|
|
| Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn (974377) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (974515) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Sep 3 01:27:18 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 00:21:42 2010. well I didnt ride the trains till I went to college. however my father's father was a motoroman from 1930 to 1969 and his last train he controlled was 3823 so I discovered trains and r32s when I saw the film of his last day in 1993. I like all trains up to r42s and I can tolerate 44s and 46s. as far buses go I was obsessed from early on with new looks here in rockaway on the green lines. gm ang flx. do you recall any gbl new looks in particular? |
|
|
| (974517) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Sep 3 01:31:27 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 00:31:11 2010. nice comparison man |
|
|
| (974518) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 01:43:27 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Sep 3 01:31:27 2010. That was one of the first things to catch my eye about the old look types.Of course, they're trying it again with the "guided" BRT buses. Regurgitation of an old tactic. Note the superficial resemblance between the NABI BRT bus (St. Louis) and this Alstom Citadis trolley (Bordeaux France).   |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (974519) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Sep 3 01:46:42 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 01:43:27 2010. definitely ! very good dude |
|
|
| (974525) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 03:20:06 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 00:31:11 2010. The book "Trolley Car Treasury" mentions in the chapter on the PCC car that the PCC was initially disliked by rail buffs because it looked too much like bus. How times have changed! |
|
|
| (974526) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 03:23:45 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 3 00:36:08 2010. Back when the Q35 was under private operation, it was not allowed to discharge passengers going towards Rockaway except at K/Hwy and points S/O Kings Plz or to pick up passengers between Kings Plz and Nostrand Av so as not to compete with the B41. |
|
|
| (974530) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Fri Sep 3 06:51:02 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by BMTLines on Thu Sep 2 22:06:39 2010. In other words, the city made the free market do its magic and shitty businesses died.You want YOUR tax money to go to private interests for privatized gains and socialized losses. That's worse than socialism. That's FASCISM. If a business can't hack it without taxpayer money, it has no business being in business. |
|
|
| (974532) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Fri Sep 3 06:53:33 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 00:24:11 2010. A private operator would be more efficient even allowing for a profit,If that were the case those businesses would have survived. They wanted YOUR tax money because they knew that nobody would ride their shitty buses if they had to charge a break-even fare let alone a profitable one. |
|
|
| (974542) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Fri Sep 3 07:31:29 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Thu Sep 2 22:44:42 2010. B103 comes to mind... IMO that has to be the biggest sucess story of MTA Bus! |
|
|
| (974544) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Fri Sep 3 07:34:12 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Catfish 44 on Thu Sep 2 22:26:09 2010. I can't even tell you how many times I been on an NYCT bus that smelled like urine. IIRC, its because B/O pee in the rear door area to due lack of an bathroom @ the terminal, I was on an fairly new hybrid that smelled like piss! |
|
|
| (974562) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 08:14:32 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Triangle Junction on Fri Sep 3 00:56:08 2010. "OTOH, the guys at LL and (especially) NYBS HATE the take over"They were innocent bystanders as was Queens Surface. They maintained their buses and followed a schedule. I agree Command was not too bad, but the rest of Cooper's operations made up for it and it was the way he ran his companies that drove the city and DOT to have the MTA take over the private lines. As a regular rider of the former private buses the service today is so much better than when Cooper ran the buses. |
|
|
| (974568) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 08:31:52 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Sep 3 01:27:18 2010. Not any in particular as most were removed IIRC before I hit my teens. There were only a small handful on the Q60 but I did notice when my parents took me to the mall I did see quite a bit on the Q11. During my teen years there were quite a few flexes on the Q60 I always loved the looks of it. Also, my last ride on one was during my HS days on the Q25/Q34 from Flushing to Jamaica, ironically the Q25/Q34 was where the Queens Surface ones retired from. IIRC you can do a Google images search for the New Looks and there are several GBL and Triboro ones that will come up. In fact there is a hobby shop that comes up where you can buy a Triboro Coach model of one |
|
|
