Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 162 posts

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#101

Post by Symbiote »

zanny wrote: post #90
lasermike026 wrote: post #67

NYC MTA needs billions of dollars to fix the system. NY state must raise taxes on the rich and deploy it too the MTA. The federal must chip in too. The MTA will never make money and this is how it is.

Where does the misguided notion infrastructure should make a profit even come from? Everyone hates on Amtrak for not being a profitable company. When in history has infrastructure ever existed for the sake of the network operators profit? It is always for the sake of profiting those who use it - the infrastructure enables profits, but in the same way sticking profits into medicine cripples the efficiency of the syste…

> When in history has infrastructure ever existed for the sake of the network operators profit?

Most railways in Europe and North America were built for the profit of their investors, and made a profit for a long time.

Before that, so were some highways, the canals, and many bridges.

In Britain, the railways were bankrupted by WW2, and afterwards consolidated into a national company (British Rail).

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#102

Post by Symbiote »

zanny wrote: post #87
mysterydip wrote: post #71

Is this just a problem with NYC's system, or is this an "elephant in the room" problem with mass transit? If an individual's car breaks down, they can find alternate means to get where they need to go. If everyone were to depend on public transit in the future, how do you handle upgrades? I know the metro in DC will run extra bus routes for some down trains, but I think that's just for certain smaller repairs. It's s…

Almost every Subway supports transparent upgrades during operation. In the absolute worst case scenarios you shut down single stations at night. By design almost every Subway is redundant - you at least have to have two lines, one for station bypass and one for returning trains. When you work on any Subway, you shut down one of the lines and manage traffic through the other. The NY Subway is just the most incompetent…

In much of Europe, metro systems will shut down for maintenance for appropriate periods. This is massively cheaper than working around a live railway (especially underground), where safety would necessitate many more staff required and more interruptions to work -- if it's even permitted in the particular location.

The period depends on the city. Here in Copenhagen, where the metro runs all night, they tend to shut part of a line from 00-05h on a Monday-Thursday night, and put on buses instead. Cities with bigger metro systems might not need the buses: this was the case the last time I visited Berlin, and a central section was closed overnight.

London sometimes closes parts of lines at weekends, and every 2-3 years or so there is major work on a line (closed entirely) on ~25-30th December.

(To be clear then: the "absolute worse case" is closing an entire line for around a week.)

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#103

Post by ghaff »

jdavis703 wrote: post #95
ghaff wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to those who don't have reasonable options to move elsewhere for family and many other reasons, NYC (and Manhattan specifically) is filled with people who can't imagine living anywhere else. A lot like the Bay Area in that regard. Even those who live elsewhere (e.g. bedroom communities to the north) often have to take the subway once they reach the city by train. All of this, by the way, is a topic that's…

Cities have multiple tools to handle building more infrastructure as density goes up. There's land value capture which is a tax developers (or new occupants) agree to pay on any excess value created by a transit improvement (i.e. chicken before the egg). Then there are development proffers, which requires developers to pay for certain public improvements (i.e. egg before the chicken).

In theory. In practice, as we see, building things like new subway lines take decades. More money certainly helps but build a few skyscrapers of residential housing over the next decade and you might get incremental subway lines to support that in fifty years or so.

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#104

Post by Symbiote »

mysterydip wrote: post #71

Is this just a problem with NYC's system, or is this an "elephant in the room" problem with mass transit? If an individual's car breaks down, they can find alternate means to get where they need to go. If everyone were to depend on public transit in the future, how do you handle upgrades? I know the metro in DC will run extra bus routes for some down trains, but I think that's just for certain smaller repairs. It's s…

Balance the inconvenience of service interruptions with the cost of reducing the interruption.

Engineers and other staff can work at weekends / nights / popular vacation times / public holidays, but at an increasing cost. There's also a limited total number of engineers, so it will help to have a steady amount of work (i.e. permanently employed staff).

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#105

Post by Symbiote »

TillE wrote: post #88
Sangermaine wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Then it should close at night. No, it shouldn't, and I take it by this statement you don't live in NYC. I do, and have lived in Tokyo and other cities with excellent mass transit. While Tokyo's system is much, much better, it's pretty fantastic that I know I can always get a train home no matter what time it is, no matter where in the city I am, much faster than any ground vehicle would take me.

Everywhere else just runs replacement buses at night and it's fine. Yeah ok it's a little slower, but it means you're not running a huge train for five people.

Many larger cities in Europe run the metro continually from Friday until Sunday night.

This is a decent compromise.

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#106

Post by mulmen »

rb808 wrote: post #76
Nelkins wrote: post #69

The line about overcrowding being one of the major drivers behind delays doesn't hold much water. Ridership has essentially been flat or even declining in some areas[1] (peaked in early 2010s). Decreasing mean distance between failures in cars [2] (as well as mismanagement of crews & trains as mentioned in article) are among the main culprits. [1] http://web.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/ridership_sub_annua... [2] ht…

Are you sure? nytimes recently said its doubled. (thougcomparison to 40s is interesting) > Subway ridership has risen dramatically since the 1990s, when about four million people used the system each day. Now it is nearly six million riders each day — the highest level since the 1940 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/28/nyregion/subw...

What caused the spike in the 1940s? Wartime fuel rationing?

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#108

Post by Symbiote »

jdavis703 wrote: post #96
eric_h wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

475 stations, 840 miles of track, the signals have to be 'hot patched' as the system still needs to keep running 24/7/365. 50 years might be an over estimate, but projects like these tend to slip their deadlines. [Edit] peterwwillis's answer is much more thorough than mine https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14948951

Just implement speed restrictions (say 5 M.P.H.) in block sections that are being upgraded. Sure it's annoying to have your train slow down, but if you're going that slow you don't really need signals, to begin with.

We're underground. Is there space for the maintenance staff to stand whilst a train passes? Probably not everywhere.

If trains normally average, say, 30mph, and 12 times per hour in one direction, a 0.5mile restriction adds 5 minutes to the journey time. Now we can only run 11 trains per hour -- which messes up the whole schedule.

The periods where there isn't a train passing will be quite small. Is there time to get any necessary equipment onto the track, start the work, then clear the equipment away before the next train is approaching?

What happens if the staff make an error, and break the existing system? It might not be possible for trains to move, in which case we now need to evacuate hundreds of passengers along the tunnel.

Work within metro tunnels while trains are running is, therefore, very unusual.

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#109

Post by BartSaM »

empath75 wrote: post #107

I know this would probably be unpopular but why not just temporarily raise prices until fewer people can afford the train. And use the extra money to upgrade the system.

In current ecosystem, with so many politicians promising golden eggs, price rise will almost never end up in the decrease.

Also, you are taxing the poorest. I think they struggle enough. You could start selling premium services though.

Re: New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All

#110

Post by stingrae »

Instead of cancelling trains, why not take the unused cars and make the running trains longer? I understand that the stations may not be able to handle the length. You could stagger entries so that the first half of the train loads, pulls forward a bit then the second half loads.

If it is an issue with the strength of the train engines, could you use two train engines together? Especially if their intended routes are just getting cancelled.

Post reply on HN