As we all know Grand Central Terminal will reopen today October 1 after a 4 year $200 million makeover to restore the 85 year old terminal to its former glory. There is a great article in the Wednesday September 30th NY Daily News. If anyone gets a chance to attend the grand reopening, your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Charlie Muller.
And what a slap in the face to the fellow who was the head of the Grand Central Partnership who got canned by Rudy last week.
Grand Central Partnership has nothing to do with the terminal. They're a Business Improvment District, covering a certain area (uncertain of the boundries) that has resposabilities for keeping the area clean, directing tourists, and improving the quality of life in the area. The only association with the terminal is the name, and that it is the center of the BID.
-Hank
I attended the rededication this morning. I must say that I was delightfully overwhelmed at the amount of people who attended the event. I however do not blame Mayor Giulanni for not attending this event, this was clearly a New York State event not a new york city event. I am dissappointed in the fact that METRO NORTH did very little in terms of the Equipment display. I do not feel personally that they should have cancelled the Croton Harmon Open House for this. I also believe that the Metro North employees have not been recognized as honorably this year as they are at the Croton Harmon Open House. I think that the MTA Was smart in doing one thing today, They took the oppurtunity to push the idea of the connection of the Long Island Railroad into GCT.
Aww man, thay canceled the open house this year?????
Also, Did you notice the LIRR MU parked there, I noticed it last sunday before the IRT LowV trip. I was wondering if anyone knew about it, as it looks like it's been there / will be there. Is this thing gonna be a prototype for the M-7?
One thing that cosistantly bothers me about GCT recently, in the Media, even the MTA spokesman mentions the ceiling, and how it is a replication of our veiw of the heavens. Does anyone here besides me realize that it's a reversed image? The only explanation I ever heard for this was that it is supposed to be 'as g-d would veiw the havens, from above them'
Honestly, I just think the artist screwed up.
-Hank
I have read (I dont remember where) that the view was altered due to artistic license. (The artist decided it would look better the way it was done. Something about spacing would have been a problem.)
There is a good article in the Friday October 2 NY Times Metro Section Page B1 and continues on Page B6. If anyone gets the NY Times at home or on the web it is a very good article. There is also a article in the New York Daily News on pages 20 and 21 about the Grand Central Terminal Makeover.
Charlie Muller
What equipment is on display?
--Mark
Three old cars (not sure what they are), I think one said new York Central on it and appeared to be some sort of dining car. Another had staterooms in it with beds and such; very comfortable looking. The last one I did not get a good look at. They are somewhere near tracks 29, 28, and 26. The LIRR had a two car display (only the last car has anything inside) showcasing the expansion to GCT (see my other post). This last car had no seat and a carpeted floor. Along the insides were large pictures of equipment from the past. Check it out if you can.
I've noticed that a small stretch of elevated structure on SEPTA's
Market-Frankford Line along Frankford Ave. has single "lattice"
supports in the middle of the street in the vicinity of the Margaret-
Orthodox station. This is the only section of the Frankford El with
this style of support "column". Can anyone tell me what the purpose
is for such different supports, and why just that short section of the
El has them? They are very different from the typical el structure
support column. The Market Street El in West Philly should have been
built that way in the very beginning!!
When they "supposedly" begin reconstruction of the Market St.(West Philly) El next year, the supports from east of Park Ave(in Millbourne) to 45th St. will be this single column design.
As you may remember the Frankford El was redone a few years back and while I don't know exactly why only this section was rebuilt, my guess is SEPTA trying it's hand at a new design. Margaret-Orthodox(I just call it Arrot St. to save breath) is a major station on the Frankford El like 52nd is on the Market St. El and they were probably testing the design to see how traffic flows, etc around a major station.
These columns that I'm talking about are not new. They are the
original supports, and are made of steel. It was over 10 years ago
when I first noticed them, long before the Frankford El reconstruction
began. I've heard that the Market Street El is going to have concrete
columns.
You're right and......you're right. Must've still been half-asleep when I did that.
The center columns on Frankford Ave were designed to keep the narrow sidewalks on Frankford Ave clear of obstructions. Sidewalk columns were only needed under the station platform areas. The Frankford El columns are founded in the sidewalk, unlike on Market St where the columns are in the street.
Frankford Ave, in addition to the narrow right of way, was and still remains to some extent a thriving business area, and the columns would have contributed to the sidewalk clutter. This dictated the support scheme.
Yes, Market St as rebuilt will feature concrete columns as well as a concrete structure, although the columns will have a steel "Y" in the upper section.
You guys all almost had me thinking of something else, but I double-checked my map and realized you were at the end of Frankford El.
What I was thinking of is that a portion of the Frankford El WAS actually reconstructed/moved. When I-95 came through, the El was put in the median of I-95 at Spring Garden Street, requiring some rearranging between Girard and 2 Street. I'm not sure of the details, though.
Michael
Strangely enough, when the Frankford El was relocated to the median of I-95, there was the old el structure (minus rails & associated equipment) remaining. Since there had been rumors that the Frankford El was substandard from 1922 on, the engineers decided to load test the abandoned structure. They loaded it to SEVEN times the rated load before the stucture failed.
So, it was revealed that all those stories about the Frankford El "ready to fall down" were just that, stories.
And all the flexing of the structure in the single column sections? It was built to flex, so the stresses would not damage the steel.
I had heard the story that the structure held up under 6 times the design load and still didn't fail. The engineers merely stopped the test. And all those years of slow orders in the early and mid 70's for naught!
The reconstructed el structure on Front St south of Girard is very similar in appearance to the old el north of that point, with the exception that the material used is concrete. The support system is double-column bent. Use of a single-column system would have been difficult given the width of Front St in this area (34' roadway). The big changes from the original in this area in addition to the new segment of el are the relocation of the line into the I-95 median, the Spring Garden stop, the middle layup track south of Spring Garden, and the relocated portal.
The rebuilt 2nd St station was not part of this effort and actually was completed a couple of years after the el was relocated. 2nd St, along with 11th, were the last remaining stations still in their original (1907) condition, more or less, until this time period. The only visual change was the addition of flourescent lighting, which 2nd didn't get until it was rebuilt.
Of course, we all recall the "erector set" temporary el thru the I-95 construction site during the mid-70's also! What a ride for 35 cents.
I forgot to mention in my previous posting that I have a copy of the SEPTA report on the Market-Frankford El rebuilding program options. (1982). I was a writer in the SEPTA Marketing department at the time.
At any rate, the problem was not so much the overall structure as the corrosion in the center horizontal beam, encased as it was in concrete. Apparently it was supposed to have been left clear. The concrete also was deteriorating and the third rail was inadequate even for the trains of 1922 (whose cars were very boring compared to the original Market Street Subway Brill cars). There were also a lot of electricy "leaks" that were causing corrosion. The concrete problems would have been much less if an imperveable membrane had been laid down originally for the concrete to be poured over. Such membranes were available even in the late 1910s. But overall the structure was sound, and that's why SEPTA held out for a rebuilding rather than the city's much more expensive plan of tearing almost everything down and starting almost de novo. I left SEPTA and Phila. soon after so I am not sure what happened next. I did ride the line in November of 1996 and was favorably impressed with the general condition of the structures and the cars, but not so much with the thuggish young men who littered and smoked away. Now when I was a lad....
Why did the newer city-built Frankford segment gave so much trouble, while the older Market line seems as sound as a nut.
Stanley Sandler
Also, the Frankford el was a little suspect as it was a city-sponsored project and graft and material skimping had been alleged by politicians during its construction. It was never as solid as the privately-built Market St el.
Although I've never heard similar stories about the Frankford cars, perhaps there are some.
Actually, Bob, not being a Philly native, I don't remember the "erector set" of the 70s. Any pictures/stories/evidence?
Michael
From me, no, yes and no.
I think I have a couple of photos, but I'd have to find them. I don't know of any online.
Yes, I can relate some stories. I'm going to have some info for Subway Buff's history of Phila lines, coming soon I believe.
No, all the evidence is buried beneath I-95.
My memories go back to the original MKT-FD El Brill cars(1905, I think)We used to love their "Dutch doors" at each end. In those pre-air conditioned days,it was one way to cool off somewhat without paying for a movie. The cars also had chimes, but they were never used. I did get one when the cars were scrapped, as well as a builder's plate ("Easy Access Car").
That said, my favorite city transit trip was on the Ridge Avenue Subway. When I was really little, there was something mysterious about those unique Art Deco cars vanishing into a spooky lower level at the Fairmount station. The cars' deep leather seats (!) were a delight. Sure, the new Broad Street cars had changing destination signs, but they never seemed to work well, and you might get out at "North Philadelphia" rather than "Erie." At Broad & Erie, you caught the #23 car for Germantown. And what a thrill when the old wood-slat seat, slow, rattletrap Nearsides were replaced in 1947 by PCCS!). The #23 could take you to Wayne Junction, where you could transfer to a trackless trolley on Windrum-Wingohocking, a #50 Wayne Avenue (the first Phila PCC line), or Wayne Junction station itself, where you could get a train to New York! the shore!, whatever. You might even catch a glimpse of The Crusader, Reading's streamlined steamer express. Kids waited along the line for that consist to thunder by.
In conclusion, no one can be a rail fan and still believe in progress.
As I recall, the #53 trolley ran on Wayne Ave. and the #50 ran on 5th St. and Rising Sun Ave.
You are correct. Of course, now the 53 bus is on Wayne Ave, and the 57 bus, which replaced the combined 50 trolley and the south end of the 5 bus, travels that area.
Anybody have the new Septa map yet. It's $6.95 but you will see a big difference in many lines and also see the new routes! I picked one up at the transit museum but you can get the map many other places, also.
Yes, I've seen it. It's already slightly incorrect given a couple of recent route modifications (e.g. Route 35 was extended to Wissahickon Loop, but even the electronic voices and announcements on the Ikarus buses don't note this yet either). I also noticed a couple of small glitches, such as Route 25's Bridesburg loop still being shown. It's a bit pricey at nearly $7 but it's worth it for transit fans.
I have been reading some of the posts concerning people's fear of riding a subway through a bad neighborhood.
I say you should be concerned.
I have a 10 year old daughter and I wouldn't let her ride the subway if an angel himself told me to do so. Subways are(as my experience as been) full of slovenly, dirty people as the night progresses and during rush hour, you never know who's being jammed into your back.
Label me whatever you wish, but the safety of my family overrides "getting to my destination".
Label you what I wish? Very well.
Ignorant is number one. I don't know where your experience has been but as a man who ridden countless subways in several US cities after 10pm, I'd have to say that.
Inexperienced is two. Stop me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't sound like you've been on a train recently in any city. A jaunt on the 'A' train might wake you up.
Unreasonably terrified is three. You never know who you're sitting next to. Neither does the person sitting next to you. Or the person sittine next to them. There's no problem in wanting to protect your daughter, but absolutely banning her from even looking at a subway entrance may not be so good.
Bottom line, if you're looking for a forum to trash subways and the people that ride them, you've come to the wrong place.
Why would you be on a subway forum if you hate them so much?
I'll defend this persaon on one point only.
A 10-year old should not be traveling alone/unsupervised by any means.
-Hank
Hank, I wonder if you meant that 10-year olds shouldn't be travelling on the subway alone. My parents both worked, so I was trusted to take the M-13 bus home alone at age 8. (this was 1977) I doubt, however, that my parents would have approved of the fact that I would occasionally take the F train home by myself without their knowledge.
{Hank, I wonder if you meant that 10-year olds shouldn't be travelling on the subway alone. My parents both worked, so I was trusted to take the M-13 bus home alone at age 8. (this was 1977) I doubt, however, that my parents would have approved of the fact that I would occasionally take the F train home by myself without their knowledge.]
And it's been noted elsewhere that children commonly ride alone to and from school on the Tokyo subway starting at age SIX.
I traveled on the subway when i was 13 years old. I was allowed to go to the old Yankee Stadium and i went to Rice High School from back from 1971 to 1975. Now do not get me wrong, i am concerned that you as a parent are correct in caring for your child, but when that child goes to high school, she might have to take the train.
My parents told me to sit in the same car as the conductor until i got off at 125th Street to go Rice High School at 124th St and Lenox Ave. Nobody bothered us cause the Good People of Harlem would keep a eye on us and saw we are going to a Good High School.
Charlie Muller.
No, I meant ANYWHERE. If I had kids, I wouldn't want them traveling by themselves until they were at least 12. At 10, let them travel in groups of 3 or more. At 12, alone is fine.
-Hank
I guess my parents were also 'concerned'...I did not solo on the
subway until January 28, 1969, at the age of 14 years 5 months 9 days.
I went from A.A. to Church Avenue on the #3 (at the time) train at
about 3 in the afternoon (what a mixed consist it was - R17,R12,R15,
R21 R22 and Redbird). Nothing happened. I think it is unwise to have
any child under the age of 12 traveling unsupervised on any form of
public transportation - bus, train, or whatever.
I saw only two 'dirty, slovenly' people on the system yesterday.
They were two homeless guys having lunch on a #2 train, one was
in a wheelchair. They weren't drunk or nothing, just looked like they
needed to have a shower and a stop at the laundremat.
Wayne
[I did not solo on the subway until January 28, 1969, at the age of 14 years 5 months 9 days. I went from A.A. to Church Avenue on the #3 (at the time) train at about 3 in the afternoon (what a mixed consist it was - R17,R12,R15, R21 R22 and Redbird).]
Now here is a REAL transit buff!
I wonder what that Redbird was. None of the single-unit IRT R units came from the factory decked out in red, although the R-17s were originally maroon. Some, if not all of the R-12s and R-14s were repainted red before the silver-and-blue scheme came along.
Do you know what the car numbers were?
The R-33 and R-36 (mainline cars-double units) were delivered in bright red, quite similar to the current Redbird paint job, except that the front sign panels and gates were also red (as opposed to black, as they are now).
When I was 11, I started using the bus to go to school; I was able to get a bus pass in the 6th grade. Then when I realized this same pass was good on the TRAIN, well, I only used the bus when I had to. If only my parents knew how often I used the subway when I was in the 6th grade, I might not have been around to write this post.
Now that I'm a parent of 2 kids, I wouldn't let them on the subway at such a young age unless they were in a group and I was sure they knew where they were going. They're growing up in a suburb of NYC; they don't get the "street smarts" kids get growing up in NYC seem to acquire.
--Mark
Of course, if that A train were made up of R-10s, it would give you insomnia and an adrenaline rush at the same time, especially up CPW.
Why do you - Jack - love the subways so much, that their honor and "good name" is more important to you than peoples foolish hobby of actually thinking of a public utility in terms of it's usefulness and safety, and not its "railfan value"!
Don't get me wrong.
If there's some kind of fault that I see in the subway of any kind, I don't just shrug it off and say "Oh, that's alright."
Subways as a public utility. Yes they are. But you(I would assume) look at a subway and say "Is this the train that will get me to Times Square?"
I look at it and say "Hey, this is a nice car. How many of these are on order? Who made them? etc, etc."
I'm a guy that loves trains. I don't just see them as a means of transportation, even though that's what they are.
Some people look at paintings and see the artist's creativity coming through with every brushstroke.
I see paint on a canvas in the general form of a tree.
You look at things one way, and I another.
I don't have my head in the clouds. I not a nut.
But some people have bumper stickers that say "I'd rather be fishing."
Mine says "I'd rather be on the 'G' train"(not really, of course).
Mine would say, "I'd rather be on the A train". Of R-10s, of course.
I miss those cars.
My wife once, maybe twice, had a fit when I sent one of my kids (who went to work with dad) to the corner delli for coffee & donuts (116th & Broadway). The kids thought it was c-o-o-l. At a "bring your daughter to work" day, I took a bunch of girls for a walk. We went to St. John The Devine (they were filming a movie, just dumb luck), then went for Icecream, I never heard any bad comments from their parents.
My point: Use a little causion, but enjoy what the city has to offer, there are so many great things to see & do here, don't hide in your "safe" neighborhood !
Mr t__:^)
I'd never criticize a parent for being concerned about their children, but you have to be consistent and rational about relative risks. What do I fear, given that I work surrounded by numbers every day? The auto.
I fear auto accidents. There is a mis-impression that subway victimization is beyond your control, whereas you are in control behind the wheel. But the children of two of our friends have already been to the hospital in auto accidents which were not their parents' fault. With these heavy sport utility vehicles, a side impact fender bender is enough to kill a child. Instead of smashing the door, the bumper smashes through the window into his/her head.
I fear having my children become teenagers and start driving someday. I was a responsible nerd, but my brother and sister each totaled a car or two. Several kids in my high school died in auto accidents. Meanwhile, all the teens in my neighborhood ride the trains and buses all the time, often to school. We hired one teen to watch our kids, and she brought them to Manhattan for the day on the F. No problems, to my knowledge, ever.
So I live here in Brooklyn, where we only drive recreationally and my children can get around without driving until they are in their 20s. But I'm still concerned about having them get killed crossing the street. I bring them on the subway with me all the time (they are aged 4 and 6), but I still insist on grabbing their hand when we cross -- I won't even let them walk next to me without holding on. I'm not sure when I'll be ready to let them cross by themselves. I'd let them ride the bus alone first -- if they didn't have to cross the street to get to it.
The only time I'd worry about them taking the subway is 3 to 4 p.m., when rowdy teens account for the majority of the riders. But I wouldn't hesitate to send them to a junior high in Manhattan if things worked out that way, as long as they stayed there until the early part of the rush hour.
Are you (A concerned parent) saying that you wouldn't let your 10 year old ride the subway alone or ride at all. I agree that she probably shouldn't ride alone at her age, but I don't see why she can't ride with someone. I rode MaBSTOA bus routes to/from school when I turned 9, and I admit that many times I took the long way home or took a ride on the subway because I was a transit buff.
Many of us have no choice but to use the subways to get around so I'd hope that any child would eventually ride the subway.
Put it this way: you couldn't have pried me away from the subway after we moved to Jersey. I was hooked on it. No trip to New York would be complete without a subway ride. Of course, back then I usually rode with my folks, as we would go to New York together. Later, if there was time before our bus was supposed to leave from Port Authority, I would take a joyride on an A train up CPW by myself while my mother and sister waited for the bus. I rode many A trains by myself back then on Saturday afternoons (with one or two D trains of R-1/9s for good measure), and nothing ever happened. I almost missed my bus once, though.
My folks were never afraid to use the subway for as long as they've lived in the U. S., much to the amazement of their relatives who lived in Brooklyn, and this attitude rubbed off on me. (I know they had to have ridden a Triplex train or two back in the 50s, but they don't remember.)
I can tell that you haven't been on the system for quite a while.
Although it is still necesary to be careful, as you would be anywhere on any kind of place late at night, the subway is much more safer than the way it was in the 80s.
Why would someone who hasn't used the system for so long even bother to post a message here? I wonder...
In one of Larry's posts, he mentions auto accidents. My question is
why are the bumbers on SUV so high? Some are as high as four feet.
A saden doesn't seem to protect a person from such a collision.
Even the bumber on busses are lower.
Guess the only safe way is to drive a tank :)
Yesterday, Larry Littlefield posted a message regarding the future labor pool. I don’t think people have given it much thought, or aren’t concerned at the moment, however, within ten to fifteen years, organizations may have great difficulty finding "qualified" people to perform jobs.
I use the word "qualified", because it is my opinion that there is a segment of the labor force today that is either not qualified, or unwilling , to adequately perform all the tasks pertaining to their jobs. Case in point. My experience here in Chicago has led me to believe that a bus driver or ‘L’ operator’s job is to "make three trips". If they, by chance, carry riders, then so be it. I have been subject to a few horrendous rides on the ‘L’ recently. Jerky operation and hard braking is to be part of the rider’s experience. This is the result of offering early retirement to the most experienced and seasoned operators on the system.
This posting is not to blame those whose job it is to drive us around town. I place the blame mainly with management and the unions. Management time is preoccupied with obtaining as much subsidy money as possible. Scheduling and running buses and trains seems to take a back seat. The union makes it almost impossible to get rid of the "bad actors", or those unable to perform their jobs.
What is the answer? I don’t have one. Although, I’ve felt that subsidy money should be tied to performance and customer satisfaction. CTA, or any other transit operating agency, should not expect to receive the same amount, or more, subsidy money year after year to offer less service and carry less customers.
However, when the baby boomers, of which I’m one, start leaving the job market over the next 10 - 20 years, it will have a distinct impact on many organizations. Service and quality will most likely suffer, and we the public, paying for goods and services will be getting the short end of the stick.
Responsible debate/dialog is always invited.
As us boomers age there will be fewer new workers to step up to take our places and we will need more services. New workers will become very important.
The CTA must cover 50% of their operating expesnes from fares. If they cannot collect more fares then they must cut expenses.
PACE and other IL. transit agencies do not have the same requirements.
Subsidies for the freeway and local street systems are substantial but are not in the spotlight as funding for transit is. If transit is a needed service that government provides why do they need to collect fares? It's a throw back to the old days when there were no cars transit generated revenue in the form profits for the owners of the systems and in franchise fees that were paid to the cities.
Archaic work rules, fare policies, and public policies that support highway users keep tranit from being as effective as it could be in our urbanized areas. In Europe the cost of Gas for cars is much higher (3 to 4 times). the difference in cost is due to taxes collected that discourage auto use and collect cash for the transportation infrastructure. Privatizaion is touted as a solution but that is a boondogle. Good service funding, planning and reasonable work rules will do much more to enable transit to become what it should be.
As long as we keep focusing on labor bennefits (which are needed) and farebox recovery ratio's we will not get to the real issue of providing mobility for an aging society.
And Lary I do not think that Jeepneys or gypsy vans are the answer, but who knows.
I killed my entire Netscape preferences folder, so my cookie problem is all taken care of. Of course I forgot to back up my bookmarks and my address book...
Darn. Now SubTalk doesn't remember who I am each time I come back. If I had enough hair to pull, I'd be pulling it out by now!
This is only a test.
Tim, what are you testing?
I'm having a helluva time with my Netscape cookies. As soon as I post this message, I'll see if I have the problem licked!
It doesn't look like I did. Sorry for taking up space on SubTalk, but I'm just going NUTS!
A few months ago, it started "forgetting" my name and display configuration, first after a few days, then every day. Now, the configuration is sticking, but the name never sticks, and now, it won't show the "read" posts in a different color, even after trying to reset it in Preferences.
But when I use the old account on my friend's computer, (which is only once in awhile) everything works.
All those things are functions of your browser, not of the site. Try reinstalling whichever browser it is that you use. Of course if you use IE, good luck trying to uninstall it in order to reinstall it.
-dave
Subtalk remembers when I visit making new messages and how many new ones there are but since I upgraded to netscape 4.06 it never remembers YOUR NAME or EMAIL Address and I have to type it in each time...
Go figure...
Help !!! I am having Cookie problems with MS Internet Explorer. I have Windows98 and Plus98 but have had no luck reinstalling Explorer. Any detailed help in restoring my system will be greatly appreciated and rewarded....if successful. E-mail replies only. Don't want to abuse Dave's hospitality...
What Eric describes is what is happening to me. I have reinstalled Netscape and it still doesn't remember who I am. I have reinstalled Netscape 4.06 twice from scratch with no success. Ideas, anyone?
does anyone know if the metro north croton harmon open house is going to occur this year? i haven't heard anything about it yet. thanks.
sorry to bear bad news. due to the grand central project there will be **no** open house this year.
SOURCE: official metro north web page
ps- did you see the latest version of the MTA web site. the NYCT page took a hint from this site and now has an arts for transit section showing art at various stations, some of which are also on this site (Not the same pics!)
If you have a funny story about something that has happened to motormen,please respond below.
Eric B stopped by yesterday with tables from the MTA's East River Crossing study. One table shows what will happen if the city-state game of Manhattan Bridge chicken carries through to its logical conclusion -- loss of service. It's ugly.
The BMT southern division would, or course, have its service cut by half (25 trains) to Manhattan. But 14 trains would be added to the F, and 9 trains would be added to the Fulton St line. So in theory everyone can get in, but the waits would be longer for trains and inconvenient tranfers would add about 10-15 minutes to everyone's trip. Crowding would increase until the transfer points.
Brighton service to Manhattan would fall from 22 to 12, and those 12 would crawl through the Montigue tunnel. That alone would add 10+ mintues to the trip to Midtow -- hellish crowding might mean a longer trip Downtown (than the current DeKalb transfer) as well. The plan seems to be to drive people to take a bus to the F (more time lost), or take an extended shuttle to an inconvenient transfer to the A local (another 10 minute loss). 18 E trains would be the Fulton Express, and the C would terminate at WTC. The Brighton is packed right now at peak hour. Eventually, the diminished quality of life will convince enough people will move away, to be replaced by those who don't work in Manhattan or don't work at all.
The N would become a local, and cut from 10 to 8 trains, and the R would be cut from 10 to 8. Both would crawl though the Montigue tunnel, but they would be much more crowded. Hellish crowding might induce people to go to the F at 9th St, but that long change will take 5 - 10 minutes. All 28 Fs will be locals, presumably to allow frequent transfers with the N/R. Of course the F would still be a slow local in Manhattan. South of 34th St, there would be no 6th Ave express. Perhaps those from Bay Ridge will switch to express buses, but with the Gowanus Expressway similarly in disarray, that wouldn't be much of an option time-wise. But at least you wouldn't be packed in like sardines. So much for the renaisance of Sunset Park. People with choices will not move in, and natives who advance will, once again, move out. This could otherwise be Brooklyn's next great neighborhood -- in some ways it already is.
The worst end gets it again. The M is gone, so service is reduced from 13 trains an hour to 9. And that's just as far as Pacific, where one will be faced with getting on a jammed N/R. Again, perhaps the idea is people will take the bus to the 28 Fs. Or move out.
Things aren't much better if the MTA got the city to pay for its preferred option -- a one-side connection to the Rutgers tunnel. With trains backing up at the Manhattan Stations (all Brooklyn trains would be locals -- Q loses 5 minutes), you only get 30 trains through the tunnel. The Q would go through the tunnel, and the D would still crawl though the Montigue tunnel. The N and R would be no worse off than today (which is of course worse off than when the bridge was fully open) -- until Pacific Street, when all the B riders would have to pack on. But the MTA proposes a transfer to from Lawrence to Jay, so if you can inhale for two stops you can make a second transfer (more lost time). Once again, the M is eliminated, cutting west end riders from 13 trains to 9.
The MTA claims the Rutgers connection would take five years. It had no other suggestions for this problem. And it has no intention of even paying for this.
What about the "NEW" Franklin Ave shuttle and the new IRT transfer??
I know this would add two more trains to my trip (I'm D to F live in Brooklyn, work in Long Island City) But one train more for Brighton Line Pax might not be as bad as going through the mess at Dekalb??
As Larry mentioned, the shuttle would be extended, (to Brighton Beach) but only 7 trains per hour. Remember, the extended single tracking north of Park Place. Also, it would only be two-cars for 170 ft stations. The plans said "consider double tracking to Fulton, and extending platforms to hold 8 75 ft cars", but it looks like they are not going with that now.
I hope they don't completely burn their bridges behind them and at least leave provisions for the double track and long stations. Someone said in another post that the bridge over Atlantic was removed, so I hope the new one will have space for two tracks, and that they don't go and build concrete structures (walls, electrical rooms, etc) at the ends of the platforms making it impossible to extend them, figuring it doesn't really matter, it's just a shuttle. They know the Manhattan Bridge could go someday, and they know the Franklin line would help in such an event, so that would be an idiotic move indeed.
(Is the MTA study public yet?)
The Rutgers connection appears to be a difficult and very expensive engineering proposition. At least on a map it looks like a tight fit. If the connection from the BMT to the IND is made north of Myrtle from the south-side tracks, it looks like tunneling would be required sharply west under Tillary, then sharply north under Jay Street where you might have the possibility of hooking it up with 'Y' switch to both the A/C and F tracks.
Another possibility that was mentioned back in the early 80's when the Manhattan Bridge work started is to build a connection from the BMT either north of Parkside Avenue or north of Prospect Park to the IND via a tunnel west under Prospect Park to the IND 9th Street tunnel just east of 7th Avenue. At that point 'Y' switches could direct trains to the local or better yet, the currently unused express tracks. Again, we are talking about massive financial and engineering consideration.
A cheap variation on one of the 'official' scenarios would be to institute peak-hour 'F' express service from Kings Highway to Jay Street or from 18th Avenue to Jay Street. It would be a bus-subway connection for Brighton passengers. But at least the subway portion will be pretty direct as the 'F' has dedicated facilities into Manhattan, with a direct platform connection to the A/C at jay Street for downtown passengers.
It looks like we are talking at least $2B here, any ideas oh how to raise that kind of money??
Personally, I don't think connections such as the one to the Rutgers need to cost $2 billion -- or even $700 million, as the 63rd St connection has (some say that cost includes the additional cars purchased for V service). I don't think they should cost more than the amount being spent on the bridges as they are. And if pulling the trains off the Manhattan Bridge (or just using the bridge a rush hours) prolongs its useful life), the connections could be cheaper.
The MTA plans to use both federal and state tax dollars -- in part funded by city residents -- to pay for an LIRR connection to GCT, while cash cowing the city. I have a better idea.
There is a city income tax surcharge, dedicated to the police, which is about to expire. I say renew it for ten years, dedicated to new subway and road improvments in the city (the governor promised the subway could be maintained without more money, right?). That surcharge brought in $500 million per year. It could be used for the connection to LaGuardia, Manhattan Bridge replacement, the top part of the 2nd Ave Subway, and other improvements. Perhaps even for some of those SI street improvments. As part of the deal, I'd exempt the program from all those cost increasing state laws. Perhaps we could agree to pay each state legislator $100,000 to "monitor the program" -- a revolting step which may be cost effective.
Then you'd add a surcharge of equivalent value to the city commuter income tax paid by suburban commuters. It would probably bring in $150 million per year. It would be used for the LIRR to GCT connection, Metro North to Penn Station connections, and other infrastructure as the suburbs see fit. Connecticut would benefit from Metro North improvements, but Connecticut commuters would pay the tax. Tough luck for Jersey, but with the money its sucking out of the city through the Port Authority turnabout is fair play.
Tax increase, right? Nope. I'd cut the New York State Income Tax by the same amount the city income tax and commuter taxes were increased. And cut some of that excessive state spending, on Medicaid in the city and on schools outside the city, which spend 40 percent more than the national average. Upstate, which has all the infrastructure it needs but fewer people to use it, would be left with a state tax cut. It would not have to fund downstate investment, but neither would it receive more public spending it doesn't need in exchange for spending downstate does need.
While the surcharges and increases you propose may add up financially, I can't see the legislature approving any of them. I still think the last thing NYS or NYC need to do now is increase taxes. Especially with the stock market roller-coastering. We still have a high-tax reputation. And as you know, most of the business decision-makers reside in the suburbs, raising their taxes creates a bad image of NYS & NYC. This is another case of no easy solutions. How do you see the 'powers that be' handling the Manhattan Bridge situation once it reaches critical mass? I haven't seen anything this dire in the press, maybe after the elections it will receive more focus.
The idea isn't increase taxes, it is to redistribute revenues from the Vampire State to a dedicated transporation fund. State taxes would fall as much as local taxes rose. And what would the Vampire State have to cut? How about Medicaid. New York State spends $30 billion per year on Medicaid, more than Texas and California (both of which have more people) put together. The city coughs up $4 billion of that, and the state kicks in $9 billion. Its' all a huge racket, basically -- the services are no better here than anywhere else. In many ways they are worse. But the benficiaries have their hooks into both political parties in Albany.
High taxes? In fiscal 1994 New York City's state and local taxes (as a share of personal income) were 40 percent above the national average, and its spending on transportation, education, parks and cultural affairs was 13 percent below average. In fiscal 97 the city's state and local taxes were just 25 percent above average, and its spending on transportation, education, parks and culture was 25 percent below average (40 percent below for transportation). So we're even, or at least equally behind. New York City is being drained by the rest of the state, and New York State (and the Northeast) is being drained by the rest of the country, and both are being drained by the medical/social service complex here.
Being 25% above average is still a handicap for NYC & NYS. You are right about Medicaid, and you also know what will happen to any attempt to reign it in. So basically we are back to square one. The short term for transit looks good. The long-term looks bad because like the old song says - good times don't last forever. NYC has long-term structural problems in it's economy. The schools here turn out cretins. There are too many poor people here for the rest of us working suckers to support forever. Upper middle-class and middle-class people are still leaving the city, being 'replaced' by a few Manhattan yuppies and tons of poor immigrants, not a good economic scenario. Realistically, the trick is to move out of the city and state before it really hits the fan. I live here but I think the smart folks were those who bailed out to the suburbs in the 1950s and 60s. They missed the crisis-to-crisis years of the 70s and 80s. Their kids went to decent schools and they rode nice clean trains into NYC. So property taxes are high, Uncle Sam lets us all deduct that anyway.
[NYC has long-term structural problems in it's economy. The schools here turn out cretins. There are too many poor people here for the rest of us working suckers to support forever. Upper middle-class and middle-class people are still leaving the city, being 'replaced' by a few Manhattan yuppies and tons of poor immigrants, not a good economic scenario. Realistically, the trick is to move out of the city and state before it really hits the fan. I live here but I think the smart folks were those who bailed out to the suburbs in the 1950s and 60s. They missed the crisis-to-crisis years of the 70s and 80s. Their kids went to decent schools and they rode nice clean trains into NYC. So property taxes are high, Uncle Sam lets us all deduct that anyway.]
New York actually has managed to maintain more of a middle class and working class than have many other large cities. My guess (from the perspective of a suburban commuter) is that the highly visible extremes of wealth and poverty make it seems like there's no longer any middle. That's not to say that the large number of poor aren't a burden, and your observation about the schools is pretty much correct.
One aspect about suburbanization - something that city residents often don't realize - is that many of the suburbs are less than idyllic these days. Yes, the city's suburbs include places like Darien and Pound Ridge and Short Hills and Garden City. But they also include Bridgeport and Mt. Vernon and Paterson and Roosevelt. Many of the problems often associated with the city are now plagueing the suburbs.
The data does not support your conclusion, at least in the handful of surviving cities -- New York, Boston, San Fran.
You are observing the "first wave." Housing built for the middle class of the time hits 50 years old and becomes undesirable and cheap. It is passed down to moderate income households for a generation (often subdivided) and deteriorates further, then is passed to welfare recipients and deteriorates further, then is abandoned. In most cities, that is the only wave. Of the 19 cities which had over 200,000 people in 1900 (major, pre-auto cities), only two have lost less than 20 percent of their population -- NYC and S.F. Most have lost more than one-third.
But in NYC, there is a "second wave" -- people with jobs and money re-occupying the center. In 1940, Manhattan was the poorest borough, but today it is the richest county in the country with a per capita income of $64,000 (Fairfield, #2, is $47,000). This wave of wealth has swept into Brooklyn. In the 1980s, median household income almost doubled in Brownstone Areas of Brooklyn, as rooming houses were re-converted to luxury and middle-income housing. My father in law left Brooklyn for the south shore of L.I. in the 1960s, but my house probably now costs more than any on the south shore, save for the five towns and the waterfront. Good thing I bought when I did. Nor are all the immigrants poor. East Flatbush has a labor force participation rate which is higher than Nassau. 25 percent of all NYC immigrants are college grad.
Meanwhile the first wave is moving out into the suburbs (and some of the outer areas of the city) built for the middle (not upper-middle) class in the first 15 years after WWII. Houses in middle income communities are being subdivided, often in violation of the zoning. Not that Garden City will cease to be Garden City -- Park Avenue was Park Avenue even when Manhattan was the poorest borough. But don't be too sure fleeing the city is a good idea, unless you are very confident in where you are moving to. The two waves have moved, at varying speeds, for 60 years, and have never gone into reverse.
Chicago is seeing the reinvestment that happened in NYC. The near north side and printers row area to the south. Other areas have been more stable.
As some of the early suburbs age they are experiencing some of th same things that happened in the city, but many neighborhoods in chigago were sold to solid middle class minorities as the block busters made their money.
Urban lifestyles are enjoying a renisance in many cities across the country. Living in town beats commuting.
The binder I have from the study includes both horizontal and elevation maps of the connection. Both N&S bound tracks branch off immediately north of Tillary. Both sides remain on Flatbush Av, descending at 2.7--3.3% grades, until; Sands St, where they start curving onto Jay St. (The Sbound track passes under both lines, and then ascends to Jay St level.) Then, they merge into the B tracks at Front St., missing the York St station.
The Prospect Pk connection was in the long list of alternatives, but dropped out because it was too expensive, disruptive, and would only benefit the Brighton line.
The incrased bus service, which I never mentioned in any of my posts:
B45 (8 per hour) B67 (5 per hr) extended over Manhattan Br to City Hall
B99 Empire Blvd/Prospect Pk sta. and Atlantic Av.--City Hall via Manh. Br. (12 per hour each)
B51--eliminated
B71extended via Battery Tunnel and West or Church St to lower Manhattan
A City owned lot between Delancey and Broome Sts, or another spot would be needed to store buses.
Ideas I had were to add special regular fare express bus routes to existing ones on Ocean and Coney Island Avenues. Perhaps one out on Flatbush as well.
Use articulated buses
Changfe route from Cortelyou-Coney Island Av-Church to a direct crossing via Beverly Rd, to the expressway.
And to Larry, everything is not local when the bridge is closed, with the connection built. The Q does still go express. The N is local though, and the B a shuttle as you said. Without the connection, everything is local, though.
Here's the real skinny:
All these bridges will be FUBAR to all subway traffic within the next 20 years. The MTA should right now begin to study digging tunnels under the East River. Only problem seen is linking new tunnel to existing ROW in Williamsburg along with the usual NIMBY wimps crying foul all the way to Judge Koch's chambers. As for the Franklin Shuttle: 4 car length platforms as an even compromise and run the line to Coney Island
Here's what I don't understand. The connection as you describe it would run about 2,000 feet -- less than 1/2 mile -- with two switches, an no stations. Meanwhile, to connect the south side tracks to the Cranberry tunnel you need only run about 1,500 feet, less than 1/3 of a mile. Connections on the other end -- from the Rutgers near the waterline to entrance to Grand Street, and from the Cranberry up Ann St to the lower level of City Hall, are about the same distance. That's 1 1/2 total miles of tunnel with no stations, for a set of connections which would give Brooklyn all the capacity and speed it needs with no bridge.
Now consider this. In L.A. they shut down the subway program because it was costing an astronomical $200 million per mile -- including stations. At that rate, the connections would cost just $150 million! Even of you assume the four grade-separated "flying junctions" would add $50 million to the cost, you're talking $200 million -- only as much money as they just spent renovating Grand Central! If the connections will cost less than $500 million, why won't they do it? And if they will cost more than $500 million, why does it cost so much?
Moving the Manhattan Bridge services to the A/C Cranberry tubes or the Rutgers F line tubes is not a cure all. Service reliability becomes a problem when more than 3 services have to use the same trackage. If a lay-down somewhere causes reroutes, matters are complicated. In my opinion, two costly alternatives are needed: (1) Brighton Express tracks hooked up to the F express tracks at Prospect Park for present day Q service; (2) new underriver tube to take the present day B/D/N services off the bridge from Dekalb with a cut off on the Manhattan side to Canal/Grand St. stations.
I understand your point about reroutes, but capital is scarce. Having redundant tracks for rush hour disasters is an inefficient use of it. Remember the existing plan is to do nothing and hope for the best.
And with all the connections, you don't have to have more than three services on one track: F, B, D through the Rugters, A, C, N though the Cranberry (N into the Broadway Express at City Hall Lower Level); and Q, R, M through the Montigue. Both the B and N could bypass DeKalb at rush hour, speeding them along. The V from Queens could terminate at 2nd Ave in Manhattan.
Moreover, you could keep the Manhattan Bridge open for rush hour emergency re-routes. With fewer trains going over (and going over both sides equally) there would be less wear and tear, and the bridge might actually last. Today there are perhaps 1,000 trains going over the bridge every day, and only one side.
To answer your first reponse, I don't know why they don't consider a Cranberry connection. It was never even in the long list of options.
It does look pretty simple. The intersection of Jay and High St (where the IND station is, and the street becomes Cranberry on the other side pf Cadman Plaza) is not even a block away from the bridge tracks. It's only about 100 feet away, and add another few hundred for the curve of the Cranberry line from Jay to High/Cranberry! You could branch this connection right off of the new Rutgers connecting tracks.
But when I asked the ERC officials why it wasn't on there, they were pretty vage, saying it would be disruptive. Perhaps it might be because of the Brooklyn Bridge ramp that is another few hundred feet away? I don't know.
(Why no Cranberry connection?) Perhaps it has something to do with the Brooklyn Heights Association -- the only political players in Brooklyn rich enough that the politicians have to take them seriously (they have to listen to the Hasidm because they vote in a block, but they don't take them seriously). To merge the south side tracks on the Manhattan side of High St, you'd have to do some work under the streets of Brooklyn Heights, since the front of the station is on the border of Brooklyn Heights and the park. If they don't like it, you could always eliminate High St station as part of the same project and merge under the park.
And yes, you would have to get under the Brooklyn Bridge approach, which might require shutting it down in the middle of the night a few times. Compare that with their plans for the Williamsburg Bridge subway tracks (sorry, no service for months).
Which all goes to show you how unimportant people think this is.
What if we still created the Rutgers/Cranberry connection but STILL used the bridge for "V" service. Only the "inner tracks" would be used (one in each direction). V trains leaving Brooklyn would leave Stillwell Ave down the Brighton Line and use the inner track on the North side of the Bridge, run up 6th Ave and 63rd St to Queens Blvd and terminate at 71st / Continental Aves. V trains leaving Queens would use the 60th ST tunnel with the N & R, switch to express down 7th Ave & Broadway to the lower level of Canal St, use the inner track on the south side of the Manhattan Bridge into Dekalb and then head via the Brighton Line back to Stillwell Ave. This could be a rush hour only service to "conserve" the Bridge.
Another suggestion (not completely thought out): What is the feasibility of converting the Brighton Line (in Brooklyn) to IRT clearances (extending station widths a bit, basically) and connecting the Brighton Line near 7th Ave to the IRT 2/3/4/5? Send the Brighton Line trains up the West Side to 137th St or into the Bronx to Dyre Ave. "V" trains would terminate at Grand Street maintaining service there. This would remove some of the burden on the Manhattan Bridge.
--Mark
I think the IRT lines are at or near capacity, so hooking into the IRT doesn't help.
The thing about connecting the tunnels on both ends is there would be routing flexibility, from Jay St or DeKalb/Pacific and from each of the three Manhattan trunks. Service could be adjusted as needs change over time. V now, Q later.
Dear Sir/madam:
My friend recently gave me a 1964 World's Fair Subway Map. What
were the schedules and operations for the subways during those days?
The map DIDN'T have any schedules or times on them? I don't know what
time which train operated? Does anyone have the schedules, so I can
copy them and attach them to the map? Were these markers the trains
displayed then?:
IRT trains
Markers Discription of train
1 Broadway-7th Avenue Local
2 7th Avenue Express (White Plains Road)
3 7th Avenue Express (Lenox Avenue)
4 Lexington Avenue Express (Jerome Avenue)
5 Lexington Avenue Express (Dyre Avenue)
5 Lexington Avenue Thru Express (White Plains Road)
6 Lexington Avenue Local/ Pelham Local-Express
7 Flushing Local-Express
8 3rd Avenue Local
9 Dyre Avenue Shuttle
SS 42nd Street Shuttle
SS Lenox Avenue Shuttle
SS Bowling Green South Ferry Shuttle
IND trains
Markers Discriptions
A 8th Avenue Express (Washington Heights)
AA 8th Avenue Local (Washington Heights)
BB 6th Avenue Local (Washington Heights)
CC 8th Avenue Local (Concourse)
D 6th Avenue-Houston Street Express (Concourse)
E 8th Avenue Express (Queens)
F 6th Avenue Express (Queens)
GG Brooklyn-Queens Crosstown Local
HH Rockaway Shuttles
BMT trains
Markers Discriptions
J Jamaica Express
JJ Jamaica Local
KK Broadway-Brooklyn Local
LL 14th Street-Canarsie Local
M Myrtle Avenue Express
MJ Myrtle Avenue Local
N Broadway-Sea Beach Express via Bridge
Q Broadway-Brighton Express via Bridge
QB Broadway-Brighton Local via Bridge
QT Broadway-Brighton Local via Tunnel
RR Broadway-4th Avenue Local via Tunnel
SS Franklin Avenue Shuttle
SS Culver Shuttle
T Broadway-West End Express via Bridge
TT West End Local via Nassau Street Loop
I don't know what time these trains ran. What are the schedules for
each of these trains in 1964?
The letter and number markers are correct, although not all of the BMT letters actually appeared on every train (some of the cars stilll in service back then had no end signs), plus the old number code was still being used.
I'm going to attempt to list hours of operation as best I can; some may not be right. I'm sure our other Subtalkers will correct me if I'm wrong.
IRT
1: 242nd St. and South Ferry at all times; weekdays some trains terminated at 137th St.
2: 241st St.-White Plains Rd. and New Lots Ave. at all times.
3: 145th St. and Flatbush Ave. 5:00 AM to 9:00 PM Mon-Sat. and 7-ish AM to 9 PM Sunday.
4: Woodlawn and Atlantic Ave. at all times; rush hours to Utica Ave.; nights to Flatbush Ave. making all local stops.
5. Dyre Ave. or E. 180th St. and Bowling Green; rush hours to Utica Ave; evenings to South Ferry.
5. Thru Express: 241st St-White Plains Rd and Utica Ave., express from E. 180th St. to 149th St.-3rd Ave. peak direction
6. Pelham Bay Park and Brooklyn Bridge; evenings to South Ferry.
6. Pelham Express: Pelham Bay Park and Brooklyn Bridge; local in Manhattan; express from E. 177th St. and 3rd Ave. peak direction.
7. Flushing local. Times Square and Main St. at all times.
7. Flushing express. peak direction.
7. World's Fair super express. Nonstop from Queensboro Plaza to Willets Pt. Queens-bound middays; Manhattan-bound evenings.
8. All times.
9 Nights.
SS. 42nd St. Shuttle. All times.
SS. Bowling Green - South Ferry Shuttle. Weekdays.
BMT
J. 168th St. and Broad St. All times. Skip-stop along Jamaica Ave. Manhattan-bound during AM rush hours; express from Eastern Parkway to Essex St. Manhattan-bound AM rush hours; Jamaica-bound PM rush hours. Trains with signs were marked #15.
JJ. AM rush hours: 168th St. and Canal St. Skip-stop along Jamaica Ave. PM rush hours: Canal St and Crescent St. or Rockaway Parkway. Trains with signs were marked #14.
KK. Same notes as JJ.
LL. All times. Trains with signs were marked #16.
M. Nassau St. express. This marking was used for rush hour "Bankers Special" trains in those days. They ran local along the Brighton line to Manhattan via the Montague St. tunnel to Chambers St. during AM rush hours, then deadheaded over the Manhattan Bridge back to Brooklyn. During PM rush hours, it was the opposite: they deadheaded over the bridge to Chambers St., then ran local via the Montague St. tunnel via the Brighton line.
M aka #10. Myrtle-Chambers. Metropolitan Ave. and Chambers St. rush hours only.
MJ. All times. This marking never appeared on the trains themselves.
N. 57th St. and Coney Island at all times, skipping DeKalb Ave. during rush hours.
Q. 57th St. and Brighton Beach 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM Mon-Fri.
QB. Astoria and Coney Island via Manhattan Bridge 7:00 PM to 6:00 AM Mon-Fri and all day Saturday and Sunday.
QT. Astoria and Coney Island via Montague St. tunnel 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM Mon-Fri.
RR. 71st-Continental Ave. and 95th St. 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM Mon-Fri; other times to 57th St.
T. Astoria and Coney Island 5:00 AM to 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM to 8:00 PM Mon-Fri; 57th St. and Coney Island 5:00 AM to 8:00 PM Saturday. Older equipment was marked #3.
TT. Chambers St. and 9th Ave. or Bay Parkway rush hours Mon-Fri.; to Coney Island 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM Mon-Fri. Between 36th St. and Coney Island 8:00 PM to 5:00 AM Mon-Sat. and all day Sunday.
SS. Frankiln Ave. Shuttle. All times.
SS Culver Shuttle. All times.
IND
A. 207th St and Lefferts Blvd. All Times
AA. 168th St. Wash Hts. and Hudson Terminal. All times except rush hours.
BB. 168th St. Wash Hts. and 34th St.-6th Ave. Rush hours only.
CC. Bedford Park Blvd. and Hudson Terminal. Rush hours only.
D. 205th St. and Coney Island. All times; express in Bronx peak direction during rush hours.
E. 179th St. and Hudson Terminal; rush hours to Euclid Ave. or Rockaway Park or Far Rockaway. Express in Manhattan and Brooklyn rush hours only; express in Queens between Queens Plaza and 71st-Continental Ave. all times.
F. 179th St and Broadway-Lafayette St; nights and weekends to 34th St.-6th Ave.
GG. 71st-Continental Ave. and Smith-9th Sts. all times.
HH. Euclid Ave. and Rockaway Park or Far Rockaway all times except rush hours.
Whew!
That's about right. The Q ran local in middays (I don't know why), and there was also the banker's s[ecials from 95th that ran over the bridge to Chambers and back through the tunnel in the AM, and vice-versa PM. I believe it was express from 59th to Pacific. I forgot whether it stopped at Dekalb or not. Neither specials were listed on the versions of the map that do have the timetables.
You've got a good memory....most of the route designations shown are OK. Some corrections, though..:
#2: Dyre Ave or - Flatbush all times except owl.
Owl: 241St/White Plains Road - Flatbush, replacing #5.
#3: 145/Lenox - New Lots all times except owl.
#4 Owl service, all local, Woodlawn - New Lots
#5: 241 St/White Plains Road - Atlantic Ave middays Mon-Fri;
241St/White Plains Road - Utica or Flatbush in peaks
241 St/White Plains Road - South Ferry nights/weekends
(#5 Thru express as indicated on the posting).
In the spring of 1965, when the World's Fair opened for its second year, the routings were simplified. #2 became 241/White Plains - New Lots at all times; #3 became 145/Lenox - Flatbush when it ran;
#4 was pretty much unchanged except all night express service was reinstituted (to Flatbush Ave during owl periods): #5 became Dyre Ave - South Ferry/Atlantic/Utica, depending on the time of day.
Thanks. I took the info off of the Hagstrom's map from that era, although I didn't have it in front of me when I wrote that post. It shows the World's Fair, and also lists Willets Point as a terminal for the 7. The 4 and 5 had several service patterns, and I couldn't remember which Lexington Ave. train ran to South Ferry at which times. I know they took turns with the shuttle.
P. S. By the mid-60s, I believe the remaining Triplex units were used on the West End express, hence the reference to the #3. Any units on the Sea Beach carried #4; on the Brighton, #1 whether they ran express or local. Some R-16s ran on the 4th Ave. local and were marked #2.
I was on a Triplex August 8 1964 (yes the date is from a photo taken
that day) It was a Saturday - the train ran thru express from 59th
all the way to Coney Island. This was just before the R32s made their
debut - the first one I saw of them was Nov 22 1964 on the "QB".
Last BMT standards I saw were seen on Culver SS April 11 1969.
By 1969 (thats when I started collecting numbers) the R16s were all
over the RR then they moved to the EE/GG the following year.
They were all wearing their multicolored mylar curtain rolls when I
first started collecting numbers.
Wayne
Man, that must have been fun! How fast did that Sherman tank of a train run on that nonstop stretch? Was it sporting a numeral 4? It had to be some sort of one-time special, since the "sunny Sunday specials" had been long since discontinued by 1964.
I remember seeing BMT standards on the Canarsie in the spring of 1969. On one occasion, I was entering the Lorimer St. station through the iron maiden gate just as a Manhattan-bound train of R-7/9s was set to pull out. The next train was made up of standards, much to my dismay.
And, yes, the R-16s did receive the multicolored roller curtains in the front destination slot, as did the R-32s and R-38s.
I think we did about 45 MPH average, maybe a little faster once we
got through the gentle curves. There may have been some kind of track
work going on. There were quite a few people on the train and yes, I
do remember riding up front. Can't remember the sign up front, but I
guess it would have to have read "4". We saw R27/30s running in the
opposite direction but no R32s. The "D"s I saw at Coney Island were
all of the R4/R6/R7 variety.
That very same day, I got my first look at the underground Canarsie
Line, promptly fell in love with it and am still very fond of it
to this day. That train was a B Type BMT Standard.
Wayne
The R-32s were introduced to the public on September 9, 1964 - my first day of school in second grade. An 8-car train ran from Mott Haven yard to Grand Central, where it remained on display for the day. The third rail shoes were rigged in order to be compatible with the New York Central's underriding third rail.
I'm sure they entered revenue service soon afterward.
My first experience on the Canarsie line was on July 20, 1967 from Eastern Parkway to 8th Ave., then back to Union Square. I vivdly remember my initial reaction when I saw the BMT standards for the first time: yeecchhhh! Then I rode them on the Canarsie for two years every Saturday from 8th Ave. to Lorimer St. until they departed from the scene, after which the R-7/9s and R-42s took over. I felt the same way about the standards as I did about the E train - cruel and unusual punishment. But since the Canarsie line had only standards ( I never saw any R-16s on that line back then), I had no choice. We would go as far as Union Square on the way back to Manhattan, where we would change to an N to Times Square. I figured that if I was going to ride on the BMT, I wanted to be on a train with letter markings on the front. The way those R-32s (and, on occasion, R-27/30s) would zip past 23rd and 28th Sts. - ya gotta love it!
I'd be very curious as to what the car assignments were on the Southern Division during the early 60s when the R-27s, R-30s, and R-32s were arriving and the BMT standards and Triplex units were being phased out. I know that the Triplex units ran on the three express routes and that the last ones ended up on the West End. Is it true that the standards were still running on the Brighton local as late as 1967? I never saw them there; in fact, when we visited New York in July 1965, all I saw were R-32s, R-27s, and R-30s. And to think we left for home on July 23 - the same day the last Triplex units were withdrawn.
Found this table in Cunningham & Dehart's "History of the N.Y.C. Subway System" for replacement of BMT Standards:
Line Dates Replaced By:
Brighton Local 11-60 to 7-61 R27
4th Ave. Local 7-61 to 2-62 R27
Brighton Exp. 9-64 to 1-65 R32
Sea Beach 1-65 to 4-65 R32
West End 5-65 to 10-65 R32
Unfortunately, there's no table for D Types (Triplex). It does say that retirements began 10-64 (replaced by R32) with the last run on the West End Local on 7-23-65.
Hope this helps...
Whaddaya mean Yechhhhh when you talk about the standards? They had personality instead of the post-1950 R's which almost always looked like they were popped out of the same cookie cutter. Even the Budd Brightliners caved into the NYCTA's bland design standards instead of their smooth look as were the experimental R-11's.
Apparently you don't remember the triplexes on the BMT main lines or the 5-part articulated multisections which made a career on the Canarsie line. In fact I was dumbfounded when I saw a Clark Bluebird parked at the Canarsie yard. And I travelled from the Bronx to be there.
I always thought that, ponderous as they were, the B-type BMT
standards DID have a certain charm. I liked the split doors, the
little bulb over the door and the seats every which way. The only
thing I DIDN'T like was the lack of signs up front. My last ride on
one was April 11, 1969, from Ditmas Avenue to 9th Avenue in Brooklyn.
(My Dad didn't bring his camera, unfortunately). She was scruffy,
her age was showing, it was a brief but enjoyable ride. (The "B" we
connected with at the other end was an R32 - they are a whole OTHER
story in themselves - the bionic cars! - 99% of the fleet still going
at the age of 33 to 34 years)
Wayne
Wayne, you took the words right out of my mouth. I didn't care for the BMT standards for the very same reason - no signs up front. That said, I agree that they were extremely well-built, rugged, and durable cars. Woe to any other car that picked a fight with a BMT standard! An R-16 and an R-27 can attest to that. This was discussed some time ago, but I never, ever remember seeing the conductor anywhere near any of the button consoles in the center of those cars while working the doors. I do remember that all doors opened and closed simultaneously in each car, and very smoothly at that.
I never saw or rode the Triplex units, unfortunately. Forgive me for repeating myself, but my first subway ride was on July 21, 1965 on an N of brand new R-32s. (The Bluebirds and multis were gone by then.) We rode the West End local on either the 21st or 22nd in the early afternoon, and the train was made up of either R-32s or R-27/30s. Had we ridden that line during rush hour on either of those days, we might have gotten lucky and caught a Triplex train. We left for home, which was still South Bend, Indiana, on Friday the 23rd, which marked the final day of revenue service for the Triplex units. I'm pretty sure my parents rode them when they visited New York in the early 50s, but they don't remember for sure.
Ah, yesh...the unlucky ones: 6494 (the R16) and 8217 (the R27).
And as was said before, the Standards roll off with nary a scratch.
Constantine Steffan has listed me some BMT standard numbers which
were involved in one sort of accident or an other- NONE of them
went to the scrap heap as a result (at least that's the way I read it)
not even the one that split the switch or the one that dropped the
truck into Jamaica Avenue.
I always make a point of visiting #2204 whenever I'm at the museum.
She is a beauty, crackly ceiling paint, dim lights and all. It would
also be nice if they finished restoration on that other one (#2796?)
they have at C.I. yard.
Wayne
When did a standard drop a truck on Jamaica Ave? It must have overshot the bumper post at 168th St.
You get the feeling that the BMT standards should have been nicknamed "supercars" because they were practically indestructible. I'll bet even Kryptonite wouldn't have hurt them. Their side impact resistance was second to none.
According to my archives, AND COURTESY OF CONSTANTINE STEFFAN:
B-Type BMT Standard #2570 went through the bumper block at 168th St
and dropped its front truck into Jamaica Avenue. Only its sheer
weight (98,000 lbs) kept it on the El. The front half hung over
the street but it stayed up there.
THEY DONT MAKE 'EM LIKE THAT ANY MORE!
Wayne
It sounds as if the motorman came into the station too fast and couldn't stop in time.
Here's a question: if a train of R-46s can withstand a 20 mph crash without having any couplers sheared off, how much of a crash could a train of standards withstand with another train of standards?
My guess (we are talking sheer physics here) is that BMT B-Type
Standards could probably ram each other at a speed of 25-30 MPH
without sustaining anything more than a bent (what passed in those
days for an) anticlimber or sill. They would have be on straight
and level track though - anything on a curve or a grade might result
in an "over-under", (i.e. the sills not being flush with one another)
with some resultant end crush, but with the Standards, even that might
be minimal. Based on their size and construction, I would think that
not even a major impact would damage them seriously.
I'll have to ask Constantine if there were ever any rear-enders among
the B-Types. He did mention one between Triplexes though and a number
of cars there were banged up pretty good - happened at Stillwell
Avenue.
OK HERE IT IS STRAIGHT FROM THE SOURCE : (Circumstances of incident
not known)
BMT D Type 6045ABC, 6078ABC Collision at Stilwell Avenue
June 19, 1955.
6045C and 6078AB were scrapped*; 6078C rebuilt as 6045C
Scrapped car information courtesy of Constantine Steffan.
Wayne
That's pretty amazing. If two trains of BMT standards were to collide, chances are the passengers would sustain greater injury than the cars themselves.
BTW, how would the standard at the Transit Museum be classified? (A unit, part of a rebuilt B set?) I heard during one visit that its door controls were deactivated. If so, was there a way to key them open?
Let me go check...OK. #2204...
That is listed as an American Car and Foundry B-Type BMT Standard,
circa 1914-1919. One of the early ones, probably had the white
milk-glass shades over her bare bulbs when first delivered (they were
taken off in the late 20s). Don't know about the door situation though...were you referring to the situation being true while she was
in revenue service or after she arrived at the Museum. She is such
a beautiful old lady, with her aged, crackled ceiling paint, wicker
seats, lazy old fans, and her interior lights. It is too bad more
of her kind were not saved back in 1969.
I thought I heard someone else say that many of the B-types were
still in running order when the final day came.
Wayne.
Let me go check...OK. #2204...
That is listed as an American Car and Foundry B-Type BMT Standard,
circa 1914-1919. One of the early ones, probably had the white
milk-glass shades over her bare bulbs when first delivered (they were
taken off in the late 20s). Don't know about the door situation though...were you referring to the situation being true while she was
in revenue service or after she arrived at the Museum. She is such
a beautiful old lady, with her aged, crackled ceiling paint, wicker
seats, lazy old fans, and her interior lights. It is too bad more
of her kind were not saved back in 1969.
I thought I heard someone else say that many of the B-types were
still in running order when the final day came.
Wayne.
I will be visiting the Transit Museum during my stay in the city next week and will check out that relic. I was curious if it remained an A unit, or if it was part of a 3-car B or BX unit.
As I've grown older, I've come to appreciate the BMT standards for what they were: solid, rugged, durable, and dependable subway cars. Did I forget to mention indestructible? You have to remember that I was a stubborn 10-year-old when I saw and rode them for the first time, and the fact that they didn't have bulkhead signs just didn't appeal to me. (My dislike for the E train can also be traced to this stubbornness.) They moaned and groaned exactly the same as did the R-1/9s because of the spur-cut bull and pinion gears commonly found on all prewar equipment, but their braking and door sounds were different. You didn't hear a release of air before the doors opened the way you did on the R-1/9s and R-10s.
I wouldn't have any qualms about riding a train of standards today if they were still in service, but I still won't take an E train along 8th Ave. even though the signs (on R-46s, anyway) say "8th Ave. local".
> It would also be nice if they finished restoration on that other one (#2796?)
CI Yard has the 3 Standards that always seemed to be considered "the museum train" in more recent years. Their numbers are 2390, 2391 and 2392.
--Mark
Yes I have those three listed...
Methinks there's another one (#2775) out there - it's not operational
but it DOES have new brown/black paint job - if I remember correctly
her photo is in the gallery. It is supposed to be awaiting restoration. CAVEAT: I MAY BE WRONGO ON THE UNIT #
Wayne
BMT standard 2775 reposes at the Shoreline Museum. It has a fresh exterior paint job, but as far as I can tell, it doesn't run. It has no trolley poles, and has been sitting on one of the back storage tracks exposed to the elements.
Re: BMT Standard #2775 ... that's true, also on the storage tracks are SIRT #388 & H&M/PATH #503. Maybe by next year one of these may join NY Days subway/Trolley festivities. I'll let one of our Shoreline/Branford friends comment on any plan in this direction.
Mr t__:^)
Unless Shoreline has acquired another H&M car, that particular specimen runs - at least it did back in 1980 when I photographed it during their trolley pageant.
Was it common practice to lash up consecutively numbered BMT standards into 3-car B units? Most of the photos that I've seen don't support this theory. It was impossible with the motorless trailers, since they were numbered in the 4000s.
In their late heyday (say, the 1950s), Standards in three-car sets were numbered consecutively, for example, 2000, 2001, 2002, and labeled 'B.' The trailers were mated with 2400s, with the last two digits of the 4000 half of the even numbered 2400, and were labeled 'BX.' Thus 2400, 4000, 2401; 2402, 4001, 2403. Singles were labeled 'A.'
The NY subway car book from the Museum has a good history of the cars, including the two-car matchings that were used for a while in the 1930s, if I recall (I'm not at home to check it). Those were 'BT' units, though I think 'BT' was used in the '50s or '60s for something else.
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
I just picked up Subway Cars of the BMT at the Museum, along with Sansone's book on the rolling stock, and Peter D's track map book. All I need now is some time to read them...
Didn't see any letters (A, B, BT, or BX) on 2204's bulkheads. The Triplex unit wasn't around; it may have been at Coney Island after the fantrip.
The LIRR is going to occupy space on the west side of the lower level on what now is space used for maintenance. They are going to build 10 tracks with 5 islands. The video presentation said that it should be done before 2010 (yeah, right). The 63rd street tunnel is already built and is being prepared for rail use. It will split off from the main line near Sunnyside Yard.
So, the LIRR started working on a connection to GCT like at the turn of the century (I believe this is why the MP-41s were so tiny). They finnaly built a tunnel years ago (63 street was in the 60's, right?) And now they say 2010.
Typical LIRR, late as usual.
BTW - has anyone heard anything on the New Diesel equipment, or are they still dragging their feet with that too?
[So, the LIRR started working on a connection to GCT like at the turn of the century (I believe this is why the MP-41s were so tiny).]
What connection was that?
I thought the MP-41's, which were used on the Brooklyn Atlantic Ave. Local Service, were purchased to be used on the BMT though a connection at Flatbush Avenue.
Possibly. I really don't know enough about the MP-41 and their use to know. I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt I ever will, since I know of no existing cars left. I've only seen one MP-54 and a few BM-54s and a double decker. It's not very easy to find much info on LIRR electrics, or electric operations in general, as railfans seem to be obsessed with either old steam or modern deiesel freight operations :(
[It's not very easy to find much info on LIRR electrics, or electric operations in general, as railfans seem to be obsessed with either old steam or modern deiesel freight operations :(]
That's quite true. I wonder why?
A few years back, on the Transit discussion group, there were several periods of lengthy discussion about the physics and mechanics of bringing LIRR trains into GCT. Basically, the arguments were that it seems to be physically impossible to curve from 63rd Street into Park Avenue, especially with the grades and the interference from the Park Avenue tunnel's horizontal and vertical track fan into GCT.
I wondered at the time (and still wonder) if the real MTA agenda is to build their "suburban" subway under Madison Avenue (and keep out the "City folk") to the palace they proposed for their headquarters at one time.
It's also possible, and quite believable, that the LIRR part of the 63rd Street tunnel was done like the subway portion--no real planning, just a feeling that 'if we build it, we may be able to figure out how to use it,' and they may be counting on another billion or two for construction and salaries in the process.
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
Possibly. I really don't know enough about the MP-41 and their use to know. I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt I ever will, since I know of no existing cars left. I've only seen one MP-54 and a few BM-54s and a double decker. It's not very easy to find much info on LIRR electrics, or electric operations in general, as railfans seem to be obsessed with either old steam or modern deiesel freight operations :(
I though I read somewhere that the Steinway tunnels were going to origionally be a way in for the LIRR, but that was ended after a few messy construction acidents.
The least use for the 41's was the Mitchell Field shuttle, which then got RDCs for a few years, then was semi-abandoned. Interestingly, this line goes right past the obnoxiouly popular Roosevelt Field shopping mall / area, and brushes near Nassau Collsium and Hofstra. I wonder if this would be the ROW for the sometimes mentioned Light Rail system over there, though I can't really see the use of it other than to shuttle people between Nassau and Mineola for Islanders games....
Do they really need ten tracks? They have only nine right now
at Penn (13 through 21). From what this sounds like, only two
tracks are going to go under the river, via the lower level of the
63rd Street tunnel. Unless they're going to use some for layup,
they could save a considerable sum if they reduced the number of
tracks from ten to say, no fewer than six, like at Flatbush Avenue.
As for 2010 - I'll believe it when I see it.
Wayne
Okay. So I remember about hearing and reading about this light rail service being proposed for JFK.
Now I see some promotional signs advertising the "ground breaking" for this system.
What exactly is this going to be? An actual "train to the plane," accessible from the NYC subway system to JFK? Or just some monorail thing that goes around the airport ala Newark?
Rob
I will be a train that goes from Jamaica to the airport, stopping at all the terminals along the way.
It will be a train to the parking fields, with a spur to the A train at Howard Beach and a spur to Jamaica up the Van Wyck. It is difficult to imagine how the A train spur will be better than the bus that's already there.
Rob, Why don't you search this site by topic first, then post a question if you still have one. i.e. there has been a great deal of Q&A posted here over a period of several months.
e.g. alt routes; why; when; cost; value; etc.
Mr t__:^)
Don't be so petty. The point is to discuss and ask questions.
Well, the PA has done it again:
http://www.panynj.gov/
They have a nice section on Airtrain, which is apparently the gimicky name for it...
Cost: 1.5 BILLION dollars
System length: 8.4 miles
Technology: Light Rail,which they say is "compatible with the region"
10 stations/w platform doors
1.5 billion dollars and it's a trolley (oh sorry, LIGHT RAIL) that loops around JFK and goes between Howard Beach, and Jamacia, both of which are well known trourist hot spots.
I used to always think the LIRR was a bunch of idiots, but it looks like the PA has stolen the crown from them.
What exactly does "compatible with the region" mean? Does the PA even know?
$1.5 billion? That sounds awfully steep. I could justify the cost if it were a subway line. Denver's southwest light rail extension, which will be 8.9 miles in length, carries a price tag of $170 million.
This is the thing -- the cost of all public works in the city seems ridiculously steep. They cut back the LA subway because it cost an outrageous $200 million a mile, complete with stations. Even at that rate, we could afford to build lots of things, but actual costs seem to run in multiples of that amount.
"... a trolley (oh sorry, LIGHT RAIL) that loops around JFK and goes between Howard Beach, and Jamaica, both of which are well known tourist hot spots."
Umm...
1) Howard Beach -- nearest connect to subway system.
2) Jamaica -- connect to major hub of LIRR.
Not that there aren't some problems with the project, but give the devil its due -- they picked Howard Beach and Jamaica for good reasons, not out of thin air.
I hadn't thought a rail line between Howard Beach and Kennedy could be a worthwhile improvement over the PA bus--until I took that bus, which is a nightmare. Now I'm a hundred-percent Airtrain booster. It's certainly a shame that we still won't get a one-seat ride from midtown to the airport; but it would have been illegal under the Federal conventions governing the use of airport money to integrate the line into LIRR or subway service, and a dedicated ROW all the way into the city seems incredibly wasteful. The 'compatible with the region' line in the PA press release I guess means that the light-rail structure will be strong enough (as the city had demanded) to accomodate heavy rail, if/when subway cars are developed that can handle the turns and grades inside the airport loop; presumably at that point the city or MTA would buy the system from the PA?
Given the limited scope of the system, its success will clearly depend on how easy it is to transfer to it at Howard Beach and Jamaica with a couple of heavy suitcases; naturally, the PA didn't post renderings of those stations, so does anyone know how the airtrain will be incorporated into the existing MTA structures?
When will the first R142A (or is it R110A) cars come into service?
I understand Bombardier got the majority of the contract, Kawasaki the rest.
Are they being assembled in upstate NY?
The first "test" batch were pulled because of brake defects, right?
And the new ones wil go exclusively to the IRT lines? Finally the Number 7 will have new cars?!
What about other aging fleets (Budd Co. on the C,E, Q, etc)? Are there order for those too?
Are there any other companies left in the world that still manufacture subway cars besides these two?
And one final question - what does MDBF stand for?
Thanks for your patience!
Rob
The R-142's are supposed to arrive for the IRT next year. There is a chance the R-62's that were on the 1/9 will be moved to the 7 to make way for the R-142's.
The IND/BMT(specifically the 'L') is to get new R-143's in 1999(there is a photo of the mock-up on this site under the Illustrated Car Roster)
The R-142 will be typical IRT specs and the R-143 will be 60' feet long so it can operate on the Eastern Division lines(J,M,Z and L).
MDBF satnds for "Mean Distance Between Failure" or basically, how many miles a subway car can go before it breaks down, needs reapirs on brakes, motor, whatever(or so I think).
Budd no longer exists as I understand it. They were the builders of the subway/el cars we are soon to be rid of here in Philadelphia. The folks still making rapid transit cars are Kawasaki, Bombardier and ADTranz. I know of no other manufacturer.
I know of no test R-142's coming in unless you mean the prototype R-110a's, which were pulled out of service for brake problems but i believe they're back.
Isn't Breda Ferroviarie Sp.A. still making RT cars or trolleys?
They've been making cars for Washington DC...
R32 cars on the C, E, G, N, Q, and R may last until 2015 or so,
from what I've heard.
Wayne
I'd LOVE to see R32 last that long - they are a good car and I LIKE them. I wasn't too crazy about them the first time I saw them, but they kinda grow on you. I've also noticed that they can get FREEZING inside durring the summer - has anyone else noticed this?
Hmmm...2015. That's about what? 50 years? Given that they don't rot away (and i doubt they will because they are stainless), they could last that long...
We were in #3359 on the R Wednesday and it was as cold as an air-conditioned subway car could get.
I hope the R38s and R40s last that long too, esp. the slants.
Wayne
I think the 32's and 38's will last longer than the 40's and 42's.
Heck, the R-32s and, most likely, the R-38s will probably set a longevity record for New York subway cars. The Gibbs Hi-Vs are the current champs, followed by the Lo-Vs and BMT standards.
I still miss the blue doors on the R-32s.
At the Seashore Trolley Museum we have a subway car from Budapest, Hungary that ran from 1896 to 1973. Now that's venerable! If NYC were to run equipment for that many years, BMT standards would still be in operation!
Standards!!!!!! How about IRT Gibbs cars?
We have one of those, too!
As I mentioned in a previous post, Seashore's Gibbs Hi-V 3352 is, in all likelihood, the oldest survivng all-steel railway passenger car of any kind in the world. The IRT pioneered the use of all-steel cars. The Gibbs cars, as a fleet, logged more than 50 years of service. On an individual basis, they lasted between 51 and 54 years; three cars lasted until 1958 (don't have their numbers handy). Because of their "brutal" manual doors, the Gibbs cars were the first ones to be retired when the R-17s arrived on the scene.
Put it this way, if New York planned to keep subway cars for 70+ years, the R-1/9s and Triplex units would still be hauling passengers, as well as the BMT standards (God forbid!).
Maybe the R-32s will be around for 70 years!
To continue this thread, some of the Hudson & Manhattan's (PATH) first generation "black" cars were around in the mid 1960's... There's a picture on the site of car 270 (Pressed Steel Co., built 1909) at Exchange Place, and car 273 at Hudson Terminal, in 1965. That's 56 years. 1965 was the year the first of the "PA" cars came online so that was probably the year of retirement for cars 270 and 273, as well as all of the other '08-'28 cars. (H&M didn't buy ANY new cars for 30 years between 1928 and 1958!)
That's 1909 PrSt. car #270. I was wondering if the date on the slide (2/14/1965) could possibly be wrong but you can clearly see the blue "PATH" sign in the first window, which would date this after the 1964 takeover of the H&M by the Port Authority.
That's car 273 at Hudson Terminal, also supposed to be taken on 2/14/1965.
Those old cars were certainly built to last, weren't they? Many people feel they were better built than the stuff we have today (R-32s notwithstanding).
No, you're right. The R32's were built in another era!
I think the R-143 will be 67 feet long, not 60.
For those that keep such records, this one will need a asterisk.
Bus #501 arrived today, but it's going back because it has a dent on the drivers side near the battery box door. Looks like a side swipe, though a small one. This was to be the second & last for a while. The nxet 15 of 70 to follow.
Mr t__:^)
does any know if njt has started work on the newark and jersey city light rail lines yet. if so can tell us where the work is going on
A repeat of a post I made a couple of times: Try to get your hands on a copy of the "Sept/Oct" issue of "Mass Transit", a "trade" magazine. The feature article is about the NJT Light Rail line & incl photos of ROW & bldg construction. The project started 9/96 with Phase 1 sched to open March 2000.
Copywrite ackl: I mentioned the publ by name & not quoted more than 70 words.
Mr t__:^)
"A repeat of a post I made a couple of times: Try to get your hands on a copy of the "Sept/Oct" issue of "Mass Transit", a "trade" magazine. The feature article is about the NJT Light Rail line & incl photos of ROW"
and a nice picture of the director of NJT on the front of the locomotive on the cover.
Just a quick word of thanks for those of you who have been E-Mailing me and reporting car defects on the E, F, G and R lines. The information is being given to the Car Desk and the cars are being called off the road for repair. Your reports have been found to be quite useful. From now on, I will try to reply by E-Mail and let the reporter know what we found. Thanks Again
Steve
By the way, I will pass along information on the A,C or H lines too but can't promise a reply.
If the T.A. claims to save over 2 million dollars a year by not putting a conductor on a train how much do they LOSE? The Grand Central Shuttle employs 2 motormen at $20.87 hr instead of the lower rate conductor. The additional train service supervisors jobs that are dedicated to the OPTO service would not be necessary with the old work programs. Finally lawsuits such as the rape victim on the "G" line that are litigated in court awarded to people suing the T.A. are probably not figured in their big "surplus". How much does it really cost the T.A. to run OPTO?
As said in prior thread, I'd like to cut the train in half during all off peak hours and run them OPTO with double the service -- and half the headways. True, you'd be replacing a conductor with a higher-priced operator, and you'd have to pay someone to uncouple and recouple the trains, but it would be worth it for the extra service. Look at OPTO that way -- increase service, not cut costs, and its something that the union could endorse. And, of course, the chance of being mugged would go down if you had to wait around for less time in the station.
You want conductors out on the street don't you?
No one wants put anyone out of a job. We in Chicago had our conductors removed from all Red & Blue Line trains in November 1997. The other lines converted earlier. The two exceptions being:
· Six & eight car trains in the State Street Subway employ "attendants" between Fullerton and Cemak (each is the first station outside of the subway).
· Six & eight car trains in the Dearborn Subway employ "attendants" between Clinton and Division (each is the first station in the subway).
The riders didn't like and the union didn't like it. However, the union was smart enough to realize it was better to give on this issue than to slowly see the system shut down. And another point is the CTA did this by jerry-rigging the existing equipment. The riders were told the equipment would be rebuilt to be OPTO, and include intercoms. The CTA riders are still waiting for this to happen. However, no one lost their jobs. Early retirements were offered, and others were re-assigned. The die has now be cast for saving the CTA rapid transit services for the future.
Re-read Larry's posting. I makes sense to me. Cut the train length, employ OPTO, and enhance (i.e. more trains) the service. Larry isn't reducing people, he is just changing the job title.
What is the problem, are you one of the conductor's who would be replaced?
No I'm not one of the conductors that would be replaced.I'm a motorman that doesn't like the idea of working without a conductor.It's unsafe,doesn't save any money etc.. Suppose the motorman on an OPTO train falls ill while enroute, who gets that person help? Probably nobody.What happens when the motorman has to go down to the roadbed to check on a problem? Now there is nobody on the train with the passengers.Do you believe that I should be compensated for performing the duties of two people? Probably not.You sound like a manager to me,looking to save money any way you can without taking a hit yourself(you'd probably get a bonus for your idea).It has been proven already here in N.Y that running short trains with short headways doesn't work. For example the D line ran 4 cars on weekends about 5 years ago,that's with a conductor. It didn't work because passengers we're running from both ends of the station to get the train.As a result,the train couldn't maintain the schedule.It was overcrowded.Ditto for the A line.These we're called "Showcase Lines" because there was more frequent service.It may look good on paper but in practice it doesn't work.The Showcase concept was scrapped soonthereafter.
If the trains have half the length and run at double the frequency, what makes them more crowded than before? The only thing I can think of is that the increased frequency is actually causing more people to take the A and D lines after these changes. Sounds good to me. Single operators on trains have been used by the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system, in the San Francisco area, all the time. And trains are up to ten cars long.
A point to ponder regarding BART and its single operator with up to ten car trains. BART stations are column free and I don't remember any stations containing any curves such as here in NYC... Most new systems have stations that have no columns for safety reasons and to allow a safe view of the platform from any standpoint
To A. Pardi, you also have to take into account the miles of track that BART serves, and the miles of track that the NYC subway serves. Also look at the population of the two cities. San Francisco only has 734,676 people and NYC has 7,333,253 million people. How many people use BART in San Fran, compared to the amount of people who use the Subway in NYC. The OPTO might work for BART but may not work for NY. I rather be on a train with a motorman/women and a conductor on board in case i get injured or sick.
Charlie Muller.
I think everyone here is forgetting that BART (and WMATA Metro, for that matter) are AUTOMATED operations, that technically don't need human intervention...
-Hank
Hank, that is PRECISELY what scares me the most, the dependence on automation. After all, nothing can go wrong . . .go wrong . . . go wrong ...
"Hank, that is PRECISELY what scares me the most, the dependence on automation. After all, nothing can go wrong . . .go wrong . . . go wrong ..."
Paging Ned Ludd! Paging Ned Ludd! Ned Ludd to the white messenger pigeon for an important message!
Do you ride in elevators? Everyday, in hundreds of cities, tens of millions ride in tens of thousands of automatic elevators without mishap. Until the 1950s, many people rode every day in manual elevators. If the attitude you are expressing had been the rage in the '50s, we'd all still be saying "hello" to our elevator boy every morning (and paying extra rent to pay his salary).
I've ridden the unmanned train system at O'Hare on dozens of occasions. Never have I been afraid that the train was going to fail, any more than when I'm on a human-operated CTA train.
Before the invention of remote-controlled train doors, there used to be a guard or trainman for every two cars of a train. And in Chicago, that guard had to ride outside between the two carriages he operated! By the same arguments that are put forth for OPTO -- spotting people stuck in doors, maintaining security -- we should go back to a five-man crew for an eight-car train!
Accidents in London tend to be due to humans screwing up. The Moorgate disaster was due to a driver not stopping at a station, in theory the guard could have intervened, but didn't. Another acciden,t on the Metropolitan line, involved a driver breaking the "stop and proceed" rule during fog (if a signal is red for more than a certain length of time, drivers used to be permitted to proceed at reduced speed). The driver in question accelererated to normal speed after the red light and drove into the train in front. End of driver. Meanwhile, the Victoria Line (one of the busiest on the Underground) has been relatively problem free, despite having automatic trains (supervised by a driver in the cab).
One of the arguments against computers etc. is that they are capable of taking decisions without comprehending them (e.g. starting nuclear war without a second thought) but the problem with humans is that they have moments of non-comprehension too, and that is when accidents happen.
Don't forget - computers only do what humans tell them to do.
You haven't been to Denver International Airport, I take it. The trains at that airport are very similar to the People Mover at O'Hare, and they've broken down a few times this year, causing total chaos. I've supported the airport all along and still do, but feel it was a major oversight to not have included an emergency walkway between each concourse.
Didn't Chicago's 4000-series cars originally have manual doors?
I still feel they shouldn't have done away with full-time conductors on the Red and Blue lines.
DC Metro is automated only insofar as the motion of the train is
concerned. The attendant must still open the doors, announce the
station name and what side the doors open on (I wish NYC would do
this!) etc. He or she can override automatic control if the need should arise.
Can't comment on BART - haven't been there yet.
Wayne
MARTA is the same way. The human opens doors and makes announcements and while the computer "runs" the train, the first train in the morning is run "manually" and the human can override the computer, or "assist" the computer-I've seen both. One time the train wrong railed due to delays and I saw the human walking to the other end and the train was moving! I have also seen humans running manually and doing doors only and starting up and then letting computer take over.
PATCO is the same. The operator monitors directions given by the computer and the central computer controls speed, spacing, etc. The operator controls the doors and makes station announcements. The only train control usually seen is the occasional stop at the "tower" (op center) just east of Broadway-Camden where the trains leave the Bridge Line subway and enter the long curved underpass beneath I-676. There is a small wooden platform here where personnel can board and leave trains on call.
BART, I believe, is identical to PATCO.
WMATA is the same. This brings to mind a story I've seen in several places, in which a WMATA operator left his/her train, closed the doors from the outside for some reason (it wasn't a layup, since passengers were on the train), and the train started on its way with no operator. Stops were made at stations, as instructed by the computer, but there was no one aboard to open doors, so after the prescribed default interval, the train started once again. As I recall, the train got pretty far until supervisory folks caught up with it. I guess this is an example of No-PTO?
PATCO operators have told me that this very situation could never occur on PATCO since there is a dead man switch of sorts in the operator's position (you can't even call it a cab on PATCO, since the operator is in full view of riders). If the dead man is not engaged, the train won't go.
The WMATA "incident" is a true one. The T/O left the cab by the crew bypass without disabling the controls. When the door closed the train promptly started, proceeded to the next station where the train came to a computer controlled stop, waiting the programmed dwell time before starting again. This went on 4 or 5 stops before a passenger with sense picked the door lock with a bobbypin and hit the big red STOP button, then calling for help. WMATA revised the door circuits so that the crew bypass switch won't work if the control is engaged.
Around Labor Day, when the San Francisco MUNI (the city subway, which shares the two-level Market Street tunnel with BART) brought its new computerized control system on line, an enormous amount of mayhem ensued--the incident that got the most play in the press concerned an operator who got out at Embarcadero, the end of the line, for a bathroom break and came back to find his train had reversed and left without him. The 'NoPTO' (I like that) train stopped at Montgomery and Powell without incident, and passengers only realized they had been on a driverless train when MUNI personnel caught up to it at Van Ness and someone jumped into the cab.
And today's moral and lesson is: If you leave the car/cab for ANY reason, turn off the control stand and take the key WITH YOU.
At BSM we teach every new student the importance of taking the reverse bar (Baltimore term for what some call a reverse key) with them if they leave the car. If an operator/motorman forgets, a supervisor is likely to pick up the offending reverse bar and put it in their pocket. This usually leads to the offending person frantically looking for it, only to discover that the supervisor that is grinning like the proverbial Cheshire cat has it. It usually takes only 1 such incident for the lesson to be learned: If you leave the car, take the bar with you.
I suspect the MUNI operator got a few days off to digest what he just learned.
We do the same thing at Seashore -- teach operators to take the reverser key at all times; and Instructors have been known to abscond with reverser keys left in by accident. We also have a standard place in each car to "hide" the key, so that operators will know exactly where to look for it, but random visitors won't find it. We had one enterprising operator a few years ago, who when he couldn't find the proper place in North Shore Car #755, put it in the first aid kit! We only found that out after calling him at home -- in another state!
We have a large locker for all control handles for all cars, both in service and out of service. When a car is pulled in at the end of operations, the handles are put in a canvas bag labelled with the car's number, which goes in the locker. That way everybody knows where the handles are when operations start.
Of course, if he needed to go really bad, he may have just totally spaced it. When you gotta go, you gotta go, but that could have been a recipe for disaster.
Precisely my point! I'd rather have a person aboard train operating the train and the doors thank you!! It seems everyone wants automation in the mindset that saving labor costs is going to dramatically save them money at the farebox. However slashing one or more titles to save money while spending more money to employ high tech personnel which come at a higher salary. MTA is spending incredible amounts of money on technology for fare cards and equipment which is already out of date.
Don't say San Fransisco has only 700,000 people vs. NYC's 7 million. BART serves the entire metropolitan San Francisco area, including Oakland, a city large enough for its own baseball, basketball (and once again) football team. San Fransisco's 700,000 citizens are only a small part of BART's coverage area. In fact, the San Francisco region has more people than Philadelphia, Washington or Boston.
You are right that BART is much newer and was designed as a more streamlined system, so that may have something to do with BART being able to handle OPTO better than NYC.
First, I question your statement that the metropolitain area of SF has more people than Philadelphia, Boston, or DC. The city of Philadelphia has 1.6 Mil. people, the metropolitain area has about 4.5 to 5 Mil. people. What you are defining as the Met. area of SF is probably much more dispursed than the Met. areas of the east coast cities you listed. If you used your definition of the met. area of SF for DC, you would probably also need to include Baltimore and all of it's suburbs which I'm sure would be significantly higher than SF.
Second, Bart does not serve the ENTIRE metropolitain SF area in any capacity similar to the way the NY subway serves NYC. It serves 1 narrow corridor through the city of SF, two corridors through Oakland, and certain surrounding communities with 5 terminal points. The NYC Subway has 23 lines with almost as many terminal points. It serves many more stations with much shorter headways than BART and does it 24 hours a day. Also, in addition SF's lower poplulation density, people there are much less likely to use public transit than in NY. I've been to SF many times, and almost everyone I know who lives in the city has a car. The exact opposite is true of NYC. I don't know anyone who owns a car here.
Ultimately, the two systems and regions are so radically different that they are difficult to compare on this level.
I've read a lot of view points here before deciding to put in my own two cents worth.
I'll have to agree with our motorman friend. The "success" out-of-town not withstanding. What is OPTO suppose to do for the riding public ? Hiring a lot of mngt & supvr of them isn't going to do anything for the public. The TA has too many people who have nothing to do with operations as it is. Get rid of some of THEM & the service won't cost so much. Here at my company we have about 50 mngt keeping 300 buses rolling, how many does the TA have ?
I feel the COST of crime & graffiti justifies the second man on trains
Disclaimer: I don't work for the TA or DOT & opinions are my own.
Mr t__:^)
Is that 50 managers (ie. one per 6 vehicles) or 50 non-operating personnel? Are you counting clerical staff, buyers, change counters etc. in the 50?
If its managers, remeber the T.A. has 10,000 vehicles. At one per 6, that's 1,600 or so managers. Then you have to factor in all the people managing the signals and ROW, a role a bus company does not have.
I'd wonder what a direct comparison -- operating personnel, maintenence personnel, non-supervisory office workers, managers -- would show.
Here at City Planning, we have a series of divisions, each with a director and deputy director. The staff has been cut by 40 percent since I was hired. But we still have the same number of divisions and, therefore, directors and deputy directors.
OK it looks as if somebody realy looks at this cost ... that's good !
Correction: Lets make the one-to-one a little easier, the TA has 4,000 buses vs. 1,000 at the "privates".
How many are dedicated to Queens where they carry LESS folks then the "privates", this ought make the comparission a little easier, BUT wait you can't just count the folks in the depots, no no, you have to include "support" staff in Brooklyn (some of them at least), plus the Woodside facility (maybe a 1/4 or 1/3, as they O/H all the TA fareboxes & turnstiles), plus... plus, it gets a little hazy.
Yes ... yes you have to add DOT & TA "support" folks to our numbers too. Well anyhow do the math & see what you come up with.
There's an old saying ... numbers don't lie, but liers can figure.
No pun intended to present company !!!!
Mr t__:^)
I'm sorry I don't follow. The T.A. has about 10,400 vehicles including the subway cars. And you have one (manager or support person -- which is it?) per six buses (50 vs. 300). By dividing by six, we can find out how many the T.A. would have at the same rate, and see if we can find out what it actually has. So who is included in the 50, managers or all non-line personnel?
It should be noted that the private vans have no managers or support personnel at all, nor any real estate, nor do they have enough assets to attract lawsuits every time someone stubbs their toe. This may account for the reason they can cover 100 percent of their costs while paying enough to attract willing workers. Perhaps those line personnel who complain about top heavy management on this site might consider the advantage of some type of semi-privatized bus/van system. If you don't like being bossed, you can always go into business yourself and do it your way. (I'd love to be able to open my own planning agency and dispense with the 10 layers above me, as you could probably guess).
Now now Larry, I'm NOT going to let you turn this into a political statement :-)
TA "Surface Division" has 4,000 buses. For purposes of this topic I don't want to count the subways, it just makes the answer harder to figure out. Next I want to reduce the 4,000 to the number serving Queens. I can get that myself by looking in the "Insiders Guide":
- Queens Division: Staff 1,427; buses 623
- Casey Stengel: Staff 503; __buses 218
- Jamaica: Staff 413; ________buses 178
- Queens Village: Staff 459; _buses 227
Hmmm: 503 + 413 + 459 = 1375 (error = 52)
Hmmm: 218 + 178 + 227 = 623, that one adds up
Well that's nice 623 vs. 1,000. The only problem is that many of these 623 don't stay in Queens & they get help from Brooklyn (I have a Queens bus map & it has "B" routes on it). Plus some of the "privates" come from the Bronx. The water is getting muddy.
Regarding the 50, I'ld better not elaberate any further, for fear of someone getting mad that I gaving out secret information, yes I know it's my fault for bringing it up in the first place. All I'll say is that when I add "support" staff, not listed above, they come close, i.e. total number vs. total number.
Well I guess I'll go back to sleep on this issue for a while.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are my own & not my employeer.
Mr t__:^)
You mean there is no operating rule that requires flag protection when crew must enter the track bed?? ( I don't mean call out the yellow lights (4) and flags, just someone to watch his back). I thought signals group always worked in pairs so one can flag or at least protect?
An OPTO Train operator can just go down on the track bed??
Sounds dangerous...
I've always seen a conductor "go out" with the train operator when inspecting the train. Matter of fack the conductor saved the bacon of an Train Operator the other day at West 4th. The stalled train was on the North Express tracks, the crew was on the south express tracks tyring to get down to the middle of the train. The operator two car lenghts in front of the Conductor. A downtown express comes in at speed, only the frantict waving of the condoctor (sitting between tracks) flashlight got the downtown express slowed so the operator could move out of the way.
Whoa - thats fairly scary...
And I can't believe that's the way it should happen! Shouldn't the train crew that is about to enter the right of way notify a dispatcher, who would then issue some sort of slow order through that area???
