Damaged M-8s near Bridgeport

Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, Jeff Smith, FL9AC

Ridgefielder
Posts: 2686
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 7:22 pm
Location: Harlem Division MP 15

Re: Damaged M-8s near Bridgeport

Post by Ridgefielder » Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:51 pm

Trainer wrote:Apparently, commuter railroads either operate under the assumption that people do not have any choice but to travel on their system or they don't care if people choose to travel on them or not. MNCC has made several choices over the past few years (with a couple exceptions) that may be operationally sound but customer unfocused. Imnsho, it's because they believe that with a captive audience and a perpetual subsidy, short-term operational efficiencies are the only things that matter. It'll be interesting to see if that theory holds as the commuting public and their destinations evolve.
From personal observation, 90% of the regular commuters aren't looking out the window to begin with. They're either asleep or focused on their newspaper/magazine/book/electronic device.

And even if he does happen to be looking out the window for the couple of seconds it takes to pass the East Bridgeport yard, I'm willing to bet that the first thought through the mind of the average non-railfan passenger when he sees a car covered in a tarp is going to be "Oh my God, wreck-damaged equipment!!" More likely he thinks "guess they're painting it" or "I wonder why that is on there," then goes to back to pondering the derelict factories and weed-grown empty lots that make up the rest of the scenery in those parts.

Clean Cab
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: South Dennis Massachusetts

Re: Damaged M-8s near Bridgeport

Post by Clean Cab » Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:35 pm

Does this rather bland topic deserve so much discussion?
I'm stuck on a sandbar on Cape Cod, and I couldn't be happier!!!

Bill D
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:57 pm

Re: Damaged M-8s near Bridgeport

Post by Bill D » Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:03 pm

Ridgefielder wrote: From personal observation, 90% of the regular commuters aren't looking out the window to begin with. They're either asleep or focused on their newspaper/magazine/book/electronic device.

And even if he does happen to be looking out the window for the couple of seconds it takes to pass the East Bridgeport yard, I'm willing to bet that the first thought through the mind of the average non-railfan passenger when he sees a car covered in a tarp is going to be "Oh my God, wreck-damaged equipment!!" More likely he thinks "guess they're painting it" or "I wonder why that is on there," then goes to back to pondering the derelict factories and weed-grown empty lots that make up the rest of the scenery in those parts.
From my experience traveling through Bridgeport on occasional weekday trains, I would agree with your observations. Nobody (except us railfan types) really care about what is parked along the tracks. The cars have a silver tarp covering them, which I think does a good job of blending in with the car color, effectively camouflaging the damage. Unless you are focused on seeing those cars, you would probably not even notice them.
Clean Cab wrote:Does this rather bland topic deserve so much discussion?
No, we're just bored.

Bill

Trainer
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:29 am
Location: Western CT

Re: Damaged M-8s near Bridgeport

Post by Trainer » Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:38 pm

pbass wrote:Jaap said it:there aren't any places on Metro-North where these wreck damaged cars may be held without the public being able to catch sight of them while awaiting all the legal claims to be settled and then they will be sent away for scrapping.Does someone have room in their basement for them?
No, that's not what Dutch said.

But otherwise, the novel points being raised (it's standard practice, planes are not trains, and commuters do not look out the window) don't detract from the conclusion that public perception is just not a commuter railroad priority, and likely for the reasons previously cited. It's just not seen as worth the effort to find a better place to store the wrecked trains, let alone move them. If this was framed as a challenge to suggest better places to put them, I know that the knowledgable folks here could suggest a half dozen better places.

Prioritizing operational efficiency is not a bad thing at all, provided that the public is benefiting from it. They'll happily board the train and avoid the window view if they're reliably getting to work on time every day, and MNCR's record is admirable over the years in providing that. But if the trains don't run because it's too hot, or too cold, or too wet, or too dry, or too old, or too new, or there's worker fatalities, or fill in the blank, then public perception becomes a political football that ends up on Channel 2 News the next time there's an accident. When reporters start taking pictures of those wrecked trains in public view in context with other issues, they'll be moved within 48 hours.

Return to “MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail”