
New York’s Subways Are Not Just Delayed, Some Trains Don’t Run at All - martinald
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/nyregion/new-yorks-subways-are-not-just-delayed-some-trains-dont-run-at-all.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
======
notmtaemployee
The MTA's problems begin and end at a weak senior management unwilling to
standup to Cuomo's frivolous micromanagement and a transit union unwilling to
modernize.

Politicians should be pushing for serious procurement and labor work rule
reforms, otherwise the systemic managerial and operational deficiencies will
ensure that the deterioration of service we see now will repeat it self in 5
to 10 years, regardless of how much money or technology is poured into the
MTA.

London and Toronto have been able to modernize much of their transit systems
in last 5 years and its not because they have more money. Once you fix the top
everything else will fall into place.

Look what Andy Byford has been able to do in 4 short years at the TTC. His
5-Year Plan to modernize the TTC focused on transforming corporate culture and
updating internal processes, in addition to new equipment. The results of
these changes have been overwhelmingly positive with the TTC recently being
named best public transit agency in North America and The TR Class of TTC
subway cars in May having a MDBF of over 924,000 miles.

If your interested in getting involved with transit activism in NYC I highly
suggest you follow @2AvSagas on twitter.

------
pavement
A lot of what affects the NYC subway is the principle of the "Sick System."

[http://issendai.livejournal.com/572510.html](http://issendai.livejournal.com/572510.html)

The system is too essential for a stop-the-world overhaul, but so far gone,
that only a stop-the-world overhaul can part the clouds.

Without a hard flush of antiquated mission critical infrastructure, millions
of turbulent eddies and vortices will ensure that the system is always
afflicted by parasitic equipment and debris.

~~~
chiph
Not a New Yorker, but what I heard was that the tunnels only have two tracks,
and both are needed for daily operations. So you can't replace one when it
wears out because of the service interruption. If they had made the tunnels
wide enough for three tracks, they'd have a spare for when they do repairs on
one of them. And give them a place to do a rolling-upgrade of old middle-20th
century signaling equipment.

~~~
IshKebab
Why not just do work on it at night like they do on the tube?

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

~~~
nandemo
Is that the official reason though? "The service cannot be stopped even for
planned maintenance" doesn't sound like a reasonable constraint.

~~~
rst
They have been doing shutdowns of particular lines for planned maintenance,
but almost always with replacement service in place (either other nearby
subway lines, or for more isolated lines, buses). And then there are major
tunnel repairs, which can lead to shutdowns of over a year. (There's an
upcoming shutdown on the L which a lot of people are dreading, as there is no
good replacement service of anything like the same capacity.)

------
bogomipz
>"Officials at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority acknowledged that the
schedules were not being met, and they blamed overcrowding for the shortfall."

No, the overcrowding is the effect of the MTA not addressing massive increases
in ridership over an almost 20 year period. The MTA likes to pretend publicly
that the ridership boom came out of nowhere and blindsided everyone. However
the increase in ridership has been occurring and been every since 1998.

"Between 1975and 1998, New York City subway ridership hovered between about
900 million and 1 billion riders annually. The net change between the annual
ridership in 1975 and 1997 was about 100 million, an average increase of just
over 4 million per year. However, 1997 was a turning point for the relatively
stagnant ridership growth experienced by New York City’s subway system. In
1998,just after the introduction of the MetroCard, over 137 million more rides
were taken than the year before. The boom continued for the next two years,
during which time another 181 million rides had been added to the annual
total. Over the next 15 years, the system continued to increase its ridership
totals at an average of 25 million more rides per year. In 2015, subway rides
totaled more than 1.7 billion."[1]

To make the current situation with chronically late trains worse there is no
way to know when the next train is coming until you have paid for a fare and
are standing down on the platform. Little good it does you then to find out
that next train is not for 12 or 15 minutes.

The MTA could have put the electronic arrival boards up on the street level by
the train entrance so that people could make an alternate choice such as to
use a Citibike, taxi, bus or even just walk instead. The MTA decided to
reserve that space to sell advertising however. Despite their press release
you will not find the next arrival times on any of these. See:

[http://www.mta.info/news/2012/03/29/digital-urban-panels-
deb...](http://www.mta.info/news/2012/03/29/digital-urban-panels-debut-
manhattan-subway-entrances)

[1]
[https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/State%20of...](https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/State%20of%20Subway%20Ridership%20-%20Mar717.pdf)

~~~
joatmon-snoo
_To make the current situation with chronically late trains worse there is no
way to know when the next train is coming until you have paid for a fare and
are standing down on the platform. Little good it does you then to find out
that next train is not for 12 or 15 minutes._

SO MUCH THIS.

Fortunately, because the MTA has exposed the live schedule data, Google Maps
lets you check this (sadly, it isn't 100% reliable: oftentimes a train will
claim to have arrived somewhere, or even be departing from a station, while
it's still getting there).

