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.
Sign in to follow this  
Via Garibaldi 8

MTA board member slams the agency for misleading New Yorkers about delays in subway service

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

MTA board member slams the agency for misleading New Yorkers about delays in subway service

 

mta24n-2-web.jpg
MTA board member Charles Moerdler blasted the agency for putting out "largely uninformative data" about delays.  (NICOLAS ENRIQUEZ©/NICOLAS ENRIQUEZ©)
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Monday, January 23, 2017, 6:12 PM

Stats the problem with the trains!

 

The MTA wants to dig into riders’ pockets for more money — but not tell them just how bad the ride has gotten.

“Service as a whole ranges in the view of the ridership as somewhere between poor and forget about it,” MTA board member Charles Moerdler said Monday.

 

He ripped into the agency for giving out “largely uninformative data" about delays and keeping the riding public and board members in the dark about its efforts to keep trains flowing as smooth as possible.

 

NYC commuter allegedly draws gun on MTA worker over subway delays

His blistering criticism was shared by Andrew Albert, an MTA board member and rider advocate who complained that delays are broadly categorized and vague.

 

“Anybody that rides the system frequently knows your overall trip time appears to be getting longer,” Albert said. “With the coming fare hike, we really need to be able to tell our riders what’s being done to speed their trip.”

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority on Wednesday is planning a vote on fares hikes, which are expected to jump to $3 a swipe.

 

Another month of stats showing pain on the train sparked the complaints about fuzzy numbers.

 

EXCLUSIVE: MTA moves to raise subway fare to $3 per ride

Train cars continue to break down at an ever-increasing rate. They now travel 16% fewer miles before a malfunction over a 12-month period ending in November.

turnstile.jpg
The MTA on Wednesday plans to vote on raising fare hikes to $3.  (DAVID HANDSCHUH/NEW YORK DAILY NEWS)

Clunkers like the R32 trains — the oldest model, riding the tracks on the A, C and J/Z lines — saw the distance traveled before a breakdown shrink 32%, to 32,327 miles.

 

Riders on board every model of train, except for the newest model that runs on the No. 7 line, saw breakdowns happen more frequently.

 

All but four of the 20 major train lines saw fewer trains sticking to its schedule over a 12-month period ending in November.

 

4 beeps back plan to slash MTA costs for low-income New Yorkers

In November alone, 60,274 trains ran behind schedule — an increase of nearly 20% compared to the same month in 2015.

 

“Trains aren’t getting through the system,” said Ellyn Shannon, associate director of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA. “When trains aren’t reaching their destination, then you’re not running as many as you’re saying.”

 

NYC Transit President Ronnie Hakim responded to the criticism by saying an internal team of subway and bus officials are looking at transit systems in other countries that report more detailed operations data. She said detailed figures could be presented to the board as early as next month.

 

“A lot of work is going on behind these pages and behind this data,” she said.

 

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mta-ripped-misleading-new-yorkers-subway-delays-article-1.2953806

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's a lot of work going on with the data, then let's see it.   I'm just glad that the (MTA) is actually admitting the truth here, which is that service is worsening and not just a little bit either.  Now the question is what are they going to do with the data to improve it?  For example, what are they doing with the current fleet to ensure fewer breakdowns?  The general consensus has been that the delays are primarily caused by passengers.  I'm not so sure I buy that. 

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The general consensus has been that the delays are primarily caused by passengers.  I'm not so sure I buy that. 

 

It's pretty true. I witnessed this firsthand on the C train few months ago. We left the terminal (168) on time. Then as we progressed down the line, by the time we got to Hoyt, I believe the train had been 10 minutes late which prompted it to be sent express. The problem is passengers like trying to fit themselves in the trains. Everytime those doors have to be reopened (or even stay open longer cause people don't clear the doorways) it causes a delay. This is multiplied with every station. Merging trains also can have some effect.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty true. I witnessed this firsthand on the C train few months ago. We left the terminal (168) on time. Then as we progressed down the line, by the time we got to Hoyt, I believe the train had been 10 minutes late which prompted it to be sent express. The problem is passengers like trying to fit themselves in the trains. Everytime those doors have to be reopened (or even stay open longer cause people don't clear the doorways) it causes a delay. This is multiplied with every station. Merging trains also can have some effect.

People are squeezing themselves onto trains because of the delays/unreliable service. If you have to be somewhere like work for example, well if you've been waiting for a train for "X" amount of minutes when they're hasn't been one, well you squeeze on that train.  I definitely give myself extra time when taking the subway, but no more than 30 extra minutes.  After that it seems absurd to give extra time for such a short distance (two stops most of the time). Passengers squeezing onto trains certainly doesn't excuse the high amount of breakdowns.  Seems like they're slipping on maintenance, or the quality of these newer cars aren't cutting it or both.  

