|
|
| Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) (1166734) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
|
| (1167337) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Ian Lennon on Wed Jul 18 23:42:08 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Train Dude on Wed Jul 18 22:03:08 2012. I know they are far from the P-Wire they came with. I thought both had GE Motors, and the same brake pipe pressure. The mainlines have higher brake pipe pressure, and Westinghouse, or am I wrong? |
|
|
| (1167351) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jul 19 04:55:03 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by mr mabstoa on Wed Jul 18 22:08:32 2012. You left out a digit somewhere. |
|
|
| (1167376) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Jul 19 10:17:09 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Ian Lennon on Wed Jul 18 23:42:08 2012. The issue of GE and/or Westinghouse motors is moot because both are interchangeable. Even Westinghouse and GE propulsion packages have run together with no issues. The air brake is another story on R-46 the Brake Pipe is 110 PSI but on the R-44 it was unregulated and varied between 130 and 150 PSI. There was some speculation as to which would dominate the other if they were ever added together but I never tried to find out. There were issues with the dis-similar door systems too but the real problem was making the R-46s respond to the Staten Island Signal System. That's where the real engineering headaches and costs were found. Will it be done in 2017? Wait and see. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1167391) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Jul 19 12:50:29 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 15:22:09 2012. Ehhh, much as I liked that paint scheme, it was not for every car. |
|
|
| (1167407) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 13:51:49 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Thu Jul 19 12:50:29 2012. Well if it was good for the R-36s, it certainly would have been good for any SMEE from the R-16 on up to the R-33 since except for the picture windows of the R-36s, all those cars were virtually identical. |
|
|
| (1167409) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 13:55:30 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Westcode44 on Wed Jul 18 21:33:01 2012. Although AFAIK, they never ran together, I believe they were intended to be compatible. I seem to recall some tests being done with both types to check for compatibility. |
|
|
| (1167413) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Jul 19 14:05:13 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 15:24:03 2012. Sorry :)To each his own, right? |
|
|
| (1167415) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Jul 19 14:07:10 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 15:19:33 2012. While we disagree about the windows, I agree with you on everything else here- the R15s were definitely an improvement over earlier designs..inside conductor controls, no exposed fans, etc.. |
|
|
| (1167425) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 15:42:04 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Train Dude on Thu Jul 19 10:17:09 2012. Unless they do something out of the box, like get a long, fat PA5 for SI, which is FRA compliant. |
|
|
| (1167426) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 15:43:30 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 13:55:30 2012. Some book I have says R44's and R46's were compatible, but "will not in regular service".The original brakes on the R44 sounded like an M-1 when they dumped. What was wrong with that apparatus ? |
|
|
| (1167431) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 15:50:42 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Jul 19 14:07:10 2012. The round windows were art deco and attractive. |
|
|
| (1167447) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 16:58:02 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 15:43:30 2012. Both R-44s and 46s had a brake system that utilized P wire to control the brakes electronically. The R-44s had the WABCO RT-5 which was almost identical to the M-1's RT-5 system while the R-46s had the Westcode version of the same system. I think the problem was the unfamiliarity with that type of brake system of the NYCT Car Equipment employees. From what I have heard, the LIRR M-1s encountered similar brake failures when first delivered. Additionally, the NYCTS was a slightly more hostile environment than the LIRR or M/N and it's likely that the greater concentration of steel dust in the subway portions of the NYCTS contributed to the high failure rate of the R-44 brakes. While the R-46s performance was slightly better, those cars also suffered from incidents of P wire failures which is what prompted the MTA to change the brake systems on those cars to the respective Westcode and NYAB versions of the proven RT-2 (SMEE) brakes just prior to and during GOH and to order RT-2 and the NYAB variant, Newtran brakes on the R-62 and 68 orders. |
|
|
| (1167489) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Jul 19 22:31:00 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Joe V on Thu Jul 19 15:42:04 2012. They still have to build the long & fat PA5 to be compatibe with the SIR signal system |
|
|
| (1167656) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by CJ on Sat Jul 21 14:41:40 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by William A. Padron on Wed Jul 18 07:12:24 2012. What are the odds of a passenger saying that now a days? That must of been surprising to hear. |
|
|
