Home  Maps  About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]

< Previous Page  

Page 5 of 9

Next Page >  

(1146769)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 04:13:50 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by 3-9 on Mon Mar 26 01:56:46 2012.

Prior to Chrystie and for a short period thereafter. All IND local line in non rush and Sat were 4 cars and midnights and Sun were 3 cars. Once a significant number of married pairs were on the lines, 4 car trains became the off peak standard.

(1146784)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 26 09:14:54 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by WillD on Sun Mar 25 15:37:14 2012.

WAIT!
WAIT A MINUTE!
It can be done by rail!
Send a pair of LIRR DMUs through Penn Station, through the Hudson Tunnels, interconnect to Bayonne, over the lift bridge, rebuild the west side line to Tottenville, and your expensive truck is solved.

(1146790)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Mar 26 10:09:36 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 26 09:14:54 2012.

IIRC, trucks are cheaper than boats or non-NYCT rail.

(1146799)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 26 11:18:37 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 04:09:04 2012.

Would Park place have platforms in both directions or just the s/b side?

(1146802)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 26 11:32:48 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Mar 26 10:09:36 2012.

Exactly my point.
When were the last RR ferries used ?

(1146804)

view threaded

Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Mar 26 11:45:05 2012, in response to And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by G1Ravage on Fri Mar 23 18:07:14 2012.

- Hyundai-Rotem did look in this contract, but they really didnt bid.

- Bombardier will build the cars (including car shells) in Plattsburgh, NY plant. Most of the work will be in NY.

Car delivery scheduled....
Q4 2014 ... 10 car test

Q2 2015 ... actual car delivery begins

Q4 2016 ... last car delivery arrives

MTA is not going to waste more money to overhaul the R32 & R42 cars.

(1146806)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Mar 26 11:56:56 2012, in response to Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Mar 26 11:45:05 2012.

This contract has been moved to the MTA Board. Expect to approve by Wednesday.

(1146819)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 13:41:56 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by grand concourse on Mon Mar 26 11:18:37 2012.

Park Pl was originally an island platform, rebuild it back that way!

(1146824)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by R32_3671 on Mon Mar 26 14:14:10 2012, in response to Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Mar 26 11:45:05 2012.

I still doubt they will replace all the R32s, rerember we are going to loose 64 R46s to SI (doesn't make any sense at all just give them new cars) and the 2nd ave subway, the amount of R179s is not enough to replace everything, 300 cars is not enough, there are currently 240 R32s on TA property, 220 of them are used, and 64 R42s. On TA property 48 of them are used, 64 R46s going to SI would create a car shortage if they replaced all R32s, 64 R46s is like loosing 7-8 sets of trains

(1146835)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by J trainloco on Mon Mar 26 16:31:38 2012, in response to Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by R32_3671 on Mon Mar 26 14:14:10 2012.

The R46 to SI thing is not set in stone, and the R179 will not replace the R32 on a 1:1 basis.

(1146845)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 17:07:02 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by grand concourse on Sun Mar 25 21:15:15 2012.

The J and M don't need it, waste of money. We need to refurbish disgusting stations system wide moreso, like the 4 Archers, Chambers, and Bowery.

For the L, it would be easier to retrofit for 9 cars trains, then mix 4 & 5 cars sets of Alstom NTT's, or upgrade R143 to be compatible with Kawasaki R160.

(1146848)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 17:17:59 2012, in response to Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by R32_3671 on Mon Mar 26 14:14:10 2012.

R32 sharp margin is about 35% (18 * 8/ 222). They put out about 4 or 5 R42's a day, so 20 - 40% with them,. That will go to 10% with the R179, so only 250 cars replace 272 R32/R42. There are 50 cars for either some SIR/R44SI replacement or Q train extension to 96th/2nd.

TA has over-scrapped many times before (R30GOH, R32's) and they'll do it again.

