|
|
| Keeping the system partially open? (1336399) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1336399) | |
Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 11:02:08 2015 Would it have been logistically possible to let's say keep the underground lines like the R,E,& C open? The 4,5,6 could have stayed open and stopped service before they entered the elevated portions. The 1,2,A and the rest of the system could have conceivable kept the under ground portions open. But then when those trains would reach stations before the elevated or outdoor portions, there would not have been any busses. I was just wondering if it would have been possible taking into account turning trains etc. |
|
|
| (1336405) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by GOlD_12tH on Wed Jan 28 11:20:47 2015, in response to Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 11:02:08 2015. Simple answer: Yes. |
|
|
| (1336418) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015, in response to Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 11:02:08 2015. It is entirely possible for the following basic underground only pathways for each of the subway lines:#1 - Running between South Ferry and maybe 168th Street or Dyckman Street (if possible) #2 - Running between 149th Street-Third Avenue or Grand Concourse and Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College #3 - Running between 145th Street (or maybe 148th Street-Lenox Terminal) to Utica Avenue, Brooklyn. #4 - 149th Street-Grand Concourse and Utica Avenue, Brooklyn #5 - Running between 149th Street-Third Avenue or Grand Concourse and Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College (or Bowling Green) #6 - Running between Hunts Point Avenue and Brooklyn Bridge #7 - Running between Times Square and Hunters Point Avenue (or maybe Queensboro Plaza for a short elevated segment) A - Running between 207th Street and Euclid Avenue B - Bedford Park Blvd or 145th Street to 34th Street/6th Avenue or Second Avenue, or Prospect Park C - 168th Street to Euclid Avenue D - 205th Street to to 34th Street/6th Avenue or Second Avenue, or 36th Street/4th Avenue. E - Jamaica Center and WTC F - 179th Street and Church Avenue G - Court Square and Church Avenue J - Chambers Street (or Broad Street) and Essex Street L - 14th Street/8th Avenue to Broadway Junction M - Forest Hills and Second Avenue or Essex Street N - 57th Street or 60th Street/Lexington Avenue and 59th Street/4th Avenue Q - 57th Street to Prospect Park R - Forest Hills and 95th Street S - Times Square To Grand Central Station (no Franklin Shuttle) --------- For the folks who repeatedly, and I do mean repeatedly were saying that the "underground secions" of the subways could have been kept running. Yes, that is true, but think about the sections of the city that would not have had service: Major portions of the west Bronx, and most of the east and north Hronx would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. Major portions of Queens, such as Flushing, Astoria, Rockaways, Ozone Park, Richmond would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. Major portions of Brooklyn, such as Coney Island, Gravesend, Brighton Beach, Bushwick, Williamsburg, Brownsville, would not have had service, especially with the buses not running. All of Staten Island would not have had service since the SIRT is entirely on the ground or above the ground! With the buses not running all of the eastern, southern, western, northern and middle island sections of Staten Island would have been without transit service. The restrictions on the Staten Island Ferry service, as well as the restrictions on bridge travel would have made Staten Island almost impossible to get to, from, or around. The only borough that would have really retained something resembling regular subway transit from an "underground only" weather-impacted subway system would have been Manhattan, even if given the fact that the buses were not running. Yes, there would be places in Manhattan that would be difficult to get to easily with the bus system running. The folks who repeatedly, and I do mean repeatedly kept saying that only the "underground sections" should be kept running it seems never really looked at the sections of the city that would be out of service under such a scheme. Now to the argument that the subways have run before in storms with both underground, on-the-ground and elevated segments in operation, and that problems were dealt with where needed. That street closings due to snow did affect some bus routes in the past, and that those were dealt with as needed. Yes - those folks have a good point - that the transit systems are more resilient than some times believed. The argument for "keeping underground only open" and the "subway transit (underground & elevated) is more resilient and up to the task" are really too different arguments. Another argument that is not often thought about is the famous - "hindsight is wonderful". Mike |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1336424) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 12:41:35 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015. THANK YOU |
