|
|
| Re: R-160 Option III Order (840980) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
|
| (841945) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:30:44 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Wed Oct 7 22:43:09 2009. As some of the other posters in this thread pointed out, the A line DID get its allocation of R-42s when they were new. I remember in July of 1969 while on V/R I would get a train of R-42s on the way to work at 207 on the AM but in the 2 weeks I had that run I only had an R-42 once. The rest of the time I had R-10s. While R-42s often ran in consists with other SMEES on the other lines, I only recall seeing R-10s and 42s mixed on the A once and that was due to the R-10s having air doors and R-42s having all electric doors which didn't blend very well. |
|
|
| (841956) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Oct 8 14:43:31 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:30:44 2009. But how did the doors operate while the 42 and the 10 were couples together? Were the electric portions exactly the same, or a little different? |
|
|
| (841963) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:54:15 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Oct 8 14:43:31 2009. The electric portions were the same with the exception of the absence of a PA circuit on the R-10s as originally built. The problem was that there was a slight delay in reaction time on the R-10 doors due to their being air operated. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (841968) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Oct 8 15:03:21 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Q Brightliner Harry on Thu Oct 8 11:45:45 2009. Primary objective when the new equipment came out was to replace as many arnines as possible running in midtown. I suppose that's why Eastern Division got the arnines as hand-me-downs as most of those lines (except for the KK) didn't show up in midtown. And curiously, looks like the choice of sending the arnines to the KK eventually doomed that line as nobody wanted to ride them once air conditioning came to town. |
|
|
| (842017) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Thu Oct 8 16:57:19 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Wed Oct 7 23:56:05 2009. The only R42s on the primary Queens Blvd lines (E and F), prior to GOHs and reassignments were 4924 thru 4949. That of course discounts any of the N trains when they were routed as Queens Blvd locals. |
|
|
| (842029) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 8 18:04:32 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:22:40 2009. Could K cars MU with SMEE cars ? |
|
|
| (842034) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Bill From Maspeth on Thu Oct 8 18:16:27 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by lrg5784 on Wed Oct 7 22:29:16 2009. Well they're not.Well they're not. |
|
|
| (842037) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Bill From Maspeth on Thu Oct 8 18:23:20 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 7 03:05:28 2009. When I worked the Franklin Shuttle a few years ago, one morning rush we had no B/Q service north of Prospect Park for awhile. That was real fun on the shuttle. It was like trying to squeeze 5 lbs. of sugar into a 2 lb. bag. |
|
|
| (842039) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Bill From Maspeth on Thu Oct 8 18:24:27 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:25:20 2009. I've ridden the express after Mets games a couple of times last season and we did not stop at 74th. |
|
|
| (842040) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Thu Oct 8 18:26:49 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by G1Ravage on Thu Oct 8 00:12:01 2009. Thanks. |
|
|
| (842048) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Bzuck on Thu Oct 8 19:16:07 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Bill From Maspeth on Thu Oct 8 18:24:27 2009. I have taken the post game expresses quite often and never stopped at 74th st. The stops are Woodside, QBP, Court house, and Grand Central next. |
|
|
| (842053) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by (3) Livonia Ave. Local on Thu Oct 8 19:40:34 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:25:20 2009. I think it's so that G.O.s that require the (7) to go express can do so either after stopping at 74th St or with stopping at 74th St after going express. But, more recently, Flushing G.O.s have been the (7) be a full express all the way. But, it has been used before in that capacity. |
|
|
| (842120) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Oct 8 23:54:50 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Edwards! on Thu Oct 8 05:58:45 2009. I'd be interested in seeing the proof. A historian of the A line says otherwise. |
|
|
| (842143) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Fri Oct 9 01:12:16 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 8 14:25:20 2009. They have never been used for that purpose thus far. Express trains and super express trains do not stop at 74 Street - Broadway. |
|
|
| (842192) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Oct 9 09:59:59 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Bill From Maspeth on Thu Oct 8 18:24:27 2009. They put in the switches there so when they run a GO that has trains running express in one direction they can stop at 74th. I suppose that also means that they have a way to supply third rail power to the area of the station independantly of the rest of the local tracks. |
|
|
| (842567) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 10 16:49:13 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Thu Oct 8 23:54:50 2009. As I said in another post in this thread, I was a V/R M/M who worked the A line in 1969 when the R-42s were new and I lived in Wash Hts. I rode them quite frequently an even operated them on rare occasions in that year. |
