RailRunRob

18 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

They also cut off-peak service and with the BxM5 not serving Wakefield, Wakefield only has peak service now. The BxM5 should be extended to Wakefield when the BxM4 isn't running at the very least. Not happy with this at all. The BxM5 should be quicker than the BxM11 because it has been moved to a wider street which should increase the speed of the buses

The BXM5 serves Wakefield just not the extreme Northern end. Just 238th and 241st cut on the Wakefield side.

41 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

Co-Op City (Bx23/Bx26/Bx28/Bx29/Bx30/Bx38/Q50): What the  wants to do here is to have the Bx23 become the Co-Op City circulator and have every other route meet the Bx23 at some point in the route. Sounds good on paper but really isn't the best solution. This requires most people in Co-Op city not connecting with the  train to transfer. The Bx23 can still be the main route for getting around Co-Op City but there should be some changes. What could be done to improve service is to have the Q50 also serve the loop to give people a direct ride to Queens since Co-Op City is a big ridership generator for the Q50. I also think that the Routing of the Bx23 should be modified to serve the Dyre Avenue line since a lot of Co-Op city riders want to go to the  and not the  and with the Bx38 being eliminated, that is not an option without a transfer. Below is the map of my proposed Bx23 service. With the Q50 serving Co-Op city as well, The Bx23 would run every 5 minutes during the rush, every 10 minutes other times and every 20 minutes overnight. The Q50 would keep its regular frequency.

I'll be there on the 25th For the Co-Op feedback session. Beside the BXM17 everything designed is the total opposite of what was asked for most folks were pushing for pre-2010 service patterns. Here's what was being handed out from the Co-Op Fastfoward meeting. I feel they're going to tweak some of these plans for sure can't wait to hear the public feedback.

10 minutes ago, Lex said:

Is the Bx30 chopped liver or something?

Sure seems like it. With no service via Gun Hill or the medical complexes. Baychester is somewhat close but not as direct as Gun Hill routing. 

3 hours ago, Lance said:

I was talking about the ones found on the bulkheads of the 142s - 179s.

Gotcha!

39 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

The Bx38 at the very least should of been kept to serve (North) Co-op City. Asch Loop still has the Bx26 and Bx28. Section 5 would be ok with just the Bx23.

I agree I was saying this in the other topic chat. North Co-Op still need direct access to the  at Gun Hill you get decent ridership from Dreiser and Carver Loops 

1 minute ago, Lance said:

Here's to hoping they'll upgrade those route bullets to full-color at some point. The cost of full-color LEDs has dropped significantly since the blood-red displays were first installed on the 142s back in 2000.

These are full color. Both the front and sides saw some of the shots from the MTA brass tests.

4 hours ago, Lex said:

Boston Road is not that far from the Baychester Avenue station. Section 3 is in close proximity to Section 4 (where Bx28 service will be available, with a bump in frequency as compensation).

That's pretty much how I expect it to play out (and it's not technically wrong).

Drieser and Carver are light years away from Asch Loop. If I need to get to the  or even   Montefiore For that matter the 38 is a life line. Why should some one have to switch buses? Not everyone is going to the  or even the Eastside. Cut the 26,29 or even the 50 but at the very least Co-Op needs direct access to the Dyre Ave line.

They're going to get an ear full from Co-Op City later this month. There really needs to be GunHill Road  coverage for Northern Co-Op City. The 38 is used fairly well. They should keep the 28/38 setup until SBS conversation. This is at the very least. The Q50 could stand to be routed to Bay Plaza.  But if nothing else changes the  Train Coverage is important.

8 hours ago, RTOMan said:

Good Post here i learned a few things!

Same here.

46 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

If they want to launch CBTC on Lexington, wouldnt that require shutting down the main corridor?

Possibly might be in activating the Local and Express blocks independently.

10 hours ago, Q Broadway Express said:

Won't happen because the is a twenty-four hours train. Unless you have the run local at night.

That and how would that work with the terminal setup? The  Terminates at Brighton on the Local tracks? That's a lot of work to reverse. Your only saving 6-7 mins between local and express service from Prospect and BB.  It would take longer to reverse the train plus the possible disruptions to the  with switch operations.

21 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

I would guess 10 minutes.

Yep 7 to 10 minutes. 5.3 miles 

14 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

I can't think of one area with "Port" in the name that doesn't have some semblance of industrialism within it....

