|
|
| Re: The LIRR President Speaks (244048) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 11 |
||
|
| (244398) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by tydev417 on Sat Apr 22 18:55:28 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 18:38:50 2006. The sad thing is that the current trains go through even more extensive testing than the PRR's stuff ever did, and they STILL suck.Says who? All trains have their major problems, the older trains seem more problematic mechanical-wise than current trains that have more technical problems. So this weight problem you keep on bringing up everytime, do you have a diet plan for them to rid the weight? The trains are heavier than the M1s but big fricking deal, as long as the trains are getting from Point A to Point B, that's all that should really matter (but of course it isn't like that). |
|
|
| (244400) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 18:55:56 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 16:49:05 2006. That's like asking "how come ACF, Brill, St. Louis Car Company and Pullman Standard are no more". Non-sequitur. |
|
|
| (244408) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 18:38:50 2006. If you think for a moment that a M-7 with 1000 hp per car and AC propulsion uses more electricity than a M-3 with DC propulsion and everything wasted through Grid resistors at 660 hp per car your sadly mistaken.The M-7's are twice as fast accelerating than the M-3's who could never operate at full rate. The Weight is something nothing can be done about the car structure which must be capable og a 1000 000 crush load is never gone weigh less than what they are. If todays Comet V weighs in at over 100 000 lbs you will never built a MU for much less than what a M-7 weighs. You claim destruction of track structure by M-7's ??? cool wonder how 298 000 lbs Genesis units and simular DE/DM's don't destruct track ?? You are again on a unsupported rant, with unsubstantiated bullshit you know nothing about. For Budd they sold their rail business while order book was full with M3's for LIRR and M3a for MNCR they were building the Baltimore subway cars and the Miami Metro cars. When the company emerged as Transit America it was owned by Thyssen Ag the same company that tried to hog swindle us into buying the transrapid Maglev system, the same company that currently still owns BUDD. The M-3's had shitloads of problems, so did Baltimore and Miami cars. Mainly because due to large orders they used unskilled workers to assemble cars just like todays manufacturers do. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (244409) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Apr 22 19:08:51 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 17:16:08 2006. False statement. Budd wanted to be in high-margin businesses, and railcars these days don't qualify. EU manufacturers did indeed outcompete Budd, but Budd made little effort to go after European markets. |
|
|
| (244412) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sat Apr 22 19:11:05 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006. Great Statement! :-D |
|
|
| (244414) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Apr 22 19:15:42 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006. "For Budd they sold their rail business while order book was full with M3's for LIRR and M3a for MNCR they were building the Baltimore subway cars and the Miami Metro cars."They shut down their railcar business because they saw the end coming. Once those orders were filled that was it; end of the line. They didn't care to invest any more in a low-margin business, one that Bombardier and Kawasaki and Siemens and Alstom would dominate. So tyhey focused on their core - which automobile parts. |
|
|
| (244415) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by tydev417 on Sat Apr 22 19:18:13 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sat Apr 22 19:11:05 2006. Agreed! :-D |
|
|
| (244418) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Sat Apr 22 19:23:18 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Peter Rosa on Sat Apr 22 11:46:12 2006. The process may be easy, but if I have seat all the way to Jamaica, I am going to want to keep it to my final destination rather than possibly being made to stand because I had to change in Jamaica. Granted, I usually take the LIRR to wherever is most convenient (if I am going to lower Manhattan or Brooklyn that means Flatbush Avenue*, anywhere else in Manhattan, Penn Station)*The notable exception is during peak times so I can have a shot at an express train or during off-peak periods where I have time to kill as there are more amenities in Penn Station |
|
|
| (244420) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Sat Apr 22 19:28:07 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Peter Rosa on Sat Apr 22 12:02:29 2006. That would not be a good idea because it will discourage people on the Greenport line from taking the train from where they live because of the second transfer. The more transfers, the greater the chance for delays. It would cost more money, but why can't they electrify past Babylon? By doing that they could add more service on the Montauk line without the reliability issues of the DMs |
