What is the reason for adding a third headlight to LIRR M-1/M-3. They are so
asthetically unpleasing!
Those third headlights are known as ditch lights. Federal regulations now require them on any trains that go through grade crossings, as they supposedly make the trains more visible to drivers.
Yeah, I've noticed the New Haven line it getting them too. God knows they got a tone of grade crossings on that one :/ (for those of you who don't know, there are NO grade crossings on New Haven, and the equipment is unique to that line)
I agree that those lights kills the looks of the M-X series. Hopefully, the new ones (I've heard LOTS of talk about a M-5 or M-7 lately) will implement it better. At least the single light at top looks better than the double lights at top.
Are there any grade crossings on the New Canaan branch of the New Haven line? If so, the ditch lights make more sense because the branch uses the same equipment as the main line.
The MBTA Commuter Rail here in Boston has them too. Both the diesel engines and the control coaches, which formerly had only the upper middle headlight, now have two additional lights in the "standard" headlight position. There's an interesting interlock: when the engineer activates the bell (for crossings and approaching stations), the two lower headlights flash in a wig-wag fashion.
Speaking of crossings, most communities in suburban Boston BAN grade crossing whistles, so only the bell is used. This is a far cry from LI; I grew up just a few blocks from the I.U. Willets Road crossing at the Albertson station on the Oyster Bay branch, and came to enjoy the different "whistling techniques" used by the engineers at various times of the day and night. You'd be surprised how many versions of LONG-LONG-SHORT-LONG there can be! I wonder if the whistles on the new LIRR diesels have the same pitch/tone, or if they sound more like the M-1/3 horns?
!!!!
Wow, I don't think that would EVER happen on LI, given that the LIRR is getting rid of Herrick AVE grade crossing. The worst accident of the 80's - because of a bunch of drunk kids in a van. But of course, it's the LIRR's fault they went around the gates....
I've not heard the new Diesels (I've only seen quick glimpses of them parked at Hillside), but I would assume they have the usually GM whistles. BTW, I've noticed lately that a few MUS have horn that sound a lot like the diesels. Is this just a "feature" of the M-3's, or are they changing them??
Speaking of it always being the railway's fault when someone gets hit by a train (usually ignoring the gates and signals) here in Chicago we had, a few years ago, an incident in which a school bus was hit by a Metra express at a crossing and seven children died. There is a highway parallel to the rail line [Northwest Highway, since the rail line is the UP(former C&NW) Northwest Line], and the bus, on a cross-street, crossed the tracks and waited at the light to enter or cross Northwest Highway, with the rear of the bus extending over the tracks. The bus driver, unfamiliar with the route, did not hear the train or the screams of the passengers over her radio until it was too late.
Nevertheless, the people of the suburb where the incident occurred blamed the speed of the Metra train and lobbied "for the sake of the children" for a 50 mph speed limit on all Illinois rail lines. And the UP-NW line where the incident occured is 65 miles long! The thing would have passed the Assembly too, with the "concerned citizens" going to every legislator waving the proverbial bloody shirt and pointing a "J'accuse!" at "evil, heartless money- and-speed-over-safety" Metra, but for Governor Edgar arranging a compromise bill where the speed would be lowered to 50 mph in that suburb only "on an experimental basis."
A 50 mph speed limit would have been pure sabotage, as surely as blowing a rail bridge, and would have resulted in **more** deaths as rail passengers were driven to use the highways, but all the "concerned citizens" saw were seven dead children and one huge railway organization which "had" to be to blame.
As I recall, the NTSB found the cause of that accident was the fault of METRA. A defective device which links the traffic light to the track sensor for the crossing gate was not detected during a routine inspection. This caused the traffic light to remain green while the train approached, trapping the bus on the crossing. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this.
As for the Herricks Rd. grade crossing elimination project, the reason is more political than practical. The daughter of a NY politician (State Senator, I think) was killed in that imfamous incident. Political because the most deadly crossing on the LIRR is just a few miles down the same line at Covert Ave. No move has been made to eliminate it because no one of power lost a member of their family there.
Nor have I heard of an attempt to rid the line of the THREE crossings (5 if you count OB) that at RIGHT on the other side of Mineola - and I've seen LOTS of DUMB moves there as well.
Oh yeah, and don't forget the 3 at New Hyde Park and the additional one at Westbury.
So that leaves 7 (9) more "dangerous" grade crossings left before Hicksville.
Nevermind the fact that one of the LIRR's WORST accidents occured at the location of a grade crossing elimanation in progress.
Of course if motorists would follow the laws, there wouldn't be any accidents in the first place....
[Nor have I heard of an attempt to rid the line of the THREE crossings (5 if you count OB)that at RIGHT on the other side of Mineola - and I've seen LOTS of DUMB moves there as well.
Oh yeah, and don't forget the 3 at New Hyde Park and the additional one at Westbury.
So that leaves 7 (9) more "dangerous" grade crossings left before Hicksville.]
There also are a number of grade crossings on the Main (Ronkonkoma) Line east of Hicksville. Farmingdale is another multiple-crossing area, similar to Mineola. One of the more unusual sights is just west of Farmingdale, right after the Montauk Line splits off. The busy Main Line crosses a street at a grade crossing, while in plain sight, just a couple hundred feet to the south, the far less busy Montauk line is on an overpass over the same street.
One correction - that's known as the Central Branch and not the Montauk branch.
I don't know if it's a law related to RR crossings, but the anti-gridlock 'spillback' law would seem to be a good bet in the case of that school bus accident. Spillback is essentially, if there isn't room on the other side of the intersection for your vehicle, it is illegal to enter said intersection. So if your truck/bus/supertanker won't fit on the other side of a crosing safely, DON'T CROSS!
And do you think 50mph rather than 65mph would have made ANY difference in that accident?
-Hank
A. The driver was a fill in, BUT,
the biggest factor, in that school bus accident,
B. They were the HEAD of safety, for the school bus co.
Even if it is a closed freight line, if there isn't any room, you don't cross
God Bless American Workers
Using the assumptions I made in my original posting, it would have given her three more seconds to take action; who knows, it might have been enough. The best solution would have been to revise the Railroad signal system to provide 20 seconds or more additional advance warning to the traffic controller.
If I recall correctly, it's hard to pin the blame on Metra in particular, because the railroad (which is actually Union Pacific, operating commuter rail service under contract with Metra) is responsible for the crossing signals and gates but the Illinois Department of Transportation, as operator of Northwest Highway, is responsible for the traffic lights. The two systems are supposed to interface, but it's not entirely clear in the regulations how the interface is supposed to be done and who is responsible for it.
Again if I recall correctly, the signals and gates worked in due time, and the traffic light was "told" about the oncoming train, but the timing of the traffic light was not set properly for the speed of the express train. This could be UP's fault or IDOT's fault, but the point is that it's a problem that can be coped with by proper timing of lights and signals, or possibly the better placement of the device that trips the signals, and does not require the reduction of speed of trains as was advocated and to some small degree achieved.
I read the NTSB report when it came out, and believe the fault was in the fact that the tripping of the gate by an approaching train also set into motion the stopping of traffic by the signal on the parallel highway, and the turning to green of the light holding the school bus from pulling off of the tracks. This is standard traffic engineering practice for such a layout. But, because the signal from the train arrived in mid-cycle, the traffic control box had to cycle through yellow and red on the main highway before displaying the crossroad green. This takes 8 to 10 seconds. By then the train was upon her. I think I recall the statement that the light had turned green seconds before the impact, but by then she had frozen, having seen the train on top of them. What was needed was an earlier signal from the approaching train, and slowing down the trains was seen as a quick and not too dirty solution.
In my "prior life" I was Safety Director of a school bus company on LI. Rule number of one railroad crossings: Mandatory stop between 15 and 50 feet before the nearest rail. Rule number two: If you can't get your ENTIRE BUS across the tracks PLUS A SAFETY MARGIN, DO NOT MOVE! Rule number three: If you don't understand rules one and two, DON'T GET BEHIND THE WHEEL.
I was thinking the same thing about school buses at grade crossings. I can remember when I was a child on Greyhound buses they would stop at all grade crossings including those inactive ones. The driver would also open the door, and close it again after crossing the tracks. I don't know if they still do this, but if Greyhound can take such precautions I would guess that school bus companies should be doing at least the same. I have noticed that school buses don't turn right at red lights. So even if METRA is at fault I think part of the blames goes on the driver or the bus company if they don't instruct their drivers to stop if they cannot get the entire bus across the tracks.
In New York state, it is illegal for a school bus with passengers on board to turn right (or left) on red. Many companies/districts instruct their drivers to not do it at anytime, so that they are consistent (and seen that way by other vehicles). As I mentioned in my earlier post, school buses are required to stop between 15 and 50 feet from the rail. The driver is required to STOP, LOOK, and LISTEN until he/she is satisfied that the way is clear, that the warning signals are not active, and no train is coming. And finally that the bus can get all the way across the tracks with a safety margin once it begins to move. (Also, back when our buses had manual transmissions, we had to use the lowest forward gear and were not allowed to shift gears while on the tracks.) If aiding that process involves opening the driver's window or passenger door, that is permissible (but NOT required). However, if one opens the door, it MUST be closed before proceeding. That's because it is not legal to put a school bus in motion while the door is open! Another tidbit -- the red "school lights" must NOT be used at this point, as they are only allowed when passengers are loading and unloading. The four-way emergency flashers or right-hand signal is appropriate to warn other traffic that the bus is stopping/crossing the tracks.
[Boy, this is more fun than the weather!]
> school buses are required to stop between 15 and 50 feet from the rail. The
> driver is required to STOP, LOOK, and LISTEN until he/she is satisfied that
> the way is clear, that the warning signals are not active, and no train is
> coming. And finally that the bus can get all the way across the tracks with a
> safety margin once it begins to move.
Not just school buses ... I think ALL passenger buses are supposed to stop. I occasionally take ShortLine into NYC from Ridgewood, NJ and the route uses NJ route 17 to get to I-80; just where I-80 passes over route 17 is a rarely-used freight line, crossing route 17 (a busy 6 lane highway at that point). The bus drivers pull onto the shoulder and STOP for the RR crossing, and some open the door as well before proceeding.
--Mark
That's also part of the NJT/MNCR joint line to Port Jervis, I think...
-Hank
Yes, I thought about that crossing on route 17 also when I read the preceding description about what the school buses have to do at RR crossings. Does anyone know just where that line that crosses 17 goes to or comes from (it is NOT part of the Port Jervis line), and about how often, if indeed ever, trains actually run on it? Also, are there any plans to rebuild that stretch of 17 and eliminate the crossing?
No plans, AFAIK, to rebuild route 17 at that location; it would still have to be at the surface because I-80 passes directly ovrhead at that point.
I have never seen a train cross route 17, but I have seen freight cars west of that point sitting on a siding.
--Mark
I remember hearing about that case. I blame the traffice engineers who set up the signals. HOW COULD THEY PLACE A TRAFFIC LIGHT WHERE IT WOULD REQUIRE A VEHICLE TO STOP BEFORE FULLY CLEARING THE TRACKS? Suppose that, when the bus started across the tracks, there was no train coming, and the traffic light was green. A split-second later, the light goes to yellow. Would the bus have had time to clear the tracks and get past the stop line of the intersection before the light went red? If not, he was in a catch-22 situation: run the red light (risking a moving violation) or stop at the light and risk being hit by a train.
Clearly, the former would be preferable if the true situation was known. But a red light in front of you is obvious, and the fact that the rear part of your long vehicle has not fully cleared the tracks is less so. I guess the driver should have used his rear-view mirror to verify that he was indeed clear of the tracks and, if not, run the red light if he had to to GET clear, moving violation or no. But it was still a no-win situation for the driver. How many tracks wide was the rail line? Was there any sign indicating that vehicles over a certain length should not use the crossing, or should wait for a "fresh" green on the signal on the other side? I doubt it very much. Most importantly, HAS THE LAYOUT AT THAT CROSSING AND INTERSECTION BEEN CHANGED?
Unlike New York, Illinois allows right turn on red unless there is a sign to the contrary. So the bus does not have to wait through a red light if the driver doesn't want to (and there are no cars coming in the other street).
I believe the line is three tracks wide at that point. As to the rest, I don't know as I haven't been to that intersection before or since the incident. But the usual treatment where a major road with traffic lights runs parallel to the railway is to place the stop line on the cross-street on the near side of the tracks and post a sign that says "Stop HERE for red light."
As I mentioned in an earlier post, in NY State, it is ILLEGAL for a school bus carrying passengers to turn right (or left) on red. This of course is outside NYC, where that practice is not legal for any vehicle. Then again, there aren't too many active RR crossings within the five boroughs.
The whistle sounded at grade crossings ( Long Long Short Long ) is virtually the same throughout the country. LIRR refers to it as 14L for the rule which specifies it. Oddly enough, Most of the other RR rule books I've seen also refer to this as 14L except for PATH and B & O (which calls it 15L).
Incidently, in Florida, there are many crossings (at least in Broward County) which state that trains will not sound their whistles between 10 PM and 6 AM. This is in sharp contrast to the LIRR's 'Good Neighbor' policy in which the engineers were warned that in areas like Farmingdale and Mineola, where several grade crossings are spaced very closely together, they MUST sound 14L at each one.
I don't care for the looks of those lights either. I always thought the the M- cars (along with the R-44/46) were the best looking MU cars in the NYC area. Maybe it wouldn't look so bad if the 3rd light could have been flush mounted instead of the way it protrudes.
The New Canaan branch does in fact have grade crossings. I'm still not sure why they need to outfit the whole fleet, however.
About the Chicago accident: I don't care how the signals were set, or how fast the train was going. Signals break. Parts fail. Stuff happens. IF YOU CAN'T PULL ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE TRACKS, YOU DON'T PULL OUT AT ALL.
To clarify, the new headlight is a cyclops light on the top of the train. The required 'ditch lights' are the original headlights on the train, and the main headlight is the roof light. And they still look better than anything on NJT except an ALP44
-Hank
You've got to be kidding. The cyclops light(s) on the M-X sereies look like such a hack job, it really spoils the the front of the train.
I wonder what would have happened if the TA did not get rigd of that grade crossing on the Canarsie line at E. 105th Street. Would they refit the whole fleet or simply get rid of the crossing?
Federal requirements for visibility (formerly referred to as conspicuity)...
LIRR MU Upper light (Cyclops, BiClops) is actually the headlight....the original headlights are considered "auxiliary" lights (needed to form the triangular pattern determined by the feds to be more readily visible)
There are some technical distinctions between "ditch" lights and auxiliary lights having to do with the angle of the beams.
Double fixture used on LIRR MU conversion, since a single lamp failure would leave head end w/o a working "headlight"
As I was browsing through the page of the descriptions on subway cars, I saw a few picture on the most recent new subway cars being the R110. Then I realized that I have not seen or rode one for quite a long time. The R110A's I believe are on the IRT 7th Ave line while the R110B's are on the IND 8th Ave line. I don't really ride the #2, but the "A" train is part of my commute during the week. Does anyone know if the cars are still in use or whether they were just used for a practice run by the MTA.
When I was in New York last April I was on an R-110B to the Rockaways.
The last time I saw the R110 A was on March 5 at 1:00pm at 241st Street. The dispatcher wasn't thrilled when I told him I couldn't take it out on the road because I wasn't qualified on it. Just as well, since on that trip, it had door problems that were bad enough to warrant taking it out of service.
I rode the R-110-As once. The PA announcements were very easy to understand, and the ride was nice. It's just too bad there was no window in the door to the motorman's cab to see through.
I have seen the R-110-Bs, but have not ridden them.
Is my cousin lying or does he just not know his subway cars? He just came back from a visit to Staten Island and said he took their el(I'm assuming the SIRR)
and said he saw a car with a description quite close to the R-110B. I asked him to tell me what kinds of cars he saw(he knows them somewhat) but says he swears he saw an R-110B on the line. I told him only R-46's run on that. Please back me up in telling him that's not what he saw.(by the way, if there's a subway car uglier than the R-142, it's the R-46.)
I have visited n.y.c. and lived there and i would like to refresh my memory.
I would like to know where the deepest subway station is in n.y.c. I have read that it is in Wash. Hts. on the 1 or A train at 190th st. Please let me know.
It's either 190 or 181. I seem to recall 181.
It's the A train's 181 St. station that is the deepest.
Let's go in the air a little. Whatever happened to ALL of NYC el's? I've seen old pictures and you guys sure had 'em. Was each replaced with a current subway?
2nd Ave: Torn down around 1940. Not replaced by a subway.
3rd Ave: Manhattan segment torn down in 1956. It was supposed to be replaced with a 2nd Ave subway, of which some very short segments were built (110 - 110th St, Chinatown), but work stopped in the 1970s because of NYC's fiscal crisis. Will it ever be finished? Yes! (April Fool!)
6th Ave: Torn down in 1940. Replaced by 6th AVe IND line.
9th Ave: Torn down around 1940. 8th Ave IND line, one block over, became its substitute.
El over Brooklyn Bridge to Park Row: Also torn down in the '40s.
The only elevated segments left are, ironically, from the 1st subway line - the #1 line has the 3/4 mile Manhattan Valley viaduct running from about 120th ST to 130th St, and the line turns into an elevated line just south of Dyckman Street.
--Mark
--Mark
Are no trains to Coney Island subways?
In terms of underground lines to Coney Island, no. All lines to Coney Island, however, even though they approach Stillwell Ave either by elevated structure or open cut/surface ROW, are classified as subway.
There is confusion as what is the difference between a genuine el and a subway line which runs on an elevated structure. A genuine el is defined as an elevated line dating back to pre-subway days which was not operated as an extension of the subway system. In addition, steel subway cars could not operate on these older els simply because they were too heavy. There are elevated structures still in service which were rebuilt from older, genuine els: the Broadway-Brooklyn (J/Z) and the Myrtle Ave. (M) east of Broadway. The remainder of the Myrtle Ave. line which is now gone was never rebuilt.
There were other els which were torn down in 1940 and later:
Myrtle Ave. west of Broadway: closed from Park Row to Jay St. in 1944; closed from Jay St. to Broadway in 1969.
5th Ave - Brooklyn: closed in 1940; parallelled by the 4th Ave. subway a block away.
Fulton St. between Sands St. and Rockaway Ave.: parallelled by the IND Fulton St. line. This included a stretch from Franklin Ave. to Rockaway Ave. which had been upgraded in anticipation of being tied into DeKalb Ave at Ashland Place. The rest of the el, from Rockaway Ave to just before 80th St., closed in 1956 when the IND was extended to Lefferts Blvd and the Rockaways via the outermost leg, which from 80th St. on had been built to handle subway trains.
Lexington Ave. Brooklyn: closed during the late 40s-early 50s. The G partly parallelled the line where it runs under Lafayette Ave. Provision was made to add an extension from Bedford-Nostrand Aves. (there is a never-used center track at that station which splits into two track stubs) to Broadway and beyond, but this was never built.
A section of the BMT's Fulton El still exists- it was built to current standards. This section is used by the IND Lefferts Line. (This section runs over LIberty Ave.)
That's right. The section which runs over Liberty Ave. was built to subway standards right from the start, when it was extended. The IND Phase 2 plans included an extension even further, but that's a different story. The section of the Fulton St. el which ran over Pitkin Ave. was never rebuilt and could not bear the weight of steel subway trains; it was served by Type C el cars and the Multisectional units until service ended in 1956 concurrent with the opening of the IND connection.
The 1986 facts and figures handbook, which I was issued as a NYCTA employee, lists 191st and St Nicholas Ave as the deepest station, at 180 feet below street level. But is it still the deepest? What about Roosevelt Island?
According to the 1993 Facts and Figures book, the deepest is 191st on the 1/9, at 180' below ground. To answer the next question, the highest is Smith-9th, at 88' above ground.
Oddly enough, above this is the top ten busiest stations. #1 is Grand Central (34.5M), #2 is Penn Station on the 1/9,2,3 (22.6M) #3 is 34st Herald Square (22.4M). No surprise, as you meet MNCR, LIRR/NJT/Amtrak, and PATH at each of these respective stations. The odd station is listed at #9. Penn Station A,C,E with 15.1M...
Right down the hall, one block away, and 5M less people.
-Hank
What type of transportation is the MNCR. I have never heard of it.
I am heading to Philly from NYC. what is the cheapest way besides bus or gettin a ride or hitch hiking. I am not desprete, but interested to know??
If you want to go by rail, the NJ Transit's Northeast Corridor line can take you from Penn Station to Trenton and from there you can catch the R7 Regional Rail line to Philadelphia(Get off at 30th Street or Suburban Station) and from either you can catch the world-famous El(maybe you'll be lucky enough to catch a new one. Trust me, you'll know the difference between the old and new even if you've never been on either) or from Suburban the el, any of the five trolley routes or the BSS(follow the signs). It will take about 2 1/2 hours to get to Philly from NYC(a half-hour longer than AMTRAK) but it's about 20-40 dollars cheaper). Bon Voyage!
Jack is correct about taking NJT from Penn Station in Manhattan to Trenton. Here's some more on that. To travel this way, buy a ticket for "Philadelphia via SEPTA" from a NJ Transit window or machine. (Don't go to an Amtrak window-It only sells Amtrak tickets which are more expensive & not honored on NJT trains!)
Pick up a NJT Northeast Corridor timetable which will show the connection at Trenton, NJ, the end of the NJT line & the location where you must change trains. The connecting train at Trenton is operated by SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transporation Authority, which operates all transit in the Philadelphia area), & is known as the R7 Regional Rail Line.
(Usually, the SEPTA train will be on the same or a nearby platform as the NJT train you used to get to Trenton. There's usually quite a few people who will change trains in this way-especially on weekends!)
The SEPTA train may be marked "R7 Chestnut Hill East" which is a section on Philadelphia where the line terminates AFTER passing through Center City Philadelphia. That's OK. In any event, the SEPTA train will get you into Philly.
You can ride to 30th Street Station (30th & Market Sts.), Suburban Station (J.F. Kennedy Blvd. from 16th-18th Sts.) or Market East Station (10th-12th Sts. & Market St.) You can connect to SEPTA's Market-Frankford & Broad Street Lines at these stations. Enjoy your trip!
Michael S. Buglak
MNCR stands for Metro-North Commuter Railroad. The "Commuter" part has been dropped from the official name. It runs commuter service from Grand Central Terminal to upstate New York and Connecticut. There are three main lines:
1) The New Haven line, which runs to New Haven, with branches to New Canaan, Danbury and Waterbury.
2) The Harlem line, which runs through the middle of Westchester County to Dover Plains in Dutchess County (eventually to be extended about 10 miles to Wasaaic).
3) The Hudson line, which runs along the east shore of the Hudson River to Poughkeepsie.
Metro-North also has two lines west of the Hudson, running out of Hoboken to Port Jervis and Spring Valley, operated through an agreement with New Jersey Transit.
Last summer I got up early one morning and took the SIRR to the outerbridge crossing, walked across to New Jersey (easy, even though you're not supposed to)
I walked to Trenton which isn't as far from South Amboy as one might think. It took most of the day. At Trenton I got the SEPTA to 30th Street where I changed trains to go to Wilmington, DE. The total cost of the trip was under $10.00.
Walking? What's walking?:)
I'd like to know how you managed to avoid being hit by a car, or breaking an ankle crossing the Outerbridge, since it has no walkway, and tthe only 'walkable' section has a conduit on it....
And Trenton is VERY far from South Amboy...over 50 miles, at least...more than a days walk, even for an experienced hiker....What did you REALLY do on April 1?
-Hank
First of all, I climbed over the highway divider after the toll plaza to save some steps in traffic. At first there is only a narrow stoop of concrete separating the divider. It's about a foot wide or so. I hugged the edge facing the oncoming traffic which was greatly slowed by the impeeding toll. Once you are out over the water there is a service walkway separate from the highway for a good stretch. There were construction guys there, working on some kind of pipe crossing the bridge. They didn't think anything of my being there, they just waved and said hi. The last leg was the toughest but drivers were courteous enough to move over to the left to give me a little room. As for Trenton, check your map. It is just 30 miles from Perth Amboy as the crow flies (or as the Pedestiran walks!) It took just over 8 hours. I actually woke up in Brooklyn just before first light and waited for my connecton at 30th Street Station as the sun was setting. Remember that when your atlas tells you it's 101 miles from New York to Philadelphia, they mean from Geographic Center to Geographic Center. I got a huge head start by taking the Subway and the SIRR to the city limits. And again by taking the SEPTA from
the city limits in Philadelphia.
Incidentally I continued walking, and aside from a State Trooper giving me a ride across the Susquahanna, a city bus from White Marsh to downtown Baltimore, and the the commuter rail from Camden Yards to Union Station, I made it to Washington, D.C. in just 4 days walking, plus 3 nights at Holliday Inn! I doubt
I spent $20.00 on transportation.
No, it is 191st on the 1/9. Although an argument can be made for Roosevelt Island. It's pretty deep.
-Hank
The honor of the deepest station goes to 191st St.-St.Nicholas Ave. on the 1, where the tracks are 180 feet below street surface. The stations on the A line in Wash. Heights are fairly deep, too.
Although I am not questioning your answer, I was just wondering if you know why 191 St. is the deepest and not 181 St. I was under the impression that 181 St. was deepest because of its proximity to the GWB. Why, then, is 191 deeper? Just curious.
--EJM
I don't have any hard facts on the subject, but having been in the area recently and visited a couple of the stations in question, I'd say it's just because the hill is higher over that station. The other interesting thing about the 191st station is there's a one or two block long tunnel that runs over to Broadway from the station, so you don't have to climb the hill to get to it. At that point, Broadway runs in a narrow valley between the ridges the IRT and IND run under.
Also, what would the bridge have to do with the 181st station? It's the hill that counts.
And I beleive Smith/9th Streets on the F & G lines is the tallest station in the NYC subway system...with a great view of downtown Brooklyn & downtown Manhattan.
Whilst in NY I paid a visit to the subway museum. They were selling the strap hangers which appeared to have been salvaged from retired subway cars. For a souvenir I purchaed one which is now resident in my garage in England. The museum did not know from whch cars they came, does anyoune else know?
Describe it, and our experts will try our best!
My definition of a strap hanger is the object fixed to the roof of the car which standing passengers can hang on to. They are made of stainless steel and measure approx 350mm long and form the shape of an elongated triangle. There appear to be several different types but the one in my possession has quite accute angles. The rtansit museum had several of the in stock at the time of my visit on 8th March of thids year.
Is it curved or straight?
Let me enlarge on my question, and perhaps turn it into an answer. If the handle has a distinct curve, it is from an R-10 or R-12. Anything earlier would be porcelan coated rather than stainless steel. If the long legs of the triangle are straight, then I would guess it was from an R-29 or R-30. Most newer cars are still in service in large numbers. As an aside, straphangers is what we call those who use the devices, not the devices themselves. They are just called straps, dating from when they were leather and hung fron a bar along the ceiling of the car. I hope it is a curved R-10 that you bought, because they bordered on being a work of moderne art.
Gary, thanks very much for your help. I am sorry I got the terminology wrong but I did not know what to call it.
The one I tried to describe is very similar to that in a R33/36 car but obviously it does not come from one of those as those cars are still in service. But I did notice on my trip to NY that the one in the R33/36s looked very new certainly newer than the cars themselves. Perhaps they have been changed during overhauls. I am trying to get a little bit of history for an object which adorns my gargae roof and which reminds me so vividly of the super trip I had to NY and the subway.
Howdy, folks! Since everyone's favorite public transit transit entity may soon be on the picket lines let me ask a question so we have something to remember them by. I know the el gauge and the subway gauge and the trolley gauge, but if someone could tell me the gauge for: PATCO, the Route 100 and the Regional Rail lines, I'd appreciate it.
That's easy - They're all standard gauge. (Or 4'8 1/2"). The P&W (Route 100) was built as an electric railroad to compete with the Pennsylvania. They were going to Chicago, but only got to Strafford. The Norristown branch came later.
PATCO was built in the late 1960's and was connected to the Ben Franklin Bridge tracks that originally connected to the Broad Street subway.
The Regional Rail lines were inherited from the Pennsylvania and Reading Railroad suburban services.
So does that mean an LRV from the 100 could theoretically run on the BSS? Are the third rails contacted differently? I think the 100 is underunning but I'm not sure.
The Route 100 is overrunning third rail. Only the Market-Frankford line has underrunning in Phila.
Theoretically, the ABB cars could run on the Broad St subway and the Kawasakis on the NHSL.
From Excite.....without permission, but the credits remain, so it's ok (I checked)
By Patrick Connole
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - House Republican leaders ignored
loud protests from within its own ranks and a veto threat by
President Clinton to overwhelmingly approve the most expensive
transportation bill in the nation's history.
At the end of a long legislative day, the House voted 337-80 for
the six-year, $217 billion Building Efficient Surface Transportation
and Equity Act (BESTEA), reauthorizing federal funding for
highway construction and mass transit.
The House package would spend $26 billion more than
authorized in the balanced budget agreement of 1997, and raise
spending 43 percent from the previous transportation act, which
ran from 1991-97.
The House bill also surpassed a $214 billion transportation
package approved by the Senate three weeks ago. The chambers
were to meet in conference to mold the two bills into final form,
and send the resulting legislation to the White House before
current highway funding runs dry at the end of April.
I am all in favor of including Bar-Cars among the new IND trains, but I am more than a little annoyed at the stylistic approach. $4.50 for a drink and $3.50 for a beer is too much! Those are the kind of prices paid by rich LIRR or Metronorth riders, not your average subway Joe! Once again Guilliani will be catering to the rich without reguards for the working class! I believe that the mayor has finally lost touch and is heading for disaster. Just because ridership is up does not mean that there are enough riders willing to pay such outrageous prices to justify the initial investment.
First of all, I have no idea what you're talking about. I've never heard any plans for any kind of bar car on the subways.
But since you bring it up, perhaps we're better off with those prices. After all, there are certain people who we really don't want to get a hold of a 46. I don't know too many people who would ride the subway just for a drink. If somebody's that desperate, there are bars, grocery stores and bodegas in infinate numbers all over the city.
Anyway, what's the point in having bar-car services in the subway? I think that this idea is too tacky and there is absolutely no need for it. Bar car services are perfect for Metro-North and the LIRR, but an Absolut (!) waste of money for the subway.
The railroad that really should experiment with bar car service is NJ Transit, especially on the Northeast Corridor trains.
I have to agree. The Subway Bar-Car is the worst transit idea since Robert Moses suggested Sleeper cars on the Coney Island Local as compensation for discontinuing the "F" Express. It will never work unless the prices come down.
The Bar Car is just a joke.
The actual proposal is a roving coffee bar, intended to raise the glamour of the subway to that of the airlines.
As part of the M.T.A.s effort to become more customer-driven, the M.T.A. will send attractive and personable station-agents with food carts to randomly selected stations each day to offer complimentary beverage, breakfast sandwich, and newspaper with the ride. The stations will be selected by something like a lotto wheel the night before, but their location will be kept secret to prevent crowding.
Have I missed something? (Well, yes, including most pop
music since the Andrews Sisters, the entire Ford Administration, and who shot J. R. Ewing; but specifically...) Quite apart from Chris C's concerns over costs, is there seriously a proposal to incorporate bar car service in new NYC subway stock? This is so surprising that at first I suspected an April Fool's gag, though if so it's a day late. It would be unprecedented, as far as I know, in the urban transit industry; the closest thing I can think of would be Red Arrow's operation of tavern-lounge service on the _Libety Liners_ some thirty years ago, and that was more suburban rail than rapid transit. More details on the proposal would be appreciated!
Perhaps someone got taken in with an april fools joke?
-Hank
I often say that the best April Fool's jokes are pulled either a day before or a day after -- people seem so gullible then...
Does anyone have an updated list of planned changes ,for the depots in anyone of the 5 Boros
Thank you
Does anyone have DETAILED info for the planned Shutle Bus Routings
This is due to commence in the Summer
Thank you
STEVE
Please read
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/TRACKMAPS/index.html
Thank you
Chris
Another approach is that the G train after Fulton Street since it goes under or crosses the A and C lines befor Hoyt Schmerhorn is that the G train instead using the inner platforms that the G uses the outer tracks of Hoyt Schmerhorn and after the station since these outer tracks go to the transit museum, switch to the A and C lines with scissor switches since the two line as from the map looks close to one another and the G train travels the A and C line entering Jay Street staion or switches to the F line before the station and then proceed through the rutgers tunnel. If the G stays on the A and C line it could then switch to the F line after the Jay Street station or continue into Manhattan through the Cranberry Tunnel and terminate at Chambers Street. I think this is feasible since there would be less tunneling, except for maybe connecting to the A and C line before Hoyt Schmerhorn.
Between Hoyt-Schermerhorn and Fulton St./Lafayette Ave., the G tracks duck beneath the westbound A and C tracks and run alongside them before continuing along Lafayette Ave. I believe they start to descend almost immediately upon leaving Hoyt-Schermerhorn, so it may be difficult, if not impossible, to sqeeze in a set of switches between the Fulton St. express and G tracks.
As you are all no doubt sick of hearing, I think it wise to connect the Manattan Bridge tracks out of DeKalb to the Rutgers and Cranberry tunnels, and those tunnels to the lower tracks of City Hall Station and the Grand Street station. This would allow the TA to run lots of trains through existing tunnels without back-ups at stations, restore Broadway express service, and eliminate the risk of losing the rest of the bridge.
I'm told the Williamsburg bridge isn't as bad off, but it does seem to be closed a lot, so why not get rid of it too? It seems that the Eastern Division suffers from too many lines and too many stations, but inadequate destinations. Almost everyone in walking distance of the Broadway line west of Broadway junction is also in walking distance of the Fulton Line, the Canarsie line, and or the G crosstown. But the G doesn't go to Manhattan, so few use it and it has little service. The Broadway line goes to Lower Manhattan, but connections to Midtown require a long change at Essex.
Hence the need for a G loop. The track maps posted here imply that the G WEST of Hoyt could be hooked up to the F tracks into Jay Street -- as it is they are hooked up, but in the other direction. On to the north, the G could be hooked into the 53rd Street tunnel rather than run to Court Street. The G could run as a 6th Avenue local. The F could remain a local, but travel via 63rd Street. With direct access to Midtown, some of those now riding the J/Z would switch to the G.
West of Cypress Hills Street, the Jamaica Avenue Line could be extended along Jamaica Avenue direct to Broadway Junction -- with three properly spaced stations rather than the existing five. Some may have to walk a little farther, but all would ride a lot faster, especially with that curve gone. Beyond Broadway Junction, these trains could be ramped into the 14th Street Eastern Line. This line will be the first to get new signals, increasing capacity and reducing trip time. With more frequent service on what is now the L, some would switch from the Broadway line to the L. At Metropolitan Avenue and Lorimer, those traveling to Midtown would transfer to the G northbound. Those traveling to Downtown Brooklyn or Lower Manhattan would take the G southbound. Those traveling somewhere in between would take the 14th Street line. Service would be increased on all these lines, and on the C. Everyone would get more frequent and more direct service.
At that point, would the rickety old Broadway line be needed at all? It could still be run, but at least the city would be immunized against disaster if the Williamsburg bridge is lost (remember we're building a zillion dollar third water tunnel as insurance against the failure of one of the first two).
Two problems would remain. First, residents of an area roughly centered on the Kosciuszko St station, are beyond a 1/2 mile walk from the G, L, and A/C lines, and would suffer a significant loss of access. Second, the M to Ridgewood would be cut off. There is a cheap solution and an expensive one. The cheap solution would be to ramp one track of the M into the 14th St line as non-revenue connection, and run the M as a Myrtle Avenue shuttle to the L connection. The Broadway line would be torn down, but its tracks over the bridge would be converted to a bus only right of way, and all the buses that now terminate at Washington Plaza would be run into Essex St Manhattan instead.
The expensive way would be to extend the M as a subway beyond the point where it runs over the street to serve the affected areas. It could snake down to the area near Kos Street, turn onto Lafayette Street, then continue to Downtown Brooklyn by entering the existing connection to the G. That's two miles ($600 million at the LA rate), but the TA would eliminate the need to maintain and rehab three tracks of a rickety old elevated, replace 14 old stations with perhaps six new ones (with more traffic and perhaps more investment in other area stations), and provide faster and more direct service to employment centers for just about everyone in Brooklyn living north of Atlantic and east of Flatbush Ave.
Whaddya think?
It makes too much sense that the MTA would not go for it... Your idea of running the M as a subway really make sense... That's why, it'll never happen...
If only the MTA would listen to its customers...
If only the Depression hadn't hit...
A Myrtle Ave. subway was included in the IND Phase 2 project which would have included an extension from Bedford-Nostrand under Lafayette Ave. It would have linked up with one of the lines from S. 4th St. at Myrtle Ave.
Here's an idea concerning the G: move the existing scissor switches between the Fulton St. local and express tracks further down the tunnel toward Lafayette Ave. from where they are now; there's plenty of room. Install scissor switches between the Fulton St. express and the G tracks just past Hoyt-Schermerhorn where the existing aforementioned switches are now. It may be a tight fit, depending on how soon the G tracks start ramping down to clear the westbound Fulton St. tracks. Realisticlly, this is the only place where such a connection would be simple. The G could then switch over to the F track past Jay St. using the existing switch. Tying the G into the 53rd St. line, probably west of 23rd-Ely, would be sensible; you could then reroute the F to 63rd St.
I strongly agree with linking the Rutgers and Cranberry tunnels with DeKalb. The Rutgers tunnel can easily accommodate one, if not two, additional lines. The city needs to start taking a proactive approach when dealing with the long-range outlook on the Manhattan Bridge. If they wait until it falls down or is closed to rail traffic before doing anything, it'll be too late.
Speaking of bridges falling down, someone just said the TA is thinking of simply eliminating J/M/Z service for a summer while it works on the Williamsburg Bridge. Can that be true?
My boss, who rides the Z in from Kew, says more and more people in Bushwick and northern Bed-Stuy are getting on and going to work. Meanwhile, a few "yuppies" have been sighted moving into Williamsburg and Ridgewood, bringing in income to support more local businesses. But who will move in, or get a job, while the bridge is out? Economic disaster.
Which bridge is worse?
The service will be shutdown for six months to allow for a rebuilding of the tracks from Essex to Marcy. The shutdown will not occur until the new steel is on site. The work will be 24/7 to insure timely resumption of service. While I do not have info on what the service will be, I am sure they will provide alternate service including free bus over the bridge. The Willie B is not as bad as Manhattan since, according to city engineers, the bridge is really 3 bridges in one- the two vehicle sections(the separate N and S) inner/outer roadways, and the center elevated transit structure.
**opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT**
Just shutting down service to Brooklyn for six months, eh? Well I'm all in favor of public works on the crash plan -- six months of hell is better -- and cheaper -- than six years of heck. Just hope the contractor doesn't default in the middle. The TA is an easy mark for scams -- heard this directly from a TA engineer.
Its troubling, that the same day I have about six months of hell for those commuting from Brooklyn to Manhattan, NJ Gov Whitman announces a new quarter-mile connection to give more areas of NJ a one seat ride to Manhattan.
Yes, let's hope the contractor for the Willie B work is not the same as the Manhattan Bridge .....
--Mark
Yesterday I had the luck of deciding to catch an earlier train and caught a very crowded M-4 for the very first time. It was nice, although the AC everyone's so hot over didn't seem to be all that cool. But the train is aesthically nice to look at. I saw a second one going eastbound and got my hopes up that all 220 had finally come in. Am I going to be disappointed and find out they're not?
Only about 20 are in so far, and only two trains are running.
Hi guys! I'm glad to be back amongst normal people, though I left Florida just at Spring Break season. As Homer Simpson would say-D-OH! Anyway, while I was there I meant(since I was ten miles from Miami) to try and ride their metro line. I never got the opportunity. Could someone give me a little information about it, please.
Well, it starts out in Hialeah, on the northwest corner of the city. It makes a direct connection with the Tri-Rail commuter line (at a new stop built for the purpose, a few blocks from the old station where the Amtrak trains still stop). It then winds its way through a collection of really bad neighborhoods (like Overtown). It has a couple of stops on the edge of downtown, including one where it connects with the people mover that goes around downtown. It then heads southwest down US1 (Dixie Highway, I guess it's called?) and ends up at Dadeland Mall. It's completely elevated except for a short stretch at grade south of downtown. The cars are identical to the ones in Baltimore, which makes sense since apparently it was a joint order. I forget whether they use tickets or not; I think they did.
The people mover is a trip. It's a rubber-tired vehicle on flat concrete strips with a third-rail-like thing in the middle to guide and power it. The cars are completely automatic, and have huge windows in either end that you can sit in front of. Some stretches are like roller coasters, particuarly going across the Miami River to the big financial neighborhood in southern downtown. For some reason, not having guardrails scared the heck out of me, despite the fact that it's not like the puny ones on your average El are going to save the train if it derails.
Why doesn't the stretch of el a little off the Williamsburg Bridge have guardrails. And I agree. If a eight car train of 70,000 pound cars tips over, a 70 pound fence will not save it.
I was just thinking - what ELs HAVE guardrails? I can't think of any, except maybe a few short sections of El rounding curves (CTA's Loop comes to mind here).
--Mark
The Market-Frankford el in Philly has gaurdrails the whole length of each el section(let's not forget it's a subway downtown). The Patco trains do too when crossing the Ben Franklin Bridge. I've never and never will ride one to N.J. I don't like water and I don't like heights. So if I'm high over water(since the trains are on either side of the bridge right on the edge) you're asking for trouble.
The guardrails in the corners serve a different function than on straignt track don't they?? Why do you need them on straight track?
I saw that it was for emergency exits if a train was stuck between stops on an el and the train needed to be evacuated. Besides that, a gaurdrail serves no practical purpose I can see.
Riding the People Mover between the tall office buildings of Miami with no operator or conductor (and very few seats) is a treat! It runs on its own with pre-recoreded station information. A People Mover is only about 3/4 the size of a bus inside but the idea is that wherever you board it, it's a short ride to the real subway.
And yes, it is a bit daring to be in this vehicle on a cement track in the middle of the air with no guardrail. It looks odd, from both inside the car & from the ground. I know no guardrail is going stop a car from falling down if it wants to, but suppose there's a long power outage & people have to be guided out of one of these cars on foot and to the nearest station? That's really what guardrails on any elevated rail line are for...an emergency walk from a disabled train to safety.
And one thing I noticed on the entire Miami subway & people mover system...No Signs in Spanish. Even though everyone acknowledges Miami as the capital of Latin America, there's more Spanish on the NYC & Chicago subway systems. I can only assume English-speaking politicians have labored to keep Spanish out of the Miami system, which makes no sense when so much of Miami's economy & tourism is from Spanish speaking countries. I only rode the system one day last fall but I didn't even remember emergency signs in Spanish!
Red and Neck. That's my answer.
How come the E line still runs the older cars since sometimes the A and C are newer. I do see that the G train gets the old ones once in a while I guess if they have to run an extra train but the E always has the older cars. Is it because they fir mor people that they are longer a little and that the seats are horizontal so more people can fit standing. I am just curious.
Historically, the E and F lines used to get the newest equipment. Both the R-38s and slant R-40s were initially assigned to these lines, although the R-38s were used on rush hour E trains when they ran out to Brooklyn; R-1/9s plied the E line during non-rush hours until the slant R-40s came along. Many R-46 cars also wound up on these routes. I believe the borough president pressed the MTA to assign the newest cars to these lines. The R-46 cars ran on the E line until around 1991, when the R-32s took over. I'm sure there is a logical explanation for this change, but it escapes me.
Yes, I remember hearing about the late Donald Manes who was the Queens Borough President at the time managed to convince the NYCTA that all of the (754 of them) R-46 cars should be assigned to Queens. I wonder how he did that and what his excuse was. A while back the issue of why the E line uses R-32 cars was discussed. I believed Steve answered this one for us - and I believe it was due to the fact that since R-32's are 60 ft long and R-46's are 75 feet long - a 600 foot long train or R-32's (10 car) will have 8 more sets of doors on each side than a 600 ft train of R-46's (8 car). The R-32's would then have less dwell time in stations than the R-46 because it has 40 sets of doors per side versus 32 set of doors per side on R-46's.
I'm going to be in NYC this weekend. Any recommendations for goings on underground that I shouldn't miss? I thought a trip on the shuttle to Queensbridge might be nice, as I haven't ridden that piece of track before.
If you haven't tried it before, you should take the A train out to the Rockaways. The long trip over Jamaica Bay is quite an experience.
I've ridden the whole system many times over, so I probably won't get out to Far Rock this time. You are right, though -- it's one of my favorites!
You might check the papers to see what day the subway wine tasting event is going to be. Or one of the various underground lectures or poetry readings.
Have you been to the new E & J stations out in Jamaica Queens yet? The E express is a good ride along Queens Blvd. since most E trains have no cab blocking the front window and the express tracks' right of way separates from the local for several miles. The last three E stations in Queens are among the youngest with the E upstairs & the J downstairs the last two stations.
Why are there all these different rail gauges? Is it to confuse and bewilder or is it something else?
In most cases, local ordinances dictated track gauge. Generally, odd gauges were adopted for competitive reasons; i. e., if a streetcar company didn't want to have a steam or interurban railroad sharing trackage (and possibly taking away business), the easiest way to prevent this was to alter the track gauge. That's what happened in Toronto, which was, and remains, the only city to use a gauge of 4' 10.875" on its streetcar lines.
Certain Northeast cities (Baltimore, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia) all got the 5 foot plus gauge when the city councils in the cities would dictate to the first street railway applying for a franchise that the "gauge shall be that of the local wagon builders". The feeling seemed to be "if we're going to allow a private company to lay track in the public street, then the public should be able to use it". Baltimore ended up with 5' 4 1/2" from 1859 to 1963. Economic factors usually kept the gauge the same so that equipment could be reused in the switch from horse to cable to electric.
The Toronto gauge story is pretty well known. (if you don't know it, e-mail me and I'll send it to you). New Orleans' major operator was affiliated with the Wiedner-Elkins syndicate, so the guage is 5' 2 1/4" (Philadelphia money/gauge). Louisville kept the 5 foot gauge of the old South, and St. Louis was just plain wierd.
The oddball gauges were few in number. Most everybody else used good ol' standard guage.
But in Philadelphia, only the El has the 5+ gauge. All other city rail lines are "good ol' standard". Why is the El the strange one?
No they aren't! The Streetcar/LRV gauge is 5' 2 1/4". The MFSE is the same. Only the BSS and PATCO are standard. Don't believe me? Get a tape measure!!
And the 100 and the RR lines are standard. I tried the tape measure thing and got yelled at last year. Stupid people at the car barn:)
Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, may I have your attention, please. After a month of experimenting with various times(since I have too much) I have figured out the usual frequency of when SEPTA runs the M-4's. You can catch it at about 7:20am from Bridge and Pratt and about 7:50am from 69th Street in the morning and in the afternoon, you can get it from about 2:30pm to 2:50pm from 15th Street, usually on Thursday or Friday afternoons. I was just somewhat validated when I caught the M-4 for the ninth time from 15th Street at around 2:40 on Fridays from 15th Street. I just love those new trains! So, if you get the opportunity, see if I'm right!
Oh, let me say this for you foul doubters out there[:)], it was eight Thursdays in a row and the last two Fridays consecutively(I don't get to the El as much since I moved.)
After riding the LIRR in electric territory (and also the Ravenswood line in Chicago) and having seen the grade crossings, I formed a question that I've never had an opportunity to ask until now. If any of you grew up on Long Island in electric territory, tell me; did your parents ever go out of their way to tell you not to play on the railroad tracks? How many people do get fried a year, anyway? I'm surprised it isn't something you hear about, particularly with kids.
I'm shocked it's so easy to happen. But I can tell you stories of non-Septa employees running across el tracks to save time changing from eastbound to westbound with varying degrees of success. But of course, it's the el. You'd only be in danger if a train was coming and you ducked under the platform. If you ask me, that's a dumb place to put a third rail.
Well, since I was in Diesel land, it wasn't an issue, although I knew damm well NOT to mess around with the third rail anyway. I don't know how often people get fried*, but I do recall last September or so, some girl upstate got a little bit too close to the third rail....
Of course this was "obviously" Metro-North's fault, not the fault of the dad who let his daughter cross the tracks knowing damm well that rail was there.
My only question to these people: would you let your kids play in an electrical substation??
*Interesting aside: once we had to call a Dishwasher repairman - in the course of talking, we got on the subject, and he showed me a BIG scar remaining from childhood from contact with the rail.
Other thing - the LIRR used to run that rail EVERYWHERE. Even under of in front of *low level* platforms.
I grew-up in Diesel land too, and like you I knew damn well to stay away from tracks. I also knew to stay away from the third-rail. Between '90 and '92 I worked in Mid-town and commuted from Ronkonkoma which is electric. At the time there was only one center platform and the only way to get to it was by using the single overpass. Back then, Ronkonkoma had some 3500 parking spaces (now it has close to 5000), so people had to walk a great deal to catch the later trains. Some of those who were running a little late used to walk through a hole in the fence and walk down the track to the platform and then use the track access ladder to get onto the platform. I thought this was incredibly stupid since one slip could be deadly. Now that there are two outer platforms and two overpasses, and the outer platforms have access to the parking lots all along its length, this is no longer an issue.
Funny you should mention the Ravenswood (Brown) line in that context. A few years ago, in the early 1990's, a man died on the right-of-way of the Brown Line of electrocution. He was very intoxicated at the time he died, and his trousers and underwear were around his ankles when he was found. It is fairly clear that he was going to urinate and was electrocuted, but the Medical Examiner would not speculate as to whether he touched the third rail with his foot or leg or whether the electric charge flowed up the urine stream.
The widow of the deceased sued the CTA, and won at the trial level. The judgment was reversed in the Appellate Court, and I can't recall what the Supreme Court did with the case, though I'm pretty sure they agreed to hear it.
One main argument was that the ROW was marked DO NOT ENTER and DANGER and all of that, but no warning, much less a warning in other than English, that the danger consisted of electricity as well as moving trains, and the deceased was a recent Korean immigrant who might not fully comprehend the concept of an electric railway.
The other argument, which many think was the one that convinced the jury, was that there should be gates across the right of way that open when trains pass but otherwise keep persons from entering the ROW. CTA argued that such gates would be prohibitively expensive, but the widow countered that there are just such gates at the two grade crossings of the Purple Line in Wilmette. Wilmette is a tony white-collar suburb, while the area where the Brown Line runs on the surface is mostly immigrant blue-collar. The jury probably saw the CTA's decision as valuing lives in Wilmette over lives in, for instance, Albany Park, and thought more of a child trespassing onto the ROW than a drunk adult.
The case is Jae Boon Lee v. Chicago Transit Authority, if anyone wants to chase it down.
Yeah, having ridden both the Brown and Purple lines, I always was kind of curious why one had gates and the other didn't. Still not sure the widow should have won because of that, but anyway. . .
I don't think so, either. I think the jury's decision was ultimately wrong, but at least it was logical and understandable, as opposed to the press portrayal as "Million dollar payout for drunk man on CTA tracks". Which would be strictly true but leaving out many details -- my main problem with the media is not that it lies, because it rarely lies in the sense of stating untrue things, but that it leaves out details that complicate the portrayal of simple, good vs. evil, black and white stories.
I grew up in Ridgewood, Queens near the Bay Ridge Branch (freight only) of the LIRR in the 50's and 60'[s. Two kids I knew, in separate incidents, were electrocuted when playing on top of boxcars. One lost a leg; the other both an arm and a leg. You can be sure that Mom always said "Don't play by the railroad tracks!".
Based on what I see daily, I don't think the parents can be trusted to teach their kids much. I commute daily on the Ronkonkoma Branch. Daily on my east-bound commute I am amazed how many people get off at the front of the train and run to cross the tracks in front of the train. This is especially true in Bethpage and Deer Park. Just today, some rocket scientist, jogging on New Highway, ran in front of the train I was riding (60 MPH+). This is not the exception to the rule so what do you expect these people to teach their kids. Hopefully the kids are born with more sense than the parents.
Some of the worst examples of commuter idiocy occur right at Ronkonkoma Station. For those not familiar with the station, it has two tracks with two side platforms and an island platform. There are two elevated crossovers, one located at the far west end of the platforms and one near the middle. Given this arrangement, people riding in the head cars out of Penn Station have to walk back half a trainlength in order to cross over.
Most days I get the 5:22 or 5:23 out of Penn Station to connect to the Greenport shuttle at Ronkonkoma. As I'm waiting on the island platform at Ronkonkoma, the 5:41 express pulls in on the south track. Invariably, a few people walk right across the tracks at the east end of the platform - not at an official crossing - to get to the parking area on the north side of the station. They're willing to do something illegal and dangerous just to save a few minutes' walk.
The trouble is few people ever see the results of what happens when man (or woman) meet the business end of a moving train. It ain't pretty. I've seen it too many times. People crushed to death, cut in half, even cut in half and electrocuted. Sometimes they are alive until the train is moved off of them. Inevitably, they die too. When I took 'driver's Ed.' back in the 60s, they showed a movie called "Unsafe at Any Speed", with some graphic pictures of auto accidents. Perhaps the MTA should put together a similar movie and distribute it to the Junior High Schools and make it compulsary for all students and their parents to watch.
I grew up along the Long Beach branch (electric country). Yes, my parents repeatedly warned me about playing around the tracks and were thorough in that they brought up the dangers of both the trains and of the third rail. And, of course, we played on the tracks anyway.
I never heard of any electrocutions. Rather, the most frequent incidents were daily commuters crossing behind their stopped train at the Oceanside station and being hit by an express coming in the opposite direction. The platform at Oceanside is an 8-car platform that uses every inch of space between the two cross streets, so the gates stay down when the train has passed the first crossing and is still in the station.
The LIRR went as far as adding sirens to the regular crossing gate signals (the sirens sound when the gates are down for trains on both tracks), but I'm not sure that this fully alleviated the problem. The last time I was out there, I noticed that fencing had been erected in such a way that it was more difficult to get around the crossing gates.
Today I was walking down 16th Street West after taking the (A) Train; Even though I know it's April 1998, I saw this brown rusty EL structure on
10th Avenue. What Is that that I saw? What are they doing with it?
That is part of the old New York Central (later Conrail) freight line. As has been discussed here previously, it actually had some service up until the time when the Javits Center was built. During the "temporary" disruption of service that occurred during this construction, the line permanently lost its last remaining customers, so it has been unused ever since.
As for what "they" are doing with it, the unfortunate answer at the moment seems to be "nothing".
When was the Javits Center built? I had thought that it was built during the '80's, whereas I thought the Central's line through Riverside Park was closed during the '70's. Or did they serve those customers via carfloat?
Apparently some (very limited) service remained on the west side freight line until about 1980, when construction on the Javits Center began. See the Usenet archives on this site for more info - that's where I got my information from.
In the 1980s, Conrail wanted to restart the High Line for waste transfer -- moving recycable paper out of the city on one train per night. Chelsea activists are desperate to see the line torn down, so it can never be used again.
I thought the structure was purchased by a railfan (organization) with the hope of using it for light rail ....
--Mark
Not exactly a subway question but maybe someone will know. Until the 70's I lived in NYC and used to take the 5, Lexington Ave Thru express in the Bronx. Southbound approaching the tunnel portal near 149th St the El passed over a double tracked New York Central freight line. I Remember the line was srewn with trash and there was a tunnel in the distance. Eventually the Right-of-Way was cleaned up, single tracked, and some slight clearance improvements made to the tunnel. About that time a line with improved clearances was proposed between the Hudson division and Oak Point Yard in the Bronx. Construction on a line that hugged the Bronx shore started and then stopped. Has this route been completed?
The freight route along the Harlem River is called the Oak Point Connector. It has been completed but isn't in use, due to some political squabbling about its access to the Oak Point Yard.
The Oak Point connection is completed, accept for a couple of tracks connecting directly into the yard. Unfortunately, it was designed 20 years ago as a Trailer on Flat Car route, then susequently the freignt world moved on to double stacked containers. The bridges south of Tarrytown are too low for such containers. Zillions were spent to allow double-stacked containers as far as the GM Fischer Body plant in Tarrytown. Then GM closed the plant.
[The Oak Point connection is completed, accept for a couple of tracks connecting directly into the yard. Unfortunately, it was designed 20 years ago as a Trailer on Flat Car route, then susequently the freignt world moved on to double stacked containers. The bridges south of Tarrytown are too low for such containers. Zillions were spent to allow double-stacked containers as far as the GM Fischer Body plant in Tarrytown. Then GM closed the plant.]
Typical bureaucratic thinking! Not that it really matters in the long run, since there are plenty of double-stack facilities in the area ... yes, those facilities are in New Jersey, but I reject the New York/New Jersey distinction, it's all part of the same metropolitan area.
I believe that you are talking about the NYC Port Morris Division/
Branch. It Terminated south of the New Haven Oak Point car float yards.
I have pix from the early 60's showing stored/out-of-service New Haven
electric locomotives. I cant remember if I actually walked on the NYC
Port Morris ROW or at the terminal.
It would be interesting if that line could be used to hook up the former
NYC Harlem Div with the NYNH&H Harlem River (shore) Line.
I'm afraid that the roadbed on that (now single-track) line is covered with debris again. Trains can undoubtedly get through, but it certainly looks ugly. The exposed portion of the tracks run adjacent to a ballfield, I guess people can't resist the temptation to use the trackbed as a garbage can. Sad, but I guess they need to build high fences which would block all ability to do this. Some such fences do exist, I think near around a pedestrian overpass which crosses the tracks from the ballfield, but not where the tracks cross under a regular street. Across from the ballfield is a soon-to-open youth detention center, which already has plenty of security fences (though some are hidden behind brick walls), so a couple of more fences in the area won't exactly be a scar on the neighborhood.
Anyway, the Hagstrom maps show that line branching off from the Harlem line just north of the Melrose "station" and heading southeast to the Oak Point yards, partly in tunnel and partly exposed. But the maps show no connection with the Amtrak/Conrail tracks to the Hell Gate Bridge. I'm sure there must be one, what would be the point otherwise? Or could it be that no connection was permitted because of competition between the railroads? In the days before the Penn Central merger, were the tracks indeed kept unconnected, with each railroad transferring cars onto lighters, or transferring goods onto trucks, at the yard?
If this is the case, a connection would presumably have been built in 1968, soon after the merger, right?
[Anyway, the Hagstrom maps show that line branching off from the Harlem line just north of the Melrose "station" and heading southeast to the Oak Point yards, partly in tunnel and partly exposed. But the maps show no connection with the Amtrak/Conrail tracks to the Hell Gate Bridge. I'm sure there must be one, what would be the point otherwise?]
I believe this line is in regular use, as the main freight route to Long Island over the Hell Gate Bridge.
No, there is no direct connection.
This was a carfloat terminal line just like the New Haven.
The line dead-ends at the water.
Ther may be an intermediate tema track between the two yards.
The NYC Port Morris Line goes under the NH Harlem line at a right angle.
Folks‹
Did my weekly check of the subway service disruptions on the MTA web site Friday night and noticed a service change.
Starting Monday, they're extending the 21st Shuttle to "34th Street/6th Avenue" (quoting the MTA here) from 6 am-9 pm.
Curiosity got the best of me...so I checked the schedules. And what happened is exactly what I thought was going to happen.
Look carefully at the schedule. Note the stops...
21st/Queensbridge
Roosevelt Island
Lexington Avenue
57th Street/7th Avenue
42nd Street/Times Square
34th Street/6th Avenue
Now that's a novel bit of travel if I ever saw it! Train goes forward and backwards several times, crashes through a wall onto a different line, then reverses the route... ;-)
Seriously, though, we know that what the MTA is trying to say is that the shuttle will run to 34th Street AND BROADWAY and that youl will have to transfer upstairs to the Q line for service to 57th Street/6th Avenue.
I can understand what the MTA is doing. It wants to cut out a transfer for weekday riders. Now, those from Queensbridge/Roosevelt Island will have to make one transfer instead of two. But why not just say so, instead of making it appear that the train will operate on Sixth Avenue?
I wonder if any poor schlep will fall for it...
BTW, the service will still run at 20 minute intervals. The trains will probably cross paths between Times Square and 57th Street. And at 34th Street, the trains WILL arrive and depart from the downtown express track. The switch between the express tracks north of 34th Street allows only that move.
Michael
I don't think the MTA is trying to fool anyone. Anyone who took the shuttle, made the transfer to the N/R, then to the B, D, Q, or F trains at Herld Square would appreciate the extension of service, beacause it cuts out the N/R ride for them. I doubt riders were fooled by the MTA's extension of service to "34th Street/6th Avenue" into thinking that services were via the 6th avenue line, since they have already been taking the shuttle to the BROADWAY line.
JC
You are right, the shuttle will be a lot more convenient now that it runs to Herald Square ... unfortunately, riders will still have to struggle with the 20-minute headways!
The station at 34th Street on the N/R *is* at 6th ave- Herald Square is where Broadway crosses Sixth Ave. I checked the service notice and the next paragraph *does* state that the shuttle will use the downtown N/R Platform. The reference to 57th st and 6th ave is to advise that when the B train stops running for the night that station will be closed.(Why keep a station open when there are no trains).
(Yes, I am a NYCT employee and this adjustment in weekday service from 6am-9pm shows that NYCT is trying to meet the needs of you- our customers.)
A little common sense never hurts.
Getting back to the question of whether the shuttle will use the local or express track, it would only make sense to use the express track, since it is directly tied to 63rd St. And, heck, you even get to skip 49th St.
For those of us who are up on Sunday April 5 in the wee hours of this day, at 12:40 a.m. the movie Nighthawks is on channel 22 tbs is now on.
I caught a train on a El at the 174 street station. The next subway station will come up later on in the picture.
Charlie Muller
It looked like the 3rd Avenue El in the Bronx but I am not sure. I think the movie was made after the El was torn down.
Nighthawks came out in 1981; the 3rd Ave el in the Bronx came down in 1973. That elevated line at the beginning of the movie is probably the 2/5 if it's 174th St.
The subway sequence starts in the 63rd St. tunnel, which was still under construction, and winds up on the unused outer tracks at Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts. They also pulled the R-1/9s out of mothballs for the sequence; it's a treat for those of us who remember them. You may have noticed that the station signs all say "57th St" at first, then, as Stallone and Billy Dee Williams leave the train at the "next stop", the signs now say "42nd St". Gee, they forgot all about 47-50th Sts! At least the train is correctly marked as a B train.
My question regarding the upper level station at Roosevelt/Jackson Heights has to do with the descrpitions on the NYCSUBWAY site. From all of the descriptions it sounds like if this connection was ever finished the trains coming from the extension would leave the mainline east of the Roosevelt Avenue Station and then make a stop at this "empty" station on the upper level. Why would the IND have the trains stop twice at the same station? Or are the descriptions on the site incorrect and that the connection with the mainline would be west of rather than east of the station? Also while we're on the Queens Blvd. Line subject, whatever happened to the 1970's plan to extend service from 71st Avenue via the Kew Loop (Jamacia Yard Entrance) and then under Jewel Avenue?
Not really sure about the Roosevelt IND station, but I bet you one of two things, or a combination of the both, stopped the Jewel Ave. Line you talk about.
1) Lack of money. 2) NIMBYISM
JC
Where/how can I see this so called empty station? I'm coming back to NY for a short spell and do plan on traveling in the subway.
I got a tour of it once from the Transit Museum. You can see it from the end of the platform in Roosevelt Avenue. There's a gate that leads to it, I'm not sure where it is in the station, but I think it's kept locked.
I don't exactly remember the alignment of the station, but I know that if you proceed up part of the mezzanine (outside of the fare-paid area, I believe), it ramps up. At the top of this ramp, straight ahead of you, appears to be a long corridor with NYCT offices on the right. This was the beginning of the platform. It may be closed off by a gate; if it isn't and you see one of the offices open, I'd ask to take a quick peek. If you can, follow this corridor all the way back and you'll see part of the island platform (full of stuff), the trackways and the tiled walls. Standard IND type station. I couldn't tell if there were any hanging signs on the platform the last time I was there.
Note that this was not indended to be the configuration of the station; it became this way when it was realized that the Roosevelt Ave line would not be built.
--Mark
The never-used station at Roosevelt Ave. was supposed to be the terminus of a crosstown line which would have extended to, I believe, Rockaway Beach. Provision was made to tie this line into the Queens line, in addition to the unused station. The trackways for this connection are still in place and are visible from the local tracks at the eastern end of Roosevelt Ave., if I'm not mistaken. One line would have branched off the Queens line; the other would have terminated at the unused station. There is an excellent write-up about this and other never-built lines of the IND Phase 2 system elsewhere in this website.
Regarding Roosevelt Ave, the never-used station at Roosevelt Ave. was supposed to be the terminal of a line to the Rockaways. Planned as part of the IND second system, it was designed to provide through service to the Rockaways from midtown, and also to serve the neighborhoods of Maspeth and Ridgewood. It would have curved southeasterly between 78th and 79th Sts. to Queens Blvd., then along the LIRR ROW into Garfield Avenue to 65th Place, then along 65th Place to Fresh Pond Road, and then along Fresh Pond Road. The line would be 2 tracks, and would be subway to 45th Avenue, then elevated to Fresh Pond Road, then subway again to Central Avenue. Provision for this connection was made while the Roosevelt Ave station was beign built. A fully completed 2 track station, including tiled walls and an island platform, was completed, and the trackways extend from this platform approximately 750 feet. The trackway has a scissors crossover just outside the station and this level starts to veer to the south over the eastbound (71Av) express and local tracks before ending abruptly. The area is currently being used by NYCT for storage.
More information on the IND Second System (1929) proposal
--Mark
Metro North cars are the most quiet cars in the whole system. I think that they are the size of the B.M.T cars. If the M.T.A was smart they were put them on the B.M.T and I.N.D lines if they are bigger than the normal cars then cut them and you got the M-3 model on the I.N.D and B.M.T lines
Well, the M-3 is a bit longer I think.
Also, they SUCK power.
They can't accelerate for shit.
And they have two set of doors on each side instead of four.
They bounce.
They're heavier.
And I doubt they'd hold up as well.
And they have the same damm whinning HVAC system as all the other M-series trains do.
In other words, it's not a great idea...
Sorry but your idea is very simplistic. First of all, the M-3 was not designed for subway type service. The door arrangement does not lend itself to frequent stops and crush loads. Neither does the seating. The accelleration and braking are designed for commuter rail service. The car-body envelope would likely be too large for the standard IND/BMT tunnel. Finally, if that's not enough, consider the following: M-3s are too fast, too heavy and too electricity hungry for use on the subways. As for them being quieter, perhaps if they ran on concrete roadbed instead of ballast, they wouldn't be.
Actually, if you want to hear them on concrete, take the Flatbush Ave Line.
It ain't quiet
Starting tomorrow, the 63rd St Shuttle will be extended to 34th St & Broadway. This article was in today's Metro Section of the New York Times on p.37.
