|
|
| Re: Canal Bridges Re: Unfair Tolls: Re: Air Train question (567079) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 17 of 29 |
||
|
| (579572) | |
Re: Canal Bridges Re: Unfair Tolls: Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:40:42 2008, in response to Re: Canal Bridges Re: Unfair Tolls: Re: Air Train question, posted by BMTLines on Sun Mar 2 14:23:24 2008. The local population would be perfectly happy WITHOUT a canalNot only is the local population being made to suffer by the division of their community caused by the existence of the canal How do you know that? The local population may benefit greatly in their Economy from it. Why are they "duffering"? Why is the canal a burden? The canal owners/operators should pay for any bridges that need to be built in order to restore the status quo ante to communities they disrupt. Communities they disrupt? How do you know there is a "disruption"? What if it's the government that built the canal? |
|
|
| (579575) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:41:50 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 14:04:28 2008. It's not an imaginary post, and it's only "not a good post" in YOUR opinion. Your views are no more fact on this matter than anyone elses. |
|
|
| (579577) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:42:26 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:41:50 2008. It's not an imaginary postI meant it's not an imaginary line. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (579580) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:43:51 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 17:16:16 2008. There wasn't a fence UNTIL they built AirTrain.So what? And I heard at one time they did charge an extra $2 there when tghe JFK Express still operated. I don't know that for fact though. And even nif they didn't, who cares, before there wasn't AirTrain. |
|
|
| (579583) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:44:32 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 17:16:48 2008. And it's only YOUR OPINION that it's "wrong", "immoral", etc. |
|
|
| (579585) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Mar 2 18:51:16 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 17:16:48 2008. Can it be LEFT? |
|
|
| (579599) | |
Re: bridge over Welland Canal |
|
|
Posted by timz2 on Sun Mar 2 19:11:48 2008, in response to Unfair Tolls: Re: Air Train question, posted by AlM on Sun Mar 2 08:10:03 2008. "Back in the 1950s or whenever there was no canal connecting Lakes Erie and Ontario.The they go and build the Welland Canal through what was plain old dirt, put a bridge over it, and CHARGE A TOLL FOR THE BRIDGE." Any idea where? Any idea how long the toll lasted? |
|
|
| (579605) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:13:32 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:36:08 2008. But you BROUGHT up the reason for the $5 charge was distance based! You said it was because of the EXTENSION from Lefferts that the $5 has to be charged. YOU ARE MAKING IT A DISTANCE BASED ISSUE. Thus we're saying that if you want it to be distance based, then it should be about 50 cents maybe instead of $5. |
|
|
| (579608) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:15:31 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:41:50 2008. No, it is a fact that there is an imaginary line that is being crossed in order to access the free on-property circulator. |
|
|
| (579609) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:17:39 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:43:51 2008. And even nif they didn't, who cares, before there wasn't AirTrain.Do you read anything we post!?!?! The reason people care is that it is a ON-THE-F'ING-PROPERTY FREE CIRCULATOR for which a fence was put up so that they could charge a fare! Do you not see how wrong that is????? |
|
|
| (579610) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:18:33 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 18:44:32 2008. Yes, opinion based upon facts, such as that the circulator is 100% on the property and that no other circulator charges for this service. |
|
|
| (579626) | |
Re: bridge over Welland Canal |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 19:43:42 2008, in response to Re: bridge over Welland Canal, posted by timz2 on Sun Mar 2 19:11:48 2008. Wrong on all accounts - sorry to say.""Back in the 1950s or whenever there was no canal connecting Lakes Erie and Ontario." The Welland Canal is over 179 years old - the first opened in 1829. The 4th & current Welland canal was opened in the 1930s. "The they go and build the Welland Canal through what was plain old dirt, put a bridge over it, and CHARGE A TOLL FOR THE BRIDGE." None of the numerous bridges that cross it or the 2 tunnels that pass under it, charge tolls nor IIRC have they ever.  |
|
|
| (579627) | |
Re: bridge over Welland Canal |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 19:44:10 2008, in response to Re: bridge over Welland Canal, posted by timz2 on Sun Mar 2 19:11:48 2008. Wrong on all accounts - sorry to say.""Back in the 1950s or whenever there was no canal connecting Lakes Erie and Ontario." The Welland Canal is over 179 years old - the first opened in 1829. The 4th & current Welland canal was opened in the 1930s. "The they go and build the Welland Canal through what was plain old dirt, put a bridge over it, and CHARGE A TOLL FOR THE BRIDGE." None of the numerous bridges that cross it or the 2 tunnels that pass under it, charge tolls nor IIRC have they ever. |
|
|
| (579638) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 19:58:14 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:18:33 2008. such as that the circulator is 100% on the propertyOnly if you consider the system to be a "circulator" and that no other circulator charges for this service. So what? |
