Talk:Long Island Rail Road
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Long Island Rail Road has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City Public Transportation.
|
 Archives |
| Archive 1 |
[edit] Billyburg
Williamsburg Bridge says BRT and LIRR shared the central dual tracks on that bridge, but it's not on the list in this article. Is the other article mistaken? Jim.henderson 08:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- I believe it to be correct, although it may have been the other way around (elevated trains on the LIRR); it should probably be added to the history section since it was a brief trackage rights operation. [1] It may have only been to Broadway Ferry, and not over the bridge: "On October 4th, LIRR trains ran through service from Broadway Ferry to Jamaica using the incline. This service lasted only three months, ending January 10th, 1899." [2] claims the LIRR did run over the bridge, and later extended through the subway to Chambers Street (!). If I ever get a book from interlibrary loan I may have more details. --NE2 08:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks; shows how little I know; never heard that there was a ferry at Broadway of Williamsburgh as well as the more famous one at Grand Street. It points out a few gaps in Wiki coverage of New York transport. First, there is no overall ferry history page. Second, the articles for big bridges don't say what ferries they replaced. Third, neighborhood articles don't mention the role of railroads in building them up. Exceptions include East New York and Manhasset but only because I added this information, to the best of my limited knowledge. Fourth, History of Brooklyn doesn't adequately point out how much its late 19th Century expansion was due to local railroads. Ah, well, to write thus stuff myself I'd have to become a hardcore railfan.
-
- Also in the talk page of Gowanus Canal I was skeptical that gasoline had ever been manufactured there, since there had never been a freight railroad there. Now I wonder whether there was, and it just escaped my notice. And grr, Newtown Creek is a much smaller article than Gowanus Canal even though it's a bigger freight route. Jim.henderson 17:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- List of ferries across the East River is in a sadly neglected state... care to help out? I'm not sure that the truly big bridges really replaced any ferries; the ferries often continued to operate for a long time after the bridges opened. --NE2 17:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
-
By the way, I just got Steel Rails to the Sunrise through interlibrary loan, and will be working on this article again. --NE2 17:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent for the book and thanks for the link to the ferry list, to which I added a link from history of Brooklyn. Alas, these ferries are a topic on which I am unqulified to write articles, but the articles for the mighty Brooklyn, Williamsburg and Narrows Bridges ought to mention that the ferries continued to run for, well, whatever number of years it was in each case. Jim.henderson 15:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's not always clear what ferries the bridges replaced. I'm sure you can easily tell for the Narrows Bridge, and probably for the Williamsburg, but there were many ferries connecting Downtown Brooklyn with Lower Manhattan; the subway tunnels probably did more to replace those ferries than the bridges. --NE2 15:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, there was no LIRR service; BRT trains operated over the bridge and LIRR to Rockaway Park. --NE2 10:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Service cuts and improvements
I moved this from the article, since it's probably a bit too much detail for the main article. --NE2 22:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
In addition to service cuts, several of the more lightly used branches were threatened with abandonment in 2006. The threats included the Oyster Bay Branch, the Main Line between Ronkonkoma and Greenport, and the West Hempstead Branch. The service cuts were intended to reduce opposition to a fare increase or encourage the state to provide more money (which it ultimately did). All the threatened lines have had considerable capital investment in recent years to "bring them up to a good state of repair." The LIRR was originally chartered with the specific purpose of service to Greenport, and the land under the Main Line tracks would revert to heirs of the original owners if that service were abandoned. In addition, a large portion of the threatened Main Line east of Ronkonkoma has been slated for electrification by 2016 as part of LIRR forward planning.
The 2005-2009 capital program of the MTA provides for a third Main Line track from Bellerose to Mineola, with the intent of extending it to Hicksville.
A second track between Farmingdale and Ronkonkoma on the Main Line is also planned, which would greatly increase capacity. Ronkonkoma already suffers from overcrowding, and locals have called for additional service east of Ronkonkoma. The capital program also provides for a landfill in Yaphank (east of Ronkonkoma) to be capped and set aside for this future railroad purpose. This may involve extending electrification, building parking structures, or a building a yard needed for Main Line storage. (The current yard in Ronkonkoma already operates at capacity.)
