Slashdot Mirror


New York's Subway Is Slow Because They Slowed Down the Trains After A 1995 Accident

According to the Village Voice, New York City's subway trains are running slower because the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is deliberately running the trains slower. The Village Voice obtained MTA internal documents, discovering that the decision to run the trains slower was made following a fatal 1995 crash on the Williamsburg Bridge. From the report: The subway's performance has been steadily deteriorating for many years. The authority's own internal data shows that delays due to "incidents," such as broken signals and tracks or water damage, have only marginally increased since 2012. But there is one type of delay that's gotten exponentially worse during that time: a catchall category blandly titled "insufficient capacity, excess dwell, unknown," which captures every delay without an obvious cause. From January 2012 to December 2017, these delays increased by a whopping 1,190 percent -- from 105 per weekday to 1,355. In December, one out of every six trains run across the entire system experienced such a delay. The increase has been steady and uninterrupted over the past six years.
[...]
In 1995, a Manhattan-bound J train crossing the Williamsburg Bridge rear-ended an M train that was stopped on the bridge, killing the J train operator and injuring more than fifty passengers. The National Transportation and Safety Board investigation placed most of the blame on the J train operator, who the NTSB suspected had been asleep. But the NTSB also identified potential issues with the signal system that contributed to the accident, which it found didn't guarantee train operators enough time to apply the emergency brakes even when awake. "They slowed the trains down after the Williamsburg Bridge crash," a veteran train operator who asked not to be identified told the Village Voice. "The MTA said the train was going too fast for the signal system." As a result, the MTA, quite literally, slowed all the trains down, issuing a bulletin informing employees in April 1996 that their propulsion systems would be modified so they could achieve a maximum speed of 40 miles per hour, down from the previous high of 50 to 55 miles per hour on a flat grade. But the MTA didn't stop there, internal documents show. One of the NTSB's safety recommendations was to set speed limits. As a result, the MTA began a still-ongoing process of changing the way many signals work to meet modern safety standards.

154 comments

  1. Meanwhile, in Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If their trains are off by even a couple seconds there's an inquiry.

    1. Re:Meanwhile, in Japan by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      It would be interesting to find out the amount funding required from the Japanese governments to keep it that way and compare to the dollars that New York gets.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re: Meanwhile, in Japan by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      I'm going to guess New York spends rather more per rider. NYC is notorious for corruption

    3. Re: Meanwhile, in Japan by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter how many riders use a system, you are going to have to spend a certain amount to keep that system going and if you spend it first then more people will use it. If Japan keeps theirs going on ten million a year but New York has fifty million, then you know there is a problem.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:Meanwhile, in Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been living in Tokyo for two years and I can assure you this is not true.

      It is relatively common to have trains and metro which are a few minutes late, especially in rush hours, probably happening on a frequency a tens of times per week at least.
      Plus it does happen that in case of particular events, somebody jumping under the metro, a typhoon, snowing or some animal getting on the tracks (for the metro that also continues as surface trains), you even get 10-20 minutes of delay.

      And this is just talking about metro and trains... busses are routinely up to 5 or so minutes late.

      Don't get me wrong, it's still an absolutely efficient transportation network, and the delays, when they happen, can be annoying, but definitely reasonable, with announcers keeping you informed. It is not, however, this fantasy world of perfection and trains arriving to the second, with death penalty otherwise. ;)

  2. Doesn't sound like it was the accident by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it sounds like the accident merely exposed a flaw in their signaling system. Rather than improve the signaling system (for which there was probably no money, we were 15 years into massive nonstop tax cuts) they did the only logical thing: slow the trains down.

    This is yet another symptom of Americans not wanting to spend money (e.g. higher taxes) on infrastructure. The maddening thing is nearly all of those tax cuts went to the top 1%ers. Enough already. They get the best civilization has to offer. Make them pay their bloody God damned dues.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There would be plenty of money for infrastructure if it wasn't diverted to other pet projects. No need for higher taxes. A politician has never met a dollar he/she wanted to save for long term maintenance and infrastructure goals. It's always spend fast and furious.

    2. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      NY and CA would be much better off if their residents didn't have to pay Federal tax (i.e. NYExit and CALExit). NY and CA pay more money to DC than they get back, to support (often) red states whose residents profess to dislike them.

    3. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NY and CA pay more money to DC than they get back

      Only when you excuse indirect money.

    4. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean military protection racket? Military protection wouldn't be as needed if they weren't part of the US, which has managed to annoy a lot of the world with its brainless meddling.

    5. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bullshit. Per capita inflation-adjusted government revenue may dip occasionally during a recession, but it's up tremendously over time. Can't blame this on a lack of revenue. The MTA has it's own sources of funds, anyway. It's not supposed to depend on the Federal government.

      Even The New York Times acknowledges that this is a political issue, one which Democrat Cuomo is mostly to blame for.

      The real scandal is that NY's Subway costs more to build an operate than just about anywhere else. Their labor cost is $140K/year/worker on _average_. They also run two people per train, compared to one pretty much anywhere else and they still manage to have their crews spend less time working vs. deadheading.

      Face it, this is the natural result of government worker unions combined with complicit politicians. The politicians and their cronies and allies make money and the public gets screwed as they suck the subway system dry.

      If you want to fix it, then remove all the union rules and privatize it. I know, will never happen, because certain folks have too much political power in NYC.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    6. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 0

      The real cretins are the ones that believe that the US as it now exists is remotely sustainable.

    7. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real cretins are the ones that believe that California and NY as it now exists are remotely sustainable.

      Fixed that for you. This will come as a shock to you but all the brain power that drives Silicon Valley came from states that are neither NY or California. If California and NY had to fund the education of their employees that they steal from other places, then they go bankrupt.

    8. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      California and NY both have first-rate public university systems, which is more than can be said for 75% of US states. Texas, Michigan, New Jersey, Massachusetts, North Carolina are up there, but plenty of states concentrate more on jocks and sports than students.

    9. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      The top CUNY schools (read: Brooklyn, Queens, Hunter, CUNY uptown, Lehman) provide an amazing education, especially considering their cost, which is under $7,000 per year. (Or free under certain circumstances.) For professional/grad programs, SUNY has some amazing and also cheap schools -- tuition at SUNY Downstate, an excellent medical school, is 50% of that of most other schools for in-state students.

