|
|
| Option III order for the R160? (866131) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (866146) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Tue Dec 1 19:31:24 2009, in response to Option III order for the R160?, posted by Chipper10 on Tue Dec 1 18:43:48 2009. An Option III order, if there is one, would be to replace the R44 cars. A decision will probably have to be made this February since that's when Alstom and Kawasaki will have to begin shutting down their R160 production lines. It would take approximately 350 R160 cars to replace the 282 R44 cars. |
|
|
| (866155) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by willd on Tue Dec 1 19:50:31 2009, in response to Option III order for the R160?, posted by Chipper10 on Tue Dec 1 18:43:48 2009. Given that they've moved on to the R179s, and the fact that it is unlikely those cars will significantly deviate from the form set by the R143s and copied with the R160s, then it is highly unlikely there will be an additional order of R160s. That having been said, because of the conservative nature of the NYCT's rolling stock acquisition process, you could probably view the R179s as an option order of upgraded R160s. In the same way the R160s could be viewed as an option order of upgraded R143s. Fine, the manufacturers and a few bells and whistles may change, but on a fundamental level the R179s will be effectively no different from any other NYCT rolling stock introduced in the past 50 years.While the rest of the world will continue to adopt subway stock that allows passengers to walk from one end of the train to the other unimpeded, NYers will be restricted to whatever 50 to 60 foot box they happened to board, all in the misguided name of safety. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (866162) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 1 20:29:22 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by willd on Tue Dec 1 19:50:31 2009. Um, you do realize it would be pretty difficult to have safe passage on 75' cars especially on sharp curves like on the B/D from 7th Av to 59th St, right?People don't care about waiting till a train is stopped at a station to cross between cars, they just cross the cars whenever they feel like it. |
|
|
| (866176) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Tue Dec 1 21:01:56 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 1 20:29:22 2009. I think willd was referring to cars that have gangways between them, not doors, but open spaces. A recent example of this is found in London with their new "S" stock, and IIRC the 2009 Tube (Victoria) stock. No doors to be found except at the cab ends.wayne |
|
|
| (866195) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 1 21:38:11 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Tue Dec 1 21:01:56 2009. Yeah, but can they withstand like 100+ degree curves on a daily basis? |
|
|
| (866248) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Dec 1 23:16:56 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 1 21:38:11 2009. Yes.The Paris Metro has turns much, much tighter than anything found on the NY subway, yet they've been using walk-through trainsets since the MF88s and MP89s were delivered the early 90s, and they continue to do so with the MF2000s. MP89:  MF2000: The small profile network of the Berlin U-bahn has turns every bit as tight as anything the NYC subway has, and their HK stock features four unit walk-through trainsets. The large profile lines use H class 6 unit walk-through trainsets. An HK:  An H: Even has passenger operated doors, something it'd be nice to see US systems adopt. Toronto uses 75 foot rolling stock, and they too are ordering 6 unit cars with full length gangways, the T35A08 "Toronto Rockets".  Hell, every tram network outside of Philadelphia, a few historic trolleys, and perhaps a few systems in Eastern Europe that have old Tatras uses an articulated vehicle which operate on curves of much closer radius than any curve anywhere around New York City. I don't think I could state this more clearly, but curve radius is not an issue for an articulated subway car. |
|
|
| (866250) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Dec 1 23:24:08 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by WillD on Tue Dec 1 23:16:56 2009. Oic, thanks for the correction then. |
|
|
| (866251) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Dec 1 23:24:49 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by VictorM on Tue Dec 1 19:31:24 2009. CORRECTIONIt will take 340 60-foot cars to replace 272 75-cars 340 X 60 = 272 X 75 = 20400 feet |
|
|
| (866275) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Dec 2 00:14:27 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Train Dude on Tue Dec 1 23:24:49 2009. Or: 272/8 = 340/10 |
|
|
| (866277) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Dec 2 00:18:29 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Dec 2 00:14:27 2009. Ab-So-Lute-Ly |
|
|
| (866281) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Dec 2 00:42:16 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Train Dude on Wed Dec 2 00:18:29 2009. np. |
|
|
| (866359) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by mack C-49 on Wed Dec 2 07:45:56 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by WillD on Tue Dec 1 23:16:56 2009. Isn't it interesting: the BMT used articulated rolling stock into the 1960s and one of the reasons cited for not continuing with articulated cars was the difficulty of maintaining the large inseparable train sets. In the 50s and 60s we had married pairs of two cars, then we had the 75 footers, and now we have train sets of 5 60 foot cars. What's the deal? How is this so different from articulated sets? |
|
|
| (866552) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Dec 2 17:35:50 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by willd on Tue Dec 1 19:50:31 2009. There is no evidence they have "moved on to R179's" other than make specs. They are obviously happy with R160's and may see no reason to shift gears, hence the Option III rumors. Since passengers are not supposed to walk between cars, the overhang is not an issue. |
|
|
| (866587) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Dec 2 20:41:28 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Joe V on Wed Dec 2 17:35:50 2009. With the recent D Line incident, the MTA might at least want the passengers to be able to cross between cars in an emergency without having to wait for a crew member to unlock the end doors. |
|
|
| (866593) | |
Re: Option III order for the R160? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Dec 2 20:47:02 2009, in response to Re: Option III order for the R160?, posted by Joe V on Wed Dec 2 17:35:50 2009. Given the "out of the box" outstanding performance of the cars, it seems a wise move at this time. |
|
|
