|
|
| Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. (1142854) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1143095) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Mar 4 21:23:23 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Sun Mar 4 10:45:43 2012. Who says he doesn't? |
|
|
| (1143096) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Mar 4 21:23:49 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Mar 4 12:26:22 2012. I like the last part! |
|
|
| (1143099) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 4 21:32:20 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Sun Mar 4 21:21:11 2012. I thought he was gone before Conrail gave up the territory to the meatball ... |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1143109) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sun Mar 4 22:18:00 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Sun Mar 4 20:34:52 2012. No smartass vibe detected here. Fair question. From what I've noticed from dealing with LIRR people, the only good idea is one that comes from within. The way we do buisness is the only way. They would rarely, if ever look outside of themselves to solve a problem or, say look at a system & go ahead & say lets give it a try.Some simple examples: the way they sold tickets. MN in the 80's looked to Europe for a better way & developed a CATSS (Computer assisted ticket selling system) method. More efficent faster, & cut dowm on employee "mistakes". LIRR, kept the same method thus kept the same slowness & inneficency. MN installed miles of fiber optic lines for improved signaling & communications. LIRR Last time I asked around, not an inch of fiber optic lines on its territory. LIRR never thought of converting its 3d rail to underriding contact shoe even though the underriding design is proven to be better in snow. With all the miles of electrified terrritory & Long Islands occasional snow burials, you would think that someone would think that would be a good idea. You would be wrong. And why not?? Because thats the way we do things. thats "Pennsy" attitude simply put. These are just a few examples I could think of off the top of my head. |
|
|
| (1143177) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 13:26:20 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sun Mar 4 22:18:00 2012. I personally prefer "underrunning" 3rd rail myself, But I wonder how the entire LIRR could be changed while still maintaining service which would have to use the older overrunning type during the transition. |
|
|
| (1143179) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 13:27:53 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 4 21:32:20 2012. I'm not sure of the exact chronology but if that is in fact the case then that is even more reason for the LIRR to be tumbled from its original throne. |
|
|
| (1143192) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Mar 5 14:52:20 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 13:26:20 2012. It may be easier for the LIRR to convert to overhead wires. Changing to underruning third-rail may not have as many benefits as overhead wires. |
|
|
| (1143193) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Mar 5 14:54:54 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Sun Mar 4 18:10:20 2012. Which MP54s were rebuilt? |
|
|
| (1143198) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 15:08:27 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 13:26:20 2012. It cannot be changed and should not be. |
|
|
| (1143199) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 15:10:01 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sun Mar 4 22:18:00 2012. LIRR MUST NOT BE MERGED with anything.It is the Longest-lived original flag, and that should be honored and kept. ROAR |
|
|
| (1143209) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 16:27:02 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 15:10:01 2012. If the LIRR or any other commuter operation were that good it would still exist as a separate entity and not have had to be taken over by the public sector. That being said, there would be n problem with merging the 2 commuter agencies under the MTA as "MTA Commuter Rail" or similar name with the former RRs designated as the "MN Division" and LIRR Division" much the same way as the IRT, BMT and IND became separate divisions under a unified NYC Transit System upon city takeover in 1940. Another railfan remarked that it wouldn't be a good idea since the 2 respective RRs have different operating rules and other infrastructure differences, the different types of 3rd rail being among them. Differences of that nature didn't prevent the creation of a unified transit agency the B of T which morphed into the NYCTA which was ultimately placed under the MTA umbrella. The IRT was unable to be merged operationally with the BMT and/or IND due to differences in car sizes and tunnel differences but the operating rules and procedures especially those involving the signal system were able to be standardized as can be done should the LIRR and M/N be administratively merged. |
|
|
| (1143211) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 5 16:33:40 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 15:10:01 2012. Merge and call the new beast, the LIRR. |
|
|
| (1143213) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:38:48 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 4 20:56:34 2012. We are way beyond that point. The MN M-7A have a rooftop air chute and would not clear the 63rd Street tunnel when it opens. The 2 M-7 fleets have numerous other customizations as well, going as far as braking application rates. |
|
|
| (1143214) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:41:41 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sun Mar 4 22:18:00 2012. Seems to me converting the 3rd rail from one type to another is a monumental undertaking that would bring a lot of service disruptions during the transitions.As for the rest "the only good idea is one that comes from within.", chalk that up to isolated "Island Culture". Great Britain is kind of like that too. Don't tell them they are Europe. |
|
|
| (1143216) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:43:01 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Mar 5 14:52:20 2012. No clearances for that in the Atlantic tunnels, nor the 63rd tTreet tunnel, which are (will be) much tighter. They were made for flat-top M-1's, nothing more. |
|
|
| (1143218) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by seabeachexpress on Mon Mar 5 16:44:16 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:38:48 2012. I am coming in late in this thread , but aren't there Union issues between the MNRR engineers and conductors and thier brothers and sisters who work for the LIRR?? Different unions and maybe pension plans? Years ago a MNRR conductor told me they wanted to merge and call it MTA Railroad but the unions were able to push back. |
|
|
