Home  Maps  About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3]

< Previous Page  

Page 3 of 3

 

(1167428)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by subfan on Thu Jul 19 15:47:29 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Jul 19 13:33:32 2012.

I absolutely agree, but the issue is that then you'd still lose operational flexibility as to where the full-width cabs would be placed in an 11-car train.

subfan

(1167430)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by subfan on Thu Jul 19 15:49:06 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 14:27:40 2012.

OK, but that was a situation where there was no choice based on how the cars had been constructed. Here, the TA is creating a situation that limits flexibility for no good reason.

subfan

(1167451)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 17:05:27 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by subfan on Thu Jul 19 15:49:06 2012.

I agree, but the MTA really limited flexibility by unitizing the cars in the first place. The IND operated for many years with all single cars and had the best operating flexibility anyone could hope for.

(1167454)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Widecab5 on Thu Jul 19 17:17:56 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by G1Ravage on Thu Jul 19 05:29:11 2012.

It would appear the "1's" and "6's" are the ends losing the full-width cabs.

However, these are being buried in the middle with the "0's" and "5's" RETAINING the full-width cabs.

The bigger issue is where the available Master Door Control (MDC) panels will be located. That determines where the Conductor works vs. where the existing C/R Boards are.

On the 7 line, the C/R Boards are between 6th and 7th cars Flushing- (north) bound, and between the 5th and 6th cars Times Square- (south) bound.

Based on the information that's floating around so far, here's how things line up:

--The 0's and 5's, in linked unit, retain the FWC's and become north and south end motors on a permanent basis.

--The 1's and 6's, in linked unit, LOSE the FWC's and become middle transition cars (5th and 7th cars on the 7 line specifically).

--The remaining single units (car numbers still 1901 to 1970 with exceptions for the GC Shuttle) become the "middle" (6th) car in each train and have the existing quarter cabs mate with the "transition" cars on each unit.

This was seen already with a few (test?) trains out there:

(S) 1766/1770-2047-1656/1660 (N) on July 14;
(S)1721/1725-1967-1651/1655(N) and (S)1781/1785-1944-1666/1670(N) on July 15.

In these cases, both the Train Operators and Conductors were working out of FWC's, but if the trains were faced the other way the C/R would have been crossing between 2047 and 1656, 1967 and 1651, and between 1944 and 1666, respectively.

As additional links get their cabs taken down at one end and become transition cars this actually should become the case. What the MTA's institutional barriers are to this procedural change (if any) I do not know.

There probably are a number of valid reasons this is being done, but I offer these:

The most obvious is to allow permanent 5-car linkage of the existing 224-car fleet of single units heretofore assigned to Corona. That saves on individual maintenance of Master Door Control, windshield wiper, controller, brake valve, coupler and draft gear componentry, which would reduce necessary inspection cycles and cost, perhaps significantly.

Since the 7 line uniquely requires 11-car trains, a way had to be found to add single units to each 10-car set, yet retain the ability to station Conductors as they have been. Whereas the remaining single units will retain their complete quarter cabs in any case, it evidently makes sense to someone that they be employed along with a quarter cab in one end of the new linked sets, as opposed to the alternative of having two 5-car links with FWC's at both ends (with only one middle one in use at any time) plus two unused and completely-equipped quarter cabs in between. Apparently that is considered to be a waste of resources.

There is perhaps also a saving to be derived from the elimination of one additional MDC station in each of the reconfigured links.

Another factor is possibly the cost associated with maintaining the WABCO brake valves that were re-fitted into one end of the existing single units in recent years. As you may know, "WH R-62A single units ending in 0, 2, 4 and 6 have modified WABCO brake valves and are to be used as North Motors."

By arranging the trains with "0's" and "5's" as permanent operating motors, the problem of drilling single units into a specific configuration, as well as the maintenence cost of many WABCO brake valves, could thereby be eliminated entirely.

The next things to watch is when (or if) these "5-1-5" train sets begin turning around and force Conductors to again work between cars. Secondarily, the first set of newly-linked single units, which have been out of circulation for some time, should soon appear (2151-2155) and it will be of interest to see how the cabs on it are configured (my bet is it will have a FWC on 2155 but a quarter cab on 2151).

