|
|
| LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... (333618) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
|
| (333618) | |
LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 04:21:03 2006 Here's teh story of another GAP-fall incident on LIRR. (this time at New Hyde Pk) |
|
|
| (333663) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 10:31:36 2006, in response to LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 04:21:03 2006. Sorry. Cant read what requires a sign in.ROAR |
|
|
| (333705) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 13:59:55 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 10:31:36 2006. It loads fine here (without sign-in) but oh well.... Yet another victim falls through LIRR station gap (11/03/06) MINEOLA - Another person fell through the gap between a train and platform at a Long Island Rail Road station Friday evening. Witnesses say a 69-year-old woman was rushed and possibly pushed through the train doors before she fell through the gap at New Hyde Park station. According to witnesses, the woman, whose name is not yet available, laid on the tracks before a passenger wisely pulled the emergency break and prevented the train from moving. LIRR employees then removed the woman from the tracks. MTA police say she complained of hip pain and remains in Winthrop University Hospital for treatment. The episode happened on the 5:33 p.m. train from Penn Station to Hicksville. Several people have been injured, including one fatality, in the past few months due to gap-related incidents. The LIRR plans to move tracks closer to platforms at ten stations and New Hyde Park station is among that group. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (333706) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 14:00:34 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 13:59:55 2006. teh article here... (funny it doesnt ask me 4 a sign-in) |
|
|
| (333759) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Nov 4 16:41:19 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 10:31:36 2006. I had no problems viewing it without signing in, but there's always BugMeNot.com |
|
|
| (333802) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Nov 4 19:20:18 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 13:59:55 2006. However, Syosset has no plans. What surprises me is why the LIRR doesn't arrange things so that at Syosset, inbound trains stop on the outbound platform during the AM rush, and during off peak, only the last two or four would open at Syosset (so that cars aren't on the platform)? Platform gap fillers on the cars at Syosset would not help too much, because the cars are on a curve, and they lean AWAY from the curve on the inbound platform.A shorter platform will do the trick on the inbound platform. |
|
|
| (333897) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 21:51:39 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 13:59:55 2006. "It loads fine here (without sign-in) but oh well...."Only if you are a subscriber to one of the three or four ISPs that are in that area. The rest of us HAVE TO PAY to get there. ROAR |
|
|
| (333898) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 21:53:45 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 14:00:34 2006. Are you a cable subscriber who receives News 12? Yes, I am a subscriber to: Cablevision Comcast Time Warner Service Electric No, I am not a subscriber Click here to purchase a monthly or yearly subscription to the site. Only $4.95 a month or $48 yearly. |
|
|
| (333947) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sat Nov 4 23:11:13 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 21:53:45 2006. SO LIE!!!!! SHEESH@@@@@ |
|
|
| (333948) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Sat Nov 4 23:15:13 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Sat Nov 4 23:11:13 2006. That's exactly what I thought...but then it asks for your account info. and password. I would have tried bugmenot, but south ferry had already posted the article. |
|
|
| (334028) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Sun Nov 5 02:17:07 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 4 21:51:39 2006. eesh... some of teh anchors are teh suck. |
|
|
| (334030) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Sun Nov 5 02:18:38 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Easy on Sat Nov 4 23:15:13 2006. no doubt. cant believe they actually CHARGE for access... when their "news offerings" and article depth (AND LENGTH-- OR LACK THEREOF) is MAD SKIM compared to other news sites. |
|
|
| (334054) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 08:00:32 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Sat Nov 4 23:11:13 2006. But they already *know* what provider you are using by virtue of your IP number. How do you think I got that page when you guys do not.ROAR |
|
|
| (334063) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 5 08:27:34 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 08:00:32 2006. Cable Provider! Not ISP! Just lie and then use Bugmenot! |
|
|
| (334084) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 10:02:18 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 5 08:27:34 2006. But *why* do I get the warning, and others do not?They *KNOW* from where I requested the page. ROAR |
