Gong Gahou

6 hours ago, Lex said:

That's honestly pointless, as the doors are locked on those to keep people out of harm's way (look toward the next car while going around a bend).

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.

1 hour ago, R10 2952 said:

...how were you able to locate the direct link?

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.

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

Results are in: the plan is moving forward. I stumbled upon this from picking up AM New York's newspaper this morning.

Quote

MTA board approves reorganization plan that could cost up to 2,700 jobs

Updated July 24, 2019 7:08 PM

 

The MTA's board on Wednesday approved a controversial and quickly prepared reorganization plan that could cut up to 2,700 jobs by consolidating back-office groups.

The “transformation plan,” as it's called, could save the authority up to $530 million annually over the next three years as it remains in the throes of a financial crisis. But it has also drawn an outpouring of opposition from experts and advocates who believe it could obscure accountability, level worker morale and undermine successful programs at the MTA — all while not doing much to actually curb bureaucracy.

“Much of this plan is rearranging for the sake of rearrangement, consolidating for the sake of consolidation,” said Ben Fried, spokesman for TransitCenter, one of several groups that had implored the board to vote it down.

“The haste to enact the reorganization plan actually risks delaying the critical work of modernizing the transit system that is now underway — including efforts to make the subway and bus service more reliable and to create a subway system that is accessible to all New Yorkers,” Fried continued.

The plan for the 70,000-person state authority was crafted in 12 weeks. It was passed in the state budget, as required by law, but without much public input — another point of contention. Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the State Legislature attached it to a host of new funding mechanisms for capital projects at the MTA, including congestion pricing.

MTA officials on Wednesday described the reorganization as critical to keeping afloat its operating budget — a ledger for day-to-day needs that faces large budget gaps. After a round of fare hikes, a hiring freeze and other cuts, the MTA managed to push back a billion-dollar budget gap that was anticipated for 2022 — but only by one year.

The reorganization plan would cut that deficit in about half, to $433 million by 2023. MTA CFO Robert Foran said there were few other options.

"It is increasingly difficult for us to find additional savings the way we are structured now,” Foran told the board. 

Yet the board and the public have been afforded few details of the plan as it came up for a vote.

City Council Speaker Corey Johnson announced on Twitter Wednesday evening that the Council will hold an oversight hearing on the plan, saying that “massive changes” shouldn’t be made so quickly.

“This was rushed and is being pushed through the board without any real public review,” he tweeted.

Several board members also voiced concern over the lack of clarity as to how it would be carried out and what exactly would be impacted.

“For me this plan — a parallel example would be: I decide to remodel my home; I hire a contractor; I sign off on the design but I have not reviewed the specs nor the details of the work,” board member Veronica Vanterpool said. “And I feel like this is what we’re moving forward with today.”

The MTA had set up an online portal to receive public feedback and has logged just 18 comments so far, according to Vanterpool, the lone board member to vote against the plan. That amounts to about .0002% of the MTA’s daily ridership, she pointed out.

The MTA hired the firm Alix Partners to the tune of $4.1 million to craft the plan. Ultimately, it would consolidate 40 groups spread across various MTA agencies into six departments. It would also create three new executives — a chief operating officer, a chief transformation officer and an accessibility officer — to help implement the changes at the authority, which has an $18 billion budget.

“I think the blueprint they’ve created will help achieve three goals: one is improving customer service; secondly, making this a more effective and cost-effective organization; and, three, a significant reduction in operating costs,” said MTA chairman and CEO Pat Foye.

MTA officials said the plan would largely be implemented over the next six to nine months and take two years to complete. 

Much of the concern about the reorganization focused on the proposal to pull engineering staffs from each operating department and have them report to a new engineering chief, instead of their individual agency bosses. 

Some advocates and board members also worried that the move could undermine NYC Transit president Andy Byford, who is pushing forward with his own plans that have begun to stabilize subway service. Byford’s Save Safe Seconds plan, which has brought higher speed limits across the subways, is largely credited for the system’s improvement in reliability over recent months. 

It was not explicitly clear Wednesday if Byford would still have full control over Save Safe Seconds or his Fast Forward plan to modernize transit service.

Foster Finley, a managing director at AlixPartners, said such work would likely stay within Byford’s purview, but he wasn’t definitive.

“Anything that’s already underway or anything that is very unique and specific to an agency will probably stay there,” Finley said. He said he had spoken about re-signaling with Byford and that the details were "pretty unique and specific and shouldn’t be something that’s thrown into a common pool.”

Many other board members were uneasy with the lack of details but reasoned that the plan is a road map — a living document that could be changed over time. The plan will now go through a 90-day review process. 