|
|
| (842572) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 10 16:51:38 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 8 18:04:32 2009. Probably not, since even though both car types had SMEE brake systems, each agency/company had its own idea for electrical propulsion systems as well as the H & M's and later PATH's desire to have more sophisticated door operating circuits than the NYCTA. |
|
|
| (842583) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 17:07:09 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 10 16:51:38 2009. PATH seemed to have gotten their door circuits all screwy though. Instead of Empty-yay's synchronized bell ringers, PATH cars are a cacophony of independent bongs which have no sense of coordination at all. It's hysterical to listen to. :) |
|
|
| (842624) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 10 19:47:59 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Thu Oct 8 23:54:50 2009. Were YOU not a subway rider back then?How could you not know this? |
|
|
| (842627) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Bill From Maspeth on Sat Oct 10 20:07:58 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 10 16:51:38 2009. You can say this about PATH too: when it was under H & M, they had the K cars with working air conditioning, whereas the TA had 6239 outfitted for a/c and taken out 2 weeks later because it didn't work. |
|
|
| (842629) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 20:14:16 2009, in response to R-160 Option III Order, posted by TheCiskoKid on Tue Oct 6 09:41:55 2009. Also who's saying these R160's will go to the A? Couldn't the MTA just send them to Jamaica and shove off more R46's over to the A line? |
|
|
| (842631) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:23:02 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 20:14:16 2009. Yours is a reasonable thought that was mentioned Thursday. In the real world some might say it makes sense to have a unified fleet on the A line. As of Thursday at 3 PM this was not the popular thinking.Whether the R-160 option III comes to pass or the R-179s are ordered and delivered early, it appears that the new fleet will be assigned to the A line and may be far soooner than previously believed. Things are changing on a daily basis. Stay tuned. |
|
|
| (842637) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 20:37:27 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:23:02 2009. Interesting, thanks.Yeah I would've figured that a single fleet [like with the R68's only on the D] would be a better fit for the A/C lines vs a 2nd fleet of cars [the 10-car train sets] that could be maintained at two yards [Jamaica and CI]. |
|
|
| (842638) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:43:14 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 10 19:47:59 2009. Back in the 60s I primarilly rode the Brighton Line to Dekalb Ave or the Queens Blvd Line & the G to Fulton St. I rarely used the A line but I will say this. There is a difference between one new consist running a line and the fleet being assigned there. Back in the early 1970s, the R-44 fleet was assigned to Jamaica Shop. The very elaborate diagnostic equipment was installed there. No such installations were made at Pitkin Shop. The last new fleet based at Pitkin Shop were the R-10s to the best of my knowledge. When the allocations of the R-160s were being discussed, this fact was stated (unchallanged) to TA President Howard Roberts by my (then) boss. That's the best I can do. |
|
|
| (842639) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:50:09 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 20:37:27 2009. The A Line runs 38 full length trains and 3 shuttles while the C runs 18 full length trains. With the allocation of spare cars, that would require 532 cars - clearly doable - leaving Jamaica 220 R-46s.I would assume that the concerns are primarilly political at this point. |
|
|
| (842640) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 20:52:05 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:43:14 2009. This may help ... back in 1969-1970, the Empty-yay droids hadn't taken over full management as yet and the 42's and 44's were considered political footballs because they were the first of the full-fleet "air conditioned cars." As such, political brinkmanship demanded that they appear on every line even in the token amount of just onje consist. With the 42's, that often meant just a couple of cars mixed in with 38's and 40's or even R10's if needed just to spread them around. Even the CC got a set of 42's and later 44's regardless of which yard they "belonged to."Remarkably, in the old days, sending a trainset home to another yard didn't require a boardroom meeting or a mission statement, it was just another WAA job similar to sending someone to pick up an ABD and tow it somewhere. No big deal back then. I can also confirm seeing at least one trainset and some frankentrains consisting of the new cars even on the AA and GG. Doing so was a political necessity. |
|
|
| (842645) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 21:15:18 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:50:09 2009. That's true. Sadly what the 'politicians/public wants' is likely what they are going to get. |
|
|
| (842648) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:23:19 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 21:15:18 2009. And didn't Liu win the primary with a total of four votes in some districts? You KNOW Liu is going to insist on the shiniest. |
|
|
| (842650) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 21:30:24 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:23:19 2009. Oy... I'd rather have Thompson as comptroller again. |
|
|
