Grand Concourse Posted January 12, 2013 Share #51 Posted January 12, 2013 Oh god, why are you ppl so obsessed about the screen doors? There's no money for them, and forget the costs and vandalism. Given the mta's track record with escalators and elevators, do you trust them to maintain these doors for long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted January 12, 2013 Share #52 Posted January 12, 2013 Remember that if the doors are installed the stations can finally be air conditioned because they are enclosed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted January 12, 2013 Share #53 Posted January 12, 2013 They'd be better off stationing a cop at every station (or at least all the heavily used stations). Plus at least it'd be a side benefit in catching a criminal sooner or act as a minor deterrent. A few days a guy got power-bombed (A wrestling move) by another guy on the (4)/(5) platform at Atlantic Ave WITH the cop standing there, dude was huge so the cop couldn't do anything to stop him unless he shot him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilbluefoxie Posted January 12, 2013 Share #54 Posted January 12, 2013 Remember that if the doors are installed the stations can finally be air conditioned because they are enclosed. and whos gunna pay to retrofit all the underground stations with A/C, a bunch of platform fans should do the trick to keep the air circulating, plus you get a damn good breeze when the train thunders into the station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted January 12, 2013 Share #55 Posted January 12, 2013 Well fans are useless unless there's a way to vent the air out. Otherwise the a/c will also be useless if they are given the same 'attention' as the elevators... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JubaionBx12+SBS Posted January 12, 2013 Share #56 Posted January 12, 2013 While I do like the fact that folks are pulling out the facts on other transit systems and showing the potential benefits of the doors, New York is just an entirely different city from those and I don't see this making much of an impact here. The main goals of the platform doors would be to... 1) Prevent deaths in the subway.- The platform screen doors would do very little to accomplish this. Trains don't kill people, people kill people. The doors won't stop someone from exerting physical force or using a weapon on another rider if he/she really wants to. I would go as far to say that these doors won't outright eliminate 12-9's (in NYC). 2) Speed up service- If there is a problem with speed of subway service in NYC it has more to do with outdated infrastructure than the lack of platform doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilbluefoxie Posted January 12, 2013 Share #57 Posted January 12, 2013 Well fans are useless unless there's a way to vent the air out. Otherwise the a/c will also be useless if they are given the same 'attention' as the elevators... Exactly, lets not give them more mechanical/electrical things to break down and need fixing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtattrain Posted January 12, 2013 Share #58 Posted January 12, 2013 "If there is a problem with speed of subway service in NYC it has more to do with outdated infrastructure than the lack of platform doors." I don't see how outdated infrastucture has to do with screen doors; they could just do fastrack or weekend work to update the stuff lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted January 12, 2013 Share #59 Posted January 12, 2013 <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="lilbluefoxie" data-cid="631377" data-time="1357958367"><p> theres still issues on the A-division, the doors on the R142/As are wider than the R62/A doors, plus they aren't automated. People should just learn not to lean over the edge, stay away from hobos and hang near the wall or the middle of the platform (on island platform stations)</p></blockquote> Its only a foot wider, not that much of a big difference. Plus the train doesn't have to be automated, it could just use sensors. Look at the gap fillers at Union Sq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted January 12, 2013 Share #60 Posted January 12, 2013 I don't see how outdated infrastucture has to do with screen doors; they could just do fastrack or weekend work to update the stuff lol. True. But it would take a heck of alot of funds and grant as well as more 12-9's for the MTA to formally get the point and take action to install screen doors. That is a good proposal on your part though. Maybe I am looking at this subjectively --- people who desire to commit suicide, I only wish they can see that yes crushing adversities do happen however there is light at the end of the tunnel..... I know someone who hanged himself in Pensyvania ... I kick myself in the ass to this day because I should have caught this before this happened. Anyway as the MTA can afford in their capital budget this I think platform doors is a great idea. It will take time though, many years before they can cover most of the stations here in NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenFrancis Posted January 13, 2013 Share #61 Posted January 13, 2013 Ive heard so many times that they are proposed on the line and at 34th Street-11th Avenue on the extension line, so ummm besides the expense considering the economy nowadays AND crazy people, who will just do scratchitti, probably run into them all the time and evenutually break the glass and it still would pose a hazard because you always see people holding doors on the train, if someone tries to hold the doors and those screen doors shut, youre basically f**ked because, there was an incident in Singapore where a man held the train doors and the screen doors behind him shut and he got pulled under and got killed, bet that will happen considering the amount of crazy asses in the subway, so why waste the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted January 13, 2013 Share #62 Posted January 13, 2013 The biggest argument against them really is cost..and the fact that there are different door setup profiles that would mean that door alignments for some cars would not work for others. In Paris, there is one fleet per line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted January 13, 2013 Share #63 Posted January 13, 2013 You do not have cars with identical door placements system wide now, but such is not really a problem. Nearly half of the system can only handle cars of a specific design, or such will become true in the next 5 years. Places where this could be done now or in the next few years- 1. The entirety of the A division (can all be done now R62/R142 are similar enough to design a system which could deal with both). 