[this is not an opinion on OPTO - it seems like, even with a conductor out there, having an operator on the tracks, even with a conductor flagging, should require lower speeds...]
As an aside, any ideas how often operators have to enter the ROW?
Anytime the train brakes go into emergency, and the cause is unknown, the Train Operator must go to the road bed and investigate for a possible cause.
If the Train Operator observes an obstruction on the road bed and he can safely retrive it, he will go to the road bed.
If a Train Operator receives permission to key by a signal at danger and the stop arm will not go down, he will go to the road bed and hook the stop arm down. He may also have to unhook the stop arm after the train clears the stop arm.
In answer to your question I posted these examples. It would be very difficult to estimate how often a Train Operator need to go to the road bed on mainline track. Some may never have to for years and others may go twice in a week.
As a Conductor, I have experinced all three of these examples at least once in the last year.
This next part is adressed to ALL on the topic of OPTO:
As far as OPTO goes, as a Conductor, it does not concern me about my job in the least. I only know the A Div.(IRT) it will never work on the "main" lines thru the central business districts, and I don't think they will ever try it.
There are a lot of very good Civil Servants out there who do the best job they can every day. When we came on board we took an Oath (in short) to do and be the best we can, and if we succeed we are promised a job until we retire. So, to my fellow Conductors, if you do and be the best that you can you will always have a job at the TA. It may not be as a Conductor, but we get first crack at jobs, that we have the ability to learn, that they offer to the public. Unless of course they succeed in changing the Civil Service Law.
On a Personal note I think OPTO stinks. Its just another way to short change the public. If the TA were serious about Customer Service they would look for other ways to save money. The idea of only one crew member on a 600 hundred foot vehicle is plain and simple foolish. If they ever do atempt it(which they have not) it will come back to bite them in the a**.
If we have to go check on the roadbed for some reason; brakes in emergency and we don't know why,we don't have flagging protection.Only personnel doing maintenance on the tracks or on the platform less than 8 feet from the edge of the platform require protection.The control center can order trains to operate with caution through an area where a train operator may be on the roadbed investigating a problem.therefore you would be on the adjacent track.
the rule book specifically states that gangs of two or less employees don't use the same flagging protection along ROW then do track repair gangs, for instance as signal maintainers as a pair of two use one flashing lamp a "sufficient" distance away. Two or three flashing lights are placed from the gangs 6 and three hundred feet away from a flagger with a lamp and tripping device. Slow speed lamps for track conditions mandating slow movement of trains are to be placed 700 feet away from the condition. As for us train crews investigating bies of course the T.A. writes us off at our funerals with their shoddy flagging rules as you know signal maintainers have been dying in PAIRS! such as at 121 St-J line; Astor Place-#4 line; King Hway-F line
as well as other disasters here at the HALL OF SHAME. The TA probably assumes that the two blocks of red signals behind our stalled trains are sufficent distance enough to save us. Unfortunately our superiors in control center are alot like the supervisor on the "Money Train"
Having spent my share of time as an RCI back when RCIs actually had responsibility for the road, I spent more than my share of time on the ROW without protection. The closest call I ever had was when I was under a stalled R-10 CC that stalled between 155th and 145th Streets. A Motor Instructor discharged the follower and brought it up to make an add. He did so without warning. He came very close to getting a brake handle across the side of his head.
As you've said, there have been many tragedies in recent years. In addition to the ones you mentioned, there was the TSS killed at 145th St. and the flagman killed at W4 St. Where I disagree is when you blame management. None of the instances you cited were the fault of management. They were largely the fault of RTO operating personnel who did not follow the procedures. This was especially true in the Kings Highway - F line incident where it was clearly proven that the operator took his eyes off the road while correcting a situation when he clearly should have brought his train to a safe stop first. How is management to blame for that?
In the W4th St incident, the flagman tried to board between cars while the train was relaying in a G.O. area.
In the 145th St. incident, the TSS was in a 'No Clearance' area and failed to flag the train by at reduced speed OR th T/O didn't see his signal.
In the incident I was involved in, the TSS made an add in violation of safety rules. My mistake is that I took the T/Os handles but didn't put a flag at the rear of the train. Who'd have thunk?
Again, how was management responsible for any of these incidents? The operating employees FAILED TO FOLLOW ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES.
Steve, you are everything that is wrong with the T.A. Everything is another departments fault. In addition why did you not notify the command center that you were under the train? As a T.S.S. I would'nt expect an idiot like you under the train but who would have thunk? perhaps the best thing is that you are no longer an R.C.I. By the way what safety rule did the T.S.S. violate?
P.S. If you ever need to go under a train again pull the cord before doing so.
First of all, I'd watch who you call an idiot. However, if you are so sure you know me, then identify yourself. Then feel free to call me anything you wish.
As a matter of fact, Command Center was notified that I was under the train. I had the train operator's brake handle (against his wishes) and left the train top-sided so I could plug the M-Gs. Then again, being a TSS, what would you know about moving a stalled train. Tell me Mr. Hangstrapper, how many dis-abled trains have you added to without notifying the crew?
That particular TSS was instructed by the Desk Trainmaster at that time to discharge the follower and key up to the dis-abled train and await further instructions. Because of his stupidity, he ended up with a significant amount of time to think about his error.
In the incident at 145st,my understanding is that there was: 1)lots of noise in the area because some machinery was being used,and 2)there was no flagging protection on A4track.There should have been 3 yellow lanterns 700 ft away from where the work was being done on tk A2
Also when work is going to be done on the tracks where flagging is required,control center must be notified and they must approve.When I used to work on the G and R lines the work between queens plaza and 36st was just starting to go full steam ahead. Lots of weekends you would have 2 tracks out of service between Queens Plaza and Roosevelt ave.(1 lcl 1 exp).Quite a few times Iwould be operating between QP and 36st.You would have private contractors working on the adjacent track doing work on the columns in the tunnels while on ladders literally inches away from the train.You know what,there was no flagging on my tk to protect those guys.Suppose the signals were all green and I come into QP on the post and one of those contractors loses his balance and falls as I approach him.If there was flagging out there Iwould probably be able to stop the train in time to avoid hitting him.I know it says inthe rulebook that it's the opinion of the foreman in charge if flagging on the adjacent is needed,but command center has the overall say because they have to be notified and they don't want the railroad running too far behind.Remember with 3 or 4 lines going through there there is a chance for lots of late trains.They don't want that.I agree with the T.S.S.
You are correct and this incident was a poor example for my contentions. In this case, it is my understanding that the General Order was late in clearing and the TSS involved was ordered to the G.O. area to investigate and assist in restoring normal service.
What happened was a true tragedy. It was the result of complacency and carelessness. Anyone who has been required to be on the roadbed without the benefit of flagging protection knows how unpredictable and unforgiving the tunnels can be. I'm sure that there are many such rules but the two that I sware by are:
Expect that a train can be traveling on any track, in any direction at any given time.
You can only hear one train at a time.
I don't wish to take sides in this. But, with that said, because we move millions of people each day and one delay can have a domino effect on the whole system, this must be said: in various communications, the phrase " every second counts" is on so many bulletins & notices. We have to rush, rush, rush. These orders are being given by RTO Control Center, Car Equipment Control Board, et al. For example, if there is a signal problem, Control Center wants the signal maintainers to block & clamp a switch to allow service to go through. All well and good, but when can they fix it? We don't have time to think. And that is precisely when we put our fellow employees in danger. RTO Control Center is constantly hounding us on the radio during breakdowns so because we don't want to be nagged, rush & make a mistake. Steves near mishap under the CC train, I bet was not intentional by the motor instructor, but a case of Control Center not giving us people out in the field a chance to properly react to situations only WE in the field can solve.
I ride trains virtually every night (and yes, I ride in the cabs when cars have transverse cabs). I get a lot of good information from the crews about how my cars are performing and try to impart some insight as to why cars operate the way they do (I also teach some TSS's). Therefore, Bill, I understand and agree with what you say. The other night on an E train from WTC to parsons Archer there were 2 reroutes due to G.O.s and at least 14 areas where people were on the tracks. Most of those were working sans flagging. You guys at the controls can never relax and never have an easy trip. I can understand, therefore, why mistakes happen.
My whole point was that we are possibly the best trained workforce in transit and we usually respond magnificantly during the unusual (as in 135th St.) and in the everyday. It's just that we must also recognize the screw-ups too. We must correct the deficiencies and hold those responsible accountable. If we have no accountability, how do you maintain safety?
another point that makes it worthless to "double" service to maintain OPTO service is that the TA will never stick with the program as to schedules. If the TA were to run 5 minutes instead of ten, they will predictably station platform checkers to survey passenger loads, therefore looking to cut service even more. Generally until this year the TA runs light riding supplements during the summer to screw the riders and save more money for their surplus. Is this the time to experiment with OPTO when the grievances on the "G" line have yet to be answered by the T.A.? There is no safety margin for a motorman working on a system of trip cocks and sound powered phones being rammed down the throat of the 21 century. A system with two to three major accidents a year needs all the help it can get. Perhaps instead
of the bean counters at 370 Jay St sitting on their behind and putting out smoke instead of the fire, they should put their resources into decent training, better brakes and less of the bloated managerial forces within; moving more passengers SAFELY and EFFICIENTLY will pay for all in the long run.
My opinions of OPTO not withstanding, conductors are their own worst enemy. The surest way for you to show any organization that they can do without you is to not do your job. It's a sad fact that Conductors do not do theirs.
Example - Trains go out of service all too frequently due to a Guard Light Failure where the conductor failed to follow procedures and cut the door out improperly or didn't even bother to try.
Example - Conductors who open on the wrong side far too often and who don't observe the platform leaving the station.
Example - Conductors who repeatedly fail to make required proper announcements.
Example - Conductors who ride up front with the train operator when the train is running light (instead of where they are supposed to be).
If conductors want to protect their jobs, they should start by doing their jobs. Right now conductors act as though their ONLY function is to open and close doors. The R-142s & R-143s will likely come with 'Door Enable' circuitry. If the conductors are no longer needed to open and close the doors, why will they be needed. Wake up guys & gals.
Just like there are bad conductors, there are many more good ones. I can attest to this from working the road for 17 1/2 yrs. I've been privledged to work with many more good ones than bad, but human nature makes us remember to bad ones more prominently. There are also some bad motormen, many more good ones. An OPTO train can go out of service just as easily if the motorman improperly cuts out a door or didn't bother to try. You and I know well that a good motorman can save a bad conductor & possibly prevent a train from going out of service by " walking" a conductor thru a problem. Many times a conductor gets shaky because Control Center is able to intimidate him to rush without giving him much time to diagnose the trouble. When this happens, errors are made. An OPTO motorman can just as easily open on the wrong side & the platform is NEVER observed when the train is leaving the station, he can stop in the wrong place & no conductor is there to check. A motorman can make as lousy announcement just as a conductor: some people are not good speakers & are intimidated talking to large crowds, even though it is not face to face. Road car inspectors were also their worst enemy, they used to be assigned all over, yet tough to find because they took forever to come back from the previous call, so the TA got rid of most of them too! You didn't respond to what happens if that OPTO motorman gets sick or assaulted & possibly can't speak on the radio. What happens? You know, but don't want to admit, that negative OPTO incidents are happening but are suddenly disappearing from the computer system. That's because the TA is totally commited to this farce & will make it work no matter what they have to do. As I said in a previous message, the word "SAFETY" is very subjective. Who makes the determination what is and what isn't safe when the union says "unsafe" and management says " safe". Management always gets the last word anyway and those who don't like it can just quit and not be allowed to change it. I've never seen morale as low as what is now.
Perhaps I did not make it clear but in the first line of my post I implied that I do not agree with OPTO. I then went on to point out why the people in Operations Planning think OPTO can work. Having worked my way up through the ranks, I feel differently. The trouble is that the TWU and the conductors themselves have sharpened the knives that upper management will use to cut their jobs.
New, high-tech equipment is currently under test which will overcome some of the safety concerns. Car 6026, for example has been equiped with an infra-red video system where-by the operator can view platform mounted cameras from his console as he enters or leaves a station. The prototype tests have been successful.
The TA knows OPTO would save a lot of money on labor costs. So it probably comes down to the order coming from above for Operations Planning to make sure it DOES work! This way, conductors can be phased out and we can get higher paid people oversee this work in the offices downtown!
You can compare the sucess of the new M-4 Philly cars and determine if
one man operation would be a viable thing in NYC. For one thing, Philly has stations that are straight and a camera has a good view of the platform in that respect. You NYC guys have some platforms on curves? , that would require multiple views and thereby increase
dwell times at stops.
Hi tech equipment which would overcome safety concerns is well and good until this senario happens: Years down the road & we have OPTO on a full length L train, for example, (which really happened 2 weeks ago): Packed rush hour train in the tubes, sudden loss of Motormans & Conductors indication between stations. Incident must be investigated because we can't move without indication! Both crew members must squeeze past customers in every car to find defective door operator. Each checks 4 cars. OPTO would mean that 1 man has to check all 8 cars, THEN, make his way back. #2 OPTO F train: 600 feet of train. Guard light in last car. OPTO man has to go ALL the way back to investigate, find defective door operator or discharge customers, then walk back the 600 feet. I guess on a combined 2 minute headway of E & F, that rush hour would send the railroad down the toilet!
Bill, I do not disagrree with your stand on OPTO but your arguments are somewhat misleading. While guardlight failure is fairly common, the incidence of loss of indication occurring between stations is very uncommon. However, since the new-tech trains will have micro-processors which will tell the crew which car and which door, troubleshooting will be much easier. Once it is determined that no doors are open, the loss of indication can be overcome by using the side door bypass and moving to the next station.
Is a Hanging guard light also the fault of R.T.O.? or is this a car equipment charge? By the way where is that Head End permit?
My 2 ccents worth:
I like having a conductor; a live person to ask questions of, or just to say hi to. It's comforting to know there is a person to communicate with, especially if there is a problem. The mere presence of a company employee may also help deter crime and other unwanted activities.
Perhaps the line of thinking should be to find more duties for the conductor, maybe in the area of safety. The alternative vision is of the BART system.
Perhaps so but think back a few years. A young female in the midst of a domestic dispute was given sanctuary in the Conductor's cab of a B train. Both were shot through the cab door. That conductor was not a deturrent to crime nor was he hired to be so. He paid a very steep price for his courage. What you don't know is that more than 1/2 of all reported on-duty injuries to conductors are a result of assault by 'customers'.
your post hits the mark! Know one want to make announcements snap open doors without paying attention to indication boards and everyone seems to do a half assed job naturally management sees this as a tool to eliminate jobs while increasing phantom jobs at jay street or livingston plaza funny how this makes no sense to me. Station Managers were created to focus on customer service and now these clowns are nowhere to be found oh I forgot they're field managers so probably they managing pastures somewhere(hehe) This title was created to give customers a focal point to voice their concerns ovver safety cleanliness and service. remember the corsage wearing people who used to greet people and their pictures in stations? ANd in rapid transit operations Train service supervisors are being hired at an incredible rate whats the ratio now three supvisors to an hour employee or something like that? with the bullshit story that they have to increase managers to the balance of employees in the field unreal!!!!!
You too have hit the mark with one of y pet peeves, 'Station Managers'. However, I would not call them clowns. Clowns are highly trained and usually very good at what they do.
After reading the posts, I think the experience with PATCO (30 years of OPTO - no incidents to speak of, with most stations on straight-aways but certainly having lots of columns), the Broad St line (nearly 10 years, same thing) and the current M4 cars shows that OPTO can work. The social reasons for not having it, such as perception of safety by riders, need to be weighed. Here in Phila, the conductors never leave the cabs as in NYC, so the issue is moot. However, on four different trains last weekend, before and after the Lo-V trip (not counting the Grand Central-Times Sq shuttle), conductors were out of the cab only once - an R train from Lex to 42nd. Admittedly, the runs from Penn to 42nd are kind of short for the conductor to leave the cab, but he/she has to anyway to switch sides. ?
increase service during off peak hours with trains cut in half to accomodate opto thats a rich one!!! thoroughput for full length trains during rush hour with 3-4 minute headways is a bitch so introduce opto during off hours as you mention and double the amount of trains and really through a monkey wrench in things. For one thing you'd have idiots still holding doors on one person trains still holding up service how would this increase service? that opto train breaks down and has to be taken out of service passengers are then discharged and train secured to be moved to the yard will then back up the entire line isn't going to improve SHIT! OPTO IS DANGEROUS look at the passenger killed in the Rockaways by some homeless woman and the priest also robbed in the Rockaways all on an OPTO train and you want this spread system wide? the wait for an off peak train mid day is at average 8-10 minutes between trains some areas 6-8 minutes. and most weekend trains are on that same schedule. Midnights 20 minutes seems to be the norm for all lines and in some areas it fits the ridership levels. the number 1 and 4 locals should be moved to 12- 15 minutes but with the levels of ridership I still wouldn't recommend opto with the level of rideship that has occured.
All these predictions were voiced when Chicago went OPTO, and none have come to pass. And Chicago 'L' trains journey though some rough neighborhoods.
So it works ... but is it a service improvement or just a cost cutting measure ? If the latter why should we support it ?
I still feel the TA should look elsewhere to cut cost & save money, how about a few less "studies", how about using the data in the data base instead ...oh there's a lot of errors in the data ... oh gee why is that ? ... just one example.
Mr t__:^)
"OPTO IS DANGEROUS look at the passenger killed in the Rockaways by some homeless woman and the priest also robbed in the Rockaways all on an OPTO train and you want this spread system wide?"
I know the Brits call conductors "guards," but calling a tail a leg doesn't make it so. Conductors are NOT armed policemen, or even security guards:
1) they are not armed, and
2) they are not provided police/security training.
While they probably can suppress or discourage graffiti, noisy or disruptive passengers, etc., they can't prevent or control the incidents of armed or aggravated violence you are describing.
the idea is not to run out of the cab and yell "stop or i'll shoot" the conductor also has communications besides the T/O to command center. Isn't dangerous for a train op to communicate via radio while a train is in motion? isn't concentration taken away from the road ahead of them? while a conductor is aboard the tasks of reporting to command center any out of the ordinary events allows the train to continue safely... If a one person train were disabled between stations and the motormen is on the road bed aren't the customers alone onboard? and heaven forbid the person became incapicitated what would happen and how long would assistance come to the aide of the disabled train? TA makes everything sounds peachy when it comes to pushing the envelope on safety by saving some money? How much money will be saved by having to shell out more on lawsuits due to stupidity on their part? Having fewer conductors and cutting trains in half to make more trains with less personnel with one person trains isn't smart business with the RECORD number of riders on the trains. when would you suggest the one person trains operate?
I've been watching with interest all this discussion about OPTO
and I would just like to add my layman's opinion: While OPTO may
work wonders in places like Washington DC, where computers 'drive'
the trains, it would not work well at all in NYC due to the nature
and configuration of the system and its equipment. The only places
where it MIGHT work would be shuttles where trains were only a few
cars long. I would not feel too good about a long-haul train (say
an "A" or "F" or #2) having just one crewperson aboard. NYCT trains
need two people to operate them - one to drive, the other to man the
doors and make announcements. Anything less, in my opinion, would
be risky.
Wayne (layman's opinion only!)
In Bitain, a "guard" is a person who gives the starting signal on a train, operating doors if necessary. The last guards on the Underground will almost certainly go when the Northern Line receives its new trains (whenever that will be).
A "conductor" usually has no responsibility for train movements, their job is to issue and check tickets.
On some of the less busy lines, the person who gives the starting signal also has to sell tickets, what do we call them? Well, I often see the phrase "conductor-guard" used, a mouthful, but logical.
"In Britain, a 'guard' is a person who gives the starting signal on a train, operating doors if necessary."
That's exactly the role that comes with the "conductor" title in the U.S., and that's why the anti-OPTO people are complaining: their argument is that the conductor doesn't just open doors and make announcements on the PA system (which is what most passengers think of), but is a decision-maker in the operation of the train, and can tell the operator when to go and not to go when there's something the conductor sees but the operator can't (i.e.: person stuck in door).
> when the Northern Line receives its new trains
> (whenever that will be).
Coincidentally I just read that some new trains (less than 10 i think) are in service now, with more coming online soon.
David,
I phoned the Northern Line helpline telephone number and found that there are currently four new trains in service (it was five, but one broke down this morning). The intention, apparently is to introduce two new trains per week, but I was told that staff training is difficult because of lack of sufficient numbers to release people (the Northern Line has traditionally had difficulty recruiting people). Next time I am in London I will find them and report back, I guess the last chance to ride on 1959/62 stock will also come soon, making the oldest stock on the Underground the A stock on the Metropolitan line (built 1960, no one is even mentioning replacing them). The oldest tube stock will be the Victoria Line (1967).
BTW(1), I finally got round to sampling the new Jubilee Line stock the other day, very impressive and much more comfortable seats than on the Central Line, no transverse seats though which is a shame, I doubt that very many more people can be squeezed in with longitudinal seats and they are far less comfortable. For some reason the windows are much smaller on the Jubilee Line trains than the Central Line trains, I have no idea why, although Neasden and Willesden are not very nice places so I will not miss the view:-)
BTW(2), LT claims that a buyer has been found for the Epping-Ongar branch on the Central Line (closed for quite a while now) and that a commuter service will be introduced. I will believe it when I see it.
The TA did short trains during the financial crisis days of the mid 1970s. In 1976 I had a summer job that started at 7:00 am, so I would catch the last of the 4-car R44/46 'F' trains at 18th Avenue around 6:00am, at least they had that nice Bicentennial stripe on them.
>>and you'd have to pay someone to uncouple and recouple the trains,
Funny you should say that, I took the Green Line Shortcut (Green Line running on Red during Rush Hour) of the Washington Metro. We get to the end of the line for the Greenline in Maryland and the train goes out of service (BTW, Washington METRO is OPTO but the Computer drives the Train).
I exit the train and low and behold the operator/conductor hops out and seperates the train. A new "operator" walks over and off it went back down the line to DC. The operator I was watching pulls his half into the station and 10 minutes later it to went into service.
Imagine a Train Operator or Conductor in NYC Subway breaking up trains at terminals??
Would the Union ever allow it?
Say Lou, if you take the green line to Fort Totten during non-rush hours, do you pay another fare or is it a free transfer. My son who works at the Univ. of Maryland at College Park says to get a 'Metro pass" so you can ride all day. It that $5.00? We have to get downtown on the red line when we visit. Help!
The Metro Maven sez:
YES IT IS A FREE TRANSFER. Just go down the escalator into the mezz
then turn left. Down another flight and you're free to ride on the
Green Line.. Reverse directions to reach the
upper level Red Line platform.
Yes, there is an all-day pass and it DOES cost $5.00.
However, you may only take advantage of this bargain after 9:30 AM. Buy your pass at any farecard vending machine at any time,
but it won't be usable until 9:30AM. After that, the system's yours.
That Green Line... ain't it something.
Serpentine route, in and out of tunnels, distinctive stations (West
Hyattsville, Prince Georges Plaza AND Fort Totten)... the works.
Wayne
The Metro Maven sez:
YES IT IS A FREE TRANSFER. Just go down the escalator into the mezz
then turn left. Down another flight and you're free to ride on the
Green Line.. Reverse directions to reach the
upper level Red Line platform.
Yes, there is an all-day pass and it DOES cost $5.00.
However, you may only take advantage of this bargain after 9:30 AM. Buy your pass at any farecard vending machine at any time,
but it won't be usable until 9:30AM. After that, the system's yours.
That Green Line... ain't it something.
Serpentine route, in and out of tunnels, distinctive stations (West
Hyattsville, Prince Georges Plaza AND Fort Totten)... the works.
Wayne
In my distant youth (early 1970's) I watched exactly that activity take place on tracks #7 and #8 at Stillwell Ave. on a nightly basis. After the P.M. rush, "B" West End trains would be reduced from 8 car consists to 4's. Usually, two motormen would have this done in a matter of minutes. One section would return to service while the other would be sent to Coney Island Yard. A similar operation was performed at 95th St. - 4th Ave.
Since you didn't reply to "Funny motoman stories",I'll tell you my story.
This summer,Iwent to a subway in Mexico.On the terminal stations,they have this little office that has a restroom. The office is not open to the public,but you can peek in a window.One office has a window,and the other one is just made out of mirrored panels.I think that the panels are windows, if you see them from the inside.I peeked into the one with a window.The office was a mess, compared to the station.There was papers and towels strewn around, and a file cabinet was overflowing.The desk was cluttered with papers, too.Three motormen,waiting for their shifts,were inside.Funny part:When I peeked the first time,a yellow door in the back was closed.Then, I waited a little while,I peeked again,the door was open.A motorman was washing his hands! I ran to the waiting train and held on to a pole.
Then, a motorman came.He was flicking his wrists,drying his hands.When he got in the cab and we started moving,I laughed!
(the cab is soundproof,he couldn't hear me!)
A motorman washing his hands, apparently after using the restroo is funny? I guess that either I got the story wrong or I just had to be there. I'll tell you a funnier one. I was on the E train and the motorman sneezed. Hahahahhahha
These aren't exactly motorpeople stories, but....
I was on the 6 train once and a drunk guy came into the car. It's actually kinda amusing to to watch someone talk the subway map.... "Hi number 6 train! How are you?...."
One engineer on Metro-North told me how he deals with cell phones, beepers, walkmans, etc on the New Cannan shuttle. Simple - he announces at each station to turn them off "because they interfere with the signal system" It works too. People will believe ANYTHING, provided it comes out of a little speaker in the ceiling.
I was on a bus once where the driver came up with a novel use for the new ADA features it has. Apparently, you can direct the microphone to those annoying outside speakers on the bus. Somebody tried to squeeze past and cut off the bus - and JUST made it. To which the bus driver promptly grabbed the mic and yelled a******!!!!!
Ever wonder why the arrival/departure monitors in Penn station are so messed in terms of colors, alignment, etc? I was watching one as an Amtrak train pulled in on the track below me. Apparently, the magnetic field from the locos is what does it.
I once got a round of appluse after a door fight with a conductor on the Times Square Shuttle. Apparently, everyone in the car had had the SAME experience. I have therories as to why the conductors don't simply open the doors and let you slip in...
As for the last part, the conductor has to close SOMETIME. There are people constantly boarding & SOMEBODY has to miss the train. This would have not happened in the first place if you didn't try to squeeze in as the doors were in their closing mode. You and your fellow riders who do this are making the trains late, so don't complain about lack of on time service.
No, what irks me is closing the doors right in my FACE. I seriously think the only reason why conductors do this is because they get a kick out of it. And anyway - if somneone's there half in half out - open the damm doors and left him in instead off standing there yelling for the guy to pry himself out. Heck, even the LIRR is better in this respect...
Two problems with your argument;
First, on a standard train there are 30, 32 or 40 door openings. It would seem that with all those door openings,there would never be a time when nobody is trying to board during peak hours. Someone must be shut out.
Second, The LIRR runs trains on a widely published and widely respected schedule. People know that they are going to catch the 6:08 out of Ronkonkoma and are there before that time. In addition, the LIRR has less door openings per car and more dwell time at stations. Despite this, when I rode the 4:51 PM out of Penn Station, I saw many, many people hit by doors and shut out.
If the doors don't close in your face, they must close in someone elses face! There are people coming down CONSTANTLY. At a certain point, the conductor must close down, otherwise he will NEVER get that train out of there. Plus, the conductor can only see the side of the train, he cannot see around poles and can't see people running down the stairs. If he reopens for you, he has to reopen for everybody else & there would be no semblance of on time performance. Obviously, you tried to get on while the doors were in that 2 second start to finish closing mode.
My favorite pet peve is the F train and 47th-50 Rock. I need to switch to the F somewhere along 6th ave to get to Queens Plaza. If I don't see an F train until 34th St 57% of the time the following happens.
(D/Q) Pulls into 34th Half a Car lenght behind the F and the F's doors are closing just as we open. This happens at 42nd Street, and I mean we are only about a half a train length behind the F.
At 47th St, the F train is all closed up just as we open and disapearing towards Madison ave. I've been told by the Tower (RTO) at 47th/50 Rock they will not hold trains or meet trains during rush hour. But 30 seconds is not to much to ask for becuase for the next 20 minutes Q trains are arriving local because there is no F in sight.
This is begining to happen more and more. I can't see why the F can't have a meet at 47th street or even at 34th street. Hold the F not the B/D/Q since it is the only line on the local track.
(Off Soap Box)
"One engineer on Metro-North told me how he deals with cell phones, beepers, walkmans, etc on the New Cannan shuttle. Simple - he announces at each station to turn them off 'because they interfere with the signal system' It works too. People will believe ANYTHING, provided it comes out of a little speaker in the ceiling."
What the &%$%#@%$#^%$ is bloody wrong with the RESPONSIBLE use of a telephone, beeper, or headset on the train?!?! If someone is talking on the telephone too loudly, or has their headset too loud, that's a legitimate problem for the train crew to suppress. However, the mere use of a phone or radio, or leaving your pager on to receive important pages, should not bother the normal passenger or crewperson. It's the commuter railway, for %!#$% sake, not the symphony, the opera or the theater where they rightly expect you to shut off your phone and put your pager on vibrate.
The train is not a monastery with a vow of silence -- people talk on the train to other people, and nobody seems to complain about this as long as done at a respectful volume. Why is a telephone conversation no louder than one of those live conversations a problem? Why is a headset that cannot be heard by others as more than a faint buzz troubling anyone? Any why is receiving pages, EVEN IF SET ON VIBRATOR, bothering this sanctimonious Metro-North engineer?!!?
Most people don't have pagers and phones to show off -- they have them to send and receive important messages. I'd hate to see a doctor who rides the New Canaan shuttle miss a medically-vital page because (s)he SHUT OFF his/her pager at the behest of this engineer! If such a thing happened, and the doctor were sued for malpractice for not timely responding to the page, I would advise him/her to implead (sue) the Metro-North Railway and the engineer -- missing vital pages for no good reason is a VERY foreseeable consequence of telling people to shut off their pagers ON FALSE PRETENSES!!!!!
I don't have a wireless telephone or a pager, but I do wear a headset radio and listen at a low volume, so I can hear the morning news and debate programs. I don't see why my respectful listening should take the skin off the nose of a railway engineer, conductor, or passenger.
Can't we all just get along?
Were you smoking anything unusual down in Mexico City?
[Were you smoking anything unusual down in Mexico City?]
I know I was when I was down there -- the city's air.
(Mexico City has one of the worst air pollution problems in the world, along with Athens, Rome, and Paris --- apparently, breathing in one day's worth of their air is the equivelant to smoking 2 packs of cigarettes within the same time span).
And to think that back in the 60s, New York had the dubious honor of having the most polluted air in the country.
I guess the funny part was the motorman not drying his hands even though "towels were strewn around". Hell, in the TA, we are lucky to have restroom soap, towels, hot water & toilet paper. The TA forgets that employee rest rooms are used 24/7, with a lot of traffic unlike those at 370 Jay, et. al.
I have seen very few pictures of the connecting tracks that ran from the Westchester Ave subway structure and then over Willis Ave to 143 St and the 2nd/3rd Ave El structure.
I never seen any pictures of the original 149th St connector El/subway structure.
Anybody know of any?
Don't know of any pictures of the above but I have another question-
What's going on at the northbound platform at Brook Avenue (6). It's walled off except for the east end - is this a renovation in process or a renovation gone bust?
(If they're renovating, they'd better keep those unique multi-tiered
diamond tiles they got there - only one like it in entire system.)
Thanks,
Wayne
September 1998 Service Summaries
B36 Westbound service via Surf,,delete Mermain av between Stillwell Av and 21 street,eff 10.98
X17 Huguenot -Manhattan Express
proposed to run on Saturdays bet 630 Am-=750 PM
,effective Bet Nov and Dec 1998
IRT 1===add 6 NB trips bet 7 pm and 10 PM ,,M-F
September 1998 Service Summaries
B36 Westbound service via Surf,,delete MermaiD Av
between Stillwell Av and 21 street,eff 10.98
X17 Huguenot -Manhattan Express
proposed to run on Saturdays bet 630 Am-=750 PM
,effective Bet Nov and Dec 1998
IRT 1===add 6 NB trips bet 7 pm and 10 PM ,,M-F
IRT 7---add 16 trips on Saturdays
IRT 7 add 14 trips on Sundays
FLUSHING REROUTES
Q12 WB via Sanford,Bowne,,Roosevelt,,discharge on
Roosevelt and Lippmann Place
Q12 EB via Roosevelt,,Prince, 38 Av,,Main
,,Roosevelt ,,and start Pickup ,,,and Bowne,Sanford
Q13,,Q16 ,,Q28 VIA UNION,37 AV,138 ST,39 AV AND
DISCHARGE PASSENGERS,ON NEAR SIDE OF Lippman Pl...
,,EB P/U ON FARSIDE OF LLppman Place,and then Left
on Union St
Q14 via former route path ,,drop off same stop on
Roosevelt and Lippman Pl with the Q12,q14,Q15 and
Q28..
Q15 return to former route path via Bowne,Roosevelt
to stand far side of Lippman Pl,,,then via
Roosevelt,,,Prince,,38 av,Main,and Roosevelt to
stand on Roosevelt Av West of Main St for EB
Q17 drop off on Roosevelt and Mian,layover on
Roosevelt bet Mian and Prince,,,,ret via Prince,,38
Avenue and Main st
Q20 drop off zone on Roosevelt and Lippman Pl with
the 12.14.15.26. and SB Q44
Q26 via Sanford ,Bowne,, Roosevelt,to new station
enrance,, turn around via Rosevelt,,PRince,38 av
Main ,and Roosevelt ,,Pickup at New Subway
Entrance,and Bowne ,,Sanford ,
Q27 via discharge at the new drop off zone on
Roosevelt ,far side of Main,,,layover midblock, bet
Main and Prince, turnaround via ROosvelt,,Prince,
38 av and Main St,,,,Will use the same stop as the
Q17 on Roosevelt ,far side of Main
Q44 Southbound only
via Union St,Roosevelt ,,drop off bet UNION AND
LIPPMAN,..Pickup on Roosevelt bet Lippman and Main
St,,L onto Main St,/////Northbound buses WILL NOT
change
X! X6 X7 and X9 Manhattan Route Modification
new terminal on Central Park South ,North Side bet 6
and 7 av, Due to be implemented Sept 98,,however ,,
due to operating necessity ..was implemented on Aug
of 1998
>>X! X6 X7 and X9 Manhattan Route Modification
new terminal on Central Park South ,North Side bet 6
and 7 av, Due to be implemented Sept 98,,however ,,
due to operating necessity ..was implemented on Aug
of 1998
Umm not as of last Tuesday (29th) X1 and X6 left from the old terminal, I was on the X6.
The Hillside Avenue line terminates at 179th Street. That station was opened in 1950. When the trains turn around, the go into tunnel east of the station. I would like to know how far east of the station the tunnel extends and if there are any plans to extend the line further. I did see a map reprinted in Stan Fischler's book, "The Subway" that indicated the city originally wanted to extend the line as far as Little Neck Parkway.
The tunnel ends around 187th Street and Hillside Avenue.
While I think it would be nice to extend this line east as four-track
as far as Springfield Boulevard (with local stops at 188th, 197th,
Francis Lewis Blvd, and 212th Street), there are currently no plans
to do so. (Extension to LNP would be local stops at Winchester Boulevard and Cross Island Parkway).
I used to live on Little Neck Parkway - It would have been great to have the "F" almost at my doorstep.
Wayne
[The tunnel ends around 187th Street and Hillside Avenue.
While I think it would be nice to extend this line east as four-track
as far as Springfield Boulevard (with local stops at 188th, 197th,
Francis Lewis Blvd, and 212th Street), there are currently no plans
to do so. (Extension to LNP would be local stops at Winchester Boulevard and Cross Island Parkway).]
Why are there no such plans? Is it cost, or concerns that ridership wouldn't be sufficient?
I would wager that cost is the main consideration, but not just the cost of building the additional line...
If you have ever taken a morning rush-hour F train out of 179th, you know those trains pull in empty and pull out jammed. If the line were extended further east, then you would have a huge additional ridership...not only would you have the expense of building the additional line, but you would also have the cost of providing the large amount of additional service that would have to be provided.
Personally, I am not holding my breath until this addition happens. It would make too much sense, and we all know we can't have that!
As an aside, anyone have any opinions about what you think the next addition anywhere in the system will be (not what you think should be done, but what you think will actually happen.)
Most (if not all) of the people who board at 179th Street get there via the Q36 or Q43 bus routes. The extension of the subway line would
effectively eliminate the Q43, so all the people who rode that bus line would board at the subway stations. The Q36 bus may also be re-routed to feed into Springfield Boulevard station by sending it
up Braddock Avenue rather than up 212th Street. Other bus route adjustments would also result. Nassau Bus routes (notably the N6) would also be adjusted to go to Springfield Blvd and the N22/24 would
end at Little Neck Parkway. Eliminate the bus feeder traffic and
the only people who would then use the 179th Street station would be the area residents. So by the time an "F" train reached 179th Street
it would no doubt be just about as crowded as it is now.
There were plans to extend "way back then" - I'm at a loss as to why they don't start digging. Money changes everything - we're looking at about a $5 Billion construction job here (at the least!).
PS I have station designs in my notebook "1982-1983" maybe I should dust them off. (They are traditional IND but use violet, pink and aqua).
Wayne
The only subway extenstion I see being built in the next 20 years is the 2nd ave line. Beyond that, I don't see much, although the LaGuardia extension of the N may happen....
-Hank
I can probably speak on behalf of most, if not all, of our fellow Subtalkers on the question of the 2nd Ave. line being built anytime in the future: I'll believe it when I see it.
[ As an aside, anyone have any opinions about what you think the next addition anywhere in the system will be (not what you think should be done, but what you think will actually happen.) ]
Rutgers Street tunnel connection just north of DeKalb.
2nd Ave will never see the light of day. There'll be studies and more studies and more studies but it won't be built.
--Mark
Isn't it silly in this modern day that subway lines in Queens end in the middle of a very populated borough, yet four lines in Brooklyn all go down to Coney Island due to population patterns from the early days of the Century.
Residents of Eastern Queens should be pressing the city to extend the F line down Hillside Avenue and the 7 line down Roosevelt Avenue.
Sure, at one time we had farms beyond Flushing on the 7 and Jamaica on the F. No need to have subways out in the countryside. But today we have tens of thousands of riders having to take half-hour bus rides just to get to Jamaica or Flushing. Southern Brooklyn was sparsely populated in those days too, but subway builders wanted their lines to get folks to Coney Island in the summer for the beach and the amusement park, so the Brooklyn lines (except for the 2) were built as far as there was land. So today, someone in Brighton Beach or Bensonhurst can hop a subway and be in Midtown in 40 minutes. Folks in Eastern Queens have to travel 1:15 each time they want to come into the city.
Reggie
ytc6666@aol.com
You bring up a valid point - the 7 and the F should be extended. Of course, back when those lines were built, most of Queens was undeveloped, or was farmland, and it was most likely deemed that further extensions would not be necessary. Then again, when the Depression hit, projects ground to a halt. It was a struggle to complete even the Phase 1 IND lines. The IND Second System would have extended the Flushing line out to Bayside. While there were no plans to extend the Hillside Ave. portion of the Queens line, there was talk of doing so.
I picked up a copy of 12 Historical Street and Transit Maps last week at Barnes & Noble; the Second System map is fascinating.
The Hillside Avenue line terminates at 179th Street. That station was opened in 1950. When the trains turn around, they go into tunnel east of the station. I would like to know how far east of the station the tunnel extends and if there are any plans to extend the line further. I did see a map reprinted in Stan Fischler's book, "The Subway" that indicated the city originally wanted to extend the line as far as Little Neck Parkway.
There are 8 tracks east of the station on two levels. The upper level goes approximately 1,600 feet east. This was the segment which was originally planned to be extended to the city line. The lower level goes back roughly 1,000 feet and was intended to be used only for storage and relaying.
I have a question that might be stupid, but also might be able to be answered
Why are there so few turnstiles at some MAJOR stations and so many at some LESS MAJOR stations?
On the CTA there are only 6 or 7 at Washington, Monroe, and Jackson on the Red Line. But there are about 10 for just EXIT and another 10 just for entry on the Green & Orange at Roosevelt and also on the red at Chicago/State
Is this just beacuse of space restraints? Beacause the downtown red line stations have to be the busiest on the system! I think it is great that the others have so many, but the Downtown ones should come first if there is space!
Also, just 2 turnstiles for entry and exit at Harlem/Congress on the blue line isn't sufficient for rush hour crowds.
What do ya think?
And I thought only stupid shit like this happens in New York City wow!
BJ - Look around the stations you are using. The Addison (Red Line) Station was recently rebuilt and has a large station house. It also has twice the number of turnstiles that normal CTA stations do. This is because it was designed to collect fares from large numbers of people leaving a ball game. Secondly, the Roosevelt Rd ('L' Station) was recently built. It, like all of those on the Orange Line, have larger station houses.
You site the stations in the State Street Subway. These were built in the early 1940's, following the design of the old elevated stations. Most of the old elevated companies built station houses at gound level to collect fares. These are small in comparison to the newer design like Addison and Roosevelt.
So, you get Belmont/Sheffield, which has four turnstiles and collects at least as many fares that Addison does with its eight turnstiles.
For the record, I don't know that there is more that 4 or 5 turnstiles at Chicago/State. Unless they added more recently.
Here is the latest list I have complied from official ASFC Bulletins
Banana Republic (9/14)
86--1,9,4,5,6 72--1,2,3,9
68--6 59--4,5,6
Lexington Ave--E,F 51--6
Grand Central--4,5,6,7,S 47/50th--B,D,F,Q
34--B,D,F,Q,N,R Prince--N,R
Sprint (English/Spanish, 9/28): Times Square--1,2,3,7,9,N,R,A,C,E,S
Continental Airlines (10-5)
96--1,9,B,C 86--1,9,B,C
79--1,9 72--1,2,3,9,B,C
66--1,9 50--1,9,C,E
23--1,9 18--1,9
Christopher--1,9 Houston--1,9
Canal--1,9 Franklin--1,9
Chambers--1,2,3,9,A,C,E Park Place--2,3
Beth israel Hospital (10-5): Union Square--4,5,6,L,N,R
St Lukes Roosevelt Hospital (10-5)
59St/Columbus Circle--1,9,A,B,C,D 110--B,C
125--A,B,C,D
****a booth may run out of cards. According to the bulletins there will not be additional deliveries for these cards.****
(Also available, but not posted is Sprint in Chinese, and "Hispanic")
Thanks for your post, there are a few collectors on this site & we appreciate you willingness to pass on this info. !
- Banana Republic: Is avail here in good numbers now, I suspect it is being sold in Queens too.
- Continental Airlines, if you know, is it a repeat of the blue one that read "Work Hard Fly Right", 1/2 globe on lwr left ?
Also recently issued, September:
- Montrenx Jazz Festival
- Dharma & Greg, a ABC TV show, incl. photo of both
Mr t__;-)
Before anyone asks: The Dharma and Greg Metrocard is sold at "widely spaced randomly selected stations" so I could not post a list of where to buy that card.
I know they were selling the Dharma and Greg Metrocard at tbe stations on the N line in Queens. I don't think that they have any left, though.
I am reading from the September, 1998 employee newsletter of the NYCT.
"...The R143 mockup[at 207 shop] was only one third the size of a full 60-foot car..."
Charles Seaton, Customer Service
According to the article the new cars are expected to last 35 years.
In the Sunday October 4, 1998 NY Post Page 8, is a article on the NYC Subway restrooms. Their is also a small lsit of some of the worst and best bathrooms on the subway. After you good folks of the Subtalk read the article, please post your thoughts of the subway restrooms.
Charlie Muller.
[I'd rather squat on a platform during rush hour than use a subway bathroom, said Brooklynite Carrie Schadle.]
Pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?
This can be deceiving. On last week's Lo-V trip, we were given the chance to use the crew room facilities at the lunch stop at Parkchester. On my return from my lunch, I took advantage of the open rest room at the mezzanine level there. While it wasn't the Roman Baths, it was surprisingly clean and operational. I was told the ladies' side was in similar shape. Who'd have thought?
I didn't know that any were still in operation!
(although I DID run into one in working order at Rockaway Parkway (L)
during one of my trips and it wasn't that bad). I usually get out
at Downtown Brooklyn, Union Square, Coney Island-Stillwell or Rock Center if nature calls.
Wayne
I knew of a couple that were good to go at Queensboro Plaza, Dyckman ST (1/9), and Jamaica Center. The crew rest room at 21st-Queensbridge was all right despite the fact I was there on the very first train to use the station for revenue service (which was also the same night someone was rolled at the Roosevelt Island stop)
If you think the public restrooms are bad, many stations have employee restroom (only one) that are in worse shape--we also have no doors, many wont flush, etc. many look liek they have been bombed! Of course, there are also the stations that have decent, nice facillities.
)The employee restroom is usually behind a locked grilled gate and many have their own special key (no-not the 069 but a different key for each station.)this restroom is often the former public restroom-either men or women-many still have the wall mosaic which is painted over ,removed, or in some cases still there! The other one may be used for storage or for the cleaner or even as a lunch/locker room and yes, sometimes the fixtures are still there!
to avoid alienating anyone, I wont print a list of good/bad employee restrooms/ facillity rooms.
In defense of transit- it takes time and I agree with put the public first.
**this post is personal opinion and not that of MTA or NYCT***
Greetings from San Francisco; I'm here for a 3-day weekend. Yesterday I rode the MUNI subway which was recently converted to automatic train control (ATC) and a moving block signal system, similar to that which will be tested on the [L] in the future.
Since my rides were on a weekend, things did not go too badly. The trolleys (Boeing LRVs and new Bredas) moved swiftly, but exhibited a noticable "pulsing" sensation while braking at stations. My understanding is that there are still many bugs in the system, resulting in significant delays during rush hours.
MUNI has also instituted a proof-of-payment (POP) system in the subway, whereby there is OPTO service when multiple car trains are in operation. Trailer cars are un-manned; the lead car's operator opens/closes all of the cars' doors (up to 3-car trains operate). A rider must posses a pass, transfer, or other proof of payment while on-board, or risk a fine from roving officials.
More details when I return to Bahstin!
Todd,
Have you ridden the PCC street-cars on the F-Market Street line. ( or is that Cahs)
New Orleans sent one of the rebuilt standard gauge PERLEY THOMAS cars there. I saw it when it was ready to be shipped in New Orleans. Have you seen it there?
Have fun and keep us posted on what you find.
Back to BOS from SFO last evening.
Of course I rode the PCCs on Market Street! In fact most of them are rehabed SEPTA 2700 series cars, same as we have at Seashore (2709). But the MUNI cars are outfitted for ADA, etc. They're still in GREAT shape. I did not get a chance to see NOPSI 952 however (we have 966 at Seashore so it would have been great to compare them). A good friend is in charge of the historic fleet for MUNI. He is a "graduate" of Seashore, and now makes his living doing what many of us do for fun!
And while the cable cars, MUNI metro, and BART are the "classic" transporation modes in SFO, I also enjoy riding the articulated FLYER electric trolleybuses up the amazing hills -- which they climb with the greatest of ease.
I read that when the cable system was shut down for rebuilding in the early 80s, diesel buses ran in place of the cable cars, and had a devil of a time with those steep hills. In some instances, passengers would have to get off so the bus could make it over a hill! I can see it now: the driver realizes he won't make it over the hill, so he stops and says, "OK, everybody out and push!"
That's true. I was there at the time. Though it would have been more fun if the buses had manual transmissions!! (One used to be able to rent a stick-shift in SFO, and I alway did just for the fun of it. Alas, no more, just automatics.)
dynamic braking on the electic buses would be a great help. A diesel bus with a V-730 trans. might be ok but I do not think I would want to do the hills with a GM V-drive like a VH-9 or VS-1.. That would be too scarry on the way down the hill.
That's a good point. At least with the cable cars, the cable itself acts as a brake, since it moves along at a steady 9 or 9.5 mph.
Put it this way: those brake and transmission shops in San Francisco probably make a fortune. Goodness knows the auto glass shops in Denver make a mint with all the damn gravel that gets dumped during the winter.
IN San Francisco, clutch and brake life has a direct correlation to where you live on a hill. During the 1970's before the 1 California ran along its current route east of Presidio Avenue (California to Steiner, and then on Sacramento from Steiner to Franklin and then westbound buses on Sacramneto and Clay for the eastbound) the 55 Sacramento line used the old GMC Diesels which often conked out on the slopes of Nob Hill and Chinatown. Until the line was electrified, MUNI had set a side a sub-fleet of GMC's with yellow "55 LINE ONLY" stickers in the lower right-hand corner of the windshields. Apparently these coaches were among the best performers in the Kirkland Division- based fleet (TWW this is the yard that has failed several recent Highway Patrol inspections) and could handle the route. I live along the 6 Parnassasus line and anytime there is a parade on Market Street (St. Patrick's, Columbus, Gay Parade) Diesels sub for the old Flyers and sound like they will need a paramedic when reaching the summit of my hill.
I rode in some of the new MUNI Cars back in April when I was in SF. I don't know if they had started using ATC at that point, but the system was down so frequently that I just stopped using it. When I could, I used Bart, otherwise, I took a cab. (And cabs in SF are more expensive than in NY.)
I had no complaints about BART which is a dream. Fast, Reliable, and from what I understand, it was a pre-cursor to the DC Metro.
I was in SF in Jan. Rode the MUNI LRV and Market st .F line Historic streetcars for week with no problem. However, The E line was being operated separately (as a shuttle) from the other lines. You had to change at the Embarcadario station from the L,M,N to the E. Service was separated at mid-platform by a standard DOT STOP sign placed in the middle of the tracks! (I thought it was a nice intigration of two divisions of transportation! )
I stumbled across this bulletin, and I wish we had something like this for the SF MUNI. I live in SF and ride the N-Judah line every day. The new ATCS has been an unmitigated disaster for MUNI. I'm sure Alcatel's system works fine on closed-system loops with a dozen or so trains, but the MUNI Metro has too many ways for this rather finicky system to crash.
Where to start? As of today, there are very few (<25) Boeing LRV's being operated under the ACTS. These cars were designed 25 years ago when systems like Alcatel's were futuristic dreams, and much of MUNI Metro's congestion can be traced to the Boeings breaking down in the subway (which lacks adequate pocket tracks and cross-overs). So MUNI's solution was to remove all but the most reliable Boeings from service entirely. Unfortunately, this leaves MUNI with less than 80 (and often <70) workable cars to operate a rush-hour schedule that requires 99. This has led to severe over-crowding. The new Breda cars are arriving, but it will be several months to a year before there are enough to operate the published schedules, and at least half a year more until we can get rid of those *&$^$# Boeings. So the Metro will be a problem for quite a while.
The ACTS also has a habit of rejecting "log-ins". When a streetcar enters the subway (BTW, most of the Metro system operates as old-style streetcar lines - stops at yellow stripes on the pavement, no fancy stations!) the computer runs a brief check on the car's systems. If it's not perfect, the operator will have to run the car in the subway using the old cab-signal system still in place. Since the car is not run by the computer, the ACTS leaves a large buffer zone around it - good for safety, but it defeats the purpose of having the ACTS. Compounding the problem, MUNI procedures require permission from Central Control (an oxymoron) to operate manually, and permission can take up to fifteen minutes to get. Meanwhile, the car (and passengers) sit on the ramp into the subway, blocking all following cars. And as I said earlier, the ACTS is finicky. A slight difference in wheel diameters between two cars in a train will confuse the ACTS, a condition that wear and tear almost guarantees. (We have very sharp curves in some of our street trackage.)
I could go on and on. MUNI's PR disaster regarding Proof-of-Payment, the runaway train, staffing and training problems, political posturing, etc... The patience of this dedicated MUNI rider is wearing thin...
The "E" shuttle from Embarcadero to CalTrain is history! The N/Judah line has been extended to CalTrain now. All other lines (J/K/L/M) turn at Embarcadero.
That sounds exactly like what we have here in Denver on our light rail line. Did you ride the F line on Mahket St., by any chance? How about BAHT?
This is actually the second incarnation of an ATC for the MUNI Metro, During the early 1980's when the system first opened they had some sort of an automatc stopping system in place which nailed a lot of trains seemingly unexpectedly. This was especially the case on trains moving Inbound from Church Street on the K, L and M lines toward Van Ness where the N and J lines join the subway from Church and Duboce. Because of the sudden and hostile stops, the preferred seat for my travels was a backward facing seat because it provided almost a "self-bracing" situation. But that was not the only Metro defect among the others:
--Not enough doors for a subway, only two sets of double doors per car at high-level platform stations on the original Boeing Equipment.
--No air conditioining, San Francisco may not be warm during the summer, but underground and during the Fall it can be.
__Poor signage placement in stations, the original idea for both BART and MUNI was that trains would run frequently enough that all passengers would receive seats and thus their placement and number were geared toward seated patrons with favorable sightlines.
--Lack of sidings for disabled trains.
I could go on and on, but I am grateful that in 1987 I started driing and didn't need the Metro anymore. I took it a couple of years ago and was appalled at the condition of the trains graffitti, pot-smoking thugs carrying unmuffled boom boxes and spewing freqent profanities. If Willie Brown were serious about the system, he would take the attitude that New York has when it comes to "quality of life issues" and run these skells out of the way of decent citizens. I have been to NEw York three times in the last 14 months and have seen less thuggery in Manhattan than I would in five minutes in San Francisco.
I am a bit confused about the Amtrak track design at Penn Station. I remember in the 80's I took a trip to Montreal on Amtrak , a night train, and we left from Penn Station. However, on our way there we went over the Hells Gate bridge next to the Triboro Bridge. I was wondering how this was possible since the NYC subway map does not show these tracks up Manhattan rom Penn Station. Can someone clear this up?
From Penn Station, the train proceeded east thru the East River tunnel
to Queens, crossed Sunnyside Yard, then over to the Hell Gate Bridge. It followed the NorthEast corridor till New London when it switches North.
That portion of tracks is not on the subway map because they're not used by any subway or commuter train.
There's another way from Penn Station to Montreal that leaves Penn to
the West and then North along West Side Manhattan along the Hudson
River. Those tracks lead North to Albany and then to Canada.
Now wait a minute: "Penn to Montreal, by going West, then North along west side of Manhattan, then North on Hudson"
- From Penn you can go East to Hells Gate Bridge, then to Hartford, then Springfield, then to Montreal
- From GCT you can go North on the Hudson river to Albany & Montreal
- From Penn you can go West into NJ, then North
P.S. The Hells Gate Bridge is also called the NY-CT Railway, I'm not sure actually owns it right now, but maybe Peter will tell us.
Mr t__:^)
And, for a few years now the west side line has been running from Penn Station up the West Side across Spuyten Duyvil(where the Harlem River meets the Hudson River) into the Metro-North tracks coming from GCT.
Gee, you've got me realy courious now.
I've made a couple of recent trips to the cruise piers at 55th. On the return I've come down the West Side Highway. I didn't see any tracks going North.
Spuyten Duyvil, that's near the Henry Hudson auto bridge. I don't seem to remember any tracks near Columbis Univ at 116 St. Are you just playing with me ?
Mr t__:^)
The West Side tracks are in a "box" tunnel until about 110th St (I'm guessing here... they are out of the tunnel by the 125th St. valley). If you're driving north on the Henry Hudson you can clearly see where they come out -- you can see signals along the right side of the road. I've never caught a train along this stretch but the tracks are pretty clearly visible....
How does the tracks turn north from Penn station. I see four tracks go into the Hudson RIver tunnel. The tracks to the north are LIRR layup and goes to the West side yard.
The turn must be very sharp. How can a 90 foot railroad car make that turn?
Also, can one walk in the tunnel under Henry Hudson park?
Heard there are a lot of homeless there.
To Dave/Peter, ... First Dave thanks for detail.
At Penn my guess would be that the tracks cut off West of the stn & East of the layup yard. Looking West of the stn there seems to be some funny track arangement (North side). Also the LIRR had a big job a couple of years ago to re-do tracks West of the stn assoc with, but not in the layup yard. So if it's there, how does the Amtrak get to it, i.e. cross over from track 13 to 21 ?
Question: I still confused, re "box tunnel", does that mean open on the top ? Well where is it ? At about 59th I went cross town right to the water, to get to the cruise pier, and didn't see any evidence of ROW going North.
Mr t__:^)
By "box tunnel" i meant that it used to be open to the air but was covered over and a park planted on top. I don't really know much more about it but I would guess it is under Riverside Park starting from the 70s on up.
-dave
OK, thanks for the two answers anyway. Mr t__:^)
The tracks are underground from Penn Station until around 125th Street, and they do indeed run right underneath Riverside Park. In fact, if you walk along the park (on the "mezzanine" level, between Riverside Drive, which is above you, and the Henry Hudson Parkway, which is below you), you will see large steel grates, similar to subway emergency exits, at frequent intervals. Look down and you will see the tracks. Also, if you go down to where the various basketball courts, baseball fields, etc. are,, or if you drive up the HH Parkway, you will see large semi-circle openings in the "cliff" of Riverside Park. These are for tunnel ventilation. Further up, near the water treatment plant, the tracks emerge from the tunnel and run alongside the Parkway.
Well all right ! That's why I never saw them at 116th Street. BUT I have seen the structures you mention. Always wondered what they were, but never got too close due to their being a hangout for the homeless.
Thanks to all for educating me & Dave too for nice photos !!!
Mr t__:^)
Empire service goes to the extreme right (West bound) under the Post Office to make the connection to the "box" tunnel. I've seen the new Genniess engines pulling Empire Service as we leave Penn.
The old FL9's (two of them) are on the extremem left side (leaving Penn West Bound) under the post office against the wall as of two weeks ago. I do not think they are in service.
NY State is going to be giving some extra money to Amtrak to restore highspeed service. Bring back the Turbo trains or a form of them for 110+ service to Albany.
Did the Turbos ever get this far south. I thought they stayed up in Canada (except for the NH ones).
Mr t__:^)
Thurston writes, "Did the Turbos ever get this far south. I thought they stayed up in Canada (except for the NH ones)."
You're mixing up 1950s-1960s aircraft-designed (United Technologies?) turbos, used by the NH and CN, with the 1970s French-designed Turbotrains used by Amtrak. The earlier ones had a reputation for being top-heavy, bouncy, prone to mechanical failure, and rough riding and were out of service by the mid-1960s, if not sooner, I would guess. The Canadian National one lasted later than the New Haven. One of the magazines, 'Trains,' I think, had an article on them within the last year or two.
The later turbos were a few sets borrowed from France and run in Michigan (into Chicago, I think) and in New York. Then Rohr got the contract for several sets bought in the mid-1970s (starting delivery in 1976, if memory serves) for Empire Service in New York, which were combination diesel and electric, the latter for service south of Croton-Harmon, going into Grand Central. For a while, they were also used on the Adirondack from New York to Montreal. The sets had a power car at each end and because they didn't have to change locomotives at Croton-Harmon, there was a significant savings in travel time. They seem to have functioned well for about 15 years but then began having mechanical problems, including a fire in one at Penn Station after the Empire Service was rerouted down the West Side at Spuyten Duyvil through the park (alongside the Henry Hudson Parkway and under teh GW Bridge) and that tunnel that everyone is talking about. (BTW, I think that tunnel is single track and doesn't have a third rail. And you can see the homeless from the trains, especially during daylight, with sunshine coming through the places where there are grillwork bars or glass blocks.)
They were withdrawn from service, but one set has been rebuilt at State expense for higher speeds than previously; I think the rebuilt one runs at 120 mph, but I haven't been on it. The previous limit was the Amtrak 79 mph limit. It was quicker to go from Albany across the middle of the State on "conventional" equipment, which even in the late 1970s was going over 100 mph through the Mohawk Valley.
The biggest disadvantage of the Turbos was their inflexibility; you can't just add a car or two when you have to disconnect semi-permanently attached power cars to add cars into a train.
Jouef, the French model manufacturer, made an HO model of the European Turbo (buffers and all) but in Amtrak colors--you might be able to find one at a train show. The model isn't the greatest runner, but it is fun to watch it streak along.
With apologies for probably giving more information than you needed (or wanted).
8-)
Ed Alfonsin/SUNY Potsdam
Actually, the original RTG Turboliners weren't just borrowed from France; Amtrak owned the misbegotten things. They were originally ordered by the French system, but Amtrak bought them off the assembly line from the manufacturer, ANF-Frangeco; when delivered, they still had the SNCF (French national railways) logo etched on the partition glass.
Amtrak was sufficiently committed to this equipment that a Turbo maintenance base was built at Brighton Park, on the southwest side of Chicago. Among the services on which Amtrak used them in the 1970's were Chicago to Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, and Port Huron. Some were, I believe, rebuilt in the late Seventies/early Eighties with Rohr-style noses.
We've got everything here, just for the asking! :-)
Here's a picture of the New Haven type:
(South Station, Boston, 1970).
and the Amtrak type:
(Near Spuyten Duyvil under the Henry Hudson Bridge, May 1981)
Ed, No apology needed ! It was geat reading. AND yes I was thinking about the P&W A/C Turbos. My Uncle & father worked at P&W, but neither on the Turbos.
Mr t__:^)
Some corrections RE the UA turbo trains
These trains entered service with what was by then Penn Central in the late sixties. I'm not sure of the exact date but I remember riding on them in the years 1969-1971 on my way to school in Bethlehem PA. This was an experimaental service sponsored by DOT as the original Metroliners.
Originally they ran into Grand Central but later switched to Penn Station (maybe after Amtrak moved everything to Penn?)
I remember the equipment was pretty unreliable. They had a resident UA mechanic that rode along on each trip. However they were fun to ride on as they had a great view out the front behind the engineer.
I think they lasted into Amtrak until sometime in the seventies when VIA brought them to augment their fleet in Canada.
Actually, I thought the turbotrains of PCRR vintage lasted until the early to mid-70's, since they were mentioned in the old TA transit guide from 1976. I know they were definitely gone by the late '70s.
As far as I can determine, the last day of revenue operation of Amtrak's United Aircraft TurboTrains was September 8, 1976. Their last regular assignment was on the _Yankee Clipper_, New York-Providence. Why just Providence? Well, that's where the TurboTrain maintenance base was; they had been cut back from Boston the previous February 15.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Thurston writes, "Did the Turbos ever get this far south. I thought they stayed up in Canada (except for the NH ones)."
You're mixing up 1950s-1960s aircraft-designed (United Technologies?) turbos, used by the NH and CN, with the 1970s French-designed Turbotrains used by Amtrak. The earlier ones had a reputation for being top-heavy, bouncy, prone to mechanical failure, and rough riding and were out of service by the mid-1960s, if not sooner, I would guess. The Canadian National one lasted later than the New Haven. One of the magazines, 'Trains,' I think, had an article on them within the last year or two.
The later turbos were a few sets borrowed from France and run in Michigan (into Chicago, I think) and in New York. Then Rohr got the contract for several sets bought in the mid-1970s (starting delivery in 1976, if memory serves) for Empire Service in New York, which were combination diesel and electric, the latter for service south of Croton-Harmon, going into Grand Central. For a while, they were also used on the Adirondack from New York to Montreal. The sets had a power car at each end and because they didn't have to change locomotives at Croton-Harmon, there was a significant savings in travel time. They seem to have functioned well for about 15 years but then began having mechanical problems, including a fire in one at Penn Station after the Empire Service was rerouted down the West Side at Spuyten Duyvil through the park (alongside the Henry Hudson Parkway and under teh GW Bridge) and that tunnel that everyone is talking about. (BTW, I think that tunnel is single track and doesn't have a third rail. And you can see the homeless from the trains, especially during daylight, with sunshine coming through the places where there are grillwork bars or glass blocks.)
They were withdrawn from service, but one set has been rebuilt at State expense for higher speeds than previously; I think the rebuilt one runs at 120 mph, but I haven't been on it. The previous limit was the Amtrak 79 mph limit. It was quicker to go from Albany across the middle of the State on "conventional" equipment, which even in the late 1970s was going over 100 mph through the Mohawk Valley.
The biggest disadvantage of the Turbos was their inflexibility; you can't just add a car or two when you have to disconnect semi-permanently attached power cars to add cars into a train.
Jouef, the French model manufacturer, made an HO model of the European Turbo (buffers and all) but in Amtrak colors--you might be able to find one at a train show. The model isn't the greatest runner, but it is fun to watch it streak along.
With apologies for probably giving more information than you needed (or wanted).
8-)
Ed Alfonsin/SUNY Potsdam
Actually, the original RTG Turboliners weren't just borrowed from France; Amtrak owned the misbegotten things. They were originally ordered by the French system, but Amtrak bought them off the assembly line from the manufacturer, ANF-Frangeco; when delivered, they still had the SNCF (French national railways) logo etched on the partition glass.
Amtrak was sufficiently committed to this equipment that a Turbo maintenance base was built at Brighton Park, on the southwest side of Chicago. Among the services on which Amtrak used them in the 1970's were Chicago to Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, and Port Huron. Some were, I believe, rebuilt in the late Seventies/early Eighties with Rohr-style noses.
We've got everything here, just for the asking! :-)
Here's a picture of the New Haven type:
(South Station, Boston, 1970).
and the Amtrak type:
(Near Spuyten Duyvil under the Henry Hudson Bridge, May 1981)
Ed, No apology needed ! It was geat reading. AND yes I was thinking about the P&W A/C Turbos. My Uncle & father worked at P&W, but neither on the Turbos.
Mr t__:^)
Some corrections RE the UA turbo trains
These trains entered service with what was by then Penn Central in the late sixties. I'm not sure of the exact date but I remember riding on them in the years 1969-1971 on my way to school in Bethlehem PA. This was an experimaental service sponsored by DOT as the original Metroliners.
Originally they ran into Grand Central but later switched to Penn Station (maybe after Amtrak moved everything to Penn?)
I remember the equipment was pretty unreliable. They had a resident UA mechanic that rode along on each trip. However they were fun to ride on as they had a great view out the front behind the engineer.
I think they lasted into Amtrak until sometime in the seventies when VIA brought them to augment their fleet in Canada.
Actually, I thought the turbotrains of PCRR vintage lasted until the early to mid-70's, since they were mentioned in the old TA transit guide from 1976. I know they were definitely gone by the late '70s.
As far as I can determine, the last day of revenue operation of Amtrak's United Aircraft TurboTrains was September 8, 1976. Their last regular assignment was on the _Yankee Clipper_, New York-Providence. Why just Providence? Well, that's where the TurboTrain maintenance base was; they had been cut back from Boston the previous February 15.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Go on W. 43 St between 10th and 11th Avenues. You will pass on a viaduct over those tracks.
I will thanks !
I'll also have to go up town. I can't believe I worked there 11 years & don't remember tracks (between the park & river) at 116th. Granted I never went too far into that park, nor the one at Morningside (looked over the edge of the walls).
Mr t__:^)
The tracks are just east (not west) of the Henry Hudson Parkway from the tunnel portal (about 120th St.) to the 158th St. exit, then they cross under and run west of the Parkway from there to the northern tip of Manhattan. The tunnel portal is just north of the spot where the long exit ramp for the 125th St. exit branches off from the northbound parkway; the tracks run between the parkway itself and the exit ramp.
The southern portal of the tunnel is at 72nd St., it is in fact the 72nd St. exit ramp from the northbound Henry Hudson Pkwy./West Side Highway. Between about 35th St. and 59th St. the tracks are in a mostly open but narrow cut that snakes its way north from the vicinity of the Javits center. From 59th to 72nd St. they are on open land (once a N.Y. Central freight yard) that I believe is now mostly owned by Donald Trump. There is street called Freedom Place that runs west of West End Ave. from (I think) 66th to 70th Streets, and it should be possible to see the tracks (or track, perhaps there is only one) below from there--provided there is not a solid fence blocking the view, which there might be.
Thanks Dan !
The system is awesome. Although I am very loyal to NYC Subway I must say that the Washington Metro is very quiet and clean between the tracks. The stations were pretty cool looking. However the Metro gets thumbs down for the price and the easability as to how much you should pay for your destination. It was confusing for the first time rider. At least in NYC it is one price and easy to know how much to spend. That is all I have to say. Any other Comments
After 9:30am, you may buy a $5 all-day pass. That makes it a bargain
for sightseers. Yes, the system has a zoned-fare system; always has. You need a chart to find out what your fare is. Base fare is $1.10. One-stop hops actually cost less than that during peak hours (85 cents), fare maxes out at $3.25 (i.e. New Carrollton to Franconia-Springfield or equivalent distance). Other than that,
Metro is a superb subway (still can't hold a candle to NYC, though in
terms of size and aesthetic diversity)
Wayne
It also closes at midnight, which is ridiculously early, every day of the year except for july 4th. And it generally has less frequent service, particularly nights and weekends, then you would expect from NYC.
And make sure you do not even think about bringing food or drink (not even water) near that train or platform. Metro likes rules. They like to be in CONTROL.
A more serious example of management's desire for control comes out of the story behind a crash which killed a metro operator 3 (?) winters ago. It was snowing and icy, which messes up the train speed sensors and affects braking distance. However, the automated train control system could not tell this was happening! The train was overshooting stations and the operator had put in a request to manually operate the train. The request was denied. Apparently metro felt that operators manually braking trains were wearing down the wheels too much (not grinding them flat - they are disk brakes so they were just wearing out the rotor too fast, i think).
So the poor fellow continued with the train operating automatically. At the last station, the train slid past the station and into a parked train, and he was killed.
I think this is a good example of why we need to be wary of automated things - sometimes they fail! I think there were only a couple of passengers on the train - it was late at night, fortunately - and there were only a few minor injuries among them.
A little while later I found a special order on a train which stated that train operators who feel they have been given an unsafe directive need to stop their train and resolve the situation, blah blah blah. Clearly the whole top-down management of the metro was at fault here, not an operator who is not in any position to argue with his superiors at central control....
That accident occurred on February 16, 1996 just past the Shady Grove
station (within the yard confines, I believe). There's a point where
the two tracks are at different levels and the one train derailed onto
the adjacent track, landing on top of the first car of the parked train. The news pictures I saw (televised) showed a grotesque wreck
of the two Breda cars. I could not see the unit numbers.
That was a bad day for DC Area transit - over at Silver Spring, there was a fiery wreck involving a MARC commuter train and an Amtrak intercity liner.
I believe there was only one other accident on Metro that involved
injuries and/or fatalities to passengers. The same day that the
Air Florida jet crashed into the 14th Street bridge, a Blue line train
went up the wrong track north of Smithsonian and during the act of
correcting its path (backing up), split the crossover switch. The
first car was all tangled up in the concrete divider between the
tracks. (Jan.13 1982 or 1983)
Wayne
Actually, the train was labeled as "Orange"---the one that was in the accident back in '82---If memory serves me (and it often fails)--It was headed towards New Carrollton
Ah, yes...it's good to be back in NYC. I arrived on Slamtrak train #99 from Boston at 1327 this afternoon (three minutes ahead of schedule!!!) and got a nice surprise at Penn Station...A trains were running via the F line from W4th to Jay Street, so I was able to take one train from Penn Station to Second Avenue! After freshening up a bit, I then had dinner in Chinatown with a friend, and after we parted company at Court Street, I decided a trip to Stillwell would be a nice way to end my day. I hopped an 8-car R68 D train at DeKalb and squinted out the front window, trying to see through that damn polarized plastic window on the cab door. I prefer the metal screens I've seen on the 68A's cab door windows. I rode the F back -- the ride was pretty quick, and we reached 48 mph down the hill coming out of York Street into the Rutgers Tunnel. Before we got to that point, however, I noticed a couple of things that I'm sure can be answered here:
1. Why are the columns different on each platform of Jay Street/Boro Hall? Did the station exist as a 2 track at one time and have the second platform added later?
2. What are the bright white signal lights as you approach, enter, and leave Bergen Street Northbound? They are marked with a WD prefix, I believe, and I saw one flashing as we approached. The flashing stopped when we were practically on top of the light.
3. Any suggestions for anything good going on tomorrow on the subway? I've decided to allow myself 9:30 A.M. to 12:30 P.M. and 2:30 to 5:30 to ride. was thinking it had been a long time since I'd ridden out to Archer, so maybe I'll go out the J and come back on the E, then later do New Lots and Canarsie together.
As for question 3: most likely you will see single track J service over the WillyB every 24 minutes in prep for the long term closure of the bridge in May '99. Notice the iron beams overhead. Perhaps some kind of scaffolding will be hung from there in May. BTW: the new pedestrian walkway is partially open: on the Manhattan side from the end of the overhead structure (subway signal # J2 99) to the exit where the J/M/Z goes underground. As for question #2: these are called "Wheel Detectors". The idea for these came from the Union Square wreck a number of years ago. These are supposed to prevent trains from going too fast on diverging moves, but in actuality, where these start before Bergen St., is well before the switch. What it does is to cause an emergency brake application from blind trippers if the train is going too fast in a designated area. Another place: s/b "N" as it crosses from local to express north of Pacific St. Only pass them when solid white or dark, not when flashing: that means you are going too fast! Needless to say, any motorman encountering a wheel detector will go much less than the posted speed, otherwise the Command Center hears about it that he was speeding & the penalties are too great.
Jay St. was built all at once, as were all IND stations. Quite honestly, I never noticed anything different about the columns at that station.
I didn't realize that 8th Ave. local trains could still switch over to the 6th Ave. local tracks south of W.4th St. I know it could still be done the other way around (6th Ave. local to 8th Ave. local). That maneuver would definitely be worth the wait for an A train of R-38s.
That was part of the JFK Express route. The 8th Ave local tracks desended a few feet and were alongside the 6th Ave tracks for a few hundred yards where there was a switchover.
That's right. I've never had a chance to observe the switches at that location, so I was curious. Are there scissor switches between the local tracks, or plain old crossover turnouts?
There are two tracks in each direction.
One that goes from 6th to 8th and the other way.
This means that a train switching from 6th to 8th
and another switching from 8th to 6th can run that section
at the same time.
The uptown tracks are also designed likewise.
On the other hand, just before reaching Bway-Lafayette,
There is a crossover between uptown local and express,
between uptown-downtown express track, but no
crossover between downtown local and express tracks.
Which means that an uptown train leaving Grand St.
can get to the 8th Ave. Local track at W4th but not the other way around.
Jay Street and Hoyt-Schermerhorn Street have the same quirk -
Tiled columns on the southbound side, I-beams on the northbound.
As far as I know, these stations were all built and opened as they
are all at once; the reasons for the difference in columns are
unknown.
Enjoy the Canarsie line! I hope you get a Slant R40. Lots of
lovely things to see out there...
Wayne
I did Canarsie and Jamaica Center. I didn't get a R40S, though. Just R42's, both on the L, then on the J. Nice trip back on an R32 on the E! 50 MPH between Continental Ave and Roosevelt!
Am I missing something here? Subway cars are equipped w/ speedos now? When did this happen? By the way, I'm in Florida and haven't rode in the subway since 1993.
The R-46s were the first NYCT cars to get speedo's in 1992. That was followed closely by the R-44s. The R-44 through R-68 were the first generation speedometers which sensed speed by reading from the Bull gear in the #1 gear case. Beginning with the R-68A and then through the 60 foot cars (including the R-32s) and IRT fleet (except the redbirds), all remaining cars were equiped with Dopler Speed Sensors by 1995.
The R-44s and R-46s had speedometers when they came from the factory. They were the analog variety; in fact, I remember seeing them function on the R-46s, but not on the R-44s. R-44 speedometers had a white needle on a black face and were not illuminated; R-46 speedometers had what appeared to be an electronic needle on an illuminated background. By the late 80s, before rebuilding, the R-46 speedometers were no longer functioning.
I thought the Redbirds received digital speedometers when they were rebuilt. Maybe I'll get lucky and catch a train of them in which the operator will have his cab door open a crack and see for myself two weeks from now.
You can usually see the digital speedometer's display through the door hinge if it's not a full-width cab.
The R-46 was delivered from the factory with a speedometer (I don't remember about the R-44s). The speedometer was driven by the Axle-Tach on the #1 truck with an interface through the ATO package. When the Rockwell trucks and the ATO packages were removed, the spedometers were rendered useless. In 1990, during the overhaul by Morrison Knudsen, the speedometer feature was completely eliminated. In 1992-93, the NYCT began installing speedometers on the R-44/46 fleet. Brocksopp Engineering supplied the speedometer kits for the R-46s while Bach-Simpson supplied the kits for the R-44s...
I know the R-44s had them, too. They were in the same location on the instrument panel as on the R-46s, but they looked different. I never saw any of the R-44 speedometers function.
One more question..This is probably up Steve's alley--Are the speedos installed the same way car speedos are installed?
Most-if not all auto speedometers operate via a rotating cable that is mechanically coupled from the final drive to the readout. NYCT trains use two systems. neither of which is similar to the automobile system.
On R-44/46 and 68s there is an inductive sensor mounted in a gear case of each car. (On R-44/46 only on the A cars. On R-68 on the #1 and 4 gear case of every car). The sensor 'counts' the teeth on the 'Bull Gear' and the speed is calculated from that via a chip in the speedometer head. 121 teeth = 1 revolution of the wheel. The inductive sensor sends pulses via a shielded cable from the gearcase to the speedometer. There are no moving parts added to the system.
On all other cars, we use Dopler sensing to measure the speed of the train. It works exactly as the Radar used by the police operates. A radar signal is sent out, is reflected and is returned. The time differences of the reflected signal are used to calculate the speed.
Naturally, the dopler system is more accurate since it is not affected by wheel wear or skidding wheels. However, dopler can be affected by fluorescent lighting along the ROW. Hope that the explanation clarifies things a bit.
What does the signal in the Doppler system get reflected from?
Any idea what the frequency and amplitude of the transmitted signals are? I know there has been concern about police radar guns causing cancer (in the operators thereof), and they emit only momentary pulses. Do the trains emit these signals continuously? Where are the transmitters mounted on the train cars?
And yet another question: If I'm driving under an elevated line, and one of these trains passes over, can it set off my radar detector?
As for the transmitters - they are most likely located under the cars - the concerns about poliece getting cancer basically was due to the fact that old guns worked continuously - and sometimes the officer would put the gun down on his lap, effectivly slowly nuking you-know-where. Plus there were concerns about reflections inside the poliece car. Bear in mind that *traffic* radar is normally microwave, though nowhere NEAR the power of your oven. BTW, Microwave ovens use the same vaccum tube technology as aircraft radar - the cavity magnetron.
I don't know the power of the signal emitted by the Dopler Transducers. This was not specified in the 'specs.' submitted to prospective vendors. Neither, do I know the frequency. I do know that the readout refresh rate is 100 milliseconds so that under extreme accelleration or braking, the units are supposed to count down without skipping any numbers. The transducers are mounted under the Anticlimber of the car under the Train Operator's cab. The sensor is mounted at approximately a 45 degree angle with the roadbed. The signal is reflected off of the ties/rails. The 45 degree angle and the spacing of the ties more or less insures that the signal will not pass to the street from elevated structures. I did find that some of the earlier units would 'read' the fluorescent lights (60 Hz), while over an inspection pit, as 22 MPH while standing still. I'm sure that the mathamatically inclined can come up with some info from that.
It's amazing what Doppler radars can "see." The new National Weather Service "NEXRAD" WSR-88D (Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler) is well known to reflect off bugs, dust, and other airborne objects in addition to rain. In fact, those studying birds can watch migrations; we can see "dry" fronts through the convergence of bugs, etc. In fact, one of the ways in which the new WSR-88D helps identify severe weather, such as dry microbursts (strong winds out of clouds without rain falling) is by seeing dust and other particles in the atmosphere.
So... I wouldn't be surprised if the Doppler speedometers reacted to things other than ties & rails if pointed or tuned improperly. [Doppler weather radars are typically 5-10cm; I'd be interested in the wavelength of the speedometers!]
And that's transit and weather together!
How often do the speedo cables get ripped off during detrucking
on the 75' cars?
When first installed, it happened occassionally. Now it hardly happens at all. One improvement was the Mil. connector added to the sensor on the R-44 and R-68 so the sensor could stay with the truck. This was a problem on the R-46 because the sensor had to be 0.15" from the Bull Gear to read accurately and since the GE gear cases were built with more than 0.15" variation in the outer dimension, this became problematic.
Whoa! 50 mph on that stretch? Your train must have had a clear track. It's all level grade, too, so that train would have accomplished that speed all on its own. But then, the R-32s have always had a reputation for being fast.
Come to think of it, I rode that line for the first time in the spring of 1968 on an E train of R-1/9s, and, let me tell you, those traction motors were howling and that train was screaming. As much as I didn't care for the E train, that ride was nontheless exhilirating.
This past weekend, the A trains were rerouted via 6th Ave. in BOTH DIRECTIONS from W.4th to Jay. Since the access to/from the 8th Ave. line is the local track at W4th, the A trains were local in Manhattan, with C service suspended. This brings up the case that the weekend J service must be extended to Broad St. Since there was no service on the A at Broadway/Nassau, & the J shut down at Fulton St. how do you get the A from there? Take the 4/5 one stop to Brooklyn Bridge, #6 one stop to Canal, then the J 2 stops to Essex? What a time consuming hassle that was! The person who simply wanted to A at Bway/Nassau would be totally confused.
For Broadway Nassau you'd change at West 4th for the Downtown E to WTC,yes it is running. Change to the 2 or 3(At the uptowen end of the platform you follow the signs.) Take the downtown train one stop to Fulton Street.
what is happening is a switch replacement at Canal Street- they are installing a full diamond crossover (According to trackworkers I spoke with.) From the front window of an R32 I saw that there will also be connections between uptown express and downtown express to possibly allow short turn trains to end there if needed. (this statement is opinion- I do not have official info.)
When I went through there, the trains are under slow speed orders at all times and the track is a temporary type of track-I think they say it is "Skeletonized track".
Here's a question: is it possible to see the stub ends of the never-built Worth Street line in the tunnel between Canal St. and WTC?
Yes, it's entirely possible: take an R32/38 E or C train and look out the front window. The stub branches off to your left going downtown. There is also a stub on the uptown side but it is harder to see, since the headlights do not face into the alcove.
I saw a General Order Sunday, forgot the dates (sorry), but it said a test train would be ran to polish the rails & test signals and switches on the closed tracks since February. So that project seems to be halfway done so the tracks now used will be taken out of service for water remedy & rebuilding. The master plan is to have the whole project done by May when the WillyB closes, so that an orderly transition to new picked jobs, work locations & days off will take place in the B division. If finished early, a temporary supplement schedule can be put in on the B & Q till May extending through service to 21 St. from Brooklyn.
In the Monday October 5 NY Daily News Page 7 is a article about the # 2 and #3 reroute tunnel rebuild on Lenox Aveune so workers can repair a tunnel wall damanged by an underground stream will end on Monday October 12 Columbus Day.
When everyone gets a chance to read the article please post your thought's here in subtalk.
Charlie Muller.
I picked up the paper at 30th St.(Amtrak-all NY's papers are availible there) and gave it a read. The subway maps say October 8th, but who's counting days?:)
A section of the article says:
"The Transit Authority early this year blocked one of two subway lines under a portion of Lenox Ave. so workers could repair a tunnel wall damaged by an underground stream."
What are they talking about. Do they mean tracks, as only one was used at any given time?
And uptown trains in the mornings and downtown trains in the evening. Isn't it the other way around?
And what is happening specifically at 116th St, as mentioned in the article?
To be perfectly honest, the first article to catch my eye was the one above it about repaving the West Side Highway. About darn time.
When I lived in NYC for 4 months ages ago I took a drive around town(in the old beat up station wagon I had to part with for a Taurus I haven't used since the strike). I came through the Battery Tunnel and up the West Side. My car almost fell apart on a pothole somewhere near the Village(I think).
Anyway, the Lenox is almost over. Now we wait with bated breath for the Franklin Shuttle and the Queens Blvd. connection. What a grand time that'll be.
I was at 116th Street Station on Sept 30 1998. The Northbound side
is open and 85% finished (just the walls and ceiling need finishing).
The Southbound side is more problematic - the trackbed looks like
it'll make the Oct.12 opening date but the platform and entrance is
still under construction. These guys were busting their butts down
there, so there may be considerable daily progress. My guess is that
S/B 116th Street may miss the Oct 12 opening date but will re-open
shortly thereafter. Or it could reopen on Oct 12 but with a considerable amount of work still going on. There was still daylight
visible over the S/B platform.
Keep up the good work guys!
Wayne
The southbound service will stop at 116 and lenox on 10/31/1998 according to posters on the IRT in Manhattan.
Now for Jack's question:
they had to remove the northbound platform at 116 to do the work. It is a whole new platform now. They also had to open up the walls. When I went through there there were big holes in Southbound's walls allowing a view of the street above. They closed one track at a time and ran on one track. That is why the trains ran to Manhattan in ther AM and to the Bronx in PM and 24 minutes apart overnight and weekends and the 3 ended at 137 and Broadway. as of Monday, normalcy returns to Lenox-- 2 always goes to 241 and 3 (When running) goes to 148/Lenox.
There is still tons of water flowing at this station and I dont know if it will finally stop when the southbound side reopens.
Ill drink to that! Lets all sing 99 gallons of water through the wall and watch the T.A. flush more money away. By the way have you seen the snail or can of sardines on the posters on the trains asking you if it reminds you of your commute? KILL OPTO!
They should hang those posters in Chicago.
I was in Grand Central this afternoon and I noticed a very large presentation (I don't know what else to call it) with a picture of an old LIRR car on the side and an M1 car on the front. On it was a sign saying something like "Coming soon to Grand Central .... the Long Island Railroad."
From what I know this is at least 5 to 10 years in the future and I don't believe any work has begun yet to connect the 63rd street tunnel to Grand Central. Does anyone have any new info ?
Read the article I posted on Friday entitled LIRR and GCT.
Must have been one of those secret settings I didn't know I change in the first place Dave. But after today's post Subtalk started to remember me, oh excuse me I mean my BROWSERs started remembering me and my email address since it is a setting I changed and changed back in my broswers (Haven't touched Preferences since install).
Anyway I'm just happy the posting process is all that much faster now thanks to whomever.... Bill Gates maybe??
You know something? It's remembering me, too, and I didn't touch a thing!
Welcome to the twilight zone!
You all are hard to forget
We always remember you, especially Lou.
Me too (since last week), but it still won't change the color for read messages.
If you are using Netscape 4.x, try making sure you have Preferences/Appearance/Colors set to two different colors (one for visited, one for unvisited), and you may wish to select "Always use my colors, overriding document." Under Preferences/Navigator, make sure "Expire History after X days" is some positive number. The visited history is not maintained in cookies or on the SubTalk server in any way. I realize it is easy to say that it isn't my problem, but really, the visited history is not maintained anywhere but in the browser.
--Dave
p.s. I'll let everyone in on a secret- I rewrote the cookie code in SubTalk this weekend from scratch. Not sure why it was working for some people and not others before, but it seems to work for everyone now.
-Dave
I'm using Internet Explorer, and I do have it set to two different colors.
In fact, "About www.nycsubtalk.org", "Read Responses", "post a new message" and "return to the index" are still in the other color. When the colors stopped working, posts that I had read when they were working stayed in the different color.
What is it, that IE is a bad server or something?
I'm using Netscape and the special colors that I have chosen for unread/read are displaying correctly. Must be something to do with your copy of Explorer.
Interestingly, I was trying I.E. 4 tonight (no, I haven't given in to Bill) and Subtalk didn't remember me UNTIL I posted a message. When I returned to SubTalk, there was my name welcoming me back. I suspect (maybe Dave can clairify) that I.E. doesn't know who you are until you post, then you get the cookie.
> I.E. doesn't know who you are until you post,
> then you get the cookie.
Should be true regardless of browser, since it doesn't KNOW who you are until you post (that is, when you fill out the name and email address form).
-Dave
It remembered me too! I thought something was missing for a while!
I was looking over something today that always irks me.
On the Brooklyn IRT tour, I looked at one of the track maps of the Franklin/Nostrand area and read "Short distances causes delays" or whatever and that annoys me.
So I myself drew a track map to see if I couldn't come up with something as feasible without holding up trains any longer than usual.
Unfortunately, it requires an at-grade crossing(am I the only person who thinks that's a little bad?). Here's somewhat of a track map showing it.
_________________________(To Manhattan)________WB_________________
________________________(To Brooklyn)_________EB__________\________
! \
! \
! \
| |
| |
Nostrand Ave. line
I hope that bears some resemblence of what I meant. The #2 swings off onto Nostrand as usual. The rush hour #5 switches to the local and onto Nostrand Avenue fron Eastern Parkway. Coming back, the trains descend to a single lower level track come up and turn between the Manhattan bound local and express(I don't know how wide this is, but it's only one track) and onto the express track and a switch just before the station onto the local track.
Whaddya think?
The Franklin junction indeed has been long noted as a major headache. There was a discussion here, a week or so ago, about whether the $$$ being spent on rebuilding the Franklin Ave. Shuttle would have been better spent on the junction.
At the south end of the Manhattan-bound local platform there's a passageway closed off by tin sheeting, currently full of spare lightbulbs. I'm guessing it went up inside the old LIRR terminal, and was closed off along with the underpass beside it when that building was demolished--does anyone know for sure?
More generally, has any more information come out about the redevelopment of the site? The last I heard was some very general noise about offices and a movie theater.
The MTA and Forest City Ratner have an agreement in principal, and engineers and architects are drawing up plans. Forest City Ratner is the entity which owns the Metrotech office complex, the Albee Square Mall, and the Atlantic Center Mall adjacent to Atlantic Terminal. The plans are complicated by plans to renovate the whole Atlantic/Flatbush station at the same time.
No one has announced who the tenants are, but rumours include Sears (which took the vacant Alexanders in the Kings Plaza mall and also has a store in Flatbush) and a mega-movie plex. If the movie plex is built, it would be Brooklyn's 3rd (along with the new one on Linden Blvd in East New York and the one proposed for the banks of the Gowanus at 2nd Ave and 9th St). Who knows? Brooklyn's movie screens per 100,000 people might rise to the national average (it would be about the only business in that category). I'd also expect an aerial walkway from the new center to the existing Atlantic Center. You can't walk directly from the subway to Atlantic Center, but it seems to be designed for a walkway to hook into the 2nd floor corridor.
My main concern is -- is the MTA smart enough to make sure that the logical alignment of an LIRR connection into Lower Manhattan isn't blocked by pillars holding up the new shopping center. Not that such a connection is likely to be funded anytime soon, but forever is a long time, and it's good to keep your options open. My boss tells me not to bother raising the issue -- the MTA couldn't be that stupid to obstruct the alignment. Could it?
NYC Subway Buff article
In the October 1998 issue of "Brooklyn Bridge"
starting on page 62, there is an article about Subway
Buffs.
On the cover it is referred to as:
"Love on the Tracks - The Underground Transit Cult"
(Note: I personally object to the word "cult")
It has interviews with several individuals who
volunteer at the Transit Museum, as well as others who
are members of the Electric Railroaders Assn.
The article is fairly well written although I think
some of the facts might be wrong (did they ever run
the R110B's on the N ? - I don't think they did).
"Broolyn Bridge" is available at most newstands (in NY, that is)
for $2.75.
(For those of you who are asking: what is a lifelong
Bronxite doing reading a magazine about Brooklyn? A
co-worker who lives in Brooklyn brought it to my
attention.)
Are there pictures with it? Namely some tablets on the BMT lines?
I WONDER WHO took them... :o)
Guess who
it is a good article with pictures inside the bmt triplex. also has an article on an ulmer park bus driver.they sell it all over brooklyn. as a brooklynite for 40 years now in si and a bus operator i loved this magazine.
Here's something you don't see often. I was waiting for uptown N train
at 42nd Street about 7:30 PM. An R32 pulls in and the small roll sign
at the top of the front of the train is the letter I. I've seen
incorrect letter signage but always an actual line letter, like M
or Q on the N line.
The R-32s do not have Roll Signs and have not had them since 1989. If you saw the letter 'I' on a flip-dot sign, that's not unusual since they have the ability to display every letter of the alphabet, digits 0-9 and some test displays, all by rotating a knob.
Has New York ever considered(or have considered) using the "forgotten letters and numbers":
H(still in contention as the Rockaway shuttle),I,K,O,P,T,U,V,W,X,Y,8 and 10.
I know H,K and T have been used in the past and I have also read that the GCS is sometimes referred to as the #8.
Why so forgotten?
