Eric B

I thought I had seen something about reverse peak trains being added as well, and that in the AM, they were later, like around 10 or something. I guess that wouldn't be to benefit riders, so probably for some operational benefit or something (I know that area feels like such a long winding rollercoaster, and always thought express would be nice; too bad they now can't find a suitable local replacement so that all (F)'s could go express).

Anyone else heard about something like this? I forgot where I saw it, whether here or on some FB group or elsewhere).

The're saying it's because of the escalator addition at Union Sq. but it must be other stuff, for it to not go as far as Lorimer or Myrtle.

Also, whatever happened to the MTA's idea to revive the other Metro Apple Express routes?

I remember that, and will often think of it and wonder what ever happened with it.

12 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

The last time I was in that yard , 30+ years ago, it was strictly a work train yard with hand throw switches. I don't think it was set up to handle passenger cars back then. Perhaps someone out here has more recent information. BTW isn't the bus depot next to the yard ?  I also think both facilities are on the north side ( Manhattan bound ) of the West End tracks so I'm not sure how that impacts using 36th St or Ninth Avenue as a terminal. Carry on.

7 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I seem to recall reading that the  have long term plans to make that yard capable of storing revenue service trains, primarily from the full length SAS. But I also recall reading that they’re considering fast-tracking the plans for 38th St Yard to store revenue trains. I say, the sooner the better. Would be much better for the  or a full time  4th Ave local to be based in a Brooklyn yard, as opposed to being based all the way up in Jamaica Yard.

When  started, and the M was going to 9th Ave and Bap Pkwy, they did store some there during the day. This started around 30 years ago, and ended at some point between 2001 and 2010.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2019/08/07/times-square-shuttle-to-get-upgrade-after-century-of-service

Now, it's "MIGHT add the passageway". The passageway is already built (and the 6th Ave. end visible), just not opened. I see the stuff posted above is talking about the technical difficulties of the underpass to be used to get to it. Especially involving a sewer they have to go under.
So they're considering dropping it now?

I would say they should consider using the existing (and long closed) underpass that runs between the Bway express tracks, to the far side platform, and then extend the passageway to there. (which is where I thought the passageway was going to come out anyway).

On 8/2/2019 at 11:52 PM, Around the Horn said:

I believe they're referring to this one in the bottom of this image

and here too

I'm just noticing they haven't mentioned the one on the other side of the shuttle (connecting to the other end of the platform, and shown on the right of the bottom photo), and hope it hasn't been dropped or something.

Quote

Adding a new, modern turnstile area: This spacious mezzanine will have new LED lighting, glass barriers and new digital screens that provide a large station entrance for Times Square customers

Is that the one in the mid block arcade on the north side of 42nd? It doesn't mention the passageway that is apart of, but instead mentions this new entrance connected with 1 Times Square.

That had to be some other problem; otherwise, they wouldn't say there was NO service east of Crescent.

They used to have yellow also, for something inbetween; either part time, or a high wheel entrance, where there was no fare booth, and you could only enter if you already had a token. (and red was exit only).

Every time I pas through there, I look for a spot they could place it, but it would be difficult, and require the removal of many columns, which then would require massive structural work (the ceiling) to replace the support.

Quote

In 2018 and 2019 there have been very few fastracks. Maybe the new technologies (https://thecity.nyc/2019/06/new-technology-signals-hope-for-faster-subways-down-the-line.html) about the signals are already working?

What I heard is that it is a specially funded project, and it's been winding down, and not renewed.

I think it was because of the aluminum side strip, as opposed o the carbon one the rest of the fleet got, which rusted and allowed rust to get to the frame.

OK, so cool! Finally a layout and a time. Three years? Hope so, because that sounds like a lot of work to reconfigure all of that.

I had assumed the new passageway would tie in to the "employee facility rooms", which were built where there used to be an old exit to the old building there.

So according to this, it doesn't even come anywhere near that far, but ties into the end of this new platform, and from the mid-block area, where an exit was always planned (green in the top illustration). That explains why they didn't just remove the rooms and connect it already. (The passageway does extend a bit past that area, and dead ends [black area], but I'm not sure what that is).

2022 will be 13 years after the completion of the Durst building (1 Bryant Park/Bank of America tower), when the passageway was promised to tenants. Hope it stays that soon.

