|
|
| PA-5's kick R160 @ss (851651) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
|
| (851657) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Mon Nov 2 18:33:35 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. [The PA-5s] … ride smoother and are quieter than the subway's NTT cars.The same could be said about PATH's older cars. |
|
|
| (851662) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:38:22 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by R36 #9346 on Mon Nov 2 18:33:35 2009. Apples and oranges. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (851702) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by BEDT26 on Mon Nov 2 20:29:01 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. I have to agree with you, plus the PA-5 is much more attractive too. |
|
|
| (851705) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Westcode44 on Mon Nov 2 20:31:21 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. I hope to ride soon..waitin on Mr. R.T., BMTguy, Lord Vader, Hartbus and Lou from Bklyn.WE-44 |
|
|
| (851712) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Mon Nov 2 20:44:30 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. LMAO @ the thread title! |
|
|
| (851715) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 20:46:48 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Mon Nov 2 20:44:30 2009. It's true!Anyone know why they are numbered the way they are? I'd think they'd use numbers starting with #1000, not #5600. Why 5600? |
|
|
| (851773) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Mon Nov 2 22:27:36 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 20:46:48 2009. Basically they kept the same numbering series but added a "5" in front of it. The single-ended motors will be 5600-5769 and the non-control motors will be 5100-5269.Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (851775) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 22:35:19 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Mon Nov 2 22:27:36 2009. I still don't understand why they are keeping them as single units than like linked sets. Or at least an a-b pair. |
|
|
| (851786) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by INDependent on Mon Nov 2 23:08:16 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. Better -- unless of course you'd like to look out the front. Then you'd have to like staring at solid metal to like the PA-5! |
|
|
| (851788) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Buffer on Mon Nov 2 23:25:53 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 22:35:19 2009. I would think it allows for more flexibility. Look at some of the problems NYCT has encountered with linked sets. Most recently the R-46s that were transferred to the A in which they needed the AA pairs. |
|
|
| (851793) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 23:40:11 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Broadway Buffer on Mon Nov 2 23:25:53 2009. I guess that's true. But I still would think linked sets would be better than indiviual units though. imo. |
|
|
| (851820) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by R32_3672 on Tue Nov 3 02:18:02 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 23:40:11 2009. Iawt thread they p3wn the R160's and they got Nbc on their monitors that show the weather compared 2 the junky R160 that tells about itself and adds about the Mta rules. Smh |
|
|
| (851847) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 08:00:22 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. That's kinda ass backwards because in reality the PA-5s are shrunken R-160Bs with some tweeks here and there. The Port Authority even made it a sticking point that they essentially got the same car as the MTA at a MUCH cheaper price per car.Yeah that's sticking it to the MTA. -Trevor www.ttmg.org |
|
|
| (851852) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 3 08:08:03 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 08:00:22 2009. um, it makes total sense that they would be cheaper. nothing was stuck to the MTA. you're wrong again. |
|
|
| (851855) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 08:13:52 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Mon Nov 2 22:27:36 2009. Ok, I read that the breakdown of the order was 130 A-Cars (5600-5729) and 210 B-Cars (5100-5309).Piece from Railway Age Article also stating about the amount of A-Cars: PATH operates four terminals—Newark, World Trade Center, 33rd Street (Manhattan) and Hoboken—13 stations, and four core weekday services—Newark-WTC, WTC-Hoboken, 33rd Street-Hoboken, and 33rd Street-Journal Square (Jersey City)—with shared track. The CBTC system will be deployed in sections; much of the legacy automatic block system with mechanical trip-stops will, at least for a time, be retained as a fallback, and as a means to operate non-CBTC-equipped railcars. Onboard CBTC equipment will be installed inside 130 PA-5 cars equipped with an operator’s cab; these cars, like NYCT’s R-142 and R-160 cars (supplied by Alstom and Kawasaki) have been designed and built "CBTC-ready." -Trevor www.ttmg.org |
|
|
| (851869) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Nov 3 08:54:23 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Westcode44 on Mon Nov 2 20:31:21 2009. Oh man, you must mean the PA-7.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (851886) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 09:14:57 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. Yes, those are pretty cars. I like the blue enamel. Is PATH a railroad or rapid transit? I take it that PATH cars are cut to B-division dimensions? |
|
|
| (851887) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Tue Nov 3 09:16:49 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 09:14:57 2009. IINM PATH is considered a railroad. The cars are not cut to B division as they would be too wide to fit, it is closer to A division but 1 can correct me if I am wrong |
|
|
| (851896) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 3 09:21:13 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 09:14:57 2009. Is PATH a railroad or rapid transit?That's been debated here countless times. |
|
|
| (851900) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by chuchubob on Tue Nov 3 09:26:17 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 09:14:57 2009. Is PATH a railroad or rapid transit?Yes, of course. |