      I can't find nationwide rankings for public schools, only regional, but the CUNY schools usually come out top-ranked.

    10. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CUNY schools are community colleges.

      SUNY schools are a national joke.

      Name one CEO that came out of the SUNY or CUNY systems.

      Because I can name two that came from public universities in Alabama. Tim Cook and Jimmy Wales.

    11. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      The CUNY schools I just listed have masters and Ph. D. level programs. They're a city-owned university system -- don't confuse it with "community college."

      The city in question has more population than many US states. Think of them as state schools with more vertical campuses.

    12. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Also...
      Colin Powell (general)
      Jonas Salk (scientist)
      Bernard Baruch (Wall St. CEO)
      Julius Blank (basically created Silicon Valley)

    13. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Do you know why they concentrate on sports, most people do not realise why. Universities have a tax exempt status, so sporting revenues, advertising and ticket sales are tax exempt and hence the major source of profits for insiders, investors and staff with inflated salaries, why sport in US universities, greed not education, although that would technically be an education in US greed. Infinite greed is eating the USA alive, the snake eating it's own tail in it's rapacious gluttony.

      Seriously slow down the trains rather than fix the problem, that'll work with growth really well. Slower trains less passengers per hour. I can guess the next 'er' improvement, remove the seats, standing room only basically cattle cars to get as many domesticated mud monkeys (earth primates) on the cars as possible and it will make the train carriages cheaper, extra bonus.

      Hey America, can you taste the Russian governments trick yet, trying to break the stalemate they have enforced will cost approximately about three times what you currently spend, to just barely enable an offensive first strike opportunity. Of course all Russia has to do is double spending, currently 1/10th of US spending, and the US would have to triple it again.

      Part two of the plan, joint Russia China space program, which will scream ahead of the US, especially when Russia and China invite other countries into the program, as the good guys, all about gaining access to the universe, rather than a fascist takeover of the planet. After all the defence spending growing out of control, the US will be forced to find funding for space, to compete with Russia and China, who working to achieve a lost cost stalemate, will spend money saved on a very expansive space program (guaranteeing the further collapse of US infrastructure which will cripple the economy from which they are trying to squeeze out more defence spending).

      US insolvency assured, not because they can not see it coming because well, at least some of them are not that stupid but because others do not give a crap as long as they fill their pockets. They are quite content to retire to say Yalta (interesting reasons why Yalta, the number one pick for major tourism and retirement development in the 'near' future, good weather and a fairly steep coastline, you don't have to go very far inland to avoid becoming underwaterfront and of course Russia has become a stable government, far more stable than say the Ukraine, which is why the Ukraine had to lose the Crimea in order for the Crimea to financially take off, hence the no longer so hidden global investment).

      Now Americans can either ride that public train to collapse in full view of the rest of the world or stop the rot, end the infinite greed and poseur status mentality which feeds corruption or suffer the self driven consequence.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    14. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure mean states like Bangalore or Delhi, correct?

      Or maybe you mean states like Jalisco or Chihuahua?

      No, I'm not joking.

    15. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First CUNY schools are not city owned. The state pays for them. And not a single CUNY school is a top rank school.

      Second they offer phds in bullshit which are not real phds.

      Third I’m still waiting for you to name one CEO to come out of the SUNY system. I can name one CEO that came out of from University of Buffalo, Harvey Weinstein.

    16. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also...
      Colin Powell (not a ceo)
      Jonas Salk (not a ceo)
      Bernard Baruch (not a graduate of CUNY in this or last century)
      Julius Blank (not a ceo)

      Fixed that for you.

    17. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bernard Baruch is not a product of a CUNY school since CUNY was established until 1961.

    18. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Salk did more for humanity than most CEOs. Blank was an innovator and one of the founders of Fairchild Semi.

      Why is being a big dick in corporate America vs a scientist or engineer so fucking important?

    19. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They vast majority of people that did more for humanity didn’t come out of either the CUNY or SUNY system. They were educated at public universities in states you hate.

      Name a single US president to come out of the SUNY or CUNY system. I can name a several presidents educated at public universities in your so called fly over states.

    20. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While the union and the unique size of the NYC transit system is problematic, its state politicians that are the real cancer to the MTA. (And they appoint the people who run the MTA, more cancer.) If Shelly Silver wasn't diverting state and MTA money to go into a 2nd ave subway line, the money could have been made available to replace the turn of the 20th century signalling equipment. Then the subway wouldn't have to operate at a slower speed (not a decision that I criticize, btw).

    21. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      And aren't they proud to have the opportunity to practice the socialism they preach? Those that have wealth should have their wealth confiscated and given to those who are not. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." It isn't that often that we get to actually implement our beliefs in daily life, and put our money behind it. I cheer for NY and CA as they get to uphold their deeply held beliefs.

      As I have often heard, deserving has nothing to do with it. You comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Moreover it is NY and CA who have, for decades, relentlessly mocked and despised the rest of America through their control of the media. The dislike they get is their own hate being returned to them. This is why hate is so toxic and wrong, because creates a vicious cycle.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    22. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "First-rate" if you're an illegal immigrant, in which case you get preferred admission status.

    23. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's right, keep listening to the propaganda instead of doing something useful.

    24. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No... roads, sewer systems, health care programs, international highways, bridges, funds for education.

      Red states have pretty terrible economies because they don't invest in their citizens and they drive their best and brightest out of their states to other states.

      So red states depend heavily on the federal government. States like wyoming with 280,000 citizens per senator vote themselves federal money paid for by states with 19,000,000 citizens per senator. It's atrocious.

      I wonder just how low the population of these states has to go before the system breaks down.

      You know, if california just paid 40,000 of their "liberal" folks to live in wyoming that would flip wyoming blue.

      40,000/38,000,000 seems like a pretty good deal to me.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    25. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah, privatization will fix it! Let's see, what would a private operator do... invest as little as necessary to keep people from switching to an alternative while charging as much as possible ...

      In other words, it would be like it is now. Maybe with higher ticket prices if they can get away with it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    26. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by mentil · · Score: 1

      The Senate is explicitly designed to NOT scale with population. Now if you wanted to complain that some states have a much higher citizen-to-representative ratio than others (which some do), then you'd have a point.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    27. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      New Yorkers pay the highest taxes in the country, but you can't plow much back into infrastructure when your trash collectors retire on $285,000 a year.
      http://thedeepstate.com/retire...

