Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Gong Gahou

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

142 Excellent

About Gong Gahou

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,076 profile views
  1. The barriers in discussion are not supposed to prevent people crossing between cars from falling into the tracks; the six-chain barriers in-between cars serve that purpose. The role of the three-spring barriers/pantograph gates is to prevent straphangers on the platform from falling into the tracks. And if you are directing your response to the chain barriers: They are certainly not pointless. Even though the storm doors are locked, employees do cross between cars and passengers do cross during evacuations. As long as there will be people crossing between cars, some form of barrier will be necessary.
  2. I explained this in the first paragraph of my previous post. It is the same procedure that was given to you by another member before, with a bit more info added to lead you into the right direction and not make the same mistake again. Below is the link of the webpage containing the image you want to embed: https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?108110 From there, follow what I wrote and you will get the direct link. If done correctly, the link on the address bar will appear exactly as shown in my previous post.
  3. Since you are still copying the web page link instead of the image link, you need some clarification on this procedure. After you open the image in a new tab, you need to click on that newly-opened tab if the browser was not configured to immediately switch to it, and copy the link shown on that address bar. That will be the direct link to the image. A direct image link always ends with a file extension. It does not contain the same address information as the webpage with the embedded image; this is why adding the file extension to the end of a web page link does not work. Entering this link into your browser will display only the image and nothing else, except for a single-color background if necessary. The direct link for the image you are trying to embed is below: https://s3.amazonaws.com/nycsubway.org/images/i108000/img_108110.jpg
  4. Results are in: the plan is moving forward. I stumbled upon this from picking up AM New York's newspaper this morning.
  5. The service change is a bit inaccurate - it should have said "Uptown trains are running on the local track between Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall to 125th Street." I thought the planned service change for downtown trains was cancelled, but a brief visit to a local station revealed that it still remains in effect.
  6. It is listed on the Planned Service Changes, though.
  7. As per this update, the closed platforms on the line are set to reopen on July 1st (rehab notice previously displayed on that day has disappeared),
  8. I wouldn't put any stock into that. That footnote reminder is useless information for that service change, since the will run on the in both directions. It is likely there due to human error; the person in charge might have copied the information off of somewhere and—unaware of where it will go—forgot to omit that part. Also, consider that: The main information (aka the title) for the July 5-8 service change is a rerouting, while the station rehabilitation service change explicitly states station closures. The former is also short in duration and intermittent, while the latter is around the clock and thus must be listed every single day. The disappearance of the latter for practically the entire month is a very strong indicator of a reopening date, compared to a 3-day listing of the former with a useless reminder that supposedly might prove otherwise. While the reasoning for the former service change is labeled "station rehabilitation," this does not mean that the stations will remain closed; it is not unusual for the MTA to reopen stations to the public even when construction work is not fully completed.
  9. Not exactly a planned service change, but more like an end to one: barring any last-minute changes/delays, Coney Island-bound trains should resume normal local service from 8th Avenue to Bay Parkway about a week from now, since the rehabilitation notice has not been listed for July 2nd (Tuesday) and onward. I had noticed its disappearance since the weekend of June 7-10 (last time trains ran express on Sea Beach line), so I think it is pretty safe to say that the stations would reopen on that date.
  10. The hyperlink in the quoted post is omitting the "l" in "html" for some reason. Just manually copy the entire link or add the missing letter, and it will lead you there.
  11. The MTA has never considered the entire complex to be ADA-accessible. They clearly note this exception in the list of accessible stations on their website , signage on the passageway itself already states such, and they are working on making the shuttle accessible. If you are referring to the subway map, take note that the IND station is listed separately from the IRT and BMT stations; it is technically correct that both stations have the accessibility symbol next to it as it only applies to the stations with said names and the lines that serve it. While it is understandable that such labeling might lead straphangers to believe that the passageway is accessible, the fact is that the wheelchair symbol may not necessarily apply to transfer corridors between certain lines. This is a limitation that arises with the current labeling and also by the lack of real estate on the map to list such nuances; Midtown is cluttered as is, and you can't really cram "Passageway not accessible" into the map while making it big enough to be legible. It can still be accessible, and it does not require the space of a switchback ramp. Instead, a portion of the wide passageway can be set aside for ADA-compliance by constructing a series of ramps and landings along the entire corridor (see the Utica Avenue station for an actual example). While ADA does limit ramp slope and length, it does not limit the number of ramps one can use; this is despite It noting that multiple runs with landings can make the overall ramp difficult for the disabled.
  12. No, it did not. South of 42nd Street, the first subway ran under various roads, with Park Avenue making up almost half of its route; not once did it touch Lexington Avenue, which was a block away.