[edit] Working out a full list of joint operations
- Brighton Beach Line joined Atlantic Branch at Franklin Avenue, with reciprocal trackage rights, 1878-1884
- Culver Line junctioned Bay Ridge Branch, with reciprocal trackage rights, 1885-probably 1899 (Culver connection built to Fifth Avenue El in 1895)
- Fifth Avenue Line junctioned Atlantic Branch near Flatbush Avenue, with El trains over LIRR to Manhattan Beach? and Rockaway Beach, and LIRR "rapid transit" trains over El to Sands Street (latter mentioned in Steel page 43)
- Jamaica Line junctioned Atlantic Branch near Conduit Avenue, with El trains over LIRR to Rockaways, and LIRR over El to Broadway Ferry, Essex Street, and Chambers Street
- Connection somewhere for Manhattan Beach to 39th Street Ferry and Sea Gate [3] or was this totally streetcar?
- More structured list
On August 7, 1876, the Brooklyn, Flatbush and Coney Island Railroad (Brighton Line) opened to a junction with the LIRR's Atlantic Avenue Branch near Franklin Avenue, and began operating over the LIRR to Flatbush Avenue and Long Island City.[1] This agreement was terminated between the 1883 and 1884 seasons;[2][3] the BF&CI was later connected to the Fulton Street El.
A ramp at 36th Street and Fifth Avenue in Sunset Park, connecting the Culver Line to the Brooklyn Elevated Railroad's Fifth Avenue El, was completed in 1895, and the BERR began operating trains from the Brooklyn side of the Brooklyn Bridge to Manhattan Beach (using the Fifth Avenue El, Culver Line, Bay Ridge Branch, and Manhattan Beach Branch) on August 5.[4] On April 19, 1896, the beginning of the 1896 summer season, the BERR started using the connection to run to West Brighton, the end of the Culver Line.[5] The Manhattan Beach route was extended over the new El tracks on the Brooklyn Bridge to Park Row on June 18, 1897, but only on race days.[6]
An incline connecting the Brooklyn Elevated Railroad's Broadway El and LIRR's Atlantic Branch at Chestnut Street in Cypress Hills was placed in operation on July 17, 1898, allowing BERR trains to run from Broadway Ferry in Williamsburg to Rockaway Beach.[7] This incline was also used for El service to Jamaica,[8] and later for LIRR service over the Williamsburg Bridge to Chambers Street and Canal Street.[citation needed]
An incline at Flatbush Avenue and Atlantic Avenue, connecting the LIRR's Atlantic Branch to the Fifth Avenue El, was opened May 24, 1899 for through trains between Jamaica and the Brooklyn end of the Brooklyn Bridge.[9][10][11] The Brooklyn Elevated Railroad began using this incline and LIRR trackage to Manhattan Beach and Rockaway Beach on July 29 of that year.[12] --NE2 06:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- OK... I added a condensed version to the article. --NE2 10:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Trolley operations
Long Island Consolidated Electrical Companies was incorporated as a holding company on March 30, 1905. It was dissolved July 18, 1935.
- Ocean Electric Railway
stopped 1928
- Northport Traction Company
opened 1902 under LIRR control; sold 1924
- Nassau County Railway
opened 1902; stopped 1924
- Glen Cove Railroad
opened 1905 under LIRR control; stopped 1924
Huh??? This had something to do with the Cedarhurst Cut-off.
