Go to bed, David.
Adam
Click here
The responses prove it was here , but the photo has been removed .
til next time
Can anyone tell me what the rosters are like for train drivers in the NYC area? I understand that it might change from week to week but any info on what a typical week is would be greatly appreciated.
many thanks for your help.
1968...The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is created to oversee one of the world's largest commuter rail systems.
1993..."The Boss" is back, as George Steinbrenner returns to head the Yankees after a suspension from baseball.
Expected the 7 GO so no surprise there. We took the F from LES and off we went to Roosevelt.
Saw no crowding at 36th St. but rush situation at 74th/Bway/Roosevelt.
Our stay at the Meadows was quite eventless, transit wise.
(My son was yelling "sheven, sheven, sheven" to all parked trains in Corona)
Took a 7 to Main St. for some shopping. Transit wise, no big deal there either. We went to Flushing Mall.
(That was also my first adventure on Main St. since the early 90s, so yes I was quite impressed)
On the way home, once he had a taste at it, my son insisted on being at the RFW. (It's probably in the genes) Just before we hit 74th, a guy was walking on the tracks and we almost went BIE. (Actually a guy in white T's, out of nowhere. Is it common there?). With loud announcements at 74th/Bway, some people got angry but we just went down the stairs. Since we knew about the F G.O.(via Cranberry), our plan was to not to get on one. We got on an R which announced at Queens Plz. "No A, E, Fs are running". We also saw some D trains on Bway. We got off at 8th St and I later found out on the news how lucky we were!
Now, anyone knows where the F trains that passed our R train went after leaving Roosevelt? I'd assume 57th/7th...
Track vandalism leads to subway evacuations in New York City
NEW YORK - (KRT) - An apparently deranged Bronx man unleashed chaos in a Greenwich Village subway tunnel last night by hurling debris on the tracks - sparking a series of explosions and a blaze that brought trains to a screeching halt, officials said.
More than 1,000 straphangers had to be evacuated from six trains stuck south of the W. Fourth St. station, and at least five passengers were treated for smoke inhalation, fire officials said.
The underground scare, which underscored the city subway system's vulnerability to sabotage, left passengers shaken as they emerged from the smoke-filled tunnel.
I can predict his defense ... he'll claim that he became temporarily unhinged due to the emotional trauma of having to go through life with a ridiculous name :)
I can't even imagine what country that could be.
If that's the case, most anybody's subway system is vulnerable to sabotage if they use a similiar type of third-rail based power system.
Not only third (or fourth) rail. I can think of a few ways to mess up the overhead or track circuits.
(Wait for some fool to start a thread on how to do it )
Fourth Rail is much less susceptible to loss of power caused by debris short-circuiting one rail. The whole voltage is then concentrated in the other one so the potential difference across the train is the same. In this way, London Underground can still operate when some prat wedges a Coke can between the 3rd rail and the running rail.
Anyway, this is doubly ironic, given that I had taken the Q that day from Flatbush to Macy's to get on a train at Penn Station...around 6 pm. (It coulda been one of the orange trains instead- B? D? Nooo, it was the yellow "Q". Nonetheless, I didn't mind hunting Macy's for a bathroom... :))
This isn't good. Is there more of this going around? Or are there just fewer "money or your life" incidents to drown them out in the media?
I would imagine that the numbers of such incidents haven't really increased when you look at a reasonably long time frame. It's just that there's been a flurry of recent incidents.
The CIY shootings aren't really in the same category, as that was a premeditated crime.
Actually it's quite worrying. If he'd used something which would have caused more permanent damage to the infrastructure, eg a bomb, it would only take three of these guys (one at each of W4th, Atlantic IRT, and De Kalb) to make almost the entire system seize up for days.
Hey, Timmy could have taken his truck into the Lincoln Tunnel. That would have destroyed the city for YEARS.
Ain't nuttin' you can do 'bout it needer.
PS. They got the guy who did this.
Robert
Well, the certainly did not get *all* of him, for clearly he was not all there!
OK, so they got him, what are they going to do with him?
Put him in a jail? Keep him in a hospital?
No, soon enough they will toss him back out on the streets.
Elias
Congratulations and good luck!
Just don't pull all-nighters too often cause you WILL pay for it one way or another!
Is suicide and death by crime or accident still a big problem on the NYC system? I'm sure it still happens but apart from the odd one here and there it doesn't seem to get mentioned.
Any numbers available?
Thanks
I am assuming that your question is about persons being struck by trains, known as 12-9s (customers under trains). Aside from 12-9s, you also have those who are struck by trains while on the platform. There are people who stick their head over the platform edge and get hit or those who slip and fall into the side of a train or even get caught between the train and the platform edge (space case).
I'd rather not quote any hard statistics for 12-9s. I can say that this year there have been somewhat less than each of the last two years (for the 2 month period). Statistical glitch or economic upturn or something else? I can say that the average 12-9 will delay service about 70 minutes.
An equally nagging problem is the problem of people who get sick or hurt on the trains and people who unfortunately die on the trains. Whether due to natural causes or crime, these incidents do tend to cause many more protracted delays than 12-9s do.
Mark
http://www.ny1.com/ny/TopStories/SubTopic/index.html?topicintid=1&subtopicintid=1&contentintid=37753
I wonder whether you can use an unlimited Metrocard there now? That would be great. The view of the city from the tram is wonderful, despite the ride being somewhat scary.
There's an article in the Post that mentions that children who used the tram to go to school on Roosevelt Island were able to buy a $5 monthly pass. The article suggests that this will be no longer.
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/19372.htm
http://offer.ebay.com/ws3/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=2227700148
I don't know how rare this one actually is but it is the small Y cut but on the "Good For" side there are no dots between the Good For / One Fare.
The Atwood-Coffee catalog mentions that there were 4 variations (not counting the solid one). Usually the variations are more subtle.
In checking my collection I found that I actually have all 4 variations (including the "No Dot").
I'll tell ya - with ebay the price of being a collector is going through the roof.
Full play-by-play recap is coming up soon.
For those of you unfamiliar with I-81, it is a north-south Interstate highway running from Knoxville, Tennessee to the Canadian border in New York State, and passes through Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New York State.
Virginia is currently in the planning stages for a major rehabilitation project for Interstate 81. Various proposals have been floated by STAR Solutions and Fluor Virginia for widening the roadway (four lanes segregating cars and trucks, three mixed lanes, etc.), plus another curious proposal: Don't do anything to the actual road, and instead install a rail line running the length of I-81 in Virginia (325 miles) to carry trucks through the state.
Presumably, trucks will get on the train at Bristol (at the Tennessee border), be ferried to Winchester (near the border with West Virginia) and released back onto the highway at Winchester, and vice versa.
So what do you all think of this rail idea?
Ben F. Schumin :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Mark
I think the rail idea is a bit impractical, though. And I believe the trucking interests would probably fight it tooth and nail as the uploading and downloading time and waits for trains would mostly likely increase their travel times dramatically. Also, what do you do with trucks that have intermediate or terminal destinations within Virginia? The separate truck lanes would seem preferable and more practical.
The one problem I see in all of this is the stupidity of the VA DOT. It took them seven years to rebuild two interchanges and widen I-81 from two to three lanes from exit 74 in TN to exit 7 in VA through Bristol. And they had to rework the roadway between exits 5 and 7 and reconstruct a bridge at exit 5 because the engineering people who designed it screwed up the project big time. If this is any indication, look for such a statewide project to be completed no sooner than 2104 -- if your lucky.
As for me, I'm moving to Philly in three months so I'll be dealing with a whole different set of traffic issues.
*As for me, I'm moving to Philly in three months so I'll be dealing with a whole different set of traffic issues. *
I suggest that you need to re-move again, if you're living in philly you have zero need to be dealing with any traffic issue.
Read what he said (and you quoted). He was stuck behind one created by the truckers... he didn't create it.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Mark
You have never traveled on the Pennsylvania Turnpike have you.
John
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
See, there's no excuse for that. I understand the frustration that truckers face from motorists sometimes, but that sort of behavior is unprofessional, immature and potentially dangerous. Besides, why take out the frustration from the actions of one dumbass driver on a bunch of motorists who didn't do anything to them? Personally, I understand that trucks cannot be driven in the same manner as cars and always keep my distance between myself and trucks (and buses, for that matter). I get out of their way and make sure I can safely clear them when passing. And I would not appreciate anybody deliberately driving slow in front of me trying to piss me and other drivers off because that kind of thing will only lead to more road rage and more maniacal driving.
How about capacity? How frequently could you run a train? Would it be able to hold all of the truck traffic? Since you would have to carry all of the truckers, as well, would it fall afoul of rules against passenger and freight rail together?
I've mostly wondered this with regard to commuter rail, whether you could fairly cheeply set up a commuter line on the median and put park and rides at major exits (I bet there is plenty of state owned land inside the clover leafs of most exits for a decent parking lot).
Of course most highways close in to a city have done away with any unpaved land in the median.
I see two things going on. Let's say they don't get paid, and it doesn't count to anything, possibly being a slower travel. It might be a hard sell.
On the other hand, with the national lack of space at rest stops and truck stops this may be good. Park it on the train, go to sleep or whatever. When you're ready you're out of state and you did twice the milage. Not bad.
Their problem is that an enormous volume of truck traffic carrying freight runs on a north south axis (probably a bad choice of words. . . .) between Germany and Italy. This leads to enormous traffic jams on the expressways running through the Alps, as well as unsafe conditions caused by massive trucks navigating twisty mountain expressways. Several years ago, the Swiss decided to implement a policy of moving frieght off of trucks at the northern border, and putting it on trains. At the southern border, the freight is unloaded, and placed back on trucks for delivery into Italy. Although the truck industry grumbled about it at the time, it seems to make sense to me.
The problem, however, is that it is still more expensive to ship stuff through Switzerland by rail, than by truck. Therefore, the Swiss government has imposed heavy, mileage-based taxes on trucks using Switzerland as a transit point, thereby making rail more economically attractive. Unfortunately, I can't imagine our own government doing that here, particularly with Dubya in office.
Here are some links:
The Swiss rail cargo company. If you click around in here, you will find some nice railfan photos of Swiss trains.
A collection of articles about Swiss transport policy, including articles about moving trucks off the road and onto trains.
SDB
I just pulled this bit of news of Destination Freedom and it was so monumentous that it deserves it's own posting. Looks like the Snobway isn't going to be getting it's Upgrade while the Subway continues to go to hell. We can have no fear, the ACMU's will be around for years. You'll never kill the Pullmans.
The Democratic-led New York State Assembly on Friday vetoed plans to buy 120 commuter trains, a victory for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg who feared it would have drained money from city bus and subway lines.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs New York City’s commuter lines, subways and buses, had asked the state’s capital review board to let it buy the rail cars from Canada’s Bombardier Inc. 18 months faster than initially planned, Reuters reported.
A spokeswoman for the Assembly, which has one voting member on the board, declined comment on the details of its opposition. She said only that the nation’s largest mass transit agency had failed to answer its questions.
The MTA, which carries 7 million bus and subway riders every day, also rejected the Assembly’s request to extend the deadline, the spokeswoman added.
MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow said, “It is particularly disturbing that this veto was issued without explanation after extensive briefings and information were provided over the last month.”
Spokesmen for Gov. George Pataki and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno of Rensselaer were not immediately available. Both Republicans also have representatives on the capital review board, which must approve the MTA’s capital spending; technically, the Assembly’s representative rejected the agency’s proposed amendment to its 2000-2004 plan.
The Republican mayor said he was pleased the Assembly, whose speaker represents Lower Manhattan, had “stood up for the people of New York.” Bloomberg added: “Transportation for City residents must be the agency’s first priority.”
The new Bombardier cars were destined for the Metro-North railroad, which serves commuters who live in New York State and Connecticut. To help pay for the cars, the MTA got its board to approve a $208 million bond sale.
#3 West End Jeff
MTA apparently tried to get cars due in 18 months NOW, that's all this is about. If we HAD the money, I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem buying ahead. But since we don't have the money ... well ... November's coming - Westchester can show their appreciation in the voting booth. :)
#3 West End Jeff
LOL!
Yeah, let me predict right now that not a single independent or Democrat will vote for Bush.
Since the outcome of New York erections are already in the bag BEFORE erection day, I've often availed myself of the sliding door of justice just to make a point ...
They provide the paper, YOU provide the pen.
Nothing like voters coming to visit the polls, and the results are "Write Error Unable to write to disk in drive : KERNEL32.DLL has encountered a problem and needs to close. The information you were just working on might be lost."
But then, there's something nice about automating Florida, no? :)
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
#3 West End Jeff
I'd like him to explain why. NYCT isn't the only part of the agency and shouldn't be the only one to get new cars.
Hmmm... maybe looking to cut more funds from the city yet keep the same treatment?
Certainly not in New York City.
You also need to define 'mild'. The amount of snow we got this year was high above the average.
BTW, we got more than that this winter season.
1. Your memory is failing, or else you're too young to remember. They really had a disaster in the early 1990s.
2. This was unusual snow. The snow was light and fluffy, and then for 3 weeks it never got above freezing. Even after those 3 weeks had passed, every time a train went by it raised a huge cloud of snow, as if it had just snowed the previous day.
MNRR hardly serves upstate. MNRR mostly serves the suburbs.
I guess Dutchess and Orange could be considered Upstate.
One possible border is the Hudson Highlands running along the Rockland Orange Border and through Putnam. The slopes and state parks limit development.
Others might say that I-84 is the real border, due to second wave commuters. That is Westchester is a suburb of Manhattan, but Dutchess is a suburb or Westchester.
My grandmothers is now in a rehab place in northern Westchester. It's a haul. Couldn't imagine doing it every day.
The additional 120 cars, were to be delivered right on top of the original 180. Now that second order will be delayed 18 months. It is not quite as bad as it sounds for Metro North.
No they won't, the initial order of M-7A's will kill them off.
Bill "Newkirk"
SubTalk field trip(s) time.
Don't wait, till it's too late. get yer shots NOW !
Bill "Newkirk"
Sounds like you would prefer that MP54s would return to the Northeaset Corridor also. Unsafe commuters are not a thing to be happy about.
Stop dancing like a ballerina. If I "had" to drive an ACMU I would be loving every minute of it!
And in terms of driving, try to deal with MTA management at the same time. It's a job, not a fantasy.
Bitter in that I wont see the M7's in that new shiney scheme
Sweet in that my M1's and M3's are here to stay.
Nothing against the M7's though. Nice breed of cars.
Surburban riders have always gotten a disproportionate amount of capital spending from the MTA. Any complaining on their part is inappropriate.
R-142, R-142A, R-143 and soon R-160. Is Bloomberg that myopic ? New York City hasn't been cheated as he says so. These subway cars weren't found underneath the Christmas tree !
Bill "Newkirk"
Why is the "Service Guide" detailing the characteristics of each line located at the BOTTOM of the map? In the extra large versions of the map posted on platforms, you need to practically sit on the floor to read the service guide. On the regular size maps posted on side platform walls, you still need to bend over to read the service guide, unless you are a little person or a child. It seems to me that the only position from which you can see the guide comfortably is when you are seated on a train, and even then, you have to turn all the way around.
I would put the service guides at the top.
I'm sure that's the case; I'd also wager that Mitch is a tall man. I'm tall and since the dawn of ADA, I've stooped to use lower ATM's, elevator buttons, etc. I've gotten used to it and feel the benefit to our handicapped amigos outweighs the little inconvenience involved.
Your pal,
Fred
Anyone know? Some photos would be greatly appreciated too.
Isn't it the side of LIFF ticket offices?
your pal,
Fred
John
One of the safety features that is designed in to every WMATA station is the platform is cantilevered at 2’ 5 5/8" (75.2475 cm). The area under the platform is where one can escape from getting run over by a train. The distance from top of rail to top of platform is 3’ 2 1/2" (97.79 cm) add about 6" to 8" (15.24 cm 20.32 cm) for rail, track fastener and grout pad, its makes it about 3’ 8 1/2" (107.95 cm) to 3’ 10 1/2" (113.03 cm) from concrete track bed to top of platform. Not that difficult of a jump up for anyone that in descent shape.
John
Mark
subfan
The URL address for the rest ot them is as follows:
http://www.transitgallery.com/showalbum.php?aid=201&uuid=44
I forgot how to link a website on this board (can somebody help me out) so just copy the above and paste in the address box and it should get you there.
Enjoy.
In some cases, the new Eastern Division roller curtains were spliced onto the end of an older curtain. I noticed a Houston-Lafayette St. sign in one of 401's boxes, so apparently it does have some, if not all, IND terminals. I have one such curtain that also contains all of the north terminals on the Southern Division. The thing I'm most curious about is whether or not the light fixtures were hooked back up when the sign boxes were reinstalled.
When the R-1/9s were scrapped, the wires into the signboxes were cut flush with the edge of the box. That's how mine looked when I acquired it. I suspect the same was done with 401's original signboxes.
The proper HTML code for this link is:
<a href="http://www.transitgallery.com/showalbum.php?aid=201&uuid=44">Far Rockaway A Train's MOD Trip Pictures</a>
Hope you enjoy the pictures.
Thanks for sharing!!
The URL address for the rest ot them is as follows:
http://www.transitgallery.com/showalbum.php?aid=201&uuid=44
I forgot how to link a website on this board (can somebody help me out) so just copy the above and paste in the address box and it should get you there.
Enjoy.
http://www.transitgallery.com/showalbum.php?aid=201&uuid=44
Car #100 between Avenue H and Newkirk on the Brighton ROW
Car #100 leaving Park Place Station on the Franklin Ave Shuttle ROW
Car #401 tailing just after Ditmas Avenue on the Culver Line Elevated
Car #401 at 62nd Street Station on the West End Line.
Click Here for 2 minute & 41 second Sound Clip of The Motors from #100 & 1575
Surprise Sound Clip
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.info
Trevor
www.transitalk.info
Amazing photographs. Makes me wonder why I'm 'waiting?'
Regards,
Trevor Logan
www.transitalk.info
Better start drawing up that royalty schedule now... :)
Started by taking the normal Q to 57/7, had to endure a crackhead cursing though most of the trip. Ignoring that pettiness, I walked over to 59th/CC to board the MOD train. The train arrives at 10:45 and we loaded and took off. We did the quick relay at 34th St., then went to 21st St./Queensbridge where a big guy was asking though the window on the MOD train. After we left Queensbridge, Ozzy and Trevor were reading a very dirty and funny book as I took the book and nearly made coconuts on it (LOL). Car #1575 had a very nice floor redo; blue with yellow diamonds (shades of the Q Diamond). David of Broadway’s device ran out of batteries so he asks me for an donation (j/t). Car #484 had the guy with the subway videos again. We went over the Bridge and arrived at PP interlocking for what would be the highlight of the trip, 3 round trips on the Franklin Avenue Shuttle. For the next 35 minutes, riders accustomed to the R68 cars are gawking in amazement as they mingled with the TSS and our railfans on the cars’ history. I took the first trip up to Franklin Ave. Since it was a 4 car train, OPTO was suspended on the train as the run went as follows: Towards Franklin, the north 2 cars were platformed, while back to Prospect Park, the south 2 cars were used. At the S/B trips from Franklin Ave, the customers were asked to move to the front 2 so they can exit at the other 3 stations. The first trip up north was rather uneventful as the T/O overshot the first 2 cars at Botanic Garden station and we had to key out to exit the customers and board new passengers at that station. Most of the railfans went to Park Place while I stood at Franklin. Some of us took pictures while 2 officers stationed near the passageway and escalator watched and enjoyed the show. I let the train go back and took the R68 (2920-2924 was the trainset) to Park Place for the second run-by. Most of the day, the photographers were very cooperative, which was a nice departure from last trips. David of Broadway takes his million dollar shot outside fare control, as I was debating to run to the overpass one block south of Park Place but I took no chances and stood by the south end of the side platform. I took the train back up Franklin, thinking this might be it (the schedule called for only two round-trips), but a switch problem at PP interlocking made us do a third revenue service trip. I stayed at PP for more photos as the train goes back and forth one more time. We came back to PP and took the train OOS and not before we left, a man into his walkman at the Manhattan-bound Q side, was doing the “Beat It” dance, it was so funny as I took pictures of this happening. We glided into Church Ave when a man really had a bladder control problem and left the MOD train (my back was turned when this happened) and he should know better (there were restrooms at Prospect Park). Continuing the trip, I took the Q ahead to Kings Highway where Jehuty and Koi-PTIML were chasing me to the front end for the runby. The train should’ve slowed down but was maintaining full speed, but I managed to get a decent shot anyway. The train experiences homeball (red over red signal) at KH as I exchanged harmless barbs at Chris and Trevor. Train takes off, so I went out at KH for lunch and posted a halftime report on the MOD trip.
Second half was mostly yard visits, I took the Q to Bright Beach were the MOD train was waiting there and saw BMTman and heypaul were there to see the train but not chasing it. Took off at around 3:25 and saw the progress at West 8th St., stunned workers were eyeing the train, and Stillwell (AWESOME)! Me and our Webmaster, David Pirmann were exchanging window space for our photos, teamwork is very important. At the spur track under the Belt Parkway, the train stops there for the TSS crew to inspect the car’s trucks. No problems and we took off for Avenue X. and stayed on the express track, wiping out the 22nd Ave-Bay Parkway photo stop. We arrived at 18th Avenue where I was partially to blame for some miscommunication. We though there were be a run-by for Ditmas Ave, but Bill and another TSS said there will be no runby but we ended up waiting at 7th Ave for the next R32 F train anyway. As we sat there, an F train behind us at Kings Highway was stopped for an unattended package left behind. Overhearing the radio, control asked the crew if they inspected the cars at Avenue X relay but someone could’ve got on at Avenue X or U and left the package there at Kings Highway. We had a long dwell time as I nearly fell THROUGH the platform as a large square of concrete at the Manhattan-bound side was rocking me back and forth. This is a dangerous condition. We had a long dwell time and our run to 207th St yard before sunset was in jeopardy, however we took off from 18th Avenue at 4:30 and still have a chance. Total mismanagement as usual (with a big DUH) when the 34th St. platform was supposed to be closed N/B as the A trains were running local, no one was there to direct people to the local platform. After a so-so run up the CPW dash (timers always kill this run), we arrived at 207th St Yard in time. The photos of the graffiti covered redbird and the R62 wreck were some of the best photo opportunities at the yard. We went back towards 125th St. and the end of the trip where Bill Wall was clarifying with 59th St. master Tower on the final instructions on the excursion train and went as follows (while I overheard on the radio, not the exact words they said)
Bill Wall: 59th M/T come into the excursion train
59th M/T: OK excursion train, what’s your lineup, 125th St. or spur track at 135th St.?
BW: 125th St. (as if the train will discharge at the unused track at 135th St.. DUH!)
59th M/T: OK after 125th St., what is your next move?
BW: Back up to 207.
59th M/T: OK
(Does 59th M/T read the G.O. for the excursion train?)
We discharge at 125th St. at 6:15 PM in time for a homeless man to cause havoc at West 4th St. and disrupt the entire 6th and 8th Ave IND train service. Our D train was turned back at 59th St as a big crowd, including many other Subtalkers piled upstairs for the #1 train. We cheered every time an R142 #2 train zooms by on the express track and crowded the # 1 train. In the process, I accidentally stepped on an elderly woman’s feet and she stared to yell at me. I explained to her that there was a problem at 59th St. and all off us was dumped into this train. We got off at Times Square as someone had a lousy shot trying to deposit a glass bottle into a trash canister and ended up broken glass all over the crowded platform (Ozzy didn’t do it!). We walked over the BMT platform at Times Square, in time for an incoming D train rerouted onto the Broadway Line. Me, I just wanted to get home, so I took the next crowded Q train home. Thanks again for some great fun yesterday.
Partial list of Subtalkers: As always, should leave your name out, please let us know you were there and accept my apologies. Next time, look for the man with a notebook and I will ensure that your name is part of what we call family here.
Nycsubway.org Webmaster, David Pirmann
LincolN (HAPPY BIRTHDAY)
Sir. Ronald of McDonald
David of Broadway
R32/38
Operational Engineer II
MDT Route 29
Chris R27/30
John “Sparky” S. (a.k.a. the Greenpoint Gremlin)
Lou from Brooklyn
Lou from Middleton
Bombardier
Koi-Public Transit is My Lifeline
Jeffery Rosen
Silverfox
Incognito
Thru Express
Jehuty
Transit ChurchGreene
ChurchuBob
NJ Coast Express
T-Broadway/West End
Bill Earland
George Boucher
Boriqua
R33 #9279
Kevin Walsh
Far Rockaway A Train
Kingsbridge 4BD
Clayton
David
R32/R1 lover
Faxman
Mr. Foamer
Henry R32 #3730
Flushing-bound Exp.
Amin Perala
Sci-Guy #6586
Just Visiting: heypaul and BMTman.
Q R68 2797
Museum Train
R4 401
R4 484
R7A 1575
R1 100
D R68 2633
1 R62A 2219
Q R68A 5174
But considering otherwise with that terrorist at West 4th st, I still think NYCT did an excellent job of keeping the trains rolling, such as the diversion of the D to the Broadway line, and evacuation of several trains in the process.
But what we saw at 34th st/8th Ave with lots of people, no excuses there as some people should've been at the lower mezzanine directing people to take the side local platforms for the A train. (The S/B E running express on an unannounced G.O. would've not mattered anyway)
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
They cannot have 3 trainsets on the FAS route.
Peace,
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
I explained it right here:
http://talk.nycsubway.org/perl/read?subtalk=667983
8 > ) ~ Sparky
Chuck Greene
Ands bring the green book too next time. I was LMAO on some of the jokes.
I was originally positioned up on the Carroll Street pedestrian bridge (four blocks south of Park Pl.), with a fellow railfan from the National Historic Railway Association. We both were able to snap off a couple of good shots before heading over to Park Place.
R-9s and K-cars... you should have borrowed your last car to do a "period" shot.
...National Historic Railway Association
Society, not Association. NHRA is the National Hot Rod Ass'n.
What factors did the BMT use in determining that the Sea Beach and Brighton Express would have the triplexes, and the West End, Culver, 4th Ave, and Brighton local would have the standards? How was the decision made?
I am asking, because the triplexes were very heavy and it would have made more sense to run them through the tunnel. I wonder if their going over the Manhattan Bridge for so many years accelerated the Manny B. problems.
The axle loading on the Triplexes was, on average, only about 6% higher, unloaded, than the Standards. With a passenger load, this would have been less. I know you could have the "camel's straw" effect, but nevertheless, I don't think the car types killed the MB. It was more like the uneven loading and the fact that the bridge was badly maintained for decades.
Be that as it may, they were signed for both bridge and tunnel, and had provisions for loop service as well.
Maybe they thought that the seating arrangement was more suitable to a long-haul than a local.
During the late 50s and early 60s, Triplexes also appeared frequently on the Sea Beach Express (#4), where they appeared to be about half of the runs, the other half being Standards. They also appeared occasionally on the Brigton Local (#1) and West End Express (#3). I don't recall ever seeing one on the Fourth Ave. Local (#2), although I did see an occasional pre-war IND R-type (R 1-9) on that route.
-- Ed Sachs
Switching Tracks
John Melovich and Danny Swails rely on 66 years of combined experience in switching freight cars around CSX's Yeoman rail yard.
They also rely on technology like never before, beginning each workday by strapping electronic devices that look like industrial-duty Nintendo gear to their waists.
Melovich and Swails form a distinctive CSX crew, one of five locally that operate diesel locomotives by remote control without an engineer in the cab.
The veteran employees have become part of a nationwide evolution in the railroad industry that CSX joined two years ago when it launched remote operations in Jacksonville and Tampa.
Like the demise of the caboose two decades ago, the replacement of engineers in certain yard-switching operations has become a milestone in the culture of railroading.
``As far as engines, I think this is the biggest change since the 1940s when we went from steam to diesel,'' said Melovich, a remote-control foreman who, like the old days, calls himself a conductor.
---------
How did they ever make money in the old days when so many people had to work, when nowadays the only way to secure a profit is to have no employees?
http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news.cfm?ArticleID=12255
I wonder if New York Waterway will provide ferry service once the six slips are refurbished or will we see the large boats (Staten Island Ferry Size) back again. I think the makeshift platform New York Waterway developed is part of the problem but we really need service from Hoboken to Midtown/Uptown. It would be a shame to spend all this money and not expand the service to uptown. It seems the majority of the routes all go to lower Manhattan where most of the jobs are not situated. I would love to see a Waterway route from Hoboken to the east side.
Nothing about converting the low platforms to high. For that $79 million, they could throw that in if they budget right. No need to keep low platforms once all of the Comet Vs arrive and the Comet Is finally retire. Arrows and Comets could finally use their center doors and wheelchair passengers would have an easier time of getting on and off the trains . . .
Actually, I think renovating and reopening the upper-level ferry waiting room may be in the plans...
See more photos here: http://www.railfanwindow.com/gallery/album35
http://talk.nycsubway.org/perl/read?subtalk=667263
at 8:22 AM
Enjoy!
Great photo!
Submission for March 2004 has begun, so post them photos!
Maybe it triggers the starting lights. I managed to trigger the starting lights at 14/8 last night by saying "ding!"
http://www.amandanoelle.com/images/modtrip_022904
Nice Job!
Chuck Greene
Nice to see another female railfan!
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
No, not RonFormerlyOfBayside.
You're the one who's son fell asleep on the last trip, right?
Which is why I always go on these MOD trips stag. All the waiting, the long lunch breaks, long running times between photo (and bathroom) stops, and frequent changing ends can really test the patience of young'uns- even if they are railfans. For the $40 it costs- let alone $60 for adult and child- I want to make the most of it.
Sadly, I couldn't make either of this past weekend's trips due to prior commitments on both days- and the fact that I was allowed to go on the December 27 one. You know how it is with spouses: give and take. I DID have time to come down to Columbus Circle to see the Saturday trip launch. It was very frustrating to see and hear the train leave without me. Judging from the events that messed up the whole system late Sunday, I'm GLAD I didn't go then.
Me. And I always wear a name-tag with my handle on it. There are not many others besides me.
We are one happy family here, most of us do act like it on the MOD trips but a few Subtalkers just don't want to scan around and meet us in person.
or the classic "I was there... you will meet me next time".
which then becomes "I saw you at the RFW, I was right behind you".
Nametags are a terrible thing to waste.
(Appreciation to those who took EFFORT into making them).
How true, always wear the name tag, but none other then those who I
know from other venues say anything. True, I don't photograph or
video tape and usually seat myself in one car. But I attend most
B division MOD Trips, so will you say howdy next trip? >GG<
8 > ) ~ Sparky
I've gotten the impression that I fit into the latter category, but the truth is, I'm pretty shy and don't talk much to begin with... so I apologize :) Takes me a while to warm up to people, but I eventually do.
til next time
Since two trains in a row did it, I'd suspect some rubbish on the tracks. Maybe a dead rat or something, that tripped the trains.
Elias
I did a double-take. Where is this Robinsdale place? Do I even have the name right? The little sound clip was in the same tone and inflection as all the others, so I'm guessing the recording was made at the same time as all the others. Then why have I never heard this announcement before waiting for a westbound train from the KO branch?
Also, while I was waiting I looked down towards Divide and noticed black rectangular boxes suspended from the ceiling. They looked suspiciously like the LED signs at subway stations like Queensboro Plaza or Woodside, but they had little white rectangles in the middle. I went down to check them out and saw that they were, in fact, the same signs as the ones in the subway, and the little white rectangles were pieces of paper taped to the middle of the signs saying "NOT IN SERVICE". Are they replacing the TV-based system with LED signs? It's a shame, I always wished they would expand the system to other stations. Then again, it was running off an old Dell OptiPlex in the ticket office, and it got rather annoying when the Windows screensaver would pop up every 5 minutes. Guess nobody ever found the Display control panel. :P
But I'm still interested in those LED signs.