Jack,
Actually, I and many others have seen one or more of the following:
"V" (6th Av)
"W" (BMT Broadway (diamond))
"8" (Lexington Av)
"10"(Lexington Av)
"11"(Flushing)
"12"(Lexington Av)
"13"(Broadway-7th Av)
The #8 has been used for IRT 3rd Av. and earlier for Astoria, although I doubt that it was ever actually posted in either case.
Bob Sklar
> The #8 has been used for IRT 3rd Av. and earlier for Astoria,
> although I doubt that it was ever actually posted
> in either case.
Actually, the R-12s started appearing on the IRT Flushing and
Astoria lines prior to the lines becoming IRT-only and BMT-only
respectively in 1949, so I would imagine that some trains did
have the #8-Astoria routing posted at that time.
Last year, under the threat of an AMTRAK strike which would have shut down the LIRR into Penn. Station, the NYCT drew up several contingency plans. One of them was a 'super-express' designated as the 'P' train. It's route was supposed to be; From Parsons Archer via the J/Z line over the Williamsburg Bridge, onto the 6th Ave. line to W4th St., switch to the 8th Ave. line to Penn Station. The strike was averted and the P train never ran.
[Last year, under the threat of an AMTRAK strike which would have shut down the LIRR into Penn. Station, the NYCT drew up several contingency plans. One of them was a 'super-express' designated as the 'P' train. The strike was averted and the P train never ran.]
I've been on a few trains that should have been called the "P Train"!
The "P", were it to run, would probably crawl all the way to Eastern
Parkway, being in contention with J's
and Z's already out there. It might
get a crack at the express track between Eastern Pkwy and Myrtle Ave.
but would have to share once again from there to Essex Street.
Some super-express! I would guesstimate this train's average speed
at about 10 MPH over the entire line given the traffic it would have to contend with.
Wayne
I suppose you are correct but in this case Super-Express was only meant to imply that it was non-stop from Parsons-Archer to Penn Station.
Wait a minute -- why can't they run it via Queens Boulivard, following the E train? Wouldn't that be more direct and possibly faster?
What was special about the P train was that while going super-express down the Broadway line in brooklyn, and express on the Jamaica el, it was going to go through the other Christie street connection that goes from Delancy St. to Broadway-Lafayette, through West-4th street, and ip 8th ave to Penn Station.
Nowhere convenient to turn it around once it got to Penn Station!
Going northbound, they'd probably either deadhead them uptown
or turn them around in the unused lower level at 42nd Street.
Anyway it would be hard pressed to run non-stop sharing as it was
with E's and F's along Queens Blvd and in the 53rd St. tunnel.
Let's hope the LIRR doesn't strike anytime soon!
Wayne
The plan was to run them lite to 207 yd, and repeat the process for the PM rush.
========================= Wayne wrote ====================
The "P", were it to run, would probably crawl all the way to Eastern
Parkway, being in contention with J's
and Z's already out there. It might
get a crack at the express track between Eastern Pkwy and Myrtle Ave.
but would have to share once again from there to Essex Street.
Some super-express! I would guesstimate this train's average speed
at about 10 MPH over the entire line given the traffic it would have to contend with.
===========================================================
My guess is that if that strike had actually happened, they could do something like run all J/Z trains local myrtle-marcy, and then this "P" thing would have a clear run for a good stretch.
If the strike did happen, though, I'd certainly think that going to Brooklyn, hunterspoint/LIC, or Woodside would still be faster than that circuitous route.
-SteveK
"I" is problematic because it can be confused with the numeral "1". For the same reason, "O" is unlikely to be used as long as a "Q" service exists. I think "10" isn't used because they don't want to use double digits if it's at all avoidable (defective sign and "12" gets confused with "2", for example). Besides, 8 isn't used (the Grand Central shuttle is "S") so any additional IRT line could use 8 before they'd have to resort to double digits.
I read a post here some time ago in which someone said that TA personnel(on da trax) sometimes refer to the GCS as the '8'. He also said "Ask a TA worker where to get the '8' and see what their response is".
I think they're holding onto the '8' as a new name for the Diamond 6
although I believe this is just in the planning stage.
8 is a green sign on R62 and R62A rolls, I saw one between cars of
a 6 train some time back.
Wayne
The Bronx Third Avenue el was designated as the "8" train on MTA maps of the late 1960s and early 1970s, but as far as I know the number never appeared on train or station signs. The number was never used again after the el closed in April, 1973.
R-12s which ran on the 3rd Ave. el were marked, "shuttle".
Hi,
From 1961 to 1963 I lived in the Apartment complex on the corner of Myrtle Ave and Wiloby(mis-spelled) St. I was on the 3ed floor and my livingroom window was about 40 feet from a passing train! That was a real trip! They came by every 1/2 hr during the day.
Is the El still there or is it gone now as all wonderful things come to an end? Thanks. Stan Livingston
The 'M' to Metropolitan Avenue runs over just a portion of Myrtle Avenue, right? Not like the REAL Myrtle Avenue El of many years past. My north Brooklyn gepgraphy fails me at the moment but the only subway stop I can recall at that area is Myrtle-Wiloby(as you say) Aves. on the 'G'. To answer your question, the 'M' may still run nearby(on whatever street it is) but the Myrtle Avenue El is gone.
Of course, I haven't lived in Brooklyn since 1980. Had to leave when the bell bottoms went out of style:)
The Myrtle Ave. el, specifically, the portion between Broadway and Jay St. ended revenue operation on October 4, 1969, and the structure itself has been dismantled except for the part which lies directly above the Myrtle Ave.-Broadway station. It was the last railway in North America to use wooden equipment. The remaining segment, from Broadway to Metropolitan Ave., was upgraded to handle steel subway trains and continues to be served by the M.
Its a shame i never got to ride on the old Myrtle Ave el when i was still goin to downtown. It was long gone by the time i was born in 1975. The only memories i have of the old time on the NY subway are the old R1-9 that ran on the LL when i was little and of course the graffiti rittled trains that ran everywhere else. Oh and of course the "ding-dong" train as i use to call the when i was little on the F line which meant i was going to coney island in the summer time. All i have is visits to the transit museum which i still love to do and lookin out the front window of the J train as i go home.
P.S. I was cleaning up my office, because I'm expecting a guest & came across the 1998 Subway Calendar, publ. by Newkirk on LI. The July page has a "Q-type", i.e. the Myrtle Ave El train w/shot taken July 1962. The highway below has Chevy, Olds, Buick & two Fords plus the RKO Bushwick was showing Kirk Douglas in "Lonely Are The Brave". The caption states that the "Q" was just being "moved" to the East NY yard
I also has a couple of other years of this calendar that I put in such a "safe" place I haven't been able to find them recently.
Mr t__:^)
Are there any photos of R-1/9s or R-10s on that calendar?
January = R-1 with the first car painted yellow (no MOW stripes)
August = R-10 "A" going uptown, in world's Fair type colors
Mr t__:^)
Don't feel bad - I never rode the Myrtle Ave. el, either, but I do remember seeing the Q units operating on it while looking through the front window of a QJ train at Myrtle Ave.-Broadway.
You must have an incredible memory if you were born in 1975 and can remember the R-1/9s. The last ones were withdrawn on March 31, 1977. I have many fond memories of those cars and their distinct sounds.
You also know how to make a guy feel old - I graduated from high school in 1975 (just kidding!).
P. S. The Mets won the World Series just 12 days after the "Myrt" closed up shop in 1969. I remember that event as though it were yesterday.
Its funny but i do remeber them on the L train. Ive taken the train since i was a baby (we didnt have a car)
They were kinda nasty at the end of their lives but they were ancient relics of thing i didnt get to see before i was born
I rode the Canarsie line every Saturday for 3 years from 1967 to 1970, beginning with BMT standards and ending with R-7/9s and R-42s. Oddly enough, I rode the old IND cars more on that line than I ever did on the IND!
October 3, 1969 was a double treat for me: I found my Mom waiting
outside the JHS (middle school nowadays) - she almost never picked me
up = on the car seat was a Brand Spanking new copy of "Abbey Road"
which had just come out that same day THEN we ate early I wondered
why and then my Dad appeared and announced that we were going to
Brooklyn THAT EVENING - it would be the last ride for the "MJ".
We went up and down the line twice. Towards the end people were
starting to snatch stuff. A kindly employee got me a leather strap
when we were up at Metropolitan. I still have it.
I have some of the car numbers I jotted down 1622A-B-C, 1615A-B,C,
1623A-B-C, 1612A-B-C etc. I think one of these (1622 or 1623C)
is now 1278 in the Museum. (the 1600 series number's painted over)
My Mom settled for a bulb (which she later put in a little lamp) and Dad asked for and got one of those little fans. I remember a bit of mischief on the way back I got in the empty last car of a "QJ" and got up and changed the rear curtain roll to read "MM" and "Metropolitan Avenue". Bad boy! They weren't the original signs - they didnt have
the little 'line designation' under the letters just the letters
themselves, in a more rounded font. This train was an R27/30.
All were white letter on black background, unlike the R16 signs.
I also set the side signs to "TT" - no one caught me (lucky me!)
Fond memories,
Wayne
Lucky you! It sounds as if your folks knew what you liked. The R-27s and R-30s never got the multicolored roller curtains which the R-16s, R-32s, and R-38s did. They also kept their front destination signs (yippee!).
I once changed a roll sign on a BMT standard. I don't remember exactly what it said, but it wasn't "14th St. L'c'l". There was a plain old "Local" marking on that roller curtain, and when it came up, that was good enough for me. My mother was praying that the conductor wouldn't come through the car at that moment.
Thats funny i use to do that on the old grafitti rittled trains in the 80's (i dont know what type of cars they were)
I got a good slap in the head from my mom every thime i did
haha
Riding the Myrtle Ave line in the late 50's was a real treat.
The gate cars were still in operation.
It was an experience never to be forgotten.
Although I lived in the Bronx, and rode in the converted closed-end
cars on the 3rd Ave El, those gate cars on the Myrtle Ave line were a real step back in time.
I do not remember seeing any gate cars on the remaining portion of the original Fulton Ave El to Rockaway Ave before it was demolished.
I think that up until 1955 or 56, the 3rd Ave line still had a work train of gate cars. I remember that one of the cars had some big drums or tanks on the front platform. I always saw them during snow storms on the Mosholu Parkway viaduct structure.
I have a Bronx IRT question - since you live there, maybe you might
know - Last Wed. I went up the Pelham line to Hunts Pt Ave to take
pictures and noticed that the Brook Avenue station northbound platform
is walled off (covered up with blue plywood).
What happened there? Is this a renovation in progress or was there
some damage to the wall there? I'd hate to think the latter - they
have a unique mosaic at that station.
Thanks for any info,
Wayne
I have not been on the Pelham Bay line for over 30 over years.
So, I have no idea of what they are doing there.
Maybe you can email the MTA with your question.
There are a acouple of Bronx related pages and chats
that you may be able to get an answer from.
Here is, (what I think), an interesting question on a related subject.
How come the Pelham Bay line was never connected to the White Plains Rd line at Westchester Ave. The structures are only a couple of blocks apart. I believe that the Pelham Bay line was part of the Dual Contracts Construction.
Had that connection been made, the 2nd/3rd Ave El trains could have traversed that line also.
Except for the 3rd Ave. el and the Dyre Ave. line, the entire IRT network in the Bronx (Woodlawn, White Plains Rd, and Pelham) was part of the Dual Contracts. As for the connections, that's a good question.
Wasn't the part from 3rd Avenue-149th St up to East Tremont Ave opened
as part of Contract 1? My linear map shows opening dates of 1904 and
1905 for this section of the line. The stations there look different
too, with fancy roof ornamentation and ironwork suggestive of the
old 3rd Avenue 'El', (some has been replaced - Intervale Avenue
has been rebuilt recently etc)
Wayne
The line to E 180th including the line that went to Bronx Park (the old Bronx Park connection can be seen north of the E. Tremont station) was contract one.
The original part of what is now called the White Plains Road Line was built before the dual contracts. The original terminal was at 180th St at Southern Blvd. The dual contracts extended it across the Bronx river to the NYW&B terminal at 180th ST and then up White Plains Rd.
That is why this subject intriques me.
The Jerome Ave line was made an extension of the 9th Ave El.
The original 149th St connection from 3rd Ave to the subway structure implemented the El use of the structure before the tunnel under the Harlem River was completed.
The dual contracts provided for the third tracking and double decking of the el structures and the later connection from 143rd St, up Willis Ave to the Westchester Ave subway structure.
I had a previus inquiry for any know pictures of either the original 149th St or Willis Ave Structure.
Although this may bore the Brooklyn El fans, there are some other relevant subjects from the same era that could use some expounding upon; The original Wiliamsburg Bridge El Terminal in Manhattan, the original ferry station terminal on the Brooklyn side.
The 3rd Ave El in Brooklyn is sort of a mystery to me also.
I believe that it was originally a surface route to the ferry at 69th St and would have been a connector to the tunnel that was never completed.
While we are talking ferry terminals, How about the the 34th St Branch of the 3rd Ave El, and the South Ferry Terminal of all the Manhattan Els.
The original Williamsburg Bridge el terminal, aka the Essex St. trolley terminal, opened in 1908. It originally served as a terminal for BRT trains operating over the Williamsburg Bridge. My guess is that there was a loop for trains to turn around, judjing from the large space down there. When the Nassau loop was extended to Chambers St. in 1913, trolleys began running into the terminal.
At Essex and Delancey, the original 1908 BRT terminal was a normal, stub-end terminal. It was never intended as a final terminal, and was in fact extended southward to Chambers St. in 1913. The BRT trains never looped at this location. The trolley terminal still visible on the south side was indeed just that - a loop terminal for BRT trolleys that crossed the bridge and then fanned out onto the same streets still served by NYC Transit bus routes today - Nostrand, Utica, etc. The trolleys ran over the bridge until December 1948, when the current B39 bus began operating.
BTW, LIRR trains from Rockaway Beach connected to the Broadway-Jamaica el at Chestnut Street in East New York and also served this terminal (summers only, until 1917, when the joint BRT-LIRR service was ended.)
I stand corrected. I understand that structural evidence of ramps to the LIRR can still be seen at Chestnut St. I've ridden that line many times, but have never seen anything out of the ordinary.
Don't believe there's any evidence left. The LIRR was on ground level along Atlantic Ave. in the days the BRT el connection was in use. The current tunnel from East NY to Dunton opened in 1942. I have not seen any evidence of a connection from the J/Z train el structure on Fulton Street - but maybe I missed something. I have travelled the J/Z many times in the last few yearsl. Please let me know if there is any such evidence. Thanks.
If you look closely you can still see the trolley tracks in the open space. It would be great if there was a tour of that station as part of a larger tour of the Easter division!
I have a couple questions though: where were the original entrances/exits from the trolley terminal both above and below ground? Was the stub end always 3 tracks or was the configuration changed later? And finally why does it seem like there are trackways at the west end of the station, beyond the trolley terminal? It almost looks like the tracks from Chambers Street led toward the trolley terminal at one point instead of the current config.
FYI,the Transit Museum's Subway Unification Tour, which I am hosting on Dec. 6, 1998, will end at this very location. Tour participants will be able to walk into the old trolley terminal from the southbound J train platform.
The Myrtle Ave. el used 1300 series el cars, I believe, before the Qs took over. In retrospect, maybe they should have kept the 1300s, if the Qs were as sluggish as I've heard. I'm curious as to why the Multisectionals weren't used on the "Myrt". Maybe it was because of their braking problems.
The outer leg of the Fulton St. el was served by C units which, like the Qs, were originally open-platform el cars and were rebuilt into closed platform vehicles. Unlike the Qs, the Cs did not gain as much weight, so they could still run on the unrebuilt portion of that el. The Multisectionals also ran on that line; since they could also run in the subway, there was a 14th St.-Fulton St. service which lasted until the A train was extended out to Lefferts Blvd. in 1956.
Talking about the Multisections, they were used on the Myrtle Ave. line, not to Jay St, but for the Myrtle-Chambers service, from about 1956 (when the 14th St-Fulton St service ended, replaced by A train through to Lefferts) until they were retired in 1961.
I think the reason the Multis went to the Myrtle Chambers was that the line only ran rush hours, and the cars were getting old and cranky at the time. On a rush hour only route, they only had to make a couple of trips each day, with lots of time between for some TLC at Fresh Pond yard.
There ia a story in Subway Cars of the BMT about a runaway multi which was running on the Myrtle-Chambers line. There was a Myrtle-Jay el train ahead of it, and its motorman received orders to keep going and not stop. The story ended with a quip that the multis loved to run and run and keep running.
Today's M route from Metropolitan Ave. to Broadway is indeed a bonafide 19th century elevated route, although it's certainly true that the oldest, unrebuilt portion of the Myrtle El did indeed close down exactly 29 years ago this week. Originally (that is prior to the Dual Contracts) the portion from Broadway northward was mostly on street grade and used trolley wire. It was called the "Lutheran Right of Way" because it terminated near Lutheran Cemetery (still does).
Under the Dual Contracts (c. 1915) the line from Broadway to Metropolitan Ave. was placed on a newer elevated structure that was capable of carrying the BMT Standards (steel subway cars). The Standards were used on the Myrtle/Chambers line, over the WillyB Bridge and terminating at Chambers St., Manhattan. Of course, the wooden el cars continued to operate alongside the Standards for many years, continuing along Myrtle Ave. from Broadway to Jay Street (and over the Brooklyn Bridge until 1944).
The line travels above Myrtle Ave. as far as Wyckoff Ave., and then follows Palmetto Street and private right of way to Metropolitan Ave.
Interestingly, the terminal at Metropolitan Ave. is still on ground level, one of a few such stations in NY and a remnant of the original "Lutheran Right of Way."
Had the IND Second System been built, the entire Myrtle Ave. line possibly would not be around today. The never-built trunk line along S. 4th St. was to include a branch along Myrtle Ave. which was to be joined by an extension under Lafayette Ave. originating at Bedford-Nostrand Aves. on today's G. That's what the middle track was for.
When going to school at Brooklyn Poly Tech (last stop of the Myrtle Ave El) I occasionaly rode her all the way to Metropolitain Ave (the other end of the line). I'll let one of the other buffs ID the exact model# of the train, but the last were like the LoVs, but wood sides. They made a lot of noise & went very slow ... now I realize what a great ride it was.
Mr t__:^)
They were none other than the Q units. They found their way back to the BMT and the el in 1958 after the Manhattan portion of the 3rd Ave. el was shut down. The reason they were so slow was because they were fitted with trucks salvaged from the Composites when those cars were retired in order to reduce their gross weight so they could run on the el.
Let's back up for a moment. As we know, the Qs were rebuilt from older open platform elevated equipment for service to the World's Fair. They gained quite a bit of weight as a result, but because the Flushing line was built to handle subway equipment, that was no big deal. When joint IRT/BMT service came to an end in 1949 and the Flushing line became IRT-only, the Qs became surplus property. Because equipment was in short supply, it was decided not to scrap them, and instead they were sent to the 3rd Ave. el. That's where it was discovered that they were now too heavy to run on that line. Because the Composite trucks were lighter then the Qs' BMT running gear, a truck swap was carried out, motors and all. Even so, the Qs were still considered heavyweights as el cars go, and could carry passengers only when running on the express track during rush hours. They had to deadhead in the other direction.
The Qs kept those Composite trucks when they found themselves on the Myrtle Ave. el. Unfortunately, the motors on those trucks just didn't have the muscle that the BMT truck motors had. It has been said that the Qs could barely make it up the grade to Broadway and that, more often than not, the motorman would cut power once the train got rolling and would coast to the next station.
Thanks Steve for the info.
I'm not your typical buff, haven't been on every line & don't carry a camera ... I do ride up front & ask questions if the motorman is in a talkative mood. So it was just my dumb luck to have got a ride on this unique train. I'll tell you all that it felt like being in a time machine at the time.
Mr t__:^)
Don't mention it. I can't say that I've been on every line in New York myself, and normally don't carry my camera gear unless I'm going to Ellis Island or some other tourist spot.
BTW, that CTA token is in the mail; I dropped it off yesterday.
Does it make a difference(speedwise) if a train is running with pantographs on all cars as opposed to just two-four(depending on the length of the train)?
You typically find R8 trains(usually no more than 4 cars) running with 3 if not all cars with pantographs.
I was always under the impression that the pans were required for each car or locomotive in the consist. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, and you maent that there are two pans on the car, and they're both up...
-Hank
I was under the impression that all MU's today have only one pantograph. The last cars I remember that had two were all DC cars (like Illinois Central and Lackawanna) Pennsy MP-54's had only one pan
and motors (P-5, GG-1) had two. The ONLY time I saw two pans up was during snow/ice storms.
Yeah, Most stuff after WWII has a single pan - two really aren't needed. Lacawanna used duals on their 3kv system to Hoboken to scrape ice. One pan was set at the normal tension, the other was jacked up in tension. All of the other systems, both pans were of equal tension. GG-1s and such changed pans whenever direction changes were made - the rearmost one was aways used. This way, if it hung up and got ripped off, there was little chance the front would be hit and dammaged by it - the front could be used as a spare. The E-33 (EL-C, EF-4) and E-44 had single pans though. The E60 has them both at one end next to each other, the AEM-7 has one at each end. I've only once seen an Amtrak train drop and switch pans. I seem to recall hearing that switching them, or maybe it was running with both up, was dangerous for some reason, though I don't know what.
After a while, they realized that 2 pans were uneeded, and MUs started to get single ones. Married pairs can share a pan, and The M-4/M-6 triplets share two I think. Single units got their own. NJT I think is the only RR left in the US that uses a way cool diamond type (it's a pretty slick looking one). The others use bent arm halfagraphs, Metro-North's are biggies BTW. They might be the largest used anywhere in the US. Only locomotives still have 2. If an MU loses it's pan, it's not that bad since other cars in the train can move it (obviously not possible in a single car or married pair), but it a locomotive losses it, the train is stuck in the dark until it gets towed.
So, Septa runs single cars and married pairs - and that's why some trains have lots of pans, and others have few. A three car train can have either a married pair and a single, or 3 singles. If it's 3 singles - it's 3 pans, and if its a married pair and a single - it's 2.
I meant that all cars have only one pan, but all cars on the train are equipped with one. I refer to SEPTA's Silverliners for the Regional Rail, in particular the R8 since it runs with the fewest compliment of cars than any multi-car rail line(excluding light rail).
Are there Silverliner MU's, because I have seen blind cars on the R8 and R3, the lines which use them the most.
And has anyone noticed that some cars are being repainted, the MA's that have recently been refurbished inside. The area around the windows has been painted red and blue. The only cars I've seen were on the R6.
All MU's in a train run with their pans up, since bus jumpers are impractible at 12,5 KV and up.
Impractical?
Try this:
Go to GCT
Find ANY departing New Haven train
Find a car end with a pan on it
Look up.
That big black hose like thing between the two cars is a 12kv jumper cable.
FWIW, The TGV in France runs only one pan and haas 25KV roof jumpers on it
MU equipment in use today comes in two varieties. Either SINGLE units (i.e. NJT & SEPTA) or DOUBLE or PAIRED units (Metro-North, SEPTA, NJT, & Metra Electric).
Single units have ONE pantograph, of course, otherwise they wouldn’t be able to operate as a single unit (i.e. NJT Princeton Dinky). On NJT and SEPTA, the pantograph is located at the "F" or "A" end. Paired units, on the other hand, share ONE pantograph per two car set.
On NJT and SEPTA, where single units are operated mixed with paired units, you may see a combination of a FIVE CAR TRAIN with THREE pantographs (two paired units and one single).
On all properties noted above, MU equipment operates with ALL pans up. The only time you would see a car(s) with the pan in the "DOWN" position, is if there was a mechanical failure on that particular unit. In that case the car would be "dead". Modern MU equipment isn’t "buss connected" like the old Reading Company MU cars were. An explaination follows below.
The old MU fleet of the Reading Company, if anyone is old enough to remember them, could operate with selected pantographs up. In fact, it was the policy of the Reading Company to operate their trains with trailing (i.e. last) cars pans up only. On trains of up to four cars the last two cars would have their pans "up". On trains of five to eight cars, the last four cars would have their pans "up". This was possible because all the cars (single units) were "buss connected", that is they had an electrical connection that ran along the roof of the car. At the car ends, the connector extended and touched the connector of the next car. Thus, the cars with the pans collecting current would feed the current along the buss connection to the other car motors. The Reading always specified using the last pans, because if the train struck debris on a trip, the pans on the end cars would be damaged, however, the engineer could then raise the forward car pans and continue on the trip. Had the train been operating with the forward pans up, the debris could conceivably damage all the pans on the train. The PRR also ran its locomotives with the rear pan up. This wasn’t done because it made a good photograph. It was done for the same reason the Reading Company, a safety precaution. The buss connectors were removed from the RDG MU (Blue cars) equipment in the 1970’s, however, there are many pictures that illustrate what I’ve related above. Although I’ve got old RDG Employee Timetables that spell out the pantograph policy, anyone who is interested in learning more about the RDG electrification and MU operation can read about it in Wes Coates book, (I’m not sure on the title), but it is something like "MU Trains to Reading Terminal". It is a very good book and worth the money ($20 something).
MU equipment in use today comes in two varieties. Either SINGLE units (i.e. NJT & SEPTA) or DOUBLE or PAIRED units (Metro-North, SEPTA, NJT, & Metra Electric).
Single units have ONE pantograph, of course, otherwise they wouldn’t be able to operate as a single unit (i.e. NJT Princeton Dinky). On NJT and SEPTA, the pantograph is located at the "F" or "A" end. Paired units, on the other hand, share ONE pantograph per two car set.
On NJT and SEPTA, where single units are operated mixed with paired units, you may see a combination of a FIVE CAR TRAIN with THREE pantographs (two paired units and one single).
On all properties noted above, MU equipment operates with ALL pans up. The only time you would see a car(s) with the pan in the "DOWN" position, is if there was a mechanical failure on that particular unit. In that case the car would be "dead". Modern MU equipment isn’t "buss connected" like the old Reading Company MU cars were. An explaination follows below.
The old MU fleet of the Reading Company, if anyone is old enough to remember them, could operate with selected pantographs up. In fact, it was the policy of the Reading Company to operate their trains with trailing (i.e. last) cars pans up only. On trains of up to four cars the last two cars would have their pans "up". On trains of five to eight cars, the last four cars would have their pans "up". This was possible because all the cars (single units) were "buss connected", that is they had an electrical connection that ran along the roof of the car. At the car ends, the connector extended and touched the connector of the next car. Thus, the cars with the pans collecting current would feed the current along the buss connection to the other car motors. The Reading always specified using the last pans, because if the train struck debris on a trip, the pans on the end cars would be damaged, however, the engineer could then raise the forward car pans and continue on the trip. Had the train been operating with the forward pans up, the debris could conceivably damage all the pans on the train. The PRR also ran its locomotives with the rear pan up. This wasn’t done because it made a good photograph. It was done for the same reason the Reading Company, a safety precaution. The buss connectors were removed from the RDG MU (Blue cars) equipment in the 1970’s, however, there are many pictures that illustrate what I’ve related above. Although I’ve got old RDG Employee Timetables that spell out the pantograph policy, anyone who is interested in learning more about the RDG electrification and MU operation can read about it in Wes Coates book, (I’m not sure on the title), but it is something like "MU Trains to Reading Terminal". It is a very good book and worth the money ($20 something).
Does anyone have any drawings of the proposed signal and interlocking changes ,,including StGeorge Tower
Thank you
Steve
It appears that Jamaica Avenue trains cannot get onto the 14th St-Eastern Line without going through the East New York yard first. I have also read that Broadway Junction will be reconstructed somewhat when the new signals are put in place.
Does the MTA plan, as part of this reconfiguration, to build a ramp for Jamaica Avenue trains to access the Canarsie Line? If not, given the tenuous state of the East River Bridges, why not? In fact, given the fact that the Williamsburg will be simply shut down in a few months, why hasn't this been done already?
When is the willy b closing????
Will there be some kinda express on the L train to compensate. Please tell me so cuz if not im gonna have to get up very very early to get to work in the mornings
They'll probably run L service on a 3-5 minute headway during rush hours like they did in 1988 when it was closed abruptly after an inspection.Also additional A and C service provided.It is scheduled to close for 6 months in May 1999
How will "L" trains run on such a close headway with "L" trains limited to one in its East River tunnel because of ventilation problems? Or has that been taken care of already?
--Mark
I understand they are speeding up the grade time signals in the tube to accomodate the extra service.If you don;t know what a gt signal is,check the section on signals in this site
As it stands now there is no direct link from the J line to the L line from Parsons-Archer.In order to get from the J line to the L line,you have to take the train to Chauncey St middle track(J3/4). you change ends,cross to J1 tk,enter EPY station.At the north end of the station,there is a ramp that goes to the right;that leads to the L line (Atlantic ave).If you're coming from Canarsie,at Atlantic ave there is a ramp that can take you to ENY yd or EPY station(J2TK)
As it stands now there is no direct link from the J line to the L line from Parsons-Archer.In order to get from the J line to the L line,you have to take the train to Chauncey St middle track(J3/4). you change ends,cross to J1 tk,enter EPY station.At the north end of the station,there is a ramp that goes to the right;that leads to the L line (Atlantic ave).If you're coming from Canarsie,at Atlantic ave there is a ramp that can take you to ENY yd or EPY station(J2TK)
What happened to the ramps which were used in years past by the K/KK/14 trains? Are they considered no longer usable?
Bob Sklar
The ramps from the J (heading towards Parsons) to the L Line (towards Canarsie) are still there. They are used only for construction reroutes, or maybe for an L train to get to Coney Island. One day I was riding the J and arrived on the centwer track. Across the platform on the Jamaica bound local track was an L train. I rode the trackage!
A ramp from the Queens bound J to the Canarsie bound L doesn't help. It's the Broadway line, not the Canarsie line, which runs over a cracking bridge.
Can anyone explain, given the 12 year saga of the rusting bridges, why ramps were never built to bring Jamaica Line trains up to the level of the Canarsie Line? Why can't it be done right now -- before the Willie B shutdown next spring?
[Can anyone explain, given the 12 year saga of the rusting bridges, why ramps were never built to bring Jamaica Line trains up to the level of the Canarsie Line? Why can't it be done right now -- before the Willie B shutdown next spring?]
I don't see what these ramps would accomplish. Only one train at a time can be run through the 14th Street tunnel on the Canarsie line due to inadequate ventilation. So even if there were a ramp, I doubt if many J/Z (Broadway) trains could be routed onto the L (Canarsie) line.
The next logical question is -- how did we end up with a tunnel which can only be used by one train at a time, and is anyone doing anything about it? Think about how ridiculous this all is. How would it sound in the newspaper? How long has the 14th Street tunnel been in this condition?
We have a four track bridge with only two tracks usable, and a two track tunnel with only one track usable.
Actually, both tracks are usable - it's just the ventilation equipment that's NG. Correct me if I'm wrong - one train at a time
PER TUBE (there are two tubes), so, theoretically, two trains could
be under the river at the same time, one eastbound, one westbound.
Again, correct me if I am wrong on this one.
As for the feasibility of building a ramp to connect the westbound
"J" to the northbound "L": They'd have to find a way to overcome
the very steep drop from Broadway Junction station to its tunnel
portal, some 250 or so yards away. The only way I could see
it happening it would have to cross at grade like the "M" does at
Myrtle Avenue while the "L" tracks were just above ground level.
Would they do it? I dont think so. There's just no room with the
yard there and all.
Wayne
I think the idea would be to extend the Jamaica line along three blocks along Fulton St or perhaps Herkimer St, rather than have it turn onto Broadway as it does today. A new station would be built under the Canarsie Line's Broadway/ENY station. It would meet the Canarsie Line on the way down.
The Eastern Parkway Station on the J, and all stations to the west, would be served by trains originating in the East New York Yard.
[Actually, both tracks are usable - it's just the ventilation equipment that's NG. Correct me if I'm wrong - one train at a
time PER TUBE (there are two tubes), so, theoretically, two trains could be under the river at the same time, one eastbound, one westbound. Again, correct me if I am wrong on this one.]
I've heard that it's only one train at a time regardless of direction. Apparently the non-working ventilation fans affect both tubes.
So, there are ventilation fans in place but they don't work? This isn't a matter of installing fans where there were none, but only fixing ones already there? I can understand, on some level, the buck passing on a multi-multi-million dollar project like the Manhattan Bridge, but if the TA has money to BUY new subway cars, they can surely FIX the ventilation on a subway tunnel? I was under the impression that the TA was out of its "intentional neglect" period? What is delaying or preventing the TA from fixing the fans?!?
If there is adequate airflow for only one train, what would the air situation be if a fire broke out?
They are being fixed. They're scheduled, someone posted on this board earlier, to be finished in February, in tine for the bridge shutdown.
I posted my message in recollection of the following exchange:
[[Can anyone explain, given the 12 year saga of the rusting bridges, why ramps were never built to bring Jamaica Line trains up to the level of the Canarsie Line? Why can't it be done right now -- before the Willie B shutdown next spring?]]
[I don't see what these ramps would accomplish. Only one train at a time can be run through the 14th Street tunnel on the Canarsie line due to inadequate ventilation. So even if there were a ramp, I doubt if many J/Z (Broadway) trains could be routed onto the L (Canarsie) line.]
You can see how this gave me the impression that the ventilation situation in the 14th Street Tunnel/Canarsie Line was permanent, or at least would not be resolved in time to provide relief to the bridge problem.
All the more reason to build the ramps. The Jamaica line would have to be extended, elevated (its and industrial area) for about 1 1/2 blocks on Herkimer Street from the point where it now curves onto Broadway from Fulton Street. It could then curve over two parking lots (city owned, my guess) and merge with the Canarsie line just south of Broadway -- East New York station. The Jamaica-bound track would pass under the Canarsie line before curving up to it. How much could 1,000 feet of elevated trackage cost? It cost $200 million a mile to build a subway in LA, complete with stations, and it was thought to be so expensive that they cut back the program. At $200 million a mile, 1,000 feet costs $40 million. Elevated with no stations, it could cost half that.
Now would this scenario leave some sort of connection between Alabama
Avenue station and Eastern Parkway station intact? Any extension
west of AL would have to cross at grade - there's a yard lead there
too. A new station beneath the existing BJ station? (I'll design a mosaic to match the others) What about the existing BJ station - I
guess that would have to serve the existing "L" from Canarsie. Not too much wiggle room for a junction south of Bushwick-Aberdeen although If you put the switch just inside the portal you could get away with it.
And don't even THINK of eliminating the existing B-A station, lightly
used as it is.
Wayne
If you branch the Jamaica line off onto Herkimer for 1 1/2 blocks, you would run the ramp up onto the Canarsie line before Broadway Junction station. Both the J and the L would stop at BJ.
There's plenty of room -- you'd just have to curve the Manhattan-bound track over a parking lot. The Brooklyn-bound track would have to curve over a parking lot and under the Canarise line, which is up high to get over the existing Broadway tracks one block away.
You could leave the steel up for the existing connection to the Broadway line, but you'd only need a crossover connection there since Jamaica train would use either the Broadway or Canarsie line, but not both.
NOW I SEE! This would be an all-elevated construction.
Manhattan-bound "L" just south of BJ - right by the Olde Tower
there's the "JJ" flyover. The new track would go under it I guess.
Maybe some of the other yard leads could be sort of re-used in order
to do this. Maybe even use the old stump of the Fulton El to
connect southbound just out of BJ but that would be one heck of a
sharp curve there. Neat Idea!
Wayne
couldn't a manhattan bound j/z train enter bway junction and be double ended via the L ramp up to Atlantic ave to reach Manhattan? hell even in reverse for the Pm rush? it also sounds pretty time consuming and would tie the road up to change signal to wrong railthe trains. What about passengers for manhattan change trains as plenty do now to the A/C trains?
Sure you can do all that -- reverse the trains or require a change. But would you want the TA to implement such service disruptions as a policy? A direct connection would be better.
I was wondering if anybody knows of a place that I could get my hands on a somewhat modern subway train car to film a short film? The 42nd shuttle the MTA offers is too expensive, and the Transit Museum is sort of expensive as well. Is there a lot filled with unused train cars that I might be able too shoot at for real cheap? Like the Coney Island Lot? Any info would be greatly appreciated.
Have you contacted the transit museums (Branford, etc.)? Maybethey can help.
Goldens Deli, Richmond Ave (Kmart Shopping Center near Mall) has 3/4's of a subway car (R1?? not sure) in their resturant. Maybe at night when they are closed you could film?
I think your best bet would be the Transit Museum in Brooklyn. In fact, somebody told me once that the R-11 on display had its center poles removed so that movie cameras could fit and have more room to maneuver. I have even seen a very breif portion of a music video that took place inside an R-11, and I'll lay $1000 that it was the car in the museum.
In addition, you of course have the other cars that could be used. Call them up and ask--you got nothing to loose.
I have put together a description archive of all of the NYC Subway Maps in my collection (about 40 versions since 1963). You can find it at SUBMAPS. I'll keep it updated as new ones are published, and also with corrections/additions people send me.
To our Web Host Dave, please feel free to grab it and make it a part of SubTalk's section on "Subway and Transit Maps" if you like.
Hey - nice job! One thing: my 1967 TA map does not have any photos or drawings of subway cars. It has the TA logo on the front and a list of places of interest on the back along with which trains to take to get to a specific location. Other than that, it's identical to the one on display at the Transit Museum. Maybe yours was a limited edition.
please forgive the test of the new netscape.
A test. Please forgive
Come join my discussion list:
www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/NEpass
I was out sick yesterday so I caught up on TV. I was amazed at how many shows have some reference to a subway(in particular NYC's). So I started to count. There's a NYC subway map on the door in the lounge on "Newsradio". An episode of Sesame Street has a stop where you can get the 1,2,A and B. I'd love to know what stop that is.
And of course, the various commercials.
But I've noticed signs in storefront windows in JCPenneys too. Two ads with kids modeling in an R-62(with the most recent map in the background).
And a Lerner New York ad with "20% to 60% off all shoes" or something like that on the southbound local platform of 34th St on the IRT.
Have you noticed anything?
The only possible stops where you could theoretically catch an A, B, 1, or 2 would be 14th St. and 59th St. Since the transfer between 8th and 7th Aves. at 14th St. is now closed, that would not be possible. Even if that transfer was open, the B would have to be running local. At 59th St., the 2 would have to be running local, making all stops.
There are three stations where one can transfer from a 1 to an A: 168th St., 59th St., and Times Square-42nd St. Before the B and C swapped northern terminals, it was possible to transfer from a 1 to a B at 168th St; it can still be done at 59th St.
There are also three stations where one can transfer from an A to a 2: Times Square, Park Place, and Fulton St.
Under normal service patterns, the only location where it would be possible to transfer from a B to a 2 would be Pacific St.-Atlantic Ave. in Brooklyn.
I mean the *ONLY* trains you can catch are the A,B,1 and 2. Not the 3. Or the 9 or anything.
I don't think they wanted to be precise. Just teach kids the alphabet.
Maybe I overdid it just a bit. Of course, sometimes even the ads aren't precise.
When I was a little boy (I mean three or so) my Mother taught me
letters while we rode on the Nostrand Avenue IRT. She'd point out
the letter on the wall then write it on a little piece of paper
and put it in her purse. Or she would put the piece of paper in a bag to make 'letter salad' (another learning game she came up with)
Of course, she has related this story to me many times - my memories are VERY dim of this. I do remember recognizing an "S" at Sterling Street though and a "W" at Winthrop. She made a point that my name also began with a "W" too.
Last February 28 and March 21 I went back there and re-learned my
alphabets - and saved them all for posterity.
Wayne
In Los Angeles we will be having are Subway opening in the Spring of 1999. I have been very fortunate to photograph the construction of it. My web page has some photos.www.pacificnet.net/~ken
I would enjoy your e-mail responses.Ken
Does anyone know of any dual power lines besides Seattle's busway tunnel?
The LIRR has one Dual-Mode train running on the Port Jefferson Branch. It will operate on 3rd Rail DC power from Penn Station to Huntington. There it switched to diesel Mode for the remainder of the trip. In the next few months, the LIRR will be introducing several more dual mode units.
Actually, It switches to diesel mode as soon as it clears the tunnel in L.I.C. -- Running in diesel mode whenever it is not in a tunnel.
I've always wondered why they didn't do this. After all, if you can switch from pantographs to 3rd rail why not switch from diesel-electric to 3rd rail?
The next question concerns costs. I assume locomotives cost money, but so does electrification. How much? Does it make sense to electrify a line, rather than purchase dual mode locomotives -- especially since the latter are not as affected by snow?
Amtrak is now electrifying the line from New Haven to Boston along the coast. It chose this line over the line up through Hartford, Worchester, and Springfield. But for the same money, it could have upgraded the track to high speed on both lines and not electrified. Dual locos could have run on both lines.
How about the line to Albany above Croton, or the Oyster Bay branch. Does it make sense to electify these? What is the "break-even", based on the number of locos you need (based on ridership), before it makes sense to electrify?
You can get High Speed (110+) from diesel?? (Actualy Diesel-Electric, Diesel engines run generators to create electric power for the traction motors)
You save on the man power, time lost switching engines with a single mode. Your running the same engine from Washington to Boston, only crew changes are effected for the trip. Now imagine 110+ all that distance??
No refuling too (not that diesel engines get fuled often)
I always wondered why dual power diesel engines only draw thrid rail power when they are in the tunnel (park ave or east river) and immeaditly switch to diesel....
Because dual mode diesels don't run well as (pure) electrics. The FL-9 never did, and the P32DM doesn't either I doubt the DM30 will, but I've not seen thosen on the LIRR yet, and seriously, don't expect them for another year or two. I've heard the "in about a month" line from the LIRR so many times it's about as worn out as the excuses for bad equipment/poor track/no airconditioning (namely "we're the largest commutter railroad"). The LIRR is always moaning about how nobody rides the Oyster Bay line - but it has the worst equipment, the worst stations and it's slower than a bus. I know nobody who takes that line if they can avoid it, and I myself won't ride it if I don't have to. I doubt we'll see new disels soon, and frankly I'm not expecting them to be any faster.
Ok, enough ranting.
Getting High speed out of diesels is a lost cause. They're too heavy, too wimpy, and too impracticle for high speed use. The French and everyone else figured this out in the 60's, though I've heard that the government is looking to develop one. The fact is, electrification is the only way to achive high speeds reliably. But electric trains aren't, and never will be widespread in this country.
Oh yeah, and speaking of dual power systems - the New Haven line is 600V third rail to around Pelham, then becomes 13kv AC overhead.
They ALSO could have used the "airline" ROW & made a brand new line from NH to Middletown then on to Boston.
Mr t__:^)
[They ALSO could have used the "airline" ROW & made a brand new line from NH to Middletown then on to Boston.]
That's a much more direct route than the coastal one actually used. Only trouble is, I'm not sure how much of the Airline ROW is still remaining east of Middletown/Portland.
The ROW between Middletown & Willimantic CT AND Worcester MA has been in disuse for sometime now, but I don't know that it is used for any other purpose. It would seem ideal for a NEW high speed line. NIMBY folks all along to way not withstanding.
Mr t__:^)
I was following thei post when someone started talking about the Airline route in Conn. I used to have some land in Colchester, to which a branch from the Air line ran to.
Its been a long time, but one of the Conn Highways in that area had a bridge over the right of way. However, when the road was expanded to 4 lanes, the new two did not span the right of way.
Where is that, Route 11 or Route 2 ?
My mom is South of Cobalt & sister is in Norwich, so I have reason to go thru Colchester & would like to visit the site your talking about.
Mr t__:^)
I was touring in Stoningham, Ct. recently. It's clear from some of the signs I saw posted about the town, not all of the residents favor electrification of the AMTRAK line there. Apparently, it has sparked (no pun intended) some heated local debates.
Some times electrification may not be cost-effective in low traffic areas and may not be politically possible in others. Dual mode loco's provide a less expensive (but still costly) alternative.
this what the new haven did with the fl-9 back in late 50's or early 60's. is was the spare the cos cob power plant from a major rebuilt
I can't understand WHY anyone would oppose electrification.
Dangerous?
The same type of 25kv powerlines run down a lot of streets.
Electric fields?
You recieve more of a field from being near your TV set.
Transformers?
They RARELY explode, and today's stuff has NO PCBs in it.
Lets look at what Diesels have to offer:
Noise - lots of it
Smoke - lots of that too
So why would anyone opposed electric? It's safe - it works. We KNOW it's safe, we KNOW it works. 100+ years of handleing electric trains has taught us how to do it right.
You're making the mistake of applying logic and common sense to the question of electrification. You have to realize that the "modern" paradigm is that if it's:
1) really big,
2) metallic or otherwise industrial-looking, and
3) built and operated by a big corporation or, worse, by a government agency,
then it is "unnatural", most probably harmful, and highly suspicious. Also, the more someone from the corporation or agency tries to explain or justify it, the more suspicious it is and harmful it must be. And trying to understand it is not worth it because all you need to know about it is 1), 2), and 3).
I do not think that Diesels are that noisy, if properly muffled. True that diesels put out exhaust, but so do the generators that make the electricity. I do not oppose electricity, but I am not 100% against diesels either.
Why would anyone oppose electrification? Cost. How much does it cost? Diesels cost too, of course. I wonder at what point it is cost effective.
Also, pantograph wires may hurt freight service. One thing we talk about, but do not know, is if double-stacked containers could get over the Hell Gate bridge, and if not if the lowest steel beams to be removed to permit it without compromising the bridge. But on my last ride over the Triborough, I noticed the electric wires over every track. Kind of makes the point moot.
In Switzerland, every line is electrified. In fact, in Europe, most major rail routes are electrified. And they carry freight as well as passengers. They use equipment that is similiar to that used in the US & Canada.
The SBB, the national railway, and most of the private lines, use overhead wire. Catenary reigns supreme in this little country. The Gotthard Line over the Alps carries quite a bit of freight on double stack cars, by the way. The Gotthard Line, from Lucerne/Zurich to the Italian border, and the BLS (Bern-Lostchberg-Simplon) Line between Bern and Brig, are major tonnage carriers funneling freight from north to south. These two lines run passenger and freight trains on what we would call a streetcar headway. The Swiss heavily regulate trucking in their small country. Most trucks are loaded onto the trains at the border and there are special rail cars (actually old passenger coaches) available for the drivers.
The Swiss don’t seem to have a problem with mixing freight traffic with catenary.
Why is Switzerland almost 100% electric. It is because they have swift running water coming off the mountains. Electric generation is cheap for them. They have NO coal or oil resources.
(Switzerland uses all electric). You know, I saw this "Great Railway Journeys" about a train ride in Switzerland. I was amazed that a train stopping at small towns in rural areas through the Alps was electrified. I thought to myself -- what a rich country! They have so much money, they could afford the investment to electrify lines like this! One could only wish. Kind of makes you appreciate JK Gallbreith's description of the U.S. -- private affluence, public poverty.
The Swiss are rich. But even once-poor Italy's FSI is mostly electric. They went big on electric in Europe because diesel fuel is very expensive there as is gasoline. The big outlay comes when you build it. But someone is living near the power plants that generate the 'clean' electricity.
Given the useage of Hydro and Nuclear (remember that?), I wouldn't call that a tradeoff.. The big outlay is building it - but I'm sure even over here it's cheaper to run, and more price stable...
Of course, being that this contry is run by bean counters, we don't look long term, we want quick and CHEAP solutions to everything, which is why we have Diesel commuter trains, even though Diesels aren't suited for the kind of High acceleration / quick stop use they get out of it...
Never would have gotton approval for high-speed diesels through there. Amtrak had to fight for the electricity...
-Hank
how about nj transit's midtown direct (and other) lines?
You might be interested some 1980 to 1990 census of population data I've tabulated, which shows the effect of declining subway service on the local economy.
First some background. In 1990, commuters from Brooklyn to Manhattan accounted for 41 percent of all the income earned by Brooklyn residents, and 80 percent of those commuters rode the subway. Brooklyn to Manhattan commuters took an average of 49 minutes to get to work, but 12 percent took more than one hour. Among those working in Brooklyn, more than one-third worked for the government or government-dependent non-profits (hospitals and social service agencies, for example). Most of the rest worked in businesses that provided services to Brooklyn residents, whose customers were either Manhattan commuters or government-dependent. The Brooklyn to Manhattan connection, along with government spending, provides the economic base of the borough.
Between 1980 and 1990, the part of the Manhattan Bridge was lost, increasing travel times by 5-10 minutes for a large swath of the borough -- those in Community Districts 10 to 15. So what happened? From 1980 to 1990, the number of employed residents increased 5.1 percent in CDs 10 to 15 -- and 19 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. The number of employed residents traveling to work by subway fell by 11 percent in CDs 10 to 15 -- and increased by 18 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. And the total income of residents of CDs 10 to 15 (adjusted for inflation) increased by 22 percent -- compared with 41 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. Note that the rest of Brooklyn includes the borough's most poverty-stricken areas -- Bed-Stuy, Bushwick, Brownsville, and East New York.
This is with half of the Manhattan Bridge tracks out, and the less-important half at that. The damage will be greater when the A/B tracks are closed, greater still if the cracking continues and the bridge is closed to trains altogether.
[Between 1980 and 1990, the part of the Manhattan Bridge was lost, increasing travel times by 5-10 minutes for a large swath of the borough -- those in Community Districts 10 to 15. So what happened? From 1980 to 1990, the number of employed residents increased 5.1 percent in CDs 10 to 15 -- and 19 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. The number of employed residents traveling to work by subway fell by 11 percent in CDs 10 to 15 -- and increased by 18 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. And the total income of residents of CDs 10 to 15 (adjusted for inflation) increased by 22 percent -- compared with 41 percent in the rest of Brooklyn. Note that the rest of Brooklyn includes the borough's most poverty-stricken areas -- Bed-Stuy, Bushwick, Brownsville, and East New York.]
1990 census figures may not be particularly useful indicators of the Manhattan Bridge effects. As far as I know, the south side tracks wrre closed in 1989. That was when the census data were being collected, so it's somewhat unlikely that they would reflect bridge-caused employment shifts to any significant degree. Some inconvenienced residents of CDs 10 to 15 indeed might have moved or sought different jobs once the south side tracks closed. But surely that process would have taken at least a few years, and hence wouldn't be shown to much extent in the 1990 census.
This isn't to deny that the employment and income shifts from 1980 to 1990 aren't significant. If I had to guess, I'd say that they show a "flight to the mean," though that might not be the exact statistical term. In other words, the more affluent sections of Brooklyn became (relatively) poorer, while the poorer sections became (relatively) more affluent. There probably are a host of demographic and economic factors to explain that.
Lastly, I do agree 100% that a full bridge closure would have severe effects on Brooklyn. Hopefully things won't come to that ...
(Other factors may be responsible for the relative economic lag of neighborhoods served by the BMT southern division). Accusing me of a spurious correlation, eh? Not so fast.
As far as I can remember, the problems on the Manhattan Bridge led to diminished service beginning in the mid-1980s (1985), so that is enough time to have an effect. There is an overall trend of areas closer to Manhattan becomming richer, and areas further away getting poorer as their housing stock ages and becomes less desirable, but closer has to do with time, not distance.
Correlation is not cause, but when the anecdotes match the data there is something going on. A couple of people I worked with in the mid-1980s who lived in Bensonhurst moved to NJ, complaining that with the N running as a local you can get to work more quickly from over the river. People being priced out of Windsor Terrace also tend to move to NJ without even considering nicer neighborhoods further out. Too long to get to work Manhattan, they say.
These people don't make the connection to the Manhattan Bridge. Nor do local merchants understand that access to Manhattan determines the buying power of the neighborhood. But it is so.
Of course, there are other sources of income to support a neighborhood. But we already have one borough where all the highest earners either work for the government or own an outer-borough business (Staten Island), and there is not enough of that to support a whole section of Brooklyn as well. But there are lots of jobs in Manhattan.
Bottom line, transit is an investment, and the Manhattan Bridge is a disinvestment with consequences.
There are plenty of places in NJ that reqire less travel time into NYC than from Brooklyn or SI. But I think that to more and more people moving out of Brooklyn equals moving out of NYC entirely, except for the too many ex-Brooklynites moving to Staten Island. Mature communities like Bensonhurst, Kensington and Windsor Terrace are just maxed-out in terms of the number of people working. Also as older better-paid residents retire, their income drops. That's a microcosm of what took place in my old neighborhood (Webster Avenue). The older folks retires and moved out. The rental housing stock aged and deteriorated. When I moved a realtor told me that the area was shaky then (1990) but in 5 or 6 years it would be up-and-coming. Not so last time I passed through. And we had excellent 'F' train service.
I also know people who are leaving Bay Ridge and Dyker Heights for places like Westfield,NJ and Scotch Plains,NJ. Both nice towns with so-so NJT diesel service which requires one or two changes to get into Manhattan. Some people trade off the long trip for 'more house'. Look at all the commuter buses from Pennsylvania, that's at least two hours in good weather. To each his own, four hours on a bus is a bit much.
Some people from here moved out to the Westfield/Scotch Plains area (Fanwood). The thing is, it's a one-seat ride to Penn Station, and just 35 minutes or so with a seat. And if you're heading Downtown, its an easy change to the PATH at Newark.
As you say, there are a variety of factors, with the age of the housing stock being one. But quick and easy access to the employment base in Manhattan is (or should I say ought to be) the advantage of Brooklyn, along with the ability to walk to things. That's why BMT southern territory was developed in the first place. You sacrifice other things to live here -- finding a good school is a hassle, hard to park, houses require renovation, etc. Without the subway, its all pain and no gain.
Many of the families at my children's school have lived in BK all their lives. They stopped using the subway in the 1960s and have not gotten on since. The brownie troop did a clean up in Prospect Park last week, and many of these folks hadn't been to the park in 30 years (or every), and were amazed that they'd dare go in. These folks drive everywhere, work outside Manhattan, etc. One wonders what benefit they get living in Brooklyn, instead of the suburbs, since they are living exactly as they would in the suburbs. And sure enough a steady stream of them leave. They question is who will replace them.
The 'old Brooklynites' are a hardy bunch. Very few things faze them, except violent crime. Windsor Terrace's semi-isolation between the Prospect Expwy and Prospect Park preseved it's sense of community. A lot of my neighbors stayed on Webster Avenue, dealing with alternate side parking, etc. They're tough and maybe a bit blind to what's going on around them. Transit may be o.k. but for a thousand reasons the public schools aren't o.k. That is what really pushes families out. You can stay here and put your kids in an expensive parochial or private school, or move to a suburb with a longer commute, pay very high (tax-deductible) property taxes and put the kids in a good public school. A lot of my Staten Island neighbors consider the NJ suburbs when the kids get to High School age, that seems to be the big decision time. Now if the stock market really crashes................
Bad schools push people out of declining neighborhoods. Unfortunately, rising prices push people out of good neighborhoods. Maybe if the stock market really crashes, more of the "old Brooklyintes" will get to stay in Windsor Terrace. The Times real state section just reported that a one-family across the highway on E. 2nd St, in that little enclave next to the cemetary, sold for $350,000. Ouch. I'm not exactly an old Brooklynite, but I'm not the kind of guy to carry that kind of mortgage either.
If I had to sum up this whole debate, I'd say that transit availability is *one* of a variety of factors behind relocation decisions, and not necessarily the most important one. As you've noted, many people move to suburban locations even though the transit isn't the best. Consider that commuter trains and buses are substantially more expensive than the subway and have less frequent schedules. For example, from where I am in central Suffolk (an area that probably attracts some ex-city residents) it's about 1:40 into Penn Station on the LIRR. It could take almost as long from some parts of the city if bus-to-subway transfers were required or if I were on Staten Island. But I'd then be spending only $63 per month, while I know spend $214 for the LIRR and maybe $25 to $30 on the subway. That difference adds up. Also consider that in many suburban locations there's no parking available near train stations. I don't know what I'd do if I lived most places in Nassau.
What it really comes down to is whether the attractions of living in an urban neighborhood outweigh the perceived convenience of the suburbs. Schools are an important factor, though in my opinion the differences between "good" and "bad" schools probably is overstated. Some people like the less-crowded atmosphere in most suburbs, while others like to be close to urban attractions. The point is that there are so many things entering into decisions that the importance of transit can be overstated.
Just as I've asked in the past for acronyms to be expanded, would it be asking too much to have some identification beyond 'Community Districts 10-15,' such as the neighborhoods or the bordering streets? Is everyone who reads Subtalk familiar with all the CDs in the City? I wonder if someone will next use Zip Codes, Congressional Districts, or State Assembly and Senate Districts in one of these threads.
Are ridership figures easily available by station? In addition to the figures already cited, it might be interesting to see what happened to boardings at, say, 69th, 77th, 86th and 95th Streets (Fourth Avenue) between 1979 and 1998, as well as how much late-night riding dropped after the Toonerville Shuttle from 95th Street was instituted as another TA improvement to the old BMT lines.
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
(What neighborhoods are in CD's 10 to 15?)
CD 10 Bay Ridge\Dyker Heights
CD 11 Bensonhurst
CD 12 Boro Park/Kensignton
CD 13 Gravesend/Coney Island
CD 14 Flatbush/Midwood
CD 15 Sheepshead Bay
Thanks to Larry Littlefield for the list of CDs 11 through 15; it helps to visualize the areas and the routes.
Ed Alfonsin/SUNY at Potsdam
While transit has it's impact, other factors are at work here. During the 1980s the areas affected by the MB work were fairly stable middle-class areas that wouldn't see big spikes in income. The poorer neighborhoods has no place to go but up in the 1980s. You also had the slow out-migration from Brooklyn of the upper end of the middle class which I think is reflected in your income stats. The poorer residents did better because of all the (now lost) entry-level hiring that took place on Wall Street. Do you have 1990 to date stats?
(And peripherally do you have income stats for Staten Island. Staten Island is growing. But based on my own un-professional observations it seems that the upper-middle-class is leaving SI in large numbers, and is being replaced with working class families from Brooklyn.)
Quick response -- Staten Island is getting richer all the time according the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Sub-county stats will not be available until the 2000 census.
I crossed the bridge today. From the Manhattan portal to midway between the towers there is new third rail protector boards and clear track. From the midpoint towards the Brooklyn Tower there is no third rail cover and some storage of material on the track.
From the Brooklyn tower to the Brooklyn Portal, there is tons of material on the tracks oncluding track panerls, steel girders, ec. There are many sections where all you see is nothing--no tracks, no girders underneath, etc.
(condition of south side tracks) I took the ride over last week, PM. They had a crane dropping steel on the Brooklyn side. It looks like the beams that will go under the tracks are pre-assembled steel panels which are being dropped in place.
Here's a link to a very exhaustive study of overcrowding on the Queens subway lines and various proposals, including new lines, connections to LIRR and the 63rd street tunnel, etc.
More than you ever wanted to know... http://www.bts.gov/smart/cat/queen.html
Bill
Hey, thanks Bill. I just got an assignment today in which I have to do some research on overcrowding in subways. Does anyone where I can find more information about subway overcrowding or plans to relieve subway overcrowding? Thanks.
Ask the TA to provide you with info out of their database ;-) The Cubic system is SUPPOSE to record turns of the "wheel" & due historical searches by route, run, station, line ;-)
I wish you good luck (I'm going to a meeting today about why it doesn't work !).
Disclaimer: I don't work for the TA or DOT, AND opinions expressed here are my own & not that of my employeer,
Mr t__:^)
The MTA has done an upgrade of its Web site.
The new topics available include:
MTA Network
MTA Leadership
What's New
Maps
Service Advisories
Schedules
Investor Information
Employment
Procurement
Arts for Transit
Transit Museum
Communications
Capital Programs
The Investor Information section has many reports that will make interesting reading! For those of us that have bookmarked portions of their Web site, such as Subway Diversion Notices, the URLs have changed (frames are now used).
Of even greater interest to data junkies is the "facts and figures" section which is currently listed as "under construction." It would be great if it had ridership/budget/employment by division figures, along with subway rosters and history, like the "facts and figures" book (my version is over a decade old).
Todd, et.al.Ñ
Do note, however, that their schedule pages are NOT updatedÑand they actually say so.
For example, they treat the B/C Bronx switch as if it were upcoming. They also have the "current" schedules for the 2/3. While those schedules return to normal Monday morning (!!), they weren't modern at the time the page was redone.
There is still a lot of work left. Hopefully, they'll do a better job removing outdated service advisory material.
Michael
It's a nicely redesigned page, but there's *still* no e-mail link as far as I could find ...
A couple of times I asked the AFC folks in Brooklyn about E-mail addresses, for business purposes ... they looked at me like I had two heads. Hay, I have one, obviously, & Cubic has them ... we could all exchange useful information ?
Don't all mainframes have an e-mail system ... then it's just a matter of connecting to the outside & then protecting it from hackers. I guess there must be other issues that I'm not aware of.
Disclaimer: Eye don't work for the TA or DOT.
Mr t__:^)
the tr-33,36's have a nostalgic meaning to many new yorkers as well
as those who lived there during the 60's. I know there are new cars
entering the system sometime in the future. hopefully, the 7 line will
not be affected for the next 10 years. If you know any new info on
this, please write me at my e-mail address.
sincerely;
Dan
the tr-33,36's have a nostalgic meaning to many new yorkers as well
as those who lived there during the 60's. I know there are new cars
entering the system sometime in the future. Hopefully, the 7 line will
not be affected for the next 10 years. If you know any new info on
this, please write me at my e-mail address.
sincerely;
Dan
At long last I've booked a trip to NY for my third tour of the Subway. In the three days that I have I want cram in as much express running and see as many sights as possible. Can anyone suggest some good runs or unusual places where good view of the subway can be accessed. I am certainly looking forward to it.
Views of trains entering/leaving stations from above the tracks
at Borough Hall, Brooklyn (4/5), Union Square, Manhattan (4,5,6),
168th Street Manhattan (1,9 - locals), Utica Avenue, Brooklyn (A,C)
There are other locations too.
Take a line-by-line tour at www:nycsubway.org/lines to preview
some of the more aesthetically pleasing locations. Set aside some
time to view the artwork underground. It is plentiful in the IRT
and BMT lines.
Express runs worth seeing: Ride a Redbird #2 or silver #3 train from Borough Hall Brooklyn up the west side (express starts after Chambers St) - "E" or "F" through Queens, #4 or Redbird #5 up Lexington Avenue in Manhattan, "Q" down 6th Avenue in Manhattan and out to Brighton Beach (inquire from the conductor as to whether the Brooklyn portion is running express - there was track work going on there), "A" through Brooklyn and from 59th to 125th St. in Manhattan.
During the rush hour, the Flushing #7 has express service, inbound
in the morning, outbound in the afternoon.
Enjoy your trip!
Wayne Whitehorne
When you're ready to "Take the A Train", as immortalized by Duke Ellington, it might be worth your while to wait for a train of R-38s, rather than R-44s. The R-38s are quicker, and have half-width cabs, so you can get a nice view out the front window. They also have electronic pixel route signs directly above the storm door which can be difficult to decipher. You can't miss the R-44s: they will display a large white-on-blue A.
BTW, when you will be in the Big Apple? I'm flying in on Oct. 19 myself.
Steve Many thanksto you Mark and Wayne for all your helpful suggestions. I can't wait and will certainly pack as much into my four days as I can. I arrive on the 7th November, are there any special events planned for 7th November onwards over my four days ?
Well, let's see .... trying not to repeat other good suggestions:
Train watching:
- Stillwell Ave / Coney Island (B/D/F/N). Nice perch on overhead walkway over 4 subway lines. Also walk along Surf Ave and the overpass connecting W 8th St to the Boardwalk for some great double-el scenes, D on top, F on bottom.
- Whitlock Ave (6). Nice view of trains rounding 90 degree curve and crossing two trestles. Similar view (but no trestles) at E Tremont Ave (West Farms Sq) on the 2/5.
- Elder Ave (6), Pelham-Bay bound platform, front end. You can see up the line 3 stations ahead of you.
- Broadway Junction / East New York (J,Z). The complicated maze of trackwork and the East NY Yard all in front of you. Still amazes me no end.
- 42nd/Times Square shuttle stop. See where the original line turned north under Broadway.
- E 180th St (2/5). Overhead walkway to yard accessible by passengers. Nice over the top views.
- Neptune Ave (F). Decent view of Coney Island yard from the north end of the platform. ALso, get out and walk under the Belt Pkwy (there is a road there leading to an employee entrance) and get up close and personal with layovers in Coney Island shop. Also, walk along Shell Road to Ave X for other views of the yard.
Unfortunately, you can't see City Hall Loop anymore; you won't be allowed to stay on the train.
Express runs:
- #5 thru-express, rush hours only, from E 180th St to Brooklyn Bridge. Wow!
- Brighton Line, Brighton Beach to Queensbridge (Q). Wutht he R-40 slants, the cab view is back.
- A to Far Rockaway only if you catch the R-38s. It's ho-hum on an R-44.
- Queens Blvd (E, F). Make sure you catch an E train of (my favs) the R-32s. Catch a glimpse of the construction in progress to connect the 63rd St line.
The J line is one of my favorite El rides. The B in Brooklyn used to rate up there, too, but now it's serviced by R-68a's which don't give you a good cab view anymore.
Well, that's it ... have fun!
--Mark
I assume you're a tourist as well as a subway buff, so see some of the city while you're at it:
- Take the N to Queensplaza change to 7 back to the city & see the skyline. (get off at 5th on the N for the Central Park Zoo)
- Take the F in Brooklyn across the Gowanus Canal
- Take the 1/9 into Harlem: At 125th see the train emerge from the tunnel for one station, after 145th see the underground yard (disused now), at 168th take the foot bridge over the tracks & elevator up 2 1/2 stories then switch to the C. Also on 1/9 visit: at 42nd yes visit 42nd & to the Marriet- go to about the 4th floor where there is a bar in the middle of the atrium ( vast opening within the bldg, the cokes are $2.00 but worth it); at 66th Lincoln Center; at 116th Grants Tomb, Riverside Church, Columbia Univ, on the C stop at 81st for Museum of Natural History (if you go up the C there's an entrance to the Museum in the station)
I'll let others add more tourist sites that are convient from the subways.
Mr t__:^)
Hi Thurston, the yard at 137st on the #1 line is still used to lay-up trains during the overnight periods.(monday-friday)I don't know about weekends though.
the yard is also used to store trains on weekends. the interesting feature at 145 is the Uptown side is offset from the downtown side due to the uptown right track merging with the center track within the confines of the downtown platform--three tracks enter from the South and two tracks leave the station.
tHANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I WASN'T SURE IF THEY LAYED-UP THERE ON WEEKENDS WITH ALL THE SERVICE THEY PROVIDED.
Thanks to everyone who suggested solutions to my cookie problem. First let me say, I am once again being recognized by SubTalk. In the hopes of helping someone else or possibly debunking my theory of what has happened, here is what I found.
The other night, I noticed that I had not checked my hard drive for errors in over 13,000 days. Since I am using Windows98, this was obviously impossible. I checked my time and date settings and found that I had 'Time Warped' to the year 2098. Once I corrected the date, my other problem was solved.
Is this possible?
Why did I time-warp?
I can imagine what would happen if this happens on the R-142s or R-143s. (Just to keep this posting Subway relevant).
Time warping with Win95/98: I had it happen to me once (I wondered why only WordPerfect and Calendar Creator worked in the year 2038.) and also to a friend of mine. Reset date, no further problem. MicroSquish had no answer as to why it happened to either of us. A virus was not suspect because both of us run a first class virus detection/prevention program.
I can see it now: a train of R-142s hits 88 mph while cruising on the Lexington and gets sent 100 years into the future, a la Doc Brown's DeLorean. Who's the wise guy who installed the flux capacitor?
That would definitely be the source of the problem... Cookies are usually set to expire on the order of months (the time is variable)... not centuries. So effectively the Cookie Sub-Talk handed you was set to expire in a few months from Oct 98, and when your computer found itself in 2098 it had effectively already expired your cookie... and wouldn't send it back to SubTalk.
Aha! You've discovered an undocumented feature in the Operating System called Active Dates. Unfortunately, the time propulsion module, as you can see, still needs work. It should make the beta of Windows NT 7 ....
--Mark
There is a new TV show about a transit cop called "DiResta" on the UPN network Mon at 8:30. While it's basically a comedy, there are some good shots of subways in the opening and in interludes. The main part of the show takes place at "Coney Island" station. The last time I was there, it wasn't nearly as neat, clean and busy as the show depicts it. Also, the station is represented as a stairway to a platform where "trains" arrive, unlike the real Stillwell Ave station. (Picky, picky). Anyway, it's enjoyable.
What are anti-climbers?
Are they the platform which we step on to cross to another car?
How about the shape?(round) If they were like the LIRR MUs', there
would be a smaller chance of a person falling through.
Yes they are. On the LIRR they are more rectangular while on the NYCT they are rounded. The purpose is not to prevent people from falling between cars, howerver. The purpose is to prevent cars from climbing over each other in a minor collision (hence the name).
The anti-climbers are on the edge of the threshold plates (platforms) on the ends of the cars. They are corrugated; this prevents one car from climbing up onto another and telescoping. Instead, they merely bump into each other.
On streetcars they look like bumpers but they have 2" sidways plates extending from them, usually 3 or four rows. If the cars hit they interlock and one car cannot ride up. I older accidents, especially on the old wooden rappid transit and interurban cars the floor of the car that lifted up would ride on top of the floor of the other car and shear off the support posts and slide right on through the other car.
I have a book 'Trolley Car Treasury' - there is a picture of just
such a crash between two interurban trolleys at Minetto, NY (upstate,
near Lake Ontario). Severe telescoping and carnage to say the least.
Due to speed (so says the caption text) , I don't think anti-climbers would have helped there.
Wayne
Speed makes a big difference. I have seen the picture you are talking about. 25, 50 and 80 MPH each have very diferent operating problems.
Speed makes a big difference but so does the type of draft gear on the cars. NYCT cars R-44 and up have draft gear with Shear Pins. Each end has four and each pin will absorb 180,000 ft/lbs of force before yielding. The average R-46 8-car consist can absorb a coupler to coupler hit from a train of equal length at 20 mph without sustaining any damage other than shear pin breakage. The collision at Steinway Street for example resulted in 104 broken shear pins but only one slightly bent anticlimber. An R-32 (for example) will be more severely damaged at less than 1/2 the speed.
On page 115 of Stan Fischler's book _The Subway_, there's a picture of a 1919 crash on the Third Avenue El that vividly shows what can happen in the absence of anti-climbers.
Were the two cars involved in the Williamsburg Bridge crash of
June 5, 1995 (either the R40M #4461 or the R42 #4664) fitted with
anti-climbers at the time of their collision. Based on the graphic
photos in the papers, we think not, at least not in #4664's case.
Wayne
all current subway cars have anti- climbers.
Steve, or others in the know, please correct me if I'm wrong in my interpertation: I'm sure everybody has noticed that when you cross between cars, sometimes the anti-climber on one car is higher than the other. I've even had instances where it was so bad an add in a yard was a chore because of this. Sometimes it's slight, sometimes significant. I heard 4461 recently had a truck change right before the accident. That coupled with wheel wear & wheel truing is the reason for the height difference. In the WillyB wreck, one anti climber was significantly higher than the other thereby causing one car to climb atop the other.
I had not heard that carbody height was an issue in the incident. While I would not deny that it could have contributed to some additional damage, properly aligned anti-climbers would not have prevented the vast majority of the damage.
High-Low conditions in the yard are more likely due to track conditions than car conditions. Most experienced operators will attempt to move cars to a more level section before blowing (3).
Having said that, you are correct in your conclusion that wheel wear can contribute to this condition. So can worn shock absorbers or weak bolster springs. However, during routine inspection and after wheel truing, carbody height is gauged and adjusted. Each truck side has a device called a Woodruff key which permits 4 different height adjustments by rotating it. Of course, the car has to be jacked up for this to be done.
[Were the two cars involved in the Williamsburg Bridge crash of
June 5, 1995 (either the R40M #4461 or the R42 #4664) fitted with
anti-climbers at the time of their collision. Based on the graphic
photos in the papers, we think not, at least not in #4664's case.]
You might already know of this, but the National Transportation Safety Board's web page (www.ntsb.gov) has lengthy narrative reports on several transportation accidents, including the Williamsburgh Bridge crash, in Abode format. I downloaded and looked at the report, though I can't remember if anti-climbers were mentioned.
And I Quote:
M Train Damage:
"Of the train's eight cars, the first four had no reported damage and
the next three suffered cracked bonnets (*) and bent anticlimbers
(flanges). The eighth and last car (4664) suffered massive carbody
intrusion. The anticlimber and front structure was pushed in about
seven (7) feet. The floor was penetrated, and had buckled upward and
inward. The vacant operator's cab in the back of the car was totally
crushed; no survival space remained.
* Bonnets refer to the fiberglas ends found on R40M, R42, R44, R46,
R62, R62A, R68, and R68A cars as well as the fiberglas slanted ends
of Slant R40s (my verbage)
And THANK YOU for pointing this site out to me - not only did I down-
load the Acrobat Reader 3.0, I got the Metro Accident 1-6-96, the
MARC/Amtrak accident of 2-16-96 and the infamous B & M accident of
2-3-96. I will probably send away for about three other ones,
including the Union Square wreck - maybe I can put an end to the
squabble over which car came first (1437 or 1440) PLUS the one I've
been looking for: Utica Avenue, 7-3-81 - need the unit numbers for
Master Scrap List, Master Numbers Book, etc. etc.
THANKS AGAIN PETER!
Wayne
[re the NTSB's accident report site]
You're quite welcome, I'm glad to be of help. Those NTSB reports make fascinating though definitely not light reading. One particularly grim report involves that grade crossing collision a couple of years ago between a METRA train and a school bus.
PATCO cars have none on ther #2 end and very samll on the #1 end. I passedf between cars, standing still at a station and noted the lack of anti-climbers!
I have a simple question about most design of diesel locomotives.
Some have the engin in the front of the train. Doesn't this block the
engineer's view of the track ahead? The "hood" can be up to 40 feet long. This doesn't seem to make sense.
I recently had the experience of riding in the cab of a LIRR loco. This particular loco (a power pack) was operated with the hood foward while the GEEP at the other end was operated with the Cab foward. From where I sat, onthe right side, there was a definite problem of visibility of signals. Otherwise, visibility was not really a problem. On the other hand, I perfer the view from a cab-foward unit.
Only the signals??
I know from a Port Jeff diesel driver the over 20 crossings at grade and lack of visibility make the heart run faster than the train...
Some rXr operate the engine forward for safety, i.e. the crash won't get the engineer until it gets the engine first. Early Geeps had high noses on both ends, most have low ones on the short end now.
Mr t__:^)
Metra operates with the diesel on the outward leg so during sunset and winter nights there is protection of the engine.
Metra's diesel locomotives are pointed on the "west" end because it puts the locomotive in a position outside of the terminal. It makes servicing easier. Passengers don't have to walk past a "roaring" diesel in HEP mode to get to the coaches.
The fact that the locomotive is headed west into the sunset is a secondary advantage.
As for safety, the Metra passenger locomotives have cabs that are positioned forward and high. The control cabs on the bi-level coaches are on the second story level. This makes for a comparatively safe work area of the engineer, much more so than the position that most engineers are in MU equipment (i.e. Silverliners, M-1, M-2, M-3, M-4 cars, Highliners & CSS&SB cars).
No grade crossing is safe. Engineers have "close calls" on a routine basis. Most of the time the pedestrian or car gets the worst of the encounter. Although engineers do not enjoy crashes, the encounter the a locomotive engineer truly fears, or may have nightmares about, is that of hitting a gasoline truck or tanker. That is a assuredly an recipe for disaster. Fortunately, these encounters have been few and far between.
In Boston, the diesels are on the "outbound" side (northerly for North Station trains, southerly for South Station trains.) This is so that the exhaust does not enter into the terminal areas, which are semi-enclosed for a few car-lengths at each terminal.
Once I was waiting for my usual morning train at Misawum on the Lowell Branch (north side), and the train came inbound with its engine on the inbound side. First I did a double-take, then I kicked myself for not having a camera with me. I asked the conductor "why?" and he didn't even acknowledge something was different about this consist!
Last time I was at South station - I saw a few diesels head end in first. I also saw what would have made an EXCELLENT photo - toward the end of the platfor, where the overhang begins, there was a diesel, just slightly in under the building - and a giant sign on the side of the building just above it "Do not pull diesel locomotives under building". My friend tony, who is a diesel fanatic couldn't beileve how many of those suckers were hanging out around the station.
Also, I coulda sworn I saw LIRR timetable available at the info counter. It this so? Or did I forget my pink pill that day?
Speeking of MBTA..
On my labor day weekend outing to Boston when I went south on the Orange Line, I noticed an MBTA Diesel heading INBOUND that was a) Wrong Railing and b) Diesel on the Inbound side! The consist was just leaving Ruggles at about noon on Sat before Labor Day.
njt lines (diesel)into hoboken are also usually on out bound side. the old cnj line is ether side.
When you saw diesels head-end in at South Station, you were undoubtedly seeing the AMTRAK engines that bring in the long-haul trains. They come in and shut down; a spare engine in brought in behind to hook in and pull the coaches out... then the original diesel goes to the yard.
MBTA commuter trains are always diesel-end "out" (south end) at South Station.
LIRR tables? I don't think so...
Actually, one or two trains are often run between South Station and either Kingston/Plymouth or Middleborough/Lakeville with an engine at both ends. (In South Station the Old Colony trains use tracks # 11, 12, and 13 almost exclusively) It took me awhile to find a conductor who could explain the double engine conundrum to me, but it seems they like to have an extra engine on the move somewhere on the Old Colony in case one breaks down. I guess this way they can split one engine off at Braintree and send it down to retrieve the disabled train. I have heard of this happening only once.
[MBTA commuter trains are always diesel-end "out" (south end) at South Station.]
Not always.. I wasn't hallucinating when I related what I saw on September 5 in a previous message. I can assure you that this was an MBTA train.
And Tim Speer has provided a good explanation in a prior post for this. So let me revise my statement (kind of like a revised forecast, you know?) and say it's extremely rare to have a head-in engine on the MBTA Commuter Rail. I travel on the North Side every day and I've only seen it once in 4+ years.
Does anyone know what is going on with the construction of coliseum depot?I believe that its scheduled completion date is sometime in 2000.The last time Iwas there, it looked like very little was accomplished.Maybe they feel that they can get by with the way the buses and routes are currently assigned.Any info will be helpful.Does anyone know about the rumor that the old Coliseum was going to be designated a landmark?
When METRA rebuilt the old Northwestern Station (now officially called the Ogilvie Transportation Center) a few years back, they put solid roofs over the first few (from the bumper post) car lengths of each track -- beyond that it is open above each track for the diesel exhaust. So, if a train were to operate into the station locomotive-first, it would have to stop far short of the bumper posts.
When the Olympic Torch arrived in Chicago at this station in July, 1996, the torch train backed in, but since the torch car at the rear had a large cauldron with an open flame, it stopped several car lengths short of the bumper posts so that it was under the diesel exhaust opening.
As for Geeps operating long hood first, when railroads were first ordering them in the early 1950s, they were replacing steam engines. Engineers who were used to looking around boilers probably found looking around even the long hood of Geep gave much improved visibility.
I rode diesel #161P from Jamaica to LIC. With the hood foward, at crossings, I could only see the left side as I'm sure the engineer could only see the right side. The view from the cab of the FL-9 is obviously better.
Steve, as a former R.C.I. and now a company man for the T.A. what were you doing inside a cab of a L.I.R.R. locomotive? Who gave you your Head end pass? Peter Stengal former Chairman of the M.T.A. was busted by the F.R.A. for riding in the cab of a metro north F.L.-9. So I know that a low life manager at the T.A. breaks the rules he writes. If you try to weasel your way out of this the only way out is for you to post a copy of the Head end pass issued to you. By the way it would be my pleasure to notify the F.R.A. of your violation so you can have charges brought against you and to see your beloved T.A. that is so innocent of not hurting it's employees defend you. They will defend you won't they Steve?
I don't like wasting Dave's space but I can't respond to your moronic posting in any other way. First, I don't know who you are but I do know your type. You call people names using this semi anonymous forum. You post under a ficticious pseudonym because in real life, you are a nobody. You are afraid that if you include your E-Mail address, someone will shine a flashlight on you and you'll have to scurry back into your hole. Why don't you come out of that hole and identify yourself. Then call me a low life. If you think I am guilty of something, come out of your hole in the ground. Then you and your one man organization can take your best shot. In the meantime, sit in your cage and we'll bang on the bars when we want you.
If I recall correctly,Stangl was busted by FRA for OPERATING the train without the required license.FRA has no say over who rides in the cab. All that's needed is a permit or release signed by an officer of the carrier. As MTA chairman,I think Stangl qualified in that respect.
Actually, you are almost correct. He was accused of perrmitting an unqualified friend to take the controls of a train out of grand Central late on a Saturday night. He stated that he only permitted the friend to 'Blow the Whistle'. Actually, I've also ridden in the cab of an AMTRAK train to Albany and return. AMTRAK personnel had no problems with my credentials either.
In Chicago, what subway stop would I have to get off at to get to:
a) The United Center
b) Wrigley Field
c) Comiskey II
United Center-Brown/Orange/Purple Lines to Madison/Wells, transfer to #20 Madison Bus
Wrigley Field-Red Line to Addison
Comiskey Lite-Red Line to Sox-35
"United Center-Brown/Orange/Purple Lines to Madison/Wells, transfer to #20 Madison Bus"
If you're taking the #20 bus to the United Center, you can also catch it at State/Madison, getting off the Red Line at either Washington or Monroe stations.
On Bulls and Blackhawks game days only, there is also a #19 Stadium Express bus that picks up on Madison at State or Wells (as with the #20) and runs express from Halsted (800 W) to the United Center (approx. 1800 W) -- about 10 blocks. While it runs on the same street as the #20 Madison, running express skips the iffy neighborhoods that lie between downtown and the United Center.
Smarty pants. Forgot about the specials, John. Also, many of the restaurants downtown have bus service to the games at the UC
To get to the United Center Either take the Express bus (#19) or Drive.
DO NOT TAKE THE 20 OR ANY OTHER LOCAL BUS. THE UC IS IN A HORRIBLE AREA AND EVEN THOUGH I'M A VERY BIG TRANSIT FAN I WOULD RECOMMEND THE EISENHOWER EXPRESSWAY THE MOST.
On the other hand Comiskey is a in questionalble area that you shouldn't stray to far from and the taking the to it is proabaly acually safer then the Dan Ryan! ( Even though the El runs down the Dan Ryan median, no one throws bricks at it like they do to cars!)
Wrigley is in an excellent are with no parking and the El is the #1 way to go
BJ
Your attitude and concerns reflect the argument the Yankees are making for why they should move out of the Bronx and get a new billion dollar stadium in Manhattan. In fact, a NYC delegation went to Chicago to study the new Comisky as an example of a new stadium which is a "failure," in contrast with the "successful" downtown stadia in Baltimore and Cleveland, and the successful suburban stadium in Arlington. They want to make the point that no one wants to go to the Bronx because its poor (70 percent of Yankee fans are from the suburbs), and that there is no "spinoff" because everyone gets out of the Bronx as fast as they can.
Do Chicagoans regret not putting Comisky in the institutional area along the waterfront, near Soldier Field, or some other area near the loop?
Everyone I know is hoping the Yankees move to New Jersey, because they don't want to pay for the stadium. But everyone I know from New Jersey wants them to stay in the Bronx, because they don't want to pay either.
I want them to stay in Yankee Stadium because of the historical significance of Yankee Stadium.
If I'm not mistaken, the area around Ebbets Field had fallen into decline by the time the Dodgers left Brooklyn, and supposedly, people didn't stick around after night games. The area around the Polo Grounds wasn't much better. Parking was a problem, too.
BTW, my aunt told me she went to a movie recently at a theater right by the Addison stop on the L, and when the movie let out, there was a huge crush of fans on the way to Wrigley Field. Apparently, everyone went to see Sammy Sosa. My aunt nearly got swept into Wrigley by the mob, but she managed to get to the L; she's not a sports fan. I was in Chicago once when the Mets were in town, but when my aunt offered to "take me out to the ballgame", I politely declined. She knows nothing about baseball, and I would have had to explain everything to her as it happened - in Lithuanian, to boot. (She wasn't even aware the Dodgers moved to Los Angeles in 1958.)
They did a nice job of rebuilding the Addison station; it should have been done a long time ago. Now the Red line has the inner tracks all to itself from Howard clear down to the State St. subway.
I received a number of requests for detailed instructions on
coming up to the Shore Line Trolley Museum this weekend via
public transportation. I've updated the directions page to
include this information, which was supplied by several members
who do this routinely. The trip is quite manageable.
See http://www.bera.org/directions.html
Thanks, I'm trying to get a car for Sunday from the Inlaws but might have to rail it.
Sunday looks like the best weather day, if you see someone 6'8" 300lbs, that would be me...
Help! How do I find out how to get from JFK Airport (at 11PM) to Newark airport? I heard about a bus that leaves every 20 minutes from JFK for $23.00. Is there a cheaper but not too crazy way of getting there by train? (VERY inexperienced subway riders) We are going to some town in Jersey near Newark airport but our plane lands in JFK and a rental car is out of the question. Email me at kimberlykoury@hotmail.com with suggestions if you have any. I would REALLY appreciate it! Thanks.
The Manhattan local track is gone. no ties, no rail, no ballast. it has been removed from the crossover. There is a continuous orange construction fence running the length of the Manhattan bound platform. I did not see what is/is not happening on the coney island bound platform, but the local track is still in place from the crossover to Propsect Park. GUESS: the roadbed will be completely rebuilt by the time the bridge work is done and train service resumes. SInce the train ahs used the manhattan side, I don no *think* they'll do anything on the coney island side.
**disclaimer: the above post is personal opinion. I have no knowledge of actual plans.
Both leads from the interlocking to the local tracks of Prospect Park are blocked with two ties crossing over each other.
The intresting thing about the local side is the single stancheons are left and weren't removed.
The Coney Island side is used sometimes, great to have with a stuck switch. It was most recently used during track work north of Prospect park with no service during the weekends. D "Shuttle" trains of R38 (8 car lenghts) went up the Manhattan local side and switched back down the Coney Island side (thoughts of Melborne crossed my mind at tha time).
Still waiting to see what will happen to Prospect Park, thank goodness the are keeping both entrances open. The part time entrance is now 24 hrs since the shuttle bus leaves from it.
Are you sure they were R38s.Kind of unusual for cars from the A line being there.Maybe R 32S?
I was going to say: R-38s? R-32s would be more like it. If that's the case, it's about time! Put the R-32s back on the D, and send the R-68s over to the E (no offense to E buffs). Are the R-46s really any better than the R-68s?
The R46S ARE BY FAR BETTER THAN THE R68S.THEY'RE FASTER BRAKE BETTER DON'T BREAK DOWN OFTEN LIKE THE R68.
What's that weird yellow line you guys have in Chicago with one station on it?
My guess is it's an express run to some historical town or something.
When was it built?
Do they run normal trains on it?
The CTA Yellow line is the Skokie Swift. Originally it was part of the Chicago, North Shore, and Milwaukee interurban line (the famous "Electroliner" route), which died in 1963. In 1964, the CTA took over the five mile stretch from Howard Street to Skokie, and it has been a CTA route ever since. It connects at Howard to CTA Red Line el trains. The trains are one car/one man and require pantographs to switch to overhead wire after leaving Howard Street.
Any of our regular Chicago respondents might want to add some stuff. I've been to Chicago twice and know something about the CTA system.
The CTA Yellow Line, AKA Skokie Swift, was originally part of the Skokie Valley Route of the Chicago North Shore and Milwaukee, built in the 1920s as a bypass for the slow line through lake shore communities (with street running in several). This new route allowed the North Shore Line to provide Chicago-Milwaukee express service which could compete with the C&NW and CMStP&P.
When the line opened, the Chicago Elevated (L) lines provided sevice between Howard St. and the Niles Center (now Skokie) station at Dempster St., with several intermediate stops. This service operated as a shuttle (usually two cars). There was a separate terminal station for the L train shuttles at Dempster St., the tracks and platforms were located where the commuter parking lot now sits. This shuttle service continued until 1950 or 1951, when it was replaced by the #97 Skokie bus (which still runs). Afer the L service ended, the North Shore Line carried local passengers between Dempster St. and Chicago, and the intermediate stops became "disused and abandoned stations" (one or two still exist).
After the North Shore Line was abandoned in 1961, the C&NW (which had a freight line paralleling the Skokie Valley Route) purchased the line north of Dempster St., ripped up its own parallel tracks, and began using the the North Shore Line tracks (without the overhead, C&NW - now UP - was diesel). It has been said that the C&NW was afraid that some public agency would try to resurect commuter service on the line which would compete with its commuter service.
In 1964, using a grant from the US Urban Mass Transit Admin., the CTA refurbished the line to Dempster, built a new terminal there on the site of the North Shore Line station (and a parking lot on the site of the old elevated terminal), and began running the "Skokie Swift" service as a non-stop shuttle from Howard St.
Chicago jargon note - L stands for "elevated". L train is a generic term for a rapid transit train in Chicago, and does not refer to a specific route (as it would in New York).
This line had a interesting mix of rolling stock before the Morrison-
Knudson cars were introduced. Since the pantograph was put up on the
fly (much like the New Haven Line and the Blue Line in Boston) one car
units were used along with a set on three car articulated units. I
believe one car, I think it was #24, was equipped with a Stemmen
pantograph. This constrated with the Evanston line,now called Purple,
where the motorman or conductor manually raised the trolley poles at
South Blvd. to continue the run north to Linden.
The line never ran on Sundays and now I believe there is no Saturday
service. It provides a great view of the Oakton Shops, which is right
where the switch from third rail to catenary occurs.
Ed's narration is basically correct, except that the North Shore was abandoned in January 1963 not 1961. The last day was operated in the teeth of a howling blizzard.
I have a magazine article which documented the final Chicago-to-Milwaukee Electroliner run on that fateful night. It was bitterly cold, but even so, the train cruised along at 80 mph between stops. That Skokie Valley route was built for flat-out speed: ruler-straight track with a maximum curve radius of 2.5 degrees. The Shore Line route, which had a lot of street running, closed in 1955.
That article focused on the Electroliner returning to service in its original livery at the Illinois Railway Museum in February 1991 - 50 years after it entered revenue service on the North Shore. I saw it when I visited the museum two years ago; it looked really sharp! So did Green Hornet #4391. CTA donated part of its collection to IRM, including Blue Goose #4021 and Old Pullman #460.
At the terminal, there is also a Gryehound Bus depot. Great combination of signs on Dempster St. A big one heralds the Greyhound Bus station, and a smaller one below advertises "Dog Grooming."
Oh, and right down the street there is an intersection with "Bronx Av."
If you get to Chicago the Swift is a must ride line. The ride is at Maximum speed for the Chicago equipment but not as fast as the 80 MPH that they ran when it opened. The speeds were too hard on equipment and the track, and with non-stop service the difference in the end to end runnng times was not significant.
Earlier responses gave the basic history of this line, so I'll just address your "one station" issue. Although the present Yellow Line (Skokie Swift) has been non-stop since its inception in 1964, the earlier incarnation of this service, Chicago Rapid Transit Company's Niles Center branch, did have about five or six intermediate stations.
The Niles Center line (like the Swift, just a shuttle from Howard Street to Dempster; I don't believe it ever saw through operation to the Loop) ran from 1925 to December 1948. One of CTA's first acts upon assuming operation of the "L" in October 1948 was to substitute buses for this service to what was then a relatively unpopulated suburban area. As with CTA's abandonment of the Westchester Branch in 1951, the timing was unfortunate, since both areas saw a major building boom in the 1950's.
I have questions first for the guys up in New York. Is Unionport yard a working subway yard or is it abandoned. And is the Linden shops a part of NYCTA? Now for the Philly question. How many trains are running in peak service on the Market-Frankford and Broad St. lines? Thanks for any help.
I'll take a guess at the Phila question. I don't know precise answers.
The Market-Frankford el runs 6-car trains, with a peak headway of 3 minutes. The round trip circuit is about 100 minutes. This would lead one to believe that roughly 35 trains are needed, or 210 cars. This also fits the 220-car order, more or less, of new M4's.
