 | |
| |
I went on the tour yesterday and have the official car rosters complements of John Hogan, superintendent of Stamford M of E Facillity.
8200-8300 .....M1
8400-8800 .....M2
8000 ..........M3
8900 ..........M4
9000-up........M6
(these are accurate as he remembers)
(great tour. They showed us a jacked up train and we saw the pantograph close up plus the grid system on the roof. We also saw the wire train first hand and boarded the train along with a diesel locomotive.) They even gave us a special train back to Grand Central that went non-stop with just our group.
6101-6123 (odd) Push pull Bombardier 1985-91
6150=6190
6201-6219 (odd)'
6250=6274
6301-6308 push-pull Bombardier 1996
6330-6358
6309,6310
6361=6374 push pull Bombardier 1997
8000-8141 M 3 a Budd 1983=85
8200-8377 M 1 A Budd 1971=1973
8400=8471 M=2 GE 1973-1976
8500-8571
8651=8669 (odd)
8700-8749
8800-8849
8900-8935 M-4 Tokyu Car 1989
8951=8985 (odd)
9000-9021 M-6 Morris=Knudson 1994
9051-9081 (odd)
NJT 5198-5199 Comet 1=A GE 1978
NJT 5994=5999
NJT 5175=5177 Comet II-A Bombardier 1983
NJT 5988=5993
NJT 5178 Comet II=B same 1987
NJT 5986-5987
NJT 6000-6003
NJT 5179=5180 Comet III same 1991
I don't think the New Haven line has any M-6 cars....they are only on the Harlem and Hudson lines. If I'm wrong, what do the M-6 new Haven ine cars look like?-Nick
I was at their Stamford M of E SHop on Saturday 2/28/1998 and they **do**/ have M6 cars. See Steve Lowenthal's post for the car numbers.To my non-Metro North expert eyes they all look the same to me, but if the general foreman says they have M6 that is good enough for me!
Did Stamford have an open house or was this part of a tour?
It was a transit museum-sponsored tour. This Saturday it's the Hillside (LIRR) Maintenance Complex, another TM tour.
--Mark
Does anyone know whether any R26-33 cars have been withdrawn since the FAQ sheet was produced and at what time will the R142 cars be introduced.
I think the R-142's will start appearing in 1999.
Thanks Adam,
I am certainly looking forward to seeing lots of R26 -33's when I come over for my short visit to New York and the Subway at the end of the week. Am I safe traelling on all lines - perhaps you can advise me.
Redbirds (R-26/28, R-29, R-33 & R-36) operate on lines 2,4,5,6 & 7. All of these lines pass through some not-so-good areas, but my opinion is that you're like to have an uneventful ride. Of course there are some obvious no-no's, but if you plan to ride during day and evening hours you should be just fine.
As long as you stay below 125th Street on the 2, 4, 5, and 6, you won't be riding in any "not-so-good" areas, but I've never had any problem in these areas and I think, as Wayne says, riding when it's populated will lessen even further the chances of anything happening. As for the #7, it rides through Flushing, Queens which is a decent area, as long as you're not riding late at night when it gets rather deserted.
I need help, I would like to know what lines are the R142 cars are going to. Please post information.
I have been noticing that signals have been adding "NO KEY BY" signs (Yellow with black lettering) to some signals. At DeKalb southbound at the end of the N/R/M (center tracks) going the wrong way is a signal with the new sign added. I can undertstand this signal being a no key by with it's tight turn into MetroTech and downgrade (if you were traveling the wrong way on this track).
Now at Kings Highway on the northbound Express track traveling in the correct way the signal just north of the platform has the added No Key By sign. This one i don't understand. There is no grade, you can almost always see the next signal (you would need very heavy fog not to) and there is no curve. There is also no interlocking until just after Church Ave, two express stops away.
So why the No Key By??
Are train operators not following the rules and keying by without approval from command at this signal??
One of the possible causes of the Steinway Street incident was the proximity of the 'leaving signal' to the stop marker. A train operator could, in some instances, 'key' a red signal without knowing it. This, of course, is a safety problem so these signals, where that possibility exists, have been modified so that they can no longer be automatically keyed.
Steve,
Yup that's it, I checked this AM and the yellow keyby block is just outside the edge of the station so an operator could key down the trip without even knowing it. Cheaper than moving the signal these signs . Thanks
I would like to know on what depots the 350 NOva buses that NYCT ordered (9350 to 9699) & how many did each depot received & what seriel numbers are at each depot, please post. I need help on this.
Flatbush 9383 9387 9390 9399 9403 9412 9416=9417 9419 to 9422, 9430
Queens Village 9353=9355 9359 tp 9361 ,,9363.9367,9370,9371 to 9374,9377,,9379
I do not have serial numbers
Steve
Please contact me at Christof@webtv.net
If you have already notice in todays schedule change, the S53 bus has been extended to 86th St/4th Av to provide new transfer connection to the B16,B64 & B70. It terminates on the southside of 4th Av along now with the S79 which hads been moved there too & follows the same path as the S53 in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, any comments, please add them to the subtalk. I would like to hear from you
what do you need
It's not exactly an extension, but a re-route. The bus will no longer serve the 95st station.
-Hank
It makes sense for both Staten Island buses serving Brooklyn to terminate at the same intersection. When the s53 & the s79 go back over the Verrazano Bridge, they use different exits on the Staten Island Expressway but share a few bus stops on or near Hylan Blvd. So a rider in Bay Ridge can take whichever bus is leaving first for the fastest route to those stops on Hylan Blvd.
I have been trying to connect with these pages all weekend ,,with no success ,,Can anyone advise what is the problem
Steve—
I've had the same problem.
My only thought is that the MTA's website is down. The problem extends not just to the subway and bus pages. I have tried to log on to the general MTA page and have failed.
Michael
Both the MTA Offical sight (mta.nyc.ny.us or something like that) and the
mirror site at lirr.org are both down all weekend for me no matter where/when/or how I tried to connect to them.
What is the lenght of a LIRR MU? How about a Comet coach?
nominally these cars are 85 ft over buffers as with most lightweight mainline passenger stock--note that Comets have been cloned for ATK as Horizon cars and of course M1's thru M6(?) are of similar dimensions whether on LIRR or NYC/NH trackage
Yeah, the M-1 - M-6 are of more of less the same dimensions. Quick spotter's guide:
M-1 (LIRR) numbers in the lower 9000 range, married pairs.
M-1a(MNCRR) numbers ???? look like M-1, but have openenable windows
M-2 (MNCRR) numbers ???? married pairs, older, cooler looking Pans, "power bump" on roof
M-3 (LIRR) numbers high 9000, air intake vents in midle of car, different t/o cab windows, same cool door close bell.
M-4 (MN) numbers ???? triple car set. A flimsy pan on two cars, same power bulge, made in Japan, ride like crap and have annyoing humming noise inside, annyoing door close chime (I think - I avoid them if I can)
M-5 doesn't exist, rumored to be in development to replace M-1 or M-2
M-6 (MN) numbers ???? Also triples, but made by MK. Much better riding car, has same annoying chime + whinning doors. Newest electrics of either RR. Same pans as M-4. Has that "power buldge" on top too.
ACMU (MN) 1100 series. Look like diesel hauled coaches, but older. No - frills design includes manual doors, no door bell, flipover seats, budget lighting, and chains between cars. Way cool, but on the way to the scrap heap.
LIRR Diesel fleet Numbered in the 2000 series. I call them Rustliners. Mostly old Zips, and MP-7X stuff. Doors seldom work, no bell, very dirty, rusty, smelly. Pass between cars at own risk. Should have been ditched long ago. Look for cutout for headlight at car end if you want to ride in a former M.U.
LIRR Double Decker. Cool when it runs, which isn't often.
Basically, you can spot New Haven stuff by the "power budge" on the roof where the resistor banks are. Septa cars have that to, but NJT has them in the open...
Also, is it me, or do the ACMU's look too much like the LIRR Zips??? Are they somehow related to each other??
M1 and M3 are 85' coupler face to coupler face
Does anyone know if the transit related sales site is still in service? I have e mailed Mr Adler on several occassions with no luck. If anyone is interested I have some maps and other itmes for sale, just e mail me.
Also, what is the address for the transit worker bulletin board not afflilated by the TWU.
Thanks for all the help all.
Fernando, I would be interested in maps, timetables, etc. (I need some entertainment in case SEPTA goes on strike next weekend!) Please email me with your list.
Thanks, Michael S. Buglak
Fernando, since you are our bus guy, what's up with anyone having any bus roll signs for sale? I think I asked you this before. Can you help?
Right now Im looking for some Manhattan bus maps circa early to late 1970's. Im willing to trade some 1971 subway maps in excellant condition. I dont know anything however about old roll signs.
Fernando, I'm not sure if you got my e-mail but I am very interested in buying any subway maps that you might have before 1987. Could you e-mail me at adw7@cornell.edu with more details? Thanks!
-Adam
I was perusing my SUBWAY map (not "The Map"!) and I noticed that next to the 145th Street Station on the #3 line, it says "Exit From the First 4 Cars Only". I am just wondering why this is the case? Is the station too short to accomodate the entire train? If so, why don't they extend it?
The platform is too short. One of the problems with extending the station is that forward you have the sharp curve into 148st yard, and south is the level crossover into the Harlem River tunnel for the #2. This is why the 148st-Lenox Terminal station was built, because they needed to turn around longer trains.
-Hank
The switches between the Lenox Ave. spur and the Harlem River tunnel are
known as the 142nd St. Interlocking, so presumably they are at 142nd St.
That leaves three blocks from there to 145th St. The portal to the yard
is I think at 147th St. So there should be five blocks of straight track
there, which would be more than enough for a full-length station.
What am I missing?
Well, for one thing, how long is the station currently? Also, usually the interlockings are named for the closest southern/eastern location, so even though it is the 142st Interlocking, it most likely occupies the space below 142-143 sts.
Also, how long is the station now? does it currently run one block, from 145-146 st, or 144-145st? Or more, from 143-145, 144-146, etc? Are the blocks closer together than 'normal'?
Having seen the area underground, I can't see how the could extend the station south. North I'm not too sure of.
And what's above ground there, if anyone knows?
-Hank
Well, there are 20 blocks, on average, to a mile. 5280/20 = 264 feet. One IRT car is about 50 feet long, coupler to coupler, so ten cars is 2 blocks long. So a station has to be at last 500 feet plus another 30 feet for the stairs down at each end and some extra space. So by these numbers it seems putting in a full length station would be a very tight fit, wouldn't it? Plus probably now, a lot of people just get off at 148 St. -7th Avenue (Lenox Terminal). So it seems your skepticism about space to lengthen the station is well-founded
I haven't been there in about 4-5 years, but as I recall, the station is centered on 145 street with that being the only exit. If I remember correctly, you cannot enter the northbound platform at this station, it is exit only. (Are there other stations like this?)
Above ground is Esplanade Plaza, a complex of 3 or 4 very large apartment buildings.
I just made a little observation that made me chuckle anyway. SEPTA has at last started to run the new el cars a little more frequently. But they always run on rainy days. I was on it today and the last two times I was on it it was pourin' down. Maybe it's a SEPTA style car-wash.
Perhaps it's a test of the outboard disk brake rotors, to see what rain/wet conditions do to them on the El's. (See the earlier posts on "Strange Trucks" for an explanation of disk brakes on railway equipment.)
I was riding the F today from Church Ave to Smith/9th and found OPTO signs at Church, and all stops to Smith/9th. My first thought was "is F going OPTO?" but then I noticed conductor boards marked R-46 6car G. Does this mean that ther is a plan to return to G to Church Avenue?
The G is going OPTO. There were some inacuracies in the Daily News article yesterday, most notably that the train is '8 cars long' now, and will be cut to 4 cars. The G always runs 6 cars, R46. Even when it used R32s, it was only 6 cars. In OPTO service, the train will be a single 4-car set of R46 cars.
-Hank
Hank. You missed my question. The G ens at *smith/9th** the OPTO signsa were at Stations *after* Smith/9th to Church Ave. My question remains- is the G being extended to Church or is the F going OPTO?
When they start service like this, they usually mark more than they have to, because trains occasionally get re-routed. It is posible that extreme delays on the F could cause them to run it express to Church Ave, thus the G would provide Local service.
Also note that the Express tracks on the 8th and 6th ave lines are marked for opto, even though OPTO service will only exist on 8ave Local service.
-Hank
Actually- when the G runs with R-32's, they run with 10 cars.
Having ridden the G at rush hour from 1990 until 1992, I will say that I have never seen a G train wuth more than 6 cars. During this time, most of the trains were R32, with an occasional R46 set sprinkled in.
-Hank
In all my years of riding on the system, I've never seen a 10-car train on the G line - even when it was still the GG
If you are talking about the G train in that time period then I would say you are correct. I misunderstood you by thinking that you were talking , because I have seen a few R-32's on the G line especially last week when I was heading to Brooklyn. While on the R-32, I saw another R-32 G train heading to Queens- they were both ten car trains.
I've seen R-46's running on the E line- anyone know why?
One possibility would be to supplement the base service now provided by R-32s. Don't forget: prior to 1991, through most of the 80s, (at least after the troublesome Rockwell trucks were replaced) the E line was served almost exclusively by R-46s. When I moved out to Colorado in September of 1980, a number of R-10s had just been assigned to the E line; by my next visit to New York in 1984, the R-10s were all back on the CC.
It would make sense to extend the G a few stations further into Brooklyn so G riders could connect easily with the 4 Av. subway lines (R, sometimes N, sometimes M).
By the way, what is so significant about terminating at Smith/9th Streets? (Other than the fact that it's the tallest station in the system & has a great view of Brooklyn & lower Manhattan.)
I'm looking for photographs of elevated new york city subways. I want photos that show elevated stations, stairs, trains and views showing the elevated structures. Close ups of the steel girders and beams. These photos will be used for painting a mural. thanks.
Are you looking for photos of the Manhattan elevateds (2nd, 3rd, 6th, and 9th
Ave. Els), or the still existing elevateds in Brooklyn, Queens, and The Bronx?
I also collect photos of elevated structures, stations, and stairways.
Timothy
Check out the Line-by-Line Astoria page. The Astoria line is entirely an el, so all of the shots on there are elevated stations and structures.
This past Sunday, I went into the 14th Street station on the 8th Avenue line to take the L train out to Brooklyn. Now, I have taken the L before, but it has been a LONG time since I used this station. After going through the turnstile, I went to the stairway leading to the Canarsie Line platform and couldn't beleive my eyes - the passageway was untouched! It appeared to be in it's original condition, with the incandesent bulbs, yellow wooden banasters, grimy concrete stairways, dimly lit . . . it brought back so many memories! The only things that were missing were the old style turnstiles and BMT standards waiting for me on the platform! However, I saw that another part of the station is under construction, and unfortunately, I have a gut feeling that this passageway will shortly be modernized. The Myrtle Avenue station was also still lit by incandescent bulbs. Any other stations that are still in or close to their original condition?
The 14th St. IND station is being remodeled, including installation of elevators from the mezzanine to the platforms. Your post brought back memories - I used to transfer to the L from the A every Saturday at 14th St., and also remember BMT standards (later R-1/9s and R-42s) waiting at the 8th Ave. station. I understand that R-16s also ran on the Canarsie line from time to time, especially during winter snowstorms, but I never saw or rode them on that line.
Your memories brought back my memories! My earliest experiences on the LL were R1/9's with wicker/rattan seat material and paddle-blade fans. I think one of the cars in the Transmit museum had the interior restored with these seats.
I welcomed the R-1/9s on the LL when they began to appear in early 1969, partly because I loved them, partly because they had signs on the bulkheads (although they didn't use the destination signs on R1/9s which were transferred to the Eastern Division lines), and partly because I never liked the BMT standards.
What's funny is that they were around the same age then as the R-32's are now! Imagine if NYC had taken such good care of the original IND cars!!!
The R-1/9s were solid, well-built cars, typical of how they used to build things. The same can be said about the BMT standards and Triplex units, as well as the IRT Hi-Vs and Lo-Vs. All of these cars remained in service for 40 years; the oldest Hi-Vs pushed 50 years! It's safe to say that these cars were better built than what is out there today. For most of their careers, these units were well-maintained, although there was a period of deferred maintenance in the late '40s.
Unfortunately, by the late '60s, the R-1/9s had become victims of neglect, mainly because new equipment was on the way. When I started riding the subway regularly in 1967, you could still find illuminated side destination signs on trains of R-1/9s. By 1970, you almost never saw that. As light bulbs burned out, (yes, those sign boxes used incandescent bulbs) they weren't being replaced. Sticking doors were being encountered more and more, although I never saw this on the Canarsie Line. I believe that those R-1/9s which were transferred to the BMT Eastern Division lines did get some attention: new roll signs in the sign boxes, although the light bulbs were removed, and new bulkhead route signs in the route slot. The destination roller curtains typically showed blank white canvas, apparently keeping the trend ushered in by the R-40s, which had no destination signs. Some, but not all, were repainted silver and blue; the ones which remained on the IND were used mostly during rush hours and were not repainted.
Something else sticks out in my mind: I rode the Canarsie line every Saturday for three years from 8th Ave. to Lorimer St., almost always leaving 8th Ave at 8:30-8:35 AM. Every week, it would be the same motorman and conductor on that particular train.
While it's impressive that the R1/9s lasted 40 years, it looks like the R32/38 cars will do at least as well if not better. They're approaching 35 years old and as far as I know haven't even been scheduled for replacement. The Redbirds of course have been around for many years, but it looks like their days are (relatively) numbered.
The Redbirds vary in vintage: the oldest ones, the R-26s, are pushing 40 while the newest ones, the R-36s, are maybe a year older than the R-32s. It was mentioned in an earlier post that body corrosion will spell doom for a car, and some of the Redbirds are not in the best of shape in that regard.
How old were the R17's when they were retired? The way I figure it, they lasted only ~30 years. Was it body corrosion or was it simply because they weren't air conditioned?
The R-17s were built in 1955-56, so they were over 30 years old by the time they were retired in the late 80s. A group of R-17s were fitted with experimental air conditioning units; however, this test failed. I read that the filters got clogged in a matter of a couple of weeks (imagine that!), and that the air inside the cars was not only cool, but damp. Although corrosion probably contributed to their retirement, the fact was they were just plain worn out. Being single-unit cars, it wasn't cost effective to rebuild them, let alone install air conditioning. The R-21s and R-22s were retired for the same reasons.
I haven't ridden the LL long enough to remember the Standards (to put it diplomatically 8-)) but a brother of mine remembers seeing (not riding, unfortunately) the Standards just before their retirement. I remember the LL being rife with R1/9 cars, and I hated them because they were so old! As I got older, I learned to appreciate them, but by then the last of them were retired. When I was in HS I took the LL regularly, which by then had R27's, 30's, and 42's. Around 1980-81 they brought back the R16's (for some reason they apparently haven't been in service for awhile, they still had the service change bulletin from 1976, as well as 1976 ads!), and I lost track of the LL after I graduated.
While it's true that the R-1/9s were getting on in years when a number of them wound up on the LL (actually mostly R-6, R-7, and R-9 cars), the BMT standards were even older! The oldest standards dated back to 1914; they started being phased out when the R-27s arrived. The last ones were delivered in 1924; a few hundred were rebuilt in 1959 and lasted until August 1969. They were as durable and reliable as any car ever built.
I felt the opposite way: I never liked the standards because they didn't have bulkhead signs, although I remember them very well. The R-1/9s have a special place in my heart. The biggest kick of all was riding a prewar A or D train with no headlights up Central Park West. Interestingly, I rode the R-1/9s more on the LL than I did on the IND!
The R-16 were used on the Canarsie line prior to 1976; there is a photo on this website of a train of R-16s at 8th Ave. with "16" displayed on the route roller curtain. While they rode well, the R-16s were not very reliable in snowy weather. Supposedly, whenever a big snowstorm was headed for Brooklyn, the R-16s would be sent to the Canarsie line while the standards went out on the Broadway-Jamaica and Myrtle Ave. lines.
The R-16s were retired in 1986-87. By then, they were in pretty bad shape. I have a New York Times article which chronicled the final days of car 6321. It got to the point where it was decided to just get rid of it because it was breaking down every few days.
I personally never saw any R-16s on the Canarsie line, even though I rode it regularly for three years. I do remember R-42s on that line when they were new.
East Broadway still uses a large number of incandescent lights on its mezzanine. The token booth area and stairwells use a combination of incandescent and fluorescent lights, but if you walk far enough away from them, you will be going by the same lighting as when the station was built. There may also be wooden bannisters there, but I doubt it (I don't like the new metal ones, I keep hitting my hand on the bannister supports). Aside from a couple of closed entrances (Lower East Side stations have a lot of them), the token booths, turnstiles, and a couple of bricked up areas the station is relatively unmodernized.
Then, of course, there is the Transit Museum. Still uses incandescent lights at platform level and the mezzanine, and has those old wooden bannisters. They probably don't have those metal plates in the stairs anymore, though.
Folks‹
Visited the web site this evening (after dealing with it being down all weekend). Looked through both the service notices (updated LAST WEDNESDAY!!! and mostly outdated), the "service for XX line" and "schedules for XX line."
Unfortunately, there's lots of work and corrections to be made. (subway-buff, maybe you can get to your employers' web area!!)
They have the new B and C schedules up. They also have the Q running to 57th Street, so I believe all is OK there. But is that the Q schedule that reflects the new pattern with the B now running to Bedford Park or 145th Street?
The A schedules cannot be found. All seven of them (uptown versions for weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays; downtown version for weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays; and Rockaway branch).
The 1 schedules cannot be found. The 2 schedules have not yet been updated. Getting to the temporary 3 schedules, you have to go to the special Lenox Rehab page. This is very cumbersome. They have updated the 5 schedules, but the page only loads up part way (the schedule ends about the middle of the weekday uptown area).
They have updated the 7 schedule, and have added the 63rd Street shuttle to the Shuttles page.
That's the update on the actual pages. Now a scheduling question.
On the B line, I notice some "short trains" that operate uptown evenings and show times only for 57th Street and 34th Street. Where do these trains originate/terminate? What is their purpose?
That's all for now...
Kind regards,
Michael
First-they now have the correct 2/3(keep reading the page). The 1 is missing.The Q is correct(Keep reading.)
I too have found many outdated or failed to include items. The MTA(according to the main MTA Page) is without a webmaster.(I do not have webmaster skills- I am still learning HJTML -1 :-) ). If I meet the NYCT erbmaster I'll pass along the concerns. Like Steve, I can not change the NYCT overnight-it has to be done slowly and within the system. I am on a one year probation- I can not make waves or I'll wave myself out of there!
--All opinions are my own and not those of MTA and/or NYCT--
Looking for Timetables and Destination Sign readings
for the County Bus Routes
Thank you ,Steve
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/TRACKMAPS/index.html
Does anyone have phone numbers and info on the Private carriers in the County..except Bee Line
Thank you
Steve
Above some of the stations on the G/R line in Queens there are blank electronic signs. They have been hanging above the platform for over a year now. Does anyone know when they will become operational? I've noticed that 23rd Street Station has electronic signs above the platform that is already working. Also besides just showing us the time what else do thesesigns intend to display? It would be nice if it displayed the amount of time till the next train.
These signs are being installed system wide. It will take time for a system with 468(plus or minus) stations to be fully operational. It is the intent, once fully operational to display train information such as disruptions, etc.
--opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA and/or NYCT---
Thank you for the quick response. Hopefully these signs will be installed system-wide by the year 2000.
If these signs do display service disruptions, it will be a big improvement over broadcasting messages on station loudspeakers. It's next to impossible to understand anything coming out of those loudspeakers.
Today at 149/Grand Concourse lower level one of these signs displayed the service disruption info for the 2/3 Lenox reroutes.
Yeah, the messages generally sound like "There will be no N...until...take the...to 42nd Street and switch for the.... Thank you for riding NYC Transit"! Or how about this one: "This is the last stop on A train because.... There will be no service on this line between...so take the next...train at...."!
I think I remember a great SNL skit on the NYC Transit Authority School of Subway Announcing. They taught people with normal voices and diction to sound like muffled, mumbling halfwits. Very, very funny!!!
Then there was the Exxon School of Supertanker Steering...
There was a conductor on what is now the Red Line Chicago who sounded like a radio personality. He didn't just announce each station; he would say something like, "They call this the ___ ___ ___. This is.....Wilson! I thought it was amusing. Even New York has its colorful conductors. I boarded an A train once at 59th St. and was greeted with, "Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, you've just boarded a downtown A train to Lefferts Blvd. The next stop will be 42nd St; you can transfer to the AA and E across the platform (this was in 1980). No smoking on the train. No smoking on the train."
Will these signs also display destination/routing/departure time of the next train(s)? Given the complexity of the system I find it incredibly under-signed. We are enjoying color matrix displays in Hamburg, Germany displaying all the above details which is nice but not actually necessary (apart from the departure time) in a system with no route overlaps. It would certainly be of far greater use in NYC's subway system.
They are starting to test these signs. Yesterday I was riding along Queens Blvd
doing research. There is an audible "Bong" type tone and then a message appeared
on the signs about pickpockets.
I noticed this at many stations on this line-even in the mezzanines.
Agreed this is not earthshaking but it is
evidence of attempts to try out the system to work out any bugs. ALso being
into computers, having done some light programming, form letter design,
spreadsheet design, newsletter design I know the need for "beta testing"which
is a time to test the form letter or spreadsheet to be sure you get the expected
results. Nothing is worse than a spreadsheet showing 2+2=5 due to a wrong formula.
--opinions expressed are my own and not those of the MTA or NYCT --
At the Queensbridge Connection worksite, there loks to be a tower that is being built over the now covered tracks on the Manhattan-bound side of N line. Does any one know what this "tower" is going to be.
The "tower" is a new fan chamber.
Joshua Caesar
studlyjc@aol.com
Has anyone noticed the advertisements on the trains for the Transit Museum. This ad in particular shows us the "Subway News" exhibit at the museum. I believe this exhibit talks about subway etiquette. Can anyone tell me if the newspaper shown in this Transit Museum ad (depicting a scene in wich a man has his feet up on a subway seat next to a young lady) exists anywhere in the libraries or anywhere else? What is some forms of subway etiquette anyway? Is the subway stare one of them? Finally are there any books that go into detail about subway etiquette?
Are you talking about the "Subway Sun" ad cards? They were ads run, same place as ads are run now, that looked like the front page of a newspaper, with a cartoon drawing about some etiquette thing that the Board of Transportation or the NYCTA wanted people to remember to do. They were not actual newspapers, just reminders to be a nice person. They sell magnets of these ads at the Transit Museum and at the Grand Central Store. We have a couple on our refrigerator. One says "Please don't sit if you can't fit" (predecessor of Johnny Cochran's famous phrase) and shows a woman wriggling in between two people where there just isn't enough space. They are a lot better than reading about what diseases you may have and what doctor to call.
As for newsletters or newspapers put out by transit systems, NYC as far as I know never did that. Frankfurt's transit system puts out a bi-monthly color 5x7 12-page free magazine which has great pictures of their trains and streetcars, though I can barely read it, since it is not in English, obviously. And Washington puts out a tiny newsletter that says things like "Patronage is up" or "We're buying new busses" or "For your convenience, we are eliminating some service you mistakenly thought was convenient." :-)
I think that subway etiquette is at an acceptable level today, although I'm sure there can still be improvements. I've seen a number of people, including myself, give their seats to older people or mothers with babies. I also see people moving into the middle of the cars once they're in, rather than standing in front of the doors when the next crowd of people try to get on. Finally, when the train is really crowded, nobody seems to get upset when you try to squeeze on before the doors close. Some things you shouldn't do are stare at people, take up more than one seat either with yourself or your packages, play radios, smoke, spit, and be loud and disruptive to your fellow passengers.
Heh, heh- I've seen people clipping their nails on the G train.
Don't go there! (^:
Here in Chicago, the Metra commuter trains have a monthly newsletter, "On The (Bi)Level", and one or two pages (of four) are dedicated mainly to passenger complaints. But most of the complaints are not about the Metra's service, but ongoing whines from passengers about how other passengers put on makeup, clip nails, eat meals, drink alcoholic beverages, have conversations, talk on cellular phones, put their feet on the seat across from them, stand in the vestibules of the cars, stand up too soon for the final station, sneeze, cough, snore, and otherwise act like human beings.
Speaking of standing up too soon for stations, I find it strange how Boston people actually wait for the train to stop before they get up to disembark. I am conditioned to get up early and make my way to the door.
Also strange is that Bostonians don't seem to respond well to my NYC "Watchaback" or "Getting off!" My sister told me that in Chicago they say "Out, please!"
Does anyone else have an interesting regional variation of these phenomena to share?
No, except to confirm "Out, please!" as the "proper" Chicago usage.
I'll just chime in and agree with Tim. I too have inbred Noo Yawker reactions on my Bahstin commute. On the Green Line streetcar entering Park Street (our major transfer station), people not only try to enter the car before everyone has gotten off, but people love to stand in the stairwell/doorway reducing the flow by half or more -- even when there's room to move in.
What I really miss here in Boston is the favorite expression of every conductor in NYC, "WATCHDACLOZINDAWZ". Here, it's more like, "Cleah the dahs".
The CTA train crews have a standard spiel, which I give below. The portions in parentheses are "optional" in that some people say them and some don't.
Welcome aboard the CTA ______ Line (run number _____) making all stops to _____________. No smoking, littering, or (radio playing OR loud playing of radios)(allowed on the trains). Watch the doors, (the) doors are closing. __________ will be our next stop, ______________.
Yes, as the above shows, there are some conductors and train operators who say "Doors are closing." instead of "The doors are closing." AAAARGH!
I didn't realize how stereotypically and uniquely Chicago this was until I saw it printed on a t-shirt for sale in a tourist store in the Palmer House!
I'm a native New Yorker but lived in Hungary for two years and I've got to admit that the first Hungarian phrases I learned, after where is? and I don't speak Hungarian, came from the metro announcers. Interestingly there at the end of the line, the conductor asks passengers to make sure their fellow passengers get off the train. One Hungarian friend of mine said the reminders was to make sure that all the drunks were nudged awake before the train moved into the station house. Since Hungary has one of the world's highest alcoholism rates there could be something to that.
On a side note (and forgive me if I missed this in an earlier discussion) did anyone ever hear Al, the subway conductor's announcements? He retired about five years ago but was famous for saying things like, "34th street. Home of Macy's the largest store int he world and watch out for those speeding bicycle messengers, they can know you down before you blink."
I wonder if this was the same conductor on the A train which I spoke of in a previous post.
In Washington, DC, people wait until the train stops to stand up to get off. That's because the operator waits about 3 seconds before opening the doors. My wife always waits, I always stand up early. We didn't know why until once in NYC, I sat with her until the train stopped, the doors popped open immediately, and before she even say "What the..." and do a double take, the doors started to close.
In Philadelphia the Broad Street Subway doors used to start to open before the train completely stopped. The conductors timed it so that by the time the train was just about to rest back on its springs, the doors were fully open. Now getting off there you had to be really ready in advance.
In Washington, before the doors open, they now have a recording of a female voice saying "Doors Opening" and before the close she says "Doors Closing" then the chime rings, then the doors close. Soon they'll have a male voice saying "Door Closing to be Announced" before the announcement. It currently also says, "Please stand clear of the doors. Thank you!" It really should say, "Hey what the heck (or some other term) are you doing? Get away from those doors..." Maybe they should have a recording also saying, "Doors Closed...Too Late" if someone touches the doors after they have closed.
On buses, people in Baltimore and Washington always yell out "Back Door!" when the light isn't lit for opening it. In NYC I remember people just rang the bell 30 times to gently notify the driver that the light wasn't on. Sometimes down here you get a chorus of the entire bus saying "Back Door!" when some poor schmo like me is standing there pushing on it to get off.
In Baltimore and Philadelphia people often call bus transfers a "pass", though neither transit authority officially does. (Now, though, Baltimore has replaced transfers with an All-Day Pass for $3.00 vs. a one-vehicle trip of $1.35. Pretty smart if you ask me.)
I still ask for an "add-a-ride" when I get a bus transfer in NYC.
As for getting off the back door of the bus, the Boston standard exit plea seems to be "Reeah Doah, Please!", as the back door on MBTA buses is NOT a "Passenger Operated Safety Exit Door," as in NYC. They should call it the "Driver Operated Inconvenient Exit Door," as buses often seem to have a tough time pulling safely into bus stops, since Bostonians regard them as perfectly good parking spaces.
the call of "BACK DAHW" is also widely used here in NYC.. on the newer buses you cant ring the bell 30 times anymore.. so its either BACK DAHW, or youre waiting till the next stop. im many cases the person getting off the bus isnt loud or assertive enough and ends up getting help from the whole back of the bus screaming BACK DAHW..
As a life-long Baltimorean, I must protest about calling a transfer a "pass". That seems to be a Philadelphia affliction. In Baltimore the little piece of paper was always called a transfer. The possible Baltimore affliction was to to ask for a "check" when presenting the transfer. That meant that a third transfer was needed and the operator/conductor would tear of the retransfer stub and return the remainder to the passenger.
I started riding when streetcars were still the vehicle for the heavy lines, the PCC's were still mostly in Alexander Blue, and the fare was 18 cents. I NEVER heard a transfer called a pass.
Yes, you're right, I was wrong about that. I remember now that it was the "check" for the retransfer. I knew it was something colloquial and since I lived in Philadelphia for 4 years, followed by Baltimore for 3 years (before moving to Washington 22 years ago), I got confused and thought "pass" was in both places. But it was just in Philadelphia.
Here in Chicago, a transfer is a transfer.
But until about two or three years ago they used to assess a $0.25 surcharge on the morning southbound Evanston Express (Purple Line running express to the Loop M-F rush hours). Either you paid the $0.25 when you paid your fare and got a slip of paper -- which meant always using the ticket agent, since the turnstiles wouldn't issue the express slips -- or you paid the conductor on the train $0.50 for the surcharge.
The odd thing, which was a bit of a running joke, was that the slip of paper which showed you paid was called an "Identification Check". The conductor would go through the train once it left Howard for the express run south calling out "ID Checks or surcharges!" Whereupon new riders thought he was checking actual ID cards (why?) and take out their wallets, or jokers would mimic "Papers, please!" in a thick mock German accent.
SO why was a receipt showing you paid a surcharge called an "Identification Check"? It doesn't identify anyone. It's a ticket, a surcharge slip, a receipt, whatever, but its not identification and its not a check!
I seem to recall that in Chicago, a transfer could be used for a return trip within a certain time frame. On the Evanston line (Purple) during off-peak hours, if you board a southbound train, you needed to ask for a transfer if you were continuing onto Chicago, but there was no extra charge (this was in 1979).
Here in Denver, a bus transfer is valid on light rail, and a valid light rail ticket is good for transferring to a bus. Light rail fares are handled on an honors system: you buy your ticket from a vending machine at the station. It's good for an hour and 20 minutes. There are roving fare inspectors who randomly come by and ask to see your ticket. While you might be able to get away with a free ride, if you're caught without a ticket, you get kicked off at the next stop, and are levied a fine.
Paper transfers -- cost $0.30, must be paid at time of purchase of first ride -- got you the original ride and two transfers within two hours. Until about two years ago, you could not use the transfer on the line you bought it on, which was punched onto the transfer.
Now, there are the transfer cards if you pay cash fare or tokens -- still $0.30 paid at the time of the first ride, still original ride & two transfers in two hours, but no limitation on what line you can use it on -- and the Transit Cards, not unlike Metro Card, where the turnstile or farebox does the transfer thing automatically -- first time through a turnstile or farebox in two hours: $1.50, second time: $0.30, third time in two hours: free.
As to the Purple line off-rush-hour, to continue downtown on the Red does not require a transfer. You just cross the platform from the Purple to the Red train. When they had transfers for this, how was the transfer checked on the Red train? Did the conductor on the Red train go through the train, or check transfers as people boarded at Howard from the Purple, or what?
Although I have a long memory, some details can get fuzzy. I rode the Purple line only twice in two days from Evanston when the single-unit green and white cars were still in service. You paid your fare on the train. I do remember telling the operator I was going on to Chicago; I can't say for sure that I was issued a coupon. There may have been a conductor at the Howard St. platform who checked for coupons as we left the Evanston train; with single-car trains, it was fairly easy to do so.
Here in Baltimore an Identification Check was a small paper transfer (1 1/2 X 5) that we issued to pasengers that rode only in the suburban fare zone overlap area (example: Towson to York Road Car House was the "overlap" on the Nimber 8 line. The base fare was 25 cents and the zone fare was 10 cents. If a southbound pasenger got on at Towson and said he was only going to Lake Avenue, we issued an identification check to him when the base fare was paid that was then surrendered to the operator upon exit. If the passenger wanted to transfer to a 44 line bus at Belevedere Avenue, the zone fare was charged and the transfer issued. Passengers boarding a northbound car above York Road Car House were issued an indentification check if riding past Dunkirk Road (end of the city fare) so that no zone fare was charged. No check, "10 cents, please".
You can check out recent issues of "Metra on the (Bi)Level" at Metra's web site:
http://www.metrarail.com/news.html
In the afternoon, I change from the 'D' to the 'A' at Columbus Circle. Before the doors on the 'D' have opened, people are pushing their way on. Often, one must lower his (or her) shoulder to get off the train. The same is true at Penn Station when I get off of the 'A' Train.
However, far worse than any subway mass of humanity is the scene I see every day in Penn Station. In this case, I must agree that the MTA braintrust must be out to lunch. The 4:51 train to Ronkonkoma and the 4:52 train to Babylon leave from 15 and 16 track respectively. Oddly enough, 15 and 16 track share a common narrow platform. These trains are always packed and the head end of the platform is jammed. One can't imagine the pushing and shoving that goes on. Makes the worst subway crowd seem like a church service by comparison.
>However, far worse than any subway mass of humanity is the scene I see every >day in Penn Station. In this case, I must
>agree that the MTA braintrust must be out to lunch. The 4:51 train to >Ronkonkoma and the 4:52 train to Babylon leave
>from 15 and 16 track respectively. Oddly enough, 15 and 16 track share a common >narrow platform. These trains are
>always packed and the head end of the platform is jammed. One can't imagine the >pushing and shoving that goes on.
You are so right, the pushing and shoving to get on Ronkonkoma trains is worse than anything on the subway. No doubt Babylon's as bad. I frequently take the 5:41 to Ronkonkoma connect to the Greenport shuttle. The 5:41 leaves from track 16, and a train to Great Neck leaves from the same track at 5:29. People often have trouble getting on the Great Neck train because of all the people lined up for the Ronkonkoma train leaving 12 minutes later! If you're not lined up by 5:30, right after the previous train leaves, forget about getting a seat.
While I don't like the rudeness, in a way I can understand the rush to get onto Ronkonkoma trains. They're always standing room only, and nobody wants to stand for an hour ... well, come to think of it, I like to stand *if* I can get the front window! I'll also stand if only middle seats are left - I absolutely refuse to sit in those ghastly things.
Thoght everybody would like early warning that "The Incident" the 1967 movie about two punks terrorizing a subway car full of passengers, will shown on The Movie Channel cable service on March 26, at 6:30 am ET (For those of you who get the West Coast feed , 6:30 PT) This features in the beginning great scenes of the old 1938 IRT Worlds Fair cars running on the old 3rd Ave El in the Bronx at night, arcing up a storm!! Also, if you can believe it,Ed McMahon! Too cool to be real---I posted this early so that those of you who that know someone who has TMC to start sucking up now!!!
Its a great movie because the movie studio who made it had a hard time finishing the project to due budgetary problems. Included in the cast is a young Jeff Bridges and Martin Sheen.
The line is actually the #4 Jerome Ave. line, although it's possible that some of the sequences on the elevated portion may have been filmed on the 3rd Ave. el. One thing to watch for: there is a brief shot of the train as it enters the tunnel past 161st St. If you look close, you'll see that the train is made up of R-29/R-33 units; it's correctly marked as a 4. You can also see a metal plate sign marked "Woodlawn" in the interior scenes on the train; the car is #5674. And, of course, the moaning, groaning, and whining of the traction motors can be heard, along with the rapid pulsing of the compressor pump. Donna Mills is in that movie, too. So is Beau Bridges, who turns out to be the hero. I'll leave it at that. It's unusual to see Ed McMahon doing anything other than The Tonight Show or TV Censored Bloopers or spots for Publishers' Clearinghouse. (At the time the movie was made, he was also hosting a game show called Snap Judgment, which is very similar to Password. In those days, most game shows being done in New York.)
Will the R142 have colored electronic signs, or yellow and black ones like the R44 and R110?-Nick
On the way up to Albany yesterday, I noticed a bus traveling the oppossite direction down the thruway, right outside of Albany. I looked carefully at the bus, looking to see what Albany's transit systems's buses looked like (having never been to Albany before) and when the bus came closer I noticed that it was a NYCT bus. Within 3 minutes, I saw 2 more buses. I know they are probably coming from a plant upstate, but where? What for?
Josh Caesar
studlyjc@aol.com
Well, it would depend on what kind of bus you saw, Flyer, Orion, RTS, MCI...I'm willing to bet you saw Orions, coming from Oriskany....Bus Industries of America.
-Hank
My guess is that the NYCT buses that Joshua spotted were RTS'es since more are showing up daily at NYCT depots and someone recently stated that Nova delivered them to Schnectady, and NYCT drivers drove them from there into New York City plus I haven't noticed any new NYCT Orions since #631-680 were delivered.
I think it was probably an RTS. I travel the Thruway every day between Suffern and Newburgh, and have occasionally seen RTSs heading back towards the City. And they did look brand spanking new and shiny.
Now I know why I've seen them.
--Mark
I have the news on the 2 and 3 line changes.
For 2 train riders.
During the Morning Rush Hours the 2 will run Express on the Lexinton Ave Line. So for Bronx riders you take the 5 or 2 train. During the Afternoon Rush Hour it would run up through the Lex. Line
For 3 train riders.
During Both Rush Hours the 3 train will terminate at 137 Street and go to New Lots Avenue like Normal.
For people who need to go to manhattan. At 149 You can get off and tranfer to a shuttle bus which will go to all the stops that the 2 train makes. Then you can tranfer at 96 Street.
I hope that this help you with your trip to Manhattan
Actually, it was a little more confusing....
The 2 FROM BROOKLYN will operate via Lex Express to the Bronx during AM, Except for trains departing Flatbush between 7:42 and 8:58, which will operate to 96st/Bway. The 3 will run to/from 137st/Bway all times, with limited special trains from Lenox Terminal. All Brooklyn-bound 2 trains will operate as normal. Shuttle Buses provided between 96st and 148st/Lenox and 149st/Grand Concourse for NB Passengers.
The 2 FROM THE BRONX will operate via Lex Express to Brooklyn during PM, 3 service to/from 137st/Bway, shuttle buses will be provided from 148/Lenox and 149/Grand Conc.
-Hank
Hey Hank, do you realize that Chris is about 7 years old? Give him a break and stop showing us all how much you know. We ALL know a lot here, stop with the constant reiteration. PLEASE!
i noticed riding to and from school every day that all of the articulated flyer d60's exactly from number 1070 and up have the number of the bus displayed in the back smaller than all the others even though the display screen is the same size.. the height of the letters on number 1070 and up is only a little more than half the height of the whole display and are positioned at the top of the display while on numbers 1000-1069 (what i understand was the first order of artics) the whole back display is used and the numbers are much larger and easy to see.. does anyone know what is wrong, or not wrong with the new ones? by the way, when were number 1070 and up delivered and ordered and how many of them?
I don't if it's a problem or not. You're probably on to something. The second order of New Flyer D-60's is for 40 buses - #1070-1109. They are being delivered as we speak. It looks as if Kingsbridge will get the buses being delivered now and most of the others will be transferred to Gun Hill.
Also - An order for 350 Nova RTS are also being delivered. In the Bronx, Gun Hill depot has received a few of them so far.
Currently I work on the M104 in Manhattan, and on the 42 St. portion of the route we run with the M42 out of Hudson. Yesterday for the first time I've seen new 9500 out of Hudson depot. I saw three busses. Number 9510,9513,and 9515. Ive said it before, there is nothing prettier than a new RTS with the alumium wheels.
Fernando,
I agree with you about RTS's w/aluminum wheels. If my memory serves me correctly your depot, along with ENY and OHS were the first depots to get these RTS's. With all of the changes coming along, I'm guessing a new pick is starting - will you change assignments?
Because my depot lost the M116 and M79 and I am not crazy about the 104's and I defintely do not want to work in the Bronx, I switched to Manhattanville depot and picked on the M103. There seems to be delays in this pick going into effect. Orginally in was planned for March 1, but now there saying March 8 and the union is telling us until further notice. Manhattanville is the better choice for me because they also got the M2 and M60 from Mother Hale and I like both those lines since I worked them before at Clara Hale depot.
There is, a New MCI with _6_ aluminum wheels and a $3.00 x-bus fare! :)
-Hank
It's the MCI 102DL3 model and it's 45 feet long.
if this display problem is a bug in whatever, is it something that they would bother to fix?
WMATA (Washington, DC) is testing a low floor articulated bus by New Flyer. It is blue and orange with Metrobus logos, fleet number 1111 and it has 3 doors. If anyone is wondering what it looks like - just imagine an articulated version of the low floor New Flyer buses in shuttle service at JFK, LGA and EWR airports. I don't know the model designation, but based on New Flyer's other model designations I'm guessing it would be D-60LF.
I was just reading an article in the Daily News online at
http://www.mostnewyork.com/most/NEWS/030398/crime_fi/50115.htm
which is about a woman getting raped at Park Slope's Ninth Street station at 9:30 AM yesterday. The article mentioned the station was BUSY, so how did this not go unnoticed, especially because it ocurred on the PLATFORM. People need to pay attention and report crimes in progress that they see in the subway.
I used the 4th Avenue/9th Street station this morning. Like most people, I was waiting on the uptown platform. But, unlike in most stations, the view to the opposite side is obstructed by ceramic columns. You can only see the feet people across the station, and in only some spots. Moreover, the platform is only accessed at one end. Most of the small number of people getting off would walk toward that end and not look back.
It still took a nut to commit such an act -- the trains arrive every five minutes, someone in a rear car might have observed, and a call for help would have brought people running. Such nuts are around, unfortunately. Some time ago, I identified this station as one of the scariest off peak, with its three story winding passages to transfer. I never thought something like this could occur during rush hour.
It's also a sad fact that many people who witness such a crime don't want to get involved. You'd think there would be a Good Samaritan or two in a big crowd.
Adam: In Philedelphia, many years ago, 5:30 P.M., afternoon rush hour, 30
people on the trolley platform at the 30th St. station, with all the people
able to see from the subway platform, a nut grabbed a woman, in the center of the platform and raped her, while the 30 all walked down to the west end of the platform. It seems that the nut had no weapon. WHY, with no weapon couldn't they have smashed his head against the wall, then went down to the west end and when the cops came, as they carried him off, say "I didn't see a thing.
Even if you don't want to get involved physically, I can't beleive that someone from either platform coundn't slip away and call 911. The cops didn't get there for quite a while.
If there is a weapon in sight, I wouldn't want to be a dead hero, but if I had any chance,I would hope I would take it and call for help. I would do the same thing for anyone who was hurt, I would not move them cause I don't know how, but I MUST call and get them help.
I think it's sad, I HAVE NEVER seen it anyother way.
Can someone get me up to speed on what's up with NYC transit? I'm in the military and am a little behind on the latest goings on . Also, what are these Nova buses I'm hearing about and is there a website(s) that can give me some info
I would like to know if Crosstown bus depot in Greepoint, Brooklyn will be reopened to bus operations anytime soon. Need help from anyone who might know about this, please post.
Need help, how can I join THE URBAN TRANSIT CLUB, post any information you have
Just Join on the 2nd saturday of the month at the Masonic Hall at
23rd Street and 6th ave. the hall is next to a Duane Reade Store,
Sorry but i forgot the address.
I belive membership is 30 dollars.
Foti
Next meeting at the above stated address on Saturday March 14,1998.
non-member admission is $5.00 per meeting.
Just Join on the 2nd saturday of the month at the Masonic Hall at
23rd Street and 6th ave. the hall is next to a Duane Reade Store,
Sorry but i forgot the address.
I belive membership is 30 dollars.
Foti
Next meeting at the above stated address on Saturday March 14,1998.
non-member admission is $5.00 per meeting.
I LEFT BROOKLYN WHEN I WAS 19 IN 1983. TODAY HOW SAFE IS THE SUBWAY IN THE DAYTIME? IS THERE A PARTICULAR LINE OR AREA I SHOULD BE WEARY OF? I PLAN
TO VISIT NEXT MONTH AND WANT TO RIDE THE ENTIRE SYSTEM WITH MY CAMERA.
CAN YOU STILL RIDE IN THE FRONT CAR AND LOOK OUT THE FRONT WINDOW?
In general, the system should be quite a bit safer than it was in 1983. Subway crime has dropped considerably over the years. While there's been some deliberate undercounting, that itself has been going on for years, so the relative improvement isn't any less real.
I really don't know enough about specific lines (I ride mostly in Manhattan during rush hours) to give much advice as to which are the safer ones.
I have found that riding in midtowm Manhattan shouldn't pose any problems. There are a few lines you may want to stay off of at night to be sure, specifically those lines which go through Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brownsville, and East New York (and maybe the South Bronx).
A little common sense goes a long way. Know where you're headed to ahead of time so you don't need to keep looking at the map on the train. Blend in with the rest of the crowd: don't flash jewelry or anything fancy which may draw attention. Be aware of your surroundings. I personally keep my wallet in an inside jacket pocket or front pants pocket while in New York; it helps thwart pickpockets.
I hope I didn't scare anyone off; while it is possible to be victimized, it really isn't all that bad. If you don't go looking for trouble, it won't look for you.
While I'm not personally familiar with too many of the lines outside Manhattan, as I stated earlier, I have heard a few things about relative safety. "Relative" is the key word as the chances that anything bad will happen anywhere are very low. Supposedly, the A and C through Brooklyn, parts of the G, the Franklin Avenue shuttle, and both ends of the 3 are among the riskier lines. Interestingly enough, even though there are some rough areas in the Bronx, I've not heard bad things about the subway lines in the borough.
On the other side of the scale, the safer lines include the N, R and 7.
If I were going to be at the front window displaying a camera, I would definitely want a partner watching my back! This goes for all times, all areas, because smart asses are everywhere . You can have your camera grabbed in a crowded train and be as helpless as you would be in an empty one.
The subway is quite safe during the day. I do not think people here want to say which specific lines are dangerous; different people have different points of view on this. I would not use all capital letters to talk on SubTalk. There are some cars where you cannot see clearly out the front window. The glass is not transparent, just translucent. Others here will know which ones they are.
Do you know that the entire system can take over 24 hours to ride? You would need a lot of 35mm film and/or have to recharge your video camera's batteries many times to get everything.
Hey, your the guy who likes graffiti right? I would highly recommend that you take your camera and take an late night ride on the Franklin Shuttle. Trust me, it's safe.
Thanks to everyone for the useful advice on subway safety. As to my liking graffiti when I was in my early teens in the early seventies, yes. Now, no.
But let me say that as someone who was born and raised in Brooklyn and
grew up riding the trains everyday, the trains now seem very boring. But
in turn I do respect the fact they need to be clean and safe to better serve the ridership that depends on the system everyday.
I disagree with GIA 7: the subway trains, although sterile, are not boring. I am always looking at every nook, cranny, passenger, and advertisement, all of which make the ride interesting. But more than the cars themselves, the people and the city which make the subway ride truly interesting. Every subway station is a world unto iteslf--a microcosm of its neighborhood. Lines like the 7 and D represent all that is colorful (and wonderful) about New York. The city and the subway feed off each other. With out one, the other is simply not.
There seems to be, in these pages, a belief that the funding for each and every transportation proposal is decided on independently, and that more proposals mean more money. Actuallly, there is a limited amount of money. Actually making one investment means losing others.
In New York State, the priorities are Medicaid for hospitals, maids, personsal shoppers, ambulettes to everywhere (but not doctors) in the city, and luxo-schools in the suburbs. Transportation in general is at the bottom.
Nationally, money goes for roads, and to the south and west, and away from transit and the north and east. I'm surprised that no one has commented on moves in the House and Senate to drain money federal money out of transit for highway spending. Isn't anyone else angry? Out predecessors paid to build the infrastructure in the Sunbelt during the 1950s to 1970s. Now that our infrastructure is old, when is the payback? We need a Northern League like the one over in Italy: you pay for yours, we'll pay for ours, and we'll cut out the middle man in Washington.
Next fantasy -- the federal government will pay for it. All that means is that federal politicians, not state or local politicians, will decide how New York State's fixed pool is spent. If D'Amato and Moynihan cut a deal to build the Long Island Railroad into Grand Central and a freight tunnel to Brooklyn, that will simply be deducted from the TA's capital program -- the 1970s all over again!
I wish we could eliminate all federal transportation spending, all federal infrastructure spending. Perhaps state spending as well. New York City residents have to pay a local income tax (no one else does) to pay for what their state and federal income taxes are funding for everyone else. I'm happy to increase my local income taxes, but I want my state and federal income taxes cut. It seems that the rest of the country wants to bleed us until were dry!
You know how I got my reputation around here -- by predicting, in 1992, that even though NYC was a big part of Clinton's winning coalition, he'd screw us. The Democrats can stick it to us because the city always votes for the Democrats. The Republicans stick it to use for the same reason. Clinton of Arkansas, Lott of Mississippi, Gingrich of Georgia, ARGGH.
You are certainly right about the gross inefficiencies in the current
system of determining what gets funded. And you are right about the
inordinate emphasis on Medicaid, and on medically-related things in
general. Including doctors. It is what I call the "medicalization"
of daily life; just about any problem people have can be redefined as a
medical or public-health "disorder". (As an example, consider the AMA
coming out in favor of gun control, on the ground that "gunshot wounds"
are a "public health" problem. You'd think the "wounds" spread by
themselves, instead of each one being deliberately and willfully inflicted
by another human being pulling on a gun's trigger.) But as for the aides
you characterize as "maids" and "personal shoppers", the truth is that
they are far less expensive than putting all people who can't care for themselves into hospitals or nursing homes, which was the previous
practice.
To get back to the subject of transit, though, there will never be an
equitible or efficient system of determining what projects to build as
long as the decisions are made by politicians. I don't think there is
even any attempt made nowadays to determine whether the costs of a
project can ever be recouped at the farebox; the result is bound to
be inefficient use of resources, since the people who make the decisions
do not bear the costs of their decisions. If we could return to private
operation (and control) of subways, we would see more sensible decisions
being made as to what does or does not get built.
The city's landscape would surely look rather different today if the
various layers of government had not willfully destroyed privately-operated
mass transit in the NYC area. I say "willfully" because it was mainly the
refusal of the city to allow the IRT and BMT (and the NYWB Ry.) to raise
their fares above 5 cents that killed those lines. Then the city took over
and promptly doubled fares to a dime. Just like they always accuse
"predatory monopolies" of wanting to do...
This week there was a proposal in the Senate to increase highway aids by about $28 billion with no increase in transit aids. The ratio has been about 80% highway 20% transit aids.
There are substantial unmet needs in transit that continue to be unmet beacuse roads are being build rather that investing in transit.
The $.05 cent fare didn't help transit in the past nor did the fact that the streetcar companies had to build and maintain the road they ran in so that the cars could use them. Transit was subsidising the auto industry and still is.
Public policy has supported continued use of cars and truck that choke our cities and spew pollution at the expense of convinenet transit. The interstate system that was to be for interstate travel just made long distance commuting easier.
While I am certainly angry at the current funding decisions,some facts I believe should be remembered. 1. There is a mandated protocol for predicting ridership as a function of applying for Fed funding--fraudulent as the supporting data may be. If the numbers aren't cooked by the regs the dollars are not supposed to flow. 2. I do not believe that ANYONE can name a rapid transit system which both is of adequate capacity to service rush hour loads in a major metropolis AND covers its entire capital and operating cost out of the farebox. Please remember that actual usefulness of public works projects is secondary to personal/institutional imperatives.
If you want to get angrier, check out the Website of the Northeast-Midwest Institute. NEMW.org. In the regional equity section, you'll get the return on the federal tax dollar. You'll find that the very states who angry because they put in more in gas taxes than they get out in funding are those which put in less and get out more overall.
We will continue to get nailed until our elected official say -- lets get rid of federal funding altogther, and raise local money for local projects. As longe as congresemen come home and brag about the 80 cents they obtained for their constituents, who had to pay in a dollar, we'll be the losers.
If highway projects were held to the same standard as transit projects none would be built. The cost of funding auto use is far greater than any public fundng for transit. Except for toll roads most of the cost of local streets , collectors and arterials are paid for with not auto user fees.
I read in the paper the other day that the states of RI and MA have agreed that MBTA commuter rail train service can be expanded (currently only five trains run from Boston to Providence on weekdays) and extended all the way to the T.F. Green Airport, just South of Providence. Does anyone know anything more about this? Does a train station exist at the airport? Will RI run its own trains from Providence to the airport, or just rely on the MBTA service?
What about slamtrak?
The Manhattan Bridge needs construction really bad and that might affect service on one of biggest lines in the city. In the the 1900s the Brooklyn Brigde use to be used by the Park Row El can't we make some new tracks and make hook up and use it while the construction is going on. I ask one Question will it be able to hold the weight cause the old trains were light.
Where on the bridge do you propose to put the tracks? And where would
they connect with the subways in Brooklyn and Manhattan? I don't think
this is a very practical idea.
I have one other idea for service diversion in the event of a Manhattan
Bridge closure that hasn't been brought up here yet, to my knowledge: why not return Brighton local service to its original route over what is now the Franklin Ave. shuttle? With the shuttle tracks now being rebuilt, and a
new enclosed connection built at Franklin and Fulton Avenues, this should
be feasable. Some passengers would change at Botanic Garden via the passageway now being built (or rebuilt) to the Franklin Ave. IRT.
Conceivably, ramps could even be built to carry trains from
the shuttle line west on Fulton St. and down to a junction with the
Fulton St. subway. The D could then run up the Brighton/Franklin shuttle line, join with the A line to Jay St. or West 4th St., and then resume its normal route...
Here's an idea. The Manhattan Bridge trains can use the loop to the 'A-C' line, use the Fulton Street tunnel and switch to the 'F' line and be on it's merry way.
I had asked this question last year, and I'll ask it again.
Why not put trolleys/light rail back on the Brooklyn Bridge?
And I'll ask the question Dan Schwartz asked: where? What kind of room is there?
Michael
At one time, the Brooklyn Bridge did have elevated trains and streetcars running across it. El trains ran on what is now the extreme left lane of each roadway, while streetcars ran on what is now the center lane of each roadway. Streetcars descended to a terminal at street level at Park Row, while el trains had a trainshed at Park Row. After the el trains ceased operating over the bridge in 1944, streetcars took over the el tracks, and the roadways were widened to two lanes apiece. The emphasis here is that Park Row was an elevated terminal, and had no direct connection to the subway. I'm sure that the bridge could handle steel subway trains easily, given the high safety factor it was designed with, but tying it into the subway system would probably be more trouble that it's worth. A light rail line would make more sense, given a choice.
While the Brooklyn Bridge is in better shape than the Manhattan Bridge, I don't think it's strong enough to support today's steel subway cars. It was never intended to carry 70,000+ R-62s, for example; it handled wooden BRT cars for the most part until trains stopped running over the bridge in the early 40s.
--Mark
While the Brooklyn Bridge is in better shape than the Manhattan Bridge, I don't think it's strong enough to support today's steel subway cars. It was never intended to carry 70,000 lb+ R-68s, for example; it handled wooden BRT cars for the most part until trains stopped running over the bridge in the early 40s.
--Mark
This would be feasible at the expense of a lane in each direction on the bridge. With traffic at record levels, this is one scenario that won't happen, IMHO.
--Mark
How about above the roadway? Or if it's wide enough, under the walkway?
Just where are all the people who are driving into Manhattan across the Brooklyn Bridge going? New Jersey?
> Why not return Brighton local service to its original route over what is now
> the Franklin Ave. shuttle? With the shuttle tracks now being rebuilt, and a
> new enclosed connection built at Franklin and Fulton Avenues, this should be
> feasable. Some passengers would change at Botanic Garden via the passageway
> now being built (or rebuilt) to the Franklin Ave. IRT.
How many people, do you think, would be travelling on the Brighton Line from say, Sheepshead Bay to Franklin Ave, as opposed to some destination in Manhattan? And, as a (former) Brighton line rider, why would I want to give up a one (seat) train ride, either via express or local, to some Manhattan destination?
> Conceivably, ramps could even be built to carry trains from the shuttle line
> west on Fulton St. and down to a junction with the Fulton St. subway. The D
> could then run up the Brighton/Franklin shuttle line, join with the A line to
> Jay St. or West 4th St., and then resume its normal route...
If this were done, it would likely mean that the current Franklin ROW would have to be entirely underground to make the connection with the Fulton ST line easiest. This is certainly a feasible scenario, but it would be less expensive to build a connection with the under-utilized F train at the Rutgers St tunnel than it would be to rebuild the underground Shuttle and its new stations.
--Mark
The Franklin-Brighton connection was apart of the Long list of Manhattan Bridge alternatives, but failed the first phase of screening. Too much disruption to the neighborhood was one of the reasons.
How dare I say I know all about the rails and don't even know how they perfectly measure a track gauge. How were they able to make 722 miles of subway track all 4' 8.5' exactly? Or any other gauge for that matter.
ive seen a little vehicle that MNRR workers were using when laying down new track on the viaduct north of grand central. it was a little cart that had the wheels spaced at exactly the right spacing and was small and easy to move.. i would assume that its just for making sure that the rails were laid right in the first place, which i guess they do by making precise markings on the ground where its to be laid, and by calculating precisely, before the rails are laid, what curvature (or how straight) a section of track should be, whether its on the inside of a turn or the outside of a turn, and the length.. i dont know if any of this is exactly how its done but i would assume so..
The gauge is measured between the rails, 5/8" below the top of the rail. Although many things nowadays are undoubtably automated you can still get a simple tool called a gauge bar. It is placed on the top of the rails and spans between them. Flanges projecting down from the bar are 4'-8.5"outside dimension to outside dimension on a "Standard Gauge" bar.
from recent posts i see that new RTS's were purchased as well as some orions. why is it that the MTA doesnt purchase only one kind of bus? is the RTS more appropriate for a certain type of bus line? i noticed that orions dont run on the local bus routes in manhattan, but they do on the express routes. do RTS's handle stop and go traffic better or something? in other words, what are the differences between the orion V and the RTS, besides the obvious like the way they look.
Deciding which bus, or for that matter any complex machine is "better" is sometimes subjective. I don't know about MTA, but in my dealings with government purchasing they usually must take the lowest bid that meets all their specifications. The government may also reject all bids, modify the bid documents and send it out for bids again.
The MTA will purchase small samples of buses with many differnt configurations
I was at the RTS plant one time and there were 4 or five different power configurations being installed in the RTS buses. The comparison in operating condiditons allows the refinement of specifications for future purchases. The same comparison can be done between bus body brands.
Also remember Orion has a manufacturing presence in New York State that is considered in the purchase process. I think Nova has some final assembly cappacity in New York State now also.
The MTA is the best test track for new technology in the world. If it works there it will work allmost any other place.
NYCT is now purchasing buses from different Manufacturers, but from 1981 to 1993 the NYCT(A) only purchased RTS's which of course was sold by GM, TMC and now Nova. It drove me crazy because I wanted to see some variety in the fleet and not 3600 RTS's. I'm sure the NYCT stuck with the RTS because it was a proven coach, but in my opinion they ignored Flxible becuase of the disaster with the Grumman 870. I always felt this was a mistake by the then NYCTA, becuase Grumman took care of the structural problems, but the NYCTA said their buses were not safe. Most of those buses are still operating for NJ Transit today and many agencies use Grumman 870/Flxible Metro buses. In Baltimore with the exception of the Ikarus Articulateds, I believe the entire fleet are Flxible Metro's and they are quite numerous in Washington DC also. I was quite suprised (and happy) when NYCTA started to by Orion buses because something other than an RTS was operating in New York. NYCT had been interested in purchasing articulated coaches for years now and GM built an articulated RTS bus in the early 1980's, but it never made it into regular production. I don't think BIA offers articulated Orions either, which probably is why NYCT turned to New Flyer for it's articulated buses. I'm also curious as to why Orions are not assigned to Manhattan depots. I'm also very curious as to why Casey Stengel (Formerly Flushing depot) has a 100% Orion fleet, including it's expresses.
After the Grumman mess of the 80's transit decided to not invest all their eggs in one basket. By going to different vendors there is less of a chance of back orders and delays and also in case of an emergency with a particular model the whole fleet won't go out of service. Several years ago Busses almost purchased Flexible's metros but backed out because the plan was to have them maitained by an outside contractor and only fuleing and driving would be handled by TWU members. As you may guess this didn't go through. As far as Casey Stengal is concerned, this move was made to make maintence simplier. Kingbridge depot runs Orions and Artics on the M100 currently, mainly keeping the artics only in the morning rush.
Fernando,
I agree that it is better not place all of your eggs in one basket, but the NYCTA did just that after the Grummans were withdrawn from service. RTS's (1200-8000) were the only buses purchased from 1981 until the first Orions arrived in 1993. Your explanation about Maintainence simplicity make a lot of sense. I had forgotten that the NYCTA had made a move similar to this earlier. After the Grummans were repaired by Grumman and the first RTS's delivered they were distributed to most depots and later each depot had either all Grumman 870's or RTS's with some older GMC fishbowls and Flxibles also.
This was a strange time also, because I remember some depots did not have any of the "New buses".
Those were: West Farms, 100 St (OA), and Crosstown and Fifth Ave (TA). These depots used mostly 1977 Flxibles (9000-9309) since they were the newest buses prior to the Grumman 870 (1980), and RTS (1981)
In the early 90's TMC was having problems completing orders with the changeover from GMC, etc. Also the 8400's - 8600s had many problems with wheelchair lifts and transmissions. So the changeover to Orion took place. Also many manufacturers entered a program to test thier products on the New York streets including the Artics which ran tests on Staten Island and out of 126 St depot, and the low floors which ran tests out of Mother Clara Hale depot. Also included in the tests is a special machine transit leases that really tests a bus body and frame by simulating 50,000 of city driving in a garage, but I forget the exact details of where this machine is located. Coming soon also will be hybrid busses that run on electric and diesel built by Orion to be delievered this year,
see my previos post on the real reason they bought from orion. the orion 6 that you mentioned was due in feb. with 10 buses in service by oct. but as usual they are late in delivery. contrast that with nova which is right on time.
There was also an all-electric bus in East New York, that they've tested, but I don't know what has become of it now.
Whatever happened to AMC (American General- the American Motors people). I know memphis,TN had some (as did Nashville) and they rocked side to side over 25 mph to where the driver had to slow down. I haven't seen any lately? what happened to AMC General- who bought them out?
i used to own an amc matador. what a piece of junk. i guess their buses were just like their cars and they gave up. also orion never bought flxible. they went bankrupt in 1995 and orion also was near bankruptcy until they were rescued by western star truck. this must say something about the type of product these companies make.
Also you must remember that the only transit agency's who purchase busses are the big cities and they dont even purchase busses at a real regular pace but at short clips at a time. With the smaller cities keeping thier equipment for at least 25 years there is really not a large market for inner city bus equipment thus the large amount of bankruptcies and mergers.
The MTA in Baltimore bought NOTHING but Flxible "Metros" from 1982 to 1994. The only resason we don't is because Flxible went bye-bye. Now we buy from NABI (American Ikarus?) both artics and 40 footers. The Flx's are being repainted to match the NABI's, but everything is white, with black window treatment and a Mylar blue stripe. The Solid Blue fronts on the old fishbowls is found only on the subway, only because the shop hasn't figured how to get the Imron to adhere to the fibreglass ends. (We do have three orders of Flx's with Fibreglass splash panels, but the Fibrelass is white.)
I always wished that the NYCTA had bought Flxible Metros. We have Metros operated in NYC suburbs (Westchester & Nassau Counties), but none in New York City. I've said many times that I my opinion is that the NYCTA tried to make Grumman the scapegoat for the 870 problems after they received their A-Frame retrofit, but I remember well that during that time the NYCTA did not maintain their buses nearly as well as they do now. The result is that out of nearly 3900 buses in the NYCT fleet over 3000 are RTS's. NYCT has come up with a really strange paint scheme for it's older buses in which certain parts are being painted white. As a whole, I'm really happy about the strides and accomplishments made by the MTA/NYCT over the past years, but I think they dropped the ball on this new scheme.
those grumman buses were the worst they ever bought. i used to drive them out of ulmer park depot. i got a backache and headache all the time. once the steering wheel came off in adrivers hand. as far as flxible they are out of business so nyct is lucky not to have dealt with them. rts buses are still the best and they only buy orions because of a sweetheart deal ex governor cuomo made with them.
They were going to by 50 Flexibles, being that RTS was having some trouble regarding the wheelchair lifts, and during the switch from TMC to Nova. But that's when Flexible was bought by Orion, and 50 Orions were sent instead.
Did Orion buy Flxible? My understanding was that Flxible declared Chapter 7 , and went out of business. Supposedly some of the employees were going to start a company to supply parts for Flxible's, but I'm not sure if that ever happened.
I'm thinking of photgraphing the CTA this spring and would like your suggestions on what you would like to see. I live here in Chicago and pretty much could phtograph any part of the El system.
I can't photography every station, but just about any one you would like to see. The few pictures you have here of the loop are ok, but you don't even have any subway pictures.
There is also part of the CTA that exsists out of the downtown area.
Also, there will be no service as of the 3rd round of the cta serice cuts
on the 54th/Cermak branch of the Blue Line on weekends or overnight periods.
What do you think? Should service really be cut on the whole weekend?
I would appreciate you suggestion for photographs and comments on this round of service cuts. ( The rest of the Blue Line will still run 24-7)
Sure if you can get some good pics of the new Orange Line at Midway Airport
And the prerequisite pics of new rolling stock and buses And some pics of the new
structural work in the North Side that was recently reopened.
Sure if you can get some good pics of the new Orange Line at Midway Airport
And the prerequisite pics of new rolling stock and buses And some pics of the new
structural work in the North Side that was recently reopened.
How about some photos along the Red Line, specifically Bryn Mawr, Wilson, Addison (with Wrigley Field as a backdrop), Belmont or Fullerton, plus the State St. subway? And, of course, the Dan Ryan? Perhaps you could throw in a few pics of an Evanston Express (Purple), running along Red Line trackage, too.
One area of the CTA that might be interesting, if you can get a good photo spot, is the relatively new (ca. 1992?) arrangement of Howard Street yard and the Evanston viaduct over the yard area. Also, the new station in downtown Evanston (Davis St., I think), complete with trainshed.
I had a collection of NY Daily (Sunday) New clippings from the 50's.
Unfortunately, it has been lost. One of my most remembered pictures was of the 6th Ave El terminal at 58th ST.
Does the NY Daily News still publish this column in the Sunday News?
Does anyone else have a collection of these?
Does anyone know if the original pictures form the News are available?
Does the News have a web site?
Yes you can still find Changing Scene in the Daily News as far as I know
And their website is: www.mostnewyork.com
another bonus: The Daily News moved from their E 42nd St digs to the
West Side near Times Square.
Thanks for the info.
I remember when an outfit called CINCSTRIKE out of MacDill
was one of our chief message people when I was
in the Middle East in the 60's.
The 6th Ave. El was dismantled in 1939; the 9th Ave. El south of 155th St. came down in 1940.
I've got an interesting question for everybody: What's your favorite ad in the subway? I know the ads are constantly changing, so is your favorite a current one or one from the past?
As for me, my favorite ad is the ones about "Julio and Marisol" and the anti-AIDS campaign. I really like the comic book-type design and the different installments. For those of you who haven't seen these, the ads are about a bunch of teenagers who are struggling with the issues of AIDS and sex. One or two of them already has AIDS from sleeping with each other and are dealing with it. This all happens in the comic strip. I think they're up to the tenth one now. I even wrote in to the address listed to get the entire comic book about the characters! I feel this is a good way to get across a difficult message and it's also great reading material for a subway ride!
I remember an ad for Milky Way candy bars from my first subway ride in July 1965 on a train of brand-spanking new R-32s. It featured a girl with chocolate all over her face (I wonder if she just stuffed a whole bar into her mouth), grinning ear to ear with a caption, "Do all minors (or miners) dig Milky way?"
Pretty risqué for 1965, don't you think?
I was always a fan of the "Miss Subways" contest. Although they weren't advertising a product, it was neat to read a little biography on your way to wherever you were going.
Also fun were Benson and Hedges ads. I always got a kick out of people stupid enough to do the following
1. smoke
2. forget they were smoking and squash the end of their cigarettes
(I smoked for quite a few years myself, so I group myself in the "stupid" category)
Remember the NY Telephone yellow pages word-play ads? First a strange picture would be posted, with no words, soon, the words would be added. The first one was a blue rabbit--"hair dye". Then a whole series followed for months.
I am looking for one 75th anniversary token,and one 1981 token with the solid Y.If an body knows were i can find them please let me know.
thanks
Try the Gift Shop in either the Transit Museum in Brooklyn, Grand Central Station, or Penn Station. They had an entire bowl of old tokens last time I was there.
Hi! My name is Daniele and I'm from Italy.
I need help because next 12nd of April i will be in Philadelphia and I will have to go to the 2131 of N. American street (crossing at w. Diamond street);
Obviously I want to go there by subway or bus, so please tell me how I can do.
Thanks and sorry for my bad English! Daniele
Daniele--
There is no subway that runs near the area you're talking about. We'd be talking about a bus. I have a map in my car which I will double check later today (Thursday).
Michael
I am not real good at Philly geography, However Diamond around Broad St is a one of the most dangerous areas of the city. IMHO I would take a cab not SEPTA.
It appears that American St. is around N. 4 St. Danielle could get off the Frankford El (Market St. Subway, same line) at Berks St. which I think is at Front St. still (we all need to look this up). then she walks two big blocks north to Diamond, and 4 blocks west to N. American St. (which is a tiny street between 4th and 5th -- I have to look this up later). Personally, for a foreigner walking through N. Philadelphia, I'd vote for a taxi, too, at least from the Berks St. station if she really wants to save money.
I will check the Yahoo map service and write more later.
I am not sure I can get this to be a http reference, but if you highlight and "copy" it then paste it into your browser's location, it's a map of neighborhood. Here it is both ways:
http://maps.yahoo.com/gif?&CT=39.98277:-75.13585:10000&IC=39.98282:-75.13818:5:&FAM=yahoo&W=400&H=250&
2131 N. American St.
American St. is between 2nd and 3rd (ignoring all the other half-streets and alleys, of which American St. is one), which makes it even closer. Berks is two blocks south of Diamond. The train stops at either Front and Berks or Frankford and Berks, so it is no more than a 6-block and may be as little as a 4-block walk.
Here it is not so bad to walk, I don't think, especially during the day.
To get to that station take a train on the track saying "To Frankford" under the 30th St. Railroad Station. If you come from the Airport, get off at 30 St. or Suburban Station or Market East station, look for that "To Frankford Train" business. If you're just in Center City (downtown to outlanders) get it at 15, 13,11,8,5,or 2 Street. If the train has a lit-up A or B, don't take the B train, wait for the next one which is an A train.
To be 100% sure, I will find out in the next 1/2 day whether the train stops at Frankford Avenue or Front St, though it's a small difference.
I got a AAA map of Philadelphia, complete with Rail station lines on it. The stop Daniele wants is the Berks St. (or York-Dauphin) Station of the Market-Frankford Subway Elevated, as I described previously. Get off at Berks and N. Front St. (Front is the equivalent of First (1st) St. Then walk north (higher numbered addresses to Diamond St. Turn left on Diamond, walking past Kensington Hospital past N. 2nd to N. American St. which you should encounter before N. 3rd St. Then look for the address you want. I do not believe it is dangerous to walk there, especially during the day. Even though the Broad St. Subway also seems to go to the same cross streets, Broad St. is the equivalent of 14 St., which would make for a 1.2 mile (2 km) walk to 3rd St. vs. a 0.2 mile (0.3 km) walk from Front Street.
Remember that during rush hours (7:15 - 8:45, 4:00 - 5:45), Berks is an "A" station, so if the A or B light is lit on the train, be sure and take one that has the A or no light lit. (You'll see it, it is just above the front window and on the sides in a glassy white cylindrical looking area.
Good luck. There are many, many nice things to see and do in the City of Brotherly Love, especially Fairmount Park, the Art Museum, and Independence Hall, among others.
By the way, Daniele, your English is much better than my Italian... Enjoy you visit.
By the way, Daniele, your English is much better than my Italian... Enjoy your visit.
Carl--
I think you may have confused the poor person slightly.
First off, do not assume Daniele's gender. Daniele could be a woman, or a man. Europeans spell their names a bit differently that us Americans.
Secondly, Daniele indicates an arrival date of April 12. Travelling on that day, Daniele does NOT need to worry about A/B trains, since April 12 is a Sunday. In fact, it happens to be Easter Sunday.
However, Daniele, everything else Carl said is correct. You can get the Market-Frankford Line trains at 30th Street station (or just outside of it). If you are coming from the airport, take a commuter train to 30th Street Station. Go to the subway, and look for trains marked to Frankford.
And another quick bit of advice. Only ask uniformed personnel for instructions. Even if you're lost, act like you know what you're doing. Your English seems strong enough that you can hold a decent conversation and get yourself out of sticky situations.
If you need any help, please do not hesitate to e-mail me (click on my name in the line that starts with "Posted by..." at the top of the page.
Good luck!
Michael
Thanks a lot for the help!
However I'm a 21 years old man, even if everytime I write on the web every person thinks I'm a woman.
Don't worry about my safety because I will travel with 2 friends and it will be my second visit to Philadelphia and expecially to the place I want to go (it's a records warehouse and I know it's not a recommendable area).
Thanks again! Daniele
Sorry about the misunderstanding. The "e" at the end of Daniele made me think it was a female name. I guess a female name would have a double "l". Oh,well...
Carl:
I don't know how it shows up on the map, but
Berks is the southern stop, and York-Dauphin is 4 blocks north, they are 2 differend stations.
From Berks, your directions are correct, but I think that it could be important that Daniele realize that they are 2 stations.
I don't know what the borders are for the BADLANDS, but I think they are along American Street. Nightline did a show there (badlands) a few years ago and I think that Ted had quite a few police with him.
I also thought of the Broad St. Subway to Ceicel B. Moore, and there should be a bus going east. I have to check a little later.
You are right, it is a wonderful city and has so much to offer, not as much as when I grew up, I spent half my life in Fairmount park at that time, and never worried, almost didn't have too.