| (1167667) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by FarRock on Sat Jul 21 15:23:19 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by CJ on Sat Jul 21 14:41:40 2012. The same went on when the yuppies 1st seen the 32s on the (A) in May, most thought it was the (C). They were still out in Long Island back when 32s on the (A), (C), & (E) were a normal thing. |
|
|
| (1167674) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jul 21 15:58:05 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by FarRock on Sat Jul 21 15:23:19 2012. Due to the dumbing of America in recent years, many passengers totally ignore both the signs on the trains and the PA announcements opting instead to assume that certain types of cars are restricted to certain lines. The N is predominantly R-160s but an occasional R-160 does show up on the R so passengers should be alert that any type of car can be used on any line at any time. I feel no sympathy for passengers who are too ignorant to be aware of anything and everything that is going on around them. The other day while waiting for the R shuttle at 59 St, a female passenger was performing some sort of function on he I phone or whatever the device was. when the train entered the station and opened the doors,she continued to punch the keys and only walked towards the train after she was finished. I was hoping that the C/R would have closed the doors before she had a chance to board so that maybe she might learn to prioritize her activities by having to wait another 20 min for the next shuttle. |
|
|
| (1167756) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 22 00:47:46 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Thu Jul 19 13:51:49 2012. except for the picture windows of the R-36s, all those cars were virtually identical.That's the thing. The WF cars had those rounded picture windows and door windows which matched their height and level. It fit with the semi-circular, striped WF design. Now picture that design on the other SMEE cars. Except for the R-10's, -12's, and -15's, the windows tended more towards sharp corners and were divided into 3 parts (as opposed to the single, long, picture window, or short picture window and rounded sign). It simply would not flow as well. The only other cars I can think of that would come close would be cars like the R-38, or even the R-40 or -42, which had picture windows but less corrugation to break up the design. |
|
|
| (1167801) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jul 22 13:45:57 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Sat Jul 21 15:58:05 2012. I don't think most people know the type of trains, even by sight. My mother and sister rode the 8th Avenue subway for a few months once a week last fall for a sick sister. Believe me, they do not notice an R32, from a R46, from an R160. The look at the signs and the track assignment. |
|
|
| (1167812) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:37:24 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Tue Jul 17 18:28:26 2012. A Boeing 707, perhaps?:) |
|
|
| (1167813) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:39:09 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Jul 16 20:40:23 2012. Were the door chimes in tune with each other?:) |
|
|
| (1167815) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:41:51 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 15:22:09 2012. That racing stripe scheme was the best one of all. |
|
|
| (1167816) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:44:37 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 22 00:47:46 2012. The door windows on the R-32s also matched the height of their side windows.And speaking of the R-32s, yesterday marked 47 years since my very first subway ride, on a Norton of shiny new Brightliners from 36th St. in Brooklyn, over the north side tracks of the Manhattan Bridge, to 34th St. Although I vividly remember the green backlit "57th St." side signs, I don't remember skipping any stations even though we most certainly did. |
|
|
| (1167906) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jul 22 19:47:10 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 22 00:47:46 2012. I think even with the squared off windows of the standard post R-16 SMEES, either the full turquoise and blue racing stripe scheme or the later modified version as found on the R-10s would have looked good. Maybe if someone out there is good with photoshop, they could experiment to see what it would look like. |
|
|
| (1167907) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jul 22 19:48:16 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:41:51 2012. That's exactly my point. It should have been applied to the entire fleet. |
|
|
| (1167922) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 20:55:03 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by merrick1 on Mon Jul 16 06:53:30 2012. The 32s 38, 40, and 42s all had asbestos in them, the 44s and up not. The stainless steel is valuable and can be recycled, but not at the expense of asbestos abatement.ROAR |
|
|
| (1167926) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:01:23 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by bklyntekgeek on Mon Jul 16 13:13:22 2012. The R-10s were *the* signature train of the A line.1948... that was the year I was born. I guess 1948 was a very good year. ROAR |
|
|
| (1167927) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:05:24 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Tue Jul 17 18:12:05 2012. The R-11 was the cat's meow! They should have built a whole fleet of them, and would have done so had the 2nd Avenue Line been built on schedule!ROAR |
|
|