 

 

Andrew Albert and Charles Moerdler for  (MTA) Chairman!

I've always loved Charles.  Andrew I've seen in person in the elevator when I was going to one of the (MTA) board meetings to speak.  Pretty down-to-earth guy...

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are squeezing themselves onto trains because of the delays/unreliable service. If you have to be somewhere like work for example, well if you've been waiting for a train for "X" amount of minutes when they're hasn't been one, well you squeeze on that train.  I definitely give myself extra time when taking the subway, but no more than 30 extra minutes.  After that it seems absurd to give extra time for such a short distance (two stops most of the time). Passengers squeezing onto trains certainly doesn't excuse the high amount of breakdowns.  Seems like they're slipping on maintenance, or the quality of these newer cars aren't cutting it or both.

 

the new subway cars all run on the most demanding lines in the system and those lines run full-time and have heavy ridership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are squeezing themselves onto trains because of the delays/unreliable service. If you have to be somewhere like work for example, well if you've been waiting for a train for "X" amount of minutes when they're hasn't been one, well you squeeze on that train.  I definitely give myself extra time when taking the subway, but no more than 30 extra minutes.  After that it seems absurd to give extra time for such a short distance (two stops most of the time). Passengers squeezing onto trains certainly doesn't excuse the high amount of breakdowns.  Seems like they're slipping on maintenance, or the quality of these newer cars aren't cutting it or both.  

 

 

I agree that if the service is unreliable, then you would take whatever does come whenever that is.

 

The trains tend to crawl because of the high amounts of train traffic on the tracks. These signals only allow for a max of 2 minutes (I believe, may be wrong) and trains are scheduled as such. Lex in particular I notice trains are one behind the other.

 

As for maintenance, something you have to realize is that said cars run 24/7 in some cases. These cars also aren't ''new" anymore as some of them are over a decade old already. After a few years any machine with pristine maintenance becomes less reliable especially as parts become obsolete.

 

Door problems will happen when you constantly have people prying them open trying to get on the train (that just messes up the doors and eventually they give up the ghost).

Edited by Jdog14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Passengers squeezing onto trains certainly doesn't excuse the high amount of breakdowns. 

Passengers squeezing onto trains is whats causing a majority of the delays and breakdowns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Passengers squeezing onto trains is whats causing a majority of the delays and breakdowns

Yeah right. It can't possibly be due to the (MTA)... If that is the case, it should be well.documented, and the (MTA) should be looking for ways to remedy the problem. Those people are squeezing on those trains because so many of them are delayed in the first place.

 

I go back to this comment made in the article:

 

“Trains aren’t getting through the system,” said Ellyn Shannon, associate director of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA. “When trains aren’t reaching their destination, then you’re not running as many as you’re saying.”

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez. Where do I begin?

 

1. I never said delays weren't the (MTA) 's "fault". If you'll notice, I said the passengers caused "a majority" of the delays. On no way did I suggest it was fully passengers' fault or or the MTA had no responsibility for the delays in the system.

 

2. It is well documented and virtually every article on the subject notes the increased dwell times. It's relatively common sense, and this has been mentioned over and over again on the forums, that longer dwell times at stations create delays that cascade further down the line. 10 extra seconds turns to 20 extra seconds at the next and then 30 extra seconds at the next and so on. In fact if you were to look at the SAS FEIS, they specifically say Lex is delay prone due to dwell times at Grand Central during rush hour. It takes too long to empty the platform, meaning the next train is coming in as people from the previous one are still on the platform, gumming up the works.

 

3. Almost every article on the subject of delays mentions platform conductors, who provide an additional set of eyes and ears on the platform, monitoring the boarding process and ensuring that dwell times do not get too long. There have already been some positive effects on the Lex and the pilot program was expanded.

 

4. The person from the article you quoted clearly has no idea how the subway actually works. "Trains aren't reaching their destination" ?! Are you f**king kidding me? Of course their reaching their destination, slower than they should. But to suggest they aren't reaching their destination is either cheap sensationalism, which people eat up like sheep, that person has their head in the sand or they have no idea what their taking about.

 

If these are the kind of people who are going to advocate for better service, then god help us...

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. The person from the article you quoted clearly has no idea how the subway actually works. "Trains aren't reaching their destination" ?! Are you f**king kidding me? Of course their reaching their destination, slower than they should. But to suggest they aren't reaching their destination is either cheap sensationalism, which people eat up like sheep, that person has their head in the sand or they have no idea what their taking about.

 

If they short-turn the trains because they're too delayed, then technically, less service is being operated (even if it may very well be the most prudent thing to do, if those extra trains would clog up the terminal or something). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez. Where do I begin?

