Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644

Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644 (1569677)	Home · Maps · About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3]

< Previous Page

Page 2 of 3

Next Page >

(1569888)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim* on Mon Mar 1 16:36:49 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Mon Mar 1 14:15:27 2021.* As in a failed suspension component?? I've never heard of that happening. That dosen't mean it never happened however. I would guess if there was an equipment problem, the train would be OOS & those folks in the car would be on the platform.
Post a New Response

(1569890)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 16:38:18 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Mon Mar 1 12:54:56 2021.* The fact that there are no niches visible in the immediate area of the photo is not consequential since it could just be that there were no niches exactly opposite where the train stopped. One of the problems I am having is trying to read the partial nam on the station sign since it doesn’t seem to match anything resembling either the word “street” or”avenue."
Post a New Response

(1569891)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 16:43:51 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Mar 1 12:55:06 2021.* I’ve seen the original tiles on all the stations on the 4 Ave subway and the tiles on the local and express sides at both those stations were identical. Oddly enough, I have been to the S/B platform at Gold St which is no longer there but not the N/B side which still is and the columns were the same on both sides.
Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1569892)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Elkeeper* on Mon Mar 1 16:45:25 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Mon Mar 1 14:15:27 2021.* No, it's the end of the down ramp from the WillyB. I remember seeing this at the west end of the side platform of Essex St, years ago. If you look closely at the pic, the right hand side of the girder under the door is lower than the left hand side.
Post a New Response

(1569895)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by K. Trout* on Mon Mar 1 17:23:59 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Mon Mar 1 16:38:18 2021.* I tried playing with the brightness and contrast and got nowhere. If you really squint you can sort of imagine the top half of an E and an X as in Essex, maybe glare on the enamel from the camera flash is obscuring the bottom half. As for the niches my memory is that they're fairly frequent along 4 Av but I don't know the exact dimensions to know if it's a coincidence.
Post a New Response

(1569901)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Bill Newkirk* on Mon Mar 1 18:35:33 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Mon Mar 1 16:33:52 2021.* While I am not 100% sure, Essex is high on my list of possibilities too. Another thought entered my mind. The photo seems to have taken place in the mid 50's. Weren't the higher number deck roof AB's assigned to the Southern Division while the lower numbered empire roof cars assigned to the Eastern Div ? Just a guess. Bill Newkirk
Post a New Response

(1569903)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Mon Mar 1 18:50:13 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Mon Mar 1 16:23:53 2021.* You're right. The picture I was looking at was Pacific. It was the only one from Pacific, all the rest were from Dekalb.
Post a New Response

(1569904)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Joe V* on Mon Mar 1 18:57:25 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Mar 1 18:35:33 2021.* Both roof designs were on the Eastern Divsion. I remember them mixed in consists in the 1960's.
Post a New Response

(1569907)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:43:14 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Mar 1 16:27:16 2021.* All I can say is possibly. It’s too bad we can’t see more of the enamel sign on the column. What you can see of what should be the bottom word doesn’t look like any normal word like “street” or “avenue” which would be the only possibilities for stations on the underground portions of the BMT. It doesn’t even look like any name or number that would be on any station name plate even if the word “street” or “avenue” were omitted which is the case at some stations.
Post a New Response

(1569908)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:45:55 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 1 18:57:25 2021.* Correct. Most of the single “A” cars were in the 2600 series and there needed to be a sufficient number of A cars to make up the 8 car trains for the Jamaica Line.
Post a New Response

(1569909)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:51:02 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by zac on Mon Mar 1 18:50:13 2021.* I’m not too sure if there was any tile like that at Pacific St either. If, and that’s a big “if” there were any it would have to be at the south of the station since when the platforms were extended from holding 6 ABs to 8, Pacific and Dekalb were done at the south end. At both those stations, the tower and the switches were at the north end so the platforms couldn’t be extended towards the switches or the tower.
Post a New Response

(1569910)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:55:59 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Mar 1 16:45:25 2021.* It isn’t at the end of the down ramp off the Willy B either since there is no place at that end of the station where you would see a tile wall immediately behind a train standing at the platform. If it were Essex, it would have to be at the west (RR north) end of the station since the photo indicates that is the most likely spot.
Post a New Response

(1569911)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:58:19 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Mon Mar 1 17:23:59 2021.* Why would you see the top half of anything on the enamel since the only thing visible in the photo is the BOTTOM of the enamel sign?
Post a New Response