|
|
| (579642) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:05:21 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:17:39 2008. Do you read anything we post!?!?!We? Who is "we"? Like there is some sort of alliance of "the righteous" here? I do know what YOU and a few other posters post, not that there is some "we" involved against one person (which is also not true. Your insights on this matter are all a matter of opinion, not any fact that is more right than anyone else's comments on this matter. The reason people care is that it is a ON-THE-F'ING-PROPERTY FREE CIRCULATOR for which a fence was put up so that they could charge a fare! "WHO?" are "these people" that care or make a big deal out of this? "Who are "these people"? And that was only put there after their TRAIN was built there, a train that is way more convenient than that which it replaced. Who cares if there used to not be a fence there? That has nothing to do with the present and the new train that was built there to service people. There was no reason to have a fence there before, as there was no train there prior to evade a fare on. And from what I have read, they used to charge $2 there in the 70's when the JFK Express used to run, but I don't know that for fact. (Not that the past has anything to do with the present on a matter such as this). Do you not see how wrong that is????? No, it's not wrong at all, because they are charging for the use of their train. |
|
|
| (579649) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:11:27 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:15:31 2008. But it's not a free on-property "circulator". The circulator is the loop that circulates the airport. It has two paid branches. One of those branches runs through a parking lot that could have been built on the loop, but made much more sense to build on one of the said branches, so they waive the fair to people entering at that station. Since they waive the fare at that station (which was built on the paid branch as a matter of convenience and efficiency), they also allow access in a second station which was not built for the lot in a far out of the way inconvenient location at the far corner of the lot....but since the circulator to a transit station was built there anyway, they decided to also waive the fare at that station for the few people that use that from the aprking lot because it wouldn't make sense to charge them there if they are not charging at the other station. This causes a semantics problem, but the semantics problem is better to have than just denying access to that station all together from the parking lot for the few that may park at that far end of the parking lot, in that inconveient location. |
|
|
| (579651) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:18:20 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 19:13:32 2008. I am not making it a distance based issue. YOU (not we, you are not speaking "for the people"), so the proper phrase is "I am saying") that.It is a FLAT fee system for it's two branches. One of the paid branches happens to pass through one of their parking lots. Instead of making an invonvenient loop through that parking lot, they decided to make the loop smaller, and leave that parking lot out of the main loop, since they were building a branch to a transit station. If they were just building a circulator, they could have just built as far as the lot they were serving, or just make the look a little bigger, but since they were going to be building to a transit station that abuts the airport, they put that parking lot on that paid branch (which makes much more sense operationally, and also design wise). Because they were going to be getting revenue from going all the way to that transit station a short distance more, they designed it this matter. This caused a semantics problem (as already discussed), but the design positives outweighs the semantics problem. So we have an airport circulator with two paid flat fee based branches by this design. |
|
|
| (579653) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:18:58 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:05:21 2008. why can they charge for the use of an on-the property free train!?!?!? |
|
|
| (579654) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:22:04 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:18:58 2008. They don't charge for people in the airport. It's not a free train unless you are on the airport property. It is a free airport circulator with two paid branches, which charge a flat fee for the train's service (a reasonable one too, considering the costs of most other methods of coming to the airport). One of the branches picks up parking lot people for free, as parking in that lot is just like parking at other lots on the airport property. |
|
|
| (579655) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:24:51 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:11:27 2008. But it's not a free on-property "circulator". The circulator is the loop that circulates the airport. It has two paid branches.Nope. A circulator is not by definition a loop. A circulator circulates people throughout the airport grounds. It does not carry people off the grounds as that would be a rapid transit service. The branch to Howard Beach meets all the requirements of a circulator and none of the requirements of a rapid transit line. One of those branches runs through a parking lot that could have been built on the loop, but made much more sense to build on one of the said branches Um, no. The lot is no where near the loop. This causes a semantics problem, but the semantics problem is better to have than just denying access to that station all together from the parking lot for the few that may park at that far end of the parking lot, in that inconveient location. Again you leave out the easy solution of just dropping the fare for subway riders. Instead you'd rather deny parking lot access to the station. That's ridiculous. |
