|
|
| Re: Silverliner V problems (1400681) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 8 |
||
|
| (1401399) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Jul 9 09:02:14 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jul 9 02:41:52 2016. People in close-in neighborhoods may also be more dependent on the train. They may not have a car or may only have one car for the family and the other family members use the train.Most people in the more-distant suburbs have plenty of cars and could just drive to work if they have to. |
|
|
| (1401401) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 9 09:33:35 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 00:52:38 2016. no transformer for 25 hz and I believe no low level platform doors.but 5000 Lbs split over 8 contact points of equalizer bars won't make difference. |
|
|
| (1401402) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 9 09:35:02 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 01:08:00 2016. Amtrak is sending them two ACS-64 and 5 Amfleets. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1401407) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 9 12:56:46 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 8 15:20:12 2016. Seemed like it,too.They practically took over ALL SERVICES on the KK/LL/M lines,and a third of the QJ. During those days,the QJ was the Only ENY route that ran SMEE equipment regularly,basically anything C.I could toss on it to make service...though for some reason,I never saw a R38(of course,that doesnt mean they DIDN'T use them if they had to). The Eastern Division was treated like the crap hole of the Transit Authority. Even Today,most of its new cars were placed on a IND LINE...a line that by all means Should be sharing cars with its sister line to make ONE common fleet..instead of Two separate fleets. |
|
|
| (1401413) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 13:45:36 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 9 12:56:46 2016. The R-16s spent their final years on the (J), and by the time they went to scrap in 1985, they were in truly awful condition. Of course, so, too were almost all of the pre-1959 SMEE cars on the IRT, when the R-62s started arriving... |
|
|
| (1401416) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 14:04:27 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by chuchubob on Sat Jul 9 07:46:58 2016. Thanks for the info!Does SEPTA normally have to deal with different voltages and cycles? I would think Amtrak at that point would be using 25 Hz power. |
|
|
| (1401417) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 14:06:15 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 9 09:33:35 2016. Thanks! |
|
|
| (1401419) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 14:07:55 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 9 09:35:02 2016. Lucky that Amtrak can afford to part with 2 of their newest. |
|
|
| (1401423) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 9 14:17:16 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by 3-9 on Sat Jul 9 01:08:00 2016. Amtrek, eh. How many people remember Amtrek? |
|
|
| (1401425) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sat Jul 9 14:30:29 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 13:45:36 2016. R-16s spent their final years on the (J)While the R-16s did spent their final years on the J Line, R-16s made its last run on the M Line (June 15, 1987). |
|
|
| (1401433) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Sat Jul 9 17:23:11 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 9 14:17:16 2016. LOL! Sounds like a Saturday Night Live skit. |
|
|
| (1401434) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Sat Jul 9 17:26:18 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 9 09:35:02 2016. Very lucky. |
|
|
| (1401435) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sat Jul 9 17:36:30 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 9 12:56:46 2016. "The Eastern Division was treated like the crap hole of the Transit Authority."Aint that the truth!! Just by ordering 75ft state of the art (then) cars that they knew damn well could not run on the eastern division says it all right there. |
|
|
| (1401445) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 19:41:33 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by renee gil on Sat Jul 9 14:30:29 2016. OK. I thought 1985 was their final year. Thanks for the correction. |
|
|
| (1401446) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sat Jul 9 19:59:58 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 19:41:33 2016. No Prob. |
|
|
| (1401451) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 9 23:17:47 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 13:45:36 2016. Sure...The 16s came back after the R9 were retired,but only at that time to the LL line. The J kept its R27 and 30 cars for awhile longer...but soon after,the 16s ran the show. |
|
|
| (1401456) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Sat Jul 9 23:43:36 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by renee gil on Sat Jul 9 14:30:29 2016. And the RR had the "bankers special" R-16 every morning up until that time as well. |
