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.


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fishmech

  1. Neither have I... never actually been on a (M2)... I would have a reason to take the new (M). Still waiting to take the (T) lol.


    BTW i know this isnt going to be an issue for sometime, but with (W) being eliminated and the (Q) taking its place....when phase 1 of the SAS open's whats going to happen to the (Q) then? is it going to split terminals?


    Since the first phase is just an extension of the (Q) and there'll be no other parts of the SAS ready to run on, I imagine they'll label trains on the Phase 1 SAS the (T) from the start!


    The SAS won't go below the splitoff to the (Q)'s tracks until Phase 3 - which was originalyl going to be when the (T) service was to be introduced, but if they don't have the (Q) freed up I imagine the "split terminals" for the (Q) will result in (Q) to Astoria remaining (Q) and (Q) to 96th street(phase 1)/125th street(phase 2) being the (T).

  2. yeah I was visiting the city in 06 some weeks before i moved to the UWS when I decided to try the tram that day to visit a relative in Roosevelt Island and something just told me to use the (F) that day. I sat there wishing I had. I'm afraid of heights and I can't swim very well.


    That's why they're doing a full overhaul of the tram. The trams were built in 1976 and were only expected to last 17 years - when you rode in 2006 they were already 13 years past their due date to be demolished or replaced.

  3. The money lost by non-fare collection vs. installing a fare system. The (MTA) lost 3.4 million a year without collection of fares. Then 6.9 million was spent on adding fare control to Tompkinsville. So that's about two years of non-fare collection and the (MTA) plans to add this to another station.


    If it pays for itself in 2 years, it sounds good to me.

  4. Why? You don't need a fast processor or a lot of memory to interpret how far the train ahead of you is.


    The further you are from another train, the closer to MAS you can travel. The closer you are to another train, the slower you must go (to maintain a preset "safe distance").


    Yeah, Vancouver has had an all ATO system for 3 decades or more now.

  5. Don't forget - Staten Islanders still don't have to pay for the SIR if they take a bus to it. You take any Staten Island bus route and transfer to the SIR, you get one free transfer at the St George fare gates and another free transfer at (1)(R)(W) Whitehall/South Ferry or any Manhattan bus that stops at the ferry terminal or nearby.

  6. All I have to say is...it's about time. Eliminating the fare from the stations as well as the ferry was a mistake from the beginning.


    Meh, the ferry fare was never all that much, and besides if you're taking the ferry you're probably taking the subway or a bus on the Manhattan side and a bus or the SIR on the Staten Island side.


    I say: let's reinstate allowing cars to be taken on the ferry, each of the ferries with car holding capability can hold like 20 cars minimum right? Reinstate the car toll - I believe it was $5 until cars on the ferry were banned after 9/11 - let's make it $8 now each way.

  7. was there a strict reason to why they took the R32 off the (A) and (R)?


    Well they are putting more R46s onto the (A), I imagine it replaced the 3 R32 trainsets it had.


    Will the (A) still have R32s on late-nights/other times the (C) doesn't run though?

  8. could the (MTA) be saved by a 2 cent gas tax? this guy seems to think so! PLUS money for jersey and conn.


    "Correction Officers Benevolent Association President Norman Seabrook, an MTA board member, proposed last week that the agency lobby lawmakers in New Jersey and Connecticut to impose a new two-cent gas tax to bring in new revenues.


    “I think that would not only take the MTA out of the hole that it’s in, but I think it would also provide additional money for the State of New Jersey, additional money for the State of Connecticut. It would provide additional money for the City of New York,” he said."




    i read this in The Chief Leader on Tuesday before i found the article here. it'll b on the Chief's website in a month


    Of course it will provide funds for NJ and Connecticut - otherwise they can't improve service on the Metro-North West-of-Hudson lines and the Metro-North New Haven line.

  9. The MTA can test out R160s on the SIR if they like, but they have to get a permit from the FRA, take all of the SIR trainsets off of the line, and I believe set the switches so that no other trains can enter the line while the R160s were test run.


    So yes the MTA could test run the R160s - just without passengers and without any other service running on the line.



    I think two important facts need to be pointed out here.

