Saturday, November 12, 2011

No Manhattan Bound Roosevelt Island F Train Subway Service This Weekend - Crowded Tram Cabins and Only One Cabin Operating In Morning

There is no F train subway service to Manhattan from Roosevelt Island this weekend resulting in crowded Manhattan bound Tram Cabins.

A Roosevelt Island resident reports on crowded tram this morning at about 9:15:

The tram was packed, and they were only running one cabin even though the subway is out - what is the point of having 2 cabins if you won’t run them in these circumstances? Also, a woman fainted or collapsed while the tram was in motion. There was a loud thud. The tram operator was very good in handling it.
I was on the Tram at about 2 PM and both cabins were running though it was still crowded.


You Tube Video of Crowded Weekend Tram Cabin

14 comments :

Tram_Rider said...

Only one tram cabin at 10:07 am. Tram operator said second cabin would run at 11:00 AM. RIDICULOUS.

Trevre Andrews said...

Really, I would like to see the operations budget for the tram and know who is making the decisions about its schedule.  I have voiced this many times, but it is not most efficient to have the tram waiting at either side on some type of schedule.  The tram should leave as soon after it arrives as possible (after everyone is boarded) to reduce everyone's waiting time on average.  Someone is getting paid to sit in the tram, they might as well be running it continuously.  Time is money, and right now they are wasting several minutes of hundreds of peoples time per day for what?  The longest anyone should ever have to wait is 5 minutes (i.e., the one way trip time).  The tram should also run earlier, at least 5 am.  It seems as though the tram operator determines the schedule, rather than a transportation engineer. 
     

Frank Farance said...

Although there are two independent systems, they can't really run independently because the towers would need to support both trams going in the same direction. Thus, they are dependent and, there is little scheduling improvement over the prior single-haul system.  In 2008, we modeled it and, at best, the dual-haul system might deliver 10% more passengers per hour.

As for not running continuously, that is so the tram can be synchronized with the red bus.  By synchronizing the tram and bus scheduled, there is  less waiting time and more schedule predictability.  I know it sounds intuitive that running continuously makes for less wait time (at least on a individual level), but in fact this isn't true (on a system level).

You say "Someone is getting paid to sit in the tram, they might as well be running it continuously", but that does not make for the best operations.  Taking your point, the operator is a fixed cost, while each tram run has a cost (electricity, maintenance, wear-n-tear, etc.), so running it continuously creates the highest cost while *still* transporting the same number passengers.  You say " but it is not most efficient to have the tram waiting at either side on some type of schedule", however the *MOST* efficient tram usage would be to wait until the passenger compartment is full (regardless of how long the wait is), and then go to the other side <-- most efficient, but not very convenient because you could wait hours.

The tram should only run continuously when the cabins are filled to capacity, otherwise, they should run on a schedule to balance efficiency with convenience; and they should use the single tram strategy when the load is light.  Considering that a two tram operation requires scheduling two operators to be on duty, that might be the hardest part.  With all the F train outages on weekends, maybe there might be a better way handle higher passenger loads ... I'd have to look at more data to make a more specific recommendation.

YetAnotherRIer said...

"Although there are two independent systems, they can't really run independently because the towers would need to support both trams going in the same direction (which they can't)." 

Could you cite the source for this (that the towers don't support two trams going into the same direction)? AFAIK there has never been made a statement like this until yours now. How does it make a difference for the tower if a tram comes from the Manhattan or the RI side?

Trevre Andrews said...

Disagree.  You have not considered the largest costs of all, our time.  Make 1000 people a day wait an extra 2 minutes, and that is 2000 minutes, ~300 hours, at $10 per hour, that is 3K/day, put that in perspective with the additional wear and tear.  First coordination with the Red bus doesn't matter to many of us, plus the total time Manhattan to red bus would be the same, it just changes where you wait (Manhattan or RI).  I thought this was a well oiled machine with the low operation and maintenance costs.  Please provide an estimate justifying how costly it is from a maintenance perspective to run the tram more often.  What is this cost of wear and tear per trip compared to our time?  

Frank Farance said...

Only the middle tower can support the two trams at the same time.  The Roosevelt Island and First Avenue towers cannot support both trams simultaneously.  This was discussed in the meetings with the tram engineers in Fall 2008 when they were discussing dual vs. single haul technologies and the purported advantages of the dual haul system.

Now rereading my comment, perhaps I should have said it clearer "because all towers would need to support both trams going over them at the same time".

Frank Farance said...

I've asked RIOC for information on this.  I'll get back to you when they provide it.

Trevre Andrews said...

Thanks Frank.  Also I think you meant it was not engineered to continually support both cars at the same time under normal operation.  I am sure it is capable of supporting both cars during an emergency or by accident (e.g., the tram operators decide to have a race).  

theohiostate said...

Check your facts, because they can go across side by side.  I've been on the north Tram in the morning watching the South Tram ride right next to us.

YetAnotherRIer said...

Right. That's why I was asking for clarification about this. The trams meet pretty much anywhere across the river now that they are uncoupled and I haven't noticed that they are timed in some way so they won't go across the same tower at the same time.

Frank Farance said...

OK, I'll check.

Frank Farance said...

Both RIOC Board Member Mike Shinozaki and I had similar recollections about the engineering discussions in Fall 2008: No problem with Tower 2, unsure about Towers 1 and 3.

RIOC VP of Operations Fernando Martinez provided a definitive answer: "The tramway is designed to operate in all operating configurations. This includes running both tramways together."

In other words, they can run independently.

Ratso123 said...

I would like to know where I can see the plans for the tram that show a tower can support both trams if they are going in opposite directions, but not if they are going in the same direction.  Torque, tension etc. might be distributed differently, but  the weight of both would be a constant.  Also, include the plans for the new station and the bathrooms.  If this is true, then the towers should have been replaced, so the trams can be run the way Mr. Andrews suggests, and all of those involved in this nonsense should be fired.  

Trevre Andrews said...

Awesome, so when is the tram car race scheduled for>?