LED's are awesome
TURN IN YOUR TOKENS FOR METROCARDS
• Beginning 6:00am Monday, March 1, 2004 you may exchange your
MTA tokens for MetroCards (Example: 2 tokens = 1 (one) $4 MetroCard)
• Exchanges may be made at the Tramway Stations
(Roosevelt Island & Manhattan)
• Offer expires 7:00pm, Mon., March 15th
*Questions: Please call RIOC @ (212) 832-4540
I assume MVM's won't be on their property, but booth personnel will sell Metrocards ?
I read this mornings NY Post article that Metrocard free transfers would be honored. I wonder if Metrocard fare boxes will be next on their bus system.
Bill "Newkirk"
Brooklyn convertible 4573
Third Ave Railway (Manhattan and Bronx)car 629
Johnstown, Pa car 357
Montreal car 2001
As if the rest of us haven't experienced a dewirement or two? As long as you don't make the car go crunch!, other sins during training will be forgiven. Dewirements are rarely the operator's fault anyway, unless you're running too fast through the a switch, in which case you get to answer to the General Manager.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Oh yes, such as "Instructors" bending Trolley Poles in front of the
entire class. >GG<
8 > ) ~ Sparky
Question: How do operators put the connector back to the pole, especially when it is down? Is there some wheely or is it automatic?
That operator job sounds awesome too!
It's work if you have to do it, fun when you don't have to :-)
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Michael
Washington, DC
Regards,
Jimmy
Operator Training 2004
Wanted: Trolley car operators. The Shore Line Trolley Museum needs you to help keep our operating program running smoothly. No prior experience is necessary to become a trolley operator. Our training course will teach you everything you need to know about how a trolley works, how to operate it smoothly and safely, the rules of our railway, and how to interact with visitors. The 2004 course will be held on Mar 6, 13, 20, 27 and Apr 3. Each session starts at 10:30 AM and runs until approximately 4:30 PM. To sign up, send an email to training@bera.org.
Now it's official as per the Dispatcher for the Training Course.
8 > ) ~ Sparky
THE NUMBER OF HEADS CAN BE FOUND ON A PAPER AT THE MUSEUM.
My first pic insertion here, so don't clobber me too badly; that URL is fearsome.
Anyway, what is this thing for?
A. Theft-proof ashtray?
B. MTA Monolith like in the 2001 film?
C. A new line of MTA furniture?
It sits on the sidewalk and measures about 3 feet cubed. I've not seen one anywhere else and don't know what it's function is other than diverting people around it for some reason (again, not apparent). Any ideas? Thanks.
Your pal,
Fred
http://www.imagestation.com/mypictures/inbox/view.html?id=4185366895&url=http%3A//www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid105/p265047e9a955a96f93eafc53670fad2d/f977a16f.jpg&caption=The%20MTA%20Cube&album_id=4287553413&from_album=1
Copy and paste that to the Address bar (or Location bar or whatever).
Anyway, what is this thing for?
A. Theft-proof ashtray?
B. MTA Monolith like in the 2001 film?
C. A new line of MTA furniture?
It sits on the sidewalk and measures about 3 feet cubed. I've not seen one anywhere else and don't know what it's function is other than diverting people around it for some reason (again, not apparent). Any ideas? Thanks.
Your pal,
Fred
Fred, when you post images from ImageStation, you have to cut the .orig.jpg from the link. Thank you.
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
Exactly. It's for the giant rat outside of the station.
http://community.webtv.net/hey-paul/GrandCentralRat
<"http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4287553413">
Thanks to any and all who offer some coaching on how to post a link here.
Your pal,
Fred
Here is a link to your album.
The easy way to see how this is done is to use the “view source” button in your browser. The piece of code that does the work is this:
<a href=http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4287553413This is the destination>Text here is what appears as the link</a>.
John
Franklin Shuttle
Brighton Line and Stillwell (includes a shot of the Cyclone.
new roof at Stillwell; Coney Island Yard
Culver Line and 207th Street Yard
Early nominees for photo of the month for March!
It was nice to meet you on the trip as well. :)
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks. It wasn't easy. That was my only shot out of four that worked. I was trying to shoot in a space between girders, counting "1 - 2 - 3 - space - 1 - space - 1 - 2 - 3 - space..." etc.
Brooklyn Bridge from MOD train on Manhattan Bridge
But they ended the segment with the communication system that was used in 1913 to enable trains to communicate with the power station. If a train broke down, the conductor or engineer was supposed to go on the catwalk and pull on a rope which rang a brass bell on the power level. The location of the train would be printed out by a ticker tape machine. I wonder if this was a system similar to what the fire department used in the old days. If you pulled a box, a mechanical device would send out a coded signal which would be punched out on a tape (I think that's how it worked in the fire department).
Anyway, had anyone ever heard of this system at GCT?
To request having power removed from the third rail, one pulled the cord in both directions, to send an alarm from the box at either end of that section of cord.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Philadelphia
Guess if Kawasaki or Bombardier cannot have their way, no one can!
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
1. Where is bombardier mentioned in this article? If you are going to say Kawasaki and Bombardier want everything to themselves, why not include Alstom in that bunch?
2. After making special rules that they would make a selection based on things other than lowest bidder, SEPTA went ahead and chose the lowest bidder, even though they ranked last in the competition. That's unfair to everyone in the competition.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Twotrains
CSX: Man, their way of practicing safety is just amazing! Frankly, I am surprised no one has gotten killed yet in a while in any CSX accident!
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
Oh? AMTK does not despatch that line.
Of CSX is no stranger to these
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#CSX
With CSX's rating having been cut to neutral to buy, guess they have to find things to cut, such as safety, their own plans to build a hangar in Jacksonville, corners...
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
*******************************************************************
Until the next meltdown that is. We should form a pool. I got 20 bucks that there is some frame cracking problem.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Acelas
It is also one of several other improvements Amtrak needs to make. By itself, each improvement (including this one) is small. Together, though, they are enough to create the 2.5 hour NYP-WAS trip time (including stops)that Amtrak's Acela should have been delivering right from the start.
I agree with that but wha would be a suitable interval in mph? I say increases of 10mph per...lets say ever few months for example. Current top speeds of Amtrak [and US railroads] is inadequate IMO. There's so much Amtrak needs to do [as you said] to even before they could think of doing such a thing.
*******************************************************************
Now all Amtrak has to do to get it's bucks it jump through the ring of fire, through the ring of ice and over the dog doo stick.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#DOT
*******************************************************************
Well, express freight didn't work, mail didn't work so now it's trackwork under contract from shortlines.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#California
*******************************************************************
Wouldn't it be such a shame if this man, one night while sleeping on the platform, rolled off in front of a moving train?
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Homeless
This fellow is a leech. Represents everything wrong with the courts system. Note to David Gunn: Get this guy put in federal prison.
And known as "Betty the Bottom" :)
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
*******************************************************************
Oh wonderful...from the country that has brought us one rail crisis after another.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Virgin
I can go on and on and on, but people who are SUPPOSED to be thinking of this stuff makes way too much money for me to be giving input. I'm seriously.
Virgin Active - Fitness club in South Africa
Virgin Atlantic - Airline
Virgin Atlantic Cargo - Freight Airline
Virgin Balloon Flights - (UK)
Virgin Bikes - bike shop(?)
Virgin Blue - Airline (Austrailia)
Virgin Books - Bookstore
Virgin Brides - (NOT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING, GUYS!) Bridal shop
Virgin Business Solutions - Communications
Virgin Cars - Car dealership
Virgin Cinemas - Japan
Virgin Cosmetics - UK
Virgin Credit Card - UK
Virgin D3 - UK College Student web site
Virgin Drinks - Soft drinks
Virgin Experience - (Again, NOT WHAT YOU THINK!) Too diverse to describe. Check out the site if you're curious.
Virgin Express - Airline (Europe)
Virgin Holidays - Travel packages (from UK)
Virgin Home - Utilities (UK)
Virgin Incentives - Provides incentive vouchers for small businesses
Virgin Limobike - Commute around London
Virgin Limousines
Virgin Megastores (UK & USA)
Virgin Mobile - Cell Phone provider
Virgin Money - Financial
Virgin Play - Software (Spain)
Virgin Radio - UK Radio station
Virgin Trains - Railroad operator
Virgin Travelstore - Travel agency
Virgin Vacations - Travel Packages (to UK)
Virgin Ware - (Europe) Clothing
Virgin Ware - (UK) Lingerie
Virgin Wines - Winery
And that's only a sampling of the many services provided by Virgin-owned companies. To find out more go to http://www.virgin.com.
The only use I have for their crap service is that they provide a 2345 out of Euston (as opposed to Chiltern's last Birmingham train at 2210 out of Marylebone).
Ouch! That's a huge differential. With airlines, including Virgin Atlantic, most first class seats are occupied by frequent travelers using upgrade awards, rather than by people actually paying the FC fares. Could Virgin Trains be doing something similar?
Nope, they're mostly not occupied. Their idea is that people charging their employers expenses won't care how much it costs. Unfortunately for them, most employers in Birmingham now will not pay for first class travel (precisely because of Virgin being a rip-off).
There is little wonder that these guys with their lack of common sense need a government subsidy of £12.44 per passenger!
I also see a lot of buses, but I think that would be listed under:
Virgin Holidays - Travel packages (from UK)
Which is how most, or almost all of them seem to get to florida.
So there are Catholic girls' schools in the USA too? ;-)
If only others would get in on the act...like Southwest Airlines for example...they should be offering to run the Texas Triangle instead of killing it.
Mark
*******************************************************************
Nope, not E-60 603 and not F40 235...although it is another F40.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Museum
*******************************************************************
Note the picture...note there is no way to pass between trainsets. That'll make ticket collection and food service logistics just wonderful. Also notice how much end space is wasted by cab.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#DMUs
Another thing that's interesting, that regiosprinter car. I'm not sure if it was orlando, or tampa, but in the mid-90's they did tests and a public viewing/demo of that car to try to sell a local rail line(which is still talked about). I think it was actually in both cities. We need to relax some laws or find a way to cheaply build these things, it shouldn't take decades to get a rail line in.
Food service logistics? These are to be used by commuter lines, not Amtrak. As for ticket collection, ever hear of POP? It is used by many new start-up commuter lines. POP makes platforms into fare-paid areas, therefore ticket inspectors may check at the station and not necessarily on the train.
As for not passing through trainsets . . . two-car DMUs would be the norm, and passengers are expected to stay in their seats. That is, referring to the Siemens DMU. Tri-Rail bought some of the CRC DMUs, which will be pulling two BBD bilevels in push-pull service, like shown in this here pic . . .
One thing this article does indeed reveal is that Siemens has an FRA-compliant version of the VT642. They have it wrong where it comes to the DMU-plus-two-bilevel Tri-Rail train, because only the CRC DMU is powered and the bilevels are unpowered.
Food service logistics? These are to be used by commuter lines, not Amtrak. As for ticket collection, ever hear of POP? It is used by many new start-up commuter lines. POP makes platforms into fare-paid areas, therefore ticket inspectors may check at the station and not necessarily on the train.
They tried POP on the NJT AC line and it didn't work. You also run into problems with the TVM's break down. When headways are in hours or days people can't just "catch the next one" after missing a connection to buy their fare. Platforms as fare paid areas only creates a legal catch-22 zone, especially when the TVM's are located on the platform.
As for not passing through trainsets . . . two-car DMUs would be the norm, and passengers are expected to stay in their seats.
Looks like another advantage of rail transit bites the duts.
That is, referring to the Siemens DMU. Tri-Rail bought some of the CRC DMUs, which will be pulling two BBD bilevels in push-pull service, like shown in this here pic . . .
They tried that with RDC's...the acceleration went to shit and they overheated like mad. Ask Phil, he hates the Trailer Car comcept worse than Push-Pull.
*As for not passing through trainsets . . . two-car DMUs would be the norm, and passengers are expected to stay in their seats.*
I always saw being able to switch cars as a safety or convienance issue. Why's this treated as the opposite?
They report in the papers the tests are doing really well right now. I'm surprised I haven't seen more than one picture so far though.
Well Tri-Rail has been POP since the beginning 15 years ago.
People? Not nowadays, at least not private ones. And comfort? Ever hear of ergonomics? There is a reason why cabs of public transportation vehicles are getting more comfortable and easier to work with. For my part, I would prefer to have a comfortable engineer move me up and down the high iron versus an uncomfortable stressed-out one.
They tried POP on the NJT AC line and it didn't work
They never tried POP on the Atlantic City Line. Don't know where you got that from. If NJT had done that, rest assured that it would still be today's method of fare collection, despite TVM problems.
Looks like another advantage of rail transit bites the duts
What are "duts"? And it has always been the case that railroads did not like passengers passing from car to car, with the exception of long-haul journeys. And as for the DMUs, the cabs will invariably be at the ends of the trains, so the only "advantage" lost would be if you wished to jump off the end of the train at speed.
>>Tri-Rail bought some of the CRC DMUs, which will be pulling two >>BBD bilevels in push-pull service, like shown in this here pic . . .
They tried that with RDC's...the acceleration went to shit and they overheated like mad. Ask Phil, he hates the Trailer Car comcept worse than Push-Pull.
RDCs are not CRC DMUs. RDCs were never designed to work with anything besides other (engined) RDCs. Remember that blurb about "voiding the warranty" with Budd if any road tried using the RDC to pull trailer units? The CRC DMU is designed to push-pull trailer cars--and they are not the only DMU in the world that has done such a thing successfully; many British and European DMUs have been doing exactly that for over a half-century. Don't compare apples and oranges, I suggest . . .
They did try POP and I was there for it. There were validators on all the platforms and you had to punch your ticket. They abandonned it after a fairly short period of time. Chuchubob can confirm this.
And it has always been the case that railroads did not like passengers passing from car to car, with the exception of long-haul journeys. And as for the DMUs, the cabs will invariably be at the ends of the trains, so the only "advantage" lost would be if you wished to jump off the end of the train at speed.
I don't think railroads have a problem with passing through...it enables them to use lo-level platforms and/or mini-highs where only one or two doors open or short platforms where not all the doors open.
The advantage is being able to change your seat based upon car conditions. What if you get into a car w/o AC or with a bunch of kids or noisy babies? In these things you'd be trapped. You only shoot yourself in the foot with a "beak" cab when it comes to operational flexibility.
Re: the Colorado Railcar DMU, it has 1200 hp. For proper acceleration you want about 500hp per car. Anything less and you'll start having acceleration problems. I don't know if the 1200 value is for a single railcar or for a married pair. There might also be an issue with a lack of adhesive weight.
And the CRC DMU it's just a cab at one end of each train, there's no issues on changing cars that I am aware of. And I still understand the test to be sucessful....so far.
I don't remember ever riding an AC train without having the ticket checked (but there's a lot that I don't remember).
[Aside] I rode the first regularly scheduled NJT train to Atlantic City. It wasn't the official first train, though. That was run at midnight for insiders, including the current president of the local NRHS chapter, who had been a PRSL tower operator for ten years before being downsized and moving to the Illinois Central Gulf where he worked for David Gunn.
I caught the next train back to Lindenwold from AC (30th Street service came later), and was glad I did, because a subsequent AC to Lindenwold train on the first day killed a woman and her two small children. The woman drove past 5 cars that were waiting at the crossing gates, then drove around the gate and committed double murder/suicide.
NJT Atlantic City to Philly train
Which means if you ran CRC DMU's in motor-trailer married-pair sets, you would still have an extra 200hp left over. Defintely there wouldn't be acceleration problems. And CRC was able to demonstrate more than once that its DMU could push and pull two trailer cars with no problem, even on a grade. That's what convinced Tri-Rail to purchase a three-car DMU set.
I just wish the MBTA and SEPTA could have at least considered testing the CRC DMU in service. But noooo, that would have made sense and these two agencies don't seem to know what makes sense (Silver Line BRT, Schuylkill Valley Metro, etc.).
I'm not assuming. I read the article. It refers to Florida and Oceanside, California. I suspect Jersey Mike refuses to type "California" since Arnold the serial groper became governor.
*******************************************************************
Any comment from our Sound Transit fans? All I remember is that you love or hate ST. BTW, when will they want their trainsets back from VRE?
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df03012004.shtml#Sound
When it recurred a couple of times, I thought it might have been some fighter jets that we've had here on and off since 9/11.
Then I realized the sound was coming when trains passed on the LIRR embankment, a couple of hundred yards away, so I thought it was an acoustical effect of the extreme cold weather.
Well, I finally pinned it down. It's M7s! When I hear the sound, I've rushde to see what was going by, and it's always an M7. Why would this be? It's not flat wheels. The bi-levels must be heavier. ????
Also the M7s duct their traction cooling fans differently, higher up, away from the posibility of snow ingestion.
Elias
Thank you in advance.
I think modifying IRT stock is cheaper (3*51 = ~150) than modifying the whole line
My guess is that the Franklin line will be the final redoubt of the 75' cars. What will be done when those cars reach end-of-life is anybody's guess. It's too far in the future to speculate reliably.
A not unlikely scenario is that they'd just run two 60' cars. Is the Franklin line ever crush-loaded?
Yes! When school's out.
You had made a general announcement for everybody; that guy obviously wanted his own personal announcement.
You can't win, even for losing.
welcome to civil service...
(I exept the fact the fact no matter how good I make an announcement most still going to get someone who don't get it.)
I exept the fact that no matter how good I make an Announcement most of the time your going to get someone who don't get it.
Here she comes!___________There she goes!
Some highlights:
W Bwy
You are quite welcome!
A little more than a week I can see the B up close and personal...
I can tell that you are excited. Have fun!
W Broadway Local
Astoria & City Hall
Next stop on the B Brighton Express, Newkirk Ave. Please stand clear of the closing doors.
I wanted to be out there... but had class. :(
Tomorrow my afternoon is free! :)
It did turn out to be an awesome afternoon though. Too bad I had to spend it in a windowless "box" of a room at Baruch! Tomorrow promises to be better sky-wise, though a tad cooler.
Once the days start getting a bit longer again, then I'll head back out after work to places like the Brighton Line.
W Broadway Line
I'm glad you like them. I enjoyed taking them, and can't wait to do a Bombardier style photo assault on the line soon.
My advice is to ride the Q-lo in the last car and stop at every station starting from Beverley on down.
Robert
Departures between 10pm and midnight don't really count because most of the passengers will be at the airport before 10. And the number of arrivals in that time period is fairly low. What's important is that AirTrain be open by 4am, as people with early morning flights (not to mention workers) start arriving soon after.
That's true, although UA probably has fewer flights than AA or B6 given its diminished presence at JFK. Even so, if a 6-hour AirTrain shutdown is required, 10pm to 6am probably is the best time period because very few people are coming to JFK to catch flights during those hours. Figure also that delays for people leaving JFK after arriving on flights are less problematic than delays for people coming to JFK to catch flights.
AirTrain trains on the terminal loop were still running in the "wrong" direction as of Sunday AM. Perhaps this work is intended to fix whatever caused them to have to do this in the first place.
CG
CG
http://www.straphangers.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000438;p=1#000000
Lexman who is a T/O posted:
"It seems like the Assistant Chief Transportation Officer for Subdivision A(the IRT) has launched a personal vendetta against all crews. Train Operators and Conductors are being subjected to severe disciplinary actions for "violations", some of which are totally ludicrous. Some of these so-called violations are things such as train operators not wearing ties(they are NOT required to wear ties), not having shoes or boots shined to the max, and even buying lunch during your lunch break can get you disciplined. He even disciplined a conductor who had to go to the bathroom (her train still left the terminal on time). Lord only knows if anything major happens. He has already stated that lunch breaks are to be eliminated, and work programs are to be changed without any regards to seniority. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I give 110% to give the riding public the best service I can. I don't need a big boss trying to demoralize the work force. We need all the help we can, before he destroys morale completely. He has even threatened employees who go to the union for help.
HELP US, ALL PLEASE! "
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems serious or maybe just an overreaction. Who knows.
Let's discuss.
Does he prefer an incident like that which occurred on the MOD trip ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't resist....
He has already stated that lunch breaks are to be eliminated, and work programs are to be changed without any regards to seniority
I now have to believe that the complaint is exaggerated. A break period is required under NY State Labor law and I'm sure the seniority rules are contractual. I don't think a transit official would overtly advocate violating both NY State Labor Law and Union agreements....
Nurses have to do mandatory overtime, and now as "professionals" no longer qualify for overtime wages. Maybe this endemic spreads beyond the TA. But more people are EXPENSIVE, and nobody wants to pay more, etiehr for a swipe or a wipe.
Elias
The Lunch breaks have been shortened on the # 5, 6 Lines you use to have 45 Minutes but it got cut to 30 Minutes. So if something happens on the Lex Line you won't have a Lunch. I find myself eating Lunch after my 8 HR Tour. I normally don't eat before work so it can get to be a problem so I may just change my eating habits.
Also another change is on the #6 Line you do all trips back to Back then get over 1 HR WAA at the end of the job. Sometimes I think they are trying to kill us.
Employees: be careful how much you say here or they may figure out who you are :-(
However, what you may see as minor issues, remember the rules are written and they want them followed word for word.
When I was in school car for C/R, a TSS was making a point. He asked if vests had to be worn in the yard. I said yes. He said no. He then instructed me find where the rulebook (at the time, don't know if its changed now with the new rulebook) stated the vest must be worn in yards. Guess what? The rulebook stated vests must be worn on structures, in tunnels and when crossing tracks. I always remember what he told me "the rulebook is in black and white... there are no shades of grey, no interpretation."
That's the thing. No interpretation. I've seen many employees who feel that certain rules are b***shit and so they choose not to obey them (like C/Rs with the tie in the top button hole, top button open). So, if the employee's be witten up for something "ludicrous" but is plainly written in a black and white in the rulebook, there's really not room for an argument.
Things like the boots are questionable. Says they have to be shined, but doesn't mention to what degree. H@ll, I come in with boots scuffed up that I wear while working on the car. However if I get caught, I have to take it.
About the lunches, remember this: the rules state an employee may not leave TA property once they've signed on the payroll. So, if some TSS or ACTO with a bad attitude wants to enforce that, you've got no leg to stand on.
About the lunches, remember this: the rules state an employee may not leave TA property once they've signed on the payroll. So, if some TSS or ACTO with a bad attitude wants to enforce that, you've got no leg to stand on.
Please point me at the correct rules governing these - I'll be damned if I can find them. Assuming that something does exist to cover circumstance #2, how does a switchman go between 239 Yard and 241 Station? New Lots Station and Livonia Yard? Pelham Bay/Parkchester and Westchester Yard?
Walk on the structure to/from these points.
"Pelham Bay/Parkchester and Westchester Yard?"
Take the next train to either Middletown Road or Westchester Square and walk on the structure to the yard.
For the latter, give me a day to find it again, but its in there.
Note: the image next to the article does not match the caption. The photo shows the second card in the series. It is of 72 St. The FIRST card in the series is as described in the article and caption, and a photo of it appears in the print edition of today's NY Post on page 17.
Sean@Temple
You're slipping Brian.
......
-Stef
-Stef
For what its worth I put some shots in of my home territory..
Not much to add about the trip,either, except how awesome it was, etc...but I also wanted to put some appreciation for the crew of the trip,who were all EXTEMELY patient with us foamers! Anyone know who everyone was?
Again it was real fun meeting everyone.... :>))
Trevor takes some outstanding pictures and I was laughing so hard at that frozen (or fried) rat.
However, being one who knows the Brighton Line very well, image #17 in your album has the incorrect caption, that is clearly not Church Ave. Looks more like Park Place on the shuttle to me. The Church Ave renovation took place around 1984-85, long before yellow tactile strips and wheelchair boarding area signs came into being (and regarding the yellow bumpy strips, that is the norm for all new station renovations.) Also Church Ave on the Brighton line is not wheelchair or full ADA accessible.
Thank you for a wonderful album and it was very nice for you to come down from the NY State mountains and meet me on the MOD trip.
This is not what 99% of the NYPD force would do, however with observations like this on the remaining 1 percent, we are not prepared for another terrorist attack in the subway system. This is very sad that innocent lives may be lost over such stupidity as the lack of being alert in the subway system (or anywhere else for that matter.)
However after the inital conversation between the officer and photographer on a legimate purpose, such a the personal use or a hobby results in the photographer being asked to move, that is harrasment right there.
Officer have the right to ask someone to move if they are in direct violation of the law.
Disclaimer: Have nothing to do with this publication, accept being a subscriber.
First of all, what do you mean by "The El?" New York has had two different kinds of els in the past century. The earlier els were erected in the late 1800's and predated the opening of the subway in 1904. Others were constructed in connection with the "Dual Contracts" of 1913 and were, in some cases, extensions or modifications of existing lines. There are other classifications too.
If you mean the classic els that ran in Manhattan, the last one closed in May of 1955, when the Third Avenue El was shut down. The Bronx portion of that system, from East 149th Street to Gun Hill Road, continued until 1973, when it too was closed.
You can also visit the "Elevated City" exhibit of the NYC Transit Museum in downtown Brooklyn.
Some closing dates of Brooklyn els :
Lexington Avenue : Friday October 13 1950
Myrtle Avenue (Bridge-Jay to Bway-Myrtle) : October 3, 1969
Fulton Street : June 1, 1940 (Adams St. to Rockaway Avenue)
June ? 1956 (Rockaway Avenue to Grant Avenue)
The elevated Manhattan-bound portion of the 14th Street Canarsie "L" line over Snediker Avenue, between Sutter and Atlantic Avenue stations, was closed, and demolition started, the second half of last year (2003). There are many photos of the demolition in progress under Sutter and Atlantic Avenue headings of the BMT Canarsie Line section of this site.
Many elevated lines still exist and run in all five boros of NYC.
This may sound unbelievable but until last summmer, I never knew what life was like under those elevated rail lines. The last time I rode the MTA to the elevated portion must have been around 1975 or 1976 when my father took us to Far Rockaway as children. Other than that day, I don't ever remember riding an elevated line in New York City. To be totally honest, there was never a reason for me to ride the subway into the Bronx or Brooklyn since I live in Jersey.
Last summer, I decided to take my bicycle and ride to the last stop of every line in Manhattan and come back home using my GPS. It was an EYE-OPENER on how life goes on beneath those elevated lines.
I'll never forget it. There was a block party going on beneath the #5 elevated with music and people cooking and food everywhere. I couldn't believe the festive nature under what was a very poor community. All of a sudden, a train came roaring by and scared the daylights out of me. The noise was unbelievable and I never heard such a racket before in my life. It was louder than the music that was booming from huge loud speakers. Seriously. I covered my ears to block the noise and closed my eyes to prevent any flying dirt and particles from the passing train.
Afterward, I noticed everyone looking strange at me like I was crazy. You see, no one even bothered to cover their ears or run for protection. In fact, they kept on enjoying themselves like it was NORMAL! I guess people can get used to even the worse of circumstances. I read they were going to close the elevated or use ballast to decrease some of the noise. Unfortunatly, it never happened and cities across the nation at the turn of the century who were thinking of using elevated rails were turned off from the idea after studying our system. It was a mistake.
Personally, I would never live within 5 blocks of an elevated line but it's a necessay evil if you're going to have mass transit. There is no way you can cut and cover for miles without spending tens of billions of dollars. All those cities who were afraid to build elevated railroads will simply continue to construct more highways. Once they run out of space and can no longer expand the system, they will begin spreading out or shrink like in Atlanta.
Really wasn't all that bad - you get used to it. Stef? You live next to WPR el, no? If the trains stop running for whatever reason, have trouble sleeping? =)
Regards,
Jimmy
On the SIRT (or MTA Staten Island Railway), the Stapleton Station area is on a concrete vaiduct, while most of the line is on an embankment. Also,the Dongan Hills Station is on a concrete/brick embankment which feels like an old 'el' due to two 1930's era steel overpasses(Seaview/Garretson Aves).
"http://www.nycsubway.org/nyc/sirt/"
CBTC gets a lot harder to phase in after that. Every other A- or B-Division route shares trackage with some other route, at least some of the time. Does CBTC have any benefits when it is usable on only part of a route?
I do realize that this "problem" is many years away, but I was curious.
The 1/9 and 6 are effective isolates, so I suspect they will be next.
1. They aren't effectively isolated, because frequently express trains run on the local track or vice versa.
2. Others have posted that various IND lines are next. Culver and Fulton come to mind.
Is is indeed conventional. My guess is the CBTC will function as an overlay in the initial phase.
With CBTC functioning as a signal overlay in certain areas but a motorman still at the controls of the train, properly equipped trains could operate in and out of CBTC areas without a problem.
On the MUNI Metro in SFO there is full ATO with CBTC: The motorman rides almost as a formality (ie: safeguard against loss of comm), and acts as a conductor until the street running begins.
Aside from the L and the 7, does any line derive benefits from being CBTC-enabled before the *entire division* is CBTC-enabled? Obviously you could convert isolated sections of routes, but if any part of the route still uses conventional block signalling, then the route as a whole doesn't derive any benefit...does it?
The only exceptions I can see are the 1/9 and the 6, which in their normal daytime configurations are isolated. Every other route in the system interconnects with some other route in its division, so I'm wondering if there is a significant benefit before a division in its entirety is converted.
Exactly what quantitative "benefits" are expected from CBTC-enabled track?
According to my understanding, the main benefit is that trains will be able to safely operate at closer distances than they do today, which will allow shorter headways, and hence greater capacity.
There are a number of ancillary benefits, such as being able to provide better passenger announcements.
How is that possible? Train separation is a function of the maximum stopping distance of the following train. CBTC does not improve braking performance.
which will allow shorter headways, and hence greater capacity.
If trains are opeating more slowly because their separation is less and there has been no improvement braking performance, then it is not at all obvious that reduced separation will result in reduced headway.
How is that possible? Train separation is a function of the maximum stopping distance of the following train. CBTC does not improve braking performance.
I think you already know the answer, but I'll answer as if the question were sincere.
CBTC does not change the laws of physics, but it provides the signalling system with more accurate information about where the trains actually are. With the present signalling plant, the only thing the system knows is whether a train is present anywhere within a fixed block. The system doesn't "know" whether the train is moving, or where on the block the train is located. Because of this, the signals are more conservative than they would need to be if the system had perfect information about the speed and separation of trains. It is my understanding that CBTC provides that information.
In other words, trains today are required to maintain greater separation than the laws of physics require, because the signalling system doesn't have all the information it ideally should have about where the equipment is located and how fast it is traveling at any given time.
The one catch with making use of the speed of the train in front is: suppose the train hits an obstacle and decelerates at a much higher rate than normal braking provides (example, deranged man drop steel objects on tracks)? You wouldn't want the train behind to crash into it.
Therefore, I'm not sure you can get much benefit from the fact that the train ahead is moving.
Also, as Stephen loves to point out, fixed block systems can have 500' long blocks, and in fact do so in places where it matter such as the southbound 4/5 at 14th St.
Here's my guess: if you designed a fixed block system from scratch, you could probably get virtually as short train separations as with CBTC. But if you're going to design it from scratch, you might as well make it CBTC for the same price and get added benefits that allow OPTO or even eventually ZPTO.
Also, the current signaling system got messed up by a sudden change in believed braking ability of trains. Thus all the timers, because timers are cheaper than redoing the whole signaling system. With CBTC, any such change is a software change, not a need to reposition every single signal.
How much more information greater precision and accuracy will CBTC supply?
Suppose CBTC were 200 feet more accurate. This means that trains could be spaced 200 feet closer together and still obey the same physics. If the trains were travelling at 40 mph, this translates to 3.3 seconds.
Somehow, I don't think a 3 second decrease in current headways will raise current service levels from 26 tph to over 30 tph. The difference between 26 tph and 30 tph is the difference between 138 and and 120 second headways. CBTC will buy 3 seconds, how will the remaining 15 seconds be obtained?
You wouldn't need to convert a whole division, just a whole line segment. CBTC-equipped trains can operate on non-CBTC track, though not very well vice versa.
Example: CBTC-enable the Queens Blvd Line, hopefully allowing 40 tph. That doesn't mean you have to CBTC-enable the G line or the Culver. But you would have to run CBTC-enabled equipment on them if that equipment went to Queens Blvd.
On the same section of track?