    28. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Bright+Apollo · · Score: 1

      The MTA has run the subway system long enough to have diverted some of their infrastructure spending on PTC, which in a wholly-owned line should have been an automatic project. Why wasn't it?

      Signaling and interlocking control being solved with PTC, what's left is operator issues like falling asleep. Taking care of engineers and watching them better is another automatic spend, but why aren't they doing it?

      Start looking at how the MTA spends money on external vendors. There's your big question.

      --#

    29. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Bright+Apollo · · Score: 2

      The union is soaking the MTA entirely here. I'm all for safety, but they've got do-nothing crew requirements for everything. Look at the massive over-allocations for the 2nd Avenue project to see just how horrible the union is.

      And this is why the knee-jerk reaction to "Right to work" takes place, because unions get greedy. I'm a fan of unions, not a fan of greed.

      --#

    30. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem easy to track down for a little face to face education. When you're not expecting it.

    31. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That guy was not a sanitation worker. He was management. He likely managed more people than the mayor's of most towns. He did real work. Plus his retirement was high becuse he invested his own money into his pension.

    32. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is yet another symptom of Americans not wanting to spend money (e.g. higher taxes) on infrastructure. The maddening thing is nearly all of those tax cuts went to the top 1%ers. Enough already. They get the best civilization has to offer. Make them pay their bloody God damned dues.

      BS. New Yorkers pay lots of taxes, they just don't get much value for money.

      New York has the highest construction costs in the world.

      Compare that to other large modern cities and you see that there is no excuse for that (aside from graft, incompetence, and kickbacks from unions & contractors).

      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

      https://jalopnik.com/heres-the...

    33. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The idea of governance and public servants has been replaced with politics.
      We elect too many people based on beliefs on areas that the position has little if any control of, and there are so many political rivals ready to pounce on any bad judgement calls, even if it one they themselves would had made, but they didn't have to make it at the time so they blame you for that mistake.

      As tax paying voters we see a good portion of our paychecks being cut into taxes. This money if we were allowed to keep would probably raise our standard of living up a notch (In the short term at least). Fixing a light that is underground or trying to explain why it costs 100x as much to install the equipment then it would for a hacker to build the same thing with off the shelf electronics, is difficult. Then combine if you try that there will be someone ready to stab you in the back. Because your campaign slogan was to use less money, and here you are asking for more.

      But all this is politics not governance. As a responsible public servant you are trying to work for the best interests of your constituents, and perform you jobs as well as you can. This means evaluating the long term (Past your current election cycle) benefits of such actions. Slowing the trains down as a short term solution while you evaluate improved signaling systems, Seeing evaluating to see if the Gold standard system that has a high cost and offers more features then you will ever use, vs a middle tear system that will really do what is needed at less cost (even if you are the greatest city in the world) however rejecting the cheap system, as you will be spending money and not getting what you really need.

      What I feel is the core of the problem is we as citizens do not have access to the information to help us make appropriate decisions. And I don't have a good solution.
      Commercial media: They are all about profit. So their goal is to get your attention long enough to get to the ads. They are willing to give misleading headlines to get you interested and fill up time with commentators so you are yelling at the TV, Website, News Paper, Radio... But you are still viewing it. Going down to the deep dig on the issue will be boring, and viewers will drop off.

      Government media: They are about survival. The phrase don't bite the hand that feeds you comes into mind. Our government (of whatever country you are reading this from) isn't always the good guy. Bad decisions are made with bad intentions. And for an organization who's lively hood is based on these people means they may be willing to look the other way or put a spin be a propaganda arm of the ruling party.

      Social media: Really lack of any depth at all. Long winded posts (Much like mine here) shortly fall down to the side to witty memes that say hey look at this, other people feel the same way that I do on such a topic. And Cat videos because we all love watching cats play.

      Public Media: In many ways this has the problems of all three. While I have found they are more likely to go into a bit more depth, because the people who pay for it ask for more details. and they don't need to show as many ads (err umm. Underwriters?). They are at the mercy of the quarterly fund drive, so they need to keep people who would pay them interested enough, and often that means pandering to the interests of the local community, not hitting too hard against the grants and underwriters (often politicians, governments and big companies and special interest groups) and keeping the format close to that of commercial so people just don't turn that dial and not be engaged.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    34. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      NY's Subway costs more to build an operate than just about anywhere else.

      . . . what about scenic New Jersey . . . ?

      Their labor cost is $140K/year/worker on _average_.

      Tony Soprano's crew need to eat, too!

      When New York City is capable of cleaning up the Fish Market . . . "transport" . . . get back back to me.

      I guess the folks in NYC could vote in candidates who vow to fight corruption in the city . . . but too many profit from the corruption!

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    35. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Do you know why they concentrate on sports, most people do not realise why. Universities have a tax exempt status, so sporting revenues, advertising and ticket sales are tax exempt and hence the major source of profits for insiders, investors and staff with inflated salaries, why sport in US universities, greed not education,

      I always find it amusing that any public spending on medicine in the US is decried as "Socialized Medicine" and yet public run and supported institutions have these huge sport programs.

      "Socialized Medicine" is bad but people don't have a problem with "Socialized Sport" from college/university teams. Minor league sports teams rarely stay solvent for long in the US, they constantly open and close, relocate, etc... trying to eek out a meager existence because they can't compete with Socialized Sports teams. A University team has a bad year... that's OK... there's more government money to keep them afloat for a while- or another influx of students next year. Minor league teams have no such protection.

      15 years is ancient for a minor league team in the US- you go to Europe and there are MANY small teams that have been playing on the same grounds since the 19th Century- they're the norm not the exception. They're not being crushed by socialized sport.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    36. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by torkus · · Score: 1

      Well, the MTA 'budget' is it's own problem.

      As a private company, their books are not open for public review despite getting a large portion of their funding from the city. Those books almost certainly have huge amounts of graft and wasteful spending (MTA got in trouble for 'retiring' a large portion of their outgoing employees on disability a few years back for example).

      I agree, there's more investment needed in infrastructure but the money is likely there within the MTA if you cleaned up their budgets (and took away millions upon millions of illegitimate spending).

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    37. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by torkus · · Score: 1

      Remove the union!? How DARE you? That's blasphemy!