Maybe my previous posting wasn't clear that Berks is a different stop from York-Dauphin on the MFSE. Sorry about that. The #3 bus (I think) runs across Cecil B. Moore Avenue (formerly Columbia Avenue). The #39 bus runs across Dauphin St. I personally think it would be better just to get off at Berks and Front St. on the Market-Frankford Line and walk or take the #3 bus the two blocks than wait at Broad St. and ride 12 long blocks. Anyway, Daniele and his two friends should have no trouble on Easter Sunday walking from Front St. It's in Kensington, which is a pretty friendly place.
And the previous post about asking only people who clearly work for the Transit system or police (or are dressed up nicely for Easter) is a good idea. I work at the Smithsonian on weekends and there are constantly people offering "advice" on the street in front of the Metro station who are trying to sell free maps or otherwise trick people into parting with their money. People here have suggested having a Smithsonian kiosk at the escalator, but that has not been implemented.
Carl: You and I had the same thought, 3 bus on Cecil B Moore, old Columbia Ave., but no more, it runs on Berks now. You are correct about the 39, westbound on Susquehanna Ave, eastbound on Dauphin St.
I wonder if a record warehouse would be open on Easter Sunday in north Philly?
I think that I found a good idea for Daniele. IF he is in center city, anywhere,
and he takes the Subway train, going east toward Frankford, as you said at 30th, 15th, 13th, 11th, or 8th,
gets off at 2nd St, walks 1 block west on Market, they can board a 57 bus, going north on 3rd. It goes north on 3rd, takes a left on Germantown Ave for a few blocks, then a right on Oxford 2 blocks, and than, a left on American St and
right passed the address he wants to go too. After they are finished, they cross American get the bus and come south on 4th to market, or whatever. This is a 15-20 minute bus ride. On Sunday, from 8 a.m. til 8 p.m., they run every 20 minutes. Weekdays, 7 to 12 minutes apart.
I can't remember hearing of a 57 before, but there it is and Daniele, I wish you lots of luck with the 234 SEPTA STRIKE.
contact the DVARP with the same question
they will help your inquirries
What is the DVARP?
So many people live upstate that go to NYC and that they have to take the Upstate Metro North to Hoboken. It is only one track. It stinks. To make my point they have make a conection without having to transfer and paying again. Plus they should make a second track so that the trains would run full time insted of Rush Hours. How much wilol it cost and how long will it take?
So many people live upstate that go to NYC and that they have to take the Upstate Metro North to Hoboken. It is only one track. It stinks. To make my point they have make a conection without having to transfer and paying again. Plus they should make a second track so that the trains would run full time insted of Rush Hours. How much will it cost and how long will it take?
Upstate commuters (by this I mean Rockland and Orange Counties) have to use the Pt. Jervis line to Hoboken because there is no active rail crossing of the Hudson River between Penn Station and almost all the way to Albany. A new crossing in the area of the Tappan Zee road bridge, for example, would surely make rail commuting easier, but don't hold your breath waiting. Rather than going through Hoboken, many commuters from Rockland and Orange counties use the Tappan Zee Express bus service to the Tarrytown Metro North station.
Double-tracking the Pt. Jervis line probably would help as well. I fact, I believe it was at least partially double-tracked until relatively recently, though I don't know why the second track was removed.
The Port Jervis line has a few areas of double-tracking, now used to allow trains to pass one another.
The nearest rail crossing is in upstate Selkirk, NY. Freight trains with cargo for NYC need to travel north to Selkirk, cross the Hudson and then travel south to NYC. That's why we recently heard Senator D'amato that after 76 years, it's time for the Port Authority to build the rail tunnel thay were originally chartered to do .... right now, freight also can travel to NJ docks and then is trucked across. This river crossing would save 1 million (!) truck trips into NYC per day.
Passenger demand and NIMBYism (Not in My BackYard) isn't going to warrant another trans-Huson passenger crossing of any kind real soon.
--Mark
How many people use the Port Jervis line in one morning? 200 maybe? What is the potential, 1200, maybe? Why build a 40-mile long track so that a few people can have slightly more service. And why build another railroad bridge so that a few people don't have to switch to the PATH train at Hoboken? Personally, I would prefer to take the PATH train than to fight the crowds getting off at Penn Station. It's also easier during rush hour to get to Wall Street via the PATH anyway. When I travelled a lot between Philadelphia and Brooklyn, I always got off at Newark, took PATH to WTC then got the BMT into Brooklyn. It was a lot easier, than pushing my way through the narrow exits at Penn Station.
I like the idea of a NJ-NYC freight connection because of the savings of truck traffic from NJ to Long Island, the putting to use of the Cross Brooklyn RR, and the increased traffic generated to the Brooklyn Terminal Market and other businesses in Brooklyn and Queens. Also the Hells Gate tracks would be used less, allowing better on-time passenger traffic through the Bronx, Westchester and north on both sides of the Hudson River. Because the tunnel is long and would be only one track, it could not be for passenger use, though. Actually the only drawback (to me) is that if the Cross Brooklyn RR were used for lots of freight, it would probably never be converted into a light rail line as part of the subway system. Not that it was ever going to be done anyway....
As a Orange Co. resident, I can guarantee you that more than 200 people use the PJ Line every day.(I'd quote the exact #s, but I don't have a MN report in front of me right now!) You should try getting out of the Harriman or Middletown parking lots after getting off the 4:45 or 5:42 out of Hoboken!! Actually, I don't see the Secaucus conn. doing anything, as most people from here go downtown anyway, plus wwould NJT have 1,000 standees through the tunnel?? Plus they are using all their slots at Penn Sta. asit is, so they really can't add too much service that way anyway
I've also heard that the Pt. Jervis line has impressively high ridership considering the distance to Manhattan and the long travel times. Compared to other long-haul commuter lines in the metropolitan area, it does far better than Metro-North's Waterbury branch or the LIRR's Greenport line, and has a smaller but still sizeable edge over Metro-North to Dover Plains and the lIRR to the Hamptons/Montauk.
What is interesting is why the Pt. Jervis line does so well.
If I can be a little modest about our area (hardly), a lot of people like moving up here for some reason!! I guess in comparison with Rockland, Bergen, Westchester,(NTM NYC) that the housing prices are fairly reasonable, ditto the taxes (well...)and services. I'm amazed at the people who move way the hellout in PA...they literally drive 1/2-1 hr to Port, then ride 21/2 into Hoboken,etc,etc-talk about never seeing your family!!! Anyway, it seems to work for them- I've lived all my life, & I'M amazed at the changes in the last 10-15 years.....
Interesting that you mention all the people moving to Orange County and NE Pennsylvania. Every Friday (?) the New York Post runs a special section full of real estate ads. In keeping with the demographics of the Post's readership, most of the houses are toward the lower end of the price spectrum, especially in comparison with what you see in the Times. At any rate, most of the ads for new single-family-home developments seem to be for those areas ... they're probably among the very few places in the metropolitan area where people can find reasonably affordable housing.
Looks like others have the same idea.
The MTA wants to upgrade the Port Jervis line to be double-tracked over
almost its full length, and to run hourly service on the line in each
direction. It is trying to buy the line from Conrail, which owns it.
But Conrail itself is about to be divided between two private
railroads, CSX and Norfolk-Southern. The latter is going to get the
NY state Southern Tier line, of which line between Port Jervis and Suffern,
NY is part. And they don't want to sell, because they want to run
increased freight traffic on the line. As I understand it, the pre-split
Conrail management had agreed to sell the line to the MTA, and the MTA is
taking legal action to force NS to honor the agreement. But they
are also negotiating with NS over how the line will be used and they may
reach a settlement out of court. Once the issues have been resolved, work
on upgrading the line should begin. In a few years, there could well be
regular hourly service on the line. And service to and from Penn Station
will be available by way of the Secaucus Transfer station now under construction.
The one section of the line that I believe has to remain a single track is
the Moodna Viaduct, the (highly) "elevated" section north of Harriman. While a train is on the viaduct, trains in the opposing direction would have to
wait for it to be clear before entering. But since the viaduct itself is relatively short, this should not cause major problems.
Much of the above information comes from an e-mail sent to me by
Jim NY@aol.com, a Metro-North employee who answered an enquiry I had posted on the nyc.transit newsgroup regarding the line.
Some years ago, the MTA studied the possibility of constructing a rail bridge adjacent to the Tappen Zee and a connection across lower Rockland to the Port Jervis Line, to provide direct electric service from the North-West suburbs to Grand Central. Not surprisingly, they decided not to bother. To little bang for the buck.
Meanwhile, Congressman Nadler and others have been pushing a rail freight tunnel to Brooklyn, to eliminate the need for freight trains to detour through Albaln to reach the city. It would be a single track tunnel which would cost cazillions, have limited capacity, and would have to exit a mile inland a double back to a terminal in Sunset Park, and area which would have to be leveled. Extravegant claims are being made for the tunnel, including an absurb statement that it would remove trucks from the roads (it would remove trucks from the bridges and tunnels, allowing more cars to get through, but the freight would still have to be delivered by truck).
A blinding flash of the obvious. Since a rail bridge at Tappan Zee would cost a fraction of a rail tunnel, why not build a rail bridge for passengers and freight? Under the break up, the West Hudson track and the Port Jervis line are owned by two different railroads, so there would be competition to the city. There is a single dedicated rail track on the Hudson Line. And trains may be able to head north from the crossing and east from Beacon, shifting freight to truck outside the Metro Area, where there is less traffic. And trains would probably get to Sunset Park quicker via a direct run over the Hell Gate Bridge than via a tunnel and a switchback in the Bay Ridge ROW.
When a Orion bus (New City buses), are driving along or ideling for a long while, air is released from the back. What is this? The air brakes?
I'm not a mehanic, but my experiences with deisel powered military vehicles with
pneumatic braking systems is that the system is bleeding off excess air from the service tanks
That is the air dryer. All late model buses with air brakes do this.
Some light rail vehicles do this also.
As the air compressor runs, water from the air is condensed in the air
storage tanks and runs via gravity thru a valve and into a small tank
below the main air storage tank. When the compressor stops, the open valve
closes and a valve opens to release the water and the air trapped in this
small tank. That is the sound you are hearing.
Patrick
centolanzi@aol.com
at 2:28pm today 3/5/1998 WCBS 880 was reporting no service on J/M between Essex and Marcy due to "track trouble". At 3:48 the disruption became "Broad Street to Marcy Ave". "Bus service is being provided. This will last thru the rush hour"
Question: Does anyone know what is going on?
WNBC-TV lead story- structural problems on the bridge- may be closed tomorro.
Decision to be made tomorrow morning on service status.
TV4 says no Brooklyn Service till 7 pm then every other train to Eastern Parkway only till 530AM when further decision to be made. NYCT says to use A,C,E to Brooklyn (Broadway-East New York) or L to Myrtle Ave to M train at Wcykoff to Broadway-Myrtle.
Maybe they should close it now and rebuild the tracks? (Yes-I know service will be as bad as Lenox)
--Opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT--
Latest reports indicate that it is a cracked girder on the bridge on the north side that is causing the problem. As I write this 7:30 PM EST they are sending alternate J trains over the bridge using the Northbound track (single track operation) to Esssex Street. Other J trains are terminating at Hewes Street going into the middle to Marcy Av and then heading back north. Some are terminating at Eastern Parkway.
M trains are terminating at Broadway/Myrtle.
This is the current operation as of 7PM. Anything can happen (and probably will)
What will happen Friday morning is too soon to tell.
This was bound to happen sometime... the bridges in the city are slowly coming down due to whatever excuse City Hall can come up with... I just hope nothing serious happens... It happended on the Williamsburg, but what about the Manhattan?
At 6pm at DeKalb Ave announcement made on the Quincy Train was due to service delays on the M train, take the N or R to 36th Street for B Service. Do not wait for the M at Dekalb.
As late as 6 pm, NY1 Rail & Road report was saying that the filming of a movie in Williamsburg was responsible for the disruption. Then they began reporting the truth.
I was going to post something about the movie anyway, because both that morning, and in the evening, I saw a TA RTS, numbered 5287 on the roof. The front number looked like it was a 3000.
Anyway, everyone remember that next year, the bridge will be closed for 5 months.
Folks‹
Then there's the TA version (and -buff, you'll get a good laugh out of this).
Noticed the advisory on the New York City broadcast wire at work (I work for the AP), but no other story went with it. Curious, I called the MTA-NYCT phone number. Under the "service update" (or whatever they call it), had a woman saying the service disruptions were being blamed on "structural problems at Marcy Street."
Are we all sure this is the Willy-B's problem? Or is NYCT trying to blow smoke in front of a bigger problem?
I would keep checking the WCBS-News 88 website (http://www.newsradio88.com/) or listen to News88 or 1010 WINS.
Michael
Can anyone tell me whether photos are allowed to be taken on the subway. I fear that the regulations may not permit it, but are they ever enforced?. I have seen pictures with photographers in and also tourists taking pictures. Your advice would be welcome.
This question has been asked and answered before; basically, if you don't use flash, nobody will mind. and since flash is really not that effective in such large areas, fast film and a Flourescent Light filter would be better anyway.
See the Faq: http://www.nycsubway.org/faq.html
-Dave
A point-and-shoot camera might be preferable to an SLR, since it's less likely to draw attention. I have two Nikon SLRs and have taken pictures on the subway with them, but I use them with discretion. Once at Times Square, I waited for the crowd to thin out before taking a shot of an original placard indicating "Downtown Express Trains". That placard is gone now.
I am a #7 rider. Does anyone have details on the #7 'Super Express' ? I've heard of it and have seen pictures of a #7 car with 'Super Express' on the front car destination sign.
Thanks
The only super-express I remember was the Worlds Fair Super Express. It began at Times Square and stopped at Crand Central, Queensboro Plaza, and Willets Point. In the AM or early Afternoon. After the PM rush-hour, it ran the other way.
The 1964-65 World's Fair express trains did not stop at Queensboro Plaza,
only at Times Square, Grand Central, and Willets Point.
The ran in the midday (from end of AM rush to beginning of PM rush) outbound,
and after PM rush until the fairgrounds closed inbound. They also ran on
weekends.
Too bad they don't run something like that after Mets games at Shea anymore. Not necessarily super express, but plain old express.
When did the "Baseball Special" #7 express trains stop running?
SUP JUST WANTED 2 SAY THERE IZ WRITERS OUT HEA HAWAII,MAUI
Yes, we know all about the effects of Maui Zowie on brain cells.
Maui Zowie?? Is that a variety of pot like Matanuska Thunderfuck? =)
Seems we never get any of that good stuff up here in Hartford :(
Of course, *every* subway car is a redbird after a few tokes, but only if the stuff is good.
Why do I hear silence in here??
Hi all,
I sent in a request for updated maps from (NY)MTA and I got the maps,
but the latest map I got was "The Map" issued January 1998, I did
specfically asked for March issue (the one with B/C switch) I guess
they don't read it the whole letter :-(
I would like to ask anyone of you to send one March 98 issue map and I
will update my maps (NYC Subway map and Time-based maps) if you find
any errors, please let me know as well.
Thanks,
Michael Adler
USPS letter carrier serving Wheat Ridge & Mountain View, Colorado
70+ subway maps available at www.nycsubway.org
P.S. I need only a couple or so to review my updated maps for *ANY*
errors before I release it to Dave Pirmann to post the maps, (I will
file attach my maps to you)
Just to let everyone know that I am covering Michael's request for the March Map.
Thanks Allan, look forward to the map in the mail :-) I need few subway
buffs to review my updated maps (NYC Subway map & the time-based maps)
for any errors, let me know and I'll file attach the draft maps to you
during the week of March 16th.
Cheers,
Michael Adler
USPS Letter Carrier serving Wheat Ridge & Mountain View, Colorado
70+ subway maps available at www.nycsubway.org
"How I Became a New Yorker":
http://www.albany.net/~hello/ny.shtml
Mary Murphy
How true, how true. The only thing you left out is how good it felt to give that advice in your new guise as "Expert NYC traveller".
I apologize for using "talk" for a personal message,
but I don't have Gary Jacobi's e-mail address.
Dear Gary,
Thank you for responding in SubTalk to my little story. May
I please quote you in our Letters page?
Letters
And since I've just learned that SubTalk knows HTML, I might as
well plug in:
How I Became a New Yorker
Sincerely,
Mary Murphy off the tracks
hello@albany.net
Hello
good one, but much faster to take 1 @116th--> 2/3 @96th --> NR @42nd
Lefty wrote:
> good one, but much faster to take 1 @116th--> 2/3 @96th --> NR @42nd
Yes, probably, if I didn't get lost.
Maybe:
1. My aunt didn't want to confuse me with letters.
2. She didn't want me to cut corners.
3. The story wouldn't have been as funny.
But I had to tell it exactly as it happened, no?
Thanks,
Mary
I am working on a Reference Project.
I understand Hartsdale Bus is running the following lines
34 Orchard Hill Commuter
38 Secor Rd Commuter
39 Ridge Rd Commuter
64 Green Knolls Commuter
65 Longview Commuter
66 Dobbs Ferry=Scarsdale--Larchmont==New Rochelle
70 Bonie Briar Commuter
71 Larchmont Manor Commuter
76 Rye-Port Chester
Can anyone verify the operator of these routes,and has a telephone number and an address
The new Rte G,,,is this being operated by Metro North or by the Bee Lines
Your assistance is greatly appreciated
Thank you
Steve
How is the B/C terminal switch working out? Any problems?
from an operational standpoint, I'd rate the change somewhere between "about the same" and "Somewhat better". As for convenience, I miss being able to get from Penn Station to Bedford Park, in the morning, without changing trains.
There have been ongoing posts about re-establishing the Culver (F) Express in Brooklyn and establishing the West End Express between 9th Ave. and Bay Parkway, both in peak direction on center track. Since this approach is used on other lines, e.g., 2/5, 6, 7, J/Z, and (ironically) now B/D in the Bronx, what criteria determine whether it would be used? Patronage, disruption to people at local stations, ?? It seems to work for some lines, I guess. Are there any complaints about it? The West End provides, in a way, the mirror image of Bronx B/D operation. But which would be the express and which would be the local in Brooklyn, the B or the M? And what is the impact on M operation with the Williamsburg Bridge problems? Could alternate B's run as Express, as alternate F's did (I think) on the Culver line?
Don't know the answers, but they have to do something. The "F"Train, New Yorks worst Line has never been so bad!
The F train was able to run alternate express trains because they have always had service every 4-6 minutes during rush hour. In fact half the rush hour trains still only go to Kings Highway because the stations south of there only "need" 8-12 minute service. The B runs every 8 minutes, as does the M. Either could be the express on a center track service but because the B runs express from Midtown and from Pacific St. it would probably remain the express past 9th Avenue and the M would be the the local. For track switching efficiency, either 1) both trains would have to go to Coney Island or 2) the B might end at Bay Parkway during rush hours; that's a detail I have no answer to.
The options noted are indeed possible. For historical perspective, past operations on the West End line show another option re: what can be done, based on what had been done. Back in time, (I think through the 1950's - and probably done for decades before) - non-rush hour West End expresses ran to Coney Island. During the rush hour, they terminated at Bay Parkway, used the cross-overs on the Coney Island side of the station to enter the middle track and then cross over to the Manhattan-bound track for return operation from Bay Parkway to Manhattan. How was the line connected from Bay Parkway to Coney Island during those times? By shuttle (generally old, wooden, open-ended cars!). The shuttle would run from Coney Island on the Manhattan-bound track past 25th Ave. station to the cross-over, and then switch to the center track and enter the Bay Parkway station on it. On return to Coney Island, it would use the other cross-over and switch to the outer track and serve the remaining stations and Coney
Island. So if you can picture it, the shuttle picked up Coney-Island bound passengers by cross-platform connection, and discharged Manhattan-bound passengers by cross-platform connection (on the other side). This apparently worked well. I imagine West End local (Rush hour Nassau loop) service, which I think also began and ended at Bay Parkway, was threaded into this turn-back approach. So maybe rush hour B's could run express to Bay Parkway, and via switching tracks, then run local to Coney Island, while the local M's do the turnback at Bay Parkway. This would be no more complicated (maybe less so), than past operations on the West End line. (By the way, this past rush hour shuttle approach, as far as I know, was used only on the West End. Neither Sea Beach, Culver or Brighton line operations used it. I'm not sure why it was done and why the West End was selected. Those old cars did give a feel for another era, and though it was inconvenient for those needing to change trains, added a little "flavor
to the trip.)
n throngs in the city.
I know I've read that an identical service was run on the Culver line from Kings hwy. to Coney Island until 1954 when the R16 cars were delivered. The reason given was the shortage of steel cars on the BMT and the need to get them back to the rush hour throngs in the city. The R16's simply replaced the old gate cars and allowed the BMT Standards to resume serving Coney Island on both the West End and Culver lines.
Then in the mid 1960s on the Culver (D) train after it was connected to Church Avenue, the D often went only to Kings Highway midday or weekends, and a shuttle went from Kings Hway to Coney Island. Same reason, they could save a few cars and 2 employees by having less freqent service south of Kings Highway.
As to why this wasn't done on the Sea Beach line, the answer should be obvious: there are no express stops at all along this line. I don't have any theories about the Brighton line.
On Wednesday, I spoke to the person who's in charge of the J/Z line. The reason
being is that I wanted to know if their was any thought of bringing express service
to the center track starting at Eastern Pkwy and Marcy Ave. I was disapointed to find
out that their are no plans to go ahead with this idea. I did however bring up the
fact that when the MTA starts those monthly passes, ridership will increase even more.
Also, the plans were not said as to what will the agency do about this increase.
-Garfield
I see no good reason to have center-track express service between Eastern Parkway and Myrtle Avenue. It would mean paying for either much more train service like from the Canarsie Line to Broadway-Bklyn, which maybe isn't needed, or making the Z or J (one has to be picked) to be less desireable than the other because one would be a local. Since we are talking about a grand total of 4 stations and the skip-stop service already means each train skips 2 of them, what's the difference? It might actually mean just more congestion at Myrtle Avenue as more trains crossed in front of each other to switch tracks. No, unless a third train line was provided, that doesn't seem like an important improvement to me. In fact I thought that making those stations skip-stop stations and instituting equal J and Z trains was inspired, schedule-wise. Sure for us train-ride lovers, it's not so great, but they don't run the system for us. They run it for the much larger constituency that unfortunately just sees it as a utility. We then get whatever fun we can out of it.
What kind of center track is on the Culver line? Is it one track (a la the Flushing 7) or is it two? If it is one track, then it is a good idea to create a "Rush Hour F" that works in conjunction with the standard F (again, just like the Flushing 7). The stops that will become express would be those that are already equipped to handle rush hour express service from when the line previously had express service.
If there are two tracks, what is the feasability of adding another train to the line? Perhaps a new local east side IRT train could be added and would meet with the F at Second Avenue. Is there an abandoned connection between the two lines? If so, then it should be reconnected and the IRT train would be the express on the Culver line. This would enable people who travel on the Culver line to have access to the East Side as well as releave the pressure from the F train.
What do you think?
The Culver line is a three-track line. The subway portion, including the ramp from the McDonald Ave. portal to Ditmas Ave, has four tracks. The southbound local track merges with the express track just before Ditmas Ave. Keep in mind that the subway part was part of the IND system. I haven't ridden the Culver line in a long time, but the last time I did, it was being rehabilitated, with temporary platforms built over the center track. Given the fact that the Culver line is a three-track line, any express service would more than likely be peak-direction only.
This is very simple during rush hours:
1)Culver: F Express in both directions between Bergen Street and Church Avenue
with G Local in both directions.
Coney Island Bound F Express in peak direction between Church Avenue
and Kings Highway.
Kings Highway Bound F Local in peak direction between Church Avenue
and Kings Highway.
2)West End: B runs Express between 9th Avenue - Bay Parkway in peak direction
terminating at Coney Island.
M runs Local, and terminates at Bay Parkway.
This is the most logical system and it was tried for awhile. The only two things preventing it are:
1) People in Park Slope and Carroll Gardens think the G doesn't run often enough (this could be fixed by running extra G trains between Bedford-Nostrand and Church Ave. or between Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Church Avenue).
2) People in Park Slope and Carroll Gardens don't like climbing those steps at Bergen St. and having to take an extra train to get to Manhattan.
3) More people live in Park Slope, Red Hook, and Carroll Gardens than live along the Ocean Parkway corridor and the former can complain louder than the latter can express satisfaction (which is common in all politics), so they win, unfortunately for those of us who like using subway tracks in the most efficient way possible.
I had the same thoughts after posting my message. This problem could be solved by originating 2 or 3 F locals out of Church Avenue making all stops to Bergen Street, and then down the ramp into Jay Street.
The F service is not that frequent where this will cause a bottleneck at Bergen Street.
Also, the TA can post the schedules of the F locals at the local stations so the passengers will know when one will be around.
This will keep the people closer to the city from complaining.
I think you're too optimistic on the willingness of passengers to arrange their schedules according to what the TA thinks is rational. Remember when the 1/9 skip-stop service was inaugurated? At first 191st St. was served only by the No. 9 during rush hours, then people served by the station (and their "elected officials?) decided that their station was too important for so little service and shouted long enough for the TA to agree with them and have both trains stop there. That's why the No. 9 makes 3 skip stops and the No. 1 makes 4 today. There was a similar TA proposal for 125th St., but that station never was served by only one line; the neighbors were very alert and never gave the TA a chance to try skip-stop service there. And then there was the F train east of Continental Ave. It ran express for a while and the R ran local during rush hours until the locals decided they didn't want to have to fight for a seat on the express in Kew Gardens or Forest Hills. I think your idea is sound, but dream on!
I've heard the F express was killed by Thomas Cuite, the head of the City Council many years ago, who lived in my neighorhood. He insisted, the rumour holds, that every train stop at our stop, Prospect Park 15th St.
There are two issues: are we talking about adding service, or redistributing existing service? And is it better to wait longer and ride slower, or get on quickly and stop often?
If we can add service, we can have an F express when the 63rd St tunnel opens. The replacement for the G on the Queens Boulevard Line would shift over to the 6th Avenue local track at 50th St, then run local to Church. The Brownstone Brooklyn stops would have the same level of service, and the outer stops would have an express.
If waiting is better than a slow ride, one could terminate both half the F trains and the G trains at Church. The inner stops would still get 12 trains per hour, though half of those would require a change. The outer stops would get six trains per hour, but they would be faster. Outer trains could be added if a faster F took traffic away from the Worst End.
As for serving the inner stops with the G alone, it wouldn't make me happy.
I think your plan is even better than mine.
You can't do too much with G service making the local stops and not going into Manhattan. You are penalizing the Manhattan bound riders with having to switch at 7th Avenue or Bergen Street for a train to Manhattan.
When the 63rd Street connection is completed, G service will be cut back to Court Square, so maybe the Southern Terminus becomes Church Avenue.
I would say that a redistribution in service is what I'm leaning towards.
I boarded a Long Island bus this morning, then jumped on LIRR to Brooklyn. At
Atlantic Avenue, I went through the turnstile and was charged a 2nd fare. I thought you were entitled to a free transfer, if within two hours. Is transfer
from Long Island bus only good at designated locations like Mott Av, Far Rock?
Someone please clarify.
I think that gold cards used on a Nassau bus are only good for transfer to certain specific Queens routes. I'll check the brochure I got on MetroCard Gold and write another post in a couple of days.
I'm in Paris on a business trip, but of course I've been riding the Metro as much as possible. I just saw a sticker plastered to a train door window, facing out, that said "Please DON'T let the People Out!" I'm not sure the significance (I assume it was not official), but it's kind of funny in light of the thread we had here last week about subway etiquette!
Paris is probably the greatest city on Earth. And not just because they have great subway lines. Are you lucky!!! Don't forget the new streetcar line from St. Denis to Bobigny, though you may not really have time to see it.
I have heard rumors that the rail cars now have push-buttons that open the doors rather than those little handles that one popped open with the typically French look of pouting annoyance. Oui? Non? Do the new cars still have that quiet Middle E note played before they slam the doors shut?
There used to be a store that had a lot of books about railroads and subways about 1-2 blocks east of Gare St. Lazare. Plus the parks, the museums, the crepe vendors on the street, the trees with the little light green leaves, the uniform look to the streets, the river, the restaurants, the statues, the cobblestone streets, the Pantheon, the two Statues of Liberty, the funny loooking green busses with the balconies in the back, the RER (oops I'm back to transit again), etc.
What a great place to be. (Do you get the feeling I wish my company would send ME to Paris for a week or two?)
There is a nice mix of old and new cars... and of course a few lines with rubber-tired cars too (but the majority of lines are steel wheeled). The "note" still plays, and most cars have the pull-handle to open the doors. It's the RER "express" which has push-buttons.
Oh, by the way, the sign to which I referred in my original post was in English, not friench!
-Todd
p.s.
In Montreal, the North American subway line modelled after the Paris Metro, all written & verbal announcements are made in French. But the new cars on the Blue line along Blvd. Jean-Talon have 2 electronic signs in each car which show the name of the next station after each stop (and also runs animated commercials between stops).
The conductor doesn't have to speak on the P.A. A pleasant-voiced woman tells us in French the stops & gives other reminders.
And all Montreal cars are rubber-wheeled.
Line 5 (Blue Line) is not the only route with electronic signs: Line 2 (Orange Line from Henri Bourassa to du College (or Cote Vertu, I can't remember which) has them too. The signs indicate the next station and the corresponding bus routes serving that station. Then short ads follow.
Toronto is considering doing this too. Currently, it is a spoken announcement which, depending on the age of the subway car and its PA system, may or may not be heard.
I haven't ridden Montreal's Metro in a long time - not since 1971, before the three original lines were extended. Back then, the cars had roll signs up front which showed the route number and destination. There were no announcements made at that time. My first experience on the Metro was while visiting Expo '67. The rubber tires made for a smooth ride and, interestingly enough, all stations have outside platforms (I don't know about the lines which were built later).
When Lines 1 and 2 were extended in a somewhat west/southwest and west/northwest direction, they intersected at a new station: Lionel Groulx. This station has two levels both with centre platforms. The difference here is that when changing lines you need only cross the platform if your journey is continuing in the same general direction, ie. west/southwest (Line 1) is across the platform from west/northwest (Line 2) and the other level accommodates transfers to east (Line 1) and east/north (Line 2). When Line 5 was built across the top of the island its temporary western terminus is where it connects with Line 2 and again they both have centre platforms. Because these lines cross at more or less a right angle, I don't recall whether these platforms provide the same transfer scheme, but more than likely do not.
Another aspect of Montreal's Metro is the rubber wheels. Instead of cars having eight steel wheels, each car has eight steel, eight rubber and an additional eight smaller rubber wheels on guideways. (To keep the trains on the track.) Because of the friction of the rubber wheels, and the fact that the tunnels have no barrier between the tracks which helps allow air to be sucked in from street level vents by passing trains, the temperature over the past 32 years has been increasing to a level where it's absolutely blistering in the summer and warm enough in winter to forego winter coats. Since none of the cars have ever been air-conditioned, a crowded train ride of any distance in the summer results in a lot of sweaty people. There was talk several years ago of air-conditioning the entire system (it is entirely underground) to combat this effect, but I'm sure the hydro costs would be prohibitive.
I didn't realize the trains were not air-conditioned. Even in the summer, they seemed cool to me. But maybe I wasn't in Montreal after the August heat had a chance to build up. I wonder if Toronto subway cars are air conditioned? I'd assume Vancouver isn't because it runs mostly outdoors.
In Montreal, the rubber wheels make a quiet & smooth ride. And the fact that there's no wall betweeen trains travelling in different directions makes it more interesting for us subway fans, especially since we can't see out the front or rear doors because the cab extends the entire width of the car.
I have been in Montreal 3 times, both times in August. The subway is boiling hot and sweaty in August.
Paris and Washington also don't have walls between the tracks in many side platform stations, just large round tunnels.
Most trains in Toronto are air-conditioned, though a few of the oldest may not be. They don't look very different from the air-conditioned ones, so it is a surprise when you get in one that is warm inside.
I just realized that you meant there are no walls or pillars in the non-station sections of track. Washington is NOT like that but parts of Paris, I think, are.
Believe it or not, there is a stretch of tunnel in New York in which both tracks are in the same tunnel with no walls or pillars: the 1/9 line between Dyckman St. and possibly 137th St. or 145th St. This is the deepest underground stretch in the entire system; it was built by the deep-bore tunnelling method.
There is no crash wall between the express tracks on the original Contract One IRT segment (96th St.-Times Square; the shuttle; and Grand Central-Brooklyn Bridge), only pillars. The same is true on the Contract Two segment from Brooklyn Bridge to Bowling Green.
Gee, I thought France was the contry that was trying to keep English from "invading" the French language. Here's a French transit agency bringing English in front of Frenchmen.
As Todd G. said, it looked unofficial to him, but you are right that there is very little English used there, especially compared with its next door neighbors like Belgium, Luxembourg, and Germany, where someone in every store or bank speaks fairly good English, and instructions that visitors might need are frequently in foreign languages.
>I have heard rumors that the rail cars now have push-buttons that open
the doors rather than those little handles that one popped open with the
typically French look of pouting annoyance. Oui? Non? Do the new cars
still have that quiet Middle E note played before they slam the doors
shut?
The first to have a push button instead if the handle was MF77(1977). Every Metro stock built after that has the buttons, including some of the RER stocks.
>There used to be a store that had a lot of books about railroads and
subways about 1-2 blocks east of Gare St. Lazare.
That is the bookshop of the publishing company that puts out the weekly " La Vie du Rail". It's on Rue de Milan and it's worth paying a visit if you read French. Otherwise, many books about French transit are published in English (British, though) if you go to England.
New subway car in Paris (MP89, line 14 METEOR), will have automatic opening
doors without push-buttons or handles.
Some of these trains are test running on line 1
Has the new line opened yet? Do you know when it is opening? I have read about the METEOR line somewhere but don't remember what is special about it.
METEOR will be line 14 of Paris "Metro". It's a rubber line, with fully
automatic operating system (no cab & no driver) with automatic doors
on the platforms. A new map (January 98) issued by RATP show it in
dotted line, and says it will open in the second half of this year.
Stations are (SE to NW) :
BIBLIOTHEQUE (new station, left bank)
DIJON (new station)
BERCY (interchange with line 6)
GARE DE LYON (interchange with line 1)
CHATELET (interchange with lines 1, 4 & 7)
PYRAMIDES (interchange with line 7)
MADELEINE (interchange with lines 8 & 12)
Wow - this brings me back...
I was in Paris in 1996 - we had more of the push-button type doors... one stop (I think the Louvre) was running an announcement -- Pour ouvrir les portes: appuyez sur le bouton au centre de la porte, merci (To open the door, press the button in the center of the door, thank you)... I thought that was interesting... Correct me if I am wrong ~ the trains run 90 seconds there, don't they?
PS... je suis desolee if my french is a little rusty - it has been a few years...
Oui, c'est vrai!
But today the Big Aluminum Tube returns me to the land of blue, green, orange, red, and purple (lines). Then this weekend, to the land of A->Z and 1->9.
For those of you who have not had the pleasure of riding the Paris Metro, it's a wonderful system. The only thing "missing" is lines converging/diverging and running local/express such as we have in NYC. Imagine, if you will, all likes operating like the "L", point-to-point, local only, with no switching to/from other lines. There are 14 such lines here.
Ligne 14 merged with Ligne 13 in the late 70s, when the cross-Seine connection was made. So, regular subway service is down to 14 lines since then. Just a reminder and this does not count RER and METEOR
To be excruciatingly exact, there are 13 lines of the Metro, two of which (13 & 7) have Y-shaped branches and alternating service -- with a tiny yellow or blue light on the sides indicating which it is. There are also two shuttles that were part of the original lines, but when the lines were extended in other directions, the old branches were changed to shuttle service (3b and 7b). All are right-hand running. The 6 crosses the Seine twice. Eight others cross the Seine once. No line is only on the Left Bank. And I think just four lines have the rubber tires.
And for those who have wondered what is the difference between 1st class and 2nd class subway service, it is that fewer people are in the 1st class cars because they are more expensive, and the color scheme of the car has more yellow in it, to distinguish that car on the train. That's it...nothing about it is more luxurious, it's just emptier. I don't even know if they have 1st class anymore on the subway there.
The two class structure has been discontinued for many years now. Currently, it operates a one-fare (for any car) system like Toronto, Montreal, New York and probably many other North American systems. Even the RER lines operate under the same fare within the city limits, allowing free transfers between them and the metro. Beyond the city, they charge on a per-distance basis.
First class is now gone from the Metro. Both first and second class are available on the RER.
Sheesh. Ten hours ago I was riding Le Metro. An hour ago I was on the Bahstin T. C'est un miracle!
>regular subway service is down to 14 lines.
Oops! Obviously, I wanted to say 13 lines not 14.
Rubber lines are line 1, 4, 6 and 11. The first tests occurred (with
passengers) from April,13 1952 to May,31 1956 on a junction line between
"Porte des Lilas" and "Pre Saint Gervais". This junction line called
"voie de la navette" was half mile long, it is out of service now. 5th
rubber line will be METEOR, a fully automatic line opening this year.
1st Class disappeared on August,1 1991. At the beginning all cars where
natural wood color. When metallic cars appeared 2nd class cars where green
and 1st class red. "Nord-Sud" line (now line 12) cars had a colorful
scheme, 2nd class where light blue with bright blue ends, and 1st class
where light yellow with bright red ends.
During the sixties the paint scheme applied to new rolling stock was
light blue for 2nd class, and light yellow for first class cars. In the
seventies new cars where painted bright blue with a yellow stripe on the
first class cars. Now all cars have been painted with the new (& ugly)
white & blue-green scheme.
Are there any old, abandoned PATH/LIRR/MetroNorth tunnels/viaducts or opencuts in NYC? If there were I wonder what would be the possibility of expanding the system with those abandoned thoroughfares.
There really aren't many abandoned transit tunnels or lines in the area. One possibility is the LIRR's (presumably now the NY&A's) Bay Ridge freight line in Brooklyn. It is not quite abandoned, but has only a minimal level of service. There have been suggestions to use the line as a sort of circumfrential subway route.
How about this:
Use this line as a potential airport/cross-borough line... Begin it at the 8th Avenue station on the N line (or extend it to 4th Avenue and build a passenger tunnel to the 59th St. station)... The follow the ROW... Have stations at:
-- New Utrecht Ave. (change for B,M,N)
-- McDonald Ave. (change for F)
-- E. 16th St. (change for D)
-- Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College (change for 2,5)
I will list the rest of the propsed route and the stations later this week...
O.K. So far I have the 4 stations (New Utrecht, McDonald, E.16th, and Flatbush)... Here are more:
-- Kings Highway and E. 53rd St.
-- Rockaway Ave. off of Ditmas Ave.
-- Livonia Ave. (change for the #3 and L)
-- Atlantic Ave. (change for L and LIRR)
Will continue to post more stations later this week...
When Amtrak moved operations from Grand Central to Penn Station, they re-opened the last of the unused tunnels in upper Manhattan for their Albany and Buffalo service. The LIRR has no unused tunnels, and, with the blessing of Sen. D'Amato, is looking into wresteling the 63rd St. tunnel away from the NYCTA to use it for LIRR service to Grand Central. (Although nothing is fianlized, I imagine that the LIRR might not be as interested in taking the 63rd St. tunnel for themselves since Sen. Moinyhan has asked for a proposal to turn the Post Office at 33 St. and 8 Ave. into a new Penn Station.) The bottom line is that there is a shortage of tunnels as is and any new lines would have to be built new.
Wasn't the lower level of the 63rd St. tunnel intended for LIRR trains into Grand Central?
> Wasn't the lower level of the 63rd St. tunnel intended for LIRR trains into
> Grand Central?
Actually, the original plans for the 63rd St. tunnel (in the 1960s) called for a new LIRR terminal to be built in the vicinity of 48th St. and 3rd Ave. The plan to run the LIRR trains into GCT came later.
I've noticed that alot of the IND stations used to have full elght/width mezzanines and nopw they are being cut back to a North Mezzanine and South Mezzanine witht he central portion barricaded off and the stairs from platforms removed or barricaded. Was this done as part of the safety concern.
Speaking of mezzanines- stay tuned for my pages on the A and G Trains. I found a station that has a full mezzanine which uis located over the tracks and affords a view of the tracks. I also found two IND stations other than Kingsbridge where you go down to exit due to no exit on one side.
(I won't tell you- you'll have to wait for the pages)
Took the 1/9 tonight, and they wrong-railed us northbound on the southbound track from 145-168, due to work on the tunnel lighting. As we entered the 145st station, a worker on the platform handed a slipper wrapped with black tape to the motorman, who stepped out of his cab to recieve it. At 168, before the crossover, the slipper was p[assed back to the man on the platform. Am I safe to assume that the slipper is a gant of block authority? Is this how the TA works a single track bi-directional service?
-Hank
That's correct.
At the Seashore Trolley Museum, we call it "the paddle" -- it looks like a green ping-pong paddle. (We also have a more complicated system that permits multiple cars on the single-tracked line using a series of numbered paddles in conjunction with Dipatcher's orders.)
On the MBTA Commuter Rail, I have seen them use a conductor in the same manner; only the train with the special conductor physcially on board has the right to enter the single track block. (I've come to call him/her the "human paddle" based upon our Seashore system.)
In General Orders written to cover a single track situation, it's referred to as a baton. Only the train with the baton may enter the single track area...
This is one way that they deal with bi-directional service on a single track. For the other way take a 2 train on the weekends between 96 St. and 149 St./ Grand Concourse. During the Lenox Ave. reconstruction authority to enter the single track area is by signals. This is why service is scheduled for every 24 minutes in each direction.
I guess you could put the track warrant in the slipper but it's a kewl baton, I hope it was pink so it didn't clash with the red 1/9.
Most C train riders are mad at the terminal switch. I have a plan to make riders happy. Make the C train Full Time from 168st to Lefters Blvd. That can make the A train full time Express to the Rockaways. Would that be a good idea? Or is there a better idea?
Heres an idea...A train service runs between 207 st-lefferts blvd(via express except nights) C Trains run between 168 st-Euclid ave(via local except late nights) and bring back the H that runs from Rockaway blvd(for connection with A)-Far Rockaway-then to Rockaway Park-then back to Rockaway Blvd..During Rush hours(in peak direction) run some A trains from Far Rockaway.
The H? It's been a while since that has been used... Two things with this:
A) Does the 3rd rail still work on Hammel's Wye?
B) Was the service eliminated due to lack of ridership?
Now, if you said the A full-time to Far Rockaway, and the C to Lefferts, then that might work... Again, that would be quite a trip for the C to make local...
The Hammel's Wye was used in revenue service late at night to cut down on the number of motorman and trains to be used in the middle of the night. It required anyone going home to Far Rockaway to go all the way to Rockaway Park and back before hitting any Far Rockaway stations. They discontinued using it for normal revenue service because it added a lot of extra time to people travelling TO Far Rockaway, and for people going FROM Rockaway Park. I would think avoiding the Hammel's Wye is a service improvement, not a bad thing.
Sometimes it is used to move trains around or when tracks are being repaired.
A 1995 proposal had the C running to Euclid on weekends, plus the Culver exp, people keep asking about. The newly elected Pataki's budget cuts killed that :-(, and I don't know if these plans will come up again, but they definitely should.
Christopher--
There is a saying, which I cannot remember, that says something to the effect that the youngest minds come up with the most brilliant ideas. It's us adults that screw them up.
Your approach is novel, although it can be applied either way (either the A or the C could go to Lefferts). However, I think it would be squashed by the bureaucrats at the MTA. They'll give you these excuses:
--Not enough money.
--Not enough weekend passengers.
--No room. There are only three tracks beyond Euclid Avenue. You're talking about some switching and merging. The MTA will probably consider it duplicative service.
There is also the unwritten reason: it would mess up the implementation of OPTO (one-man operation) on weekend C trains.
But you know what? Don't give up! I've seen many good ideas from you. Maybe when you grow up, you go to work for the MTA and eventually run it--as long as you don't get corrupted and start thinking like a bureaucrat!!
Michael
I could see weekend A express service in Brooklyn if it can be proven that there is enough ridership to justify implementation. I understand that the A is now running or will run express in Brooklyn until 10 PM weeknights.
As for the C, I feel it would be better to run it to Rockaway Park during daylight hours and bring back the round robin shuttle during late nights. It wouldn't make sense to have two routes running to Lefferts Blvd because of redundancy.
There isn't a whole lot of weekend express service in Brooklyn right now - the 4 to Utica Ave. and the B along 4th Ave. That's it. Apparently, there either isn't enough ridership to justify the need for express service, or it isn't budgeted. My guess would be the former.
I love the Subway system. My favorite Subway line out of all is the 8 Train a.k.a 3rd ave Line. Whay did they take down that line and all other elevated lines in the City. Is there any way to get them back? Help!!!!!!! Plus what would it mean if those lines were made again. Plus what would it do to the other lines in the Subway . I need everybody to answer
Essentially, the consideration that led to the Third Avenue El, and others, being torn down in favor of subways was that they were considered something of a public nuisance: ugly, dirty, noisy, cutting off sunlight and obstructing street traffic. These were the community concerns which, as recently as last year, led the CTA to tear down three-quarters of a mile of newly-rebuilt "L" structure along East 63rd St. Of course, we transit buffs may see things differently, but to the public at large an elevated line is seen as a distinct detriment to neighboring residents and businesses.
In the case of the 3rd Ave. el----I would think another factor would have been the sheer age of the structure and the cost of maintaining/ repairing it---That's one reason that the Jamaica Ave. el (J line) has disapppeared over the last 20 yrs.
In most, if not all, instances, the idea in New York was to replace the els with subway lines. The 3rd Ave. el got a reprieve of sorts as it survived in Manhattan until 1955, while the other three Manhattan els were gone by 1940. The 2nd Ave. line was supposed to replace the 3rd Ave. el; we all know what happened there.
Not only were they old and falling apart, they could not bear the weight of newer trains. The Myrtle Avenue El and the Third Avenue El would either needs their own fleets of cars, or substantial weight capacity improvements would have to have been made. Plus all the other aesthetics considerations.
For all you MAD Magazine fans out there, some time after 1956, MAD had an item in a parody of a newspaper gossip column. It stated: "It is definitely not true that New York's Third Avenue El was torn down so that they could make more Oscars for Walt Disney!"
It's absolutely true, however, that the scrap metal resulting from the razing of the 6th Avenue El in 1937 was purchased by Japan, and "returned" to us a few years later.
Bob Sklar
My grandparents lived on Gun Hill Road about 3 blocks from White Plains Road, and my grandfather would take us for rides down the 3rd Avenue El to E.149 Street on the R12's and R14's, and then back up White Plains Road on the #2. My earliest memory as a child is boarding a Worlds Fair Low V with my grandmother at Fordham Road.
Chris, I was 9 years old when then threw it down, and basically the structure was very old. The middle express track was already ripped out, the stations were basically all of wood and of need of repair. It cost alot of money to run, maintain, and upkeep.
I still love viewing the Gun Hill Road/White Plains Road station, and still see the Third Avenue El trains making the sharp turns into and out of the station.
I found another stack of pamphlets that were issued when the PRT at West Virginia Univ. in Morgantown first opened. If you would like one or missed out on one due to the fact that I thought I had run out, e-mail me with your home address and I'll get one out to you ASAP.
I have a picture postcard view of the
wreck of the 9th Ave EL at 53rd St. & 9th Ave.
that occurred September 11, 1905.
How can I send it to you?
I believe that it is a ground level shot of the
same wreck that appears in Reed's NY Elevated.
I got the Picture and it Said September 7, 1905
If I'm not mistaken, there was a plan some time ago (I think I read this in the NY times in the fall of '84) to use the LIRR LIC spur as a Queens super express, from Jamaica, with stops at Woodhaven (Metropoiltan) and a few other places, straight into LIC where commuters couuld switch to the 7. What should have been done is the following:
1) "Super Express" Jamaica - LIC (above ground)
2) approaching LIC, build a cut into the existing G line to Queens Plaza
3) Connect the 63rd St. Line to the G, perhaps building a new level for the station.
4) Have that train go through the 63rd st. tubes and down the BWay line
5) That would give the following stops:
• Jamaica (Switch for E, F)
• Metropolitan (Switch form M)
• Penny Bridge
• Haberman
• Vernon/Jackson (Switch for 7)
• Court Square (Switch for G)
• Queens Plaza (Switch for E, F, R, G)
• 21 Queensbridge
• Roosevelt Island
• 63/Lex
• 57 B'way
• Times Sq.
• 34th
• 14th
• Canal St.
• City Hall
• WTC
• Trinity Pl.
• Whitehall
Conversely, an argument could be made to turn the tracks the other way and have the train go over the Willy B. to downtown.
What do you think?
The last real plan for the Queens Super Express was for a cut at Woodhaven Blvd. (E & F Lines). The line would proceed west along the LIRR R-O-W through Sunnyside Yard and into the 63rd Street tunnel at 21St St. At the same time, a storage yard (40+ tracks)would be built on the north side of Sunnyside Yard. That plan was given such serious consideration that an R-46 train was set up with Custom End Signs and modified Electronic Side Sign messages, for a special run for (then) Governor Mario Cuomo (He never showed). There is a photo of the the train in the R-46 Segment on this site.
To work in conjunction with that plan, was a plan to extend the 'E' train south-east along Merrick Blvd. & Francis Lewis Blvd. to Rosedale Queens. The extension was to be a combination of subway and elevated (on earth) trackage with a small yard near Rosedale. If and when this extension is built, the E line will be the only line where the northern terminal is south of the southern terminal.
Currently, there is still a plan for Sunnyside Yard. The TA plans to build a facility in Sunnyside which will primarily be for the servicing of work equipment/diesels. It will be accessed by a cut at 46th St. (R & G lines) and by a lead from the #7 line. There will also be a loop track for the #7 trains so that they could be turned around in Queens rather than being moved to Coney Island to be looped.
Steve:
Can you answer me on two other things?
When traveling on the 7, there is a single track (i guess frieght) line that runs on the ground perpendicular after 74th Street I think. What is that and can it be used for revenue service?
Secondly, there is a single track leading out of a tunnel as the L train rises above ground at Wilson Avenue (Canarsie-bound). Again, can this be used for revenue service?
I like the idea of a Super Queens express, but if the LIRR row can be used, it will be the only way it could be feasible. What about having it go through the "unused" platform at Roosevelt/74th and routed to LGA before turning west and going to 63rd/Lex? Then it would be this route:
1) LIC (Vernon/Jackson and 21st/Van Alst) Change for G and 7
2) Haberman
3) Penny Bridge
4) Metropolitan (change for M)
5) Additional Woodhaven stop
6) 74th/Roosevelt (E, F, G, R, 7)
7) additional two Corona stops (northern or Astoria Blvd.?)
8) LGA
9) two stops along expressway
10) Either above ground on N and down 59th st. tube or
11) Cut into 63rd St. Line and down 6th or B'way
Would this work?
The track you see @ Wilson ave is the line that runs from Hell Gate Bridge, thru Fresh Pond Junction to Bush Terminal (NYCRR/LIRR). It was a freight line, but I gather from this website that it is not receiving much use.
I'll answer your first two questions with the same answer because it's the same line from the Hells Gate Bridge into Brooklyn. Right now it's used once or twice a day for a garbage transporting train.
As for your hypothetical line, I don't know. The LIRR is cutting back service there because of lack of use. However, perhaps a LightRail line fed by a Ferry at the LIC end and LaGuardia at the other might work.
Steve:
Is there a map showing the route? Can it be used for revenue service?
I'm quite sure that there are maps around which show this route. Most of the NYC 'Street Guide' maps depict it. As to whether it can be used for revenue service, that's another story. By revenue service, I assume you mean passenger service. If you are talking subway service, then you would need 3 things.
1) Stations - which this line does not have
2) Electrification - which is not present
3) Demand for the service
While I'd like to see direct service from Queens to the Bronx via Hells gate, I doubt that I'd have to fight for a seat. I'm afraid that the same would be true of the Brooklyn/Queens segment. One would have to do market studies before such an undertaking would be considered. Then you'd have the problems of ROW ownership to deal with and the NIMBY folks.
All may not be lost, however. If the Williamsburg Br. is closed to train traffic for an extended length of time, there is a plan being considered, to use that line to transfer subway cars (pulled by diesels) between Coney Island and East NY yards.
>If the Williamsburg Br. is closed to train traffic for an extended
>length of time, there is a plan being considered, to use that line to transfer >subway cars (pulled by diesels) between Coney Island and East NY yards.
Where does this line connect to the subway?
The northern connection is around Linden Shop where there is a connection to the 'L' line. The southern end would likely be via SBRR to 38th Street yd. I'm not quite sure but it definitely has been discussed.
I had thought that the L train/LIRR connection has been removed ...
Steve:
Thanks for the update. Can certain parts of the ROW be used in conjunction with new construction (i.e. to LGA) for revenue service?
Along the existing line, where would the most likely stops be?
The Archer Ave. subway is supposed to be the first leg of such a line to Rosedale. It will be very interesting to see if it ever gets extended that far.
I don't think that's a very high priority now.
To give my 2 cents about the G line, I think the effect of the cutback on Queens riders (those on the Queens Blvd. line where the G currently serves) is being ignored. Those of us getting on a Steinway Street and all of the local stops will only have one train choice now. (Are they going to increase R service in Queens to make up for the lack of G service?) Going into Brooklyn while avoiding Manhattan will now be a 3-train trip as well. So it's not only the people in Greenpoint who are being inconvenienced. It's everybody, but I'm willing to pay the price for relieving the congestion on the Queens Blvd. line.
According to WCBS AM 880 NYCT plans on installing metrocard machines and phase out token sales. The machines would take credit cards and allow adding fares to your Metrocard. The people would be retrained as Customer Service Reps to give out information.
**My opinion(as a "Station Agent"): On the test it said that duties included travel info and questions about attractions, transit maps were on the test.
Giving up tokens would suit me- no money to attract those of ill repute.
According to the Daily News(Dont know when) it is under negotiation as to whether or not we would empty the cash from the machines.
ALso- the machines will take time, and money to install. I am old enough to remember the first token machines that always ate money and never worked. They were red, yellow or blue depending on how many you wanted and they just took quarters, dimes, and nickels.
This story shows NYCT is trying to deal with customer suggestions/gripes.
-Opinions are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT --
The question is, will the new machines accept coins or only bills and credit cards? What will be the minimum purchase amount?
One thing I liked growing up in NYC is that it only took (30 cents, 50, what ever the fare was) in ANY form to get you on a subway at any station. Several times I got caught short while away from home and made up the difference by picking up bottles and cans for deposit. There were even a couple of times when I outright asked some people for spare change to help me get home.
Is NYCT seeking to make it impossible to get on the subway with coins? I hope not. Or are they simply indifferent to the possibility? Perhaps on the grounds that "homeless" people are the ones most likely to pay in coins? Currently, they officially "discourage" the use of pennies to pay part of a fare, but they will still accept them.
Oh yes, I remember those colored mechanical token machines too. I wonder why they were so unreliable? BTW, new token machines have recently been installed at the stations on the Dyre Ave. line, the only ones currently NOT staffed by booth clerks during late-night hours. The machines are reliable (judging from my experience with similar machines at Grand Central), but they take only five-dollar bills (or tens or twenties) and always dispense the maximum number of tokens that can be bought for the bill inserted, giving 50 cents or a dollar (two or four quarters) in change.
The machines are not here yet. I presume they will take coins(No pennies and I guess they'll also take Half Dollars and Susan B. Anthony Dollars---SBA.) I also guess they'll give out SBAs as change.
We'll still be here to tell you how to get to Coney Island or Macy*s or wherever or to assist you with the machines.
--opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT--
This adds to my conviction that the station job should be merged with the conductor job. When the trains pull in, a "station conductor" standing on the platform could help with crowd control as the train operator closed the doors. Between trains, a mobile TA worker in the station would aid security, as well as providing information. Under the current system, both the railroad clerk and the conductor are stuck in a booth, where they add little to security and can do little about a jerk in the last car holding the doors.
Speaking of conductors, what was it like in the days of the Hi-Vs with manually operated end doors? Back then, a conductor was stationed at every two cars. Did they ride on the trains or did they remain at stations? I remember speaking with an elderly gentleman some years ago who remembered that conductors would throw passengers off a train if they started horsing around.
Let me offer my view on the Token Booth debate.
I have always recieved great travel information and wonderful service from
the token booth folk, including filling metrocards.
However, if you are in the paid area, transit and travel information is
impossible to get from the TA. And, if you just need travel information,
you have to stand on line with those buying tokens.
San Fransisco (BART), Atlanta (MARTA) and Washington, DC (WMATA) have had
great success with ticket selling machines, and in most cases, there is no
person at their stations to take cash and sell tickets. At BART, the
Station Agent Booths are situated such that passengers can get information
both the paid and unpaid areas. There are also intercoms that allow
passengers on the platform to contact the station agent booth (may not
work in New York).
Even if the token booths close, someone will have to watch the turnstiles.
I imagine that Token Booth People turned Customer Service Reps would be
stationed just inside the turnstiles to provide passenger information,
greet passengers, and keep a watchful eye on the turnstiles.
I completely disagree with the TA that passengers should be required to
have a token or metrocard to ride the subway late night. Public transit,
in order to be public, has to serve the entire public. The TA has not
shown that the public is well informed of the need for a token or
metrocard to access some stations late night. If they cant afford to
collect fares and watch turnstiles late night, then the fare should be free
during late night hours.
While I am at it, I completely disagree with the fact that NYCTA buses do
not take dollar bills. If you are going to charge a $1.50 fare, then you
should take dollar bills, dang it. I am not aware of any significant
transit system that does not accept dollar bills in bus fare boxes.
Patrick
centolanzi@aol.com
and just how is it that a public entity refuses to accept legal tender??
The problem with the TA is the problem with the coin of the realm. Civilized countries long ago adapted their currency to inflation by eliminating some coins and converting notes to coins. A dime is worth what a penny was worth in 1940. A fifty cent piece is the equivalent of a 1940 nickel. A Susan B, which no one uses, is the equivalent of a dime. Etc. If not for opposition to change, we'd ditch pennies, nickels and quarters. We'd add fifty cent, dollar, and five dollar coins. The turnstiles could be modified to accept coins and Metrocards, and tokens could be eliminated. Vending machines would be more useful as well. They never accept my dollars.
not my point at all. I care less about the value, my issue is how DARE any entity refuse to accept legal tebder for "debts public..." i. e. fares?!
$100 bills are legal tender too, "for all debts....," but MacDonald's won't accept them (in fact they won't accept $50's!) Is this legal?
I don't think it has as much to with legality as it does with merchants' concerns of counterfeit currency. Besides, clerks may not have sufficient change to be able to break large bills. Back in the good old days of the 20-cent fare, I remember seeing a notice posted on token booths which read, "RR clerks are not required to change bills larger than $5.00." Policies vary from merchant to merchant. I had a summer job once selling gate admissions at an amusement park. While we weren't required to accept anything larger than a 20-dollar bill, we weren't banned from doing so either. I would accept a fifty or hundred if I had enough change (on weekends, this wasn't a problem), and would make sure that the customer understood why I could or couldn't do so.
Doesn't the TA have an upper limit to the amount of bill they will accept at the token booth as well (like $50 or $100?)?
I believe they can accept no more than a $20 bill at the token booth.
Charlie Muller.
to use a 50 dollar bill.you must spend 30 dollars in tokens or put 30 dollars on a farecard.
I am a Station Agent and here is the policy:
*if* you put at least $30 on a Metrocard or buy $30 in tokens you can pay with a $50.
Also- the most tokens you can buy at one time is fifty tokens ($75.) To buy more than 50 tokens at once you'd call Jay Street to get permission and they'll call the station of your choice to authorize bulk token sales- Call the 1-718-330-1234.They'll tell you to pay by a certified check. We can not take personal checks or non-certified business checks without advance approval from Jay Street.(Yes, a cashier's check will work)
If you have any further questions, I'll try to answer you unless it is confidential (which this is not.)
If you can pay with a $50 bill if you put $30 on a MetroCard, can you pay with the $100 bill if you're putting on the $80 maximum (same amount of change back)?
no $100 bills will be taken.no matter how much you put on a farecard.
BUFF you must read the memos.bulk token sales are no longer done.I'm also a station agent.good luck on saturday.
I am in class now. They said(My instructor is P. Parker and K. Jeffries) that they still do bulk sales.(50 or less) and we need advance permission for more than 50.
It very well could be. A few years back, someone sued the Garden State Pkwy Authority for giving people with GSP tokens their own lanes during rush hours, over those people paying cash fares - even exact change. This person lost the lawsuit.
--Mark
collection agents will take the money out of the machines.didn't you put in for the collector job.got to read those memos BUFF.You taking test on 21
As a New York City and New York Subway afficienado, I am ashamed to admit
that I have never riden on a R-110 car and may have only seen one once or
twice.
Where can R-110 cars be found most often during Evening and Weekend
service hours?
Please respond to email centolanzi@aol.com (as well as this thread, if
possible).
Thank you for your help.
Patrick
You can find these trains weekdays during rush hours on the #2 and the A train.-Nick
I have been led to believe that the R142 configuration is as follows:
A-B-C-B-A
A = cab car, two powered trucks
B = no cab, one powered trucks
C = no cab, no powered trucks
Has anyone else heard this? (This conflicts with the information supplied
on this site.)
Please reply to email centolanzi@aol.com (and on this thread if possible).
Thank you.
Patrick
The original specification required A, B and C cars. The A and C cars were to be fully motored and the B cars non-motored. Train formation would be A-B-C-B-A so that out of 20 axles, 12 axles would be motored. This requirement was changed since the important aspect is performance and distribution of equipment through a 5 car unit.
It should ne noted that the R142 cars will be built by two manufacturers (Bombardier and Kawasaki). The Bombardier cars will use GEC Alsthom equipment and the cars will be 4,5 or 6 car units where A cars are all axles motored at each end of the unit and all intermediate cars are B cars with only two (2) axles motored.
I can't say for the Kawasaki cars what their configurations will be, they are the competitors!
Richard Bevan
R
For a look at the R-142 cars got to:
www.transit-technology.com
from this site:
select current projects.
Select United States and you'll see the New York City Project.
Select this item and you'll see a picture of the inside and outside of the R-142.
if you'll e-mail me, I'll respond with an embedded e-mail link to that page.
Hey... I think you meant www.railway-technology.com
Droo- You are right! Sorry!
Hey, no problem! I enjoyed trying to decipher the Dutch site!
In the book "Uptown-Downtown" if memory serves me right, in the section labeled extensions, they listed the 2nd Ave, subway, the 63rd St. tunnels and I could swear, a blurb mentioning the destruction of the Rockaway Pkwy station and then rebuilding the station so that the line would extend down Flatlands Ave. back towards Flatbush Ave. with an extension of that line as well......Was I imagining this, everybody go find your books now.
At one time, the L line did go all the way to Canarsie, with stations at Flatlands Ave., Ave. L, and Canarsie. With the line being at ground level, overhead wire was used to supply power. When third rail was installed, the line was cut back to Rockaway Parkway, with a free transfer to a trolley line which took you the rest of the way to Canarsie, using the same ROW as the trains did. After trolley service ended, the B-42 bus transfer was implemented. Interestingly enough, BMT standards carried Canarsie signs on their roller curtains until they were retired (I vivdly remember seeing those signs); R-16 and later units had Rockaway Parkway signs.
And some Canarsie politician must have been behind the preservation of free transfers between the L train & the B42 bus up till MetroCard ended previous subway-to-bus transfers. The B42 pulled directly onto MTA property, giving passengers only a short walk to the outdoor street-level Rockaway Pky. platform, without having to walk through any turnstyles. I don't know how the B42 hooks up with the L train in this day of the MetroCard, although The Map shows no special transfer there now.
The other free subway-to-bus transfer that survived till MetroCard was at E. 149 St. between the 2 & 5 and the Bx55 bus, which replaced the old 3 Av. El (although other free Bx55 transfers were phased out at Yankee Stadium from the 4 & D lines and at Gun Hill Road on the 2 & diamond 5 lines in the North Bronx).
Free subway to bus transfers were little by little ended around the four boroughs thru the years. (The B35 which replaced an el line on Church Av. and the B54 which replaced the Myrtle Av. el south of the J line had free subway to bus transfers in the '70's & '80's.)
Don't forget the weirdest one: Many downtown Brooklyn busses allowed you to transfer free to the A train at High St., supposedly only to take you to Bway-Nassau St. You got the transfer as you got off, in fact. This was a replacement for Bklyn-Bridge trolley service that ended long before I was born. To go back you had to get a transfer ticket at the IND entrance to Bway-Nassau/Fulton St. station. It was good only on all busses that passed the High Street station in Brooklyn. I assume they got rid of that a few years ago.
Not too long ago you could also get a transfer at Marcy Avenue to the B39 bus to the Brooklyn waterfront. That was the replacement for the el spur to East River ferries.
No transfer collection was complete without these strange ones.
Also- dont forget the weird transfer situation at Jay Street (A line) to Myrtle El-coplicated paper rules.
What was weird was, I didn't even know they did a free transfer to a bus at Marcy Ave. until the previous subway map was first released, showing the bus transfers. I actually had no idea they still had replacement service to the (extinct) Broadway ferries.
I have a dog-eared and marked-up Hagstrom's subway map from the mid-60s which indicates a free transfer to bus from Marcy Ave.
So I guess the question remains: Is the transfer from the B-42 to the L train a Metrocard based transfer or does the bus still pull right up to the platform not requiring a Metrocard?
As far as I know it's still a completely free transfer, no MetroCard required. It's therefore possible for people to take buses to the L, then the B42 at Canarsie, all for a single fare.
The SOuth end of the Station ramps up. At this end the bus pulls directly into the station inside the fare control area. This a a throwback to the day when the trolley pulled into the station.
I think this is a disturbing trend: Bus lines replacing subway lines. Yes, it's nice that both combined can get you somewhere. But it's a lot more convenient to stay on the subway and not worry about transferring to a bus within 2 hours. We shouldn't sit back and be complacent while our subways are being replaced by buses. We should use the riders of the Franklin Shuttle as an example.
0ne more thing... The B42 schedule to this day perfectly fits with the L schedule, so even overnight this bus runs on a 20 minute schedule. L riders wanting to continue to Canarsie Pier should never have to wait for a bus. (In all five boroughs only a handful of bus routes run more frequently than 40 minutes overnight.)
There was an amusement park at Canarsie Pier, not to mention a ferry to the Rockaways. I think this justifies the trolley and later bus transfers as something more defensible than just Politics.
It's really that they try never to really remove service, just sometimes they change it to a (much more inconvenient) bus for the same price. That's even why the Bx55 on 3rd Avenue in the Bronx is a limited stop bus, to imitate the train line. That bus line did not exist in its current form before the rail line was torn down. And if the replacement is popular it is hard for it to ever go away, which is the situation with the B42 train replacement trolley and bus. The B54, the B35, the B39, and the High St. ones were not so popular, so after a mere generation or 2 or 3, they were able to get rid of those. So many people live in Canarsie and depend on that line that it would always have remained a free transfer (before Metrocard made it moot).
While here in Paris, I have *ahem* obtained a batch of Paris Metro/RER/bus pocket maps. If you would like one, please send me a self-addressed, stamped ($0.32) letter-sized envelope to:
Todd Glickman
Assistant Executive Director
American Meteorological Society
45 Beacon Street
Boston, MA 02108
Magnifying glass not included...
Thank you, thank you, thank you...
Are they the little ones that just open up like a little pamphlet, or the seemingly little ones that fold out into a large Metro map on one side and a very detailed bus map on the other side?
Either way (though I am hinting at the second one), on behalf of all of us Paris and subway lovers, Thank you again.. I'll be sending my envelope soon.
It's a bi-fold that ends up being about 2-1/2 x 4 inches. The inside
is the bus map, and the rear is the metro/RER map. It is a laminated,
high quality stock. "Edition Janvier 1998"
This is the only kind that I could *ahem* acquire in large quantity.
We'll let it go this time... :-)
I know what you mean. It's hard for me to just get two of some map. I always say, "It's for my brother." Even NYC token booth people give me a look.
I have had co-workers and friends who travel at times. About half of my requests for a map get a result. The weirdest one was a Seoul, S. Korea, subway map which was actually part of an advertisement for a tailor, not that that was easy for me to figure out. One woman was in W. Berlin, made it halfway up the outside steps of the main RR station and got so unnerved by the "bums" sitting around there, she said, that she gave up and went back to the hotel. So close, yet so far. Someone else went there later and got me a map of W. Berlin's subways. Now I guess that's a collector's item, since the two segments have merged. Then there was someone who went to London and got me a *postcard* of the London system, except that the postcard copyright was from 10 years before. Luckily, someone else got me the latest one with the DLR and the planned Jubilee extension.
It is really nice of you to think of all of us while there. Again, on behalf of all us Subway and Paris lovers and WCBS listeners (though for me it can only be after sunset), thank you. (BTW, did you notice that the RER has left-hand running? I first noticed it when I saw the train already in the station, got on, girded myself for the motion "forward" and felt like the floor was pulled out from under me.)
You are all welcome, of course!
I am staying near the Port de Verseilles station on the #12 line, and the yesterday the information booth was "unmanned" for a while, and the stack of guides was within easy reach :-)
Yes, it's strange going from right-hand running Metro to left-hand running RER. The old RER trains, which are single level, have a (sort-of) rail fan window, whereby you can look over the operator's shoulder ahead. The new ones, which are double-decker, have no such feature :-(
Your maps are coming home via air mail tomorrow (me too). And for you WCBS
fans, it's my turn this weekend :-)
-Todd
The Metro used the streetcar rules when it was built. Most of the RER routes were formerly (some of them still are) SNCF lines which operate with left hand running. There was a tremendous pressure from the city against whoever who wanted to build a subway with main line standards, so they could keep the main lines out of the city. That was at the turn of the century. Even though the only exception was the actual Eastern part of Line C of the RER, where extension to the inner city was approved.
YES, the western part of the line was also built very early, but it was originally a line dedicated to serve close suburbs and the World fair 1900.
By the way, one interesting factor about the RER is that, before line A(east) opened in Dec. 1969, that commuter line was operated with steam engines and 3-door coaches by the SNCF! Steam operation for commuter rail almost saw the 70s in Paris!
Oh goody! I'm outting in my (thirty) two cents now! Hold one for me!
Thanks, Todd!
--Mark
I need help, does anyone out there have a list of NJ Transit's current bus fleet & what depots are they assigned to,how many each depot has & what bus routes are assigned to which depot. Your help would be greatly appreciate it. My e-mail address is sarand@cris.com or post it on the Subtalk.
Thank You,
Michael
did you seer the news on WNBC-4 riday where they showed a scene of a NYCT RTS bus (xx37) being blown up- with fire department standing by? Yes, they really
did blow up the bus?
Question-if we have a shortage of buses why blow up one? Did the movie people buy the bus or was it a bus that was being scrapped anyway?
They actually used 2 1981 scrap RTS. One was former 1263, the other one
which was actually blew up was a number unknown to me. Before it was
blown up the windows were taken out. The "explosion" took place at the side of the Williamsburgh Bridge.
did you seer the news on WNBC-4 riday where they showed a scene of a NYCT RTS bus (xx37) being blown up- with fire department standing by? Yes, they really
did blow up the bus?
Question-if we have a shortage of buses why blow up one? Did the movie people buy the bus or was it a bus that was being scrapped anyway?
it was probally ither a scrap bus or a un serviceable one that was used for fire-fighter traning. it could be an ex MYCTA used for a movie also. the firefighters have to practice somewhere dont thay
I saw this and even mentioned it in the threads about the Williamsburg bridge closing last week. The number painted on top was 5287, and I could not tell what the nmber in from was, but it looked like it began with 3. By the afternood, it was blown up, and being toewd away. I still wonder what movie this was.
I think now i've seen a clip of this movie. It's about an asteroid hitting the earth. I saw it on an ABC News Close Up tonight about the dangers of nearby asteroids.
I saw the scene of the bus blowing up, and it looked like what left the remains I saw a few days ago.
Disney is filming a movie, due out this summer, about an Asteroid htting earth. As a way of attracting some publicity, Disney was quick to supply film clips of their movie to major news outlets when they heard that an asteroid was predicted to give earth a glancing blow in October 2030. Now that another set of astronomers fro NASA refute this, the jokes are starting to pour in ...
"NASDAQ - the market for the next 30 years."
"This is bad for retirement planners"
"Bill Gates would lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue from Windows 2030"
-etc-
--Mark
Anyone know if the proposed Moving Block signal system slated for the Canarsie line elimanates the motorman's basic control? I'm hearing conflicting opinions.Thanks.
The CBTC system is essentially the same system developed for the army to pinpoint the EXACT position of battlefield tanks. As applied to the NYCT system, it will be able to locate the position of a train within 10 feet on straight track and within 25 feet on curved track. While it will not relieve the train operator of the essential operating functions, it will permit the operator to know precisely what is in front of him and will adjust the size of the block and maximum speed accordingly.
With the resignation of the president of Metro-North, odd-makers are that the next president will come from the TA. Will it be:
[ ] Joe Hofmann - Senior Vice President?
[ ] Mike Lombardi - Chief of Operations - Service Delivery?
[ ] A Dark Horse?
If Joe Hofmann becomes the new MNRR president, they'll have to build a shower stall in his new office :-)
(A couple of years ago, at the same time the TA announced reductions in the number of subway cleaners as a budgetary move, J.H. had a private shower stall installed in his office at a cost of about $25,000).
How does it cost $25,000 to install a shower?
Apparently, the section of the building where Joe Hofmann's office was located didn't have adequate plumbing, so it had to be installed at great expense. In any event, the cost of the showerstall wasn't the issue. What struck a raw nerve was that he was getting one installed at the same time riders were being forced to endure dirtier cars. This was one of the very few times that it really was the principle of the thing, not the money :-)
I don't know whether the showerstall actually was installed, given the public outcry that developed. Besides, there's a general consensus that Joe Hofmann has been a very good manager, showerstall or not!
When I worked at the Transit Authority in the early 80s, in the department now being run by Joe Hoffman (the VP & GM at that time was Charlie Kalkhof), I reported to Mike Lombardi. He remains to this day the best boss I have ever had anywhere. For a time he ran Coney Island Shops and I marveled at how he could bring the diverse constituencies there into alignment. I know of Mr. Hoffman's reputation, but I sure hope Mike gets the job. He is tops!!!
Could anyone help me out with a date to go with my childhood memory? I remember very clearly the construction of the tall escalator housing up from Broadway ENY visible from the Eastern Parkway platform. I'm quite sure this was in the late forties, but would like to nail it down more closely. I suspect 1948, since that is when the run to Euclid avenue was opened, but it could be later.
I don't remember when the escalator was built, but do remember riding it on a regular basis when transferring from the Canarsie Line (LL, now L) to the A or E at Broadway Junction. I remember that the steps were very narrow and it was very steep. I also remember that usually one of the two escalators were out of service. Very long and steep climb if the "up" escalator was not working.
Since I haven't been there in quite a while, were these particular escalators ever rebuilt or do they still break down on a regular basis??
BMTman might have known the answer, but I don't think he was active on Subtalk when you raised the question.
Paul, I thought escalators were your area of expertise!
I was on the BSS the other day and was in the front car looking out the only available passenger front window(which has a narrow view) and saw a level separation(I think it was before Olney Avenue) where there are 5 or 6 tracks and two go up on either side? Is that for the Ridge Avenue subway(the Broad-Ridge Spur.) And, does anyone know why they(this time SEPTA) remove crossovers? There are two places on the MFSE, one before 8th Street and one before 11th Street.
You can see where the crossovers used to be.
The tracks you saw going up are to the upper turnback yard at Erie Ave. This was to be a possible location of branches to either Germantown or the Northeast. The Broad-Ridge spur branches off at Fairmount station, and uses to middle "duckunder" tracks.
Switches are removed because they are an expensive maintenance nightmare. There is little reason to have them if they are rarely or never used.
Andy Byler
Does anyone have updated track maps of the BSS and
MSE showing changes to track layout ,within the last
3 yrs
Thank you
Steve
htp://www.angelfire.com/ma/TRACKMAPS/index.html
Thanks for that info. I was always curious about those ramps. Can you tell us more about this upper turnback yard? Is it ever used? I assume it is underground.
Bill
The upper trunback yard is not currently in regular use.
Formerly, when the Broad-Ridge spur trains ran local to Erie Ave., they continued up these ramps and the motorman changed ends on the train the yard. The yard consists of four tracks, however, only the middle two allow reverse movements between the two sides of the four track BSS line.
The intention in building the yard was two-fold. 1) To serve as a short turn location for trains heading south - the middle two tracks where for this purpose. 2) To allow a grade seperated junction at this point between a line up Roosevelt Blvd. and the main line up Broad st. The current southbound local track would drop upon leaving the station, and turn northeastwards under the express tracks, joining up with the northbound local track and cutting underneath Hunting Park so as to intersect with the Roosevelt Blvd., coming to light in its very broad median near where Hunting Park Ave. and the Roosevelt Expressway seperate (longitude of 11th St.), then presumably taking to the air over 9th and 5th Aves. This line was to continue in the median all the way to Rhawnhurst near the pennypack Circle (if proposed again today, possibly it might be extended into the far-northeast to around Grant Ave.). The two side tracks of the yard would descend upon reaching the end of the upper yard (current location of a knock-out wall), and rejoin the current local tracks.
Andy Byler
There is a complete unused station in the former Sears East Coast Hq at the Blvd. and Adams Avenue. It was supposed to be for the Roosevelt Extension. But since it was never built, the station has never been opened. I think Cincinnati has a couple of blocks of completed but never finished subway tunnels, also.
yes Cincy built a short downtown subway section and some above ground station--then had a preview of the 1nd Ave meltdown. Currently there is a fiant water main running through some of the tunnel and the above ground ROW is an interstate. You can see the two portals from the highway. fuller history in a book on Cin. trollet ststem w/ pix
Just south of the Cold Spring station there was a spur that led onto the
northbound (Poughkeepsie bound) track. This spur came from the east. Anyone have a clue where it came from? Maybe a Putnam Line track?
This might be the infamous Beacon Secondary, which MN bought with plans of running trains to Danbury via that route. They bought it a couple of years ago, and not a word has been heard since......(also to capture some the of the people that now commute W to E on I-84)
Not quite, but a good guess...The line you are referring to branches off the southbound line just south of the Beacon station...these tracks are still in place and travel thru to Hopewell Junction (where at one time it merged with the NYNHHRR line that went across the Hudson over the big bridge at Poughkeepsie). From there it continues to Brewster and onto Danbury, CT.