Train A is not CBTC equipped and its follower, Train B, is. The CBTC system does not see Train A and thinks Train B has a clear track ahead. Train A stops and the CBTC system still thinks Train B has a clear track ahead. The CBTC system tells Train B to plow into the rear of Train A. N.B. Train B no longer has stopcocks that can be actuated by trippers. CBTC does not need them. Besides, debris is always causing trains to go into emergency.
CBTC uses a minimal block system to guard against non-CBTC equipment on CBTC track. The TA's minimal block system will handle only 4 trains/hour on a single track. Bring in a non-CBTC train, or one with a damaged DCS, and the whole line grinds to a crawl. Is that your idea of coexistence?
The problem with that approach is a high inital cost for no benefit. You're advocating retrofitting 6000 cars (at least 1500 with linkbars) on the chance they might have to wander onto CBTC track. CBTC will require a 30 year implementation period for the entire system. A lot of the retrofitted equipment will be scrapped before they see full time CBTC operation.
I've NEVER been permitted into a cab on the R142 class submarines. But, thanks to many things coming together for my Christmas visit to the city in 2001, I happened to run into friends on an invite after a wonderful outing with the subtalkers that came and hung out with Nancy ("bingbong") and I when we last got down there. Bottom line was the 143's had JUST gone on the rails and arrangements were made for us to take a ride, get some handle time on a real 143, and play around on the first trainset that had arrived (8101-8108 for car number takers - only reason I remember is I'm looking at a photo of me in one and noted the console, and can count to "8 units").
Anyhoo ... the 143's had a CBTC cabinet offside down on the floor. In the "sure, check it out" mode that had been going on during the "run it back and forth and open off-side" on the Canarsie line, was shown all the open panels and "what's inside" during pre-acceptance testing with Kawasaki brthren plus a retiring TSS who's now gone. Provisions were made - the ONLY issue at the time of delivery was precisely WHAT would slide into the cabinets as far as circuit board matching the designed-in pinouts ... looked almost like a pair of S-100 busses to me.
The final "plug-in communications" gear was not yet "designed" so I was told when I ran an R143 on the Canarsie line with a "pilot" in the dead of night very near or on a holiday. But it was "on the way" then. So as far as the "about to go CBTC Canarsie" the CARS are equipped. The electronics is probably already on property ... so CBTC will NOT be a "poor investment" there, nor is its cost much delayed. I believe that once the signals wake up, the cars will too in a mutual orgasm of clockwork precision. Heh.
It's just that the CBTC will *require* 143's and no other car can enter unless GOH'd with CBTC electronix. I've seen the "modern" R32 cabs. GEEZ! I'm willing to wager REAL MONEY on where they're going to cram that stuff. Ain't no place to stick it and trust me, the T/O's already got enough crammed up there already without having to make room for more. :(
So CBTC-equipped gets the steel cars and non-CBTC gets the wooden cars. But from an engineering standpoint, the work was executed well, designs work, it's all a matter of getting it all plugged in ... lamp test, anyone? :)
At least we're starting with some agreement :-)
But future contracts are not determined, and that's what we're talking about. There's absolutely no reason why the ZC's could not monitor the legacy track circuits and signals.
I assume you're suggesting that future CBTC "conversions" might consist of a full-fledged block system, in addition to CBTC. In a word, the problem with that approach is cost. CBTC is supposed to save money. It can't if it requires a complete block system and another CBTC system on top of it.
Why do you think Flushing was just resignalled when it is next on the CBTC list?
I believe the Flushing line's resignalling had more to do with Con Ed's refusal to continue supplying 50 Hz power for the existing signals than with CBTC's arrival. It was colossal bad timing with the entire system scheduled for replacement within a decade.
Those signals aren't going anywhere, I'm sure they will stay as a back up system. Politically, the TA cannot afford massive delays on the 7 when implementing new technology, so 4TPH is out of the question.
Again, if the only way that CBTC will be practical is for an entire duplicate 30-40 tph block system, then its cost becomes prohibitive. Just put in the backup system and forget about CBTC.
Sure. -but why remove the legacy system during cutover? Like Jeff says, non equipped cars will dissappear before CBTC is system wide. And at any rate, the discussion is whether the system can be phased in. If you overlay CBTC over an existing system, then you can run anything on it, and have backup for the new stuff when it fails. Whether or not transit chooses to work it that way is up to some planning committee somewhere.
I believe the Flushing line's resignalling had more to do with Con Ed's refusal to continue supplying 50 Hz power for the existing signals than with CBTC's arrival.
Absolutely not true. Firstly, nothing on the IRT or BMT ever ran 50 cycles, and secondly when Edison pulled the plug on the 25Hz in the late 90's, static converters were installed at the TA substations, which continue to supply 25Hz signal mains to this day.
Again, if the only way that CBTC will be practical is for an entire duplicate 30-40 tph block system, then its cost becomes prohibitive. Just put in the backup system and forget about CBTC.
The best idea I've heard yet. Coded track circuits with speed enforcement sound great to me.
Legacy systems are expensive to maintain, otherwise they would not be replacing them either in kind or with new technology. One will obviously keep the legacy system running until a major section of CBTC controlled track has been proven. After that, high maintenance costs will dictate their removal.
non equipped cars will dissappear before CBTC is system wide.
The problem is more that all cars have to be equipped before CBTC becomes system wide. Consider the following example. Suppose for example, the BMT 4th Avenue lines were equipped with CBTC but the Brighton weren't. Some incident takes out the Brighton between DeKalb and Prospect Park. Where do you put the non-CBTC equipped sothbound Brighton trains rolling into DeKalb. Once they go onto the 4th Ave line, 4th Ave service is toast (4 tph). No, every train must be CBTC equipped to guard against contingencies. That means a large up front cost for very little gain - very little CBTC service.
when Edison pulled the plug on the 25Hz in the late 90's, static converters were installed at the TA substations, which continue to supply 25Hz signal mains to this day.
I read this information on this board. It was posted by an MTA employee whose stated responsibility was to oversee the signal rehabilitiation projects. Then again as an economist he has always insisted that he had no engineering training. I guess he was sold a bill of goods.
I'm glad they used static converters. I stated such a solution was better than replacing the signal system, when the subject was raised.
That still leaves the question as to why they replaced the signal system on the Flushing Line. The replacement still uses hard wired logic. It's not the type of technology that's especially easy to interface to CBTC equipment with serial communications. They would have been much better off interface-wise, had they used PLC based solid-state equipment.
Coded track circuits with speed enforcement sound great to me.
It's not going to improve service capacity sufficiently to justify its added cost.
When they did that replacement, they learned an awkward lesson
about phase locking!
Okay, the thread is: Can You Phase In CBTC? and now you answer is yes, overlap them and then remove. right? 'cause before you said no.
The problem is more that all cars have to be equipped before CBTC becomes system wide.
And thus the overlay.
Step 1:
Equip all cars and all lines with CBTC at you leisure. For this time, test CBTC using fixed-block as a fall back, using cars that are equipped. Continue to maintain the old signals, and continue to pay train operators and conductors. Signal Maintainers are issued only 12v test bulbs and hammers.
Step 2:
Once CBTC is proven and 100% installed on cars and tracks. Remove the legacy signals, lay off any T/O's or C/R's that don't want the new title of "OPTO Train Attendant." Signal Maintainers are still issued 12v test bulbs and hammers, but now get a laptop also.
:-)
As far as the AC power stuff goes, all I can say is that I've personally worked on the 25-cycle equipment on the IRT and BMT. 50-cycle equipment never existed anywhere that I've heard or read about.
The crux of the matter is the schedule for equiping cars and lines. This would not be a challenge, if the lines were discrete. They aren't and that's the challenge.
If a single non-CBTC train wanders onto CBTC track, the system reverts to a block system. If this is a frequent occurrance then any benefit in terms of increased performance or lower maintenance from CBTC will be lost for that section of track.
OTOH, if a CBTC equipped train spends most of its time on non-CBTC track, then there is little benefit to be gained from equipping the train.
Either way, a lot of up front money must be spent before any payout can be expected. This might be the norm for the TA but most enterprises expect faster returns on investments.
This is clearly true, but it appears you're stating the worst case. In my original question, I was asking what benefits can be achieved assuming that car purchases and signal system upgrades are rationally coordinated. Obviously, if it's done irrationally, you could spend tons of money without getting any benefit for many decades.
Or, are you saying that no conceivable implementation plan, even if done rationally by smart people, could deliver phased-in benefits?
I've heard that RTO has serious reservations about the backup system for Canarsie, and also heard that the debacle in San Franciso was in part a result of a buncha software guys blindly saying "oh yes, It will work" until the day of the cutover everyone said "Oh no, It's not working!" Unfortunately, Canarsie just might be the place where things get fixed in Beta-Testing = on your way to work.
Another spawning project is Automated Train Signalling...ATS. Far easier to install and maintain. This system is in use on mainline freight. I've never been able to contact 'Team ATS,' the group involved in this project.
Incidently, I was surprised to see mention of the '7' line. Historically, this was the first line to use 'electromechanical control' before computers were even dreamed of. I remember the physical construction: specially built loops of wire were mounted in circular housings parallel to the cab face. Loops of wire were mounted in square signs parralel to the track. When the train passed by, the two loops of wire acted as a transformer and allowed the 'message' to pass which controlled switches and signals. I do not know the method of communication. It did work, for a while...like everything else. CI Peter
David
David
That's too much of a simplification and not completely accurate. Most train control systems use wayside sensors to determine the presence of a train, its location and possibly its speed. The wayside sensors are connected to a logic system that determines orders to the the trains. It transmits these orders back to the train. The logic system can be distributed hardwired logic, a central computer or any variation in between. These orders can be relayed directly to the cab or via wayside signals.
CBTC is fundamentally different. The train knows its position and speed. The train communicates this information to wayside equipment. The wayside equipment communicates this to a logic system that may be distributed or a central computer. Again, train orders are computed and sent back to the train. The difference is that the train knows its position and communicates this to the traffic control system.
Originally, the 'L' was to have continuous microwave transponders operating on the 2400 mHz amateur radio frequency band. Later on, the software supplier was dropped and inductive link couplers (coils of wire that act like transformers) were set every, say 100' feet on the railbed so as to set up 'zones' like signal rail.
There are 3 types of Digital Communication System's (DCS) commonly used for CBTC systems. This is the communication between the train and the wayside equimpment. They are RF, inductive loop and leaky transmission wire. An RF system is favored for the TA because it should require less equipment. The DCS that passed the field trials used a packet switched network (TCP/IP), not continuous transponders. The TA has let the lead contractor substitute its own proprietary and untested RF DCS in place of the system that was used in the tests. One of the two follower contractors has dropped out as a result. The remaining follower contractor will purchase the DCS from the prime contractor. To date all operating CBTC systems use either inductive loop or leaky transmission line.
I was surprised to see mention of the '7' line. Historically, this was the first line to use 'electromechanical control' before computers were even dreamed of. I remember the physical construction: specially built loops of wire were mounted in circular housings parallel to the cab face. Loops of wire were mounted in square signs parralel to the track. When the train passed by, the two loops of wire acted as a transformer and allowed the 'message' to pass which controlled switches and signals. I do not know the method of communication.
The Identra System wasn't a communication system. It was a grid dip meter. The toilet seat mounted on the train was a passive tuned circuit. There was a switch that selected a capacitor to correspond to a given route. The wayside equipment transmitted low level RF and determined which resonant frequency it was coupled to, as a train passed.
I'd imagine the Manhattan trunk lines would be the last to go to CBTC.
I'll forget about the grammer or bad typing.
That portion was not shortened as much as rerouted. The Jamaica line was redirected to the new Archer Avenue extension in 1988. Then the abandoned portion of the El was torn down.
Look like you've already forgotten about your spelling.
Dates on which I last used the now-demolished Jamaica el stations :
168th Street : early September 1968.
160th Street : never used it. But it's close to the present end of the E, J and Z lines at Jamaica Center, Parsons Blvd. / Archer Ave.
Sutphin Blvd. : early June 1979
Queens Blvd. : Tuesday January 26 1982. Was the end of the line at that time.
Metropolitan Avenue : early June 1984.
Jamaica Avenue looked weird, naked, without the el, when I rode under it on the Van Wyck Expressway, May 1990 and September 22, 1991.
There is now a multiplex cinema (I think 10 screens) on the southeast corner of Jamaica Avenue and either Parsons Blvd. or 160th Street, taking the place of the once-grand and now-gone Loews Valencia (now Tabernacle of Prayer) Merrick and RKO Alden cinemas. You can see the Valencia and the Alden in some images of the demolished 168th Street el station.
I don't remember being in the Valencia as a kid. My dad, and a friend at work who will turn 56 on the 21st of this month, remember it well, especially the blue ceiling which, with its stars, resembled the sky. My friend from work thought it WAS the sky, when he was a kid !
I've never been in the Valencia since it became a church. I walked by there June 28 last year but didn't go in, although it did look dark, cool, and inviting on that busy street, on that warm, sunny summer day. The sheer size of the building struck me especially as I was crossing Merrick Blvd. on the north side of Jamaica Avenue, as I saw the unbroken immensity of the east side of the building, about five stories high, and a block long.
I too am glad that the interior of the Valencia has not been changed much. The covering or removal of some of the naked cherubs reads like typical evangelical, Pentecostal church modesty. I'm reminded of an art professor commenting on how Jimmy Carter asked that some paintings of nudes in a hotel lobby be covered while he was campaigning there in the summer of 1976.
I have not ever been in the building , but the doors on the side were open once when I went by , and the building is nicely maintained , even if by a church instead of a theater . I guess it could be worse , they could be showing porn in it like some of the Times Square ornate theaters had to go through for a few decades before "Disney" came in to save them .
God has no problem with our genitalia, though we humans too often seem preoccupied with, and overstimulated by, them.
The Austin, at Lefferts and Austin in Kew Gardens, was pornographic, until it became a multiplex art cinema in the latter '90's. The Haven, formerly in Woodhaven on the south side of Jamaica between
Forest Parkway and 75th Street, would have been pornographic, but for protests of local civic groups. I think it's a mini-mall now.
The Haven, formerly in Woodhaven on the south side of Jamaica between
Forest Parkway and 75th Street, would have been pornographic, but for protests of local civic groups. I think it's a mini-mall now.
While I think it would be really sad if they were using a beautiful theater for something like pornography, I guess it would be better than the alternative...destruction. A mini-mall to me is a worse fate. I only wish the old Madison or Bushwick theater had become a "porn" theater in the 70's, they still may be intact today, with the hope of restoration one day. Granted, both those buildings still exist, but the interiors are gone, of course better perhaps than the Broadway near Myrtle-Bway that is totally gone. Even the beautiful New Amsterdam theater in Times Square had to be a porn theater for a while to "keep it alive", and now Disney has the Lion King in there and it is totally restored. Who knows, even the "Tabernacle of Prayer" has the potential to return to the "Valencia" one day - in the meantime, the building is being maintained.
Old movie "palaces" are stubbornly difficult to convert to other uses given their physical nature. Among the very few alternative uses that allow the interiors to be kept intact are places of worship or "legitimate" theaters. Converting one to retail use or multiplex theaters usually requires subdividing the interior, in the process losing what made it a special place to begin with.
Perhaps this question has already been answered by the atrocious board game, "Ghettopoly", or by the Spike Lee film, "Crooklyn".
I would not have wanted the RKO Madison Theater to become pornographic. I remember a sign on the front of it in late February 1978 :
THIS IS HOW YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD STARTS TO DECAY.
IF THE CONDITION OF THIS BUILDING BOTHERS YOU, CALL XXX-XXX-XXXX
I never called that number, but I was glad when the RKO Madison Theater was no longer vacant and unused.
I do agree, however, today only it's shell remains. It was way to beautiful a theater to be turned into a "porn" theater, however, it was also way to beautiful a building to lose it's interior also. I remember in the early 80's when it became Consumers, and then "Odd-Lot". The ceiling line followed that of the balcony. They put a low ceiling in, but the balcony ceiling remained (or the floor of the balcony). At some point the theater burned, I don't remember if that is before or after it was gutted. I wonder what remains if anything of the old ceiling's plasterwork.
The same with the Oasis on Fresh Pond Road. Today it's just a hulk of itself as a CVS store. While it was converted in the 80's to a roller rink, all it's features were still there. And while I had many of fun days there when it was a roller rink, I wonder that if perhaps it had survived as a theater, even the unthinkable, a porn theater, maybe it would have survived long enough to one day be restored for proper theater use....or perhaps not, it may have burned anyway. In that case, at least the building did "die" somewhat happy in it's final days as the roller rink as opposed to have to spending it's final days as a smut theater.
Luckily many theaters like the New Amsterdam survived that humiliation to beome shining stars one again.
Image that - From Porn to Disney - can't get more opposite than that!
Coming home from high school and college to Ridgewood on the L train, coming up out of the Myrtle Avenue station at the easternmost exit on Myrtle, just east of Wyckoff, by McDonald's and the Optimo Cigar Store, the RKO Madison Theater marquee was one of the first things I saw. It would have been disheartening to see porno films advertised on it. Even blaxploitation crap, like Raymond St. Jacques in "white brain in a black body", which I remember from fall 1969, or "The Legend of Nigger Charlie" in summer 1972, would have been preferable.
As an aside, the Wagner Theater at Wyckoff and Dekalb Avenues, adjacent to the DeKalb Avenue stop on the L line, used to show German-made films, but, as the German population of that area of Wyckoff Heights decreased, it became porno, showing such masterpieces of cinema as "Devil's Bed" and "Let's Play Doctor" in the late '60's.
I have no idea what the building is used for now, or if it still exists.
The Arion Theater, on Metropolitan Avenue just east of 73rd Place in Middle Village, Queens, was a smaller "bargain" cinema. I saw films there from 1970 to 1984, "Marooned" to "Terms of Endearment". I've been in it since it became a Jamron Drugs store. It was an odd feeling. I tried to imagine where the ticket booth, lobby, refreshment counter, seats, aisles, and screen had been, but could only roughly locate them. Nothing of the interior decoration was left.
I fancifully tried to pick up the vibes of the past, from when it was a cinema, but got nothing.
At least some of the interior decorations remain at RKO Keith's in Richmond Hill. Sadly, the American Museum of Sound Recording has left there. A recent "Queens Chronicle" article noted that the fate of the massive RKO Keith's in Flushing is still in debate.
Better known as Why Do I Keep Playing Golf When I'm So Much Better at Basketball?
it became porno, showing such masterpieces of cinema as "Devil's Bed" and "Let's Play Doctor"
Now wait ... isn't Let's Play Doctor a new reality series on the Discovery Health Channel?
I saw films there from 1970 to 1984, "Marooned" to "Terms of Endearment"
Terms of Endearment, blecch! I'd rather watch blaxploitation or porno, than that syrupy crap.
The "white brain in a black body" movie was 1969's "Change Of Mind", with Raymond St. Jacques and Susan Oliver. Probably very good, compared to "The Thing With Two Heads", or whatever it was called, with Ray Milland and Rosy Grier.
"Now wait ... isn't 'Let's Play Doctor' a new reality series on the Discovery Health Channel?"
Perhaps, and perhaps a direct descendant of 1992's "Dr. Giggles" :
"The doctor is out ... of his mind !"
Preceded a year earlier by that drug control ad, shown in theaters, showing a surgeon, high on grass, about to operate on a patient, from the patient's POV, right before going under anaesthesia.
I walked out of "Terms of Endearment" at the Arion Theater, late April 1984, took the Q54 bus east a few miles, and caught "The Right Stuff" (literally!)at the Cinemart in Forest Hills.
it became porno, showing such masterpieces of cinema as "Devil's Bed" and "Let's Play Doctor" in the late '60's.
Hahaha! Your comment, "such masterpieces of cinema" really made me laugh. It remindes me of the first time me and my friend snuck into the XXX section at my local video store as a teenager, and being hysterical at some of the titles being a "play" on real films, like "Bright Lights, Big *****" (filling in a rhyming word to "Cities")....such "masterpieces".
Clever porn titles ? Try "My Bare Lady" and "Ball Street".
Due to falling asleep on a Q65, I wound up at Jamaica, so I had to walk around 'aimlessly' to find a Q17. I walked down Jamaica Avenue, with the sidewalks paved in brick. I just can't picture a rickety El running down there, but I guess the TA succeeded.
The remaining section beyond 121st Street was closed in 1985, but the structure remained standing for quite a while afterwards. I drove along Jamaica Ave. in October of 1988, and that abandoned stretch was still intact.
I rode out to 168th Street a few times, once in March of 1968 on a JJ and twice in 1969 on QJ trains.
I have a vivid memory as a kid from either the summer of 1979 or 1980 of watching construction workers taking chainsaws to the Jamaica bound track inside the Sutphin Blvd station as I waited for a Q44 bus to the Bronx Zoo. It was so sad to see, and I was afraid that the whole J line was going to be demolished.
A reasonable sign, I'd say, that the joint was beyond redemption :)
The first part of the answer has been given, i.e. to reroute the line.
The second reason was it was supose to be the initial phase of an extention of the J into South-East Queens (they were going to take over one of the two LIRR "Babylon" pairs of tracks.
There is more detail for you to read about on this site.
Instead of a Subtalk field trip----
How about the first annual Metro Olympics---Teams of two ride
the entire system---Perhaps, all teams start & end at the same station(s)----Perhaps, start at Franconia and end at Glenmont---
We can refine the rules later--i.e.---for proof, log all station times that we were in and the car numbers--or even more sadistic, get off at each station and get a bus transfer as proof.
Also, do we allow people to use buses to go from say Shady Grove to Glenmont or is the rule that a person can't leave the RAIL system...
Hmmmm....might deserve further thought & discussion...
Mark
p.s.---Would you believe we still have snow on the ground up here--UUGGHH!!!
That's a great idea!! Spice things up a little bit by having something like that. The funny thing is that I was thinking along those lines not so long ago that it could be a fun thing do by using different modes of transit in the area. Start at Point A to get to Point B using whatever means is the easiest. I like it!!
Yes, wear your best flannel and get a beat up old pickup truck with a gun rack and you're all set!
Wow, you still have snow on the ground? What a crazy winter this was. Makes me thinking of that lump of snow we saw at Huntington back in April last year!
1) RAIL ONLY
2) Start at Shady Grove and end at a station that has multiple lines running through it, like Metro Center or L'Enfant Plaza. By setting the start and end at 2 stations that are on the terminus of lines would lead to less variation in terms of possible routings
Rail only, especially Metrorail is a snoozer.
Mark
Try and get a Neo!
Maybe try and get a Breda, Rohr, and CAF enroute to the terminus too!
A friend of mine coined the following phrase to describe how smooth the ride on metrorail was, "Cadillac on steel wheels". I pass it on to Cody Pfanstiehl who was WMATA director of community service up to the mid 1980s. It was used in casual discussion by WMATA promotion people back in those early days but never really caught on. I thing it’s still a pretty good description of the ride.
John
Start at Glenmont
Red to Fort Totten
Green to Greenbelt
Green to Branch Ave
Green to L'Enfant
Blue to Addison
Blue to Stadium-Armory
Orange to New Carrollton
Orange to Federal Triangle
LUNCH
Orange to Vienna
Orange to Rosslyn
Blue to F/S
Blue to King
Yellow to Huntington
Yellow to Gallery
Red to Silver Spring (needed bathroom/refreshment, we really only needed to go to Fort Totten)
Red to Shady Grove
Mark
The only thing is we'd have to find someone who wouldn't participate to make up the clues so they wouldn't have an unfair advantage.
I think this whole idea WILL come to fruition
Mark
p.s.--Perhaps John and I could come up with the clues---I know, between the two of us---it WOULD be a challenge...John, you up for it?
I'm beginning to see this thing coming together....
John, you and I could have a good time testing their knowledge of Metro and its history and such.
mark
Here's a scenario...
We start at Union Station----I'd give all the teams their first clues which would taking them to a station where John will be waiting---from there John will give a clue to where I will be (I'll be going to that station straight from Union Station)---then as the teams get to where I am, I'll give a clue to the next place where John will be waiting (he would've traveled straight there from his previous location)---The only real work would be John and I coordinating the clues and making sure he and I are going where we need to be at the given moment...
Now all we need is a date---as for a starting location--I like the idea of Union Station to make it easy on the folks coming in from out of town.
Mark
But, May is pretty wide open except for Memorial Day weekend, which wouldn't be too fun anyway with all the extra things that go on that weekend.
I will assume the John you are referring is me.
Now all we need is a date---as for a starting location--I like the idea of Union Station to make it easy on the folks coming in from out of town.
I am game. Mark you and I can work out the details by e-mail. You guys pick the weekend makes no difference to me.
On a side note. I was looking at the March calendar this afternoon and noticed that WMATA metrorail will celebrate it’s 28th anniversary to the day on a Saturday the 27th.
John
Ballston, You and Oren pick the date---John and I will work out the clues based upon a starting point of Union Station....As for the end station----John and I will figure out how to work it...
Mark
Time for John to change his e-mail as I have been using the same one sense 1997.
John
Mark
Makes no difference to me, any weekend will do.
John
John
Here's a thought though, in order to not bring suspicion to ourselves, assuming it's nice out---Let's make a ruling that the teams HAVE to leave the system to get their next clue---In other words, lets say for example, the clue led the teams to Union Station, Either John or I would be standing by one of the pylons at street level--there we would hand out the next clue---this could be interesting at those stations w/ multiple entrances (L'enfent Plaza) and those where the pylon is a good distance from the station itself (Silver Spring)....I figure, on camera, if the station attendant saw someone hanging around handing out white things to people---I'd be suspicious so I figure they would be too....plus it forces those from out of the area to actually look at their surroundings...
Whaddya think?
Mark
Oh and a warning to all those who plan on participating---I figure teams of two or three will be sufficient-----be sure to bring any and all material you have on the system (old maps, plans, news articles, etc)---some questions will be definately easier than others.
John
As to Marks "Metro Olympics" I hate to through a wet blanket on this, but with all of the weekend track work WMATA has been doing it would be hard to predict what work will be being done where. This would likely reduce the amount of coverage a teem could get in one day.
For me it would refresh some of the stuff in my mind that I saw on my many tunnel walks I made back in the 1970s and 80s during construction. I don’t get to ride on metrorail very much. For you I will share the knowledge I have accumulated over the years about stuff you have never seen or how the stations were built.
Like, for those that saw Jane’s New York this last weekend and recall the front of the tunnel boring machine that had just broken through. This is the same type of machine that was use to bore the tunnels from just south of Woodly Park-Zoo (A04) to just north of Medical Center (A10) on the A Route Red line. When I saw it the second time it had just broken through in to what is now the north blowout vent shaft at Van Ness (A06).
John
Chuck Greene
John
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
Chuck Greene
Ben F. Schumin :-)
Mark
One of the neat things about attending the Rail Rodeo is if you show up early when there are doing the operator competition you get a chance to ride train in the yard.
John
There is test to show how close one can stop at a fixed marker, (manually stopping a train at the proper birthing point at a platform). They also tested how well the operator would deal with a dark interlocking signal, and how the operator would deal with a fire aboard the train along with ad lib announcement describing why the train was delayed, station announcements along with other stuff.
The maintenance people had a drill on cars that had failed systems and how quickly they could trouble shoot and correct the system, along with some bench drills A set of cars was on a hoist to do a visual inspection drill. Oren will tell you that pointed out to him that one of the cars was missing a third rail shoe.
John
Can someone help me here?
Chuck Greene
We look forward to having you both down here---as for pairing you up with DC Pros----Consider it done....
Yes, it IS June 5th--tentatively 9:00 am at Union Station Gate G? I believe---It's the gate where we always meet....
Should you have any questions...don't hesitate to e-mail me.
Mark
Chuck Greene
Pic 1 at 18th Avenue
Pic 2 at 18th Avenue
Pic 3 at 18th Avenue
Pic 4 at 18th Avenue
Pic 5 at 18th Avenue
Pic 6 at 18th Avenue
Pic 7 at 18th Avenue
Pic 8 at 18th Avenue
Pic 9 at 18th Avenue
Pic 10 at 18th Avenue
Pic 11 at 18th Avenue
Pic 1 at Sheepshead Bay
Pic 2 at Sheepshead Bay
Pic 1 at Kings Highway
Pic 2 at Kings Highway
Pic 3 at Kings Highway
Pic 4 at Kings Highway
Pic 5 at Kings Highway
Pic 6 at Kings Highway
Pic 7 at Kings Highway
Pic 8 at Kings Highway
Enjoy these until Next Week
I think the NY Daily News needs to read track maps, how could a northbound D train run adjacent to a southbound F train?
DUH!
Thanks, Chris
til next time
The February 28th, M.O.D. Chaser Album
Armed with the free upgrades that Amtrak sends its "Select" members of Guest Rewards, I've sampled first class a few times. It can be quite noisy with cell phones and loud conversations. In addition, even though the seating is 2 x 1, once the singles are gone, you may be stuck sharing a facing foursome (2+table+2) with others. That can be rather cramped, and you may be forced to ride backwards as well if the car is crowded.
In addition, when in first class, you're basically stuck in that car. The attendants aren't keen on letting their passengers through the kitchen into business class, even to find another rest room if the one in the first class car is occupied (you can insist if you must). If you choose the quiet car, you can wander to the other coaches (and the cafe car) if you desire.
I'd stick with the quiet car.
At about 15:00, something happened which affected service on the north tracks of the Manhattan Bridge. At about that time, I was standing at Pacific Street, waiting for a southbound D train. The first 5 announcements were confusing and sometimes inaudible. The woman claimed that a "malfunctioning switch on the Manhattan Bridge" was causing all southbound D trains to "operate at slow speeds". Of course I uttered the obvious: there are NO switches on the bridge. Each proceeding announcement was laced with pauses, giggles (it was a female) and off-mike comments. Needless to say, the gathering crowdswere becoming frustrated with the seeming aloofness this woman demonstrated in her anouncements. After 4 N trains passed in 30 minutes, the message changed from a "switch malfunction" to a "power off condition". Many were wondering why this woman was telling blatant lies in her increasingly annoying and useless announcements. At 15:40, it was stated that a W train was approaching Pacific Street and that it would make all D train stops to Coney Island. We waited for 8 minutes for this "approaching" train to arrive on the southbound local track. The woman making the announcements said the W train would make "all local stops" to CI via the D line. At this moment a D finally arrived on the southbound track. The woman making the announcements didn't even acknowledge it's existence. While the two trains sat at Pacific St, the conductor on the W train announced that the next stop would be Union St. Several confused passangers seeking a local train rushed on. The doors closed and the W left. Only after leaving the station did the conductor announce that the next stop was 36th St. Hundreds of people who assumed the original announcement that the train would go local were trapped and obviously upset. They all left the train when we got to 36th St. Seconds later that D train pulled into the station on the southbound express tracks. 3 minutes passed before Murphy allowed the D to leave, announcing that the rerouted W train was now out of service. Of course you can imagine hundreds of delayed West End riders at 36th Street trying in vain to get on the next train out. The D train left first, running express down the West End line on the local track to make up for lost time. Now for my 3 major beefs:
- Why was the woman making the announcements at Pacific St. telling absolute falsehoods about the cause of the delay? Why was she giggling with men in the background and not concentrating on informing people as to what was going on?
- Why was an N train not rerouted via West End to cover the 45 minute gap in service?
- Why was a contingency plan used (extended W) which basically couldn't be put into practice before the situation began clearing up?
- Why were the northbound M trains leaving Bay Parkway this afternoon not going into service there? I saw 2 M trains pull into the station, pick up their conductors, then leave, without a single announcement being made. Luckily, I caught the 2nd one at Pacific St from the D.
This has not been a good past few days for whomever is in charge of contingency planning for emergencies. 59th Street botched the whole incident at W4th St. Sunday evening, and the performance during today's problem was inexcusable. To top it all off, I probably saw the worst conductor in the system on the B train I rode this morning out of BPB. She was held at 145th, double buzzed twice by the T/O to close down. Ignoring the buzzes, the T/O then told her to close down on the PA. She was told to disreguard the holding lights twice, but she wouldn't accomodate him until she personally called the tower to confirm that she could ignore the lights. I'm sure the T/O was pissed at this needless delay (approx 9 minutes).
