Angels Flight announces price hike as iconic L.A. railway becomes latest victim of inflation
Angels Flight Railway has endured sweeping changes over decades ferrying passengers up and down a hill in downtown Los Angeles — but even it isn't immune to the pressures of inflation.
The iconic funicular railway has announced that fares will increase from $1.00 to $1.50 starting June 1 to keep pace with the rising cost of insurance, maintenance and labor. A souvenir round trip will be available for $3 and L.A. Metro TAP Card users can continue to ride at half price.
This is the first price increase since 2017 and officials say they do not anticipate another being necessary for the foreseeable future.
'Angels Flight is not just a mode of transportation — it's a living piece of Los Angeles history,' Hal Bastian, president of the nonprofit Angels Flight Railway Foundation, said in a statement. 'This fare change will allow us to continue serving our community while maintaining the safety and heritage of the world's shortest railway.'
The funicular has dealt with its fair share of maintenance and safety challenges over the years, most notably a terrifying 2001 accident when a car broke loose at the top of the track and plummeted to the bottom of the hill — killing an 83-year-old tourist from New Jersey and injuring seven others.
Investigators later concluded that faulty mechanical systems, combined with weak oversight, were to blame.
Tickets cost just a penny when the train opened in 1901, offering commuters a practical way to navigate the steep terrain between ritzy Bunker Hill housing and downtown Los Angeles offices. The railway carried about 4,000 passengers daily before shutting down in 1969 when Bunker Hill's historic housing was razed to make way for skyscrapers.
The railway reopened in 1996, half a block from its original location, to offer tourists and residents the opportunity to sample a unique piece of L.A. history. Tickets to ride the revived Angels Flight between Hill Street and California Plaza cost 25 cents then.
However, the railway shut down once again following the 2001 incident. It took nine years to get the troubled train back in commission and it continued to be plagued by problems.
Angels Flight closed temporarily in 2011 due to wear on the cars' tires. Two years later, the railway was shut down indefinitely following a derailment that September, with no injuries reported, and a subsequent safety report by the National Transportation Safety Board.
The funicular returned to the limelight in 2016, when Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone rode it for the film 'La La Land.' A year later, it reopened to the public with new safety standards in place. Since then, no significant issues have been reported.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Yahoo
Where Is the Safest Place to Sit on a Plane? Experts Answer
An airplane aisle providing a view of passengers in their seats. Credit - Constantine Johnny—Getty Images It's the age-old question of passengers—where is the safest place one can sit on a plane? While people often prioritize leg-room or proximity to the bathroom when it comes to air travel, others may think a little more deeply when it comes to their seat selection. This rings especially true when you consider how one man—Viswashkumar Ramesh—was the sole survivor of an Air India flight crash that resulted in the deaths of the other 241 people on board. Ramesh, who was travelling with his brother, was seated in 11a on the journey from Ahmedabad to London. His survival has reignited conversations about air travel and seat selections. The general consensus has been that sitting in the middle or at the rear of a plane is statistically safer. A 2017 National Transportation Safety Board study that investigated 20 plane crashes since 1971 found that those sitting in the back of the plane had a higher chance of staying alive than those in the front. Additionally, those placed nearby the wing also had a better chances of survival. Meanwhile, a study conducted by TIME in 2015 found that the middle seats in the back of the aircraft were those with the lowest fatality rates, the worst-faring seats were on the aisle in the middle third of the cabin. Read More: What to Know About the Air India Crash and the 'Miracle' of Its Sole Survivor But how does that account for Ramesh sitting near the front of the plane and being the sole survivor? Steve Wright, a former systems and software engineer in the commercial aerospace industry and a former associate professor of avionics and aircraft systems at UWE Bristol, has often pondered on the "safest seat" question. For Wright, the Air India survival story was 'unusual' for a number of reasons. He says that although sitting towards the front of an aircraft can typically be 'dodgy' in terms of survival chances, the accident in India was 'atypical.' 'When an aircraft goes [down], it's usually nose first, which is, of course, why seat 11a would be [among] the first to [feel the impact],' Wright says. But the Air India flight 'sunk' into the ground with 'the nose up.' Wright attributes Ramesh's survival to being 'ironically, partly because he was at the front.' Whereas the traditional instances where a plane goes nose first, the front of the airplane is known to act "as a shock absorber," according to John Hansman, an aeronautics and astronautics professor at MIT. Wright says usually, though, the safest place on the airplane is near the wings of the plane, where there is more 'structural support' to protect a passenger in case of an emergency. Jim Braucle, an aviation attorney with Motley Rice Law firm, says that from diagrams he has seen, Ramesh's seat was right next to an emergency exit and in front of the plane's wing. This seat, next to a window, was just behind the business class section on the Boeing 787. 'Structurally on the airplane, the strongest part is obviously where the wings come in,' Braucle says. 'And he was close to an exit—I know he didn't exit because he was behind some rubble, but those areas are reinforced so that, in the case of an accident, the door doesn't get deformed, so people can escape.' In an exit row, Braucle says, the additional space provided could save lives, as well. 'As stuff starts collapsing and falling or people fall back in their seats... I know it's not much, but I think those inches count,' he notes. In agreement, Wright points out that being near an emergency exit is pertinent, considering most emergencies he knows of are not related to crashes, but rather the result of incidents on the tarmac. 