|
|
| Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... (333618) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 4 |
||
|
| (334743) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Nov 6 12:01:15 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:41:31 2006. The neigh? |
|
|
| (334753) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 12:47:38 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:41:31 2006. How do you figure? If an 11-car train of bi-levels holds more people than a 12-car train of single levels, than more people got off the first train onto a low-level platform than got off of the second train onto a high-level platform. |
|
|
| (334764) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Nov 6 13:36:03 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by jabrams on Mon Nov 6 11:23:47 2006. Also, the M7 is narrower in portions of the car, likely making it easier to fall through the gap. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (334776) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:22:05 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:35:02 2006. What I find interesting is that overgead catenary was available nd working from the 19-teens.If it is so incredibly superior in all aspects to third rail, the subway could have used it. Now, if you want to present the excuse that "it's historical," then I would point to new Metrorail systems (San Francisco, Miami, Washington, Atlanta, Los Angeles) and lines like SEPTA's Norristown High Speed Line. Why did none of them harness catenary? Unlike MTA, most of these operators have experience with catenary and work forces that are familiar with it. Boston's Blue Line uses catenary, as do the Green Line trolleys. Why didn't that spread to the rest of the MBTA subway system? Is it because all these transportation systems are run by low-grade morons who need help learning how to trip over themselves and most importantly, refuse to hire WillD to design their power systems? |
|
|
| (334777) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:23:10 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Nov 6 09:20:04 2006. Yes - and their volume still doesn't compare to Penn. |
|
|
| (334780) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 14:31:30 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:23:10 2006. Total volume doesn't matter. What matters is people per platform per period of time. |
|
|
| (334785) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:43:20 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 14:31:30 2006. And LIRR has it beat. |
|
|
| (334794) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 14:50:08 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:43:20 2006. PROFF? |
|
|
| (334800) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 14:54:28 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:22:05 2006. Is it because all these transportation systems are run by low-grade morons who need help learning how to trip over themselves and most importantly, refuse to hire WillD to design their power systems?One of the reasons that third rail continues to be used in many urban transit system applications is because of tunnel clearances. To shave off some dollars in construction, the tunnels are designed with smaller clearances. Just as a side point, the with the exception of two lines, the Tokyo subway system uses a 1500vdc catenary system, and that's for one of the most used subway systems in the world. IIRC, when the RER in Paris was constructed, some of the 600VDC third rail lines were converted to 25kV @ 60hz. Also, IIRC, there are provisions for pantographs for MBTA's Orange Line fleet and the N-5s for SEPTA. As for why those lines were never converted, I won't speculate, and I'll leave the question open to anybody with a proper answer. |
|
|
| (334826) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 15:55:08 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 14:54:28 2006. Thank you. I assume the N-5's are the Kawasaki Broad street Line cars? |
|
|
| (334829) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 16:00:32 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 15:55:08 2006. No, the N-5s are the Norristown cars delivered by AdTranz. Their late delivery is why SEPTA won a free ALP-44. The M-4s are the MFL cars by AdTranz. Their late delivery IIRC was how SEPTA ended up getting a nearly free signaling system upgrade for the subway-surface.AdTranz is currently now a part of Bombardier Transportation. |
|
|
| (334839) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 16:33:16 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by New Brunswick Station on Mon Nov 6 12:01:15 2006. Wrong end of the horse. |
|
|
| (334842) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 16:35:16 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 12:47:38 2006. "You're aware that some lines run eleven-car trains of bilevels at as little as ten minute headways? "Are you aware that LIRR has trains in and out of NYP on 90 second intervals, and you want to tell the that CHI-UNION has more passengers. I'm here to tell you about horse by-product~ ROAR |
|
|
| (334848) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 16:43:56 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 16:00:32 2006. Thanks.Speaking of which, Miami Metrorail and the Norristown line are both above ground. So your observation about tunnel clearance, while valid, would not apply to them. So there must be another reason. |
|
|
| (334849) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 16:45:52 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 16:35:16 2006. I've been to Union station in Chicago. It's nice and busy, but not like Penn.VRE runs 10 car trains in the morning to/from Washington DC. That doesn't mean they are packed. |
|
|
