NJ Transit--capacity--12 car single level vs. 10 car multi-level ?
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
running with 10 multi-level cars. One train leaving NYC was so full
passengers couldn't get in from the vestibule as the foyer was full.
Would anyone know the relatively seating capacities, so would a 12 car
single-level train have more or less capacity than a 10 car multi-
level train?
One problem with the multi-levels is that one can see only their level
in their car. In single level trains, one can see up and down the
whole car and into adjacent cars, and move if there are more seats
elsewhere.
Has there been any stopwatch studies to see if the multi-levels take
longer to board or discharge than single level cars during crowded
conditions? It seems that they do, but one would need a stopwatch to
be sure.
thanks.
[public replies, please]
Stephen Sprunk
> NJT NEC trains were standing room only yesterday in both directions,
> running with 10 multi-level cars. One train leaving NYC was so full
> passengers couldn't get in from the vestibule as the foyer was full.
>
> Would anyone know the relatively seating capacities, so would a 12 car
> single-level train have more or less capacity than a 10 car multi-
> level train?
Some seat numbers (AW1) I found with a quick Google:
Bi-level cab car = 139
Bi-level coach w/bathroom = 141
Bi-level coach no bathroom = 146
Comet V cab car = 109
Arrow MU = 118 - 122
So, a 10-car bilevel train has more seats than a 12-car single-level
train, but not by as large a margin as you might expect.
Standee capacity (AW2 or AW3) isn't addressed in any of the papers I
found, but I suspect it's also a bit more, which is counteracted by the
stairs and potentially conflicting passenger flows in the vestibules.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Bi-level cab car = 139
> Bi-level coach w/bathroom = 141
> Bi-level coach no bathroom = 146
> Comet V cab car = 109
> Arrow MU = 118 - 122
>
> So, a 10-car bilevel train has more seats than a 12-car single-level
> train, but not by as large a margin as you might expect.
Thanks for the numbers.
If my math is right, a 12 car MU (118+122)*6 = 1,440 passengers. A
max bi-level of ten cars of 146 = 1,460. But a train needs two
restrooms and cabs, so the capacity would be less.
A ten car has the advantage of concentrating passengers, which they
tend to do at most platforms anyway, rather than stretch out to the
very ends (some exceptions).
While NJT apparently loves its new bi-levels and can't buy them fast
enough, IMHO, more MUs would've been a better choice.
Michael Finfer
> NJT NEC trains were standing room only yesterday in both directions,
> running with 10 multi-level cars. One train leaving NYC was so full
> passengers couldn't get in from the vestibule as the foyer was full.
This seems to be rather common, even on weekends.
> Would anyone know the relatively seating capacities, so would a 12 car
> single-level train have more or less capacity than a 10 car multi-
> level train?
>
> One problem with the multi-levels is that one can see only their level
> in their car. In single level trains, one can see up and down the
> whole car and into adjacent cars, and move if there are more seats
> elsewhere.
I suspect that the crews are getting lost on those trains. Many cars
have "bathroom car" and "cab car" as appropriate written in marker on
the bulkhead above the stairs to the lower level. You cannot see
through the train as you can on the single level equipment.
> Has there been any stopwatch studies to see if the multi-levels take
> longer to board or discharge than single level cars during crowded
> conditions? It seems that they do, but one would need a stopwatch to
> be sure.
I'm sure that if these studies exist, NJT would not make them public,
but note that the doors are mal-positioned. People using the inner
doors block access to the vestibules.
I've been on multilevel trains so crowded that I actually have to climb
over people to get off. Boarding is not efficient under those
conditions on any type of equipment. Note also that fares are not
collected under those conditions as well.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
Michael Finfer
> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> NJT NEC trains were standing room only yesterday in both directions,
>> running with 10 multi-level cars. One train leaving NYC was so full
>> passengers couldn't get in from the vestibule as the foyer was full.
>>
>> Would anyone know the relatively seating capacities, so would a 12 car
>> single-level train have more or less capacity than a 10 car multi-
>> level train?
>
> Some seat numbers (AW1) I found with a quick Google:
>
> Bi-level cab car = 139
> Bi-level coach w/bathroom = 141
> Bi-level coach no bathroom = 146
> Comet V cab car = 109
> Arrow MU = 118 - 122
>
> So, a 10-car bilevel train has more seats than a 12-car single-level
> train, but not by as large a margin as you might expect.
>
> Standee capacity (AW2 or AW3) isn't addressed in any of the papers I
> found, but I suspect it's also a bit more, which is counteracted by the
> stairs and potentially conflicting passenger flows in the vestibules.
