SubTalk Archive 3/1997

Thread title: Looking for Subway rolls (753980)
Started on Sat Mar 1 18:09:56 1997, by Josh Blackman

Subject: Looking for Subway rolls
Message Number: 753980
Posted by: Josh Blackman
Date: Sat Mar 1 18:09:56 1997

I'm looking for those fabric rolls the NYC subway conductor would wind wind to show the subway's destination; now they use electronic destination signs; Know where I can find a lot of these fabric destination rolls? or just one? Please let me know! Thanks for thinking about it! Josh Blackman 212.463.6261 joshb@panix.com
- Subject: Re: Looking for Subway rolls
- Message Number: 754023
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Sat Mar 1 20:36:22 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Looking for Subway rolls posted by Josh Blackman on March 01, 1997 at 18:09:56: When I was at the Shore Line Trolley Museum's New York Transit Days last fall, they had a number of these for sale. Just the rolls, not the mechanisms. Might want to give them a call, see if they still have them.

Thread title: Question about abolishing 2 fare zones (754014)
Started on Sat Mar 1 20:00:55 1997, by Richard Hu

Subject: Question about abolishing 2 fare zones
Message Number: 754014
Posted by: Richard Hu
Date: Sat Mar 1 20:00:55 1997

I currently ride the Q train from Brooklyn and take the B4 bus. I am wondering how Guilliani's proposed abolition of 2 fare zones is going to be carried out... Are riders going to be able to get tokens from transfering busses or transfers that are accepted at the subway station? Another words, B4 doesn't go into the subway station but stops a block away...hows the transfer going to happen... Please e-mail me if have answer THANKS
- Subject: Re: Question about abolishing 2 fare zones
- Message Number: 754063
- Posted by: Sylvain Ringuette
- Date: Mon Mar 3 00:42:16 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Question about abolishing 2 fare zones posted by Richard Hu on March 01, 1997 at 20:00:55: You will have to use a Metrocard. The information will be incoded on the card. But I don't know exactly how.
  - Subject: Re: Question about abolishing 2 fare zones
  - Message Number: 754157
  - Posted by: Steve
  - Date: Mon Mar 3 21:27:51 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Question about abolishing 2 fare zones posted by Sylvain Ringuette on March 03, 1997 at 00:42:16: The two fare zones will only be abolished for intermodal use (transferring from bus to subway or vice-versa). When a person uses their metrocard to board a bus, the card serial # and the time will be recorded in the metro-card computer. It can then be used up to two hours later to enter a subway station (only). After two hours, the free transfer is lost and another fare will be required...

Thread title: BAHN Simulations (754091)
Started on Mon Mar 3 09:19:08 1997, by Iain Logan

Subject: BAHN Simulations
Message Number: 754091
Posted by: Iain Logan
Date: Mon Mar 3 09:19:08 1997

Congratulations on this new development Dave! I'd welcome any feedback on the BAHN network simulations I've contributed to the BAHN page. All the best, Iain
- Subject: BAHN Simulations
- Message Number: 754102
- Posted by: Iain Logan
- Date: Mon Mar 3 09:19:22 1997
  
  Congratulations on this new development Dave! I'd welcome any feedback on the BAHN network simulations I've contributed to the BAHN page. All the best, Iain

Thread title: Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac (754124)
Started on Mon Mar 3 13:28:15 1997, by David M. Razler

Subject: Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac
Message Number: 754124
Posted by: David M. Razler
Date: Mon Mar 3 13:28:15 1997

In Reply to: [6]Re: light bulbs posted by Philip Nasadowski on March 03, 1997 at 06:25:38: OK, AC voltage is measured (generally) in RMS, or average voltage (leaving out the math of Root Mean Square calculation), while DC voltage is "true" voltage. That said, an incandescent bulb *should* glow at the same level either under the same DC or AC voltage, if the AC voltage is not at some outrageously high frequency. Home voltage is 60 Hz, which is, for many purposes, practically DC. Be that as it may, the reason one tried to steal the bare incandescent bulbs that lit the older NYC cars is that they cost more at the time, and during some periods, notably World War II, were scarce. Whether the bulbs worked optimally or not wouldn't really matter.
- Subject: Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac
- Message Number: 754200
- Posted by: philip nasadowski
- Date: Tue Mar 4 02:06:46 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:28:15: So as long as the bulb is rated 120 DC, it'll run on A.C. at 120 too. I think the reason why they are 130, not 120, is because the tunnel lighting that you see with lights in groups of 5 or 6, is D.C., from the third rail. I think quite a bit of the origional lighting was that way, and it made sense back then, since D.C. was in MUCH more widespread use back then. As was 25 cycle A.C, I have an old RCA radio that is able to run on 25 cycle lines.
  - Subject: Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac
  - Message Number: 754570
  - Posted by: Steve
  - Date: Mon Mar 10 09:47:56 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: light bulbs/resistors dc vs ac posted by philip nasadowski on March 04, 1997 at 02:06:46: Incadescent lamps used in groups of five (called a 'Bank of Lights) is used in the tunnels as will as in the shops (for troubleshooting rail car problems) . The nominal 3rd rail voltage is 600 VDC but comonly runs to 650 volts, hence 130 volts per lamp. The idea is not to get maximum illumination, just longevity. When used with colors, yellow or green, they become critical safety items, telling the train operator he is entering or clear of a work zone and to sound his whistle/horn at the appropriate times.

Thread title: Grand Central Shuttle Lights (754285)
Started on Tue Mar 4 18:24:09 1997, by Gary Jacobi

Subject: Grand Central Shuttle Lights
Message Number: 754285
Posted by: Gary Jacobi
Date: Tue Mar 4 18:24:09 1997

Sorry about the double posting on the Second IND system; I am an incompetent typist! I would like to take this opportunity to answer a question posed some time ago on the usenet, concerning the system of lights guiding one from GC-Lex to the Shuttle Platforms. THey were there long before the 1964 World Fair. They might indeed have been switched to blue at that time; NYC did all sorts of cornball stuff to try to save that fair, but only turning peoples mindsets back to 1939 could have succeeded. Anyway, the lights were there in the 50's, and looked pretty old and cruddy even then. I always presumed that they went in in 1918, or shortly thereafter, as a peace offering to the businesses at Time Square who were extremely paranoid at the time that ignorant New Yorkers wouldn't be able to find them after realignment of the original IRT line.

Thread title: R-9 Photos (754330)
Started on Wed Mar 5 21:50:54 1997, by Steve Kreisler

Subject: R-9 Photos
Message Number: 754330
Posted by: Steve Kreisler
Date: Wed Mar 5 21:50:54 1997

I'm looking for Jpg's or Gifs of NYC Transit R-9 equipment (R-1 through R-9 for the purests). I'm particularly interested in photo's of car #1313.

Thread title: Melbourne Subway System (754463)
Started on Sat Mar 8 00:36:39 1997, by M.JONES

Subject: Melbourne Subway System
Message Number: 754463
Posted by: M.JONES
Date: Sat Mar 8 00:36:39 1997

Pretty Non existant, with only three underground stations. There are however, about 200 above gound ones. Has been cleaned up, and had a makeover recently

Thread title: destination signs (754667)
Started on Wed Mar 12 11:55:45 1997, by Charles Fiori

Subject: destination signs
Message Number: 754667
Posted by: Charles Fiori
Date: Wed Mar 12 11:55:45 1997

Anybody out there have any NYC bus signs for sale or trade. Looking especially for the older black/white, blue/white, canvas.
- Subject: Re: destination signs
- Message Number: 754678
- Posted by: Gary Jacobi
- Date: Wed Mar 12 12:49:28 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]destination signs posted by Charles Fiori on March 12, 1997 at 11:55:45: Take a look at Dave's answer to Looking for Subway Rolls, near the bottom of this page; I think it applies to what you are looking for as well.

Thread title: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR (754711)
Started on Wed Mar 12 19:00:14 1997, by Sean Belfi

Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
Message Number: 754711
Posted by: Sean Belfi
Date: Wed Mar 12 19:00:14 1997

In Reply to: [6]NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:21:31: Bushwick terminal used to be in use with an elevated line running south to south brooklyn. The NYC subway took some of the tracks for their lines.x
- Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
- Message Number: 754722
- Posted by: Bob Andersen
- Date: Wed Mar 12 20:00:07 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by carl margolies on March 04, 1997 at 20:12:59: Actually, the Bellaire station was serviced by Hempstead trains, which also serviced the Union Hall St. and Hillside (not the current Hillside Facility station, but the old wooden station, now mostly demolished, located immediately east of where the Babylon branch splits off).
  - Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
  - Message Number: 754799
  - Posted by: Kevin Walsh
  - Date: Fri Mar 14 00:13:32 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Peter Rosa on March 08, 1997 at 20:14:46: abandoned around 20 - 25 years ago due to low ridership, even thought it wasn't particularly old.>>> That would be the Woodhaven station; Woodside is currently undergoing a major renovation.
    - Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
    - Message Number: 754810
    - Posted by: Kevin Walsh
    - Date: Fri Mar 14 00:16:03 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Tim on March 07, 1997 at 12:08:37: where to find an old map like that of the LIRR? >>> Ron Ziel's book Victorian LIRR Staions has an old LIRR map on the endpaper showing many former LIRR stations in Queens.
      - Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
      - Message Number: 754931
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Sat Mar 15 16:19:04 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 05, 1997 at 19:49:39: As I youngster in the 50s, I have a recollection of a station on the branch between Bethpage and Babylon. It was just to the south side of Boundary Avenue and was primarily for one of the aircraft companies in that area. Similarly, east of Farmingdale at Rt110 there was also a stop on the Ronkonkoma branch which was abandoned after the electrification.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 753879
        Posted by: Todd Glickman
        Date: Mon Mar 17 16:50:31 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 05, 1997 at 19:49:39: There was also a station between Hicksville and Syosset on the Port Jefferson Line, LANDIA. While the platform is gone, there is still a grass strip on either side of the right-of-way where the station used to be, near the first road crossing east of Hicksville. I believe it closed sometime in the early 60's.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 753923
        Posted by: Todd Glickman
        Date: Tue Mar 18 08:19:56 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Steve on March 15, 1997 at 16:19:04: The station before Bethpage was named "Grumman". I believe it was served by a limited number of weekday trains through a good part of the 60's and maybe even into the early '70's.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754028
        Posted by: David Steckler
        Date: Thu Mar 20 11:12:19 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Todd Glickman on March 18, 1997 at 08:19:56: Regarding the Grumman station, it was used until the early 1980's. In John Scala's superb book, "Diesels of the Sunrise Trail," there's a picture of a train just leaving the station in August, 1981.
        
        Subject: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754113
        Posted by: David M. Razler
        Date: Mon Mar 3 13:21:31 1997
        
        Over the years, the LIRR abandoned many stations in Queens alone, but none seem to be listed in the various sites and FAQs on abandoned stations. Two or three remains of stairways from stretlevel and platforms are visable on the tracks just east of Jamaca station (at least when coming in on the Babylon branch) Also at least one or two stations have either vanished completely or been turned into yard/maintenance facilities, platforms still visable on tracks cutting in towards the Babylon branch tracks from the north, located physically at a lower level than the Babylon tracks. Anyone know names/histories?
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754146
        Posted by: Laurence Simpson
        Date: Mon Mar 3 20:39:07 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:21:31: I grew up in Jamaica as a kid. If memory serves me right, the first set of platforms east of Jamaica Station belonged to the old Union Hall Station. It was unused even in the later 50's. These platforms were really local stops, and probably fell into disuse with the building of the IND subway out to 168th Street, and ultimately 179th Street in Jamaica. Prior to that, your choices to get to Jamaica were the BMT Jamaica El on Jamaica Avenue, or the LIRR. If you worked in "midtown", it would have been a lot easier to take the LIRR.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754188
        Posted by: philip nasadowski
        Date: Tue Mar 4 02:01:18 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:21:31: Hmm...I know of Elmhurst on the Porst Washington branch. i think it was still open when I was younger (1980ish). Also remember a few on the Huntington mainline that are abandoned, but still have visible platforms (like Elmhurst). Only other one I know of in the system is the old Garden City stop, which still exists, tracks and all. I think the trackage was the old Mitchel Field run, or maybe some other mainline (?!?) I also think it was electric, although it's a low platform (as the Port Wash stops were and some of Metro North is). No third rail anymore, but I sorta remember reading that MP 41s were used on that run... Interesting aside - if you look under the platform at Manhasset, you'll see the old low one, still intact.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754241
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Tue Mar 4 16:47:49 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Laurence Simpson on March 03, 1997 at 20:39:07: You are correct about the Union Hall station. It hav d served the rr brotherhood union hall, which closed soon after the gradfe separation structure was built. It is rumored that management never again did anything nice for labor in the years since as a result!
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754296
        Posted by: carl margolies
        Date: Tue Mar 4 20:12:59 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Gary Jacobi on March 04, 1997 at 16:47:49: There's the old Woodhaven station on the B'klyn line. I believe it's the only abandoned subway stop on the LIRR. It wasn't that old, built in 1941 as part of the Atlantic Av. grade separation project. On the Main line there is the old Bellaire stop(where you could see some rotting pieces of the platform. Can someone verify as to whether there was a station on the LIRR called Westbridge? It was located on the line to Penn. Sta. at Jamaica Ave. It would have been abandoned before WW11. Carl
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754319
        Posted by: David M. Razler
        Date: Wed Mar 5 19:49:39 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by carl margolies on March 04, 1997 at 20:12:59: Expanding Eastward, the only station I know for sure that was abandoned in Suffolk County is Flowerfield, on the Port Jefferson branch, just west of the current Stony Brook station. It served both passengers and freight when the area was the Flowerfield nursery and later Gyrodyne helicopter co. (a name Thos. Pynchon apparently liked) Current talk is of closing down the Stony Brook station and reopening Flowerfield, along with the other plans to close a handful of Suffolk County stations with riderships of under 10 passengers/day.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754362
        Posted by: Andrew Huie
        Date: Wed Apr 16 22:38:47 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Steve on March 15, 1997 at 16:19:04: Over the years there were a lot of Suffolk stations that were dropped. A couple of the more recent (if I remember correctly) were Pine-Aire and Calverton, on the Ronkonkoma Branch. I remember seeing the remains of the ground level shed at one of these stations several years back, long after the platforms were raised and the line electrified.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754364
        Posted by: Andrew Huie
        Date: Wed Apr 16 22:43:46 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Andrew Huie on April 16, 1997 at 22:38:47: Oh, and I highly recommend "Steel Rails to the Sunrise" which gives a very nice history of the LIRR, plus a map showing a lot of the stations which no longer exist. I know the book was reprinted a few years ago, not sure if any copies are still available.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754407
        Posted by: Tim
        Date: Fri Mar 7 12:08:37 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:21:31: The 1974 NYC Commuter Rail Overview Map by Michael Adler located at this site shows many LIRR stations no longer serviced. As for stations abandoned prior to 1974, I have now idea where to look...anyone know where to find an old map like that of the LIRR?
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754479
        Posted by: Bob Andersen
        Date: Tue Apr 22 18:18:50 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Andrew Huie on April 16, 1997 at 22:43:46: I met the author of the book you mention, "Steel Rails to the Sunrise", Ron Zeil, at a model train and toy show a few months ago. I bought a personally autographed copy for 60 Bucks. For a railfan like me, it was well worth the money. I particularly enjoy the several maps throughout the book which show the extent of the LIRR at various stages in its history. There is also a composite map showing the dates of construction and abandonment of every branch of the LIRR ever existing.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754528
        Posted by: Peter Rosa
        Date: Sat Mar 8 20:14:46 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by David M. Razler on March 03, 1997 at 13:21:31: One interesting abandoned station is Woodside, located underground on the line into Flatbush Avenue. It was abandoned around 20 - 25 years ago due to low ridership, even thought it wasn't particularly old.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754591
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Mon Mar 10 14:02:13 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Peter Rosa on March 08, 1997 at 20:14:46: I believe the station you are thinking of is Woodhaven, which was rendered useless when the Rockaway line was abandoned.
        
        Subject: Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR
        Message Number: 754624
        Posted by: Peter Rosa
        Date: Mon Mar 10 21:40:49 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC abandoned stations -LIRR posted by Gary Jacobi on March 10, 1997 at 14:02:13: Right you are - it was Woodhaven, not Woodside! I don't believe that its abandonment was necessarily a result of the Rockaway Line's closure. The LIRR stopped service on the Rockaway Line in (I believe) the late 1940s or early 1950s, with the subway's A train taking over most of the route. Woodhaven station remained open until the mid-1970s. If its ridership fell off precipitously after the Rockaway Line changeover, I would think that it wouldn't have lasted that long.

Thread title: Musicians in the subway (754733)
Started on Wed Mar 12 22:34:30 1997, by Ruth Hirsch

Subject: Musicians in the subway
Message Number: 754733
Posted by: Ruth Hirsch
Date: Wed Mar 12 22:34:30 1997

I'm writing a paper about musicians in the subway.Need background, articles etc.
- Subject: Re: Musicians in the subway
- Message Number: 754756
- Posted by: Wayne Fields
- Date: Thu Mar 13 10:14:18 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Musicians in the subway posted by Ruth Hirsch on March 12, 1997 at 22:34:30: Simple! Read Underground Harmonies, by Susie Tanenbaum (Cornell Univ. Press, 1995). It's THE reference work on subway musicians.

