|
|
| Re: R211a sets (1633711) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Jul 6 13:10:54 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Sat Jul 6 01:09:00 2024. Out of all the trains we timed one made it in only 6 1/2 so the director of schedules whose initials are AEF decided to make the timetable runtime 6 1/2 min meaning all the trains would be late. Relying on the performance of one reckless T/O is not an intelligent way to operate and thank goodness, he is no longer around to infect the transit system with his incompetence.Here's a 40 year old anecdote from a friend who was a train operator and TWU shop steward. There was an R38 that always finished its route about 5 minutes ahead of schedule. It made no difference when it ran nor who the operator was. The TA eventually broke the train apart and exchanged cars with other trainsets. "Problem solved". Trains have been known to come out of the yard with a few non-functioning motors. Such trains will have lower balancing speeds and lower service braking rates. They will not be able to operate at the same speed as a trainset with all motors functioning, even with identical movements of the brake and throttle handles. It may well be that the 6 1/2 minute train was operating on all its motors, whereas the rest of the fleet wasn't. If the fast operation between Nevins and Franklin were repeated between other stations, it's likely 1 or more trainsets would be required to operate a rush hour schedule. This is a considerable cost savings. A thorough investigation of why a large percentage of trips cannot maintain a schedule might properly reveal the cause as poorly maintained equipment, rather than placing the blame of train operators or schedule makers. That investigation would not take place, if the schedule were padded to hide the equipment fault. |
|
|
|