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

Community Reputation

575 Excellent

1 Follower

About Mysterious2train

  • Rank
    Not Mysterious any more

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,483 profile views
  1. Some relevant tweets. So this route is starting this weekend, poles installed, and the MTA has yet to officially announce it to the public? I definitely don't see any info on the website.
  2. Kawasaki is a reliable carbuilder for the MTA, certainly more so than Bombardier at this point (as low as that bar is) but relying on them to be NYCT's sole carbuilder would be asking for trouble. Even if we assume Kawasaki acts with the MTA's best interests in mind and wouldn't try to take advantage of their monopoly, any delays they experience could have a domino effect on their orders. While we've all heard about the delays with the M9s, and we're prepared for the possibility that the R211s could be delayed too, there's also the additional 60-car M8 order for Metro-North (and (formerly?) Shore Line East?) - supposed to start arriving back around September and is now some 9 months late. I don't think we've heard anybody from the MTA/CDOT/Kawasaki come out and give a reason for the M8 delays, but I would assume the M9 delays have pushed back work on the M8s. Granted, delays and setbacks are normal, and the M8 order is a small, supplemental order meant primarily to increase service as opposed to retiring an older fleet, and there's presumably little need for those extra M8s right now with ridership down due to COVID. But in a world where demand shoots back up, we really shouldn't open up NYCT to a situation where an issue with Kawasaki or any hypothetical sole manufacturer production ended up delaying multiple big car orders. The MTA already only has a handful of bidders willing to work with it. Restrictive low-bidding laws are certainly something to look at, but going with a single manufacturer is just restrictive in a different direction.
  3. More pictures posted online and linked on Reddit: https://imgur.com/a/sgPWqO7
  4. I was interested in the discussion in the Random Thoughts thread on on-time performance in the wake of the R46/R160 swap, so I went through the board materials and crudely pasted together weekday OTP info for all of 2019. OTP for the fluctuated all last year. In particular there was a noticeable jump in August once the returned to using the express tracks between 36 St and 59 St in Brooklyn (Several other lines also saw improved performance in August). service to Coney Island ended on October 21 but it's hard to say what impact, if any, that had on OTP. There were also other events last year like signals being retimed, speed limits being raised on certain areas of track, and schedule changes (which might include runtime changes). The R46/R160 swap started early in December and we do see OTP drop on the and and rise on the and from December to January. But of course there are so many factors affecting performance and OTP is changing every month so I wouldn't blame the swap just yet. It'll be interesting to see the numbers for this month when they come out.
  5. Now I'm not saying these rumors are true at all (more just playing devil's advocate) but even if we ignore his interventions on big projects like the Second Avenue Subway and the L Project, Cuomo has certainly shown a willingness to micromanage MTA affairs in the past. Like when the Queens Midtown Tunnel was renovated post-Hurricane Sandy and he ordered the MTA to replace the white tiles with blue and yellow tiles to match NY state colors (which the NY Post claims cost an extra $20-30 million). You can even see it in official MTA board materials with the vague mention of "tunnel wall tile modifications to meet New York State branding guidelines". Not to mention the light shows on several NY state bridges (including some owned by the MTA) and the blue and yellow wraps on the R160s, R211s, R262s and M9s, it's clear Cuomo/his administration is concerned with appearances is and wiling to extend that to the MTA. I honestly don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for the Cuomo admin to hear about shabby-looking subway cars that are closing in on 60 years old, with reliability slowing falling, with a new fleet of cars currently arriving to replace them, and him then ordering the MTA to get retire those old cars as soon as is feasible. If he or a high-ranking admin. member did give the order, would the MTA really be able to say no? And on what grounds? Maybe arguing that retiring the R32s now would create a car shortage, but would even that work? And putting aside the rumors/speculation from this thread, there's also Dan Ravoli saying outright in the article quoted above and on his Twitter that the R32s are being retired this Spring. Now granted, he doesn't work for the MTA and could be misinformed, made a mistake or is flat-out lying, but I would hope he know better than that being a reporter. Given how he reports heavily on transit issues and is a fixture at board and committee meetings I'd like to think he's a little more trustworthy than the typical reporter, but who knows. He doesn't have a title at the MTA, sure, but literally appoints a plurality of MTA board members, including the Chair/CEO and as of last year, the state budget director. And we know he and his administration are more than willing to interfere with MTA operations of any level, from big projects down to trivial issues, and he often gets his way. Not to mention the state legislature giving him most of what he wants when it comes to MTA things that require legislative approval (which is of course the legislators' choice, but just pointing it out). He definitely has influence.