Will it be running on the local or express track?
Bob Sklar
Yes, what is the deal with that express track on the N/R. On the track map I have, it connects with the lines over the Manhattan Bridge(I'm sorry I mentioned that). What was that used for? And would somebody tell me what all this 63rd Street tunnel stuff is! I hate to say it but I don't know!
The express tracks of the BMT Broadway Line (N train) do indeed connect to the Manhattan Bridge south side. Your track map is correct. Circa 1986 BC (Before Construction), the N train ran express from 57th St/7th Avenue to Canal Street, then would proceed over the Manhattan Bridge, skip DeKalb Ave and stop at Pacific St. Because the Manhattan Bridge south side has been under construction for so long, it appears as if these tracks have been abandoned; for all practical purposes, they could be; construction is supposed to end in 2004 sometime. Don't hold your breath.
The 63rd St tunnel was known as the "tunnel to nowhere"; started in the early 70s, construction took nearly 20 years to complete a two level tunnel under the East River at 63rd ST, connecting Manhattan, Roosevelt Island and 21st - Queensbridge with a new subway line. This line has grander plans; it was supposed to become a super-express line through Queens; it didn't happen because of the city's fiscal crisis in the '70s. Yet somehow this construction went on. It became called the "tunnel to nowhere" because, at 21st/Queesnbridge, it didn't connect to anything, and seemed to go "nowhere", even though the IND Queens Blvd line was only 1500 or so feet away. Construction started a few years ago to connect this line with the IND Queens Blvd line, to alleviate congestion on that line (the busiest during rush hours); opening plans are in 2002 or 2003, I think.
The lower level of the 63rd St tunnel, also connecting to nothing, is a two track tunnel for eventual use by the LIRR into Grand Central terminal. Talk arises now and then on finishing this connection up, but that's all it usually is - just talk. Wonder what kinda shape this lower level is ....
--Mark
Last I heard this lower level is flooded and nothing has ever been done about it. Presumably it does not already connect to the railroad tunnels under Park Av.
Bob Sklar
The special Q shuttle will be extended weekdays 6am to 9pm to start/terminate at 34st Station N/R line (Broadway). Trains leaving 34th St will depart from the downtown Express track and switch to the uptown express track upon leaving 34th Street.
WAY TO GO TA!!!! You listened to someone THANK YOU, taking three trains where I used to take one was a PAIN, now it's down to a manageable TWO!!!
The shuttle uses the downtown express track between 6am-9pm Monday- Friday. AT other times it ends at 57th/7th-also Downtown Platform. The NYCT has posted signs at these stations advising of the shuttle changes and at Timse Square BMT there is a new electronic sign advising of the shuttle.
What does this longer shuttle line mean to the pledge that the Queensbridge/63 St. Tunnel will have 20 minute headways, 24 hours a day. Will there now be two shuttle trains assigned to the line to maintain the 20 minute headway? Since only one track is in use between 57 St./7 Av. and Queensbridge, will a Northbound train have to idle at 57 St. waiting for the Southbound shuttle to get off the track?
I doubt a train can get from Queensbridge to 34 St. and be ready for the return trip all in 10 minutes.
Sure it can... If the MTA is smart, the train would run express from 34th Street to 57th Street, thus only adding about 5 minutes to the train ride. This would actually be a feasible idea...
Since the Broadway express tracks lead directly to the 63rd St. line, common sense would dictate that the shuttle run express from 34th St. to 57th St. To have the shuttle run local just so it could stop at 49th St. would be just plain stupid because of maneuvering logistics. The train would have to be switched, switched, and reswitched before it even got to 57th St., causing further delays.
Of course, the government has been legislating common sense out of existence, or trying to anyway....
I'd always heard that 25 trains per hour was the maximum down a length of subway track. That's what TA people told me, and what I'd always read in the newspaper. When I ride in through the Montigue Tunnel, which has 25 train scheduled, the train I'm on is always right on the heels of the one in front at Dekalb, Lawrence and Boro Hall, though not in the tunnel or beyond.
According to the MTA website, however, 18 F trains and 12 E trains are scheduled in the morning peak hour on the Queens line. That's 30.
What is the maximum? And what makes it the maximum -- the back-up in the staitions or the safe following distance between trains? What are the consequences as one approaches the maximum? I just want to see if my assumptions are correct.
My understanding is that 120-180 second headways are the norm for most lines. The Queens line might have a higher capacity for a couple of reasons, no switching of tracks west of 71st Avenue, only five stops between Forest Hills and Lexington Avenue and with the exception of a couple of curves, it is mainly a straigtaway. Also this explains why E trains are composed of R-38 Silverliner Stock which has more doors and thus facilitates faster loading at Roosevelt Avenue where boarding delays can be commonplace.
The R-32s on the E line were called "Brightliners" when they first entered service in September of 1964.
SilverLiners? I think those are the nicknames of the SEPTA commuter rail fleet.
The Budd R32s received the nickname BrightLiners because they were the first major order (600 cars) of stainless steel subway cars, and when compared to the low alloy high tensile (LAHT) cars running at the time, they were very, well, bright!
--Mark
SilverLiners? I think those are the nicknames of the SEPTA commuter rail fleet.
The Budd R32s received the nickname BrightLiners because they were the first major order (600 cars) of stainless steel subway cars, and when compared to the low alloy high tensile steel (LAHT) cars running at the time, they were very, well, bright!
--Mark
I always thought that the Lexington Avenue Line had combined 4 & 5 line headway of 90 seconds at 5:00 PM in midtown Manhattan. Also the 7 combined local and express have a combined headway of 90 seconds at peak times. I don't know if they sustain that for a full hour. But this may have changed in recent years because of safety concerns. BTW, 90 seconds headway means 40 trains per hour in one direction.
I always thought it was 30 trains an hour max...Also heard that in the past years ago on the Flushing (7) line they use to run more, discharge at Times Square, closeup with a new operator at the Flushing end (no pax) and keyby most signals back to Flushing.
Hello,
Another page hosted on the same server as www.nycsubway.org got written up in Ziff-Davis/Yahoo technology news this morning and has been receiving approx. 10,000 hits an hour. There's not much we can do to stop the flood of hits until their page gets cycled out of the headlines and the people stop clicking over to us. SubTalk will be especially affected because its pages are entirely generated from programs rather than static HTML files.
Sorry for the inconvenience...
-Dave
Yeah but Dave, You didn't make PA announcements during the service interruption. I'm sure you'll be hearing from Sammy about this one.
chuckle, chuckle!
The CTA announced that they are cutting overnight service on the Green, Purple and Douglas branch of the Blue Line. The Douglas branch is also losing all weekend service. Numerous bus route changes/cuts were also made. Causes cited were decreasing ridership and the need to cut costs. I wonder if this isn't the begining of the end for the Douglas branch. Both it and the Ravenswood need rehab and if there is only money for one the Brown line wins
given its ridership and demographics.
In 1990 the Americans with Disabilites Act (ADA) was passed. One of the benefits of the ADA is that the handicapped must have access to all public facilities. My question is: if the TA is providing bus service which can accomodate the handicapped, is it still required to provide subway access for the handicapped? If so, expensive elevators will have to be built in every station. Nothing for nothing, but if the TA provides disabled riders with bus service, I do not see why it would have to provide them with subway service. The current situation of a small handful of subway stations having wheeelchair access is stupid and the TA should stop. Please tell me that the subways are ADA exempt.
No, the subways are not exempt! Slowly (very slowly) the TA will install elevators at all stations.
I doubt this very much.
What is the basis for your comment?
Thus far, however, almost all of the handicapped stations are in the central business district. If you're handicapped, and seek to live in a neighborhood with an accessible station, no luck. Its important to come up with neighborhoods where the handicapped may live.
Elevators would have been nice a few years ago when I was pushing a stroller. Perhaps there will be one at Prospect Park 15th before I start using a cane.
I'm a little sad that handicapped people still have to plead and beg for even the simplest thing sometimes. I lost the use of my legs 4 years ago, and though I'm only 17, I know how hard life can be when you're stuck in some dumb chair. I've actually been on a subway once in two years. I really miss that. But until folks like the TA recognize that handicapped people have the right to access ALL public facilities, I guess I'll have to settle for the bus. Either that or I guess "It's a nice day to roll to Yankee Stadium."
Let me quote from "The Americans with Disabilities Act" Questions and Answers
(Publication EEOC - BK - 15)
Page 23 "Businesses are not required to retrofit their facilities to install elevators unless such installation is readilly achievable, which is unlikely in most cases."
and on page 27 "The Dept. of Transportation has issued regulations mandating accessible public transit vehicles and facilities. The regulations include requirements that all new fixed-route, public transit buses be accessible and that supplimentary paratransit services be provided for those individuals with disabilities who cannot used fiwed-route bus service. "
I hope that sheds some light on the issue. The MTA and the NYCT are going beyond what the law would seem to require. Other info is available from the Federal Transit Administration at 202 366-9306 (Voice) or 202 366-2979 (TDD)
Thank you, your quoting from the EEOC was very helpful.
The Page 23 quote refers to BUSINESSES, not public facilities, such as a subway. This means if you own a two story office building that was built without an elevator, you don't have to add an elevator (unless you do significiant renovations), but this doesn't apply to public subways. The Page 27 quote seems to be refering to buses, not rail, so that doesn't apply either. Besides, according to a bus driver friend of mine, newer rules have since been instituted requiring ALL public bus routes to be handicaped-accessable. A transit agency he used to work for (in Davis, CA) used to use old British red double decker buses, but they had to stop a few years back because they weren't accessable and there was no way to add accessability. My guess is they will EVENTUALLY have to add elevators to all stations, but who knows by when. (I also wouldn't be suprised if eventually they might close a few stations with low patronage because they don't feel like spending the money to add an elevator.) However, I don't think we have determined for certain whether or they will need to add elevators.
Your guess is wrong. The ADA does not require an elevator at every station, and there would be no need to shut down low-patronage stations to avoid the cost of installing one. The law requires, for both commuter rail and rapid transit, accessibility at KEY stations (and that only one car per train has to be accessible). I don't recall how or even if that term is defined, but it clearly allows the transit authority to not change every station and lets off the hook relatively sparsely-used stations.
I'll give credit where it is due. According to the Economist magazine, the 1990 ADA led to an explosion of litigation, with most claiming "back injuries" and "emotional distress" and wanting reasonable accomodations, like not being asked to work. Often, businesses capitulated based on the (short run, single case) calculus that it was cheaper to settle than fight. BUT, the magazine reported that 60 percent of all handicapped discrimination cases are thrown out, that only 16 percent are successful, and most of those are scaled back on appeal. It claimed that the courts are scaling back the more extreme interpretations.
ON THE OTHER HAND, even when the defendent wins, it loses -- time, effort, and legal bills. The defendent cannot win. And the plaintiff cannot lose. The plaintiff only loses its own time and effort. If the plaintiff is on a contigency fee basis, and the lawyer does not have better cases to handle (due to the glut of lawywers), why not file a suit and try to get a company to settle for less than the legal fees it would have to pay just to get the case dismissed?
Perhaps if the loser at least paid the legal fees if the case was thrown out, the number of lawsuits would decline.
The ADA requires that accommodations be made except where modifications to existing facilities would exceed reasonable costs. The TA has an ongoing program to modifying stations to provide handicap access. Braille signs and tactile strips are becoming comon-place in stations. In addition, the MTA is providing Para-transit for handicapped (physically challanged) individuals. In addition, the TA has a course for supervisors and managers on ADA Compliance. Finally, the TA held panel discussions with handicapped transit users, on the design of the R-142s and R-143s.
As Steve mentioned, with the size and complexity of the infastructure of NCYT you can imagine the amount of time and money it will take to complete the enitre system. It took 13 years just to make the entire bus fleet 100% accessible. Also it requires a change in employee behavior to the disabled including classes and procedures. In the busses ADA law includes making all annoucments, kneeling the bus when its not curbed and priority attention the disabled whether you can tell thier disability or not.
NYCT *does* have plans to add more accessible stations. It takes time and money to add elevators. The usual plan is to add the elevators when the station is being renovated. AT the present elevators are planned for:
Penn Station (all lines and platforms), Times Square(BMT,IRT), Whitehall(BMT) 161/ Yankee Stadium (IND, IRT)among other stations.
The project is being complicated by the crowded real estate in NYC. THe city just used eminent domain to acquire part of a Bank and Sbarro's for elevatorsd at Penn Station IRT which needs at least 3 elevators.
Further complcating the issue is stations with multiple levels such as 14th street sixth Avenue. NYCT is aware of the need for access and is working on the problem.
**opinions expressed are my own and not those of NYCT or MTA***
When I come to NY to visit my step-daughter we are limited in our transit AND other options as she ROLLS . I would love to take her to the transit museum--not a quick trip from 30th & 2nd in Man by BUS. You are not MERELY conveniencing the chair rider. Oh and BTW having RORO access to transit is also better for luggage on wheels laundry, shopping etc. Yes its expensive and clearly the major stations first but all will be more useful to ALL the citizenry when fixed.
The entrance to the musuem, and platform level has an elevator. The entrance is at Court and Schermerhorn Street. Just notify someone downstairs and they'll activate the lift. A second lift is available from mezzanine to platform level.
As an NYCT employee, I can assure you that NYCT is trying to make the subway more accessible to people with disabilities. At present a new feature called
"Auto gate" is being installed at accessible stations to allow people with mobility impairements, who use a reduced fare metrocard to enter the system without asking the agent to open the gate.
If you will call 718-330-1234 and ask for a reduced fare metrocard application, they'll be glad to send it to you.
Unfortunately, adding elevators does cost in time and money and the complexity of the system further complicates the issue. I do not know if Canal Street is on the list, but if it is it would need: 2 elevators for N/R, two for the 6, two for the J, and at least two to the street.
**opinions expressed are my own and not those of NYCT or MTA ***
How many stations are wheel-chair accessible? In my hometown of Philadelphia, I know only of 69th Street Terminal having it.
The new (rehabbed) Frankford El Stations are ADA Compliant, with electronic signs, strobe fire alarms, electronic message centers (not sure if ADA requirement, but they are there) Handicapped entrances/turnstiles, etc.
Of course, to be totally ADA accessible, you need elevators, and not all of the El stations will have them. Only the "key" stations will. These will include Girard, Allegheny, Erie-Torresdale, Margaret-Orthodox, and Frankford Terminal.
Suprisingly, on the Broad St subway, Erie is NOT considered a key station. Go figure on that one!
Here in Denver, all light rail stations and vehicles are handicapped accessible.
This is a follow-up to my earlier post. I have an official Guide as published by NYCT when Kiepper was Presaident, listing "54 key stations" to be accessible by 2010 and the expectation that state law will require a "substantial incrase
The list of future stations and stations under construction as of 8/94:
Manhattan:
34th ST IRT, IND 8th Ave,Broad St (J), Union Square,59th (IRT,IND), Times Square (IRT [all], BMT),W4 (IND),168 (IND), Chambers (1/2/3/9)
Brooklyn:
Pacific, Atlantic (BMT Brighton), Church (F),Jay (Fulton St Line), Marcy (J),
Utica (2/3/4),Euclid(IND),95th st (R),DeKalb(D/Q/B/M/N/R)
Bronx:
161(4/c/D),Hunts Point(6), Pelham Pkwy(2),Fordham Rd (4),231 (2)
Queens:
Main Street(7),74th/Roosevelt(7/E/F/G/R),179,71/Continental,Union Tpke.
the ADA office at NYCT is located at:
Office of ADA Compliance
370 Jay Street-9th FGloor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Telephone number for accessible station info is 1-800-734-6772 and
1-718-596-8273 TTY/TDD
The following section is personal opinion only: I have noticed many other stations where it appears that elevators are being installed such as 137 and Broadway(1/9). Please be patient- NYCT wants to be of service to all our customers, including those with disabilities.
Reading your responses, I feel better about the TA's plans; but I'm still concerned about the prohibitive cost and safety issues. Where is the money coming from? Is the federal government funding ADA projects?
I don't mean to be an asshole, but I have to bring-up the subway culture and how it will deal with wheelchairs on subway trains and platforms. As we all know (all too well) when inconsiderate people are in a rush they will hockey check, push, shove, and do whatever it takes to make the next train or rush out of the station to work or wherever. We (those of us who are considerate on the subways) have had little luck improving the behavior of theese boorish riders, so what will happen when they encounter someone in a wheelchair on a train or pedestrian cooridor that isn't moving to the aggressor's liking? Maybe I'm being way to pessimistic and cynical, but I see many disasterous encounters ahead.
If brining subway stations up to ADA code is not taking funding away from other TA projects and the TA will do whatever it takes to make the new elevators safe, then I'm in favor of the change. It would be nice if we could all ride together nicely; but, again, I see the same people that spit on the tracks and shove people in the corridors and stand in the doorway for no reason continuing to make life difficult for all of us, but especially those in wheelchairs.
I also want to appologize to those I may have offended, especially those in wheelchairs. Re-reading my initial entry, I realized that I come off as cold and uncaring. I should have chosen my words more carefully so that I conveyed my concerns about cost and safety instead of a "to hell with 'em" attitude.
I'm hope I'm not going to piss off too many people here, particularly the people in wheelchairs who posted, but here goes anyway: there's a difference between treating people "equally" and treating them all the "same". For half the money (a third? a fourth? a tenth?) we're spending all over the country making kneeling buses and putting elevators in stations, we could have a 24-hour, door-to-door, on-demand van service in every city (and yes, I know, a lot of paratransit services suck. Believe me, we divert some of this ADA money into it, and they'll all be gold-plated. For that matter, for people who aren't in wheelchairs but still need help getting around, we could have free taxi coupons). I know that many things built for the handicapped also help regular people (curb cuts, station announcements, etc.) and to the extent that it's reasonable, I'm all for it. But the idea of taking the entire New York subway system and forcing it into a role that it won't perform well at great cost for a relatively small population--that's just stupid, particularly when the alternative is probably better for the people who need the service, anyway. I think there's only so much you can ask in the name of "mainstreaming."
The idea is not stupid. Everybody with or without a disability has the right to use the subways. Next, the ADA does not, repeat not, require full 100% access but only "key locations". The ADA realizes that the cost of retrofitting some locations is prohibitive. The ADA also requires that if a non-accesible site is renovated, ADA access must be added. NYCT *does* care and takes great measures to allow access to the system by *all*
In 1985 I was hit by a driver under the influence and was off my feet for four months- during this time of hobbling around on crutches I came to appreciate those few curb cuts and accessible facillities such as ramps instead of stairs, railings, etc.
If I had lived in NYC at the time subway use would have been quite difficult and I would have been robbed(if your idea were adopted) of spur of the moment choices due to being "locked in" to a dial a ride. New York is easy to get around due to the spontanaity of the subway. You know a train will arrive in 5-10 minutes during most of the day. Dial-a-ride would be stuck in traffic.
No Thanks!
***opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT.
I don't know if I like that plan too much, David. Hear's one I find equally foolish. All sighted people who use subways and buses must cover their ears whenever there is an announcement for a train. Dumb, huh?
Very dumb. I guess he was being(painfully) realistic. I really don't want to sound cold but a lot of times, everyone wants to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and comfort the lonely until they see it's going to come out of their pocket or affect them somehow. I think entities such as the TA should do evrything neccessary to accomodate evryone and give every New Yorker the opportunity to use that big, ca-chunking thing under your streets. Incidentally, Coming from 8th and Market to get the El I saw that there is a new handicapped elevator being installed. A good sign! Hopefully the stench of urine wont overpower them the way it does me! UGH!
There's been quite a bit of discussion on Usenet (mostly on misc.transport.urban-transit) about the relative costs of handicapped access vs. paratransit. According to most estimates, paratransit is *far* more expensive in the long run. While making subway stations, buses etc, handicapped-accessible involves a substantial up-front cost, that's pretty much it. Paratransit is quite the opposite. While up-front charges are modest in comparison (not that a wheelchair van is cheap), the operating costs are extremely high. Soon enough it loses whatever initial cost advantage it had enjoyed.
Just outside Co-op City, Section 5, mounted on the fence that separates Erskine Place from the Amtrak NEC tracks, is a sign that reads "West Side IRT Detour" with an arrow pointing to the right. Following this signs puts you onto the southbound New England Thruway (I-95), which does not cross the west side (#2) IRT line. It goes instead to the Pelham Bay line, which runs only to the east side.
(OK, if you stayed directly in lane, you would get on and immediately off of I-95 and head west on Pelham Parkway, which does indeed cross the #2 line. But I don't really think that is what the sign refers to.)
I suspect that this sign actually dates back to before May of 1965, when the #2 and #5 lines exchanged terminals. That is, the sign pointed the way to a station on the Dyre Ave. line (either Gun Hill Rd. or Baychester Ave., I don't know which) which at that time was served by the #2 line. Co-op City was only a gleam in the planners' eyes then, and the highway ramps were configured differently.
The persistence of this sign to this day is just one of those weird New York occurrences, I guess.
I was wondering if anybody knows the starting salary and pay range for a train operator and a conductor? Also, what kind of promotions are there and what do those positions pay? Thanks in advance for any info.
All NYCT hourly positions start at 70% of the full salary (except Road Car Inspector which starts at full salary) If memory serves me correctly, it takes 30 - 36 months to reach full pay. Currently, train operators earn about $22 per hour while Conductors earn about $18.
Promotions from train operator or conductor are ATD (assistant Train Dispatcher), TD (Train Dispatcher), YD (Yard Dispatcher) or TSS (Train Service Supervisor). Supervisory titles pay $53K to around $58K. There is also a semi-promotion to Console Train Dispatcher (like Pelham 1 2 3). From there it's off to management.
When you take its total payroll and divide by the number of workers, the TA is about the best-paid public agency there is.
The last time I asked for a tabulation of average annual pay per employee, from the unemployment insurance records, separately for NYC government agencies (1993 data), the average person employed in the NYCTA earned $43,762. The average for NYC's private sector was $41,383, but the average for local government agencies as a whole was just $33,764. The average in the city schools was just $26,201. In general, the agencies whose workers are allowed to live outside the city did better (police and fire $42,439) and those required to live in the city did worse (parks $28,864). The TA and schools are exceptions -- (TA high paid and living in the city, schools low paid and living outside the city).
Looked at another way, the average in the city's private transit companies was $26,555. The average in NYC's airline industry was $40,620.
Of course, TA ridership, productivity and reliability are up since 1993, which is more than I can say for the quality of the schools, so perhaps you get what you pay for. The TA performances seems to be growing into its salary. As for us city bureaucrats, I now earn less than the average person working in Manhattan -- including everyone working part time in a McDonalds, but also everyone earning a $10 million bonus on Wall St. As a friend at the state department of labor says, those guys are making so much that almost everyone else is earning less than the average.
Comparing average salaries within city agencies might be misleading because of differences in the percentages of managerial-level people. Assuming that thses percentages differ among agencies, those which are more "top heavy" are likely to have higher average pay levels. That might account for the TA's relatively high average salaries, as it is widely known to have many management layers.
Having worked at the TA, and worked with a wide variety of other agencies, I find the TA to one of the least top heavy of all (of course you have the MTA on top of it, which is all top, but that's another story).
Consider my agency. Seven years ago, it had a given number of divisions, each with a director and deputy director. During the recession, the staff has been continually reduced, and is now down about 40 percent -- but the number of divisions, directors and deputy directors remains the same. Any they're all busy, overwhelmed by the amout of work a dwindling number of employees produced for them to review.
Thirty one vice presidents for one agency? Each bus depot has four bosses, not including road managers and then dispatchers. There is to damn much management and white shirts with gold badges. As far as unionized employees is concerned train operator make the most then bus operators and I think railroad clerks and cleaners are at the bottom. Train operator is a promotion thus you cannot start your career as such. Me myself Im proud to work for the best transit agency in the WORLD and for the biggest and best city in the United States.
At what position do you have to start at? And how long does it take to get promoted? Thanks again for answering these questions.
there are two main "entrance ramps" to Transit Freeway. 1- Station Agent (You work in the booth) or 2- Cleaner (and for this one you could wind up cleaning up sxcrement from trains.)
Once on the Transit Freeway (I use the term as an analogy) there is no limit where you want to go just like once on the freeway you can go where you wqant to go.
Jobs like conductor, train operator, collector, tower operator, dispatcher,etc
are promotion titles.
How long do you have to be a station agent or cleaner before getting promoted? And what do these 2 jobs pay?
literally *one* day. The Station agents start at $12.005 per hour(plus $1.00 per hour for selling metrocard-all booths do!
Cleaner is about the same .
TO get promoted you take a promotion exam when given.
A cleaner at top pay earns $16.72/Hr + night differential. Not to mention 4-5 weeks vacation + medical benifits. You are eligable to take promotional exams after just one day in title.
not to mention OT.Heard some cleaners are making 60-80,000 thanks to overtime.
Geez, maybe I'm in the wrong profession!
Overtime pay is usually well earned.
Overtime is needed for several reasons: changing people in the booth, emergencies, etc.
We are trained to help evacuate trains if needed. If we are on board a train and an emergency occurs, wre are instructed to identify ourselves to the train operator and/or conductor and ask how can we help. We are then officially on the payroll, even if we just left our job and are on the way home or on our days off or vacation.
Another case- suppose there is a sick passenger. If the conductor knows we arer on board we may be placed "in charge" of the sick passenger and the train released to avoid delays
Read in "THE CHEIF" NYCTA fileing for Trackworker, goodtime to get on the "Freeway".
Speaking of Pelham 1-2-3, I couldn't resist quoting a line from the original movie.
Garber (Matthau), introducing the directors of the Tokyo subway to Frank Corrall (Dick O'Neal), IRT desk trainmaster:
"And this is Fran Corrall, the Lord Byron of the New York City subway system. Notice how fire and smoke shoot out of his ears."
"Don't bug me, Garber. I've got problems."
"Oh yeah, what's the matter?"
"Oh, nothing. A train is down, its radio's dead, the power's out, and it's dumped its load. Aside from that, everything's ginger-peachy."
I also loved the part when Martin Balsom when backing up the rest of the train from the hijacked first car and he was looking back out of the cab window as if he could see 9 cars back not to hit something behind the train! Including the jobs Subway Buff mentioned, other entrance level jobs are also conductor and bus operator. Conductor however can be a promotional from cleaner and Railroad clerk. In the TA side you can go from bus operator to train operator, however in MABSTOA you cannot. The only promotional is dispatcher, which is another option for TA bus operators. In MABSTOA you need one year on the job to go to dispatcher from B/O. In TA you need one day to go to any promotional title.
You need one day on the job to take the promotional exam, but you need to be off probation to be promoted. In most Civil Service titles, with the exception of MABSTOA, probation is 1 year. I think MABSTOA is 6 months.
the "secret" is to apply to take the test, even if on probation, because by the time the test is given, graded, the list of eligibles drawn up, medical, drug test, etc. you will be off probation.
Did just that ;-) Unfortunatly the Train Operator exam just given was one of the hardest in recent memory, according to those around much longer than me. The scuttlebutt around the crew rooms is 46 people passed the exam. I would not be surprised. I walked out of that exam felling dazed. Anyone have any inside information about this exam?
Then, after Balsam stops the 9 cars, the following dialogue ensues:
conductor: "What was that?"
Mr. Brown: "What was what?"
conductor: "I didn't know these things went backwards." (DUH!)
Mr. Brown: "Now you know."
Irate passenger: "Would you mind telling me what you gentlemen are doing?"
Mr. Brown: "Yeah, I would!"
My favorite line:
"Screw the goddam passengers! What do they expect for their 35 cents, to live for ever?"
Not just 35 cents, but lousy 35 cents. That was a direct quote from the novel, although I don't believe John Godey (not his real name, I understand) included goddamn.
Then Frank goes on and on:
"What about that cop on the train? When is he going to start shooting?"
Garber: "We don't even know if it is a he."
Frank: "Lady cops - what the hell good are they? Can't even get a gun out of her goddamn purse."
I was a little concerned after reading the threads on the easy accessibility to the third rails on Long Island. Well, I saw it happen here in Philly. As you may or may not know, the Millbourne Stop is not exactly your most futuristic metro stop. There is a walkway from the stop about 3 blocks down to the township center(a police station, a car detail store and some houses). I was down there on Friday evening and saw something a little disheartening. There was a group of kids playing in the walkway, a walkway which runs parallel to the El tracks and is literally inches away from the third rail, separated only by a fence. The kids started reaching and playing through the fence for some reason and I had to shoo 'em out. Isn't there some kind of law or guideline set up to insure transit companies keep there external power sources safe or at least separated from the public? Some day, somebody is going to be killed. And it's very easy to access some places you shouldn't be. Cobbs Creek Park runs right along the ROW the el uses to access 69th Street. You can get on the tracks through the park!
Pehaps if SEPTA was at risk of being sued for negligence they would seal off the Right-of-Way. But it seems to the that the way the legal system works, if someone gets hurt SEPTA will have to pay whether it was negligent or not.
Some time ago, a trio of eight year old boys climbed a fence into the Prospect Park (Brooklyn) zoo in the middle of the night. Then they climbed two more fences, one with barbed wire, to check out the polar bear exhibit. When the bears made their move, two got out, one got digested.
The parent (ie victim for not having her child protected when he was wandering around at 3 a.m.) sued and won a big settlement. It seems that even if you're only one percent negligent, you must pay compensation for any and all losses. The zoo closed, but reopened years later with lizards, rabbits, and similar animals.
If that's the way the courts work, from an economic point of view, why spend the money to put up the fence? No matter how much it tries, it can always be proven that more measures could have been taken, and that SEPTA was thus -- to at least a miniscule extent -- responsible.
But why bother? You're ALWAYS going to have at least ONE moron out there that will manage, despite what you do, the get on the tracks. Look at that case last september of that girl getting killed on MN's hudson line. Nothing would have stopped that. The ironic thing, is that before that asccident, there was an article in the Times complaining that Metro-North was being to agressive in enforcing the laws against tresspassers. The article went on the compliain that Metro-North "owes" it to NY to provide SOME sort of acess to the shore, and that they are being WAY out of line by enforceing the law. The article never mentions the dangers of third rails, high speed trains, and the fact that fishing in the *HUDSON* river... well, you get the idea. Very biased. Nevermind the fact that you have the whole OTHER side of the hudson, and there ARE acess points along there anyway.
Yet time and time again, we see people walking on, or beside the tracks, as if nothing is wrong with it. And when someone gets hit, it's always the railroads fault. Same thing with grade crossing accidents. I stopped being sympethetic with stupid people long ago.
The trouble is that the legal system in this country thrives on stupidity and lawsuits. It's hit the point where EVERYONE is a victim, and NOBODY wants to claim reasponsibility, or admit their mistakes.
And please don't blame the Democrats, since the Republican "see no evil" attitude is partly to blame too...
Not too many years ago, a father who was spending a quiet Sunday with his todler along the West side H'way in Manhattan. Well he fell asleep and the child wandered onto the AMTRAK tracks and was killed. He was negligent but AMTRAK paid bigtime. The trouble is we've developed a cultural psychology where we believe that someone else is responsible for the ills that befall us and that that someone (usually the rest of us) should pay. Anyone want to join me for a hot cup on McDonalds coffee?
This, unfortunately, is exactly what's wrong in America today. Too many lawyers in "private practice". Not to mention a court system that is run by the law establishment and won't do a thing to correct an obvious wrong. Court systems need to start to refute the filing of stupid lawsuits, and we need to adopt a principle that is in EVERY Western legal systems except ours - LOSER PAYS. That and a ban on "No fee unless we win" is desparately needed.
Thank you for the SoadBox.
I think the problem is "joint and several liability" -- everyone who is even one percent to blame is responsible for compensating any and all injuries.
My dad worked for a ladder company once (early 1980s). A guy gets drunk, falls off a ladder, and gets hurt -- a purported $10 million in harm suffered. In the past, the courts would have found that the injuries were the drunk's own fault. But, the courts began to find that gee, the ladder company has to be at least one percent responsible. Since the drunk doesn't have any money, any all liable parties are liable for all $10 million -- boom, the ladder company pays $10 million. If we had "proportional liability," the ladder company would only have to pay $100,000, and the drunk who was 99 percent responsible would have to eat the rest of the loss himself.
Same with the transit issues. Even if the transit authority is only ten percent responsible, or one percent responsible, they pay the whole thing. That's what the lawyers want -- deep pockets to pay the claim, and their own fee.
If entities only had to pay in proportion to their actual fault, things would be different. At least, there should be a requirement that any person or entity which is less than half responsible should only have to pay their share.
Lawsuit abuse has reached epidemic proportions, it seems. Everybody is suing everybody, if for no other reason, than to make a fast buck. People need to start taking responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming it on everyone else. Whatever happened to plain old common sense?
This is the rhetoric of the insurance companies and others who don't want to pay out when their insureds do something wrong. Its language that's easily repeated and means nothing. The facts are different.
1) The vast majority of the scientific studies of the civil legal system have concluded that Americans are no more likely now to sue than they were 200 years ago. In a society of mobility and freedom, where social control (the neighbors knowing everything you do and societal pressure maintaining conformance to standards both set by law and by pure convention) has never been the instrument it is or was in other nations, Americans have always -- 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 50 years ago, or yesterday -- sued each other in large numbers.
2) Most studies also show that the legal system is not a "lottery". Over three quarters of cases are DISMISSED as having no legal basis. Most of the rest settle for much less than the person was originally seeking. And I defy anyone to pick up the legal newspaper in their city -- a city large enough to have a subway almost always has a daily paper for the legal community -- and see the jury verdict reports. The "not guiltys" come up as often as the "guiltys" (actually, that should be not liable and liable, but the jury states its verdict officially as guilt or not guilty, even in civil cases.)
3) As I stated in my other posting, the media distorts its coverage of the legal system to make it seem like a lottery. If you leave out that about 75% of cases are dismissed, that several procedures exist solely to throw out cases that have no basis, and that most people who do collect get a fraction of what they asked for, and instead report the filing of a groundless suit for millions of dollars as if the person already won, of course the system looks grotesque. So does the reflection of Cindy Crawford in a funhouse mirror. Remember this: no newspaper has ever made a ha'penny from reporting that a plane landed safely, than an election went smoothly, or that a senator never took a bribe. Only the dysfunctional and the unusual sells papers or gets listeners/viewers to tune in. There is a definite financial incentive for the media to make the legal system look dysfunctional, to report the one percent of unusual cases and not the 99% of ordinary cases where reasonable people differ over facts, where the people suing really feel, rightly or wrongly, that they were injured by the person they were suing, and are not suing to win the lottery, and where they are looking for enough money to put them right and not to retire to Bermuda.
4) Along the same lines, time and again I have read cases in the law reports that the media described as "frivolous", like the McDonald's coffee case as I described in my earlier posting. Most of the time, one or more major details was left out of the press coverage, details that made the case more complex, something that reasonable people could differ about instead of the open and shut case the media described. Details that were the real reason the case went the way it did. But black and white is easier to read in the newspaper than shades of gray.
No, I dissagree.
Today, turn on the TV durring the midday, you'll see ads like "and a lawsuit judgement that's even in the Guiness Book of World Records" or "If you slip and fall, WHO will COMPESATE YOU???"
Maybe, if Lawyers could only make a set amount on a legal case, as opposed to a percentage, we wouldn't have $10,000,000 lawsuits for spilt coffe. It's the legal system, and everyone's greed "greed is good", that is driving the mega lawsuits. Often, it's cheaper to settle them than to fight them.
This is why, with little or no evidence supporting their claim, a bunch of lawyers managed to sink Dow - Corrning over breast implants.
And limits on "class action" lawsuits. I recently got a 15 buck refund on a 2 year old computer monitor, because Apple stated the size as 14", but the viewable size is really only 13.5" Same thing as everyone else. Some lawyer decided to sue Apple, IBM, Compaq, AST, Acer, etc, and won. I doubt HE only made 15 bucks on the deal. Heck, he probbly owns 2 new Beamers now...
Did you bother to **read** my posting on the McDonald's coffee case? That case involved a woman with THIRD DEGREE burns, which you usually get from fiuriously-burning fires or extremely hot metal, and should not get from any susbstance you are supposed to drink. She had thousands of dollars in medical bills, not just a few bandages and a ruined dress. The jury agreed she was 80% responsible for her own injuries. The award was about $1.2 million, not $10 million, she got it because McDonald's knew its coffee could give **severe** burns and didn't give a flying f*ck, and amounted to ONE DAY'S sales of coffee in McDonald's own (not franchise) restaurants. And the judge cut in by more than half as soon as the jury announced the verdict.
Why is it wrong to ask in an ad who will compensate you if you slip and fall? If something is on the ground that isn't supposed to be there, who's in a better position to clean it up and prevent injuries, you or the property owner? Let me ask you: do you walk around with your head down all the time, looking for spills on the floor? Do you expect everyone else to?
Large judgments come from large injuries, not from "lottery" juries. Most studies of jury damage awards have shown that most awards of over $1 million come from a case where someone either died or was severely injured for life, and that punitive awards are handed down by juries only when the evidence shows that the wrongdoer intended to injure the person or at least knew what he or she was doing.
And let me let you in on a news flash: sometimes people sue because they were actually INJURED by the NEGLIGENCE of another person and all they want is reasonable compensation!!
If I slip and fall, the last thing I do is go sue someone.
If I spill hot coffe on me, I don't sue anyone?
Sure it was HOT - people want their coffe HOT. If I were buying coffe, I'd sure be careful - I'd expect it to be HOT. And I know I can get burned by things that are HOT. Besides - it would be PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the coffe to be > 100 degrees C. Most fires burn MUCH hotter than that.
The making of coffe involves more of less boiling water, therefore, it's not unreasonable to expect coffe to be at or near boling temperature when served.
I think plain common sense should've kept her from fiddling with her coffee while driving.
Let's talk about common sense for a moment.
The primary ingredient in coffee is water.
According to the laws of nature, water at sea level and not under pressure cannot excede 212 degrees farrenheit.
Therefore the since the coffee was not boiling and was cooling several minutes, we can assume that it was cooler than 212 degrees.
Third degree burns involve charred flesh.
Can flesh be charred by hot water?
If this woman had charred flesh between her legs, I think she had more than coffee going on there. The defense rests.
Another case,personal experience. I owned a Honda Motor Scooter valued at over $2500. It was stolen from my carport in a North Mississippi Suburb of Memphis,TN. The law did catch the thieves-minors. The damages were $1500!! The dealer wanted to total the bike but my insurance said no- and "fixed"it was. I finally unloaded it back to the dealer at a big loss. Oh, yes- the thieves were charged with Grand theft auto (due to value). The judge let them off with a promise the repay-they never did. The same group kept harassing me I kept calling the law to no avail. I finally asked what if I were to get a gun permit. I was told I would be hauled in. I then asked what if it would be fixed so it could *never* fire anything-and same answer. I left that place in 1994.
Sorry but I totally disagree.
First, I heard a commercial the other night. Lawyer says:
"Maybe you've been in an accident. Maybe you don't know that you were injured in that accident."
Who is kidding who.
Second, TA just re-enacted a 7-year old accident. A customer, late at night, jumps in front of a 'G' train. She lives but loses limbs. Now she's suing.
Give me a break.
I agree there should be liability for faulty products or reckless behavior but if we didn't learn anything from the McDonalds' Coffee case we're in real trouble. How stupid do you have to be to put a hot cup of coffee between your legs. Do you really think McDonalds should have foreseen that and had warning signs "WARNING - HOT COFFEE, DO NOT DRIVE WITH CUP BETWEEN YOUR LEGS"
Then I guess they'll have to warn the other morons not to carry a Hot Fries under their arms. Get real.
Did you bother to actually READ my message? She had third degree burns from the coffee! What if she had DRANK it?!?!? She would have scalded her mouth, her throat, and all of her digestive tract, possibly killing the entire tissue. McDonald's didn't lose because she spilled coffee on her lap -- she was found 80% responsible for her own injury because she put the coffee between her legs. They lost because they made coffee too hot for anyone to drink. They put the warning on their cups not to avoid future lawsuits but to twist and distort the case so that people thought McDonald's lost because it didn't foresee someone holding coffee between their legs. Apparently, they have succeeded.
As to that ad, some kinds of injuries really do pop up as pain some long time after the accident, and a lot of times people ignore real pain so they can work, or blame real pain on something else, like old age. Not everyone who is not in screaming agony right after the accident is faking it later when they claim to be injured.
So what that a woman who was hit by a train she jumped in front of is suing? Once and for all, the fact that someone is suing DOES NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT MEAN THAT THEY WILL AUTOMATICALLY WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!
I used to practice law, and if it was as easy to get money for clients as the public thinks it is, I would be very well off. By the fact that I'm in a different industry now, you can be sure that I wasn't making that kind of money. There are motions to strike, motions to dismiss, and motions for summary judgment, which exist solely to weed out cases that have no merit. The filing of a lawsuit is not the winning of it, and the winning of it is even more rarely the winning of how much money you asked for in the original complaint. When cases do go to trial, juries do not "knee-jerk" favor the plaintiff. As many cases find for the defendant as for the plaintiff.
So what would you propose to solve the problem? Right now, anyone can file a complaint that alleges anything, however ridiculous, and the clerk of the court must accept it and assign the case to a judge. Would you have the clerk, usually only a high-school graduate, refuse to accept complaints that look frivolous to him? As I have repeatedly stated, we already have procedures to throw out cases that have no merit, after a proper hearing before a judge to make sure that a legitimate case isn't being tossed out. Roughly three quarters of all cases are thrown out under those procedures.
I don't know about the McDonalds case (yes I did read it), but I do believe things are out of control in NYC, even if not in Chicago. There is an attitude here that if anything happens to you, you deserve to be compensated, whether someone was negligent or not.
Some lawyers I know (is it just me or are half the people lawywers) blame the insurance companies. They created, in effect, a cartel in which everyone based rates on the average losses of everyone. It is expensive to fight, and easy to settle -- as long as it is just one case. Especially if you can just pass the cost on to the ratepayer along with everyone else. And the threat of huge judgements causes people to take out more insurance.
The problem with such a system is, the people who sue think their beating the insurance companies, when in reality they're just soaking their neighbors, who in turn are blaming the insurance companies.
The problem is, dismissed or not, lawsuits can drain you -- and require you to pay lawyers for years. The justice system takes too long. That's the lesson I get from Paula Jones.
And sometimes you do lose by winning. Here in NYC, everytime anything is approved, it requires an environmental impact statement. And everytime something is approved with an environmental impact statement, whoever doesn't agree with the decision files a lawsuit on procedural grounds, claiming the EIS was invalid. The lawsuit always takes years to resolve. And the result -- is that years later the court finds the lawsuit had no merit, and years after that, the final appeal finds the lower court was correct. But if the approval was for a development, the litigation itself is enough to have the banks withdraw financing -- can't loan against a building that will never be built. All that time, the developer is paying finance charges on the purchase of a site. I can't tell you how many projects have been approved by everyone democratically empowered to approve them, then killed by a lawsuit which is eventually found to have no merit. A lawsuit itself does damage, for which there is no compensation.
So, Koch decide that if he tried to build a new subway tunnel, or new connections, someone could sue and drag it out for years. So he did something which was exempt from the procedures which give people standing to sue -- maintain things exactly as they are.
I've had to write depositions, so I know this. Yes, we always win, but it doesn't matter. The lawsuit itself is a weapon.
I recall reading in the Guiness Book of World records, that there are some people who take baths in 200 + degree F water, I know personally I've measured my water temp a few times and found it to be > 110 F. Besides, if the coffe was TOO hot, she could have waited for it to cool. Also, people add creamer, etc to their coffe. They are running back to their office, car, etc, with it. It gets cold. People hate lukewarm coffe. So you sell it hot - surely those cups can't be perfect - you can feel the heat through them. Most people should have at least enough capacity to be able to maker the simple determination as to how hot is too hot to drink, or put in a position where it can be spilt on you. I know if I spill boiling water on me (personnaly), it's gonna hurt. So I don't go putting cup of boiling water between my legs. It put it somewhere where it won't hit me if it spills.
Is this really to much to ask of people, or should McD's, and everyone else assume everyone is a complete moron??
On a further note - legal issues have pushed manufacturers to put warnings on EVERYTHING. I've seen soda bottles with warning labels (sprite or was it 7 up?). I've seen dishwashers with " do not let children play inside the dishwasher". Ever buy a new TV? They come with seperate saftey BOOKS. There was a time when some TVs didn't even have BACKS, letalone whole parts of the documentation dedicated to safety. But now, you have to tell people the obvious. Heck, my computer has a warning in the manual not to use it in a shower.
The fear of lawsuits has pushed companies to assume people are complete morons.
What about lawn mowers with "deadman" controls. Let go and it stops. All because some IDIOT tried to use his mower as a hedge trimmer and cut off his arm. A friend of mine stpidly put his hand under his mower before it stopped. He did get cut badly, and blamed NO ONE but himself.
Joke: Why can't you buy a stepladder shorter than 4 feet? No room for all the warning stickers!!
As Steve said: "Whatever happened to common sense?"
Factiod: Common Sense was apparently made illegal sometime during the Johnson Administration. Anyone born after 1964 doesn't have any. It's a Federal Crime.
Well, I was born after 64, and I've got common sense (I'm 19)...
I'm picking up an old (1947) TV saturday. In need of repair. You can bet I'm not going to screw around in there with it on. And if I HAVE to (to take voltage reading, etc, I'm going to dissconnect the HV supply, so I don't get a 19kv "surprise".
And oh yeah, I never touch an "All American Five" radio set, unless it's unplugged, and you shouldn't too, because one side of the chassis it connected directly to the 120V line. Even if it isn't, that paper capacitor may have shorted long ago. Moral: Only service a tube set if it's unplugged, unless it has a power transformer (which provides the needed isolation).
Just remember that if you ever pick an old radio up at a garage sale because you like it's cool looks...
I think you're referring to an isolation transformer, which is what you should use when working on a TV set. As for the high voltage compartment, as long as you don't touch the base of the tube socket, you should be OK; however, it's a good idea to discharge the capacitor first. Anyway, a lot of people do use common sense, and they are to be commended.
I agree: common sense has been legislated out of existence. Speaking of lawn mowers, I lost a couple of fingertips on my left hand to a lawn mower when, without thinking, I tried to move it by reaching underneath while it was running (we hadn't put the handle back on). I never blamed anyone but myself for it. It has never bothered me psychologically, and I still have full movement and feeling in all fingers. Plus, I'm righthanded. I look at it this way: it could have been worse. The mower missed the index finger entirely. And unless I tell someone about what happened, they usually don't notice it anyway.
Although the state of Connectict has a rather odd legal system in many respects (for instance, it has individual jury selection, thereby delaying matters greatly), they did enact a reform some years back that made a lot of sense. Lawsuits no longer state specific dollar amounts, only that they claim under $15,000 or over $15,000. This means that there aren't news reports about "$10 million lawsuits over s stubbed toe," that seem to get so much attention elsewhere.
Be that as it may, speaking as a law school graduate who now works as an editor, I fully believe that the lawyer glut bears a lot of responsibility for all these junk lawsuits. The number of lawyers in practice exceeds the amount of legitimate work available for them, hence all this frivolous nonsense. It's a sad truth that law has largely become a field that people essentially fall into rather than select in a rational manner. Going to law school is more or less an extension of liberal arts college, a magnet for graduates who lack marketable skills. Despite stories to the contrary, law school is not difficult - no math, no science, no computers - and therefore is a powerful draw for nontechnical types who lack other employment alternatives. While the lawyer glut is no secret, young people flock to law school nonetheless thanks to the "it can't happen to me" attitude as well as the aforementioned lack of alternatives. For their part, universities just love having law schools, as they're quite profitable due to traditionally high student-teacher ratios.
Nothing is going to end the lawyer glut, and reduce the number of fraudulent lawsuits, unless and until states begin putting moratoriums on bar admittance. Don't hold your breath waiting.
Connecticut has or had some other, shall we say, unique laws such as no passing on the right on a highway having fewer than three travel lanes in one direction. There used to be different hand signals for making turns or stops when driving before they wised up and adopted the standardized hand signals in use today. I still have a driver's manual from the early 70s with the old signals (I lived in Conn. fron 1973 until 1980 and am a UConn alum). Connecticut even had blue laws until the 80s.
Didn't Connecticut at one time post signs on Interstate highways (and may have on local roads) stating: "Road Under Repair. Drive at Own Risk." Or was I dreaming or in an alternate deminsion?
No, you were not dreaming. I recall signs just as you are speaking of. They said somthing to the effect that the State of Conn. liability was limited if you continue to use this road while it is under repair.
One of the places that I remebered these signs was on I-95! It struck me as absurb that the state would post this on a interstate where you couldn't avoid using the bridge/road. This was after the tolls removed from 1-95 in CT. I didn't see any the last time I was in the state. Were their use discontinued due to a lawsuit?
In addition, those signs also said, "Road legally closed".
Two verdicts today in NYC that illustrate the insanity of the civil courts:
Case 1 - Coney Island; A young man dives off of a pier in Coney Island where there is no life guard. A sensible person would assume it might not be safe to swim. Not this guy. He dives, head first, into the water (5 feet) and breaks his neck. Now his brother witnesses the tragedy and dives into the water to help his brother, also head first, and also breaks his neck. Both are now paralyzed and the city is guilty to the tume of $120,000,000.00
Case 2 - A young man shoots at a police officer with a 9MM machine pistol. Both are of the same race so that's not an issue. He shoots at the cop during a chase which ends when the cop catches the miscreant. During a struggle for the officer's gun, the perp is shot and paralyzed. Cop is awarded medal as a hero. Today a Bronx Jury awarded the young man, with the gun, $76,000,000.00 .
Lawyers, a pox on all their houses.........
But what's the average IQ of Brooklyn and Bronx jurors? I'll bet it's comfortable room temperature :-) Seriously, too many of them have attitude problems ... no wonder those boroughs have double-digit unemployment.
At the risk of being branded a bigot, I had similar thoughts. Perhaps if those good citizens payed taxes, they wouldn't give the money away so freely.
It isn't just the people one is typically bigoted against who have the LOTTO justice attitude. People in general just think that if someone like them can beat "the system," great. No one understands that the system gets its money from them. I was working packing out at an A&P once, and I stupidly sliced open by arm with a box cutter (lots of fat cells in there). I went to the emergency room, had it sewn up, and now there is a two inch scar on the underside of my arm. My relatives couldn't believe I would miss my big chance and not sue, especially since I was "disfigured." What a fool, they thought.
As for suits against the city, I would have the city assume no new judgements in its budget, and allocate the money to a wide variety of non-essential but highly visible public improvements -- to be made in the fiscal year following the allocation of the funds. Station rehabs, playground equipment, computers in the schools, streetscape spruce ups, repavings, new traffic signals, things of that sort. Then, with every judgement in a borough, the city would announce that one of those things would have to be taken away.
People would get very angry, and jurors would think twice. In some (legitimate) cases they would be angry at negligent public officials, a useful political check against sloth. But in other cases, they would realize the consequences when "the system" is found guilty.
And that goes for settlements too. Its so easy for a politician to give a few hundred thousand to a grateful potential voter, if those who lose (everyone else) is none the wiser.
I read an interesting thing about Brooklyn lawsuits a couple of years ago - unfortunately, I can't remember where. At any rate, in the nation as a whole a certain percentage of multivehicle auto crashes result in personal injury lawsuits. It was something like 15 to 20 percent, as I recall. In Brooklyn, by contrast, the percentage was just about *double* the nationwide figure!
The only legitimate explanation for this difference would be if crashes in Brooklyn were more likely to result in physical injury than crashes elsewhere. Hence lawsuits would be more likely. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that Brooklyn crashes are a lot less serious than in most parts of the country, given slower urban speeds. All in all, this much greater propensity to sue must be due to attitude problems on the part of way too many Brooklynites.
The figures didn't break down the lawsuit rates by neighborhood ... but somehow I suspect that people in Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope, Windsor Terrace etc. etc. aren't quite as "lawsuit happy" as those in Bushwick, Bed-Stuy, East NY, etc.
Of course, if you crash into a support column of an elevated subway structure...
...then the TA (or anybody else that they think they can sue) will be slapped with a massive lawsuit for putting a support column where an auto can run into it. Despite the obvious fact that the column was there long before the "poor unfortunate victim" could run into it.
My goodness - now they're grouping people by the boroughs. No wonder this country which has so much potential is such a laughing stock.
Well said. Just wanted to lend my support.
Thank you... It's that type of insensitivity that keeps society divided. I wish it would end, but I guess that's just a wish (or dream).
Unfortunately, the insurance industry does group people by borough. That's why Kings County drivers pay so much, regardless of their driving and claim records. After Andrew, they jacked up my homeowners insurance due to fears of flooding in a "coastal" county, even though I live miles inland on top of a hill.
Remember "Redlining?" The banks are prohibited from doing it, but insurance companies do it all the time.
The insurance companies also group people by ZIP codes. I live in a suburb that is surrounded by Chicago, and while our telephones have a suburban area code, the mail goes through a Chicago post office, with a 606XX ZIP code. Needless to say, my automobile insurance is higher based on me living in "THE CITY" as opposed to "THE SUBURBS." Yeah, right, like there's no difference between Lincoln Park (an expensive city neighborhood) and Englewood (a slum) or Lake Forest (an expensive North Shore suburb), and Robbins (an absolute and literal dump of a southern suburb) are the same risk level.
Yeah, my aunt and uncle live in a suburb on the edge of Philly which sucessfully agitated to have its zip changed for exactly the same reasons.
I still say, I don't think that me or anybody else, should have paid that woman's medical bills, let alone her get anymore money for being so stupit.
If you purchase a 6oz, a 10oz, or a 16oz cup of coffee, and you can swallow any amount of it the first 3 or 4 times you try, the coffee is not hot enough. When you finish your bacon & eggs, or 2 donuts, or drive 10 minutes to get to your office and go to drink it, it will only be warm at best. If you buy something hot, it must be hot. No one ever drinks a 6, 10, or 12oz coffee, straight down.
Same thing with soup, you sip it from the spoon, if you can get it right down,the bottom of the bowl will be warm, if your lucky. These places that give you warm juices, milk, soda are nuts.
If it is not very hot or very cold, as the item should be, I DON'T GO BACK.
I felt and feel now, sorry that the woman got hurt, but it could and has happened to many of us, when we made some stupid mistake.
When I read, I read the entire post.
Not only are people out to make a fast buck, they don't seem to use any common sense, either.
I wouldn't have even paid the medical for that coffee
A few years ago, ABC, I beleive, ran a story that a homeless couple were making love, on a seldom used subway track, when a train came along. I think he lost a few toes, but the lawyer was suing for 10 Mil. The reporter ask, "If it was there property, there track, what did you want them to do, should they have had someone running in front of the train yelling, everybody up? The lawyer thought that they should have done something, since they know the homeless live down there.
This was a tieless section of track and the train did go over them.
Has anyone ever heard what it cost the TA for that case?
Lest no one think you are making it up - that actually did happen on a J train outside Essex St. The enamoured couple dragged a matress onto what they thought was an abandoned track. The train struck both of them. The woman (who apparently was in the 'superior' position) was struck in the head by the coupler and the gentleman did lose a few toes for the cause. However the TA was clearly at fault. They failed to post "NO SCREWING ZONE" signs in the tunnel.
Actually they should have arrested the two for trespassing and billed them for the emergency service. And if you want to know the obsurdity of the lawsuit. Check with the Workers' Compesation Board. See what you would get if you lost 4 toes while on the job. I guarantee you - IT AIN'T $10 MILLION.
Open your ears, close your mouth, and drink your coffee (those last two not necessarily being in order)!
1) The media loves "frivolous lawsuit" stories because they are simple, black and white, good and evil. So, while the media rarely lies, in the sense of making false statements, they often leave out the details that complicate a story they want to be simple. A lawsuit that survives the various motions to dismiss and for summary judgment (which I will discuss below) is by definition a case where facts are in serious dispute and reasonable people differ over the proper outcome -- in other words, NOT a simple, black and white, good and evil matter.
2) Case in point: the infamous McDonald's coffee case. What most of the media "left out" of the story:
a) The woman had medical bills in the six digits, that is, in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
b) The woman had third degree burns, which my doctor friends tell me come from things like burning petroleum, not any liquid meant to be ingested by a human being.
c) The jury found the woman to be 80% responsible for her own injuries, and gave her only 20% of her medical bills, lost income, and pain & suffering.
d) Most of the $1.2 million award was punitive, because McDonald's own scientific people told management that the coffee was too hot and would burn people way beyond the ordinary coffee burn. Management responded that they wanted the coffee that hot because customers like hot coffee and they could use fewer beans if they boiled more flavor out of the beans with hotter water.
e) The punitive award was set by the jury to be one day's coffee sales in McDonald's corporate-owned restaurants (as opposed to the franchises), not exactly an earth-shattering sum.
f) The judge rather soon after the verdict granted a remittitur, a motion by the defendant to reduce the award. It was cut by over half.
Not such a frivolous case anymore, is it?
3) It is true that anyone can file a lawsuit. It is also true, however, that several motions exist in the law solely to throw out frivolous lawsuits. One always hears about innocent people settling to avoid trial. But what the media never discusses is that about three quarters of lawsuits are dismissed outright, and it is most of the remainder (about 25%) that settle, with only 1-2% going to trial. A system that kept "frivolous" cases from being filed would make the court clerk, usually barely a high-school graduate in my experience, into judge and jury. Instead, we let the complaint be filed regardless of its content and then have a judge decide in a proper hearing whether or not the case has any merit.
But the media often talks about cases just filed as if the person already won by merely filing complaint, and that they have won every penny they asked for. I personally have heard many exchanges on the radio like this: "A man in Alabama is suing a gun manufacturer for $1.5 million for pain and suffering due to him shooting off his own toe. How can a man get rich for his own stupidity?" The answer is usually that HE'S NOT GOING TO! The filing of a presposterous complaint is on page one, and the butt of jokes for every radio announcer in the free universe. The dismissal of the suit a couple of months later is on page twenty-three, or not in the paper at all, and strangely escapes the attention of the morning-drive yahoos. And the fact, known to ever businessman and wily shopper, that you demand more starting off than you ever expect to get or will get in the end, seems to be forgotten when lawsuits are discussed.
Just today a jury awarded a $76 million dollar judgement against the city (my household share -- $25 in higher taxes or reduced services). It seems an off duty cop (yes off duty) got into a fight with someone and shot them (no he wasn't trying to stop a robbery). I guess the city issued the firearm, which made it partially responsible, and the young gun didn't have the money to pay, so I'll have to.
The issue is beating the system. When the system was strong (most people went to work, raised their kids, paid taxes, met their responsibilities, and the government wasn't trillions in debt) the idea of beating the system was romantic, and tolerated. But people are starting to realize that all of us are, or depend on, the system, and its being beaten to death.
If a person, company or agency is clearly negligent then fine sue them, but my opinion that too many people are lawsuit happy. Along with them are many lawyers who are just aching to collect a third. They know that in many cases a compay (especially insurance companies) will settle out of court rather than go through lengthy (and expensive) litigation and then still lose the case. This is the strongest country in the world, yet our legal system is used (and abused) in such a way that we're laughing stocks to other countries. We have so much potential that not reached (and may never be reached) because there is so much in-fighting, racism frivilous lawsuits etc. going on that holds us back. Just think how much could be done if our professionals didn't have to worry about being sued for any and every little thing.
I remember a case in the 80's I believe against the NYCTA. I don't remember how much the man was seeking, but it seem that a NYCTA bus had barely tapped the back of his car and it was so minor that there was no visible damage. The car driver gets a lawyer, goes to court and says that he can no longer perform his job in a pizza shop and it was difficult for him to lift the dough to make a pizza. The NYCTA sent (probably the IG Team) someone to follow the man after he and his attorney left court. They both left in the mans' car which later got a flat tire. The man not only changed the tire, but he picked up the flat tire with one hand and hurled it into the trunk of his car. The lawyer was standing nearby watching all of this. It was all caught on tape. Sounds quite frivilous to me. What's wrong with making an honest living??? It seems that too many people are getting greedy and want to get rich easy.
Everyone can easily cite to examples of frivolous lawsuits because the media makes millions of dollars publicizing bizarre lawsuits. I say once again: the media never made any money from announcing that hundreds of thousands of subway passengers arrived on time at their destinations, only on the one passenger who gets stabbed or shot. And they have never made any money describing the vast majority of cases where either a frivolous case gets dismissed or a case where there is a real dispute gets decided, and people either way get the justice they deserve.
If all the public knew about the courts came from the media coverage of the legal system, you would think that there has never been a case in the history of the United States where a person was actually injured through the negligence of another and was compensated for his or her injuries with a fair amount of money. You would have the perception that there has never been a case where actual facts were in serious dispute and reasonable people on both sides of the case honestly thought they were right. In short, you would have the perception that every lawsuit is frivolous. Actually, from the postings on SubTalk, full of rhetoric straight from the insurance companies, that seems to be fairly close to the common public perception of the legal system, so maybe everything the average person knows about the legal system DOES come from the media.
As I have stated twice already, the media-created perception of the legal system, and not the actual operation of the legal system, has created the lottery and get-rich-quick perception that exists among the public.
As to professionals, companies, drivers, and anyone else out there with the potential to harm or kill others with their mistakes, I would prefer that they worry about being sued, not over "every little thing" but over real negligence, which (I'm sure to your surprise) does indeed occur. I consider the horror stories of incompetence that I have heard from friends **who are doctors** and wonder how doctors would perform if they didn't have to fear being sued "for every little thing". Yes, doctors should be afraid of "little things" like cutting off healthy tissue, not cutting off diseased tissue, giving too much anaesthetic, letting the patient bleed too much. Yes, "little things" like disablement and death. Or for architects and builders, "little things" like calculating loads incorrectly and a walkway collapsing in a hotel lobby. Or for trained sea captains, "little things" like spilling thousands of gallons of crude oil or running into icebergs. Or for drivers, "little things" like cutting off another car to get to work one minute faster and instead causing a chain collision.
As to the easy and popular sport of lawyer-bashing, it is exceedingly rare for a lawyer to create a case, and fairly common for a lawyer to prevent or end one. Attorneys are forbidden from soliciting clients -- they can be and are suspended or disbarred for it -- and restricted in their advertisements. Thus, most people who come to an attorney with a potential lawsuit come in because **they** want to sue and, in a system without lawyers where every person is their own counsel, would already be sueing. Since the attorney gets paid only if he or she collects money, they won't want to waste their time on a case that has little chance of winning. The contingency arrangement weeds out many more frivolous suits than it creates. When I worked in a law office, we turned more potential tort (lawsuit) clients away than we accepted. If a law office was measured by what it does the most, the typical law firm would be called a "lawsuit rejection office" and not a "law office".
I'm not here to bash lawyers and with every profession there are good ones and bad ones. Doctors are human too! Of course we expect them make good decisions, judgements, etc, but the bottom line is that they are human and therefore fallible. Suprise.
I know I have already posted in this thread, But the more I read the morre I have to re-post. In Phila a SEPTA bus fresh from the garage, had made no stops had an accident. People jumped on the bus and claimed injuries. It was dismissed but the lawyers got a very light slap on the wrist by the PA bar. This is an olympic sport in PA and all the lawyers are still at it. Even dismissed cases cost the enity being sued money.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll say it again: some people will do anything, even sue, in order to make what they perceive as a fast buck. As for lawyers, I am remided of the 2015 sequence in Back to the Future II, in which Marty McFly's future son is "tried, convicted, and sentenced to 20 years in the state penitentiary" for robbery within TWO HOURS! Doc Brown replies that "the judicial system acts much more swiftly now that they've abolished all lawyers." Wouldn't that be nice?
Not if you've been arrested for something you didn't do. (Paging L-man. Paging L-man! L-man to the white courtesy phone.) You would very quickly be sent to prison. So you think the criminal justice system would be better off without lawyers too? There's another one the media loves to discuss -- criminals getting off on "technicalities". The last time I checked, the Bill of Rights was not a technicality. The right to not be searcehd without probable cause was not a technicality. The right to not incriminate yourself in the face of police browbeating and outright deception is not a technicality.
Even assuming ever single police officer is honest -- a bizarre assumption to make in New York City considering past corruption scandals -- people who investigate and have to come to conclusions, whatever the field may be, often form an opinion early and then filter all later facts through that opinion. They become attached to that conclusion, and are very reluctant to reject it in the face of conflicting evidence. Evidence contrary to their early conclusion is planted, or contaminated, or being misinterpreted, or is just ignored. In science, the mechanism to counter this is the peer review. In the area of crime control, the mechanism is the court system and, if needed, the trial. And with the power of the State against you, would you, if accused of a crime, want to be in court alone, without help, without advice? Would you want to go to jail because the Government's agent, the prosecutor, is more eloquent than you? Would you want to go to jail because there was a law which favored your case but you didn't know about it?
Yes, swift trials. Trials are very swift in Red China. "Trials" under a stout tree with a rope were very swift in the Wild West and the Deep South. But I wouldn't want to entrust my liberty to a swift trial. In answering whether, beyond a resonable doubt, the accused committed a crime, haste really does make waste.
Going back to lawsuits, I know nobody believes this, but a system without lawyers would have more stupid civil cases and not less. People come into law offices all full of anger and righteous indignation at whoever they feel injured them. If there were no lawyers, they wouldn't have gone to a law office but directly to the courthouse to file suit. But we often -- MORE OFTEN THAN WE ACCEPT CASES -- have to tell them that they have no case under the law or that if they win, what they'll get isn't worth the effort.
Instead of swallowing what the media feeds you, I defy you to ask twelve random attorneys who do tort cases -- not every lawyer does -- how many people who come to them with cases that they turn away as not having a case or not having one worth pursuing.
"Lawyers turning down stupid lawsuits." My wife is a bank examiner. Bankers tend to go from not loaning to anyone, no matter how creditworthy, because no one else is, to lending money for any project no matter how shaky, because everyone else is. Can't get fired for following the herd.
At the peak of the 1980s, a banker told my wife that the deals were not as stupid as they seemed, because they turned down four deals for every one they accepted. BUT the one they accepted had generally been turned down by four other banks. And the four they rejected were generally accepted somewhere else. Perhaps the same is true of stupid lawsuits -- SOMEONE will agree to file them.
Look at the bright side John. Unlike Shakephere, none of the Subtalkers has threatened to kill you. Perhaps you should try again to shift the discussion to journalists, politicians, televangelists or the cigarette companies.
It's long been reputed that just about any lawsuit, no matter how absurd, will find a lawyer eager to handle it. With almost a million lawyers in the United States, and law-schools-cum-diploma-mills churning out tens of thousands more each year, there are a lot of lawyers desparate for work, who are willing to take chances on ridiculous cases if there's even a remote chance of success.
Now if some of those lawyers would get retrained as engineers and programmers, our economy would be in far better shape .... oh, that's just wishful thinking.
