|
|
| Misdirection? (1165860) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1165860) | |
Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012 Do you think that anyone taking the 'C' train, whose designation implies that that it should be an 8th Av Concourse train, is surprised when it goes to Washington Heights instead? Or that the 'B', which ought to go to Washington Heights, ends up on the Grand Concourse?Or do people just note the ultimate destination and figure it out for themselves? It certainly bothers ME that the naming "rules" are not being following |
|
|
| (1165862) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 09:58:45 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. Well, they can't use "AA" for what is now the C train, since they eliminated double letters in the 1980s.They can't use "DD" for what is now the B for that reason, and the fact it runs express on 6th Avenue and in Brooklyn. That, and it would likely confuse many who are traveling to Brooklyn, since the B and D take different routes after coming off the Manhattan Bridge. |
|
|
| (1165863) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jul 10 10:29:33 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. Mighty few people today are even aware of what the original IND naming rules were. Those few who know are also well aware that they are no longer followed.I learned them from my dad as a kid, and yeah, it bugged me a bit when they switched the B and C terminals. But now it seems right. C is certainly a better designation for the 8th Ave. local than K. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1165869) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Tue Jul 10 12:37:05 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. You could argue that the B makes sense because it's other terminal is Brighton Beach ...--Mark |
|
|
| (1165871) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jul 10 12:45:45 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jul 10 10:29:33 2012. To think that the switch to single letter designations was done with a $21 million federal grant! |
|
|
| (1165875) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Jul 10 13:16:05 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. With all of the service changes over the past couple of decades most New Yorkers do not think of the traditional historical significance of route designations. They make sure they know what lines are going where at the present moment and they act accordingly.The B/C switch took place in 1998 I think. If anyone is returning to the city after being away for 14 years, I would think they'd consult a map, friend, or signage before just assuming the lines go where they went before. |
|
|
| (1165882) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 10 13:56:04 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. Do you think that anyone taking the 'C' train, whose designation implies that that it should be an 8th Av Concourse trainWhere is such implied? (Does that mean that the F train is the Fulver, err Culver Line?) |
|
|
| (1165886) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 14:13:53 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 09:58:45 2012. And if it weren't for that stupid Futurama episode, the D would probably still be the Brighton express. :) |
|
|
| (1165888) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Tue Jul 10 14:22:16 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Jul 10 13:16:05 2012. i was at da bedford park blvd station of da d train when they did da B/C Switch.it was done over da weekend. chud1 |
|
|
| (1165892) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jul 10 15:21:01 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. "Naming rules", what is that? If you liked the old double letter "rules', that is your opinion. I prefer the single letters to the QJ, RJ, JJ, KK, etc, mess that confused a lot of riders. |
|
|
| (1165900) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:37:11 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 14:13:53 2012. B is for Bender, that's good enough for me. |
|
|
| (1165908) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Re: Misdirection? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:59:46 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 10 13:56:04 2012. No, F is 6th Avenue/Queens.Here's the original IND line naming scheme, in convenient table form.