|
|
| (851909) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Neil Feldman on Tue Nov 3 09:50:22 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. It has a quieter propulsion sound thatn the R160B version of it! I bet the R179 will take that PA5 design on a bit! |
|
|
| (851910) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 09:51:37 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 09:14:57 2009. PATH Cars are 51 feet long, have a width of approximately 9 feet 4 inches and are 9 feet high.Pulled from an Article about PATH and the FRA: While the PATH resembles a typical intraurban heavy rail rapid transit service, it is in fact a railroad under the jurisdiction of the Federal Railroad Administration. PATH continues to be subject to FRA regulations because it used to share trackage with Pennsylvania Railroad in the section between Hudson interlocking near Harrison and Journal Square. In more recent past the line continued to have a connection to the Amtrak mainline near Harrison station and also near Hudson tower, but these connections have since been severed as the track layout at Hudson interlocking has been modified considerably. While the PATH does operate under a number of grandfather waivers, it is required to do things not typically seen on American transit systems. Some of these include the proper fitting of grab irons to all PATH rolling stock, the use of federally certified locomotive engineers, and compliance with the federal railroad hours of service regulations. While the PATH did once share trackage with the Pennsylvania Railroad, this joint running and all interlocking connections to the former rail lines have been cut, except for one diamond crossing on a siding near the Hudson tower. Due to its isolation from the national rail network, PATH could potentially end its status as a railroad. However this railroad status might prove valuable if PATH were to extend service along existing rail routes as normally transit lines are required to either run on separate rights of way or time share with FRA railroads. The PATH shares a similar status with the Staten Island Railway, which is also an FRA railroad running on a somewhat different waiver. Hope this helps. -Trevor www.ttmg.org |
|
|
| (851921) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 10:32:39 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 09:51:37 2009. Yes. Thanks. I didn't think this was a point of debate. I simply didn't know the answer. With width <10' they could run on B-division routes, right? Can anyone briefly explain what "federal railroad hours of service regulations" means? |
|
|
| (851925) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Tue Nov 3 10:39:10 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Nov 3 10:32:39 2009. Train crews under FRA can not work more than 12 hours per calendar day and must have 8 hours rest for work performed under 12 hours, and 10 hours of rest after working 12 hours. Some passenger railroads have built in rest periods in their on duty time which extend their time over 12 hours. In these cases, rest periods do not qualify for HOS if they extend over 4 hours, but are counted as on duty HOS time if they are 3:59 or less. There are no HOS restrictions against working any RDOs or even both RDOS, but the hours of service restrictions apply to any day worked. |
|
|
| (851946) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Nov 3 11:43:10 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:38:22 2009. They're both fruits though. |
|
|
| (851950) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:58:42 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 22:35:19 2009. PATH uses 7-car trains, which means you'd have to have either some as singles anyway or you'll have to split the sets into 3 and 4 car sets, which hampers flexibility. Besides, I think PATH has some plans to expand WTC-NWK trains to 8 cars in the future. Singles make the most sense. |
|
|
| (851951) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:02:21 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Grand Concourse on Mon Nov 2 23:40:11 2009. I think PATH has less ability to absorb having to take an entire set out of service because of a problem with a single car. The smaller fleet also reduces the maintenance advantages of linked sets. |
|
|
| (851952) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by 156n3rd on Tue Nov 3 12:03:11 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by BEDT26 on Mon Nov 2 20:29:01 2009. There is no comparison on how they look inside and out. NY's units are boring, plain and unattractive. |
|
|
| (851953) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:05:47 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 08:00:22 2009. Sorry, the PA-5's, from this rider's perspective, are better. Perhaps the superior elements are merely cosmetic. It's nice to sit on a train with a comfortable seat and not have Big Brother telling me that my backpack is subject to search whenever we enter a stretch of track without a station stop for more than three minutes. |
|
|
| (851956) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by 156n3rd on Tue Nov 3 12:11:18 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:05:47 2009. It's so sad because there are many far superior units all over this country and the world. NYC should have a transit system that makes a statement as well as move people. Such a rich history and nothing to show for it but what's in the museum. |
|
|
| (851958) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:13:14 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 09:51:37 2009. Interesting. Too bad the HBLR already took the ROW, but a PATH extension via the old CNJ to Bayonne and across to SI would have been a more realistic way to connect SI to the outside world via rail than connecting to the NYC subway in Bay Ridge to the SIR. |
|
|
| (851959) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Tue Nov 3 12:17:54 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. PA5 are just smaller R-160s, and they still have those horrendous bucket seats. I like them aesthetically but I prefer the black face of the R-160. They're the same cars just cheaper and smaller, maybe its that small cute aspect that makes people like them more. |