Having in the past worked as a manager for BK I can tell you people complain if the coffee is not scalding. I also have read that the older the person the more severe a burn can be using identical temps. I have a great deal of sympathy for this woman but I expect hot things to burn me. As for her medical bills how much was paid by Medicare, and did Medicare get subragation for these bills?
Hi. I guess I should mention that "Jack" introduced me here. I thought he was a nut:) but this site really exists. Hmph. Anyway, in our conversation, we talked about the usefulness of the Broad-Ridge Spur. Why was that built? For people from the Gallery who were too lazy to walk to Broad Street?(Incidentally, are the any mall subway stops up there in New York. I've never been on a New York Subway. I was too scared. Go figure.)
Hey, Denise. What kept you? You never told me I was a nut:)
Hello, everyone.
The Broad-Ridge Spur was not built to be a shuttle to the Gallery, although today it seems that is one of its primary purposes. The B-R Spur was originally the eastern leg of a two-track, bi-directional "distributor subway" which was to depart the Broad Street main line, run along Ridge Street, 8th Street, Locust Street and (I think) back up along either 18th or 19th Street to the Spring Garden area where it would return to the Broad Street main line.
Obviously, this plan did not come to completion. The subway was built as far as 15th-16th & Locust Streets Station; a "spur on the spur" was built out from the 8th and Market Streets station as far as Broadway Station in Camden, New Jersey over the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. When PATCO extended rapid transit service out along the right-of-way of the old Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines as far as Lindenwold (i.e., built the Lindenwold Hi-Speed Line) the leg along 8th and Locust Streets became its downtown distributor. The local Philadelphia SEPTA trains were cut back to the new "upper level" single-track platform built at 8th & Market Streets. This is the B-R Spur service, and they no longer serve the Locust Street subway.
Today, besides serving the important downtown shopping area near the Gallery Mall, the B-R Spur actually serves several key functions:
1) It provides New Jerseyans with quicker, "one-seat ride" access to jobs in the Temple University area since they can transfer to/from PATCO at 8th Street and not at the Walnut-Locust Station on the Broad Street main line;
2) It provides North Philadelphians "reverse commuter" access to jobs out in New Jersey for the same reason as stated above; and
3) It serves the residents of the Chinatown area, who have their own subway station on the Spur.
Currently, B-R Spur trains run up to Olney Station with weeknight and Saturday service extended one more stop to the terminal at Fern Rock Transportation Center. Recently, SEPTA terminated Spur service north of the Erie Station; the clamor from local citizens persuaded SEPTA to restore service as far as Olney Station within weeks. There is no Sunday service on the B-R Spur; it is the only "rapid transit" line in Philadelphia to not have Sunday service.
Finally, I think I recall reading once that although the subway tunnel along Locust Street between 8th and Market and 15th-16th Streets was built during the 1930's tracks were not laid down until sometime after WW2. I guess it made a good bomb shelter during the war!
For further info, you should check out a book called "The Lindenwold Hi-Speed Line" by J. William Vigrass.
The northern limit of the "Center City loop" line was Arch St, not Spring Garden St. Portions of the Arch St subway exist at 10th St and in the 1200 block of Arch. Neither has ever seen a train.
The Ridge Spur has been one of SEPTA's success stories, considering the institution of the free transfer between Broad St and Market-Frankford at City Hall in '79 almost killed it. When that didn't work, the Spur was replaced by a shuttle bus in '81-83 during construction of the Commuter Tunnel. The bus ran very infrequently and there was talk at the time about the Spur never returning. Obviously it did and it's doing well.
I'm not sure of the volumes that use the Spur today but they've never been all that high. Chinatown station is right up there with the lowest volume subway stops in Phila, I'm sure, given its out of the way location and almost unknown status. Much of the time there is no cashier on duty. Despite of the Spring Garden corridor east of Broad growing with small-scale commercial establishments, as well as the relocated Red Cross, the Spring Garden stop remains shuttered.
Is that why they shut down the Spring Garden station on the B-R? I think that's Philadelphia's only "ghost station." I've only been on it twice, and I'm not to keen about the 8th Street terminus because, well, there's no bumper there. If a train comes barreling in there's nothing there to stop it(or at least, as they say "slow it's roll").
I believe that on what is now Patco, there was a local stop just before the ascent to the bridge. Am I mistaken? Its been 33 years.
Yes, there was a stop at Franklin Square. I remember getting on there once as a kid. It was closed sometime in the '80's, I assume for poor patronage. There isn't much around Franklin Square, and what there is (Police Headquarters, WHYY, etc.) isn't stuff Jersey people would be going to anyway. The park there is mostly inhabited by homeless people. I'll know Philadelphia is really here to stay if Franklin Square becomes a hot place to hang out. . .
Looking over the Septa rail map in the yellow pages(do they do that elsewhere?) the B-R spur and the Patco line ran parallel to each other(I assume on different levels) until the bridge. If they re-opened The Franklin Square stop and put a stop there for the B-R that might boost patronage. I also want to know just how old is the exit portal for the Frankford el in Philly? It looks very modern for 1922.
The exit portal(or just portal is fine) that we see today was built I believe in the 70's but don't quote me. It was relocated to Front and Race just before the Ben Franklin Bridge from Front and Arch(wow, one block). I think it was to accomodate the (at that time) new station at Spring Garden St. from Fairmount Avenue. I think that's also when they renovated the station at 2nd Street. It's a little better looking than the others in the tunnel. It's one con-when turning to exit the portal, that lound "screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"The train makes is not pleasant to the ear. No problem with that on that new el car which I won't mention because we know it so well.
To be precise, the El was relocated when the stretch of I-95 it runs down was built (I think the exact year was 1971). There were two stops that were consolidated into the Spring Garden station, one of which was Fairmount--I forget the other.
As for the Broad-Ridge idea, beyond the fact that it wouldn't help patronage, (because there isn't enough stuff at Franklin Square), the stop is past the point where the PATCO and B-R split. So you'd have to dig new tunnel at great expense. Not worth it.
The Frankford El was relocated into the median of I-95 in 1976-77. There was a portion of the line that was temporary and "shoo-flied" around the construction zone, quite literally, for 3 or 4 years before the relocation. The new ortal dates to this time.
The El had a stop at Fairmount which is the only one which was abandoned due to the relocation. The new stop at Spring Garden replaced it.
The old portal at Front & Arch was a good picture spot since one could get up above it easily on the street. The grade difference between Front St and Delaware Ave was quite severe.
The Franklin Square stop isn't close enough to the Ridge Spur to make the connection very easy. As noted in a previous post, Franklin Square isn't exactly a place that would produce ridership. Even when the Metropolitan Hospital was open (a block away), not many patrons used Franklin Square. The same can be said for the Spur's Chinatown stop.
An additional problem would be an operational one. The Spur goes to single track just south of Chinatown to access its terminal at 8th & Market. The Franklin Square stop would have to be on this single-track stretch.
I contacted PATCO about this stop. It was built to handle the bicentennial and opened in 1979 I believe. It was closed due tow low ridership.
while on the PATCO subject-have you noticed they are using NYCT style floor tile now on their Philly renovated statiions such as 8th and Market?
Franklin Square Station was built in the the 1940s I think, but closed around 1963, I think, then reopened for the Bicentennial, then closed again because it is practically in the middle of nowhere, unless you are headed for the entrance ramps to all those highways and bridges.
Franklin Square is the only one of Wm. Penn's original squares that has really fallen into disuse and is unpleasant to be at.
Actually, the park per se is quite well up, with nice trees, grass, and buildings. It's just the homeless lounging all around that kind of mess it up, not to mention the roaring expressway 10 feet away. . .
I seem to remember reading that the Locust St. extension opened in the mid-50s. And it was only opened during rush hours until the PATCO line started in 1969.
I always thought the Ridge Avenue line, built in the late 20s or early 30 was to get shoppers to Gimbels and Strawbridge & Clothiers, which were both at 8th and Market.
Don't forget Lit's (lit bros.)
That was a VERY busy corner. I'm sure, when built, they knew that, but then things changed.
With regard to the question about mall subway stops in New York:
The best example is at the Herald Square complex (34th Street/Broadway/6th Avenue), where the multi-level Manhattan Mall is directly connected into a large subway station complex that includes two NYC Transit express stops (one for the B, D, F, and Q; other one for N and R) and the PATH 33d Street Station.
Another example is at 59th Street and Lexington Avenue, where Bloomingdale's has a basement connection into an adjacent and unique 3 level station serving the 4, 5, 6, N, and R lines.
The NYC subways aren't really scary - take a trip here and take a ride!
Don't forget Woodhaven Blvd. on the R/G under Queens Blvd. and its proximity to Queens Center Mall.
Do the downtown Brooklyn stations like Hoyt St. and Hoyt Schermerhorn count because there are near all the department stores there?
Perhaps the idea is large complexes accessible direct from subways, without going on the street, as in Montreal.
The World Trade Center is one such complex, and has a substantial underground shopping area. Grand Central and Rockefeller Central both have extensive shopping, and are adding a lot more -- both have direct subway access. If the MTA ever succeeds in selling the Colesium, the resulting development would be accessible from the Columbus Circle subways. The new Atlantic Center mall has no direct access from the subway, but a new shopping center by the same developer has just been approved for the location directly over Atlantic Terminal. The second floor corridor in the existing building ends facing the hole in the ground, and appears to have been designed to facilitate a walkway over a street linking the existing building with the new one -- and the subways.
I've often argued that the huge vacant area southwest of Stillwell terminal would be a great spot for a major commercial complex. A walkway could be built over the street with removable glass -- one could walk direct to the complex while taking in the ocean breeze in the summer, but be protected from the elements in the winter. The complex could open directly onto Boardwalk, with a parking garage at grade. The zoning would not permit such a complex, however, and I have yet to convince anyone of the value of changing it. Broadway Junction would be another good site, although it is hard to attract private investment to such a poor area. The parking lot at the Junction in Flatbush -- right at the end of the Nostrand Avenue line, is for sale for commercial development. The local councilman is pushing it.
A developer has proposed a shopping center over the Bay Ridge division railroad right were the West End and Sea Beach division intersect. Directly accessible from two subways. Transit advocates (ie Transportation Alternatives) oppose it as being "suburban" and "auto-oriented", while claiming not enough parking would be provided???? The claim building additional commercial development at this site would encourage people to buy cars and reduce ridership. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
The Gallery(the nation's largest city mall, thank you very much) has subway stops from the El at 8th and 11th Streets. But here's what I don't like. I've been to NYC countless times and make sure the next vehicle I step in after that NJ Transit train is a subway. I like the fact that there is direct access to the subway(at least the 7th Avenue, I've never bothered for the 8th) without going outside. Here in Philly, you go to 30th Street, and, well, the story's different. When one exits 30th Street(which is funny because the main entrance is on the Schuykill Expressway[29th Street, if you will}) to get on either the trolley or the El, you must cross 30th St. OUTSIDE then enter down STEEP steps to the turnstiles, walk 75 feet, pay, then go down steps. Total time, about 3 minutes if it's rush hour and you got cars coming off the expressway. By then, you could have missed two trains and innumerable trolleys(I love the frequency of the trolleys). If it's snowy or rainy(I remember doing it in 5 minutes during the Blizzzzzzzzzzzzzard of '96 which I needn't revisit). I find that a little inconvenient.
I've often wondered myself, why there is no direct connection between 30th
St. Station, and the Market-Frankford/Subway-Surface Lines. Does anybody know
if SEPTA has ever considered constructing an underground concourse that would
directly connect 30th St. Station with the subway? I think it would be a MAJOR
improvement if they did. Since 30th St. Station is Philadelphia's main train
station, I think it's stupid that it doesn't have direct access to the subway,
especially since the subway runs right passed it, and the subway station is
right across the street. I feel that SEPTA could very easily construct a
concourse or tunnel to connect 30th St. Station, with the Market-Frankford/
Subway-Surface Lines' 30th St. Station mezzanine.
Also since Greyhound is the major bus station...I cannot believe that there is no direct connection between that and the Market East station or the Market Frankford EL. It would be so convenient.
Yeah, but the Filbert Terminal isn't exactly the P.A. Terminal. Have you ever been there? Yikes!
Is anyone in your family a schoolteacher? My english teacher's name is Moskal. You don't meet many Moskals.
As far as I know I do not have any english school teachers with my last name. Where do you go school and where do you live? I am curious as to where this Moskal is from.
I go to Masterman High(which I saw in a thread not too long ago). I live in Philly. The school is right outside Center City(or downtown). If you choose to visit, take the train on up.
.....history...repeat...--take a look toward the south end of the platforms at 30th st. There were at one time stairways down from each to an East West tunnel which in turn connected by stairs to the Market st sub fare control mezzanine. These were sealked circa 1969 when Metroliner Service started and I am also sure that by then they were becoming a public urinal. As to the dirty dog, in the mid sixties their atation was on Market around 18th or so and accessinle by underground concourse from both the Market sub and Suburban(PRR) station. It is both sad and remarkable how much was provided for in earlier years and how much has been trashed.
We may sort of be thinking of the same thing here, but maybe not. I remember as a kid walking through the direct connection from 30th Street to the El stop. However:
a.) That was in the '70's or early '80's, which was after David V. remembers it, and;
b.) The entrance I remember was from the main hall of the station, rather than the platforms. I'm trying to think of exactly where it was. I'm pretty sure it was in the northwest corner of the hall, which is now where the escalators to the parking garage are. However, sometimes I think it might have been in another spot instead. Anyway, by the time I got back to Philly for college in the late '80's, it was closed. It remained sealed for a few years with the big "Subway" sign over it. I assume it was closed either because of the new garage or else (much more likely) because it became a homeless/urine/crime trap. It's true that it would be nice to have it back. However, we are at least better off than Chicago in that the station is right next to the stop. All of the stations still left in Chicago, you have to walk at least a block to get to the station. The worst is Union Station. The closest there is two or three blocks away, through a mostly empty commercial neighborhood--and the entrance to the subway station is underneath a freeway overpass!! I'd hate to do that late at night.
Indeed there was also a stairway down from the street/concourse level pn the hall at the southwest corner of the station, but in my previous post I was descrining a connection from the through(morth-south--RR east-west) train platforms such that you never even entered the concourse of the main station. Both of these connection paths were especially nice in nasty weather AND could buy you a quicker connection!
I forgot to say in the last post that you can still see where the connection was in the 30th Street El Stop. It's a sealed-off section of wall when you turn towards the staircase closest to the Amtrak station.
Fascinating how everybody now uses the politically correct expression 'the homeless', when discussing the filthy derelicts and bums who turn our transit facilities and parks into toilets (see other postings on the closed Franklin Square PATCO station).
As long as Americans continue to tolerate animals who shit all over public facilties, convenient transit links such as the 30th St. Station - Subway passage (wherever it was) will continue to be in jeopardy. Derelict trash - excuse me - 'the homeless' - should be living in jail or facilties designed to contain them, not rail stations & bus terminals.
OK, while I grant you there are those "derelict trash" who have no respect for public property, think of how hard it is to get out of a situation like that. If some guy wearing 7 layers of clothing and reeking of urine came into your office and asked for a job, would you give it to him? A lot of homeless are in that situation because of circumstances out of their control. Some are lazy bums that sit around waiting for handouts and taking no initiative, but look at me. I lived on the street for 5 months and it ain't pretty. There's no living in subway concourses, the mayor puts up giant "works of art" to block steam grates and streetsweepers roll over you if you don't get up after three wake-up calls. I lived that life and am proud of the fact that I picked myself up by my bootstraps and went back to school. Now, I have a scholarship and this time next year will be at Yale. so before you go calling the homeless all sorts of ignorant names, why don't you give up your warm bed, your hot meals and your nice slippers to a man on the street and try living that way. Try that life and see how easy it is to bounce back. Than if you still have ignorant things to say, I wont throw up after hearing them.
Good luck
paul
While I dislike the fact that people put down other folks without living in their shoes, you can't blame the guy for his opinion. I used to give a homeless guy some spare change if I had it, but you don't know what that money may be going for. Now I applaud you. You took the initiative and knew that the only person who could help Paul was Paul. You're one of the good guys, but I see "homeless people" who tell folks getting off the El to spare a little change to get something to eat. Well, I never knew crack contained all the essential vitamins and minerals needed for a healthy life. I don't want to sound callous, but you just don't know if they're helping themselves out or helping themselves down. Let's just hope I'm wrong.
I hesitate to add to this, but when I see bums begging for money I think that while I was saving money and learning to live like an adult, hold a job, and follow the law, the supposed "homeless" were wasting their money, wasting their time, probably not paying attention in high school, wouldn't accept the opinions of mental health professionals, and allowed the normal world to slip away from them. Also, when I hear about their sad "drug abuse" I think that there is a reason that those drugs are illegal, and if now they are pathetic addicts, maybe they should have paid attention when they were told that they were illegal (though not true of alcohol).
Plus, every "homeless" person could get free meals at church-run food places, and a place to sleep every night.
If society is at all responsible, it is only that the bar has been raised for living a reasonable life. There are no longer boarding houses, or farms you can just live on temporarily, or much use for people who want to pay low rent and do unskilled labor (thanks to welfare and the idea of universal college).
Also, many "experts" refuse to accept that illegal drugs are illegal for a reason and are very different from alcohol which is handled by most peope responsibly, and cigarattes which only hurt your long term health, but don't affect your ability to live like a human being. Also it seems that the "homeless" are allowed to live their way and ruin otherwise pleasant places because they have newly invented "rights" to wreck places up, while I don't have the "right" to even drop a piece of paper on the street (not that I should) or even think something about someone for a possibly unwarranted reason. But I find stinking up a place or living in a public stairway much worse than dropping a candy wrapper down the sewer or having a stereotyped belief.
I have also seen -- as a server at soup kitchens -- that many "homeless" or users of soup kitchens are not really homeless. At the soup kitchens many just need a free meal to save money because they are poor (which is okay by me if done by a charity); on the street I've seen beggars get left off by relatives to start begging, and I've seen beggars standing in places beggars could not easily get to without being driven there.
Nobody feels sorry for the relatively unsuccessful person who works like a son-of-a-gun and maybe doesn't achieve what he has worked hard for in life (nobody gives me a handout for not being rich, despite having a post-graduate degree). Nobody has sympathy for someone who smokes cigarettes in order to avoid drinking alcohol or to avoid being nervous and tense or just likes doing it. Many city people insult and harangue people who work hard in order to live where it is safe, pleasant to them, relaxing, and their children may be educated to their full extent (I mean maybe they just want to live that way). But we have to have complete sympathy for people who refused to follow the simplest guidelines in life (don't break the law, you have to do some work to stay alive, save at least a little for the future). Give me a break!
End of harangue... Back to the Subways
This is some food for thought for Paul -
I agree that people find themselves in situations beyond their control. I can be compassionate and support organizations that take care of those down on their luck.
However, I find it hard to endure a "homeless" person spread out over two plus seats with all their worldly possessions when I’m riding to work on the CTA Red Line ‘L’. This while I’m on my way to WORK. I’ve experienced situations created by homeless people ranging from awkward to downright disgusting. An example - I've witnessed one using the train he was riding as a bathroom. In right in front of a full car of onlookers, however, I was a lucky one, I wasn’t close enough to get wet. How many will think about finding an alternate way to get to work?
By in large, most of the people on the train are going to work. I know that is a four letter word, but something we must do if we aren’t lucky enough to be born wealthy.
Without sounding heartless, operators of public transit must make some hard decisions regarding these people and their effect on the customers and property. I’m sorry, but customers using public transit shouldn’t be subjected these people. Some of who can be downright abusive and dangerous.
Don't we riders have the right to expect a clean, safe and on-time ride on the bus or 'L'? We are, by the way, going to work to pay the taxes to make this country operate.
I’m not a suburbanite. I live and work in Chicago. I know of what I speak!
P. S. - I'm very glad you were able to get yourself "on track" again. I just can't agree with you on this subject.
Well, that's what smart coversation is-disagreement. I have horror stories of my own of homeless people and some atrocious acts. Just over the weekend I did something for someone that I wasn't sure about first but decided was better than giving him money. I was walking downtown and saw a homeless man rummaging through a dumpster behind a pizza place. I don't like to see things like that so I went and bought the man some food. He graciously accepted it and as I turned away I heard "Hey, guys, we got some food." I turn to see two little kids come out of a large box next to him. There are children on the street who are in this kind of perdicament. I didn't see that many when I was on the street(about 4 years ago) but when I did, I sacrificed what little food I had or change I found on the ground to help them out. There are many homeless people out there who I admit warrant nothing but disgust, but there are those who have to confine themselves to back alleys to keep from bothering everyone. When I saw the man and his kids I hoped that he was as good as he seemed to those kids. I gave him $30 for some items and told him of a job that I knew of in my neighborhood. Today I saw the man on the subway with some nicer clothes. I asked him where he was going. He told me he was on his way to the interview. He was on the right train and definitely on the right track.
I think there is ground that we can agree on. I am not a "heartless bastard" who thinks all homeless should disappear. I know that will not happen. My heart goes out to families that are caught between jobs and loss their homes. This in a country of so much plenty. There are, however, places for these people to go. I’ve heard stories that some of these shelters are not much better than living on the street, however, it is a place to start.
There are those in the world who are "contributors" and there are those in this world who are "takers". You don’t have to be homeless to be in the latter category.
Many homeless are trying to make a better life for themselves. And for them I’m supportive and encourage them. There are those however, who work the system, have no intention of contributing and in general, make a pain in the ass of themselves. These are the people that I object to - whether there are homeless or otherwise.
You are correct, solving problems, understanding people and reaching consensus begins with disagreement and is ends through conversation.
I congratulate you, and I hope you will continue to point out the truth about life as a homeless person to those who insist on condemning people they do not know. I am wondering how you did manage to pick yourself up and get that scholarship. This isn't really the place for a lengthy discussion of the matter, but perhaps a quick summary of the steps you finally took would be instructive.
Well, it's really a story of teen angst. I was your typical teen runaway at first. My mother was getting ready to marry a real ***hole about a year after my father passed away. I didn't want to be in a family that I felt put me last. I took off and lived on the streets. I only felt a sense of freedom and independence for about two days when my stomach began to ache. I was too proud to return home( and TOO frightened) so to get food I lived off of the $27.36 I had taken with me and only ate half a hamburger. Amazingly I kept this up for a month. After that, I decided to return to my general neighborhood but nowhere near what was to me then, my former home. I ran into some friends of mine who were relieved to see me and told me that my mother *and* my new father were searching for me. I was too stupid to realize that it would have been so much better to go to them. I told my friends that I needed to clear some things up and asked them for whatever money they had on them. I had lied. And what really tore me up inside was the fact that they said they would keep my secret for another day and then tell my parents where to look for me(I justified my actions to myself by disclosing the place I used as a home the first month).
Knowing that I had probably dug myself into a hole I had to find new "lodgings" because I was in no way swayed by the news of my parents concern. I saw only rage. For three months I was in and out of homeless shelters after hearing stories of people being thrown out after a few days. In the last month I was dirty, hungry and aching to be with my family again. I began routinely going around my neighborhood and once late at night dared to go past my home. I saw one of friends during the last week of what I call my re-awakening. He told me that all of my teachers were worried, my parents were at wits end and him and the rest of my friends felt betrayed that I didn't make good on that promise I made to return. I told him to get lost, because I didn't want to hear anything that would make me feel like I did anything wrong. But that night was VERY cold. I sat around looking at stars and airplanes and thinking what the past 5 months had been for. I had spent many a night doing this but this night was different for a reason I still fail to comprehend. I decided that I would return home that Sunday. And so I did. When my mother opened the door it was like some kind of thing inside me died. It was something bad that I felt inside. That I was elfish enough to put my family and my friends through that kind of torment. The next two days were spent getting to know each other again. I must have apologized to my mom 3,000 times but she didn't want that. She wanted to hear me say that this wouldn't happen again. She wanted to know did I ever think of what my father would think of that. When she said that it hit me like a ton of bricks. I stood there and thought "this is the person your father loved?" I broke down and cried. I just sat down and cried. I asked my father to forgive me, my mother, everybody. She said to me that everybody makes mistakes, but that it takes someone with "nads"(she never really got that, just from me) to come back. The next day, tuesday, I was in school again. I was surprised that no one knew of what I'd done. They said that my friends told them that I was away to see family. Did my parents tell my teachers differently? If so, they didn't tell the students. I went to my friends later that day and told them that I was beyond apologies. I owed them, big. They were just glad to see me again.
I came in too late to get any good grades, but worked hard the next year. I was able to get a part time job to help out at home. Things were going OK. And they have been since. I have no problem telling people this story because they can see the kind of dumb mistakes self-righteousness can cause. Well, that's my story.
No, you didn't make a mistake, you just waited a bit too long to do the right thing! And you are very kind and wise to be willing to share your story with others who will profit from hearing it. You didn't mention if you wound up with any sort of relationship with your new Stepfather, but since you recognized so clearly that YOU had been an asshole, I hope it helped you to realize that we are all assholes in some way or other, and one of the major lessons of life is to overlook those aspects and concentrate on the positive traits of others, no matter how long it takes to find them!
Well, after I came back, I decided to give my new stepafather another chance(Actually I never gave him the first chance) to show me what kind of person he is. He isn't so bad. Other than the obvious, he has been very supportive of everything I've done and never tried to make me feel bad when I made CONSIDERABLY smaller mistakes. We get along great. I'm actually planning a surprise for him. Hopefully, he won't be using the computer and checking URL's:)
Your experience is remarkably similar to the parable of the prodigal son in the Bible.
Paul:
I'm really glad for you that you got your life together. But that's just it. YOU had to do it, and ultimately you did it for yourself. Sure, I cry my eyes out that life's a bitch and there are not too many warm grates to sleep on anymore, but you know, maybe because I've dragged my weary ass out of a warm bed (no slippers though) every day for the past 20 years to hustle to work to put meat on the table for my 2 kids, I just don't have all that much sympathy left for those too lazy, too stoned, too drunk, or too mentally screwed up to support themselves. Actually, if these people don't stink up the train or bus I'm riding to work, or the station I use, then I actually have no beef with them, and 'ignorant' as my comments may be, I sometimes even hand over a buck or two I hope they'll actually use for food. As you found out, it's a cold world out there, and nobody owes you jack shit. Yeah, I'm thank the Good Lord I'm not on the street, but my own sense of responsibility has a lot to do with this happy state of affairs. And, you know, if some guy reeking of urine with 7 layers of clothing came to my office asking for a job instead of a handout, I might - if only from shock - actually hire the sonofobitch.
Suburban Shopping Malls thrive for many reasons, but tossing your purchases in the trunk of your car( Watched by rooftop cops where it has proven necessary) has become something the masses are comfortable with. Carrying a Bloomingdale,s or Sach's chic parcel home on the A train is not going to be met with the same same enthusiasm.
I guess that is true, for large purchases at least. But people buy small things in malls too--some tapes and batteries at Radio Schack, a paperback book or two at B. Dalton's or whatever, a pair of shoes...
There are actually surprisingly few "malls" in N. Y. City. The only suburban-type mall I am aware of that connects with a subway station is the one at the north end of DeKalb Ave. station, and the connection between the station and the mall is only open during certain hours.
To some extent, the suburban mall is a replacement for neighborhood commercial strips, something that NYC still has plenty of. So we don't really need "malls", but I expect we will be getting more of them over the next few years as people from other areas, who are accustomed to malls, move (back) to NYC and establish themselves here. (Am I right that the percentage of NYC residents who formerly lived elsewhere in the US, as opposed to native New Yorkeers or foreign immigrants, is going up?)
Census info on those moving in:
The share of native born Americans moving into New York City is low, at least as measured by the 1990 census. About eight percent of households in 1990 had moved to their present address from another state in the prior five years. Affluent areas of Manhattan, and "Brownstone" areas of Brooklyn, match that figure. The area which attracts college educated people from across the country (mostly white but other races as well) is, in fact, expanding. I got a call from the "first yuppie in Ridgewood" recently, asking for data on the neighborhood.
Most of those moving in are young, often just out of school. When they have children, and face the fact that only 30 percent of NYC housing units have three or more bedrooms (vs. U.S. ave of 60 percent), many move out. I think that with the capital gains on houses tax-exempt up to $500,000, many baby boomers will sell their suburban homes and move back into a city apartment, perhaps buying a second home as well. As of 1998, however, the number of people moving to NYC from the rest of the country is probably lower than when masses of baby boomers were leaving college. 1976 was the bottom year of the "baby-bust", so the number of kids finishing college and available to move to the city is hitting a low this year. From this point, more and more children of baby boomers will be leaving school.
In the rest of the city, however, virtually everyone moving in is an immigrant. About 50 percent of the population is now foreign born or second generation. Non-college educated native New Yorkers are leaving, moving to areas where they can afford to buy a house. When their parents die, their homes and apartments are being occupied by immigrants. Bensonhurst was heavily elderly in 1990. It will be heavily immigrant in 2000 (unless the Manhattan Bridge goes, in which case it will be heavily abandoned).
The shopping mall phenomenon (I work for the agency which is trying to promote retail) is driven by the fact that the city, based on its population and income and national averages, should have 50,000 more retail jobs than it does. Local commercial streets are full, and have no room for large stores in any case. So people seeking large stores shop in the suburbs, and this costs the city jobs and taxes. A few years ago, Brooklyn only had three department stores. A super-regional mall, of which there are dozens in the country, is defined as a mall with at least three department stores. Thus, Brooklyn had fewer department stores than a single mall.
[The shopping mall phenomenon (I work for the agency which is trying to promote retail) is driven by the fact that the city, based on its population and income and national averages, should have 50,000 more retail jobs than it does. Local commercial streets are full, and have no room for large stores in any case. So people seeking large stores shop in the suburbs, and this costs the city jobs and taxes. A few years ago, Brooklyn only had three department stores. A super-regional mall, of which there are dozens in the country, is defined as a mall with at
least three department stores. Thus, Brooklyn had fewer department stores than a single mall.]
It's not hard to see why the city is relatively "under-retailed." Owners of small stores fight desparately against any attempts to permit more large retailers. Witness the City Council battle of a year or so ago, in which the small-store interests were able to stop zoning changes that would have opened up some industrial areas to large retailers.
In addition, much of the city is not physically suited to modern large-scale retailing. These operations generally require large single-story buildings, space for which can be in short supply. And that's not to mention the parking issue.
Finally, I have read (you may know more about this) that national retailers consider the city a run-of-the-mill location in terms of profitability. A New York store is likely to have high revenues - possibly higher than any of the retailer's stores in the United States - but also high expenses, so the bottom line is close to the national average. This doesn't prevent retail development, of course, but it does put in the city in line with many other potential locations throughout the country.
Even so, there is some hope on the horizon. K-Mart, Home Depot and Circuit City all have moved into the city, and Wal-Mart and Target are as close as Westbury.
Can anyone tell me where the majority of immigrants who reside in New York City
originated? As I've noticed that New York City has a rapidly growing Asian
population. I was told that New York has 3 Chinatowns, with a 4th in the making,
along with 2 Koreatowns, which makes me believe that the largest percentage of
New York City immigrants are either Chinese or Korean.
Dominicans are the single biggest immigrant group in the city. Chinese are probably second.
New York City, namely Greenpoint Brooklyn boosts the highest number of Polish immigrants and citizens on the East Coast!!!!!
New York City, namely Greenpoint Brooklyn has the highest number of Polish immigrants and citizens on the East Coast!!!!!
Just full of boring fact today. According to data published by the demographers across the floor, the top sources of NYC immigrants 1990 to 1994 were
Dominicans 110,140
Former Soviet Union 66,301
China 59,798
Jamaica 32,918
Guyana 30,764
Poland 19,537
Phillipines 17,378
Trinidad & Tobago 15,878
Haiti 14,957
India 14,957
Ecuador 13,980
Ireland 12,403
Columbia 11,309
These are, of course, legal immigrants. The total in five years was 562,988. The thing that makes NYC different is that its immigrants are more likely to be college educated and come from the Former Soviet Union and the Carribean. Mexicans are just starting to show up here, while those from China show up everywhere.
Yes, those stops count (as well as DeKalb Ave (D, Q, N, R) because of their proximity to the Fulton Mall downtown.
--Mark
The precedenst are the bride/walkways from the Loop to Marshall Field's and of course the labyrinthine corridors at GCT as mentioned above. Interestingly the corporate name of the developer for Atlantic Ave is similar to(affiliated?) the outfit which did the Cleveland Terminal Mall rehab which has turned a run down former long distance train station into a downtown Mall. This location has had rapid transit from the begining of the project in the 20's
I have never quite figured out the relationship between Forest City, the Cleveland-based publicly traded development company, and Bruce Ratner, the former city official and Brooklyn native, who has been personally rebuilding Brooklyn, using his connections to get public approvals and subsidies. I alway hear the company referred to as "Forest City - Ratner." My guess is that its some kind of joint venture -- Forest City provides the money and builds the buildings, Ratner does the deals.
Ratner built the Metrotech commercial development in Downtown, bought the Albee Square Mall, also downtown, built Atlantic Center, has two stores under construction across from Atlantic Center, won the right to build on the hole over Atlantic terminal, is trying to cut a deal to do an entertainment center at Coney Island, was the only bidder interested in redeveloping the old Loews Kings in Flatbush, owns the former Caldors in Flatbush, etc. If you want a new building in Brooklyn, he's a monopoly, except for the downtown hotel under construction by Muss company.
In April our family was in Cleveland and discovered Tower City; it is great, even though the Amtrak lines do not stop there anymore. It is popular mall, right above all 3 transit lines (running on the same double track) and has a direct covered connection to the Baseball stadium (Jacobs Field) and the Arena for indoor events.
This is an occurrance at many stations....On the Red Line, you have direct access from the Friendship Hts station into Mazza Galleria---At Crystal City on the Yellow/ Blue Lines, direct access to Crystal City Underground mall..the same would normally hold true for the Pentagon if it weren't for the renovations going on there. The Metro has also developed land parcels around stations to be used as retail, business and other mixed uses...this has really worked well at Bethesda (Red) and Rosslyn (Blue/Orange) and the Ballston (Orange) stations. There are also other stations named after malls in which the centers are nearby, White Flint (Red) and Prince George's Plaza (Green) come to mind.
I believe the Washington Metro has a specific policy of using new transit stations to promote commercial development, and using commercial development to pay for new rail stations. It has been written up in the transit literature. The great things about ending a transit line at a suburban mall are:
Since most people don't shop during the workday, the mall can lease spaces to those who park and ride to the city, and
Low wage workers from the city can get to the mall without a car.
I'd love to see major commercial development adjacent to Stillwell Terminal, with a pedestrian walkway over Surf Ave for those damp cold winter months. Entertainment themed retail, restaurants and services programmed for moderate and middle income housholds could be a real winner there.
Also, the Metro Mall on Metropolitan Av, adjacent to the M train terminal
When Fulton St.,Downtown Brooklyn was torn up for the IRT, the El stayed in place complicating underpinning. Consequently, the basements of the big department stores lining Fulton were exposed to the excavation. Many redid these walls as show windows, which remained into the 40's after the stores closed, visible from the IRT platforms or a mezzanine level, I'm not sure. Abraham and Strauss was the last major department store left in the 60's, and I think it had access from the IND Hoyt-Schermerhorn complex, but we seldom used the IRT to shop because it was too long a walk home from New Lots Avenue. Shepherd ave. we could schlep. In fact, I thought at first that the station name WAS Schlepard!
I don't know if all of these count according to strict definition, but here's some places I've been by:
a.) The Miami Elevated (it's not really a subway) ends at Dadeland Mall, one of the largest in the country.
b.) The Baltimore Metro ends pretty close to Owings Mills Mall (the upscale mall in town) and a path has been built between the two so you can walk from one to the other (Which is pretty amazing, given that the mall is in the beautiful suburbs and I'm sure most of the people who go there by subway are from the inner city. It's so unusual to see a place like that go out of there way to make themselves convienient to poor people.)
c.) SEPTA's Route 101 (Media trolley) has a stop at Springfield Mall
d.) The Pittsburgh trolley (I REFUSE to say "light rail") basically ends in the parking lot of whatever the big mall to the South of town is (I think it's South Hills--I had lunch there.) Of course, it also goes past Station Square across the river from downtown.
e.) While I've never actually gotten out there, I understand the Blue/Yellow lines in Washington have a direct connection to Crystal City (which is underground)
Also, isn't there a big mall on the PATH at Pavonia now?
It's not so surprising that a mall would make itself easily accessible to the inner city. Yes, some customers come from the city to the mall. But more importantly to the mall, many of the employees of the mall and the mall's stores also come from the inner city. This is one of the big arguments for extending the Blue Line subway in Chicago several miles into the boonies to the Woodfield Mall. The other big reason is the large number of office buildings (that is to say, real jobs) around Woodfield. (Few people are arguing that it'll make it easier for the suburbanites to get downtown -- they already do that by driving to the nearest Metra station.)
The Pavonia/Newport Station on PATH is close to the Newport Mall but you have to go outside, cross a 6 lane street at a crosswalk, walk thru an office building lobby, and cross a ped. bridge to the mall. It's not as bad as it sounds but the station certainly isn't in the mall itself.
In Washington, Crystal City is a poor excuse for a mall. I was in D.C. a couple years ago with time to kill so I went there. It was closed, and this was around 6:30 pm. (Slogan could be: Every day is like Sunday at Crystal City). There's Pentagon City (isn't there a "real" mall there with regular department stores, like Macy's/Penney's?). Also Union Station has a shopping/eatery/movie theater complex.
In New York, there's the Manhattan Mall (formerly A&S Plaza, formerly Gimbels) at the 34th St station on the N,R & B,D,F,Q and PATH lines. Access is just up the stairs right into the mall. People always mention World Trade Center, but that too is a pretty lame excuse for a mall. There's a Gap, a Radio Shack, a few other stores, and recently added, Borders Books & Music.
In San Francisco, there's a mall on Market St. across from the cable car terminal. Nordstrom's is there, and the only *curved* escalators I've ever seen. There is direct access to the Muni Metro station here (and BART? Can't remember if there's a BART station here too.)
-Dave
Quote:
In San Francisco, there's a mall on Market St. across from the cable car terminal. Nordstrom's is there, and the only *curved* escalators I've ever
seen. There is direct access to the Muni Metro station here (and BART? Can't remember if there's a BART station here too.)
Endquote.
I think you are refering to one of the four stations that are shared by BART and Muni, although I'm not sure exactly which one.
How about Los Angeles? If I remember correctly, there are two small "malls" within half a block of the 7th Street/Metro Center Red Line subway/Blue Line light rail station (this is the only Blue Line subway station, there rest are elevated or ground level). Each has at least one department store, and a variety of other shops. (I believe one has a Macy's, a hotel, and maybe six or eight other shops, and another one (named Seventh Marketplace) has one or two department stores and a dozen or so other shops.) Also, there is a large suburban-type shopping center named Kenneth Hann Plaza (drug store, supermarket, etc.) at the Imperial/Wilmington Blue Line/Green Line station, but that doesn't really count.
ELEVATED light rail?
Other Elevated Light Rails that I know of:
The northern section of Boston's Green Line at Lechmere;
The Baltimore Central Light Rail Line over the Patapsco River, into Baltimore's Penn Station, and in from Linthicum to Ferndale, MD.
The People Mover in Miami (???)
The entire U6 line in Vienna is a seemingly light rail line and it is elevated over a street for long sections
There may be others...
Miami's People Mover doesn't count as light rail for a simple reason-it doesn't run on rails. It runs on some type of depressed roadway and runs on rubber tires. But then again, Montreal's subway uses rubber tires. Crazy Canadians:)
The Miami People Mover is not a depressed roadway. It's a large metal elevated structure, with a metal guideway down the middle of each "track" to guide the train. There are even switches where the guideway shifts to pick a direction at a fork in the "road", but since there aren't really rails or flanged wheels, it's hard to call it a light rail line, but it's definitely elevated.
Montreal and Paris have rubber-tired trains but there are not only wide "tracks" for the tires, but also tracks for the metal wheels next to them, much more like a "rail"-road than the people mover.
In Toronto:
Yorkdale station is connected by a walkway to Yorkdale Mall.
Eaton Centre is right above Queen and Dundas Stations.
I think the subway extension line east of Kennedy on the Bloor-Danforth line connects to a shopping center in Scarborough.
At last check, the path that you mentioned that runs between the Owings Mills station and the mall has been closed due to victim being raped/ murdered. The path is rather long and it isn't always as well lighted as you would like. Speaking of Baltimore though, the light rail line has its northern terminus now in the parking lot of the Hunt Valley Mall.
You are absolutely right. The path was closed (with shuttle to the station during Mall hours) due to a mugging. Hunt Valley (aka Death Valley) Mall does have a Light Rail terminal on the grounds, but it's still a hike to the mall.
We came back from Washington on Monday and, of course, rode the subway there. I was totally stunned. I had no idea a subway system could be so nice! Sure I like the tunnels and els of New York, but, whoa! But, if you ask me, those cars kinda look like the R-110b(kinda). Have they gotten new cars since the opening in '76?
If subway trains get their power from a "Third Rail", whatever that is, why are there sparks on the tracks a train rides on?
A subway train does get it's power from a third rail, which is literally a third rail. It runs alongside the regular rails off the ground and carries the trains power, not the regular rails. You see sparks because to complete the circuit, a train has to conduct the charge back through the tracks. Or that's as I understand it.
Yes, on Third rail and overhead lines, the current supply return is through the tracks. This creates the complete circuit that is needed to let current flow. Therefore, sparking CAN happen to the tracks, though I'm unsure how bad it really is (it probbly isn't). Most tracks are "bonded" at the joints, that is, they have jumpers that are welded (?), to electrically connect the rail joints together. Of course, if the bond fails, you can get sparking. Right outside Mineola, there's a grade crossing where there are a few joints at the end - happens as lot there too. One Metro-North engineer told me that on the New Haven line, if a train derails, nobody moves or gets off it, or touches it until the power is cut, because the body of the train COULD become live if the Pans are still on the wire, or if the wire fell to the roof of the train. Of course people ON the train, being at the same potential as the car, and being effectively sheilded by the metal body from any return path, are totally safe.
Why doesn't the power effect the signal system (which itself is electric)? Looh at the tracks the next time you take the LIRR or Metro-North. Those big black boxes between the rails every mile or so are called "impedence bonds". They are designed to pass DC, but not AC through them. Since the signal voltage can be AC, if you use DC power, this becomes a way to isolate each section of track, as AC would "see" it, but leave one continuous return path, as DC would "see" it. Actually pretty slick, huh?
Anyone want to add or correct me here??
Sparking happens on subways in Philly a lot too. But I never knew that happens on vehicles with overheads. So that means that stepping on the tracks, minus the obvious threat of trains, is not safe or just when a train is approaching?
Chances are you are not seeing a "spark" on the track, but rather an "arc" on the third rail. Third rails have gaps and beginnings/ends. This is to accomodate switches, crossovers, and changes in placement (one side to the other). As the third rail shoe loses contact with the third rail at one of these gaps/end points, it can cause an arc to be drawn between the third rail and the shoe. The arc is merely the current flowing through the air as the direct contact is broken. If you watch a moving train and see such an arc, you will probably see one every time a third rail shoe goes by (two per car). When the train is past, look at that spot and you'll see the gap or end of third rail.
For overhead wire, the same thing can happen when the pan is temporarily separated from the wire -- as would occur at an insulator or if the pan bounces down or wire bounces up a bit and causes the separation.
In trolley operation at the Seashore Trolley Museum, we teach our operators to power off at an insulator in the overhead wire, so that (1) there's no arc,(2) the instant off/on surge doesn't damage the traction motors, and (3) there's no jolt to the passengers.
Here in Boston on the Green Line's new flyover from Haymarket to North Station, there's an insulator midway up the ramp. Most operators keep power on and there's a noticable jolt when the pan (or pans if a two-car train) passes this point. Every now and then I get a good operator who knows it's there, and momentarily powers-off at this point for a smooth ride -- and probably nicer treatment for the motors!
I just saw a picture of an M-3 that gave me a chuckle. Visit http://www.trainweb.com/railpix/s841s1.jpg. There, you will see what they should be doing with those abominable M-3 cars on the MFSE.
My thoughts exactly!
What the picture shows is probably one of the single units that SEPTA equipped with trucks salvaged from PATH's K-cars and transferred to the P&W to supplement the CTA cars after the 60's and Bullets passed from the scene. When the N-5's were delivered, the cars were scrapped as the El did not want them back.
That will be the fate of the Budds when all the M-4's are delivered. A rapid transit car built in 1961 is still 40 years old when all the new cars are here.
Budd did not build like Brill - equipment that, with normal maintenance, would last for 50+ years.
[Budd did not build like Brill - equipment that, with normal maintenance, would last for 50+ years.]
Maybe not for Philadelphia but I'd consider the NYCT R-32s (now nearly 35 years old) to be one of, if not the, most reliable subway car in the NYCT fleet, and will probably be running for close to 50 years before they're retired. And they were good even before the mid-life overhaul. The upcoming R-143 order will liley replace the R40s and R42s BEFORE the R-32/R-38 series is retired.
--Mark
Heck, given it seems that the average NY subway car gets about 40 years, provided that the R-32 doesn't fall victim to fatigue (i.e, MAJOR cracking of the body), I can't imagine that there'd be anything ELSE that would kill the fleet. In terms of lifespan, I'd say 50 years is conservative, 60 - 80 is more like it...
Remember, the LIRR MP-54 series lated 70 years, with Steel bodies and LIRR maintainece. The R-32 is Stainless, and probbly well care for now...
I didn't like em at first, but they grow on you....
Let's not blame Budd for the sins of the operators. As I've said here before, I think the Budds/M-3's would not be up for replacement if normal maintenance and upkeep had been performed. Despite the lack of attention, almost all of the cars look great, inside and out. The naysayers who said that AC was an absolute must could have been appeased by the addition of AC as part of a major overhaul, which was done with one car and could have been expanded to the entire fleet.
I'm afraid we've fallen into the good ol' American way of run it into the ground and then throw it away. This is not good news for supporters of transit and will only be ammunition for those who maintain that spending for transit is wasteful. The M-4's have already been bashed by the local media, and perhaps deservedly so. I shudder to think if there is a major failure when all the Budds are gone. Let's hope not.
Another thought on this - PATCO's orignial cars are approaching their 30th birthdays. Would you have guessed by looking at them? PATCO has a meticulous record when it comes to maintenance and the cars always look spiffy both inside and out. Would you have guessed these are the older cousins of the El cars?
It's hard to tell the '68 Budds from the '80 Vickers cars at a quick glance unless you know the spotting features/differences. They were all built to the same plans and specs. Yet the older cars still look futuristic and as good as new. Go figure!
It appears that PATCO has a much better maintanence schedule for its equipment as compared with PRT/PTC/SEPTA.
PTC was letting its streetcar/El/Subway maintenance go to pieces in the middle '60's. Air Brake PCC's with loose & noisy brake shoes, MFSE Budd's with air leaks, non-functional door leaves, and interior lights out. Reportedly in the SEPTA era, the 69th Street Shop was considered the most inefficient and corrupt workplace on the property.
At Woodland Depot in the middle 60's, defect reports would go untreated for weeks. It was not unusual for an operator to write up a car for a problem, only to get the same car a week later with the same problem. Woodand was a firetrap in the early 1960's (there were still feed troughs in one bay - the wooden part that had been there since horsecars. When it burned on October 23, 1975, taking 57 PCC's and several pices of work equipment with it, NOBODY was very surprised.
I agree. Don't you just love it when the doors on an M-3 only open halfway. Ok, no more M-3 bashing. Well, maybe a little more M-3 bashing.
PATCO has not been without its share of troubles either. The last time I was in Philly in February of this year, they had notices in their cars stating that they had to turn off the baseboard heaters due to safety concerns until the heaters could be modified. I know no details but apparently there must have been a fire or sparking or smoke condition or electric shock to a passenger.
Perhaps one of our Philly posters could help with this. Steve, has NYCT had any heater problems with the Budd Cars.
I don't know if it's the problem, but the heaters do get hot, and I have heard complaints from people who put umbrellas, briefcases, plastic bags, etc down near them. Could this be it? It's the first I've heard of such a problem.
It's a problem on the Market El. I burned my leg on that thing last summer. What are they doing running heaters in July(I got mad and sued. I won:))
As the self-appointed unofficial biggest fan of the M-4's I've heard no such put-downs. What was said?
Maybe that's what this two-bit burg needs. A sturdy, good lokking car with brakes that work:).
People who take the subway there is new train in town so look for it!
Care to elaborate?
I hope you are not talking about the R110A & B because tgise have been around for quite a while.
The R142 won't start to be delivered until next year.
t st
That's right, Allan. If you rode this "new" train on the A or #2 line, you may be surprised to know that those hi-tech trains are actually 6 years old...but they are in really good condition, so it's probably easy to get fooled.
But have no fear, a new train will be in town on the IRT starting in April 1999, when the first round of R142's arrive. The BMT will get R143's later next year as well.-Nick
Care to elaborate?
I hope you are not talking about the R110A & B because tgise have been around for quite a while.
The R142 won't start to be delivered until next year.
I am of course assuming you are talking about NYCT
Care to elaborate?
I hope you are not talking about the R110A & B because those have been around for quite a while.
The R142 won't start to be delivered until next year.
I am of course assuming you are talking about NYCT
What do you think of this idea, wild and crazy as it is:
Why not install solar-powered radio-controled message boards in the subway? Transit has enough antenna in the subway for the radio, and since all the stations are lit 24/7 anyway, there would really be an enregy SAVINGS, since much of the light produced is waste. I know it sounds crazy.....but highway call boxes and highway construction message signs function similarly...
and they don't have a 24hour light source.
-Hank
There is already a new messaging system being installed. Those new displays that currently show the date and time are supposed to also be used in the near future to indicate if there are delays, what is the next train coming, etc. Power consumption is not a serious concern for these boxes; trying to add "solar power" to the project at this point would undoubtedly cost more money than it would save.
But the idea of recapturing some of the energy used to light stations is possibly something that should be looked into. If solar cells could be mounted under transparent platforms, or perhaps just mounted on station walls, and the energy collected fed back into the third rails... Would the electricity savings outweigh the costs of installing and maintaining such a system? I don't know, perhaps this should be studied.
On the general subject of energy recapture, I am wondering what fraction of the energy currently used to accelerate trains, and to maintain their speed against frictional drag, is currently recovered by dynamic braking. Can it be improved?
Finally, on the subject of radio signals in the subway: I have heard that the new technology signalling program is going to involve the use of microwave beams propagating down subway tunnels and being relayed from train to train. Is this correct? Is it REALLY necessary? Why can't VHF radio of the kind now used for voice communications be used to carry the data for the new signalling system? Are the long-term effects on passenger and crew health of exposure to such microwave beams FULLY understood?
There wouldn't be much, if any useable electricity recovered from solar panels anyway.
Solar panels are NOT efficent at at all. I think on the order of 2%
As a light source, the sun is MANY tim,es brighter than the total light output of station lighting in a station. MUCH more energy could be saved by useing more efficient light bulbs, and more effcient trains.
Dynamic braking uses the motors to stop and creates heat only.
Regerative braking on newer cars puts power back into the sytem.
They are also using it on hybrid buses that use a small geratror, batteries and regerative braking to cut the size of the engine needed.
Solar works well for charging batteries in remote locations to run equipmen all day and night but not a big power output yet. Battery technology seem to be improving faster that photovoltaics for now.
I would be interested in hearing about solar projects though
Yes, I should have said "regenerative" not "dynamic" braking. Which cars have it? By how much does it cut the bill for electricity? Can older cars be converted to use it?
I worked for two years in a small community powered entirely by solar cells, and I have a couple of comments of all of the above.
I don't see any way to recapture station lighting in a meaningful way. Station lighting is much, much weaker than the sun's light, and to make use of any of it you'd pretty much have to place the photovoltaic cells right up against the flourescent lights, which would plunge the stations into darkness. No point, really.
As far as placing photovoltaics on the tops of subway cars, that would work for some purposes. Someone said 2% efficiency for photovoltaic cells -- I think the figure is a bit higher. The thing is, the cells produce DC current, which would need to be transformed ("inverted"?). A small transformer could be used for, e.g., inside car lighting or emergency lighting, etc. A transformer big enough to power a subway car would be much too large to attach to a subway car. That, and the fact that the cells couldn't really power a subway car the way they now work. (All this might change if/when DC cars are introduced).
But, if the tops of subway cars were lined with photovoltaic cells that charged DC batteries, (like car batteries) and charged from the third rail when not enough sunlight was present, some of the subway car's electrical needs could be met (depending on how much of the line and the yards are underground, of course). Indeed, with enough invenstment in equipment, the trains sitting in the yards would probably generate a fair amount of juice on a sunny day.
One final point -- the cost of the cells is prohibitive, and for the present the idea is not economical, regardless of whether it might practically work.
--mhg
Subway cars ARE DC -- powered by 600V DC from the third rail. So no conversion to AC is needed or wanted. But it seems you are right about the weak nature of the lighting in stations making recapture of that light by "solar" cells impractical. And putting the cells and associated equipment on train cars would add extra weight and probably be self-defeating too. That leaves the outdoor sections of subway lines (elevated, surface, open cut, embankment) as possible sites for collection of useful solar power. Any such equipment would need to be highly rugged and require little or no maintenance. Could cells be placed between the tracks? Possibly between the running rails of tracks? With solid-state systems to control the flow of electricity into the third rails, it should be possible to build a system that is esentialy "install it and forget it". The question is, at today's prices, would it be worthwhile?
I don't think that the price of solar cells would justify the cost of their installation, at least not in NYC where the cloud cover is a relatively high % of the yearly weather, and the cost of land (space) is so high.
A couple of thoughts, though. One problem with placing the cells between the tracks would be the endless soot and steel dust the NYC and subway operations (respectively) generate. The cells must be clean to operate. I would try to place them away from the rails, which are the source of the steel dust. I would also want to angle them to maximize their exposure to the sun (e.g. the citibank building).
The cells are fairly rugged, actually. They won't withstand being crushed, but they're not like champagne glasses or anything.
Also, I may have this backwards, but don't subway cars actually run on AC current (regardless of what the third rail supplies). I had thought that one of the ideas for new generations of cars was to have true DC motors, so that reversing the current would act as a brake, and the heat wasted in transforming DC to AC (or vice versa) wouldn't be lost. Can someone straighten me out?
--mhg
Only cars with AC motors are "AC". The great majority of NYC subway cars have good old series wound DC motors. AC technology is only now making inroads into the transit industry. Where they are used the power transmission system remains DC for ease of use in urban areas. See the SEPTA N-5's, the Baltimore LRV's, the new MUNI Breda's for in-service rail equipment, to name a few.
Thanks. I must have had it backwards in my head.
--mhg
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/TRACKMAPS/index.html
is now down
If you need to contact me
Steve Lowenthal
216 North Fulton Av
Fleetwood NY 10552
914 668 9218
THANK YOU
Most people are going to miss the R-33/36 model when the R-142. I need help I want the R-33/36 model to go to the museum. How much will it cost?
There is already an R-33 in the Transit Museum.
Remember the R-36's are married pairs so there might have to be 2 of them and the Transit Museum does not have that kind of room (Yes, they have the room at Coney Island Yard).
You might want to call Tom Harrington (Transit Museum Curator 718-243-8601) and
discuss it with him.
But figure anywhere from $5000 and up for one car (no guarantee on the condition).
The R-33 at the Transit Museum is one of the single unit World's Fair cars. It's #9306 and is still sporting its original color scheme and roll signs.
You may also want to contact Branford or Seashore Trolley Museum to see if they're interested in the single unit R-36s (I doubt they'll be interested in a married pair) - it would sure be nice to ride them after they've been extinct.
--Mark
Possibly, but I don't think that they would be interested in a single ended
car of the R-36. An R-33 maybe (but the big problem is $$$$$)
Branford has R-17 #6688, which had been painted red before it was retired. As I understand, it runs fine. I doubt if they'd want to spring for a car which, save for the picture windows on single R-33s, looks much the same as what they already have.
NYCT has "tons" of IND redbirds at Coney Island Yard. In fact, I took my subway train evacuation training on IND redbirds at Coney Island. Furthermore, they have many that are used for "training".
To everyone who frequents this site, I really need your help. Every year, the MTA-NYC Transit is one of the top participants in the March of Dimes Walk-A-Thon. No - I'm not asking you to sponsor me, although I won't turn down any offers either. I am, however, looking for donations for a very worthy cause. I don't expect to get your donations for nothing, though. SO here's the deal.
I have patches (90th Anniversary TA patches as well as patches from various shops and lines).
I have hats from different shops and lines.
I even have a few copies of the much coveted book, "Revenue & Non-revenue Car Drawings".
For those interested in making a donation in exchange for the above, E-Mail me and we'll talk about it.
Thanks Again
Steve
On Monday April 6, 1998, at about 2:00 a.m. i saw a MTV video starring Mary Lou Lord singging a song called ``Lights are Changing.'' I did not catch which subway line it was. If any else saw it can you tell me what line it was. Thanks Much.
Charlie Muller.
I would like to get some information on metro north signal aspects.
Thanks,
Mark
I don't know much, I thought they went to cab signaling and lineside only at interlocking (well on the Hudson line)....
Why doesn't the L train turn left at 8th Avenue and run down Hudson? I will require a better excuse than mere whining about the lower level on the 8th avenue line. How about putting the lower level back into service and making an extension down Hudson street? Or how about sending the L train uptown via the existing lower level tracks on 8th avenue?
Another thought would be to send the 7 train down 8th avenue on the lowere level with maybe an extension down Hudson. But I like the L idea better.
I would use the block on 42nd street between 7th and 8th Avenues to build an extension that runs under the 8th avenue lower level and continues west, where at 10th avenue it would deviate from the Grid underneath the maze of roads leading to the Lincoln tunnel and head strait for the Javits Center. Express from Times Square to Jacob Javits. From there it could potentially extend down to Battery Park City via 11th Avenue and West Street.
There have been ideas for extending the L beyond its current terminal at 8th Avenue. One interesting proposal I've heard about involves extending the line westward to 10th Avenue. The line would then turn north to 42nd Street, where it would join an extension of the 7 (through running wouldn't be likely, of course, due to incompatible equipment). An extension of this sort would provide more convenient if not front-door service to the Javits Center and also would provide service to the newly trendy West Chelsea area.
By the way, the lower level of the 8th Avenue line is located only near 42nd Street. There's nothing as far south as the L terminal at 14th Street. Even at 42nd, the lower level shouldn't be much of an impediment to extending the 7 because it's been abandoned for years and no one would miss it.
The problem with the lower level at 42nd St. is that it blocks further extension of the 7, unless the Flushing line were to nosedive underneath. The platform of that lower level is directly beneath the downtown A, C, and E platform, which lies between 42nd and 40th Sts. If you stand on the uptown platform and look across the downtown express track (A trains still fly down that stretch), you'll see where the track which leads to the lower level slopes downward. The 7 ends at Times Square, specifically 41st St and 7th Ave.; I'm not sure how far west of 7th Ave. the station extends. The tracks continue on, but must dead-end, since the Flushing line has only one physical connection with the rest of the system.
The Canarsie line ducks beneath the 8th Ave. subway; there is nothing there to block a westward extension. I don't see how any extension could hurt. The 8th Ave station opened in 1931, and was probably built at the same time as the IND line above it. On top of that, the station walls have the same tile scheme as the IND a la Fulton St. and Broad St. on the Nassau Loop.
The lower level at 42nd and 8th is really no barrier to an extension of the 7 - the extended line simply could break right through the lower level's walls, though of course there would have to be sufficient shoring of the upper, active level. There are no plans to resume service on the lower level and therefore it's loss shouldn't matter.
Personally, I'd like to see it bear just slightly to the left and follow Gansevoort St. to the Hudson River, then under the river to Hoboken. But it isn't going to happen, and neither is any other extension, unless the area west or SW of 8th Ave. undergoes a remarkable surge of development - something that itself is highly unlikely, since it doesn't have the hard bedrock that the midtown and Wall St. areas have. There is no lower level IND blocking the way at 14th St. though - that is at 42nd St., blocking the #7 line.
Ithink some of what is proposed here is a little impractical. Transfering to the 8th ave. line off of the Canarsie is no big deal. However, access to West Chelsea is more important and should be considered. Someone mentioned that there isn't major development going on there. There is plenty. Nightclubs/bars like Hell have opened, as well as the three-star Warterloo Restaurant (great muscles and pomme frits). Somehow, someway the existing el structure that runs from Bank Street to the Javits should be used in the mix. How about having the L tie into it at 10th Ave and go to the Javits? There is a lot of activity like the Chelsea Piers happening, and any mass rapid transit would be a boost to the neighborhood. It won't get done though, because it doesn't "benefit" enough people who need to get from Brooklyn/Queens to downtown or uptown concentrations of business.
I noticed the yesterday as I was coming home from work that they're
doing some construction (closing?) at the stairs to the abandoned
lower level. Are they just going to close it off and let it rot?
Anyone have any info on this?
Where did you see this construction? Was it at a stairway leading down to the lower level? As of last fall, the stairway at the south end of the downtown platform was still there. Common sense would dictate at least one stairway being left in place. I don't know how many stairways there were in all. I believe the stairway at the northern end of the downtown platform, which was used as an underpass before the entire mezzanine became a paid-fare zone, has been cemented over as has been the stairway at the southern end of the uptown platform. The floor opening in the mezzanine for the escalator which led directly to the lower level has also been cemented over. This escalator was at the extreme southern end of the mezzanine in the southwest corner.
It appears as if there are no plans to use the lower level again, except perhaps as a movie set or if an emergency necessitated rerouting of E trains. While its original purpose is unknown, it is believed that it was put in to allow E trains from Queens to get into 42nd St. even if both downtown tracks were occupied. Even so, it came close to being included in the never-used station category. From 1959 to 1981, it was used by Aqueduct Special trains; in fact, all IND cars from R-1 thru R-38 (at least) had Aqueduct Race Track destination signs. There used to be signs all along the mezzanine which said "Entrance for Aqueduct Specials at 40th St." In the early 70s, rush hour E trains used the lower level; I still remember seeing signs stating that service.
I saw the construction at the southern end of the southbound station.
There's (webbing?) around the construction area, the up-to-last-week
chained off railing is gone, and they've put some (boards?) across
the hole. Don't know what they do from here...
About a year ago, I toured the Times Square Complex with the Transit Museum, hosted by Andrew Sparberg (IS this the same person as the poster on sub talk?)
We toured the lower level and he stated that it is a favorite site for the homeless. While I am not certain, even if they do seal it off they might instal floor to ceiling gates or they might just leave it since trains could still run through the station even if they could not stop.
(all the above is opinion and not fact)
It sounds as if they're going to cement over the floor opening for that stairway, effectively sealing off the lower level.
Last week there was a 30th Anniversary issue of New York Magazine. On the back cover is an Absolut Vodka ad called "Absolut Citron" showing a bunch of yellow taxicabs.
If you look closely at the sidewalks, you will see that the "photo" is a somewhat twisted version of...
South Broad St. in Philadelphia between Chestnut and Sansom Streets, looking south, sortof. You can see in the lower right corner the entrance to the Broad St. Subway (Orange Line), plus there is a Chestnut St. street sign and other obvious Phila things on the street.
It is a strange composite in that the center island on the street is missing (and they needed the two-way street to look one-way). But you can see the white stop lines on each half of the street.
Interesting back page to make a Phila. street look like NYC's Madison Avenue or 5th Avenue.
Good Gravy! You sure know Phillly when you see it! Maybe in that picture they showed the "false friend". Once while walking down Locust St. in a dreamlike state, I wondered what it would be like if Philly were actually an exciting town(sorry to put it down, but let's face it. Old bells or Times Square? Which would you pick?) There were some lights on the Corner of "Brawd" St, I thought there were gonna be some fancy lights to brighten Center City at night(Chestnut Street at 9pm is frightfully dark, and the bums come out.) and saw only a well lit billboard. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr......
Maybe the message is, when in Philly, bring vodka!
This is directed to "Bobby", who posted the IND Section System-1929 Plan section on this website.
Nassau Blvd. is the same as Horace Harding Blvd. A piece of it still exists breaking off from I-495 just west of Little Neck Pkwy and continuing to the Nassau County Line. Also, you spoke of a line running down Van Wyck Blvd. to 166th Av. Was this a typo? 165th Av. is the last avenue in Queens, and Van Wyck Expwy. enters the airport at about where 149th Av. would be. The airport land was presumably undeveloped in 1929.
Finally, do you or anyone else know anything further about the Utica Av. subway. I'm from that area (at Midwood St), and was always under the impression that there were plans to build an IRT line down Utica Av. to Kings Hwy (did they actually mean Kings Plaza?), presumably connecting to the stub ends of the express tracks on Eastern Pkwy east of the Utica Av. Station.
Bob Sklar
According to the 1969 'Plan for New York City', new subway lines in Brooklyn were to include:
1 - a line down Utica Ave. to Flatbush Ave and then on to where Kings Plaza is now located. (If memory serves, it wasn't built yet in 1969).
2 - a continuation of the Nostrand Ave (2/5) lineto approx. Ave W.
3 - a removal of the Canarsie line from B'way Junction to the end of the line at Rockaway Pkway and its replacement with what appears to be the LIRR freight line from B'way Junction to Flatbush Ave, making connections with #2 above. There was also to be an eastern spur, leaving the ROW at New Lots Ave, curving to Flatlands and Pennsylvania Aves. and continuing on Flatlands to Fountain Ave.
Accordimng to the legend on the map, these projects were fully funded and approved and were to be completed in 10 years. This also shows a number of other transit projects, of which only 1 has actually been completed - the subway link to Roosevelt Island.
During my research for the Lexington Avenue Express page on this site, I noticed the bellmouth on both levels just past the crossover east of Utica Ave Station. This was probably for the Utica Ave IRT extension that was proposed.
Thanks for the info on "Nassau Blvd." It makes sense that the line would follow what is today the LIE.
I rechecked my copy of the 1929 NY Times Second System article. With regard to the Van Wyck it says, "the Van Wyck Boulevard line will be a two track extension from a connection with the Long Island City-Jamaica line at 137th Street and 87th Avenue southerly to Van Wyck Boulevard, along Van Wyck Boulevard as subway to about 166th Avenue (the number is correct), then elevated along Van Wyck Boulevard to Rockaway Boulevard." I haven't lived in NYC myself in 12 years, and I don't have a map handy, but I do know that during the construction and expansion of Kennedy Airport, numerous streets were eliminated. The numbers may well have gone higher in 1929, possibly as "potential" streets like those that exist off the West Shore Expwy in Staten Island (streets are marked, overgrown dirt roads, doesn't look like a city at all). I don't know that the Van Wyck Expwy reaches Rockaway Blvd today, and if it does, Rockaway Blvd could have been relocated since 1929. We'd need to compare old and current Queens street maps to settle this question.
