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  
Lawrence St

MTA continues to confuse riders by not updating or fixing NTT Programs before Planned Work.

Recommended Posts

On multiple occasions this year, the (MTA) has confused riders by not updating, fixing, or adding programs to their New Tech Train fleet before the start of planned work. Is there no team to check and make sure that these train programs are functioning right before they publish them to the rest of the train fleet? Why are the newer programs no longer as detailed as they were prior to 2019? When will they start actually fix these issues BEFORE the start of planned work?

Some of these examples include;

(M) to 145th Street G.O. For the first week, all (M) trains kept announcing "This is a Myrtle-Wycoff Av bound (M) train", confusing riders.

(W) to 96th St G.O. When this program was originally made, the trains kept saying "This is a Queens bound (W) local train", creating a ton of confusion at 57th St. While this was recently fixed, the announcements still dont explain that it's running on the (Q) line. This is the same problem with the (R) . How come newer programs no longer announce the lines that they're running on? For example, "This is a 96th St bound (W) train, via the (Q) line."

(4) to East 180th St G.O. There was no program made, which caused a ton of confusion along White Plains Road and Lexington Avenue as multiple (4) trains were signed up as various destinations for the first weekend. 

(J) to Metropolitan Avenue G.O. There was no program made, and caused a LOT of confusion at Myrtle Av as (J) trains were signed up to Broadway Junction or the Automated System turned off, despite there being an (M) program from Broad St to Metropolitan Av, which would have worked better in this scenario.

Thoughts on these issues?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

On multiple occasions this year, the (MTA) has confused riders by not updating, fixing, or adding programs to their New Tech Train fleet before the start of planned work. Is there no team to check and make sure that these train programs are functioning right before they publish them to the rest of the train fleet? Why are the newer programs no longer as detailed as they were prior to 2019? When will they start actually fix these issues BEFORE the start of planned work?

Some of these examples include;

(M) to 145th Street G.O. For the first week, all (M) trains kept announcing "This is a Myrtle-Wycoff Av bound (M) train", confusing riders.

(W) to 96th St G.O. When this program was originally made, the trains kept saying "This is a Queens bound (W) local train", creating a ton of confusion at 57th St. While this was recently fixed, the announcements still dont explain that it's running on the (Q) line. This is the same problem with the (R) . How come newer programs no longer announce the lines that they're running on? For example, "This is a 96th St bound (W) train, via the (Q) line."

(4) to East 180th St G.O. There was no program made, which caused a ton of confusion along White Plains Road and Lexington Avenue as multiple (4) trains were signed up as various destinations for the first weekend. 

(J) to Metropolitan Avenue G.O. There was no program made, and caused a LOT of confusion at Myrtle Av as (J) trains were signed up to Broadway Junction or the Automated System turned off, despite there being an (M) program from Broad St to Metropolitan Av, which would have worked better in this scenario.

Thoughts on these issues?

That (4) one could've been avoided if they just used the (5) designation. (The same goes for that (J) scenario with regards to the (M), as does that "(5) to Burnside Avenue" crap they pulled with regards to the (4).) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Lex said:

That (4) one could've been avoided if they just used the (5) designation. (The same goes for that (J) scenario with regards to the (M), as does that "(5) to Burnside Avenue" crap they pulled with regards to the (4).) 

Isn't that what they did during the 2nd weekend of that G.O?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they have to manually install the program in each unit. 
 

some service changes, like the M on CPW, are so rare, what’s the point of having to reprogram ENY’s entire roster for a reroute that’s only going to be used for a few days?

I mean, they knew about the 2010 changes months ahead of time, and yet most of the NTTs ran announcements and finds off for the first few weeks until their inspection turns came up, after the changes went into effect.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kamen Rider said:

Because they have to manually install the program in each unit. 
 

some service changes, like the M on CPW, are so rare, what’s the point of having to reprogram ENY’s entire roster for a reroute that’s only going to be used for a few days?