| (1143219) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:46:02 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Mar 5 14:54:54 2012. About 2/3rd of the the MP54's and P54's in the mid-late 50's.Steam coaches got the value 7,000 added to their number MU's got 3,000 added for control motor, 4,000 added for blind motor, and 6000 added for T54 trailer |
|
|
| (1143226) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 5 16:57:19 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 13:27:53 2012. Conrail was still running the meatball norsk into the 80's. I did a news story on channel 54 about a passenger strike when they raised ticket prices in 1980 and it was still Conrail at that time. Ronan Caesar was gone by then but I'm not sure of exactly when the Empty-yay took over the remains ... |
|
|
| (1143235) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Mar 5 17:05:16 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 16:41:41 2012. Stages, multiple stages, like fast track. Let's brain storm it. |
|
|
| (1143254) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Mon Mar 5 18:01:10 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 5 15:08:27 2012. Cannot be changed?? Why not?? Its the same rail. identical just upside down.Just slap on those reciently developed 3d rail contact shoes that can run on both designs & presto, no service interruptions. It can be done in sections on weekends with minimal service disruptions. As far as better, overriding can handle say a 4" snowfall where inderriding it would take 6" for a service hit. 2 inches can make a big difference So sez the MN trainmaster I consulted with. Safety? Ive seen guys trip & fall & land on the underriding 3d rail, (with that thick plastic cover in place) suffering from just the effects of clumsiness which result in some nasty bruises & shameful embarrasment. If the same thing would have happened in an overriding 3d rail situation where the live rail is right there, with the legs in contact with the running rail, chances are the outcome might have been different. |
|
|
| (1143256) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Mon Mar 5 18:11:08 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Fisk ave Jim on Mon Mar 5 18:01:10 2012. speaking of 3rd rails,does anyone know why there are about 50 aluminum 3rd rails stored in corona yard,lirr? |
|
|
| (1143258) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Mon Mar 5 18:17:44 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sun Mar 4 12:09:08 2012. PennCentral had to compete vs trucks and airlines for passengers... and laws that hurt them badly. So to compare this to that is flawed. |
|
|
| (1143278) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:11:15 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 5 16:57:19 2012. Although it was technically Conrail and actually prior to that Penn Central, the equipment was MTA M types, not sure of number. The original MTA commuter cars had logos which read "M Central" which was later changed to "M Conrail" before the final change to Metro North. |
|
|
| (1143279) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 5 19:14:46 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:11:15 2012. I only rode it in the gonerail days from Poughkeepsie, and from there to Croton, it was RDC's and diesel coaches. When I changed at Croton, it was mostly ACMU's ... but then again, I tended to ride out of peak so no idea of what was rolling for rush there.But I'm pretty sure Ronan and his dancing fools were gone by the time the meatball took it over. |
|
|
| (1143280) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 19:15:29 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:11:15 2012. An the M-2's (at least the initial 144 tranche, not the 100 of 1976) has stenciled "PENN CENTRAL" under the cab window. |
|
|
| (1143285) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:32:46 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Mar 5 19:14:46 2012. Pretty much. |
|
|
| (1143286) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:33:51 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 19:15:29 2012. Thanks for the info. I couldn't remember the M contract number on the first P/C, Conrail, M/N cars. |
|
|
| (1143288) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:36:27 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by seabeachexpress on Mon Mar 5 16:44:16 2012. I doubt that if such a merger were to take place, there could be much opposition since mergers of other RRs throughout the country in similar circumstances were able to be done. |
|
|
| (1143292) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Mar 5 20:03:48 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 16:27:02 2012. your comparing federal controlled railroads with no contrl subways.different game. |
|
|
| (1143293) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Mar 5 20:06:29 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 5 19:36:27 2012. the Surface transportation board saw no reason for merger other than undermine the unions.their stance has not changed, If LIRR and MNCR were to be merged only one union per craft would survive as only one union can hold the contract.. |
|
|
| (1143326) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Mar 6 02:06:49 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Mar 5 20:03:48 2012. Although the subways weren't under the control of the ICC (FRA's predecessor) they were under the control, of the NYS PSC until the establishment of the NYCTA so there was some external oversight. Even with federal oversight, as long as the combined RR conforms to FRA standards there should be no problem. It was done with Penn Central and several other class 1 RRs throughout the country. NJT is a combination of PRR, CRNJ and Erie/Lackawanna and SEPTA commuter operation is built on a combo of PRR and Reading. |
|
|
| (1143327) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Mar 6 02:07:26 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Mar 5 20:03:48 2012. Although the subways weren't under the control of the ICC (FRA's predecessor) they were under the control, of the NYS PSC until the establishment of the NYCTA so there was some external oversight. Even with federal oversight, as long as the combined RR conforms to FRA standards there should be no problem. It was done with Penn Central and several other class 1 RRs throughout the country. NJT is a combination of PRR, CRNJ and Erie/Lackawanna and SEPTA commuter operation is built on a combo of PRR and Reading. |
|
|
| (1143330) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Mar 6 04:39:02 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by randyo on Tue Mar 6 02:06:49 2012. thanks for bring up NJT and SEPTA the cluster fucks of railroad or is it subway or bus industry. |
|
|
| (1143331) | |
Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .. |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Mar 6 06:48:10 2012, in response to Re: merging LIRR and MNCR and ... and .., posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 5 19:15:29 2012. Which was as I recall noticeable in the 1997 film "The Ice Storm" that was set on Thanksgiving 1973. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