There, I've vented. Respond/flame as you please ...
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
Well, I can think of certain possibilities :)
"Why was the woman making the announcements at Pacific St. telling absolute falsehoods about the cause of the delay?"
Being that neither you nor I know the REAL reason/cause for that delay, it's unfair for you to state the announcer was blatantly lying. Perhaps the "switch problem" was at the Gold St interlocking south of the Bridge, but how many nonrailfans are familiar with "Gold St?" Maybe that was why "Manhattan Bridge" was said. I'm 100% certain that announcer only stated information she was provided...no "dedicated announcer" has PERSONAL knowledge of situations...they simply relate what they're TOLD to relate.
Concerning the W conductor...I wouldn't be surprised if, at first, he was instructed to make Union St the next stop, then - after the train doors had closed - was instructed to make 36 St instead the next stop. It's not an uncommon occurrence to be told to advise customers one thing, to be immediately followed by an instruction to do something completely different instead. WHY this happens, I don't know...but it surely DOES happen enough. I remember one day working the M, and pulling into 36 St after a R train in front of me was removed from service at DeKalb Av (that train kept going BIE). As the doors opened at 36, and I opened my cab door, a customer asked me "is your next stop 9 Av?" I answered "as of THIS moment, it is." No sooner did the words leave my mouth did Murphy Tower instruct me to go to 95 St to provide customers with R service.
Sunday, I sat on an A train at 59 for three hours (I was the 6:30 PM out of 207). I was the only train not turned back uptown...since I was already in the station when service was disrupted, I couldn't be turned. I agree the announcements made over the station PA at 59 weren't very helpful; however, the train crews were repeatedly instructed to advise customers to take the 1 train. While I knew from the train radio there was a "smoke condition" at Broadway-Lafayette, and that power had been turned off from 50 St - Chambers on the 8th Av Line, I didn't know anything about the throwing of objects onto the tracks, or ANY of the info stated by Robert (T/O) in his post. In short, if you, as a customer, are on a train, and the train crew is giving out very little information, chances are the crew knows little more than you as a customer knows. After Sunday's events, my wife FINALLY believes me when I tell her what I just stated...she had seen the news reports about the fire, etc, all of which was news to me.
Finally, the conductor on the B: I'd be willing to bet that was a VERY NEW conductor, who was extremely fearful about making a mistake/possibly losing their job. Think about it: you're new, a T/O you've never worked with before tells you to ignore holding lights, and your school car instructions tell you NEVER to ignore holding lights. What do you do? "Whenever in doubt, call on the radio for instructions." Sorry, Chris...the conductor did the right thing.
Oh no. You're defending these idiots. Why?
As for the information (or lack of it) provided by the "dedicated announcer" at Pacific Street, as Tony indicated, she can only provide the information that she is given. She's not the person deciding which trains are to run where, only the person giving information to customers in what's supposed to be an easy-to-understand way free of jargon. Should she have been given better information? Maybe -- I had no involvement with the incident whatsoever so I don't know the specifics (what happened, how it unfolded minute-by-minute, what was going on in the tower, etc.), and, of course, there's no way any passenger could have all such information, either, but it sounds like she was doing the best she could to provide as much information as she could as it was given to her. Should she have been more composed when making the announcements? Possibly. Make a complaint to NYCT and have it investigated if it's that much of a concern.
As for a train running express after an announcement that it would run local, Tony gave examples of what can happen, and, as a passenger, I can attest to the veracity of his examples.
David
Buzz. Wrong. Because an order was given by local supervision, using holding lights, to hold the train in the station. Both the T/O and C/R must follow supervision's instructions.
This "the C/R is in charge of the train" is a bit of a misstatement, not your however. What it really means is that the C/R is responsible for the safety of the passengers and the equipment, among some other things. It does not make the C/R the "boss".
> What she should have done (and, according to the initial posting, did do) is contact local supervision to request that the holding lights be turned off.
Oh, so now the C/R determines how long the lights stay on? She should have called for clarification as to why they were being held, not to request that they be turned off.
David
Its a catch phrase that the TA uses, which needs to be changed. All it means is that the C/R is responsible forthe safety of the passengers and equipment. The C/R has no authority over anyone. Neither does the T/O or TW/O (despite what some of either title may think). The only "bosses" in the TA are supervision, management - and the supreme boss, the rulebook.
And the "good book" states QUITE clearly that holding lights are to be OBEYED. BLINDLY. A motorperson or conductor has *NO* authority to make "independent decisions." If there is *any* question, you're supposed to consult with supervision before doing ANYTHING not in the rulebook. When I was a "geese" I got honked off often at the realities of being a seat-warmer, but I knew also that the rules were the rules and heaven help ANYBODY that violated but one of them for ANY reason.
Your gripe therefore shouldn't be with the conductor at ALL. The conductor did the RIGHT THING. Your beef is with whoever was in charge of the holding lights ... sorry, but this is an immutable reality of the railroad ... the folks in the train are NOT allowed to make "management decisions" any more than passengers are. :(
If the T/O knew she had authorization to ignore the lights, why didn't she? It was her lack of attention that increased a delay unecessarily. She was very chatty with a male rider who got on at Kingsbridge Road. No one was asking her to break rules, including me.
Ever since conductors were also issued radios, the CONDUCTOR was fully responsible for calling in in such a situation and NEVER taking someone else's word for it (or Beulah the buzzer) for closing down. Believe me, I understand your feelings fully. And what you might not also be aware of is that a delay for the CREW means in all likelihood a missed break, a missed lunch or other PERSONAL penalty when things like this happen. They're even MORE interested in "let's GO dammit" than YOU are. Their NEXT job number/interval doesn't shove off if they arrive late, and they need some recovery time themselves.
But given your passions on what happened there, the REAL issue was why were the holding lights retained? Given your apparent anger, you might want to have someone in management look into why THAT happened. If the lights went out, the train would have left, and there would have been no need to call the BMT desk to figure out why on the part of the conductor. I'm merely saying that the wrong neck is getting choked here. :)
I agree. I'm not saying the conductor should follow the T/O's orders here. I'm simply stating that she should be more aware of her job duties. The T/O sure was.
But if I was "back there" and saw my lights still lit overhead, I'd be getting a bit grumpy - but I wouldn't close up just because my partner told me to ... the proper response would be "control? Why are we being held?" Been there, done that ...
Guess what, you took the test, you may be one of "these idiots".
What's annoying is when people who do not know all the facts, refer to everyone else as "idiots" for having a different view.
I wasn't blasting all conductors/MTA employees, only those who directly committed the acts I described or those who want to apologize for them.
I am neither. In this case I am an angry rider.
What's annoying is when people who do not know all the facts, refer to everyone else as "idiots" for having a different view.
I know the facts. I'm simply putting them foward differently, in a way which apparently you don't like.
Don't feel bad, its not only the train screws. When I signed on Sunday evening I called W4 to find out what was going on, WHY were we holding trains, so I could make PA announcements (being the only trains I had in my station were N/B, the S/B customers had to get their info somewhere). All I got was there was "a problem a Broadway-Lafayette... *click*". I couldn't get information from other sources except for "Power will be removed from all 4 tracks to 29th Street".
Think about it: you're new, a T/O you've never worked with before tells you to ignore holding lights, and your school car instructions tell you NEVER to ignore holding lights. What do you do? "Whenever in doubt, call on the radio for instructions." Sorry, Chris...the conductor did the right thing.
Another thing to think about here Chris. You mentioned in another post that the C/Rs radio may not have been working. Yes, policy forbid this but it often happens: what is the T/Os radio is not working, and there is an emergency situation ahead (that signals won't necessarily prevent a train from entering the area)? The C/R closes down, train leaves, possible disaster, and guess whose ass is on the line? The one who ignored holding lights.
Just think of that for when you become a C/R: When I first started, I blew holding lights on a regular (particularly at Jay Street, but that's not really my fault with where they're located). My father, who was a C/R 20 years ago, brought it to my attention that they're not always holding for a connection or for time, but there may be something serious ahead and holding lights are the only way of preventing a larger problem. That stopped me from ignoring the meaning of holding lights.
Wait wait wait, she's the worst conductor for doing her job?
Let's get something straight, the T/O does NOT have the authority to tell a C/R to ignore holding lights. Only local supervision does, in this case the T/D at 59MT or 145 St, which is who she questioned. Before you make such a statement, know what you're talking about.
Sorry bro, but I had to vent on that one because I have had several situations this week with 1 A line T/O who felt he was my supervisor and I had to follow his instructions on which train went first, how I was not to hold his train even though its 5 minutes early (10:00 at night an additional 5 minutes means a lot to those going to Far Rockaway). T/Os are supervisors to no one, and they can't give orders. In fact if that C/R was to close down with those holding lights on, and wasn't given permission to do so by a supervisor, her ass could be in trouble.
The rest I'll agree with you though. It sounds as if communication was definitely poor between customers and employees. I had a similar situation on the R a few weeks ago where after the train left 36 Street, after being there for 5 minutes, did the C/R announce the train was going 63rd.
I've seen it done dozens of times before.
What galls me is this attitude that rules and personal interests dictate actions, not providing service to the paying customers. What if her radio wasn't working? Does she delay passengers and tie up service simply because she's unwilling to do the sensible thing? If she's too afraid to do so, then the whole MTA culture needs to be changed. We, the riding public, come first.
David
But her radio did work, when she called to confirm that she could ignore the holding lights.
Any suggestions as to ways the rule book might be rewritten to take customers' concerns into greater account without compromising safety or operations, rather than just saying that it should be rewritten, would be greatly appreciated
No rule would have been compromised, because the whole point to this was that she already had permission to ignore the lights. Even her T/O knew that, given the terse comments he made on the PA.
David
I see more personal intersts down here that result in a train being early leaving you to wait longer.
What you do not know is if there was a reason that she was given to hold in the station initially, and was just never updated. As far as she knew the situation still existed.
I'm not saying that's the case, but its a possibility.
> What if her radio wasn't working?
You said she called on her radio, which meant it was working. If her radio was not working, then she'd have to rely on the T/O and hope he/she was doing the right thing when he/she told her to ignore the lights.
I can't wait to see how you'll be the great C/R when you get called. It seems you know the job better than the current employees ever could. Can't wait until you get in trouble for doing something in the interest of "providing service to the paying customers" as opposed to following instructions.
I remember my days with the TA (shudder) ... and it's even MORE insane now. :(
Its one car length now, might as well not even stick your head out of that window. At sevety-five feet I think a train is still moving slow enough for someone to successfully jump onto the side of the train to ride, or attempt to get between cars.
Peace,
ANDEE
Adam
It has been said that women -- in general -- tend to be more emotional, whether it be laughing or crying, or any other outward display of emotion.
As for the testing,
1. It shows either ignorance or lack of communication between DeKalb and other towers along the line, in either direction.
2. The testing, I believe, is to show that a person knows what (s)he is doing, and what Chris posted demonstrates that it seems to him that people don't know what they're doing, therefore, connecting it with the exam, and accusing that it's too easy.
Regards,
George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)
- The new B/D/N/Q/R schedules need some adjustment, particularly outside rush hours. Trains are not evenly spaced. In fact, the D/N on 4th Ave and W/R in Manhattan run far to close together. N/Q and B/D trains are arriving at Gold Street at the roughly same time, invariably causing one train to be held as one is allowed to cross ahead.
- Some of the Concourse R68's have been recently worked on. I saw new black floors and new, scratchitti-less window glass installed on several consists. They look great, but I don't think they'll last very long in their present condition.
- Jamaica's R46's are filthy. Some of the windows are so covered with whatever that white substance grafitti artists have been using recently that it's almost impossible to see out of them.
- Has anyone been able to find out the reason behind the GO on the N beginning next week? Sea Beach riders will be crushed to see their trains once again condemned to the tunnel for a month after a 2 week "tease".
I took some color photos of that building with my Canon AE-1 Program film camera a few weekends ago and I'll have to scan in some of the shots. The 5Pointz building in LIC (viewable from the approach into 45-CHSQ from HPA) is set up and owned by people who sell permits to have artists come do some work on the building facade. Their goal is to fill up the whole building both interior and exterior with various writings and drawings. Hope I opened your fairly biased eyes!
I for one happen to enjoy the garish display as I pass it on the #7 train. One day I hope to visit there and view the canvas up close.
wayne
wayne
I haven't heard about any merging/diverging conflicts at Gold Street since the Manhattan Bridge opened fully last week. However, if it is observed regularly, I would wager that the schedulers will be made aware of the situation and work something out.
David
This morning I was on the 8:07 arrival at Brighton Beach (having boaded at 7:20 at Columbus Circle), in the second or third car from the south end, and there were few if any standees. (I was aiming to be one interval earlier, but the 1/9 I was hoping to catch ran early and its follower ran late, so I missed my connection by a few minutes. The BMT is fine; let's try to fix the IRT now.)
We paced an N over the bridge. This was the first time I've seen two trains pass through Gold Street in the same direction without conflicting, and it was an utter joy.
As for the upcoming GO on the N, it affects southbound trains only, until 7:45am only. I hardly think that will cause much of a hardship for most Sea Beach residents. (I do wonder, as a non-Sea Beach resident, whether that's referring to trains that leave Ditmars until 7:45, trains that reach Canal until 7:45, or something else entirely. I may need to ride the N into Brooklyn around that time and I'd like to know what to expect.)
No, southbound only, and the end time was changed to 7:45.
It's also affecting PM southbound N service.
It is? I haven't seen any such advisories.
Does anyone have a clue as to why it's necessary?
I'd guess that work is being done on the south-side-to-bypass track that requires more than the (approximately) five hours that the N normally runs through the tunnel. This GO gives the workers another two or three hours.
So Sea Beach service in the peak direction is unaffected? If so, I've been misinformed.
I'd guess that work is being done on the south-side-to-bypass track that requires more than the (approximately) five hours that the N normally runs through the tunnel. This GO gives the workers another two or three hours.
If so, a more sensible GO would be to start running the N thru the tunnel earlier, like 10 PM, instead of confusing rush hour service.
Do you think more passengers are bound for the Sea Beach line after 10pm or before 7:45am?
Another Subtalker whose word I took.
Do you think more passengers are bound for the Sea Beach line after 10pm or before 7:45am
There's no W train at 10 PM, routing the N via the tunnel then would be less congesting.
I've encountered merge delays every single time I've been on a train crossing from Brooklyn to Manhattan, at every time of day on either side of the bridge. Rush hours I expect it. You can't squeeze 36 TPH thru that interlocking without some delays. It's been 18 years since this service pattern last existed, and the current trackage probably has signal and speed restraints which didn't exist in 1986, so I'm not really complaining. I'm certain they'll eventually work it all out.
They should be able to increase service, but I would rather wait an extra minute than have run time increase because of delay. The trains haven't been that crowded that more service would necessarily be needed.
I boarded a southbound B at Columbus Circle right on schedule. Crossing the bridge, nothing was pacing us on the south side, but DeKalb managed to hold us at Gold Street to let a Q in front anyway. We passed that Q at Cortelyou and met it at Newkirk. Then, at Kings Highway, we held for so long (with no problems visible on the track in front of us) that the Q beat us to Sheepshead Bay by at least a minute. We reached Sheepshead Bay (where I got off) a few minutes after our scheduled arrival time at Brighton Beach (even though, when I asked the T/O at Kings Highway what was going on, he said we were being held for time). If something was wrong, it would have been nice if the C/R could have told us to transfer to the local at Kings Highway. And if the problem was at the terminal, why couldn't the train have waited at Sheepshead Bay, where about half of its remaining passenger load gets off?
Then, in the afternoon (before 3), a northbound V didn't hold for a connection with the arriving B at W4, even though there was a temporary disruption in F service at the time and the V alone runs at 11-minute headways.
It's one of those days, I guess, although I did get one of my favorite C/R's on the 1/9 in the evening.
A lot of it is made up of high school students, but it has plenty of adult ridership as well.
Anyway, Did trolleys connect to freight lines many(as in 70+) years ago?
These are greatly reduced and degraded for space.
Double tracked in the street, probably original bricks too:
There's that switch. Another interesting thing is these are the only blocks in the area that say "COLEDALE BLOCKS". All the others that are named say Baltimore blocks. Wonder any info about this company:
There's the conduit thing about a foot or two away from the switch:
I was taking some pics of some tracks in an empty field today, and when i walked away, i guess someone was coming and saw me. This guy walked over and started looking at them too. They were by themselves next to a tree. It's contagious.
I've been doing some research and came to the conclusion that when the swtich was around, all Tampa consisted of was the current City Hall surrounded by rail yards. About 5 of them all linked up in every direction. Big Port and Agriculture is all I know of that existed. And of course Henry Plants famous hotels.
Regards,
Jimmy
Of course, this is what you probably meant....
There they are
I really need to stick to one region someday and work from there...too all over the place.
I'm about a week from going to press with version 3.6 of the Track Book, but I have a question to any and all Bronxians. What's the nature of the GO that has southbound service running on M track, with extended platforms in place, from Gun Hill down to E180th? How long should this be going on for, and are there plans to do the northbound once the southbound side is complete?
Thanks.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3.6 Coming Next Week!
The S/B Plat at Gun Hill Rd is currently closed for rehab, the contractor is preparing for escalator and stairway removal from the street mezzanine. It is also my understanding that the existing fare control will be moved upstairs.
Structural work was completed on Track M in January, while the S/B Track is getting worked on now. I'd expect another major GO to effect the 2 after 6/4, where the N/B Track will be taken out of service.
-Stef
P.S. As of this writing, all new signals are in place on the IRT from south of East 180 to North of 3rd Ave, and switch removal at Freeman St is complete!
Hi Stef,
Thanks for the heads-up on the project. I copied the June 4th in-service date. I'd guess it's a safe bet that they'll do the other side after that.
P.S. As of this writing, all new signals are in place on the IRT from south of East 180 to North of 3rd Ave, and switch removal at Freeman St is complete!
So I saw this afternoon :-) Have you heard or seen a timetable yet for the conversion of the last three sections of IRT signals (E. 180th to Bronx Park East, Mott to the Portal and the Dyre line)?
Thanks.
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3.6 Coming Next Week!
Sorry, don't have a timetable for E180th St - Dyre Av, but estimate by early 2005?
This would leave East 180th St to do....
-Stef
Wouldn't that be Bronxite ?
I'm originally from Brooklyn, making me a Brooklynite.
Bill "Newkirk"
As always, if anybody has info on upcoming track, tower or signal changes in the NYC transit system, I'd be very grateful for a heads-up with details, etc. I'm hoping to get the next version of the book out no later than the 10th of March, so deadline's fast approaching!
I already have all the service changes and track re-openings completed, Bronx signals on the 2/5, M-track GO mentioned in an earlier post is in there, some minor changes at Canal St. on the JMZ and a few homeball corrections. I have a tentative new track plan for Corona Yard and some rolling-stock changes that came about with the 2/22 service changes.
What say ye? Anything new??
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3.6 Coming Next Week!
anything else?
paul
It is in active spoken use here in NY to describe certain Shuttles or shortened runs do to G.O.'s.
1. Go to the index
2. at the top of the page, click on, "Change Display Style / Killfile / Simple Search / Archives"
3. Select the following configuration:
List messages: Chronological
Poster: [+] USERNAME
Notes:
- Replace USERNAME with your own user name. For example, if I were looking for posts that I made, I would type, R36 #9346.
- The Posted within the last: and Or, pick by date: options are the date control options. Configure those to your liking. If you're looking for a post older than a month old, use the pick by date option.
- Be sure to check the box between the Poster: heading and the input box.
wayne
This was a one-shot deal. We got lucky. The Franklin Shuttle passengers got very lucky.
I'm sure they were happy to be on that train with rabid railfans.
Kidding aside, did any of them prefer to wait for the regular shuttle because they didn't want to get on the old equipment?
(I am not rabid - I had my shots)
If by some miracle you added three more cars, then you would have a train.
Why not? They used 2 car SOACs in regular service. They just ran them right behind regular trains. They could do the same thing with the museum trains.
Peace,
ANDEE
Lou,
I'm not offended. In my youth I was breed on 180' "GG" in off peak hours.
360' during peak. I'm all for running the "GG" with three arnines from
Queens\Forest Hills to Smith\9th Streets. Bring it on.
A true "GG" of my youth. Now if I could only turn back the
physical clock.
8 > ) ~ Sparky
"We'll be running these trains through our centennial year, and some lucky customers will get to ride on them...but they'll have to pay more than the 15 cents, though."
He does NOT explicitly state that the trains will be running in revenue service, so why are people jumping to that conclusion and asking if we already know the details of such future revenue runs?
Here's what we do know:
1. The MTA plans on running the museums trains in revenue service on October 27, 2004.
2. The MTA plans on running the museums trains on Nostalgia Trips many time throughout this year.
3. Because a recent MOD trip wanted to run on the Franklin Shuttle, the museum cars ran in revenue service for three round trips.
My thoughts on how these statements relate to Peter's quote:
1. They have publicized plans to run them in revenue service on one day. If they are going to run them in revenue service on more than one day, I think they would publicize it ahead of time to gain the maximum returns from the event. Peter's vague comment did not do much to inform people about more days of revenue service, if that was his intent. If that was his intent, I think he would have done a better job of making it clear.
2. Peter could have been talking about the Nostalgia Trips. His choice of words are odd if he was, but still, I think this makes the most sense based on the information we have.
3. I doubt Peter even knows the MOD train ran in revenue service, and even if he does and his comments were referencing that, then it would mean that future MOD trips will run in revenue service during large portions of their runs, or at least that many future MOD trips will travel over the Franklin Shuttle. I find both of these conclusions to be highly unlikely.
Because this is SubTalk and that's one of the things we do best!
P.S.: If I can, I'll post a link in response, but for now, I forgot the link-posting code. Sorry. :(
Daaaaaaaaummmmm!
til next time
March 2, 2004
HARTFORD -- A deal announced yesterday would assure funding of $60 million for up to 2,000 new commuter rail car seats and locomotives for Metro-North's New Haven Line.
The agreement, struck by Democratic Speaker of the House Speaker Moira Lyons and Republican Gov. John Rowland, could speed up delivery of new rail cars by a year or more. They could arrive in 18 to 24 months, officials said.
The existing fleet is 30 years old -- years past its normal life span -- and as much as a third of the cars at a time this winter were sidelined by bad weather.
Republican and Democratic legislators hailed the move as a good but incremental first step toward filling the rail line's need for 400 new cars. The deal would allow the state to buy 20 new rail cars and one or two locomotives.
"For the folks who are riding the rails, this is a major plus for them and not an easy thing to have succeeded in doing," Lyons said in a telephone interview. "We needed new cars and . . . it would take four years to get them, which everyone realized is ridiculous. We had to find a way to do it ASAP and have a way to achieve that."
The agreement includes $25 million in new state bonding to be backed by the state's Transportation Fund, a separate part of the state budget paid for by the gasoline tax that this year is estimated to be $923 million.
A previously allocated $35 million would come from the special traffic mitigation fund authored and pushed through the Legislature by Lyons in August. That fund, paid for by increased Department of Motor Vehicle fees, set money aside to pay for specific Transportation Strategy Board projects to alleviate traffic congestion.
The No. 1 project slated for southwestern Connecticut under that special fund is the purchase of new rail cars for the New Haven Line.
The agreement includes an additional $14 million to pay for additional transportation projects around the state.
The Transportation Strategy Board had allocated $49 million in the special fund for new rail cars, but the actual price tag is at least $60 million. The $49 million was not to have been available for at least another year as revenues built the fund up. The agreement makes the money available as soon as legislation is passed, as early as this month.
"Before we were basically constrained in that we couldn't start the process until we had the money in hand," said Harry Harris, public transportation bureau chief of the state Department of Transportation, in an interview. "That would take at least two years. Now we can start the process immediately."
The need for the cars became acutely apparent this winter when snowfall and record low temperatures put as many as 100 of the 300-car New Haven Line fleet out of commission for repairs. Trains were delayed, seats were few and many commuters were stranded waiting on platforms in the cold.
"Metro-North explained they were doing the best they could with a 30-year-old fleet that was expected to last 25 years, 18 service bays, and cars remaining out of commission for days, not hours," James Cameron, co-chairman of the Connecticut Rail Commuter Council, told the state Transportation Committee yesterday. "Commuters are angry, they are overcharged, they are getting lousy service and I fear they are starting to abandon the trains and get back in their cars and contribute to the worst traffic conditions."
In a statement, Rowland said: "The events of this winter have clearly demonstrated the need to accelerate the purchase of this equipment."
The cars are just the first installment of replacing the entire fleet. Rowland yesterday also asked for a report by the DOT and Secretary of Policy and Management Marc Ryan within 60 days to outline a plan to buy the 400 cars that the Transportation Strategy Board estimates are needed over the next several years to meet ridership demand.
"We must replace the entire 300-car rail fleet and the governor has directed Marc Ryan to come up with a plan to do that," said state Sen. William Nickerson, a Republican who represents Greenwich and parts of Stamford and New Canaan. "I'm very pleased that the governor has stepped in and recognized that the ancient, fragile fleet needs our immediate attention."
State Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, said the effort "needs to be sustained over an extended period of time if we're going to improve our mass transit mess."
Westport First Selectwoman Diane Farrell, who heads the lower Fairfield County regional agency of municipal chief elected officials that oversees transportation issues, said "this is the first piece of $1.5 billion" needed to replace the rail fleet and build the necessary facilities to maintain it.
Harris said the DOT is looking at three options to get the cars on line as soon as possible: Seeking out compatible surplus equipment from other U.S. commuter railroads; looking for other rail lines across the country that might have compatible equipment already on order or being manufactured and "piggybacking" on the contract; and designing and ordering the cars brand new.
Harris said the variables under all three scenarios vary so widely he could not give a cost per car, but expects the $60 million would cover the expense
from :
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-stam.trains2mar02,0,5212091.story?coll=stam-news-local-headlines
Where would they find surplus equipment that runs on catenary and third rail ?
Bill "Newkirk"
At maybe 6-7 million per locomotive and less than $900,000 a push-pull car (using the Comet V purchase by NJT as an example), 109 seats per Cab Car, 111 seats per toilet equipped trailer car, and 117 seats per trailer. A 42%-7%-51% split between Cab Cars, Toilet Equipped Trailers, and Non-Toilet Equipped Trailers is the breakdown NJT used in buying the Comet 5. 18 cars would fit 2036 people, in a 8 Cab Car, 1 toilet-equipped car, and 9 non-toilet equipped trailers, at an approximate cost of 16.2 million dollars, or $7956 per seat. If four or five ALP46s modified to run on 3rd rail at a cost of $7 million per locomotive are thrown in, then the cost rises to 44.2 or 51.2 million dollars, which would work out to $21,709 or $25,147.34 per seat.
If we call it $300,000 per car (a complete Wild Ass Guess) for the Mafersas from VRE, with 113 pax per car and 25 cars purchased. Then MN would get 2825 seats at a cost of 7,500,000 dollars, or a mere $2,654.87 per seat. With the same 4 or 5 dual-system locos tossed in, it'd be a total cost of 35.5 or 42.5 million dollars. However, those coaches are limited to 80mph, are getting rather old, and would have to be replaced in a relatively short time.
Of course those Dual-System locos would serve the same purpose as a P32 purchase, they'd allow the reassigning of P32s currently running diesel express service on the NH line (if any). Their order would have distinct advantages over buying new P32DM-ACs, since they'd also allow the purchase of M8s to be forestalled. Whereas the P32 purchase would be a stopgap solution, until the M8s, vehicles more suited to the NH line, could be designed, purchased and delivered, the Dual-System electrics would have pretty crappy acceleration on 3rd rail, but would offer MU-like performance under the wire. The P32's performance on the other hand would be universally bad, they're underpowered and would likely not be able to keep schedules on the local sections of the line they are working. Since expresses skip most of the stations on the 3rd rail anyway, the acceleration of an dual-system electric on the rail would be largely a non-issue anyway, whereas P32s will be forced to make some local stops on the NEC out past Stamford, where the electric locos could shine, the P32s will merely smoke and choke. That is of course unless the P32s are supposed to run full-line expresses GCT to NHV, but there would seem to be little point in ignoring all the enroute ridership so that a diesel can keep schedules on an electric route.
Compared to a potential M8 purchase, the ALP46 still comes out looking relatively intact. If we assume the M8 will be designed off the M7 (which to me seems logical), then it'd hold 104 people in a toilet car, and 113 in a non-toilet equipped car. With a 50/50 toilet/non-toilet mixture, you'd need 20 cars minimum for 2000 seats (actually it'd be 2170) with a M8 purchase, at a cost, assuming 2-3 (another WAG) million for new MUs, of $40-60 million, or $18,433.18 or $27,649.77 per seat (40 or 60 million dollars divided by 2170 seats). Of course the MUs have to be maintained more than a push-pull fleet, so they'd be down for maitenance more often, and would also be enormously heavy. The M7 weighs some 130,000lbs, and that's without a transformer or the dual-system equipment, which could add 20,000-30,000lbs, you could easily end up with a M8 weighing 80 tons, or roughly 75% as much as a ALP46 weighs anyway.
I guess I'm just confused why MN and CDoT would want to run P32s under exsisting wires when there's clearly an alternative, I know I am not the first and only person to propose this. Also I'm confused why they haven't considered electric-hauled push-pull sets for their express trains, where the MU's acceleration is not an issue. I'm not against the eventual purchase of M8s, I just question why so long a route with so many expresses needs the assistance of MUs when it's running at full speed for much of the run. Of course I definitely question the wisdom of buying more P32s, especially to be run under the wire, that makes very little sense and is a gross waste of infrastructure, electric locomotives with a slightly higher purchase price, but lower maitnenance and fuel costs would do quicker and more efficiently.
Any comments?
(BTW: anyone know a hard figure for the M7 and P32 per-unit purchase costs, or have a possible figure for the M8?)
2. $60 million would buy maybe 30 cars. Where's the funding for the other 1,970 cars?
David
David
The article does state, "The deal would allow the state to buy 20 new rail cars and one or two locomotives." Referring to them as "2,000 railcar seats" seems like a new low in wowing the readership with big numbers.
wayne
The accident occurred several months before the work was completed linking the Brighton line to what is now the service along Flatbush Avenue to link up with the 4th Avenue line at DeKalb.
The nasty S curve had just been put in so that Brighton line trains could swing around the new line to get into Prospect Park station on the local track as it is constructed today. It was supposed to be a 5 mile/hour (8 km/hour) curve....
Minor correction: Luciano was not a tower operator,but a yard-based crew dispatcher. Had he been a tower operator, it's possible that he might have known about the sharp curve with its speed restrictions.
IMO, he did know how to operate the train, if not expertly. BUs were difficuly enough to operate, that if he knew how to take it as far as he did, he knew enough to deal with the Franklin route. Evidence indicates he entered the curve without trying to slacken the train's speed. Mundane as the explanation is, I think he thought he was making a straight run into Prospect Park until the new curve showed him otherwise.
Luciano had no trouble handling the steep downgrade on the Brooklyn Bridge.
Evidence indicates he entered the curve without trying to slacken the train's speed. Mundane as the explanation is, I think he thought he was making a straight run into Prospect Park until the new curve showed him otherwise.
He also didn't appear to know about the flag stop at Consumer's Park.
I believe so. There also was some way that people waiting on the platform could signal trains to stop. In the Malbone Street case, signals to stop at Consumer's Park were made both by passengers on the doomed train and by people on the platform.
The Greyhound stops still do have flags that you can set if you want the bus to stop.
Mostly now the driver calls ahead (if it is a manned stop, such as at the local C-Store) to see if somebody is waiting, and if not, they don't even get of of the freeway.
Elias
Out our way, the bus does the route - if nobody's there it just keeps going.
But flag-stoppage is kind of a surprise for intercity and running "hot" is no crime.
