Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars (219397) | |
![]() |
|
Home > SubChat |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
Page 3 of 4 |
![]() |
(219912) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by r7 torresdale express on Thu Feb 23 08:51:33 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Wed Feb 22 23:09:34 2006. Barbecue sex. |
|
![]() |
(219932) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Feb 23 09:33:54 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Feb 22 23:25:18 2006. However, one these days has to wait until the train reaches Greenwich to buy beer! (I have had a cold one on an NH train myself.)That would be a problem if LIRR and MNRR merged: LIRR doesn't allow alcohol; Metro-North does. |
|
![]() |
(219937) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Feb 23 09:39:53 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Feb 23 09:33:54 2006. >>>>>LIRR doesn't allow alcohol..... <<<<Source? LIRR most certainly DOES allow alcohol, witness the 100s of pepple drinking beer on thier trains daily. NJT allows it also, for that matter, they just don't sell it. |
|
![]() |
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
![]() |
(219940) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 09:49:50 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Feb 23 09:33:54 2006. That would be a problem if LIRR and MNRR merged: LIRR doesn't allow alcohol; Metro-North does.The LIRR doesn't allow alcohol? That's news, as their policy certainly doesn't reflect that. They sell alcohol from drink carts, they used to have bar cars on Montauk trains. I have many of times done the "party thing" on the train on the way to the city for a baseball game or a hockey game, and have taken twelve packs of beers with us, take one of those sections where the seats face each other and "tailgate" on the train with my friends before the game, and the conductor never says anything. I have seen plenty of people on the train doing this. The subway outlaws alcohol, but the LIRR certainly does not. |
|
![]() |
(219942) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Thu Feb 23 09:58:16 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Wed Feb 22 13:44:14 2006. The middle seats on the M-1/3 are somewhat uncomfortable. The middle seats of the M-7 are unsittable!On very crowded trains, mostly all of the middle seats on the M-1/3's do fill up, but not so on the M-7's. People just don't want to sit there - so as Peter suggests, get rid of them! |
|
![]() |
(219944) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:02:06 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by r7 torresdale express on Thu Feb 23 08:51:33 2006. You're sick. |
|
![]() |
(219945) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:03:15 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Feb 22 23:28:57 2006. Yes. |
|
![]() |
(219946) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 10:05:58 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Bob Andersen on Thu Feb 23 09:58:16 2006. That's funny, they're substantially wider than R-62A seats, and if you look at the seats on a typical crush loaded 1 train, they're pretty much all filled. |
|
![]() |
(219947) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:07:31 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by R30A on Thu Feb 23 00:32:03 2006. The M7s have more equipment on board. They have more computer components than an M1/3 which would increase weight, the bathrooms that are larger also increase weight a bit. The motors and components are heavier because they are stored in heavy cabinets underneath the train which help protect it from the elements. |
|
![]() |
(219949) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Thu Feb 23 10:10:53 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Feb 23 09:39:53 2006. There are still a couple of LIRR trains that have Bar-carts on them. I think the 7:22 PM to Huntington is one of them. |
|
![]() |
(219951) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:18:31 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:03:15 2006. OTOH, an M7 car weighs alot less than a G5 steam locomotive from the 1920's. ;) |
|
![]() |
(219955) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 10:30:05 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Feb 23 09:39:53 2006. And it's literally 100's of people drinking beer on the trains. And seeing that many of the LIRR trains have bar cart service, it's ludicrous to say the LIRR doesn't allow alcohol - they even sell it! Don't they even have bar carts sometimes on the platforms at Jamaica? I know I have seen it in the past, but haven't ridden rush hour in a while. |
|
![]() |
(219958) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by mambomta on Thu Feb 23 10:36:22 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:07:31 2006. They have more computer components than an M1/3 which would increase weight,Modern computer components would add a negligible amount of weight. the bathrooms that are larger also increase weight a bit. The bathroom may be larger, but that doesn't mean it weighs more. Most likely, the larger bathroom probably weighs less than the seats that would have been in that space. The motors and components are heavier because they are stored in heavy cabinets underneath the train which help protect it from the elements. it still doesn't explain the weight problem. A heavy cabinet is not necessary. You can have a strong cabinet with lighter-weight material(which is sometimes stronger than with heavier-weigt material. |
|
![]() |
(219962) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:39:20 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by mambomta on Thu Feb 23 10:36:22 2006. Well than what is it that make an M7 heavier than an M1/3? |
|
![]() |
(219965) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 10:41:02 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 10:05:58 2006. That's funny, they're substantially wider than R-62A seats, and if you look at the seats on a typical crush loaded 1 train, they're pretty much all filled.Very few of the people sitting in the narrow seats on the 1 train are going to be there for 45 minutes to an hour. Hardly a fair comparison. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(219966) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Feb 23 10:42:23 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:39:20 2006. Poor diet. |
|
![]() |
(219967) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 10:45:58 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 10:41:02 2006. If they can physically fit for a minute, they can physically fit for an hour.What's being discussed here is a matter of comfort. |
|
![]() |