  13. @Engineer Sorry for the late reply. I knew I missed something in my last post - your assumption is correct, HPS lamps will not work under household current - they simply will not light up. I am no electrician so I can't tell you what to do, and it can be risky if you don't know what you're doing. I might revisit this when I learn about basic electricity concepts and do some more research, but until then I'd stick with household lighting - its definitely much less hassle to deal with.
  14. It looks like all the existing tunnels are built to IND specifications, with the exception of the middle trackway. The width of the maintenance platforms, the addition of the narrow stairways leading up to the ceiling, and the slight shift in the columns as they approach the maintenance area - they all indicate that the transverse distance between columns is greater than the typical width of 13.5 feet, which also means the island platform will end up being wider than 16.7 feet. In addition, the island platform can gain an extra 2 feet of space if the bench walls along the northbound and southbound trackways are removed (any remaining space must be reserved for wayside signals and other equipment). If the MTA chooses to do so, they can - but not in the way you two described. The modifications, in general, can be boiled down to 1) removing all existing lightweight columns spaced 5 feet apart and 2) using heavier columns spaced 15 feet apart to hold up spans of heavy longitudinal beams that will support all the transverse roof beams and transfer all the roof's load to the new columns. There is no need to worry about the feasibility of this procedure as it has been done many times before; the numerous platform extensions that were carried out on the IRT and BMT stations to accommodate longer trains, and even Bleecker Street's new uptown platform (for a more recent example) all use the exact same column and beam design. Add Times Square to the list as well; official drawings show that its columns will be modified in the same manner as part of its upcoming reconstruction. It is very likely that there will be two rows of columns due to how the tunnel was originally designed. Its design also limits how close the column rows can be placed near each other; by comparison, constructing the station so that there is only one line of columns running down the center of the island platform will most likely require replacement of all transverse beams with heavier sections since the original beams may not be strong enough to hold up the ground above. It will be interesting to see how the engineers will handle the tunnel's roof design. It is hard to see in the tunnel's current state, but this blog has a photo taken during construction (courtesy of NYTM) showing that the roof beams over the maintenance track are situated above the beams over the northbound and southbound trackways. This could change the way they will modify the structure; most stations with platform extensions have transverse roof beams whose flanges are aligned from one end of the beam to the other. In addition to the plain steel columns, I hope 116th Street takes on a look that is like a nod to the design of older IND stations. I share sentiments with someone who asked the MTA during a public Q&A session for Phase 2 to make their new stations look more like the old, as the Second Avenue Subway stations have nothing in common with the rest of the system. Of course, the IND does not exist anymore, so I would understand if the MTA prefers to move on from the past and go with the new design they've been using thus far. Depends on where it is located. If it is not within or near the mezzanine locations, then it is possible the openings may be sealed up if the room is not repurposed in some way. Just saying stairways by itself will require column shifting is not entirely accurate; there are other factors to consider before deciding where columns should be located, such as the overall width of the platform and the clearance between the stairway and the platform edge. I can't make any sense out of the second part of your question, but on the topic of underpasses I'll mention that they might not be necessary since there is enough room for a mezzanine; the station is about 40 feet below street level, according to the FEIS (Chapter 2, pg. 16 of pdf). Another photo taken during construction (courtesy of NYTM) shows the constructed tunnel behind the light rays and the empty space between it and the scaffolding at street level. I wonder if they could cut costs even more by constructing the mezzanines over the existing tunnel instead of demolishing what was already built. Since they are only planning to excavate certain portions to create entrances, it gives them a perfect opportunity to build onto the existing structure. The passageway connecting the north and south mezzanines at 14th Street-Union Square on the Broadway Line is one example where such construction was done. It was definitely constructed after the station's opening; besides the columns not being riveted, its higher floor level and the ramps at both ends of the passageway are due to the fact that the original transverse roof beams remain and are deeper than the beams used to support the mezzanines.
  15. From what I can see, the flooring is all concrete, which is a bit strange; while this is not the only station rehab where the MTA decided not to tile the floor, I was expecting tiles since the northern portion of the mezzanine already has them. In addition, many of the light fixtures that were there prior to closure remain in use, many stairways retained their original railings (with minor modifications), and the retiling work maintained the recessed spaces that were used for advertisements back then; I would have expected all of that to be removed/replaced. Overall, I like what I am seeing; it is like a return to the past. Hopefully the shortcomings from this rehab is not an indication that the reopening is intended to be temporary. Not surprisingly, they decided to keep the remaining portion of the mezzanine and the stairways to Grand Street shuttered. Understandable, but saying that they will "probably never" reopen is so exaggerated that it is pretty ridiculous. They serve the station's namesake street and have a bus line that runs on those streets. All the cosmetic work done in the station houses would be a waste of money if they were to remain closed for the foreseeable future. Unless there was prior notice to the public beforehand and unless this is what people want, expect them to reopen. Something about Sea Beach rehab that is more related to this discussion at hand: after being closed for 30 years, 8th Avenue's second entrance at 7th Avenue has reopened since last month.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.