Hmmm. I don't have my copy of Brian Cudahy's book handy, but it is my distinct recollection that Luciano's only proven mistake prior to the crash was not signalling the towerman at Franklin concerning the wrong lineup. Some passengers said afterwards that the train's speed on the Brooklyn Bridge downgrade seemed excessive, but that was probably just faulty recollection influenced by the crash. He apparently did not realize that he was supposed to stop at Consumer's Park, it wasn't that he couldn't stop. And let us not forget that the train's speed at the time of the crash would not have been excessive had it not been for the recent track realignment.
At trial he testified that he tried to slacken the train's speed, but it wasn't responding, but this was a cover story. The physical evidence showed he never tried to slow the train, and it was in perfect mechanical condition.
I think that Luciano just lost the ability to control the train. It could have happened at several points that day. It just happened at that point.
I don't think so. He never attempted to slow it. I've never heard any argument to the effect that he passed out, or became terrified and "froze", or anything of the nature. IOW, he not only didn't do anything effective to slow the train, he didn't do anything ineffective either.
Since the lead car's cab was largely intact, we can ASSUME that investigators first examined the position of the brake handle and valve on the left and, from what's been reported that he probably made no effort to APPLY, there's a missing piece that one would not expect reporters or lay persons to have followed as to what might have happened in those fateful last seconds.
And sadly, there'd be no EVIDENCE for certain as to what actually happened BECAUSE of the pair of trailers and the way they collapsed in the wreck. This would have certainly broken the airhoses and left the train BIE as a result with brake shoes applied. And I'd expect it would have been very difficult at the time to scientifically determine how many wheel revolutions occurred with brakes applied before the consist came to a full stop during the accident.
On the old BU's (as well as the Q cars), the controller was VERY different from what is used in more modern cars like the LoV's or arnines - it was more like an old Otis ELEVATOR control on the right hand side of the cab. At "rest" the control handle was straight up and in the vertical plane for operating, as opposed to the horizontal plane in which "modern" controllers work. You'd move it to the left (I think) to move in forward, the more you moved it from "top" the faster you went - and similarly the opposite direction would be "reverse."
When in motion, if you allowed the controller to return to the "top" position, you dumped the train and went BIE. In fact, operators would often run Q cars with a finger on the protrusion at the top in order to PREVENT the controller handle from rising up to the top position and dumping the train.
Since the BU's were straight air, it'd be the same braking to just let go of the controller as bothering to apply the brake. So unlike today's trains, the fastest way to stop a train would have been to just let go of the controller and let it "center up."
HOWEVER, there's ANOTHER angle with the old BU's and Q's ... when you APPLIED, you'd count to FIVE seconds before you'd feel the brake shoes setting up. This is MUCH longer a time than "modern" trains (arnines would take about 2-3 seconds which could seem like forever - this was more than TWICE as long).
So my guess is that as soon as Luciano spotted trouble, he probably DID let go of the controller and dumped the train. However, by the time the brakes actually APPLIED, the train had already careened around the curve with two trailers coupled and the dynamics of the air setting up and propagating (there was NO electric assist, so propagation time would ALSO be an additional delay factor) and the BIE probably resulted in the severity of the derailment.
The problem however would be that it'd be VERY difficult to tell if this was the scenario since the controller handle would have been vertical any way it was sliced. So I therefore wonder how they'd determine whether or not he did apply or just dump it. Factor in the five+ second delay before braking actually happened and it would certainly appear to those who don't know the characteristics of the old air brakes that no effort was made to stop the train. And when the shoes finally DID grab the wheels, WHAM. :(
But that's MY theory and I'm sticking to it. :)
Pennsy's MP-54 cars used a similar controller, and those cars ran until the late 1970's on the "Big Red Subway".
If the brakes were true "straight air" (common charged brake pipe) there would be a lag between the application and when the brakes on the trailers started to take hold.
The harzard of that type of air brake is that if the brake line is vented for any reason, you have no brake at all.
By 1918, the BU's were most likely equipped with a brake system that is similar to what we have today: vent the brake line, BIE!!!
I've also read that BRT practice was not to run two trailers coupled together, but with the strike, trains were made up with anything with wheels and brakes.
IF Mr. Peabody will loan us the WayBak Machine, we can play "You Are There" for real, and "See It Now". All the questions will be answered.
That answers my brake question.
Lap means "hold what you have". If you have nothing, lap holds nothing. If you made a brake application, lap will hold it until you either release or add brake.
Speaking of CSL/CTA 144, I was at IRM a number of years ago, and as a "visiting fireman" got to run it. I had just made the safety stop at the Olson Road crossing, got two from the Conductor, and took power. I had just cleared the crossing when three bells sounded. I shut off, took almost a full brake. Just as the wheels started to grab, I relased almost everything, and then took enough to to make a smooth, fast stop.
I turned around and saw both the Conductor and his student (a retired CTA man ) with big grins on their faces. The student (a 35 year man with CSL/CTA) said "I just wanted to see if these guys from Baltimore as as good as people say."
Makes you very happy when you can live up to the reputation you have.
But I'm quite sure that myself having to deal with *real* "straight air" would probably be every bit as amusing as me watching the SMEE guys trying to stop an arnine without landing out on the tracks in front of the train when she stopped. (grin)
It's rewarding and somewhat scary.
I've wound up running on railroads I've never been on. Either I'm damn good, or the street railway gods are watching over me. It's happened at Branford, Wharehouse Point, Seashore, IRM, Arden, SEPTA, Shaker Rapid, and heaven knows how many other places. Other folks have had handles "thrown at them" at Orange Empire and New Orleans.
It's very fortunate that I've never screwed up anywhere, and neither has anyone else from BSM. I have been behind a lot of controllers and in a lot of operator's seats and I "done good".
It's good for the "rep" and the legend keeps growing.
Hope the regeme change happens and we get a real economy back so you can journey down our way next February.
The summary of the findings was that the running gear was normal and in good condition, the brakes were not set and not in BIE, and the controllers on all cars (save one, IIRC) were in the Coney Island (forward) position, indicating no attempt to reverse the train. The car that had controllers in Park Row position (reverse) was traced to damage from the impact.
As an interesting aside, the filaments in the circuit for the forward markers were found broken, explaining why the train had no markers at the critical Fulton-Franklin junction.
Although it's a prohibited practice TODAY, and heaven HELP you if you're in the cab and an incident should occur and they DON'T find the brake handle itself in emergency, the reality of yore was that it was FAR more efficient and quicker to just dump the deadman. It takes about a second to move the handle whereas letting go of the controller is much more instantaneous. Alas, lawyers determined that proper emergency handling is to rotate the brake valve instead. :(
Throwing the reverser doesn't always help - and in more "modern cars" the chances are FAR better that you'll either blow the motors or the breakers and have nothing at all. That's one of the things I can't fathom - even an idiot in the cab would at LEAST have let go of the controller handle and let nature take its course. I find it difficult to believe that didn't occur at least ...
Which is why I tend to think Luciano thought he was making a straight run into Prospect Park. In those days he would have been able to see the lights of the station through the double-track tunnel. Were you ever in the M/M cab coming into the single-track wreck tunnel? You can't see it until you're right on top of it.
Though some passengers told colorful stories of a wild ride, others testified that there wasn't anything very remarkable about that downhill ride at all. I especially recall one person who said that the train was moving along at an even pace until suddenly they were in the tunnel and all hell broke loose.
I'd tend to agree with you as to the scenario - but still find it hard to believe that no action at all was taken, even in the last fateful second or two ... that's what I find difficult to swallow. It would seem from the "report" that he had it in power all the way to the end, and that's the hard part ...
I *meant* to the right ... dyslexia strikes again. :)
See ... THAT'S my strange basis here ... of COURSE there'd be evidence of a brake application, no matter *HOW* severe the wreck, the handle usually gets crushed in the position it was in when the cab gets squished like a grape (don't mind me, schoolcar again - you phuck up, ***BANG!*** you're ***DEAD*** ... they never let that angle go). Like high school students and the drunk driving films, schoolcar had films that showed you *HOW* squished your "remains" would be if you phucked up ... blood and gore and things in the teeth, Arlo Guthrie style. It worked ... made me a PUTHY in the cab. NO problem crawling up to the marker and losing 7 minutes on a trip being "careful" ... I've commented often before how I came into the system as a probie RIGHT after the Roosevelt wreck ... they was *NERTZ* in schoolcar about "THOU SHALT!" Heh.
I don't see (in THOSE cars) the failure to move the brake handle as a problem. You'd *LIKE* to ... but sometimes the "oh chit" factor is one of those nasty ... *****SURPRISE!***** events that most motorpeople who don't have the longtime yard-switching and other experiences that *I* lacked being shoed out in revenue without *ANY* real yard work beyond schoolcar. I was one of those "OK, you're good enough for revenue, you get a split shift - upside is you don't sit the board." I *took* it. STUPID, stupid me ... I shoulda HAD some yard time. But at least no 12-9's and no close calls since I worked the rush ONLY.
The RULES state "you'd BETTER have your brake handle at emergency when supervision arrives" but I would have expected "Luciano" (I still doubt that was his real name) with his inexperience to at LEAST do what comes naturally in an "oh chit" ... you let go of the handle. Those handles would spring-return to top dead center and DUMP ... granted, 5 second delay as I'd explained before ... no need to move the handles on (GO AWAY, MR LAWRENCE, LEAVE ME ALONE DAMMIT! heh) "straight air" ... pulling the handle is as good as "letting go" ... and *NO* better ...
Wanna stop a standard, an arnine, a Qcar, a BU? Let go of your "go handle" ... PSSSSCCCCCHHHHH! Skreek. Same for SMEEs and the latters. That's the ONE angle I don't get, would LOVE to see some of the raw data if it's available. Coverups by the way were rampant back in the days of the BRT ... and while BRTco insists that the cars were in good order, one would also compare their "honesty" to the BS numbers invented by the MTA as just one example. I can't see the benefit in a company examining their own in the days when Hylan could declare, "wooden cars?" and blaming themselves. Some things never change.
The ABSENCE of indication that the emergency valve (from the stand) is a GLARING anomoly ... there SHOULD have at least been (if the examination was real and Luciano DIDN'T APPLY) a record that the emergency trip on the controller had been let go. Even *IF* Luciano hadn't let go, he would have had to let go AFTER the wreck and forensics of that time could have ascertained if the emergency valve had vented BEFORE or after the wreck ...
THIS is my own uncertainty ... it don't make sense, but I freely admit I'm probably missing plenty in the absence of the report. But it bothers me just the same ... they COULD have told if Luciano dumped, or the wreck dumped ...
That's the reason for the "RULE OF THUMB" ... if you didn't want "premature matriculation" then you'd put your THUMB between the vertical handle and that "teat" up on top. As long as you didn't allow the control handle to go top dead center, all was cool ... if it went straight up though ... ssssshhhhhh ... (sorry, not your loud "CHOW!" dump of today but trust me, the shoes were indeed headed for the rim shot) ... THAT'S what I don't get ... no sign? Ummm ... as is the case today in political realms, "beware of floating rocks" ...
In the picture I provided, unless you're a motorman or know a locomotive airbrake, one might MISS where the handle goes in the brakepipe on the left of the picture ... but like the "reversed stands" of a BRT/BMT car, STANDARD railroads have a similar layout ... handles backwards from current TWU ... but the saving grace in the old buzzards was that you didn't have dynamics, you didn't have anything else but air. Dropping the controller rather than trying a "full serve" was *NO* different from one another. "Trainmen" were taught back then to "just let go" and use "technology" in an emergency. It was there, USE it. Different mindset, different time ...
But to ME, the question is ... did he even TRY to stop? triplevalves not withstanding, I can't believe someone seeing a dogleg and just not letting go is just astounding. I'm not denying the possibility of "he just froze" ... but before I personally "judge" ("judge though not lest YE be judged") Luciano, I'd hate to think that he'd not at LEAST let go of the controller. :(
Who said he was even looking out the window?
If he *THOUGHT* it was still a straight shot, and from what you guys have said about all of a sudden its being right there... A moment's distraction is all it would take. I mean, you all drive cars, can you tell me that you never look down to a map, radio control, heater switch, lamp switch, or your bottle of soda pop?
OK, so he *was* new at this, there are still a lot of other stimuli in the cab, the eyes cannot always be on the track, and even if they are, it is quite impossible to keep the mind there even if you are looking that way.
Elias
Just pointing out that the "setback" really didn't make much of a difference and the view was probably better than anything pounding the rails today.
Onec you get to know your line and memorize all of your signals and such, then a little less attention is required. OH CHIT! Somebody on the tracks! (didn't see that coming?) ... I can tell ya though, running rails is VERY different from driving a car, and at least when you're new at it, you do tend to pay more attention to your iron. I'd expect Luciano was the same, and even more focused because he was still trying to get used to making a good stop. Mentally diverted perhaps, running through his mind how to do it properly and worrying about the schedule. But when you're new, the iron does grab your attention.
Selkirk, you WORK at Selkirk? Wow. I was there for a tour in Sept 2001 with the PC Hist Socy. Really enjoyed it. Were you there then?
Luciano survived uninjured, left the scene, and was apprehended at the yards a few hours later. He was tried for manslaughter, along with some BRT supervisors, but was not convicted (I don't remember if he was acquitted or the charges were dropped). Luciano left the BRT soon after, moved away from NYC, and basically dropped out of sight.
Correct - and the influx of injured people from the wreck was especially hard for Brooklyn hospitals to handle because they already were crowded with flu victims.
As you probably know, it's been said that the recent death of Luciano's daughter may have indirectly caused the wreck, by causing him to be distracted from his duties. I just don't see any connection. As far as I'm concerned, all the evidence shows that Luciano operated the train in a reasonably competent manner; he simply didn't know about the recent realignment at Malbone.
The only EMPLOYED railroading I did was just less than a year with the Transit Authority. There's nothing like some real railroading to cure the foamies for good. Heh. My connection with Selkirk is that I live in Voorheesville which of course is where most of the railroad employees live. Got hundreds of friends who work Selkirk, and when it was CONRAIL, used to get cab rides and hang out in the yards with some of them - even got a good amount of handle time when running light and would often ride out to Syracuse or Cleveland and back with friends along for the ride.
Conrail was pretty good about issuing "cab tickets" to people who could be trusted not to get in the way - and having friends who were dispatchers also helped when the mood striuck to go for a ride. Only thing I wasn't permitted was handle time in the hump yard itself - that can get tricky and dangerous. But out on the mainline, no problem.
Then came CSX ... I've only been on the property ONCE since 9/11, again thanks to friends in CSX' "police" who made the arrangements for me to come down with BigEdIRTmanL one afternoon - he wanted to see the operation. Needless to say, NOBODY gets on CSX property any longer.
Also have friends and neighbors who work for CPRail out of Kenwood yard (Albany) and Mechanicville as well as others who work Amtrak out of Rensselaer. Prior to 9/11, got cab rides there as well as free deadheads to keep a neighbor company for 12 hours - and again that all stopped after 9/11 ... I've NEVER set foot in a GE Genesis ...
But I thank the MTA for curing me of my childhood ambition of being a motorman or railroad engineer. :)
You said it, boss!!!
Funny Baltimore story re: CSX. The CSX main line to Philadelphia (Ex-Baltimore & Ohio) passes right over the BSM property.
A while ago, several fans were on BSM's property, snapping pics of the CSX GE's passing overhead.
A short while later, a black sedan stopped on Falls Road, and a uniformed man got out, entered our property and began harassing the fans about the photography.
One of our people quietly went into our Visitor Center, called 911, and shortly two Baltimore City Police cars, sirens wailing and lights flashing, pulled into the our parking lot.
The City cops told the CSX Cop to leave or be arrested for trespassing on our (BSM) property.
The CSX cop got in his car and left. The fans went back to taking photos.
I understand that I won't have to worry about falling through the floor anymore.
BIE applies only the AIR BRAKES, Full Service applies the Dynamic Brakes too, and usually will make better use (control) of the air system as well.
Set the brakes and jump.
Well, ok on a subway car, I guess you set full brakes, bolt the cab, dive for the floor, and hope for the best. Sure you'll panic the geese, but at least (maybe) you'll still be alive to help the survivers. You ain't going to help anybody when you are squished flat in your cab, impaled by an I beam.
Elias
But yeah, a full serve beats a BIE given the extra "drag" of having your motors turn into generators into a dead frigging short goes (although I'm sure the car manuals dictate "Bethpage" as the dissipation standard) ...
But back in MY arnine days, and all that preceded the "heritage" that I *chose* to take out so fellow TWU brothers and sisters would be forced to not ONLY deal with the geese, but also press a "push to talk" button and SPEAK ... heh. Like your own scribancy at a computer, ridding you of the minutae of proquills, t'was MUCH easier back then with the arnines ... deal with the train, SCROO the geese. :)
But back in the days of the old gals, there weren't any dynamics, and a BIE back in those days beat dynamics by QUITE a few pounds of force. BIE *used* to be MUCH faster than full-serve - an item I've gotten in trouble with here before with current day rail-pounders. And they're ***RIGHT*** ... TODAY, pulling handle better than dumping train. Didn't USED TO BE. :(
Ah, we are of the same mind, Selkoik! (Not sure that's a compliment)
Hylan went on about WOODEN CARS, but the R62s at least, don't seem any more structurally sound, and maybe less so...
At one time on NYCT, that was true. My understanding is no longer is true.
David
People don't always react instantaneously to an emergency situation. Luciano may have frozen up for a secopnd or two before he went for the brakes. And by then, of course, it was too late.
Yes, he could have frozen - but the DESIGN of the controller is such that if you were to lose attention span, it'd want to return top dead center unless your thumb was on the top to stop it. Even then, the sudden stop of a train "wedging" would have caused the thumb to slip and the inevitable dump to occur. (CHOW! as they say today) What *I* don't get is that there was no sign that at least he'd let go of the controller. THAT is what convinces me that the company wanted to point a finger so it wasn't *THEIR* fault (two trailers together? nah ... wooden cars? Nah ... we screwed our employees and they walked out? nah ... unqualified people running a railroad as "strikebreakers?" Nah ... seems so ... well ... republican) but rather, someone else's ... *SO* fitting of that era of "uhmerica" ...
ANY brake application on BU cars ... intentional or emergency take between 5-6 seconds before the shoes hit the wheels ... that can be a *LONG* time even IF the brakes were applied ... thus my own little "how did the MM screw up?" :(
Sure... the pax were probly not aware of the track change, and its implication on what speed the new apporach would require.
Elias
If there even were many such photos. I recall reading in Brian Cudahy's book that the removal of bodies was almost completed before midnight. Not really much of an oppirtunity to take pictures.
While he may have had no other option, it strikes me as an extraordinarily dangerous practice. Was it a common or even occasional procedure or occurence on the BRT??
According to Brian Cudahy's book, Luciano handled the re-routing properly, following correct operating practice at all times during the process. In fact, his ability to handle the situation suggests that the wreck was caused by his not knowing about the new routing at Malbone, rather than by his inability to operate the train properly.
With what had happened that day because of the strike, I wonder how many other employes were pressed into service as motormen that day?
It's also been speculated that the recent death of his daughter may have left Luciano distracted and inattentive. No one will ever know for sure, of course, but I believe that the crash was caused by Luciano's unfamiliarity with the route, not by any deficiency in his train operation.
Any moron can make a train GO ... it takes skill to STOP one properly and as I recall, he had a good deal of difficulty and overshot or nearly overshot a few stops. I'd say he was not competent for the duty he pulled. Regardless of the circumstances, he should not have been in that cab, especially on that route.
http://www.bmt-lines.com/towerinst.pdf
It *is* a revenue track, and two revenue trains use it daily (when the put in or take out one of the two FS units) If you know the schedule you can ride that train through that place.
Elias
But yes, in addition to that occurance, non-revenues happen often. And from time to time, pax have been hauled in that way on a consist going out of service. Been confirmed by folks that work the line ... it's true ... just rare. :)
Message never got to me, they waited and then did it AFTER we'd rode down to Prospect. It was sitting there on the platform (me unaware of its purpose) and HeyPaul, BMTman, Newkirk and a few others noted its presence there and we all shrugged our shoulders and said "wow, that'd be neat riding THROUGH there" ... our limousine awaited and we had no idea. :)
But the person who set that up was also the person who got me some handle time on 8101-8108 before "acceptance" in testing as well as my "open the door, go ahead" checkout of the 143's. And I asked about the Frankie and was told, "maybe 3-4 times a week." I've been told more recently that the "spare" gets laid up there too. But my last experience was the only one I had with the line, there definitely WAS a train on the platform there and I've been told it's rare, but not unusual - usually associated with a layup or a swapout for the "monthly visitor" as the ladies would call it. ;)
Chuck Greene
Chuck Greene
R-32s have sexes?
http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/railroad/se_2.htm
If you're into the "angle of the dangle" and serious humping, Selkirk's mootown farm *is* the place to be. Hee-hee. :)
Oh... That's not SubTalk's problem.
That is a problem with your equipment!
Just get one of those 60" wide monitors, and you will be all fixed.
Truthfully... it is your browser that is the ultimate arbitor of how a particular page is to be displayed. All SubTalk does is to indent each reply.
I have dual monitors, and I can set Netscape to occupy both of them if necessary. Then it looks just fine.
Bottom line: It is an issue that you cannot get away from.
Elias
And what screen resolutions do these computers have? The standard 15" monitor is usually set for 800 pixels, my 17" monitor is set for 1024 pixels.
Try setting a monitor to 1600 pixels, you might not be able to read the type becuase it will be so small, but you will see that many more of those posts will be on the screen.
And I don't recall seeing it on any other message board.
And just what other message board gets as much traffic as this one? (sic)
Besides, I never look at those posts all the way out there, because by the time they get out there, they are usually way off topic anyway. : )
Elias
Thank's for a brilliant suggestion. ;=D
Seriously, there are boards that display message followups in a similar way but they don't shimmy and scrunch.
It is your browser that is doing that. If you had a bigger screen it would not do that. That is the nature of HTML text. If the text was displayed as a gif or in a table with a fixed pixel size that would not permit your browser to truncate it, then your browser would put a scroll bar at the bottom, and would allow you to keep going east until you reach the Atlantic Ocean.
It is the nature of HTML browsers.
Here, look at this line, I will make it as a single word, your browser will be unable to break it and it will force a scroll bar at the bottom of your screen:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
: ) Elias
Sorry to bother you, but what's that link again?
http://subways2020.tripod.com/
I really have to do some more work on it, but I have several other projects running at the same time, and as a hobby project, that one takes back seat.
But I will get to it with some better navigation and more content.
My "Subway Photos" will be different thatn what others have done.
Elias
He's in "hog heaven" now that his beloved Sea Beach is back on the Bridge where God (and the BMT) willed it.
W Broadway Local
W Broadway Local
Astoria & City Hall
The worse is definitely the Steinway. Besides, the MTA only makes themselves more incriminating after the news articles over the storage of oil near them...
PS: How's school coming?
I noticed new signals in the folowing places:
Bergen UL, approx at the C/R's position N/B.
Canal St IND, N/B local track. Near the end of the station. Looks like they're installing new WD's, cuz these signals are very short.
All signals still covered in wrapping.
The new Singals inside Canal are regule three color ones. They are putting them in so a North Bound E can enter the station while a C crosses in front. Right now a E train has to stay out of the station untill the C clears the switch. There new signal will have a station timer on them this way the train can be beought in at a slow speed.
Also has anyone nowest that some of the signals head look like they have LED inside now. The way they look to me as I pass them in there iside a squire headed mount.
Robert
#3 West End Jeff
It was fun though!
--Mark
Same here, although I wasn't a railfan at the time and therefore probably didn't get quite as much enjoyment from the experience as I would now.
#3 West End Jeff
blurb in Wednesday's NY Post
A schedule of upcoming centennial events is available at www.mta.info mentioned in blurb
If a schedule of some sort is announced you can be sure it will get posted here.
They were the Transit Museum's Arnines returning to Court Street,
with a brief stop off for the Centennial MetroCard ceremony at
59th\Columbus Circle.
8 > ) Sparky
Where would they find surplus equipment that runs on catenary and third rail ?
Bill "Newkirk"
At maybe 6-7 million per locomotive and less than $900,000 a push-pull car (using the Comet V purchase by NJT as an example), 109 seats per Cab Car, 111 seats per toilet equipped trailer car, and 117 seats per trailer. A 42%-7%-51% split between Cab Cars, Toilet Equipped Trailers, and Non-Toilet Equipped Trailers is the breakdown NJT used in buying the Comet 5. 18 cars would fit 2036 people, in a 8 Cab Car, 1 toilet-equipped car, and 9 non-toilet equipped trailers, at an approximate cost of 16.2 million dollars, or $7956 per seat. If four or five ALP46s modified to run on 3rd rail at a cost of $7 million per locomotive are thrown in, then the cost rises to 44.2 or 51.2 million dollars, which would work out to $21,709 or $25,147.34 per seat.
If we call it $300,000 per car (a complete Wild Ass Guess) for the Mafersas from VRE, with 113 pax per car and 25 cars purchased. Then MN would get 2825 seats at a cost of 7,500,000 dollars, or a mere $2,654.87 per seat. With the same 4 or 5 dual-system locos tossed in, it'd be a total cost of 35.5 or 42.5 million dollars. However, those coaches are limited to 80mph, are getting rather old, and would have to be replaced in a relatively short time.
Of course those Dual-System locos would serve the same purpose as a P32 purchase, they'd allow the reassigning of P32s currently running diesel express service on the NH line (if any). Their order would have distinct advantages over buying new P32DM-ACs, since they'd also allow the purchase of M8s to be forestalled. Whereas the P32 purchase would be a stopgap solution, until the M8s, vehicles more suited to the NH line, could be designed, purchased and delivered, the Dual-System electrics would have pretty crappy acceleration on 3rd rail, but would offer MU-like performance under the wire. The P32's performance on the other hand would be universally bad, they're underpowered and would likely not be able to keep schedules on the local sections of the line they are working. Since expresses skip most of the stations on the 3rd rail anyway, the acceleration of an dual-system electric on the rail would be largely a non-issue anyway, whereas P32s will be forced to make some local stops on the NEC out past Stamford, where the electric locos could shine, the P32s will merely smoke and choke. That is of course unless the P32s are supposed to run full-line expresses GCT to NHV, but there would seem to be little point in ignoring all the enroute ridership so that a diesel can keep schedules on an electric route.
Compared to a potential M8 purchase, the ALP46 still comes out looking relatively intact. If we assume the M8 will be designed off the M7 (which to me seems logical), then it'd hold 104 people in a toilet car, and 113 in a non-toilet equipped car. With a 50/50 toilet/non-toilet mixture, you'd need 20 cars minimum for 2000 seats (actually it'd be 2170) with a M8 purchase, at a cost, assuming 2-3 (another WAG) million for new MUs, of $40-60 million, or $18,433.18 or $27,649.77 per seat (40 or 60 million dollars divided by 2170 seats). Of course the MUs have to be maintained more than a push-pull fleet, so they'd be down for maitenance more often, and would also be enormously heavy. The M7 weighs some 130,000lbs, and that's without a transformer or the dual-system equipment, which could add 20,000-30,000lbs, you could easily end up with a M8 weighing 80 tons, or roughly 75% as much as a ALP46 weighs anyway.
I guess I'm just confused why MN and CDoT would want to run P32s under exsisting wires when there's clearly an alternative, I know I am not the first and only person to propose this. Also I'm confused why they haven't considered electric-hauled push-pull sets for their express trains, where the MU's acceleration is not an issue. I'm not against the eventual purchase of M8s, I just question why so long a route with so many expresses needs the assistance of MUs when it's running at full speed for much of the run. Of course I definitely question the wisdom of buying more P32s, especially to be run under the wire, that makes very little sense and is a gross waste of infrastructure, electric locomotives with a slightly higher purchase price, but lower maitnenance and fuel costs would do quicker and more efficiently.
Any comments?
(BTW: anyone know a hard figure for the M7 and P32 per-unit purchase costs, or have a possible figure for the M8?)
-- Ed Sachs
The R-27 door motors made a "whirring" sound when they opened and closed. The R-30's were quieter and faster on opening and closing.
Bill "Newkirk"
Not exactly larger, but the R-27 escutcheons were flared like the R-26 and R-28's. The R-30 escutcheons were straight, like the R-32 thru R-42's.
Bill "Newkirk"
That was me, did you remember a "whirring" sound too ?
Bill "Newkirk"
At least those are the same "class of cars", the R27 and R20 were complete differnt classes. I'm hoping that the R160's will be a bit different from the R143's so I don't have to refer to them as the "R143-160's" in the future.
2. $60 million would buy maybe 30 cars. Where's the funding for the other 1,970 cars?
David
David
The article does state, "The deal would allow the state to buy 20 new rail cars and one or two locomotives." Referring to them as "2,000 railcar seats" seems like a new low in wowing the readership with big numbers.
Enjoy!
---Sir Ronald of McDonald
Peace,
ANDEE
The R-68A's should be called "the flying filth" !
Bill "Newkirk"
It's nice to see an R-68a on the B train after sooooo many years.
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
Heh, I didn't even think of that. Hmmmm, that would be a great riding and/or photo taking opportunity. Thanks.
Brian, the B is running below 34th st for over 10 days now. Anything that is signed as a B, from R32 to R110B will run on the Brighton Line. :-D
I don't understand what you are talking about.
It will stay open.
1) It is a much more important transportation center.
2) The RNC is not the same sort of political target as the DNC
?) WHAT? WHY? People with agneda *can* help shape the Democratic platform. Ain't NOTHING that they can do or say will help to shape the Republican platform. Either you believe in the Republican Agenda, and trust them to Do-What-Is-Right (far right???) or you vote for the Democrats. Sure there will be a whole passle of protesters, but they are after TV coverage and Anarchism rather than legitimate political change *in* the Republican Party. They will probally want to be as close to the convention as possible (Javitts Center, right?) rather than some remote location such as MSG.
Even so, back in the 80's the convention *was* at MSG, and they did not close down NYP.
Elias
No one thought anything would happen in NYC, until on 2/26/1993, that date in history changed the course on what we think about our security.
It would be much easier to evacuate the entire city and relocate every non-conventioneer to Worcester for the week.
Mark
Or, here’s an idea: rent out the Senate building over the summer to each of the parties. All the security you could want and none of the hassle for the rest of us!
That's odd, all the big names that are at the conventions are within a few acres space on and around Capitol Hill most of the rest of the year, and no one feels the need to shut down the DC Metro or Union Station...
Mark
An investigation is being launched by different city agencies on whether a serious communication breakdown contributed to the West 4th St. incident last Sunday evening.
The T/O reports to control what he saw, which is by itself subject to his own intrpretation of what he saw. Several more T/Os made similar reports to control. Obviously the could not have all said exactly the same thing, but it was clear that there was a problem there.
Control makes requests to the Police Department, but those reports are necessairily subject to Control's own understanding of the situation, and by giving a station name "Broadway Laffayette" as well as "Go To West 4th Stret" it makes for confusion.
Let me tell you, LEC in Dickinson is never very clear on where they want me to go on a ambulance run, why should NYPD despatch be any diferent. (That I am dyslexic with numbers and directions does not help matters, but then I usually do not drive the ambulance myself... My job is patients not vehicles.)
A TA supervisor should have been despatched to the scene together with the police, ought to have gotten there first, and could then direct officers as the situation warrants.
Elias
There is always a TSS or other RTO Supervisor in a particular tower, at the south end of the 6th Ave LL of West 4th St, which was less than 100 feet from the scene of the crime. So what happened?
Enjoy!
Suggestion: Can you increas the size of the frames by say 5-10 pixels? I am having trouble fitting each destination in the frame. The images scroll is too sensitive, at least on my browser.
In which direction?
What's your screen resolution? It works best at 1024 * 768.
[The images scroll is too sensitive, at least on my browser.]
Try it now.
My rez is 1280x960
Scroll works great now, thank you.
