|
|
| Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? (661178) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 6 |
||
|
| (662501) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 21:38:39 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Aug 5 23:08:30 2008. R-9's had clasp brakes with two shoes to each wheel.LO-V's had only one shoe to each wheel. I think the break cilenders were the same. Both had electric breaks with the R-9 using the same plug as the AB's. The LO-V's used a key like the cutting key for uncoupling. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662514) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 21:47:44 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Aug 5 22:43:06 2008. HI KEVENThere is a relay in the R-9 group switch wich is hot all the time so the coating on the coil gets cooked after years. Rewinding a relay is no big deal if you have the little machine with the counter. Have to look at Ebay and see if I can find one. Have to get the wire too and bet it is not cheap. Might be able to get GE to do the work. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662524) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Wed Aug 6 21:51:27 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Wed Aug 6 21:34:09 2008. :( I am sorry, i wasn't here when it was explained. May you explain?I have seen strings of five to six or so lightbulbs hung on tunnel walls in areas of trackwork. I assumed they ran off of the 600 volt DC power. the only reason i can think of why they would explode is because there is a temporary short circuit when they burn out, due to the arc-over, so this would cut one lightbulb out, and the other lightbulbs would get 120 volts each instead of 100, but i don't think the 120 volts would cause an explosion. Would the bulb that burns out explode? Does it have to do with the arc behaving differently under DC current? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (662533) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Wed Aug 6 21:56:51 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Gerry6309 on Wed Aug 6 07:22:37 2008. Maybe someone forgot to swap the forward and reverse wires on one end, or swapped them where they shouldn'thave? Nope, because that would have caused a consistent condition, whereas this was intermitten. If the reverser doesn't throw. the interlocks will prevent the Line Switch from closing. True, but what did Holmes say about the impossible vs the improbable? I'll explain in agonizing technical detail what happened. I know you are very familiar with PC-5, but I don't know how well you know PC-10. The line switch pickup circuit starts with the forward or reverse trainline energized (they are inexplicably numbered 4/5 on IRT equipment rather than the more conventional 1/2). Let's say we want to go forward. One branch energizes the FWD magnet valve, through an interlock which is made when the reverser is NOT in forward. On the negative side of that magnet valve circuit is an interlock proving the line switch in the OUT position, then to ground. The other branch continues through an interlock on the reverser which is only made when it is fully forward. So far, so good. Now that latter branch, as you know, continues through various interlocks, e.g. the overload relay is not tripped, the PC-10 drum is in the home position, and eventually winds up at the coil of the line switch, where the circuit completes through the '0' trainline back to the master controller to ground. I'm sure you know how GE relays are constructed in general, and perhaps you've seen a GE potential relay (PTR). With a GE relay, the moving armature and the coil core and support frame are all connected, as is the moving contact. The stationary contact is held on an insulated block. In this particular case, the moving contact is part of that line switch pickup circuit (32V). The coil of the potential relay is connected to 600V, through some dropping resistors. The coil insulation had developed a puncture, such that in certain positions of the car, the coil winding touched the support frame, creating in effect a high-resistance short between 600V and the line switch circuit. All of this might have not caused a noticeable problem, but the reverser was also a little bit sluggish. So, if power was requested in the forward direction, but the reverser was in reverse, this 600-32 V short would effectively bypass the reverser interlock, allowing the line switch to pick up. Once that happens, the reverser magnet valve interlock is broken, and the reverser, being stiff, stays in the reverse position. At any rate this problem has long since been corrected. Once the PTR was removed, the bad spot on the coil was quite obvious (but while it was on the car it was pretty much impossible to see). The relay was rewound. |
|
|
| (662536) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 21:58:42 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by irt1958 on Tue Aug 5 23:04:24 2008. I could get the first car of an R36 train to stop at the five carmarker with a four car train with the start at the beggining of the platform. LO-V's could lock the wheels on wet track and you would not know it. I had Mike crying on the Sea Beach line as I had the wheels locked up and it was sliding at a good pace but the water was keeping them from getting flats. When we move 5466 at Branford it takes a lot on a rainy day to move it as the wheels spin very easy. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662539) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 22:04:30 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by irt1958 on Wed Aug 6 10:59:58 2008. Needed a whole hazmat outfit for that not just a mask.They did a good job when they rebuilt them and took care of all the trouble. Best looking of the arch roof SMEE's. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662542) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 22:11:52 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Aug 5 22:52:52 2008. Had one SMEE in the river tube in Brooklyn that was going so fastthat it starting bonce up and down and that was the last time I tried to see how fast I could go in the tubes. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662548) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by R33/R36 mainline on Wed Aug 6 22:18:19 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Aug 5 22:52:52 2008. When i rode on those runs, the 68's on the D line was OUTPACING the R1/9 train. Arnies have somewhat sluggsh takeoff, but once they get moving they can FLY!! |
|
|
| (662559) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Wed Aug 6 22:35:21 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Wed Aug 6 22:18:19 2008. That's the thing...the Hippo took off at the same time as us, it had a head start at first, but their acceleration died down, and it felt like the arnine acceleration kicked up...and we began outpacing the hippo. |
|
|
| (662561) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 22:40:40 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Wed Aug 6 21:56:51 2008. WHO is rewinding the relays?Want to get the ones on our R-9 done. Some one had to ask that question. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662588) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Buffer on Wed Aug 6 23:13:02 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Wed Aug 6 22:18:19 2008. How did you directly compare the two? Did you really calculate the speed and accelerate when on the R-9 vs the usual R-68? |
|
|
| (662590) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by R-1-9 on Wed Aug 6 23:14:35 2008, in response to What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Mon Aug 4 14:42:52 2008. It will nice if people give out the correct info,why the Low-V are not running.The grids were 1 thing,and they are fixed,and a electrical problem is being worked on.A car of that age will have some problems,just like the R-1-9,s. |
|
|
| (662654) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 7 01:53:25 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by irt1958 on Wed Aug 6 18:47:18 2008. Used to run 'em for a paycheck ... loved them. And 30 years later, got to run 1689 at Branford again for that fine nostalgic wax. Seeing them is one thing, RUNNING them is a lot more fun! :) |
|
|
| (662655) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 7 01:57:08 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 21:47:44 2008. When I was younger, I had one of those Lafayette Radio "coil winders" with a hand crank and a spinner dial on it with a pointer that would point to how many turns you did. Wish I still had it. Yeah, I've done that kind of stuff, both layered and honeycombed windings ... 36 or 600 volt on that coil? |
|
|
| (662656) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu Aug 7 02:00:26 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Broadway Buffer on Mon Aug 4 19:41:47 2008. MK is now Alstom. |
|
|
| (662708) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by R33/R36 mainline on Thu Aug 7 07:50:15 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Broadway Buffer on Wed Aug 6 23:13:02 2008. Have you ever heard of a station called West 4th street?????Where the V line (The line the arines was running on). Runs arocss the platform from the D line. And the R68 D train left the same time as the R1/9 V train. Both trains was leaving the station at the same time and the 68 was going FASTER. |
|
|
| (662739) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Gerry6309 on Thu Aug 7 11:07:57 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Wed Aug 6 21:56:51 2008. Interesting combination of failures. Thanks for the rundown. I understand perfectly the combination of events and why a fuse didn't blow. Murphy does state thatif you design for 10 ways something can go wrong, an 11th will develop. Oddly, the same failure might not happen on our Orange Line 0900s at Seashore, since the leakage current might not be enough to close the Hi-V Line Breaker. Then again... |
|
|
| (662753) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Gerry6309 on Thu Aug 7 11:30:38 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Tue Aug 5 22:43:01 2008. With all the material Seashore has accumulated, nothing beats the NOPSI Maintenance Manual for explaining "How it works". Donald Curry retyped a lot of that material for the ARM reprint. Still, when you find yourself with a K-35GG controller that someone installed a K-35F drum in, you can go crazy without a full set of K controller diagrams. (Happened last spring @ Seashore)Do you have any material from GE/Westinghouse on the more recent cam controls? |
|
|