I mean, they knew about the 2010 changes months ahead of time, and yet most of the NTTs ran announcements and finds off for the first few weeks until their inspection turns came up, after the changes went into effect.

I disagree with this. When they created the (M) to 145th St program, did they not check their work or test it out before implementing it to the rest of the ENY units?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lex said:

That (4) one could've been avoided if they just used the (5) designation. (The same goes for that (J) scenario with regards to the (M), as does that "(5) to Burnside Avenue" crap they pulled with regards to the (4).) 

Surprisingly, there wasn't too much confusion (from what I've seen) with the (5) to Burnside.

It's much easier to denote them as (5) to Burnside and run them express than to describe that "select (4) trains will run express from 149th Street to Burnside Avenue, and end", and "select (4) trains terminate at Bowling Green", because it wasn't a 50-50 split of each. Also, that in itself makes things much more complicated for those going to Bronx and Brooklyn destinations. If (5) trains made stops at 161st and 167th, there would be a lot of time wasted by having conductors explain that the train only goes to Burnside (specifically at 161st). Going southbound, most people should realize that the (5) will make the same stops as the (4) up to Bowling Green and that they run on the same line into Manhattan, so it wouldn't be too confusing for (4) train riders.

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I disagree with this. When they created the (M) to 145th St program, did they not check their work or test it out before implementing it to the rest of the ENY units?

You’re assuming they actually created a program.

Unless they have finally gotten around to updating the process (you never know with the MTA) the trains have to be brought into the shop and be hooked up to a special computer (I’ve seen the one that was at East 180th), something that takes time to cycle through.

 

you are assuming they had time to do all that.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Isn't that what they did during the 2nd weekend of that G.O?

That's what they did before that G.O., so why they decided not to for that one weekend is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2019 at 2:31 AM, Lex said:

That's what they did before that G.O., so why they decided not to for that one weekend is beyond me.

Let's see how long it takes them to fix this (5) train to Burnside Av since 138th St uptown is going to close soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the better question that needs to be asked is, why can't this be done remotely? It's 2019. One shouldn't need to physically plug into the onboard computers to update the system these days. Naturally, that will be an added expense, but considering the existing hardware likely needs replacement anyhow, perhaps it's a good idea to look into.

Side question: how are the digital ads updated on the 142s/160s?

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lance said:

I suppose the better question that needs to be asked is, why can't this be done remotely? It's 2019. One shouldn't need to physically plug into the onboard computers to update the system these days. Naturally, that will be an added expense, but considering the existing hardware likely needs replacement anyhow, perhaps it's a good idea to look into.

Side question: how are the digital ads updated on the 142s/160s?

It is according to my calendar, also 2019 over here. The problem is that NTT trains aren't from 2019 they are builds and rehashes of technology from the R110 and the first generation NTTs. Under the hood the computer programs are still of the Windows XP/Windows 2000 ilk. The downside to wanting interoperability between manufacturers of the same type is every has to build to the Lowest Common Denominator, as such no party is going to be interested in re-doing the coding under the hood from the basic structure that was developed forever-and-a-half-ago. I'm not sure what hardware you're speculating needs replacement so I won't comment,

Speaking to the technological implementation, be careful what you wish for. Here at the LIRR we have an ASI that is primarily drawn from a remote telemetry system, in Penn Station and Atlantic Terminal this system is often overwhelmed  and will take several minutes to download, or will fail entirely leading the crew to have to manually program the system.  I think the intent was for the MTA to be able to put in notices and special announcements without crew intervention but because of this short coming in never worked out. 

The application in NYCT will face similar shortcomings especially considering the prolonged periods underground and the apparent poor radio reception that exists in many parts of the system.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2019 at 12:43 PM, Lawrence St said:

(4) to East 180th St G.O. There was no program made, which caused a ton of confusion along White Plains Road and Lexington Avenue as multiple (4) trains were signed up as various destinations for the first weekend.

That is why the following weekend and onward, they suspended the (4) completely and replaced it with the (5). There is already a (5) program from Utica Av/New Lots Av to Dyre Av anyway so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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