One final thing (FWIW), I take this as a sign that it may be some time (perhaps QUITE some) before there will be any progress on completing the R-188 order. Though the 33 pilot cars are progressing (given the 7811 sighting in Yonkers) and should also soon appear, there seems to have been no news on enactment of the Option, or any additonal R-142A moves to KRC in Yonkers. Were the R-62A's soon to be definitely headed to the 6, it would have been nigh senseless to make such operational concessions on the R-62A's at this stage, presumably given that they'd all (GCS excepted) be unitized with FWC's for 10-car train operation in any case. These actions seem to indicate the existing R-62A fleet is expected in some quarters to remain on the 7 for the longer term.

Regards,

George Chiasson Jr.
(Widecab5@aol.com)


(1167456)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Railman718 on Thu Jul 19 17:24:22 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Widecab5 on Thu Jul 19 17:17:56 2012.

Thank you for the informative post..

(1167459)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 17:34:46 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Widecab5 on Thu Jul 19 17:17:56 2012.

The Pelham/Lex Local passengers aren't going to like that. The R62's have dingy lighting.

(1167468)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jul 19 19:14:15 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by G1Ravage on Thu Jul 19 05:29:11 2012.

"thus providing free movement through most of the train"

But passengers are not permitted to move between cars anyway. There must be another reason for this.

(1167473)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Jace on Thu Jul 19 20:28:35 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Widecab5 on Thu Jul 19 17:17:56 2012.

Fear not, the R188 option cars are coming but not until after the first three trains go through testing. Figure about one and a half years from now before they start rolling out on the 7 line en masse.

(1167477)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Southern BMT on Thu Jul 19 21:04:24 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Widecab5 on Thu Jul 19 17:17:56 2012.

Thanks for the information.

Now, let's think long term:
I'm wondering about when the R188 C-cars arrive and they are attached to two current 5-car R142 sets to make 11-car trains. Wouldn't that once again cause the problem of transverse cabs obstructing free movement through the train?

(1167478)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jul 19 21:23:35 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by TERRapin station on Thu Jul 19 11:30:07 2012.

Supervisor can ride inside, car inspector can ride inside, train operators who work the line sometimes get students............

(1167488)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Thu Jul 19 22:19:15 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 17:05:27 2012.

IAWTP. Even married pairs, you had some flexibility.

(1167505)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by randyo on Fri Jul 20 03:22:12 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jul 19 19:14:15 2012.

However, passengers need inter car access in emergencies!

(1167511)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by G1Ravage on Fri Jul 20 06:04:04 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Southern BMT on Thu Jul 19 21:04:24 2012.

Only at the C/R's position, which is a non-issue.

(1167512)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed the 7, then turned around and put back

Posted by G1Ravage on Fri Jul 20 06:07:27 2012, in response to Railfan windows return to the 7, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Jul 13 01:58:55 2012.

Just about anything can happen nowadays at Corona Yard. 1666, which was knocked down to a half-cab and buried in the middle of the train for the past week, was back on the south end today, still a half-cab. I operated it. Still no side window, either.

I checked periodically, and NO ONE took advantage of the RFW view. Lame.

(1167514)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by merrick1 on Fri Jul 20 06:54:01 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 20 03:22:12 2012.

The crew can unlock the cab doors remotely. At least they can on R68s. One time the D train ahead of the one I was on stalled leaving the Grand Street. We inched up until the first car of our train was in the station. The conductor announced that passengers could walk through the train to the first car and get off. The storm doors and cab doors were unlocked remotely. The only change I would suggest is a way to turn the cab lights on remotely. It is kind of dark crossing from cab to cab in the tunnel.

(1167516)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Railman718 on Fri Jul 20 07:16:43 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jul 19 21:23:35 2012.

Which can have a bit more precedence than us "feeling good" it must kill him inside that he can't hack it down here...

(1167517)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Railman718 on Fri Jul 20 07:25:55 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by merrick1 on Fri Jul 20 06:54:01 2012.

The crew can unlock the cab doors remotely.

Not remotely there is a key we can use from other operating Cabs though on the R68's and R46's..

(1167530)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Southern BMT on Fri Jul 20 11:13:35 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by G1Ravage on Fri Jul 20 06:04:04 2012.

Only at the C/R's position, which is a non-issue.

Are the R188 C cars going to be placed between two five car sets of R142?

If so, you would get transverse cabs (from the R142s) blocking movement between the 5th/6th cars and 6th/7th cars of the 11 car train.

(1167532)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 20 11:27:48 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Southern BMT on Fri Jul 20 11:13:35 2012.

They are to be placed within an existing 5 car set, making a 6 car set.