| (1167929) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:11:57 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Tue Jul 17 15:10:33 2012. LION suspects that the outside door controls were a hold over from the gate cars. Nobody thought to bring the guy indoors. Also did not the outside controls make zoning the train easier, electrically speaking.ROAR |
|
|
| (1167930) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 22 21:18:13 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:11:57 2012. Nope ... still had to go in a cab for the drum switches. The good thing about working outside was visibility. Standing on your perch, you were up above the passenger's heads and could see your end cars from up there. |
|
|
| (1167931) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:18:46 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 16:11:52 2012. Originally, the Astoria was a BMT line, and the BMT had no yards in that part of Queens, so whatever served Astoria had to be serviced in Brooklyn. Since the Astoria was the LOCAL, it *had* to go to 95th Street.And there is the rub. LION would return the (R) Astoria to Fort Hamilton as the LOCAL 24/7. Him would saturate the line with as much traffic as it could bear, maybe short turn some at Whitehall, or City Hall (lower) as needed. Him would then send the (Q) to 125th Street and the (N) to 71st Street via the 63rd street tunnel. ALL EXPRESS TRAINS would be 63rd Street via Bridge ALL LOCAL TRAINS would be 60th Street via Tunnel. Period. ROAR! |
|
|
| (1167932) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:25:50 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by Train Dude on Thu Jul 19 22:31:00 2012. Why is the SI signal system an issue? The operator reads the signals and controls the train accordingly, does he not?ROAR |
|
|
| (1167939) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Jul 22 22:01:22 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:18:46 2012. For the N it's 71st Ave., not street. A very common error, even by conductors!You'll have the N with a yard on both ends, and none for the R, which was the reason why the terminals were swapped several years ago by NYCT. Therefore, it should stay as is today: R to 71/CTL, N to Astoria. |
|
|
| (1167963) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jul 23 00:50:40 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:44:37 2012. I thought of the R-32's but the full height corrugated sides would have messed up the design, IMO. The R-38 would have been a better choice, with the smooth top half, but even then the corrugated sides would have been a distraction. |
|
|
| (1167965) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jul 23 01:03:59 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Sun Jul 22 19:47:10 2012. Yeah, that would be an interesting photoshop project, see what some of the other cars look like in WF colors. :-) |
|
|
| (1167967) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jul 23 01:08:19 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Tue Jul 17 15:15:05 2012. Yeah, when I saw the R-62's and -68's for the first time, I thought that at some point they were planning on putting the blue strip on, but decided against spending the money on blue paint. |
|
|
| (1167972) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Mr Railfan on Mon Jul 23 02:31:32 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Mon Jul 23 01:03:59 2012. I'll see what i can come up with. |
|
|
| (1168004) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Jul 23 07:54:43 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Jul 22 22:01:22 2012. LION *knows* about the problem with the (R) terminal. The (N) would NOT have a yard at both ends, it lives in Coney Island. (Period)The (R) is also a BMT train, and the BMT has no yards in Queens. The (R) is the LOCAL [60th Street to Tunnel] and the 4th Ave Local happens to go to Ft. Hamilton. LION is LOTH to touch the nice shiny interlocking leavers on Broadway, that will only slow his trains down. What ever train you send to Astoria MUST use the 60th Street tunnel and therefore MUST be the LOCAL. The Local goe to Ft. Hamilton. End of story. LION will EXTEND the line from 95th Street under Fifth Avenue and build an underground yard there that can do overnight maintenance and cleaning. For major repairs the train goes OOS to Coney Island or to Jamaica, your choice. Layups at the north end of the route can be on the middle track. AS him has said, him will SATURATE the (R) with trains so that the good wildebeests at Astoria will never miss their express. Short terns can happen at City Hall, at Whitehall and at 9th Avenue, and there is a yard at 9th Avenue, and they will have no trouble getting in there. It is the Best the LION can do with what has been built, AND WITHOUT TOUCHING THE INTERLOCKING LEVERS IN MANHATTAN! ROAR |
|
|
| (1168010) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Jul 23 08:22:32 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by randyo on Wed Jul 18 15:22:09 2012. I think part of what made the bright blue so cool was that it was only on one line (except for occaisional loans of WF cars to the mainline- which is well documented on nycsubway.org).If it was universally applied, it would have been less special. I know some R10s got the light blue paint as well. I suppose that's kind of OK- kind of celebrating their emrgence into daylight after the long runs under CPW and Fulton Street... But my bottom line- and it's just an opinion, after all, is that it's better it wasn't applied to the whole fleet. |
|
|