|
|
| (579660) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:36:16 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:18:20 2008. YOU (not we, you are not speaking "for the people")Actually I am speaking for the people. one of the paid branches happens to pass through one of their parking lots. No, sorry, it does not just happen to pass through one of the parking lots. It is 100% fully contained in the long term lot, except for the portion above the road to Fed Circle. The primary purpose of the line is to get people from the long term lots to the terminals. And I believe the ridership numbers would prove that. People would have to be certified nuts to actually pay that $5 rip off if they know about it ahead of time and understand they are getting ripped of BIG TIME. It's an insult to their intelligence. Instead of making an invonvenient loop through that parking lot, they decided to make the loop smaller, and leave that parking lot out of the main loop, since they were building a branch to a transit station. No, you can't seriously believe that they ever wanted the parking lot to be on the main loop and that the main purpose of the HB branch is to serve the (A)!!?!?!?!? f they were just building a circulator, they could have just built as far as the lot they were serving, or just make the look a little bigger, but since they were going to be building to a transit station that abuts the airport, they put that parking lot on that paid branch (which makes much more sense operationally, and also design wise). Because they were going to be getting revenue from going all the way to that transit station a short distance more, they designed it this matter. This caused a semantics problem (as already discussed), but the design positives outweighs the semantics problem. No, I highly doubt it went down in any way like you are saying. No, there is the circulator, a branch with a fee, and a branch with a free station and a station that is both free and has a fee. |
|
|
| (579662) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:38:16 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:22:04 2008. They don't charge for people in the airport.I know! That's the whole point!!!! And if you need to get into the airport property because you are just across the line at the (A) station, they steal $5 from your for that privilege. It's pretty disgusting IMO. |
|
|
| (579665) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sun Mar 2 20:42:36 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 09:30:38 2008. Here's some speculation on my part. Is it possible that the FAA forced the PA to charge a fare/toll at that location because a free NYCT-to-AirTrain transfer would have made AirTrain a mass transit system in the eyes of the FAA? In other words, they would have looked at a free transfer from the (A) to AirTrain at HB in the same way as the (E/F) to the (7) transfer at Roosevelt Av or others like it in the absence of a charge. |
|
|
| (579668) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:51:18 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:24:51 2008. Um, no. The lot is no where near the loop.Right, so they chose to put the parking lot station on their PAID branch to HB. The branch to Howard Beach meets all the requirements of a circulator and none of the requirements of a rapid transit line. Some sort of service is needed to get people from that transit station to the terminals. That is one of two PAID branches of Airtrain. Without that service, it's not like people will just be walking to the terminals. It's a necessary service. Again you leave out the easy solution of just dropping the fare for subway riders. Instead you'd rather deny parking lot access to the station. That's ridiculous. You could also say that instead, they could charge $5 for all the people coming from that parking lot for the one of two PAID branches of AirTrain. We could be arguing a semantics argument about how it's "immoral (or wrong) to be charging people from one parking lot and not the others. No where else does that happen"..... Very easily THAT could be the senario for that PAID branch of airtrain. They chose to waive the fee for the parking lot people as it would cause a greater semantics problem than the one that currently exists. |
|
|
| (579672) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:01:56 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 11:41:21 2008. No it's not, because others can use it from that station for free. Those others are already on the property. Therefor a pedestrian toll is being charged for those who want to cross the property line. This is not done anywhere else in the country that I know of. And for good reason - it's just WRONG! |
|
|
| (579673) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:03:12 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by SMAZ on Sun Mar 2 20:42:36 2008. i wouldn't have any insight into that. if you could dig up some info on that, it would be interesting. but remember, there used to be a free connection from NYCT to the parking lot. |
|
|