The Broad St line runs 3 different services in the peak - mainline local, Walnut-Fern Rock express, and Ridge spur. The first two run 5-car trains, with the spur having 4-car trains. Peak headways are 6 minutes local, 8 minutes express, 8 minutes spur. I won't do the math, but locals take 80 minutes to make a circuit, expresses about 40, and spur about 30. I've heard the number 110 tossed around for maximum cars in the peak. I've also seen Fern Rock yard in the peak, and you won't find many cars lying around there that time of day.
Does this help?
Unionport Yard is a recently built facility. It is a storage facility as the East 180th Street Maintenance Shop, which is being rebuilt to accommodate the R-142s, is behind schedule and has not re-opened yet.
Linden Shop has two purposes. The first is for the fabrication of track panels used in rehab. projects. The second is the eastern end of the facility is for 'Fleet Operations' where non-revenue vehicles are maintained and inspected.
Thanks Bob & Steve for your help on my Philly & New York questions. Your always learning something new on this great hobby on this also great web site. Thanks to everyone who contributes such good info
> It [Unionport Yard) is a storage facility as the East 180th Street
> Maintenance Shop, which is being rebuilt to accommodate the
> R-142s, is behind schedule and has not re-opened yet.
I guess I'm a bit confused then. I was in the area yesterday (Bronx Els Tour), saw the "Unionport Signal Tower", and just behind it was a yard full of R-62s and some redbirds. Is that Unionport Yard? If not, where is it in the E 180 St complex? (Is it like Coney Island shop which really has 3 yards in it, not one?)
--Mark
Not working in the A division, it's possible that I have it wrong. The A division is like another company. As I understand it, E180th St Yard is the few tracks adjacent to the E180th St. Shop while Unionport is the storage facility on the other side of the Bronx River Pkwy. As I said, I may be way off base...
Oh ... OK ... well, having been in the area taking pictures at Bronx Park East, I can tell you that Unionport Yard is open.
--Mark
Was riding the the LIRR to Brooklyn Saturday and spotted 3 new bilevel coaches at Jamica. Standing at Track three looking east there are two stub tracks between Track 3 and 4. One stub had 4 MU's and one had 3 or 4 of the new Bi-Level coaches. I didn't get enough time to get any closer before the Brooklyn train arrived BUT...
Leaving Jay as we past the Engine yard I saw the new DEC30 Diesel stainless steel monocoque carbody in yellow and blue. I couldn't catch the number so I don't know if it was a DEC30 or DEC30AC. The order I think calls for 23 DEC30's and 18 DEC30AC's that are dual mode. I know the first 2 have been testing in Colorado's FRA test track in August.
They are both "AC" types - they both use AC traction...
I believe the proper desegnations are DE30AC and DM30AC - the DM type being the dual mode
I've seen the DE30 and it's train being tested.
When I was last down by Babylon on my Harley, I saw the DE30 and its train pass in the other direction. I've heard they've been having many problems with it, includeing speed control and rumor has it it popped a few traction motors too...
Of course, since the coaches are probbly 480V 3 phase AC HEP, there's no hope of putting them in service while EMD and the LIRR debugg the locomotives...
Given what I've heard on the rumour mill, I wouldn't hold my breath for them...
Knowing the LIRR these dual power Diesels will proabably fall (Dashing Dan Diesel??).
Since dual power has worked for years with MetroNorth and even the New Heaven I can't see why LIRR is having so much trouble...
I love the "new" automated annoucements now "The eastbound train due to arrive at 12:40 has been spooted at West Jamica and is running 4 minutes late".
I'm not as pessimistic as others here. The LIRR has to make it work, they just have no choice, so it will ... eventually.
Mr t__:^)
Does any one know if you pay an extra fare during weekends(daytime)
when the green line shortcut is not running, do you need to pay an extra fare when transferring from the green line to red line at
Fort Totten?
No. The DC Metro has "free" transfers at all interchange stations. The fare is calculated by distance based on where you enter and where you leave the system. The fares are lower in the off-peak, and they are also more uniform then (e.g. within DC is a single fare, crossing a DC-MD boundary is another, etc).
Does annyone know if the Oyster Bay Branch of the Long Island railroad is being electrified? How can I find out? Will the new dual disel-electric trains eliminate the need for Sea Cliff passengers to change trains at Jamaica?
There aren't any plans to electrify Oyster Bay or any other diesel lines. Eventually, there should be at least some through trains to Penn Station using the dual-mode locomotives, but don't hold your breath. At least the new bilevel cars will make for a more pleasant ride than the ancient diesel coaches, even with a Jamaica change required.
Ditto on not holding your breath, though you will most likeliyt have to hold your nose for another year while they (real damm slowly - flame away, but only AFTER taking a few OB trains) get off their buts and put the new stuff into service.
I frankly don't hold much hope for the dual modes - I'm guessing they'll be a failure. Call me a pessimist, but past dual modes haven't been very good.
I have got a few pictures taken at Locust Valley (Manor?) on the OB line which showed a weekend train being pulled by a swicther!! Cab end was out on a westbound train.
Woah. You mean the NEW stuff?
Yeah, the station is Locust Valley.
I live a few blocks from Glen Head, but avoid that line If I can...
Last I saw, the platforms at OB were half done, but that was early Sept, since I'm up at school and only get to go down there occasionally, and only get to see that end of the line when I take my Harley out, which isn't gonna be often if we get the winter we deserve. Of course, on the brighter side, next summer I hope to get a Wide Glide, in Black, which'll be a BIG upgrade from my little 883 Sportty. Maybe then I can make it up to Maine, out to PA, and to all the other museums I've been meaning to hit....
But yeah, the next time I'll see the OB line won't be until spring most likely...
I don't think that it was the "New Stuff" yet. Likely just not a GP38.
BTW - We ride all winter Phil. Not too many Harley owners but we do ride all winter.
OK, you M-4 folks. Didja know this? I rode the El last week and was treated to a train of M-4's. By chance, I rode in car 1001, the first of the series. It was mated to 1004. I had heard previously that 1002/1003 were also mated. It appears that all other cars I have seen are properly mated. Does anyone know if this is just an oversight, to be corrected later, or are these marriages permanent?
By the way, the BVTA El fan trip on Sun 10/18 is still on, if anyone is interested.
OK all you Septa folks - here's a Silly Question for you:
Since I've never ridden SEPTA (although I hope to, one day)...
My Father was in Philadelphia recently for an army reunion and
he took a picture of a subway train at a station that looks like
this: Stainless steel body; corrugated sides up to just below
the windows - windows are large, have rounded corners and are one-
piece panes. The unit number is 907, the plaque is conspicuous
in the photo. Seats look like they're perpendicular to the car
sides.
Is this an Almond Joy?
Thanks,
Wayne
Yes, that was an M-3!
Notice the roof humps: The roof is not flat, the roof humps is for the fan-air. An Almond Joy candy bar has 2 humps. Therefore the nickname.
Tough to see the roof in my Dad's photo (station roof is low, so
these features are not visible) - silly me thought that it had to do
with the color of the interior being almond beige (as it is, it is
mostly orange! I'm not all there, am i?) Anyway, thanks for passing
that tidbit on.
Next time I'm out on the Eastern Div. I will be on the lookout for
differing anti-climber levels between R40M and R42 cars.
I was reading the NTSB report on a Jan 6 1996 accident on the DC
Metro - NTSB sez Breda 3000 series are not crashworthy! AND THEY
DON'T HAVE ANTICLIMBERS EITHER. Breda 3252 rammed into Breda 3191
and fell apart like a cheap sweater. You thought Willy B was bad!
Last time I saw a telescope like this was Chicago, Oct 30 1972.
Thanks,
Wayne
You noted that the car number plate was 907. This would put the car in the Budd (M-3) series - 601-50 single units, 701-920 married pairs. Also, the Almond Joy nickname came from the candy, as the cars have 4 "bumps" for fans, and a full size Almond Joy has two pieces with two "bumps" each, thus the similarity. Personally, I never much cared for the nickname, and most Phila folks will simply call them "the el cars". Now that we have M-4's, they need a new name, and my preference is the Budds.
With their service record thus far, maybe they(M-4's) should be called Mounds(the G rated version of the word).
Hi all, just thought i'd write about some impressions of the Boston "T" system. I'm up here for the weekend.
Red Line - I've been riding from Quincy (pronounce "Quinzy") Adams to downtown. Lots of huge park and ride lots on the south end. Haven't gotten to visit the Mattapan branch yet. Hopefully the weather will clear up and I'll go over there Monday or Tuesday. Park St. is a very interesting station - two side & one island platform, trains open doors on both sides. Big arched ceiling at the north end, sound end has a low ceiling because of the Green line station above. The older cars have three doors per side and remind me of the R27/R30-- painted exterior instead of stainless steel, but the sides aren't straight -- there is a "bend-out" at waist level or so.
Green Line - Waaaay too busy even on Saturdays and Sundays. The outer edges of the lines need more service but the Park St. tunnel probably can't handle it, not to mention the at-grade junction of the E-Heath/Arborway branch with the others. Speaking of which, the Park St. station is just amazing to watch the number of trolleys coming and going. There are always three or four trolleys on the four floor-level tracks. The inbound cars to Lechmere open on both sides as well.
Blue Line - I'm surprised the trains are so SHORT! 4 50' cars. The stations are even shorter with the ends of the train off the platform at some stations (State). Aquarium is pretty deep; the tunnel in this area is a single arch with two tracks similar to lines in Paris (like Metro ligne 1). The trains are almost exactly like PATH PA1-PA3 cars with some differences - more seats, less standee room, different door chime. Both the Blue and Red lines have uncovered third rail.
Orange line - haven't visited yet.
More notes to come, and photos next week.
-Dave
Probably it would be too expensive to extend the platforms on the Boston Blue Line because in some cases, you would have to bore thru solid rock. I remember at one station, it is a perfect 4 car fit with tubes at the entering & leaving ends. Another reason: they have OPTO on the blue line, so it is safer to leave the trains short.
Short trains frequent headways sounds like good service.
The green line is intesting and Park St. and the Govt Cntr. make transfers easy. The system is not freindlier than NYC for new visitors. I have not been out to Mattipan but next time in Boston it is a must ride line.
L
Short trains frequent headways sounds like good service.
The green line is intesting and Park St. Station and the Govt Cntr. make transfers easy. The Boston system is friendlier than NYC for new visitors. I have not been out to Mattipan but next time in Boston it is a must ride line.
Looking forward to your pictures and future reports Dave.
I love some of those blue line stations - without the support posts in the center and in the tunnels, they have a nice "open" feel to them. That's something I never liked about NY - the stations feel cramped. When I went on the Blue line with a friend, it was a big change. Next to Mattapan, the blue is my favorite. Pantagraphs, weird Hawkker Siddley equipment, and just plain overall coolness. And simulated woodgrain vinyl paneling everywhere in the cars!!!! Nothing beats that stuff for a nice 70's feel :)
The Blue Line was even better in the 70's when the "old" 1950's (even some 1920's) equipment was still running. They made all the right sounds, and that was before the new timing signals were put in place. Back then, trains would roar through the East Boston tunnel...
Just as A trains of R-10s would roar up CPW in those days.
Anyone going to Boston should not miss the Mattapan Ashmont high speed trolley. Its 1945-vintage PCCs that shake, rattle, and roll from Ashmont (Red Line subway terminal) to Mattapan Square. Along with Newark City Subway and SF Muni's F-Market line, these are the last examples of PCCs in revenue service in North America.
Good news on the Mattapan-Ashmont line. There have been rumors for years about converting this to LRV, trolleybus, or (even worse) bus service. But the T has decided to not only retain the PCCs, but rebuild them. A colleage of mine from Seashore, who up until a month ago was a Green Line Inspector, has been named project manager. We're in good hands!!
Great news. I saw a news clipping a few years ago where the planning dept. mentioned the possibility of replacing them and at the next public hearing they got an earful of why the PCC's should be retained.
It just goes to show that they don't build 'em like they used to.
Have they already undergone a rebuilding of sorts? Wonder if they'll take Newark's (NJ) PCCs when the LRVs are delivered in a few years ...
--Mark
The Mattapan-Ashmont PCC fleet consists of "Wartime" PCCs, built by Pullman-Standard in 1945-46. The active cars (10) were rebuilt in 1978-1983: 3087, 3230, 3232, 3234, 3238, 3254, 3260, 3262, 3263, 3265.
3286 is now in the new rebuild program at the Orient Heights Carhouse.
Since this fleet more than meets the M-A route needs, I doubt they would want the Newark fleet.
Are you guys trying to tell me there are no more Beacon Street/Brookline or Commonwealth Avenue PCC's? There goes another fond memory.
Report #2:
Orange Line - rode from Downtown Crossing to Oak Grove. Similar cars to the Blue Line but longer (60'? vs 50'?). Still, they would feel right at home on the PATH system :-) Not much to see on the Orange line- very industrial area. Can see the MBTA commuter rail shops and the Orange yard near Wellington (what is that odd monorail-like thing for? You can see it in Mark Feinman's Boston video...)
Mattapan Branch - very rustic! I wish it hadn't been a crappy day. They seemed to have 4 PCCs in midday service, with another 5 or 6 stored at the Mattapan yard. Good to read Todd's note about the retention of the PCC's. They sounded really old, compared to Newark's and SF's well maintained fleet. The hard plastic seats need to go too! If it's sunny tomorrow or Wed. morning I will go back for some more photos of this line in operation.
Blue line @ Gov't. Center (aka Scollay Under)-- the east end of the platform is closed off but there was a door that one could look thru. The Scollay Under signs are still visible on the tunnel wall across from the closed platform ends.
Till next time,
Dave
I think the Boston cars that are running are Air/Electic cars with air tread brakes or air driveline brakes. Both New Jersey and San Francisco are St. Louis built all electric cars. Are the Boston cars Pullmans? I think they have GE Linear Accelerators like the later Chicago PCC "L" cars. Does anyone know for sure?
The PCC's are indeed the last air-electric's in service for a transit property in the country. They are Pullman-Standard cars built to Boston spec's (left side center doors, right side center doors offset 1 window to rear.
The air brakes are tread brakes. They use cast iron brake shoes for the final stopping cycle.
The patterns for the brake shoes is held by The Baltimore Streetcar Museum, who also has the ONLY standard 46 foot Pullman air car in extistance in the world. When the T need brake shoes, BSM located the foundry that got the contract. They were so grateful for the business that they gave us the patterns.
We keep them available for the T. The royalty is extra shoes for us.
Red Line cars are 69'6" or 69'9" X 10' or 10'2", Orange Line cars are 65' X 9'3", and Blue line cars are 48' X 9'3". As for that monorail at Wellington, that's the (in)famous people-mover! I haven't actually seen it myself, but I've heard about it.
Let us know what you think of the Orange Line out at my end! (Forest Hills)
> (what is that odd monorail-like thing for? You can see it in Mark
> Feinman's Boston video...)
There are two peoplemovers that connect Wellington Station with a multi-level parking garage on the other side of Wellington Shops. You can get a good view of the yard and shops by taking a round trip on this peoplemover.
--Mark
Hi all, for my third and final installment of "T" talk....
Green line - rode to Lechmere first. Remnants of when the Park St. subway was used for El trains are visible at North Station (upper level)-- high level platforms on the south end of the northbound platform. Then rode the "D"-Riverside branch as far as Reservoir; walked over to the "C"-Cleveland Circle branch for the return trip. Found the Boeing LRV's holding down the "C" route, the other lines seemed to have all Type 7's. I was almost thinking the Boeings were all gone but then I realised all the sliding doors had been switched for folding ones. There's still a Boeing w/ sliding doors in the tunnel between Boylston and Park on a siding. North of Haymarket you can see the "original" Haymarket Station, and inbound from Lechmere you can see an unused loop and platform at Gov't. Center. The Park St. loop is also clearly visible on an Inbound car entering Park St.
Other comments - strange fare structure! The outbound Green line is free. I noticed that at some point, the inbound D-Riverside line starts to cost $1.00 (base fare $0.85). To take the D line from Reservoir to Park costs $1, but to take the C line from Cleveland Circle (up the street from Reservoir) costs $0.85! Also, at Quincy Adams and Braintree, it costs 2 tokens to board ($1.70) and one to exit, which I can understand, but, at Quincy Center it takes 2 to board but no additional token to exit. Weird.
Anyway, back to NY manana....
-Dave
The D line runs a mix of Kinkis and Boeings, actually.
And the D/Riverside line boasts the only regular three-car train of trolleys (Type-7s); there's one consist during morning rush hour.
The Boeing LRV parked in the tunnel with its original panel doors is #3417, a work car, painted white with pin-striping. It is the rerailer/emergency car, the T's first response to incidents on the Green Line. By the way, that location is where the old Tremont Street subway came back to the surface before the Boylston Street subway was extended.
The loop that Dave mentioned at Government Center is known as the "Brattle Loop," and was used way back when to turn north shore trolleys. It is still used occasionally for Lechmere-Government Center shuttle service when work or other operational conditions require.
In normal operations, E/Heath and D/Riverside cars proceed on track 4 northbound through Park Street to Government Center, Haymarket, North Station, Science Park, and Lechmere. B/Boston College and C/Cleveland Circle cars proceed on track 4 northbound through Park Street to Goverment Center, then loop around for their return trips outbound. Track 3, the inner track northbound at Park Street, is used to short-turn cars if there is congestion at Government Center or large gaps in service. Usually when that happens, it is the B or C lines that are short-turned; rarely D or E cars. By the way, the order for this to happen is given by illuminated "letter" signal departing Boylston Street: there is a vertically stacked signal displaying N/G/P. N was formerly used to mean terminate at North Station/Canal. G means divert/turn at Government Center loop. P means divert/turn at Park Street loop; this requires that operators change their AVI (automated vehcile identification) designation to cause the switch just north of Boylston to change from diverging (to track 4 at Park Street) to through (track 3 at Park Street).
And just like Dave, now I'm heading to NYC. NYC-based SubTalkers may tune in to WCBS Thurs-Sat to see if I can slip in some subway references to my weather reports!!
Hope you had a chance to hop an uptown A train at 59th. If not, I will be doing so next week when I'm in the city. Sorry we couldn't connect.
When I'm in NYC on a weekday (rare!) I ride the expresses I can't do on my normal weekend visits. This trip: <7>, , and <6>.
I'll be listening, Todd. (I always listen to CBS NewsRadio 88 in the
AM and on the way home for work). I remember one time I heard you
mention the "Slant R40s on the Q" -
that brought a smile to me face (we just LOVES the Slant R40s)
Wayne
Thanks, Wayne. Indeed I rode a classic slant-40 Friday during my midday break... and I'll make mention of it today on the radio. By the way, our traffic helicopter reporter, Tom Kaminski, is a subway fan too. When I flew in the 'chopper with him early this summer, we did a 'tour' of subway yards from 1000 feet up!
So Todd.. where are the photos from that trip huh? :-)
I have a great 8 x 10 of the Stillwell Yard taken from Chopper 88 hanging on my livingroom wall. If I can find the negative, I'll get you a copy!
My wife heard your transit and weather together this morning sometime between 8 and 9, I'd guess. I think you made mention of the Q train and something else about Stillwell Ave, or so she sez.
--Mark
Indeed. On Saturday morning I reported on my Friday midday ride on the Q over the Manhattan Bridge to Brighton Beach and back, telling listeners who might be tourists that it's a great and inexpensive way to see wonderful parts of our city! But I also warned not to look for a Q on weekends; only the D local. Someday, hopefully...
Todd we heard your report Saturday :-)
Hey we did the next best thing to-day: we took a ride on the D-Type
Triplex train, which approximated the Q by running the
Brighton Express all the way. What a grand old train! And it's in
great shape for its age (70 years). We did through express on
Broadway (to Canal) and on Fourth Avenue in Brooklyn too.
P.S. the Slant R40s were out in force on the N today - at least five trains running,
along with two stray R68A's. #4320 was sporting an Sixth Avenue
orange N sign in its front window.
The R train wasn't running at all.
Wayne
> P.S. the Slant R40s were out in force on the N today - at least five
> trains running, along with two stray R68A's. #4320 was sporting an
> Sixth Avenue orange N sign in its front window.
The N was also sporting some R-32s sprinkled in with the R-40 slants and R-68s. They were also running what would seem 5 minutes apart near Stillwell Ave. As soon s one N train would terminate, you'd see another beyond the Coney Island Creek Bridge waiting to enter the station.
--Mark
Yep you're right! 3352-3353, 3848-3849, 3700-01, 3638-3630 and
3846-3747...he was the one who tooted to us as we went back up
the N line...
It was good to see the Slant 40s out there. I got a fine head end
shot of #4193. The orange sign on #4320 was on the wrong side for
me to get a picture of it, plus it was in shadow. Maybe next time.
Wayne
I saw R-32s #3350 and 3351 heading an (gulp) E train last week. The very first numbers in the series (3348 doesn't count, as far as I'm concerned). I had hoped to catch a glimpse of R-32 #3352, but not knowing which line it was running on... Did they realize at the time that the R-32s would bear the same numbers as the Gibbs Hi-Vs? Here's something to think about: the Gibbs Hi-Vs and lower series of R-32s have/had the same numbers. The way the R-32s are going, they may be around even longer than the Gibbs cars.
BTW, I didn't see a single E train of R-46s, and I rode the 8th Ave. line quite a bit. There was an E train camped out on the southbound express track at 34th St., which made me do a double take. They were taking it out of service.
Most of the Redbirds I saw had very little corrosion while others were in advanced stages.
How fast did that Triplex train go? I'm getting jealous.
According to my 1997-1998 R32 Master Census List, #3352-3353 are members of the N group.
With a few exceptions, R32 tend to stay assigned to one line for periods of time. I have seen shifting between E and R, and there's the group that's on the S, which seem to have come from the N group. I do believe that the R46s have retreated from service on the E line.
The D-Type Triplex reached an estimated top speed of 45 MPH along
the Fourth Avenue express tracks, in the stretch between 36th Street and Pacific Street stations. It also did quite well on the Brighton Line, maybe about 40 or so, between Newkirk and Kings Highway. We then had to yield to a revenue D train around about Avenue "U", causing about a ten-minute delay, which nobody seemed to mind at all. It was a splendid trip on a grand old train, and I will gladly do it again. Maybe one of these times they will trot out some B-type BMT Standards...but is three cars enough?
There were about 400 people aboard the Triplex, so I was told.
Wayne
> We then had to yield to a revenue D train around about Avenue "U",
> causing about a ten-minute delay, which nobody seemed to mind at
> all.
Actually, we came onto a red signal just north of Kings Highway, and the train operator was having difficulty reaching Command Center at that point to clear the signal. (Radio problems or just a dead spot, I guess). In that time, a revenue D train passed us by.
> It was a splendid trip on a grand old train, and I will gladly do it
> again. Maybe one of these times they will trot out some B-type BMT
> Standards...but is three cars enough?
It'll have to do as that's all there is! But they're still a long way from operating condition, though.
> There were about 400 people aboard the Triplex, so I was told.
No way - couldn't have been. 57th/7th would have been much more crowded that it was when the train pulled in. The GO only asked for 2 of the 3 units, but we ended up with all three. I walked through 2 sections of units that were virtually empty. This trip was the least crowded I've seen in quite a long time. Hope it isn't the start of a trend.
--Mark
Todd, I too heard your report about the D vs. the Q
Mr t__:^)
The Blue line stop "aquarium" is reminiscent of the 168th street stop on the #1, 9 trains in manhattan. One tunnel, no center columns, and poorly lit.
Dave...your in the shoes that I was a month ago, getting used to the Boston Subways (I just started college in Brookline). I wish there were more cars on the green line. Taking them on the weekends (especially the D&B) and during rush hours is tough. Sometimes a car is so packed that you have to wait AWHILE for the next train! Also, after 9 pm on the weekdays, you have to get off at kenmore, and take shuttle busses to B, C, D, and E branches because they are repairing the tunnel from flooding damage last year. It's a pain!
But the nice thing about the green lne is that it looks so "historic" from the outside, whether you get a train that is 10-15 years old, or one of the newer models. To me, it looks like a cross between a train and a bus. Of course it's not like the PCC's, but its the next best thing.
One thing about the red line...notice how they run older models and new hi-tech trains (similar to the R110) on this line...you can certainly tell the difference! If you want, we could meet each other...drop me an e-mail and we'll do lunch. Looking foward to your next report and the pictures!-Nick
"The Blue line stop 'Aquarium' is reminiscent of the 168th street stop on the #1, 9 trains in Manhattan: one tunnel, no center columns, and poorly lit."
And by the length of the escalator/stairs from platform to surface, as deep as Hades!
Re previous post - I had stated that DC Metro cars don't have
anti-climbers - according to tech sheet they DO - but apparently
their presence was not enough to prevent telescoping due to speed
of estimated 26-29MPH at time of Jan 6 1996 accident.
Sorry for any misinformation.
Wayne
So on the subway cars, you have red lights on the outside and inside
indicating whether the doors are closed.
What are the single yellow lights on the outside of subway cars for?
Sometimes I see them blinking and am wondering what their significance
is. Are they malfunction indicators?
Rob
The yellow lights are 'multi-purpose'
Their original purpose is to mark a car with a possibly bad motor. Now, on IRT cars equipped with alarmed covers for the emergency brake, if it is blinking it indicates that one of the covers in that car has been moved or opened, or is just malfuntioning. A steady light is for the motor indication.
-Hank
Hank,
The yellow flashing light on A div (IRT) indicates that an emergency brake cord has been pulled. Please forgive me for correcting you, but I am sure you and others would like to know what causes that light to flash.
The end of the emergency brake cord is attached to a valve on the brake pipe. When the cord is pulled, it pulls a lever which opens the valve causing the air to "dump" from that car. The air pressure in that car drops and cause the elctro-magnetic valve in that cars brake pipe to make an electric connection, sending a message to the other cars in the train. That message is for all the other cars to dump their air. And when a train dumps its air, you will have an emergency brake application.
Now back to the yellow light. On the lever at the end of the cord is a switch. The switch looks like the kind you would see used in buglar alarm system. The one that is in two parts and used on windows and doors. The two parts must be next to each other in order to signal that the door or window is closed. When the lever is moved these two parts are moved away from each other casing a electric connection which causes the yellow light to flash. When you open the cover to the emergency brake cord all you get is an alarm.
Sounds like a proxy (proximity) switch to me!
I would assume then that this device malfuctions frequently, since I've seen moving train with flashing yellow lamps constantly. But why would you need an electrical signal to tell the other cars to dump the air? Isn't the air system trainline? I realize there is a compressor to each car, but all the cars brake together. And I can't think that the brake valves can work so fast in all the cars to keep the train from becoming a bucking bronco as the air goes out in each individual car seperately.
-Hank
The electric brake feature on all subway cars are trainlined to enable simultaneous application and release of the air brakes.
Thats the way the emergency brake system was explained to me. When ever I pulled the cord I was'nt paying much attention to wether the train became a bucking bronco or not. I was most likly trying to keep my butt cheeks together, if you know what I mean.
Maybe one of our experts here will read through these posts and fill in the blanks.
The SMEE brake system uses an emergency valve. When brake pipe
pressure is reduced beyond a certain point (90 psi? have to
look it up) and/or rapidly reduced, a piston moves and accomplishes
two tasks. One is to open a rather large port which vents the
brake pipe to atmosphere, compounding the rate at which the brake
pipe is exhausted and hastening the adjoining cars' going into
emergency. It is a pneumatic chain reaction. If not for this
"dump valve" feature, a pneumatic emergency application, such
as an opened trip cock, deadman or conductor's valve would be
attempting to discharge the entire volume of the trainline brake
pipe via whatever small orifice exists at the device initiating
the emergency app. It would take a few seconds for such an emergency
application to propagate through a ten car train, and that would
indeed produce the "bronco" effect that Hank alluded to.
The dump valve makes the application run through much more quickly,
as each car is only exhausting that portion of the brake pipe between
it and the next car. In addition, an electric emergency feature
exists. When the emergency valve enters the emergency state, it
closes a contact that energizes a trainline "EMV" wire. On each car
is an Emergency Magnet Valve which is energized by this wire and
which vents the brake pipe. This combination of pneumatic and
electric acceleration of the emergency application ensures nearly
simultaneous action via the electric, or at worst case (e.g. an
open EMV train line) reasonably quick action.
The emergency valve also effects a "dump penalty" in that it will
not reseat until the brake pipe pressure has reached zero and remained
at zero for some period of time (17 seconds?) that more or less
guarantees that the train has lurched to a stop before it is possible
to recharge and release the brakes.
All of this is in addition to the electric brake, which deals with
service braking only.
As for whether the flashing yellow light is tied to opening of the
passenger cord cover or to the conductor's valve, I dunno. Steve?
Thank you very much Jeff. I have heard mention of dump penalty, and now I know what it is.
A few weeks ago, only one track was in operation across the Willy B. Therefore a train would have to wait at either Essex St. in Mnhtn and/or Hewes St. in Bklyn to let the train cross the bridge and return to it's normal track. As part of the Williamsburg bridge rehab project, does anyone know of any plans of stopping train service across the bridge span in order to complete this job. I first heard of this during the late summer but have not heard of anything since.
-GarfieldA
I understand the bridge will be closed to train traffic for five weekends. Work will begin in early November. This will be preliminary work; in advance of a five to seven month closure that will commence in the Spring of 1999.
Are there any plans with the rebuilding to add a switch west of Marcy Ave to access the express track from the bridge, to avoid passing through the station? What about restoration of express service on the J from Eastern Pkwy to Myrtle, and maybe a K express out of Canarsie? Finally what about the completion of the third track to 121 street? That would make the J a fast viable alternative to the E.
The skip stop j/z was implemented to offer quasi express service. The expense to add a third track over the island platforms from Crescent St to Alabama ave and remove what ever sits in between the two tracks from Cypress Hills to 121 st wouldn't justify the costs. I suppose the completion of the 63rd st connector to the e/f/g/r at 36th st by adding additional trains per hour SHOULD increase service. Although it looks as if at one time an elevated structure for a third track was in place between Alabama ave and Bway junction.
Who remembers incandescent lighting on underground station platforms, and when was it replaced? I'm talking about platforms, not mezzanines, and underground not el stations. I can remember incandescent lights on various parts of the IND -- Roosevelt Ave (at least as late as 1973), Union Turnpike, Sutphin Blvd, Van Wyck Blvd, Parsons Blvd and 169th St (at least as late as 1977), all of the GG Crosstown (Court Sq, Van Alst at least as late as 1981), parts of the A on Fulton St Bklyn (Lafayette Ave at least as late as 1975), Seventh Avenue Brooklyn (F) (possibly as late as 1985??), various stations on the Concourse (155, 167, 170, 174-75, Tremont, 182-83 at least as late as 1978 and possibly 1981).
What I am too young to remember is such lighting in any station in Manhattan (photos on this site show it in the 1960's on Sixth Avenue and Washington Heights). Also, when was fluorescent lighting installed on the IRT and BMT subway stations? They've always been fluorescent in my recollections. I've never seen photos showing anything else.
Is it possible that I remember incandescent lighting on the platform of 155th St./8th Avenue on the D and CC in the 1970's? Other than that, I can only remember them in the outer boroughs. When I was in High School, probably in 1986, I remember when they changed over Fulton St. (GG) and Lafayette Ave. (A,CC) to fluorescent lights. I know they're brighter, safer, and more efficient, but I still loathe them!
Most of the IRT and BMT underground stations were converted to fluorescent platform lighting in the late '50s. I believe that the 14th St. line (now the 'L' line) was the last, in 1960 or so. The IND underground stations came later, probably because they were much brighter with the incandescent lighting that the BMT or IRT stations were.
Some of the IND stations (those opened after about 1950) had fluorescent lighting as original equipment. These included the stations from Liberty Ave. to Grant Ave. on the Fulton St. line in Brooklyn, and the 179th/Hillside terminal in Queens.
The open-cut stations along the Brighton line were, I believe, the first outdoor stations to receive fluorescent lighting, in the early 1960s.
> The open-cut stations along the Brighton line were, I believe, the > first outdoor stations to receive fluorescent lighting, in the early > 1960s.
Under the canopies, this was true. Newkirk Ave had it under the overpasses on the Coney-Island bound platform, but where there was no canopy, there was standard incandescent lighting until the mid-80s, when all the Brighton Line stations south of Newkirk Ave received fluorescents.
--Mark
Look up at the ceilings of a platform along 6th Avenue, for example, and you will still see a number of the original fixtures, with bulbas still in them...
even today, many IND station still have old lights- some still working to supplement the fluorescent lighting.For example- Penn station IND
East Broadway station's Madison Street stairwell is lit with ghostly
incandescent lights, still on their original stems.
Outdoor stops:
Atlantic Avenue on the "L", with its Dual-Contract period iron lampshades is nothing short of lovely. No flourescents under the eaves there, either - just big old 100-watt bulbs in their inverted metal bowl shades. They don't make em like that any more!
Look at Bowery BMT station's mezzanine - that's another classic
example of 'ambient lighting' and Greek Revival tile.
Wayne
Even today, 10/1998 many IND stations, especially Queens Boluveard Local station still have completely incandescent lighting in the mezzanines. As of today 10/1998 168th is being relit as are many sea beach stations. there are plans to do 30more stations. See the official MTA site and click capital programs item.
The outer Queens line beyond Continental Ave. still had incandescent lighting as late as 1978, and even possibly into the early 80s. Ditto for 155th-8th Ave. on the Concourse line, as well as the other local stops other than 161st.
Most of the IND in Manhattan still had incandescent lighting in the late 60s. The IRT and BMT received fluorescent lighting first, since those two divisions are older.
The outer portion of the Fulton St. line, from Broadway-East New York to Euclid Ave., had fluorescent lighting when it opened, as did Grant Ave. when the line was tied into the Fulton St. el in 1956.
The New York City Subway system was the best system when they had over 30 lines. Why don't they have an old lines day? Even though some lines may not be able to return. Most of the the lines will and it will be great and it might just show how many of these lines need to be put back in their orignal postions. They can also make some lines seasonal only like the NX line. They an make it Summer only to Coney Island. The M train going back to Coney Island. If they did that the MTA will see that they should not have taken some of these lines away!
Recently, while waiting at 59th and Columbes Circle station, I glanced up and studied the route selector box above the platform. Something just crossed my mind -- aren't those boxes vulnerable to some kinds of nuts on the platform who might "select" the wrong route or just press buttons for kicks?
Aside: Are there any pictures of a route selector box on this site?
Each tower has a model board showing the location of every train in that sector. The tower operators would be able to tell right away if some joker were pushing buttons.
The route selectors are not directly monitored, or overridable, to my knowledge. The only way they work is if there is a train present in the preceding block to the interlocking.
-Hank
As Hank said, I thought a train has to be in the block or the block preceeding it for the selctor to work. As soon as the last car clears the signal at the selector the light on the selector goes out so I think that kinda proves it?
The Route Request box is just that. The train operator requests a route by pressing and holding the appropriate button. If a vandal were to press the 'wrong' button, the operator would know immediately since the leaving home signal would display an incorrect aspect. The train operator would then press the Cancel button and then request the proper one. If the T/O does not check and takes a wrong line up, shame on him (or her).
That happened a lot when the Chrystie St. connection opened. Nobody knew for sure where any train would wind up. I wish I had the article I saw which wrote about a motorman who pushed an incorrect button and wound up on the Manhattan Bridge instead of the Montague St. tunnel. It didn't say which set of tracks - north or south side - the train ended up on.
Unfortunately, wrong routes occur too often. Conventional wisdom is that "A wrong lineup can never be given, it can only be taken." Meaning that if a tower operator displays a wrong route, it is the the burden of the operator to recognize and challange it. In some areas, signs are posted, showing graphics of the proper signal aspects. Obviously, the transit purist find this wrong.
And there are still times even when the button is pushed nothing happens. Toot on the horn so the tower will line it up.
Happens enough to notice at 47th-50 Rock, a lot more when they send a Q down the local tracks from West 4th...
According to my diagrams of the NX/UR interlocking plants used
by transit (the push-button ones, not the old lever machines)
the motorman's (hey, that's what it says in the drawings, not
train operator) route request panel is only active when the track
circuit covering that section of track is down. In other words,
unless there is a train within a few hundred feet of the punch
box, it won't do ANYTHING when one pushes it.
If one of these plants is set to automatic mode, where there is
no human towerman, then the punch boxes act as if the towerman
pressed the corresponding entrance/exit buttons on the tower panel.
So, what if: What if after the motorperson selects the proper route,
gets the correct lineup, and starts to pull out, a malicious
thrill-seeker hits the CANCEL button? Well, a little thing called
approach time locking prevents the machine from dropping the ball
on the train. It is all very well thought-out and fascinating to
study what is, in effect, a computer program written in terms of
electromechanical devices. I recommend Bernie Greenberg's NXSYS
simulator (even though it only runs on WinBloze). The URL for
it should be somewhere on nycsubway.org
For those of you who wish to take a "simulated" head-end R-21 ride on the Lexington Avenue Express, redbird 7773, the one with the R-21 storm door and working sildable window, was heading a #5 train yesterday (Sunday 10/11). I happened to catch it twice on my own Bronx Els tour yesterday - once at the rear and once at the front, heading southbound (gives you an idea of how long I was on the system yesterday :) Boy did that bring back memories.
Also, unless my eyes were deceiving me, at 149th St/Grand Concourse (2/5), heading southbound (to Manhattan), at the front of the platform between the staircases, the newer helvetica-font "149th St" sign wasn't there; it revealed a "Mott Avenue" sign, in the tile. I caught it in passing and didn't get a picture of it. Was that station at one time called Mott Avenue? (I'm aware of Mott Haven (138th) station being renamed ....)
--Mark
The Grand Concourse, south of 161st St., was originally called Mott Avenue, as in Mott Haven. The name derives from an early Bronx industrial pioneer named Jordon L. Mott, inventor of coal stove. I don't believe the name was changed until the 1930's, long after the IRT subways were built there. So the sign was probably telling passengers that that particular stair led to "Mott Avenue."
BTW, the Mott Avenue in Far Rockaway is a different person (Valentine Mott), prominent in Long Island history.
All those sheet-metal tablet signs that say "149th St-Grand Concourse"
have something hidden beneath them: the original 1905 cut-marble
tablet that bears the station's original name: MOTT AVENUE.
Wayne (Mott's the word!)
I wa on a Redbird Sunday Night, a Mnahattan bound 2 train, with a GRAY 5 and narrow block letters that said 'SPECIAL' It has some very odd metal straps, a single arm with a metal loop, as opposed to the large loop that is the standard....neglected to get a car number....
-HAnk
Like the R22's perhaps? They had a straight arm with a triangular
handhold at the end of the arm. It couldn't have been one of those
that were shaped like the number "6" or one of those little square
ones, the kind you can just about fit your fist into?
I take it that this was an R26 or an R28 - did you notice if it had
a little square window up front?
Anyone out there have any more info on this oddball just give
us a holler.
Wayne
Many times when I was riding the 2,4 and 5 lines I've overheard the motorman and other TA personnel (Via the motormans' radio)refer to 149th St/Grand Concourse as "Mott" or 149th and Mott.
Mott Avenue tower is located at 149th st Grand Concourse
In the late 1960's or very early 1970's, I saw the remains of a collision of two trains at the IND station at Yankee Stadium. I recall that the trains were on the southbound track. One may have been a D train & the other a "CC", if there was such a designator.
Can anyone direct me to an information source where I can find out what happened. (It wasn't during baseball season).
Thanks, Chris
You may have seen the aftermath of a collision between a
D train and an AA train near 59th Street, with the damaged cars being moved to their respective yards afterwards. This happened in early
1971 and involved units #3629 (the D)
and #4612 (the AA). #3629 had her
entire clock cleaned, with 6 feet of interior penetration and massive
roof/bulkhead damage; she was lost. Her funeral photo is out in the
Subway Car photo archives here on the site (under R32-she is listed
erroneously as #3628).
#4612 had his bonnet ruined and his cab, sign, door and sill all smashed up; the guys at 207th Street put him back together again (he was only two years old) and he lives out on the J line now.
My records show this as the only collision on the IND in that general
area (there were others in Brooklyn and Queens in 1970) during that
period of time (1968-1972). If anyone knows of any others, please
let us know.
Thanks
Wayne
I heard this news today on the NBC Chicago station and couldn't have had a better surprise on my Columbus Day! Here is what they summerized the report to on the internet:
CTA: FARE CUTS, IMPROVEMENTS AHEAD by Thom Johnson Chicago,
October 12- While the city rolld out today's Columbus Day Parade, the CTA was floating its annual budget by the reviewing stand. CTA President Frank Kruesi said, the agency's new budget cuts $2 million in expenses from last year, and calls for service improvements partially funded by more riders. Kruesi said for the first time in 15 years, ridership is up, with 1.3 million more riders ridders logged on so far this year on the system's trains and busses. Five million more CTA riders are projected in the next year.
In addition, CTA officials promised service improvements, including a renovation of the crumbling Blue line and bigger platforms and longer trains on the Brown Line, which has seen a 25% increase in ridership in the last two years.
"We are leaving people on the platform. This would proabaly be the single best investment there is" Kruesi said.
For bus riders, additional busses, and a promise of better spacing on routes are top concerns. "Three or four busses will be right behind one another, and you'll have to wait an hour or a half," said one CTA bus rider. "That's bad in the winter because you can freeze your tootie off."
The CTA says it will try to avoid bus bunching with satellite technology used by shipping compaines. "If Federal Express can keep track of a package, it shouldn't be that difficult to keep track of a bus," Kruesi said.
WHAT DO YA THINK?
BJ
Good to see ridership rising somewhere other than NYC.
I say, ALL THE MORE REASON TO PUT FULL TIME CONDUCTORS BACK ON THE RED AND BLUE LINES!
Maybe it's reverse psychology; you'd expect ridership to be down in light of all the service cutbacks in the Windy City.
Encouraging -- but where did the headline writer for WMAQ's website get the impression that fare cuts were on the agenda? There's nothing in the body of the story as quoted to suggest this most improbable development.
Longer trains on the Brown Line (Ravenswood) must imply a plan to extend platform lengths; at present, I believe, all or most of the Brown Line stations not shared with other lines can accommodate only six cars.
And, if CTA is prepared to spend a gazillion dollars on renovation of the Blue Line (meaning, I assume, a Green Line-style rebuilding of the Douglas Park Branch elevated segment), dare we hope that they'll try to get amortize their investment over the greatest possible number of riders by restoring weekend Douglas service?
"And, if CTA is prepared to spend a gazillion dollars on renovation of the Blue Line (meaning, I assume, a Green Line-style rebuilding of the Douglas Park Branch elevated segment), dare we hope that they'll try to get amortize their investment over the greatest possible number of riders by restoring weekend Douglas service?"
I had the same thought when I read the news. Actually, what occurred to me was that, if Douglas (54th/Cermak) Branch ridership on the weekend really is low, CTA should do exactly what they do now with the Brown Line on Sundays: run shuttle trains that make all stops but turn around when they meet the main line, where passengers traveling on to downtown and beyond can change trains. On the Brown, this is at Belmont, where you change to Red trains. For my idea, 54th/Cermak weekend shuttles would turn around at Racine, where passengers can change for O'Hare/Forest Park trains if need be.
So, what do you think?
A Douglas Park Shuttle to Racine, passengers transferring to Forest Park Trains? Not having to deal with the bus?
Makes too much sense. CTA will never do it!
In responce to your questions: ( Sorry I haven't been able to access Subtalk for a while)
Yes, the brown line platforms are only big enough for 6 cars trains and that is why the CTA has to wait to implement the new 8 car service. This is a great quincedence, because the CTA was already going to extend the with of the Brown line platforms and do a "renovation" on the line anyway when they realized ridershiop was up.
As far as the blue line goes, I could be wrong, but I think some of the cars from the 54th/Cermak branch are used on the Forest Park-Ohare main-line on week-ends. I think this because service on the Forest Park branch is so in-frequent on week-days and so frequent on weekends. Less then every ten minutes on Saturday and every 10 on sunday. On week-days service is from every 10 minutes to 3 trains an hour. Also when the week-end Douglas service was going to be cut, new schedules were published for the Forest Park Stations.
As far as a shuttle running, it would be possible, but the line is so "crappy" that I personally think that the CTA cut week-end service when they realized ridership was down AND the Line was falling apart. I personally think week-end service will be restored when the line is restored and when people will ride at times besides rush hours. I think the only people who will ride is during rush hours because of the slow zones. When there is no traffic, take the Forest Park line and a bus, only $.30 cents more for a transfer and a quicker trip!
BJ
Even if it makes sense it sounds like a great idea. People do not like to transfer to a bus. Some of the double ended 5-50 series cars that are now for sale would be perfect equipment.
On weekends I drive to Howard rather than ride the Swift replacement bus.
First of all sorry it took so long for this responce, but I've been having troubles accessing the board from the main page (www.nycsuway.org), sometime it would "Time out" or take up to 5 minutes.
Here's what I think about the Douglas line shuttle. The line is so old and falling apart that the CTA figueres if the ridership isn't at a high level on week-ends cut it and the line will be able to operate until the renovation comes about or is possibly completed if the line operates thorough it. I don't think there a chance in hell the line could operate through the renovation but the CTA might.
I agree with the week-end shuttle idea and here's what I would do. I would have the Racine Station have another track added on to the south side and another platform put between it and the inbound exsisting track. Then the Forest Park trains could open the doors on both sides of the train if possible to let people transfer from the douglas train and get off for Racine Street. I think another platform & track would be needed to not make the concern of delaying inbound Forest Park trains. And have it scheduled so about 30 seconds to minute after the shuttle arrived the Forest Park train to downtown and Ohare would pick up the people from the shuttle.
I realize this is in the middle of the Eisenhower Expressway but if I'm not mistaken there once was three tracks in this area and there is more then enough room for another track between the exsisting one and the concrete wall/expressway.
I also think that on the Forest Park route there should be more then three trains an hour on week-day off-peak hours since there is service every ten minutes or better all week-end long ( Except Late night/early morning) on the line. Even during the weekday 7 o'clock hour there are only 4 or 5 inbound trains, what a weird schedule!
As far as the brown line, you are correct, there is only enough room for 6 six car trains at most of the station outside of the loop besides Belmont & Fullerton ( Red Line Stations).
That was allot to type! What do ya Think?
BJ
Cars 5 - 50 are off the property effective August, 1998.
Jim; what do you mean by:
Cars 5-50 are off the property effective August, 1998.?
And Yesterday the latest of CTA Fare Improvals for Customers went into effect. You can purchase a transit card for a minimum of $1.50 and get $11.00 worth of fares for every $10.00 inserted in the transit card machines. ( No more $15.00 for every $13.50 & $3.00 minimum purchase on a card)
Go to their Web site and read the news section to see the other improvments that are to come in the months ahead and January "99.
BJ
Jim; what do you mean by:
Cars 5-50 are off the property effective August, 1998.?
Yesterday the latest of CTA Fare Improvals for Customers went into effect. You can purchase a transit card for a minimum of $1.50 and get $11.00 worth of fares for every $10.00 inserted in the transit card machines. ( No more $15.00 for every $13.50 & $3.00 minimum purchase on a card)
Go to their Web site and read the news section to see the other improvments that are to come in the months ahead and January "99.
BJ
Jim; what do you mean by:
Cars 5-50 are off the property effective August, 1998.
I was told by a CTA employee that all the PCC cars were shipped off the property by Labor Day. Is this not correct?
THE PCC Cars were the trolley cars, right?
Who did you get this information from? The CTA Takes such a long time to respond to letters and stuff like that, I sent one over 6 months ago and have gotten no responce! Do you have someone you could give it to that would acually repond.
I thought that the PCC Cars were gone a long time ago to the Illinois Railway museum, guess I way wrong!
Also if you know:
I saw some old cars with Howard/Jackson Park A or B ( I'm not sure of which) on them a few months ago when I was passing over the Howard Street yard in a Evanston-Wilmette bound train. What about the old cars like these that aren't in use anymore, what can the CTA do with them?
THE PCC Cars were the trolley cars, right?
Who did you get this information from? The CTA Takes such a long time to respond to letters and stuff like that, I sent one over 6 months ago and have gotten no responce! Do you have someone you could give it to that would acually repond.
I thought that the PCC Cars were gone a long time ago to the Illinois Railway museum, guess I way wrong!
Also if you know:
I saw some old cars with Howard/Jackson Park A or B ( I'm not sure of which) on them a few months ago when I was passing over the Howard Street yard in a Evanston-Wilmette bound train. What about the old cars like these that aren't in use anymore, what can the CTA do with them?
BJ
"The PCC Cars were the trolley cars, right?"
Perhaps the better term would be "former PCC cars". When the CTA was phasing out streetcar service, they had a bunch of PCC streetcars still in decent shape on their hands. Rather than scrap them, the CTA converted these cars to L cars. Actually, they took them apart, kept pieces both large (chassis) and small (windows) for "new" L cars, and scrapped the rest.
These L cars have been out of passenger service for a while now (and I believe some are at the Illinois Railway Museum), but some were used as work cars. It is these former-PCC work cars which have just been disposed of.
The Branford Trolley Museum (NH, CT) has two SEPTA PCCs: #18 & #21 both mfg in 1949 by St Louis Car Co, they have a cab on both ends. They also have the FIRST PCC, which was delivered to NYC, #1001.
#1001 was brought out for "NY Days", we even got to ride it backwards (no place to turn it around at EOT).
Mr t__:^)
Sorry John & CTA friends ... still finishing my first cup of coffee, thought this was a Philly question vs. ORD (Chicago).
I have three questions.
A-How do SIRT cars get to Coney Island?
B-Why is there no yard for SIRT cars on Staten Island?
C-Am I the only person who thinks having SEPTA maps at Penn Station and MTA maps at 30th Street is a good idea(for commuters-have you seen crunch time at the LIRR/subway level?)
Thanks for your ears.
Now I gotta get used to this new computer. Damn Dells with thier fancy-schmancy Pentium processors:).
More than likely, SIRT cars are barged over to Coney Island. That's how the surplus 1920s vintage cars got to Coney Island when the TA acquired them secondhand in 1954.
SIRT's repair yard is in Clifton. It wouldn't surpise me if SIRT cars never went to Coney Island, and were just worked on at Clifton.
I don't know that you should post a bunch of SEPTA maps all over Penn Station. And if you have just one, I'm not sure the few people who need it could find it.
Perhaps there should be information kiosks at all AMTRAK stations with maps for connecting transit systems up and down the line -- Washington, Baltimore, Philly, NY, NJ, Boston. While the MTA's maps are free, the kiosks could sell out of town maps for a nominal fee (ie. a dime) to make sure people don't take them just to take them and waste them.
The difference between your Dell and my three year old Dell is yours is probably a lot faster, and was probably a lot cheaper.
You have to remember the whole problem with the SIRT rebuilds of their R44's. They were supposed to go out to a firm (I forget the name) and they kept failing testing. One I remember the article in the Staten Island Advance was a load test. The cars were rebuilt and they placed a passanger load of 150% of max weight of the passangers on the car and it failed. That's when Coney Island ended up rebuilding the rest of the fleet.
I seem to remember cars being loaded on flatcars at the MOW yard just before Tompkinsville. I don't know where the cars went from there.
Yes fleet maintence is done at the yard at Clifton, there is a MOW yard near Bay Street but on the other side of the Right of Way is a carbarn where they perform maintenance on the cars. SIRT Diesel fleet (one or two engines) is kept here with their two cabooses as well. They also have some ballast cars and flatcars. The main MOW is between Tomkinsville and Stapleton and the SIRT Police HQ is there as well.
OK, If and when SIRT cars have to leave, they go by TRUCK. That's happend a few times so far, most recently when 435 caught fire. The only thing Clifton can't do that CI can do is a heavy overhaul. There is a spur for loading the cars onto trucks at Clifton Shop. On the north side of the tracks at Clifton is the car shop. The diesel fleet (NYCT GE 059, and Alcos 821 (ex-USA) and 407 (ex-LIRR)) is kept there, with the Alcos in the bay closest to the platform.
On the south side (Bay St. side), is the MOW storage facility, with parts of switches, railings, bumpers, etc.. It is also the location where rail is scrapped.
Tompkinsville is the MOW base. a Burro rail-mounted crane, 2 other high-rail cranes, ballast tamper, and a track alignment machine are kept there. Panel Track and switches are also assembled there, and it is the usual storage location for the flat cars, 501-507?. The Ballast hoppers 601-609? are usually kept at the ballast loading spur at Huguenot.
There are two cabese (620 and ?) that are used for MOW crew also kept at Clifton.
As for the original rebuilds, I also can't recall the name of the firm, but I do remember that after loading the truck at Clifton on the south side, the truck could not clear the Clifton overpass, and it took part of a day to figure out how to route the truck afterwards. It was this first car that failed the crush load test, and was brought to CI, where it was rebuilt again by the TA.
SIR R-44 rebuilds were torn down at 207st, and towed to CI with plywood over the doors and windows (caught it at 36st one day in 1990) where they were rebuilt.
Overall, the rebuild is poor. There are cracks in the walls by the door motors, the floor heaters had to be completely replaced after a faulty on caused a fire in car 435, and some exterior welds cracked where the FRA-mandated grab irons were removed. A few differences between the SIRT R44 rebuilds and the regular ones is the retention of the divider windows (which have since been vandalized and removed from all cars) removal of side destination signs, and the blue stripe was removed, rather than painted over. Also, the interior wall between the cab and the passenger section retained the odd split, and couplers are used on all cars, instead of drawbars as on the TA fleet. During the rebuild process, we had 2 sets of R46, which wore different signs every day, just to keep us amused.
-Hank
I don't mean post them on walls. Have them availible for a small fee( a dime is good) so that commuters or people from either end of the NE Corridor heading for the other(particularly those headed for NYC) for a day would have a transit map and not have to feel the squeeze at the station. The little information desk by that huge screen in Penn Station can sometimes have a line going all the way back to the trains(there was once a line going past the Houlihan's restaurant believe it or not!)
I thought i'ld find other messages about the GREAT day had by all at Branford Trolley Museum this past Sat & Sun, well let me be the 1st.
It was a beautiful Fall day just north of New Haven. I met several TA motormen there but no regular SubTalkers, except Jeff H. who works there. I rode all NINE NYC trains/trolleys in Jeff's post of 9/29, plus boarded #220, which was outside the barn, AND got my ticket punched 9 times, by 8 different Conductors. Other than 220 the others in Jeff's post were either not open to the public or otherwise difficult to board, but I saw them because I walked all over the place this time. Even got permission to walk thru the shop.
So, what did I ride ?
Trollys: #316; #4573 (in Summer mode); #629; and #1001, the 1st PCC (backwards & forwards)
Subways: #1227 =BU; #3662=Hi-V; #5466=Lo-V; #1689=R-9; #6688=R-17
Most memorable MOVE of the day came near the end when the Dispatcher said "we'll be ready to go to Short Beach when "they" get done playing with their trains". Here's what was required:
R-17 moved up the track & switched to Barn #2 track; R-9 & Lo-V seperated; Lo-V switched; BU & R-9 moved up the track; Hi-V switched to a different track; BU & R-9 moved up to clear the switch then moved back to the doors of Barn #1 (so Hi-V & Lo-V would clear); Hi-V & LoV coupled; Hi-V/Lo-V moved to platform for boarding. The funniest part of this was watching one of the engineers walking in front of the Hi-V/Lo-V holding the Trolley Pole while the train followed him (I know who, but won't tell). These guys were having entirelly too much fun !!!!
Some of the trains in fair shape & some were crowded, it felt almost like rush hour, but this writter didn't mind. If you missed the event, well there's always next year.
Mr t__:^)
Well as a subtalker who was there and had a blast Sunday, R17 with a trolley pole???!!!
Loved it and BREA as a whole. Best part of my whole weekend in CT with my 5yr old Nephew and I got a great pix of him with his hand on the R17's controller (bit of a reach for his 48 inches).
The PCC ride backwards was great. A lot of intresting cars and such and I make sure I rode all the subway cars or lets just say the High Level cars.
On one of the R17 runs passengers asked to be let off and the end of the line...opps no highlevel platform there.
Was very impressed with the whole BREA operation.
Well, I'm glad to see you were having a good time. NY Days was good, but not every piece of NY equipment was out. Only one BU was out even though there were others. I was hoping to see Car G before it came down to the Transit Museum. Unfortunately, it was left in the barn pending shipment down to the Transit Museum in November. I came on Saturday and assisted a Transit Museum staff member during the day with his group of people who visited Branford. I was impressed with their operations. The people at Branford coordinated their moves of equipment quickly. My only gripe was that the Hi-V wasn't in better shape. She ran well, but is in need of a great cosmetic makeover. Nevertheless, it was an enjoyable experience. I'm a member of Branford now, and I've been thinking about helping Jeff H. and those good people over there. Hey, I could be an operator. Who says you have to work for Transit to enjoy your hobby?
-Constantine
P.S. I've been sending pictures to David Pirmann on trains and a new section on buses. I'll probably send NY Days photos over to him.
<< I'm a member of Branford now, and I've been thinking about helping Jeff H. and those good people over there. Hey, I could be an operator. Who says you have to work for Transit to enjoy your hobby>>
That is the same reason I joined Seashore three years ago. I have operated just about everything that can move there. You don't have to work for the NYCTA, or MBTA etc. to enjoy it!! I'd encourage anyone who has ever wanted to operate to do the same(at either museum).
Well, I'm glad to see you were having a good time. NY Days was good, but not every piece of NY equipment was out. Only one BU was out even though there were others. I was hoping to see Car G before it came down to the Transit Museum. Unfortunately, it was left in the barn pending shipment down to the Transit Museum in November. I came on Saturday and assisted a Transit Museum staff member during the day with his group of people who visited Branford. I was impressed with their operations. The people at Branford coordinated their moves of equipment quickly. My only gripe was that the Hi-V wasn't in better shape. She ran well, but is in need of a great cosmetic makeover. Nevertheless, it was an enjoyable experience. I'm a member of Branford now, and I've been thinking about helping Jeff H. and those good people over there. Hey, I could be an operator. Who says you have to work for Transit to enjoy your hobby?
-Constantine
P.S. I've been sending pictures to David Pirmann on trains and a new section on buses. I'll probably send NY Days photos over to him.
<< I'm a member of Branford now, and I've been thinking about helping Jeff H. and those good people over there. Hey, I could be an operator. Who says you have to work for Transit to enjoy your hobby>>
That is the same reason I joined Seashore three years ago. I have operated just about everything that can move there. You don't have to work for the NYCTA, or MBTA etc. to enjoy it!! I'd encourage anyone who has ever wanted to operate to do the same(at either museum).
Did they open and close the doors on 1689 and 6688? Did they go easy with 6688, or did they peg it up to multiple and have it take off down the straightaway? I hear it still has a lot of get-up-and-go.
I guarantee that if I had remained back east, I would have been at Shoreline regularly. Put me on a subway car or train, and I'm a kid again.
BTW, I presume that 5466 and 3662 were coupled mechanically, but not electrically, since Hi-Vs and Lo-Vs are not compatible.
My ride on the 6688 was just like a subway ride (with the exception of reseating the pole on the wire after going through a swtich): doors closed, someone hit the buzzer two times and off we went.
Sounds from the squeals on the rails just like the subway, slamming the brakes on hard, letting up, and slamming them on agian.
All this from a non TA person operator too.
Great ride and I'm glad that 50yrs down the road the R17 will still be there.
That's a comforting thought. Maybe they'll paint it in its original maroon shade the next time it needs a paint job. Not that it looks bad in its Redbird red scheme.
Did they go easy on 6688's throttle, or did it take off like a bullet? I also understand its brakes are still sensitive.
>>Did they go easy on 6688's throttle, or did it take off like a bullet?<<
On the straight away just after the line goes single track we moved but then there is a portion where the have to power off right before a curve and then it was slower until we crossed two small bridges. Opened up a little from that point until the end of the line and the brakes grabbed hard. Nothing like the LoV trip or any Trolley ride that day!!
The R-9 #1689 & R-17 #6688 platformed at the station & the doors opened, they have one on a side track vs. a step stool for the Trollys. They didn't realy push them, i.e. it was a nice smooth ride down the line & back. The BU #1227, Hi-V #3662, & Lo-V #5466 also platformed, hay it wouldn't have been a REAL subway ride if we didn't board at door level !
The Lo-V/Hi-V hook-up I think WAS electrical. I believe we ran on the Hi-V out and the Lo-V on the way back (they were pumping air between the cars too). The Hi-V wouldn't take more then a few notches on the throttle. After a few cut-outs Jeff just let it cruise along at what she would take. Comming back we did a little better. I had my fingers crossed when they had a little trouble getting the R-9 & Lo-V uncoupled just before our Lo-V/Hi-V ride.
P.S. Lou from Brooklyn ... did I talk to you Sunday ? I hope you not the guy I interupted while he was talking to Jeff, if so sorry about that.
Mr t__:^)
>>did I talk to you Sunday ? I hope you not the guy I interupted while he was talking to Jeff, if so sorry about that. <<
I wouldn't remember if you did. Was there a 5yr old blond kid with a 6'8" tall great looking guy on the head end nose on the glass?? Then yup that was me.
Steve (B.):
Doors were operable on all the subway cars.
Both HiV-LoV and HiV-R9 trains were air and iron. We run with
trainline brakes but the trailing car does not have a pole up
and runs as a trailer. The LoV and R9 could theoretically M-U
in terms of trainline wires, but they do not have compatible
electrical connectors (R-9 has an electric portion slide, the Lo-V
has plug couplers) Thinking about a hi-voltage jumper cable
so the trail car can have auxilliaries (compressor, lights, fans)
Does anone know when/if they are having the open house this year??Any information will be appreciated.
Sorry :-( No open house this year due to the Grand Central Rededication.
source: MEtro Noprth Home page
Doesn't the 2nd Avenue tunnel connect down to 89th Street? I've seen
a ventilation shaft where MTA personnel have come and gone. The shaft is in front of a deli on the northeast corner of 89th and 2nd. Also, 2nd Avenue has a convenient way of caving in somewhere in the high 80's. Doesn't the tunnel exist here as well?
Are there any future plans for further contruction/completion of the tunnel?
The existing sections of the Second Avenue subway are:
Second Avenue from E. 99th to E. 106th Streets
Second Avenue from E. 110th to E. 120th Streets
Under the Manhattan Bridge
David
[The existing sections of the Second Avenue subway are:
Second Avenue from E. 99th to E. 106th Streets
Second Avenue from E. 110th to E. 120th Streets
Under the Manhattan Bridge]
There originally was a fourth section, from 2nd to 9th Streets in the East Village. It was later filled in, though I don't know why.
i heard it was caveing in so thats why they filled it in.
Yes -- I remember the construction VERY WELL! Navigating 2nd Avenue was NOT easy then. I remember my dad telling me how nice it would be to have a subway line just a block away. I may someday move back to the very apartment in which I grew up, but I'll bet it never gets built! Where was the closest stop to E. 6th Street planned, anyway?
The 2nd Av. station on the (F) has a space above the platform which appears to have been intended to be another set of platforms and trackways. These were presumably intended to be used for a 2nd Av. line at the time the IND Second System was drawn up (1930's). Presumably anything already existing such as this would be used as a Houston St. station.
Bob Sklar
And the next stop north would have been at 14th Street--presumably incorporating a transfer to the Third Avenue station of the L; so it wouldn't've been as convenient as Timothy's father hoped. (Stations were planned to be up to a mile apart on 2nd Avenue, because the two-track line would have no express service; see the various plans elsewhere on this site.)
It would be nice to be able to get into the subway at 14th and 2nd, though, and especially at 14th and A; and according to the TA's neighborhood maps, the Third Ave L platforms extend almost the length of the block to 2nd, and the First Ave platforms nearly reach A. Any chance of new entrances when those stations are rehabbed, maybe with the new Metrocard iron maidens?
The Grand St. station is also considered a part of the 2nd Ave. line. The station walls are designed to be removed for conversion to a four-track, two center island platform station. The trackways of the segment which underpins the Manhattan Bridge approaches spread out at the northern end in anticipation of such a connection.
The section in the East Village was never actually built. Some trenches were dug for utility relocations, but that was it. I believe that work on that section was stopped in mid-1975.
The MTA has been doing the Manhattan East Side Access study (MESA) which has, as one of its options, completion of the Second Avenue subway north of 63rd Street. The brochure I obtained from them shows the northern end of the line curving west to meet the Lexington Avenue line at 125th Street. The document also mentions provisions for an extension to the Bronx, possibly by converting the Pelham line to B division standards. At the southern end, Second Avenue trains would run west along 63rd Street and then use the now dormant express tracks of the Broadway BMT to reach Times Square and the Financial District. This is obviously not on the front burner yet; it's not even on the back burner, but it may be coming out of deep freeze. I suspect there will be modifications to the plan if it moves forward and community groups start to here about it.
I have been impressed by the detail of NY Subway schedules on the Internet. During the Lenox rebuilding for the 2/3 lines, many other schedules were posted to show every train for the whole day rather than 'frequent service every 5-9 minutes' etc. This gave a very good idea of how many trains per hour were scheduled in rush hours.
Now at September, I see that the schedules have reverted to the previous practices.
I have a TA map of 1954 which shows rush hour trains and cars per hour on all lines, and would be interested to make comparisons. For instance, which is the busiest line in NY: 6, 7 or combined 4/5 Lex Ave Express?
I would be interested in comments/remarks on Met policy on posting full schedules on the net, or other details.
Ian Brady
Anybody have any information on Amtrak plans to turn the old main post office at 8th Avenue & 33rd into a 'new' Penn Station?
I'd read somewhere a couple of months ago that the US Postal Service had given permission to turn over the building for use as a station...
The Postal Service will retain some portion of the building--how much I think is still to be determined. No final design has been concluded either, but presumably the GPO will remain open at the top of the stairs and access to the station will be through new openings cut into the corners at street level. The train concourse is to occupy the current courtyard inside the building.
I'm not sure what the timetable is for the conversion, or how far the funding won for it this year in Congress is supposed to carry the project. In the meantime Amtrak is making some improvements in the current rat's nest in preparation for the high-speed service (allegedly coming by 11/99)--article in today's Times, p. B7. Apparently high-speed customers will get their own waiting room and so on.
Amusing fact of the day is that the new train sets will only shave fifteen minutes off the New York-Washington run.
Yeah, but it'll be "European" train service. Of course, Amtrak STILL won't run on time. Amtrak just doesn't get it - on time performance, more than anything else, is the #1 reason why people hate Amtrak.
I Seriously hope, however, that for once, Amtrak DOESN't live up to the reputation that has resulted in thei numerous nicknames.
Maybe I'm just a perpetual cynic, maybe I don't believe the hype. I would be happy to see Amtrak prove me wrong, and run a safe, on time, high speed system. Such a sucess could only bring people back to rail travel.
Thanks for the updates. It sounds like the Post Office project has a ways to go, but if it ever gets done, at least the city might again have a long-distance train station somewhat worthy of its illustrious predecessor (the old Penn Station). The currect station is pathetic.
As for Amtrak running on time, I share your skepticism. Whenever I'm in NY on business (banking) and the bosses need to hustle down to Washington, they ALWAYS take the shuttle, NEVER the metroliner. When I've asked why, the reply (after the initial shock that anyone would seriously propose using the train) is that it's just too unreliable (i.e. always late) and that it's too slow. Not sure if the 15 minute time saving with the new high-speed trains will make a big difference; as you point out, really reliable on-time performance would. Maybe it's time to privatize Amtrak...
Joker writes, "Maybe it's time to privatize Amtrak..."
I really wonder how anyone could believe that giving passenger service back to private operators would result in service that would be any better than it was when the private operators did everything they could to rid of it. The likely scenario would be to run all the taxpayer-provided equipment and infrastructure into the ground (pun intended) and then ask for subsidies so the 'stockholders' could continue to get their dividends while fares increased and service was cut. Why should passengers be expected to pay more so some stockholder gets money for no reason other than having bought stock from someone else? (I feel the same way about electric power, BTW--when someone in a town 35 miles from me pays 40% less because of publicly owned power, why should I be paying so someone can collect dividends?)
As much as I detest the MTA, especially the NYCTA (and public authorities in general, because they're not accountable to the bill payers--the citizens) and would prefer direct operation by bodies such as the pre-TA NYC Board of Transportation, a directly controlled political body under direction of the mayor and the people of the city, public operation in whichever form has generally done quite well over the years it has been around, whether you're talking Muni in San Francisco, TTC in Toronto, or a lot of the newer systems such as Dallas or Denver.
Did any of the Amtrak privatizers ever ride many passenger trains run by the railroads? Did any of them every experience the terror of arriving in Chicago from New York only to discover that the New York Central hadn't made the connecting reservation to get to Colorado Springs on the Denver Zephyr? As it is said, "Been there, done that."
What's needed is a level of subsidy such as rubber-tired vehicles get
--and I mean not just paving and rest areas, but the costs of street lights, traffic lights, policing, courts for traffic offenses, areas removed from general use to dedicate to parking, one-way signs, pedestrian crossing signals, and everything else that gasoline taxes and general taxes pay for.
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
The private sector does have some advantages over the public. The private sector can innovate and adapt (if there is competion spurring it on), and the public sector cannot. Believe me, I work in it. Just try to get any change past 15 layers in 15 agencies.
The private sector got out of railroads and transit because it no longer paid, but the government bears some of the blame. The government and the unions treated the railroads like a monopolies when they weren't anymore, and forced them to maintain unprofitable services with cross-subsidies from profitable ones, which became unprofitable once the competitors moved in. They had no incentive to invest. Were it not for this mistake, and bad management, railroads would have maintained short haul inter-city passengers service while losing long haul service to the airlines, and would have maintained long haul freight service while losing short haul service to the trucks. As it is, they lost almost everything, although post deregulation they are getting long haul freight back. It should be noted that one of the biggest subsidies is the fact that railroad rights of way pay property taxes, while roads used by trucks do not.
If privatized, most of Amtrak would disappear -- but the Northeast Corridor, which is exploited to benefit the rest of the country, would prosper, along with service in other dense corridors. Just another way the Northeast gets drained to benefit the superior people of the rest of the country. I'd bet that if the government kept the tracks, you could have three or four competing operators running trains -- and implementing new and better ways to serve the public every day as a result.
On privatization of Amtrak, Larry Littlefield writes, "I'd bet that if the government kept the tracks, you could have three or four competing operators running trains -- and implementing new and better ways to serve the public every day as a result."--That's just my point--if you're going to privatize, then the privateers should pay full market value for the property and equipment and then pay taxes on top of it. And all of us who paid taxes that went in to building up passenger service should get our prorated share back. We don't need Yeltsin-style gifts of what we as taxpayers have paid for.
Greyhound has been mentioned--but how much subsidy does Greyhound get? There's a lot of indirect subsidy--street and highway paving, policing, streetlights, street cleaning. The other effect of privatizing, as Greyhound has done (the airlines, too, for that matter) is to have decent service reduced to major traffic corridors, with people in outlying areas forced to drive all the time. (I used to be able to take a Greyhound bus from where I live to Plattsburgh NY to transfer to go to Montreal--to Plattsburgh was 3 1/2 hours for the 100 miles, but that included a meal stop, and the ride was bearable. Now, with all regulation gone, and the privates allowed to do whatever they want, from here to Plattsburgh is a 14 hour trip and where once we had three buses a day, now there are two.)
If everything has to pay for itself, then we should start a movement to have toll booths on every streetcorner to collect a proportional share of tire wear on pavement and shoe wear on sidewalks and streets.
I think it is shameful that the NY transit fare is so high that the farebox recovery is among the highest in the country. I still believe transit (all transit, including rural areas) should be subsidized in a way similar to the way road users are subsidized.
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
I agree with one of Larry's points, i.e. if the government "owned" the ROW & the service providers were privatized, then we might have some hope of maintaining a decent service level. The problem is and will be the political process. If you have to keep going to the well for the money over & over again, each time the politians are going to play with it. The customer looses.
Privatization doesn't need to mean the the operator is allowed to cut & slash service to make a profit. It can just as well mean that the operator is given a fixed amount of dollars (in subsidy & ticket) to provide the service. This is the trend in the US where various government agencies what to get out of the operating business. Phoenix (Valley Metro) is one example, NJT's new light rail operation is another.
I think the days are long gone where any RxR company can realisticly be expected to run a passenger operation at a profit out of the farebox. That said some other system needs to be invented if the public thinks the govenment shouldn't be doing it.
Mr t__:^)
(Railroad can't run at a profit). I don't agree. Certainly local transit can't run at a profit, because you have to run service all day to maintain accessibility while most customers only travel at rush hour (rush hour service should be profitable, however, and with the growth of ridership mid-day service could be profitable as well).
But why can airlines and buses can run at a profit while inter-city trains cannot? True, taxes support the roads and maintain the air traffic control system, but what if taxes paid part of the cost of the RR rights of way? In other words, what if the RR were compared on a fair basis, with the ROW thought of as a road?
Without featherbedding, railroads should be able to have far fewer employees per passenger-hour than buses and airplanes, and bus and airline employees are pretty well paid. They also use far less fuel. They aren't going to beat the airplanes on long distances (if Amtrak were privitized long distance travel would be limited to tour excursions), and they can't beat a bus on a route with low traffic, but railroads should beat everything in the dense Northeast Corridor and perhaps a few others.
My guess is that featherbedding and sloth, which made a limited number of people better off in the short run but wiped out the railroad industry in the long run, are to blame. Workers and managers in other industries like buses, airplanes and trucks, weren't used to a monopoly, and accepted the need to do a decent job for a fair price. Still, if the federal government had nationalized the rails after World War II (rather than returning them to private owners), fixed them up as a complement to the interstate system, and deregulated at that point with competing carriers on tax exempts ROWs (as for trucks and buses), things might have been different.
[But why can airlines and buses can run at a profit while inter-city trains cannot? True, taxes support the roads and maintain the air traffic control system, but what if taxes paid part of the cost of the RR rights of way? In other words, what if the RR were compared on a fair basis, with the ROW thought of as a road?]
I'm not so sure about the bus lines (though aren't many of them subsidized?), but in the case of airlines there is a "hidden" subsidy that helps them earn profits. I'm referring to the exhorbitantly expensive fares paid by business travelers and some others. If the advertised "lowest fares" for any particular flight were the *only* fares, you'd better believe that the airlines would be jealous of Amtrak. But in fact, the full-fare passengers subsidize those travelling on discount fares. You'd need a similar fare structure for long-distance trains to become profitable.
(Airlines use high business fares to cross-subsidize).
Just another reason why a private rail operator could cut the airlines off a the knees. You'd run it like a subway, with carry on bags only and just four crewmembres for a train with 1,200 passengers. You'd swipe your ticket on the way in, and on the way out, and buy at automated machines, as on the DC metro. And you'd pay just $30 to travel from NY to DC or NY to Boston (three hour trip downtown to downtown), and just $40 from DC to Boston (six hour trip). You'd probably get 1,500 passengers per run -- that's $45,000. And in the private sector, the crew would work three 13 hour days, so there would be no layover -- just down and back three times per week, with cab crews taking turns at the wheel.
"And in the private sector, the crew would work three 13 hour days, so there would be no layover -- just down and back three times per week, with cab crews taking turns at the wheel."
Doesn't the Federal Railroad Administration have an eight-hour rule for train crews, enforced by a rather heavy fine for the railroad? My understanding is that no train crew can work more than eight consecutive hours, and for purposes of the rule, if they are in a position where they MIGHT be made to operate the train, this counts against the 8 hours.
For example, if a train crew were in the middle of nowhere on a single track, even if they stopped the train just a few minutes before they "expired" and completely ceased working, this would do no good because they MIGHT have to operate the train to get it out of the way of another train, or they might have to evacuate the passengers in case of emergency, or otherwise MIGHT have to work. Therefore, even if they are sitting drinking coffee and reading the Times, refusing to move the train or serve the passengers, they are still a working crew for purposes of the rule, earning wages for themselves and a hefty fine for their railroad.
If that's true, no wonder the RRs went under. Certainly, no one should operate a train for more than eight hours, or perhaps even for more than two hours. But if you have three workers in a cab, one can drive, one can watch, and one can rest or sleep. I don't see why a freight train can't go coast to coast non-stop on that basis.
Here is what should be an advantage over trucks, but it doesn't exist. With two containers behind him, a single trucker can only go so far without switching off. Railroaders should be able to take turns. But I guess the train has to stop to switch crews after eight hours. Meanwhile, the trucks violate the hours restrictions all the time, putting our life and limb in danger. Does this make sense.
Yes, there is a federal "Hours of Service" law. For RRs, its 12 hrs on, with 8 hours off. Thats right. They cannot work this way continuously, because there is a maximum number of hours that they can work a month - but it is HIGH. In good economic times such as these, freight railroad engineers and conductors work horrible - really really horrible - hours.
The Hours of Service law is a safety law. It is clearly necessary
Basically, they always work 12 hour shifts, and since they only have to have 8 hours off, their schedule is perpetually shifting, which is perpetually screwing them up.
They are paid very well - but they probably deserve it for the hell that this entails.
Also - there are only two workers on most trains, the only exception being locals with heavy switching.
I do not think it is practical or humane to have crews sleep on trains. Can you imagine what it would be like to sleep on a freight engine? The noise, climate control, vibration, and ride are all far worse than on a subway car. This is improving, but its still pretty bad.
Freight railroads are *not* featherbedded these days. Nevertheless, there are real operational reasons why they have an economic disadvantage for short hauls or for small shipments.
The RxR system is similar to that of the airlines, i.e. pilots can only work a max number of hours, but on long flights you have a second crew that switches off. Pilots also can only work a max hours a month, which I assume is less than RxR engineers. Pilots pay is much higher & the RxR engineer's union wanted the max hours high because their members want the OT. Mngt probally would be just as happy with guys at straight time vs. senior guys at OT.
No I'm not so sure about the comment that the crew has to get off the train when the replacement one takes over. It may be related to when their next assignment is. I think they also get travel time, if the switch site is the middle of nowhere.
Commuter operations (subway/buses/etc.) is interesting where the motorman/driver is away from home 12 or more hours, but gets a 4 hour break in the middle of their shift.
Mr t__:^)
I think your proposal is great, as some of your others have been. The only problem with it is it makes too much sense. The laws about crew work hours could certainly be changed as you suggest without compromising safety, but even if they weren't, the crews could change in New York, with the crew arriving from Boston working the next train back to Boston, and the crew arriving from Washington working the next train back to Washington. This would not generate a major increase in costs.
Could the Federal government legitimately maintain the right of way for such a service? If the postal service also used the tracks, either to run its own mail trains or by requiring the private carriers, as a condition of using the tracks, to carry mail cars on their trains, then the tracks could probably be designated as a "post road" and therby meet Constitutional muster.
I don't think "ownership" is a difficult issue for the government.
NOW we have gov.: Roads; Waterways; Airlanes ... so why not RxR ROW ?
They could charge the carriers a toll/useage charge to cover some/all of the maint. cost ... or just make them free like the interstates. As Larry and others have said .... they need to level the playing field somehow.
So what would be the result to truckers, (inter-state) buses, & airlines ? The long haul trucking business may not be effected that much (RxR don't want one or two truck loads of business from point A to point B). Bus & airline passenger business is another matter. Just look at the European model.
Mr t__:^)
There's a lot of merit to your privatised-railroad ideas. But there is one obstacle that could make it unworkable outside the NE corridor and a few other places. In most parts of the country, the airports are today much more centrally located that the railroad stations. While it's not so evident around here, as a general rule much business activity is in the suburbs and hence usually closer to the airports. Downtown railroad stations are increasing out of the mainstream areas. Also note that tourism infrastructure (especially lodgings and rental car locations) are concentrated in airport areas, not downtowns.
I agree with your first point, i.e. ROW subsidized by government, but I think that's what I said before.
We have to seperate INTRA from INTER city transit:
- Inter-city & long distance travel by rail should be sold like it was a cruise line, i.e. premium price for premium service. There isn't any other way it can pay for it self. You can add some discounts of some sort to fill up the train, i.e. sell the discout at cost because once the run breaks even everything else is profit. The airlines learned this a long time ago. As a former employee, I was the LAST to board unless I paid 50% of the fare. Well, we did get ONE flight a year at 20% that I could reserve a seat.
- Intra-city, i.e. commuters: First you have to remove the ROW cost and that's not simple because most of them are also used by carriers in business for profit, so you have a big political issue ... if you subsidize the ROW and the freight guys start making big profits the truckers, boaters & airlines will yell. Next you have to deal with the equipment costs. If the commuter outfits have to bear the cost, then the fare has to go up. We come back to the old problem of the public not understanding why the cost of a ticket should go up for any reason. Then you're just left with the government contracting out the right to serve or in some other way ensuring that the service level is maintained. Our subways expansion just has two problems: NIMBY & political will.
- I think the basic problem, locally, is that the politians don't want to spend any more money on roads in the city. They may even realize that it isn't a very efficient way to move lots of folks in & out. You also have the problem of no space to put the road ... NIMBY ! BUT they're unwilling or unable to bit the bullet & solve the problem ... put a bandaid on it and leave it for the next administration.
Mr t__:^)
"The likely scenario would be to run all the taxpayer-provided equipment and infrastructure into the ground (pun intended) and then ask for subsidies so the 'stockholders' could continue to get their dividends while fares increased and service was cut."
In terms of fares and service - this has already happened in the Northeast. Service is less than what it used to be and I can no longer afford to take Amtrak. For trips between Boston and New York, the bus is faster, cheaper, and runs way more frequently. For trips between New York and Philly, the bus is WAY cheaper (between 1/3 and 1/2 Amtrak fares - $31 vs. $68-$90 non-Metroliner), only about 15 minutes slower on average, more reliable, and about as frequent. The latest I've ever been on PeterPan is 30 minutes. The most I've been delayed on Amtrak was over 3 hours.
The rolling stock on these bus routes is also a lot newer than on Amtrak.
I'd love to see Amtrak get it's fair share of subsidy, but in the current political environment, that's just not going to happen.
As I see it, Amtrak is already at rock bottom in terms of service and accessability. I don't see how privatizing it would make it worse in the Northeast.
You miss the point entirely.
The private railroads ran their operations into the ground in large part because of heavy government regulation which prevented them from charging fares which would yield a profit. There was also the influence of recalcitrant unions which resulted in a high cost base and excreble service. Finally the government, in its infinate wisdom, chose to back other, often less efficient transportation modes, i.e. the car and plane. Who do you think originally built the trains of the world and the subways? Not governments, but private investors in search of profit - that dirty word.
Why do you have a problem with the concept of profit? If there's no incentive to provide a service, why should it be provided? For the hell of it? If public ownership were the key to innovative, high-quality service, the Soviet Union should have been a roaring success and a consumer paradise. Does the government seizing money as taxes and distributing it in a non market-driven manner guarantee quality? Wake up. Nobody takes risks, nobody innovates, without incentives.
While you mention a couple of mediocre-run public transport agencies in the US, are you unaware of the privatization of the British railways (even the Londong Underground), and the fact that in Japan, over a dozen private railroad operators run hugely-profitable local & long-distrance operations transporting millions every day with service standards that Americans can only dream of? Somehow or other, privately-run airlines in the US and abroad manage to transport millions of customers every day too. Should the government be running the airline industry as well? Would you prefer to fly on Aeroflot? No, it doesn't have to be done the way it is in the US, but the parochialism of most Americans prevents that point from being understood. The result is that Americans continue to be stuck with some of the worst rail & rapid-transit service in the developed world.
If the Northeast corridor were available to the highest bidding private operators, you would see a big growth in innovative service. Some firms would compete on speed, other might try to do it on price, others on service. In any event the rider would be the judge of which approach was right, by his willingness to pay or not.
Long distance routes would probably disappear. Then again, maybe they wouldn't, if entrepreneurs could come up with 'rail cruising' or other innovative concepts which convinced consumers that the train was worth the sacrifice in time.
Is this such a difficult concept?
> Amusing fact of the day is that the new train sets will only shave
> fifteen minutes off the New York-Washington run.
While this may be true, the big gain will be between NY and Boston, where electrification and the American Flyer trainsets are supposed to shave, what, nearly an hour off the current running time.
--Mark
can someone provide renubering tables for these cars as there is insufficient information at www.nyc subway.org
I added the trailer to the message caption so it might catch an eagle
eye out there.
It's not as simple as: (R44 old + 5202 = R44 new) or
(R46 old + 4982 = r46 new) They renumbered em any which way.
Faint vestiges of the old number decals can be seen at the ends of
some of the R46 cars. You have to look sort of sideways against the
light to see them but they're there.
While we're on this subject: 5282s old number, ditto 5283 and 5319
for my MASTER NUMBERS BOOK #3 and #4 which have the OLD R44 numbers
so I can scrap 'em off. I'm sure that somebody out there has this
information somewhere (Bill? Steve? Constantine?)
Wayne
For your information the original car numbers were factory stamped onto the anticlimbers at each end of all cars of the 46 fleet. As for thee 44 fleet the original numbers are HANDSTAMPED onto each side of each end of A and B cars. They were stamped by hand because they never had them during the period in whick they still had the blure striping. Therefore you have to look at it from two angles: if the TA stamped the numbers they are probably correct; if the contractor (M&K) stamped them they may be correct because M&K had to obey a time delivery clause written to the contract. As for the three cars you mentioned they are in the "Jurassic Park" section of 207 Street Yard.
The R-46s were re-numbered after the Morrison Knudsen overhaul was completed. They were renumbered in no particular order as the original 2-car consists were also in no particular order. In addition, 1/2 of the four car linking was done in house and in no particular order so no formula will work to convert old number to new. Since the cars were still in warranty when the linking was done, the database I used to track warranty failures had to be expanded to capture the number change. I have a hard copy which includes the OLD NUMBER, BUILD SEQUENCE, and NEW NUMBER. If anyone is interested in a copy of that list, I'll try to run some copies off. E-Mail me and I'll tell you where to mail me a SASE. Of course, I will reserve the right to withdraw the offer if I get swamped with requests.
Those of you who are New York Division ERA members might want to check back issues of the Bulletin, their monthly newsletter. They were publishing the old/new numbers over a period of months a few years back. More recently, they published all the codes for the R-44/46 side destination signs and what the signs would say based on the code selected.
--Mark
My son and I have been at work revising the tour of the el and will be mailing it to you over the weekend.
Would you also like one for the BSS?
PLease do so Jack. Thanks!
Yesterday (Tuesday) evening, I saw two locomotives of the Florida "Fun Train" (tourist train painted in gaudy flourescent color scheme) in the midst of the usual Amtrak locomotives (I didn't know Fun Train was an Amtrak operation) in the Amtrak yards south of Chicago Union Station.
I was on the 6:00 pm Burlington Northern out of CUS, and I spotted the two Fun Train locos -- they are hard to miss in the midst of the silver and grey Amtrak equipment -- in the portion of the yard, next to a large carbarn or repair shop, just south and east of where the BNSF tracks turn west to leave the yards.
Anyone have any ideas on this?
The Florida Fun Train was a service using Amtrak equipment between Tampa, Orlando, and Daytona Beach. Sadly, the service was discontinued due to low usage and a fatal truck accident at a remote gateless crossing in Florida. The accident drew the nail into the coffin. The train had magicians, clowns, video games, and a bar/restaraunt.
I was just curious as to how many of the orderd Adtranz M4 cars have actually arrived? Last night, I was treated to a round trip on the M4 car number 1064 and 1057 -- do they have a target for the switchover?
According to "Cinders", the local NRHS newsletter, 68 of the 220 were on the property in mid-September. I have heard reports that about 80 are here as this is written.
SEPTA's plan is to have the entire fleet in operation by about this time next year and the Budds off the property shortly thereafter. If the Market St el reconstruction starts next year (and it's likely to begin sometime next summer), the Budds will probably enjoy less than a full year of service on the line from today.
The M-4's continue to have little glitches that slow down the acceptance process and perhaps could breathe a little more life into the remaining Budd fleet. SEPTA may have learned its lesson given its experiences with new fleets on the subway-surface and Broad St lines and may well keep several trains of Budds around for a while to cover some service in case they are needed. Then again, SEPTA being SEPTA, nothing may have been learned.
The Buckingham Valley Trolley Association is sponsoring a fan trip on the Market-Frankford el on Sun 10/18. It starts at 69th St at 10 AM. Two round trips are planned - one on a Budd train, the other on a train of M-4's (something for everyone?). The cost is $35. Tickets are scheduled to be sold on the day of the trip if anyone is interested. It is scheduled to last about 5 hours, including a lunch stop, probably between round trips.
This may be the last time a trip like this will run, given the short time that the Budds are expected to be on the property and the imminent reconstruction of the Market St el structure. Unfortunately, it is the same day as a Nostalgia Train in NYC.
I plan to be there and will be seeking out some SubTalkers as I attempted to do on the Lo-V trip. Hopefully, I'll be more successful this time around. Although I did talk to a handful of 'Talkers then, I expected to unearth a few more.
I'd be there if i wasn't doing the AIDS Walk. Guess I missed that train:)
I rode the #4 from Manhattan to Brooklyn this afternoon. Since I was in the head car, I decided to try to peer through the small darkened window and out onto the tracks. I noticed the lighted speedometer, and decided to see how fast the train went.
I guess the operator saw me out of the corner of his eye, because as the train started picking up speed descending into the Joralemon tunnel he stuck one hand up so I couldn't see the speedometer. Then he stood up and operated the train while standing awkwardly to block my view of the speedometer. As the train started to ascend toward Brooklyn the train slowed down, and the operator sat down.
Is there some kind of labor-management conflict going on here? Why did the operator seem so paranoid about the speedometer?
That is exactly what I would do in that case and management is always looking to write people up in the TA, and as in this case as Steve pointed out in an argument with "HangStrapper" we all do ourselves in to management. The posted speed limit in the rivertubes between Bowling Green and Boro Hall is 35 M.P.H. Alot of times some of us cut corners here and there to try to make up time. There are others who learn the hard way after they are caught with the radar gun during efficency tests to slow things down a little but the real problem is that the TA always overlooks safety when the press are off their backs and trains are on time but when you read about "Cowboy Motormen" in the papers the TA says they have no knowledge but will rectify the situation by handing out suspensions and handing supervisors the radar guns. When I was a train virgin I got a few complaints about the way I took that last turn (back then no speedometers) but because I take my sweet time I get complaints from the hand that signs my check.
Why does TA mngt have a such a problem with train speed ?
- Are the trains unsafe at that speed, i.e. accident ?
- Are the tracks unsafe at that speed, i.e. derailment ?
- Is the Motorman unable to react to events at that speed ?
- They (mngt) just like playing traffic cop ?
I rode for 11 years on the 1/9/2/3. The express would frequently make up time on the run from 96th to Chambers. The train jumped around a little but I didn't feel unsafe.
Mr t__:^)
Maybe the signals are pretty close together to warrant the speed restriction.(I don't know definitely since i am a motorman in the "B" division.(letter lines)
You'd be rocking and rolling on an uptown 2 or 3 just before reaching 72nd St. and, subsequently, 96th St. Even now, those expresses will hit 40 mph (saw it for myself on a 3 of R-62s). That straightaway down 7th Ave. is a cool stretch, too.
Ive seen been on an uptown 2 and seen it get up to 43mph. Those express' grow wings.
The speed limit is 35? As the train slowed down and the train operator sat down and took his hand off the speedometer, it read 35! Guess that's the answer. However fast we were going, it didn't seem too fast to me.
Speedometers aren't the problem. I agreed with the NTSB finding that subway cars should have them.
It's the TA and all the new speed restrictions, grade timers. Look at the run from Prospect Park to 7th Ave on the D, now have I think 1 or 2 Grade Timed signals and all the curves are after 7th Ave on the way to Atlantic and they have 4 GT there too.
Same thing coming into DeKalb from the Bridge, there was a derailment not to long ago just after Dekalb. You now have timers on the signals in the station (heck can't tell if I missed the train now since it is Yellow, Red, Yellow signal aspects).
What ever happened to RAPID TRANSIT in this city??
I think it went to the scrapyard along with the last of the R-10s.
>What ever happened to RAPID TRANSIT in this city??
The "Advocates" started moaning and groaning, train brakes got worse, controllers got castrated, and the people in charge started bowing to vocal groups who have no understanding of the laws of physics besides "Speed Kills". Nevermind the savings on wear and tear (read $$$$) and electricity by running slower.
It could be worse, it's long been known the LIRR has been getting slower since the 50's (despite the fact that the M-1s are probbly faster than any of the MP cars ever were). I've heard that CalTrans between San Fran and San Jose is 1.5 hrs, even though that's a distance of only 45 miles.