      Unions ensure workers get their 'fair' pay (WAY over any vaguely comparable job), excessive benefits, and then allow employees to boycott together when they don't get their way on raises or something else. Oh, and who remembers what a pension is? Maybe your parents or grandparents do...and MTA employees.

      Unions were needed at one point in history. They've long since outgrown their usefulness and have become another blight on society.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    38. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by torkus · · Score: 1

      I guess the folks in NYC could vote in candidates who vow to fight corruption in the city . . . but too many profit from the corruption!

      Are you kidding? They couldn't even prevent a mayor from basically buying himself an extra term beyond the legal term limits. That's how bad NYC is for greed and corruption among the billionaires.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    39. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      The MTA is a "private company" - har har hardy har har.

      Yes yes, I know, from a legal-formalist perspective they have no doubt jumped the bureaucratic hoops required to be a "private company".

      But any goddamned fool can see they're a government agency. The MTA is about as much a giant plaid avocado as it is a "private company".

    40. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Good one, Ivan!

    41. Re: Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah! Down with weekends! You're gonna work 60 hours a week, and you're f going to kiss the boss's boots when he kicks you. You don't DESERVE a raise, peon! What kind of pussies demand fucking health insurance? Die in the street like a dog, you deplorable.

      Fuck unions! Fuck working people! All power to the landlords and money lenders!

    42. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter if Michigan loses the championship or not. It matters when some government bureaucrat refuses to pay for my operation because he doesn't like my politics, age, race or religion.
      When a company does it I have some chance by taking it to the courts. When the government does it who do I go to?
      So no. I don't want government to be making health decisions for me.

    43. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blue Wyoming project! Where's the kickstarter . . . . :-)

    44. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      The senate was designed not to scale with population back when states were of approximately equal population density and the idea was to prevent small states from being marginalized by large states. It was not designed to give rural interests an advantage over urban interests. You could argue that the current system has it's benefits but what we have now is not the design intent.

    45. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The intent of the Senate was to give the states their voice in the federal government, selected by the state's government.
      Then the 17th Amendment flipped that on it's head and made them elected by the people of the state instead.

    46. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You post this junk all the time but it isn't exactly what you say it is. "Red states" get money for a lot of things that are there purely for the rest of the country's benefit. Military bases, federal installations. Virginia is called a red state, but has much of the national government's offices in it as well as a massive military presence. Much of the military presence is there because it physically cannot be anywhere else in the country and maintain effectiveness. Your skewed thinking would call that nothing more than federal handouts but it is there because the country needs it there. They lump welfare in the same boat as things like government facilities and military in your numbers. They are not the same.

    47. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      you know a domestic router that you buy for $49 at best buy is a good solution for a household with 1-4 people. It's not good for a small business which requires a more expensive router. And that router's no good for a corporation with tens of thousands of employees.

      The senate is broken. We no longer appoint senators. We've made other changes as well to the filibuster rule.

      Think about this. Say a wealthy family thru a series of bills passed, real estate purchased, and companies driven out of business managed to drive everyone else out of Wyoming such that it was just the three or four people in the "state" of wymoming. Would it be broken enough for you then?

      Basically 4 people would get two senators, a representative, the governorship, the state legislature, apply for federal funds to assist their 'state'. Those two senators could demand a lot of money for their 'state'. And that's essentially what has happened- just a little less extreme.

      One thing that could happen is that states are broken up into roughly 5 million citizen states. sure, wyoming and similar states would still be outliers but the difference wouldn't be so extreme. So california would become 6 states-- 4 liberal and 2 conservative. Texas would become 5 states- 3 conservative and 2 liberal. and so on.

      Our republic is failing under the strains of the current system. We need to address it.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    48. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 1

      Except the current system doesn't have those same incentives. Instead, no matter how slow the trains are, no matter how many accidents there are, or how bad the service and security is, the MTA still gets funded and the union workers still get paid.

      In fact, it's even worse, pride keeps many of the workers actually doing their job, but in terms of financial incentives, the worse job the MTA does, the more people and politicians will politic for giving them a larger budget, more union workers and more money, all to "fix" the problem by throwing money at it. Over the last decade, the MTA's costs have outpaced inflation by 50%!!!

      Compared to subway systems in Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, which all benefit from private companies and money, the MTA's maintenance, signals, environment, safety, etc... is crap. All you have to do is look at the real world comparisons between the systems.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    49. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Name one CEO that came out of the SUNY or CUNY systems.

      I have no doubt that there's lots of them in small companies. However, CEOs of large companies tend to get there by being part of the elite to begin with, and tend to go to more prestigious schools in the first place.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    50. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sit down and reread what you wrote.

      First, you said that unions give their members a massive boost in quality of life. Then you said that unions have outgrown their usefulness. You seem to think that fair pay is what non-union jobs pay, not what union jobs pay, when the union pay rates have to be low enough to keep the company profitable. You talk about "excessive" benefits in the same way. Pensions. Why don't you have one? Presumably because you're not unionized.

      What you really need to do is to stop trying to tear others down for their relative success. Instead, form a union and grab the goodies for yourself.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    51. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I don't know these systems. But I know some systems in Europe and can only say that the ones that are affordable and reasonably well staffed and on time are not exactly the privatized ones.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    52. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 1

      Well, feel free to educate yourself, then. You have access to the Internet, after all. :)

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    53. Re:Doesn't sound like it was the accident by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You can ride the subway in New York via the internet now?

      Did I miss an important development in telepresence technology?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. What a itch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the ubway can be.

  4. Re:Thank god by AC-x · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How's the traffic this morning?

  5. ...so? by fafalone · · Score: 1

    On the vast majority of the system, trains won't even hit 40mph. I can only think of a couple spots where a couple trains hit that speed, and even then only for a couple minutes. I can't imagine those spots having trains run 10-15mph slower has any discernible impact.

    1. Re:...so? by Sique · · Score: 2

      Lowered speed has more impact than you might imagine. It means that rails are occupied longer, that following trains have to wait longer, that they might miss time slots, which in turn means less trains and thus the ones running being more crowed, which in turn causes them to have longer waiting times at the stations. Time schedules on a highly occupied rail system are very finely tuned, and even a small lagging behind schedule ripples through the system and causes more lagging elsewhere.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    2. Re:...so? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 2

      Exactly this. NYC as it is today is not sustainable without both investment in transit infrastructure, and also getting the cost structure under control (more difficult in NYC than many other places due to entrenched union rules/benefits and the much higher cost of living compared to most of the U.S.).