When Metro-North bought the Beacon-Danbury line a couple of years ago, they readily admitted that there were no foreseeable plans to institute service. Their concern was that if they did not buy the line (then available at a presumably bargain cost), the right of way would soon be built upon and there would be no chance whatsoever of beginning service at any time to come.
Is this the Mayberry line which the railway museum at Danbury ran its excursions on?
>Is this the Mayberry line which the railway museum >at Danbury ran its excursions on?
Yes.
Is that the line where Andy and Aunt Bea are the engineer and fireman? Do you mean the Maybrook line?
Er, uh, May*brook* is correct!
Metro North recently announced that it plans to develope rail service from
North-Western Dutchess County to White Plains.
Trains leaving Beacon South-bound would divert to cross county tracks and
then would link up with the Harlem Line near Brewster.
They expect the service to be ready in five years.
>Metro North recently announced that it plans to >develope rail service from
>North-Western Dutchess County to White Plains.
>Trains leaving Beacon South-bound would divert to >cross county tracks and
>then would link up with the Harlem Line near >Brewster.
In addition, there also are plans to extend the northern end of the Harlem line to Wassaic from its current terminus at Dover Plains. This would serve the northeastern part of Dutchess County, complementing the service to the northwestern part that you noted.
>In addition, there also are plans to extend the northern end of the Harlem line to >Wassaic from its current terminus at Dover Plains.
Would this be new contruction or extension of service along existing rail?
JC
[re Harlem line extension to Wasaaic from Dover Plains]
I believe that there is an existing right of way, but the tracks themseves have to be completely replaced.
This is a typical sham - the line used to go to Chatham!
When the MTA/MN took it over they refused to go past Dover Plains because of their arbitrary claim that 75 miles is the limit of communting distance and thus the ROW was abandoned needlessly, only to waste more money later...
Metro-North officials may have thought that 75 miles was the maximum feasible commuting distance, but experience proved them wrong. Supposedly there are a number of cars in the Dover Plains parking lot with *Massachusetts* license plates! Whether that's true or not, presumably it's come to Metro-North's attention that many people are willing to commute longer distances, hence the plans to extent the line to Wasaaic.
I wouldn't be surprised if another factor was the strong ridership from Port Jervis. That also may have helped convince Metro-North that demand exists for ultra-long-distance commuter trains.
I believe that Manhattan is generating a new "telecommuter zone" of people who come in for meetings once or twice a week but otherwise work at home. This may expand the CBD's area of influence further -- instead of two million people arriving at nine and leaving at five, there may be four million people with less frequent links. This would explain the exurban rail ridership growth.
The census also shows a large increase in the number of second homes in Manhattan. Some affluent people stay at small apartments when in town on business, but live in the country otherwise.
[re Metro-North Dover Plains/Wasaaic ridership]
"The census also shows a large increase in the number of second homes in Manhattan. Some affluent people stay at small apartments when in town on business, but live in the country otherwise."
That could well be the case with the upper Harlem line. It goes (relatively) close to some areas, especially NW Connecticut and the Berkshires, that are prime second-home territory for New Yorkers.
>This is a typical sham - the line used to go to Chatham!
>When the MTA/MN took it over they refused to go past Dover Plains because >of their arbitrary claim that 75 miles is the limit of communting distance and thus >the ROW was abandoned needlessly, only to waste more money later...
Wow, I had no idea that the line had gone that far. Does anyone know how far the ROW goes now before it is blocked by a building or some other sort of development?
Sounds nice.
The next step would be to build a rail bridge over the Hudson between Beacon and Newburgh. It could connect with the Beacon Line at a point just east of where the latter connects with the Hudson line (that is, just far enough inland for the tracks from the bridge and the tracks from the water-level Hudson Line to be able to meet). On the west side of the Hudson, it could connect with the Port Jervis line. Only a short stretch of new track should be needed to bring trains from the bridge onto that line near the Cornwall-Salisbury Mills station.
I think this is more practical than a bridge in the Tappan Zee area, since it does not require an all-new east-west line to be built. Very little new right-of-way would need to be acquired. Freight trains could run over the bridge as well, and it would be a lot cheaper than the proposed freight tunnel under NY harbor. If the bridge is built to be shared by passenger and freight trains, it should carry four tracks, two for passenger trains and two for freights, to minimize interference between the two types of service. Perhaps it could be built just south of the two spans of the I-84 bridge, in a similar archetectual style, to minimize the visual impact on the river.
P. S. for more info on the Beacon Line, see Pierce Haviland's page at
http://www.quuxuum.org/~haviland/beacon.html
The Queensbridge Connection will not be completed on to the year 2001. Three years. That is slow progress. The first subway line took 4 years and it was longer. The Queensbridge Connection is 1/16 of the original Subway line so why is it taking it so long?
Actually, it's been going on for a while so the project will take longer than 3 years. Check the archives for a lot of info on this subject, including your exact question. Basically, they are building this line in a very congested area underground so sewer lines, electric, gas, etc. need to be moved. Also, the entire track configuration around Queens Plaza is being reconfigured so that's pretty complicated.
The real reasons that the Queensbridge connection is taking so long are two in number, and they are the same reasons that the Empire State Building could not be built today in 11 months.
1) Money. Sufficient funds are never provided to complete projects in a timely manner, because that would eliminate their usefulness as make-work schemes. Do you realize that construction on this Subway line has no dragged on for 30 years! Yes, since 1968, they've been busy building the 63rd St. Subway and tunnel, and the Queensbridge conncetion. They will be at it for years to come too, because after the subway connection is completed, the LIRR connection to the lower level of Grand Central will commence construction, and drag on for years to come. There are construction workers out there who have now probably spent the vast majority of their careers working on this project. There are bureaucrats in the funding agencies who have done little but worry about keeping a steady stream of cash trickling (not flowing) into these sort of projects.
2) Bureaucratic Redtape Paperwork BS. There is an unbelievable amount of paperwork, lawsuit, acts of compliance to various and sundry useful and ridiculous laws. Preparing thousand page environmental impact statements, major impact studies, preliminary designs, ridership studies, routing simulations, 50% designs, 90% designs, final designs, etc. takes forever. For the orignal subway, the only major paperwork was the engineering designs concerning what was going to be built.
Of course, thousands of otherwise unemployable people who inhabit various bureaucratic offices would be out of a job were it not for the work created by the above mechanisms.
That being said, is it any wonder that the Manhattan Bridge is under permenant rehabilitation? Jobs for life!
Andy Byler
"2) Bureaucratic Redtape Paperwork BS. There is an unbelievable amount of paperwork, lawsuit, acts of compliance to various and sundry useful and ridiculous laws. Preparing thousand page environmental impact statements, major impact studies, preliminary designs, ridership studies, routing simulations, 50% designs, 90% designs, final designs, etc. takes forever. For the orignal subway, the only major paperwork was the engineering designs concerning what was going to be built."
Clearly, there were no environmental laws back then, but there were whopper lawsuits that accompanied the building of the original Manhattan els **and** the 1904 subway. There are references to them right here on this web site in that "Building of the IRT" book (I believe that is the name).
John B. Bredin, Esq.
jbredin@planning.org
The comments about evironmental surveys, panning, Fed regs, lawsuits, and decade-long planning reminds me that the Baltimore Central Light Rail Line was constructed in just THREE YEARS from proposal to opening. Maryland wisely chose to built the Timonium - Cromwell (Glen Burnie) segment under Maryland rules (and Maryland money) rather than the Federal funding. The three extensions (Hunt Valley, Penn Station and BWI Airport) were built with UMTA funding. Planning started concurrent with the original segment, and they opened in 1997!!
There is a lesson here somewhere.
I'm not debating that, nor am I doubting that there is a heavy burden from environmental reporting requirements. I was only responding to the thinly- veiled assertion that "in the good old days," lawsuits weren't started over the construction of rapid transit lines. Landowners and residents along proposed rapid transit lines have been filing or countersuing "NIMBY" lawsuits against them since the 1880s, and probably before! Not usually successfully, because of the eminent domain power, but suing all the same.
There is a difference in the content of the lawsuits, however, which lengthens the process to the point of practically killing the project. The opponents of a project are just as satisfied to delay a project for decades; there is no need to kill it outright. So lack of compliance with dozens of Environmental and some other regulations are alleged, usually resulting in having to redo a similar number of reports, which in turn need new studies, which have to wait for new data, which can only be gathered in Spring, etc., etc. I do not think those who put these requirements into law had this in mind, but the opponents are clever, and recognized another way to "win" through delay.
I made a mistake before. The document on this site which was the IRT history of the original subway construction is "The New York Subway: Its Construction and Equipment". Anyway, I went there again, and I found three things that counter your assertion: "For the orignal subway, the only major paperwork was the engineering designs concerning what was going to be built."
1) The route of the subway was laid out by a court, not by the politicians, financiers or engineers! This was because all of the landowners along the original proposed line did not consent.
2) The contract between the Subway Construction Co. and the Rapid Transit Commission was exceedingly detailed, in matters unrelated to the actual construction and operation of the line.
3) Because the City of New York wanted to take no risks, the Subway Construction Co. and the IRT had to make guarantees, and post bonds and other sureties, in the sum of hundreds of millions of dollars before they could spend a single cent on the actual engineering and construction of the line. Incidentally, hundreds of millions would translate into billions today. [I realize that to get a surety bond, one pays only a portion of its face value to the surety. But even one percent (a cheap bond indeed) of hundreds of millions is millions!]
This doesn't sound to me like "the only major paperwork [for the 1904 subway] was the engineering designs concerning what was going to be built".
The glacial pace of construction on the Queensbridge connection is fairly typical of government construction in general, not merely transit construction. I have had some experience with that. When I applied to the University of Connecticut law school in late 1977 or early 1978, the cover of the course catalog featured its future campus, a Gothic-style former seminary which for several years had been under extensive renovation (the law school was then located in a wholly inadequate building more suited to a junior high school). It was promised that renovations would be done in time for the entry of my class, in the fall of 1979. Needless to say, government construction being the way it is, my class never saw the new campus, if you don't count out graduation ceremony, held outdoors at the (still unfinished) property in 1982. The campus didn't open until the mid-1980s, by then more than ten years behind schedule ... and keep in mind, this was renovation, not new construction!
That's state beaureaucracy for you. By the way, I'm a UConn grad (BS) myself.
> The route of the subway was laid out by a court, not by the politicians,
> Financiers or engineers! This was because all of the landowners along the
> original proposed line did not consent.
Business owners along the lower portion of Broadway did not want the new line at all, which is why the original line went under today's 4th Ave / Park Ave South and then turned left to Times Square before continuing under Broadway. The original proposal was for the line to go up Broadway from City Hall.
--Mark
Ignoring bureaucratic reasons (stuides required, funding, etc etc etc), the Queens Blvd connection is being build around existing lines. These lines just happen to be the most crowded lines in the system (E,F) as well as two other local lines (G,R). The work has to be done in such a way to minimize impacts to existing trains and schedules, a problem that didn't exist for the original 1904 subway since it was a new line that didn't go through other underground lines. Additional work had to be done to reroute existing trains around the construction site and then begin work on the construction site itself. The building of the original 1904 subway was a 24 hour a day venture (i *think*) - this work has to be done around rush hour schedules.
--Mark
Could it be true that there are only twenty (20) R110 cars? What possible
purpose could have been served by purchasing only twenty cars?
This means what, two trains, one on the "A" and one on the "2"? Based
on what I read about them, I was anxious to see them. But I am seldom in
the City during the rush hour. Is this the only way to see them (during
the rush hour)? I guess I would have to wait an hour or so in one spot
for all the trains to go around before I found the R110 train.
The ones on the 2 train is an IRT standard 51 foot train with 10cars. But the one used for the A is a 67 footer which needs only 9 cars. Same as the old BMT STDs.
And they were purchased for experimental purposes. It was a big step. I found so many of the features found in the Tokyo subway in them. NYC and Tokyo have the same problem. The wait is too long, even in rush hours.
Paris was great from that point of view... but their trains are to short to handle the actual demand.
There are actually two such new technology trains:
- R110A - 10 cars of standard IRT length and height
- R110B - 9 cars of 67' length (same as BMT "Standard"
They were purchased to test out new technology and are prototypes for future orders. That's why so few of them were purchased.
This is also not precedented. The "million dollar train" of Budd R-11s purchased in 1949(?) was experimental - after the BMT Zephyr, it was a test to see if Stainless Steel could be practical in the subway, as well as other things that were new at thet time. 10 cars were purchased as $100,000 each (hence, the "million dollar" train).
It will be interesting to see where these experimentals end up when the R142/R143 order is actually delivered. Will they remain in current service or will they run out their useful lives on short run trains or shuttles? I guess we'll have to wait and see.
--Mark
The R-11s were built in anticipation of being used on - you guessed it - the 2nd Ave. line. They were equipped with an ultraviolet lamp which supposedly sterilized the air inside the car; this was before the polio vaccine came out. This gizmo was called a precipitron. These devices were removed when it was discovered they emitted unsafe levels of radiation.
> The R-11s were built in anticipation of being used on - you guessed it - the
> 2nd Ave. line
Right you are. And who says history doesn't repeat itself ... the R44/R46 fleet was also built in anticipation of the 2nd Ave subway.
--Mark
Absolutely. They were also equipped to decode electronic impulses which were to be implemented on that line.
I don't remember which station I was at, but I saw this service train pass by loaded with what looked like black luggage bags with tags on each stacked up on each other.
I could not figure out what the purpose of this train was. Can anyone help?
Well there is the Garbage train that has two of the most expensive subway cars ever bought (Box Motors) and two to three (I forget) flat cars. The flat cars have smallish dumpsters that fit into the large size triangle shape garbage cans (with two flaps at top on some). Station cleaners take the garbage bags out of the round garbage cans to these larger dumpsters and at night (most of the time my D train is behind it) the garbage train collects the roll out dumpsters and puts in empty ones. The sides of the flatcars drop down like a ramp so the dumpsters can be rolled off/on. Maybe you saw the black garbage bags that fill the moveable dumpsters as your "luggage"??
Most Sunday Morning 5am, you can smSeell the train on the north bound express track at kings highway on the D/Q line while you want for the D.
The D train is great in the Summer. From the Bronx to Coney Island. A great line to go the beach on. The Q train is a short line. They should make it full time and it should be the new Brighton Local. The D will be the new Brighton Express that will speed up the trip from 205 Street to Coney Island in 35 minutes. That would be the Super Exprees of the New York City Transit System.
35 Minutes??
Don't think you can make with the new slow rules. It takes just 5 to 10 to go over the Manhattan Bridge and its 15 to 20 minutes DeKalb to KingsHighway. It's slow through DeKalb to Atlantic Ave, a little faster Alt. Ave to 7th Ave and then you fly to the Park. But you used up most of your 35minutes just in Brooklyn.
The D used to be express with M local then also didn't the D run on the F line back then too??
The D ran on the F (Culver) line from 1954, when that line was linked up to the IND, until 1967, when the Chrystie St. connection opened.
Thirty-five minutes? Let me pass along a few interesting facts. From Bedford Park to 59th St., the running time (express from 145 St - 59 St.) is 31 minutes. Running express from Brighton beach to Prospect Park will save less than 12 minutes. Try about 1:18 end to end.
Time passes more quickly when you are young. Trust me on this one!
What is the status on the Second Ave. Subway? How much would it take to complete? Will this ever happen? I want to know.
Will it ever happen? Unless the people who run the city of NY take there heads from where the sun doesn't shine, then no: the 2nd Ave. will always remain on paper...
In today's dollars, the cost of the subway would cost approximately $1.2 billion...
Tim, I hope that at least the MTA and the city entertain the thought of building it... If anything, let them ride on the Lex. line during rush hour... Then, they certainly would be in favor of building it...
Does anyone know the service diversions if the Willamsburg bridge is closed to rail traffic?
People will be diverted to living in places where Mass Transit access to Manhattan is superior. The MTA plans to improve connections to Long Island, New Jersey, and the Northern Suburbs.
Any plans to add a switch between the bridge and Marcy ave. to facilitate express service...what about the long proposed third tracking between Cresent and 121 street...just two switches to allow Woodhaven as an express stop and you have a real, viable, alternate to Queens Blvd Ind...Anyone have news??
while the line is wide enough for a third track, and in some stations small sections actually exist(Yes, I've ridden the line), the space is mostly used for various equipment rooms and on the middle section of the s curve it is used for train storage.
Personally, I dont think it will happen because the section from Alabama to Cypress Hills still slows down the line, along with that sharp s curve.
the past two days ive taken the 1/9 back to my house and have been delayed both times... both times @ 125th st the train waited more than 5 minutes to close its doors and then proceeded very slowly to a red light right befor ehte 137th st station platform where it waited a couple of more minutes... it also had to wait at the beginning of the 96th st station platform where i was first waiting for it until a 3 train cleared the interlocking to get to the local 1/9 track so it could go to 137th.. in other words the 3 trains are delaying mine and many other peoples commuting because it causes such delays.. the delays i figure are caused mostly by the fact that the interlocking has to be switched constantly, and 3 trains have to be laid up on the center track between 137th and 145th i figure, or the interlocking has to be switched to send it into a layover in the mini yard between 137th and 145th.. all these interlocking switches are causing delays.. in other words, i say, why bother with the 3 train service to 137th? all it does is screw stuff up, it doesnt come even close to replacing the real 3 service, and if anything makes it much worse.. the trains should all just terminate at 96th and do direction reversals and track switching on the 2/3 tracks just north of 96th st so that it doesnt disrupt local track service. anyone have any opinions/facts? (by the way, the MTA has a bunch of workers up @ 96th st directing the operations and what not, i saw about 10 people in an office at the north end of the uptown platform at 96th st. about 2 people out of those 10 looked like they actually might be doing something important.. the others were all hanging out and goofing off in the office lounge area)
Lefty--
To most of us, it makes logical sense to terminate the 3's at 96th Street. But I have to agree with the MTA on this one.
If you terminated the 3's at 96th Street, coupled with the 2's that either originate or terminate at 96th Street at certain times in the rush period, think about what kind of traffic that would generate on the street above.
We're talking gridlock conditions. Shuttle buses waiting to take uptown passengers or dropping off downtown passengers. At about 8:15 in the morning or at about 5:30 at night, think what kind of fiasco that would be.
By having the 3 terminate at 137, and various shuttle buses running from 96th, 110th and 125th Streets, it spreads the chaos out a little bit.
What might be a better solution would be to suspend 9 service for the duration of the work and run 3's instead of 9's during rush hour. North of 96th Street, the 3 would do the same skip-stopping as the 9.
Of course, the problem you then have is that people going to stations served only by 3 trains won't be too happy, since they'll have to wait longer for a train.
There is really no happy solution to this situation.
Michael
all of us who regularly attend yankee games know of the great subway race. for those who dont know, once every game in a break between innings, there is an animation of the 4, D, and C trains having a race to get to yankee stadium, and everyone roots for a train and stats are kept throughout the season of who wins, and at the end of the season one of the trains is a champion. im not sure but i think the D train has the most championships since they started this great tradition (does anyone know when it was?) well the point is, not are they gonna have to put the B train in the great subway race instead of the C train? its gonna be so.. weird..
Wow, the great Subway race ! another great NYC tradition indeed.
One thing I didnt get though, how do they decide which line is the race winner, is it random ? is it according to the crowd applause ?
i guess the winner is actually predetermined or random somehow but that still doesnt take away the fun of it:)
The 4 train was the chapion in the world series year. It killed the C and D train. They cannot but the B train cause it runs on the same line as the D so they will keep the C train to keep the tradition going.
The C has been shown because it's one of the 3 trains that stops at 161 St.-Yankee Stadium station. Now with the new season, the B train will stop there instead during rush hours (when the D skips that station in one direction). Your statement that the B train "runs on the same line as the D" is surprising because these are animations on a screen we are talking about, not trains on tracks, and besides, the B is replacing the C north of 145 St. during rush hours so it is not true that the B is supposedly the same as the D and the C wasn't the same.
You have to remember this is all a fun public service message for people to take the subway to the House that Ruth Built. It still gets the job done no matter what subway train they are talking about.
I haven't seen these "race" animations, but if they used colored graphics of orange, blue, and green "trains" displayed on the scoreboard, then having two of them the same color (B and D both orange) would certainly detract from the experience.
BTW, I remember reading last year (or was it the year before?) about a real "subway series" held in McCombs Dam Park (across the street from the stadium) between transit workers from the #4 and #7 lines (trains serving Yankee and Shea stadiums). I don't know who won, but I think there was a suggestion that some of the workers had called in sick in order to play the game. At any rate, the the game was played on a Monday, and the headline for the story in the Daily News was "Sick transit, glorious Monday".
No, on second thought, it was "SLICK transit, glorious Monday". Nothing about calling in sick.
It's the 4, C and D trains (green, blue, orange) which are the three trains that stop at Yankee stadium (I believe). One thing I've noticed is that they still use the old MTA logo (the giant M) on the screen before the race starts....its time for an updating!-Nick
What are the more funny, crazy, nasty announcement conductors have made, that anyone has heard? Monday morning atrain broke down in Astoria ahead of us. When our train approached the station where had discharged from the broken down train the conductor iformed us to make room for a whole crowd of people. There was indeed everbody from the previous train waiting for our train. After informing us to make room, he then said "And God bless you all." Another time back in the 80's when I was going to Aviation High, at Rawson St student were holding the doors open. The conducter said, "I' m waiting for the person who is holding the doors open to close them. I'm still waiting. Can't close them right, thought so!" Another time at this station we had a funny one, "this is #& train landing at Rawson Street. #7 Airlines is waiting to take off." Must have been for the Aviation students.
"Please do not hold the doors, not only do you delay the train and everyone on it but you MIGHT DAMAGE THE DOORS!!" or something to that effect.
How about, "There is another train directly behind this one. Please step all the way in and do not hold the doors".
Or the one I mentioned earlier: "Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. You just boarded a downtown A train to Lefferts Blvd. The next stop will be 42nd St. You may change to the AA or E across the platform. No smoking on the train. No smoking on the train."
"E express making all local stops." Huh?
and my absolute favorite:
"Step in please and watch the closing doors.
Watch the closing doors.
Watch The Closing Doors!
LET GO OF THE DOORS THIS IS NOT A TAXICAB!"
Funniest one I ever heard was about 10 years ago on an uptown #2 or #5 (I don't remember which). The conductor had been making station announcements as usual. After leaving Times Square he announced, "Willoughby, next stop, Willougby." About a half-dozen people, including myself, started to laugh. To the puzzled looks of the other passengers, we explained the significance of his station call.
For those still in the dark, "Willoughby, next stop, Willougby" was from an episode of the Twilight Zone. Great episode, BTW.
If you were leaving Times Square, it was a 2.
Was that the episode featuring the commuter train stopping at an idyllic little town, and when the unhappy commuter finally decides to get off there he winds up stepping off a moving train, and is taken away in a hearse marked "Willoughby"? If so, I would rate it as one of the ten best episodes.
It was, and the title was "The Next Stop is Willoughby". It was written by Rod Serling, and the final scene is the "unhappy commuter" waving to the people as he walks in the idyllic town /with the cut to the crossing with the conductor saying "I don't understand it. We were doing 90 miles an hour and he just stepped off" as the hearse door is closed and we see the sign "Willoughby and Son, Funeral Directors"
A Twilight Zone Classic!!
Sounds like an oxymoron, doesn't it? It makes as much sense as when the R-1/9s ran on the E line and carried "E/8th Ave. Express" on their roll signs while running local in Manhattan. Of course, those same cars had "F/6th Ave. Express" signs, too. Then again, the E and F are probably the only two routes which run express outside of Manhattan, but not in Manhattan.
The 6 runs local in Manhattan but express in the Bronx.
You're speaking of the rush hour 6 service.
Here's a good one I heard recently .....
"Please step all the way into the car and watch the doors...."
"Please step in - there is another train behind this one"
"Ladies and Gentlemen ... NYC Transit really does run more than one E train each day. Please let go of the doors in the back so others can get to work this morning. Thank you".
--Mark
"Might Damage The Doors" is not as funny as it may sound. It can actually happen. Here are 3 examples.
1) If a car is equipped with "Obstruction Sensing" equipment, the door edge rubber (nose rubber) must be precisely aligned or else they will not close properly, leading to a hanging guard light. Holding the doors will tend to deform the rubber, temporarilly.
2) Some car contracts have door operator motors without thermal overload protection. Holding the doors cause the door motors to heat up. If they get too hot, the motors armature's can burn open.
3) When doors are held, the Conductor will see a guard light. In order to clear the Guard Light, he will open and close the doors rapidly (beef the doors). Because of the weight of the door panels and the high torque of the door motors, incredible force is placed on the door linkage. This excessive force can cause castings in the door linkage to crack and break.
There use to be a guy on the #1 train who was quite the wit. He would make announcements like: "79th Street; Zabars" and "Times Square, where, with any luck at all you can catch the #2 or #3 Express!"
Once when riding to Yankee Stadium in the late 80's the conductor, who was a young kid, make the annoucement "155th Street- Polo Grounds!"
There use to be a woman on the F-line who would tell you the history of each station as you arrived. That was nice.
As I recall now, the woman on the F would announce:
"Delancy Street, the native subway stop of James Cagney and Irving Berlin"
She would also tell you stuff like
"Broadway/Lafyette the reason you are unable to switch to the uptown #6 is becaus the MTA didn't want to spend the money to build a tunnel"
Another one I recall was, Upon entering Manhattan:
"East Broadway, first stop in Manhattan, once owned by the Mahaatan Indians, purchased by Peter Minuette for 60 Guilders in trinkets"
Sometimes she would call out the Indian Names of various places and explain their meaning in English. What ever happened to her. I suppose she has gone the way of crossing a city intersection without being hassled by the cops.
Houston Street, We call it Howston, most call it Hueston.
Grand Central Terminal, yes terminal Grand Central Station is a Post Office.
Penn Station, nothing to see, the real Penn Station was torn down long ago.
I get this guy on the Q some times, 34st and Atlantic Ave it is LOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGG ISLAND RAILROOOOOOOAAAAAAAADDDDD 30 seconds just to say the name and to think Railroad is one word that was broken up for the LIRR markings.
I heard many interesting anouncements:
Once I heading to Queens on a Jammed packed rush hour E train. We were at Fifth Ave station and about 30 seconds after the doors closed the train had yet to move and then then motorman's voice broke the silence by saying "Conductor, can you open the front section again so that this man can drag his bag in". Then at Queens Plaza, again after the doors closed then conductor says "lady can you move your body aaaaaalllllll the way in or aaaaaallllll the way out."
Another on the A train. Thesouthbound train arrives at 59th St and when the conductor says "Express, Express, A Express, Express Express, A Express" and says this rapidly for about 10 seconds. Also a few conductors at this time didn't seem to know that the old AA train did not operate during rush hours. I remember one conductor on the D train would always say "....Change for the A,B,AA and CC on this level...."
>Another on the A train. Thesouthbound train arrives at 59th St and when the >conductor says "Express, Express, A Express, Express Express, A Express" and >says this rapidly for about 10 seconds. Also a few conductors at this time >didn't seem to know that the old AA train did not operate during rush hours. I >remember one conductor on the D train would always say "....Change for the >A,B,AA and CC on this level...."
Here in Chicago, on the Blue Line, we have a conductor who seems to be deathly afraid passengers are getting on a train in the wrong direction. "This is a Blue Line train, making all stops to O'Hare. O'...Hare. O'Hare. O'Hare. O'...Hare. O'Hare." At least when he does it in the other direction, it makes sense, because there are two branches. Which reminds me of the handful of conductors who still say "Congress A train" or "Douglas B train", along with "Blue Line to Forest Park" or "Blue Line to Cermak", even though A & B skip-stop went out a few years ago.
Old habits die hard. My aunt remembers hearing conductors on the Red line announce in the State St. subway, "Change here for the Dan Ryan...correction - change here for Englewood-Jackson Park." This was right after the Howard and Dan Ryan routes were through-routed and became the Red line.
I heard many interesting anouncements:
Once I was heading to Queens on a Jammed packed rush hour E train. We were at the Fifth Ave station and about 30 seconds after the doors closed the train had yet to move and then motorman's voice broke the silence by saying "Conductor, can you open the front section again so that this man can drag his bag in". Then at Queens Plaza, again after the doors closed conductor says "lady will you move your body aaaaaalllllll the way in or move it aaaaaallllll the way out."
Another time on the A train. The southbound train arrives at 59th St and when the doors opened the conductor says "Express, Express, A Express, Express Express, A Express" and says this rapidly for about 10 seconds. Also a few conductors at this time didn't seem to know that the old AA train did not operate during rush hours. I remember one conductor on the D train would always say "....Change for the A,B,AA and CC on this level...." at 59th St.
Boston: (toward the end of ball game at Fenway) Passengers please hurry into the train as soon a possible, the final score will be available soon"
*
Boston: (New Red Line Trains) Recording: "Entering Park Street/Change for Green Line" Operator: "The green line is not running due to flooding - use alternate route"
Dallas Airport (American Airlines "TrAAm"): The doors are closing now... do not interfere witht the doors... please move clear of the doors... you will delay this train... please move clear of the doors...
(this is apparently an automated system - there are several small trams with very little room for people & luggage)
Phila: (M-4 MFSE trains) while riding to 30th Street from 15th Street: (around 22nd) Recorded: 30th Street, doors opening now. Person: No, they are not, sorry, what can I say, 'we're getting there!' " (This is SEPTA's new slogan)
Phila: at 15th Street = Station Announcer... "Frankford train, now arriving westbound to 69th street now boarding." Though he was referring to two different trains, it just sounded strange to have them together.
And now I dont remember for the last one (D-C I think, but not sure)
This train is now boarding... please move all the way in... another train is comming within 5 minutes, but the next train will not stop.
Phila
Thank you all for the interesting responses about conductor announcements. I also remember the "Twilight Zone" episode about the commuter who gets off at the fantasy station "Whiloughby". That was one of my favorite episodes of TWZ. Another announcement I heard a few weeks ago on the N train was, "There is another train directly behind us. I know you don't believe me, but there really is one." Or another one I heard last year on the 6 train was, "Sorry for delay, but there is this lady with about a million bags trying to get in."
Wasn't there a conductor years ago who used to actually sing. I believe he worked on one the East Side or West Side lines. He was an older man I believe. I remember him being featured on the local news, but I don't rember exactly if he retired or what. I think if he actually existed may have retired about 5-10 years ago.
In the book "Subway Lives," it talked about the singing conductor working the #6 line doing his best Elvis. The book also said he got fired.
CTA just printed a new system map, dated February 1998 though they started coming out in very early March. They are free and there are absolutely piles of them in most stations. The CTA also prints free timetables for each station, but the availability of these varies by station -- every station has some but some stations have racks full of them and others only have a handful.
The shame is that the RTA map hasn't been updated in over a year, and it's free but not easy to get (not available in most CTA stations, but in some of the more important Metra stations). It has the CTA map on one side and the metropolitan area map on the other.
Both maps show all rail and bus routes, and are very readable.
If anyone wants the CTA map, drop me an e-mail, and I'll send you one the next day. The RTA map and station timetables are another game entirely -- I can send them, but it would take longer (especially if you want a station timetable from a station I don't go to often.).
Why is there no train that serves all four bouroughs? Is it to insure that everyone must use a variety of lines or is it an intentional delay?
Why should there be a train to serve all 4 boroughs? The train would not go through EVERY point in every borough and since a person can only go from one place to one other place in a single journey, eventually some trip will require a transfer, since not every train can go to every station. Since the boroughs are not all in a straight line, it would be extremely wasteful to plan a train hitting all four boroughs just for philosophical reasons. Most trips are either within the same borough or with an origin or destination of Manhattan, anyway.
A simpler example: I sometimes use a train here in Washington that starts in Maryland, goes through DC and ends in Virginia. But the odds are greater than 50-50 that I have to change trains anyway to get where I want to go, especially if it's not in DC (the "Manhattan" of this area). There is a logic behind every train line, sometimes geographical, sometimes political, sometimes architectural, sometimes cost-related. Sometimes the logic becomes outdated as populations shift or their needs change. But no one builds a subway purposely to make people miserable (though it may happen inadvertently after awhile).
Basically, it's a question from a lazy train rider who doesn't have to worry about that here in Philly but wonders......
Um.....thanks, Jack. But were you making a comment or responding to my response?
I consider the DC subway to be the most logically laid out of all the US systems. I suppose this should be expected, since it was not built piecemeal like many other large systems. In thinking about this, I realized that the beltway was completed before the subway was begun, yet having a ring and spoke routing was apparently rejected. The ring route could have been surface running in the beltway median,like segments of BART, while the spokes could still be Subways, at least inside the belt. The spokes would be able to continue as far as the suburbs that the existing system does.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only train that ever served all 4 boroughs was the 1979 late night C train that went from the Bronx to Manhattan to Brooklyn and then to the Rockaways in Queens.
You are correct about the C: it was the only route ever to serve four boroughs. At that time, it was a rush hour service only, I believe.
It was rush hour only in the CC days and until Dec. 88 even after its code change to C. Up until a few years ago, it ran except evenings, nights and weekends through the boroughs of Manhattan, Broolkyn and Queens. Rush hours included an extra Bronx service on the Concourse which made all the four boroughs.
Other times, trains ran from 145 St. or 168 St. to World Trade, making it a single borough train.
Thank you very much Carl. You have helped me in most of my things that I written in the past. You must know alot on the New York City Subway System. No more games I need you help. As you now I making a new line. I have the teachers in my school helping me. Can you help me and also you have a voice in Subtalk so can you get everybody in Subtalk to help me. Thank You
Christopher James Rivera
Write again in Subtalk what your assignment is, what your goal is, and an outline of what the new line should be and I and others here can certainly help you. I can't write more today... Perhaps tomorrow.
You must be a regular subway superman, nes pas?
Can you help me and Carl? I hope that you help?
Well, at the risk of making a fool of myself, here's my subway Curriculum Vitae:
I have been through every subway station in New York at least once including PATH and the Newark City Subway, except for nine NYC stations, and I've driven by four of those. I have also been on a bunch of abandoned or currently non-revenue sections, including the Bronx-3rd Avenue, the Myrtle Avenue west of Bway, the Jamaica Avenue section from 121-168 St, the old South Ferry shuttle, the Essex->Bway-Lafayette connection, and the Culver Shuttle. I even have an old photo somewhere I took of the railroad crossing at E. 105, Canarsie.
I have been on subway/elevated systems in 11 North American cities (NYC/Newark, Philadelphia/Camden, Boston, Toronto, Montreal, Baltimore, Washington, Miami, San Francisco, Chicago, Cleveland) and in 10 European cities (Amsterdam, Paris, London, Frankfurt, Munich, Hamburg, Mannheim/Ludwigshafen, Copenhagen, Stuttgart, Vienna).
I have just about every NYC subway map going back to 1961 (when I was 10 years old) and I've been on just about every car type going back to the IRT Lo-V trains which took my father and me to Yankee games. I apparently inherited this from my father who lived near Van Siclen Avenue on the New Lots Line but dated my mother who lived near Mt. Eden Avenue on the Jerome Avenue Line.
I would not consider myself at all knowledgeable about how equipment works, just what one can see as a rider, especially one who looks out the front window a lot. Also I do computer software work for a living and I often have written manuals for users and operators.
But seriously, as a group I bet we can all help Christopher get an "A".
I hope that this posting doesn't make me look too much like a fool. I've just done a lot of business travel (and subway travel on the weekends).
I'm sorry you felt a need to justify your expertise; it was already obvious to those of us who frequent this website in search of information as opposed to personal gratification.
I knew that it was a little self-centered of me to write all that; oh well, I had some free time at work and... Thanks, though, for your understanding and the compliment.
[I have been through every subway station in New York at least once ... except for nine NYC stations]
Tsk tsk. You'd better get cracking on those nine :-)
Everything I know I learned from NYCSUBWAY.Org. Well, almost everything.
I had no idea you had such a vast range of experience and travel not only on the NYC subway but in other cities as well. I aspire to do the same some day. Thanks for being an inspiration to me if not others on this site!
Which lines were you on when you visited Philadelphia and what did you think?
I lived in Phildelphia for four years. I've been all over it. I lived there so long ago, the Camden subway only went to Broadway Camden, and you had to buy a token (2 for a nickel) as an extra fare to exit or enter the line in Camden. Of course the regular fare was 25 cents at the time. They had special Camden cars with narrow windows on the doors and plush dark green seats. They almost looked like what a stagecoach looked like.
I think the MFSE cars are great, except for the lack of air conditioning. They have this salmon-pink, green, and silver coloring that makes them really look different. The front window opens so you get a good dose of fresh air when standing there. And the silver outside never looks old or worn. I only hope the new cars are as good.
I lived over a subway-surface station at 37 and Spruce. Besides feeling like you are on a bumper car, if no one is getting on or off at a stop, the driver just skips the stop. So you can get to Center City in the evening sometimes in less than 10 minutes.
The Broad Street Subway is a bit pedestrian looking, but it at least has 4 tracks. And only recently the express tracks were added north of Erie Avenue...the ROW was there, just no tracks for years.
The el can look pretty dingy to me sometimes. How is the subway 'pedestrian looking'? The new cars on the el are much better anyway. They have AC! Hallelujah!
Here is the mission Carl.
The 8 train (Local)will go down Webster Av. until fordham road then it will go down Third Avenue all the way to 133 Street and Bruckner Blvd.
The 10 train (Express)will go down White Plains Road after Morris Park Avenue then it will go on to Lafayette Avenue. then it will go under the Bronx River. Then it will share the same road as the 6 train. Then it will go on to 149 street then it will go down St Ann's Avenue on to 133 Street past Willis Avenue and on to second avenue when the two lines will meet at 125 Street. They will go down second avenue until it ends hen it will go down allen street then on to E broadway then on to park row then go on to a right-a-way then past South street in to brooklyn. Then it will go on to third avenue. The 8 train will terminate at 77 street and third avenue the 10 train will then go on to 86 atreet and meet up with the B and M trains. Then it will go up Avenue U and meet with the rest of the coney island trains. Then it will go on to flatbush avenue and terminate in the Rockaways at Beach Channel Drive write to me at my internet address and you will get more info on the line.
Christopher Rivera
I like the Bronx part. Connecting the White Plains Road and Pelham tracks make for a nearly crosstown Bronx line. If the northern part could go along Fordham Road across the Bronx, that might even be better.
Manhattan is well designed too.
In Brooklyn, I have trouble with the Brooklyn-3rd line. It is one block from the 4th Avenue line. It is under a huge expressway in part. I don't think it's a good location. You could connect it with the northbound (actually eastbound from Hoyt-Schermerhorn) G and go to Bedford Nostrand, then further along Lafayette Avenue, then maybe continue down Utica Avenue into an underserved part of Brooklyn all the way to Kings Plaza Mall. See what you think.
In general, though, it sounds great. I'm sure others will comment, too.
I like the idea very much. Cant it go down Ocean Parkway and then continue on its orignal route. If you read my new story on the top which you did we can put the R-155 on that line making it a great line to ride from the people on the Lex. Line point of view. It will be the most famous route in the history of the NYCTA history. Do you agree
Ocean Parkway is only 5 blocks (1/4 mile) from McDonald Avenue and 1/2 miles from E. 16 St. The F line is already underused, and the D/Q is close by also. So an Ocean Parkway line is not really necessary, unless they tear down the McDonald Avenue El. Building a line under Ocean Parkway would be a great replacement place for the F train to go, since there are so many apartment buildings on Ocean Parkway. Brooklyn has a lot of train service, it turns out, except for the area along 86 St. east of 18th Avenue, the Utica Avenue corridor south of Eastern Parkway, and the Nostrand/Flatbush Avenue corridors south of Avenue H.
How about it not going into Brooklyn at all but your 2nd Avenue line ending at the foot of Water St. How about a branch under the East River to the near-empty LIRR train line from Long Island City out to Jamaica and St. Albans? Then it could go across Queens to the Nassau County line. You may choose where. So Queens and Bronx trains would all go down 2nd Avenue south of 28th St. maybe.
If you wanted to spur West Side redevelopment you could build a pair of lines that run down 2nd Avenue to the 14 St. line or just past and over to Avenue A and cut across Houston St. over to 10th Avenue (or Hudson St). Another branch would hook into the 63 St. tunnel from 2nd Avenue and go over to 10th Avenue and down 10 Avenue all the way to Battery Park City along the West Side. It would look like the letter P with line coming out the top right straight up. Figuring out how to get enough service may be a problem, but, hey that part is up to you. Maybe that Queens spur would come in handy.
If the current situation continues, we will be without SEPTA Transit City Division at the end of the week. What are your thoughts on the strike? Do you think SEPTA is right or is TWU right?
Management: Wants to change contract structure, modernize fares, plan new routes, etc.
Union: Against most of what management wants.
See www.septa.org and more information, read the crossroads newsletter. Sorry, I dont have a union site to point you too.
My opinion: The Union should make concessions. We pay the highest base fair for a system that is somewhat out-of-date. Changes must be made!
As a daily SEPTA commuter for over 10 years, I feel that neither the TWU nor SEPTA management are completely right or wrong on a lot of the issues at hand. We in Philly do pay the highest base CASH fare in the US, & the system does need major work on infrastructure, reworking the fare structure, & updating the route network to bring it out of the 1950s, just to name a few issues.
I do feel that SEPTA management is still top-heavy & too politically-motivated rather than truly interested in operating the system in the best interest of the general public. I read in SubTalk about how NYCT & others are making real efforts to try & recapture lost ridership, while SEPTA just doesn't seem to care if all the ridership just fades away. On the other hand, Local 234 needs to realize that without SEPTA, life here will still go on. The 1995 strike was certainly a hardship for many, but for many others it was a non-event. SEPTA just doesn't MOVE the city as they once did.
SEPTA has been discussing the possibility of operating the subway lines with management personnel during limited hours (weekday peak hours only?). I don't believe that SEPTA should even try this-There is just too much possibility of violence & other labor unrest!
In short, unless the two sides in the present dispute both wake up & smell the coffee, mass transit in Philadelphia may never again be as important to the general public as it should be. That's really a shame. We still have a relatively extensive system which would cost billions to build today, & those in charge seem to be just content to let it die a very painful death.
Michael S. Buglak (Survivor of the 1995 & pending 1998 SEPTA Strikes)
I was in the City of Brotherly Love for a convention during the '95 strike, and I remember a little tinpot Napoleon of a union leader/spokesman pronouncing **proudly** to the assembled media that he had paralyzed Philadelphia, while I looked out my hotel room window and saw hundreds of people walking down the street like a normal day. As a certain TV character says, "Maybe not so much!"
I also remember two stunts the union pulled to disrupt alternate transportation:
1) Blocking the tracks at one regional rail station until the sheriff came with a court order to cease and desist, whereupon they did and reassembled at another station, blocking the tracks until the sheriff came with an order to remove them there, whereupon they went to another station, ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
2) Driving very slowly down the Skucklhill (pardon my atrocious spelling, and how do little Philadelphian children deal with that name?) Expressway, in as many cars abreast as there were lanes. They were pulled over and arrested for obstructing traffic, but were not charged if I recall correctly.
We took cabs when we had to travel, though most of the convention and sightseeing was in short distance and we walked to it, and the cabbies seemed to love the strike. One cabbie professed solidarity with the strikers, but I thought it more a matter of additional fares. (^: The strike ended the day we left town.
That union leader John B. refers to is Harry Lombardo, who was head of TWU Local 234 during the 1995 strike, & now is a vice president of the TWU. (Steve Brookins ia the current head of Local 234.) Lombardo always did come across as a Napoleon type ro me, too! :)
The way I learned to say "Schyulkill" is SCHOOL-kill. A popular nickname for the Schyulkill Expressway here is "Sure Kill" since the road can be torture to drive in rush hour. (It's a very old expressway, built in the 1950s, which is only 2 lanes each way for most of its length.) When Lombardo staged that stunt to slow down traffic on the Schyulkill Expressway, he was quoted at the time as something on the order of "Getting all the suburbanites in their BMWs to pay attention" to his situation. Needless to say, suburbanites in Norristown, Chester, (neither of which are particually well off), & many other places who DON'T drive BMWs (if they even drive at all) were not amused!
Michael S. Buglak
I've lived through a few SEPTA (and PTC) strikes and the net effect of those, especially the most recent ones, is not catastrophic. In '95 the first two or three days were bad, then people just sort of got used to it. The Schuylkill (sorry, Mike, it's both tough to say AND to spell!) didn't really get tied up until the TWU bozos pulled their "motorcade" actions a few times. The commuter rail lines did well in handling the crowds and the weather cooperated, as I recall - no snowstorms or anything like that. The worst effect was on SEPTA ridership itself, which is just now regaining the numbers of pre-strike '95. Of course, just in time for a possible strike (and, so far, knock on wood, it looks promising that there may not be one).
It seems that the first few days are always confusing since the Suburban side is still operating (its contracts go for another two weeks or so) and there are places where SEPTA buses still operate, even within the city limits (the 94 to Chestnut Hill and the 108 through Southwest Phila are two examples, with the 105 in Overbrook often not entering the city). In '95 the TWU also took to picketing places like Wayne Junction and several commuter rail terminals in efforts to shut down those lines, but those actions usually only lasted until the court orders could be obtained.
The worst strike I can recall was the 44-day affair in '77. I was going to college at the time and it was hell to get back and forth. Traffic was truly terrible as people tried to find the inevitable shortcuts (now, the news media here is advising drivers of "best routes" through neighborhoods, etc - it will be interesting to see how long this will last!). I also recall how slow riders were to return to SEPTA after that one, although many eventually came back.
The key is that the Phila area is so decentralized at the present time that only Center City generally is affected directly by the strike. Most suburbanites, who do not enter the city at all, could care less, and SEPTA is often viewed as the vehicle for the poor city folks. How untrue that is!
Another local example of a catastrophic strike is the 75-day one against Transport of New Jersey in '72. Once it was over, so was TNJ. Some of you may recall that TNJ buses were diligently hanging on despite competition from PATCO in many South NJ corridors. Not long after the strike ended, the marginally successful "Bus Rail" feeder system was instituted. TNJ later became NJT and bus commuting in South NJ has not been the same since. A lesson learned?
There is one strike you forgot about... The 1983 commuter rail strike, that
lasted a whopping 108 days!! Do you remember how that affected area commuters?
Although I lived in the far southwestern suburbs, finishing my senior year in
high school, and therefore, didn't rely on SEPTA, I was really hoping for that
strike to end. I was glued to the TV everyday, just to get the latest on the
strike. As the strike wore on, I, and probably other people as well, were
afraid that Philadelphia has seen the last of commuter rail service. Do you
recall what measures SEPTA took to lure back riders after the strike was finally
settled?
I do recall it but it didn't directly affect me, so I guess I kind of forgot about it.
At the time I was using the 36 line every day. Suburban commuters were driving to places like the Island/Lindbergh shopping centers to park and ride in every day. The subway-surface lines picked up somewhere in the area of 40% (!) higher ridership during the '83 strike. The 100, 101 and 102 rail lines were also packing them in and running two-car trains frequently in the peaks.
I don't think the commuter lines have ever really recovered from that strike, but it was nowhere like the '72 TNJ strike, since at least most rail riders came back eventually. In the TNJ scenario, riders were abandoning the buses even before the strike. The Center City tunnel helped bring folks back, especially on the Reading side, where riders didn't have to take another vehicle to get to the new office buildings on the west side of Center City.
I recall during the planning for Railworks that the shutdown issue was a very sensitive one. Much of this began six/seven years after the '83 strike but it was still in the minds of the planners. It was about the time that most of the riders who were coming back had finally done so and there were many fears that the Railworks shutdown would only scare them away once again.
Since the news of a transit strike in Philadelphia is not exactly "hot", did 234 go out on March 15 or not.
Those of us in places other than Philadelphia would like to know.
Question for the SEPTAland dwellers: Would the Pennsylvania legislature go for what the Maryland General Assembly did in 1970: The MTA here received binding arbitration in labor (contract) disputes.
It does come with a price - sometimes the arbitrator gives the union a settlement higher than requested and the MTA has to accept it. The plus is that we've been free a transit strikes since 1970.
As of 8:00a on Monday, 3/17/98, SEPTA & Local 234 were still at the bargaining table. The union did not walk out when the contract expired on Sat. night @ midnight. SEPTA & the union have been talking almost non-stop since then-They've made a lot of progress! Local 234 has stated that if there is a strike, it will give enough notice so that no rider will be left stranded.
Michael S. Buglak
As of 8:30a on Wednesday, 3/18/98, here is the status of SEPTA contract talks:
On Tuesday night (3/17), about 9:30p, The TWU Local 234 negoitators walked out on the contract talks. They did not have any comment at that time-& haven't heard from since! SEPTA has also had "No Comment". The system is operating this morniong, but it now seems like the whole situation is in limbo-No one is saying if the union will strike at any time of not. If I hear anything more, I'll post it on SubTalk below this message.
Michael S. Buglak
You know what I'm about ready to do? I'm going to chain myself to a bus. Either that or raise a ruckus at 1234 Market Street. Now I have a side-and it's SEPTA. They seem(to me) to have made all the accomodations. The TWU seems to be playing the growling game as I call it. Why don't they either agree or strike and stop keeping the city breathless with uncertainty.
This morning at 47-50 Rock it seemed a supervisor (well he wasn't in a uniform with radio and clipboard) was handing out papers to only Q train operators. He even made them SIGN for them (yup print and sign name).
Isn't this a strange way to hand out information?? How is every Q Train Operator going to get one? Way not do this at the terminal now one stop away? The tower also had more people in it than usual (one person most of the time). There was a SLIGHT delay to customers, the train was closed up way before the train operator had signed for his handout.
I saw the handouts to two Q trains before my F(orever) showed up.
When they come out with the old monthly and weely passes this summer, the back of the pass should have a calendar style score card on the back so that people can mark off when they use the system and determin if the pass is worth it.
For the amusement of riders, bored with Gulliani style confromity, Monthly pass riders should, upon entering and exiting the subway, got through the turnstyles in numerous times in quick succession in order to give MTA tracking and accountin technology a run for its money.
Any other suggestions.
Someone here recently stated that a daily or monthly pass cannot be reused for 5 minutes after a use. This is to prevent one person from allowing in innumerable people on one card.
Here in Boston the timer is set at approximately TWENTY minutes.
There is an interesting twist on Sundays, however. On Sundays, "T" pass holders are permitted to take a guest for free. So instead of using the turnstyle, one goes up to the collector's booth (which is always directly adjacent to one turnstyle) and flashes the pass; the collector hits the "pass" switch twice so that two can go through that turnstyle. I suppose unscrupulous users could do a pass-back and let two more through in the same way...
From a financial standpoint, by the way, the two-for-one-on-Sundays is one of the key features of the "T" pass. Two others: Subscribe by mail for 12 months' service, and pay for 11 months (the 12th is free); get 15% off the comprehensive portion of your car insurance if you collect 11 passes in a 12-month period and send them into your auto insurance agent.
My "T" pass, which includes up to Commuter Rail Zone 2 (approximately the same mileage as Mineola-Penn Station on the LIRR), all subways, and all buses, is $72/month. After the discounts above, my total commuting cost is about $700/year for all I can ride on the systems. Suchadeal!
That two for one is a great deal for families. During the debate on discounts, I wrote to the MTA suggesting a half fare off peak rather than a monthly pass, to both attract off-peak rides and provide an incentive to change work schedules to ride off peak. During a meeting where I work, someone asked H Ring of the MTA is something could be done for a parent taking children on a subway. The answers were no and no. Ring didn't think there was any way it could be done.
But there it is: a twenty minute gap to deter fraud on-peak, and allow two riders off peak. Why not?
SEPTA has a similar restriction on its passes. For a bus ride, the limit is about 15 minutes, while its 30 on the subway (& El) system. The farebox display reads "PASSBACK" & whistles, or the turnstile will not operate. SEPTA does not have the 2-for-1 on Sundays like the T in Boston does, although they've tried it a couple of times in the past as one-shot deals.
On weekends, all zone limits are wavied for SEPTA passholders on all vehicles, while on the Regional Rail all Zone 3 passes are good to any higher zone during off-peak hours.
As a comparision to Todd's pass, my Zone 3 TrailPass (which covers all SEPTA City Transit, 3 zones on Suburban Transit, & Regional Rail up to Zone 3 or about 18 miles from Center City Philadelphia) costs $109.50.
Michael S. Buglak
and out here SF BAREA where BART like DC METRO is distance priced the passes which come in many flavors DO NOT allow for unmetered use of BART although some do for other transit agebcies, SF MMUNI, San Jose, etc.
The employee passes lock out for around 8 minutes I think. But at the construction site at Queens Plaza everyone is using the gate in the morning (TA employees and contractor).
Does anyone know yet if the "lockout" is limited to the same location?
Here's my situation. I take the M79 bus from 81st and CPW across the
park and transfer to one of the downtown buses at 5th Av. (the next stop) I've never timed it, but I'd guess that there are many mornings where only 2 or 3
minutes passes in between the first and second card readings.
Will I end up standing around waiting for the lockout period to pass?
I *am* a station agent (Token booth clerk). I hate to spoil your "fun" but we do not count exits via the turnstiles. we count entrances, The fare card (the pass) will have a feature on it to prevent such an action as you propose. The reason is to avoid two people entering on one card.
Please be considerate of Transit Employees!
To the other posters: The details are still being worked out. MTA will share the results when it is decided.I will be brought back for additional training when they are ready to roll out the pass.
I hope this answers your question.
--opinions expressed are mmy own and not those of MTA or NYCT---
Instead of marking up the pass, how about have the reader TELL you how many times you have used the pass ??? The turnstile board which now tells you :Proceed $1.50 Remaining could be programmed to say: Proceed 25 uses or something...The same thing,obviously for the weekly or daily passes.
Hoping that the pending SEPTA strike is short lived, Can anyone tell me if there
is a limit to how long a transit strike is allowed to last, since many people
depend on the transit system? If I remembered correctly, the last SEPTA strike
in 1995 lasted only about 4 or 5 days. How likely is it for a transit strike
to last up to a month, or even longer? Has that ever happened? Also, if SEPTA
goes on strike, Will the transit museum remain open?
I can't say for sure if there is a limit as to how long a transit strike can go on. Here in Denver, RTD bus drivers went on strike for almost a month in 1982 before reaching a settlement. New York's transit workers went on strike for about 2 weeks in January 1966, and something like 2 weeks in 1980.
I don't know how long a strike can last. But the very thing that saves Philadelphia from total disaster -- the regional rail workers are in the railroad unions, while the City Transit Division workers are in another union entirely -- comes to haunt Chicago every few years or so.
Specifically, when the freight railroad union's contract comes up for renewal every few years, the union always threatens a strike to force better terms, and the union(s) that operate Metra threaten to go out in sympathy, though they usually have no grievances of their own. There's always a last minute settlement, but it always bothers me that the commuter train union(s) would threaten to tie up metropolitan commuting for somebody else's gripes.
Do the unions operating commuter trains in other cities (NY, Boston, Philly, DC) make that same threat every few years or is that just a Chicago thing?
As far as Philly goes, the regional system was relied on for the '95 strike and will be relied on if necessary starting Sunday. Their plan is as follows:
(This information is cut and pasted from the SEPTA web page:)
*Regional rail service would run on regular schedules, but train times may be adjusted to accommodate the increased number of passengers.
*SEPTA's service guarantee would be suspended during a strike because of expected extremely heavy ridership during peak hours.
*Weekly TransPasses would be valid for travel to all regional rail stations within city limits for the duration of a city transit strike, except for Forest Hills and Somerton Stations. These stations require Zone 3 fares.
*Passengers boarding trains in Center City would be asked to wait on theconcourse-level for their trains to be announced. This is to avoid over-crowding on the platforms. SEPTA staff would then direct passengers to the trains.
*Tickets would not be collected on inbound trains. Tickets would be collected for a round-trip on all outbound trains. Passengers must purchase round-trip tickets at SEPTA locations, prior to boarding trains leaving Center City. During the evening rush hour,all tickets would be collected prior to boarding. Even riders riding only one way must purchase a round-trip ticket to board a train.
*Parking is available at SEPTA regional rail stations throughout the region and at various locations near the Broad Street Line and the Market-Frankford Line. SEPTAwould also issue a special Riders Guide that will include additional parking locations that will be offered if there is a strike.
*Since no SEPTA Suburban Transit Division service would be operated into the city, a number of Suburban Transit Division routes would be rerouted to include stops at rail stations feeding Center City.
Hmmm ... didn't LIRR and NJT plan to not run trains into NY in sympathy with a threatened Amtrak strike this past summer? Only with some last minute negotiating did LIRR, NJT and Amtrak make some kind of agreement to allow their trains to run into NYC during the strike ....
--Mark
Definitely not sympathy;the problem was more one of logistics. Movements in and out of Penn Station and on the NEC are controlled by Amtrak personnel.Without them,it would be impossible for LIRR and NJT to operate in these areas. Amtrak agreed to staff towers and dispatching centers with management people to allow NJT and LIRR to maintain service in the event of a strike.
There are some areas of NYC that are not serviced by subway... I have a poropsal for a new line that would run from Bay Ridge in Brooklyn to LaGuardia Airport in Queens... I know I'll probably receive criticism... I'm ready for it... If you have any adjustments, feel free...
The "X" line (Bay Ridge -- LGA)
-- 4th Avenue and 63rd St. (passenger walkway could be built to 59th St. station; change for N,R)
-- New Utrecht Ave. and 61 St. (change for B,M,N)
-- McDonald Avenue bet. Avenues H & I (change for F)
-- E. 16th St. off Avenue H (change for D)
-- Flatbush Ave. off Avenue H (change for 2,5)
-- Kings Highway & 53rd St.
-- Rockaway Ave. off Ditmas Ave.
-- Livonia Ave. off Van Sinderen St. (change for #3 and L)
-- Atlantic Ave. -- Fulton St. off Junius St. (change for A,C,J,L,Z and LIRR)
-- Myrtle Ave. and Fresh Pond Road
-- Metropolitan Ave. (change for M)
*NOTE* -- At this point, the line would become a subway... From Bay Ridge to now, it is similar to the Brighton and Sea Beach lines: open-air depressions.
-- Eliot Ave. and 75th St.
-- Woodhaven Blvd. & Queens Blvd. (change for G,R)
*NOTE* -- At this point, the subway would follow 59th Ave. to Junction Blvd. At Junction Blvd., it would turn left and follow Junction Blvd.
-- Corona Ave.
-- Roosevelt Ave. (change for #7)
-- Northern Blvd.
-- 94th St. and Astoria Blvd.
-- 94th St. and 23rd Ave.
-- 23rd St. and Ditmars Blvd. (LaGuardia Airport)
Feel free to respond... I'm open to suggestions!
I presume this is meant to follow the Bay Ridge line. You are certainly not the only one who has thought about such a line. It seems to make a lot of sense, after all the tracks are already there (or at least one of them is)... The expense would be in building the stations, the transfer corridors, and installing third rail and signalling. I think the possibility has been studied, and the conclusion was reached (exactly when, and by who, I don't know) that not enough people would ride the line to justify even that investment.
Well, if a full-fledged subway isn't justified, how about a "ligt rail" (trolly-type vehicle) line? I think there must be enough ridership potential to justify that. The subway/LRV transfers would be the crucial factor. Start out with Metrocard based transfers, and build enclosed connections as the ridership justifies it. A three-way transfer at Livonia Av/Junius St. between the L, the 3, and the LRV line would seem especially deserving of construction, but even that could be implementde with Metrocard first: install "swipe before exiting" card readers within the turnstile areas of the two stations; people who want to transfer would do so, and there Metrocards would be encoded to allow free entry at the "transfer to" station within 5 minutes. (Similar setups could be set up at other station pairs, such as Queens/Queensboro Plaza, Court/Courthouse Square, or 60th/63rd St.-Lexington Ave.)
But back to the Bay Ridge line. I think the line between New Utrecht Ave. and Livonia Ave. would be the most important stretch, connecting as it would the "Southern Division" and "Eastern Division" of the BMT, without needing to go through Manhattan. In a way this would be analagous to the G line, which connects the Queens and Brooklyn sections of the IND. The section west of New Utrecht would only parallel the N train, and the section north of Livonia would only parallel the L and the M. The subway to LaGuardia is a pipe dream; aren't there already definite plans to extend the N train to LaGuardia? But an LRV running on the existing ROW from New Utrecht to Livonia, with transfers at the points indicated, seems eminently doable. One problem is that freight trains do run through there sometimes, so actually there would need to be separate tracks for the LRV, since freights and LRVs (or subways) are not allowed to use common trackage. Question: how many tracks can the width of the existing ROW accomodate?
Two questions:
1) Why would there need to be a seperate freight trackage??
2) Why couldn't LRV's interchange with the subway?? There's no technical reason, the LIRR demonstrated high / low level platforming in the same car at the turn of the century, and there are examples of third rail/overhead lines, nor should exposed shoes and low platforms be considered dangerous - the LIRR did this, even to the extent of running the third rail *under* some *low level* platforms. God knows they'd never get away with that today though...
Hey - Stairway to Heaven is a cool song.....
Ummm... where was I? :)
Oh yeah - there is NO reason why you can't interchange LRV/Subways, though I don't know of any existing examples. I'm sure the MTA should be able to pull it off though.
issues: 1. the LRV Subway mix is not a good idea. Its all about "buffing or cornerpost" withstand specs. sort of like a geo metro not being compatible with a Chevy suburban in a wreck. In this regard I am curious as to the specs for the Cleveland Rapid high platform MU's and the Shaker Bredas which share right of way. 2. as to freight/LRV if the freight operations are restricted to a late night window... The precedent is the Baltimore LR line which has some shared tracks I believe. 3 . ridership/market? I suspect it would fill out just fine. There was a relitively well written proposal for this project published by a small org. in NY which I read 3? years back. *The major stumbling block is probably NIH at MTA/can they make it look sexy enough to get FTA money while PA is vacuuming up available new money on the JFK missdesign? While one is imagining, there is enough physical space on Hell Gate to run thi thing into the Bronx and for that matter to DYRE.
The Baltimore Central Light Rail Line has two sections where freight trains use the tracks. The North end has Conrail (soon to be either CSX or NW) and the South end (ex B&A) has freight service provided by the Canton RR (A state owned railroad that used to serve the Port of Baltimore). The south runs 2 or 3 nights a week, but the north end has heavier service. The "Big Time" is the Conrail stone train from the Campbell quarry at Cockeysville to Sparrows Point. The really interesting part is the fact that the train usually leaves the quarry about 5:45 AM - and operates right along with the first LRV trips. What amazes all of us is that the converted MTA bus dispatchers actually manage to keep everything out of each other's way AND switch the stone train off at 28th Street without delaying anything. The stone train usually has 2 GP38's, MU'ed through 15 to 20 hoppers. It's neat to watch the commuter reactions as this train barrels through the stations at 35 MPH with both diesels yelling their heads off, with hopper loads of stone in the middle!!
Wow!! If I saw a freight train coming past me at one of those small Light Rail stations (especially if I had just walked across the track), I think I'd faint.
Then again, freight trains used to run at night on Pratt Street and Guilford Avenue. Now that was a strange thing to see if you were driving home on a Saturday night...
Your Way-Back machine must be working regularly, or Mr. Peabody visits your house often.
B&O trains haven't been on Pratt Street since the early 1960's, since the Pratt and Light Street wharves were removed to form Sam Smith Park. McCormick's used to get a few cars up to 1975, but these were delivered from the Locust Point end. (The tracks on Light were served from Key Highway and Lawrence (No, not named for our family) Street.)
There were Pennsy trains on Fleet Street and Boston Street until the late 70's, before (ugh!) Penn Central.
The Pratt street tracks were there until Harbor Place was begun. I remember in the early 70's (since I only lived there from 1971 until 1974) that the right northbound lane of Light St. was 3 feet from the water at that time.
Even though tracks were on a long stretch of Pratt St. the part I saw freight cars on (and just twice) was at the section in front of the water around Calvert Street. This was before they reversed the directions of one-way Pratt and Lombard Streets, so Pratt at the time was a westbound street. When Harbor Place was started, they paved it over to look good, removed the old bridge over the Jones Falls from Lombard St., put the old bridge (a small one) on a plot of land near the Streetcar Museum, built a new bridge, and reversed the directions of the two streets.
A few times I saw freight cars on Guildford Avenue though, and the tracks are still there, though completely unused now I think.
The Lombard Street Bridge, which carried 2-car trains from the 26 line for years, was "Preserved as a Baltimore Landmark" by William Donald Schaefer, our Mayor (and later Governor) for 17 years. The bridge, which was unique in that the center "girder" was the 32" water main that gracefully arced from west to east in the center and held the two lanes up, was replaced with a (sterile) interstate style bridge. It was moved to the Falls Road Highway Yard for storage, the pipes came along, but some dum-dum scrapped the pipes around 15 years ago as "junk". He didn't ask why they were there. Somebody could have told him.
Anyway, it's still there in 1998, nobody knows what's going to be done with it.
We've (BSM) thought about moving it to our ROW, but that's a L-O-N-G term project. If we move, maybe we'll take it with us and incorporate it in the new car line. (Now, if we only had a pair of 5800's.) (sigh.)
The San Diego Trolley shares some of its tracks with local freights. The freights run at night.
After thinking it over during the night, I think the most practical vehicles to run here would not be LRV's (for which too much time would be wasted in choosing a design) but rather existing cars of FRA-modified R-44's from the Staten Island fleet. That would eliminate the need for separate tracks. Some sort of passing sidings would still be needed to let freight trains past the new quasi-subway line. Run single married pairs (2-car trains) of R-44's back and forth between New Utrecht and Livonia Aves., at least to start with. Since they are still R-44's, they can still be run over regular subway tracks for storage or servicing. If the line is a success, build the enclosed transfer corridors at all transfer points, and perhaps extend it northward on the eastern end.
P.S. Does anyone from the MTS read this board?
Typos strike again. What I was trying to ask in that lastline was whether anyone from the *MTA* (especially anyone involved in planning) reads this board.
My observation is that the current ROW can support two tracks, maybe three with some enlargement of the retaining walls. Not sure about all the roadway overpasses, though.
--Mark
I'd prefer that the MTA just make the subway improvements promised in 1968 when it was formed. The eletrified the whole LIRR and rebuilt entire sections to eliminate grade crossings. Somehow the subway portions never got built. The Transit Authority built the Christe Street connection and the 6th Avenue express just before the MTA was formed. We've gotten nothing since.
The plan included a connection to the airports and the 2nd Avenue subway. The 1969 plan for New York City also recommended (I'm not sure of the entire MTA program) rebuilding the IRT junction at Franklin to increase capacity, extending the IRT in Brooklyn down Nostrand and Utica to serve Flatlands and Mill Basin, a super express in Queens, the 2nd Avenue subway extended along the Dyre Avenue Line, a cross town transitway on 47th St, LIRR connections to Grand Central and Downtown, etc, etc.
All those taxes and tolls, all those years. I'll be if we could have back the money spent on planning studies, we could build at least one of these.
Had New York City not gone bankrupt during the 70s, chances are the 2nd Ave. line would have been finished by the late 80s (they had figured it would take 10-15 years to build). Construction began in 1972, and came to a halt in 1975.
I agree with you... For years I have written letters to the Mayor's office as well as the MTA office in Downtown Brooklyn about the construction of the Second Ave. line... If there is something that is desperately needed to alleviate congestion on the Lex. line is the 2nd Ave. line...
If you wish, in the archives, a man posted a message dealing with the 1929 proposal from the IND to extend the subway... I think you would find it of great interest...
On the Hudson Line trains, after they terminate at Pourkeepskie(Is that how it is spelled?) water is released from the a pipe near the door. What is it?
A/C? Can't be toilet water.
The run-off from the HVAC is continually released from the evaporators and drips from the underside of the train (so that is likely not the source of the water you see). Toilet water is held in a tank and must be pumped out (so I doubt that too). What size pipe is it? How much is released? and from which end of the car?.
Does anyone know how long it takes to go from 7th av. to Bedford Park Boulevard on the D train. What about the D thru express and it the Bedford park station elevated??
Subway maps from the late 60s and early 70s listed running times from midtown Manhattan to either terminal. Of course, train speeds are a bit slower today than back then. I've ridden on D trains on that stretch many times, especially during PM rush hours, but can't say for sure how long that run is now. As a rough guess, I would say 30-35 minutes. If the D is running express in the Bronx, you might save a few minutes, but those trains seem to just plod along the Concourse express track nowadays.
BTW, my first express jaunt up Cenral Park West was on a D train of R-1/9s on Nov. 24, 1967, two days before the Chrystie St. connection opened. A trains of R-10s were fun to ride on that line, too. I always make it a point to ride that stretch at least once whenever I'm in New York. Next time, I'll time it.
The official MTA homepage has schedules for every line. That's how I've been able to determine how many trains are using the bridges and tunnels at peak hour. Economically, the key is to be able to get to any point in the Manhattan Central Business District in less than an hour -- door to door, including the wait for the train and any connections. For the Bronx, Queens, and Upper Manhattan, the key is how long it takes to get to Downtown. For Brooklyn (and Staten Island Ferry Riders), Midtown is further away.
My wife is a bank examiner, and works at banks all over Manhattan. From the vicinity of the Prospect Park 15th Street F train station, it takes her about 55 minutes to get to the Grand Central area, where hundreds of thousands of jobs are concentrated. The West Side is closer, especially with the possibility of a change to the A at Jay. I figure Ditmas is about as far out as you can go and have a reasonable trip to work.
Is that a trick question? Which 7th Avenue? The one in Brooklyn or the one in Manhattan? If you are talking about the one in Manhattan, the running time is 33 minutes to Bedford Park. On the express track, take about 4 - 5 minutes off the running time. The Bedford Park station is underground on the B/D line and elevated on the #4 line.
Can anyone tell me if Philadelphia's transit museum will remain open with normal
hours if SEPTA goes on strike? Thanks.
During Monday and Tuesday's blizzard in Northern Indiana theSouth Shore got wasted.
There are some pics and description of the service outages Up to several
weeks!
For any interested I have a picture of the MCI Express coach transit has recently purchased for Staten Island express service. Just E mail me your request so I can send you one. Does anyone remember the address for the transit workers bulletin board. I cant seem to find it in the archives and lost it in my bookmarks. Thanks.
Please send me a photo,,thank you
Steve Lowenthal
59 New Ludlow Road Suite 8B
Chicopee ,Mass 01020
I was talking to a bus driver of the Green Bus Lines company. He was telling me that the MTA had helped in purchasing their 40 or more new Orion buses late last year. By the way those Orions are a beauty. Reason being was that the company's fleet couldn't handle the addition of new riders ever since the free transfers from bus to subway was introduced. Does anyone know or have any clues on how the MTA will handle the expected increase again in ridership once the monthly passes roll out this summer.
Third Ave El Operations South of 149th St.
Abandoned Stations
For a couple or more years after suspension of service of 3rd Ave
El operations south of 149th St, the structure south of 149th St
to the Harlem river remained and continued to be used in non-
revenue service for turnbacks and afternoon storage.
The El structure south of 143rd St was over PROW and the station
structures at 143rd, 138th and 133rd Sts had some substantial
concrete ground level entry ways.
The structure south of 149th St was demolished some time before
1960 or when the wood el cars were replaced by the subway cars
and the open third rail was replaced by the covered third rail.
However, I would imagine that the ground level entrances to the
PROW stations remained for some time after the El structure was
removed.
I remember from seeing old 1970's Subway Maps that there had been a K rush hour train from Jamaica, coming into Manhattan over the Williamsburg Bridge, then following what is now non-revenue track onto the F line and terminating at 6 Av./57 St. What ever happened to that line? (For awhile in the '80's there briefly was a K train that served as a Manhattan-only 8 Av. Local, middays and weekends. I'm not refering to that K.)
When the subways were first built, the plan was to get people downtown where most of the businesses & offices were. But nowadays, how many people in Jamaica, Middle Village, East New York and Williamsburg have business down along Nassau St.? So why do all J, M & Z trains go downtown after the Williamsburg Bridge? Sure, Wall St. is still important, but those neighborhoods in Brooklyn & Queens served by the J, M & Z are blue collar. I'm sure those riders would mostly like to go uptown, for work, entertainment or school.
When the Queensbridge connection to the Queens Blvd. line is completed, and eventually the Q is back on the Broadway express tracks, there'll also have to be a 6 Av. train feeding into the 63 St. Tunnel to make sure the station at 6 Av./57 St. station is served. Could that be the old K train?
I have an addition to that line if you let me cause I like that idea very much. The addition is contiue past 57 Street on to the N and R line then Terminate at the Canal street that was abondon after the Manhattan Bridge was closed down on that side of the tracks. Hey now I know how they made that movie on the wrong side of the tracks. See ya tell me if it is good.
The 6th Av-63rd St service was originally supposed to be the V, which I think was the replacement for the K, which had been reused for the AA when double letters were eliminated. But now it seems that the V has been merged into the Q, which will stay on 6th Av. If the Q does go back to Broadway, the plans had the V going to 2nd Av. If the Manhattan Bridge is closed, then the V would go out on the Culver to make up for lost capacity on the other lines. So it seems there is no plan to reinstate this service. They feel they tried it, and there wasn't aenough ridership. But perhaps, rush hours wasn't when it was needed the most. I think they shoud run it on evenings and weekends, when everybody is coming from midtown on the F, and hardly anyone foes to Wall St. The M, currently just a shuttle at these times, could replace the J at Chambers.
For the record, the train was known as the KK when it ran from 168 St.-Jamaica, and had its designation changed to K when it was cut back to Eastern Parkway.
The KK made its debut on July 1, 1968, when the 57th St.-6th Ave. station opened. It was a rush hour service which ran skip-stop with the QJ between Eastern Parkway and 168th St. By 1973, it was cut back to Eastern Parkway and became the K, at which time the QJ was permanently cut back to Broad St. and became the J. The K route was discontinued in 1976, either due to lack of ridership or budget cuts. The K designation resurfaced during the mid-80s, when all double letter routes became identified with single letters. In this case, it was a simple renaming of the AA. When the C became a regular, full-time route, the K was dropped.
The Williamsburg Bridge crossing was the BRT's first venture into Manhattan; it was the first leg of a proposed loop line which became the Centre St., later the Nassau, Loop. Interestingly enough, the BRT wanted to build an elevated structure into Manhattan, since they had no subway building experience at the time. But the powers that be said nothing doing; it would have to be a subway. BRT (wooden) el trains began operating over the Williamsburg Bridge into what later became the Essex St. trolley terminal in 1908, and would continue to do so until the Broadway el was upgraded in 1916. It took five years to extend this line to Chambers St. The south side tracks from the Manhattan Bridge were tied into the loop in 1915, and it wasn't until 1931 that the loop was completed between Chambers St. and the Montague St. tunnel.
<the Montague St. tunnel.>>
...and this is why the style of the Fulton St. and Broad St. stations resemble the original IND design. Was the completion of the loop from Chambers St. to the Montague St. tunnel part of the IND plan, or was it done separately?
The Nassau Loop was part of the Dual Contracts; it had nothing to do with the IND. You are correct about the station tiles at Fulton St. and Broad St.: they are IND style (so is 8th Ave. on the Canarsie line), although I understand they are being redone to resemble BMT-style mosaics. The reason it took so long to complete the Nassau loop was that John Hylan, who by the 20s was mayor, was opposed to private subway operation and succeeded in blocking completion of the loop. By the time it opened, Jimmie Walker was in City Hall. Hylan was a BRT motorman who was fired for attempting to run down his supervisor; he bore a grudge against the BRT and private operations for the rest of his life, and pushed for municipal (IND) operation.
Why on earth change the original design? I happen to think that the IND style tiles are attractive. Unless BMT style mosaics are less expensive...
If memory serves me correctly, one reason why the old K was discontinued was because there were many more F trains scheduled than K trains. So people would simply take an M or QJ (if one came first in Brooklyn), and simply go downstairs at Essex/Delancey and probably get to their destination quicker. I agree that 3 services going thru Broad St. may not be needed today in light of the fact that Wall St. has no where near the number of jobs it had 15, 20, or 25 years ago.
During the census every decade the census bureau asks employed "long form" recipients how they got to work in the prior week. The bureau divides the city into 140 or so districts called "minor economic areas," which approximate neighborhood boundaries and have neighborhood names. Recently, I sorted the data to find out which neighborhood has the highest percent of its residents using the subway to travel to work.
The results surprised me. Perhaps they will surprise you. Take a shot if you wish. I'll post a response with the answer later.
I bet it is Harlem or Bedford Park. What is if I am wrong
Jamaica, Queens
I also think that it is coney island cause it has alot people going to Manhattan. Downdown Brooklyn you know what it it (I don't mean it in a bad way)has all the train in a twisted maze of tracks so from there you can get anywhere and any boro in the city.
I'll guess it's Flushing. I'm making this choice because the Main Street terminal of the 7 train is the busiest station outside Manhattan.
I would have guess Manhattan, where the smallest share of the population has cars. But it turns out nearly one-third of those in Manhattan walk to work or work at home. Manhattanites also uses buses and taxis.
Or course, the Manhattan CBD IS the area where the highest share of those working there use the subway.
But the neighborhood with the highest share of its residents using the subway to get to work (1990 census journey to work file) is Park Slope Brooklyn.
This is one of the reasons why there is no F express service between Church Avenue and Bergen Street...
Since most of the people getting on the train in Flushing or Jamaica are from further east, and I think most of these people have cars to use when they're not going to the city, I would guess the upper west side has the most subway riders.
I had a chance to ride the 63rd St. [S] Shuttle today, and since I haven't seen a report on its operation on SubTalk yet, here's a brief summary:
The service is provided by a ten car train of R-32 cars (great for rail fans!). There is an operator at each end, plus a conductor. While the layover which takes place at 57th St./7th Ave. is about ten minutes, the train reverses direction immediately when arriving at Queensbridge. The train is signed for [S] on the Luminator on each end. The three vertical side signs on each car are:
21st Queensbridge
South Terminal
SHUTTLE
[gee! I don't see "South Terminal" mentioned on my new "The Map."]
The service runs from the uptown platform at 7th Ave./57th St. from 1pm to 5am daily, and from the downtown platform from 5am to 1pm daily. I assume that is to facilitate the majority of transfers. Currently, all service is on the single southbound (Manhattan-bound) tracks. Leaving 57th St., the service wrong rails from 57th St. via the G3 track, then switches to the T1 track just prior to Lexington Ave. Approaching Lexington Ave., Roosevelt Island, and Queensbridge, the operator blows warning whistles as the train is coming from the opposite direction from usual traffic. On the return trip, the train is on the "right rail" of course, T1, then switching to G3 just past Lexington Ave. Today, there was significant work activity going on, especially at the Roosevelt Island Station on the now unused northbound (Queensbound) track.