Thread title: Is there still an SBK? (754745)
Started on Thu Mar 13 02:05:50 1997, by David M. Razler

Subject: Is there still an SBK?
Message Number: 754745
Posted by: David M. Razler
Date: Thu Mar 13 02:05:50 1997

Does the subway system still operate the Southern Brooklyn Railway freight line as described in Uptown, Downtown? Are there still any freight operations at all carried on by the MTA on subway tracks other than for system maintenance?
- Subject: Re: Is there still an SBK?
- Message Number: 754078
- Posted by: Ben-Zion Cassouto
- Date: Wed Mar 26 04:27:31 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Is there still an SBK? posted by David M. Razler on March 13, 1997 at 02:05:50: To add to the question - Has anyone recently checked whether the track connection near Bush Terminal waterfront still exists? BTW, if not, how does the TA get its cars these days?
  - Subject: Re: Is there still an SBK?
  - Message Number: 754085
  - Posted by: Mark Feinman
  - Date: Wed Mar 26 12:44:16 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Is there still an SBK? posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 26, 1997 at 04:27:31: Warning -- long append pulled from nyc.transit .... a good summary of the SBK .... In article , Bill Joseph wrote: >Does anybody know anything about the South Brooklyn Railroad? > >I used to pass by a lot when I lived in Bay Ridge. Never saw anyone >around, but the cars always moved. I still wonder, how/why do they get >the cars over to their yard? Do they use the LIRR Bay Ridge Line and >connect in the Navy Yard, or do they go over the subway tracks? Or, do >they just take things off ships, and not really go anywhere? When do >they move these trains? > >For those of you who do not know the area, it is west of the BQE/3rd >Ave, on what I guess is/would be 1st Ave. The tracks leave the yard and >go right in the middle of the street from about 40th to the Navy Yard on >around 60th. Don't get confused with the old trolley tracks. Just passed there today. The SBkRR starts on a pier off 36th Street and 2nd Avenue, used to go straight through what is now the CostCo parking lot (appears to have been re-aligned fairly recently around the south end of the lot), crosses 3d Avenue at grade, goes through a small yard between 3d and 4th avenues, is joined by the West End subway line (which supposedly has trackage rights over the SBk, not the other way around; since the SBk is owned by the NYCTA, I'm not sure what practical difference, if any, this makes) goes through a tunnel, the 9th Avenue station (lower level), and dead-ends at Fort Hamilton Parkway just past the 37th-39th street yard. There's a new set of two sidings (with third rail) off this track in the yard where the trash train unloads to trucks. Once upon a time, these tracks continued beneath the Culver Line all the way down 37th Street and McDonald Ave, with sidings at various places along the way (one still visible at Kings Highway), a transfer track to the LIRR Bedford Branch at Avenue I, a transfer into the Coney Island Yard somewhere around Avenue Y, and a balloon turnaround loop approxi- mately under the Van Sicklen [Neptune Ave] station. This line was shared by freight and passenger service, although the loop at the south end was way too sharp for anything but a trolley car. The rails were paved over a few years back. The yard seems to have undergone some heavy work fairly recently. There's new ballast, a pile of new ties (blocking one of the main tracks!) and a stretch of one of the yard tracks is jacked up in the air, probably so the aforementioned ties can be installed underneath. There are also a couple of MoW cars hanging about. The tracks you refer to, however, are the property of the New York Regional Railroad (railway? not sure), formerly the NY Cross Harbor, previously IIRC the Bush Terminal RR. These originate at the same pier as the SBk, split off right at the pier's gate, and head southwest along 2nd Avenue to about 41st Street or thereabouts, turn right on that street, then left onto 1st Avenue. There are also tracks visible in 2nd Avenue northeast of the pier, but these are abandoned: no longer connected to the rest of the tracks going south. Even if they were, the track is in horrendous shape: split switches, broken rails, hogbacks in the roadbed (due to humpy asphalt), etc. Still, it's fascinating to see the huge amount of paved-over sidings: seems almost every building on the street had one... there are some diamond crossings visible on the abandoned section, too. (Some buildings must have had their own tracks going straight to a pier, crossing but not interchanging with the BTRR.) I didn't follow this to the end to see where it went; I've got to go back sometime and see. South of the pier, it looks old, but maintained. (Cobblestones between the rails, with holes filled up with what looks like recent asphalt.) There were once two tracks, but one is abandoned and mostly paved over. A few blocks along 1st Ave, it leaves the street for trackage in a yard west of the street; here are two ancient ALCo/GE diesels, with plates over the windows, still in NYCH markings; a NYC boxcar, various other dreck, and lots of relatively new boxcars that seem to be still in service. Lots of sidings here too, some abandoned, others active (evidence: one had a boxcar on it, sticking out of the company's driveway onto the sidewalk). I followed these tracks until they disappeared into the Brooklyn Army Terminal (not the Navy Yard: that's in Williamsburg, with its own network of street-running tracks once owned by the Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal RR); evidence suggests that they link up with the LIRR Bedford Branch. at 65th Street, where there is another transfer bridge. Note though, that you can't go directly from the SBk to the NYRR without going out on the pier past the switch, then reversing. There is what looks like an abandoned subway train, not on rails, sitting on this pier. Anybody have any idea what this is for? Anyhow, to answer your question, the SBkRR mostly is used for delivery of new subway cars, via the center (express) track on the West End el, to the Coney Island yards. Freight won't fit through the tunnel southeast of 4th Avenue, and there's noplace for it to go anyhow past there. The NYRR is used for delivery of boxcars to various industries along 1st and Second Avenues; also for transfer of freight from the metro area to New Jersey via carfloat, which is slow but faster than sending them up to Albany. For more info: http://bjr.acf.nyu.edu/ ("Penny Bridge") note that this is NOT my site, but I recommend it strongly. NYRR has their own web site, accessible via a link from the above page. -- ||J.Alan Septimus||You can't have everything...||septimus@acsu.buffalo.edu || KA2GYP ||...where would you put it? ||NYS Pharmacy Intern # 071612 ||===============||==========Stephen Wright====||NYC Locksmith License 824141 --Mark
    - Subject: Re: Is there still an SBK?
    - Message Number: 754086
    - Posted by: David Pirmann
    - Date: Wed Mar 26 15:10:40 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Is there still an SBK? posted by Mark Feinman on March 26, 1997 at 12:44:16: One other thing about the SBK... Peter Dougherty recently investigated the area and posted track maps of the SBK and NYCHRR. See [7]NYC Subway Track Maps for the maps. --dave

Thread title: Re: The Hudson-Bergen LRT (754766)
Started on Thu Mar 13 10:40:46 1997, by David Pirmann

Subject: Re: The Hudson-Bergen LRT
Message Number: 754766
Posted by: David Pirmann
Date: Thu Mar 13 10:40:46 1997

In Reply to: [6]The Hudson-Bergen LRT posted by Ted Nielsen on March 12, 1997 at 16:45:50: Never seen such a beast on the web but the Hudson County Transportation Management Assn (201-432-2200) or New Jersey Transit should be able to help you. --Dave
- Subject: The Hudson-Bergen LRT
- Message Number: 754700
- Posted by: Ted Nielsen
- Date: Wed Mar 12 16:45:50 1997
  
  Does anyone know where I could get a map of all the trackworks planned and under construction for the Hudson-Bergen LRT ? ( including proposed stops / stations , interchanges , switches , depots , elevated sections , tunnels , local streets , etc. ) I want to create a file for the BAHN rail simulation program , thanks !

Thread title: Re: Destination scrolls from D.C. Metro (754777)
Started on Thu Mar 13 20:40:38 1997, by Mark Greenwald

Subject: Re: Destination scrolls from D.C. Metro
Message Number: 754777
Posted by: Mark Greenwald
Date: Thu Mar 13 20:40:38 1997

Does anybody know where I can get a hold of destinations scrolls from the D.C. Metro? They've now converted to all digital destination signs on the trains because the sensors used on the scrolls didn't always stop the mechanism on the right destination. On one train, you could have at least 8 destinations listed on 5 different lines, some of which were stations not yet in revenue service.

Thread title: LIRR track goop!!! (754788)
Started on Thu Mar 13 20:51:36 1997, by philip nasadowski

Subject: LIRR track goop!!!
Message Number: 754788
Posted by: philip nasadowski
Date: Thu Mar 13 20:51:36 1997

Over the last summer I got a chance to ride a lot of the LIRR's electric lines, and noticed something interesting as I looked out the front window. Every now and then, usually at turns, there were these small devices on the tracks which seemed to ooz this black, oily, tarlike, thick goop, presumeably onto a passing wheel. I noticed these most on PortWashington and Huntington tracks. What in the world are these things, and what do they do??? Is it some sort of lubricant, or rust preventer?? Whatever it is, it sure gets all over the tracks and surrounding area....
- Subject: Re: LIRR track goop!!!
- Message Number: 754821
- Posted by: Gary Jacobi
- Date: Fri Mar 14 10:54:49 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]LIRR track goop!!! posted by philip nasadowski on March 13, 1997 at 20:51:36: My, you are observant! I know what these are, but have never spotted them. They are curve oilers, a rather common railroad item, and both reduce wear, and help quiet squealing wheels on tight curves.
  - Subject: Re: LIRR track goop!!!
  - Message Number: 754019
  - Posted by: Bill Mosteller
  - Date: Wed Mar 19 16:06:11 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: LIRR track goop!!! posted by Gary Jacobi on March 14, 1997 at 10:54:49: Exactly! And I think Model Railroader had an article on building one for yhour layout some years back, certainly at least a decade!

Thread title: Re: 2nd avenue subway (754832)
Started on Fri Mar 14 18:56:38 1997, by John

Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
Message Number: 754832
Posted by: John
Date: Fri Mar 14 18:56:38 1997

In Reply to: [5]2nd avenue subway posted by Emily Michaud on March 08, 1997 at 13:28:10: If, by some wild chance, the MTA decides to finally build the 2nd Avenue subway, I don't know what type of equipment will be used, but I do know that the old R-11 cars (the ones with the two circle windows on the door leafs) were origionally destined for the 2nd Avenue subway, but since it was never built, the R-11s weren't heavilly used. Maybe if the MTA builds a 2nd Avenue subway, they will re-commission the R-11s?
- Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
- Message Number: 754898
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Sat Mar 15 10:55:21 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on March 14, 1997 at 18:56:38: Recommission the R-11's? there's only 1 left! (there were only 10 to begin with).
  - Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
  - Message Number: 754007
  - Posted by: EMichaud
  - Date: Tue Mar 18 13:24:33 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Gary Jacobi on March 10, 1997 at 18:25:33: Thanks, everyone -- for all suggestions and help.
    - Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
    - Message Number: 754008
    - Posted by: EMichaud
    - Date: Tue Mar 18 13:33:09 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Peter Rosa on March 08, 1997 at 20:43:07: I have actually found a copy of "Subway Lives". Am very grateful for your suggestion. emily
      - Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
      - Message Number: 754040
      - Posted by: Peter Rosa
      - Date: Fri Mar 21 23:30:43 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by EMichaud on March 18, 1997 at 13:33:09: I'm glad you were able to find a copy of _Subway Lives_, it's definitely the most informative thing I've read about the system even though it's starting to get a bit outdated. When I first read about the "Beame Shuffle" and the Second Avenue line, I found it hard to imagine that elected officials could be *that* stupid ... but I guess I was wrong!
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754053
        Posted by: Erich Rastetter
        Date: Sun Mar 23 16:30:55 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]2nd avenue subway posted by Emily Michaud on March 08, 1997 at 13:28:10: I heard from a teacher that the MTA is spending millions on keeping second avenue from falling, because they "forgot" to maintain the parts that were dug out, and now its begining to cave in, and also that they have postponed any talks on finishing it until 2000, or 2004, i forget, so for the next few years they won't consider finishing it.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754059
        Posted by: Mark Feinman
        Date: Mon Mar 24 12:35:59 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Erich Rastetter on March 23, 1997 at 16:30:55: I can assure you, having been in the portion of the Second Ave Subway dug under Chinatown, that this portion is no where near in danger of collapsing anytime soon. What NYC Transit is spending money on is keeping the sump pumps active and the inspection of these tunnel sections to prevent 2nd Ave (or the Bowery) from caving in. This portion of the 2nd Ave Subway is actually in very good shape. NYC Transit considers the 2nd Ave line an "active" project (whatever that means) but I suppose we can all agree that we'll likely not see this subway built in our lifetimes.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754114
        Posted by: Peter Gray
        Date: Fri Mar 28 03:19:50 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Mark Feinman on March 24, 1997 at 12:35:59: Does anyone know the total cost estimate for constructing the 2nd Avenue subway? With London privatizing their underground, perhaps a privately-financed/owned line is one approach. It doesn't seem like the MTA has this very high on their agenda.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754115
        Posted by: Peter Gray
        Date: Fri Mar 28 03:45:30 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Peter Rosa on March 21, 1997 at 23:30:43: Never - but never - underestimate the stupidity, greed, and corruption of elected officials - especially in New York (as a native New Yorker, a painful admission!). Ken Auletta's book "The Streets Were Paved With Gold" is a great overview of what he terms the "failure of democraticly-elected government" in NY, which contributed to the decline of the city in the '70's and to things like the demise of the 2nd Avenue Subway
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754202
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 6 20:56:22 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by David Pirmann on March 15, 1997 at 10:55:21: That's it? Man, is my face red! What happened to the other 9? And why were there so few?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754203
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 6 21:00:16 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by David Pirmann on March 15, 1997 at 10:55:21: That's it? Well, so much for that idea. But what happened to the other 9 cars, and why were there so few to begin with?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754360
        Posted by: Andrew Huie
        Date: Wed Apr 16 22:14:29 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 06, 1997 at 20:56:22: Were the other 9 scrapped? I remember seeing them in Coney Island in the early-mid 80's. I was surprised they weren't scrapped, and in fact (from a distance) they looked like they were in pretty good shape.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754416
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Sun Apr 20 20:56:05 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Andrew Huie on April 16, 1997 at 22:14:29: The R-11s (re-designated R-34s) were unceremoniously de-commissioned in the mid 80s. 9 were scrapped and one is on display at the transit museum.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754433
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 23:02:22 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Steve on April 20, 1997 at 20:56:05: They ran into the '80s? I don't remember them going that long. What year were they decommisioned?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754439
        Posted by: Andrew Huie
        Date: Mon Apr 21 13:59:23 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 23:02:22: As far as I know, they were taken off the Franklin Avenue shuttle in the late '70s and never used again, but my information is pretty sketchy at best.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754459
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 21 18:01:29 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 23:02:22: The date a car is no longer used in service and the date it is de-commissioned (scrapped) may be several years apart. The R-16 flat-bottoms were removed from service and a year later, some were returned to service for a short period. This is not unusual.
        
        Subject: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754472
        Posted by: Emily Michaud
        Date: Sat Mar 8 13:28:10 1997
        
        Am working on a case study of above and would greatly appreciate it if anyone could point me in the direction of studies, news items, anything about proposed/long hoped-for subway line.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754519
        Posted by: MJS
        Date: Thu Apr 24 14:39:34 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Steve on April 21, 1997 at 18:01:29: when were the R-16s removed from service and returned to it again?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754547
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Sat Apr 26 15:27:25 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by MJS on April 24, 1997 at 14:39:34: In April or May of 1984, most of the R-16 were lined up out near Linden Shop, waiting to be scrapped. I don't recall the exact circumstance (perhaps the removal from service of many R-46s and R-44s due to cracked trucks) but the R-16 flatbottoms were quickly placed back in East NY Yard.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754548
        Posted by: Peter Rosa
        Date: Sat Mar 8 20:43:07 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]2nd avenue subway posted by Emily Michaud on March 08, 1997 at 13:28:10: A useful starting point is the book "Subway Lives," by Jim Dwyer (Crown Publishers, 1991, ISBN 0-517-58445-X). It has an excellent description of the political shenanigans that effectively killed off the line in the mid-1970s. I don't know if the book is still in print - when I bought it a couple of years ago it was already on the remainder shelf - but you could try a search through Amazon (http://www.amazon.com). The Second Avenue subway also has been discussed at length in the nyc.transit newsgroup; a DejaNews search should bring up the postings.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754565
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 27 21:57:52 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Steve on April 26, 1997 at 15:27:25: Are all the R-16 trains scrapped, or do some still exist?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754568
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 28 00:38:21 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 27, 1997 at 21:57:52: There are at least 2 which have not been scrapped. One is still in Coney Island Yd. The other one is in the parking lot of PS248 on 86th Street in Brooklyn. (The TA took over this school and it is now a training center)
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754590
        Posted by: John
        Date: Mon Apr 28 19:19:57 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Steve on April 28, 1997 at 00:38:21: You mean a subway car was converted into a classroom?! I gotta see this one. PS284 is on 86th St. and what? What condition is this car in?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754606
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 28 23:52:44 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 28, 1997 at 19:19:57: It's near the 25th Ave station on the B line or 86th Street. The car is not a classroom. It's just on display although I suppose that classes could be held in it. RTO (Rapid Transit Operations) uses a pair of 27s as a school car.
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754613
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Mon Mar 10 18:25:33 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]2nd avenue subway posted by Emily Michaud on March 08, 1997 at 13:28:10: You may already be aware of this, but the second avenue el was razed with the "IRON-CLAD" promise that it would be replaced as soon as possible with a subway. Therefore, it should be possible to chronicle the whole sad story just by searching headlines for the last sixty years!
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754630
        Posted by: John
        Date: Tue Apr 29 17:25:27 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by Steve on April 28, 1997 at 23:52:44: How do you use a subway car as a classroom, anyway? Obviously the seats are for the students to sit, but what do you use as desks? What do you use for a chalkboard (or do they use a portable marker board)? And what do you use for the teacher's desk - the motorman's cab?
        
        Subject: Re: 2nd avenue subway
        Message Number: 754638
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Tue Apr 29 20:14:33 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 2nd avenue subway posted by John on April 29, 1997 at 17:25:27: It's not all that hard to imagine. You sit in the car and the Train Service Supervisor (formerly called Motor Instructor) talks - often accompanied by black boards and other visual aids. Many of the School Cars have displays built into them. By the way, the term school car does not always mean a car used for school. School car instruction is any training that is given to the crews, either on the train or in a class-room.

Thread title: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE (754843)
Started on Fri Mar 14 19:02:30 1997, by John

Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
Message Number: 754843
Posted by: John
Date: Fri Mar 14 19:02:30 1997

In Reply to: [5]IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 04, 1997 at 17:25:49: I tell you, Gary, you can never expect the MTA to be organized and competant. You expect answers from them about proposed subway plans? Good luck! The reason why the subway is half of what it would have been is a combination of poor planning, beurocracy, and the fact that the MTA seems to have a tradition of screwing up.
- Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
- Message Number: 754952
- Posted by: Erich Rastetter
- Date: Sat Mar 15 22:48:28 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by John on March 14, 1997 at 19:02:30: There was a second phase planned for the IND? Does anyone have info on this?
  - Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
  - Message Number: 753962
  - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
  - Date: Tue Mar 18 12:17:11 1997
    
    In Reply to: [5]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Erich Rastetter on March 15, 1997 at 22:48:28: Apparently, yes. I learned of it indirectly through reading the Abandoned Subway stations listing posted elsewhere at this website. In particular, check out S. 4th st, Utica Ave and Roosevelt Ave. I have heard several stories as to why it was never built, mostly relating to war shortages, but that doesn't hold water for me. The real reason is probably that, after the consolodation of 1940, it no longer made sense to build lines in direct competition with the BMT and IRT, as the Fulton St. and Sixth avenue lines had been. Without hard info on routes, I am just guessing, but the huge station planned at s. 4th and Union in Williamsburg must have been associated with a tunnel duplicating the Williamsburg bridge Broadway line, and the crossing at Utica and Fulton might have been to capture the residents not served by the IRT which never extended, as promised, south of Flatbush Ave. on Nostrand ave.
    - Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
    - Message Number: 754030
    - Posted by: Mark Feinman
    - Date: Thu Mar 20 13:52:11 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 04, 1997 at 17:25:49: There is a map (1929, I believe) that had the lines for the proposed "second system" already included on the map. So the lines of the second system were not speculation. The stations that have partial provision for these additional lines were built that way initially in anticipation of the completion of the second system. Had the second system been built, money would have been saved (and less service would have been disrupted). The routes were never built because of the depression and the fact that after the depression and WWII, most people were thinking CARS and ridership went down. I also think you can purchase the map (for $30+) from the Transit Museum by special request. If you contact John or Eva in education, they should be able to provide you more info. The Museum also gives tours of some of these stations on the "Routes Not Built" tour. Specifically, this tour visits Roosevelt Avenue, Lower level of the BMT City Hall Station (N/R) and the portion of the 2nd Ave subway under Chinatown.
      - Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
      - Message Number: 754055
      - Posted by: Dan Greenberg
      - Date: Mon Mar 24 09:35:28 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 04, 1997 at 17:25:49: I went on the "Routes Not Built" tour yesterday and recommend it HIGHLY to all. We didn't get to see the 2nd Ave tunnel (the MTA is apparantly starting a lead abatement program there), but we did get into the built but never opened half of Roosevelt Avenue built as the stub-end of a line intended to go to the Rockaways. The tunnel extends 6 or 700 feet east of the station and is in perfect condition (albeit dusty!) even after 60 or so years. The tour also included the 2nd half of the Lex Ave station on the B line -- behind the orange wall -- and the mostly built 3rd avenue exit from the station. We walked up from the lower platform level to the fare collection level -- easily 7 or 8 stories. Last but not least, the lower level of City Hall. This is an excellent tour!
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754057
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Mon Mar 24 12:00:41 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Dan Greenberg on March 24, 1997 at 09:35:28: Your'e breaking my heart,Dan; I am three thousand miles away, and not likely to be able to take the tour!
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754060
        Posted by: Mark Feinman
        Date: Mon Mar 24 12:40:23 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 24, 1997 at 12:00:41: Gary ... I have this (as well as other tours) videotaped - email me if you're interested. Mark
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754061
        Posted by: Mark Feinman
        Date: Mon Mar 24 12:42:25 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Dan Greenberg on March 24, 1997 at 09:35:28: Looks like I have to retake the tour :-) Rumour has it that a future tour might include Utica Avenue (A/C).....
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754116
        Posted by: Peter Gray
        Date: Fri Mar 28 03:53:23 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Mark Feinman on March 24, 1997 at 12:40:23: How often do these tours take place? How does one sign up??
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754122
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Fri Mar 28 10:28:59 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 04, 1997 at 17:25:49: There is another unused IND tunnel. North of the 168th St. Station on the A line is the 174th St. yard. A1 and A2 track go back about 900 - 1000 feet to a brick wall. On the other side of the wall, rumor has it, is a tunnel which leads to the George Washington Bridge. It was to be a subway link to New Jersey. You probably won't see it on any tour...
        
        Subject: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754252
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Tue Mar 4 17:25:42 1997
        
        Having just learned of the existance of this intended system, and of the partially built stations, I am fascinated and wish to learn more. Surely there were sketch plans drawn, but can no one now find them? Why is there just speculation as to where it would have gone?
        