    3. Re:...so? by fafalone · · Score: 1

      The spots where the trains could go 50 instead of 40 are on the outskirts of the system, or a couple parts of express tracks, where the headways are already controlled by shared track elsewhere on the line. In general your comment is accurate, for the NYC subway in regards to setting a limit at 40 instead of 50, I don't believe it is.

  6. So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The obvious answer is that the demand has gone up, and the capacity hasn't met the demand. The headline is bullshit, and the slowness has nothing to do with an accident in 1995.

    It's well documented why the trains are slow in NYC, it's because they haven't put enough money back into the system. It's a failure of not maintaining the system that's at fault here, not one incident 23 years ago.

    1. Re:So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Put enough money back into the system? You mean, like, they are siphoning off revenue from the fares???

      I bet we could pull up a balance sheet and it would easily show there is zero positive revenue from actual paying riders to siphon off. So what is this money to 'put back into the system'??

    2. Re:So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The subway runs an operating profit, I think it came out to something like 20 cents a passenger. However that money is "shared" with the New York City Transit side of the bus system, which runs at a loss.

      If they were to eliminate the bus-subway transfers and separate the revenue pools, the subway would probably be shown to operate at even more of a profit (since a lot of people take an unofficial round trip discount by taking the subway one way and the bus back).

    3. Re:So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      p>It's well documented why the trains are slow in NYC, it's because they haven't put enough money back into the system.

      says who, the people who get to play with the budget of money put into the system?

    4. Re:So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The subway runs an operating profit, I think it came out to something like 20 cents a passenger.

      This says it loses $6 billion a year. I think you're wrong. Or are you talking about a "gross profit", like those Tesla fanbois? You know, profit before you actually count all costs needed to collect the revenue?

    5. Re:So why weren't they slow from 1995 to 2012? by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      The OP referred to an "operating profit" which means that running the subway is net positive vs. just shutting it down. It does not mean that capital costs will be recovered. It's not a "gross profit" either. These terms have specific accounting meaning. Gross profit is near 100% on a subway since the incremental cost of carrying a passenger is essentially zero. When you subtract out maintenance costs you get an operating profit. Depreciate the capital expenditure to get the net profit (or in this case loss). A business with an operating profit should continue to operate since it's better than shutting down (smaller net loss).

  7. Re:Thank god by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    My drive to work is two miles. The maximum speed limit, for about a third of that distance, is 45 mph.

    The pay isn't the greatest, but it's really fricking worth it.

  8. Strange Tone by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This reads like a shocking expose'. But if you have trouble with signalling systems, it makes absolutely perfect sense to slow the trains down until the problem is corrected.

          OK, yes, they could be fixing it faster, but this seems like a perfectly responsible choice.

    1. Re:Strange Tone by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem is the hack for enforcing speed limits - timer signals. Basically, train passes spot "a", a hidden timer starts counting, signal at spot "b" turns green if the timer runs out before the train gets there, otherwise it stays red. If you ride up front (on one of the few trains where you can see the same as the operator), you can see how the timer signals work and see the speed the train is going (either with a GPS app on your phone, or by peeking through the gap in the door to the cab). Here's a typical interaction:

      A sign says "GT 35" meaning 35 MPH enforced speed limit. Great. Except, even in a perfect world, if they actually go 35, they will not see the signal clear - the timer would hit zero the second the train reaches it. So they have to go 34. But, the speedometers aren't perfectly calibrated and may be off by up to 3MPH, so now down to 31. But wait, the signals aren't calibrated right either; some of them say 35 but are actually counting down too fast (not like there's a quartz crystal in there), it could be off by as much as 5MPH. The end result is, in an enforced 35, the operator can only "safely" (as in his keeping his/her job safe) go 26. Experienced operators will instinctively know the fastest they can get away with, but anyone new will follow the rule of 9MPH under the limit. Since throughput during rush hours is only as fast as the slowest train, one overly cautious operator can tank the schedule for all the trains behind him.

      Now one solution to this justified over-caution was "two shot" timers - there are two signals. The first one is yellow with an S under it, the second red. If the first one clears to green before the train passes it, the second one also turns green. If the first one does not clear to green, the operator has to slow down so that his average speed since the start of the first timer is slower than the enforced limit, or the second one remains red. So if he enters a 25 going 35, in order to make that second shot he has to drop down to somewhere around 15 (but likely that won't be enough, so they will instead come to a complete stop). In the case of two shot timers, to deal with a 25MPH enforced speed limit, trains operators who make a mistake on the first shot are reducing their speed to 0 for several seconds. All this has to do is happen once to cause a ripple effect on all trains behind.

      At a lot of the locations these timer signals do not make any sense. Some of them are on uphill grades. Some are on banked curves designed for 60MPH running - if it were simply a signal system limitation that had them slow down the trains, there would be no reason to treat curves any differently from straightaways. The speed restrictions designed for human limitations on reaction time were also copied over to the modern signal system the L train uses without being re-evaluated (in other words, they fixed the original problem from 1995 but left in the hack). Thus why it is an expose - reducing speeds is now a kneejerk reaction to any perceived danger, bordering on superstition.

    2. Re:Strange Tone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To be fair, reducing train speed is in fact effective for every perceived danger, excluding oddballs like an armed train robbery/hijacking. Banked curve with poor visibility? Reduce speed. Hilltop the operator can't see past? Reduce speed.

      Sure, the system might have been 'designed' for 60 mph, but they already know, thanks to an investigation after people dying, that the design is inadequate and needs to be revisited.

    3. Re:Strange Tone by Bright+Apollo · · Score: 1

      Boy, you'd think an industry with 180 years of engineering expertise would've figured out what you just did in a Slashdot reply.

      --#

    4. Re:Strange Tone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that the MTA engineers and administrators don't understand these aspects of system design. It's that the incentives are all stacked against them.

      They're massively penalized for any accidents and especially any loss of human life. They're strongly penalized for over-spending on equipment. Any attempt to actually automate the trains, as has been done in cities all over the world, results in a union strike that paralyzes the MTA as it currently exists.

      The penalty is lightest for running a sub-optimal system so that's what they do.