An interesting sight is what I assume to be the beginning of the tunnel to what would be the turnout to the alleged 2nd Ave. subway, just north of Lexington Ave. The entire round-trip takes just 20 minutes.
When I went to look at the shuttle on its second day of operation, the bottom sign read "Shuttle" I told the conductor that there was a yellow-S "63rd Street Shuttle" reading (somewhere near N on the scroll), and he said he'd check it out. When I looked again, it was changed. So now, did they change it back, or something? And I'm wondering if they ever or ever will use R-40's and 68's on the shuttle. It is using Coney Is. based N/Q assigned cars, isn't it?
To Eric B. on equipment assignment on 63rd St.shuttle operation: NYCT uses Coney Island based R32's mostly they are the most dependable equipment around. The problem with the R68 is that the Conductor would constantly be required to change operating positions and the 68's are extremely slow charging trains. As a possible footnote, in an emergency whenever the shuttle equipment "goes bad" they are liable to "steal " anything in order to maintain the service.
And they don't in a 32? Lexington Ave is on the (looking Queens-Bound)left no matter the direction. RI and 21st are on the right on Queensbound-track, and the Left on Manhattan-bound track. Understanding that they are only using the Queens=bound track, conductor on an AM run is on the left at 57st, left at Lex, Right at RI and 21st. PM, he's on the right at 57st. So he's changeing side at least once per trip. At least in a 68, he doesn't have to change cabs.
-Hank
Todd‹
Thanks for the report!
The 63rd Street Shuttle is actually the only thing I did not have a chance to see on my trip to the city yesterday. In the short time I had, I went into Queens to see work on the connection (and it looks real cool!!) and took a ride downtown on the 2, so I got to see all the Lenox work.
One thing that's disappointing on Lenox: at 116th Street and 11oth Street, they have build wooden walls to block off the contruction site. It is all wood. I wish they had put some clear plastic panels so you can watch the work (especially at 110, where the platford is between the two tracks.
Michael
The train must have laid over at 57/7th that long because it was late.
The actual schedule is virtually impossible to maintain. The train runs on a 20 minute headway 24/7. Running time each direction is 8 minutes each way with a 2 minute layover at each terminal. It probably laid over for 10 minutes to "put it back into place"
I thought the same thing. But during the 10-minute period prior to my trip, as well as the 10-minute period after my trip, station platform agents were announcing that the next train would leave "...in 10 minutes," and so I asked and was told they were on 30-minute headways at that time. I realize this is not what the published schedule says, but such was the case yesterday!
30 minute headways? "The Map," as you noted, says 20 minute service, 24 hours a day. There's no reason for 30 minute headways since there's virtually no major construction work going on, at least nothing within view of the one track in service. And there's no other train to cause a conflict, since only one train is operating the entire length of the Queensbridge track and there are no express trains coming into 57 St./7 Av. because all Broadway line service is on the local tracks.
There's an unwritten policy that all stations in the NYC Subway System are served at least every 20 minutes, even overnight and weekends. The operator never has to walk the length of the train, since 2 train operators are on duty PLUS a conductor. So what's the excuse for failure to keep the 20 minute rule?
By the way, after taking the shuttle a few weeks ago, I understand there's a second transfer allowed on MetroCard between 63 St./Lex and 59 St./Lex. I'm not sure if Todd mentioned that in his well-detailed report.
When I rode the [S] a week ago, there WAS some activity going on in the viscinity of the Roosevelt Ave. station. There were a lot of safety-vest clad people on or near the track. So I assume that's why they were running 30-minute headways; thought I could not get anyone to admit to that fact.
You are correct about the additional "MetroCard only" transfer between lines. I suspect we'll be seeing more and more of these as time goes on.
Speaking of MetroCard, someone posed a question here a while back, which I don't think was answered by someone who knows the official answer (as opposed to speculation!). When one buys a new "daily" Metrocard when they become available, will it be a CALENDAR DAY card, or 24-HOUR card? Same with the weekly: will it be a SEVEN CALENDAR DAY or FROM THIS MOMENT to 168 HOURS LATER card?
I'm gonna be in town on March 24th ... Looks like a field trip to this shuttle is in order!
--Mark
I just got a copy of the new map mailed to me from a good friend in the Bronx. WOW, I was not warned of the completely new format of the map. The jury is still out as to whether or not I like the new format. I will say this though, I am glad to see the SIRT on this. Up to now it seemed as though this system was treated as the "step-child" of the system. Your thoughts please.....
I keep forgetting to get the new map when I go into the New York City.
I understand the map gives equal billing to the New York City Subway,
MTA Long Island Railroad, MTA Metro North Railroad and the MTA Staten
Island Rapid Transit.
There is some controversy that creating one map for regional rail and the
city subway would not well serve either. One could make the case that city
dwellers (not meant to be a bad term) are really only interested in the
city subway map, while the suburbanites (or suburb dwellers) would pick up
the appropriate regional rail map at their local railroad station.
A word on the SIRT. It is not the Subway for MetroCard purposes. The
MetroCard does not allow free transfers from subway to subway. Staten
Island dwellers can ride the SIRT on the MetroCard, then ride the Staten
Island ferry for free, then transfer free to the Subway.
Two questions for Staten Island folks: 1. Can you ride a bus, the SIRT
and the subway on one MetroCard fare. 2. Should the "R" subway be
extended accross the Veranzano Narrows Bridge to connect to the SIRT?
You can transfer from a bus, to SIR, then to the city subway or a local bus in Manhattan. You can also transfer to an express bus, if you so choose, but that will cost you an additional $1.50. You dip the card on the bus, and the fare is deducted. Swipe in St. George, a transfer is accepted. There is no swipe at the ferry, it's totally free to everyone, the turnstiles only count passengers, as per USCG Regs. When you get to Manhattan, the card is accepted at all subway stations south of Fulton St, and on the M1, M6, M9, M10, and M15 buses.
Express bus transfers are allowed on SI, with an additional $1.50 charged (so the full $3 x-bus fare has been charged)
SIR is free between Tompkinsville and Tottenville, and trains will soon go to OPTO operation between rush hours.
-Hank
Actually, I must admit, the map does compliment all the different transportation options available to the native New Yorker, BUT, I feel that, althought the regional rail & the SURT are shown well here, it makes the NYC subway look more confusing than it is.
Sorry about that...SIRT...one too many microbrews...."Maryland's Best" beers
> Should the "R" subway be extended accross the Veranzano Narrows Bridge to
> connect to the SIRT?
Yes, it should, and in fact, the lower level of the Verrazano Bridge was supposed to carry subway trains to Staten Island, but Robert Moses would not have trains crossing his bridges.
--Mark
All this talk about the new map and I have no way of seeing it. I would very much appreciate someone out there mailing me a copy of it to:
Ian McCrea
112 Queensdale Avenue
Toronto, ON
M4J 1Y4
If you'd like any transit related information on Toronto's systems, I'd be happy to oblige.
The March edition of "The Map," now just 15 days old, is out of date again!
According to today's New York Times, the LIRR ended service at ten little-used station on Friday. So the following stations are now closed: Penny Bridge, Haberman, Fresh Pond, Glendale, Richmond hill, Holtsville, Center Moriches, Southampton College, Quogue, and Mill Neck. Will there be a NEW The Map???
If there is a new copy of THE MAP to be put out, maybe Queens Village will be put in Queens and not Nassau County this time.
JC
You mean the copy of THE MAP that I picked up yesterday while in the city on business is useless?
Penny wise, pound foolish...
Michael
It's not only the MTA map that's out of date. The LIRR's new Montauk line timetables still list the three closed station on that line (Center Moriches, Quogue and Southampton Campus), though obviously with no trains listed as stopping at them. Apparently it was cheaper to do it this way than to reprint the entire station grid.
That's not all .... don't depend on THE MAP to find certain neighborhoods in New York City anymore ... From NewsChannel 4:
New York, March 17 - The Metropolitan Transportation Authority admits that several New York neighborhoods were left off the 1998 subway map. In Brooklyn, neighborhoods like Crown Heights and Fort Greene are not on this year’s map although both made the cut last year. Queens also lost two neighborhoods and Manhattan lost Little Italy from the map. The MTA said the missing areas were an oversight and they will correct it with a new printing of the subway map.
--Mark
Besides, Richmond Hill, were any of the closed LIRR stations renovated with raised platforms? I seems a waste if they closed a station they just renovated.
Also have they done anything to the stations or have they simply closed them up?
Richmond Hill has had high-level platforms for decades now; I don't know why they were built that way or when. So it's not a matter of closing a recently rebuilt station. The other stations on the Montauk line have existed simply as asphalt patches next to the tracks or a street crossing the train tracks for many decades. The old station buildings were torn down a long time ago.
Richmond Hill was built as a raised platform station when that section was raised to eliminate grade crossings. I believe this occurred in the same era as the Atlantic Ave burial work occurred, which was early thirties. Never having ridden the line, I wonder how far north the raised structure continues. Is Glendale more than a paved waiting area?
Why did MTA order R142 from two different companies? Which companies did MTA order R143(IND/BMT) from?
There are 2 seperate contracts. I believe that Bombardier will build the
R-142As and Kawasaki Heavy Industries will build the R-142s. Of course, it may be the other way around. As for the R-143s, the RFP was extended and closed on March 9th. The initial order will be for 108 cars with an option for 80 - 100 additional cars. To my knowledge, the prime contractor has not been selected (or at least announced)as yet.
Thanks for your response but you did not answer my first question. Perhaps I did not state it clearly. Let me ask that again. Why did MTA seperate the R142 order into two seperate contracts? Would MTA get an even better offer if it orders all of the R142s from one single company?
Because this way youdon't rely on one supplier for every car (see: R44-R46), in case thers a strike, etc. This is actually, I would assume policy since they've done it ever since the days of the private companies- not all the Standards, for example were done by one maufacturer... Competition is a Good Thing!
The same holds true with R-1/9s: most were built by American Car & Foundry; some were built by Pressed Steel; the remainder were built by Pullman.
1225 were built by American Car & Foundry
275 were built by Pullman Standard Car Co.
201 were built by Pressed Steel Car Co.
The original order for the R-142s was supposed to be 600 or so cars, but because of some serious negotiating, the MTA was able to get 1,080 cars for the same price. Perhaps splitting the order across the two companies enabled the savings.
--Mark
One Thousand Subway Cars is a very substantial order, especially when they
all are suppossed to be delivered over a two year period.
Kawasaki Heavy Industries will build 700 cars with an option for 300 more.
Bombardier will build 300 cars with an option for 300 more.
This is the first I have heard of an R143 car -- anybody know any more
details.
Bombardier is famous around here for the MTA Metro North and New Jersey
Transit Commuter Rail Cars.
I am not sure I have seen a Bombardier car in the subway. I will be
interesting to see what they look like.
You probably have already been a passenger on a Bomabardier Subway car. The R-62's on the 1/9 trains are manufactured by Bomb.
-Michael
I don't recall seeing Bombardier on them.....ANF Industrie, I remember, Bombadier, no...course, I could be wrong...I do know the 68s are a Bombardier product.....
-Hank
The R110B is also a Bombardier car.-Nick
To clarify (if I'm not totally confused now):
R-62 are Kawasaki HI
R-62A are Bombardier
R-68 are ANF/Westinghouse Amrail
R-68A are Kawasaki HI
The initial R62s were built by Nissho-Iwai of Japan. The second load, I guess the R62As, came from Bombardier.
I would like to know if anyone has the latest list of NYCT bus roster bus fleet.
Can someone please help me on this.
Has anyone heard on when NYCT plans to open West Side depot & I need a list on what bus routes in Manhattan & the Bronx are going to what depot when West Side depot opens. I need your help on this.
this info has been posted ,,by me,,,in a past thread,,,about 1 month ago
While Mr Lowenthal has given out the info on where all the lines will be going, March 22 is the date slated for Management to move into Westside and then operators and busses March 29. The latest news is that TA wants the 27/50's back and instead of having another general pick in December the 27/50's will go back to 126 St depot and the M57 will go to Westside. Of course I will tell all the details when it all happens.
While the NYCT has managed to keep the paint and pen graffiti under control, we have not been so successful in two other areas. The etching and scratching of glass and the gouging of the stainless steel skin of the cars. Several companies have proposed a method of restoring badly scratched glass. Unfortunately, the glass must be removed to be repaired. At this point, the process is not cost-effective but work is continuing and in the near future,may be an answer.
As for the gouged stainless steel skin on the R-42 through R-68A contracts, there is a very cost-effective process available. The 3M corporation has developed a simple (relatively) for restoring the exterior stainless steel on the cars.
The most effective weapon in fighting graffiti was the TA Police Vandal Squad. They compiled a data-base of tags and taggers and were qickly able to zero in on most serious offenders. With the merger of the TA police into the NYPD, one can only hope that the Transit Bureau maintains and uses this important database.
What about that plan to put Mylar (or a similar substance) over windows?
Is graffitti slowely making a return? A couple weeks ago, I was on an R42 on the J train (car #4818) and the inside had scribbles all over the doors and wall panels. Yesterday, I saw a small amount of scribbles on a wall panal in an R38 on the C train (I forgot the car #). How often are subway cars cleaned and graffitti removed?
It's probably just "wanna-be's" when it comes to spray can graffiti that want to bring it back. But glass scratching as you may already know, is now favorie amongst vandals. The MTA will win the fight again. A company will come up with a solution that the MTA will use to combat the vandals.
On Saturday February 28, 1998, instead of taking the D train home to Bedford Park Blvd, i took the #4 train home to Bedford Park Blvd. When i got to 59th st and Lexington Ave at 7:45 a.m., (I work 12 a.m. to 8am) a rare R-29 Redbird pulled into the station. For once i was able to look out the front window of the first car since the motorperson's cab was not a full width cab. This was great especially when we came out of the tunnel between 149th st and the Grand Concourse and 161 st and River Ave and Yankee Stadium. I thought the R-29 Redbirds were retired since the R-62and R-62a were on the IRT. What IRT lines still use the R-29?
Charlie Muller.
The 5,4,6, and the 2 uses them.
When the R-62/62-A's arrived, the older IRT equipment up to the R-22's were retired. The R-29's were rebuilt in the mid-80's and still operate today. The are 236 (8570-8805). They are currently assigned to the #5 and 6 lines.
IRT cars are so small. Compare to the IND and BMT cars. I have made a car caleed the R-155 model. It will be 2 doors bigger than the orignal R-62A model. So use them in 6 cars for the size of the normal IRT full lenth train. Also these cars can be put into 8 cars and you got the size of the normal IND and BMT train. That will be less money to spend on train cars. Also if they make a new line they can make it the full ten cars which will be the biggest ten car full lengh in the History of the NYCTA.
Christopher Rivera
When IND/BMT cars went from 60 feet to 75 feet, every tunnel had to be inspected to be sure that curving trains didn't crash into the walls (because every curve causes the ends of the cars to stick out since they don't bend). Anyway many sections had to be chiseled and blasted away. I believe the same problem exists with the IRT so they remain at 50 feet rather than chisel away at the edges of the tunnels. Also since they are 15% narrower, it is POSSIBLE that they become unstable if they are much longer than 50 feet, though I am just speculating on this.
Someone once mentioned a way to increase IRT capacity that I hadn't though of before -- why not expand the trains to 12 cars? True, stations would have to be rebuilt, but to make the cars wider entire lines would have to be rebuilt. Rebuilding the east side stations has to be cheaper than a Second Avenue Subway, faster too. Is it possible that just the express stops could be rebuilt, leading to express-only 12 car service?
In that case, why stop at twelve?
My wife suggests running one continuous train, with its doors open, from Brooklyn to the Bronx along the East Side. Just jump on, jump off. She says that at rush hour, it doesn't move much faster than that anyway.
That's a great idea! How would you know what train you were on, though? ...and from where would the motorman control the train?
Nope not OPTO it will be NOPTO!!
A continous loop would be needed for that I think. The other solution would be more shorter trains at closer headways. Could be paid for with all the savings from OPTO
If it were just the lenght of the platform that limited train size, then we'd already have 12-car trains. Path and the LIRR regularly run trains that don't fully platform. One problem with extending the length of trains beyond their current limits is that using current equipment, they would become unreliable in the operation of the MU functions. Additional length and added electrical interlocks all add resistance to the trainline circuits. What starts out as 37.5 volts at one end of a train, can wind up being 30 or less at the other end. In the case of propulsion control, every additional group switch box would require the master controler to carry additional current. Adding 2 cars to a 10-car consist wouls increase the current demands on the master controller by 20%. I would have some doubts about the reliability of the trains control circuits under those conditions.
Many places particularly at terminals, at one end you have the bumper block/ end of structure and the other end you have switches. You also have the problem of the "gap fillers" (moving platforms). The cost to have longer & wider IRT cars would be in the hundreds of billions, not to mention the service closures required to make these modifications.
There several locations on the IRT with extremely sharp curves: South Ferry, the City Hall loop, and the connection from Lexington Ave. to the White Plains Rd. and Dyre Ave. lines which the 5 uses. I doubt if any cars longer than 51 feet could negotiate these curves. As for width, the tunnel of the original Contract One line (north of Times Square on the 1, 2, 3, & 9; the shuttle; and south of Grand Central on the 4, 5, & 6) was built to narrower specifications than later lines, which is why IND/BMT cars, which are 10 feet wide, can't be used on the IRT.
The cars dont have to be wider but longer much longer in the begining. I think that R-155 model that I am designing can take on the turns at South Ferry and the 149 Street Loop and 1 more sharpe curve the before the Lenox terminal. The original IND/BMT cars were based on the design of the IRT cars. If you make them that way one more door bigger they can make on those harsh turns in the subway system and they can be used between all three Transit Systems.
Not True. Big sections of the 4th Avenue subway tunnels had to be blasted away. Making a car longer make the edges stick out more, unless you put the wheels a LOT farther apart. Then you need to make the curves have a much larger radius. Neither can be done easily. I also wonder how people would feel in a car that is 70 feet long and 8 feet wide. It might be a bit weird feeling. Also if the train length is the same, nothing mucb would be gained.
The BMT and IND cars were lengthened when it became a new standard mainly to cut down on maintenance and yard operations (I believe) : A 600 ft train only has eight 75-ft cars, eight sets of motors, 16 pairs of wheels, 7 couplings, etc. while ten 60-ft cars has 10 sets of motors, 20 pairs of wheels, 9 couplings, etc. As far as the number of people it can hold, there is no discernable difference, except for the space provided by 2 fewer couplers and motorman cabs. In fact there is less door space, with only 4x8=32 doors per side versus the old 4x10=40 doors. Also the doorways in NYC are about the widest in the industry from what I have seen.
>Also the doorways in NYC are about the widest in the industry from what I have seen.
Some cars in Tokyo have doorways 6' wide (4 doors in 67 footers) and many trains in the Paris Metro have 5'3" doorways (e.g.: MF77). In the latter case the cars are about the IRT size and have 3 pairs of doors. Also, in Japan, you see 60 or 67-foot cars with 5 or even 6 doors! And in fact the 6 door cars in Tokyo have motorized flip-up seats, so in rush hour, there would be no seats at all! One or two of these cars would be used in a 11 car train on the most crowded part of the train (think southern end of an E train at World Trade).
You can work wonders with models but don't lose sight of the fact that you are talking about a model. How does the car you designed, perform going around IRT style curves? Do the wheels "Hunt"? You didn't specify what scale you are modeling in but assuming you are working in HO (1:87). A 75 foot car would then have to be slightly longer than 10 inches. What about axle loading? If o accurately modeled, your car will weigh about 900 LBS. Therefore, each axle must carry roughly 225 LBS so I hope that you are not using plastic wheels.
The original IRT Hi-Vs and Lo-Vs had end vestibules; the BMT standards did not. The BRT blazed its own trail when it came to designing subway cars. There was a proposed Triborough system before the Dual Contracts which called for larger tunnel dimensions than the original IRT Contract One line to assure compatibility with standard railroad equipment. This is because it was hoped a railroad would assume operation of the new subway lines. Although this never materialized, the larger tunnel dimensions were adopted on Dual Contracts lines, as well as the IND. This is why BMT/IND cars are ten feet wide, while IRT cars are 8 feet, 9 inches wide. Even the upper Lexington Ave. line was built to the larger tunnel specifications, although station platforms were fitted with extension plates. (I'm not sure about the 7th Ave. line.)
The R-1/9s on the IND had, I believe, similar, if not the same, door controls as the IRT Lo-Vs and Hi-Vs, but that's where the similarity ended. The Interborough had nothing to fall back on when the original cars were designed; it was an entirely new concept. Passenger loading was time-consuming because of door placement (initially in the vestibules only), plus the fact that originally they were all manually operated. The R-1/9s were the first true subway cars designed to move masses of people with emphasis on rapid loading and unloading, which is why they had four sets of doors on each side. The BMT standards had three sets of doors
Right, but BMT cars are (12 feet?) wide, and IRT cars are only 10. Additionally, you'll see the post about the R44/46/68 being 75' long. Even THEY had problems. They still can't run on the eastern division of the BMT. Additionally, the width impacts the length. That's why jeeps are so prone to tipping. (height has to do with it too) The longer you make something, the wider it should be for stability. Although this is mostly a function of height.
(higher->wider)
There is extreme difficulty in widening tunnels to accomodate longer cars. The end swing would increase, also. If you're ever at South Ferry, look how close the car corners come to the platform edge. It's the same way in the tunnels, because of the catwalks.
-Hank
I don't think height is that big a problem, given the low center of gravity innate to subway cars. (I think I read somewhere that more than half the weight of a subway car is the trucks)
You are right: more than half the weight of a New York subway car is in the trucks.
Whereever you read that, it is incorrect. An R-68 weighs approximately 93,000 Lbs. However, less than 20,000 Lbs are due to the trucks. The ratio is a bit smaller on IRT equipment where the average weight is about 78,000 Lbs with about 20,000 Lbs for the trucks.
Okay, which one of you Steves is right?
Unfortunately, neither is totally correct. I stand by my original comment that less than 1/2 of the weight of the car is because of the trucks. However, I mis-stated the weight of the standard trucks. The standard IRT (redbird) truck is actually 13 - 14,000 LBs. The standard IND truck is about 16,000 LBS. In any case, this would make the trucks 30 - 40% of the total car weight. Incidently, the heaviest truck used by the NYCT (that I have records for) was the motor truck on the R-9 series which weighed 24,000 Lbs.
Your idea while great has a big problem. When Belmont decided to build the IRT he wanted to make sure no freight trains could run on "his" railroad so he deliberately built the trains smaller and shorter and designed the tunnels so no one could change later. If you were to switch an IND/BMT car to the IRT the car would strike the next platform and crash into the next curve.
When Mayor Hylan(The same Hylan as Hyland Blvd in Staten Island) built the IND he used the size of the BMT . Even the IND/BMT had to modify tunnels and some curves to fit the 75 foot cars such as the curve near the WTC.
When the Astoria line was changed from the IRT to BMT operation, the platofmrs had to be reduced in size so the BMT cars could fit.
Please continue to contribute. I appreciate your contributions and look forward to the day when you grow up and work for transit.
The original IRT subway was NOT built small so that railroad trains could not fit. Belmont built the subway to fit cars that were the same dimensions as the Manhattan Elevated Railway (which the IRT leased for 999 years in 1903) cars - 51 feet long and 8'3" wide.
The proof of this is that the first subway cars, the Composites, were removed from subway service when the first all-steel subway cars (the Hi-V's) were delivered, were moved to the Elevated, and ran there for many years.
Once the tunnels were built to the "smaller" size, all succeeding cars had to fit the same profile, or, as the British say "the loading guage.
The tunnels could of been rebuilt to handle the BMT sized cars, but the IRT was not about to spend the money when what they had worked just fine for them.
It is very well documented that Belmont built his subway narrow purposely to prevent people like Vanderbilt from taking over, and running their trains in the city tunnels, and taking over the system.
-Hank
There are a few sharp curves on the Canarsie subway and Jamaica el which prevent 75-foot cars from operating on these lines, although the 67-foot BMT standards could.
So does that mean that the new R-142's (or 143's...I forget which is for each division) will be able to run on the on the Canarsie line and Jamaica el? Did this have any bearing on the decision to buy 67 foot cars?
The BMT standards were 67 feet long. Their trucks were placed further in from the ends; this probably enabled them to run on the Eastern Division lines. Even so, they ran with their storm doors locked the way R-44s and R-46s do. I may be wrong, but I understand the R-143s will be 60 feet long.
I understood they were to be 67 feet long, and joined in semi-permanent three-car units, which would make a 9 car train 600 feet long -- the same as a ten car train of 60 footers or an eight car train of 75 footers
>When Mayor Hylan(The same Hylan as Hyland Blvd in Staten Island)
It's Hylan Blvd! Don't worry though, even the city can't get it right. I have a photo of a street sign that says 'Hylan' on one side, and 'Hyland' on the other. Advertisers often use 'Highland' or 'High Land'
But the best I ever saw was Home Depot's ads. They put their store (physically) on Forest Ave, between South Ave and the Goethals Bridge approach. Their advertising placed them between South Ave and the Martain Luther King Expressway!
-Hank
Does anyone want to take a guess at what will happen to B,D,Q trains if they shut down the bridge...
I could give you an idea of what would happen: MASSIVE CHAOS AND PANDEMONIUM!
Unless we connect the lines to both the Rutgers and Cranberry St. tunnels, it is going to be interesting to see how people are going to travel between Brooklyn and Manhattan... Since the Rutgers tunnel is underused (F train), and the Cranberry could support 1 more line (maybe the Q), maybe that might work... But that seems to simple to do... I guarantee you that the MTA will find a solution that is so complicated that it ends up not working...
DISASTER! The TA would add F trains and A trains, and encourage people to get out and walk between stations. But this would add only 15 trains, compared wit the 25 lost, and jamming those lines and adding to everyone's trip. It would encourage people to tranfer to the IRT at Flatbush Terminal, but you know how crowded that is. It would probably run one of the Brighton trains through the Montigue Tunnel, and take one of the Pacific Street trains off. Everyone's trip time would go up by 15 minutes at least, and become very uncomfortable. Some would drive, and some would switch to express buses, but (with few expressways and jammed crossings) their travel times would be worse also.
People working in Manhattan, where two thirds of the jobs and most of the income is concentrated. Those who could would move away. Property prices would fall. With less income coming across the East River, fewer local businesses could be supported, and these too would close. Eventually, an equalibrium would return, with Brooklyn far less populated and dynamic than before. Manhattan would be hurt also, with that much less residential capacity in its commuter shed. The TA brass told me, after the meeting last year where I worked, that any such shutdown would cause neighborhood decline long before the service could be replaced.
The only way Brooklyn's ongoing recovery can be assured it to replace the bridge before it fails. The NYC DOT report which said something had to be done soon, and which was reported in the papers, seems not to have existed. I can't get a copy. Some believe the failure will be gradual, and after the bridge tracks are shut down one week a month for repairs a replacement would get underway. I am not assured.
Note that we are spending cazillions to build a third water tunnel in case the first one fails, even though there is no sign that it will fail. We are not building new rail tunnels even though the Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges have failed at times, and one-third of their combined capacity is out. Thank God the Brooklyn Politicians drink water and go to the bathroom, and Brooklyn gets its water from the same place as the rest of the city. Otherwise, we'd be facing the loss of water as well as train service.
So, let's see what has been happening the past 3 months with the MTA:
-- The #2 and #3 trains need (and are receiving) the well-deserved repairs of the Lenox Avenue tunnel... But why did it have to come to this? Could this have been avoided?
-- The #4,5 and 6 are still experiencing severe overcrowding... Now with the #2 running on this line until October (possibly), overcrowding will decrease a little, but look at the delays that have been created. Example: At 5:20pm, I boarded a downtown #2 express at Grand Central... I needed to go to Brooklyn Bridge... Normal time travel: 10 minutes tops... Time travel during this incident: 37 minutes!
-- The #7 has received 2 more trains per hour during rush hour... It has taken them a while to realize that a lot of people depend on this train from ponts beyond Flushing.
-- The B and C have switch terminals north of 145th St. Okay, let me get this straight: rated the worst line in NYC by Newsday and the Daily News, the West End B will have to travel farther during rush hour, thus causing severe delays in Brooklyn (I know... I have waited up to 12 minutes more for B trains). Brilliant!
-- All the bridges are falling down, falling down, falling down;
All the bridges are falling down, MR. GIULIANNI!
The Williamsburg and the Manhattan Bridges have had it... The Williamsburg is being saved (somewhat), and it is needed... Hopefully people could adjust when they shut it down from subway service temporarily so that they can repair the tracks and the bridge... The Manhattan? Well, I don't know... Can anything else be done to the bridge to save it? At this point, we are looking at it re-opening in 2003... Yet, the rumor is that the Broadway connection will not be able to operate for much longer (if it all)... So, what now? Should a new tunnel be built? For the long term: yes! For now, you could create some minor diversions or make some minor connections... For example, the Rutgers St. tunnel (where the F runs) is severely underused... So, let's run the B and D trains there... Have it run along the F, stopping at 2nd Avenue, East Broadway and York Street... Then, after York (around the intersection of Sands and Jay Streets), build a tunnel spur coming off these tracks and connecting it to the Broadway connection to the Bridge... This way, service between DeKalb and Broadway-Lafayette would not be disturbed... Then, when the 63rd St. Connection is complete in Queens, then have the Q run from 71-Continental Ave. to Grand Street... What about express service on the Brighton line, you ask? Well, you could run the M back on that line as the local terminating at Brighton Beach, and run the D express... As for the West End line losing the M, either provide more B service (which they should) or introduce a new train line (call it the W), and have it run local from either Bay Parkway or Coney Island to 57th St./7th Avenue in Manhattan... Then, this means that the Montague St. tunnel would have 4 lines running through it... Don't fret! The W would only run during rush hours (and, since the R and W would run local between Canal St. and 57th St., bring back the N express!)...
I think I've raved enough... I would comment on the fact that there is no subway service to many parts of Queens, no 2nd Avenue subway, no train connection to LGA, no airport connection via rail, and a couple of unused subway shells throughout the city (can you say South 4th Street in Brooklyn? That sucker must be huge!)... But, another time, another dream!
I understand exactly what you are saying and every time I ride the D train, I have always wondered why is it that after the the old Myrtle Ave station there is a tunnel that goes to the southside of the bridge then the train CHANGES TRACKS to the track that goes up on the bridge. Was the first track supposed to go to the F line?? There is the million dollar question
What you see past Myrtle Ave. is this: first, the lead to the south side bridge track which is accessible from both the bypass (inner) and outer tracks from DeKalb. This is the wye switch. From here, the run is all uphill; the two tracks merge just before coming onto the bridge. The tracks to the Montague St. tunnel go their own way just past DeKalb Ave. (Look at the track map of this area on the website.) You could run a connecting spur from these tracks to the IND tracks north of Jay St, or possibly use the leads to the south side tracks for this connection.
I looked at the trackmap as you had said. On the track map it shows the D train shifting to the left. There is a 20-30 foot stretch without a track alongside the track leading to the bridge before the inclined approach to the bridge and after the switch to the southside tracks. If you want you can take a look at it since track maps only show the tracks and not tunnel construction.
Mr. K. is right that "massiv chaos" would result. But to be more specific, here are my guesses/suggestions as to what might happen if this situation arose unexpectedly:
1) M train extended to Coney Island, via West End, all times except nights, replacing B train. Operates express Pacific St. to 36th St.
2) B trains from upper Manhattan and the Bronx terminate at 2nd Ave. station, switching from express to local track, or vice versa, before entering W 4th St. station from either direction.
3) D trains from the Bronx terminate at Grand St. D trains from Coney Island terminate at Atlantic Ave. No Q service. More frequent service on the Franklin Ave. shuttle, with trains 4 cars long.
4) 57th St.-6th Ave. station closed until further notice.
How about running the Q as they did in 1995 - through the Montague St. tunnel, then express between Canal St. and 57th St., continuing onto 21st St?
Steve--
Right now, because of the the work on the 63rd Street tunnel, you can't run the Q to 21st Street. That's what the 63rd Street Shuttle is for.
And back to Dan: there would be no need to close the 57th/6th Station. The Grand Street shuttle would probably run there.
Actually, if you go back to the last Manhattan Bridge shutdown (middays and weekends in 1995), here was the pattern:
B-operated between Pacific Street and Coney Island
D-operated between the Bronx and 34th Street/6th Avenue
Q-replaced the D in Brooklyn to DeKalb, then via Broadway to 21st/Queensbridge (express from Canal to 57/7th)
S-Shuttle running from 21st Street/Queensbridge to Grand Street on Sixth Avenue, making all local stops
I would bet we'd be more likely to see that pattern, although Dan's idea does take into account the fact that the B now runs to Grand Concourse during rush hours.
Michael
The essential issue is that there will not be enough track capacity from Brooklyn to Manhattan. There are currently 25 trains using the bridge and 25 trains using the tunnel, and both are at capacity. So 25 trains would have to terminate in Downtown Brooklyn. It would be an interesting battle to determine which 25 those are, probably similar to the R68 issue. But those who lose through service would not be the only ones to suffer -- they would merely crowd onto the other trains. The result -- DISASTER!
Once again www.newsradio88.com to E-mail questions for the Ask the Mayor and Ask the Governor radio programs. It might be asked why 3 1/2 billion will be spent to improve access for Long Island, and billions in surpluses are squandered on re-election pork, while disater awaits Brooklyn.
I love your plan however, The Franklin Ave Shuttle is only using 2 cars because the MTA allowed the Franklin Ave station to rust down to a 2 Car length as well as the Park Place station. The next time that you are out here you should see what is wrong with that entire line. Instead of repairing it, the MTA should tear it down and rebuild it (It is one of the oldest set of tracks in the system).
The shuttle is being rebuilt to a modern standard. It will have new platforms at Franklni and Park Place and major repair at Botanic Graden including a frwee transfer to the Franklin Ave IRT 2/3/4/5 line. The Shuttle Franklin Station will have elevators and a combined enclosed entrance to A/C and Shuttle.
Sometime late this yeaer the shuttle will close for 18 months for rebuild. Wprk is already underway.
The brooklyn Bridge can be used.
What, will trains use the walkway? (I never knew they had feet.)
They can't. The tracks were removed from the Brooklyn Bridge way back in the 50's, long before either of us were born. The bridge also has a 4-ton weight limit, although I am told that the weight limits are purposely set 2 tons below what they could routinely support to save wear and tear. A fire truck, I am sure, weighs well in excess of 4 tons. Trucks are banned from the bridge, also.
-Hank
PS-FDNY has special units designed to respond on the FDR drive and the Brooklyn Bridge.....
So...My Manhattan bound F Train arrives at Roosevelt. We're told that due to
delays on the local R service, we would be making local stops to Queens Plaza.
No problem. Except, why are we rerouted over the G line once we get to
Queens Plaza? There were NO problems on the E or F into Lexington. Why dump the entire train?
Anybody hear any more information on why there closing these stations? (Richmond Hill, Fresh Pond,Haberman,Penny Bridge and Glendale).Seems like a lot of stations to me.
There are five others as well (Mill Neck, Quogue, Medford, Southampton College and one other which I forget at the moment). The NY Times had a big article on this yesterday, and we ran the story on WCBS radio this morning. According to the story, these stations have extremely low ridership (a few to a handful of people a day). The new LIRR diesel-drawn equipment (double deckers) to arrive this year will not have "traps" and steps to accomodate low-level platforms. They will require high-level platforms to be in accord with Federal ADA requirements. It is reported that the cost to make these stations high-level platforms is very large for the small population served.
The new schedules went into effect today. If you ride one of the trains from Jamaica to LIC you will see that the referenced Queens stations are practically invsible! It IS a nice ride however... and very unusual -- the portion through Forest Park would make you think you are in the countryside!
Todd has it exactly correct, as does WCBS all the time (do I get brownie points for this?).
According to the NYTimes, the Queens stations had between 1 and 5 people a day. The reporter interviewed all the people who use one of the stations, all 2 of them + a 3rd who goes outbound to Islanders Games and then goes home some other way. Each station renovation would cost between 250 thousand and 2 million dollars. Closing them seems reasonable to me.
The 5 Suffolk County stations have about 20 riders (or fewer) per day. They are all within a mile or two of other much more popular stations. And it is only one westbound train and 2 eastbound trains this is happening to. And the trains do not even go into Manhattan, just to a connection to the #7 line.
Just one correction. Medford station was not closed, although it had been on the original hit list. A high-level platform is nearing completion. You might have been thinking of Holtsville, the station to the west of Medford on the Greenport line, which has been closed. Bellport got a reprieve along with Medford.
Center Moriches was the other closed station in Suffolk County.
Question:
Everyone who rides the LIRR knows that points east of Huntington, Ronkonkoma, and Babylon do not have electric 3rd rails, as well as the Oyster Bay Branch (except for East Williston)... Wouldn't it make sense to electrify these lines so that faster (and more direct) service can be made available? How about a super-express from Penn Station out to Montauk, making stops at Jamaica, Babylon, and a couple of stops on the Montauk Branch? That way, you don't have to get up off the train at Jamaica, Mineola, Babylon and Ronkonkoma to switch trains... Now, with these station closures, wouldn't service be quicker?
Just a thought...
There's been talk of expanding electrification, especially on the Pt. Jefferson line past Huntington. But as far as I know these plans are dead. I actually don't see the need for electrification - the change at Jamaica is quick and easy, a real no-brainer. And the new diesel coaches will be a huge improvement over the current ones.
I had to take a train out to Port Jeff a few weeks ago. The switch at Huntington wasn't bad at all, off the electric train, two minutes later, in came a diesel, and I was on my way.
But that's the whole point: why should you have to get up? Say you are tired from working a long day... You work at 43rd and 5th in the city... You live out in Glen Cove... It's a nice day, and you would like a seat going home, so you take a walk to Penn (maybe down the road, if they make the new connection, you could go to GC)... But, before you move, you realize that the train out of Penn doesn't go on the Oyster Bay branch... You have to change at Mineola... BUT, if you really wanted a seat, you could hop on the #7, spend a extra $1.50, get off at Vernon-Jackson, walk to LIC and catch the train there...
The point of this story is why should you have to go through this? Why use diesels... It's great that they have a new fleet, but isn't electricity better?
[But that's the whole point: why should you have to get up? Say you are tired from working a long day... You work at
43rd and 5th in the city... You live out in Glen Cove... It's a nice day, and you would like a seat going home, so you take
a walk to Penn (maybe down the road, if they make the new connection, you could go to GC)... But, before you move,
you realize that the train out of Penn doesn't go on the Oyster Bay branch... You have to change at Mineola... BUT, if
you really wanted a seat, you could hop on the #7, spend a extra $1.50, get off at Vernon-Jackson, walk to LIC and
catch the train there... ]
It isn't necessary to do any of this now, even with diesels in use. As far as I know none of the diesel lines are so crowded that the trains are standing room only. The truly crowded trains are those to Ronkonkoma, Huntington, Babylon and (I think) Pt. Washington, electric lines all.
I believe I'm correct when I say that electrification of the entire Oyster Bay Branch was started back in the Sixties. They had only gotten as far as East Williston when residents along the rest of the line decided that electrification, and the resulting loss of the delightful old diesels, would destroy the quaint atmosphere of their little towns.
Mike
Exactly right. I grew up a few blocks from the Albertson station. I remember the debate well.
They still run one electric train inbound from East Williston at 7:28am
(it deadheads to EW). There is no corresponding PM service. This is to keep the third-rail happy.
>It is reported that the cost to make these stations high-level platforms is very large for the small population served.
How would anyone expect more ridership if trains run only twice a day?
If people are complaing about the LIRR main line or Queens Blvd Line, the MTA should think about the use of the line. If the original plan to use the 63rd St. connection and GCT for LIRR is impossible (although the idea is being revived recently), why not make a Y-connection from the Penny Bridge line to Hunterspoint Ave.(underused, of course) , so it can have direct transfer to the 7? Electrification would be needed but the cost should still be cheaper than building the tunnel connection.
BTW, I believe the 63rd St. tunnel was built w/ 2 levels so it can acommodate the LIRR. They sould make the connection to the Queens Blvd line the same way, so one day when they finally realize that a connection is needed, they only have to dig a short portion of tunnel to get to the Sunnyside yards section.
>BTW, I believe the 63rd St. tunnel was built w/ 2 levels so it can acommodate >the LIRR. They sould make the connection to the Queens Blvd line the same >way, so one day when they finally realize that a connection is needed, they only >have to dig a short portion of tunnel to get to the Sunnyside yards section.
The LIRR portion of the tunnel has been expanded as well. When it comes time to link it to the Sunnyside yard, only a short connection under Northern Blvd will be needed.
JC
Any proposals of linking that tunnel to the Penny Bridge line? Even without turning it to a subway line, there is great benefit to the LIRR users. Especially if the residents of the area don't want a subway line (read the other thread below)
The 5 now closed stations are part of the Montauk Branch. It is a fact that a number (20+) years ago, it was proposed that this branch be electrified since it is and still is vastly underused. The community outcries (NIMBY) of Middle Village & Glendale killed that proposal. Also, it would be great to electrify the diesel branches, especially Huntington to Port Jeff & east of Babylon to Patchogue or Speonk, but the cost is prohibative. That is why MTA LIRR has invested millions in new diesel equipment. A more pressing need is grade crossing elimination, particularly east to Mineola, but again the cost and service interruptions would be horrendous, coupled to the fact where do you put a temporary right-of-way. Just to eliminate the Herricks Road grade crossing must be costing them hundreds of millions.
Actually, the terminal to the Penny Bridge line (Long Island City) is only 3-4 blocks from the 7 (I think the station is Jackson Avenue. It would be easily visible if the neighborhood was a little less hilly.
I can't imagine electrifying the line from LIC to Jamaica. So few people use it now (3 trains a day for a 2 track line, not including freight!), would it justify the cost just so people have to get off the trains in Queens to switch to an already crowded #7?
You may recall that one of the proposals for the 63rd Street tunnel was a connection to this line, which would be come an express subway to Midtown through underserved Southwest Queens, to Jamaica, and onto one of the two LIRR services in Southeast Queens.
But Southwest Queens fought the subway. They saw it not as a way for them to access the job market in Manhattan, but for the "criminals" in Jamaica and Southeast Queens (which were already becoming minority communities) to discover their neighborhoods.
I'm told that Gerardine Ferraro got her start marching the length of the Rockaway branch leading a protest against the subway. If that is true, I hope someone will dig up the old news item (must have been late 60s/early 70s) and point it out during the primary.
Does anyone have any info on transit-related chatrooms on the net?
I may be able to set up an interest group on Planetall/Geocities.
Then we can access one of the geocities chat fooms.
That'll work That way we can have a live room to share intel and facts and even get new buffs involved.
Ok, become a member at
http://members.planetall.com
then search for NYC Transit
Here's a different approach---if it'll work---Have you all heard of ICQ---it's essentially a virtual chat room--Maybe that would work
I remeber as a student going to Aviation High during the late 80's using a Metrocard at the Rawson Street Station. The Metrocard back then was used exclusively by us students. I believe the actual time of usage may have been from Sept. 1989 to 1990 or maybe a year earlier. The students in my school instead of using paper passes used these plastic Metrocards. What was nice about them was that each month we were issued a different one with a diffwerent color. The face of the card had a line drawing of a subwas car and the month and year was printed in black. I think we were one of the few schools to experiment with this now common way of fare paying. Does anyone remember being one of the select few to use these Metrocards back then or maybe have known/seen someone using these. For about a few years after I graduated I held onto these cards but unfortunately they may have been thrown out by now. To refresh anyone's memory only a few stations -very few- had the turnstiles to accept them and the cards were brightly colored each month.
Hi Everyone:
Remember the story of the token clerk I posted? She refused to help customers, let two fare beaters jump the turnstiles, refused to give out transfer tickets and either didn't give people alternative routes to get home or bad information? (The L train was down). She also called the cops and told them I had threatened to blow up her booth (that's funny because not only would I never say anything like that, I haven't practiced chemistry since I graduated undergrad school in '83). Well, I talked to the station manager, finally. I had tried to get in touch with Mr. Michael White for two weeks, and he finally called me back last week. When I talked to him Sunday, he was not at the number he gave me, so I had to call around until I finally got him. The results were as follows:
1) I pleaded not guilty (that's a given).
2) Mr. White played as dumb as can be. Instead of disciplining the clerk (who should be fired), he said it was a criminal matter now for the courts to handle (what a bunch of B.S.)
3) I have the number of the lawyer the case was handed to, but I'll probably never reach her.
What a waste of time to have a station manager. He did nothing even though there is a definite wrong here. An employee was not only out of line, but lied, and refused to do her job. In most businesses, it would result in instant termination. Welcome to the MTA, where justice does not prevail.
While I am a station agent, and do not know the other side of the story I have some comments.
first- We *are* instructed to call the police if someone "loiters" around the booth or creates a "commotion". We are trained to be aware of surroundings. We are trained that such a "commotion" could be a diversion to a robbery of the booth funds or other action against the station agent.
Second- The transfers: We are instructed to call our supervisor before issuing the tickets you mentioned. If the supervisor sdaid "no" then the agent has to obey or be written up for insubordination and disobeying orders.
Third- it is possible that this person did not know about a disruption in service. We do have several means of finding out about diversions includign scanners to monitor the train dispatcher. It is possible that the scanner may have been out of order.
Fourth- while you may not have meant it we are instructed to take such statements seriously(like you dont yell fire in crowded theater).
Fifth- Anytime there is such a dispute the supervisor asks the agent to explain their side of the event. While I do not know of the fate of the employee, I do know that management investigates every concern by our customers.
*****While this is my own personal opinion and not those of MTA or NYCT, I regret any trouble you may have had with the Transit System.******
Please continue to work with the Supervisor. Dont let a bad experience ruin transit for you.
Dear Sir:
Let me state the following for the record:
1) At the First Avenue Station, I stayed next to the turnstiles. I did not move.
2) I made no threats. I simply said "as a union person, she doesn't have to help you". I did not make any motion whatsoever towards the booth, nor shout, nor cause a commotion.
3) I caused no commotion. There were many more people upset. As I remember it, one passenger gave her the finger.
4) She was on the phone well before she wrote on the whiteboard that there was a disruption in service. After she got off the phone, she did nothing for 15 minutes.
5) If the police were called, it should have been for the fare jumpers, not me.
6) The token clerk well knew that there was a disruption in service
7) She had no knoweldge of the surrounding transit system. That qualifies as an incompetancy.
8) No one, much less an employee of the transit union, has the right to slander and/or libel someone. That's exactly the case here.
9) The transit worker should be removed from her job immediately, pending an investigation.
10) By strict job descritions, the employee did not do here job. That should result in immeditae termination.
I'll tell you this. If my case is not dropped I will sue the TA.
> I'll tell you this. If my case is not dropped I will sue the TA.
On what theory, if I may ask?
--mhg
Sir:
A person makes a false claim against someone and it goes on that person's record. This is called slander and no one, much less a token clerk, who is incompetant at her job has this right.
>I'll tell you this. If my case is not dropped I will sue the TA.
>A person makes a false claim against someone and it goes on that person's >record. This is called slander and no one, much less
>a token clerk, who is incompetant at her job has this right.
If you actually intended to sue the transit clerk, rather than the TA, then that makes much better sense. You have a chance of winning against the clerk. Too bad she doesn't have enough money to make it worthwhile.
Incidently, since truth is a defense to a claim of slander, you may wish to concentrate your efforts on being acquited of the criminal charge. If you don't beat the ticket, you can't win against the token clerk. Perhaps you should say "If I can beat the ticket, I will sue the TA." That way, it's less of a weak threat and more of a statement of principals.
--mhg
Because of the way the Justice system works (In the U.S.) I think that L-Man could easily sue the TA. Basically he would sue the Station Agent and also name NYCT in the lawsuit since it (NYCT) employs her. It's similar to the way people involved in a auto accident will seek money by suing the insured driver and naming his/her insurance company. The person (or his/her lawyer) know fully well that the person has little or no money, but that's how they get to the party that does have the money. Many times a case like this would be settled out of court. I'm not taking sides here, but this scenario is quite possible.
> Because of the way the Justice system works (In the U.S.) I think that L-Man > could easily sue the TA. Basically he would sue the Station Agent and also > name NYCT in the lawsuit since it (NYCT) employs her.
Actually, I don't think that he can. Not for slander, anyway. But before I go into that I am curious to see what other people think.
I do want to make one point though. _Anyone_ can be named in a lawsuit. Anyone. All it takes is a pencil and a piece of paper. But, I'm getting at the idea that there is no real claim that can be raised against the TA on the facts presented by L-Man, and that he'd not accomplish his goal vis a vis the criminal charges by doing so. The question of whether he can spell "NYCTA" in the caption box and bring that piece of paper into a courthouse is not the point (and I assume that he can).
I'm interested in what people have to say.
--mhg
you forget about the police officer who issued the summons.he must have witnessed some crime.or he wouldn't have issued a DAT.yes a polce officer would take the word of a station agent over a customer.but,still the point is the police officer must have witness something.this guys beef is with the cop,for false arrest.
I agree, I just can't see a police officer making a arrest just because the booth agent say he made a bomb threat or whatever L man did. There had the be a reason why the officer went through the arrest process, and we probably won't find out. I think this entire situation has been blown out of proportion and whatever L man did he deserved it. Either for that moment or for another time he acted crudely, demanding "his rights". If you feel a transit employee is doing you wrong, put in a complaint. Yelling and screaming wont work but will only make you look uncredible and your complaint moot. Now a days NYCT is very much in the customer service business. Every complaint is investigated and put on the employees record. Something may not happen the first or second time, but eventually it will happen. As a transit employee myself,I run into L mans all of the time. I found the only things that work are ignoring them for as long as possible, speaking to them like children and then referring them to the people who can help them with whatever crisis is about to end their world. Generally what happens after that is that L mans go home and turn on the TV and forget what the crisis was or go harass someone else like a supermarket clerk or their doormen.
It looks as we're beginning to speculate about the facts in this case, which is not right. The only people who know exactly what happened is L-Man, The station agent and witnesses, if any. The police officer could only show up and listen to both stories in which he/she may or may not get the correct version of what really happened. In the perfect world L-Man would have been deserving of the DAT he received. But as we all know it's not a perfect world and police officers do not always do the right thing so it's quite possible that L-Man was wrong as well as the agent and police officer. As I stated before, I'm not taking sides here because I don't know what actually happended. All I'm saying is that it's juries that give awards in lawsuits and litigation is quite expensive, plus many companies/agencies would rather settle the case. If L-Man did make threats then, yes, he should given the DAT and/or arrested, but again only he and the agent know if that's what really happened. If the clerk did what L-Man said, then she should be disciplined - and If this happended and L-Man did not make any of the threats/actions that the agent claimed. In other words if he truly thinks she made a false report against him which resulted in the DAT, then if I were him I would demand that this case: not be simply be dropped becasue it still show as a case against him that's been dropped, but I would want it to be expunged from his record. If this was not done then, I would go full speed ahead with the lawsuit. I'm not saying he should seek money, but to have criminal charges against you are serious and if you know you that the charges are false then I can't imagine not fighting to clear your name. That's my feelings. I hope I didn't offend anyone.
hi everybody.
I agree with you. I'd be the first one to say that if I did make those threats and say what the token clerk said I did, then I deserve the punishment.
However, I did not. The cops who showed up were not even interested in what I had to say. At that point, I stood on the side and kept my mouth shut. I was ejected from the station and left it at that.
However, this clerk, who not only did this to me but would not help other patrons (and refused to do it) should be fired. In any other business, she'd be gone, and that's exactly what should happen here. Someone this misdirected should not be working for the MTA. If a real emergency happened on the Canarsie line, how would she handle it? I doubt in a smart, safe way.
Do us straphangers a favor and eject her from the system.
you know what will be funny.when after you go to court,you'll get community service and have to clean her station.
Take the case to court. If the Judge lets you off it's over. The agent has the responsibilty to protect the users of the system and also needs to feel safe. Agents are often at high risk in their jobs. They need to call for assistance. The police are the ones that issued the ticket not the agent. Apparently they felt that there was sufficient reason to issue it.
The agent was trying to represent the most good. She was likely unaware of your good intentions and was defensive. In her case a defensive posture can be the difference between life and death. Go to court and let it be. There will be another day.
Can anyone point to a reliable statement from a reliable source that the Manhattan Bridge is likely to be permenantly closed to subway traffic? There have been a lot of posts that assume that the Bridge is somehow beyond repair and that subway service will be terminated sooner or later. But is there a source for this idea, other than the obvious fact that the bridge is not in good shape, or is it just wistful(?) thinking. I have found nothing.
--mhg
In 1986, a consultant hired by the city found the bridge was unlikely to be viable in the long term. Unwilling to take on the political controversy, Mayor Koch hired another consultant who said the bridge could be fixed in two years for $100 million. That plan went forward.
Half the tracks on the bridge have been out of action ever since. The repair has taken ten years and $500 million. There are plans to spend hundreds of millions more. There are no plans to fix the southerly tracks before 2005, and maybe not ever. Since this has constrained service, the bridge has already failed.
The MTA conducted an East Side Alternatives study which found that a) the bridge was owned by the city and b) they should just fix it, and it should be good for 50 years. The study came out a year or two ago.
Then last fall NYC DOT, which runs the bridge and is responsible for the repairs, issued a report which said the bridge is unlikely to be viable for trains in the long run due to "tortion" and rust, and that an alternative should be under construction by the turn of the century. It said that as soon as it finishes rebuilding the bridge, it will have to start all over again due to ongoing deterioration. The report said the Williamsburg should be OK. The report was cited in all local newspapers and on Newsradio88, but I have never been able to get a copy of it. C Lynn, the Commissioner of DOT, then changed jobs (hopefully for unrelated reasons).
The President of the TA and his planning director gave a presentation at my agency, and said they consider the Manahattan Bridge a potential disaster, but also said that as far as they knew the city could "just fix it," the finding of the MTA study (which to me sounds like Koch's two year $100 million study). They pointed to the quick fix on the Thruway overpass in Yonkers. Maybe my agency should do a study to show how important it is, they said.
Studies by may agency gather dust. You can see the dust falling as the pages leave the laser printer. Nonetheless, I suggested (to those who do such things) that a study be done. NYMTC has given the city agency authority to do a new East Side Access study, spending federal planning money to do it. The MTA is in NYMTC, and could have said the study isn't needed because they just completed their own, but didn't.
I'm not an engineer, but the history isn't good. The bridge may not be falling down, but it is degrading, has diminished capacity, and is vurnerable to ongoing service disruptions.
You may not be an engineer, but you use engineering thinking well enough to pass. Saying the Manhattan Bridge is falling down is just headline grabbing. It will not be allowed to fall down, because Bureaucrats are in charge, and though they are hard to get moving for fear of attracting attention, they know the amount of attention a collapse will attract, and can roughly calculate how many of their heads would roll. HOW they prevent it from falling is the problem. Closing it to rail transit traffic is a good engineering fix. Sociologically, it is a disaster, but sociologic failures are not headline material, or at least not an imprisonable offense. So that is what NY stands to get, and the net effect will be similar enough to it falling down to fool most subway patrons in Brooklyn.
Thanks for the replies. What I am still looking for is evidence of an affirmative statement, made publically by someone whose authority to make the statement is acceptable, that the bridge must be permenantly closed to subway traffic because of its condition.
I recognize that the bridge is in lousy shape, and I am aware of the political maneuvering that has been going on for the last 25 years. I even accept that one day the bridge may be closed, but that in the meantime people are screwing around with a possibly insoluble problem. But, so far, as near as I can tell, no one in authority has seriously suggested closure publically.
What I find really amusing about this is that so many people have assumed the the bridge _must_ be closed for structural reasons, and written at great lengths about alternatives when closure happens. But, it appears, no one with the remotest authority to authorize closure has ever made such a prediction, or suggested that it is inevitable. I've searched the newspapers for that and haven't found it. I've posted here and elsewhere, and no one even says "I seem to remember that someone once said . . ." And that's fine. I'm not disputing anyone else's opinion. My only purpose was to see whether I had missed something in the news about the Bridge having to be closed. My conclusion is that I didn't. I'd love to be proven wrong, though . . .
--mhg
I don't think you will find the clear statement you want from a person in authority. That is the point I was trying to make about bureaucrats.(I have been an engineer for 34 years, and a bureaucrat for 32. I seldom get to practice engineering, but get lessons on how to be a bureaucrat every day, whether I want them or not). Bureaucrats learn quickly that sticking to telling the whole truth is not appreciated by their superiors. Those who get ahead in the organization have learned this lesson well. If they are really skillful, they can say something acceptable, and still avoid lying. The wanabes just lie! There is nothing to be gained by going on the record that the Manhattan Bridge is in danger of falling down, especially since the chance of being proven right is miniscule, and the heat that would come down on the individual who opened his mouth would be swift and painfull. It is not going to happenin this life!
That's right, we bureaucrats tell the truth and nothing but the truth. The whole truth? What's the sense of telling the truth that the bridge must be replaced if the problem is unlikely to occur for a decade, and if money is already committed to improvements for Long Island, Westchester and Queens?
Imagine if the Governor or Mayor, neither of whom are likely to even know that the subway goes over the bridge -- unless they happened to notice a train while driving over it -- heard a lot of people complaining about the loss of the southside tracks, and the threatened loss of the northside tracks? Imagine if they said "let's fix it." Once the people in charge decided to pay for a solution, a problem would magically appear.
Notice how the coal burning furnaces in the city's schools were not a problem until the Environmental Bond Act was on the ballot. Without money, real problems are not problems unless they are immediate problems affecting influential constituents. With money, non-problems (ie. the possible failure of the first water tunnel) are problems.
Hmmmm ... what if the Manhattan Bridge was closed to all auto and truck traffic, allowing ONLY subway trains to cross it. For the moment, let's assume that the auto and truck interests think this is a good idea - I'm looking for strictly an engineering type of answer on this one. Would the bridge be able to handle this load for the foreseeable future? If not in its current state, then what if the tracks were moved to the lower center roadway to cut down on the "tortion" and the bridge STILL remained closed to all auto traffic?
--Mark
What all this bruhaha about the Manhattan Bridge-the third ugliest in NYC?
From what I've seen of the bridge's underside in Manhattan, that would appear to be a great deal of work. There are heavier beams supporting the tracks than the lower roadway, so for this to work, they're going to have to put a lot of steel under the roadway.
Would anybody who is a regular (or semi-regular) be interested in getting together sometime like maybe Easter week?? Maybe meeting at Nathans, a quick ride around, etc,etc- It would be interesting to meet some of the faces behind the "names"-Either rsvp in the index or mail me or something!!!
I might be interested, though with two young children any and all appointments are subject to change.
Does anyone have info on the Rockaway Shuttle( car type etc.)
The Rockaway Shuttle is usually composed of R-44 units. Last August, I remember seeing some R-32 and R-38s, too, but I haven't seen that since. Usually, it's a 4 car train; during the summer, it increases to an 8 car train.
--Mark
The train is also OPTO, meaning no conductor
As of 4 weeks ago when I rode it it was 4 R44's OPTO but with a cop because it was 2pm and school was out >G<. I do not know if the Officer is a permant weekday addition for that job or not.
There was mention of R32-38s. Are there any of them that are converted to OPTO? Or maybe in the Summer time, when the trains are 8 cars, OPTO is lifted? The last time I rode as far as Rockaway Park, the H Shuttle was still in operation. Maybe I should go out and chack it out.
Nope 32's-38's have "Coffin" style or "Closets" for the train operator with no cross train ability without changing cars. I don't think that is a problem with OPTO on the shuttle except for the terminals but I don't know if the agreement with the Union and the TA requires OPTO to be on trains with full width cabas.
Will let you know about summer time >G< I hope sooner than later...
When I went on the Nostalgia Train back in August (or Sept), (you were there Mark, Weren't you??) it was running with 8-car sets of R44s.....
-Hank
Yes, I was there (August 24th); we had a 90 minute layover at Rockaway Park, and during that time, I videotaped various Rockaway Shuttles consisting of R-44s and R-32s on that day.
Anyone going on the Nostalgia Train on 4/26/98?
--Mark
The other day I was riding the N train. It was one of the few N trains left made out of R-32 units. Anyway, on the scroller that says what line the train is there was one spot that said:
W(diamond) Astoria
Does anyone know what this train is or was or anyhing else about it?
The "W" Train is most likeley the Express of the "X" Train I saw last week while poking around in the Bergan Street Express Station below the "F" Line. I believe that in the late 60s/Early 70s there was a local version called the
"WW" But it was discontinued because riders confused it with the "UU" Local train in Brooklyn which riders often refered to as the "Double-U".
I could be wrong.
WHAT?!?!? I have NEVER heard of ANY train called the 'UU', or before the opening of the 63st tunnel, a 'W' or 'WW'.....
Where are you making this stuff up from?
-Hank
Before the Z line came into being, the highest letter designation ever used was the T on the pre-Chrystie St. West End Express route and its local counterpart, the TT.
U, V, W, X, and Y have not been used to designate subway routes (if you don't include the short-lived NX which ran in 1967-68), although there is a V route planned to be introduced when the Queens connector opens.
I Beg to differ. When I was a kid riding along 6th avenue I can vividly remember seeing a train at 47/50th with a "D" that was as high as a man!
Those days are long gone though, new cars and electronic signage have replaces the high letters of old. In any event you will surely agree that the "W" is the widest letter ever used by the TA as the M is depicted with the sides straight up and down while the sides of the W are angled outward.
Chris, I beleive that when Steve said that 'T' was the highest letter, he wasn't reffering to the actual height of the letter T, but rather it's position in the English alphabet, if A is the lowest, and Z is the highest.
But those large signs on the R40s and R42s were pretty hip.
> Chris, I beleive that when Steve said that 'T' was the highest letter,
> he wasn't reffering to the actual height of the letter T
Where's your sense of humor, man? :-)
-Dave
Wow! Talk about the stuff legends are made of ... I could see this being posted here again in 20 years as fact :)
--Mark
All of you don't get it, NYCT plans to use the "W" train as a local train between Ditmars Blvd & Whitehall St in rush hour use & the "N" train returned to the Manhattan Bridge & express along Broadway in Manhattan. All of this is under consideration after the completion of the Manhattan Bridge is finished.
Optimistic!
This is extremely exciting! Will the W only run during rush hours? And during the times the W will be running will the N only be in Manhattan? And if the W is a local train, why was the sign with a W that was seen on the train a diamond?
The diamond marker denotes rush hour service only. If the W winds up running local between Ditmars Blvd. and Whitehall St. during rush hours, that would be a logical explanation.
The reason that the W that you saw was in a diamond is because it was a rush hour train. Diamonds just signify rush hour train and not express / local status.
Then for consistency's sake, NYCT should make a <9> and in place of the (9) and (Z) now used since they are rush-hour only services!!
Guess the same could be said for the
As I had said in another branch of this thread, the W on the newer signs is basically the old rush hour special that ran local to Whitehall, while the main N service was express and via bridge. It was originally conceived to denote this service which would e resumed upon the complete reopening of the bridge. Since it looks like that might not happen for awhile, the TA, instead of waiting for the Bway side to reopen to restore N service over the bridge, may just go on and send the N up the 6th Av. side. The W then would probably be full time, even though it is a diamond (just like the diamond was used on the R-68's even after it was evtended to middays. The other idea, is they might just switch the N and Q.
The question then is, where would the weekend Q go?
Good question. I only see that happening if weekend Brighton express service were to be implemented, which I doubt. The only weekend express service in Brooklyn right now is the 4 to Utica Ave. Running the Q to Astoria would be nothing new; Brighton service used to go there.
That's what I was saying, but had to get offline. You would wind up with two services to 63rd St (B and N, unless they sent one of them uptown, but that probably wouldn't be needed), and perhaps the Q would terminate at Whitehall
It would be nice to have express service on more of the Brooklyn lines, though.
I believe the "W" is being reserved for when the 63rd Street connection is completed.
Service will be down Broadway, and may go Astoria - Whitehall or through the Tunnel to Coney Island over the Brighton line.
I'm not really sure.
Actually, if you check out the other sections of this website, there is an area that gives you a completely run down of all the subway lines that ever existed... I believe that the W was a Sea Beach express line operating from Coney Island to Astoria...
The letter was designed to replace the diamond local from Astoria to Whitehall. It was to be used when the Bway side of the bridge reopened and the N went express. Another plan has it running if the Rutgers st connection is opened, the Q is shifted that way, and the N is removed from Bway altogether and replaces the Q on the 6th Av. side and runs to 168th St.
Before the Rockaway line was part of the NYC subway, it had been part of the LIRR. The line, when connected with the curent Far Rockaway line, made a sort of "loop" . I was looking at a LIRR map and noticed that the Hempstead and West Hempstead stations seem to be a near miss, just like the Far Rockaway station and the NYC subway.. Were these lines ever connected, as a "loop" line? How was service ran on the Rockaway line before part of it was sold to the subway?
JC
Excellent detective work! I believe you are correct. I grew up near the junction of the Oyster Bay and Main lines, and recall there being a single track, southerly turn-out just east of the Mineola station on the eastbound side. This was back in the late 60's or early 70's... and I asked my father about it then (who commuted from Brooklyn to Hofstra via LIRR in the 40's!) He told me that it was indeed once part of a freight "loop" that connected West Hempstead, Hempstead, and the Main line. If you look at the Hagstrom's Atlas of the area, you can almost make out the right-of-way through the street layout, though some streets have "overgrown" the old right-of-way. The turn-out disappeared sometime in the 70's.
I think that the track may not quite have connected the Hempstead station with West Hempstead. Instead, I think the line broke off from the Hempstead branch somewhere between Country Life Press and Hempstead.
You can still clearly see the right of way extending from the West Hempstead station. I don't have a map of the area, but if I recall the last time I saw one correctly, you can make nearly a straight line between West Hempstead and Country Life Press with only major roads crossing.
I have an old LIRR passenger System map on my wall, and according to it, the West Hempstead/Hempstead line ran around in a circle...What is now the Hempstead line cut off at Garden City, (a line ran from here to Meadow Brook) and connected to the current W. Hempstead line at Country Life Press. The Hemp. line continued to Hempstead, also. The W. Hempstead line also ran to Meadow Brook. Also, there was a connection from Mineola to Meadow Brook.
Also on the map: Lines to Ozone Park and Creedmoor (which connects west to Floral Park)
Map is 'corrected to 1960', I'll try to scan it later today...
-Hank
In the book, "Change at Ozone Park," by Herbert George, there is a 1942 route map of the western portion of the LIRR illustrating the trakage y'all are referring to.
Now that I think of it, I remember a proposal back in the 80's which
would have converted the West Hempstead line to a trolley or light rail,
and then followed the right of way that we've been discussing up to Mineola where the Oyster Bay line would also then be converted.
The plan may have even included the Far Rockaway line.
Is this plan completely dead, or does it still kick up now and then?
I found the following is from the Tr- State Transportaion Campaign's website
(http://www.tstc.org)
Issue 141 September 5, 1997
Traffic headaches on north-south routes on Long Island are spurring road construction by the NY State DOT, but planning for transit lines to serve these trips is receiving less concerted attention.
The Regional Plan Association proposed a "Cross-Nassau Light-Rail Link," in its 1996 third regional plan, a Region At Risk. The project would link the L.I. Railroad Oyster Bay and West Hempstead branches with a 3.3-mile restored right-of-way. This line used to run from West Hempstead to Mineola when LIRR service was more comprehensive. But passenger service ceased in the late 1930s, and freight passage ended in the fifties. Now, much of the right-of-way is gone and the LIRR plans an Oyster Bay branch service upgrade that would preclude use of the line by light rail.
Slightly to the east, however, transit planning appears more feasible. A new transit system is the linchpin for a scheme to consolidate and further develop a "Nassau Hub" comprising major institutions and office complexes (mostly in Hempstead) (see MTR 138). The present effort will determine which type of transit, if any, would suit the hub concept. U.S. Reps Carolyn McCarthy and Peter King are seeking support for the initiative in this year's federal transportation authorization.
This demand is also reflected in transit ridership -- north-south bus use is up on major routes, with the Freeport to Mineola route on its way to being the most heavily used bus route on Long Island.
I heard this morning on AM 1010 that the Port Authority is considering raising the PATH fare, which has remained $1.00 for quite a while. When can we see this happening?
By the way, are there standard bus fare zones in New Jersey, or does each commuter bus carrier have its own fare system? I ask this because of the following:
1. A one-way ticket from New York (Port Authority) to Paramus on NJ Transit is $3.25. The same trip on Short Line is $5.50
2. One way from the PA to Allwood Road on NJT is $7.15, on DeCamp it's $4.45.
3. One way from the PA to Wayne on NJT is $4.60. On Lakeland Bus it's $5.05
Ok if the BMT leased the manhatten elevated for 999 years and then the city took control and tore down some of the elevated lines wouldent the city have to pay whomever owns the manhattan elevated lines to rebuild them? or did the city forget and just tore the things down anyway?
No, the City took title to all properties
except certain bus lines which had a special operating company set up
to run the buses. I am not sure, but I think this was part of the
dissolution of the Third Ave Railway (Trolley) System.
The 999 year lease of the Manhattan Elevated Railway Company was not made by the BMT, which didn't exist then (it was the BRT) but by the Interboro Rapid Transit Company (AKA August Belmont). The lease was executed so that the IRT would control the rapid transit system of New York. The BRT/BMT didn't enter Manhattan until the Dual Contracts era.
The City has the power of eminant domain, and can use that power to condemn property and take title to it. Generally, the City simply tells a property owner that it is going to condemn his property, and then the City and the property owner haggle over price. If they cannot agree, the State courts will settle the dispute.
Also, the large transit companies went into bankruptcy earlier this century and they were taken over by the city. As with eminant domain, that involves buying the assets of the company and taking over its property. The same situation exists w/r/t disputes about price.
I don't know the particulars of how the City (or a City agency) came to own the El's, but it probably occurred in one of the two manners just described. When the El's came down, the City was simply cancelling its own lease.
--mhg
The elevateds in Manhattan came to the city (TA) with the takeover of the IRT/BMT. The IRT had the elevateds because of the 1903 lease for 999 years. See Above comments.
The city bought the IRT, which was the lessee (the tenant), and became the lessee. But the question is who was the lessor (the landlord) and did the city buy them or their rights? Presumably, it did, and then the lease came to naught, the same entity being landlord and tenant. But what if the city didn't?
The IRT was basically a holding company and by buying it outright, the city took posession of the company and all of its assets. It could then do what it pleased. The 2nd and 9th Ave ELs came down shortly after unification; the 6th Ave El was torn down in 1938 (I think) as part of the deal to build the 6th Ave IND underneath.
--Mark
But who owned the elevated lines that IRT leased? The city bought all of the IRT's assets, but if all IRT had over the el lines is a lease instead of ownership, the city still had (or has) to buy the rights of the landlord, the underlying owner of the els. The reversion on a 999-year lease on a depreciating asset like an el, even considering that comes with the right (and indeed duty) to build a replacement el, is not worth much. But it is worth something, and the owner of the els was/is entitled to that money.
I think that you misunderstand the idea of the "lease" as it applies to this sort of situation. The City gave the transit companies a 999 year right to build and operate the elevated lines -- a "lease," as you say. When the City "bought" the transit companies, they received back the right they had given to the transit companies in the first place. The only entity that had the right to "lease" city streets is the city.
The transit companies also got limited powers of condemnation so that they could condemn privately-held rights to air and light, as well as entire buildings, etc. Once the land/air was condemned, the right to that land/air belonged to the company. The City picked up these rights too when it took over the El's. These rights were permenantly divested from their original owners and were not subject to the 999 year lease. (Perhaps they were permanent only so long as the land was used for RxR purposes, it depends).
Naturally, when the El's were torn down, these "leases" and the public rights held under them ceased to exist. The private rights of air/light were restored, of course. I don't know whether condemened property was returned because that depends on whether what I said in the paranthetical above happened or not. Probably not in the case of the El's, but I don't know for sure.
Hope this helps.
--mhg
Are you sure of your facts? I distinctly remember reading about a 999-year lease for the Manhattan and Bronx Els between two *private firms*: the Manhattan Railway Company as lessor, and the Interborough Rapid Transit Company as lessee. Whether this lease was for any commercially significant amount, or for a "token" sum of one dollar, I am not sure.
But the point is, the Manhattan (and Bronx) Els existing prior to 1904 were built, operated, and OWNED by the Manhattan Railway Co., presumably under a City franchise (not lease) that gave them the right to build their rail lines in city streets. The subway system (including elevated portions), on the other hand, was built under a contract which gave the IRT Co. the right to build and operate the lines, but vested actual title in the City. So the IRT never owned any lines per se: it operated service over Subway lines ownd by the City, and over El lines owned by the Manhattan Railway Co.
The problem is, once the operating lease between the IRT Co. and the Manhattan Railway Co. was signed, the latter seems never to have been heard from again. When the IRT Co. abandoned service on the various El lines, ownership in the underlying structures (and profit from the sale of same as scrap metal) should have gone to the Manhattan Railway Co., not to either the IRT or the City. Likewise, when the NYCTA and MTA abandonned the portions of the Els that survived unification.
Perhaps if the Manhattan Railway Co. and the IRT Co. were actually under the same ownership (Belmont's), then the "lease" would have been from one of his companies to another, and the Manhattan Railway Co. could have "decided" not to complain about its "lesee", the IRT Co., converting its leased property to its own use (by selling El scrap). This is just a guess.
At any rate, I do not believe that the Constitution allows Eminent Domain powers to be vested in a private entity under ANY circumstances whatsoever.
>Are you sure of your facts? I distinctly remember reading about a 999-year >lease for the Manhattan and Bronx Els between two *private firms*: the >Manhattan Railway Company as lessor, and the Interborough Rapid Transit Company >as lessee. Whether this lease was for any commercially significant amount, or >for a "token" sum of one dollar, I am not sure.
I was trying to keep it simple, and I don't know a lot about the details of each company. The idea, though, is that the city grants a franchise to the RxR to occupy public space -- the street and the air above the street, etc. The right to build the tracks was granted by easements over both public and private (more in a moment) property. The franchise was not permenant, but was for a term of years, whatever the number of years is. The following sorts of things would happen: When the RxR breaches the terms of its franchise (e.g. goes out of business), the franchise terminates and the rights are restored to the grantor, the City. The easements would also terminate as to the RxR at that point. Alternately, when the RxR goes bankrupt, its right to the remianing 960 years is bought by the City for 10c on the dollar. The easement over public property was destroyed when the two "estates" merged in the hands of the City. The private easments remained. Something along those lines would have occured.
As for the ownership of the structures itself, perhaps the City "built" it and leased it to the RxR (a lease-buyback arrangement, like a car lease). Maybe the RxR "built" it and owned it outright. Whichever. The tangible property rights were transfered to the city when the RxR's were taken over. The mechanics were either that title belonged to the city and the RxR lost the right to lease the structure, or the City bought the structure for, say, 10c on the dollar when then RxR went bankrupt. Either way, the title to the tangible property passed to the City when the RxR's were taken over.
>At any rate, I do not believe that the Constitution allows Eminent Domain >powers to be vested in a private entity under ANY circumstances whatsoever.
The Constitution does not prohibit the legislature from granting eminant domain to private concerns. During the RxR years (1900's), Congress granted limited eminant domain to the RxR's to condemn property to be used for RxR purposes. That is why MNCRR owns so much Park Ave. real estate -- it condemnend the ground above its tracks. It had statutory authority to do so. Presumably, NY State did the same thing w/r/t the urban transit lines. Naturally, there are Constitutional restrictions on the practice, but the practice was legal. There were literally dozens of lawsuits by building owners who, e.g. had noise coming into their hotels, had the corners of the building lots taken from the so the curve of the El could make it around the corner, etc. The landowners had to be compensated for the loss of their property rights (land use, air, etc.), but they had their property divested from them. The biggest losers were the people who owned entire blocks above GCT, who were forced to sell them for their current, undeveloped value, to then have MNCRR's predecessor build luxury apartment buildings and later office towers, and make a mint. (Actually, the land was leased, but no difference).
The point I raised earlier about what happened when the El's came down was this: the private right to light/air was restored by the fact of tearing the El's down. Did the landower who lost part of his building lot get the corner of the lot back? I don't know.
--mhg
It was, of course, the IRT, not the BMT, that leased the assets of the Manhattan Railway Co. (i.e. the Manhattan and Bronx elevated lines) in 1904 for 999 years. I doubt anyone really expected that they would remain standing in the year 2903 AD (if they did, they were pretty foolish, and the people who ran things in those days were seldom foolish). But just what WAS the real point of that "lease" has never been terribly clear, at least to me.
An interesting point is that the Manhattan Railway Co. OWNED the elevated structures it operated, while the Interborough (IRT) Co. merely operated the subway lines (including elevated portions thereof), while the City owned them. Were any clear demarcations made between City and Manhattan Railway property at those points where "el" lines and "elevated subway" lines came together, e.g. Westchester Ave. north of 149th St., or 162nd St./River Ave.?
999 year leases were a holdover from English Common Law - a lease for 999 years was considered a term lease, not a lease in perpetuity. A strange distinction, but a lease in perpetuity was considered as a purchase, while a 999 year lease could be recovered by the lessor at the end of the lease, if any would exist after 999 years. (1 short of a milenium.)
The 7 lines in Queens is the slowest line in the whole IRT system and I know that alot of people agree. A slow 6.30 Minutes between trains. I can get between Woodlawn and Bowling Green faster.
I was reading the N schedual and from Astoria to Coney Island is an amazing 87 minutes. The R train from 71 Avenue to 95 street is 75 minutes and their train run every 10-15 minutes.
To my conclusion the 7,N,R lines are slowest lines in the NYCTA.
My brother:
If you want a SLOW train, take the newly extended B train from Coney Island to Bedford Park during rush hour... When you factor in the waiting time, your trip out to the Bronx can take FOREVER!
I think for sure the slowest line, at least for the time being, is the #2 line. There is currently only one track operating on Lenox Ave., but even when trains are running one direction only, there are other trains terminating at 96th St., and some crossing over from the express to the local tracks there. Trying to go from Times Square to 149th St.-Grand Concourse in the Bronx takes forever during the PM rush, or at least it did when I tried it on, I think, the 3rd day of the construction. And of course on weekends, when they try to run trains in BOTH directions through there (headways are supposed to be 24 min. between trains in the same direction), things are likewise horrendous.
The N train is a joy to ride by comparison.
The 7 headway was just shorten as per a service notice I saw last week. I work at Queens(&boro) Plaza but do not ride the 7 much but I can time them out the window if ya want.
Anyway the notice said they were increasing service for a midday 5 to 7 minute headway I BELIEVE.. It might still be posted on the TA website....
The new headway is 6 minutes.