| (842653) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:33:04 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 21:30:24 2009. Heh. I thought that would make some ears prick up. :)But yeah, if he gets the gig, they'll be running R-160's on the (7) no matter WHAT it takes. Heh. |
|
|
| (842655) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 21:34:10 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Sat Oct 10 16:49:13 2009. If you say so. I have nothing but anecdotal evidence - same as you have. |
|
|
| (842656) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 21:35:09 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:33:04 2009. They are getting the R-188s. Can't get much newer than that |
|
|
| (842657) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:36:15 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 21:35:09 2009. Heh. But this is LIU we're talking ... he wants his cruise boats *NOW*, mister! :) |
|
|
| (842664) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Oct 10 22:02:39 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Wed Oct 7 23:56:05 2009. And, of course, The French Connection cars originally ran on the Norton. |
|
|
| (842666) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 22:09:29 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Oct 10 22:02:39 2009. And now they sit in Pitkin yard |
|
|
| (842671) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 22:20:52 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 21:33:04 2009. To be honest, I would love it if the 7 line east of QBP ran B division trains and connected to the Broadway line. |
|
|
| (842675) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 22:22:14 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 21:35:09 2009. True, but aren't they just single unit cars to be inserted into existing 10-car R142/a trains? |
|
|
| (842681) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 22:36:23 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 22:20:52 2009. Sounds like someone's pulling a lever for Liu. :) |
|
|
| (842683) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 22:41:05 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 22:36:23 2009. lol, nah, all he'd do is complain about it. But no matter how much bitching one makes, nothing's gonna change the Flushing line setup :( |
|
|
| (842687) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Union Turnpike on Sat Oct 10 22:50:02 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 7 02:57:04 2009. I think mixing began with the R12s and went through the R42s though I think some cars weren't mixed.Some I recall: R40M/R42 R32 Brightliner/R38 R27/R30 R15/R17 R12/R14 R12/R14/R15/R17 |
|
|
| (842689) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 22:51:03 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 22:41:05 2009. Except for G1Ravage if you taunteth him too much. He can wedge a train faster than you can say "watch the closing ... whoops." :) |
|
|
| (842693) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 10 23:09:41 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 10 20:43:14 2009. The problem here is you are thinking as a manager/supervisor instead of a fan right now.Okay..did you know that the 42s were placed on damn near every B division line during those times[late 60's-early 70] to spread AC CARS around..? Also ..regardless of what kind of "elaborate diagnostic equipment"JAMAICA HAD...the R44 still ran in A service. Not Only did the A get them..the D,F and E got them too...so Jamaica didn't get all 300 cars. |
|
|
| (842694) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 10 23:14:56 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 20:52:05 2009. Exactly so...I remember all that and I'm suprised that he's playing the "I don't remember that" game here when it's very "all over the place" in subway history! |
|
|
| (842698) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 23:38:22 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 10 23:14:56 2009. He might have been an out of towner at the time. :)He does claim a system historian as his source, and it wouldn't surprise me at all that the entire fleet was owned by Jamaica on paper at least. Hell, ALL the new toys belonged to the E and the F. Never got to run any 38's or 40's in revenue and as to the 42's, only ONCE. But any such paper would have been MTA paper, and we all know what MTA's paper railroad was worth before 1971. Hell ... lookit how long it took them to find Don Harold's LoV's? Heh. |
|
|
| (842710) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sun Oct 11 00:49:33 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Grand Concourse on Sat Oct 10 21:15:18 2009. Political, in this case, I would believe refers to internal line management politics. |
|
|
| (842711) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sun Oct 11 00:50:48 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 10 22:36:23 2009. I pulled a lever a today. :-) |
|
|
| (842715) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Oct 11 00:54:46 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by G1Ravage on Sun Oct 11 00:49:33 2009. Liu probably has a building pass. :) |
|
|
| (842716) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Oct 11 00:55:14 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by G1Ravage on Sun Oct 11 00:50:48 2009. Are you SURE? Heh. Lemme C ... :) |
|
|
| (842721) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sun Oct 11 01:14:52 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by Union Turnpike on Sat Oct 10 22:50:02 2009. I recall every cars of every A-Division class from R12 to R33 running in the same train. |
|
|
| (842727) | |
Re: R-160 Option III Order |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Sun Oct 11 01:33:56 2009, in response to Re: R-160 Option III Order, posted by G1Ravage on Sun Oct 11 00:49:33 2009. Oh, ok. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