(1167533)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Southern BMT on Fri Jul 20 11:29:01 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 20 11:27:48 2012.

Oh, OK... I see.

(1167537)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by WillD on Fri Jul 20 12:35:27 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by subfan on Thu Jul 19 10:51:33 2012.

It's for when the TA decides to finally cut their losses and springs OPTO on the union :P

(1167540)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by TERRapin station on Fri Jul 20 12:39:35 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by subfan on Thu Jul 19 13:13:24 2012.

Obviously. You'd have to ask the actual decision maker if you want the actual reason that they chose to do this. I was just giving you one of the commonly cited pros.

(1167541)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by TERRapin station on Fri Jul 20 12:41:33 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jul 19 21:23:35 2012.

But you can open the cab door and achieve the same result. So I don't think those reasons are as highly cited as others, including the one I gave.

(1167543)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by Railman718 on Fri Jul 20 12:46:30 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Railman718 on Fri Jul 20 07:16:43 2012.

Bump.

(1167547)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage)

Posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Jul 20 13:25:23 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Southern BMT on Fri Jul 20 11:29:01 2012.

Illustration of 11 car R-188 config....
http://www.imagebam.com/image/0075ee176586108

(1167548)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by subfan on Fri Jul 20 13:28:50 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by TERRapin station on Fri Jul 20 12:39:35 2012.

OK, no problem and I understood that. I, in turn, was giving the cons.

subfan

(1167549)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by subfan on Fri Jul 20 13:31:16 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jul 19 21:23:35 2012.

All good reasons to leave a full-width cab at the front end. My point was that there are even better reasons to leave it at the C/R position - and they're still knocking them down there.

subfan

(1167574)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed the 7, then turned around and put back

Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Jul 20 17:13:55 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed the 7, then turned around and put back, posted by G1Ravage on Fri Jul 20 06:07:27 2012.

Thats odd I just saw that consist about an hour ago. 1711 is the south motor 1670 is a north motor.

(1167579)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage)

Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Jul 20 17:36:32 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage), posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Jul 20 13:25:23 2012.

The illustration shows there will be two C cars per train. I thought only the 6-car set was getting C cars.

(1167580)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by randyo on Fri Jul 20 17:37:21 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by WillD on Fri Jul 20 12:35:27 2012.

With the state of the art being what it is, OPTO can be accomplished with corner cabs using closed circuit TV cameras like Philly does on the Market/Frankford Line .

(1167581)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by randyo on Fri Jul 20 17:40:33 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by merrick1 on Fri Jul 20 06:54:01 2012.

However, there may be a need for passengers to be able to pass between cars without having to wait for the crew to unlock the doors and as long as safety on 51 ft or 60 ft cars is not the issue it is with 75 ft cars, access needs to be provided.

(1167583)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage)

Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jul 20 17:43:44 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage), posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Jul 20 13:25:23 2012.

Allright, what's a C car and why is it differentiated from a B car?

(1167586)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage)

Posted by Gold_12TH on Fri Jul 20 17:59:42 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7 (R-188 11 car linkage), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jul 20 17:43:44 2012.

Video: http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1142677

Just a small info, unless some one from this board can explain more....

(1167606)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7

Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Jul 20 21:21:18 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed from the 7, posted by Southern BMT on Thu Jul 19 09:54:44 2012.

Unlike other 60-foot car classes, you cannot run to the conductor when both the operator and conductor are operating from the same 5-car set.


(1167623)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows to be removed the 7, then turned around and put back

Posted by G1Ravage on Sat Jul 21 07:38:48 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows to be removed the 7, then turned around and put back, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Jul 20 17:13:55 2012.

So they juggled it AGAIN between Thursday and Friday.

I don't think I saw it at all today.

(1167624)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows return to the 7

Posted by FarRock on Sat Jul 21 08:31:05 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows return to the 7, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jul 14 09:04:11 2012.

We do that in the "B", spread the fun.

(1167626)

view threaded

Re: Railfan windows return to the 7

Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jul 21 09:22:20 2012, in response to Re: Railfan windows return to the 7, posted by G1Ravage on Mon Jul 16 06:28:58 2012.

They should have just bought the cars the way PATH did where the crews, not shops, can set them up so there are no walls in between cars, and walls on the end of trains by matter of how the side doors and cab doors are closed.

[1 2 3]

< Previous Page  

Page 3 of 3

 

[ Return to the Message Index ]