|
|
| (1401457) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Sun Jul 10 01:56:24 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 9 23:17:47 2016. Heck, I remember the 16s on the J line when it was the '15' line. And when the R-46s were taken out of service they were on the E and F trains as well as the GG and EE trains. |
|
|
| (1401470) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 10 08:31:46 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sat Jul 9 17:36:30 2016. The Three Stooges Division has been the Rodney Dangerfield of the NYC subway system. |
|
|
| (1401471) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 10 08:34:55 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Sun Jul 10 01:56:24 2016. I remember riding on an R-16 15 train on September 23, 1967. It still wore its original olive drab and had vertical door pockets and it didn't break down. At the time I wondered, what's a 15? No need to chime in; I know what a 15 is now. |
|
|
| (1401472) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 10 08:37:02 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Jul 8 21:11:20 2016. When I say, "old timers," I am referring specifically to the R-1/9s. I always refer to BMT equipment by their common designations (BMT standards, Triplexes, etc.). |
|
|
| (1401484) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sun Jul 10 09:28:26 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by BILLBKLYN on Sat Jul 9 23:43:36 2016. Yup. |
|
|
| (1401497) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Jul 10 10:30:13 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jul 10 08:34:55 2016. That R16 Didn't break down? A miracle.Whenever I had one on the M at the end of their lives, every trip was an adventure. |
|
|
| (1401503) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 10 10:50:42 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Thu Jul 7 20:15:00 2016. I remember all of that very well!Of course, that was the real reason the (E) was running the R-10s back then, but it was funny the given reason was people on the (CC) complaining about lack of air conditioning and the line using the R-10s. |
|
|
| (1401507) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by murray1575 on Sun Jul 10 11:26:57 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 9 13:45:36 2016. Those R-15 through 22 cars were some of the worst cars on the system and it was a relief when they got replaced by new R-62 and R-62A cars which were air conditioned as well. Finally in the mid to late 1980's the MTA decided to put some money into buying new cars and performing GOH on many of the existing cars to make them safe and reliable. It's a shame that riders and employees alike had to suffer so many years of neglected maintenance throughout the system. |
|
|
| (1401510) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jul 10 12:39:00 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by murray1575 on Sun Jul 10 11:26:57 2016. Wasnt the TAs fault.It was the MTAs fault. Most funds were used to play catch up on the railroads,while our subways went straight to hell. Our subways carried a steady stream of riders under 24/7 conditions...from amazing 90 second headways to every 20 minutes overnight. No other system in the USA operates,or carries That many customers,or maintains that level of service. The fact that it was allowed to degenerate to such deplorable conditions is a testament to the "I dont give a damn" thinking of those who were in charge of the City,and state. Its a good thing that where it counts,those people were replaced eith forward thinkers...smart enough to know that the Subway system is the Best way to get around town. |
|
|
| (1401512) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Sun Jul 10 13:28:51 2016, in response to Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Sat Jul 2 16:18:50 2016. More gripes |
|
|
| (1401513) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Jul 10 13:55:24 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Sun Jul 10 13:28:51 2016. Everybody (thinks) they're an expert.In general, leave it alone. |
|
|
| (1401517) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 10 14:50:05 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Sun Jul 10 13:28:51 2016. they need better math ? 120 cars represents 1300 seats ?? |
|
|
| (1401518) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Sun Jul 10 15:05:30 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 10 14:50:05 2016. It's (82) single end cars with 107 seats, (38) double end cars with 109 seats = 12,916 seats.Thanks, Dutchrailnut, somebody dropped a zero. |
|
|
| (1401521) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 10 17:13:55 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Sun Jul 10 15:05:30 2016. They fixed it.IMO, they should go with more frequent service. How close would they get to their rush hour capacity if they double the current number of trains by splitting them in half? |
|
|