>
> S
>
Standee capacity is very limited because there's little or no room in
the aisles on the upper and lower levels. Standees there have to be
pretty much single file. Many of the standees will be on the mezzanines
and in the vestibules.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
Michael Finfer
> On Dec 28, 3:17 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> Bi-level cab car = 139
>> Bi-level coach w/bathroom = 141
>> Bi-level coach no bathroom = 146
>> Comet V cab car = 109
>> Arrow MU = 118 - 122
>>
>> So, a 10-car bilevel train has more seats than a 12-car single-level
>> train, but not by as large a margin as you might expect.
>
> Thanks for the numbers.
>
> If my math is right, a 12 car MU (118+122)*6 = 1,440 passengers. A
> max bi-level of ten cars of 146 = 1,460. But a train needs two
> restrooms and cabs, so the capacity would be less.
NJT seems to have no mechanism for determining how many bathroom cars
(or even cab cars) are on each train. A 10 car train may have several
bathroom cars and even two or three cab cars (only one is required).
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> I suspect that the crews are getting lost on those trains. Many cars
> have "bathroom car" and "cab car" as appropriate written in marker on
> the bulkhead above the stairs to the lower level. You cannot see
> through the train as you can on the single level equipment.
Frustrating for passengers, esp with the ever-increasing run times (I
think they added another five more minutes for runs to Trenton).
It's hard to find a conductor (tickets aren't always collected) to ask
where a bathroom is, and then to get to it. Not all stations have
bathrooms in it, and one can't use it anyway if one is just catching
the train.
Note that the M-7s and their predecessors and the Jersey Arrows all
had a restroom in every other car (eg a ten car train would have five
restrooms). But a NJT multi-level doesn't have as many despite
carrying more people.
>
> > Has there been any stopwatch studies to see if the multi-levels take
> > longer to board or discharge than single level cars during crowded
> > conditions? It seems that they do, but one would need a stopwatch to
> > be sure.
>
> I'm sure that if these studies exist, NJT would not make them public,
> but note that the doors are mal-positioned. People using the inner
> doors block access to the vestibules.
>
> I've been on multilevel trains so crowded that I actually have to climb
> over people to get off. Boarding is not efficient under those
> conditions on any type of equipment. Note also that fares are not
> collected under those conditions as well.
Thanks for your feedback.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Standee capacity is very limited because there's little or no room in
> the aisles on the upper and lower levels. Standees there have to be
> pretty much single file. Many of the standees will be on the mezzanines
> and in the vestibules.
The multi-levels have very limited luggage racks, very thin in one
level and none at all in the other level. Most passengers are
carrying a briefcase, on weekends, suitcases or shopping packages.
Without the luggage racks these items block the aisle. They're
supposed to go in a bin but there's not enough room. Typically on MUs
the luggage racks are completely filled.
With many passengers using Newark Airport station, the luggage
situation is made even worse.
Peter T. Daniels
Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
Philip Nasadowski
<2030a844-c269-4431...@n16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains?
Because it's too fucking slow?
> How long is the longest scheduled trip?
Too long. A lot of NJT runs push 1.5 hours - the M&E and NEC are both
painfully slow, and I doubt the Coast or Port Jervis are any better.
The LIRR's got this issue too. About the only place where you can say
bathrooms would be needed is the New Haven line, but shit, it's 80 miles
or so long and very curvy with tons of speed restrictions. And has bar
cars :)
Sancho Panza
> In article
> <2030a844-c269-4431-b580-de8e73e28...@n16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains?
>
> Because it's too fucking slow?
>
> > How long is the longest scheduled trip?
>
> Too long. A lot of NJT runs push 1.5 hours - the M&E and NEC are both
> painfully slow, and I doubt the Coast or Port Jervis are any better.
> The LIRR's got this issue too. About the only place where you can say
> bathrooms would be needed is the New Haven line, but shit, it's 80 miles
> or so long and very curvy with tons of speed restrictions. And has bar
> cars :)
The Coast Line is two and a half hours end to end, and that is on a
good day with no construction, police activity, mechanical problems y
or bad weather. And most of the stations that do have sanitary
facilities lock them up for most of the day.
Peter T. Daniels
What are its terminals, and does anyone actually ride from end to end?
Michael Finfer
> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
> the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
> to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
Port Jervis-Hoboken is just shy of 2 1/2 hours. Newark-Bay Head is
about 1 3/4 hours. Newark-High Bridge, NY-Long Branch, and NY-Trenton
are about 1 1/2 hours. Port Jervis-Cape May could take all day because
of track conditions in South Jersey and because there's no direct route.
You'd have to go by way of Philadelphia.
You really do need bathrooms on trips of that length, and I am grateful
for them on the occasions that I have really needed them.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
Philip Nasadowski
<a5cc54b8-71b6-4e90...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Note that the M-7s and their predecessors and the Jersey Arrows all
> had a restroom in every other car (eg a ten car train would have five
> restrooms).