1. I never said delays weren't the (MTA) 's "fault". If you'll notice, I said the passengers caused "a majority" of the delays. On no way did I suggest it was fully passengers' fault or or the MTA had no responsibility for the delays in the system.

2. It is well documented and virtually every article on the subject notes the increased dwell times. It's relatively common sense, and this has been mentioned over and over again on the forums, that longer dwell times at stations create delays that cascade further down the line. 10 extra seconds turns to 20 extra seconds at the next and then 30 extra seconds at the next and so on. In fact if you were to look at the SAS FEIS, they specifically say Lex is delay prone due to dwell times at Grand Central during rush hour. It takes too long to empty the platform, meaning the next train is coming in as people from the previous one are still on the platform, gumming up the works.

3. Almost every article on the subject of delays mentions platform conductors, who provide an additional set of eyes and ears on the platform, monitoring the boarding process and ensuring that dwell times do not get too long. There have already been some positive effects on the Lex and the pilot program was expanded.

4. The person from the article you quoted clearly has no idea how the subway actually works. "Trains aren't reaching their destination" ?! Are you f**king kidding me? Of course their reaching their destination, slower than they should. But to suggest they aren't reaching their destination is either cheap sensationalism, which people eat up like sheep, that person has their head in the sand or they have no idea what their taking about.

If these are the kind of people who are going to advocate for better service, then god help us...

1. If you're stating that the "majority" of the delays are on the passengers, then that means you are blaming them and giving the (MTA) yet another pass. Seeing as if these board members seem to be in the dark regarding the cause of and the rise in delays, I'm not so sure that the blame should automatically be on the passengers.

 

2. That may be the case, but even with such evidence, you have some that believe the system is just fine. You can't fix anything if people remain in denial.

 

3. I've seen them and am not sure how effective they are. What exactly do they do that personnel on the train can't see aside from waiving those big flashlights? One thing that tends to be a problem is people packing into one car from one or two exits.

 

4. If a train is scheduled to terminate one place and is short turned or skips stops it is supposed to make, then that means less service for those affected and perhaps longer waits and usually more crowded trains. These delays are also extending well into the night past rush hour. We had a (1) train skip 86th street and runs express to 72nd street the other night. Had to be around 08:30 or so. It wasn't clear what the delay was from either but the train that skipped took quite a while to arrive.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the new subway cars all run on the most demanding lines in the system and those lines run full-time and have heavy ridership

Just about all of the lines run full-time and have heavy ridership. That means you need more maintenance workers to get trains repaired and back out again and you need enough fleet to handle the ridership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always confused when it comes to these conversations. What is it that they fully want to MTA to do exactly? Be more transparent? Optimize more in the same size box?  It's a fight with one hand tied behind your back almost. We know the Subway is carrying more people than it was intended to. Shouldn't we be talking and trying to get more money to increase the size of the box? I get the point of transparency and being accountable. We know the system is going to continue to go downhill even with more accurate reports. What is it that MTA needs to do to get more funding to expand?  It's crazy logic one I don't understand. " I want better service, faster more frequent but you're going to have to work with essentially the same system we had in 1960" The only thing they do kinda have control over somewhat is cleanliness and visuals. What am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 27 minutes that it took to get from 111th to Sutphin on the (J) this past earlyfriday morning, I seriously doubt was caused by some passenger.....

 

Supposedly there was congestion - but the whole time, only one Manhattan bound train whizzed by us in the opposite direction, so I wasn't buying what the c/r was selling (although I'm not faulting her at all.. at least she kept pax apprised of the [supposed] situation).....

 

Ever notice whenever there's talks of a fare hike, service gets worse & worse? Do you all think that's accidental.....

My own parents once told me that I care too much about shit to claim I don't care about what I say I don't.... Well, 35 years of life in this city & quite frankly, I'm tired of the crap.... A lot of it is centered around the politics of it all (which is what the lot of us come on here & muse about).... And although there are some chill people on this forum, as the days go by, it's feeling more & more like a chore just coming on here to talk transit....

 

In any case... What's up, MTA.... How's that record subway ridership doing now :lol:

Sons of bit.....

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always confused when it comes to these conversations. What is it that they fully want to MTA to do exactly? Be more transparent? Optimize more in the same size box?  It's a fight with one hand tied behind your back almost. We know the Subway is carrying more people than it was intended to. Shouldn't we be talking and trying to get more money to increase the size of the box? I get the point of transparency and being accountable. We know the system is going to continue to go downhill even with more accurate reports. What is it that MTA needs to do to get more funding to expand?  It's crazy logic one I don't understand. " I want better service, faster more frequent but you're going to have to work with essentially the same system we had in 1960" The only thing they do kinda have control over somewhat is cleanliness and visuals. What am I missing?