| (334866) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 17:38:04 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 16:35:16 2006. you want to tell the that CHI-UNION has more passengersThat's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that it is possible, but not certain, that in the AM peak hour, a comparable number of people step onto a specific low-level platform in Chicago from one track as do onto a specific high-level platform from one track at New York Penn Station. |
|
|
| (334893) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:33:26 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 6 17:38:04 2006. I think that the Lion only cares about one terminal in Chicago—that being Randolph Street, the one with high platforms. |
|
|
| (334896) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:36:04 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by R30A on Sun Nov 5 23:14:31 2006. Traps are a pain and they couldnt fit double deckers is the reason for the othersMARC, MBTA, VRE and now NJT have double-deckers that feature trapdoors. (VRE's trapdoors are even automatic.) Low floor platforms are ideal for low floor cars. High floor platforms are ideal for high floor cars Hmm, and high-floor trains operated out of the low-platform networks out of Hoboken for over a century. Over in Chicago and San Francisco, they continue to do so (gallery cars are high-floor). So this is merely a matter of opinion on your part . . . ? |
|
|
| (334897) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Nov 6 18:37:12 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:36:04 2006. The higher use stations on those lines are being converted to high platforms as the funding comes in for it to be done. |
|
|
| (334899) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:41:16 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 11:35:02 2006. PRR only had third rail in NYPSo? GCT I was electrified (yes, before they built today's GCT II). Hope this image doesn't unnerve you . . . (Mama look, a low platform, they shout!)  |
|
|
| (334902) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:43:35 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:22:05 2006. If it is so incredibly superior in all aspects to third rail, the subway could have used itUh-oh, someone hasn't been studying electricity principles. Subway has low overhead clearance. Even low-voltage wires make big sparky-spark. Closed system can deal with ground losses better. |
|
|
| (334904) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:45:55 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 16:43:56 2006. Cost too much to change from third rail when it comes to the Former Philadelphia & Western. Miami has h u r r i c a n e s . . . too much cost to replace blown-down wires if Miami gets hit hard. |
|
|
| (334907) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Nov 6 18:53:09 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 23:10:37 2006. Otherwise there woudln't be a bunch of high platforms on the New Haven Line of Metro-North.Low platforms on the New Haven and the NY Central. The high platforms came in with the Metropolitans and the Comopolitans. If I remember correctly, even 125th used to be low level. |
|
|
| (334908) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:55:23 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:43:35 2006. Aha! But if that were such an important factor, you could not have overhead wires anywhere underground, and yet you do (Penn Station, 30th Street-Philadelphia, Stt. Louis Metrolink, Philly Subway-Surface Cars, Boston Green Line.And Miami Metrorail is all above ground. So is the Norristown High Speed Line. So ground losses are independent of underground right? Meaning a third-rail system does have some efficiency advantages... |
|
|
| (334909) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:55:45 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:33:26 2006. That may be his favorite one. |
|
|
| (334910) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:57:46 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:45:55 2006. Thank you. So in other words, third rail may have some good advantages in bad weather over catenary.That could explain why Phiolly has trouble in the winter even wuith new catenary in bad weather. Turns out those third-rail engineers aren't as cretinous as William Dobner thinks they are. |
|
|
| (334911) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:58:51 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:41:16 2006. Did an example of that loco survive to see a museum? |
|
|
| (334912) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Brighton Private on Mon Nov 6 19:04:03 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Sun Nov 5 10:53:22 2006. Where is this pic? |
|
|
| (334916) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 19:20:09 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by R30A on Mon Nov 6 18:37:12 2006. However, the challenge is to make a car that has 100% ADA compliant boarding that can platform at ANY station in the United States, preferably without a lift. |
|
|
| (334918) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 19:29:02 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:57:46 2006. Thank you. So in other words, third rail may have some good advantages in bad weather over catenary.That could explain why Phiolly has trouble in the winter even wuith new catenary in bad weather. The Japanese and Taiwanese use catenary, and those nations are subject to typhoons which are Pacific versions of hurricanes. Sweeden, Japan and Korea are both subject to heavy snow storms during the winter, yet they use catenary as well. As for why SEPTA has trouble with catenary, it might actually be due to an aging catenary system. In contrast, there haven't been issues with New Jersey Transit's catenary on the Morris and Essex Lines or the New Jersey Coast Line. Turns out those third-rail engineers aren't as cretinous as William Dobner thinks they are. Maitre Dobner's choice to disagree with the further electrification of LIRR and by lesser extent, MNRR, with third rail does not mean he holds those engineers in contempt so please cease in making such allegations. |