What baffles me is, how come if the subway ran faster years back without major accidents, it's suddenly so unsafe to go fast?
Perhaps it has something to do with lawsuits, and the growing aversion to the minutest risk. You see it in environmental regulations as well. The good side is more people buckleing up, not smoking, not driving drunk, etc. The bad side is slowing down so that when an accident occurs they can't say it's your fault. Perhaps accidents are no less likely to occur. Perhaps you have to pay anyway, because negligence has nothing to do with negligence suits. But at least you CYA.
>>and the growing aversion to the minutest risk<<
Okay now I'LL throw in the recent lifting of the 55MPH max on all federal funded highways??
I've seen 65, 70MPH now and even the land of the no left turn has lifted the 55mph on some sections of the Turnpike.
But the subways go slower still...
And then there's Montana!
Once you leave metro Denver, the speed limits on I-25, I-70, and I-76 are 75 mph. The western states complained for years that 55 mph was stupid because of all the wide open space. I'm glad that Washington had the common sense to allow states to set their own speed limits for a change.
I haven't heard of anyone doing, say, 100 in Montana yet, though.
Even when the 55 mph speed limit was in effect in Montana, I hear that the speding fine was $5.00, and the violation was "Wasting Natural Resources!"
Trivia: Does anyone else know the only other time in U.S. history that a national speed limit was imposed? What was the limit?
I'll guess WWII and the speed limit was 40.
--Mark
You're right about WWII, but I heard it was 30 MPH, which has always sounded dreadfully slow to me. Can anyone corroborate either 30 or 40 MPH?
i heard it was 45 too save rubber and gas. also i know some who got stopped in mt for 105, not because of speed but the cop said "i stopped because of the cross winds in this area".
Speeds must be "reasonable and prudent for the conditions," or something like that.
I just read that somebody is suing the State of Montana because that phrase "reasonable and prudent for conditions" is too vague. Stay tuned--Montana may be forced to post numbers.
Doesn't Montana have a nighttime speed limit (70)?
--Mark
That's not surprising. I'm sure cops may have let a lot of speeding violations slide in those days out west. maybe they even looked the other way. It wasn't the same in Ohio, though. One of my father's coworkers got pulled over on the Turnpike for doing something like 58 and got a ticket.
The fact that people are more and more risk adverse, but are in favor of raising speed limits, shows the clear difference. People are willing to take risks themselves (drive faster) in exchange for a personal benefit, because the risk is minimized in their mind because they are in control. But they are unwilling to accept risks imposed by others (ride faster) in exhchange for a social benefit (better transit service), because they feel they are not in control.
As long as the difference is speed limits is reflected in different costs of insurance so there is no subsidy for speed, Montana residents can go as fast as they want as far as I'm concerned. In fact, I once had this idea for a privately financed toll expressway clear across the Great Plains. It would have no speed limit at all, but you'd have to sign a liability waiver before entering, and emergency assistance if you crash would be provided on a cost-plus basis. Get the thrill seekers off the regular roads, I say.
Too many hunger lawyers on the lookout for a quick nuisance lawsuit.
YVY
The best express run used to be down Central Park W on the D. But that was before they instituted the speed limits... The run is pretty tame nowadays compared to the past...
Actually, the faster run was the same one going uptown. Even though you are going uptown, it's mostly downgrades. Prior to the new speed restrictions, a D train would leave 59th Street and with a good operator, be in power just 2 minutes of the 7 minute trip to 125th Street.
If you want speed, try the trip southbound on 6th Ave from 34th St to W4th St. on the express track. 68s can hit 50+ there.
Although I have not seen their speedometers, Slant 40's on the
Q move along at a pretty good clip
there as well; I'd guess between 45 and 50 MPH. The one that Peg
and I were on back on Sept 30 (#4175) certainly was moving along.
Wayne
Ageed, Steve, the 6th Ave. express 34th to W. 4th is my all-time favorite express run. It takes about 2:10 on average (we paying passengers prefer the Q Slant-40s since we can't get in the cab of 68's!).
I didnt think R68's went that fast. even on downgrades.I still prefer to operate my R42 anyday.
I liked the 59th - 125th express run also, and I think everyone likes the 6th Ave run from 34th-W 4th, but we also had some good run on Lexington and 7th Ave lines. I also liked the 4th Ave run from 36th to Pacific Street. Ohhh.. those good ol' days.
Hey, let's not forget the venerable R-10s on the A. I loved the way they simply roared past 81st. Same thing with the slant R-40s when they ran there. The R-32s on the D were very swift, too. Even the R-1/9s would howl merrily along that stretch, too
I rode an uptown D last week to the Bronx during rush hour. Ho hum. It got up to maybe 30 along CPW. On top of that, there was a service diversion in which uptown D trains were stopping at 155th, 161st, and 167th Sts. They would stay on the local track and bypass 170th and 174-175th Sts., then once they left Tremont Ave., they'd switch to the express track and skip 182-183rd. Those R-68s seem to plod along the Grand Concourse when running express.
It didn't suddenly get unsafer. In fact, it's not unsafer. But look at what has happened on the IND for example. When opened, the IND operated with R-1/9s. That fleet had two 190 HP traction motors per car or 380 HP. In the 40s the R-10s came with four 100 HP traction motors and that became the standard for the next 30 years. In the mid 70s, the 75 foot cars arrived with four 115 HP traction motors. Still not a problem since the HP/Weight ratio stayed about the same. It the 1980s, the NYCT began to overhaul the fleet. Cars built with 100 HP traction motors were retro-fitted with 115 HP motor. This increased the HP of every train by 15 percent. At the same time, the signal system was never upgraded from the 1930s operating standards. In actuality, the braking characteristics for every car class have not changed but the top end speed has.
In past posts on this board, it has been stated that trains often go as much as 50 in the Joralemon tunnel. If the speed limit is 35, then there's a huge problem.
If the speed limit is appropriate, there must be a grave safety risk going 140% faster. It also begs the question, why are there no timing signals on this stretch that would preclude these speeds? Are there not curves or grades on this stretch anyway?
If the speed limit is arbitrary then there is also a problem. Either the subway operation much less efficient than possible or 50 is really a safe speed, but it is lowered artificially to make it look like the motorman who exceeded it was at fault (even if he was expected to by an unspoken understanding as Damage Inc. suggests).
What are the criteria for setting speed limits and under what conditions do they change?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Larry L’s posting of the paranoid operator on the #4 train. I would have to say this: "Put yourself in this guy’s shoes." He doesn’t know who you are. You could be TA, a busybody who is looking for ways of getting people into trouble, or just an interested party.
I spent many hours riding the "head end" of Reading Company MU trains in the late 1960’s, and early 1970’s. Yes, Mr. Straphanger, you might want to take issue with the fact, because, I didn’t have a pass to do so. Anyway, the point to this is that my benefactor, a "worthy brother" and engineman of 30 some years, said to look it like this. "Would you like to have someone standing at your desk looking over your shoulder all day?" This worthy brother took great pains to tape newspaper over the window looking into his control compartment when the new Silverliner MU’s were delivered. The older equipment had a curtain that did the job of keeping unauthorized persons from looking out the front window.
There is a traditional deep distrust between union and management in the railroad and transit operating organizations. I’m not saying that it is right, wrong, or justified, I’m just saying it has always existed. This may answer your question regarding the paranoid operator.
I’ve had similar experiences myself. On the CTA since OPTO, most operators are leaving their cab doors ajar while operating. It is fun to watch the speed-o-meter/cab signal system working in conjunction. However, on occasion, I’ve received some "not to happy" looks from the operator when I’ve paid too much attention the operation of the train. I do this rarely since my lesson from the worthy brother taught me to put myself in the other guy’s shoes.
This all makes sense so far; everybody is entitled to their point of
view, and since it's impossible to know what others are thinking, we
have this kind of discussion.
*But*, what if the person standing outside a cab were a motor
inspector? Admittedly, they'd probably let themselves into the cab
or make their presence known, but just in case they didn't, wouldn't
this motorman's *hiding* his speed be just as incriminating? (Just
playing devil's advocate)
And for a final thought, twice I've ridden downtown from Columbus
Circle to 42nd street (C) with the motorman propping his (32/38?) cab
door open with his foot! Yay! Now I finally know what those handles
look like in operation.
This discussion is amazing. As Sherlock Holmes might say, "Let's examine the evidence". An operator stands up.
That's it. That's the evidence. How does anyone know why the operator stood up? Maybe he has hemoroids.
Watch out for assumptions. They're often false.
Bill
The operator didn't just stand up. Prior to standing up, he put his right hand on the speedometer and covered it over, while holding the controller with the left. Then he stood up to block the view. And he did it while on the downgrade in the Joralemon tunnel, not before or after (when speeds were lower). If all he did was stand up, I'd of thought nothing of it.
Yesterday I did a fiedl trip to PATCO, Ridge SPur and Broad Street subway in Philly.
my first impressions:
very clean, no graffiti (on PATCO only one station with 1 hit, very little on the subway), scratch free windows, clean cars and stations, although some stations need TLC.
I found evidence of removed stairways and at one station a lower level.(Stay tuned for the page!) In two weeks I will be touring the Market Frankford line.
A station by station is underway for all Philly lines.
I even saw some Philly redbirds andf Philly "greenbirds"
I extend my thanks to the PATCO and SEPTA employees who gave me assistance by answering questions. I also thank Bob W and Jack for their help.
Abandoned lower level? Cool! Which line / station?
The Fairmount station on the BSS has a lower level for the Ridge Avenue line and then the Ridge trains come up and join the main line.
There is also a lower level at Pattison which was last used during the Phillies World Series showing 4 or 5 years ago.
The Broad St subway also has two lesser-known "upper" levels. One is north of Erie and allows Ridge spur trains to turn back between the two local tracks (they rise to the upper level, cross over, then drop back down to the southbound local track). This is part of the junction to the never-built Northeast extension.
The other is north of Olney, where expresses used to turn back before they were extended to Fern Rock. This is another junction to a not-built extension.
Hmm, so where do they bring in the cars from? Isn't there a
connection between the El and Patco? Is there a connection between
the BSS and the El? And finally, if there's a connection, couldn't
they bring in some cars through the Winslow junction off NJT's
(conrail) AC line?
The El is a different gauge from the Subway and PATCO (5'2 1/4" vs. standard gauge). There is no connection in any event, and there can be no physical connection. The El's tunnels are smaller, similar to the IRT dimensions, and the Subway/PATCO are similar to the BMT/IND.
PATCO and the Ridge Spur do connect physically in the 8th St subway but the former track connections have been severed. In several instances in the past, the City of Phila, which owns the Broad St subway and the PATCO subway in Phila, has suggested that SEPTA's service contracts be cancelled in favor of PATCO operation of the line. PATCO is usually amused but nothing has ever come of it. With the talk of a possible baseball stadium in the Broad/Spring Garden area, thoughts have been given to have direct PATCO service to the site via the Ridge Spur and a reverse move on Broad St to Spring Garden station. While do-able, it sounds like a dispatcher's nightmare.
Sorry, Lee, I didn't answer your questions fully! Cars are delivered onto the lines mainly by flatbed truck. The El once had a connection to a PRR branch at 69th St, but that is long gone. The Subway has a tie between the Fern Rock yard and the ex-Reading main line directly behind it (now a bustling SEPTA commuter corridor). This explains how those RR boxcars got into Fern Rock!
PATCO has connections to the ex-PRSL line now used by NJT to get to and from Atlantic City. Freights use this line occasionally as far as I know. PATCO itself used a portion of this trackage in the area of Woodcrest station when that station was being built in the late 70's/early 80's. The westbound PATCO track was switched into the freight track for a short distance to bypass the construction area. I recall the looks on the faces of many riders, accustomed to the speedy trains on welded rail, when the cars entered this rickety jointed line at fairly low speed.
For those that record such things, #501 came back yesterday. It went back to the factory for the fix of some body dammage.
P.S. Dave say hello to Andy for me !
Mr t__:^)
I was at a TA/DOT meeting, at 370 Jay Street, in late Sept. & a TA person happen to mention the status of the Fun Pass (the meeting had a totally different purpose).
It is now scheduled for a mid to late November release. It will be priced at $4.00, and good for unlimited rides on NYC buses & subways, BUT:
- Not express buses, i.e. locals only
- The clock starts with the first use and expires at Midnight of THAT day, so Cinderella you better watch out !
Disclaimer: I don't work for the TA or DOT
Mr t__:^)
YIPPEEE! Just in time for my November 27 1998 all day excursion!
Now for the $64 question === are they going to sell them at all
stations, just some stations, or at 'special locations' like I have
heard in previous discussions.
Wayne
"They" don't want to sell them, but I'll let the "Subway-Buff" report IF any stations are scheduled to have them.
Mr t__:^)
Hi,
My question involves the speed of NYC subway trains. It sounds like
rapid transit is becomming an oxymoron. WHy doesn't the MTA change the signal system to match that of the LIRR or Metro-North?
That type of signal seems safer and will allow for higher speeds.
The NYCT estimates that it will take 30 years to replace the signal system on all lines. Work has already begun on the L line where a 'state of the art' CBTC system will tested with 12 R-42s and the R-143s. The success of this system will actually set the pace for other signal replacements. However, the LIRR MAS is 80 MPH. Considering the layout of the subways, don't look for speeds ever to exceed 55 MPH.
I'll be satisfied with 40 mph, except on long express runs. If you can do 40 on 4th Avenue and stop at lights, you should be able to do 40 under 4th Avenue and stop at stations. Otherwise, the subway is not competitive on time. Aside from the Jorelemon tunnel, when I have seen the speedometers they have never been above 25, and are ususally below 20.
I've seen speedometers on the #3's R-62s reach 40 mph while skipping 77th St. and, subsequently, 50th St. heading downtown. Downgrade through the Joralemon St. tunnel, I have seen 50 mph indicated.
Too bad the R-10s didn't have speedometers. Back in the good old days, A trains seemed to hit 50 regularly while thundering along CPW.
I'm sure every operator is different. Today I rode the [Q] out to Brighton Beach during my midday break. [There was some work in progress on the Manhattan Bridge south side tracks!] On the return trip, there were workers on the local track near Kings Highway, with appropriate flag protection. However there was no flag protection on our express track. Yet, there was a worker standing on the local track third rail, which is less than two feet from the express track third rail we were using. Our operator blasted through "at the post," blasting his whistle like he was an LIRR engineer, with road crossing signals (2 long, short, long).
By the way, on the outbound I waited eight minutes at Rock Center for the [Q] after a [D] came by. We only managed to pass that [D] all the way to Brighton Beach, not two as I would have thought.
When I rode the <7> express the other afternoon, we passed two [7] locals outbound from TSS to Main Street.
Maximum speed of the train is a part of but not the only contoling factor of system speed. Other factors play a major role in system speed such as:
Dwell time in stations (The time the doors are open and the train is not moving.
Rate of Acceleration
Rate of Deceleration
Number of Stops
Distance between stops
Then there is the signal system that controls how fast trains can run and how close together they can be operated safely (headways) You can run one train an hour very fast but that is not acceptable service.
Now that I'm back from vacation, I thought I'd pass along a few observations regarding speed in the subway.
I rode several A trains up CPW, both R-38s and R-44s. Speed-wise, there wasn't much difference. We were doing 36-37 mph by the time we hit 81st St. going uptown, and 40-41 approaching the upslope at 110th St. The 45 mph sign I remember on the northbound express track is gone; there is a 35 mph sign at one location. There is a 40 mph sign on the southbound express track approaching 86th St. Southbound, we held 36-37 mph until we reached 81st St.
On the runaway southbound stretch from 50th to 42nd Sts, both the R-38s and R-44s reached 43 mph by the time the operator applied the brakes to stop at 42nd. (You'd never know there is a lower level; the stairways are cemented over.) Between 34th and 14th Sts, both classes of cars skipped 23rd St. doing 36 mph, and reached 40 before slowing down to stop at 14th. The R-10s used to go just as fast. I rode an uptown A of R-38s along that stretch, and it did 15-20 mph as it skipped 23rd; the R-10s never went that fast through there. Along Fulton St., 35-40 mph was the norm; I rode R-38s both ways. Saw the unused shell at Utica Ave.
I also rode the Lexington up to 125th St. Alas, it was a bit of a disappointment speedwise. Uptown, my 5 train of Redbirds probably didn't exceed 35; nor did the 4 of R-62s going downtown. Everyone was going to the Yankees' ticker tape parade. (I saw a 5 train of R-62s for the first time)
The smoothest stretches were the 7th Ave. express run from 34th to 14th Sts, where those Redbirds seemed to float all the way, and the Brighton line from Prospect Park to Church Ave. The northbound Q built up a good head of steam from W. 4th to 34th Sts.
BTW, the 63rd St. shuttle now consists of two 8-car trains of R-32s - at least when the shuttle is running to 34th St. Southbound trains switch over to the southbound express track just north of 57th St. After leaving 34th St., they switch to the northbound express track before Times Square. Several people asked the operator if this train went to 23rd St. while we were parked at 34th; he told them to take the train across the platform. I remarked, "Even if this train were to continue south, it wouldn't stop at 23rd anyway; it's on the express track." The operator replied, "They don't know that."
Anyway, it was nice to spend a few days in the Big Apple and ride the Redbirds for perhaps the last time.
Where is the unused shell at Utica ave?
A portion of the ceiling in the middle of the platform at Utica Avenue/Fulton St. hangs rather lower than the rest--that's the shell, a provision for the IND second system, which was to include a four-track line from Williamsburg under Stuyvesant Avenue and Utica Avenue, passing above the Fulton Street line through the shell. Urban renewal in the neighborhood has since put the new Boys and Girls High School in the way of that alignment, so even if a Utica Avenue line were built it would have to pass over the existing station at a different angle (probably into Malcolm X Boulevard, following the new curve of the avenue).
Steve, you mentioned "Redbirds for the last time". Do you know when they are due to withdrawn?
This is tentative - the first of the Redbirds' replacement cars (the R142) are scheduled for mid-1999 delivery. I expect the Redbirds to be retired in stages, with the most badly corroded ones (8570-8799 series) going first. Oddly enough, some of the oldest Redbirds
(R28, 7860-7959, circa 1959) are in better shape than their newer
(1961) counterparts. The order is scheduled for 1,080 cars; current
Redbird fleet, including the R36WF, is about 1,400 cars, give or take
a few dozen. (210 R26/28, 236 R29, 500 R33, 40 R33WF singles, 424 R36WF, 36 R36 mainline; 15 scrapped=1395 cars) This may leave some of the Redbirds still running even after full delivery of the 1,080. I think someone mentioned an option for additional R142 (or similar) later on, ostensibly to replace the R36.
Dont worry - there will be plenty of Redbirds still around come Nov.7
Wayne
I wouldn't think there would be any surviving "redbirds" after 1999 that is dealing with TA mentality. Years ago around 91 when the "C" train was doing away with GE R-30 equipment the general view from car equipment was even though they were not air conditioned, they were valuable because of the overhauls they had gone through years before. Their MBDFs running in Pitkin Barn surpassed their R-44 and R-32 MDBFs. On time performance was above average with an R-30 as apposed with other equipment. It was proposed that some cars be made as spares after their "retirement" (it was said that some R-10s had been retired twice). Fortunately our friends at 370 Jay Street never let us down as they link-barred the R-44 fleet therefore creating the car shortage created by the one car down-three go with it syndrome, this being after they scrapped the remaining thirtys. Therefore expect TA to mass slaughter just like they did to R-9s, then watch them scratch their heads. TA doesn't buy the slogan "if it ain't broke don't fix it".
I can see scapping cars which are not air conditioned, or are not stainless steel, because they are obsolete. The question is what is it that would cause the TA to take air-conditioned stainless steel cars off the rails? Metal fatigue leading to cracked frames? Computer controlled signalling (could be installed in existing trains, no?)? New trucks and controllers with dynamic braking (could also be retrofit?)
Once the redbirds are gone, I think it will tempting to retrofit rolling stock, use buys to increase the fleet, and divert dollars to the stations and signals.
Many R-32s and some R-44 equipment has or will be scrapped because of metal fatigue. The question is how much of a hurry will the TA be in to scrap cars when replacements are not yet on the property. Remember the R-9s were scrapped even though the R-46s were developing their "teething pains" to the cost of Pullman Standard. Some R-10s were actually bought back from the vendors because the R-44s had to give up their trucks to keep the R-46s running. Just because those redbirds are old doesn't mean they are obsolete. An article in the news a year back stated that the R-33 fleet had MDBFs over 100,000 miles! Compare that to R-68/As. The TA will inevitably prove through their Hall of Shame that they are more concerned about their bloated managerial force than they are about the riding public.
As it is right now, 592 of the 600 delivered R32 are still rolling.
That is 98.67% of the original fleet. The only ones out of action are #3616, 3620, 3629, 3651, 3668, 3766, 3934, 3935. The last two are R32GE parts cars, the others except 3620 were wrecked etc.
The R44 are tin and are slow as molasses- I would not be sorry to see them go. Now, the Slant R40...when THEY go I'll put on the black armband.
Wayne
We know, we know. That's OK, because I happen to like the slant R-40s myself. I rode them on the Q two weeks ago. Did you ever notice the deep-throated rumble they develop when they get a full head of steam? I noticed that when they ran on the B. On that express run along 4th Ave., they rumbled.
I noticed something peculiar this time around with the R-44s: their doors have gotten awfully sluggish. They were opening and closing at about the same rate of speed as did the doors on the BMT standards. IMHO, the R-10s had the fastest doors of any cars.
Yes, I notice that sound myself - heard #4175 and her brood making it on the Q between 34th & West 4th back on 9/30; also hear it when I'm on one of the 4400's of the L going through the 14th st. tunnel.
I noticed something else about Slant R40 - some of them turn without a sound and others scream blue murder. A s/bound B I was on back in 1997 threaded De Kalb without a peep, just a little hoot going into the first turn; a n/bound N going through the same area back on 9/19 made all kinds of noise. I've been on about half of the L Slant R40 fleet, some make noise, others don't, even on the tightest curves (i.e. Graham Ave., Montrose/Morgan). #4402 and #4412 are eerily quiet.
#4402 did the "S" curve north of Sutter without a screech back on June 28. N #4264, however, made all kinds of gruesome noise north of 57th St. back on Oct. 18. Go figure.
I've been a Slant R40 fan since 1968...
Wayne
I also remember when the slant R-40s debuted on the E and F lines. They certainly were unique, to say the least. The first time I rode them was on an F, and then only because my sister wanted to! She got a big kick out of them back then. I think the first time I saw them was on the F. This particular F train pulled into 34th St., and my mother said, "Look, an F train." "How can you tell?" I wanted to know. I was used to looking for signs above the storm door, only none were there except for the EXP and LOCAL signs. "See the big F up front to the right?" Well, duh. We also used to see them on the E at 42nd St., but because I flatly refused to take E trains at all costs, I never rode them on that line. In fact, it wasn't until the slants wound up on the A line during the late 70s that I would ride them again. Man, did they fly up CPW! They gave the R-10s a run for their money, that's for sure.
As long as the new R142's have straight side, rivets, a window at the front and those metal bits that stick out in front I shall not mind that much.
Are there any plans for the Subway Museum to preserve a few Redbirds?
The Transit Museum already has samples of the second-generation IRT fleet: an R-12, an R-15, R-17 #6609, and WF R-33 #9306. The Redbirds fall into this category; whether any will be preserved remains to be seen.
I'd like to see the WF cars on the Flushing line repainted to their as-delivered colors before they're retired....maybe not all of them, but maybe 2 or 3 trains worth.
-Hank
Well for all you speed freaks, here is one T/O who will make a couple of minutes overtime on the 8th Av Line. Check out the new grade time/wheel detector circuits installed north of Chambers to Canal St. Instead of operating a train around what was designed as a curve meant for 25 M.P.H., we now do it in as little as 10 to 15 M.P.H. Make your time adjustments and thank your favorite bean counters accordingly.
As I've said already, it isn't RAPID transit anymore!
First, off, it takes a while for a train to acellerate to 80 or so, second, it requires straight track, of which there isn't much of either in the system, third, it requires a well designed roadbed, with charateristics different from what the subway has, fourth, there isn't enough space between stations....
Finnaly, both the LIRR and Metro-North signal systems probbably aren't suited for RT use anyway - look at what other subways in the US have, they are much like NYs. And besides, the I don't think they are any "safer" than the current subway ones. FWIW, they can go through stop indications at low low speeds without triggering and type of emergency brake. On paper, you can't do that with the current subway signal system..
Actually, you can 'Key By' a red automatic signal (most) at very slow speeds on the NYCT. It was virtually all automatic signals until the Steinway Street incident. Now some 'leaving' signals have been modified so they can not be keyed.
The LIRR and the NYCT signals differ primarily in the spacing of trains. LIRR trains operate with much greater spacing. I would estimate that an approach signal is displayed when the lead train is 1-2 miles ahead while on NYCT, it may be just several hundred feet. The other major difference is that on the LIRR, approach signals are enforced electro-mechanically. If the engineer does not slow down in advance of an approach signal, the automatic speed control will apply an emergency brake. On the NYCT, there is no mechanical enforcement of a yellow light. This is a decided dis-advantage which the new CBTC system will remedy.
Does anyone have info about this Sunday's fantrip in NYC?
The Nostalgia Train of D-types will make another trip to Coney Island this Sunday. Starting at 57th St / 7th Ave (BMT downtowm platform), the train will proceed via the BMT Broadway Line via tunnel to Dekalb Ave amd then via the Brighton Line to Stillwell Ave. After lunch, it will proceed back to 57th ST & 7th Ave via the Sea Beach Line. Departure time is 11am. You can buy tickets between 10am & 11am on the 57th/7th BMT platform.
Does someone have the actual G.O.? It would be great to ride the Broadway Express for the first time in umpteen years.
--Mark
Hello, my name is Jason and I'm new here(SubTalk, not Subway Resources) and finally have a question that doesn't seem dumb to me.
What is the longest elevated segment in New York? Is it on the IRT Flushing?
I'll bet it's either the J from the Willy B to where it dips into the Archer Ave subway or the A from just past Grant Av. to Mott Av./Far Rock. Anyone know for sure?
I'll bet that the A is on an embankment part of the way (any knowledge here?) It would have to be the J, although the White Plains Rd line to 3rd Avenue is also a long, slow ride.
I'd have to say it's a tossup between the Pelham and White Plains Rd. lines. Embankments don't count.
I'd say that the El routes, from longest to shortest, are:
- the J from Delancey St to where it dips underground after 121 St
- the White Plains Road line (2) between 149th St & 3rd Ave
- the Flushing Line (#7)
- the West End Line (B) in Brooklyn
- the Woodlawn Line (4) in the Bronx
- the Culver (F) in Brooklyn
- the Pelham (6) in the Bronx
- the Myrtle Ave El between Myrtle Ave & Fresh Pond Rd (M)
- the 1/9 in upper Manhattan and the Bronx
- the Liberty Ave El(A) from 80th to Lefferts Blvd
- the Canarsie Line from Broadway Junction to E 105 St
- The 2/3 Line between Sutter Ave/Rutland Road & New Lots Ave (3/4)
- the Astoria Line (N) betwen Queensboro Plaza and Ditmars Blvd
- the Brighton from Neptune Ave to Stillwell Ave
Pelham (6) is actually relatively short being elevated starting only at Whitlock Ave. And I'm not counting the A in the Rockaways because it runs on a former LIRR ROW and that elevated structure is not traditional "El". The elevated structure over Manhattan Valley (the #1 over 125th St) is also not mentioned because it realy isn't an "El". Finally, the Franklin Shuttle nearest Fulton St is elevated, but if I remember correctly, it's an embankment, not an EL on that very short stretch.
Have I forgotten anything?
--Mark
I would have to count the stretch of the 1 and 9 over Manhattan Valley, even though it is thr ground falling and not the track rising that produces this change. You have a train running on a tradition "El" structure above the ground, although it is a fairly short stretch.
Personal note: My father taught at IS 43 (Adam Clayton Powell Intermediate School - then Manhattanville Junior High School) and used that station for many years - you can see the school in the background after it leaves the station.
The White Plains Rd. line is on solid ground for most of the stretch between E. 180th St. and Bronx Park East stations. Is the J on elevated structure without interruption through the Eastern Parkway/Broadway Junction complex? If so, then the J is surely the longest elevated run.
The J Line is a traditional New York style elevated, built atop public streets, for the entire stretch from the Williamsburgh Bridge to 121st St. and Jamaica Ave. The stretch through Eastern Parkway/B'way Junction is atop streets throughout. So the J wins as the longest el segment in New York. BTW, when it went to 168th/Jamaica Ave. the el stetch was even longer - 5 stations are no longer in existence (Metropolitan Ave., Queens Blvd, Suthphin Blvd, 160 St, 168 St).
And, probably the longest ever, would have been the 3rd Ave El structure from South Ferry to Gun Hill and on the White Plains Rd structure to 241st St. That must have been some ride.
The Brooklyn Fulton Ave line from Park Row in Manhattan across the the Brooklyn Bridge to the Sands St Terminal and out to Lefferts was probably the longest elevated ride in that quarter.
Do our historical maps have mileage data?
I dug out my video of the original Pelham this past weekend and noticed a few things which made me wonder. For instance, in the sequence in which the train pulls into 51st St., there is a noticeable gap between the edge of the platform and the train, almost as if the train was running on IND/BMT rails. The station appears to be legit. The same gap is visible when the train pulls into "28th St.", which we all know is fake. Naturally, the camera never focused on the wall with the tilework and station name. Also, when the train pulls in, the 7339 number plate on the first car is clean. When it pulls out of the station right after the hijacking, there is a red splotch on the 7339 plate.
When the train pulls into "Grand Central", a tiled column is visible with "42nd St." on it once the doors open and Mr. Mattson gets off. It makes me doubt that Court St. was used for this scene, since none of its columns have tiles. They may have used one of the outer tracks at Hoyt-Schermerhorn.
Trust me, I don't have as much spare time as you may think....
Pls let me know when pics arrive and if they meet your needs. Thanks.
Charles-I got your email. No need to duplicate posts on here :-)
Will let you know when they arrive.
Good web page. I learned quite a bit.
Lets do a poll. How many of you think this was actually posted by Rudy Giuliani? I vote NO. Rudy would be in meetings or out on the road politicing at 4:15, not surfing the web.
This site has had some good press so he might have heard about it. I know he is busy, but, can you dictate E-Mail or BBS postings?? Is it real? The odds are against it though.
Is it real? Probably not, though I believe Dave can tell from what IP address posts are originating from. So I suppose we may all know the answer at some future point.
--Mark
Of course it's not real. Shame on you for even entertaining the thought! :-)
"This site has had some good press so he might have heard about it. I know he is busy, but, can you dictate E-Mail or BBS postings??"
If an elected official dictated a message, or designated someone else to write in his name, it would be longer and more detailed ("flowery" for the cynical and "uplifting" to the non-cynic) than what was actually sent.
Seriously, I think we have a few "somebodys" who either log on themselves or someone in their staff is doing it & passing on info once in a while. Most of the "somebodys" I know are like smonges when it comes to input, i.e. newspaper, magazines, networks of friends ... so why not the Internet. I think many of them are computer literate now. I know one who came up the hard way & has model subway cars at home. He has a computer on his desk too. BTW, what is Dilbert's bosses name ?
But then I was once asked to install a computer terminal, in my previous job outside of transit, in a "somebodys" office. They didn't want it to work, so they didn't want to pay the monthly connection service charge. They just wanted it as a piece of furniture. If the company logo came up on the screen that would have been a plus.
Mr t__:^)
> what is Dilbert's bosses name?
Pointy Haired Boss.
-Dave
Even if it wasn't hishonahdamayor it is still a great site
This site has had some press I've seen, mostly travel books.
But you never know ol' Rudy. One minute vanquishing porno salesmen in Morningside Heights, the next, praising the good ol' e-folks who make his town look great(or at least less menacing-I've learned NYC's bark is a lot more irritating than it's bite).
Can anyone assist me with an updated Roster
containing the following info
Fleet Numbers
Date
Mfgr
Model Numbers (M-1 ,M-2 etc)
Thank you
Smokiecat@webtv.net
could anybody tell me about this device. i hear NYCT has one, yet i have not seen it. at present the tracks don't seem much cleaner. how does it operate? what are future palns for it?
I remember seeing one or something like it at the Rockaway Park station in Queens during the summer. Actually the machine was parked in on of the tracks in the mini-type train yard at the station sides. I also saw a feature on it on TV. From what was said, first track workers must do the intial job by removing large items(including people) from the trackbed. It's hard to catch one of these guys since it's so slow and that they operate during the wee hours of th morning.
-GarfieldA
I have seen the vacuum train operate along the 7 Avenue corridor in lower Manhattan. It has been used on N/B and S/B express tracks; working under a general order.The train (i believe) is still undergoing tests and had not been put into official use.
The train "sucks" up everything and reall get the tracks clean. Workers have told me that they can adjust the vacuum settings and on a low setting will suck up a live subway rat.
turn it on high and watch them rats go!
2-legged rats or four-legged rats?
What size rats are we talking about? Some of them can get pretty big. Makes you want to say, "Move over, Pied Piper".
For someone who tried to pass himself off as a Train Service Supervisor (in an earlier posting), you know incredibly little about the system you allegedly work for. I GUESS WE ALL KNOW WHO YOU ARE NOW.
The Vacuum train has run in all 3 divisions and each time it does run, a General Order is written to cover it's operation. Aren't TSSs required to read the GOs.
So Mr. Hangstrapper Phoney, post your pass or even your pass number. Until then, you have lost all credibility.
Don't be so cranky. Even if Hangstapper is trying to pass himself off as something he is not, at least he didn't claim to be the Mayor.
At the risk of starting something (and I'm not trying to do this!), I had my doubts about someone who would call him/herself by the moniker of "Hangstrapper". I appreciate the play on words, but if memory serves me correctly, if the connotation of part of this word is the same as it was when I was a pre-teen (many moons ago!), it's not a complimentary term by any means.
Now back to the more topical issues of this group...
What is the total cost of the Franklin Shuttle reconstruction project?
How many passengers, on average, boarded the shuttle at Botanic Garden and Park Place, and were estimated to enter the subway system or transfer at Prospect Park and Franklin Ave., in order to take the shuttle?
According to official figures in an employee newsletter, the rebuild will cost $63 Million.
For the record; It is 1.4miles long and the oldest section dates to 1870s (the open cut section). In 1924 the platforms were lenghtened to 250 feet, Franklin Ave became one track and in 1928 the present location of Botanic Gardens Station opened.
A long time ago I remember a news report that the MTA wanted to shut down the shuttle because almost no one used it. The MTA based its data on tokens collected. Community leaders argued that was an unfair way to count, since everyone riding the shuttle beat the fare. That's the only reason to ride the shuttle and transfer, rather than just board the D/Q, 2/3, or A/C.
> In 1924 the platforms were lenghtened to 250 feet ...
In the 1950s and 1960s, the platforms were long enough to accommodate a 6 car train of BMT standards (which would make them about 400 feet). The Botanic Gardens station was even longer. I recall once (early 60s) when due to a derailment or some other problem, I was on a Brighton Local (QT) train which was re-routed to Franklin Ave. Gardens and all doors on all cars opened. It then went non-stop to Franklin, where, I believe, they only opened the doors in the front half of the train (it may have been the first 6 cars).
Fixing previous somewhat garbled posting:
In the 1950s and 1960s, the platforms were long enough to accommodate a 6 car train of BMT standards (which would make them about 400 feet). The Botanic Gardens station was even longer. I recall once (early
60s) when due to a derailment or some other problem, I was on a Brighton Local (QT) train (8 60 ft R27/30 cars) which was re-routed to Franklin Ave. The train stopped at Botanic Gardens and all doors on all cars opened. It then went non-stop to Franklin, where, I believe, they only opened the doors in the front half of the train (it may have been the first 6 cars).
Where was Consumers Park in relation to the Botanic Garden Station? Or are they one in the same?
They are one and the same.
--Mark
No, Consumer's Park was south of where Botanic Gardens is. It was originally a siding, and you could see on the east side of the ROW where there was space for a siding along side an industrial building.
Some friends and I are eagerly looking forward to a quick trip to NYC on 10/23.
Can you tell me the best way to get from W. 44th St. to West St. and Battery Place (Battery Park, I believe) - and back?
Thank you in advance for your help. The last thing NYC needs is 6 dames from Vermont wandering around lost!
Kim
The #1 train to South Ferry or the R or N train to Whitehall Street will work for you. Both can be reached at the 42nd St (Times Square) Station.
If you use the #1 or #9 train to get off at South Ferry
a) ride in the forward part of the train (the first four or five
cars). The conductor will remind you of this
b) Watch Your Steps getting off! Platform is curved - watch the
moving platform.
Wayne
You can also take the M10 bus at 44 St and 7 Av and take it to the last stop in Battery park city. To come back back take the M10 at Battery park city and take it to 45 St and 8 Av.
You can also....
Take the M6 bus (runs along 7th Avenue from 59th St to Times Square, then along Broadway to South Ferry). You can get the M6 at 47th St and 7th Ave. or at 42d St. and Broadway. Get off at the last stop, South Ferry. Returning, you get it at the same stop you got off. Uptown, the M6 will drop you on 6th Ave anywhere up to 59th St.
So you ladies are going from "Moonlight in Vermont" to "Autumn in New York." Nice trip.
If you are further west on 44th Street, you may want to try and take the 8th Avenue trains (A,C,E) from 42 St. to the World Trade Center. There is a great observation deck above and an interesting mall on the concourse level. Or, ride the same trains to Fulton St., and head upstairs for a short walk over to South Street Seaport and Pier 17.
Have fun!!!
Hi
I have a question to ask about the New York Subway. I have taken a look at the maps of the New York subway, and I have a map of the subway from when I visited New York, and I still can not understand how to get from one place to another on the subway. We used the bus when we were in New York. My mom was born in New York, and she use to use the subway everyday, but she said the names have changed. My question is how do people in New York figure out which lines to take, with all the symbols on the maps, that say trains might skip stations, and things like that. How do you know your train will stop at the station you want. Also some areas it looks like 10 different lines intersect. Is that a transfere station. The New York Subway sounds great. It is much more different then the Toronto Subway, which I have to say is a great subway, and I love riding it. So overall my question is, do New York residents know the subway by heart, or do they always have to ask transit personal how to get to a certain place on the subway. Even my mom said the map looks confussing, now.
It's easier than you are making out to be. If you have an official map (the ones on this site are not "official" and omit some useful information for navigating the subway)... each station is marked with what trains stop there along that particular line.
For instance it would say "Cortlandt Street N R" which means trains marked "N" or "R" stop at that station. Any place where the lines intersect and there's a white circle or bar or similar symbol there is a free transfer between the lines.
Find the station nearest your starting point and destination. If they're on the same line (by color) great. If not, find a transfer point or two that will get you where you're going.
The trains are clearly marked as to what line (A, B, 1, 2, etc) it is, and stations are well marked as to what trains stop there and which platform they stop on. I think the map is clear enough for you to be able to figure out where you are going.
-Dave
Knowledge of the subway depends on the individual. Not all New Yorkers know everything about the routing -- some know only the ones which they use or the ones they live near. Some may not know any routings at all. And there are, of course, those who know the entire system inside and out (like me, for example, and most others on this site). The map and system may seem overwhelming at first, but it's not that difficult to comprehend after awhile, and it's even easier if you have a great interest in it.
The main thing you have to watch out for are service changes, diversions, or disruptions, most of which are the result of trackwork or other construction. Like this past summer, IRT service had temporary reroutes because of a major reconstruction project on the Lenox Avenue spur of the Broadway-7th Avenue Line. And then there's the Manhattan Bridge . . . that's a whole other story. Nobody knows when that damn thing is going to shut down and reopen. It's like an evil cycle. Thing is, what you see on the map is almost never 100% true -- something is always happening somewhere, but for the most part, as long as you follow the map, you'll get to where you need to go.
Lines to watch out for (constant minor changes): Broadway BMT -- N and R service seems to be frequently affected -- either the N is not running, or the R is only running between 59th and 95th, or the N is operating on the West End instead of the Sea Beach . . .
6th Avenue IND: B and D service also are frequently affected. Be wary of the F, too.
8th Avenue IND: In particular, the E train. With the Queens Boulivard/63rd Street construction project, the E is also hit with changes at times.
Least likely subject to changes: The #7 Flushing, although lately, there were a couple times where service was not operating to Manhattan on weekends and post-midnight service.
42nd Street Shuttle: Now, let's get real here! How much do you expect a *TRUE* shuttle, operating strictly from point A (Times Square) to point B (Grand Central), on its OWN tracks (not sharing its tracks with anything else), to be changed or diverted! Be careful though -- a couple years back, they discontinued late-night service on the shuttle. Use the #7 during this time instead.
If you're interested in getting around Manhattan, a quick-and-dirty approach is to stick to the N and R lines. These lines run mainly along Broadway and are shown in yellow on the map. They're fairly user-friendly as there's no need to worry about expresses and locals. The N and R will get you reasonably close to most of the tourist sites.
Did your mother grow up in Brooklyn? Back in the good old days the BMT Southern Division lines were known by their colorful titles: Brighton, Sea Beach, West End, Culver, and 4th Ave. While no longer officially used, these titles still appear on maps, and are referred to on certain cars: R-32s, R-38s, R-44s, and R-46s. Many Brooklynites still use these titles; I personally still refer to the N/R in Manhattan as the BMT Broadway line.
Don't let yourself be overwhelmed. Today's maps greatly simplify things by assigning a different color to each trunk line; 20 years ago, each individual route had its own color. A good rule of thumb to follow is to stick to locals if you're not familiar with the system. They run on the outer tracks of most four-track lines. Each track is well-marked with which routes operate at what times. As you become more familiar, you may find yourself leaning more towards express trains, which is what I do.
For those of you who model in 'O' gauge, an interesting note. Several people who work with me have purchased a set of O gauge R-42s. There are 2 versions available. The first (for around $200) is a 4-car unit 1 powered and 3 dummies. The other (for around $300) is configured the same way but with (10) electronic station announcements. the interior detail is very good, down to the stantions. Like most O gauge equipment, they are slightly truncated though. All and all, they are beautiful models which run well. Although I do not operate in O gauge, I've ordered a set for a Shelf railway I'm building in my den. Anyone who wants additional info can contact me directly.
I just got mine. It was ordered in November 1997 and didn't arrive at the hobby shop until late last month due to production delays on the part of MTH.
They're very good for typical O-27 trains. They have nice details and are very good looking with excellant workmanship. For the scale modeler: trucks are not to prototype, as mentioned previously they're 50' instead of 60' long, undercarriage details are not to scale, etc. Don't get me wrong -- they're _very_ nice Lionel-style trains.
I got the one with "ProtoSound" and haven't run it yet. I model HO and have nothing to run it on. Cross post to Model SubTalk at http://www.iop.com/~patv/ModelSubTalk.html for more details. There's at least one other fellow who has a set and has run it. I'll try running it some time soon and post results there.
Everyone I know who has gotten a set is very positive about the performance. Aside from my 1:1 train set, I also model in N gauge (love really long trains). I was so impressed with this set, I've decided to add a shelf railway in my home office.
Maybe someday someone will come out with S Gauge subway cars. Preferably R-1/9s and/or R-10s, of course.
Received your envelope. Thanks. Keep in touch.
According The Unofficial Guide to the LIRR, popular rumour has it that the new equipment MIGHT just be put into service this comming tuesday!!! Of course, on the port Jeff line :(
The sticking point right now is a software bug in the speed control. Supposedly, 2 sets are ready to go. I doubt Oyster Bay will see these anytime soon though.
This Sat. I took the LIRR to Manhattan to see a friend. At Jamaica on the way in I saw the new coaches North of the station (on lay over tracks). On the way back they (#4041,4042 & 4044) were East of the station. S-o-o-o-o-o maybe they were testing to get ready for service introduction.
Mr t__:^)
Saturday I was once more out to Merrick and the outside North track at Jamica had a whole train of the new billevels. View was blocked by two other tracks full of MU's but those three you saw were great looking once we got to the platform.
I'll take a ride on them once they are in service!
[This Sat. I took the LIRR to Manhattan to see a friend. At Jamaica on the way in I saw the new coaches North of the station (on lay over tracks). On the way back they (#4041,4042 & 4044) were East of the station. S-o-o-o-o-o maybe they were testing to get ready for service introduction.]
Not to dash anyone's hopes, but those coaches have been sitting there for several weeks. And I'm not holding my breath waiting for them to go into service.
Sighted diesel #419 with consist of new cars incl. #5008 at Belmont Race Track siding last night, this AM it was gone.
Mr t__:^)
It has been seen in revenue service today on the Port-Jefferson branch. The consist was as follows: Engine 419, Coach Units 4008, 4031, 4010, and Cab Unit 5008.
It was the 4:38 westbound from Kings Park (which was 15 minutes late
and had to yield to the eastbound Eisenhower-era 4:58).
Wayne
WooHoo!!!! They're HERE!!!!
I rode on them!!!
I was on the maiden eastbound voyage today: the 6:31pm Hunters Point to Port Jefferson. It was a four car consist with 5008 on the west end (in the upper level of which I was) and 4008 on the east (which I heard on the scanner 'cause it had signage trouble.) behind one of the new diesel locos.
I rode with a bunch of car cleaners who were talking about how they planned to maintain them. They're going to need a lot of stainless steel and vinyl cleaner.
I peeked in the window of the control cab (it's very nice) and saw the
onboard phones but didn't get to play with them.
The seats are blue and grey vinyl (and smell really new) with a contoured headrest. They cars tend to sway a bit and several crewmembers complained of nausea.
I couldn't help but smile and yell "excellent" as I looked down from the HP Ave overpass. I was also pleased to see smiles on the faces of the teeming millions as I squeezed past them when exiting at Jamaica.
I believe the collector said we'd get the train again on Friday, if anyone wants to hop aboard!
Mike.
OK, if you were going to race all the trains in the A (or B) division,
who would win? Which trains would pull away the fastest and which
would achieve the highest speed? (From the oldest to the newest.) I
gather there's no perfect answer, but anything close would be cool
to clarify things.
Which train on the NYCT system is the fastest? That's an easy
one: The Lo-V museum train :)
It's too bad none of the Multisectionals were salvaged. They would probably blow the doors off anything else, including the R-62s. Those cars didn't have "Hold on" signs for nothing.
I'll bet the R-68s and the Q units could duke it out for the dubious honor of slowest cars. Even the BMT standards could accelerate faster than either one of them.
I had occasion to ride the J train out of Jamaica Center for the first time a few days ago. I have to say, riding in the front looking out the window, it was a great and interesting ride...there is nothing like taking that S curve yourself instead of reading about it on a website! One thing though...that must be some ride to take up there in really bad weather.
Back on August 1, 1971 I was aboard an eastbound J train of old R-7/R-9 cars (they called it the QJ back then) that got hit by lightning as it left the Cleveland Street station. It hit the gates of the last car (#1540)and left some scorch-marks. The train got taken out of service and we had to stand there in the teeth of a furious thunderstorm until another train came along.
Most of the stations between 121st Street and Cypress Hills have windscreens in their platform sheds so they are fairly well protected. The old 1880's stations (Crescent thru Alabama) are the ones wide open to the elements, being island platforms.
The J line has a wide variety of architectural styles, too: the newest (Jamaica Center, Sutphin), Dual Contracts (121st-Cypress Hills), Pre-BRT and new Pre-BRT (Crescent-Alabama, with original 1885 ironwork on some stations), Dual Contract redo of original BRT lines (Eastern Parkway-Marcy) with 1980's re-do at Marcy Ave. then classic BMT underground stations the rest of the way (Broad St. and Fulton Street used to look like IND stations until they did the Grecian Revival look a few years back). Essex St. has the old trolley terminal still visible, plus new blue and grey tile. Chambers Street, as bad shape as it is in, is full of little architectural gems, like the bas-relief and marble-pilastered plaques on the wall of the closed northbound platform. Just remember, if you go to Chambers Street, bring an umbrella. It is nothing less than a sieve. It rains there even on bright, sunny days.
Wayne
Was that enough of a lightning bolt to disable that car?
I rode that line once when it was snowing hard, during the winter of 1970-71; don't remember if the train was made up of R-7/9s or R-27/30s. We managed fine in either case.
The story goes that the R-16s weren't fond of snowy weather. If a snowstorm was bearing down on New York, they would send the R-16s to the Canarsie line, and BMT standards would traverse the Myrtle-Chambers, Broadway, and Jamaica lines.
I was riding several cars up in the QJ train, maybe about the
fourth car or so and that thunderclap was like a cannon going off.
We had just closed the doors at Cleveland and were just about to
get under way when it hit. Train jerked to a stop before getting
out of the station. There was a bit of commotion and confusion -
emergency lights came on. We were ordered off and huddled in the
shed amid the lightning and thunder. The train was taken out of
service - as it pulled away I could see a big scorch mark on the
back of #1540 beneath the cab window, which was blown out.
We waited quite a long time for the next train to pull in, it was
a 4800-series R42. The disabled train was later seen in the center track after Crescent.
Wayne
I put up some new Boston pix at
http://www.nycsubway.org/boston/new/
Of course we already had a lot of Boston pics from Jason DeCesare, and I'll incorporate my new ones into the existing pages in a week or so.
-Dave
It's soon going to be time to change the "Now in our third year..." to "Now in our fourth year...".
Just like cheese and wine, a good subway site gets better with age.
Well, our first stuff went online in late summer 1995, so I guess you are right. Maybe I should restore the site as it was at some time back then and put it up for kicks (a sort of website Brigadoon Day). Just in time for the 94th Anniversary of the IRT.
-dave
That sounds like a great idea, Dave! We'll all look foward to seeing the old site on October 27th!-Nick
I was wondering, in regards to the 63rd St. tunnel connection project now nearing completion, do any Subtalkers have any information and/or knowledge regarding what the TA's plans are to add or change routes and service when this project is completed?
As for one change, I believe I read on these posts that the Q will run along the Queens Boulevard line, probably to 71-Continental Ave.
Would that mean that the Brighton line will have a 24 hour express when the line is complete or would they just run a Shuttle service late nights?
knowing the MTA and how they have treated the Brighton line in the past ( remenber it had the D,M and Q all serving that line until the bridge reconstruction where it seemed that they forgot to put the M back over from th west end line) and with th older R40 train there that are suppossedly temporary for the q instead of the R 68 that it was using due to the fact that that Q does not run all day and they see it as way to update the train door sensors while letting th e B use the R 68s, how long it took them to change the Q lettering color from yellow to orange since it no longer ran the broadway express,and constand construction on the line, the best you can hope for is maybe longer hours of service from th Q or even weekend service ( then again that was suggested for the fulton line on weekends but that never happend)but believe me no 24 hours express on the brighton line > the ta amight feel there is not enough ridership to support that (EX:NX Route) and feel everyone shouled suffer in cramped slow trains.
They'll probably just cut it back to 2nd Av during off hours. When 63rd St first opened, the Q continued to run from 21st to 2nd Av until 11 at night for a few months, until they cut B service from uptown after 9PM, and sent that there.
I would like to see weekend express service. Just this past Sunday, a D was sent express, (and it was not too far behind the one before it, because I had just missed that one) and when I got off a Church, there was still a lot of passengers. Even if alot of them get off at Newkirk, if you send it local after Kings Hwy, it will still have enough people to justify express service.
From what I hear, they may start the Fulton express in May, (at the same time the Williamsburg Bridge closes)
And besides, if the Manhattan Bridge now switches sides at the time the tunnel is finished (2001) , then the Brighton will have no access to 6th Av/63rd St service. (They should send it to Church Av. then). And they probably won't extend it through the Broadway connection, because both Brighton trains will be running to 57th. If one goes through to Queens, and the West End goes to Astoria, where will the other line go?
My guess is:
Q trains weekdays, B trains evenings and weekends, F trains overnight through 63 St. The G will never go past Court Sq. or Queens Plaza again.
While the Manhattan Bridge is being redone, there are so many possibilites, along with split service, that the mind boggles.
It hardly makes a difference for 63rd St. Basically, one of the 2-4 trains running along Queens Blvd. at any time will run through the 63 St. tunnel, bypassing Queens Blvd. and replacing the G service along Queens Blvd., which had the problem of being filled with passengers and not going into Manhattan. Finally all four rush-hour trains on the Queens Line will go into Manhattan.
Was it worth building that messed-up 63 St. tunnel for merely that? Not in my book. They could have just run an extra Bway local service into 60 St to Whitehall St. and cut back the G line anyway. Then 3 train services would run on Broadway and it still would have space for another.
Here's a thought ... when the 63rd tunnel becomes a reality, why not terminate the "G" at Court Sq or Queens Plaza & run extra E/F/R service ?
P.S. I have no idea how much traffic rides the G to Brooklyn. So factor that into you reply.
Mr t__:^)
Thurston--
The first half of your message--about the G being cut back to Court Street when the 63rd Street tunnel is finished--that's just about a done deal.
As for adding service on the E/F/R--don't hold your breath, especially if they switch sides working on the Manhattan Bridge (with all trains running up Broadway line).
Michael
I'd be willing to bet they might run just one Brighton service similar to what was done in 1995: local in Brooklyn, express in Manhattan, and whatever they decide to do in Queens.
I wasn't in NY at that time. How did that work? What train was running local in Brooklyn, express in Manhattan and then on to Queens?
It was the Q
I'm certainly glad I was around to see that. But in response to Steve B's comment, that was a full closure when there was only one Brighton service. When the soulth side is open, there are two Brighton services (express and local), plus the West End, and if one goes through to Queens there is nowhere else to terminate the other, unless they send it to Queens as well, and I don't see them doing that.
Hey Eric -
Want better colors for your markups?
Use 'FF6820' for Orange and 'FFD700' for a nice Broadway Gold!
Other colors:
Brown - AA7500
Purple - D000D0
Lt Green - 80FF00
Grey - C0C0C0
Lt Blue - 40E0D0
Lex.Ave Green - 009300
Wayne
Thank you very much. But I use AAAA00 because I think this deep gold should be used for the line. I had been suggesting the TA use it for years, because it is more visible on the map (as well as on our posts), and you could use it with a white letter, just like all the other letters (I never did like black and yellow together. When they do use white letters, as on old signs, they deepen the yellow by adding orange, but this color is a pure yellow gold).
I also wish they would return to the different color borough street signs and use this color for Manhattan, which also had the black on yellow
But if these are the colors you used on the post about the Washington purple line, then they are very good. It took me a while to find a good gray and brown.
Thanx anyway.
Hey Eric -
Speaking of which - I saw a N train, yes with an Orange sign, at Coney on Oct.18 - it was in Slant R40 car #4320's front window. It was certainly orange, and had a white letter. I had seen other N signs with white letters, but not with an orange background.
I'll have to go out to my paint box and pull that GIF file (pylong.gif) and eyedropper out the purple to see what it's RGB code is. When I do I'll post it here.
Thanx
Wayne
There seem to ba alot of anomalies on the R-40 signs. I've seen the ones with the N with a white letter, and then there would be B with the exact same color and white letter. It's hard to tell whether that was supposed to be yellow or orange. Perhaps it was made ambiguous for reroutes. The TA did have thoughts of switching the N and Q in Manhattan/Queens, but otherwise, I have not seen provisions on signs for 6th Av. N (there is a code or two on the R-44/46 side signs for 21st St via 6th Av) Some of those R-40 signs even have a grey circle encasing "Shuttle" and "special"
Now right before the Metrocards were system wide, there was a poster showing all the stations that accepted them, with the lines, and a deeper orange (almost red) was used for BDFQ, and the pale orange (white letter) normally used for 6th Av was used for N & R ! This I liked, but I still wish they would use the less orangey (FONT COLOR=#AAAA00>gold for Broadway
When I previewed, I couldn't get the text back to correct the colors. Luckily, this time it worked
The colors that appeared on this poster were. BDFQ
NR
I wish they would use goldfor Broadway
Some color purists would say that THIS is GOLD , others would say it is a shade of yellow. Your shade is
more of a gold than mine. The color code for the above is FFD700.
I wish I could have gotten a picture of that one, if only the train
had come in on track 8 rather than track 7 at Stillwell. As it was,
I took a portrait of #4193 and her yellow-and-black sign. #4320's
sign side was in shadow of the staff hut and away from the platform
side.
wayne
Brian Cudahy speaks of an orange and white N displayed on the R-32 he rode in during his Sea Beach jaunt in the epilogue of the original Under the Sidewalks of New York. He mentions it again in the appendix about subway footage in movies, namely, the R-42s used in the chase sequence in The French Connection. In his words, "The units chosen for the film were normally assigned to the N line, had no B line signs, and operated during the movie with an orange and white N in the front slot."
BTW, that book has been revised once again. I saw it at the Transit Museum, but didn't buy it.
I've seen "The French Connection" numerous times - that is the standard "N" sign in #4572's front window, which is not the same color as those found on the "D" - that is Orange; the "N" sign is deep yellow, some could call it gold, others could call it yellow-orange; I guess some people's interpretation of the color orange is anything yellow with a little red in it. When I think of R42 (original) signs that are orange, those would be "D" and "EE". "JJ" too, but only for R16 and R32.
Wayne
The R-16s kept their multicolored route roller curtains until they were finally put out of their misery. (Sorry, but I couldn't help myself. It's not that I didn't like the R-16s, but let's face it - they died a slow and painful death.) I remember seeing those orange JJ signs on them when they were running on the J in 1985 and '86 and, for that matter, the light blue M signs as well. Obviously, no one was going to bother to replace the roller curtains on those cars, but I'm sure passengers were able to figure out what route those trains were running on.
Those N signs never appeared to be orange to me, anyway.
Certainly a cause of a yellow sign looking orange could be fading due to prolonged sun exposure. BTW--Those R16 colored front and side route signs have colored readings for MM (green); JJ (orange); HH (red) and TT (blue); Though the lines were contemporaries, there were no readings for the RJ and NX. Also, a set of signs was created for R10s which would have the routes in the old colors.
Certainly a cause of a yellow sign looking orange could be fading due to prolonged sun exposure. BTW--Those R16 colored front and side route signs have colored readings for lines such as MM (green); JJ (orange); HH (red) and TT (blue); Though the lines were contemporaries, there were no readings for the RJ and NX. Also, a set of signs was created for R10s which would have the routes in the old colors.
I remember seeing those orange JJ signs on the R-16s in 1985-86, long after the JJ had been dropped.
Most of the overhauled R-10s had new route signs with the appropriate color against a black background a la the Redbirds. Since they were all running on the C by then, you would see them sporting a blue diamond C. Other than that, I never saw any R-10s with multicolored curtains.
If my memory serves me well, the R16s had the same (or similar) curtain signs as the R32s which went as follows:
A AA B CC D E EE F GG HH JJ KK LL M MM N QB QJ RR S (black letter on white) SS TT
There was no "J" sign on these, so they merely substituted the next best thing: JJ.
They also had matching side window curtains, with the same color patterns as above. One's still in #6387's side window at the museum, set to A.
Wayne
When the R46s were first delivered, you all will remember that there were a bunch of them on the N. The yellow tint used on the N front route sign, when back lit by the fluorescent bulbs, would come up looking orange. Unlit, it was definitely yellow.
On the current model front signs, with the black letters on the yellow circle, either the mylar used to make the sign is thicker, or the yellow tint was different. I have samples of both signs (You knew I would) and will see if I can discern any difference.
Speaking of mylar, I take it that's what is used today for roller curtains, instead of canvas. My aunt picked up a CTA North-South roll sign for me from Merchandise Mart (probably out of a 2000 or 2400 series car) when the current Red and Green lines were aligned, and it's definitely not canvas. I wonder if I could get it to fit in an IND side destination mechanism...
When the R46s were first delivered, you all will remember that there were a bunch of them on the N. The yellow tint used on the N front route sign, when back lit by the fluorescent bulbs, would come up looking orange. Unlit, it was definitely yellow.
On the current model front signs, with the black letters on the yellow circle, either the mylar used to make the sign is thicker, or the yellow tint was different. I have samples of both signs (You knew I would) and will see if I can discern any difference.
Speaking of mylar, I take it that's what is used today for roller curtains, instead of canvas. My aunt picked up a CTA North-South roll sign for me from Merchandise Mart (probably out of a 2000 or 2400 series car) when the current Red and Green lines were aligned, and it's definitely not canvas. I wonder if I could get it to fit in an IND side destination mechanism...
I remember the Manhattan signs always having white on green. Staten Island had black on yellow, Brooklyn had white on black, queens was blue on white, and though I've never seen on, I think the Bronx was white on blue. I remember my dad pointed the differences out one sunday going from one grandma to the other along Linden Blvd..you knew when you got to Queens when the street sign colors changed.
I don't know if anyones been on lower B'way lately, but they've put in a few new white on black signs, with directional street numbers included. The ones on B'way are also marked 'Canyon of Heros'
-Hank
No, Manhattan became green at the same time as the other boroughs. It had beeen yellow before, There were no green signs in NYC, and I had always said that Si should be green, since the color wasn't used, and you saw green signs in the suburbs, and that borough was the most suburban.
I wish they would change Bronx and Queens back, leave Staten Island green, make Manhattan the gold I mentioned, nd if the old Brooklyn black & white was not visible enough, then substitute either brown (like LI state park roadsigns), or the purple originally used on EZ pass signs (they were changed to pink/magenta now)
There are always special signs that use different colors.
Going back further, I remember Brooklyn especially had two level street signs in enamel white on blue. The main panel had the street you were on and above it in a "window" was the cross street.
HOYT STREET
F U L T O N S T R E E T
(now draw lines around both and you'll get the idea. ) these disappeared in favor of the 1960s style.
>>Going back further, I remember Brooklyn especially had two level street signs in enamel white on blue. The main panel had the street you were on and above it in a "window" was the cross street
There's one still around in Manhattan--northeast corner of Park and (I think) 64th.
I believe these signs were originally found throughout the city, except possibly Staten Island. Pale imitations of the originals are showing up at various locations in midtown Manhattan. A few can even be found in White Plains, and are still provided with new inserts when street names change.
A few years ago a movie company was filming at my corner (Riverside Dr. and W. 113th St.) and they created old signs, except that they stupidly made the sign say (113th St) instead of (W. 113th St). When I informed them that "Hey, this is Manhattan, not Corona!" they merely shrugged their shoulders (What else?).
Bob Sklar
Hank Eisenstein mentions that "they've put in a few new white on black signs, with directional street numbers included. The ones on B'way are also marked 'Canyon of Heros."
Are there really street signs in Manhattan that use that spelling for the plural of 'hero'? Of course, if it's a canyon of sandwiches, that spelling would be what one would expect.
If the signs do read "heros," they were probably done by the same person who approved the "Flatbush Avenue Extention" signs in Downtown Brooklyn twenty years ago. I haven't been on the surface of Flatbush Avenue Extension in many years, so I don't know if those signs are still there (or if anyone even noticed them).
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
Re: "Heros" vs. heroes.
That's not any different that the people on this group and elsewhere, who otherwise employ good spelling, who pluralize "bus" as "busses". The plural of bus is buses. The singular of busses is buss, which means a kiss.
The only place these two should go together is at the edge-of-the-city subway terminals where people arrive by by car at the "kiss-and-ride" or on the bus. (^:
Re: "Heros" vs. heroes.
That's not any different that the people on this group and elsewhere, who otherwise employ good spelling, who pluralize "bus" as "busses". The plural of bus is buses. The singular of busses is buss, which means a kiss.
The only place these two should go together is at the edge-of-the-city subway terminals where people arrive by car at the "kiss-and-ride" or on the bus. (^:
It could also be that Hank is a lousy speller. :)
I don't know how they spell it on the signs, but that's the way I spelled it when I posted it. A canyon of heros is a canyon of heroes is a canyun uf herows.... :)
-Hank
OK, I looked on my way home yesterday morning, and it's spelled 'Heroes'
-Hank-eos :)
Thanks for your heroic effort in checking; it's good to know there isn't something new to complain about in my native city. Does downtown Brooklyn still have "Extention" on Flatbush Av. Ext.?
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
At this point, the connection may be done well before the service is changed. In order to run the Q to Queens Blvd., it has been determined that 14 additional trains would have to be assigned to the 'Q' line. The fact is that with current maintenance levels, even with the purchase of 108 R-143s, there is no way that the B division can put out enough cars to meet that requirement. Alternatives being talked about include exercising the option for an additional 100 R-143's or increasing the MDBI.
Except for the minor detail of the R143 being vaporware at the moment...
-Hank
Microsoft is building trains now too? :)
--Mark
What happened to the plan to re-route the "F" via 63rd tunnel to take pressure off 53rd tunnel ? Wasn't that why it was built in the first place ?
Mr t__:^)
yes that what is done at night when the F runs to queensbridge but that is it
And this is probably what they'll do at night when you don't need both services from 6th Av to Queens. Anyone for 53rd St stations and 23rd St Ely will still have to take the D to 7th Av for the E
The F hasn't run to Queensbridge in months. There is a B'Way shuttle running 24/7. The 63rd St connector was built to reduce the bottleneck at Queens Plaza. The 53rd St tunnel was able to handle the traffic.
Darnit! I KNEW we should have kept those R-30s!
Ahhhh, but to air-condition them? Impossible! Better would have
been to keep the R10s and air-condition THEM, placing the a/c units
in the peaks of their ogee roofs and creating dropdowns at the ends
just dreamin'
Wayne
What would have been so hard about AC on the 30s? It was
basically the same interior as the R32, and they managed to
stick the AC in those. They'd be damn HEAVY though. I have
to admit, there is something strangely appealing about an R10
HVAC mod. An air-conditioned car with air-operated doors!
And the R10s looked damn attractive at 21/Queensbridge the one
time they were out there.
From what I remember hearing, they studied air-conditioning the
R27 and R30 cars and came to the conclusion that due to roof clearance
problems that it would not be feasible. I think they were going to
try and retrofit them the same way that they did the IRT cars.
So they settled on rebuilding a handful of them (the R30As) without
A/C.
My fantasy blueprint for hi-tech R10 included the following:
Air conditioning, dropping the center channel in the interior ceiling (A/C vents go there), replacing the flourescent light with
PCC bullet-style lights (down the edges of the interior ceiling), adding flourescent lights in parts of the center of the ceiling, replacing the seats with R44 style buckets, but in shades of blue, green and grey, digital signs in their original pockets, new doors with the same window shapes, new exterior window frames, new flooring speckled black like R68A #5057) among others..
That which stayed the same: the straps, handholds, door controls,
SMEE braking system. The rest of the mechanicals would have been
modernized.
Wayne
The good news is that because of the car shortage created by the 63rd St. Connector, a committee has been established to determine what steps will need to be taken to extend the life of the R-32s and R-40s by a minimum of 5 years. Look for new floors on the R-32s very soon.
I just enetered the conversation in the middle so don't mind me as to what I am going to ask. From what I gather the r32 and r46 can't fit in the 63st tunnel, or is it some other type of cars that do not fit because of the air conditioniing. Thanks for those ho will answer this question.
It isn't the R32 for sure; they're all that's currently running on
the S Shuttle from 57th & 7th.
As for R46 cars, the Q was running
R68s out there before they went to Slant R40s - R68s are 75-foot
cars, just like the R46. Maybe you were thinking of the problem of
running R62 cars through the 7 line tunnel - someone had mentioned that there was clearance trouble there.
-Wayne-
Maybe it is some other class of car. In Greller's NYC SUbway Cars Book, there is a picture of the R62 on the #7!
As far as I know, there are no clearance issues with any
current passenger rolling stock in the 63 St tunnel.
When the R62 test train was tested on the Flushing line in
1984, it exited the Steinway tubes with fewer marker lights
than when it entered :) The problem has since been corrected.
If the BMT-IND is going to have a car shortage when the 63rd St. tunnel opens, and the IRT is going to have too many cars after the new R-142s start arriving. it seems like they could take some of the redbirds, fit them with extenders the way they did for some of the Low Vs on the Culver Line in the late 1950s, and run them temporarily on the BMT or IND.
They could use the IRT cars on some of the rush-hour only lines (skip stop Z or the M on the West End, for example), freeing up some of the R-42s - with more passenger capacity - for use on the Q, F, or whatever line the MTA decides to run through 63rd Street.
It would also give the redbirds at least a couple of years reprieve from the scrapyard, even if seeing one pulling into DeKalb Ave would look a little bizzare.
I got flamed for a suggestion like that (ie. making the Brighton Local to the Franklin Shuttle Redbirds, and running all the through Brighton service express) months ago. The car imbalance does seem silly, however.
If I may put in my two cents' worth:
Keep the pneumatic doors on the fantasy R-10s. Beef up the motors, add some soundproofing... and put them back on the A line where they belong!! Modernize the signals along CPW so expresses can run like expresses again. I don't know about the R-68s, though.
P. S. Last week, I was on an express which actually blew by a local between stations! I think it was on the West Side IRT. Go Redbirds!
Yes, I miss operating & riding those R30's too, even with the ones with the Westinghouse Controllers being the heaviest ones to hold down! But the reason why they were let go, eventhough some IRT models were older, was because converting them to air conditioning was a must, but that would have made the cars prohibatively too heavy.
look at how the service is now durin the week days with the the Band Q line and maybe knowing knuckle heads in the MTA they amy kep those trais running but only with the exception of B or Q express service beyond 21st Queensbridge
Just got back from a weekend in Wash. D.C. and had the pleasure of riding the Green line from Greenbelt to the temporary end at Fort Totten. Nothing less than spectacular with many runs thru tunnels
or was it underground? Stations are above ground but you quickly dive under for the trip to the next station subway style! Took the Red
line the rest of the way to center of D.C. and transferred at the awesome Metro Center Station to the Blue Line.
I was not too happy with the ATC on certain segments of the Red Line.
It seemed like power was too choppy and jerky in certain spots. They need to smooth out the power application somewhat .
Overall, I was pretty impressed overall. My score is 9 out of 10.
The part right after it goes underground (just south of College Park-
U.of Md.) is bored tunnel (you can see the shieldwork from the front
window) up until the last curve before Prince Geo. The first section
after Prince Geo. is really just a covered cut - then you're back
outside for the crossover. You can see how it dives again into the
next underground section; this part is under the park and is bored too, but not the same way as the first part is. There's a reverse
question-mark curve; it reverses direction just as it comes out for
West Hyattsville. Then you got your 90-degree right after W.Hyatts
and we're back underground. This part's like the
Red Line between Grosvenor and Twinbrook - underground but
not too deep underground. Did you notice the half-and-half station
at Fort Totten - part of it is truly underground (in the hillside)
and looks like an underground station.
Glad you enjoyed your journey on the Green Line!
Click here to take another ride on the Green Line
Wayne
I rode the Greenline shortcut back in September, most intresting ride I've taken yet on the metro. I haven't been to the other end of the Red line (have not gone bast the zoo yet). Only other thing I like is the end of the Yellow line how the station ends up in the side of a hill. The handicap "incline-nator" or eleavator was neat there too.
On my trip on the shortcut when we switched off the Red line to the Green in the tunnel I think we lost ATC. We came to a short stop, then there was some message traffic from the operator to whomever (Command in NYC) and then we moved off. I think he might of said he was taking over control. The train upon reaching the end of the green line was out of service and they split the train in half, the back half going back into service.
Great ride...
That shortcut track beneath Fort Totten station isn't part of the
actual system - it's normally used only to transfer trains between
lines, so it doesn't surprise me that there's no ATC there. They'll be using it at least until the end of next year, when the Green line's two ends connect.
Wayne
The Green Line shortcut is IMO the smartest, most innovative thing WMATA has done in a long time. Kudos to Richard White, the current General Manager. I also like him because I get the impression he really listens to passengers and understands what they need.
I no longer live in DC, but I was still living there when the Green Line opened to Greenbelt -- in fact, that was the last opening I was able to attend before moving to Stockholm in 1994. It didn't take me long to decide that Prince George's Plaza was my favorite station in the system.
IMO the Washington Metro is a great system, marred only by the rather high fares (which they're about to offer some relief for; just read it on the Washington Post site) and the lack of sufficient money for maintenance and a high level of service in recent years.
Tim Kynerd
Sundbyberg (småstan i storstan), Sweden
Here you go, my friend!
Click here to take a ride on the Green Line.
Wayne
Tim—
Hate to tell, but many Washingtonians would disagree with your positive contention...
In order to run the Green LIne Shortcut, WMATA had to reduce the frequency of trains on the Greenbelt section of the line from every 6 minutes to every 9 minutes. Why, you ask?
There is only one connecting track between the Green and Red lines at Fort Totten. To go from the Green Line onto the Red Line, a downtown train must...
a) Cross over to the outbound Green Line tracks just east of Fort Totten.
b) Use the switch, and the connecting track to get up on the Red Line (at slower speeds).
c) Wait for any Red Line train to pass before moving onto the downtown track.
A returning train must make sure no downtown train is using the connection before proceeding down the connecting track. Fortunately, it makes no switch.
So it's a one-stop trip in exchange for service frequency. Washingtonians don't mind the transfer, since they do it outside of rush hour anyway.
A better approach might have been to alternate trains going downtown and terminating at Fort Totten. You'd still have service every 6 minutes to all the stations except Fort Totten. And you could choose to take the one-stop ride or a train that requires a transfer.
Michael
Thanks to all who made today's D-Type Triplex trip most enjoyable!
It has been 34 years, one month and ten days since last I set foot
in one of those trains. And that old train can still get up and go-
we left one R68-full of N passengers in the dust along Broadway
(well, at least for a few moments) - you should have seen the looks
on some peoples' faces when we went through the express stops!
I would bet that many of them had never seen a D-Type before.
The guide in our car (6112A) on the way out to Coney Island was
extremely informative and helpful, pointing out sights and features
that I had never taken notice of before.
Hey, who was running the show out on the E line today? I had to
wait over twenty minutes for one to show up (I needed to get to
Jamaica LIRR) at Roosevelt Avenue (I got there 3:10, E arrived
after two Fs at 3:33) and when it did, it ran local all the way.
As a result, I missed my 3:51 express to Babylon by a whisker and
had to suffer the milk train local, which, thankfully, I fell asleep
aboard. I was not a happy camper.
Wayne
E and F train service ran local in both directions at least between Roosevelt ave and Queens Plaza.Reason:no R service.G.O IN EFFECT. I don't know what they were doing.The E was probably delayed because all A train service was operating local in manhattan due to switch replacement work at Canal st.As a result, no C train service.Too many G.O'S at one time.
I took the N train to 86th St (Brooklyn) right after the D-Type trip ended, having been assured the train would return to Coney Island via the Sea Beach Line. Boy was that a LONG local ride on the N train. It wasn't fun at ALL. I don't envy anyone getting on at, say, 20th Ave in Brooklyn and having to travel all the way to midtown Manhattan.
Anyway, after waiting for the D types to arrive at 86th St for a half hour, I decided that they weren't going to traverse the Sea Beach Cut. So I took the next N to Stillwell Ave and took an F to Neptune Ave. From the north end of the platform and a decent lens, you can really see what's going on in Coney Island yard. Anyway, while taping some of the yard moves, in comes the R-110A's using the West End yard connection, followed by the D Types! Talk about some new and old video! While the Nostalgia Train GO said they'd be returning via the Sea Beach cut, they, too, were diverted onto the West End line. West End service was terminating at Bay Parkway because of switch replacement on the Stillwell Ave approach.
So I (accidently) got my closing shots from another good D-type trip up the Brighton Line with the D-types being laid up in the yard.
--Mark
I agree totally about the guide. Very knowledgeable about switches,
had a great sense of history of the road, and he fielded all questions
very well.
And hey...I got my $25 worth the sec I saw that D-Type pulling into
the station blowing it's whistle. The rest was all bonus. :)
Now I'm really getting jealous. Maybe one of these days they'll run the Triplex train down the Sea Beach Express tracks. Heck, I might get lucky one of these days and make it to one of those fantrips.
NYCT HAS INSTALLED FRONT DOOR INTERLOCKS ON A FEW MCI BUSES. HAS ANYONE EVER HEARD OF THIS BEING DONE ANYWHERE ELSE?
I believe this is standard procedure in San Francisco. I know the Macks, GM fishbowls, and New Flyers (still operating today), as well as the Flyer tracklesses, have this feature. Anybody know more?
Question One: How was the El fantrip on 10/18? I missed it because of my commitment to the city AIDS Walk held the same day. I would've liked to have met some of you cowpokes.
Question Two: Am I the only person who has noticed the fact that the Regional Rail is still using the cars borrowed from Virginia during the magnanimous strike?
1. You missed a good trip (I thought so). I think there were about 60 people aboard, which was much smaller than I thought would turn out. It appears that, in addition to the Nostalgia Train in NYC, some group was running two PCC's around the SEPTA trolley lines at the same time.
The first part of the trip was a four-car Budd train. It went very smoothly and several photo stops were made along the line, including a "run-by" of sorts at Spring Garden (we were removed from the train, it backed into the layup track to clear the road train, then re-entered the station to pick us up - good side-by-sides of the special and the road train south of the station). Part 2 was a six-car M4 train with a similar itinerary, although we were permitted a nice photo shoot at Millbourne westbound. I'm not sure how many "cowpokes" were there - I met Timothy and spoke to a couple of other folks. It was sure a nice day for the trip, though!
2. I haven't seen the VRE train since early August and was under the impression that it was sent back to VRE. It sat in the yard at 30th St for a good week before it disappeared again. Are you sure it's still here? I have also heard that one car of the six leased was never operated the whole time it was on SEPTA property.
Too bad there were so many events taking place Sunday. I was on the PCC trip. It was non-stop riding over many lines: Germantown Ave., Girard Ave., Island Ave., City Subway, etc. We covered lots of mileage. I live in NYC & didn't feel like driving to Philly at the last minute. As I went with my son, we took AMTRAK from NYP to 30th St. At $38 per ticket, I thought the price was quite steep & planned to take SEPTA/NJT home via Trenton, to save $, but we got a ride home to the NY side of the GWB. We took a short ride on the new M4's from 30th to 11th St's. Compared to a current NYC subway car, contrary to what many of you think, I found no problem of slow accelleration. We immediately caught a 23 bus. Our first time in a Neoplan bus and won't mind if it's the last. Suspension good, but is slow & noisy accellerating till the tranny shifts. Then it bucked, then took off! That was a 1984. We had a fare box problem + a driver relief so around Erie/Germantown we swapped bus & driver to a 1986 Neoplan. Same kind of ride. Got off at Germantown Depot & had a wonderful day riding on our PCC!
Your impression of the M-4's is the same as mine, after a few rides and the fan trip on Sunday. There remain some teething problems, but that's common among any new equipment.
The higher-numbered Neoplans (8400-8800 series) seem much more "jerky" in their rides than the newer, lower-numbered (3000's). The transmission shift jerkiness is very noticeable and often catches standees by surprise.
I agree with your feelings on Amtrak's high cost. I used to take NJT for just that reason. You may have seen my previous posts on my last NJT trip on the day of the Low-V outing. I'm not sure I'd wholeheartedly recommend that option any more.
The Neoplan's have a high torque first gear to get them moving. The shift from 1st to second gear upward is the most jerky. The other shifts are not too bad and the downshifts are not too bad either. I love the whining noise when in 1st gear but boy do you get a jerk when it shifts into second!
Try one on an expressway run, especially when you're standing and it downshifts from 3rd. My advice would be to hang on tight! (I'm not always standing, but I experience this all the time.)
Granted, the worst group shift-wise seemed to be the original group, 8285-8434. The following orders seemed to get progressively better.
The worst series, care-wise, seems to be the 3100's formerly based at Callowhill, now dispersed to other barns. A group is at Allegheny and is often assigned to my line (27). They are without a doubt the most beat-up, abused and derelict buses on the system, and they all seemed to be that way upon reassignment from West Phila. But the signs work!
Does anyone know which stattions are next on the list? We should start our own list of the most needing stations. My picks: Chambers J/M/Z, 59th ST N/R, Broad J/M/Z, Court N/R, Dekalb N/R/D/Q and Grand B/D/Q(just because its ugly!)
Broad Street (J/M/Z) HAS been renovated, perhaps it is the period Grecian Revival tile, which has that original 1913 look that gives it the impression of age.
(Station opened in 1931 under Dual Contracts looked like IND originally).
The same treatment was given to Fulton Street; this job was completed in either 1995 or 1996.
59th and Lexington (N/R) has also been renovated - note new platform
surface tile as well as white wall tile panels w/red trim as well as
a cleaned and resurfaced mosaic "Lex" frieze. I think this was also a 1995 or 1996 completion. They did 5th Avenue/59th at about the same time.
You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT about Chambers Street. I have complained
about this so many times...but this is more than just window dressing.
The root cause of this decay comes from above. They are planning to
re-do Foley Square sometime soon, at this time, some attention may be
given to the subway station. If they don't do something soon, the
ceiling may turn to dust. I have a "wish list" of repairs/renovations for Chambers Street, may make it public some day.
AGREED: Both Court and De Kalb Avenue, especially De Kalb need work as well. The same people who did Pacific Street and 36th Street (nice job there) should be retained for this, since the stations are the same style. Northbound side De Kalb had large sections of mosaic frieze
missing near the station's Brooklyn end (shame shame!)
Don't think Grand Street IND will be renovated though - that wall is
a temporary one, behind it there are trackways for the 2nd Avenue
subway, if it ever opens.
Other stations that need renovation:
* 59th Street (A/B/C/D). Very gritty station, needs sprucing up.
* Queens Plaza (E/F/G/R). Lose the yellow I-beams! Patch that wall! Make everything purple.
* 149th-Grand Concourse (2/5). I have specific ideas for this too:
(do the ceiling like 53rd/5th / Roosevelt island, restore some
of the original tablets, sandblast and refinish the brick & marble
put platform pylons with lights in the top like the DC Metro does)
* 6th Avenue (L). Platform level needs attention.
* Canal Street (J/M/Z) UGH!
* Bowery (J/M/Z) DOUBLE UGH! (although parts of it have been cleaned)
(don't think ridership levels will warrant more than cosmetic work here)
There are others as well...
(my own opinions, not those of NYCT or any of its agencies)
Wayne
Wayne: Canal Street J/M/Z "is under renovation". The current hold-up (Along with the 6 platyforms) is the building that collapsed some time ago. Also, there are rumors floating around of only using the one side at Canal J/M/Z thast has been renovated.
to Hangstrappers: it seems that you do not ride the system!How else could you miss the floor tile at Broad St and 59th N/R?
So the wall at the south end of Canal St. J/M/Z would be knocked down, and the center track extended to connect to the Brooklyn-bound track south of the station? That seems like more trouble than giving the current east platform a makeover...
Would the same then be done at Chambers Street, consolidating service onto one platform and connecting the tail track there to the through tracks?
I WORK FOR NYCT!!!! WHAT I SAID WAS 59TH STREET ON THE N/R IN BROOKLYN! WHEN I SAID BROAD ST, I MEANT BOWERY. I APOLIGIZE FOR MY RAMBLED THOUGHTS ON THAT
Hmmm..!I forgot about 59th St-4th Avenue! And to think I was just through there Sunday! That sure is one sad looking frieze there. BUT
it is no worse than was 36th Street at its worst. The only problem
at 59th Street is that some of the base colors seem to have faded out
which may require not only reglazing but retinting as well. One of
the riders on the D-type, when the reglazed tile at 36th was pointed
out remarked that it stunk to high heaven when the glaze was first applied, causing some a bit of distress.
Again, Bowery isn't a total loss - some of it is actually in fairly
good shape, but the parts that are shedding need to be addressed.
I keep missing Canal Street on the J/M/Z. Last time I was there was
Oct 31 1997. Northbound side looked pretty sad to me. What is this
plan they have, closing one set of tracks? Do tell...
Wayne
Wayne: Canal Street J/M/Z "is under renovation". The current hold-up (Along with the 6 platforms) is the building that collapsed some time ago. Also, there are rumors floating around of only using the one side at Canal J/M/Z thast has been renovated.
to Hangstrappers: it seems that you do not ride the system!How else could you miss the floor tile at Broad St and 59th N/R?
While were on the subject of Grand Street and 2nd Ave line, I just want to mention that the Grand Street Station is currently in the process of adding more street entrances. On the Southbound platform, they have constructed a makeshift shack against the platform wall. There were definitely some construction going on behind that shack, but I couldn't tell if a hole was made through the platform wall. The door to the shack was locked each time I went there (it was during the weekends). So if anyone passes Grand Street and sees that door open, take a peek. You might get lucky and the other part of the station.
David L.
***Just want to make one thing clear- I am not the same person as "Dave L."***
>>***Just want to make one thing clear- I am not the same person as "Dave L."***
It's true, he isn't. I guess if people are confused we could flip to see who takes a different nom du post...
I had thought the work at Grand Street was limited to the one new stairwell between the street and the fare level, and assumed that the shed on the platform was just for storing materials; but since I pass that way most days, I can keep an eye out for an open door.
>>It's true, he isn't. I guess if people are confused we could flip to >>see who takes a different nom du post...
No, I like my name. I've been using it since SubTalk started. I just don't post frequently as frequently as I use to. :-)
Back to Grand Street...
I did see some support beams behind that shed, but I couldn't see if a hole was made in the wall.
David L.
72 St/Bway needs platform enlargement. The stairs are very narrow. There can't have people gooing up and down at the same time. It is particularly frustrating when a train comes in and you want to hurry down the stairs to catch your train but you can't because of the people going up. Woul need more stairwells as well with at least another entrance/exit.
But I know it would be costy and there is the control building that is a landmark. Wasn't it supposed to be done a few years ago?
There is also that Heins-LaFarge mosaic tapestry that's there -
they lost one at Bowling Green thru oversight, don't think they'll
want to lose another, ratty as it may be. (They did a great job of
restoring one at 110th & Lenox)
Period mosaics must be preserved wherever possible.
Wayne
Please Stand BY... Seriously, the project is listed in the MTA's current capital projects list. There will be a second entrance further North with a new entrance, crossover and elevators. The current entrance will be renovated and retained(restored.) platform space is also supposed to be addressed.
After the 1970s covering/removal of mosaics and subsequently some being declared landmarks the MTA now restores instead of removes. Also, if federal funds are involved, and for 72 there will be, some money *must* be spent on art--"Arts for Transit". This program has resulted in such art as the Cortlandt BMT mosaics, Nevins IRT, Lenox Ave Stations (116,125,135), 59th/Lex (IRT/BMT),5th Ave BMT manhattan, Penn Station IRT among others.(These mosaics are either on this site or will be soon)
A new mosaic is currently being installed at Chambers/WTC/Park Place IRT/IND Complex. So far there are "eyes" in the tile near the top color band at various locations. I frquently use the stationa nd will post updates. (Wayne will be taking photographs when the mosaic is completed and will post to the site.)
While on the subject of this complex- a new, straight entrance is being built for the IRT. The new plywood is to serve as a screen for asbestos removal going on behind the plywood. (Asbestos removal is also being done on the West End and Sea Beach Lines).
disclaimer: While some info is based on official information, this post is personal opinion and not that of the MTA or NYCT**
And not to mention Pacific Street, 36th Street-4 Ave BMT (great glaze!), Broad Street, Fulton Street (BMT), Astor Place, Spring Street, Borough Hall IRT 4/5, the list goes on and on. The only issue I have is with what they did at 3rd Avenue-149th Street in the Bronx. However, it may have been done that way because the original tile may have been in bad shape. That does NOT excuse the cementing-over of the original cartouches; at the very least they should have been preserved in new locations.
Wayne
My favorite mosaics are the ones in 5th Avenue BMT in Manhattan. I love the zoo animals! The monkeys with their long, curved tails are my favorite! I think this is an exhaustive list of the other mosaics:
Polar bears
A Horse
Penguins
Turtles
Birds
Ducks
Snails
Monkeys
Let me know if I omitted any animals!
I didn't know about the horse, turtles and ducks - but there are
also butterflies! Most of these should be appearing soon in the
"line-by-line" for the Broadway BMT. I took pictures there on
August 1 and September 19 - I think I got ALL of the animals in the
60th Street exit. The 59th Street exit wasn't open on Sept.19 as it
was a Saturday.
Not only are the animals very attractive works of art in tile, but the
completely-restored 1919 Squire J. Vickers frieze, icons and tablets
are worth a good look too. Every last bit of tile has been cleaned
right down to the shine. They'll also be included in the station
photos...
Wayne
Wayne,
Probably the reason you didn't see the turtles and the ducks is that they are in the long passageway that leads to the entrance right next to Central park on Fifth Avenue. But the horse is very large, right at the bottom of the stairway from the entrance at the SE corner of 5th and 60th, behind the token booth. I don't know how you missed it!!!!
Where are the butterflies???? I would love to see them. Thanks for pointing their omission out to me. I don't think they are any less important than the other animals!
I missed the horse probably because I didn't exit the station.
The butterflies: from Northbound N/R go up stairs, make a left past
the monkeys, then go about seven feet and look left. They're right
over a bench. A closed door is to their right. There are four of
them, and they are predominantly blue, with green accents, very attractive. I took a photo of them on September 19.
Wayne
You heard it from me first. The upper portion of the el, past Mt. Eden Av has been diagnosed unreliable for the future. There is no need to be alarmed now, as the structure is in fine condition. It is the condition 10 years from now that is a concern, since the el was built as a temporary measure and meant to be replaced by a subway. That is what NYCT is now studying and leaning towards as a viable option.
"Temporary structure"?? It has served reliably for 80 years, if that is temporary, they had a pretty permanent idea of temporary structures back when the Jerome Ave. line was built. The Jerome Ave. line is of typical Dual Contracts construction - what is temporary about it? What other lines, if any, were similarly built as "temporary structures"?
As for being replaced by a subway, the Concourse line is only 3 to 4 blocks away. The idea that NYCT would build a new subway line that close to and parallel to an existing subway line just doesn't seem credible. Where did you hear this?
I guess you need to define "temporary". You may recall that the old P & W had a temporary terminal at 69th St in Upper Darby for over 50 years!
... and the terminal at Flatbush & Nostrand (2/5 lines) is STILL temporary :)
--Mark
So is the PATH terminal at 33rd St.
Speaking of a subway to replace the Jerome Ave. line, the Concourse line was intended to do just that, given Mayor Hylan's intense dislike for the privately operated IRT and BMT.
If I remember correctly after our '81 strike there were mentions in the newspapers about closing the line north of the 167 street interlockings due to low ridership caused in part that the Concourse line had an express that provided "somewhat" superior service than the Jerome Av line. Some rumors have been floating for decades and 2nd Av "will be finished on schedule".
Very interesting! With the Concource line nearby, I doubt if money would be appropriated to rebuild it. But closing it would cause 2 primary NYCT operational problems: one link of transfer between the IND/IRT divisions would be severed; and a total loss of access & closure of Mosholu Maintance Facility for inspection/repair of the #4 line fleet.
Does anybody with knowledge of SEPTA operations have a list of the various depots and which routes come from which depots?
contact DVARP
This is the most accurate info I have, and I'm covering all the lines since you didn't specify which (bus, trolley, etc).
Allegheny Depot (all bus) - 9, 27, 32, 33, 35, 39, 48, 54, 60, 61, 65*
Callowhill Depot (all bus) - 15, 21, 30, 31, 38, 40, 42, 43, 44, 46, 52, 63*, 64*, 65*, 121, G*
Comly Depot (all bus) - 1*, 14, 19*, 20, 24, 28, 58, 67, 70, 84, 88*, R*
Elmwood Depot (all rail) - 10, 11, 13, 34, 36
Frankford Depot - bus 1*, 3, 5*, 8, 19*, 25, 26, 73, 88*, 89, J, K, R*, trackless 59, 66, 75
Frontier Depot (all bus) - 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 124*, 125*, 127, 128, 129, 130, 201, 310, 311, 314
Midvale Depot (all bus) - 2*, 6, 18, 22, 23*, 47*, 47m*, 53, 55, 56, 57*, 77, C*, H, L, XH
Southern Depot - bus 2*, 5*, 7, 12, 17, 23*, 37, 47*, 47m*, 57*, 63*, 64*, 68, 108*, C*, G*, trackless 29, 79
Victory Depot - bus 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108*, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 124*, 125*, rail 100, 101, 102
Rapid Transit - Fern Rock, all Broad St, Ridge Spur; 69th St and Frankford (el), all Market-Frankford
Routes with * are shared operations.
Hopefully, I didn't miss any. If I did, please correct if you notice.
Bob and Steve thank you for your imput on my SEPTA question. That was a great help. One small question isn't there a Luzerne depot? I didn't see it mentioned. Did SEPTA close it? Again thanks for the help.