(219972) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 10:50:37 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 10:45:58 2006. It's easier to be uncomfortable for 10 minutes than it is to be uncomfortable for an hour. And they pay a lot more for their seat than $1.67 or less that subway riders pay.How is this discussion not a matter of comfort? |
|
![]() |
(219976) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 10:54:07 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 10:45:58 2006. If they can physically fit for a minute, they can physically fit for an hour.What's being discussed here is a matter of comfort. Being unmercifully squashed for five minutes is far more tolerable than going through the same thing for an hour. What you seem incapable of understanding is the simple fact that it was absolutely unnecessary for the LIRR to have ordered the M-7's with 3x2 seating. 2x2 seating would have worked far better for everyone. I am convinced that the LIRR's decision to go with 3x2 seating is at least in some way related to the contempt in which it holds its passengers. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(219989) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:02:53 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 10:54:07 2006. I am convinced that the LIRR's decision to go with 3x2 seating is at least in some way related to the contempt in which it holds its passengers.I think it has alot more to do with capacity than contempt. |
|
![]() |
(219992) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:04:55 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu Feb 23 10:42:23 2006. It's a possibility. :pWouldn't using heavier materials be cause of weight gain in a railcar. An M7 weighs 2000 pound more than a steel Pullman Standard Coach. |
|
![]() |
(219993) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 23 11:05:07 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:02:53 2006. Contempt requires thought. I don't think the designers of the M7's put much thought into their seating arrangements. |
|
![]() |
(219995) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:06:43 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 23 11:05:07 2006. I guess they thought that putting less seats might cause riders to go away, so thats why the 3X2 seat arraingment was chosen. |
|
![]() |
(220010) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:18:10 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 10:50:37 2006. But standing is also uncomfortable. Peter prefers to stand than to sit next to somebody, but somebody who takes the middle seat obviously doesn't share his preferences, and is perfectly entitled to that seat. If at that point Peter would prefer to stand, he has that option.(Regular LIRR riders pay much much less per mile than typical subway riders, for a much more labor-intensive and heavily peaked service, and already have a much greater level of comfort.) |
|
![]() |
(220019) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:24:40 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:18:10 2006. (Regular LIRR riders pay much much less per mile than typical subway riders, for a much more labor-intensive and heavily peaked service, and already have a much greater level of comfort.)Good point. |
|
![]() |
(220020) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:25:05 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 10:54:07 2006. Except that 2x2 seating would have held fewer passengers than 2x3 seating. And then some intending passengers wouldn't be able to fit on the train at all, and would have to wait for the next one (and hopefully they'd be able to fit on that one).That's worse than having to sit or stand in discomfort for an hour. Once again: you don't seem to mind standing. So stand! What's the problem? |
|
![]() |
(220021) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:26:34 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:06:43 2006. I guess they thought that putting less seats might cause riders to go away, so thats why the 3X2 seat arraingment was chosen.Go away to where? To the other railroad which competes with the LIRR? The unfortunate truth is that the LIRR has a near-monopoly on Long Island-to-Manhattan commuter traffic. The only way of avoiding it is to move or find another job, and for many people neither option is possible or practical. Any private business which offered such dismal service and treated its customers with such contempt would be gone in short order. Its competitors would destroy it. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(220023) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:28:48 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:25:05 2006. Except that 2x2 seating would have held fewer passengers than 2x3 seating. And then some intending passengers wouldn't be able to fit on the train at all, and would have to wait for the next one (and hopefully they'd be able to fit on that one).LIRR trains can accommodate a surprisingly large number of standees. You'll sometimes see that when a train is taken OOS. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(220024) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:28:55 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:26:34 2006. If the LIRR were a private business, fares would be much higher than they are now, since the LIRR is heavily subsidized. Those monthly tickets are a steal! |
|
![]() |
(220025) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:29:56 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:28:48 2006. Yes, and I'm sure the standees on a crush loaded train are much more comfortable than the people sitting up against each other! |
|
![]() |
(220026) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 11:30:15 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:26:34 2006. Go away to where? To the other railroad which competes with the LIRR?Well don't most LIRR passengers perfer to have a seat on the train? Any private business which offered such dismal service and treated its customers with such contempt would be gone in short order. Its competitors would destroy it. How do you know the LIRR treats its customers with contempt? |
|
![]() |
(220027) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by monorail on Thu Feb 23 11:32:01 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:29:56 2006. all depends on who they are sitting next to |
|
![]() |