  9. Gridlock, of several kinds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Baby boomers are still in charge of basically everything in the nation.

    They've essentially not cared enough to do anything about the state of the nation for a couple of decades.

    Gridlock mechanisms have rewarded those preventing any action to fix anything in the nation for about that same amount of time.

    So, either no action on crumbling infrastructure, until it becomes SUPER expensive to fix, or else deeply corrupt interests gain control of what little is allowed to be done, that the fixes are meaningless and hyper-expensive.

    Why? Because those who are the biggest block of voters are old and disgusted at the thought of helping those who aren't immediately themselves, efficiency and society be damned.

    1. Re:Gridlock, of several kinds... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Millineals will fix it. That's for certain.

    2. Re:Gridlock, of several kinds... by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      You assume there is anything to fix. From all appearances, the subway system is working as intended: delivering daily punishment to those who ride it; for it is the suffering of the souls within that counts, not whether they actually get to their destinations in a suitable condition and appropriate time.

  10. Cars purchased 20 years later... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Informative

    Cars purchased 20 years later -- in 2016 -- have a max speed of 55 mph...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Doubt that ALL cars are limited to 40 mph, maybe some older cars were for a while. Signaling system is another issue/can of worms.

    This thread says that cars were capped at 55 mph after the 1995 crash, not 40 mph:
    https://www.nyctransitforums.c...

    1. Re:Cars purchased 20 years later... by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      Express sections of the A train in Brooklyn seem much faster than 40MPH to me. Probably closer to 60MPH. (Disclaimer: I visit NYC occasionally but do not live there.)

  11. Re: Thank god by AC-x · · Score: 2

    You drive 2 miles? You could cycle that in less than 10 mins, 15 if you don't want to break a sweat. It would also be a very reasonable distance for a public transport system.

  12. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you know he is able to cycle at all?

  13. Tourism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess, New York won't be putting this info on the brochures.

  14. What's the impact? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    So, what's the impact of the slowdown and delays? I lived in Brooklyn in 2013 and things were pretty smooth and reliable. The only train with any real issues was the G train, aka the Ghost train, because no one ever saw it show up

    1. Re:What's the impact? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I'm not in Brooklyn enough to speak to it, but the E/F train in Queens was pretty abysmal (slow, often running local) through most of 2016/7.

    2. Re:What's the impact? by freeze128 · · Score: 2

      WINSTON!

  15. Whats the story by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    The option to buy better trains is not going to be supported.
    The ability to rework the signal system is not something that could happen.
    The trains stay safe and staying slow is the only method that supports that is not a story.
    Want a good train? Invest in a great transport system.
    The UK, Japan, South Korea, parts of the EU can offer great turn key rail networks for export.
    Tunnel design, working air-conditioning, new systems to move a lot of people around faster.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Whats the story by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Signaling is being upgraded and a lot of subway cars in NYC are new/better. There are even plans for open-gangway cars, where the connection between cars is almost as wide as the car itself, and passengers can more freely between segments.

    2. Re:Whats the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      dude the doors between cars are biological containment seals. you have never been on a train with a mysteriously empty car have you? where the reason is that some hobo took a monster dookie right in the middle of the car? or dropped trou and drained the lizard? if the cars are open it means the whole damn train will stink.

    3. Re:Whats the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Signaling is being upgraded and a lot of subway cars in NYC are new/better. There are even plans for open-gangway cars, where the connection between cars is almost as wide as the car itself, and passengers can more freely between segments.

      Nobody cares about this crap. We care about 95th percentile journey time from station A to station B, given random time of arrival at station A. Maybe we also care about 99th percentile, but less. And that is all. We do not care about anything else. We don't care about signs that incorrectly estimate when trains will arrive. We don't care about ADA improvements. We don't care about silly payment methods. We don't care about car shape color or new-ness. We don't care about "busses." None of it. 95p A -> B or GTFO.

    4. Re:Whats the story by russotto · · Score: 1

      There are even plans for open-gangway cars, where the connection between cars is almost as wide as the car itself, and passengers can more freely between segments.

      As can bumstink, so one bum can smell up an entire train instead of one car. I don't know what they were thinking. (If you ever see an empty subway car at a busy time, DO NOT GET ON)

  16. Re: Thank god by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

    most people can

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
  17. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you're ableism is showing check your privilege

  18. Autonomous trains by PPH · · Score: 1

    When?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Autonomous trains by edi_guy · · Score: 1

      Seriously. Larry Page is apparently launching an autonomous helicopter/airplane hybrid, yet no one has figured out how to get automation on what is essentially a one-dimensional problem space? Every time I hear about a train operator going too fast around a curve and jumping the tracks, I cringe and cannot understand why the speed isn't just set by computer and adjusted per the trains location on the track condition.

    2. Re:Autonomous trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The L was shut down on weekends for two years to install autonomous equipment. Highly visible signs went up warning/bragging to track workers autonomous trains were in use. Then the union killed the whole project.

      They were planning to leave a driver in the autonomous trains to do nothing, just sit there. But currently the trains have two humans in them, a driver at the front and a conductor in the middle who operates the doors. The union wouldn't accept going from two useless humans to one useless human.

    3. Re:Autonomous trains by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      The goals of the people in charge of upgrading and maintaining the subway system may be orthogonal to those who ride it.

    4. Re:Autonomous trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ohh fancy-talk. you sound like a fag.

    5. Re:Autonomous trains by Cochonou · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There have been automatic speed control systems in subways since at least the 60's.
      There has been fully automatic subways lines operating since at least the 80's.
      It's not a technology problem.

    6. Re:Autonomous trains by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      In NYC? I have no idea. In major airports and in Miami? Years ago.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    7. Re:Autonomous trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NYCT Subway L Line fan operate fully autonomously. It does not do so because of Union rules that requires one motorman and one conductor to be aboard every train, even if they have nothing to do.

  19. British rail system had a solution to this... by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... in the 1800s.

    Naturally I wouldn't employ that solution in exactly the same way because we have better technology to facilitate the concept, but I would still enact the same concept.

    The British system simply made it physically impossible for trains to enter a stretch of track unless the train in front of it or going the other way or whatever had turned in a key. The key was slotted into a signalling box which permitted other trains to enter that track. If the key was NOT turned in then further trains could not physically access that track. The switching station would literally not actuate.