First, your question (and you're welcome). Luzerne is still there but in limbo. Its vehicles were moved to Midvale in Spring 97. Since there is no rail at Midvale, any restoration of the North Phila trolley system will require Luzerne to re-open in some fashion. In the meantime, it's there.
Second, I have a few corrections for the list I previously supplied.
Allegheny - remove 39
Callowhill - I forgot about the 13 bus shuttle (during bridge construction, it closes the gap on Chester Ave where trolley route 13 runs on Woodland), 76 and the Market-Frankford El "Owl" bus
Comly - add the M-F Owl and Newtown Shuttle
Frankford - add the M-F Owl
Frontier - add 118 (shared with Victory) and 206
Midvale - add 39, 89 (shared with Frankford), and the Broad St Owl
Southern - add the BS Owl
Victory - add 122, remove 206
Is Luzerne completely closed up (bays/windows covered/blocked) or is it used for storage of dead equipment? (buses, TC's, PCC's LRV's)
LUZERNE IS CLOSE AS FAR AS BUSES OR TROLLEYS PULLING OUT OR IN.DON'T KNOW TOO MUCH I,DROVE OUT OF CALLOWHILL+COMLY DEPOT ALL BUS.10YRS ON THE EL. 8YRS IN SUPERVISON ON THE BROAD ST.SUBWAY
The last time I was by there, the outer fence was locked and all bay doors were closed. No equipment was anywhere to be found. All the derelicts were carted over to Midvale, where PCC's are stored on the outer fringes near Wissahickon Ave, and AM General tracklesses are grouped closer to the other extreme, near the Roberts Yard.
I have heard that the office space is still used, but that may be it. The new SEPTA map still shows it as "SEPTA Luzerne District". Even the Route 53 bus, which in its life as a trolley line looped on the northeast corner of the property, goes around the block at 12th & Lycoming rather than use Luzerne loop.
Bob you mentioned in one of your responses that the AM Generals are stored at Midvale. Since there routes come out of Frankford and Southern are these buses that SEPTA is going to dispose of or is a sign that SEPTA in the future will use gas powered buses instead of the trackless buses for those routes?
It's hard to say. SEPTA purchased 110 AMG's in '79-'80 for its five trackless routes. The order was trouble-plagued from the start, and many adjustments, etc had to be made on the coaches before they were finally accepted. The initial assignment was 800-844 at Southern and 845-909 at Frankford (800-09 have wheelchair lifts). Shifts were to be made if and when new extensions were built, and there was talk of conversion of 6, 56, a combined 75/53, 60 and a 66 extension to Franklin Mills. Nothing has come of any expansion of the network. The order for 110 was based on some increase in trackless service which has not occurred.
The actual peak vehicle requirements are about 25 at Southern and 45 at Frankford. Thus, only about 70 of the 110 are needed given the current service levels. Hence, the rest would only clutter the depots, and the decision was made to put them into storage. Some are at Germantown and others were at Roberts Yard (regional rail) until Midvale was near completion. The Midvale site, which is almost next to Roberts, is very vast, and there is plenty of room there for lots of storage. The depot itself sits back from Wissahickon Ave, and if you enter its driveway, you get the impression that you are going into a large SEPTA junkyard, since many derelict buses are stored there. Several other tracklesses were at Frontier for a while, and may still be there (I haven't been back there in some time).
What does SEPTA intend to do with trackless? Well, the 75th anniversary of PTC's startup of trackless operations on Route 80 was earlier this month, but that may be no indication of the future. The AMG's are nearing their 20th birthdays and, while they are in good shape, may need to be replaced. SEPTA has talked to Dayton and SF about leasing the spares but there seems to be no interest. Any expansion or new routes seem to be dead issues. Often, on weekends, particularly on the Southern routes (29 and 79), diesel buses can be found filling in for runs. If SEPTA has its way, the TT's will surely go away in the near future.
I want to thank Peggy, Jeff, Mike and Rich for their E-Mail reports of car defects (all on the E Line). I welcome all such reports (for the E, F, G and R lines as well as the A & Cs) and will take steps to get the cars repaired. I'll also be sending replies as to what was found.
Steve,
Do you only take reports on B1 and B2 Division equipment?
How can I report defects (if any) on A Division equipment?
The NYCT has a customer complaint Phone # which I'm sorry to say, I don't have available. It's been posted on this site before and I'm quite sure that one of the 'regulars' will re-post it!!!
Does anyone know how much the TA gets for using a subway car or train for filming a movie?
Actually, not really lines, more like their tracks. Where, besides McDonald Avenue would one find trolley tracks in NYC(or were those tracks on McDonald Avenue for some railroad(name's on the tip of my tongue.........)
You mean the South Brooklyn Railroad ... yes, the trolley tracks were for both. And the tracks on McDonald Ave have been mostly paved over ... very little is left. However, you can see a small area of track where a trolley car barn used to be on McDonald between Kings Highway and Ave S. Also a wee bit where the connection to the Bay Ridge line is (ex-LIRR, now NY & Atlantic Railroad). My father keeps telling me of trolley tracks showing between yards of people's homes somewhere in East NY, but I don't know where.
--Mark
[My father keeps telling me of trolley tracks showing between yards of people's homes somewhere in East NY, but I don't know where.]
That might be the old trolley line that ran to the Canarsie Pier from the L train terminal (though the neighborhood would more accurately be described as Canarsie rather than ENY). It ran for at least part of its route via a private ROW among houses. It replaced a regular rail line and itself was later replaced by the still-extant free transfer to the B42 bus.
Say Mark
You have to keep pumping your Dad for info, I can think of the Norton Point Runs, the Coney Island Terminal area and the Flushing-Ridgewood Run (Under the Myrtle Av El from Seneca to Fresh Pond) where the lines were on private ROW, but nothing in East New York. The Church Ave Run was also off-street down near the waterfront.
Perhaps he's talking the New Lots Ave area. Photos of the Bristol Street Loop always suggested a back-yard location to mer2ch
That right of way went between E.95th and E.96th Street from just
south of Glenwood Road all the way to the seaside. Most of it is
gone, but there may be bits of it here and there from what I've
heard...the Olde Canarsie Line...
Wayne
Not correct.
The remnant on McDonald and Ave S. is of a former coal siding.
(see my upcoming Bahn layout...)
Back in 1969-70-71, I remember seeing trolley tracks poking through asphalt along Metropolitan Ave., Myrtle Ave. in Queens, Broadway in Brooklyn, and Jamaica Ave. before the el structure turns onto it at Cypress Hills, just to name a few. In fact, as recently as 1995, you could still catch a glimpse of trolley track on Smith St. at Schermerhorn St. on the way to the Transit Museum. Smith St. has been resurfaced now. I also remember seeing streetcar tracks along 125th St. from the MetroNorth station.
I have one copy of the R 1/9 side route sign used when the service ran on the Eastern Division. Printing is on both sides. Readings are AA-8th Avenue local, J, K (one side says K, the other side shows KK), LL, M, and Shuttle. $15 (incl. postage) gets the prize. E-mail me with your address.
Let me know if there are any other sign wants you may have.
Charles Fiori
I am lookig for a 1970s R32 mylar bulkhead curtain roll.
It should include the HH, JJ, MM and TT route markers.
Also - (forgot this one in the Email) is there an R16 color side
destination sign out there?
thanks
Wayne
Wayne, Compuserve didn't like my reply bec. it sent it back as undeliverable.
I have both those signs, the front and side color route signs. Unfortunately, I have only 1 of each. I would be interested to trade for a Flushing depot bus sign (either black/wh or blue/white)
Funny you should mention the Eastern Division R-1/9 route sign. The IND route curtain in my sign box has an Eastern Division roller curtain spliced onto one of the ends, just before the A/8th Ave. Express sign. I have a separate Eastern Division route curtain which also has SS/Shuttle; however, it was an adhesive sign which is glued to the canvas resulting in a very stiff sign.
I also have an Eastern Division curtain which was spliced with an older curtain; I suspect the old curtain is out of a Triplex unit; later BMT standards had larger lettering. It has Astoria, Queens Plaza, 57th St.-Manhattan, Times Square, City Hall(!), and Chambers St. This distinctive curtain with mechanism was picked up at Cityana Gallery, as a matter of fact.
Sorry, guys, but these signs are not for sale.
BTW, Charles, I've already installed the IND destination curtain in the mechanism I have, and have set the bulkhead signs to D-Coney Island, just as I said I would.
Does anybody know where one could find a BMT standard sign box?
Folks ...
For the 4th anniversary of this site, and the upcoming 94th anniversary of our beloved subway, four New York Times articles from Day One are now available for your viewing pleasure. Now we can all read what it was like to be at the festivities and on the train on Opening Day.
The articles were transcribed from the NY Public Library microfilm - not an easy job given its condition. However, it'll get easier for the next time. My voice dictation software just came in the mail yesterday :)
Enjoy. The page is http://www.nycsubway.org/dayone.
--Mark
A++. Or, in the parlance of our medium, maybe C++:):):):)
Can someone please verity the new routing of the M27 M50 extension to 42 st
The Info line told me via s on 2nd av,,east on 42 to 1 av,,ret via 42 st and 1 av to 49/50 sts
The Mta Bus site sts to a new Terminal on the FDR Dr Can someone please verity which routing is the correct one (routing)
Thank you
Steve
smokiecat@webtv.net
An operator on the M 104 informed me that recovery and layover time is taken where the M42 and M104 have been all these years which is 41 St between the Drive and 1 av. There's a dispatcher on duty now at that post 7am to 11 Pm to book the 4 lines.
I read the items about possible future shutdown of part of the #4 Jerome Ave. elevated structure due to safety concerns. If the MTA is concerned that far ahead, how come it doesn't address the ongoing Manhattan Bridge problems? I'm sure the passenger load on the B, D, and Q (and already-removed N) trains is much more than on the Bronx segment of the #4 line, yet no replacement effort seems to even be considered by the MTA. Any comments on what seems to be a priority discrepancy? What are the political dynamics involved? Why is Southern Brooklyn somehow in the shadows, with no concern as to effect of the bridge shutdown?
I know that the MTA is conducting an East River Crossings study that deals with the Manhattan Bridge, but I don't have any information about it yet. I'm on an MTA mailing list that will notify me about any public hearings for that study and two other studies (the Manhattan East Side Alternatives and Lower Manhattan Access studies), so as soon as I get some news, I'll post it.
While this line does parallel the IND, there is heavy ridership, especially near Kingsbridge, Burnside and Fordham Road, and of course 161-Go Yankees!. If the line were to be shortened there would be crush levels on the IND. I enjoy els and frequently ride the line from Woodlawn, preferring it over the IND. I usually wind up standing from Kingsbridge or Fordham heading back to Manhattan.
While the original poster may be right, I dont think that if the line were to be shutdown/shortened that MTA would be spending money on repainting, new lights, column repairs, etc. Even now, the 161 station is being renovated. Perhaps Steve, who used to work at Concourse Yard might have some info and might be able to tell us what plans might be if the line is shortened. In my opinion, IND service would have to be increased to handle the extra load, and I am sure Steve could tell us if the IND has enough cars for an increase on the Concourse IND Lines.
Is it possible that the line would be shut down, not permanently, but only for purposes of repairing/overhauling the line?
Here in Chicago, the Green Line was closed for about two years, but, at least after the initial planning stage, there was no question that it would be reopened. In some places, the L structure was rebuilt from the ground up, and I know the project cost somehwere in the triple digits (I want to say $270 millions, but I'm probably wrong). Mind you, the line had been built in the early 1890s as a steam- powered line! The only portion torn down and not replaced was a short portion at the end of the Jackson Park branch (which I think eliminated only one station), which was done with the support of the residents and merchants along that portion of the line.
I think the end of the Green Line to Dorchester was partially rebuilt (the new station platform was poured, at least) and THEN it was torn down.
-Mark
(Why is the Manhattan Bridge being ignored by the MTA). It isn't being ignored. The MTA is simply demanding that since the bridge is a city facility, the city spend the money to fix it, so that the MTA's money (which as comes, in large part, from the city) can be used for other things, like improved service from the suburbs. They can't very well make that argument with the #4 line, since it is their facility. So, if the poster is correct, they are threatening to close it to get the city or state to give them money for that as well.
The MTA's stand, in every meeting I've seen, is that the City or New York should "just fix the bridge," the hundreds of millions of dollars spend on it so far nonwithstanding. And when, ten years after fixing it, problems recur, they will demand that the city "just fix it again." No one thinks they will get political credit for fixing a problem which is not yet a disaster. The problem is that the endgame of the game of chicken is the bridge is lost before anything is done about it.
If the poster is right about the #4, and money was unlimited, a subway on University Avenue would be a logical solution. The West Bronx has two hills, with University atop one and the Concourse atop the other, so its a tough walk from Highbridge to the Concourse line, even if it is only 1/2 mile. But perhaps the MTA is setting up to simply eliminate the #4 to force Bronx residents to walk or take a bus to the Concourse -- thereby getting them off the Lex and eliminating the need for a 2nd Avenue Subway.
Larry you make some good points ....
Re - 1: MTA/City play'n chicken w/ need to fix/repl Manhattan Bridge.
Re - 2: IRT #4 repair of El vs. hidden intent to take down El & force customers onto IND/Concourse & elim. need for 2nd Ave line.
If this be true & can be proved shouldn't the MTA/TA sr exec who are behind this be fired ? If it's some of their plng staff, then fire them ? Isn't their mission:
1 - Maintain service level ?
2 - Plan for future needs, i.e. traffic volume growth & service expansion/extension ?
If the city was broke & had to cut cost to survive & maint. rating on their bonds, then & only then might we tollerate a different policy.
P.S. I can't believe that the MTA/TA would have ALREADY spent so much money digging the 2nd Ave to now just want to walk away from the project.
Mr t__:^)
(Shouldn't the MTA execs be fired?) It isn't the MTA execs who are behind any games of chicken and cuts in service -- its the elected officials. I'm sure all the MTA execs are in favor of investments to maintain or improve service to all places everywhere. Politicians, however, are only willing to allocate resources to places with political influence. Brooklyn and the Bronx have little of that, since its elected officials only care about directing handout spending to their own political fiefs (ie. non-profits), and its citizens are not organized and motivated to lobby on their own.
No one will ever decide to abandon the service supported by the Manhattan Bridge. In fact, the minute the bridge were lost there would be a big political push to fix it regardless of the cost (ie even with a new tunnel). My concern is that by the time the fix were completed, the economic and social damage will have been done, and the investment will just be a waste. NIMTO = not in my term of office. NIMBY = not in my backyard. Compared with goodies like new stadiums, tax cuts, service increases and fare reductions, investments of the type we are taling about are NIMBY/NIMTO.
[Politicians, however, are only willing to allocate resources to places with political influence. Brooklyn and the Bronx have little of that, since its elected officials only care about directing handout spending to their own political fiefs (ie. non-profits), and its citizens are not organized and motivated to lobby on their own.]
Getting the politicians to do anything on their own might be a lost cause. But if the voters of Brooklyn started organizing and demanding solutions to the bridge mess, the politicians would fall in line. It's somewhat odd that there hasn't yet been much organized pressure to that effect. Could it be that most borough residents don't realize just how serious the situation is?
(Don't realize how serious the situation is).
As long as the trains keep going over the bridge, the situation is not thought of as serious. I recall the outrage a decade ago when both sets of bridge tracks had to be closed for emergency repairs for a couple of days. The newspapers reported that the politicians said it would never happen again. And until it does, there is no problem, and it is a problem for future administrations. And when it does, it will be the fault of prior administrations.
Something else occurred to me. It might be difficult for Brooklyn's voters to unite and demand a solution to the bridge fiasco because of the ways politics works today. We are now in the era of "identity politics," where a person's race and ethnicity go a long way toward determining how he or she votes. And Brooklyn's ethnic diversity, while one of its best features in many ways, might make it hard for the borough's voters to unite on anything. Which, obviously, is quite ironic in this context; if the trains stop running over the Manhattan Bridge people of all races will find themselves mightily inconvenienced!
(Identity politics makes it hard to unite). Poltically active Brooklynites have no trouble unting -- against things. That's because most of those who are vocal are the sort of people who think things are going to hell, and have been moving out. Our Brooklyn Office gets more comment from FORMER Brooklynites than current Brooklynites. They are against new businesses, new people, new buildings, new anything. Say you are closing the bridge, and people will unite against it, and you will lose votes. Say you are replacing the bridge, and they will unite against any proposal, and you will again lose votes. Do nothing, and no one can accuse you of doing something.
Brooklyn Pols are a bunch of bums.
[Our Brooklyn Office gets more comment from FORMER Brooklynites than current Brooklynites. They are against new businesses, new people, new buildings, new anything. Say you are closing the bridge, and people will unite against it, and you will lose votes. Say you are replacing the bridge, and they will unite against any proposal, and you will again lose votes.]
Your comments pretty well tie into something I've noticed. New Yorkers may think of themselves as trendy and sophisticated, but an awful lot of them are excessively obsessed (if that isn't a redundant expression!) with the past. Consider a point raised in the latest Penn Station discussion on nyc.transit. Many people continue to whine about the loss of the old Penn Station as if it happened yesterday. Yet it's been gone for 35 years, and from what I've gathered was a dirty, run-down embarassment for at least ten years before it was demolished. And you don't have to look far to find a lot of nostalgic longing for other now-vanished city landmarks. I've not yet heard of anyone bemoaning the abandonment of the Beach Pneumatic Subway, but maybe if I look harder ... :-)
Seriously, my concern is that this fondness for the city's supposed "Golden Age" of past decades can lead to a neglect of its future needs. And as far as transit is concerned, there unquestionably are quite a few issues that will become critical, probably sooner than later: the Manhattan Bridge, the Williamsburgh Bridge, the Jerome El, possibly some of the river tunnels (hey, they're no spring chickens, so to speak). You've already shown that the politicians won't do anything without prodding. And if the voters are obsessing about the past, and paying no attention to the future, they won't be doing any prodding.
For a moment there, I thought you were referring to Coloradans. Voters here have gotten a reputation for "just saying no" over the years. On top of that, we had a governor who, besides being a total jerk, vowed to "drive a silver spike" through a highway project which was eventually built for ten times the original cost. Not to mention a newspaper columnist who spits venom at Denver International Airport at every chance he gets. Gee, that sounds just like John Hylan blasting the IRT and BMT whenever he could. Then take the Regional Transportation District (RTD) board. You can split it right down the middle between pro- and anti-light rail members. Their meetings sound like something out of WWIII.
Now, the hottest issue is a stadium ballot issue. The Broncos want a new stadium, or else they just might leave Denver. (The Dodgers went through the same rigamarole.) They claim that Mile High Stadium is outmoded and would cost a fortune to renovate. Essentially, the ballot issue calls for an extension of the 0.1% sales tax used to pay for Coors Field, which is almost paid for.
Let's face it - some people like things just the way they are. Not me.
Sorry for getting off the subject at hand.
Glad were not the only ones getting stuck paying for a stadium. Of course, the Mets and Yankees are asking for about $1.5 billion, plus infrastructure. I'm so sick of this. I recommend E-mailing the Department of Justice Anti-Trust division and demanding an investigation into abuse of monopoly power by the sports leagues. I've done it already, but I'm from New York, so no one in Washington is going to listen to me.
BTW our stadium task force visted Denver to hear how great it is to put your stadium downtown (ie Manhattan) and not in some poor neighborhood elsewhere. If we get stuck paying for Steinbrenner, you Colorodans are partially to blame (along with Baltimore and Cleveland).
[Glad were not the only ones getting stuck paying for a stadium. Of course, the Mets and Yankees are asking for about $1.5 billion, plus infrastructure. I'm so sick of this. I recommend E-mailing the Department of Justice Anti-Trust division and demanding an investigation into abuse of monopoly power by the sports leagues. I've done it already, but I'm from New York, so no one in Washington is going to listen to me.]
All this stadium extortion should come as no surprise. Businesses have been doing much the same for years, demanding huge tax breaks and infrastructure improvements or else they'll (figuratively) take their ball and go play elsewhere. Sports teams are just doing the same thing, only in a *literal* sense.
Determining whether a relocation threat is serious or just blackmail is the important thing. Some corporations have relocated when they didn't get their demands met, and so have some teams. But others were just idle threats.
As a Mets fan, I have to mention that the crew at Shea never threatened to leave, and they are chipping in significant amounts of their own cash. Steinbrenner doesn't want to contribute, doesn't pay the proper share of stadium revenues as he is supposed to, and has been proven to create fraudulant records of maintainence at Yankee Stadium to reduce his rent. He's also threatening to pick up and move the team.
The Dodgers left in a completely different manner. They wanted a new stadium, they were going to build it with their money, all they wanted was the land and city approval, which Robert Moses refused to give for their location (Downtown Brooklyn LIRR terminal) He wanted the stadium out in Flushing, and that's what we got, sans Dodgers...
-Hank
The Mets have suggested that they'd kick in 15 percent of the cost of a new stadium -- if they didn't have to pay rent and got to keep all the revenue. I believe the "naming right" for the stadium would just about cover their contribution.
The Mets have acted classier than the Yankees, but then they are not the ones located in a poor, minority neighborhood so there is no way to be sure they do not share the same predjudices. They are just as greedy as Steinbrenner. And they did threaten to move to Nassau County, and held discussion with Nassau (just as Steinbrenner has had discussions with NJ) to back up their threat.
Bottom line -- MONOPOLY ABUSE. If major league sports were not a monopoly, there would be 3 or 4 teams in the Metro Area in every sport, and teams with a solid fan base would be grateful to keep it.
Re: Baseball monopoly: That's why I & a bunch of my friends travel to AA and AAA games locally. We've been to R.I., CT (Norwich), NJ (Trenton) & next year CT (NH or NB or Bridgeport). I did go to Yankee statium once this year, but I'll have to say I enjoyed NJ & Norwich more this year. The two "poor socks" games last year were fun too, we even stayed in the away team's hotel ... can't do THAT in NYC.
Mr t__:^)
You will soon, maybe. The boro president of SI is saying full steam ahead on a stadium for a Yankees farm club in St. George (also for SI Vipers soccer team), and the Mets have alledgedly agreed to put a team in Coney Island,,,,perhaps named 'Brooklyn Dodgers'?????
-Hank
That's one interesting point. But hopefully buses will run frequently enough if that does happen.
First of all, if the MTA ever does that just so it doesn't have to build the 2AS( shorter version of the 2nd Avenue Subway) they can save their energy, it will, just as has been said here trillions of times, never be built during a year with 4 digits.
Secondly, they may want to look at the type of things happening with increased bus crush in other cities. Does the Rte. 125(SEPTA) ring a bell?
I don't know how many people will like having to take the bus(in general, slower than subways)from the Bronx and transferring to a Manhattan bus (I don't remember which routes take you from the Jerome area to at least 3rd Ave/149 St. where you could get either of the IRT Manhattan trunk lines).
Third, they're still going to have a crush on some subway lines/stations.
If everyone transfers at 3rd/149, you'll still have a sea of humanity coming down the Lex', and I don't know how prepared the station is for that kind of crush. Or the West Side IRT?
Then the Concourse line. When those trains gets to 145th St. look out!
Since the rush hour 'C' doesn't go to the Bronx anymore(does it still exist?) and the 'D' doesn't go anywhere where the crush seems to be look for problems(rhetorically, of course) at:
Columbus Circle(between A/C/B/D and 1/9)
42nd St.-Times Square(I don't even have to tell you)
34th St.(what are they gonna do-take the LIRR to Wall St?)
A move like that would be fueled by one of two things:
A-alcohol
B-Lust for money they think they'll get from angry Bronxites with no other fast way to get where they need to go.
It's a crummy system. And the MTA's got problems too.
"It's a crummy system. And the MTA's got problems too."
If you are lucky, you'll never have to live without a car any other place in North America.
If you did so, you would discover how UNcrummy your system is.
I'm not saying the MTA does not have problems. But every once in a while I have to say something like this when I read the many gripings that appear on Subtalk!
:)
-David
Sure NYC has a great transit system, but why is that. The Regional Planning Association said it best -- we're living off the dividends. Lots of good plans and far-sighted decisions before 1965. But we have every right to gripe about what has happened since. Once the feds and the state got control of the transportation funding stream, and the medical industry got control of more and more of our local tax revenues, we were hung out to dry.
I live along the four line there has been constuction for the last two years and there has been no complaint yet that I know. As for the Manhattan Bridge they have done enough already as fast as they repair it the damaged. The four eleveted is in good condidtion. There is no need also when the Franklyn Avenue connection is finished the D,B and Q will go through the A,C,E alines and the real repairing will finally begin.
The connection is people only. not for trains! but nice try!
Why is downtown Brooklyn so forbidding for subway connections? It has been many years since the subway lines were run by competing companies. Why is there, for example, no tunnel under Hoyt St. connecting the IND and IRT lines? And a tunnel from there to the N and R lines north of them?
Perhaps more people would ride the G if it connected to something!
Tony that is a very good point.
well, for onme thing, the IRT and IND have different specs so having a connection , because of that difference, would be a waste.
Also, I'm sure the trains cross over and under each other at all manner of altitudes and say the Montague tunnel(N,R, rush hour M) connecting to the Fulton tunnels(A,C) may be a nightmare with tracks connections, trains coming from one line to the next and so on.
As for the 'G' train, I guess you are correct. Maybe the guys behind the IND had some kind of grand scheme in giving it no connnections tro another line(sensibly) to go into Manhattan or give it it's own tunnel.
Mysteries.
I don't think he was talking about a track connection between the IND and IRT. He meant a passenger tunnel.
One is planned for Jay St. to Lawrence. It is said to be only the matter of knocking out a wall and relocating some utility rooms.
Is anyone aware of efforts to get J/M/Z patrons riled up about this planned (and mysteriously uncontroversial) Williamsburg Bridge closure? Williamsburger friends of mine freak out when they hear of this, and I haven't seen any visible effort to get the word out or do something about it.
And: as a newly-minted F commuter, I gnash my teeth every morning, making two transfers to get onto the East Side IRT uptown to my job near Grand Central (chug along with the slovenly F to Jay St, run across the platform to the A or the C, transfer again at Fulton/Nassau for a 4 or 5 uptown), I'm wondering what possible engineering nightmare forestalled a pedestrian connection between the B/D/F/Q Broadway-Lafayette station and the uptown 6 platform at Bleecker.
Waiting for the IND Second System (or at least an F express),
Daniel Casey
Can't you make the transfer from the IND to uptown Lex. local @ B'way Lafayette anyway with a Metrocard?
yes it can be done for example take the A or C train to Franklin ave. before the massive recontruction taking place, you would have to ask the token-metrocard clerk for a metrocard tranfer( which is the exact thing tas a bus tranfer ,but coded for one time use only) to get to the shuttle upstairs and outside. go rup and ou the station cross the street and swipe card and discard. so thre is a way to do it and it is possible , but leaves open for possibliities for people who use tokens or change to ask why they cannot get transfer to the subway or vise vers since the trnafer used is trhe same as thast used on buses
yes it can be done for example take the A or C train to Franklin ave. before the massive recontruction taking place, you would have to ask the token-metrocard clerk for a metrocard tranfer( which is the exact thing tas a bus tranfer ,but coded for one time use only) to get to the shuttle upstairs and outside. go rup and ou the station cross the street and swipe card and discard. so thre is a way to do it and it is possible , but leaves open for possibliities for people who use tokens or change to ask why they cannot get transfer to the subway or vise versa since the transfer used is the same as that used on buses
Maybe one of our station agent friends can confirm this ...
Do agents have magnetic (paper) transfers, like they have in the buses, that can be issued to cash paying customers ?
We,ve heard before that this DOES happen at St. George on SI (makes since there ... cash customers want to ride the SIR, then transfer to a bus to complete their trip).
That would mean that they would have to work in a turnstiles outside of SI.
Mr t__:^)
There was only one station where paper metrocards were issued--Franklin Ave (Shuttle and IND.) the nooth ahd a gizmo that looked like a bus fare box and it issued the mag transfer.
As far as SIRT--we do not work in Staten Island--it is *almost* a separate company, they have their own people that only work on Staten Island. and as such I do not know what they do or do not do.
Thanks for your input. It's interesting to me that the TA policy is to prevent customers from Queens, who pay cash, from getting the free ride on a subway ... while elsewhere in THEIR system the reverse happens.
P.S. A couple of prev. posts confirmed the TA policy in SI. And it makes just as much since there as it does in Queens, i.e. why should a cash customer have to pay an extra $1.50 to switch from the bus to the train or vice versa.
Mr t__:^)
The northbound and southbound stations at Bleeker Street are located some distances away from one another. In addition to building a passageway under the Lex, you'd have to move the northbound station two block south to build the transfer.
My preferred solution is to build a 6th Avenue station on the shuttle between Grand Central and Time Square. The #7 is too far down and back up -- with the wait you're better off walking.
As for Williamsburg, I don't know why people aren't going crazy. That said, better a lot of pain for a short time than substantial pain for years and years. They should do everything this way -- shut it down, fix it fast and once and for all. Unfortunately, the history of the bridge says it ain't gonna be once and for all.
For some alternate options:
take the F to Lex. Ave and transfer for the downtown 6 to GCT.
take the F to 42nd St. and transfer for the 7 to GCT.
take the F to 42nd St. and walk. The exercise is good and its probably faster than any other method.
I spent four years traveling from Ave. N to 86th/Lex before the connection was made at 51st/Lex, when your method was the only way to do it. No sympathy here for at least four years.
I have two questions concerning my upcoming trip to New York.
First, why doesn't the 'R' run as an express train on Broadway?
Second, could some one describe for me the physical layout of Times
Square station.
Thank you.
The R has always been the Broadway local and there has been no express service along the Broadway BMT line since the south tracks of the Manhattan bridge were closed. My guess is that express service will resume along Broadway when these (Manhattan Bridge, south) tracks re-open.
The layout of times square is very complex and I'm quite familiar with it, but I don't know where to begin in trying to explain it's layout. But heres my attempt: The following lines serve Times Square : 1,2,3,7,9,S,N,R,A,C,E
If you're on the N & R platform - you must walk toward the north end of the station and up the ramp or stairs, the S (Times Sq-Grand Central Shuttle is straight ahead, turn left, walk about 40 feet, left again and down a flight of stairs to the 1,2,3 & 9 platform(s), down the next flight of stairs and the #7 platform is down one more flight of stairs. turn right and head up the ramp and through the long corridor to the A,C & E trains at 43md Street/8th Avenue.
This station is has many stairwells and corridors and can be quite confusing, but there are many signs to guide you along.
If you walk from the N & R platform to the A,C & E platform - will take about 3-5 minutes depending on how fast you walk.
Enjoy your visit!
Wayne
(1) The R has always been a local train along Broadway. It is today's name for the old BMT 4th Avenue Local, which has always been a local between Whitehall Street and 57th Street.
(2) To describe the physical layout of Times Square in words is quite daunting. Briefly it is actually 5 separate stations built at different times that are now one station for fare control purposes. Here it is in chronological and geographic (east to west) order:
-the original 1904 platforms, now used by the Grand Central shuttle, closest to the street level and actually north of the IRT 1,2,3,9 platforms.
-the 1917 BMT (N and R), 2 island platforms, 4 tracks, standard NY express station layout, below and south of the shuttle platforms.
-the 1918 IRT #1,2,3,9 platforms, also 2 islands/4 tracks, on the same level as the shuttle and south of it. Just north of these platforms you can see where the shuttle tracks originally connected - the original 1904 routing across 42d Street and then north under Broadway.
-the 1927 Flushing (#7) line - one island platform, 2 tracks, directly below the 1,2,3,9 platforms... and by following a passageway at the west end of the Flushing line mezzanine - you will access the:
-1932 IND A,C,E station, part of the original 8th Ave Independent Subway and now part of Times Square by virtue of the free transfer connection. While this looks like a normal 4 track, 2 island platform station, the platforms are offset so that the station is 4 blocks long from 40th to 44th Sts. Only a small section of the two platforms overlap.
If that's not enough you can e-mail me if you have more questions. Also, FYI, under the auspices of the NY Transit Museum I am conducting of tour of the Times Square station complex on December 6, 1998. Please contact the museum for further information.
Describing Times Square station is a little like trying to describe the geography of some place in words: pictures work much better.
Look at Peter's track map on this site:
http://www.nycsubway.org/maps/34-42.gif
Times Square subway stop includes the stops on these lines: the 1239 (Broadway-7th avenue), the NR (7th avenue - Broadway), the S (42nd St) and the 7 (also 42nd St!!!). Additionally, one can transfer for free over to the ACE (8th ave) line, but that station is really the 42nd street station and its a full block away.
The others, as you can see on the map, are all crammed together. Peter's map has it right: The 1239 and S lines are on the same, highest level, basically one long level down from the street. The NR line is lower than these by one level, so it can get under the S. The 7 is a level below the NR, and two below the 1239 & S, so it can get under the NR. Whew!
The actual passages are a complete maze. Just go there and follow the signs.
A little more description:
The N,R line runs SE to NW along Broadway. The 1,2,3,9 line runs North to South along 7th Avenue. They "intersect" (one 20 feet above the other under 42 St. where the stairs connect between them. Also on the mezzanine is the 42 St Shuttle which runs along 42 St east to Park Avenue (Grand Central Terminal).
The #7 line is fairly low down underground and runs along 41 St. with its terminal extending from 7th Avenue to about 2/3 of the way to 8th Avenue. Above it at normal mezzanine level is a connecting tunnel from the Bway and 7th Avenue lines to the 8th Avenue subway. (It used to be outside the paid area, but was put in it about 10 years ago.) The northbound 8th Avenue platform is between 42 and 44 St; the Southbound platform is between 42 and 40 St., both under 8th Avenue. Below the southbound platform is another platform, that was used for Racetrack specials back when the regular fare was 15 cents, and the Racetrack fare was 50 cents and used big tokens like the 30 cent ones.
I hope explaining this makes your trip to NYC possible. It sounded from your original note that the R running local under Broadway and knowing the configuration of TS was a problem in your actually making it through NYC. I hope we have made this possible :-) Actually, the best thing is to just wander through the TS station. Grand Central is pretty nice too, not to mention the Mother of all labrynthine transfer points: Fulton St.(2,3)(4,5)(J,M,Z) @ Broadway-Nassau (A,C), which has more people scrambling through it at midnight changing trains than are on all the streets within one mile of it at that time of night.
One interesting thing about the Times Square station is that it really isn't under Times Square. Its northermost entrances are on 42nd Street, which while the southern boundary of Times Square is really out of the main part.
The southern entrances to the 49th Street station of the N and R, one stop north of Times Square station, feel like they're in the heart of Times Square.
Also dont forget Canal Street's Maze. To go from the N/R to the J you make multiple up and down and wind up on the closed (for now at least) express/Bridge station and climb up again to the 6 or the K platforms-here there is just one stairway to the N/R, the Downtown 6, the uptown 6, and the lower level underpass on the J station.
The lower level at 42nd St. is no longer accessible even if you wanted to see it; the stairways from the southbound platform have been cemented over. I rode through 42nd St. several times last week and looked over to the southernmost staircase leading up to the mezzanine, where there used to be an adjacent staircase leading to the lower level. You'd never know it was ever there. The northern end of the lower level was used as an underpass between the two platforms for years before the entire mezzanine area was incorporated into the paid fare zone; I remember using it on a couple of occasions.
The only way to catch a glimpse of the lower level now would be to be onboard a rerouted E train as it passed through the station (the track is still in place). You wouldn't be able to get off, as the train wouldn't be stopping.
BTW, I saw the fenced-off stairway at the shuttle which was part of the underpass between the former local platforms. I also saw where the Broadway express tracks spread apart just north of Times Square to accommodate that underpass.
There's a tour that promises to see the lower level of 42nd Street in December I think. Maybe just that will happen.
Has anyone been on this tour? Having never been on one but interested in taking one this one sounded it might be interesting. It was a tour of Times Square, Essex St. and the lower level of 42nd. Recommendations?
Re: Lower Level of 42nd Street ...
Maybe they're only talking about the #7 line platform under the 1/2/3/9 & N/R vs. the IND station at 42nd Street ? Since you can now walk underground between 7th & 8th Ave it would be easy to missunderstand.
Mr t__:^)
Thurston, It's pretty clear that we're talking 8th Ave 42nd Street lower level.. here's the whole tour description from the Transit Museum's page: It doesn't clarify if people will be allowed on the platform or not.
Sun., 12/6, 11:00 a.m.
THE SUBWAY UNIFICATION TOUR
Tour Guide Andrew Sparberg will take us on a nostalgic walk through the Times Square subway station. From its humble beginnings in 1904 as a local stop on the original subway, Times Square evolved into a huge express station. Here we'll be able to see examples of the three original station styles--the IRT, BMT, and IND. We'll also see the long unused lower level at 42nd Street and 8th Avenue, as well as the site of New York's second worst subway disaster, a 1928 accident on the IRT. Later, we will subway to Delancey and Essex streets, where we will see an unusual two level station and a long closed underground trolley car loop that was last used fifty years ago.
It sounded interesting to me, but I wanted to know if anyone had any other experiences with these tours to see if it was worth the effort for me to try to get to the city.
Jersey Boy ... thought you were mainly a bus nut ? Thanks for the post of the detail, I may join this one myself. Hay, if we get bored we can always skip the rest of the tour and hop on the Q & go to Conney Island for a dog. Back to something more serious ... a friend picked up a copy of the Transit Museum's "Calendar", 39 pages ... toward the end it list this and other scheduled tours as one line entries. I now see where the "tour" came from that visited Branford October 11th.
Mr t__:^)
I give the illusion of a bus nut, just because I sat through many a many busses at Rutgers and the only local service around here is done by busses. But I've been more of a subway nut since a 1986 visit to the Washington Metro when I was 10 years old. When I do head into metropolises, I always prefer subway to bus. In fact I dread the day when it snows really bad here and I'll have to leave my Legend and 20 minute drive at home for a 90 minute 2 bus trip to work, never really experiencing snow driving before. When going into Manhattan, the Academy bus terminal is down the street from me, and costs half as much as the NJTransit Coast Line, but I'd still prefer rail over bus. Rail is fun! =)
My dirty secret is that my first real experience with NYC Subway came just a year ago.. with an unexpected battery run on the F! I've only ridden on the 8th Avenue local (express to West 4th) between Penn and WTC, the F Between West 4th and Jay Street, and the L between 8th Ave and 3rd Ave, and the 1 between WTC and 50th Street. I'm a big fan of the Washington Metro and the London Underground and knew both like the back of my hand many many years ago. I still have my first Metro farecard from 1986 which was an unlimited ride card. Want me to scan it? I've been on subways in Washington, London, Milan, Toronto, New York, and Boston.
I think I was on PATH once.. I have this distinct memory of going to Manhattan when I was 4 or 5 and remembering a large elevator bank with the four door variety in a store... similar to what Macy's has, but not quite, since there was one floor which was on a balcony or something like that where you could see the elevator bank from the floor below..... and then going to a subway station that was quite clearly a terminus for some subway line with several tracks and multiple platforms.. that I think were slightly inclined in some way.. and was well-lit but black and scary looking walls. I remember nothing else, and my parents don't remember this at all. Does this fit the description of the 33rd Street PATH station at all circa 1980?
BTW, How do these subway tours work anyway?
-JB (Debating on changing my name to my common internet nickname)
Sounds like it could be 33rd St. but there aren't any elevators there. (There is a small platform-to-street elevator in the complex but it isn't like you describe.) The north ends of the PATH platforms are ramped up. The elevators you describe might have been in the Gimbels (or was it A&S Strauss by then) which is right on top of the 33rd St. PATH station.
-Dave
Thanks Dave
The elevators weren't a part of the station, but definitely in a big store.
I remember walking right out of the store to go down some stairs or an escalator to the station at the same intersection.
If I end up doing this tour, I may just take the PATH to find out the answer to one of the great mysteries of my life =)
Let me try to explain it. The Path station ramps up at the North end of the station. That end shares the mezzanine with the IND and BMT. Now, from this mezzanine, near the subway enterance to Manhattan Mall (formerly A& S Plaza) is an elevator to the street level, outside of the Mall. There is also elevator access to the BMT platforms. IND access is also via elevators.
Hope this helps
I think the handle fits, you're a boy (compaired to some of us old farts) & you're from Jersey.
I also think that this "tour" is for you. With limited exposure to the system & if you just have to know why/how ... this will help.
I've been one of the "but why" kind of guys all my life.
As for how to join the tour my copy of the Museum hand out says:
- Reserverations and advance payment required.
- Fee Members @ $15, non-mem @ $20
- Phone 718-243-8601 (the phone # makes me think it's at 130 Livingston Plaza, Brooklyn, although the Museum is just around the corner from there).
Mr t__:^)
I have been on a number of the Transit Museum tours, and they're terrific. And Andy Sparberg is a super tour leader (OK Andy you owe me now :-)
I'm curious as to how one would gain access to the lower level at 42nd St. nowadays, with all the stairways from the downtown platform, as well as the escalator from the mezzanine, cemented over. IMHO, they should have kept one staircase intact, perhaps securing it with a locked gate. As I mentioned earlier, I suspect the only way to go down there would be via a rerouted E train coming in from Queens. It would simply stay on the track which leads from 50th St. instead of switching to the local track the way it normally does.
I'm in search of technical information pertaining to Amtrak AEM7's and E60's for my web page.
Can anyone supply me with this? Please drop me an e-mail.
http://xoom.members.com/NEC1/Default.htm
If I really dig, I might have an AEM7 operator's manual. I
According to someone who works at the Shore Line Museum, there was an "O" gauge train set recently made by Mike's Train House in 1998.
The replica was of an R42 car set (??) along with some stations and realistic sound effects.
Does this sound familiar to anyone? Des anyone have it? What is it like? Are there any stores in Manhattan/NYC metro area that might sell it?
Sorry -- I do not know model trains well, so I apologize if my terminology is poor.
Rob
There has been some other talk about these earlier this week.
My set runs and sounds great. It a four car set (two married pairs) but since its been modeled to run on O-27 the cars have been shortened to about 50 scale feet. I think they look great, Lettered as a "D" from the Concourse to Coney, and since I'm up here, 150 miles north of the city, not many are aware of this shortening. If I'm not mistaken original Advertising suggested an IRT 3 door model which would have minimized the length problem.
Don't know about the availability in Metro New York Area. I haven't seen them advertised in the Magazines yet. MTH has a WebSite that I will try to relocate. Mine were ordered last fall and finally came end of this September.
I have seen these train in Trains and Hoby's on Metropoltain Ave in Forest Hills Queens
Try www.mth-railking.com. I flipped over the Classic Toy Trains on my desk, and there it was on the rear cover.
Today at 3:15,Iwas driving on 63rd Dr in Rego Park when I spotted a brand new CNG bus being tested.I'll presume that it was going on a test run on the Q53 since it was on the 53 route.It wasn't in service.The number was 3000.I should be able to get to Triboro soon to check if they have anymore in.
The Orion factory in NY is now back to work (was on strike) and finishing up its order of V CNGs for the "privates". Green Bus is the only company not to get some right away, because they have no where to fill them up. The frist two for Queens Surface Corp. are now registered and have been out on the streets this past two days with "Road Instructors" training the first batch of drivers. The next 15 for QSC are expected soon. When they start comming in these new buses should start revenue service. At Command & Triboro they have Nova CNGs so they're likely to enter revenue service sooner, i.e. shorter learning curve. LI Bus has a extensive fleet of Orion CNGs currently in revenue service. They replaced most of their Grummans.
Mr t__:^)
This car is not listed in the museum roster but is preserved in
England.(The only NYC car outside US?).1144 is at the Buckinghamshire
Railway Centre at Quainton Road to the north of London
Do you have a picture? That would be nice to go along with the entry.
-Dave
Sorry,no picture of 1144.The car is currently in use as th cafeteria at the museum
What is the target date for electric operation from New Haven to Boston and when do new electric locomotives and trainsets begin delivery?(Any road numbers assigned yet?)
I believe that service should start about this time next year. Construction crews have been erecting the new catenary support towers and stringing the wire. I was in downtown New Haven yesterday, and I saw that all the new signal bridges and catenary towers were up and crews were installing the support arms for the wire. All the old catenary supports from the old New Haven Railroad have been cut down and are laying along the side of the tracks waiting to be taken away.
The are some sections east of the Town of East Haven that have not had any work done yet.
When I was up for NY City Days at the museum we went up to Mystic as well. They have support wire (poles and everything) up but looking closely from the car the actual wire.
On the way to the trolley museum it confused some of us since we saw track with wire over it and wondered if it was part of the museum property. .
We stayed at the Resident Inn in New Haven and I got to see the Amtrak engines on the Ballon Track turrning for the northward voyage (right next to the parking lot). 5yrold loved it when we got the engineer to sound his horn!! So they are still using Diesel service as of two weeekends ago...
Lou ... I two saw the poles & wires on the NH main line North of New Haven at NY Days. Your comment about the Engineer's "hello" to your daughter made me remember when I was a kid that I used to get the tug boats on the CT river do the same for me. Next time you over-night in the NH area remember that Bridgeport has a Circus museum.
Mr t__:^)
I ride the MBTA Commuter Rail (south side) mail line as far as Mansfield about once a week, and can see steady progress on the electrification. As of last evening, this region had poles and cross arms, but no wire.
AMTRAK has a quasi-regular on-line newsletter about the high speed rail project.
When does electric service start between these two points and when do the new locomotives and trainsets begin delivery?(Any road numbers assigned yet?)
I saw that new diesel train yesterday heading towards the city East of Jamaica. It was going "backwards". I am assuming that the last car has controls in it for when the locomotive is bringing up the rear. Is this correct? Is this what the cab car is?
[I saw that new diesel train yesterday heading towards the city East of Jamaica. It was going "backwards". I am assuming that the last car has controls in it for when the locomotive is bringing up the rear. Is this correct? Is this what the cab car is?]
Yes, that's what a cab car is.
So are the new Diesels in service with bilevel cars??
Port Jeff line??
Anyone know and know what train?
I'll ride them out to Smithtown Friday if so??
WCBS AM this morning was reporting that service had begun, PAST TENSE, on the Port Jeff line. I let someone else comment on how much service, but I did notice that the same train set that I saw at the Belmont Race track siding was the one mentioned this AM here. I feel bad for our friend from Bean Town who had duty here last weekend vs. this.
Mr t__:^)
Thanks, Mr. T. I'll be down for two weekends in November, and hopefully there will be some Saturday afternoon service I can ride on. Maybe even on my old "native" Oyster Bay Line!
Todd, yeah, I'd love tosee them on the OB line too, but I have a feeling that'll be the LAST line that gets them :(
Boy, the LIRR sure has been quiet about these things, but the fact is, clean, comfy, fast, airconditioned, reliable diesels on the LIRR is practically front page of the Times news. You'd think that they'd be promoting their butss off of the fact that they actually have real diesel trains now.
Maybe we could all write to our favorite Nassau county politician (you know, the one who's witholding taxes owed to the LIRR because of poor service) to up the pressure on the LIRR to put these things on Oyster Bay - NOW. Aw heck, we could all email him - Nassau has a web site now...
Oh yeah, on other thing - Dave - what's the word on using html backgrounds in our posts? Apparently WebBBs supports this (I tested this, but never posted the results), but I was wondering if you had a problem with it? (Yeah, I know I should email these questions, but I'm too lazy to open my emailer now :)
You can include whatever HTML mark up you like in the message text. I'm not sure what you mean about "html backgrounds" though. Talk to me off line in email if you have any other questions....
Newsday reported one new consist will be dispatched to the Oyster Bay Branch next week.
You can see my first hand account of the maiden eastbound voyage of new Bi-Levels from this past Wednesday elsewhere on the board.
Mike
I saw them twice today - once on a westbound Port Jeff train leaving
Kings Park at about 8:45am and again on an eastbound train, same
station, leaving at about 7:45-7:50 pm.
Slightly different consist though. Engine 419 up front, with
coaches 4008, 4031, 4010, but different cab unit 5009 and an extra
Engine 421 at the rear.
I dont know if this means that they'll be overnighting at PJ and
spending days in Jamaica...during the mid-day they probably would
shuttle to and from Huntington.
Wayne
I forget who it was that bemoaned the lack of press on this new service ... well the was some ...
Thursday Newsday (I read the LI edition & will let someone who saw the NYC edition confirm if this article made it there). Page 21 of section A, no not front page stuff. Nice picture of "Dashing Dan" in his suit & tie, paper in hand, with a puzzled look on his face. Article talks about $412 M project, incl 134 coaches to replace 170, 23 diesels + 23 dual-mode engines to replace 50, the latter NOT to enter service until March '99.
Mr t__:^)
Question to someone who has been inside one of the new control cab cars: Is there a railfan window? On the Boston MBTA commuter rail control cab cars, there is a window on both the door between the engineer's vestibule and the passenger compartment, and the outside storm door -- for excellent viewing. Will we have the same opportunity on the LIRR? Also (maybe Andy S. knows this?), is there a policy of running the engine only on one end (East/West) and the control cab car on the other? Or will they vary by operational requirements? Varying would be great for us, so that (assuming there's a window) we can watch in both direction like on the M-1/3s.
There may be a railfan window, but if there is, the engineer will more than likely be sitting there with the door open dangling his feet out so you can't see. Actually, they asren't even supposed to have the cab doors open I don't think. Nor do I know of anything prohibiting watching out the front door, or standing there. Anyone know what the word is on the LIRR in regard to this? Steve?
[There may be a railfan window, but if there is, the engineer will more than likely be sitting there with the door open dangling his feet out so you can't see. Actually, they asren't even supposed to have the cab doors open I don't think. Nor do I know of anything prohibiting watching out the front door, or standing there.]
Quite a few times I've gone to look out the window on MUs only to find the engineer's door open as you described. But it's no obstacle. All you have to do is go in front of the door, no engineer has said anything to me about that.
By the way, this morning I drove 20 minutes to Stony Brook (vs. my usual two or three minutes to Medford) in hopes of riding one of the bilevels. I'd heard that some were running on the Pt. Jefferson line, and I figured that the 6:53 - which runs express from Syosset to Hunterpoint, bypassing Jamaica - would be the most likely candidate for them. Imagine my dismay when a consist of creaky old coaches lumbered into sight ...
>>There may be a railfan window, but if there is, the engineer will more than likely be sitting there with the door open dangling his feet out so you can't see.
That won't be a problem since the cabs in the new cab cars have sliding doors! The entire front cab section can be separated from the seating area by a swinging door with a window, and there's a door with a window to the outside world beyond that. However, that area can be opened as a passageway to an adjacent car crew can close the sliding door to the actual cab.
>>Actually, they asren't even supposed to have the cab doors open I don't think. Nor do I know of anything prohibiting watching out the front door, or standing there. Anyone know what the word is on the LIRR in regard to this?
An engineer is *supposed* to radio for permission to operate with the cab door open, usually done because the cab is too hot or too cold. (or his bed is too hard or too soft--no, wait, that's another fairy tale.)
Mike
On Friday morning, at 1:09 AM, Loco #420 with 5 new coaches was on 5 track in Jamaica Station. I believe it was preparing to head east.
About two nights ago I saw an IRT #7 (flushing local) train pass through the Dekalb Avenue station on the Southbound M,N,R track. This is the second time I've seen it happen. Does anyone know why?
-- P
About two nights ago I saw an IRT #7 (flushing local) train pass through the Dekalb Avenue station on the Southbound M,N,R track. This is the second time I've seen it happen. Does anyone know why?
One could guess it was on it's way to Coney Island for maintenance.
That #7 train was probably on its way to the coney island shops for mantience....It switches over a queensboro plaza and takes the N line to Coney.
THIS IS NOT AT ALL A STRANGE CONSIDERING THAT THE# 7LINE WAS NOT ALLWAYS IRT.AT QUEENSBORO PLAZA WHERE THE 7AND N TRAINS MEET WAS JUST A TRNSFER POINT FOR BMY TRAINS LATER THE IRT USED THE LINE AND NORMALLY THE ONLY TIME NOW TTHAT ANY TRAINS CROSSES FROM THE N LINE TO THE 7 LINRE IS FOR TRACK OR STATION WORK PERHAPS THAT TRAIN WAS ON ROUTE TO CONEY ISLAND. IF Any one remenbers the ad on the subways showing the R110a and R110b (#2 and A line respectively) with another photo taken with a bmt type standard train, those pictures were taken on bmt and ind lines this is not realla rare occurance
The phot I think you are mentioning was staged at Hammels Wye in the Rockaways, with the R110A on the left, the 110B on the Right, and the IRT low-v's on the center track.
-Hank
That photo, staged at Hannel's wye, is on the front cover of the 1996 New York City Subways calendar.
Perhaps a clear description without CAPS is in order. The #7 has (Div. A) IRT equipment but is maintained in Coney Island, a Division B (BMT) yard. To get there it switches at Queensboro Plaza and makes its way to Coney Island via Bway.
This goes back to the days when the Astoria and Flushing line were jointly owned (BMT/IRT) and had connections for the 2nd Avenue El to connect it to the IRT main lines. I remember seeing IRT cars headed for Coney Island when I was 12 years old (in 1963) even.
Thanks for the responses!
The #7 line equipment is maintained in corona yard.The reason they are seen in coney island is that they are there for some overhaul work. work that a regular maintenance shop could not provide. for example;replacing a truck
THIS IS NOT AT ALL A STRANGE CONSIDERING THAT THE# 7LINE WAS NOT ALLWAYS IRT.AT QUEENSBORO PLAZA WHERE THE 7AND N TRAINS MEET WAS JUST A TRNSFER POINT FOR BMY TRAINS LATER THE IRT USED THE LINE AND NORMALLY THE ONLY TIME NOW TTHAT ANY TRAINS CROSSES FROM THE N LINE TO THE 7 LINRE IS FOR TRACK OR STATION WORK PERHAPS THAT TRAIN WAS ON ROUTE TO CONEY ISLAND. IF Any one remenbers the ad on the subways showing the R110a and R110b (#2 and A line respectively) with another photo taken with a bmt type standard train, those pictures were taken on bmt and ind lines this is not really a rare occurance
Is it just me, or does it seem that New Jersey makes a lot of transportation improvments, while NYC just issues a lot of transportation studies. How many real improvements have their been in each place since 1980 (no, not just rebuilding things they way they were)? Can Subtalkers list them.
In NYC I could think of three rail improvments: the Archer Avenue line, the (unfinished) 63rd St connection and the (unfinished) Oak Point freight link. I guess you could call the fact that the subways are now air ocnditioned an improvement. Roads? The Long Island Expressway was really expanded when it was rebuilt in the 1980s. I guess you could count EZ-Pass as an improvement. Against this, of course, you'd have to count the infrastructure which has disappeared -- ie half the lanes and tracks on some bridges we know.
In NJ, you have the Midtown Direct track connetion, I-287, and the soon to be completed light rail to the airport. Route 1 was rebuilt as a divided highway in recent memory. I'm sure there are lots more over there.
Is it just me, or does it seem that New Jersey makes a lot of transportation improvments, while NYC just issues a lot of
transportation studies. How many real improvements have their been in each place since 1980 (no, not just rebuilding things they way they were)? Can Subtalkers list them.]
Just considering transit:
Add to the New Jersey list the Hudson-Bergen light rail, the Montclair connection, and that new transfer station (Allied Junction?) All are either under construction or about to begin. In Metro North territory, there's the under-construction Harlem line extension to Wasaaic. While I'm not sure how close to reality it is, there's a planned Hudson line extension to Rhinecliff. There's no actual construction on the LIRR, but the replacement of the diesel fleet certainly qualifies as a major development. Nothing in Connecticut I can think of, unless you count the Amtrak electrification east of New Haven. Finally, within city limits there's the just-begun Port Authority JFK rail connection.
Where have you been, the Oak Point line opened a couple of weeks ago
(Oak Point Yard opened). I've been right here, but I didn't hear a thing. There seems to have been no press on this one -- perhaps it was pushed out by the coverage of the rededication of Grand Central. The last I heard Conrail and the state were fighting over the cost of the last little bit of rail.
Is it receiving trains? More trains than before?
It opened with much press coverage shortly after the derailment on the Hudson line.
-Hank
You're absolutely right that there's been much more development (at least transit-wise) across the river.
I think that there are two reasons.
First is necessity. When I lived to NJ in the late 80's and early 90's, I was very surprised to learn that there was no one-seat (or even one-carrier) rail ride into Manhattan.
The second is space. In NYC and on LI, there is simply no open areas in which major improvements can be made without significant disruption to local economies or, worse yet, eminent domain condemnations. The Midtown Direct connection (and also the Secaucus Transfer station that Peter Rosa mentions) are both built on the Meadowlands. The Montclair connection (which rivals the Second Avenue Subway for longest planned but never built rail line) has always suffered from the need to condemn about 20 homes in Montclair.
Finally, an addition to your NYC list of additions is the Nassau Expressway.
Sorry, the above should have said that there were no one-seat rail rides into NYC from *Northern* New Jersey.
Maybe part of the reason for the discrepancy is political. With NJ you are getting a statewide solution to problems with state funding. In NYC (and here in Phila it's the same), upstate legislators resist funding improvements for the "big city" and forget the bigger picture that the city might be where the population, usage and needs are the greatest. In my experience, NJ seems to also be much more flexible in the way it spends and doles out transportation dollars and has a Transportation Trust Fund to fuel it (no pun intended), which is derived from gas taxes, vehicle registration fees, etc. In Pennsylvania, PaDOT controls who gets what from liquid fuels taxes, and politics at every level can easily influence decisions.
Additionally, keep in mind the size of NJ compared to its neighboring states. NJ is relatively small in the company of NY and PA. NJ also has the highest population density of any state. In many counties in NY and PA, the deer outnumber the people (and there are probably some politicians who wish that the deer could vote!). Transportation dollars must be spread out over larger areas in NY and PA, while they can be concentrated in a much smaller area in NJ.
You make some good points about the disparity between NJ and NY transit construction (necessity and more available space). As I see it, there also is a less-easily-defined psychological factor. NYC has almost entirely lost its "can-do" spirit. What would be relatively simple projects elsewhere turn into expensive fiascos. Consider the reconstructions of 14th Street and Columbus Avenue - both took far longer and cost far more than anticipated and wrought havoc on area businesses. Parts of 14th Street remain run-down more than five years later. And then there's the case of LaGuardia high school, which took the city *fourteen years* to complete.
Why the city can't handle construction projects is not certain. Possibly it's a lingering dislike of the neighborhood destruction (which is exaggerated) of the Robert Moses era, which manifests itself in this way. Or possibly it stems from the city's misplaced spending priorities: taxpayer-supported hospitals seem to shoot up overnight. But whatever the reason, the city's nutty-professor incompetence has left it unable to accomplish desparately needed transit projects. Need I say "Second Avenue Subway"?
I'll bet Larry will like this comment ...
[...relatively simple projects (turn into) expensive fiascos]
It's the bidding process ... the city only awards to the lowest bidder, even if they realy have no clue if the awardee have ever done this type of work or can otherwise be expected to do the job. Yes, they go through a review process where this is supose to be checked out, but that's a joke too.
I'm an old purchasing guy ... if two guys bid on a BIG road paving job, one has a track record, while the other has one dump truck & has fixed a few curbs & aprons ... who would you pick. This isn't realy a good example of my point, but many of you know what I mean. What realy makes me sick is when city project managers blame the BIDDING SYSTEM when the contractor can't/won't preform. Like that's supose to let them off the hook or something.
Disclaimer: I don't work for the city of NY & am not a contractor.
Mr t__:^)
(Mis-bid) As another old logistics guy, I can't agree more. (How come you didn't end up at the TA -- it was full of ex-Pan Am guys when I was there 86-88?) A TA engineer I met at a campground told me the bidding process inflates the cost of TA projects by one-third. A lawyer who specializes in fleecing the TA wins the bid, then subcontracts to a clueless contractor, and begins documenting why every delay and cost overrun is not their fault. When the share of money the have collected exceeds the share of work they have done, they walk away, and the lawywer is all set to fight the MTA in court. He recommended design-bid, but that may be a little naiive (he was from out of the country). With that much discresion, you might get a call from Senator D'Amato's staff pointing out that his campaign contributor had the best design.
Corruption and all, maybe it would be better if we just required the politicians to pick the contractors, and publicize the choice. At least they would be blamed if things go wrong. As it is, no one knows.
My last job at Pan Am was mgr of elect purch unit in '82. From there went to Columbia where I designed their automated Purch sys, from the users point of view. Ended up in the DP dept & stayed 11 years billing users for connections to mainframe. Registration time was interesting, because we had to hurry up & add lots of equip to the gym, cables on the floor & stuff, then rip it out for a basketball game. And if one of the termanials/PCs went down, immediately we got these lines of angry students for some reason. Had a few other hats, e.g. LAN Mgr of MIS group. Only thing I didn't like was the length of the day. As i've said before, with few exceptions, I enjoyed the 11 years on the IRT & LIRR. Now i'm back in the transportation industry where the buses go by my office all day, it's great.
Mr t__:^)
You think the can-do spirit is gone in public works, then you should see the lack of spirit when it comes to improvements to the zoning code. One deal at a time, all of which make the zoning more complicated and ridiculous, is all you can do. Fixing the whole screwed up thing is out of the question. "The world is not ready for it." "Life is too short." "It's not the way we do things here." Etc. Etc.
I beg to differ with you on the Nassau Expressway. It's still only one-way, and it still doesn't get to Far Rockaway. And I don't care if it ever does, because the limited access route would just funnel Nassau County traffic to the Van Wyck and the Belt, which are bad as it is. It also keeps the LIRR in business over there...
-Hank
The Nassau Expwy, for the longest time, stopped at the Van Wyck. In the last 5 - 10 years (don't know exactly when), it now connects to Rockaway Blvd, which I think is an improvement over what it was beforehand.
Other recent road improvements in the tri-state area include the rebuilding of the I-87/I-287/NY 17 interchange (exit 15) of the Thruway, exit 15A relieving traffic on route 17 coming out of Hillburn, the rebuilding of the FDR viaduct downtown, rebuilding Ocean Pkwy, the "trench" on the BQE (remember how BAD that once was!) and the New England Thruway. I wouldn't say that NY is just standing still on this one.
In NJ, adding the HOV lane on the Turnpike between exits 11 and 15, truck lanes extended south to exit 8A and I-287 from Wayne to Mahwah.
Railroad improvements are much harder to find in NY. Most of them have been to existing infrastructure (new subway cars, new coaches, new buses, new/welded rail, removing underground streams :). Most of NJ railroads terminated in Hoboken or ferries; perhaps their improvements are coming about because of a lack of this infrastructure?
And isn't it interesting how ferries are back in vogue again?
--Mark
Building I-80 through Paterson was no picnic, either. As for I-287, it seemed destined to fall into the same category as the 2nd Ave. line before it was, at long last, completed. I saw it through my plane window as we took off from LGA on Sunday. It skirts the northwest corner of Pompton Plains, where we used to live, and I was also able to spot my old high school.
I'm very tempted to say that if I-287 could be completed, there's hope for the 2nd Ave. line, but I don't want to get too optimistic.
Why do dispatchers choose to hold trains in stations for a connection to say, an arrivng express, yet sometimes permit the trains to leave just as another is pulling in, even when there are no trains arrivng in the near future?
The holding has less to do with allowing people to make connections (or miss them!) than keeping smooth flow on their own lines. Trains that are bunched together leave large gaps in service. And there's a "negative feedback loop," which means that the more the bunching, the worse it gets as people take longer to squeeze in and out of trains that arrive after the long gaps.
So to get the best possible spacing, dispatchers will hold trains in stations (last train in the bunch) and/or order "battery runs" (express past normal local stops) (first train in the bunch).
Also, When trains are held in the station it is usualy to time. Which means the train is early, and will be released when the time comes it was supposed to leave that station.
I thought during Rush Hours they don't hold trains to make connections only hold trains for schedule adujstments.
I was told this by RTO at the tower at 47-50 Rock, why the F always leaves even though the express is just a few seconds behind in opening it's doors as the F is closing.
During peak (Rush Hour) trains will be held to time. If this allows a connection to be made, that is consequential of one of the trains being early. During peak the train dispatcher will not make the train late for a connection. However, during peak if there is a problem with train service behind a train that has arrived at a gap station e.g. 125 st Lex, Times Square...., the Train Dispatcher can and will "Gap" the train that is in his station. In other words he will hold the train in his station in order to reduce the Gap between it and the following train.
During off-peak (non Rush Hour) the Train Dispatcher can make a train late in order to make a connection with another train. Two minutes is the Max time a Train Dispatcher will make a train late under normal conditions.
That's a good point, I'm surprised no one else thought of it. Now that I think of it ... I remember it happening on the 7th Ave IRT.
Mr t__:^)
I'll let one of our TA friends confirm this ... The TA has a SCHEDULE for it's system. Built into that are scheduled meets of some express/local service. BUT shit happens ... so if one of the trains is late or the waiting train has a BUNCH behind it, then the Dispatcher will release it. On the IRT 7th Ave they seem to try to hold the train if the other is almost in the station. Maybe Dispatchers on other lines don't have a much leaway or just don't care about the "service" part of their job.
Mr t__:^)
Everyone should remember that the 7th Av. IRT local service is normally separate from the two express services north of 96th and south of Canal. Therefore holding a local to connect with an arriving express will not affect that express train later on. On the other hand, the 8th Av expresses and locals combine in upper Manhattan and the Bronx. (the A ex and C loc or the B loc and D ex) Thus holding trains just to make connections can cause a logjam uptown. The 6 train on the east side is also separate from the 4 and 5. Even the Broadway Line (when the bridge is open permitting express service) has a problem as the N and R combine for the run through the 60th St. Tunnel before dividing again. And since the B & D share the 6th Av express tracks as well as the Concourse Line, this also would be a mess if trains were held for connections at 59th, 110th or 125th. It seems the designers of the IRT had it best - separate routings for locals and expresses!
I've heard that the rule is to never hold a train during peak hours unless a service disruption requires it. That is, when F service is screwed up and there will not be another F for a long time (more and more these days), they will hold it at Jay so As and Cs can make connections.
Off peak, however, scheduled meets are more critical since a missed meet can mean a long wait. Therefore, trains are held.
Sorry can't agree with that on the 7th AVE.
Re: No Holds during rush hour ....
I rode almost exclusively at rush hour & they "held" trains frequently. Particularly at 96th. Since I got off at 34th I have little personal knowledge of what they did or didn't do at Chambers St. But I did observe "holds" there once in a while.
Mr t__:^)
Good point Gerry, so there was a reason for the better "service" on the IRT 7th Ave.
Mr t__:^)
The current IRT service pattern north of 96th St., with locals continuing due north along Broadway and expresses turning off onto the Lenox Ave. branch, was implemented around 1960 when the R units began to replace the old rolling stock. Prior to that, both branches had express and local service, which meant that fully half the trains had to switch tracks north of 96th St, and this caused frequent delays. Chambers St. wasn't immune, either: at one time, 7th Ave. expresses operated to South Ferry either during weekends or Sundays only, which involved a change of tracks there, too.
The current service pattern is very logical and sensible, so much so it's almost scary. Since none of the routes have to merge or diverge, it helps to keep things moving along.
Steve B. Re: 1/2/3/9 serv above 96th ...
Let me add my two cents worth, this is addl info vs. nit picking ...
Before the current "Skip-Stop" system on the 1/9 AND after the express service left the upper Broadway the third track continued to be used to a limited extent as an express (I don't know what the orig. "express" was so maybe Steve will reply to this). AM southbound they ran express from 137th to 96th, then local the rest of the way. Northbound the trains were turned above 137th and at the end of the rush they used the underground yard to store them. PM they went express above 96th. 137th is interesting because there's only two platforms for all this switching.
I have always assumed that the TA used this same system every other place they have 3 vs. 4 tracks, i.e. I know that's what happens on the #7 line between Queens Plaza & Main Street, or Willets Point if you want to get picky.
Mr t__:^)
Yes, there really is a schedule for service. All of us workers know it - at least a couple of intervals to either side of our regular runs. This is why if you ride at the same time every day, you will probably get the same Conductor (assuming its not his day off).
SOP is for a train to leave its terminal no earlier than 2 minutes prior to its scheduled departure and no later than 15 seconds after. During rush hours, no connections are to be made unless:
1.- both trains arrive simultaneously in the station.
2.- the first train to arrive is held by supervision.
3.- the idiots -oops, I mean customers- force the connection by holding doors, since they will only change trains if the other train shows up.
It is exception 3 that causes the most grief, because during rush hours, the conductors will do their best to close down before the other train arrives in the station, so as not to delay service (and thereby get yelled at by supervision). Today, as an example, I had a downtown 2 coming into Times Square. At 50th St, we passed up a 9.This means that everyone saw that train. We made the stop at TS, and the doors were closing in the rear as the 9 started to pull into the station. Now, 60 to 70 more people wanted to get off the 2, holding the doors from the inside, where I can't see them. As a result, the connection was forced, and it took us an additional 2+ minutes to leave the station. Meanwhile, anyone who looked could see the headlights of the next express and local right outside the station!
Re: 50th St local vs. express ...
So why doesn't the Dispatcher throw a red signal to the local between 50th & Times Sq ?
It would seem, human nature being what it is, that the TA should either accept the connections as part of the service OR find some way to let the customers know that the connection won't happen.
Mr t__:^)
So that explains why I always saw the same conductor and operator when we took the Canarsie out of 8th Ave. at around 8:30 AM every Saturday back in the late 60s.
I know of a bus driver who was give a birthday party by his regulars.
I had the opportunity to ride a rare battery run on the F train this past Sunday between Stillwell Ave and Kings Highway.
--Mark
Does anyone know from whence the term battery run comes?
I don't where the term "battery run" originated, but here in NYC Transit I have heard it most often refered to as a "skip".
The first time I ever heard the term "Battery Run" used, it happened to be in a NYCT Train Trouble report. I think Control Center uses the term 'Skip' because it's more easily understood.
Perhaps "Battery Run" is a term that goes back to the IRT -- ie. if you skip all the stations you end up at the Battery.
I don't know if you were serious about your thought, but I did get a good chuckle out of it.
I looked up battery in the dictionary and the closest definition to a battery run is: A number of similar things grouped or used together.
The only thing I could think of is, since you or skiping a series of stations (similar things) and they are along the same line (grouped) and you are passing them at the same time (together). Maybe the term battery fits the action. Might be a stretch. Input of others would be welcome.
For me, the term "Battery Run" is correct, as it does mean skipping stations so as to maintain a higher than normal speed, to allow the motor generator set to fully charge the batteries. This is a Subway (or urban) version of the "The Carbon Run" of my youth, when we would take our cars out on the highway and "open 'er up" to get the carbon build-up out of the combustion chamber. That was the theory, at least. Actually, the term meant you left the city and went out on the highway where is was easier to speed! (LOL)
I agree with the likely meaning, a run where the batteries are charged but your reasoning is totally incorrect. First, the M-G speed is not dependent on train speed. The M-G rotates at a fixed speed regardless of train speed. Second, the term Battery Run was coined before the M-G was ever used on the NYCT. Prior to the R-10, the NYCT cars did not use an M-G to charge the batteries. They used a magneto on the end of the motor shaft of the air compressor. One could assume that the constant operation of the brake valve caused the air compressor to run more frequently, thereby charging the batteries.
Minor correction concerning battery charging on pre-SMEE cars.
Yes, the compressor was involved, but it did not drive a magneto
generator. The battery charging circuit is a simple voltage
divider. 600 volts, through the compressor governor or synchronizer
switch, through the series-wound compressor motor, then to ground
via a heavy resistor. The battery is connected across the
resistor. As far as the 600V compressor motor is concerned, the
30-40 volt drop across the resistor/battery is nothing. A portion
of the compressor motor current trickles into the battery.
Some cars also included a layup charger that subsitutes a big
ballast resistance for the compressor motor to keep the batteries
charged during long lay-up periods with no compressor running.
As for the term "battery run", I doubt it has anything to do with
electrical batteries. Maybe from the el days, as in "go directly
to South Ferry". Anyone know?
That's a good analogy. On top of that, in those days cars had DC generators which wouldn't cut in until you were doing 18 mph or so. Consequently, if you crawled along in stop-and-go traffic with the lights on, the battery would run down. An alternator, because it has diodes to convert AC to DC, will put out current whenever the engine is running; the blocking action of the diodes prevents battery discharge. Even so, short trips can kill a battery today as well. A high-speed trip such as the one you describe would allow the generator to recharge the battery. Not to mention boiling off all the water and acids and other nasty stuff brewing in the crankcase. I always tell my father he should have done that with his '53 Pontiac; he drove it only to work and back (2.5 miles one way), which turned the engine into a sludge factory. On the other hand, that car would start no matter how cold it got, and it had a 6-volt battery!
battery run is used to overcome a large gap in train service the first train will skip say 6-8 stations the second will skip 3-4 stops and usually the last train in sequence will make all station stops
Haha, I had one from Kings Highway to Church Ave on Saturday arriving 15th St. at 11:55am (I was trying to make a Noon movie at the Pavillion).
Two women who did not speak English very well screamed at the operator who had his door open (little yellow wood, but that is another thread) to let them off as we past each station. They were pulling their hair out, almost missed getting off at Church since they were screaming and ran to the wrong side of the car...
"Haha, I had one from Kings Highway to Church Ave on Saturday arriving 15th St. at 11:55am (I was trying to make a Noon movie at the Pavillion)."
Not that this is on point, but I don't start worrying about when the movie starts until at least 10 minutes after the scheduled starting time. This is because there are inevitably (at least) ten minutes of advertisements, public service announcements, and previews between the posted start time and the actual time the feature starts rolling.
It gets to the point where the audience cheers when the little "And now the feature presentation..." comes on the screen.
One of my friends jokes "It could be worse. What if they still had newsreels?" Also, the previews sometimes turn out to be better than the feature!
I personally wouldn't mind a newsreel before a feature. I'm just tired of the 'buy snacks at the refreshment stand at 5 times what you pay at the supermarket' ads....
-Hank
Holding trains or not holding trains for connections is a matter of policy. Simply stated in a bulletin from the Cheif Transportation Officer, Train Dispatchers, under normal circumstances are required to make connections during off-peak hours. During peak hours, when service is more frequent, dispatchers are not to make connections.
(During peak service hours, holding a train for a minute to make a connection might delay one or two following trains)
why does NYCT have a group of high-pressure hoses to clean off stations when they do not accomplish the most obvious goal, removing gum. There are similar devices that can accomplish this feat, why did NYCT opt against them?
Just a few years back, the Transit Authority had a few teams that removed gum off of concrete platforms. This work was very labor intensive and was scrapped because the union (T.W.U.) complained that the chemicals being used were detrimental to the health of the workers.
In addition, concrete platforms were cleaned during certain times of year using oxalic acid. This chemical really brightened up the platforms. However, union complaints about the acid causing the workers to suffer poor health conditions led to the abolishment of the acid.
The chemicals being used today are quite mild compared to those that were used just 5 to 10 years ago. This may account for a less clean station environment. It is better to have some gum stains than have a bunch of cleaners with cancer and nose bleeds.
Do the stations that have tile installed on the floor have less of a gum problem? Seems like it could be effectively scraped off there...
How many stations have tile anyways?
No need to use acid, or scrape the tile anymore.
Our great mayor has ordered New York's Finest to ticket any and all offenders who spit out their gum on the sidewalk. I assume this order is also tranferable to the Transit Unit (opps,) I mean those officers who patrol the subway and any gum that is offendly spit out upon the platform, hallways and stairs.
Reminds me of the October 7, 1994 politcal cartoon in the New York Post. Keystone cops on top of a Metro North train chasing robbers witht the caption below "FORGET THAT, A bunch of guys are down here playing CARDS!!!!"...
Yes it is wrong to spit out your gum on the street (platform) but law enforcement should not be compromised to enforce a littering violation.
"Yes it is wrong to spit out your gum on the street (platform) but law enforcement should not be compromised to enforce a littering violation."
I agree that not a single officer should be assigned to the task of catching gum-spitters, or any other of the "minor" ordinances, like those against public urination or littering.
HOWEVER, if an officer, in the course of a normal patrol, sees someone spit gum on the platform or the sidewalk, (or urinate, or throw a wrapper on the ground), the officer **should** ticket the offender. I don't think it would compromise law enforcement to take out five minutes at most to write out a citation.
> Our great mayor has ordered New York's Finest to ticket any and all
> offenders who spit out their gum on the sidewalk.
This is not without precedent. It is illegal to chew gum in Singapore. Why? A number of years ago, the country was filthy and chewing gum on the sidewalks was a big part of the problem.
--Mark
Singapore is a city/country where almost everything you do is illegal. Sure, it's neat and clean, but things that are normal in the rest of the world (mostly stuff that doesn't bother anyone) is a severe penalty. What goes on there is almost fascist.
Some of the tiles that were put down ended up being too slippery when wet, some to the point of being real dangerous to passengers, so as a temporary solution, they are being made rougher on the surface to improve traction. This could make it more difficult to remove the chewing gum.
And the TA in its infinite wisdom commissioned a study on why the tiles were so slippery.
--Mark
At each station with tile floors they have a special cleaner called HDC or Heavy Duty Cleaner. They operate scrubber machines and they do scrub every inch of tile. Where the scrubber cant reach they hand mop and scrape. As far as the floor finish they now use a special chemical treatment to reduce the slip factor.
Also at stations where tiles are used on ramps they are now scored or grooved and may also have friction strips to improve traction.
The most effective gum removal process involves the use of Freon. You spray the gum with freon and when it freezes, it pops right off the surface. Of course, because it works so well, the EPA won't permit freon to be used....
Gum is a real problem in some places! I was changing from the N/R
to the 1/2/3/9 at Times Square, arguably one of the busiest stations
in the system, and one of the passageways there was one huge wad of
gum. Another gummy spot - REAL gummy - the transfer passageway
between the Atlantic Avenue BMT/IRT stations and the Pacific Street
BMT station. It is FILTHY! Bhleccch! Ptui!!
Wayne
What about CO2? Wont that also serve to freeze the gum?
I never considered CO2. Possible but I believe it could be toxic. Liquid nitrogen would work too not far more dangerous. Freon was until recently relatively safe and easily attainable.
C02 is normally a solid. Actually, I don't know if it CAN exist in a pure liquid form. Liquid Nitrogen would be worth a try. It's safe (makes up 70% of air!), can't cause explosions, and it's properties are well understood - it's used quiet a bit in industry I guess. That, and it doesn't corrode anything, nor is it bad for the Ozone layer. Like I said, it's what makes up 70% of the air we breathe..
CO2 exists as a gas, how do you think the fizz gets in Coke and other sodas. CO2 also makes up part of the atmosphere, trees use it to get carbon and release O2 into the atmosphere.
Yeah, that's it. It's a gas or a solid, but I don't think it can be a liquid. Ahh, I suck at chem anyway, what do I know?
I think it can be a gas, chemistry isn't my strong suit either, but I've seen insulated tank trucks marked with the DOT diamond stating "LIQUID CO2"
If a substance has a solid and a gaseous state there is usually a liquid state somwhere. Since CO2 exists as a solid (Dry Ice) at a temperature way below zero Celsius, there has to be a liquid state around zero or so. One of our other correspondents probably knows what is what.
Maybe thwere can, under some conditions, be a liquid state. FWIW, Iodine CAN'T exist in a liquid state - apparently, it's impossible. The stuff you see sold as iodine in drug stores is an iodine / alcohol mixture I think. Iodine also makes a nice purple gas when heated :)
Most Transit shops had freon on hand and it was not hard to handle.
CO2 and amonia at standard temperature are benign but in a form cold enough to pop gum off of floors is likely to hard to handle. They need to be cooled and stored at very low temperatures. Maybe Todd can shed some light on how cold they need to be to be liquified or frozen.
Maybe there should be a gum tax dedicted to transit and schools to clean up the evil effects of gum.
Well, folks, here's the scoop...
-CO2 can be liquified, but only under quite a large amount of pressure. When under pressure, the liquid form is quite stable. In fact, there is very likely a tank of liquid CO2 sitting behind your local McDonalds - that is where they get the CO2 for the fountain drinks for any high volume soda system.
-I think Iodine (I2) can exist as a solid, but I am not positive. Iodine can exist as a solid and a gas, and I don't know of anything that is a stable solid and a stable gas that is not stable as a liquid. As a rule, everything can be made into a liquid at some temperature and pressure. So if the liquid is stable, it can exist. (Interesting note - acetylene, used in welding, explodes if you liquify it. But acetylene tanks hold a liquid! They have liquid acetone in them, and the gaseous acetylene dissolves in the acetone.)
-Back to subway relevance:
Freezing gum with liquid CO2 - not practical because of the high pressure equipment (much higher pressure, I think, than is needed with freon), I think. Not sure, but nobody uses CO2 in this way, so I think this is the reason. Also, it would probably evaporate too fast...and cool less as it does so, relative to freon...
Freezing gum with dry ice (solid CO2) - very inefficient, because it is solid and it sublimes. You can also burn yourself with it - frostbite - its actually more dangerous that way than liquid nitrogen. But with a little bit of training, it is very safe to work with.
Liquid nitrogen - requires some semi-expensive handling equipment (the containers you carry it in cost a few hundred dollars), and some minimal safety training.
NONE of these coolers (CO2, Nitrogen, Freon) are toxic. Freon destroys ozone so it is no longer produced. HOWEVER, all of these things can kill you if you are breathing them instead of air because they contain no oxygen. Therefore they can be dangerous in small confined spaces. CO2 and Freon are worse because they are heavier than air (CO2 a little bit heavier, Freon a lot) and therefore if you release it while you are in a low area (say, a manhole) they will displace the air upward, just like water would, and you asphixiate. HOWEVER, I do not think either of these would be any danger in something the size of a subway station.
Having said all of this, I'm not sure freezing gum off of a concrete surface would work well - it might make the concrete so brittle that the concrete would get scraped off with the gum. But I don't know.
If anyone is still reading this malarkey, the freezing point of CO2 (Not under high pressure!) is -78.5 °C. The boiling point of liquid nitrogen is -209.9 °C.
David McCabe
(sorry for the long posting. What can I say, I am a chemist!)
Now we know who to turn to if any of us Subtalkers have pressing questions on chemistry. You da maannnn!
Actually, the amount of nitrogen in the atmosphere is closer to 80% - 78%, to be exact. I believe they use a cryogenic on Montreal's Metro to remove chewing gum.
these are called "Mobile Wash teams". They use trucks which are self cobntained-meaning they carry water, chemicals, etc. on the truck. They were designed by NYCT and have been copied by "other" systems.They usually operate during midnight hours. There are also tile cleaning teams. They use big brooms and buckets of "chemicals" and they scrub the tile side walls of the stations. This too is done overnight.
As far as how often: It depends on the station but 59th ST IND is on a 10 day cycle- where eveyrthing is done once every ten days with a different section every day.
(Yes- I have seen both in action especially the wash teams.)
the system is fascinating overnight- you see lots of trains you usually dont see such as garbage trains. These trains use flat cars with dumpsters. at the station they drop the sides, push out the empties and load full dumpsters. (or they just load individual bags.
Tile cleaning teams, eh?
Well, they have a BIG JOB to do at 125th Street-Lexington Avenue -
the Harlem Bridge mosaic panels look like they haven't been cleaned
since 1955 or so - can't somebody scrub them down?
Wayne
When will the new tech trains be in operation,which line will have the new fleet of r142s first?
> When will the new tech trains be in operation,
They have not been delivered yet. Some time next year for the first of them.
> which line will have the new fleet of r142s first?
The 2 & 5. The East 180th St. shop is being overhauled to handle maintenance of the R142 fleet.
This past spring, the MTA said on it's "Transit Transit" tv show that the trains should start arriving in April of '99...but of course that is subject to change. My guess is maybe late summer-early fall the first r142's will come, but the full delievery will probably not be until the end of '99, or quite possibly in 2000.-Nick
Can anyone tell me if the order for R142 cars still stands at 1080 cars or has it been scaled back because of the cracked wheel problems? Also is true that the entire fleet of Redbirds will not be retired because there will be a car shortage?
The order has not been scaled back. Where did you get the idea that there is a cracked wheel problem? No such problem exists on any NYCT car class. In fact, I can count the number of cracked wheels we've had in the last 2 decades on one hand.
The R110A had been out of service recently due to cracked trucks. There is no cracked wheel/truck problems on any other car class currently on the property. Here, to my knowledge, is how this RUMOR got started: Kowasaki sent to NYCT replacement trucks for the R110A which is the same model truck for the R142. I was told by a relative who is a supervisor in 207 barn that after the cars were taken on a "dry run", cracks were found in the replacement trucks. Becuase of this there is a RUMOR and it's JUST A RUMOR that the Kowasaki portion of the order is now up in the air.
That is correct. The original R-110A Trucks developed cracks in the portion of the truck frame which held the tread brake units. Those cracks have subsequently been repaired. Failure analysis is currently being conducted....
Thanks Bill and Steve for clearing that rumor up about the R-142 order. I knew I had heard something about either Cracked wheels or trucks. Also with this order they won't be able to replace all the Redbirds will they?
Put it this way: there are 1080 R-142s on order, but the number of Redbirds is greater, probably 1200 or so. I've heard that some Redbirds, most likely the single R-33s and some of the World's Fair R-36s, will be retained. There is also a plan to assign R-62s to the 7. If I had to make a guess, I would say the remaining Redbirds could wind up on the 3, if they keep the single R-33s, in order to run 9-car trains. Correct me if I'm wrong on this.
Speaking of the R-62s, does anyone know if all of them will be reworked into 5-car sets, or will some of them remain single units? I didn't see any 5-car sets on the 1 or 3 last week, only the 4. You'd figure that if the R-62s are going to the 7, they'll need a few single cars to make up 11-car trains.
BTW, I did see some reworked 4-car sets of R-68s; I assume the R-44s and R-46s have all been reworked into this configuration.
All the R68 a;s (5000series) are now 4 car units as well as the R44 R46.iDON'T SEE THE SINGLE UNIT r33'S GOING TO THE 3 LINE.THEY'RE NOT AIR CONDITIONED.THEY'LL PROBABLY WIND UP IN MAINTENANCE SERVICE,SOME OF THEM.THERE IS 1 TRAIN ON THE #1 LINE THAT IS A 5 CAR UNIT(2 UNITS OF 5).THE R62A'S ON THE #6 LINE,SOME I SHOULD SAY,HAVE BEEN CONVERTED INTO TRANSVERSE CABS.THEY ARE NOT PERMANENTLY LINKED BECAUSE I BELIEVE THEY USE THOSE CARS ON THE GRAND CENTRAL SHUTTLE.(3 AND 4 CAR TRAINS OVER THERE).WHEN THE CARS ARE PREPARED FOR SERVICE,THEY HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CABS ARE ON THE OPEN ENDS AND IN THE MIDDLE.
Whoa Mike, easy on the caps. First, the 5000 series are R-68As and are in fifty 4-car sets. The R-68s are 2500-2924. They are currently being linked into 104 4-car sets with 9 single car units for the Franklin Shuttle. The first 2500-2501-2503-2502 was nearly complete a few weeks ago and may very well be in service.
I did say that the 5000 series cars are R68As.Ijust misused one key when typing it in.
Mike, you are right. Between all those Caps. and my poor eyesight, I missed the 'A'
It's ok Steve.Thanks for the reply on the R42 O gauge cars
I don't understand why the R68/68A are being linked even-odd-odd-even, considering that they are all double-ended single-unit cars, unlike the R44/46, where the evens are cabs and the odds are not. They didn't do this with the R62/62A, which are similar, mechanically speaking.
-Hank
I raised that very issue at a meeting in August. The maintenance people would perfer the cars linked consecutively and RTO would clearly perfer this too. However, despite the fact that A division links are consecutive, the B division 4-car links will be linked Even-odd-odd-even. The decision was made by the engineering division and done so the R-68s will be consistant with the 68As, 44s and 46s. In my opinion, a poor choice...
the reason the #2 ends of those cars are linked together is so when the cancer known as OPTO spreads to the other lines, the end of the train will have the M/Ms cab equipped with c/rs buttons to open each side. The TA can kill two birds with one stone by having all cars permanently linked to avoid hiring switchmen AND full trains capable of One Person operation to avoid hiring conductors.
Obviously, you are correct to some extent but keep this in mind, Mr. Damage. The operational configuration for the R-68 was always to have the transverse cabs at the C/Rs position. That was well before OPTO was ever thought viable on the NYCT. The other thing was that while a transverse cab was never officially required at the train operators position, it was widely understood that the operators would refuse to operate from the #2 end, opting for the larger cab. The crews demanded transverse cabs and now you are getting them....
Why does the order matter. Dont the consecutive cars have #1 and #2 ends, or am I missing something. (I think yards have loop tracks so a car could be turned?) couldnt the proper ends be linked whatever the numbers?
Yes, and as we all know from previous experience, 'damage inc' speaks from the opposite end of the human body than the rest of us.
-Hank
Sorry if the issue of car linking has become so confusing but it is because of several factors. The R-68s have just one transverse cab that is on the #1 end of the car and a *corner* cab on the #2 end of the car. Operationally, it was always required that the conductor's position of the train have a transverse cab as it was usafe for the conductor to *cross* from car to car while in motion AND because there were no Master Door Controls (MDCs)in the #2 end cab. There was no such operational consideration for the train operator. He/She could operate equally well from the #1 or #2 end as both had fully functional train controls. The trouble is that the train operators *demanded* the transverse cabs too, for their operation. Jump ahead 12 years.
The cars are now being linked into 4-car units. The #1 ends have to be the operating ends because the Conductors controls are still only in the #1 end. Therefore the cars must be linked with the ends as follows:
(1 2)(2 1)(1 2)(2 1)
Issue two is the sequence of car numbers in the linking. The shops and the RTO personnel would have perferred to link the cars as follows:
(lowest even)-(lowest odd)-(highest even)-(highest odd)
While the engineering people wanted the cars linked as follows:
(lowest even)-(lowest odd)-(highest odd)-(highest even)
The former makes keeping track of train consists simpler while the latter keeps the linking number sequence consistent with the R-44/R-46/R-68A number sequences. Operations people lost the battle.
I hope that this clearifies the several issues here...
When the R-68s were new, it was not uncommon to find an occasional train whose first car had the half cab facing out. I rode a few Q trains with this arrangement and enjoyed the view through the front window immensely. Too bad this is now a thing of the past...
I was wondering how they were going to do that with the R68s - now I know - I couldn't see them leaving one car the odd man out.
The R68As make trainspotting and numbers collecting tricky - I have
to spot the one that Divides Evenly By 4 first (5068, 5124, 5036, 5168 etc.) then count three backwards. The second car in the bunch is the low number (5002-5001-5003-5004). They're probably arranging the
regular R68s like this for familiarity's and convenience's sake.
I saw R62As being bunched up too (2331-2-3-4-5 AND the ones on the #5
line have cars that end in 1 or 6 at the ends)
Wayne
Thanks Bill and Steve for clearing that rumor up about the R-142 order. I knew I had heard something about cracked wheels or trucks. Also this order won't be able to replace the enitre Redbird fleet will it?
The order for R-142s may not be equivalent in size to the entire red-bird fleet (I'm not sure of the size). However, that does not mean that the entire fleet can't be replaced. The new cars will have a much higher MDBF and greater reliability,therefore, more cars will be available every day. Hence, less new cars may be necessary to replace the 40 year old clunkers
however due to required inspections equipment whether new or not are held out of passenger service from time to time. So less is better isn't always the answer
There's a location in Queens at a major subway station where a long line of buses await the subway passengers. To expedite things, a dispatcher will allow passengers to board through the back door as long as you "show" your Metrocard. Does this distort transportation or transfer figures? Does the MTA keep track of how may trips are the second leg of a transfer?
<<. To expedite things, a dispatcher will allow passengers to board through the back door as long as you "show" your Metrocard. Does this distort transportation or transfer figures? Does the MTA keep track of how may trips are the second leg of a transfer? >>
I know here in Boston where I board my express bus daily, they do back door loading as well when there are large crowds. On numerous occasions, i have either seen the starter tell the driver how many people boarded, or the driver counted him/herself, and entered the # of passes into the farebox manually.
I wou;d guess the location is either Roosevelt Ave-Main St in Flushing, 169th St-Hillside. 179th-Hillside or Parsons-Archer in Jamaica. Maybe the dispatcher is counting the passengers and gives the count the the driver who then enters it manually (if possible).