With regard to the Utica line, the line in this proposal was clearly IND and was to built in addition to an extended IRT Nostrand Ave line. Although there are stub tracks that could be used for an IRT Utica Avenue line, I can only surmise that plans for their use had been dropped by 1929. The Utica Avenue line is described in the article as, "four tracks from Driggs Avenue (where it would diverge from the other (Myrtle-Central) line coming from S 4th Street) to Avenue S then two tracks with provision for later expansion to four tracks along Avenue S and then Nostrand Avenue to its terminal at Voorhees Avenue. It is proposed to extend the Nostrand Avenue subway in Brooklyn from its present terminal at Flatbush Avenue and build it along Nostrand Avenue as a two track subway to Kings Highway, then as an elevated line to Avenue S, where there may be track connections or transfer to the Utica Avenue line." I don't think the concept of Kings Plaza existed at that time.
Let me know if there are any other questions, or if anyone knows how to obtain further information on this and other abortive attempts at subway expansion, especially those for which provisions were built into the existing system. I'd love to be the NYCTA's archivist!
Rockaway Blvd. certainly crosses the Van Wyck today - it is Exit 2, that is, north of the Belt Parkway and Kennedy Airport. It crosses the Belt diagonally to the east of the Van Wyck.
This story ran on WCBS newsradio this morning. (I have no further info,
as I'm in Boston, but accessed it remostely through our newsroom computer.)
___________________________________________________________________________
State lawmakers have put the brakes on the Transit Authority's experiment of
running subway trains with one crew member, instead of two.
The T-A had said it saved 3-million dollars a year by eliminating the conductor
from the G-line and certain shuttles.
But, the subway workers union had expressed concerns about safety ..and jobs.
The state legislature is providing the T-A with 3-million dollars to pay
salaries for the year.
Thank God. Now if the TA can only get rid of these bloody full width cabs.
I'll second that motion.
Ah, NY politics at it's finest. The legislation was more likely passed to insure the safety of the Willie James presidency of the TWU rather than for any concern for public safety.
By this, I intend no value judgement as to the validity or safety of OPTO & to quote Subway-Buff, the opinions expressed here are my own and do not represent the MTA or the NYC Transit.
Gotta agree with Steve...
They can come up with three million to try and eliminate OPTO, but they can't do something to investigate/address the Manhattan Bridge situation...
Kind regards,
Michael
Other than the loss of conductors' jobs, what's the big beef against OPTO? When we had the same situation here in Phila with the institution of OPTO on the Broad St express trains, there was outrage. Folks were going to get killed, people would get caught in doors and dragged (it did happen on the Market St subway a few years back - on a train WITH a conductor!), blah blah blah. Keep in mind that on our system, unlike NYCT, the conductor never leaves his/her cab unless there is a shift from island to side platform (and the Broad St cars, with their full-width cabs, don't even require this). So, the issue of a presence on the train to deter crime, etc isn't there. The conductor in Phila might as well be invisible.
With all this rhetoric, OPTO was tried and succeeded on both the expresses and the Ridge Spur. No lives were lost, etc. The TWU pointed fingers all the while and predicted disaster but it just did not happen. The only thread of any complaint left, after all the BS (not = Broad St, by the way!), was that trains ran a little slower when OPTO was expanded to the locals and the Spur. This was due to the many island platforms where the motorman had to leave his/her position to open/close doors. Some riders took to this, but let it go once it was learned that the extra amount of time was two to three minutes per one-way trip (which takes roughly 40 minutes end to end).
The M-4's will be OPTO with a unique closed circuit TV system to assist motormen. Of course, only 3 intermediate stops on the El have island platforms, and, depending on how the trains enter either terminal, there could be an island situation at each also.
PATCO has been OPTO from day one and, while all platforms are island, many trains must load/unload on the opposite side (the operator is on the left side of the train). PATCO's situation is decidedly low-tech (the operator must view the doors - no "Star Wars" stuff). At the offside locations, he/she is assisted by mirrors, both on the platform and on the car exterior, and he/she does not leave the operator position to operate doors. I can think of no accident attributable to this in PATCO's nearly 30 years of operation. And, while PATCO mainly runs two-car trains, these can expand to six cars in the peak. A lot of cars to watch, with large crowds.
Again, I am not speaking for NYC Transit or the MTA nor are these necessarily my views. However, aside from the loss of Conductor jobs (a BIG union issue), the issue of safety is always simmering. While OPTO may work well on the Franklin Shuttle or the B shuttle during the overnight hours, some people have their doubts about its' safety with full length trains. Other safety issues which have been raised are:
If the Train operator must go to the roadbed, the C/R is required to man a radio for safety and communication reasons. Not possible with OPTO.
Dealing with Sick customers, en route.
The Train Operator can not observe the platform and check for dragged customers while the train is leaving the station, as the Conductors now do.
The Conductor is another pair of eyes, ears and an extra nose which will help in detecting crimes, emergencies and mechanical failures.
Once again, I am neither taking a pro or con position in this matter but these are just some of the issues which have been raised.
If a conductor is needed, why not put one on buses and raise the fare to $2.00? Yes I know a train is ten cars long, but this was a patronage issue pure and simple. Should have just handed $3 million over to a few people and had them stay home.
For safety's sake, I'd rather have someone on the platform in heavily traveled and curved stations than someone in a cab. The TA should integrate the station agent and conductor jobs. The station-conductor could circulate through the station to provide security between trains and move to the platform as a train arrives. How good is a conductor between stations? Eliminate the token booths and the conductors, and add people on the platforms at rush hours and in crowded stations at all times, and the system is better for cheaper.
Instead, the MTA is going the other way, trying to save a buck by leaving stations unmanned. Where is the TWU concern for safety on that one?
Yeah, but if we eliminate the token booths, where and how are people going to pay their fares? The MTA will surely go bankrupt without collecting any fares. And as for unmanned stations, what about vandalism and farebeating? How are these controlled?
As a Subway Conductor who has worked on platforms as you suggest, I can speak from experince. For the record I am not concerned about OPTO, It will never eliminate my job, at least not untill the MTA comes up with a way to control the stupidity of some of the people who use the system.
An employee on the platform has no reliable way to stop the train in the event of an emergency. The only person who can reliabliy stop the train is the Conductor who is observing platform as the train is leaving the station.
A Conductor between stations is monitoring the operation of the train, as he is required to stop the train if it is being operated in a reckless manner. He is avalible to assist costomers with travel information, which I do often. He monitors the master door control indication lights, which light when all door are closed and locked. If a door is opened while the train is moving the lights will go out, and the Conductor signals the Operator to stop.
The MTA is going to do what it wants to do. If they can operate trains at all times and on all lines safely, then so be it.
If they want to operate 3 or 4 car trains during rush hour then they will be able to get rid of Conductors. How many of you think that will happen?
You may have a point about the value of conductors on the train vs. the platform. But the proper decisions about the amount and distribution of manpower are more likely to be realized by the interaction of labor, management, and the customers than by the NYS legislature. The less they intervene in our affairs the better. Why, after NYC has received less than its share (based on population) of state transportation money year after year for decades does it decide to fork over a paltry $3 million to aid a major political contributor? Give us back our tax dollars, and we'll have three conductors on a train, and c coffee and a bagel besides.
This sort of intervention shows how state transportation (education, etc) spending is a bad thing, even if you believe more money should be spent overall. Remember, this is the same state which is fiddling while the Manhattan Bridge rusts. How many TWU jobs will be lost when half of the BMT southern division disappears? But that doesn't have a fast political payoff.
One thing I think we can agree on -- if a station is open, an employee should be in it. For my $1.50, I'd rather have an employee moving around the station than an additional employee on the train.
I don't necessarily agree that OPTO is a panacea but it could be useful especially on short trains. My beef with the arguments against it here in Phila is the role of conductors on SEPTA trains - they NEVER leave their cabs during train operation, except to switch sides according to platform location. I have always thought that NYCT's policy of having conductors outside the cabs between stops was superior, with the presence of someone to field questions, keep an eye on things, etc. If the conductor's role is merely to sit in his/her box and open/close doors, then who needs a conductor?
The arguments were made that SEPTA's rapid transit lines would become deathtraps when conductors were removed, and horror stories of dragged riders, people caught in doors, children left on/off trains (this STILL happens on the Kawasaki light rail cars despite years of experience and plenty of warning signs - dopey parents!), etc. It hasn't happened. The fact is that conductors do not want to leave their cozy cabs during runs. If that is the case, who needs them?
Adam brought up a good point about station safety. The long range plan calls for the station agent (Person in the booth) to do just that- move around the station to give directions, assist users, inspect stations, etc. that is currentlyt being done by members of management.
There is no time table for this change but it is a plan. The idea of "platform conductors" is in practice right now at station such as 53rd and Lex on the E/F.
The platform conductor wears a safety vest and carries a flashlight. This person tells the "train conductor" when to close the doors and tells the platform passengers to "watch the closing doors".
A first step towards this change will be the elimination of tokens but even this step has not been taken yet and no date set for the end of tokens.
***The following section is personal opinion and not that of MTA or NYCT: If tokens were to be eliminated it would simplify our jobs tremendously due to the computer being used to put the money on the metrocard and reduce the chance of being robbed of tokens, however- the token is too ingrained into the NYC lifestyle to do a quick fade-away. Even now, with the 11 for 10 people specifically ask for tokens. I ,in accordance with policy, suggest a metrocardso they get a discount(free ride) and they tell me "I don't like the mterocard."
anothe problem is the stations that still dont have access via metrocard. There are many stations without the new Metrocard iron maidens but only the old style token iron maidens. To do away with the tokens, NYCT must replace all the old iron maidens with new ones and even then the straphanger's campaign would squawk about the discrimination against token users.***
Of course, if the token really does go the way of the 15 cent fare- I'll be one of the first to cheer!
I believe that in order to get rid of the token booth as we know it, all turnstiles would have to become iron maidens because with no one to watch over them, people would hop over them.
One question that I have is are the token booth attendants required to empty the turnstiles? And if so, isn't this dangerous? Does a police officer have to be present? How many times a shift do the turnstiles need to be emptied?
Yes, we do have to empty the turnstiles. The specifics I am not able to reveal, but if we do not feel safe we can stay in or wait for as police officer to comwe by. We are well trained and have means to take care of ourselves.
If we need to empty the turnstiles, we can even call for an officer to come by.
Wasn't there an incedent about a year ago where a token booth clerk was murdered while emptying a turnstile? I think it was at a Long Island City station, and he was a few weeks away from retirement.
Yes. That is why they changed the policy to what it is now.
Killer of that station agent was caught 2 weeks ago in lower Manhattan, after shooting it out with cops.
As another conductor, I am forced to agree with Mike - as long as people are stupid, I'll have a job. On Saturday, I was one of those 'platform conductors' at 161 St on the 4 line. If I and three others had not been there, it would be a good bet that someone would have gotten hurt and, there would still be a crowd in the station trying to get home on a train whose doors wouldn't close.
In answer to fare-beating, the amount of people and their location in the station do not matter - people will try it anyway. Case in point - Friday afternoon at about 3:40 at 137th St on the 1 line. My downtown 1 stopped in the station, where my position is about 10' south of the token booth/turnstiles. As I started to close the doors, a 50ish gentleman crawled under the turnstile to make the train - right in front of me, a platform conductor, and two station agents in the booth. For all that, he did manage to miss the train, and then had the unbelievable chutzpah to tell me to open up again. Contrary to training, I laughed in his face and told him to go and pay his fare, which, even more amazingly, he did.
You mean he didn't get busted for fare beating? You did the right thing in telling him to go back and pay his fare. I guess age has nothing to do with it.
Amazingly enough, no! Aside from me, the platform conductor and agents, this station is also home to a division superintendant, the line superintendant, one (sometimes more) Train Service Supervisors,and alarge number of train crews; but a cop? Not here.
About 10 years ago (maybe more) there were very many full time platform conductor jobs. They were eliminated by the TA. The union DID scream about public safety issues, but the public & news media accepted these cuts in liew of further fare increases and service cutbacks. Eventhough a platform conductor would be of great assistance to customers on the platforms, the TA would never reinstate these jobs. They have to find a way to make up lost revenue from MertroCard free transfers, despite additional ridership. It costs money to put on additional buses.
When the TWU cries safety, most do not take it seriously. They assume it's more 'labor' rhetoric. Why? Because when there is a lapse in the system which results in injury, the TWU will usually fight holding the employee at fault, accountable. You can't have it both ways, Bill.
As Steve metioned in a previous posting, the elimination of OPTO is just the TWU's lobbyist's in Albany doing what they get paid a lot of money to do. Including the 20/50 fight which is going to start soon, and the re election of the James team vs the New Directions team, its all good timing. I personally feel (and I work in buses) that OPTo is a bad idea only because this is NY, not Paris, Europe or Philly. New Yorkers ALWAYS feel that that train or bus leaving is the last one of the day, despite the fact that the next train may be seen behind the one in the station waiting to get in or a empty bus is waiting across the street to enter the stop because they all want to squeeze in the crowded one. New Yorkers are always in a rush and gettin nowhere!
Hello again.. I was wondering if the new 142 and 143 look like any of the cars now on the system. Also I would like to know where I can view pictures of such trains. I know on this site there is stats on the new cars but was wondering if there are oictures. Thanx
I've searched the 'net high and low, from the MTA's official site to anything with the prefix "sub" in it. Except for the hideous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! picture of the inside of the R-142, there are no external photos. But they say they look like The R110a and b. So try to imagine a bit.
visit the bombardier website the have a computer generated photo of the R-142
I took a look at it. It looked like the R-110a after Slim-Fast. I was surprised that the top speed was 62. I thought New York trains went faster than that.
Anyone know the length of the Ak Drawbridge on Staten Island and the hight of
the Smith-Ninth Street Station? It looks like it's 160 feet.
Anyone know the hight of the AK Bridge on Staten Island and the hight of the
Smith-9st Street station in Brooklyn? It looks 160 feet.
You're about half right; The Smith/9th street station is officially 89 feet high.
AK bridge (raised) is a little lower than the Goethals over MHW....not exactly sure of either number.
-Hank
The S train or Shuttle train is wide spread around the City. The question I got is what sysytem controls the S train. The IND,BMT or IRT? For the mahattan Shuttle they use IRT brightliners or as we know it the R-62 or the R-36/36. The Rockaway shuttle uses the R-44s or R-68s. The Franklin street shuttle uses the R-38. So what system controls all the Shuttle and don't say the M.T.A he.he.he.he.
The letter "S" is used for shuttle and as such can be IRT,IND, or BMT.
yes- there are shuttles in all three.
BMT has the B & R Shuttle overnight in Brooklyn.
IRT has the dyre and Times Square .
IND has the Queensbridge, rockaway Park, and the overnight lefferts shuttle.
Does the Times Square shuttle ever use redbird equipment?
Used too....recently, it used IRT Low-Vs...and somebody (I won't name names) forgot the Franklin shuttle....
-Hank
Recently, it used IRT Low-Vs? It's April 11th. April Fools Day was a week and a half ago!
no joke. It was in honor of something, I'm not sure what....it was a commemoration....
-Hank
Lo-Vs were run on the 42nd St. shuttle on Oct 27, 1994 to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the opening of the first subway in New York; the shuttle was, of course, part of the original line. I was in the city the week before, naturally. I can only imagine what they have planned for the centennial anniversary on Oct. 27, 2004, but one thing's for sure: one way or another, I'm going to be there.
In the late 80's the Times Square Shuttle was running Redbirds out of the E180th St. Yard complex till they were replaced by the R-62's out of Jerome.
You also forgot the M shuttle from Metropolitan Ave to B'way/Myrtle
Today, only the 42nd St., Franklin Ave, and Rockaway shuttles carry the S designation. Before double letters were dropped, shuttles were designated as SS trains. In those days, S was used for revenue collection trains, which also carried "No Passengers" signs. And, last but not least, the now-defunct Aqueduct Special was also an S train. Yes, this was the route which started from the now-abandoned lower level at 42nd St.
Also the 63rd Street Tunnel Shuttle carries the [S] designation. I suppose since it terminates on Broadway it's a BMT shuttle???
You could say that, although, since the 63rd St. line was built after the IND and BMT were merged, the line itself is considered IND/BMT.
Yes, but the train operator must be using either the BMT (B1) or the IND (B2) frequency on his radio. Based on what I once read about the demarcations, I assume that the shuttle will be on B2 from Queensbridge to 57th St., then switch to B1, and that when the shuttle terminates at 57th St. it stays on B2 the whole trip (despite being across the platform from the N/R trains on B1). Can anyone specifically confirm or refute this?
Technically, the "S", stands for shuttle and there are about four or five "S"(shuttle) trains operating including the one that operates to and from Roosevelt Island. This being that the shuttle two but usually no more than 5 stops or so. My best bet is that there is no group that the "S" train belongs to since there are about 4 lines with the "S"(shuttle) as lettering belonging to them.
-Garfield
depends on what division you are reffering to franklin shuttle is BMT because of location and original builder Grand Central-Time Square is Irt
Radio frequency is probably not the best guideline, since the IRT 7 line operates on the B1 frequency, and it is most definitely not BMT.
Lest this not sound like a commercial;
I didn't anticipate the response I received about this bookin my previous posting. Due to te demand, I ordered some extra copies which will be ready on April 24th.
For those who don't know what this book is about, it's roughly 200 pages of drawings of most of the NYCTA equipment from the 'Q' cars through the R-68A and virtually all of the work equipment. It has dimensions, prices and dates of significant modifications. It was compiled by the Division of Car Equipment, Maintenance Support department.
Now the bad news - They're not for sale !!!
If you want one, I'll send you one for a donation to the March of Dimes. If you are interested, E-Mail me for details.
And if you missed the previous posting, I still have a few hats and patches, also for a donation to this worthy cause.
Finally, for those still waiting for a response, we will be replying to all through tomorrow. Thanks for the overwhelming response.
Finally, Dave, thanks for the space.
Since the 'Legal System' thread has gotten so much interest, here's another legal issue which transit systems are now facing.
The NYC Transit system accepts advertisements for treains and busses, including those large ones on the bus exteriors. Some of the ads have become somewhat sexually suggestive and some sexually explicit. The first ammendment requires that the MTA accept the ads but the TA has a policy on sexual harassment which requires that no material may be posted if it offends any person. Now take one of those Calvin Klein ads for example. The TA must carry the ad if it passes the 'Obscenity Test' yet if the ad offends a female employee (or male for that matter) it can not be displayed in the work-place. You can see the conflict. An employee assigned to clean a bus is offended by the ad on the side. Which takes priority? The first ammendment right to free speech or the TA policy against sexual harassment in the work-place. Should the employee be permitted to sue for sexual harassment in this case? And you thought we just had fun with the trains!!!
I've heard this debated in Labor relations seminars. I'm curious about what everyone on this site thinks.
We just had our sexual harrassment training at NYC Planning. Judging from the Paula Jones decision, they are going to have to redo it. Perhaps ads that display non-obscene female anatomy are not OK, but ads that show obscene male anatomy are OK.
Personally, I think the MTA should emulate the "adopt a highway" program in its stations. In that program, after banning billboards communities allow one business to advertize its good citizenship on one sign in exchange for maintaining the road. There is only one sign, but it stands out since it is the only one.
Businesses would pay big bucks in exchange for exclusive rights to stations in the Manhattan CBD, expecially near their offices, or in affluent areas. And there would be less signs.
Very interesting idea.
A good idea - it DOES work on roadways. What bugs me with this type of thing is the idea of "harrassment". Just as in the current thread on the legal system, I think harrassment is often used too conveniently, especially when it will help someone like the bus cleaner in the example given by Steve get out of some work. We've grown way too sensitive and perhaps it's time to be a little less accommodating.
Granted, there do need to be standards on obscenity, etc, but I think this should be common sense. Like most media, ads tend to go a little overboard in their attempts to attract certain markets. Ads on buses and subways are exposed to a large variation of folks. We shouldn't subject kids, etc to stuff like we see all too often. By the same token, though, some ads meant as humorous are often seen as demeaning, etc. Are we too sensitive to this side of the coin and less diligent on the stuff that really doesn't need to be seen?
MBTA in Boston already has this. One of the major downtown stations, formerly "State" is now "State/Citizen's Bank", with the "Citizen's Bank" in the script of the bank's logo rather than the usual MBTA sign font. I recall this idea being discussed elsewhere, maybe on this board, and the main concern was that people wanted the sponsorship to be from businesses near or connected with the station and unique to the city, like a "Washington & State/Marshall Field's" in Chicago, and not such a generic thing as "42nd Street/Burger King" or "Lake Transfer/Sbarro".
My guess is that a TA employee wouldn't have much of a case for sexual harassment involving a publicly displayed advertisement. There's a difference between, say, a suggestive poster in an employee lounge and something that the world as a whole can see.
By the way, First Amendment or not, the TA surely does have some discretion over accepting advertisements. One firmly established principle is that "commercial speech" (such as advertsing) has significantly less legal protection than other forms of speech and communication.
Yes and that is IMHO an affront to the Bill of Rights, even though we may many of us remember various refusals by "commercial" organizations of ads poliyically un comfortable to management. I am fairly absolutist about BOR issues. After all we allow _______ to advertise, speak, purvet wrpng opinions no?
The short answer is that the First Amendment trumps the TA's rules (or indeed, the rules of any public agency). But, I don't think that you've quite mapped out how a conflict might arise. For one thing, the appropriate standard for regulating advertising would be "commercial speech" and not "obscenity." I realize that those labels are not illuminating by themselves, but the TA has considerable discretion to exclude advertising that is less that obscene.
--mhg
The First Amendment absolutely takes priority over "sexual harassment" law any time the two are actually in conflict, as it does over laws of any other kind that conflict with it. The question is, will the courts recognize that there is indeed a conflict? I am quite sure you are wrong as to the MTA having a policy to ban all ads that "offend any person". Just about anything is likely to offend someone. I expect the policy is not to accept ads considered likely to offend a significant portion of the public; the question is, what is "significant", and who "considers" what ads are likely to offend.
If the Budd Co. plant in Northeast Philadelphia was still in operation today,
Would SEPTA still be ordering the M-4's, or would they most likely be sending
the current Market-Frankford Line cars (M-3's) to the Budd plant, where they
were originally made, and having them rebuilt, with air conditioning installed?
Also, I can't understand why SEPTA is getting rid of all the M-3's, when the
M-4's are placed into service, because on the commuter rail lines, they kept
the Silverliner II's, which are also built by Budd, and almost as old as the
el cars, when they purchased the Silverliner IV's in the mid 1970's, and the
Comets in the late 1980's. Why can't SEPTA combine the M-3's with the M-4's,
just as they do with the Silverliners? Because there have been many times I've
seen Silverliner II's, III's, and IV's combined on one train.
Even if the Budd Co. was still in business, I don't think it would necessarily mean that the cars would be sent there for a major overhaul. Look at what happened to New York's subway cars, where many of them that were built by Budd, St. Louis and Pullman were sent to MK, Sumitomo and GE for re-manufacturing. If SEPTA really wanted to re-manufacture and keep the M-3's another fifteen years or so, it would have already done so. If SEPTA had the the capability, it would even be able to do it in their own shops, although it probably would not have been of the quality the outside contractors would produce.
Does anyone know if there is any acess to the old IRT subway station. Are there any tours. Are you allowed to ride through the station of the 6 train?
Yes you can ride the loop thru City Hall Station on the 6 train. One suggestion would be to stay away from the crew positions. Many do not like this idea and will ask you to leave the train. Customers are not required to leave the train unless a TA employee asks them to leave the train. You are always better off complying with a TA employee and then if you feel you have a beef, take it up with customer relations dept. Enjoy the ride, its a great station.
The best idea is just to ask the T/O or conductor if it's all right to ride around. They probably won't turn down a direct request.
I would not suggest simply riding around without asking the train crew. There's always the chance, however unlikely, that the train is going out of service and will be heading back to the Pelham yards without stopping on the Bronx-bound trip.
Last Friday afternoon, with an hour to kill, I decided to ride around the City Hall Loop. Since I was at Grand Central Terminal, I got on a [5/2] train downtown. Wow! You folks are right! What a crawl!! TWO [6] locals passed us on the way from 42 to Union Square. Anyway, I got off at Brooklyn Bridge, and then got on the next [6] train for my ride around the loop. As we said on a related thread here some months ago, the City Hall Loop is now revenue track. That means that officially, you cannot be denied a ride around the loop. Of course, some operators may not be happy about taking you, but if one gives you a problem, ask him/her to call the dispatcher and verify that there was a General Order issued last year to this effect. It will be confirmed. My trip was easy:
Operator to Todd: This is the last stop.
Todd to Operators: I'd like to ride around the loop, please.
Operator to Todd: Sure. Enjoy.
Hint: If a full-width cab R-62 comes by, pass it up and wait for a train with a good rail-fan window. That's the best viewing position. Note the water squirted on the rails as you go around the loop to squelch the squeals!
Last week there was some discussion here about the Port Morris line in the Bronx, the single-track freight line that runs through the South Bronx. Yesterday morning I decided to check out for myself the end of this line.
It crosses under Bruckner Blvd. and the Amtrak/Conrail NEC line at about 142nd St. and immediately turns to the left (north). Contrary to the Hagstrom street maps, it does not go to the edge of the water. At 149th St. it merges with a track that branches off from the NEC line. The merged track then acts as a yard lead, with a number of additional storage tracks branching off from it. Thus, trains from either the Port Morris line or from the Hell Gate Bridge have access to this yard. For trains from the Port Morris line to cross the bridge requires one reversal of direction.
Well, what ever the dirction the line goes now,
It was a car float terminal line at one time.
If you look on the NYC transit Map. In the Downtown Brooklyn section. You shold easily see the twist and turns between all the Systems IND BMT and IRT. How did the enginnes get through the maze of tunnels with out hitting another tunnel. For me I would think that this is impossible. Now how did they do the tunnel without meesing it up?
One thing not shown on the transit map is the level at which each tunnel is located. My suspicion is that these downtown Brooklyn tunnels are at different levels and therefore can cross each other without obstacle.
If anything, I'll bet the IND tunnels may have been the toughest to build, since they came along after the IRT and BMT lines were built. The most interesting geometry has to be at Smith St. between the Jay St. and Bergen St. stations where the Fulton St. and Crosstown tracks diverge. I believe the F tracks are on top, followed by the A/C and G tracks leapfrogging each other, with the Court St. stub tracks beneath everything.
Good question, I would like to add a follow up question for whomever is going to tackle this one. That is: on the Manhattan bound IRT at Borough Hall, the 4 and 5 trains are on the right while the 2 and the 3 are on the left. At some point on their way to the Little Borough, they have to cross over so that 4 and 5 can run up the East Side and the 2 and the 3 up the West. Where and how does this take place?
Also, the 6th Avenue Express and the 6th Avenue Local magically switch places in the mysterious darkness between 42nd Street and 47th Street. Is it done with mirrors?
Between 42nd street and 47th street. The Express train goes over an underground bridge and the local goes on the other side while the express track is on the other side. That is why 42nd street is deeper than 47 thru 50th street.
You're speaking of the 6th Ave. downtown local and express tracks. They do switch places between 42nd St. and 47-50th Sts. by means of a flyover/crossunder. The express tracks didn't really become express tracks per se until they were extended from 34th St to W. 4th St. in 1967. Prior to 1967, the "express" tracks ended at 34th St. and were used by BB trains during rush hours and F trains during middays, nights, and weekends. Keep in mind that the 42nd St. station at 6th Ave. ducks beneath the 42nd St. shuttle and at the same time passes above the Flushing line. Considering all the lines the 6th Ave line has to dodge, sidestep, and snake over and under, it's no wonder that this line was the most difficult one to build.
You can add one more difficulty to the construction of the 6th Ave. express between W4 and 33rd st; It was deep rock tunnelled down several hundred feet just to avoid the spaghetti bowl at street level. I'm sure the city thought it could take over the PATH tracks which split the existing 6th Ave. local tracks sooner or later, but they always underestimate Jersey, don't they?
According to Brian Cudahy in Under the Sidewalks of New York, the 6th Ave. line was supposed to take over the H&M tracks and use them for local service; a new tunnel was to be built for express trains. This plan was shelved when it was discovered that the H&M tunnels were built to IRT clearances, and it was felt that the cost of retrofitting the tunnels to accommodate 10-foot wide cars would be prohibitive. The end result was the H&M kept their tunnels and a new terminal was built at 33rd St; the IND built a two-track ROW alongside and underneath the H&M tunnels. The express tracks south of 34th St. opened on Nov. 26, 1967, when the Chrystie St. connection went into service. Initially, these tracks were used only during rush hours by B and D trains. When the 57th St. station opened on July 1, 1968, D trains began running express at all times. Currently, only the F line makes all local stops along 6th Ave.
I'm curious as to how deep those express tracks really are. No steep grades are apparent anywhere along that stretch. Heading uptown, there is an upslope as you approach 34th St, then the plainly visible downgrade through the southern half of that station.
That may be the reason why 42nd St. Station is deeper than 47th St. but also consider that the 6th Avenue line has to cross underneath the original Contract line trunk known today as the Times Square/Grand Central Shuttle.
The 2/3 cross below the 4/5 somewhere under City Hall Park. The 4/5 run close to the surface betweeen Fulton St and Brooklyn Bridge while the 2/3 are heading east/west between Fulton St and Park Place.
I am not sure what you mean in your 7th Avenue vs. Lexington Avenue question. The Lexington at Hoyt St. is in the middle of the 7th Avenue tracks. By the time they reach Borough Hall, the westbound (northbound) Lexington is completely to the south (left) of the 7th Avenue. The Bklyn-bound 7th Avenue does this by crossing under the (Lexington) express tracks, which is why the Bklyn-bound 2/3 platform is underneath the Manhattan-bound platform, but the 2 4/5 tracks are next to each other.
Now, you wonder, how does the Lexington Line cross the 7th Avenue Line to run up the East side when it seems poised to run west of the 2/3 line? They cross in Manhattan when the northbound Lexington tracks under Broadway cross over the westbound (northbound) 7th Avenue tracks under whatever street is just south of Chambers St. In other words they cross near City Hall.
The #2 and #3 remain to the "right" (east of) the #4 and #5 until north of Fulton St. station - the 2/3 stops and Fulton and William Sts., the 4/5 stops at Fulton and Broadway. Then the 2/3 turns west - I think along Park Place - and make the stop of that name (connecting with the 8th Ave. line) and finally turn north again just before Chambers St. station on that line.
As complex as the downtown Brooklyn area with regard to subways, that's nothing. Think of the 6th Ave IND at 34th St. When built, it had to duck over or under the Pennsylvania Railroad (Now NJT/LIRR), the BMT Broadway line, an aqueduct, and the Hudson & Manhattan (today's PATH) all while supporting the 6th Ave EL above AND the 6th Ave trolley. Look at how 6th Ave - 34th St is shaped. The north end is significantly lower that the south end and the grade to the south end is rather steep.
--Mark
The recent and existing maps provided by NYCTA have all been Schematics, that is, they show you what line will get you where, but when scale, position, grade, elevation, or other "annoying" facts get in the way, they are ignored so as to maintain ease of use. The last accurate subway map I had was so great, I wore it to dust. It was printed in 1961 by the Seaman's Bank for Savings, a one office bank down around Whitehall St., gone now, I'm sure. But if any of you hang around used book stores, and spot one, give it a look, I'm sure you will agree that it is a gem. It is basically a street map, with subways added in exactly the streets they occupy in real life! Before I lost it to the fuz pile, I rather crudely transferred it to the only street-by-street map I could find, which was a 1964 Gulf Oil map of lower Manhattan. It too is now in pieces, but by God I still have them! Besides being handdrawn and torn, they also suffer from ending at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, so the intracacies of the second system can't be added.
Private bus operators all offer charter services during off-peak hours, to get a few bucks out of what would otherwise be idle equipment. Why doesn't the MTA do the same? If you get a group together on a Saturday or Sunday, why can't you rent a bus to take you anywhere in the five boroughs, and perhaps the adjacent counties as well?
I imagine it as a side deal with the TWU. The TA would charge its marginal cost (diesel, maintenance, collision risk per mile) and the driver would keep the rest. The cost could be 35 passengers times two trips times $1.50 -- about $100. You could pay that cost to have one bus drop you off, and another pick you up, at an appointed time. Or there could be a surcharge to lay over, or to take a group around from place to place. From what I've heard, TWU workers love overtime, and have been getting less of it. Charter opportunities could be used to reward the best employees.
Where would people go? The beach, for those who would otherwise have a long and winding trip. Shopping excursions. Weddings (my parents chartered a school bus to bring my family from Yonkers, where we are from, to Long Island, where my wife is from, for our wedding). Sporting events. In the mid-days, why not compete with school bus companies for school trips? The school buses have to rush back for 3:00 -- TA buses would have more time before rush hours. How about tour groups?
Some places (anywhere other than Manhattan, or the area on your particlar bus and subway line) just take a long time by transit. You would have to swith two, three, and four times. A charter would offer direct service -- to places other than Atlantic City.
Even if done on a break even basis, it would increase mobility, and it could be marketed to every church, school, and social club directly.
I think that it is due to Federal Transit regulations: If a bus is purchased with Federal subsidy money it cannot be used in charter service. This was put in the regs at the urging of private bus charter companies who felt it would be unfair to allow authorities (the receiptiants of Federal subsydies) to complete with private operators who had to shoulder the equipment purchase / maintenance with their own monies.
I know that's the case in Baltimore and I suspect that it's the same everywhere.
Fed bus money:No charters.
This apparently does not extend to rail, as every authority that has rail, charters rail cars.
(RE federal government prohibits the use of buses purchased with federal money for chargers). OBSCENE! The Feds shaft us again! That's as bad as the FAA ruling that a transit system funded by a passenger facility charge (ie the one at JFK) cannot be connected to the overall transit system, but a highway so funded can be connected. Its as bad as the NYC Council giving into the TWU and making it impossible to operate a properly licensed private transit van.
Does the customer have any say here? Who paid the federal taxes for that bus? I did. If I want to rent it for a church picnic on Sunday, and a bus driver wants to make a few extra bucks by providing a service, why can't I? Its MY BUS! The bottom line is most charters are used for long hauls -- outside the city. An MTA charter would open up a new transit market (just as the private vans are an asset to the outer-borough transport system).
Sorry!!! Go charter from one of the private operators!! And pay a lot more than if the local TA was doing it.
That's because the private operators had better lobbyists than the authorities.
It may be the case in Baltimore, perhaps a state law??? I always wonderd about NYCTA buses doing charters. I do know that the some older buses with the curtain destination signs had a "Special-Charter" reading. I don't know if it was all depots, but it was in the OHS depot signs. I can remeber seeing many NJ Transit (and NJDOT Companies) using buses for charters. Also in the 1980's I went on a trip and the Bus Conpany, Academy Tours sent one of the "Jersey Cruiser" MC-9's that were purchased with state and/or federal funds. Also, Jamaica Buses used to do many charters but for some reason they stopped.
An operator that trained me when I was hired told me he moonlighted for Jamaica buses doing charters on their RTS's several years ago but that they stopped doing them. Also I have seen Command bus companies doing Atlantic City charters with RTS's also. Transit has used buses for taking operators to Dispatcher tests on weekends as they did with the December 1995 test held at Murry Bergtram High School. Also transit use to have a bus when an operator passed away to take operators to the wake.
That's "inside", not a charter in the strict sense of the term.
If the TA was interested in doing charter work it probably would be no problem during off-peak hours. When I was much younger I don't think they had many buses in good enough condition to do chatters. I referring to the 70's and early 80's when buses were simply battered. The express buses were better, but I'm guesing there always been somewhat of a shortage of them because - even though I lived in the Bronx, I could routinely spot local TA buses makeing express runs. Liberty Lines also used to do alot of charter work with MC-8, MC-9 and GMC 4905 series buses, but it seems to be a thing of the past now. Maybe the TA should do some charter work, but first they need to get rid of some of those engine governors or raise the top end a bit.
As was said in earlier post in this thread, the TA CANNOT do charter work due to provisions of the Federal Transit rules. There are NO exceptions to this Federal policy, Transit authorities CANNOT do charter work with buses purchased with Federal money. Internal use (non revenue) is not in violation with this policy because no "common carrier" service is being performed.
ARRRGH! OK, one thing I have learned from the world of zoning is once lawyers and lobbyist get a ripoff on the books, only a fool tries to get it off. Instead, savvy operators hire lawyers and lobbyists to get around it. Glass-Stegal doesn't seem to be bothering Citicorp and Travelers, does it?
Instead of a charter, lets say the TA updates its local bus routes on a real-time basis. If a group is interested in a new route, it can pay, say, $100 to fund a "study." If the study indicates a new route may be justified, it it could be operated on a trial basis -- say one run -- and the group could get a $100 credit toward bus ridership on the new route. After the trial, the route could be discontinued, but it could be studied again another time.
My boss says I must learn to embrace hypocracy if I am to survive in the public sector. Perhaps I'm learning. The lawyers and lobbyist rules, and it is fruitless to confront the higher powers!
Well... I'm very curious as to how NJ Transit and NJDOT Companies get around this because they do lots of charter work and many of those buses used are those with the PAXXXX fleet numbers.
I suspect that it's the private operators that charter, and the Fed regs say nothing about leased buses from an autority. Just a hunch. NJT may have a charter division that is a subsidiary private corporation, but I don't know for sure.
I have an experience with a bus charter which is interesting. In September, 1987, I was a student at Hiram G. Andrews Center, which is a state-run & funded rehab center for the handicapped in Johnstown, PA. The school chartered a Neoplan lift-equipped transit bus from the local transit operator, Cambria County Transit Authority, for a trip to a Pittsburgh Pirates game.
I remember that the school was able to charter the transit bus for the following reasons:
-No private charter operator in Johnstown had lift-equipped buses in 1987.
-Also, I think that the school actually chartered from a local private carrier,, which sublet the charter to the CCTA since it could not provide a WC lift equipped vehicle itself.
The trip was mostly uneventful (as uneventful as riding a fully loaded Neoplan transit over the Allegheny Mountains can be!) except that three people in Pittsburgh tried to flag the Johnstown bus down, thinking it was a PAT bus!
So, I believe that there IS a way around the charter ban, at least if wheelchair users are involved, since there are still not many charter buses (MCIs, etc.) that are lift-equipped today. The key seems to be if the private operator CAN provide accessible service to WC users. If not, then maybethere would be an exception to the FTA regs.
Michael S. Buglak
While I regard the farecard with suspicion--think DC Metro with rush hour surcharge and distance billing--since they are here, let's move ahead. The bus transfer goody is a fine first step. 11 for ten is nice, both of these are however merely policies which have been implemented in other systems without electronics. Groundbreaking would be real integration of MTA's many services--electronic ticket from Tarrytwn say good for one sub or bus within 1 hour of arrival GCT. LIRR electronic tickets with any ride within Queens,Bklyn, Manh no more than current NYCT fare. invluding free transfer as above. AND horrors joint agebcy fares Port Jervis Hoboken /Path Manh plus one sub or bus a single ticket or multiuse pass. Wot cho tink?
I want a reduced off-peak fare. The monthly pass provides, in effect, free rides off-peak rides for those working full time, but does nothing to encourage work schedule shifts from 9 to 5 to other hours. Nor does it help part-time workers, and the legion of work-at-homers who travel to Manhattan once or twice a week. And, even for a pass-holder, a non-working spouse/child is full fare off peak.
At least the next required fare increase should apply to peak hours and the monthly ticket only, not off-peak fares.
Larry's comment is exactly why the DC setup is a GOOD thing--the rush hour people, who put the most load on the system, should pay the most, and people who ride 20 stops should pay more than those who ride two. As for combined tickets, don't they already sort of have that on Metro-North/LIRR? If I remember the little ad I remember correctly, they print your monthly ticket on the back of a Metrocard. I know here in Philly, if you buy a monthly commuter ticket, it also gets you free rides on any subway or bus in the city.
I get the feeling that New York may be moving toward establishing fare zones, charging extra during rush hours, and the like, now that MetroCard is here. There will more than likely be resistance and opposition by those who prefer a flat fare. Each system, be it a flat fare or variable fare zone, has its pros and cons.
Thanks to the design of the Metrocard system, it is impossible to establish fare zones, since (unlike Washington) you do not pay to exit. This, I'm told, was the result of a backroom deal in which predominantly white outer areas of the city allowed the Metrocard to go forward. In any event, a ride is a ride -- it doesnt' cost the TA much more to carry someone from my stop than it does to carry someone from further out. With the subway, and commuter rail, there area, in effect, far zones.
There is, however, a big economic difference between peak and off peak. Just today there was a news article about rising crowding and jamming doors leading to more delays. Yet there is no break for altering travel schedules. Even the wealthy might appreciate paying a higher peak hour fare, if the less affluent changed their shifts and left more room on the trains.
The bottom line -- the politicians don't get it. White middle-class people even objected to the monthly pass, on the grounds that they have cars and only use the transit system at nine and five, so they do not benefit. Remember, the mayor wanted a fare cut to $1.25.
That makes sense. We have peak ($1.50) and off peak ($0.75) fares for bus and light rail service in Denver. RTD also operates regional buses at a premium fare (don't remember what it is). In addition, express buses operate to Denver International Airport from select Park'n'Ride locations.
Fare zones in New York are difficult but not impossible. There actually is (modest) precedent for the idea, as there were premium fares charged for travel from the Rockaways after the subway took over service from the LIRR. These lasted until the mid-1960s I believe.
True zoned fares would require a MetroCard exit swipe, similar to what's used on the Washington Metro. This obviously would be expensive to implement and probably would lead to lengthy delays. As a more practical alternative, the entrance turnstiles at some of the more remote stations could be programmed to deduct premium fares. This would at least charge premium fares in one direction. Exit-swipe turnstiles could be installed at a smaller number of stations to deal with the issue of local riders. For instance, on the R line, the turnstiles at the stations between Bay Ridge Avenue and 95th Street could be programmed to deduct an extra fare upon entry. Special exit-swipe readers (they wouldn't have to be part of turnstiles) could be installed at all of these stations except 95th, to "refund" the premium for local riders. In fact, the exit-swipe readers could be installed on other stations on the line, say down to Prospect Avenue, if the idea is to avoid the premium fare for intra-borough travel. Once again, this idea is a updating of what had been done in the Rockaways.
Please note that I am not necessarily advocating fare zones, I'm just pointing out the practicalities.
Separately, I find it hard to accept that the no-fare-zone policy after MetroCard was part of a deal with the "predominantly white outer areas." As far as I can tell, most subway lines terminate in *nonwhite* areas ... though my earlier example of the R in Bay Ridge is a notable exception :-) Consider the 2 (both ends), the E and J in Jamaica, the 5 at Dyre Avenue, etc. etc. Also, the objections to the monthly pass were not from "white middle class people" as much as they were from suburban commuters, who indeed are likely to ride only twice a day and therefore won't benefit much. While most suburban commuters are middle class (or higher), they no longer are all white.
But it doesn't work quite that way for Transpasses. If you leaving Zone 1(Really Center City, but It's the whole city up to about Fox Chase) you have to pay x amount of dollars. They've never asked me though. You can use it on Regional Rail in the city during off-peak hours. Basically, unless you going from the Gallery to the Vet, a Transpass is very restrictive. Now I buy Trailpasses. A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE but a lot more useful.
Trailpasses were what I was talking about. When I say "commuter", I mean the regular railroads, as opposed to the subways and trolleys..
The Miami-Dade Transit Agency recently acquired fifty (50) new buses from North American Buses Inc. I had some questions regarding this acquisition.
1. Is NABI actually the North American version of Ikarus, the Hungarian bus manufacturer? MDTA acquired some Ikarus buses that were articulated somewhere close to the middle a few years ago, and their appearances (windows, ends, etc.) are somewhat similar.
2. The taillights and turn signals of the new units seem to be made out of LED arrays. Anyone know whether this is true?
There's always that possibility. As for the tail/ turn signals,
They're probably LED type since the Gillig Buses here in Tampa have
that type of light which makes them really bright both during the day n night
NABI is the renamed American Ikarus, related to the Ikarus of Hungary. The tail and marker lights look to be LED. We have 400 of them here in Phila. This may become 399 as one was "highjacked" last week and crashed into an El column. From the looks of the news photos, 5267 may not be returning to service.
How come until the the 80's if I am correct did the MTA use double lettering for the subway lines. What was the significance of it like calling the th now G train the GG and the R the RR, and so forth. It bewilders me since now they use single letters which seem to be much better.
I believe the single letter lines were Express while the double letter lines were Locals.
Yes, single letters denoted express service; double letters were used for locals. Double letters were dropped in the mid to late 80s to minimize confusion, since many trains ran express along one stretch and local elsewhere. A good example of a double letter line which fit into this category was the rush hour QB. It ran express in Manhattan and local in Brooklyn. It is now the Q line, which also underwent a service pattern change: it now runs express in Manhattan and Brooklyn.
The single letter express / double letter local is a throwback to the original IND that started this convention. It was easy when the system ws independent; C trains ran express to 205th St via 8th Ave express, and CC did the same as a local. But now that lines traverse more than one borough and some run express in one borough and local in another, the double letter convention became ambiguous. So the TA simplydropped it in favor of giving each line its own single letter code.
--Mark
The IND was even more stratified symbolically than just 2 letters local, 1 letter express:
A, AA, C, CC, E, EE were 8th Avenue
B, BB, D, DD, F, FF were 6th Avenue
And
A, AA, B, BB were Washington Hts.
C, CC, D, DD were Concourse
E, EE, F, FF were Queens
GG was Crosstown
HH was Fulton Street local to Court St.
So looking at the letter told you its midtown route, its northbound destination, and its type of service.
That's absolutely correct. Not all letter designations were used, however. There never was a DD or FF service, and the B line didn't come into being until 1967, at which time it took over the BB rush hour route. In addition, there was no EE until 1967, and then it didn't even run along 8th Ave (it ran along Broadway to Whitehall St). That route was dropped in 1976.
I believe that the MTA is going even further soon and giving routes like the #6 express its own number as well as the #7 express its own number. I believe this will cut down on confusion when getting on the train and realizing it's the wrong one. Does anybody know what the new numbers will be and when they will be implemented?
I have a suggestion to throuw out there. The computer LED signs which flash the origination and destination on the train cars, the R line and F Line and so forth should also flash the next stop or the time. I do know that would be complicated since I am sure every time the train is out of service and then put back the clock would then have to be reset. But what do you all think. The new Market Frankford line flashes the next stop on its display if I am not mistaken.
I worked on the Luminator Sign system since the prototypes were installed on 10 pre-overhaul R-46 cars. The system, as delivered, would not support the suggestions you have made. The current system requires that either the Train Operator or Conductor enter a code into a keypad in the cab(ODK). This tells the system to play one message (some are up to 4 lines long) over and over again. Those messages (there are over 1,000 currently) are stored in a series of memory chips in the sign control unit (SCU). The system you suggest would need to receive external data such as location and whether the train was going to stop at an upcoming station. This will be possible, eventually, with the CBTC signal system scheduled to be installed on the L line but no where else any time soon.
The Lisbon subway has this feature (next stop is . . .). The Lisbon subway system is considerably simpler than the NYC subway, which helps. But I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to program a chip with the NYC subway routes and stations, and to have a sensor on the doors to tell when a stop was reached. A fairly simple touchscreen would enable the conductor to change the signage around, as is done in Lisbon. Should be(!) pretty straightforward.
--mhg
Boston has it in their new Red Line cars, both audible and visual. However, these are separate from the destination signs.
The idea is good but the current time/next stop is ... information would be better suited on the new CBTC based signs which could also tell me when the next train is coming, as is done in London.
--Mark
The L line is a logical choice for such an implementation: it's two tracks from end to end, local only, and it doesn't share trackage with any other route.
Due to the seeming versatility of these signs, why weren't they installed in other cars- either as original specified equipment or when the cars were overhauled? Is it due to greater cost.
To my untrained mind, it seems that the cost would be cheaper due to "instant: change in re-route due to service diversions or "new" service" I have seen these signs change enroute due to announced service changes-to me a great benefit.
What is the reason they chose not to go with these signs system wide? WIll future new cars use this type of sign
In order to be cost effective, they need to be in linked units. Just to give you an idea of cost, for a married pair:
4 LCD displays @ $6,000 each
1 SCU Master @ $5,000
1 ODK Keypad @ $ 800
That's roughly $30,000 per 2 car unit plus installation. I had suggested it for the R-68s when they go through verhaul but $6.4 million for material was a bit high.
When will the R-68s go through overhaul, and what can we expect from it?
Are both the R-68 and R-68As being overhauled? I do think the R-68s are in bad shape and are in need of work.
I think that your impression of the R-68 is a tad harsh. The cars look like they are in bad shape because of the vandalism to the interior stainless steel. This will not be addressed during the overhaul. In reality, the R-68 has been noted by state auditors as one of the NYCTs better performing car fleets. As for what will be done on the overhaul, the major upgrades will be:
Replacement of the propulsion package to the "E-CAM", a microprocessor based control system.
Rebuilding of the trucks.
Replacement of the HVAC components & convert to AC Evaporator motors.
Replace all door panel upper tracks.
Replace car floors.
Rebuild the brake package
Re-designed hand brake.
The overhaul is scheduled for 1999 but the replacement of the control package may begin several months earlier.
Despite providing a smooth ride, the R68 cars seem to be consistently filled with litter: pages from newspapers, paper bags, even glass bottles. I think something about the design, particularly the open spaces under the seats, encourages people to throw things under the seats, from where they move around all over the car. How about installing metal boxes under the seats to block off those spaces? I think that, psychologically, this will discourage a lot of the littering - or at least make it easier to get at and remove whatever litter there is. IRT cars, which all have such boxes (installed for other reasons, I realize), and the R-32 cars which are similarly designed, do not seem to have the same problems with litter.
The R-68s are not the only cars with open spaces under the seats. The R-44 and R-46 also have them, as well as the IRT R-62.
The metal boxes on the other cars are (I think) heaters. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that they are heaters.
The metal 'boxes' house the heaters and the door operators. On R-44 and higher, the door operators are behind the swing sashes adjacent to the door panels.
As we "speak" the R68As are in the process of being linked together into 4 car units. These cars were once 'single car units', capable of operating solo if need be (although rules prohibit any single car moves being made, even in yards). They still have converters and compressors on every car, but that could eventually change. They have already capped over or removed (not sure which) cutting valves between the linked cars.
Two small corrections:
1) The 4-car links have been completed.
2) The compressor in the lower numbered odd car has been removed to save money (A serious mistake as it turns out)
Beginning in January, the R-68s will be similarly linked.
obviously in an attempt to save money on maintenance cars are being unitized. To eliminate some duplicated equipment as on R-44/46 cars A units(with cabs) have Air brake compressors and converters to supply low voltage to A cars (even numbers and b units (odd number). 44/46 are set up as follows a-b-b-a-a-b-b-a, can be operated as four car units, only Car Equipment Department can uncouple links. R68a are in the process of being lashed up to eliminate weight and to lower maintenance on fewer pieces of equipment needed on a UNIT Trainset. In a four car 68 or 68 a all thats need are one master controller and brake stand at each end, and H2C coupler atthose ends . In number 2 end cabs controllers removed and link bars replace h2c couplers which weigh less. Electrical aparatus nolonger going through electric portion of coupler results in fewer problems. more than likely one larger capacity air compressor will replace to smaller ones for each car. cars without compressor units would have volume resevoirs to hold reserve air from compressors in lead units as in R44/46.
They also removed the operator seats and control stand, but caps in the holes that were left. But they left the window wipers >G<, I don't know if they left the control for the wiper but the wiper is there...
On R44/46, all cars have air compressors, but the B cars lack the motor-generators. On the SIR, you can ride a train that is set up A-B>A, and even an AA
the < or > before the car indicates the direction of the cab.
Overheard on boarding in St. George:
'I hope we got on going the right way'
-Hank
On R-44s and R-46s the A car (even numbered) have Air compressors and static converters (in place of motor generators). The B cars (odd numbers) have neither.
The metal boxes you refer to on R32, 38, 40, & 42 type equipment do indeed contain heaters, but they also have the door operators lurking there too. (And oftentimes, a LOT of grunge...)
Yes, the new M-4 cars feature the next stop on the LED panels. It appears to me that the panels are two sided; so I would assume it displays the next stop out side too.
In a staion it reads
69th: ALL STOPS
While Moving
Next: 34th St
Speaking of the new trains, they were running last Friday; are they running them more frequently now?
The newer Bombardier cars on Boston's Red Line display the next stops. They also display the train's destination as the train gets close to the point when Ashmont and Braintree trains diverge. As if that weren't enough, a computer voice (it might be a digitally sequenced voice recording) announces all the information displayed on the LED panels.
The R-110A cars do exactly that on the LED displays which are mounted within the cars, so it should be possible to do the same on the window-mounted displays, but I doubt that it is desirable. The outside signs should be short and to the point, since they need to be readable as the cars pass by people waiting on the platforms. Having too many "lines" alternating on these displays would make them almost useless.
P.S. The R-110A displays are in the wrong order! That is, I think they should read, for example, "(2) 7th Ave. Express / To Flatbush Avenue / Next stop Bronx Park East" but instead they read "(2) 7th Ave. Express / Next stop Bronx Park East / To Flatbush Avenue".
Just as a point of personal curiosity - when you are riding the subways, do you listen to the conductor's announcements, or do you ignore them and hope the train goes where you expect it will? It seems lately that I am ending up with more people who will not listen to announcements and get very upset when they arrive where they don't want to go. And before everyone asks, I know that the PA is working in these cars, because they are are my operating cars.
Many time. I do not hear the announcements even though the PA is working. The typical C/Rs announcement blends in with all the other noise. However, when the C/R begins his announcements with a pleasant greeting, I aways hear it. Not a suggestion, Alex, just an observation.
Two other problems:
Conductors, I assume, are urged announce every station, so no New Yorker listens, since they all know where they are headed. When an announcement of importance comes up, like "This train is going to run express to 96 St.", they don't hear that either.
Also, the loudspeakers are very difficult to understand, no matter how well the conductor speaks. And often the announcement is made just once. I remember hearing at 96 St. on the #1 train, "This train is skipping all stops to 137 St, next stop 137 St.", the doors closed and that was that.
What can be done?? Here is a suggestion: Say: "This is a special service announcement..." and say the train change two times, with "I repeat" between the announcements. I learned this from working at a place where we had to announce phone calls as in "John Q. Public, Call on Line 2, John Q. Public". It always worked: the person didn't pay that much attention until the magic word "Line 2" was said, and then heard the name one more time and new to pick up the phone.
Not urged to announce all stops. Required by Law to announce all stops.
-Hank
There's another reason why many riders seem to ignore conductor annoucements. Depending on the train, there might be a lot of riders who don't understand English.
You mean the 1 will occasionally run express from 96th to 137th?!? On the center track? Man oh man, I need to ride that line more often! Seriously, I feel that repeating an announcement works best if you want to get everyone's attention. Conductors on the 1/9, for example, will repeat their announcement about the doors opening only in the first five cars at South Ferry. Any deviation from normal service, such as running express instead of local, definitely deserves a repeat announcement. Sometimes a conductor will repeat an announcement even if the service is "normal". I rode a rush hour A train once in 1978, and as we were approaching Hoyt-Schermerhorn, the conductor came on: "Change for the CC local at Hoyt-Schermerhorn for all local stops. This train will run express to Lefferts Blvd. Repeat: change for the CC local at Hoyt-Schermerhorn for all local stops. This train will run express to Lefferts Blvd". In the past, I have heard conductors on the B repeat that "this train will not stop at DeKalb", although they don't seem to make that announcement anymore.
The center track use of the 1 was because the tracks and platforms were being rebuilt around 116 - 137 St. It was a Saturday afternoon about 1.5 years ago, though. I was with my daughter and a friend of hers and we were headed to Tom's Restaurant (the Seinfeld Restaurant).
We not only went up the center track, but at 137 Street the train pulled in going uptown into the downtown platform, we got off and 3 minutes later, a downtown train pulled into the same platform. A true rarity, which my daughter sort of understood because I have been telling her about the subways for years, but lost on her friend, who was mostly excited that the train shook so much and we had to stand, and that it was outdoors for the 125 St. (non)stop.
Like most contributors here, I am transit-knowledgeable, and always know where I'm going. But not everyone does. The real issue for me concerns switching from the A to the F at Jay Street. When service is screwed up, some F trains go express. I hear that.
The more important announcements are in the stations. I want to know why the train isn't there. Or between stations. I want to know why the train isn't moving.
Those loudspeakers at stations leave a lot to be desired. I often find it very difficult to understand anything being said in those instances.
As, Carl already said, I think people who know where they're going generally don't pay much attention to announcements, but it usually catches their attention when an announcement is made stating that there will be some sort of deviation from the regular service. I think it's also very helpful when the conductor repeats the announcement. Just watch - Many times passengers may be in their own world, but when the conductor announces that their local will make exp stops many passengers will respond.
When the F train goes express, they usually hold in the station for an eternity, and annouce it several times both in the station and on the platform. But you'd be amazed how many people, after the umpteenth announcement, suddenly jump up and push their way out the closing doors.
[When the F train goes express, they usually hold in the station for an eternity, and annouce it several times both in the station and on the platform. But you'd be amazed how many people, after the umpteenth announcement, suddenly jump up and push their way out the closing doors.]
An even worse sort of confusion happens afternoons at the LIRR's Ronkonkoma station. I get the shuttle train to Greenport, which leaves after the 5:41 from Penn Station arrives. Before the shuttle leaves, the conductor clearl announces that it's the eastbound shuttle to Greenport. There's usually only one open car, so it's not hard for the conductor to announce it to everyone on board. Yet, at least once a week there's someone on board (maybe more often, these are only the ones I hear) who thinks it's a Penn Station train and finds out too late. And that's a mighty nasty position to be in, seeing as how there's only one more westbound train to Ronkonkoma, and that doesn't run until after 11 pm.
One nice thing about SEPTA's commuter trains is that they have boards right next to the doors telling you which line the train is running on and where it's going. Something more commuter authorities need to copy. . .
As a #2 was pulling into 72 St. the other day, I noticed the conductor speaking into his booth's microphone, announcing the station. But when I got inside the car, I heard no announcements. "Poor guy," I thought. He keeps talking but no one is hearing him.
And a couple of weeks ago, a #6 was going out of service at 125 St. The conductor spoke extra loudly to say this...or something. But he didn't speak...each...word...clearly... Itwasalljumbledup. And with the bad P.A. I didn't understand more than a word or two. I knew more about what he MIGHT be saying than the average passenger but I swear I didn't figure out what he meant till he turned the lights out on the train.
With such bad P.A.'s and with so many passengers whose first language isn't English, you'd think conductors would know they have to make important announcements IN...A...CLEAR...AND...WELL-SPOKEN...STYLE.
And now I answer myself - no one listens unless they are spoken to directly!
Thursday on a 2 train, a woman got on sat down outside my cab at Flatbush Ave, listened to me make all the announcements in a clear voice ( I am 3 months out, its the only one I have)that this train was going up the East side of Manhattan at every station. As the train left Brooklyn Bridge, she asked how to get to the Chambers St. station and why didn't this train go there.
Yesterday on a New Lots bound 3 train at Atlantic Ave a couple stood in front of me on the station as I made the announcements, looked at the 18" tall 3 sign next to me, and asked if the train was going to stop at "the Junction". A blank look from me got a further explanation - "you know, it used to be the last stop on the 2 train."
Do these people really need a private announcement? Couldn't listening and looking to what is going on around them be a bigger help?
As a postscript, the people cited here all spoke English very well, seemed familiar with the area and had no problem understanding the answers they got. I cannot ( and will not) fault apparent tourists and non-English speaking people for asking silly questions.
People hear what they want to hear. I've come up with several theories about this: either their attention span is incredibly short, and they just don't listen, or they're hard of hearing. Then again, maybe they feel that such announcements couldn't possibly pertain to them.
Improvise on this "paraphrased" saying-Speak softly and wave a big stick. Trust me, they'll listen:)
This past weekend, I rode a J train heading from Manhattan. But what struck me was that the entire line had a total of only 4 cars to each train. This has happened in the past before on previous weekends and even during middays. Does anyone know what the reason for this is.
Doesn't sound too unusual. Of hours the C runs with 4-6 cars, the G is almost always 6 cars. They cut the trains because the ridership isn't there for the extra cars. It cuts the energy cost. I remember going on trips with my grandparents from Canarsie, when we got to Rockaway Parkway station, the 'next train' light typically said 'forward cars only', and the 8 car train would be cut to 4 or 6 cars.
-Hank
I figured that was one of the reasons. It's true that the J line is not heavily used with the exception of rush hours. As I said in my first post, this was even done during weekdays in between the morning and evening rush hours just a few years back. I don't think the idea of having 4-car trains on weekdays in between both rush hours was a good idea so it's only been done on weekends only.
-Garfield
Ridership can vary from line to line, as well as the time of day. On the West Side IRT (the 1, 2, 3, and 9), 10-car trains (9 on the #3) are the rule all day long. As a general rule, if trains are shortened at all, it's during the late hours from 1-5 AM. It's also possible to have shorter trains on weekends, especially Sundays. When I used to make my weekly trek on Saturdays in the late 60s, AA trains would be 4 cars long (R-1/9s or R-32s); E trains would have 6 cars (R-1/9s or slant R-40s); A trains (R-10s, of course, with a rare cameo by R-1/9s) would be 8 cars long. As the holiday season approached, those same trains would grow to 8 cars on the AA (I never could figure out why IND local trains were never longer than 8 cars), and 10 on the A and E. The 6th Ave. line was much the same: B trains were 6 or 8 cars (R-32s); D trains 8 or 10 (R-1/9s or R-32s); F trains 6 or 10 (R-1/9s or slant R-40s).
Hi all,
This is to request a favor from all your subtalkers out there... if anyone has any of the following books and would lend them to me for a short while, I'd appreciate it. Send me email if you can help. Thanks.
A History of the New York Subway System, Vols 1 & 2
Joseph Cunningham & Leonard De Hart
The Tracks of New York, Vols. 1-3
Alan Paul Kahn and Jack May
Sorry, Dave. Can't help. But I'd like to ask you a question. When was the NYCSR
created? Was it the brainchild of a guy who had a dream that one day people from around the world could get together and talk about....subways? Or was it the brainchild of 7 guys who said that? I'm very interested.
Well, the quick capsule history is this:
Started it up as a "personal" page (www.k2nesoft.com/~pirmann/subway.html, if I recall), with two features: A trip report of a Transit Museum Nostalgia Train from July 1995, and some photos from a Transit Museum-sponsored tour of City Hall Station from May 1995. I think the pages went up in early August, 1995. I even bought a scanner for just this purpose. :-)
A few other early sections were photos from "field trips" to the IRT lines of the Bronx and Queens, and the BMT Canarsie/Broadway El lines. I think in October 1995, I went on a "Day One on the IRT" tour and put things up from that. I guess around this point I set up a "www.k2nesoft.com/subway" URL (the guy who runs the k2nesoft.com site is a friend of mine and I basically was webmaster there at the time).
Around that time I met up with Peter Dougherty who provided the most excellent track maps section. I can't really detail the timeline of further additions because it sort of exploded from there. A list of other contributors can be found on this page. My apologies to those I've overlooked.
Around June or July 1996 I put together an old Sun workstation and moved the site to its own dedicated server (subway.k2nesoft.com), running the Apache http server. This system proved to be faster, more flexible, and provided more space to work with. Plus the ISP host wasn't as p.o.'ed at me for hogging his web server. :-)
SubTalk went online on 2/27/1997. Some people had suggested a chat area and the wwwboard system seemed perfect for the task.
I registered the new domainname nycsubway.org and it went online on 6/1/1997.
In February 1998 I put up the current fully-CGI-based web_bbs SubTalk, and upgraded the server to a theoretically faster machine with nice fat hard drive (the old one was 100% full).
A rundown of other section additions can be found on this page.
So that's the (not so short) history!
-Dave
All of us from all over the WWWT (World Wide Web Transit) thank you for all the good work you do. I give web friends the url every chance I get.
It's nice to see that there's still such a thing as dedication. Or at least a story not cooked up by the paparazzi:)
You know, Dave ... why don't you take the blurb of the "evolution of NYCSR" and add it to your "about nycsubway.org" page?
And good luck with those books - they're long out of print and very hard to get. The NY Public Library (main branch) can't help?
--Mark
This is my writeup of this new book for the bibliography. Thought I'd post it here for those interested.
The Evolution of New York City
Subways: An Illustrated History of New York City's Transit Cars,
1867-1997
by Gene Sansone
Division of Car Equipment
MTA New York City Transit
New York Transit Museum Press
(130 Livingston Street, Room 9001, Brooklyn, NY 11201)
ISBN: 0963749285
This new book is now the definitive guide to the rolling stock of
the NYC subway and elevated system, covering the first elevated line
in 1867 thru the R-142 car contract of 1997. Each car type is
illustrated with photos, mostly black & white, and a writeup, as well
as the diagram sheets from the NYCT internal publication Revenue
and Non-Revenue Car Drawings where available. This book is a good
general introduction to the car types, but the books below go into
further detail and illustration about the "sub-classes" (no pun
intended) of the cars (early IRT, early BMT, and R-types). There are
some color photos but New York City Subway Cars is the clear
winner in that category. This book is unique in one other respect: it
is the first comprehensive book about any aspect of subway history
published by MTA New York City Transit, and hopefully not the
last. This book is a necessary addition to any subway fan's
collection.
Good book. It costs $59.95. I got mine at the NY Penn Sta Transit Musuem Gift cart.
[Good book. It costs $59.95.]
For that price, it ought to be good!
When I was a kid, my grandmother and I took the Third Ave. El. to the
Chatham Square Station of the South Ferry Branch. At that time the City
Hall branch had stopped running...
At any rate, when the train left the Chatham Square Station going north, I could look down to the left and see the tracks that led to the City Hall spur.
The lower level tracks, where the Third Avenue trains went were nice and
shiny. But, to my surprise, the upper level tracks (formerly used by the
Second Avenue El trains) leading to the City Hall station were *also*
nice and shiny! How could this be?
From the various track maps on the web site it seems that there was no way
for the Third Avenue line trains to use the upper level City Hall Station
and no way for the Second Avenue trains to use the lower level City Hall
Station. Can any one explain this phenomenon? E-mail directly to
flcg1018@fujens.fju.edu.tw please...
Best wishes to all...
Morton Belcher
I believe that the 3rd Ave line had a connecting ramp north of the junction.
I got mine there, too. Just a note of warning - there was a recent bad batch of books. Some had pages missing or repeated and some pages were blank. Make sure to scan the book before you buy it. I'm not sure if they've pulled all the defective books yet.