What does the headway of 6.30 minutes have to do with the speed of the train? When you talk about the slowest train do you mean frequency or do you mean actual average speed? As an example, the R train goes a long distance as a local in all its sections (Queens Blvd, Broadway, Bway Tunnel, 4th Avenue). It *should* take a long time. Someone going from 71 Avenue in Forest Hills to 95 St at Fort Hamilton would probably take the F to 42 St, the B to 36 St, then the R to 95th St.
Every train has its purpose in different sections. Usually people take expresses to avoid the sections where the local they started on is too "slow", meaning that it remains a local for a long distance. But something has got to be a local. A street example would be E. 7 St., a narrow one-way street in Brooklyn, which is one block away from Ocean Parkway. I could drive for miles down E. 7 St, stopping at stop sign after stop sign, taking a very long time to go from one end to the other. Or I could switch to Ocean Parkway (which is instead of E. 6 St.), a 6-lane road with left turn lanes, synchronized traffic lights, and a higher speed limit, for up to 4 miles and at the last minute switch back to E. 7 St. to reach my actual destination.
If you mean: The slowest line section in average travelling speed (to include or not include the dwell time, your call) is probably the F south of Church Avenue, because the elevated structure is falling apart, and they have had to slow it down greatly. The second slowest may be the 7 between Vernon-Jackson and Queensboro Plaza because of the twisting elevated tracks to be negotiated.
>The second slowest may be the 7 between Vernon-Jackson and Queensboro
>Plaza because of the twisting elevated tracks to be negotiated.
In theory of course you are right, Carl. But last weekend I rode the [7] from Times Square to Main St. and back. ("[7] To Main(e)" said the conductor... whew that's a long ride!) On the return trip I rode with one hot-shot of an operator. Entering each station, he was still at full power (parallel) at the conductor's board (half-way through the station), then did a quick shut-off and maximum braking to hit the <11> marker. On the twisting elevated tracks between QP and VJ, he ran as fast as the timed signals would allow... and it was quite a ride!
Another example of a maddeningly slow section is the Lexington Avenue downtown express line between Grand Central and 14th Street. The 4 and 5 trains c-r-a-w-l along that stretch during morning rush hours, often being overtaken by 6 train locals.
I've noticed that myself on more than one occasion, on more than one line. It's the same old story: your express plods along, while adjacent locals zoom right by. Go figure. That stretch from Grand Central to Union Square should be a race track for expresses, being the only ruler-straight section on the original Contract One line, if you don't include the shuttle.
There was a thread recently on nyc.transit about why the downtown Lexington expresses are so slow between Grand Central and 14th Street. My suggestion was that the curved platforms (and moving platform extenders) at 14th Street are the main culprit. Note that 7th Avenue expresses don't experience a similar slowdown as they approach that line's 14th Street station. But then someone else suggested that the bunching of trains as the approach Grand Central reverberates farther down the line. Who really knows?
Dear Sir/Madan,
When the IND Fulton Street line was constructed in 1946 was the InD route constructed above or under the Bay Ridge RailORadin East New York. How? was the IND fulton street line constructed between Broadway-east New York and Liberty Avenue without causing a disruption of the BMT Broadway-Jamaica and 14thStreeet-Canarsie routes (JMZ and L) . When the IND Fultunstreet line was constructed inEast New York , did the construction destroy part of the BMT East New Yard? Is the Bay Ridge Rrailroad under East New York Avenue?
> Was the IND Fulton Street line constructed between Broadway-east New York and
> Liberty Avenue without causing a disruption of the BMT Broadway-Jamaica and
> 14th Street-Canarsie routes (JMZ and L).
WHen the IND Fulton St line was originally built, it ran as far as Broadway / East New York and was later extended to Euclid Ave in 1946. WWII caused the delay. The connection to the BMT Fulton St line didn't occur until later, I think the early '50s. The intent of the IND Fulton St line was to take competition away from the Fulton El; it wasn't until the connection to the BMT in the City Line section of Brooklyn occurred that the Fulton El west of that point was abandoned. There wasn't any major disruption along the Fulton El when this construction was done; I think the TA may have closed the line for a weekend to connect the FUlton EL to the IND Fulton St line.
> When the IND Fultunstreet line was constructed inEast New York , did the
> construction destroy part of the BMT East New York Yard? Is the Bay Ridge
> Rrailroad under East New York Avenue?
I don't know, although I never heard of this.
--Mark
The Bay Ridge line runs under Junius St. for about half a mile or less; it is above ground north of Bushwick ave, and I have seen pictures of the South portal which is somewhere south of Livonia. It is hardly buried at all, and seems to have been done to avoid a grade crossing with the LIRR Atlantic Avenue line. Consequently, when the Atlantic Ave line went underground around 1930, it had to stay "up" at Junius st. Steam trains used this underground tunnel regularly. It is possible it was never electrified, wheras North of Bushwick there WAS 11KV overhead at least into the 60's.
The Fulton st (Actually Pitkin Ave) line did not have to shut down to connect up with the City Line(Liberty Ave) el in 1956, because stub tracks were provided East of Euclid Ave in 1946, which were used to hold trains being turned around, or brought from the Pitkin Yards for entry into service. Two of these were connected to Grant Ave. without disturbing operations.
The BMT ENY yards are north of Fulton St-Jamaica ave, and were not affected by the IND construction. There was a small yard between Pitkin and Belmont just East of the Canarsie line which serviced the old El., but it came down with the structure between Rockaway Ave and Hudson St. in 1955 or so.
If memory serves, there were catenary supports as well as PRR style position lkght block signal masts in the section parallel yo the Sea Beach line as it left the tunnel ubder 4th Ave. I infer ZPRR electric freight motors in the early years.
Dear Sir/Madan,
When the IND Fulton Street line was constructed in 1946 was the InD route constructed above or under the Bay Ridge RailORadin East New York. How? was the IND fulton street line constructed between Broadway-east New York and Liberty Avenue without causing a disruption of the BMT Broadway-Jamaica and 14thStreeet-Canarsie routes (JMZ and L) . When the IND Fultunstreet line was constructed inEast New York , did the construction destroy part of the BMT East New Yard? Is the Bay Ridge Rrailroad under East New York Avenue?
Hi ! Maybe this is not a new question but I was wondering what is the longest line of the NYC subway system. I have 3 proposal:
2 from 241st street to Flatbush ave.
A from 207th street to Far Rockaway
F from Coney Island to 179th street/Jamaica
What do you think?
I say that it is the A train or number 2 on the question sheet
It is definitely the "A" train.
Yes, you are right. I remember seeing an MTA advertisement stating that the 'A' train is 31 miles in length, the longest in the system.
Yes, the A Train is the longest route.
However, The 8th Ave Line may not be the longest.
Assuming the 8th Ave Division/line extends from 207th St
to Fulton St in Manhattan or Hoyt St in Brooklyn, then the
Brooklyn Fulton St Div/Line goes to Lefferts.
In those terms, which is the longest division or line of all the NYC subway?
If SEPTA's city transit division was to go on strike, Would the Transit Museum
remain open with normal hours? Hope someone can answer this. Thanks.
I suspect that the SEPTA Transit Museum will be closed if TWU 234 strikes. The employees at the museum are City division people and 234 should be their union, unless the "clerical" employees belong to another union.
A London couple visiting NYC were at the 53St and Lex stop, during the rush hour. They asked a police officer "Excuse me Sir, where is the queue?" and the officer responds "Q no, E or F, 47 and 50 St for the Q."
Read that in the New York times.
Whats the dealio with the Philly strike? Wasn't it set for March 15?
This is what is happening with SEPTA. The union (TWU Local 234) started talks with SEPTA late in the PM on 3/14. They continued talking until 9:00p or so on Tuesday, 3/17, when the union stormed out of the talks without explanation. At about 10 this morning (3/18), the union president, Steve Brookens, returned to the talks but said that he was very frustrated with the lack of progress. The system has been operating so far this week, but only on a day-to-day extension of the old contract. There was quite a lot of confusion last night over whether the system would operate today, as there was no word from Local 234 or SEPTA on the status of the talks; but apparently it was business as usual today.
At the last report I heard from KYW 1060 AM,(4:45p this afternoon,3/18) the union & SEPTA were both stating that each side was "at the end of their rope" over work rules, & workers comp. (SEPTA wants to take injured employees off the payroll, put them on Workers comp, & no longer pay medical benefits. Local 234 is adamantly refusing to agree to this issue.)
I will post another update around 8:30a tomorrow, 3/19.
(BTW, Fernando, that was a good story about the "Q"!! :))
Michael S. Buglak
I am somewhat familiar (in a numerical way) with the economic state of Philadelphia, its region, and its state, relative to the New York area, Boston area, Washington area, etc. Its bad, real bad.
And why? Go back 20 years, and examine the housing stock in Philly (owner occupied one-family rowhouses, compared with renter occupied cash cow apartments under rent control in NYC), its crime rate (lower than other large cities) and its stability, and it should be a garden spot.
I was in Philly a few years ago, and once considered moving there (it has many of the charms of Brooklyn, and a few others). The SEPTA lines did not seem ot be in good shape. The crime rate is up, population is falling, the city almost went broke, even the Mayor says he's fighting the tide.
A strike would be regional suicide. Are these guys out of their minds?
As of 8:30a, 3/19, talks between SEPTA & Local 234 are continuing. There was some progress reported overnight. The system is running. (SEPTA reports about a 10% loss in ridership due to uncertainly over whether service will operate from one day to another.) Other than that, nothing new to report. I'll post another update later today.
(To other Philly SubTalkers: Please continuw to post progress reports after today, I'll be away from the 'Net until Tuesday, 3/24. Thanks!)
Michael S. Buglak
This afternoon (3/19), Local 234 requested a face-to-face meeting to be held tonight with the SEPTA negotiating team, to gauge where the two sides stand. The union has stated that it wants to know how serious SEPTA is about avoiding a strike. Meanwhile, SEPTA is offering a $1000 reward for information on who committed a reported 67 acts of vandalism this week to SEPTA property systemwide.
The only assurance that Local 234 is making with regards to the system running is that if it runs for the AM peak hour, it will run that afternoon.
On a personal note, SEPTA pulled all the City Transit timetables (several hundred in all) out of the schedule racks at Suburban Station & replaced them with additional Regional Rail TTs. Coincedence? I wonder!
Sine I will be unable to post any more updates for now, the best places to get SEPTA updates would be the Philadelphia Inquirer & Daily News' page,
www.phillynews.com
& for those of you in the Philadelphia area (or further at night), KYW News Radio 1060(AM) has updates at least every half-hour at :00 & :30.
Have a great weekend, everyone!
Michael S. Buglak :)
Not much has happened to date. It remains a very confusing situation. The talks are off and on. Ridership is down close to 10% on the system since people are fearful that the strike could happen in the middle of the day and riders could be stranded. The TWU has assured that it will not allow this to happen, but...
The last I had heard (this afternoon), strike captains were going to meet tonight and a strike could happen as early as 12:01 AM Sun 3/22. We can only wait and see.
This might upset some union folks out there (and, while I am not one, I can generally sympathise with you), but the clowns at the helm of the TWU here in Phila are doing little but hurting themselves. As a customer of the SEPTA system, I think that, for once, SEPTA isn't asking for too much in the way of concessions. It's difficult to justify outdated work rules and the TWU just isn't being very reasonable, or in my opinion, intelligent. When the customers go away and service gets cut and the vicious cycle continues to the detriment of transit, what will the TWU do then?
Yes, these guys are out of their minds!
Anyone who lives, sleeps and breathes the BSS, maybe you can help. Where do the trains go southbound after Walnut/Locust. There is a switch south of the station. Does it become a loacl after it's run as an express and where do the trains go after Pattison Avenue? Is there some kind of terminal down there?
South of Walnut-Locust the four tracks narrow into two. Southbound expresses that end at Walnut-Locust just switch to the northbound Express track in the tunnels between Locust and Lombard Streets. Locals continue on to Pattison Avenue by continuing on the two tracks into South Philadelphia. I do not remember any tracks heading off to somewhere else, but there is not much other place to go. They do not connect to the PATCO line along Locust Street, that's for sure.
At Pattison, there may just be some extra track for train turn-arounds and storage. There is also a lower level platform for extra trains when huge crowds are anticipated, though I don't think it is used much. There is nothing much south of Pattison Avenue, especially when you consider that above ground only the stadiums, the Food Distribution Center, the expressways and the Naval Base are the only things south of Pattison before you hit the Delaware River.
You are correct, except that the Food Center (I'll use the term found on SEPTA bus signs!) is mainly east of Broad St along Pattison Ave. South of the Pattison terminal, one finds the CoreStates Center, I-95, the Conrail line to the port, and the former Naval Base.
As far as I know, the lower level of Pattison is officially closed. I had heard something last year about problems with the turnouts leading to the lower level which led to them being spiked in position. If this is true then trains cannot access the lower level.
I do not ever recall it being used since the extension was opened in '73. The idea was allegedly to use it during stadium events, with "super expresses" (which run before and after baseball and football games, and to a limited extent before and after hockey games) to load on the lower level and locals from the upper level. This would allow riders to differentiate from the two services. There is sufficient room on the upper level to store six six-car trains and this is what is usually done so trains can be filled and dispatched after the events. Recent studies have shown that only about 5% of event attendees use the subway to get to and from the stadium, so the lower level is not really needed anyway.
Living in Philadelphia, I can definitely confirm that the lower level at Pattison was used as late as 1993. When the Phillies were in the World Series and there was a simultaneous Madonna concert at the Spectrum, concerns about gridlock were high. Attendees were strongly advised to use the BSS, and both levels at Pattison were open with "super expresses" running from the lower level (first stop Walnut-Locust). It is true that when there is no event at the Sports Complex, there is little traffic at this station, especially now that the Navy Yard and Naval Hospital have been closed.
Thanks. I stand corrected!
In my experience (living in Phila since '57), I have neither seen nor ridden trains in the lower level of Pattison. I'm glad someone has done so.
grounded rail at PATTISON LOWER LEVEL has resulted in the the returns being disconnected.apparently the electrolysis damage potential to gas mains in the area is a concern
Here is a trackmap. /++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1
/ --------------
/ --------------
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3
+------------------+ / X
+ Lombard-South + / ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4
+------------------+ / --------------
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\ --------------
\+++++++++++++++++++ 2
Walnut-Locust
Walnut-Locust is two island platforms. Track 1 is the SB local, track 3 is the
SB express. The X between 3 and 4 south of the station is a full crossover to allow the express trains to reverse and head north on track 4. Tracks 1 and 2 continue on to Pattison at the south end of the line. There is a crossover between these two tracks just north of Lombard-South station which is not normally used.
(The numbers are mine, SEPTA may use different numbers.)
Bill
Cool way for a makeshift track map. Actually an original idea in this world.
Jack,
I'm suprised it worked. On my browser it gets scrambled beyond recognition. So try this. http://rvcc2.raritanval.edu/~johnston/bss.htm
Bill
The tansfer between the #6 at Bleeker and the B,D,F,&Q at Broadway/Lafayette is only between the Downtown #6 and the InD. Why doesn't the TA have the transfer between the InD and Uptown #6 as well? Wouldn't such a transfer make life easier for people travelling between the culver line and the Upper-East side?
Let me know.
This transfer was put in when the Bleeker St. platform was lengthened to take 8-10 car trains (1961?). The southbound platform was lengthened to the south, bringing it close to B'way Lafayette. The northbound platform was lengthened to the north, making it further. This situation has been bitched about ever since, but nobody ever said "thank you" for the southbound connection. And we wonder why bureaucracies are unresponsive!
It may never happen, but as part of the Manhattan bridge replacement study for if (when) the bridge is closed permanently an uptown connection is suggested and it has been decided that at least that should happen no matter what else happens.
Another thing to keep in mind is that starting this summer, these "missing connections" will be free for people using the daily/weekly/monthly passes.
As a former frequent F line rider in Brooklyn (an old girlfriend lived near Church and McDonald Avenues), I know that most people I knew changed for the A train at Jay St., since every F is timed to meet an A or C train, then changed at Bway-Nassau for the Lexington Line. Going home, if there happened to be a local, we sometimes changed at Bway-Lafayette. It's convenient but not as essential as it may seem at first glance, because there is always a meeting of two trains at Jay St. (This is similar to the way the D and C almost always arrive simultaneously at 59 St, and the A and B usually arrive there simultaneously as well.)
In addition, the least expensive way to connect the Bway-Lafayette station to northbound Bleeker St. is to build an underpass from the north end of the southbound platform to the south end of the northbound platform. But then there would be a large amount of foot traffic the entire length of the S/B platform which could be a dangerous situation (accident-wise, not crime-wise). So I assume that is why it was never done.
Finally, it is a Lexington local-only station, so it is not a lot (if any) better than getting the express at Bway-Nassau(A/C)/Fulton St.(4/5).
But, even though to me it does not seem to be a major priority, it would still be nice if they could one day build a convenient connection in both directions at Bleeker.
My wife often switches from the F to the A/C to the 4/5, but there are problems. First, that is two walks and two waits -- this isn't that you can't get there from here, but that it takes too long. A switch with a walk and a stair takes more time than a breeze across the platform. Second, the Lex is crowded, and local is more crowded that the express. Third, at the height of rush hour and the peak of the business cycle, it is often difficult to crowd onto the A. Back in the 1980s, we often had to let A trains go before squeezing on a C. In fact, at that time you often couldn't get on an F at Carrol. We haven't returned to that point, but we're getting close.
One thought -- rather than build an East Side IND/BMT line south of 63rd Street, or even build this connection, perhaps there is a way to improve service crosstown. One would stay on a single train to Midtown, then travel acrosss. As it is, crosstown buses (and the proposed trolley on 42nd St) are slower than walking, since they get stuck and every avenue (the avenues have longer signal times). It takes too long to walk down to and up from the 7 train.
Perhaps service could be improved by building platforms for the 42nd St shuttle right under the 6th Avenue station, and perhaps at Madison and Fifth Avenues as well. Perhaps rather than a subway with a two minute headay, the ROW could be converted to automated cars running several times a minute. If it could be ducked under the Lex Line, perhaps it could even be extended to the east.
Grand Central is the missing link here. IND/BMT riders (except the Eastern Division), with a change, can already reach the East Side at 63rd, 60th, 53rd, 14th, and Houston Streets while avoiding the crowded Lex Line. But there is a huge concentration of jobs around Grand Central. Could more be done with the shuttle?
There was a plan proposed in the 1960s to replace the 42nd St. Shuttle with some kind of people mover. Does anyone have any info. on this plan?
But, this is why a Second Ave. line should be built... Why should people have to deal with the overcrowding of the Lex line... Believe me, if that could be built from Water and Wall Streets, run north, and hook up to the Lex station at 63rd Street (or, maybe, extend it towards the Bronx or Queens)... One idea I have is to run it on Second Avenue up until the Triborough Bridge... Have a tunnel built between 120th Street and the FDR in Manhattan and hook it up to Queens... Then, you could run the line on Ditmars Boulevard (have a transfer station at 31st Street to the N instead of extending the N) and hook it up to LGA... Then, you would have 2 trains going to the airports (A to Kennedy and this line to LGA)... It seems to simple for the MTA to understand...
I agree. The problem is, is that it makes too much sense, the MTA will not do it.
An underpass would be nice and simple, and would make sense in this instance. Granted, not many local stations on the IRT and BMT have underpasses, since most are one flight down from street level. The only local station I can think of which has an underpass is 66th St.- Bwy on the 1/9, which happens to be at Lincoln Center. 59th St.-Columbus Circle also does, in a roundabout way: you use the IND station underneath.
Most of them at IRT stations are closed. You can see traces of old underpasses at Astor Pl., 23 St., 28 St. to mention a few. But I think there never was one at Bleecker.
I live near the station, on the East side. Until they reopen the Houston/Lafayette entrance, to get a downtown 6, I have to walk all the way to Bway and then come back underground to 6 platform. It is so stupid that instead of taking the 6, I walk a block more to Prince St. (N/R). An underpass would solve all these problems. Easy 24h access to the downtown platform!
someone tell me.. is it such a ridiculous idea to incorporate the technology of articulation, (now used on high speed trains like the TGV's in europe and on buses like the new fliyer d60's in NY and the new flyer e60's in san francisco) to the construction of subway cars? this way they would be able to negotiate curves and allow extension of trains beyond 10 cars in the IRT... (this is in reply to christopher riveras original post: who says IRT cars size cant be changed).. so, can articulation work?
Wouldn't an articulated car be not one car at all but essentially a married **pair** of cars?
An articulated car is two or more bodies sharing a common truck(s). See Triplex, most modern LRV's, some railroad TOFC flats and Tank cars/trains.
The advantages are that you get more capacity with less people (operators) and that an articulated vehicle has fewer wheelsets than coupled single cars /married pairs.
The operational disadvantages are that if the vehicle fails in service, you lose two or more cars, not just one or two with standard cars.
It's a trade-off.
The BMT used quite a bit of articulation (Multi-Sections 7000 - 7028), Budd Zephyr experimental (7029), the Green Hornet and the Bluebirds (8000 - 8005). I think even the first C rebuilds were articulated but they had trouble with it so went back to three car coupled sets.
But wasn't there a set of R-21s or R-22s that were cut up and rejoined as an articulated unit to test this concept out on the IRT?
--Mark
Don't forget about the BMT Triplex units when speaking of articulated units. The nice thing about articulated units is that the car sections are typically shorter than conventional cars, so these units can negotiate tight curves. Case in point: although the Triplex units weren't normally used on the Eastern Divsion lines, they could navigate their way over them.
I don't know about any R-21 or R-22 units being used in an articulating unit experiment.
You mean not every NYC subway car can run on any NYC subway line? How ridiculous is that?
the long and short of it is, jack, that the subway as it is known today was not all built by the same people, but rather by separate companies which were all unified later.. and thats why theyre not all compatible..
... and New York is not the only transit system where all cars aren't interchangable:
- Boston - Blue Line trains run using third rail for part of the trip, then beyond Logan Airport, they switch to overhead catenary. The other subway cars are not equipped with Pantographs. In addition, Red Line cars are much longer than Blue Line cars and would not be able to negotiate the tight curves that the Blue line trains do. Finally, Green Line trains consist of LRVs which can't run on the other three "heavy rail" lines.
- London - you have deep bored twin tube tunnels with tube trains that have a smaller measurement than the former steam lines that run closer to the surface. This is not unlike the BMT/IND cars being unable to run on IRT lines in NYC.
- Paris - some subway lines have rubber tires and require different equipment than the traditional "steel wheel on steel rail" lines do.
--Mark
Chicago's Evanston (purple) line north of Howard used overhead catenary up until 1974; consequently, only 4000-series cars with trolley poles could operate over its length. Once third rail was installed, the remaining 4000s were retired. Today, only the Skokie Swift (yellow) line still uses overhead catenary; all other lines in Chicago use third rail.
You mean not every NYC subway car can run on any NYC subway line? How ridiculous is that? Though I shouldn't talk. That's not the case in Philly, but that's because of track gauge. I thought NYC had a universal gauge? Or is it something else. Something more sinister.....
All NYCT cars run on standard gauge track, 4' 8 1/2". The main reason that some cars cannot operate on all lines is simply a matter of car-body dimensions. IRT cars are 8' 9" wide (give or take an inch). B division cars are 9' 9" wide (again give or take an inch). Therefore IRT cars can operate on BMT/IND tracks but IND/BMT cars would hit platforms or tunnel bench-walls if operated on IRT tracks. Additionally, some IND/BMT cars are 75' long while others are 60' long. Some of the 75' cars will not clear on all curves an some B division lines.
New York's subways all use standard gauge track; however, the original IRT line which opened in 1904 was built with narrower tunnels. BMT and IND lines were built with wider tunnels; as a result, these two divisions are now fully merged and operate jointly. The BMT and IRT lines were built by private companies at different times, while the IND was built and operated by the City of New York right from the star,t using the larger BMT dimensions.
the north shore electroliner cars were 4 bodies on 5 trucks. married pairs would use 4 bodirs on 10 trucks. They ran well over the open track and on the chicago L
Their sides also tapered out because of tight clearances on the L structures. And, of course, they could cruise at 80 mph once they were outside of Chicago.
no, because one car would still have only 2 trucks.. and one car wouldnt necessarily be twice as long as a regular 50 foot IRT car but maybe one and a half times as long, like the new flyer d60 articulated bus is 1.5 times as long as its 40 foot brother, the d40...
And if the trains were longer than 10 cars? Then they have to stop twice at each station, since most stations are only 10 cars long (exceptions being the Flushing line at 11 cars and South Ferry & 145 St stations which are 5 cars long). Or would you like a different group of ten cars to stop at different stations? If so, YOU can teach the regular passengers and the tourists which cars stop at what station. The day they use this idea in service isthe day I stop working as a Conductor.
How on Earth do trains and rail vehicles stay on those thin as sheets rails without crushing, breaking or falling off of them more often-especially on highspeed train rails like subways?
The space between the rails is carefully measured. Also, the wheels are flanged on the inside, which prevents them from wandering off the top of the track. As far a really high speed trains go, the engineering is meticulous, and the entire length of the track is inspected every single day for any debris, damage, etc.
--mhg
Those "thin as sheets" rails weigh 100 or more pounds per foot.
Rail is rated in Pounds per Yard, not Foot, but it is still Hell for stout.
This reminded me of something...
A few years ago, a volunteer at the Transit Museum explained that express trains used to run much faster than today. (This is before the recent speed restrictions were put into place.) For example, he stated that the A and D trains between 59th Street and 125th Street travelled as fast as 75mph. Today, they max out at about 50mph. He explained that the reason they don't go as fast is the track, but he never elaborated. Can anyone comment on this?? Again, we all know that trains have been running slower over the past year due to the speed restictions following the Williamsburgh Bridge crash, but the 50mph that the Transit Museum volunteer referred to was before these restrictions were there.
My memory is also that express trains used to run faster. However, I think that the poor track condition in the past may have simply made the ride _seem_ faster. I think that better maintenance today should increase train speed, not decrease it.
--mhg
I think that fellow was exaggerating when he said A and D trains used to do 75 between 59th and 125th, although they did seem to go faster in the good old days. Besides, riding in a tunnel gives the impression of going faster than on an el structure or open cut. Going uptown, by the time you reached 81st St., you were flying. There was a 45 mph sign in the uptown tunnel; it may still be there. The R-10s really hauled back then, plus they were noisy. In the late 70s, the slant R-40s were used on the A line, and they used to fly down Central Park West. The R-38s still zip along at a good clip along that stretch. I understand that today's cars have a chip which limits top speed to 50 mph, something the older cars didn't have.
One volunteer at the Transit Museum pointed out that the rail used in the subway hasn't changed all that much over the years in terms of weight rating, and that it's not rated for very high speeds. Speaking of rail, the Flushing line now has titanium rail, if not along the entire line, in certain sections.
Fast runs is what we need. Fast runs on the outskirts, and frequent service in the inner city. If the city is to remain competitive as a residential address, subway service will have to become competitive with commuter rail -- as it is in DC, where the system is a cross between the two.
What about the Brighton Express? Could new track move it faster?
And why do both express and locals generally make a series of stops to the end of a line, as on the Brighton & Fulton Street lines. Why don't locals serve the inner areas, and expresses serve the outer area, with one transfer point between them (ie. Euclid)?
Not every line has express and local service all the way to the end. In fact, the first subway lines in New York were built with the very idea of having separate local and express services to distinguish between passengers who travel short distances and those who travel further.
As for the Brighton line, it was rehabilitated with welded rail over its entire length, although speeds have not gone up. Go figure. I guess the MTA has taken the slogan, "speed kills", and applied it to subway speeds as well.
I remember riding the D or rush hour B trains in the 1970's -- the trains seemed to FLY through the 34th St. to W4th St. express run. Visiting NYC is still great, but I too miss the speed.
Here in Boston, it seems the Red line is the fastest. I take a commuter rail train that parallels the Red line from Braintree to JFK/UMass, and if the commuter rail train is not moving at full throttle, the Red line trains pass us easily. They must be going a good 55-60 mph, as I think the commuter rail trains run 70-80 when they hammer down. The Orange Line has a lot of straightaways, but the trains don't seem to go as fast. The trains also run in a boring open cut for much of the run, and just don't have any character.
I MISS NYC!!!
The section of track between 34th St. and W4 St. (southbound) is the fastest on the 'D' line. Trains will reach 48 - 50 MPH, albiet for a short time. Northbound is not quite so fast.
As a young man my favorite stretch was the Rockaways. After the train crossed the bridge the operator would slide to control to the top on a R-44 with the old configuration or on the r 40 put it in parallel and then the train would move! It would jump up and down and swing side to side. The fun part was getting real close to the seagulls on the tracks. I imagine if one hit the windshield it probably would smash up the glass. Does anyone know if the extra 3rd rail power on the Rockaway segment is the reason for the speed or is it just the long stretch.
3rd rail power is nominally set at 600 Volts DC. The voltage is not raised or lowered to assist in train speed control. However, since we are dealing with relatively low voltage DC, one must take into account losses due to the load and the distance from the sub station.I believe that there is a sub-station near Broad Channel and traffic is relatively light. Therefore, the track voltage would likely be at or near 600 volts whereas on the Fulton St. segment of the line, the voltage might be somewhat lower.
As for speed, I think that you get a different perspective because of the open space you are traveling through and because of the wind etc. The fastest I have ever crossed 'the flats' was at 55 MPH.
As for your windshield comment, I doubt it. The windshield which was installed on the R-44/R-46 withstood the penetration of a heavy object at normal operating speeds. This is due to a sprawl-shield which is an integral part of the glass. Please don't ask what the heavy object was because I don't want to give anyone ideas.
Steve, didn't NYCT have a problem with the latest car equipment being tested on the Rockaway line due to the higher voltage, shorts in the electrical system or something? I dont recall what equipment it was (110b?). Also, those seagulls in the Rockaways look like they might weigh 30 to 40 pounds, faboulous!
The stretch from 59 to 125 . What is the speed there? if lower, which I am guessing it must be, why is it lower? IN looking at the track map book I can understanding the 125 to 145 layout, but what about 59 to 125
The stretch of track between 59th St and 125th St is not as fast as the one between 34th and W4th St. In the days before we slowed the equipment down, the northbound run was 7 minutes. Of those 7 minutes, a good train operator would be in the 'coast' position for 5 minutes. That section of track is now 40 MPH to 96th St and then timers slow the trains into 116th St. The timer leaving 116th St. says 25 MPH but does not clear above 20 MPH.
The run between 59th St. and 125th St. typically took 7.5 minutes a few years ago. That is 1/8 hour. Since it is about 3.3 miles long, the average speed over the stretch was 3.3 x 8 = 26.4 mph. While instantaneous speeds in mid-stretch were obviously higher, it seems hard to believe they could have come anywhere near 50 mph, which would be almost double the average speed.
I remember seeing 45 mph signs on the uptown express track. At any rate, in those days, by the time an uptown A or D train reached 81st St., it was hauling. It was even more fun entering the subway from the basement in the Museum of Natural History. The museum subway entrance leads directly to the uptown platform. If you tried to go through the door to the subway mezzanine at the same time an express went roaring by, you got a nice blast of air. If you were standing on the uptown platform when an A train of R-10s would go barrelling past, there would be quite a racket. The R-10s weren't the quietest cars around, but I still enjoyed riding them.
The downtown run can still be exciting. I rode an A train of R-38s maybe two years ago, and it zoomed along until it got to 72nd St., where expresses customarily slow down and crawl the rest of the way to 59th.
I also remember boarding a prewar downtown AA train at 81st. in May of 1967, and running alongside a D train, also made up of R-1/9s. I got a kick out of seeing "Coney Island" being illuminated on the side signs of the D train. You could still see illuminated side signs on R-1/9s back then; by 1968-69, you almost never saw that anymore. As light bulbs in the sign boxes burned out, they weren't replaced. (Yes, those signs had incandescent light bulbs wired in series.)
You bring up a thought provoking point; while estimating speed from insise a subway train is likely to overestimate it, we all can get pretty close estimating the speed of vehicles passing when we are pedestrians( we've had lots more practice ).Anyone standing at a local platform along Central Park West in the 60's will attest that the expresses flying by were doing a lot more than 28 MPH!
Unfortunately I'm too young to have seen R-1/9 cars on the D line. By time I started riding the sysem alone the R-1/9 cars were in their last days on the CC. I do have fond memories of the R-10's on the A line. They were nothing short of a blast to ride if you could stand the noise, especially in the summer when the storm doors were usually open.
I used to enjoy the R1/9's as you could really "feel" the traction motors accelerate. You never got that feeling on an R-10. Although, once the R-10 got moving, it was very fast and very loud. Also on the R1/9's, you got some great "air sounds" as the train was braking and also when the doors closed.
I agree with you Mike, but as I said earlier I missed the R-1/9 on express routes. Other than the Nostalgia train I only saw and rode them on the CC line - and at that point their time was nearly up.
All of my express jaunts up CPW on R-1/9s were on D trains, and then only maybe twice or three times. The last time I rode a prewar train on that stretch, the first car had no headlights, which really made things interesting in that the only lighting was provided by the tunnel lights. You could barely see the track. The R-1/9s had a unique cacophony of sounds: whining motors (due to spur-cut bull and pinion gears); throbbing compressor pumps; distinctive braking and door sounds. Music to my ears. I wonder if any conductors ever slipped on a step plate while moving into position to operate the doors.
I didn't get to ride too many prewar A trains - a half dozen times at the most - and then never up CPW, even though I've probably ridden on more A trains than any other route. The R-10s had their unique sounds: their compressor pumps sounded unlike any other, except perhaps the World's Fair Lo-Vs (you can hear them in The Incident), and even their doors sounded distinctive - they were also air-operated. As noisy as they were, the R-10s didn't moan and groan the way the R-1/9s did because their running gear consisted of helical-cut bull and pinion gears.
Interestingly enough, I rode the R-1/9s more on the Canarsie line than on the IND.
All those air sounds were truly nostalgic and I miss them. The problem was you needed peak efficient compressor air and you had loads of trouble with the air during cold weather.
Then again, virtually all IND construction was underground, and while it could get cold in the subway during the winter, you wouldn't get the severe cold air that would be encountered outdoors on elevated portions. By the same token (no pun intended), the R-1/9s were solid, durable cars.
> The R-10s had their unique sounds: their compressor pumps sounded unlike any > other, except perhaps the World's Fair Lo-Vs (you can hear them in The > Incident), and even their doors sounded distinctive
Something about the unique vibrations of the R-10 cars caused me to get a headache, or an ache in the back of my neck, whenever I rode them. I learned to stay off them.
Granted, the R-10s were noisy when running at speed; towards the end, they raised a racket even when pulling out of stations if one car had a noisy truck. I understand they didn't have a whole lot of insulation or other soundproofing. Nontheless, I still liked them. To me, they will always be synonimous will the A line, which is my favorite.
You can get a pretty good idea about the speed of the train you are on, using some simple math. Since most of the IND platforms are 630 feet (give or take), simply time how long it takes to pass the station. Assuming it's 10 seconds:
630'/10 sec. = 63 ft/sec. Since 1 ft/sec = 2/3 MPH (roughly) 63 ft/sec = 42 MPH.
Yeh, northbound is uphill. The downtown express trains were always the best when the lights allowed the train to run full-speed all the way into the W.4th St. station. All too often, though, there would be an orange light just before the switches at about 12th St. (it's hard to tell exactly where when underground), and the train had to slow down before getting into the station. It was loads of fun nonetheless.
The lack of speed today really bugs me. In addition to the segments stated, I also remember the B train flying on the express run between 36th and Pacific Street in Brooklyn, and on the E train in Queens. The uptown Lex-press from Brooklyn Bridge to 14th Street was a thriller (it still is pretty fast , but not like before when you'd literally get an adrenalin rush
on many of these runs). I actually sometimes find myself discreetly stamping my foot on the floor and screaming on the inside: faster Faster FASTER!!! It's very frustrating sometimes, because I really dug the zippy runs. Damn the TA!! Always taking the fun out of something!! First, we lose the original looks of the subway cars, then we lose the old style stations, and now were loosing speed.
MTA - New York City Transit. Can't live with it, can't live without it.
It is equally frustrating to us motormen. The main reason why the trains are slowed down is because the brakes are lousy. It simply takes longer to stop a train both in the regular & emergency modes due to decreased brake shoes on the trucks. It cuts down on the amount of steel dust emmitted, prevents hard stops, & cuts down on the incidents of flat wheels. There is also a tendency for a lot of wheel slippage on wet rails. These trains feel they're on ice when it rains. So we need a longer distance to stop. Many times while going up grades, the train feels like it's going to "die" For example you're lucky to be going 20 MPH going up the WillieB leaving Essex St. , going about 21 in the Canarsie tube, etc. It's difficult to ascertain if you have a slow train until it's too late. Before the cars were started to be rebuilt in the mid & late 80's they had no power and good brakes. You could stop on a dime But now it's just the opposite. Unfortunately the ones making decisions in the TA are not out there every day pounding the road..
Sorry Bill, but while you are correct that the trains are slower, you are incorrect as to why. The standard braking rate for a NYCT train is 3 to 3.2 MPH/Sec. That has not changed since the R-10s. However in the 1980s, all cars were overhauled and the 100 HP motors were replaced with 115 HP motors. Tis means that a 10 car train had 600 HP more than when they were originally built. The signal system was never designed to handle the speeds that the trains were now capable of achieving.
In 1996 and 1997, every car class was required to pass a rigid braking test. Every class except the R-44s passed. The R-44s were modified and now they too pass. In addition, in 1994 thru 1996, the emergency variable load valves were replaced to increase the emergency brake rate on every car class.
Finally, the number of brake shoes per car were NEVER decreased. I don't know what they are teaching in School Car there days but I would suggest that you check your facts. All car classes below R-42 have 'Clasp Type' brake rigging and have 2 shoes per wheel. All car classes R-44 and up have Tread brake units and have one shoe per wheel. R-42s came both ways. The braking force with either clasp or tread brakes is the same. Besides, as I'm sure you know, dynamic brake slows the train to 5 MPH before the air brake even takes effect.
Steve,
Thanks for the braking rate info. How about the acceleration rate?
Bill
For a modern car the acceleration rate is probably the same as the braking rate, about 3 mph/sec. These rates are the practical limit because the people standing will fall down if they became much faster.
Acceleration is roughly the same as the braking up to about 20 MPH & then trails off.
Reminds me of a Q and D train meeting at Kings Highway, D (R68) driver to the Q (R38) driver "You have a REAL train there"....
He's right, too. The R-32s were always swift, as are the R-38s.
It is equally frustrating to us motormen. The main reason why the trains are slowed down is because the brakes are lousy. It simply takes longer to stop a train both in the regular & emergency modes due to decreased brake shoes on the trucks. It cuts down on the amount of steel dust emmitted, prevents hard stops, & cuts down on the incidents of flat wheels. There is also a tendency for a lot of wheel slippage on wet rails. These trains feel they're on ice when it rains. So we need a longer distance to stop. Many times while going up grades, the train feels like it's going to "die" For example you're lucky to be going 20 MPH going up the WillieB leaving Essex St. , going about 21 in the Canarsie tube, etc. It's difficult to ascertain if you have a slow train until it's too late. Before the cars were started to be rebuilt in the mid & late 80's they had no power and good brakes. You could stop on a dime But now it's just the opposite. Unfortunately the ones making decisions in the TA are not out there every day pounding the road..
When the slant R-40s ran on the B line, the run from Pacific to 36th was fun. I haven't ridden on the B line since the R-68s were assigned there, so I can't say if there has been a difference since that time. When the R-42s were new, they would fly along that stretch when they ran on the N line.
I rode an E train of R-1/9s along the Queens line for the first time in the spring of 1968, and it really moved. I've ridden that line quite a bit since then, and it's not the same anymore, even with the R-32s.
You're right about the Lex from Brooklyn Bridge to Union Square - the express run isn't fun anymore. The run from Grand Central to Union Square is unique in that it's the only straight stretch in the entire original Contract One route, excluding the 42nd St. shuttle. There are a lot of curves on that line, and many stations were built on curves. This was avoided on Dual Contract and IND lines.
There were many good express runs. Some of my favorite were Lexington Ave Exp Southbound 125th St - 86th St and Grand Central to Union Square.
7 th Ave line also were quite fast from 96th to 72nd and Times Square to 72nd Street. I think 34th to W 4th was a favorite of many people.
Remember in the "good old days" transit equipment did not have speedometers. This based any speed restrictions upon the judgement of the motorman.
How much is any subway tracks welded rail??
I used to remember back awhile on the N line a kinda weld shop in the old express tracks. I know the system has insulated joints but between those points and interlockings do they use welded rail??
I'm not in the track dept. but I can make an educated guess. The "continuous rail train" is 8 (IRT) cars long. Therefore, I assume that the rail segments are 400 feet or less. By contrast, on the LIRR main line between Sunnyside and Jamaica, the rail segments were about 1,200 feet long.
After the piece or pieces of CWR is put in service Track Dept goes back and thermowelds the joints, so you could have 3 or 4 390 foot sections welded together (negative rail). The signal rail is another story.
About two weeks ago, I walked the North Shore line of the Staten Island Railroad. The line extended from St. George and ended a few hundred feet to the west. I think it is used to store trains. The line continued with only one track all the way to Arlington Yard. It was thick with weed. Very muddy.
I saw 6 stations that were still in tacked. The lead to the Arlington yard had been rebuilted. I walked all the way through the yard and to Howland Hook Marine Terminal. A guard told me that I was traspassing.
I heard that this line can be walked.
Was the guard right?
Send some responses.
Would be interested in hearing more about your walk, particularly about the conditions of the stations. There's always talk about reviving the North Shore Line and it would be interesting to speculate how much work it would take to restore it to a passenger configuration with a via over the lift-bridge over the Arthur to NJ Transit & Northeast corridor.
I'm sure he saw why it would be impossible to restore service in a time period faster than 2 years, with the washouts, encroachment, and the need for all-new hardware. From what I remember of the stations, they platforms are disintegrating, the overheads are rusted out, and a few of the bridges over the line have been replaced, anf the stairways to the platforms were removed. If you look back into the Archives for subtalk, I posted a 'virtual walk' down the North Shore....I'd be interested to know how accurate I was.
-Hank
Hank, you're right. Those stations are being held together with rust and weeds, and the track beds are mostly mud. It would need quite a rennovation if not demolition to get it back in shape.
It is a pretty neat walk though.
Which stations still exist? I know Port Richmond is still there, and there were stairs near Sailor's Snug Harbor, but otherwise I didn't see any others. Which station remains were still visible?
Anybody walking the old North Shore line should be very careful. In many places, like Snug Harbor, the tracks are basically just suspended over the water. The line passes through some rough neighborhoods like Mariner's Harbor. The western part from just east of South Avenue down along the west shore to the Visy Paper plant is being re-built for freight service, but I don't know how far east along the North Shore the line is to be renovated. If you go to South Avenue and the West Shore Expwy (NY440), you will see a brand-new railroad crossing complete with gates and lights. I don't think that trains are running just yet. As for trespassing, Howland Hook is private property.
There's a new PATH/H&M book online for those of you interested in that system. It's called "ILLUSTRATIONS OF INCIDENTS IN TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION, H&M R.R. CO." and it's at http://www.tmk.com/books/hmdinner/
-Dave
There has been significantly less service on the 4 train since the 2 has been running on the Lexington Avenue. Before the disruption, I rarely needed to wait more than 5 minutes for a 4 train heading uptown from 86th street at 7:15 in the morming. Now, that wait can be as much as 10-15 minutes.
What should be done to reduce traffic congestionif 2 trains are running up Lexington Ave. is cut back 2 and 5 service slightly, not 4 service. The 4 is always MUCH more crowded than 2 and 5 trains, clearly showing a need for more 4 service. The train is packed as far north as Bedford Park Boulevard, where I get off. If more service is needed from Flatbush Ave., run some Flatbush-Woodlawn trains.
In addition, there has been very poor scheduling regarding 2 trains entering the the Lexington line tracks south of 149th street. It appears that on almost every trip home from school, my train is held at 149th street for a 2 to pass. The schedule on the 2 should be adjusted so trains do not need to be held at 149th street. I don't know if this is a problem in Brooklyn when the 2 enters the lexington line track.
They should have thought about bribing people to switch to the Concourse Line during the construction. There's plenty of track capacity on the IND if they can come up with the cars. Let's say they cut the Metrocard fare on the Concourse line to $1.00 during construction. How about if they installed turnstiles blocking the transfer at 161st, and put some money back on the card if you agree to transfer from the Jerome Avenue to the Concourse. Then run regular service on Jerome, but turn some trains around before Manhattan.
Some people would have to walk east from 8th of 6th Avenue. So you pay them a dollar a day in compensation. The crowding goes poof.
The answer is to turn some trains at 149th Street/Grand Concourse so the service up Jerome Avenue is not affected.
You might have to change trains, but you won't have to wait as long.
They should have thought about bribing people to switch to the Concourse Line during the construction. There's plenty of track capacity on the IND if they can come up with the cars. Let's say they cut the Metrocard fare on the Concourse line to $1.00 during construction. How about if they installed turnstiles blocking the transfer at 161st, and put some money back on the card if you agree to transfer from the Jerome Avenue to the Concourse. Then run regular service on Jerome, but turn some trains around before Manhattan.
Some people would have to walk east from 8th or 6th Avenue. So you pay them a dollar a day in compensation. The crowding goes poof.
I was looking over a couple of the Usenet archives on this site and wanted to ask a couple of questions. First, in the article on the legendary Atlantic Ave. Tunnel on the LIRR in Brooklyn, the statement was made that the line through Brooklyn was not used for a large part of the 19th century. This is not the impression I've gotten from LIRR histories. Is this true? If so, when was the Brooklyn line rebuilt?
Second, does the 42nd Street Shuttle run right on top of the Flushing line tunnel, or are they separated? Why did they decide this street needed two lines, anyway? Was there ever any thought given, either with the Flushing tunnel or with other lines, to creating a direct connection between Grand Central and Penn Station? (Something I've often considered in my imaginary redesigns of the system.:-)
Finally, at the risk of repeating stuff that's already been said, could someone give me a brief synopsis of events with the Manhattan Bridge over the last year or two? I haven't seen anything on it in the media, either. It strikes me that in the time it's taking to rebuild the stupid thing (which may or may not work), they could bite the bullet, tear it down, and build a totally new bridge that wouldn't twist every time a train went over it. Or maybe they could be really creative and build tunnels for the trains.
The Atlantic Ave. tunnel was closed for mainly political reasons. After being sealed off in 1861, it was subsequently forgotten.
The 42nd St. shuttle runs directly beneath 42nd St. It was part of the original mainline when it opened in 1904. At Times Square, you can see where the original ROW merges with the 7th Ave. line. The shuttle was put together when the 7th Ave. and upper Lexington Ave. lines opened. The Flushing line starts at 41st St. and 7th Ave, and swings over tor 42nd St. at Fifth Ave. Originally, it only went as far as Grand Central, then was extended to Fifth Ave., and eventually to Times Square. In this regard, you can say it happens to run beneath the shuttle for part of the way. As to why it was extended, I would say it was done so that passengers bound for Times Square from Queens would have direct access without having to transfer to the shuttle.
No comment on the Manhattan Bridge.
To expand a bit on Atlantic avenue, the bricked up tunnel was part of a line that ran all the way to the East River. I believe the section from Flatbush Ave back to Morris Park remained, but with little or no traffic after the Long Island City line was built. But as commutation became a viable business, Atlantic was upgraded, the Terminal at Flatbush being built at around the turn of the Century. The volume on Atlantic avenue, with dozens of grade crossings, led to putting the tracks mostly underground in about 1930.
The Flushing line comes in below Grand Central because it is still coming up from it's River crossing. But when they extended it West, they eventually had to switch over to 41st St. As the other posts mention, this was done after a short time of having to use the shuttle, so we may infer that the transfer traffic was crushing!
> Does the 42nd Street Shuttle run right on top of the Flushing line tunnel, or
> are they separated? Why did they decide this street needed two lines, anyway?
> Was there ever any thought given, either with the Flushing tunnel or with
> other lines, to creating a direct connection between Grand Central and Penn
> Station?
Steve B answered this question well. The only thing I want to add is that, while NYC Transit (and its predecessor companies) never had plans for this kind of link as far as I can recall, the Hudson and Manhattan RR did. Before the 33rd St station was reconstructed to make room for the 6th Ave IND, the H&M tunnels actually proceeeded a bit north for such an eventual link. The 33rd St station was actually moved a bit when reconstructed so no remnants of this tunnel exist anymore.
> Could someone give me a brief synopsis of events with the Manhattan Bridge
> over the last year or two? I haven't seen anything on it in the media, either.
> It strikes me that in the time it's taking to rebuild the stupid thing (which
> may or may not work), they could bite the bullet, tear it down, and build a
> totally new bridge that wouldn't twist every time a train went over it. Or
> maybe they could be really creative and build tunnels for the trains.
See this thread and this thread, and you'll be all caught up!
(Hope the links I set up work!)
--Mark
The only thing I can answer(I'm so helpful) is the shuttle concern. They run on two levels because the shuttle used to be the IRT connection from the east side line to the west side to 145 St. If you want a visual answer, check out the track map section. Answered many of my questions. Still does.
While the 42nd Street Shuttle and the 7 run along the same route to some extent, they do have different purposes for different riders. For instance, people heading to or from the 8th Avenue line (A/C/E) will usually find the 7 more useful than the Shuttle, as it's quite a bit closer. The Shuttle, in turn, is better placed for the 7th Avenue (1/2/3/9) and Broadway (N/R) lines, as well as for people beginning or ending their trips at Times Square.
On the other end, the 7 is somewhat closer to the Lexington Avenue lines (4/5/6) than is the Shuttle.
I found this site with the history of the tunnel to be built connecting Staten Island to the rest of the city:
www.panix.com/~danielc/nyc/sibktunl.htm
HI!
I'm from Brazil, I love NYC, I have been there twice, I got 2 unts
who lives there, i don't know what to say, send me something new to me.
Thanks.
I think I've helped sort that article out, if I'm not mistaken....
-Hank
Why Hasn't a line from Brooklyn or Manhattan to Staten Island been built?
Politics, NIMBY, and Money. But the original reason(s) were WWII and allegedly Mayor Hylan (probably why he is honored out here with a street bearing his name :)
-Hank
Mr. Rogers must be from Staten Island, because he likes things just the way they are. All of the long-time residents, and probably many of the new, recognize that SI is different than the other boros, and suspect that increasing accessibility might change this charm. You can argue the point, but you can't blame them for not wanting to risk what they have.
Or you could suspect that the reason the Staten Islanders don't want a direct subway connection is because they don't want "THEM," "those people" from Harlem, etc. being easily able to enter their neighborhood.
It's no different that the infamous "LOOT rail" nonsense by BigDumb (aka Big Don) that drove me (and I'm sure others) out of the public-transit related groups on Usenet. Surprisingly, we don't get much of that nonsense in Chicago, even though Chicago is definitely not a paragon of race relations. I don't recall any NIMBY outcry when the Orange Line was built, running through and stopping in (white) blue-collar middle class neighborhoods in the general vicinity of Midway Airport.
On that subject, does anyone know if there was public objection when St. Louis built its Metrolink rail line across the Mississippi River into East St. Louis? If there was any place to fear, a la "LOOT Rail", East St. Louis is it. High crime, high unemployment, crumbling infrastructure, non-existent city revenue. The last I read on the topic, the largest building in town is abandoned, the police officers fix the police cars and supply their own walkie-talkies at their own expense, and the City Hall was almost sold to pay a civil judgment (in an unlawful police shooting case) because the city had no money to pay a judgment or even to make a plausible agreement to pay over time. I'm not saying the rail line shouldn't have been built, just that a NIMBY effort against it would not have been surprising.
We have our share of naysayers in Colorado. People didn't want Denver International Airport, saying that Stapleton was adequate. NOT!! It was outmoded, with an ineffective runway placement. DIA is equipped to land three planes simultaneously in bad weather. Others didn't want Major League baseball, saying there were more head of cattle than fans in Colorado. WRONG!! Coors Field is sold out for every game, and fan support has been nothing short of incredible. Not even the Mets can claim the same thing (While I like the Rockies, I will never root against the Mets). I could go on, but enough said.
As a black man, I have endured my share of prejudice and fear, but it's amazing how quickly people change their views when they see you're on their level, so to speak. It's also saddening to see how quickly people change when different people come to live with them. I have lived in Northeast Philadelphia(predominantly white) since 1985. I have had to put up with ignorance but never let it get to me. What right do they have to make me afraid. I don't let people take up space in my head. And bringing the rail issue into it, it's really strange to see what some people will consider "racial preference" or "racial inequality". I was on the Frankford el days ago when a black couple was discssing their opinions of the renovated el on the Frankford side. They were discussing why Septa had yet to do so on the Market Street side(which runs through predominantly black neighborhoods). "Oh, just them crackers at Septa. That's what they'll do. I wanted to talk to them and see why they had such negatives feelings about it. I could have told them that Septa is going to do the same thing to the Market Street el this year. But will this ignorance end? Will people stop looking for trivial means to label someone or something racist. I am from Brazil, and we didn't have these kinds of problems there. Everybody gets along. What happened in this country that has seemingly turned you against each other so?
I'm sure you studied American History. For 400 years, black people in this country were enslaved. It was a gruesome, mean, ignorant practice and it happened in the land of the free and the home of the brave. I know how uncomfortable I make some people. I have black friends who are comfortable around me as I am around them. But take me around their other friends and you can cut the tension with a knife. It seems like everyone hates and/or distrusts anyone who doesn't look like them. People who look like me don't exactly have the reputation as the friendliest race of people. I woder what kinds of things I would endure if I weren't white. I sure wish the USA were more like Brazil. Then discussions like this wouldn't be neccessary.
Enough of this 'NIMBY' nonsense! When YOU pay my mortgage and my property taxes,
then YOU can lobby for a subway connection that will only lead to a slow deterioration in the quality of life of other tax-paying Staten Islanders. The days of spending billions on projects that no sane person desires are hopefuly over!!
According to a piece in Newsday, the PA is considering a revival of the old! Rockaway Lirr line as an airport service to mix with its ltv proposal. At last some sanity! This would be the one seat ride hoped for. Since the Mta is also involved a hookup with the Montauk line should be done too, with a connection just before the LIC station back up the mainline for the eventual Grand Central hookup. At a relatively cheap cost, you could have a new, direct airport service AND a direct local service to sections of Queens from Grand Central. Go for it.
My only question to this plan is how much R-O-W exists above Liberty Avenue where the A train cuts in.
It is my understanding that some of the bridges/overpasses have been demolished, and businesses now exist where the tracks used to be.
This one wasn't rocket scientry, and took them long enough to figure it out.
In New York City, four people can stop anything, and there are more than foru homeonwers along the ROW. On the other hand, reactivating the ROW would improve the quality of life, property values, and economic activity in neighborhoods occupied by tens of thousands. We have a process designed for one thing -- to keep Robert Moses in his place. Moses is gone, and were talking about transit, but its the same process. Nice if it happens. Don't bet on it.
Where along the ROW? I was under the impression the ROW, though overgrown still existed. And isn't the land owned by the State or MTA? Did they actually sell it, or did these people trespass?
Does anyone know if there is really going to be a light rail from NY airport to a nearby sbuway station. I thought this idea had been talked about a lot, but nothing done,
Jason Chudleigh from Sydney, Australia
I have ridden on many subway systyms around the world and find the newyork transit athority.to bethe best subway systeyms in the world.
is your real name larry reuter.
It's nice to hear that you feel that way since quality is ultimately determined by the customer. However, it would be nice to know what other systems you are comparing NYCT too and in what areas you find it the best.
Oh, boy. Yesterday was my first time on the Philadelphia trolley since 1988. It's too bad we're down to 5(and 4 go in generally the same direction.) The two I miss most are the 15 and, of course, the 23. Why'd they turn them into buses? you'd figure trolleys would be a little more eco-friendly. And on this note, for all you Northeasters who miss PCC's and don't feel like the long trip to Frisco, Philly runs some special PCC service, not just at Christmas as I understand. More next time....
Us nor'easters who want to ride PCCs can go to Boston (I think they still have some on the Mattapan-Ashmont line), or, even in my backyard, Newark NJ.
-Dave
They have those in Newark?
yes in newark city subway they still run pcc's but not for long!!!
PCC s are comming soon to Kenosha WI Should be running by mid 1999. See PCC's on the WWW on this site.
Toronto still has two all-electric PCCs from 1950 (4500 and 4549) which are used occasionally, but only for charters and special events. These cars were substantially rebuilt in the early 1990s. The Kenosha cars are ex-Toronto boomers, also from the 4500-4549 series.
Yes They Do !
In response to the question about "regular" PCC runs on SEPTA, I am not aware of any outside of those chartered for group runs. Even though there are barely enough K-cars to provide the required line service on the 5 operating routes, there are no PCC "supplements" to the schedules as there were at one time, up until about '90/'91.
Two things to keep in mind: 1) SEPTA will allegedly conduct another Trolleyfest this year, and this event usually brings a bunch of PCC's out for a day or two (the bad news is it got rescheduled from last fall to this spring and looks like it'll get put off again to this fall). 2) NJT's Hoboken Festival is also allegedly being conducted on May 16. The last few Festivals have featured a Newark City Subway PCC on a flatbed for those who don't want to venture into Newark to ride the Subway.
Other PCC's in the Northeast include those at Seashore Museum (MBTA and SEPTA models), Connecticut Museum, Baltimore Streetcar Museum, and National Capital Museum.
Indeed, the Seashore Trolley Museum regularly runs PCC 2709, ex-SEPTA. We also occastionally run 3127, ex-MBTA. And we have two dozen others in various condition on the property.
Wanna learn to run one? Join up and become a volunteer operator!
Does the MBTA still operate PCC trolley cars on the Green Line? I visit Boston about once or twice a year and the past couple years, I haven't seen any.
Practically, no. Technically, yes.
The Green Line, as it is known to the public (B/Boston College, C/Cleveland Circle, D/Riverside, E/Heath) all use Type 7 (Kinki) and Boeing LRV cars.
However, PCCs still run on the Mattapan-Ashmont shuttle. This segment is known to the public as part of the Red Line, which extends from the Ashmont terminal of the Red Line. However, since it is in actuality a light rail service, it is operated and maintained by the Green Line division (training, maintenance, inspection, etc.).
Thanks. I visited last summer and was lucky enough to see both 2709 and the Red Arrow center door car in operation. Unfortunately, the PRT Nearside is in storage. I would have liked to ride it also.
Does anyone know where i can find some old AMTRAK timetables??
Arnold Joseph's shop, on Broadway, carries a good stock.
do you have an address, and where exactly on b-way?
1140 Broadway (at 20th St. or so), Rm. 701, Tel. (212) 532-0019
I wish the MTA would spend some money on passanger education about when to pull the brake cord. Just the other day on the Q after leaving 34th street southbound a group of young gentlemen got in to a heated agument right in the middle of the car that led to a full fledge fight. Everyone moved to the ends of the car to avoid this and then SOMEONE PULLED THE CORD.
Now we are sitting somewhere in the bowls of NY with a full fledge fight going on. How are we ever going to get any cops??
Somehow luck was with us, a paz had moved up through the cars asking for PD and amazingly on this ONE Q train there were 3 plaincloths cops and one uniform cop who came to the end car. Thank Gawd for plastic, all offending youths were plced in those neat little plastic tie strings they use for handcuffs now aday. Once the "scene" was under control the train operator was able to walk back and reset the R40's and then walk all the way back 10 cars so we were on our way.
This was the 2nd time in a month in the same long corridor that the cord has been pulled and it delayed HELP (other time was a sick pax, how the heck does EMS get to us in the tunnel???).
I think this is a life and death issue and the MTA/NYCTA and whomever should start a advertisement campain about the CORD and not just the MetroCard!!
(End Soapbox mode)
One thing that is very difficult to teach is 'Common Sense'. I have seen cords pulled for all sorts of 'reasons'. The most bizzar is the passenger who pulls a cord because the train is passing through a smoke condition in a tunnel. One would assume that you'd want to keep moving so that you pass through the smoke area. The other is the passenger who pulls the cord during a medical emergency or a police emergency, virtually insuring that help will not get there in time. Perhaps, the people who pull the 'Emergency Cord' believe that it rings an alarm bell instead of activating the emergency brake.
>>Perhaps, the people who pull the 'Emergency Cord' believe that it rings an alarm bell<<
That's an idea. I like the PATH trains with the call buttons as well as brake cords.
The existence of the brake cords always puzzled me. As a Phila resident, I never saw brake cords on subways until my first experience in NYC. My first reaction was that it seemed to be an invitation for vandals.
On SEPTA's cars, there is either no way to notify the train crew of a problem, short of pounding on the cab door of the motorman or conductor (current Market- Frankford cars) or an emergency alarm which notifies the train crew (Broad St cars). The M-4's will have the latter also. Would this not be sufficient for NYC stock? Is there a law or regulation or whatever that mandates the need for brake cords?
NYCT had a train of R-42's assigned to the J line with a "Customer Alarm System". Called the CAS train, it had more false alarms than anything else. It was recently removed from the cars.
I've got a better one for you:
The "emergency instructions" say DON'T pull the cord.
Why is the cord there then???
in case of emergency of course :) !
I would feel saffer in an airplane if anyone on it had access to the controls. (NOT) God bless transit and the antiquated rules we live by. Lets go back to the $.05 fare too.
Yes, the PATH trains seem to be sensibly equipped in this regard. There is a call button or switch located inside a box. To use it, a passenger must first open the box, then activate it. It seems more sensible than the "call strips" that are on the R-110 trains. They are just too tempting, and are probably used in situations that are hardly emergencies, or at least they would be if they were in "regular" cars, ones people rode in every day.
As for the emergency brakes, the recent practice of enclosing the cords in *alarmed* boxes should be implemented across the system. That should eliminate people pulling the cords as a prank. But would it stop people who pull the cord in "emergencies" that are made worse if the train stops? Perhaps the boxes covering the brake cords should say something like "Think. Pulling this cord will STOP the train. Is that really waht you want to do?" At least the brake cords do say "Brake" nowadays. They used to just be labeled "Emergency" which must have led to even more inappropriate use than exists today.
Perhaps this cord pulling will be alleviated with the upcoming R142/R143 order that contains the passenger to train operator intercom .... These folks must figure that pulling the cord will get the train crew's attention ... and it DOES, but it can also be putting an entire train at risk, just as you have shown with your example of someone pulling a cord in a smoke condition!
Any plans to retrofit existing cars with passenger to crew intercoms?
--Mark
Why cant we take videos or photographs of the subways or other transit areas that we travel in ? is the transit authority so broke as to fine us for this harmless act ?
There is no law against taking photos on NYC Transit property.
See the Subway FAQ for details.
You can take pictures if you want as long as you don't use flash.
Never thought about this before but under what circumstances would it ever be appropriate for a passenger to bring the train to a stop? About the only thing I can come up with would be if someone was caught in the door and being dragged. Does that ever happen?
For anything else it seems like a help call would be better than the emergency brake.
Any thoughts?
Bill
I suppose the other rare occurrences could be:
- the train operator passes out with his weight still on the controller
- the passengers feel the train operator is not operating the train safely and they determine that the train should be stopped.
- person walking betwen cars stumbles onto trackway. A train operator would have no way of knowing this.
Hmmmm ... when did the emergency brake cord first appear on NYC subway cars? After the Malbone St wreck?
--Mark
I can think of another situation when it would be proper for passengers to bring a train to a stop - if a medical/police/etc. emergency occurs after the train's doors have closed but before it pulls completely out of the station. Admittedly, this isn't particularly likely.
This did happen to me, we were at Prospect Park and a gentleman was having a seziure. I tried to keep the doors open but the conductor just yelled on the intercom to stop holding the doors. A person went to run up to the conductor's operating station but the doors got closed, at this point the brake cord was pulled.
The gentleman did pass out and a fellow passanger was able to call on his cell phone 911 well before any TA employee with a radio even got to the car. I am so glad that we did not leave the station and EMS was (now NYCFD) there within 7 minutes of the cell phone call.
Cell phones work in the subway?
No Cell phones do not work IN the subway. This was Prospect Park Station on the D/Q line where the subway comes up into an open cut, only the last 2 or 3 cars are still underground. This happened in the front half of the train while still in the open cut I guess he did get a good enough signal to call. I know that I can use my cell phone from Newkirk Ave and beyond on the way to Coney Island from past experience.
And one more reason, which I have seen three times in the last three months: child (or parent) gets on train while parent (or child) is still on platform and the conductor closes the door and the train begins to move. This has happened at Queens Plaza on a Jamaica-bound F; Kingston Avenue on a Manhattan-bound 3; and Times Square on a Brooklyn-bound 3. This has got to be the STUPIDIST thing that a parent can do.
This sounds like another good reason NOT to have the cord! Cut the cord now!
When the Kawasaki cars first came here to Phila, the center doors had warnings posted above them not to leave small children use the doors behind parents, since the treadle sensors were not sensitive enough to detect the weight of a child and the doors could close, leaving the child on the car and the parent/ adult at the stop. This was the same situation on the PCC's and on the then-new AM General tracklesses. I can't count the number of times, despite these warnings, that parents would leave the car first and then bang on its side and yell that his/her child was still on the car behind the closed exit doors. It even got to the point that trolley operators would take advantage of the PA systems on the cars to remind people of this problem, usually to no avail. It continues to happen, 18 years after the K-cars first came to Phila, as I witnessed a few weeks ago.
It's not just a Philadelphia problem. In Baltimore the treadles were set for a 45 pound weight setting. We always had to watch the center door mirror to be sure a dumb parent would get off first and then try to pick the child up as the doors closed. I would always balance the doors if I saw this, which would cause the door bell / low air buzzer to sound when the doors were recharged.
At the BSM we still have this problem, 35 years after streetcars disappeared from Baltimore's streets.
Some things NEVER change!! Stupidity still exists.
I think most riders don't know that he activation of the cord disables a train on the spot and that it must be manually reset. Even with a sign there, people don't read, don't know how to read, or don't know how to read English. It would be impossible to put up signs in the many languages spoken.
Actually, all the common languages spoken in New York could state warnings and explain how the cord works if they were put on the subway maps. Granted, this is not an end-all solution, but at least its a start; and maybe some of the riders for whom English is a second language will get the message.
I have heard Ronkonkoma referred to as 'KO' by LIRR crews. It sounds fairly logical until you hear the same people refer to Deer Park as 'JS' and Riverhead as 'LD'. I heard one explanation of this. Does anyone have any insight or know of any other curious abbreviatioons.
Another LIRR trivia question: What is the MAS (maximum allowable speed) of the FL-9/bi-level train.
Perhaps those abbreviations refer to the name of the interlocking towers nearby.
Perhaps, but not the explanation I was given !!!
I like the name of the tower DIVIDE i think it is or GREAT DIVIDE something like that... What's the other name of the tower at Jamaica (Not Jay the other one)??
I think that they call it Morris, named after Morris Park Yd. (not the cat).
This brings up another trivia(l) question; The employee-only station for the Hillside Facility is simply called Hillside. What is the employee platform at the Morris Park Yard (Brooklyn Branch) called?
I think the tower just East of Jamaica is HALL ... after (Union) HALL (St.).
You are absolutely correct. My error.
The most unusual tower on the LIRR has to be PD Tower at Patchogue. It's more accurately known as the Leaning Tower of Patchogue, given the list it has! In fact, when I saw Titanic last weekend, and near the end the ship's decks were listing and people sliding down them, I couldn't help thinking of PD Tower :-)
Have Septa's new cars been in revenue service latley? I have seen them sitting at 69th st terminal twice now but Septa says there still testing them, what's going on.
At last count there are 18 M-4's on the property and two 6-car trains have been in and out of regular service in testing mode. I have heard that they do NOT operate in the peak hours. When the single train was operating, it was on a regular schedule on Tue, Thu and Sat from 10 AM to 2:30 PM. I do not know if the two test trains are on a similar schedule.
What's the big fuss about them anyway???
I've taken the current stuff on HOT summer days, and while I'll agree it's not spectacular, those BUDD cars aren't anywhere near the junkers the LIRR has. Actually, I thought they had a bit of personality to them. Are they unreliable, or just hated by Philly??
We hate them. At least I do. They smell. They're hot in the summer. They smell. They look dingy. They smell. They're noisy, even for a subway car. Did I mention they smell? While I grant you they're not the R-110b(A darn fine car if you ask me) they're the newest cars since 1959!!!!!!!!!! The BSS opened 20 years after the El and they got new cars 15 years ago that blow the M-3s away! I like the fact that we'll have something new to look at. I despise those fan "humps" on the top. Makes the train look like a silver Baby Ruth bar.
I think they're great, too. However they are not air-conditioned, except for the air flowing through the windows of the end doors. I assume they are just getting too old to be reliable, since they were originally purchased in 1960, I believe. The new cars are very similar looking (at least in photographs I've seen), so apparently SEPTA agrees that the old Philadelphia Transit Company made a good choice 38 years ago.
I know the old ones have two font windows and the new ones three. They also have one big AC hump Instead of the 4 little ones.
I'm not so sure the riders would agree that the cars are in need of replacement if you take the AC issue out of the discussion. When the order for new cars was announced, I recall that many riders felt that the Budds were not that old that they needed to be supplanted by newer cars.
The Budds always have been deceivingly modern-looking and, considering that they replaced cars that were between 38 (the current age of the Budd fleet) and 53 years of age, the previous fleet was greatly in need of retirement when the Budds came along. This is Phila, remember - we have a history of keeping rapid transit cars a long time (the original Broad Street cars lasted for 55 years!_. We don't throw things away too hastily!
The Budds tend to be hot in summer and cold in winter (yes, the heaters are somewhat inadequate, and with outdoor terminals at either end where the cars lay over open to patrons, they can get quite cold). SEPTA was anxious to get AC cars on the line at some point. The age of the Budds, which, as noted, we tend to forget, was hammered home in the '90 derailment. They are wearing out. The harsh winters of the late '70's took a significant toll on the cars and this began to show once again in '94 when Phila had severe snow and ice.
By the time the M-4's are all here, the Budds will be 40 years of age. That's time enough!
I dissagree. I think the Budds, like the Brightliners, can last a bit longer (10 - 15 years). True, they may not be as "modern" as new equipment is, but they are solidly built, something that can't be said of some newer equpiment, noteably the current LIRR/Metro-North electric fleet, which is already falling apart (the LIRR has scrapped 10 M-1s so far). Heck, Metro-North is still running the ACMUs, which are late 50's vintage, but still in good condition. I believe the issue with the ACMUs is probbably the real reason why the Budds are going too - they aren't exactly ADA compliant. The ACMUs have fairly narrow, manual, doors at the end, no closing bell, and a "dangerous" passage between cars (better than the LIRR diesel stuff though). I don't remember a PA system on them, and they sure don't talk. The Budds are in the same boat too. Look at newer subway and commuter equipment. The Boston red line stuff talks, has "disabled" spaces by the doors, wide doors, etc. I personally hate talking trains (and busses too, LI bus has them, you go insane after a few stops), and see no reason for them, though wider doors, etc help everyone.
Have the Budds even been rebuilt yet??
The "talking" feature is another ADA compliance requirement. It is for visually impaired passengers so they will not miss their stop.
No, the Budds have never undergone a major rehab or rebuild program, and that's the main source of the problem. I agree that they COULD last several more years if this had happened. The program was supposed to be undertaken in the late 70's but it never did. The only result of this was the lone AC equipped single unit.
There are Silverliners in the commuter rail fleet which are nearly as old as the El cars and the 'liners are in much better shape. They are about to undergo a second major rehab! If the same level of care were applied to the Budds, there would be no need for M-4's.
Of course, the Budds being the last transit vehicles in Phila that are not AC does not help matters very much either. It's just another example of the throwaway society that we have today.
The M-3's are the last subway cars in the US without AC.
I'm not so sure the riders would agree that the cars are in need of replacement if you take the AC issue out of the discussion. When the order for new cars was announced, I recall that many riders felt that the Budds were not that old that they needed to be supplanted by newer cars.
The Budds always have been deceivingly modern-looking and, considering that they replaced cars that were between 38 (the current age of the Budd fleet) and 53 years of age, the previous fleet was greatly in need of retirement when the Budds came along. This is Phila, remember - we have a history of keeping rapid transit cars a long time (the original Broad Street cars lasted for 55 years!). We don't throw things away too hastily!
The Budds tend to be hot in summer and cold in winter (yes, the heaters are somewhat inadequate, and with outdoor terminals at either end where the cars lay over open to patrons, they can get quite cold). SEPTA was anxious to get AC cars on the line at some point. The age of the Budds, which, as noted, we tend to forget, was hammered home in the '90 derailment. They are wearing out. The harsh winters of the late '70's took a significant toll on the cars and this began to show once again in '94 when Phila had severe snow and ice.
By the time the M-4's are all here, the Budds will be 40 years of age. That's time enough!
The cars are showing their age now in an unsafe fashion. Two days in a row now I was on two different cars when the brakes went kooky. Entering 30th Street eastbound the entire first car went past the platform because of the brakes(or so the motorman said). THAT'S SERIOUS! I hope the M-3's are gone before we have another derailment(this is scary to me. remember-it's called the EL!)
Right now the El cars are pieces of trash. My understanding is they're basically being held together with spit and chewing gum. I can personally attest that the doors have an awful habit of sticking open, and even when they do close they never seal properly. (All the doors have big stickers on them saying "Do not lean on door--may open unexpectedly!!" Comforting.) They have brake problems, metal fatigue problems (what caused the crash a few years ago--something fell off the bottom of one car and got tangled in a crossing), no AC, no door chimes, etc. I love them as much as anyone--riding with the front window open and the wind in your face may be the best experience in North American transit. But it is long past time for them to go.
"All the doors have big stickers on them saying 'Do not lean on door--may open unexpectedly!!' Comforting."
To be fair to SEPTA, the CTA always announces "Do not lean against the doors" at every stop as the train leaves the station, though there hasn't been an incident for years where someone fell from a moving train because a door opened. I personally think this is a relic from the cars with folding doors, because leaning on the sliding doors shouldn't cause them to open but leaning on the folding doors can very easily cause them to open.
Chicago rapid transit cars, some of which are fairly new and many others totally remodeled, don't have door chimes either. The "old" Metra cars don't, but the new ADA-compliant cars, of which each train must have at least one, have a door chime and voice: "Bing BING. The doors are about to close."
Did you notice the feature of the computer voice saying "Doors are closing."? The BSS also has door chimes and sometimes the train announcer at 15th Street tells you to watch the doors.
The old Broad St stock had stencils on the window panes in the doors stating "Keep Clear of Door". On one trip leaving Pattison Ave in the mid-70's, that notice took on new meaning to me.
The car I was on, one of the original '28 group, gave off its usual "whoosh" of air which signified that the doors were closing. The doors were two panel sliding type with a center post. As the doors were closing, I thought I heard a "clunk". When the doors had closed and the train began to move, one of the door panels in the set opposite my seat dropped right out of its track onto the platform. With the large pane of glass in the door, the sound of cracking glass was quite loud, easily heard over the whine of the traction motors. I thought for sure the train would go into emergency, but it kept on moving and picked up speed as it cleared the crossovers toward Oregon station. I went back to the conductor's cab and got his attention, and the train stopped at Oregon where it went out of service. Neither the conductor nor the motorman could understand why the train didn't go into emergency, except that perhaps the door circuit indicated that a door was closed (not that a door was missing!).
After that, I tended to "keep clear of door"!
Also, I was on a southbound local out of Olney not long after that and a patron squeezed through the doors as they were closing. He was most of the way in but the train started on its way, even with the door not fully closed. He finally got all the way into the car about halfway between Olney and Logan.
Did youhear about the accident in Jacksonville, Florida?
An automated Peoplemover car struck and killed a workman on the structure.
Speaking of people movers---There are plans in the works to try and get some dollars to build a people-mover/ monorail in the city Baltimore the inner harbor complex and Oriole Park @ Camden Yards and the new stadium for the Ravens due to debut w/ the upcoming NFL season......we'll see.
There is also a proposal to build a light rail system and a people mover in the area of the Nassau County Downtown to the Colliseum & Marriott area. One interesting proposal would be to have a system of 'individual people movers', cars that would carry up to 4 people, directly from point A to Point B. When unoccupied, they would cruise like empty cabs or wait for a call on a siding.
Steve, what you are discribing sounds alot like the PRT at the West Virginia Univ. in Morgantown....all those cars are computer operated and move from place to place based on the programming when people board......
God, I hope NOT!!! The City of Baltimore Public Works director asked for $2M for "planning". Maybe the City Council thinks he's kidding. Somebody from Upcountry (up Parkton way) suggested in a letter to the editor in our local rag that a "trolley line" would be a better use for the money spent - "heritage trolley lines have been a success everywhere they've been built".
The whole mess is the result of a multi-million dollar hotel being proposed by a politically connected individual a mile and a half from the newly expanded Convention Center. This has proponents and opponents and goes on forever.
I could go on, but.......
Sheesh!!
Dan, I couldn't have said it better----The almighty dollar (and lobbying group) speaks again......I should hope that common sense would prevail, but, oh that's right, this isn't Oz, it's the land of O's.
Don't worry. I work in planning. When the government wants to do something it does it. When it doesn't want to do it, but does not want to draw fire from those who want something, it does a study. And another study. And another study. As long as they are doing studies, nothing will get built.
What is the allowable circumferential (or diametrical - which ever is used) variation between train wheels which are mounted on the same axle?
Current NYCT standards for maximum wheel differences are:
1/8" difference between wheels on the same axle
1/4" difference between wheels on the same truck
1/2" difference between wheels truck to truck
Just a reminder (& correction) "The Incident" the 1968 way-cool movie, wil be on The CINEMAX pay service on the morning of 3/26 at 6:45 AM ET (also for those outside the east, at 6:45 PT, if you get the West feed of Cinemax). a great chance to get this greatmovie sans commercials.
Just recently, I started to hear the term, "Peoplemover". Can anybody tell me
what they are in detail? Is Peoplemover just a nickname some cities use for
their rapid transit system? Are Peoplemovers usually operated as part of city
transit systems? How do Peoplemovers compare to subway/elevated, and light rail
systems? What cities currently have Peoplemovers? Thanks.
The only Peoplemover I've been on is in Miami. It's really quite ingenious. It's run on an elevated cement track with the guide to keep it from falling to the street in the center of the track. And it's totally automated. Station announcements are pre-recorded and there is no operator. Because the car is small, so are the stations and so is the distance between stations.