I know this type of boarding is used often on subway shuttles in which most of the passengers boarding will surrender a paper transfer.
I believe Wayne is talking about a subway "block", i.e. service is down (blocked) for some reason, so riders are give a long "pink" piece of paper so they can switch to a bus & complete their trip. The problem is that if you have to get back on the train down the line it will cost you $1.50.
Mr t__:^)
Yes, Mr. T - that's the service I was referring to - the (subway) serive is usually out for some major G.O.
Keep in mind that there has been bus service that allowed the rider to re-enter the subway without paying again. One of the longest ones I remember was the Lenox Ave shuttle around 1980-81??? - in which #2 service operated along Lexington Ave from 10 PM to 5 AM and the entire weekend and the northbound #3 would terminate at 110th St-Lenox. At this point riders were issued transfers for the #3 bus to 149th St-7th Ave or the very popular #2 bus to 149th Street-3rd Ave. On the #2 bus the driver would issue transfer to re-enter the subway at 149th St-Grand Concourse and at 149th St-3rd Ave.
Wayne
What was the Lenox Ave. line closed down for back in 1980-81?
While I am at it, what's up with the roof of 125th st. Station blowing off?
A severe T-storm overt the summer blew paarts of thee roof off the southvbound platform at 125 and B'way, and onto the tracks. service was halted for about 2 hours while power was cut, the tracks cleared, and power restored.
-Hank
In the early 1980's they were doing major work along the Lenox Ave line. I believe it was structural as well as track work that was done.
Hmm. Would have been nice if they had taken care of the underground stream that they spent so much time/money on this year back in 1980, when, presumably, things were ripped apart anyways...
Not if you tell the driver you need to re-enter the subway. They're called 'Block Tickets', and are not always distributed during GOs, I picked one up at 96st one day when the roof blew off the 125st station. Took the m104 to 137st to get back on the subway.
-Hank
I would be very interested in knowing what color strip was on the side of the bus, i.e. blue is TA, any other is one of the "privates". At Main Street Flushing, I believe there is only two.
To my knowledge there is NO way for the driver to record a paid full fair. He/she can record a free or reduced fare ride, dump the coin to clear a short fare & record a Transfer issued or received. At my company we do it on an exception basis.
Another point ... the "privates" spend a lot more effort getting the numbers right into the farebox because we get paid based on the service provided. E.G. NYC has changed the student pass system. They are now much more interested in how many passes were used & where they were used. The system used to be based on a % passes issued.
Disclaimer: I don't work for NYC-DOT & opinions expressed here R mine
Mr t__:^)
Does anyone know:
(1) the exact dates in 1999 when the J/M/Z service will be suspended over the Willy B?
(2) the route modifications planned for the J/M/Z, and the additional services planned for the A/C and L lines, during the bridge closing?
Thank you.
Yesterday, when I was looking to take the 2:51 express to Babylon.
I step on the train and the conductor announced that the train had machanical problems. OH S**T!! there goes my trip. The crew disconnected the first married pair. Motorman operated the train backwards to Jamaica and switched tracks. It was a slow trip because
we were stuck behind the local. On my way back, I took the diesel express to Jamaica from which came from Montauk. I saw the married pairs in Hillside Facility. I never found out what was wrong with those cars.
Dispite that it was my lucky day. From Woodside the conductor didn't
see me get on so he didn't clip my ticket. On the Babylon train the crew didn't collect tickets either. It was $5.25 round trip from Woodside to Babylon.
Any other commuter stories like this?
Guess there are a lot.
P.S. The LIRR should replace their M-1.
No. But ironically, the only times I've ever been stuck on (commuter) trains were on Metro-North. First day, heading up to my HD dealer in Stamford, the train was about to hit the 59th street abandoned station, when..BIE!! Apparently, some air hose got loose - in our car. Every time they charged the system, you could hear the air venting. It was only a 10 min delay, and wasn't that bad except for the little kid next to me who took a liking to pulling on my (rather long) hair when her mom wasn't looking. Other than that, the trip up was rather uneventful. I also got stuck a few days later for like 1 hour, because an MU ahead of us died. The express then localized itself, and we made the zillon stops between NY and Stamford. This one was chaos, almost, because it combined a class trip with loud kindergardeners from New Rochelle to Greenwich, and a bunch of teenage girls argueing (loudly) about their sex life too. Lots of fun, really.
By the way - if your train gets into GCT late, apparently Metro-North has some sort of "late note" you can pick up and pass to your boss...
As a former everyday commuter on the Ronkonkoma line, I experienced regular delays. On several occasions, the 5:41 express from Penn to Ronkonkoma had mechanical problems causing severe delays. One time I'll never forget is when suppossedly the breaks would not completely release after Hickville. We traveled from Hicksville to Ronkonkoma doing between 15 and 20 m.p.h. I'm sure all the trains behind us were thrilled. The train arrived some 40 min. late.
Another memorable morning was when in the dead of winter the 7:22 express to Penn broke down just oustide Framingdale. This trian is standing room only after Central Islip. (The trian's run is Ronkonkoma, Central Islip, Brentwood, Penn Sta.) We made the unscheduled stop at Farmingdale and waited for the next train, the 7:31 local from Ronkonkoma which is usually full after Wyandanch. When that train arrived, most of us manged to fit on, but it was like taking a rush hour subaway trian from Nassau to NYC. Consequently, the people at Bethpage, Hicksville, Mineola, and Jamiaca were screwed because there was no where for them to go.
Oh well, such is the life of a commuter.
Delays on the Ronkonkoma line are particularly troublesome because much of the line is single track east of Farmingdale. Add to that the gross overcrowding you mention, and it's easy to see why a stuck or slow train can wreak havoc.
A couple of times in my 11 years on the LIRR the first car died, so the engineer moved to the second and the conductor sat up front talking to him over the radio ... we moved along a little slower than normal but it wasn't too bad. I've also experienced a train that had to get backed up by the flag man (no sure here ... it's the other guy with a key). AND once the train died over a switch out of Brooklyn ... I guess one of the switches there has a long gap. They can't go too fast or they derail & if they go to slow they get stuck once in a while. How about riding between the cars in a slow storm ... how about exiting between the cars because the train is packed (you know the old equip cancelled routine) & you're the first stop.
As I've said before I enjoyed my 11 years, but a few times it was a challenge to get home (the wife just loved it when I called from East Rockaway to have her come out in a snow storm to pick me up).
Mr t__:^)
I having Netscape Communicator problems. Sometimes, when I put the cursor on a hyperlink, instead of turning into a hand, it stays a cursor and when I click on it, nothing happens. Anyone know how to fix
this problem?
Are you sure it's a link and not just some underlined text?
This is not really the forum for debugging your general browser problems. Check out the help available at home.netscape.com.
-Dave
I observed, yesterday, that on some of the M-1/M-3s the LIRR has begun to use a wheel with a different web profile. My questions.
How long has this change been in effect?
Are these corrugated wheels?
Any of our LIRR friends care to shed some light?
I went to the MTA service notices web page, http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/service/index2.html, and saw this service change for the #2:
Brooklyn-bound service runs to South Ferry then on the 4 Line from Wall St to Nevins St
Late night, 11 PM to 5 AM Mon to Sat until Dec 5 (normal service Nov 25); 11 PM Sat to 6:30 AM Sun until Nov 22
For service to Park Pl, use the Chambers St station. For A service at Park Pl, get a transfer ticket at the Chambers St station and walk to the Chambers St A station.
For service to Fulton St and Wall St, take the 2 to the Wall St 4 station.
For service to Clark and Hoyt Sts, use the Borough Hall Station.
How is that done? I know that that the South Ferry Loop has a connection to the Lexington Ave line. Unless I'm confused, but don't trains end up in the uptown-direction after leaving the loop?
When the train goes thru the loop to the Lexington Avenue Line, they will either cross it over north of the station into the downtown Wall St station where the train operator will change ends and take it back downtown into Brooklyn or take it to the uptown Wall Street station and then crossit over heading downtown.
This is a common move when they are doing construction on the Clark St Tube
The train arrives on NB track at Wall St. The Train Operator dumps the train and a new crew takes the train south to Brooklyn, crossing over just S of Wall St. As a result of the reversal, everyone who got in the front of the train in the Bronx & Manhattan ends up in the rear in Brooklyn and complain as they walk the lenght of the station because their exit is at the front of the train.
Also, David L., in case you were wondering, the 2 switches over to the inner loop (Lexington Ave.) track just past the platform at South Ferry.
Took this little trip this evening...
2 train crossed at 34st, ran express on the Local tracks to Chambers St, skipped Cortlandt, Rector, SF, and Bowling Green. Stopped at Uptown platform at Wall St on the Lex, crew changed, and train departed southboud, crossing over as it left the station.
-Hank
If I didn't know better I think one of our Supt. friends in the TA arranged this train move just so you could confirm it for us. I'm impressed !
Mr t__:^)
Pure chance; I was coming from 231st in the Bronx, and changed at 96st, since I needed the 2 to Wall St to get to work (the exit from the plaatform is in the basement of my building) As it turned out, I got to Wall St, but had to walk above ground since I was at the wrong station! (BTW, the Wall St stops on both IRT lines, and Broad St on the Nassau line, all exit to my building.)
-Hank
I am planning to take an Amtrak trip to Washington DC, I know most of you get around alot. I wanted to know if anyone had any advice as to Where to go to shoot rail equipment (metro, Amtrak, Marc etc...) or Buses. I will be there from 7am to about 9:30pm Any insight would be greatly apprecated
Your immediate connection to Metro is right there at Union Station -
the Red Line.
Metro trains photograph pretty well underground - just don't fire the
flash in the operator's face i.e. wait till the train comes to a
full stop then take your picture. ASA 400 FILM IS AN ABSOLUTE MUST
for taking Metro pictures. If you want killer pictures, go to
one of the transfer point stations (Gallery Place, Metro Center or, L'Enfant Plaza) and take shots from the overpasses.
Outdoor shots:
go up the Red Line to Silver Spring or Rhode Island Avenue, or try
the Orange Line past Ballston. Or: take the Red Line train to
Fort Totten then change for the Green Line : neat stations with
unusual architecture up there. Woodley Park-Zoo has a neat arch
ceiling and an endless escalator. Other stops on the Red Line are also similar.
AMTRAK- best spots are right at Union Station.
MARC - ditto, plus Silver Spring, New Carrollton,
VRE - King Street (Alexandria), Crystal City
BUSES: Right in front of Union Station. Also downtown along "F"
street NW and along Connecticut Avenue NW. There are also bus
transfer points at some of the outlying stations: i.e. Ballston
on the Orange Line.
May I Suggest: Buy a day pass for $5.00. It can be used for
unlimited entries and exits AFTER 9:30 A.M. Good on Metro Buses too.
Visit the Washington DC Metro Page to get a sneak peek at most of the stations!
Wayne
If you're pressed for time, I would agree with Wayne, right there at Union Station, you can catch all 3 including the VRE (commuter rail going into VA)-----If you're only interested in shooting the rolling stock, go to any bridge crossing over the Red Line between Union Station and Silver Spring or Orange Line between Cheverly and New Carrollton, all three systems (Marc, Metro & Amtrak) go through this area. If you want architecture, there's a lot to choose from--I know Wayne particularly likes Prince Georges Plaza on the Green Line and I like Huntington on the Yellow, both are very beautiful and very original and well worth the trip----but---if you want the true feeling of Metro and the grand scale and scope of it, visit Metro Center---there's really nothing quite like it. Gallery Place & L'enfent Plaza are similar but not quite the same as Metro Center.
Ah yes, but only Gallery Place's south end (Green/Yellow line, lower
level) has that super-high ceiling!
Two other interesting stations are Rosslyn and Pentagon - their
southbound tracks also have very high ceilings.
AND - don't forget to ride over the Yellow Line bridge between
L'Enfant Plaza and Pentagon.
Wayne
The all day fare card is a great deal. But be careful; it's not good during rush hours (hours are posted at the machines where you can buy the card). So if you're planning to get to Union Station in the morning, figure on doing some picture-taking there and in the vicinity until 9:00 am or so.
The All-Day pass is valid during the PM rush hours - it is only good
after 9:30AM. Dad and I used ours freely between the hours of 4 and 7 PM during our Aug 28 trip...
Wayne
The $5 pass is also good ALL DAY weekends as well.
I spent 4 days in DC, two of them on a $5 pass and the other two (travel days) I didn't come anywhere near $5 in regular fare so it was a great deal IMHO. My nose print is still on the window of that red train as it left Union Station looking at all the equipment and deadhead and positioning moves...Great stuff..
I assume all Oyster Bay branch Mail&Ride customers like me got this...
----------
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE
NASSAU COUNTY EXECUTIVE BUILDING
ONE WEST STREET
MINEOLA NY 11501-4895
October 23, 1998
Dear Commuter,
I would like to bring your attention to some good news. As you may
recall, I had asked Long Island Rail Road officials to give the Oyster Bay Branch a priority for operation of the new diesel equipment.
I am pleased to inform you the President of the Long Island Rail Road, Thomas Prendergast, has advised me that he anticipates that the Long Island Rail Road will begin to operate one train on the Oyster Bay Branch utilizing the new diesel coaches and locomotives during the week of October 26. Mr. Prendergast informed me that the balance of the new coaches and locomotives will be phased-in fully next year.
Please be assured that my office will continue to monitor this
situation.
Warmest regards,
[signed] Tom Gulotta
Thomas S. Gulotta
County Executive
TSG
Enclosure
----------
The enclosure was a copy of the Newsday article "A Smooth, Quiet Ride: LIRR Unveils New Fleet" from October 22, 1998, page A 25, with the following paragraph shaded in blue and underlined as shown:
Yesterday, riders across Long Island were surprised as the elegant new trains rolled into stations from Port Jefferson to Huntington, as well as Hunterspoint Avenue, Queens. Prendergast said he expects another new diesel train to be put in service on the Montauk branch by Friday and another on the Oyster Bay branch next week. The dual-mode locomotives (diesel and electric), which can run all the way into Manhattan, will hit the rails by March, 1999, he said.
The full article can be found by searching here.
If someone discovers which run this consist is assigned to on a regular basis (especially on weekends) would you be good enough to post it here?
I'd love to ride it on my native OB branch... maybe even file a report for WCBS "Transit and Weather Together."
-the other TSG
Perhaps a bit off-topic for SubTalk -- but for any readers with an interest in historical Chicago traction, there's a new bulletin board dedicated to the Chicago North Shore and Milwaukee Railroad at http://www.northshoreline.com/bbs. (This is part of a North Shore website which might also be of interest to some of you.) The BB has been up since the end of September.
Alan Follett
Hercules, CA
Alan
I had a look and it is a nice site. New and still under construction but it is interesting.
The #2 (White Plains Rd.) line in the Bronx is running nonstop southbound from 241st St. to Gun Hill Rd. and from Gun Hill Rd. to E. 180th St. all weekend, every weekend till December. Today I saw a car with large spools of cable on it parked on the southbound track just north of Allerton Ave. Is this indeed for updating the signal system?
Anyway, as the uptown local pulled in to Gun Hill Rd. station a downtown express (i.e. train on the center track) was just pulling out. We missed it by a few seconds. Then we waited about 15 minutes for the next downtown train. Once it came, I boarded, and it started pulling out, there was the next uptown train, whose arriving passengers just missed the train I was on, by perhaps 20 seconds.
Why can't they adjust the schedule so the downtown train can wait the extra 30 seconds or so at Gun Hill and make the connection? It would make the detour a lot less annoying. Even with waiting the extra seconds to make the connection, the downtown train will still make better time than it normally does stopping at every station.
Could be worse. I was also in the Bronx, at a Colgate-Fordham football game, today. I was with a Manhattan friend, and decided to accompany him on MetroNorth rather than walk up the hill to the Concourse Line. Besides, I figured I'd see the renovated Grand Central. A southbound New Haven Line train pulled in, and people got out, but we were not allowed to board. We were told to wait 20 minutes for a Harlem Line train. How's that for attitude? At least no one came around looking for tickets on the Harlem Line train.
It this another Nutmeg State thing? Connecticut DOT is willing to help pay for trains that transport their swells to Manhattan, and our proles to Connecticut to work (so they don't have to live there, as long as they get out by nightfall), but they're not about to let their trains carry me and my little girl home from a football game?
[A southbound New Haven Line train pulled in (at Fordham), and people got out, but we were not allowed to board. We were told to wait 20 minutes for a Harlem Line train. How's that for attitude? At least no one came around looking for tickets on the Harlem Line train.
It this another Nutmeg State thing? Connecticut DOT is willing to help pay for trains that transport their swells to Manhattan, and our proles to Connecticut to work (so they don't have to live there, as long as they get out by nightfall), but they're not about to let their trains carry me and my little girl home from a football game?]
New Haven trains indeed don't board passengers at Fordham. The reasons are a bit murky today, but they go back to some deal decades ago between the NY Central and the NYNH&H. Connecticut DOT doesn't have anything to do with it.
> New Haven trains indeed don't board passengers at Fordham. The > reasons are a bit murky today,
> but they go back to some deal decades ago between the NY Central and > the NYNH&H.
> Connecticut DOT doesn't have anything to do with it.
Just to clarify, it is southbound New Haven line trains to Manhattan that you cannot board at Fordham. Likewise, you can't ride a New Haven train northbound from GCT or 125th to Fordham; I have wondered what would happen if someone tried. I agree this policy makes little sense. Getting a northbound train at Fordham to points in eastern Westchester or in Connecticut is OK; lately I have been making the trip from Fordham to Port Chester fairly often.
I thought the mission of the MTA was to provide seamless transportation to all. Hmmm........Maybe ConnDot who share the expenses with MTA just doesn't want us City Slickers on their rails!
The MTA is only interested in seamless transportation if you're part of the MTA family. NJT, PATH & ConnDOT are not. It's a purely money thing with the MTA. They don't want any of those OTHER guys getting any of THEIR money.
Disclaimer: I don't work for the MTA or TA & opinions here R my own
Mr t__:^)
(Has to do with a deal between the New Haven and NY Central decades ago)
Only in New York would a deal made decades ago between entities which no longer exist be used as an excuse to continue to do something stupid today. This really is the most conservative part of the U.S. Opposition to change, and indifference to the future, is killing us.
It's the same old excuse: "That's the way it's always been done."
Dan,
What you saw was indeed the cable for the coming signal upgrade.
Train crew are advised to make the connection you are speaking about. Your experince is unfortunate, and it is a shame that more train crews do not consider customer service when they make there decisions. At that particular point only the train operator can see the approching uptown #2 train. At that station and under the situation you relate, I often receive a long buzzer signal from the train operator inorder to hold in the station. I welcome the long buzz as we do make good time with out having to make all of the station stops to 180st.
Because that would make perfect sense, and we all know how rare it is for the TA to do something that makes perfect sense.
-Hank
this may sound like a stupid question but Im new to NYC and I have a few questions.
could someone please briefly
I have looked at all of the FAQs etc
explain the 2nd ave subway, is it still being built or is itstopped or what, im confused
explain the 63st tunnel what is qong on, it confuses me when I look at a map and read what is said about it
why was the 8 toen down
thanks in advance
The 2nd Ave. line was originally conceived as part of the IND Second System back in the 20s. The Second System included several lines in Brooklyn and Queens which were never built, as well as extensions in the Bronx. The Depression put a halt to all of this; however, the 2nd Ave. line remained on the drawing board. After numerous delays and revisions due to various reasons, ground was broken on October 27, 1972 on the Upper East Side. Fate stepped in once again a few years later, when the city experienced a monumental fiscal crisis during the mid 70s. The 2nd Ave. project was halted with a few bits and pieces completed, and is now indefinitely on hold. While it hasn't been officially killed, the chances of the line being completed as planned are slim and none.
The 63rd St. line included a connection to the 2nd Ave. line; it was supposed to be a part of a super express line across Queens via LIRR right of way. A four-tube, twin level tunnel was built under the East River and Roosevelt Island which included a provision for LIRR trains to enter Manhattan to a new East Side terminal. This project also fell victim to the fiscal crisis of the 70s and was subsequently scaled back to a subway-only river crossing. The super express line was shelved, and plans were altered to connect the line to the IND Queens line, which is being done now.
As for your last question, I am assuming you're referring to the 3rd Ave. el. It was supposed to be replaced by the 2nd Ave. line. The Manhattan portion was demolished in 1955, and the Bronx segment survived until 1973.
Does the 63rd St--Queens Blvd connection include bellmouths for the super-express, in case the plan gets resuscitated?
The only bellmouths I could see are the ones which would lead to the 2nd Ave. line south of 63rd St. They're plainly visible through the front window of the shuttle (R-32s). Even after 9 years, the tunnels still look very clean. Since the 63rd St. line was supposed to go directly to the LIRR ROW, I doubt if any bellmouths for a connection exist.
Any ideas / info from MTA on the new services via 63rd St. Tunnel once connection is completed between 21st Street and Northern Boulevard link to Queens main line (E, F, R & G). Will it be Q or R services? How about operations: local or express? Which terminal(s) -- 179th Street? Forest Hills? Jamaica Center? Will services use tracks to both 7th Avenue AND 6th Avenue? Is new conection to local AND express tracks at Northern Boulevard?
Thanks in advance for insights.
Tony
ACM
The way it's shaping up is This:
G service will terminate at Court Square.
Q will run express via 63rd Street to 179th Street (rush hours) and 71st Avenue-Continental (mid-day)
E service MAY run local
F service will probably be unchanged.
R service MAY be increased.
The flyunders from the 63rd Street connection will be set up to
connect to both Queens Boulevard local and express tracks.
NOTE that this is all subject to change at the last minute and does NOT represent the official NYCT word, just an amalgamation of what I've heard posted here.
Wayne
The G going to Court Sq. would be a done deal since the TA would be able to run 24/7 OPTO there. The service plan would be contigent upon which side (or both) would be availiable on the Manhattan Br. But you should run the E express & the Q local since if an E & R got to Queens Plaza from Manhattan at the same time, one train will be "plugged" at the crossover to the local track. It would also cause a problem at 71/Continental middays when the terminating Q on the express track & terminating R on the local track may be both ready to go into the relay position at the same time plugging thru E & F trains behind them. Also, during rush hours, once the E switched off at Hillside/Van Wyck for Jamaica Center, you would need the Q or F to go local from Union Tpke. to 179 anyway, so why not just leave the Q on the local track, all the way to 71/Continental or 179? In the non-rush, with the R & Q terminating at 71/Continental, you can run the E & F local after 75 Ave., & keep them on the express track all the way when the Q goes to 179 during the rush.
Recently, while in the area, I looked behind the fence at 41st Av and (I believe) 29th St, where the connection between 21st St-Queensbridge and the E/F is being built. There is a building under construction there, only I have never heard of any plans to include a station between 21st St and 36th St (local) or Roosevelt-Jackson Hts (express). Any info as to what this building is?
Bob Sklar
It is a fan plant. I found that out from a diagram of the connection that I did forward to Dave.
Yup, a ventilation tower now sits at 28th Street right next to the old Long Island City High School (they build a new one it is now a multinational high school of some sort). Matter of fact at the corner of the school are two standpipes marked LIRR Level and TA Level which I assume are for firefighting on each level of the tunnel. I don't know if the standpipe connections are still there once they started digging up and I couldn't park at the ParkFast I stopped walking over towards the high school.
In addition to running Nostalgia Trains, why doesn't the Transit Authority put a few historical and vintage trains in revenue service on special days, perhaps on the subway's anniversary in November. I know this was done on the Times Square shuttle in 1994 for the 90th anniversery, but why doesn't the TA put more of those trains on different lines, and run them on the anniversary weekend instead of just the exact day? This might give more people an opportunity to ride them.
Just an idea. What do you think?
For the Brooklyn Bridge Centenial, the Lo-V museum train was used in the celebration. One of the problems with operating the vintage equipment is that there are so few train operators qualified to operate them.
The lack of qualified crews is not the problem. If the TA has even one train crew qualified to run a low-v that same crew is also qualified for all rules and lines in that division. The TA can arrange for a change in assignment or even overtime in the case of a fantrip I was called for many years ago. The R-110s in the B division have been run by the same two or three crews qualified for the past year. The crews that originally operated on the A are now running the same train in C service. Perhaps the reason not to run the Nostaligia was made by the museum
The lack of qualified RTO crew is a problem, but by far not
the most serious one. The lack of qualified maintainers is
a bigger one. The lack of spare parts is an even bigger
obstacle.
Good point. You're talking about equipment and technology which, on these old cars, is long obsolete. On top of that, the BMT cars have the controller and brake valve reversed. It's enough to give an operator dyslexia. I doubt if there are any motormen still around who ran even the BMT standards in their final days in 1969.
For one thing, most subway riders wouldn't appreciate it. They want to get where they are going as quickly as they can, and would prefer to do it on modern equipment. I think the only reason the 42nd St. Shuttle Lo-V run worked is that a new train (R-62a's) would pull into the station before the Lo-V train departed, so people who preferred the new train could take that. Plus it was widely announced on the news and ran on a very limited stretch of track, so people who wanted to ride it could find it easily. (Yes, I rode it; it brought back interesting memories from my childhood.) Running such a train on a main line from the Bronx or Queens through Manhattan to Brooklyn would only confuse people who weren't expecting it, and it would be hard for the people who did want to ride it to find it.
Putting them into regular service would lead heavily to the possibly of vandalism by those who don't appreciate vintage equipment, even with a cop in every car! P.S.: if qualified train operators were to be a problem, I hereby volunteer!
Nevermind one other thing - many of those old cars would be considered "unsafe" by today's standards. Do you really think the T/A could run cars with large openable windows and metal bladed, high speed ceiling fans toady? Nope. everything needss to be idiot proof these days. They aren't mechanically unsafe (though I'm not sure what kind of fatigue issues could exist, if any), but the aren't idiot proof - and lawyers, being the sharks they are. I believe this is part of the reason why Metro-North is ditching the ACMU, even though those cars argueably have another fews years of life left in them...
Unfortunately, this is very true. It wouldn't be long before some idiot decides to stick a head or arm out an open window and lose it in a collision with a signal or a tunnel wall. Same with the open fans as you point out.
Nevertheless, it wasn't too long ago, 1980, that you had your choice of THREE Nostalgia Trains EVERY WEEKEND - one to the Cloisters (R9s on the A line), one to Coney Island (D Types or Standards) and one to Rockaway Park, all departing from 57th St/6th Avenue.
--Mark
We have to get in another dig at lawyers, don't we?!
I don't think it's being petty or frivolous to sue when a "metal bladed high speed ceiling fan" is placed in a crowded train car where many of the passengers stand, are josteled back and forth, and there are generally more taller people (6ft+) and people with long hair than there were when these cars were built. This isn't the same as someone suing a ladder manufacturer because they fell off a ladder in the rain. For example, a 6'2" woman with very long hair should not have to worry about her hair getting sucked into a fan when she rides the subway.
I agree that everything should not have to made "idiot-proof." Most of the cases that sound that way are based on the rule that manufacturers are strictly liable (no need to prove negligence) for the products they make. I personally disagree with this rule, and I feel that people and companies should only be liable when they do something wrong (negligence or intentional harm). However, strict product liability was intended to protect consumers from shoddy goods, not to make the public and attorneys rich. The fact is that "years ago" they (railroads, car manufacturers, etc.) used to not be so much concerned with safety. I think the fans you are discussing are such an example, and not an example of how all laywers are sharks.
[I don't think it's being petty or frivolous to sue when a "metal bladed high speed ceiling fan" is placed in a crowded train car where many of the passengers stand, are josteled back and forth, and there are generally more taller people (6ft+) and people with long hair than there were when these cars were built.]
As far as I know, these fans weren't considered a safety hazard when they were in everyday use. Even given the general character of the times, people probably would have sued the Transit Authority if the fans did cause injuries. It's just that today there is a (sadly justified) need to avoid even the merest risk of injury.
Is it really true that there are more tall people around today than, say, 50 years ago? I'd suspect that the average height of New York subway riders has dropped in that time, due to Asian and Latin American immigration.
I was aboard a jam-packed KK train way back in August of 1969 (squeezed in at B'way Lafayette) and I saw
a very tall fellow get his afro bumped by #1649's whirling fan. He
simply moved to one side (after mumbling something) and acted as if
nothing had happened. Don't forget that those fans are set in the
crown of the roof, which is higher than the average car ceiling.
I can't see subjecting vintage equipment to the everyday rigors of
passenger service. The only solution, FAR-FETCHED AS THIS SOUNDS,
is to create a limited number of replicas, with somewhat modernized
interiors and car bodies approximating the originals. Of course,
this is just a pipe dream - the vintage equipment should remain
in the hands of the Museum...however, maybe they should run it just
a little more often, like every other month or so.
Wayne
I am planning a trip to Mexico City.
I would appreciate contact with someone
who knows the Metro System. I am seeking
tips on which lines are the most interesting to ride.
Tanx Much
aBk
Everytime I ride the Washington DC Metro, I forget the grap irons run down the center of the car and the doors. I bang my head each time I haven't riden the DC Metro in awhile. I don't sue DC though, thanks for the Idea.... 6'8" (ask Jeff. H.)..
Well, here we go again. Is it frivolous to buy a house near an airport and then sue over the noise? I'm sure we can all cite examples of law suits which challanged the credibility of the legal profession. The fact of the matter is there are unscrupulous manufacturers who knowingly make products that are not idiotproof. There are people who are idiots. There are also people who make a living looking for the ultimate law suit. BUT, most important, there are far too many lawyers who are willing to prostitute their chosen profession for the sake of a dollar. Lawyers have earned the negative perception the public has of them.....
And that's why lawn mowers have deadman controls, ladders have umpteen warning stickers on them (Joke: Ladders shorter that four feet have been banned: no room for all the warning stickers.) Carry-out coffee cups have "caution HOT" on them.
Common sense has apparently been revoked.
Seriously, we need two reforms for tort cases:
1. Eliminate "no fee unless we win".
2. Institute "loser pays" Every other Western legal system has it, why don't we?
1) What's wrong with deadman controls on lawnmowers?
2) I agree about the ladders, since the risks (falling and electrocution) should be obvious to the average user -- notice that there are not warnings on knives, scissors, or razor blades. But SOME of the warnings on ladders are reasonable -- if you look at a ladder, you would reasonably think that you could stand on the highest step, but all ladders are marked that you shouldn't stand on it. That's not obvious.
3) Don't get me started about the McDonald's coffee case. The Wall Street Journal, about as pro-business and pro-tort reform a media outlet as you can get, did an article on why the McDonald's coffee decision was NOT unreasonable.
*The coffee was served much hotter than any other restuarant served or serves it.
*McDonald's own scientists told management that the coffee was unreasonably hot and would severely burn someone, but management blew them off and said they wanted to keep the temperature high to boil the most out of the coffee beans.
*The woman's burns were third-degree burns, and my doctor friends all tell me that a human should NOT receive third degree burns from anything meant to be ingested.
*Her medical bills were in the $200,000 range, not just a little pain, a bandage, and a few pain pills.
*Far from ignoring her responsibility for spilling the coffee, the jury found her to be partly responsible for her own injury and reduced her damages proportionately.
*Most of the $1+ million award was punitive damages for McDonald's selling the coffee too hot when they KNEW from their own scientists that it was dangerous. The amount of punitives was set by the jury to be ONE DAY'S coffee sales in the company-owned (not franchise) restaurants.
*Right after the jury handed down its award, the judge cut it by more than half.
*There has NOT been a rash of coffee burn cases in the aftermath of the original one, and the few that were filed were quickly dismissed or were settled very low (for "nuisance value").
Business owners would like to operate unencumbered by the tort system if they could, and have a strong incentive to defame and distort the public image of the tort system so that the public votes for tort "reforms" that reduce the liabilty of businesses for the torts they commit, such as caps on damages. What better propaganda that putting those CAUTION: HOT BEVERAGE warnings on coffee cups? I personally believe that a lot (some but not all) of the warnings on products out there are not really there because of an actual past lawsuit but because it helps reinforce the propaganda of a tort system gone amok.
I agree completely with the "loser pays" system, but I think you're dead wrong about taking cases on contingency (no fee unless we win). I think this is one of the biggest incentives for an attorney to TURN AWAY an iffy case. I don't work in a law firm anymore, but when I did, we turned away more tort cases than we accepted, and that was because we thought there was no case or the case was too weak for us to risk working on it and then not getting paid.
Let me tell you something else about the potential tort cases that came in -- most of the people who came in felt (rightly or wrongly) that they were the victims of some sort of injustice, and did NOT come in with visions of dollar signs dancing in their heads.
Also, if we were not there to tell the ones that had no case under the law about the reality of their situation -- if we had the lawyer-less system that so many people fantasize about -- they would have gone ahead on their own and pressed suit in the conviction (correct or not) that they were in the right. Imagine trying to reach a settlement with such a righteously-indignant client, untempered by having a lawyer telling him or her what the realities and odds of the case are! I can tell you from experience that many clients are reluctant to settle at any price (because they feel wronged, and not because they're greedy) and probably would not settle if the attorney were not there to apprise them of the realistic chances of getting to trial and winning.
I believe that the widespread believe in excessive claims is the result of personal observation as much as industry propaganda. Lets face it, people behave differently if the purportedly negligent entity is another person or a small business, rather than an insurance company, a large company, or the government. The difference is the amount of money available, and the ease of getting it.
My father-in-law blames the insurance companies for being unfair back in the 1960s, creating a climate in which people large numbers of people felt justified in inflating claims. It is also true that the bigger the total amount of claims, the bigger the total amount of insurance, as the costs are passed on to the policyholders. So everyone has an incentive to let things get out of hand. You may not like draconian measures to push the genie back into the bottle, but something has to be done. As it is, you are a fool to buy insurance unless you are planning to beat the system, because that is the only way to get ahead.
You can't help but notice how much lower premiums are for the insurance company which only insures former members of the armed forces. The reason? Those people are, on average, less likely to come up with bullshit or inflated claims. Unfortunately, I have no characteristic which tells the insurance companies I am not dishonest, so I am lumped in to subsidize those who are.
[You can't help but notice how much lower premiums are for the insurance company which only insures former members of the armed forces. The reason? Those people are, on average, less likely to come up with bullshit or inflated claims. Unfortunately, I have no characteristic which tells the insurance companies I am not dishonest, so I am lumped in to subsidize those who are.]
You're also subsidizing your dishonest borough neighbors. You've mentioned before that you live in Brooklyn. A couple of years ago, I read a fascinating statistic about the borough. Nationwide, X percent of crashes involving two or more vehicles resulted in personal injury lawsuits (as best I can recall, X was maybe in the high teens or low twenties, something like that). But in Brooklyn, the percentage of crashes leading to lawsuits was much higher, something like 2.5X. This might be legitimate if Brooklyn crashes were more likely to result in injury, but in fact (due to lower urban traffic speeds) the opposite is true. So dishonest people in Brookly, aided by equally dishonest, desparate-for-work lawyers, are in large part to blame for your high permiums.
[I agree completely with the "loser pays" system, but I think you're dead wrong about taking cases on contingency (no fee unless we win). I think this is one of the biggest incentives for an attorney to TURN AWAY an iffy case. I don't work in a law firm anymore, but when I did, we turned away more tort cases than we accepted, and that was because we thought there was no case or the case was too weak for us to risk working on it and then not getting paid.]
In theory you're correct, but it doesn't always work that way in practice. There are too many lawyers for the amount of legal work available. That means that more and more lawyers are eager to take the most ridiculous cases because they don't have enough legitimate work to keep themselves busy. You're less likely to turn down a fraudulent case with slim chances of success when there's nothing else on your plate (and note that clients pay expenses on contingency cases).
The only real solution to the litigation explosion is to limit the obscene numbers of new lawyers being churned out every year. We need engineers, computer scientists, and other technically trained people, not more dime-a-dozen lawyers.
"The only real solution to the litigation explosion is to limit the obscene numbers of new lawyers being churned out every year. We need engineers, computer scientists, and other technically trained people, not more dime-a-dozen lawyers."
The problem is not as simple as "too many lawyers".
1) Because the law governs most everything a businessperson does, many people who go through law school have no intention of practicing law. They just want to know the law so they can make day-to-day business decisions. The study of law is unique in this aspect: while almost everyone who studies to be a physician intends to practice medicine, and most people who study engineering intend to be an engineer, MANY people who study law never intend to be lawyers. Is it your intention to tie the hands of business owners who want to be more fully informed?
2) Most all of the statistics introduced to show that the U.S. has more lawyers per person than any other nation compare apples and oranges. They compare the number of persons in each country able to represent others in courts of law. However, every American who gets a law license thus counts in the U.S. total -- even if many are businesspersons and not practicing attorneys -- while in most all other nations, only those who go on to a higher level of training and can practice in court (barristers, avocats, etc.), a fraction of those with a law degree, count in those nations' totals.
Lawnmowers have deadman controls?
I must trade in my dad's 20 year old Craftsman and 35 year old Briggs and Stratton! Many a times I wish they had deadman controls... as it is.. if it's in gear.. it goes.. with or without a rider.
Yep, my old Lawn-Boy had a top (handle bar?) that was 2 halves...in
order to start/run the engine, you had to pull the top half down to
the bottom, making a full handle to push with and closing a mechanical
gate of some sort that allowed the motor to run. It was a pain...
every time you let go, the engine stopped.
Trainwise, what makes the deadman's control on subway cars? Just
pushing the throttle down? I understand Amtrak locomotives are a bit
more sophisticated.
Yep, that's all it takes. A few pounds of pressure. Can the deadman be
overrided like in Palham 123?
NJ transit uses something like a foot pedal.
A (at least at one time) common m/m practice is to hang a heavy
bag from the controller handle. Will also get you a few days
in the street if caught.
Since you brought up Pelham 1-2-3:
The description in the novel made sense - a heavy iron mold cast in the shape of the controller which fit over the handle and nullified the deadman's feature. The original movie falls short in its portrayal of this sequence. The remake, as pathetic as it is, features a much more accurate portrayal, including breaking out the window as written in the novel, but omitted in the original movie (possibly because contemporary equipment - R-22s - was used; the cars in the remake were going to be scrapped anyway).
I get the impression that it was much tougher to defeat the deadman's feature on the Hi-Vs and Lo-Vs, whose controllers had stiff buttons which needed to be depressed. Our Subtalkers who are members of the Seashore museum and who have run Gibbs Hi-V 3352 can attest to that fact.
Also speaking of deadman's features, the A. C. Gilbert Company of American Flyer fame made toy transformers whose controls included this. I have a couple of these transformers; they also have a clip which allows for the handle to be fastened down. When I run my trains with one of these transformers, I hold the handle down without fastening it, the way it should be done. Of course, since I picked up a Lionel ZW transformer, I use it instead. My trains really move with it!
Actually, since you brought it up, it was/is easier to
turn off the deadman on HiV and LoV cars. On the HiV, there
is even a convenient little cut-out cock near the controller.
The Lo-V is a little tougher....the deadman emergency application
is effected electrically. When you release the handle AND the
reverse key is NOT centered, contacts in the master controller
energize the trainline "E" wire, which in turn energizes all of
the Emergency Magnet Valves on the train. Turning off the deadman
there is as simple as cutting 1 wire.
> In addition to running Nostalgia Trains, why doesn't the Transit
> Authority put a few historical and vintage trains in revenue service
> on special days, perhaps on the subway's anniversary in November.
The TA isn't in the business of saving old equipment for nostalgic purposes, although this seems to have taken on more importance to many people recently. Their purpose is to quickly, effectively and economically transport large numbers of people from point A to point B. Running old trains for this purpose is not part of their mission. Safety standards have changed a great deal since the Nostalgia equipment made their debuts back in the early parts of this century.
> I know this was done on the Times Square shuttle in 1994 for the
> 90th anniversery, but why doesn't the TA put more of those trains on
> different lines, and run them on the anniversary weekend instead of
> just the exact day? This might give more people an opportunity
> to ride them.
Having said that, it wasn't too long ago, 1980, when you had your choice of THREE Nostalgia Trains EVERY WEEKEND - one to the Cloisters (up the A line), one to Coney Island and one to Rockaway Park, all leaving from 57th St/6th Ave. It seemed to work very well for a while but interest fell off. Also, the TA has on rare occasion, run the old equipment in service. The Lo-Vs (the original 5 car trainset before one car was sold to Branford) ran on the Lexington Ave local between 59th St and South Ferry during the Diamond Jubilee (1979).
I would expect, and hope, that NYC Transit with the help of the Transit Museum will put on some kind of event in 2004 (100th anniversary) that would "showcase" all the old equipment that survived to this day. Perhaps there would even be an re-enactment of opening day in front of City Hall, rededicating the plaque that sits in the sidewalk today. Or maybe even a parade on the Culver Line (or any 3 track BMT/IND line) where the older equipment would "parade" down the center track. It would be great to have the R9s running on the IND, the Lo-Vs on the IRT and the D-Types and BUs on the BMT. In 1979, there were many open houses, and I remember the one in Coney Island yard, where visitors were treated to a ride around the yard on the BUs. Maybe that'll happen again in 2004, where visitors can inspect the older equipment in whatever state it's in.
--Mark
I'm sure there will be some sort of commemoration ceremony six years from now on Oct. 27, as well as an old train being run for the occasion. I know one thing: one way or another, I'm going to be there. BTW, Oct. 27, 2004 will fall on Wednesday.
I have a suggestion.Since the Transit Authority is buying lots of new buses and having problems storing them because of lack of space,I suggest that when the Yankees move out of Yankee Stadium the T.A. buy the stadium from the city and use it for a bus storage facility similarily as the old Coliseum Depot was.We could put a roof on it,take out most of the seats ,and leave monument park up.We could call it Yankee Depot.Real good I think.
i think that is a rediculous idea. its something Steve might have thought up. the yankees will never leave the bronx for manhattan because we all know all the resulting poltical opposition and lawsuits that will arise. If they leave for jersey, there will be a huge effort to preserve the stadium for something else. the better question is why the TA cant buy tracts of cheap, underused land and build the depots there.
There aren't many sites of cheap, underused land in the city. Besides, the Mayor promised that if the Yankees move out he would make the stadium available for soccer.
Steinbrenner isn't going to keep the Yanks in the poorest borough in the city. If he can't move to the richest county in the country (Manhattan), he'll definately move to the suburbs. If that's his attitude, I say good riddance. I'd rather go see the Bronx Dominicans play the Bronx Puerto Ricans than give a dime to that exploitive, blackmailing sports monopoly. Let's lend him a transit bus to move the team out.
[the better question is why the TA cant buy tracts of cheap, underused land and build the depots there.]
If the TA (or any government agency, for that matter) went looking for a large tract of land, it suddenly wouldn't be so cheap anymore. Landowners love it when a deep-pocketed buyer comes calling. Private corporations can use shell companies to assemble large tracts while keeping the real buyers' identities secret. That's how Disney managed to acquire the huge amount of land occupied by Walt Disney World at bargain rates. It was one of Walt's last big decisions before they stuck him in the liquid nitrogen tank. Anyway, there surely are legal obstacles to a government agency's doing that sort of thing, so it will end up paying top dollar.
Where is your HEP STEVE?
No, I think not, Weaselstrapper. You see, I stay within my field, which is not busses. But let's se, you are an expert on busses. A couple of weeks ago you were trying to pass yourself off as a Train Service Supervisor. Then, it was you that said, "I am an employee!"
Okay, weaselstrapper, time to make up your mind. Who do you work for today? I think it was wise to drop the 'Association' from your 'Nom-de-plume' since even your own alter-ego likely would be embarrassed to be affilliated with you.
I've made no secret as to who I am but you, weaselstrapper have gone to great lengths to conceal your identity. Who are you this week weaselstrapper? A station manager? A track supervisor? Or maybe you want to pretend that you work in the division of car equipment?
Hey, I got a great idea, why don't you pretend that you are an FBI agent, this week. That way you can arrest me for riding in a cab with no head end pass. Get a life weaselstrapper, sitting home alone on Saturday, popping pimples, is no way to live.
It's a good idea although I am sure if the Yankees were to vacate the House That Ruth Built that the stadium would be put to some other sports use.
--Mark
I have seen a lot of speculation about Q train service going to 179th St.--Jamaica when the new tunnel opens. Do we have any info as to what the details of this service will be--what stops will it make along the F route, etc?
Nothing is official yet, but if the Q were to run all the way to 179th, I don't see why it couldn't run express. They may have it stop at 169th St. during middays the way the F used to. Supposedly, the F will become a local over its entire route at all times, since the G will be permanently cut back to Court Square.
Isn't the proposed V line supposed to run express all the way to 179th St?
Once again, The F feeds directly into the express tracks, while the 63rd St connection will fork into both. From the very beginning of the plan, the V(or now the Q) was to be the local. The only thing that is not decided is whether to make it go to 71st or 179th.
It always seems to me that Brooklyn's 4th Ave. line is the worst. Everything about the line from Pacific to 95th is old. Besides renovating Pacific and 36th, does anyone else know specifically the work done being done, or planned on the line?. Are there anyplans for welded rail, such as on the Brighton line? Also, why do the express trains maintain such low speeds on the straightaways even when congestion is not a problem?
Also, the setup of the trains disturbs me. Besides the B, i do not think any of the other lines M/N/R, run to potential. it seems to me that the R, with a greater amount of passengers it seems, should be the express, while the N should becoem a local. The M is also under utilized. Anytime M riders can connect with a B at 36th St southbound, they do, leaving the near empty m's waitng for the B to clear and holding up the R behind it.
Can anyone give me information on my questions or comment on my suggestions?
All the trains on the 4th Avenue line have been hurt by half the tracks on the Manhattan Bridge being out. If the other bridge tracks fail, you might as well fill it in and forget about it. Since the bridge problem started, it has added 5 to 10 minutes to everyone's trip. Subway ridership started to fall, and falling ridership is the clue to divert resources elsewhere. The big problem is the bridge.
59th Street station seems to be a candidate for renovation - for that
matter so is De Kalb Avenue. The other stations don't look THAT bad,
although I haven't been south of 59th Street in twenty years or more.
I understand 86th Street station is showing its age. Maybe they can
get the guys who reglazed Pacific Street and 36th Street to do the
same thing for 59th and De Kalb. Doing DeKalb may be difficult because of the amount of traffic moving through it.
THEN there's the whole issue with the Manhattan Bridge.
Here's a new spin on my old idea - build new concrete roadbeds where
the existing ones are now, but put new piers beneath them so the load
doesn't have to be borne by the bridge proper. Put the piers up
first then put the roadbeds in. Make sure that the main weight of
the load is borne by the new concrete piers.
Wayne
{Here's a new spin on my old idea - build new concrete roadbeds where
the existing ones are now, but put new piers beneath them so the load
doesn't have to be borne by the bridge proper. Put the piers up
first then put the roadbeds in. Make sure that the main weight of
the load is borne by the new concrete piers.}
So if I understand this correctly, you would put concrete piers in the river to support the trackbeds for the subway? The Corps of Engineers would never allow it. You're essentially building 2 new bridges that marine traffic cannot pass. And for the cost, you could either drill a new tunnel or build a new bridge.
-Hank
Since I am a train operator on the M line I think I can confidently answer your question. You complain about the B plugging the M at 36 St., with the M plugging the R in turn. The idea of the N & R swapping their local/express routings is utterly ridiculous. They are set up the way they are because at 59 St. the express tracks lead to the Sea Beach N line & the local tracks go to 95 St. Your idea would make it necessary to cross them both over leaving 59 St., causing more congestion if local & express arrive at 59 St. at the same time. Also, the express N has more than double the stations & running time after 59 St. than the R. Obviously you are a rider who gets off the R after 59 St. and are shallowly thinking what is best for you, but the physical layout of the railroad is such that the 95St. service will be local FOREVER! Even if this could be done and NYCT wastes billions of dollars building a flyover at 59 St. so your idea could be implimented, how much time would you save? 3 minutes? As for the M being underutilized, you are 100% correct. But WE during service delays bail out the late B's & R's by being rerouted to their terminals during THEIR service delays, thereby causing inconvenience to OUR riders, partiularly on the way back to Queens when the M trains are now on an inconsistent headway for the return trip to Metropolitan Ave.
Why not run the M's express peak then??
I know there are only what 3 or so express stops once the train leaves 4th ave but maybe that could make up some time. I use the M to Broad street from Brooklyn once a month in each direction. I even wait until the start service at 3:30pm and I save time even waiting 15 mintues for the first M train to Brooklyn.
How about running the M Express reverse peak in Brooklyn to get them back to Manhattan faster?
During my forthcoming trip to NY it would be nice to perhaps pick up one or two books on the Subway. Can anyone please advise me where the best shops are.
Very many thanks
The one really good NY themed bookstore is gone. Your next best bet is a model place called "The Red Caboose" on 45th St., bet. 5th and 6th Aves. And of course, the gift shop of the Transit Museum in Brooklyn. The major chain bookstores will not really be of use if you are looking for subway books. They simply don't have them on a regular basis.
Another place worth checking out is the Strand, on Broadway at 12th Street (4,5,6,N,R,L to Union Square). It's a used bookstore with a vast selection. While the last time I looked there wasn't too much on transit, the selection changes from time to time and is worth checking out. Come to think of it, the Strand is a fascinating place even if you don't have anything specific in mind.
Barnes & Noble will occasionally have transit books on New York in their New York section.
I cleaned out the transit museum last time I was over. One particular video I have in mind is one which shows the opening of the IRT. I shall have to see if I can get a copy in PAL format as I understand that yours is different.
Thanks to Peter Rosa and yourself for the information
Simon
Simon,
You are correct. Our TV format in the States is NTSC, with a frequency of 60 HZ. A tape purchased here will not play correctly on a VCR in the UK, which is on the PAL system and at a frequency of 50 Hz. There are video dealers who will convert tapes, for a fee. They can usually be found near a university area or by mail order. The cost is generally ~$15 to convert a 2 hr.tape. Our students from the Middle East and Asia are converting movies from home all the time in this manner.
Enjoy your stay!!
Thanks very much for the info. I suppose someone must be able to it in the UK.
Simon
Seashore Trolley Museum has a good stock of NYC and Philadelphia Subway and Trolley books and takes mail orders. Also a huge selection of videos and some good postcards. Write to:
Seashore Trolley Museum Store
Box A
Kennebunkport, ME 04046
and ask for the Mail Order Catalog (new one coming out soon).
Boston books are another story - with a few minor exceptions, they just don't exist! :(
Shore Line in East Haven, CT also has a book department, though not as extensive as Seashore's, it is accessible by transit. Check their website for open times.
Simon,
There are shops along Tottenham Court Road in London which sell three-format video recorders (PAL, SECAM, NTSC). In some of the less reputable shops it is also possible to buy dual slot video recorders (i.e. which can record tape to tape). I once was told that they are not supposed to be sold in the UK.
For people with a PowerMac who wish to convert video formats, try this address for a cheap solution:
http://pw1.netcom.com/%7Emwarner1/hacktv.html
Thaks for the info Max. I am up there almost every week so I should be able to seek something out. I will try and buy some subway videos whilst I am in NY and them hopefully get them converted when I get back. I will however try the address you kindly gave me.
Regards
Simon
Just wondering if anybody was out & about in LIRR land this weekend. Was the new non-electrified equipment running? Unfortunately, in my case, I can only ride on Sat. & Sun. If they were not running, does anybody know when they will see weekend duty?
I don't know about the new equipment but the old equipment was out in force. Speaking of which, the November 98 Issue of Rail News has a pretty extensive article on the Cab Units which the LIRR has for the past quarter century, used as power packs. Just thought I'd pass the info on for anyone who is interested.
There is a former power pack (FA 608, nee Western Maryland 304)on one of the dead tracks at the Illinois Railway Museum. The engine is in its last LIRR paint scheme. Long-term plans are to repaint the exterior but I don't know in which railroad's colors, but it will be one that traveled into Chicago. Maybe the PRR or NYC.
tue am i seen 3 new coaches in newark's oak island yard just north of exit 14 on the tracks next to the turnpike. new bilevels i think.
I heard a report on my FM station, sorry Todd, that the LIRR has the new train sets sidelined due to problems with the brakes.
Mr t__:^)
Mr. T:
FM? What's that (tee-hee-hee). Well hopefully they'll get the new trainsets up and operating for weekend service when I'm in NYC in Nov. Maybe I can make up some good reason to do my weather reports from one of the new trains -- something like how they'll behave in snow. "Transit and Weather Together."
Todd, Re: Report live & in color from the new equip ...
I'll be glad to hold the mike for you ;-)
Mr t__B-0
I heard that it was a problem with the electric brake controls and that the equipment should be back in service in about a week. But before we jump to any conclusions, perhaps we should wait to hear from Ms. Hangstrapper. I hear that this week (He/She) plans to be the president of the LIRR.
For those that want more detail then Todd gave us yeasterday ... Newsday LI Edition ran a small article on page A5 (Intro report was page 21 ... hum).
Of interest is reporter Sylvia Adcock & Steven Kreytak's report that the second train (the one that first had the problem) was running between Montauk & Jamaica. A third was scheduled to be added to the Oyster Bay branch.
I would hazzard a guess for the low key introduction press was due to the LIRR considering this part of the "test" ... three train sets don't an introduction make ! If all went well it was an introduction, if not it was just a test ?
Mr t__:^)
For those of you who tried and were unable to get the 1998 Subway Guide, I have been able to locate 25 copies. The book is 52 pages about the Department of Subways. It has dozens of B/W photos, lots of history and a current roster. For anyone who may be interested, you can contact me directly by E-Mail. Although some have said that they were able to get them free, we are asking for a modest $5 donation to the March of Dimes (which will include postage).
Last year the NYCT raised $156,139 for the March of Dimes, the largest amount of any NYC corpporation or organization. For those of you who helped us last year, our profound thanks for making us number one. BTW - We will be offering the Revenue/Non-Revenue Car Drawing Book again beginning the 2nd week in November and hope to have a similar Complete Non-Revenue book ready before the holidays.
I have the book,also,it is nice review
steve
FDNY
Anyone out there know when/if the MTA and/or The Transit Museum ever plan to offer a special fan trip of vintage trains over the little-used but interesting LIRR Bay Ridge Line trackage that runs along Avenue I in Brooklyn?
Unfortunately, no trips of this type are being offered by the Transit Museum at the present time. There was in the not so distant past a trip along the South Brooklyn Railway with the 1927 D-Types and two diesels some 23 years ago (run by the ERA). That particular trip went to the river front near Bush Terminal before coming back into the system. We at the Transit Museum are looking for new trips to operate in the future. Two of us have had an idea of running a Museum train into Linden Yard. There's no 3rd Rail in Linden. We'd go in by diesel, get a tour of the shop, and take lunch. Linden Yard is connected to the LIRR Bay Ridge Line. What about operating an inter-divisional train? Lo-Vs could operate on the BMT Eastern Division to Linden Yard and return by the IRT? You'll never know.....
To operate trips of this type operating expenses would go up. It costs money to operate the diesels. So you might pay more for a ticket than usual.
-Constantine
P.S. When the Willy B closes in 1999, trains will have to travel along the Bay Ridge line to get to Coney Island.
OK I FIGURED WHEN THE BRIDGE CLOSED CERTAIN R42 CARS THAT WOUND UP ON THE MANHATTAN/BROOKLYN SIDE OF THE BRIDGE WOULD STAY THERE AND BE TEMPORARILY ASSIGNED TO CONEY ISLAND MAINTENANCE.
Well, this is most likely the case. In April 1988, the R30s could be seen making the long trek from Linden Yard to 39 St. ENY no longer has an active shop with the exception of the one for the buses. The shed that is in ENY now can only do small time work. The more serious work like replacing the axles on a truck would have to be done at Coney Island. All cars regardless of location will have to go to C.I.
-Constantine
Let me show my age and lack of knowledge with whats happened to the system in the past 40 years.
Your comment about ENY answers one of my questions. I assume that there are no longer shop facilities at Fresh Pond. (Does anyone know if there ever was. I go back to the time of the trolley at this location)
I assume that you access The Bay Ridge from the Canarsie ("L") connection to Linden Shops (This is a track and structures facility...Correct?).
How many options do you have at 39th. Are you limited to the West End ("B") on the Fourth Ave Side of the 9th Avenue station or can you still work your way over to MacDonald via the South Brooklyn RR and access Coney Island by traveling under the Culver ("F") along the streets?
> I assume that you access The Bay Ridge from the Canarsie
> ("L") connection to Linden Shops
Yup. Or from the IRT connection to Linden as well. No third rail here, diesel only.
> (This is a track and structures facility...Correct?).
Not sure what goes on there. Work train maintenance or iron works or something... someone proposed a diesel powered fan trip and tour of Linden Shops, that might be interesting.
> Are you limited to the West End ("B") on the Fourth
> Ave Side of the 9th Avenue station or can you still work
> your way over to MacDonald via the South Brooklyn RR
No. The tracks to McDonald are long gone. There is a small yard in this area for garbage removal from work trains but no tracks to McD.
South Brooklyn Railway tracks on McDonald Ave (and the alley between 38th and 39th Sts) are long gone. Condos are going up where the El and the tracks underneath once were. The only connection to 39th St is via the West End Line.
They've also been repaved over on McDonald Ave, too. No more connection to the LIRR / NY & Atlantic RR at Ave I.
--Mark
You could also run a similar all-electric trip with the D-Types using 39th St yard in Brooklyn. Run the D-Types from the Museum up the Culver Line through CI Yard and down the West End Line to 9th Ave / 39th St. At 9th/39th, reverse direction and terminate the train at the lower level of 39th St. Passengers can have a look at the station, then can be taken to the 39th St yard for a tour. Lunch could be in Coney Island (I don't think there's much at 9th Ave). The return trip could be the reverse, or just use the West End Line to W 4 St, then the 8th Ave IND back to Hoyt - Schermerhorn as has been done on past rides.
I am sure you'd fill this trip to capacity in a short time, if for nothing else but a glimpse of the lower level of 9th Ave.
Are the R1/9s reposing in CI Yard in runnable condition? And what about the BUs - last I heard, they were in the shops for asbestos removal, but it's been 6 months since they were supposed to run.
--Mark
Hey Mark,
Your trips sound great! The question is whether or not the Transit Museum is willing to do the trip, and if the RTO would grant us the right to run in these areas. RTO has the final say on the routing of the train. This last Nostalgia Special, the TM decided to cut the time it took to get to Coney Island. Go from 57th St instead of the Museum. It makes sense, so we could cover the old BMT routes without wasting too much time. I don't mind switching around different lines; but not everyone shares my enthusiasm. Why couldn't we have gone to Astoria? The D Types (which need body work) turned around at Beebe Av, to go back to CI. Reasons for having the Nostalgia Train at the Museum: the folks get to see the displays they haven't seen previously and go to the gift shop. I'll suggest your idea to the curator. Still you have to agree a diesel powered Museum train is rather interesting.
As for the R1/9s and the BUs: the R1/9s may be in operable condition. However they haven't gotten any major mechanical/cosmetic work. The best candidate to operate if at all possible would be R9 1802. It got a paint job, but I believe it needed some interior work. So if the R1/9s had to run (they might), use 100, 484, 1575, 1802. The BU situation is more complex. They received cosmetic work while they were away, but received no major mechanical work. The cars have an asbestos problem which was cleaned up, but not completely solved. 1407s controller is not working, to my knowledge. 1273 needs a compressor. To install the compressor, the cars would have to go through a complete asbestos abatement program and then the compressor could be installed. These won't run unless someone pays the cost of a complete asbestos abatement program.
1227 from Branford put these cars to shame. Asbestos is everywhere, what's the big deal?
R1/9s could run in the future. The Museum needs new trips/equipment.
I'm in the Museum on Sundays, drop in (I'm the tour guide).
-Constantine
> The D Types (which need body work) turned around at Beebe Av, to go
> back to CI.
Yes, and they didn't go back with the route the G.O. stated ... I happened to catch them "by accident" later that day from the Neptune Ave station of the F train ... preceeded by the R110A.
> Reasons for having the Nostalgia Train at the Museum: the folks get
> to see the displays they haven't seen previously and go to the gift
> shop.
If somehow all 3 units could be stored there, I'd bet the body rot situation would be considerably less, the salt air doing its dirty work and all.
> I'll suggest your idea to the curator. Still you have to agree a
> diesel powered Museum train is rather interesting.
Agreed. I'm not sure how much people are willing to pay for Nostalgia Train rides. The Lo-V fantrips run by the RPC run $40 a ticket. The Nostalgia Train audience has some overlap but it isn't complete. Would members be willing to pay $40 for a diesel D-Type excursion on the Bay Ridge Line? I would, many others who follow this forum would, but how many others with a casual interest in trains would do so? Even if you said that part of the cost of the trip goes to restore the old equipment, some people would be tighter with their pocketbook. This last Nostalgi Train trip - I thought it was a unique route given that most rides go to the Rockaways, yet it was one of the least crowded in recent memory.
Anyway, the idea of going to 9th Ave lower level and 39th St yard could probably be done at the same cost of recent Nostalgia Trips without having to use diesel. And the layover would be out of revenue traffic, with an added benefit of seeing a closed station that hasn't seen revenue service since 5/11/1975 (although it did see the "Farewell to the R-30 Fantrip" in 1993.
> As for the R1/9s and the BUs: the R1/9s may be in operable
> condition. However they haven't gotten any major mechanical/cosmetic
> work. The best candidate to operate if at all possible would be R9
> 1802. It got a paint job, but I believe it needed some interior
> work. So if the R1/9s had to run (they might), use 100, 484, 1575,
> 1802.
100, 484 and 1575 have been idle for years .. I'll bet that, even though they look good, there's quite a bit of work that would have to be done on these. I thought the other R9s along with 1802 were in better shape; guess looks can be deceiving.
> The BU situation is more complex. They received cosmetic work while
> they were away, but received no major mechanical work.
Mike Hanna told me they were in good operating condition ... but from your description, I guess not as good as originally thought.
--Mark
Mike was right. They are really in good operating condition, if they get the full treatment. Then again, the Museum hasn't said much about the asbestos problem to public, because they don't want to alarm anyone. But so far the BUs haven't gotten the full treatment because TA employees are not willing to operate them and fear the asbestos. If only someone could pay for the complete cleanup of these cars then they could work properly. Still Mr. Hanna is correct in his statement, but the NYTM may not agree with his views. It's not totally impossible to operate these cars, it's a matter of who's willing to operate them and when. For the asbestos cleanup, the cars would have to go outside of the system and be done by a private vendor. The compressor would bring out the asbestos particles in its present state.
I forget what the problem is with 1407. 1407 has a bad coil that connects to the controller, making the controller non-operable. Another problem is the batteries of these cars. The batteries aren't constantly charging because of the fact that the 3rd rail power is shut down during the night at the Museum. In my views I think the work on the BUs is relatively minor, but certain folks have made a big deal out of it (money and parts). The TA wasn't worried about asbestos in 1980.
The Lo-V 4902 is another problem. It has a short in its electrical system preventing Mike from putting the lights on. It was thought that the shoes weren't on the 3rd Rail. They were wrong. This car has sat in the Museum with no lights since it returned. It will be returning to Coney Island so its problem could be solved. While it's there it should be painted to match its companions and be mechanically upgraded. This is my opinion, not the opinion of the Museum. 5 Lo-Vs is a better alternative than 4 Lo-Vs.
R16 6387 needs body work. The rust went through its body (gaps) and now has to be worked on. It took them 4 years to fix 6387s truck, because no one bothered to ship it back to the Museum immediately.
In summary, there are things that the TA could have done for these cars, but no one cares. Couldn't they have stored the D-Types in the barn every once in a while? The D-Types may go the way of the ABs - be in a terrible non-operating condition. The AB Standard restoration project is going but is slow. I'm grateful for what's operating now.
-Constantine
Constantine..no offense to Mike, whom I hold in high regard,
but sometimes he's a little too optimistic. There's a varying
definition of "operable" and "hey, it limps around the yard"
is a long way from "ok to cover 100 miles of revenue track
with grades and long contact rail gap sections, not to mention
packing a swinging load too"
The batteries should only be the least of the BUs problems.
They charge off the compressor, so if the compressor isn't
being run, they aren't being charged! I've worked on those
control groups. They are not too complex, but they require
frequent and skilled inspection and adjustment. A loose
interlock finger here, a leaky magnet valve there, and the
car is dead. I won't comment much on the asbestos issue, except
to say that it is a valid concern.
To Constantine Steffan: thanks for your information! I am looking forward to a diesel-driven fan trip into all that interesting trackwork in the Eastern division over by New Lots Ave. I was there last week taking pictures of what looked like the remnants of an old spur from the Bay Ridge LIRR tracks to the Canarsie "L" line. A gated chain-link fence also indicated the location as a former LIRR/subway interchange. Does anyone know when it was last used, or when the switch-trackage was removed?
BTW, for all interested parties: the current LIRR/subway interchange occurs about a half-mile north of this location via a single-track elevated spur that originates from the Linden Blvd. shop of the NYCTA. At this location -- previously suspected of being a repair shop -- is in fact the TA's track assembly facility. What this entails is the prefabrication of whole sections of track. (In the "old days" tracks were replaced with the time consuming work of laying individual rails, having them aligned, set in place (w/worker muscle power!) and then tamped. I believe this same location is/was also used as a wheel truing facility. If my info is correct, the yard has a spur that re-connects to the LIRR Bay Ridge trackage when heading west from the yard.
Again, thanks to all for the replies. BMTman
For info and specifications on the new R-142 cars (and other subway, LRV and rail vehicles in various cities), check out the Bombardier Transportation website.
http://www.transportation.bombardier.com/htmen/4_0.htm
My Dad was recently in Philadelphia for an Army reunion and he took
a picture of an M-3 (Almond Joy) from his bus window - but neither he
or I have any idea where it is
I will describe:
* The train is on a low elevated structure crossing over a street.
* A highway overpass goes right across the tracks above the street,
about five feet above the top of the train.
* A suspension bridge is in the background. It has 'X' crossmembers
in its tower and round knobs at the top.
* It looks like the transit line may be on an embankment.
* A fence, painted black, surrounds the embankment.
Does anyone in Phila know where this is?
BTW the Almond Joy it is - the bumps on the roof are clearly visible.
Wayne
THE PICTURE YOU ARE DISCRIBING OF THE ALMOND JOYS SOUNDS LIKE THE SPRING GARDEN STATION AREA WITH THE LINE RUNNING IN THE MEDIAN STRIP OF INTERSTATE 95. THE X MEMBERS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THE PEDISTRIAN OVERPASS OF THE GIRARD AVE. L STATION.HAY I THINKING OF DOING A VIDEO ON THE MARKET-FRANKFORD EL PAST AND PRESENT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LINE EQUIPMENT AND A COMPLETE RUN OF THE LINE,INCLUDING THE A-B EXPRESS SERVICE,SOME OF HE TRAINS ACTUALLY MOVE UNLIKE N.Y.C.T.A.- ALTHOUGH IM NOT DOWNIMG IT. IF ANYONE IS INTERSTED IN HELPING ME WITH THE VIDEO,CONTRIBUTING MOVIES,PICTURES,ETC. DROP ME A LINE.
My guess is that this is Race Street passing under the El. The El exits the subway just south of here and the entire area is an interesting maze of structures.
The El is on embankment on either side of Race Street and is the median of I-95. The suspension bridge you see with the "x" members in the towers is the Ben Franklin Bridge. This passes over the El, I-95 and the I-95 ramps to and from I-676 (Vine Street Expressway). The ramps cross above southbound I-95 and below the Ben. In the midst of all this is a Delaware River Port Authority building immediately below the Ben and the west anchorage of the Ben just east of that.
The Ben's west anchorage is another interesting place. A station for the then-Bridge Line (now PATCO) was to be built into it, with a connection to the Frankford El which also was to have a station here. Neither stop was ever built. Provisions for the stop can be seen from PATCO trains.
A similar view can be had two blocks north where Callowhill Street ducks under I-95 and the El. An I-676/I-95 connecting ramp crosses over the El and I-95 just south of here. Depending on the camera angle, the shot could be here also, but I'd be willing to bet it was taken at Race Street. Why not post it and we'll find out for sure?
I was wondering if anyone had any information on the proposed new silver line. I've heard some vague mention of it running from Dudley Square to the waterfront developments in South Boston.
Seth
The "Silver Line" is the plan for the South Boston transitway, to initially connect South Station with the new development in South Boston. There are vague plans to extend it to Dudley Square. The latest I heard is that the line will use dual-mode buses, which operate on overhead wire in the sub-harbor tunnel, and then can switch to diesel power on the street. There is also a scenario which would bring the Silver Line into the old Tremont Street tunnel, which would then have the line terminate at Boylston Street Station on the Green Line, for a cross-platform transfer to the Green Line.
There is still much controversy regarding the MBTA's "promised" replacement for the old Orange Line service along the Washington Street corridor. Transit advocates would love to see a Green Line extension, with private RoW light rail service. The MBTA is arguing for "alternative power" bus service as less expensive, and also reducing congestion in the central subway. As usual, there is more politics here technology or reality. (Politics? in Boston? nahhh.)
The present issue of "Rollsign", published by the BSRA, has a piece describing the 'sham' Silver Line 'replacing' the Washington Street El. The project started out as a Light Rail Line to be routed into a replacement for the old Broadway Portal of the Tremont St. Subway, and follow Washington St. to Dudley Sq. This would take full advantage of the extraordinary with of Washington St. between Cass Blvd and Union Park St. with a reservation. It would replace a route which was abandoned in 1938. Later a trackless trolley became the vehicle, with a limited reservation. Now it's an articulated, exotic fuel bus with some 'reserved' lanes (which nobody will pay attention to). By the time we're through it will be the same 49 bus that runs there now!
The bottom line is that New Dudley St. and Tremont St. between Dudley Square and Ruggles is a solid line of buses at rush hour. Dudley is still the transit hub and deserves its own 'REAL' feeder service with FAST service downtown!
The South Boston section is at present totally separate and is to be a dual power vehicle, operating in a tunnel under the Fort Point Channel and then in the city streets or PRW. An extension through the Ted Williams Tunnel to Logan Airport has also been proposed.
Does anyone have information regarding DC's proposed Purple line, the Blue line extension, or a new line to Dulles?
The only thing I have info on is the Blue line extension:
It is currently under environmental impact study and when constructed
will be a surface route, running east from Addison Road with two stations: one at Summerfield, just inside the Beltway, and another one at Largo Town Center, east of the Beltway. Don't have any estimates for startup or completion; could be 2005 at the very earliest.
GREEN LINE should link up December of 1999, deep beneath New Hampshire Avenue NW...the other end is slated for a 2001 debut. They're digging as we speak.
The spur off the Orange Line at West Falls Church is just that - a spur. Neither Mark Greenwald nor myself have any more info on the Purple line other that
that it is just a plan, either a circle line or the Georgetown-Fort Howard New Town route.
Wayne
I may at least get the Transit-Chek deduction after all. According to the Daily News, the City Council Tranportation Committee held hearings yesterday on a law to force the city to join the Transit-Chek program. The money from my pass would be deducted from my check, and I'd I get it tax free. The Giuliani Administration says it is "in complete support" and is "exploring options." Well, the Economic Development Corp already has it.
Frankly, I think that the city should not only allow the tax break but also contribute to the cost of the pass. After all, I use mass transit on business sometimes -- since I bought the monthly I am now subsidizing the city (of course I have to buy my own computer disks too since there never are any, but that's another story). If they won't do that, they should at least take everyone parking spot away to even things out.
As a city employee I'm all for Transit Chek, maybe now I can force myself to by a monthly instead of two weeklies.
My Dad who worked for the Federal Government and they used Transit Chek all the time.
Probably the longest elevated section ever in NYC, would have been the 3rd Ave El structure from South Ferry to Gun Hill and on the
White Plains Rd structure to 241st St. That must have been some ride.
The Brooklyn Fulton Ave line from Park Row in Manhattan across the the Brooklyn Bridge to the Sands St Terminal and out to Lefferts may have been the longest elevated ride in that quarter, unless the Broadway Jamica line was longer or one of the Coney island routes from the Brooklyn Bridge, possibly out the 5th Ave line to the Culver line.
I assume that was all on elevated structure.
Do our historical maps have mileage data?
Outside of NYC, the combination of the Chicago Northside, Loop and Southside line to where it went down to ground level to junction with the Stock Yards line is still a very long elevated structure.
Has that junction ever been upgraded?
In NYC, the longest uninterrupted el lines left are (IRT): #2/#5 IRT from 149th/3rd Ave to 241st/White Plains Road; (BMT) J train from Williamsburgh Bridge to 121st/Jamaica Ave.
In Chicago, I don't believe the Stock Yards junction on the South Side el exists any more - that line goes straight to 63d Street where it splits into the Englewood and Jackson Park branches. Now that it has returned to the Loop el and continues west to Oak Park along Lake Street, this route (Green Line, I believe) is probably Chicago's longest uninterrupted el line.
This is extreme nitpicking, but the 2/5 is not continuous to White Plains Rd. The E180st station is on ground level, as is most of the trackage through the yard on the White Plains line.
-Hank
For the IND I'd say it is the Rockaway Service from East of Grant to Rockaway Park and Far Rockaway. Yes, I know that Rockaway Park is at ground level.Of those I'd say far Rockaway takes the prize.
For that matter, so is Broad Channel, and most of the line from the Rockaway Ave split to Hammels is on embankment or ground level.
-Hank
OK. Let's change the criteria. What is the longest open air (el, open cut, embankment, bridge, surface, concrete viaduct, steel viaduct, etc.) line in the current subway system. For the sake of this, anything but three walls and a floor (anything but deep bored or cut-and-cover)
I think you mean 3 walls and a ceiling...
My call would still be the J line, as continuous, but maybe the A out to the Rockaways for total mileage. Of course, if you'd like to combine lines that are, technically, continuous, I'd go with the Brighton-Sea Beach combo.
-Hank
> Do our historical maps have mileage data?
No, and neither do our current maps. I've never seen any maps, on this site or elsewhere, with mileage data on them, have you?
-Dave
I measured all of the station to station intervals when I did a run time analysis some time back. If I can find the time I will post the lengths of all the existing el structures in NYC. And sorry, Hank, from Liberty Av to Broad Channel is NOT elevated, though the Rockaway portion of the line is.
In line with that, do we consider the trackage on the Manhattan and Williamsburgh Bridges elevated? Its above grade on steel structure, but in the case of the Manhattan it's below a roadway.
Gerry
I never said it was....
I wouldn't really count the Rockaways line as an el by your definition, (or mine) either. It's on a concrete viaduct, as opposed to a steel elevated.....but that's semantics....
-Hank
I have seen some old timetable of the Manhattan Els that also contain milage data. Perhaps, our friends at ERA or the trasit museum or Joe Ker can help us.
Has Anyone Heard If the MTA Has Made A decision on What to do with the second ave. line they started? Also, does anyone know the acess points for these lines? Were any stations built, or is it just tunnel?
[Has Anyone Heard If the MTA Has Made A decision on What to do with the second ave. line they started? Also, does anyone know the acess points for these lines? Were any stations built, or is it just
tunnel?]
Technically speaking, the Second Avenue line is still an active project. Latest plans call for a double-track line from 125th to 63rd Streets only. But nothing's actually been constructed, and I doubt you'll find many people who think the line will be built anytime soon.
The three existing tunnel segments are just trackways, without any stations. Such access as exists is probably through manholes in the street. Note that the southernmost segment, the one near the Manhattan Bridge, would not be included in the latest plan.
Nightime entertainment establishments, along with solid waste transfer, draw the most complaints among city residents. I think the subway is a great place to put a disco. The noise impact would be minimized if the disco were literally underground, and if there was a subway station patrons could come and go without going through the neighborhood. The Essex St terminal and S. 4th Street station come to mind. Both are in trendy neighborhoods and could be advertized as "underground" clubs. The excavated 2nd Avenue Subway segments are another possibility.
Ever heard of Tunnel? from what I understand, it's exactly what you've described. It's not a subway tunnel, but maybe abandoned freight lines / possibly some connection to the elevated structures that still exist between 10th and 11th Aves. It's on the northeast corner of 27th and the West Side Highway. It's a long, deep club - it looks like a subway tunnel with mutiple rooms clustered at both ends off of the "tunnel" It's not my favorite club - but it's busy every weekend. Danny Tenaglia is the main Saturday night DJ - if anyone here cares.
Speaking of . . . What are those elevated structures between 10th and 11th Aves (north of 14th Street)? I think they were for freight since they seem to connect the many warehouses in that neighborhood. I'd love to climb up and see what's there.
Speaking of . . . What are those elevated structures between 10th and 11th Aves (north of 14th Street)? I think they were for freight since they seem to connect the many warehouses in that neighborhood. I'd love to climb up and see what's there.]
You are correct. These structures are part of an old freight line, that ran to a terminal near the Holland Tunnel entrance. It was later cut back to about Bank Street. Meat-packing companies in the Gansevoort Market district below 14th Street were its main customers. As you noted, the line actually ran through some of the industrial buildings along the way.
Service on the line ended when construction on the Javits Center (late 1970s - early 1980s or thereabouts) severed its access to the main West Side line, the one Amtrak now uses. This was supposed to be just a temporary thing. Unfortunately, the work dragged on longer than planned, long enough that the remaining freight customers, who had been obliged to switch to trucks for the duration, decided to stay with trucks. Service never resumed. Several years ago, there was a proposal to reactivate the line to serve a garbage transfer station or similar facility, but the plan got caught in a legal tangle and soon faded away.
Today there are only bits and pieces left below 14th Street. As far as I know, there is no ground-level access to the line.
Its called the "high line." To placate Chelsea residents, the city has been pressing Conrail to tear it down. I thought the solid waste idea (ie. recycable office paper collected in the CBD every night) was a good idea.
There is a nightclub in the low 20's and 12th avenue which was (is?) called the Tunnel Bar. Legend has it that the basement level of the club was an abandonded station and/or right-of-way of an abandoned line. I haven't been there in years... has anyone been there recently?
That's the club I was talking about, Tunnel. It's on 27th (maybe 26th).
I was there earlier this year. The DJs there are still good - but I'm getting a bit too old for their Saturday night crowd. And since I'm 26, that's saying a lot about how young Saturdays have become.
Anyway, from what friends of mine have said, you used to be able to see the actual tunnel and possibly the track bed. That was in the mid/late 80s. And I'm not sure how reliable those accounts are. The club has been renovated many times since then. So although the general shape of the club implies a tunnel - you can't actually see tunnel beyond the confines of the club anymore. The club is quite labyrinthine - and has a full bar in the upstairs bathroom.
And on the topic of clubs in spaces that used to have another purpose. Limelight re-opens this Friday. (It's in an old church on 6th Ave in Chelsea).
{And on the topic of clubs in spaces that used to have another purpose. Limelight re-opens this Friday. (It's in an old church on 6th Ave in Chelsea).}
The Caves on Staten Island are, first off, real caves. They served as storage for an old brewery, whos name escapes me at the moment.
-Hank
I've heard the same thing from somone else who went there. She said it was an actual train tunnel and if you looked at/through the floor you can see rails. However, since the person wasn't into trains and she didn't go there to look at the floor 8-), she couldn't tell me how genuine it was. This was over 10 years ago so a lot has probably changed.
Didn't someone mention a LONG while back on this board that the tunnel was some kind of siding? Supposedly the cars would be loaded/stored in these underground tunnels then brought up to the line by elevator. The article also mentioned that a few of these tunnels exist under the old industrial buildings.
[There is a nightclub in the low 20's and 12th avenue which was (is?) called the Tunnel Bar. Legend has it that the basement level of the club was an abandonded station and/or right-of-way of an abandoned line. I haven't been there in years.. has anyone been there recently?]
I suspect that the abandoned-station story is indeed a legend. The only West Side line found to the south of the current LIRR yard area is the West Side freight line we've discussed, and that's strictly an elevated line. There weren't any underground lines in the area of the Tunnel nightclub.
I was in that section on a Museum tour. entrance is via a standard emergency exit set in the new Manhattan bridge walkway (on the side of the closed subway tracks). When you descend that exit you come to a room from where standard stairs go down quite a way to the catwalk level. From the catwalk is standard subway ladder to trackway level. There is no track--just the trackway and pumps to keep from flooding. There is worklighting down there along with space for various mech rooms.
The only work going on is lead removal and tending of pumps to keep from being flooded and undermining the street.
They actualy added the pumps very recently. It seems without trains moving throught the tunnel the water was building up and causing damage. Spent a lot of $$$ of an abandoned tunnel. The TA has to inspect it too.
The portion of the Second Avenue subway from 63rd Street to 125th Street is one of the options in the MTA's Manhattan East Side Alternatives Study which is now underway. The northern end would be at 125th and Lexington, by the way, to allow direct transfer to the 4, 5, and 6.
Then MTA's next big construction priority is Long Island Railroad access to Grand Central through the lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel. When the next Federal transportation bill comes up in 2004, you might see the MTA line up for some funding for the Second Avenue line.
Has Anyone Heard If the MTA Has Made A decision on What to do with the second ave. line they started? Also, does anyone know the acess points for these lines? Were any stations built, or is it just tunnel? E-mail me at the address above.
Other than Grand St., which is considered a part of the 2nd Ave. line, no other stations were built, only tunnel sections.
There has been talk of building the line north of 63rd St. to 125th St. and providing a transfer to the Lexington Ave. line at that point. The track connection from the 63rd St. line to the 2nd Ave. line is already in place.
Does Anyone know when the MTA is going to begin to use the R110's?
They've been using the R110's since 1992 when they arrived.
-Dave
p.s. if you read back a day or so you'll find out more information about the R142 fleet and when it is expected to begin to arrive.
Has anybody heard if they have decided on car numbers for the R142 and the R143? 6300 is the next series in line, I think (though every time I picture an R142 with a car number of 6300 something, I see an R16!)
Wayne (I miss my R16s)
The R110B is running. I rode it yesterday. Runs quiet. the signs were luminator type as found in R44/46-no color. End doors werre large reminding me of some R40/40M/42 cars. The cab while full, had a lartge window allowing a front end view. In car 3001, the lead car, the seats were a sea foam green in mixed longitudinal (against the wall) and transverse (sticking out) like the R44/46, R68/A.The front of the car had black highlights. the floor is black with tan raised areas near the side doors.
The only negatives: side signs had no inside display and car end displays inside only showed the time- no station info. No recorder announcement-olny human which was not made.
An apparent glitch:the side signs said "listen for announcements" and none were made
I am assuming that you were on the 'C' line when yourode the R-110b. Since the side signs are the Luminator type, there should be 1,041 messages programed into the Sign Control Unit. "Listen for Announcements" is one of the codes given to the crew. It's used when the appropriate message has not been programmed into the SCU (Such as an irregular service like the Queensbridge shuttle). This may be the case or the SCU may just not have been functioning.
I've heard that the 110B does not use the same 1000+ codes of the R-44/46. So it probably doesn't even have C yet. It had only ben programmed for the A so far.
Even though the R110b is on the C, It doesn't have the destination signs for the line. The signs, I believe are on a touch screen control in a list form
I've heard that the 110B does not use the same 1000+ codes of the R-44/46. So it probably doesn't even have C yet. It had only been programmed for the A so far.
It was on the C Line. The train line section (The section on the left) did say C. The human did not make any announcements (nor did the tape).
I was impressed with these cars.(and that is from a Lo-V, R44/R46 fan!)
When I was on the R110b back in mid-August, the conductor did make announcements. The only computerized voices I heard was when the time was given, and an announcement saying that the MTA is trying to improve the high-tech trains. I figured by now that they would have the c programmed by now, but I guess not. Why don't they just put it back on the A? Also, did the R110a ever start running on the #5?-Nick
There are only six of the nine left - not enough to field an A train. The other three cars are "donor" cars, i.e. they're being cannibalized to provide spare parts! Boo! Hiss!
Wayne
Why is this? They broke down beyond repair, or something?
No, there were no spare parts supplied by the manufacturer when the cars were delivered! Can you believe this oversight? I guess it is too expensive to either buy more or make more so they resort to this.
Go figure. 3007-3008-3009 are the donor cars. Rumor has it they're up at 207th Street, waiting to be picked clean.
Wayne
They must have figured those cars would never break down. DUH!! (I saw them on the C two weeks ago, BTW.)
That's OK; Denver International Airport was designed without a backup walkway between concourses in case the trains quit running. They figured the trains would never break down. Well, duh, as my father pointed out, any mechanical device is bound to break down at some point in time.
P. S. Now they're thinking about putting in a tunnel between concourses. Nice going, guys. That said, I still support DIA.
"Denver International Airport was designed without a backup walkway between concourses in case the trains quit running. They figured the trains would never break down. Well, duh, as my father pointed out, any mechanical device is bound to break down at some point in time."
That's not the limit of transit-design shortsightedness. Ask yourself how a person escapes from a disabled or wrecked monorail train. The answer, at least on the Disney system (and I'm dead serious): climb up on the roof, move to the back or front of the train, and lower yourself to the beamway to walk to the next station. So what does a wheelchair-bound passenger do?
Good question.
The R-110 Series were experiments to see if *new* technology could survive in a mass transit environment. The 2 trains were built with this in mind and it was never envisioned that they would continue in revenue service beyond the life of the test. Because of this and because of the cost of purchasing spare parts for such an extremely limited market, few if any spare parts were bought with the contract.
Maybe they should put the two remaining units on the five month full-time M shuttle next year. Can they clear the curve into Myrtle-Bway?
I'm quite sure they can clear the curve as they are only 67 feet long. I had suggested that the remainig 6 cars be dedicated to the Franklin Shuttle. The idea received a big yawn.
the two new trains where pulled from service. the computerize brakes haved failed. heard on the radio about 10:20 am
Here's a copy of the wire story, (c) AP
(New York) -- The new Long Island Rail Road trains that began last week have been pulled from service because of mechanical problems. The railroad says the computerized brakes on the two bi-level trains had a problem.
Spokesman Brian Dolan says the train didn't respond to the engineer's braking quickly enough during a stop in Speonk on Friday. The railroad's maintenance staff re-set the computer, but L-I-R-R President Tom Prendergast decided to pull the two trains from service.
He says the equipment is under warranty and the railroad wants to make sure all the bugs are out of it.
The new trains are part of a 412 (M) million dollar plan to
replace the railroads diesel fleet.
Larry Silverman of the L-I-R-R Commuter Council says he worried
about the reliability of the new trains, because they were put on
line with little fanfare. He says normally the railroad would have
had a big announcement it had confidence in the new equipment.
Just a note... when starting a new thread-- please try to indicate what your post is referring to. Someone may not have any idea what two new trains you are referring to, and in fact until i read Todd's followup, I didn't have a clue either.
When will the ongoing rehab of the Manhattan Bridge And Lower Level Canal St/Braodway Station End. When It Does End, What train Will Run On That line, and will they still use the currently Decrepit Lower Level Platform at the station. Anyone who has had to do a N/R to #6
transfer at that station knows what I'm Talking about.
The due date I've heard is 2001, when the north side tracks will be shut down, although things seem to be moving quickly.
With both the N and R trains going through the Montigue Tunnel, maybe the trains off the bridge should bypass Canal and get to Midtown quicker. Those going Downtown could transfer at DeKalb or Pacific. A straight shot from Pacific to Union Square on the B would be a nice ride.
Thanks, It seems that if I ever do go through that transfer, all I see is 4 or 5 guys sitting on a work train eating lunch. However, if it is ahead of schedule, that's great, but what will happen to the D/Q? Will they then have to go through the tunnel?
(What will happen when the H tracks open and the A/B tracks close?)
My guess is they will want to run the B, D and Q as Broadway Expresses, just as they are 6th Ave expresses today. But would they be able to turn 25 trains per hour around at 57th St? I think not, so I suggest the following:
R 4th Ave local, Montigue Tunnel, Broadway Local, Queens Blvd Local (no change)
M West End Local, Montigue Tunnel, Nassau St Local, Myrtle (no change)
N Eliminated
J/Z Sea Beach, 4th Ave Express, Montigue Tunnel, Nassau Express, Broadway Brooklyn Skip Stop
D Brighton Local, Bridge, Broadway Express, switch to local tracks, Astoria Local
B West End, Bridge, Broadway Express, terminate at 57th St
Q Brighton Express, Broadway Express, terminate at 57th St
D/B Concourse: terminate at 34th St
Grand St Shuttle.
Before Chrystie Street the BMT was like this:
4th Ave local--Astoria
Sea Beach--57/7th
West End-- 57/7th
Brighton Exp--57/7th
Brighton Local--Astoria
They also had some service (local) through the Nassau Loop.
I remember when they first started doing work on the bridge back in the 80s, they would run the D through via the old K route and through the Essex St. station, then reverse direction and go through Montague St. That might be an option for non-rush hour service, since they could still run D service through from Coney Island to 205th without having to turn trains at 57th and 7th. Rush hours, though, would be too much of a problem at Essex (assuming the Willie B work finishes before the new Manhattan Bridge repairs begin)
The TA stopped bothering with this awkward routing around 1984, then splitting it up Broadway became the sole choice. The Nassau line can only hold short eastern div. trains, so when it used to go that way, it didn't open up and take passengers, and if they did open up at Essex, they couldn't open up all the cars. I remember it backing out partway onto the bridge approach. This would be a big problem with the R-68's, where the doors are locked between cars. Besides, who would want to do a reverse move anyway. So they just don't do this anymore. (They did put a code for it on the R-44/46 side signs, though). What they should have done is put a 2 track loop in the old empty trolley terminal space beside the station, but I don't know if that was wide enough for a loop pack to the other side.
People are forgetting that in both the pre-Chrystie arrangement, and the 80's shutdown, the West End went to Astoria rush hours (middays To QP, 80's; didn't run--TT extended to CI, 60's), so only 2 services had to termminate at 57th at any time.
If you can shove three services through the 60th St, tunnel, with one switching over from the express, and given that there is capacity on the Queens line, you might do this:
N, R, M = no change.
D, Q = Broadway express to 57th St.
B = Broadway Express, onto the Queens line with the R
The 60th St tunnel would have 9 R, 10 N, and 7 B -- a little tight.
The Queens line local would have 9 R, 6 G, and 7 B, not a problem. The additional rush hour R trains to Whitehall would be eliminated, replaced by B service. That's where you'd get the extra trains to run the B further.
The last thing Broadway needs is 5 trains with 3 express and 2 local. As it is the N and the R are virtually empty compared to the 6th Ave. trains. I can see moving one of the 6th Ave lines over to Broadway as an express train but otherwise 6th needs all the trains it can handle.
(Keep trains on 6th Ave). The trains will not be able to travel on 6th Avenue, because the Manhattan Bridge tracks which connect DeKalb to Grand Street are going to close (while the tracks that connect to Broadway are going to open). The F will be the only train in Brooklyn that can get to 6th Avenue.
WHat'll happen is, when people get wind of the new service patterns on the Broadway BMT and the lack of express service on 6th Ave, many people are going to switch to the Broadway BMT and 6th Ave service will go down. The common transfer point would be 34th St and that station will see a huge increase in transferring passengers.
--Mark
Yeah, what Larry described above is exactly the way they did it from '86 to 88.
6th Avenue will get one additional service, the 63rd St line, which was a shutlle before, but now will be the V to Queens. Even though the ERC plan I saw had it terminating at 34th (there was no uptown B), still, they can always get smart and extend it to Brooklyn on the Culver, allowing express service.
I have a question: is there any guarantee all the service will actually terminate at 57th/7th?
By that point, the 63rd Street connection to Queens Blvd. could be done, and some trains could be routed there.
With apologies to the Brighton people, here's my thought on this:
B, D--from the Bronx to 34thSt/6th Avenue, following current schedules (ie., no B train at night).
F--normal
S--Sixth Avenue Shuttle, Continental Avenue-Grand Street, local, all times,
G--terminates at Court Square, all times (sorry, G fans!)
N--local, all times
R--normal
Q--Brighton Express 6a-9p, Brighton Local other times, to Continental Avenue, via Bridge; local via tunnel at night
V--West End service, replacing the B; operated via bridge, skips DeKalb all times, to Astoria Blvd rush hours, to Queensboro Plaza evenings and weekends, to 36th/4th Ave. (Brooklyn) at night, express peak direction in Astoria
M-Extended as Brighton Local weekdays, 6a-9p, operating to Coney Island (returns to where it was before 1st round of bridge rehab), otherwise normal
It would be an inconvenience for some West End customer to lose extra rush hour service, and it would be a HUGE inconvenience for Brighton Local customers to lose weekday service into Manhattan, but this accomplishes some things.