If (MTA) board members can't even get detailed reports regarding the uptick in the delays, how are they supposed to address any problems? Without that information one can only speculate why the delays have risen sharply. During rush hour the trains could be more delayed due to passengers, but what outside of the rush when trains aren't as crowded? What's the cause of THOSE delays? The board members should be privy to such information to then attempt to address the issues, otherwise the people voting on improving the system will remain in the dark. Terrible policy on the (MTA)'s part that must be addressed and quickly. What's troubling is they need to look at other transit systems to come up with a solution to providing data that is more accurate.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If you're stating that the "majority" of the delays are on the passengers, then that means you are blaming them and giving the (MTA) yet another pass. Seeing as if these board members seem to be in the dark regarding the cause of and the rise in delays, I'm not so sure that the blame should automatically be on the passengers.

 

2. That may be the case, but even with such evidence, you have some that believe the system is just fine. You can't fix anything if people remain in denial.

 

3. I've seen them and am not sure how effective they are. What exactly do they do that personnel on the train can't see aside from waiving those big flashlights? One thing that tends to be a problem is people packing into one car from one or two exits.

 

4. If a train is scheduled to terminate one place and is short turned or skips stops it is supposed to make, then that means less service for those affected and perhaps longer waits and usually more crowded trains. These delays are also extending well into the night past rush hour. We had a (1) train skip 86th street and runs express to 72nd street the other night. Had to be around 08:30 or so. It wasn't clear what the delay was from either but the train that skipped took quite a while to arrive.

 

1. Actually, they are. I see the monthly reports for daily "incidents" and what group or department takes the hit for each. Passengers are far and away the most responsible for delays and cancellations. Like, not even close. Vomit on train, passenger charge. Holding doors, passenger charge. Fight on train, POLICE charge (yet still it's really a passenger). And passengers are far and away the most responsible for delays and cancellations WITHOUT factoring in police charges (police charges are a separate category)!

 

2. No one I know believes the system is "just fine." Rather, most people in the know tend to believe, as I do, that this is the best that this system, as currently designed can do. It needs new routes, and it needs them fast. Otherwise before long we'll just be like all those hellholes in India and Asia where people gamble with their lives every time they squeeze onto a train...unless this city finally stops upzoning every single swath of real estate in this nightmare.

 

3. Platform controllers are nothing more than one of those slightly expensive, but much less expensive than new construction half-measures that I constantly talk badly about, invented by politicians and other officials as a short term stopgap "fix" to make themselves look good while continuing to ignore the real problem (insufficient system expansion since 1950).

 

4. Not true of turns. Often a train will be turned because there is massive congestion ahead in one direction, and a gap in service in the other. Turning the train allows the congestion to resolve itself faster once the incident causing it is resolved, and also provides needed service in the opposite direction which is being underserved (whether due to the delay or another reason). As for Skips, they are not ideal, but the lines that most frequently get them are lines that don't have the luxury of a two-pocket terminal to balance the service and cushion against delays (the most frequently "skipped" lines are the 1, 6, and B). Skips are not so much about the current trip but rather the return trip, since on these lines with South Ferry, Brooklyn Bridge, and 145 St/Bedford Park middle tracks...if a train arrives late to the terminal it will most definitely leave the terminal late, causing the delay to persist in the OPPOSITE direction of travel. Residual delays from an earlier incident should be worked out as soon as possible, not allowed to persist for more than half of a line's round trip running time, hence skips.

Edited by SubwayGuy
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If (MTA) board members can't even get detailed reports regarding the uptick in the delays, how are they supposed to address any problems? Without that information one can only speculate why the delays have risen sharply. During rush hour the trains could be more delayed due to passengers, but what outside of the rush when trains aren't as crowded? What's the cause of THOSE delays? The board members should be privy to such information to then attempt to address the issues, otherwise the people voting on improving the system will remain in the dark. Terrible policy on the (MTA)'s part that must be addressed and quickly. What's troubling is they need to look at other transit systems to come up with a solution to providing data that is more accurate.

@Subwayguy hit the nail on the head. That's really where my confusion lies I constantly hear people bash the system itself and for a person coming from an engineering perspective, it's not logical especially with the system is running at 100% and has been for quite awhile with no added bandwidth. So you're not giving the system the tools it needs to perform as expected and you never did really. That's like me getting mad with my SR.coders for not performing to standard my standard at that when I'm paying them a half salary and they're working with 10-year-old systems to compile kinda crazy. And to his point as I was walking around Downtown Brooklyn yesterday with my wife we were astonished at a number of hi-rises along Flatbush and Schermerhorn we live somewhat in the area but never really noticed the new density of the area. She asked a simple question how are all these new people going to get around? There are very simple calculations one can perform to know amount of riders that may be added a line and you also know approximations of current ridership. So you overtax the system and then talk crap about it after. Now to your point your correct in saying there should be accountability and transparency to the board but even with that said the improvements that you're thinking can from those optimizations are minuscule what 2%, 5% even tech like ATO/CBTC can only do so much I can't see double improvements across the majority of metrics. Also taking into account the major variable that SubwayGuy mentioned I think ATH said this as well there's a lot more to running a Railroad a very fluid situation indeed things you 100% plan for nor quantified fully. I'm inclined to take his point as well this is what he does the board isn't out there in system day in and day out so there's going to be situations that they nor we understand you have to submit to that the fiery Mr. Morder might as well that's how you move forward take in new information and apply it.