  6. Realistically, to get backing from suburban politicians with the connection to Metro-North, and to keep the project simpler by keeping it in Manhattan (as sending it to an outer borough opens up a new can of worms). Also I know "Phase 2 should have gone to 149 St" discussions come up every other month in the SAS thread, but the big price tag shouldn't really matter either way; it's not like going 149 St wouldn't have the same cost issues as any other Capital Construction megaproject, and presumably would have been even more expensive, what with one additional station (with the stations being the most expensive elements of Phase 1) and having to build transfers to the and , and an underwater crossing, albeit a short one.
  7. darkstar8983 is not referring to the frequency but rather the span of service. The ran to/from Astoria for a longer span each day than the . Southbound service from Astoria ran from 6:02 AM to 11:01 PM. Northbound s arrived at Astoria from 6:34 AM to 11:34 PM. From 2008-2010 and from 2016 to 2018, the span of Southbound service was from 6:53 AM to 9:58 PM, and northbound service arrived from Astoria from 7:45 AM to 11:29 PM. Because service to/from Astoria started later and ended earlier than former service, bringing back the effectively reduced the number of trips to/from Astoria during those early morning hours and late evening hours. There were some news articles written back when the returned pointing this out. This was addressed in 2018 when the schedule was adjusted and the span of southbound service from Astoria was increased from 6:13 AM to 10:07 PM (with northbound trains arriving at Astoria from 7:47 AM to 11:48 PM). Of course, back in November 2019, evening service was adjusted to end a little earlier, with the last southbound leaving Astoria at 9:26 PM, and the last northbound arriving at 10:55 PM, but the increased service in the morning remains.
  8. The state legislature passed a bill this year requiring the MTA to add "Medgar Evers College" to the names of Franklin Avenue and President St. It was sponsored by Senator Zellnor Myrie and Assemblywoman Diane Richardson who represent the area. The SubwayTime and myMTA arrival apps already reflect the change.
  9. Agree 100% with the idea of connecting the to the Franklin Avenue - but of course it should be its own route going all the way up to Court Square, not just a slightly longer shuttle. Going off further into never-going-to-happen land, A 21 St subway line would connect to the at Queensbridge, serves Astoria, could potentially go all the way to LaGuardia, and would still connect to the at Court Square. Would require closing 21 St but it doesn't exactly have high ridership to begin with. My deepest, most never-going-to-happen fantasy for the would probably be to close down 21 St and build a new platform at Vernon Blvd-Jackson Av connecting to the , since the literally passes right below the station (Thanks John Hylan?) Would definitely be tight and disruptive to build, but like anything it would be possible with enough money and political will. This could save 7-10 mins on some Brooklyn-bound trips as by no longer having to go the additional 2 stops to Court Square you'd be able to catch the previous trip to Brooklyn sometimes. You'd see smaller but still noticeable time savings going Brooklyn-to-Manhattan since the runs more frequently.
  10. There's a cross-passage running east-west under E 45th St as part of Grand Central North that passes below the lower level platforms. (It's shown on this outdated GCT North map, but it's a little hard to see) There are stairs/escalators that run directly from the upper level NW/NE passages to the 45th St cross-passage bypassing the lower level platform. Since the 45th St passage is below the lower level platforms, using it is similar to accessing the express platforms at Atlantic Av or 34 St-Penn Station on the subway. The 45th St passage should be only about 20-30 ft above the top of the southern end of the upper ESA cavern. It definitely should have connected to the ESA caverns and I assume the mindset that LIRR/MNR must be separate is what prevented it. Hopefully it could still be built in the future, albeit more disruptively and expensively than building it now.
  11. Elevators at 62 St/New Utrecht Av opened today. https://www.flickr.com/photos/mtaphotos/albums/72157709742946302 http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/mta-installs-four-elevators-other-ada-features-new-utrecht-av62-st-station
  12. 7 Av/Broadway Line will be completely suspended for two weekends in August due to interlocking work 96 St, with the rerouted up Central Park West to 145 St to substitute: http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/essential-work-replace-switches-and-tracks-96-st-set-begin-late-friday
  13. Don't forget Assemblywoman Amy Paulin and Senator Leroy Comrie who are the chairs of the Corporations, Authorities and Commissions committees in the Assembly and Senate (respectively). Those committees also have oversight over the MTA (in addition to the Transportation committees) and all appointments to the MTA board have to pass through the Senate Corporations, Authorities and Commissions committee (in addition to the Senate Finance and Transportation committees). https://nyassembly.gov/comm/?id=9 https://www.nysenate.gov/committees/corporations-authorities-and-commissions https://nyassembly.gov/mem/Amy-Paulin https://www.nysenate.gov/senators/leroy-comrie
  14. Kind of surprised the topic of board member seats doesn't get more discussion on here. Like the fact that Cuomo appointed Mujica to replace Michael Lynton after less than 3 months on the board. Or the fact that even after the State Senate confirming 10 people in new board seats this year (plus 2 reappointments) the board still has 4 vacant seats. Or the general idea that the State Senate seems to rubber-stamp anybody Cuomo appoints to the board. It's true that this process is not fully transparent. I guess it's all futile in the end.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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