1. Your browser. I recommend that you use Microsoft Internet Explorer 5 or higher (with minimal toolbars).
2. Your operating system. I've designed it with the Windows PC in mind. I tried to call it up in a Mac just before I posted this, but I've exceeded the bandwidth limit. I'll try some other time. I know the GUI's of these OS's are different, so the GUI of a particular OS (or browser, for that matter) might not allow to view the page as I intended.
3. The page design. I've designed the frames so that each rollsign reading shows up in a 450 * 80 frame, with images at 400*80 and 360*80. The rollsigns in the interior (left) view don't match up because they're designed for a smaller window, which I don't know how to code in HTML, (at least without tearing the whole frameset apart and rebuilding it).
I'll see what I can do in terms of that, if it indeed is #3.
We always see the shots from the platform, like this:
But after some net searching, I couldn't find much showing the wonderful monstrosity that this station is, so I went down to street level and got some pics like this:
I have more pics here. The album is a compilation of Sunday's and photos from a previous visit.
It's a work in progress; while on the street, a guy started following me around and that took away the party atmosphere and comfort level for me. I'll go back soon, but in the meantime enjoy the pics.
Your pal,
Fred
PS Thanks to all for putting me to the wise about posting pics and links here.
Amen. We have to preserve our great heritage of empty, rubble-strewn lots.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Empty beer cans and a brandy bottle - in a mess room which, presumably, only employees can enter - don't constitute "evidence"? Did I just wake up on another planet?
Drunk Maintenance Workers on Underground
all over the front page!
Now, it is entirely possible that the people concerned imbibed their adult beverages after their shifts, but 100 bottles for 7 people does look a bit extreme!
Most Sun readers would be too interested in Page 3 to take notice of the headline :)
Either:
1) rather more than seven people were involved
or:
2) these cans accumulated over quite some time
- An L train signed up, "TO ATLANTIC AV," followed by another L train signed, "TO BWAY JUNCTION."
- New canopies being installed at the north end of the 74th Street/Broadway station on the 7 line.
Discuss away!
Are they going to take down the existing canopy and rebuild it? As they have done in renovations to Broadway Elevated stations?
My Pic
Wow, but I will admit, he defintly must have the better camera.
Your Pal,
Fred
-Adam
(allisonb500r@aol.com)
John
Digital or film ?
Bill "Newkirk"
Click here to see the album, which is on Webshots.
The wonderful thing about San Francisco's system is that it's the best way to get anywhere in the city, so even if you're not travelling with non-railfans, you'll still get lots of riding in because whatever your non-railfan companions want to do usually requires a train ride.
Mark
In about 50 years, we'll be wondering why we ever stopped running the PCC's since all of them will have historical value.
Maybe Newark just needed more tourists...
Mark
How does SFMuni keep them going? It's not easy, parts support is only one of the problems, you can get alot of things. Finding people skilled in fooling with them to keep them in service is another.
Mark
I've had some photos sitting around here submitted by people that I haven't put on the site because I lost the email that they came in, with the photographers name. Basically I have the JPG's, and sometimes some caption data, but no photographer names. I figure I'll never figure out whose work they are if I don't post them and let the photographer claim them. Sorry about that, submitters!
These first three were submitted by someone named Mike..
28619
28620
28621
Don't know this one...
28624
And these last bunch were submitted by someone who edited them using THE GIMP and were originally called "djXXXXX.jpg" if that helps.
28625
28626
28627
28628
28629
28630
28631
28632
28633
28634
28635
If anyone knows the locations of the artworks in those last few please let me know that, too.
Sorry guys. There may be a few more coming up.
That would be Greenberger.
The last one is immediately south of the N. Conduit station.
As for exact dates, the first few were on 6/8/03, the Q at Bay Parkway was on 6/9/03, and the rest were on 6/11/03.
I honestly don't remember sending you those photos, but since you somehow got your hands on them, enjoy.
Quoting from The New York Subway: Its Construction And Equipment:
"At each station there is a down grade of 2.1 per cent, to assist in the acceleration of the cars when they start. In order to make time on roads running trains at frequent intervals, it is necessary to bring the trains to their full speed very soon after starting. The electrical equipment of the Rapid Transit Railroad will enable this to be done in a better manner than is possible with steam locomotives, while these short acceleration grades at each station, on both up and down tracks, will be of material assistance in making the starts smooth.
Photograph on page 26 shows an interesting feature at a local station, where, in order to obtain the quick acceleration in grade for local trains, and at the same time maintain a level grade for the express service, the tracks are constructed at a different level. This occurs at many local stations."
What follows is what the book refers to as the "Photograph on page 26."
Houston Street, 33rd Street, 79th Street, 86th Street (Broadway), 91st Street.
If you haven't did any research go here.
"When deep sections of the London Underground were being constructed, the track at the stations was built at a higher level than the track between the stations. Trains leaving a station travel downhill, which reduces rolling friction and increases acceleration. Conversely, trains approaching a station can be decelerated by running up a slope, thereby reducing brake wear. This system is obviously ideal when trains stop at every station and was easy to construct while tunnelling was being carried out. Of course, it would be impractical on surface lines."
Copy of e-mail sent out by TfL:
02 March 2004
Full Integrated Service on the Northern line
I am pleased to tell you that a full and integrated Northern line service will be restored from Sunday, 7 March.
The restoration of the integrated service means that trains will now follow the normal service pattern, which is:
* Edgware to Morden via Charing Cross AND Bank branches;
* High Barnet and Mill Hill East to Morden via Charing Cross AND Bank branches.
We understand that for a significant minority of passengers, the 'split' service has been a benefit, providing them with a regular service, with every train guaranteed to take them to and from their regular destinations. However, for the large number of passengers who have to change at an already congested Camden Town station, the return of a full integrated Northern line
service will be very welcome.
London Underground and Tube Lines have undertaken extensive engineering work to redesign the points at Camden Town and have carried out safety checks using the latest available technology.
The switchblade at Points 20B at Camden Town, which was found to be the main cause of the derailment, has been redesigned using sophisticated computer modelling techniques. The new design was manufactured at the Lillie Bridge
workshops.
Over the last three weeks, the performance of the new design has been thoroughly tested by London Underground running empty passenger trains at various speeds, up to and a little beyond the permitted speed limit of 15mph. All test runs have been completed in the Underground's Engineering Hours and the behaviour of train wheels passing over the new switchblade
design has been closely observed and monitored using special high-speed cameras on the trains and on the track. During these tests, the new switchblade has also been coated with a special paint to enable the exact path of the wheels to be traced.
All of the results have been closely analysed by a team of experts. Their conclusion is that the new switchblade design performed exactly as predicted and that it is safe for use at Camden Town.
In accordance with London Underground's Safety Case, the new design and associated testing procedures have been subject to our Safety Review and Change Control procedure.
Staff and trade unions were also advised prior to the decision to restore the full and integrated Northern line service.
My Public Affairs team can assist with any further queries you may have. Please contact them via email at David.Hurren@tube.tfl.gov.uk mailto:David.Hurren@tube.tfl.gov.uk or by phone on 020 7918 3524.
Kevin Hafter
General Manager Northern line
Anyway, I wanted to get to Bank returning home, so when the Archway train got into Camden Town, I left the train, made my way to the other Southbound platform, and got on the first train, all without looking at signs, destinations etc.
Next thing I know, we've stopped at Mornington Crescent. I had to leave the train at Euston (WE branch) and head over to the City branch platforms. Not the most user friendly interchange in the world.
So how could this have happened? Were a few trains slipping through that were not confined to the restricted service routes?
I'm one of those that hoped. The Northern Line is confusing for non-regular users. As Rail Blue pointed out in a recent thread about London's southern commuter railways, there is the "everywhere to everywhere" tradition which leads to services that are hard to understand, whereas the subway/metro/tube tradition is of having different separate "lines" that are each fairly easy to understand for the uninitiated.
It would have been better (in my opinion) to have made a virtue of necessity after the derailment, and split the Northern Line permanently into two "lines", one going Edgware-Camden Town-Bank- Kennington-Morden, the other High Barnet or Mill Hill East-Camden Town-Charing Cross-Kennington-Morden.
I'm not sure how they could have found two different shades of black for the map, though (8-)
Edgware--City--Morden (cross platform interchange at Euston for Victoria Line)
Hign Barnet--West End--Kennington/Morden (cross platform interchange to East Finchley for City destinations via Finsbury Park)
That way, only people at Archway, Tufnell Park, and Kentish Town would have to undergo the ordeal of Camden Town.
This all seems so sensible to me that one wonders whether even today a case could be made for relaiming the abandoned Northern Heights extensions. The GN suburban services don't really need the Finsbury Park-Moorgate, and when Thameslink 2000 gets started, they will probably abandon it except for a few rush hour journeys.
Perhaps not when Thameslink 2000 gets started, but who knows when that will be. Meanwhile I think GN needs Moorgate.
When I was up there in last August's heat I didn't find it was all that bad, and I'm not exactly what one could consider in all that great shape :-( Mind you, if I had to do it every day I might feel differently about it!
Cheers,
PJ Dougherty
Publisher, Tracks of the NYC Subway
VERSION 3.6 Coming Next Week!
Generally nice. Richmond is by far the nicest of the lot. Ealing is the worst of those, but it's a good area still by any standards.
Rail Blue: Generally nice. Richmond is by far the nicest of the lot. Ealing is the worst of those, but it's a good area still by any standards.
Shame on you, sir - Ealing is the Queen of Suburbs! And seriously, it is more upscale than Upminster.
Morden on the other hand was an impressive facility that looked to be in the middle of nowhere.
wayne
Sounds like High Barnet - after ascending the long exit ramp from the station, you're on a reasonably prosperous-looking high street. Uxbridge had an unusual arrangement; the station exit led out to a pedestrain-only street with what looked like some upscale shopping malls nearby (both had just closed when I got there, however).
Yes, and nowadays, unless you happen to live close to a station on the Wimbledon-Sutton line, it is usually faster to catch a bus to Morden tube station, which has frequent services to prime destinations, than use the roundabout route to Thameslink.
High Barnet station was built by the old Great Northern railway and is substantially unchanged since its conversion to a tube station over 60 years ago. Alan A. Jackson in his book 'London's Local Railways' conjures up an amusing image of corpulent City gents on frosty mornings, slipping and ending up their walk to the station sliding down that ramp on their backsides.
So the old Northern City line is only a part-time service. 10 TPH rush-hours, 6 TPH weekday middays, but no service on evenings and weekends. I suppose Kings Cross could handle the rush-hour load, but Moorgate is better for City folks.
Of course, when Moorgate trains were routed over the Ally Pally, Mill Hill and Barnet branches, there was a seventh platform at Finsbury Park.
With so many tracks, the layout must be really inept. I wonder what would become of that branch under Thameslink 2000.
Not to mention the fact that the area around Finsbury Park station is a real armpit :)
Of course you mean when they ran via the Widened Lines and Kings Cross.
If the Northern Line extensions had been completed after WW 2 there would have been two extra platforms at Finsbury Park . :-)
District Line
Extensions:
- Wimbledon dive-under to take over Sutton Loop
Services as present with trains terminating at Wimbledon extended to Sutton.
East London Line
To be renamed Outer Circle and operated by BR.
New stations on WLL:
- Battersea, Chelsea West, White City, North Kensington
New station on ELL/BR(S:SE):
- Deptford Park
Closure:
- New X
Services:
- New X Gate - ELL - NLL - WLL - Clapham Jc
- Stratford - NLL - WLL - SLL - London Bridge
- Stonebridge Park (DC) - WLL - SLL - ELL - Stratford
- Clapham Jc - SLL - ELL - NLL - Stonebridge Park (DC via Primrose Hill)
- Victoria - SLL - ELL - NLL - Richmond
Hammersmith & City Line
Extensions:
- from Paddington into new BIG tubes, curving to be aligned under Seymour St etc (Bond St, Oxford Circus, Goodge St, Russell Sq, Clerkenwell, Farringdon, Moorgate, Liverpool St), then rising to take over GER Local to Shenfield (re-electrified at 660V 4th rail)
Service:
- Hammersmith to Shenfield
Jubilee Line
Split!!! For London Bridge - West Ham see Shuttle.
Extensions:
- from Charing X under the Strand and Fleet St etc (Aldwych, Ludgate Circus, St Paul's, Moorgate, Shoreditch (ELL), Cambridge Heath, London Fields, Hackney Downs, Clapton) then rising to take over GER St James' St - Chingford
Service:
- Stanmore to Chingford, with short turns
Metropolitan Line
Pruning:
- Amersham and Chesham Branches transferred to BR
Extensions:
- Watford Branch re-routed via Croxley Green, Watford West, and Watford High St to Watford Jc
Services:
- Watford Semi Fast to Aldgate
- Uxbridge to Whitechapel or Barking
Northern Line
Extensions:
- Edgware Branch extended (Edgwarebury, Elstree South, Aldenham, Bushey Meads, Bushey Hall, Watford High St)
- Mill Hill Branch extended (Copt Hall, Mill Hill (Hale), Edgware)
- Alexandra Palace Branch reopened (Highgate, Cranley Gardens, Muswell Hill, Alexandra Palace)
- Connection to Moorgate Line (Finsbury Park, Stroud Green, Crouch End, Highgate)
- Branch from Archway (Stroud Green - interchange with line to Moorgate), rising to replace Gospel Oak - Barking Line.
- South Kentish Town reopened
- New interchange station with Thameslink at Hendon North
- New tubes from Charing X Branch at Kennington (Angell Town, Brixton, South Brixton, Streatham Place, Streatham Hill, Streatham), rising to take over LBSCR Wimbledon Line (Tooting renamed Tooting East, new interchange station with Bank Branch at Tooting South)
- Extension from Morden to South Morden
- Extension from Moorgate (Northern City) to Bank (Drain), new station at Blackfriars, then curving into the Jubilee Line station at Waterloo, thence to Westminster, then as a new tube line (Victoria, Sloane Sq, Chelsea, Chelsea West (interchange to WLL), Fulham Broadway, Fulham West, Castelnau, Barnes Bridge, Mortlake), then rising to run alongside LSWR (North Sheen, Richmond), then further new tubes (Petersham, Ham, Kingston North (Fernhill Gdns), Kingston (Wood St), Kingston South (County Hall), Surbiton)
Services:
- Surbiton to Watford High St via Finsbury Park and Mill Hill
- Surbiton to Alexandra Palace via Finsbury Park
- Morden South to Edgware via Bank and Euston
- Morden South to Barking via Bank and Euston
- Wimbledon to Watford High St via Charing Cross
- Wimbledon to High Barnet via Charing Cross
Shuttle
Replaces Jubilee Line between London Bridge and West Ham
DLR
The planned extensions, plus turing the Bank Line into a huge loop back to Stratford and Bow Church, a line to Thamesmead, and extending the Tower Gateway stub in the middle of Thames St then through the old tram tunnel to Holborn. Perhaps a new spine line on the South side of the Thames too.
Hammersmith to Shenfield looks a bit pointless. You are spending £££ to offer an improvement to Shenfield, much needed, but Hammersmith passengers already have a good service. Why not West Drayton/Greenford?
It's a bit convoluted, but it gives passengers on the Met Main Line and the District Wimbledon Branch better service by getting the H&C out of the way. What might be a good idea would be giving Ealing (and then Greenford) double the service it gets now and routing Richmond over the H&C.
It *is* better for City employees, but they are a declining proportion of commuters. I'd guess that there would be more hurrahs than complaints if the Welwyn and Hertford locals were diverted to Kings Cross at all times. But the Kings Cross suburban platforms haven't the capacity to run the peak-hour service.
Passengers on the Moorgate trains running down the old Northern City Line tubes get a cross-platform interchange on to the Victoria Line at Highbury and Islington. It would be interesting to go there in the rush hour, and see what proportion of them carry on to Moorgate and how many change on to the Victoria Line for the West End.
I think it is likely that if Thameslink 2000 happens, the old Northern City Line will close and all the Kings Cross suburban trains (inner and outer services) will go via the Thameslink line to south of the river. In that event, City-bound commuters, both from the Bedford-Luton direction and from the Great Northern routes, will have a choice of Farringdon, City Thameslink and Blackfriars for The City. All of these are on The City's western edge. Alternatively they will have to change at Farringdon for underground trains to Moorgate (Circle, Hammersmith and City or Metropolitan Lines). The Thameslink 2000 plan envisages closing off the junction that allows Thameslink trains from the north to turn left at Farringdon and run into the terminal platforms in Moorgate subsurface lines station (not to be confused with the old Northern City Line terminal platforms in the deep-tube part of the station!).
Welwyn and Hertford locals ... Kings Cross suburban platforms haven't the capacity to run the peak-hour service.
I don't think Thameslink 2000 would have room for those local trains either.
The plan was for 14 TPH (peak) on the St Pancras line and 10 TPH (peak) on the Kings Cross line.
The Thameslink 2000 map (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Documents/thameslink2000_map.doc) shows that they do not plan to serve any stations between Finsbury Park and Potters Bar, and they do not plan to serve Hertford North. Their 10 TPH (peak) via Finsbury Park would go to more distant places, leaving the Welwyn and Hertford locals to the GN franchise.
I don't remember any discussion of that issue in report on the Thameslink 2000 hearings, whereas a tremendous stink was raised by the St Pancras to Moorgate (high level) crowd who would have to change at Farringdon. Which suggests that those local trains would continue to go to Moorgate (low level) rather than Kings Cross, at least on weekdays as at present.
Does anyone know what's become of #51722 and #52722, the two 95s which were damaged in the collision? Have they been sent for scrap or are they to be repaired?
wayne
enjoy
Linked for the LAZY
http://forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?board=Safety;action=display;num=1077818593
Regards,
Jimmy
1/9: REGULAR: R62A
2: REGULAR: R142
3: REGULAR: R62A
4: REGULAR: R62, R142
5: REGULAR: R142
6: REGULAR: R142A
7: REGULAR: R62A
A: REGULAR: R38, R44
B: REGULAR: R40, R40M: OCCASIONAL: R42, R68A
C: REGULAR: R32, R38
D: REGULAR: R68
E: REGULAR: R32
F: REGULAR: R46: OCCASIONAL: R32
G: REGULAR: R46
J: REGULAR: R42
L: REGULAR: R143
M: REGULAR: R42
N: REGULAR: R68A: OCCASIONAL: R40
Q: REGULAR: R68A: OCCASIONAL: R68
R: REGULAR: R46: OCCASIONAL: R32
S (42 St): REGULAR: R62A
S (Franklin Ave): REGULAR: R68
S (Rockaway Park): REGULAR: R44
Z: REGULAR: R42
How do you define "occasional"? There are several sets of R-32's on the (F) and they run on the (F) every day. I would consider that regular.
My attempt is here. We seem to agree as far as I can tell except on the N.
1/9: R62A
2: R142
3: R62, R62A
4: R62, R142, R142A
5: R142
6: R142A
7: R62A
A: R32, R38, R44
B: R40/M, R42, R68/A
C: R32, R38
D: R68
E: R32, R46 rarely
F: R32, R46
G: R46
J: R42
L: R143
M: R42, R143 weekends
N: R40/M, R42, R68/A
Q: R68/A
R: R32, R46
S (42 St) R62A
S (Franklin Ave) R68
S (Rockaway Park) R44
V: R46
W: R40/M, R42
Z: R42
Note: R62's is becoming the dominant rolling stock on the 3.
Also:
L: R42, R143
N: R40/M, R42, R68/A
Q: R68/A
R: R32, R46
W: R40/M, R42
Better?
N: R40/M, R42, R68/A
Q: : R68/A
R: : R32, R46
W: : R40/M, R42
"Web-safe" colors have been a very moot point for many years, now. This is web-safe and it'll work in many places where the above won't.
<span style="color:#ffff00;background-color:#000000;"> yellow on black </span>
<span style="color:#000000;background-color:#ffff00;"> black on yellow </span>
Mark
A: R44, R38, 2 sets of R32's
B: R40, R40M, 1 set of R42's, 1 set of R68A's
C: R32, R38
D: R68
E: R32
F: R46, about 3 sets of R32's during off hours and weekends, 10 sets during rush hours
G: R46
J: R42
L: R143, about 2 sets of R42's that sneak their way on during Rush Hour
M: R42, 4-car R143's on weekends
N: R68A, R68, about one set of R40's weekedays, at least 5 sets (from the W) on weekends, with an occasional R40M
Q: R68, R68A
R: R46, R32(like one or 2 sets)
S(Franklin Ave): R68
S(Rockaway Park): R44
W: R40,R40M (about 50/50)
Mark
Regards,
Jimmy :^)
til next time
Now all we need is that elusive W R32 set...where is it?
wayne
til next time
Was that a reproduction of the original paint job or did someone just get creative?
http://images.nycsubway.org//i25000/img_25752.jpg
It's had a few since it first pounded the rails though - I'm pretty sure I've seen it in the aqua/white as well many many years ago.
Unca Kevin, I think you need to change your reading glasses.
Anyway - does anyone have an answer on the paint job on the floor of 1575?
Looks YUCKKY! But do in not recall that is had a similar appearerance once when they were new, perhaps with inlaid linoleum?
Somebody tell us, was this so???
Elias
-William A. Padron
["Fulton-East N.Y."]
I'll have to defer to others though since I wasn't around in the 1948 era ...
wayne
Bill "Newkirk"
I remember the diamond shapes on the R-10s and yes, no I reall that they were brass inlays and not linolium inlays.
I'll betcha that it was painted on the demo car rather than being built into the floor as per the production run.
Interesting.
Elias
And I was told that the yellow should have been gold.
I hope they update soon...
Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks
-Chris
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
put the url of the link where it says "url" and put your description where it says "NAME OF LINK"
My message lost the </a> when I went from preview to post.
Hope it works this time.
<*a href="http://www.yourwebsite.com/Directory/Filename.html"*>Put your caption here. <*/a*> (Delete the "*"s to make it work do not forget to include the quotes and the http:// part of the url.
You can reference a page on your Geocites site using this, but given the number of people here who will click on it you will easily go over tyou hourly bandwidth quota.
To make a link to a photograph use:
<*img src="http://www.yourwebsite.com/Images/Photoname.jpg"*> There is no closing (< /a >) tag with this one. You cannot reference images on free web sites, but it will work fine if you are paying for the site.
The photos that I post here are hosted on my own computer, which has a built in web server. Yours does too, if you are using Windows 2000 or Windows XP, but you do need to know how to use it and how to protect your computer and network from attacks. You also need to have a static IP number. Some Cable and DSL providers will not allow you to operate a server on your network... you'd need to pay a business price for this serivice. I *do* pay a business rate, plus a premium for the static IP number.
Elias
Here's an ordinary, non edited pic:
And here's the experimental retouching:
I like it, how about you?
Here are some other retouchings:
The last looks way too fake though because both trains at different distances are clear. It actually looks like a model train set with a backdrop.
John
:(
Now you just need to crop off the bottom 6th of the photo, so we don’t have to look at the garbage on the yellow walkway in the foreground and so the train will truly dominate the page!
CLICK HERE TO SEE THE MAP
Hehehehe..... NOPE.
Your first problem is that you want to link to an .html page. Geocities will not let you make outside links to .jpg .gif .etc files.
Second problem is a .bmp file is TOO BIG! It will take too long to download, and you will use up your hourly download limit with just one download. Use your graphics program to save it as a .gif (Use .jpg for photos and .gif for other kinds of graphics.
Third (hehehehehe.....) Dave does not host stuff like this, though if it is good he might. But that is up to him and it will take time.
Fourth: www.webmasters.com offers 750 MB of hosting space with many GB of bandwidth and 300 email address for 9.95 a month. : )
Elias
Here ya go (hope it works)
(PS-u might have to save and use MS Paint or something to zoom in and see its DETAIL.)
CLICK HERE
Thanks again
-Chris
Thank you
-Chris
BIG Map
-Chris
Also, the lower level Verrezzano would be more than enough (although I personally would cross the Bayonne with Path or the light rail -- Staten Island is really part of New Jersey and nobody told them). There would never be enough development on the north end of the island to justify a loop via tunnel AND bridge, given how far it is from Manhattan, in my opinion.
First off, I know the area around the Church Av/McDonald Av station well enough to say that there is NO 17th Avenue along a path that takes the G between Church/McDonald to 9th Av/39 St. I am assuming that at this point, the G is following the route of the Culver Shuttle. There was a stop at 13th Avenue, if you want to put it there.
Also, why the shuttle between the College of SI and the SI Mall? Why not just extend the T there?
Someone had an idea of taking a line to Co-op City, Why not send the 11 (new line) there?
Why the transfer between the Beach 67 St and Beach 90 Street stations? Why not just run a train between the two? That is a wye connection, so running a train between the stations is possible.
There's already a connection between the Flushing Line and the Queens Blvd line at 74th St, so why the extra one at 82nd?
All in all, a good attempt.
What is faster: walking or subway via Broad Channel?!
Check the track map to see what I mean.
e-mail me your e-mail address so I can send you .gif format... I was able to convert your .bmp into 163kb .gif format (without any image loss)
subwaymap@comcast.net
P.S. you might want to ask David Pirmann to consider adding this map on Fanasty Map page.
Great job on the map though. Where the hell is the SAS? :)
I imagine you're also trying to get out to the end tof the Jamaica line, but I don't know that doubling back with the H is going to give enough time advantage over a transfer. How about a new express line (like you did on the Flushing) that runs along the cemetery?
During the rush, if you live in brooklyn, only the 1/9, 6, & 7 trains have better headways.
None of those trains go to Brooklyn.
A few comments [I know it's a fantasy map 8-)]:
a) I would bring the N to Dyre instead of WP Road
b) How about some Co-op City service
c) On Queens Blvd I'll assume that the extra tracks are built.
d) The SAS is not there
e) How about a Hillside extension
But I say keep up the good work!
I do agree that a connection should be made between the Queens "A" and "J/Z" terminals. They can't be too far apart.
Keep up the good work.
Regards,
Jimmy
What else . . . the N and W running on the 2 and 5? Are you presuming that the White Plains Road line will be converted to BMT/IND along with the Lex Ave Line?
L on restored Pitkin Avenue el to Van Siclen, but no re-extension to Canarsie Pier? How about sending the L west under the Hudson River to Hoboken Terminal, too . . . ?
Could use a Sea Beach Express. Put the J on there instead of the M on the West End Line.
SI: You figured out the logistics of a cross-harbor tunnel? That may spell the end of the SI Ferry. And why new shuttle trains on SI? Shuttle trains are leftovers of old main lines, such as the Franklin Avenue Shuttle (which branched off the Fulton Street El, which I see you covered with your Brighton Beach Line "C" Train) and the Times Square Shuttle (part of the original IRT line). Why no Victory Boulevard Line? Why no cross-Arthur Kill tunnel to send the SIR to Perth Amboy to connect with NJ Transit? Also, looks like you have your Richmond Avenue Line going via the North Shore Line for part of the way . . . no service to Mariners Harbor?
Also a fav of mine, the Myrtle Avenue Line; bring that back as a cut-cover (hang the NIMBYs). The M continuing on the Broadway Line is not a good thing. Old Myrtle Ave line into Manhattan and back uptown via the 2nd Ave.
Why the 1 train to New Lots? The 3 as an express between South Ferry and Lenox Terminal . . . the south terminus requires switching tracks from express to local.
You know that the C train does not run up Grand Concourse anymore? Not feasible to join IRT and IND at Woodlawn, yet again.
8 train: Where's the LGA stop?
P and H trains are redundant. Never underestimate the power of a free transfer, which is just as good as a one-seat ride in many instances . . .
And how about a 9th Avenue subway also?
Well, since it's a fantasy map, you can assume anything, regardless of its practicality or cost-effectiveness.
What else . . . the N and W running on the 2 and 5? Are you presuming that the White Plains Road line will be converted to BMT/IND along with the Lex Ave Line?
L on restored Pitkin Avenue el to Van Siclen, but no re-extension to Canarsie Pier? How about sending the L west under the Hudson River to Hoboken Terminal, too . . . ?
Could use a Sea Beach Express. Put the J on there instead of the M on the West End Line.
SI: You figured out the logistics of a cross-harbor tunnel? That may spell the end of the SI Ferry. And why new shuttle trains on SI? Shuttle trains are leftovers of old main lines, such as the Franklin Avenue Shuttle (which branched off the Fulton Street El, which I see you covered with your Brighton Beach Line "C" Train) and the Times Square Shuttle (part of the original IRT line). Why no Victory Boulevard Line? Why no cross-Arthur Kill tunnel to send the SIR to Perth Amboy to connect with NJ Transit? Also, looks like you have your Richmond Avenue Line going via the North Shore Line for part of the way . . . no service to Mariners Harbor?
Also a fav of mine, the Myrtle Avenue Line; bring that back as a cut-cover (hang the NIMBYs). The M continuing on the Broadway Line is not a good thing. Old Myrtle Ave line into Manhattan and back uptown via the 2nd Ave.
Why the 1 train to New Lots? The 3 as an express between South Ferry and Lenox Terminal . . . the south terminus requires switching tracks from express to local.
You know that the C train does not run up Grand Concourse anymore? Not feasible to join IRT and IND at Woodlawn, yet again.
8 train: Where's the LGA stop?
P and H trains are redundant. Never underestimate the power of a free transfer, which is just as good as a one-seat ride in many instances . . .
And how about a 9th Avenue subway also?
Aside from the missing Second Avenue Subway and no line to LaGuardia. Why is their no thought of running lines in to New Jersey in any of these fantasy maps. Such a dream would make this a truly regional system.
I would do it myself but I know little about the land use and commuting patterns in New Jersey to make a logical map.
John
Then you can make maps showing travel time to work, population density, income, race, education, everything you want from the 2000 census.
BTW, I like your map. When are you going to put the SAS on it?
Another good idea might by a Fifth Ave. subway line/10th Ave. subway line.
What's the purpose of the H-line (Bronx- Queens)?
This map makes interborough travel more convinient :)
Extend virtually every line at least to city limits. Glad lots of you picked up on Co-op city. Here are a few more:
1. New Lots to JFK & Green Acres
2. Extend 7 and L to terminals in NJ (build a new bus terminal there to reduce Lincoln Tunnel traffic.)
3. Flushing to Bayside & Little Neck
4. Hillside, Archer & Lefferts to city line
5. Canarsie to Bay Ridge via LIRR (was part of 1968 plan)
6. Nostrand Ave to Emmons or Floyd Bennet Field
7. (1) to Getty Square
Manhattan "East Side Infill" Stations
2nd-1st Ave on (7)
2nd-1st Ave on (N)
2nd-1st on (V)
3rd-2nd Ave on LIRR/Amtrak with connecting concourse to (6)
Ave C on (L)
Water St on (F)
Water-South St on (A)
Water St on Clark St tunnel (2)
2nd-1st Ave on (7)
2nd-1st Ave on (N)
2nd-1st on (V)
3rd-2nd Ave on LIRR/Amtrak with connecting concourse to (6)
Ave C on (L)
Water St on (F)
Water-South St on (A)
Water St on Clark St tunnel (2)"
Wouldn't they all be very deep stations, because the lines are all on their way down to the under-river tubes at those points?
Of course, this fantasy land, but providing those stations in real life might be tricky.
Only if the MTA had about a trillion dollars siting around!
-Chris
-Chris
No tunnel.
Cut and paste the link below. There are more photos from other MOD trips as well in the album.
http://www.imagestation.com/member/index.html?name=R40_Railfan&c=201
This Is What I Live For...
Click here for pictures
til next time
wayne
wayne
I see the 142s as technologically "forward" but stylistically "retro." There are "touches of red" here and there. The interior colors are reminiscent of R32-42s. The inside ceiling is reminiscent of the R10-12 (minus the enamel & the fans.)
The R143s remind me of R42s.
My favorite MTA* car (from my lifetime) is the R44 and its "M" cousins. Yeah, they were a mess, but at least their design was the first to acknowledge that passengers/customers are sentient beings who expect "aesthetics" with the products they consume (why do you think the car companies spend millions on style?) That public transit is an "option," not "the last resort for those who can't drive." I feel that transit vehicle design has moved backwards over the past 5-10 years, the "bread truck" style of our buses being an example.