BTW - worth all $59.95; 10% discount to Museum members .....
--Mark
Can This Book Be Purchased in other stores such as Barnes & Nobel
Or Thru Amazon.com on the net.
I definitely recommend the book. Although not as many color photos as New York City Subway Cars as mentioned in the review, its documentation of pre-R contract equipment is excellent. Also, while both New York City Subway Cars and The Evolution of New York City Subways: An Illustrated History of New York City's Transit Cars have the diagram sheets, the latter's drawings are of a much better quality.
All in all, it's a must for any serious buff.
Received my copy of the book today. Although it is an impressive binding, filled with some very good drawings and technical info, I am concerned with the way many of the photos were reproduced. It is clear that the photos are reproduced from scanned (digitized) images that were manipulated for sizing in the book. Unfortunately, this was done without regard for consideration of scale. Some (9' wide) IRT cars look wider than 10' IND/BMT cars and the BMT/IND cars look enormous! What's that you say, never saw an 80' IRT car? Check out the photo of R-29 8571-2 on Page 366! For a book with "archival" quality, the distorted perspective is quite the gaff. Also, much of the prose has been lifted from "They Moved the Millions" by Ed Davis (not that that's bad-it's just that poor old Ed deserves some credit!). In summary, OK for the general railfan, disturbing images for the knowledgeable subway buff, and generally useless for serious modelers! I expect to see brass 80' IRT R-Types in the distant future being offered for sale by an importer who used this book as the definitive reference. Not a lot of bang for the buck, but the limited edition status will make this a "must have" for many subway nuts!
I have a question. I noticed that on weekends the 13th street token booth and turnstiles are closed on the Eastbound platform of the El. I was wondering as to how those who want to go eastbound get on the train at 13st. Do they have to walk to 11 or 15th street to get on the train?
Get on at the westbound side, and walk over the tracks via the overpass to the eastbound side.
Further to my previous comment:
I work on alternate Saturdays at the Information Desk at the Smithsonian Castle (or at others sometimes). (Look for me if you are there.) A few times people have asked about closed Metro stations. No stations are closed early on the DC Metro (except for Arlington Cemetery) or the Philadelphia subway (except for Spring Garden-Ridge Ave. when the Ridge Avenue line isn't running. Only certain entrances are closed.
I explain at the Smithsonian that one entrance may be closed but a second one is always open. The signs and brochures in DC are unclear; they say "Station Closed" in brochures and say "Station Entrance Closed" at entrances, I believe. They don't make clear that alternate entrances are available.
The Spring Garden stop on the Ridge Spur is history. Nothing stops there any more and the entrances are sealed. I believe this occurred in '84-'85 when the Spur reopened after its closure due to the Commuter Tunnel construction.
You may be thinking about the lower level Fairmount stop.
You're right. I was thinking of Vine St. Chinatown and wrote Spring Garden which I know is closed forever. Also the lower Fairmount station is closed when the line is not running.
Personally, I think they should just close up the Ridge Ave line completely and run better service on the main line, like have expresses run as frequently as locals and both run every 5 minutes, and have more MFSE service. Then people would be more likely to use it if they knew the next train was going to arrive within 4-5 minutes all day long. That's how it works in Toronto, with a very similarly shaped system. The trains there are always running with a high frequency, so people know that once the bus gets them to a train station, they'll continue on their trip in a couple of minutes.
I have walked the passageway from Market East to Suburban many times and I've noticed that there used to be (according to signs) an underpass to the other side of the passageway at several locations. When were these underpasses closed ?
There was an overpass at Juniper and an underpass at 13th. I don't know when Juniper was closed. 13th never opened - it was built in the mid-70's when the 13th St station was modernized and the eastbound side lengthened, but to the best of my knowledge it has never been used.
On Carl's post - you are correct. The Spur's lifespan was shortened when the free transfer was instituted at City Hall in '79. When the Spur went out in '81 due to Commuter Tunnel work it was thought that it would never return. It does provide a good shortcut, though. Politically, it has its supporters, as evidenced when SEPTA tried different operation patterns last year.
I am not sure if we are talking about the same things here or not... I apologize if we are...
On the Pedestrian Concourse around 11th street, there are what appears to be staris down?? They are illuminated each time I walk by, but there is a steel door across them.
Are these the underpasses mentioned?
Yes, it sounds like the same one. It's actually closer to 12th St (if you can visualize where 12th St would cross).
If you go down the escalator in the 1234 Market building (SEPTA HQ) from the lobby to the concourse level, you'll see where another escalator going down further from the concourse is, behind a barricade. This is the one.
Okay, here is an oral tour of the pedestrian concourse from the subway entrance at 13th Street, on the same side of the street as the Hard Rock Cafe(great place might I add). OK, I'm walking down and pass the 13th Street westbound platform walk down a little more and see a sealed entrance that I believe connects to the el and trolley. Than I walk some more and there are no more entrances or secret passageways one can see until 11th. There are steps that lead to an overpass to the eastbound side(both for the train and the other side of Market Street), stairs to the street and an entrance to the Gallery. I do not reccomend this walk for anyone without a bat or a gold medal in track, because there are some less than savory characters down there(as well as the ever present stink of old fast food and urine.)
It seems to me that I read somewhere that with the extensive renovations being performed on the Pentagon and for security measures, they have placed SEVERE restrictions on who can enter/leave the station to the surface within the Pentagon building...the station itself is "business as usual' though when it comes to Blue-Yellow Line transfers and the such.........Paging Mr. Dan Lawrence...can you confirm this or is it a figment of my imagination?.. :)...:) Thanks Dan
No, you are right. People without Pentagon passes can't even go into the small shopping mall in the basement of the Pentagon anymore. Many years ago you could without a pass. I believe the other poster was thinking of the shopping center 1/2 mile away: the "Fashion Centre at Pentagon City." Pentagon City is a neighborhood next to the Pentagon. Your description about getting from the station to anywhere is pretty accurate, though I haven't been there in a couple of years.
Pentagon city is a great example of "If you build it, they will come"....Metro purposes built in some areas that were rather deserted with the plan of developing mixed use developments around them....Unlike older areas like Bethesda (Red Line) where the urban areas were revitalzed, new areas like Pentagon City (Blue/Yellow) , Eisenhower Ave. (Yellow) station area and the Van Dorn (Blue) are great examples of how the station came first, then the development.
If going eastbound, you must pay at the westbound platform then go under the platform via the free conection to the the trolley and walk straight across for the eastbound. Simple, huh?
I am curious as to what lines on the transit system will be getting the new R142 cars. Also is there anywhere on the web I can view pictures of the new cars? Do they look similiar to any that are on the system now or will they be different as to looks and little "perks" and conveniences.
I would like to know where did you hear or read about the MTA purchasing R142 cars ?
I heard talk about the R142 here on subtalk....I thought I heard a few mention that they are on order as are the R143 and will be delivered at the end of this year and the beginning of next year. CAN ANYONE ELSE SAY THAT I AM CORRECT?
An order for 1080 R-142 subway cars for the IRT division(600 Bombardier, 480 Kawasaki) was indeed placed and expected delivery is sometime in '99. Bids for 500 or so R-143 cars for the IND/BMT are being solicited now; the order hasn't been placed yet.
--Mark
As of Friday, there was no contract for the R-143. The bid calls for 108 cars with an option for 80-100 additional cars. My personal preference would be for Kawasaki cars.
About six months ago, the Governor announced that contracts had been
signed with Bombardier and Kawasaki for about 1,000 R142 subway cars to be
delivered late this year and early next year. These cars are based on the
R110A new technology cars. They will replace some or all of the R26, R28
and R29 redbirds and will be used on the numbered lines.
The cars come as a 5-car semi-permanently coupled unit train in a a-b-c-b-a
configuration. The "a" car is a cab car with two powered trucks, the "b"
car has one powered truck and the "c" car is a trailer.
Ten prototypes should be delivered in late 1998, with the production cars
being delivered in 1999 and 2000.
This does not make a lot of sense, but talk on the rails is that the MTA
is interested in ten R143 subway cars, which would be an update to the
R110B new technology car. I am sure someone out there has better info
than this.
Since we have about two months or so 'til these weekly and monthly passes which some have predicted even more ridership of the system, should the MTA have those new cars purchased and ready to roll by the time the passes take effect. Jason Moskal had stated the arrival of the cars to possibly be at the end of the year.
The R142 cars are supposed to appear on the 2, 5 & 7 lines to replace the redbirds. If you get up to the E.180th St station on the 2/5 you can see the new barn being built at the far side of the yard. This is supposedly for the sole care & feeding of the IRT R142s.
To the news article quoted above, the MTA has contracted to buy 1000+ new cars, 850 of which are to go to the IRT and the remainder to the BMT/IND.
The last I heard, trainsets were to begin arriving at the end of the summer for non-revenue testing and were to go into revenue service early in 1999.
I was up in Hornell NY visiting family. Bombardier/GEC Altshom factory is located where the Erie RR shops were. last summer while staying at the Comfort Inn across from the Hornell railroad station and GEC Alsthom rail facility the local papers had in the paper the manufacture of NYC R142 cars. the last time I was up there nyc subway cars and metro north equip was in for rebuild. I was up in Hornell being of April this year and was hoping to get a glimpse of these new cars but all I saw were Chicago CTA subway cars for rebuild.. I don't think we'll see the R 142 for awhile hmmm.
An order for 1080 R-142 subway cars for the IRT division(600 Bombardier, 480 Kawasaki) was indeed placed and expected delivery is sometime in '99. Bids for 500 or so R-143 cars for the IND/BMT are being solicited now; the order hasn't been placed yet.
Ridership is already up and riders are starting to feel the pinch because of increasing dwell times. Check out today's Daily News front page article TA Push Comes to Shove: Crowds block doors, delay trains.
Wonder if the R-143s are going to revert to 60' cars, 4 doors / car, to speed passenger loading/unloading.
--Mark
I just came back from the Bombardier site and got some information on the R-142. Here it is:
Max speed-62 mph
Car length-51'4"(That's it!)
Car width-8'9"
Doorway width-4'6"
Configuration-A-B-B-B-A
Train configs-6,9 and 11 cars(but how is that done with the above config?)
A little small for a NYC car, huh? M-3's are bigger than that? What's the TA doing. No better way to curb overcrowded subways than making smaller cars. But I assume the 11 car comfig might make up for that. But did that happen before. I've never been on an 11 car subway before, not even in NYC rush hour!
If you want to see it for yourself there is also(finally) an external photo at
http://www.transportation.bombardier.com/htmen/A1A.htm
Then you should ride the [7] train! It is always made up of 11 cars, except in the summer when the 11th car, which is non-airconditioned, is removed to make up a fully airconditioned 10 car train.
And while the theoretical top speed may be 62 mph, trains today are limited to a practical top speed of around 40 mph on tangent, level track, as a result of the Willie-B accident a few years ago. This is the same reason that trains now crawl up inclines such as after going through the 53rd Street tunnel on the [E][F] in either direction. I suspect it will take a revamp of the old signal system to bring back the faster speeds. This is too bad, since riding the 6th Ave., Lex Ave., Queens Blvd., and other expresses at 50+ mph was a whole lot more fun before the speeds were cut back.
I've noticed that train speed of the Queens Blvd. exp have been pretty fast. I would say that most of the speeding occurs in the 53st tunnel and the area between the Queens Plaza and Roosevelt Ave stations. Also, the speed of trains has risen on the Williamsburg bridge. The days following the accident, the top speed was from 10 to 15 miles. Now it feels like the trains are doing more than that as soon as they depart the Essex St. station in lower Manhattan.
Even ten years ago, E and F trains would move along at a good clip between Queens Plaza and Continental Ave. if there weren't any delays. Unfortunately, the speedometers on the R-46 cars (before they were rebuilt) were nonfunctional, so you couldn't tell how fast you were really going; I still remember when those original speedometers worked. All cars today have digital speedometers in the corner of the operator's cab. You can see it if the cab door is kept partially open, or if the door window into a full-width cab isn't covered over.
I have seen #4 trains hit 50 mph in the Joralemon St. tunnel and #3 trains reach 40 mph between 96th and 72nd Sts. Of course, nothing can compare to an A train of good old R-10s thundering along Central Park West at 45-50 mph by the time it reached 81st St.
As long as we're talking about speed, I have seen O'Hare trains in Chicago reach 65 mph in the median of the Kennedy Expressway. This was back in 1982, before the line went all the way to O'Hare. I have also been on a BART train which did 72 mph in the Transbay Tube, and 85 mph in Oakland!
The speed on the E/F between 71st Continental and Roosevelt, then Roosevelt and Queens Plaza seemed so much faster a year ago. I suppose they slowed down because of the construction going on at 36 St for the B Q extention. One thing I find interesting is where modern track is. According to Stan Fischler's new Book- 'The Subway' there is new concrete tie/welded track on the 1/9. In the paper I read that the TA is upgrading track on the B Q under central park/63rd street. Why do they do that on local lines but not express? Imagine the safety and speed improvements that would result from welded rail on runs like the A at Central Pk west and the E/F under Qns Blvd. It would make the run alot queiter too. Ride an express LIRR train between Penn and Jamaica on the new track, you'll see what I mean.
I may be wrong, but I get the feeling that the express tracks along the Queens line do consist of welded rail. You don't hear the clackety-clack which would be present if standard-length rail were used. On an F train of R-46s, the ride is very quiet in that regard, you feel as though you're floating on the track. Of course, the R-46s are pretty quiet cars to begin with. Even on a E of R-32s, it's quiet. According to one of the volunteers at the Transit Museum, the type of rail used in the subway is not considered high speed rail.
I rode the M train across the Williamsburg Bridge from Essex Street, Tuesday afternoon. Top speed across the bridge was 20 MPH. Yesterday I rode an Eastbound E train (R-32 equipment). A young child standing by the T/O Cab was peeking through the hinge and took great delight in calling out the speed as we rode from Queens Plaza to Roosevelt Ave. Top speed he announced was 36 MPH.
Top speed that I've found recently is the run from Lex to Queensboro Plaza. It's also one of the slowest. At the bottom of the tube, 54 MPH, rapidly dropping to 19 climbing out of the portal.
Is that the 60th St. tunnel? I didn't think the grade was that steep; certainly not as steep as the Steinway tunnel which the 7 uses. Of course, with a fully loaded train, you can lose speed in a hurry going uphill.
I remember the first time I rode the Queens line. It was in the spring of 1968 on an Manhattan-bound E train of R-1/9s. By the time we reached 36th St., that train was flying. Granted, there was no speedometer, but the traction motors were whining at a feverish pitch (right around F# above middle C; average pitch at running speed was E above middle C). I'd say that train had to be doing 45-50 mph. Hey - I'm a musician with absolute pitch. What can I say except that those R-1/9s were literally music to my ears?
Ironically, I never liked the E train because I always thought it was mislabeled. Those of you who remember the R-1/9s will recall that their side route signs read, "E/8th Ave. Express". My feeling was: some express; it's running local in Manhattan. I have a sign box complete with IND roll signs, and to this day I won't display the E route.
The 51'4" lenght and 8'9" width are the standard dimensions of an IRT car. All of the numbered lines suffer from this limitation. A longer or wider car will not fit the curves and stations.
the 75 foot length has indeed been abandoned due to loss of doors (8 x 4=32 in a 75 foot train vs 10 x 4 = 40 in a 60 foot car).
Source: NYCT Transit Musuem book on Subway Cars
So, are the R-142s going to be 60 feet long or 67?
According to the new book published by the transit musuem- The evolution of the NYC subway ir is ***60*** feet since even 67 feet wont fit in some places. Alaso, according to the book the shorter cars accelerate faster, stop faster and are lighter (meaning they use less energy)
I think that you might be getting two things confused. The 75' car has been found to be less efficient because of the reduced number of door openings. However, the 75' cars were never used in IRT service, where the R-142s will be used. The standard IRT car is 51' 4" long. The R-142 & R-142A will be exactly that long. The R-143s will be 67' long, and run in multiple 3-car sets. Hence, a train of three 3-car units will be 603 feet long, equal to an 8-car train of 75' cars or ten 60' cars.
Thanks for the info. I know that IRT cars are 51 feet, 4 inches long and are pretty much stuck at that length. The issues I wasn't clear on were which cars are the R-142s (IRT or IND/BMT) and R-143s, and then if the R-143s would be 60 feet or 67 feet. You answered those questions.
When I wrote the story on about the downtown brooklyn twist. One person wrote that was brought to my concideration was the part about the sixth ave line. Was that the hardest line in the whole system to build in Manhattan? With it snake like rises and drops. Between 42 and 50th street. It has to go under the Shuttle and over the 7 line. To top it off it has a underground type of bidge wich makes it harder for the line to go under the shuttle then to rise over the 7 train. Also it has to go under the LIRR right after the 42 street station. So how did they get through and how did they figure out how to build the stations the right way.
Very carefully.
Seriously, I'm sure there was a lot of surveying and studying done before the project was undertaken. You're not going to just start digging any old where. Besides, sewer, water, and gas mains had to be relocated, as always. If you can find a copy of Building the Independent Subway, you'll see a number of photos taken during construction. The stretch between 42nd St. and 47-50th Sts. was built through solid rock. Incidentally, when construction began, streetcar service on 6th Ave. ended, but the el still ran. The el closed in 1938 and was dismantled in 1939.
When I wrote the story on about the downtown brooklyn twist. One person wrote something that was brought to my concideration was the part about the sixth ave line. Was that the hardest line in the whole system to build in Manhattan? With it snake like rises and drops. Between 42 and 50th street. It has to go under the Shuttle and over the 7 line. To top it off it has a underground type of bridge wich makes it harder for the line to go under the shuttle then to rise over the 7 train. Also it has to go under the LIRR right after the 42 street station. So how did they get through and how did they figure out how to build the stations the right way.
Someone told me that the AK Bridge is the longest of its kind in the world.
Is this true? If so does anyone know the lenght?
What the hell is the Ak bridge? And beware of claims of the "Longest of it's type", because the builder often designates type purposely to gain a record.
The AK bridge is the the Arthur Kill Railroad bridge between Staten Island and New Jersey. It is a lift bridge spanning a semi-major shipping lane in the Port of New York and New Jersey and is currently being renovated in expectation of being put back into service along with the Staten Island North Shore rail line.
O.K., then I can answer that it is still listed as the longest movable span bridge in the world, rail or highway. The height of its towers would have to be sufficient to lift the span clear of the waterway's listed vertical clearance, which is probably 150'. Add for machinery, and you are talking about 170'.
What confused me at first is the now under construction Asagi-Kyoshu bridge will be the longest and highest in the world of any type when finished later this year. 6,000'+ spans, and 300M towers.
Hi, I am a Chicagoan who has never been to NYC. I am very adventurous and wanted to know the best way to get from La Guardia to downtown (to see Empire States Building, and The Statue of Liberty). My flight gets to LAG at 11 am Sat and my flight leaves JFK at 3:30 PM (same day). Is there enough time to take pictures of the two historical sites and then catch a train from downtown to JFK on a Saturday.
Thanks a lot.
Unlike Midway and O'Hare, New York City's two airports are not hooked up to thed subway, although plans have been in the works for decades. My wife is in Chicago this week on business, and will enjoy her transit trip to the loop in a "city that works." I suggest you plan on taking a cab from LaGuardia to Midtown -- the bus to train link takes forever.
You need to find a way to spend more than four and a half hours in the
World's Greatest City. You are cheating yourself if you dont.
The transit connections between the airports and Manhattan are slow and
tedious, but what do you want for $1.50. Most places, like Cleveland,
Atlanta, Chicago and Washington, there are long walks to the train and the
ride is not short (45 minutes to an hour and something). Philadelphia has
a good deal, the train takes 20 minutes, but it costs $5.
For most people, the private busses, like Carey, will take you to the
airports for $8 to $12 and they make stops all over Manhatten.
You could probably get one (the Empire State Building) done and still stay on public transit. But it will be very tight, and only work if your arriving flight is on time! Since you'll need to be at JFK at least 45 minutes before your flight, here's what a sample timeline/routing might look like:
11:00 Flight arrives LGA
11:20 Get the Q-33 bus in front of the terminal
11:45 Arrive Roosevelt Ave. (last stop on the bus)
11:55 Get on the [F] train towards Manhattan
12:20 Get off the [F] train at 34th Street and 6th Ave.
12:30 Take your pictures from the street -- no time to go upstairs!
1:00 Get on any downtown [B][D] or [F] train at the same stop you got off at
1:15 Get off at West 4th Street, and go up two flights of stairs
1:25 Get on a downtown [A] train, marked for Far Rockaway (not Lefferts Blvd!)
2:15 Get off at Howard Beach/JFK Airport
2:25 Get on the shuttle bus for your terminal
2:40 Arrive at your terminal
I offer no guarantees that this will work, but I think there's enough
slop in the schedule to handle the reduced running of subways/buses on
a Saturday. Just keep in mind that the [A] train ride to JFK is long,
and very slow since it makes all local stops. Good luck, and let us
know how it goes!
Tod Glickman's Plan is the best. I have been pleasantly surprised by how much better the LAG bus-train arangement works than maps might suggest. However I never tried it on a Saturday when the F train runs infrequently.
Since you are so pressed for time, might I suggest that you take a taxi from La Guardia, the cheaper taxi fair of the two airports. (I'd guess around $20 to midtown) On a Saturday morning there will be no traffic and you will get there the fastest (20 minutes with any luck) and save on the fare as well! This might take the edge off of the ticking clock. It's always better, I think, to save your time up front. You might save enough time to rush to the top of the tallest building in the world in which the windows open (if there is no line) or at least, be able to choose not to have to take a taxi to JFK, which will be very expensive from mid-town.
In the old days you could have walked to the Pan Am Building and taken a chopper from the midtown roof to the airport! Incidentally, when the designed the Empire State Building they had planned to use the top as a docking port for Blimps with what is now the observation deck as the Terminal. You might have gone on to your ultimate destination from the top of the building. In theory, if things were really working, you might have taken a blimp from Chicago to the Empire State, had a brief layover for a connecting blimp and skipped the not only the airports but the elivators!
One day New York will climb out of the dark ages and get public transportation
happening. Untill then, take a taxi.
Take a cab to Times Square then take the 1 train to South Ferry and then take the Liberty Island Ferry. When you get back take the 1 to 34 street and grab either the M16 or the M34 bus and take either one of them to the Empire Stateb building. Take the bus back to 34 Street and take the A train to the to the Howard Beack Station and take the JFK shuttle in to J.F.K. It will take around 60 minutes. Or you can take the cab but you will be missing the sites that the A gives of Queens.
P.S get a $15.00 golden Metro Card so that you can get free transfers between Bus and Subway. Don't worry I was born in NYC and I have stuied the NYCTA and the transit system like the back of my hand. I have stuied for 9 years. So don't be worried on the directions I give you.
If he takes your advice, he'll not only miss his flight, but he will probably miss the next day's flight, too. Perhaps he should climb the stairs in both the Statue of Liberty and the Empire State Building while he is at it. (Humorously sarcastic enough for everyone??? I guess it's a slow day at work here today.)
I hope the transfers on the Metrocard gold are good for the CAB!
Forget about the Statue of Liberty. By the time you get to the Battery, get on the boat, get to Liberty Island, and stand in line for a few hours, you will have missed your flight. As for the Empire State Building, the line for tickets can get pretty long pretty fast. The last time I was there, the line stretched clear down the hall and around the corner in the basement, and the ticket windows hadn't even opened yet!
These are two of the most popular tourist attractions in New York, and unless your schedule is very flexible, you might not get to see both of them in the same day, especially since weekend crowds can be heavy. I don't mean to discourage you, but your schedule is tight, and I'd hate to see you miss your flight. Given a choice, I'd go to the Empire State Building; you could even have the taxi from LaGuardia take you right there (the Midtown Tunnel isn't all that far away). That way, you would have at least a chance to go up to the 86th floor observatory. Just keep an eye on the time.
Good luck!
P. S. If I were going from the Battery to the Empire State Building, I'd take an N or R from Whitehall St. to 34th St. You're a block closer when you get there.
If you take the N or R train down to Whitehall St. (or the 1 to South Ferry, or the 4 or 5 to Bowling Green), you can definitely see the Statue of Liberty on the water. So really you can see both places in one day. Use a telescopic lens on the Statue and it will look great. Stand on 34th St near 5th Avenue to see the Empire State Building and look up and it will look great. You can also see the Bldg almost from anywhere on Manhattan Island. So you can get off about 1 mile away (14 St. at Broadway or 6th Avenue) or 1/2 mile away (23 at Broadway or 6th Avenue)) and get a great picture of it jutting out above the other buildings.
One last thing: I wonder if it is faster on the weekend to take the E or F train to Union Tpke and catch the Q-10 bus to JFK Airport, rather than the Far Rockaway A train and the shuttle bus. Any comments?
Add one more corner cutting idea... The view of the Empire State Building from LaGuardia Airport is excellent!
Here is an interesting Sunday morning route change from the CTA. They better be careful though......clean and accessible stations might just make for increased ridership!
Hope they remember to unclog the drains BEFORE doing the powerwashing :)
--Mark
The re-route of the 'L' on Sunday mornings has been going without a hitch. Being a North-side Chicago resident, I got up early and took a ride from Belmont to Cermak (Chinatown) and return last Sunday.
The CTA is making a effort to "spruce up" the stations in the subway. However, a lot of work must be done to improve the CTA image with the riding public - I think most businesses refer to them as "customers".
I use the Ravenswood Brown Line to commute to the Loop everyday. The service on this line is about the best on the rail system. It is about equal to the Midway Orange Line on reliability and puts out clean equipment.
The Red Line, on the other hand, has been "sucking wind" since it went to One Person Operation last November. Since CTA is using the same number of trains on an lengthened running time (by about ten minutes), you can only guess, less, but more crowded trains.
The brains at the Mart just don't get it.
I'm not so sure that OPTO is such a good idea on the Red Line. It's the most heavily-used line in the city; you'd think they'd want to reduce headways. You get the feeling that they're going broke with all the cost-cutting measures being implemented. Granted, I'm all for reducing costs, but not at the expense of passenger safety. Keep the conductors on the Red Line, and not just in the subway.
I wonder why it has to be a all or none deal.Clearly OPTO is practical at off peak times and on less heavily used routes but the Red line ridership and train lengths makes me wonder how long it will be before someone gets hurt. Of course then the CTA will catch political hell and not be able to use it at all...
Exactly. The Red Line should have conductors over its entire length simply because it is the most heavily used line, and runs eight-car trains all day long every day. It might be able to use OPTO at night when trains are presumably shorter and there is less ridership. OPTO would probably work just fine on other routes, except possibly the Blue Line. I rode the Orange Line the last time I was in Chicago; OPTO was no big deal there. One funny thing: when I got off the train at the Loop, I saw a what appeared to be a conductor in one of the middle cars.
My gut feeling is the train operator has enough to worry about in terms of operating the train in a safe manner. When you factor in passenger loading and unloading, it can compromise on safety , especially on a heavily-used route. I agree that OPTO should not be all-or-nothing.
Rummor has it that the City not the CTA will rebuild the state st station(S)(really just one Looong platform.
The red line has gotten slower but the not so express Evanston Express picks up some of the slack. Not quite so exclucsive as it used to be but more effective.
The fastest way from Evanston to downtown is to take the Purple (Evanston Express) to Belmont, where its long express run (Howard to Belmont = 46 blocks, or about 5.75 miles) ends, and then the Red from that point south. Purple all the way use to be fastest, but now that it stops at all the Brown Line stops south of Belmont (Wellington, Diversey, Armitage, and Sedgwick), it's easier to skip the Red Line stops by riding the Purple and then skip the Purple stops by taking the Red. (^:
When did the Purple line begin making Brown line stops south of Belmont? I know it stopped at Belmont and Fullerton before Merchandise Mart, but was unaware of this latest change. My aunt rides the Red line regularly (she lives right next to it), and she hasn't told me anything about it.
I still remember when the all-steel 4000-series heavyweights (for Chicago, anyway) ran on the Evanston Express. They sounded distinctly different from the 6000-series cars; I could always tell when one or the other went by.
The Evanston Express started stopping at all stations south of Belmont in June, 1997. This was the date the line went OPTO. Since there was no longer a conductor to collect the "surcharge" why not downgrade the service even more. In recent years I've referred to the Evanston service as the "Evanston NOT Express".
The official CTA statement was they were going to schedule Purple Line trains to stop at the local stations to alleviate crowding on the Brown Line trains. It all comes down to slower service.
So, the Evanston Express is a far cry from its former "fast ride to downtown" self. It is not offically referred to as the Evanston Express anymore. It is now the Purple Line with destinations signs either indicating LOOP or LINDEN.
I don't think you can, with fairness, call a train that goes from Howard to Belmont without stopping a "not-express".
John B. - I think you know what I mean. The CTA has, over the past few years, systematically cut and slowed down train services until they are not very attractive to its customers.
I'm a daily CTA rider. I live on the Northside of Chicago between the Wellington and Belmont stations. I do not have a car. In the two years I've lived here I've seen the CTA at its worst. They say they want more riders, and then the actions they take show they really don't. Such as, adding stops to the Evanston trains, One Person Operation of Red Line trains, doing away with A/B skip stop service, etc.
Given the history of decisions made at the MART recently it is only a matter of time the Evanston or Purple Line will no longer run downtown, thus doing away with the ONLY express service they have on the rail side.
The Purple is not what it used to be but much better than the all local (no AB) red.
I drive to the swift on weekdays and ride in from there. METRA is looking better all the time.
From the standpoint of a New Yorker who's only rode the CTA a few times, I wonder why management keeps hurting its own service:
1) No more overnight service on Green, Purple and one branch of the Blue line. Shouldn't OPTO have saved enough money to keep 24 hour service? In NYC only a few stations are closed overnight. The #3 line gets replaced by a bus for two stations in Harlem. And Broad St. in the Financial District is closed weekends but it's only 2-3 blocks from several 24 hour stations.
2) Why take the Purple line and make it not just a regular express but as much a local as the Brown line after all three lines meet. There's no such thing in the NYC system. There are plenty of lines where two express lines share the express track while only one line runs local, as the Brown line used to do. (2 & 3 express/1 local; 4 & 5 express/6 local; B, D & Q express/F local.) If Brown line trains are overcrowded, make the Purple line a regular express like the Red once the three lines meet. Or maybe add two more Brown line trains per hour while eliminating one Purple during rush hours.
3) In NYC overnight buses run on 40-60 minute headways and subways run on 20 minute headways. In Chicago, the red line runs on a 15 minute headway and buses run on 30 minute headways, but elsewhere the CTA is cutting back owl service. Why not just make the headways a bit longer & keep service on all lines? Is the CTA's budget crunch really so bad? Did it have to eliminate 24 hour service on so MANY lines all at once?
The purple line only runs all the way into the loop in AM and PM peak on weekdays. The rest of the time it's a shuttle between Evanston and the Howard St. Station.
The green line has parallel bus service that before the Green Line was rebuilt was running faster service.
The problem in Chicago is the RTA is not allocating enough funding for the CTA which provides the most service for the most riders. Are the suburbs being subsidised??
On recent LIRR tie replacement job on the Atlantic Branch viaduct... the interior guard rails (between the running rails) were removed and replaced with external, (outside the running rails) longitudinal timbers (ties) screwlagged into the ties.
This was said to be a NYCT standard design. How do the longitudinal timbers keep the trucks from skewing, should the wheels start to "climb"? Any background from NYCT usage??
They cannot do much to keep a truck on the rails. This feature is being abandoned as too damaging to great lengths of track, and the philosophy adopted is to armor the ties from being cut thru, and letting the flanges dissapate energy chewing up the guard timbers, bringing the train to a quicker stop.
Thanks. If I understand correctly, the steel guard rails are the feature being abandoned...in favor of the timbers. Any idea how long the timbers have been in use...any incidents where the wheels rode up and over the timbers?
Every day from work I like to look through the scarred windows of the E train when it's just passing the 36st station to see the construction of a work in making. Every time I pass there, I try to catch every glimpse of work that is being performed to make a future rail system work and run. From digging the earth, to structual beams and support, to laying the cement which is later be the framework of the tracks. At the same time this work is still going on even with the rumbling and shaking with four train lines within a few feet away. All this work that I see just amazes me each and every time I ride through the work zone. Anyone here in "Subtalk" who passes there should know.
-Garfield
I do the same thing here in Denver driving down Santa Fe Dr. in the afternoon on my way home from work. Our light rail line is being extended down an adjacent rail corridor, and it's interesting to watch the progress being made. Right now, they're putting in bridge piers and doing some earth moving. Next, they have to relocate existing freight track used by the Rio Grande and ATSF railroads. Once all that is done, the light rail tracks will be installed and overhead wires strung. The extension is scheduled to open in July 2000 - I can't wait!
P. S. By scarred windows, you must be referring to "scratchiti" on the R-32s.
Yes! The scratching and defacing of windows on both train and buses.
Yes, I know what you mean.
Last summer, I had the opportunity to go by Union Square while the steet was all torn up. You could see right down to the subway level (and see how close it was built to the surface). You could see all the steelwork required to keep the street from caving in. You could also see the abandoned local 14th St platform with the eagle "14" mosaic, long hidden on this abandoned local platform.
Always amazes and awes me to see construction projects like this go on without interfering with existing services. Also makes me imagine how things were "way back when". All the major construction equipment was steam powered.
--Mark
Except for the stretch in Washington Heights, the original Contract One line runs directy below street surface. Even express stations had walkways, instead of mezzanines, above the island platforms. Union Square, in fact, is like that. 72nd St. doesn't even have mezzanines: you go through the turnstyles, walk down a narrow flight of stairs, and you're on the platform. At 96th St., there are underpasses beneath the platforms. There are even air vents directly above the uptown express track at one spot around 59th St. I would say that the distance from the tunnel roof to the street surface at that point is maybe 30 inches. There are similar vents above one of the express tracks on the BMT Broadway line at either 23rd or 28th St., too. Delancey St. has an air vent cleverly located in the median between Essex St. and the Bowery which is directly above the Broad St. - bound track.
They must have covered everything up by last fall at Union Square; I didn't notice any construction then. Seeing the local platform had to be a real treat. It would be interesting to know how many tons of steel went into building the framework which supports the street above the tunnel. Those rows and rows of I-beams weren't put in for cosmetic purposes, although they flash by nicely when zipping past a local station on an express train. And just think - in 2004, that original line will be 100 years old!
Did anyone hold centennial celebrations two years ago for America's first subway? If not, I have some great ideas for the celebration of NYC subway's 100th. Like clean platforms and easy to read maps for out-of-town yokels such as myself:)
There was a big celebration here in Boston last fall for the 100th anniversary. It included a "trolley parade" in the original right-of-way tunnel from Park Street to Boylston Street. There were four cars: A Type-5, a PCC, a Boeing LRV, and a Kinki Type-8. Then there was a reception complete with political mumbo-jumbo on Boston Common. The TV and newspaper press gave it pretty good coverage. I filed a radio report which played around the country on the CBS radio network.
Don't complain too much about the maps. "America's First Subway" charges $6 for a real map, akin to the CTA map or MTA's "The Map". The free MBTA map is a tiny pocket card of the subway and near-in commuter lines that shows most of the Green Line stations as dots without names. Incidentally, to touch on another topic thread, the MBTA map shows a lot of accessible stations, except on the Green Line. If Boston's system is older or at least as old as NYCTA, and they can do it, so can New York.
I have one of those maps from last May when I went to Boston. I liked scratching out those little circles on the visitor maps.
Remember, though, that:
a). Boston has a lot fewer stations than New York.
b.) Boston, as far as I remember, doesn't have any stations that match the complexity/depth of Times Square, Lex/59th (my latest discovery in the ever-continuing saga of what an amazing engineering accomplishment the system is), or the Fulton/Nassau/Broadway complex.
c.) Many of the newer stretches of line in Boston were built with elevators already in place (the new parts of the Red and Orange lines) or else were much easier to convert. Remember, too, that outside of downtown, most Boston lines are at ground level.
Not to mention, as stated in my previous post on the subject, the unsuitablity of subways for handicapped transport in general.
What do you mean "unsuitability"? The rocking and rolling? Everyone who uses the subway or really any kind of public transit endure the shakes and shimmies. While I grant you it may be a little more aggravating to someone in a wheelchair I dare you find a faster way to get from point a to point b in a city like New York. I think we should stop going on this tangent before we start disliking each other.
Two points about the handicapped. First, in just about every case where an advocacy group has reported data, I have found that the data turned out to be used in a misleading way at best, and fabrications at worst. But when the handicapped advocacy groups published the share of people who are handicapped, and came up with a very high number, it turned out turned out to be right out fo the census. I hadn't considered that the congenitally handicappped are a small share of the handicapped. Many more people become handicapped when they get old, or temporarily handicapped when they are injured. I recall the trip to work on crutches when I had a severe ankle sprain. It was hell.
Second, handicapped accessible is stroller accessible. Sure found those ramps useful a few years ago.
I think I'm in an unfortunate but unique situation to shed a light on this subject from another angle. I grew up able-bodied in New York, and would never take a bus if I could get there by train. I recently lost my Right leg, and was wheelchair bound for almost a year. I have now been fitted with a Prosthesis, but am not agile enough to climb stairs. When I read the short list of handicapped accessible stations on the MTA map, I realized I could no longer retrace ANY of the trips I made as a youth. This is immensely depressing to me! I am a useful contributing working person, with the need to feel as normal as possible so as to continue this way. Why should I be confined to Paratransit, where I might be the only passenger capable of carrying on a conversation without drooling. However, the year in the wheelchair convinced me that the Subway is indeed not a place I'd like to frequent in a wheelchair. Way too many places to get boxed in, wedged, stuck,etc. On a crowded platform, the risk of being pushed from behind would be life threatening. And just having access advertised is not enough. Two life examples: Just because there is an elevator doesn't mean you can find it, or that anyone will help you. And even though you manage to find it doesn't guarantee it will be in working order. I damn near froze riding the car deck of the ferry from Seattle to Bremerton last year because the Out of Order sign was only posted on the elevator, not at the entrance to the boat!
[And just having access advertised is not enough. Two life examples: Just because there is an elevator doesn't mean you can find it, or that anyone will help you. And even though you manage to find it doesn't guarantee it will be in working order.]
Well, considering the Transit Authority record on maintaining subway escalators, I'd say you could just about guarantee that an elevator would *not* be in working order :-)
Personally, I'd rather see existing services interfered with if the cost is reduced and the project is shortented. The cost of the QB connection, I've heard, is $700 million and it took years and years. If a little disruption would have cut the cost and gotton the job done faster, it would have been worth it. I think the TA is making the right move with the fast jobs in Harlem and on the Williamsburg Bridge. Six months of hell is better than years of heck.
Is this car being repaired from the collision at the wakefield yard or was it scrapped??And does anyone know what happen to the two #2 train car that did not burn??
I have two questions concerning "how much is too much?". With all my free time during the day, I took the opportunity to do something I haven't done since '96-ride the BSS end to end. In the cars, some of the seats are arranged so that it is possible to get a view out the front(or in the cabs of the other cars) as good as the motorman's(or whoever the heck was in car one before this OPTO crap). But today, I settled for the back car. Going on, I caught the express coming down towards town and could see the electronic speed display. The highest spedd I saw was 62 mph. How fast can those B-4's go? Then I did the same thing-on the 36(the trolley to South/Southwest Philly). As we were nearing the terminal loop at 80th Street the trolley began to run on a ROW in the middle of Island Avenue. I noticed that the weeds and grasses along the tracks were higher than the rails and bending towards them. Basically, this is a long-winded way of saying how thick can an object laying on a rail be before it is too thick and can derail a train? I mean, I used to put pennies on rails as a kid, but with trains that go at ungodly speeds(like the new "Slamtrak" trains-coming soon!) would something like a penny or a blade of grass derail it???!!!
The A train is a long slow ride ride on weekends and nights. The K train should be put back into service and The K should run from the Bedford Park to Jay Street. The C will go from local to Express in Mahattan and after Jay Street becoming local it becomes Local to Euclid Ave. The A will be Exprees in all broughs. After Euclid Avenue it will be Local. The S train will be like the H Train except that it will terminate at Broad Channel it will go around the whole rockaways giving the A train to be express in the Rockaways. Even if there are only 2 track put less S train like every 10 minutes. That make everybody happy or will that be too confusing
I agree with reinstituting the K train; but I think it should run from 205 St. in the Bronx to Lefferts Blvd in Queens. Idealy it would run express in the Bronx, but more than likely it would run local in the Bronx. Regardless, the K train should run express from 145 St., Manhattan to Euclid Ave., Brooklyn and then run local to Lefferts. The C would run local from 168 St., Manhattan to Euclid Ave., Brooklyn. The A would travel to Far Rockaway and the S would run from Broad Channel to Rockaway Park and would be supplemented by some rush hour A service. Overall, these routes would run rush hours, middays, evenings, and weekends. Late nights would stay as they are now.
Now that we have free bus to subway transfers, I think a case can be made for eliminating the A train to Lefferts. Only a few trains are diverted to serve those three stations, so the wait for a train is long. If more frequent bus service were provided, those on both Rockaway Blvd and Liberty Avenue, from both the area of those three stops and further away, could transfer at Rockaway and Liberty where ALL the A train stop. Perhaps the TA could use some of the money it saved on operating the three stations to build ramps and a bus station in the air. The Liberty Avenue and Rockaway Blvd buses would climb the ramps, stop next to the station as a train arrived heading toward Manhattan arrived, wait until a train from Manhattan arrived, then head back along Rockaway and Liberty. I think trolleys at Stillwell Terminal and at the end of the Canarsie line used to have such a link.
I think this could be better (give the long times between trains to Lefferts) and cheaper (without maintaining the three stattions).
I agree with your extra-bus idea. At least it's realistic.
But, unfortunately, I think the MTA believes Rockaway only needs every 2nd train to go there. I disagree with their assessment of that.
My personal subway-only thought would be to have the C train run to Lefferts Blvd. all day on weekdays, have all A trains go to Far Rockaway, and have a Euclid Avenue-Lefferts Blvd. shuttle run at A train frequency whenever the C train isn't running (late nights and weekends). But that assumes the MTA would have 8-10 minutes weekday service to Far Rockaway (and on the shuttle connecting to Rockaway Park), and I doubt they will ever do that. If half the trains ran on new tracks to the airport (hahahahaha) then this might be a good alternative, and allow them to maintain half service to both the airport and Far Rockaway.
In a miricle change of budget priorities, the train from Rockaway Park could be the LIRR on the old Rockaway Branch, with several stop before meeting the mian line at White Pot Junction. Those hopping off at Aquaduct to change to the A from Far Rockaway would avoid the extra LIRR fare. Rockaway riders would have a choice of a cheap ride to Downtown, with slower service to Midtown, or more costly service direct to Midtown.
Can anyone tell me if Budd had anything to do with the design of SEPTA's
Silverliner IV's? Because even though they were built by General Electric,
the side windows are very similar in shape to the Silverliner II's windows,
which are shaped similar to a capsule (pill). Is it likely that railcar
manufacturers, such as General Electric, and St. Louis Car Co. may have designed
some of their cars to resemble ones built by Budd? I've also noticed that NJT's
Arrow I's, which I believe were built by St. Louis Car Co., have a very striking
resemblance to the Arrow II's and III's, which were built by G.E., just like
SEPTA's Silverliner IV's, except the Arrow I's lack the hump on the roof.
I think the desire was to have as many interchangable parts as possible to keep the parts inventory down. Otherwise, there are not too many noticable similarities between the Budds and GE's (or the St. Louie's, for that matter).
As I mentioned in my post, the only similarity the GE Silverliners have to the
Budds, are the side windows, except I've noticed that the windows on the GE's
are somewhat skinnier than the windows on the Budds, but they both have the
same overall shape, instead of being perfectly rectangular, like the ones on
the Comets and Amtrak trains, they are rounded to sort of an oval shape. The
thing I want to know is if GE and St. Louis Car Co. copied that design from
Budd, since I believe the Budds were the first railcars with windows of that
shape.
Good question. I don't know the answer. I would assume that a window manufacturer developed the design and then made it available to other car builders, since the car builders don't necessarily make the windows.
At some intervals, I've waited a good long time for a train heading Manhattan bound just a little pass the morning rush hour. When the train heads towards Queens then arriving at Rockaway Blvd, some go to Lefferts, others to Far Rockaway, and the last to Rockaway Park(rush hours only). My question is why at times I would wait so long for a train when you have trains going to to and sometimes three different locations. I'm suspecting that there would be more trains since you have them heading up to three diffrent locations.
I am completing the job I started by doing the 6th ave (from Dekalb to 57th), L from 8th Ave to Rockaway parkway,J and M lines.(M from Broadway/Myrtle to Metropolitan.)
Any trivia, photos, etc. will be appreciated. You wiull be given credit for your submission.
I seem to have grown into the "job" of Stations Specialist on subtalk. I will be glad to answer any stations related question about the system. If I do not know the answer I'll try to find out.
okay. I have a trivia quiz are you up to it.
1. How many train stop at Dekalb?
2. It the connection between the M and J/Z in Brooklyn the only elevated connection in the the whole city?
3. In what direction does the M,N,R come into when entering Dekalb.
Good Luck what don't you give me a trivia on all of the Subway system just try to beat me hahahahaha....
51 trains stop at DeKalb in each direction during rush hour. Is that what you are asking?
The N and 7 meet in the air at Queensborough. The F and D meet in the air neear Stillwell. The F, D, B, and N meet in the air at Stillwell. The 2 and 5 meet either in the air or on an embankment at 180th.
Those trains enter in both directions, depending on which way they are going. Is that what you're asking?
1. There are 5 trains which stop at DeKalb: D, M, N, Q, and R. The B does not stop there.
2. By elevated connection, are you referring to across-the-platform or one level to another? If you are referring to train-to-train transfers, my answer is no: you also have E.180th St (2/5) and Eastern Parkway-Broadway Junction (J/Z/L). And, of course, Queensboro Plaza (N/7). I am leaving out elevated-to-subway transfers. If you are referring to elevated diverging train routes, my answer is still no: the Dyre Ave. line connects with the White Plains Road line at E.180th St., and the Rockaway line branches off the Liberty Ave. extension just past 88th St.-Boyd Ave. on the A. And, of course there's Coney Island-Stillwell Ave.
3. I'm not sure what you mean, so I'll pass on this one.
The L train also stops at Dekalb...of course, it's not the same Dekalb Ave. station!
But it's probably the same street. OK, it was a trick question - I missed the L!
Don't forget the now-defunct #14 Broadway-Brooklyn which ran from Canal St. to Atlantic Ave. and on to Rockaway Parkway, as well as the #17 14th St.-Fulton St which ran out to Lefferts Ave. before the IND was extended out there.
Another trivia note: the L line terminated at 6th Ave. initially and was extended to 8th Ave. in 1931. The Manhattan-bound entrance to Lorimer St. at the corner of Union and Metropolitan Aves. was marked as "14th St. and 6th Ave." as late as 1970 and possibly later ( I boarded L trains to Manhattan at Lorimer St. for three years). Until the stretch from Montrose to Eastern Parkway opened in 1928, the line was totally isolated, with no physical connection with any other line. The BMT had to tow standards along a temporary street track, and ease them down an inclined ramp into the subway to get them onto this line. There is a new book out about the New York subway (it might be Subway Cars of the BMT) which has a photo of this offbeat maneuver. It drew quite a crowd of curious onlookers.
For years some Broadway-Brooklyn local trains ran to 111th St. or Crescent St. too (in addition to Eastern Parkway, Atlantic Ave. or Rockaway Parkway).
Yep, they sure did. Didn't Lexington Ave. el trains run to 111th St. also?
This site under Abandoned Elevated-Historical Prespectives has two photos of the Pitkin Ave elevated departing the Canarsie Line. I always thought that the Standards seen in these photos were Atlantic Ave Layovers, banned from further travel up Pitkin by their weight. Did not know they went further than Atlantic.
Question. What was the purpose of the curved "Manhattan Junction" platform between the Broadway and Fulton Elevateds. As a kid (sometime between 1945 and 1952) I watched "Gate-Trains" {they could have been "C-Types") using this trackage . I've concluded that they were yard moves to the Rockaway Ave elevated station that allowed a free transfer to the initial portion of the Fulton Street Subway. Any other possibilities?
> This site under Abandoned Elevated-Historical Prespectives has two
> photos of the Pitkin Ave elevated departing the Canarsie Line. I always
> thought that the Standards seen in these photos were Atlantic Ave
> Layovers, banned from further travel up Pitkin by their weight. Did not
> know they went further than Atlantic.
The Standards never went up the Fulton St. El. The ones in the photo must
be layups. The lightweight multi-section cars were used for the 14th St -
Fulton St. rush hour through service (8th Ave - Lefferts).
Thanks Ed . That was my impression. What threw me was the reference that "Broadway" trains travelled to Lefferts. I know that the"Lexington" and "the 14th" along with the "Old Fulton El" had service to these points
Does anyone know what happened to the cars that were involved in this train wreck??I know cars 9142-43were scrapped but what about the #4 train(car1400).was this car scrapped or is it being repaired?
At the time of the derailment, I remember a transit official saying that they are not going to bother to make repairs of the cars that were involved. Reason he said being that there to old and were going to be retired to make way for the new shipment of cars.
For those of you concerned, I thought I might spread it around that the 10 trolley in Philadelphia is being re-routed off of Lancaster between 48th and 52nd. The trolley will run on the tracks formerly used for the 15 on Girard Avenue. A shuttle bus will carry passengers to stops in the track-renewal zone.
Also, you may note that this may be the last place that girder rail will be used on a track renewal project on SEPTA. It's the last of the batch. SEPTA is going with "T" rail with the wrap-around "boot" for future renewals.
Whuzza?
I took one of the Regional Rail lines to Fern Rock Terminal in Philadelphia and got off to get the Broad Street train. When I went to the platform I saw some of the old subway cars(Were they for the Market Street line or Broad Street?). Is there anywhere in NY one can see old cars(as in original IRT low-v's?).
The cars you saw at Fern Rock were the old Brill cars built in the 1920's when the Broad Stree Subway opened.
It is impossible for a Market-Frankford car to be in the yard unless it was on standard gauge trucks. The Broad Street system was built using standard gauge, whereas the Market-Frankford Line was built to streetcar or 5 ft 2 1/4 inches (Pennsylvania gauge).
There were 200 Broad Street cars built in two orders by the J G Brill Company. I'm not sure of the dates, so I will not guess.
Although now living in Chicago, I spent many years riding both lines during the 1960's & 1970's.
Further to the question of old cars sitting around at Fern Rock:
If the double doors had wide windows, kind of like current subway car-door windows, they are the original red-colored Broad Street rail cars, which looked a lot like BMT standards, just designed in a red motif. If they had two thin windows on each of the two doors, kind of like folding bus or Chicago subway doors (though these in Phila. didn't fold), then they are Camden line Broad Street cars, which had a green motif with heavily upholstered seats and which were mainly used on the 8th-St.-Camden branch. There are even two types of red train cars, but I don't remember what the (subtle) differences are, since I haven't ridden them in a couple of decades. But it's nice to know they are still around for gawking at. These trains are so old they had the big ceiling fans in them, but they were taken out right around 1970. Maybe very tall people were getting nervous with them spinning just above eye level.
In New York you can see a number of restored subway cars at the Transit Authority Museum on, I believe, Jay Street.
There is one preserved car representing each class of Broad St car, if you will B-1, B-2 and B-3 (although they were never called that).
Car 1 is the original Broad St car, built by Pressed Steel in 1928. It is in its original paint scheme. One of the 151-200 series (Pressed Steel, 1938) is there in the later fox-red scheme, the last worn by the fleet. I want to say the preserved car is 166, but I'm not sure.
One of the Bridge Line cars (Brill, 1936) is also preserved, also in the fox-red scheme. I believe it's car 1019 but again can't say for sure.
There is one other car of the 151-200 group that was kept for work purposes. The last time I visited Fern Rock it was coupled to some boxcars.
As Carl noted, the 1-150 group has large windows in the doors. 151-200 has two panel windows. The Bridge Line cars have four "finger" panels that resemble folding doors.
> Is there anywhere in NY one can see old cars(as in original IRT low-v's?).
Yes:
- At the NY Transit Museum
- At Coney Island yards, visible from a southbound F train or sometimes from the street. Binoculars at the Neptune Ave F station sometimes yield good results, too.
- At the Trolley Museum of NY in Kingston
- Empire State Plaza in Albany has R-9 1802 as a static display.
- I think there's a deli on Staten Island near the SI mall that has a number of R1/9 car bodies in it serving as restaurant seating.
(or did you just mean NYC :)
--Mark
Restaurant seating? To a subway buff(snicker) like myself, it seems blasphemous for a great piece of subway history like that to be seats for a McDonalds(and I'd be upset if they were.)
You can listen to a copy of my CBS radio report on the 100th anniversary of the Boston subway here. Beware - it is a .wav file over 1mb, so it may take a while to load.
Was there (or is there going to be) any special event for the 100th anniversary?
--Mark
You must have misssed this post! It was in October of last year, even though the actually anniversary was in early September, 1997.
Yup ... I did miss that post ... saw it about 10 minutes after I posted my question! Played your WAV file, too. Direct Internet connections are nice :)
--Mark
I also must tell you. I, Jack, self appointed, unofficial biggest fan of the M-4 subway/el car has beef with it! Last night I caught the "new el" on the wrong track(as does anyone else going westbound late at night[don't ask]) I caught the M-4 for the zillionth time. When I got off at 69th Street, I was disboarding and tripped on my way out the train(ha-ha). I wanted to kick myself(and did) and then looked at the doorway. To my surprise, the floor of the train was about 3 inches below the platform. That's not good. So, that's it. I don't deserve my charge. O shame on me!
Yes!!! It's Adtranz!!!! The railcar company that can't build anything right. SEPTA M-4's, Baltimore LRV's, heaven knows what else - the track record is just plain lousy. We've actually gotten a new ADtranz car to run well enough to use. The noise and vibration is still there, just dampened enough to use. That's 1 car (5040) out of 18. The 21st Century may be 3 years old before either MTA or SEPTA gets everythin they paid for.
Isn't Adtranz what happened to ABB??? God knows ABB can't do ANYTHING right...
They F***** up every FL-9 they got their hands on - I understand the origional, unrebuilt ones are more reliable!!! Also, their rebuild of the NJT stuff isn't has impressive either. And I've seen more than a few AEM-7s and ALP-44s get stuck.
Oh, ok, on their web page it sasys they are a merger between ABB and Daimler-Benz AG. So their you have it.
I would laugh my butt of at ABB, except that they are involved in another industry too....nuclear reactors...
Isn't Adtranz what happened to ABB??? God knows ABB can't do ANYTHING right...
They F***** up every FL-9 they got their hands on - I understand the origional, unrebuilt ones are more reliable!!! Also, their rebuild of the NJT stuff isn't has impressive either. And I've seen more than a few AEM-7s and ALP-44s get stuck.
Oh, ok, on their web page it sasys they are a merger between ABB and Daimler-Benz AG. So their you have it.
I would laugh my butt off at ABB, except that they are involved in another industry too....nuclear reactors...
Uh-oh! Ka-boooooooooom!!!
Actually, more like meltdown - the only type of nuke that can go ka-boom is a liquid metal fast breeder - and the only comercial one in this country was closed in 1974 (find a book at your library titled "We Almost Lost Detroit" to read more, but be aware the book is "mildly" anti-nuke). All others are either Presurized water (ABB, Westinghouse, Babcock & Wilcox), or Boiling Water (GE). There are no gas cooled reactors in the US, although England has a lot of them (CO2 cooled). Nor are there any grafite reactors like that one in the Ukrane that exploded but I can't spell it's name, you know which one...
BTW, that was a steam, not nuclear, explosion.
Of course, none of this makes me feel any safer that ABB makes nukes...
ABB did one thing right! The Baltimore LRV's. The quality and testing were present from day 1. Two cars, 5001 & 5002, were delivered in November 1991 and were run constantly for two months. All the control/mechancial bugs were worked out with these two, then the remaining 33 were delivered. Acceptance was down to two days at the end of the order. All 35 cars have performed beyond expectations, with fleet realiability approaching 97 per cent.
MTA was so happy that they wrote the additional 18 cars into the end of the contract. Unfortunately, they got burned by ADtranz. They thought they were getting Volvos - they got Travants instead. Betcha they won't order anything else from ADtranz.
Side Note: AAI Corp, which built the trucks for both orders and the body shells for the second, has secured a contract to provide 110 cars for WMATA. (AAI is old line military contractor that has built big and sophisticated items for Uncle Sam. If they can do that, and build (in association with SKODA) ETB's, then railcars should be easy.) Are LRV's next?
Boeing also has a good reputation in airplanes, However the LRV'S sucked big time. I right this as one who has stood for hours in the cold waiting for one.
I guess this would be a question for Mark Greenwald. I spotted a Baltimore-MTA Flxible Metro in Washington last night carrying passengers. It was heading south North Capitol Street nr the post office and Union Station. It was carrying passengers, then about five minutes later I saw it again heading north along N. Capitol without any passengers. Does the MTA provide bus service in to Washington or perhaps this was some sort of special that may have brought last minute tax filers to the Post Office in Washington sice it stayed open late???
What time last night? A thought may be that since Conrail doesn't allow MARC commuter trains to Oriole game excursions late at night, this is the replacement for fans from the DC area.....from there (at Union Station) I guess fans can board the Metro (assuming it's before midnight) to get home from there. This is the logical (although not the smartest in my opinion) to a replacement for the train since the train ran from Union Station to Camden station anyhow, the bus follows the same route, although, if they put on their thinking caps, they should've provided bus service to an outlying station instead of downtown DC (like Greenbelt, New Carrollton or possibly Silver Spring)----this is all assuming that the reason for the bus was to provide service to O's fans that are from the DC area AND that this was done within the hours of Metro operation.....assume, assume, assume. On a different note, the O's trains from DC are not the only casualty of Conrail's "freight only" status........Oriole trains used to run from Cumberland (far Western MD) to some O's games, but, they were canceled rather abruptly late last year..PARTY POOPERS!!!!!!!--Go O's!!.......p.s.thanks for thinking of me Wayne :)
Mark, It was about 11:55 PM. Thanks for the explanation - it sounds quite possible.
Yesterday I picked up the brochure titled "MTA Service to Oriole Park at Camden Yards" and here is how it describes a relevant bus routes: 901.
"
901 MARC Bus From Camden Yards (weekday night games)
Post-game service to Savage, Greenbelt, and Union Station leaves Camden Yards 20 mins. after the game
"
MARC Commuter line riders can get there on weeknights by train around 6 or 7 PM, but there is no train to go home, so the 901 exists. Savage is near two between-the-cities towns, Columbia, Maryland, and Laurel, Maryland, and has a huge parking lot (I work near the Savage station as a matter of fact). Greenbelt is of course the end of the Green Metro Line and Union Station is across the street from the U.S. Capitol and 1.5 miles from the White House.
On weekends there is a 903 bus that goes up to Baltimore from Greenbelt only and then returns again 20 minutes after the game.
WOW--I better mark my calender--I got one right ;)
I'll be gone for three days(I can hear the shouts of rejoicing) so I want to leave this so when I come back I'll have enough to get started on. I am planning to(on paper) build a subway system. One quite large and by size isn't really comparable to any in existance(Don't ask if it's bigger than New York's, because I won't tell you) but if anyone out there has done this before, could you give me a few pointers. I'm an old hand at model-making, but not for a railroad. I'll appreciate any input(even if it's "Shut up, Jack!"). See ye on Tuesday(Maybe sooner if I get to a computer).
A subway system for what city? Or is it for a fictitious city? Every subway is unique to the city that it serves, and responds to the existing form of the city (where are the pre-existing railway terminals, ballparks, universities, night life districts, etc.?).
As to a way to model a subway system, or any other railway system, try Bahn, a computer program. There's a whole bunch of stuff on Bahn on this website.
This sounds like quite an undertaking. I have built a model subway (actually it's all elevated because if it were subway, no one could see it), in my basement. It is my version of a model railway, but instead of mountains, tunnels, etc., I have built a large urban centre with bridges, expressways, and of course, rapid transit. This has been a work in progress over the last several years, and I actually had to move the entire thing from my old house to my current one back in 1991 (so now a lot of the streets look like true city streets - broken pavement, etc.!)
Anyway, it will one day be fully electric and the trainbodies will have to be all hand made. It's in (more or less) N-scale. A true labour of love, as you can see.
There will eventually be seven routes, although some use the same rights-of-way. Two main city centre routes have express and local tracks, while the suburban portions have either two local or two local and one peak express. While the city is ficticious, this system is more or less designed to reflect the style of our favourite system: New York's.
Feel free to e-mail me for more information. I'd love to hear more about your endeavours in this, what sounds to be colossal, undertaking.
I have a model subway system in HO scale in my family room, freelanced but loosely based on NYs. It was/is my first layout, and subway modelling is actually one of the easier types of RRs to model, in my opinion. I'm not a master modeller by any means, but over time, you learn some new things and with a little imagination and strategically placed things, you can make a layout look pretty realistic.
I have a two track main line with some express passing sidings. The mainline has 1 island platform based station along the main line and 2 other island type platforms forming transfers to other "lines". The portion that runs in subway (tunnel lights and grafitti included) is nearest the back of the layout, with a strategically placed viewing area down the mouth of the tunnel. Even put some small areas of open cut into it. The rest that runs "outside" is either open cut or just open (for the moment, like any model RR, it's NOT done yet). I'll also have a 3 track, 4 train underground storage yard once I put the street down! Trains are no more than 4 cars (each car maximum 75' HO scale) long.
I have a major transfer station that uses Stillwell Ave as its basis. I modelled what I think Stillwell Ave would be like underground. 1/2 the station is underground (with one track having a complete subway approach -neat to watch), 3 tracks having cutaway underground approaches and 4 tracks having open cut / outdoor approaches. 2 approach tracks fan out into 7 tracks with island platforms, one track has its own subway tunnel approach. 5 tracks can handle the 4 car trains, 2 tracks can handle 3 car trains and 1 track can handle a 2 car train.
I was able to get lots of track into this layout and put some of it underground so I have lots of "rush hour" scenarios I can run through and the layout doesn't necessarily look like a maze of spaghetti.
One city / borough / metropolis is complete. It runs 2' x 8/5' over the tracks. Lots of buildings growing into skyscrapers the further back into the layout that you look. (N scale Atlas glass skyscraper kits work GREAT in HO scale!) Layout is on 2 tables, one 4' x 8'; the other 4' x 6' - a one foot wide "shelf" forms a bridge between the 2 tables.
Rolling stock is mixed: 2 trains of R-1/9s, 2 trains of BMT standards, 3 trains of San Francisco BART cars, 2 trains of WMATA cars, 1 train of R-15s and one "new technology" train of 3 WMATA cars repainted to resemble the 1980s standard MTA silver/blue scheme. Cut up subway maps for signage and even included this on the trains. Used standard Atlas components and track to electrify the whole thing. Used the Atlas "how to wire your layout" book to learn the wiring techniques. It ended up making a modern looking switchboard, in retrospect.
Underground stations are lit. Passengers gotta see :) Litter on tracks in stations. Some tracks have drainage ditches ala New York. Hanging signs from ceiling and small signs on steel beams. Tunnel walls grafittied. Stillwell Ave tiled wall is somewhat grimy but otherwise clean. Station platforms "comfortably crowded" with people, thanks to a fluke buyout of HO scale people at a "just a buck" store a few years back. Streets also fairly crowded because of another "just a buck" sale (2 HO scale cars for $1.00. Bought them out!) Working streetlights (some purposely out), non-working hanging traffic lights (amazing what a little black thread can do), scratchbuilt subway entrances using Atlas / Model Power gate kits.
Wish I can run it more often than I do!
Anyway, this oughtta give you some ideas to get started.
--Mark
Boy, that takes me back. I remember the model line for the city I created-I called it Chaddsburgh-in NE Michigan where I was born. This subway isn't really like New York's or any other system I'm aware of. It consists of 7 lines that start in various areas of the city, naturally converging in the downtowmn area, and then continuing to other areas. One suggestion I have, draw up a map first. It helped me immensely. The lines I built(I guess you could say my system is like Chicago's now that I think about it) are: Red, green, blue, orange, yellow, brown and purple. Only the Brown and yellow lines are ever elevated. I had to build it on two tables instead of one since a wheelchair is somewhat confining. But it was a real treat. The layout of the lines is this. Each line has four tracks, local outside and express inside, until the central area when the express tracks converge with the local and another line runs on the express tracks of that line(can you picture it?). All but the red line do this. They run down four streets, two lines per street and one having just the red line. Then after leaving downtown the lines separate and are individual again. I got the model tracks but the story of the cras is my own. I built them using tools and some toy race cars I bought. Cutting, scraping, painting and gluing, I was able to get the cars I wanted, which look like thr R-110B. Maybe I predicted them. I built this model in 1980. Anyway, the total time it took for me was three years to get it the way I wanted it. I hope this doesn't sound daunting, but anything worthwhile requires time and effort. And you're going to love the way I got it to move. Come see the worlds first cable pulled subway. Using a crank and pulley type system, I pull the cars along the track. an individual cable for eack track. And it was a miracle I found a way to do it over switches. So that's the story of the LMRT(Lew Murphy Rapid Transit-sound familiar, anyone?). Now that you brought it up, Jack, I think I finally have the motivation to start my light rail line. It's been on the brain's hard drive for a while. Maybe I should try to do it.
Re Help: How can I get into this forum AND FIND MY WAY
Well, if you wish to leave a bulletin for someone to respond to, use the scroll bar and travel down the bottom of this particular page or if you want to respond to a message already posted, click on it read it(and if it's a response to another response, it helps to read that one, too) then go to the bottom and put in your two cents. And I have a question for you-is there a subway in Stockholm?
Let me put my 2 cents in here. I am in the process of trying to model a sort-of NYCTA subway, with eventual street transportation (buses), and an elevated line; in other words, a triple-decker.
Right now I'm working on the subway part, in HO scale. My two biggest problems are that 1) nobody is making the car bodies I need (R1/9) in HO at the moment; and 2) just about everything I find that might be useful from the Walther's catalog isn't in stock, and won't be in this century. Also, being located in Arizona is a bit if a handicap.
On the bright side, I have found what I consider to be the ideal pre-fab tunnel material. It is a plastic wire conduit I found in the Grainger (tool co.) catalog, comes in several sizes, and looks like subway tunnels. Needs paint. Grainger #5A679 for the 2" x 2".
Looking forward to further communiques on this subject.
Jeff Trevas
I've also started a layout with the R17 and R21 from Hobby Images as my rolling stock. I had planned a subway section but I'm not sure that I will go through with it. I had planned it as a shelf layout, placing the tracks at eye level and allowing the viewer to "see through" one tunnel wall by leaving it open. You may want to consider something along those lines.