And the LIRR and NJT seem to think that smack dab in the middle of the
car is the ideal location. Because everyone wants to sit near a smelly
bathroom that's not been cleaned in a long time, and is overflowing onto
the floor (as the LIRR ones have been known to do)...
The real issue is why the hell are these runs so long that you need
bathrooms in the first place? NJT's simulations say an Arrow set can do
NY to Trenton in a bit over an hour, yet the locals exceed an hour and a
half, and that's assuming on time operation.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> And the LIRR and NJT seem to think that smack dab in the middle of the
> car is the ideal location. Because everyone wants to sit near a smelly
> bathroom that's not been cleaned in a long time, and is overflowing onto
> the floor (as the LIRR ones have been known to do)...
The NJT multi-levels have the bathroom at the car end in the foyer.
The Arrows have them at the car ends, too.
I believe the M-7s and some other newer trains have them in the middle
because ADA requires a much bigger footprint than in the past.
Older trains used to have a water fountain, too (some of SEPTA's 1963
Budd cars had 'em, been out of service for many years.)
> The real issue is why the hell are these runs so long that you need
> bathrooms in the first place? NJT's simulations say an Arrow set can do
> NY to Trenton in a bit over an hour, yet the locals exceed an hour and a
> half, and that's assuming on time operation.
Any run over 60 minutes should include a restroom. Some people need
to go during that time interval. When travelling with children the
need will be more frequent.
The NJT runs have always been long enough to justify a restroom.
Unlike in the distant past, most stations either do not have a
restroom at all or they're locked. In some stations it's not
advisable to use the restroom.
When NJT started, a local took 70 minutes between Trenton and NYC, now
it's 95 minutes. If there's a delay en route it could be much longer.
On the LIRR and Metro North the restrooms are frequently used by
passengers. Good thing they're there.
Peter T. Daniels
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
> > the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
> > to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
>
> Port Jervis-Hoboken is just shy of 2 1/2 hours. Newark-Bay Head is
> about 1 3/4 hours. Newark-High Bridge, NY-Long Branch, and NY-Trenton
> are about 1 1/2 hours. Port Jervis-Cape May could take all day because
> of track conditions in South Jersey and because there's no direct route.
> You'd have to go by way of Philadelphia.
I didn't ask how to get from Port Jervis to Cape May -- I asked how
long a direct trip from one corner of the state to the other, which is
probably somewhere around 200 miles.
> You really do need bathrooms on trips of that length, and I am grateful
> for them on the occasions that I have really needed them.
As Professor Peter Schickele says to the orchestra tuning up before a
P. D. Q. Bach concert, you should have thought of that before you left
home!
Peter T. Daniels
> <a5cc54b8-71b6-4e90-afb2-e4d306553...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
That's kinda why I asked my question ...
Bolwerk
> In article
> <2030a844-c269-4431...@n16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains?
>
> Because it's too fucking slow?
>
>> How long is the longest scheduled trip?
>
> Too long. A lot of NJT runs push 1.5 hours - the M&E and NEC are both
> painfully slow, and I doubt the Coast or Port Jervis are any better.
Port Jervis seems to run over two hours. And if you're commuting from
the city, you need to get to Hoboken first. Just checked; today's
schedules towards Port Jervis ran anywhere from 2h7m to 2h31m.
Sounds like you could spend three or more hours in each direction a day
commuting from Port Jervis to NYC. That's nearly a shift.
Michael Finfer
> On Dec 29, 10:09 am, Michael Finfer <fin...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
>>> the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
>>> to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
>> Port Jervis-Hoboken is just shy of 2 1/2 hours. Newark-Bay Head is
>> about 1 3/4 hours. Newark-High Bridge, NY-Long Branch, and NY-Trenton
>> are about 1 1/2 hours. Port Jervis-Cape May could take all day because
>> of track conditions in South Jersey and because there's no direct route.
>> You'd have to go by way of Philadelphia.
>
> I didn't ask how to get from Port Jervis to Cape May -- I asked how
> long a direct trip from one corner of the state to the other, which is
> probably somewhere around 200 miles.
If you drove, such a trip would probably take at least five hours. It
takes me over two hours to get to Port Jervis from here in Somerset
County (there are no good roads on a direct route from here, and the
route with the best roads, which is not saying much beyond the end of
the Route 23 expressway, is indirect), and over three hours to get from
here to Cape May.
If you were to try to run a train from Port Jervis to Cape May, as I
said before, it could take all day.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > You really do need bathrooms on trips of that length, and I am grateful
> > for them on the occasions that I have really needed them.
>
> As Professor Peter Schickele says to the orchestra tuning up before a
> P. D. Q. Bach concert, you should have thought of that before you left
> home!
