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.

Culver Line

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Culver Line

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. I paste the signature picture in between [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] I see the picture there after the paste. Then i save it and the picture disappears. The picture size is only 177x68. What is the problem?
  2. There are about 5 tph on the Brighton Local in PM rush hour (about 12 minute wait) and the MTA doesn't care about it. That's a much bigger difference that what would be on the F Train..
  3. I've gotten my image in again. Will someone kindly tell me how to get an image into my signature? When I try to past an image between the two [sIGPIC], all I get is a pointer to where the image is on my disk. I can't find an easily explained way of how to get the image itself there. thank you
  4. testing restoring picture to see if it works as i have not received help on this
  5. Can someone explain why they disappeared and how I re-load them and keep them. Thank you
  6. Are these expected to be more of the longitudinal seating cars?
  7. Can anyone point me to a list of Marker Lights that were used on the trains before the TA eliminated them? I have some: Green & Orange = F Train to Coney Island Orange and Yellow = F Train Church Avenue relay Double Red = A Train I found one website that lists them but as there are mistakes in that list (the F Train lights there are wrong) I don't know how many others are also incorrect. Thanks
  8. The R32 signs are hardly small - though their original roll signs were better - but I can see them in a single one-second glance. Can't do that with the electronic ones. Perhaps...but the trains are primarily for the residents who have to take it twice a day, day in and day out. Tourists come and go. And when I am a tourist, such as in San Francisco, I much prefer the old PCC trolley cars to the "modern" light rail cars, and the less comfortable ride of the cable car to the comfortable bus. The PCCs and the cable cars have "character" and are not sterile the way the light rail and buses are. Different enough. There is a subtle difference in the comfortablility of the R32 bench. More important, it has four more seats than R40/R40M/R42. And it has direct brighter lighting that isn't hidden behind advertisements, giving it a more open feeling. That's fine that we have our own opinions. I'm not trying to make you change your mind, just taking the opportunity to put my opinion in the thread. Signs on every car are useless if I have to read three cars' worth of signs to get one understanding of which train it is and where its running as it passes by me pulling into the station. I don't have the luxury of telling the conductor to wait ten seconds until I can read the full cycle to know whether this is my train and/or if I want to get on. With the mechanical roll signs, I know everything as soon as I see the first sign. And the inside signs disappear every time there is an announcement or it is busy displaying the time (I have a watch for that!).
  9. Chimes are relatively new - they began with the R44. Before that, people managed quite well to get on to trains without chimes and without being crushed. You had to be alert and know what you were doing and where you were. Rather than having everything spoon-fed, passengers were expected to be observant and to know their surroundings (i.e. that the doors on the train are going to close). Hand-cranked signs are full signs. You can see in an instant which train it is and its route. Unlike the "21st century" signs that display only rotating partial information, so you have to try to read across three cars as the train is passing you to try to figure out what it is and where it is going. The same is true once inside; you have to keep trying to see and to keep staring past people for more than a few seconds at the rotating sign (when it isn't displaced by announcement nonsense). Yes...they are enjoyable to ride. Simple and functional! I agree. There was a time when different cars ran on different lines. Having only R160s (and their twins) will be very boring - which it is already becoming.
  10. Great pictures!I wanted to add my "thanks' but there isn't any "thanks" button in your post Would someone kindly tell my why??
  11. The website is having problems...my reply got added twice. I edited out the text from this one but couldn't delete the post
  12. more examples of the MTA having no interest in preserving, using and fixing the system. Instead of designing a plan to attack the criminals and rid them from the passageways, they took the easy way and rid the passageways of the law abiding people.
  13. They can get away with it because they know that the people who use the trains don't have any way of pressuring them to fix what's broken and to make the service better. They are a monopoly. People have to go to work and have no alternative but to keep using the trains and put up with the reduced/deteriating system and service.
  14. Yes, it was pretty bad in the '70s/'80s. But it was pretty good in the 50s/60s when the BoT and the TA were running it. Stations weren't such messes in such disrepair, trains ran more frequently (look at some schedules from then - they even had special Saturday theater matinee service!), were more comfortable with more seats and were definitely cleaner (ask people who rode the trains back then). So while it is true the MTA has made things better than the 70s/80s, it is still functioning much too often in a catch up / patch up mode. Yes, one can list specific good things: train clocks (though the Moscow system had that in the 60s), much more inter-line connections, faster equipment (at least theoretically), longer plats on much of the system et al. But overall, the MTA "making it better than the 70s/80s" while true, is mostly a relative, not an absolute, improvement, when compared to the pre-70s system. Hard to tell the difference when you're waiting in rush hour 12-15 minutes without a breakdown As I noted in a prior post, the E Train 7th Avenue Station that had been re-built at who knows what cost is way past the point of just needing some good scrubbing and a hose down. The MTA often looks at whatever has a high profile and buries whatever doesn't have one. Just as they did with the BMT Canal Street express station, which for years was neglected, filled with garbage on the tracks, and in complete disrepair until one of the tabloids "discovered" it and make it a major story. Even though the MTA had eliminated bridge express service, people had to walk through the express plat to make connection with Nassau Loop / IRT trains. The MTA cleaned it up and fixed it up, which let (pushed?) them (to) return express service there. There is clearly an absence of pride at the MTA - pride in how the system runs and in what it could provide for its passengers - that the TA had.
  15. But keep in mind the difference in size. Despite the shrinking of the NYC system since the 70s, it is still much larger than almost every other system. Washington was innovative in many ways but it is still a completely local system - no express trains at all. PATH was also innovative - that had a/c in their cars while New York was still saying the technology doesn't work - but again, it is a comparatively tiny system. I am not dismissing the valid complaints about crowding and panhandling, nor the general neglect of maintenance which is still continuing (the MTA spent a ton of money to re-do the E train 7th Avenue station, then completely neglected it to the point where it is so damaged that the whole station has to be re-done again). Yes it could be better. But the infrastructure is there to make it better.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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