- Huntington Railroad
acquired 1898?; stopped 1919
acquired 50% in 1905[4]; sold 1926
acquired 50% in 1906; sold 1926
acquired in 1906?; sold 1908
- Central Branch trolley operations
Nassau and Suffolk County street railways never controlled by the LIRR include the New York and North Shore Traction Company and Suffolk Traction Company. --NE2 11:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- If you need to merge my page on the Suffolk Traction Boulevard for an article on the Suffolk Traction Company, be my guest. ---- DanTD 17:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Big article
Isn't it time to slice off the excellent history section into a new article? It's well beyond the recommendations of WP:SIZE and probably some readers who want to know what the railroad is, rather than what it was, are having trouble with it. Not me, with fast connection and desk computer, but some. Jim.henderson 07:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oh boy... I'm improving this article to featured status, and you want to cut it up? Much more happened from 1832 to recently than in the last few years. The LIRR basically is its history. --NE2 07:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll think about it anyway... --NE2 09:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I agree with Jim. The history section is indeed quite good, but far too long to exist in this article. It should be split off into a new article (History of the Long Island Rail Road?), with a more concise version replacing it in the current article. Larry V (talk | e-mail) 10:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- LIRR today is a bore, a useful tool for workers, students and others who have places they need to be. This evening, after repairing a computer, I caught the 8:36 from New Hyde Park to Penn Sta, thankful for good service and slightly miffed at the price. Plenty of people like me use it occasionally or are curious about how to use it, and ought to have a nice clear little article to tell them about the tool.
-
-
-
- LIRR in its first century was a sprawling saga of hope and fear and rich people guessing wrong and going broke, or hitting it lucky and getting richer. A story of clever and strong men building the industrial age. Much more fun than the present railroad. That saga deserves its own article explaining how the railroad came to be. Separate from the neat little article that says what it is and what it does today. Jim.henderson 05:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I agree that it was a good idea to split it off into a new article, but shouldn't the History section of the main article be more than "The Long Island Rail Road was consolidated from a number of railroads during the 19th century"? Most articles at least have a summary of what is in their "History of" article in the main article. -- BlastOButter42 See Hear Speak 18:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "The Gap"
(After just a quick glance at the article) No mention of "the gap" being too wide in some spots and causing injuries to some people? This has been on the front page of Newsday like every day. One should start a section for this; references should be easy for this one. (I don't have the time to do this myself, sorry.) →EdGl 01:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think if someone does add a section on this, they should have to source Newsday and at least one other source. I don't think Newsday's coverage of the gap has been unbiased. --Meadowbrook 18:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think 900 commuter accidents, including some of them that have been VERY serious and crippling to commuters makes the GAP a valid issue. Why does no other railroad in the US have a "GAP issue?" Even Metro North, which is in a similar area and has similar commuters does not have a GAP problem. Part of the reson is -- smaller GAPS. I think by attacking Newsday for reporting facts you are displaying a very biased and non-neutral point of view. --Candide08
[edit] Clarification
"[Penn Station] is reached via the Amtrak-owned East River Tunnels from the Main Line in Long Island City, the only LIRR trackage not owned by the LIRR." The Main Line article says the tracks are indeed owned by the LIRR. I assume that someone meant the Amtrak tunnels aren't owned by the LIRR, but that isn't how the sentence reads. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New Source for Station History
Okay, maybe the source isn't new, but the URL has been reparied, and the info is quite useful(http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirrphotos/LIRR%20Station%20History.htm). Hope the rest of you agree. ---- DanTD 23:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Routebox Trouble; Bethpage (LIRR station)
I'm currently having trouble adding the routebox for my proposed Bethpage (LIRR station) article. As you can tell by the title, it's with the routebox:
| Preceding station | Long Island Rail Road | Following station | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
toward New York terminals
|
Ronkonkoma Branch |
toward Greenport
|
||
| Central Branch |
toward Montauk
|
I can't separate the colors on the Central Branch and inidicate it's destination to Babylon Station. ---- DanTD 01:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Ah, that's because no one had made Template:S-line/LIRR right/Central yet. --NE2 22:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I made it. Thanks for the fix. Although I wonder if the color bars should be green or teal, since it leads to Babylon Station towards the Montauk Branch. ---- DanTD 15:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- The MTA definitely shouldn't be the only source, but they do color it purple on their map. --NE2 04:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Conflicting statistics on track mileage
I was just looking at a ref for daily ridership ([5]), and it also gives the miles of track as 594. This claims "more than 700", and that is the stat that is used in the article. This is a conflict of over 100 miles, which is not insignificant. All of the other stats agree, however. Perhaps the "more than 700" includes yards and other non-revenue track or something, but that's just a guess. What do we do? -- BlastOButter42 See Hear Speak 01:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- [6] claims 701, with 300 miles if everything were single track. I can't easily find anything non-MTA. --NE2 02:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] List of former Long Island Rail Road lines chaos
Should this list be reorganized somehow? It's not in alphabetical order, nor is in listed from west to east. ---- DanTD 23:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Commuter Issues are Valid Issues
The LIRR has a whole Press Department to put out its POV (Point of View). Basically whatever they say is printed UNCHECKED, in the mainstream press. The LIRR goes around and brags about being "The biggest Commuter Railroad in North America."