Edited by RailRunRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Subwayguy hit the nail on the head. That's really where my confusion lies I constantly hear people bash the system itself and for a person coming from an engineering perspective, it's not logical especially with the system is running at 100% and has been for quite awhile with no added bandwidth. So you're not giving the system the tools it needs to perform as expected and you never did really. That's like me getting mad with my SR.coders for not performing to standard my standard at that when I'm paying them a half salary and they're working with 10-year-old systems to compile kinda crazy. And to his point as I was walking around Downtown Brooklyn yesterday with my wife we were astonished at a number of hi-rises along Flatbush and Schermerhorn we live somewhat in the area but never really noticed the new density of the area. She asked a simple question how are all these new people going to get around? There are very simple calculations one can perform to know amount of riders that may be added a line and you also know approximations of current ridership. So you overtax the system and then talk crap about it after. Now to your point your correct in saying there should be accountability and transparency to the board but even with that said the improvements that you're thinking can from those optimizations are minuscule what 2%, 5% even tech like ATO/CBTC can only do so much I can't see double improvements across the majority of metrics. Also taking into account the major variable that SubwayGuy mentioned I think ATH said this as well there's a lot more to running a Railroad a very fluid situation indeed things you 100% plan for nor quantified fully. I'm inclined to take his point as well this is what he does the board isn't out there in system day in and day out so there's going to be situations that they nor we understand you have to submit to that the fiery Mr. Morder might as well that's how you move forward take in new information and apply it.

While they may not be in the field, several (MTA) board members actually use the system to get to and from work.  As you probably know, Fernando Ferrer lives in Riverdale (not too far from me in fact), and I have seen him on Metro-North several times when going to work.  Mr. Moerdler is also a resident of Riverdale (North Riverdale in fact), and I would imagine uses the system as well.  I wouldn't be so fast to say what some folks do and don't do.  Now granted they may not be able to understand the technical side of things, in other words the real nuts and bolts of the operation, but some of them are riders just like the rest of us, and when you see some of the things going on in the system, you have to question what is going on and why.  The fact that the system is almost at capacity is a separate issue.  That isn't the question, but rather a convenient excuse that can be thrown out there every time the system worsens.  For now we have to work with what we have, and so the question is how can the (MTA) improve with the existing infrastructure?  The system is NOT at capacity 24/7.  I would argue that it is during parts of rush hour on certain lines, but during off-peak, we should not be seeing the sorts of delays that I've been witnessing for such short trips on various lines.  That is a problem that is inexcusable, and you don't need to be in the field to understand that trains seem to operating with more delays at all times.  

 

As for the density situation, the issue goes much further than just density.  As a Brooklyn native, I am astonished at how a lot of the borough is transforming.  I grew up in the Sheepshead Bay/Manhattan Beach area, and the same thing is going on.  Massive luxury buildings going up that are selling out at record clips, but not all of these people are actually living in them, but rather using them as investment properties.  I've spent a lot of time in the Brooklyn Heights/Downtown area as well (interned for the (MTA) down there for a few years), and still hang out in over there, but that area has been transforming going back to the 90s, so I'm not too shocked by that development.  What is troubling however is the marketing of the subway system that is overtaxed in some instances.  The city is trying to move in the right direction by understanding travel patterns better and trying to fill in gaps where possible to alleviate some of the pressure off of the subway system.  We have citywide ferry service starting this year in several areas.  Proposals pertaining to light rail service...  There are many other things in the works that I've been privy to as part of my job that I find interesting.  We need more cooperation between our local transit systems to work together in the meantime until we can get more funding in place to expand the subway system, and that seems to be happening little by little.  Numerous transportation agencies in the tri-state area are trying to learn more about how their customers' commutes and offer better alternatives to get folks off of the road, so in some ways we're trending in the right direction.  This is something that the (MTA) needs to be doing as well.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While they may not be in the field, several (MTA) board members actually use the system to get to and from work.  As you probably know, Fernando Ferrer lives in Riverdale (not too far from me in fact), and I have seen him on Metro-North several times when going to work.  Mr. Moerdler is also a resident of Riverdale (North Riverdale in fact), and I would imagine uses the system as well.  I wouldn't be so fast to say what some folks do and don't do.  Now granted they may not be able to understand the technical side of things, in other words the real nuts and bolts of the operation, but some of them are riders just like the rest of us, and when you see some of the things going on in the system, you have to question what is going on and why.  The fact that the system is almost at capacity is a separate issue.  That isn't the question, but rather a convenient excuse that can be thrown out there every time the system worsens.  For now we have to work with what we have, and so the question is how can the (MTA) improve with the existing infrastructure?  The system is NOT at capacity 24/7.  I would argue that it is during parts of rush hour on certain lines, but during off-peak, we should not be seeing the sorts of delays that I've been witnessing for such short trips on various lines.  That is a problem that is inexcusable, and you don't need to be in the field to understand that trains seem to operating with more delays at all times.  

