Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IIAOPSW t1_jbrkrdb wrote

When the IRT opened, the Mayor was given the honor of operating the first train. The engineer and the IRT president were in the cabin, trying to find the right words to inform the mayor his speed was unsafe without pissing off this politically important figure. Supposedly he was like a child with a new toy, and refused for a short while to yield control. What were they going to do, kick him out?

I'd like to see Adams or Hochul operate the inaugural trains. Not cause I like them, but because I'd like to see it established as a historical tradition. A nice perk of the office. "Actually get something upgraded, and we'll let you play with the trains for an hour."

85

ratheismhater t1_jbs3188 wrote

Careful, you'll make me run for mayor!

21

IIAOPSW t1_jbs3z5v wrote

You'll have to beat me first.

7

WednesdayKnights t1_jbxi62u wrote

Remember when that teenager impersonated being an MTA worker and the one thing that got him busted was that he went over 45 mph. The MTA said that he did a great job except for that one mistake that got him caught. That kid was living his best life.

3

IIAOPSW t1_jbxk9f0 wrote

I don't remember that. I do remember the guy with this lifetime obsession / mental disorder that impersonated MTA officials like a dozen times before working up the courage to finally hijack a train straight out the yard. He then drove it like he stole it. By which I mean calmly and normally so as not to attract police attention. He operated it perfectly safely making all stops as normal. He had studied the shit out of everything. His one true crime was operating an MTA vehicle on schedule.

To this day, no one really knows why this grown man didn't just apply for a job at the MTA.

4

feelslikeheaven t1_jc3xvnt wrote

There's a documentary about this guy, it's called Off The Rails, came out a few years ago.

1

WednesdayKnights t1_jcerjzs wrote

That might have been the same guy. It happen in the 90s, and I think he may have done it more that once. The MTA would have hired him except for the fact that he stole the train.

1

IIAOPSW t1_jcetf78 wrote

Oh sure they could hire him, but he keeps doing it for free.

1

kellyformula t1_jbuqxca wrote

That plan sounds like a great way of getting NYC’s 1st autistic mayor!

0

IIAOPSW t1_jbuwn04 wrote

Its only autism when you fail at life. When you're successful its neurodiversity. You know the difference between Mark Zuckerberg and an aspergers diagnosis? A billion dollars.

Hmm lets see. Obsessed with trains, deeply into routines and organization, speak bluntly because unconcerned with social graces, hyper focused on details nobody else gives a shit about, often found in very technical fields like data science... Fuck yeah I want a neurodiverse mayor. In fact, I want the whole civic service to be neurodiverse as fuck. I can't think of a single government function which wouldn't benefit from having them run it. From now on, no more hiring normies at city hall.

When the neurodiverse come to power, second ave subway will finally get done. So will every other transit project. They won't get fatigued by arguments with karens and nimbys, their capacity to not back down no matter who it upsets is unparalleled. Corruption will end because it would be too upsetting to them to break the rules. All the named streets will become numbered. Queens will finally have a real grid system, by way of bulldozer if need be. It will be a utopia. Frankly, we should have made these people into the political class ages ago.

14

kellyformula t1_jbuwstl wrote

I think that was the whole point of the Chinese bureaucrat system

3

MarkMan267 t1_jbu1d46 wrote

Um, no? They aren't qualified to do that.

−1

IIAOPSW t1_jbu50g2 wrote

I wasn't qualified as a kid either but they still let me push the lever for a few min.

Come on, we're not talking about throwing them the keys and shouting "comebackinanhour". I'm sure its perfectly safe with an engineer over their shoulder backseat driving for the duration of a photo op.

9

IRequirePants t1_jbuh0jd wrote

> Come on, we're not talking about throwing them the keys and shouting "comebackinanhour"

I would want to be on that train.

3

IIAOPSW t1_jbv0ley wrote

tossing you keys
come^back^in^an^hour

2

MarkMan267 t1_jbue08u wrote

Yeah, just because a lot of ops did dumb shit like that back then (and only got away with it because of no social media) doesn't mean we should continue said dumb shit today.

Any vehicle like this, you shouldn't be allowed to operate unless you've undergone training at first. That applies even if you have someone watching over them.

We wouldn't let someone operate a bus or plane for "just a few seconds" under the guise of "Eh, it's just for fun." Same should apply here.

Allowing unqualified people to operate trains literally helped lead to the deadliest accident in NYC subway history. Hard pass.

−2

IIAOPSW t1_jburuxx wrote

Before everything got up tight over 9/11, pilots were happy to entertain kids curious about the cockpit. Most people were in fact totally cool with it for "just a few seconds" or "eh, its just for fun".

Malbone Street was not an instance of letting someone unqualified-but-supervised touch the controls for a bit. Malbone street happened because the BRT hired some union scabs and then tossed them the keys with basically no training. There was nobody over Luciano's shoulder telling him to slow down when he took that 6 mph turn at over 30 mph. It was not a one off ride with him either, he had been operating the train unqualified and unsupervised for about a week. Don't bait and switch me, I know my history too.

3

MarkMan267 t1_jbv5kmq wrote

Even though he didn't have supervision over his shoulder, it doesn't change ny main point....had he been qualified, the chances of that happening would have been slim to none.

Oh, and by the way, entertaining kids "curious about the cockpit" isn't the same as giving them the controls to the plane for a few seconds or minutes. If I'm guilty of a bait and switch, sounds like I'm not the only one here.

−1

clarkepov t1_jbtljwd wrote

All these new trains and we’re still on the late 80s 1 trains, priorities

−5

IIAOPSW t1_jbtn3t2 wrote

40 years is a reasonable service lifespan to sxpect. New cars are being rolled out, literally that's what this article is. They are being replaced exactly on time for when they are due for replacement. You wouldn't want an Apple style consumerist bullshit purchasing cycle on transit infrastructure. It would be prohibitively costly with no real benefit. Lasting from the late 80s up to now is a feature not a flaw.

22

iv2892 t1_jbttsen wrote

I like seeing common sense responses in this thread . Is the same logic as why would you replace a perfectly working car after 4 or 5 years.

6