Subways are for sleeping: NYC Transit survival thread

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/01/31/2011-01-31_cuomo_may_cut_funding_to_transit_system_without_raising_fares_new_route_for_mta.html

this guy's gonna be great!

relevant to thread title:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/02/01/2011-02-01_mta_eyes_sliding_doors_as_subway_platform_lifesaver.html

always wondered how much this would cost

A lot

Can't think of anywhere in the world where platform edge doors have been retrofitted. In london they exist only on the section of jubilee line built in the last decade. So I think the answer is: Ruinously expensive.

xpost

right, and nyc has more area to cover...imagine it would be even worse w/ elevated stations that don't even have a ceiling to work with. and american transit can't even do basic things on a budget. but at the end of the day we're just talking about doors! admittedly a shitton of doors, but cmon, it's 2011.

cheaper to let ppl die imo

mebbe let private companies fund a lot of the project and put up whatever the fuck ads they want on the walls. pretty sure they could come up with a way to put up some DOORS for less than a billion dollars.

fwiw it is cheaper to let people die but this would presumably increase ridership a tad and be an investment that pays off in the long-long term

# of people who die is statistically insignificant = absolutely no incentive to do anything except possibly as a PR maneuver. Ridership already a captive audience, how would this substantially increase anything?

Laurel otm

My two favorite words.

Current subway commuters might be captive but there is still a decent percentage of the city that could commute by train and does not. Making the experience more pleasant might draw a small percentage tho obviously it's not as important a variable as the cost of driving. Still, a small percentage adds up when you look at it from a 50 year perspective. The new countdown clocks would also be a stupid investment if we look at this assuming a captive audience.

I mean what do we really want the system to look like in 2061? Unlike constructing new lines this seems like an infrastructure improvement that could work well as a public-private partnership.

Those barriers aren't gonna make anything more pleasant, they'll just be a reason for people to shove each other right up against them instead of leaving some room by the edge.

And per this thread, they'd have to be covered in advertising to have any financial hope, so throw that garishness in, and figure the ads/whatever is on the walls is going to block out the view across the tracks of any tilework, or other platforms, so it makes your platform that much more enclosed/claustrophobic.

These things are seriously expensive. It's not just a matter of installing doors but the signaling systems that go with them:

trains need to stop at the exact same point every time
there needs to be a way for the train driver/guard to safely operate the doors which requires new infrastructure for the train to talk with the station
you need new safety systems to stop trains if the doors are forced open

All of these things can only really be achieved during a major signaling upgrade or new construction.

Signaling upgrade is gonna be inevitable in coming decades regardless. But the lines that be automated in the future would be the obv place to start. In 2061 hopefully that would be the entire system.

"That will be"

Undoubtedly, but the idea that this could be a quick, cheap, ad funded project is ridiculous.

I never said quick or cheap! Just that it could be more feasible if the mta could split the bill. And that the underlying technology does exist.

But yes I do realize that its more complicated than just throwing up some plexiglass especially when you're starting with early 20th century infrastructure. But bringing the system into the 21st century is a process that's gonna have to happen one day regardless. I dont think this would have particularly high upkeep costs once a system was in place.

Sorry typing this shit on an iPhone I change my mind I actually hate 21st century tech

fwiw it is cheaper to let people die but this would presumably increase ridership a tad and be an investment that pays off in the long-long term

― iatee, Tuesday, February 1, 2011 12:20 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^ explain increased ridership logic.

A cleaner, safer trainride is inherently appealing! Rider death in the news once a week might only matter for Pr reasons but Pr matters!

I can't remember the last time I heard about a rider death. It seems to me that as a general rule most this kind of information is not really important to most NYers.

iirc Paris is doing this with its linge 1 while converting it to automatic. Yea it's a simpler system and below ground and they have tue know-how with linge 14 but is it possible? Totally.

Which is to say, I'd be surprised if it's really a part of the reason that more people don't use the subways. First of all, I think a lot of people use the subways. And the ones that don't probably don't for other reasons (particularly status signaling reasons, like they'd rather drive in the smelly disgusting taxi cabs than the smelly disgusting subway).

Okay I read a lot of transit stuff so I prob do overestimate how often people hear

is there really one subway related death a week? that is much higher than i would've guessed

No idea how much Paris is spending and can't look it up on this stupid phone but I will later

90 were hit by trains in 2009 and 40 deaths so nearly

Can't find a number but the RATP/Transillien capital budgets would make a new yorker weep.

okay found it for the 13

33,3 millions euros for 12 stations

http://www.leparisien.fr/yvelines-78/des-portes-anti-suicide-installees-sur-la-ligne-13-05-01-2010-765524.php

if we could do it anywhere near that price range I don't think it would be crazy to hope for doors for the 7 and the L within 15 years...but again I have no idea how elevated stations would affect the cost. admittedly this is not a subject I know a ton about.

but then stuff like this happens

http://secondavenuesagas.com/2011/02/01/cuomo-removes-100m-in-dedicated-transit-dollars/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/nyregion/03bus.html?_r=2

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/nyregion/06sadik-khan.html?_r=1&hp

strange hit job from the times / don't vote for weiner

I would never vote for SchumerMiniMe Weiner, and I really don't like pedestrian tourist plazas on Broadway

sent the transportation commissioner the following email:

Dear JSK -- This story in the Times is bullshit. Please carry on with your dictatorial yet awesome plans. And fuck Anthony Weiner.

apparently nyc.gov does not have profanity filters

tourism is pretty amazing tbh, people from around the world want to come to your city and throw their money at it. it creates lots of jobs that can't be outsourced. the downside is so small "lol...tourists are annoying! they don't even live here!"

morbs, you don't drive, you don't take taxis - how does shutting down broadway affect someone like you negatively beyond 'too many tourists'? I feel like you associate the tourism boom/urban improvements w/ gentrification and the unaffordable cost of living, and I mean there's a certain correlation in that there is strong demand for visiting/living in 'nice places' and making nyc a nicer place to live in will continue to increase that demand and the cost. that is not a good reason to want to make nyc a worse place to live in or return to grungy/dangerous nyc. the city getting safer and more walkable isn't a problem, the problem is that we're not expanding the city fast enough to meet the demand.

at the botttom of this there's the weirdo american conservativism that has a knee-jerk reaction to *any* change.

not too invested in it, i avoid midtown whenever i can, but when i have to it's HELL ON EARTH

look I don't spend my weekends hanging out in midtown either, but I still don't want to get hit by a taxi on my way to work.

anyway bloomy comes off v. differently here than in the article:

http://www.streetsblog.org/2011/03/04/bloomberg-on-his-transpo-commissioner-keep-coming-up-with-new-ideas/

what a shitty article

any article that uses the formulation "some say" should be banned from the new york times

i wonder who is trying to take her out?

well not to be all conspiracy-theorist but schumer recently came out against the PPW lanes almost definitely due to pressure from his wife (who used have JSK's job)

i dont think it makes you a conspiracy theorist to think that article is just weed-carrying for some faction of the political class

Schumer lives on PPW btw

he'd also towed a different line until recently:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-charles-e-schumer/exploring-new-york-by-bik_b_218468.html