| (579677) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:07:54 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 20:51:18 2008. Right, so they chose to put the parking lot station on their PAID branch to HB.No, they chose to run the free branch to the parking lot to the howard beach station of the A. Some sort of service is needed to get people from that transit station to the terminals Says who!?!? That is one of two PAID branches of Airtrain. Without that service, it's not like people will just be walking to the terminals. It's a necessary service. It's not necessary. The rail line was there first, AFAIK. The airport came later. The airport does not have to provide service there. It just so happens that for many years the airport provided a free shuttle bus from the edge of the parking lot to the terminals. Then they went and started charging a fare. There was no need for that. You could also say that instead, they could charge $5 for all the people coming from that parking lot for the one of two PAID branches of AirTrain. No i couldn't! Because no airport charges people to ride from ON THE PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We could be arguing a semantics argument about how it's "immoral (or wrong) to be charging people from one parking lot and not the others. No where else does that happen"..... Very easily THAT could be the senario for that PAID branch of airtrain. They chose to waive the fee for the parking lot people as it would cause a greater semantics problem than the one that currently exists. I doubt that. |
|
|
| (579684) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:20:58 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:07:54 2008. You are absolutly 100% wrong in your opinion. |
|
|
| (579688) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:26:39 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:36:16 2008. Actually I am speaking for the people.Who are these people? People would have to be certified nuts to actually pay that $5 rip off if they know about it ahead of time and understand they are getting ripped of BIG TIME. Uh no. Airtrain provides a very convenient service, and they are NOT getting ripped off at all paying $5 for it's convenience. It blows the hell out of the bus it replaced. No, sorry, it does not just happen to pass through one of the parking lots. It is 100% fully contained in the long term lot, except for the portion above the road to Fed Circle. So what? The service it provides from Howard beach is a great asset, and blows away what was there before. As I said, they could charge for the parking lot people too, but that would cause an even worse semantics problem between that lot and the other lots than we have now with Howard Beach. And that is all it is at HB, a semantics problem. who cares. No, I highly doubt it went down in any way like you are saying. Maybe, maybe not, but ever since Charles brought that up, it made a lot of sense. That whole branch may not have been built had it not been because of the revenue recieved from it to help operate it, and it's VERY conveneint and a great asset for those coming from Howard Beach that that which it replaced. the parking lot could have been just as easily served with buses to Federal circle, but since the connection to Howard Beach (a fee based leg) was going to be there anyway, it made sense to have a parking lot station on it. So NO, the main reason for that branch is not the parking lot, the same could have been done with buses to Federal circle, although less conveneinetly. And since a train to that lot was a good addition, it would have been silly not to connect to HB too, but if it didn't go all the way to Howard Beach, where they could collect a fare, it may not have been worth it to build the whole branch. So either way, however it came down, the extention to Howard beach was probably built as they knew it would get a fare. |
|
|
| (579689) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:26:39 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:20:58 2008. You are absolutly 100% wrong in your opinion. |
|
|
| (579692) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:27:26 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:36:16 2008. Actually I am speaking for the people.Who are these people? People would have to be certified nuts to actually pay that $5 rip off if they know about it ahead of time and understand they are getting ripped of BIG TIME. Uh no. Airtrain provides a very convenient service, and they are NOT getting ripped off at all paying $5 for it's convenience. It blows the hell out of the bus it replaced. No, sorry, it does not just happen to pass through one of the parking lots. It is 100% fully contained in the long term lot, except for the portion above the road to Fed Circle. So what? The service it provides from Howard beach is a great asset, and blows away what was there before. As I said, they could charge for the parking lot people too, but that would cause an even worse semantics problem between that lot and the other lots than we have now with Howard Beach. And that is all it is at HB, a semantics problem. who cares. No, I highly doubt it went down in any way like you are saying. Maybe, maybe not, but ever since Charles brought that up, it made a lot of sense. That whole branch may not have been built had it not been because of the revenue recieved from it to help operate it, and it's VERY conveneint and a great asset for those coming from Howard Beach that that which it replaced. the parking lot could have been just as easily served with buses to Federal circle, but since the connection to Howard Beach (a fee based leg) was going to be there anyway, it made sense to have a parking lot station on it. So NO, the main reason for that branch is not the parking lot, the same could have been done with buses to Federal circle, although less conveneinetly. And since a train to that lot was a good addition, it would have been silly not to connect to HB too, but if it didn't go all the way to Howard Beach, where they could collect a fare, it may not have been worth it to build the whole branch. So either way, however it came down, the extention to Howard beach was probably built as they knew it would get a fare. |
|
|