| (974571) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 08:46:39 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Fri Sep 3 07:31:29 2010. Actually, I would say the Q60 is a good success story too the buses run frequently and do not break down half as much. They only bunch up mostly during peaks and looks more like on purpose bunching than lazy driver bunching. Since the MTA took over there have been very few times I have had to wait more than 20 minutes for a bus. In fact, when Cooper ran GBL it wasn't uncommon to wait 1/2 an hour for a Q60 during peak! Another big improvement is the Q60 is now 24/7. Bet, 1 am & 6am is the only time u wait 1/2 an hour for a Q60. |
|
|
| (974572) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 08:49:21 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Fri Sep 3 07:34:12 2010. Yes many male b/o's will pee by the rear door areas. When I was a kid I used to hang w/ a friend of mine on the Q74 and he taught me what b/o's do for a bathroom. He did say female b/o's also do it but I wouldn't know about that Lol |
|
|
| (974576) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 09:30:36 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 00:32:34 2010. When the takeover happened I remember a DOT rep at a local community meeting saying the subsidy rates for each company was the same. It wasn't a set amount in $$ but a % of the entire pot based on the amount of routes and size of each company which means Cooper received 47% of the pot if my math is ok.That is a very bad formula to begin with since it does not take into account actual operating costs on a per-company basis. The public utility formula where each company is guaranteed a return on investment makes more sense if you are going to regulate fares. Since we do not know the cost structure and other factors that went into each company's operations it is very difficult to say that the amount of money the Cooper companies received was sufficient. Why did the city refuse to allow the companies a fare increase but granted it instantly to the MTA - I call that hypocrisy and one of the reasons I will stand by my opinion that the companies were treated unfairly The MTA deserves no special praise for improving service since given double the subsidy and double the fare I believe that ANYONE could have accomplished the same thing |
|
|
| (974577) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 09:34:49 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by SMAZ on Fri Sep 3 06:53:33 2010. Its the government that refused to grant them fare increases - we will never know if they could have survived if they had the right to price their product at a rate that would guarantee them a fair rate or return like public utilities can. |
|
|
| (974595) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Evan on Fri Sep 3 10:46:10 2010, in response to [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Newkirk Images on Thu Sep 2 19:33:27 2010. The details of private operators and city politics aside, I'm curious what will happen to what's left of BHRA's assets in Red Hook. Will the BHRA live on or be dissolved? |
|
|
| (974597) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 10:52:28 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 03:20:06 2010. They certainly got things backwards. The PCC car was designed way back in 1929 and the first ones went into service in 1936, whereas the Old Look GMs date from 1940. |
|
|
| (974602) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Fri Sep 3 11:10:31 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Sep 3 00:15:25 2010. THat is too bad. I took that tour twice. Bob should have approached IKEA or Fairway. THey are corporate giants and maybe they would have been interested in providing funds. |
|
|
| (974603) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 11:14:26 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Sep 3 00:30:56 2010. Did they employ drivers a wage and fringe benefits package like those given to New Jersey Transit employees or did they pay crap wages?Don't know for sure, but they sure couldn't have kept the work force they did if they weren't paying them well. The 24 was one of the NJT routes that was actually fully reprivatized after joint operations between NJT and different private companies. Did they maintain the buses to high standards* or did they cut corners and get "free" buses from the state to cover their capital costs? Almost all of their buses were former NYCT Grummans. They even had a few Fishbowls (GM, not Flxible) in regular service, and those were the best out of their fleet. Did they maintain frequent service during off-peak hours that was reasonable, or did they magically disappear middays and after 7 PM? Look at Route 24's present-day schedule under Roach USA. O.N.E. ran the same timetable. In addition, the 24 amalgamated most of the former NJT route 30 First Street (for a while, route 50) in Elizabeth, which became the Elizabeth Avenue division of route 24. did they have to cross subsidize less profitable services like NJT does in order to provide some semblance of state-wide service NJT doesn't really have to do that. They're a behemoth of bloat. |
|
|