 

As for the density situation, the issue goes much further than just density.  As a Brooklyn native, I am astonished at how a lot of the borough is transforming.  I grew up in the Sheepshead Bay/Manhattan Beach area, and the same thing is going on.  Massive luxury buildings going up that are selling out at record clips, but not all of these people are actually living in them, but rather using them as investment properties.  I've spent a lot of time in the Brooklyn Heights/Downtown area as well (interned for the (MTA) down there for a few years), and still hang out in over there, but that area has been transforming going back to the 90s, so I'm not too shocked by that development.  What is troubling however is the marketing of the subway system that is overtaxed in some instances.  The city is trying to move in the right direction by understanding travel patterns better and trying to fill in gaps where possible to alleviate some of the pressure off of the subway system.  We have citywide ferry service starting this year in several areas.  Proposals pertaining to light rail service...  There are many other things in the works that I've been privy to as part of my job that I find interesting.  We need more cooperation between our local transit systems to work together in the meantime until we can get more funding in place to expand the subway system, and that seems to be happening little by little.  Numerous transportation agencies in the tri-state area are trying to learn more about how their customers' commutes and offer better alternatives to get folks off of the road, so in some ways we're trending in the right direction.  This is something that the (MTA) needs to be doing as well.

 

Okay here's a few questions and critiques on your points. A lot was said so let's focus on the Subway that's the topic at hand me and a few others gave idea's on better integration with MN and LIRR and even a new rail division so yes on that im with you. My Mom knows Ferrer well she's worked with him various times with the Unions and City Councils. He's a nice guy but it doesn't mean he's in the know. If Ferrer and Moerdler don't understand the details, technicals, and nuts and bolt's then how can they even speak/ or gauge the subway let alone talk about accountability. If I'm telling you I'm having electrical distribution issues and you don't know an AMP, OHM from a VOLT then what are we really doing besides going thru the motions? It looks and sounds good nothing more. The one thing even Ray Charles can see and if they indeed ride a crowded subway is the need to build. Where's the talk of trying to get some funding into a City that accounts for 15% of national GDP that's what I want to hear! Yeah, we can tweak here and there but that's end game end of story build. If you're not building the system, running the system or maintaining the system there no way you'll have the full picture so a lot of guys here know. If you agree with better integration then why do I feel like there's always opposition when ideas are presented? It's charity or too costly, NYC is NYC it's their problem and so forth what's your position I feel some flip-flopping going on.  As for capacity okay I'll give you there could definitely be an increase in frequency on some lines over the weekend. But construction and maintenance is also done over the weekend as well could that be a factor? Maybe someone else can speak on that with more knowledge. The mark of infrastructure is how it handles the extremes the system can't stretch another inch, okay the system is not a capacity 24/7 but were it really counts is rush hours when the system carries the most bodies. That's that's ceiling that's the mark. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay here's a few questions and critiques on your points. A lot was said so let's focus on the Subway that's the topic at hand me and a few others gave idea's on better integration with MN and LIRR and even a new rail division so yes on that im with you. My Mom knows Ferrer well she's worked with him various times with the Unions and City Councils. He's a nice guy but it doesn't mean he's in the know. If Ferrer and Moerdler don't understand the details, technicals, and nuts and bolt's then how can they even speak/ or gauge the subway let alone talk about accountability. If I'm telling you I'm having electrical distribution issues and you don't know an AMP, OHM from a VOLT then what are we really doing besides going thru the motions? It looks and sounds good nothing more. The one thing even Ray Charles can see and if they indeed ride a crowded subway is the need to build. Where's the talk of trying to get some funding into a City that accounts for 15% of national GDP that's what I want to hear! Yeah, we can tweak here and there but that's end game end of story build. If you're not building the system, running the system or maintaining the system there no way you'll have the full picture so a lot of guys here know. If you agree with better integration then why do I feel like there's always opposition when ideas are presented? It's charity or too costly, NYC is NYC it's their problem and so forth what's your position I feel some flip-flopping going on.  As for capacity okay I'll give you there could definitely be an increase in frequency on some lines over the weekend. But construction and maintenance is also done over the weekend as well could that be a factor? Maybe someone else can speak on that with more knowledge. The mark of infrastructure is how it handles the extremes the system can't stretch another inch, okay the system is not a capacity 24/7 but were it really counts is rush hours when the system carries the most bodies. That's that's ceiling that's the mark. 