|
|
| (244421) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Apr 22 19:37:07 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Peter Rosa on Sat Apr 22 12:02:29 2006. If you did THAT, then you would see a massive drop-off in ridership. Why do you think people dread the "change at Jamaica" transfer? The demand is for a ONE-SEAT RIDE. In addition, there aren't as many people north of 495 as there are south of it. |
|
|
| (244448) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Sat Apr 22 20:42:45 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 01:23:52 2006. Ok, you're boring me with this M7 dragging through the mud campaign. You're little M1 are lucky if they go 75,000 miles before breaking down. You're little M1/M3 cant survive a winter storm above 2 inches for their life. The M7 proved themselves this winter by survivng some nasty storms, yes some got knocked around, but compared to previous storms it was good for the LIRR. The M7 are proving to be cheaper in the long run because they run longer and breakdown less frequently, meaning loss cost on replacement parts and repair.You're M1/M3 did their thing for their time, and it's time that new cars that can survive better, operate better, take their place. You sound like those R-142 haters that dispised them before they even ran, and now all their mouths are shut. Don't be mad because their seats are uncomfortable or there is no railfan window. The MTA is not in the business of pleasing the railfan, they're in the business of pleasing the commuter who ride their lines more than 200times a year. Even the MTA is listening to them, and making all their improvments into the M8. Face it you're little beliefs about the M7 being worse than the M1/M3 is full of hot air. |
|
|
| (244449) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Sat Apr 22 20:43:58 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006. Dutchrailnut knows his stuff big time! I wish he'd let me in. I work M7s. RRCI Peter |
|
|
| (244451) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:45:29 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Christopher Rivera on Sat Apr 22 20:42:45 2006. You're little M1 are lucky if they go 75,000 miles before breaking down.The average is more like 27,000!!! |
|
|
| (244453) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:46:31 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sat Apr 22 16:34:57 2006. He said last night that they are hoping before the end of this year. |
|
|
| (244455) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:50:29 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Apr 22 16:33:47 2006. The problem is the station is at capacity. It's already a circus with the amount of people using it. There are just too many cars, and most of those people just come there because that's where the service is.They want to alleviate that a bit, by diverting some of those people to Yaphank, or wherever the new yard and station will be. It's silly to have people driving all the way to Ronkonkoma, when they are coming from points east. He made it pretty clear that they are "done" with ROnkonkoma, there will be no further parking or improvements made there. They have set their goals on electrifying eastward toward Yaphank. They already have some funding due to the loss of the potential new yard and further electrification on the Port Jeff line, which has been scrapped. |
|
|
| (244457) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Sat Apr 22 20:51:04 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:45:29 2006. I'm trying to be nice... (lol) |
|
|
| (244458) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:53:56 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Apr 22 19:37:07 2006. In addition, there aren't as many people north of 495 as there are south of it.???? Have you ever driven on Middle Country Road or Route 347? |
|
|
| (244459) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:56:15 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sat Apr 22 17:12:49 2006. Let's see, 167,000n (M7) miles between breakdowns or 27,000 (M1) miles between breakdowns..... Which train do they like better, that's a tough one. |
|
|
| (244461) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 20:59:11 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sat Apr 22 17:12:49 2006. |
|
|
| (244462) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:00:40 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Apr 22 19:08:51 2006. Conjecture. You haven't proven it false. |
|
|
| (244463) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:01:28 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by tracksionmotor on Sat Apr 22 20:43:58 2006. Dutchrailnut knows his stuff big timeGuys at NJT get annoyed at him for thinking he knows all about ALP46s and PL42ACs though. |
|
|
