|
|
| Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (49335) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:54:17 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 11:19:53 2005. If that were the case the TA would not have placed orders in the magnitude that they did. When the R68 and R68A were ordered, they came in batches of 200-400. The cars coming in nowwere ordered in much larger batches. This despite the fact that Albany has abandoned capital funding for some time."With 1700+ R160's and the 212 R143's in the fleet, the Eastern Division's needs will be met well past this century's mid-point" When they are here, of course. They are not all here yet. "Length of cars does not indicate incompatibality of parts." Well, actually yes it does. It's not the length so much as the manufacturer and type of propulsion being used. I would guess that trucks themselves are interchangeable (I may be wrong about that) but other components are not. And the TA is going to do what is easiest on the maintenance shop and what allows most flexible equipment deployment. And that means a 60' car. That decision is already made. If they revisit that decision, it isn't going to be for another 40 years. If we're still around in 2050, we can check with the TA's procurement dept. to see what they are ordering (and if it even runs on steel rails anymore). |
|
|
|