I would hope that Mr. Ferrer and Mr. Moerdler understand the system enough.  Ferrer has been on the board for almost six years and Moerdler almost seven.  The insinuation you made that (MTA) board members aren't competent enough to make decisions regarding our transit system seems rather absurd, and if they aren't qualified to make such decisions, well then we have a serious problem.  Dumping money on the problem isn't necessarily the answer either.  The (MTA) first should be focusing on what they have now and making that efficient because any capital improvements are years down the line.

 

I'm for integration of the system, just not as much as you are, and I don't believe that we should be overusing other parts of the system to supplement subway service.  I've always talked about using other services more so to complement the subway system.  There's a difference.  You also seem to have this belief that money will solve the issues at hand and I don't believe that's the case.  I don't think incompetence and inefficiency can be solved by throwing money down the tubes.  We need to find a balance with everything, and forcing the subway down everyone's throat isn't necessarily the answer either.  

1. Actually, they are. I see the monthly reports for daily "incidents" and what group or department takes the hit for each. Passengers are far and away the most responsible for delays and cancellations. Like, not even close. Vomit on train, passenger charge. Holding doors, passenger charge. Fight on train, POLICE charge (yet still it's really a passenger). And passengers are far and away the most responsible for delays and cancellations WITHOUT factoring in police charges (police charges are a separate category)!

 

2. No one I know believes the system is "just fine." Rather, most people in the know tend to believe, as I do, that this is the best that this system, as currently designed can do. It needs new routes, and it needs them fast. Otherwise before long we'll just be like all those hellholes in India and Asia where people gamble with their lives every time they squeeze onto a train...unless this city finally stops upzoning every single swath of real estate in this nightmare.

 

3. Platform controllers are nothing more than one of those slightly expensive, but much less expensive than new construction half-measures that I constantly talk badly about, invented by politicians and other officials as a short term stopgap "fix" to make themselves look good while continuing to ignore the real problem (insufficient system expansion since 1950).

 

4. Not true of turns. Often a train will be turned because there is massive congestion ahead in one direction, and a gap in service in the other. Turning the train allows the congestion to resolve itself faster once the incident causing it is resolved, and also provides needed service in the opposite direction which is being underserved (whether due to the delay or another reason). As for Skips, they are not ideal, but the lines that most frequently get them are lines that don't have the luxury of a two-pocket terminal to balance the service and cushion against delays (the most frequently "skipped" lines are the 1, 6, and B). Skips are not so much about the current trip but rather the return trip, since on these lines with South Ferry, Brooklyn Bridge, and 145 St/Bedford Park middle tracks...if a train arrives late to the terminal it will most definitely leave the terminal late, causing the delay to persist in the OPPOSITE direction of travel. Residual delays from an earlier incident should be worked out as soon as possible, not allowed to persist for more than half of a line's round trip running time, hence skips.

1.  If that's the case then, what exactly is the confusion regarding delays and why aren't (MTA) board members getting more accurate reports as to the reason for the uptick in delays?

 

2.  lol... I don't get that feeling at all from some of the posts that other members have.

 

3.  Interesting.  

 

4.  What isn't true?

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trains are slow and Queens Blvd is horrible especially evenings and weekends. What makes it worse is that the majority of riders have to transfer to/from a bus! What's going to happen when it gets CBTC and one incident shuts the whole line down?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trains are slow and Queens Blvd is horrible especially evenings and weekends. What makes it worse is that the majority of riders have to transfer to/from a bus! What's going to happen when it gets CBTC and one incident shuts the whole line down?

They'll just use the block signals like currently. They've learned their lesson from the (L) train debacle...

 

Speaking of Queens Blvd, they've been installing some transponders recently...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 years of life in this city & quite frankly, I'm tired of the crap.... A lot of it is centered around the politics of it all (which is what the lot of us come on here & muse about).... And although there are some chill people on this forum, as the days go by, it's feeling more & more like a chore just coming on here to talk transit....

It's become a chore mainly because of some of the adolescent smart-asses who have flooded this place in the last 4 years or so. Perhaps there were too many head-in-the-clouds dreamers and drama queens back when you and me first joined, but I've frankly grown tired of all the bean-counters and those who mindlessly support the hi-tech march into oblivion.

Because I have a bit more sense than to believe that a particular switch placement is enough to prevent a particular service improvement from happening, and I know from actual experience that tried-and-true electromechanical designs are inherently more reliable than computerized garbage. And thank Christ I'm not the only one who sees through the folly:

I'm going to keep saying this until the retards who think an urban studies class in high school makes them qualified to opine on transit system design get it through their head.