(1569912)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Mon Mar 1 20:59:04 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Mar 1 16:27:16 2021.* All I can say is possibly. It’s too bad we can’t see more of the enamel sign on the column. What you can see of what should be the bottom word doesn’t look like any normal word like “street” or “avenue” which would be the only possibilities for stations on the underground portions of the BMT. It doesn’t even look like any name or number that would be on any station name plate even if the word “street” or “avenue” were omitted which is the case at some stations.
Post a New Response

(1569917)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by K. Trout* on Mon Mar 1 21:21:17 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Mon Mar 1 20:58:19 2021.* I imagined the letters I traced in red as the top half of EX and the blue as the area obscured by glare. It's a stretch, I know.
Post a New Response

(1569935)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by RockHound* on Tue Mar 2 00:09:12 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Mon Mar 1 21:21:17 2021.* Delurking here. DJ Hammers has just posted a video, part of which was shot at Essex Street. At the 4:20 mark, you get a pretty good look at a portion of the platform that has the right kind of tile and the right kind of pillar. The track and platform does curve a bit there. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLgOoPVDIVI&t=316s (Don"t know how to embed the video, sorry.)
Post a New Response

(1569936)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by K. Trout* on Tue Mar 2 00:15:30 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by RockHound on Tue Mar 2 00:09:12 2021.* (On Youtube, click the Share button, then "Embed", then copy the HTML code and paste as-is here.) The tiling and pillar are indeed quite similar...but also, take a look at how high the door sills are above the platform.
Post a New Response

(1569937)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by RockHound* on Tue Mar 2 00:19:47 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 00:15:30 2021.* Thanks.
Post a New Response

(1569940)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Joe V* on Tue Mar 2 06:43:17 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Mon Mar 1 20:45:55 2021.* By the 1960's, they were never on the "15" except when it snowed, and they remained 6 cars even then.
Post a New Response

(1569946)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by JayZeeBMT* on Tue Mar 2 08:16:55 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Mar 1 18:35:33 2021.* If this helps, the passengers are dressed correctly for the late 1940s or early 1950s.
Post a New Response

(1569947)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Tue Mar 2 08:47:11 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 00:15:30 2021.* That's a long 3rd rail gap!
Post a New Response

(1569952)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Tue Mar 2 11:17:12 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 00:15:30 2021.* While the tiling looks the same as in the picture, the tiling in the video is not original.
Post a New Response

(1569954)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by K. Trout* on Tue Mar 2 11:51:17 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by zac on Tue Mar 2 11:17:12 2021.* What about this image, posted upthread? The platform tile is square, but it looks like the track-side tile is brick style.
Post a New Response

(1569958)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Bill Newkirk* on Tue Mar 2 12:24:22 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Mar 2 08:16:55 2021.* If this helps, the passengers are dressed correctly for the late 1940s or early 1950s. Okay, thanks. Bill Newkirk
Post a New Response

(1569962)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Tue Mar 2 14:22:28 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 11:51:17 2021.* Compared to the original pic, the columns are too far back. And unless the photographer was standing in the exit corridor there wouldn't be enough room to get the column in. That's possible, but I still think the spacing is wrong. I guess this will just be a mystery.
Post a New Response

(1569963)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Elkeeper* on Tue Mar 2 14:26:25 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Joe V on Tue Mar 2 06:43:17 2021.* But, there were 8 car Myrtle Ave Express trains (to Chambers St) back then, right? Unless, this photo predates the R-16's.
Post a New Response

(1569970)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Tue Mar 2 15:59:34 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Mar 2 14:26:25 2021.* Myrtle/Chambers never ran 8 car trains of steels because for some reason, Metropolitan could never hold an 8 car train of steels, only 7. The platform could just hold 8 60 footers which are 480 ft long. Even after the fire and the station was rebuilt it still only just fits 8 60 footers.
Post a New Response

(1569973)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Tue Mar 2 16:03:55 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Joe V on Tue Mar 2 06:43:17 2021.* However, a few single As remained in the Eastern since they ran 5 car trains of both steels and R-16s on the Bway Bkln Lcls in the AM. In the PM they ran 6 car trains of both types of equioment on the Bway Bkln Lcls.
Post a New Response

(1569980)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by qveensboro_plaza* on Tue Mar 2 17:35:41 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Tue Mar 2 16:03:55 2021.* Not to beat a dead horse, but I've done a bit of forensic work on this "mystery" pic. First, I found a vintage photo of DeKalb Ave. station on nycsubway.org (below): I cropped this image to highlight a detail of the name sign, and converted it to b/w. I rotated the detail to approximate the angle of the "mystery" photo, and then combined it with a section of the original photo that shows the portion of the sign. I increased the contrast of both images so they have about the same value: As you can see, the fragments of lettering are very similar in both pictures, which suggests that the "mystery" photo may, in fact, be from DeKalb Ave. (Interestingly, both signs have a chip in the porcelain on the bottom in about the same location, though to be sure, just about every one of these old signs got battered up through the years.) There is still the very significant problem of the difference between the wall tile patterns, but perhaps one of our intrepid Subchatters can find more info. Have at it!
Post a New Response