|
|
| (851965) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:22:53 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by ClearAspect on Tue Nov 3 12:17:54 2009. PA5 are just smaller R-160s, and they still have those horrendous bucket seats.I like bucket seats. It clearly defines in no incertain terms the space you are allowed to fit into. Perhaps my standard sized ass is biased. They are infinitely more comfortable than the R142/143/160 seats. |
|
|
| (851966) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by bzuck on Tue Nov 3 12:44:01 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. What line(s) are they being used on? |
|
|
| (851973) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Tue Nov 3 13:17:34 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by ClearAspect on Tue Nov 3 12:17:54 2009. I dunno I have yet to ride the PA5 but do like the way it looks far better than the R143/R160 which IMHO is butt ugly. For some reason I do not find the R142 that bad and I guess it is because of the red headlight area. I prefer bucket seats too, and wish all NYCT cars had them. |
|
|
| (851991) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by pablo m 201 on Tue Nov 3 14:04:55 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. IAWTP 1000%!!The R160s ain't got nothing on the PA-5s. I hate to see the PA 1s, 2s, 3s and 4s go, but the PA-5s are acceptable replacements. |
|
|
| (851994) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Nov 3 14:08:15 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:05:47 2009. Reading is fundamental hun....I never said the PA5s were any better or worse than the R160s. I personally like both cars equally. I had stated that there was some braging done by the PA that they essentially got the same technology at a cheaper price than the MTA.Trevor |
|
|
| (851996) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 3 14:11:52 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by pablo m 201 on Tue Nov 3 14:04:55 2009. I hate to see the PA 1s, 2s, 3s and 4s go, but the PA-5s are acceptable replacements.Not really. Less seats (IINM), less standing room (IINM), no RFW, and no RFV seat. |
|
|
| (851999) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Tue Nov 3 14:14:57 2009, in response to PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:27:30 2009. They are far more comfortable, ride smoother and are quieter than the subway's NTT cars.I'm admittedly shocked at their quietness given that they're of a similar design as the NYCTA units, but smoother ride maybe due to the fact that PATH track is in better shape than NYCTA track... |
|
|
| (852009) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by pablo m 201 on Tue Nov 3 15:09:29 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by bzuck on Tue Nov 3 12:44:01 2009. Mainly the Newark-World Trade Center and Journal Square-33rd Street lines, but I have seen them on the Hoboken-33rd Street from time to time (well that was the line when that one set hit the bumper block at 33rd), and also I've been told they have seen service on the Hoboken-World Trade Center.On weekends whenever they do run its mainly the NWK-WTC line. I myself never seen them in service on the JSQ-33rd via HOB on weekends but they've probably have (you can take your chances and just sit at JSQ, but weekdays would be more advisible to go ride them). |
|
|
| (852055) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:24:52 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 3 08:08:03 2009. Because you say so?What is it..you hang out here just to phuck with folks? Find another hobby that less stressful for you. |
|
|
| (852057) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:34:10 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:22:53 2009. LOL...!Funny stuff. |
|
|
| (852061) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:41:53 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by arnine on Tue Nov 3 09:16:49 2009. You mean too narrow for the B DIVISION...The center belt line bulges slightly which may or may not cause problem along A Division tunnels |
|
|
| (852064) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:47:37 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:58:42 2009. I read it was 10 car trains for NEWARK-WTC service. |
|
|
| (852070) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Tue Nov 3 17:53:38 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:41:53 2009. Yeah your right I was thinking the wrong direction. The belt line I think may make it but maybe not although we can see if PATH will lend us one to find out LOL |
|
|
| (852179) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Nov 3 21:00:08 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 12:02:21 2009. oh ok. |
|
|
| (852180) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Nov 3 21:00:57 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:58:42 2009. So currently the max length for all PATH stations is 7 cars? |
|
|
| (852199) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Nov 3 21:53:04 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by 156n3rd on Tue Nov 3 12:11:18 2009. Most of those systems are younger and not as old though. From the drawings of the SAS we'll see a much more modern group of stations built. The new South Ferry terminal for the 1 is very nice as well. |
|
|
| (852202) | |
Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss |
|
|
Posted by Pablo M 201 on Tue Nov 3 21:57:15 2009, in response to Re: PA-5's kick R160 @ss, posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 3 17:47:37 2009. Thats what they want to try to do for that line, which they are moving forward with (Exchange Place is being worked on now, Harrison would be 10 car platforms after renovation, Grove would need to be worked on so I would imagine that station gets a facelift, and WTC will be good for 10 cars after the project there is complete).I don't know if the upper level platform at NWK Penn can fit 10 cars (I'll have to take a closer next time I'm through there, or someone can post here if they know), but I know the WTC bound platform can for sure. Journal Square is good for 10 cars or just shy of it IIRC. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
