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.

Lance

SENIOR MODERATOR
  • Content Count

    3,120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Lance last won the day on February 2

Lance had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,743 Excellent

About Lance

  • Rank
    Senior Moderator

Profile Information

  • Location
    New York

Recent Profile Visitors

3,472 profile views
  1. Not good, but not surprising either. If there are ~20 minute intervals upon leaving the terminal, it's not surprising there are these large gaps between trains mid-route.
  2. Another thing of interest in the latest observations is the almost doubling of the MDBF for the 142As, previously one of the chronically under-performing cars in service. I'm still concerned that they are still performing at half of what the 142s can accomplish, but this increase is a good start.
  3. As much as we like to bemoan the excessive costs for MTA-related construction projects, I cannot see the reason for most of the outrage in this case. From the modifications outlined, it looks like a lot of the additional expenses were the result of deteriorating conditions that weren't visible or apparent when the initial estimates were agreed upon. We'd all like for the expense to remain the same without any changes, that's rarely the case. Things like this pop up in any old structure. I'd much prefer they took care of this items now rather than wait until the components fail and we have to pay for another full station renovation five years from now. That mention of the additional waterproofing however is yet again, very annoying. Water flows down in constant rain storms? Color me shocked.
  4. Not really. Given the big jumps between R-numbers for the revenue cars since the R-series is used for almost anything car-related these days, it really isn't a huge leap to assume that the replacements for the 62s would be in the 200s. Besides, I think the MTA also chose that R-number symbolically, just as @Roadcruiser1 probably did.
  5. What's with these threads? If there's a serious discussion to be had, go for it. If not, continue the discussion in the Random Thoughts thread.
  6. Don't try to force a discussion. Random trivia is better suited in the random thoughts thread.
  7. First off, I hate you for reminding me of that damn song. As for the decrease of homebuying in this generation, it's because most of us already have a 30-year mortgage by the time we leave school due to the ever-increasing cost of education. Then there's the costs of actually buying anything around here. Nowadays, you have to go pretty far out from the city to get the best bang for your buck, unless you're trying to do the fixer upper thing. With that said, this ever-growing homeless problem has to be curtailed. It's already fast becoming a quality of life issue for everyone with incidents like the one captured in the opening post happening with growing frequency. Riders shouldn't have to wade through piles of garbage or deal with "passengers" who smell like something worse than death warmed over. Maybe instead of running a campaign that's never going to go anywhere or avoiding the agency until it's time for a photo-op, perhaps our esteemed mayor and governor can actually do something about this before this city becomes San Francisco II.
  8. It's more of that "we didn't think of it, therefore we cannot use it" mentality at work here. That and the perceived fear that forcing developers to compensate for the increased foot traffic their buildings will bring may somehow scare them off.
  9. Actually, South Ferry was paid for in part by Sept. 11th recovery money to revitalize Lower Manhattan following the attacks. Also, the original loop station was built for the amount of service operated at the time. The IRT couldn't possibly fathom running ten-car trains back in 1905 when the station was originally built. @subwayfan1998 I'm glad you're interested and inquisitive here. A problem I'm noting however is a failure to listen to what other people are telling you. Asking the same questions over and over in a slightly different way and expecting a different response will not serve you well here. Listen to what people are telling you and think before you post.
  10. I believe they're completing these renovations in both directions at once going forward to avoid the excessive lengths of time needed at one particular station. With the previous one-directional closures at 104 Street and 121 Street for example, half of those stations were closed for almost two years in total. A six-month full closure is a much better alternative than that.
  11. Flushing CBTC Temporarily Offline Following Multiple Station Overshoots - Dan Rivoli - NY1 The MTA's latest technology, computers driving trains at the push of a button, got derailed on the 7 line, days after its full launch last week. The reason: trains were overshooting stations — by four cars in one instance. Six trains — including three Friday, a day after the launch — overshot a station last week. Pete Tomlin, the MTA's subway signals executive, called it an "anomaly," where trains didn't stop when they were supposed to and instead headed straight to the next stop. He notes there were at least 12,000 successful runs of the system. "We've actually decided as a precautionary matter we would turn it off, get to the bottom of it," Tomlin told NY1. "If the operator has to emergency brake the train, or take control of the train, that's not a good thing. It's not unsafe." The 7 line is the second, after the L line, to get a new signal system this year. In April, the MTA started testing the 7's automated feature, slowly rolling it out to more and more trains. The computerized system lets trains run faster and closer together — up to 29 trains in a single hour at peak times. MTA leaders want to expand the technology to other lines within 10 years, after spending nearly a decade bringing it to the 7 line. Officials say the results are clear: a major improvement in the number of trains running on time, reaching 89 percent this April during its slow rollout. Passengers spent less time waiting on platforms and their trips were quicker, according to the MTA. "Automatic train operation is a great add-on to every line that we have. It makes train travel predictable, people know where exactly every train is," said Andrew Albert, the chair of the NYC Transit Riders Council and an MTA board member. "We have to make sure that the glitches are worked out and obviously some of the glitches were not worked out." MTA officials are working with the contractor to figure out exactly what went wrong, how to fix it, and get the system running again within days.
  12. It kind of does matter when neither agency can manage their finances worth a damn. PATH, and the PA in general, hemorrhages money with their expenses and that FRA stipulation that the PA cannot get out of does not help matters in the slightest. For what it's worth, it'd be a really beneficial expansion with very little work involved, and that's not something I'm against. I just don't see the two agencies working together on this, nor do I see them playing fair with the costs of operation if such a combined route were to ever come to fruition.
  13. It's probably for the best that didn't happen. Port Authority would love for someone else (the MTA) to foot half the bill for PATH expenses seeing as that "railroad" costs much more per rider to operate than the subway. Not surprising since they never wanted to be the railroad business in the first place and only are because of the World Trade Center. I could quite easily see that happening should the MTA ever build a track connection to the PATH network.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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