(1569983)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Tue Mar 2 18:08:12 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by qveensboro_plaza on Tue Mar 2 17:35:41 2021.* Dekalb was extended onto the curve at the south end of the station to allow for 8 car trains of ABs and 4 D type units. It may be possible that the BRT/BMT may have either elected not to use matching tiles for the extension or maybe at the time perfectly matching tiles weren’t available. I can’t recall specifics but I have seen a few BMT and IRT stations which were lengthened pre unification that had non matching tiles on the extensions.
Post a New Response

(1569987)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Tue Mar 2 18:30:44 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by qveensboro_plaza on Tue Mar 2 17:35:41 2021.* What would make sense is that on the curve the pillar would be closer to the track as in the mystery photo than in the later one, and that the tile could be different. There is one way to find out, and that is to visit Dekalb Ave station and see what is remaining on the curve. It has been rebuilt in the active portion but I doubt that they rebuilt the curve since it is out of use. I remember standing in the front of that station with my daughter with our bikes, dripping wet, when we quit the 5-boro bike tour due to the rain. The Q came in, stopped, opened the rear doors, and then pulled out. I always go to the front of the train when I have my bike with me, plus the stairs are in the front. Let's just say the curved platform is kind of gross.
Post a New Response

(1569988)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Tue Mar 2 18:33:04 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by zac on Tue Mar 2 18:30:44 2021.* I should add too that I agree with the lettering. It does look to be the same.
Post a New Response

(1569992)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Bill Newkirk* on Tue Mar 2 19:22:21 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by qveensboro_plaza on Tue Mar 2 17:35:41 2021.* If you truly solved this mystery, then good detective work. Bill Newkirk
Post a New Response

(1569996)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Tue Mar 2 19:44:18 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Tue Mar 2 15:59:34 2021.* Moe is still a victim of soicumstance.
Post a New Response

(1570006)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by jabrams* on Tue Mar 2 23:34:15 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 11:51:17 2021.* Notice the height of the car in relation to the platform.
Post a New Response

(1570018)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Express Rider* on Wed Mar 3 08:48:59 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Tue Mar 2 15:59:34 2021.* Where were the BT's assigned to operate? All over, to make up train consists of 8 cars or just exclusively on the Eastern or Southern Divs. And, were the only BT's, formerly BX's, or were any of the AB's semi-permanently coupled as two car units from the beginning? "beginning" meaning during the 1920s (?) when the BMT's program to semi-permanently couple Standards together into the specific unit's to create B-Type's BX's etc.
Post a New Response

(1570024)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Express Rider* on Wed Mar 3 09:42:18 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Express Rider on Wed Mar 3 08:48:59 2021.* this sentence - And, were the only BT's, formerly BX's, or were any of the AB's semi-permanently coupled as two car units from the beginning? should read: Was the BT fleet, originally semi-permanently coupled together as 2 car units, or were BT's created only after scrapping of the center 4000 series trailers. *originally - the 1920s BMT program to semi-permanently couple the Standards fleet into B's, Bx's etc.
Post a New Response

(1570026)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Express Rider* on Wed Mar 3 10:05:13 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by K. Trout on Tue Mar 2 11:51:17 2021.* re: pillar signs I wonder if the original pillar sign (pre-1940)* for this station was a very large "E" followed by smaller uppercase letters "SSEX". That was the style I saw on two pillars at Dekalb - large "D" smaller lettered "EKALB"; and at also Chambers St. - large "C" followed by smaller uppercase letters "HAMBERS" - seen from the back RFW on the October 16, 1965 B-Type ERA fantrip. *installed by the B.M.T.
Post a New Response

(1570032)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644 [CORRECTION]
Posted by Express Rider* on Wed Mar 3 11:04:56 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644 [CORRECTION], posted by Elkeeper on Sun Feb 28 14:51:41 2021.* I just posted something about this - I wonder if original pillar sign was large "E" and smaller uppercase "SSEX". Again, to repeat on 10/16/1965 B-type fan trip, last two columns before entering the tunnel both at Dekalb and Chambers St. had what were probably original B.M.T. pillar signs: large uppercase "D" and smaller upper case "EKALB" and large uppercase "C" and smaller upper case "HAMBERS" any comments, corrections welcomed.
Post a New Response