| (974606) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 11:14:48 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 09:30:36 2010. Regardless of whether or not the formula is good or bad, the other 3 companies did not have the issues Cooper companies had. Actually, as pointed out one of Cooper's companies (Command) was fairly decent, so if he wasn't getting enough money, how was that possible?? Again, it wasn't really a $$ issue it was a management issue.The city gave the MTA the additional subsidies because for them to run the companies required more $$ as now depots had to be rented, the employees will have to be paid accordingly to MTA rates (the drivers now get MTA bennies which are better than Cooper was giving them), drivers also had to be trained to MTA standards as Cooper companies drivers were no where professional. For example, I once took a Q60 out of 2nd Ave & 60th Street at 12:15am and I was the only PAX when we got to Queens Plaza the diver pulled over to a subway station and tried to kick me off the bus as he did not want to take 1 pax. I refused and he called the cops who forced him to finish his route. That would not fly under MTA. Also, the MTA also had to bring the fleets up to decent shape as many buses were destroyed by Cooper's lack of maintenance. They also immediately got new buses. The fare was not granted to Cooper companies b/c they were getting a sufficient amount of $$. I remember one thing mentioned at the pre-MTA takeover meeting the rep. from DOT said LL, NYBS and Queens Surface were not having issues and why should Cooper Companies, and she was right as they were getting the same fares, and subsidies. Again, there was no answer to that question (you even haven't really addressed it) b/c it wasn't a $$ issue but rather a mgmt issue. The Cooper companies years before had made a case to the DOT asking for more subsidy $$ so they could provide better service. Well, DOT granted it but the service did not improve on the Cooper companies 1 damn bit, but service did improve on the other 3 companies, which had good service to begin with. The MTA was granted their fare increase to keep things even with regular MTA fares and buses. It also allowed for a lower increase in the subsidy needed. You can stand by your opinions and I will too as right now though there are more facts to back my opinions up. If the other 3 companies had bad maintenance and bad service, I would agree totally that the companies were treated unfairly. But the fact of the matter it was only the majority of the Cooper Companies that had issues, so it was with them not the city, MTA, and others it landed sqaurely on them. We all know you do not like the MTA, but TBH I share the same feelings, if you look at my past posts in regards to the MTA you will see I almost always side against the MTA as they usually are wrong. But credit is due when it is due and they do deserve some credit here. Service on the former Cooper Companies lines have improved quickly and is now great, something that cannot be denied. Maybe the deal wasn't a good deal, but the city had to relieve the suffering of the pax on the former Cooper companies. The deal wasn't perfect for all, but they had to do something for the majority who were suffering and where was the suffering? With those riding Cooper companies lines. Sorry that isn't an opinion but a fact that was recognized in surveys, their own ridership data and by sheer observation. |
|
|
| (974607) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 11:15:25 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 09:34:49 2010. See my recent post b/c again the other 3 companies survived on the same fares. |
|
|
| (974635) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 12:54:16 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 10:52:28 2010. But there were still pre "old look" Yellow Coaches, Macks and other manufacturers' buses around which were slightly more modern looking than most of the streetcars of the day hence the comparison. Also the very first PCC design PCC I was not quite as modern looking as subsequent designs and definitely not as modern looking as the final design. |
|
|
| (974648) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 13:26:55 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 11:14:48 2010. The logic that a flat dollar subsidy was sufficient for one company should have also been sufficient for another is flawed since we do not have the actual operating expenses of each company to do a fair comparison.For all we know the subsidy barely covered the Cooper companies interest on their mortgages and there was no money left over for maintenance. without seeing detailed financial statements I can't answer your question and since these companies are not traded on public stock exchanges that information is not readily available. So I am deferring an answer pending addtional research. A comparison can be made with real estate. Just because three buildings have the same number of apartments and square footage does not necessarily mean that they have identical expenses. There are too many factors to consider that are not as obvious. Finally the city had options that did not involve expanding the socialist MTA empire. Typical of New York they went for the socialistic solution and we are now paying the price in reduced service and exorbitant taxes. |
|
|
| (974655) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 13:40:30 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by BMTLines on Fri Sep 3 13:26:55 2010. No they all had the same subsidy rates, they all had the same expenses.They all had their contracts which specified maintenance and service neither of which the Cooper Companies provided. Let us just agree to disagree we have been debating this back and forth and neither of us is convinced the other is right. Which is fine. It is hard to tell as it has been done. I am just happy with the end result which is good service and at the end of the day that is all that matters that the service is being provided. |
|
|
| (974725) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 17:53:15 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 12:54:16 2010. All the Yellow Coach buses I see from 1929 were front-engine jobs that look closer to schoolbuses. When 1936 came around, they were still front engine, albeit some had a slightly PCC-esque look most likely due to being aware of the PCC design. (And TARS had some streetcars that were far more modern than any of the contemporary bus designs.) |