Well, if that is OK, commuter issues should also be OK to discuss with the LIRR. I will tell you 100% positively - commuter opinions about the LIRR are very different from the LIRR's opinions of itself. Let's not suppress and censor these issues. The opinions of more than 250,000 commuters DO matter and should be heard.
The OTP (On Time Performance) of the LIRR is a bad joke. It is always much higher than any commuter will experience. When I worked for them I heard high level executives joke about how it was so bad. Everyone knows this. So, if it is such an "Open Secret" - why object just because it is in print here? The railfan, always rosy side of the LIRR story is NOT the only one and should not be the only one told.
If this is objectionable - then I propose that the LIRR fix it - by performing better.
"Another criticism is that the On Time Performance (OTP) calculated by the LIRR is meaningless and manipulated to be artificially high. As defined by the LIRR, a train is "on time" if it arrives at a station within 5 minutes and 59 seconds of the scheduled time.[12] Some Commuters groups have been formed to represent commuter interests and their belief is that the OTP has no meaning to what commuters experience on a daily basis. The LIRR publishes the OTP (called 'Monthly Lies' by most commuters) in a monthly booklet called 'Keeping Track.' The number always seems to be 94% to 96% regardless of bad performances. Most commuters experience a 70% - 75% Real OTP, and LIRR executives quielty chuckle to themselves that this is really a more accurate number.
Until this is changed to a more meaningful measure it is highly doubtful that the LIRR will gain any credibility with commuters. Their reputation is so bad that even the head of the MTA called the LIRR "The third best railroad at the MTA" - there are only three." 71.250.35.133 14:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- I remember the descriptions of LIRR problems from when I read The Power Broker. This is definitely something that's notable and has some history. --NE2 22:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- The way to do this here, is by keeping a neutral point of view. Without that, you sound as bad as you profess the railroad to be. Find some newspapers or some credible source expressing these criticisms (and based on what you keep telling us, they shouldn't be too hard for you to find). Pacific Coast Highway {blab • stalk} 22:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately getting accurate information from the MTA is difficult. The MTA will only furnish a copy of the 1996 report, referenced below, in reply to an FOI request.
- The 1999 article below in the New York Times does give a good overview of both the ongoing rocky customer relations and mentions a 1996 MTA Inspector General Report that found serious "flaws" with many LIRR procedures - including the way the On Time performance is calculated. This included timing trains about 1 mile before their timing point in some cases.
- This NY Times search query shows 9 articles that indicate less than smooth performance and less than ideal relations with LIRR customers:
- NY Times LIRR Search Query
- These articles below are examples of ongoing poor performance and poor customer relations:
- I completely agree with the NPOV neutral point of view, as long as that applies evenly to everyone. I find that "railfans" do not have a NPOV, they tend to romanticize railroads in general and the LIRR in particular, presenting a biased (in favor of) point of view. I think balance and presenting many sides and differing opinions concerning the LIRR is both prudent and necessary. --Candide08
The "Passengers Issues" section is the opinion of a non-profit, 501-c-3 commuter group that has more than 500 members. The LIRR and its "rail fans" do not want this information to be put forward, even though it is 100% accurate and referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Candide08 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Candide08 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