| (579694) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:30:25 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:26:39 2008. Absolutely not. You are wrong and there is nothing you can say that will convince me that you are not. |
|
|
| (579696) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:36:04 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 20:38:16 2008. I know! That's the whole point!!!! And if you need to get into the airport property because you are just across the line at the (A) station, they steal $5 from your for that privilege. It's pretty disgusting IMO.They don't "steal $5" from you. They charge a fee for a very convenient train, that beats the hell out of what was once there. It's not "disgusting". That this conversation continues however may be "disgusting" as once again, the circle continues. it's not going anywhere in either direction, and neither side seems to be budging (which I already said about 600 posts ago, but somehow I got drawn back into this). |
|
|
| (579700) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:39:07 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:26:39 2008. Who are these people? The people who dislike the $5 ped toll and/or didn't know there was one. Go to HB and you'll see them. Uh no. Airtrain provides a very convenient service, and they are NOT getting ripped off at all paying $5 for it's convenience. It blows the hell out of the bus it replaced. Yes, they are getting ripped off big time. They are paying $5, according to you, to ride from HB to Lefferts, because the PA had to go through the time and expense of extending the line from Lefferts to HB. $5 is a huge rip off for about 30 seconds of riding time. As I said, they could charge for the parking lot people too, but that would cause an even worse semantics problem between that lot and the other lots than we have now with Howard Beach. And that is all it is at HB, a semantics problem. who cares. No, they couldn't, since that's even more in the wrong direction and they would get laughed out of the airport business. That was never and is never an option. Cheating mass transit riders out of $5 is something less people will complain about. The service it provides from Howard beach is a great asset, and blows away what was there before. That doesn't make the pedestrian toll right. That whole branch may not have been built had it not been because of the revenue recieved from it to help operate it, I DISAGREE!!!!!! The revenue from HB is minimal!!!!! Go out there and see how many people get on throgh the HB fare gates vs how many get on for free at HB vs how many get on for free at Lefferts. The amount being cheated out of the $5 is much less than the amount riding for free, from what I have observed. I would welcome official figures. As such, the branch was NOT built because of the revenue from the HB station. It was built because the long term lot is a long way from the terminals and there needed to be a better way to get the people to the terminals! and it's VERY conveneint and a great asset for those coming from Howard Beach "great asset" does not necessarily equal "requires a fee" the parking lot could have been just as easily served with buses to Federal circle, but since the connection to Howard Beach (a fee based leg) was going to be there anyway, it made sense to have a parking lot station on it. No, servicing the parking lot was and is the primary goal of the branch, not serving the (A). Because many people can see what a ripoff it is so they don't use it. So NO, the main reason for that branch is not the parking lot, the same could have been done with buses to Federal circle, although less conveneinetly. No, the main reason for the branch is the long term lot. And since a train to that lot was a good addition, it would have been silly not to connect to HB too, but if it didn't go all the way to Howard Beach, where they could collect a fare, They shouldn't collect a fare there. But they are anyhow. but if it didn't go all the way to Howard Beach, where they could collect a fare, it may not have been worth it to build the whole branch. Nope, it was worth it for the lot. The people and money coming from HB are not significant IMO. So either way, however it came down, the extention to Howard beach was probably built as they knew it would get a fare. Even thogh the fare is not right. |
|
|
| (579701) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:40:32 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:30:25 2008. You are absolutely 100% right in that nothing I can say will change your opinion that I am wrong. But I don't care, lol. I wasn't trying to change your opinion. |
|
|
| (579702) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:41:45 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:36:04 2008. It's disgusting that they charge $5 to get onto the property to ride a free ON THE PROPERTY circulator. You can not deny that the entire HB branch is ON THE PROPERTY. |
|
|
| (579703) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:42:00 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:01:56 2008. WE HAVE DISCUSSED ALL THE ABOVE ALREADY. Why should I repeat what I already said about that? But apparently I must.No it's not, because others can use it from that station for free. Yes, they could either charge the parking lot people on that PAID branch of Airtrain, or they could waive it for the parking lot people as they have. Not waiving it would have been a bigger semantics problem than the present one. Therefor a pedestrian toll is being charged for those who want to cross the property line. It's a FEE to use their airtrain on that line. Not to mention, they used to charge $2 there when the JFK Express used to run from what I hear. This is not done anywhere else in the country that I know of. Who cares, and there is nothing that says a fee can't be charged for a "circulator" or for an extention of said circulator. What happens elsewhere is irrelavent. And for good reason - it's just WRONG! No it's not, that's an opinion. An opinion that has no more push than an opinion that it's justified. |