~~~
bogomipz
>"Fortunately, because the MTA has exposed the live schedule data, Google Maps
lets you check this (sadly, it isn't 100% reliable: oftentimes a train will
claim to have arrived somewhere, or even be departing from a station, while
it's still getting there)."

Yes and the issue is that the MTA doesn't make the service disruption data
available.

See: [https://medium.com/transit-app/how-were-bringing-real-
time-c...](https://medium.com/transit-app/how-were-bringing-real-time-
countdowns-to-nyc-s-lettered-lines-482d3b8f9899)

Why wouldn't you make this data available? Why stop short? Most likely because
it would expose just how many unplanned maintenance disruptions there actually
are.

~~~
tacostakohashi
For much the same reasons as not operating all the trains on your schedule, I
guess - apathy, incompetence, mismanagement, under-resourcing, etc. It seems
odd to expect a transit agency that isn't good at operating trains to be great
at providing data.

------
kposehn
The biggest reason for these delays I've found over the years it the signaling
system and headway spacing.

Blocks on a railway system are designed to provide enough space and warning so
that trains do not crash into each other. However, when you use line side
signals and CTC (Centralized Train Control) to dispatch them, you end up with
a set of rules that create spaces for occupancy that can easily be longer than
the trains themselves.

In the NYC subway, speaking as an observer as opposed to an insider, the
signaling and dispatching requires certain distances between trains and
headways (time between trains) to provide safety of 2-4 minutes. However, this
results in the cascading delays as one train that dwells too long in a
platform can have a stacking effect on trains behind.

For example, if your minimum block distance is 1000 feet, and a max length
train is 500 feet, a stack of five trains waiting to enter a station would
actually occupy 5,000 feet of track. This could stretch to previous stations
along the line.

The best solution would be dynamic blocks and cab signals, where the system
itself defines spaces occupied by trains and only allows a train into a space
where it can occupy safely, but also can make the distances dynamic based on
conditions. Cab signals would be required as you can't have dynamic blocks
with line side signals.

However, to do this requires a massive investment in new equipment both line
side and on the trains that would take years to implement, along with a
massive amount of painful work that would cause even more issues while it is
being set up.

Sadly, running more trains probably won't cut it as the system literally
cannot handle more safely.

~~~
jdavis703
Can't you also use manual train control during delays? I was once on a badly
delayed train (we were second in line to the station behind a train with
"police activity"). The operator pulls up to the train that's being held with
maybe one inch between the bumpers and let's passengers off through only the
front-most door. More creative thinking like this could help alleviate delays
and increase passenger happiness.

~~~
Symbiote
I think overriding the signalling system should only be done in extreme
circumstances.

If it becomes normal, it's too easy to make a mistake during the procedure,
and cause an accident.

------
treyfitty
I used to take the 456 line on Lexington Ave. back and forth between Home &
Work for the past 5 years. In January, the Q line on 86th st. opened, and
although it takes me ~10 minutes longer each way, it is a MUCH more pleasant
experience.

The 456 is a nightmare, and I can tell you first hand, that it is crowded to a
point where it is inhumane (imagine people literally fighting for a spot to
have the "privilege" to smell the arm-pits in their faces).

The Q line is well worth the headache, and the frustration of dealing with the
456.

~~~
spyspy
The 456 is the reason I stopped commuting to work before 10. Taking the L from
where I live today isn't much different. The trick I've found is that if the
sign says there are two trains incoming that are within a minute of each
other, always take the second train. People will self-sardine themselves on
the first and the second with be mostly empty.

~~~
magic_beans
That was my biggest lesson of the L or the 4/5/6\. If you _wait_ , the next
train will be much, MUCH less crowded.

Another trick is that if I'm at Union Square trying to get into Brooklyn on
the L and the station is packed, it ends up being faster and more comfortable
to take the L backwards to 8th ave, and then grab a seat on the Brooklyn bound
L at the 8th ave terminus.

~~~
dionidium
I use this technique when I need to catch a Queens-bound 7 train in Midtown.
It's much better to take a walk over to Hudson Yards and board there.

------
jandrese
So the transit authority decided that it was more important to have trains
evenly spaced out (to minimize the worst case wait times), but the tradeoff
was less total capacity and thus more crowded trains.

