bobtehpanda

Hey now, there is a difference. You get to pay an arm and a leg for the privilege on the LIRR.

Most of the national drugstores are run like shit across the country. All about driving costs down.

Eh, so at least Y makes sense as well; there's a whole famous skit based on confusing the word "why" as the question word rather than a statement

"Super express" became kind of a misnomer as the project evolved over the years to become more useful. The original iteration was one track with no stops. It was about as useful as the possibility of running QBL 3/1 in the peak direction; not very, because what goes in must come out. Later it became two tracks and stopped at Woodside for the . This is no net stop reduction; the makes one stop between Queensbridge and Forest Hills and so would the super-express. At that point, the speed improvements would pretty much just come from rolling stock, but there's an additional wrinkle there as well; higher speeds lower your max TPH because it takes longer to come to a full stop. All the NTTs have 55MPH limits anyways so in practice we would've never taken advantage. When you consider all of those things, the switch at 75th becomes an equivalent or bigger time saving than the new route.

If anyone's interested, uploaded the 1994 study of a Tappan Zee/Cross Westchester rail link

View File Feasibility and Benefit-Cost Study of Trans-Hudson, Cross-Westchester and Stewart Airport Rail Links Obtained via FOIL request to Metro-North. Submitter bobtehpanda Submitted 02/19/2022 Category Manuals  

Just thought of another problem with an E-R swap. Right now Staten Island Ferry passengers have direct connections to the east side via the and the LES/Broadway via the . The would be redundant with the , as previously mentioned, and ferry passengers would have to walk longer to the already overcrowded for East Side services. This would be true as well for all stations south of City Hall.

I ignored it because you didn't explain what *new* destinations people gained access to. Musical chairs is not a service improvement if everyone already had access to it. No one is gaining a new alternative because you just eliminated the current route. There's zero net benefit. The already has pretty tight operating conditions. Smushing into DeKalb would be a disaster.

This doesn't give any new opportunities to riders. Riders wanting west side stations have the at Borough Hall or the at Metrotech. Riders wanting 53rd St can already take the and walk a little bit from 59th St. It would have cost a lot of money, and would result in no net benefits for Brooklyn riders, and significantly worsened connections for Broadway riders. At least the Chrystie St connection brought new direct Midtown services to lines that did not have it before.

One of the problems with to Montague is where exactly is the supposed to go? If it just terminates at City Hall that's just musical chairs. 4th Av passengers already have west side access via the at Borough Hall.

Interesting. TBH, parkland alienation should probably be moved to the City Council but state politics is FUBAR.

I think it was more about testing. Older equipment is generally used as a "safe" test bed in case the test is a total f**kup.

Right. As an interesting thought exercise, if it was a BRT, one other option would be a bus tunnel either to the existing Gowanus HOV or some kind of new busway facility to the BBT.

The point of RX is that it's cheap to do, and a tunnel to Staten Island is definitely not cheap

A linear park is something like the High Line. Personally, the last place I want to be when going for a jog is choking on vehicle exhaust on top of the Van Wyck.

Most TV, not even just the Weather Channel, have gone with "if it bleeds it leads" because the media has been bleeding money since the internet took their ad money. And the Internet's not that much better. At this point, pretty much the only safe news is NPR, because they don't take ad money.

It could always be worse. Here we shut down after a half inch of accumulation. To be fair, it's because most of the city is on massive hills, so you get scenes like this: There's a bus that wipes out at 2:50.

Right. The original plan involved the E just taking the line entirely, but that's no longer possible in 2021; in 1968, LIRR ridership had been in steep decline, and so it was projected that they would be fine with just the line to St. Albans. Today, there are too many trains to fit on a single pair of tracks; you'd probably need to triple or quadruple the line through St. Albans.

Also, IIRC, the way advertising works in the MTA is that the ad agency pays for things like the digital ad spaces, the touch screen kiosks that also have ads, etc.

Well, day one did not involve demolishing the . Archer Avenue would've been a lot simpler had they not done that, and I think we would see the full line down towards SE Queens. Ironically, the Macy's that asked for demolishing the left Jamaica shortly after.

The devil is also in the details on this one. Bay Ridge Av's northern end is under Senator St, so it's only 690 feet to the ROW.

Where exactly are the extra spaces on 4th Av? They ruled out subway cars as an alternative, so presumably they'd need to at least be walled off from each other.

This will definitely happen, but I don't think anything about the bus routes themselves will really change, which is more of what I was getting it. IBX is not really a major change in that sense, not like how Archer Avenue's opening in 1988 rerouted dozens of buses to serve the new line.

Okay, so 4 cars is maybe not the end of the world. I was just thinking of LIRR's 12-car trains, where the 4-car platforms are a hassle.