| (662803) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 13:40:04 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Wed Aug 6 22:18:19 2008. IIRC prewar equipment accelerated more slowly, something like 1.25 to 1.5 mph/sec on level track. The SMEEs accelerate faster, something like 2.5 mph/sec on level track. Plus the R-68s have a higher gear ratio. OTOH given time, the R-1/9s can howl ass. |
|
|
| (662837) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by FLASH GORDON on Thu Aug 7 15:11:08 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Broadway Buffer on Wed Aug 6 23:13:02 2008. Were the signals and track conditions the same and was the powerthe same? IRT has more power on the local tracks to help the trains to get moving faster. FLASH GORDON |
|
|
| (662839) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Subterranean Railway on Thu Aug 7 15:16:05 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 13:40:04 2008. Don't forget that the R68 has field shunting disabled... "Rapid Transit" indeed... |
|
|
| (662858) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 16:24:57 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Subterranean Railway on Thu Aug 7 15:16:05 2008. Well, the final field shunt step is disabled. Yeah, it's leisurely transit now. You'll get there - eventually. |
|
|
| (662861) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 16:27:08 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 13:40:04 2008. just for the fun of it,what speed did an R9 reach at pueblo,colorado? |
|
|
| (662882) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by irt1958 on Thu Aug 7 16:59:35 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 7 01:53:25 2008. I hear you cap'n, there can be no comparision, you earned the previlege. ;^) |
|
|
| (662883) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by irt1958 on Thu Aug 7 17:00:35 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 7 01:53:25 2008. I hear you bro, there can be no comparision, you earned the previlege. ;) |
|
|
| (662906) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by David on Thu Aug 7 17:53:19 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Subterranean Railway on Thu Aug 7 15:16:05 2008. Disabling the field shunting doesn't affect the initial acceleration rate, which remains 2.5 mph/s.David |
|
|
| (662914) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Tony Clifton on Thu Aug 7 18:13:43 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Thu Aug 7 07:50:15 2008. "And the R68 D train left the same time as the R1/9 V train. Both trains was leaving the station at the same time and the 68 was going FASTER."That line of reasoning is invalid. |
|
|
| (662925) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 18:44:47 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by FLASH GORDON on Thu Aug 7 15:11:08 2008. really? I never knew that. it makes sense, but is the same done for the IND local tracks too?By the way, the SMEEs on the IRT are definately faster than the SMEEs on the IND/BMT, probably the entire IRT has a higher voltage, PATH also has a higher voltage, though that is kind of unrelated. |
|
|
| (662938) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 18:59:14 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by FLASH GORDON on Wed Aug 6 21:38:39 2008. Isn't the only difference between clasp brakes and tread brakes because tread brakes use one shoe, while clasp brakes use two? So Lo-Vs had tread brakes?Also, what do you mean by electric brakes? Wasn't the only electric part the "electric hold"? I know there was an electric part which activated all brakes at once, but the brakes themselves were air brakes. Couldn't you revert to slack-in braking if you didn't put the plug in? |
|
|
| (662974) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 19:45:12 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 16:27:08 2008. AFAIK no R-1/9s ever came out here. OTOH a pair of R-42s did. |
|
|
| (662989) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Aug 7 20:19:21 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 19:45:12 2008. Yeah, I was thinking TTC wasn't around until the late 1960s... |
|
|
| (662993) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 20:24:39 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Aug 7 19:45:12 2008. And what was the top speed that the R42s hit??? |
|
|
| (663131) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:14:17 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 20:24:39 2008. I believe the article was in rail pace magazine about 6 years ago a lone R9,with special field shunting hit 98mph,now thata walkin` the dog. |
|
|
| (663136) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:19:08 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:14:17 2008. more fun.whats the higest speed a train of R9`s reached on the A line? |
|
|
| (663138) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 23:19:53 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:14:17 2008. WOAH!!!! WOAH!!!! THAT IS EXCELLENT!!!! For some reason, i am glad to hear this. Did they have a modfied gearbox??? Wouldn't that make them the fastest subway cars???But i guess not standard equipment. But that is fast...EXCELLENT!!!Now a side note...people might not believe you. I remember reading about an R30 WHICH HIT 70 MPH, but people say that is impossible, maybe it was an R30 test by the MTA? But i believe you... |