|
|
| (334930) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 20:04:32 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 19:20:09 2006. Not that you'd ever get enough political backing so all these transit agencies would adopt it. People are parochial. |
|
|
| (334931) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 20:07:20 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 6 19:29:02 2006. "Maitre Dobner's choice to disagree with the further electrification of LIRR and by lesser extent, MNRR, with third rail does not mean he holds those engineers in contempt"Yes, it does and he makes that clear in his post. It isn't a allegation. It's the attitude of a 20-something engineering student who thinks he knows a hell of a lot more than he does. It's a self-correcting problem; as his career progresses he'll mature as a professional and take his share of hard knocks for being cocky. |
|
|
| (334932) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 20:10:28 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 20:04:32 2006. Say what? Things can work in mysterious ways...or are you blind? |
|
|
| (334934) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 20:13:18 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 20:10:28 2006. 8-) |
|
|
| (334961) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Nov 6 21:17:08 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:22:05 2006. The Shanghai Metro subway system uses overhead catenary. |
|
|
| (334962) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Nov 6 21:20:28 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by R30A on Mon Nov 6 18:37:12 2006. Not Metra -- it's impossible (except on the electric division, where everything is high-level.) |
|
|
| (334963) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 21:20:36 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Nov 6 21:17:08 2006. Thank you. |
|
|
| (334990) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 22:16:48 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:33:26 2006. LION has been to CHI on AMTK, that means Onion Station. It is a nice big station, busy, maybe, but nowhere near as busy as NYP.Even assuming that more people arrived on a given train, it has much more time to remain at the platform before it has to make way for the next. LIRR can get more people off faster with more stuff more easily. LION FAILS to understand how anyone cannot be ecstatic over high level platforms. LION has been to CHI Onion, and found it lacking, that a major station should have such a bad and awkward platform system. The LION was NOT impressed. ROAR |
|
|
| (335002) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 22:30:46 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 19:20:09 2006. "However, the challenge is to make a car that has 100% ADA compliant boarding that can platform at ANY station in the United States"El Toro Poopoo The car only needs to be complaint on its own system. It does not matter a ding what other systems require. ROAR |
|
|
| (335063) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Nov 7 02:13:29 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 16:45:52 2006. VRE runs 10 car trains in the morning to/from Washington DC. That doesn't mean they are packed.No, their performance measurement shows that*: mhtml:http://www.vre.org/about/performance/performance-measures.mht!performance-measures_files/frame.htm *at least according to your previous statements that a three quarters full train is 'crowded' or 'packed'. |
|
|
| (335103) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Nov 7 07:54:33 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 6 22:30:46 2006. If it is Amtrak, you might want to be compliant everywhere just in case the station lift isn't available. |
|
|
| (335143) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Nov 7 09:13:57 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by WillD on Tue Nov 7 02:13:29 2006. The ridership slide is blank.This slide: mhtml:http://www.vre.org/about/performance/performance-measures.mht!performance-measures_files/frame.htm shows you have no clue as to what you're talking about. Try again. |
|
|
| (335159) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 7 09:35:39 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Tue Nov 7 09:13:57 2006. The ridership slide is blank.No it isn't.  shows you have no clue as to what you're talking about. No, YOU have no clue what you are talking about, as usual. What it shows is that in order to view it, it seems you must click through from the website itself. If you spent half as much time insulting and twice as much time listening to what people have to say here, maybe everyone wouldn't hate you and maybe you wouldn't be wrong ALL the time. |
|
|
| (335207) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Nov 7 10:58:05 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Nov 7 07:54:33 2006. Nope.Superliners do not need high level capacity. They never go into high level territory. ROAR |
|
|
| (335263) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Nov 7 13:07:03 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 14:23:10 2006. So your position is that a 1000 square foot high platform can hold more people than a 1000 square foot low platform? How the hell does that work? People take up less room when they're elevated by 51 inches? |
|
|