|
|
| (334101) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 5 10:46:02 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 10:02:18 2006. Lie and use bugmenot. |
|
|
| (334110) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 10:53:22 2006, in response to LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by South Ferry on Sat Nov 4 04:21:03 2006. Low platforms, baybee . . . cheaper, and no fally-fall. |
|
|
| (334157) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 13:07:59 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 10:53:22 2006. I feel very reassured that all the passengers waiting for OLCR's rush hour express to Penn Station Monday morning will benefit from the comfort and safety of low platforms.*OLCR=Olog's Lionel Commuter Railroad |
|
|
| (334206) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 15:30:59 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 13:07:59 2006. If they'd ordered the C3s with a three door arrangment with two doors in their current location on the middle level and another door placed in the middle of the lower level then the LIRR would have had level boarding at both high and low platforms. Admittedly ADA compatibility for passengers boarding at a low plat and heading to a high platform station would be difficult, but Metra has not encountered any severe problems with their lift equipped Gallery cars. It would have been child's play to place a lift under one of the high level doors and have wheelchairs accomodated in there. That way they would have achieved 100% ADA compatibility without the need for an expensive and, as we're now learning, dangerous high platforming which the C3s required.Course one of the big advantages of electrifying with OHLE is that the platform placement need not be a balance between keeping the fool off the third rail and keeping that same fool from falling into the inevitable gap between the platform and car. So long as the system is new and doesn't have inconsistencies such as the '[non] Standard Railroad of the World' created on the Long Island Railroad a low platform + 25kv OHLE is by far the correct choice. |
|
|
| (334213) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 15:37:14 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 15:30:59 2006. "Metra has not encountered any severe problems with their lift equipped Gallery cars"Metra and LIRR are not comparable in passenger demand. That does not mean an idea tried on Metra can never be good on LIRR. But in this case, your comparison isn't valid. High platforms aren't just for ADA; they are also far superior to low platforms when dealing with large numbers of people. That's why you have to pay attention to many aspects of a problem, and not focus on just one. That kind of strategy leads you to the wrong place too often. |
|
|
| (334220) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 15:52:16 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 15:37:14 2006. Metra and LIRR are not comparable in passenger demandI'm not comparing them in terms of system operation. I was making a case on a purely mechanical basis for a wheelchair lift, since the conditions under which the lift would operate on the LIRR would not be significantly different from those on Metra. Indeed, the wheelchair lift could concievably have greater reliability on the LIRR due to its decreased usage owning to the LIRR's high platforms in the electric territory. High platforms aren't just for ADA; they are also far superior to low platforms when dealing with large numbers of people. And I'm not saying don't build high platforms. However, does Yaphank really need a high platform? Does Westhampton? How about Locust Valley? Your one-size-fits-all argument holds no water for stations with low passenger counts such as those. We're not talking about NYP, Jamaica, or even Ronkonkoma here, the number of passengers are likely low enough that they could easily be accomodated by a center mounted low platform level boarding door on the C3s. The LIRR could have saved hundreds of millions of dollars squandered on high platforming lightly used stations if they'd simply ordered their new rolling stock to be ADA compatible at low platforms. That's why you have to pay attention to many aspects of a problem, and not focus on just one. That kind of strategy leads you to the wrong place too often. Right back at you dumbass. That's why you pay attention to the many aspects of a problem, and don't try to make some one-size fits all solution. |
|
|