|
|
| (663140) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 23:20:26 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:19:08 2008. 75 MPH in the tubes???!?!?!? |
|
|
| (663142) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 23:20:59 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 23:19:53 2008. And just for the record, i will quote that 98MPH figure in the futurE!!! |
|
|
| (663147) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Aug 7 23:34:29 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Wed Aug 6 21:34:09 2008. I'm not trying to be cute here, but I must have missed those postings...could someone tell me why household bulbs could explode under DC current, and what's different between AC & DC bulbs? |
|
|
| (663150) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Thu Aug 7 23:43:10 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Aug 7 23:20:59 2008. you have my blessings.I don`t know the gear ratio,don`t remember reading it. |
|
|
| (663175) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Buffer on Fri Aug 8 01:23:36 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by R33/R36 mainline on Thu Aug 7 07:50:15 2008. Yeah I have, and let me tell ya something, that line of reasoning AIN'T valid. There are so many reasons why that local could have been going slower, especially if this was S/B at W4. There are too many variables for it to be a fair comparison. The 'proff' ain't in the pudding. |
|
|
| (663185) | |
R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 02:00:57 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Broadway Buffer on Fri Aug 8 01:23:36 2008. No, as a qualified arnine motorman, there IS a significant difference in the acceleration rates of the prewar and postwar cars, and that's universal across all of the older equipment with the possible exception of the Bluebirds and maybe the Multis. I'm not a "gearhead" like some of the experts who frequent this joint, but as a motorman, I knew what my equipment and the railroad was like.It's the NUMBERS I'm not certain of, but hope I'm right. The prewar cars had an acceleration curve of 1.75 Miles per second per second whereas the postwar cars were something on the order of 3.5 (maybe it was 2.5 but whatever, SMEEs and later had a LOT more "pep") ... it's only the actual numbers I'm unsure of, operating them is definite. :) The original IND was designed so that (with R1/9's) you wrapped the controller around and KEPT it there! And I mean from the second you took off from any IND station until you entered the next. Operating them (aside from timers) was WRAP it, hit balancing speed, and then COAST like there's no tomorrow until the speed fell off on an express run and you needed to give it another third notch post to regain. IND was built for speed, but the arnines themselves were also designed for another aspect of how the IND was designed - if there was going to be a curve or jog, it was usually right at the end of the platform. So even between 14 on the A and W4 and other locations, you WRAPPED it taking off into a hard curve. Railroad was BUILT for that. Second notch was for interlockings except for terminals. And the original prewar acceleration curve let you do that without worrying about "whipping" your tail cars. :) With the lower acceleration rate though, an arnine did not stand a chance for a "sprint" ... they won on ENDURANCE because once they DID get up to balancing speed, they could beat any SMEE by the difference between a walk and a brisk stroll ... they topped out about 2-4 MPH faster than any SMEE. So on an express run, you'd pass the local even before it was applying brake. But arnines would NEVER win a "sprint" against anything newer. Took a while to get up to speed. And this comparison is based on the OLDER SMEE's before GOH and neutering. Nowadays it's not a fair drop at all. Heh. A SMEE will *still* beat any arnine at takeoff, but since the museum arnines still have their balls uncut, it must be impressive how much faster they can run than the current fleet as it exists. Bottom line, arnines are slower if you're compating at takeoff acceleration ... but once they stretch their legs, no contest ... not even "back in the day." =) |
|
|
| (663188) | |
Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:16:47 2008, in response to R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?), posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 02:00:57 2008. they topped out about 2-4 MPH faster than any SMEE.The "SMEE" cars were designed for a slightly HIGHER balancing speed of 50 MPH vs 45 MPH for the R1-9 fleet. After "neutering", the current "SMEE" cars balance at about 39 or 40. |
|
|
| (663190) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:23:47 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Gerry6309 on Thu Aug 7 11:07:57 2008. What are the 0900's, PC-5? I know nothing about them. Theyare line voltage control? Is there the equivalent of a PTR? Often it was not included with hi-v control since the loss of 600 would cause the line breakers to drop out anyway. |
|
|