It's about two-thirds the size of a bus with only a few seats. Most people during rush hours will stand but the ride is not supposed to be too long. It travels two or three routes thru downtown Miami, has about 30 stations and is designed to take you from whatever downtown office building you work in to a single subway station (also an el) on Miami's one subway line. The subway line runs from the northwest suburbs to downtown, then to the southwest suburbs. Depending on how you pay, you have either a free or 25 cent Peoplemover ride to connect you with your $1.50 subway ride.
One other note about the Miami subway and people mover. Everything is totally in English. It's more English than the NYC or Chicago systems. Clearly English speaking politicians have kept the Miami rapid transit system English-only which makes little sense in a city that is the de facto capital of Latin America and derives so much of its income from tourists and trade from Spanish-speaking countries.
The monorail at Newark Airport is a pretty good example of a peoplemover.
West Virginia University @ Morgantown has one that connects the two campuses and the downtown area...a track map is located here on NYC Subway Resources in the transit maps section.
I guess you could (don't laugh) include the namesake "peoplemover" at Disney World in this...maybe the monorail would be a better example since it has more than one station and a couple of lines.
The Walt Disney World Monorail System is considered an Intermediate Capacity Rapid Transit System. It handles many more people that a peoplemover could ever handle.
--Mark
Wasn't the term "peoplemover" also used for moving walkways such as they have at airports? That's what the term seems to have meant when it was used in the MTA's 1968 "Plan for Action" referring to a proposed crossing of midtown Manhattan at 48th St.
Other examples of Peoplemovers are the terminal shuttle at DFW airport, and the shuttle between the aircraft gates and the main terminal at Orlando airport.
Since the advent of mass auto ownership, most older forms of mass transit in most places have been used primarily by the poor. Since the movement of most whites into the middle class, which occurred at the same time, mass transit has been associated with racial and ethnic minorities. Mass transit ridership, therefore, is associated with diminished social and economic status.
Therefore, a peoplemover is a form of mass transit intended to attract middle class whites. Light rail is a trolley designed to attract middle class whites. Coach service is a bus designed to attract middle class whites. And commuter rail is heavy rail designed to attract middle class whites. A people mover can be a monorail, a subway, light rail, or anything else, as long as the affluent do not feel diminished by riding on it, and it is thought of as an equal quality experience to a car. It is mass transit's attempt to use that old private sector marketing ploy, snob appeal.
Perhaps if the subway, and the city's economy, continue to improve, it can be designated a "peoplemover." There are those where I work who beleive that if the "subway" is connected to LaGuardia Airport, business people will not use it. If a people mover is connected to commuter rail instead, it will work. I say they are too negative about human nature, at least in New York. Then again, who is to say.
I don't think that's necessarily correct. Have you ever been to Miami? Their downtown people mover is great. it has a loop branching off to three lines, and everybody uses it. It seems the subway hardly goes where you want it to.
Last time I was in Miami (for Super Bowl XXIX – San Francisco/San Diego), the People Mover cost a quarter and was usually on time. It hooked downtown to the Miami Arena and to other parts of the city, including the Omni Mall. its something we should have for LGA.
In the case of Jacksonville, it is a political boondoggle.
In reality, it is a very expensive monorail like vehicle that traverses
an elevated guideway. The cars are automated, that is, no operator.
I'll get some pictures soon.
I reject the notion that the term "PeopleMover" has been adopted as
a moniker for mass transit to make it more appealing to middle class
whites.
Websters Dictionary defines people mover as: "any of various rapid-transit
systems (as of moving sidewalks or automated driverless cars) for
shuttling people"
There is a great web-site that covers the technology at:
http://www.fta.dot.gov/fta/library/technology/apm/apmrev.html
One of the most successful urban transit line-haul application of the
technology is the Vancouver, BC SkyTrain, operated by BC Transit. One
of the most widely used systems for activities (such as airports) was the
Westinghouse PeopleMover, used at Atlanta, Los Vegas and all Florida
Airports. Of course, the original and first PeopleMover would have to be
the PeopleMover in Disneyland's Tomorrowland in California. It was
provided by a company named WedWay, which until than had specialized in
automated cargo moving systems.
To use the term PeopleMover to refer to commuter rail, heavy rail, light
rail or any non-automated form of transit would be improper. It is
generally accepted that a people mover is a high-capacity, automated
guideway system used for various applications.
Hmmm ... I though that BC's "SkyTrain" and the Scarborough Rapid Transit (Toronto) were both rated ICTS (Intermediate Capacity Transit Systems) - they were designed to handle a large number of people, not as much as heavy rail (subway), but more than "light rail" (LRV applications).
--Mark
Denver International Airport has a peoplemover between the terminal and the three concourses. It's like a subway in that it runs entirely underground, but it is fully automated. Even the tunnels are very similar to New York subway tunnels. Three-car trains were run when the airport opened, but traffic proved to be so heavy that additional cars were ordered and additional doors were added at the stations to accommodate four-car trains.
Chicago's O'Hare Airport also has a peoplemover much like Denver's, except it runs on an elevated structure.
Hi ,
A new version of the MM Railway screen saver will be released early next year
and the programmer needs drawings that meet the specifications below :
- Windows bitmap ( *.bmp )
- 16 standard colors ( full color , not B&W or outlines )
- Scale : 1 pixel covers 10cm in reality
- Animated locomotives : 4 bitmaps ( rotating parts are drawn in steps of
90 degrees )
No US or Canadian trains are currently represented on his version 3 list
located at the website below ( you can get more info , a demo ) :
http://home.t-online.de/home/MMM/homepage.htm
thanks , its a great screen saver and would be nice to have US trains in the
next version like Amtrak or Union Pacific ( including Amtrak's NEC services ).
-
It would be VERY interesting if a NYC subway-specific screen saver were to be available.
Perhaps a screen saver with round and diamond-shaped route letters and numbers bouncing across the screen could be considered by the developer...
Heck, I'd write one, but:
a) I need to dig up my Codewarrior CDs to reinstall a few things first.
b) MacOS 8 killed my version of Afterdark, so I have no way of testing it.
c) Who the hell uses Macs anymore (bsides me), and no, I'm not about to port to Wintel.
Ooo.... I think Apple covered drawing to the screen in some TIL article a while back, maybe I'll write an INIT that runs little #7 trains around the screen while you work :)
Hi all,
I need information on E line between 71-Continental & Jamaica Center.
Rush Hours: skips 75th & Brairwood/Van Wyck
Middays: ??
Evenings: ??
Nights: All stops
Weekends: ??
Thanks in advance,
Michael Adler
During Rush Hours and Mid-day and early evening (while G runs, till 9pm) the train runs express. After 9 pm until 530am it runs local making all Queens Blvd stops. On weekends it is more complicated--assuming no diversion it runs express to 71/Continental. After this stop it runs local.
Late nights the E runs local making all stops (as does the F.)
When the E runs local, the express tracks are used for storage from Union Turnpike to the turnoff.
Hope this helps
I have seen trains stored on the express tracks from 75th Ave. on. Speaking of 75th Ave., on earlier maps, it carries the designation, "75th-Puritan Ave".
Buff--
I had thought the E operated the same way from 9 pm until midnight as it does on weekends (express 71st/Continental to Queens Plaza).
Actually, when I just looked at my version of THE MAP, no mention is made about the differing express operations weekdays and weekends.
Then, I looked at the website, and according to the time schedule, the 71st/Continental to Queens Plaza express operation begins at 7 PM!!!
So now that Mike is totally confused... (actually, both Mikes, Adler and me...)
Kind regards,
Mike Klufas
The map I picked up last fall (not THE MAP) corrected a previously overlooked tidbit regarding E express service in Queens. Unless things have changed, the service pattern for the E is thus:
Rush hours and middays: express between Jamaica Center and Queens Plaza.
Evenings and weekends: express between 71st-Continental and Queens Plaza.
Late nights: all local stops.
Previous maps erroneously had the E running express in Queens all the way to Jamaica Center at all times; station signs were also labeled as such.
Midays and evenings are the same as rush-hours
I am here to help
Which is the NYCT line with the most stops during:
1. rush hours (note: reverse-peak-only stations do not count)
2. weekends
3. nights (I'm guessing the 4; it seems to be longer than the 2)
4. middays (optional)
5. evenings (optional)
-- P+rfnoff
for item #2 it is the A which runs local to Far Rockaway in Brooklyn
For item #3, again the A, this time also running local in Manhattan.
#1 has to be the C, right?
If that was too easy, how about the shortest (in terms of number of stops) NON-SHUTTLE line running under each of those conditions. (Things like the evenings/nights/weekends M line and the former Q from Queensbridge to Broadway/Lafayette are shuttles. The E line, perhaps?)
How about the G when it terminates at Court Square?
For rush hours, the least-stop line seems to be the 7 express. That's right; only 15 stops! A runner-up is the Q line (on my old map running to Queensbridge via 6 Av), and the Z line, with 19, is not far behind.
I think I've found THE SHORTEST line during late nights -- the R train, with only 8 stops from 36th Street to 95th Street.
Unfortunately, I classify the late-night R as a SHUTTLE.
Unfortunately, I thought it might have been classified as a shuttle. Could you clarify again what is and isn't a shuttle?
The most stops at night is the A train when it is Local.
For Rush Hours I guess the R train.
What do you think?
In the documentary, "Subway:The Empire Beneath the Streets", there is old footage of the orinal first subway line about halfway through the documentary. In one scene I believe I see 42 Street- Grand Central in black and white. You can see from the front window of the train peole dressed in turn of the century clothing, stepping back. Where is this station located, is it still in use or if not where can it be seen? It looked like this station had high cielings.
Also a question about subway in the movies. What Alfred Hitchcock movie was it where a dying man mentions something about a body being buried in "the beach" as the detectives thought he meant but he actually meant the Beach Pneaumatic Subway.
The original 42nd Street stations are the two shuttle stations. AN interesting piece of trivia: After the current lines were built, this section continued to have justa local station at Tims Square. Later, track 2 was removed and the current island platform for track 3 was built. The present Timse Square (1/2/3/9) and Grand Central (4/5/6) Stations are not original but added when the original (City Hall to 42 to West side to 145.) If you go to the 1/2/3/9 platform and go to the shuttle station, walk to the platform on track 4. You can still see the track conenctions to the mainline local track , and the gap in th I-beams wherer the connection tot he opther tracks was. (Yes, the metal bridge can be removed for trains, usually done at midnight hours but even then they usually replace trains via track 1 at Grand Central SHuttle Station(connects to downtown Local>)
>(Yes, the metal bridge can be removed for trains, usually done at midnight
> hours but even then they usually replace trains via track 1 at Grand
> Central SHuttle Station(connects to downtown Local>)
Actually, train replacement on shuttle tracks 1 and 3 is done from the Grand Central end, and on track 4 it is done, lifting the metal bridge, from the Times Square end. The reason is that there is no direct track connection between shuttle track 4 and the other tracks. Why they don't build a switch connection, I don't know.
The reasoning was probably simple: since Track 4 has a direct connection with the West Side uptown local track, there was no reason to tie it to the other shuttle tracks. It would be nice if it did have a tie-in, however...
[re: connecting of shuttle track 4 to 1 and 3]
Why should the TA connect track 4 of the shuttle to the other tracks?? It is a waste of perfectly good money. Train replacment takes the same effort whether or not is from the West side or East-side line (save for raising the bridge, which is no big deal anyway)
JC
I think that black and white scene you were referring about is a movie from the Library of Congress. The filming began at 14 St- Union Square where a camera was put in front of an uptown local train on the lexington ave line. The train with the camera on it filmed another uptown local train directly in front of it. It proceeded up the uptown local track stopping for a few seconds at the 18 St, 23 St, 28 St, and 33 St stations. The film ended at the Old 42 St Grand Central Station. I downloaded the movie from the Library of Congress website about one or two years ago. The film lasts 6 minutes and it's a 57 megabyte download.
Thank you all for the response. I may one day when I get a zip drive download the film. I do remember looking at the Library of Congress website about that film.
If you look close, you'll notice just how sharp the curve is just before the train enters Grand Central; I don't think the station platforms extended to the curve. I'm curious as to how much of the original Grand Central station on the shuttle remains today. The passageway to the Lex was supposed to be an extension of the shuttle, but then they realized that two tracks and one platform would be insufficient, and left the original station as the shuttle terminal.
I am looking for ideas on how to get from NYC to JFK either by train from Penn station or by bus from Port Authority 2nd stt.
I don't live in NYC and am looking for info. either name of carrier or schedule
From Penn Station, you could take the A train to Howard Beach (make sure the train is marked Far Rockaway) and transfer there for a free bus to JFK. I think the trip takes anywhere from 60-90 minutes depending if the A is running express in Brooklyn and bus transfers at Howard Beach. From Penn Station, you could also take the E train to Kew Gardens and transfer to the Q-10 bus to JFK. Not sure, how long this takes. I would say to allow at least 1 hour.
I'm pretty sure there is still an express bus from the Port Authority Bus Terminal (on 42nd Street) to JFK. I used to take it regularly, but haven't in a few years. Not sure of the fare...
To JFK...
My prefered route is to take the LIRR to Jamaica, then a cab to JFK.
Penn Sta. - Jamaica $3.75 20 min.
Jamaica - JFK about $10 15 min.
The whole trip costs a lot less than a cab to JFK, and is a helluva lot faster than the A train.
'Bye
Alex
anc8@columbia.edu
Simple enough. Take the A train southbound (Far rockaway train, not Lefferts Blvd). Ride in the middle of the train. Get off at the Howard beach station. Use the stairway to get to the northbound platform. Walk along the northbound platform to the north end of the station where you'll find a passage to the shuttle busses.
From the Port Authority, you can take the Carey Bus to Kennedy Airport. The fare is $13.00, however, I heard rumers that it might have been replaced by Olympia Bus. Trans-Bridge Lines also offers limited service from the Port Authority to Kennedy Airport (they also go to Newark Airport).
According to "Transit Transit", a monthly video news magazine, we will see the first of the R-142's (of course not all 1,080 of them). Now, the question is, will they be on time, and how many will be delivered first?-Nick
Taking slamtrak up home today, I noticed in the Bronx a section that looks like it broke off from the line (the overgrown tracks were the giveaway), and continued up an embankment to what would have been an elevated stretch. Sure enough, a second later, I noticed the remains of an elevated structure, which looked like I was a few hundred feet long and crossed a few streets. Did I forget my pill this morning, am I having a flashback, or is this a part long forgotten NY,W&B rail line?? I know of the few abandoned stations along this stretch, but I never noticed this before...
Slamtrack? Oooh, the hits just keep on comin'.
Do you know just where on the line this was?
The NYW&B connection was via a ramp that ran from 174th to 177th St. The ramp was removed about a year ago, apparently in conjunction with the demolition of the adjacent Coliseum Bus Garage. The structure between 177th St. and 180th St. is still in place; it ends abruptly at the property line on the south side of 177th St.
There wouldn't have been any "overgrown tracks" there to be seen, but I can't think of anyplace else in the Bronx that would have them either. Can you place the site of these "overgrown traks" between any other landmarks?
Not really, the train was wizzing along here. I know it WAS right after one of the abandoned stops. I'll try to watch closely the next time I head up.
Well, first, if you were going northbound, was it on the left or right side of the train?
Left
I believe that it was not too far away from the Whitlock Ave. station where you saw this ramp... The ramp is located (if memory serves correctly) right after the bridge over the Bronx River.
Sure sounds like the NYW&B. Were the tracks still connected to Amtrak? I thought the tracks themselves would be gone by now - I never saw them when I took Amtrak.
On another note, if part of the ramp has been demolished, will it still be possible to build an alternate line that goes to Dyre Avenue in the future (like the 2nd Avenue line, for instance)? In one of the proposals the 2nd Avenue was to follow the Amtrak ROW then join with the Dyre Avenue line. I always thought it would use that ramp, since it was already built to railroad tolerance, which presumably would be enough for a subway. If the ramp is demolished and people start building on the property, would that development make this proposal even more unfeasible?
Does anybody remember a TV drama that took place in a subway train which was "stalled" on a switch track? The lights went out and one of the passengers got hold of the emergency axe and was threatening the other passengers. I think the plot was that one of the passengers was a murderer but we weren't sure which one. It aired sometime in the 50's or early 60's.
Anyone remember?
Bill
I don't know if it's the same one, but there was a TV movie in the late 60's/early 70's timeframe called "A Short Walk to Daylight", about a train trapped in a tunnel after an earthquake, I believe. I also think it was supposed to be an IRT line but R-1/9 equipment was used. ???
I don't remember an axe in "A Short Walk.." But I do remeber that they used the old BMT D units when it supposed to be the Lex Ave Line...... "Its MY subway,man..."
I'll bet they used the Court St. station (before it became the Transit Museum) as a station setting. I've never seen A Short Walk to Daylight, though I'd love to.
Thanks for the info. I'd like to see the Short Walk... but I'm pretty sure that's not the show I saw. Somehow I think it might have been a Rod Serling program, but it's a pretty dim memory.
Bill
They did use Court Street in "A short Walk to Daylight". I haven't seen it in a long time, but I think there were even signs that said "Court".
All the pityful whining about the lack of a Second Avenue line seems to center on building all the way down to Whitehall St. Yet the congestion everybody talks about is on the East Side. Would building the line down to, lets say 53rd. St. help? Surely the expensive stretch is the one in the Wall St. neighborhood, and I think there are plenty of parallel lines there. Commuters would redistribute themselves crosstown between 63rd and 42nd. Local reaction?
I have always thought that the Second Avenue Subway should feed into the Nassau St. ROW to get it all the way downtown. Any thoughts?
Not sending the 2nd Ave subway all the way to the Wall St area would just cause a heavier bottleneck at whatever last transfer point you establish. So if the 2nd Ave subway ended at, say 59th Street, you'd be causing a bottleneck (and crowding problem) at 59th St for all those people commuting downtown.
Re: - the Nassau St ROW, you mean terminating at Chambers St?
--Mark
Yes, I meant terminating at Chambers St. Trains could still be routed through the Montague St. Tunnel to various points in Brooklyn if need be, but I guess that would depend on ridership patterns that would develop.
No, because the line wouldn't just end in midtown, it would connect to the Bway exp tracks and run all the way downtown from there.
The current MTA plan is to build the portion from the connection to the 63rd St Broadway Express to 125th Street.
When the Second Avenue subway was first proposed, most people worked south of 14th Street. Its design, therefore, did not anticipate the development of Midtown as an even more important destination. Second Avenue is residential. A Second Avenue subway from the 60s to the 30s would be no close to Grand Central than the 6th Avenue Line.
In the early 1960s, the City Planning Commission proposed an alternative: Eliminating the BMT Broadway division north of Madison Square, and running it up Madison Avenue, with connections to Queens and to a Second Avenue subway north of 60th Street, serving the Upper East Side. That would have provided three IND/BMT lines though Midtown -- the 8th Avenue on the West, the 6th Avenue in the center, and the Broadway/Madison in the East. But it would not have served the hospitals in the East 20s, or the residential areas east of 3rd Avenue from 60th Street down to 14th Street.
Assuming the portion above 63rd St gets built someday, perhaps it would be better and cheaper to build new crosstown lines rather than an east side IND/BMT subway. One would take a north-south train into Midtown on 6th, 7th, or 8th Avenue, then travel crosstown to other destinations. The 14th Street subway is one such line. Perhaps a 6th Avenue station could be added on the Times Square shuttle, and it could be ramped down under the Lex and extended to the U.N. Perhaps the 7 could be extended to the west.
Of course, we already have crosstown buses, but the traffic, headway, and signal priority given to north-south avenues make them slower than walking. That's why I think a grade separated service is required. Not to tweak anyone's sensibilities further, but perhaps if such services were "peoplemovers," those arriving at Grand Central and Penn would also use them.
Why don't they build a cross-town spur from the 2nd Ave line across
Canal Street or 23rd or 34th. This would open the door to all kinds of
transfer options as well as cross town options as well as the ability to get between the Yorkville or the Upper East Side and Say, Penn Station or Tribecca without having to change trains.
Do I have to think of everything???
Funny you should mention Canal St...
There is a never-used tunnel under Canal St. I'm not sure how far it extends, but there was supposed to be a crosstown line from Broadway to the Hudson River. There's one catch: this tunnel begins just west of the now-unused Canal St. station - the one which leads to the south side tracks of the Manhattan Bridge. Maybe such a line could be tied into the Rutgers St. tunnel instead.
Yes build the 2nd ave line as much and as soon as possinle. Certainly tieing the line to the Nassau loop just below Grand/Chrystie is a good step either interim or permanent. The area from Houston to Midtown is both a destination and origination area for users from Man and the other boros and is also desperately in need of service. When this line is in place the L should be modified so as to connect and an Ave B station should be added. Guess which neighborhood I lived in! As to thre north end, again build and open as much as fast as possible. Ultimately go to the Bronx, but in fact the 63rd street tunnel is a great opportunity for several possinilities,
Personally, I think that the North terminusshould tie into the 2/5 at Third Ave. and come all the way down to the South Ferry station on the 1/9. This will create a service that will run down the East side and up the West side (or vice versa). At the same time, permanently extend 4 service to New Lots Ave. instead of Utica Ave. and change the north end of the 3 (148 St -135 St) to a shuttle. This keeps all stations serviced, adds new service on the east side that actually goes somewhere, and gives Transit another way of getting 2 trains to Manhattan when the spring at 116 St once again destroys Lenox Ave.
I was on the 4 train today and it went directly from 149 St. to Burnside avenue. It was a big help, considering that I was running slightly late. It saved me about seven minutes, due to its lack of stops! Awesome!
Easy Vasken there was construction on the 4 today and that is Luck. I mormaly when I go uptown on school trips never get that chance to save 7 to 10 minutes. Tomorrow you it may happen again cause the constuction will continue on and off.
Did the train go up the middle track? And, by the way, was this track ever used for revenue service?
Was there ever a #8 train in New York? It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to have 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-9 trains. And, what's the color scheme behind the lines? What color would the '8' train be or the 'H'(is the Rockaway Shuttle the 'H' or the 'S' as my map says?
The was an 8 train. Between 1955 and 1973 when the the Manhattan part of the third ave line was tore down. The Bronx part became a line. The 8 train. The color scheme is so that people wont get confused. The 4 train was magenta and the 5 was black. The B was also black and the AA was also magenta.
I am here to help.
Christopher Rivera
in 1979, they had 'the big change', where they went and changed all the line colors to match the street in Manhattan they ran under below 59st. All the Lexington Av trains became green, 8th Ave is Blue, 7th Ave red, B'way yellow, 6th Ave orange, and Nassau St brown. Now you knew that if the train coming down the CPW line had an orange sign, it was going to 6th Ave, and the blue on was going to 8th.
-Hank
Why did they tear it down? Knowing how riled up NYC can be at rush hour it makes no sense to tear down awhole el line(wasn't it?)
At the risk of us repeating a whole long discussion that we had a few months ago:
The 3rd Avenue El in Manhattan was ancient, could only hold lighter old cars, and made the neighborhood along 3rd Avenue much less worthwhile than it would be without it (I know, I know....not to us train buffs). And the line wasn't that crowded near the end. It also didn't connect to any other lines in Manhattan. In the Bronx, they had planned to replace it, but never did. It also was a lightly used line.
I know I've mentioned this before, but...
The 3rd Ave. el was supposed to be replaced by - surprise! - the 2nd Ave. line. We all know what happened there.
The R12's and R15's that ran on the #8 toward the end were not that light...
The #8 train used to run in Astoria as well.
Yes, there was a #8 Astoria route, which was the BMT designation. I don't believe this number ever appeared on any trains. Remember that the Astoria and Flushing lines were jointly operated by the IRT and BMT until 1949. IRT routes didn't have any markings until the R-12s and R-14s arrived, which was also in 1948-49. These cars were initially assigned to the Flushing line, which by then was IRT only, and became the #7.
#8 was also used to designate the Bronx portion of the 3rd Ave. el until it was closed in 1973; however, this number never appeared on the trains. R-12s running on that line displayed "Shuttle" on their bulkhead route curtains; World's Fair Lo-Vs simply showed the destination.
There's also been an idea poking around to use the 8 designation for the rush-hour 6 express. Apparently, the local/express distinction on that line has been confusing for many riders. I don't know if this plan is still active.
I think that would be a great idea, because it is confusing. If they could do that with the 1/9 and J/Z, why not a 6/8?
Or we could go to something like to old IND scheme (single letter express, double letter local) so the express would be '6' and the local '66' :-)
Then you would call the skip-stop (wait for it)
666 :)
-Hank
If the TA did that, they'd be accused of Satan worship.
"8" was also the IRT designation for Astoria. It can be found on the bulkhead rollers of the IRT cars of the late 1940's.
Bob Sklar
I don't think a train ever said 8 in Astoria, did it? If you mean a BMT 8-Astoria, those cars never ran with numbers except on Bway-Brooklyn. If you mean an IRT 8-Astoria, the line became BMT before numbered cars ever showed up on the IRT in the early 50s.
I believe the #8 designation for the Astoria line (BMT) was used prior to 1949. If so, then this number never would have appeared on the trains themselves.
Back when the Astoria and Flushing lines were jointly operated by the IRT and BMT, their station platforms were built to narrower IRT-size clearances. BMT trains from Manhattan terminated at Queensboro Plaza, and connecting service was provided by open-platform el cars and, later, Q units which were rebuilt for World's Fair service in 1939-40. None of the el cars ever had bulkhead roll signs.
When the joint arrangement ended, the Astoria line became a BMT operation, and station platforms were shaved back to allow 10-foot wide subway trains to be through-routed from Manhattan. The Triplex units were used on the Astoria line, typically on the #1 Brighton and later the #3 West End routes; it's possible they might have carried an 8 on their roller curtains. The R-16s had all numbers from 1 to 16, but they didn't arrive until 1954-55 and were assigned to the Broadway-Brooklyn and Myrtle Ave. lines intially. Some of them did run on the Astoria line later, but on the #2 4th Ave. local. Unless a #8 shuttle still ran after 1949, chances are this number never appeared on any rolling stock.
In addition to the 3 ave El, and other lines that were the number 8 which users posted, the 42nd Street shuttle is often refered to internally as the number 8 train. For a good laugh, walk up to a NYCT employee in times Square or Grand Central and ask how to get to the number 8 train.
JC
Is that why the train designations available to the public went from the #7 to the #9?
The Q train will become full time from 71 Contintal Avenue running local down Queens blvd and once it hits 6 Avenue it will become 6th avenue/brighton exprss and when that happens the B will become full time to Bedford Park Blvd and never go to 57 street and above again. The F and E will be a full time express in Queens
Full time as in 24hrs???
I would love a 24hr Q on weekends...
Heck I would just take a Q on weekends from 6am to 9pm as long as it is express in Manhattan and Brooklyn!!
Where'd you hear this from?
--Mark
^There is plenty of time for NYCT to work out a service plan.. The problem I have with yours, is that there will be multiple service duplications during midnite hours, something I don't see NYCT doing.
Okay this has gone tooooooo far. Lets face it sooner or later the trains on the Manhattan Bridge will be a memory. Why don't they make a rail bridge right along the Manhattan Bridge and Call it Manhattan Bridge JR. That will take a whole lot of traffic of the Bridge and it will cost one tenth of a tunnel being made. The will make room for high constuction and reduce the chance that the Bridge will be torn down.
A tunnel is les disruptive to the surrounding communities. If they were to build another bridge next to the Manhattan, it would have to be designed to carry more than just trains. It's not just the tracks that have problems, the entire bridge is ready to be dismantled.
-Hank
Certainly a bridge is attractive. I saw a TV show which chronicled a new bridge being built over the mighty Mississippi for $50 million. In contrast, we've dumped $500 million in the Manhattan since 1986 to no avail, a major league boondogle.
On the other hand, local residents could tie a new bridge up in teh environmental review process and courts for years. That's why Koch wimped out on replacing the bridge in 1986 -- the politics and conflict.
The thing that bothers me the most about the bridge is the capacity in the existing tunnels (assuming branch offs after and before the stations) and how close the bridge approaches are to the tunnels. These things used to get built all the time! Why does it cost so much?
Note: many of those who say the bridge is not strong enough for trains also say it is not strong enough for trucks, and it carries more trucks than any other East River bridge. Like the Brooklyn, it probably needs to be limited to cars and pedestrians. That implies a new vehiclular tunnel for the trucks, perhaps funded by a toll. That, too, would be controversial.
But I'm not personally worried about the trucks. I'm worried about the trains.
Do the trucks travel in the lanes above the tracks or in the 3 center lanes between the tracks. The problem is supposedly caused by the trains crossing the bridge on the outer edges of the lower level. Wouldn't trucks running right on top of the trains just add to the problem?? Are trucks banned from these upper roadways of the bridge?? If not, shouldn't they be??
Put it this way: having trucks running directly above the trains certainly wouldn't help - not with the way things are now. I've always felt that putting the tracks on the sides was a bad idea: if the bridge had been designed with the tracks in the center, there would have been much less flexing. Add to that, prior to 1967 and the Chrystie St. connection, the north side tracks, which fed the Broadway line, were used around the clock, while the south side tracks, which fed the Nassau loop, were used mostly during rush hours only. This resulted in much more flexing on the north side. Chances are the the engineers who designed the bridge figured that there would be equal use of both sets of tracks, so that flexing would be balanced on both sides. Obviously, this didn't happen until after the Chrystie St. connection opened, by which time the damage had already been done.
I don't think engineers anticipated the weight of heavier transit vehicles over the years, though the D-types were pretty heavy. I wonder if there was a tortion problem with the BMT standards when the bridge opened up in 1915.
--Mark
Granted, the BMT standards weren't quite as heavy as the Triplex units, but they still weighed in at 95,000-99,000 pounds apiece. It's safe to assume that flexing from subway trains was a problem on the bridge from Day One.
Actually that's a great idea but that would require something for the powers that be to do: To think.
i found this on the web while looking to find out what is actually wrong with the manhattan bridge.. all i ever see on this site it that something is wrong with it and i figure some of us might want to know whats wrong in the way of structural problems. anyone have any more information? check this out -
BAKER TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES DURING MANHATTAN BRIDGE
REHABILITATION
NEW YORK (6/18/97) -- Baker Engineering NY, Inc., has signed a 44-month, $5.8 million
contract with the New York City Department of Transportation to provide construction support
during rehabilitation of the Manhattan Bridge. Baker Engineering NY, Inc., is a unit of the Michael
Baker Corp. (AMEX:BKR).
Baker will provide shop drawing reviews, execution drawing reviews and specialized engineering
services, according to H.P. Lim, president of Baker Engineering NY. Construction work will
involve replacement of the bridge's westside subway floor system, redistribution of main cable
strands within the anchorages, rehabilitation of the anchorage eye bars, stiffening trusses, and tunnel
approaches. Bearings and some lower level floor beams will also be replaced.
Additional services to be provided by Baker include interim inspection every six months, load
ratings for critical members and development of repair/shoring details. Baker will also provide
engineering expertise to fully evaluate and remedy conditions. Richard Hallahan, P.E., Baker's
project manager, is prepared for a fast start on this time-sensitive project.
The Manhattan Bridge is a suspension bridge which joins eastern Manhattan with Brooklyn. With a
135-foot clearance above the East River, the 6,855-foot-long bridge has a suspended span of
1,470 feet. The bridge opened to traffic in 1910 and is known for its impressive 40-foot-high stone
colonnade. The bridge carries four vehicular lanes of traffic on the upper level. The lower level
carries four subway tracks and three vehicular lanes of traffic. A new 12-foot-wide cantilevered
bicycle/pedestrian walkway will be added to the west side of the bridge as part of this project.
Michael Baker Corp. (www.mbakercorp.com) provides engineering, construction, and operations
and technical services through its five global business units: transportation, civil, environmental,
buildings and energy.
i found this on the web while looking to find out what is actually wrong with the manhattan bridge.. all i ever see on this site it that something is wrong with it and i figure some of us might want to know whats wrong in the way of structural problems. anyone have any more information? is this stuff actually happening? check this out -
BAKER TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES DURING MANHATTAN BRIDGE
REHABILITATION
NEW YORK (6/18/97) -- Baker Engineering NY, Inc., has signed a 44-month, $5.8 million
contract with the New York City Department of Transportation to provide construction support
during rehabilitation of the Manhattan Bridge. Baker Engineering NY, Inc., is a unit of the Michael
Baker Corp. (AMEX:BKR).
Baker will provide shop drawing reviews, execution drawing reviews and specialized engineering
services, according to H.P. Lim, president of Baker Engineering NY. Construction work will
involve replacement of the bridge's westside subway floor system, redistribution of main cable
strands within the anchorages, rehabilitation of the anchorage eye bars, stiffening trusses, and tunnel
approaches. Bearings and some lower level floor beams will also be replaced.
Additional services to be provided by Baker include interim inspection every six months, load
ratings for critical members and development of repair/shoring details. Baker will also provide
engineering expertise to fully evaluate and remedy conditions. Richard Hallahan, P.E., Baker's
project manager, is prepared for a fast start on this time-sensitive project.
The Manhattan Bridge is a suspension bridge which joins eastern Manhattan with Brooklyn. With a
135-foot clearance above the East River, the 6,855-foot-long bridge has a suspended span of
1,470 feet. The bridge opened to traffic in 1910 and is known for its impressive 40-foot-high stone
colonnade. The bridge carries four vehicular lanes of traffic on the upper level. The lower level
carries four subway tracks and three vehicular lanes of traffic. A new 12-foot-wide cantilevered
bicycle/pedestrian walkway will be added to the west side of the bridge as part of this project.
Michael Baker Corp. (www.mbakercorp.com) provides engineering, construction, and operations
and technical services through its five global business units: transportation, civil, environmental,
buildings and energy.
The article which said that the bridge is not viable for trains in the long run was "Bridge Trains May Make Tracks", which was published in the Daily News on September 10, 1997. The story also appeared in the other newspapers, and on the radio. It was based on a New York City Department of Transportation report. If you want to know the situatation, get a copy of the report.
All the more reason to start working on viable alternatives; i. e., DeKalb-to-Rutgers-Cranberry-City Hall tunnel connections.
What is the URL of the website you got this from? It sure makes sense, although what they describe might not be ALL that needs repair. Both floor beams and anchorage fittings are classic points for deterioration on Suspension Bridges. The automobile roadway floorbeams are semi-redundant in that one may suffer a joint failure and not drop the roadway or even the car, The railroad deck system is something again! RR loads are concentrated, and a failed floor beam or girder connection could indeed cause one or more railcars to drop. Perhaps this has more to do with closing the bridge to rail traffic than the often quoted torsion effect, which I believe has been blown out of proportion. It was originally "exposed" in the newspapers in the late 50's when a news photographer took a series of photos across to the Williamsburg Bridge deck while a train passed on the Manhattan Bridge. When he developed the shots, he was amazed to see that one or two were shot well below the deck! He knew a scoop when he saw one, thinking the bridge had sank by that much. The city explained that the bridge had twisted under the off-axis load, and altered the line of his shot. The story ran anyway, but as you can see, nobody cared for forty years!
Check out http://www.wai.com. This appears to be the very firm responsible for repairing the bridge! No problem other than lack of steady funding by the city, they say. Their work is keeping lanes of traffic open, and will extend the bridge's life 50 years (from 1980), they say. But what about the train service? Aside from the fact that it is responsible for the deterioration of the bridge, they have little to say about the subway. And what about the fact that half the tracks have been out for a decade? They have nothing to say about that. Perhaps someone who knows more that me (ie. an engineer) should E-mail them and ask what the hell is going on, and what the hell was the 9/10/97 DOT report which said the trains had to get off about. Was that their report?
The website mentioned above includes a four page article on the Manhattan Bridge from a 1996 backissue of the company newsletter. It is somewhat self-congratulatory, as one might expect, but seems factual and relatively complete.
Go To:
http://www.wai.com./Newsletter/Spring96-insert/wanews1.html
The reality of the situation is that everyone in the MTA knows that the Bridge will not be able to sustain the heavy subway loads past 2002. No one wants to come out and say this for obvious reasons. Expect severe overcrowding as current
Bridge-based services are forced to use the Montague tunnels. Early MTA estimates are that 45 minutes additional commuting time EACH WAY are to be expected. The good news is that with an upgraded signal system, the tunnel can easily handle such an increase. A form of ship-stop service along the affected lines will also help smooth things out until a permanent solution can be devised.
2002 huh? Early MTA estimates huh?
The Department of City Planning just started a study of the issue. With luck the study will be done by 2002. Of course, there will be an incomming administration that year, so the release of the report will wait months, and perhaps years, before it will be approved for release. By then the city will be in recession, so any solution that requires money will be unaffordable.
Real estate prices sure have gone up. Perhaps I should sell and move out. I just need to know if the LIRR to Grand Central will be built so I can know where to move to. Should I warn the neighbors or sell first? Or should I begin lobbying to spare F service by preventing the former B, D, Q, N, R and M passengers from crowing on!
Here's an idea.
The A train's express run in Brooklyn now operates until I believe 10:00pm. On weekends, unfortunately, it is still local in Brooklyn. Since you have both A services running on weekends (Lefferts and Far Rockaway), why not make the Far Rockaway trains express in Brooklyn and the Lefferts trains Brooklyn locals. This would definitely make the run to JFK via Howard Beach more attractive by offering a faster service over the weekend. At night, service would stay the same with all A trains running local to Far Rockaway and connecting with the Lefferts shuttle at Euclid Avenue.
An alternative to this would be to run the C train to Lefferts on weekends as a Brooklyn local. I don't think this would happen as NYCT would need to provide more trains on the C to extend it on weekends. You already have the A in Brooklyn servicing Lefferts and Far Rockaway. Why not just switch the Far Rockaway trains to the express tracks between Euclid and Hoyt?
I am not certain that people who live near the A local stations along Fulton Street want service every 16-20 minutes, which is what they would get.
That infrequent service happens in Rockaway because the peninsula is only 4 blocks wide. It happens at the last three stations leading to Lefferts Blvd because the MTA won't provide a 8-10 minute shuttle service, which I think they should provide. But having a highly populated section of Brooklyn get very minimal service just to provide an express service on weekends is not a good idea.
Having the C train run on weekends is a good idea, if the train usage is high enough. Since they don't provide it, it must not be high enough.
I was riding the A line from Broadway/East New York yesterday and after one station an Express A passed us. I got off at Utica to change and congestion prevented me from making the train (and to go back to the local). SO I waited and sure enough the next A was also an express. The conductor announced A train making express stops. He announced that the following A train would be making all local stops.
My Idea: Run every other A train as an Express till around 8-9pm, to make official what seems to be going on anyway.
(I have no inside info on whther it will or will not happen.)
**opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT****
It's possible that locals may have been piling up ahead somewhere for some reason, and some trains may have been switched over to express to keep things moving. I saw that once on the BMT Broadway line at Union Square in 1992. There was a local sitting on the track and not going anywhere. An N train pulled in on the uptown express track, much to my delight, and I hopped right on. As we cruised uptown, I saw a local sitting at every stop - 23rd, 28th, and 34th, which is where I got off. I never found out what happened - I would guess there was a stalled local somewhere uptown - and I would imagine that an R train or two may have been sent up the express track, too.
I am coming to Manhattan by bus. How do I get from the bus station to 151 W. 34th Street. I am going to Macy's Herald Square.
Thanks.
If you're coming into the Port Authority Bus Terminal, go to the subway in the basement (A/C/E lines, it doesn't matter which), and take a downtown train one stop to 34th Street. Macy's will be one block east. Or you might find it easier to walk the whole distance, as the PABT is only about a half-mile from Macy's. Go one block east from the PABT to Seventh Avenue, then south to 34th Street. The PABT is on Eighth Avenue between 40th and 42nd Streets, and Macy's is on 34th Street between Sixth and Seventh Avenues.
I second the motion: walk! Just head for the clearly visible Empire State Building, and you can't get lost.
walking will only take 10-15 minutes
And if it's pouring rain outside, take any downtown train (A,C,E) to W. 4 St., then go downstairs to the UPTOWN B,D,F,Q train track and take any of those to 34 St. You won't get wet.
Or -- to beat this thing to death -- take the uptown E two stops to 7th Avenue, then go upstairs and get the downtown D or B to 34 St.
There's a quicker way to get from the Port Authority to Macy's in the rain. Take the A/C/E to 34th, walk through Penn Station, and use the LIRR exit at the corner of 34th and Seventh. You're diagonally across the corner from Macy's.
Of course, if you have a raincoat and umbrella and don't mind getting a little wet... Come to think of it, I was in the city once when it was pouring rain, and ended up taking a lot of one-stop subway rides. Of course, it was 1979 and the fare was 50 cents. This is really beating it to death, and will border on the ridiculous, but if you want to get your money's worth, take an uptown A of R-38s from 42nd to 125th, and change to a downtown D to 34th. You'll get to experience the most popular, and my personal favorite, express jaunt in the whole city.
The subway can be used to alleviate the crosstown pedestrian traffic which is tying up vehicular traffic in Midtown. If you want to get from the east side of 5th Avenue to Rockefeller Center, walk over to 51st Street and take the Lex to Grand Central, then take the 7 to 5th Avenue, then take the B, D, F, or Q to Rockefeller Center. We can barricade the entire stretch of 5th!
My wife gets reimbursed for here commutation cost as part of the federal "Transit-Check" program. It is tax free income. When the new monthly pass comes out, her reimbursement will be enough to cover it. She will, in effect, have tax free transit around the city courtesy of her employer. And, she will no longer have to fill out forms to get reimbursed for transit trips on company business. Perhaps her employer will simply issue the monthly Metrocards.
What about city and state workers? Aren't the city and state governments responsible for encouraging mass transit ridership to meet air pollution goals? Thousands of city and state workers -- from high officials to uniformed employees -- are given free parking on the street, often in reserved zones where the general public is not permitted to park. Lower Manhattan is full of reserved parking, as are the blocks in close proximity to police stations, fire stations, and schools. City workers who drive, in effect, have higher pay than those who use the subway.
Public sector pay has lagged so far behind private sector pay (except at public authorities such as you know who) that it is impossible to recruit anyone competent. How about issuing Metrocards to city and state employees as a tax free bonus? Has the MTA even considered marketing the monthly pass directly to the city and state, and other large employers? I want my free Metrocard!
id love to see the #1 city employee, the mayor, ride to city hall every day on the subway with his free monthly metrocard :)
The Federal Transit Benefit was copied from Private Industry. It originally came about in air quality non-atainment areas, when EPA gave credit to localities which implemented it. So local Air Quality Agencies put the heat on local employers to hop on board. In towns with a large contingent of Federal workers, these agencies complained to their representatives that they couldn't meet the minimums without participation by the Feds. It took a few years, but we got permission to participate, annd believe me, it wasn't because they wanted to help us out to put our kids through college!
Gasp! You mean one state agency (GASP!) cooperating with another state or (GASP!) city agency??
I think I'm having trouble breathing :)
--Mark
To tell ya the truth District Council 37 (DC37) the largest City Employee Union and other city unions are currently in contract negotiations. Yes they did settle the money issue a while ago but non money stuff like Holidays, OT pay and yes Transit Check are on the adjenda.
Believe it or not my City Pension is Federal Exempt but not State or City so each year on the State Tax form you have to add back the amount of money you put into the 414H plan. I guess since the CITY would not get any benift from giving transit check to the city workers they won't do it (not that I have faith in my union reps LoL).
I have seen transit check metro cards and this would cover my work travel een at the current 10% off.
I mentioned the Transit Check issue to my union rep. But the Civil Service Technical Guild (375) just dumped all its reps! You may have read about the election (the insurgents appeared to win, then a bunch of ballots disappeared, and new elections were called, but some believe the new crowd is also composed of crooks).
Perhaps I'll mention it to the new crowd. Perhaps they'll be willing to pary less frequently in the Caribbean and use some of the massive dues for this benefit.
Here is the EPA scoop on Transit Pass Subsidies:
TRANSIT PASS SUBSIDY PROGRAMS
Type: Pollution Prevention
Description: Public Law 103-172, the "Federal Employees Clean Air Incentives Act," provides
for the establishment of federal programs to encourage employees to commute by means other
than single-occupancy motor vehicles. The purpose of this law is to improve air quality and
reduce traffic congestion. One of the programs contemplated under the law is the offering of
transit passes that subsidize employee use of public transportation. Such passes represent benefits
that fall under the "Energy Policy Act of 1992." This act amended section 132 (f) of the Internal
Revenue Code to change the tax treatment of employer-provided "qualified transportation fringe"
benefits by increasing the tax exclusion for transit passes from $21 to $60 per month and setting a
new $60 exclusion for van pools ($60 is an aggregate limit). In other words, it specified that
employees are not taxed for these employer-provided transit pass benefits.
Actual Use: Under these laws, the USEPA implements the EPA Transit Subsidy Program in its
offices across the country. In Washington, D.C., this is done through a farecard voucher system in
partnership with the Washington Area Mass Transit Authority WAMTA. The farecard vouchers
are issued by WAMTA in amounts up to $60 per month for use by more than 2100 participating
Agency employees. These vouchers are good for subway rides or they can be exchanged for
equal fares on any other type of approved public transportation that serves the Washington, D.C.,
metropolitan area. Potential Use: Transit pass subsidy programs such as this could be adopted by
State and local governments across the country, as well as by private sector firms. While they
might be most effective in large urban areas, they should be environmentally beneficial in any
location.
Advantages: These subsidy programs can reduce pollution emissions (estimates for the federal
program are 6.6MMT of carbon equivalent by the year 2000), contribute to energy savings, and
help reduce vehicular traffic congestion during rush-hour. They can reduce the need to construct
new parking facilities, and reduce or delay the need for new highway expenditures. Finally, they
raise the disposable income of employees taking advantage of such programs.
Limitations: Transit pass programs are subsidies that must be funded out of employer resources.
There may be negative economic impacts on some business sectors by promoting mass transit.
Reference for Further Information: USEPA, Office of the Comptroller, Environmental
Finance Program, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20460. Mail Code: 2731. Contact:
Timothy McProuty at mcprouty.timothy@epamail.epa.gov.
I was just on the El at 3:42 and saw whiz past us an M-4 stacked with people. They do run at rush hours.
Jack‹
It's possible that what you saw was a midday train completing its run, partly into rush hour. That can happen.
Michael
It could. But it depends on one's definition of "Midday Service." If the train was starting from 69th Street it doesn't even take 20 minutes for it to get to
15th let alone 40. Now hopping from that and onto something else(sorry, that's a bad habit) how possible would it be to extend the stations on SEPTA's two heavy rail lines. Most stations are long enough to almost accomodate another car(a sixth for the BSS and a seventh for the El). It would sure help overcrowding, especially on the El. I've had the misfortune of riding a NYC subway at rush hour(the '6') and being so packed in the doors almost exploded. Never again, I say. I've never rode one of your trains after 3:00 since. It's enough to make you claustrophobic!
You are correct about the Broad St Subway. Many of its platforms can fit 8-car trains, and 6-car trains were the norm until the car shortage problems of the late 70's. (Fern Rock is the only station on the Main Line (i.e. not counting the Ridge Spur) which, I believe, cannot accommodate anything greater than 6 cars.) The only problem is car availability - check out Fern Rock yard in the peak period and you'll find very few cars there. The 125-car order was based on 5-car trains.
The El is a different story. While most of the Market St subway stations were expanded to fit more than 6-car trains, nearly all of those on the Frankford El would have difficulty with 7-car trains. And, with the 220-car order of M-4's, the availability problem will also have an effect.
Maybe with all the $$$ slumbering somewhere in SEPTA's bowels can rectify the problem with the BSS the next time their # is up. (It's symbol time!)
Maybe with all the $$$ slumbering somewhere in SEPTA's bowels can rectify the problem with the BSS the next time their # is up. (It's symbol time!):)
I just bought "Under the Sidewalks of New York" by Brian Cudahy and one section mentions plans to apparently create a line to the Rosedale section of Queens east of JFK. Did that ever materialize? And what's the deal with the Rockaway line? Why does it service a portion of the area and doesn't go farther west. I say this only because I used to live by Jacob Riis Park and kind of missed out.
The Queens extension you read about was yet another of the plans proposed in the 1960s (and possibly earlier) that fell apart after the city's fiscal crisis of the mid-1970s. This extension hasn't received much attention since, as it was overshadowed by the collapse of the Second Avenue Subway plans at the same time.
I don't know for sure why the Rockaway line (which originally had been part of the LIRR) doesn't go west of 116th Street, but most likely it was lack of demand. That would be especially true if the line predates Riis park.
I'm surprised that bit about Rosedale was left in the "updated" book. I have the 1985 version, and it says the same thing. Glad I didn't buy a new copy.
Prior to developing Riis Park, and construction of the Marine Parkway Bridge, Rockaway Point was kind of snooty, and probably didn't want a common railroad making it accessable to the masses.
The line to Rosedale is supposed to continue from the Parsons/Archer terminal. Whether or not it ever gets built is another story. And, yes, this is mentioned in both the original and updated editions of Under the Sidewalks of New York. The original also has a detailed description of a ride on the Sea Beach line, circa mid-70s, in the epilogue.
The Rockaway Line doesn't go west of Beach 116th Street because when the TA took the line over from the LIRR, that's where it ended. No plan was put in place to extend the line.
--Mark
I have a 1884 large-scale map which shows a third line running to
Rockaway, apparently starting at St Albans and then running west of the LIRR
branch to a junction just east of the area of the present junction at
Rockaway. Also, the present western branch at Rockaway is shown extended
down the peninsula to Jones Beach. Did these two lines ever exist? Who
planned them?
I would LOVE to see your map! It's even older than the one Dave has posted here.I'm not sure you meant west, but Jones beach is east of Rockaway, and not on a peninsula, but an island separated by two inlets to Great South Bay. There is a LIRR line to Long Beach, which is the barrier island in between.
I believe what is being regerred to here is the fact that there was once a
different route betwween the Laurelton area and Cedarhurst. This is shown and discussed in "Change at Ozone Park". One route was eventually eliminated.
I would like to know what the construction is for after Queens Plaza station heading towards 71 Continental. The tracks that are being worked on on the tracks if you look as you go by is that they are building a brand new set of tracks so instead of four tracks across the tunnel there will be 5 or six. These new tracks are between eastbound EF Tracks out of Queens Plaza and the EF westbound into Queens Plaza. I am very curious. Thank YOu
Jason
This is where the Queens connection will be tied in. The tracks being added will ramp down where they will join the existing tunnel past 21st St.-Queensbridge.
Here is what things look like now:
--The Queens bound local track has not changed.
--The Queens bound express track has been reconnected to the old layup track (where the G used to lay up evenings and weekends).
--The old trackbed for the Queens-bound express track is being connected to the 63rd Street tunnel. The trains coming from 21/Queensbridge will have the ability to connect to either the express or local tracks.
--The Manhattan-bound side hasn't changed...yet. They are building a new area for the local track. The current local trackbed will be used to tunnel to 21/Queensbridge. You will be able to go to the 63rd Street tunnel from either the local or express tracks.
It will all be ready in a few years.
Michael
Everyone at City Planning believes that the 63rd St Tunnel is being connected to the local tracks alone, not local and express. Is it possible that no one working for the City of NY knows what's going on?
Recall the many alternatives: connecting to the express tracks with reverse signalling, coverting the Motauk line to a subway to 63rd St, using capacity on the LIRR main line as a super expresss, etc. Last I heard they decided to cheap out and go the local only route.
In one sense, if they connected both local and express its a waste, especially if they only run one Queens Boulevard train through the tunnel. It would have been better to connect just the local tracks, then connect the G to the tunnel, as well and run it direct to Manahttan. On the other hand, flexibility is good. Wish we had some alternatives to... the Manhattan Bridge. Perhaps the G could be swung into the 60th St tunnel someday (it looks easy on the track maps -- just turn it around.
By the way, the airport connection proposed by City Planning and agreed to (allegedy) by everyone else had the 53rd and 63rd St tunnels taking all the Queens Blvd trains. The 60th St tunnel would be used by the Astoria Line and a new service to the airport, which might use either the Astoria line or new tracks in the Amtrack/BQE right of way direct to the airport (and perhaps on to Shea/Downtown Flushing to relieve the 7. Ah, dreams.
I have a problem with the disruption or limited service on the G line (Crosstown between Brooklyn and Queens). I think it is so stupid that to get to the Queens Center mall You must switch trains at Court Square to get the E and F and take them where they make local stops on the weekend. Also in some neighborhoods it is the only vital subway line to the city. Thanx
Don't the E and F trains run express between Queens Plaza and Continental Avenue during the day on weekends? They don't run local till about 11 at night, I think. Queens Center Mall is closed by then.
The G train ends at Court Sq. because there is no longer a turnaround track at Queens Plaza for it anymore. Of course it could go to 71 Avenue, but apparently the MTA thinks there is not enough local stop patronage to require more than the R train during weekend days and evenings. I personally would think that there are enough people who use the local stops in Queens on weekends that they should get 5 minute service and not 10 minute service. But that is a whole different story from ending the G line one stop south of where it used to end.
Slight Correction: The R runs every 8 minutes midday on Saturdays.
As a straphanger who utilizes the Steinway Street station often, I am upset that the service at that station will be reduced. Now we have a choice between the G or the R to go local in Queens. Without the G, I feel the R will become intolerably crowded.
But they reduced the service at a time when loading is insufficent to support both trains. Rush hours and during the day, it still goes all the way to 71st. Nights and weekends, it is cut to Court Square, and both the E and F are local all the way late nights (A mistake, I think. The E should have remained express...) By the time the 63st connector opens, there will be more service. Unfortunately, I see it over-utilized the day before it opens.
-Hank
I believe that local E service on Queens Blvd. overnight is only temporary due to construction. After all, the F is also local on Queens Blvd. overnight & both changes were made at the same time, when the F stopped going to Queensbridge overnight.
As far as I know, the E should again be a 24 hour Queens Blvd. express when the work ends on the Queensbridge line or, barring that, when the final configuration of Queens service begins as Queensbridge is linked to Queens Blvd.
Jason, I think you need to meet "Sammy"; What do you think Steve?
In theory, I disagree with the curtailing of 'G' service in Queens. I would have hoped that the 63rd St. connection would have been used to increase survice and not just traded one for the other. One way to do it would be to run the R train through 63rd St and down the B'Way line and alternate the F service between 53rd St to 6th Ave and 63rd St to 6th Ave. In this way, the Queens Plaza bottleneck would be eliminated, capacity would be increased and because no new line would be introduced to the Queens Blvd. line, the G service could be maintained.
And please - I've had my fill of confrontations with Ms. Sammy.
Hi Steve.
I haven't posted in a long time, but since you insisted........
Let me throw my two cents in. As a long-time resident in the Willy B-Greenpoint area, it amazes me how little the MTA thinks of our communities. The problem is that the MTA has its head so far up its kazoo, that it doesn't know which end is up or down.
Any economic survey would lead to one conclusion: the second ave subway is vital and more important than the 63rd St. line. Secondly, does things in such a backasswards way it makes it impossible to feel any sympathy for these joes, as in lets roll out a new subway map and change line terminations a month later. How much is the reprinting going to cost? As in, let's just curtail the G and the heck with what the consequences are. Instead of thinking how the change would effect the economies of certain neighborhoods, and thinking what solutions would be best (such as creating more accessible transfers to the 7 via a new station on the G), they go ahead and bulldoze us. Your turn Steve.....
>As in, let's just curtail the G and the heck with what the consequences are. >Instead of thinking how the change would effect the economies of certain
>neighborhoods, and thinking what solutions would be best (such as creating more >accessible transfers to the 7 via a new station on the G), they go ahead and >bulldoze us. Your turn Steve.....
I think that Steve has had enough fun with you for a while! I'll give it a whirl, though. How do you know that the TA didn't consider any of these things. Please don't just say that they have their heads up their asses. That's a cop out. Point us, if you would, to some proof -- perhaps a document that the TA created that says these things. Or, better yet, can you identify the planning documents that the TA used to make it's decision regarding the G line (you know, date, author, document number)? They should be public records . . . .
-mhg
Sammie, in this case, I agree with you. I think it's a significant error to reduce G service to support a new service with questionable utility. Hopefully the people in Operations Planning will reconsider. (besides, I think my plan makes more sense)My only criticism of your argument is that you place too much of the economic burden of that area on the back of the MTA. I don't think that the question of economic growth should be borne solely on one agency. G line ridership is a smallportion (about 5%) of total subway ridership. We need to consider ridership in its' totallity.
PS: Why the change in the spelling of your name ?
In reference to permanent cutting back of G service at Court Square to support the 63rd St. connection: NYCT doesn't really like running more than 2 services on the same trackage, although in a few cases BDQ & MNR they have no choice. If a train lays down, a long lingering delay will persist. Since I think NYCT is very Manhattan oriented, and since the G doesn't touch Manhattan, it is expendable to be cut back. Also, you would not have a 1 for one service ratio if you have 3 services on th Queens Blvd. local with 2 lines going to Manhattan and 1 not. Finally their goal is to have 24/7 OPTO on the G. If it goes into Queens past Court Sq., the ridership is too high for a half-train with only 1 crew member. The cutting of the 63rd St. tube into the Queens IND is a mistake. A completely new line thru Queens should have been constructed, but NYCT must play the cards it is dealt. I am personally against OPTO & as a former Greenpointer, I would like to see the G left alone. But I don't see any other way to run it. If you have 3 services on the local & 2 on the express, if rerouting is necessary, now you have 5 services sharing 1 track.
Speaking of OPTO, the TWU is lobbying the state legislature to give the MTA additional subsidies to make up for the lost savings if OPTO was discontinued. Rep. Nolan (D) has introduced such a bill to restore 2 person train operation and reimburse the MTA for the additional expense.
Here are the three dilemmas: 1) Too many trains go through Queens Plaza; 2) Only 3 of the 4 trains on the Queens Blvd. line go into Manhattan; 3) Most G riders need to get to Manhattan but must change somewhere.
The 63rd St. line supposedly will fix the first two dilemmas: Only 3 trains will go through Queens Plaza and all 4 trains on Queens Blvd will go into Manhattan. The G dilemma hardly changes at all, only the terminal will change. Instead of going to Queens Plaza and walking up and down the stairs, one will have to walk to 23-Ely from Court Square. Below, I have another useful connection...
I've noticed from my Hagstrom map that the G tracks run seemingly inches from the #7 Vernon-Jackson (below-ground) Station. Perhaps a new station can be built there to allow people to connect. The disadvantage is that the Flushing line would be more crowded than ever for 3 stops. Oh, well, we can't have it perfect, can we?
I am quite confused of the new tunnel and the proposed changes of reducing traffic to Queens Plaza. Do I take that the B and Q trains will run on the Queens Blvd tracks instead of terminating at 21 and Queensbridge. Also then what trains will use the 63 street tunnel. Isnt that tunnel the same as the E and F tunnel where it pulls away from the G and R lines skiping Steinway St and those stops there. I am sorry I am confused. What I really would like if someone could respond and tell me what lines after all the changes occur will be using Queens Plaza and how the E and F and R and B and Q trains will get into manhattan. Also where does the 63 street tunel will take the trains. Thanks so much for your time.
Jason
The B will no longer run in the 63rd St. tunnel; it now runs to Bedford Park during rush hours and 145th St. middays. I'm not sure where it terminates on weekends; either 57th St.-6th Ave. or 145th St. The Q is supposed to continue to run via 63rd St, but once the connector opens, it will continue onto 71-Continental Ave, bypassing Queens Plaza. Whether it runs express or local remains to be seen. In Manhattan, it supposedly will return to the BMT Broadway line, where it will run express to Canal St. and over the bridge - if it ever gets fixed. A new V express route is planned to run between 179th St. and 2nd Ave. via 63rd St. and 6th Ave.
The tunnel you're referring to where the E and F pull away is a direct route, via Northern Blvd., to Roosevelt Ave. The G and R trains run in a totally separate tunnel between 36th St. and 65th St. Every subway map I've ever seen clearly shows these two diverging routes.
Jason,
In addition to what Steve said, check out the track maps at nyc.subway.org. They show very clearly where the tunnels go today, and what the changes in western Queens will be. I think that you'll find the midtown manhattan and w. Queens maps helpful.
--mhg
Mark:
you should lay off sammie. He (she) has a valid point. I live in Greenpoint also, and I have done some research into the origins of the G. By the way, I come to my information through word of mouth. There are plenty of "old-timers" who live in Greenpoint. Here's what I found out.
1) Over time, the connection between the G and L at Metropolitan was to be a major hub. The G was to connect lines at both ends of the station, one for 14th st, the other for Houston St. However, GP and Willy B were considered "too industrial" - i.e. the factories along the waterfront to be considered for "extra" subway service. As a result the waterfront is served by 4 "gneral vicinty" lines - the L (bedford ave), the J (marcy ave), the G (Greenpoint Ave) and the F (york). Throughout time, this has been a forgotten area. Accordingh to my neighbor, the city planners turned down many plans that would have increased service and connectivity, such as an extra G stop near the Waterfront, a closer connection with the 7, a connection to the Super Queens express (I would guess the ROW on the LIRR LIC-Penny Bridge-Jamaica branch), etc. It seems because Greenpoint is just "too industrial" it counts less than other parts of Queens/Bklyn.
What a pity, because our tax dollars are going to support projects that don't and won't increase the quality of life of the city, whereas a second avenue line would.
Sir, maybe it is you with your head in the wrong place. Perhaps you should ride the G sometime and experience the frustrating delays, the long (and unsafe) walks at 23/Ely, etc. Maybe then you'd gripe. Otherwise, lay off Sammie and stick it!!!!
If it didn't cost $700 million dollars just to make the connections they're making, the city could connect the G to tunnels to Manhattan at Queens Plaza and Downtown Brooklyn and run it as a local loop on the 6th or BWY/7th Avenue line. There is track capacity in Manhattan, even with the extra train off the Queens Boulevard line. Ridership, property values, and the quality of life would soar. As it is, we are more likely to lose the Manhattan Bridge than gain a G loop.
How many connections like this were built before 1970? It went on all the time, even as new highways were built. Now, nothing. Our transportation tax dollars go to the suburbs and the sunbelt, and business follows them.
Hello Again....How will the 63rd street tunnel alleviate traffic at Queens Plaza. Still there will be 4 trains going to Queens Plaza...the G, R, E and F once the constructionis over..am I right or is the G stopping at Court Square once the 63rd street tunnel is complete. I could see it alleviate traffic since those who ride the F train will take the Q to bypass Queens Plaza but the E train will still be crowded as always. Also too, if they stop the G train to Court Square permantely, is what I am assuming...then there will be possibly only one local train from Queens Plaza to 71 Continental...which will make the R train corwded from Queens Plaza if not already since alot of people switch at Queens Plaza from the F and E to get off at these local stops. Another thing is I am sure they will make the Q express because the approach tracks from the new tunnel is between the westbound and eastbound track of the E and F and therefore will have to cross these tracks to become the local or the other was be the local then cross the Eand F lines to go into the tunnel to Manhattan. I hope this makes sense . Thanx
Jason
The 63rd Street connection lines will come up between the local and express tracks in each direction. If you ride through the area now, you will see that the Queens-bound express track right-of-way is now where the old center (relay) track was, making way for the new connection track inbewtween the local and express. Manhattan-bound, you will see that they are making a new right-of-way on the outside (northerly side) of the current trackage. This will be the new Manhattan-bound local track. What is now the Manhattan-bound local track will become the 63rd street connection track. Thus, 63rd Street trains will be able to go to/come from either local or express tracks in each direction.
While there is a lot of speculation on the eventual services, there have been no firm plans. In fact I am told that there have been a number of versions "settled on" by the TA, and then changed. However there will probably be even versions when the dust settles in 2001 (2?, 3?). My personal guess is that we will still see (at rush hour, at least) four Queens Blvd. services: Two local, and two express. The split between 53rd, 60th, and 63rd St. will probably be two, one, and one, but hey - I have enough trouble forecasting today's weather, no less what subway service will be in three years!
As for the 53rd, 60th, and 63rd services, my guess would be two-one-two. I know, I know, that equals five: the E and F along 53rd; the R along 60th; and the Q and V, if implemented, along 63rd. Now, if the 2nd Ave. line is ever built (knock on wood), the pattern would probably be two-one-one: the Q or possibly the N would head up 2nd Ave.
Shall I say it???
The 53rd/60th/63rd tunnel guarantee is two-one-one.
Tune in in about three years. If Todd is wrong, he will give the first response to his admission of error a thousand dollars.
The tunnel guarantee. Only on SubTalk...
Michael
Touche, Mike!
However, I have to be off by "five" trains to pay out...
-Todd Glickman for CBS Nooz, on the [E] Train.
I-Man, do the words 'proof-read' mean anything to you? I can make virtually nothing from your posting. From what I can gather, your neighbor is an expert in history and public planning. What is your point? Do you have one?
Let me give you a bit of NYC history. Population growth followed the development of public transit, not the other way around. Second, the IND was not built solely to provide public transportation. The Ind (of which the G has always been a part) was built withthe intention of driving the IRT and BMT out of business. Mayor J. Hyland had a major hatred for both and set out to destroy them. Therefore, lines were proposed with the intention of directly competing with existing lines of the IRT and BMT. Poor reason for doing things?
Definitely? Are we living with the problem 60 and 70 years later? Of course.
You and Sammie (Sammy) may be correct, that service in those neighborhoods is poor but here are two things you should consider.
First, the G line is made up of 14 trains, less than 5% of the total # of trains run by the NYCT and carrying less than 5% of our customers.
Second, when I worked at Jamaica Shop, we always wanted full service on all lines. However, when we were short trains, be it one or ten, the official policy of the NYCT was the 'G' was always full. We could never be down a train on the G line.
Now, as I said, I disagree that the service on the G line should be cut. I think there are more intelligent ways to utilize the 63rd St connection without cutting existing service. But what you and Sammie (Sammy) seem not to grasp is that the NYCT is in business to provide public transit We are not in business to do social engineering or change the demographics of the neighborhoods we serve (or don't serve).
And please don't tell me that my head is in the wrong place. I ride the G line along with virtually every other BMT/IND line.
Steve:
This is why people like you should not work in or for the Government (which you do via the MTA). Let's get one thing straight. You really have zero concept of how things are in this city.
FACT: A large percentage of the NYC population is considered "middle" to "low" income, I'd say more so than the national average for urban populations.
FACT: This segment of the populace moves to where things are cheaper for them - i.e. housing, AND TRANSPORTATION (do you understand this?)
FACT: Our transit Tax dollars go to projects WHICH DO NOT ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THIS SEGMENT OF THE POPULACE. If that was the case, we'd have an extension on Utica, better service on the G, J, M....
OPINION: As part of the workforce, let me say this. MY TAX DOLLARS SHOULD NOT GO TO THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD TO DRIVE CARS BECAUSE I CANNOT AFFORD ONE> THEREFORE I HAVE TO DEPEND ON THE SH---Y SERVICE THE MTA PROVIDES ON THE G AND THE L LINES (as do many others).
The City has to relaize that the other end of the population stratum deserves public transit and proper service. BUILDING THE 63RD ST LINE ONLY GOES TOWARDS REINFORCING THE OPINION THAT THE "RICH" ARE GETTING "RICHER".
Now, sir, what about this do you not understand?
As for proofreading, you do not come off sounding like Einstein yourself.
You said...
"MY TAX DOLLARS SHOULD NOT GO TO THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD TO DRIVE CARS BECAUSE I CANNOT AFFORD ONE> THEREFORE I HAVE TO DEPEND ON THE SH---Y SERVICE THE MTA PROVIDES ON THE G AND THE L LINES (as do many others). "
Don't forget also that subway fares are subsidized much less than LIRR and Metro-North fares. So those hurtin' communities in Nassau and Westchester get a break on their train fare.
Class bias is even worse in Boston's transit system. Dudley Square, a subway station in Roxbury that was the second-busiest station in Boston, was demolished along with the Washington St. elevated ten years ago. Residents have had nothing but diesel buses since then. Now the MBTA wants to build a "permanent" replacement for the Washington St. El. -- electric buses, still running on city streets!
I don't often ride the G or L lines, but I'm certainly willing to believe that the MTA provides better service to people with more political clout.
'Bye
Alex
anc8@columbia.edu
Mr. I-Man, why should I not work for a government agency? Because I don't agree with you? Small minded, wouldn't you think? Just how would you improve service on the G-Line? By running empty trains every 3 minutes? By digging new tunnels at a cost of $27,000 per foot so you don't have to walk 3 blocks?
Tell me Mr. I-Man, exactly how would you improve G service?
As for the L line, it will be getting 108 new cars and an advanced signal system which will vastly improve service on that line. I understand your problem with the 63rd Street connection. It'll really benifit those rich people in the Queensbridge Houses or the millionairs in Elmhurst and South Jamaica. How sad it must be to be so small minded that you oppose progress if it doesn't benifit you. Just remember the 63rd street project was started in the 60s. Do you think that the demographics of the city might have changed in those 30+ years. What might have seemed as a worthwhile project then may not have been the best choice for today.
Perhaps instead of griping about the service, you should go to work for the Operations-Planning department. Hell, with your understanding of what it takes to build and run a modern mass transit system, you'd probably be running the place in 3 or 4 months. Especially since most of us are still busy, going to school at night while you have clearly completed your education.
Very funny, Steve.
Obviously, you fail to grab hold on one of thew key points. TRhere is a symbiotic relationship between transit and the populace. I guess that's something that even the great Steve has trouble comprehending. The MTA's short-sighted decision to curtail service even further on the G is stifling the growth of the neighborhood. If we had adequate mass transit (including bus service) then your argument would be valid. Too bad it isn't.
Do you really think those in Queensbridge will benefit from the connection? Doubt it.
If you want to see empty trains, check 63rd street-bound trains when the connection is done.
FACT: A benefit of the 53, 59th st. tunnels is it connects to the Lex
Fact: The 63rd St. Tunnel won't.
Fact: A smaller percentage takes the F train further than fifth ave. than gets off at Lex.
Fact: bypassing queens plaza puts much more strain on the 7 and 74th/Roosevelt
Fact: Long Island City is growing by leaps and bounds because of plentiful mass transit into the city.
Now what would I do? Firstly I'd fire you. Maybe you could go into sanitation collection or something.
Secondly, I would build two G stations: one at Ash st. and one to connect to the 7 at Vernon-Jackson.
Thirdly, I would close 21st Van Alst.
Fourthly, I would look into using the LIRR ROW from LIC to Jamaica in some way.
That's not rocket science, Mr. Steve, just good 'ol common sense, which you seem to lack.....
See, Sammie, I mean I-Man, now you got the sanitation people pissed off. What makes you think they would want me either. See, the trouble with you is you still see things in terms of Lionel trains. In real life, you don't just lay tracks because you have space on your board. There has to be a demand for the service. Why Ash street? Does DLJ have an office there or are you looking for a 2nd career at the local Mickey Ds. LIC is not thriving because of the Subway service. LIC is thriving because the $$$ per square foot rent is suitable for 'Back Office' operations while it's in close proximity to Manhattan and it's workforce.
Your right about the 63rd Street trains now. Gee, that must feel good to have someone say you are right. Bet you don't hear that too often. However, if Full F trains to and from Queens were run through 63rd street, it would be irrelevant whether the people in Queensbridge or Roosevelt Island use the service. The congestion at the Plaza and at Lex would be relieved. One thing that you and your alter-ego (Sammie) don't realize is that 63rd street is not up for debate. It is a reality. Hello!!!! Am I reaching you. It's a done deal in whatever final form it takes. But if the city council and the MTA were to agree to your wish-list, you'd be getting your senior citizens discount at Wendy's before ground was ever broken.
If you were right about the need for more transit in your area, the vans would be flourishing. Are they? No, they are running around Kew gardens, Parsons Archer, Main Street, and Flatbush Avenue. That should tell you something ..... unless you think the MTA is involved in a conspiracy with the van drivers against the good people of Williamsburg and Greenpoint.
Finally, let's not talk about common sense. What you are talking about are speculations and suppositions without any documentation to support your contentions. Show me any market research that shows that there is a reasonable demand for the service you suggest (enough to make the expenditure worthwhile) and then tell me its plain old common sense. Until then it's just plain babble.
I hate to bring up money, but as an economist that's my job. NYC local taxes, as a share of its personal income are nearly double the national average, but its spending on transportation, recreation, education, etc is well below average. Now, the unemployed poor will be cut off welfare after five years: cash to the poor accounts for about 15 percent of NYC social service funding. So where does the extra money go?
Interest paid on debt which benefitted those who got more and paid less in the past. Luxo-services in the rest of the state -- spending on education as a share of personal income NYC 4.2 percent, national and NJ average 4.8 percent, rest of New York State 6.4 percent.
But, most of all, to the richest, largest "non-profit" health and social services industries anywhere. These industries went from employing 300,000 in 1983 to 470,000 today, fueled by public money. Since Medicaid (on which we spend multiples of any other state) is a mandated entitlement, they charge and get whatever they want and everything else divides anything else that is left. We gave these industries an unlimited budget, and they exceeded it.
So where does this leave the war between Steve and I-man? There is an unspoken deal in Albany. The city gets world leading Medicaid funding. The rest of the state gets luxo-schools, roads, and commuter rail. In exchange, the city accepts very high state and local taxes and inferior services, while the rest of the state accepts relatively high taxes. Everyone gets a huge debt, but they the sort of people who have power are the sort of people who have been moving away, so what do they care? The difference between Pataki and Cuomo? Brooklyn gets a little less Medicaid, the suburbs get a lot more education funding. That's it.
The rich get transit service because they have traded it for thousands of non-jobs in organizations which support, and are sometimes controlled by, your politicians. They could not care less about the subway, since they are too rich to ride it.
As I said, if NYC spending on transportation as a share of personal income was at the national average (and corruption/incompetence/red tape did not inflate, also mandated by Albany, did not inflate the cost of construction) everything, including the G, would be connected to everything else by now.
THE VAMPIRE STATE!
L-Man,
You've almost got it! You countered my complaint to sammie that she's just blathering without adding any facts, with what appears to be cogent, intelligent analysis of what the TA has actually decided. Excellent! There's actually something of substance there.
As for sammie, I'll lay her when she figures out how to do the same. People like her (and sometimes you) who argue based on "everyone else is stupid, corrupt, etc.," are setting the stage to be ignored by the people they are trying to influence. Imagine being a TA official locked in a room with sammie -- what's the point, when it's obvious that she has never seen anything produced by the MTA, and has no idea what the MTA thinks or how the political and planning process really works. She's just upset. As I said once before, this is not a local bar or a streetcorner, and that kind of rhetoric is valueless.
Turning to what you said, even anecdotal evidence, like what you just presented, is suspect--how does anyone know whether they've got it right? (I heard that the CIA killed Kennedy, eh?). It sounds plausible, but have you ever seen the TA's planning documents re: the G line. They are public documents, available for anyone who wants to see them. I have not, which is why I didn't say that sammie was wrong, just that she shoudn't talk out her ass. But, if you want to talk about what the TA thinks, it would probably be a good idea to actually know.
Anyway, if you do that sort of thing -- and exercise enough self control to avoid cursing me out at the end of your posts -- people would think that you were normal.
--mhg
BTW, you should learn how to control your emotion a little.
--mhg
If it didn't cost so much to make connections, the G train could easily be made better, rather than worse. For example, if the G was also hooked up to the 63rd St tunnel (or to the 53rd St Tunnel, with the F diverted through 63rd St), and the tracks were switched around at Schemerhorn and Jay so the G connected to the Culver tracks in the other direction (toward Jay St), then the G could run as a continuous loop on the 6th Avenue local. When you add up the Broadway Express and the 6th Avenue local, there is enough room for 35 more trains between them: plenty for 12 more Queens Blvd locals, 10 more Gs, and a train to LaGuardia. If such an investment were made, L and G riders would have three options at the transfer -- G northbound into Midtown, G southbound to Downtown Brooklyn and Downtown Manhattan, and the L to 14th St for everything in between.
It just a question of not enough money spent on transportation overall, and the excessive cost of capital improvements in NYC.
Bravo Mark, well said. Except for the part where you said, " As for Sammie, I'll lay her when she figures out how to do the same." I'm sure you didn't mean it, especially if you had to listen to her afterwards. (Sorry Sammy, couldn't resist)
Actually, everyone is getting a bit hysterical over this issue. There are no firm routes ste yet. Yes it does look like the Q will be coming to Queens and the G will be cut short but that is not a done deal. It depends on the installation of 25 new tracks in Jamaica Yard. 14 to hold the Q put-outs from the Queens end and 11 tracks to get trains, now layed-up on the main line, off. This project has not yet begun and, in fact, may never begin.
I have suggested a far more moderate approach that I'm hoping will be looked at. My suggestion is:
1) No change in E service
2) G service would run to Continental Ave at all times.
3) F service would be split with trains alternating through the 53rd St. and 63rd St. tunnels in both directions to 6th Ave.
4) R service would shift from the 60th Street tunnel to the 63rd St tunnel to the Bway line.
By doing this, service through the 53rd St tunnel would be reduced by 25% and service through Queens Plaza would be reduced by about 35%. This would eliminate the 2 biggest bottlenecks in the system and permit more trains in the Queens Blvd corridor. Not very sexy but simple and effective. Will it be accepted? Not likely!!!
One question about Steve's plan. If I understand it correctly, there would be no trains from Queens Boulevard using the 60th Street tunnel. I thought the whole point of 63rd Street was to create two more tracks across the river. It seems this would defeat the purpose of building 63rd Street. Of course, I don't know what the capacity of all the connecting lines are. Maybe there are just too many damn trains to use every tunnel. . .
Steve's response was : E train -60 street, 1/2 F trains-60 street
Q- 63rd street R- 63rd Street (instead of 60th)
Steve's plan would allow the G to continue to run to 71 street
You are correct. Anyone who rides the E or the F regularly knows that the two westbound bottlenecks are east of Queens Plaza and coming out of the tube into Lex. The biggest single bottleneck eastbound is the junction between the E & F at 5th Avenue. By diverting 50% of the F trains to 63rd St, all of these bottlenects are eliminated. I realize that sending all of the Rs through 63rd St.would mean no R's through 60th Street but what the hell. We have electronic side signs, Lets send 1/2 of the Rs through 60th St and 1/2 through 63rd St. Just like the F (where both sub-routes join at 47-50th St) both sub-routes will meet at 57th & 7th.
As I said, the advantages would be no bottlenecks in the morning with greater capacity and more intelligent utilization of the tubes. 53rd St would carry E & F trains. 60th St would carry N & R trains and 63rd St would carry F & R trains. There would no longer be a need to run the Q train beyond ????? The other advantage is that G service is preserved and the money to expand Jamaica Yard would mean no trains layed up on the main line, resulting in cleaner & better maintained equipment.
The dis-advantage is that every other F and every other R alternating service would increase some waiting times and would cause some confusion at first. Of course we could call the diverted trains the FQ and the RQ and really confuse the hell out of people.