| (1401532) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by murray1575 on Sun Jul 10 19:48:10 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jul 10 12:39:00 2016. I would agree as I only use the bus (or foot travel as a last resort) to places the subway doesn't conveniently reach (such as West End Ave). |
|
|
| (1401542) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 10 21:38:53 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Jul 6 23:31:19 2016. The point is, every little bit helps, especially in a week where many are making adjustments. |
|
|
| (1401543) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Jul 10 21:43:55 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by shiznit1987 on Fri Jul 8 21:11:47 2016. The trolleys do help a lot, but I believe there is limited parking and some of the trolley routes are single-tracked at some points going west.That said, the Media line is already shortened right now because of work going on and could be replaced by shuttle buses going further if need be. Trenton should be the priority in full-bore service the week of July 25th due to the large number of people likely coming down from NYC for the Democratic Convention. |
|
|
| (1401567) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jul 11 05:39:54 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Jul 10 10:30:13 2016. The only other time I ever rode on them was on a Moe in October of '86. Two stops in lower Manhattan. And it didn't break down, either.There was a NY Times article about the demise of 6321 and how it was finally put out of its misery. |
|
|
| (1401568) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Mon Jul 11 05:42:42 2016, in response to Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Sat Jul 2 16:18:50 2016. The day begins , with leased equipment. Too early to tell what will happen this rush hour.Septa train service Keep checking back on this link. |
|
|
| (1401588) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Mon Jul 11 13:11:34 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Mon Jul 11 05:42:42 2016. NJT helps SeptaNJT helping Septa at Torresdale Station, this morning. Thanks for the video, Joe Parlin. |
|
|
| (1401621) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Mon Jul 11 17:03:29 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jul 8 19:40:10 2016. Correct!--Mark |
|
|
| (1401627) | |
Re: 1980 R-46 problems |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Mon Jul 11 17:15:22 2016, in response to Re: 1980 R-46 problems, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Mon Jul 11 17:03:29 2016. Alright. |
|
|
| (1401670) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems... From an email I got |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 05:19:49 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Mon Jul 11 13:11:34 2016. newsletter@dvarp.org11:37 PM (5 hours ago) Reply to mail Lots to report today, and we hope you'll send us some reports of your own. The first day of the improved SEPTA schedule was a step backwards in some ways. Two of the three leased trainsets were in service: an NJ Transit train on the Trenton line and an Amtrak train on the Paoli line. The third one: a MARC train to be used on the Wilmington line, wasn’t ready Monday morning because inspection and crew training hadn’t been completed. The absence of the MARC set contributed to a morning that was missing several scheduled trains, including the “clean-up” set that was supposed to run from Glenside. As a result, nine trains were overcrowded to the point where they couldn’t pick up all the waiting passengers. Four of those were on the Lansdale line and at least one more was on Warminster making for a miserable commute on the Reading side. At least the wait for the following train wasn’t as bad it as it was last week. Lansdale riders had still more problems in the afternoon: the 5:10 was cancelled, leaving the following train badly overcrowded and 45 minutes late by the time it got to Doylestown. . Trying to get ahead of the situation, SEPTA called a press conference this afternoon, where we were able to get some answers about what happened today and what SEPTA is doing to try and improve commuter service. We have a variety of sources, both official and unofficial, providing information for you. Today’s schedule had 574 trains running systemwide, compared to 549 in the modified Saturday schedule run last week. The normal weekday schedule has 788 trains. Most of the difference is in the rush hour, so it’s a really significant difference. Besides the rush hour woes today, there were problems over the weekend too. A source tells us that 21 trains were cancelled Saturday because of crews being unavailable. I raised some questions about crewing at the press conference, and learned that SEPTA has not yet set up new crew run assignments: they’re still working from the runs assigned for a short-term weather emergency, augmented by crews called off the extra board. So besides the new schedules still reflecting the weekend running times instead of the time it really is taking when trains are so crowded, they aren’t yet fixed from a crewing standpoint. I asked whether we could expect more revisions to the schedule July 18 or July 25 to fix these problems and