Worst comes to worst, if they are short 50 cars, the can cherry-pick 50 R32's for the Z until the R211.

(1146849)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Mar 26 17:29:15 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 26 11:32:48 2012.

For SIR? Probably the GOH of the early nineties.

(1146853)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by J trainloco on Mon Mar 26 18:14:30 2012, in response to Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 17:17:59 2012.

R32 sharp margin is about 35% (18 * 8/ 222). They put out about 4 or 5 R42's a day,so 20 - 40% with them,. That will go to 10% with the R179,so only 250 cars replace 272 R32/R42. There are 50 cars for either some SIR/R44SI replacement or Q train extension to 96th/2nd.

TA has over-scrapped many times before (R30GOH,R32's) and they'll do it again.


They're replacing 272 cars with 300. They have not confirmed that they will send some cars to SIR, but even if they did, you mention the R32 currently requires an abnormally high spare ratio, which is similar to what i've seen. The C will be operated with the same level of service but with fewer cars sitting around the shop. If the cars don't need to sit around the shop, they can go elsewhere.

(1146869)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 26 19:30:49 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 17:07:02 2012.

The J and M are both rather crowded, go through some of the most rapidly growing areas, and with the Flat junction at Myrtle, I doubt you can reasonably add that much more service. 480 foot trains should be a thing of the past as soon as such is possible. I also suspect that the sooner it is done, the cheaper it will be to do, as construction costs seem to rise faster than inflation.

(1146870)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:38:42 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by R30A on Mon Mar 26 19:30:49 2012.

They are running less service than ever on the J/Z.
5 minute intervals, where as the old 14/15 was running 3 minutes. I have a pdf of the 1960's schedules. There are nowhere close to needing 10 car trains.

(1146871)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:40:34 2012, in response to Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by J trainloco on Mon Mar 26 18:14:30 2012.

No, they are replacing 272 with 260. The remaining 40 cars are to be in 5 car sets and will never see the J/Z/L/M ntr C.

(1146875)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by J trainloco on Mon Mar 26 19:51:34 2012, in response to Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:40:34 2012.

The R32/42 are not forced to be exclusive to the C/J/L/M, as evidenced last summer. Even if we subscribe to that theory, the eastern division will see an increase in number of cars. Only the C will have less cars, and you've already identified the reason why.

(1146877)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Edwards! on Mon Mar 26 19:54:25 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:38:42 2012.

yet the east is getting a ton of new cars..
we actually need about 64 new cars for ideal service.

(1146905)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Mon Mar 26 22:11:48 2012, in response to And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by G1Ravage on Fri Mar 23 18:07:14 2012.

From what I am hearing, there will be 260 cars in 4 car links. This will mean that the (C) train will be all R-179s BUT will remain 480' trains. That also means that the R-32s will be scrapped. 48 cars will go to the east to replace the remaining R-42s. The final 40 cars will be in 5-car links and will likely go to Coney Island so Jamaica can have their R-160s back.

(1146908)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by ClearAspect on Mon Mar 26 22:34:51 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Train Dude on Mon Mar 26 22:11:48 2012.

The J needs 40 cars to kill off the R42 so that would leave the 260 cars, the C according to needs 18 sets which means 144 cars, add 5 back up sets so thats 184 cars. Thats 224 cars and leaves 76 available. You can send 30 cars to the F that would eliminate the need for R46 on the F. That would leave 46 cars which you could send to the L for expanded train sets for CBTC. (2 cars for spares)



(1146911)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:07:52 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 13:41:56 2012.

Hem, gonna be hard to justify abandoning that station house to have a new entrance and platform built there. But then again, it probably wouldn't be fair to tell people to go to Franklin to return back for one stop.

(1146912)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:10:04 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by R30A on Sun Mar 25 20:53:51 2012.

At this point the MTA would be better off giving SI new trains or send the R68/as there. It doesn't make sense to give SI trains that might/not last 2-5 years and then they would need replacement trains.