If you're going to keep the G, why not run in through the Cranberry tunnel to Chambers St. (According to the track maps here) there is a lay-up track north of Chambers for the G to turn around, and (according to the MTA schedules) there is capacity for a few more trains in the tunnel.
The G takes 20 minutes to travel from Queens Plaza to Hoyt-Schemerhorn. The C takes less than 10 minutes to travel from Hoyt to Chambers. On the other hand, it takes 25 minutes for the E to travel from Queens Plaza to World Trade. If Queens people could get over their fear of the borough to the south, then those traveling to Lower Manhattan could have a slightly longer or equal time, and much more comfortable, ride to Downtown on the G. Removing Downtown passengers from the E would free up travel space to Midtown on the other services.
And, not to sound greedy, but it would make it easier for Brooklyn F riders to transfer from the F for service to Lower Manhattan.
The TA could do this now, and launch a promotion campaign, rather than wait for 63rd St to open. The G was probably intended to take workers to their factory jobs along the East River. There are many fewer people working on the waterfront and traveling long distances by subway, and it would not be too much to ask them to ascend the stairs at Jay and cross over. The mass heading for Manhattan would benefit greatly.
You know, that is a great idea! Better service for Williamsburg, Greenpoint Bed-Stuy, Ft. Greene and LIC commuters, more passengers for the long-neglected G line, and compensation for the G riders who may not have easy Queens Blvd. access in the future.
There's really little reason for the G to terminate at Smith/9th Sts. or serve Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn. Going to Manhattan is a much better idea.
There is a spur at Chambers Street, 5 track as it is referred to. If you take a look at some of the detailed maps by Peter Doherty (elsewhere on this site) you will see it. You will also see that there is no connection between the Fulton Street line and the Crosstown line. Because of the track configuration on either side of Hoyt-Schermehorn, a connection would not be feasible.
I do not mean to beat a dead horse and sorry for provoking tension with this topic but I find the NYC subway intersting. My question is.....would the new Q train then run on the N and R lines in Manhattan, or on the B and F lines in Manhattan, because I assumed it would be on the B and F lines. I ask this because someone mentioned that it would be the Broadway express and that is the N and R lines......Welll wait that would make sense because the middle tracks at 42nd street Times Square and south and North are not used and that would provide room for the new train. Finally, someone else mentioned that if the 2nd Ave line be put in use that the N train would run up that line. I have not checked the maps but does that meant that one the N train gets inot Manahattan....it will then turn onto the 2nd Ave line. Is that feasible and if so how would the 2nd ave line run. From what stop and where it will end via any other streets. Also as the proposal mentioned that the G tarin go into Chambers St. Wouldn't be chaeper to build a crossover to the Chambers Line or the Culver line to deliver the G train into Manhattan. What do you think. I hope no one is mad I ask too many questions.
I do not mean to beat a dead horse and sorry for provoking tension with this topic but I find the NYC subway intersting. My
question is.....would the new Q train then run on the N and R lines in Manhattan, or on the B and F lines in Manhattan, because
I assumed it would be on the B and F lines. I ask this because someone mentioned that it would be the Broadway express and
that is the N and R lines......Welll wait that would make sense because the middle tracks at 42nd street Times Square and south
and North are not used and that would provide room for the new train. Finally, someone else mentioned that if the 2nd Ave line
be put in use that the N train would run up that line. I have not checked the maps but does that meant that one the N train gets
inot Manahattan....it will then turn onto the 2nd Ave line. Is that feasible and if so how would the 2nd ave line run. From what
stop and where it will end via any other streets. Also as the proposal mentioned that the G tarin go into Chambers St. Wouldn't
be chaeper to build a crossover to the Chambers Line or the Culver line to deliver the G train into Manhattan. What do you
think. I hope no one is mad I ask too many questions.
While nothing is definite, one plan calls for the Q to return to the Broadway (N and R) line and run express to Canal St; the express tracks are directly tied to the 63rd St. line. As for the N running up 2nd Ave., there is a second track already in place which will turn north onto 2nd Ave. past Lexington Ave. It's on the other side of the wall which runs down the entire length of each platform at that station. The 2nd Ave line is supposed to run to E.180th St. in the Bronx, where it would either have a direct connection, or transfer, to the Dyre Ave. and White Plains Rd. lines.
As for the 2nd Ave. line ever being built, I wouldn't get my hopes up.
As an employee who deals directly with the public daily, it would be total mass confusion if alternate F's go thru the 53rd & 63rd St. tubes. People don't listen to announcements, don't understand English or won't read the signs. Also Steve's service plan gives no access to 59/Lex. from Queens Plaza. I have a problem with that.
Look at the final version posting. It takes you concerns into account. If you are worried about people being confused, you haven't been around too long. We used to have service on the Brighton, SeaBeach and West End lines where you actually had to read the signs to see if the train was going via bridge or via tunnel or via the Nassau Loop. In those days, the real riders even knew which it was by the marker lights.
The proposed V line is supposed to accomplish exactly what has been presented in the form of alternate F service: except for running via 63rd St., the V would duplicate the F north of 2nd Ave. or B'wy-Lafayette, depending on where it ends up terminating in Manhattan.
I know that the cars on mostly all the subway lines are still in great shape as appearance and the sort, but does anyone know if the MTA will be introducing new cars in the near future. Like how come none of the new cars or fairly new cars are not on the E or number 7 or some of the Number 6 Line. I am very curious. Do these old acrs hold more people or something since I notice these are like one of the most crowded lines in the system. Thanx
Jason
1080 cars in the R142/142A class for the IRT (A Division)lines are expected to start arriving next year (1999) at which point the "Redbirds" (R29 - R36) will
start to be retired. There are also cars to be built for the BMT/IND
(B1/B2 Divisions) to replace the R32 and R38 cars. I believe (and I know I will be corrected if I am mistaken) that these will be R143.
[There are also cars to be built for the BMT/IND B1/B2 Divisions) to replace the R32 and R38 cars. I believe (and I know I will be corrected if I am mistaken) that these will be R143.]
The new cars on the B Division will be replacing the R40 and R42 cars. There are no plans afoot to replace the R32 and R38's, as they're still quite reliable despite their age.
And structurally sound. One thing I've noticed about in-house R44 rebuilds, most notably on the SIR rebuilds. The interior walls are cracking. Near the tops of the door motor panel advertising frames. The outside rebuilds look as if the section of wall was cut away for equipment placement. The question is, why are they cracking?
-Hank
[There are also cars to be built for the BMT/IND B1/B2 Divisions) to replace the R32 and R38 cars. I believe (and I know I will be corrected if I am mistaken) that these will be R143.]
Actually, they won't be replacing _anything_, at least not unless the order is greater than the 100 or so cars projected (bids are being evaluated now). They're intended to allow for service increases once the 63rd Street Connector goes online in 2001.
I was watching transit and transit and they were showing the R-142 model witch they called the Secrect Car. Teh model is the worst and it is looks tight uncomfortable and it is only made for the IRT. Go on to
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us
and look for the section for the transit transit and you will see a model photo and you will agree.
I was at 130 Livingston Street the day that the Model was unveiled for public
inspection and comment (and I can assure you there were plenty of comments).
The car is the standard IRT size and is an improvement over the R110A units in as much as they return to the longitudional seating. The wider passenger doors are retained to a certain extent but room is provided for a wheelchair passenger.
The photo is very misleading as it is only about 3/4 the length of a real subway car (that was all the space they had to put the mock-up in.
Don't worry the BMT/IND lines will get new equipment too.
My understanding is that the new models sacrifice seats for standing space. I do not agree with that. We should be adding trains so that more, not fewer, people can sit. It has to do with expectations of quality. On Metro-North and the LIRR, there is a service problem if one person stands. Yet the TA lists the capacity of an R44-R46 car as 280 people. That's equivalent to the Mayor, the Governor, the City Council, both houses of the state legislature and the entire MTA board. I'd like to pack them all into one car and make them ride the Culver from Coney Island to Midtown, making all local stops along the way.
There's a difference in the service provided, though. As to the photo of the model, that photo was taken with a wide-angle lens, with less than 25mm focal length. It's a wide angle shot taken at close range, and looks extremely distorted.
A NYC Subway car may only carry a crush load for 15 minutes, while an LIRR or MNCR car can carry a crush load for over an hour. I have never stood on a subway for more than about 10 minutes, andeven having been on Queens Blvd, unarguably the most crowded line in the city, at 7:30AM, I have never been so crushed by other people around me that I didn't have 'room to breathe'
-Hank
My understanding is that there used to be a pedestrian corridor between the 34 St./6 Ave. subway station and Penn Station. My grandfather believes that it was sealed-up in the late '60s, but isn't 100% sure. When was this tunnel sealed and why? Also, are there any opinions out there on whether it should be reopened or not? Let me know.
is sealed in the early 70's I think for safety reasons
The tunnel was closed in the late 70's. There were a lot of muggings and other crimes. The stores in this passageway closed in the mid-70's. I don't remmeber
exactly what types of stores where there.
As for reopening - I don't think that will happen for a long, long time
- if it even can be reopened. I would think at this point that parts of it
were probably reclaimed and used as part of the building of the Manhattan Mall (originally A&S Plaza)
Considering the current state of crime in the city, along with the increased
number of police from the 70's safety really shoudn't be a major concern anymore. The tunnel from 7th to 8th ave at Times Square can't be much differernt
and that was a welsome addition. I'm sure the number of people going from
Penn to the B,D,F or Q or even the PATH would appreciate it.
The passageway from Herald Square to Penn Station can't really be compared with the one under 42nd Street. The latter is in the fare-paid zone, used for transfers between the Seventh and Eighth Avenue lines. By contrast, the Herald Square passageway is located well outside the fare zone. Social problems including crime are a lot easier to control within the fare zones.
For an illustration, take a look at the north-south corridor located on the west side of the Herald Square station. This corridor is in the free zone, and includes the boarded-up entry to the Penn Station passageway we're discussing. Even though it's wide and heavily used, the corridor also functions as a bedroom (and probably restroom) for skells. Given this situation, it's not hard to see why passageways outside fare zones aren't such a wise idea.
Until the early 80s, the 41st St. passageway wasn't in the paid fare zone. Indeed, there used to be stores all along the subway mezzanine below 8th Ave, including a hamburger stand right at the entrance to the Port Authority Bus Terminal. The paid fare zone was split between downtown and uptown platform stairways at 42nd St.; if you wanted to transfer from uptown to downtown, you had to use the underpass which connected the ends of both platforms, which provided a glimpse of the now-abandoned lower level. Even though the stores are gone now, it was an excellent idea to incorporate this passageway into the paid fare zone. It made it possible to transfer from the A, C, and E to the IRT and BMT stations at Times Square. There used to be a sign at the 7th Ave. end which said, "No free transfer to IND subway. For free transfer, take an uptown 1 to 59th St."
Perhaps the MTA should make more of an effort to encourage redevelopment underground. Many parts of the city have a retail space shortage. And there are some legitimate business activities, especially late night entertainment (bars, nightclubs, billiard halls) that neighbors would just as soon have underground.
Consider my home station at Prospect Park 15th. It has an enormous upper level pedestrian concourse, with both inside and outside fare paid corridors, what almost never sees a passenger. The station could certainly be reconfigured to create a retail space entered outside the fare paid area without disrupting operations. 7th Avenue in Park Slope is even bigger, and commercial space at that site is even more valuable. I'll bet that's true of many IND stations.
I agree with you completely. A couple of things come to mind, though:
1) Do you think that the TA would be a good landlord? I imagine that as a storowner you'd have to worry about broken pipes, emergency repairs, homeless people, etc. Imagine having the only open bathroom in the subway system . . . .
2) It will take some heavy duty HVAC to make those spaces comfortable year round. It might be very expensive.
3) Just shooting from the hip, I'll bet that before the TA could redevelop those spaces, it would have to comply with the ADA -- i.e. install elevators giving access to these areas. I haven't thought this through entirely, but that would be a major expense. Of course, it could also be a creative way to fund the construction of elevators . . . .
4) Also, I don't think that the MTA will want to have to deal with the liability problems that would come from having drunk bar patrons, e.g., discharged into their stations every night.
Anything else come to mind?
--mhg
Some of the commercial establishments in the 42nd St-8th Ave mezanine were in the paid fare zone. I opened a bank account with an institution that had a Mini-Bank in this area specifically because it allowed me to make transactions without paying an extra fare. I also seem to recall a Nedicks food stand and a camera store in the same general vicinity.
As you walk by this area in the 42nd Street-8th Avenue mezanine, most of the stores
are boarded up and out of business. I wonder if the MTA is actively looking to
rent them out. However, there is at least one clothing store that I can remember
being currently in business in that area, within the paid fare zone. While we're
on the subject of stores in stations, an excellent example would be the Roosevelt
Avenue station in Jackson Heights. There are a number of food establishments and
even a locksmith last time I was there. And about 8 years ago I used to go to an
arcade in the lower level of Roosevelt Avenue station. Does anybody know if it
still exists? And is or was there an arcade in any other station in the system?
I thought it was a nice setup, especially for the large numbers of schoolkids who
traffic through that station everyday.
Well, there was station break in Penn Station, but that closed a few years ago.
Actually that corridor was in the fare-paid zone it's just that there were turnstiles and Token booth at the west (8th Ave) end of it - which is why you couldn't transfer between the 8th Ave IND and the 7th Ave IRT/Bway BMT. The area directly above the 8th Ave tracks was not fare-paid area which is why one had to use the underpass to transfer between northbound and southbound 8th Ave IND platforms.
In the late 60s, the turnstiles to the IRT and BMT were at the eastern end of the 41st St. corridor; i. e., at the 7th Ave. end. That's where the "no free transfer to IND subway" placard was located. I seem to recall that the turnstiles were relocated to the 8th Ave. end of the corridor later on (mid to late 70s), which would have had it inside the paid fare zone, and by the late 80s, after the Port Authority Bus Terminal was expanded, the entire mezzanine under 8th Ave. was incorporated into the paid fare zone, and the escalator opening to the lower level at the 40th St. end was cemented over.
I used to come into the city by bus every Saturday from Jersey for three years, from 1967 to 1970, and got to know the 42nd St. station well. The mezzanine is brighter now, with better lighting, than what it used to be. Without all those stores, though, it looks bland.
Not as familiar with the 6th ave side as the Penn Station side, but from what
I can remember, they recently tiled over the entrance to the tunnel, it doesn't appear that difficult to add it to the paid fare zone
I'll have to take a closer look to be sure, but as far as I know it would not be easy to bring the Herald Square - Penn Station passageway into the fare zone on the Herald Square end. It probably would be necessary to bring the existing north-south corridor along the west side of the station within the fare zone. In one sense, that might not be a bad idea as it would help ease the skell problem, but it would prevent PATH riders from entering or exiting at 34th Street.
I had been trying to post a picure I drew of the whole area, with ideas on how to bring the passage into the fare zone to alt.nyctransit, but I apparently do not have the software necessary to post binaries to the newsgroup.
Basically, starting from the north, you would remove a section of the fance adjacent to the 34th st turnstiles, and then run fencing down the middle of the n/s passage as far as the elavator to the street (to keep it and the stairs out of the fare-zone) Then ypu would separate the end of this passage right between the Penn sta. passage and the entrance to the mall with another fence, or new turnstiles. You may also bring the crooked passage between the glass walls and the stairway to the DBFQ it leads to behind the newstand into the fare zone, so the connection would not only be accesible to the north end of the station. On the Penn sta. side, you would have to close or place a high wheel entrance at the stairawy on the south side of 33rd St , and then run the fence across that mmexxanine until it connects with the 1/9 uptown platform.
This would solve the homeless problem in both n/s and e/w passages.
Okay, I think I can picture what you're trying to accomplish. It's not a bad idea, though as far as I can tell it would no longer be possible to enter PATH from 34th Street - which may not be that big a deal anyway.
BTW - if you do work out how to post binaries, nyc.transit (not alt.nyctransit) would not be the right place as it isn't a binaries newsgroup. It would be a better idea to try alt.binaries.pictures.rail.
You're right; I never thought of that. PATH passengers from 34th St (the actual street, not the station) would have to walk above ground to the 33rd st. entrances. But hey, they would no longer have to pass by the homeless and the urine filled corners! :-)
[You're right; I never thought of that. PATH passengers from 34th St (the actual street, not the station) would have to walk above ground to the 33rd st. entrances. But hey, they would no longer have to pass by the homeless and the urine filled corners! :-)]
Giving PATH riders an entrance/exit at 34th Street is no big deal. Walking one block above ground hardly matters (especially given the un-esthetic corridor!) PATH riders who connect to the subway wouldn't be inconvenienced in any way, as they can connect just as easily at the south end.
All in all, bringing the corridor into the fare-paid zone is an idea well worth considering.
Then let's GO FOR IT!
Actually, in these days of inexpensive video systems, you wouldn't need that many cops, I mean, PATH already has a system in place, & it wouldn't be THAT much more....
By the way, while having a corridor "inside" the station definitely makes it easier to keep it clean and socially acceptable, it isn't impossible to do the same with "outside" corridors. Here in Philly, there's a huge corridor extending down Broad Street from the City Hall station of the Broad Street Subway all the way to Spruce Street--about four blocks. Only a small portion of this at the Walnut-Locust station is under fare control. There used to be a huge, horrible homeless colony at the Spruce Street end of it when I was in college (late '80's--early '90's) Apparently, when I was living in Florida for a few years, the police came in one day and cleaned them all out. Today, there really isn't much of a problem. The same is true of most of the corridors in the City Hall-Suburban Station-Gallery complex. Now, they could use better lighting and some more retail action, but that's a whole other story. . .
[By the way, while having a corridor "inside" the station definitely makes it easier to keep it clean and socially acceptable,it isn't impossible to do the same with "outside" corridors. Here in Philly, there's a huge corridor extending down Broad Street from the City Hall station of the Broad Street Subway all the way to Spruce Street--about four blocks. Only a small portion of this at the Walnut-Locust station is under fare control. There used to be a huge, horrible homeless colony at the Spruce Street end of it when I was in college (late '80's--early '90's) Apparently, when I was living in Florida for a few years, the police came in one day and cleaned them all out. Today, there really isn't much of a problem.]
Ah, but the City of Brotherly Love is not the Big Apple. A "sweep" operation as you described would be wholly unacceptable in New York, which is surely the most compassionate (if misguided) city in America. While the rest of America enacts welfare reform, New Yorkers demand *higher* benefits for recipients and are willing to pay more taxes if necessary. Any attempt to remove skells from a station would be met by outraged howls from the Upper West Side guilt-ridden Ruth Messinger types.
Hurry! The lower mezzanine at 34th Street and 8th Avenue bteween 35th street and 34th street will be permanently closed as of 4/6/1998 for installation of elevator rooms and security concerns. The lost and found is in this area. I do not know where or when it will be moved or if it will be moved.
Source: MTA NYCT Sign on the wall at this location.
Has the TA conducted a study on the viability of providing riders with self-cleaning pay toilets? What ever happened to those French models the city was experimenting with? Is the one that was outside City Hall still there and working?
The TA--in my less-than-humble opinion--should consider placing those toilets in such busy stations as Times Square, Atlantic Ave./Pacific St., Union Sq.,and Herald Sq. (and probably at least half a dozen others as well). What do you think?
I think that no matter what type of toilets you install in the subway system, they will become breeding grounds for drugs, sex, and vandalism. Why put toilets in when all of the original bathrooms had to be closed due to this type of deviant behavior in the subway system?
The POINT of having toilets is that people have to go to the bathroom! This is basic, universal, human need. It has always been extremely difficult to find any public restroom in Manhattan, but now it almost impossible!
What I am trying to say is that these public restrooms will be used, as they
have in the past, for activities other than going to the bathroom. There are
plenty of large stores and some restaurants that will let you use their
bathrooms if you are really in need.
Anyone who has been to France will attest that they are NOT very good at designing toilets. Besides, I would be afraid to sit down on a self-cleaning toilet for fear of setting off the shit-sensor!
Well, at least they know how to use them, left alone run them. I mean, their public conviniences are still open and usable. Not such in NYC.
I lived in Tokyo, Paris, London and have been living in NYC for more than 10 years. Guess which city has the dirtiest bathrooms in white-collar office buildings? NYC! It seems like nobody taught them how to flush the toilet after use. So one can only guess how people in this city will treat public bathrooms!
You would think that flushing a toilet after using it would be plain old common sense. Some people just don't think, or maybe they're just plain lazy. I am reminded of a sign I saw in more than one teacher's lounge during my days as a teacher: "Your mother does not work here. Please pick up after yourself."
The saga of public toilets in the city is long and sad. Back in the 1960s or early 1970s, when New York liberalism was at its peak, the state legislature decided that toilets should be free. It passed a law to that effect. It didn't concern itself with why anyone would, or could, pay to stock, clean and maintain bathrooms, let alone hire attendents to ensure safety, with no revenue to pay for it. It simply assumed "they" would have to pay. So in the 1970s and 1980s, when many "theys" moved their businesses out of the city, other "theys" allowed their public restrooms to deteriorate then shut them down. The city almost went broke, and the TA also abandoned its bathrooms.
Twenty years later, several companies which operate pay toilets in other cities came to New York hoping to do the same. They ran right into the law. After much public pressure, the state legislature made an exception was made for pay toilets on street in cities over one million (ie. New York). But then the handicapped sued because the toilet wasn't big enough for them. Then Mayor Dinkins was not re-elected, and the whole thing stalled.
Eventually Mayor Giuliani created a long and detailed review process to decide which company would get to install the toilets. It went on for years. But certain newspapers accused the Mayor of using the street furniture contract (which included the toilets) as a form of political patronage. Perhaps because the Mayor realized that awarding the contract would cause him grief without credit, he cancelled the whole process and decided to start over. And that's where it stands.
Bottom line -- if the public could be charged, private operators would be willing to re-open the existing facilities as attended, pay toilets. Perhaps they could even take Metrocard. You wouldn't need the self-cleaning toilet. There is no free...well, you know.
I really like this idea, though I wonder how it would work. Would there be bidding for the contracts or contract and would the Station Managers be responsible for overseeing the operations?
It is my understanding that some women's groups are considering taking the TA to court over the toilet issue due to the fact that tunnels, platform ends and the gap between cars unfairly provides men with the opportunity for relief while women are forced to suffer. I believe that the main reasoning behind the Metrocard Monthly pass (due out this summer) was to appease these groups who are seeking tens of millions of dollars in claims from not being able to reenter the system after exiting to find a bathroom. For a time the TA was considering printing on the original Metrocard, the words: NO REENTRY/NO BATHROOMS in a further effort to combat lawsuits. I remember the old Subway bathrooms when I was a kid in the 70s. For some time now, however, there has been no barrometer with which to determine the social graces of bathroom enlightenment. I say give it a shot. Anyone who has been to the public bathrooms in Bryant Park or in any public library or police station will tell you, that although a good idea, it is far from ideal. These problems may be due to the fact there are only a few bathrooms available to 16 million people!!!!
"It is my understanding that some women's groups are considering taking the TA to court over the toilet issue due to the fact that tunnels, platform ends and the gap between cars unfairly provides men with the opportunity for relief while women are forced to suffer."
That is the most preposterous legal claim I've ever heard. Urinating in the subway is illegal. You cannot claim unequal treatment when the alleged "preferred" behavior is illegal and that law is enforced. (I presume with Guiliani's "quality of life crimes" program that if TA personnel spot a person urinating on TA property, they summon police and the offender is arrested.) The only inequality is in the greater ability of male offenders to commit the offense without detection, and that's grounded in biology, not any policy implicit or explicit of the Transit Authority.
I'm an attorney, and I'm always explaining to people how most so-called frivolous lawsuits that get media coverage are not so frivolous, or if they are they will most probably be dismissed. However, this **is** a frivolous case and, if filed, should be dismissed ASAP.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the case has something to do with the language of the law. One group was seeking a better legal definition for various terms of prohibition. It also had to do with the arbitrary nature of the law which was designed for "Public Health Reasons" Urinators get tickets while the number of people clipping their finger and toenails on the subway is on the increase. I once saw a guy using a portable electric razor on a crowded "A" Train. I've seem people urinating on the subway all my life, but that razor thing really gave me the willies. I have also seen, on more than one occasion NYC police officers spitting sunflower seeds on the floor of an IND car. A case might be mad with reguards to the % of saliva content projected from the "Offending" and unpunished officer. There is another group I know of that is interested in ticketing riders who use their pants as a bathroom. It is an uphill battle since that guy in New Jersey won his case against the public library system that was trying to discriminate against his civil right to omit odors. If Gulliani had his way, he would pass out tickets for breaking wind or for exhaling deadly carbon monoxide with every breath. With all this clamor, it is clear that the laws and maybe even the Constitution need to be rewritten.
When you mention spitting, you hit on one of my pet peeves. Not people spitting on the platform or stairs, or spitting onto the tracks in the subway, but spitting onto the tracks on the L, the majority of which here in Chicago is steel girderwork rather than solid concrete viaduct. The people who do this either do not realize or do not care that there are people and vehicles passing in the street below the L structure. I don't mind stepping in spittle -- you expect the soles of your shoes to contact rather odd and disgusting things -- but I really wouldn't like someone spitting on my head!
Please explain these strong feelings to the pigeons and seagulls!
But like a baby spitting up on your good new suit when you are holding it, the birds don't know any better. The track-spitters on the L, being presumably human beings, should know better.
["It is my understanding that some women's groups are considering taking the TA to court over the toilet issue due to the fact that tunnels, platform ends and the gap between cars unfairly provides men with the opportunity for relief while women are forced to suffer."
That is the most preposterous legal claim I've ever heard. Urinating in the subway is illegal. You cannot claim unequal treatment when the alleged "preferred" behavior is illegal and that law is enforced.]
Besides, who says that women have to suffer? Those people on this board who also follow nyc.transit will surely remember Cap'n Bludd's posting a few weeks ago, about the young woman at Canal Street ...
Frivilous lawsuits are nonetheless popular and profitable. I have a cousin in law who was an Emergency Medical Technician when the Lex IRT hit the pillars at Union Square. He was an early arrival on the scene, and his effort to help people was impeded by savvy citizens rushing into the station to claim to have been aboard and injured. Eventually they had to post guards to keep people out of the station.
Some people will do anything to make a fast buck.
I suspect that this was a joke, something like Jonathan Swift's "modest proposl"
I don't think such a lawsuit ever existed or was ever threatened, nor that the original poster believes that one was. I think he wanted to see if anyone would take the claim seriously, and the fact that several people have is simply an indication of how we have lost all sense of perspective in society today.
Now I've heard everything! So-called women's groups suing because they have the
wrong type of biology to urinate easily in the subway. Well, the only answer I
have for them is to start evolving very fast or else deal with it. If women feel
like urinating in the subway then let them. I'm not going to stop or report them
but I'm sure they'll get picked up by the police just as the men do. It's not that
easy for men to hide while urinating in the subway, either! I'd like to know how
many public urination tickets are given out each year. And some men just don't
care about getting caught. I was walking into the uptown entrance of the 49th
Street stop on the N train and some guy was urinating right down the entrance
stairs. Gives a new meaning to puddle hopping, I guess!
I've heard rumours of vagrants urinating in the tunnel, hitting the third rail, and having the current run up the stream and fry them. Of course, that might be just another New York story, like the alligators in the sewers. But anything was possible a decade or so ago.
I know of a documented case of a kid being fried by peeing on the New Haven 11KV overhead from an overpass, but I am not sure 600 Volts could put enough amperage through "the stream" to kill, and I'm not curious enough to find out.
Not referring to pay toilets, but "zaps", we once had a case in long ago Gwynn Yard (electrified with 11kv overhead). Two kids climbed up on a boxcar in the yard and hit the trolley with 3 GG1's and 2 E-44's all accelerating. Since the yard was on the same circuit as the mains, there was a loud boom, the sub dropped and the cops (railroad and city) were called. All that remained of the kids were some smoldering rags. The medical examiner was summoned, and the "remains' were taken to the morgue. It took four days to determine the race and sex of the victims and the only way a positive ID was made was for the cops to go door to door in the surronding neighborhoods until somebody had a kid missing.
I forgot to mention that the boxcar had a 3 foot hole BURNED through. 11kv is nothing to fool with.
600 volts DC is nothing to fool with, either. A fully loaded subway train can draw as much as 10,000 amps when starting from a dead stop.
Speaking of ID, dental records can be used if a body is burned beyond recognition. Of course, if the kids' teeth were vaporized...
You don't need to remind me (or anybody else) about 600 volts DC. In a 28 year career as a streetcar supervisor/instructor I've been bitten twice - once by a hood switch on a 1900 Brownell convertible and once by a worn insulation spot on a "stinger". The hood switch has a brass ring (on a wood handle) that's charged. Everyone has been warned about this car's pecularity, but if you contact the ring with one hand on the controller to (K11, brass top) ZAP! The singer got repaired promptly by the Overhead Lines Dept. 2 shocks in 28 years on a streetcar property is nothing to boast about, just a constant reminder that 600 volts is nothing to fool with.
Still no strike. Still talking but sporadically. Suburban Division drivers set to "strike" also (contracts are up in one week).
The good news is that the riders who were scared away from the system in the past week due to the impending and unpredictable situation have now come back since they obviously do not believe the strike rhetoric.
The TWU local president and its spokesperson are sending different messages and this contributes to the confusion. This past weekend the spokesperson was telling the media that a strike would happen on Sunday or Monday but the president would not confirm and ultimately nothing happened. It's not very exciting at all. Good news for us customers!
As 234 and SEPTA continue the play PR games (and the UTU gets its day(s) in the press) this semi-annual farce will continue. The riders that are left will suffer, the service will continue to deteriorate and the automobile/highway lobby will continue to reap the benefits.
Turn the record over, the same sad story is on the other side with a 2002 date on it.
SEPTA base fare in 2000: $2.00
The economy of Downtown Philadelphia cannot withstand this. Business will leave even faster than they already are.
There were 19 U.S. cities with more than 200,000 people in 1900. These are the major pre-automobile cities. Only two -- New York and San Francisco -- have lost less than 10 percent of their peak populations. Most have lost more than one third. People in Philly better pull together and row. The current is pushing them over the falls.
A small point: semi-annual = every half-year, i.e. twice per year
bi-annual = every second year
touche!!!
biannual -- occurring or appearing twice a year; semiannual
semiannual -- happening every half year
biennial -- happening or taking place once in two years
Don't you just love the English language?
And don't you just love SEPTA? The fare will probably hit $2 before 2000. Many riders are paying $2 per ride today, not just to get a transfer, but it's easier to put 2 dollar bills in the box than trying to find 60 cents in change!
Does OPTO, NYCT style, make sense? On the Fraklin Shuttle, the TA has removed the Conductor from the one train. A conductor earns $35,000 - $40,000 anually without overtime. However, the TA has assigned a TSS to the line to make sure that OPTO works. A TSS (Train Service Supervisor) earns $55,000 to $70,000. Yherefore, OPTO is costing the TA up to $30,000 annually on this one line.
On the surface, it doesn't make sense, because the Franklin Shuttle has only one train running on it. However...
I'd bet two tokens to a transfer that they are practicing on the Franklin Shuttle for other lines. Then 1 TSS will be used for maybe every 5 trains (just to pick a number out of thin air). Then they will save money. But then everyone will want to ride in the first car, instead of the two middle cars, to be near a uniformed employee.
I think having a conductor is important, especially on a non-automated line, so that the motorman can keep his attention to the driving and not be distracted by having to handle platform congestion, getting the doors open, getting them closed, and having to handle unexpected hardware problems alone. On NYC's long trains with so many passengers, a TSS every (let's guess) 10 stations may not be enough of a help to the motorman that a conductor provides.
Not to be petty, but the line has 2 trains running till about 9PM
One of the "wish list" topics that pops up periodically here in Chicago is linking the Brown and Blue Lines. The Brown Line is the old Ravenswood L, and runs to Kimball/Lawrence terminal. 20 blocks, or 2.5 miles, west along commercial Lawrence Avenue is the Jefferson Park station, a major Blue Line station which is also a Metra UP-Northwest station and terminal for many important CTA and Pace bus routes. Bringing the Brown west to Jefferson Park would allow people along the Ravenswood tracks and in Lincoln Park easier access to O'Hare and to office parks at the Cumberland and Rosemont stations. The usual proposal is to bring the Brown Line into the bus terminal and allow transfer between transit lines by a short walk.
Maybe I've been here too long, listening to the various plans of the New York City subway riders, but it occurs to me that if you bring the Brown Line tracks up under the open-cut Kennedy Expy., have them surface in the middle of the Blue Line tracks just east of Jefferson Park, and tie the Brown tracks into the Blue, multiple possibilities arise:
1) The obvious, and one with the least change: same-platform transfers between Blue and Brown trains.
2) Extending some runs of the Brown along the Blue tracks west of Jeff Park, making the trip to O'Hare, etc. a one-train ride.
3) The most ambitious: a new "all airports" line, running from O'Hare to Midway along the tracks of the Blue, the Brown, the Red (State Street Subway), and the Orange (Midway line). The Brown and Orange tracks meet on the Loop L, but I prefer a subway routing to bring the route close to the North Michigan Avenue shopping area at the Chicago-State subway station.
So what do you think? Feasibility? Cost? Ridership?
The Blue line already comes into downtown via the Dearborn St. subway. Perhaps it could be tied into the Orange line a la the Ryan-Howard hookup.
The Blue Line connects with all other lines for free-transfer purposes, but the Blue **trackage** connects with the rest of the system at only one point, south and a good bit west of the Loop, over the non-revenue one-track former Metropolitan L between the Forest Park and Cermak Branches of the Blue and the Lake Street portion of the Green. The cheapest and easiest direct connection of the Blue to the Orange would require a portal and ramps to be built where the Blue Line runs as a subway under Lake Street and the Green Line runs on an L over it, thus allowing trains to pass from the Loop L to the Dearborn-Milwaukee Subway and vice-versa. And that would have to be in the short, congested two blocks between the river crossing and the Loop L junction.
The Brown Line linkup has various advantages over a direct Blue-Orange via Loop "all airports" line:
1) It would serve to more directly bring the white-collar crowd (leaving their cars at home) along the Ravenswood line and in Lincoln Park to the Cumberland and Rosemont station office parks, where a Blue-Orange would not.
2) Using the State Street Subway, it would connect the airports to the Michigan Avenue shopping and hotel area and the Rush Street and River North entertainment areas much more directly than any Blue-Orange linkup.
2) The Brown linkup would involve construction far from downtown in a mostly commercial-industrial area.
Does anyone have the inside dope on the (now closed) bank teller windows inside the station at Borough Hall in Brooklyn? That's right, inside, after you pay your fair. When were they built, concieved, in opperation? What is their current status? I am looking for some office space and I was wondering...
Any history on commerical establishments INSIDE the system???
Let me know.
Don't know anything but that was Crossland Savings Bank (FSB) that went belly up. I used to bank at those windows when I worked in downtown brooklyn. THey then went to deposits only and then closed them. There is a bank moving into the old Crossland soon, I don't think they will have "Subway Banking" though. IT sure was easy on Payday (this was before direct deposit).
Another bank-in-the-subway was the Dry Dock Savings Bank at 59th St./Lexington Ave., there used to be teller windows on the southbound local platform. As for other commercial establishments, there were lunch counters at both ends of the Times Square/Grand Central shuttle. Also, a jeweler's on the Grand Central end and I think some other stores as well (actually along the corridor between the shuttle and Lexington Ave. line). For a time there was a clothing store in the 42nd St./8th Ave. station. And then there is the record store in Times Square station; it may still be there; I'm pretty sure something besides a newsstand remains in place in Times Square. Newsstands are the only businesses remaining in the system today, with that one exception. Another type of business I remember were hot dog stands. There was one (two?) in the 59th St./Columbus Circle station, and there was one at B'way/E. New York at the bottom of the escalators.
I remember from my high school days (early 1960s) that the Dime Savings Bank had a branch in the south mezzanine of DeKalb Ave. station (inside the paid area). I had an account there, and I occasionally stopped at DeKalb to make deposits or withdrawals without having to pay an extra fare.
Other businesses in the subway I remember: a record shop in Union Square station (I believe it was above the downtown IRT platform), and numerous snack shops and lunch counters.
The Bowery also had a bank branch inside the paid area of Grand Central terminal. I went there often to make deposits and withdrawals when I was in college until it was closed down.
Herald Square also 1 or 2 hot dog stands. I wonder why these things disappeared.
The Coney Island yard does one sixth of the train fleet. The IRT cars also need to be fixed. How do they get to Coney Island without being noticed and without causing traffic on the other lines. If not Coney Island then where in New York City do they go?
On the IRT only the #7 line cars go to Coney Island and I think it's for heavy maintainance. The simply swith to the BMT's tracks at a crossover just east of the Queesboro Plaza station and continue down Broadway and one of the three BMT routes in Brooklyn that leads to Coney Island. I've seen one recently at passing through Times Square (BMT Broadway) on the southbound local track. It deadheads as usual. All other IRT equipment goes to 207th street for heavy maintainance
Why of all places is the city's main train yard at Coney Island, a location not exactly easily or quickly accessible by other train routes? Why not the Jamaica Yard or 242 St.?
Why is Coney Island not easily accessible? The B, D, F, and N trains end at Coney Island normally, and Q and M trains can easily continue on past their normal (or in the case of M, rush hour) terminal just two or three stops to Coney Island. That's six lines right there. G trains can continue on the F tracks (Culver Line) to Coney Island, as can the R over N trackage (Sea Beach Line). J and Z trains can follow the same route to Coney as the M.
Isn't 242nd St. on an IRT line and thus accessible only by IRT trains?
Not a bad list from Chicago! Not only that, but Brooklyn (with 2.3 million people) only really has one highway: the Belt Parkway runs into the BQE around the edge of the borough. That highway runs past Coney Island. And Ocean Parkway, a major boulevard (Brooklyn has very few of those as well) runs right into Coney Island.
Most of the land due west of Stillwell Terminal is vacant -- acres and acres along the Boardwalk. There have been dozens of plans for this area, but it appears that major commercial development will not happen. Let's hope so. It would be great for the area to come back as a major destination by the time my kids are teens.
The "L" train can also get to Coney Island using the connection at Eastern Pkwy once used by the "K"/"KK"/"14" trains. Actually, every BMT/IND line can easily enough get to Coney Island. Trains coming from 8th Av/14th St or 95th St-Brooklyn would have to backup.
The "7" train was always connected to the BMT at Queensborough Plaza because, prior to 1951, there was dual BMT and IRT service between Queensborough Plaza and both Astoria and Main St-Flushing. IRT trains to Flushing/Astoria were numbered, respectively, "7" and "8", while the BMT trains were numbered either "8" and "9" or "9" and "8" respectively. I'm not sure which. The Astoria line was originally built to IRT platform clearances. Therefore, BMT trains coming from both Flushing and Astoria terminated at Queensborough Plaza, which originally contained 4 tracks and 2 platforms on each of 2 levels.
The A line also has a yard lead to 242nd Street, making the yard accesible to BMt/IND trains, as well as IRT trains.
JC
This is just a guess, but -- when you mention 242nd St yard, do you really mean 207th St, which has leads to both the A and the 1/9 tracks? The yards from the IRT tracks are:
240th Street on the 1/9
239th Street on the 2/5
148th Street on the 3
Westchester Yard on the 6
Corona Yard on the 7
Livonia Yard at the Brooklyn end of the 3
- used for 2,3, 4 & 5 mid-day and night lay-ups
E.180th Street/Unionport Yard on the 2/5
and the two cross-divisional yards
207th St Overhaul on the 1/9 and A
Jerome/Moshulu Yard on the 4 which joins Concourse Yard on the B/D
Coney is accessable, but not centrally located, which I think was your point. The choice of location was driven by the pre-existance of heavy shops inherited from the many steam railroads serving Coney Island at the turn of the last Century.
Actually, the shops at Coney Island were built by/for the BMT in the 1920's as part of the dual contracts, replacing the inadequate (by that time) shops at the 36th street yard (the one just west of 9th Ave. station on the B line).
I assume the reason for building the large yard/shop complex there was the availability of land -- the area was largely undeveloped (i.e., farms, in Brooklyn yet!) until after WW II.
There was some open space around Ebbets Field when it opened, too, as I understand.
I am told that the reason Coney Island Shops were built on their present site, in Coney Island is because the Head of the BMT (at that time) worried that if he built Coney Island Shop if Flushing Meadows, people might be confused by the name. Enough already !!
It was the BMT, an independent company, that built the Coney Island yard. The IRT already had several Manhattan yards, but they were being closed up. There isn't much real estate available for a yard the size of CI in Manhattan for heavy overhauls. At the time, Coney Island Yard was swamp land, readily available for use. Not many sites like that existed. Also, to the BMT, it made sense, since Coney Island was a major destination for many many people and saw a great deal of traffic.
Most lines have small yards at either end for rush hour put ins. Some have small shops for light or scheduled maintenance; 207th St and Coney Island do the major overhauls and fix the major problems.
--Mark
Ok, right now, Coney Island is not a reach for the B,D,F,G,J,M,N,Q & Z. Those lines are either already there, or just keep going to get there.
Jamaica would facilitate the E, but would lose the J, M, Z and then preclude the B,D,& Q from having a "major" shop either at the end of its line or adjacent. The G would be a "push".
207 St is fine for the A & C, and could function for the B & D, but would be cumbersome for all other lines.
242nd St would be wholly inadequate as it is geographically hemmed in (by Gaelic Park, the 1/9 line, and the Riverdale neighborhood. I am assuming that double decking would not be an option. Think how bad getting an IRT car to its heavy overhaul was before they put in the link off the Bway line to 207 St. 242 St-berthed cars would have to go down to South Ferry, up the 4 line, switch from Jerome to Concourse yards, back down to 145-St. Nick, and then up to 207 St. No joke.
I can remember (digressing a bit) when I worked at 242 St in 1981-82, we still had the R12-14s. Whenever a compressor needed to be changed out, it could only be accessed from 1 side. The car might have to be sent down to the loop at South Ferry and turned around so it could be brought back on 1 Track in the barn and changed. That had to've been the nadir, right there...
A question: When was the link between the 207th Street yard and the 1/9 lines constructed?
That connection was built around the 1985-86 timeframe right when the 1 started getting their R62A's along with the new Switch Tower.
Thanks Chris for answering my question, here's another one for you, when was the link built between the Concourse and Jerome Yards? Also does the right-of-way still exist between the Jamacia Yards and the World's Fair site or did it become the ROW for the Van Wyck Expressway?
I don't have any info on the Jerome- Concourse connection, I know it was there back in 1983 when I started my love for our subway. As for the World's Fair-Jamaica Yard link, according to Brian Cuddahay, Stan Fischler (Subway Authors), That is now part of the Van Wyck.
Someone Answer me this--Is the Jerome Yard NEXT TO or BELOW Tracey Towers? I've never been close enough to actually see for myself.
Jerome Yard is not under Tracey Towers but it is under the Tracey Towers Parking Garage. Scott Towers parking Garage is over the lead to Concourse yard.
Steve, i stand corrected. You are right. My mistake. Scott Towers is next to the #4 irt yards. I always get Scott and Tracy Towers mixed up. My friends and relatives live in Scott Towers not Tracy Towers.
Charlie Muller.
A much nicer building, too!!
Scott Tower and Concourse Yard are neghbors. Because of our propinquety, and our mutual interests we try to maintain a good working relationship with the Board of Directors.
Someone answer this one for me---Is the Jerome yard NEXT TO or BELOW Tracey Towers? I've never been close enough to actually see for myself.
The IRT Jerome Yard is at or above Street level.
I have pictures from the early sixties.
I Believe that those towers are built over the IND Yards
that are south of the IRT yards. A connection was built between the
Jerome line and the IND Concourse Line Yards.
Another item;
That ICQ softare with an on-line chat is available at
http://www.mirabilis.com
I am ICQ #10413274
The IRT #4 Jerome Ave Yards are across the street from the IND Concourse B and D yard, on 205th street between Jerome Ave and Paul Ave. The Jerome Ave Yard for the #4 train is next to Tracy Towers and below the parking area of the Tracy Towers. The #4 Jerome Ave Yard is above street level. You can get a good look of the #4 yard coming downtown on the #4 train between Mosholu Parkway station and Bedford Park Blvd station. Tracy Towers are built above the #4 Irt Jerome Ave Yard, which is north of the B and D Concourse Yards. There are NO buildings built over the B and D Concourse Yards. I have a few friends and a few relatives who live in Tracy Towers, so i do get a good look over both train yards.
I hope this helps.
Charlie Muller.
It does I really do appreciate that insight. It's been a long time since I rode the #4 line or even the buses that went past Tracy Towers. I used to go to JFK HS and travel to DeWitt Clinton to watch the many sporting events that we played. Plus, getting all those Westchester Co. buses that happened to stop nearby.
Thanks Again!!
Chris
I read as did another writer, that when the BMT took over many of the steam railways the land at Coney Island was already being used as a railroad repair/overhaul/storage depot and that as time went on it was one of the few places where an abundance of land existed for such endeavours. It's the same reason why United Airlines has its maintenance in San Francisco at the time they begain building their facility the land was there despite being a remote locale when they established the Maintance Operations Center in the 1950s'. Several other airlines have maintaine facilities off the beaten track for reasons of cost, one exmaple being American at Tulsa, OK rather than Chicago-O'Hare, Dallas-Forth Worth or JFK.
To answer the other question. On the 1 line there is a track connection to the 207 overhaul shop where the mainline IRT (all IRT except #7) are repaired. The 7 goes to coney Island via the N line- There is a crossover at Queensboro Plaza where they switch the cars to the N tracks. They reverse ends and run via BMT tracks to Coney Island Yard.
Actually, I believe they run with a work car or a R127 on the lead, due to the differences in the brake triggers for the IRT and the IND-BMT.
-Hank
It's not necessary for Corona cars to have R-127s as lead motors when operating on BMT/IND trackage. The #7 line, while classified as an IRT line, uses BMT signals, thus trip cocks are on the opposite-cab side of the car.
I don't think so...I'm pretty sure that's where I first noticed the difference. I'll check Tuesday, though...Opening Day @ Shea!
-Hank
Yeah, let's go Mets! Bring back Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver and Jerry Koosman and Tug McGraw and the rest of the '69 gang.
Speaking of the Flushing line, how are R-36s transferred to the IRT mainlines? I remember hearing a Transit Museum volunteer explain the procedure, but I didn't catch it all. The switch to the BMT at Queensboro Plaza is obvious, but what then? There must be a lot of maneuvering involved.
The move is a bit complicated or long and simple.
The long and simple is N line to Coney Island Yd, loop the yard and come back north on the F line. Switch to the D line at 34th ST. and north into Concourse Yard. From Concourse Yard, up the lead to the #4 line.
The short and complicated is N line into the 60th St tunnel - Reverse move through the 11th St. cut into Queens Plaza - Reverse move along the F line to 34th St - Reverse move north on the D line to Concourse Yard and onto the #4 line.
Since 'Drags' (Transfer trains) are always double ended (operator on both ends) the latter is the perferred move.
back in 1991 while visiting from California, I drove down to the Jamacia Yards for some sightseeing. While looking through the fence from the bottom of the driveway from Union Turnpike, I noticed two trains of Flushing Line cars in the yard. My theory is that the Flushing cars are switched onto the BMT at Queensboro Plaza, proceed into the 60th Street Tunnel where a) they are taken directly to Coney Island via the Montague Street Tunnel or b) are lead into the 60th Street Tunnel approach and then reversed into the Queens Blvd. Subway taken to Jamacia, held there, and then relayed along the F or G lines to Brooklyn.
It is also possible that the Corona cars were in Jamaica yard for maintenance. Jamaica Shop is one of the 4 maintenance shops that has a wheel truing machine and from time to time, wheels for the Corona fleet are cut there. This is especially true when the Wheel machine in Coney Island is down for maintenance or repairs.
For the record, NYCT has 6 operating wheel truing machines
IRT machines are at 207th Street Overhaul Shop and 239th St. Maintenance Shop.
BMT/IND machines are located at Coney Island Overhaul shop, Jamaica Maintenance Shop, East NY Maintenance Shop and Concourse Maintneance Shop.
Sorry Steve to say you're wrong. The trip cock on the #7 fleet is in the same place as on the Mainline cars: on the motormans side. The transfer from Corona to Coney Island always has a R33 single car at the ends: because it has 4 trip cocks.
As previously stated, #7 cars go to Coney Island Yard for heavy Maintance (truck changes, heavy overhauls, etc.) Transfers thru Queensboro Plaza interlocking are made daily after the PM rush. Occasionally "MainLine " IRT cars make their way down there too in the late PM or midnite by transfering thru the #4 connection by Bedford Park Blvd. thru Concource Yard, then down the D&F lines into Coney Island Yard south of Avenue X station .
By the way, not too many main line IRT cars are sent to Coney Island. I have seen R62A SMS overhauls done there, and as of a few weeks ago, the 5 car set of R62's rear ended by the #2 lay-up at 238th yard (1396 thru 1400) were there receiving body work.
Why can't they make a connection on the 2,3,4,5 lines to D and Q lines at Flatbush Avenue and that will make it easier to get to the Coney Island/Avenue X yards.
[Why can't they make a connection on the 2,3,4,5 lines to D and Q lines at Flatbush Avenue and that will make it easier to get to the Coney Island/Avenue X yards.]
A connection at Flatbush Avenue would make the transfer somewhat easier, but there's no pressing need for one - as noted elsewhere, only the 7 train regularly goes there for service and it connects only to the N.
For the amount of trains using that connection, the money could be used more wisely, like extending the Flatbush line to Ave. U.
Was there ever a 'K' train? Where did it go? And what's the talk about the 63rd Street tunnel? Isn't there already a 63rd Street tunnel where the B and Q trains go? I like this site. It's cool!
There were 2 "versions" of the K train.
The first orginally known as the KK ran from 57th St/6th Av via a connecting tunnel south of Broadway-Lafayette to either 169th St/Jamaica (J line) or Atlantic Av (L line). It ran from 1967 thru the 1970's.
In April 1986 the AA line was renamed the K. Thsi is when the TA changed all
double letter lines (AA, CC, GG, LL etc) to single letter. Since there
already was an A line, the AA local was given the K. That K service was discontinued in 1988.
__________________________________________________________________________
Yes, the 63rd St tunnel is the one where the B & Q used to go (service is temporarily replaced by a one track shuttle while the roadbed is replaced.
This tunnel will eventually connect to the Queens Blvd line (E, F, R) just sout
west (or south if you prefer) of the 36th Street station.
With all this talk of extending the 63rd St. tunnel going on. When is construction starting or has it started and when will it be operational?
The construction work started some time ago and is now going on in full force. Completion is scheduled for 2001, though one would be ill-advised to hold one's breath ...
Actually, I would expect it to be done ahead of schedule, because work on the connector is ahead of schedule.
-Hank
The KK debuted on July 1, 1968. In 1973, it became the K and was cut back to Eastern Parkway. It was eliminated in 1976.
The other K replaced the AA when double letter designations were dropped in favor of single letters. When the C became a regular, rather a rush-hour-only service, it took the place of the K, since it duplicated that route below 145th St.
Curious question folks, does anyone know if the MTA has individual bus and subway timetables for all MTA routes? Or is it still 50% of the lines (as of last year)? You can e-mail me or post here-
Thanks,
MIKE
While I won't speak for the bus lines, the MTA does have timetables for all
the subway lines (including the new "S" 63rd St shuttle service). That latest for most of these are 9/97. The new S is from 2/98.
As far as the subway, all the lines have their schedules on the MTA site. I don't remember the offical URL I use the mirror at www.lirr.org and drill down to the subways..
I wish the bus schedules were posted but hey change more often than the subway it's hard to keep up.
The URL for the official site is:
www.mta.nyc.ny.us
select NYC Transit, then select subway then select timetables.
I knwo this isn't the right place but since my wife asked me (native Staten Islander, living in Brooklyn 2.5 yrs now) and Hank your up on all transportation issues on the Island, is there going to be a new Feryy Boat next year??
She heard a rumor and I no longer get the Advance so?? Thanks
According to newspaper reports, the Feds announced one new boat on the style of the JFK class boats (thank goodness) will be ordered. The city is trying to cough up enough $ for a second ferry. But those 3 boats are over 30 years old and they all need to be replaced.
The estimated cost of a new bout is in the $37-$41M range. The new ISTEA bill is expected to provide $28-$30M for a new boat that will be designed to carry cars. The city is also seeking funds to build a natural-gas powered boat. The 3 Kennedy-class boats, all built from 1964-65, are becoming increasingly unreliable mechanically. Currently, the Kennedy is out of service due to a burned-out generator.
Any new boaty would not see service until 2001, at least. The last 2 boats delivered, in 1986 and 87, the John Noble and Alice Austen, have a capacity of only 1250 persons, as opposed to the Kennedy (3500+40 cars) and the Barberi class (6000) boats. Personally, I saw them as a waste of money, because they were built solely to save on manpower costs. The Noble is permanently out of service, and being usd as a parts supply for the Austen.
The new boat(s) will likely have the same drive system that the last 4 boats have, a varible pitch propeller system with no rudder. Oddest thing I ever saw last time the Barberi was up at Caddell.
-Hank
Washington State Ferries has a great website, with drawings and specs of each class of boat, and progress schedules for upcoming new ones. I tried to find a similar site for NYC, but apparently the ferries are no longer run by the dept. of marine and aviation, because my search engine struck out. You local New Yorkers who are up on what agency now runs the ferries might try a search of your own.
The frries are run by DOT, under the division of Marine and Aviation. There may be some info on it on the official nyc web site, I think that's the right site...
-Hank
No doubt you've all heard about rising transit ridership in NYC, with subway use (like crime and local taxes as a share of personal income) returning to the level of the 1960s. The question is -- why, and is the same increase happening in other areas (excluding those which are adding new lines)?
Transit advocates are claiming people are "returning to the system" from other modes. Anecdotally, I disagree. People who experienced the collapse of the 1970s and started driving are probably still driving, but many are moving out and dying off. Their place is taken by immigrants from abroad and people who never experienced the bad old days.
There are many people in my neighborhood, which has many old time Brooklyn families, who have neither ridden the subway nor entered Prospect Park since they became "dangerous" in the 1960s. Meanwhile, new people are moving in exactly because of the good subway access to Manhattan and the park.
Therefore, I credit population turnover with the increase. What do you think?
Anecdotally once again, I'll agree with your hypothesis. One thing I've noted about the subway is the relative youth of its riders. Yes, there are many exceptions, but by and large I'd say that there are not many riders over age 55 or thereabouts. This tends to be correct even outside of rush hour, when the lack of older riders might be explained by today's younger retirement ages.
In addition to these observations, census data show a pronounced turnover in the city's population. So it's not hard to see why most riders today do not remember the bad old days.
I also think that the long awaited Metrocard breaks and free transfers between subway and bus also had a great deal to do with it. My mother, for example, used to take an express bus to Manhattan for $4.00 (or whatever the fare is these days) thinking that for only $1 more than bus to subway transfer, she could ride in relative comfort. Now that there's a free bus to subway transfer, the commutation cost was cut from $6 a day to $3 a day. Now it's $1.50 one way vs $4.00. She's willing to make the transfer because the savings is greater. That makes a difference for people with strict budgets.
--Mark
What I'm wondering is, are other cities with significant mass transit networks also having increases in ridership.
In Washington, ridership increases as the system grows. After the Franconia/ Springfield station last summer, transit ridership broke records.
Light rail ridership in Denver remains strong. In fact, when the line opened, so many people took to riding it that a few downtown bus routes which had been discontinued had to be restored, and RTD wound up ordering additional LRVs. The biggest problem right now is insufficient parking space at Park'n'Ride lots.
I don't know, but the subway today is MUCH MUCH better than even 10 years ago...
Ironically, a light rail line in Hartford CT is being killed off by C DOT, because of "low projected ridership", and "declining ridership on transit systems around the country". But I've noticed the exact OPPOSITE. Even the LIRR has a pretty heavy ridership on the weekends now, and Boston, NJT, and the other systems I've been on don't seem to be empty at all. Of course, it's no big secret that CDOT hates rail lines in general, I believe Rowland wants to kill the Shore Line east too. All in the name of Highway construction and lower gas prices, though IMHO gas is so cheap they should give it away around here...
So, us people who don't have cars (mostly because I'm not paying 400+ a year to park at the ass end of campus...) have to play "cab roulette", or walk.
But at least I'm getting cheaper gas prices :P
Is the proposed Hartford light rail line supposed to use the old Griffin freight line, running up through Bloomfield?
Yeah.
Oh yes, the Griffin Line light rail plans ... now I can recall hearing about similar plans many years ago. In fact, I believe it was when I was either attending school or working in the Hartford area, which would place it no later than 1984!
So it looks like these plans are nothing new. As the expression goes, breaths should not be held.
Larry:
I agree with your analysis. Everyone I talk to (again, anecdotal evidence) who was turned off the system when it reached its nadir in the 70's still stays aways from it. It was so revolting that no amount of PR about 'improvements' can erase all those 'blade-runner' impressions, and that palpable feeling of being in jeopardy.
Abroad, the NY subway still has the image of being "dangerous". Even people who admit the rolling stock is better than it used to be still find the riders scary. You'll notice in the off-peak hours the ridership on the buses is decidedly older than that of the subways. It must the flow of immigrants/young people who are riding in greater numbers...
[I agree with your analysis. Everyone I talk to (again, anecdotal evidence) who was turned off the system when it reached its nadir in the 70's still stays aways from it ... You'll notice in the off-peak hours the ridership on the buses is decidedly older than that of the subways. It must the flow of
immigrants/young people who are riding in greater numbers...]
While I too have noticed the relatively young average age of subway riders, I'm not so certain that it's attributable to bad memories and fears. There are two other factors that might account for the relative lack of older riders. During rush hours, today's younger retirement ages could be a factor. People are commonly retiring these days in their early to mid fifties, and retired people are unlikely to be riding the subway during rush hours. Secondly, many older people find the system hard to negotiate, with its stairways and long passageways and crowding. I'm not talking about people in wheelchairs, but older people who aren't as physically fit and steady on their feet as they used to be.
At any rate, with this relative lack of older riders, it may well be that there's a strong peception of youth when one surveys typical ridership.
I still wonder about the "control group": other cities. Is transit ridership increasing in Chicago, Boston and Philly?
Something is definately going on in NYC. I am not surprised that subway and commuter rail ridership is going up. I am surprised that bus ridership began to ride, even before bus trips were offered, in effect, for free.
Last time I checked (which was at least six months, if not a year ago), commuter ridership in Philly was up significantly. City ridership (subways and buses) was basically static, which means a lot lower than it was even in the early '90's.
There was an artcle in the Inquirer last year that talked about SEPTA's ridership levels. The Regional lines showed the highest ridership in the system. Ridership on other heavy rail lines(especially the BSS) has gone down a littler. Light rail lines were very static as were buses.
The whole perception of safey question was a major factor in the Bernie Goetz civil trial. From what I read in the (Chicago) legal newspaper, the defense team was worried that a new generation of subway riders, not having faced the subway conditions of the '70s and early '80s, would not understand the threat and the fear that Goetz allegedly faced at the time of the incident. I believe they were going to introduce evidence and testimony to show what the atmosphere of the subway was like at the time, but they were still worried that the jurors would understand in their minds what conditions were like but not really assimilate it in their feelings or "heart".
Well, there must have been something to that concern, since Goetz basically won the criminal trial, held when the subway was still in its old condition, and lost the civil trial held now, after much reform and improvement in the subway system.
Funny you should mention the "Blade Runner Effect". Can you imagine how much stronger it is in LA? I for one used to never miss a visit to the Bradberry Building(Even after they started charging admission at the front door!)whenever I visited Downtown, but since that movie(which I dearly love), the place gives me the creeps! I expect the airship broadcasting opportunities on the Outer Planets to float across the skylight at any moment!
I agree with your analysis. As I noted in the Bowery Station discussion, some stations that were considered dangerous 20, 30, 40 years ago are still considered dangerous now. As for me, I started riding the subways in December 1986. Things did not seem to bad then, but then again I was 17. Still, I had no fear and grew to love the system when I noticed the system shaping-up because of all the improvements. My parents (who haven't been on the subway since we lived in Jackson Heights in the early '70s) and grandparents (for my grandfather it's been 16 years and for my grandmother it's been 46 years) are all still mistrustful of the system, although less so now than 10 years ago. My mother's cousins who grew-up in Little Italy and now live in Statan Island and Queens haven't used mass transit since the Third Ave. El was torn down.
Between the immigrants and riders like me who did not live through the "bad old days" of the '70s and early '80s, there is a new wave of subay ridership causing the increased patronage.
I rode the subway for the first time on July 21, 1965 - a red-letter date in my life - on an N train of brand-spanking new R-32s. I was a bright-eyed 8-year Hoosier. Two years later, when we moved from Indiana to Jersey and started to go to the city regularly, all I wanted to do was ride the subway; I was hooked. It's been an ongoing love affair that has never died. I didn't get into New York much from 1972-76, and went three years without riding the subway at all, but by the late 70s, I would go down from Connecticut once or twice a month. Even though it was very depressing with all the graffiti, I never felt threatened. I came out to Colorado in 1980, and didn't find myself in New York again until 1984. Since then, I've been to the city at least once a year, and must admit that the subway has indeed come a long way from the state of near-collapse it had been in. Granted, I miss the R-1/9s and R-10s, but still get the same thrill by looking through the storm door window of the first car. All the more reason to wait for an A train of R-38s instead of R-44s.
My parents never felt intimidated by the subway, either. They visited New York in the early 50s, and got around fine. My father had relatives in Brooklyn (right off the West End line, as a matter of fact), and even though I've pressed them for details as to what trains they rode (Triplex, standards), they don't remember.
What is the relationship between the MTA and the stores and newsstands withing the subway system. As I wrote yesterday about the bank inside the Borough Hall station, I am interested in uitilizing this wasted unused space. Perhaps someone can help me get started. At first I wanted to just use it as an office, but in the interest of public service, I am now considering a much needed Bed and Breakfast for downtown Brooklyn.
Does the city take a cut or do they just take bids and rent the space?
A Bed and Breakfast in the Subway Mezzanine? Talk about charm! Maybe one of those Japanese style cubbyhole-motels would be more appropriate.
Hello....I am curious to know if there were any plans or construction projects that existed years ago that would connect the Broad Street line to other parts of the city...Like the 8th Street Spur to continue south on 8th through Market Street to about South and then Cross over back to Broad and Connect possibly above Pattison or at Pattison. Or do the same Spur in West Philly like going through west pHilly but not crossing the River. Also How come Temple University was never made an express stop since there are so many people getting on and off the train here. I think it is really dumb to have four stops in a row be express...Spring Garden, Race-Vine, City Hall, and Walnut Locust. They should have kept City Hall as Express and maybe Walnut Locust because of the connection with Patco, but there is hardly people at Race and Vine station and Spring Garden I am unsure, but they could get rid of the express there and then people could take the train to Girard to catch the Northbound Express. I could see Girard as and Express since you have the 8th Street Spur but then maybe since Temple was here early, that subway station was important and could have been the Express and Local Stops instead of Girard, since you have a major instituion there. What do aother people think.
The proximity of express stops was likely based on ridership patterns when the Broad St subway was first built, so at the time, ridership may have warranted such a setup. In New York, we have many express stations close together (for example, 34th St, 42nd St, 47th/50th, 7 Ave and 59th St/Columbus Circle on the B&D lines). Ridership patterns change over time.
--Mark
Jason asks a lot of questions and Mark has answered one.
Yes, there were plans way back when to expand rapid transit all over Phila. The Ridge Spur was part of a delivery loop that never got past 16th & Locust (now Patco uses the Locust St subway). Portions of the uncompleted tunnel exist beneath Arch St near the Convention Center. I would suggest you refer to DVARP's website (accessible thru the main page of this site) for more detailed info on this.
Also, the express stops are as Mark described. When the Olney-Walnut (now Fern Rock-Walnut) midday expresses began operation in the early 80's, neither Race-Vine nor Spring Garden were express stops. With both crowded locals and expresses when the popularity of the subway began increasing in the 80's (a combination of the express service and the Kawasaki cars), patrons began to complain about having to change between services at Girard for access to the non-express stops (and there is already confusion at Girard since that is the station to change for the Ridge Spur trains), SEPTA caved to pressure and instituted express service at the two stops.
Here's what I know about old plans to expand the Broad Street Subway (supplemented by my copy of , an excellent, if way out of date, guide to rail lines in the Philly area:
1. Bobw is right about the Ridge Spur; apparently there was a plot to use this and the Locust St. Subway (now Patco) to get to Southwest Philly somehow.
2. Between Tasker-Morris and Snyder stations in South Philly, a spur was planned to run down Passyunk (that's "Pashunk" to all you non-natives) Ave. The tunnel is a little wider here, and the tracks switch from one side to the other. You can also see a little bit of where the new line would have gone.
3. In the '70's, there was a serious proposal to build a branch way up Roosevelt Boulevard into Northeast Philly (no idea how far up). Supposedly, Washington recommended that the city spend the money on this rather than the Center City commuter rail tunnel that we have now. My understanding is that this failed for two reasons:
a. Frank Rizzo, mayor of our glorious city at the time, was heavily indebted politically to the construction unions, who of course preferred the far more expensive downtown tunnel:
b. The good citizens of the Northeast were afraid that the new line would make it easier for residents of North Philly to move there (and I don't think I need to spell out the racial makeup of these two areas for you.)
I don't guarantee the truthfulness of this story, but it sounds like something that would happen here. Anyway, the connection would have been in one of two places:
a. Right north of Olney, where the tracks turn right on Grange Street to head into Fern Rock, there are apparently trackways laid out for a full 4-track flying junction. I'll have to look hard the next time I go up there.
b. Just north of Erie station, there is a upper level with a small four-track yard. This has been used to store and turn around locals, Ridge trains, etc., at various times. I've actually been in this on a fan trip.
I also vaguely remember a proposal for an extension to Chestnut Hill back in the '30's. It's possible that one of these may have been for that, and the other for the Roosevelt Blvd. line.
4. There was also, at the very beginning of planning for the line, a proposal to build a branch up the Benjamin Franklin Parkway (leads from City Hall to the Art Museum, where Rocky ran.) This is the other reason why City Hall station is on a curve, to connect more easily with this. (The main reason is to make its way through the foundations of the building)
As far as the express stops go, Race-Vine and Spring Garden were both orginally constructed as express stops. Of course, the service didn't actually get started until the '50's, but we won't mention that. . .I remember when the expresses used to skip those stops, but the trains had to slow down and toot their horns anyway to make sure no one got hurt. Seems to me if you have to do that anyway, you might as well stop. I suspect Spring Garden gets a decent amount of ridership because of the State Office Building there, but I could be wrong about that.
A couple of additions:
1. There were to be lines both out Woodland Ave to Darby (you wouldn't need subway-surface Route 11 if it were built) and out Lancaster Ave to Overbrook (more or less the route of Route 10 today). Each could either branch off the Market St el or from a new Chestnut St subway that would tie into the Center City delivery loop (Locust St, as mentioned, is the only piece of this loop that has service today).
2. The dual-level junction at Erie would have been the "take-off" point for the Northeast subway. The Olney dual level was primarily a turnback until the extension to Fern Rock in 1956. There were plans for a "Cedarbrook" subway that would have probably followed Ogontz Ave somehow and branched off Broad St using this junction. There were other ideas to take over the Reading line to Chestnut Hill (now the R7) and tie it into the subway system.
3. The City Hall curve is more for the connection to the Parkway subway and less for the ability to miss City Hall's foundation. It wouldn't be so pointed to the northwest if it were only to miss the structure.
If all these lines were built...we in Phila would have our own SubTalk today!
The Roosevelt Blvd. extension was planned to go from Erie Avenue to Rhawn St. in the Great Northeast. Going up the Boulevard was a perfect plan because (informally) the Northeast part of Phila. west of the Boulevard were mostly people of one religion and those east of the Boulevard were of another.
Roosevelt Blvd., besides being the widest street I have ever seen (it beats Ocean Parkway, the Concourse, and Queens Blvd. by far -- it's got 12 lanes and three traffic islands), it goes right up the middle of the Northeast. But, alas and alack, instead, Phila. got the American version of Paris's RER lines (the Mid-City Tunnel).
The last comment is that at Adam Avenue, under Sears Roebuck's former East Coast HQ, there is a station, all built and completely unused (since no line runs through it).
Where does the religious point become important? You lost me.
The subway extension would have actually turned off the Boulevard at Adams Ave (the stop at Sears was built beneath the parking garage there) and then into the median of the planned Northeast Freeway. The Freeway would have followed the line of Pennway Street. This right-of-way still exists and features overhead power lines, a Putt-Putt course (at Cottman Avenue), and some impromptu ball fields.
The terminal at Rhawn Street would have featured a large yard and shops. The land for this was purchased and is still owned by the City. This can be seen at Rhawn St close to Dungan Rd. Of course, there is nothing to see but vacant land.
Sometimes I sit and wonder what it would be like to have such a system here. Then I wouldn't have to take two trains just to have a big subway experience. But I do have a question. In West Philadelphia there are a set fo trolley tracks that run down I believe 43rd Street and are covered by tar right at Market. When were these used, if ever.
There used to be so many trolley lines that I am sure they were used for something. One question is: it is N. or S. 43rd St.?
The main library at 20th and the Parkway may have PTC maps from the early 50s still around in their reference section.
BTW, I have always found it interesting that in Philadelphia the "Boulevard" always means Roosevelt Blvd., and the "Parkway" always means Benjamin Franklin Parkway. I've never seen that in any other city.
I can't recall any tracks in 43rd St. There are paved-over tracks in portions of 41st St north of Market, and some of these could be exposed. North of 41st, one of the tracks is active (the "diversion" route for Route 10 cars not entering the subway-surface - cars runs south on 40th to Filbert, west on Filbert, north on 41st back to Lancaster). The other lines - 11, 13, 34 and 36 - use 40th south of Filbert and pass the 40th St station of the Market St subway. Route 10 riders must walk 1/2 block north on 40th to catch a car when they are not operating in the subway.
41st is odd since the street is one-way northbound but two tracks exist, with only the eastern (northbound) track having wire. The southbound track was removed in the Powelton Ave intersection when that street was rebuilt several years back. The northbound track was not placed in the true center of the street since only a small portion was being replaced and doing so would have required transitions on either side of the intersection.
I vaguely remember from about 25 years ago that there were tracks along 42 or 43 St to connect the already abandoned Spruce St. streetcar and the SW subway surface lines to the tracks going along Lancaster Avenue. It's just a vague memory but it was something like that. maybe they connected Spruce St. to the tracks along Market St. at the time (pre-1955).
I am going down and take a look, I don't remember tracks on 42nd or 43rd sts.
Years ago, the route 40 ran from 48th and Parkside loop, east on parkside, south on 40th st. crossed the river on South St., and whent to front and south.
After it crossed the river, on the westbound trip, it came north on 41st. It got back to 40th north of Lancaster Ave., than crossed Girard Ave. and went west on Parkside.
This is the subway-surface diversion route. It follows the below routing:
Starting at 42nd & Woodland (connection to 11 and 36), via 42nd (connection to 13 at Chester Ave and 34 at Baltimore Ave), Spruce, 38th (southbound via 40th), Filbert, 41st (connection to 10 at Lancaster Ave), Ogden, 40th (back to double-track), Girard (connection to 15).
The southbound track on 40th runs all the way through from Girard to Spruce. The northbound turns only to the west at Girard, thus any car headed eastbound on Girard must use the around-the-block loop via Girard, 41st, Parkside back to Girard (Parkside is a diagonal street). Westbound cars headed south on 40th must "jughandle" around the block on this loop also.
The diversion route allows cars to travel from Woodland/Elmwood depots to Luzerne and connected the North and West Phila operations until the demise of the former six years ago. This is also the way cars access the former Welcome Line since all cars are now stored at Elmwood. Route 10 cars use the diversion for pull-ins and pull-outs since they also are based at Elmwood.
Routes 11, 13, 34 and 36 use the diversion as far as 40th & Filbert, then drop off and pick up passengers at the 40th/Market el stop. Route 10 cars, which must turn back at 40th & Filbert, load and unload at that point and patrons must walk 1/2 block to and from the el stop.
The diversion is used during emergencies and also one night a week when regular maintenance is performed. During this time "owl" service connects with
the El's "owl" buses at 40th St. I believe owl cars operate only on 13 and 36.
While your description of the Closed-subway diversion route is correct, it is not the double track on 43 St. That is a covered over thing that has reappeared. I remember seeing it 25 years ago before it was paved over, but it was mostly unused then, too.
I checked an old PTC track map and could not find any evidence of track in 43rd Street. I am fairly certain there was no car line on any numbered street between 42nd and 52nd. Anyone else have an answer?
I agree with you.
As I had posted, the 40 went south on 40th and north on 41st.
But I remember, back in the late 40's, down around Baltimore ava., Chester ave.,
Woodland ave, I was surprised to see track on either 42nd or 43rd, I don't remember which, and I don't remember what trolley used them, I think it was a
(we use to call them DINKIES), like the 38A, that ran from 48th & Parkside loop to 52nd & Jefferson. Here they seem to mean, at Market St. & 43rd, and if there
showing, I want to see them. I rode the 31, on market st., many times and don't
remember them.
Those were single-truck Birney cars that served Route 14 on 40th and 42nd Streets. Before my time but I've seen pictures.
I walked down Market Street yesterday and saw tracks on 41st Street but not 43rd. In my neighborhood the 10 trolley has been running on the 15 tracks for a while. Boy, it's nice to see 'em back, even if it is only until June. Now if they only bring the PCC's back..........
Thank You, you saved me a trip
I didn't buy the tracks on 42nd or 43rd, anywhere near Market
The 10 runs all night, too.
It's N 43rd Street. If you care to check out the transit museum(Why don't they have a link?) on Market Street inside SEPTA HQ, there are some glass displays that show old transit maps(even pictures of, dare I say it, the M-1!)
Teach me to use strange marks in HTML. The book I'm referring to in my post is Delaware Valley Rails.
How would one get to West Philly without crossing over or under the river?
For your concern about the express situation, the reason why Spring Garden and Race-Vine are express stops are: Spring Garden connects to CCP, the State Office Building, FLC, Franklin and Masterman High Schools and for Race-Vine: For Rendell's favorite child,The Convention Center, the Convention Center, the Convention Center and of course, the Convention Center. My beef is that R-V, City Hall and W-L are WAY too close to each other. But they have to service Central Center City. I don't think it makes a world of sense for the el to travel from 30 to 15 without any stops. That's a third of Center City it's skipping!
Yes I see that the the Race and Vine stop is for the Convention center. But you already have a stop for it on the Market Frankford. I am sure that more people use the 13 or 11 street subway to the Convention Center than Race and Vine. Not for nothing but when there are events at the Convention Center....Race and Vine is still not at all crowded as I see. So I still dont see that the Race and Vine stop services the Convention Center. Also what I meant by not crossing the river...it was may mistake......was that the Braod Ridge Spur go south of Market cross Broad and service the area of Rittenhouse Sq and Fitler Square before returning back to the Broad Street line at Pattison. Well thats all.
Wouldn't it make sense to have to Rittenhouse Square or would it? It's like Philly's answer to the Village in NYC. Or is that South Street?
Actually, Rittenhouse Square is more like Central Park West or 5th Avenue by the park; lots of tall apartment buildings. It's the one place where Philly kind of looks like New York (thank goodness there isn't more than one. :-) )
I have recently found the following bulkhead signs on the IRT:
8, 10 and 12 - colored Green
11 - colored Purple
13 - colored Red
Does anyone know the intended uses of these designations? Are they meant to remove the duplication used by the 5, 6 and 7 lines for rush-hour service?
Bob Sklar
8 = <6>
10 = <5>
11 = <7> (of course)
12 = Woodlawn--Flatbush
} ( if I remember correctly)
13 = 148 St--Flatbush
8=6exp, 10=5exp, 11=7exp (of course)
When I used the brackets to make the diamond shapes, the numbers didn't appear in that last post. I don't know why
> When I used the brackets to make the diamond shapes, the numbers didn't appear > in that last post.
> I don't know why
That has happened to me to. And the reason is...because your browser interprets them as "unknown" HTML codes, and so ignores them! To avoid this, use ">" for ">" and "<" for "<". (I think that the quotes in the preceding sentence will ensure that the contents are displayed literally - as opposed to the unquoted, and meaningful, HTML codes I just used to italicize the word "think".) No, "preview message" shows that it didn't work as I intended. Use "&" followed immediately by "lt;" instead of "<", and "&" followed immediately by "gt;" instead of ">".
So if the <11> is going to replace the <7>, so be it, but I don't expect it to happen. Nor the similar plans involving 8 and 10. This is the first I've heard about the red 12 - is that in a diamond too? I wonder if there are actually any definite plans for it, or if they just wanted to have a number in reserve for some future service on the West Side IRT lines?
I wondered how you could get italics on these boards. This is good information.
I heard a couple of years ago, they were seriously considering using the 8 for the Pelham exp, but I don't know what ever happened with that. I prefer the diamond instead of wasting a character for a service that runs the same exact route, only differentiated by one being exp, and the other local; or skip-stopservice. (I would have used "I" instead of "Z", and a diamond <1> that uses the middle track, intead of the 9.
I think they avoided the "I" to avoid confusion with the "1". Not so confusing on a colored train sign, but surely confusing on a document.
I remember seeing work trains with old b/w roll-signs saying "9", "SUPER EXPRESS". Was this used for the post game expresses from Shea?
The express I rode in 1970 after a Mets game was a 7.
I've never seen a "9" marked super express, but it was originally intended (but never used, I don't think) for the Dyre Av. line before it was connected to the "2"/"5" in 1957.
Bob Sklar
My whole point in using the I for the J skip-stop service was because of the fact that it is not useful as its own line because of its undesirability due to the possible confusion with a "1". The skip stop services oftern aren't given their own circle, but share one with the other line: (1/9, J/Z)
Dan,
The 12 was green, the 13 was the only red. Neither one was a diamond. In fact, none of the signs I mentioned were diamonds. The TA seems to have always been quite inconsistent in the use of these diamonds.
Bob Sklar
Thanks, Eric B. The numbers did appear when I received the message.
Bob Sklar
Recently, while at the Columbus Av. flea market, I came across a Hagstrom subway map dated 1948. This contained a series of yellow, blue, and split yellow/blue circles denoting transfers between the subway and both NYC and private buses! Transfers could be purchased for 2 cents, 5 cents or 6 cents depending upon whether it was from or to the subway, and upon whether it was to/from a NYC or private bus.
I am quite sure that this service had been abandoned by the time I became conscious of and started riding the various subway lines (late 1950's), as this is the first I've ever heard of it.