Doubled letters (AA, CC, GG, HH, etc.) are used for local trains, single letters are used for express trains, even if they are express for only a portion of their route. Note that the table above does not give any indication as to how a given letter code operates below West 4th Street in Manhattan. Under this scheme, any route that runs between The Bronx and Brooklyn could be called C, CC, D, or DD, depending on how it's routed through Midtown Manhattan. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| (1165909) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 17:02:15 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Tue Jul 10 12:37:05 2012. The most alliterative line in the system, right in front of the M. |
|
|
| (1165911) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 17:18:53 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jul 10 15:21:01 2012. The "naming rules" were an IND thing where a single letter meant "express" and double letter (the SAME letter, doubled) meant "local" and there was a very logical naming pattern to it. Not so once Christie happened and a rather insane double-lettering (like those you describe) went to the BMT lines. But it was logical and easy to understand, at least as far as the IND version went. |
|
|
| (1165913) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 17:28:43 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:37:11 2012. Good enough for the Empty-yay too. THIS is why they yanked the D train off the Brighton ... :) |
|
|
| (1165914) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 17:32:33 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:59:46 2012. Uncle Olog is omnipotent. Do not taunt happy fun ball. :) |
|
|
| (1165916) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jul 10 17:40:32 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:59:46 2012. Didn't the original rollsign reading for the HH say "Fulton St. Local"? It was later used for the Rockaway shuttles, but they are still kind of associated with Fulton St. I don't think HH was ever a generic designation for shuttles, like the later SS and today's S. |
|
|
| (1165931) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 10 18:02:39 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 10 16:59:46 2012. Nothing stays the same, especially government designations. The Vuchic numbering scheme for SEPTA |
|
|
| (1165945) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 18:35:41 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jul 10 17:40:32 2012. IND never specified "shuttles" in their lettering plan although even the original HH turned out to be one in practice since it never went past court St. The "S" stuff was a NYCTA creation. |
|
|
| (1165947) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:43:01 2012, in response to Misdirection?, posted by Ancient Mariner on Tue Jul 10 09:47:25 2012. Nobody but NY transit fans understood the IND nor BMT lettering standards.When the N & R swapped in Queens 25 years ago, people in my office asked me why not just leave the Astoria service as R and Forest Hills as N. They were not aware that the standard is governed by the South Brooklyn Branch while the northern terminus did not matter. |
|
|
| (1165948) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:54:34 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 10 18:02:39 2012. He is still brooding over that ! He failed to understand that 97% of SEPTA passengers did NOT ride thru. He is concerned only with routing trains, not passengers, and too theoretical to comprehend how OTP suffers when delays magnify from one line and out to another.He was pontificating at the NARP member meeting in Philly last spring, saying NY has 3 "dead end systems" and they should all run thru. He said when he goes to "Long Island", he must spend a half hour "figuring out the other system" and buy a ticket at NYPS. Gee, I have made transfers with 90 seconds to spare. The only thing that hold me back now is that fucking 14 day expiration on MTA tickets, so I can't buy them in advance. (I admit there should be thru ticketing however. Appending LIRR's 8 fare zones onto NJT's should not be that difficult). I would think a publish/perish Professor would figure it out before embarking on such a voyage. I also think he is equally predisposed to being taken to wherever the "thru" train leaves him, like Sayville, Smithtown, or Ronkonkoma, and he can expense a $30 taxi ride to take him to whichever he was originally headed. |
|
|
| (1165949) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:56:57 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 17:18:53 2012. CTA seemed to be moving in that direction in the early 1980's.I remember maps calling the present day Blue Line CM & DM (Congess, Douglas, Milwaukee), and the North-South Line as EH & JH (Englewood, Jackson Park, Howard). |
|
|
| (1165950) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 19:04:29 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 18:35:41 2012. Had the Houston St Line past 2nd Avenue station (or whatever line in Manhattan was to) ever been sent out to Court Street, HH would have been dropped, and the F would have been a run thru service with the A & E. Then you would probably have seen the A Euclid local, E to the Rockaways, and F to Lefferts. |
|
|
| (1165955) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 19:50:13 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:56:57 2012. Now THAT'S confusing! :) |