|
|
| (579707) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:46:29 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:41:45 2008. THE HOWARD BEACH BRANCH IS SEPERATE AND APART FROM THE CIRCULATOR. Maybe it would help you to think of it as an amusement park where all the rides are free and there is no admission charge but there is a fee to park your car. |
|
|
| (579708) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:46:43 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:42:00 2008. Yes, they could either charge the parking lot people on that PAID branch of Airtrain, or they could waive it for the parking lot people as they have. Not waiving it would have been a bigger semantics problem than the present one.There's no reason is has to be a paid branch by default. In fact, it's a free branch by default. You just pay a ped toll to get onto the property. That's a fact. It's a FEE to use their airtrain on that line. That's what they want you to think, but it's not true. If it was a fee to use airtrain, then everyone would have to pay it. They don't. The people being carried from the subway or from the west end of the parking lot are receiving the SAME EXACT SERVICE, yet are being charged differently. It's obvious. Who cares, and there is nothing that says a fee can't be charged for a "circulator" or for an extention of said circulator. What happens elsewhere is irrelavent. It's called precedent. There is none. No it's not, that's an opinion. An opinion that has no more push than an opinion that it's justified. Right. The unanimous decision of every airport in the country in this situation is that the on-property circulator is free, and that no fare is charged from adjacent transit stations. JFK is going against the unanimous decision. |
|
|
| (579709) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:48:26 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:46:29 2008. No, the free circulator circulates people around the airport property. Last time I checked, the long term lot was on airport property. |
|
|
| (579710) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Mar 2 21:51:32 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:48:26 2008. Long term parking is not served by the circulator. Should it? That's a whole other issue. See, you're still incorrect. |
|
|
| (579711) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:52:15 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:07:54 2008. No, they chose to run the free branch to the parking lot to the howard beach station of the A.Oh, so you mean they chose to extend the branch to Howard Beach? I just WONDER if they only did that because they could charge a fare? Hmmm. Says who!?!? So you think all those people would walk from the NYCT station? A lot less people would be using it if that was required. Let's see...what's better. NO SERVICE (I am responding to a post that says "Some sort of service is needed to get them to the terminals" and the reply was "Says who") would mean people would have to walk. They used to have an inconvenient bus, but they improved the service with a reliable train with a 10 minute trip to the terminals. Sounds better than walking to me. It's not necessary. The rail line was there first, AFAIK. The airport came later. The airport does not have to provide service there. Oh stop it. Now you are pulling at straws. It just so happens that for many years the airport provided a free shuttle bus from the edge of the parking lot to the terminals. From what I hear there was a $2 fee at one time from the JFK express. I don't know that as fact (which I had stated the first 3 times I posted it), but I have mentioned it about 6 times now with NO response (ignoring perhaps?) so I am going to assume that is correct. But even so, SO WHAT? They replaced the inconvenient and less reliable bus with AirTrain, which is capabable of moving a lot more people a lot more reliably and efficiently. Many more people would consider a rail connection over a bus connection, especially as seemless in all weather conditions as Airtrain. No i couldn't! Because no airport charges people to ride from ON THE PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO CARES? We are talking about JFK Airport. Other airports are irrelevant. Many airports don't even have a system such as Airtrain. I doubt that. Oh really? Then it just "must" not be true, because YOU doubt that. |
|
|
| (579716) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 22:07:47 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:39:07 2008. The people who dislike the $5 ped toll and/or didn't know there was one. Go to HB and you'll see them.Oh really? You mean like the people that don't like the current raise in LIRR fares, or the fare for the subway, or the cost of gasoline? People like that? I am glad you have the power to "speak for the people". LMAO. Yes, they are getting ripped off big time. They are paying $5, according to you, to ride from HB to Lefferts, because the PA had to go through the time and expense of extending the line from Lefferts to HB. $5 is a huge rip off for about 30 seconds of riding time.