|
|
| Re: Air Train question (578781) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 1 08:39:25 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Feb 29 19:37:03 2008. Let's try this again, I shouldn't have attempted to respond last night.You missed the whole point. I will not repeat it will likely continue to elude you. You say that just because an article was never written or that opposition isn't widespread that doesn't mean there isn't a valid point. Is that correct? One of the major hurdles that has to be overcome is the use of the phrase "pedestrian toll". I am never going to even begin to understand the opposition's views if that term isn't done away with. It's only used as a semantics argument, and only used to make Airtrain's fare structure look more ludicrous than it may or many not be. Most people's choice in using AirTrain is not a matter of how "close" the subway line will take them to the airport before boarding Airtrain. Their choice in what mode of transportation to take to the airport is basically just to get them to the airport on time. Both legs get them to their terminal from the subway station in 10 minutes (give or take, source AirTrain website, as well as personal use). There is a cost motivation too of course, and there are many choices one can use. They can use a car which will add a certain conveninece and cost, personal airport shuttles services which offer a certain convenience and cost, they can choose Airtrain which will add a certain convenience or cost, and for people that want to go "cheaper" there are bus options. All the options are out there, and all may be wiser or more attractive for different people. People don't care if they traveled 5 miles or 1 mile, they care that it will get them to their plane on time in the time advertised airtrain will take them there. So really, I don't see people having a problem with the fare at HB. To most, it's irrelevant how far they physically travelled from the subway station to their terminal. They are looking at that "10 minutes". it's not a "conspiracy, immoral, or bad transportation policy". It's a level fare structure making Airtrain a balanced system from either subway access point, regardless of the distance traveled, bot legs take 10 minutes, which is what most people are looking at. Most are not looking at how far they traveled in those 10 minutes. No conspiracy. No, that is not why we are correct. If you feel our most recent points are incorrect, you may demonstrate why. So far no one has done that to some of my most recent points. I haven't seen any "most recent points" that haven't been addressed about this. The last one I saw was the distance point, and I have addressed that earlier in the thread, and again more recently. If there are more, I searched way back numerous times, and I can't find them to respond. So if I "missed" something, please point me to it. If not, I can't respond, as I don't know what I am supposed to be responding to, so nothing is willfully being skipped. Yes it does, especially as one can travel nearly the entire length of the on-airport branch for no fare. Right, I understand that. But remember that the HB station was only build because of it's connection to the subway station. There is no logical way they can charge people for parking and then again for a shuttle, as THAT would be out of the ordinary. To use the phrase used over and over by the opposition, "No where is a circulator charged for". So, I can't see rectifying the supposed and alleged "injustice" by making the parking lot people pay $5 to use that branch. The conroversy appears to be then that there is a discrepancy in one side calling the connection to Howard Beach a part of the circulator, and the other side does not consider that to be the fact. Whatever one wants to call it, a circulator or a route, I perfectly understand why they charge at Howard Beach the same as Jamaica, and I explained that balancing in another post. It would be different. Such a parking lot would not be an on airport lot. It would be like any other lot. It would be if the airport owned it and used it for the parking use. It's irrelevant on weather that lot butted right up against the rest of the main property, if it had to cross a highway dividing it from the main property, or if it had cross over someone else's property before entering the main airport property. Either way it is AIRPORT PROPERTY's parking lot for use for the airport. The schematics or space considerations may have made it necessary to build one lot in that matter. And parking fee structure for that lot would be the same as for other lots for the same purpose, even if space considerations required it to be "somewhere along the Jamaica branch" instead of butting up to the rest of the airport. The logical conclusion to that is if not every line NEEDS to connect to the AirTrain, nor do the E and J. E and J passengers not wishing to pay the $5 can transfer to the A just like people on the D and other lines do now. And if you're so concerned about treating passengers equally, why are you not concerned about the unequal treatment that some passengers are receiving at Howard Beach? Right, not ever line NEEDS to connect. But in addition to the A, the E and the j lines DO connect to AirTrain. that's all that matters. I never assumed every single line MUST connect. Those are two different assumptions, and I did not even hint at the latter, and agreeing with the first one does not imply the latter. As for the parking lot people vs the Howard Beach NYCT people, again, it's a difference in semantics. The HB airtrain station was built with only one purpose in mind, to connect to the HB subway station. The other station was only meant to connect to the long term parking lot. A smaller portion of the parking lot people may use the Howard Beach station just because it's there, and I see no reason to close it off for them just to evade a semantics problem with "some riding free". The situation could have been resolved with a larger loop which looped through the long term parking lot, and then had the Howard Beach branch break off of that free loop circulator, but that probably would have cost more, as the loop would have had to be bigger, not to mention the time of the circulator would be longer too because of the longer loop necessary for that design. They chose the more efficient smaller loop, with a long term parking lot station along a branch instead. I feel that is the better choice, even if it makes a problem in semantics with hthe free vs subway people. A similar way to resolve that would be to charge the parking lot people $5 for the use of the same leg, but that also would cause another problem of semantics, a far worse one I feel. A distance based subway might be more equitable but when the subway opened it was considered unviable. Regardless of how viable it is now, it is politically impossible to implement. Agreed. The AirTrain is a new system and is not encumbered by over 100 years of continuous practice. Just because it's a new system doesn't mean it must be or is better to be distance based farewise. Furthermore in the case of the subway, EVERYONE pays the same fare regardless of their location of entry and exit. False. Everyone pays different amounts. Depending on the fare structure they wish to use they have many choices. Some even "ride free". Let me explain. Some people pay $2. Some pay $1.67. Some pay less than that through unlimiteds. It could also be said that some ride "free", as if they buy a daily, weekly, or monthly for "x" amount, and they ride very frequently, after they use up the threshold of rides that would be the cost of those rides using the base fare or the pay per ride fares, you could subtract that, and any ride after that could be considered "free". Of course, some may not like that notion and have to find the need to divide the cost of the unlimited pass by the number of rides actually taken instead to come up with some amount per ride, but that's neither here nor there, as no, everyone doesn't pay the same for the subway. If the subway is a good analogy for AirTrain, then either everyone would have to pay $5, or no one. I addressed that above. Yet you saw no need to respond to it until I called you on it and you continued to post the same thing despite my pre-existing response having already countered your point. That's not true at all. I continued to post "the same thing", as I didn't feel your points countered my points, not because I "ignored" anything. If I don't feel your point counters my original point, I i will of course still hold by my original point. I think the point we are talking about in this part of the post is the connections being treated equally. Please correct me if I am wrong. I mentioned many times in this thread, and very early on I covered and it based way back to Charles G's comment somewhere in this thread where I mentioned that I feel the two subway connections should be treated equally. I also covered it above, so look for that comment above in this post, or the post I just made before this one, so it's no sense repeating it. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|