|
|
| Re: (G) cut from Queens Boulevard (538573) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: (G) cut from Queens Boulevard |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sat Dec 22 12:07:55 2007, in response to Re: (G) cut from Queens Boulevard, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Dec 22 11:19:40 2007. I believe that since the 1930's-1940's the G-train has terminated at 71st Avenue, and at some point the RR, the EE, then N, and now R-train terminates there also. Now the V-train terminates at 71st Avenue also. I believe that on the inbound local track, the trains had to be cleared of riders before the train had to head to either the train yard or to the two relay tracks that exist under the main-line tracks.So how does this "policy about passengers having to exit trains at relay terminals" differ from activities in the past? Why should the legislator get involved in a train operation practice of the TA? For example, in public schools, the legislator usually does not get to tell the cooks HOW TO ACTUALLY make the meals. Those kinds of decisions are usually left up to the professionals in that field to follow standard industry practices. There does not seem to be "health and safety" issue with the TA's practice discharging riders and making sure that riders are not on the trains. In fact one could argue that the TA is aiding the "health and safety" of the riders by making sure that they are not stuck on yards that spend the night in the train yard, or the riders are not walking the rails. I get the fact that some folks here do not like the practice of making sure the riders have left the train, but that does not mean the legislator has a role here. Just a few thoughts. Mike |
|
|
|