(1570052)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by randyo* on Wed Mar 3 16:33:26 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Express Rider on Wed Mar 3 09:42:18 2021.* According to some documentation i’ve seen, a few BTs were created in the 1920s along with the Bs, abd BXs and there were a few AX units which were a 2400 series car coupled to a 4000 series trailer that had a M/M’s cab at one end. Neither the BTs nor the AXs lasted too long and by the end of the 1920s there were only Bs, Bxs and the single As necessary to make up 8 car trains when coupled to 2 B units. When the steels were GOHed circa 1960, only one BX was done and the TA opted to get rid of the 4000 series trailers and substitute a 2600 series A car for the trailer creating additional B units. A few former BX units were not converted to Bs but instead merely recoupled without the center car recreating the BTs which could be used to make up 8 car trains without having to use the few remaining A cars. When the steels were unitized in the 1920s, the C/Rs door controls were decommissioned so that only the center car of a unit had working door controls and was known as the “master” car. When the BTs were recreated, since they were only intended to be added to the ends of trains, the door controls were left decommissioned so that for a line like the Culver shuttle which only used 2 cars, BT units could not be used in that service.
Post a New Response

(1570061)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Bill Newkirk* on Wed Mar 3 18:55:40 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Wed Mar 3 16:33:26 2021.* What was an "AA" ?
Post a New Response

(1570062)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim* on Wed Mar 3 19:07:23 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Mar 3 18:55:40 2021.* 8th Ave Local???:)
Post a New Response

(1570063)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 3 19:24:19 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by randyo on Wed Mar 3 16:33:26 2021.* On the Eastern Division, they ran 3, 5, 6, and 8 car Standards. From what you write, the only operable door panels were in the middle of a 3 car set or the middle of a single car. How did they arrange conductor boards with all those restrictions ?
Post a New Response

(1570072)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Thu Mar 4 04:54:12 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Wed Mar 3 19:07:23 2021.* Nice try.:)
Post a New Response

(1570073)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Thu Mar 4 04:57:28 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 3 19:24:19 2021.* The only time the conductor was smack in the middle of a BMT standard consist was on a three-car B unit. With six cars (two B units lashed together, he was in either the second or fifth car. IINM there were two conductors on an eight-car train at first.
Post a New Response

(1570075)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by William A. Padron* on Thu Mar 4 06:08:48 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Mar 4 04:54:12 2021.* According to research and documentation, during the 1920's decade, the BMT AB's were modified with a nine point jumper cable for a full train with MUDC, so that only one conductor controlled a train door's operation. When installed on a car, it carries an extra "A" prefix to its classification. As cars were modified, "AA", "AB" and "ABX" units were created. The extra "A" was used only during this modification period, and when the entire fleet was completed (by the year 1930), the extra "A" was dropped. Source: "Subway Cars of the BMT", authored by James Greller, his book published by X-plorer Press, page 13, paragraph 7. -William A. Padron [Not "Wash. Hts.-8th Av. Lcl."]
Post a New Response

(1570081)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by zac* on Thu Mar 4 07:49:13 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Mar 4 04:57:28 2021.* Was the 14th St-Canarsie line able to run 8 car standards? If it could I've always wondered why they didn't create 9 car trains of R143/R160 for it. At least before CBTC they could have put a 4 car and 5 car R160 together. I remember when they extended platforms on the Brighton line thinking they were going from 8 cars to 10 cars, never realizing it was already 9 cars long, plus or minus a few feet. I never really knew how long the triplexes were, but it had never occurred to me that the standards were longer than the R27s replacing them.
Post a New Response

(1570082)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Joe V* on Thu Mar 4 08:11:48 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by zac on Thu Mar 4 07:49:13 2021.* Randy has said there were at least 2 8-car consists on the 14th St-Canarsie line during rush hours. I think 9 car trains would have been a cheaper and faster retrofit for capacity expansion than CBTC. On the QT and RR in the 1960's, I suppose they could have run 9 car trains of 8 R27's + 1 R16, and not scrapped as many Standards as they did in the early 1960's. A Triplex and 2 Standards were very close in dimension lentghwise, but not down to the inch.
Post a New Response

(1570137)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Thu Mar 4 18:28:02 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by William A. Padron on Thu Mar 4 06:08:48 2021.* They were still the mean old BMT standards...:)
Post a New Response

(1570139)	view threaded
Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Thu Mar 4 18:33:12 2021, in response to Re: [PHOTO] Mystery Photo - AB # 2644, posted by Joe V on Thu Mar 4 08:11:48 2021.* A Triplex was 137 feet long while two BMT standards were 134 feet long.
Post a New Response

[1 2 3]
< Previous Page	Page 2 of 3	Next Page >

[ Return to the Message Index ]