But a passenger very often might have a drive from his home to the
station and no useable facilities at the station. The combined feeder
trip and train trip may exceed one's comfort time. Many passengers on
commuter rail trains serving NYC come from a considerable distance.
Does PATH have public bathrooms at any of its stations? I tend to
doubt it excepting perhaps Hoboken and Newark in the railroad terminal
section.
OT Side reference: Often doing a search on "Horn & Hardart Automat"
brings up references to PDQ Bach. I don't understand what the two
have to do with each other. Can anyone explain?
By the way, there was an Indie movie on cable, "Metropolitan", about
the life of 20-somethings in the city during the holidays. It
included a dinner scene at an H&H Automat--I was surprised one was
still open when the film was made; it looked like the machines were
electronic. H&H's were often in or near railway and subway
terminals. Anyway, one character goes away and his friends see him
off at Grand Central. However, some other characters have to get out
to Montauk and end up taking a taxi at an enormous cost--why didn't
they take the LIRR, which runs all night?
Valentin Brückel
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:03:50 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
>>the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
>>to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
>
> I almost never agree with Peter, but I've wondered the same thing for
> years. You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours. I take an
> early morning train occasionally that's been en route for about 1hr 20
> min before it reaches my station and then has another hour to go. If
> people can't go 2 hours and 20 minutes between bathroom breaks, then
> there's a bit of a problem.
One hour might me okay, but two is really pushing it. Under perfect
circumstances, it might work, but there are enough scenarios when this might
get critical, typically involving health conditions. A few months ago, I had
to leave a train without bathroom in quite a hurry, because my stomach was
reacting violently to an antibiotic I had taken an hour earlier, for
example.
Once "commuter" also includes people "commuting" to social events like
visiting friends, restaurants, bars, sports stadiums, celebrations, etc.,
the practical limit for journey times without a bathroom may even go down to
half an hour. Keep in mind that while you have a lot of people on a train,
if only one of them has to go, you have a problem.
Val
Peter T. Daniels
So you're saying NYC's subway trains should have restrooms as well?
and buses?
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> So you're saying NYC's subway trains should have restrooms as well?
> and buses?
Many subway stations were built with restrooms but I think they're all
sealed off. IMHO principal stations should have them, although
security with them is obviously a difficult issue.
Stephen Sprunk
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:03:50 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
>> the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
>> to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
>
> years. You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours. I take an
> early morning train occasionally that's been en route for about 1hr 20
> min before it reaches my station and then has another hour to go. If
> people can't go 2 hours and 20 minutes between bathroom breaks, then
> there's a bit of a problem.
You seriously overestimate people's bladder capacity, particularly
children, pregnant women, and the elderly. You also overestimate how
much planning people put into their trips. Many people in the morning
will be drinking coffee before they board, and caffeine is a diuretic;
for those who stop for drinks after work, alcohol is also a diuretic.
So are many prescription medications. Not to mention that holding it
for an extended period of time, especially when consuming diuretics, is
a major cause of urinary tract infections; just ask teachers, who have
the highest rates of infection of _any_ industry because they can't
abandon their classes to go when their bodies tell them to, day after day.
Expecting _everyone_ to be able to hold it two hours or more is simply
unrealistic. Even _one_ hour is pushing it; urban systems can get away
with it because at (nearly?) every stop there will be nearby businesses
with facilities they could use if necessary, but that doesn't
necessarily apply to commuter systems where stations may consist of a
platform, parking garage/lot, and not much else within reasonable
walking distance (esp. for the elderly, pregnant, etc.). If the
conductors don't allow re-boarding on the same ticket, that could also
be problematic: people will be quite upset if they have to buy a second
ticket just because the train didn't have a restroom.
Most importantly, though, existing patrons of US commuter systems have
gotten used to the restrooms being there. It'd be one thing to not
provide them on a _new_ system, because people don't know what to
expect, but taking them _out_ of an existing system is another matter
entirely.
The loss of seating isn't a serious problem, even with the large
ADA-compliant restrooms, as long as it's only one per 3-5 cars. The
bigger problem is keeping them clean, refilling the water (or whatever),
and emptying the waste tanks. That's a lot of manpower, special
equipment, materials, and other expenses.
Larry Sheldon
When last I rode commuter rails (going back to Harriman cars) people
brought coffee on with them in the morning and beer or cocktails in the
evening (and vice versa)--and the run for locals was more than an hour
sometimes--sometimes much more than an hour.
But it boils down to marketing--if you want people to use what you
provide, even if you give it away, you have to offer things they want.
The great socialist notion that the People Who Know What Is Good For Us
will always have the right answer really does not work--people will
decide for themselves.
Among the reasons I don't fly much anymore is the concern I have for
sitting, trapped, in a tiny seat in a sealed tube, parked on a tarmac
for hours, with no access to air, water, or toilet.
--
Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.
Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca
ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
Larry Sheldon
things potential customers look for is a place to park, since they
probably don't live in the train station:
http://lawhawk.blogspot.com/2009/12/edison-nj-finally-gets-mass-transit.html
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours.
Actually, there are plenty of situations in the NYC metro area where
the _total_ trip time exceeds two hours, especially when you take into
account the time necessary to drive to the station, park, get tickets,
etc.
As mentioned before, the restrooms on Metro North and LIRR trains do
get used often.
Clark F Morris
The lack of toilet facilities for longer transit trips and at stations
is a deterrent for some. I know that I would find two hours wait a
problem at times.
>
>Val
Michael Finfer
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:16:31 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Dec 29, 10:31 pm, Cyrus Afzali <pnsm...@lnubb.pbz> wrote:
>>
>>> You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
>>> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours.
>> Actually, there are plenty of situations in the NYC metro area where
>> the _total_ trip time exceeds two hours, especially when you take into
>> account the time necessary to drive to the station, park, get tickets,
>> etc.
>
> medical problem and should seek counsel of a doctor.
I have a medical problem, and I am under the care of a doctor, but that
does not change the fact that right now I would probably need to use a
restroom on a two hour trip, and I am certain that many other people
would say the same thing. That's one additional thing that makes the
train more attractive than driving.
As was said before, marketing IS important.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
Miles Bader
> I almost never agree with Peter, but I've wondered the same thing for
> years. You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours. I take an
> early morning train occasionally that's been en route for about 1hr 20
> min before it reaches my station and then has another hour to go. If
> people can't go 2 hours and 20 minutes between bathroom breaks, then
> there's a bit of a problem.
For the most part people won't need to use them, but there are
occasional exceptions -- people which _do_ have medical problems, or are
bit messed up after drinking too much the night before, or who cut it so
close making the train they couldn't even stop at the toilet, etc.
Maybe in such cases they can wait 25 minutes or something, but an hour
or two might really be pushing it.
How you deal with that seems to depend on the type of train service.
I think for a frequent (e.g. subway style) train, it's perfectly
reasonable to just say "get off and use a station toilet and grab the
next train", but for american-style commuter lines which run quite
rarely (e.g. 1/hour or 1/half-hour), that's pretty harsh, so a few
onboard toilets can really help.
[Of course if you tell people to use station toilets then you have to
actually have station toilets...]
-Miles
--
`There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.'
Peter Schleifer
A few are still open and if you need one badly enough, you'll use it.
--
Peter Schleifer
"Save me from the people who would save me from myself"
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> You live in Pennslyvania, so
> how do you know how often ANYTHING gets used?
Let's be clear you know nothing about where I live or travel.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> restroom on a two hour trip, and I am certain that many other people
> would say the same thing.
Yes, a great many people, especially as the population ages.
It is for this reason that I'm glad Amtrak includes a toilet in
individual rooms on the Viewliner, and I hope they continue to do so
in future orders despite the expense. On the Superliners, using the
hall bathroom in the middle of the night is a pain.
> That's one additional thing that makes the
> train more attractive than driving.
True. Many exits off of expressways do NOT have any places one can
run in and use a restroom.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> I think for a frequent (e.g. subway style) train, it's perfectly
> reasonable to just say "get off and use a station toilet and grab the
> next train", but for american-style commuter lines which run quite
> rarely (e.g. 1/hour or 1/half-hour), that's pretty harsh, so a few
> onboard toilets can really help.
>
> [Of course if you tell people to use station toilets then you have to
> actually have station toilets...]
Many urban subway and commuter rail systems were originally built with
restrooms in stations. Unfortunately, years ago crime and drugs
became such a problem that they had to be closed, especially in
subways. Today, a few subway stations have usable ones near the
station agent who can buzz people in. More commuter rail stations do
have them.
Peter T. Daniels
Not long ago you let it slip that you claim to live in Staten Island.
Is there a reason you withhold that claim now?
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > Let's be clear you know nothing about where I live or travel.
>
> Not long ago you let it slip that you claim to live in Staten Island.
> Is there a reason you withhold that claim now?
Are you and "Cyrus" actually the same person? Sure seems that way,
especially with this post.
Peter T. Daniels
If you can think that, you have not been reading this newsgroup.
It is assumed that you are a Philadelphian because you are continually
talking about SEPTA, and over the years you have denied you are in
Philadelphia. But never have you stated where you actually are, until
last week.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> It is assumed that you are a Philadelphian because you are continually
> talking about SEPTA, and over the years you have denied you are in
> Philadelphia. But never have you stated where you actually are, until
> last week.
A lot of people think Staten Island isn't really part of the city.
But in reality it's no one's business.
spsffan
Thanks for the laugh Jeff!