further refine the plan to match shifts in ridership, the reply was “don’t hold us to that.” We’ll keep urging SEPTA to get the job done. One more problem became apparent today: the real-time information that is more essential than ever because of the interim schedules had more than a few glitches. We saw trains on TrainView that weren’t actually out there on the tracks, and other trains reported under the wrong numbers. Between the pass-ups, the TrainView trouble, and the cascading delays, it would be a big help to get specifics of all the problems, which will help SEPTA track down causes and fix things sooner. For the next few days, please e-mail us at mail@dvarp.org with a report on how your trip went: where you boarded, what time, whether the train was standing room only, whether the train was able to pick up passengers at all the scheduled stops, and whether it was showing up correctly on TrainView and Next to Arrive. Even if you have a routine trip with nobody having to stand, that’s useful information to us. If you help, we can crowdsource a good report that will provide some on-site data presently unavailable, and help SEPTA give us more realistic schedules sooner. Finally, we got an update on the investigation of the cracks in the equalizer bars. Metallurgical tests are underway, and once the results are it, SEPTA can decide whether or not it will be safe to keep using the trucks without cracks. If it is, that will be a big relief: not enough to get more than a small group of Silverliner Vs back into service, but enough to give us a little breathing room. Matthew Mitchell Commuter Rail Committee Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers |
|
|
| (1401708) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 11:58:50 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems... From an email I got, posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 05:19:49 2016. Cost per month |
|
|
| (1401732) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 13:57:10 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 11:58:50 2016. Repair or replace |
|
|
| (1401758) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jul 12 16:41:05 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 11:58:50 2016. Ouch on the lease cost. |
|
|
| (1401783) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jul 12 19:42:28 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by TransitChuckG on Tue Jul 12 11:58:50 2016. Article appears to have been updated, the cost is only 1/3rd the original quote:Per week, SEPTA is leasing five coaches from the Maryland Area Regional Commuter train service for $19,462 per week; one locomotive and eight coaches from NJ Transit for $15,570 per week; and two locomotives and five coaches from Amtrak for $16,375 per week. That Marc set is pretty expensive. If you value a locomotive as equivalent to 3 cars, NJT and Amtrak are comparable, maybe NJT is slightly cheaper. If NJT wants to make some money on the deal, they could shorten five comet sets from the Hoboken division and lease a second train at the MARC rate... |
|
|
| (1401788) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Jul 12 20:13:33 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jul 12 19:42:28 2016. if NJT really wanted to make money they reactivate whole bunch of stored comets.cause my believe is the SEPTA outage might be longer than they think . |
|
|
| (1401790) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jul 12 20:32:02 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Jul 12 20:13:33 2016. Can they lease them to SEPTA "as is", and allow SEPTA to pay for the work getting them roadworthy again? Then it's a win-win, SEPTA doesn't have to pay as much, NJT gets some money without affecting their operations, and at the end of the lease they have cars they can actually use should the need arise... |
|
|
| (1401792) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Jul 12 20:44:19 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jul 12 20:32:02 2016. union contract probably only allow njt workers to perform the work unless sold. |
|
|
| (1401796) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jul 12 22:02:34 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Jul 12 20:44:19 2016. if so those shopuld be abrogated. |
|
|
| (1401804) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 12 23:22:47 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jul 12 22:02:34 2016. The left-winger calls for union agreement abrogations? Nice one, tovarishch. |
|
|
| (1401807) | |
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jul 13 00:47:54 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 12 23:22:47 2016. Thinking about it, in this case there shouldn't be - it would set a bad precedent.Hear me out: by allowing non-NJT to work on it, it opens the door to contracting the work out. As we all know, the "lowest bidder" requirement means the government is (by design) *terrible* at selecting contractors. Keeping things in house ultimately saves money. Also they can be sure that the maintenance records are kept consistent. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 8 |
||