|
|
| (1336425) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 12:42:38 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by GOlD_12tH on Wed Jan 28 11:20:47 2015. THANK YOU ! I do not know much about storing trains, lay ups or turning trains. |
|
|
| (1336426) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:45:31 2015, in response to Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 11:02:08 2015. Keeping the system partially open?Why are you even asking this quesiton? "Keeping the system partially open" is what was done for every snow storm until this one. So why now would it suddenly not be logistically possible??? |
|
|
| (1336427) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 12:45:59 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015. Maybe the MTA should use your plan for these rare situations. |
|
|
| (1336429) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:48:18 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 12:45:59 2015. Maybe the MTA should use your plan for these rare situations.Huh? The MTA already has a plan for these situations. |
|
|
| (1336432) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jan 28 12:54:37 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:45:31 2015. So why now would it suddenly not be logistically possible???Because Prince Andrew knows that almost everyone will forget that he closed the subways for no good reason. But if he had let the MTA run whatever limited service made practical sense, and they had bungled it and left people to freeze for 10 hours, he feared he would be blamed. That how he thinks. :) |
|
|
| (1336433) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:58:16 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by AlM on Wed Jan 28 12:54:37 2015. All you're doing is further confusing rbseabeach. |
|
|
| (1336439) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Kevin from Midwood on Wed Jan 28 13:14:52 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:58:16 2015. But other posters basically already answered his question before he asked it. |
|
|
| (1336446) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jan 28 14:24:47 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:48:18 2015. Right:The MTA DID have a plan. They know what they were doing and learned a lot of lessons from 2010. Cuomo simply didn't trust them and PO'ed a lot of people who are in a position to use it against him and the Democrats and will bank it for future use. |
|
|
| (1336462) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 15:07:22 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Kevin from Midwood on Wed Jan 28 13:14:52 2015. Yep. He obviously hasn't been following along and doesn't care to read the posts from the past few days. |
|
|
| (1336476) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 16:27:04 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 28 12:48:18 2015. I did not know if the MTA had a specific plan to run specif underground service during these situations.I was just asking the experts on this board. I am just a railfan. |
|
|
| (1336478) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 16:29:06 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Kevin from Midwood on Wed Jan 28 13:14:52 2015. Thank you I do not read this board every day. Maybe I should? |
|
|
| (1336553) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Jan 28 21:05:40 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 16:29:06 2015. You don't need to read it every day in order to see posts from the recent past concerning current events. Transportation related discussion of the storm in the media picked up in earnest Sunday evening, so on Tuesday night or Wednesdat morning, if you mossie on over to SubChat and you are interested in that topic, wouldn't you want to go back and read all the posts from Sunday until now before starting your own new thread? |
|
|
| (1336559) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Wed Jan 28 21:25:08 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by rbseabeach on Wed Jan 28 16:27:04 2015. That's why you're here. To learn. That said, the MTA posted on Sunday that NYCT would operate a Plan V for the storm. That's the plan that NYCT has to run specific lines during these kinds of storms. |
|
|
| (1336613) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Thu Jan 29 08:13:29 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015. Turning at Prospect Park may be an issue since the interlocking is outside in an open cut with nowhere for the snow to go.Get 4 inches an hour and you are not keeping the switches and signals clear in an open cut IMHO. |
|
|
| (1336626) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Jan 29 09:35:59 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by AlM on Wed Jan 28 12:54:37 2015. Yes, and his fears were likely that it would torpedo his hopes of becoming President in either 2020 or '24 because it would be used in attack ads against him even if he had ZERO to do with it.Instead, he violates Rule #1 of politics by PO'ing Wall Street and I suspect got behind closed doors a verbal scolding by Democratic Party leaders over the shutdown, possibly warned never to do it again. |