* - My favorite NYC car is the PA1-3
Any SubTalkers gone AWOL lately?
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
Peace,
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
It's still incomplete after almost 100 years ... sounds like a subway station escalator :)
However, if the Cathedral of St. John the Divine is able to gain approval for a real estate deal we're attempting, we might be able to have the building completed within the next 20 years.
Of course, if anybody would like to help speed up completion of the Cathedral, we're always happy to accept donations. :-)
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
As may the Second Avenue Subway.
And skilled masons are much more difficult to find than escalator mechanics.
Not that NYCT is finding it easy to hire competent escalator mechanics.
However, if the Cathedral of St. John the Divine is able to gain approval for a real estate deal we're attempting, we might be able to have the building completed within the next 20 years.
Similar, in some ways, to the tax increment financing plan for the 7 line's extension. Except the Cathedral's approach is a lot less risky.
Of course, if anybody would like to help speed up completion of the Cathedral, we're always happy to accept donations.
Heh. The Cathedral's lucky. All it really needs is money to enable its completion. NYCT, in contrast, needs more than just money to complete the SAS and other projects; it needs competent leadership, and you can't get donations of that.
This is assuming, of course, that St. Peter's technically counts as a cathedral in the technical sense... Since it's the seat of the Bishop of Rome (the pope), I'm inclined to say it does. But then, I'm not Roman Catholic, so I welcome any corrections.
-- David
Brooklyn, NY
St. Peter's is not a cathedral because it's not the seat of the Bishop of Rome. St. John Lateran across town is the seat and therefore the cathedral.
Actually, the largest Roman Catholic church in the world is one (I don't know if it's a church or a cathedral) built about a decade ago in the Ivory Coast.
Peace,
ANDEE
#3 West End Jeff
"Working Papers
Students between the ages of 14 and 17 interested in obtaining working papers should contact the Department of Education's Working Papers Office at (718) 222-6220."
"working papers" sounds like something a jack-booted thug would ask you for: "YOUR PAPERS PLEASE."
REPOST!
Did you seriously even check the archives, or even think that no one would have posted this information even though it has been available for over two days now?
Bill "Newkirk"
article here
Can you image if part of the NEC blew up and Davd Gunn was presented with a similar ultimatium? I don't think he'd have any choice but to pay.
Peace,
ANDEE
Peace,
ANDEE
Thanks for playing, Charlie Pellett, please tell him what he's won ... "OOOOooooKkkkkkk ... watch the closing barn doors, Wilbur!" :)
Friends don't LET friends enter "BizarroWorld" ... unless they really WANNA.
Of the major NY papers today only the NY Post and The NY Times were around to cover the 1904 events.
I agree with the Kalikow connection theory but personally would haae preferred the NY Times because they could have done a better sponsorship job (I would really rather have the Daily news but they weren't around then).
Aside from the different reporting style and general lack of intelligence, it is still the NY Post regardless of who many times it changed hands.
Your pal,
Fred
Maybe because SUBWAYSURF mentioned it?
Oh NO, does this mean no that instead of MOD trips this year we will have POST trips? EWWWWWW!!!!!!
http://www.gateway2russia.com/st/art_218792.php
For more on the story.
They live in southern Siberia, which is probably quite pleasant. Maybe they could be sent to northern Siberia.
The Russkies *I* deal with are a real problem. But all they usually want is for you to fix your "PayPal" (tm) account problems on their fake website. :)
The kids will probably get hung ... but that's their idea of a joke culturally ... Beavis and Butthead ... heh.eh.eh.eh.eh. "He said 'butt'" ... :(
Tahiti?
On second thought, why not keep them in Siberia, but have them locked up in a cell watching continuous episodes of 'Gilligan's Island'. That oughta turn 'em into vegetables!
That you are older than me is completely irrelevant and is simply a feeble attempt to show some kind of superiority over me.
All together now:
76TH STREET.
Did Bombardier build these cars?
Even for stations on the Broadway El, Hewes and Lorimer Sts. have low ridership (#405 and #354, respectively). Even the G station between them does better business, about a million people, though not as much as the two BMT stations combined.
Would operations and passengers be better served by demolishing the two elevated stations and replacing them with a single local station at Union Ave., with an escalator transfer to the G? You could make the IND station less of a cesspool while you're at it, although they should do that regardless.
Clearly this replacement is much easier to do with an elevated than with a subway--you could build the new station first around the existing tracks, close the old ones once it's operational, and then scrap them at leisure. Would signals need to be altered? That's about the only objection I can think of, beyond the inconvenience to the small number of people who would have to walk somewhat farther for the BMT, and the fact that MTA has, I think, done some rehab work on the two existing stations recently (new lighting and those stained-glass panels? correct me if I'm wrong about this). I'm thinking that the new convenience of a transfer (and a minute less dwell time along the line) would outweigh those objections.
It is a good and sound idea, but with one improvement from my point of view... Keep the existing enterances, but install moving sidewalks to wisk passengers along the el structure to the new sataion. Probably with a few shops or something along the way, selling coffee donuts and newspapers and such. Probably rent the new space to the existing merchants so that they will not complain or be hurt by the new project.
(Bake the donuts in the street level store, but sell them on the new subway concourse.)
Nobody need be inconvienced, and economic development follows the investment.
Elias
Wow you really have hope for the gentrification of the area around Broadway! Coffee shops, etc....well I guess you didn't say "Starbucks".
The money goes where the money goes.
They ain't gonna invest in a neighborhood or a building where they cannot get a return on their investment.
Elias
Shame that doesn't mean the same in New as in Old Amsterdam ;-)
I do agree though, although it's water under the bridge, that they should have just abandoned both stations and built a new station at Union, partially using the money they used at Hewes and Lorimer for all the upgrades and renovations.
Re : consolidate Hewes, Lorimer : There used to be a Park Avenue station on the Bway el between Myrtle and Flushing Avenue stations, but it was closed and demolished in the Dual Contracts reconstruction due to lack of revenue and use.
I take it you have no problem with the continuation of the Flushing Avenue stop on the Bway el. I think that area has undergone some gentrification. The sister of a person in my work group, in her late '20's, lives near there and is, I think, doing well.
It may interest you to know that the original Cypress Hills station on the Jamaica el was over Crescent St. between Fulton St. and Jamaica Avenue, and was the end of the line, before the Dual Contracts extension of the el to Jamaica Avenue and 168th Street.
As for the Cypress Hills-Crescent S curve, I think the best thing for that is if they built an express track over Jamaica Avenue from 121st St to Broadway Junction. The center track would rise up through the Cypress Hills Station, and over the Manhattan Bound track and continue west over Jamaica Ave to Broadway Junction. No stations would be on the new Jamaica Ave portion of the line. One express station would be made at Woodhaven Blvd. To keep costs down, the local platforms would stay just where they are, but the express track would rise through that station too, with express platforms over the local tracks.
The Fulton St portion of the J would run just like it does now (except minus the skip stop). I don't feel full relocation of the line to Jamaica Ave would be a good idea because basically the new section runs next to a cemetery on one side, and all the Fulton St passengers would have a hardship, with the loss of easy stations.
W
Of course, had the IND's fantasy map come to pass, connecting the G to the Broadway El would be a nonissue, as the Houston and Worth St. alignments via S. 4th St. to Bushwick Ave. and points east would have superseded it and the El would, I assume, have been razed. I wonder what on earth they'd've done with the Willy B tracks and the BMT segment between Chambers and Essex? Abandoned the latter and given the former to cars, I guess.
Yes, the Broadway El would have been razed if the IND second system came to being, just like the Fulton El (much of which was up to dual contract specs had been razed).
As for the WillyB, it's track's fate would have been similar to that of the Queensboro Bridge or the Brooklyn Bridge's tracks - just a memory given over to cars.
As for the subway between Essex and Chambers, I believe that there was a plan to connect it to the IND somehow. I think that was post-IND planning though. See this post and it's responses.
In the other direction, there are two levels all the way. The LIRR tracks will turn off near 3rd Ave.
Peace,
ANDEE
How would such a spur have gotten passengers the Jamaica connection and service to the rental car and long term lots?
Starting from Jamaica Center station (upper level), run the trains down the QB line, and the 63rd Street tunnel to the 6th Avenue Line. At West Fourth Street, to goes and follows the C into the Cranberry Tubes, and follows the Fulton Express (and later the Fulton El) to the Rockaway line, onto the 3 and 4 tracks, and up and over to what is now the AirTrain line. Have it serve all the terminals, then send it up to Jamaica. All that would be needed is to construct a connector from the Jamaica AirTrain station to the tail tracks on D1A and D2A north of Jamaica Center, and a layup track (D3A) to hold E trains, as D1A and D2A would become through tracks. The JFK Express would then become a huge loop through Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan!
Stations (Counterclockwise from Jamaica Center)
Jamaica Center
Sutphin Blvd
Union Turnpike
Roosevelt Avenue
21st Street
Roosevelt Island
Lexington Av/63
57th St/6 Av
Rockefeller Center
42nd St/6 Av
34th St-Herald Square
West 4th St
Chambers St
Broadway-Nassau St
Jay St
Station E - Howard Beach II
Station B
Station C
Terminal 1
Terminals 2 & 3
Terminal 4
Terminals 5 & 6
Terminal 7
Terminals 8 & 9
Station C
Station D
Jamaica Center
A clockwise loop will also run, serving the stations in reverse order.
Then those signs that say "VIA JFK AIRPORT" will have some meaning!
"[The JFK Express] made all stops between 21-Queensbridge and 34 Street, then stopped at:
W 4 St, Chambers St, Broadway-Nassau, Jay Street, Howard Beach"
Both incidents of passengers being shunted into the yard was caused by human error according to todays Newsday article.
Bill "Newkirk"
UNSCHEDULED YARD TOUR!
Incident was caused by human error.
Bill "Newkirk"
www.forgotten-ny.com
One pearl that struck me is that Roosevelt Island ranks #238th, which is just below the midpoint of #211 (21st-Queensbridge). This is a very "young" station, having been open for just 15 years. And yet, it is already busier than almost half of the stations in the system, with nearly 1.6m fares per year.
This is significant, because commercial and residential development tends to be partly dependent on transit options. But given the time it takes to get anything done in New York City, 15 years is like the blink of an eye.
This suggests that new stations in the right places can make an enormous difference—and it can happen relatively quickly.
Ground Broken for Westside Homes
Mark
Mark
So then, Why not build the Myrtle-Fifth Avenue Subway that I have proposed.
Those rich speculators could buy land along my proposed routes, and could float and buy construction bonds for the new system, and then profit both from their land speculations, and from their bond dividends.
The city would get a new and needed boost to its infrastructure, plus tax revenues generated by new housing, businesses and jobs that would be created. And all because some investers were willing to invest and profit in the city. See... RICH FAT CATS *ARE* good for something.
Or did you rather want to wait for the Federal Government to give you a handout. You could wait until HELL FREEZES OVER for that! Ain't NONE of those rich fat cats (or their minions) gonna vote a soggy sow for more taxes to build that project.
Do you see how money works now? YOU NEED THE RICH PEOPLE!
Elias
After all, somebody has to bankroll the revolution.
I just wish I could borrow some of Atlanta's rich and powerful people and bring them to Philly to shake things up a bit! I can't see them tolerating the city wage tax for very long, and they might just get the ball rolling on some decent transit expansions, like the Roosevelt Boulevard subway and a sensible plan for commuter service to Reading.
Mark
All long as we're engaging in some wild speculation, I wish I could somehow disband all local government in NYC and put it under the control of Atlanta's administration. Both taxes and the unemployment rate would fall, massive construction would start on the WTC site within a few months, the Second Avenue Subway (full-length ... no stubway crap) and the 7 to Javits (which itself would have doubled in size) would be running within five or six years. Full implementation of CBTC in the entire system might take a year or two longer.
All of the other stuff could happen if hell freezes over, but this is simply impossible without shutting down the subway for 5 or 6 years. CBTC will take at least 15 years, no matter how progressive and can do the administration is.
Which abandoned station would have the highest ridership, if the station were still open today? Limit yourself to stations where the line itself still exists.
Yes, that is MY choice too!
Go Brooklyn!
GO YANKEES!!!!!
Let Forest City/Ratner push the idea.
86th Street is #57 in the system with almost 6 million fares, and 96th St is #20 with over 10 million paid fares. Even if 91st St took away 1.5 million of 86th's users and 1.5 million of 96th's, it would have about 3 million fares which would put it at about 133rd in the system, certainly nothing to sneeze at.
They're too busy jumping turnstiles.
The station had entrances/exits at the intersection of Worth and Lafayette, which would put you within a short block of many very important places. In the immediate area around the station locale are several important buildings, including 26 Federal Plaza (where, among other things, immigration applications are processed, resulting in very very long lines sometimes), Crimimal Court at 100 Centre St., the Manhattan Correctional Center (the Tombs) right next to it, Family Court on Lafayette Street, the Civil Court building at 111 Centre (incorporating Civil Court, Landlord-Tenant Court, a few Supreme Court Parts and Small Claims Court), the Supreme Court building at 80 Centre Street (which until recently housed the local FEMA offices aiding people who lost jobs and businesses on 9/11) and the State Office Building across the street from 80 Centre.
Its true that the extension of the Brooklyn Bridge IRT station enabled NYCT to connect the station to the Chambers Street BMT station, putting IRT riders one block from Worth Street, but its pretty inconvenient to use. For example, in order to use that exit, people exiting the 4/5 at Brooklyn Bridge have to go down a flight of stairs, walk down a fairly long passageway, make a right turn and then climb 2 flights of fairly steep metal stairs. That puts them into the mezzanine of the Chambers Street station. Riders then have to exit the station and climb another hefty flight of stairs to get to the street. They then have to start walking to Worth and points beyond.
That entrance/exit is great for people using the State Supreme Court building at 60 Centre Street and the Federal Courthouse at 40 Foley Square. But to get to points beyond Worth Street, its a pretty far walk, especially in the winter.
So I say Worth Street's reopening would best serve a large segment of riders.
According to the IRT description on this site, Worth Street was closed when Brooklyn Bridge platforms were extended, so I guess the Worth Street platforms are too short for 10-car trains.
The only thing I could add would be the large number of people that work at both 1 and 26 Federal Plaza, and at the new Federal Courthouse on Worth Street opposite the foot of Baxter Street. 26 Federal Plaza is the second largest Federal office building in the United States, the largest being the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
It would be interesting and convenient to have entrances to a reopened Worth Street station right in the plaza of Federal Plaza, assuming they didn't interfere with the basement garage there.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Any data available on what ridership / fares / use were like on Worth Street station when it was open, and in use ? When did it close, and why ?
What happened to this extension ? It's not there now. The uptown ends of the BB platforms are now south of Duane Street, more than two blocks south of Worth Street.
I still maintain it would be worthwile to re-open Worth St. station, for reasons I have already stated, and because, too many times, the downtown 6 has stopped about half a dozen times for no apparent reason between Canal St. and Brooklyn Bridge. If it's going to continue doing this, it may as well use, rather than waste, this time stopping at a re-opened Worth Street station to discharge and admit passengers.
It is still there. In the 60's, the southern end of the original Brooklyn Bridge platfroms was abandoned (see Brennan's site), and the extension pushed the station north. Remember also that Worth St only had one side extension to full lenth, and that was on the downtown side. The uptown side is still only the length of the original IRT stations (like 18th St). Also remember that all the extensions on Lex were done in opposite directions on the opposing sides, so the downtown ones went towards north (to Canal in Worth's case), but the uptown sides went south (which needs to be extended to full length at Worth) and would have to be extended south towards BB because if it extended north, it would go too close to the Canal St uptown platform which was extended south in the 50's. So in either direction on the uptown sides, the neighboring stations were extended towards Worth.
The uptown ends of the BB platforms are now south of Duane Street, more than two blocks south of Worth Street.
True, but the Worth St platform must be extended south (as to not conflict with the layout of all the other Lex stations and the Canal platform extension on the uptown side). That would bring the unextended uptown platform of Worth one block closer to BB. And their reasoning was that there was an entrance near Pearl St to the Chambers St station mezzanine, which connects to northern BB stairway to the north end of BB.
It would probably be used, as you say, but the tail end of a 6 going uptown may almost still be in BB as the front enters Worth St. It was probably poor planing in the 50's that caused this. The BB realignment in the 60's was smart to avoid the curve and moving platforms, however I have no clue what possesed them to extend the uptown platforms at Astor, Spring, Bleecker, and Canal to the south as opposed to making them even with the already extended downtown platforms from the 30's.
What was different, when Worth Street station was open, about Lex local train lengths, and the Brooklyn Bridge / City Hall station ?
If they extended the Worth St uptown platform towards Canal, it would get too close to Canal St because the Uptown platfrom at Canal St was extended southwards towards Worth St (unlike the downtown platform at Canal that was extended northwards towards Spring St).
What was different, when Worth Street station was open, about Lex local train lengths, and the Brooklyn Bridge / City Hall station ?
Until the 60's, the Brooklyn Bridge platforms were further south than they are now, and none of the uptown local platforms between BB and 14th had full length platforms till the 50's.
I think I need to see on a to-scale map of Lafayette St. between Canal and Reade Sts. (an enlargement of part of a "Neighborhood Map" from BB-City Hall station would be good) why a re-opening of Worth St. station would not work with current #6 train lengths.
Of course they COULD reopen Worth St. It's not as though the distance from the north end of BB to the south end of Canal is so short that it's impossible.
However that latter distance is under half a mile, so there's no way NYCT is going to add another station there.
No. But for new construction it's certainly a good rule of thumb. If you add Worth St., you have stations less than a quarter mile apart. When was the last time NYCT or its predecessors opened a new train station where the distance to the next stop was a quarter mile or less away?
My gut feel is: before 1925.
Couple of questions:
How long does it take NJT/MN to train the train crews for the new cars? Is there anything really revolutionary for them to learn..or is it like getting a new car: you know which buttons to push,just a matter of finding them?
Posted on:3/4/04 9:31:34 AM
Posted on:3/4/04 9:31:34 AM
Due to a police investigation at Fulton Street trains are operating on the line from Nevins Street in Brooklyn to 149th Street Grand Concourse in both directions. train service is suspended between Nevins Street in Brooklyn, and Brooklyn Bridge in both directions until futher notice.I'm going into the city in a couple of minutes. I will investigate the situation and have a report later this afternoon. If service is still disrupted when I get there, I will interview at least 5 customers to get their priceless thoughts on the situation.
Really just curious here. This has always been the anomaly in the system.
Over 10 years ago, the late night H shuttle did "round-robin" shuttle service, an unpopular shuttle with both crews working on the shuttle and the customers who use them. Why should you make rush-hour commuters from the Rockaway Park section, take at least 3 trains before they even get to Howard Beach? (Rockaway Park to Beach 67th st, down and over to another shuttle to BC, then regular A train into Manhattan.)
Have you actually seen the current headways for Rockaway service?
Pardon my ignorance but why isn’t service to the peninsula and Broad Channel run as a “stub” or as a separate entity? Can shuttle service connect the both terminals on the peninsula with Broad Channel (or a point further north)?
It's fine just the way it is.
With prominently posted scheduling in each station, you could run three or four shuttle trains per hour to connect with the A further up the line.
Umm shuttle trains currently run at 12-16 minute intervals, do the math on the # of trains per hour. I thought the schedule times are made so people don't have long waits for the Rockaway Park shuttle at Broad Channel.
Even more radical would be to close all but the two terminal stations and run buses to BC.
Depending on the Q22........enough said ;-). Replacing the trains with buses will do no good whatsoever. Good thing you said that it is radical b/c it most likely won't happen but then again you never know.
Really just curious here. This has always been the anomaly in the system.
The words rapid transit is an anomaly in this system ;^D.
Last week it was the #1 train running to the Rockaways, this time it's the D train entering the IRT. Start laughing because I was talking to one Subtalker last night and he initially didn't believe me.
Its amazing how people are lazy; with cutting and pasting, there is more time for proofreading.
Perhaps I have a suggestion for everyone: Should I start seperate DUH! threads or use one Offical thread and track all of the DUH! mistakes?
It's nice to know, living in Baltimore, that NYCT is as incompetant as our Maryland Transit Administration.
All seriousness aside, I suspect it's just bad cut-n-paste on a "good for all notices" form.
See you folks in 20 years for some pics(if i'm not an invalid at that time).
Mark
Miami-Dade County's mass-transit aspirations got a boost last week when the Florida Department of Transportation appropriated $100 million for a Metrorail extension to Miami International Airport.
The grant will pay more than a third of the costs of the project, with the remaining $160 million coming from revenues from a half-percent sales tax, said Carlos Bonzon, county manager of surface transportation.
At hand is a plan to extend Metrorail from the Earlington Heights station at Northwest 22nd Avenue and State Route 112 to a proposed transportation hub, the Miami Intermodal Center, next to the airport.
The project is to be completed in 2012. Metrorail would enter the center, and passengers would transfer to a people mover that would take them into airport terminals.
http://www.fakeisthenewreal.org/subway/index.html
I'd imagine we're familiar with NYC and it's actual layout, but there are other cities here too...
Mark
I like the way Moscow designed their system with a central location, lines that extend to distant locations and one line that circles all of those extentions. Incredible.
It'd likely be incorrect to include things like RER and S-bahns on these maps, since it says "subway systems of the world" at the top. However, it is somewhat misleading to show Berlin and Paris with such a seemingly piss-poor Metro systems, when in fact they have a system which does not qualify as a subway, but serves the same role as the extended branches of the NYCTA system.
http://www.chiri.com/download/routemap/23_rosenzu_01.PDF
(Do not post direct links to this file. Copy and paste, please)
You may need the asian languages plug-in for Acro Reader.
London also has an intensive above ground network, most of which do not make onto the Tube map.
I agree with you, and I suspect that the London map is too small.
There seems to be no email address to complain to. I can only conclude that "www.fakeisthenewreal.org" is a fake!
Domain Name:FAKEISTHENEWREAL.ORG
Created On:13-Jan-2003 17:05:18 UTC
Last Updated On:09-Jan-2004 00:01:41 UTC
Expiration Date:13-Jan-2005 17:05:18 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:R39-LROR
Status:OK
Registrant ID:44D138CEA4FFC3E6
Registrant Name:Neil Freeman
Registrant Street1:121 S. Professor St.
Registrant City:Oberlin
Registrant Postal Code:44074
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Email:neil.freeman@oberlin.edu
Hello, Neil
I am one of several railfans at www.nycsubway.org "SubTalk" who have looked at your maps at www.fakeisthenewreal.org.
We think it's a very good and interesting idea to show subway maps of different cities on the same scale.
But we also think that some of your maps are not correctly scaled.
The following discrepancies have been noted:
1. The map of London is much too small, at least when compared with New York and Paris.
2. The map of New York, when shown on the larger scale, doubles in width but only increases by about 30% in height.
3. The map of Tokyo is upside down.
I am sure that we would be very happy if these errors could be corrected, as your concept is such a good one.
Sincerely,
David Fairthorne
david.fairthorne@rogers.com
Reason: 5.1.1 unknown or illegal alias: neil.freeman@oberlin.edu
Let me look into this further. I hate guys who do this stuff.
Chuck
Domain Name: OBERLIN.EDU
Registrant:
Oberlin College
173 W. Lorain
Oberlin, OH 44074
UNITED STATES
Contacts:
Administrative Contact:
John Bucher
Oberlin College
148 W. College St.
Oberlin, OH 44074
UNITED STATES
(440) 775-6727
john.bucher@oberlin.edu
Technical Contact:
Ken Ervin
Oberlin College
173 W. College St.
Oberlin, OH 44074
UNITED STATES
(440) 775-8798
ken.ervin@oberlin.edu
Name Servers:
DNS.CC.OBERLIN.EDU 132.162.32.243
DNS2.CC.OBERLIN.EDU 132.162.32.244
NS1.OAR.NET
... what I did was to blow up the small-scale maps to 6 x size in xv
and print them that way, so I could count the individual pixels. I also pasted on a 60x120 pixel rectangle (equivalent to 10 x 20 pixels before scaling) so I could measure distances to check my count.
I then picked rail landmarks as I described before, this time being
careful to choose ones I could locate as accurately as possible on the 1/300,000 scale city maps in my world atlas; I measured and counted pixels horizontally and vertically on the images from the web site, and measured the diagonal distance on the atlas maps. And here are the results, which I am confident are within about 3% of the true numbers, and probably better than that in most cases.
Paris
CDG/Etoile - Gare d'Austerlitz
48 pix hor X 33 pix vert = 58.2 pix diagonal distance
map distance 20.7 mm -> 6.2 km = 3.9 miles
=> 14.9 pixels/mile
New York
Lower Manhattan curves - Rockaways junction
117 pix hor X 85 pix vert = 144.6 pix diagonal distance
map distance 71.5 mm -> 21.4 km = 13.3 miles
=> 10.9 pixels/mile
Washington
West Falls Church - Wheaton
47 pix hor X 56 pix vert = 73.1 pix diagonal distance
map distance 67 mm -> 20.1 km = 12.5 miles
=> 5.8 pixels/mile
London
Richmond - Epping
86 pix hor X 74 pix vert = 113.5 pix diagonal distance
map distance 128 mm -> 38.4 km = 23.9 miles
=> 4.7 pixels/mile
Chicago
O'Hare station - middle of Loop
60 pix hor X 31 pix vert = 67.5 pix diagonal distance
map distance 84 mm -> 25.2 km = 15.7 miles
=> 4.3 pixels/mile
Conclusion: the supposed uniformity of scale is no such thing. It is
an error or a fiction. And you can quote me on that.
--
Mark Brader "One might as well complain about the Sun
Toronto rising in the daytime instead of atnight,
msb@vex.net when we need it more." -- John Lawler
The first leg of the multibillion-dollar project, approved by voters in 2000, would connect Orlando and Tampa.
Gallagher said Thursday he will serve as chairman of Derail the Bullet Train. It will take 488,000 voter signatures to get the repeal effort on the ballot.
State Rep. Bob Allen, who is sponsoring the high-speed-rail repeal effort in the House, said Wednesday that he welcomed Gallagher's leadership.
"I think he'll help a lot," said Allen, R-Merritt Island. "He's the chief financial officer of the state, and he knows what the investment and the financial impacts are. He's a statewide figure who will bring attention to the issue."
Initially, the bullet train is to run between downtown Tampa and Orlando International Airport at speeds up to 125 mph, with stops in Lakeland and at Walt Disney World, starting in 2009. Other cities would be added later.
-----------
I don't get it. They just flatly ignore other laws. The 3 times more expense school size law isn't complied with, and they don't even start campaigns against them. Whys' this one different?
They're talking about another law limiting citizens right to amend the consitution now, and another law to oust any elected official who refuses to comply with them.
What a can of worms that's open now. If they can find 488,000 people in the panhandle and the space coast(the only two areas opposed) this thing will be back on the ballot.
Let's just hope their desparate measures are just that, remembering that "desparate" comes from a Latin word meaning "without hope."
Mark
And to think, the Bush is supposed to be pro-business. Who is more capitalist than Richard Branson?
Mark
I commend Gov. Bush on his reluctance to cave into the "Spend,Spend,Spend" agenda that seems to always be the
goal of the Liberal party. Don't waste MY Money!
ROB
Ft.Lauderdale, FL
How would you know it would not work if it hasen't been tried? LightRails are flourishing all over the country bringing life into communities that have been abandoned for decades. New hotels, hi-rise condo and jobs are being created with each new mile of rail. Ft. Lauderdale spread out because there was never any attempt to construct a central point so you're stuck driving miles just to get a newspaper.
Rail is going to come back because empty space to put another "freeway" are running out but the number of cars continue to grow each year.
>>>>Taking in the cost to build and operate the Metrorail, it would be less expensive per person to actually put the riders in a limo and drive them to thier destination. <<<
Where are your figures? How much is it costing to fix, build and police your highways? The freeway is not free.
>>>>>I commend Gov. Bush on his reluctance to cave into the "Spend,Spend,Spend" agenda that seems to always be the
goal of the Liberal party. Don't waste MY Money!<<<<<
The conservative is NOT fiscally conservative. Folks. These conservative folks in Florida are a joke. The current administration in Washington has not vetoed a single spending bill in the past four years. Futhermore, they are spending billions fighting two wars and now they want to waste a trillion dollars for a trip to Mars!! Meanwhile, my property taxes are going through the roof because Washington cut back on state aid and grants for education. The whole situation is insane and getting worse.
USA Today is saying that gas prices are going past 2 bucks this summer but I could care less since my Metrocard protects me against any price fuel price hikes. Those conservatives in Florida without any rail service will simply have to spend more of their hard earned bucks the next trip to the pump.
If gas goes up to $10.00 dollars a gallon, I will sleep like a bab thanks to rail transport.
I don't think this means that transit won't work in an area where sprawling suburban style land-use is the norm. Houston is a sprawlopolis, and rail has been a huge hit there, drawing as many riders as the trains can hold. What's more, it seems to be fostering the kind of denser development that will make transit optimally effective.
The coordination of transit and transit-friendly development will become ever more crucial as sprawl-as-a-rule becomes less and less tenable. Traffic jams, expensive gas, and 2-hour commutes will make the car-only world impractical and rail transit and transit-friendly development will be necessary.
Also, just because I hate to make this a liberal vs. conservative issue, there's a lot of money to be made in redeveloping the abandoned centers of sprawling cities into vibrant communities. Hey, if I owned real estate downtown I'd make a lot more money renting my space out to twenty businesses and a hundred residential tennants than use the space as a parking lot.
Mark
I'm glad you pointed out the lightrail project in Houston. The people who fought against this rail line were those in the burbs who were not going to receive any benefit. All they want are more highways and cheaper gas but those days are comming to an end. Folks. Smart growth and denser developement is the next wave of the future. It's just getting too expensive to provide essential services anymore to communities hundreds of miles in the middle of nowhere.
Urban sprawl was made possible on the assumption that fuel was aways going to be available and cheap. Not so anymore. Hundreds of millions are in debt up to their eyeballs because of this expensive auto-centric lifestyle.
We will one day return to this "denser developement" as was stated in a previous thread simply because we can no longer afford to sprawl anymore.
Or do you want to close down airports too?
Actually, I think a high-speed rail network lends itself to a place where there are lots of people living far from urban centers, because a train can add stops to serve outlying areas, which you can't really do with air travel. This works for areas with sprawl like Florida, or places like Texas that have a considerable rural population filling the countryside between its large cities.
I used to live in a small town, and it was a real pain to always have to drive two hours to get to the nearest major airport. A good rail system integrated into our airport system would have made my life a lot easier.
Mark
And my favorite. How many tourists? 65MILLION. Half of which are international. As you know in Miami the rental car agency is pretty big and powerful. International people aren't too fond of our highways, plus, you like driving around rentals and tourists? Nope. One rental almost plowed into a bus yesterday before jumping a median.(after i watched a pickup rearend a minivan). I can't stand driving around rentals, I dont' see what's so hard about driving them, but apparently the majority of people are so inept as it is.
Plus, i see you're point. I don't want a cent of transportation money going to Miami. Worse 3rd world drivers around, and y'all are so rude too. And you have bus and rail, park and ride, I have nothing.
With each new subdivision, commuting by motor car becomes increasing difficult. Sprawl is a machine that needs more land to feed it's supporters. The problem with this machine is the fact that we can't build enough roads, sewers, gas lines, schools, fire departments, police departments etc, bus service etc, etc fast enough once these subdivisons start to grow. People think it's cheaper to live out there until their property tax bill comes due!
All I know is, with traffic the way it is and 1.72 for gas(i think the buses are a lot fuller now than 2 months ago), jet-train would've been nice. Instead of talking about it for 20 years, if they built it we wouldn't have this need to spend billions on highways, just slightly less. I would be able to visit my old area. Plus I probably would've been able to commute to a dream job. What a shame.
Highway construction, by the way, only meet the demend of almost 20 years, and only increase the ratings from 'F' to 'D' Around here, and sometimes just an F+.
That because there already is a funding stream for roads. Their called motor fuel taxes, registration, operator license, fees and other user fees.