| (244464) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 21:01:44 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Apr 22 19:15:42 2006. Actually, Baltimore and Miami didn't get the last Budd/Transit America Cars. Chicago did and here is the very last car to come off the production line.... And kudos to Dutchrailnut laying the smackdown on WillD! About Time! Regards, Trevor Logan www.transitalk.info |
|
|
| (244465) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 21:03:54 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 01:23:52 2006. and on no basis do you make any sense! Stick to Philadelphia Transportation where you may have some knowledge and leave NY to us! |
|
|
| (244466) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:07:06 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 21:03:54 2006. He's still suffering from latent fear that the Silverliner V would be based on the M7. Pity too . . . because now Hyundai will be building those EMUs. |
|
|
| (244471) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by nasadowsk on Sat Apr 22 21:20:38 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006. If you think for a moment that a M-7 with 1000 hp per car and AC propulsion uses more electricity than a M-3 with DC propulsion and everything wasted through Grid resistors at 660 hp per car your sadly mistaken.Dutch, you're wrong here. You're violating the laws of physics, pure and simple. The resistors are in SERIES with the traction motors, thus the maximum current through them = the max current through the TMs, which has to be limited on acceleration (the LIRR limits the M-1s to around 300amps). Since the voltage at the third rail = 750 volts (for all intents and purposes), the only thing that's changing during acceleration is the resistors are burning less and less power, and the motors are burning more and more, but the TM current never gets much above the limit setpoint. The DC drive's less efficient, but ONLY durring the times the acceleration resistors are in the circuit, which if I recall correctly, is alarmed at 20 seconds or so on the LIRR's cars (per Budd's book). An AC inverter drive's more efficient because of this lack of series resistance, and little else. And they're nowhere near 100% either (80 - 90% is what you'll realistically see). Chopper DC drives (i.e. phase angle as seen on the Silverliners, pre rebuild Arrows), is as efficient as AC - the only reason NJT saw a 7-10% power drop on the Arrow III rebuilds (per conversations with the engineer involved on the project) was regen durring coasting/braking means a reduced HEP load (as seen by the catenary, the actual load is still the same). It's a known fact the M-7s use a LOT of power - they were derated once on the LIRR already because of this (the infamous 850amp per car limit). They as currently are operated, simply cannot use all 1000 HP, or even close (a more reasonable limit is 750V * 850 amps = 854 HP, but we need to knock out HEP, assuming 30Kw, that's 814HP, then assuming inversion losses, somewhere between 700 and 800 HP, with 750 being the logical number) The Weight is something nothing can be done about the car structure which must be capable og a 1000 000 crush load is never gone weigh less than what they are. 1 million lbs? Hint - read the FRA's regulations - it's 800,000 lbs as of october 2005.: (a)(1) Except as further specified in this paragraph or in paragraph (d), on or after November 8, 1999 all passenger equipment shall resist a minimum static end load of 800,000 pounds applied on the line of draft without permanent deformation of the body structure. (2) For a passenger car or a locomotive, the static end strength of unoccupied volumes may be less than 800,000 pounds if: (i) Energy absorbing structures are used as part of a crash energy management design of the passenger car or locomotive, and (ii) The passenger car or locomotive resists a minimum static end load of 800,000 pounds applied on the line of draft at the ends of its occupied volume without permanent deformation of the body structure. (3) For a locomotive placed in service prior to November 8, 1999, as an alternative to resisting a minimum static end load of 800,000 pounds applied on the line of draft without permanent deformation of the body structure, the locomotive shall resist a horizontal load of 1,000,000 pounds applied along the longitudinal center line of the locomotive at a point on the buffer beam construction 12 inches above the center line of draft without permanent deformation of the body structure. The application of this load shall not be distributed over an area greater than 6 inches by 24 inches. The alternative specified in this paragraph is not applicable to a cab car or an MU locomotive. (4) The requirements of this paragraph do not apply to: (i) A private car; or (ii) Unoccupied passenger equipment operating at the rear of a passenger train. Further, the carbody weight is hardly the dominating factor in railcar weight. In most equipment, the propulsion system weighs far more. It's true for the Silverliners, the M1/2/3/4/6, the Arrows, NYC subway cars, etc etc etc. I'd be surprised if the M-7's carbody - the raw carbody