For my elevated structures, I've gone through the trouble of making molds and casting my elevated structures in order to build the layout. After a "prototype" run, I'm now in the process making a second set of molds and "going into production" so that I can finally start building the layout. These new molds have design improvements that will allow me to build sturdier structures than my original design.
Keep an eye out on my web site (http://www.iop.com/~patv). The stuff that's there is old but I expect to start putting new material and tips up there as I build the layout.
Some folks have all the luck! I've been haunting the 98 cent clearance store for years and have only found things remotely usable in ANY scale!
I have built a small (2' X 16' and growing) modular elevated line that is based on NYCTA prototypes. It is entirely elevated, on scratchbuilt structure that is based on the Third Avenue El (Bronx, above 200th St.). Currently there are two stations, a two track, center island terminal, based on the Ditmars Blvd. Sta. in Astoria, and an outside platform local station that is based on the 67th St. Sta. of the Third Avenue El (Manhatten). The structure is detailed with third rails, guard rails, signals, signs, etc. You can see a some photos of my work at Mr. Pat Villani's web site at www.iop.com/~patv/railroad.html. Mr. Villani is also in the process of modeling an elevated railway based on NYC prototypes.
Check the list of references on his home page. I provided these to help other modelers. If you are truly serious about this, you must try to obtain any and all articles by Joe Frank. Mr. Frank is the undisputed "guru" of rapid transit modeling, having built extensively in HO and O scales. His current O scale layout (now located in Philadelphia) is breath taking! A subway? Sounds very difficult to do. Perhaps you can model it as a cut section. Try to visit the Vanderbilt Mansion and museum (The Breakers Carriage House) in Newport, RI. The museum model builders did a credible job of modeling the subway under Grand Central Terminal. GOOD LUCK!
Take it easy on the BIG aspect! As you have already heard from earlier posts, most modelers wind up building Els, usually because they want their modeling skills to be visible. The late,lamented Lionel layout in NYC had a subway station visible through a glass panel set into the fascia of the layout. Since they manufactured no true transit prototypes, I believe they ran one or two of their 4-wheeled trolleys in a small loop with automatic stopping at the visible platform.I hardly remember any more details, because I was less than 10, and quite frankly I found it boring compared to all the action going on on the surface layout.So, what's my point? I would sugest starting construction with a window-viewable subway station with plans to continue as either subway or elevated.If you have already visited Pat Villani's site and seen Frank Gazatka's El dioramas, you can't help being inspired! Rather than a thru subway station, I would be tempted to model a terminal like Main Street, Flushing, with layover tracks beyond the platform, also rendered visible to visitors so they can see models not presently running. The rails can pop up and become Els whenever the change suiits you.
I'm trying to keep MY subway model small, to fit in my home office, around my desk. Interesting to see other people's trials. I plan to have the subway part (most of the layout) as a more-or-less IND E train from Kew Gardens to Queens plaza (in 35 feet?). This is a nostalgia trip (I'm in AZ now). Three stations, in diorama format. The rest of the tunnels will be as described in an earlier post of mine, which will allow peek-a-boo sightings of the trains.
Biggest problem so far: finding ho-scale IND R1-9 cars. No makee. No sellee. I'm not good enough to scratch-build. IRT will rule, for now.
I am interested in modeling a NYC subway.
Any web sites or info on existing layouts and
suppliers of trains and components would
greatly be appreciated.
Just thought I'd add that I've started Model SubTalk for discussions of subway and elevated modeling at:
http://www.iop.com/~patv/ModelSubTalk.html
The C train is known as the one of the worst lines in the system. The C train shold be full time and run time to leffters and beyond. at the least 4 more stations will be made and here they are if you have any comments pease ask and I will answer.
Now the list of the new station for the C train
Continuing on Liberty Avenue
1. 127-128 Avenues
2. Stuphin Blvd
Now on Stuphin Blvd heading South
3. Linden Blvd
4.Rockaway Blvd
Now turning on Rockaway Blvd heading still South
5. No/So. Conduit Avenue
Now turns east onto North Boundry Road entering JFK airport
6. 150 Avenue Street /JFK Aiport
7. JFK Terminals 7,6,5
8. JFK Terminals 4,3,2,1
9. JFK Terminals 8,9
You can look on your Queens Bus map for a real idea of what it will be like cause that is what I did and I think thaat it will be a sutible route for everybody.
There seems to be a consensus that the C should be extended to Lefferts Blvd. when it is operating in Brooklyn. Let me add my vote, too. That way, the A could ron to the Rockaways exclusively. Too bad the elevated portion over Liberty Ave. has only three tracks. If it had four, the A could run express to Howard Beach, or even Broad Channel.
Is there sufficient weekend ridership on the Fulton St. line to justify implementation of express service?
I remember reading somewhere that C service doesn't run to Brooklyn on weekends because of low ridership. However, I know that the A train can be jam packed on the weekend between Manahattan and Broadway Junction. Maybe when the MTA did their study there was low ridership but now there is a definite need for a second train.
And Your Idea to extend the C train past Lefferts Blvd is great but I think its funny that for IND Second Phase It was planned to have trains running more or less the rout that you named. This makes me feel that the MTA needs to stop playing around with Guiliani they need to get to work on IND Second Phase.
Speaking of the IND Second System, the Liberty Ave. line was supposed to be extended for something like 6 miles out to Springfield Blvd., I believe. Whether or not this would have meant the present elevated structure isn't clear, but since this was operated by the BMT at that time, I would guess not. The Fulton St. subway's four tracks extend past Euclid Ave. for a short distance after the A line diverts and starts its ascent toward Grant Ave. and the connecting ramp to Liberty Ave. According to the track map on this website, these four tracks come to a dead end, giving the impression that an extension would have continued from that point.
I am in the middle of doing a cost benefit analysis on the construction of a 2nd Ave line... I have a question about the costs: Most of the material I have are from the mid-1970s, when a hearing was held and, arguably, this was the last real threat of this line becoming a reality. My question is this: Would anybody recommend me at what rate should I inflate the costs so that I could put them in 1998 dollars rather than keeping them in 1975(?) dollars?
Thanking in advance,
Daniel A. Valles
Pace University, NYC
P.S. -- If it is possible, could I receive this info before Monday at 1:00pm... I would greatly appreciate it!
>this was the last real threat of this line becoming a reality.
Huh?
The Second Ave line is probbably THE most needed improvement to the system right NOW! Forget an airport rail link - for what it would cost to FINISH the 2nd ave line, vs what it would cost to BUILD an airport link - the airport link is a waste. You'd get FAR more people a DAY useing the 2nd ave line than you would get useing an airport link a WEEK! Frankly, an airport link would be hugely sucessful if it got as many as 10,000 riders a day. Yet a Second Ave line would EASILY top that figure. Ever take the 4/5/6 during rush hour?
Really, you shouldn't have any opposition to a rail line anyway - the costs of builiding it are far outweighted by the benifits of reduced congestion, and pollution that it brings. Not to mention the mobility it gives people in the city. Remember, NYC wouldn't be NYC without the subway!!!
If you want to base it on the U.S. CPI, as most do, multiply 1975 figures by 3.06 to inflate into 1998 figures. Based on the average annual pay of those in the "Heavy Construction Industry," you might multiply by 3.07.
All this misses the point, however. Cost-benefit analysis is widely ignored and discredited in government because
a) it relies on assumptions. A small change in assumptions wildly skews the results, and since most cost-benefit analyses are conducted by advocates of one thing or another, you can imagine. Not that transit advocates shouldn't play the game, since everyone else does at our expense, but don't expect to change the world.
b) it assumes resources are infinate. If resources are finite (which they are), than many things which are "worth it" must be foregone in favor of other things which are more worth it.
In New York, it is thought worth it to accept crumbling schools in the city which don't teach, a lack of transport improvements, soaring debt and high taxes in order to spend double the national average on Medicaid (the Democrats), fund luxo-services upstate and provide high wage government jobs in the city for people in the suburbs(the Republicans), and build a new Yankee Stadium (the Mayor). These are values which are not likely to be changed by cost-benefit analysis.
It also misses the other point -- were in not for the Wicks law and other laws intended to enrich construction companies, consultants, and a few powerful unions, costs would be lower and we could afford to more things.
The NY Times reports that the proposed STUDY of a rail link to LaGuardia is slated to cost $100 million. The construction of the Nassau loop cost just $100 million ($10 million inflated into today's dollars). THAT's cost inflation. For just ten dollars, I'll tell you that the connection should be built, and you should start extending the Astoria line one block north into the industrial area and then east -- tomarrow!
You can probably uncover the appropriate inflation rate somewhere on the Web. But just multiplying the 1970s costs by the inflation rate would be misleading. There are a whole host of costs that a major construction project would encounter today, that didn't exist in the 1970s or were in much diminished form. Consider environmental regulations, ADA, worker safety, litigation by aggrieved neighbors, etc. etc.
Litigation by aggrieved neighbors, or neighbors who perceive themselves as aggrieved, against subway construction is NOT new. If you look on this website, there is a page in the IRT book on the building of the subway where the lawsuits trying to block the 1904 subway are mentioned. It also mentions that suits were filed in the 1880s and 1890s trying to block the original L lines! (Or should I say "el" lines since this is New York?).
Certainly any public action, no matter how many people it benefits in the long run, is going to attract opposition, because someone will lose in the short run. And, perhaps the losers have always found some pretext to sue, at least those with the wherewithall to hire lawyers.
Still, as someone involved in the process of securing public approvals, one cannot say that nothing has changed. 40 years ago, a subway extension would have required approval by the board of estimate. Now there is an environmental review procedure which takes at least 18 months (can someone tell me how a subway can be bad for the environment in an already-developed city), a procedure which gives everyone standing to sue on the grounds that the review was inadequate and which, in a public action, generally results in a moratorium on work. Everything must be reviewed by community boards, borough boards, borough presidents, the city planning commission, the city council, the MTA board, the state legislature, the mayor, the governor, the federal government, etc. Any investment requires virtually unanimous consent.
The record of public works -- lots of them until 1970, and almost nothing since -- proves nothing has changed. Things can be rebuilt because rebuilding is exempt from the whole process that has been built up. That's it. If that wasn't true, the city would not have tried to rebuild the Manhattan Bridge rather than simply replacing it.
I'm not disagreeing with you on the environmental impact statements, community approval, etc., etc. Most of these processes didn't exist until the 1960s or 1970s.
It may also be, in addition to EIS and the review processes, that lawsuits are more common simply because more people are in a position to sue. Those in the middle of the income distribution are much more able, especially operating through groups, to afford a lawsuit, especially one who's objective is to delay something to death rather than win.
Fifty years ago, the people who could afford lawyers tended to be business interests, and business interests are the greatest supporters of transportation improvements. So, while lawsuits by the propertied might have moved the original IRT off Broadway, the interests of the propertied in general were sufficient to ensure it got built somewhere. It may not be so today. It seems that the legal system allows a small group with access to the courts to kill anything, but there are so many more people to pay off today. And I guarantee you that in NYC people don't just try to stop things they oppose. They try to stop things which are important for others, then demand to be bought off.
Benefits? DUH!!!! Hello! Anybody home?!?
How about relieving crowding on the Lexington, and not just during rush hours? With ridership on the upswing, the time to act is NOW. One can only hope that those bits and pieces which were completed before the city went broke are still in good shape and haven't deteriorated to the point where they'll have to be redone (Can anyone say 63rd St. Line?).
I have a question and a story. First, when I was on the el this morning in Philadelphia, why did I see a trolley with an LCD? There weren't any Kawasakis with LCD's as I recall. Secondly, On the BSS(I guess) I saw two girls smoking. I know that's illegal and it's also disgusting. I gave up smoking two years ago after my mother died of lung cancer. I am worried for people my age today.
I've seen teenagers (not me) smoking on the Broad Street Subway since I was in college in 1967.
On some busses in the evenings in Washington DC, the last row has sometimes been a party row with the smell of cigarettes and marijuana in the back. What bus driver is going to argue with them? (i haven't seen it in a couple of years, so maybe it doesn't happen anymore.)
Here in Chicago, it is very rare to see someone smoking on a train or bus in violation of the law. However, both times that I saw someone smoking on a train, it was a real "skel" (to use a New Yorkism) -- smelly, tattered clothes, and talking to itself -- and nobody but nobody wanted to confront it to tell it to extinguish the cigarette.
The first time, it was a woman on a Purple express -- Howard to Belmont with the doors never opening -- and nobody ever told her to put it out. The second time was a man, a real nutjob wandering up and down the car telling off passengers for imagined offenses, and he was ejected from the train by the operator, who was told by a departing passenger. But the smoker had traveled all the way from Washington to Irving Park on the Blue Line before someone had the guts to even tell the train operator.
My brother travels the 6th Ave local to school and gets off at times and on the train at 23rd street. He told me that they have a recording in that station that a train is two stops away and approaching the station. Is this true? If I recall the N and R lines at 42nd street station does have it also but do not here it all the time when I use the station. Does that mean that the MTA has fitted these lines with such a signal syatem as one that is being implemented on the L line?
I don't think the 6th Ave local has the new signalling yet. And not for a while.
A more likely explanation is that the dispatcher at W 4 St tower presses a button to run the "2 stations back" recording whenever an F train pulls into West 4th.
--Mark
It's been a long time, so maybe someone can update ...
I remember that many of the outdoor (elevated, open cut) stations had "Train Approaching" indicators which would light up and make a noise (a doorbell or buzzer type sound). These indicators were located in the "Mezzanine" areas (where the token booths and turnstiles were) which were generally heated so that one did not have to wait out on the open platform in cold weather. There were separate ones for each track for each direction of travel, usually labeled "To City" and "From City", or "To City Express", ... .
As I recall, these were activated by a short stretch of "3rd rail" opposite the powered rail. As the train passed over, the third rail shoes would bridge the 600v DC power to this section, which would be connected to the indicator at a station down the line. You could even tell how long the train was by how many times it rang or buzzed (and, I recall, in the early 60s, I could even distinguish the different patterns on the Brighton line between the Triplexes, the Standards, and the new R27s).
Many along the Brighton Line still exist, although some were upgraded with station upgrades. I think they just say "next train" althoug I never paid clsoe attention to them.
--Mark
Can anyone tell me if Budd had anything to do with the design of SEPTA's
Silverliner IV's? Because even though they were built by General Electric,
the side windows are very similar in shape to Budd's Silverliner II windows, in
which the sides of the windows are rounded. Is it likely that railcar
manufacturers, such as G.E., and St. Louis Car Co. may have designed some of
their cars to resemble ones built by Budd? I've also noticed that NJT's
Arrow I's, Which I believe were built by St. Louis Car Co., have a very striking
resemblance to the Arrow II's and III's, which were built by G.E., just like
SEPTA's Silverliner IV's, except the Arrow I's lack the hump on the roof.
The "Pop-up" balloons and overall general design of the current map is just plain silly. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the map on this site? Since there's usually two maps per car, use one for normal/rush hour service and the other for weekend/latenight service. Clear, colorfull, big, and bold. You don't have to lean forward or squint in front of the person seated in front of the map. The text would obviously be reduced, and thus made larger if spread across two maps. Finally, any word on when the site map will be updated?
I still wonder why they didn't just update the "SUBWAY" map they have been using for the last 15 years up until 3 months ago. It was the best ever (other than the 1961 map that was my substitute for a teddy bear).
They might as well have both, one as a general guide to all the MTA rail systems and one that has the accurate and easily updated details of the subway alone, controlled completely by NYCT, and not by the umbrella MTA. But that would be too useful (he griped...)
Say, my cousin had a subway map from that era. He showed to me once, in 1968, while we were visiting his family in Montreal. It had a photo of a then-new R-27, as I recall, which the TA was plugging at the time as being one of so many new cars. I wonder if he still has it - it would be a nice addition to my map collection.
Anyone know what the reasoning is for two Baltimore Metro stations to close at 8 PM every evening?
The two stations are "State Center" (which I guess closes because no one is going to the State Office Bldgs that late in the evening) and "Old Court Road" which is 9 miles out and has about 600 parking spaces. I would think that closing it early makes some people not want to park there, in case they are going to stay in downtown Baltimore late. And residents who live really nearby must be frustrated that they must use a station about 1.5 - 2 miles away and then take a taxi.
Keeping it open means having one more person working at a fare booth till 12:30 AM, and maybe one police car patrolling a little later (which it probably does anyway).
Anybody know why? I certainly don't...
At one time we considered moving to Albany NY, a town dominated by civil servants feasting off tax revenues sucked out of NYC (better to be on the receiving end). We checked out the (bus) transit, expecting that wherever we lived it would be with just one car rather than the American Standard of 2+.
It turns out that on most lines, the last bus pulls out of Downtown Albany at 5:15 p.m.! Sure enough, as we stood on the corner, state office buildings emptied at exactly 5:00. By 5:30, there was no one left for the buses to pick up.
I was in Detroit once, and saw a very similar effect. Contrary to popular perception, there are a large number of operating office buildings in downtown Detroit. But the streets are absolutely empty until after 8:30 a.m., then buses and cars swarm in, then the streets are clear again until noon, when everyone pours out of their offices to eat. The streets are deserted again by 1:30 at the very latest, and at 5:00, they fill with buses and cars that are completely gone by 5:30!
The irony is that I walked around downtown when everyone was holed up in their offices, and it was fine. I wasn't bothered by anyone -- I didn't see anyone to bother me! It struck me when I was out at about 10:30 a.m. that if I were walking down a similar street back in Chicago at the same time, it would be filled with people and not deserted.
I think the Peoplemover doesn't help at all. At lunchtime, the streets were still mostly empty -- the people who left their buildings to eat traveled by Peoplemover instead of walking two or three blocks.
Downtown Detroit probably isn't at all unusual in the way it essentially shuts down after business hours. That's more or less typical of most U.S. large cities, with some exceptions (New York, Boston, Washington, Chicago, San Francisco and maybe a couple of others).
Here ya go------State Center---right on, most patrons work at the state office complex on Preston Street & it wouldn't be cost effective to keep the station open. As for Old Court, again, low patronage, as for the 600 spaces, if you know the area, Old Court Rd. is a rather long & twisting road and is rather difficult to get around on unless you know the area....whereas, the two stations in both directions (Owings Mills & Milford Mill) have higher patronage and are generally easier to find if you're not that familiar to the area.
The reason that the two stations close at 8 PM is due to the fact that State Center traffic drops off almost completely after 6 PM due to the State employees
leaving at 5:00. Two bus lines, 10 and 19 serve the area also and go downtown. The Light Rail is a block away and runs to Midnight.
Old Court is lightly used because of its location and has the smallest passenger count of the entire Metro. Most passengers who use it don't work late. If they do, they use Milford Mill. The station sits almost isolated in the small valley, its closest neighbor is the ramp from 795 to the eastbound Beltway. I've been through it at midday to early afternoon and most trains pick up and discharge only one patron.
When the hearings were held, nobody complained about the closings.
Of course, the line has been running since 1983 and still doesn't operate on Sunday. Not even for Orioles games.
It is amazing that Old Court Rd. station is so lightly used, because it is 1.5 mile from the Reisterstown Rd. exit from the Beltway, the main circumferential highway in Baltimore. It is 1 mile from the center of Pikesville, a suburban town where I happen to know a lot of people. I would not have thought that it is lightly used from its location near the Beltway. But I guess not too many people live near the stores and the highway entrance so they use the other two stations in the area. Thanks for the info...
Those are distances "as the crow flies"--those are not "driving distances"--It's a lot tougher to find your way back there than it would appear to be.
People seem to be posting from many cities outside NY. Just for my information, how many cities have rail transit direct from their central business district to their airport (s). Chicago is the only one I know about for sure, although Newark will have it soon. Please let me know if this requires a change of trains (as proposed for JFK).
Philadelphia has the R1 Airport Line which will take you directly form the three downtown stops(Market East, Suburban and 30th Street) go down south a little(University City-By U of Penn) then directly to the five airport terminals. It is the yellow Regional line. If one wants to walk a little before a flight, the Broad Street subway stops not a vast distance from the airport. There are also some bus routes that go there directly. One from(here's a shocker for Philly residents)-69th Street!
It's no short walk from the Phila Airport to the nearest Broad St station! It's more like 4 miles from the Airport to Pattison and the walk would be across a very foreboding (to pedestrians) Penrose Ave bridge. The Broad St Subway can be accessed from the Airport via either Route 68 to Pattison or Route 37 to Snyder.
Actually, SEPTA's Route 68 bus no longer serves the Airport, just Routes 37 from Broad-Snyder or Route 108 from 69th Street. (As well as the R1 Airport Line from Center City, of course.)
Michael S. Buglak
Yes, you are correct, although technically one can jump off the 68 at Island and Enterprise and walk to the remote parking lot shuttles. Don't take a lot of luggage - it's a long walk.
Cleveland, Atlanta, and Washington DC (to National Airport, not Dulles) have rapid transit stations at the airport. I believe Baltimore light rail goes directly to the airport, but it might actually be a bus shuttle from a nearby station, I'm not sure. Boston has a station on airport premises and a short bus ride to the terminals.
Philadelphia has a train to the airport, though oddly it is a regional (commuter) line that served the airport and not a subway line. The advantage is fewer stops. The disadvantage is that the train runs only every half-hour.
Living in Chicago, I'm very happy that we have rapid transit to both airports. It's a real godsend. But it's not all roses:
1) The Midway station is about a block east of Cicero Avenue, off airport property, and the air terminals are a bit west of Cicero. You walk over a block in a long overhead walkway from station to terminal. This may be part of the "no landing fee money for transit access, only for projects solely on the airport" thing. Or it may be because they eventually want to extend the Orange Line to Ford City Mall (Cicero and 75th Street), and that's easier to do on the east side of Cicero.
2) There is no provision for express service on the Blue line, even though it takes over 45 minutes from O'Hare station to Clark & Lake station downtown.
Baltimore's light rail line DOES go directly to the terminal---In fact, the trains run directly from Penn Station (Amtrak) to BWI
There's Washington D.C , London England, Does Boston MA officially credit their Airport Station? Doesn't St LOuis have it and is San Francisco only a future plan.?
St. Louis has a light rail line to the airport operated by the Bi-State system that serves St. Louis and points across the Mighty Mississippi.
The BART extension to San Francisco International Airport (from the current end of track at Colma) is in the early stages of construction, with completion an optimistic three years in the future. Oakland International already has indirect BART service, by way of a shuttle bus to and from the Coliseum/Oakland Airport station.
I know that Washington National has Metro access (this is one of the reasons Congress has kept DCA open instead of closing as suggested after the Air Flordia crash in 1982 because with Metro they can be on Capitol Hill in 15 from the airport via Metro) and London of course has the Picadilly Line serving Heathrow's Central Terminal Area and Terminal 4. San Francisco International will be served by an extension of BART into the new international terminal by the year 2001 with tracks being extended from Colma on the Daly City line.
This should probably be a FAQ, by now. :-)
I think you'll find a lot of non-U.S. cities will have rail transit to the airports. Someone's already mentioned London, which now has two rail services (actually I think the second opens later this year): the Piccadilly Underground line, which takes about an hour to get to Piccadilly Circus (19 stops from Heathrow 4 to Piccadilly Circus station). The new service will be more of a "regional rail" service from Heathrow, partially via a new right-of-way to Paddington station (transfer to the District, Circle, Hammersmith, and Bakerloo Underground lines).
In Paris, Charles de Gaulle Airport is served by a regional rail line with something like 5 minute headways even on Sundays at 7 am (when I was there); this same rail line - "RER B" - travels thru Paris and down to Orly airport on the southern side. Charles de Gaulle Airport is also served by TGV trains from Paris to the north of France.
Also in Rome there is a rail connection from the airport to the Roma Termini station. Trains (not subway) runs every 20-30 minutes from 7AM to 22PM and connect the Termini station to the Leonardo da Vinci intercontinental airport in about 30 minutes. The distance is 32km (21 miles).
Daniele.
All three of London's airports (Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted) now have a rail connection, as do Manchester and Birmingham. In Europe it's now more common for a major airport to have a rail connection than not.
Briefly. Cleveland Station within terminal bldg
Chgo O'Hare ditto
Midway described above mediocre but in service
DCNational direct walways from fare control to terminal--Out of weather
Phila described above
Boston shuttle bus from Blue lineMBTA)
Oakland expensive jitney from BART station
St. Louis described above
San Francisco under construction but typical BART way overpriced and wrongheaded design
New York the tracks are so close the service so far--look up the old LIRR schedules in an Official Guide thirty five minutes wi9th eight intermediate stops it is inconceivable that the cost to re institue the abandoned secdtion and extend into the air port could exceed the cost of the proposed stand alone and thus missdesigned PA proposal.
I don't think these were mentioned:
- Atlanta's MARTA goes directly to the Airport; it's the last stop on one of the subway lines (I forget which).
- Amsterdam - direct regional rail service stopping beneath Schiphol Airport.
--Mark
This has not been mentioned either.
Rome, Italy has direct service from downtown tran station Termini right into the airport's main terminal for check-in. It takes 30 minutes and is very comfortable cheap. There is also a cheaper fare train from Termini but makes local stops in Rome about 5 or six and then to the airport. That train takes about an hour, if I am not mistaken.
And we can't forget that Frankfurt Airport, the busiest in Continental Europe, has two S-bahn (commuter) (S-14, S-15) lines going right into it every 10-15 minutes.
Hamburg has a joint U-bahn and S-bahn station 2km from the airport and a bus that connects with every pair of synchronized trains that pulls into that station, meaning a bus goes to the airport every 10 minutes.
I think Munich now has an S-bahn (commuter) train connection to its airport now.
Zurich has one also.
Also, to make the story of the Baltimore connection complete, the Central Light Rail line pulls into the airport basement every half hour. Maryland MARC (commuter) trains that run between DC and Balto. hourly all day, and Amtrak trains from NYC, Balto. and DC also go there. The station that MARC and Amtrak trains go to is about 1.5 miles from the airport and a shuttle bus runs to the airport grounds from there.
An interesting thing about the Boston Airport shuttles: they are numbered 11, 22, and 33, rather than 1,2,3. I believe it is because the numbers seem farther apart with two digits and are easier to remember: 11 is all terminals, 22 is Subway + some terminals, 33 is Subway + the other terminals (at least that's how it was a couple of years ago).
Thanks for the info. I intend to E-mail the ask the Governor show (www.newsradio88.com) why NYC doesn't have such a link when all those cities have it. The state has a big surplus and I guarantee you all those taxes are being paid by the finance/business services/fashion/and media companies in Manhattan. These businesses need one thing more than any other -- a quick, reliable one-seat ride from the airports to multiple points in Midtown and Downtown.
The powers that be think a separate system is required because visitors to the city will fear the subway. But most riders to LaGuardia would be New Yorkers, former New Yorkers, and frequent visitors traveling on business. These people use mass transit all the time. The Astoria line doesn't go through any poor neighborhoods, and runs every 6 minutes are rush hour and every 10 minutes in the middle of the day. The ride from Ditmars all the was to Whitehall (MTA website) is 45 minutes at rush hour, and 38 minutes at other times. An extention to LaGuardia would add, perhaps, six minutes. It would take you from LaGuardia to Times Square in 25 to 30 minutes every time. And, the N train stops in the vincinity of most major hotels in the city.
The Times reports there is a $100 million study of a connection to LaGuardia. I'll bet if they just extended the Astoria line two blocks north into the industrial area then around on the street, it would only cost $300 million. This is madness, an outrage!
I agree. Sometimes it seems as if the studies cost as much as the construction. I could study the thing for the cost of a round-trip Metrocard and tell them that they should build an extension of the N train to the airport, or at least a Light Rail connection down Astoria Blvd to it. They get $100Meg just to say "Yeah, build it -- here's our bill", or maybe to say "No, it would be too useful -- here's our bill."
I E-mailed the Astoria line to LaGuardia issue to "Ask the Governor" (www.newsradio88.com), but it is more likely to be asked if others also ask the questions. If everyone who posted in this thread wrote in with a list of other cities with access, trashing the Governor's proposal for yet another "study", and demanding that the N be extended to LaGuardia, the question is more likely to be asked on the radio show.
Probably too late for your notice to the governor, but from Asia add Hong Kong (link to new Chep Lap Kok airport to open in June), Tokyo, Osaka, Fukuoka, and Sapporo.
I just noticed a few things on the Broad St. train coming up. First, in reference to the "Do you hear what I say" thread, it's not so easy on the BSS anymore. The P.A. systems on most of the trains I've been on was next to inaudible. Next, I noticed entrances to a lower level at Pattison(which is the lower level I used when the Phils actually got to the World Series a few years back. But I noticed something between Tasker and Morris and Lombard and South.
On both sides there appears to be an area that looked like it was originally intended for trains. It is wide enough to accomodate, but only long enough for one to connect to the local track. What was that? Also remembering the thread on why Spring Garden and Race and Vine are express stops, there are still line maps(Which Septa never takes out) from 1984 which show the entire express routes having exactly and only the following stops: Olney, Erie, Girard, City Hall and Walnut and Locust. Were the platforms on the newer express stops always islands or were they wall platforms that were converted?
One issue at a time.
PA's - the blame is not always on the system. Some trainmen/women just don't know how to use a microphone.
The two-track subway below Walnut-Locust is beneath the northbound lanes of Broad St. This is the reason for the tight curve southbound just north of Lombard-South. Just south of Tasker-Morris, the subway moves to beneath the southbound lanes, then shifts quickly back to the other side just before entering Snyder. There are two reasons for this - 1) Snyder was to have a four-track terminal under some plans (the tracks are numbered 3 and 4 here), and 2) the proposed Passyunk Ave subway could have branched off at this point to the southwest (and it was never built).
The stations having express platforms north of City Hall have had them since the subway was built in '28. Until the late 50's there was no track in the express trackways, save for short segments. The express trains currently do not stop at North Phila, the only such station having express platforms but no express service.
Also there was no track in the express sections from north of Erie to just south of Olney until the 1980s.
That's amazing. Express right of way but no express trains for some 30 years! Not even express tracks in case of a derailment or sick passenger to allow trains to pass one another in an emergency. What were they waiting for?
Nowadays Broad Street makes for a great subway line with frequent express & local traffic. But why the wait? NYC subway lines had express & local service from the original days of service. (Although at least one outer borough line, the F in Brooklyn, has lost peak direction express service over the last decade. And because of repairs that never end on the Manhattan Bridge, the Broadway line in Manhattan has no express service currently because N trains are on the local track after using the Montague St. tunnel into Manhattan instead of the bridge.)
The major motivation for SEPTA to finally provide through express tracks from Olney Ave. to Walnut-Locust was the 1992 -93 Rail Works project. The Reading RR viaduct from the Center City tunnel portal to Wayne Junction was totally rebuilt over two summers. In order to accommodate customers who trravelled the old Reading branches (to/from Doylestown, Warminster, and West Trenton) the Regional Rail trains were turned at a new, high-level platform Fern Rock station which was given a direct pedestrian walkway into the BSS Fern Rock terminal. Broad Street Subway Express trains then carried the displaced Regional Rail customers to Center City.
I have "Three Technical Questions". First-How many miles of track are there on the New York subway. I've seen 321. I've seen 700+. How many is it?
Secondly, how many cars are there on the system. I mean cars even from orders way back to the redbirds. Lastly, What is really the diff between overrunning vs. underrunning? And is one "better"?
Ummm... I've heard currently there are ~5000 cars in the system...
Overrunning third rail means the contact slides along the top of the rail, like the subways is. Underrunning means the contact slides along the BOTTOM of the rail, like Metro-North. Underruning is supposed to be more weather resistant. Who knows??
An underrunning third rail is supposedly better in that sense, but overrunning is, I heard, better in the event of some type of "overcharge" and the charge can be grounded more quickly. I don't think that's true but what do I know?
Huh??????
> How many miles of track are there on the New York subway?
According to "New York City Transit's facts & Figures", there's 656 miles of mainline track and another 186 miles of track for the yards making up a total of 842 miles.
> Secondly, how many cars are there on the system. I mean cars even from orders
> way back to the redbirds.
5,803 as of 12/94. 5,797 as of mid-1997. Now, it's a little less because of a recent derailment at the 238trh St yard.
> What is really the diff between overrunning vs. underrunning? And is one
> "better"?
It's how the electrical shoe beam of the train picks up the electrical current from the third rail. Overrunning means the third rail shoe slides along the top of the third rail; underrunning means it slides along the bottom. Which is better? Who knows.
--Mark
The answer to the third rail question is that overunning is by far the preferred method of collection. Underunning third rail (restricted to the former New York Central and the Market St. El.) is usually referred to as Wilgis-Sprague Third Rail. The "advantage" is that it seems to be more resistant to icing. That didn't seem to bother the Chicago L, which had miles of uncovered
third rail.
If anyone else is using Wilgis-Sprague third rail other than the two mentioned, could we be so informed.
Well, if in overrunning the shoe(so that's what that thing is on the truck) is over the rail is the rail covered? On the Broad Street subway, it seems to be underneath it(as in, below what I see). Is that wooden plank it's protection and if so, is that it? Couldn't the third rail be placed somewhere else(maybe on the dividing pillars so I can see it better).
The third rail has a coverboard on an overrunning third rail so that lowlifes and idiots who trespass have a lesser chance to electrocute themselves. The Chicago "L" has miles of uncovered overrunning third rail due to the use of gravity shoes. Maany older cars used gravity shoes which cannot have a coverboard due to the design and operation. Normal third rail shoes have a spring that forces the shoe against the rail. On overrunning the spring pushes the shoe down, on underrunning it pushes the shoe up. Third rail is placed not so we can all see it easily, but to keep it as far from possible trespassers and in most caseson the side away from the stations where idiots are more likely to contact it.
The third rail has a coverboard on an overrunning third rail so that lowlifes and idiots who trespass have a lesser chance to electrocute themselves. The Chicago "L" has miles of uncovered overrunning third rail due to the use of gravity shoes. Maany older cars used gravity shoes which cannot have a coverboard due to the design and operation. Normal third rail shoes have a spring that forces the shoe against the rail. On overrunning the spring pushes the shoe down, on underrunning it pushes the shoe up. Third rail is placed not so we can all see it easily, but to keep it as far from possible trespassers and in most cases on the side away from the stations where idiots are more likely to contact it.
So there's no possible way a shoe for an overrunning rail could become underruning and vice-versa? Why were there two different types?
Didn't some NHRR equipment (electric locos and FL9s) have third rail shoes which could operate both on the underrunning GCT 3rd rail and the overrunning 3rd rail in Penn Sta.? Maybe the Rohr Turboliners too?
That is interesting.
It would appear that two different 3rd rail shoe sets on a locomotive
would be an operational nightmare.
The original PRR 600 V DC electrification and LIRR was the cause of the overrunning covered 3rd rail operation.
The overhead 11,000 V AC was installed in the 20's.
All PRR and New Haven and current electric locomotives are AC only.
However, the 3rd Rail was kept in the Hudson River Tunnels for DC powered
work trains. The NY Connecting and the LIRR passed through the East River
Tunnels. The original PRR and New Haven and current AMTRAK units use the AC
overhead. The former Long Island uses the DC third Rail. The two lines divide
at the Sunnyside yards, the NY Connecting with its AC overhead north to the Hell Gate Bridge and the former LIRR east to Long Island.
If anyone cares at this point. . .
The Hell Gate line was always electrifed with catenary, because the New Haven operated it. My understanding, however, is that the wires were not extended from Sunnyside through the tunnels to the station until the PRR went to overhead in the '30's. The NH simply handed off the train to a DD1 at Sunnyside. Even after the overhead was completed, that's still where the two railroads officially met and exchanged locomotives.
There are several photos of NH electrics in Pennsylvania Station and in the open cut west of the platforms, e.g., in "Manhattan Gateway: New York's Pennsylvania Station," proving that the NH and PRR didn't always (if ever) exchange locomotives in Sunnyside.
The name through trains like the Congressional limited and the Southern Cresent all changed electric locomotives at Penn Station.
The GG1's would turn over their consist to the New Haven EP4's on the northern trip. The New Haven would swap with the PRR on the Southern trip.
On rare occasions before Conrail and AMTRAK GG1's would proceed north on special runs. After Conrail/AMTRAK the GG1's regularly went the distance between Nwe Haven and Washington, DC.
Now, for the under-running shoes, only on the NY Central to Grand Central.
Here, there was a logistical motive power problem for the New Haven.
The NH AC/DC units were needed for the Grand Central Commuter and a few long distance runs (to Springfield, Cape Cod, Montreal and a couple of other places.
While those units could travel anywhere on the NH 13,000 V AC overhead (and NY Connecting), only thos units rigged for 600 V DC under-running 3rd rail could operate into Grand Central. Of course, the FL9's could go any where except the East River Tunnels because of the under-running 3rd rail shoes.
Overrunning contact shoes run along the top of the 3rd rail.
Advantage: Gravity helps the fulcrum spring maintain good electrical contact.
Disadvantage: Snow and ice affect this more than underrunning.
Underrunning contact shoes run along the bottom of the third rail.
Advantages: Less affected by snow and ice.
Disadvantages: Fulcrum spring must support the weight of the assembly and overcome gravity in order to maintain positive electrical contact. 3rd Rail requires more intricate mounting and greater support since it is supported from the top.
What is the speed of the A train between 81st street and 59st?
It's a long run, three miles or so? They seem to go aroung 40?
My second question is what is the difference between welded rail and
non-welded rail? What are the improvements?
81 St. to 59th St is about 1 mile. Going north, the speed is about 40 MPH but going south, the speed is less because that entire stretch of track is controlled by timers. The average is about 25 MPH.
Welded rail provides a quieter and smoother ride by reducing the number of track joints.
How can welded rail reduce the number of track joints? If they're welded, they are still joints, no?
Not after all is said and done. Everything is welded together into one continuous rail. You can't even tell where the weld joints are.
I guess I was being overly precise. I maintain that even if I can't find it, it is still technically a joint!
Okay, let me clarify it for you. When rail is welded, even though there are, technically, joints in the rail, because they are welded, the joints are almost non-perceptible and thus the ride over such welded joints is quieter and smoother than conventional joints which are bolted together.
That makes perfect sense to me. I was being overly technical -- call it a character flaw!
Non-welded rail is typically in 39 foot lengths. The need for a rail joint at each end creates the old "clickety-clack" sound.
Welded rail is just what the name implies - rails welded into lengths much longer than 39 feet - which reduces the need for joints. Results - smoother and quieter ride for passengers; reduced maintenance costs due to fewer rail joints and less wear on train wheels.
There used to be 45mph signs in the northbound tunnel for the express track. They might still be there. The R-44s don't seem to move as fast as the R-38s, which is one more reason I'll wait for an A train of R-38s. Besides, you get a nice view out of the storm door window.
Back in the late 70s, the A line was served by slant R-40s, in addition to R-44s. If anything, the R-40s were as fast as, if not faster than, the R-10s. Say what you want, but the A line isn't the same without the R-10s.
Anyone know how I would get to the abandoned Woodhaven LIRR station?
I know it's in a dangerous neighboorhood but I'm sure it would be interesting
to see.
Is it on a EL or underground?
There are actually two abandoned Woodhaven Stations, one atop the other at right angles. The lower level is inside the still very active LIRR Atlantic Avenue tunnel between Jamaica and East New York. It has been closed since 1972, and has no public access. Do not attempt to venture into the tunnel because there is constant high speed train movement at all times.
The upper level is on a viaduct that is part of the old LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch. Trains were last operated on this line in June 1962; by then it was the obscure Ozone Park Branch, created when the LIRR Rockaway Beach route became part of the NYC Subway A Train. If you stand on Atlantic Avenue you can clearly see the old elevated station (the viaduct still crosses Atlantic Avenue), but once again there is no public access. I would not recommend trying to climb onto the track/station level as the old ROW is heavily overgrown with brush. You might risk serious injury. It has been basically unmaintained since 1962. By the way, the City of NY - not LIRR - owns the old Rockaway Beach ROW.
Woodhaven is not in a high crime area - so you can safely travel there and walk in the area. Take the J train to Woodhaven Blvd Station (at Jamaica Avenue) and walk south. Or take the A train to Rockaway Blvd and walk north on Woodhaven Blvd. By bus, the Q24 NYC Transit and Q11 Green Bus stop in the immediate vicinity.
While there's no public access to the underground station, you can get a reasonably good view of it from any LIRR train heading to or from the Flatbush Avenue terminals. There's enough light on either platform to see the entrance stairway and a bit of the platform.
If you venture just north of Atlantic Avenue, you'll see some interesting bridges along the old line. The short trip makes an excellent study of railroad ROW in urban settings.
I distinctly remember a single electrified track emerging from the Atlantic Avenue Subway, Eastbound, and then curving up to meet the Rockaway branch. Even if the tracks have been taken up, there is a good chance the embankment can still be found, which would be about as safe as it gets in terms of reaching the overhead line. From there I would double back North toward Richmond hill for as long as it seems safe.
What is the technical term for the recesses in the walls of a subway station or tunnel that track workers can use to avoid being hit by trains? Peace of mind depends on the answer to this.
Jeff Trevas
They are called "Niches". (one of them is a "niche")
I prefer 'Hidey-Hole' :)
-Hank
For years the Staten Island Railway was missing this very important feature to their small short tunnel. I believe the FRA made them put the holes in the wall a few years ago. Glad I know what to call em now.
I believe that whole tunnel on SIR is almost condemend, when are we going to see a 500lb piece of metal fall out of it?
The technical name is "Niche" but I've also heard them referred to as "Wells".
Now a technical question of my own: How does knowing the name give you "Peace of Mind" ?
This way if he's walking along the tracks illegally and a train comes by and he runs for dear life, and the arresting officer asks where he is, he can say he's in a "niche" instead of "in a dent in the wall."
Addendum, in case my previous (supposedly humorous) posting was seen as impuning anyone's honesty -- Sorry, it was just a joke, I forgot the :-) at the end.
But knowing about a niche can add a certain air of professionalism to my favorite perennial excuse, "My homework fell on the tracks and the train swept them into a niche." :-)
You deceitful cad:)
As a long-time teacher, I can honestly say I've never heard that excuse!
Thanks fellas, for clearing up this extremely important question.
Jeff
I can buy a map New York subway system.
Please write to me.
address:
Marek Poustka
Stavbaru 211
Strakonice 1
38601
Czech republic
e-mail poustka@hotmail.com
Marek! Welcome back. I haven't heard from you for a while. Well, to answer your question, it is possible to buy a NYC subway map, but I don't know if the TA handles international mail. The next best thing would be to visit the MTA homepage. I don't remember the URL offhand but if you search the web for it, you'll find it. Maybe someone else on here can help. Well, I'm glad to see you back!
Excuse me Alex, but it would be more simple if you would send Marek a subway map. I would do it but I live in Italy and it's a bit difficult for me to send Marek a map. I have only one map and I got it this last Easter, during my last holidays in NYC.
So ask Marek his address and send him a map! (it's only a suggestion)
On Deja News nyc.transit I read a post of a suggestion to put the Yankees on Governors Island complete with a subway spur.
What are the opinions of those on sub talk of this idea? Is a tunnel to the island possible/feasible? If so where would the connection be in Manhattan?
Whirehall (N/R) Cortlandt/WTC (under E?)
The biggest problem would probably be the fact that so much of the North side of Governor's Island is a n historic district. It would be hard, if not damn near imppossible to get the necessary permits to dig under these buildings for a subway tunnel coming from Manhattan. Barring that I like a connection from Whitehall only because the route would be shorter. However, other possibilities could be:
1 - make it the southern terminus of the ever-proposed 2nd Ave subway.
2 - Start with the lower level tracks at Bergen St on the F and tunnel under Union (Carroll or President) St to the water' s edge and then continue on to Governor's Island. You might get away this because you can add two stops in Brooklyn that will serve customers 24/7.
Wouldn't you have to dig a REALLY deep tunnel to go under the Brooklyn/Battery tunnel? And isn't Governor's Island some kind of military outpost?
Depending on where such a subway line were to be routed, you'd have not only the Battery Tunnel to reckon with, but possibly the Joralemon (Lexington) and Montague St. tunnels as well. It could get dicey. And, yes, Governor's Island was, and may still be, a military outpost. Did you know that Governor's Island was enlarged to its present size with earth and rock fill from subway excavation? So was Ellis Island.
Funny. I thought all that dirt became the East River:)
The military is giving up control of the island within the next few years. Those who want to develop the south side of the island for Yankee Stadium have to get in line behind several prominent developers (looking to build condos there effectively making Governor's Is. another Roosevelt Is.), New York University (which is looking to the Is. to create a "typical" college campus), Columbia University (which sees itself outgrowing its current campus in the next fifty years), and historical organizations looking to keep the Island as is. Besides, I don't think the costs of building a stadium there are feasable. More than that, Steinbrenner wants more PARKING! How would motorits from New Jersey and Long Island drive to Govenors Island? In the end it will never happen.
Let's face it: Yankee Stadium on Governor's Island isn't such a hot idea. People will still want to drive to get there. Don't forget one other thing: lack of parking at Ebbets Field was one of the reasons the Dodgers left for L. A.
Speaking of dormitories, there was talk of converting the hospital administration buildings, along with the contagious disease wards at Ellis Island into dormitories for Columbia or NYU. Funny thing - nobody said anything about the baggage & dormitory building.
[there was talk of converting the hospital administration buildings, along with the contagious disease wards at Ellis Island into dormitories for Columbia or NYU]
Presumably, the bugs have died by now :-)
My idea for Governors' Island is to move the UN and all the embassies there. They get an international peace island to enhance their prestige, and they are still a ferry ride from Manhattan. We get less parking violations, more valuable property on the tax rolls in Manhattan, and less traffic disruption when all the VIPs come to town (they could ride a ferry from JFK), and we still have the capital of the world, albiet offshore. The Feds could give the island to the UN to settle part of its debt to that organization. The UN and embassies could use the money from selling their existing locations in Manhattan to build the new buildings (or rehab the existing buildings) on the island. The city would duck, once and for all, the cost of maintaining the island.
My idea for the Yankess is to offer free transit bus rides to New Jersey -- one way!
[re moving the UN to Governor's Island]
I remember reading somewhere that when the UN was scouting around for a permanent location in the late 1940s, one of the places it considered was, indeed, Governor's Island. What I don't remember is why the UN eventually rejected the idea. It might have been because the Army (which occupied the island at the time) didn't want to move, or maybe the donation of the land on the East Side was the deciding factor.
At any rate, the idea is interesting, though I can foresee one obstacle - the various national ambassadors might find it too inconvenient to have to travel between the island and their consulates (which presumably would remain concentrated on the East Side).
The UN on Governor's island is the best Idea I've heard yet!
All the embassies could not possibly fit on Governor's Island. Besides, people need access to the embassies in order to get visas to go to the countries they represent.
"All the embassies could not fit on Governor's Island, and people need access to get Visas"
I don't know about either of these points. Governors' island is pretty big, acres and acres. I't almost as big as Windsor Terrace, and 12,000 people live here.
As for visas, how do people in Chicago get visas? I don't think you actually have to go to an embassy. And if you do, people could take the ferry and go there.
Nonetheless, at City Planning the UN concept was passed over in favor the casino -- although if we have to have a casino, placing on an island away from the rest of us in not a bad idea.
The big problem with Governors' island is you need a bridge. People could get on and off by ferry, but trucks and emergency vehicles would have to get on some other way. And a lift bridge over the Buttermilk channel would cost big bucks. If it could be a "world peace island," perhaps the feds would put up the money.
Great Idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is already a tunnel that runs under Atlantic Avenue from Court Street to the Bay. It was built in the 1840s to connect Coal Powered Freight trains with Lines running out on Long Island at Atlantic And Flatbush. This tunnel could be used. I would have the train Begin at Atlantic and Flatbush where nearly every subway line in the city could make a connection, as well as the LIRR. Then I would stop at Court and Maybe again at Hicks. to service Brooklyn Hights and Cobble Hill. Next stop Governors Island/and the new Yankee Stadium. The train would then continue on to Manhattan and run up second Avenue.
Great Idea for everyone and truely an ideal location for a stadium and not just because it's undeveloped, but more importantly because, with the right subway line, it would be convinient for a great many people. People who could use another Manhattan-Brooklyn connection in spite of the need for new stadium and the inevitable development of Governors Island. The relationship between Long Islanders and the Yankees would drastically improve to say the least.
As a novelty, they could even run a ferry on game days, that would make stops along both sides of the Hudson and arrive at the stadium for the game. They could sell beer and hot dogs right on the boat. Hell, if it was me, I would have the dock at which the ferry landed, INSIDE THE STADIUM! Your ferry ticket and the game ticket would be one and the same.
We are talking about a clean slate here, in the middle of a lot of people. If planned right, they could kill a whole flock of birds with one small stone. It just needs to be the right stone.
There's one problem with the idea of putting a new Yankee Stadium on Governor's Island. Stadiums today are designed to attract bigshot corporate types who are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars for "luxury boxes" and similar amenities. Pursuit of this corporate market is the driving force behind the construction of ever-more-expensive stadiums nationwide. Somehow, I doubt that the bigshots would be willing to take the subway to a stadium on Governor's Island - they surely prefer to use taxis and car services. Sure, a subway link to the island would get heavy use from "average" fans ... but teams are no longer interested in attracting them :-(
You couldn't be more right! I find myself always trying to justify causes for what seems more and more to be an ideal world. Huge corportations and conglomorates and multi-nationals and Donald Trump and Steinbrenner and Gulliani and the Republicans and the Democrats and the Government and the Rich and Starbucks and MacDonalds and Pepsico and the Gap will crush us all. Perhaps they are working on errasing this post as fast as I can write it. Or, more likely, they are figuring a way to subvert this post without seeming to come out as the bad guy. However, If anyone is out there and somewhere down the dark road ahead happens upon these few and humble words, let it be known that someone in their past had a nice little idea that their lives might have been a little bit different and original.
EVERYONE, POST WHAT YOU REALLY THINK AND FEEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Great Idea for everyone and truely an ideal location for a stadium and not
> just because it's undeveloped ...
Undeveloped, maybe, but a historic landmark also, I believe. It's not easy to get historical landmarks altered.
> People who could use another Manhattan-Brooklyn [subway] connection in spite
> of the need for new stadium and the inevitable development of Governors
> Island.
What about the people who drive? How woudl THEY get to the new Stadium? Like it or not, many people will not take the subway at all, no matter how convenient. Big shot execs and politicians will not stoop down to use the "lowly" subway.
> As a novelty, they could even run a ferry on game days, that would make stops
> along both sides of the Hudson and arrive at the stadium for the game.
New York Waterway ferry is foaming at the mouth for the chance to ferry NJ Yankees Fans to the new Stadium if it were build on the West Side of NY.
--Mark
Your ideas are sound but your vision is backwards. First of all, cars should be banned from NYC! Or at least motorists should be punnished with drastically more severe tolls, parking taxes, registration and inspection fees, Increased parking meter rates and sadistic crackdowns on moving violations. Like tobacco companies, auto makers should be taken to court for polluting the environment, squandering resources and disturbing the peace.
I am reminded of the old story about the guy from New Jersey who came to visit New York. He drove his car right off the George Washington Bridge. The car was in the Hudson sinking to the bottom and instead of getting out to swim to safety, he started honking his horn and yelling "I hate New York, Why don't they pave over these rivers anyway!" My advice to the corprate types who won't take the subway to the game is the same as my advice to the the guy in the story: If you don't like it, move to Los Angeles!
As far as your historical landmark arguement; if you think that the gods of historical preservation are going to stop SOMEONE from developing Governor's island, then you must be smoking something. Building a public facility is an weapon that can be used to shut out INEVITABLE DEVELOPMENT into something like Donald Trump's country club and Casino or another Freakin' Disneyland. Besides, a stadium wont take up the whole island so there should be plenty of room left over for History and even a park or maybe a zoo or a marina.
Preach on, brother man!
I certainly agree that NYC isn't a place for cars but you still have many Yankee fans that drive and will not take the subway, no matter how safe or convenient. Where on Governor's Island would you find the room for all these cars? How would they get to Governor's Island at all? You expect them all to go by ferry? It'll never happen. A bridge crossing? I'd rather see the Manhattan Bridge rebuilt first. I can't see parts of the island, as historical landmarks, altered or torn down to make room for parking lots. Leaving games would be a logistical nightmare.
Now back to what I was smoking .....
--Mark
NO CARS!!!
I might remind you that Fenway Park in Boston has NO Parking lot!
Like with guns in the old west, everyone can check their cars at the border in New Jersey or Long Island in huge parking garages built for that purpose. Incidentally, Nassau and Westchester Counties are second on my list for Auto Free Zones in New York State. So watch out!
"The lowly subway"? If you saw "The Devil's Advocate", the subway was obviously good enough for Satan:) Anyway, I have a funny story about bigshots who are "above the level of the common folk" and are "better than the losers who use public transportation". There was a fellow english teacher of mine, surprisingly from Ukraine, who had never been on a subway in her life and would never stoop to "the level of the poor". Well guess who ended up eating their words one Saturday afternoon? She always made sure that everyone knew how much she loved her Mercedes(which is strange. I don't see how she could afford one on a teacher's salary. My wife and I both teach and don't have enough for a decent used car). One day somebody plowed into the back of her car(while it was parked and she wasn't in it) and it was a wreck. That very Saturday, who was taking the el home? Well, I don't rub things in people's faces but you always kick the person you end up needing. Life is tragically amusing sometimes.
P.S.-She has a new Mercedes(??????) and a newfound respect for us "losers" who take the subway.
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz? This woman can afford to get a second? Must have been mondo insurance. But don't you hate it when people talk as if they're above the level of us "common folk":( And I hear this from people who use regional rail(yeah, like that's a real big leap) all the time. "Oh, God. How could you use the filthy subway?" "Only criminals and poor people ride the subway!" And these are people who use regional rail!! Why do people who mconsider themselves of a "higher standing" look down upon us dredges who toil in the brick pits? Before they got that big promotion they probably could give you directions to the DeKalb Avenue station forwards and backwards in French. This kind of stuff ticks me off. Well, maybe I don't want that Mercedes after all;)
Please write a title that makes sense:) Pertaining to your comment, I have noticed that from people who think they're better than you simply by your mode of transportation! I really can afford a halfway-decent used car but I choose to ride subways. Call me crazy, but pilots like to fly, racers like to drive and subway fans like to ride subways(if they can). Some people like subways so much they make scale models(the thread you began, Jack) of systems just to look at it and be proud. Anyway, I don't know where the regional rail thing comes from. I guess you're from Philly, so if I say I take the R3, you don't know if I get on at Elwyn or 49th Street(not to put down any particular area). I never knew that the number train you took was a status symbol. What next? "Oh you use the IRT. Well I use the IND. I'm so special". Just a little bit much, don't you think?
I assume you're saying something about the 49th Street area that's not really to....complimentary? A little lack of $$$$$, perhaps?
Makes you wonder if she's into some sort of illegal activity. I personally have seen enough professional people on the subway to put me in a position where I can take exception to her observation of losers using it. Chances are most of us who use Subtalk will agree. It's a shining example of one person's misconception.
Two words come to mind -- Logistic Nightmare.
Picture opening day 2002. 60,000 fans watch the Yanks win a nail-biter in the bottom of the ninth and then descend upon the subway. At once. There's no way off the island except for a few boats and a helicopter or two for the biggest of the bigshots.
Of course, the station is a good 6 or 7 levels below the surface, so first everyone must wait for the elevators. (Picture Clark Street at rush hour, multiplied by 100).
Assuming hardy New Yorkers can jam 1500 of themselves onto a single train it will take 40 trains to clear the stadium. If you further assume headways of 5 minutes (which is optimistic, given the time most games end these days) it will take over three hours to get all the fans off the island.
It sounds like a neat idea, but it ain't gonna happen
There's easy access by car to Manhattan, the Bronx and Queens via the Triborough Bridge. And, for rail access, they could build some sort of connection to the freight line that goes over the Hell Gate bridge and perhaps another connection to the Second Ave line, whenever that gets built.
Maybe we could use the Metro-Pass instead of Qwik- Pass for tolls on the bridge.
At times it takes as long to get over the TB as it does to travel the remaining 140 miles to Albany. That's one reason we drive down to Poughkeepsie and Metro North in.
Back in the good old days we would walk to the RI stadium from the Lex 125th station. There used to be two great signs on the bridge.
1 read, "In case of Air Raid, Drive off Bridge" (Remember we were walking)
the other read
" Verticle Lift Bridge Ahead
Stop on Red Light
Violators will prosecuted"
It didn't warn that violators would probably be dead!
Those are great signs, especially the one about driving off the bridge in case of an air raid. How funny. Like, gee, do I get hit by a bomb, or do I drown? That reminds me of a sign (which I photographed) in the middle of Royal Gorge Bridge, which is 1,050 feet above the Arkansas River: "No fishing from bridge." DUH!!! That's the exact equivalent of looking down from the 86th floor observatory of the Empire State Building.
Have some Immagination!
First of all, the privacy of Governor's Island will allow them to build the stadium into the ground below the street level. Fans on the lower level will have a two flight head start on the Deep Subway station so only banks of large escalators will be needed. Remember also, that service will go both ways so that Brooklyn Long island fans will load onto the Eastbound while Manhattan and Bronx fans will board the West Bound. There is no grid above to dictate the with of the station platform allowing for a nice wide waiting area, Not like the D train at 161st Street.
Jersey fans will take the game day Hydrofoil Ferry to their waiting cars across the Hudson. While the would be Governor's Island residents will simply walk home.
I think that 60,000 is too big a stadium anyway. 50,000 is more practical. What's Camden Yards 48,000 I think?
I can see the Daily News headline now ... "The Yankees Are In the Basement" :)
--Mark
Both figuratively and literally speaking.
Camden Yards has a seating capacity of 47,000.
Coors Field in Denver has a capacity of 50,200 thereabouts. Initially, it was designed to seat 43,000, but when the Rockies kept drawing huge crowds to Mile High Stadium in 1993 (crowds of 60,000+ were commonplace; Mile High seats 75,000), plans were altered to increase the capacity of Coors Field. I went to see the Mets when they were in town in April of '93, and the crowd was in excess of 57,000 (at Shea Stadium, that would be standing room only). When I saw tham again in August, the crowd was just over 60,000. The next day, there were 70,000! The Rockies ended up drawing 4,483,350 during 1993, a record which will probably never be broken. They were on a pace to top that in 1994, (during one ten-game homestand, they AVERAGED 65,000 per game) but the strike put an end to those hopes.
Was anybody on the 'Day one of the IRT' tour this past Saturday. I was the conductor on the 1 train that picked up the tour from 91st St south to 42nd St, and was wondering who was in charge of it and why you all were not wearing safety vests?
NYCT rules require a safety vest for anyone on the roadbed. Some departments also require safety vests be worn when employees are on duty & in contact with the public for identification purposes (only). I was not on the tour, however. Were people actually allowed on the tracks. If not, I see no reason for safety vests.
I thought you can't go on the roadbed until you had the training class on how to signal a train??
When we subcontracted inventory to the TA a select few had to attened the class before going to some far out storage locatations.
Absolutely true
The tours are led by members of the Transit Museum staff; the one I was on a couple of years ago was led by curator Thom Harrington. I've never been on a tour that has issued safety vests to the tour-goers. The staff members on the tour wear them, however.
-Dave
Steve and Dave are correct.
I was on the Dec.13, 1997, Day One Tour.
Only the two Museum staff persons and the TA representative wore vests. We were never allowed on the track; in fact, we were always warned to step back from platform edge when a local was coming through. Train traffic was being monitored by the TA staff person. He also opened the access to the Brooklyn Bridge abandoned side platform and the BB backup interlocking tower.
(would he be considered a conductor or a train operator? He signaled the trains to stop via radio and keyed open a single car door to allow us off and on at the abandoned stations.)
I read recently that the TA was using titanium rails somewhere on the system. (maybe on the Flushing line???) Why is this?
Also, what is the alloy that is used for standard rails? Are they heat-treated? To what hardness?
I heard about it, too. One of the Transit Museum members told me in June of '96. Unfortunately, I can't remember the benefits of titanium rail.
I'd be surprised to hear that ANYONE was useing titanium rails ANYWHERE. Titanium is an expensive metal, and VERY difficult to work with. Actually, I believe it wasn't until the 50's that it was even used for something, noteably the SR-71 spy plane. I couldn't imagine what desireable properties it would have for rail use anyway.
Standard rails are some sort of plain steel, though I'm not sure what composition or treatment (if any) they get. Bare in mind, with heat treating, you can do some AMAZING things with steel - this is how those scissors that cut through pennies that you see on TV are made - it's no secret metal alloy, simply a heat treating process. We covered this a bit in my Manufacturing Processes class last year...
Presumably it is some sort of titanium-steel alloy that was intended, surely not pure titanium, but that still doesn't answer that question of why it would be used. I think titanium alloys are used to reduce weight in aircraft (provide greater strength per unit of weight), so I guess that would be the general idea. But I thought that weight was considered good in rails.
Just what is the reason for using different weights of rail? I know I have seen references to "90-pound" and "100-pound" rails as being used for the better mainline railrods, with lower weight-rating rails on less heavily travelled lines. How is this weight measured, and is there any operational advantage to using lighter rails in certain situations, or is it simply a question of saving money by not using the more expensive heavier rails where they aren't required? What weight of rails is used in the subways?
Subway rails are about 100 pounds per foot. That's some serious mass!
This week's
NYC Subway Service Notices for the [E] and [F] Lines has an interesting note. Can you imagine LESS service and MORE crowding during PM rush hour?
It sounds as if it's going to be one of those necessary evils while they do track work in the vicinity of the 63rd St. connector. Looking over that list, it appears as if there's a lot more going on, too.
Okay so the Monday morning blues right? I know on my line there was no express service because over the weekend they ripped up the express track on the D/Q line.
BUT NO Q TRAIN??
Not a one, was waiting or it and did not see one this morning of the two that should have pulled in. Also when I got to 47/50 Rock they said (what I could hear over the moving trains, why do THEY start annoucments when I train just arrives and never repeat it) that NO B (as in Bravo) trains for at least 20 minutes.
SO, what happened??
Didn't hear anything, did this delay the Q's starting up??
Where were the D/Q tracks "ripped up"? On the Brighton Line? I thought that new welded rail was installed only a few years ago ....
--Mark
There was an early morning track fire at B'Way-Laffayette St. Station which forced north-bound re-routes and trains being turned back to Bklyn. There was also track work going on Sunday night.
Question: why is one of the Brighton express tracks being torn up? It seems those tracks were redone not too long ago - welded rail, ballast, the works.
According to one G.O. I read, they will be installing track panels until July.
Yup, the "RED" notice in the station says no express service from April 20th to July 24th, Q trains will run local both directions Kings Highway to Prospect Park. Red flags and the signal just north of Kings Highway is red. Though people are still waiting for the Q to arrive on the express track this morning.
Thanks to everyone who gave some advice on how to start up. While I was out I decided what to call this city-Ultropolis, after my aunt Felicia Ultropa. I've decided to go with the Map making first idea(thanks, Mr. Murphy). Anyway, for Mr. Rabbin, I was taking Slamtrak(I can't stop calling them that) back from Pittsburgh and was talking to a man named Carl Mitchell Rabbin on the train. I told him There were two guys with that name(well, maybe not the Mitchell part) and he laughed. It's like finding out there's another Milhouse on your block or in my case Westinghouse anywhere else. Well that's my story. Oh yeah, I was measuring track this afternoon on the trolleys here in Philadelphia and saw that the gauge was indeed 5' 2 1/4". How those huge trolleys balance with nothing but flanges to keep it from falling will mystify for ages to come. Well, thanks everyone.I really appreciate it! I know you all missed my witty repartee:)
You're very welcome, Jack. I hope you enjoy it. It can be a little bit much at times but if you stick with it till the end, you'll be glad you did. And of course we all missed your witty repartee:)
The flanged wheel is a wonder, isn't it? The actual area of contact of a wheel on a rail is about the size of a Robin's egg. (On an aside, the area of contact of an automobile tire on the road is about the size of a man's fist. Remember that when you slam on the brakes at 35 MPH on a snow covered street) Those wheels are pressed onto a solid axle, which is one of a pair in each truck. The weight of the car is spread over those 8 contact points. What is really amazing is that a streetcar can continue to operate over badly maintained track that is missing the head, the flangeway, or is out of gauge.
Ain't modern tech-no-logy great:)
I read somewhere that Birney streetcars could negotiate badly worn track; I don't know if PCCs or modern LRVs are that forgiving. There is probably some tolerance when it comes to track gauge; if it gets too far out of whack, you'll have a derailment.
P. S. I've heard people refer to Amtrak as Amtrash.
LRV's I don't know about, but as for bad track and PCC's, soitenly!! In Baltimore up to 11/3/1963, the westbound track on Fayette at Guilford was out of gauge by at least 3/4" (on a 5'4 1/2" system) and missing the check and most of the head on the north rail for about 3 feet. Both the 8 & 15 lines used the trackage (very heavily) and every westbound car on both lines passed over that rail. The cars banged over that point, and when we checked it, the cars were running on the cobblestones for those 3 feet. If the south rail had been in the same shape we would have had a car on the sidewalk.
As for generally bad track and PCC's see Pittsburgh in the PRys era.
Can anyone tell me where I might find statistics that would tell me what times of day how many passengers are riding the New York Subways? How does rush hour passenger traffic compare to other times of day... midnight... mid-day, etc.? I would appreciate the help. Thanks.
I've read that the Lex Line north of Grand Central was built to IND/BMT dimensions as part of the Tribourough system. Is that true of the Lexington tunnels as well? Transit Authority facts & figures lists their diameter at 19 feet, vs 18 for the IND tunnels and 17 for other IRT tunnels.
If the Lex tunnels can take B division trains, I think I know a way to build the 2nd Ave subway on the cheap. Build it without stations -- as an express route for half of the trains from the Bronx, leaving the Lexington Local for Manhattanites only (with a turnaround at 125th).
The 2nd Avenue super express would enter the Bronx via the Lexington tubes now used by the #6 trains, then connect up with the Dyre Ave, Jerome Ave, or Pelham Bay lines, as per the original MTA proposal. It would curve into the 63rd St station and run down the Broadway express tracks, as under the current MTA plan. Every train from the Bronx would be an express -- perhaps the 86th stop on the Lex Express could also be eliminated. At 125th St, Bronx and East Harlem riders would switch to the Lex Express (25 trains per hour) if they were heading to East Midtown, or the 2nd Avenue Express (another 25 trains) if they were heading to west Midtown or Lower Manhattan. The agonizingly slow ride for those on the Pelham Bay line would be eliminated.
