|
|
| Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement (939788) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (940232) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed May 9 23:42:06 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by italianstallion on Wed May 9 23:03:31 2012. Nip, nip, nip! mother fucker |
|
|
| (940234) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Thu May 10 00:00:03 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed May 9 23:40:25 2012. Brooklyn has one of the deepest bays in the world (Thanks Fred G for that info!) so for freight I would focus on building a route that would connect Elizabeth Shipyards and Freight, Staten Island and Brooklyn Freight Yards with a connection to that Brooklyn Line that parallels the Sea Beach... (LOL forgot). You serve 3 major areas, make Staten Island prime for industrial development and give Brooklyn the chance to build up its ports and help NYC become an industrial powerhouse again. WIth a connection to the freight line you can move rail from either brooklyn or SI through either Jersey then via Conrail to Upstate NY or via Oak Point towards New Haven or Selkirk (HAHA). Since the height difference is a major factor with MNRR, a tunnel would be a better option than the bridge because a bridge forces any commuter rail line to connect with the Harlem Line which only has 2 tracks to Crestwood. Build the tunnel and have it connect to the Hudson Line. |
|
|
| (940237) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu May 10 00:15:34 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by ClearAspect on Thu May 10 00:00:03 2012. They could do an IRT style jug handle to the Hudson line. That'd be a hoot. :)But yeah, can't fathom why they won't connect up Staten Island to somewhere given Long Island, the city and all else there that could use a much shorter path to AMERICA for freight. While we admire spotting the garbage train and all the other good stuff that rolls through here, parked trains waiting for a slot at Selkirk is kinda making it look like Chicago around here. (grin) |
|
|
| (940259) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Chimpan Zee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 10 07:38:51 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Chimpan Zee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 9 21:26:12 2012. Sure. I am purposely more partisan here than I really am in real life, but that's because the pure BS posted here from may (that seem to really believe what they are posting is real) has to be shown for what it is. BS. |
|
|
| (940260) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Chimpan Zee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 10 07:40:36 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Chimpan Zee Bridge Replacement, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 10 07:38:51 2012. What BS? |
|
|
| (942238) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed May 16 21:18:20 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 9 23:36:32 2012. That's what debit cards are for. E-ZPass is for vehicles only. |
|
|
| (942243) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 16 21:34:25 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed May 16 21:18:20 2012. Stop being so obtuse. Drive-through=having a vehicle. |
|
|
| (942246) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 16 21:36:21 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed May 16 21:18:20 2012. And also, why "debit cards" specifically? You know that most people consider "credit card" do be the generic term for debit, charge and credit cards collectively? You just have bizarre thought processes. |
|
|
| (942325) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:46:45 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 16 21:36:21 2012. You just have bizarre thought processes. That's being nice. |
|
|
| (942326) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:48:41 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed May 9 23:40:25 2012. Cutting those costs would more than pay for the bridge I'd suspect. Lowering the railroad's operating costs would pay for the bridge how exactly? |
|
|
| (942327) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:51:52 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 9 23:36:32 2012. Yes. Not really. Speaking of E-ZPass, it's about time they open it up to commercial applications. Like paying for parking besides at the airports, drive through food payment and possibly gas payment. I could be wrong but I don't think it is necessarily NOT open to commercial applications. I think it is just that would-be commercial users don't want to invest/pay what it would cost to implement. Those that have implemented RFID or other non-traditional payment solutions may have found it cheaper to go non-E-ZPass routes. |
|
|
| (942328) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:52:50 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by ClearAspect on Wed May 9 23:29:31 2012. NY is way behind Florida in terms of the high speed EZpass. I disagree. What new toll crossings have been built recently in NY without high-speed E-ZPass? |
|
|
| (942329) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:53:43 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed May 16 21:18:20 2012. E-ZPass is for vehicles only. WTF? Why would it be for vehicles only?? You're wrong again, Dan Lawrence. |
|
|
| (942334) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by dand124 on Thu May 17 10:04:40 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed May 16 21:18:20 2012. 