'The most likely danger you will [face] on an aircraft is on the tarmac when something has gone wrong, potentially a fire,' Wright says. 'It kind of doesn't matter which exit it is, in that sense, but essentially, you want to get off that plane as quickly as possible.' Read More: Boeing's 787 Dreamliner Has a Long History of Safety Concerns Wright also argues that though life vests are mandated on aircrafts, smoke hoods should also be included, to protect passengers in the event of an emergency. Mary Schiavo, an aviation lawyer and the former Inspector General of the Department of Transportation, says that after years of working with people who have survived plane crashes—and after writing a book on how to fly safe—she now always attempts to get a seat in the exit row. She also makes an effort to have a smoke hood as part of her carry-on, and tries to wear long sleeves and pants. 'The people I've worked with who have had to fight their way out of plane crashes have said they wish they had more protection on,' she explains. Schiavo always makes sure she knows how to open the emergency door of the plane, taking into account that different aircraft may have varying emergency exit mechanisms. If she cannot get a seat in an exit row, she tries to get a seat in the immediate rows behind, since her studies have shown that in the event of an emergency, passengers will push forward towards an exit. 'If you do sit in an exit row, you need to take it seriously,' Schiavo says, emphasizing that being able to reach an exit or find your way through a crack during an emergency can make all the difference. Every airplane emergency, though, unfolds differently. If Ramesh's story shows anything, it is that survival in a plane crash can be less about where one sits, and more about how exactly the plane crashes—something no passenger can predict. Should a door get ripped off mid-flight, the exit row might not be as safe of a place as previously described. What's safest in this instance is different from what would be safest in an emergency water landing. This is why the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advises passengers to listen to their crew and pilot, and in the case of an emergency, locate and utilize exit rows. Passengers should also take the time to review and familiarize themselves with the passenger safety cards before takeoff. Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
13-06-2025
- Time Magazine
The Safest Place to Sit on a Plane, According to Experts
It's the age-old question of passengers—where is the safest place one can sit on a plane? While people often prioritize leg-room or proximity to the bathroom when it comes to air travel, others may think a little more deeply when it comes to their seat selection. This rings especially true when you consider how one man—Viswashkumar Ramesh— was the sole survivor of an Air India flight crash that resulted in the deaths of the other 241 people on board. Ramesh, who was travelling with his brother, was seated in 11a on the journey from Ahmedabad to London. His survival has reignited conversations about air travel and seat selections. The general consensus has been that sitting in the middle or at the rear of a plane is statistically safer. A 2017 National Transportation Safety Board study that investigated 20 plane crashes since 1971 found that those sitting in the back of the plane had a higher chance of staying alive than those in the front. Additionally, those placed nearby the wing also had a better chances of survival. Meanwhile, a study conducted by TIME in 2015 found that the middle seats in the back of the aircraft were those with the lowest fatality rates, the worst-faring seats were on the aisle in the middle third of the cabin. But how does that account for Ramesh sitting near the front of the plane and being the sole survivor? Here's what expects have to say about the safest place to sit on a plane Steve Wright, a former systems and software engineer in the commercial aerospace industry and a former associate professor of avionics and aircraft systems at UWE Bristol, has often pondered on the "safest seat" question. For Wright, the Air India survival story was 'unusual' for a number of reasons. He says that although sitting towards the front of an aircraft can typically be 'dodgy' in terms of survival chances, the accident in India was 'atypical.' 'When an aircraft goes [down], it's usually nose first, which is, of course, why seat 11a would be [among] the first to [feel the impact],' Wright says. But the Air India flight 'sunk' into the ground with 'the nose up.' Wright attributes Ramesh's survival to being 'ironically, partly because he was at the front.' Whereas the traditional instances where a plane goes nose first, the front of the airplane is known to act " as a shock absorber," according to John Hansman, an aeronautics and astronautics professor at MIT. Wright says usually, though, the safest place on the airplane is near the wings of the plane, where there is more 'structural support' to protect a passenger in case of an emergency. Jim Braucle, an aviation attorney with Motley Rice Law firm, says that from diagrams he has seen, Ramesh's seat was right next to an emergency exit and in front of the plane's wing. This seat, next to a window, was just behind the business class section on the Boeing 787. 'Structurally on the airplane, the strongest part is obviously where the wings come in,' Braucle says. 'And he was close to an exit—I know he didn't exit because he was behind some rubble, but those areas are reinforced so that, in the case of an accident, the door doesn't get deformed, so people can escape.' In an exit row, Braucle says, the additional space provided could save lives, as well. 'As stuff starts collapsing and falling or people fall back in their seats... I know it's not much, but I think those inches count,' he notes. In agreement, Wright points out that being near an emergency exit is pertinent, considering most emergencies he knows of are not related to crashes, but rather the result of incidents on the tarmac. 'The most likely danger you will [face] on an aircraft is on the tarmac when something has gone wrong, potentially a fire,' Wright says. 