Actually, I can't imagine either one of them surviving 2 hours on a
train without restrooms, considering how full of *#*$ they are. At least
Peter is entertaining.
Peter T. Daniels
In this particular newsgroup, it's the business of the readers of the
newsgroup.
If you have no connection with Philadelphia, why are you always
posting about Philadelphia?
If you are in Staten Island, why do you have nothing to say about
transit in Staten Island?
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> In this particular newsgroup, it's the business of the readers of the
> newsgroup.
Nope.
Have a happy and healthy new year everybody!
Sancho Panza
The lack of public facilities and ensuing public urination are a well-
known problem in the city. Reference the long discussions over the
sidewalk toilets.
Larry Sheldon
> The lack of public facilities and ensuing public urination are a well-
> known problem in the city. Reference the long discussions over the
> sidewalk toilets.
I recall the tunnels at Palo Alto after the station was closed and
locked most of the time.
Robert Coe
: Seems like this was mentioned already but in case it wasn't--among the
: probably don't live in the train station:
:
: http://lawhawk.blogspot.com/2009/12/edison-nj-finally-gets-mass-transit.html
I'll bet there are more than a few locations in the New York area where people
live in the same building at which the train stops.
Bob
Robert Coe
: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:16:31 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
:
: >
: >> You can take almost any line in the metro area and be hard
: >> pressed to come up with a trip that's more than 2 hours.
: >
: >Actually, there are plenty of situations in the NYC metro area where
: >the _total_ trip time exceeds two hours, especially when you take into
: >account the time necessary to drive to the station, park, get tickets,
: >etc.
: Again, who has to use a restroom every 2 hours? If you do, you have a
: medical problem and should seek counsel of a doctor.
And what do you do if the reason you have to go so often is because of
medications prescribed by a doctor? Or a medical condition that can't be
corrected easily? Or at all?
How old are you, Cy? If you're not at least in your sixties, let us know if
you're still as indifferent to the problem when you're a few years older.
Bob
Larry Sheldon
I don't actually know, and I am not going to see if I can find out. But
I suspect that if you take all of the people for whom that is true as a
fraction of all of the people who ride trains, "probably don't live in
the train station" is still correct.
Unless y'all are lying about how many ride the train.
Larry Sheldon
What I do is open the troll filter and make an update.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> I'll bet there are more than a few locations in the New York area where people
> live in the same building at which the train stops.
Yes, there are, as well in other cities, too.
Having a commuter rail station nearby boosts property values. Many
stations have luxury high rise apartments very close by.
Miles Bader
>> I'll bet there are more than a few locations in the New York area where people
>> live in the same building at which the train stops.
>
> I don't actually know, and I am not going to see if I can find out. But
> I suspect that if you take all of the people for whom that is true as a
> fraction of all of the people who ride trains, "probably don't live in
> the train station" is still correct.
Certainly people who actually live in the _same building_ is a small
fraction.
But that's not really relevant; what's relevant is whether they live
close enough that a car is not necessary for normal use (this distance
becomes greater if there's widespread bicycle usage, etc, but that's not
common in the U.S.). [and when a car is not _necessary_, it usually
becomes a liability for such uses.]
-Miles
--
One of the lessons of history is that nothing is often a good thing to
do, and always a clever thing to say. -- Will Durant
chris.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Dec 28, 8:04 pm, Michael Finfer <fin...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> > > On Dec 28, 3:17 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
> > >> Bi-level cab car = 139
> > >> Bi-level coach w/bathroom = 141
> > >> Bi-level coach no bathroom = 146
> > >> Comet V cab car = 109
> > >> Arrow MU = 118 - 122
>
> > >> So, a 10-car bilevel train has more seats than a 12-car single-level
> > >> train, but not by as large a margin as you might expect.
>
> > > Thanks for the numbers.
>
> > > If my math is right, a 12 car MU (118+122)*6 = 1,440 passengers. A
> > > max bi-level of ten cars of 146 = 1,460. But a train needs two
> > > restrooms and cabs, so the capacity would be less.
>
> > NJT seems to have no mechanism for determining how many bathroom cars
> > (or even cab cars) are on each train. A 10 car train may have several
> > bathroom cars and even two or three cab cars (only one is required).
>
> Why does a commuter rail line "need" bathooms on trains? How long is
> the longest scheduled trip? If there could be a train from Port Jervis
> to Cape May (the longest possible trip in NJ), how long would it take?
Because they sell beer.
Valentin Brückel
> But that's not really relevant; what's relevant is whether they live
> close enough that a car is not necessary for normal use (this distance
> becomes greater if there's widespread bicycle usage, etc, but that's not
> common in the U.S.).
Don't forget about buses. A decent feeder service can greatly increase the
"walking distance" around rail stations.
Val
Miles Bader
Yup...
[They're currently building a new train station near me for a train line
used mostly for commuting (I live in a "near suburb" of Tokyo), and as
part of the construction, they're building a four-story bicycle garage,
and a large bus/taxi stop rendezvous (dunno the proper term), but _zero_
car-parking...]
-Miles
--
Mayonnaise, n. One of the sauces that serve the French in place of a state
religion.
Clark F Morris
<otter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 30, 6:35�am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
France has the same problem. The problem in Paris was described in
the Wall Street Journal and some of the YouTube videos of Strasbourg
Light Rail show men urinating in the street. Some people can go
longer periods than others and have little understanding of those who
don't have the capability.
Larry Sheldon
>> The lack of public facilities and ensuing public urination are a well-
>> known problem in the city. Reference the long discussions over the
>> sidewalk toilets.
>
> France has the same problem. The problem in Paris was described in
> the Wall Street Journal and some of the YouTube videos of Strasbourg
> Light Rail show men urinating in the street. Some people can go
> longer periods than others and have little understanding of those who
> don't have the capability.
I think it is pretty much a problem everywhere that public-accessible
facilities don't exist.
I remember years ago seeing an unfortunate old woman, loaded down with
grocery bags (on her way home, I'd guess--she was not a stereotypical
"homeless" person) peeing in the grass parking strip in Los Angeles.
She was about as old as I am now. And I take Furosimide. If it were
not for a gas-station with open restrooms[1] the other night I'd have
had to stop along a city street.
So I have some sympathy for people who need public facilities. It is
not the people like me that are the problem--it is the people with no
sympathy, augmented by the people who must trash everything in sight[1].
Just so you know, I have long believed and practiced that where private
parties make their facilities accessible, I have an obligation to buy
something if I can--fuel, a cup of coffee, a candy bar. Trivial, I
know, but it is something.
I'd take great pleasure in hearing what the perfect folk, that don't
ever need a restroom do if it turns out that something they ate
disagreed with them, or they came down with a case of the flu, and the
plane they are on sits on the tarmac with the fasten seatbelts sign on
for four hours. (I once sat on a plane for more than eight hours under
those kinds of conditions.)
Peter Schleifer
>OT Side reference: Often doing a search on "Horn & Hardart Automat"
>brings up references to PDQ Bach. I don't understand what the two
>have to do with each other. Can anyone explain?
It's on The Wurst of P.D.Q. Bach CD:
1] Concerto for Horn and Hardart, S. 27 (P.D.Q. Bach)
Allegro
Tema con variazione
Menuetto con Panna e Zucchero
http://www.schickele.com/shoppe/pdqrec/wurst.htm
Andrew Price
>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:51:09 -0500, Cyrus Afzali <pns...@lnubb.pbz> wrote:
[---]
>: Again, who has to use a restroom every 2 hours? If you do, you have a
>: medical problem and should seek counsel of a doctor.
>
>And what do you do if the reason you have to go so often is because of
>medications prescribed by a doctor? Or a medical condition that can't be
>corrected easily? Or at all?
Never mind the medical condition - a few cups of tea or coffee a half
hour before beginning the journey will put most people into that
situation.
Oh, and in case it had slipped your attention, "Cyrus" is a (somewhat
dim-witted) troll...
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Just so you know, I have long believed and practiced that where private
> parties make their facilities accessible, I have an obligation to buy
> something if I can--fuel, a cup of coffee, a candy bar. Trivial, I
> know, but it is something.
Some private business owners are jerks about that sort of thing. For
instance, in some diners, buying a soda isn't enough justification in
their eyes to use their restroom; they expect you to buy a whole
meal. Considering what they charge for a soda and the profit margin,
I think they're being a bit greedy.
And as we discussed elsewhere, some small food joints won't let you
use their bathroom even if you do order a meal. I've learned to ask
to use the restroom _before_ paying for my food order.
Jishnu Mukerji
> Yes, a great many people, especially as the population ages.
>
> It is for this reason that I'm glad Amtrak includes a toilet in
> individual rooms on the Viewliner, and I hope they continue to do so
> in future orders despite the expense. On the Superliners, using the
> hall bathroom in the middle of the night is a pain.
The new Viewliners will not have in room facilities in the roomettes.
They will continue to have them in the bedrooms.
Jishnu Mukerji
Staten Island is in Pennsylvania? ??? ;)
spsffan
Actually, having ridden in Superliner bedrooms several times, I have to
disagree with Jeff. I never rode in older equipment and have never
ridden in a viewliner. My first overnight trip in a sleeper was about
1989 or so.
Before ever riding on an overnight train, looking at the layouts in
Amtrak's pamphlets, I thought that having the restroom down the hall
would be a problem. But the more I thought about it, the more it makes
sense. Here at home, my toilet is not in my bedroom. Neither is it in a
hotel. Neither is it in anyone's home I've ever been in, nor, even
recreational vehicles.
It is tough enough getting in and out of bed in a Superliner standard
bedroom with 2 people occupying it. And do you really want your travel
companion (often not my SO or even a close family member) in the same
room when you use the toilet? I'm one who must get up at least once
during the night (not due to age...I was like that even as a teenager)
and I'd just as soon have the toilet in a separate room, and not have it
in the same room that I'm occupying for the next 24 (or whatever) hours.
Regards,
DAve
Jishnu Mukerji
> It is tough enough getting in and out of bed in a Superliner standard
> bedroom with 2 people occupying it. And do you really want your travel
> companion (often not my SO or even a close family member) in the same
> room when you use the toilet? I'm one who must get up at least once
> during the night (not due to age...I was like that even as a teenager)
> and I'd just as soon have the toilet in a separate room, and not have it
> in the same room that I'm occupying for the next 24 (or whatever) hours.
>
> Regards,
>
> DAve
>
Dave,
In the Viewliner bedrooms the toilet is in a separate cubicle. In the
roomettes it is just by the bed. Consequently, I think it is OK for the
toilet cubicles to be available with the bedrooms and it is also OK to
remove the toilet facility from the roomettes.
Jishnu.
Larry Sheldon
Depends on whose GPS you are using.
--
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
take everything you have."
Stephen Sprunk
> Jishnu Mukerji wrote:
>> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> Yes, a great many people, especially as the population ages.
>>>
>>> It is for this reason that I'm glad Amtrak includes a toilet in
>>> individual rooms on the Viewliner, and I hope they continue to do so
>>> in future orders despite the expense. On the Superliners, using the
>>> hall bathroom in the middle of the night is a pain.
>>
>> The new Viewliners will not have in room facilities in the roomettes.
>> They will continue to have them in the bedrooms.
>
> Actually, having ridden in Superliner bedrooms several times, I have to
> disagree with Jeff. I never rode in older equipment and have never
> ridden in a viewliner. My first overnight trip in a sleeper was about
> 1989 or so.
>
> Before ever riding on an overnight train, looking at the layouts in
> Amtrak's pamphlets, I thought that having the restroom down the hall
> would be a problem.
I thought about it, but I realized it wouldn't be much of a problem. I
normally don't take nightclothes with me when I travel, but it's not
much of a hassle to throw on a pair of shorts and T-shirt for a short
trip down the hall.
> But the more I thought about it, the more it makes
> sense. Here at home, my toilet is not in my bedroom. Neither is it in a
> hotel. Neither is it in anyone's home I've ever been in, nor, even
> recreational vehicles.
I can't recall _anywhere_ I've seen that has a toilet in the same room
as a bed except for jail/prison cells.
The difference between a home or hotel room and a train, though, is that
(in the US, at least) one does not need to get dressed (even minimally)
to visit the toilet even though it's in another room; one can go in
whatever one wears to bed (if anything). It's the same problem one
experiences with some older hotels in Europe, which can be quite
shocking to many Americans who are used to every hotel room having its
own restroom.
> I'd just as soon have the toilet in a separate room, and not have it
> in the same room that I'm occupying for the next 24 (or whatever) hours.
Indeed. Depending on what one is eating and the state of one's
digestive system, it may be a very _bad_ idea to share a room with the
toilet, as convenient as it might seem at first.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Staten Island is in Pennsylvania? ??? ;)
Yes.
You know those omnibus bills Congress passes at the end of the year
that no one reads? Well, the folks in Pa slipped in a rider annexing
S.I. You snooze, you lose. The S59 bus is being extended to run
south on US 1 until the ferry terminal is relocated to Tottenville.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> The new Viewliners will not have in room facilities in the roomettes.
> They will continue to have them in the bedrooms.
Do they already have drawings for the new Viewliners?
Has this been published anywhere, such as on Amtrak's webpage or in
print?
thanks.
Jishnu Mukerji
LOL
Jishnu Mukerji
> On Jan 5, 9:00 pm, Jishnu Mukerji <jis...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> The new Viewliners will not have in room facilities in the roomettes.
>> They will continue to have them in the bedrooms.
>
> Do they already have drawings for the new Viewliners?
Yes.
> Has this been published anywhere, such as on Amtrak's webpage or in
> print?
Not available publicly. Only available as part of the RFP documents.
Sancho Panza
"Jishnu Mukerji" <jis...@nospam.hp.com> wrote in message
news:hi2qtl$g8o$1...@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
Tottenville already has a ferry terminal, or at the least the remnants of
one.
Robert Coe
Thirty or forty years ago they would build subsidized housing near stations
because land was cheap there and the assumption was that the residents might
be less likely to own a car thsn the average commuter. Now land near a station
is generally too expensive to use that way.
Bob