 

If you want to increase system capacity, knock it off with the half measures.

Two things are needed:

-MORE TRUNK LINES AND YARDS

-SLOW DOWN GROWTH / URBAN SPRAWL / DEVELOPMENT

These are the only two things that will alleviate overcrowding, and neither one is the jurisdiction of the MTA. The politicians who run this city and state MUST make it a priority or else you will get the same inferior service with shitty half measures that make improvements on paper that are quickly dwarfed by ridership increases of a magnitude far greater.

Boo hoo, it's expensive. So's every other damn thing in life worth having.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hope that Mr. Ferrer and Mr. Moerdler understand the system enough.  Ferrer has been on the board for almost six years and Moerdler almost seven.  The insinuation you made that (MTA) board members aren't competent enough to make decisions regarding our transit system seems rather absurd, and if they aren't qualified to make such decisions, well then we have a serious problem.  Dumping money on the problem isn't necessarily the answer either.  The (MTA) first should be focusing on what they have now and making that efficient because any capital improvements are years down the line.

 

I'm for integration of the system, just not as much as you are, and I don't believe that we should be overusing other parts of the system to supplement subway service.  I've always talked about using other services more so to complement the subway system.  There's a difference.  You also seem to have this belief that money will solve the issues at hand and I don't believe that's the case.  I don't think incompetence and inefficiency can be solved by throwing money down the tubes.  We need to find a balance with everything, and forcing the subway down everyone's throat isn't necessarily the answer either.  

1.  If that's the case then, what exactly is the confusion regarding delays and why aren't (MTA) board members getting more accurate reports as to the reason for the uptick in delays?

 

2.  lol... I don't get that feeling at all from some of the posts that other members have.

 

3.  Interesting.  

 

4.  What isn't true?

 

1- There is no confusion. People complain to politicians, politician asks a barely introductory question or bases it on personal experience and huffs, puffs, stamps foot, and declares the state of affairs "unacceptable." Few decision makers are willing to really delve into details, they leave that for all the middle managers. That's why the few decision makers that do deal in details are exceptional at what they do.

 

2- Not talking about the kiddies that come here to argue about train paint schemes and fantasy land where the subway goes to Jersey. Talking about the generally informed posters. I don't even read the kiddie posts anymore unless I feel like trolling someone who I feel deserves it for excessive shitpoasting. Otherwise I ignore the children.

 

4-"Not true" was in response to your post claiming turned trains cause longer waits and delays for the passengers who don't get service because a train is turned. The service remains frequent because of the congestion that necessitates turning the train in the first place. Oftentimes, a train is turned to alleviate this congestion which causes "station to station" delays, where a train arrives almost immediately after the previous train left, and is held until its leader vacates the next station. The wait time is nearly nonexistent in these situations and turning a train in this scenario allows the area of the delay to be reduced by one station, while providing badly needed service in the opposite direction which is likely being underserved at that exact moment due to the bunching.

 

Think of it like this. You ride the 1.

 

-Train #1 has a sick passenger at 137 St. That train has to hold for EMS.

-Train #2 has to hold at 145 St. You don't want trains stuck between stations, so the train will be held.

-Train #3 has to hold at 157 St.

-Train #4 has to hold at 168 St.

-Train #5 has to hold at 181 St.

 

The RCC Dispatcher happens to notice a delay in service going uptown behind the train that just so happens to be at 181 St. going north (Train #6). So the Dispatcher decides to turn Train #4 back uptown to provide uptown service behind that train, until Train #7 arrives, say, 10 minutes after Train #6. If train #4 is turned so that it leaves exactly between the northbound Trains 6 and 7, you've maintained a 5 minute headway.

 

Not only does this provide needed service in the uptown direction, but it also reduces the size of the delay going south. Train #5 can now move up to 168 St. once Train #4 has been turned. Once the sick passenger is cleared up, Train #1 can be given a skip to 96 St., and the next 3 trains (2, 3, and 5) can run regular to pick up passengers and help recover from the delay, which isn't as bad with one less train in that mix.

 

Or, looking at it another way, Train #2 could be crossed to the middle track and operated express to 96 St. to bypass the delay. There are lots of strategies to manage delays, almost all of which Transit already uses. Which one is appropriate depends on the time of day, where on the line the delay occurs, and what direction of travel is more "vital" at that moment at that location. During the AM rush you need to get people into the CBD (Central Business District). During the PM rush you need to get people OUT of the CBD. The proper strategy is always the one that meets that goal, and allows the corresponding terminal that provides that service to run trains as regularly as possible.

 

Turns AND skips both make service better than doing nothing and letting trains idle in stations as incident related congestion builds.

Edited by SubwayGuy
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

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