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

520 Excellent

1 Follower

About Mysterious2train

  • Rank
    Not Mysterious any more

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

922 profile views
  1. Mysterious2train

    Fix & Fortify - 14th Street Tunnels Closure

    It's been 50 years since revenue service last ran from Canarsie down Broadway in Brooklyn, right? I wouldn't expect any area politicians to know about such a service or advocate for it. I would hope none of them oppose this additional bus service.
  2. Mysterious2train

    Fix & Fortify - 14th Street Tunnels Closure

    A new bus route, the L5, will run rush hours only between Utica Avenue and the B42 terminal in Canarsie Pier, along Remsen Av, Flatlands Av and Rockaway Pkwy, to provide additional service to Canarsie during the shutdown. http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/mta-bring-additional-temporary-bus-route-fully-ada-compliant-subway
  3. Mysterious2train

    Enhanced Station Initiative

    I meant that ever since the ESI was put on hold, the agency stopped using that term in press releases announcing talking specifically about the rehabs (for example: http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/broadway-39-av-nw-stations-undergo-extensive-repairs-renovations) For the regular press releases for weekend service changes that go out each week, the term "ESI" still gets used. But why would we expect consistency from the MTA.
  4. Mysterious2train

    LIRR Third Track Project

    No, P3F and I are talking about the Third Track. The MTA awarded the contract for the Third Track late last year and the contractor has been doing some preparatory work here and there in 2018 so far. But last week was the "official" groundbreaking for the project/Cuomo pre-election photo-op.
  5. Mysterious2train

    September 2, 2018 Bus Route and Service Changes

    Yeah, I remember somebody saying on this on Subchat or somewhere that Green Bus Lines, which used to operate the Q89/Q9A, created the route primarily to prevent other bus companies from running service on that section of Linden Blvd. I don't know how true that is, but I can't think of any other explanation for its extremely poor headways and downright bizarre span of service. If that reasoning is true, it seems like in a weird way, the Q9A/Q89 accomplished its goal? Since the MTA never did anything with it after taking over the route and that portion of Linden Blvd continues to be without local bus service to this day. I wonder if the MTA kept the route around just because they didn't want to look like they were cutting service.
  6. Mysterious2train

    LIRR Third Track Project

    I believe the MTA has been doing bits of work here and there. This was just an announcement to make Emperor Cuomo look good before the gubernatorial primary election this week. Nothing more.
  7. Mysterious2train

    Enhanced Station Initiative

    http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/weekend-subway-service-advisory-september-7-10 Anybody notice that the term "ESI" is still used in the press releases for each weekend's service changes? Maybe the agency figures nobody reads these press releases so it's okay? 😜
  8. Mysterious2train

    LIRR Third Track Project

    http://www.mta.info/press-release/lirr/governor-cuomo-announces-groundbreaking-historic-long-island-rail-road-third MTA and Emperor Cuomo held an official groundbreaking last week.
  9. The next town hall is Tuesday the 25th at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn... thankfully with a bit more notice.
  10. Mysterious2train

    September 2, 2018 Bus Route and Service Changes

    http://web.mta.info/busco/schedules/q089cur.pdf If a route was discontinued after 2002 or so, and it doesn't share a timetable with a route that still exists today (e.g. S67 and S66), its timetable should generally still be accessible on the MTA site. Speaking of the Q89, is there any credence to the story I've heard that Green Bus Co. created it solely to prevent another bus company from running an actually usable bus route on that part of Linden Blvd?
  11. Mysterious2train

    Second Avenue Subway Discussion

    Something I don't think was posted here: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2018/07/26/what-went-wrong-with-second-avenue-subway-construction-the-mta-doesnt-want-you-to-know/ Last year, Brian Rosenthal from the New York Times (who contributed to the exposé on construction costs late last year) submitted FOIL requests to the MTA for evaluations of the contractors used for construction of Phase 1. A few weeks ago, the MTA rejected the FOIL request, arguing the reports contain opinions and evaluations that would affect the bidding process for current and future contracts. Sounds like business as usual, and seemingly speaks to the relatively small number of contractors that are able to bid for MTA projects under the law.
  12. Mysterious2train

    Despite New LIRR President, Delays The Worse In Almost 20 Years

    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/LIRR/documents/full-review.pdf This is the 2006 report from the MTA Office of the Inspector General that the post you mentioned was based on. The report is over a decade old, but I'm assuming most or all of those work rules are still part of collective bargaining agreements, although the LIRR has taken steps to reduce the triggering of the penalty payments. The work rule you mentioned where engineers get double the pay for operating a diesel and electric train in the same day is called 'commingling'. What makes commingling really crazy is that under this rule the LIRR's dual-mode locomotives are considered "electric" engines. So an engineer could hypothetically operate a dual-mode locomotive for a short trip from Babylon to Patchogue, and then operate a diesel locomotive a return from Patchogue and Babylon, do literally nothing else for the entire day, and they'd be entitled to double the pay just for that. It's crazy. What makes it worse is that according to the report, this rule on commingling was instituted in the 1960s, long before the LIRR used dual-mode engines and it was less likely for an engineer to use a diesel locomotive and an electric engineer in the same day. Just goes to show you the potential harm of antiquated work rules.
  13. Mysterious2train