        Subject: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754263
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Tue Mar 4 17:25:49 1997
        
        Having just learned of the existance of this intended system, and of the partially built stations, I am fascinated and wish to learn more. Surely there were sketch plans drawn, but can no one now find them? Why is there just speculation as to where it would have gone?
        
        Subject: Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE
        Message Number: 754361
        Posted by: Andrew Huie
        Date: Wed Apr 16 22:26:32 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: IND SUBWAY SECOND PHASE posted by Gary Jacobi on March 18, 1997 at 12:17:11: It'll be tough to check out the places you mentioned, since they are more or less inaccessible to the public. Utica Avenue in particular -- I went there, and I didn't even see a door into the incomplete areas. As for Roosevelt Avenue, you'll have to take the tour (but you can also see the ramps to the lines from the R and G trains east of Roosevelt). South 4th Street area is accessible only to maintenance personnel. Bummer.

Thread title: Re: problems with ny subway system (754855)
Started on Fri Mar 14 19:11:35 1997, by John

Subject: Re: problems with ny subway system
Message Number: 754855
Posted by: John
Date: Fri Mar 14 19:11:35 1997

In Reply to: [5]problems with ny subway system posted by malcolm on March 03, 1997 at 17:25:10: Problems with the Subway? Hmmm, where should I start? Well, for one thing, it's almost impossable for out-of-towners (or unexperienced subway riders period) to get to their destination trouble-free. Small construction projects here and there always have local trains skipping certain stops, transfers are very rarely available to trains travelling the opposite direction, steps can be very steep at certain stations, the new tiles that the MTA are installing tend to resemble an ice-skating rink, and the one problem (call it a problem if you wish - it really isn't one) that really bugs me is about the trains. Compare a picture of an R-30 series of R-40 series subway car (just to name a few) taken 20 years ago with one taken recently. You might find the recent picture of the train to be much uglier, thanks to the MTA screwing up once again. This time, it was in the late 1980s, when the MTA rebuilt most of the fleet of subway cars.
- Subject: problems with ny subway system
- Message Number: 754135
- Posted by: malcolm
- Date: Mon Mar 3 17:25:10 1997
  
  I am searching for anyone with information on problems with the new york subway system ie. where they lie, whats involved and what attempts have been made to fix them

Thread title: New York Subway Equipment (754876)
Started on Fri Mar 14 19:30:49 1997, by John Ohanian

Subject: New York Subway Equipment
Message Number: 754876
Posted by: John Ohanian
Date: Fri Mar 14 19:30:49 1997

I don't know about you, but I really miss the old cars (the post R-10 cars, anyway). The oldest car currently in revenue service are the R-26, R-29, R-33, and R-36 IRT Redbirds, which are probably endangered by the new R-110 car. Another thing I miss are the old interiors of the cars. I think the rubber frame around the door windows are much better than the steel frames. And what about the straps? They replaced the straps in just about all the cars (except the Redbirds) with poles and bars. I like the straps much better! I could go on and on about the things I miss, such as the large door windows on the R-40s (replaced by smaller, older-looking windows). And what has the MTA done with the R-32? They killed it! All the original charm - the deep blue doors, the head signs, the light blue and white interior, the straps - all lost through a transformation into the blandest, ugliest piece-of-crap that ever hit the NYC Subway tracks.
- Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
- Message Number: 754887
- Posted by: Steve Kreisler
- Date: Fri Mar 14 23:58:57 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]New York Subway Equipment posted by John Ohanian on March 14, 1997 at 19:30:49: Just to clarify one thing that you said; There will be no other R110s. The new contracts will be R142 on the 'A' division and R143 for the 'B' division. Otherwise, I agree with much of what you say, however, keep in mind, not all red birds were always red birds. At one time 452 of them were delivered with a Blue and white paint scheme for the worlds fair.
  - Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
  - Message Number: 753992
  - Posted by: Julio Perez
  - Date: Tue Mar 18 12:48:13 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: New York Subway Equipment posted by Steve Kreisler on March 14, 1997 at 23:58:57: Steve, the 452 blue and white cars you refer to were very nice looking. Too bad the chemists contracted by the TA couldn't come up with anti-graffiti paint in those colors, along with their light blue interior and... AIR CONDITIONING!
    - Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
    - Message Number: 754011
    - Posted by: Steve Kreisler
    - Date: Tue Mar 18 19:13:04 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: New York Subway Equipment posted by Julio Perez on March 18, 1997 at 12:48:13: You're right about the paint. As for the air conditioning you are part right. The R-36 2-car units were air conditioned during a subsequent overhaul. The R-33 single car units were not. This is why on the #7 line, eleven car trains run except during the summer
      - Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
      - Message Number: 754012
      - Posted by: Steve Kreisler
      - Date: Tue Mar 18 19:13:17 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: New York Subway Equipment posted by Julio Perez on March 18, 1997 at 12:48:13: You're right about the paint. As for the air conditioning you are part right. The R-36 2-car units were eventually air conditioned during a subsequent overhaul. The R-33 single car units were not. This is why on the #7 line, eleven car trains run except during the summer when the R-33s are not used.
        
        Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
        Message Number: 754041
        Posted by: Michael Berson
        Date: Fri Mar 21 23:41:33 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]New York Subway Equipment posted by John Ohanian on March 14, 1997 at 19:30:49: You are so right about what has happened to the equipment. As far as the R-32's are concerned, once the graffiti was cleaned up and the cars were air-conditioned, why did they make the decision to make the interiors the drab color they are today. The blue interiors and the silver and blue exteriors were very attractive. I wished they would have reinstated the old colors after the cars were rebuilt. One of the saddest rebuilds are the R-42's. These had the long windows on the side doors and the rectangular window on the end door. The shorter window on the side doors make it look very out of place with the larger windows of the R-42. I was 10 years old when the R-42's were introduced and they were very popular (with one of the best Air-Conditioners I have ever seen in the subway.) Why couldn't they just rebuild the cars mechanically, but leave the original color schemes and designs of cars such as the R-32, 38, 40 and 44.
        
        Subject: Re: New York Subway Equipment
        Message Number: 754231
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Mon Apr 7 17:00:44 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]New York Subway Equipment posted by John Ohanian on March 14, 1997 at 19:30:49: I totally agree with you concerning the original appearance of the older equipment. Right down to those horrible metal window frames in the doors. I also don't understand why the R-40, R-40M & R-42 had their doors replaced with the new out of place doors. The R-42 used to be one of my favorite cars, but now it's hard for me to look at them. I'm glad the older equipment was rebuilt, but I wish they could have kept their original appearances. Of all of the rebuilds on the B-Division I think the R-38, R-44/46's faired the best. For years I used to be happy to see the few R-32's, R-40 and R-42's that escaped the first tan/orange paint treatment. I sure some of you will remember R-40 #4416, R-42 #4764/65 (D line) and R-32's #s 3946 and another that I can't remember. Even though they were covered by graffiti inside it was always refreshing to see their original Blue and White interiors.

Thread title: Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways (754909)
Started on Sat Mar 15 12:14:24 1997, by Peter Mosse

Subject: Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways
Message Number: 754909
Posted by: Peter Mosse
Date: Sat Mar 15 12:14:24 1997

In Reply to: [6]Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways posted by David Pirmann on March 10, 1997 at 11:22:45: There is currently an exhibition of NY subway art co-hosted by the NY Transit Museum and by Michael Ingbar Gallery at 568 Broadway (nr Prince). It continues through March 29. Also, you might want to look at "Subway Ceramics - A History and Iconography" by Lee Stookey, which should be available through the Transit Museum
- Subject: Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways
- Message Number: 754032
- Posted by: Mark Feinman
- Date: Thu Mar 20 14:16:01 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways posted by Jennifer on March 09, 1997 at 13:07:53: I don't know what your timeframe is, Jennifer, but there's going to be a tour called "Ornamental Underground" being run by the New York Transit Museum on April 21st. The theme of this tour, I believe, is the mosaics that adorn many of the first stations that were built.
  - Subject: Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways
  - Message Number: 754035
  - Posted by: David Pirmann
  - Date: Thu Mar 20 21:08:28 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways posted by Jennifer on March 09, 1997 at 13:07:53: Jennifer, Here are some items you might find useful: Art In Transit [16 pages] US Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration US Government Printing Office: 1995 (Item 611-822) Design For Transportation - 1995 National Awards [60 pages] US Department of Transportation National Endowment for the Arts US Government Printing Office: 1995 (sorry can't find item #) Art En Route [30 pages] MTA Arts for Transit Metropolitan Transportation Authority: 1994 Art En Route: Your Guide To Art in the MTA Network [pamphlet] MTA Arts for Transit Metropolitan Transportation Authority: 1993 The first, third, and fourth items can be purchased from the Transit Museum bookstore. --Dave
    - Subject: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways
    - Message Number: 754559
    - Posted by: Jennifer
    - Date: Sun Mar 9 13:07:53 1997
      
      I have to do a paper on Art on the New York City Subway System, and I haven't a clue where to find any information on the subject! Can anyone help? If you can, please e-mail me at JennynJupy@aol.com THANKS!!
      - Subject: Re: Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways
      - Message Number: 754581
      - Posted by: David Pirmann
      - Date: Mon Mar 10 11:22:45 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Looking for Info on Art on the NYC Subways posted by Jennifer on March 09, 1997 at 13:07:53: There is a page of links regarding art projects in Transit systems here on the site: http://subway.k2nesoft.com/arts.html The National Endowment for the Arts even puts out a nice little arts in transit award booklet which you can request from their web site.

Thread title: Re: Bus Photos (754920)
Started on Sat Mar 15 14:33:44 1997, by Zack Wilhoite

Subject: Re: Bus Photos
Message Number: 754920
Posted by: Zack Wilhoite
Date: Sat Mar 15 14:33:44 1997

In Reply to: [6]Bus Photos posted by Clarence Barnes on March 02, 1997 at 07:21:37: the bus spot has 1 or 2 pitures it's adress is http://www.members.aol.com/busspot/main.html
- Subject: Bus Photos
- Message Number: 755852
- Posted by: Charles Fiori
- Date: Fri Jun 20 07:42:16 1997
  
  David--Great collection of photos. I am still very interested in tracking down any and all bus destination signs. Special wants would be the older black and white versions. ANY HELP AT ALL WOULD BE APPRECIATED. THANKS.
  - Subject: Bus Photos
  - Message Number: 754034
  - Posted by: Clarence Barnes
  - Date: Sun Mar 2 07:21:37 1997
    
    I was looking for photographs of old buses in the NYCTA rolling stock from the beginning to present. Anyone out there know where I can obtain them? Thanx in Advance! CB
    - Subject: Re: Bus Photos
    - Message Number: 754043
    - Posted by: wiljan koopmans
    - Date: Sat Mar 22 07:12:01 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Bus Photos posted by Clarence Barnes on March 02, 1997 at 07:21:37: i am searchin for photos of metro's from 1972- 1985 .
      - Subject: Re: Bus Photos
      - Message Number: 754133
      - Posted by: Bob Redden
      - Date: Fri Mar 28 23:39:05 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Bus Photos posted by wiljan koopmans on March 22, 1997 at 07:12:01: up right now on alt.binaries.pictures.vehicles

Thread title: White Pot Underjump (754942)
Started on Sat Mar 15 21:13:53 1997, by Steve Kreisler

Subject: White Pot Underjump
Message Number: 754942
Posted by: Steve Kreisler
Date: Sat Mar 15 21:13:53 1997

I was told recently, by a LIRR employee, that the trackage in Forest Hills where the tracks from the now abandoned Rockaway branch pass under and at one time joined with the main line, was called the White Pot underjump. I'm wondering if anyone has heard similar accounts or knows of some documentation related to this area....
- Subject: Re: White Pot Underjump
- Message Number: 754031
- Posted by: Mark Feinman
- Date: Thu Mar 20 14:13:50 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]White Pot Underjump posted by Steve Kreisler on March 15, 1997 at 21:13:53: A recent book (out 2 or 3 years, I think) called "Change at Ozone Park" discusses this abandoned LIRR line. It is a good read and has some great pictures, too.
  - Subject: Re: White Pot Underjump
  - Message Number: 754162
  - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
  - Date: Wed Apr 2 19:58:33 1997
    
    In Reply to: [5]White Pot Underjump posted by Steve Kreisler on March 15, 1997 at 21:13:53: I notice no answer to your question has surfaced, so I will offer a longshot. During the years of competition between the Long Island and two other rivals in the ninteenth century, the LI built what they called the White Line vaguely described as serving Flushing. The Rockaway line was in existance before 1880, but only as far north as the Hunters point line, which was the Main at the time. The underjump at Rego Park was added with the new electrified main from Penn Station in about 1910, at which time the Rockaway line was electrified as well. I have never seen a map depicting the White line, so cannot speculate any further.

Thread title: Re: Chicago Transit Authority (753890)
Started on Mon Mar 17 17:09:09 1997, by Bryan Layne

Subject: Re: Chicago Transit Authority
Message Number: 753890
Posted by: Bryan Layne
Date: Mon Mar 17 17:09:09 1997

In Reply to: [6]Chicago Transit Authority posted by Augie JAKosz on March 08, 1997 at 13:42:03: Lots Of People ride the "L".Thousands of daily commuters ride from the south,west and north sides to get to downtown. Not to mention the increased ridership due to the explosion of yuppie population in the neighborhoods along the Ravenswood line.
- Subject: Chicago Transit Authority
- Message Number: 754483
- Posted by: Augie JAKosz
- Date: Sat Mar 8 13:42:03 1997
  
  Who rides the "L"

Thread title: MEMORY'S (753901)
Started on Mon Mar 17 17:41:46 1997, by D ROWE

Subject: MEMORY'S
Message Number: 753901
Posted by: D ROWE
Date: Mon Mar 17 17:41:46 1997

THANK'S TO EVERYONE WHO POST'S MESSAGES HERE. ALL THE MEMORY'S YOU'VE BROUGHT ME HAVE BEEN GREAT. I MOVED TO NC 7 YEARS AGO, AND HAVE CRAVED A SUBWAY RIDE SINCE. NOONE HERE UNDERSTANDS! PS THE OLDER CARS RULED!
- Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
- Message Number: 753952
- Posted by: gary jacobi
- Date: Tue Mar 18 11:54:56 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]MEMORY'S posted by D ROWE on March 17, 1997 at 17:41:46: Glad you are enjoying it! There are a lot of us lost New "Yawkers" around. I, for one, have been west of the Pecos for over thirty years. I look at the modern pictures, and can't believe the system can exist without R-10's, Standards and Low V's. And they tell me the new cars are QUIET ! What can compare with the screeching and clanging that assaulted riders of the vestibules on the old IRT cars. I last rode the subway in 1972, with the newer cars just coming into service, and it was just not the same. I've been back as recently as 1993, but have not ridden again.
  - Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
  - Message Number: 753981
  - Posted by: Dave Pirmann
  - Date: Tue Mar 18 12:38:16 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: MEMORY'S posted by gary jacobi on March 18, 1997 at 11:54:56: It's not that quiet. :-)
    - Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
    - Message Number: 754024
    - Posted by: Richard Angeloni
    - Date: Wed Mar 19 23:20:51 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]MEMORY'S posted by D ROWE on March 17, 1997 at 17:41:46: As a born and raised New Yorker who grew up with a birdseye view of the Coney Island Yards, I too miss the subway. My favorite memory as a youngster was riding the old R1-9 on the West End. I can still hear the "whirring" sound of the motors when the train accelerated. The interiors of those old cars also had a certain musty odor. I moved out west in 1989, and ride BART everyday. BART may be cleaner, but the rolling stock here has no individuality. The exterior of every car is essentially the same.
      - Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
      - Message Number: 754036
      - Posted by: Michael Berson
      - Date: Thu Mar 20 21:21:27 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: MEMORY'S posted by gary jacobi on March 18, 1997 at 11:54:56: What I liked about the ole days is the variety that existed. For example in the '70's on any IRT line anything from R-12's thru R-36's would be coupled together in a single train. I especially remember this on the #3 train. How about the F train. On this line you never knew what type of train you would get. On the F alone, I have ridden R1-9's, R-32's, R-38's (one of my favorites), R-40's, R-42's (another favorite) and R-44. Later when the R-46's arrived, the R1-9's were removed. The rebuilt and new equipment lack the "personality" these older cars had.
        
        Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
        Message Number: 754045
        Posted by: Carl C. Jackson
        Date: Sat Mar 22 11:51:36 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: MEMORY'S posted by gary jacobi on March 18, 1997 at 11:54:56: Since I've been reading this thread, I've shed several tears. I too have aLOT of memories. I grew up in Brooklyn on Monroe Street between Nostrand and Marcy Aves. I remember taking the B44-Nostrand to schoole (St Peter Claver) when the equipment was Mack busses! When I was very young, my grandfather (who was subway car mechanic at the Coney Island Shops) would take me on the B47-Tompkins Ave line when it was a ETB! That's right, an electric trilley bus! I also remember when PCC trolley's ran on the B68-Coney Island Ave. How about when several SIRT cars ran on the Culver-Nassau Shuttle? Or when the Franklyn Ave Shuttle ran 6-car locals to Coney Island on Saturdays! I truly do miss it all. I've been away from New York since 1971 with only a few visits between then and now. But as irony would have it - I now drive an ETB in Seattle!
        
        Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
        Message Number: 754225
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Mon Apr 7 14:30:04 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]MEMORY'S posted by D ROWE on March 17, 1997 at 17:41:46: I am also a native New Yorker (Bronx) with very fond memories of our NYCTA. I recently moved to Maryland (10/96) and I'm terribly homesick for the TA subways and buses. I am only 31, but I can remember the last of the old-look GM buses, as well as the 3rd Avenue el's last days. I had a special attachment to the GM fishbowls that served us well into the 80's (some into the 90's). My favorite were the 8000 series and 4800-4900's. It was great before budget cuts when all trunk lines in Manhattan provided 24 hr express service. I travel to NYC at least once a month and I continue to "stay in touch" with our beloved NYCTA. I also still carry a MetroCard with fares on it.
        
        Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
        Message Number: 754432
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 22:55:13 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: MEMORY'S posted by gary jacobi on March 18, 1997 at 11:54:56: Gary Jacobi, I agree with you so friggin' much, it's not even funny. Everybody in my family hates the noisiness of the New York Subway, but I LOVE it!! To me, it was actually thrilling to be in a crowded subway train, hanging on to a strap, while the train fled through the tunnel, banging and shimmying, with the lights flickering on and off and the wheel trucks making funny noises and the earsplitting sound of scraping and screeching metal as the train rounded a curve or came to a stop . . . those were the days. Now, it's a slow-ass ride on a mouse-quiet train that hisses to a stop and does a 1/2 mile an hour around turns. What the hell is that? What's going on? What happened? What happened to all the 'good' trains? And, oh, what happened to the beloved handstrap? How could the TA do such a thing as to replace the traditional handstraps with railings? The New York subway wasn't ment to be angelically quiet with modern equipment. At least not the New York subway I grew up with and became accustomed to. Washington and San Francisco's subways were meant to be that way, but not New York.
        
        Subject: Re: MEMORY'S
        Message Number: 754436
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Mon Apr 21 13:15:17 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: MEMORY'S posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 22:55:13: Couldn't have said it better! I sometimes think that the subways were safer, from a crime standpoint, because robbers are cowards, and the old subway scared them too much, and you could always act as if you didn't hear them and be believed. Of course, the Sullivan Law also worked in your favor, in that you knew with 99% certainty that the jerk didn't have a gun, no matter what he told you. In the late fifties and early sixties I actually told attempting holdup men to perform a physically impossible act on five occasions, adding that I knew that it wasn't a gun they had stuck in my ribs. Of course it helped to be 18 years old and six foot six to back it up. All five fled. I would not recommend this tactic today!