    1. R44SI units are far from compliant with FRA regulations.

    2. R46s have run on SIR without any kind of modification at all. (During the R44 GOH)


    That all being said, R160s can't run on SIRT for different reasons. Shops are not equipped to handle them.


    The SIR, like the PATH, operates under an FRA waiver. They do have to abide by certain FRA rules, and can ignore others.

    The MTA had to apply for special permission to use unmodified R46s.

  10. I think we've come across the one of the (if not the) first references to the idea of Park-&-Ride. It's a very good posibility that the IND, opening after the tunnel and setting up an express station, was trying to capitilize on the new passengers that would be driving through the tunnel. They could park downtown and take the IND, or drop someone off.


    The IND Canal is actually easier to get to from the tunnel ever since Varick (under which the IRT runs, 7th having ened at Houstan) was made one way*. The last tunnel exit forces you onto Laight St for a block, at the end of which is the IND station.




    *Ok so I have no clue as to when that happened...


    http://www.forgotten-ny.com/STREET%20SCENES/tunnelgarage/tunnelgarage.html Here's one of the first parking garages built in anticipation of the Holland Tunnel.

  11. Whenever the TWU started acting up and threatening to go on strike riders used to be able to take private bus lines in lieu of the MTA. Now they no longer have that option. Some of the express bus routes that may be eliminated were former private bus lines. They would still be around if it weren't for the MTA.


    Or the former private bus lines if they were still private might have shut down due to not being able to pay for themselves to stay running, when MTA's publicly funded system means bus routes only need to pay for 30% or 40% of themselves.

  12. I thought GCT was the original station. After Penn Station was demolished, people didn't want GCT taken down as well, so it was restored.


    So now we know what happened, but why? Is the upper west side to lower east side service pattern not one that could be useful today?


    No no no. I'm talking the Grand Central subway station, the original one NOT the terminal for regular trains. The tracks from the Lex to the shuttle tracks branch off before you get to the modern GCT subway station, which is north of the turn off, and on the other side, the modern Times Square station is south of the connection to the Shuttle tracks.


    It could be useful today, but how would you thinkt he subway would handle having 4 tracks split off the Lex and cross over to the shuttle and then havign those same 4 tracks merge into the 7th Ave/Broadway? Also, you'd need to completely demolish the current shuttle platforms on both ends, considering on both ends the platforms are built over where the tracks used to go, and at Time Square there's even that removable block to get to one of the tracks (on the GCT side there's new access tracks built to connect to the Lex for the other tracks).

  13. I was looking at an old subway map, pre-unification, and I noticed that the east side IRT turned west at 42nd st and headed uptown on the Broadway tracks over what is today the 42nd St. Shuttle. I was wondering, why did they get rid of this service pattern? also, was the southern part of the west side IRT not built at first?


    The original IRT as first built went up the present Lex Ave line from City Hall/Brooklyn Bridge to Grand Central, turned onto the shuttle tracks, and then proceeded up the west side 7th Ave/Broadway Line from there.


    It stopped when the Lex was built north past GCT and the 7th Ave/Broadway was built south past what became Times Square. The original stations at GCT and Times Square were demolished, and new stations were built on the respective lines and for the shuttle.



    This was the IRT a few months after opening dxy35l.jpg

  14. Agreed!


    Second part-agreed.

    First part-WHAT? Why make BOTH branches go to LGA?


    Well the idea here is that you'd transfer from the Howard Beach - JFK AirTrain at Federal Circle for a LGA-JFK AirTrain. Of course there's actually plenty of capacity on the AirTrian system, so it probably wouldn't cause any problems to in fact have a direct from Howard Beach AirTrain to LGA.


    Same with any service from Manhattan directly, even if it ran through LGA, would still probably get you to JFK quicker than subway or LIRR to Jamaica or Howard Beach and then AirTrain from there.

  15. Who would use the Airtrain from JFK to Laguardia?


    AirTrain JFK to LAGuardia means AirTrain Jamaica to LaGuardia and AirTrain Howard Beach to LaGuardia. There's also people who take a domestic flight into LaGuardia and need to get over to JFK for international flights and vice versa.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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