That leaves an additional 25 trains per hour on the Lexington Local, with nearly all the capacity for Manhattanities. Only a few Bronx residents who work on the Upper East Side would switch to the Lex local, and they would be getting off as others get on. In 1990, 110,000 workers who did not work at home or walk to work resided on the Upper East Side between 59th St and 120th St. 50,000 of them rode the subway to work. Depending on your idea of crush loading (a much smaller crush than today), the Lex Local alone could probably move 30,000 people per hour in one direction. And some riders would board at the the 59th St and 63rd St express stops, rather than board the Lex Local. And some riders in the northern area might ride the 6 northbound in the morning, then take an express southbound -- especially if they needed to get to the west side or downtown. That should eliminate the crowding problem.
Contrast this with the current MTA plan -- build northward one station at a time over the next century. Since the 2nd Avenue is to be built using the cheaper "deep bore" tunneling technique, it is the stations (which must cut through all the infrastructure to the street) which cost big money. Given that the northern sections of the line are already built, the whole stretch without stations might cost no more than a station or two -- much more crowding relief for the money. True, it would not end the long walk for those on York Ave, but neither will the proposed plan anytime soon. The no-station route could be designed to accomodate stations when money became available.
What do you think.
Yes, the Lexington Ave. line north of Grand Central was built to what amounts to be IND/BMT specifications. It was begun in 1911, before the Dual Contracts were signed, as part of the Triborough System, most of which was absorbed into the Dual Contracts. I also read that the 2nd Ave. line was supposed to have fewer stations to begin with, thus keeping your idea of a super express service on the Upper East Side. Of the five sections which were completed, two or three are on the upper portion of the line; the gaps between each section are presumably where stations are supposed to be built. The idea of using the line as a super express service is a good one, in my opinion. Lord knows that line is desperately needed.
Why not just build a 3rd pair of tracks under the Lexington Avenue line with just one station at 86 or 68 St. before turning down the Broadway line at 63rd St?
White Plains Rd. & Dyre trains would be on the new tracks, the Pelham line would be the regular express, and a fresh set of empty cars would always leave from 125 St.downtown.
Of course the people who would like to have closer service to their apartments on 2nd, 1st and York Avenues might be disappointed, but then again maybe not, at least there would be enough capacity and nothing would have to be torn up, just a lot of deep tunnel boring.
If the new superexpress tracks are supposed to connect with IND/BMT lines at 63rd St., it would have to be the Pelham Bay trains that would use it, or possibly the Jerome Ave. trains. The White Plains Rd. and Dyre Ave. lines connect with Lexington Ave. by way of original IRT construction (from just north of E. Tremont Ave. station through to 149th St.-Grand Concourse) and connecting trackage with very tight turns that IND/BMT cars could not negotiate.
The Pelham Bay and/or Jerome Ave. lines, on the other hand, could be easily upgraded to IND/BMT standards (no pun intended re 'BMT standards'!), as was done for the Astoria line in 1949.
Does anyone know why the B and C trains switched their uptown terminals in March 1998? I assume it was consistency - the C now always terminates in Manhattan (168 or 145 Sts) while the B, when it runs along Central Park West, serves the Concourse Line local stations as well instead of trading places with the C at 168 St.
There were 2 reasons, neither having to do with consistency.
First - It was so R-44s could be used for OPTO on the 'C' line during the weekends (NO LONGER NECESSARY)
Second - Because it eliminated the need to move (at great expense) 2 C trains each day, from Concourse yard to 207th St.
There were some (internal) political reasons but the reasons are really too subtle to seem significant.
in addition it eliminates the need to move c line equipment friday night to 174th st yard to make up weekend c service. It used to be a cool switching job I used to get on the extra-extra list. Bring an 8 car r32 consist to 174 st yard cut the train to 4 cars and change signs for world trade center-168 st. once there at 174st yard other c trains were laid up and i'd make up other trains for saturday morning. if memory serves me correctly 40 cars (10- 4 car r32s)were used for sat-sun c service 168 to world trade center
When it was the AA, it used to be seven 4-car trains of Slants (In the good old days)
When were slant R-40s used on the AA? I never remember seeing those cars on that line. I do remember that R-32s appeared on the AA (and, for that matter, the B and D lines) right after the Chrystie St. connection opened; I also saw a train of R-27s on the AA once at about the same time frame. If I'm not mistaken, R-42s also found their way on that route.
BTW, my first ride on the 8th Ave. line was on an AA of R-1/9s on May 7, 1967.
For some reason the MTA made two changes to cars around the R-40 period that were really foolish:
Instead of the plastic seats having some curvature to them, they made them flat on both halves. My back and other places always hurt after sitting in one.
Some genius decided to put the fluorescent lights behind the supposedly translucent advertising, which made the cars pretty dim and shadowy. If an old non-translucent ad was used, it was even worse.
At least they learned from it and the cars are normally bright and more comfortable to sit on than in those "un-enlightened" :-) days.
The same "genius" was employed by the CTA in the design of the 2400 (Boeing 1978-79) and 2600 (Budd 1981-85) series cars. These cars are dark and dreary as you described. Just try reading the paper or a book on the train. These cars may have been designed/built around the same time as the R-40's, thus a "great idea" might have been passed around. The new MK 3200 series cars have a row of lights independent of the advertising. A huge improvement!
Did you ever wonder what some of these engineers/car builders/transit operators are thinking when they come up with these "great ideas"?
Not quite accurate. The R-32A was the first car with the traslucent plastic light covers designed to hold advertising signs.
In answer to Steve B, in 1982/1983, I worked at the 168th St. terminal. At that time, R-40 slants were used in AA service. The AAs were made up of B trains which were cut during off peak hours. The 40Ms and 42s were always put in service so that they would lay up in Coney Island.
That explains why I never saw the slant R-40s on the AA. I moved out to Colorado in September of 1980, and didn't visit New York again until October 1984. Looking back, I missed the period of near collapse of the system.
The AA used slant R-40's around the mid 1980's. In fact, I think they were still there when the AA became the K.
For those of you who don't know what good those cameras are on the El platforms in Philadelphia, they are for the new M-4's. When I was exiting a train this morning I got a look at the CCTV and the view seemed as if it was generated from those cameras. Maybe they are for security too, but I think that's what they do.
The cameras send the image of the platform to a receiver in the motorman's cab so he/she can watch the doors and provide the services of both operator and conductor. I don't think they are tied to any security system right now.
Although this may have been answered, how come since all the years of growth of JFK Airport one the busiest if not the busiest airport on the east coast, has never had a direct rail connection into Manhattan. I am sure that as the airport grew it would have been easier to do something of that nature since it wasn't too developed that area anyway. Was it that it cost too much or was there any political resistance and if anyone has information....when was a direct rail connection to the airport proposed. I think that years ago they should have had a direct train from Grand Central straight to LaGuardia and then on to JFK where it stopped at each terminal before looping back to the city. This would have been ideal because since the LIRR runs below Grand Central they could have connected to Penn Station and connected to the New Jersey Transit Lines and then on to New Jersey and to Newark Airport. However this is could of cost alot of money but they do have the tracks now for it and all they need to do is then build connections to the airport. Since the LIRR has stopped service the branch line with the Penny Bridge stop that spur is now free to run great service out to JFK. Although I love NYC they have been slow as to other cities in regards to public transportation. In my opinion I think for how much JFK handles it is very inadequate and out of dat airport compared to others.
Didn't there used to be a direct IND shuttle to JFK from midtown? I remember it blasting by my station once and costing me a job interview. I haven't been fond of the IND since.
Yup, twas the JFK Express, it ran on the 6th ave line then south of West 4th it ran on the tracks of the A and C line. I don't like the IND either
Foti
Yup, twas the JFK Express, it ran on the 6th ave line then south of West 4th it ran on the tracks of the A and C line. I don't like the IND either
Foti
There was a JFK Express service from the late 70s until Easter, 1990. It originated at 57th St.-6th Ave, then for a brief period from 21st - Queensgridge after it opened. It ran down 6th Ave., switching over to the A/C/E line south of W. 4th St., skipping Spring St, stopping at Canal St., Chambers/WTC, and Broadway-Nassau, and skipping High St., then ran to Howard Beach- JFK via the Fulton St. express tracks - nonstop from Jay St. on (it didn't stop at Hoyt-Schermerhorn). An extra fare was collected on the train, and all passengers were directed onto one car. The conductor would key open one door for loading.
What station were you at when this train went blasting by?
You hit it on the nose, Spring Street. I got to the interviewer 25 minutes later to find that another man(who ironically also missed the train, they told me) had gotten the job. There's no justice in the world:)
If you are interested in following up on why the NYC Subway was never built to JFK an outstanding resource is Robert Caro's biography of Robert Moses, "The Power Broker". Acording to Caro one of the orgininal plans for the Van Wyck Expressway was to extend the Queens Blvd. line from Van Wyck Bvld and Main Street (where it happens to run beneath the current expressway ROW) to the airport in a center-median arrangement, similiar to BART in the Bay Area along CA RT 24 and I580. Moses did not want this plan to take flight and he believed that the capacity of a six-lane freeway would be sufficient to carry all of the people who needed to get to JFK, despite reports at the time which stated the road would be obsolete upon its opening. Caro's account also illustrates how during Moses' tenure in New York how relatively few miles of rapid transit/railroad lines were built and how systems such as the NYCTA, the foreruners of Metro-North and the LIRR fell into disrepair.
Another important angle to examine is how whenever citys have sought to extend transit systems into airports, the airlines represented by the Air Transport Association, kick and scream in dissagreement. One reason for this is that any airport which charges for parking uses those funds to pay for airport operations and improvements. For example San Francisco Airport runs nearly a 30 million dollar surplus each year with most of the money coming from a six-story, short-term parking complex. That money keeps airline rents and landing fees low.
I believe that the ATA is currently pondering litigation to halt the Port Authority from using public funds to fund its JFK-Jamacia LIRR people mover.
Also remember that at the time Ildwild/JFK was being built and into its infancy, the PA and Moses colloborated on several projects. One of those projects was the Verranzano Bridge which the TBTA and the PA jointly own. Also since both Moses and the PA were in the business of toll roads and receiving Federal Highway dollars, the Train to the Plane was not a good business proposition.
Also the LIRR does not run beneath Grand Central, it runs under Manhattan between 33rd and 31st sts I believe.
Don't blame Moses for everything. The Transit Authority completed far more extensions and improvements to its system while he was in charge than after he left. Before 1970, road and rail improvements were made. After 1970, not much of either, except in the suburbs and the sunbelt. We need a new Moses -- one who is interested in transit, parks and schools instead of roads, parks and housing redevelopment. But today's Moses work in health care and social services organizations. And that's where all the money goes, at least in New York City. Trust me on this one. I analyze the budget numbers, NYC compared with other areas, its part of my job. The reason we don't have transport improvements is because we gave the medical industry an unlimited budget, and they exceed it.
Well put. They said the same thing about George Allen when he coached the Washington Redskins.
I fly out of JFK a lot now that I live in Brooklyn, my airport of choice is still Newark (EWR) but it just is not worth the trip anymore.
I live at the Kings Highway stop on the D/Q line, here are my options for WEEKDAY travel to JFK.
$17 (call it $20 with tip if he helps with bag) car fare.
$1.50 (hauling own bags) D/Q to Prospect Park, S shuttle to Franklin Ave, C to the A then a bus.
$1.50 D/Q to West 4th, upstairs to the A and bus to JFK.
$1.50 B82 bus to the L to the A to the bus to JFK.
So when do you think I should leave for a Noon flight??
If they built a rail connection right into JFK airport, your choices wouldn't change.
You would either have to get to the Fulton St. A train, or the Queensbound E train into the airport, or the LIRR at Atlantic Avenue through Jamaica or something. There would be no direct line from Kings Highway to the southern end of the Van Wyck Expressway.
Personally, if I were starting in Manhattan, I would take the E or F to Union Tpke and catch the Q10 bus. The best potential rail connection would probably be a LIRR line from Jamaica or an extension of the E train down to the airport.
Finally, for the average NY-based plane traveller, the $20 taxi fare is not that high, considering that it is to get to a $400+ plane flight most likely. If it is a business person, the company will pay for the convenience for the employee. Parking at an airport is usually $5-7 per day, so a $40 RT cab is the equivalent of about one week of parking and no gasoline cost.
Personally, I like using public rail transportation to any airport because it is predictable, inexpensive, anonymous, and a train, etc. And I have been on many of them. Boston and Frankfurt are the only ones that seems consistently crowded, BTW, though Atlanta and Gatwick may also be crowded.
Sorry to disagree, but parking at airports in major Northeast cities is a whole lot more! Here in Boston, the main parking garages at Logan Airport charge $18/day. I haven't parked at LGA or JFK in a while, but I recollect it being in the $24/day range! There are less expensive, long-term and off-site options, but they require a longer shuttle bus ride and potentially more risk to the parked car.
A friend told me about this option: all the hotels on the south side of the Grand Central have parking garages which charge a fraction of the on-Airport rates. Of course, you have to drop off your family and you have a long walk over the highway bridge. I nearly froze my butt off.
I'd much rather take the F to the N right into the terminal, at least for business purposes. Then again, like many who have a car for "recreational" purposes, I'd have to do something with it. Parking across the highway is cheaper than an alternate side of the street parking ticket.
Your question is well-taken, and has been discussed on this site several times. One option no-one ever seems to mention is that of privately building a rail link to JFK, via a BOO (build, own, operate) scheme such as the JFK International Arrivals terminal is now being renovated under. A Special Purpose Company, formed for the purpose of building & operating the link, receives a franchise to operate it for a given period. They are free to charge what the market will bear for the service, and they (and those financing the project, typically banks and bondholders) take the risk (and the rewards) of the venture. This is also, by the way, how the Heathrow high-speed rail link is being financed.
Waiting until NY City (or the Port Authority) builds a link is like 'waiting for Godot'. In the play, he never arrives. A publicly-funded direct like won't either because, as others have pointed out, the business of government in NY City is Medicaid/social services ripoffs and patronage, not doing anything that benefits the average tax-paying worker.
Howdy, folks.
I figured that somebody(hopefully) would want to hear about the progress of my subway. So every now and then I'll give a little update of how the Ultropolis subway is coming(I'm sure you're looking forward to that:)). Well I started otu as suggested(thanks, Mr. Murphy) and made a map. There are 7 lines that service
the city center and three of the outlying districts(sound familiar?). I've evne come up with names for the former "subway companies". They are(and you're gonna love this) the URT(Ultropolis Rapid Transit), the MRT(Metropolitan Rail Transit), the CRS(City Rail Service) and the UIS(Ultropolis Independent Subway).
So far the lines will are planned(but I seriously doubt ever built) as separate local and express trains in the outer areas, combine in the city center(does anyone have any suggestions for names for the city center-and not 'midtown') and then separate again to serve the rest of the city.
I then got carried away and made a system with 36 LINES!(though they all fit in a city a little bigger than NYC, a city with about 25 lines). I have built the model city already and had to bring it piece by piece to my new house a couple of months ago. There is nothing in my basement(I'm serious) and so there is plenty of room for the model.
Well, thanks for the help. I'm off to start.
P.S.-these trains have no choice but to be OPTO:)
How about posting your progress to Model SubTalk at:
http://www.iop.com/~patv/ModelSubTalk.html
Don't worry, Pat. I'll be there now that I know it's there.
Oh, yes. Sorry to bother you one more time, but I would like to know is it possible for a train to make some kind of spark or flame that can ignite the wooden crossties for the track? I only wonder because in the BSS there are some areas with mysteriously greasy ties. But it's Philly. All we know is grease.
Yeah, the LIRR's Oyster Bay line gets a few fires every year. Sometimes it ties up service. Happens alot by me. But that's a diesel line, so the LIRR could care less if it fell off the face of the earth...
The Chicago ‘L’ has experienced some fires on its cross ties in the summer seasons. For this reason the ‘L’ trains were equipped with "fire extinguishers" so the motorman could put them out any fires they spotted.
But it is not due to grease on the cross ties. Because the ‘L’ structure is exposed to the elements, the cross ties, and outside guard rails for that matter, tend to become very "dried out" after many years of service. The dry condition of these ties, although originally they were treated, combined with high temperature and sparks caused by the third rail, have indeed caused a few fires.
I have witnessed on more than one occasion the motorman stopping his train and going down on the tracks armed with his extinguisher to put out a smoking fire. Caution must be used with this process because of the presence of the third rail.
The section of ‘L’ trackage from Armitage to Chicago/Franklin has very old, worn cross ties and guard rails. I’ve often wondered what CTA would do if a section of track in that crucial area burned. This is unlikely, but possible.
If you do a little research you will discover that constant fires on the trestle across Jamaica Bay was one of the reasons the NYCTA was able to obtain the Rockaway Route from the "Electric" LIRR.
There weren't too many of these fires started by fishermen wanting an "in the field" meal from their catches.
I remember on a trip to New York way back in the early 80s, I was waiting for an uptown Lex local somewhere on the upper east side, when a downtown train pulled in. The motor on the car directly across from me was making a godawful noise and suddenly exploded in flames. The train departed despite this fire, but the trackbed was littered with burning debris in about a half dozen spots. Most fires eventually went out on their own but the others continued to burn when my uptown train arrived.
This is another question in regards to a earlier post that I made. For about three weeks now, the length of the J line has been redused from eight cars to four during certains parts of the day. But on certain stations, the staircases are to the front and back of the platforms. And I've noticed that when a four car train pulls in, it will stop all the way to the very front of the station. Unsuspecting riders who board from the opposite end of the platform,end up running for the train which is a good couple of yards away. The trains should stop in the middle of all stations when it has less than eight cars.
I assume the car stop markers are all up front. You know the 10 8 6 4 S(OPTO) signs that are black number on white (execpt the S for the OPTO black on yellow). The T/O has to stop at these points to insure the train is fully platformed. Now I know this is abusrd for a four car train but nobody has moved those signs in ages IMHO.
I’ve been reading all the messages about New York not having a rail link to their airports.
Chicago may be thought of as a 2ND choice to living in New York, however, we do have CTA lines to BOTH airports - O’Hare (Blue Line) and Midway (Orange Line). I live on the Northside of Chicago about four miles from downtown. For $1.80 (full fare plus transfer) I can get to either airport in about one hour. This includes a bus ride to get to reach either line. I could walk to the Brown Line (Ravenswood), the connection to the Orange Line via the Loop, but with bags I’ll use the bus connection. This compares VERY favorably with the $20 plus for cab fare to/from either airport.
New York my beat Chicago with the number of rapid transit lines, types of equipment and quality of service, however, we in the Windy City do have you beat in the Train to the Plane department!
$64,000 question: how do you feel about all those service cuts and implementation of OPTO on all lines?
What would you expect the answer to be?
OPTO on the Red (Howard-Dan Ryan) and Blue (O’Hare-Congress-Douglas) is not has not only slowed down service, but it also has made the trains more dangerous in two ways. First, most of the station platforms on both lines are island vs. side type. This means the OPERATOR does NOT have the opportunity to check the side of the train as it leaves the station. One dragging death or dismemberment law suit could cost more than the so called saving CTA keeps telling us about. As you might already know, the only employees that lost their jobs were the ones offered "early retirement". The other "displaced" employees are still working in the CTA somewhere. Secondly, these two lines operate through neighborhoods that could be considered "not exactly safe" (i.e. the south and west side of Chicago). If you are riding in the eighth car you are now seven cars away from an employee with a radio vs. four or five cars away when conductors were still used.
OPTO is OK on the remainder of the lines because of physical characteristics of the line and the equipment in use.
As for the cuts in service, many riders feel this is the beginning of shutting down the system to a 6 AM to 7PM, Monday through Friday service. The cuts seem to be targeted towards the people who need them the most.
Lastly, the President of CTA made a big show last week about installing "plastic" ties. This on the Douglas Branch of the ‘L’. One of the lines being cut. Do you think the daily riders care about plastic ties when they are losing weekend ‘L’ service on this branch? I don’t think so!
Am I to understand that there are only 10 R-110 B units?
Actually, there's only 9. (units 3001-3009, three 3-car coupled sets). It was one train, ordered to test "New Technology" for the next set of subway cars. This is not without precedent. The R-11 cars (only 10, 8010-8019) were ordered for pretty much the same reason, to test new technologies, including the stainless steel carbody.
-Dave
p.s. there are 10 R110-A cars on the IRT division, which is maybe what you meant.
What "new technologies" were being tested? I've only caught an R-110 B once and thought "Man, this is one funky car". Am I to understand that MTA is now doing the real thing with those new trains(which, after seeing some posts here, I won't even go into)? By the way, My last post(:)) piqued my interest. What types of car would have been used if the 2nd Avenue tunnel opened in our lifetimes(i.e. the 70's when first introduced). Boy, what a great day it'll be when it opens. A new subway tunnel to herald the R-89065349's:)
The R-110 trains were built to test some innovative concepts. Some of the technologies being tested are not necessarilly new but may be to the transit field or just the the NYCT. Some of them are:
MU control via RF connections and Fiber Optics.
Modular HVAC equipment
AC propulsion with regenerative braking.
CBTC signalling
Screw-drive door operators
and dozens of other lesser innovations.
By the way, Jose Desmondo Ruiz was not The Fugitive. He was the hospital janitor from whom Richard Kimball stole a hospital ID badge so he could tap into the Prosthetic Clinic's data base.
MU Ctrl via RF connections??? Heh: I can see the hadlines now: Thousands of commuters stalled when guy with Cell phone makes call on new subway train...
The R-110 B has RF controls for most trainline controls and R-110A has Fiber Optics
You found me out! I love that movie(and that name for some reason) and the two subway/el references in it.
A-the mentioning of cities with el's(I never knew Milwaukee had an el) and B:
the fight scene on the Morrison-Kundsen 3200's(is there really a Balboa Station?)
Milwaukee doesn't have an L, and there is no Balbo station, though I had to at least complement the movie makers on realizing a station behind the Chicago Hilton and Towers would be on Balbo Drive.
The Milwaukee Rappid transit TMER&L) had some L stuctures near soldiers home but removed for the conversion to the highspeed line out to west junction in the 20's (high speed line now mostly under I-94)
They had some spetacular structures over the rivers and industrial valleys. The rappid transit ended in 1950 or 51 but they used some of it for stadium streetcar specials in the mid 50's for the Milwaukee Braves World Series teams. Who did they play?? Some team called the Yankee's??
The remaining streetcar service ended in 1958.
Funny you should mention the 2nd Ave. line.
The R-11s were built specifically for that line. Had it been built back then, chances are a full production order would have materialized. As it turned out, the R-11s spent most of their lives sitting unused in Coney Island Shops. They were used briefly on the Brighton and West End lines, as well as the Franklin Ave. shuttle. One has been preseved at the Transit Museum, the rest were scrapped.
The R-44s and R-46s were also built and equipped to run on the 2nd Ave. line, which was to feature a more complex signalling system, including coded electronic impulses for speed, propulsion, and braking. Top speeds were to be 70 mph, if you can believe it; this was well within the capability of these cars, which were clocked at 80 mph during tests.
Of course, if that line ever does get built, the cars being used may very well be ordered under the contract number you mentioned, as facetious as it may sound.
I can never find anything to support these days. As you may or may not know, To say I am an enthusiast of the new M-4 subway/el car would be a gross understatement. But lately I've been finding more and more things not quite kosher about it, one EXTREMELY SERIOUS unless I *really* need new glasses!
First, how big is the gap supposed to be between a train and a platform? On some stations the gap seems wide enough to stick a football through! If someone's foot slipped down through there as a train was pulling out, they'd be in trouble. Secondly(and this one I'm leery about-I don't want to bring the wrath of SEPTA upon me), isn't the flange of a rail vehicle's wheel supposed to actually touch the rail? Because unless I REALLY need new glasses I could have sworn that when I saw a train of M-4's coming into 63rd Street, those flanges were not on the rail! Is there something on the M-4's underbelly I don't know about because this is the kind of thing you do *not* want to be wrong about!
Ummmmm, I think you do need new glasses. I just learned that Philadelphia had new subway cars when I was there last month. I had been on the new ones and the old and with the way the newer ones seemed to rock back and forth, if those flanges weren't on the rail, the train would be defying the laws of gravity. Besides, I've never met any kind of enthusiast who had "gripes" with that which he was enthusiastic about.
[Besides, I've never met any kind of enthusiast who had "gripes" with that which he was enthusiastic about.]
When one becomes an "enthusiast" he must pick out any and all problems and, if possible, correct them so everyone can be an enthusiast about said....thing. So like my gripes with the M-4, it's possible.
Cool picture change on the index. I wonder if anyone else noticed.....?
Look below this Re:
You're the first to mention it. I was bored with the old logo. Have you noticed its really cool property yet?
How many more logo changes before we have a subway under 2nd Avenue? 4,537, 4,538, 4,539, 4,540.....:)
Are you changing it daily....I've noticed two or three differnt combos
100 lb rail, 162 lb rail, etc is pounds per yard....not per foot
Thats lb/yd of rail not per yd of track
Where is Latham, NY?
You city folk think its the part of New York that's above the Arctic Circle
It's further upstate than Westchester and Rockland Counties
Everyone I know knows where every part of upstate New York is. We all went to college there. And almost everyone from NYC who doesn't go to college upstate ends up in, shall we say, other upstate institutions.
How easily would the people you know get around Brooklyn?
I spent the first 21 years of my life in Brooklyn.
I graduated CCNY back in the days when they were a basketball power (all be it headed for post graduate education at that great music school on the Hudson)
Just retired so I get a chance to return. I'm only 10 miles north of Albany.
Got to admit all those letters confuse me....I know Sea Beach, West End, Culver, Brighton, Jamaica, Canarsie, and of course A and D. but L,M,J,Q, N, R
Brooklynites still use the old BMT titles, even though they are no longer officially in use. Even so, the R-32, R-38, R-44, and R-46 cars do refer to these titles on their side route signs if they are assigned to any of these lines.
For the record, here are the corresponding letter codes:
Sea Beach: N
West End: B, also M during rush hours
Culver: F
Brighton: D and Q
Jamaica: J
Canarsie: L
Fourth Ave. - Broadway - Queens: R
Thanks Steve for the data. I was kidding, I'm aware of the letter assignments.
I was down for the nostalgia train yesterday, and as a result of the 2/3 construction I went 8th Ave to H/S. Didn't want to chance delay and over crowding.
I will admit that I was suprised to see the references to the Old lines. I was even more pleasantly surprised when those magical route markings switched from Eighth Ave Express to Fulton St Local as we passes under the river on the A. Rode the 8th Ave for 4.5 years going to CCNY in the fifties. Never knew anyone who referred to it as the Fulton Local. Nice surprise.
I know where Latham is; It was the only source of civilization near Albany in 1964 when they built the Mall there! It kept my new wife and myself from going nuts holing up for the winter of 1967 in a one room flat near Western Ave in Albany!
The Shopping Center is still here. Its been enlarged and enclosed and enlarged again. However, its now near the bottom of shopper's destinations, being bumped by a Macy's/Sears center less than 3 miles away by interstate and a newer, everexpanding "Crossgates" about a mile further on the same interstate, and a Walmart/Sam's Club just across route 7 on the NW corner of the circle (I guess circles do not have corners-but it is the rte 9/rte 7 junction that I am talking about).....I think it survives from the rent from a second floor office area. It is almost a secret area with well hidden access. The newspaper coverage of a fire in one of the retail stores several years ago leaked the location of an IRS processing center to the public. I don't know if they are still the tenants.t
These other "upstate institutions" don't rhyme with "rattika" do they?
I dont think so. In those days the may joint rhymed with Ringa Ding Ding
OOPs
read....MAIN Joint
The pictures are different every time. I can't imagine how that works, but I like it. You get a real feel for the wide variety of rolling stock that the subway system has had over the years. I hope you will keep the old picture of the "World's Fair" train in the mix though. I know the aspect ratio of it is wrong, but perhaps a part of it.
Damn clever Dave....
Now I'll be up all night trying to figure the pattern of changes......
With this North Country location I have a heck of a time getting on after dinner
By the way
Any luck with those books...I'd like to know the different arrangements of trackwork that existed on the "L" at Atlantic. What is that track structure to the right of the west bound coming into the station. I can only remember service connections to Pitkin (Outer Fulton) between the mains.
Say David
When do you pay off?
I just go two bicentennials!
Well, because of some unexpected news(nothing serious) I'm going to be spending some time in NYC over the weekend and if I have spare time will visit Aunt Louise in Jersey City and Aunt Claire in Tenafly(No other Westinghouses in PA minus the wife and kid) so if anyone has a suggestion for a subway-type.......thing I could try to do, fill a guy in. Maybe I'll catch the only current model car I've never been on-an R-62(but I'll be going to Queens, so not much chance of that).
If you haven't ridden the lines already, try the Franklin Shuttle and the A across Jamaica Bay.
I personally like the Dyre Avenue line, but on weekends when there is no Thru Express, it's a long haul up to 180 St and back.
How about the B train to Coney Island and the D train back, and get some good food at Nathans Famous? Don't take the F train all the way from Coney Island through Brooklyn or you won't get to Queens on the same day you left (I know, that's a slight exaggeration).
Have fun. I assume you will take the PATH train from Jersey City to Manhattan after seeing Aunt Louise.
I know I asked this before in a different way, but will the E line get new cars or will they keep the R32 as longas possible as they did with the M3 in Philly. Yeah I know some like the R32 but personally I like the newer trains, especially the R46, although they are not that new. Also what cars I really like is the trains in London. They are oddly shaped and gthe doors are curved and are part of the roof and side. There is a web site hich shows such type of train but do not know it off hand.
At the present time, the Operations Planning people have designated that E service shall be comprised of 270 R-32 cars. R-46s are not as well suited for the E-Line service. As for new cars - eventually the E line will get them but don't look for them any time soon. E-Line riders love the 32s.
Just yesterday at the West 4th St. station during the evening rush, I saw a E train with R-46 cars. For quite a few years now, there has been alot of toggling between the R-32 and R46 cars on the E,F,G, and R lines.
The R-32s are currently undergoing "Door Obstruction Modification". Due to this, there are periodic shortages of R-32 equipment. Hence. E service is suplimented with R-46 cars.
Check out the Transit Systems Worldwide section of this website. It has a five-tiered section of photos of the London Undergroud. I was on a London subway about 15 years ago and they aren't(externally) that greatly different from today's(or as I remember them). Did you know that in the movie "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, the scene when Superman saved the subway train? That was the London Underground, not the "Metropolis" subway(or of the city they're trying to convince us it isn't-like we don't know).
The MTA is scheduled to hold it's first of it's open house for it's proposed Lower Manhattan Rail Access. To learn more about the upcoming open house & additional information, it's address is Http://www.lowermanhattanaccess.com
The March of Dimes Walk-A-Thon will be this Sunday. I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my previous posting about the Car Drawing Book and who have helped to make our fund-raising effort an unpresidented success. Everyone who had requested one should have it by Saturday. Happily, the feedback I have received so far has been overwhelmingly and enthusiastically positive.
Our fund-raising effort will be running until May 26th so for anyone else who might be interested in obtaining a copy, in exchange for a donation to the March-of-Dimes, I'll happily respond to your requests until May 20th or until our (limited) supply of books is exhausted.
Just in case, the book is roughly 200 pages 8 1/2 X 14" and has drawings and significant facts of most NYCT cars from the R-1 through the R-68A and virtually all work equipment. It really is a very informative book.
Thanks again to everyone who has given support to our efforts.
Hey everybody I would recommend this book. It's great, with more details than I could have ever imagined about all of the subways cars past and present. This book should be the authority on subway cars!
To all subway car enthusiasts:
If you love anything to do with NYCTA subway cars, and want to know all of the tehnical info about them, you really must get this book.
It is definitely well worth the donation.
Does anyone know what happened to the E & F line this morning? All Forest Hills passengers were directed to the LIRR.
=M=
[Does anyone know what happened to the E & F line this morning? All Forest Hills passengers were directed to the LIRR.]
I don't know of anything specific that happened, but I sure encountered some delays. Instead of doing like always and getting a connecting LIRR train into Penn Station when my Brooklyn-bound train from Ronkonkoma arrived at Jamaica, today I decided to take the E train. It was just for variety, something different for a Friday morning. Bad idea! It took over a *half hour* to crawl from Sutphin Blvd. to Queens Plaza :-o Most of them time we didn't seem to exceed 10 mph or thereabouts.
Next time I want some "variety" I'll choose a faster means ... maybe I could ride on the back of a Galapagos tortoise!
Person was struck by an "E" train south of 65th Street on the express track. Power eventually had to be removed from all four tracks for rescue efforts to proceed. For a while, all service was routed via the local tracks.
When did the incident happen? I boarded the E at Jamaica about 8:00 am, and we ran on the express tracks as usual.
An E Train hit an unauthorized person on the tracks. The person was removed alive from D-3 track. Power was off for about 45 minutes.
Hi. I'm BMT and have a question about myself:) Now the express tracks on the Broadway line are partially being used for the new shuttle, right? Well, why not turn the entire express(including the new 63rd Street connections) into a new route? Is there a connection to the unused tracks on the 6th Avenue line? If so, the abandoned tracks to Brooklyn could be a part or it could run to the now unused lower level tracks at City Hall. Has this been brought up before or am I just drinking way too much Cherry Coke?
What unused 6th Avenue tracks?
As we've all discussed here many times, what we all want is for the Broadway Express to run over the Manhattan Bridge again. That's the only place it goes now and probably will ever go. I actually fear that someday the city may eventually abandon the entire Broadway line as unnecessary. You know... I just had a thought that maybe they could (though it requires some construction) connect the Williamsburg Bridge to it and abandon the Nassau St. Subway. But let's hope they just restore the Manhattan Bridge Broadway connection.
Why don't they connect the LIRR lower level of the 63rd street tunnel with the BMT Broadway Express tracks. This will allow across the platform transfers from the LIRR to the subway at the subway express stops and distribute commuters along the length of Manhattan to Canal Street. The LIRR would provide Broadway Express Service in Manhattan. Northbound, additional fares could be collected once the LIRR is back on its own tracks. It shouldn't cost any more to do this, and perhaps less, than the proposed connection of the LIRR to Grant Central Terminal. It would require joint LIRR and Subway operation. However, that is more of a political than a technical problem.
the lower tubes of the 63rd st tunnel are were intended to bring LIRR into Grand Central, however with the 70's financial crisis and monies for mass transit trashed it seems to be in limbo. the problem with connecting and running LIRR on the express track along the BMT n and r would be the size of LIRR cars which are 85' in length versus 75' for R46/68/68a equip used. With the advent of longer cars the entire IND/BMT system was surveyed for curve radius and tunnel clearance to permit longer cars to operate in the system.
There is another problem. The LIRR is bound by FRA requirements for maintenance which is stricter than NYCT has to follow. The cost would be tremendous.
PATH is bound by FRA rules since it used to be run with the Pennsylvania RR.
Path keeps trying to get out of FRA rules and they say no. Even one switch from the subway to the LIRR (or Metro North, or NJT) would force FRA rules.
Prior to the 1960"s the LIRR used to run Rapid Transit type equipment that was shorter than standard railroad equipment. They could certainly purchase 75 foot EMU's for the Broadway service. After all Boston, Philadelphia, and New York have different size rolling stock depending on the line.
There are apparently two differences between the third rail systems used on the LIRR and on the NYC subways:
1) The LIRR third rail now operates at 750 volts, while the subways run at 600 volts. Probably this would not be a problem, the trains would just run a bit slower for the same setting of the controller, but it is something that would need to be checked; possibly some adjustments to the motors on LIRR cars would be needed to let them run reliably on 600 volts.
2) There is a physical difference in the height of the third rail above the roadbed. Back in the days when the LIRR and the BRT used to run joint service to the Rockaways, some kind of automatic device for adjusting third-rail shoes on the cars used for this service was installed (as described somewhere on this web site) on the stretch of track that connected the BRT and LIRR lines; as trains went past the device, the shoes would be raised or lowered as required to properly contact the third rail on the stretch of track they were entering. I don't know if today's equipment could handle this, but if it was done once, it could be done again.
(Incidentally, since the LIRR and PATH/H&M third rails were originally part of the Pennsylvania RR system, they presumably still have the same physical specs,
even though the PATH still runs at 600 volts; so any notion of connecting the PATH to NYCT lines, or of sharing equipment between the two, would require these same adjustments to the contact shoes.)
But the biggest problem with running LIRR trains through the subway would probably come northbound at 57th St., when all passengers without tickets would have to leave the train. It would take a lot of re-education to get New Yorkers used to this! Also, the plush seats on the LIRR cars could be subject to vandalism--although, as is being discussed in another thread, that doesn't seem to be a major problem in Philadelphia. (Perhaps a compromise type of seat finish could be tried on NYCT subways--a single layer of fabric bonded to the plastic seat, as is used on some of the NYCDOT-backed private bus lines and some of the Westchester Bee-Line buses.)
At any rate, this type of joint service seems extremely unlikely to actually happen.
Speaking of padded seats, the R-16s and R-17s originally came with them. Those seats were eventually replaced with what you see on the R-32s, most likely due to wear and tear rather than vandalism.
<>
NO the problem is training MTA exec's that LIRR service (and for that matter MNCR) within the five boros should be priced as subway service. Its just a better express route to a specific locale. In turn the ticketing for all of these should be simplified and automated so thjat a monthly pass on any of the MTA entities would be cross recognized by fare machines on the others. The fare barriers today between segments of the MTA are obsolete and anti patron . After all the tax dollars although identifiable when collected and as line items really arefromf the same pool.
When did that happen? I haven't lived in NY since the 70's, but at that time I thought the LIRR and what is now Metro North were 650 v dc.
Someone posted here recentlt that the LIRR was running on 750 volts. I don't really remember who, but he sounded like he knew what he was talking about. Which doesn't really prove much.
I don't think LIRR 3rd Rail Voltage is 750 volts (nominal). I'm pretty sure that it's 600-650 VDC as is the subway voltage. However, because we are dealing with DC with some very high currents (in the area of hundreds of thousands of amps at any given moment) the peak voltage will be cranked up a little so that during peak demand times, it's close to nominal. What you are referring to are the warning labels on some of the undercar equipment of the LIRR cars. They say 750 VDC but that only represents peak voltge spikes. Incidently, NYCT equipment will operate well from 475 VDC - 750 VDC.
LIRR 3rd rail IS nominal 750VDC. Depending upon the number of cars and the location, this can drop considerably during acceleration of the equipment.
Couldn't the lower level of Canal St act as a temporary terminal for a new 63rd ST service that runs through the 63rd St tunnel then express down Broadway terminating at Canal St? Talk about a new service that wouldn't cause new bottlenecks ....
--Mark
there is no way that there is any chnace that the nassau line (JMZ) will be abandoned. nor will the N,R line. There needs to be an express but since the Q train is on sixth ave. for good, the best bet is that there will be some sort of am-pm type of epress service provided along the broadway line.
And maybe it would be an express and then down to Whitehall St. because a large number of people taking the R from Queens Plaza are headed for the Financial District south of Fulton St. The E train only goes as far south as Chambers and the rest of the 8th Ave. only has one more stop in Manhattan (Bway-Nassau). The F skips the Financial District completely, but the R goes to Cortlandt (Fulton), Rector (Wall) and Whitehall (S. Ferry).
Ahhh, but running this line to Whitehall will cause a bottleneck at Canal St when this new service merges with the current N/R lines. It IS a good idea though.
--Mark
I meant to say the Broadway express tracks. Wasn't that the 'K' train? Also, what specs are the Court Street station built to? If it were an active stop, which trains would stop there. I think it's IND. Is it?
Court St is built to typical IND standards.
What trains would stop there? HArd to say, since it was part of a never built line to lower Manhattan .....
--Mark
The K train never ran on the Broadway Express tracks. It used the now-abandoned connection from the Nassau St. subway to the Houston St. branch and ran up the 6th Ave. line to 57th St. The "other" K train, which was a simple renaming of the AA, ran along 8th Ave. and, obviously, never ran along Broadway, either.
As for Court St., a shuttle ran between it and Hoyt-Schermerhorn from 1936 to 1946. I have an old IND map from 1948 which shows an HH service from Court St. to Broadway-East New York; however, it is believed that this pattern was never implemented. The Court St. stub was supposed to link up with the WTC tracks (8th Ave. local) which dead end there, along with the southern end of the 2nd Ave. line. There were supposed to be two services which would have operated via Court St.
I noticed that they have closed off the 33rd St entrance and are completely redoing it. I was hoping they might bei reconfiguring it so they could open the passage to PATH within the fare zone, as has recently discussed. The only thing, I could see that the token booth has been moved to the south wall, where I figured the connection to the passage to the platform could have been made. So I was wondering whether anyone knew about this construction.
The area is closed for construction. The stairways will also be widened. Sorry to burst your hopes (groan!)
They also closed the "free" tunnel under 7th ave. You used to be able to walk from Penn station undr 7th ave and come out a few stores down on 33rd street.
Also anyone know why they put those glass blocks in the floor the on platform
(downtown side) of the express tracks. It seems like a lot of structural
work to let just a little light downstairs.
For those of us who are up early in the morning, the rock and roll group Hansen on VH-1 did a video in the nyc subway. On Saturday April 25, 1998 at about 5 a.m. a video by Hansen on VH-1 called ''weird'' from their record called ''middle of nowhere was on VH-1. I could not catch which subway line there where on, or the station that they used. If anyone else saw this video can you let me know what station and subway line they were on. Many Thanks. Your fellow NYC Subway rider. Charlie Muller.
Just thought I'd mention that when I caught the x-bus to Manhattan the other day, the bus farebox display said 'check memory board'. Driver told me the farebox was inoperative, and 'have a seat'
Free Ride!
-Hank
I don't know if that is policy but I think that it showed a good deal of common sense.
That is the policy now. I guess the new boxes have a few bugs still so instead of taking the bus out of service command center gives you the ol' stay in service and let them ride free, at least till you see a road dispatcher or the end of the line were you can swap a bus or maybe bring the bus in for a swap. If you monitor the transit bus frequencies as I do you here a lot of this happening lately.
pls advise bus frequencies thanks
856.6125
855.6525
856.3875
856.4125
857.3875
857.4125
858.3875
858.4125
Just program your scanner for these and listen randomly because the system jumps a lot from frequency to frequency. It may be a trunked system.
I'm sure the Daily News will consider the latest Metrocard problem to be proof that the TA should never have abandoned the chopper boxes and paper tickets and tried to implement something as radical as tokens.
you can be sure when approached with a new technology and another way to spend millions of dollars the MTA (bored) members must have salivated. From what i've been told the software is in the most basic of programming language and the equipment is as slow as molasses in January. I know since I sell cards and tokens. And wouldn't you know it After the newspapers front paged about the problems no one in heaven could properly swipe their cards to gain entry. For one thing the subway system is filthy to begin with and anyone with a computer or vcr knows dirty and magnetic media(metrocard) do not mix. Steel dust from train wheels, dust, oils from skin and other contaminants will cause havoc at the turnstile. All the automation in the world will not improve the situation.
No free ride on the subway, computer was down so they would sell ya a token for $1.50, but I had forgotten my wallet at home and I was still trying to get to work on time so there wasn't a free ride and I didn't get to work on time.
In honor of "Earth Day," the Boston area MBTA is offering free rides
on ALL SERVICES (commuter rail, subway, and bus) all day today. Are any other systems out there on board?
No takers in the big pretzel:) but if the MBTA did it to try to get more polluting cars off the road, SEPTA has been running thst campaign since the days of Moses.
Does anyone know from where the nostalgia train trip begins and at what time on Sunday, 4/26? Thanks
The train will start from the New York Transit Museum at 11am. The musuem is at the cortner of Boerum Place and Schermerhorn Street. Look for the Board of Ed building which is 110 Livingston Street-then you'll see 130 Livingston. The musuem is across the street
Can anybody post any additional information about the nostalgia train? What exactly is it--is it the actual train display at the Transit Museum? What route does it follow? Thank you for any available information.
The Nostalgia train runs several times a year over an announced route. The train uses old subway cars no longer in service such as the BMT triplexes, or R1 to R9 cars or IRT Lo-V cars. The train departs from the transit musuem and returns to the musuem.
Also usually once a year there is an all-day IRT Lo-V fan trip. I do not have this year's date yet. I went on the previous two trips. That trip has departed from Track 1 at the Grand Central Shuttle Track. That trip spends all day running the IRT. In 1997 we went through Westchester Yard, New Lots Yard, Timse Square Relay Track, Dyre, etc. and in 1996 we went through South Ferry on the Lex and came out on the Westside.(This trip is supported by the musuem but not a musuem sponsored trip but rather a private group "Railway Preservation Society".
The museum has more cars than fit in the museum which is a closed station (The old Court Street HH station),the others are stored at Coney Island including "tons" of IND redbirds.
Hope tyhis answers the questions.
[ ... Uses old subway cars no longer in service such as the BMT triplexes,
or R1 to R9 cars or IRT Lo-V cars.]
R1/9s? Do you know something we don't?? :)
[ The train departs from the transit musuem and returns to the museum...]
Yesterday's trip went to Canarsie via the old (1970s) K route through the Bway/Lafayette - Essex St connector, then via express over the Broadway (Brooklyn) El to Bway Junction, then connecting to the Canarsie line. The return trip took us through East NY yard.
[the others are stored at Coney Island including "tons" of IND redbirds. ]
Four more have just been scrapped and now sit on the "scrap track" near SHell Road.
--Mark
How many BMT standards does the museum have besides the one on display at the former Court St. station? How about Triplex units or R-1/9s? Last fall, I noticed they had managed to shoehorn R-16 #6387 between the R-11 and R-27 at the station. I would love to go on a nostalgia run, but can't seem to time my visits to New York with when take place. Such is life....
[ How many BMT standards does the museum have besides the one on display at
the former Court St. station? }
Three. 2390, 2391 and 2392. No coincidence, these used to comprise one of the Nostalgia Trains that ran in the late 70s and early 80s.
[ How about Triplex units or R-1/9s? ]
Three triplex units: 6095, 6112 and I forget the 3rd one.
R1/9s: 3 in the museum (100, 484 and R7A 1575) and I think there are 4 others in Coney Island yards. I'll try to get those numbers.
--Mark
Forgetting 6019...
Shame on you Mark
Hey - I'm in class right now .... I'm allowed :)
I'm also a little waterlogged from yesterday .....
--Mark
Here's a museum roster I've been working on. It's not complete.
R1 100 New York Transit Museum
R4 484 New York Transit Museum
R7A 1575 New York Transit Museum
R11
R12 5760 New York Transit Museum
R16 6387 New York Transit Museum
R30 8056 New York Transit Museum
R36-WF 9306 New York Transit Museum
BMT A/B 2390 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
BMT A/B 2391 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
BMT A/B 2392 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
BMT D 6095 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
BMT D 6112 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
BMT D 6019 NYCTA Coney Island Yard (one of these is in the museum)
R10 3184 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
R9 1802 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
Low-V 5292 NYCTA Coney Island Yard (part of Low-v train)
R30 8392 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
R1/9 NYCTA Coney Island Yard (visible in photograph :)
R1/9 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
R1/9 NYCTA Coney Island Yard
Low-V World's Fair #?? (see picture in Farewell to R30 Fantrip section)
Hi-V 3352 Shore Line Trolley Museum
Low-V 5466 Shore Line Trolley Museum
R4 800 Shore Line Trolley Museum
R7 1440 Shore Line Trolley Museum
R9 ? Shore Line Trolley Museum
R17 6688 Shore Line Trolley Museum
SIRT 366 Shore Line Trolley Museum
H&M ?? Shore Line Trolley Museum
SIRT 353 Kingston Trolley Museum
Low-V 5600 Kingston Trolley Museum
R4 825 Kingston Trolley Museum
R16 6398 Kingston Trolley Museum
BMT Q 1602A Kingston Trolley Museum
H&M 510 Kingston Trolley Museum
H&m 513 Kingston Trolley Museum
Dave, a correction. R4/R7 800/1440 are at the SEASHORE Trolley Museum. Look at my home page, and you'll see a picture of me running them!
Hey, Todd, nice photo! Did you have all the roll signs set for the A train? One other question I forgot to ask before: are the illumination circuits for the side destination signs functional? In other words, do the side signs on both cars light up the way they did back in the good old days? I have a funny feeling that these two cars may have been used in Nighthawks, in which case the signs probably do light up, since they did so in the movie.
Yes, the roll signs for 800 & 1440 are all there :-) I like to sign them up for "HH" since when I was very young I lived in Howard Beach. I'm not sure about the illumination, but I will inquire next time I see the "curator" of the cars.
I seem to remember that there is a key switch in the motorman's cab which toggles between the upper and lower destination lights. There is also a fuse somewhere in the cab for that/those circuits. A gentleman at the Shore Line Museum by the name of Eddie Sarkauskas (a fellow Lithuanian, I might add) pointed all this out to me, and even demonstrated how it worked. He was a maintenence man for the MTA at the time (1980) who was responsible for bringing R-9 #1689 to the museum; he may or may not still be working there. He also explained that those R-1/9s which were transferred to the Eastern Division lines had their side destination light bulbs removed in keeping in line with the newer cars which did not have illuminated side signs. I found out another interesting tidbit: the lights in the sign boxes are wired in series. This means that if one of them burns out, the other one goes out, too. There are two bulbs for each side destination sign.
Sarkauskas? That sounds more like a Greek name to me.
I hear that all the time. Most Lithuanian names end in -as, -is, -us, or -ys. My folks are both from there, and I grew up speaking the language. I still do, fluently. And, no, it is totally unrelated to Polish or Russian. Eddie told me his grandparents came over early in the century; he was born and raised in Brooklyn. He admits his grasp of the language is limited.
Actually, there were 5 130 Volt Street Railway bulbs, wired in series. This eliminated the need for ballast resistors in the circuit. The interior car body lights were similarly wired using shorting sockets. If a bulb were removed the socket would short and the remaining 4 bulbs would 'split' the 600 VDC. Remove one more in that string and 'wow'!! It wasn't long before the vandals of the 60s found that out.
Are those the bulbs that had left-handed threads so that they would not be able to fit in home light-sockets? That was a clever design, and it apparently worked for some 30 years to prevent stealing of the bulbs. You are saying that in the 60's, people would remove the bulbs just for the thrill of seeing the remaining ones go out with a bang? It is hard to believe that too many people would do this. How long did that go on?
Does the TA still have a stock of those left-handed bulbs to replace ones that do blow out on the museum cars? Do the other museums that have these cars? I don't suppose anyone is manufacturing these left-handed light bulbs today.
According to Brian Cudahy, left-handed bulbs were used in the emergency lighting system. The thinking was that the regular bulbs "would always be on and their heat alone would be ample defense against larceny". But since the emergency lights were battery powered and would only come on in the event of a power failure, they would be cool most of the time and easy to steal.
As for the sign box, I have an R-1/9 sign box, complete with roll signs, in my garage which I bought at the Shore Line Museum back when they were still selling roll signs. The wiring for the bottom destination lights is still in place, including conduit and lamp sockets, with just enough cable sticking out of the side to install a wall plug.. There are two sockets; I put 75-watt bulbs in each one. They provide ample illumination. There are two holes in the top of the box where the upper destination lights are supposed to go. I rigged up an outlet strip with two plug-in lamp sockets, lined them up with the holes, and dropped them through. Surprisingly, two 15-watt bulbs work just fine (of course, we're talking parallel lights here). On most R-1/9s, the upper lamp sockets were suspended above the sign box, and not physically attached to the box itself.
BTW, the route roll sign also has Eastern Division routes spliced ahead of the IND routes. But, of course, I like to set my signs to IND routes, most often the A or D, sometimes the F, CC, or AA.
P. S. I have several side destination roll signs, all of which have Eastern Division stations. One of them, interestingly enough, has part of a roller curtain which must have been taken out of a Triplex or BMT standard: stations include Queens Plaza, Times Square, 57th St. Manhattan, and City Hall!
I was on the D-Types last night (more about that in another post). It seems that the BRT/BMT was not as concenred with theft of emergency light bulbs as the IND. BRT/BMT used conventional right-hand threads on all of their bulbs
You asked for it Steve!
How many TA trainmasters does it take to change a light bulb?
...Two - one to change the bulb, and one to see which way it's threaded
HAHAHAHAHA, Actually, Trainmasters have gone the way of the Left Hand Threaded Light Bulbs. Too bad !!! We've sacraficed much of the character of the system for political correctness and conformity.
What's wrong with trainmasters and trainmistresses...
Personally, I found nothing wrong with trainmasters as a title for either sex. Trainmistresses, well - that might be pushing it. Now the trainmasters have been replaced by Superintendents and general Superintendents. The organizational structure of RTO is now comparible to that of other departments and it's easier for me to determine who my RTO counterpart is. However, the title of Trainmaster seemed to convey something special and it's a shame that it's gone.
I guess that means we'll have to be content with watching Pelham 1-2-3 (the original, of course) and hearing Dick O'Neill say, "Grand Central Terminal, this is the desk trainmaster. Who the hell's in charge over there?"
Yeah, I guess so. If he said, "Grand Central, this is the superintendent. Who the hell's in charge over there?" The answer would have been, "Superintendent? Fron what F&%$#@G department?"
Dave ... the R11 car in the Museum is 8013.
--Mark
Dave ...
I'm reasonably certain the 1938 IRT World's Fair Car number is 5653.
--Mark
The R-9 at the Shore Line Museum is #1689. It's in good shape, and it runs.
According to the General Order covering the Nostalgia Train (GO #3522-98) this is the correct schedule.
A Nostalgia train made up of two D-Type units will leave Coney Island yard and operate northbound via the A & F lines to north of 125th St. Station. There it will turn south on A-3 track and lay up on A-5 track at 72nd St (by 1900 Hrs.)
The train, on orders from Control Center will proceed south on A-3 track to 42nd St. and 8th Ave where guests will board the train. The train will then proceed via the A line south of Hoyt-Schermerhorn St. There it will change directions and proceed against normal traffic, via A-1 track to the Court St. Station.
After the guests de-train the train will proceed via the A line to Clinton Washington & turn Northbound. The train will proceed north of Jay St. where it will turn Southbound and operate via track B-1 (F line) back to Coney Island yard.
Now if you've bothered to read this far here's the big news. The GO is for 3 nights. It will also be in effect on Tuesday, April 28, 1998 and Wednesday, May 6, 1998 so get out your cameras.
Waitaminute... board guests at 42nd St.? For what? How can I become a guest? :-)
> The train, on orders from Control Center will proceed south on A-3 track to
> 42nd St. and 8th Ave where guests will board the train.
Huh? Please elucidate! I wanna be a guest!! Lower level of 42nd St - 8th Ave??
--Mark
Frankly, I have no further info as to who is running the shindig. However, I can assure you that I intend to be aboard when the train leaves Coney Island yard next Weds.
Just wondering, what is a air dryer for? Heard many buses and trains have them.
What's it for?
Most use a descant in a canaster that traps moisture. Air has watter in it.
It condeses out after its in the reserve takns or air lines. It gums up valves and freezes when it's cold causing all kinds of problems with locked brakes or doors that don't open or close etc.
Steve will correct me if I'm wrong-but here goes: When Freon (R-12, R-22, R-134A) gets moisture in it it become acidic and will eat the refrigerant lines. The dryer contains a powder or gel that absorbs moisture from the refrigerant. It is usually in a canister in the line before the compressor.
I don't know about becomeing acidic, though I know it messes up the fridge oil,causeing it to carbonize and harden in the system (bad thing). It can also corrode the lines on its own. Freon is pretty much used throughout industry as a solvent to wash away stuff, I think this is because it remains stable through a lot of things. It's also fairly non toxic until it burns.
Freon is also bad for the ozone layer, being a fluorocarbon, which is why it is no longer manufactured. Say what you want, but when I hear someone talking about R-12 or R-22 refrigerant, I can't help but think about the subway cars of the same contract numbers; I'm sure the similar numbers were purely coincidental.
Remember -- CHLOROfluorocarbons are the bad ones. R134a, I believe, is a HYDROfluorocarbon and is environmentally friendlier, though it is still technically a fluorocarbon.
It is my understanding that R-22, used in home Air Conditioners, is much less damaging to the Ozone layer than is R-12, commonly called Freon. This may be manufacturers BS floated for a few years while repairmen continued to vent R-22 into the atmosphere. Even a little further off the subject, did you ever ponder the profit any of us could have made by hoarding 12 oz. cans of R-12 when they were 69 cents a can?
I've heard that R-22 is used on buses. I don't know if it's used on transit buses, but I know that Greyhound uses it on their MC-12 and later buses.
NYC busses and subway cars use R-22. For the record, we are not permitted to 'vent' it to atmosphere. We are required to pump down systems using freon recovery machines. When refrigerant is added to a system, the vehicle, date and amount of refrigerant must be recorded and reported.
I believe that's the law now. Any and all Freon must be recaptured and recycled. Heck, the company I work at used to dump it on the ground before its use was discontinued around 1990.
New Air conditioning and heating units on the bus use r-134 freon which is envirionmently safe.
What new buses have the r-134 on them The last new buses I saw were 96 novas with r22. I have heard about seal problems with r134 also Any news?
I didn't say the new buses a/c's I said the UNITS which are new which replace the older units. I read this in the Department of Buses employee newsletter in response to a question I wrote to them about the climate control units.
Is this similar to the "receiver-dryer" in an automotive A/C system?
Subway-Buff is correct and it is quite similar to the receiver-dryer in an automotive system.
All of the responses to your question are essentially correct. On trains, we use desicant filters and electro-mechanical devices to remove as much moisture from the Air and HVAC systems as possible. The reason has to do more with 2 of the unique properties of water.
In the air system, water is detrimental for several reasons. First, as previously stated, because it freezes causing stuck brakes and air leaks. More significant, the air system on NYCT equipment uses compressed air at 135 PSI (or 150 PSI on the R-44). Water is non-compressible, however, and will result in physical damage to air equipment such as cracked sump tanks if it is not removed.
HVAC is a different story. I'm not sure about the acidity issue although I am sure that there are underireable chemical reactions which take place. AC refrigerants must be mixed with Capella Oil to insure proper operation. If water were to condense in the HVAC system and since oil and water do not mix, the water would displace the Capella oil (which is lighter than water) and interfere with proper operation and reduce component life.
The air system and HVAC systems on busses are essentially the same so the reasons should also be similar.
On the newer buses you can hear the air dryer when the engine is running and taking in air to the tanks. At the Shoreline trolley musuem when we finish with a streetcar at the end of the day its the operators responsibility to empty the air tanks out because the water in them will damage and eat the inside of the tank out. On rainy days a lot of water will come out when you do this.
As a young railfan visiting NY in the early '60's, I heard references to Lo-V's, Hi-V's, Steinways, World Fair's and flivers. The first four I know what they are, but what is a fliver? Not Mr. Ford's product.
Of course they were before my time but my understanding is that the Flivers were the class of cars converted from Hi-V to Lo-V.
From the new book "Evolution of New York City Subways", p.36:
"From the start of service on the IRT subway until 1915, all IRT cars had high voltage electrical control equipment. ... [By 1915] it was discovered that battery power could be used to send electrical impulses between the master controller in the cab and the underfloor controller and that the accelleration of the traction motors could achieved automatically. This concept was first used by the IRT in its next group of subway cars ... called the "Flivver" class.
... High voltage cars had manual accelleration; there were ten points of power in the master controller, 5 in series and 5 in parallel. The Flivver controller had only three points of power as the automatic accelerator accelerated the cars to the proper switching, series or parallel speeds.
Because of these differences Flivvers could not be operated in trains with other car classes. All 178 [Flivver] cars were built by Pullman in 1915 (motors 4037-4160, trailers 4161-4214). They ran until 1962, mostly on the 7th Av. Express. None survive today."
-Dave
[All 178 [Flivver] cars were built by Pullman in 1915 (motors 4037-4160, trailers 4161-4214). They ran until 1962, mostly on the 7th Av.
Express. None survive today."]
Does the Flivvers' 47-year lifespan set a record for subway cars?
I think some of the converted gate cars (Q cars) have the record, being built at the turn of the century and running until the close of the Myrtle Ave El in October of 1969.
The AB Standards also have a long record, some being built in 1915 and then retired also in 1969.
Come to think of it, the BMT Triplexes also ran from about 1920 until 7/23/1965.
They really don't make 'em like they used to!
--Mark
A question was asked if 47 years was the record for a subway car. I’m not sure if the scope of the question was limited to New York.
Let us not forget the Chicago Rapid Transit 4251 - 4255 series cars, some of which operated in revenue service for fifty years. Built by the Cincinnati Car Company from 1922 - 1924, these cars served Chicago riders for many, many years. Although ordered by the Elevated Railways, these cars, along with the older sisters built in 1914 - 1915, was the first equipment to be used in the State Street Subway.
These veterans served out their last trips on the Evanston Express. They were retired after the conversion of the Evanston Branch from overhead wire to third rail in early 1973. Thus, CTA didn’t need trolley-pole cars any longer.
These cars are a tribute, not only to their builder the Cincinnati Car Company, but the CRT and the CTA whose maintenance forces enabled the cars to continue in service long after they earned back their purchase price plus!
Unfortunately, I didn’t get a chance to ride these cars in CTA service. However, there are two in operation at the Illinois Railway Museum located at Union, IL.
For the record, a number of the original Hi-Vs remained in service for 50 years; their phaseout began with the arrival of the R-17s.
The BMT standards were delivered over a period of 10 years, from 1914 to 1924. The oldest ones were phased out when the R-27s arrived; a couple hundred were rebuilt in 1959 and remained in service until 1969.
The Triplex units arrived in 1927-28 and the last ones, as mentioned earlier, were withdrawn on July 23, 1965. Funny thing: my first subway ride was on July 21, 1965, but I didn't get to ride them.
The R-1/9s were delivered between 1931 and 1940. Most of those which remained on the IND after 1970-71 were used for rush hour service on the CC and E lines; many were transferred to the BMT Eastern Division lines in 1969 and remained in service there until their last revenue run on March 31, 1977
It seems like the R-32 and R-38 might make it to 50 years. Some of them are about 35 years old now, and there aren't any plans to replace them as far as I know.
Those cars probbably will make it to 50.
As for RT stuff, I dson't know, but I beilieve that the last LIRR MP-54 cars retired around 72 were from 1910 or so. I'm not sure about this. I do know that those old MUs lasted a LONG time. Anyone know how many of them are preserved (it's my favorite MU, so I gotta ask;)
We have LIRR #4137 at the Seashore Trolley Museum. It was built in 1930, and seats 89. We acquired it in 1972. It does not run, and need lots of restoration work, TLC (and $$) if anyone is interested.
This is actually a critical issue. The shorter the longevity of the cars (and buses), the more frequently they must be replaced, and the less money is available for other things. When Hilary Ring of the MTA gave a presentation at City Planning, he stuck to the 30 year standard that I'd always heard. If that's the case, we're facing doom on the B division with all those R32 to R46 cars reaching the end.
On the other hand, all the B division cars are now made from stainless steel, they all have interior cabs and air conditioning, and all the trucks got replaced in overhauls. That has to count for something. What, exactly, is it that wears out and cannot be replaced in an overhaul? Perhaps the steel cars can last until they are made obsolete by the shift to systemwide AC power and automated control. In that case, they may last 50 or 60 years. I was starting to get concerned about the cars, but with MDBF so high, what's to worry about?
This has been discussed previously in Subtalk, but the worst enemy of a subway car is corrosion. Once it sets in, there is no turning back. That's one big advantage of the newer stainless steel equipment - it's much more resistant to corrosion. I understand some of the Redbirds have advanced corrosion in their carbodies.
There are rumors that the R38 will not be scheduled for overhaul like its cousin the R 32... The 32 is slated for some door sensor work... But the MTA's not doing the same for the 38 does not bode well for its future... This is a real shame, because these cars are in excellent condition, and they are amoung my all time favorites to operate... The 32s and 38s had wonderful acceleration and brakes (before they were overhauled and had their motors slowed down, & composition brake shoes replaced good old steel ones) *Sigh* (I know that they had their reasons for it, but I *Still* miss 'em)
Also one 4000 car at East Troy Wisconsin, on the last operating interurban in Wisconin (passengers for the museum, freight for intercharge revenue service.)
When visiting the Pennsylvania trolley museum a couple of Sundays ago one of the fellas there tole me that the Baltimore Streetcar musuem was having problems with vadalism at the present location and you guys were thinking of moving to a new location, is it true?
Yes,we are in the planning stages to move BSM (Baltimore Streetcar Museum) from the present location. The reason is not vandlism, but the fact that the Falls Road location is in a floodplain and we cannot expand the footprint of the buildings. Also, the current location is "one of Baltimore's best kept secrets", so while the visitor count is usually enough to cover the expenses, there's no growth. The no expand the buildings (State edict) has become a problem in regards to the car house. We now have 17 pieces of equipment jammed into a building designed to hold 10. Five additional vehicles (all rubber tired) are stored off property or on loan to the MTA. Cars have to put back exactly where they came from in the barn or they won't fit.
I agree, the hidden location practically downtown but way off the beaten path, makes it easy to forget about. I go into downtown Baltimore all the time and often forget, on a weekend, to just make a quick stop to see what new things are for sale. It's a really nice museum, a modern brick main building shaped like a roundhouse, the storage sheds, a nice one-mile ride, and great selection of books, magazines, postcard, hats, scarves, and other stuff.
(For those who don't know, while the museum is a mere 3/4 mile from Penn Station in Baltimore, it is on a now nearly forgotten road that is along the river bank of the Jones Falls [river]. This river, while running north to south through the length of the city, is in a very deep valley that used to have many working mills. Even though the buildings are still there, modern life has been built up on higher land and this deep valley has mainly only 4 things: a few factories and warehouses, the Central Light Rail Line, an expressway that runs on a very long viaduct over the Jones Falls Valley, and the Baltimore Streetcar Museum.)
Back to non-parenthetical thinking... Where are you going to move it to?
I've visited a few trolley musuems and I really enjoyed my visit to Baltimore the best. There is a great selection of books and past magazines as Mr Rabbin has pointed out. The staff is extremely friendly more so that other musuems. Despite the fact that I had several maps I did get a little lost leaving to find the highway back to 95.
We are hoping to relocate to the area around the B&O Railroad Museum. There are several sites that are being explored, with one of the intregied ones bein a possible location near I-95 in a possible partnership with the MTA's MARC division's possible new locomotice/car shops. If anything about a move happens, we don't expect a move until the 2008-2010 period, unless somebody happens to come up with the money to move soon. We are continuing to support the current operation until concrete plans are developed. One hope is to move from an operating location to an operating location. Moving streetcars over highways is easier when you can load and unload them under their own power.
When visiting the Pennsylvania trolley museum a couple of Sundays ago one of the fellas there told me that the Baltimore Streetcar musuem was having problems with vadalism at the present location and you guys were thinking of moving to a new location, is it true?