“I see this as a blueprint, certainly not a plan,” said board member Susan Metzger. “I think it’s contingent on us to develop the plan….We’ve got 90 days to flesh this out and make it real; make it functional; make it work.”

 

Keys of the MTA Transformation Plan

—Cut between 1,900 to 2,700 jobs, largely from white-collar workforce;

—Merge 40 back-office groups into six departments;

—Centralize support groups so operating agencies—like Transit, LIRR—focus on safety, maintenance and delivery of reliable service;

—Create three new executives: chief operating officer, chief transformation officer and accessibility officer. The transformation officer will oversee the reorganization and report to the MTA board;

—Create a new central Customer Communication function to better communicate service delays and changes.

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.

It is listed on the Planned Service Changes, though.

Quote

SERVICE RESTORED
Effective 5 AM Monday, Jul 1
Coney Island-bound service restored at Fort Hamilton Pkwy, New Utrecht Av, 18 Av and 20 Av in Brooklyn
trains stop at Fort Hamilton Pkwy, New Utrecht Av, 18 Av and 20 Av in both directions.

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),

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.

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.

20 hours ago, <6>PelhamExp said:

I tried the link but its not working 😞 

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.

On 6/3/2019 at 8:14 PM, R68OnBroadway said:

Seems ridiculous for the complex to be considered ADA accessible...

20 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

...but it still seems odd to me to call the complex fully ADA when a major connection isn’t.

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.

16 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

The ADA not only limits slope, it limits length, because you don't want a wheelchair picking up speed and crashing into the wall.

Short of some crazy switchbacking that takes up a lot of room (like the 8th Av platforms) there is no way in hell it'll ever be accessible.

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.

@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.

@Engineer Thanks, that picture confirms what you said as well as my description of what I assumed you were talking about. In hindsight, I should have worded my response better - I feel a bit silly asking you to confirm something you can clearly see with the globe right in front of you, so I apologize if you might have taken any offense from that.

Regarding the lighting, if you plan to use it in your room, your typical residential light bulb is probably sufficient. Just make sure it fits through the hole and that the bulb is omnidirectional. But if you're interested in the bulb that NYCT used, I can tell you that they are using either a high pressure sodium (HPS) or metal halide (MH) lamp; the drawing shows an outline that indicates they use that kind of lamp, and the LED bulb they use has specified that it is meant for replacement of those aforementioned lamps. MH lamps can go as low as 3000K (which is a warm white color that is a bit whiter than the capsule CFLs used to light up the subway tunnels), and HPS lamps are really warm to the point where they look orange-ish (street lamps used the same thing before NYCDOT changed to LED). The diameter of that divider is going to be the determining factor in what bulb you can use; a quick look online  gave me a 2.125 inch diameter for HPS lamps and 2.5 for CFLs, so see what works for you.

On 2/19/2019 at 7:18 PM, EmmyABCDEFGJLMNQRSWZ said:

Hi guys! My name is Emmy and I just moved here from just outside of Cleveland, OH. I love our 1.5 subway lines (lightrail counts for half) but since moving to New York, I’ve realized how great a transit system can be! It may seem to a lot of people like the public transit is bad, but I can get anywhere it the city for only $2.75!

Everyone keeps talking about the L train shutdown and how terrible it is, but I don’t understand why it’s so bad. In Cleveland we only had one real subway! If I wanted to use it I had to drive there! I’m sure there is something I’m missing, but busses seem pretty awesome too and I’m really confused.

Thank you so much,

Emmy

Hello, and welcome to the forums!

For one, Cleveland's Red Line doesn't have the same ridership and capacity compared to NYC's L line. The Red Line has a daily ridership of ~27k riders according to Wikipedia; the L line serves more than eleven times the amount (300k riders). Passenger capacity on both lines are also different in two ways: 1) trains on the former line doesn't run as frequently (varies from 7-15 mins) as trains on the latter line (generally 4-6 mins from day to evening), and 2) the former looks to be composed of two cars per train, while the latter has eight cars per train.

There are also a lot of vehicles on the road during rush hours. I can't say what happens on a daily basis with the Williamsburg Bridge (closest bridge to the L line), but from my past and current experiences with my parents driving in South Brooklyn (Interstate 278), over the Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges, and Eastern Manhattan (FDR Drive) I can say there is a lot of car traffic during those hours and travel times can be slow. As they are one of a handful of bridges with no tolls (Williamsburg Bridge is one of them), many drivers will opt to use them over the other East River crossings.