itself - is much over 25,000 lbs, and I doubt it's significantly heavier than the M-1/3 body - probbably 5,000 lbs max. The M-7's are twice as fast accelerating than the M-3's who could never operate at full rate. Nope. And the M-3's pathetic rate's simply because the LIRR yanked the P23/P4 rates on the the older cars years ago to keep from getting hit with demand charges by Lilco. They are fully capeable of accelerating as fast (in fact, faster) than the M-7s - it's simply that they're not set up to. From what I've been told, P2 is about 370 amps on the m-1s at least. Likely a tad higher on the m-3s. DB is a LOT higher on the m-1s, by nearly a factor of 2. Assuming 370 amps, that's about 370hp per car acceleration rate on the '1s, thus 8 hp per ton on the '1s, and assuming 750hp on the '7s (it's damm obvious they run nowhere near 1000 HP), Gee, 12hp per ton. That's not twice as fast, that's maybe 50% faster out the gate. And they fall on their faces at higher speeds, just like the old stuff does. P2 works out to about 1.2mph/s per Budd's book. The M-7's spec'd acceleration was 2.0 mph/s assuming 1000 hp. I'm going to pull a number out of my ass and say it's about 1.5 or so. It's certainly NOT 2.0 - that's where the Silverliner and Arrows are, and the M-7s are NOWHERE near as fast. Further - if the M-7s really WERE twice as fast, then the LIRR would be chopping a LOT of time off their schedules. They're not. In fact, schedules have barely changed at all. Really, you should run some sort of sanity check on your statements in the future, Dutch. You're a great guy on operations / rulebook, but engineering, you're constantly making a fool of yourself with... |
|
|
| (244473) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:21:28 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:01:28 2006. only certain once , with very little seat time. |
|
|
| (244477) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:27:07 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:21:28 2006. Very little seat time . . . ? Perhaps you consider 35 years to be "very little"? |
|
|
| (244483) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:33:20 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by nasadowsk on Sat Apr 22 21:20:38 2006. I operate both M3 and M7's Nasadowski you push elevator buttons.MNCR did not didconnect or limmit P3 and P4 on neither M1 or M3. Just because we now have more running time the time between stations is still set for the slowest equipment not the fastest. and for making a fool out of myself, your right but my pay beats yours by a about 180% |
|
|
| (244484) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:36:37 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:27:07 2006. I got closer to PL42ac's with my son long before most engineers on NJT even knew there was a PL42ac coming. I had pictures from inside the Alstom factory of first one under construction posted on web before your buddy even saw the NJT newsletter with their anouncement. |
|
|
| (244486) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:46:32 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:36:37 2006. Keep it up. Most rails think you're too arrogant for your own good. |
|
|
| (244491) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 21:52:34 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:46:32 2006. So what are they gone do about it ???? try to get smarter?? or will they beat me up ?? |
|
|
| (244495) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 21:56:48 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 22 21:07:06 2006. Oooo Laaaaawwwwddd!!!!! |
|
|
| (244507) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sat Apr 22 22:14:44 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Christopher Rivera on Sat Apr 22 20:42:45 2006. Don't be mad because their seats are uncomfortable or there is no railfan window. The MTA is not in the business of pleasing the railfanI didn't know comfortable seats was a "railfan" thing. |
|
|
| (244508) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:20:00 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 21:03:54 2006. Sure, why should anyone expect EMUs to last more than 30 years when we can just treat them like buses and scrap them at the soonest available moment. Money grows on trees, right? I think they harvest it over in China, just raise the debt limit, borrow some more money and replace those EMUs rather than actually expecting the LIRR's maitenance forces to do their job.The LIRR is like a little kid that broke their toy and now wants another one. I can't wait for the warranty period on the M7s to end and them to be turned over to the LIRR maitenance folks. If they can't keep an M1 running lets see them try to figure an M7 out. |
|
|
| (244510) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 22:22:24 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:20:00 2006. * Yawn * Blah * Yawn * Blah * Yawn * |
|
|
| (244511) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by The Maven on Sat Apr 22 22:22:25 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:20:00 2006. * Yawn * Blah * Yawn * Blah * Yawn * |