--Two local, two express trains on Broadway, one each off MAJOR trunk lines (Brighton and Fourth Avenue) connecting Brooklyn and Manhattan.
--It puts some extra service on the already overloaded Queens Boulevard line, but allows some Manhattan-bound riders a quicker trip, especially if they take Q.
--It avoids a bottleneck at 57th Street/7th Avenue. Continental, IMHO, can handle more trains.
Drawbacks?
--Puts extra trains in 60th Street line, which is already backed up.
--Could STILL create a bottleneck at 57th Street/7th Avenue when N/R and V trains arrive at the same time.
Any thoughts?
Michael
First, your S-Sixth Av shuttle would be the "V", and "W" is an extra Broadway designation that could be used for the West End. (I'd rather see "T", its original letter, but that's not on as many signs), But otherwise, I guess it could work like that. You eliminate the second Bway-Brighton line, solving the problem of if one goes through 63rd St, where would the other go. I would like to see both Bway and 6th Av use the tunnel (the V would give Queens local riders direct 6th Av service, and the Q would go express, probably to 179th)
But taking one of the Brighton services off the bridge doesn't seem to be their policy during Bridge reroutes. They don't think the Brighton riders will like it, after becoming so used to all service over the bridge. I don't know if they'll ever put the M back while all of this stuff is going on.
S - Continental to Grand St - that's some shuttle!
Here - make THAT the "V", change your "V" to "T" (it used to be "T")
and run the "Q" to 179th St - and you're all set!
Yes, the "M" once ran the Brighton Line, took over for the "QJ".
Wayne
When 2001, rolls around here's what I think should happen.
BROADWAY LINE:
N-Astoria to Coney Island via Bway Exp(34 St-Canal), Man. Bridge
4th Ave Exp. Daily 6A-12M. Skips De Kalb Mon-Fri 6A-10P.
Owl(Overnight 12M-6A) via 4th Ave Local, Monatgue Tunnel
& Broadway Local.
Q-57th St & 7th Ave to Brighton Beach via Bway Exp(57-Canal)
Manhattan Bridge & Brighton Exp. Weekdays 6A-10P. Extended
to Coney Island via Brighton Local Evenings, Owl and
Weekends.(replaces D local south of Pospect Park)
R-No Changes.
T-(B south of Pacific)57th & 7th Avenue to Coney Island
via Bway Exp(57-Canal), Manhattan Bridge & 4th Ave Exp
(Pacific-36) Skips De Kalb. Daily 6A-12M. Owl, shuttle between
36th St & Coney I.
W-Astoria to Coney Island via Broadway Local, Montague Tunnel
& Brighton Local. Weekdays 6a-10P. (replaces D local
service south of Prospect Park & N local service between
De Kalb & Astoria.)
6th AVENUE
B/D-terminates at 34th & 6th Ave, otherwise normal
service patterns via Concourse & Central Pk West.
F-No major changes, but since since the 63rd St-Queens Blvd
connector is opening, the F should operate express in Queens
between 179th St& Queens Plaza via 53rd Street Daily
6A-12M. Owl service from Jamacia Center via 63rd Street & Qns
Blvd local. Also Weekday (6a-10P) express service should be
restored between Jay Street & Church Ave and the Bergen Street
lower level platform should be rehabbed and re-opened.
V-New service between Jamacia Center & 2nd Avenue via
Queens Blvd Express & 63rd St tunnel. Extended to
Church Ave, weekdays 6A-10P. Evenings & weekends
terminates at 2nd Avenue.
S-Grand Street to West 4th Street only. During weekday hours
both the the north and southbound tracks should be used
for bi-directional running of the shuttles, with single
track operation during off hours.
OTHER LINES:
E runs to 179th St via Queens Blvd Local.
G-Ends at Court Sq and is extended to Church Ave weekdays.
M-No changes.
Just thought I'd throw this in to the discussion! :)
Excellent proposal - now if someone could come up with yellow "T" signs for the R68s we'd be all set. ("V" and "W" we have already but "W" is a Diamond - I can live with that - the rush-hour only "Z" is round for whatever reason)...I'll get to work on a map of this.
CAN WE GET THRU SERVICE BETWEEN BROAD STREET AND THE REST OF THE WORLD during the midday hours out of this?
We need more rolling stock! Why in heaven's name did they scrap the R27/R30s? Where are the R16s when we need them?
thanx
Wayne
Forget the R-16s - they should have kept the R-10s. I agree that they should have kept the R-27/30 Redbirds, albeit without air conditioning.
Too bad the Old IRTs can't platform on the B division -- the could have rebuilt them as summer only open platform cars to Coney Island. Perhaps that's what they'll do the next time they excess some B division cars -- in 2020 or later.
They have a term for that in this office: BEGGING for a lawsuit.
-Hank
Don't mind me; I'm just partial to R16s... The Green R10s - didn't they have some useful life in them after their mid 1980s "facelifts", or was all that just window dressing?
Wayne
Wayne—
You write:
>>S - Continental to Grand St - that's some shuttle!
And what's wrong with long "shuttles"? :-)
--Mike
A "shuttle" usually means a short-distance trip; any route travelling that kind of distance is worthy of a letter other than "S" - (example:
the "EE" train covered a similar (but somewhat greater) distance.
If "S" were to be used, maybe use it with a proper-colored sign, i.e. orange, like they're doing now on the Queensbridge (yellow) "S" train.
Better idea, to avoid confusion with OTHER "S" trains, give such a route a letter like "V", for example.
No offence meant
Wayne
If you're going to have a new West End route, why not give it its pre-Chrystie St. realignment designation - the T?
The service patterns you reference are the pre-December 1955 pattern when the 60th St/Queens Blvd connection opened. Just prior 1967 (Chrystie St connection opened) the BMT patterns were:
RR 4th Ave. Local, 95th St to Forest Hills M- F 6 AM - 8 PM:
other times to 57th/7th.
QT/QB Brighton Local, Coney Island to Astoria, via tunnel when the Q was running, via bridge when the Q did not run.
Q Brighton Exp, Brighton Beach to 57/7th (Mon-Fri 6 AM - 8:30 PM)
T West End Exp, Coney Island to Astoria Mon-Fri; to 57th/7th Sat/Sun
N Sea Beach Exp, Coney Island to 57th/7th at all times.
This all changed Thanksgiving weekend, 1967. Only the N service was not changed.
By the mid-60s, the T didn't run on Sundays or midday on weekdays. The TT ran as a shuttle between 36th St. and Coney Island during evenings and nights and all day on Sundays. During rush hours, it ran from Chambers St. to 9th Ave. or Bay Parkway; middays to Coney Island. The Q and QT operated together at the same time during weekdays only with the Q running express over the bridge and the QT running local via tunnel. The QB ran when the other two Brighton services weren't running; it had the Brighton line all to itself during weekday evenings and nights and all day on weekends. I remember seeing QB trains of R-27s (and T trains of R-32s, for that matter) along Broadway on Saturdays in October and early November of 1967.
Was the T a local or express train?
If it was an express, what ran through the tunnel during nights and weekends? Was the N a local? Otherwise, you have the QB via the bridge, the N via the Bridge, the T (?) via the bridge. Something was missing.
--Michael
The T was an express via bridge. Prior to the 1967 BMT-IND "merger", there were 3 express services on the Broadway Subway on weekdays: Q-Brighton,N-Sea Beach,and T-West End. 24 hr. Local service on Broadway,through the Montague St. Tunnel and along 4th Ave. was provided by the RR-4th Ave Local. Looking back,I'm amazed at how this was accomplished with almost no traffic congestion. I doubt that it could be duplicated today.
The T ran only during mornings and afternoons during weekdays, overlapping the rush hour periods; it didn't run during middays. On Saturdays, it ran from 5:00 AM to 8:00 PM, but only as far as 57th St. The Q was a weekday-only service by the mid-60s, much the same as today's Q. So, the only time you actually had three express services along Broadway at the same time was essentially during rush hours; on Saturdays, you had two (and I remember seeing T trains on Saturdays in 1967), and on Sundays, the N had the Broadway express tracks all to itself (it ran local in Brooklyn on Sundays and late nights and express in Manhattan at all times).
Thanks for the info; I wasn't sure of the exact times. My riding experiences in those days took place primarily during the rush hours. As I recall, trains were spaced far enough apart for each to attain a good speed on the express runs. This may have been due to careful scheduling and a less restrictive signal system than exists today. The only real clue as to traffic density came during the bridge crossing; there was always a train visible ahead in the distance, as well as the continuous "parade" of trains in the opposite direction. So unlike today's "Montague Shuffle".
Looks good, though the more likely scenario is that the M will be cut back to Broad Street or just run to Myrtle Ave as a shuttle at all times and the N will continue its local run via Broadway to Astoria.
--Mark
(With both the N and R trains going through the Montigue Tunnel, maybe the trains off the bridge should bypass Canal and get to Midtown quicker. Those going Downtown could transfer at DeKalb or Pacific. A straight shot from Pacific to Union Square on the B would be a nice ride.)
That's a nifty idea. I'm guessing the express stop at Canal was intended as a convenience for BMT riders coming from the Wiliamsburg Bridge; now that they have easy access to the Lex express at Brooklyn Bridge, there's no pressing reason to resume express service at Canal. I'd still like to see that platform fixed up, though.
Does the TA envision ever having both sides of the Manhattan Bridge open at the same time, or will they continue to move service back and forth between the sides forever?
Why doesnt the MTA just eliminate the Willy B and Manhattan crossings and replace them with two new east river tunnels. It seems to me that the cost of repairing these two aging bridges so the subway can go up and over it is tremendous. I mean they tore down countless Els so i know that the MTA wont care if people actually like the trains to cross over the bridges. Why didnt the MTA just choose to do that instead??
Because the MTA probably thinks that the City will eventually have to fix or replace the bridges in order to maintain the **vehicular** traffic across the bridges. It's probably cheaper from MTA's perspective as one bridge user (the largest, but still one among many) to pay a portion of the bridge repair, with subway service restored, instead of 100% of tunnel construction.
Of course, if the City came up with a bridge repair plan that involved completely removing the rail lines from the bridges... (Is that likely or unlikely?)
But wouldnt the city benefit more from the bridges being converted to 100% vehicular traffic and make the subways run in new east river tunnels. The city will never learn though that more money must be invested into the city transit system. Instead of maintaining the citys subways the city let them fall apart and now the want to put a big old bandaid to cover all the boo boos. In my opinon the city should control the traffic coming into manhattan and invest in a light rail sytem on the island. REbuild aging parts and modernize other parts the subways especially in manhattan. Because you cant travel on manhattan by car or bus most of the times
"In my opinon the city should control the traffic coming into Manhattan and invest in a light rail sytem on the island."
The problem with light rail in the Manhattan context is demonstrated by one of its other names -- streetcar. As in, competing in the same street with the motorized traffic. Light rail in Manhattan, which would have to be street-running, would be no faster than bus travel. Why would it have to be street running? Because there's no room for surface private ROW (obviously), and if you go to the expense of building the line as an elevated or subway, you might as well spend the few extra millions and build it as heavy rail so it can tie in with the existing subway system.
Street-running was one big reason why a proposed light-rail downtown circulator here in Chicago was killed off a few years ago -- why spend millions on a light-rail system that won't be any faster than bus service?
Light rail works, but basically as a substitute in smaller cities for a heavy-rail (L/subway) system. In those cities, light rail is not just a downtown circulator, but a commuter service from the neighborhoods/suburbs to downtown, and the light rail runs in private ROW, or otherwise separated from street traffic, outside of downtown.
Then the city should recify the mistake they mad when they tore down the manhattan els
Rebuild them
Im sure the technology is better now than in the 1900s and a better el system could be built in manhattan.
The is no where else to go in manhattan but up.
If citizens complain show then theyll be able to get to work faster and in better conditions. At least lets say build an el on 2nd ave to replace the one that they tore down back then.
make it to Irt specs and free transfer to the subways
what do yall think bout this????
(Rebuild the Els with new techology) The new technology is a monorail, but I don't think property owners would like it.
The real problem is that most subways go north-south, not East West. This makes it difficult to get crosstown, and leaves the riverfronts without service. Buses go crosstown, but they are scheduled for just 4 miles per hour, because traffic signals favor the avenues.
If the city were to spend money, I'd like to add a stop on the Time Square shuttle at 6th Avenue for a transfer, and extend it through Grand Central to another stop directly below the Lex Line. It'd keep extending it right to the U.N., with stops on every avenue, and run it as an automated line with one minute headways and no seats -- just a quick slide over. Then I'd extend the Flushing Line to the Hudson, and over the Javits Center. You could go river to river, with a change, or get to either river from existing subway lines with one change.
Instead, the city has studied the 42nd St light rail line five times, concluding each time that it would get stuck in traffic and disrupt traffic too much.
One question:
Why in the world did they tear down all the manhattan els anyway. Werent they providing some kind of service which is twice as fast as street traffic. And why does chicago still have its els and NYC could keep its els?????
[Why in the world did they tear down all the manhattan els anyway. Werent they providing some kind of service which is twice as fast as street traffic. And why does chicago still have its els and NYC could keep its els?????]
Manhattan's Els were *supposed* to be replaced by subways. Indeed, the 8th Avenue IND replaced the 9th Avenue El, while the 6th Avenue El was replaced by the IND line on the same avenue. Now, the 2nd and 3rd Avenue Els were supposed to be replaced by the Second Avenue subway, and indeed were torn down in anticipation of the subway's construction. But the subway was never built, as has been discussed here at considerable length, and to this day the east side suffers from the lack of adequate transit service.
El's were torn down because it was believed that they diminished the value of property by blocking light and air. Manhattan east of Madison Avenue was a working class area when the Els ran down the street.
To add to the list in Brooklyn, the 4th Avenue subway replaced the 3rd and 5th Avenue Els, the Fulton St Subway replaced the Fulton Street El, and the Crosstown replaced the Lexington and Myrtle Avenue Els. In Queens the Archer Avenue line replaced the Jamaica El.
Somehow the property value effect did not apply in the outer boroughs. People who celebrated when the Els were torn down say their neighborhoods go downhill anyway.
[El's were torn down because it was believed that they diminished the value of property by blocking light and air. Manhattan east of Madison Avenue was a working class area when the Els ran down the street.]
I've read accounts of life "under the El" on Third Avenue. It indeed sounded like a rather dubious area, one that respectable people tried to avoid - not Skid Row, exactly, but not upscale (a word that thankfully was not in the vernacular then!)
One point, don't you mean Park Avenue instead of Madison Avenue? It's hard to imagine that Park was a working class area even with the El two blocks east.
[To add to the list in Brooklyn, the 4th Avenue subway replaced the 3rd and 5th Avenue Els, the Fulton St Subway replaced the Fulton Street El, and the Crosstown replaced the Lexington and Myrtle Avenue Els. In Queens the Archer Avenue line replaced the Jamaica El ...
Somehow the property value effect did not apply in the outer boroughs. People who celebrated when the Els were torn down say their neighborhoods go downhill anyway.]
It's been noted elsewhere that Myrtle Avenue went into a steep decline after demolition of the El and hasn't fully recovered. At least in that case, I suppose it could be attibutable to the fact that the Crosstown (G) line doesn't follow that similar a route.
There's an interesting story regarding the Jamaica El. Apparently, Macy's put a lot of pressure on the city to get rid of the El, asserting that the noise and gloom was hurting business at its store on Jamiaca Avenue. Not wanting to annoy such a large company and civic institution, the city demolished the El even though it knew that the Archer Avenue subway was many years off and the resulting lack of transit service would be a huge inconvenience for people and other businesses in the neighborhood. Soon after, Macy's closed its store.
(You meant Park Avenue) Yes, Park Avenue, or Lexington. The working class was on 3rd, 2nd, 1st, York, and slaughterhouses were along the river. I saw this movie at the transit museum about the last days of the 3rd Avenue El. You saw them tearing down tenaments and putting up the first luxury high rises. I'm told Beekman Place was the first area to "gentrify" and that a movie was made about it, but I forgot the name. Perhaps someone else has heard of it.
The fact of the matter is they torn the working els down for subways. Why mess with something that works!!!!!
People complained and complained about the els being noisey and all that but these were the same people who got on the damm things. Were they happier now taking crowed buses and walking blocks and blocks for the "subway"?
Its the same situation with people protesting the construction of skyskrapers in manhattan. "it will block the sunlight and make more traffic" but they are the first ones to apply for an apartment in the new luxury tower.
Go figure us new yorker!
the weirdest bunch of people on this planet!!!!
You haven't been to Denver, I presume. You should hear some of the excuses people come up with concerning anything new. For example, concerning the Rockies baseball team: "There'll be more head of cattle in all of Colorado than baseball fans." The Rockies proved everyone wrong by shattering the major league season attendance record in their first season, and have led the majors in attendance every season since their inception. On Denver International Airport: "We don't need a new airport. Stapleton is more than adequate." Runway placement was poor; because of this, all flights had to be funneled to one runway in bad weather, creating a bottleneck which caused delays at other airports. DIA can land three flights simultaneously in bad weather; delays are minimal.
Some people like to have things just the way they are.
Getting back to the els, ridership declined with the opening of subway lines, and the streets where they ran became breeding grounds for slums. Add to that, by the 30s, the IRT, which owned the Manhattan els (with a 999-year lease!), was going bankrupt, with the els eating up whatever profit the subways were able to generate.
I liked Stapleton though.. it had character!
DIA is... bleh! too septic of a design cause it makes sense!
[I'm told Beekman Place was the first area to "gentrify" and that a movie was made about it, but I forgot the name. Perhaps someone else has heard of it.]
It could be _Mame_, which was released in 1974.
On the nyc transit newsgroup there is a similar discussion of 2nd Av, and rebuilding of els, or a light rail. People certainly will oppose a new el. When the subject of monorails came up, i suggested the Bronx Zoo's Wild Asia ride, which has a very thin, unobtrusive guideway. In fact, I have to go now and see what people thought of that.
(Wild Asia) I thought of Wild Asia for Crosstown service also. The stancions (sp?) could be placed in the parking lanes on each side of the street, and parking and loading could take place between them. But there are problems. The rails would have to be way up in the air at the avenues to get over the 14'4" needed for trucks. That means you'd have to have bulk stations way up high, with handicapped access. Those tranferring from the subway would have to climb multiple sets of stairs, which could take more time than waiting for a bus or walking.
I thought about mid-block stations, and having the monorail decend to (or near) the street in the middle of the block. This reduces the height problem, but it eliminates subway transfers, and some people might get seasick going up and down.
So I'm left with two options. One is an extended underground passageway system a la Underground Montreal. This would be used by people circulating within the CBD from 9th Avenue to 3rd Avenue. You'd still have to walk, but you could walk faster, since you wouldn't have to stop at lights. Ie. all those coming in from Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx on the 6th Avenue line and working between Madison and 3rd could probably walk over faster than switching modes, if a passageway eliminated stoplights. It's about 1/2 mile across.
For service to the rivers, I think you need subways to really do the job -- extending the Time Square Shuttle east, and the 14th St Line and Flushing line west, and adding others perhaps.
You could further speed the underground passageways by adding moving sidewalks
Extending the Canarsie line westward would be the easiest thing to do. It already ducks beneath the 8th Ave. line, and would have a clear shot all the way to the waterfront. It could even turn north under, say, 10th or 11th Ave; however, things could get dicey at the Hudson River tunnel tracks to Penn Station.
The 42nd St. shuttle is, for all intents and purposes, boxed in on both ends. The Flushing line would have to duck beneath the 8th Ave. line; currently it deadends right at the wall on the other side of the lower level at 42nd St. There should be plenty of space west of the Times Square station to dive down before reaching 8th Ave. Come to think of it, as deep as that station is, you'd think it would clear even the 42nd St. lower level at its present grade, unless it runs uphill.
My flavor on this is for the Flushing line (#7) to turn onto the unused 8th Ave lower level. That would be phase one. Any extention would have to deal with IRT vs. BMT/IND standard differences.
But they might include ext. down 8th then over to the Javitis Center (not too much digging to do that); phase three ext. onto the "L". This would mean 7 or L changing standards & expansion of one of the yards to handle all the cars (Corona or East NY).
P.S. There was another comment (prev thread) that there may be a problem with Port Auth diesel tanks in the area of the bus terminal that would complicate ext. 7 to 8th Ave.
P.P.S. I don't think Monorail is the way to go. A Trolley on the street would be a nice tourest thing, but what would you do with all the traffic on 34th ? And what happans when some clown double parks ? Also I afraid too many tourest would be getting hit by cars & trucks (there isn't enough width in the street to make a trolley ROW)
Mr t__:^)
The trolley plan had both E bound and W bound trolleys in a ROW on one side of the street, with the other side becomming one way (paired with 41st St). The Mayor pretty much put the cabash on it -- there was massive opposition from bus riders, drivers, property owners, etc. The advocates were bought off with -- guess what -- more study. Kind of makes me proud I got the City Planning Dept.s transportation division to study the Manhattan Bridge issue again. They loved my suggestion. They got a federal grant to pay for people who would have been on the payroll anyway, so its a winner for them no matter what.
Larry, Thanks for the addl. detail ! Mr t__:^)
Gosh, Larry, (following traditional political logic) that means the bridge study is "free", plus providing jobs = everybody wins!!! (LOL)
Eric:
Could you please tell me how to access this newsgroup? I haven't been able to find the site.
Thank you.
Paul
nyc.transit isn't a "site" it's a newsgroup. (Just because most web browsers i.e. Netscape and Internet Explorer contain newsgroup-reading software it doesn't make them universally available.) I'd contact the support line at your ISP and ask about "usenet newsgroups" and how to access them. If they don't offer them you can visit a web site called DejaNews (www.dejanews.com) which offers a web-based interface to newsgroups.
How do monorails switch? I can see a single line from, say, the Snake House to the World Of Tomorrow in Disneyland, but how does one make up trains in the yards, switch to different track, cut out bad cars, etc.? Just asking.
Stanley Sandler, Ph.D.
An entire section of the guideway swings fom connection to the main line, to the diverging line.
In addition to Eric B's comment about an entire section of a monorail guideway shifting, the switching on the Newark Airport line is fascinating to watch--the part of the structure that is the "switch" turns upside down to feed into the other part of the connection. But generally, monorails are slow in switching and with heavy superstructures to move, rather impractical for frequent route changing.
The only thing like it I know of was some O Gauge track made in the 1930s and 1940s that had three-rail switches that flopped over so they could be either left- or right-handed (there were round rails top and bottom, compatible with Lionel, Marx, American Flyer 'O' and other O gauge manufacturers' track).
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
If I recall correctly, the Seattle monorail has one train on each track and they never switch. The trains are different colors (one red, the other blue) and I believe it's the blue that operates most frequently. The red even has a different platform for loading/unloading on the downtown end which is a couple of blocks from the end of the blue at Westlake. I was told this was done to avoid the touchy switch problem altogether. ???
The Seattle Monorail was built for the 1962 World's Fair. It was a "futuristic" look at transportation. The technology of monorail infrastructure should have improved since that time - 36 years.
If I'm correct, I recall that Japan has a few operating systems that are not just "for show", but were actually built for the purpose of transporting large numbers of people.
I remember reading about some of these systems, however, it was quite a few years ago, and I don't recall the publication the article was carried.
We all know Springfield needs a monorail!
Sing along... Monorail!!! Monorail!!!
=)
Anyone have a picture of a monorail switch?
There seems to be a tunnel (there may be two...I'm not sure) that veers to the right of the brooklyn-bound N.R tracks about 100 feet after leaving the Whitehall St./South Ferry Station. (see below for an illustration that I drew). It seems to cross over to the Manhattan-bound tracks as well. It is easily viewable from the front of a Brooklyn-bound train a minute or two after leaving the station and it looks like it was filled up and blocked. Where does this tunnel lead??
| T | | T | ^ Up To Brooklyn ^
| T | | T |
| T | | T | ____
| T | | T |/ / <- Blocked Tunnel
| T | | T /
| T | | T /
| T | | T /
| T | | T /
| T | / T |
| T | / T |
| T | / T |
| T |/ T |
| T /| T |
| T / | T |
| T / | T |
| T / | T |
| T | | T | Down 100 ft. to Whitehall St/South Ferry Station
[There seems to be a tunnel (there may be two...I'm not sure) that veers to the right of the brooklyn-bound N.R tracks about 100 feet after leaving the Whitehall St./South Ferry Station. (see below for an illustration that I drew). It seems to cross over to the Manhattan-bound tracks as well. It is easily viewable from the front of a Brooklyn-bound train a minute or two after leaving the station and it looks like it was filled up and blocked. Where does this tunnel lead??]
About all that exists are the stubs you can see. I can't recall exactly what the proposed tunnel was to be used for, but it had something to do with routing the lines through lower Manhattan. Which means that contrary to popular belief, the stubs were *not* part of a proposed line to Staten Island.
True. The connection to Staten Island was proposed to be on the 4th Ave line (BMT) in Brooklyn at approximately 65th Street.
--Mark
Whatever Happened to that 400 pound man who was on TV all over the US for suing the MTA and claiming he was discriminated upon because of his weight. Last I heard, he passed the test and was going to be a motorman on the (D) train. However, that was more than a month ago, and I live near a (D) train stop. I use the (D) train all the time, day and night, but I have not seen him. Where did he go?
He is extra list so he could be at Nathans on the D, Wendys on the F,
McDonalds on the R, gyros on the N or just plain old pizza on the A.
Ive noticed that in the last two weeks or so the ride in the east river tunnel of the L train going to manhattan has gotten really bumpy. I mean enough to almost shake you off your seat. Is there a reason for this. And when will these people finally create express or skip stop service on the L train!!!!!
If the ride is faster than usual then they sped the gradetimers up in the tube because the Willie B will be closing in May and more service is needed.As it stands now, one train at a time can only go through the tube so maybe by speeding things up they can send more than one train at a time through there.It is not practical to run an express or skip-stop service on the line because:1)the line is only 37 minutes running time.2)the line is slow due to the gradetimers in effect throughout most of the line.You would have trains stacked one behind the other therefore you would get the same result: 0 minutes saved.Just in case you didn't know,The J/Z skipstop/express service(exp between marcy and myrtle) only saves you 3 minutes.
> As it stands now, one train at a time can only go through the
> [14th St] tubes
Is this because of that ventilation problem in the tunnels? And is there any work being done to resolve this problem in light of the Willie B closing in May? This problem has been around for a while now .....
--Mark
It should be finished February
So what is the problem that restricts the tunnel to one train at a time?
The ventilation fans in the tunnel are KAPUT and are being replaced.
Running more than one train through the tunnel at once becomes a safety issue without adequate ventilation. As far as I'm concerned, fixing that fan should be of utmost importance if its absence impacts service.
Wayne
I wonder what the signals were like in the good old days through the East River tubes. The BMT standards used to fly through that tunnel, (downgrade, anyway) and they weren't exactly speed demons. If I remember right, they would coast part of the way downhill, then the motorman would reapply power just before the upgrade. Of course, they would lose speed on the uphill run; their motors would whine at a progressively lower pitch until they finally reached Bedford Ave. or First Ave.
The MTA is set to vote on the TA's proposal to close these two stations at the november board meeting. All indications are that it will be approved. Can't believe the lack of press!!!
Edward,
This is the second time in the past week you have posted something controversial without saying where you got your information (the first time being your October 19 post claiming that the Jerome Avenue elevated structure above Mt. Eden Avenue is unsafe and therefore about to be closed). Would you mind substantiating your claims?
David
If and I repeat **if* the re were ta proposal to close any station(s) there would have to be a public hearing such as was held for the capital budget. the 1995 service cuts, the fare increase to $1.50, ad infinitum.
I checked the official MTA and NYCT sites. There are **no* hearings scheduled.
Edward? Do you have a source for this information? Are you bluffing or maybe you are hangstrapper under another name(I know-you are "the professor" under another name!). Please post your e-mail address.
Granting you the courtesy that you *might* be right, but then 2+2=100! (It does in Binary!), but please post your source!! Dont scare the riders with talk of line and station closing unless you have proof.
please reveal your sources. I am a station agent with NYCT and I just picked for my next 6 months. There was **no** notice that these booths were closing and if the station(s) close(s) so would the booth(s).
I believe you are bluffing!
[If and I repeat **if* the re were ta proposal to close any station(s) there would have to be a public hearing such as was held for the capital budget. the 1995 service cuts, the fare increase to $1.50, ad infinitum.
I checked the official MTA and NYCT sites. There are **no* hearings scheduled.]
Remember a few years ago when Dean Street was closed? There was a big hue and cry well in advance. So if there were a serious proposal to close these two stations, we'd definitely know about it.
hey with metrocard vending machines and high entrance/exit turnstiles being deployed it wouldn't be necessary to close any stations. I too didn't read anything about station closings at the pick either.
Although I don't believe Edward S.'s claim that these stations will be closed, I can't help but be reminded of the public discussion (from around 1994-95) of the TA completely automating some stations. 238 St. in the Bronx, Franklin Ave. and Bowery in Manhattan, and several stations in Brooklyn and Queens would be prime candidates should the TA ever decide to do such a thing. I'm currently not living in NY (but will be moving back in December), and I'm asking you if there's been any further discussion in the TA about station automation.
Thanks,
EJM
There should be at least 1 transit employee assigned to every station 24/7. If not, a cop would be needed 24/7 for anti-vandalism purposes. If left unattended, many outlying stations would have any hardware pulled up and stolen by crow-bar-carrying vandals, then the station mezzanine would be set afire just for kicks by low lifes having nothing else better to do. BTW: I do think the original post is a farce: 25 St. is a rather busy station, with 36 St. & Prospect Ave. are a long distance away. Sometimes we have people posting here non-factual-rumor-starting-rubbish.
Automating subway stations is a bad idea for all the reasons you cited. I think when the TA discussed this it was a "weather ballon" to see if riders would like it or not. I'm just curious to know if there's been further discussion on this. To be frank: I hope not, and I hope never. Think of the safety issues if nothing else. Back in 1990, I was ill and passed out on the downtown platform at 50th and Broadway (1/9). If the token booth clerks hadn't called for assistance, I don't know what would have happened.
The subject of station closings rings a bell with me. The IRT and BMT have stations which are too close together. It would be worth walking a little farther to ride faster. But closing a station leaves them too far apart. What you really need to do is close two stations, and put one between them. As an F rider, my favorite scenario is to close Spring and Bleeker on the Lex and put a new station right over Broadway-Lafayette on the 6th Avenue Line, for two way transfers. Or just create a new northbound platform, and keep the southbound Bleeker St platform but create an underground walkway so Sohoers wouldn't have to cross Houston at grade.
I hasve not heard anything about un-tended stations. The straphangers campaing expressed concerns when they found out about future machines--safety in non-tended stations. TA then claimed at least and has told us that the "long range plan" is to "take away our money" so we can "help the customers, inspect stations, assist with machine use, etc. There will still be a booth, it will just be that we will not be "chained" to the booth-- we will be able to go out and help customers that we can not do at this tie.
exactly what we as station agents will be doing is still under discussion between the NYCT and the TWU.
When I hear anything that can be shared I will share the news. (I have not heard any rumors either.)
speaking of machines: The first machines go om-line in 1/1999 and more in 4/1999. I dont have a list of the stations and dates but I remember that Sheepshead Bay (D/Q), 59th (IND), and 34th(6 av) are among the stations that will be getting machines. At some point, I do not know when, they will have to train all of us in the care and feeding of the machines--if only hoe to load, how to unjam, etc. It is also still up int he air as to whom will empty the machines. Station agents hope this job will be left to the collection people.
**all opinions expressed are personal and not those of MTA or NYCT***
This is true. The future of the clerk, from what I have heard, as you said, is to be outside the booth assisting customers. God help your legs if you are on your feet for a whole shift,and I hope you don't get stuck for a double. My concern: you will be helping customers at the vending machines as they will have to buy MetroCards there. If there is a malfunction, what will the rules & regulations allow you to do? What about some psycho with a gun forcing you to open the machine so he/she can steal the money? I know you can't answer that question, yet I am concerned about your safety in that regard.
Having station agents serve as customer service assistants, with sales handled by vending machine, seems to work fine on the Washington Metro. There's no reason why it shouldn't work okay in New York either.
"My concern: you will be helping customers at the vending machines as they will have to buy MetroCards there. If there is a malfunction, what will the rules & regulations allow you to do? What about some psycho with a gun forcing you to open the machine so he/she can steal the money? I know you can't answer that question, yet I am concerned about your safety in that regard."
Chicago has had this system (station agents don't handle money, machines dispense Transit Cards) for some time now, and it seems to work very well, at least from the passengers' (mine included) perspective.
It is true that one of the main duties of the station agent is to help people figure out the machine, but that is where that ends. The agent cannot fix or unjam a machine (and jams seem to be exceedingly rare -- I rarely see a machine marked 'Out of Order'), and obviously don't have access to the money. I say "obviously" because the CTA makes a big deal in the media about how much money they have saved since agents no longer handle money, and that would be totally defeated by giving station agents keys to the Transit Card machines.
I doubt a "psycho with a gun" will force the agents to open the machines when everyone knows that only the revenue collection people have keys. They would know that a more profitable use of the gun would be to try to shoot the machine open. (^:
Thanks for the info. I'm glad to hear that no plan for leaving stations unattended currently exists. I hope that the NYCTA and TWU work out a plan that will be beneficial to workers, riders, and the TA.
--EJM
The following post is not official NYCT or MTA info**
I have seen PATH and NJT ticket machines. They have secured locked vaults inside the locked machine. They are emprtied by their collection people (Armormed car for NJT) with 4-5 transit police officers (NJT rep for NJT) present. The money vault is a separate lcok within the machine. I have seen NJT machines open and PATH's machines.
I am sure that NYCT's machines will have silent alarms and maybe a link to our alarm inside the booth so we know if someone is tampering with the machine. I do not have any info. Is is my expectation that all station agents will be trained in the "care and feeding" of MVMs (Metrocard Vending Machines). Even now the policy of emptying the turnstiles is changing to only when "an assist, lunch relief, supervisor, NYPD, CTA or relief is present, or when another employee is present. ... This is for your own safety..." (This quote from official messages from NYCT to us in the booth.)
I do not expect that we will empty the machines. my **guess** is we'll unjam stuck credit cards, change ribbons, fill the machine with cards, load paper for receipts. We may have the keys in the booth, we may need a PIN, and we may even have NYPD present (or an assist, blah, blah, blah).
I appreciate the concern all of you have about our safety. It is assuring that some of our riders care about our concerns/ needs.
to answer the day pass question : I have no news. I expect that we'll be told by an AFC Bulletin when they will be sold (and where). When I know anything I will post.
Y2K and MetroCard: Already some booths have MetroCards expiring "01/31/00". The cards read OK. I will be monitoring the cards to see what happens 02/1999. I am guessing that they did a quick fix and called 1994 as the first year (postponing the Y2K till 2093)
Iwould expect to see some of those MVM machines along the SIR, since the token machines at the stations were removed when Metrocard went city-wide. Annadale, Huguenot, Eltingville, Great Kills, Oakwood, New Dorp, Grant City, and Dongan Hills all had token machines. Before the switch to tokens, all but Annadale and Huguenot had clerks, with the Annadale stationhouse having been a deli.
-Hank
Y2K problem was solved in the fare collection data base system by requiring a four (4) digit date entry :-(
Mr t__:^|
[I am guessing that they did a quick fix and called 1994 as the first
year (postponing the Y2K till 2093)]
Just in time for the opening of the Second Avenue subway!
A decision that affects service patterns (other than construction) requires public hearings to be held before a vote on the matter can be taken. Please advise where these hearings are to take place.
--Mark
I don't know about 238th St (there is already only a southbound entrance), but I can't believe that 25th St in Bklyn would be closed. The next stations are 9 blocks away (Prospect Av) and 11 blocks away (36th St).
Bob Sklar
I know a lot of us out there have been collecting
MetroCards, especially the "themed" ones.
Some one had recently asked me how I keep them so they
can be displayed. At the time I was just keeping them
in an envelope.
I tried the plastic sheets used for baseball and other
type trading cards. Those didn't work to well. The
pockets are too wide so if you drop the page the
MetroCard falls out. Also the pockets are vertical
while the MetroCards are horizontal. These pages are
good, however, for the MetroCard Holders.
After a lot of thought (my head still hurts ) and
searching, I found plastic Business Card holder
looseleaf sheets (not the Business Card Books). I
found them in Staples. They are sold under either the
K & M brand name or sometimes the Avery Brand name.
The Staples price is about $6 for 5 sheets. The
sheets are made of a heavier grade plastic so they
hold up very well. Each sheet holds 10 cards (or 20 if
you want to put then back to back). The card fits
perfectly.
I am curious to know how others were keeping their
collection.
In a shoebox under my bed :)
With my transit ticket collection and schedule for the 69st Ferry :)
(What's the 69st Ferry? :)
-Hank
Before the VZ Bridge, there was a ferry from Staten Island to Brooklyn. Maybe this was as 69th st?
I never rode that ferry, but I do remember that it did use use the same boats as the Manhattan to Staten Island Ferry. I think they were white but I am not sure. All I know is that they left from St George just like the Manhattan ferries still do. (yes-the Manhattan boats were red with black trim until the 1964 Fair)
I was kidding about not knowing the 69st ferry. It did run from Brooklyn 69st to St. George, loading at slips 7 and 8. Only 7 had an actual waiting room. The Brooklyn line was privately operated, if I'm correct on my history, and used smaller boats than the Manhattan line. I believe one or two of the old Brooklyn boats wound up as ferries to Governors Island. The design of the USCG boats is certainly similar to the photos I've seen of the 69st Ferry.
-Hank
The one I remember was the Alexander Hamilton - I rode it in August of 1964. It was at night (coming back from S.I.) It had incandescent light, very dim. If I remember correctly it was smaller than the other S.I. ferries (i.e. Cornelius G. Kolff, Pvt. Joseph F. Merrell, Verrazzano - I'm not counting the 1965 fleet of Kennedy, Lehman, American Legion). It might have been the same size as Mary Murray.
What ever happened to her anyway? She had a sister too, Miss New York, I think.
We saw the Verrazano Bridge not far off, not opened to traffic yet, but pretty much fully illuminated. There was another boat or two on that run, can't remember their names, could have been named for Presidents or other old-time political figures.
Wayne
I think Alexander Hamilton was the name of one of the boats in the Governors Island Fleet, the only one I'm absolutely positive about is 'The Tides'
As for the NYFB Mary Murray and NYFB Miss New York (they were indeed sister ships); The Mary Murray is in the muck of the south bank of the Raritan River; she is visible from all lanes (best from northbound truck) just north of Exit 9. Miss New York is a restaurant moored off of Bridgeport, CT.
-Hank
What the heck is she doing there??? Did they simply leave her to rot?
She has to have been there for ten years or more - last time I saw her, she was sitting at a pier in Stapleton.
BTW - What did they do with Kolff, Merrell and Verrazzano? I suspect that Kolff has been scrapped - last I saw him he was moored somewhere along Richmond Terrace; this had to be twenty years ago.
I've been so busy with the Subway lately, I seem to have forgotten all about my Ferries.
Correct me if I'm wrong: the current fleet is five boats:
Gov. Herbert H.Lehman, John F.Kennedy, American Legion,
Samuel I. Newhouse, Andrew J. Barbieri. Am I missing any?
Wayne
There is also the Austin Class- includes the Alice Austin and I think 2 other boats. They are small boats.
Perhaps hank can give us the boat rosters.
You got them all except the John A. Noble and the Alice Austen. As for the status of the former boats in the fleet; those that I know of are:
Mary Murray-Derelict in Raritan River, NJ
Miss New York-Floating restaurant, Bridgeport, CT
Cornelius G. Kolff and Private Joseph F. Merrill- Floating Prisons, Rikers Island, NY
Verazzano-Derelict, Brooklyn Navy Yard It was formerly moored to pier 7, Tompkinsville (old ferry maintainence facility, which has since been demolished, and a pier at the Bay St. Landing condo, which had collapsed. The boat lasted longer than the piers it was tied to!
-Hank
Count me as one of the collector kind of guys. I have coins from all over the World, tokens from many cities in the US & Canada, AND over 3 dozen MetroCards, incl. some unique ones not available to the general public.
I'ld love to trade with any of you out there, especially out-of-towners. I've made a couple of friends in Chicago, one in Boston, Phoenix & Conn, but don't have any extras, and some are dated. There is also a whole phone/credit card group of collectors out there, but I had to draw the line somewhere.
Click on my name to send me e-mail off-line.
AND don't let me forget to thank Allan for the tip !!!!
I've been putting a plastic bag (cut off) over the top of a baseball card sheets so the MC don't fall out ... it looks like hell.
Mr t__:^)
In the Phila Inquirer today, SEPTA advertised for proposals from car builders for "low floor light rail vehicles". The proposals are due in December. No amount was specified in the ad. It looks as if the previous speculation on this may be coming to fruition. More details as they develop...
I went into my computer files and came up with the following:
8.19 Miles - Jamaica Line from 121st St. to Marcy Av. (does not include the Williamsburgh Bridge, the approach from there to Marcy Av. or the approach from 121st St. to the Archer Av. Subway)[ Add those and you are over 10 miles]
4.96 Miles - Flushing Line from East of Willets Pt. Blvd. to Hunterspoint Av. Portal
4.76 Miles - Jerome Av. Line from Woodlawn to 161st St. (does not include subway approach south of 161st St.)
4.36 Miles - Culver Line from Ditmas Av. to Stillwell Av. (does not include subway approach north of Ditmas Av.)
4.30 Miles - West End Line from 9th Av. to Bay 50th St. (not sure exactly where this el ends at Bay 50th - even though I've ridden it)
3.76 Miles - Pelham Line - Pelham Bay Park to Whitlock Av. (does not include portal approach south of Whitlock Av.)
3.67 Miles - White Plains Road Line - 241st St. to Bronx Park East.
3.21 Miles - White Plains Road Line - 180th St. to 149th St and Third Av.
approx 2.97 Miles - Hammels Wye to Mott Av.
2.87 Miles - Livonia Av. Line from Utica Av. Portal to New Lots Av.
2.50 Miles - Astoria Line from Ditmars Blvd to Queensboro Portal
2.28 Miles - Broadway Line from 242nd St. to Dyckman St.
approx 2.11 Miles - Myrtle Line from Fresh Pond Road to Broadway/Myrtle (not sure exactly where el ends at Fresh Pond)
approx 1.86 Miles - BroadwayJunction to East 105th St.
1.79 Miles - Liberty Av. Line from 80th St. to Lefferts Blvd.
1.55 Miles - Brighton Line from Sheepshead Bay to Stillwell Av. (I consider the section from Macdonald Av. to Stillwell Av. to be a separate section since there is no track connection)
approx 1.33 Miles - Hammels Wye to vicinity of Beach 112th St.
1.03 Miles - Smith St. Line from Carroll St. to Fourth Av.
approx 0.30 Miles - Broadway Line at 125th St.
These numbers come from measurements off a map and are as accurate as possible. They are route miles - not track miles. Without a doubt, the Jamaica Line is the longest continuous el. Not counting the section through 180th St. and the adjacent yards, the two sections of the White Plains Line would finish second, but they are separate structures. This gives second place to Flushing, followed by the Jerome Line and then the two long Brooklyn els.
I did not include the Manhattan Bridge
No doubt, however that the section east of Broadway Junction is the oldest original el in the system.
I hope this is helpful!
Gerry
Thanks for the milage data.
Where do you think we can find the historical El milage?
I know most of the routings so I could work it out off the same city map that I did the existing ones on, but that won't happen overnight. Also, one has to determine where a line started and ended, for example, the Sixth and Ninth Av. els shared some trackage out of South Ferry, while the Second and Third Av. els shared two southern terminals. Again the question of bridge trackage arises with the Brooklyn and Queensboro crossings. The Ninth Av el had a tunnel, and the Third Av. El had a double deck structure in the South Bronx. An interesting project all in all.
Routes
Culver - 9th Av. to Ditmas Av.
Fifth Av - Sands St. to 59th St.??
Fulton - Sands St. to 80th St.
Myrtle - Sands St. to Broadway
Lexington - Myrtle to Broadway
Old Main Line
Fulton Ferry Spur
Broadway Ferry Spur
Second Av - Bowery to 129th St.
Third Av. - South Ferry to Gun Hill Rd.
Sixth Av. - Rector St.? to 57th St.
Ninth Av. - South Ferry to Sedgewick Av.
Second Av. - Queensboro Spur
Ninth Av. - Jerome Connector
Second Av. - 34th St. Spur
Third Av. - 42nd St. Spur
Second/Third Av. - City Hall Spur
Brooklyn Bridge
Bronx Park Spur
Any others?
Gerry
That looks like a wrap up of the Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn El structures. The original Westchester Ave Subway elevated
Structure terminated at Bronx Park at Southern Boulevard which became a spur.
Almost all of the Spurs were the original end of line stations.
There was even a Ferry slip station below the Brooklyn Bridge.
The 34th St Spur was just that.
I am not sure if the GCT/42nd St Spur was the original end before the entire length of 3rd Ave was traversed.
The 57th St terminal was the northern 6th Ave Terminal until it was connected to the 9thy Ave El at 53rd St.
I do know that the 3rd Ave El trains did go from South Ferry to 241St in the Bronx once the Webster Ave Extension was built
from Fordham to Gun Hill Rd & White Plains Rd (creating the Bronx Park Spur).
This also brings up an earlier post this year about dual third rails on some structures where the El and Subway shared the same
trackage.
Th 2nd Ave El went on to the Westchester Ave el/subway structure.
The downton terminus being City Hall after third tracking the El.
Another interesting and possible long route is the 2nd Ave trains from City Hall (?) over the Queensboro Bridge to the elevated
Astoria and Corona/Flushing lines. The QBridge was initally built to carry el trains over it, so, no argument there.
The original plans for the Manhattan Bridge had el train stations on each end also, although the subway routes were built
instead. I think that the reason that there were/are two sets of tracks on the bridge, was that the IRT was to use one set and the
BRT the other. All kinds of politics entered into that era of rapid transit construction.
The 9th Ave El extension to the Jerome Ave Elevated subway structure
was accomplished by tunnel, so there was a definite break in that structure.
Now the Brooklyn Els, I do not know the routings exactly. However, there may have been crossovers and loops at East New
York to allow Broadway trains to end up on the Fulton line and Fulton Ave trains to end up on the Jamacia Line, and possibly
each one could have looped back to the Brooklyn Bridge from one line to another using the Lexington & Myrtle Ave Lines.
And possibly the same holds true for the Coney Island trains that could have gone out one line and returned on another,
although only the Culver line was totaly elevated, and the Stillwell Ave Terminal has always been at ground level.
What does our Webmaster think about all this?
If you have (or can find) the two volumes of the "Tracks of New York" series which deal with the els, you have a wealth of info on this subject. I have both, just don't know where they are at present...
Gerry
Ok, Thanks.
If I recall, those little red street guides for the various boroughs had subway and el mileage in their transit information sections. Somewhere around the house I have several, through the 1950s at least. I'll have to check on it.
I think that's where I got the figure of 12.39 miles from 69th Street/4th Avenue to 86th Street/Lexington Avenue, which was my high school commute. But I can't remember now if that was with transfer at 14th Street or Chambers/Brooklyn Bridge (that last was a great express run --69th, 59th, [skip 36th], Pacific, Chambers, change to uptown express, 14th, Grand Central, 86th--7 stops, one change, running time from Bay Ridge to Yorktown around 45 or 50 minutes. Try matching that trip with the improvements the TA has put in for the "benefit" of riders, especially those in Brooklyn.)
Didn't IRT system maps from the mid-1920s also have mileage in addition to running times?
Ed Alfonsin
SUNY at Potsdam
The Lexington Ave Express was a legend in the days befor 59th St.
The A or D express from 59th to 125th did not do too bad either.
I have one of those little red books from 1933.
However, I cannot find it since we moved.
No monorail!
More els!!!!! Who cares if people complain! They complain bout everything but still live here. NYC isnt the same as it was in the begining of the century. Cmon bring some back at least crosstown!
So what if theyre noisey. So is everything else in the city, at least we can benefit from this noise
Sorry don't agree ... dig or give 'em a priviate ROW on street level.
Trolleys or the trackless version OR CNG buses in my mind are the only alt to digging. Els are ugly things, they get the job done, but I wouldn't favor building any more !
The Archer Ave ext of the J is one way to improve the system without having to tear down the El & replace it with a subway.
Well here it comes .... I'll bet this will stand the hair up on a lot of you.
Mr t__:^)
Okay, Ill survive if the make a trolley but none of these trackless buses. They are cheezy!!!!!
Regardless of what they do they have to do something. Manhattan is getting really bad!!!
The subways are more and more crowded than ever and it isnt getting anybetter above ground where it take bout half an hour to get crosstown. I little advice that i learned a few years ago:
Never i mean never take a cab crosstown. Youll end up paying a whole lot more that $1.50 for the bus that been right behind the cab for half an hour
I must disagree with you on this point, Mr. T. There are systems being built in Europe, the U3 extension in Vienna comes to mind, that uses concrete, steel, and sound proofing to esthetically blend the structure with its surroundings.
Living here in Chicago, I enjoy my journey most when it begins and ends on the elevated structure. I like being outside, and not in a hole in the ground. While I’ll be the first to admit that Chicago’s State and Dearborn Streets subways aren’t as inviting as the Washington, DC Metro, I’ve been in VERY FEW subway stations that have caused me to feel "good" about being there. On the subject of Chicago, the Midway Orange Line opened in 1993, has several stretches of "elevated" right-of-way. Of course it isn’t the "old" type ‘L’ that you see downtown, but it isn’t underground either.
I may agree that Manhattan is probably not the place to build an EL, however, modern elevated structures still have their place in transit today.
So there is modern ways of building an el that wont be as noisy as the old version. I think NYC should consider it. There is no where else to go but up
There may be ways of building els that are not noisy but without a doubt els in NY would be built in the poorest neighborhoods and will help to make those neighborhoods even darker and drearier places. Whereever Els are built, property values decrease. Wherever subways are built, property values increase. It's better value for the money to build a subway.
The CTA's Northside 'L' mainline (four tracks) runs through a very upper middle class section of Chicago in the vicinity of DePaul University. $300,000 townhomes are being built right next to the Ravenswood line to the Loop. If there was NO 'L' lines in the area, I'd say the property values would DECREASE instead of increase. And these are lines that were built in 1900. No noise barriers!
If you've ever been to Western Europe, you'd see that the Europeans make sure that any infastructure such as highways and railways are built to blend into the neighborhoods that they run.
What ever happened to the phase, "Let's try it", instead all we hear today is " NO, it can't be done".
Perhaps you can try it in the city that works. Its more difficult in the city where three people, a lawyer, and a few thousand dollars in campaign contributions are enough to block damn near anything.
My preference would be out of doors in a private, grade separated ROW, rather than over the street or below it. And running on the ground (or an embankment), not a continuous bridge. Ie. the SIRT, Brighton, Sea Beach, and Dyre Ave lines. But the city is built and there is no where to put more lines like that.
There's no such thing as 'Let's try it' when it comes to an investment in ifrastructure. You're talking stuff that'll be permanent for many years. You can't build it, experiment, fail, and decide to tear it down. Look at that wasted investment. BTW, had the 3rd Ave EL lasted into the now (along its length) what kind of shape do youy suppose it would have been in, given the wonderful high-maintainence period that existed from 1960 to 1984?
-Hank
The el vs. other question lives on. An example of a new system that is almost entirely elevated is Miami. There the structure uses single concrete columns in the median of wide streets. The roadbed is solid concrete. Double columns are used where there are corners to be turned and other obstructions. Sweeping curves wipe out property at various locations. Overall the structure is ugly in its own right, though it would hold its own against a rusty undermaintained traditional structure. Personally I like the old time structures, the 'gingerbread' adds personality and the open deck admits light below.
Selling any kind of an el structure to a neighborhood is a tough job but almost anyone who rode them every day misses them when they're gone! They are the best way to bring good transit with frequent stopsto a neighborhood at reasonable cost. Replacement service for Boston's Els served different neighborhoods, leaving many residents without convenient transit. Neighborhoods near Egleston, Dudley, Northampton, Dover, City Square, Thompson Square and Everett Stations were particularly hard hit in Boston, and riders in these areas are forced to take bus rides which they didn't have to take previously.
Gerry
Attractive Concrete El's can be built, they can also be modularly built to decreast construction hassles. look at Vancouvers Sky Train, its a realively attractive EL nice in design and all. add lights under the nicely constructed EL, put the pylons to support it in a nicely vegitated center median, and you got it set. Repave the street and all and people wont notice much.
If you have a wide enough street so that when you build such a El the light can still get to the street, then it's likely to has a positive effect on business & the neighborhood ... LONG TERM that is.
In NYC that's a problem, although the AVENUES in Manhattan would seem to be candidates, e.g. 2nd Ave.
- So do we put one line of pylons down the middle ?
- What would that do to the one way traffic on either side of the El ?
- How many hits do you think a pylon could take before it comes down ?
- If that means two lines of pylons on each sidewalk, then you're back to the old construction & there goes the light.
Mr t__:^)
build an armored devidor around the pylons, make it a little higher than the cars and make it nice and heavly armored. and watch em slide off.
You're right a single line of widely spaced pylons could be done. If they won't dig a new 2nd line, then this WOULD afford nice views of the city ...hay they could charge just to go up and look around while they are building it :-(
Mr t__:^)
The wat the system is set up, three white homeowners can stop anything in this town, no matter how many people (or even how many other white homeowners) would benefit. You want ELs? Get the Rockaway Branch re-startup approved, which no one with a brain could object to (but a small number of people without brains have managed to kill all discussion of), and then we'll talk about ELs.
Robert Moses where are you when we need you ....
(Yes I know he didn't like anything to do with improving mass transit)
Is the legality of "the right of eminent domain" dead? Quite a few railroad, and highways (unfortunately), were constructed with this.
Wouldn't right of eminent domain provide a "legal precedent" for the transit authorities to build?
"Right of emminent domain" is not dead. But consider this. To just rehab the Rockaway Line and restart it (no condemnation required) you'd have to have an extensive political coalition. Them you'd have to spend $500 million on an envirnomental impact statement. Then you'd have to have public hearings before the community boards, the borough board, the City Planning Commission, and the City Council -- the latter two must approve, along with the Mayor, Governor, and both houses of the State Legislature.
That's when the real obstacles begin. You'd have to get someone to appropriate the money. And then the neighbors would sue on the grounds that the environmental impact statement is inaccurate and incomplete, thus validating the entire approval process. (It doesn't really matter if it is or it isn't). Their lawyer will shop for a sympathetic judge and get an injunction while the case is heard. Then the lawyer will see to it that the case drags on, perhaps for years.
During all that time, other interests will see to get their hands on the money. And local politicians will swear up and down to protect the neighbors by stopping the project. Politicians from other areas will be indifferent, since most of their constituents are either moving to the suburbs or on welfare anyway.
After a few years, the neighbors may offer to give in if you spend more money to modify the project. But that means a new EIS and a new approval process, which can then be challenged.
Pardon my decimal point. Those Environmental Impact Statements cost $500,000, not $500 million.
And sometimes, when an el goes away, so does business. Look what happened after the eastern end of the Jamaica line was dismantled. Macy's pushed for its demolition, then closed not long after that was done. What goes around comes around.
Well Jim you've put me between a rock and a hard place ....
From a riders point of view the El can't be beat ! Here in NYC the view from the #7 or the F of Manhattan in the morning is the greatest.
But if you have to live under the El that's another matter. Now then there are Els and Els. The #7 along Queens Blvd. is an El with it's own ROW (parking underneath), plus it's a concreat structure. You couldn't build it now in most of todays congested cities.
Another point of agreement is my trips on the LIRR ... I wouldn't have enjoyed the 45 min trip as much if we were in a hole the whole trip.
This said what makes the most since from the prospective of efficiency (volume of folks moved) & limited adverse economic impact on the area that the line goes through ? An El built over an existing street that is 6 lanes wide (4 + 2 parking) ... don't think so.
Mr (small)t__:^)
Queens Blvd. is ultra-wide for a main artery. Even with that concrete elevated structure, there's still enough room on the sides for traffic lanes. The IND Queens line was a piece of cake to build where it runs under Queens Blvd. Of course, building any subway line in an undeveloped are will be easier. Too bad they didn't build that line with six tracks. That would have been some super express run!
Did the method of construction differ on the remaining 19th century el structure along Fulton St. east of Broadway Junction than on the other original el structures? It certainly had to be the strongest of the old structures. Look at it this way: BMT standards (but not Triplex units) could run on that segment which led to Jamaica, while being too heavy to run on the other older structures.
The structure in that area was and still is very different from the remainder of the Jamaica Line which was either rebuilt or built new in the Dual Contracts era. I can't answer why this section wasn't rebuilt, though I have seen some theories posted here. The construction methodology seems similat to that used on Boston's Washington St. el along the wide section of Washington St. in the South End. The entire superstructure was Warren Truss (lattice girder) construction, creating a very airy structure which admitted a lot of light. Columns were directly under the center of the roadbed and spaayed out at the top to accomodate the full width of the span. A light arched truss bent connected the two sides together. IIRC the construction of the section of the Jamaica Line over Fulton St. is quite similar. This construction would stand the weight of an entire 71000 pound car on a single span in Boston, and was never hampered by speed restrictions which were common on other sections of the el.
Gerry
I think that you are confusing the "Fulton Street" El over Pitkin Ave, east of Broadway Junction with the "Broadway-Jamaica" El over Fulton Street, east of the same. The structure over Fulton Street east of Broadway Junction was never built using Warren truss work, although the columns were latticed (since replaced). This segment of El is the oldest extant section in the NYCTA system, but it was built originally using plate girder construction (although to a lighter standard than the Dual Contracts). The segment of the Fulton Street El over Pitkin Avenue was built using Warren truss construction just as you described using round cast-iron columns in the street.
OK, how much of a lighter standard was it? Probably enough to explain why BMT standards could run on that segment, but not Triplex units. If I'm not mistaken, it all boils down to how much weight per axle could be supported, or something along those lines. (I'm not an engineer.)
That was a nice piece of research.
Now, how about some historical milage of the Manhattan and Brooklyn Els. Then we can determine the all time longest.
Please re-send check. It was unsigned.
On October 7th, I posted a message in regards to finding someone who knew of a possible subway Train Car location I was looking for to film a short independent feature of mine. Someone, I believe the person's name might have been, "Leo", recommended the ShoreLine Trolley Museum in E. Haven. If you know who you are, please send me your email address again. I lost your information due to a computer crash. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.
Its amazing how many people are writing in planning to do films/TV shows/stories about the subway. Its getting absolutely trendy, which can't be a bad thing. Cars have gotten all the product placements for too long.
Lots of Californians in town these days. I saw the economic leadership of the city pass from finance to media when Starbucks opened. Traders don't do latte, they wash down their antacid with a black cup of Joe.
Did I read correctly that the Eastern Division cannot accomodate full-length trains? I had earlier read that it cannot accomodate 75 foot cars. What's the problem -- are all or some (which ones) of the platforms too short? How short?
[Did I read correctly that the Eastern Division cannot accomodate full-length trains? I had earlier read that it cannot accomodate 75 foot cars. What's the problem -- are all or some (which ones) of the platforms too short? How short?]
Platform lengths aren't the reason why 75-footers aren't used on the Eastern Division. The reason has to do with lack of clearance on the Williamsburgh Bridge approaches. On the L, there's a turn that's too tight for the longer cars.
Actually, AFAIK 75-footers physically can operate on the Eastern Division lines, but they'd have to go so slowly through the aforementioned tight spots that services would be delayed.
The BMT Eastern division line platforms were designed for 8 car trains of 67 ft. BMT standards (about 530 ft.). The Southern division platforms were of the same length, but they have since been lengthened to accommodate 600 ft. trains.
BMT Eastern Division platforms were not extended as the rest of the system was. So the J/Z, M and L are all 8-car trains of 60' cars (or is the L using 10-car trains?)
-Hank
No. the L is the same length. If the reference to the trains not fitting was to my post about turning D trains through Essex, that part of the line can hold 75 foot cars (like I said, the R-44/46 digital signs has the codes for service as far as Essex, and the old D reroute that reverses there), but the stations from essex to Broad were never lengthened either (Even with the recent rebuilding of Fulton and Broad :-( ). The reasoning probably was, that since the line is served by the Eastern Division, and we can't run the 75 ft cars out there because of certain curves (Crescent St is the biggest problem), then we might as well not upgrade it for 8 x 75ft trains. It can continue to use 8 x 60 ft car trains. So now this part of the B division is almost as different from th rest of the B division as the A division is.
I still wish they would bring over the two car R-46 units from the G and run them on the full time M shuttle when the Williamsburg Bridge closes next year. It was said that a bicentennial fantrip, using the new bicentennial cars ran here and to Canarsie.
The curve on the Canarsie line, between Grand and Graham noone seems to be sure about. It doesn't seem as tight as the City Hall curve on the N&R though.
R46 on the M? Unless they install track to the old upper-level platform at Myrtle/B'way, I doubt that those cars can make the Myrtle cutoff. That curve is possibly the worst on the system, 120 degrees, and then a reverse...
-Hank
Not quite 120-it's only a flat 90 degrees left then 45 degrees right.
(visual observation of the tracks; intersection of Broadway and Ditmars is a right angle; tracks go above Ditmars or parallel to it)
It is surely one of the sharpest in the system. It's at grade, too.
Turning circle of the "L" train curve just outside of Graham Avenue is tighter; I think this is one of the ones that prohibit 75-footers on
the Eastern Division. Other sharp ones on E.Div are at Crescent, Cypress Hills (80 and 72 degrees) on the "J", also n. of Sutter on the "L" (reverse curve, both about 75 degrees, VERY tight) and also on the "L" between Morgan and Montrose (turning circle is also VERY tight- 94 degrees)
Wayne
Wyane, don't forget the 7 line. The curve between Queesboro Plaza and
Courthouse Sq. 90 degrees. I think the Flushing IRT is one of the most and sharpest curve in the system.
In terms of turning circle radius, Queensboro Plaza's 88-degree curve
may be one of the tightest. The two between Cortlandt Street and City Hall on the N/R certainly rank up there. So does the elevated curve on the #7 between 45th Road and Hunters Point Avenue - THAT'S 90 degrees. Also very tight (but able to run 75-foot cars) around DeKalb Avenue and entering the "B" tunnel south of 36th St. There are curves with steep angles but wide turning circles ("N" south of 59th Street is 115 degrees but is fairly broad) and vice versa (how's about north of City Hall on the N/R northbound AND north of Chambers on the J/M/Z for sudden?) In fact, n/b J/M/Z south of Chambers the second of the two (about 80 degrees) is extremely sharp.
Somewhere we should compile a list of all this - angles I can get easily enough, it's turning circle radii that I don't have.
Wayne
{Somewhere we should compile a list of all this - angles I can get easily enough, it's turning circle radii that I don't have. }
You're absolutely right, we're looking at this all wrong! the ANGLE of the turn isn't important, but the RADIUS is!
You can turn a train 360 degrees, but it's tha radius of the curves that inhibit the operation of a train on it. 90 degress at a 100' radius is 'sharper' than a 90 degree turn at a 150' radius.....
-Hank
Not counting City Hall and South Ferry (which are loops, and therefore 180 degrees), the greatest angle on any curve must be the northbound Jughandle on the #5 as it enters Mott Avenue (149th St-Grand Concourse), I have measured this at 125 degrees. Maybe I could come up with a "ranking" system = factoring in the inverse of the radius and then adding the angle and dividing by two...round to two decimal places. Somewhere in the engineering documents this information (the radius data) must exist.
Wayne
Like I said, a Bicentennial fantrip was said to have operated to Metropolitan (but then again, the people who were on the trip don't seem 100% sure whether it went there), and the curves on the L don't seem to be as tight as City Hall, (and certainly not Crescent) even though i keep hearing thses are barriers.
A good number of years ago, (15+) a 4 car lite R44 test train did make a test run out to Metropolitan Ave. to test newly installed panogragh gates in between the cars. 75 foot cars can go on the Eastern Div. as they were tested there along with the elongated test R9's The problem is this: if 2 trains in opposing directions pass each other on the curve leaving Essex onto the WillyB, they will side-swipe each other.
Hopefully this curve will be eased during the shutdown next year. Right next to a supporting column on this curve is the foundation for a new column further out, It is located on the island that separates the bridge roadway exit from the BQE connection. It could also be for a sign of lamp post or something, but it doesn't hurt to hope.
Hopefully this curve will be eased during the shutdown next year. Right next to a supporting column on this curve is the foundation for a new column further out, It is located on the island that separates the bridge roadway exit from the BQE connection. It could also be for a sign or lamp post or something, but it doesn't hurt to hope.
R44/46, I don't believe, ever had pantograph gates on them.....at least, I've never seen it, not in a picture or in person. I do find it odd, however, that the R40S, R40M, and R42 have the gates on the number 1 end, but springs between the #2 ends...
-Hank
Now, THAT'S a tight curve! Speaking of the Eastern Division, I seem to recall that the Canarsie line regularly ran 6-car trains of BMT standards and R-42s in the late 60s, and 7-car trains of R-7/9s.
Graham/Grand curve on the "L" measures at about 72 degrees, with the balance of the right angle IN the Grand St. station. I tend to judge a curve's severity by the quickness that the cars swing around it, the faster they swing, the smaller the radius and therefore the tighter the curve. 60-foot cars (R42 and Slant R40) break very sharply here, especially on the Brooklyn-bound tracks (this is the track on the inside of the angle). I would suspect, at least from my own perspective, that any car longer than 67 feet would be hard pressed to clear this, although I don't have any evidence to the contrary. I don't know if the Jumbo R-1 was tested there.
The S curve north of Cortlandt Street is at least as tight as the one on the "L", maybe tighter. I was on the D-Type and we came to a stop going northbound before entering this curve. She negotiated the two curves at about 5 MPH, squealing, gnashing and grinding all the way.
Another interesting thing about this curve is on the southbound side: you go right then you go HARD LEFT then just at the entrance to the Cortlandt St. station, you swing right again; a similar turnout is on the IRT 2/3 line southbound as you enter Fulton St. THAT's a tight one there!
Wayne
There are also two very tight 90 degree turns on the J/Z line - east (north operationally) of Crescent Street, where the el structure curves from Fulton St. to Crescent, and where the structure turns again from Crescent onto Jamaica Ave. just south of Cypress Hills Station. 75 foot cars cannot make this turn, although 67 foot standards did it years ago.
I was just wondering if anyone knows what changes to tracks, lines, names or stations will be going on when the MTA releases their new map in '99 (or whenever the next one is).
In peticular, will any trains names be changing? Does anyone know if 8,0,and/or H,I,K,o,P,T,U,V,W,X,and Z will be used (or reused) any time soon?
Don't know for sure - I assume you meant "Y" there and not Z...likeliest candidates are "T", "V" and "W"...with V and W having signs on rolls in quite a few cars already... If we hear anything, it will be made known here for sure.
Note: probably nothing until 2001 that's when 63rd St.connection opens and Manh.Bridge switches sides
Wayne
I did mean "Y".
You were right.
Good call.
I heard that they were going back to the more efficient BMT numbering system ;)
-Hank
That may be too confusing, since IRT routes are numbered today. From what I understand, Brooklynites preferred to use the old BMT titles (Sea Beach, West End, Brighton) over the corresponding numbers (4, 3, 1) anyway. BMT maps never listed numbers, either. If anyone's interested, I've attempted to put together a list of the BMT number code and what equipment, if any, ever operated on each route which was capable of displaying that number. I apologize for any inaccuracies.
1. Brighton Triplex, R-11
2. 4th Ave. R-1, R-16
3. West End Triplex, R-11
4. Sea Beach Triplex, R-1 (ran tests in 1931)
5. Culver Triplex, R-11(?), R-16(?)
6. 5th Ave. Never displayed
7. Franklin Ave. R-11, Zephyr, Triplex (?)
8. Astoria Never displayed
9. Flushing Never diaplayed
10. Myrtle-Chambers R-16, Multisectionals, Triplex
11. Myrtle-Jay Never displayed
12. Lexington Never displayed
13. Fulton St. Green Hornet, Multisectionals
14. Broadway-Brooklyn R-10 (?), R-11(?), R-16
15. Jamaica R-10, R-11, R-16
16. 14th St.-Canarsie R-16, Multisectionals
17. 14th St.-Fulton St. Multisectionals, displayed #13
A question mark indicates that particular car may not have operated on that route. One R-11 unit was modified to m. u. with R-16s after #6494, I believe, was rearranged by a BMT standard. 30 R-10s ran on the Eastern Division from 1954 to 1958-59. The Green Hornet and Zephyr may have run on other routes as well. Some R-1s were sent to the BMT when the R-10s arrived to help ease the shortage of subway cars on that division.
Since the BMT standards made up the majority of the BMT fleet, outnumbering the Triplexes, Multisectionals, and R-16s combined, these numbers appeared sporadically. I believe the only routes ever to have service provided exclusively by equipment capable of displaying route and destination were the 14th St.-Canarsie and 14th St.-Fulton St. routes when the Multisectionals ran there.
{That may be too confusing, since IRT routes are numbered today. }
I was kidding about the change to the old BMT number system. The only thing I don't understand is why 1-2-3 are on the west, and 4-5-6 on the east...I would have put 1-3-5 on the west, and 2-4-6 on the east....West was odd, East was Even....but I'm not in charge of things....(and the peasants rejoiced!)
-Hank
If they decide to add skip-stop to the L in May when the Williamsburg Bridge closes (the tunnel fan should be fixed by then), that would be the K (that's what it was called in a 1991 proposal. There was also a plan to call it Y).
When the Manhattan Bridge does close, I have for years been telling them t eliminate the split B and D service by relettering the Brooklyn (via Bway) segments. The West End would be the T, and the Brighton local would be the W. I preferred "U", but that, as well as T is only on R-32/38 side signs, in white and with no route printedn and on digital signs. (R-44/46 side signs has T with West End destinations, and W with various Broadway routings, including Brighton, but no destinations for "U".) The original R-68 signs do not even have W, but instead have the old diamond N, which W replaced. So to make these changes, they would need new signs, or restrict the lines to certain cars.
I have seen W (albeit upside down) in the windows of #4282 and #4283
at Coney Island on Oct 18 so Slant R40s have these letters too.
Renaming the split B/D service is a GREAT IDEA. Maybe they can
tack a few feet onto the existing rolls with T for West End (AS IT ONCE WAS) and ROUND W for Brighton...
Wayne
If they do that, then like I said, I'd rather see "U" for the Brighton local. I got the idea from the skip stop service of the shutdown 10-12 years ago, since it ran with the Q. Perhaps if they restore the old local via tunnel weekdays, and via bridge all other times, the W could be for the tunnel replacing the old QT, while the U would be the QB. But if they did that, both routes would probably use the same letter, only being different between Canal and Dekalb
Got myself invited to LI Bus's Garden City depot (related to some Farbox data problems) & saw that they are celebrating their 25th year of operation. In the lobby are listed the 10 former companies that made up what is now LI Bus. They're selling a sport shirt & hat, which I didn't purchase.
Also saw a couple of Grumman Flexibles & was told that they are done to about 9 left. NJT ... what them ?
P.S. Last year Queens Surface Corp. celebrated 60 years, Rudy, yes the man himself, stopped buy & signed a special La Guardia/Giuliani bus. I thought they might take the "rap" off and mount it somewhere, but alas the bus wash has erased the souvenir.
Mr t__:^)
Yep, today I rode the new bilevel coaches. I was parking my car at Patchogue to get the 6:54 to Jamaica and Long Island City via Central Branch when much to my delight I saw a four-car consist of the new coaches pulling into the station. I was really excited ... so excited, in fact, that I locked my keys in the car :-) At any rate, the 2+2 seating on the coaches is terrific. I got a top-level window seat on the last car. The seat next to me was vacant until Islip, when an average-sized woman took it. But even then, I wasn't cramped in the least - there was room to spread out my Wall Street Journal, which certainly can't be done in regular seating. That extra space makes all the difference in the world, as far as I'm concerned.
There were only two drawbacks. The P.A. system in my car didn't seem to work; there'd just be some static whenever we approached a station. Secondly, because the bilevels require a high-level platform, they used a temporary wooden one at LIC. It was located at the western end of the yard, quite a long walk from Vernon-Jackson. Hopefully it will be replaced with a more convenient one.
Ok...I think I generally understand how air brakes work, *but*, what
doesn't make sense to me is how emergency braking is referred to as
"dumping" the air. I thought it took air pressure to push the shoes
into the wheel? Along those same lines, if it takes air pressure, how
do trains just sitting in the yard maintain brake pressure? Any
insight is much appreciated.
(I promise, I'll answer a question one day too. :)
"I thought it took air pressure to push the shoes into the wheel?"
That's what I thought too. And that's how the original air brakes on trains operated (and brakes on automobiles work, except of course that the pressure is from a fluid, not pressurized air).
However, when Westinghouse came up with his air brake in the 1860s/70s, he switched the system around. Pressure in the lines keeps the brakes from applying, and lowering pressure applies the brakes. The reason he did it this way, which is more complicated than using the pressure to apply the brakes, was that it would fail safe. Loss of pressure due to cutting of a hose or the separation of carriages would automatically apply the brakes. Also, emergency or rapid braking could be achieved by opening a larger valve than that usually used to apply the brakes, and that emergency valve would "dump" the air, rather than just letting some escape as with a normal braking.
My question is why automobiles still have it the other way around, a system rejected by railways decades ago as unsafe.
The "Westinghouse" solution is also applied to trucks and buses with air brakes. For example, on the school buses I used to drive, you could not release the emergency brake until the pressure built up to 60 lbs. Conversely, if there was a leak in the system, and the pressure fell below 60 lbs, the emergency brake would automatically apply. At first I thought that sounded dangerous (BIE while traveling on the LIE :-) but it almost NEVER happens (you can see the gauge lower and there are red "lollipops" that come down in front of the windshield with enough warning to pull over). At any rate, it's better than having no brakes!
You can only go so far in the name of safety.
For example, an engineering-minded friend once suggested that aside from drivers everyone should be riding backward on seats whose crash-resistent backs rose above their heads. In a crash, you'd just be pressed against the seat. But I get carsick if I don't look forward, and so do many other people. The view would stink too.
Actually, cars *DO* have redundant brakes. There are 2 hydrualic systems, and they a designed in such a way the if one fails, the other can still be able to stop the car. Also, ever since 1970 or, there has been a switch that senses a pressure difference between the two lines. If there is sufficient difference, say if a line bursts, an idiot light goes on (and maybe a buzzer?)
Also, don't forget that there aren't any coupling connections that can wear, and that you have the *parking* brake too.
BTW, even if you park on level surfaces, you SHOULD use your parking brake. In many cars, operating the brake causes the automatic adjuster to activate, adjusting the brakes.
And finally, you'd be amazed how effective angine braking is - as a matter of fact, you can slow down (though awfully slowly) to almost a complete stop.
So, automobiles have redundant braking systems (kinda), though not all are effective as regular brakes...
Unfortunately, I have a feeling that not enough people know that the same BRAKE idiot light that tells you that your parking brake is applied is also the warning light for a drop in hydraulic pressure.
>However, when Westinghouse came up with his air brake in the >1860s/70s, he switched the system
>around. Pressure in the lines keeps the brakes from applying, and >lowering pressure applies the
Correct in spirit. In every "air-operated tread brake system"
air pressure is used to apply the brake shoes against the wheels,
specifically, to apply the brakes, compressed air is admitted to
a "brake cylinder", pushing a piston which is connected to a rod which
is connected via a system of levers to the brake shoes. A return
spring pulls the shoes away from the wheels when there is no
pressure in the brake cylinder.
So, it is not 100% correct to say that releasing air applies the brakes.
The reversal of logic to make the system fail-safe is what George
Westinghouse invented in 1872. The train-line air pipe, called the
"brake pipe", is charged from the engineer's valve to a specific
pressure (e.g. 70 psi) Air flows from the brake pipe through
a "triple valve" under each car and into an "auxilliary reservoir"
under the car. The triple valve is arranged such that whenever the
brake pipe pressure falls below the aux res pressure, air flows from
the aux res into the brake cylinder. Similarly, when the brake
pipe pressure exceeds the aux res pressure, pressure in the
brake cylinder is exhausted and brake pipe air flows into the aux
res. To apply the brakes, exhaust air from the brake pipe.
This is a lot more fail-safe than the earlier "straight air" trainline
systems in which a ruptured hose will cause a loss of braking.
There are still failure modes. The triple valve can get stuck, or
an aux reservoir or brake cylinder or piping could rupture. This
will only affect braking on one car though. An obstruction in the
brake pipe (e.g. a piece of dirt lodged in the pipe) will cause
the loss of braking control to all cars behind the obstruction.
[Ok...I think I generally understand how air brakes work, *but*, what
doesn't make sense to me is how emergency braking is referred to as
"dumping" the air. I thought it took air pressure to push the shoes
into the wheel?]
Quite the opposite. Air pressure is needed to keep the shoes *off* the wheels. As a result, a loss of air pressure won't disable the brakes, but instead will cause them to apply (and stay applied). This is an obvious safety feature, as otherwise a loss of air pressure could be disastrous.
Emergency braking indeed dumps (discharges) the air.
Again, air brake is not that simple. Air Brake systems such as those used on the NYCT use four different 'airs'. The following is a highly simplified description of how the system works.
1) Brake Pipe is the air that charges the system.
2) Straight Air is the air which controls the system.
3) Brake Cylinder Air is the work that does the work of stopping the train.
4) Main Reservoir or Supply air is the output of the compressor which supplies 1 through 3.
With the train in emergency, Brake Pipe Pressure is at zero. Straight air is approximately 110 PSI. Brake Cylinder air is at it's maximum (which varies based onthe cylider size and brake system). The main reservoir is independent of the state of the brake system and is maintained by the compressor and governor.
When the Brake Pipe is Charged to 90-110 PSI (135 psi on R-44) the straight air becomes the controlling air. Straight air drops to around 80 PSI in the full service position. It feeds a port on the 'J' relay valve. The 'J' relay valve is also supplied by the main reservoir air. The output of the 'J' relay valve, goes to the Brake Cylinder. As straight air is reduced by the brake valve, (as long as brake pipe is charged) the brake cylinder air is reduced proportunately. For example: on an R-46, the straight air varies fron 0 - 78 PSI while the Brake Cyl, varies from 0 - 60 PSI.
The J relay, which is really a pneumatic computer (actually J1.4-14 on the R-46)takes into account other factors such as car weight in determining the actual pressure needed by the brake cylinder.
Getting back to the emergency situation: Brake pipe goes to zero. At this point, straight air goes to maximum and forces the J relay valve to apply a maximum brake cylinder pressure.
This is an extremely simplified version of how the system works which I'm sure will not please the more air brake knowledgeable readers but it should give you an pretrty god idea about the system logic.
Are the air brakes on the NYC subway electrically controlled?
Correct me if im wrong, but I thought I read someones post stating that it was both electronicly and hydrolicly (phnumic. if one were to fail then the other one was to take over and would be able to stop the train.
The brakes on NYCT are pneumatically controlled. Again, this is not as clear cut as it sounds. Because of the length of the trains (500-600 feet) it would take too long for a pure air 'signal' to go from the front to the rear of the train. This would delay application and releasing of brakes to a point where it would be unsuitable for a rapid transit system. To overcome this, the trains have several trainline circuits which speed brake response.
When the operator releases the brakes, he opens the release port on the brake valve. At the same time, a device called the Electric Self-Lapper energizes the 'R' wire trainline. This opens a 'release magnet valve' on every car. this permits the straight air to be vented more quickly and the brakes to release faster.
When the operator applies the brake he opens the application port on the brake valve. The straight air starts to rise. At the same time, the electric self-lapper energizes the 'A' wire which opens the 'Application Magnet valve' in each car, permitting the straight air to rise faster and brakes to apply more quickly. When the pneumatic self lapper senses that the requested brake level has been satisfied, it de-activates the electric self lapper and the straight air stabalizes.
When the train operator attempts to charge the train, the brake valve makes up a circuit referred to as 3 to A. This causes the 3 (back-spotting) wire to open the A magnets to cause every car to charge at the same time, speeding the cherging process.
Finally, when the train goes into emergency, brake pipe goes to zero. Each car has an emergency pressure switch, when one pressure switch senses brake pipe pressure below 90 PSI, that pressure switch sends an signal along the EMV wire. This opens the Emergency Vent valve in each car causing the entire train to go into emergency faster (for safety).
Again, this is highly simplified but do not get mis-lead. While the electric circuits speed the response, the brakes are pneumatically controlled. The air brake system on all NYCT trains (except the R-110s) will operate strictly pneumaticaly if necessary.
Of course, the LIRR and Metro-North as well as the Per-overhaul R-44 and R-46 had electrically controlled brakes commonly referred to as P-Wire. We'll save a description of a P-Wire system for Air Brake 102.
The brakes on NYCT are pneumatically controlled. Again, this is not as clear cut as it sounds. Because of the length of the trains (500-600 feet) it would take too long for a pure air 'signal' to go from the front to the rear of the train. This would delay application and releasing of brakes to a point where it would be unsuitable for a rapid transit system. To overcome this, the trains have several trainline circuits which speed brake response.
When the operator releases the brakes, he opens the release port on the brake valve. At the same time, a device called the Electric Self-Lapper energizes the 'R' wire trainline. This opens a 'release magnet valve' on every car. this permits the straight air to be vented more quickly and the brakes to release faster.
When the operator applies the brake he opens the application port on the brake valve. The straight air starts to rise. At the same time, the electric self-lapper energizes the 'A' wire which opens the 'Application Magnet valve' in each car, permitting the straight air to rise faster and brakes to apply more quickly. When the pneumatic self lapper senses that the requested brake level has been satisfied, it de-activates the electric self lapper and the straight air stabalizes.
When the train operator attempts to charge the train, the brake valve makes up a circuit referred to as 3 to A. This causes the 3 (back-spotting) wire to open the A magnets to cause every car to charge at the same time, speeding the cherging process.
Finally, when the train goes into emergency, brake pipe goes to zero. Each car has an emergency pressure switch, when one pressure switch senses brake pipe pressure below 90 PSI, that pressure switch sends a signal along the EMV wire. This opens the Emergency Vent Valve in each car causing the entire train to go into emergency faster (for safety).
Again, this is highly simplified but do not get mis-lead. While the electric circuits speed the response, the brakes are pneumatically controlled. The air brake system on all NYCT trains (except the R-110s) will operate strictly pneumaticaly if necessary.
Of course, the LIRR and Metro-North as well as the Per-overhaul R-44 and R-46 had electrically controlled brakes commonly referred to as P-Wire. We'll save a description of a P-Wire system for Air Brake 102.
Well done! I recently came across a copy of NYCTA's "Instructions for Motormen & Conductors for Operation of R-10 and up Cars". While quite extensive,the description of the SMEE system gets a bit too technical for my blood. Your plain English description makes it much more understandable. On behalf of us non engineering types,I thank you.
I am planning a trip to Mexico City
in December or January.
Would appreciate any tips I can get on how to
make the most of the limited time I will have to ride
the Mexico City Metro.
I figure I will have 2 or 3 early mornings while
my wife sleeps in; and maybe 1 or 2 afternoons
when she will go along for the ride.
Appreicate suggestions on most interesting rides,
and also to sources of material.
Tanx Much
aBk
That reminds me of something I read and heard a few months ago: there was a water stain on the floor of one of the busiest stations on the Mexico City Metro that many say looks like the Virgin Mary. (I personally didn't see the resemblance from what they showed on TV.) There were lines around the corner to see it, and the Metro passengers and employees were mad that the crowds were disrupting the normal commute. The last I heard was that the Metro management had ordered the water stain blasted away with one of those pressure cleaning hoses. Anyone else recall this, and what happened to the "image"?
There is a map of the Mexico City system in the "Transit Systems Worldwide" sections of NYC subway resources.
In several of the posts regarding possible service changes after the opening of the new 63rd St. tunnel, I have seen people commenting that they assume that the F will run local along this entire route, since the G will probably be cut back to Court Square.
I would think that for this to be true, two things would have to apply. The new extended Q service would have to run all the way to 179th, and it would have to run express in Queens, as the F now does after its initial few stations. If either of these are not the case, you are going to piss off a hell of a lot of commuters who use the F. If the Q terminates at 71st, those wishing an express ride to Manhattan will have to change trains, if they start from before 71st! That would seem like more of a service cutback to me!
Any comments would be appreciated (even to tell me I'm way off base!)
Clearly there is going to be just as much express service on the Queens line as today. The only difference will be a second local going through to Manhattan, rather than to Brooklyn on the Crosstown line.
It would be nice if they were to upgrade service by running three trains past Continental, rather than 2. In that case both the F and a new V train (or an extended Q train) would run to 179th, with one a local and one an express. It would also be nice if service was increased on the Culver -- ie. by running Fs express only to Coney Island, and V and G trains local to Church, at rush hours.
But I don't see it. With a car shortage, they will probably just run a V local from Continental to 2nd Avenue to reduce the number of additional trains.
Let me ask you a stupid question then...what line will be providing the express service from 179th if the F runs local along its entire route...and what exactly is this new V train that I've seen talked about a lot recently? What will its route be?
(V train) Beats me. All we can say for sure is that there will be an express train to 179th, and there will be new local train to Manhattan to replace the G. If the Manhattan Bridge were open, you could just run the Q (which now stops at Queensbridge) from the Brighton to either Contintental or onto 179th with the F.
As it is, the bridge will probably be closed when 63rd St opens. I hope it happens the same day, so Brooklynites will figure out where they stand. So some Subtalkers have suggested a new V train would run on the 6th Avenue local track to 2nd Ave and stop. But no one knows.
Since I have a little for time these days, I've taken to walking across Prospect Park to take the IRT. The walk is nice, and the 2/3 is a better ride than the F, which is slow and subject to frequent delays (which presumably spill over from Queens).
I do not know where this idea about the F (or E) running local all the way came from, but the 53rd St tunnel feeds directly into the express tracks. They are not going to cross the F over to the local. The 63rd st.line wyes into both tracks, so it will provide the local riders with direct service to 6th Av. The plans I've seen involving Manhattan Bridge services assume the Q or V will be going to 179th. But you may still have the problem you had when the R running to 179th. The local riders past 71st are too used to their train turning into an express. You would need 3 expresses to satisfy everyone, (and if they did that, they should be able to keep the G running local to 71st. But then that wouldn't do anything for the closer in local riders)
The V was conceived as an extra 6th Av local to run through 63rd St tunnel. It's on all the signs. But if the Manhattan Bridge is still in this configuration, or fully open (or the connection from the F to Dekalb is open) it may be replaced with the Q
The question is, if you have this brand spanking new tunnel, why not use it to its fullest? Ie. why not run the F express and the V or Q local through 63rd St, skipping Queens Plaza, and down the local track? There would no longer be a need to switch at 53rd and 6th, since every train on 53rd would go to the 8th Avenue Line.
Moreover, right now you run 18 Fs from Queens but only 14 from Brooklyn -- you need extra Fs to run empty down the Culver. Instead, you could run 18 Es and just 12 Fs, and then run some of the Vs to Brooklyn if needed. The Es could turn around and get back to Queens faster.
As I mentioned, with two local services going to Manhattan, I suggest having the express train skip 74 and Roosevelt at rush hour. That would be one long express run.
In that case, what would you do about the Manhattan-bound riders who get on West of Roosevelt Av. and need to go down 6th Ave?
(Getting on West of Roosevelt). There would be two trains going through the 63rd St tunnel and down the 6th Ave local -- one a Queens local and one a Queens express.
Would either train stop at Van Wyck Blvd? In 88 when they opened the Archer Avenue Line, we got stuck with R service only which was a disaster.
That still doesn't help riders for the 6th Ave. line getting on at Queens Plaza, unless I'm missing something...
(6th Avenue riders getting on at Queens Plaza). Does anyone get on at Queens Plaza? There is nothing there. I think QP is where people shift from the local to the express to get to 6th Ave. With a local and an express going onto 6th, that won't be needed.
Of course, G train riders stopping at Court would have to switch to the E and then turn around at 7th Ave. As I've said, the MTA should have hooked the G up to the 53rd St tunnel and the tracks to Jay St, and run it as a loop when 63rd St opened. It would mean alot for neighborhoods along the G.
(Does anyone get on at Queens Plaza?)
Good question...I've never gotten off there!
I have used the Queens Plaza station. It is home to one of the largest parking garages outside of Manhattan! I don't recall the price, but it sure beats the up-to-$36/day that one can pay in Manhattan. In addition to being convenient to E/F/R/7 service, from the roof you can get great shots of the #7 el.
My most recent time there was over the summer. It was rather busy. One of the major users may be cab drivers going to/from work. There are a lot of taxi company depots in the area; there are also many factories which likely boost ridership. I also believe there are a number of apartment building complexes just to the north of Queens Plaza, which also dominate the 21st Street/Queensbridge station area. I would tend to believe this is a rather busy entrance/exit stop for the above reasons.
Todd
Do you recall the approximate price for this garage by Queens Plaza? ($10 or $20)? And how easily accessible it was? Was it self-service parking too?
Thanks
JB,
I never actually parked there (I almost always fly to NYC when I come there to work). However I went to investigate... and as I recall it may have been in the $8/day range, but I can't be sure. It is self-park. I do know it was quite convenient, and someone else here on SubTalk made the original remark about the good photo-ops.
Email me privately and I'll fill you in on what I know.
The Muni Log with an elevator from parking level to stairs leading to Queens Plaza Station for parking enter before 9am up to 10 hours is $5.75 or might be as low as $4.75, I don't remember all I remember is gettting back a quarter all the time.
There is a special disccount for parking on the top level (it's outside) for monthly parking as well. Even with the $3.00 for the subway (or you can walk over the Queensboro) its a great deal over driving and parking in the city. Add a monthly parking and discounted metrocards it is even sweeter.
After 10 hours it goes up a bit, max for 24hrs I think at 10 bucks or so. Late hours will get you an escort to your car via golf cart. DOT parks alot of OFFICIAL Plated cars and trucks in the lot. This and the monthly passes take up the first two levels.
Why park all the way in Queens for $5.75. You can park in Midtown for the very same price ... of course, that's for ten minutes :-)
The Queens Office of the City Planning Dept. is in a small office building on Queens Plaza, which is basically a highway interchange with an elevated railroad going over it and a subway under it. I've gotten off there, and didn't see any one else on the stairs. And I've never seen anyone on the street. I once suggested it as a good place for a cut-price hotel, with a short subway ride to Manahttan, but the traffic makes is so unpleasent nothing will go there.
I work at Queens Plaza North okay. My nomral commute M-F is D/Q to F train to QP thank you very much.
BTW, next time your pix is taken going through a NYC red light, just remember right above Queens Plaza station and right acrross from the south end of Queensboro Plaza 10 NYC Police Traffic Enforcement Agents go through thousands of pictures of cars passing red lights.
Not that I work for that agency (NYPD or DOT).
A QPer, eh? Say hello to my buddies in the Queens Office at City Planning, if you ever see them.
Will do, I work in a building the houses NYCBOE, NYPD and NYCDOT and was the orgnial PanAm building before they built the little olde thing with a heli-pad
Which Stations are handicapped accesible on septa's broad street and
Market Frankford lines?
Broad St - C B Moore (nee Columbia), Olney and Fern Rock. Your ride won't be a long one.
Market-Frankford - 69th (although the elevator's been in and out of service), 2nd and Girard.
Proposed and coming:
Broad - Pattison, Walnut-Locust, Girard, Erie.
Market-Frankford - all of the Market St el stops when it is rebuilt,
30th, 15th, Allegheny, Erie-Torresdale, Frankford Terminal.
PATCO - 15th-16th and 8th-Market.
For PATCO add:
Westmont and Lindenwold
I wasn't counting the non-Phila PATCO stops. Broadway (sorry, Walter Rand Transportation Center) has elevators now. I thought Woodcrest also had them, but I could be off on this one.
Although I see the reason for the new service, I am still a be advocate for the reduction in G service. I live in Greenpoint, Brooklyn and find it acinine thaat you have to take three trains to get to the Queens Center Mall or beyond locally. The MTA shoudl find a way to increase ridership on the G line and find ways although it will probably be expensive is to bring the G line into Manhattan. By doing so it will increase ridershio as well as possible alleviating crowding on the E and F and some of the A and C line at Hoyt street. What do you all think?