Thread title: City Hall Station (753912)
Started on Mon Mar 17 23:39:48 1997, by Michael Azzollini

Subject: City Hall Station
Message Number: 753912
Posted by: Michael Azzollini
Date: Mon Mar 17 23:39:48 1997

Any updates on when the abandoned City Hall station will open as an annex of the Transit Museum? Also, in the guide to abandoned subway stations, it ststes that "as of late 1995, the loop is now mainline track and the public can ride it"(and thereby see the station). I was under the impression that the loop is still non-revenue and all passengers are required to get off at Brooklyn Bridge when traveling southbound on the local? MIKE
- Subject: Re: City Hall Station
- Message Number: 753969
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Tue Mar 18 12:37:30 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]City Hall Station posted by Michael Azzollini on March 17, 1997 at 23:39:48: Nope, you can definitely ride the loop. To be nice, ask the motorman or conductor (and to make sure he's not going out of service and returning right to the yard!). I've done this a number of times when I'm in the area. Sometimes you get a strange look but just be nice about it. Explain that you have a historical curiosity to see City Hall or something. You'll get your ride. --Dave
  - Subject: Re: City Hall Station
  - Message Number: 754010
  - Posted by: David O'Connor
  - Date: Tue Mar 18 17:00:57 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: City Hall Station posted by David Pirmann on March 18, 1997 at 12:37:30: On Sunday, Mar 16th, 1997 my wife and I visited both City Hall (N,R) station and Brooklyn Bridge (4,5) stations. None of the station staff had heard of City Hall station or how access could be gained. Apparently it is not common knowledge that the station is there. I could have been asking for a UFO landing site. Would really love to see it
    - Subject: Re: City Hall Station
    - Message Number: 754013
    - Posted by: Steve
    - Date: Tue Mar 18 19:35:04 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: City Hall Station posted by David O'Connor on March 18, 1997 at 17:00:57: Right station but the wrong line. If you had been on the #6 you would have looped through the station going from the south-bound to the north-bound. If you do make the trip, opt for an R-29 so you can stand at the front 'storm door' (which you can't do on the R-62As...
      - Subject: Re: City Hall Station
      - Message Number: 754431
      - Posted by: John
      - Date: Sun Apr 20 22:40:34 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: City Hall Station posted by Steve on March 18, 1997 at 19:35:04: Do the #6 trains still use the Redbirds? I know that the 5 always does and the 4 occasionally does.

Thread title: Re: Express Subways (753931)
Started on Tue Mar 18 08:48:53 1997, by Will Calves

Subject: Re: Express Subways
Message Number: 753931
Posted by: Will Calves
Date: Tue Mar 18 08:48:53 1997

In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by Ronald Kluger on March 04, 1997 at 17:45:18: There are several good reasons why a city both as large and as dense as New York and with as good a "transit riding habit" as New York has a real need for express services. First of all, what many people do not seem to realize is that New York City, in effect, has TWO central business districts - the downtown Financial District and the Midtown area. The distances between these areas can more efficiently be covered by a combination of local and express services. The distances between some Manhattan stations and the outer boroughs can be so great that express services are required in order to have a trip be of reasonable length/time. This "outer borough" reason is sometimes hard for out-of-towners to grasp because most visitors and suburbanites use the subway mostly as a Manhattan shuttle (i.e., like a cheaper/safer taxicab) whereas many New Yorkers must use it to get around daily. Keep in mind that it is NOT a true "regional metro" with high speeds and long station spacing in the outer boroughs. Finally, subways like the IND system were designed and built in an era when massive expressways were only models at GM's World Fair ride - they were the ONLY way to get around fast (in my opinion, they still are) and so the system was designed to be as fast and easy to use as possible. -- Will Calves
- Subject: Re: Express Subways
- Message Number: 753941
- Posted by: Mark Greenwald
- Date: Tue Mar 18 09:33:55 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Express Subways posted by John Mullervy on March 02, 1997 at 22:20:30: John, As early as last month, the DC Metro DID try their version of an express train----It runs from Greenbelt (Green Line) to Farragut North (Red Line). This train still stops at all stations in between EXCEPT Fort Totten (the normal transfer station). It uses a little used cross-over track thus bypassing Fort Totten all together making for a faster trip for folks from Greenbelt w/o them having to switch trains. This runs downtown during the morning rush and vice-versa during the evening rush. This was done to entice passengers to board at Greenbelt where there is plenty of parking. Granted, this isn't an express train by NY standards, it is a step in the right direction. I guess the real question is, will they keep doing this after the inner portion of the Green Line opens in 1999?
  - Subject: Re: Express Subways
  - Message Number: 754046
  - Posted by: FRED WELLMAN
  - Date: Sat Mar 22 21:13:43 1997
    
    In Reply to: [5]Re: Express Subways posted by Iain Logan on March 03, 1997 at 09:13:05: Boston's Orange Line North of the Mystic River was rebuilt from a EL to ground level with Express Lines that have not been used. Also when the Red Line was extened to Braintree it skipped two stations and ran side by side with the Ashmont Line. They have since added the Two skipped stations to the Braintree line. The Market Frankford El in Phila runs A and B trains at rush hours from Frankfort to Center City, maybe further. They are a semi-express as they alternate stops.
    - Subject: Re: Express Subways
    - Message Number: 754052
    - Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
    - Date: Sun Mar 23 15:22:32 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by FRED WELLMAN on March 22, 1997 at 21:13:43: The Red Line South Shore Branch does stop at JFK-Umass (nee Columbia) but still skips Savin Hill. There can't be a stop there on that branch without a major realignment of the tracks and highways. For the record, it also skips former NYNH&H stops at Harrison Sq., Popes Hill, Neponset and Atlantic, while the North Quincy Station splits the distance between Atlantic & Norfolk Downs. Dorchester got a lousy deal on that line, in order to lure suburbanites with fast service.
      - Subject: Express Subways
      - Message Number: 754054
      - Posted by: John Mullervy
      - Date: Sun Mar 2 22:20:30 1997
        
        Why is it that other cities, did not build express subways like New York? I can't imagine NY being all local like DC (a newer system) or Boston (an older system). John PS:The Disney Monorail's express doesn't count IMO
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754080
        Posted by: Iain Logan
        Date: Mon Mar 3 09:13:05 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Express Subways posted by John Mullervy on March 02, 1997 at 22:20:30: London Underground run what are ineffect express services between Hammersmith and Acton Town on the Piccadilly Line, parallel to the District, which serves intermediate stops. Similarly, the Metropolitan Line runs fast between Finchley Road and Harrow on the Hill, with only a couple of intermediate stops, the Jubilee Line serving the intermediate stations
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754096
        Posted by: Keranu!!
        Date: Thu Mar 27 09:22:08 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by Iain Logan on March 03, 1997 at 09:13:05: The NYC Subway is vast!! I don't particularly fancy stopping about 40 times between JFK and Midtown. The reason other cities don't have it is probably because their networks are neither as dense or as huge as that of New York. London has one of comparable size but the only express routes are between Acton Town and Hammersmith (District/Piccadilly Lines) and between Baker Street and Wembley Park (Metropolitan / Jubilee Lines)
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754117
        Posted by: Peter Gray
        Date: Fri Mar 28 04:09:00 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by Will Calves on March 18, 1997 at 08:48:53: Tokyo's system has express trains, but only for the above-ground suburban part of their runs, where they are not really subways at all. Even here, there are no express tracks or even third track for rush-hour express service. Rather, the express trains just skip some stations, and headways are ingeniously timed (down to 30 second intervals) to enable expresses to pass locals at the few stations with 4 tracks. All trains stop at every station in the underground portions of their routes, making the transit time slow. That's why New York, which in the early 20th century was out to build a cadillac of a system, opted for the express/local system. My rail-fan friends in Tokyo are blown away by the "extravagance" of the NY express system (as well as confused by the fact that different lines stop at the same platform, something that is never done in Tokyo). It's also evidence of the tremendous wealth and industrial power of NY in the first half of this century.
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754163
        Posted by: Bob Andersen
        Date: Wed Apr 2 22:05:51 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Express Subways posted by John Mullervy on March 02, 1997 at 22:20:30: Because, being New Yorkers, we're always in a rush!
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754238
        Posted by: Tim Hall
        Date: Tue Apr 8 08:20:23 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by Iain Logan on March 03, 1997 at 09:13:05: London actually *needs* a few express lines in the central area, and will get one if Crossrail is ever built.
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754274
        Posted by: Ronald Kluger
        Date: Tue Mar 4 17:45:18 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Express Subways posted by John Mullervy on March 02, 1997 at 22:20:30: The real question is why does New York have express lines. The complications seem hardly worth the tremendous complications and resource implications. It probably goes back to railroading rather than transit considerations. I guess I offer as proof the fact that if the idea was so good, others would have used it. In Toronto, we are dealing with transit cut-backs on surface routes while subway extensions are being dug with great controversy at the same time. No one seems to think it would be better to invest in express lines.
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754341
        Posted by: Dan Lawrence
        Date: Thu Mar 6 14:22:53 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Express Subways posted by John Mullervy on March 02, 1997 at 22:20:30: Outside of NY, the only other subway that has express tracks/stations is the Broad Street Subway in Philadelphia. Built by the city in 1922-1928, the plans were based on the BQT/BMT system, including car size, etc. Market Street was built as four track between 22nd and 15th Streets, with the "local" tracks worked by streetcars. Subway trains make no stops between 30th and 15th. Boston's are bascially either streetcar subway or converted streetcar subway (Blue Line). The Cambridge Subway (Red Line)was built as a two track line opened in 1912 since Boston didn't have the density that New York has. Everybody else was built since 1965 and expenses limited tunnels to just two tracks.
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754396
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Fri Mar 7 10:16:10 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Express Subways posted by Dan Lawrence on March 06, 1997 at 14:22:53: Density is definitely a large part of the equation that makes NYC Subways unique, at least on this contient. Sheer size is another. Take a look at any comparison of statistics, such as Boris Pushkarev's 1980 book, and you can appreciate the order of magnitude difference. For example, He lists almost five THOUSAND cars on line during rush hour in NY. Compare that to the system of your interest. Some subway runs are over an hour in duration. in those situations, which I endured for three years in the very early sixties, the trip would have taken over a half hour more if all local stops had to be made. This is a significant savings, which would not be reflected in skipping a few stops on the average system. NY local stations were also built closer together than on more contemporary systems, most closer than one mile apart, because passengers had to be able to walk to a station, for the most part. So the bottom line, perhaps, is that no other system would get a commensurate payback from the admitted expense of building 4-track lines.
        
        Subject: Re: Express Subways
        Message Number: 754494
        Posted by: Augie Jakosz
        Date: Sat Mar 8 13:46:09 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Express Subways posted by Ronald Kluger on March 04, 1997 at 17:45:18: I think that express lines are great, lots of people here in Chicago ride the Evanston Express "L" during rush hours, but it only operates during weekday rush hours, at all other times the local must be ridden. I think express trains are GREAT!

Thread title: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S) (754003)
Started on Tue Mar 18 12:52:29 1997, by Julio Perez

Subject: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S)
Message Number: 754003
Posted by: Julio Perez
Date: Tue Mar 18 12:52:29 1997

In Reply to: [6]Re: MEMORY'S posted by Dave Pirmann on March 18, 1997 at 12:38:16: Maybe a sub-board on this web site containing .wav files of current--and maybe old--subway sounds could be developed. I miss the braking sound (vapor? steam?) of the old R-1s that used to run on the E/EE/F/GG lines of the sixties and early seventies, although they did a stint in '81 on Sly Stallone's movie "Nighthawks."
- Subject: Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S)
- Message Number: 754009
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Tue Mar 18 14:52:40 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S) posted by Julio Perez on March 18, 1997 at 12:52:29: Sounds good but do you know of a source for the sounds? :-)
  - Subject: Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S)
  - Message Number: 754050
  - Posted by: Philip Nasadowski
  - Date: Sun Mar 23 13:37:10 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S) posted by David Pirmann on March 18, 1997 at 14:52:40: A source for sounds?? Hmmm... aren't there a few trolley museums around that have early R's in working order??? Maybe we could convince them to run one and someone could record it with a good Dat or something??/
    - Subject: Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S)
    - Message Number: 754058
    - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
    - Date: Mon Mar 24 12:27:58 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S) posted by Philip Nasadowski on March 23, 1997 at 13:37:10: I love the amount of interest thay my casual remark about subway noise has stirred up, but I fear the quest is hopeless, because the din resulted, for the most part, from the frightening high speed dynamics between fifty year old cars and equally old track which had been beaten out of guage by several inches. This allowed a hunting motion, as railroaders call it, eventually culminating in a slamming of the flanges from side to side, all of which reverberated in the tunnel. The more benign sounds of traction motors, air brakes, pneumatic doors, etc. could be reproduced, but that's not the sound I was talking about.
      - Subject: Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S)
      - Message Number: 754088
      - Posted by: Julio Perez
      - Date: Wed Mar 26 15:39:08 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Subway Sounds (was Re: MEMORY'S) posted by David Pirmann on March 18, 1997 at 14:52:40: Maybe someone with a TV or VCR directly hooked up to a PC can get audio footage if clean from a movie such as "Nighthawks" or "Warriors", the latter having R9 audio when running an R30 in the video. Of course, the suggestion above assumes copying of audio is LEGAL. I'm not an attorney, so I'm not sure about this.

Thread title: R-110A and B's (754015)
Started on Tue Mar 18 21:38:54 1997, by Michael Azzollini

Subject: R-110A and B's
Message Number: 754015
Posted by: Michael Azzollini
Date: Tue Mar 18 21:38:54 1997

What's the latest info on the R-110's? Has the TA completed it's testing of the trains and are they now ready to purchase more units? Are the R-142(IRT) and R-143(BMT-IND) trains based upon the R-110's design? What ever became of the R-130 and R-131 order? MIKE
- Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
- Message Number: 754016
- Posted by: Steve
- Date: Tue Mar 18 23:13:05 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]R-110A and B's posted by Michael Azzollini on March 18, 1997 at 21:38:54: The R-142s are coming. Last word was 750 of them. The R-143s are still in discussion. The 'B' division cars will be based at East NY shop and assigned to the 'L' line. The 'L' line is also slated to get a new technology signal system to correspond with the arrival of the new cars and the opening of the new control center. The question which is yet to be decided is whether to purchase 100 R-143s and retrofit R-42s to operate with the new signal system for the balance of the 'L' line fleet or purchase 180 R-143s and not retrofit any R-42s. The R-142s will not be equipped withthe electronics for the new signal system but will be readily upgradable.
  - Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
  - Message Number: 754027
  - Posted by: David Steckler
  - Date: Thu Mar 20 10:30:05 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 18, 1997 at 23:13:05: Very interesting. If the R-42s are not retrofitted, will they be scrapped or transferred to a different line?
    - Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
    - Message Number: 754033
    - Posted by: Steve
    - Date: Thu Mar 20 18:50:35 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by David Steckler on March 20, 1997 at 10:30:05: As surprising as it may sound to those of us who remember the R-32s and newer cars being put into service, many of the 60 foot cars are nearing the end of their 35 year life expectancy. There is a timetable for scrapping out of some of them and for some technical reasons, the 42s and 40s may be among the first to go. However, with increasing service demands, I think that most of the 42s will be reassigned to other lines, at least for a few years.
      - Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
      - Message Number: 754037
      - Posted by: David Pirmann
      - Date: Thu Mar 20 21:28:21 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 20, 1997 at 18:50:35: I think if the new cars are assigned to the L and the R-42s displaced to other lines, as another poster wrote, that they would use this to scrap some of the R-40 slant fronts. While these cars are probably the most unique thing the subway still has, they appear to me in the worst shape of all of the 60-foot cars. The R-32's will outlive the R-40s, I predict.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754038
        Posted by: Bob Andersen
        Date: Thu Mar 20 23:12:49 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 18, 1997 at 23:13:05: I can't believe the L train is getting brand new equipment! When I rode the line back in the 60's-70's it seem we were always getting the short end of the stick. While other lines were getting air-conditioned cars, we were still riding in 50 year old BMT Standards.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754039
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Fri Mar 21 20:17:30 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by David Pirmann on March 20, 1997 at 21:28:21: Actually, I think that the R-42s and their older sisters, the R-40Ms will be the first to go. Although both the 40s and 42s were both built by St. Louis Car Co., the Slant 40s are actually in better shape. However, you are right about the R-32s. The R-32s both phase I and phase II are among the most reliable in the fleet. They might even survive thtough another overhaul.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754049
        Posted by: Michael Berson
        Date: Sun Mar 23 12:34:26 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 18, 1997 at 23:13:05: Wow, New equipment for the L line. It's about time!!!! MB
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754126
        Posted by: Todd Glickman
        Date: Fri Mar 28 13:11:35 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 21, 1997 at 20:17:30: Not so fast on the scrapping! Recall that the new 63rd Street Connection (from the Queens Blvd. Line to Queensbridge) will require new trainsets. This line, by the way, is tentatively called the "V" train. There have been a number or proposals on how to realign service along Queens Blvd. when this service begins, but to the best of my knowledge, no decison has yet been made.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754128
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Fri Mar 28 16:31:20 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Todd Glickman on March 28, 1997 at 13:11:35: Perhaps so but the 63rd St. connection will not open until the year 2001. As a matter of fact, the current plan calls for the Q train to be extended to Continental Avenue. To provide the additional service, 14 additionl trains would be required. By that time, or shortly there after, more of the R-143s will likely be on line. In conjunction with this, is a plan to realign Stillwell Avenue station and provide a 9th track which will not have a platform. This will give Q trains a route from Stillwell Yd. to Brighton Beach without being blocked at Stillwell Ave.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754353
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Wed Apr 16 15:30:20 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Steve on March 18, 1997 at 23:13:05: Yes, it is good that the L line will finally get some new equipment. It is long overdue. My understanding is that the BMT Eastern has not received any new equipment (R-44/46/68/68A's) in several years because these 75 foot long cars could not take the sharp turns near to Crescent St and Cypress Hills stations. If this is true we know that it would only affect the J/Z lines, but maybe they are other locations like this one on these lines (J,L,M and Z). I have ridden every line on the system end to end, but I've never spent much time on these lines. I just never found them to be fun lines to ride other than the J/Z express run between Myrtle Ave and Marcy Ave.
        
        Subject: Re: R-110A and B's
        Message Number: 754358
        Posted by: Gary Jacobi
        Date: Wed Apr 16 16:59:16 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: R-110A and B's posted by Wayne Johnson on April 16, 1997 at 15:30:20: Don't give up on the J/Z if you are at all interested in stations! The ones between Alababa Ave and Crescent Street are as mixed a bag as you can find. Some of them look like they were built by local volunteers ( I think of Norwood Ave in particular). They were all built circia 1893, and several companies other than BER did the work. I'm sure that you are correct about 75 footers being too long for the Crescent Street curves. It always amazed me that Standards and Triplexes could use the structure, whereas only lightweights were allowed on Pitkin Avenue.

Thread title: Re: Green Line (754017)
Started on Wed Mar 19 10:40:38 1997, by Todd Glickman

Subject: Re: Green Line
Message Number: 754017
Posted by: Todd Glickman
Date: Wed Mar 19 10:40:38 1997

In Reply to: [6]Green Line posted by Gerry O'Regan on February 27, 1997 at 13:15:17: Here's what the MBTA has posted on the schedule changes: GREEN LINE North Station Reconstruction As part of the ongoing North Station relocation project and construction of the Super Station, Green Line train access to the existing street level Canal Street portal will be closed as of Monday, March 31, 1997. Customers will use the elevated North Station Green Line platform for access inbound and outbound. The elevated platform will be equipped with fare collection, two entrance/exit stairways and elevators for handicap accessibility. Newly constructed stairways to the elevated platform are located on either side of Causeway Street. As part of the construction, from Friday, March 28 at 10:30 p.m to Monday, March 31 at 5:00 a.m., Green Line service will be interrupted from Government Center to Lechmere Station. Construction contractors must re-align the Green Line right of way in the North Station area to accommodate the construction of the Super Station. The MBTA will provide free substitute bus shuttle service from Government Center to Lechmere Stations making all appropriate stops along the line. Effective with the closing of the street level platforms at North Station on Monday, March 31, C line train service will terminate at Government Center. During rush hour, trains will run every five minutes or less between Government Center and Lechmere Stations. Frequency of train service on the E Line (Heath to Lechmere) will also be improved. Orange Line access only will remain unchanged at the North Station street level portal. The Super Station will provide a large underground station with shared platforms between the Orange and Green Lines and is designed to facilitate easy transfers between light rail, rapid transit, commuter rail and the Fleet Center. We appreciate your patience as we work to better serve you. To Our D Line Customers Effective April 5, 1997, until further notice, D Line service (Riverside) will be extended to Lechmere Station on weekends only. The service improvement is part of the ongoing North Station relocation project and construction of the new "Super Station". As part of the construction, from Friday, March 28 at 10:30 p.m to Monday, March 31 at 5:00 a.m., Green Line service will be interrupted from Government Center to Lechmere Station. Construction contractors must re-align the Green Line right of way in the North Station area to accommodate the construction of the Super Station. The MBTA will provide free substitute bus shuttle service from Government Center to Lechmere Stations making all appropriate stops along the line. The Super Station will provide a large underground station with shared platforms between the Orange and Green Lines and is designed to facilitate easy transfers between light rail, rapid transit, commuter rail and the Fleet Center. We appreciate your patience as we work to better serve you.
- Subject: Green Line
- Message Number: 754418
- Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
- Date: Thu Feb 27 13:15:17 1997
  
  A piece of the Green Line in Boston will relocate with the spring timetable. This includes a new, double-deck steel structure, highway ramp above, rail below and the use of the old Orange Line portal north of Haymarket. Canal St. terminal is history. This is the next step toward a super underground North Station below the Fleet Center.