| (335338) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Nov 7 15:46:51 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 6 18:45:55 2006. The Miami system was pretty much laid out in a cookie cutter with the Baltimore metro system. If you look at the aftermath of typhoons which strike Japan most of the time phone and power lines are down, but the more robust overhead catenary is left standing. The wind loading on the wires isn't that great, the towers are built to be a good deal stronger than the power poles, and on constant tension installations the movable weight serves to absorb sudden gusts and even debris impacts.However, there are subways which use 25kv AC wire, for one thing the Athens Metro Line 3, which does a dual voltage 750vdc, 25kvAC system. |
|
|
| (335342) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Nov 7 16:13:40 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 18:55:23 2006. Come on Ron, find a friggin physics book. You're comparing apples and oranges, or rather light rail and heavy rail systems, to develop an incoherent, pointless argument. The latter three examples you cite are all light rail lines with power needs low enough that the higher current required by a low voltage DC system is not a significant impediment. However, if you try to run a heavy rail car developing somewhere between 800 and 1200hp off a narrow wire with a high current and low voltage you'll probably turn that wire into the basic equivilant of a toaster heating element.Philadelphia 30th St Station has plenty of room under it to accomodate high voltage AC catenary with plenty of room to spare, and as you should know, accounts for just two blocks of 'tunnelling'. Thus the higher cost of providing clearances for catenary were minimal especially when compared to the massive costs of building substations every mile from NYC to Washington DC. And that, despite your many attempts at creating straw men is the crux of the issue with respect to the LIRR's power infrastructure. The only advantage a third rail installation holds is in low clearance areas, while it is severely hampered by long distances and high power demands, which is exactly the problem with electrifying the eastern end of Suffolk county. The Philadelphia and Western was incorporated in 1902 and didn't begin operating until 1907. At that time the only AC system was the New Haven's experiment with 11.5kv catenary. As I said elsewhere the Miami Metro system was built as a copy of the Baltimore subway system. By the 1980s our quite conservative transit doctrine had the idea of subways using third rail firmly ingrained. Look at all the trouble BART went through to to keep third rail, when a 3000vdc catenary installation probably would have been much better. So ground losses are independent of underground right? If you do not understand ground losses you need to stop participating in this discussion. You can whine about how I "don't have experience", but at least I have a technical basis in this discussion. Ground losses have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with a conductor being above or below ground. Ground losses are the loss of power transmitted over a condutor to the neutral return. This is why third rail is preferable for a close clearance area, low voltage DC power is less capable of jumping from the conductor to the nearest non-insulated point than high voltage AC power. It also just happen to be why high voltage AC catenary needs to be suspended high in the air and heavily insulated from the grounded supports. |
|
|
| (336053) | |
Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Thu Nov 9 15:51:09 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Third rail vs. catenary, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 6 20:07:20 2006. Ron,I mean you no disrespect. However...who the hell gave you the "judge the nature of subChat participants" position? It's only a silly web site so I'm not going to react in tedious ways. But c'mon dude. Let the kids play already. Nobody is coming here to be evaluated. We just wanna have fun. And we like talking about trains. |
|
|
| (336128) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Nov 9 19:02:22 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 6 19:20:09 2006. How you gonna get 'em over that gap? |
|
|
| (352219) | |
Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall.... |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Tue Dec 12 12:30:15 2006, in response to Re: LIRR: Another GAP Fall...., posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 5 21:43:52 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..." RoninBayside, I try to maintain a sense of dignity on this board. But that last response causes me to momentarially sink to a baser level. (...and gee, thanks for that impetus). I have to say that you really need some kind of smack down, mental (or otherwise...), done to you. What the hell...are you some kind of mental case who indavertently blurts out insulting remarks on a whim? If so then please accept my apology. If you can't claim psychological problems however, it is simply cowardly behavior, to say the least. It's like a kid who insults someone whilst hiding behind mothers skirt. Sure, sure, all our participation here is voluntary and follows the "let the buyer beware" philosophy. It only a hobby after all. That doesn't mean we should behave in a free-for-all fashion while participating herein. If you would exhibit such mannerisms only occasionally you would probably be known on the board as being somewhat sardonic but always reliable for interesting comments. But as of now there is no humor in your mean comments, no interesting discoveries in your many submissions, no joy...at all...in reading what you post. There is only egotism and what appears to be some hidden sense of outrage at some nameless faceless "other". It's an unpleasant thing to have to witness...makes a person feel soiled. I wish you would just sit back for a while here and absorb. You're not a hopeless case, just a misguided foolish man. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 4 |
||