|
|
| (1336628) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jan 29 09:43:14 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015. I figured these types of proposals would come up. I admit I had been thinking along the same lines. I think the #4 from Utica to 149 St. would be the most used line. The #2 from Flatbush to 149 St. would complement it on the west side. Most likely, all service would be local, so that the express tracks could be used for storing unused trains. The A from 207 St. to Euclid would likewise run local, so no C. Some of the lines mentioned in the previous post do have short outdoor portions (#1 at 125 St, F and G at Smith/9th and 4th Ave.), so it might not be possible to run those sections. Likewise, the 7 from Times Square to Hunters Point would have to go outside to turn around. But perhaps standard elevated structures (like the 1 and the 7) would be OK, at least for short distances, since snow would fall right through the spaces between the ties. The Culver viaduct (F and G) is not like that, snow would accumulate on the concrete, so F/G trains could not go south of Carrol St. The sections which must be closed are the outdoor sections that are not standard els: Sea Beach and Brighton lines, Franklin shuttle, Rockaway lines, and the Dyre Ave. line. Running the 3 to 148 St. is probably out too. If els can run but outdoor non-el lines can't, would the #2 also have to end at 180th, due to the ground-level track between there and Bronx Park East? Could the M terminate at Fresh Pond? |
|
|
| (1336654) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 29 12:14:10 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jan 29 09:43:14 2015. I agree with some of your thoughts. Yes, some of your points about certain passageways could have become a concern. The agency to determine that is the MTA, and their workers on the ground in the front of the action. In this case "arm-chair planning" is not going to work, even if thinking about it is interesting or fun.I however was trying to make another point. Looking at the "run underground only option" (as some repeatedly suggested) meant cutting off vast areas of the city, especially with no bus service running. That creates additional hardship for those areas, most of which are NOT in Manhattan. I agree that it is entirely possible for a snow or severe weather event to make CERTAIN sections of track either not pass-able, difficult to clear, or that trains in certain sections might have to travel slowly. Let the MTA and their workers determine which sections or passages have been affected by the weather emergency and how to deal with the problem, before deciding to cut off vast sections of the city. Yes, indeed during a severe blizzard or other severe weather emergency it would be wise for plenty of people to simply remain home, off the roads, etc. Let the MTA and their workers determine which sections or passages have been affected by the weather emergency and how to deal with the problem, before deciding to cut off vast sections of the city. Let the city's Office of Emergency Management become an active part of the process of managing and coordinating the best response during a severe blizzard or other severe weather emergency. Yes, "plan for the worse and hope for the best" - but take note of the interests of just who is doing the "planning"! Yes, the Governor wanted to avoid any stories about folks stuck on stalled trains or buses! Yes, there were forecasts of a severe blizzard. A continual feed-back loop of information, and resultant decision making and action guided by clearing thought about planned responses should be the order of the day. As the facts on the ground changed so should the response, that almost did not happen in this case. Mike |
|
|
| (1336663) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 29 12:48:37 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jan 29 09:43:14 2015. " ...perhaps standard elevated structures (like the 1 and the 7) would be OK,"Agreed. The "box girder" type of El structure allows the snow to fall thru the crossties to the street. So based on that, outside lines should be able to maintain some service. Open cut lines (Brighton,Dyre Ave. e.g.) would have to be suspended. Also the Queens Blvd viaduct of the #7 would be off limits in a snowstorm The #7 could run in 2 sections, one TS to QBP & one from Main St. to 74st. The big financial downside to the MTA (taxpayer) for running the service in a blizzard is the first lawsuit(s) that hit the fan when someone slips & falls down a snow covered staircase & sues, which obvously wouldn't happen if the system was shut down |
|
|
| (1336665) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 29 12:57:09 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 29 12:48:37 2015. 
