Priincenene Posted January 29, 2015 Share #1 Posted January 29, 2015 (Please edit and paste this picture, any admin or mod, thnx) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/MTA_Metro_North_6710_on_New_Jersey_Transit_train_1728.jpg MINOR METRO-NORTH TRAIN DERAILMENT AT GRAND CENTRAL A minor train derailment occurred at Grand Central Terminal Wednesday afternoon (edit: night), but it caused a big disruption. Under the majestic roof of Grand Central, crowds of Metro-North passengers stood shoulder to shoulder, from wall to wall and waited. "It's going to take me probably over two hours to get home," one commuter said. It was a frustrating commute that started when the 5:19 to Wassaic somehow derailed, as it was pulling away from the platform. No one was hurt and passengers were able to get right off, but it couldn't have happened in a more inconvenient spot. "We had to do some fancy footwork in terms of reassigning tracks and combining trains," said Marjorie Anders, of the MTA. The train marooned right in the path of nine other tracks, all of them usually used for the New Haven Line. And with those platforms useless, the railroad was forced to delay departures and change track assignments, sending the hordes on a mad dash when trains were finally called. "We're going to be working overnight to get train out of the way, fix the track, and of course investigate the cause," Anders said. It has been an awful year for Metro-North, now under federal oversight after a series of incidents, most notably the fatal 2013 derailment in the Spuyten Duyvil section of the Bronx. As for Wednesday's incident, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) issued the following statement: "Much more than a minor inconvenience, this disturbing multiple car derailment delays and disrupts travel for countless riders. The derailment, fairly or not, recalls past incidents - renewing concerns about safety and reliability. I will be raising detailed questions about the derailment with Metro-North. I appreciate that the FRA has begun an investigation and has alerted me to the incident." People like Carolyn Pianin who thought she could rely on the railroad when she moved to the suburbs are clearly frustrated. "Somebody should sue them, they are ruining the property values in Connecticut," Pianin said. Source: http://7online.com/traffic/minor-metro-north-train-derailment-at-grand-central/495161/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted January 29, 2015 Share #2 Posted January 29, 2015 "Ruining the property values in Connecticut"....evidence, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 29, 2015 Share #3 Posted January 29, 2015 "Ruining the property values in Connecticut"....evidence, anyone? Transportation is very much tied into property values, and an unreliable railroad sh*ts all over property values up there. If it hasn't it will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted January 29, 2015 Share #4 Posted January 29, 2015 "Ruining the property values in Connecticut"....evidence, anyone? that's hilarious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaTransitMan4608 Posted January 29, 2015 Share #5 Posted January 29, 2015 Somebody should sue them, they are ruining the property values in Connecticut." Yeah because I'm gonna give living in the burbs up because the RR craps out every once in a while ????. Calm down lady it's not that big of a deal. I think out of all the MN lines, the New Haven seems to be the most reliable IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Sith Posted January 29, 2015 Share #6 Posted January 29, 2015 The railroad was there before her though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 29, 2015 Share #7 Posted January 29, 2015 Somebody should sue them, they are ruining the property values in Connecticut." Yeah because I'm gonna give living in the burbs up because the RR craps out every once in a while . Calm down lady it's not that big of a deal. I think out of all the MN lines, the New Haven seems to be the most reliable IMO. Craps out? There have been several derailments of late and other fiascos affecting Connecticut residents, who depend heavily on Metro-North. Given how much money the service costs taxpayers and commuters, they have every right to be pissed and to expect better service and receive answers to these problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted January 29, 2015 Share #8 Posted January 29, 2015 Craps out? There have been several derailments of late and other fiascos affecting Connecticut residents, who depend heavily on Metro-North. Given how much money the service costs taxpayers and commuters, they have every right to be pissed and to expect better service and receive answers to these problems. In all fairness, MN has been having a lot of issues lately, glaring at that, which is a shame when you consider how the company started to the powerhouse commuter railroad it has become. Now back to the current issue, this looks to me something track related that went yet again unnoticed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaTransitMan4608 Posted January 29, 2015 