|
|
| (974752) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 3 18:28:46 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 03:23:45 2010. Interesting. But could they pick up people on the local stops if people were heading towards the Junction? I mean as good as the B41 is, they have a bad tendency to bunch together and have pretty long gaps b/w buses. |
|
|
| (974758) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Fri Sep 3 18:37:43 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 00:21:42 2010. Getting back to the main topic, and not about buses and maintenance of the same. The tunnel is actually city property. When Bob Diamond collects the money for the tours, does that money go back to him or the city or divided in someway. (Transit Muesem?). If he leaves, what happens to the tunnel? Is there a group that still exists that will go down there occassionally to inspect it for leaks or other damages (well it survived for about 100 years without any maintenance. If another group wanted to give tours, etc, how would they go about it? |
|
|
| (974770) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Fri Sep 3 19:01:17 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by jabrams on Fri Sep 3 18:37:43 2010. From my understanding he keeps all funds. He was the only one that I know of that gave tours of it. I assume he would turn over the tunnel to another individual or group but that is my assumption, which I cannot say as fact. I say it from the standpoint that he wouldn't have wanted to re-discover the tunnel just for it to be forgotten about again. |
|
|
| (974799) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Sep 3 20:59:39 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Randyo on Fri Sep 3 12:54:16 2010. The postwar PCC with standee windows is the ultimate refinement of a classic design. |
|
|
| (975812) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Sun Sep 5 21:01:37 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 3 10:52:28 2010. UNTRUE!!!The roots of the PCC came out of a 1929 meeting in Atlantic City of transit officials who felt something to stem the loss of ridership. out of that meeting was created the Electric Railways President Conference Committee which was charged with designing a street railway car that could beat the automobile of it's day. Read the book "PCC THE CAR THAT FOUGHT BACK!. It should be in every streetcar fan's library. |
|
|
| (975903) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Randyo on Sun Sep 5 23:37:30 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Sep 3 20:59:39 2010. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (975904) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Randyo on Sun Sep 5 23:41:04 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 3 18:28:46 2010. Under private ownership they weren't allowed to pick up since that would have taken revenue from the MTA/NYCTA. They may have been allowed to pick up at Kings Pl at Kings Hwy but I'm not completely sure of that either. |
|
|
| (975909) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 00:25:55 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Dan Lawrence on Sun Sep 5 21:01:37 2010. The roots of the PCC came out of a 1929 meeting in Atlantic City of transit officials who felt something to stem the loss of ridership. out of that meeting was created the Electric Railways President Conference Committee which was charged with designing a street railway car that could beat the automobile of its daySo how is it untrue? I said the bus "old look" design followed the PCC design. You didn't disagree with that point. |
|
|
| (975910) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 6 00:39:05 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 00:25:55 2010. Perhaps where he was going with that is that the original PCC design didn't look as much as the later design that GM ripped off. The "familiar" PCC design that folks are used to was actually a later design from 1938. I tried to find one of the 1929 photos but it didn't turn up anywhere in google. Earliest I can find was also a later design from Baltimore ... The earliest ones were a bit more "boxy" looking than the above ... |
|
|
| (975987) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Sep 6 08:52:17 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Dan Lawrence on Sun Sep 5 21:01:37 2010. I have that book - great reading. |
|
|
| (976006) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 10:07:31 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Sep 6 08:52:17 2010. The book and his post don't seem to challenge my point, though. |
|
|
| (976008) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 10:22:06 2010, in response to [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Newkirk Images on Thu Sep 2 19:33:27 2010. Is he the only way to get down there (to the tunnel)? I want to go again but am not free on Sep 12. I can't imagine that the city would just allow it to sit there and not make any money (off tourists and railfans). |
|
|
| (976009) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 10:23:10 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 10:22:06 2010. I can't imagine that the city would just allow it to sit there and not make any money (off tourists and railfans)Isn't that what they did before Mr. Diamond came along? |
|
|