|
|
|
| (1336666) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Thu Jan 29 12:59:15 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 29 12:48:37 2015. I think the snow would make the signals act up on the traditional El Structures.Also limited visibility for the T/O, I remember the T/O of that A train that got stuck on the flats in the 2010 storm said he called control center telling them he couldn't see the ROW that well cause of the conditions. |
|
|
| (1336673) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 29 13:25:47 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Thu Jan 29 12:59:15 2015. I think the snow would make the signals act up on the traditional El Structures.Maybe as the exception, but not the rule. Also limited visibility for the T/O, I remember the T/O of that A train that got stuck on the flats in the 2010 storm said he called control center telling them he couldn't see the ROW that well cause of the conditions.Snow covered ROW from railfan window: 
|
|
|
| (1336685) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 29 13:42:46 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Thu Jan 29 12:59:15 2015. " ...called control center telling them he couldn't see the ROW"Makes you wonder how the senior guys did it w/o calling in running on the flats years ago at night w/o sealed beams & minimilly effective (to say the least) wipers. Forget snow, how about "just" a driving rain. Talk about flying blind. But they got it done. |
|
|
| (1336782) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Jan 29 22:34:43 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Wed Jan 28 12:13:08 2015. I don't think you could run the 7.Given how little of it is underground and how isolated it is from the rest of the system, you'd need to use the underground part to lay up trains. |
|
|
| (1336783) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Jan 29 22:34:50 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 29 12:14:10 2015. Yes, it's a major hardship for the outer boroughs if only underground service is running.But underground service is better than no service. If the Empty-Yay will be arbitrarily shut down by an incompetent governor every time there's a little flurry, it's better to have them running limited service than no service. |
|
|
| (1336801) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri Jan 30 01:40:01 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Nilet on Thu Jan 29 22:34:50 2015. I think that when there is another storm, even a major storm, the governor will not be so "ready" to jump in and curtail service.Given the nature of weather forecasting, and the resilient nature our transit, road and emergency systems - as well as the negative press and media attention this particular event caused - I believe a lot more thought will be put into the idea of shutting down the subways again. There is a very good argument for letting the MTA decide what services need to be in operation, curtailed, modified or shut-down based upon the conditions on the ground and in accordance with their Emergency Plans. The MTA staff know best their equipment and facilities - and how to provide the best service under the weather conditions present. Yes, there were major problems in 2010, but much as been learned and gained from that experience. Let the MTA actually run their service, and let the MTA management decide the form and shape of service during weather events, just as they do each day. Mike |
|
|
| (1336808) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Fri Jan 30 03:31:36 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Fri Jan 30 01:40:01 2015. What happened in 2010? |
|
|
| (1336810) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 07:07:51 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Fri Jan 30 01:40:01 2015. And there were a ton of extenuating circumstances with the late 2010 storm that caused the MTA to be ill-prepared for that storm that people have forgotten about (namely when the forecast changed). |
|
|
| (1336824) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 08:22:02 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 07:07:51 2015. Wrong. |
|
|
| (1336825) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 08:22:14 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Nilet on Fri Jan 30 03:31:36 2015. Were you drunk it 2010? |
|
|
| (1336826) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 08:22:40 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Michael549 on Fri Jan 30 01:40:01 2015. I think that when there is another storm, even a major storm, the governor will not be so "ready" to jump in and curtail service.I doubt it. Why do you "think" that?? |
|
|
| (1336837) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 08:51:08 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 08:22:02 2015. Um, lets see:The forecast at the time the Plan 1 Cold Weather Plan was called for the weekend that storm in 2010 took place was for "maybe 1-3 inches" with that holding through Christmas Even Day, when at the time normally such plan would have been called. That forecast only changed to 6-10" of snow late on Christmas Eve night. By then, people who might normally have been monitoring such were likely at Christmas services or with family who in many cases (especially then) would have frowned at checking in on stuff like that (especially older relatives who are much more rigid on stuff like that). That continue into Christmas Day as I remember in many cases. It then went to 15" or so on Christmas morning, but at that point it was not that well known due to it being Christmas Day. People in Philly for instance only knew if they were watching special webcasts done by WCAU-TV (NBC10 Philadelphia) meteorologist Glenn "Hurricane" Schwartz, who came in (apparently) on his own and did those webcasts because there were no local newscasts in Philly until 11:00 PM Christmas night (this was standard through then but changed after that blizzard to avoid a repeat of that). By the time late local news did air Christmas night (in some cases, the only newscasts people saw on what typically has been a slow news day) and people became more aware, it had exploded further, and the MTA had to finally call for Cold Weather Plan 4 the next day, but as people (here and elsewhere) noted at the time WAY too late to properly implement it, especially when it was likely very difficult to get some people who had gone away for Christmas back quickly. That played a huge part into why the MTA was ill-prepared for that storm. That's what I meant by extenuating circumstances. |