Thread title: NYC buses pictures (754018)
Started on Wed Mar 19 13:51:50 1997, by Ron

Subject: NYC buses pictures
Message Number: 754018
Posted by: Ron
Date: Wed Mar 19 13:51:50 1997

hey, if anyone has ANY pictures of any NYC buses can you possibly send them to me attached to an email? im starting a NYC buses section on my website because i can't seem to find any other site with it, so it'll be cool.
- Subject: Re: NYC buses pictures
- Message Number: 754025
- Posted by: Trevor Logan
- Date: Thu Mar 20 09:23:22 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]NYC buses pictures posted by Ron on March 19, 1997 at 13:51:50: I would like some pictures sent to me of NYC Buses and if possible to new Articulated (Stretch) Bus Trevor Logan Address: 3535 Hepburn Court, Burtonsville, MD 20866
  - Subject: Re: NYC buses pictures
  - Message Number: 754132
  - Posted by: Bob Redden
  - Date: Fri Mar 28 23:35:57 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]NYC buses pictures posted by Ron on March 19, 1997 at 13:51:50: I post NY Metro area Buses BIG time. Over 250 since I started (1800 Bus) on alt.binaries.pictures.vehicles. Getting ready to lay out a BIG Triboro Coach historic set some time next week. Have a bunch of NYCTA Cars up right now. Cheers! Bob
    - Subject: Re: NYC buses pictures
    - Message Number: 754226
    - Posted by: Charles Fiori
    - Date: Mon Apr 7 14:53:26 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: NYC buses pictures posted by Bob Redden on March 28, 1997 at 23:35:57: What is exact address? I am new to the web and would like to access your files. 312-580-4022 if you'd rather call.

Thread title: Re: looking for contacts (754020)
Started on Wed Mar 19 20:37:05 1997, by Mark Greenwald

Subject: Re: looking for contacts
Message Number: 754020
Posted by: Mark Greenwald
Date: Wed Mar 19 20:37:05 1997

In Reply to: [6]looking for contacts posted by Michael Weiler on March 12, 1997 at 09:20:21: Michael, Sounds good to me---I have stuff from all over the globe BUT I specialize in items from the Baltimore, Washington, New York & San Francisco systems---e-mail me directly at mgreenwald@miworld.net thanks, Mark
- Subject: looking for contacts
- Message Number: 754656
- Posted by: Michael Weiler
- Date: Wed Mar 12 09:20:21 1997
  
  Hello! I realy love subway systems and i am looking for someone who wants to get in contact with me to change subway informations and souveniers. I offer a lot of of german articles.

Thread title: info (754026)
Started on Thu Mar 20 10:28:47 1997, by Clam Man

Subject: info
Message Number: 754026
Posted by: Clam Man
Date: Thu Mar 20 10:28:47 1997

Please, I'm doing a report on subways. If you have any info that could be of any help, I would be very greatful. Please send all info to ClamMan100@aol.com Thank you for your help. History and the way the subway functions are two areas I'm pretty short on. Thanks again! Sincerely, ClamMan

Thread title: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign (754029)
Started on Thu Mar 20 13:40:58 1997, by Mark Feinman

Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
Message Number: 754029
Posted by: Mark Feinman
Date: Thu Mar 20 13:40:58 1997

In Reply to: [6]"Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Janet Wright on March 06, 1997 at 16:58:41: You might want to contact the owner of Ellen's Stardust Diner (at least I think that was the name). She was a former Miss Subways and part of the restaurant is decorated in a subway theme. In fact, the outside of the Diner is supposed to resemble one of the IRT "redbird" cars, sans doors. If I recall, the Diner is located on Broadway next to the Winter Garden Theatre.
- Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
- Message Number: 754144
- Posted by: Steve
- Date: Sun Mar 30 08:57:14 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Gary Jacobi on March 06, 1997 at 17:27:24: between 1963 and 1972, I rode the subways daily during my High School & College years. The dates are definitely correct. Some of the posters have survived via the museum cars.
  - Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
  - Message Number: 754158
  - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
  - Date: Wed Apr 2 18:33:18 1997
    
    In Reply to: [5]Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Steve on March 30, 1997 at 08:57:14: I have to yield to your more recent recollection. This might imply that I wasn't as red- blooded a youngster as I thought, or, even more likely, that I payed as little attention to advertisements then as I do today.
    - Subject: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
    - Message Number: 754352
    - Posted by: Janet Wright
    - Date: Thu Mar 6 16:58:41 1997
      
      I am an independent NYC video producer seeking information about the New York City Transporation Authority's "Miss Subways" advertising campaign which started in May of 1941 and ran through 1976. I am particularly seeking any women who were selected for the ads which appeared monthly in the subway cars. Any information or posters, etc. would be appreciated. Thanks for your help!
      - Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
      - Message Number: 754363
      - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
      - Date: Thu Mar 6 17:27:24 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]"Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Janet Wright on March 06, 1997 at 16:58:41: Is 1976 a typo? I was a healthy young male rider of the incomparable NY subway system on a daily basis from 1957 through 1963, and I don't recall any monthly "Miss Subway" posters!
        
        Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
        Message Number: 754374
        Posted by: David Pirmann
        Date: Thu Mar 6 17:27:57 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]"Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Janet Wright on March 06, 1997 at 16:58:41: Sounds like an interesting search! It might be fun to include in your video a clip from "On The Town" (Bernstein/Comden/Green) in which a "Miss Turnstiles" pagent is held. --Dave
        
        Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
        Message Number: 754385
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Thu Mar 6 22:28:43 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]"Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Janet Wright on March 06, 1997 at 16:58:41: I believe that I recently saw a miss subways poster on one of the museum trains. I didn't pay much attention to it though. There may be some available through the Transit Museum on Borem Place. I don't have the phone # handy but you can call : (718) 330-1234 and they'll give you the correct number. If I run across any, I'll give you a shout. Sounds like an interesting project - good luck...
        
        Subject: Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign
        Message Number: 754505
        Posted by: Philip Nasadowski
        Date: Sat Mar 8 20:07:15 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: "Miss Subways" Advertising Campaign posted by Gary Jacobi on March 06, 1997 at 17:27:24: Well, I for one, was still swimming around in my dad and simultaneously floating around in my mom back then, but I do remember reading about something like this in a book once... Also, since we're on the topic, didn't the LIRR have fashion shows on their trains at one point, I seems to remember reading about that too..

Thread title: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale? (754042)
Started on Sat Mar 22 07:08:33 1997, by wiljan koopmans

Subject: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale?
Message Number: 754042
Posted by: wiljan koopmans
Date: Sat Mar 22 07:08:33 1997

In Reply to: [6]Re: Old Subway Items For Sale? posted by Steve Kreisler on March 05, 1997 at 13:22:46: can you sent some information aboet your sale I am looking for stickers and comercals from metro's special the comercial from anti grafiti. i hope yuo can help me thanx
- Subject: Old Subway Items For Sale?
- Message Number: 754211
- Posted by: Julio Perez
- Date: Tue Mar 4 09:49:29 1997
  
  Is there a place on the web or a store that carries old Westinghouse fans from retired R-1s or horns from R33/R36s? Also, how hard is it to convert an R33/R36 horn for use in a 12VDC circuit?
  - Subject: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale?
  - Message Number: 754308
  - Posted by: Steve Kreisler
  - Date: Wed Mar 5 13:22:46 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Old Subway Items For Sale? posted by Julio Perez on March 04, 1997 at 09:49:29: R-33/36 type horns are D-3 pneuphonic horns. They are driven by main reservoir air from the cars air supply and sounded by an air valve, usually actuated by pulling a piece of rope or 'conductor's cord'. Electrically controlled horns such as on the R-44/46 are controlled by 37.5 volts. I suppose that you could find a valve which could be adapted and is operated by 12 volts.
    - Subject: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale?
    - Message Number: 754430
    - Posted by: Julio Perez
    - Date: Fri Mar 7 14:07:51 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Old Subway Items For Sale? posted by Steve Kreisler on March 05, 1997 at 13:22:46: I suppose by 37.5 V, you mean DC...? I don't remember whether the third-rail voltage was 600 VAC or VDC, hence the doubt.
      - Subject: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale?
      - Message Number: 754452
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Fri Mar 7 19:50:15 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Old Subway Items For Sale? posted by Julio Perez on March 07, 1997 at 14:07:51: 37.5 volts is our nominal control voltage and is, of course, DC. The 3rd rail voltage is 600volts DC (nominal) but can vary significantly.
        
        Subject: Re: Old Subway Items For Sale?
        Message Number: 754516
        Posted by: philip nasadowski
        Date: Sat Mar 8 20:09:41 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Old Subway Items For Sale? posted by Steve on March 07, 1997 at 19:50:15: Is everything on subways D.C., or do you have motor-genmerator sets like the LIRR has on the M-1s?

Thread title: old school photos (754044)
Started on Sat Mar 22 07:16:11 1997, by wiljan koopmans

Subject: old school photos
Message Number: 754044
Posted by: wiljan koopmans
Date: Sat Mar 22 07:16:11 1997

i am looking for oldschool photos from metro's and graffiti on it. i hope you can sent me some pictures. my adres is wiljan koopmans. westdorperstraat 21 9531 ta borger p.o box 47 holland ]

Thread title: Old Brooklyn El Track Maps (754047)
Started on Sun Mar 23 02:46:44 1997, by Ben-Zion Cassouto

Subject: Old Brooklyn El Track Maps
Message Number: 754047
Posted by: Ben-Zion Cassouto
Date: Sun Mar 23 02:46:44 1997

Does anyone have/know of a source for track maps of the old abandoned B'klyn Els, incl: 5th Ave Old Main Line Lexington Fulton Myrtle El between Bridge and Park Row BTW I am trying to augment Dave Snowden's nice BMT36 Bahn layout with 5th Ave El and other route improvements... Ben-Zion
- Subject: Re: Old Brooklyn El Track Maps
- Message Number: 754048
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Sun Mar 23 12:30:57 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Old Brooklyn El Track Maps posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 23, 1997 at 02:46:44: I have a map (offline) of Lexington El. and part of the Myrtle El. Contact me in email and we can arrange to get you a copy. --Dave
  - Subject: Re: Old Brooklyn El Track Maps
  - Message Number: 754051
  - Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
  - Date: Sun Mar 23 15:13:21 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Old Brooklyn El Track Maps posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 23, 1997 at 02:46:44: There was a very good book in the "Tracks of New York" series that covered the Brooklyn Els in their early years. It contains excellent detail and lots of pictures too. Out of print now, but worth having if you are interested in the els.
    - Subject: Re: Old Brooklyn El Track Maps
    - Message Number: 754056
    - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
    - Date: Mon Mar 24 11:54:08 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]Old Brooklyn El Track Maps posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 23, 1997 at 02:46:44: The fairly recent softcover book, The Brooklyn Elevateds used a beautiful map of the pre-1918 brt el system as a background for the last twenty or so pages of photos. BEING SLIGHTLY WIERD ON THE SUBJECT, I MADE XEROX COPIES OF THESE PAGES, AND CUT AND PASTED A COMPLETE MAP OF THE bROOKLYN SYSTEM THAT IS ABOUT THREE FEET BY FIVE FEET.The detail is such that individual tracks and crossovers are shown. The book was not cheap, but I think it is still available, and with a little homework, you get the map free, plus you won't have to wonder if all the sheets are there, they are!

Thread title: Archer Avenue line (754062)
Started on Mon Mar 24 23:05:32 1997, by Michael Azzollini

Subject: Archer Avenue line
Message Number: 754062
Posted by: Michael Azzollini
Date: Mon Mar 24 23:05:32 1997

I seem to recall when I was a commuter to the city on the LIRR in the early-mid 70's, that the then under construction Archer Avenue line(tunnel) made a turn south just after the Jamaica Station terminal. If I'm correct, the tunnel construction was just to the east the LIRR tracks (which head south from Jamaica to Rosedale) and below what is now the York college athletic field, and that the construction stopped somewhere about a 1/4 mile south of the LIRR main line? I believe the line was supposed to use the LIRR right of way and travel as far as Rosedale? Does anyone have any further information? MIKE
- Subject: Re: Archer Avenue line
- Message Number: 754069
- Posted by: Steve
- Date: Tue Mar 25 19:18:31 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Archer Avenue line posted by Michael Azzollini on March 24, 1997 at 23:05:32: The Archer Avenue Extension is comprised of 4 tracks. The two lower tracks are for the BMT 'J' line while the upper 2 tracks are used by the IND 'E' line. At one point, strong consideration was given to linking the two lines south-east of the Parsons-Archer Station. For cost reasons, that was not done. The current upper level. extends approximately 1/2 mile from the eastern (northern per NYCT protocol) end of the Parsons Archer Station. There was a plan whereby this line would follow Merrick Blvd. and then Francis Lewis Blvd. out to Rosedale. At least 2 versions of this plan exist and include using tunnel and elevated lines. There was also a 6 or 7 track storage yard proposed which would have been South of Rosedale. South being before Rosedale as Rosedale would then be considered the northern terminal although actually being the southernmost point geographically. If this is confusing, don't worry. I seriously doubt that it will be built any time soon.

Thread title: Info (754064)
Started on Tue Mar 25 10:37:04 1997, by ClamMan

Subject: Info
Message Number: 754064
Posted by: ClamMan
Date: Tue Mar 25 10:37:04 1997

I am doing a report on the invention of subways. I am welcome to any info on who invented and built it, how they worked and work, the different kinds, the materials and methods used in construction. I am open to the most detailed info possible. Thank you for your consideration. THANKS, ClamMan100 :-}
- Subject: Re: Info
- Message Number: 754065
- Posted by: Gary Jacobi
- Date: Tue Mar 25 10:46:54 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]Info posted by ClamMan on March 25, 1997 at 10:37:04: There is a good book on worldwide subways in many libraries called Metropolitan Corridor. I highly recommend it, especially since you shouldn't have to buy it.
  - Subject: Re: Info
  - Message Number: 754066
  - Posted by: David Pirmann
  - Date: Tue Mar 25 11:17:03 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Info posted by ClamMan on March 25, 1997 at 10:37:04: Not to be rude or anything -- but try doing some research first! There is a large bibliography of subway and transit books available on this site at [7]http://subway.k2nesoft.com/biblio/ Your school, local, or county library should have many of them. Of particular interest regarding NYC are "Under the Sidewalks of New York" by Brian Cudahy and "Uptown/Downtown" by Stan Fischler. Regarding subways in general, try "Cash, Tokens, and Transfers" also by Brian J. Cudahy and "Labryinths of Iron" by Benson Bobrick. --Dave

Thread title: JFK Express (754071)
Started on Tue Mar 25 20:08:07 1997, by Mark Greenwald

Subject: JFK Express
Message Number: 754071
Posted by: Mark Greenwald
Date: Tue Mar 25 20:08:07 1997

Not being a NY native, sometimes, the only information I receive is through updated maps. With that thought in mind, I was looking through a 1979 subway map and saw the JFK Express run that was being done between Manhatten & JFK---I never noticed w/ the updated maps that it wasn't there any longer---what happened?
- Subject: Re: JFK Express
- Message Number: 754075
- Posted by: Peter Rosa
- Date: Tue Mar 25 21:40:21 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]JFK Express posted by Mark Greenwald on March 25, 1997 at 20:08:07: The JFK express was cancelled for low ridership, in the late 1980s I believe. Its main flaw was that riders could take the train only as far as the Howard Beach subway station, whereupon they'd have to get a shuttle bus to the terminals. Contrast that with rail lines in Atlanta and Chicago, which travel right into the airport terminals. The shuttle bus from Howard Beach still exists, connecting to regular A trains. But apparently there wasn't enough demand for the special trains.
  - Subject: Re: JFK Express
  - Message Number: 754076
  - Posted by: Steve
  - Date: Tue Mar 25 23:01:50 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: JFK Express posted by Peter Rosa on March 25, 1997 at 21:40:21: Actually, not quite true. The ridership was adequate, however, the JFK Express became more popular with commuters going to the Wall St. area who availed themself of the service. The cost of the fare was off-set by the parking which was available in the long term airport parking field. Most of the year (except for the peak travel times) there was no fee for parking in the lot. I also remember that if you did park there, your parking ticket would be validated by the collector when the lot was being manned. The main problem was that the Port Authority underwrote a fair share of the operating expense of the service. When they realized that they were subsidizing an 'upper class' subway system and derived little benifit for their operation (JFK Airport) they pulled the plug...
    - Subject: Re: JFK Express
    - Message Number: 754082
    - Posted by: Mark Greenwald
    - Date: Wed Mar 26 07:53:36 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: JFK Express posted by Steve on March 25, 1997 at 23:01:50: I see what you mean about subsidizing the upper class going to Wall St. There was a flaw in the system and they found it---Ingenuity at its best. Let me ask you though, if there was an extension built directly to the terminal and made it more convenient for people in the terminal & not in the parking lots, do you think it could have worked? On a separate note, the Washington Metro also has a station AT the airport, although it's not connected to the terminal at the present time, it is incorporated into the plans of the North Terminal reconstruction going on now. Also, in Baltimore, the Central Light Rail line is building a spur that will connect to the terminal extension now under construction at Baltimore/ Washington Int'l. In the end, make it more user friendly for airport users and not commuters.
      - Subject: Re: JFK Express
      - Message Number: 754090
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Wed Mar 26 18:59:31 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: JFK Express posted by Mark Greenwald on March 26, 1997 at 07:53:36: A link directly to the terminals would have made it more successful. The ultimate success of any airport link is in how seamless the route is. I rode the JFK Express many times and the thing that irked me was the fact that the train would go south of the Howard Beach Station. The train operator would then have to walk through the 3 cars to the other end and then proceed north into the station. This took several minutes and was frequently delayed by normal traffic of the Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park trains.
        
        Subject: Re: JFK Express
        Message Number: 754105
        Posted by: Dan Weissman
        Date: Thu Mar 27 13:43:52 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: JFK Express posted by Peter Rosa on March 25, 1997 at 21:40:21: Didn't I hear something about the city proposing a new line between JFK, LaGuardia and Manhattan recently? I grew up in New York but now live in Texas so I don't have the newspapers available to follow this. Did it turn out to be just another hair-brained idea of the city "planners"?
        
        Subject: Re: JFK Express
        Message Number: 754120
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Fri Mar 28 08:50:59 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: JFK Express posted by Dan Weissman on March 27, 1997 at 13:43:52: This plan, in one form or another, gets trotted out every couple of years by politicians who need an issue. They come up with elaborate maps and drawings with lots of numbers. The latest is changing for a LRV at Jamaica station on the LIRR for JFK or a Monorail from Newark airport to LaGuardia. What they still don't get is that nothing will be successful unless it's seemless and convenient. I can't believe that the LIRR runs right into Belmont Race Track, the subway runs right to Aquaduct race track and the politicians still don't understand that those services work because they are seemless with regular service. We need trains that run to the airport directly.
        