    Second Avenue Subway Discussion

    In terms of getting the Bronx extension done, I find it hard to beat actually starting to build the first half-mile of it. And "easier" in what way? Since the segment under 2nd Avenue between 120th St and 130th St would be relatively shallow and pass underneath soil instead of rock, the MTA might just go ahead and build it using cut-and-cover regardless, just like they proposed to do back in 2002. I suppose it would depend on how the line would be built in the South Bronx (whether it passes through soil or rock) to determine if it's economical for the MTA to use a TBM for this half-mile portion. If the MTA does end up using cut-and-cover on this segment in the future, than they wouldn't have really accomplished much in terms of "making things easier" by moving and shrinking the bellmouth. And that's even assuming surface disruption is something we should actually be concerned about. (That note was added by me. Here's the link to the full original chart from 2002: https://web.archive.org/web/20170916110241/http://web.mta.info/capital/sas_docs/2ndave.pdf) Although it's true the tail tracks from under 2nd Ave 120th St to 129th St are not crucial to revenue service and aren't a hill worth dying on, I'm more opposed to the MTA reducing the scope of their projects and shirking away from cut-and-cover on principle. Roosevelt Island is fairly deep and I wouldn't describe getting to the platform as "quick". There's even an escalator landing between the street level and the mezzanine above the platform. Conversely, Lex-63 has two separate mezzanines and getting to the platforms is still pretty slow. Also, Roosevelt Island and 21 St can get away with smaller, more centralized entrances/mezzanines because they have lower ridership than the SAS stations. (Weekday ridership: 7,300 at Roosevelt Island and 10,200 at 21 St vs 17,100 at 96 St, 23,800 at 86 St and 28,100 at 72 St - Just to put that into perspective, 72 St has almost four times as many riders as Roosevelt Island) Of course, the MTA could keep the spacious mezzanines and also lower costs by just building all the stations completely with cut-and-cover instead of mining station caverns, which is how 72 St and 86 St were built. But the MTA is tripping over itself to minimize surface disruption, despite the fact that doing so increases costs. What timeframe are we talking here? Before, alongside or after phases 3 and 4? If before, if the board really pushes for this, more power to them. But there's the obvious caveat that phases 3 and 4 already have the groundwork environmental impact statement completed (just in need of updating) while the EIS for a Bronx extension will have to start from scratch. I don't see the MTA prioritizing a Bronx extension anytime soon, but I'd love to be proven wrong. Why would the MTA be legally obligated to build phases 3 and 4? Sure, the MTA completed the EIS (aside from passage-of-time-related updates) but this point in time, they're just proposals without even a single dollar of funding behind them.
  14. Mysterious2train

    R32 Fleet Swap Discussion Thread

    MTA currently says 2022.
  15. Mysterious2train

    Second Avenue Subway Discussion

    The MTA just uploaded the updated environmental assessment for Phase 2: http://web.mta.info/capital/sas_docs/ea_phase2.htm It just describes how the MTA's updated design for Phase 2 differs from the design in the original final environmental impact statement (FEIS) that was published in 2004. The major changes from the 2004 design are: - 125th St station being reduced from 3 tracks to 2 tracks (which they already announced a few months ago), along with changes to the tail tracks - Potential changes in size to the ancillary buildings and station entrances, in order to fit more equipment and better facilitate passenger flow, possibly requiring changes to the properties the MTA will have to take via eminent domain - The proposed storage tracks on 2nd Avenue going up to 129th St being scrapped Which of course also has the benefit of reducing the scope of the project. And some other minor changes due to things like changes in construction techniques/technology: - Some of the station locations being shifted slightly (e.g. 125th St station being built an extra 20 feet deeper underground so that the station can be mined instead of being built with cut-and-cover, which will reduce the impact to the surface) - Redesigning the design of the curve from Second Avenue onto 125th Street, allowing the MTA to resequence the use of TBMs, as well as the location of the bellmouth for a Bronx extension being moved south from 120th-122nd Streets down to 118th-120th Streets, reducing the amount of cut-and-cover construction the MTA has to do. Several of these changes seem to be the MTA just doing as much as it can to reduce use of cut-and-cover and disruption to the surface. Which I think is setting a bad precedent, but that's neither here nor there. And if you're itching to submit comments, you can do so online until August 13th, or show up to a presentation on July 31st.


Important Information

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