The question was specifically "when was the first air conditioned bus first placed into regular service". It didn't ask "when New Yorkers began to experience air conditioned buses" [i.e. in earnest], or when most of the fleet was air conditioned, or how well or how many of them worked. So even with that first experimental unit, it did go into "regular service", and so was the "first air conditioned bus placed into regular service".

That was roughly the turning point, when the diversions were now including weekdays, and in both directions, and so the Essex move would be far too impractical. The first emergency shutdown that used the split service was May '82. Then, they would still do individual Essex moves in the spur of the moment, or on off hours for those next few years, but the full time split service became more frequent, and finally four years later, what was for all purposes semi-permanent.

They had had numerous bridge closures the four ears before the big one, but I didn't remember the '83 one was that long, or that the B was routed via tunnel. 

(Since they were getting so long, I don't know why they didn't think to eliminate the split B and D, and run the QB (which was identical to the rerouted D), and bring back the T, instead of the B; and they were already getting new signs around this time).

That's likely tape on the windows (for protection or something)

.

As the technology improves and becomes more reliable and catches on. It's slowly getting there. (From a few decades ago when there were almost no EV's out there).

The news this morning is that he's been caught!

https://abc7ny.com/police-arrest-man-they-say-pulled-emergency-brake-on-subway/5315251/

8 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

What I personally don’t like about the Q55 is how on the weekends reliable tends to tank as well. There has been plenty of weekends where I’d take or try to take it and there’s a bus missing. It’s bad enough it’s headways are every 20 but to have a bus missing increases the wait time to 40 mins. I don’t know if the Q55 is one of those routes where they will pull a bus off to full a gap elsewhere but I swear that route tends to suffer from gaps a lot.

 

I also would agree to extend the Q55 to Jamaica Van Vyck, I always felt like it just dead end stops at Jamaica Ave and 117th and should at least have a connection to the  

Welcome to the "Cipher Zone"! (imagine having to use that to get to Jamaica when both the and  are out!)
(So-called, because it feels like all the buses to Queens are like this; like the 58 being so slow, and still bunched up even with the LTD, and then similarly stopping short of the main part of Flushing, and the 54, once you get to it, made slower by the detour to Atlas, and the 39 being so torturously long, and they continued to add new kinks to it, like when streets are made one way. And no direct access to Jackson Heights or Forest Hills at all).

That was the whole original "look" of the RTS (with the Grumman being the square alternative). The sloped back and smooth sides made it look so futuristic. The first ones I ever saw (and rode) were PVTA, in Springfield, then, shortly afterward, MTA tested one (yes, a slopeback), but then went with the Grumman, until the problems started surfacing, and then went with the squared back RTS, with the swing rear doors that were set back in the body. (I thought the slope back was from having a smaller compressor, rather than from it being located somewhere else).

So the look was gradually eroded, with the square back, rear doors, and then adding the framed, openable windows. The only really distinguishing feature left were the front end (windshield and doors).

14 hours ago, DetSMART45 said:

So the old GMCs and TMCs had the unopenable windows, then that was changed beginning with Novas? I think DDOT *may* have run the factory-first GMCs (that I believe were just "given" to Detroit by GM, since the buses were built in Pontiac/HQ in Detroit/MAJOR public outrage over piss-poor service forced the issue) with the solid windows all around, but soon had the openable windows installed. All the later DDOT GMCs that I remember surviving into the 1990s had openable windows (and those had to have been some of the originals).

SMART (via its predecessor SEMTA) ran all of the GMCs and TMCs with unopenable windows. Wasn't until the Gillig Phantoms when openable windows appeared.

The openable windows (every other window panel) began with the 3000's (1983 order, I believe, and if not then, then definitely the following year), which was still GMC.

7 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

From the pictures posted elsewhere, I notice that 5249 was just repainted without white window trim it had later in its revenue life. Was it also repainted to a black back?

Next should be to repaint the now-38 year old 1201 to its as-delivered condition with the M Surface logos.

And also remove the openable windows, as it was originally single glass panels. (That was part of the whole original look. where later, they alternated between single panels and the dual siding sash windows). There ware well enough from all the other ones being scrapped now.

It will probably have a time limit, just like the Metrocard.