        Subject: Re: JFK Express
        Message Number: 754223
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Mon Apr 7 13:01:51 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]JFK Express posted by Mark Greenwald on March 25, 1997 at 20:08:07: I think another downfall of the JFK Express was that it had to run through Brooklyn between JFK and Manhattan. It ran well during off-peak hours, but during peak hours some trains would would get held up by A trains running on the express tracks along the Fulton Stree line.

Thread title: 21st St--Queensbridge (754072)
Started on Tue Mar 25 20:11:26 1997, by Mark Greenwald

Subject: 21st St--Queensbridge
Message Number: 754072
Posted by: Mark Greenwald
Date: Tue Mar 25 20:11:26 1997

Are there any plans to extend these lines to connect w/ the other main lines in Queens--It would seem logical that they should be connected but if there's one thing I've learned--very few things in NY are logical. If there are plans, what are they?
- Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
- Message Number: 754074
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Tue Mar 25 20:21:32 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]21st St--Queensbridge posted by Mark Greenwald on March 25, 1997 at 20:11:26: This is being done now. They are currently building a tunnel extension to tie in with the Queens Boulevard main line north of Queens Plaza. Someday if we ever get a Second Avenue Subway, the 21st St- Queensbridge line will have a connection to it, as well (on the Manhattan side, of course :-) --Dave
  - Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
  - Message Number: 754147
  - Posted by: Erich Rastetter
  - Date: Sun Mar 30 23:44:52 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by David Pirmann on March 25, 1997 at 20:21:32: Yes, they will connect the "B Q" to the Queens Blvd. Line. Its taken them years to get this far, and it seems a long way off untill they finish!
    - Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
    - Message Number: 754153
    - Posted by: Steve
    - Date: Mon Mar 31 21:59:33 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Erich Rastetter on March 30, 1997 at 23:44:52: You are right. The connection is due to open in the year 2001. The 'Q' train will be extended to Continental Avenue at that time.
      - Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
      - Message Number: 754210
      - Posted by: Julio Perez
      - Date: Mon Apr 7 08:00:12 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Steve on March 31, 1997 at 21:59:33: So, they're going to have five lines running along a section of Queens Boulevard up to 71-Continental? I thought they were going to create a new line called the V instead of extending the Q...?
        
        Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
        Message Number: 754214
        Posted by: Ben-Zion Cassouto
        Date: Mon Apr 7 09:54:09 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Julio Perez on April 07, 1997 at 08:00:12: Boy, can't they come up with something more imaginative and ambitious than to connect every possible tunnel from the Queens mainline to every terminal of the Broadway and 6th Ave lines! Talk about obsessions!
        
        Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
        Message Number: 754255
        Posted by: James Auyeung
        Date: Tue Apr 8 23:57:19 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Erich Rastetter on March 30, 1997 at 23:44:52: The the new tunnel has finally broke through to the main line. For those interested in catching a glimpse of the new tunnel take the Manhattan bound E or F train and look across to the local track when the train passes 36th street. You will soon see where the new turnoff will be ( about 1000 feet after the station). By the way it looks I guess the new tracks will connect to the local track which might cause some problems if the Q or V will go express.
        
        Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
        Message Number: 754438
        Posted by: John
        Date: Mon Apr 21 13:46:17 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on April 07, 1997 at 09:54:09: Well, at least we'll have more options on travelling into the city from Queens. I don't know what service changes the TA will do once the tunnel is completed, but a new subway line (the V train) will commence operation, but to where is beyond me (probably another Queens - Coney Island line)
        
        Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
        Message Number: 754457
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 21 17:47:50 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by John on April 21, 1997 at 13:46:17: I have not heard anything about a 'V' train, anywhere except here. What I have heard is that the current plan calls for the extension of the 'Q' train to Continental Ave and the R train will be extended to 179th St. If someone has heard otherwise, I'd nbe most interested in their source.
        
        Subject: Re: 21st St--Queensbridge
        Message Number: 754571
        Posted by: Keranu
        Date: Mon Apr 28 05:03:34 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: 21st St--Queensbridge posted by Steve on April 21, 1997 at 17:47:50: Last I heard, the 'V' train was to run on the proposed (but never to be built, probably) Second Avenue Line. It was supposed to run from Broad St to somewhere in the Bronx. Anyone have anymore information about whether tyhe tunnelse are being built under the East River and where they will join with the Queens Blvd line?

Thread title: DeKalb Junction (754079)
Started on Wed Mar 26 04:30:39 1997, by Ben-Zion Cassouto

Subject: DeKalb Junction
Message Number: 754079
Posted by: Ben-Zion Cassouto
Date: Wed Mar 26 04:30:39 1997

Can anyone verify a certain point about the track config N. and S. of DeKalb before the rebuild in the 50s: * Is it true that the Lawrence St turnoff N. of DeKalb, and the Atlantic Ave turnoff S. of DeKalb were always NOT at grade?
- Subject: Re: DeKalb Junction
- Message Number: 754092
- Posted by: MJS
- Date: Wed Mar 26 21:08:54 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]DeKalb Junction posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 26, 1997 at 04:30:39: South of there everything was the same, but north of there the same tracks went to Lawrence Street, after that it was different. The original local tracks turned inward toward the express and there were switches so expresses at DeKalb could be local at Myrtle Ave. (the next stop) after Myrtle there were switches that did the opposite. North of there the expresses went to the north side (Canal Street) and the locals to the south side (Chambers Street). I believe that the Brighton Connections were NOT provided for in the original plans and the provisions didn't exist when the station opened, am I right?

Thread title: Queensboro Plaza (754081)
Started on Wed Mar 26 04:41:48 1997, by Ben-Zion Cassouto

Subject: Queensboro Plaza
Message Number: 754081
Posted by: Ben-Zion Cassouto
Date: Wed Mar 26 04:41:48 1997

Regarding the old layout at QP before 1949, when the BMT ran shuttles to Astoria and Flushing: * My map shows that the BMT shuttles ran from the northmost platform of the upper level, and that from there there was a switch either to Flus or Ast. * It appears that they arrived back from these trips to the northmost track of the Qp lower level. Can anyone verify this? * Now: how did they turnaround to get to the upper level departure track. It would seem both returning Astoria and Flushing trains were clumsily turned in the network of switches directly in the path of return from the Flushing line, tying up the area quite well. Is this possible?!
- Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
- Message Number: 754159
- Posted by: Steve
- Date: Wed Apr 2 19:14:21 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Queensboro Plaza posted by Ben-Zion Cassouto on March 26, 1997 at 04:41:48: I think the answer to your questions can be found in "The Tracks of New York" Number 3 by Alan Paul Kahn & Jack May. There are two very good drawings of the Queensboro Plaza Layout circa 1920. If you contact me via E-Mail, I can scan the 2 drawings for you.
  - Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
  - Message Number: 754174
  - Posted by: David Steckler
  - Date: Fri Apr 4 12:23:01 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Queensboro Plaza posted by Steve on April 02, 1997 at 19:14:21: There are several excellent pictures of BMT equipment (Q cars) in shuttle service at or near Queensboro Plaza in,The Brooklyn Elevated," by James Greller and Edward Watson. There are other pictures in "Subway to the Worlds Fair," by Frederick Kramer and a picture in "They Moved the Millions," by Ed Davis.
    - Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
    - Message Number: 754176
    - Posted by: David Steckler
    - Date: Fri Apr 4 16:27:16 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Queensboro Plaza posted by Steve on April 02, 1997 at 19:14:21: There are some excellent pictures of BMT equipment (Q cars)on the shuttle approaching Queensboro Plaza in, "The Brooklyn Elevated," by James Greller and Edward Watson. There are pictures of the BMT equipment in "Subway to the World's Fair," by Frederick Kramer (about the 1939 World's Fair) and in "They Moved the Millions," by Ed Davis.
      - Subject: Queensboro Plaza
      - Message Number: 760936
      - Posted by: Adam
      - Date: Sun Dec 28 18:15:42 1997
        
        I just found out that there is a major $10 million renovation scheduled for Queensboro Plaza. If anybody is interested, there is an involved article in the December 17, 1997 edition of the Western Queens Gazette that describes the entire planned operation. The Western Queens Gazette is a free community-based paper that is available in many different stores throughout Queens. The renovation, secheduled to begin shortly, may be delayed for about 6 months due to the 63rd Street tunnel construction already going on in that same area.
        
        Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
        Message Number: 760945
        Posted by: Julio Perez
        Date: Sun Dec 28 18:15:58 1997
        
        In Reply to: [8]Queensboro Plaza posted by Adam on December 19, 1997 at 11:21:17: Is the mentioned article available in electronic format somewhere? I'm curious to see what's involved in the renovation, but I live a little south of Queens--about 1,400 miles away--to receive the Western Queens Gazette.
        
        Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
        Message Number: 760946
        Posted by: Julio Perez
        Date: Sun Dec 28 18:16:00 1997
        
        In Reply to: [8]Queensboro Plaza posted by Adam on December 19, 1997 at 11:21:17: Is the mentioned article available in electronic format somewhere? I'm curious to see what's involved in the renovation, but I live a little south of Queens--about 1,400 miles away--to receive the Western Queens Gazette.
        
        Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
        Message Number: 760949
        Posted by: Adam
        Date: Sun Dec 28 18:16:05 1997
        
        In Reply to: [8]Re: Queensboro Plaza posted by Julio Perez on December 19, 1997 at 15:40:44: No, unfortunately I do not think that the Western Queens Gazette is online. However, there are two things that I may be able to do to help you. I could either just retype the entire article (which is rather long) here on SubTalk or I could send you your own copy of the Gazette. Let me know which you would prefer.
        
        Subject: Re: Queensboro Plaza
        Message Number: 760950
        Posted by: Charles Fiori
        Date: Sun Dec 28 18:16:06 1997
        
        In Reply to: [8]Re: Queensboro Plaza posted by Julio Perez on December 19, 1997 at 15:37:56: Julio, I did a quick search and the Western Queens Gazette is not on-line, at least not obviously so. I will keep checking the [9]Queens Tribune to see if any such news pops up and then post it.

Thread title: Old systems vs. New (754083)
Started on Wed Mar 26 08:11:54 1997, by Mark Greenwald

Subject: Old systems vs. New
Message Number: 754083
Posted by: Mark Greenwald
Date: Wed Mar 26 08:11:54 1997

Here's a debatable topic to ponder---With the advent of so many new systems having been built over the last 20-25 yrs. (San Fran./ Washington/ Atlanta/ Baltimore & LA) and now with smaller cities building smaller light rail systems (Pittsburgh/ Dallas/ Denver), don't you all think that it makes it difficult for older cities w/ older systems to get their systems renovated and rebuilt to current standards? In other words, with all this new competition competing for fed. tax dollars from the same pool of transit funds, there is now less to go around and each system gets less because it has to spread out so thinly. Is this fair to the newer cities trying to get their systems off the ground? NO! Is this fair to the older cities trying to make their systems more efficient, safe, and modernized? NO!!---What are your thoughts?
- Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
- Message Number: 754100
- Posted by: David Steckler
- Date: Thu Mar 27 09:31:16 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Old systems vs. New posted by Mark Greenwald on March 26, 1997 at 08:11:54: You raise an interesting question but the problem has to do with federal funding. The federal government gives money to xonstruct new systems but the funds, if any, are much skinnier for rehabbing existing transit systems.
  - Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
  - Message Number: 754103
  - Posted by: Keranu!!
  - Date: Thu Mar 27 09:43:07 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by David Steckler on March 27, 1997 at 09:31:16: I will make a lot of enemies by saying thisbut stuff the other cities! I think the Fed. Gov. should pump all of its transit system money into the cash-starved but absolutely brilliant NYC Subway.
    - Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
    - Message Number: 754104
    - Posted by: Mark Greenwald
    - Date: Thu Mar 27 09:52:15 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by Keranu!! on March 27, 1997 at 09:43:07: I'm a native of DC, so I am very familiar with their nice new system---and Baltimore's too. But I must admit, you're right, the old systems should get top dollar, not just NY, but also, Boston, Philly & Chicago. I consider those systems more of a safety hazard because of all the out dated equipment. (i.e. signaling, tunnels, etc)
      - Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
      - Message Number: 754111
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Thu Mar 27 19:18:03 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by Mark Greenwald on March 27, 1997 at 09:52:15: As usual, Federal Funding for mass transit is not without strings. For example, one section of the Urban Mass Transit Act (I could not readily locate the exact section) provides that federal funds may not be used to gain efficiency and cost savings through the use of new technology if that new technology results in the loss of jobs. It's convoluted logic like that, which force the older systems to bypass the state -of-the-art in favor of some out of date equipment.
        
        Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
        Message Number: 754388
        Posted by: JOHN
        Date: Fri Apr 18 21:49:37 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by Mark Greenwald on March 27, 1997 at 09:52:15: Now wait a minute, Greenwald. There's nothing wrong with the New York City Subway System (debatable point, but for the most part it's true). There is nothing wrong with the equipment. This system carries thousands of passengers each day without incident. I have been riding the subways since I was an infant and I have never been injured or been involved with any kind of mishap on subway property. True, some of the cars are over 30 years old, but these cars are still going strong, and with proper maintenence, can keep running for the next 30 years. True, the system is noisy, but what do you expect? Steel wheels on steel rails in a tunnel. True, that in the 1970s and 1980s, the subway was Graffitti Central and the centerpeice of urban decay, but today, not a trace of the dark days remain, and the TA is doing a fantastic job at keeping the subway in working order. WAY TO GO, MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY!!!!
        
        Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
        Message Number: 754394
        Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
        Date: Sat Apr 19 12:35:24 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by JOHN on April 18, 1997 at 21:49:37: Its always nice to see someone say something good about NYCT. Considering what the system does, and in comparison to the much smaller system here in Boston it is amazing. Back when we had 'real' signals here, two or three blocks behind the train would be red. In New York when the train is halfway out of the station the following train is already entering, protected by a signal at mid platform. Someone had their act together when the NY transit system was built and unified. Let's hope it stays that way!
        
        Subject: Re: Old systems vs. New
        Message Number: 754482
        Posted by: Mark Greenwald
        Date: Tue Apr 22 20:27:36 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Old systems vs. New posted by JOHN on April 18, 1997 at 21:49:37: John, cool your jets my friend---no offense intended---It's like you said, it is old BUT it does get the job done--whta I was wondering is that even with proper maintenance, even with age, doesn't it over time, become a safety issue? I NEVER said the New York subway system is bad---in fact--no system in the world can compare---No where can so many people be moved so fast so, so far, and for pennies on the dollar what it would take for them to drive themselves or, heaven forbid, pay for a taxi. I love the New York system, it is its own world separate from the city that surrounds it. New York wouldn't be New York without it. Don't be offended, the other cities can learn from the NY system--both its failures and successes---and I might say, it is great to see money going back into the system to cleann it up and rehab the rolling stock and stations.

Thread title: Re: Airport Transit Interface (754084)
Started on Wed Mar 26 11:08:13 1997, by Gary Jacobi

Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
Message Number: 754084
Posted by: Gary Jacobi
Date: Wed Mar 26 11:08:13 1997

In Reply to: [5]Re: JFK Express posted by Peter Rosa on March 25, 1997 at 21:40:21: I have ridden both the DC National and Chicago O'Hare Transit connections in the mid 80's during long layovers on flights. I watched, from a transit fan's point of view, for any sign that actual flyers were using the facility to catch a plane. My criterion was simple; LUGGAGE! The impression I got was that nearly nobody takes luggage with them, especially in DC where there is a long walk between terminal and train. Therefore, I concluded that very few airline passengers avail themselves of the service. This does not at all infer that transit does not serve the airport well; I must conclude that airport workers and others with business at the airport are using transit, and taking some of the load off of roads and parking lots. This fits in with the cynical attitude of some who want transit to take the "other guy" to work, so the roads will clear up for them to continue to drive wherever they want.
- Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
- Message Number: 754089
- Posted by: Mark Greenwald
- Date: Wed Mar 26 16:34:34 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Gary Jacobi on March 26, 1997 at 11:08:13: You are absolutely right!!!!!As a native of Washington, I know first hand the long trek across the parking lot to the airport station---that is why they incorporated it into the plans for the new North terminal--to solve this problem. One thing of note that I personally noticed on several occassions---A lot of travelors do use the Metro (DC) that come in through Union Station (Amtrak). As you may know there is a Red Line station right in the Amtrak station--people don't even need to go outdoors to get to the Metro--henceforth, a lot easier to use and a lot more convenient. From where I used to live, I would board the Metro @ Silver Spring which is further up the Red Line and therefore noticed what happened @ Union Station on several occassions. Also, there is a lot of talk about where to expand the Metro beyond it's current planned 103 mile/ 86 station system---One very common plan is to split the Orange Line at West Falls Church and build a leg out to Dulles Int'l Airport, throught the Tysons Corner business community. The line would run in the median of the Dulles access road. In Baltimore, due to open this year are two segments of the Central Light Rail line that will connect with other transporatin hubs. One to Baltimore/ Washington Int'l Airport and the other to Penn Station (Amtrak). There is already a LRT station at Camden Station where it connects with MARC commuter rail which serves both Baltimore & DC from the Maryland suburbs. If it works in Atlanta, it should work here.
  - Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
  - Message Number: 754101
  - Posted by: Daid Steckler
  - Date: Thu Mar 27 09:40:02 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Mark Greenwald on March 26, 1997 at 16:34:34: The airport transit connection in St. Louis, MO is very convenient. The terminal is right in the airport, no major long walks required. It has several stops in the heart of downtown St. Louis city. Funding has recently been obtained to extend the system to the new airport under construction in central Illinois, providing an airport-to-airport LRV system. Additional extensions are planned into the Clayton, MO central business district (Clayton is the county seat of St. Louis County and is where many office buildings are located)
    - Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
    - Message Number: 754112
    - Posted by: Peter Gray
    - Date: Fri Mar 28 03:02:16 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Mark Greenwald on March 26, 1997 at 16:34:34: Re the metro line to Dulles Airport. The original Dulles access road was designed with a wide median precisely to handle an envisioned train line to the airport. This was in 1962. The planners were certainly ahead of their time. 35 years later absolutely nothing has happened other than numerous feasibility studies and an explosion in suburban population in the entire Northern Virginia corridor along the route to Dulles and beyond, which makes the roads a nightmare. Mass transit options are virtually nil. My folks live in Herndon, Va., which until 1962 had (from what old-timers say) was great train service on the Washington & Old Dominion into Alexandria & DC, and out to Leesburg and the Shenendoah valley in the other direction. The right-of-way still exists as a bicycle path. I now live in Tokyo, and here in Japan new rail lines are put in FIRST, before housing developments - a somewhat different approach. Does anyone know what the Washington Metro's timetable for completing the Green Line between U Street and Fort Totten (Columbia Heights and Georgia Avenue stations)
      - Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
      - Message Number: 754137
      - Posted by: Bob Andersen
      - Date: Sat Mar 29 11:52:50 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Peter Gray on March 28, 1997 at 03:02:16: Early on, much of NYC's Elevateds and subways were also built in relatively deserted areas. It was the rail lines that spurred the development of these areas. Perhaps our slogan should be : Build it and they will come!
        
        Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
        Message Number: 754143
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Sun Mar 30 08:52:15 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Gary Jacobi on March 26, 1997 at 11:08:13: As usual, another opportunity to develope a transit-airport link will be bypassed by the NY MTA. There is less than 2 miles of mostly undeveloped land between the Ronkonkoma Station on the LIRR and MacArthur Airport. No connection is planned.
        
        Subject: Re: Airport Transit Interface
        Message Number: 754148
        Posted by: David Steckler
        Date: Mon Mar 31 07:29:36 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Airport Transit Interface posted by Steve on March 30, 1997 at 08:52:15: Not really practical to construct a connection from the Ronkonkoma station to MacArthur. Unless someone lived on the Ronkonkoma line, anyone living east of Hicksville would need to take the train west then transfer at Hicksville to a Ronkonkoma train. Given the fact that MacArthur is centrally located in Suffolk County, it's probably faster for most people to drive.