Umm Port Chester, Green port, West Port I can think of a few areas that kicked there industrial past. But I understand that's kinda why I asked when I think of Port Richmond I think of Richmond Terrace didn't know the Neighboorhood went low-density residential.

5 minutes ago, Jdog14 said:

 

Most of the southshore and near st george but apart from that I wouldn't be shocked if they dont go there too much. 

GrubHub covers everything. Even 230 Broadway Staten Island, NY 10310. Man, it's that bad over there?

1 minute ago, Lil 57 said:

It gets more residential as you go further south. The area can be sketchy but if you have street smarts, you should be fine. I wouldn't recommend walking North of Castleton Ave at night. Cops get called over alot during that time.

Gotcha matter of fact I've traveled Victory which is north of the SIE have some friends near Willowbrook. Port Richmond isnt so far from there. Like Forest Ave right?

9 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

When I first moved to Staten Island from Brooklyn I lived in New Brighton before moving to Port Richmond 6 months later and I would take the S42 often and that bus passes through alot of sketchy areas. A good portion of the S42 route are housing projects.

How's Port Richmond? I passed the area for the 1st time recently seems pretty industrial. Never really traveled to parts of Staten Island north of 278 until as of late.

5 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Cuomo was told by donors

I don't think you're to far off the mark my friend.. Somebody or Somebodies told him something. $$$$$$$$

I don't know where to start.  Years of hearings years of planning. People leaving the area Business created just to fill the void. Wow! The Transport engineering community is  way to small for me to believe that no one could have seen this or came up with this 2 years ago engineering talent travels from project to project all around the globe. So im not buying this is was never used in the US so we didn't know. Tons of managing talent isn't from the US anyways. Then from my understanding we had salt water is eating away at the tunnel lining we need to get in there. To its just wiring, we'll just create some racks. Wha?  This really makes the MTA's internal team look super incompetent. I don't know if I could beleve there incapable at that level.  I kinda feel this is to save face and clam the economic worries around the shutdown. This feels halfas*ed on top of something there saying is unproven. I'm still processing this. Madness at it's best.

Wasnt this station co-named with Beebe Ave?

8 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

 

The resemblance is uncanny. It’s even the same shade of blue. The front windows have what appears to be masking tape around the edges, which makes them appear smaller than they might actually be. Unfortunately the video doesn’t give a good shot of the sides, so it’s still somewhat of a mystery if this is indeed an R211 prototype. I think it is. 

 

The good thing is this guy is pretty consistent  with his videos watched the M9s come together on this channel as well. So we’ll probably see it come together fairly quickly as its go’s thru the assembly line.  I’m willing to go out on the limb and say it’s a R211. We’ll see soon enough for fact.

12 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But if not, then some other transit agency will be getting subway or rail cars that look very similar to the R211.

For sure NYCTA. The bonnet seams favor the R179's. And you can't deny the intercar gate spacing on the sides.

5 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

There’s actually a myriad of federal and state agencies that have jurisdiction over parts of the  operations. PTC on the railroads, signal and timer installations on the subway system, SIR equipment requirements in the past , SBS, bus specifications pertaining to road worthiness. Just a few things that I can remember off the top of my head. Ever notice a conductor or train operator with earplugs? OSHA mandated safety equipment. Even the most mundane things in the  world of transportation are subject to regulatory approval in some fashion. It’s no different than air transportation or motor transport. Carry on.

Right! I figured so. As you stated other modes of transport have standards. I'm sure with NYCTA cars there's a multiple point check every certain amount of miles and you'd need tools and a particular environment to carry out this work there's just getting around that without yard access. My point.

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Well the subway isn't under FRA. This entire thread is about the  which is not a railroad.

Understood I was speaking about the MTA in board terms why the FTA/FRA was stated. Just a bit of miscommunication.

6 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

FRA has no jurisdiction and FTA is basically nonexistent unless you're DC Metro.

The MTA doesn't have work with the FRA? They have 2 major railroads under there belts. As far as the FTA I know they had TSO guidelines to qualify for funding for agencies this was back in 2000-01 when I was working in rail industry but you might be correct then if they're not really receiving funds from the feds nowadays.  I guess that brings me to my next question what's the governing body that's setting and overseeing safety standards?  Or just standards in general?

5 hours ago, BreeddekalbL said:

If Cuomo interferes and forces the MTA to maintain manhattan service for the he is stupid as HELL!

 

I don't think it's even possible to consider without the proper setup for maintenance and safety inspections the MTA is still subject to FRA/FTA oversight especially if you're receiving ample funding from the Feds.