|
|
| (244513) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 22:26:14 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:20:00 2006. who do you think maintains them now ??? the shop crafts at mncr and lirr do.only warranty repairs and modifications are done by bombardier |
|
|
| (244520) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by tydev417 on Sat Apr 22 22:30:56 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:20:00 2006. With your thinking, if you were the president of LIRR, you would have steam trains and streamlined cars running because, why upgrade to an EMU, if you could keep the steam trains running forever and save money at the same time?Do you think the LIRR is dumb broke or something? They had money alloted to buying trains, they bought trains, they're in service, they're replacing most of their predecessors. Please...get over it. |
|
|
| (244530) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:42:23 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by tydev417 on Sat Apr 22 22:30:56 2006. No, by my thinking they'd keep stuff around until it had lived out it's useful life. Trashing a high value unit like an EMU after just 30 years is an extremely poor way to run a railroad. I don't care how pissed off the foamers are over the M7's, the simple fact is that by all rights the M1s had another decade in them. It's a sad reflection on the MTA's maitenance forces that they allowed the M1s to get into such sad shape so quickly. Then to make matters worse they went and ordered an EMU which doesn't come close to taking full advantage of the improvement in economy AC traction allows. So they're chopping the M1's lives short, but they aren't getting any real improvement in power consumption to make up for that. |
|
|
| (244531) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Sat Apr 22 22:44:36 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sat Apr 22 22:14:44 2006. You can't get all the pieces right, seats are a minor thing, I think they're comfortable. |
|
|
| (244532) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 22:45:00 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 20:50:29 2006. He made it pretty clear that they are "done" with ROnkonkoma, there will be no further parking or improvements made there.That sounds just plain dumb. Numerous MNRR stations have garages. There's a limit to how far people want to walk, and land is expensive. In fact, MTA could probably make money by building large garages, and then selling off some of the land, which would now be valuable because of its excellent rail access. Downtown White Plains and Stamford land is very expensive in part because of its good rail access. I don't think there's a single MNRR station in Westchester where land isn't extremely valuable. |
|
|
| (244537) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 22:55:18 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 22:45:00 2006. Ronkonkoma already has a parking garage in addition to the acres of parking lots.It makes much more sense to extend electrification eastward, as a very large percentage of these people are coming from points east to Ronkonkoma just because of the service. it's more dumb to have all these people drive all the way to Ronkonkoma from points east. Do you really think Ronkonkoma is such a bustling town that it would have tens of hunreds of thousands of riders on it's own? |
|
|
| (244538) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 22:57:01 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 22:26:14 2006. And it's not like the DM30/DE30 fiasco anyway. The M7's have come in pretty strong. They have exceded all expectation mechanically. |
|
|
| (244540) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:57:27 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Apr 22 19:08:23 2006. If you think for a moment that a M-7 with 1000 hp per car and AC propulsion uses more electricity than a M-3 with DC propulsion and everything wasted through Grid resistors at 660 hp per car your sadly mistaken.Where have I said the M1s or M3s were superior to the M7s? If I gave you that impression I apologize, but I have no problems with the AC traction equipment, the lack of an RFW, or any of the other arguments you apologists for bad railcar design have put in my mouth. I have nothing against the concept of the M7s, even though their purchase would appear to be premature, but I have everything against their execution. If the M7, despite weighing almost 35,000lbs more than the M1, is capable of greater efficiency then just imagine what a lighter weight EMU would have been capable of. SEPTA specified an AC EMU with a weight equal to that of the M7, and Kawasaki, Rotem, Bombardier and Siemens all thought it was possible to build such a vehicle. Chop the 20-30,000lb transformer off the bottom of that thing and you have a 95 to 105,000lb EMU which would actually do something about lowering MN and LIRR's power bills. You claim destruction of track structure by M-7's ??? cool wonder how 298 000 lbs Genesis units and simular DE/DM's don't destruct track ?? Where did I claim destruction of track? I said that the NY Taxpayers would spend millions on power, not on track repairs. Unlike yourselff I try to stick to stuff that I have some inkling about, and the interface of railcar and track is something I know very little bit about at the moment. I do know that Force equals Mass times Acceleration, and that Energy equals Force times displacement, so that by using the same acceleration rates with the same electrical system a lighter weight EMU will save on energy when compared to a heavier EMU over a given distance. |