| (334229) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 16:13:12 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 15:52:16 2006. "I'm not comparing them in terms of system operation. I was making a case on a purely mechanical basis for a wheelchair lift, since the conditions under which the lift would operate on the LIRR would not be significantly different from those on Metra. Indeed, the wheelchair lift could concievably have greater reliability on the LIRR due to its decreased usage owning to the LIRR's high platforms in the electric territory."Taken in and of itself, that's possible. It's service life on LIRR might be longer. "Your one-size-fits-all argument holds no water for stations with low passenger counts such as those." Again, you're looking at only one aspect of the problem. Have you considered: 1) The contract terms under which the stations are built (ie what f the contractor offers a package deal) 2) The cost of maintaining different equipment? Right now LIRR is headed for three kinds of revenue vehicle - M7, C3 and locomotive. Yes they still have the M3s, but ultimately the goal is to get rid of them too. 3) The tendency for people to violate tracks wirth low level platforms? Yes a fence helps but a high platform is a better deterrent. LIRR's answer to very low-use stations has been to eliminate them completely, not build low-platform stops. Now, you could certainly, legitimately, protest station closings and try to persuade LIRR to not close them, but that's a different issue. If you want to get frustrated with me and call me names, you go right ahead. It just proves my point. You're still a student, a bright one, certainly, but one who thinks narrowly and doesn't see the bigger picture. I'm not saying everything LIRR does is right, or that everything you say is wrong. But you haven't matured as an engineer yet. You can use Subchat as a place where you can fantasize about how you'd make a much better railroad CEO than James Dermody, but if you take that attitude to your next job interview, you're in for a very unpleasant surprise. You need to grow up. Your posting proves that. That's not an insult, that's a statement of fact. Five or 10 years from now, you'll know a lot more than you do today. I wish you well and that you have success. If you think I'm flaming you, that's entirely on you, completely your responsibility. Not my problem. |
|
|
| (334235) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 16:23:29 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 10:53:22 2006. With a third rail on the platform side of a low level platform?This is before safety engineers were invented. FACE THE MUSIC: I'll sing you the song: High level platforms are here to stay, they are faster and more efficient, and much safer too. Because if you are unaware of it, the are injuries on low level platforms and stairs too. ROAR |
|
|
| (334237) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 16:24:11 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 10:53:22 2006. With a third rail on the platform side of a low level platform?This is before safety engineers were invented. FACE THE MUSIC: I'll sing you the song: High level platforms are here to stay, they are faster and more efficient, and much safer too. Because if you are unaware of it, the are injuries on low level platforms and stairs too. ROAR |
|
|
| (334239) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 16:27:23 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 16:13:12 2006. Oh, and you didn't even mention the fact that third rail being involved = low platform being a bad idea (invitation for a lawsuit). |
|
|
| (334244) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 5 16:32:45 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 16:13:12 2006. The more personal attacks you launch against WillD, the better he looks to everyone else here and the worse you look. Keep it up! |
|
|
| (334257) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 17:01:33 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 16:24:11 2006. They wouldn't have a problem if the LIRR had superior catenary instead of third rail... |
|
|
| (334259) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 17:02:31 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 15:37:14 2006. Ever been to Chicago Union Station or Ogilvie? Those stations are comparable to Penn in terms of passenger volume.There's no problem with their low-level platforms. |
|
|
| (334290) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 18:06:06 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 16:24:11 2006. On a road which had the misfortune of being caught within the PRR and NYC's non-standard standards when it came to platform height then it is perhaps inevitable that a conservative management will choose to eventually make all platforms high. However, on systems which were blessed with a uniform platform height, or which are starting from scratch a low platform is likely preferable. A Bombardier Bilevel Coach loading at a low platform is not any slower than a high platform multilevel car with quarter point doors (such as the LIRR C3) boarding from a high platform. All that matters is that the boarding is level, with a minimal difference between platform and car height. Sure 30 years ago those systems with low platforms were at a disadvantage relative to the high platform systems and everyone had to use the dreaded trap step to board and allight, but the advent of the UDTC Bilevels for GO changed that. The Bombardier Bilevel offers nearly level boarding at a minimum height platform, but some improvement for a truely level boarding car from a platform around 12 inches above the railhead is still needed.The big challenge for the East Coast, IMHO, is building a car which can platform at both high and low platform stations and achieve ADA compatibility at both. We're going to have a glut of increasingly mobility limited commuters as the baby boom ages but refuses to (or is incapable of) retiring. Most likely this glut of people for whom the steps of a trap are a nearly