Home · Maps · About
Home > SubChat
 

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

 

view flat

Re: R46 Technology (was: Re: R-160 Update)

Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Sep 24 17:14:11 2006, in response to Re: R46 Technology (was: Re: R-160 Update), posted by J trainloco on Sun Sep 24 16:50:38 2006.

edf40wrjww2msgDetail:detailStr
fiogf49gjkf0d
"The R44/46 was a car order that when combined featured about 1000 75' cars. That's 125 trains, far more than the SAS would ever need. My question is: why order so many cars with ATO capability?"

Because the R44/46 wasn't just for the SAS. It was for the SAS Plus the 63rd Street Line as originally envisioned in the 1960s (which would have been of substantial length). That's two new major subway lines; three services if you count the extension of the Q train. 125 trainsets is not too many trains for three lines.

"Every plan that potentially could have opened up service in the outer boros where there was none was either shot down (Astoria to LGA)"

Astoria to LGA is a poor example. It would help the local folks get to the airport, but it would not have covered enough ground to do much else (I think the project is worthwhile, by the way). A better example is one of the projects Edwards! talked about, or the completion of the Archer av line as originally envisioned.

" or built in such a way that it doesn't help the locals (Airtrain)."

False statement, since a) airTrain was a PA project, not an MTA project and b) AirTrain is a shining example of just how a project can help the entire city and every neighborhoods served by subway or commuter rail. Its associated improvements to Jamaica Station have directly helped not only all subway riders but the Jamaica community specifically.




Responses

Post a New Response

Your Handle:

Your Password:

E-Mail Address:

Subject:

Message:



Before posting.. think twice!


[ Return to the Message Index ]