'It kind of doesn't matter which exit it is, in that sense, but essentially, you want to get off that plane as quickly as possible.' How else can you attempt to have a safe flight? Wright also argues that though life vests are mandated on aircrafts, smoke hoods should also be included, to protect passengers in the event of an emergency. Mary Schiavo, an aviation lawyer and the former Inspector General of the Department of Transportation, says that after years of working with people who have survived plane crashes—and after writing a book on how to fly safe—she now always attempts to get a seat in the exit row. She also makes an effort to have a smoke hood as part of her carry-on, and tries to wear long sleeves and pants. 'The people I've worked with who have had to fight their way out of plane crashes have said they wish they had more protection on,' she explains. Schiavo always makes sure she knows how to open the emergency door of the plane, taking into account that different aircraft may have varying emergency exit mechanisms. If she cannot get a seat in an exit row, she tries to get a seat in the immediate rows behind, since her studies have shown that in the event of an emergency, passengers will push forward towards an exit. 'If you do sit in an exit row, you need to take it seriously,' Schiavo says, emphasizing that being able to reach an exit or find your way through a crack during an emergency can make all the difference. Every airplane emergency, though, unfolds differently. If Ramesh's story shows anything, it is that survival in a plane crash can be less about where one sits, and more about how exactly the plane crashes—something no passenger can predict. Should a door get ripped off mid-flight, the exit row might not be as safe of a place as previously described. What's safest in this instance is different from what would be safest in an emergency water landing. This is why the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advises passengers to listen to their crew and pilot, and in the case of an emergency, locate and utilize exit rows. Passengers should also take the time to review and familiarize themselves with the passenger safety cards before takeoff.
New York Post
26-05-2025
- New York Post
Chopper tours around NYC would be banned under new federal bill: ‘We owe it to the victims'
Helicopter tours around New York City would be banned under a federal bill recently introduced by local Congress members — less than a month after a fatal crash killed a Spanish family and their pilot. The proposed bipartisan Improving Helicopter Safety Act — introduced May 5 by Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rob Menendez (D-NJ) and Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) — would bar all 'non-essential' helicopters within a 20-mile radius of the Statue of Liberty. 4 Helicopter tours around New York City would be scrapped for good under a new federal bill introduced earlier this month. PhotoSpirit – The bill — targeting flights used for recreation, tourism and luxury commuting – was introduced after the tragic crash in the Hudson River that killed a tourist mom, dad and their three young kids, as well as the pilot, April 10. The legislation would take effect 60 days after being signed into law. 'While we have consistently worked to address the impact of non-essential helicopters on our communities, last month's tragic crash should be a clarion call for every level of government to take action on helicopter safety,' Menendez said in a statement. 'Rising congestion of non-essential helicopters, coupled with concerning safety records of air tourism operators, are causing a direct threat to public safety. 'Along with my colleagues from New Jersey and New York, we're doing what is necessary to prevent tragedies like this from happening again,' the rep said. Choppers that would still be allowed to fly around the city under the bill include those used by police, disaster response, medical and other emergency crews and those employed for research, news and film. 4 How The Post reported Manhattan's latest chopper tragedy. The Big Apple sightseeing company New York Helicopter Tours shut down days after the deadly crash involving one of its choppers. New York Helicopter Tours CEO Michael Roth confirmed to The Post that his company was ceasing operations at the demand of the Federal Aviation Administration. The doomed helicopter was on its eighth flight of the day when it broke apart in the air and crashed into the Hudson, according to the National Transportation Safety Board. The last inspection date for the chopper was March 1. After the crash, US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) applauded the move by the FAA but noted 'much work remains to be done.' Schumer said the FAA must conduct more inspections of tourist helicopter companies and consider other questions about the industry going forward. 4 The doomed helicopter was on its eighth flight of the day when it broke apart in the air and crashed into the Hudson, according to the National Transportation Safety Board. AP The grassroots organization Stop The Chop, which has sought for years to ground the city's roughly 30,000 tourist helicopter flights over environmental impacts and noise, hailed the federal bill. The proposal is 'common sense federal legislation that will, when passed, finally put an end to the dangerous helicopter conditions in the New York metropolitan area,' the group said in a statement. Last month, the New York City Council passed a bill banning non-essential helicopter flights from city-owned heliports unless they meet FAA noise standards, although the law won't take effect until December 2029. 4 At least 38 people have died in chopper crashes in the Big Apple since 1977. ozerkina – Supporters of a tourist-chopper ban argue that the tragic incident last month wasn't an isolated incident, with at least 38 fatalities tied to helicopter crashes in New York City since 1977, according to The Associated Press. 'It was the latest in a long line of preventable tragedies in the New York metropolitan region's increasingly crowded and poorly regulated airspace,' Nadler said. 'For far too long, non-essential helicopter flights have endangered public safety and shattered the peace of our neighborhoods. We owe it to the victims, and to every resident living beneath these flight paths, to put safety first and prevent future disasters.' — Additional reporting by David Propper