I'm really not sure which is the better case. Trains always arrive in a short
time, but can be full. Or you may have to wait longer for a train, and then a
little longer still for the train right behind that train that isn't as full.

~~~
oconnor663
It might also be that "longer worst case wait times" risk turning into a
different failure mode entirely. Like maybe if the rush hour train is 5
minutes late it's just uncomfortably packed, but if it's 10 minutes late it
gets so packed that letting people off at each station now takes 3x longer
than it should, the wait time spikes further, and every other train in the
system gets stuck behind that one.

------
sattoshi
I'm always impressed how terrible the subways are in America.

In Moscow the metro is running really smoothly since the day of it's creation
except for a single day. But that was because of Hitler.

~~~
pcurve
just in NYC because of its age. I don't think it's so bad in other big cities.

I don't care about the delays or capacity. I just wish NYC subway stations
weren't so filthy. Yes, they've gotten better in the past 20 years, but every
time I go to oversea, I'm reminded of how disgusting nyc subway is.

~~~
sattoshi
I honestly don't know how Moscow does it. I never saw a garbage can while at
the same time never seeing any garbage laying around.

~~~
pcurve
I think Japan does something similar.

[http://jpninfo.com/54373](http://jpninfo.com/54373)

------
stuaxo
Why would it take 50 years to install signalling across the system ?

This doesn't sound right at all.

~~~
rrdharan
The problems with NYC subway signaling have been very extensively covered in
previous reporting that you might find interesting:

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/nyregion/new-york-
subway-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/nyregion/new-york-subway-
signals.html) [http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-subway-relies-
decade...](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-subway-relies-decades-old-
outmoded-signals-switches-article-1.3184666)

"Even something as basic as a cable is an antique.

Workers popped open a junction box to show a 70-year-old cloth-covered cable,
due for the scrap heap next year, connected to newer rubber-covered wires."

Basically, the system is so old that an incremental retrofit is very
complicated to achieve without full shutdown. Remember the overall NYC subway
system is the only train system that actually operates 24-7 so maintenance
scheduling is also much more involved.

~~~
Larrikin
Then it should close at night. Pretty much every city with a subway system
worth bragging about does.

It always seemed strange to me that Philly is the only city I've been to that
fully replaces the subway at night with buses.

~~~
darpa_escapee
Part of what makes the subway system worth bragging about is that it runs at
night.

~~~
comicjk
I am proud of that as a New Yorker, but I would much rather replace it with
buses at night if that would make it actually work during the day.

------
meandave
Relevant article on a tax to fund the changes
[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/06/nyregion/bill-de-
blasio-w...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/06/nyregion/bill-de-blasio-will-
push-for-tax-on-wealthy-to-fix-subway.html)

------
aeorgnoieang
Anyone know whether anyone's carefully considered simply adding new parallel
systems, e.g. for signalling?

I can completely sympathize with the difficulty of upgrading 24/7 critical
infrastructure, especially given that mistakes can kill or injure people. I'd
try to just deploy separate parallel systems instead.

At a comically reduced scale, businesses migrating between ERPs (or similar
line-of-business apps) often run both the old and new systems 'side-by-side'
for some period of time. What I've never seen or heard them doing is trying to
replace components or sub-systems of the old system with those of the new
system. That kind of integration work would be awful and would probably
drastically increase the odds that the migration would crash and burn.

~~~
potatolicious
This is what's actually happening to a large extent.

While CBTC signaling is being installed, the original fixed-block signaling
remains in place. It's nearly impossible to do this otherwise - you'd have to
shut the entire line down for the entire time it takes to install new signals
- which could be years.

Once the new signal installation is complete the two systems may operate in
parallel (with the fixed-block system acting as a possible backup if CBTC
fails, and also so older trains can still run).

The issue is that with 24/7 operation, there is no consistent regular time
where work like this can be done. It can only be done in short spurts (late-
night shutdowns) or the work crews in-lined with train service, which has
obvious safety concerns as well as drastically reducing the capacity of the
line.

------
mysterydip
Is this just a problem with NYC's system, or is this an "elephant in the room"
problem with mass transit?

If an individual's car breaks down, they can find alternate means to get where
they need to go. If everyone were to depend on public transit in the future,
how do you handle upgrades? I know the metro in DC will run extra bus routes
for some down trains, but I think that's just for certain smaller repairs.

It's something I haven't really thought much about before. The simple answer
is to have redundant equipment (tunnels, tracks, cars), but few would stomach
the cost. Most likely it would just get used instead, in the same way that you
can never alleviate traffic jams with more roads, you just get more people
using them.

~~~
zanny
Almost every Subway supports transparent upgrades during operation. In the
absolute worst case scenarios you shut down single stations at night. By
design almost every Subway _is_ redundant - you at least have to have two
lines, one for station bypass and one for returning trains. When you work on
any Subway, you shut down one of the lines and manage traffic through the
other.

The NY Subway is just the most incompetent, most mismanaged, most technically
indebted subway on Earth.

There is no "problem with mass transit" as much as it is a problem with
centralized administration of complex things, period. Anything of large scale
that impacts many lives but has limited controllers to manage it is both rife
for ineptitude / corruption / incompetence and easily ignored on the consumer
side because of the complexity.

The same issue turns up all over infrastructure - outdated bridges, power
lines, internet infrastructure, water pipes. Central authorities of
incompetent taxpayer dollar rent seekers run them, the people are too ignorant
/ ill informed about deteriorating conditions to care, legacy technical debt
builds up over _centuries_ to be impossibly large.

And you won't escape them. The inverse of your scenario - rather than the car
breaking down, the road collapses from age - is still wholly applicable. Car
travel and vehicular routes are just as mired in corruption and bureaucracy
making them a nightmare as trains. Trains breaking down is as easily solved as
cars - there are maintenance stations, you take one train off, you put a new
one on. The real problem is always when the tracks go bad - the centralization
part. You could have a billion trains but not enough track / switching
capacity to use them.

~~~
Symbiote
In much of Europe, metro systems will shut down for maintenance for
appropriate periods. This is massively cheaper than working around a live
railway (especially underground), where safety would necessitate many more
staff required and more interruptions to work -- if it's even permitted in the
particular location.

The period depends on the city. Here in Copenhagen, where the metro runs all
night, they tend to shut part of a line from 00-05h on a Monday-Thursday
night, and put on buses instead. Cities with bigger metro systems might not
need the buses: this was the case the last time I visited Berlin, and a
central section was closed overnight.

London sometimes closes parts of lines at weekends, and every 2-3 years or so
there is major work on a line (closed entirely) on ~25-30th December.

(To be clear then: the "absolute worse case" is closing an entire line for
around a week.)

------
lasermike026
NYC MTA needs billions of dollars to fix the system. NY state must raise taxes
on the rich and deploy it too the MTA. The federal must chip in too. The MTA
will never make money and this is how it is.

~~~
zanny
Where does the misguided notion infrastructure should make a profit even come
from? Everyone hates on Amtrak for not being a profitable company. When in
history has infrastructure ever existed for the sake of the network operators
profit? It is always for the sake of profiting those who _use_ it - the
infrastructure enables profits, but in the same way sticking profits into
medicine cripples the efficiency of the system, trying to stick rent seeking
into infrastructure defeats the point of using it.

~~~
qub1t
Hong Kong has one of the best subway systems in the world and it generates a
profit every year [1]. The USPS also generates profits as well [2]. I would
argue that the profit motive incentivises efficiency in both of those
examples.

The best innovation often happens when working under constraints; often a
drive for profit results in better service for everyone using the
infrastructure. Of course this isn't the case 100% of the time, like your
example of medicine, which is why I think that to get the best of both worlds
you need a mix of government regulation with privatized capitalism. But I
think it would be incorrect to dismiss the profit incentive entirely as being
bad, and probably in the case of US infrastructure we would benefit from more
privatization and not the other way around.

[1] [http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/30/news/hong-kong-mtr-subway-
pr...](http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/30/news/hong-kong-mtr-subway-
property/index.html) [2] [http://www.newsweek.com/post-office-aint-broken-its-
profit-s...](http://www.newsweek.com/post-office-aint-broken-its-profit-so-
why-fix-it-397788)

~~~
bo1024
There's a couple interesting issues at play. One is that a profit incentive
can be at work without the goal being to break even. For example, perhaps the
goal is to subsidize by only $XXX million/year and above/beyond this goal is
considered "profitable" with appropriate incentives.

Another is the issue of correlation/causation. Well-run systems may tend to be
efficient in their use of monetary resources (almost by definition), but it's
not clear that setting a for-profit goal will be a cure-all intervention that
causes a system to be well-run.

It's also a big leap from setting profit goals to full-on privatization, which
I'm skeptical of for several reasons. Private companies are often only pushed
to be "good enough", better than the competition. A public transit system that
is just barely better than a cab (say for daily work commute) is no good at
all. Private companies tend to have short-term incentives, for instance, the
CEO may get a bonus based on the current year's profit, which will be
destroyed by investment in infrastructure. Companies care about maximizing
revenue rather than welfare. Etc.

------
Nelkins
The line about overcrowding being one of the major drivers behind delays
doesn't hold much water. Ridership has essentially been flat or even declining
in some areas[1] (peaked in early 2010s). Decreasing mean distance between
failures in cars [2] (as well as mismanagement of crews & trains as mentioned
in article) are among the main culprits.

[1]
[http://web.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/ridership_sub_annua...](http://web.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/ridership_sub_annual.htm)

[2]
[http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/archive/160725_1030_NYCT....](http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/archive/160725_1030_NYCT.pdf)
<\-- See page 29

~~~
rb808
Are you sure? nytimes recently said its doubled. (thougcomparison to 40s is
interesting)

> Subway ridership has risen dramatically since the 1990s, when about four
> million people used the system each day. Now it is nearly six million riders
> each day — the highest level since the 1940

[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/28/nyregion/subw...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/28/nyregion/subway-
delays-overcrowding.html)

~~~
mulmen
What caused the spike in the 1940s? Wartime fuel rationing?

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
The spike was in 1946. Whenever this statistic is trotted out I always wonder
how they made the trains run back then but MTA can't figure out how to do it
today. Their handwaving about narrow doors slowing down passengers doesn't
hold water.

~~~
mulmen
That's interesting. By 1946 most soldiers would have been back in the states
but automobile production would still have been ramping up. New car designs
didn't really hit the market until after 1948. Maybe that contributed?

------
stingrae
Instead of cancelling trains, why not take the unused cars and make the
running trains longer? I understand that the stations may not be able to
handle the length. You could stagger entries so that the first half of the
train loads, pulls forward a bit then the second half loads.

If it is an issue with the strength of the train engines, could you use two
train engines together? Especially if their intended routes are just getting
cancelled.

~~~
rst
The trains on the 4/5/6 lines are already the full length of the platforms.
(As on every other NYC subway line except for the G and a few of the
shuttles.)

~~~
stingrae
I was thinking that you could have trains that are longer than the length of
the platform and have multiple steps to fill it.

------
towndrunk
Anyone know of a documentary on the New York subway? I would love to see all
this old equipment and what they are really battling in order to keep it
running.

~~~
mabub24
There is this[1] video from the MTA that goes into the signaling system, which
is extremely old and in the process of getting updated in certain sections.

[1][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx3S3UjmnA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx3S3UjmnA)

------
perseusprime11
The people in NY/NJ area have no choice but to endure the mess of NJ transit
and MTA. Politicians lack vision and will to build a modern transportation
system that accounts for growing number of riders through these systems.
Somebody must have told try these folks to keep the "lights on" and forgot to
mention that it also includes getting riders on time.

------
coldcode
It would seem one could analyze the performance in this day of big data and
find a more efficient plan for scheduling the trains and adjusting in real
time. Maybe the system is too unpredictable to make this possible. Even so it
would be fun to try to model the entire system and try.

~~~
marrone12
The problem isn't in modeling the perfect train distribution, it is in that
the system itself can't handle anything else. Many of the parts in the subway
infrastructure are from the 40s and they just can't handle more trains.

~~~
aeorgnoieang
> from the 40s

30s! And maybe even older!

------
nerdponx
Does anyone know how much those ridiculous touch screens cost?

~~~
rkuykendall-com
You mean the ones that allow them to show multiple ads, changed digitally,
without paying someone to manually change them out?

If those are net-costing anything at all, I'd guess it's a rounding error on
any subway upgrades.

------
CodeWriter23
The worst part about this is the New Yorkers who are fleeing New York City and
landing in Hollywood and Silverlake and Echo Park and Eagle Rock. No
xenophobia here it's just they're bringing their adjusted economic
expectations to LA making the Airbnb inflicted housing crunch seem OK.

------
ablation
I find it quite shocking how little of the NY subway is automated.

~~~
zanny
What would incentivize it to do so? Upgrades come effectively from the state,
and need to be passed in budgets. So you need to persuade opinionated Albanian
politicians to upgrade the NY Metro.

------
empath75
I know this would probably be unpopular but why not just temporarily raise
prices until fewer people can afford the train. And use the extra money to
upgrade the system.

~~~
BartSaM
In current ecosystem, with so many politicians promising golden eggs, price
rise will almost never end up in the decrease.

Also, you are taxing the poorest. I think they struggle enough. You could
start selling premium services though.

