) bought little token holders to keep them separate.
I feel that I was more upset with the fact that the fare was jumping from 10 cents to 15 cents. People in general were just as upset as they were five years earlier when the fare went from a nickel to a dime.
I did not mind the increase to a dime because I was young enough that my parents were still paying my way.
By the time the 15 cent (token) fare started, I was paying my own way, and I was a very unhappy traveler.
So, the shrine fits perfectly on the crown jewel of all subway lines, the Brighton Line and it's little sister, the Franklin Ave Shuttle.
However - at Bank, the 1992 stock's recorded announcement said "Change here for the Northern, District and Circle Lines, the Docklands Light Railway, and Network Southeast services" Huh? The only line that "Network Southeast services" could mean, at Bank, is the Waterloo & City Line, which has been part of the Underground for the last nine years. And the 1992 stock was delivered about the same time, so those announcements have probably *never* been right!
At least the "Please, No Windstorming" sticker found on an R-40 Slant in 2001 was polite, funny, and wasn't covering any other sticker. I also still don't exactly "get" what that sticker means...
---Brian
#3 West End Jeff
I guess Windstorming is holding on to a pole in such a storm. Maybe some southwestern sport? :-P
Also I have seen it to mean sort of travelling quickly... "He windstormed through the New York City Subway in search of Redbirds."
Wow, I haven't seen that. I can't believe they'd go that far.