impossible impediment to riding a train will come sooner than we could effectively build high platforms for the entire NYC commuter system. As such I do not think the conservative course of high platforming which northeast railroads have followed to this point is an effective solution to even their near-term accessibility problems. We need a car which either is capable of level boarding at both high and low platforms for NJT, SEPTA, MARC, and MBTA. Leave high platforming for stations with passenger flows that would overload say a single entrance low platform door, and concentrate accessibility work on the railcar level rather than the infrastructure level. The LIRR dropped the ball with the C3s, but the massive monetary backing of NYS and the MTA made up for it by installing the needed high platforms. SEPTA, MARC, NJT, and the T aren't so fortunate to have those kind of resources. Admittedly SEPTA has thusfar dropped the ball with the Silverliner Vs by ignoring a potential need for a wheelchair lift, they're at least not making the situation worse. |
|
|
| (334299) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:14:22 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 17:01:33 2006. If LIRR had catenary from the start then a lot of things might be different. But it didn't. |
|
|
| (334300) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:15:35 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 17:02:31 2006. "Ever been to Chicago Union Station or Ogilvie?"Yes. "Those stations are comparable to Penn in terms of passenger volume." Wrong. Not even close. Talking about low-level platforms and comparing them with Penn is pure nonsense. |
|
|
| (334315) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:33:37 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by WillD on Sun Nov 5 18:06:06 2006. "The big challenge for the East Coast, IMHO, is building a car which can platform at both high and low platform stations and achieve ADA compatibility at both. We're going to have a glut of increasingly mobility limited commuters as the baby boom ages but refuses to (or is incapable of) retiring."That is very true. "Most likely this glut of people for whom the steps of a trap are a nearly impossible impediment to riding a train will come sooner than we could effectively build high platforms for the entire NYC commuter system" False statement. The stations are already there. There may well be further stations built but unless brand new routes are designed or old ones reactivated, the number of stations added will be fairly small. In Boston, by contrast, you recently had a whole railroad reborn (the Old Colony branches). LIRR's expansion now consists of East Side Access to Grand Central (under construction now), and (possibly??) a new tunnel into Lower Manhattan sometime in future. Is the LIC line likely to be reactivated (ie Penny Bridge, Glendale, Haberman etc.)? Probably not. If the third rail project gets done then stations will have to be redone. Given the crowds at many of these stations at rush hour and third-rail usage, there's no point in even thinking about low platforms. Sowhat does that leave you with? What new line in the LIRR system is going to have low platforms? 90% of the stations are already ADA compliant (unlike the subway); you have some in Queens or near Queens that are not. "We need a car which either is capable of level boarding at both high and low platforms for NJT, SEPTA, MARC, and MBTA." That would help railroads share rolling stock when needed, and it's a nice idea. I would (politically) support the development of such a car. Good thinking on your part. |
|
|
| (334320) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 18:39:32 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:15:35 2006. Wrong. Not even close.Proof? I've been there and I can say that the number of passengers that board trains is comparable to that at Penn. Talking about low-level platforms and comparing them with Penn is pure nonsense. What are you trying to say? I'm saying that stations with a fairly high number of people using them (i.e. Penn, Ogilvie, Union) can work with either high- or low-level platforms if implemented correctly. |
|
|
| (334411) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 20:52:38 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Nov 5 16:23:29 2006. With a third rail on the platform side of a low level platform?You saw the pic, I take it? This is before safety engineers were invented Please cite number of people toasted by third rail at low-platform stations . . . High level platforms are here to stay Oh, I never denied that. they are faster and more efficient, and much safer too Tell that to the woman who fell through the gap. if you are unaware of it, the are injuries on low level platforms and stairs too Ain't as many as with these LIRR gaps—I daresay you can count 'em on your hand over the past few decades for all US passenger rail. And there are handles to hold onto when going up and down them steps—no handles to help you jump over them gaps. |
|
|
| (334464) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 21:43:52 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 20:52:38 2006. "Please cite number of people toasted by third rail at low-platform stations . . ."Please cite the number of meds Olog should be taking but isn't... |