John
Thanks.
BTW I've seen some wags on the "R" line set up with the Brown Diamond in the lead motor.
wayne
til next time
Forest Hills, not Astoria.
The Z and the 9 only run on rush hours and they don't have the diamond designations either.
If there were a diamond-Z, there would also have to be a circle-Z that ran at the same time but made different stops.
The M in south Brooklyn is never signed as a diamond-M, on the trains or on station signage, nor is it ever supposed to be signed as a diamond-M. The rush hour 4 is never signed as a diamond-4, on the trains or on station signage, nor is it ever supposed to be signed as a diamond-4.
The map needs to find a new symbol to denote rush hour service.
Until recently, the map showed the diamond-5 rather than the circle-5 in Brooklyn, running to Flatbush. There's only one major problem with that: the diamond-5 refers specifically to the peak-direction trains to/from Nereid rather than Dyre, and those trains generally run to/from Utica or New Lots, not Flatbush. So, while there is a diamond-5, and while the map showed a diamond-5 in Brooklyn, the real live diamond-5's specifically didn't go where the map claimed that only the diamond-5 went!
No, the use of the diamond in those situations is proper, the intended purpose of the concept when first introduced. Only in the past decade or so has the diamond's meaning been expanded to indicate things outside the rush hour only connotation. I think the diamond has evolved because there are so few rush-hour only routes in the system today as opposed to 1979. It's ironic that the only 2 in existence today never use the diamond on the map (Z, 9).
That service did not last a long time. The (W) then started to make all local stops in Astoria.
The roll signs have both. If one is showing on the train it is becasue whoever was changing the sign didn't put the right bullet up.
Let's just hope their desparate measures are just that, remembering that "desparate" comes from a Latin word meaning "without hope."
Mark
And to think, the Bush is supposed to be pro-business. Who is more capitalist than Richard Branson?
Mark
There's a page on it here.
Not saying though that the subways are 100% safe, but then again, anywhere you go you should remember to watch your back.
Regards,
Jimmy
The last big accident with multiple fatalities was probably the Union Square derailment about 15 years ago on the lexington line (4/5/6). The motorman was drunk, came in too fast and the train jumped the track. One car turned sideways, barrel-rolled through the tunnel and 15 people died. The motorman had been missing stops all along before the incident due to his inebriation. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail - not sure if he's out yet.
Not 15 people dies just only 6 people died in the frist cars split in half & over 150 people hurts.
David
Damn.
- Charles Darwin
Mark
It was a report by David Diaz.
As of 8pm 3/4, there is a link at the web page below that shows a video feed of the report.
http://cbsnewyork.com/siteSearch/topstories_story_064110906.html
If an officer has reasonable cause to believe you have committed an offense (which is not the case with most subway photographers), the officer has the right to demand identification so that he or she issue sthe summons to the correct person. If the person in question fails to provide ID, the officer may take the person into custody pending identification of the alleged miscreant.
That doesn't necessarily mean it's a crime not to show ID. I sure hope the court says it's not. But if an officer has a reasonable you've done something illegal and you don't show ID, you can almost certainly be detained, even though failure to show ID is not a crime itself.
Except that cops seem to think that subway photography is illegal.
Certainly. However, the officer should state that he/she believes you have done whatever and is writing you up and therefore needs to see identification.
So I believe Hiibel was within his rights to ask why, and deserve an explanation before offering Id. Notice at the end, the refusing to produce an Id was the only charge left.
I hope Mimi Hiibel wins an assault case against the police officers involved.
I think it was just low ridership.
The PATH was there first, is a two track lion. Call them the "express" tracks if you wish.
When the IND was built they kinda sorta used the local track positions, but are somewhat lower than the PATH, The tracks being sorta under the existing PATH platforms.
The 6th Avenue line does indeed go UP from W4th Street, but remember that they are in the 4th basement as it were at that point. The do indeed go down at 34th Street, they gotta get UNDER the Broadway Lion.
Elias
Looks much like 14th and 23rd otherwise.
Until next time...
Anon_e_mouse
Those looked like emergency exits from the IND.
Here is what occured during construction of the 6 Avenue Line.
The H&M 14 Street Station was cut back at the north end where it passes over the BMT 14 Street Line (L Train)and extended at the south end. As part of this work two unfinished passageways at the south end of the IND 14 Street platforms were built and sealed off. Eventually these became the free transfer point to the BMT. (1967.68 +/-).
23 Street: The new subway cut off access to the H&M platforms so new pedestrian underpasses had to be built.
Between 26 and 30 Streets the IND local tracks are in deep rock tunnels. The lowest point on the line is at 29 Street, 67 feet below street grade.
The original H&M 33 Street Terminal was shutdown for three years in orders to rebuild it at a higher elevation to enable the IND 6 Avenue Line to pass over the PRR Tunnels at 32 and 33 Streets. The roof of the railroad tunnel was removed and replaced with a special shallow roof which also serves as the floor of the new subway.
A "new" 33 Street Terminal was built for the H&M but it actually one block south of the old location at 32 Street although the 33 Street name was retained.
When the new "33 Street" Terminal opened 28 Street was closed. (I don't have the exact dates in front on me), but the IND 6 Avenue Line opened for service on December 15, 1940. 19 Street was closed in 1954.
Sources:
1) SIXTH AVENUE SUBWAY TWENTY YEARS AGO by Bob Olmstead, NYD Bulletin, January 1961.
2) THE HUDSON & MANHATTAN RAILROAD REVISTED by Paul Carleton, D Carleton Railbooks 1990.
Larry, ReadbirdR33
1) So what happened at 19 St? How was the station altered?
2) What was the 23 St H&M station originally like? Was it a narrow pedestrian tunnel from the building line of 6 Av to the center of 6 Av where the tracks are? Or was the station much larger and made use of all the space between the building line and the center of the avenue?
Incidentally, it looks like a lot of our questions could have been answered had we attend the tour described below. Did anyone know about this? Was it posted on SubTalk?
Tour
MIRACLES UNDER 34TH STREET
Sunday, March 14, 12 Noon
From the newest Sixth Avenue station, at 57th Street, to the oldest, at West 4th Street, this tour will explore the complexities of “wrapping” the 1940 IND subway around existing tracks. Obstacles to the new construction were the Port Authority Trans Hudson line (PATH), built in 1911, the Broadway BMT line, built in 1918, Pennsylvania Station tunnels, and the 6th Avenue el, built in 1878 — making this line a marvel of design and construction. The tour with Subway Historian Joe Cunningham will also encompass the complex 14th, 23rd, and 34th Street stations and the deep-bore express tracks that opened in 1967 between 34th and West 4th Streets.
Reservations required: $15 Museum members, $20 non-members.
Benjamin Franklin would work even better.
alas, I was being serious - there was far too much information being swirled about my head on the tour for me to absorb most of it. but I guarantee that Joe Cunningham (tour leader) would know, if anyone knew how to contact him....
Then, at 96th Street, an unusual five-car work train idling on the downtown express track Two pairs of Redbirds with #7 and 111 Street rollsigns, sandwiching special car OS02. The consist headed uptown, switching to the downtown Broadway local track my train just came in on.
Anybody know what was going on?
Here's a picture of it.
And here's the train it was running with. Needless to say, R22's.
Were does Redbirds ML or WF?
Acela
So with the Master Lever pushed in, and the operator gone home for the night, what does it become...a Relay Room?
Maybe the definition could be this:
Towers have local control from an interlocker [EP/Elec/NX/UR] with no provision for remote control.
Auxiliary / Satellite Towers have local control from an interlocker, and control may be transferred to a remote point.
Relay Rooms (mainline RR equiv= "Control Points") are designed to be remoted at all times, and have no provision for control by a tower operator, only local emergency control from a maintainer's panel
Take Queensboro Plaza Master Tower. The "Interlocking", i.e.
the vital assembly of relays which requires the operation of
signals and switches in pre-determined order to prevent conflicting
movements, is no where near the place that people call the "tower".
It is in various relay rooms out in the field. Maybe big-time
railroads would just call it a "dispatch center", but the TA
calls it a Master Tower.
Where is the QPMT in relation to the tracks?
QBMT is up on the structure just south of the station. Rawson still controls the IRT/BMT inter-dimensional X-over
So let's beat this dead horse again, just for excercise. Exactly why is the TA a rail-way and not a rail-road?
Don't say FRA.
None of the system's stations or rails extend beyond city limits; therefore the system does not qualify to be called a railroad. New York City Transit is simply a network consisting of subways and buses.
If the subways truly were a railroad, it'd be getting as much state aid as the Long Island Rail Road and MetroNorth Railroad do. The fact that customers pay more than 60% of the cost for their ride shows that is truly not the case.
The TA does not fit the definition of Railroad as drafted by the FRA.
I THINK QBMT has:
11th St cut to Ditmars [excluding Rawson]
36th St through Court Sq/X-town, 23/Ely, and Lex/63 respectively.
If the new signals at 111 are done, then just a few modems could put QBMT in control of that part of Corona. I haven't been up in there in over a year...
There must be some examples of US&S Model 14 satellite towers?
I can think of one, but it's OOS now I think. "Do you remember
this voice": "Hey Dave, I got a question, I turned this white
lever, and the darn'dest thing....."
It can't be a satellite tower unless control can be remoted, so all of the towers like Kings Hwy[Culver], 215, and the Concourse towers can't be considered as satellites.
Their master levers cut out interlocking features on the middle track so traffic can be swung with the tower closed, but there is no provision for remote control.
"...And this week on the Hide-Away, the panel discusses timing issues in UR selector circuits. Later, a motorman who claims to have seen a bottom green and taken a diverging route..."
But I did, I did! Sitting behind X60 (north of 135/Lenox) a few years back with a 3 train because of a switch problem at Lenox Terminal/Yard. After 20 minutes or so, Lenox Tower gave me a bottom green and I took the train to the right over the switch to 149/Grand Concourse.
This banner image appeared as I loaded the NYCSubway.org home page.
Seeing it there brought a smile to my face. :D
- Amanda
Care to explain your reasoning?
Just go and ride it, unless the costs are an issue (which is the real reason I think).
Disregard if posted already.
- Amanda
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4287529315
However, I only have one picture in there. I'll be contributing more in the future.
edk256
For starters, what kind of camera are you using? Secondly, what train were you on? I bet it was a R40 N, right?
If I approach you nicely, politely and QUITE respectfully, is it unreasonable for me to expect the same treatment?
And don't say that SA's (as a whole) don't have attitide problems, because that's just a lie.
I'd also like to rant about the 6 train, but you've all had enough of that.
Any thoughts?
And don't say that SA's (as a whole) don't have attitide problems, because that's just a lie.
I'd also like to rant about the 6 train, but you've all had enough of that.
Any thoughts?
most dont.
Some do.
Those that do should be fired
I was forced to jump a turnstile to get home. Lovely.
Speaking of which, you'd be surprised how many 1 stations LACK the 1/9 timetable. Asshats. <--- I like that word; if you're wondering, Blair made it up/used it.
We discovered it was the last one when Transit Chuck Greene asked for one and she actually looked under things, unsuccessfully, for another box full of The Map.
She was very pleasant and helpful.
Anyone know the real story...(Todd G., maybe).
Most inbound North Station trains are six cars, with seating of about 140 pax per car. Some have a few empty seats, others have standees. But a good average is about 800 pax per train. Assuming crush load on a bus is 60, you need about 13 buses per train. With half hourly service inbound and outbound on the Lowell Line during rush hours, you'd need a minimum of three sets of 13 buses, or 39 buses to provide service. With all of the other DNC-related activities, I doubt the T has the equipment to spare. So I would expect that the T will charter school buses, which for the most part are idle during the summer.
Besides, aren't you an advocate for a 7-day V? I am too.
I wonder why you don't pursue your pro-V stance over at the Diaries. Then again, they always give the same asshat response:
The V is useless.
Kill the V.
The G is being inconvenienced because of all this.
The E is too crowded.
There are less F trains/the F route isn't as appealing.
I tire of these mantras. Most people easily misconceive this to be the case, since they're the only ones who actually have an issue. Of course, it's most likely a misinterpretation of what's really going on and most people know the V is doing fine.
45 seconds to go over two switches? No cleanout time.
And what about the time it locks out the other tracks. Or is TPH more important than safety? Where do crews clean out. If a door gets stuck and you have to hit the roadbed how long will you give the person walking the mainline during rush hour?
This can happens anywhere and anytime, not only at turning G if they
reach QP.
It does happen all the time at CTL. But if an end door is stuck it is not a big deal to go back a car and walk the roadbed. It kills time but it is a fairly safe move.
On 5 track, trains will be whizzing by you, not a safe move.
G Arrives at 7:18
R Scheduled to arrive at 7:21-23
E Arrives at 7:24
V Arrives at 7:21. In order for the G to get the good relay. It has to leave at 7:22.Or at 7:20. But to make a connection, a transfer to the V can be done. They could send in the G into D5 track. It has 3 minutes to clean out. And get in the new crew then switch over to D5 Track, by 7:24. That's 6 minutes!
Now the relay
E arrives southbound around 7:25-7:27.
V arrives at Qns plaza around 7:31
R arrives at 7:29.
The G can arrive on the Southbound Express Track at 7:28, and depart as the R is arriving, or let a connection happen. Then the R can depart and the G follow after. Since the V arrives at 7:31 and the next E is at 7:30-32.
Now this assumes the E, R, G, V follow the schedule, and everything works according to plan. But I do show that it can be done, and have enough time to get passengers off the train. This would give the G more time to clean out the train then people at Brooklyn Bridge, South Ferry.
Remember, in this situation, QP is the G's last stop. It needn't stay to have the V across the platform from it. Have the G leave at 7:20 so that the R can come in, and have the X-over clear so the V can use it.
[It has 3 minutes to clean out.]
In the situation I suggest, it has 2. There are only 4 cars, anyway.
Now do it for the other scheduled trains!
>R Scheduled to arrive at 7:21-23
First this is not acceptable. SB would accuse you of being a NYCT OPS planning supervisor.
Second 45 seconds is too low and does not add in the time it takes for switches to lock.
While the G is crossing over they will not let another train on EITHER track N/B for safety.
If you do assume a 7:20 crossover what happens to the 7:20 E? It does run 4 mins NB at times.
At 7:28 you are expecting an R, G and an E.
Personally I wouldn't like the idea. If a G train goes BIE while crossing to/from D5 you're plugging up D2 and 4 or D1 and 3 meaning you've lost ALL service in that direction at Queens Plaza.
http://www.fakeisthenewreal.org/subway/index.html
Cool huh?
www.forgotten-ny.com
See thread starting here. Unfortunately some of us have noticed rather obvious scaling errors!
www.forgotten-ny.com
http://www.nycrail.com/amb/board1/2933.html
I think this shot would good a little earlier in the day, if the sun is over your right shoulder. It would warm up the color in the train and maybe give some good hues to the sky.
John
* courtesy of forgotten-ny.com
CLICK ON THE IMAGE BELOW TO ENLARGE IN A NEW WINDOW
Draw a line across Canal and stretch the map vertically at that point. It'll give you a lot more room to work with, and you can correct the connecting angles in Queens.
1972 NYC subway map
Mark
That's absolutely correct. It was in 1933.
The man's name was Harry Beck.
(Sorry -can't do Links )
A
AA
CC
E
1
2
3
EE
N
QB
RR
NX
B
D
F
KK
4
5
6
JJ
M
RJ
QJ
7
8
GG
HH
LL
MJ
SS
PS - sorry for the UK link - I can't find a US version.
The 1973 was perhaps the best looking NYC subway map ever, but (like most schematic maps) was difficult to use because it completely ignored geography. It was even stricture than this pretty version - there were mainly 90 degree angles! Broadway was a zig-zag, and worst of all, the station at 51st & 7th Ave was WEST of 50th & 8th!!!
When I was in London & Paris, the schematic was great for following & connecting lines, but my main maps were the rarer ones that were based upon the street systems, like NYC's current version.
In London most people use the A-Z map to get around on foot on the surface, but the tube map to plan their journeys.
I commend Gov. Bush on his reluctance to cave into the "Spend,Spend,Spend" agenda that seems to always be the
goal of the Liberal party. Don't waste MY Money!
ROB
Ft.Lauderdale, FL
How would you know it would not work if it hasen't been tried? LightRails are flourishing all over the country bringing life into communities that have been abandoned for decades. New hotels, hi-rise condo and jobs are being created with each new mile of rail. Ft. Lauderdale spread out because there was never any attempt to construct a central point so you're stuck driving miles just to get a newspaper.
Rail is going to come back because empty space to put another "freeway" are running out but the number of cars continue to grow each year.
>>>>Taking in the cost to build and operate the Metrorail, it would be less expensive per person to actually put the riders in a limo and drive them to thier destination. <<<
Where are your figures? How much is it costing to fix, build and police your highways? The freeway is not free.
>>>>>I commend Gov. Bush on his reluctance to cave into the "Spend,Spend,Spend" agenda that seems to always be the
goal of the Liberal party. Don't waste MY Money!<<<<<
The conservative is NOT fiscally conservative. Folks. These conservative folks in Florida are a joke. The current administration in Washington has not vetoed a single spending bill in the past four years. Futhermore, they are spending billions fighting two wars and now they want to waste a trillion dollars for a trip to Mars!! Meanwhile, my property taxes are going through the roof because Washington cut back on state aid and grants for education. The whole situation is insane and getting worse.
USA Today is saying that gas prices are going past 2 bucks this summer but I could care less since my Metrocard protects me against any price fuel price hikes. Those conservatives in Florida without any rail service will simply have to spend more of their hard earned bucks the next trip to the pump.
If gas goes up to $10.00 dollars a gallon, I will sleep like a bab thanks to rail transport.
I don't think this means that transit won't work in an area where sprawling suburban style land-use is the norm. Houston is a sprawlopolis, and rail has been a huge hit there, drawing as many riders as the trains can hold. What's more, it seems to be fostering the kind of denser development that will make transit optimally effective.
The coordination of transit and transit-friendly development will become ever more crucial as sprawl-as-a-rule becomes less and less tenable. Traffic jams, expensive gas, and 2-hour commutes will make the car-only world impractical and rail transit and transit-friendly development will be necessary.
Also, just because I hate to make this a liberal vs. conservative issue, there's a lot of money to be made in redeveloping the abandoned centers of sprawling cities into vibrant communities. Hey, if I owned real estate downtown I'd make a lot more money renting my space out to twenty businesses and a hundred residential tennants than use the space as a parking lot.
Mark
I'm glad you pointed out the lightrail project in Houston. The people who fought against this rail line were those in the burbs who were not going to receive any benefit. All they want are more highways and cheaper gas but those days are comming to an end. Folks. Smart growth and denser developement is the next wave of the future. It's just getting too expensive to provide essential services anymore to communities hundreds of miles in the middle of nowhere.
Urban sprawl was made possible on the assumption that fuel was aways going to be available and cheap. Not so anymore. Hundreds of millions are in debt up to their eyeballs because of this expensive auto-centric lifestyle.
We will one day return to this "denser developement" as was stated in a previous thread simply because we can no longer afford to sprawl anymore.
Or do you want to close down airports too?
Actually, I think a high-speed rail network lends itself to a place where there are lots of people living far from urban centers, because a train can add stops to serve outlying areas, which you can't really do with air travel. This works for areas with sprawl like Florida, or places like Texas that have a considerable rural population filling the countryside between its large cities.
I used to live in a small town, and it was a real pain to always have to drive two hours to get to the nearest major airport. A good rail system integrated into our airport system would have made my life a lot easier.
Mark
And my favorite. How many tourists? 65MILLION. Half of which are international. As you know in Miami the rental car agency is pretty big and powerful. International people aren't too fond of our highways, plus, you like driving around rentals and tourists? Nope. One rental almost plowed into a bus yesterday before jumping a median.(after i watched a pickup rearend a minivan). I can't stand driving around rentals, I dont' see what's so hard about driving them, but apparently the majority of people are so inept as it is.
Plus, i see you're point. I don't want a cent of transportation money going to Miami. Worse 3rd world drivers around, and y'all are so rude too. And you have bus and rail, park and ride, I have nothing.
With each new subdivision, commuting by motor car becomes increasing difficult. Sprawl is a machine that needs more land to feed it's supporters. The problem with this machine is the fact that we can't build enough roads, sewers, gas lines, schools, fire departments, police departments etc, bus service etc, etc fast enough once these subdivisons start to grow. People think it's cheaper to live out there until their property tax bill comes due!
All I know is, with traffic the way it is and 1.72 for gas(i think the buses are a lot fuller now than 2 months ago), jet-train would've been nice. Instead of talking about it for 20 years, if they built it we wouldn't have this need to spend billions on highways, just slightly less. I would be able to visit my old area. Plus I probably would've been able to commute to a dream job. What a shame.
Highway construction, by the way, only meet the demend of almost 20 years, and only increase the ratings from 'F' to 'D' Around here, and sometimes just an F+.
-Robert King
So that propaganda video had the desired effect!
The $1 billion is to be spread over five years, but the announcement is timed for the 50th anniversary and a federal election.
http://www.sra.gov.uk/publications/consultation/IKF_consultation/IKF_doc is a PDF file titled "Integrated Kent Franchise Train Service Specification", a document published by the Strategic Rail Authority.
It is a proposal for a new train timetable for the whole of the South Eastern commuter lines from London to the Kent coast.
The main goals are to provide a regular and more reliable services. Regularity would be achieved by having two distinct types of service — those that run all day and those that run in the peak hours only. Reliability would be improved through the "critical" junctions of London Bridge and Lewisham. I get the impression that the trains would run at the same minutes past each hour, rather than the present 22-minutely cycle with ad-hoc variations.
Services would have two digit identifications with a terminal prefix (CX, CS, VE, BL and SP), for Charing Cross, Cannon Street, Victoria (east), Blackfriars and St. Pancras.
The plan includes 10 tph that would run to St. Pancras via the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL).
I hope to post more details when I have had time to study the 60-page proposal; it looks very interesting.
I hope to post more details when I have had time to study the 60-page proposal; it looks very interesting.
This is a summary of what I have learned from the Integrated Kent Franchise train service specification.
Important note: Core services run all day, and are expressed in TPH. Peak extras are expressed in TPD.
TPD means trains per day during the 3-hour peak period, or the 2-hour peak period on the CTRL.
The plan provides the following services, summarized by London terminal.
Core services (running all day) as follows (in TPH):
VE Victoria 12
BL Blackfriars 2
CX Charing Cross 16
CS Cannon Street 14
SP St. Pancras 4
Additional peak services as follows (in TPD):
VE Victoria 7
BL Blackfriars 6
CX Charing Cross 11
CS Cannon Street 14
SP St. Pancras 10
Based on the above, max hourly services to Charing Cross and Cannon Street would be reduced, depending on how the peak extras were distributed over the three-hour peak periods. A reduced service is made possible by the CTRL.
The plan provides the following services, summarized by zone:
Inner suburban core 24 TPH
Longer distance core 24 TPH
Inner suburban peak extras 12 TPD
Longer distance peak extras 36 TPD
The core inner suburban services mostly go to Cannon Street; the core longer distance services mostly go to Charing Cross.
St. Pancras trains will run via the CTRL, and they are called CTRL DS (Channel Tunnel Rail Link Domestic Services).
CTRL DS will use high-speed rolling stock.
CTRL DS services would be as follows.
Core services:
SP01 Faversham and Broadstairs 1 TPH
SP02 Faversham and Broadstairs 1 TPH
SP03 Ashford, Ramsgate and Margate 1 TPH
SP04 Ashford and Folkestone 1 TPH
Peak extras:
SP05 Faversham and Broadstairs 2 TPD
SP06 Faversham and Broadstairs 1 TPD
SP07 Rochester 2 TPD
SP08 Rochester 1 TPD
In peak hours SP03 and SP04 divide at Ashford, 6 cars going to Folkestone and 6 cars going to Ramsgate and Margate.
For safety reasons, high-speed CTRL DS trains will not run through the Shakespeare tunnel from Folkestone to Dover.
Responses to ikfresponses@sra.gov.uk or by mail, no later than 23 April 2004.
I take it that 'BL' routes are those terminating at Blackfriars, and that there will still be some additional Kent-bound services through the Snow Hill tunnel if Thameslink 2000 ever comes to pass. (The proposal is to serve both Dartford and Ashford under that franchise, which is discrete from the new Kent franchise.) Would the reduction of Kentish CX and CS services through London Bridge enable significantly more (or at least faster) Thameslink trains, without requiring the rebuilding and expansion of the Borough junction?
Does the document make any mention of when it hopes to implement this timetable?
I agree that those coastal areas will benefit greatly from the CTRL DS, and the population of Ashford is growing very fast.
some additional Kent-bound services through the Snow Hill tunnel if Thameslink 2000 ever comes to pass.
The report makes only a passing mention of Thameslink 2000 and the service plan certainly doesn't take it into account. I don't know if Thameslink 2000 services would be additional to the South Eastern services or merely replacements. My guess is that the entire service plan would be revised before the opening of Thameslink 2000.
Would the reduction of Kentish CX and CS services through London Bridge enable significantly more (or at least faster) Thameslink trains, without requiring the rebuilding and expansion of the Borough junction?
The reduction of CX and CS services is based only my own counting. It isn't actually mentioned in the report. Perhaps they left a few empty slots for Thameslink. But the emphasis of the report is on the need for regular and reliable services.
Does the document make any mention of when it hopes to implement this timetable?
I didn't see any but we can safely assume that it won't be implemented before the completion of CTRL, due in 2007!
Since Connex was relieved of its duties, the franchise has been operated by "South Eastern Trains" which is a body created by the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), as a temporary measure.
The SRA plans to rewrite the timetable for the entire franchise, something that has not been done for 40 years.
The Thameslink 2000 project, if approved, would provide more tracks through London Bridge, and grade separated junctions. But it is unlikely to be implemented before 2012. So the completion of CTRL and the introduction of CTRL Domestic Services in 2007 is a good opportunity to introduce more regular services throughout the South Eastern area.
The purpose of the plan is to make the best use of existing resources, so no serious infrastructure changes are planned.
The plan is described in the PDF document http://www.sra.gov.uk/publications/consultation/IKF_consultation/IKF_doc
Some lines would be served by fewer terminals, which would undoubtedly be the cause of complaints by a vocal minority. SRA is open to suggestions based on reasoned arguments.
I have counted the trains arriving in London from the South Eastern Trains lines between 7 AM and 10 AM, and compared the totals with the SRA proposed service plan (3 hours of core service plus peak period extras). Here are the results.
Trains per three-hour peak periodPresentPlanned
VE Victoria (East) 36 42
BL Blackfriars 17 12
CX Charing Cross 67 59
CS Cannon Street 52 56
SP St. Pancras CTRL Domestic Services 0 18
Total 172 187
Some CX trains are marked "LB" meaning "London Bridge station stops may be omitted if no platform is available". This may seem surprising for a station that handles 269,000 passengers per day, but the platform shortage is not new.
On the whole I like this plan, but I prefer my own plan for Charing Cross and Cannon Street which is operationally simpler and would drastically reduce the number of trains whose paths would cross.
I would separate the Charing Cross and Cannon Street lines through London Bridge by having Charing Cross serve the fast tracks and Cannon Street serve the slow tracks. People wanting the other terminal would change at London Bridge.
To allow all trains to stop at London Bridge, resolving the platform shortage, I would have platforms 4, 5 and 6, serving Charing Cross, operate the same way as platforms 1, 2 and 3, serving Cannon Street. The middle platform would be used reversibly in the peak direction to allow plenty of dwell time. Track 7 (which has no platform) would no longer be needed.
There are other things which look bad in this proposal, but I'm going to have to read it again to make more detailed comments.
I think they plan to procure new, faster, rolling stock for CTRL Domestic Services, to run off both third rail and catenary.
it would break regulations to run them between Folkestone and Dover.
They do not plan to run CTRL Domestic Services to Dover until such time as safety issues can be resolved.
I'm going to have to read it again to make more detailed comments.
I am very pleased that you are taking a look at this plan, because it's quite far-reaching and has implications elsewhere.
One important aspect of this plan is the concept of having two types of service — "core" services that run at the same minutes past each hour all day including the peak hours, and "peak period extra" services where trains are added as needed.
Some people are saying that the existing (highly irregular) timetable has evolved over the years and it's the best that can be done. Those are of course people who would be inconvenienced in some way. In other words "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
The Hayes line would suffer from both complaints. Instead of a train every 22 minutes to Charing Cross and another every 22 minutes to Cannon Street, they would get a train every 15 minutes to Cannon Street and no service to Charing Cross.
Even that might not be too bad if trains were lengthened from 10 cars to 12, but the plan makes no mention of longer trains.
The SRA has tried to simplify the timetable, which now looks good on paper but it is bound to upset a lot of people.
LTUC's main objections are:
1. SRA overestimated ridership of the new Channel Tunnel Rail Link Domestic Services, and cut "classic" services too much.
2. SRA has re-routed the services via London Bridge to Charing Cross and Cannon Street terminals by serving some lines from Cannon Street only and others from Charing Cross only, contrary to passenger demand, which is split 50/50 between the two on each line. This simplification is called "unworkable" because it would cause severe overcrowding at London Bridge station, where passengers would have to change trains to reach the terminal of their choice.
LTUC recommends keeping the existing peak hour suburban services until an origin and destination survey is done in 2010, or failing that, re-thinking that part of the plan based on providing both Charing Cross and Cannon street service on each line.
London Bridge high level station is so congested that it would be too risky to impose such a drastic change of service until such time as the bottleneck can be relieved, as it would be by Thameslink 2000 (which could be completed by 2012 at earliest). Meanwhile the SRA should stick with the "untidy" peak-hour timetable that actually does work. It's untidy in that it lacks regularity and the only discernable pattern is that some trains run every 22 minutes throughout a 66 minute "hour".
Apart from the peak services via London Bridge, the rest of the SRA plan can be used as a starting point.
Meanwhile they should complete the suburban platform lengthening program (from 10 to 12-car trains) begun under British Rail, which was abandoned when nearly complete. That would be the cheapest and most effective way to increase capacity.
I have studied the SRA proposals in detail, and I agree with the LTUC objections and most of their conclusions.
SRA wants to run regular trains at the same minutes past each hour throughout the day, with peak hour extras added as needed. This would result in unbalanced peak hour loads, with some trains being more overcrowded than others. It would be better to deviate from the regular pattern in the peak hours, as does the present untidy peak hour service. The official policy of simplifying services is outweighed in this case by the need to match supply and demand.
Tuesday Las Vegas Sun article says 30-day testing may start this week; must be completed successfully before open to the public.
The article mentions several startup glitches that have occurred; also mentions that the prime contractor, Bombardier Transportation, could face financial penalties for missing a March 31 deadline.
Peace,
ANDEE
I am happy he is OK and hopefully he has learned a valuable, if not hard, lesson in safety.
After all, why would they tell you that you account will be closed in 72 hours for "improper usage" when a real email will inform you that your account will be terminated effective immediately?
":)"
" Hi!"
And the kicker...
"Your website"
Of course I had to open those, it could be relevant and/or important, but Macs are immune to the majority of viruses.
DO NOT open the attachment!
It was from an address : administration@qc.edu!!!!!!!!
It was also about improper usage. I checked the attachment and it had a virus on it. Erased it. How theu got hold of my email address is beyond me since I never used it.
Although, not a virus, I almost fell for a scam because it was so convincing. I use PAYPAL when paying for ebay auctions I've won.
I received an e-mail stating that my security needs to be updated. I saw various fields for social security and credit card numbers to be filled in. I knew something was fishy. So I logged onto PAYPAL, and saw a notice about a scam going around prompting customers to give sensitive information to them. They warned about greetings such as "Dear Paypal customer" etc. Sure enough, that's the way the e-mail began.
The entire e-mail right down to the Paypal logo and copyright look so convincing. The giveaway was the URL in the address bar. It didn't say www.paypal.com/, there was a bunch of numbers and slashes.
BEWARE ! Don't fall for this and other scams !
Bill "Newkirk"