Share #9 Posted January 29, 2015 Craps out? There have been several derailments of late and other fiascos affecting Connecticut residents, who depend heavily on Metro-North. Given how much money the service costs taxpayers and commuters, they have every right to be pissed and to expect better service and receive answers to these problems.The same can be said for NJ Transit except train commuters sit outside the Hudson tunnels for almost up to 45 minutes most mornings. Not only that those same tunnels are gonna be closing soon and Amtrak who owns the NEC doesn't seem to be making much progress on Gateway, our state pols don't care and NJT is too cash strapped to do anything. I understand why she's pissed, but when I hear someone say "I'm moving because NJT/Metro North is always delayed," it just sounds ridiculous and overdramatic to me. If the TA taking me to work is constantly delayed I'm not gonna change up my entire lifestyle and move my family to a whole new place. I'm gonna try to stay one step ahead of the delays. By leaving earlier, or finding alternatives. The railroad was there before her though!LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 29, 2015 Share #10 Posted January 29, 2015 The same can be said for NJ Transit except train commuters sit outside the Hudson tunnels for almost up to 45 minutes most mornings. Not only that those same tunnels are gonna be closing soon and Amtrak who owns the NEC doesn't seem to be making much progress on Gateway, our state pols don't care and NJT is too cash strapped to do anything. I understand why she's pissed, but when I hear someone say "I'm moving because NJT/Metro North is always delayed," it just sounds ridiculous and overdramatic to me. If the TA taking me to work is constantly delayed I'm not gonna change up my entire lifestyle and move my family to a whole new place. I'm gonna try to stay one step ahead of the delays. By leaving earlier, or finding alternatives. You are a teenager who doesn't have a family to raise, and doesn't know what it's like to have your job depend on your transportation. I had a colleague who was going through health problems in part because of the amount of stress he had commuting from NJ to NY. He has since found a job in NJ which affords him a MUCH better quality of life. The delays and constant problems with NJ Transit meant less time with his family (he has two young children and a wife at home), longer commutes, and just a poorer quality of life. It's easier to say leave earlier, but that means getting up earlier, having less time to sleep, or less time with family (i.e. wife and kids) or something else, and so the question is then what is being sacrificed by having a longer and longer commute and if it's worth it? Some people commute 2 - 3 hours each way, 4 - 6 hours a day, and when you add that up for a week, that's a part-time job in and of itself which most certainly tires you out as time goes on, so when I hear someone talking about it being over dramatic, it most certainly is not. Even if you currently work, you are not working for a living just yet, and when you do and you have to deal with commuting, plus the everyday stresses of your job, etc., etc., then you'll understand this woman's gripe. I used to do the same thing on Staten Island when I started working.... I would leave earlier and earlier due to more and more delays with the local buses and the ferry, sometimes incurring a 2 1/2 hour commute one way. Eventually I realized that I valued my free time and didn't want to keep spending more and more time traveling and invested in riding the express bus and paying more for my transportation. The commute time for that continued to increase as well though, and eventually I had to evaluate my quality of life and decided to move for a shorter commute. Some people have been fired because they have constant issues with getting to work on time due to poor transportation, and some employers will not even consider some candidates that live on Long Island or Connecticut or New Jersey because of the transportation issues involved. Neighborhoods that are considered to have transportation issues can certainly be affected with lower property values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lirr42 Posted February 2, 2015 Share #11 Posted February 2, 2015 I think out of all the MN lines, the New Haven seems to be the most reliable IMO. We don't need opinions when we have facts. In terms of service reliability, the New Haven Line has the lowest On Time Performance of the three East of Hudson Lines (90.6% in 2014). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted February 3, 2015 Share #12 Posted February 3, 2015 90% OTP is still fairly good, relatively speaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lirr42 Posted February 3, 2015 Share #13 Posted February 3, 2015 90% OTP is still fairly good, relatively speaking. Relative to what? 0? It's not fairly good relative to past performance or performance of other carriers in the region or in the country. It's also not very good at all compared to carriers in other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.