|
|
| (334556) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:05:27 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 21:43:52 2006. Guess you can't, eh? |
|
|
| (334557) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:06:33 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 20:52:38 2006. Please cite the number of low level platforms with third rail... |
|
|
| (334560) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:07:23 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:06:33 2006. Did you see the pic in my first reply? |
|
|
| (334562) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:08:14 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:14:22 2006. So? The PRR didn't have catenary wire "from the start" either. |
|
|
| (334564) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:09:11 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:07:23 2006. We dont live in the 1920s.Such stations would NEVER work in todays lawsuit society. |
|
|
| (334565) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:10:37 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:09:11 2006. The third rail wasn't the reason for all of the high platforms. Otherwise there woudln't be a bunch of high platforms on the New Haven Line of Metro-North. |
|
|
| (334567) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:14:31 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:10:37 2006. Traps are a pain and they couldnt fit double deckers is the reason for the others.Low floor platforms are ideal for low floor cars. High floor platforms are ideal for high floor cars. |
|
|
| (334680) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Nov 6 09:20:04 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 18:15:35 2006. "Ever been to Chicago Union Station or Ogilvie?"Yes. Recently? You're aware that some lines run eleven-car trains of bilevels at as little as ten minute headways? |
|
|
| (334692) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 09:47:47 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Nov 6 09:20:04 2006. So, spelling this out for RonIsBS since he doesn't seem to be catching on, this means that MORE people are getting onto a low level platform in Chicago than are getting onto a high level platform in NYC. |
|
|
| (334730) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:17:59 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 20:52:38 2006. "Ain't as many as with these LIRR gaps—I daresay you can count 'em on your hand over the past few decades for all US passenger rail."Dare say? Dare you say? But you do not *know*! Ain't as many? Ain't as many passengers on all of those other railroads as are on the LIRR. Maybe you could make this into a per 100,000 number. And of those lions which have not a pride of high level platforms, how many handicapped are defeated by the thought of those trains and buy not even one ticket. For a handicapped person working in New Haven, it is easier to drive to work and park in a near by handicapped parking space. For a handicapped person working in New York City, it is NOT easier to drive, to fine a parking place, any parking place, and to negotiate their to an office somewhere. Much easier to take a train. So LION thinks that you are married to a low level platform, and so be it, most other civilized places use high level platforms and mind the gap. LIRR is addressing the gap problem, it should have been addressed sooner, but that is the way of things. They do not get attention until they attract attention. ROAR |
|
|
| (334731) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Mon Nov 6 11:23:47 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Nov 5 17:01:33 2006. Question: Have all the recent gap falls been with M7 cars? Although I didn't take a picture of it: Our M1 on a curved platform at Penn Station had less of a gap than a M7 on the adjacent straight platform. |
|
|
| (334732) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 11:33:04 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:05:27 2006. I would certainly lose track of all your pill bottles. :0) |
|
|
| (334733) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:35:02 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:08:14 2006. No, but PRR only had third rail in NYP. In those days they used the Jackshafts to pull the trains into the light of New Jersey (such as that may be under the clouds of pollution), and then connected them to a big steamy locomotive.So when it came time to electrify the rest of the LION they decided upon a real live wire so to speak. ROAR |
|
|
| (334736) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:41:31 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 09:47:47 2006. Horse By-Product! |
|
|
| (334740) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Mon Nov 6 11:56:02 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by jabrams on Mon Nov 6 11:23:47 2006. Question: Have all the recent gap falls been with M7 cars? Although I didn't take a picture of it: Our M1 on a curved platform at Penn Station had less of a gap than a M7 on the adjacent straight platform.I don't know, but as most of the electric trainsets in operation are now M7's it would be entirely possible. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