I was told that ratings came out as to what was the cleanest and dirtiest line on the NYC Subway. I do not know if any of you had heard or seen it. I was told the dirtiest was the G line and the cleanest was the M line. The E line and I think the F was about 50/50. What do you all think of it. The line that has the least amount of passengers is the dirtiest. I would have thought the E line since it is so used but I do know though that when I do take the G train, that the floors are somewhat sticky or black and there are newpapers everywhere.
It was in the Metro section of Saturday's New York Times.
It may be hard to explain the dirtiness of the G, but as a more general rule I can understand why really crowded lines might be relatively clean. Figure that eating and drinking on trains is the commonest cause of littering. On truly packed trains, such as the Lexington lines during rush hour, eating and drinking is probably almost impossible due to the press of the crowd.
When the G is not going to Court Sq. it doesn't have a chance for cars to get their floors mopped. At Smith 9 it must get right out so it won't interfere with the F;, At Continental, it must get right out because of the R. E trains get cleaned at Parsons, F trains get cleaned at Stillwell, R trains get cleaned at 95 St. Note all 3 terminals the trains relay in the terminal and have layover time. The G trains have no place to be mopped between trips.
I’ve been reading the messages back and forth regarding use of guard rails on elevated railways.
Being a daily rider on the CTA rail system I’ve taken some time to observe the use on guard rails on their rail system.
On ALL trackage of the ‘L’ located on the steel built structure there are two center steel rails that run parallel to the running rails. The rails are located about four to six inches inside the running rails are look exactly like the running rails, however, I don’t believe they are the same weight. On the severe curves, and anyone who has ridden the Chicago ‘L’ knows what I mean, inside guard rail is mounted "on its side" and placed VERY close (tight) to the running rail. In "close" I mean only enough room is left for flange travel. The "tight" guard rail is always located on the "inside" of the curve. Examples of this are found the "S" curves located at Wabash/Harrison (south loop connection to the south side) and North/Halsted (Ravenswood).
On the outside of all tracks located on the steel elevated structure are timber guards. These run parallel to and are located just outside of the running rails. These timber guards are bolted to the cross ties they lay on.
Remember, the Chicago ‘L’ has no "catwalk" along the outside of its tracks as does the Market-Frankford and the more recently built structures do. This may be the reason for two guard rail "systems" in Chicago. The system must be doing job well, because although there have been derailments in Chicago, only one train recently (1977) actually fell off the structure to the street below.
If, during maintenance, either the inside steel rails or the outside timber rails are removed, the train speed is reduced to "restricted" (15 MPH) speed until they are replaced. This is the current situation in the vicinity of Fullerton to Armitage stations southbound due to cross-over switch installation.
Anyone who knows more about this subject is free to fill in anything I left out.
C service should be extended only to rockaway Park during the weekdays until 9pmand terninate at euclid during the weekends. Also A service will run to far rockaway and lefferts because service to and from lefferts helps to ease the flow of trains back and forth to Manhattan. S service will be extended to euclid when the c is not running as to ease the congestion on the A line. However for all of this to happen, the C line needs to utilze the R68 fllet while the A uses thye R110a as part of its fleet . I have more to sayt but i have go to class
I don't remember the exact date but sometime at/near the end of June of this year, the Shuttle will close for 18 months(till 2000) for reconstruction. I will post more details when I get more info.
This might be good news in disguise; I can't imagine needing 18 months to do anything short of hooking up the Fulton St Subway to the shuttle, thus hooking Cranberry St. Tunnel to Brighton beach.
I haven't heard anything about a track connection between the Shuttle and the Fulton Avenue line. There will be a major improvement to the free transfer at that location, but no track connection.
Remember, it took 18 months or more to connect the 42 (6 Ave) station to the 5th Avenue (42 St.) station of the #7.
I think it would be smarter to just connect Atlantic Avenue & Pacific St. (2,3,4,5,B,D,M,N,Q,R) to Lafayette Avenue (A,C) and Fulton St. (G) with a short tunnel and just abandon the Franklin Shuttle completely.
Now that you mention it, putting in a transfer from Atlantic/Pacific to Lafayette/Fulton is a good idea. The only downer I see is that you wouldn't be able to transfer to the A directly when it's running express in Brooklyn.
A direct transfer to the A would be nice, but that doesn't exist at Franklin either. I assume that fact won't be changing with the Franklin Shuttle rehab, since reconfiguring the station to allow expresses to stop would probably cost as much as the entire shuttle rehab.
Personally, I think the money would be much better spent instituting such a transfer at Lafayette while also turning Lafayette into an express station. That could be done simply by running both A and C trains on the local track until just past the first switch south of Lafayette (I'm not sure where that is). There wouldn't be a backlog since A and C trains are already running together on the same track from Chambers to H-S anyway. The Franklin Shuttle should be retained, certainly, but the rehab could then be on a much smaller scale (and the transfer to the C could perhaps even be eliminated).
I guess your idea might work but would you do the same for the 1-2-3 at 59 st columbus circle? or the 4-5 at 51st lexington to connect to the e and f?
No, I don't see how a similar idea would work in those cases. In general, merging local and express service for a few stops and then unmerging them would generate lots of unnecessary congestion. On the A/C in Brooklyn, both lines are traveling on the same track anyway from Chambers in Manhattan all the way to H-S in Brooklyn. Instead of having them diverge just past H-S, I'm suggesting having them diverge at the first switch past Lafayette. Traffic into Brooklyn would clearly not encounter any congestion due to the "unmerge," and the congestion on Manhattan-bound trains would merely be moved a few stops earlier, since trains already have to merge at some point before H-S.
Speaking from experience, I would love to have express service to Columbus Circle, but requiring expresses to merge with the locals at both 72nd and 42nd kills that idea. (Keep in mind that the 2/3 tracks from Lenox become the express tracks and the 1/9 tracks from upper Broadway become the local tracks, so no merging takes place there, at least without the current reroutes.)
Eighteen months doesn't sound bad for a complete rebuild of the line.
When the CTA (Chicago) Green line was rebuilt a few years back, it was shut
down for over two years.
The Franklin Shuttle, as you know, is very short (1.1 miles, I think). I guess some people feel 18 months to rebuild such a short line is way too long. They don't realize that a new transfer between Botanic Garden and the 2/3 lines is in the works as well as all the work that is involved to rebuild a line left unchanged (for the most part) since it was built! (and is the Franklin terminal going to be underground now?? I've heard those rumours, too) ....
--Mark
If it wasn't for farebeating, the MTA would be de-commisioning the shuttle now. But because it is "free," the locals fought to keep it. The money would be better spent improving the IRT junction at Franklin to increase capacity -- another part of the MTA plan and 1969 City of NY Plan that never happened. But better service is not worth it if you have to pay.
They should have had a massive crackdown on farebeating, then asked community leaders which option they preferred.
[If it wasn't for farebeating, the MTA would be de-commisioning the shuttle now. But because it is "free," the locals fought to keep it.]
Yep, I could imagine the community's reaction if the MTA got rid of the Franklin shuttle - "You're depriving us of our opportunity to steal!" Strange logic but undoubtedly true .
Presumably, any out-of-towners who read Subtalk, and who might have been unfamiliar with the quality of the area the shuttle serves, no longer have any doubts.
The line will close the end of July. The reconstruction is already underway, and includes a new, enclosed transfer betw. Botanic Garden and Franklin Av (IRT), a new station at Park Place, a new station at Franklin Av, with a street level mezzanine for both the rockaway bound fulton st line and the shuttle, and an overpass/enclosed transfer to the manhattan bound trains, stablization of the embankment, repair of the bridges and elevated sections, new and upgraded trakck, power, signals, embankments, etc. Certainly enough things to do in an 18 month period. Also, I'm wondering when the last time some of the people posting here actually rode the line. The tone of some of the replies on this thread is disturbing, to say the least. In any case, the shuttle is used by about 10,000 people daily, which is not bad out side of the New York area. The reconstuction will make the line more cost effective and tailored to the riderhsip levels.
The area around the northern end of the Franklin Av. Shuttle is quite nice. Botanic Gardens and Brooklyn Museum are still fairly beautiful. Eastern Parkway is well maintained. And other stations along the shuttle line are no worse than stations on the 2, 5 & 6 in the South Bronx or J & Z in Brooklyn.
But yes, fairbeating has been a problems. Dean Street, the first station south of Franklin St., was closed a few years ago because the MTA says it was only earning 70 fares a day. Obviously many more times people were using the station but not paying. But since Dean St. was so close to other stations on the shuttle (a 3 block walk), it was shut down about 3 years ago. Having a better transfer point between the shuttle and A & C trains will improve farebeating problems.
I have noticed the increasingly common trend of combined entrances where an El and a subway have a transfer. The NYCT is increasingly closing the elevated booth and/or entrance in favor of using the subway entrance for both services and then back up inside the fare control. Examples of this include : 161 Bronx, 74/Roosevelt Queens, 9th Street/4th Ave Brooklyn, Myrtle/Wyckoff on the M, pending Franklin Ave IRT/Botanic Garden Shuttle. (This list is not intended as the complete list. I dont want to take Dave's space by listing everything.)
Sometimes as in the case of 161, the elevated booth is left as as a Part-time booth.
(ps- I like these entrances. As a station agent it is easier to watch the people and make sure they are not jumping the turnstiles.)
**opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT.***
It makes sense to me. The hassle, though, is in going down then up. 9st/4av is a ground-level booth, up to IND, down to BMT. But I can't tell for the life of me whose booth it is. The real pain at this station is that there is only the booth on the manhattan-bound side of the BMT. to get to the Brooklyn side, you need to go UP to the IND platform and then DOWN to the BMT platform. Is there another exit from the subway here that I'm unaware of?
-Hank
you can be sure if enough people complain to local politicians and not to the MTA a solution can be achieved. Writing or call MTA only gets so far. A passenger gets arrested to fare evasion on the Dyre Line while booths are closed and no way to buy a token got some news coverage and vending machines installed pronto
Each booth has a letter and a number such as N-62A, R 112. The IND has the letter N, IRT has R. BMT has A through K. The BMT Astoria is also R (since it was built as IRT). Somewheree at the top of the booth or on the badge holder is the booth ID. Look for the black badge holder. It will say Booth N 62, Clerk on Duty and giver the phone number for compliments/ complaints.
Now here is where it gets tricky: At combined entrances the booth ID may be different than you expect. The other day I worked at A 46- Canal Street, BMT?
Actually this booth is at the uptown # 6 IRT !! I am guessing that it has a BMT because the J entrance is also at this location.
This information taken from an official document but opinions expressed are my own and not those of MTA or NYCT.
are you sure regarding your numbers? R214 should still be uptown #6 R213 downtown #6. A-46 uptown N/R and a newly opened both on the downtown n/R should be A-43. A-66 and A-68 might still be around on the j-m-z..
Yes. I worked that booth and it was as posted!
Dean Street is so close to Fulton Street (3 blocks as in 3/20 of a mile) that the only people who would get on it are those who need to go to Eastern Parkway or the Brighton Line to go south towards Coney Island. Anyone going to downtown Brooklyn or Manhattan would certainly walk for two minutes rather than go to the Dean St. station and wait 10 minutes for the next shuttle to go for 30 seconds.
I'm not saying that there weren't fare beaters, but 70 people per day sounds like it might have been pretty accurate. Even if another 100 were going for free, it seemed to be a station worth closing because that's still only about 10 people per hour during regular hours.
When they rebuild the Franklin Shuttle, are they going to make it a 2-track line again? Then it could run more frequently again during the middle of the day and rush hours. I still think building a transfer point between Atlantic Ave./Pacific St. (2,3,4,5,B,D,M,N,Q,R) and Lafayette Ave.(A,C) and Fulton St. (G) would be better than reviving the Shuttle. But then again I don't live there, so I am only an outside advisor here.
The Shuttle will be two track from after Prospect Park (D/Q) tyo Park Place Station. After Park Place Station it will be one track to Franklin Ther interlock is automated so no human is needed. (technically Prospect Park can be two tracks but they prefer the Northbound (to Manhattan) track.
Looking at Brakeman's xcellent map book, aconnection between Lafayette/Fulton onm the A/G seems possible but an underpass would need to be built on the G since at present the Booth is on the SMith/9th Bound side and you go down from the COurtt Square Bound side to exit. Of course this would also mean a new booth for the COurt Square Bound Traffic. The mezzanine at Lafayette on the A/C would also need reconfiguring to restore a free transfer between uptown and downtown, or an underpass built-not impossible but money . Now as far as adding Atlantic/Pacific- the track map books shows it to be a large distance. SUch as apassage, unless in the paid zone would probably be a homeless hotel and even tif it were in the paid zone it would probably become a homeless hotel
Howdy folks
As you may know I had the opportunity to visit NYC over the weekend. Though I didn't get as much free time as I would have liked, I did finally manage to ride an R-62 from Grand Central to Dyre Avenue. I've never been on the Lexington/Dyre Express before. Anyway, the two days were nice. I wanted to ride the front window on the Brighton Express but couldn't. I wanted to ride the SIRR and couldn't. But I'm gonna try again in a couple of weeks. So, youse guys are stuck with me until then. Anything else any red-blooded American riding the subways shouldn't have missed?
The number 7 line to Main Street Flushing....way cool elevated...
If you like a nice, long express run, catch an A train of R-38s from 59th St. uptown or from 125th St. downtown. It skips seven stops and, if there aren't any delays, gets a good head of steam along most of that stretch.
I prefer the R-38s because 1) IMHO, they're quicker than the R-44s, and 2) you get a nice view out the front window.
Howdy
I have a few comments and a question about subways in general(I hope). The first is the fact that it has been two weeks since I've been on a letter marked train on the El. All the M-3's are unmarked and all the M-4's say "Frankford" or "69th Street train making all stops." Has SEPTA cancelled A-B service? Next, I just want to be sure about something. I notice on the BSS that there is a drainage ditch in the middle of the trackbed. Is that to keep water from getting to the tracks or, God forbid, the third rail? And one more quickie, what are those things in the middle of the trackbed that I've only seen on subways in Philadelphia. It is about two feet long, black, it is a double ended-something that seems to have an arm that goes up when a train goes by and drops when one is gone for a minute or two. What the heck is that?
No more A/B skip-stop service?
This wouldn’t surprise me. They did away with A/B skip-stop service in CHI-town a few years ago. Why would you end a service that provides a faster ride for customers and reduces end to end running time? Why, you ask. The CTA said it was because riders were confused about the A/B train service. Oh, it had been running since the late 40’s and early 50’s. They said the riders felt they had to wait to long for a train. Could it be that the headway’s (time intervals between trains) were opened to wide? A/B skip-stop service is only viable if the headway’s between trains are short. Because the CTA keeps lengthening the headway’s on the Red and Blue lines the wait at a A or B station was 12 minutes. Not acceptable. Does the CTA really want customers. That is up for debate. I didn’t realize SEPTA was taking management courses on customer service at the Merchandise Mart.
Secondly, the "trip arm" you are describing is VERY important to rapid transit operated on short headway’s. It, in theory, prevents a following train from rear-ending its leader. This mechanism is part of the color-light signal that guides the motorman, or is it motorperson, or now operator (my grammar check told me not to be gender specific). Anyway, after a train passes a signal, the aspect (color of light displayed) turns to RED or STOP, and the trip arm raises after the last car passes. This arm is designed to contact the "trip bar" mounted on the first car each train. If the operator of the following train tries to pass the signal when it is RED or STOP, the train’s braking system will be "tripped" into a emergency brake application. This happens because the trip arm is in the raised position and contacts the trip bar mounted on the lead car of the train. The only way for the operator to reset the brakes is to go to the ground and reset the train mounted trip bar. Presumably, by the time this is done, the proceeding train has moved into a farther block, the signal will be displaying a less restrictive aspect, and therefore the leader will will not be struck from behind by its follower. Not to mention, this is a MAJOR violation of operating rules with time off for the unfortunate operator.
And after I wrote that long explaination on how signal trip arms work, I remembered there is a page provided by the NYC subway group explaining subway signals. The page is listed on the main menu.
Although each system has its variations, all the systems work on the same general principle.
A-B service only runs in morning and evening rush hours and only for about 1-3/4 hours of each. If you were riding after 5:45 PM or before 4:15 you may have missed it.
I ride the El at a pretty erratic frequency. In the morning, I'd have to worry about A-B trains as early as 7:15 and as late as 6:00. For the last two weeks at least, there were no A-B trains for either. The whole concept seems a little dumb to me unless the A or B will be skipping several stops in a row. Par example, if I was on a A train from Bridge and Pratt(Frankford Terminal) I'd skip Church, hit Erie, Tioga and Allegheny before the next skip. I'd make 8 stops(excluding Bridge and Pratt) before entering the tunnel. On a B train, the same. Why only skip one stop? How much time does that save, 30 seconds at most? Now three or four in a row, that's a few minutes off my commute. Another A-B mystery is the situation with 34th Street. Now in NYC, if 34th Street wasn't an express stop, people would raise cain! In Philadelphia, it's not really essential and 30th Street is an easy walk. According to El schedules, during peak(or rush) hours, all B trains are to skip 34th. Well, they never did. I saw a B train skip once. All the other times I've been on B trains at rush hour, the B stopped. The bottom line is, the termination of A-b won't really mean anything, just that it no longer matters where you board your train because they all will stop there.
According to the line maps on the M-4s 34th Street is serviced by all stops. The printed schedules list it as a 'B' stop. The M-3s and Sticker maps at various stations list all possible combinations, from A only, B only or all.
I won't miss it, as you say, because you skip very few stops with the service.
I had a post on this subject a while back, if I have some free time, maybe I will go through the archives and dig it up.
In the last few years, 34, 2, and Spring Garden have been converted into All Stop stations. The whole idea of A-B service is to skip alternate stations and have an all-stop station every few pairs of stations. On the 69 St. end, changing 34 St. from A-only to All-stop must have been to make Univ. of Pa. and Drexel people happy, even though the extra 2 minute wait at 30th St. to get an A train couldn't have been that bad.
On the Frankford end, changing 2 St from A and Spring Garden from B to All-Stop also takes away from the advantage of Skip-stop service. But the frequency of trains during rush hour (every 2-3 minutes) makes skip-stop service still a useful idea. I saw it running on April 1, the last time I was in Phila. I can't imagine they've just gotten rid of it without notice in the newspapers or brochures.
I checked the other day and it's still in operation. The hours of operation are quite limited (basically 7-8:30 AM, 4-5:30 PM leaving either terminal), thus the last skip-stop trains arrive in Center City about 9 AM and 6 PM.
I, too, question whether skip-stop is effective given the number of stations actually involved and the need for trains to slow when they bypass stops. If it disappeared tomorrow, not too many folks would mind too much, and those who are now affected by it will actually have better service in the peaks.
What the El really needs is some sort of limited-stop service to each terminal, given the high number of riders that pass through each of them. While it could work in theory, it might be tough to do in reality.
Isn't that just the point though? Skip-stop is one of the few technically feasible methods in a system without separate express trackage. Whether Chgo or Phila the dilution or elimination of AB is a degradation of service.
Absolutely. In Chicago, it seemed reasonable to eliminate midday A-B service, because when a train rain every 6 minutes, that meant A-only and B-only got 12-minute service and the time saved in a skip-stop run was only about 8 minutes so on average nothing was gained. In rush hours, when service is every 2-3 minutes, A-only and B-only get a train every 6 minutes, so on average there is a saving.
In Philadelphia they were smart and use it only when they provide very frequent service, so there is never a long wait and the trip is a little faster. If only they would restore 2 and 34 to A-only status and Spring Garden to B-only status, it would go even faster.
I agree. The problem I have with the current situation is that there are so few stations affected by the A/B operation that the trains are essentially making close to all stops in any event. If 34, 2, Spring Garden (former recent A/B stops changed to all stops) went back to A/B, and a couple more were added (such as 60, 56 and maybe even Girard), it might make more sense.
No, I don't think making 60th Street an A or B stop is wise. First, it is as important a stop in my neighborhood of W Philly as 52nd Street. That's almost like making 30th A or B. Also, it's VERY inconvenient to people who live in that area. Millbourne is a 'B' stop, 63rd is an 'A' stop and if 60th were an 'A' or 'B' one would have to go to 56th to get an assured train during rush, 'A' or 'B'.
When A/B skip-stop service was introduced on the El back in 1956, the lines was still being serviced by the old equipment - pre M-3’s. PTC was looking for a way to "speed the ride" for their customers. A novel idea in today’s environment of transit bureaucracy. The service has been limited to the rush-hour periods Monday through Friday since its inception.
When the A/B service began there were more stations designated as A/B. In fact, on the Frankford end of the line, besides BRIDGE-PRATT, only MARGARET-ORTHRODOX, EIRE-TORRESDALE, ALLEGHENY and GIRARD were designated "ALL STOP" stations before arriving "downtown" on Market Street. And then even 2nd Street was an A station. The "All Stop" stations were the those that were fed by the remaining "electric" lines, or the busiest transfer points. Bridge-Pratt had ETB #66, Margaret-Orthrodox had ETB #59 & 75, Eire-Torresdale had car line #56, Allegheny had car line #60 and Girard had car line #15.
In those days, an "A" train from Bridge-Pratt to 5th & Market made eight stops vs. twelve the locals made. Ask any rider which train they would like to use.
A/B skip-stop had other advantages touted by the CTA. Wear and tear on equipment due to fewer starts and stops. Also on the North-South line a savings in equipment requirements of four - eight car trains. Hum, thirty-two cars at today’s $1 million plus apiece. CTA also cited the respective reduction in crew requirements.
In my opinion, the incentive in providing frequent and fast service to customers was gone after the government funded transit agencies took over. The new agencies still got money no matter how many passengers they carried. However, I’m not foolish enough to think that the business of transit can go back to private business again.
There is an ad for a Lexus 4X vehicle running out here in the west which features a guy getting off the NY subway, and then freezing in place when he sees said vehicle loaded up with snowboard and kayak and off to who knows where in mid-workweek. Anyone recognize the location(s)?
Since my secret identity was revealed I will use my mild-mannered alias:) Anyway, I was watching some movies over the weekend(my other hobby after subways) and happened upon a tape I have not watched for a while-Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Now while I know this brings back Christmas horror stories, bear with me for a moment. There was a scene when the Turtles' friend April O'Neill was attacked in the BMT City Hall station and I happened to catch an inconsistency-in other words a flub. Now I know that it was shot in the unused lower level since she was on one platform and the camera was shooting her from another. At the end of the scene, a Ninja Turtle comes to her rescue after she is attacked and escapes by running through the tunnel to their sewer lair. But if you'll notice, he was running right along a wall, not along another platform into the tunnel. In other words, I think they shot the last part of the scene on the actual used platform. Strange, huh?
P.S.-I know it was the City Hall station because, well, the train that went by was an R-38 N train.
I guess the guys who produced the movie were hoping no one like us would ruin it for all the other unenlightened viewers out there. There are a few other films with some quick subway shots(nonw of them in Philly though). My favorite movie, Glengarry Glen Ross, has some shots in the opening sequence of the Q train blazing by Brighton Beach. But you'd figure that it wouldn't be blazing by it, seeing that that's where it terminates and all. Hey, maybe I found another flub.
This weekend I saw _The Warriors_, the terrible 1979 Walter Hill flick about a gang trying to get home from Van Cortlandt Park to Coney Island by subway. Although the movie is awful, seeing the subway the way it looked then was very entertaining. Then there is _Money Train_ (I'm sure it's been discussed to death on this cite). My favorite might have to be _The Taking of Pelham 1.2.3._ with Walter Matthau. What other movies can you think of where the subway plays such a prominant role as they do in the above and what do you think of them?
Well, off-hand I can't of any besides "Pelham" and "Money Train". But I did like the scene from "Die Hard: With a Vengence" when a #3 train from 125th to Wall Street(or was it Fulton St.?) was in peril. Here's what I want to know. Why does that same redbird #8010 always seem to appear in subway-danger things like that? I've seen car #8010 a few times. What's that? The one thing that get's me about is that I watch a lot of cartoons and sometimes they have some kind of battle in a subway station(hey, it's a cartoon). On one episode of the cartoon X-Men(also a great comic book) they fought a evil cloud in a NYC subway station(I keep thinking of Astor Place on the Lexington line but it looks nothing like it). When they figured that electricity would kill it, they led it to the two running rails. Um, sorry to disappoint, but that's not the "third rail" as Wolverine said. That's just one thing that irks me.
They don't use a real subway for it, but did anyone see "Dark City"? There are several scenes with trains going by on elevated lines, and my first thought when I saw them is that a lot of people on this forum would give an eye-tooth to ride trains that looked like that. The trains look like no particular train but every train in general.
There's a specific subway scene, where the main character is trying to leave the city and get to a place called "Shell Beach". (Gee, maybe not like Coney Island or anything?) When he asks how to get there, someone says to take the subway. Look for when he looks at the subway map on the wall of the train. Looks like the London system on acid! (If you see the movie, tell me what the caption was under the map. It went by too fast for me to read it.) He takes the right train, but the train stops short of Shell Beach. "Why doesn't this train go to Shell Beach?" Station personnel in old-fashioned uniform and cap: "You need to take the express to get to Shell Beach." Train with a Shell Beach sign on the end tears through the station a few seconds later. "Why didn't that train stop here?" Passenger: "That's the express." I don't think it was meant to be a funny scene, but it was so dry I laughed out loud.
In the movie "The Devil's Advocate", there are two scenes with Al Pacino(as Satan, not a big stretch) and Keanu Reaves on the Broadway/7th Avenue line to Madison Square Garden. There is also a scene when he enters the subway in, I assume because of the local flavor, Chinatown. Can anyone ID that one?
There is also a Kodak commercial when an elderly woman is anxiously awaiting her
photos from her trip to Paris. If you watch you notice that she is one an el in NYC and it looks like she crosses a bridge. If you spot that one, see if you can figure out where it is. I think it's the J/M/Z line because she boards at an el that looks like it's near a bridge.
Finally, can anyone tell me about this one. In the movie "Ghostbusters", there is a scene when a ghost flies out of a subway station that looks like it's in Midtown near the park. I don't think it's 59th/Columbus, but I'm not sure. Where's that?
The climactic scene in the cartoon movie Oliver (I watch a lot of those these days) ends with a limosine chasing a scooter down into a subway station, along the tracks, and out onto the Manhattan Bridge. The scooter drives up one of the bridge cables at the last minute and the baddie in the Limo is smashed by an oncoming train. Oliver the kitten is feared dead, but survives.
And for those anime fans, there is a video called Mad Bull 34, set in NYC, about a super-macho but kind hearted cop who works out of the 34th Precinct. In one scene, I think it's volume 1, he battles a similarly super-macho criminal in typical super-macho fashion on the #7 train. That encounter is the best depiction of the #7 and Grand Central-42nd Street I have ever seen in animation. There were some inconsistancies due to dramatic license and it wasn't picture perfect, but the Japanese animator certainly did his homework! Oh yeah, the flick is for adults only, so I would strongly advise you not to show it the kiddies!
John
Was it Running Scared with Billy Chrystal and Gregory Heinz that had the grat chase scene on the Chicago L??
Yes, it was " Running Scared "(1986) starring Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines. As I remember, to facilitate shooting the sequence in the State Street Subway, wood planking was laid down flush with the rails so the automobiles could drive on the right-of-way during the chase scene. Or at least that is the way it appeared.
The Internet Movie dataBase (www.imdb.com) has a "goofs browser" that lists mistakes for hundreds of movies. After watching the video of Money Train (a wretched movie!) I checked the list out and indeed confirmed many of the subway-related mistakes I'd noticed. There were also some I hadn't picked up on.
One thing about the goofs browser is that "big" movies tend to be chock full of bloopers. Apollo 13, Independence Day and Titanic seem to be really error-prone.
Here's the link for Money Train (Ooooooooooh, count those goofs!!) :
http://us.imdb.com/More?goofs+Money+Train+(1995)
Most of Money Train was filmed on a 4,000-foot long subway set. It mimicks the real thing fairly well in that it has four tracks with I-beams between each track, but the roof is very high - even the 4th Ave. line in Brooklyn doesn't have that high a roof. Besides, the stations on the set are local stops; 5th Ave. is correctly marked, but we all know that none of the 5th Ave. stations in Manhattan are configured that way. The cars are retired R-27/30 Redbirds, so the MTA didn't care that the last car of the train near the end got totally trashed by the "revenue car".
I saw only two real subway stations in the movie: 33rd St.-Park Ave. and Union Square, disguised as Wall St.
So, I would have to say yes, there are quite a few inconsistencies in that movie.
I don't believe that the MTA had anything at all to do with the filming of Money Train (no surprise there!) The cars used for filming were purchased from other sources, probably a scrap dealer, and the set was built in a tunnel in Los Angeles.
Right. The last R-27/30s were retired from revenue service by then; I wouldn't be surprised if the producers bought them from the city at scrap prices.
Redbird car #8010? Car 8010 is part of the R-110A "new technology" train, definitely not a redbird. In what movies did you see this car? Perhaps it was a car that was going to be scrapped and therefore the MTA didn't object to putting it in "danger". Presumably, these movies would have been shot just before the R-110A's were delivered.
Or is it possible that they (or some of them) were shot later, and that the MTA actually kept two cars with the same number on hand (but of course not used in revenue service)?
Don't forget the god awful TV-movie remake "The Taking of Bloor-Danforth" - oops, I mean "The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3" that was shot in Toronto, Canada ... I mean, how many times do we see the same train rounding the same curve using the same "special" effects? And EVERY station looks EXACTLY the same ... and the train is TOO BIG to be IRT even though it has 3 sets of doors on each side (maybe it had 4 come to think of it).
--Mark
The one thing that makes me laugh are the ‘L’ scenes shot for "ER" at the Chicago/Franklin station. When the train is ready to leave the station there is a "air brake release sound". Anyone informed person knows that Chicago ‘L’ cars are "all-electric".
I’m wondering who decided the "air-brake sounds" are value added. Would the general watching public even know the significance of a "air -brake release"? I don’t think so. They are to busy looking at George Clooney.
They got a lot of mileage out of Hoyt-Scremerhorn in The Warriors. It was used in the 96th St. sequences. Other stations I recognized were Union Square on the Canarsie, Broadway, and Lexington lines. A funny thing: the trains the gang members ride on are always R-27/30s, even though the IRT is implied for half of that trip. The train markings vary considerably, too. Just before they get off at Coney Island, a route sign is clearly visible which says, "QB/local via bridge".
Nighthawks also has sequences at Hoyt-Schermerhorn, dressed up as 57th St. and then 42nd St. (what happened to 47-50th?) as well as one of the elevated IRT lines in the Bronx. And, of course, The French Connection with the shuttle sequence and the car chase below the West End line. The West End train is incorrectly marked as an N because the R-42s chosen for the movie didn't have B signs.
Not to mention The Incident, which used the World's Fair Lo-Vs at the end of their careers.
The Movie Saturday Night Fever also has subways in it as well. One scene if I am not mistaken is one of a train going over the Manhattan bridge. However though does anyone know a movie that included throughout the whole movie was the NYC Subway. It was about a group of teens, I do not think it was a gang, but they always travelled the subway and went to the yards and layups under the ground and spraypainted the trains. It wasn't until the trains pulled out did the workers see the graffitti. Does anyone knopw what movie I am talking about?
Yes, Saturday Night Fever has several subway sequences. There is a B train of R-38s running over the 86th St. portion of the West End line during the opening titles. Later, near the end of the film, John Travolta is seen boarding an RR train of R-27/30s and lights up a cigarette after he sits down. He ends up going to Manhattan to apologize to Stephanie for making advances, shall we say, towards her.
I am still bewildered why the new express service will stop at Canal Street. I see from the track maps that the express tracks extend down City Hall. Why don't they run the train down to City Hall as that is where those tracks terminate. It would make more sense because then the express will almost run into the Financial District. I see the tracks turn above the Station but if there isn't why not connext the tracks to those to City Hall.
The N and R lines terminate at the lower level of City Hall station, which has never been used for revenue service. As far as I know, the lower level platforms were never completed and probably aren't in any shape to receive passengers.
The Broadway Express tracks, just before the Canal Street local station, dip below the local tracks and then turn towards the lower level of Canal Street. There is no connection between these tracks and where the "express" tracks pick up again, just south of that point. South of Canal Street, these tracks are basically used for layovers. These tracks then dip below the local tracks again to the lower level of the BMT City Hall station. At this lower level is a 2 track island platform station that IS complete. There is still some signage on this platform, but not much lighting other thn standard issue tunnel lights. South of the station is a ramp that was built for an eventual connection to something (I forget what) and this ramp goes for quite a distance. The ROOF of this ramp gets lower and lower because the upper level local tracks dip downwards for their trip to Whitehall St. This was a decision made well into the building of the station which explains why so much of the lower level was completed. Originally intended for passenger use, this lower level never saw passenger service. There used to be 2 staircases on the uptown upper level leading downwards; they've ben covered up and replaced by a manhole cover. The staircases still exist on the downtown side.
--Mark
Mark: It ssms to me that I remember reading somewhere the original purpose of tracks B3 and B4 at Canal but I can't recall where. It seems to me that the existing situation leaves MTA with an unfortunate arrangement . I assume that you meant the Manhattan Bridge Sea Beach, etc platforms in your initial post on this subject. Doesn't their side platform construction complicate their use as a terminal platform.
BTW. I hope I can say, "the check is in the mail," by this weekend.
Marty.
PS: It was raining so hard in NJ by the time I got my sister home, that I decided to spend the night.
Well if the express tracks do not connect south of Canal but turn towards the Manhattan Bridge why not connect them to the express tracks into City Hall. Does it cost too much money to connect them and then to dismantle the boarded up staircases at the City Hall station. It would make so much more sense. I am not an expert on figures but the majority of the trackage is there and the station is there and the straircases and means to get to the platforms. So how much mopre is it to just connect the tracks and also open up the lower platform of the City Hall Station. But if you think about it, then more people will travel this line because it is express in Mnahattan as well as Queens and then more riders will utilize it knowing they may get home quicker from Downtown Manhattan.....City Hall is north of the Financial Diatricy or just the beginning of it. I appraise the MTA for such a new line but some decisions they make sometimes just do not make sense. It would make more sense for City Hall to become a terminal because it would distribute people then maybe from the other lines and make them equally full and not one line serving one area.
The express tracks north of canal street drop down below the local tracks to turn onto the Manhattan Bridge. The question is. Do you give up the ability to eventually return service to the south side Manhattan Bridge tracks by covering up their access. You would have to widen the Broadway Tunnel that presently exists, relocating the station platforms, to enable through traffic to City Hall.
Why would you have to widen the tunnel? I have a few such track maps that show that there is such a connection to the SS Manhattan Bridge tracks but those tracks can also(or ones could be installed) go for City Hall. The tunnel is apparently wide enough unless track maps inaccurately depict the relative space between tracks. And why would the MTA suddenly trun the tracks to the bridge? Why not just have the express service to City Hall? It makes sense when you think about it. More people go through Union Square than Spring Street and more people go through Times Square than Union Square(how many squares do you guys have?) and it would be VERY convenient for people coming from downtown or Brooklyn(via the infamous NYC subway transfer-more a noun than a verb). And the map shows that the express tracks terminate at Lexington Avenue for the IND 6th Avenue(which I assume is the 63rd Street connection which I missed over the weekend). If the connection was to the Broadway tracks, why not dump the shuttle
and turn the Broadway express into, I don't know, the 'P' train, and put that up whereever the 63rd Street tunnel will lead to(it is the Queens Blvd. subway
right?).
Jack those tracks to Manhattan Bridge duck down under the local tracks to access the Bridge. To run them through to City Hall you would have to fill in this portion of the tunnel to raise them to the level of the tracks to City Hall forever cutting off access to the Manhattan Bridge or make the 4 track wide tunnel wide enough to fit 6 tracks(2 to the Bridge, as is, plus 2 for the downtown express and local and 2 more for the uptown express and local) . It may come as a surprise, but some people from Brooklyn miss their Broadway Service via The Manhattan Bridge.
I think you will discover that the track maps definitely exaggerate the horizontal track separation that exists.
With Canal Street being the Main Manhattan Bridge to Holland Tunnel Surface link I doubt that you going to see any major new construction in this area. I understand that there will be quite a mess in this area for the next few years as water and gas mains are replaced.siecon
Well, if I lived in a world where all rapid transit was run by people with sense, the plan for the N/R/ManhBridge/CityHall problem would be this:
Widen the tunnel and make the express route to City Hall, connect the SS ManhBridge tracks to the tracks with the greater headway on the same level(the headway thing to prevent any accidents if run efficiently) and have it both ways.
Ahhh ... but even people with sense who run trains still have a budget issue to deal with, and no one has really complained about express service to City Hall via the Broadway BMT, so there isn't going to be money forthcoming for such construction.
It would better serve us all to construct an alternative to trains crossing the Manhattan Bridge .... but that's another thread ....
--Mark
Good idea but NYC Transit is not going to abandon access to the Manhattan Bridge. Not just yet. Maybe after an upteenth Engineering study that deems it unsafe. Canal St could be made a "temporary" terminal until the south side of the bridge reopens, kind of like 57th/6th Ave being "temporary" until the 63rd St line opened. The station is being renovated anyway in anticipation of the bridge's reopening; why not use it sooner for a 63rd ST / Bway express service. It wouldn't cost anything significantly "extra".
--Mark
> I assume that you meant the Manhattan Bridge Sea Beach, etc platforms in your
> initial post on this subject.
Correct.
> Doesn't their side platform construction complicate their use as a terminal
> platform.
Only if there isn't a crossover before entry into the station. I *think* there is one just before the lines split, but I do not remember (and I didn't check the track maps at this site to confirm). If there isn't one, you're right - that makes it difficult.
--Mark
I dont see one in Peter's Book.
There is a Local to Express in each direction at Prince, but no Express to Express.
My concern was for Passengers going from Platform to Platform, not knowing where the next train will be.
If were talking temporary, which I think you were, perhaps some sort of fireproof passenger bridge could be erected at the shall we say "River end" of the existing platforms
Interesting idea. That would have a similar setup to the Flatbush/Nostrand "temporary" terminal of the 2/5 lines, which have such a connector at the far south end of the station. It's worked there for 40 years :)
--Mark
On the lower (express) level of the Canal St. station (leading to the Manhattan Bridge) there should be enough room east of the station, before the trains get onto the bridge, for terminating trains to switch from one track to the other. That way the downtown platform could be used for passengers to leave the train, and the uptown one for trains starting their run uptown.
There is a problem with simply "connecting" the express tracks to the lower level of the City Hall station, however. The local station at Canal St. is four tracks wide, and all four tracks are on the upper level (with bumper blocks to keep trains from falling down onto the express tracks that curve into the express station there). Thus the TA would have to blast out the express right-of-way from Canal St. to about Chambers St. (where the middle tracks descend to the lower level of City Hall station, after the crossovers from the local tracks) - or they could fill in the descending express ramp from about Broome St. to Canal St., so that express trains could pass through the local Canal St. station on the upper level. And the lower level of the City Hall station is really in terrible shape. It's not a matter of just sweeping it out and opening up the old staircases again. The station was never finished, and there are no tiles on the walls, for instance. It could be done on the cheap with paint, I suppose, but I won't hold my breath until the MTA carries out this plan, which I think is really a good one. Some posters are writing as if the MTA had already decided to run expresses down Broadway to Canal St. Is this anything more than wishful thinking?
Before the Manhattan bridge fiasco 'R' local went via Montague street tunnel and the N & Q went express via the bridge.
> Some posters are writing as if the MTA had already decided to run expresses
> down Broadway to Canal St. Is this anything more than wishful thinking?
For the moment. What I suggested was that when 63rd St service is finally connected to the Queens Blvd line, an express service starting at Canal St lower level, running up Broadway and then connecting via 63rd St to the IND Queens Blvd Line, could provide Broadway Express service with little bottleneck in Manhattan. You don't have to build a Manhattan terminal. This could be temporary until the south side of the Manhattan Bridge opens.
Which could be 40 years from now :)
--Mark
>What I suggested was that when 63rd St service is finally connected to the >Queens Blvd line, an express service starting at Canal St lower level, running >up Broadway and then connecting via 63rd St to the IND Queens Blvd Line, >could provide Broadway Express service with little bottleneck in Manhattan.
I agree with this suggestion, and moreover it should be express all the way to 179th St. (at least during rush hours). That way it would be sure to attract riders from the E and F.
One problem - if this new service would replace the current Q, what would be used for rush hour Brighton Express service in Brooklyn? How about switching the M back to the Brighton line for local service and have the D run express during that time?
The Broadway Express from lower level Canal St to 179th St is a good idea. This would become a new service and wouldn't replace the Q. When the south side of the Manhattan Bridge reopens after the connection to the IND Queens Blvd line, then this new line could presumably be replaced by the Q running through to 179th St via the Broadway BMT.
--Mark
The Q can still run in Brooklyn but there would definetly be alot of rescheduling and rerouting of trains, but looks at it like this the M would be better off on the D line, But the bottle crossing over of tracks causing delays with the N/R line may not be favorable since the M uses the tunnel to get to the J'Z line in Manhattan. As for the Q, line into the brigton line, it is alright where it's at. the adjustment to the Brighton line is the D express sevice to and from Coney island while the Q serves local in brooklyn to brighton beach.
Forgive Jason Mark. He has probably had the misfortune of only riding a full cab subway train and never saw the dip of the express tracks leading to the Manhattan Bridge and quite possibly never rode an N or the former "QB" when it traveled on that route.
What new express service? What have I missed by being 800 miles away?
Without actually looking at the track maps, I have a strong recollection that the Broadway express tracks do not go as far as City Hall. The original plan was to have locals terminate at the City Hall lower level and for expresses to continue on the upper level. In addition, there was to be a line running across Canal Street and over the Manhattan Bridge. In the end, the Canal Street line was cancelled, and the Broadway express tracks turn left at Canal Street to head across the Manhattan Bridge. (Since the Manhattan stops south of Canal would be unserved by the express, the local took over the City Hall upper level and the trackage south of there.)
What this means is that the City Hall lower level and what appear to be express tracks through the N/R Canal Street station are actually not connected to the Broadway express line, which has a station elsewhere in the Canal Street complex. Unfortunately, that station is currently undergoing reconstruction and is not usable as a stop. (Where is this station, you may ask? Transfer from the N/R to the J/M/Z and you walk the length of one of its platforms.) This means that at this time Broadway express service can only carry passengers as far south as 14th Street without switching to the local tracks, and that's assuming that there's a switch somewhere between 14th and Canal allowing trains to reverse directions.
Or has the Canal Street construction finally finished? (I won't ask about the Manhattan Bridge since I know the answer all too well.)
So that's why they are redoing that part of the station!!!
They really, really, dug up one side and put in new tracks I think. The rest of canal street looks reall nice, but they have yet to do the stairways / platform level of this part. It looks like they are working on it though...
On the J/Z line, there are little yellow square signs with black text saying:
"15 Miles When Leaving Station" on most of the line's stations. I believe that this to let motormen know that they MUST NOT do speeds over 15 miles when bypassing stations when the trains run "skip-stop" service. Sometimes this is not the case whereas I 've been on some trains where the motorman has not slowed down when skipping the station. However, I've rode a few LIRR trains and when skipping stations, the trains blaze down the tracks without moderating it's speed. Why must subway trains reduce speed when bypassing stations and commuter trains apparently do not ??
I remember, during my years of riding the Mkt-Fkd El in Philadelphia (1960’s - 1970’s), during A/B skip-stop service in the rush hours the trains rarely slowed down while skipping a station. If the trains ever did slow it was probably because the motorperson was a novice. Riders just knew not to stand close to the edge of the platform on a "A" station when a "B" train was coming through. And that was before our era of "enlightenment".
I would judge the speed of a train passing through a station to be in the neighborhood of 35 - 40 MPH. I think the Budd’s (M-3’s) topped out at about 50 MPH. Someone out there may be able to confirm my estimate. However, it wasn’t top speed that made this I remember this line for. It was the incredible torque in their acceleration that I remember best.
I've been on Metro-North New Haven line trains that have gone through Larchmont at >80 I wonder if there are any warning signs in the station? Useually they hit the horn a few times though...
>It was the incredible torque in their acceleration that I remember best.
The Mattapan/Ashmont line in boston uses PCCs, boy THOSE things can sure get up to speed fast!
PCCs were famous for their quick acceleration rates, especially when compared to older conventional streetcars.
I haven't ridden on Metro North since it has been called that; in other words, the last time I rode the New Haven line, it was still Conrail, but those trains did blow right by stations when they didn't stop without blowing any horns or anything.
Chicago's L trains didn't slow down when bypassing stations in the days of A/B skip-stop service.
New York is the only city I know of where subway trains slow down as they are about to bypass a station. This is true whether the train is a special without passengers or is operating in skip-stop or has been rerouted from express to local track. In any case, if the train isn't stopping, the operator will let out two blasts on the horn as it enters such a station.
I have noticed that, during my last couple of visits to New York, during rush hours, southbound D trains have been switched over to the local track where the Concourse and Washington Heights branches merge. They proceed on the local track all the way to 59th St., making express stops. As a D train would approach a local station, it would slow down, the operator would blow the horn twice, the train would proceed without stopping, and would pick up speed as it left the station.
PCC cars can accelerate at 4.75 MPH/Sec. Thats pretty quick. The Boeing Veritrol Cars accelerate at 3.1 MPH/Sec max. I remember the NYC sybways cars as quick and smooth when leaving a station. How fast can they accerate??
Every once in awhile, the Orange Line in Boston will get so far behind schedule that they do a "battery run." (where did that name come from, anyway?) I've been on the train at least four times when this was done, and only once did the motorman reduce speed as we passed through the stations.
The 7:10 outbound Kingston train on the Old Colony commuter rail line skips South Weymouth and Abington, and we FLY past all the commuters waiting for an inbound train. I love it!
The CTA will do this also. When there has been a delay along the line the first train will run "express" skipping a determined number of stops to get back on schedule. The next train may also run "express" skipping lesser number of stop to get back on schedule, etc. Supervisors and control use this to alleviate crowding of the first train and close the gaps in service.
When this is done, the operator will always "whistle" prior to entering the station, however, on the CTA the train does not reduce speed.
When you get on one of these "express" trains you feel like you’re getting more service for your $1.50, but for those standing on the platform as the trains run by it is very FRUSTRATING.
I had never seen subway trains bypass stations intentionally bypass stations to get back on schedule before I came to Boston. I grew up in NY before skip-stops, and remember expresses making express stops only on the local tracks, but never saw a train intentionally skip stations until I was on a Red Line train once that went express from Park St to Harvard Sq.
The practice of expresses making express stops only while running on the local track is still in use in New York, if the situation calls for it. I have ridden southbound D trains during rush hour which are switched to the local track where the Washington Heights and Concourse branches merge. They proceed down Central Park West on the local track, but make express stops only. After leaving 59th St., they turn off to 6th Ave. as always. What I haven't been able to figure out is this: the express track was clear all the way to 59th St. I didn't seen any A trains backed up or anything like that.
At least in those instances, the D wasn't making all local stops. I remember once, while riding an uptown D, we came upon a red signal at the tunnel entrance just out of 7th Ave. There is a sign under this signal which reads, "If signal is red, call 59th St. tower." The operator did just that, then proceeded once the signal cleared. We were switched onto the express track before 59th, as normal, then as the train pulled all the way into the station and stopped, I saw that the interlocking signal past the station was set to yellow/yellow. In other words, the train was going to be switched over to the local track. I didn't stick around to find out what was going to happen next. I got off figuring that train was going to be running local. This was on a Saturday back in 1969 or 1970. I have also seen Bronx-bound D trains enter 59th on the local track, only to be switched over to express via that same scissor switch north of the station.
Just a guess, really, but I'd say that subway trains slow down when bypassing stations because it's relatively uncommon for them to bypass stations in the first place (there isn't much skip-stop service). Hence subway riders are likely to stand close to the platform edges when trains are approching and risk being knocked off balance if the trains go through without stopping. In contrast, commuter trains (at least the LIRR and Metro-North) bypass stations all the time. Riders on these lines are more likely to know enough to stand back from platform edges.
TA Rule 39i states;
Trains Skipping Stations:
"The train will enter the station being bypassed at normal speed for the area; the Train Operator will then begin to decelerate gradually, ensuring that the train does not go faster than fifteen (15) miles per hour as it leaves the station. The train operator must blow the horn or whistle at the entering and leaving end of the station."
LIRR trains pass stations at MAS. The reason is simply differences in operating rules.
If you want a good "rush," stand on the LIRR Mineola platform at rush hour when many trains bypass that station - as Steve said - at MAS.
[If you want a good "rush," stand on the LIRR Mineola platform at rush hour when many trains bypass that station - as Steve said - at MAS.]
Mineola's also an exciting "trainspotting" location because there are serveral grade crossings in the immediate station vicinity and the trains therefore are blowing their whistles as they come through. The station's physical location also helps - it's partly hemmed in by buildings and a road bridge, so it feels like the trains are practically on top of you.
Indeed. And the acronym "MAS" stands for Maximum Allowable Speed.
> The reason is simply differences in operating rules.
The rules were presumably adopted for some reason. To say that the difference in operational practices is due to different "rules" just says that management, rather than the train operators, is responsible for the difference. It isn't really a reason. But thanks for posting the rule anyway.
Peter Rosa's reasoning on the subject seems to make sense. Unless someone has other information, it will have to stand as the reason for the rules difference.
> LIRR trains pass stations at MAS.
I guess "MAS" means "full speed", but what do the letters stand for?
This is from memory, however I think I remember that MAS = Maximum Allowable Speed. This is from an older (circa 1970 - LIRR Employee TT that I have. The term MAS has to do with the signal aspect received in the cab. The employee TT has a section on Cab siginals and their rules.
MAS on many LIRR branches is 80 MPH. As has been noted before here, just stand on the EAST or WEST bound platform of Mineola Station during the rush hour.
Generally the aspect related to MAS is known as CLEAR in RR operating lingo.
Gentlemen,
The reason the subway trains bypass a station in the manner that they do is mainly because of signal design and spacing.
From a station stop signals are positioned closer,because of excelleration
per Ft. sec. Now imagine a train barreling through a station and the
Gentlemen,
The reason the subway trains bypass a station in the manner that they do is mainly because of signal design and spacing.
From a station stop signals are positioned closer,because of acceleration per Ft. sec. Now imagine a train barreling through a station and the
signal system couldn't handle it.
L.I.R.R is not subway,it's RailRoad.
Thank you Gentlemen
Not only did the schools lose out of $200 million but the $3 million tht would have reinstated a conductor on the trains now under OPTO was axed too when Pataki line itemed vetoed $1.6 Billion in state spending on the new budget.
Too bad for our resident G riders .
It seems to me that the word should be BACKS not WACKS......
As unofficial website semantic advisor, it should be neither. The desired word is WHACKS. WACK is a noun, WHACK is a verb.
Well for both of you it was suppose to be BACKS not WACKS Or Whacks or CACKS or anything else, so sorry for the typing mistake and any pain it caused you.
It would seem that Mr. Willie James and his cronies should have voted Republican. The MTA also Wacked (or Whacked) the TWU rally in Albany for this coming Monday. NY politics as usual.
As Pataki says in the NY commercial: "What did you expect, this is New York."
Can someone please explain why they are ripping up the express tracks on the brighton line this time?I thought they replaced the tracks why they were working on the bridges a few years ago??
The cure for the common cold is easier to come by than the reason why they keep ripping up the Brighton Line tracks. This line has been worked on almost constantly since 1983. Can someone please enlighten us as to what the problem is??????
Can you say.....BOONDOGGLE?????
I heard that when the express tracks were originally redone in the early 80s, there was too much ballast put down. Consequently, the tracks were too high at express stations and had to be re-redone. At least that's what I was told, as ludicrous as it may sound.
I was wondering if anyone knew when the new R-142 cars come will they be tested on the Sea Beach Express tracks???
I understand they are building a new "express" track on the Dyre Ave. line for testing the R-142's, so they probably will do it all there and not at Sea Beach.
I thought the Sea Beach TRACKS were going to Track and testing of a new bidirectional signal system?
Just a Rumor I heard somewhere.
I was in Philadelphia on Sunday and happened upon the apparently new subway cars they have. Being from West Virginia, I don't exactly have as much experience actually riding a subway as all of you here at Subtalk, but there was something that I don't think I've seen in pictures of New York subways. The new Philadelphia subway cars(and if anyone has any specs for the Philadelphia subway, please give me some information) have plush seating. Now it's nice that Septa(what does that stand for?) has put that on instead of hard plastic but don't they think that it would get cut up after either years of service or hoodlums and vandals destroying it?
Whoa! You don't know about our subways? Poor soul. I'll bet those old rascals from the Big 'A' got to you first huh? Well we'll straighten them out:) Anyway, I hope you got the opportunity to ride *both* of the city's heavy rail subways-the Market-Frankford El(or just El) and the Broad Street Subway(or BSS as you may see in some posts).
The El has a broad gauge of 5' 2 1/2" and uses an underrunning third rail. The BSS is built to all the same standards as any IND/BMT NYC subway, with standard 4' 8 1/2" gauge and overrunning third rail. SEPTA stands for SouthEastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. And yes, the city obtained new cars for the El last year but have only been running for somehwhat regular service(I cracked the pattern but that post is gone) since January. I agree with you on the seating issue but it's there and I like it. Let's hope it's some kind of magic cloth that resists knifing:)
The El is a special line in that no other subway car on Earth can run on it. Only the old and new El cars can. That's why it's my favorite subway(sorry 7th Avenue local, but we both knew it wouldn't work out) because it's not like any other one I know of.
By the way, you're probably wondering why there are two BMT's. Well I saw Brian Matthew Talyor on one post and saw that he had an idea. My name is Barry Martin Tellemer. Sorry if there was any confusion. Can I be BMT2, BMT1?
Um, I kind of like being BMT, you know this being about New York subways and such. I guess you can be BMT2, if you want. But stay away from BMT!:)
Blast that BMT(or was it BMT?) who got there before me:) Well, he gave you all the right information. I hope you'll try to learn more about the overlooked, unnder-rated Philly subways. People say that they aren't that great, but try a NYC subway. You'll come crawlin' back. They always come crawlin' back:)
One would think with only 4 lines (might as well include the Subway-surface section and the Lindenwold line), one would have gotten enough of the Phila. trains after awhile, but it never happens. Maybe it's the interesting colors of the cars, or the fact that each line is very different from the others, or the speed of the doors opening and closing, or something, but they never get dull.
Admittedly, we don't have the variety of equipment that the NYCT does, but I agree that the Phila system offers much to the subway fan. The subway-surface lines often get overlooked, but they too are interesting to explore.
I think that the trolleys are over-looked too. I mean, think about it. Unless you're in San Fransisco(whose trolley I refuse to put over ours) you really can't get that type of experience in any other city in the US. One minute, you're blazing along in a tunnel right along with heavy-rail subways and the next minute you're stopping at red lights and looking out the window to see Ford Tauruses instead of rats scurrying on tracks. I only wished that there were more subway/surface trolleys or at least trolleys to other parts of the city. If they were subway/surface, it would encourage tourists to visit all parts of Philadelphia except Center City, Society Hill and maybe Chestnut Hill.
Have you heard of the newest City plan, which includes a suggestion
to add surface line from 41st and Spruce (near the portal) to the South St.
bridge (and over), all the way down South St. and hang left on Penn's Landing
and terminate at around Race/Vine/Spring Garden? Longshot, huh?
Funny you should mention Penn's Landing.
Last Wednesday, I was down by Penn's Landing and noticed some trolley tracks along Front Street(and unlike the mistaken 43rd St. tracks I mentioned, these exist on the street I named). I didn't get to see how far they went but they were definitely by Spruce Street. I would assume this is where they got this idea and where the trolley will be running.
Where did you hear this news? I guess I'm not as abreast of new transit plans as I thought.
This is a new one on me, too. I've heard of the Historic Loop and the Center City Loop (both partly on Chestnut) but none across the South St bridge. ??
Also, I can't think of any tracks on Front St around Spruce. Other than the railroad track in Delaware Ave (oops, Columbus Blvd), I am aware of a track alongside the Head House Market on the eastern portion of 2nd Street between Pine and Lombard. This is a remnant of the Route 5 car, long gone. This is only a couple blocks from Front and Spruce. ??
Don't hold your breath. The way things move in the city of Brotherly Love I predict the following: (and hope I'm wrong)
1. The North Philadelphia lines will never reurn to rail service. By the time any articulated cars arrive for West Philadelphia, the Kawasaki's will be worn out and ready for replacement.
2. None of the "plans" for streetcar service will ever come about. The city is (ans was) unable to prevent any changes in streetcar servicein any way.
3. The touted new light rail line will remain just that - a proposal.
SEPTA is so busy trying to save itself that all these streetcar proposals will take a back seat to reality - SURVIVAL!
It was Delaware Avenue in '90, it'll be Delaware Avenue in 2000. To me anyways:)
Strangely enough, padded upholstered seats do not seem to get slit up as much as you might imagine. We have had them on Sacramento Light Rail for ten years now, with very few vandalism incidents. Apparently slashing is "out" for now, and window scratching is "in". Maybe it fits in with all the BS about "art form"that the Graffitti crowd loads us down with. After all, nobody is going to look under his butt to evaluate the individual expression of the knife wielder.
Plush seats on the Mkt-Fkd El? Well, back in 1960-61 when the M-3’s (current Almond Joy fleet) was built, the El was still owned by the PTC - Philadelphia Transportation Company - a private business. I know there are some youngsters out there that don’t realize the business of public transportation in most cities was conducted by private business (read "for profit"). Anyway, what I’m getting at is the PTC "customers" wouldn’t be to happy if the seats on the new equipment were made of the "formed hard plastic" that we’re all used to these days. The seats were like those found on the PCC’s, and there were still thirteen (13) car lines and about 500 cars operating in Philadelphia back then. The last time I rode the line, about ten years ago, I recall the seats were still the same as they when they were delivered. A padded seat cushion with blue/straw (I think) upholstery with the seat backs more formed and less comfortable. I did note, however, there was some stitching to fix the damage done by vandals.
I remember when the M-3’s were being introduced into service. The new trains were inter-mixed with the trains of older cars during mid day time service. This was done for break-in and motorman training. The old cars were slower than the new cars so the new trains had to be operated during periods when the headway didn’t allow them to catch-up to the old trains they were following. The scheduled running time for the 12.8 mile, 28 station line for the old equipment was 45 minutes one-way vs. 38 minutes for the new Budd’s. Another thing about the old days. The headway’s, even during the day time (10 am - 3 pm) were close - maybe every 5 - 6 minutes.
One of my fondest memories was a Saturday excursion taken with my uncle from their stop at Tioga all the way out west to 69th St. After allowing three "old" trains pass by, finally a "shiny new" silver train came over the PRR bridge grade and into the station. I rode the front end naturally looking out the front window - barely. This was pretty heady stuff for an eight year old. When we got to 69th St. the motorman came out of the cab and told my uncle and I that this was the first trip for this pair of cars. I don’t recall the car numbers.
Boy, I wonder what it will be like when people get sick of the M-4's. Today,"Boy, look at those new trains. Wow!" 50 years from now, "When are they getting rid of them old ratty el cars?" People are fickle:)
If SEPTA will do the following
Keep all the displays working
Including the displays in stations
Keep the trains clean and in good repair
Keep the PA System in working order
Keep the surrounding infrastructure clean
assuming that they ever fix the entire thing to be as nice as the new el stations on the Frankford side
and not run them into the ground
then I will probabaly not be saying yuck, but isn't amazing how old these cars are and they are in such good condition. However, if the past is any indication of the future, in 50 years; we will indeed be worried about the cars; as well as a transit strike!
If SEPTA will do the following
Keep all the displays working
Including the displays in stations
Keep the trains clean and in good repair
Keep the PA System in working order
Keep the surrounding infrastructure clean
assuming that they ever fix the entire thing to be as nice as the new el stations on the Frankford side
and not run them into the ground
then I will probabaly not be saying yuck, but isn't amazing how old these cars are and they are in such good condition. However, if the past is any indication of the future, in 50 years; we will indeed be worried about the cars; as well as a transit strike!
No, No, No - don’t get me wrong. I’m one of those who doesn’t think there is anything wrong with the M-3’s. They were the cars I "grew up" with. I’m sure if they were maintained properly they could last for another 25 years.
As for the story of waiting for a "new" train - I was only eight years old. I didn’t know the value of the old equipment back then.
Padded seats can be found on the "T" in Boston as well. Unfortunately, one can almost always find at least a couple of knifed seats -- at least on the Orange Line, which is the one I'm on the most. I say "Why bother?" Most people ride rapid transit to get from point A to point B. I can relax in my recliner when I get home. I prefer fiberglass seating like R-38's and R-32's, though I will be an R-10 fan until the day I die!
Also -- Boston reprobates don't seem to be into scratching train windows too much.
Greetings all,
Since we were talking about it, I decided to put together a page illustrating subway cars at museums, so, check it out: Illustrated Museum Car Roster. It's not complete yet so if you know of any ommissions let me know.
-Dave
Nice work, Dave! A correction: IRT 3352 is at SEASHORE Trolley Museum. It is (barely) operational. I'll try to get you a picture of it next time I'm up there.
Thanks, I'll make the change. What's the number of the R1/9 (i think it's an R1) sitting in your parking lot? (There's a picture of it on the page.) It's not listed on the Seashore roster.
-Dave
Thanks, Dave! Good work, and more great photos for nostalgia and modelling use.
The car # is 175. It is not accessioned nor operational, and is used to store parts (mainly glass).
Hey - any hope of increaseing coverage of the page to inclued cars from other systems, including a certain type of MU car from a certain railroad on Long Island ;) ??
That's be realll neat if it could serve as a ref for all city's rapid transit rail equipment, since most other rail pages neglect subway / mu stuff :(
I'm sure Dave would appreciate volunteers :)
--Mark
You can also add Staten Island car #366. It was accessioned by Seashore in 1993, but is not operational. I'll try to get a picture of this as well next time I'm up there.
The BMT standard at the Shoreline Museum is # 2775. It has a new coat of paint and looks nice on the outside, but it doesn't run and the interior needs a lot of work. They also have a Staten Island car which has been repainted blue. I have a photo of it, and will dig it out to see if there's a number visible.
I am trying to get the roster of the Western Railroad Museum at Rio Vista Formerly the California trolley museum. They are associated with the group that runs historic trolleys along Market St. in SF. It's been hard, since they are only open on weekends. I know they were in the process of restoring a wooden BRT El car that had wound up carrying war workers to the Pittsburg, CA. Munitions plant.
I dug out my photos of SIRT #388 and BMT standard #2775 from the Shore Line Museum. #2775 has a good amount of corrosion along one side, including some perforation. #388 has some metal decay near one of the vestibule doors. Neither car has trolley poles; both are stored on a back track outdoors. It's safe to assume that the SIRT car doesn't run.
Don't forget about R-17 #6608(?) at the Transit Museum. As for the other cars at the museum, I understand they all run except for one; they didn't say which one (it might be the R-27).
Hi-V #3662 runs, I believe. At least it has trolley poles installed.
The H&M car at Shore Line runs. I'll check into its number.
One correction to my previous post: the R-17 at the Transit Museum is #6609.
The H&M car at the Shoreline Museum is #503.
I have a 45x60 NYC Subway Wall Map (Given to me as a retirement gift by an old friend that became a NY State Legislator) dated 1990. I just noticed that it shows the Train to the Plane {labeled "JFK"} as originating at Queensbridge.
I was away from the city during the period of this service. I thought the service started in Midtown. Did it really start at QB? Was if ever called the "JFK" by the public?
The "train to the plane" departed from 57 St./6 Ave. for most of its life. In 1989, that station ceased to be a terminal and instead became a thru station on the line to Queensbridge. The JFK train was extended to Queensbridge along with the other trains that formerly terminated there; they couldn't very well have the terminating JFK trains sit there at 57 St. and block the B or Q trains from getting through. Not long after this extension, the "train to the plane" was cancelled altogether.
As for what people called it, I'm not really sure. The TV commercials called it "the train to the plane"; directional signs pointing people to it called it the "JFK Express". Signs on the train itself used a symbol consisting of a stylized drawing of an airplane in a blue circle. It was unpronounceable.
People called it, "Oh yeah... that express train to the airport, don't get on it, it doesn't go to Kings Highway and they charge extra"
ANYONE KNOW WHEN TRANSIT IS ORDERING NEW CARS FOR THE B DIVISION?
VERY SOON !!!
But not until you turn off the CAPS LOCK key... :-)
The new cars for the B division are supposedly arriving in '99 along with the new cars for the IRT(or is it 2000?).
They will be known as the R-143's.
AND PLEASE DON'T USE ALL CAPS! IT'S THE ELECTRONIC EQUIVALENT OF SHOUTING!
On page 80 of April "Progressive Railroading", the LIRR has an add offering for sale:
1)106 PT72A, PT72B, PT72C, PT75 & PT75A rail cars including 12 parlor cars.
2)64 PT72 Rail cars
3)13 Power Units including FA-1, FA-2, F-7 and F-9 locos.
No asking price but they are accepting bids. I guess that means that the new equipment is here.
FINALLY!!!!!!!!
The PT72 is the Zip stuff. I don't know what the PT dfesignation means, though I know the P used to mean unpowered trailer, MP meant MU, and the T designation used to denote trailers. At least SOME of that equipment was electric in it's life I'm guessing, since I never heard of unpowered Zip cars. The PT75 are thwe larger conventional ones I think. Some of those were electric too, round windows and all. I'm surprised they are dumping the power units but not the locos....
The first 106 cars require an external 600 Volt supply while the other 64 cars have on-board generators.
PT-75's are the so called "ZIP" cars (first purchased and operated as MUs for the World's Fair)--These cars are the 27xx series numbers, and have the large "picture" windows. Also shorter in HEIGHT than other DH coaches. They have the "square" windows in the vestibule doors.
PT designation means Push-Pull coach which requires 600 VDC Head End Power.
P72's are the 29xx series, "Undercar Power Plant" or "Electric Heat " Cars. (Yes they ALL have electric heat now, but, first supplied with steam heat, as the 2900 series cars were converted, they were stenciled "electric heat" to identify which consists would need loco w/ steam genny in it....the name stuck.
PP's are Parlour cars a few of which were set up to operate from the 600VDC HEP from the power unit, but were provided with an undercar enginer-generator, to supply HEP when left by itself (private parties, etc)
I'm really glad that the LIRR is selling its old diesel coaches. But there is *no truth* to the rumor that they'll be sold to an archeological museum :-)
Awww ... you mean they won't become part of some artificial reef like some of the old H&M cars did?
--Mark
[you mean they won't become part of some artificial reef like some of the old H&M cars did?]
That would be demeaning to the fish!
A modest proposal: considering some of the stories I've heard about how frustrating commuting on the LIRR was in the bad not-so-old days, you might be able to make a lot of money for charity by charging people -- Long Islanders, of course -- $1 per blow to smash the cars with a sledgehammer.