(1146913)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:12:02 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by R30A on Mon Mar 26 19:30:49 2012.

I totally agree. The L definitely needs 600' trains. If the J and M joined the L, then there would not be any flexibility issues at ENY.

(1146914)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:13:28 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:38:42 2012.

But if you have longer trains, you can carry more people without the need to run so many trains. Sure right now they might not need the additional length, but who's to say things won't be worse down the road? Look at the L as 480' trains aren't enough.

(1146915)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:18:39 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 17:07:02 2012.

I didn't say rebuild them now, I'm saying in the future [assuming the MTA is going to let the stations 'decay' like they did before doing a total overhaul].

The main issue would be Metropolitan av. But as a temporary solution: if they can move the switches further south and have only 1 track for terminating trains, they could extend the platform to hold a 10-car train. The main thing would be trains can't stay at that stop for long [enter and then leave].

(1146918)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Edwards! on Mon Mar 26 23:40:08 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Train Dude on Mon Mar 26 22:11:48 2012.

what happened to the A?

thought the cars were being built to directly replace the the retired R44's..moving the 46's over to the C...SCRAPPING the 32. i know the J was suppose to get a few due to the 50 R42's still operating..

when did the plans change?


(1146923)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Mar 27 00:17:23 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Train Dude on Mon Mar 26 22:11:48 2012.

So that's it then...the (C) will forever remain an eight-car train?

(1146928)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Tue Mar 27 01:49:09 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by G1Ravage on Tue Mar 27 00:17:23 2012.

Its looking that way.

(1146931)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 02:29:09 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Edwards! on Mon Mar 26 23:40:08 2012.

The plan changed some time over the past year

(1146932)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 02:30:07 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by G1Ravage on Tue Mar 27 00:17:23 2012.

The "C" would have gone to 600' trains had the congestion financing bill passed,

(1146941)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Amtrak guy on Tue Mar 27 06:01:13 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Train Dude on Mon Mar 26 22:11:48 2012.

Thank you for explaining that.You are one of a handful of individuals I appreciate the insight that you contribute to subchat.

(1146944)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Eric B on Tue Mar 27 07:43:21 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Tue Mar 27 01:49:09 2012.

Ch. 7 is reporting the C getting an "upgrade" (citing the new car order) but said it was not clear whether the C would get the new cars, or "hand-me-downs".


(1146946)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 27 07:46:03 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Edwards! on Mon Mar 26 23:40:08 2012.

The plan changed due to a need to cut costs.

As for those 40 cars in 5 car sets, they might end up anywhere. Stay tuned.

(1146948)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 27 07:47:59 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by ClearAspect on Mon Mar 26 22:34:51 2012.

That's an astronomically low spare ratio you've calculated there for the C.

(1146951)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 08:30:57 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 27 07:47:59 2012.

5 spare sets? Thats high considering they only have 1 set prepared in case 1 goes out of service, if 3 sets are being maintained in the barn theres 2 sets active for service if necessary. There's currently 222 R32s I believe maintained at 207 Street, but they get a very low MDBF, replace them with HTT and proper maintenance and you won't need many spare sets as the line will be running at its max efficiency. Nothing better than a car that can go nearly 500000 miles before failure than a car than can barely get 1/5th

(1146952)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Lance52 on Tue Mar 27 09:13:37 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by G1Ravage on Tue Mar 27 00:17:23 2012.

Give and take I suppose. I'm pretty sure (C) riders won't oppose a 480' new train over a 600' older one.

(1146953)

view threaded

Re: Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract

Posted by VictorM on Tue Mar 27 09:15:31 2012, in response to Little more info on the R-179 Bombardier contract, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Mar 26 11:45:05 2012.

If they deliver those cars the same way they delivered the R142's they would be hauled on flat cars via CP rail from Plattsburgh to Oak Point, then across the Hell Gate Bridge to Fresh Pond, then ramped down to track level and pulled by an MTA diesel to Linden Shop and from there north along the Canarsie line. Final prep could be done at ENY, 207 or Pitkin (or CI).