|
|
| (1165956) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 19:51:02 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 19:04:29 2012. Quite likely ... the IND really wasn't in the shuttle business unless they had no other option. Even then, the HH carried its designated letters. |
|
|
| (1165960) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jul 10 20:20:27 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 17:32:33 2012. Olog-Hai (his handle) is a Third Earth Troll). You know as well as I do, don't feed the troll or the Turtle. |
|
|
| (1165962) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 10 20:31:34 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jul 10 20:20:27 2012. Given what's on TV, I find both of them highly entertaining ... :) |
|
|
| (1166001) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Wed Jul 11 00:26:33 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:43:01 2012. The RR was the train that ran from the Broadway BMT onto the Queens IND when I first became aware of that arrangement (1965), so it seemed to me like things were being set back to "normal" when the R took over that route after a decade or so of the EE and N covering it. |
|
|
| (1166010) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Jul 11 00:44:50 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Joe V on Tue Jul 10 18:54:34 2012. He failed to understand that 97% of SEPTA passengers did NOT ride thru.That doesn't matter, maintaining the R# system made for easier designations of terminals. SEPTA failed to understand that 97% of their passengers still call the lines by their R# designation, only to be brought to a screeching halt when confronted with a rack of schedules devoid of any easy identification. The removal of the R# designation system has only made the regional rail system more confusing for infrequent riders while doing nothing to reduce costs. It's next to impossible to give directions to people and convey to someone where their train is going and what to expect as it arrives now that the R# system is gone. He is concerned only with routing trains, not passengers, and too theoretical to comprehend how OTP suffers when delays magnify from one line and out to another. The studies from shortly after the tunnel opened, admittedly likely created with Vuchic's input, show that there was a significant reduction in schedule padding required when the Regional Rail system was created. The elimination of crew changes in Center City, and the greater flexibility over the terminals greatly improved the per-train productivity such that the propagation of delays was judged to be a fairly minor problem. Of course one of the first things SEPTA scrapped as part of Vuchic's plan (other than Swampoodle) was to do crew changes at both Suburban and the outer terminals, which eliminated that benefit. He was pontificating at the NARP member meeting in Philly last spring, saying NY has 3 "dead end systems" and they should all run thru. He said when he goes to "Long Island", he must spend a half hour "figuring out the other system" and buy a ticket at NYPS. Gee, I have made transfers with 90 seconds to spare. And I'm sure your mother is very proud of you. Do you want a cookie? (I admit there should be thru ticketing however. Appending LIRR's 8 fare zones onto NJT's should not be that difficult). Knowing the morass that is the financial side of either operation, it's probably a *lot* simpler to unify their operations. I also think he is equally predisposed to being taken to wherever the "thru" train leaves him, like Sayville, Smithtown, or Ronkonkoma, and he can expense a $30 taxi ride to take him to whichever he was originally headed. Why do you assume that? The operational experience of SEPTA (and pretty well all of Western Europe, much of Japan, and nearly every Subway/Metro in existence) indicates that there are significant cost reductions which can be had by routing commuter trains around existing terminals and distributing their passengers across a given CBD. Allowing station pairs to be linked on the opposite sides of the CBD are not a major factor in deciding to adopt a through-running commuter rail system, and arguing that they're useless is merely a strawman argument. But then if you're dealing with a significant amount of new commuter railroad infrastructure being required to accommodate current demand and potential growth you're better off designing for through-running. NYC's recent experience shows that the tunnels themselves are comparatively cheap, but the large caverns, whether for switches, stations, or other elements, are outrageously expensive. As such it's likely cheaper and much more effective to build an S-bahn/RER-like system and copy Hong Kong's cross platform transfers to get a wide variety of destinations within an easy two seat ride of most origin stations within a given metro area. |
|
|
| (1166024) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Wed Jul 11 06:35:52 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by WillD on Wed Jul 11 00:44:50 2012. Is there a significant amount of through traffic to stations like University City or Temple University from the "other" side? |
|
|