2. The entirety of the Eastern division (L can be done now, J/M in a few years when R179s come in) 3. The entire Queens IND ( can be done in a few years when CBTC comes). I would probably only do such on lines with CBTC in place, perhaps as part of installation, but door placement won't be what stops it from being put up in the eastern division or A division. I think even the two different door placements could be worked out. Like some places, the doors for the 75 footers might be far enough away from the 60ft doors that there would be no problem, and it would be set up so that it doesn't open when there's no door on the train next to it. You could start with the first door being shared by both kinds of equipment. If someone could get a side by side comparison, we could see is there would be any conflicts (like doors of the two types of equipment overlapping), but even those could probably be worked out. Like a three panel doorway, and only two of the panels would open at a time, depending on which equipment is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted January 13, 2013 Share #64 Posted January 13, 2013 Ive heard so many times that they are proposed on the line and at 34th Street-11th Avenue on the (7)extension line, so ummm besides the expense considering the economy nowadays AND crazy people, who will just do scratchitti, probably run into them all the time and evenutually break the glass and it still would pose a hazard because you always see people holding doors on the train, if someone tries to hold the doors and those screen doors shut, youre basically f***ed because, there was an incident in Singapore where a man held the train doors and the screen doors behind him shut and he got pulled under and got killed, bet that will happen considering the amount of crazy asses in the subway, so why waste the money? So...the trains should be upgraded to have sensors on trains doors + seletive reopen system. when a set of door( plus a set of PSDs) got blocked, that set of doors and PSDs will release a little bit to let the person/subject go then the PSDs could operate safety + efficiently However...i don't suggest MTA to install PSDs and upgrade the trains before the installation of CBTC-based ATO...PSDs work much better in a CBTC system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted January 13, 2013 Share #65 Posted January 13, 2013 Wrong thread ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCRailfan523 Posted January 13, 2013 Share #66 Posted January 13, 2013 As again, I would say, that the should do this when the trains are in automatic train operation. And all trains should be retired that don't match the door configurations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted January 13, 2013 Share #67 Posted January 13, 2013 1 Av - United Nations on the Not.possible. Too steep and stop foaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted January 13, 2013 Share #68 Posted January 13, 2013 There is no such thing as a station that is too deep. 168th St is the deepest point in the system, and yet, that's still a station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted January 13, 2013 Share #69 Posted January 13, 2013 There is no such thing as a station that is too deep. 168th St is the deepest point in the system, and yet, that's still a station. Steep. It means that the trains will roll back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro CSW Posted January 13, 2013 Share #70 Posted January 13, 2013 #This v Wrong thread ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted January 13, 2013 Share #71 Posted January 13, 2013 Steep. It means that the trains will roll back. If the trains roll back, then those brakes need to be checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted January 13, 2013 Share #72 Posted January 13, 2013 If the trains roll back, then those brakes need to be checked. It would be unethical to build a station on that grade of track. It's not about brakes being checked or anything at all. If by the off chance that the train was on a 15% grade and boarding passengers and the brakes failed, you could risk serious injuries to customers and multiple lawsuits. NOT to mention the cost of having to build the station in the first place. Not worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted January 13, 2013 Share #73 Posted January 13, 2013 It would be unethical to build a station on that grade of track. It's not about brakes being checked or anything at all. If by the off chance that the train was on a 15% grade and boarding passengers and the brakes failed, you could risk serious injuries to customers and multiple lawsuits. NOT to mention the cost of having to build the station in the first place. Not worth it. The injuries, alright. I'll buy that. But why are the costs a problem? I mean, of course, the money isn't directly there but if they build a new station they do it to get more customers = more profit. Why wouldn't 1 Ave-United Nations be a protifable station? Is it because the already has a station at 1 Ave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overclocked Posted January 13, 2013 Share #74 Posted January 13, 2013 The injuries, alright. I'll buy that. But why are the costs a problem? I mean, of course, the money isn't directly there but if they build a new station they do it to get more customers = more profit. Why wouldn't 1 Ave-United Nations be a protifable station? Is it because the already has a station at 1 Ave? I have one question, WHY? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted January 13, 2013 Share #75 Posted January 13, 2013 There is no such thing as a station that is too deep. 168th St is the deepest point in the system, and yet, that's still a station. And Clark Street on the and not to mention Lex Ave on the . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.