|
|
|
| (942394) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:01:20 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:48:41 2012. Economic surplus. |
|
|
| (942397) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:02:21 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:52:50 2012. Florida retrofitted it in most places where it would make sense. NY has not. |
|
|
| (942398) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:02:59 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 09:53:43 2012. He is technically correct. The most useless kind of correct. |
|
|
| (942399) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:03:18 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:01:20 2012. What do you mean exactly? And is that what Selkook was referring to? |
|
|
| (942402) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:07:10 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:03:18 2012. Selkirk probably thinks (and he was clearly only speculating) that the economic loss of trains going all the way up to his namesake to cross the river is greater than the cost of a new bridge with the appropriate rail capability. |
|
|
| (942404) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:08:55 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:02:21 2012. But the context of his post was about new infrastructure, not retrofits. Hence my statement. |
|
|
| (942408) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 17 14:11:36 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed May 9 23:36:32 2012. McDonalds had EXPass food payment for a while, but for some reason they scrapped it. |
|
|
| (942409) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 17 14:11:52 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 17 14:11:36 2012. I meant EZ pass. |
|
|
| (942414) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:15:33 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:02:59 2012. I wouldn't say that. What is correct is that AFAIK the tags are currently mandated to be affixed to a vehicle during current transactions (and as you noted, that doesn't disagree with what you were proposing). But AFAIK there's no mandate that says the whole E-ZPass system (or any of its components or sub-systems) can only be used "for" vehicles. So I don't think he is correct. |
|
|
| (942415) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:15:40 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:08:55 2012. Yes, but that was pretty much an aside. |
|
|
| (942418) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:16:56 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:15:40 2012. Seems to me the high speed E-ZPass was the aside to the main topic of new infrastructure. |
|
|
| (942443) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 15:51:35 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 17 14:11:36 2012. It was a brief experiment and only on LI. I would have made the dedicated trip to try it out but it was way too far out. |
|
|
| (942447) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 15:55:16 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:15:33 2012. But what could it possibly be used for? In theory you could carry it in your pocket and use it for other transactions, but at the current time there is no such use nor any intention to implement one. |
|
|
| (942455) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 16:30:26 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 17 14:16:56 2012. Which doesn't mean that the comment is not accurate. |
|
|
| (942494) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu May 17 18:16:30 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:07:10 2012. Correct. It delays shipments in and out by an entire day. That's a significant extra cost. And the backups up here are only growing longer. |
|
|
| (942560) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by JohnL on Thu May 17 19:39:04 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu May 17 18:16:30 2012. Of course, what’s missing is a way to convert the savings of the railroads into funding for rail over a replacement bridge. |
|
|
| (942566) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu May 17 19:55:24 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by JohnL on Thu May 17 19:39:04 2012. Tax cuts for the railroads perhaps? :)Maybe our OCD lad can come up with something ... heh. |
|
|
| (942613) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 17 22:19:30 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 15:51:35 2012. Oh wow, I didn't realize it was just on LI....my McDonald's had it. |
|
|
| (942764) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri May 18 08:43:41 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 15:55:16 2012. But what could it possibly be used for? In theory you could carry it in your pocket and use it for other transactions, but at the current time there is no such use nor any intention to implement one.You could have a second pocket-sized transponder linked to the same account for non-vehicular transactions. |
|
|
| (942773) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri May 18 09:48:52 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri May 18 08:43:41 2012. You could have a second pocket-sized transponder linked to the same account for non-vehicular transactions. That's exactly what I was hinting at. |
|
|
| (942776) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri May 18 09:56:42 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu May 17 14:07:10 2012. But that's very abstract. My point was (and still is) (and JohnL, who used to be cool, beat me to it), that it's not immediately clear to me (and it's certainly not clear to SelkookPMS, as I suspected, and as he just confirmed) how this would translate, in practical terms, to funding for the bridge. |
|
|
| (942860) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 18 18:08:45 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri May 18 09:56:42 2012. Maybe I wasn't talking about direct funding? Sometimes the cost of doing things is justified by other economic benefits. Now I realize that concept is too complicated for your simple little mind, but it's how things like this are often done. |
|
|
| (943473) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon May 21 09:37:26 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 18 18:08:45 2012. Learn how to read. AGAIN, Lowering the railroad's operating costs would pay for the bridge how exactly? |
|
|
| (943659) | |
Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon May 21 18:37:04 2012, in response to Re: Feds Reject Funding of Tappanzee Bridge Replacement, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon May 21 09:37:26 2012. Heh. OK ... so let's see if I've got this straight. You're telling ME to "learn to read" when ever so clearly, I *NEVER* said anything about the "railroad's operating costs" to begin with. In fact, I didn't say anything about ANYBODY's "costs" ...I cited possible freight traffic on that bridge (IMPLYING that it would also be used as originally planned for transit as well, freight at night for an ADDITIONAL benefit) as a GENERAL "economic benefit" that would lower shipping costs, and remove a bottleneck up here that (implying again) could lower costs all over the NY Metro area. Benefits to society that reduce expenditures allow resources (that would be "money") freed up to be spent on better things. The large benefit that knocking typically 24 hours off shipping to NYC and surroundings would compensate for the cost of putting tracks on the bridge. Can you comprehend the concept now? Of course not ... |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||