| (663191) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:28:09 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Gerry6309 on Thu Aug 7 11:30:38 2008. By "more recent" you mean WH ElectroCAM (ca 1955), GE MCM andSCM? We have some stuff...of course we have an MCM car (the 1955 R-17 subway car). Check with Billy P. up there as you guys got one car with WH CAM (the R-33 single), and another which was retrofitted with SCM as a work motor. He has drawings on both...last time I visited I corrected a peculiar failure in the SCM group which was a contactor that had gotten stuck. |
|
|
| (663193) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:51:08 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Aug 7 23:34:29 2008. "Street Railway" bulbs, designed to be operated in series stringsof 5 from a 600VDC line, have two specific design characteristics: 1) The envelope is not filled with an inert gas, but is pure vacuum. 2) The filament support has a "Jacbob's Ladder" shape which tends to stretch out the arc when the filament fails. When the filament of an ordinary household bulb fails, either because of mechanical shock or age, the arc which results has the full force of 600 volts behind it, 5 times more than the 120 volts seen in household service. It is DC, meaning the arc is not self-commuting. The result is often that the arc fails to extinguish, and instead ionizes the inert gas, briefly turning the bulb into an arc light until the heat produced by it produces enough pressure to cause the envelope to shatter. Or, the arc flashes down into the screw base and then into the socket, destroying the socket and wiring and often igniting whatever is nearby. |
|
|
| (663200) | |
Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 03:35:44 2008, in response to Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?), posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:16:47 2008. Hey guy! :)Was sorta hoping you could confirm my "numbers" since you actually KNOW that stuff ... were the SMEEs 2.5 or 3.5? I'm pretty sure I'm OK with the 1.75 on the arnines as best as I remember schoolcar but I can't remember what the 32's and 42's did for "Our Blessed Lady of Acceleration." Heh. I can only tell you how it was when I ran, but was VERY often I left 59/CC NB or 125 SB with my local across from me both releasing and yanking at the same time as me ... as well as OTHER spots. I'd watch anywhere from 6 to all 8 cars pass me in my cab window where we'd finally "match speed" and this was 1970/1971 before the "retroactive bris" ... once I was behind by 6-8 cars with 32's and 42's, I'd match speed and then start slowly passing them. And on the IND at the time, even with the faster rate, we were NOT restricted as far as "third notch" leaving, except of course on the "dumpy" BMT. (grin) So NOW you have me interested once again since I only became interested in any of the technicals LONG after I stopped waiting for the Eagle to qwappeth, but my own operation (unless I was violating secret rule 12) gave me a different experience. And whilst frothers think running trains was some sort of drag race, I fondly remember when I worked there losing the initial post position to many "newer" locals, but I DUSTED them once the pitch stopped climbing by a few MPH (not all that much, but enough) and just silently going "YEAH!" to myself ... heh. I was 20 at the time, yada-yada. =) |
|
|
| (663202) | |
Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 03:44:21 2008, in response to Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?, posted by Jeff H. on Fri Aug 8 02:51:08 2008. *THANKS* Unca Jeff! That's a failure mode even I hadn't considered when this thread came up ... all I can say is THANK YOU for not giving up on this place - THIS is the reason I even bother hanging out here anymore. Tidbits are rare, but this one was TRULY worth all the other nonsense! THANKS! :) |
|
|
| (663204) | |
Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Fri Aug 8 04:16:24 2008, in response to Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?), posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 03:35:44 2008. Selkirk: Smee cars had an accleration rate of 2.5mphps. The sprinting champs are the Multis, which had a rate of 4mphps and the PCC cars, with 4.25mphps. There is still no vehicle I know of today which can out accelerate a PCC car. |
|
|
| (663205) | |
Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Fri Aug 8 04:24:13 2008, in response to Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?), posted by 5119 on Fri Aug 8 04:16:24 2008. Not sure what the acclearation rate was of the Lo-V's. I've ridden them since the early 50's unptil the time they ere removed from service. I do remember riding the 5 ca Museum Lo-V's on a few occasions and they SEEMED to accelerate faster then the cars the had a combination of motor and trailer cars. |
|
|
| (663206) | |
Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 8 05:12:39 2008, in response to Re: R1/9 acceleration (Re: What is the mechanical condition of the Low V?), posted by 5119 on Fri Aug 8 04:16:24 2008. Heh. When I was a kid, had a friend whose dad worked the Newark City subway. I *GOT* some "footsie" with those "Public Service" PCC's when they weren't NJT. WOWSERS, they could MOVE! I'd go OUT there on Saturdays just for some "quality SEAT time." :)THANKS for the number! Wasn't sure if it was a 2 or a 3 there. And yeah, *HAD* BMT survived, we wouldn't be living with the qwap running these days, and the IND would have ended up being a pathetic joke instead of the "other way around." |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 6 |
||