| (976017) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 11:57:35 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 10:23:10 2010. No Mr. Diamond was the one who re-discovered the tunnel. He poured through drafts, blueprints, etc at Brooklyn Borough Hall and then finally found the manhole, but the tunnel was filled in and he had recruited several volunteers who helped him dig it out. I actually know one of them, he said it was hard work. He has been the sole operator since the LIRR. Also, I cannot imagine the city wanting to take over the tours as to be quite frank the city would not really want to absorb the liability.Getting in & out of the tunnel is not exactly the easiest and there is potential for danger of slipping, falling, etc. I never been in it but heard from my friend and saw pics and it looks like a libility issue not saying it is as a fact cause I am not a lawyer. I am surprised Mr Diamond had no problems that way. |
|
|
| (976019) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Michael Wares on Mon Sep 6 12:02:11 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Sep 6 00:39:05 2010. By "original" design do you mean the original production cars for Brooklyn and Boston, which were very similar if not identical to the picture you posted, or the test cars which operated briefly in Brooklyn and Chicago? They were extremely unlike the production cars. |
|
|
| (976022) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Michael Wares on Mon Sep 6 12:21:34 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Michael Wares on Mon Sep 6 12:02:11 2010. To follow up my own post:"Brooklyn and Boston" ... and Pittsburgh. Also, the one streetcar built by Clark for Brooklyn was boxier than the production cars. |
|
|
| (976025) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 12:29:38 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 11:57:35 2010. Also, I cannot imagine the city wanting to take over the tours as to be quite frank the city would not really want to absorb the liability.I doubt they'd lose much business having people sign liability waivers. I actually do know someone who was very very slightly injured getting out of the manhole, but still enough of an injury to require a trip to the doctor (knee trouble). As long as you have fully functioning arms and legs, the worst part is the step between the top of the ladder and the street, which freaked me out. I wished that the ladder could rise just beyond street level. You literally have to start and end with your chest on the street pavement, with traffic narrowly avoiding the 1 or 2 cones protecting you. What I think they will do, if I know American capitalism, is leave it closed for a decade or two and then have a big one-day opportunity and charge people like $300+ to go. |
|
|
| (976028) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 12:36:26 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 12:29:38 2010. Yeah they can do the waiver thing, but those do not really protect them that much.For example, in Philly you have the Eastern State Penitentiary where before you are allowed to go on a tour you have to sign a waiver as the facility isn't in the best of shape. The waiver is for the City of Philadelphia as they own the site (they don't run it). Last year, a tourist fell and sued Philly and won, not sure how much $$ they got but they did sign a waiver. I think that is what they will do leave it and do a once in a while thing. The city can always donate it to the NYTM, but doubt they'd want it. But, I do not know the status of Diamond's plans for transition. I suspect he won't be going anywhere |
|
|
| (976030) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 12:39:18 2010, in response to [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Newkirk Images on Thu Sep 2 19:33:27 2010. According to:http://www.brooklynrail.net/bhra_events.html There is tour scheduled for Sep 26. I can't tell, however, if this is a non-updated page from years ago or perhaps they just haven't gotten around to updating the page since this news came out. |
|
|
| (976031) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Mon Sep 6 12:40:50 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 11:57:35 2010. Getting in & out of the tunnel is not exactly the easiest and there is potential for danger of slipping, falling, etc.That shouldn't be a problem. : )  Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (976039) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 13:22:49 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Sep 6 12:39:18 2010. Don't think it is recent. The copyright date was last updated 2009 also they have the M still running on that part at Court St.It looks the same as I have seen it previously. I can be wrong. |
|
|
| (976040) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 13:23:22 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Newkirk Images on Mon Sep 6 12:40:50 2010. If only they had that type of ladder :) |
|
|
| (976048) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 14:37:09 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 11:57:35 2010. Mr. Diamond was the one who re-discovered the tunnelHe can't have "rediscovered" it if it were via blueprints in archives that told of its existence. Therefore, without him, it would revert to the same amount of disuse as it did for decades, seeing the interest the city had in it. |
|
|
| (976079) | |
Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Mon Sep 6 15:53:25 2010, in response to Re: [ARTICLE] Bob Diamond Leaving Brooklyn, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Sep 6 14:37:09 2010. Yeah maybe rediscovered wasn't the right word but I think most knew what I meant :) |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