|
|
| (1336838) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jan 30 08:57:12 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 08:51:08 2015. Your claims of limited TV news, to the extent they are true, might have caused some of the public not know a storm was coming, if they didn't pay attention to radio or the internet. But it would have zero impact on MTA management's ability to know. |
|
|
| (1336882) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 13:44:28 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 08:51:08 2015. I don't remember the details at all. What I DO REMEMBER is that you posted this same *&%$ at the time and it was BS back then so it must be BS now. I recall that you had the timing of the forecast changes wrong, and of course everything you're saying about people not knowing about the storm is completely wrong. If there's any snow in the forecast, people make it their business to be informed. So basically you're wrong, as I've been saying to you for years now. |
|
|
| (1336898) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 14:38:13 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by AlM on Fri Jan 30 08:57:12 2015. Most likely, yes, but say such management was outside New York for Christmas and in areas with limited media availability and were with relatives who HEAVILY FROWNED on looking at the 'net and so forth. I noted in another thread the case of a woman who worked in Radio that didn't find out about Whitney Houston's death until the day after because she was with her parents who frowned upon looking at such media as an example of such (which she had posted about on a radio board when that happened).Such management, especially before that blizzard might have been scolded by family members and/or religious leaders for doing so and that was a big problem, especially if such could potentially lead to a divorce in some cases, and it didn't matter that a storm had suddenly exploded. That's what I meant as unfortunately, you have people like that in our society who are that rigid. |
|
|
| (1336900) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Fri Jan 30 14:39:05 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 29 13:42:46 2015. And the C/R who had to go outside each time they open and close the doors. |
|
|
| (1336901) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 14:40:18 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 13:44:28 2015. The basic details were pretty much the same (even if the actual predicted totals might not have been). Biggest problem was the storm totals grew sharply late on Christmas Eve Night and into Christmas Day when people might not have easily found out until late Christmas Night because of family/religious commitments. |
|
|
| (1336904) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 14:45:53 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 08:22:40 2015. The Governor may very well have behind closed doors have been severely scolded by Democratic Party leaders, if so because they likely are fearful of the shutdown potentially costing them any chance of getting back the House and Senate in 2016 due to Wall Street doubling down on their efforts to keep the GOP in control to get back at Cuomo.And BTW we have another snowstorm coming on Monday, although right now the forecast is for 3-5 inches. |
|
|
| (1336918) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Fri Jan 30 15:35:30 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Jan 30 14:38:13 2015. That is a highly unlikely scenario. |
|
|
| (1336919) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Fri Jan 30 15:35:44 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Jan 30 13:44:28 2015. Excellent post |
|
|
| (1336922) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jan 30 15:47:19 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Fri Jan 30 15:35:30 2015. You can't say he lacks imagination! |
|
|
| (1336972) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by JAFO on Fri Jan 30 19:44:50 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by AlM on Fri Jan 30 15:47:19 2015. The subway ran PERFECTLY after 23:00 because there were no passengers to gum up the works. |
|
|
| (1336999) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 31 03:10:07 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Fri Jan 30 15:35:30 2015. Unlikely, yes, but you can't rule it out, especially at Christmas.I've known enough people like that over time to know some of them really are that rigid and you can't change them. |
|
|
| (1337030) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by caine515 on Sat Jan 31 11:41:26 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 31 03:10:07 2015. It will be interesting to see what happens on Monday with snow expected. I can see this occurring:local on B and Q in Brighton B service ending early and parked along Broadway tracks. LIRR delays as usual. limited service suspended. N service delayed on suspended via Sea Beach Line. Buses replace trains for Rockaway service btwn Rockaway Blvd to Rockaway Park/Far Rockaway. on overnights: Brighton,Sea Beach,Culver,West End and the Rockaways will run non revenue trains to keep local tracks clear of snow. delays expected Monday and Tuesday. |
|
|
| (1337123) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 31 17:34:14 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by caine515 on Sat Jan 31 11:41:26 2015. If the Sea Beach has to be suspended then in all likelihood the Brighton Line will be too. |
|
|
| (1337132) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 31 17:49:48 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by randyo on Sat Jan 31 17:34:14 2015. Which would make sense. Those are among the lines I WOULD have shut down when the 2010 fiasco happened. |
|
|
| (1337334) | |
Re: Keeping the system partially open? |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Sun Feb 1 15:26:45 2015, in response to Re: Keeping the system partially open?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 31 03:10:07 2015. Sure I can. Any responsible manager would explain to their family that they needed to remain in touch with work in the event of an emergency. Any manager who couldn't do that ought to be demoted or fired. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
