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

151–160 of 162 posts

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

#151

Post by rockostrich »

treyfitty wrote: post #4

I used to take the 456 line on Lexington Ave. back and forth between Home & Work for the past 5 years. In January, the Q line on 86th st. opened, and although it takes me ~10 minutes longer each way, it is a MUCH more pleasant experience. The 456 is a nightmare, and I can tell you first hand, that it is crowded to a point where it is inhumane (imagine people literally fighting for a spot to have the "privilege" to sm…

The Q doesn't really replace the 6 though. I lived on the UES and worked around Grand Central so taking the Q would've probably doubled my commute. The 6 is a nightmare in the morning, but the Q actually helped with that. Anyone going to the west side would take the Q instead of the 6 to 51st to transfer to the E.

I only lived about 2 miles from work so as long as there wasn't a foot of snow on the ground, I would just walk. 40 minutes of fresh air beats 20 minutes on a stuffy train every time.

It was definitely a welcome addition though. It probably takes half the time to get to Penn Station from the UES now.

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

#152

Post by solatic »

jdavis703 wrote: post #93
danharaj wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Give us better management. It's gonna be hard considering how many independent and adversarial managers the NYC subway has.

Can New Yorkers make ballot propositions? If so it might make sense to make the MTA responsible directly to voters who live in the counties that are served by MTA. The current situation where it exists halfway between the governor and mayor seems like a governance structure where everyone can just blame the other person, similar to the governance structure dysfunction plaguing Washington, D.C.'s metro.

And part of the dysfunction of the DC metro is the lack of dedicated funding.

Accountability and power need to stay in the same hands. Being held accountable for a task you are powerless to affect is a powerful recipe for dysfunction. In context, funding is power - the power to make decisions about who gets how much funding and resources to improve the system. If you have funding, but no accountability, then you will simply redirect that funding to projects which are are actually accountable for.

Electing an MTA head, without giving that head dedicated funding, will be a political nightmare.

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

#153

Post by smpetrey »

IshKebab wrote: post #149
rst wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York's subway system runs 24 hours, and many residents rely on late-night/early morning service.

Which is great but it sounds like they need to compromise. Does New York have night busses?

Yep. In fact they're ridden so infrequently at night, they have a request-a-stop program after late-night hours:

http://web.mta.info/nyct/bus/howto_bus.htm

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

#154

Post by wutbrodo »

sattoshi wrote: post #59

I'm always impressed how terrible the subways are in America. In Moscow the metro is running really smoothly since the day of it's creation except for a single day. But that was because of Hitler.

We're really really REALLY REALLY bad at infrastructure, for reasons that experts don't actually 100% understand yet. There's plenty of possible reasons that contribute, but most of them tend to boil down to some feature of our politics (and the process by which infrastructure construction is purchased). Looking at cost per mile of apples-to-apples transit systems is horribly depressing compared to pretty much any other country.

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

#155

Post by wutbrodo »

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…

> It's something I haven't really thought much about before. The simple answer is to have redundant equipment (tunnels, tracks, cars), but few would stomach the cost.

Given that your premise is that everyone is on transit, presumably some of the incredibly gargantuan subsidies that are handed to private vehicle drivers would be used. I don't know if it's the just-world fallacy or what, but people always seem to have trouble grasping truly how inefficient car travel is. In a situation where gov't doesn't heavily subsidize them (and the drivers aren't paying the high costs associated with cars), I can't imagine that the cost of redundancy equipment required for no-downtime upgrades would be un-stomachable.

On the other hand, the other thing I know is that the electorate is far too stupid and far too selfish to grasp simple concepts like this: my own city has to fight tooth and nail against car drivers as a political bloc in order to claw back a fraction of the outsized privileged position they have in the transit infrastructure. So you may be right that it won't be politically feasible despite being less expensive than the alternative.

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

#156

Post by wutbrodo »

iooi wrote: post #11
stuaxo wrote: post #7

Why would it take 50 years to install signalling across the system ? This doesn't sound right at all.

Unions.

As much as I think unions are an absurd way to deal with income inequality by doing everything terribly and expensively, this is a really unsatisfying answer when it comes to explaining why the US is so bad at infra construction. Freaking Germany and France are hardly famous union-busters, and somehow they manage to be infinitely more efficient than us at public works projects. There's clearly something more complicated going on than "Unions."

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

#157

Post by wutbrodo »

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.

Would it be anymore unpopular than funding it in a way that makes sense? The subway is the most efficient way to move people around: if you shunt people away from it you may very well end up making your net financial position worse. At best, this amounts to accounting trickery.

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

#158

Post by cmurf »

pavement wrote: post #21

A lot of what affects the NYC subway is the principle of the "Sick System." http://issendai.livejournal.com/572510.html The system is too essential for a stop-the-world overhaul, but so far gone, that only a stop-the-world overhaul can part the clouds. Without a hard flush of antiquated mission critical infrastructure, millions of turbulent eddies and vortices will ensure that the system is always afflicted by parasi…

A related problem is the political pressure to keep the single trip price artificially low, under the excuse that it's on behalf of the working poor.

And yet the working poor buying single trip tickets, because they can't afford monthly passes, end up paying more per trip than someone who can afford the monthly pass. So the policy doesn't even meet the goal that the policy purports to shoot for.

And still another problem is that the system capacity is insufficient for demand. The design has reached it's scalability limit. We need transporters in NYC, or something, at this point. A continuous running conveyor-belt "people mover" like in airports might be more efficient.

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

#159

Post by IshKebab »

smpetrey wrote: post #153
IshKebab wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is great but it sounds like they need to compromise. Does New York have night busses?

Yep. In fact they're ridden so infrequently at night, they have a request-a-stop program after late-night hours: http://web.mta.info/nyct/bus/howto_bus.htm

Ha, that's how most busses in the world work, at least outside large cities.

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

#160

Post by IIAOPSW »

nickv wrote: post #133
IIAOPSW wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with your diagnosis for one simple reason: The Carnarsie line (AKA the L train). The L train is unique because it is the only line in the system that doesn't share track with any other line. It is well used but if it shut down for a day (or even a week) the effect on the system wouldn't be so bad. Yet attempts to upgrade the L line have still failed. How do you explain this?

That's not true. The L line is by far the most advanced line in the system because of the reasons you said. When I lived in Williamsburg, I remember coping with weekend shutdowns all the time for upgrades. But the L now is (I believe) only one of 2 lines with modern signaling and CBTC (computer based train control), it was the first to have countdown clocks, and it runs with the least gap time (headway spacing) of an…

IIRC the original plan was to fully automate the line. It failed because of the Union. CBTC is a compromise not a victory.
Post reply on HN