(1146967)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 27 12:45:12 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 08:30:57 2012.

I'm an idiot. When you said 5 spare sets, in my head I thought 5 four car sets. What you've calculated is probably more than they will use.

(1146973)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Mar 27 13:58:09 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by randyo on Sun Mar 25 18:44:11 2012.

You missed where he said 'new build'. New build must be 100% ADA compliant in all aspects. All cars, all stations, all platforms, all areas of cars.

(1146974)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Mar 27 14:01:00 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Mar 24 20:24:05 2012.

Everything west of the start of the viaduct at Port Richmond. East of Port Richmond, a mix of encroachment and coastal erosion obliterated it.

(1146975)

view threaded

Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....)

Posted by randyo on Tue Mar 27 14:23:46 2012, in response to Re: Staten Island North shore cars (Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....), posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Mar 27 13:58:09 2012.

It is actually physically impossible to have all areas of cars fully compliant since there has to be space for truck placement.

(1146976)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by randyo on Tue Mar 27 14:26:20 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 26 19:38:42 2012.

However in the 1960s, many Jamaica trains were 6 cars and Bway Bkln lcl trains were only 5 cars. Myrtle/Chambers trains were either 6 cars of steels or 2 Multi units which were even shorter.

(1146979)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by randyo on Tue Mar 27 14:30:58 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Mar 26 23:18:39 2012.

You mean move the switches further NORTH! Since the M was routed to CTL, Met is now the South terminal as it and all the Eastern Div terminals always were prior to Chrystie.

(1146986)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 16:28:04 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 08:30:57 2012.

Spare factor is pegged at about 16%. That would be about 24 cars. Considering that they will now be dealing with 4 car links, 32 cars would be a more manageable number given current shop practices.

That would be a good number but it would not justify keeping 207th St open for that purpose. Look for the 207th St. operation to be merged with the Pitkin Shop fleet about that time (2015). 207th ST will then replace Pelham Diesel Shop for the maintenance of work equipment.

(1146988)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 16:44:55 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 16:28:04 2012.

So my #s for the Charlie are pretty accurate and their Car Requirements... so the R179 can can kill the the 42 and the 32s completely. Then the MTA can prepare for the massive R211 order to kill off the 46 and 68s. So by 2020-2025 SMEE wont exist.

Can Pitkin maintain the enormous fleet of the 179s on the C and the 46s on the A with the rigorous inspection schedules?

(1146992)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 16:52:58 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 16:44:55 2012.

Several years ago I developed a plan for just such an eventuality. Pitkin Shop can successfully handle a fleet of up to 650-700 cars.

(1146993)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Edwards! on Tue Mar 27 16:57:41 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 27 07:46:03 2012.

hmmm..interesting.
Thats something unexpected..s

So are we to assume the upcoming R211 will be for the A LINE,directly replacing the R46 cars operating there?

(1146994)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Mar 27 17:01:59 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by Edwards! on Tue Mar 27 16:57:41 2012.

Depending on the final size of the order. They would more likely replace the R-46s out of Jamaica first because CBTC will be coming to Queens Blvd long before it comes to Fulton Street.

(1146995)

view threaded

Re: And the R-179 contract goes to....

Posted by Edwards! on Tue Mar 27 17:05:07 2012, in response to Re: And the R-179 contract goes to...., posted by ClearAspect on Tue Mar 27 16:44:55 2012.

I wouldnt count on the 68's going anywhere yet..unless they want ALL railcars to be NTT/cbtc/ats/ato UNITS.

If thats the plan,then 1377 cars will be needed to replace then car for car IF the 75ft length is retained...which wouldnt be such a bad idea IF an additional entryway is included.

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]

< Previous Page  

Page 5 of 9

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]