Home · Maps · About
Home > SubChat
 

[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[ First in Thread | Next in Thread ]

 

view flat

Re: Canarsie CBTC

Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 17 16:45:42 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 17 07:53:51 2005.

edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr
That, plus the reduction in maintenance and reliance on
equipment which only one compasny in the US is capable of manufacturing anymore.

CBTC is far cheaper to maintain than the type of equipment used now. It isn't just insulated joints; it's the relays
that run to $60 million worth of equipment to control just 2,000 feet of route (Chambers St as example).

Now that conclusively proves that you either don't want to listen
to other people's arguments, or you can't follow them.

I went through the trouble of explaining why "eliminating relays"
could not be legitimately argued to be an exclusive benefit of CBTC,
and in the direct follow-up post, you bring up this argument again.
It's like talking to the wall. Why don't YOU do some research and
tell us the truth about the relative relay consumption among different
signal technologies including CBTC.

And there are at least TWO US manufacturers of conventional relays,
for what it is worth: SAFETRAN and US&S (although US&S is in fact
owned by a French company, there are still many English-speaking
people employed in this country whom you can talk to).

If the TA needs to order a replacement part for Canarsie's CBTC
system, how many US manufacturers can provide it?

you're also a liar.
To claim that I'm a liar, you should demonstrate something which
I said which I knew to be untrue. Having a different opinion than
you does not make one a liar.

And, BTW, if you would like to tell us all what Siemens is doing,
please go ahead and do so.

Responses

Post a New Response

Your Handle:

Your Password:

E-Mail Address:

Subject:

Message:



Before posting.. think twice!


[ Return to the Message Index ]