\ No rip off at all. They are free to walk from the gate at the Lefferts entrance if they would like to from North Conduit Ave. Or they can take the less convenient Q10. Many options out there. For those that enjoy the seemless connection of AirTrain can use that. there are many of them. No one is forcing anyone to use it. That doesn't make the pedestrian toll right. That's because it's a fee for the use of AirTrain. I DISAGREE!!!!!! The revenue from HB is minimal!!!!! Go out there and see how many people get on throgh the HB fare gates vs how many get on for free at HB vs how many get on for free at Lefferts. Oh, so it's not much of a problem then. "Only minimal" people get on there anyway so says you. The amount being cheated out of the $5 is much less than the amount riding for free, from what I have observed. I would welcome official figures. Right, not many people are getting cheated. They aren't getting cheated because they are paying a fee for a very convenient connection of a train that will take themn seamlessly to their terminal in 10 minutes. Oh those "poor" people. "great asset" does not necessarily equal "requires a fee" Right, espeicially when the great asset may not have been even built if not for the revenues it would collect. It was built because the long term lot is a long way from the terminals and there needed to be a better way to get the people to the terminals! ... No, the main reason for the branch is the long term lot. ... No, servicing the parking lot was and is the primary goal of the branch, not serving the (A). ... Nope, it was worth it for the lot. Nope, the same could have been done with buses to Federal Circle. Less efficiently and not as well, but could have been done. That would have severely screwed A train people though. Because many people can see what a ripoff it is so they don't use it. SOURCE please? They shouldn't collect a fare there. But they are anyhow. Thanks for your OPINION, but we have heard that already. The people and money coming from HB are not significant IMO. Source? And Thanks for your OPINION, but we have heard that already. Even thogh the fare is not right. See above. |
|
|
| (579717) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 22:10:42 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:41:45 2008. I think I answered that numerous times already. It's irrelevant if it's on the property. It's irrelevant if they do it at other airports, many of which don't even have a system such as AirTrain, and that has been discussed at nauseum already in this thread.It's disgusting Appreciate your OPINION, but we heard that already. |
|
|
| (579718) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 22:19:02 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Mar 2 21:46:43 2008. There's no reason is has to be a paid branch by default.No, that is true. In fact, it's a free branch by default. No, that is false. It's neither a pay or non-pay by default. It's whatever it's decided it is. It's an OPINION to say that either of those are more factual than the other. You just pay a ped toll to get onto the property. That's a fact. No it's not, it's a fee to use AirTrain. That's what they want you to think, but it's not true. If it was a fee to use airtrain, then everyone would have to pay it. They don't. The people being carried from the subway or from the west end of the parking lot are receiving the SAME EXACT SERVICE, yet are being charged differently. It's obvious. Wow. We discussed this earlier. You must have missed it. Please click "view flat" to see this addressed many times above. It's called precedent. There is none. A precedent? LOL!!! It's irrelevant what is done elsewhere. Right. The unanimous decision of every airport in the country in this situation is that the on-property circulator is free, and that no fare is charged from adjacent transit stations. The Howard Beach branch is not a circulator. It's a PAID branch of the system, in which they waive the fee for the parking lot people. Making the parking lot people pay too would be a worse semantics problem (considering the other parking lots on in the airport) than what is there now with the semantics of the HB station set up. JFK is going against the unanimous decision. Oh they took a vote on it? And what they do elsewhere is irrelevant. Many systems don't even have a system like airtrain. If the A train ended at Federal circle I would say otherwise. |
|
|
| (579754) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Mar 3 00:38:20 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:52:15 2008. From what I hear there was a $2 fee at one time from the JFK expressWhen the subway fare was $1, there was an extra $1 charge on "The Train to The Bus to The Plane". They dropped the premium in its latter years. |
|
|
| (579758) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Mar 3 00:49:13 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Mar 2 21:36:04 2008. I think that this is the longest thread without thread-drift since I've been on SubChat. |
|
|
| (579759) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Mar 3 00:49:33 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by SMAZ on Mon Mar 3 00:49:13 2008. That is probably true. |
|
|
| (579820) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 3 07:30:56 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by SMAZ on Mon Mar 3 00:38:20 2008. No, I don't think so, the JFK Ecpress was more than $1 more than the subway fare. They used to collect the money on the train, IINM, but it was more than $1. When the Rockaway branch was first added to the system, an exit swipe I believe was required for all Rockaway stations, making the fare double, but that's a whole different topic, and nothing to do with this $2 thing I heard about at Howard Beach. |
|
|
| (579842) | |
Re: Air Train question |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Mon Mar 3 09:27:04 2008, in response to Re: Air Train question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Mar 3 07:30:56 2008. I remember it costing more, or at least reading then that it did cost more and I recall the trains being mostly very empty, but I don't recall how much more for the JFK Express. It's probably listed on older maps, I'd think. |
|
|
|
Page 17 of 29 |
||