|
|
| (244544) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 23:02:38 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 22:45:00 2006. In fact, MTA could probably make money by building large garages, and then selling off some of the land, which would now be valuable because of its excellent rail access.Have you seen the area around the Ronkonkoma station? It's a vast wasteland. Any of the retail near the station is in shambles. Vacant stores are the norm. An entire shopping center is basically abandoned as the stores couldn't makeit. Empty lots are the norm. Run down homes are the norm. And this for a station that has thousands upon thousands of cars a day pass though. And tens of thousands of people. The place is such chaos that people just come in and get out as fast as they can. Commuters run to their trains in the morning from their cars, and they run back to their cars in the evening and peel out of the parking lot and away. |
|
|
| (244545) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Apr 22 23:04:08 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:42:23 2006. I thought they're 35 years old. Old enough to be replaced. |
|
|
| (244548) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 23:05:38 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 22 22:57:27 2006. Again, the M1's get 27,000 miles between breakdowns, and the M7's get close to 165,000 miles between breakdowns. The M1's are hardly reliable.The M3's on the other hand are not as dire. They don't perform as well as the M7's, but do much better than the M1 cousins. they will still be around, as the LIRR is overhauling them. |
|
|
| (244549) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 23:06:34 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 22:55:18 2006. Do you really think Ronkonkoma is such a bustling town that it would have tens of hunreds of thousands of riders on it's own?No. Neither are North White Plains and White Plains - they have huge numbers of riders, relatively few of whom live in White Plains. The enticement of a 35 minute ride to GCT is just too much to pass up. I didn't say not to extend electrification. I just suggested that freezing facilities is dumb - there's always room for growth. Though I guess if they electrified to Yaphank, Ronkonkoma would lose zillions of riders and the existing parking facilities there might suffice for quite a few decades. |
|
|
| (244550) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 23:11:17 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 23:06:34 2006. Though I guess if they electrified to Yaphank, Ronkonkoma would lose zillions of riders and the existing parking facilities there might suffice for quite a few decades.That's where it all lies. Since so many of these people do come from points east, Ronkonkoma will actually see a drop in ridership when and if electrification is extended to Yaphank (and remember, Yaphank is not set in stone, Yaphank would be the minimum, but thet have not ruled out any location between Yaphank and Manorville or Riverhead even. ROnkonkoma will actually loose quite a bit of ridership, as anyone east of Patchouge, Port Jefferson or Ronkonkoma will no longer come to Ronkonkoma, but will instead onslaught Medford (between Yaphank and Ronkonkoma), and Yaphank. |
|
|
| (244551) | |
Re: The LIRR President Speaks |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Apr 22 23:12:01 2006, in response to Re: The LIRR President Speaks, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Apr 22 23:02:38 2006. Have you seen the area around the Ronkonkoma station? It's a vast wasteland. Any of the retail near the station is in shambles. Vacant stores are the norm. An entire shopping center is basically abandoned as the stores couldn't makeit. Empty lots are the norm. Run down homes are the norm. And this for a station that has thousands upon thousands of cars a day pass though. And tens of thousands of people. The place is such chaos that people just come in and get out as fast as they can. Commuters run to their trains in the morning from their cars, and they run back to their cars in the evening and peel out of the parking lot and away.No. I'm not familiar with Ronkonkoma. But the interesting thing is that you could be describing White Plains 30 years ago. And now it's jammed with 15-20 story buildings. And while I'm less familiar with Stamford I think the same applies there. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 11 |
||