    Now, if you did it today, you'd use computers and sensors and encryption... etc... but the concept would be the same. If a train currently holds the "key" for a bit of track then you can't have that key and you can't access that track. You could have the trains automatically brake if they entered track that hadn't been vacated yet... you could turn off the third rail to make it extra fool proof... and you could have the brakes default to an ON state in the event that the third rail was disabled.

    Yes yes... engineering problems with what I said. Engineering solutions always have problems... even good engineering solutions.

    There are problems with a hydro electric dam and an automobile and a jet aeroplane. The trick is solving those without losing the utility of what you're attempting to do. Point is that this isn't actually that complicated.

    The system I conceptualized is damn near foolproof if executed competently. You could have drunk, high, sleeping train operators, going down the track at whatever speed the track/trains can handle, without any crashes into other trains.

    Its possible. We can do it.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Cochonou · · Score: 2

      It's more than a concept : such railway signalling systems have already been designed and have been in use for a long time ! See for instance KVB, which was introduced in the 90's, or the many other equivalent systems. They prevent trains from exceeding the speed limit or from entering blocks of the tracks already used by other trains.
      Newer systems such as ETCS are more advanced and flexible, but the basic functionality you are describing has been here for a long time.

    2. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Doubtless funding will be cited as the reason this isn't implemented. But I tend to find retrograde systems cost more over time.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    3. Re: British rail system had a solution to this... by houghi · · Score: 1

      The problem is social, not technical and is called "short term profit".

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point is that this isn't actually that complicated.

      Take a look at your nearest hydroelectric dam, automobile, and jet airplane.

      Find out that they are actually quite very much that complicated.

      The system I conceptualized is damn near foolproof if executed competently. You could have drunk, high, sleeping train operators, going down the track at whatever speed the track/trains can handle, without any crashes into other trains.

      Ah, the precious foolproof system that never actually exists, but keeps being shown not to even be evident, around the world, at all.

      Its possible. We can do it.

      Apparently not.

      There have been dozens of train on train collisions since 2010. You've been able to prevent zero of them. Why, if your solution is so foolproof, have you completely failed?

    5. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      As to your first point, I addressed that in my post.

      As to a fool proof system, you're not responding to the actual concept and neither are you aware of its failure statistics.

      Look... can you TRY to contribute something of value. Because this is pitiful. You didn't read my post and you presumed to lecture me on a subject that... as little as I know... you obviously know dramatically less.

      Guess this explains why you post AC. *shrugs*

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    6. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not funding. It's the unions. Any system that can actually improve things will result in negative impact for union members so in NYC it will never be implemented.

    7. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The system I conceptualized is damn near foolproof if executed competently. You could have drunk, high, sleeping train operators, going down the track at whatever speed the track/trains can handle, without any crashes into other trains.

      It's possible. We can do it.

      Washington DC did automatic train control until 2009, when their sensors degraded to the point of uselessness and one train plowed into another**, resulting in 8 fatalities and 80 more injuries.

      ** with the largely-ceremonial train operator jamming on the emergency brake, to no avail.

    8. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by rundgong · · Score: 1

      I think there are systems today with automatic "physical" electric safeguards.
      Like if two trains occupy the same segment of the tracks it will cause a short circuit and cut the engines of the train behind.

    9. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      That's not what I'm talking about.

      The system grants KEYS to trains and ONLY the train with the key can physically enter the track. So if the train sensor doesn't work... that doesn't really matter. And if the track sensors don't work that also doesn't matter.

      Because only ONE train will have the key at once.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    10. Re:British rail system had a solution to this... by Karmashock · · Score: 0

      I did suspect this was an element of the problem. Every government institution has something of a "deep state" at this point.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  20. I don't live in NYC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would I care about this?

  21. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2 miles is a waking distance, not even cyclinf

  22. Don't think so by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    But there is one type of delay that's gotten exponentially worse during that time

    I somehow doubt that. Care to state the equation?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  23. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two miles is walking distance!

    In fact I often cover 5k on foot by the time I get to the office if Iâ(TM)ve had to get off the Tube so I can call in to an early morning meeting. Doing this or stopping off on my 1 hour bike commute has led me to find some great little nooks, crannies and parks in this city.

  24. TOP Americuk City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With shit-tier infrastructure? Oh BIGLY will be the foreign investments, any day now..

  25. Why don't we just import from China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have over 20,000 KM of high-speed rail, and aiming for 30,000 KM at year 2020 (two years from now)

    We could buy some from the Chinese, if they still accept our IOUs

    1. Re:Why don't we just import from China? by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what that comment adds to this discussion.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  26. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they have a job you should assume they aren't a child.

  27. Elon Musk could fix it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem: Signal system does not allow enough time for train operators to complete an emergency stop..

    MTA solution: Slow the trains down via imposed speed limits (which may or may not be adhered to).

    Elon Musk solution: In a highly cost effective way, update the signal system and train control system.

    If we can have autonomous cars that drive on our roadways, why can't we have trains that operate safely on well known pathways?

    Answer: Regulatory blunders that seek to improve safety but are too costly or complex to deploy, labor unions that lobby against automation, and the inefficient railroad industry.

  28. Mystery solved? by Manqueman · · Score: 1

    So, a mystery partly solved. The local press is all over how bad the system’s gotten the last couple of years -- and as a daily rider, it seems no worse and maybe a little better. So why the crisis talk? It’s apparently (from what I can tell down there) without basis. So the explanation seems to be that it’s documented bullshit.

  29. Re: Thank god by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Checked it. It's still where it belongs, but thanks for your concern.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  30. Re: Thank god by Megane · · Score: 1

    if you don't want to break a sweat

    ...says the person who never lived in Texas, where it is 95F (35C) and higher all summer. Conversely, I'm sure it's harder to cycle after a heavy snow.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  31. I suggest a junket by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Treat some New York City subway engineers and officials to a week in Tokyo, to see how a real subway system is done.

  32. Monopoly and statism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are always surprised how a government or state-run monopoly, or any other monopolies for that matter, offer bad products, worse services and demand increasingly higher prices.

    As if that wasn't *always* the case.

    Dear statists, dear do-gooders: All monopolies quickly turn into expensive crap. No laws, new rules, regulations, oversight authorities, governing bodies, ombudsmen, committees will change that. Get that in your head.