Thread title: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? (754087)
Started on Wed Mar 26 15:29:22 1997, by Julio Perez

Subject: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
Message Number: 754087
Posted by: Julio Perez
Date: Wed Mar 26 15:29:22 1997

In Reply to: [6]R-110A and B's posted by Michael Azzollini on March 18, 1997 at 21:38:54: I read this thread about retiring some R40s and similar units in anticipation for the new equipment to arrive. In order to raise some capital, hasn't NYCTA Procurement thought about selling the units in runnable shape to other transit entities running trains that are electrically and dimensionally similar? I'm pretty sure some entities strapped for cash will take them, refurbish them, and integrate them into their fleet. Baltimore, Atlanta (MARTA), and /or Dade County, Florida Metrorail might be able to use them without having to commit so much cash. Are the people on Livingston Street reading this suggestion???
- Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
- Message Number: 754201
- Posted by: John
- Date: Sun Apr 6 20:41:58 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Julio Perez on March 26, 1997 at 15:29:22: If I'm not mistaking, I think the TA has sold some of its R-46 cars to the subway system of Caracus, Venezuala.
  - Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
  - Message Number: 754253
  - Posted by: Steve
  - Date: Tue Apr 8 22:41:20 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by John on April 06, 1997 at 20:41:58: There were 754 R-46 cars in the original purchase. Today there are still 752 in service. Cars #1054 and 941 were heavily damaged in a mishap in 1986. Both cars were scrapped in 1991. No R-46 car was ever sold to any other transit property.
    - Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
    - Message Number: 754387
    - Posted by: JOHN
    - Date: Fri Apr 18 21:33:08 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Steve on April 08, 1997 at 22:41:20: Maybe it was a different type of subway train, because I could have sworn I read in the roster section in the back of the book "New York Subway Cars" that a few trains were sent to Caracus.
      - Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
      - Message Number: 754409
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Sun Apr 20 16:05:02 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by JOHN on April 18, 1997 at 21:33:08: To the best of my knowledge, this was not the case. The 10s and the 27/30s were pretty well canabalized once they were scrapped. That's not to say that the car bodies couldn't have been re-sold (by the scrap-dealers) to another agency but IMHO I don't think reuilding was feasible.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754429
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 22:35:46 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Steve on April 20, 1997 at 16:05:02: Then what exactly did the roster say in the back of the book? Okay, let me restate this question: Did the New York City Transit Authority ever sell any subway trains to other transit authorities? If so, which ones?
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754458
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 21 17:55:15 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 22:35:46: I cannot recall any cars having ever been 'sold' to any other properties. I have heard rumors that at one time some IRT equipment was sold to PATH but I do not know how reliable this information was. I can only recall just 1 instance where subway cars from NYCT were transferred to another system. In the late 80s, 12 R-44s were transferred to the SIRT. These cars were odd-balls anyway with R-46 type propulsion and braking.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754471
        Posted by: Joshua Caesar
        Date: Tue Apr 22 14:56:13 1997
        
        Before the TA ever recieved the R-46 car number 816 was sent to Caracas by Pullman in hopes of winning that cities contract for rolling stock for their new subway. Luckly for Caracas, they did not give the contract to Pullman (the R-46 was the car where the TA brought suit against Pullman to have them pay for the replacment of the defective trucks the cars came with) But I think that leasing of rolling stock is an accepted practice among railroads, doesn't Metro-North run with some cars from Virginia? For the TA to rehab old cars and lease them out could make alot of sense. And for BMT-IND cars, the interiors could be re-done, with RR style seating, to make the cars suitable for leasing by commuter railroads as wel as by other subway systems. Josh
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754476
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Tue Apr 22 16:57:20 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Joshua Caesar on April 22, 1997 at 14:56:13: I don't knoow where your information comes from but I wish you'd give the source. Some of your facts are incorrect. First: R-46 car #816 is still in service. It was overhauled in 1990 and renumbered in 1992 but I assure you it still is in service. It, perhaps was used as a demo model before delivery but it has only left the property once. That was when it was shipped to Morrison-Knudsen in 1990 for overhaul. There are only 2 R-46 cars of the original 754 which are no longer in service. Cars 1054 and 941 were heavily damaged in a mishap in 1986 and scrapped in 1991. Second: The TA did not sue Pullman Standard, the builder of the R-46. The TA successfully sued Rockwell International, the builder of the original (Air-bag suspension) trucks. They were replaced by Buckeye Steel trucks in the early 80s.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754478
        Posted by: Joshua Caesar
        Date: Tue Apr 22 17:26:56 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Steve on April 22, 1997 at 16:57:20: I stated that before car number 816 was recieved by the TA, it was sent to Caracas as a demo. Which, according to the book I am reading, it was. As for it ever leaving the property after the TA recieved it, I never said anything of the sort. As to the MTA sueing Rockwell International, not Pullman Standard, I am sorry, I trusted the book again. According to it, the TA sued both Pullman Standard and Rockwell International, but I didn't look deeply into it. No matter who they sued, Caracas is lucky that they didn't start their system of with a batch of defective trucks under their rolling stock. I am getting my information on this matter from Cudahy's Under the Sidewalks of New York, and I am sorry for any confusion my post may have caused for anybody.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754481
        Posted by: Mark Greenwald
        Date: Tue Apr 22 20:13:38 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Joshua Caesar on April 22, 1997 at 14:56:13: Joshua, that is interesting that you mentioned the leasing of stock to other systems---It seems to me that I recall seeing that done with buses back in the late 70's or early 80's (I don't remember exactly) It seems to me that New York got a batch of GM buses that were defective and that MANY broke down at relatively the same time leaving New York without enough buses to run the routes---In a desperate attempt to maintain order, The Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority sent a good many buses to help fill in the gap for New York---I'm sur the WMATA didn't do it out of charity, they're as desparate for a dollar as are other transit agencies. If anybody has any details in order to help clear my memory--please post.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754486
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Tue Apr 22 21:49:13 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Mark Greenwald on April 22, 1997 at 20:13:38: I think that you are correct about the ddefective busses but I'm pretty sure that the busses you are referring to were the Grumman Flexibles. TA President David Gunn got rid of over 400 of the busses. Oddly enough, other NYC bus companies (Green, Jamaica and Steinway) did not have the same problems. As for leasing, many of the city busses are leased to the city by other agencies such as the Port Authority. Also NYCT also leases a number of the R-62s, R-68s and I believe R-68As. The city also 'lent' to Atlanta, somewhere in vicinity of 100 brand new busses, for the olympics. Those busses are now in service in NYC.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754489
        Posted by: zack
        Date: Wed Apr 23 00:42:18 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Steve on April 22, 1997 at 21:49:13: the buses you are reffering to are flexible metros-not flexible fishbowls
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754491
        Posted by: FRED WELLMAN
        Date: Wed Apr 23 09:48:35 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by zack on April 23, 1997 at 00:42:18: I agree with the post about the flixables. The buses were from Wash DC and had been mothballed for future transit emergencys . I think they were on loan by the Federal Govt request as they pay a large portion of the expenses to keep the buses in reserve. I know several transit systems did join in this program COTA for one. I have not heard anything about this program since the New York loan. It does make a lot of sense to keep the old buses in reserve, so it proably has been cancled. BTW if my memory is correct very few of the buses did break down on the trip to NYC from Wash DC, which is good considering how long the may have been sitting.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754507
        Posted by: Philip Nasadowski
        Date: Wed Apr 23 21:33:37 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by zack on April 23, 1997 at 00:42:18: And "Flexible" they were!!! As I recall, the Grumman ones were known for strtctural problems - I still remember the story my Aunt told me about the one she was on that actually started to *sag* something major due to the weight of the people on it..... Didn't D.C. have a simmalar problem with their ROHR rolling stock when it first came out??? And oh yeah - while we're on it - ROHR built the Bart too - reading some 70 vintage material in my library, it stated that the Bart uses as wider than normal gauge + a 1Kv third rail - anyone know if this is true??? Frankly, I can't see how Rohr stays in business.. a professor I know told me that when he was at P&W, the Rohr built engine parts were shear crap... Oh yeah - didn't Budd die off a while back???
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754511
        Posted by: Mark Greenwald
        Date: Thu Apr 24 10:19:01 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Philip Nasadowski on April 23, 1997 at 21:33:37: Yup, Third rale propulsion power is 1000-volt DC electricity on the BART Propulsion - one 150-HP motor per axle, four motors per car. Features - aluminum body, 72 seats, carpeted, air-conditiooned, tinted windows Car - 70' long, 10'6" high, 10'6" wide, headroom 6'9" Track gauge - 5'6" wide for staability (standard: 4'8") Speed - 80 MPH maximum, 39 MPH average, including 20-second station stops. I was fortunate enough to have relatives near the South Hayward who contacted BART and sent me a boat load of info.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754512
        Posted by: MJS
        Date: Thu Apr 24 13:25:43 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Joshua Caesar on April 22, 1997 at 14:56:13: The MTA sued against Rockwell International and not Pullman Standard. To me it seems that Rockwell is an incompetent manufacturer, they also produce shitty modems and water meters.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754515
        Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
        Date: Thu Apr 24 13:59:17 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Philip Nasadowski on April 23, 1997 at 21:33:37: Does anyone remember the American Motors Busses from the 70's. When the kids in Boston kicked open the emergency exit windows as they often did, the body would sag so much that the window would not close. The entire fleet of 1976 busses was gone by 1986, some being leased to other carriers before being junked. Many sat in the dead line at Everett longer than they ran in service. Compare that to 1966 fishbowls which were finally retired in 1996!
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754536
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Fri Apr 25 10:16:11 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Mark Greenwald on April 22, 1997 at 20:13:38: Mark, Mark, I remember this very well. This took place in the early 1980's (approx 1981-2). The NYCTA had been operating 637 (of a total order of 851 buses) Grumman Flxible 870 buses when they were taken out of service. The TA scrambled to get some of their own older buses back on the streets. The TA later arranged to borrow 100 to 150 buses from WMATA. The buses were mostly GM 40 footers, but some were 35 footers and a few were Flxibles. If I remember correctly, I believe the TA paid WMATA $20 per bus, per day (I was only 15 yrs. old). These buses were assigned to two Manhattan depots (Amsterdam & 54th Street) and to the Staten Island division. I believe we had them for about 1 1/2 yrs. It was great to ride the WMATA buses as they were very comfortable and seemed to be in better shape than the average NYCTA bus at the time. Grumman Flxible retrofitted the NYCTA's as well as many other transit agencies' model 870 buses, but the NYCTA claimed that the buses were unfit for service. I personally believe that while Grumman obviously put out a defective product at first, they took responsibility and corrected the problem, but the NYCTA attempted to blame future problems on Grumman. The NYCTA later sold all 851 buses back to Flxible who in turn re-conditioned them and sold most of them (approx 700) to New Jersey Transit. They are doing just fine to this day. The NYCTA did not order from Flxible again after this, but many other transit agencies continued to buy Flxible buses (including WMATA) and they seem to be operating just fine. Incidentally Washington D.C. streets are just as bad as New York streets. Also WMATA is quite strapped for cash and many of their same old GM fishbowls are still operating today. These buses date back to the early 1960's. Hope this clears it up. Feel free to e-mail me if you have more questions.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754544
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Fri Apr 25 14:42:32 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by zack on April 23, 1997 at 00:42:18: Actually, the buses were Grumman Flxable 870's. Grumman Flxable started producing the Metro model in 1982-3. The model look nearly identcal to the 870, but it had the structural improvements (and others) included. The NYCTA never did operate any Metro models. The private companies in NYC, Green Bus lines, Jamaica Buses, Queens Surface and Triboro also did not purchase the Metro. These companies did test a few Metro's in the beginning of their production. MSBA (Long Island Bus) does have both the 870 and Metro models operating. Incidentally, MSBA is under the same parent agency, The MTA as is the NYCTA.
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754562
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 27 21:44:48 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by Wayne Johnson on April 25, 1997 at 10:16:11: WMATA is still operating the Fishbowls? On which routes? I wish they were still using them in New York - I love those busses!
        
        Subject: Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies?
        Message Number: 754614
        Posted by: Wayne Johnson
        Date: Tue Apr 29 09:40:44 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Selling Old Rolling Stock to Other Agencies? posted by John on April 27, 1997 at 21:44:48: Yes, WMATA still operate many fishbowls. I would estimate that about 100 of them are still operating. It's very easy to find them on weekdays. I have quite figured out the WMATA route numbering schemes, but I see the fishbowls on some routes near to Union Station such as the 80, X2 and others. I recently moved to Maryland (from NYC), but I work in DC near to Union Station and I see several fishbowls each day. As you'd expect I don't recall seeing many on weekends. I also see them at the following Metro Stations: Silver Spring, Tacoma, Addison Road and near the Pentagon. WMATA seems to have a lot of faith in them as I spotted fishbowls operating serveral miles outside of DC. I too have a soft spot for the fishbowls and was saddened when the NYCTA started retiring theirs. Sorry, I couldn't provide more info. about the actual routes, but I have passed a couple of depots that had fishbowls in the yard if you're interested. WMATA also has late 70's Flxibles still in service also. They have wheelchair lifts and are nearly identical to the old 9000 series Flxibles the NYCTA used to operate.

Thread title: PC subway simulations ? (754093)
Started on Thu Mar 27 06:49:31 1997, by Peter Bjoern

Subject: PC subway simulations ?
Message Number: 754093
Posted by: Peter Bjoern
Date: Thu Mar 27 06:49:31 1997

Does anybody know of the existance of a PC based simulation of a subway system. I'm not looking for things like RailroadTycoon or things where you have to manage a company, but for a more technical thing. I recently visited the London transport museum and saw that they had a train simulator running, where you would drive a subway (or underground as they called it :-) train seen from the drivers point of view. I would really like to have such a program ... Regards Peter
- Subject: Re: PC subway simulations ?
- Message Number: 754097
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Thu Mar 27 09:22:47 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]PC subway simulations ? posted by Peter Bjoern on March 27, 1997 at 06:49:31: See [7]Subway Simulators. There's two programs, BAHN (in German with English documentation) which allows you to design track layouts and schedule trains. We have layouts for the entire NYC Subway system and lots of other systems worldwide. Also, NXSYS, which is an interlocking simulator that provides a cab view option. --dave
  - Subject: Re: PC subway simulations ?
  - Message Number: 754118
  - Posted by: Peter Bjoern
  - Date: Fri Mar 28 07:47:40 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: PC subway simulations ? posted by David Pirmann on March 27, 1997 at 09:22:47: Thank you very much. This seems to be just what I was looking for. I downloaded both programs ... regards Peter

Thread title: R10 Paint Schemes (754094)
Started on Thu Mar 27 07:41:46 1997, by Julio Perez

Subject: R10 Paint Schemes
Message Number: 754094
Posted by: Julio Perez
Date: Thu Mar 27 07:41:46 1997

I vaguely remember in the 70s seeing what resembles an R10 in a blue-and-white exterior paint scheme similar to the R33/R36 World's Fair trains. I think these were running on the A line then. But I also remember seeing R10s in beige with brown tops running across an elevated track over Woodhaven Blvd. Has anyone seen either one of the above trains with the stated paint schemes? More concerning, was there an elevated track running somewhere above Woodhaven Boulevard? I was a kid and was traveling across unfamiliar territory, so I may be wrong about the thoroughfare.
- Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
- Message Number: 754095
- Posted by: Dave Pirmann
- Date: Thu Mar 27 09:20:02 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 27, 1997 at 07:41:46: The NYCT has an R-10 painted in the blue/grey paint scheme in the yard at Coney Island. There's a picture of it at [7]R10 page. A few years ago they had an R-10, #3184, painted dark blue. I don't know if it's still there, but we have a picture of it too. --Dave
  - Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
  - Message Number: 754098
  - Posted by: David Steckler
  - Date: Thu Mar 27 09:25:52 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 27, 1997 at 07:41:46: The R10's ran on the A line until 1977. I believe a number of cars were rebuilt in 1985 and the last year of service for the R10 was 1989. The blue and white paint scheme you refer to was called the MTA scheme, although they were also painted in a white and turquiose scheme. When you say the elevated at Woodhaven Blvd., do you mean the route used by the #7 train today?
    - Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
    - Message Number: 754107
    - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
    - Date: Thu Mar 27 14:21:19 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 27, 1997 at 07:41:46: I'm pretty sure the El train you saw was the Liberty Avenue Line to Lefferts Blvd and Rockaway, where R10's in their customary guise as The A Train were a regular feature in the late fifties and sixties. Woodhaven Blvd changes, in name only, to Cross Bay Blvd at about this point.
      - Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
      - Message Number: 754109
      - Posted by: Steve
      - Date: Thu Mar 27 18:55:35 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 27, 1997 at 07:41:46: The R-10s has 3 distinct paint schemes, that I know of. The first was grey over grey with a red stripe on the belly-band. The second one was the blue/beige colors you mentioned. Finally, just before they were scrapped, several trainsets were painted in a deep green. They lasted about a year after that and then were scrapped.
        
        Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
        Message Number: 754119
        Posted by: Julio Perez
        Date: Fri Mar 28 08:07:49 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R10 Paint Schemes posted by David Steckler on March 27, 1997 at 09:25:52: I don't think the 7 ever traveled over Woodhaven Blvd. As far as I can remember, the 7 in Queens largely traveled over Roosevelt Avenue and Queens Boulevard. I used to live two blocks away from the Junction Boulevard station, so I'm somewhat familiar with the 7's routing.
        
        Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
        Message Number: 754121
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Fri Mar 28 09:04:09 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 28, 1997 at 08:07:49: Woodhaven Blvd ends at Queens Blvd. This is about 3 miles from the #7 line at Junction Blvd. The #7 line runs along Queens Blvd. for about 2 miles starting at 48th Street. It never crosses Woodhaven Blvd. The elevated lines which cross Woodhaven Blvd. are the A line at Liberty Ave., the J/Z line at Jamaica Ave., and the LIRR just south of Queens Blvd. The LIRR Long Island City branch passes under Woodhaven Blvd. at Union Tpke.
        
        Subject: Re: R10 Paint Schemes
        Message Number: 754327
        Posted by: Frank
        Date: Mon Apr 14 08:11:02 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]R10 Paint Schemes posted by Julio Perez on March 27, 1997 at 07:41:46: The R-10's were originally two tone gray with two red-orange stripes above and below the windows. In the early sixties, several were painted a bright "fox" red. In 1966-67, two variations on the ivory/turquoise scheme were applied. The first had a white roof which quickly turned brownish black in the grime of the subway tunnels (the brown roofs you saw), and the second had a turquoise roof with the cigar band stripe under the windows eliminated. Most cars made it into the MTA scheme of platinum mist and blue in the early seventies, and some were finally painted in the rehab green scheme just before their retirement. Unfortunately the cars wore the "graffiti scheme" through most of the late seventies and eighties. R-7A, No. 1575 (the R-10 prototype car, rebuilt from a R-7A) resides in the Brooklyn Transit Museum in the delivery scheme of gray/orange.

Thread title: Why no express on N,R trains? (754099)
Started on Thu Mar 27 09:27:08 1997, by Keranu!!