With L service severely reduced to 20-minute headways on just one track, there is not enough capacity to carry most of the riders between the boroughs; passengers will need to look for alternative modes of transportation, whether it be cars/car service, other subway lines, or buses. Other subway lines may not be able to absorb the extra passengers since they already have to deal with straphangers in the areas they serve. Car service will increase the impact of congestion even more, as I alluded to in the previous paragraph. Local buses have a schedule but often don't follow it, with one primary reason being road traffic; service will be even more unreliable due to such congestion. Shuttle buses will help out somewhat by taking extra cars off the road, but with no dedicated bus lanes travel times will vary. A bus also carries less people than a train; more buses will be used to compensate, creating strain on the existing bus system as the reserve fleet will be used for the L shutdown instead of backup for the local bus routes.

I might have some slightly inaccurate info, and I might be leaving out some information, but this is just a general idea of the magnitude of the problem without going into such specific detail.

@Engineer Can you verify that what you wrote is correct and that the metal divider "internally divides" both halves? Your description seems to indicate that the divider is a flat disc, with what I presume to be a small hole in the center where the lamp can fit through and light up the top half of the globe. Although this is an earlier design, I still find this strange - I always thought a metal ring separated the two halves and that internally there is only empty space; an official drawing for the current design also confirms this.

On 1/31/2019 at 11:34 PM, Lawrence St said:

I never knew trucks used to hit the el structure at Astoria Blvd. Wouldn't that cause  the structure to damage like it did on Penn Station ? (not 34-Penn)

On 2/1/2019 at 6:58 AM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Neither did I to be honest. This is the first time I’m hearing about it.

You don't hear about it because it wasn't too disruptive or news-worthy; the damage was minimal and did not affect the integrity of the structure. No money was spent on replacing the damaged parts, which means evidence of damage can be seen on the mezzanine and overpass beams/girders.

Clearance for Astoria Blvd under the mezzanine is 12.5 feet for the most part while Pennsylvania Av is 12 feet 10 inches; the structural damage would be more severe had the same truck that damaged the latter station's mezzanine passed under the former station.

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

Is it just me or are the new replacement signs matte? I notice they don't have that same sheen as the older ones.

Those replacement signs are really thin sheets of metal that are generally bolted onto existing signage—although they can replace the enamel sign should the agency choose to do so. For this sign, the text is carefully cut and pasted onto the sign, and then the entire text and background is laminated with some translucent white sticky layer; it is after the lamination process that the black background—which is actually glossy and smooth—takes on a matte-like finish. The MTA uploaded a video showing and briefly describing the construction of this type of sign at the Bergen Street Sign Shop.

2 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Almost all of the replacements are metal with a gloss protection instead of porcelain enamel, which carried that sheen. It looks worse and won't last for even remotely as long, but that's the MTA for you--take down what's not broken and then replace it with something lower quality!

They are less durable, but that is the point. Such signs are used because they are more economical; it costs less to reuse old enamel signs as a foundation for the sheet metal signs, as opposed to replacing the old sign entirely with new enamel signs. They are used as temporary signage during construction work, or really on any sign whose text is prone to multiple changes over the course of the expected lifespan of one enamel sign (i.e. train information signs on platforms). They can also serve as an interim until the agency gets around to ordering new enamel signs (whenever that may be); this should be what you are seeing with the changes to the station name signs.

From the full car mock-up and renderings, no accordion-like object is shown; it can be assumed that the plan is to have open gangways for every 5-car set. It is unlikely the entire 10-car consist would be interconnected because there would be resistance to this idea; to do that would mean either 1) very cramped cabs for conductors, or 2) the conductor position in the middle of the car is eliminated.

Keep in mind that open gangway and articulated have different meanings; one does not equal the other. The Toronto Rocket is not an articulated train, but it has open gangways.

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

Here's an update on the renovations at Chambers Street (photos from Facebook and not mine)

If they plan to retile the columns, I really hope they actually use curved corner tiles just like what they did with Hunters Point Avenue. But I won't be surprised if that does not happen; aside from that station, every single retiling attempt has removed the rounded corners that have been a staple in the Dual System and IND stations.

I see you are very confused. Here's a simple breakdown of the math:

• 1 train = 8 cars (in this scenario)
• One-half of a train = 0.5 train = 4 cars
• 76 cars divided by 8 cars per train will give you 9.5 trains, or nine 8-car trains and one 4-car train

Open gangway does not equal articulated, and vice versa. Their meanings are separate from each other. The Toronto Rocket is an example of a non-articulated train with open gangways, and—while not an ideal example—some freight cars are articulated but have no open gangways.

On 7/22/2018 at 10:46 AM, Cabanamaner said:

Curious, did Broadway Junction ( platforms) ever have a full length mezzanine? I see some evidence of it on the ceilings, but I can't find any records of it online. I refuse to believe that such a massive station was built with only one entrance/exit, but I can't imagine where any other exits could've been before being closed.

Well, you had better believe it now. I am very certain there is no full length mezzanine because the station is too close to the surface. This is evident by looking at how close the platforms are to the station house, which is generally at street level.