    Nothing improves services and products except competition. Yes, the state is a monopoly on a lot of things that surprisingly also turn into crap. The same applies there. Build a superstate, have a supermonopoly. Turn over control to the state for X and you will see X turned into expensive crap.

  33. Not a dime by mi · · Score: 1

    Americans not wanting to spend money (e.g. higher taxes) on infrastructure

    Certainly not. We are talking about NYC — the singular city in the most corrupt State in the nation.

    The recent painting of the Brooklyn Bridge costed well more than the original building of the structure did in 1883 (inflation-adjusted, of course).

    You expect us, the taxpayers, to willingly give even more money to these people?

    MTA should have replaced the sleepy fleshware, whose reactions and ability to communicate with each other are horrible even when they are awake, with computers — driving a train is much simpler for a computer, than driving a car, for example. They were trying to do it in 2005, and still haven't.

    Just as with the public schools, it is not about the money...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Not a dime by torkus · · Score: 1

      It also took a third of the whole construction time just to repaint it (14 vs 5 years). Mind you, at the time it was built the bridge was hugely innovative and half again longer than any other suspension bridge.

      But...this also should take into account the massive difference in safety regulations in 2018 vs 1869. Back then people were getting decompression sickness (the bends) when coming up from digging the foundation...and it was so long ago they didn't even know what that was. That partly contributes to the greatly increased cost but certainly does not take it all into account. We're still getting robbed.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  34. Re: Thank god by mjwx · · Score: 1

    You drive 2 miles? You could cycle that in less than 10 mins

    I could also run a straight razor carefully over my love spuds each morning... there's good a reason why I don't do that either.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  35. Were turning into a third world country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem are many with our transportation system. Yet we waste millions on bullet trains in obscure places just for notoriety. Trouble is politicians don't see value in maintaining the basics, they prefer adding something new to brag about while existing infrastructure goes ignored. If you can't maintain what you have don't be talking about adding something new.

  36. NYC metro suck and MTA is shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And MTA is the uber shit company running outdated 1992 diesels engines but this is nothing train cars are so old that if you take train upstate and you get on the diesel you are in 1970 with nice brown cars shit everywhere, all they do is to just replace all those seats when there is too much shit on them and there she goes again. On top of that they are so slow that lets say ride upstate of 28 miles will take you 45 minutes on express (ignore time tables as those are not real) MTA fuck you!

  37. Re: Thank god by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    Have you ever heard of hills and weather? No amount of money could motivate me to ride a bike on a public road. Around here hills are super steep and you won't find a straight section of road except maybe some four lane highways. Also this morning it was 25 degrees. What happens during the summer when its hot and humid? I get to work dripping with sweat?

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  38. college/university teams don't give much to the pl by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    college/university teams don't give much to the players hell they don't even get works comp

  39. Other countries do that too sometimes by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    But only for 23 DAYS not YEARS.

  40. They should just automate the trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It works in other countries...

  41. Re:Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A word of caution: Driving a car regularly only 2 miles may not allow enough time for the engine (assuming it's gas powered) to get up to operating temperature, which increaes the risk of shortening it's life-span from the build-up of contaminents in the engine and catalyst. Yay for you on the short commute and if you drive an electric/hybrid, though.

  42. Re:Thank god by mr.mctibbs · · Score: 1

    Parking spaces in Manhattan ran ~$500 a month last time I looked, which was two years ago. An unlimited train ticket for the month is $120. I'll let you do the math.

  43. Re: Thank god by torkus · · Score: 1

    Agreed, though you don't take into account going up the bridge which is much harder work.

    The larger problem in NYC is bike parking (well bike theft and vandalism really) and not arriving at work sweaty. The citibike programs solves some of this but they're pretty terrible to ride (by first hand experience) compared to even a slightly decent bike. Not being able to shower at work (space is FAR too tight for almost any but the largest companies to have showers) in a city that still sticks with formal office attire most of the time is pretty difficult too.

    --
    You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  44. autonomous trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all the hype with autonomous cars why not autonomous trains?

  45. Speed has stayed the same since 1995 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But performance continues to decrease? Then it's not the speed cap from 23 years ago. That's been constant.

  46. Re: Thank god by q4Fry · · Score: 1

    you're ableism is showing check your privilege

    Your grammar competency is showing. Check your sentences.

  47. Re: Thank god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh, tell that to the subject of this post:

    http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2017/06/08/bike-to-work-houston/

    Yeah, it's harder to bike after heavy snow, but it doesn't snow every day. You could easily bike 90% of the year and for snow days, pick one: 1. Stay home, 2. Carpool with someone, 3. Take an Uber, 4. Walk, 5. Take the bus, 6. Drive.

    Snow is a TERRIBLE excuse to avoid biking. Biking isn't an all-or-nothing prospect.

  48. Re: Thank god by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Hahhahaha, Australian here and daily cyclist commuter, your complaints make me laugh, harden up.

  49. Re:Thank god gave you legs to use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > My drive to work is two miles.

    Listen, you are killing yourself. It's not just the risk of obesity, but I assume your work includes sitting in the office, just like you sit in the car. Even an hour a day in the gym cannot offset the slow and inevitable damage that sedentarism causes. Please regularly walk or cycle to move your legs around morning and afternoon, so you may live to 80 or more.

    Pedelec i.e. electric auxillary propulsion boosted bicycles are now daily reality with the new Li-Po battery tech and they sell like hot cakes in Europe for commute and leisure. Bosch, Panasonic and Shimano all make battery-motor-control packs which the frame builders can incorporate in fashionable shapes. You can make great speed with them, making only a minimal or comfortable effort as you feel fit, for up to 50 kilometer or even 50 miles.

    Furthermore, stamina in the legs is very useful is you have some lady to pleasure.

  50. Senate was designed to protect wealthy landowners by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Until recently you couldn't even vote for a Senator. They were appointed. Like our electoral college the point of the Senate is to preserve the illusion of Democracy without all that messy stuff like people taxing the rich. Hell, the Second Amendment was mostly created because rich folk didn't like paying to quarter troops but they still needed an army to die for them.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  51. Re:Senate was designed to protect wealthy landowne by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

    Maybe and that's a good argument. One that might have a lot of bearing on current discussions about civilian weapon ownership. But it wasn't the stated reason!