Subject: Why no express on N,R trains?
Message Number: 754099
Posted by: Keranu!!
Date: Thu Mar 27 09:27:08 1997

I'm wondering if anyone knows why the Broadway (N,R) trains in New York are the only midtown lines with no express service even though there are disused express tracks north of Prince Street? I'm also puzzled about why they withdrew the midday M train service south of Chambers Street into Brooklyn or is it just because of the budget crisis?
- Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
- Message Number: 754110
- Posted by: Steve
- Date: Thu Mar 27 19:04:32 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Why no express on N,R trains? posted by Keranu!! on March 27, 1997 at 09:27:08: The reason that there is no Express Service on the Broadway Line and the dropping of mid-day M service are related and. for the most part, have nothing to do with budget cuts. Both are related to the closing of the south side of the Manhattan bridge for reconstruction.. Without the bridge, an express on the B'way line would not offer much in the way of time savings. At the same time, with the Ns and Rs both using the Montague Street tunnel, the addition of M service would be dupicitous and would cause unnecessary congestion.
  - Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
  - Message Number: 754185
  - Posted by: Matthias Muche
  - Date: Sat Apr 5 13:14:05 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Why no express on N,R trains? posted by Steve on March 27, 1997 at 19:04:32: Does anyone know when all tracks on the Manhattan Bridge will be available for service again? Will this automatically lead to the re-introduction of Broadway Express service?
    - Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
    - Message Number: 754195
    - Posted by: robert bonin
    - Date: Sun Apr 6 16:23:30 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]Re: Why no express on N,R trains? posted by Matthias Muche on April 05, 1997 at 13:14:05: I'm wondering why express service in brooklyn on the N line was re-introduced but on such a limited basis. Only during midday weekdays can you get express service between pacific-36th street-59 street. The N was one of the fastest trains before closing the south side of the manhattan bridge. Now it's local in brooklyn(except for the ltd express service), the slowest local in manhattan, and of course in queens it only has a relatively short run from Queensboro Plaza to Ditmars. The N used to run express all the time between 59th street in brooklyn and pacafic street. Then it ran over the bridge by-passing dekalb, lawrence st and boro hall in brooklyn and whitehall, rector, cortland, and city hall in manhattan going straight to Canal street. Then it was a fast express to 57 street(where it used to terminate.) Lastly, being from Astoria in Queens I take the N all the time. I don't mind telling you folks that it seems to me that going from Manhattan to Queens, I find I wait at least 20-25 minutes for the train. It's very frustrating. I know it's a long line from Coney Island out, but come on, put some more trains on. And don't add any of those ugly r-68 cars. Fill up the line with r-32 cars. They're faster, more reliable, have better temp control, and you can look out the front and back windows
      - Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
      - Message Number: 754342
      - Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
      - Date: Mon Apr 14 15:51:26 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Why no express on N,R trains? posted by robert bonin on April 06, 1997 at 16:23:30: Looking at the relative distances and car performances involved, the Bridge was what made the 'N' tick. Running Express from 57th to Canal would save only about 3 minutes. Since the off-peak schedule is often 8 minutes on the 'N' and 'R' this would put the two lines on top of each other at one or the other end, followed by a big gap, not good for the patrons between Canal and Dekalb or at Lexington Av. South of DeKalb the N probably needs to be on the local tracks between 36th & Pacific to access the Montague St. Tunnel. And during the Rush Hour 36th to 59th probably needs the headway on the local tracks since the run through Lower Manhattan limits the headway further out. The bottom line is that the lack of an alternate routing changed the characteristics of the N dramaticly, but why did the repairs on the north side of the bridge get done so quickly compared to the South Side. Suggestion: Reroute the N to the North Side instead of the Q, and reopen the original connection to Canal St. with a flat interlocking plant at the point where Chrystie St. ties in. Make the Q an all stops local from Brighton Beach to Canal via Montague then Express to 57th and on to Queensbridge. The D would then run express to Coney Island over its regular route as would the N augmented by the Q north of Canal. It may take some construction but its better than up to six more years of screwed up service on the N Of course the flat interlocking plant would delay some trains but if the scheduling was creative trains on like routes could meet at the junction.
        
        Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
        Message Number: 754428
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 22:26:24 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: Why no express on N,R trains? posted by Gerry O'Regan on April 14, 1997 at 15:51:26: A couple of things, though. A train travelling on the north side of the bridge cannot access the connection to Canal Street. Another thing. Recently, I transfered between the R train and the #6 train at Canal Street and part of the transfer required me to walk along the unused platform that N and Q trains used to use. The tracks were all torn up - there's no way a train can travel there.
        
        Subject: Re: Why no express on N,R trains?
        Message Number: 754456
        Posted by: Steve
        Date: Mon Apr 21 17:43:28 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Why no express on N,R trains? posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 22:26:24: At one time, the normal route for the N train was on the north side of the bridge into Canal street. In the late 60s, the Chrystie St. connection was made through Grand St. to the 6th Ave line. At that time the tracks from the north side of the bridge to the B'Way line, through Canal Street were removed.

Thread title: Mercurio Railway Server (754106)
Started on Thu Mar 27 13:46:05 1997, by Dan Weissman

Subject: Mercurio Railway Server
Message Number: 754106
Posted by: Dan Weissman
Date: Thu Mar 27 13:46:05 1997

Up until December I was a regular visitor to the Mercurio Railway Server Site. Does anyone kpnow if it's still operating or is their server down? I've been trying to access it, on and off, for about 2 months.
- Subject: Re: Mercurio Railway Server
- Message Number: 754205
- Posted by: Ted Nielsen
- Date: Sun Apr 6 21:13:11 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Mercurio Railway Server posted by Dan Weissman on March 27, 1997 at 13:46:05: http://mercurio.iet.unip.it/home.html This address still works for me. The server is now called The European Railway Server , because there is a company with the name Mercurio.

Thread title: Hello! cant wait! (754108)
Started on Thu Mar 27 18:00:31 1997, by Allen

Subject: Hello! cant wait!
Message Number: 754108
Posted by: Allen
Date: Thu Mar 27 18:00:31 1997

hello fellow train people i miss da subway :( im in albany now, and i hear there is a train ride on apr 27 th .. if anyone has been on this ride, please tell me what you thought..if you could email me that would be greatly appreciated :> ALlen yoshi@albany.net nyctarules@mightyman.com

Thread title: Is this a Cult Website? (754123)
Started on Fri Mar 28 10:49:51 1997, by Gary Jacobi

Subject: Is this a Cult Website?
Message Number: 754123
Posted by: Gary Jacobi
Date: Fri Mar 28 10:49:51 1997

In the wake of the extremely sad multiple suicide here in California, there has been much media coverage about cults using the web. One source even gave a series of questions to ask oneself to be sure a site is not Cult based. I hate to advise us all of this, but we qualify! And we are underground to boot!
- Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
- Message Number: 754125
- Posted by: David Pirmann
- Date: Fri Mar 28 12:31:52 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]Is this a Cult Website? posted by Gary Jacobi on March 28, 1997 at 10:49:51: Yes, I guess you could say that being a subway/railfan is sort of cultish, especially during a photo lineup. :-) But don't worry, we're not proposing that a majestic spectral A-Train is hiding behind comet Hale-Bopp waiting to take us all to that Grand Central Terminal in the sky, or something equally mindless :-) --dave
  - Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
  - Message Number: 754130
  - Posted by: Gerry O'Regan
  - Date: Fri Mar 28 21:03:28 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Is this a Cult Website? posted by David Pirmann on March 28, 1997 at 12:31:52: Regardless of whether this is a cult website or not, some users may starve to death waiting for the subtalk index page to load. Some method of filtering posts or a time limit for same is needed before this becomes another E train (overcrowded to the point where one want's to walk across the 59th St. Bridge [and just maybe jump off - in keeping with the cult thread])
    - Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
    - Message Number: 754131
    - Posted by: Michael Azzollini
    - Date: Fri Mar 28 22:45:38 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: Is this a Cult Website? posted by Gerry O'Regan on March 28, 1997 at 21:03:28: As a visitor to the site on a daily basis, I'm only interested in the posts that were placed recently(since I've already read the previous postings). When I choose to hyperlink to Subtalk, I "STOP" the download(by thread) immediately as it starts to show on my screen and then choose to download the index by "date". Once I get the top of the list(the unread messages) I can stop the download again and start to view the postings,- this way the entire index page doesn't have to download to see what's new. As a suggestion to the David Pirmann(the site host), maybe when the Homepage downloads, the viewer can have a choice of downloading Subtalk by "thread" or by "date"(ie:two links vs. one link). MIKE
      - Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
      - Message Number: 754136
      - Posted by: Peter Rosa
      - Date: Fri Mar 28 23:53:47 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Is this a Cult Website? posted by Gary Jacobi on March 28, 1997 at 10:49:51: Given the latest news reports about the Higher Source, I think the best way to tell if we're a cult is to listen - do we talk with squeaky little voices ?
        
        Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
        Message Number: 754138
        Posted by: David Pirmann - Web Site Host
        Date: Mon Jun 16 21:34:31 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Is this a Cult Website? posted by Gerry O'Regan on March 28, 1997 at 21:03:28: Yes, I plan to "archive" the posts. webboard doesn't come with a facility for doing that so i'll have to write some code to do it. So look for it soon.
        
        Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
        Message Number: 754156
        Posted by: Mark Feinman
        Date: Wed Apr 2 12:40:14 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: Is this a Cult Website? posted by David Pirmann on March 28, 1997 at 12:31:52: ... you...you mean, we don't all go to the great Trainyard in the sky, where the Pennsylvania and New York Central railroads live on, and the IND Second System is alive and running with R1/9s, and the BMT Bluebirds (all 500 of them!) merrily roll along ..... I thought, I..I...I....just can't believe this to be true ..... Maybe it's Hailey's comet ... yeah, that's the ticket :-))))
        
        Subject: Re: Is this a Cult Website?
        Message Number: 754337
        Posted by: Bill Mosteller
        Date: Mon Apr 14 13:31:48 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Is this a Cult Website? posted by Gary Jacobi on March 28, 1997 at 10:49:51: I'd love to know what the questions are. A friend of mine talks about taking AA's test along these lines and going 16 for 18. (He claims to have lied on two questions. Oh, and he did sober up!)

Thread title: R-142 Mock-Up (754127)
Started on Fri Mar 28 16:21:32 1997, by Steve

Subject: R-142 Mock-Up
Message Number: 754127
Posted by: Steve
Date: Fri Mar 28 16:21:32 1997

For those that are interested, the NYCT has a mock-up of the new R-142 car. It is at 130 Livingston Street in Brooklyn.
- Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
- Message Number: 754208
- Posted by: Julio Perez
- Date: Mon Apr 7 07:55:12 1997
  
  In Reply to: [6]R-142 Mock-Up posted by Steve on March 28, 1997 at 16:21:32: Unfamiliar of its specs, would the R-142 be used for IRT service? I don't know much about its length and width. Also, are the R-33/R-36s rolling on the 7 line going to be replaced anytime in the future (2-3 years)?
  - Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
  - Message Number: 754209
  - Posted by: Julio Perez
  - Date: Mon Apr 7 07:56:17 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]R-142 Mock-Up posted by Steve on March 28, 1997 at 16:21:32: Unfamiliar of its specs, would the R-142 be used for IRT service? I don't know much about its length and width. Could someone post a picture of the R-142 for viewing by people living OUTSIDE the tri-state metropolitan area (NY/NJ/CT)? Also, are the R-33/R-36s rolling on the 7 line going to be replaced anytime in the future (2-3 years)?
    - Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
    - Message Number: 754212
    - Posted by: Steve
    - Date: Mon Apr 7 09:17:29 1997
      
      In Reply to: [6]Re: R-142 Mock-Up posted by Julio Perez on April 07, 1997 at 07:56:17: The R-142s, the IRT'New Tech Car', will have the traditional IRT envelope of 51' long, 8' 8" wide and 11' 11" high from the railhead. The cars will be first based at the recently rebuilt E180th St. shop. The first cars to go will likely be the R-28s & R-29s.
      - Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
      - Message Number: 754233
      - Posted by: Bryan Layne
      - Date: Mon Apr 7 19:23:07 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-142 Mock-Up posted by Julio Perez on April 07, 1997 at 07:56:17: I agree,Im very interested to see the R-142 mock up but I live in Illinois,so could you post a picture? Maybe one of a R-110A on the subway cars page also?
        
        Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
        Message Number: 754485
        Posted by: Zack
        Date: Tue Apr 22 21:43:57 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-142 Mock-Up posted by Julio Perez on April 07, 1997 at 07:55:12: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
        
        Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
        Message Number: 754518
        Posted by: MJS
        Date: Thu Apr 24 14:34:05 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: R-142 Mock-Up posted by Zack on April 22, 1997 at 21:43:57: YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!
        
        Subject: Re: R-142 Mock-Up
        Message Number: 754564
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 27 21:56:23 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: R-142 Mock-Up posted by MJS on April 24, 1997 at 14:34:05: MAYBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

Thread title: weird subway incidents (754129)
Started on Fri Mar 28 20:17:32 1997, by miriam ely

Subject: weird subway incidents
Message Number: 754129
Posted by: miriam ely
Date: Fri Mar 28 20:17:32 1997

I will be designing a metro station in LA for my thesis in architecture and I'm interested in the sub-world as a transitional place of human gathering and interaction. If something has happened to you before or if you have seen some strange happenings in ametrostation or train, I would love to know! Thanks, miriam
- Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
- Message Number: 754140
- Posted by: beau
- Date: Sun Mar 30 00:12:39 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]weird subway incidents posted by miriam ely on March 28, 1997 at 20:17:32: miriam, i think i know you, do you live in l a ?>
  - Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
  - Message Number: 754161
  - Posted by: Gary Jacobi
  - Date: Wed Apr 2 19:31:58 1997
    
    In Reply to: [5]weird subway incidents posted by miriam ely on March 28, 1997 at 20:17:32: Good Lord, girl, where do you want me to start! Perhaps the overall statement that the NY subways were, and I'm sure still are populated with a subculture of, as far as one can tell, perpetual riders. Many rode quietly, almost sullenly, but a few were very animated creatures. My favorites were a few regulars who made it a point to ride the trains carring a large number of college students. Each had a trick Math or other question that they would try to stump a student with. I soon learned how ecstatic they became if you allowed yourself to be taken in. I always let them, figuring I would be living far away, making a good living some day, whereas they would still be riding aimlessly, and might treasure these little victories at no real cost to me.
    - Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
    - Message Number: 754246
    - Posted by: CMG
    - Date: Tue Apr 8 12:08:52 1997
      
      In Reply to: [5]Re: weird subway incidents posted by Gary Jacobi on April 02, 1997 at 19:31:58: BY WEIRD, I WOULD SAY SOMETHING VERY BIZARRE, LIKE SEEING A GUY GET BEAT BY TWO OTHER STRANGE GUYS OR SEEING A WOMEN GET SLAPPED BY HER BOYFRIEND. I HAD THE AWFUL PLEASURE OF WITNESSING BOTH. AS WELL AS FAINTING ON THE TRAIN DUE TO HEAT AND SUFFOCATION. NOW THAT'S WEIRD
      - Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
      - Message Number: 754290
      - Posted by: Jim
      - Date: Fri Apr 11 00:26:04 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]weird subway incidents posted by miriam ely on March 28, 1997 at 20:17:32: One of the weirdest things ever, occurred on the J line during a PM rush hour about 4 years ago. A homeless man and a homeless woman, both living in the abandoned tunnels around essex street, seccumbed to passion one afternoon. They dragged a mattress between the running rails of what the thought was a dis-used line. In the midst of the throws of passion, neither noticed the approaching J train. By the time the train operator saw the pair, it was too late. Fortunately, the 'gentleman' in question lost part of one foot while the lady in this tale, who was apparently on top of the situation, suffered a head injury. Skeptics, take notice, this actually happened....
        
        Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
        Message Number: 754426
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 22:14:52 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: weird subway incidents posted by Jim on April 11, 1997 at 00:26:04: Lemmie get this straight. Two bums start !!!! each other in the subway tunnel, they get hit by a train . . . where did you hear this from?
        
        Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
        Message Number: 754427
        Posted by: John
        Date: Sun Apr 20 22:20:28 1997
        
        In Reply to: [5]Re: weird subway incidents posted by beau on March 30, 1997 at 00:12:39: Has the New York City Subway System become a 722-mile long public restroom? Apparantly so, considering that I've seen a bum pissing between the cars of a northbound #5 train, and another guy taking a shit on a platform at the Broad Street Station on the J line.
        
        Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
        Message Number: 754447
        Posted by: Lefty
        Date: Mon Apr 21 16:28:55 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: weird subway incidents posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 22:20:28: i saws a guy take a dump in between cars on the 1 train.. pretty nasty.. saw a guy takinga shit on the curb outside penn station too.. Lefty
        
        Subject: Re: weird subway incidents
        Message Number: 754455
        Posted by: Jim
        Date: Mon Apr 21 17:38:02 1997
        
        In Reply to: [6]Re: weird subway incidents posted by John on April 20, 1997 at 22:14:52: Every delay to service is documented by two letters (memos). One is from the division of car equipment and one is from RTO (Rapid Transit Operations). The reports are sent out verrbally over a system called the 'Six-Wire' and over the computer system to every maintenance shop loctaion. I read both accounts and can assure you the incident actually did occur on the J line about in 1992 or 1993. (Neither person was killed although the man was more severely hurt than was his 'lady' friend)

Thread title: LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING (754134)
Started on Fri Mar 28 23:43:23 1997, by Bob Redden

Subject: LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING
Message Number: 754134
Posted by: Bob Redden
Date: Fri Mar 28 23:43:23 1997

and of course having grown up in the shadow of Ditmars Plaza loads of NYC Metro area stuff. The Public Service of NJ group had over 50 in them. Look for a HUGE Triboro historic group in the next week or so. Greyhounds, Trailways you name it it gets up on.. alt.binaries.pictures.vehicles ALWAYS KEEP YOUR EYE ON THIS SITE!
- Subject: Re: LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING
- Message Number: 754258
- Posted by: Charles Fiori
- Date: Wed Apr 9 11:24:50 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING posted by Bob Redden on March 28, 1997 at 23:43:23: Would love to access your files. Can't make the address work. "alt.binaries" etc. Please advise. Call at 312-580-4022 after 3pm Central. Thanks. Know anybody with old rollsigns, fareboxes for sale or trade??
  - Subject: Re: LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING
  - Message Number: 754368
  - Posted by: Wayne Johnson
  - Date: Thu Apr 17 09:12:54 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]LOADS OF BUS PICS ALWAYS CHANGING posted by Bob Redden on March 28, 1997 at 23:43:23: I am interested in visiting this site, but the address you listed dosen't seem to work.

Thread title: Second Ave Subway (again) (754139)
Started on Sat Mar 29 20:56:48 1997, by David Pirmann

Subject: Second Ave Subway (again)
Message Number: 754139
Posted by: David Pirmann
Date: Sat Mar 29 20:56:48 1997

Hello, I've added some US Urban Mass Transportation Administration documents to a new section about the Second Avenue Subway: [6]Second Avenue Subway --Dave
- Subject: Re: Second Ave Subway (again)
- Message Number: 754160
- Posted by: Gary Jacobi
- Date: Wed Apr 2 19:18:00 1997
  
  In Reply to: [5]Second Ave Subway (again) posted by David Pirmann on March 29, 1997 at 20:56:48: This is fabulous stuff, Dave. It is mind boggling that UMTA tried to go with a seven page EIS, even in 1973. (or did you trim it down)
  - Subject: Re: Second Ave Subway (again)
  - Message Number: 754166
  - Posted by: David Pirmann - Web Site Host
  - Date: Mon Jun 16 21:34:58 1997
    
    In Reply to: [6]Re: Second Ave Subway (again) posted by Gary Jacobi on April 02, 1997 at 19:18:00: I was given excerpts from the actual reports. There's a lot of stuff missing from some of them, which I don't actually have myself. Of what I have, I didn't leave out any text. What I have (and what you see on the web) is about 20-30 typeset pages from each report (which are typeset in pretty big fonts). --Dave

Thread title: Graf Art Comp (754141)
Started on Sun Mar 30 03:53:58 1997, by Bob

Subject: Graf Art Comp
Message Number: 754141
Posted by: Bob
Date: Sun Mar 30 03:53:58 1997

www.redondo.com/business/graffiti.html

Thread title: 1997 International Graffiti Art Competition (754142)
Started on Sun Mar 30 03:56:07 1997, by Bob

Subject: 1997 International Graffiti Art Competition
Message Number: 754142
Posted by: Bob
Date: Sun Mar 30 03:56:07 1997

Check out website www.redondo.com/business/graffiti.html. Tell everyone about this . This will be unbelievably dope. Peace

Thread title: Very Interesting Site Would make a great movie (754145)
Started on Sun Mar 30 14:56:48 1997, by chris bright

Subject: Very Interesting Site Would make a great movie
Message Number: 754145
Posted by: chris bright
Date: Sun Mar 30 14:56:48 1997

In Reply to: [6]R-142 Mock-Up posted by Steve on March 28, 1997 at 16:21:32: I enjoy surfing your site and think it would make a great movie. I especially enjoy the mosiacs, tilework and turn of the century artwork I see when I ride the subways (14th St. has some nice tilework)Was wondering if there were any other interested parties in a project like this???

https://www.nycsubway.org/articles/talks/subtalk-199703.html
This site is not affiliated with any transit agency or provider.