The "evidence" that you mentioned - and I believe I know what you are referring to, after close examination of the station - is not actually evidence of any mezzanine (or former station house, in case you might be wondering). Its really just a plain ventilation structure, its function exactly the same as the grates you see on the sidewalk. Further proof that this is a ventilation structure can be seen east of the station, where a similar structure exists above the tracks. In addition, if you examine the ventilation structure closely, both inside and outside of the station, you can also see just how close the western portion of the station is to street level.

On 9/12/2018 at 8:56 AM, biGC323232 said:

If i had to make a guess...I'll say its cheaper doing underground than aboveground...

On 9/12/2018 at 9:07 AM, biGC323232 said:

...How u so sure its cheaper that way...

transitfan111 is correct. Think about the work needed to construct an elevated line as opposed to building a subway. For a subway line, long stretches of public land needs to be excavated for tunnel construction and covered up when complete, plus extra work needs to be done to relocate/modify any utilities blocking the way and allow pedestrians and vehicles to cross over the construction area. With elevated railways, work would be limited to the erection of columns on ground level to support the elevated structure as well as the rest of the elevated structure itself.

I'm speaking generalities here; you can find more information here since it has been discussed before on this forum. As for a reliable source on the cost issue, I think this excerpt from an Engineering News article drives this home. It is dated 1915, after the Dual Contracts was signed, and it focuses on the topic of building elevated railways in New York.

Quote

A subway is preferable to an elevated line from the standpoint of the property owners along the route, and a general policy of not constructing elevated lines in the central congested districts has been followed. On the other hand, the cost of a subway is so great that, with the city's present financial condition, a universal subway system is out of the question. The program therefore provides trunk-line subways through the central districts of Manhattan and Brooklyn, with elevated feeders in the outlying districts.

The open-floor construction would cost about $16,000,000 less than the solid-floor and from $37,000,000 to $69,000,000 less than the subway. It is therefore evident why open-floor elevated construction was used for the feeders in outlying districts.

Cost of Subway and Elevated Structure

                                   Per Lin.Ft. of Structure          Total
Three-track subway........................$300 to $500      $63,000,000 to 105,000,000
Three-track elevated -Solid floor.            $200                 42,000,000
                     -Open floor.              125                 26,000,000 

Note: nearly all of the elevated lines in the NYC subway system is of the open-floor type. Examples of closed-floor would be the elevated portion between the Williamsburg Bridge ramp and Marcy Av, where the trackbed contains ballast; as well as the reconstructed portion of the Myrtle Avenue Viaduct, which has a concrete trackbed.

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Another thing, why does the  not go straight after Astor Place?

South of Astor Place the line runs under Lafayette Avenue, and north of Astor Place it runs under Fourth Avenue. Take a look at the street grid at that location to understand why the line must make those turns.

On 6/4/2018 at 5:58 PM, RestrictOnTheHanger said:

The 34th st 6 Ave interlocking got cut over this weekend. All the "new" signals at 34th and 42nd went into service. I know theyve been bagged for 3 to 4 years already but they look fresh!

It's been that long? Well, it's about time - I was wondering when the new signal heads would go live ever since I spotted the ones at 34th Street last year. I thought they would be placed into service as soon as the rest of the signalling equipment was set up for their particular block.

A couple of things are taken into account. Some of the factors:

• Crossover design: Generally speaking, the size of the crossover affects the speed trains can traverse through them; longer crossovers will mean higher speeds. Also, if no double crossover(s) is/are used, multiple single crossovers are used to compensate; this can affect terminal capacity.
• Crossover location: The further away it is from the terminal, the longer it takes for trains to traverse the distance between it and the terminal.
• Stub-end tracks: Because tracks end at the station instead of continuing several feet beyond the station, trains must enter the station very slowly for safety reasons.

That's all I can think of right now. Those who know more about this subject, feel free to add on to or correct my response.

1 hour ago, Lovablepj said:

What number did you call because i cannot get in touch with mrs  vargas.

The phone number I was given leads to the OLHA (that's what the receptionist wrote; no idea what that means), so I don't think it would be of much help. Weren't you given a number to reach her after you deferred?

I deferred last week and attempted to get my number restored today.

For those who are planning to defer their appointment in person: You will be given a phone number and the location of DCAS. The phone number is to check for the list number they have reached so far for this exam; I was told they were in the 200s. If your number is less than this, then they have passed your list number and your next step is to arrive at that location to restore your list number. As my number is in the low 300s, I can just come in next Monday to start the pre-employment process. Keep in mind that it can only be Monday of the week; you can't just come in any day on that week.

This is the information I received from the person who answered the phone. Hope this helps.