Any information on this? Thanks.
Bob Sklar
If my memory from pre-1950 can be relied on, when the nickel fare ended, subways went to a dime, but busses were only seven cents. The transfers were free, but only good for other busses, not trains. Perhaps the change occurred at the same time as the dime fare.
Anyone here a Si Ferry expert?
Those boats are pretty old and I was wondering, If they need a person in the
engine room to control the engines or they can be controlled from the
wheelhouse.
My second question comes from a observation. Before the boat moves, a crew
member drops a heavy weight near the bow. What is that for?
Why is water pushed out fom the bow before docking? I would assume it is to slow the boat down or am I mistaken?
OK, lets see...The Kennedy class boats (Jaohn F. Kennedy, American Leagion, The Gov. Herbert H. Lehman) are the oldest boats in the fleet, and the only ones that carry cars. The 'weight' that is ropped at the bow is called the rudder pin. It locks the rudder in the straight-ahead position on the end that becomes the 'bow'. The pin at the 'stern', or loading end is lifted after the gates are dropped to the deck. This releases the rudder for navigation. When docking, the bow propeller is run to slow the boat.
The newer boats, the Barbari class and Austen class (Andrew J. Barbari, Samuel I. Newhouse; Alice Austen, John A. Noble) have a different type of propulsion system that uses variable vanes to propel and steer the boat, and have no rudder pin. These boats carry no cars.
FWIW, the bow of the SI Ferry is cosidered to be the end facing Manhattan, and the marking plates on the Barbari class indicate 'NY End' and 'SI End' The boats are rarely ever faced in the opposite direction, so everything is always in the same place.
-Hank
opposite direction . . . >
Last year (I beleive it was sometime in January), I was on one of the vehicle boats (probably the American Legion), and I was with my cousin who drove onto the boat in Manhattan. As the boat prepared to dock in Staten Island, it slammed-head on into one of the wooden walls (what do you call those things, anyway?) and a huge chunk of wood fell right onto the vehicle deck, completely blocking it (had I been a few feet away, it would have fallen right on my head). After about an hour, they turned the boat around and had us all back off the ferry. Would they have kept the boat in that position, or would they have turned it back around?
The pilings are called fenders, and the pilots seem to whack them as often as car fenders get whacked! There have been some very damaging incidents over the years. In their defense, the tides in the bay are constantly changing, even between two consecutive trips, and once a pilot has comitted to what suddenly becomes apparent is a poor line, backing up and trying again is not a practical course of action. As for the turnaround question, it would depend on what damage was caused by the collision. If it was just that the timber blocked the apron, you would think they could have moved it aside. If there was damage to the bow, I'm sure the boat was taken out of service.
The car boats need to use the fenders to dock, because the control isn't as fine as it is on the new boats due to the major differences in the propulsion systems. I've never seen the wood actually fall onto the boat, but I'm sure it's unusual. They would have taken the boat OOS at that time. I was on the Barberi once where we left manhattan and the boat made an immediate K-turn before heading to SI.
-Hank
Hi, my name is Renato and I am a fan of subways. I live in Sao Paulo, Brasil and would like to know if you are interested in change pictures and informations about my city's subway, which is one of the most modern of the world. I have been in New York twice, the last in July,1997. Both times I used your subway sistem, without any problem. I take some pictures of NYC subway. If you want to see them, and some of SP subway, please send me an E-mail. Thank you!
Hi, Renato. What are the subways like there? I never knew Sao Paulo had a subway. I've been to Brazil a few times. It's a beautiful country.
Hi, Kinara. Our subways are like every subways in the world. Unfortutately we don't have enough lines for a big city like Sao Paulo, but the government is building new lines very fast. If you want to receive pictures, please send me your e-mail adress, and we also can change some informations.
If you want to know about my country and subway, send me an e-mail.
I'm looking for information dealing with the old Putnam Line that ran through Milwood, New York and goes to Putnam, New York across the tressel bridge that crosses the croton reservior..
thank you
Check out http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/rails/disused.bronx.html for a good description of the Putnam Line.
There's also "The Putnam Division: New York Central's Bygone Route through Westchester County," by Daniel Gallo and Frederick Kramer (New York, Quadrant Press, 1981), which should still be available in some stores.
Thank You Walter for the name of that book. I knew that there was one around but I didn't know the full name or the authors of the book. If you have any more information dealing with this line it would help me tremendously.
JT
Okay everybody, put on your thinking caps.
In the year 2001, the Washington Metro will have completed its contractual system of 101 miles and 86 stations with the opening of the Green Line to Branch Ave. segment.
My question is, have any of you heard of any extensions that are in the works?
I know that there is work on an extension of the Blue Line from Addison Rd to Largo, and, I've heard the annual rumors of an Orange Line branch to Dulles, but, what I'm looking for is something a little more concrete......Any new info?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Nothing concrete yet. A map was recently published in the Washington Post showing: a line to Dulles, an extension of the Orange Line to Centreville, VA, a line down NY Avenue NE, through Georgetown to connect to something (I forget what, but it is more than the plain NE-Gtown shuttle they originally thought of) and a Greenbelt to Bethesda (Rock Spring Office Park around Democracy Blvd.) Line along the Beltway (probably light rail).
You can look it up in last Saturday's or Friday's Post at http://www.washingtonpost.com
The first trainset of new LIRR bilevel coaches is parked at Hillside Maintenance Facility. I saw it from an eastbound main line train while stopped there at the employees station last evening.
As a native of the LIRR Oyster Bay branch, it sure will be strange to be riding modern equipment!
They've also been in Morris Park for a week or two.
Yeah, and unless you got a helicopter or friends at thew LIRR, don't expect to see them. I got off at Jamacia (non-click by conductor!) and went for a walk before hoping the E into the city. I circled morris park, but you can only see stuff on the side where the FBA line goes underground :( The new cars are "hidden" between where the main line and some other line split :(
Oh yeah, quick trivia - what are the names of the two jet snowblowers parked there (where the FBA line tunnel portal is)??
Also, does anyone know anything about the old looking cars parked there, at LIC, and at Jamacia's storage yard?? They don't look like any of the MP series stuff, but do appear to be work cars of some sort. No idea if they get moved or not. I think they're just mobile storage...
Another thing, at LIC, there is what loooks to be an old power plant. Around it are manholes with LIRR on them, looking be VERY old (turn of century??) Anyone know what this plant is / was, and when/why it closed??
You also can get a fairly good look at the Morris Park yard from the Long Island City line.
That's the Sunnyside Yard. Morris Park is West of Jamaica just north of Atlantic Ave.
You can get a good view of the Morris Park yard from a Long Island City train, just after it leaves Jamaica. LIC trains go along the northern edge of the yard. The Sunnyside yard isn't visible from a LIC train, though you can see it clearly from any main line train heading to Penn Station.
You are absolutely right about where Morris Park is and that's where I saw the new Kawasaki Bi-levels.
I was on a downtown #2 train about 3 weks ago,and i went pass the tunnel construction,it looked like they were making progress,but yesterday i went by there again,and i looked like they havent done a thing in 3 weeks...Are they behind schedule or are they running behind?
Tom I get through there one day a week. How can you tell what progress they're making, when it it's all behind a plywood wall? The last good look I had, rails were gone from just south of 110 St to south of 125 St on Track 3 (uptown) and the station at 116 northbound was gone - no tile walls, no stairs, no platform NO roadbed. There was however lots of plumbing as NYCT tries to move the spring from under 116 Street station to somwhere out of the way.
here's the latest info, (from the general order) on Lenox:
till 6/26/1998 the trains that run use the Southbound Track-116 is closed. the Northbound side of 110 and Northbound 125,135 stations are closed.
As of 6/27/1998, the Northside will reopen and the Southbound side will close.
As far as 116- the entire station will be closed till the end of October.
This general order is in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Yes- they are using single track operations. The entire project should be done the end of October, 1998
I worked the PM on the 2 Train tonight, the northbound tracks are closed from south of 110 st to north of 135 st. In the PM the 2 train wrong rails up the southbound tracks making all station stops. 116 st station is alive and well, I have also heard it is soupposed to be closed. I work the 2 line as often as I can, as it is my favorite A div line, I have never seen it closed.
The R-142 models a lot of people say going to take the R-33/36 model leave the face of the MTA forever. Whay can't they just upgrade them and add an extra door and you have a R-38 model that can be used on the shuttle lines or use them on the A,C,E,J,M,Z lines and that will reduce spending on the newer subway cars. That might just lower cost to ride the subway to a 1.25 again or even lower.
Great idea except for a few minor problems.
1)The cars are 10' too short. IRT cars are approximately 50' long while IND cars are 60' or 75' long.
2) The cars are too narrow. IRT cars are about 8.5 feet wide and IND cars are about 10' wide.
3) The bodies on the Redbirds are rotting off of the frames (corrosion). Consultants and NYCT engineers agree that they could not be repaired effectively.
4) If we were able to overcome all of the above, how long would the cars last?
New cars would be needed in a few years anyway.
Nostalgia is wonderful but progress is inevitable. We either move forwards or fall backwards. We cannot remain stationary. Here's a thought, for those people who frequent this site and want to preserve the redbirds; Perhaps through a fund raising effort a few could be purchased before they are scrapped and donated to 'The Seashore Trolley Museum' or 'The Branford Trolley Museum'. I'm sure Todd Glickman can provide the necessary information. By the way, the cars are cheap. The transportation is a B#&@H.
So How long will R-32 and R-38 (Brightliners) last??? Given that theyt are stainless, and seem to be in good shape, how many years would you give them???
The first to go will be the R-40 Slants. I expect that the R-32s and R-38s will be around after I have retired.
Hmmm ... I wonder of the Railway Preservation Corporation already has this in mind. (The RPC, for those of you not familiar with this organization, is the owner of some of the TA's museum fleet - the R1/9s, the only remaining Lo-V Worlds Fair car 5654, R10 3184 (I think), the 4 Lo-Vs as well as some other cars. These cars are usually stored on tracks nearest the F line in Coney Island Shop, and can be seen pretty well from a passing F train).
--Mark
The Branford, a/k/a Shoreline Trolley Museum has R-17 #6688, which was painted Redbird red before it was retired. It looks good and was in pretty good mechanical shape when the museum got it; it still runs. I don't think Branford would ante up for a married pair of cars; one of the single R-33s, maybe.
At the Seashore Trolley Museum, we have the following NYC Rapid Transit cars:
R-4 800 (runs!)
R-7 1440 (runs!!)
IRT "Gibbs Car" 3352 (runs!!!)
SI 366 (doesn't run :-(
We also have TARS 631 (that the Third Avenue Railway System, a streetcar line) which is used in frequent "revenue" service for the visiting public at Seashore.
I don't think that our Board of Trustees would go for a pair of Redbirds. I am in the minority in enjoying rapid transit cars as much as streetcars/trolleys. Plus, we have 250+ cars, accessible storage track that can hold about 200, and less than 150 of our cars are under cover. So in addition to the steep cost of transporation, we also need funds for more track, more covered space, and better preservation!
I'd love a pair of 'birds at Seashore, but I don't think it's gonna happen (hey, I'd even love a pair of Slant-40's when they go...).
Hey, don't you guys also have an MP-54 car laying around??? Any plans on getting it running??? That would be WAYYYYYYY cool...
Yup, sure do. We have LIRR #4137, a double-ended MU coach, acquired in 1972. To get it running, all we need is one or more volunteers with lots of time and lots of money. Join up and join the fun!
What I'd really like to see is one of the World's Fair 33s, restored to it's original paint scheme. (much prettier that the slants - sorry Todd) Even better, letter it with the "State of Kansas" and Sunflower logo or one of the other state-named cars. I'd gladly donate time and/or $$$ towards that end.
Ummm....I think the Transit Museum has one like that already...
I agree the Slants aren't that nice, but at least you can watch out the front, which can't be said of the newer stuff.
Hey - do you run the R-4 and R-7 together? I would have a FIELD DAY playing conductor and operating the doors with such a setup! I posed for a few photos doing just that at the Transit Museum on cars 100 and 484.
Anyway, I heard the Shoreline (Branford) museum isn't too excited about adding another R-1/9, let alone Redbirds. Those subway cars use a lot of power, plus the track is the lightweight variety.
How about #3352? Is it fully restored to its original appearance?
Yes, R4/R7 #800 and 1440 can and do run together. I must say, however, that it is a VERY RARE treat to get them out on the main line. At Seashore we have a strict policy on the amount of servicing on cars that must be done before they can be put into regular service, and these cars are not part of that program. There are occasional exceptions, such as trolley parades, etc. In addition, we limit our rapid transit equipments' use due to their high power demands (power=$$!).
#3352 can limp along, but at least last season, had developed a pretty nasty air problem in one of the brake stands. I took it out for a brief trolley parade run-by last year, then put it to bed. It needs a lot of work. Sometime in the deep, dark past (e.g. before my time at Seashore) it had its middle side doors removed, supposedly so that it could be returned to its 1904 appearance. The interior is in need of major work as well. Volunteer restoration crews and their $$ are welcome!
You're right: subway cars do consume prodigious amounts of electricity. Branford has R-9 #1689; it's been repainted and looks nice. I've ridden it there - even worked the doors while it was running! They don't run it much, or any of the other subway cars because they use so much juice. They also have Hi-V 3662 (I think; not sure if it runs); a 5400 series Lo-V which may run; a BMT standard which I don't believe runs; a Staten Island car; several BRT el cars; and R-17 #6688 which does run. Funny thing: when the R-17s started to arrive in 1955, the oldest of the Hi-Vs, among them 3352, started being phased out.
The reason I brought up 3352 is because there are before-and-after photos of it in Under the Sidewalks of New York. The before photo was taken right after it arrived at Seashore, complete with fish belly sills and center doors. The after photo shows a James Tebbets, who owns or owned the car, working on the exterior. And, yes, the center doors and sills had been removed, along with the MU door controls. Like the rest of the HI-Vs, the end doors on 3352 were manually operated. Do you realize that, in just a few years, it will be 100 years old?
One other question on #800: did it arrive at Seashore with that bleached exterior appearance? I have a calendar put out by MTA, and there is a photo of a Nostalgia run of R-1/9s in 1980, with a freshly painted #800 leading the way. It must have sat outside for some time.
Jim Tebbetts is still a volunteer at Seashore. Currently he is working on Chicago interruban car #434. Note, however, that all cars at Seashore are owned by the Museum! Volunteers can be project managers, but not owners!
I guess I don't know how to judge if NYC car #800 is "bleached." It's the same mucky greenish that I remember from my "yout" (as grandpa would say).
Did you say 'yout'? What is a 'yout'? :-)
A 'yout' is what I was when I made grandpa take me to the 'Choych Avenyah'
overpass of the Brighton Line... to wait for a rare sighting of a Brightliner
(a.k.a. R-32). STARDATE=1965?
The R-32s made their debut in September 1964. I believe deliveries continued through 1965. They were intially assigned to the BMT Southern Division express routes on the Brighton, Sea Beach, and West End lines. My very first subway ride in New York was on an N of brand new R-32s on July 21, 1965. I have to admit that I don't remember for sure if it was a N, but since we boarded it at 36th St.-4th Ave, and since its upper side route signs said "57th St." (and were illuminated in green), and since it went over the Manhattan Bridge, and since the T express didn't run during middays back then, I've concluded it was a N. I've always liked the R-32s - they're fast, good-looking cars - but they're not the same without the blue doors.
About that Chicago Interurban car - is it a Chicago, Aurora, and Elgin, or a North Shore car? Or maybe even a South Shore?
And speaking of 3352, I'll bet it ran on the very day the IRT first opened on Oct. 27, 1904. It might have even been part of the inaugural train piloted by Mayor McClellan.
Seashore's car 434 is a CA&E car. We also have three North Shore cars (two of which run - 420 & 755; the other is a trailer/dining car) which go VERY fast
and use LOTS of electricity!!! We have one South Shore car too (I don't recall the number at the moment).
I think you're right... our IRT #3352 probably ran on Day One.
Yes, the North Shore cars were mighty fast - and we're not even talking about the Electroliners. Those puppies were capable of doing 90 mph. The South Shore cars were no slouches, either. I'm a South Bend native, and still remember when South Shore trains came into downtown on LaSalle Ave.
As heavy as those cars are, they certainly do draw an awful lot of power. Is the South Shore car still rigged up as when your museum received it? South Shore trains ran on 1500 volts DC so they would be compatible with the Illinois Central, whose trackage they use from Kensington to Randolph St. Prior to 1926, the South Shore line used 6600 volts AC, single phase
If I'm ever up in Maine, you can bet I'll pay a visit to Seashore.
P. S. Even though you don't run the R-4 and R-7 much, do you at least keep them coupled together?
Our Chicago, South Shore & South Bend car at Seashore is #32. It was acquired in 1989; was built in 1929 by Standard Steel. As far as I know, there has been no mechanical work done on the car; nor does it run (though I have towed it around with our Oshawa electric locomotive #300 :-). The inside is in pretty rough shape.
And yes, the R4/R7 train is usually stored coupled. Occasionally it is uncoupled if one car needs to be shifted to the shop or onto another storage track. Shifting in our yards is like a game of Chinese checkers. There's always one too many cars and one too few spaces. It can be frustrating and fun at the same time!!!
Is South Shore #32 one of the lengthened cars, or is it one of the ones which remained 60 feet long? In the late 40s, some 18 South Shore cars were enlarged by some 17 feet and received picture windows. Others were lengthened, but received regular windows. They were heavy enough at 60 tons when they were new; those which were enlarged ended up weighing 75 tons. The Big Orange fleet eventually consisted of 64 cars, most of which were built by Pullman. Some of them were initially trailers which were converted to motorized units later on. The last ones were retired in 1983. I rode them to and from Chicago once, in April of 1967, just before we left South Bend and moved to Jersey. For the life of me, I can't remember if they moaned and groaned and whined the way the R-1/9s did, or if they were quiet.
Here's a theoretical question: if #32 were to be restored to running condition, would it run on 600 VDC even if it was still rigged for 1500 VDC operation? I would imagine it would, but just not very fast.
I know I'm beating this to death, but are the R-4 and R-7 on public display, and if they are, are visitors permitted inside them? I think you know what I'm getting at: I would love to pose for a picture or two on the step plates between the two cars while working the trigger boxes (the door controls wouldn't have to be activated).
I can't answer your questions about the SS #32, but if you email to and ask I'm sure on of the Seashore experts can help you.
The R4/R7 cars at Seashore are technically not "on display," however they are in an easily accessible yard. Anyone who wants to see them can certainly do so by asking one of the staff or volunteers. Normally the storm doors are locked, but I know where the key is :-) And of course to pose between the cars at the conductor's position, you don't need a key at all. I must admit, though, even after ten years, they still look very strange with trolley poles!
I looked up #32 in the Seashore roster elsewhere in this website and got the info I was looking for. Based on that information, this car was never lengthened by the South Shore.
How about Chicago's 6599-6600? Do they run? I rode those 6000 series cars a number of times in Chicago. I was surprised that Seashore never acquired any of the 4000-series cars from Chicago, as they're quite popular at trolley museums. The last cars in this series were retired in 1974. The later ones from 4200 on even had trolley poles, making them ready-to-run, assuming they still ran.
Seashore's CTA cars 6599/6600 ran up until just before we acquired them a few years ago. However they have not yet been outfitted with trolley poles, nor has any mechanical maintenance been done on them since they arrived. It's the same old problem - need more volunteer time and need more money!!! So many cars, so little time & funds!
I would stand on Lincoln Rd. to watch the trains as far back as the 50s(My cousin lived on Ocean Ave. I loved to watch them snake their way across the southbound X-Over from the express to the local. Now 45 years later and I'm still there. God can life be depressing
I remember the overpass at Beverley and at Cortelyou. The train operators would always wave at kids like me lookinbg down at the trains. Yes, Steve- age does creep up!
I remember when the Brighton Express went to 57th and 7th, the Local went to Astoria as did the Fourth Ave Local. The Sea Beach and Westend ran express in Manhattan and all 3 express trains used the Bridge. (Before Chrystie Street).
in fact0 the Sea Beach and West End both skipped Dekalb in peak hours.
"Both the West End and the Sea Beach skipped DeKalb." "Three expresses."
As a "young" 36 year old with access to a lot of statistics, I enjoy debunking the idea that things were better in the good old days. By almost every measure that is not a personal choice -- ie divorce, drugs, etc -- people live much better than 30 or 50 years ago. In fact, I compiled a table I pass out at Thanksgiving comparing the "good old days" with the awful presen for a wide variety of economic, social, environmental etc indicators.
But it seems that subway travel from the old BMT southern division to Manhattan was, in fact, better 30 years ago than today. I have a problem with that.
Of course, back in the good old days, the BMT standards and Triplex units plied the Brighton line as well as the other Southern and Eastern Division routes. People lamented the passing of those venerable cars almost as much they lamented the Dodgers leaving for Los Angeles. If I could turn back the clock, I'd love to go for a ride on the Triplex units, as I never got to ride them. I remember the standards very well, and even though I rode them quite a bit on the Canarsie line, I didn't care for them.
Then there were the beloved R-1/9s...
I believe service on the Brighton Line was better before the change. It took 1/2 hour to go from Beverley Road to 42 St. before the change. After the change it took 40 minutes.
But in many ways life is better now. In fact, part of the reason it seems worse is that the few bad things left stick out so much. And because so many of us now have so much more, those without seem much poorer when it's only in comparison to the current wealth of everyone else.
Wait a minute ... who says you can't go back home again?
I grew up along the Brighton Line and rode many an R-32 on the D train into Manhattan, so when I heard that the R-32s are back "home", naturally I had to spend some time capturing them ... so just 3 weeks ago, I spent 6 hours riding and videotaping the Brighton Line (got an hours worth of video) at various "photography points" along the line from Propsect Park to Brighton Beach. R-32s and R-40s star in the video of course!
Guess what - the T/Os still wave at you. Some even toot their horns in acknowledgement.
Not bad for a 35 year old (kid) from Brooklyn!
--Mark
Who says that it is not wonderful now? I have lived on the Brighton Line all of my young life (19 years) and I love it. Nothing beats the express run from Prospect Park to Sheepshead Bay. Even though I am older, sometimes I stand on the stairs a building on Caton Ave and watch the trains speed by. That view is second only to watching the Q speed out of the portal at Parkside Ave.
It must have been wonderful back then, and it certainly is good now.
+Mike
Does anyone have any information on the avenue H frieght line that ran through the middle of Brooklyn by Flatbush and Avenue I. (That is the only plcae so far I have seen the tracks.) Frieghts came through to at least 1970's. Thanks again for all the help.
JT
If my geography serves me correctly;
The line begins up in the Bronx, crosses the Hells Gate Br. It travels south through Queens and has an interchange with the LIRR around Fresh Pond Rd. It continues southto Linden Blvd where it turns West to Bay Ridge. (I think).
The Bay Ridge line is owned by the LIRR. It starts from the old Brooklyn Army Base, next to the Owl's Head sewage treatment plant in Brooklyn, interchanges with the NY Cross Harbor (its new name escapes me) and then parallels the N line open cut down to 15th Ave, where it then turns east to begin its run between Ave H & Ave I. After Brooklyn Ave, it veers once again and follows Foster Ave out to Junius St., where it follows the L line to Broadway Junction. It then runs along the west side of the cemeteries to Irving Ave, where it wyes. The west leg runs between Wyckoff and Irving to a small yard just past Flushing Ave, while the east leg runs up to the Hunters Point line, as well as continuing on to the Hell Gate bridge. Like you said, it was active till the early 70s (I lived near its crossing at McDonald Ave.) and then faded away. It did have short return when it was borrowed by the NYCTA, but I forget when and why exactly.
It was always a wish of mine that Transit would take over this line and put it into service to connect the ends of the lines out in Brooklyn, but I don't think it will ever happen.
The line carried passengers until about 1920. I think there were stations at McDonald Avenue (Parkville), Near Utica Avenue (Kouwenhoven?) and near Canarsie (Ford's Corner). I don't think that even remnants of the stations exist, perhaps some historians out there have more accurate info. A branch once existed south of Avenue H, running north of the Brighton line to Manhattan Beach. You can still see evidence of these two tracks by looking at the retaining walls today - there is room for two more tracks. At Sheepshead Bay Road & E. 17 Street two closed-off stairs lead up to where the two tracks once were. Service was discontinued in about 1023, with the right of being sold to developers over the years. The line was de-electrified in 1974 and since then has seen limited use.
Some additional evidence can be seen at the following places:
- the bridge abutments of the Brighton line south of Ave H, in some places where new construction hasn't occurred, are wider that the present 4 track ROW.
- stairs (bricked off) and a station foundation still remain on Neck Road and E 16th St.
- At Ave X, evidence of a flying junction to this other line exists - the underpass where this occurred is filled in, yet you can still see truss girders similar to those over the avenues which run under the Brighton Line.
--Mark
Does anyone when,and why the got rid of the old 8 train that ran from 149 St.-Gun hill rd.?What kind of cars did they use on that line?
The 3rd Av El - Bronx section was closed in 1973 and the structure torn down within a year afterwards.
The last equipment used were R-12/R-14 units.
Why did they get rid of it? The struture itself was very old and the line no longer went into Manhattan. To do the repairs necessary for the structure to
hold newer equipment would have been prohibitive. Additionally, the local communities under and around the El were clamoring for its removal. It was noisy and an eyesore (darkened the street). There had been talk of replacing it with a subway line but the idea came and went. Service is replaced by the Bx55 bus which believe me is not a worthy substitute since the traffic on Webster and Third Avenues can be horrendus.
The 3rd Ave. el was supposed to be replaced by the 2nd Ave. line. The R-12s and R-14s never displayed #8 on their roll signs, but rather "Shuttle".
After giving this much thought, this is the final version of my 63rd St. service plan.
1) E train - no change from it's current route.
2) F train - would alternate service between Roosevelt Ave and Rockerfeller Center. 1/2 of the trains through Queens Plaza and 53rd St tunnel while alternate trains bypass Qp and g via the 63rd St tunnel. During the overnight hours, F trains go via 53rd St tunnel only.
3) G trains - run to Continental Ave all times.
4) R trains - would alternate between 36th St Queens and 57th St. 7th Ave in Manhattan. Trains would alternate, first through Queens Plaza and the 60th St.tunnel the next would bypass QP and travel via 63rd St tunnel to 57th and 7th. During overnight hours, R trains would operate via 63rd St tunnel only.
5) Q trains- would return to the good old days. Express in Brooklyn then become the B'Way express in Manhattan to 57th & 7th.
Comments please...?
Shades of London's Northern Line!
How would we alleviate or reduce customer confusion about the same route using two possibilities to/from Manhattan? For the F train, as an example, would you install "via 53rd St" and "via 63rd St" lights on the platforms at Rockefeller Center and Roosevelt Ave ala the "via Bridge" and "via Tunnel" lights at DeKalb Ave? I think that would work.
Do you feel that the split service would cause more or fewer bottlenecks where the routes combine that having separate lines?
--Mark
With benefit of hindsight, perhaps the MTA should have built a rail connection from the G to the E/F toward Manahattan, rather than a pedestrian connection, and then reconfigured the tracks at Schemerhorn and Jay to run the G onto the F line in the other direction. The G could have run as a second 6th Avenue local via the 53rd St and Rutgers tunnels. The F could have run through the 63rd St tunnel, along with the Q and whatever else. Since there would have been fewer Gs than Fs, congestion on 53rd would have diminished. Steve is right -- my wife walks to East Midtown from Rock Center, rather than wait for the F to crawl around the curve. The elevator construction makes it even worse. This would have increased Queens capacity even more, since G riders would not have to board other trains to get to Manhattan.
If this stuff didn't cost so much, and someone was willing to spend on transportation, this improvement could still be done. A G loop into Manhattan would reduce travel times for current G riders, L riders who could transfer to the G depending on their destination, and J/Z/M riders who live in proximity to G stations. Today, the latter must squeeze onto the F at Delancy. A loop G could make up for the 6th Avenue local which could, but does not, come off the Williamsburg. But, like I said, for Brooklyn politicians subway improvments are something to trade away in budget battles.
Too bad about the lack of a G to Fulton switch at Hoyt-Schemerhorn. The southbound G connection is a waste. A G to Chambers might have attracted some interest. Much as I appreciate the complaints of Greenpointers, I don't see how one can justify running the G out to 71st, rather than another Queens local to Manhattan, when most riders on all lines are traveling to and from Manhattan.
The plan proposed by Steve is effective... but I have doubts about the Q... The Q could run express in Brooklyn along the Brighton line: fine. The Q could run express along the Broadway/7th Ave. BMT line: fine. Getting between the two: problems... The reason for this is that you would add an additional train running through the Montague St. tunnel... That would bring the total to 4 (M,N,Q,R)... This service would be effective only if either of three things were to occur:
A) The south side tracks on the Manhattan Bridge were to open... NOT GONNA HAPPEN!
B) Build a new tunnel connecting the old stub tracks to the south side of the bridge to the tracks at either the Canal St. station (express), City Hall station (lower level) or (ONLY IN MY DREAMS) to a new Second Ave. line... I could go with the 3rd alternative... Right now, I am doing a project for my Public Finance class here at Pace on the COSTS/BENEFITS of the Second Ave. line... It's quite an investment (in today's dollars, the cost of the ORIGINAL ENTIRE plan of 1929 would be approximately $1.4 BILLION)... So the city must decide: A new Yankee Stadium over the WEST SIDE tracks in Manhattan at a cost of $1 billion OR The 2nd Ave. subway at $1.4 billion? (Hmmm...)
A third would be connect the spur to the F line approximately between the York St. and Jay St. stations...
$1.4 billion? I've heard $8 billion just for the Second Avenue line in Manhattan. It cost $700 billion just to connect the Queens Blvd line to the 63rd St tunnel -- across a parking lot the MTA already owned. The estimate to connect the LIRR to Grand Central is $2 billion, and no one believes it.
I heard a figure of $27,000 per foot for tunnels from someone who I believe works for the MTA. Is that per track? Bottom line, the inflated cost of construction has a terrible effect on the city.
It's misleading to try to use per foot tunnel building costs to project the cost of new subways because there is so much more to it than just tunneling. I think the 8 Billion is a lot closer than the 1.4.
The LA Subway is running more that $52,000 per tunnel foot and that is why most current proects in LA have been stopped or scaled back. I believe the per foot figure is linear feet and not track feet.
That's $275 million per mile. According to Means Construction cost estimates, construction is 20 percent more expensive in NYC than in LA. According to Under the Sidewalks of NY, the one mile, two station Nassau Loop cost $10 million -- just $100 million adjusted into today's dollars. Of course, it was built by a private company, not a government agency.
The link in the Nassau loop which opened in 1931 had to thread its way through a congested area, dodging several older subway lines in the process. The 6th Ave. line was even more difficult to build. At 34th st., it had to hop over the LIRR tracks, sidestep the PATH tracks, and duck beneath the BMT Broadway tracks. You can plainly see the upslope at the southern end of the station.
I remember reading that the projected cost of the 2nd Ave. line from Whitehall St. to E. 180th St. was $2 billion back in the early 70s.
If you are working on a cost/benefit analysis, then you have , or soon will come up on a problem we planners have never solved: what is a person's travel time worth? If we could use his salary, the CBA would appear to justify just about any capital improvement that saved a few minutes. Once that became clear, a lesser dollar amount was seen to be more acceptable. But how low? Surveys of travelers have yielded answers all over the scale, with a significant number saying they put no value on it. If you find recent study data on the problem, please consider posting it!
Steve‹
IMHO, your plan is good, but too ambiitious and confusing.
First off, you have FOUR lines on Queens Boulevard during overnight hours. Why? Unless you plan on running two-car trains, this is WAY too much service.
Secondly, why play around with the location of trains? If I'm a rider, I'm way confused when it comes to F or R trains. I may not want to wait an extra few minutes for an F train to Lexington/53rd when the one right there is going to Lexington/63rd.
Third, you don't account for weekend B service. Would it go to 145th Street? If so, why?
Here's my approach using your thinking:
WEEKDAYS (6a-9p)
E-current route
F-via 63rd Street, express to 179th
G-to Continental
Q-via Broadway and 63rd Street, express to Continental, local to 179th
R-no change
**you run eight F trains, seven Q trains, 12-15 E trains, 14-17 R trains and 8 G trains at the height of rush hour
EVENINGS AND WEEKENDS
B-via 63rd Street, local to Continental
E-current route
F-current route
G-terminates at Court Square
Q-no service
R-no change
LATE NIGHTS
B-shuttle in Brooklyn
E-current route, all local stops
F-via 63rd Street, all local stops
G-terminates at Court Square
R-no service
Thoughts?
Michael
Not enough Fs to serve the Culver line. You'd have to run more on the Culver, and terminate them somewhere.
Hello Again. I may have a suggestion. What if the MTA build a crossover after the Hoyt-Schmerhorn going West and into the A and C lines. Here the G tarin could run into Chambers Street station, and from the track maps there is a spur or track layover, I do not what it is called, where the G train can turn around and proceed back to Brooklyn. This one stop could alleviate, and I am not sure how much though, of the ridership to Queens Plaza and alleviate the Bottleneck, because the thos riding would not have switch to the E to Lower Manhattan and also eliminate the switching to the L and then the 5 or 6 trains at Union Square which is another bottleneck and it might alleviate the crowded Hoyt-Schmerhorn platforms from switching from the A to the G or Vice Versa. The A and C lines might be less crowded out from Chambers Street. It might not make the Chambers Street crowded that much because those that ride the A and C often also get off at Hoyt Schmerhorn to switch to the G. What are your opinions?
Hello Again. I may have a suggestion. What if the MTA build a crossover after the Hoyt-Schmerhorn going West and into the
A and C lines. Here the G tarin could run into Chambers Street station, and from the track maps there is a spur or track
layover, I do not what it is called, where the G train can turn around and proceed back to Brooklyn. This one stop could
alleviate, and I am not sure how much though, of the ridership to Queens Plaza and alleviate the Bottleneck, because the thos
riding would not have switch to the E to Lower Manhattan and also eliminate the switching to the L and then the 5 or 6 trains at
Union Square which is another bottleneck and it might alleviate the crowded Hoyt-Schmerhorn platforms from switching from
the A to the G or Vice Versa. The A and C lines might be less crowded out from Chambers Street. It might not make the
Chambers Street crowded that much because those that ride the A and C often also get off at Hoyt Schmerhorn to switch to
the G. What are your opinions?
There is little, if any, room for switches at Hoyt-Schermerhorn from the G to the A and C - past the eastern end of the station, anyway. They might be able to squeeze in a switch past the scissor switches between the Fulton St. local and express tracks, depending on how soon the G tracks start to dive down to duck underneath the westbound A and C tracks. As for the western end, forget it; the routes diverge immediately.
Here's a thought, although the cost would probably be prohibitive: tie the G tracks west of Hoyt-Schermerhorn into the Court St. stub, then extend that line past Court St, through a new East River tunnel to the stub tracks at WTC. The tracks from Court St. fan out as they approach Hoyt-Schermerhorn, so such a hookup would be a straight shot from the G tracks, which would have to duck beneath the F line.
(Imagining there was money) could the G on the Court St tracks be tied to the Montigue St tunnel beyond the last station? Assuming the Manhattan Bridge is repaired to its former glory (unlikely) or replaces by Rutgers/Cranberry connections (also unlikely), the N would return to express service via the bridge or one of those tunnels. That would leave capacity at Montigue.
On the other end, the G tracks not run into the R tracks toward Queens. A little tunneling could point them toward a junction with the 60th St tunnel tracks to Manhattan, which could also have capacity as a result of the 63rd St tunnel. Thus, with two connections, the G could run as a loop, with Manhattan service on the Broadway local.
If the local tracks out of Hoyt were connected to Montigue, the westerly tracks out of DeKalb were connected to Cranberry, and the easterly tracks out of DeKalb were connected Rutgers, the TA could run any routes it wanted to.
Of course that would be expensive, but you just suggested a new tunnel. All these connections combined have to be cheaper than a tunnel.
Good point. How about this: run a connection from the bridge tracks at DeKalb (or even the tunnel tracks) to the IND at Jay St. That way, trains could be routed either through the Rutgers or Cranberry tunnel. I believe scissor switches already exist between the A and F tracks north of Jay St. in both directions, so the connecting tracks could be tied in from the sides instead of between each pair of tracks.
It' OK to dream and have ideas about service plans for the Second Ave. subway, but I think that all of us on this web site will be dead, buried and all our collective bodies and ideas turned to dust by the time the Second Ave. subway opens.
No problem, just get frozen like Walt Disney did - then when the line opens, you can get thawed out and see it. It'll be interesting to see what the R-5473 trains look like anyway :)
Well, at least I'm "only" 19, and provided I either don't get a Harley, or don't wipe out the one I get, I MIGHT just live long enough to see them get serious about finnishing it off...
Maybe they'll be finished building this durn thing in L.A. by then. Let's make a bet. The system that opens their line first gives everyone a free ride for waiting so long. Actually, no. I mean, the Metrorail? A subway? In L.A.? Makes about as much sense as a wind chamber in Kansas. Har-de-har-har.
From reading this board for almost a year I get the feeling the only way the 2nd ave subway will be built is if a major earthquake hits the area.
Either that or a provate corporation is stupid enough to sink money into the thing...
You mean it's gonna open? :)
--Mark
You're probably right. And in the meantime, the Lex will have pushers a la Tokyo to squeeze every last passenger on every train.
As I read the posts about the freight line in Brooklyn, I was reminded of a question I wanted to ask. As I was getting off the N train at 62nd Street station (N train was running on B line tracks due to track work) I noticed ferom up above where I was a single track runnig next to the street-level N line. The single track ran under the b line 62nd Street station and then looked like it ended in a pile of garbage. What was this line? I haven't been on the street-level lines in about 16 years so even the tracks that ran with N line at where the N train comes out of the tunnel in Brooklyn were new to me also.
That is the Long Island RR Bay Ridge Branch (Freight only), which runs from the Brooklyn Army Terminal across Brooklyn (e.g. between Av. H & Av. I as far as Brooklyn Av., between Ditmas Av. and Av. D from Ralph Av. to Rockaway Av. It is barely used today. By the way, most of the street map publishers absolutely refuse to believe that Rockaway Pkwy, otherwise a main thoroughfare, dead-ends at this railroad embankment.
Bob Sklar
back in the early to mid 60s I lived in the area. The Street Rockaway -**Avenue** goes through and meets the stub end of Rockaway *-*parkway** at the other end.
I was wondering if someone knew if the New York City Transit System has a Lost & Found Dept.
It certainly does and it could probably house a small city!
--Mark
The Lost and Found is located at 34h Street and 8th Ave. See the person in the booth for directions.Hours 8:00- 4:oopm
Are there any photos around of the old Fresh Pond Rd. car barns cria 1960's onto the mid 60's ? i'd like to model them as part of a traction layout, the present site is now a bus ( ugh ) garage along side the Fresh Pond El station, there are photos of the gate cars in the yard but none of the car barns, can anyone provide photos ? thanks........Karl
There are photos that meet your specifications in the paperback book."The Brooklyn Elevateds". Be advised that the Fresh Pond Yards were quite large, and would have to be selectively compressed to the point of unrecognizability.
I would like to know when these new cars are to be out in service. I rode on in December once but have never seen them ever since except one that passed through 15 street as it said it was a practice run or something. I cant wait for the old crap cars to get off those tracks.
Jason
I feel the same. You can expect to see them a little more often until(hopefully) July when supposedly SEPTA plans to completely REBUILD the Market Street side of the El. The project wont be finished until 2002 but the plans are to replace the double column suuports with single pillars and to rebuild the stations at 46, 52, 56, 60, 63 Millbourne and 69th Street. If you want more information on April 22 there will be a community forum discussing the plans and the new cars at a church on 60 and Cedar in SW Philadelphia. But the M-4's(the technical designation of the new cars) wont replace the M-3's(the old ones) until the project is done in 2002.
Can SOMEBODY please tell me what's SO bad about the old cars, besides the lack of A/C???
Answer to Philip: Me neither! Other than SEPTA has continued to allow them to rot away, nothing's really wrong that some attention couldn't fix. I was just on the line today, and in the unseasonable 80 degree+ weather, they weren't unbearable. What do you think will happen when the air fails on the M4's - they certainly won't be kept from service just for that reason (there were several buses I saw today with the roof hatches open since SEPTA won't order buses with openable windows but it also won't maintain AC)?
Answer to Jack/Jason: There are currently 20 M4's on the property. Two more have been here and have been returned to Adtranz for modifications. There have allegedly been two test trains operating in revenue service in midday periods. I haven't seen them, but then again I'm not a regular rider. The Market St el replacement will start later this year, but only the new center columns will be placed (foundations and stubs) to get this work out of the way and ready for the actual deckwork which is planned to start later in '99. There is no correlation between the El work and the introduction of the new cars, and SEPTA has stated its intention to have all M4's on the property by late '99 - just in time for the deckwork to start.
The Budds (M3's) have no door chimes, but the conductors are supposed to blow whistles when the doors are about to close. I haven't heard too much whistle blowing lately. The announcements at 15th St are from wayside speakers that are activated by arriving trains - between trains they usually play KYW news radio.
And that's another point - air isn't reliable. I've heard / noticed that on the New Haven line, the cold air just isn't there until the switch to overhead. LIRR MU aren't much better. Besides, underground, unless you vent the tunnels, you lose a LOT of air conditioning's efficintcy, since you're not only re cooling air that gets heated by the trains (ironically by the A/C units), but you're operating in a hotter environment, which MUST have some effect on the system. Of course when you're on an EL, it's different.
But does the need for air condidtioning REALLY require replacement of a worn, but certainly salvageable fleet???
There are many degrees to the current M-3s in service.
About every other car I am in looks to be up to status quo. Aside from the fact that there are no door chimes, stop announcements, and the lights flicker between each stop*, they are not that bad.
Then there are the trains that would need a little more work, that is with the old maps that predate 1981... (Announcing things like Pattison (Planned) etc... ('81 was the date I was told...)
Then recently I rode in the most horrid of cars - smells, lights out, fans sounded like they were rubbing, etc.
Finally, the biggest problem, as stated in the earlier thread is AGE. If you had a 1970 car that has thousands (if not millions) of miles on it, do you rebuild the whole thing or upgrade to the newer technology? Further it that we pay the highest fares, and riders deserve to "get what they pay for". If you were to take a Greyhound bus for even an hour would you like to ride in an old car? Even if it was rehabbed, you would have to deal with simple age problems. Somethings can not be changed. The new trains are more efficient, ADA Compliant, Quiter, etc... Would it be worth investing all the required monies into the Budds only to eventually have to replace them in another 20 years?
Finally, the biggest problem may be public perception. Pan Am had to file Chapter 11(twice) after one of their planes crashed, even though they had many other planes that worked well. Ridership has been down since 90 (and before I am sure), the new M-4s as well as the reconstruction projects will bring the public perception of the el as a modren, SAFE, ECONOMICAL, system.
------
*When I rode the M-4 on both occaisions (Oct and Nov) the lights did not flicker I am assuming there is a capacitor or something to keep the lights illuminated.
But nothing you said can't be fixed, and probbly rather inexpensively. I'd hardly consider the lights flickering between stops a problem anyway - NY area commuter trains do that too all the time, the #7 does it too. Lack of door closing chimes isn't bad, although a PA system should be added, but that's a retrofit.
Finnally, "high tech" does not mean better, especially in transit applications. Most of the more noteable failures (LRV, Metroliner, Turbotrain,the R-4X series, Metro North's FL9 rebuilds) in recent times happened because of the need to be "high tech". The LRV was a disaster, the Metroliner was complicated and broke down, the R-44/46 I think have been some of the least reliable subway cars (Steve?), and I've heard the the UNrebuilt FL9's are more reliable than the REBUILT ones that have sexy AC traction, micrprocessors, etc. Bare in mind that the FL9 dates from the late 50's...
Plus, newer equipment may not last as long. Heck, if they rebuilt the current stuff for less than, or the same cost as replacements and got another 20 years out of them, they'd be getting a BARGIN. A proven, more or less reliable, well understood car, instead of a new, untested, unproven one.
True: Lights Flickering and A/C are very minor in the "grand scheme" of things.
Rehabbing the old budds is a venerable idea, and as I stated many of them could probabally be done with a little work, and I will concede that perhaps a system wide replacement may not be necessary. However, there are many cars that need to be replaced, instead of saving a dead horse.
What can not be changed is public perception. Many see the '90 derailment as the last bullet of the Budds.
Another other mode-of-transport compairison: When you buy a used car from a dealer, no matter how much work they put into it, it still has problems (at least in my experience).
I tend to agree with the SEPTA view to replace the cars. Knowing SEPTA, no matter what they did, rehab or replace, it will probabally be 2040 AT LEAST before they look into M-5!
I agree about the derailment, though I'm sure it could have happened to ANY system. Maybe that's what got Septa into replacement rather than rebuilding?? Anyway, up until last month, it looked like something like that would have had to happen to get the LIRR to move on the new diesel stuff. Of course now, they've only got one set, and I hear the old double decker is being returned to somebody, along with those FL9s. So it's still only one for the LIRR, despite the promises that it's "just around the corner" for the last few years. And I don't expect to see the new equipment on Oyster Bay for another few years anyway - heck, we were the last line to lose steam I think...
But what gets me is that the M-1s are going to be replaced in a few years (I've heard as early as 5). Given what the LIRR paid for those cars, they should last a LOT longer than 30 years......
Two points:
a.) You have to experiment with new technology sometimes. After all, I'm sure they had problems with the first electric cars. Should the elevateds have stuck to the Forneys?:-) Sometimes you have to make mistakes to learn.
b.) You can order new cars with proven technology. To use one of Phillip's examples: my understanding with the R44/46's was that they were built with all sorts of automatic control technology, etc. in conjunction with the Second Avenue project. The trains were built to run faster so that they could get away with only two tracks. Well, a lot of that stuff hadn't been used before and broke. I'm sure that the TA's unfamiliarity with the technology didn't help. When they ordered the R62's and the BMT/IND equivalents (I always forget: R68's?), they went back to older technology, which has worked pretty well from my understanding.
The reason why the el lights flicker all the time is because one of the shoes leaves the third rail for a moment. This happens: When entering the tunnel at 46th Street, just before 34th Street westbound and just after 15th Street westbound to mention a few. And of course when going over switches. But is that normal? Or safe?
Other then the fright of the newbies there is probabaly not a problem with the flickering as far as safety is concerned - that is, they are not off long enough to cause problems in the cars.
The lights flicker intermittedly on the T in Boston; Don't remember any problems in D.C. Nada in the Paris Lines I rode.
As I mentioned, the new M-4s do not flicker like the M-3s, so either the shoes are better off, or there is a backup battery time.
Cool.
Ok - basically what happewns is this:
The shoe is running along the third rail. It powers either a battery charger for the lighting, or the lights themselfs, via an inverter. When the train "gaps", the third rail power is off and the batteries keep the lights on until that power comes back.
Older trains don't uses inverters, they use motor generator (alternator) sets. With these,0 the third rail pow0ers a motor which spins a generator. That's part of the whineing noise LIRR cars make. When you lose third rail power, the MG spins down, and power goes away. When you get third rail back, the MG spins up, and on comes the power. Some cars like the LIRR ones just let the lights go out on their own accord, but the #7 stuff cuts them in and out via a relay, as does the ACMUs, although the latter lets the lights die somewhat. The ACMU actually switches to a dim incedesent (sp?) set of lights, so it never really goes totally dark. Amtrak trains on the NEC also lose their lights every so often, and I wish Amtrak would tell people this since every time the lights go out, half the car panicks ands wakes me up :(
But there's nothing "dangerous" about it, it doesn't dammage cars, and the lights aren't going to explode. Of course, there ARE pickpockets, tourists, etc, and those can cause problem, but electro mechanically, everything is fine...
I feel like I'm sitting in 15th Street. Who's that guy in one of those big pictures they have on the walls with all those pretzels? Anyway, I have noticed a lack of whistle blowing lately. I hear it sometimes in the morning. That, and as you mentioned, KYW(News Radio-Ten-sixtyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!) I have another quickie for you. Why is SEPTA so grouchy about allowing riders to open the hatches in hot weather? Last year, I was on the 125 in July(the 125, need I say more?) and a man was actually escorted off the bus by the POLICE for opening the hatch and then not 'fessing up. People were pleading to the driver! Two people fainted!! What's that?!
Don'tcha just love those roof hatches? Half the time they won't open, the other half you can't close them. I ride the Volvo artics frequently and often this is the only way to vent the exhaust that filters up thru the bus body.
And speaking of this, I recall a trip down the Schuylkill a few years back when the Volvo filled with smoke (it used to happen quite a bit). The driver opened the front door, at expressway speed, and the forced air cleared the smoke right out. This was quite a jolting experience for the 70 + riders!
I was just up in Philadelphia Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. The new cars run all evening from about 6:15 to closing. Here's my take on them:
Nice styling, they look a lot like the old ones but with blue upholstered seats, blue and white colors inside, and comfortable air conditioning. Signs on the side are yellow LED letters saying "ALL STOPS-69 ST." alternating with "NEXT STOP - 13 ST." (as an example) I think the front sign is also LED to say A or B as needed when they are eventually used during rush hour.
Instead of the Almond Joy-looking bumps, one for each fan on the old ones, they have a smooth top for the A/C. The inside ceilings are lower than the old cars and the sides inside are slightly curved, so the car feels smaller and more cramped inside. I guess the lower ceiling and thicker walls hold new electronics and A/C equipment.
There is an autmomatic female voice announcement for each stop: "Next Stop: 56th St...Bong Bong...Doors are Opening...This train makes all stops to 69th St...Bong Bong...Doors are closing..." After about the 3rd one of this sequence it gets annoying. It seems to be constant, since stations are not that far apart. I know it's for some noble reason, but what about those of us who can't concentrate on our reading or conversation -- or even looking out the front window -- when hearing this for the entire ride.
Probably the most ironic thing about those verbal notices is this: The doors open as soon as the train gets down to 1 mph and before the train has rested back on its springs. So by the time the female voice says anything, the sound of the doors opening has already been noted by most people and some are already getting off. Sometimes as little as 3 seconds later, the doors start to slam shut and then the announcement is made that the doors are closing. If I depended on that announcement the door would have already hit me somewhere in the back long before I heard that melifluous disembodied voice.
The final thing is that it's OPTO, and the motorman has a TV screen to open and close the doors at 30, 34 St., Spring Garden, and the Bridge-Pratt terminal, the only 4 possible left-hand openings on the system. Because of track construction on Monday, westbound trains were running the wrong way on the stretch from 11 to 15, so the motorman had to get out of the cab and open the doors with a key, then close them again.
Except for the announcements, these are a worthy successor to the old pink-&-green cars. I guess they knew the style of them was great.
End of story.
Great rundown, Carl. Continuing my never-ending trend of M-4 stories, I was questioned by a woman at 15th Street last Tuesday when I was waiting(with all my free time) for those wonderful new trains. I was looking eastbound down the tunnel trying to determine whether or not it was a spineback or a hunchback(my affectionate nicknames for the M-3 and M-4, respectively) and correctly determining each time. There was a woman on the platform who was doing the same thing, waiting for the new trains anyway, and she asked how I was able to determine which was which. I told her it wasn't very difficult. When looking down the tunnel, say you see a train about one or two stops down. If you have good eyes, there's an easy way to figure out what kind of train will be pulling into your stop. The spinebacks have two headlamps on the bottom and on the top(don't ask me what they're for) while the hunchbacks have only the botton two. I correctly assumed the M-3's and one testing M-4 that passed each time. She said that she hopped on the bandtrain from her husbands obsession with subways(incidentally, I asked if either of them had ever been to NYC Subway Resources. They said no, but would try it after hearing my accolades about it). I have found that lots of people who use the el are beyond anxious to see the current fleet replaced with the new "brightliners" you could call them(they're blindingly shiny in direct sunlight). People have been less than confident in the M-3's, especially after the incident in '90 which I'm sure I needn't revisit. Some folks were telling me they felt the same way when the Broad Street fleet was replaced in '83. I think that SEPTA is finally starting to think about moving into the future and not wallowing in old policies of the past. I was pleased as punch when I learned that the Market Street El was to be REBUILT. Not refurbished, REBUILT! This is kind of special to me. Riding SEPTA from as far back as I can remember(I wasn't there when they were PTC, of course:)) and I'm glad that the transit companies of major cities like New York and Philadelphia are attempting to move forward. SEPTA's turnaround seems to be working minus this whole thing with the unions. But I'm confident that SEPTA isn't going to do anything to slow their impetus. They'll do and,to me, have done all necessary to work this out. As the "new el" ads exclaim,"The future is coming to SEPTA."
I presume that the M-4 designation for the ADTranz cars derives form the folowing:
M-1 1906 Brill (Market St. El cars)
M-2 1922 Brill (Frankford El cars)
M-3 1961 Budd cars
Am I correct?
And do the BSS designations follow the same:
B-1 1928 Brill
B-2 1936 Pressed Steel
B-3 1937 Camden
B-4 1989 Kawsaki
For the B-4's, you mean 1982, right?
No, 1989. the B-4's were built after the lrv's.
No,no. I distinctly remember it being 1981-1982. I believe that for two reasons.
A: Go to the Walnut-Locust station(if you live in town) and after going through the turnstile you will see a display of the history of the Broad Street Subway and in it it mentions that it was it's 50th Anniversary(which I believe to be the extreme late 70's if not the early 80's) and it mentions that the line would get new cars soon and the LRV's have proudly displayed "Kawasaki-1981" or "'84" I forget. But I do believe that they were delivered earlier than you state.
I guess you are correct. The LRV's do have a "Kawasaki 1981" plate on the front door side. The B-4 cars were 1982-1983. I have a promo tape put out by Kawasaki in 1982 and it shows the LRV's and a two car test set of the B-4's, with a pantograph!
However, nobody has said if my class numbering scheme is correct.
P.S. Does anybody know the route number assigned to the Market El/Subway?
As far as I am aware, there are no route numbers for either the Market-Frankford or Broad Street Lines. They certainly don't print them in anything the public sees. Since they're not shy about giving us the numbers for all the other lines in the system, I assume that means there aren't any.
Originally, when car lines first received numbers (dating to the introduction of the Nearside cars in 1911), the Market St Subway received the route number 1. It was never displayed anywhere publicly. No car line ever carried the 1 designation and it was not used until the Boulevard Limited bus route was re-christened Route 1 in the late '80's (main reason - of course, it follows US Route 1 for nearly its entire route!).
In the late '80's, SEPTA also began to refer to its subway-el lines on some maps as follows:
M1 - Market-Frankford
M2 - Broad St local
M3 - Broad St express
M4 - Ridge spur
Apparently this was a follow-up to the "R" designations given to the commuter rail lines. I have never seen the "M" routes used on timetables, public maps, etc. There would be no real need to use any such designation in practice.
SEPTA refers to the Market-Frankford Line as its Blue Line, and the Broad Strreet Subway as the Orange Line. Many locals call Market-Frankford the "el" for obvious reasons. As far as I know, numbers were never used on either line. Philadelpia citizens tend to be very traditional in these areas. Many locals call the Norristown High Speed Line (Route 100) the "P and W" in honor of its pre-Red Arrow name.
P+W is for "Philadelphia and Western", for those who were wondering...
"Red Arrow" was the name of the Philadelphia suburban bus+trolley+train division of the old PTC (Philadelphia Transit Company).
There used to be a PRW trolley line along Market St. west of 69 St, just like the Media and Sharon Hill lines, but it disappeared by 1968.
Carl,
Shame, shame, shame. Red Arrow was the "trade name" of the Philadelphia Suburban Tranpprtation Company. PST was formed by the mreger of the Philadelphia & West Chester Street Railway with the Aronomink Bus Line (Red Aronomink).
Never a part of PRT/PTC.
(I thought every Philadelphia based/raised fan knew all this.)
It's been 26 years since I've lived in Philadelphia, so that's my lame excuse.
I even have an old Red Arrow token at home that says "Phila Suburban Transportation Company." I should have known better...
You know, Dan, as crazy as it may sound I recall about three years ago seeing a book about American Rolling stock for subways and saw a photo of a B-4 with pantographs. Are there some Broad Street plans I don't know about? In response to your numeration inquiry, Septa's Market-Frankford El and Broad Street Subway have the selective title of the only two unnumerated Septa routes. I would assume the reason for this is that we here in little ol' Philadelphia only have two such lines to worry about(unfortunately) so numerating them is unnecessary.
I think the B-IV's only carried pantographs for testing at the Kawasaki plant. None were ever delivered with pantographs.
Are there remnants of where the pantographs were attached. I know it's kinda hard to see the top of a subway car, but are they there?
No, the pantograph (used only at the Kawasaki plant for testing) were on a temporary set of pantograph boards on the "A" car of a married pair. The boards were affixed to an aluminum frame secured to the drip rails on the edge of the roof.
To see the top of a subway car, just look from the top of the stairs or from an overhanging balcony, like at Fern Rock.
I don't know if busses still have it, but for years the bus number was painted on top of every bus in Philadelphia.
Nope, the bus Numbers aren't there anymore(I doubt SEPTA would do that to those new Ikaruses) and one can also look at the top of a subway at City Hall. Just don't spit over the railing:)
That's strange. Usually the numbers are on top of the vehicles so that the cops in the helicopters can see what the number is in a emergency. Every surface vehicle in Baltimore has its fleet number in 16" high characters on the roof - buses and LRV's.
The MTA here started the policy after a deranged ex-operator swiped a bus from Eastern Division. All of us with radios that could pick up the cop were laughing hysterically as cops all over the city were calling Dispatch with the number of every bus they saw. The bus involved was 2045, we heard almost every number on the street that Saturday.
I've seen the tops of buses and the city's LRV's. If they have those ID numbers, I must need new glasses.
Are you referring to MTA equipment or SEPTA's? Everything I've seen here (Baltimore) has 'em, in 3 different typefaces, depending on when it (bus /LRV) saw the paint booth last.
One MTA typeface oddity - the buses use a san serif typeface for the fleet number. The LRV's use a Railroad Roman type face in memoriam for the late, lamented streetcar fleet.
Are you sure? I don't ever recall SEPTA buses having their numbers on their roofs. NJ Transit, yes, but not SEPTA.
Yes, back in 1968-70 I lived at the corner of 37th and Spruce on the second floor of the Penn Dormitories, over the bus stop in Morgan Dormitory. So I saw the busses go by every couple of minutes. Back then the #42 bus also ran along Spruce past the school and not around the back the way it does now.
The 42? Now that's a route I'd like to see a subway. For my own sneaky reasons. I don't know whay Septic's:) problem is with putting the wrong vehicles on a route. I think that the 125 should become the mysteriously absent R4. Have you been on the 125 lately? Especially when everybody in town is on their way to King of Prussia? It's double homicide with knives, gloves, shoes and all!:)
I think there are two sets of new BSS cars. When I was in Phila. recently I noticed two slightly different stylings with different bells for when the doors closed. Maybe one set is 1982, and the second set 1989...
What do you mean, different stylings?
I think it was the shape of the windows, a little difference in the lit up signs on the side and the bells signaling the closing of the doors was different. I videotaped them so I will look closely and see what's the difference and tell you all in a few days...Got to do the taxes first.
On this site, it mentioned that the SOAC ran in Philadelphia as well as New York City. Does that mean that a B-4 could take the place of an R-68(or any other car in NYC)?
Yes, the Broad St subway is built to the same dimensions as the BMT/IND.
All the Kawasakis came in the same order in 1982-84. The only difference in styling is the single enders (500's) with one cab and the double enders (650's) with two. I have noticed that there are slight tone differences in the door chimes, and perhaps this is just wear with age. ?
Yes, almost. The B-2's were built in 1938 and are actually younger than the B-3's ('36) but the B-3's didn't come to Broad St until '70, when they were sold off by Patco. For some reason the B-4's are actually called B-IV's.
The ABB cars on the Norristown (P & W) line are similarly called N-5's. The CTA cars never received a designation (the Bullets were N-4's, Straffords N-3's). In reality, none of these cars were ever referred to by these classifications until the B-IV's.
The B-IV's first arrived on the property in early '83 to the best of my recollection. There were enough of them on hand to begin the Olney-Walnut express service in late '83 and they took over all service by mid-84.
THEY ARE OLD AND RICKETY! I envy New York sometimes. You guys get new cars after respectable periods of time. Did you wait 40 years for the R-110A and B after the R-62 and 68?
Thinking of the more than obvious lack of rapid transit to all parts of Philly(I can attest to this. I live in Mount Airy, a section with nothing but buses essentially) why not attempt to build(Can a man dream) a new line to, say, Mount Airy? I'd love it! I just moved from Mayfair(not too far from the end of the el) and I miss it. Want an idea? Make an extension of the Ridge Avenue subway up, maybe, Germantown Avenue. Or put the trolleys back. Why'd they eliminate those?
You already have "rapid" transit with the two Chestnut Hill commuter lines. If you're talking about a place without rapid transit, without any direct convenient connection to rapid transit, and underserviced "express" bus lines as a poor substitute, walk westward across the Wissahickon Creek and welcome to the place that transit forgot, my neighborhood, Roxborough. If SEPTA would institute a reasonably-priced transfer from the 9/27 routes to the Norristown line at Wissahickon (instead of making the buses compete on the Schuylkill while the trains run below capacity), maybe folks would flock back to transit.
A subway to Mt. Airy, Jack? Your neighbors would kill you!
The trolleys came off the 23 in '92 when the last of the PCC's wore out. SEPTA is still talking about revitalization of the 15, 23 and 56 lines, with 15 being the first. Don't hold your breath waiting for the 23 car to return any time soon. As a matter of fact, it's probably neck and neck (and neck) with my modal transfer (above) and your Mt. Airy subway... It doesn't mean these aren't good ideas!
Did SEPTA ever run the current Kawasakis on the 23?
During at least one Trolleyfest a LRV ran on the 23. (at least the Germantown section.)
OH MY GOD! Don't go to the TRANSIT TRANSIT section of the MTA homepage unless you want a real letdown. In there, if I'm right, is an awful picture of what seems to be the great R-142!
The car is the ultimate expression of minimalism. Look at those seats! Anyone else thinking R-32? If you weigh more than 12 pounds forget that! And the windows leave much to be desired. It looks nothing like the R-110 series-with the redbirds and the R-62 and R-68, the most superior series ever produced for NYC subways.
I agree; it looks like shit, but I'm hoping it's just a lousy shot of a not too well made mockup!
In 1986, I first saw the R-68 and was terribly let down. Like riding inside a tuna fish can. At the time I thought that from an asthetic viewpoint, the R-33/36 Worlds fair cars were the best looking cars ever owned by the NYCT. This was followed closely by the R-11s, the D types and the R-46s. Each had a character and personality I found appealing in some way. Of course, I was only concerned with looks then.
Now of course, I have nearly 300 R-68s, running at an MDBF of almost 100,000 miles and they are great. Naturally, I view the cars in terms of performance now and although style and performance should not be a trade-off, they often are. For the vast majority of NYCT customers, if the R-142a can achieve 100,000 miles MDBF within a year of delivery, they will be beautiful regardless of what they look like.
Can anything ever look better than the good old R-10's? I will miss them forever!
I agree 100%, but I think the reason everybody remembers them with such fondness is that the R-1 thru R-9's were so darkly lit, and, externally at least, dirty. R-10's represented the promise of modern things to come that the 1939 World's Fair promised, but the War put on hold.
I caught the end of the old IND trains when I first moved to Brooklyn in 1986. They had just been rehabbed dark green, and they struck me as bulky, heavy, and industrial. In fact, an "Army Train" came to mind. The train reminded me of the bulky, dark green army trucks you see on the road from time to time.
An aesthetic subway train? Practically, your choice of decor is stainless steel or plastic on the walls, thru-chip tile or rubber on the floor. No real wood panels and Corinthian leather. I guess to counter scratchitti, the TA decided to go with all plastic -- perhaps the color hides scratches. Dark colors require more candlepower to light, bold colors may be a bit much at seven in the morning. The R44-R46 are nice, but the orange and tan color schemes, along with the fake wood, make it look like a late 1960s Howard Johnson's restaurant. I could go with black, white and gray.
Perhaps they should focus on the aesthetics of the stations.
Keep in mind that prior to WWII, all rolling stock delivered to New York, except the BMT oddball units, was painted in earth tones: dark brown, olive green, and the like. Olive green was still applied to the R-16s, R-26s, R-27s, R-28s, and R-30s. The R-17s were originally decked out in maroon, and the R-29s ushered in the bright red look. Then came the R-32s...
As for the R-10s, they originally had a two-tone gray finish with an orange band. During the late 50s, a group of them were sent to the BMT Eastern Division lines, at which time they received a coat of olive green. By 1959, they were back on the A line. In 1962, a handful of R-10s were painted bright red. Then in 1966, they started to appear in the white and aqua scheme, which was my personal favorite. Finally, in the mid-80s, the remaining 110 R-10s were painted dark green.
I was surprised to find out that the R-10s could run in multiple unit with all other postwar cars up to, and including, the R-42s. There is even a photo on this website of an R-10 coupled to an R-42. I was under the impression that since the R-10s had pneumatic door controls while other postwar cars did not, they would not be compatible. Besides, I never saw them running in any mixed sets with other cars. (The only mixed sets I ever saw were R-32s and R-42s coupled together on the D line back when the TA was apparently experimenting with mixed sets on the IND and BMT in the early 70s. It was also common to see R-12s and R-14s mixed in with later IRT units Come to think of it, you almost never saw an IRT train made up exclusively of R-29s or R-33s or R-17s back then, except perhaps when these cars were brand new.)
I have many fond memories of the R-10s, and think of them whenever the A line is mentioned. They were anything but hideous to me. The same can be said of the R-1/9s. My one regret is that I never got to ride a prewar A train up Central Park West, although I did ride a few prewar D trains on that stretch. Ah, memories...
The real charm of the R-10's was their original flooring. It was a glitter-laden cement-like material set between brass metal strips like the ones used in terazzo lobby floors. The strips formed designs and separated two or three different colors of cement into a pattern of diamonds and stripes. I guess nobody thought they would ever wear out, because when they did, they seemed unable to restore them, and covered them with a dark grey patching material which looked bad when new, and horrible when it began to delaminate, causing "potholes".
And now here come the R-142's...........
Please forgive the technical explanation:
The doors on the R-10s had National Pneumatic Door Operators (driven by air engines) while most later car classes had operators which operated with door motors. The key to the compatability issue is that all NYCT equipment from R-10 through R-42 had H2C couplers with 39 pin electric portions. Later these were all changed to 52 Pin electric portion which the R-62s and R-68s were delivered with. Only the R44s and R46s are different.
Since the electric portions are compatible and the pin assignments are the same, the doors would be compatible. Simply put, the NYCT equipment is protected from 'single point' door failures. Meaning, you need 2 seperate signals to open the doors. The door pins on the electric portions are D1, D2, D3, and D4. If you energize D1 and D2 (referred to Door Unlock and Door Open) all doors on one side of the train will open. Energize D3 and D4 and the doors on the other side will open. It makes no difference what actually opens the doors, as long as it responds to commands from these two trainline wires. This is why all of those car classes were compatible. Why they were not run together is far more interesting but for another time.
When the R-44/ 46 cars were overhauled, didn't the cars get common couplers also?
When originally purchased, the R-44 came with Ohio Brass couplers and R-46 had Dresser couplers (both compatible) with side-slung Walton electric portions. Because of the ATO and P-Wire loops the portions had somewhere around 93 pins. When overhauled, both cars retained their original couplers except where coupler replacement was necessary due to wear. They were replaced with Hadaday couplers which were comparible with the Ohio Brass and Dresser couplers. Witht the elimination of the P-Wire loops and other modifications, the R-44s and R-46s were equiped with underslung Electric Portions by NY Air Brake. Needless to say, these couplers and portions are not compatible with any other equipment.
BTW, If you look at the front of an R-46 on the right side facing you, you may see, under the car, the coupler adapter so that in an emergency, an R-46 may be added to any other equipment in an emergency (iron only - no air and no electric)
So, that explains why the R-12s and R-14s could m.u. with later IRT cars. I was under the impression that their door controls had to modified in order to do so, since they also had trigger boxes like the R-1/9s and R-10s and R-11s. (I'm not talking about the ones which were modified for the South Ferry shuttle so they could open only the center doors.) This raises another question: when the R-12s and R-14s ran on the Flushing line all by themselves and not in mixed sets, did their doors make the same air sounds when opening and closing the way the doors on the R-10s did? I assume that in those days, the conductor operated the doors from the outside, standing on the step plates. My only experience with the R-12s and R-14s was from the late 70s on, when they ran on the mainlines and were always mixed in with later cars (it made them stick out like sore thumbs, I thought). Their doors made the same sounds as the later cars then. Did their cabs have door controls other than the drum switch?
I must admit that I never liked the idea of running mixed sets of trains, even though it allows greater flexibility. I just feel that a train of like cars just plain looks better. This is strictly my own opinion. I'm still curious as to what the TA's motive was in the early 70s when they were running mixed sets on the IND and BMT. On the IRT, it was no big deal, as the R-17s thru R-33s looked very similar on the outside.
According to the drawings I have, both the R-12s and R-14s had National Pneumatic Door Operators. However, on the R-12's they specify electric motors. On the R-14s they say door motors (not specifying electric). However on the R-10s they are called air engines. My guess is that the 12s and 14 both had electric door operators and so they didn't make that r-10 sound.
The reason that the TA ran R-32s, 38s, 40s and 42s in mixed combinations in the 70s is because they had to. Due to deferred Mtce. and falling MDBF they had mix and match just to maintain some semblance of service. Even today - every once in a while you'll see R-32s and R-38s mixed on the A or the C line.
I've seen R-32s and R-38s together recently. They blend well together, since they look very similar except for the fluted sides - halfway up on R-38s, all the way up on R-32s.
Was there ever an "official" reason why R-12s and R-14s never ran by themselves once they wound up on the IRT mainlines? I heard it was because they didn't want to subject conductors to moving in and out of the cars, but that sounds kind of lame when you consider that the R-10s almost always ran in trains by themselves (In the 50s, they were occasionally coupled to R-16s, and there is a photo on this website of an R-10 coupled to an R-42.), and conductors operated their doors with the trigger boxes.
And as long as we're on the subject of doors, did the doors on the R-10s make the same air sounds when they were coupled to, say, R-16s or R-42s? Anytime I ever saw the R-10s, they were in trains all by themselves.
I've never seen a R-10 operate with any other equipment in passenger service. As far as the R-12/14's I wouldn't be suprised if there was apolicy to keep them out of the conductor's position in a train, but they seemed to mixed in trains just like all other IRT mainline equipment. In the 70's and 80's it was possible to find a solid train of R-17's on the 4, but most would have an R-21 or pair of R-33's mixed in. Also when the R-17's were transferred from the 42nd street shuttle they together in one train on the #5 line for some time.
It seems that since the Redbirds were rebuilt, they have been running in unit or solid trains (all R-29s, all R-33s) on a regular basis, even having 10 consecutively numbered cars in some cases. Back in the 70s, I don't ever remember seeing a unit train on the IRT mainlines; a train would have mostly R-21s or R-22s, with an R-17 or R-14 or two sprinkled in, for example. Even a few World's Fair R-36s found themselves on the mainlines, still in their original paint scheme.
Yes, you're right Steve. It's quite easy to find a solid train with one model now, but before their rebuilding it was extremely rare. In fact even the flushing line wasn't exempt because each train would have the single R-33 in it. I do remember on rare occasions of spotting soldi trains of R-33's on the 6 line. Also at one point there were 10 R-33's that were painted green that stayed together. I saw them most of the time on the #4 line, but they also spent some time on the 2 line. And as you said their were some Flushing line R-36's than ran on the mainline routes. I think the #6 line may still have a train or two of Flushing/Mainline R-36's.
Thursday, while working on the platform at Grand Central I noticed a 6 line train that I thought looked an awful lot like the 7 Flushing line cars I had worked the previous week. The thing that made them stand out was the large bay style windows below the tilt out windows. After reading your post it all came together, this must have been the Flushing/Mainline cars you are referring to I saw. I can't seem to get it straight which train is which, When I first started it was either a red train or a silver train. But after hanging around here all this time I am learning a lot. I can't wait for the new trains to start
arriving. I know most of you don't like the idea of transverse cabs, I too like to look out at the scene ahead and often am deprived by a transverse cab. But as Conductor it's a real pleasure to have your own little office.
There are several redbirds on the #6 line, but the vast majority of them are R-29 (8500-8600). Mianline R-36's are 9524-9557 and there were a few Flushing R-36's there also, I believe they were 9500's also. All redbirds now have tilt in windows, but since you said they had large bay style windows - it sounds like yoou're describing Flushing R-36's.
I have seen Redbird Flushing R-36s on the Lexington (probably the 6 as you described). Back in the 70s, I would see them on the 1, still in the World's Fair color scheme, mixed in with R-21s, R-22s, and whatever else they cared to throw in. They looked very much out of place, to say the least, almost as much as R-12s and R-14s in a train of later cars. There are photos on this website of a solid train of Flushing R-36s on the 1 from the early 70s; however, I never saw such a train anywhere except on the Flushing line.
I know this is debatable, but I don't consider the Flushing trains as not being solid just because of the single R-33s. Granted, the R-33s were built on a different contract, but since they stylistically match the Flushing R-36s, they blend in very nicely. I understand that when the single R-33s were being rebuilt. a group of R-17s were transferred to the Flushing line to fill in for them. Branford's #6688 was one of those cars, so I am told.
One other thing comes to mind: I remember seeing some R-10s which had the same doors as the R-15s and R-11s: with two circular windows instead of the usual single rectangular window. Once I saw an A train pull into 14th St., and all 10 cars had these doors. The cars had the two-tone white and teal blue scheme (half and half). None of the books I have read mention this variation.
That train must have looked pretty interesting. I've never seen or heard of any R-10 cars with these doors. Were they built like that, or retrofitted with them? I've never been on an R-11 (never came across them -- 10 cars can get pretty lost in this subway), but have been on the R-15s a couple of times, and I found the doors to be somewhat interesting, although I prefer the regular rectangular windows.
The storm doors with the circular windows, on the other hand, I found to be quite nice, and also found them on an R27/30 car (forgot the fleet number) one time back in the 80s (or it could have been an R-16 restyled with bench seating -- wasn't the TA experimenting with new looks for the R-16?) The straps were the kind normally found on the R27/30, so that's probably what it was.
I don't remember the car #, but I do remember a green R10 car which had an R16 type storm door on one end. Also, R27 #8176 (now scrapped) had an R16 storm door on the #2 end.
I recently read that an R-27 once crashed into a BMT standard and got crunched at one end (the standard maybe had a few scratches). R-16 #6499 had also had an altercation with a BMT standard with the same outcome: little, if any damage to the standard (which outweighed the R-16s and R-27s by 5-6 tons) and a wrecked R-16. Coney Island shops spliced the good end of the R-16 to the mashed end of the R-27, keeping the R-16's porthole-window equipped storm door.
The R-26 cars (assigned mostly to the #5, occasionally on the 2) still have the drop-sash windows, but I haven't seen a solid train of them in quite a few years. I remember that in the late 80s and early 90s, all the redbirds still had the drop=sash windows after being rebuilt, and were retrofitted with the tilt-in windows shortly thereafter. The R-26 (and the R-27/30, for that matter) never recieved them.
Tthe new subway cars, R-142, R-155 have more and more electronics to control propulsion, braking , HVAC, signage etc. It has been said in SUBTALK that R-44 and R- 46 cars cannot be mixed with older equipment. Can post R-46 equipment be mixed in the same train or are they electronically incompatible? If they are , did the MTA make any statements concerning any disadvantages or advantages to ordering mutually incompatible cars?
First, there are no R-155s. The 155 is aprototype model one of the posters here is building. R-62 and R-68 are the only revenue cars built after the R-44/46 fleets. They are compatible with everything fron R-26 and up. The R-110s are not compatible with anything including each other. While all previous contracts had electrical connections in the form of electric portions between cars, the
R-110A has Fiber-Optic connections and the R-110B has RF coupling. Both have proved reliable as an alternative to the electro-mechanical connections on standard cars. As of now, I don't have a clue as to which will be on the R-142s and R-143s. I hope that they will be compatible, though.
It is a fact that the R-44 and R-46 cars are not compatible with any other equipment because they have different couplers. I may be wrong, but I understand they cannot m.u. with each other. I remember riding an A train of R-44s once before they were rebuilt, and saw a hand-written notice inside the motorman's cab which said, "Do not couple electrically to R-46 car." Can they m.u. with each other now after being rebuit?
Today, car models are technically mixed on the JZML lines. They mix R40 modifieds [GE controls WABCO airbrakes] R42 MK [GE controls WABCO airbrakes] and R42 Coney Island rebuilds [Westinghouse controls NY Airbrake] Because of this they run horribly. If you happen to get a "solid" train it runs much better. The cars should not be mixed since when emergency braking tests are done on the cars, a "solid" train is used. To my knowledge a mixed train was never used as you have two different brake systems. I have a feeling a mixed train would require more emergency braking distance.
There is only one fleet where mixed equipment is pernitted. On the E,F, R, and G lines, when R-32s are used, the train consists can be made up of Phase I (Wabco) and Phase II (NYAB) cars. Both cars have the same emergency brake rates.
However, you are correct that the braking characteristics of NYAB an WABCO are slightly different.
There's something to be said about reliability, no question about that. It's too bad they don't run the R-68s with the half-width cab facing out anymore.
As for looks, I always found the R-32s appealing, especially when they were new and had those blue doors. They certainly seem to have held up fairly well over the years.
I can't say the R-68 is a superior car. But my selfish bias is because on occasion, I have operated the cars when I "picked" lines those cars operated on. The #1 cabs are extremely drafty with an inadequate cab heater. The R44/46 with the same size cab has 2 cab heaters in the #1 cab. The R68 motorman seat is like sitting on a rock with no back support. I had back pain because of this. The most comftorable cars to operate is the R46. Nothing else comes close, although the cabs broil during hot weather. Hopefully NYCT will provide us motormen with a comftorable work space on future new equipment.
Try operating an M-3(sorry). The operators seats are little more than stools.
Can I get a copy anywhere of one of the large neighborhood maps posted in subway stations?
Specifically, I need a copy of the map in the Spring Street station on the Lexington line that shows Little Italy and the East Village.
Suggestions? Please e-mail me.
PS: Any news on when the eastern entrance to the Broadway/Lafayette station in Manhattan on the B,D,F line will open(northeast corner of Houston and Crosby)?
Yes,
Contact Daniel at the Identity Map Company located in Westbeth along 12th Avenue. This company makes many excelent maps including the awsomely detailed maps you see in the subway.