| (1168025) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Jul 23 10:59:18 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:37:24 2012. Could be. Very noisy. I remember a few Rohrs in DC doing the same thing.wayne |
|
|
| (1168029) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Jul 23 11:21:00 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 22 14:39:09 2012. Yes they were. D# - B major third.wayne |
|
|
| (1168030) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Jul 23 11:24:54 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by HANDBRAKE on Wed Jul 18 15:18:16 2012. Would they be able to make an operable set using an A-A unit? And it would be nice if they could get the original numbers (crosswalk available from http://www.nycsubway.org or on request) and put them in the condensed Helv font - black on silver plate, as they originally were.wayne |
|
|
| (1168031) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?) |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Mon Jul 23 11:41:52 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44(Preservation?), posted by ENY Blitz 5107 on Wed Jul 18 18:43:20 2012. 5264-5265 are the ex-100 and ex-159 cars.wayne |
|
|
| (1168060) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 14:45:44 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Mr Railfan on Mon Jul 23 02:31:32 2012. OK, thanks. |
|
|
| (1168061) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 14:49:10 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 22 00:47:46 2012. A racing stripe scheme on stainless steel cars would pretty much defeat the purpose of stainless steel construction, however somewhere I saw an artist's rendering of a LAHT version of the R-38 which resembled a W/F R-36. It was what a LAHT R-38 might have looked like in the event the TA decided not to have the R-38s constructed of stainless steel. |
|
|
| (1168064) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:01:05 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Jul 23 08:22:32 2012. When the R-36s first arrived, there was a newspaper article that indicated that it would have been nice if their paint scheme were applied to the entire NYCTA car fleet. That may have been why it was done on the R-10s which at the time were the oldest SMEEs on the system. While the repaint program was underway, the MTA was created which took over NYCTA's operation and rather than continue with the racing stripe scheme as it was, the TA embarked on a "temporary" program of painting the rest of the fleet R-29 red until the MTA unveiled its silver with a blue stripe scheme in an attempt to make the LAHT fleet look sort of like the R-42s and later R-44s and 46s. Unfortunately, then graffiti epidemic interfered with that program and ultimately the MTA removed all color from the stainless steel cars and opted to paint the LAHT cars fox red. IMHO, rather than either the red or faux stainless steel scheme, a variant of the later half and half paint scheme of the R-10s but utilizing a darker blue sort of like MTA bus, would have been more appropriate. |
|
|
| (1168065) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:03:28 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:05:24 2012. I agree. I think that the R-11 was one of the best car body designs on the NYCTS, and as I said in another post, followed by the R-15 as a close second even though some in this thread have criticized their porthole windows. |
|
|
| (1168066) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:06:03 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 22 21:18:13 2012. I would suspect that was the reason the BMT and IND went with the outside door control concept even though the earlier BMT steels had inside door controls. |
|
|
| (1168067) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:08:54 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by 3-9 on Mon Jul 23 01:08:19 2012. When the MTA had some offices on Lawrence St, I saw some artists' renderings there of both the R-62s and R-68s with the blue stripe. There are some R-62s that have advertisements in the belt area where the blue stripe would go and they look pretty good. |
|
|
| (1168069) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:20:34 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Jul 23 07:54:43 2012. You can't extend the 4 Av Line along Fifth Av since 5 Av ends at 95 St. The line, however can be extended down FOURTH Av. The problem is not so much with storage as it is with maintenance and it's doubtful that an efficient maintenance facility could be built in the underground area as you describe it. As I mentioned in other posts, getting an R train from 95 St to CIY for either repairs or inspection requires a revers move on the N/B exp track at 36 St which often interferes with the express service N/O 36 St. Having the car mtce for the R fleet done at Jamaica Yd allows trains to be taken directly off the road at Ctl and sent right into the yard without having to interfere with the mainline. |
|
|
| (1168072) | |
Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jul 23 15:28:10 2012, in response to Re: (Belated) Requiem for the R-44, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Jul 22 21:18:46 2012. Unless you have some sort of service operating via 60 St to Qns Blvd, your service plan won't work since trains operating via 63 St can't stop at Qns Plaza thus depriving Bway passengers of a major transfer point. You can get away with having a 6 Av service (the F) bypass Qns Plz since the M provides a 6 Av connection to Qns Plz but a Bway to Qns Plz is a non negotiable necessity. Although it is a nice idea, complete elimination of diversions along Bway is not demographically feasible. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