(220028) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:34:30 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:28:55 2006. If the LIRR were a private business, fares would be much higher than they are now, since the LIRR is heavily subsidized.If it were a private business, it would have far fewer workers and those it did have would be earning substantially less than they do now. Whole layers of paper-shuffling bureaucrats would be "re-engineered." It also would have much more freedom in buying new equipment and would escape much of the political meddling it now faces. Those monthly tickets are a steal! Then why don't you buy one for me? You've got your nice CUNY salary and (AFAIK) no family to support. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(220031) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:38:08 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:29:56 2006. Yes, and I'm sure the standees on a crush loaded train are much more comfortable than the people sitting up against each other!As a matter of fact they are. I speak from having been in both situations. In nearly all standing situations you have at least some room to move around. You aren't smashed into the sidewall by some SCA with barely enough room to breathe let alone move. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(220032) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 11:39:13 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:34:30 2006. If it were a private business, it would have far fewer workers and those it did have would be earning substantially less than they do now.Unfortunately, as with most public companies, there's a lot of waste. Management for instance. The bureacracy of the MTA in general. |
|
![]() |
(220040) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:45:14 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:34:30 2006. Nice CUNY salary? Are you out of your mind?But, fine, it's a deal. I'll gladly pay for your monthly LIRR tickets if you cover my monthly rent. In fact, I'll offer to toss in a second ticket for your wife. |
|
![]() |
(220041) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:46:37 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:38:08 2006. If you have some room to move around, then it's not crush loaded. Try again.And, once again, if you prefer to stand than to sit, then stand. |
|
![]() |
(220049) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:59:56 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 11:45:14 2006. But, fine, it's a deal. I'll gladly pay for your monthly LIRR tickets if you cover my monthly rent. In fact, I'll offer to toss in a second ticket for your wife.My LIRR ticket is scarcely the only expense I face as a result of living in the suburbs. I wish. My LIRR/NYCT blog |
|
![]() |
(220051) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 12:01:49 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by Peter Rosa on Thu Feb 23 11:59:56 2006. And my monthly rent is scarcely the only expense I face as a result of living in Manhattan. |
|
![]() |
(220052) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 12:04:38 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 12:01:49 2006. Doesn't Peter also pay either a mortgage/property taxes or Rent in addition to other expenses? That's not a phenomena only for Manahttan. |
|
![]() |
(220058) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Thu Feb 23 12:44:28 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 12:04:38 2006. And did I ever say it was?My housing costs are higher than they would be if I lived in the suburbs. Peter's commuting costs are higher than they would be if he lived in Manhattan. So if he wants me to pay his commuting costs that are so high because he lives in the suburbs, then it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect him to pay my housing costs. Of course, that isn't what happens. Even without my footing his entire bill, I already do pay a portion of his commuting costs, while he still pays none of my housing costs. (And zoning regulations in most suburbs drive Manhattan housing costs up.) |
|
![]() |
(220061) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Feb 23 12:50:50 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:39:20 2006. Most likely the carbody is simply overbuilt. BBD has never been one to spare on structural steel, that's part of why the Acela is so damn heavy. Add to that the MTA's total failure to explicitly state a specification for weight and you have a recipe for a bloated, grossly overweight EMU. |
|
![]() |
(220063) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 12:53:16 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 10:03:15 2006. But that's a BAD thing, no? |
|
![]() |
(220064) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 12:56:46 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Feb 23 12:53:16 2006. Not as BAD as a steam locomotive's weight. |
|
![]() |
(220065) | |
Re: Attention Peter Rosa |
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Feb 23 12:59:25 2006, in response to Re: Attention Peter Rosa, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Feb 22 23:19:03 2006. Because the diesel coaches quite clearly have two levels on which to place seats. This allows them to make up the difference between a single level car with 3+2 seating and the same car with 2+2 seating. A bilevel EMU likely would have been out of the question due to MN's requirements, as well as the LIRR's potential issues with the Flatbush Ave tunnel. |
|
![]() |
(220066) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 12:59:27 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by WillD on Thu Feb 23 12:50:50 2006. Well, the M7s are heavier than a steel Pullman Standard coach. |
|
![]() |
(220067) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Feb 23 12:59:48 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 12:56:46 2006. Does 1 steam locomotive plus 6 old-time coaches weigh more than 6 M-7 cars? |
|
![]() |
(220068) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Feb 23 13:00:39 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 12:56:46 2006. And did a steam locomotive hauled set cover as many miles in a day as an M-7 set today? |
|
![]() |
(220069) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 13:01:35 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Feb 23 12:59:48 2006. Yes. |
|
![]() |
(220071) | |
Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars |
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Feb 23 13:04:40 2006, in response to Re: Metro-North New Haven Line on track for new cars, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu Feb 23 12:59:27 2006. I don't see what you're getting at. Feel free to ask DRN what his numbers were based on, and whether that Pullman Standard coach was a heavyweight of the type formerly used by railroads such as the NY Central on long distance trains or if it was something like the Comet I. I'm fairly certain he was referring to the former.However, why does that matter and how is it a good thing? The M7s are a powered EMU, and while the weight of the propulsion system aught to be pretty close to 5000 to 7500lbs, a comparison between them and the old P-S coaches is pretty pointless. They're not contemporaries, they're not in the same class, they didn't even provide similar service. |
|
![]() |
Page 3 of 4 |