| (1166025) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Jul 11 06:47:15 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by WillD on Wed Jul 11 00:44:50 2012. That doesn't matter, maintaining the R# system made for easier designations of terminals. SEPTA failed to understand that 97% of their passengers still call the lines by their R# designation, only to be brought to a screeching halt when confronted with a rack of schedules devoid of any easy identification. The removal of the R# designation system has only made the regional rail system more confusing for infrequent riders while doing nothing to reduce costs. It's next to impossible to give directions to people and convey to someone where their train is going and what to expect as it arrives now that the R# system is gone.Exactly. In my opinion, the R numbering system was broken, but not beyond repair. Scrapping it AND the colors was a mistake. |
|
|
| (1166048) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Wed Jul 11 10:39:12 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by WillD on Wed Jul 11 00:44:50 2012. Thru-routing NJT and LIRR trains would be totally impractical. The biggest barrier is the incompatible electrification systems. LIRR will not be converted to catenary, and NJT will not be converted to third rail. And the rolling stock of both will not all be replaced with New Haven-style cars that can run on either. The political barrier is formidable as well, as each railroad is responsible to the people of its respective state.SEPTA did not have to deal with these problems. Both "sides" of its regional rail system are still in Pennsylvania. In fact, they don't serve geographically or politically distinct areas at all, and sometimes even cross each other. (Perhaps they should build a pedestrian transfer between the North Philadelphia and North Broad stations.) Did all the lines always use compatible catenary systems? There certainly don't seem to have been any major problems with electrical compatibility on the two sides of the Center City tunnel. |
|
|
| (1166103) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jul 11 16:55:11 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by merrick1 on Wed Jul 11 06:35:52 2012. There's your 3% |
|
|
| (1166108) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jul 11 17:17:59 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by WillD on Wed Jul 11 00:44:50 2012. Well the two R6 paths didn't even cross.What goes on in Europe does not matter. There would have to be significant dwell time in NYPS for any run-thru of NJT & LIRR to maintain a reasonable OTP. Any normal person can change trains and buy a ticket in 5 - 10 minutes. NJT is not a punctual operation. LIRR has dovetailing in Jamaica, and a lot of single-track branches, and also struggles to keep up with Metro North. All it takes is for one bridge to go up on the NJCL and the LIRR would be screwed up for hours. I have read articles where passengers said the R#'s were confusing, since they still had to keep track of whether it was for the RDG or Pennsy side. So the visitor headed to Media could have instead gone to West Trenton if all they went by was R3. You still need to know the destination. I don't see any other multi-branch commuter railroad in New York or Chicago resorting to route numbers, but they do color code. But people will always get on the wrong train regardless of the signage and announcements, which I think are quite good. They could have use double digits for one side, and had trains change numbers as it entered Philly. But it made no sense to mark a train from West Trenton, the R3 line, as R1, which is where they headed on weekends anyway. So what is the point of calling a line R3 if the train is marked for the ultimate destination on the other side ? The rigid route pairings never worked. In New York, there is not 3 stations, but one, so there is no distribution effect across the CBD like in Philly. Vuchic simply says "long Island" , like it is a homogenous place. The fact is, you are going to a specific locale, and with 7 NJT branches and 10 LIRR branches, the odds of satisfying any New Jersey/Long Island station pair for anyone's thru travel is practically zero, so you will wind up changing somewhere, whether it be Newark, NYPS, Jamaica, Hicksville. I fail to see how a NJT-LIRR thru service would have made his trip planning any easier. Vuchic is a all talk and all theory. Put him in a schedule planning office to deal with all the constraints of single-track branches, dove-tailing trains, making connections, avoiding locals close behind expresses, and he would quickly become Peter Principled. |
|
|
| (1166111) | |
Re: Misdirection? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jul 11 17:27:50 2012, in response to Re: Misdirection?, posted by Dyre Dan on Wed Jul 11 10:39:12 2012. RDG & Pennsy was an easy marriage. But they thought the thru operation would save equipment - it actual cost them equipment. While they had just dumped the MP54, while the Blueliner had to be retained, they had to buy AEM7/Comet sets, and that was when ridership kept dropping anyway. I remember 11 car MP54's to Wilmington and Elwyn in the late 1970's. By the early 1980's, no Silverliner consist was over 6 cars, and those were rare.When they stuck to rigid branch pairing, the clock-face intervals and constraints of timed, passing meets on the RDG side extended running times, so they had to break the rigidity at times and have trains change route numbers as the passed thru Philly. The majority of rush hour trains run thru but barely. They get to Roberts or 30th Street yard and layup. Sit down and do the schedule planning. It looks easy from 35,000 feet, but it is very hard. |
|
|
